CVE-2020-1048 Exploitation Attempt - Suspicious New Printer Ports - Registry

SIGMA detection rule by EagleEye Team, Florian Roth (Nextron Systems), NVISO · NOASSERTION

Detects changes to the "Ports" registry key with data that includes a Windows path or a file with a suspicious extension. This could be an attempt to exploit CVE-2020-1048 - a Windows Print Spooler elevation of privilege vulnerability.

title: CVE-2020-1048 Exploitation Attempt - Suspicious New Printer Ports - Registry
id: 7ec912f2-5175-4868-b811-ec13ad0f8567
status: test
description: |
    Detects changes to the "Ports" registry key with data that includes a Windows path or a file with a suspicious extension.
    This could be an attempt to exploit CVE-2020-1048 - a Windows Print Spooler elevation of privilege vulnerability.
references:
    - https://windows-internals.com/printdemon-cve-2020-1048/
author: EagleEye Team, Florian Roth (Nextron Systems), NVISO
date: 2020-05-13
modified: 2024-03-25
tags:
    - attack.persistence
    - attack.execution
    - attack.defense-impairment
    - attack.t1112
    - cve.2020-1048
    - detection.emerging-threats
logsource:
    product: windows
    category: registry_set
detection:
    selection:
        TargetObject|contains: '\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Ports'
        Details|contains:
            - '.bat'
            - '.com'
            - '.dll'
            - '.exe'
            - '.ps1'
            - '.vbe'
            - '.vbs'
            - 'C:'
    condition: selection
falsepositives:
    - New printer port install on host
level: high

[[ currentRule.title && currentRule.title.length > 60 ? currentRule.title.slice(0, 60) + '…' : currentRule.title ]]

06f5c8b5-444b-49d8-9d29-0a2e317d5645

Propose edits, view related rules, and engage with the community through comments.

Executable code, not a declarative rule

This submission is arbitrary [[ currentRule.format ? currentRule.format.toUpperCase() : '' ]] code, not a declarative detection rule — review it as you would any script before running it, and note that it cannot be safely aggregated or auto-executed alongside YARA/Sigma/Suricata/CRS rules.

Rejected pattern present

[[ reason ]]

What does this mean?

Format & documentation suggestions

Not a security issue — this rule is valid and was accepted as-is. These are optional fields/conventions its own format recommends, mainly affecting its quality score and how well it documents itself for other reviewers.

[[ reason ]]

What do these messages mean?

[[ currentRule.title && currentRule.title.length > 60 ? currentRule.title.slice(0, 60) + '…' : currentRule.title ]]

[[ currentRule.title ]]

Community Discussion