본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

analyzing-supply-chain-malware-artifacts

Investigate supply chain attack artifacts including trojanized software updates, compromised build pipelines, and sideloaded dependencies to identify intrusion vectors and scope of compromise.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(6)

  • SKILL.md6.1 KB
  • assets/template.md421 B
  • references/api-reference.md2.1 KB
  • references/standards.md309 B
  • references/workflows.md468 B
  • scripts/agent.py5.6 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Analyzing Supply Chain Malware Artifacts

Overview

Supply chain attacks compromise legitimate software distribution channels to deliver malware through trusted update mechanisms. Notable examples include SolarWinds SUNBURST (2020, affecting 18,000+ customers), 3CX SmoothOperator (2023, a cascading supply chain attack originating from Trading Technologies), and numerous npm/PyPI package poisoning campaigns. Analysis involves comparing trojanized binaries against legitimate versions, identifying injected code in build artifacts, examining code signing anomalies, and tracing the infection chain from initial compromise through payload delivery. As of 2025, supply chain attacks account for 30% of all breaches, a 100% increase from prior years.

When to Use

  • When investigating security incidents that require analyzing supply chain malware artifacts
  • When building detection rules or threat hunting queries for this domain
  • When SOC analysts need structured procedures for this analysis type
  • When validating security monitoring coverage for related attack techniques

Prerequisites

  • Python 3.9+ with pefile, ssdeep, hashlib
  • Binary diff tools (BinDiff, Diaphora)
  • Code signing verification tools (sigcheck, codesign)
  • Software composition analysis (SCA) tools
  • Access to legitimate software versions for comparison
  • Package repository monitoring (npm, PyPI, NuGet)

Workflow

Step 1: Binary Comparison Analysis

#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""Compare trojanized binary against legitimate version."""
import hashlib
import pefile
import sys
import json


def compare_pe_files(legitimate_path, suspect_path):
    """Compare PE file structures between legitimate and suspect versions."""
    legit_pe = pefile.PE(legitimate_path)
    suspect_pe = pefile.PE(suspect_path)

    report = {"differences": [], "suspicious_sections": [], "import_changes": []}

    # Compare sections
    legit_sections = {s.Name.rstrip(b'\x00').decode(): {
        "size": s.SizeOfRawData,
        "entropy": s.get_entropy(),
        "characteristics": s.Characteristics,
    } for s in legit_pe.sections}

    suspect_sections = {s.Name.rstrip(b'\x00').decode(): {
        "size": s.SizeOfRawData,
        "entropy": s.get_entropy(),
        "characteristics": s.Characteristics,
    } for s in suspect_pe.sections}

    # Find new or modified sections
    for name, props in suspect_sections.items():
        if name not in legit_sections:
            report["suspicious_sections"].append({
                "name": name, "reason": "New section not in legitimate version",
                "size": props["size"], "entropy": round(props["entropy"], 2),
            })
        elif abs(props["size"] - legit_sections[name]["size"]) > 1024:
            report["suspicious_sections"].append({
                "name": name, "reason": "Section size significantly changed",
                "legit_size": legit_sections[name]["size"],
                "suspect_size": props["size"],
            })

    # Compare imports
    legit_imports = set()
    if hasattr(legit_pe, 'DIRECTORY_ENTRY_IMPORT'):
        for entry in legit_pe.DIRECTORY_ENTRY_IMPORT:
            for imp in entry.imports:
                if imp.name:
                    legit_imports.add(f"{entry.dll.decode()}!{imp.name.decode()}")

    suspect_imports = set()
    if hasattr(suspect_pe, 'DIRECTORY_ENTRY_IMPORT'):
        for entry in suspect_pe.DIRECTORY_ENTRY_IMPORT:
            for imp in entry.imports:
                if imp.name:
                    suspect_imports.add(f"{entry.dll.decode()}!{imp.name.decode()}")

    new_imports = suspect_imports - legit_imports
    if new_imports:
        report["import_changes"] = list(new_imports)

    # Check code signing
    report["legit_signed"] = bool(legit_pe.OPTIONAL_HEADER.DATA_DIRECTORY[4].Size)
    report["suspect_signed"] = bool(suspect_pe.OPTIONAL_HEADER.DATA_DIRECTORY[4].Size)

    return report


def hash_file(filepath):
    """Calculate multiple hashes for a file."""
    hashes = {}
    with open(filepath, 'rb') as f:
        data = f.read()
    for algo in ['md5', 'sha1', 'sha256']:
        h = hashlib.new(algo)
        h.update(data)
        hashes[algo] = h.hexdigest()
    return hashes


if __name__ == "__main__":
    if len(sys.argv) < 3:
        print(f"Usage: {sys.argv[0]} <legitimate_binary> <suspect_binary>")
        sys.exit(1)
    report = compare_pe_files(sys.argv[1], sys.argv[2])
    print(json.dumps(report, indent=2))

Validation Criteria

  • Trojanized components identified through binary diffing
  • Injected code isolated and analyzed separately
  • Code signing anomalies documented
  • Infection timeline reconstructed from build artifacts
  • Downstream impact scope assessed across affected systems
  • IOCs extracted for detection and blocking

References

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Extract DPAPI-protected secrets such as credentials and browser data offline and online.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Audit, detect, and remediate Shadow Credentials misconfigurations on msDS-KeyCredentialLink in Active Directory. Focuses on access-controls, monitoring Event ID 5136, and credential-management hygiene.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Prepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Create forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images using dd and dcfldd while preserving evidence integrity through hash verification.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Detect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3 to identify GenericAll, WriteDACL, and WriteOwner abuse paths

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

Perform static analysis of Android APK malware samples using apktool for decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for permission analysis, manifest inspection, and suspicious API call detection.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

andycungkrinx91/konoha92026년 10월 21일 업데이트

andycungkrinx91의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고