Forge Web Credentials: SAML Tokens
Other sub-techniques of Forge Web Credentials (2)
ID | Name |
---|---|
.001 | Web Cookies |
.002 | SAML Tokens |
An adversary may forge SAML tokens with any permissions claims and lifetimes if they possess a valid SAML token-signing certificate.(Citation: Microsoft SolarWinds Steps) The default lifetime of a SAML token is one hour, but the validity period can be specified in the NotOnOrAfter
value of the conditions ...
element in a token. This value can be changed using the AccessTokenLifetime
in a LifetimeTokenPolicy
.(Citation: Microsoft SAML Token Lifetimes) Forged SAML tokens enable adversaries to authenticate across services that use SAML 2.0 as an SSO (single sign-on) mechanism.(Citation: Cyberark Golden SAML)
An adversary may utilize Private Keys to compromise an organization's token-signing certificate to create forged SAML tokens. If the adversary has sufficient permissions to establish a new federation trust with their own Active Directory Federation Services (AD FS) server, they may instead generate their own trusted token-signing certificate.(Citation: Microsoft SolarWinds Customer Guidance) This differs from Steal Application Access Token and other similar behaviors in that the tokens are new and forged by the adversary, rather than stolen or intercepted from legitimate users.
An adversary may gain administrative Entra ID privileges if a SAML token is forged which claims to represent a highly privileged account. This may lead to Use Alternate Authentication Material, which may bypass multi-factor and other authentication protection mechanisms.(Citation: Microsoft SolarWinds Customer Guidance)
Procedure Examples |
|
Name | Description |
---|---|
During the SolarWinds Compromise, APT29 created tokens using compromised SAML signing certificates.(Citation: Microsoft - Customer Guidance on Recent Nation-State Cyber Attacks)(Citation: Secureworks IRON RITUAL Profile) |
|
AADInternals |
AADInternals can be used to create SAML tokens using the AD Federated Services token signing certificate.(Citation: AADInternals Documentation) |
APT29 |
APT29 created tokens using compromised SAML signing certificates.(Citation: Microsoft - Customer Guidance on Recent Nation-State Cyber Attacks)(Citation: Secureworks IRON RITUAL Profile) |
UNC2452 |
UNC2452 created tokens using compromised SAML signing certificates.(Citation: Microsoft - Customer Guidance on Recent Nation-State Cyber Attacks) |
Mitigations |
|
Mitigation | Description |
---|---|
Active Directory Configuration |
Implement robust Active Directory (AD) configurations using group policies to secure user accounts, control access, and minimize the attack surface. AD configurations enable centralized control over account settings, logon policies, and permissions, reducing the risk of unauthorized access and lateral movement within the network. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Account Configuration: - Implementation: Use domain accounts instead of local accounts to leverage AD’s centralized management, including group policies, auditing, and access control. - Use Case: For IT staff managing shared resources, provision domain accounts that allow IT teams to log in centrally, reducing the risk of unmanaged, rogue local accounts on individual machines. Interactive Logon Restrictions: - Implementation: Configure group policies to restrict interactive logons (e.g., direct physical or RDP logons) for service accounts or privileged accounts that do not require such access. - Use Case: Prevent service accounts, such as SQL Server accounts, from having interactive logon privileges. This reduces the risk of these accounts being leveraged for lateral movement if compromised. Remote Desktop Settings: - Implementation: Limit Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) access to specific, authorized accounts. Use group policies to enforce this, allowing only necessary users to establish RDP sessions. - Use Case: On sensitive servers (e.g., domain controllers or financial databases), restrict RDP access to administrative accounts only, while all other users are denied access. Dedicated Administrative Accounts: - Implementation: Create domain-wide administrative accounts that are restricted from interactive logons, designed solely for high-level tasks (e.g., software installation, patching). - Use Case: Create separate administrative accounts for different purposes, such as one set of accounts for installations and another for managing repository access. This limits exposure and helps reduce attack vectors. Authentication Silos: - Implementation: Configure Authentication Silos in AD, using group policies to create access zones with restrictions based on membership, such as the Protected Users security group. This restricts access to critical accounts and minimizes exposure to potential threats. - Use Case: Place high-risk or high-value accounts, such as executive or administrative accounts, in an Authentication Silo with extra controls, limiting their exposure to only necessary systems. This reduces the risk of credential misuse or abuse if these accounts are compromised. **Tools for Implementation**: - Active Directory Group Policies: Use Group Policy Management Console (GPMC) to configure, deploy, and enforce policies across AD environments. - PowerShell: Automate account configuration, logon restrictions, and policy application using PowerShell scripts. - AD Administrative Center: Manage Authentication Silos and configure high-level policies for critical user groups within AD. |
Audit |
Auditing is the process of recording activity and systematically reviewing and analyzing the activity and system configurations. The primary purpose of auditing is to detect anomalies and identify potential threats or weaknesses in the environment. Proper auditing configurations can also help to meet compliance requirements. The process of auditing encompasses regular analysis of user behaviors and system logs in support of proactive security measures. Auditing is applicable to all systems used within an organization, from the front door of a building to accessing a file on a fileserver. It is considered more critical for regulated industries such as, healthcare, finance and government where compliance requirements demand stringent tracking of user and system activates.This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: System Audit: - Use Case: Regularly assess system configurations to ensure compliance with organizational security policies. - Implementation: Use tools to scan for deviations from established benchmarks. Permission Audits: - Use Case: Review file and folder permissions to minimize the risk of unauthorized access or privilege escalation. - Implementation: Run access reviews to identify users or groups with excessive permissions. Software Audits: - Use Case: Identify outdated, unsupported, or insecure software that could serve as an attack vector. - Implementation: Use inventory and vulnerability scanning tools to detect outdated versions and recommend secure alternatives. Configuration Audits: - Use Case: Evaluate system and network configurations to ensure secure settings (e.g., disabled SMBv1, enabled MFA). - Implementation: Implement automated configuration scanning tools like SCAP (Security Content Automation Protocol) to identify non-compliant systems. Network Audits: - Use Case: Examine network traffic, firewall rules, and endpoint communications to identify unauthorized or insecure connections. - Implementation: Utilize tools such as Wireshark, or Zeek to monitor and log suspicious network behavior. |
User Account Management |
User Account Management involves implementing and enforcing policies for the lifecycle of user accounts, including creation, modification, and deactivation. Proper account management reduces the attack surface by limiting unauthorized access, managing account privileges, and ensuring accounts are used according to organizational policies. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Enforcing the Principle of Least Privilege - Implementation: Assign users only the minimum permissions required to perform their job functions. Regularly audit accounts to ensure no excess permissions are granted. - Use Case: Reduces the risk of privilege escalation by ensuring accounts cannot perform unauthorized actions. Implementing Strong Password Policies - Implementation: Enforce password complexity requirements (e.g., length, character types). Require password expiration every 90 days and disallow password reuse. - Use Case: Prevents adversaries from gaining unauthorized access through password guessing or brute force attacks. Managing Dormant and Orphaned Accounts - Implementation: Implement automated workflows to disable accounts after a set period of inactivity (e.g., 30 days). Remove orphaned accounts (e.g., accounts without an assigned owner) during regular account audits. - Use Case: Eliminates dormant accounts that could be exploited by attackers. Account Lockout Policies - Implementation: Configure account lockout thresholds (e.g., lock accounts after five failed login attempts). Set lockout durations to a minimum of 15 minutes. - Use Case: Mitigates automated attack techniques that rely on repeated login attempts. Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) for High-Risk Accounts - Implementation: Require MFA for all administrative accounts and high-risk users. Use MFA mechanisms like hardware tokens, authenticator apps, or biometrics. - Use Case: Prevents unauthorized access, even if credentials are stolen. Restricting Interactive Logins - Implementation: Restrict interactive logins for privileged accounts to specific secure systems or management consoles. Use group policies to enforce logon restrictions. - Use Case: Protects sensitive accounts from misuse or exploitation. *Tools for Implementation* Built-in Tools: - Microsoft Active Directory (AD): Centralized account management and RBAC enforcement. - Group Policy Object (GPO): Enforce password policies, logon restrictions, and account lockout policies. Identity and Access Management (IAM) Tools: - Okta: Centralized user provisioning, MFA, and SSO integration. - Microsoft Azure Active Directory: Provides advanced account lifecycle management, role-based access, and conditional access policies. Privileged Account Management (PAM): - CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Thycotic: Manage and monitor privileged account usage, enforce session recording, and JIT access. |
