LSA Authentication Packages registry value modified
Matches the registry leg of AN0583: a write to the `Authentication Packages` value under HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa, which is the one place a DLL name has to be added for LSA to load it into lsass.exe at the next boot, and therefore the moment this persistence is established. The OSConfig copy of the value is listed separately because that subkey sits between `Lsa` and the value name, so a single contains on the shorter path does not reach it. Two neighbouring values that MITRE's `RegistryPathScope` knob invites you to add are deliberately left out: `Security Packages` is T1547.005, already published in this corpus with its own rule, and `Notification Packages` is T1556.002 — folding either in here would file another technique's observable behind this tag. What the rule cannot do: `Authentication Packages` is a REG_MULTI_SZ, and Sysmon EventID 13 renders anything that is not a string, DWORD or QWORD as the literal `Binary Data`, so `Details` shows neither the new package list nor the previous one. An inserted DLL therefore cannot be told from a rewrite that stores the default `msv1_0` list unchanged, no gate on `Details` is attempted, and the added name has to be read off the host during triage. The analytic's second half — lsass.exe loading an unsigned or non-baseline DLL, Sysmon EventID 7 — is a separate event MITRE's `TimeWindow` knob correlates across a reboot, which lib/sigma cannot express, and its `ImageSignatureStatus` knob is a per-host allowlist a rule cannot carry. Vocabulary matters for deployment: the brief maps Security EventID 4657 onto the Sysmon-shaped `registry_set` category, and this rule is written in the Sysmon EventID 13 vocabulary, where the key and the value name are joined in a single `TargetObject`. A 4657 feed splits those into `ObjectName` and `ObjectValueName`, so it needs a field mapping before this rule can match at all — enabling Audit Registry and a SACL on the Lsa key alone will not make it fire. On the Sysmon side, confirm the running configuration actually includes this key: volume-trimmed configs commonly watch a short allowlist of autostart locations, and one that omits Lsa leaves the rule silent rather than quiet. UNVERIFIED AS AUTHORED — derived from MITRE ATT&CK DET0207, not hand-written and not tested by its author. Any lab result is on this rule's own page.Full descriptionShow less
The detection
The 4 SIEM queries below are previews produced by Siemphony’s own translator, not pySigma, and none has been executed against a real backend — review before you deploy.
detection.yml
Sentinel · KQL
Run this as a search.
DeviceRegistryEvents| where (RegistryKey contains "\\Control\\Lsa\\Authentication Packages" or RegistryKey contains "\\Control\\Lsa\\OSConfig\\Authentication Packages")
Splunk · SPL
Run this as a search.
index=* (TargetObject="*\\Control\\Lsa\\Authentication Packages*" OR TargetObject="*\\Control\\Lsa\\OSConfig\\Authentication Packages*")Elastic · ES|QL
Run this as a search.
FROM logs-*| WHERE (TO_LOWER(registry.path) LIKE "*\\\\control\\\\lsa\\\\authentication packages*" OR TO_LOWER(registry.path) LIKE "*\\\\control\\\\lsa\\\\osconfig\\\\authentication packages*")
Wazuh · XML rule
Deploy to your manager — this is a rule, not a search.
<group name="sigma,windows,registry_set,"> <!-- Rule ids must be unique on your manager; 100000+ is the user range. --> <rule id="100000" level="12"> <!-- Set <if_sid> to the decoder/base rule for windows so this only evaluates relevant events. --> <field name="TargetObject" type="pcre2">(?i)(\\Control\\Lsa\\Authentication Packages|\\Control\\Lsa\\OSConfig\\Authentication Packages)</field> <description>LSA Authentication Packages registry value modified</description> <mitre> <id>T1547.002</id> </mitre> </rule></group>
Verdicts · reactions · comments
Community
Verdicts from engineers who actually deployed it, and the conversation around it.
Nobody has run this in a real environment and said what happened.
Verdicts from engineers who deployed it
0 castNo verdicts reported yet. The first one is worth more than the tenth — say what you ran it against.
Log in to report a verdict.
Log in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Someone who deploys this will have something to say about it.