Keylogger Deployment

By only allowing pre-approved software to be installed and run on corporate devices, the subject is unable to install software themselves.

A Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solution refers to policies, technologies, and controls that prevent the accidental and/or deliberate loss, misuse, or theft of data by members of an organization. Typically, DLP technology would take the form of a software agent installed on organization endpoints (such as laptops and servers).

Typical DLP technology will alert on the potential loss of data, or activity which might indicate the potential for data loss. A DLP technology may also provide automated responses to prevent data loss on a device.

Domain Name System (DNS) filtering allows the blocking of domain resolution for specific domains or automatically categorized classes of domains (depending on the functionality of the software or appliance being used). DNS filtering prevents users from accessing blocked domains, regardless of the IP address the domains resolve to.

Examples of automatically categorized classes of domains are ‘gambling’ or ‘social networking’ domains. Automatic categorizations of domains are typically conducted by the software or appliance being used, whereas specific domains can be blocked manually. Most DNS filtering software or appliances will provide the ability to use Regular Expressions (RegEx) to (for example) also filter all subdomains on a specified domain.

DNS filtering can be applied on an individual host, such as with the hosts file, or for multiple hosts via a DNS server or firewall.

Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) is a critical component of a comprehensive security strategy, providing an additional layer of defense by requiring more than just a password for system access. This multi-layered approach significantly reduces the risk of unauthorized access, especially in cases where an attacker has obtained or guessed a user’s credentials. MFA is particularly valuable in environments where attackers may have gained access to user credentials via phishing, data breaches, or social engineering.

For organizations, enabling MFA across all critical systems is essential. This includes systems such as Active Directory, VPNs, cloud platforms (e.g., AWS, Azure, Google Cloud), internal applications, and any resources that store sensitive data. MFA ensures that access control is not solely dependent on passwords, which are vulnerable to compromise. Systems that are protected by MFA require users to authenticate via at least two separate factors: something they know (e.g., a password), and something they have (e.g., a hardware token or a mobile device running an authenticator app).

The strength of MFA depends heavily on the factors chosen. Hardware-based authentication devices, such as FIDO2 or U2F security keys (e.g., YubiKey), offer a higher level of security because they are immune to phishing attacks. These keys use public-key cryptography, meaning that authentication tokens are never transmitted over the network, reducing the risk of interception. In contrast, software-based MFA solutions, like Google Authenticator or Microsoft Authenticator, generate one-time passcodes (OTPs) that are time-based and typically expire after a short window (e.g., 30 seconds). While software-based tokens offer a strong level of security, they can be vulnerable to device theft or compromise if not properly secured.

To maximize the effectiveness of MFA, organizations should integrate it with their Identity and Access Management (IAM) system. This ensures that MFA is uniformly enforced across all access points, including local and remote access, as well as access for third-party vendors or contractors. Through integration, organizations can enforce policies such as requiring MFA for privileged accounts (e.g., administrators), as these accounts represent high-value targets for attackers seeking to escalate privileges within the network.

It is equally important to implement adaptive authentication or risk-based MFA, where the system dynamically adjusts its security requirements based on factors such as user behavior, device trustworthiness, or geographic location. For example, if a subject logs in from an unusual location or device, the system can automatically prompt for an additional factor, further reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access.

Regular monitoring and auditing of MFA usage are also critical. Organizations should actively monitor for suspicious activity, such as failed authentication attempts or anomalous login patterns. Logs generated by the Authentication Service Providers (ASPs), such as those from Azure AD or Active Directory, should be reviewed regularly to identify signs of attempted MFA bypass, such as frequent failures or the use of backup codes. In addition, setting up alerts for any irregular MFA activity can provide immediate visibility into potential incidents.

Finally, when a subject no longer requires access, it is critical that MFA access is promptly revoked. This includes deactivating hardware security keys, unlinking software tokens, and ensuring that any backup codes or recovery methods are invalidated. Integration with the organization’s Lifecycle Management system is essential to automate the deactivation of MFA credentials during role changes or when an employee departs.

An anti-virus solution detect and alert on malicious files, including the ability to take autonomous actions such as quarantining or deleting the flagged file.

Next-generation firewall (NGFW) network appliances and services provide the ability to control network traffic based on rules. These firewalls provide basic firewall functionality, such as simple packet filtering based on static rules and track the state of network connections. They can also provide the ability to control network traffic based on Application Layer rules, among other advanced features to control network traffic.

A example of simple functionality would be blocking network traffic to or from a specific IP address, or all network traffic to a specific port number. An example of more advanced functionality would be blocking all network traffic that appears to be SSH or FTP traffic to any port on any IP address.

Privileged Access Management (PAM) is a critical security practice designed to control and monitor access to sensitive systems and data. By managing and securing accounts with elevated privileges, PAM helps reduce the risk of insider threats and unauthorized access to critical infrastructure.

Key Prevention Measures:

Least Privilege Access: PAM enforces the principle of least privilege by ensuring users only have access to the systems and data necessary for their role, limiting opportunities for misuse.

