Prerequisites/dependencies
Windows or Linux operating system
Introduction
As I write this I’m sitting in the relative darkness of
the HolisticInfoSec lab listening to Random
Access Memories, the new release from Daft Punk, and literally freaking out
over what Time magazine’s Jesse Dorris has glowingly referred to as a “sound
for which the word epic seems to have been invented.” Follow me as I step way
out on a limb and borrow from Dorris’ fine review to create a musical allegory
for this month’s topic, ProcDOT.
Dorris describes a “world in which the bounties of the past, present and future
have been Tumblr’d together into a stunning data blur.”[1] I will attempt
to make this connection with what ProcDOT’s author, CERT.at’s Christian Wojner,
refers to as “an absolute must have tool for everyone's lab.” This is a
righteous truth, dear reader; those malware analysts amongst you will feast on
the scrumptious visual delight that ProcDOT creates.
We’ve not discussed visualization tactics in quite a
while (March 2010)
but read on, the wait will be justified. ProcDOT, as described in Christian’s
March 2013 blog post, correlates Windows Sysinternals Process Monitor log files
and PCAPs to an investigation-ready interactive graph that includes the animation
of a malware infection evolution based on activity timelines.
Christian gave me the full picture of his work creating
ProcDOT to be shared with you here.
ProcDOT is the result of two ideas Christian had over the
last few years. Initially he was thinking about the benefits of correlating
Process Monitor logs with PCAP data to simple line charts with time and peaks
as well as the ability to define tags for specific data situations. Sometime
later, at the end of a malware investigation for a customer, he came to the
point where he wanted to explain the characteristics of the underlying
infection and depict the interaction of the malware's components as part of his
final report. Christian found that a simple verbal description was both
massively inefficient and insufficient at the same time (I confirm this shortcoming
as well). Christian’s thinking moved to the “big picture” in terms of a graph
with nodes for the relevant objects as files, registry keys, etc. and edges for
actions between them.
He then took the time to experiment with the Process
Monitor logs he’d captured while trying to strip them down to the relevant content.
This content he then manually converted to fit the input format of AT&T’s Graphviz
as chosen as a renderer for graphing. And there it was; a picture can tell a
thousand words. It immediately became easy to understand all the aspects of the
infection in one glance, even without any verbal explanation. That said, the manual
activities to get to this result took about 50% of Christian’s time during report
generation and he had not yet included PCAP data at this point.
As the high potential of this approach proved itself
obvious, Christian started to think about a tool that might take advantage of
all this potential while bringing behavioral analysis a step further and making
it accessible to non-malware analysts. Thus was born the ProcDOT project.
As ProcDOT is now close to its first official release it
is actually possible to automatically generate such a graph within seconds
while also considering the information in an optionally supplied PCAP file correlating
them with the Process Monitor logs. ProcDOT’s infection evolution animation
capabilities also eradicates the downside of older graphing techniques lacking
the ability to effectively visualize the aspect of time.
Christian’s road map (future think) for ProdDOT includes:
·
Export capabilities for the graph
·
Consider and provide much more information of
PCAP data
·
Time and context-dependent ranges of
frames/events
·
Customizable color themes
·
Notes and tags
·
Better GUI support of filters
·
Session related filters
This is a tremendous project and I look forward to its
long life with ongoing support. As we run it through its paces I am quite
certain you’ll come to the same conclusion.
ProcDOT Preparation
Christian has provided good documentation, including some
easily avoided pain points that are worthy of repeating here. Process Monitor’s
configuration needs to be tuned to ensure ProcDOT compatibility.
In Process Monitor:
·
Under Options,
disable (uncheck) "Show Resolved
Network Addresses"
·
Via Options
à Select Columns, adjust the displayed
columns
o To
not show the "Sequence Number" column
o To
show the "Thread ID"
column
Figure 1 exemplifies the correct Process Monitor
configuration.
 |
| Figure 1: Process Monitor configuration to support ProcDOT |
ProcDOT also needs to know where its third party tool
dependencies are fulfilled.
In ProcDOT, under Options:
·
Choose your Windump/Tcpdump executable as a fully
qualified path
·
Choose your Dot executable (dot.exe) as fully
qualified path
Figure 2 shows my ProcDOT
configuration as enabled on a 64-bit Windows 8 analysis workstation running the
64-bit version of ProcDOT. Keep in mind that the ProcDOT project releases a
version that runs on Linux as well.
