just keep writing
This commit is contained in:
parent
e3c313e93c
commit
f305cb206b
2 changed files with 26 additions and 4 deletions
|
|
@ -9,6 +9,9 @@
|
|||
\usepackage{xcolor}
|
||||
\usepackage{amsfonts}
|
||||
\usepackage{amssymb}
|
||||
\usepackage{acro}
|
||||
\input{acronyms}
|
||||
|
||||
% Used for displaying a sample figure. If possible, figure files should
|
||||
% be included in EPS format.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -85,7 +88,7 @@ Another compleing capability is the ... \agd{find another evasion technic}
|
|||
This study focuses on another specific evasion domain, process hiding.
|
||||
The list of running processes is an obvious compeling ressource to start detectin malware.
|
||||
To detect running malware, one could simply gather the list of all running software and search for known malware.
|
||||
With the list of processes frequently collected, an HIDS \agd{replace acronym} can detect known malware, mine rules, define an activity profile, or detect anomalous situations \agd{}.
|
||||
With the list of processes frequently collected, an \ac{hids} \agd{replace acronym} can detect known malware, mine rules, define an activity profile, or detect anomalous situations.
|
||||
|
||||
Staying off the process list is good first step for any malware aiming for stealth.
|
||||
We can categorize the technics achieving this type of evasion between hiding and masquerading.
|
||||
|
|
@ -94,13 +97,18 @@ For process masquerading, the aim is not so much to avoid the listing but to avo
|
|||
A process masquerading an another will assume its process name and characteristics, with the goal of appearing legitimate on the machine.
|
||||
Process hiding and masquerading differ in their ultimate goal but leverage a lot of the same technics.
|
||||
The core idea of process list manipulation is tampering with the process listing mechanism provided by the OS to the monitoring software.
|
||||
Independently of the OS, attackers often rely on intercepting system's call to remove or replace information or directly manipulating kernel objects.
|
||||
Independently of the \ac{os}, attackers often rely on intercepting system's call to remove or replace information or directly manipulating kernel objects.
|
||||
For the purpose of this study, we do not differentiate between Unix-based OSs and Windows systems as process hiding is a common practice for malware in both environments.
|
||||
|
||||
% there are detection methods but they are all host-based and dommed to be bypassed
|
||||
Of course, many methods have been proposed and implemented to detect or counter process list tampering.
|
||||
These methods --- although they leverage different mechanisms --- are all host-based.
|
||||
This create a circular dependency where the \ac{ids} rely on the host system to provide the very information leveraged to assess its integrity.
|
||||
As rootkis providing process hiding remained a threat since their introduction, it is safe to assume that current countermesures --- and future ones based on similar technics --- do not provide adequate protection.
|
||||
|
||||
% is it a bird? is it a plane? No its the good old power consumption!
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
% Thank you king of sweden. No it was nothing you are welcome. Ok get home safe now. Byeeee.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue