-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 453
[RFC] Create Mach-O - Stage 1 Proposal #1346
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Changes from 40 commits
7080358
314f9ab
1448cd6
16aae5f
ef7bd12
0107542
de73a01
714c859
07c011d
aeadc6b
29ecf43
6d77439
16ad2bc
6969054
692cc5a
f64a08d
805f6c5
cd6a5e0
cdd9766
b8c02ce
6e8e729
72ee845
c6f20b2
bbd1afd
e0e5a1a
689fa39
ccf1b88
84bdb2e
c049773
3fd0931
a53a52b
276acfe
d996d6f
fc30c23
442d212
a7ff6ae
a96fd55
5177e2e
1347c0d
3f68b02
8fc5ca4
4766435
9ddb33f
2f65d5b
9253abb
70b5b22
1db5732
867eecb
1e7fcf8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,152 @@ | ||
| # 0000: Create the Mach-O sub-field of the File fieldset | ||
|
|
||
| - Stage: **1 (draft)** | ||
| - Date: **TBD** | ||
|
|
||
| Create the Mach Object (Mach-O) sub-field, of the `file` or `process` top-level fieldsets. This document metadata can be used for malware research, as well as coding and other application development efforts. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Fields | ||
|
|
||
| **Stage 0** | ||
|
|
||
| This RFC is to create the Mach-O sub-field within the `file.` fieldset. This will include 35 sub-fields. `macho` itself is a nested | ||
| field to account for [multiarchitecture binaries](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_binary). Each architecture will be represented | ||
| by a nested objected located at `file.macho`. | ||
|
|
||
| | Name | Type | Description | | ||
| |--------------------------------|---------|-----------------------------------------------------------------| | ||
| | macho.cpu | object | CPU information for the file. | | ||
| | macho.cpu.architecture | keyword | CPU architecture target for the file. | | ||
| | macho.cpu.byte_order | keyword | CPU byte order for the file. | | ||
| | macho.cpu.subtype | keyword | CPU subtype for the file. | | ||
| | macho.cpu.type | keyword | CPU type for the file. | | ||
| | macho.headers | nested | Header information for the file. | | ||
| | macho.headers.commands.number | long | Number of load commands for the Mach-O header. | | ||
| | macho.headers.commands.size | long | Size of load commands of the Mach-O header. | | ||
| | macho.headers.commands.type | keyword | Type of the load commands for the Mach-O header. | | ||
| | macho.headers.magic | keyword | Magic field of the Mach-O header. | | ||
| | macho.headers.flags | keyword | Flags set in the Mach-O header. | | ||
| | macho.segments | nested | Segment information for the file. | | ||
| | macho.segments.name | keyword | Name of this segment. | | ||
| | macho.segments.physical_offset | long | File offset of this segment. | | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The
Looks like there's some alignment, but some fields are mismatched. I prefer the more verbose naming here in the table.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Agree, the more verbose naming is better. We'll get that cleaned up. |
||
| | macho.segments.physical_size | keyword | Amount of memory to map from the file. | | ||
| | macho.segments.virtual_address | keyword | Memory address of this segment. | | ||
| | macho.segments.virtual_size | keyword | Memory size of this segment. | | ||
| | macho.segments.sections | keyword | Section names contained in this segment. | | ||
| | macho.sections | nested | Section information for the segment of the file. | | ||
|
ebeahan marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| | macho.sections.name | keyword | Section name for the segment of the file. | | ||
| | macho.sections.flags | keyword | Section flags for the segment of the file. | | ||
| | macho.sections.type | keyword | Section type for the segment of the file. | | ||
| | macho.sections.physical_offset | long | Section List offset. | | ||
| | macho.sections.physical_size | long | Section List physical size. | | ||
| | macho.sections.virtual_address | long | Section List virtual address. | | ||
| | macho.sections.virtual_size | long | Section List virtual size. | | ||
| | macho.sections.entropy | float | Shannon entropy calculation from the section. | | ||
| | macho.sections.chi2 | float | Chi-square probability distribution of the section. | | ||
| | macho.page_size | long | Page size of the file. | | ||
| | macho.cdhash | keyword | Code Digest (CD) SHA256 hash of the first 20-bytes of the file. | | ||
|
|
||
| **Stage 1** | ||
|
|
||
| [New `macho.yml` candidate](macho/macho.yml)] | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 3: Add or update all remaining field definitions. The list should now be exhaustive. The goal here is to validate the technical details of all remaining fields and to provide a basis for releasing these field definitions as beta in the schema. Use GitHub code blocks with yml syntax formatting. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Usage | ||
|
|
||
| **Stage 1** | ||
|
|
||
| In performing file analysis, specifically for malware research, understanding file similarities can be used to chain together malware samples and families to identify campaigns and possibly attribution. Additionally, understanding how malware components are re-used is useful in understanding malware telemetry, especially in understanding the impact being made through the introduction of defensive countermeasures. | ||
|
|
||
| As an example, if XDR vendors deploys a new malware model to defeat a specific type of ransomware and we start observing a change and/or relationship to the headers, import tables, libraries, etc of that malware family, we can make assumptions that the changes to the malware model are making an impact against the malware family. | ||
|
|
||
