-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 674
[New Rule] Kubernetes Pod Creation Using Common Debug or Base Images #5890
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
80 changes: 80 additions & 0 deletions
80
rules_building_block/execution_common_debug_or_base_image_pod_creation.toml
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ | ||
| [metadata] | ||
| bypass_bbr_timing = true | ||
| creation_date = "2026/05/04" | ||
| integration = ["kubernetes"] | ||
| maturity = "production" | ||
| updated_date = "2026/05/04" | ||
|
|
||
| [rule] | ||
| author = ["Elastic"] | ||
| building_block_type = "default" | ||
| description = """ | ||
| Detects successful Kubernetes pod creation requests using commonly abused base and debugging container | ||
| images such as BusyBox, Alpine, Ubuntu, Netshoot, and network multitool variants. These images are | ||
| frequently used by attackers to deploy short-lived or interactive "throwaway" containers for | ||
| reconnaissance, payload staging, or command execution due to their small footprint or built-in tooling. | ||
| """ | ||
| index = ["logs-kubernetes.audit_logs-*"] | ||
| language = "kuery" | ||
| license = "Elastic License v2" | ||
| name = "Kubernetes Pod Creation Using Common Debug or Base Images" | ||
| risk_score = 21 | ||
| rule_id = "93120a05-caf5-47f6-a305-e8abee463fb9" | ||
| severity = "low" | ||
| tags = [ | ||
| "Data Source: Kubernetes", | ||
| "Domain: Kubernetes", | ||
| "Use Case: Threat Detection", | ||
| "Tactic: Execution", | ||
| "Tactic: Defense Evasion", | ||
| "Rule Type: BBR", | ||
| ] | ||
| timestamp_override = "event.ingested" | ||
| type = "new_terms" | ||
| query = ''' | ||
| event.dataset:"kubernetes.audit_logs" and | ||
| kubernetes.audit.stage:"ResponseComplete" and | ||
| kubernetes.audit.annotations.authorization_k8s_io/decision:"allow" and | ||
| kubernetes.audit.objectRef.resource:"pods" and | ||
| kubernetes.audit.verb:"create" and | ||
| kubernetes.audit.requestObject.spec.containers.image:(alpine* or busybox* or ubuntu\:* or debian\:* or *netshoot\:* or *network-multitool\:* or *curl\:*) | ||
| ''' | ||
|
|
||
|
DefSecSentinel marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| [[rule.threat]] | ||
| framework = "MITRE ATT&CK" | ||
|
|
||
| [rule.threat.tactic] | ||
| id = "TA0002" | ||
| name = "Execution" | ||
| reference = "https://attack.mitre.org/tactics/TA0002/" | ||
|
|
||
| [[rule.threat.technique]] | ||
| id = "T1610" | ||
| name = "Deploy Container" | ||
| reference = "https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1610/" | ||
|
|
||
| [[rule.threat.technique]] | ||
| id = "T1609" | ||
| name = "Container Administration Command" | ||
| reference = "https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1609/" | ||
|
|
||
| [[rule.threat]] | ||
| framework = "MITRE ATT&CK" | ||
|
|
||
| [rule.threat.tactic] | ||
| id = "TA0005" | ||
| name = "Defense Evasion" | ||
|
DefSecSentinel marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| reference = "https://attack.mitre.org/tactics/TA0005/" | ||
|
|
||
| [[rule.threat.technique]] | ||
| id = "T1610" | ||
| name = "Deploy Container" | ||
| reference = "https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1610/" | ||
|
|
||
| [rule.new_terms] | ||
| field = "new_terms_fields" | ||
| value = ["source.ip", "user_agent.original", "user.name"] | ||
|
|
||
| [[rule.new_terms.history_window_start]] | ||
| field = "history_window_start" | ||
| value = "now-5d" | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thoughts on a BBR at first? Pod provisioning for these images I can imagine are quite common.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, I think it's smart to make this a new terms though. But even then, these are all such commonly used container images that may not reduce noise enough. I would monitor as a BBR first in case noise is still an issue
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Converted to BBR!