Cisco Isovalent - Pods Running Offensive Tools

SPLUNK detection rule by Bhavin Patel, Splunk · Apache-2.0

The following analytic detects execution of known offensive tooling from within Kubernetes pods, including network scanners and post-exploitation frameworks (e.g., nmap, masscan, zmap, impacket-*, hashcat, john, SharpHound, kube-hunter, peirates). We have created a macro named `linux_offsec_tool_processes` that contains the list of known offensive tooling found on linux systems. Adversaries commonly introduce these tools into compromised workloads to conduct discovery, lateral movement, credential access, or cluster reconnaissance. This behavior may indicate a compromised container or supply-chain abuse. Extra scrutiny is warranted for namespaces that do not typically run diagnostic scanners and for pods that suddenly begin invoking these binaries outside of normal maintenance activity.

name: Cisco Isovalent - Pods Running Offensive Tools
id: e9d0b9e6-2f3c-4a8a-9d61-2b6f4a9c1c2e
version: 5
creation_date: '2026-01-05'
modification_date: '2026-05-13'
author: Bhavin Patel, Splunk
status: production
type: Anomaly
description: The following analytic detects execution of known offensive tooling from within Kubernetes pods, including network scanners and post-exploitation frameworks (e.g., nmap, masscan, zmap, impacket-*, hashcat, john, SharpHound, kube-hunter, peirates). We have created a macro named `linux_offsec_tool_processes` that contains the list of known offensive tooling found on linux systems. Adversaries commonly introduce these tools into compromised workloads to conduct discovery, lateral movement, credential access, or cluster reconnaissance. This behavior may indicate a compromised container or supply-chain abuse. Extra scrutiny is warranted for namespaces that do not typically run diagnostic scanners and for pods that suddenly begin invoking these binaries outside of normal maintenance activity.
data_source:
    - Cisco Isovalent Process Exec
search: |
    `cisco_isovalent_process_exec`  `linux_offsec_tool_processes`
    | stats count
            min(_time) as firstTime
            max(_time) as lastTime
            values(process) as process
        by cluster_name container_id pod_name pod_namespace pod_image_name parent_process_name process_name process_exec process_id node_name
    | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)`
    | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`
    | `cisco_isovalent___pods_running_offensive_tools_filter`
how_to_implement: The detection is based on process execution data generated by Cisco Isovalent Runtime Security. Ensure that Isovalent Runtime Security is deployed and configured in your Kubernetes environment to emit process_exec events. Configure the Cisco Security Cloud TA to collect these logs via HTTP Event Collector (HEC) and normalize them into the Splunk Common Information Model. This integration ensures that all relevant pod, container, and process activity is captured for monitoring and detection of suspicious behavior.
known_false_positives: Security testing, approved red team exercises, or sanctioned diagnostics can trigger this analytic. Coordinate allowlists and maintenance windows with platform/SecOps teams. Please update a macro named `linux_offsec_tool_processes` that contains the list of known offensive tooling found on linux systems if your environment has additional known offensive tools that are not included in the macro.
references:
    - https://dev.to/thenjdevopsguy/attacking-a-kubernetes-cluster-enter-red-team-mode-2onj
    - https://www.reddit.com/r/kubernetes/comments/l6e5yr/one_of_our_kubernetes_containers_was_compromised/
drilldown_searches:
    - name: View the detection results for - "$pod_name$"
      search: '%original_detection_search% | search pod_name = "$pod_name$"'
      earliest_offset: $info_min_time$
      latest_offset: $info_max_time$
    - name: View risk events for the last 7 days for - "$pod_name$"
      search: '| from datamodel Risk.All_Risk | search normalized_risk_object IN ("$pod_name$") | stats count min(_time) as firstTime max(_time) as lastTime values(search_name) as "Search Name" values(risk_message) as "Risk Message" values(analyticstories) as "Analytic Stories" values(annotations._all) as "Annotations" values(annotations.mitre_attack.mitre_tactic) as "ATT&CK Tactics" by normalized_risk_object | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)` | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`'
      earliest_offset: 7d
      latest_offset: "0"
intermediate_findings:
    entities:
        - field: pod_name
          type: system
          score: 20
          message: Offensive tool execution [$process_name$] detected in pod [$pod_name$] on cluster [$cluster_name$]
threat_objects:
    - field: process_name
      type: process_name
analytic_story:
    - Cisco Isovalent Suspicious Activity
asset_type: Endpoint
mitre_attack_id:
    - T1204.003
product:
    - Splunk Enterprise
    - Splunk Enterprise Security
    - Splunk Cloud
category: endpoint
security_domain: endpoint
tests:
    - name: True Positive Test
      attack_data:
        - data: https://media.githubusercontent.com/media/splunk/attack_data/master/datasets/cisco_isovalent/cisco_isovalent.log
          source: not_applicable
          sourcetype: cisco:isovalent:processExec
      test_type: unit

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

3a3de5a7-2430-4b9d-ae6c-530baad4af64

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