Privileged Account Management |
Privileged Account Management focuses on implementing policies, controls, and tools to securely manage privileged accounts (e.g., SYSTEM, root, or administrative accounts). This includes restricting access, limiting the scope of permissions, monitoring privileged account usage, and ensuring accountability through logging and auditing.This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures: Account Permissions and Roles: - Implement RBAC and least privilege principles to allocate permissions securely. - Use tools like Active Directory Group Policies to enforce access restrictions. Credential Security: - Deploy password vaulting tools like CyberArk, HashiCorp Vault, or KeePass for secure storage and rotation of credentials. - Enforce password policies for complexity, uniqueness, and expiration using tools like Microsoft Group Policy Objects (GPO). Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA): - Enforce MFA for all privileged accounts using Duo Security, Okta, or Microsoft Azure AD MFA. Privileged Access Management (PAM): - Use PAM solutions like CyberArk, BeyondTrust, or Thycotic to manage, monitor, and audit privileged access. Auditing and Monitoring: - Integrate activity monitoring into your SIEM (e.g., Splunk or QRadar) to detect and alert on anomalous privileged account usage. Just-In-Time Access: - Deploy JIT solutions like Azure Privileged Identity Management (PIM) or configure ephemeral roles in AWS and GCP to grant time-limited elevated permissions. *Tools for Implementation* Privileged Access Management (PAM): - CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Thycotic, HashiCorp Vault. Credential Management: - Microsoft LAPS (Local Admin Password Solution), Password Safe, HashiCorp Vault, KeePass. Multi-Factor Authentication: - Duo Security, Okta, Microsoft Azure MFA, Google Authenticator. Linux Privilege Management: - sudo configuration, SELinux, AppArmor. Just-In-Time Access: - Azure Privileged Identity Management (PIM), AWS IAM Roles with session constraints, GCP Identity-Aware Proxy. |
Detection
This technique may be difficult to detect as SAML tokens are signed by a trusted certificate. The forging process may not be detectable since it is likely to happen outside of a defender's visibility, but subsequent usage of the forged token may be seen. Monitor for anomalous logins using SAML tokens created by a compromised or adversary generated token-signing certificate. These logins may occur on any on-premises resources as well as from any cloud environment that trusts the certificate.(Citation: Microsoft SolarWinds Customer Guidance) Search for logins to service providers using SAML SSO which do not have corresponding 4769, 1200, and 1202 events in the Domain.(Citation: Sygnia Golden SAML) Consider modifying SAML responses to include custom elements for each service provider. Monitor these custom elements in service provider access logs to detect any anomalous requests.(Citation: Sygnia Golden SAML)
References
- MSRC. (2020, December 13). Customer Guidance on Recent Nation-State Cyber Attacks. Retrieved December 30, 2020.
- Secureworks CTU. (n.d.). IRON RITUAL. Retrieved February 24, 2022.
- Sygnia. (2020, December). Detection and Hunting of Golden SAML Attack. Retrieved November 17, 2024.
- Reiner, S. (2017, November 21). Golden SAML: Newly Discovered Attack Technique Forges Authentication to Cloud Apps. Retrieved December 17, 2020.
- MSRC. (2020, December 13). Customer Guidance on Recent Nation-State Cyber Attacks. Retrieved December 17, 2020.
- Microsoft. (2020, December 14). Configurable token lifetimes in Microsoft Identity Platform. Retrieved December 22, 2020.
- Lambert, J. (2020, December 13). Important steps for customers to protect themselves from recent nation-state cyberattacks. Retrieved December 17, 2020.
- Mandiant. (2021, January 19). Remediation and Hardening Strategies for Microsoft 365 to Defend Against UNC2452. Retrieved January 22, 2021.
- Bierstock, D., Baker, A. (2019, March 21). I am AD FS and So Can You. Retrieved December 17, 2020.
- Dr. Nestori Syynimaa. (2018, October 25). AADInternals. Retrieved February 18, 2022.
Связанные риски
Каталоги
Мы используем cookie-файлы, чтобы получить статистику, которая помогает нам улучшить сервис для вас с целью персонализации сервисов и предложений. Вы может прочитать подробнее о cookie-файлах или изменить настройки браузера. Продолжая пользоваться сайтом, вы даёте согласие на использование ваших cookie-файлов и соглашаетесь с Политикой обработки персональных данных.