Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Rule Tuning] Enumeration of Administrator Accounts #709

Closed
brokensound77 opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

[Rule Tuning] Enumeration of Administrator Accounts #709

brokensound77 opened this issue Dec 11, 2020 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
Rule: Tuning tweaking or tuning an existing rule v7.11.0

Comments

@brokensound77
Copy link
Contributor

Rule 871ea072-1b71-4def-b016-6278b505138d Enumeration of Administrator Accounts is failing in both the API search and detection engine with the following error

{
  "error" : {
    "root_cause" : [
      {
        "type" : "parsing_exception",
        "reason" : "line 6:27: no viable alternative at input '(((process.name : \"net.exe\" or process.pe.original_file_name == \"net.exe\") or\\n    ((process.name : \"net1.exe\" or process.pe.original_file_name == \"net1.exe\") and\\n        not process.parent.name : \"net.exe\")) and\\n   process.args : (\"group\",'"
      }
    ],
    "type" : "parsing_exception",
    "reason" : "line 6:27: no viable alternative at input '(((process.name : \"net.exe\" or process.pe.original_file_name == \"net.exe\") or\\n    ((process.name : \"net1.exe\" or process.pe.original_file_name == \"net1.exe\") and\\n        not process.parent.name : \"net.exe\")) and\\n   process.args : (\"group\",'",
    "caused_by" : {
      "type" : "no_viable_alt_exception",
      "reason" : null
    }
  },
  "status" : 400
}

I did not find any obvious issues with the query so we need to determine if it is a bug in EQL or the rule

image
image

REF: elastic/kibana#85506 (comment)

@rw-access
Copy link
Contributor

I believe this was an intermittent issue because of the elasticsearch version that was used when tested. I think it's all sorted out. @spong can you confirm?

@spong
Copy link
Member

spong commented Dec 11, 2020

I believe this was an intermittent issue because of the elasticsearch version that was used when tested. I think it's all sorted out. @spong can you confirm?

Commented over on the PR as well, but the es snapshot on the test cluster is from ~month ago (2020-11-12), so if this syntax was just recently supported then that's the mis-match. Will see about getting that upgraded 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Rule: Tuning tweaking or tuning an existing rule v7.11.0
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants