Skip to content
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

Support for more F-Secure alerts / log providers #26

Closed
einarssonm opened this issue Oct 21, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Support for more F-Secure alerts / log providers #26

einarssonm opened this issue Oct 21, 2021 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@einarssonm
Copy link

Request to add support for more event log providers related to F-Secure alerts. The built-in support for F-Secure alerts consumes events from the "F-Secure Ultralight SDK" provider. My limited research shows that alerts are also found in the "F-Secure File scanning" and "FSecure-FSecure-F-Secure DeepGuard" providers. These alerts aren't detected by Chainsaw.

image

image

(Let me know if there is any good documentation about event ID:s and log providers used by F-Secure.)

@fscc-jamesd fscc-jamesd self-assigned this Oct 21, 2021
@fscc-jamesd fscc-jamesd added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 21, 2021
@einarssonm
Copy link
Author

einarssonm commented Oct 24, 2021

Further research shows that the "F-Secure Ultralight SDK" provider and the FSecureUltralightSDK.evtx file seem to be present since F-Secure v14. For earlier F-Secure versions you have to rely on the Application log and the F-Secure log providers mentioned above. F-Secure versions before v14 are now End of Life, but are sometimes found during investigations.

@alexkornitzer
Copy link
Collaborator

With v2.0.0-alpha.2 builtin rules have been extracted out of Chainsaw into rules. So if you have a list of Providers I can add them to the rule or if you have time would you be able to add them an raise a PR? (https://github.com/countercept/chainsaw/blob/next/rules/antivirus/f-secure.yml#L42) It should be noted though that if the field extraction is different, then I would add them as new rules.

@alexkornitzer alexkornitzer added question Further information is requested and removed enhancement New feature or request labels Jun 7, 2022
@alexkornitzer
Copy link
Collaborator

As the features required are now exposed that there has been no response or progress with this issue I am going to resolve it out. It can be reopened if required.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants