Skip to main content
  1. Policy to Packets/
  2. Writeups/
  3. LetsDefend/
  4. SOC Alerts/

(Writeup) LetsDefend EventID: 28 - [SOC105 - Requested T.I. URL address]

Table of Contents

Welcome
#

  • LetsDefend is a Blue Team Training platform.
  • This writeup documents a SOC alert investigation involving an internal test of the firewall via attempting to connect out to a malicious URL.

Alert Details
#

Key: Value
EventID: 28
Event Time: Oct, 29, 2020, 07:34 PM
Rule: SOC105 - Requested T.I. URL address
Level: Security Analyst
Source Address: 172.16.17.47
Source Hostname: BillPRD
Destination Address: 115.99.150.132
Username: Bill
Request URL: http://115.99.150.132:56841/Mozi.m
User Agent: Firewall Test - Dont Block
Device Action: Blocked

Initial Triage
#

Actions
#

  • Copied alert details to notes
  • Created case
  • Check for “Firewall Test” email.

Thoughts
#

“That user-agent… Is it actually or firewall test, or just pretending to be one?”


Email
#

“Searching for ‘Firewall Test’ or the destination address comes up with the following email:

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Firewall Test
Date: Oct, 28, 2020, 09:28 AM
Action: Allowed

Hi team,  

We'll do a test on the Firewall tomorrow. 
You may see some malicious traffic to the 115.99.150.132 IP address. 
Ignore it.  
  
Regards

Thoughts
#

“In the real world, I’d be doing a phone call to verify. In this exercise, I believe we just take it at face value.”

Playbook
#

Step 1. Analyze Threat Intel Data
#

VirusTotal
#

Key: Value
URL 8/94
Body Hash 0/61 (-60 Community Score)
Thoughts
#

“Odd… While the URL has some malicious reports, the body is an image? And that image isn’t coming back with anything. I’m gonna check the internal threat intel feed.”

Internal Threat Intel Feed
#

Key: Value
Date Oct, 29, 2020, 07:43 PM
Data Type URL
Data http://115.99.150.132:56841/Mozi.m
Tag malware
Data Source Abuse ch
Thoughts
#

“If I were to guess, I imagine enough time has passed that the original data we were meant to find isn’t there anymore. We’ll go with Malicious for the sake of the exercise.”

Step 2. Interaction with Threat Intelligence Data
#

Log Management
#

Key: Value
type: Proxy
source_address: 172.16.17.47
source_port: 46938
destination_address: 115.99.150.132
destination_port: 56841
time: Oct, 29, 2020, 07:34 PM
Request URL: http://115.99.150.132:56841/Mozi.m
Request Method: GET
Device Action: Blocked
Process: chrome.exe
Parent Process: explorer.exe
Parent Process MD5: 8b88ebbb05a0e56b7dcc708498c02b3e
Thoughts
#

“I thought for a moment that they might’ve not actually used the endpoint, and instead spoofed a TCP SYN, but this log looks too enriched for that.”

Endpoint Security
#

Thoughts
#

“Looks like it was successfully blocked; no ’network action’ connections there. Also keeping in mind that it’s a test… Not Accessed

Step 3. Artifacts
#

Value Comment Type
http://115.99.150.132:56841/Mozi.m Malware (TI: Abuse ch) URL

Step 4. Analyst Notes
#

“Verdict: False Positive. Closing Case. Summary: Firewall Test via ([email protected]) email. Was real malicious URL. Validated via: Log Management, Endpoint Security, Threat Intel, Email Security. Actions taken: None.”


Determination
#

Verdict
#

  • False Positive
  • Close Case

Reasoning
#

  • This was an internal firewall test, no action needed.

Final Thoughts
#

“The wording was a bit odd when you have to view it from the lens of handling an internal test. Also, I believe some of the data we were supposed to be viewing was destroyed… Worked out in the end by checking more TI feeds.”
“Also, the playbook is missing the ‘check email to see if it’s an internal test’ step.”

Reed Eggleston
Author
Reed Eggleston
B.S. in Cybersecurity | SSCP | CySA+ | PenTest+ | Project+