• Just-in-Time (JIT) Access: PAM solutions provide temporary, on-demand access to privileged accounts, ensuring users can only access sensitive environments for a defined period, minimizing exposure.
• Centralized Credential Management: PAM centralizes the management of privileged accounts and credentials, automatically rotating passwords and securely storing sensitive information to prevent unauthorized access.
• Monitoring and Auditing: PAM solutions continuously monitor and log privileged user activities, providing a detailed audit trail for detecting suspicious behavior and ensuring accountability.
• Approval Workflows: PAM incorporates approval processes for accessing privileged accounts, ensuring that elevated access is granted only when justified and authorized by relevant stakeholders.

Benefits:

PAM enhances security by reducing the attack surface, improving compliance with regulatory standards, and enabling greater control over privileged access. It provides robust protection for critical systems by limiting unnecessary exposure to high-level access, facilitating auditing and accountability, and minimizing opportunities for both insider and external threats.

The Principle of Least Privilege should be enforced, and period reviews of permissions conducted to ensure that accounts have the minimum level of access required to complete duties as per their role.

Establish and maintain formal, well-communicated pathways for personnel to request resources, report deficiencies, or propose operational improvements. By providing structured mechanisms to meet legitimate needs, organizations reduce the likelihood that subjects will bypass policy controls through opportunistic or unauthorized actions.

Implementation Approaches

• Create clear, accessible request processes for technology needs, system enhancements, and operational support requirements.
• Ensure personnel understand how to escalate unmet needs when standard processes are insufficient, including rapid escalation pathways for operational environments.
• Maintain service-level agreements (SLAs) or expected response times to requests, ensuring perceived barriers or delays do not incentivize unofficial action.
• Integrate feedback mechanisms that allow users to suggest improvements or report resource shortfalls anonymously or through designated representatives.
• Publicize successful examples where formal channels resulted in legitimate needs being met, reinforcing the effectiveness and trustworthiness of the system.

Operational Principles

• Responsiveness: Requests must be acknowledged and processed promptly to prevent frustration and informal workarounds.
• Transparency: Personnel should be informed about request status and outcomes to maintain trust in the process.
• Accountability: Ownership for handling requests must be clearly assigned to responsible teams or individuals.
• Cultural Integration: Leaders and supervisors should reinforce the use of formal channels and discourage unsanctioned self-remediation efforts.

Monitor for the unexpected absence or sudden cessation of updates to the RunMRU and UserAssist registry keys, which are key forensic artifacts used to reconstruct user activity in Windows environments.
 

• RunMRU records commands entered into the Run dialog (Win + R).
• UserAssist tracks GUI-based application execution via Windows Explorer (e.g., Start Menu, desktop shortcuts).

Anomalies in these keys, such as prolonged periods without updates, missing values during active sessions, or abrupt last write timestamps, may suggest that the subject uses anti-forensic techniques to suppress activity logging. This can include disabling app tracking via registry modification, operating from a virtual machine, or deliberately launching tools in ways that avoid tracking (e.g., via command line or scripting).

Detection Methods:

• Baseline Comparison: During forensic triage, compare the current volume of entries in RunMRU and UserAssist against historical user activity patterns or comparable peer profiles. A complete absence or sudden drop in entry count over time may indicate intentional suppression.
• Registry Timeline Analysis: Use forensic tools (e.g., KAPE, RECmd, Eric Zimmerman's Registry Explorer, or X-Ways) to extract and inspect:

• HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\RunMRU
• HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\UserAssist\{GUID}

Review Last Write Time of each key and subkey and correlate them with other artifacts such as login sessions from security logs, Shellbag and Jump List updates, and file system access or modification timestamps.

• Session Correlation: Compare registry update frequency with logon sessions (Event ID 4624), unlock activity (Event ID 4801), and user-initiated application launches (prefetch, shortcut use, etc.). Look for sessions where expected application usage occurred but no associated entries were recorded.
• Gaps in GUI Execution Artifacts: If a user has opened GUI tools (e.g., Notepad, Calculator, Explorer) but no UserAssist entries appear, this may indicate launch tracking has been disabled or cleared.

Indicators:
 

• RunMRU and UserAssist keys exist but show no new entries over several active user sessions.
• Last Write Time for these keys predates the most recent login by hours or days.
• High activity from other user-space artifacts (shellbags, LNK files, Jump Lists), but no corresponding launch tracking.
• User is known to interact with GUI apps, but no UserAssist GUID entries are updating.
• Registry keys exist but contain minimal or default values, suggesting manual clearing or pre-launch suppression.

An agent capable of Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) is a software agent installed on organization endpoints (such as laptops and servers) that (at a minimum) records the Operating System, application, and network activity on an endpoint.

Typically EDR operates in an agent/server model, where agents automatically send logs to a server, where the server correlates those logs based on a rule set. This rule set is then used to surface potential security-related events, that can then be analyzed.

