Drive-by Compromise

What the technique is

Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing. Multiple ways of delivering exploit code to a browser exist (i.e., Drive-by Target), including: A legitimate website is compromised, allowing adversaries to inject malicious code Script files served to a legitimate website from a publicly writeable cloud storage bucket are modified by an adversary Malicious ads are paid for and served through legitimate ad providers (i.e., Malvertising) Built-in web application interfaces that allow user-controllable content are leveraged for the insertion of malicious scripts or iFrames (e.g., cross-site scripting) Browser push notifications may also be abused by adversaries and leveraged for malicious code injection via User Execution. By clicking "allow" on browser push notifications, users may be granting a website permission to run JavaScript code on their browser. Often the website used by an adversary is one visited by a specific community, such as government, a particular industry, or a particular region, where the goal is to compromise a specific user or set of users based on a shared interest. This kind of targeted campaign is often referred to a strategic web compromise or watering hole attack. There are several known examples of this occurring. Typical drive-by compromise process: 1. […]

What MITRE says you would watch

• AN0498

  Correlated evidence of anomalous browser/network behavior (suspicious external resource fetches and script injection patterns) followed by atypical child processes, ephemeral execution contexts, memory modification or process injection, and unexpected file drops. Defender sees network requests to previously unseen/suspicious domains or resources + browser process spawning unusual children or loading unsigned modules + file writes or registry changes shortly after those requests.

• AN0499

  Correlated evidence of browser or webview fetches to uncommon domains or mutated JS resources (proxy/NGFW logs + Zeek/HTTP logs) followed by unexpected interpreters or script engines executing (python, ruby, sh) spawned from browser processes or user sessions, rapid on-disk staging in /tmp, and outbound connections that deviate from baseline. Defender sees: uncommon resource fetch → short-lived child process executions from user browser context → file writes in temp directories → anomalous outbound C2-like connections.

• AN0500

  Correlated evidence where Safari/Chrome/WebKit-based processes issue network requests for uncommon or obfuscated JS resources followed by spawning of script interpreters, launchd or ad-hoc binaries, unusual child processes, or dynamic library loads into browser processes. Defender sees: proxy/HTTP logs with suspicious resource content + unifiedlogs/ASL showing browser/plugin crashes or extension loads + process events indicating child process creation and file writes to /var/folders or /tmp shortly after the fetch.