| As another example, tracking file metadata for specific families is useful in predicting new campaigns if we see similar file metadata being used for new samples. [Example](https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/maze-ransomware-is-shutting-down-its-cybercrime-operation/), the Maze ransomware family shutting down and re-purposing as Egregor (this is for Windows malware, but the concept is the same). | ||
|
|
||
| ## Source data | ||
|
|
||
| **Stage 1** | ||
|
|
||
| This type of data can be provided by logs from VirusTotal, Reversing Labs, Lockheed Martin's LAIKABOSS, Emerson's File Scanning Framework, Target's Strelka, or other file/malware analysis platforms. | ||
|
|
||
| * [VirusTotal API](https://developers.virustotal.com/v3.0/reference) | ||
| * [Emerson FSF](https://github.com/EmersonElectricCo/fsf) | ||
| * [Target Strelka](https://github.com/target/strelka) | ||
| * [Lockheed Martin LAIKABOSS](https://github.com/lmco/laikaboss) | ||
| * [LIEF Analysis Library](https://lief.quarkslab.com/doc/latest/api/python/macho.html) | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 1: Provide a high-level description of example sources of data. This does not yet need to be a concrete example of a source document, but instead can simply describe a potential source (e.g. nginx access log). This will ultimately be fleshed out to include literal source examples in a future stage. The goal here is to identify practical sources for these fields in the real world. ~1-3 sentences or unordered list. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 2: Included a real world example source document. Ideally this example comes from the source(s) identified in stage 1. If not, it should replace them. The goal here is to validate the utility of these field changes in the context of a real world example. Format with the source name as a ### header and the example document in a GitHub code block with json formatting. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 3: Add more real world example source documents so we have at least 2 total, but ideally 3. Format as described in stage 2. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Scope of impact | ||
|
|
||
| **Stage 2** | ||
|
|
||
| There should be no breaking changes, depreciation strategies, or significant refactoring as this is creating a sub-field for the existing `file.` fieldset. | ||
|
|
||
| While likely not a large-scale ECS project, there would be documentation updates needed to explain the new fields. | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 2: Identifies scope of impact of changes. Are breaking changes required? Should deprecation strategies be adopted? Will significant refactoring be involved? Break the impact down into: | ||
| * Ingestion mechanisms (e.g. beats/logstash) | ||
| * Usage mechanisms (e.g. Kibana applications, detections) | ||
| * ECS project (e.g. docs, tooling) | ||
| The goal here is to research and understand the impact of these changes on users in the community and development teams across Elastic. 2-5 sentences each. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Concerns | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 1: Identify potential concerns, implementation challenges, or complexity. Spend some time on this. Play devil's advocate. Try to identify the sort of non-obvious challenges that tend to surface later. The goal here is to surface risks early, allow everyone the time to work through them, and ultimately document resolution for posterity's sake. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 2: Document new concerns or resolutions to previously listed concerns. It's not critical that all concerns have resolutions at this point, but it would be helpful if resolutions were taking shape for the most significant concerns. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 3: Document resolutions for all existing concerns. Any new concerns should be documented along with their resolution. The goal here is to eliminate the risk of churn and instability by resolving outstanding concerns. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 4: Document any new concerns and their resolution. The goal here is to eliminate risk of churn and instability by ensuring all concerns have been addressed. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Real-world implementations | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| Stage 4: Identify at least one real-world, production-ready implementation that uses these updated field definitions. An example of this might be a GA feature in an Elastic application in Kibana. | ||
| --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## People | ||
|
|
||
| The following are the people that consulted on the contents of this RFC. | ||
|
|
||
| * @peasead | author | ||
| * @devonakerr | sponsor | ||
| * @dcode, @peasead | subject matter expert | ||
|
|
||
| ## References | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- Insert any links appropriate to this RFC in this section. --> | ||
|
|
||
| ### RFC Pull Requests | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- An RFC should link to the PRs for each of it stage advancements. --> | ||
|
|
||
| * Stage 1: https://github.com/elastic/ecs/pull/1097 | ||
|
peasead marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| <!-- | ||
| * Stage 1: https://github.com/elastic/ecs/pull/NNN | ||
| ... | ||
| --> | ||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ | ||
| [[ecs-macho-ussage]] | ||
| === Mach-O Usage | ||
|
|
||
| --Description-- | ||
|
|
||
| [discrete] | ||
| === Mach-O Field Details | ||
| | Field | Description | Level | | ||
| | ---- | ---- | ----------- | | ||
| | macho.cpu | CPU information for the file. | extended | | ||
| | ... | ... | ... | | ||
| | ... | ... | ... | | ||
| | ... | ... | ... | | ||
|
|
||
| [discrete] | ||
| === Field Reuse | ||
| The `macho` fields are expected to be nested at: `dll.macho`, `file.macho`, `process.macho`. | ||