An EDR agent typically also has some form of remote shell capability, where a user of the EDR platform can gain a remote shell session on a target endpoint, for incident response purposes. An EDR agent will typically have the ability to remotely isolate an endpoint, where all network activity is blocked on the target endpoint (other than the network activity required for the EDR platform to operate).

An agent capable of User Activity Monitoring (UAM) is a software agent installed on organization endpoints (such as laptops); typically, User Activity Monitoring agents are only deployed on endpoints where a human user Is expected to conduct the activity.

The User Activity Monitoring agent will typically record Operating System, application, and network activity occurring on an endpoint, with a focus on activity that is or can be conducted by a human user. The purpose of this monitoring is to identify undesirable and/or malicious activity being conducted by a human user (in this context, an Insider Threat).

Typical User Activity Monitoring platforms operate in an agent/server model where activity logs are sent to a server for automatic correlation against a rule set. This rule set is used to surface activity that may represent Insider Threat related activity such as capturing screenshots, copying data, compressing files or installing risky software.

Other platforms providing related functionality are frequently referred to as User Behaviour Analytics (UBA) platforms.

An agent capable of User Behaviour Analytics (UBA) is a software agent installed on organizational endpoints (such as laptops). Typically, User Activity Monitoring agents are only deployed on endpoints where a human user is expected to conduct the activity.

The User Behaviour Analytics agent will typically record Operating System, application, and network activity occurring on an endpoint, focusing on activity that is or can be conducted by a human user. Typically, User Behaviour Analytics platforms operate in an agent/server model where activity logs are sent to a server for automatic analysis. In the case of User Behaviour Analytics, this analysis will typically be conducted against a baseline that has previously been established.

A User Behaviour Analytic platform will typically conduct a period of ‘baselining’ when the platform is first installed. This baselining period establishes the normal behavior parameters for an organization’s users, which are used to train a Machine Learning (ML) model. This ML model can then be later used to automatically identify activity that is predicted to be an anomaly, which is hoped to surface user behavior that is undesirable, risky, or malicious.

Other platforms providing related functionality are frequently referred to as User Activity Monitoring (UAM) platforms.

In cyber deception, a "honey user" (or "honey account") is a decoy user account designed to detect and monitor malicious activities. These accounts attract attackers by appearing legitimate or using common account names, but any interaction with them is highly suspicious and flagged for investigation. Honey users can be deployed in various forms, such as Active Directory users, local system accounts, web application users, and cloud users.

Implement Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) tools to inspect the content of network packets beyond the header information. DPI can identify unusual patterns and hidden data within legitimate protocols. DPI can be conducted with a range of software and hardware solutions, such as Unified Threat Management (UTM) and Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs), as well as Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems (IDPS) such as Snort and Suricata, 

Logging DNS requests made by corporate devices can assist with identifying what web resources a system has attempted to or successfully accessed.

Monitor outbound DNS traffic for unusual or suspicious queries that may indicate DNS tunneling. DNS monitoring entails observing and analyzing Domain Name System (DNS) queries and responses to identify abnormal or malicious activities. This can be achieved using various security platforms and network appliances, including Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS), specialized DNS services, and Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems that process DNS logs.

Analyze network flow data (NetFlow) to identify unusual communication patterns and potential tunneling activities. Flow data offers insights into the volume, direction, and nature of traffic.

NetFlow, a protocol developed by Cisco, captures and records metadata about network flows—such as source and destination IP addresses, ports, and the amount of data transferred.

Various network appliances support NetFlow, including Next-Generation Firewalls (NGFWs), network routers and switches, and dedicated NetFlow collectors.

Commercial security software may have the ability to generate alerts when suspected tampering is detected, such as interacting with the process in memory, or attempting to access files related to its operation.

Deploy User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) solutions designed for cloud environments to monitor and analyze the behavior of users, applications, network devices, servers, and other non-human resources. UEBA systems track normal behavior patterns and detect anomalies that could indicate potential insider events. For instance, they can identify when a user or entity is downloading unusually large volumes of data, accessing an excessive number of resources, or engaging in data transfers that deviate from their usual behavior.

Implement User Behavior Analytics (UBA) tools to continuously monitor and analyze user (human) activities, detecting anomalies that may signal security risks. UBA can track and flag unusual behavior, such as excessive data downloads, accessing a higher-than-usual number of resources, or large-scale transfers inconsistent with a user’s typical patterns. UBA can also provide real-time alerts when users engage in behavior that deviates from established baselines, such as accessing sensitive data during off-hours or from unfamiliar locations. By identifying such anomalies, UBA enhances the detection of insider events.

Depending on the solution used, web proxies can provide a wealth of information about web-based activity. This can include the IP address of the system making the web request, the URL requested, the response code, and timestamps.

An organization must perform SSL/TLS interception to receive the most complete information about these connections.

Windows Event Log ID 1102 “The audit log was cleared” is generated when the Windows Security audit log has been cleared. This Event contains the account's SID, name, and domain that cleared the log.

This may represent an anti-forensics technique if there is no reasonable explanation for why the Event Log was cleared on this system.