 |
| Figure 2: ProcDOT tool path configuration |
ProcDOT visualization
I worked with a couple of different
samples to give you a sense of how useful ProcDOT can be during runtime
analysis. I started with a well detected Trojan dropper (Trojan/Win32.Qhost) from
a threat-listed URL courtesy of Scumware.org, “just another free alternative
for security and malware researchers,” to trace interesting behavior when
executing 3DxSpeedDemo.exe on a victim system. The MD5 for this sample is 20928ad520e86497ec44e1c18a9c152e
if you’d like to go get it for yourself. Alternatively, if you’d like to avoid
playing with malware and just want the Process Monitor CSV and related PCAP,
ping me via email or Twitter and I’ll send them to you. I ran the malicious
binaries on a 32-bit Windows XP SP3 virtual machine, capturing the related
Process Monitor CSV log and the PCAP taken with Wireshark, then resetting to a
clean snapshot for each subsequent analysis. You need to ensure that you save
your default Process Monitor .PML file to .CSV which is easily done by
selecting Save, choosing All Events
and the CSV format. I copied the .PCAP and .CSV files from each run to my
workstation and created visualizations for each.
Loading ProcDOT and readying
it for a visualization run is simple. In the UI, select the appropriate CSV
from Procmon-CSV field and PCAP from the Windump-File field. Note that the
selection window for Windump-File defaults to Windump-TXT (*.txt); simply
switch to Windump-PCAP (*.pcap) unless you actually generated text results. Check
the no paths and compressed boxes, and hit Refresh.
This will generate an
interactive graph, but you won’t yet see results. You now must select the
Launcher, ProcDOT will analyze the Process Monitor file, then ask you to select
the first relevant process. This is typically the malicious executable
(double-click it) you executed on your virtual machine or intentionally
compromised system; again, 3DxSpeedDemo.exe for my first run, as seen in Figure
3.
 |
| Figure 3: ProcDOT malicious process selection |
Hit Refresh one more time and voila, your first visualization.
A few ProcDOT navigation
tips:
1)
Hold CTRL and roll the scroll wheel on your
mouse to zoom in and out.
2)
Hold your left mouse button while hovered over
the graph to move it around in the UI.
3)
Double-click an entity to zoom in on it.
4)
Right-click an entity for details. Hit ESC to
remove the highlighting.
At the bottom of the UI if
you click the film click, ProcDOT will move into playback mode and step through
each process as they were captured. Remember our mention above of infection
evolution animation capabilities that give you the ability to effectively
visualize the aspect of time? Bingo.
Check out the Legend under
help (?) for the breakdown on the symbols used in graphing.
As I played back the Win32.Qhost
infection, Frame 91 jumped out at me where Thread 1168 of the cmd.exe process
(PID 1828) wrote data to the hosts
file as seen in Figure 4.
 |
| Figure 4: ProcDOT captures Win32.Qhost writing to the hosts file |
Oh snap! I love malware that
does this. I jumped back to my malware VM, re-executed the malware, and
captured the hosts file from C:\Windows\System32\Drivers\etc.
Figure 5 gives you an
immediate sense of who the players are in this little vignette.
 |
| Figure 5: You want me to login where? |
The IP address 91.223.89.142
is indeed in the Russian Federation but is not the appropriate A record for odnoklassniki.ru,
or mail.ru, or vk.com, or ok.ru…you get the idea. I find it ironic that a
seemingly Russian perpetrator is targeting Russian users as Eastern Bloc
cybercriminals favor spreading their little bits of joy beyond their own
borders. Just sayin’.
The Zbot sample I analyzed
(MD5: 58050bde460533ba99d0f7d04eb2c80a) made for great network behavior
analysis with ProcDOT. I can’t possibly capture all the glorious screen real
estate here, but Figure 6 should give you an idea of all the connections
spawned by explorer.exe.
 |
| Figure 6: ProcDOT network analysis |
So many avenues to explore,
so little time. Take the time, it’s a rabbit hole you definitely want to go
down. There’s so much value in ProcDOT for malware analysts, incident
responders, and forensicators. Paint a picture, cut to the quick, “the bounties
of the past, present and future” await you in a “stunning data blur” created by
ProcDOT. See Figure 7 for enough proof to motivate you to explore on your own.
 |
| Figure 7: A stunning data blur… |
In Conclusion
We’ve covered some truly kick@$$ tools already this year;
Violent Python, SET, Redline, and Recon-ng put ProcDOT in some major company, but if I were able to
vote for Toolsmith Tool of the Year in 2013, ProcDOT would be right at the top
of my list. The current release is a still an RC, if you find any bugs let Christian
know. The roadmap is solid so I am really looking forward to the stable
releases soon to come. In particular, export capabilities for the graph will be
a big step. Again, sample CSVs and PCAPs are available on demand.
Ping me via email if you have questions or suggestions
for topic via russ at holisticinfosec dot org or hit me on Twitter @holisticinfosec.
Cheers…until
next month.
[1] Dorris, J. (2013, MAY 27). Robots,
rebooted. electro-pop duo daft punk's triumphant new record. Time,181(20), 60.
No comments:
Post a Comment