|
|
||
| Note also that the `macho` fields are not expected to be used directly at the root of the events. |
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,145 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| - name: macho | ||
| title: Mach-O file information. | ||
| group: 2 | ||
| description: > | ||
| These fields contain macOS Mach Object (Mach-O) metadata. | ||
| type: nested | ||
| reusable: | ||
| top_level: false | ||
| expected: | ||
| - file | ||
| - process | ||
| fields: | ||
| - name: cpu.architecture | ||
| description: CPU architecture target for the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 64-bit | ||
|
|
||
| - name: cpu.byte_order | ||
| description: CPU byte order for the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: Little endian | ||
|
|
||
| - name: cpu.subtype | ||
| description: CPU subtype for the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: ARM (all) 64-bit | ||
|
|
||
| - name: cpu.type | ||
| description: CPU type for the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: ARM 64-bit | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers | ||
| level: extended | ||
| description: Header information for the file. | ||
| type: nested | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers.commands.number | ||
| description: Number of load commands for the Mach-O header. | ||
| type: long | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 23 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers.commands.size | ||
| description: Size of load commands of the Mach-O header. | ||
| type: long | ||
| level: extended | ||
| format: bytes | ||
| example: 3888 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers.commands.type | ||
| description: Type of the load commands for the Mach-O header. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: LC_SYMTAB, 0x2c | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers.magic | ||
| description: Magic field of the Mach-O header. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0xfeedfacf | ||
|
|
||
| - name: headers.flags | ||
| description: Flags set in the Mach-O header. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: TWOLEVEL, 0x4000000 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments | ||
| level: extended | ||
| description: Segment information for the file. | ||
| type: nested | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.vmaddr | ||
| description: Memory address of this segment. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0x0 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.name | ||
| description: Name of this segment. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: __TEXT, __DATA, __IMPORT | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.vmsize | ||
| description: Memory size of this segment. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0x4c000 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.fileoff | ||
| description: File offset of this segment. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0x0 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.filesize | ||
| description: Amount of memory to map from the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0x4c000 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.sections | ||
| level: extended | ||
| description: Section information for the segment of the file. | ||
| type: flattened | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.offset | ||
| description: Offset of the segment. | ||
| type: long | ||
| format: bytes | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.size | ||
| description: Segment limit size. | ||
| type: long | ||
| format: bytes | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 123456 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: segments.flags | ||
| description: Segment flags. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 0x0 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: cdhash | ||
| description: Code Digest (CD) SHA256 hash of the first 20-bytes of the file. | ||
| type: keyword | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 2035094a7065b29421e7a51f51db9bd61807c3628f210b1f8e667235777dc592 | ||
|
|
||
| - name: page_size | ||
| description: Page size of the file. | ||
| type: long | ||
| format: bytes | ||
| level: extended | ||
| example: 4096 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd prefer to leave the top-level ECS fields all as
objects.What about defining
macho.architecturesasnestedand having each architecture's fields defined underneath? Borrowing from what @andrewstucki proposed in elastic/beats#24195.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So, you're suggesting changing:
macho.cpu.{architecture,byte_order,type,...}tomacho.architecture.{cpu,byte_order,type,...}?macho.*being a group instead of nested andmacho.architecture.cpu{cpu,byte_order,type,...}being nested?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, mostly. One difference - I'm proposing
macho.architecturebeing the nested field that all the other fields would fall under for each architecture type.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The goal is that the "interface" to ELF, MachO, and PE have a similar feel. This will make building analytics and understanding of the data model. I discussed with @andrewstucki a while back about means to do that. The problem is that MachO fat binaries are literally two fully, self-sufficient executables in one big MachO wrapper. This means that any field that we decide to nest as architecture specific will have to contain all the architecture-dependent data. The result of this discussion is that it probably made the most sense to make
file.machoas a nested type, which drastically simplifies the data.We should meet to discuss.