TeamViewer Domain Query By Non-TeamViewer Application

SIGMA detection rule by Florian Roth (Nextron Systems) · NOASSERTION

Detects DNS queries to a TeamViewer domain only resolved by a TeamViewer client by an image that isn't named TeamViewer (sometimes used by threat actors for obfuscation)

title: TeamViewer Domain Query By Non-TeamViewer Application
id: 778ba9a8-45e4-4b80-8e3e-34a419f0b85e
status: test
description: Detects DNS queries to a TeamViewer domain only resolved by a TeamViewer client by an image that isn't named TeamViewer (sometimes used by threat actors for obfuscation)
references:
    - https://www.teamviewer.com/en-us/
author: Florian Roth (Nextron Systems)
date: 2022-01-30
modified: 2023-09-18
tags:
    - attack.command-and-control
    - attack.t1219.002
logsource:
    product: windows
    category: dns_query
detection:
    selection:
        QueryName:
            - 'taf.teamviewer.com'
            - 'udp.ping.teamviewer.com'
    filter_main_teamviewer:
        # Note: To avoid evasion based on similar names. Best add full install location of TeamViewer
        Image|contains: 'TeamViewer'
    condition: selection and not 1 of filter_main_*
falsepositives:
    - Unknown binary names of TeamViewer
    - Depending on the environment the rule might require some initial tuning before usage to avoid FP with third party applications
level: medium

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

1a9dd624-478f-4ee4-9c1d-dd40fb3e76f6

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