Windows Indirect Command Execution Via Series Of Forfiles

SPLUNK detection rule by Teoderick Contreras, Splunk · Apache-2.0

The following analytic detects excessive usage of the forfiles.exe process, which is often indicative of post-exploitation activities. The detection leverages data from Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) agents, focusing on process execution logs that include process GUID, process name, and parent process. This activity is significant because forfiles.exe can be abused to execute commands on multiple files, a technique used by ransomware like Prestige. If confirmed malicious, this behavior could allow attackers to enumerate files, potentially leading to data exfiltration or further malicious actions.

name: Windows Indirect Command Execution Via Series Of Forfiles
id: bfdaabe7-3db8-48c5-80c1-220f9b8f22be
version: 11
creation_date: '2022-12-07'
modification_date: '2026-05-13'
author: Teoderick Contreras, Splunk
status: production
type: Anomaly
description: The following analytic detects excessive usage of the forfiles.exe process, which is often indicative of post-exploitation activities. The detection leverages data from Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) agents, focusing on process execution logs that include process GUID, process name, and parent process. This activity is significant because forfiles.exe can be abused to execute commands on multiple files, a technique used by ransomware like Prestige. If confirmed malicious, this behavior could allow attackers to enumerate files, potentially leading to data exfiltration or further malicious actions.
data_source:
    - Sysmon EventID 1
    - Windows Event Log Security 4688
    - CrowdStrike ProcessRollup2
search: |-
    | tstats `security_content_summariesonly` values(Processes.action) as action values(Processes.original_file_name) as original_file_name values(Processes.parent_process_exec) as parent_process_exec values(Processes.parent_process_guid) as parent_process_guid values(Processes.parent_process_id) as parent_process_id values(Processes.parent_process_path) as parent_process_path values(Processes.process) as process values(Processes.process_exec) as process_exec values(Processes.process_guid) as process_guid values(Processes.process_hash) as process_hash values(Processes.process_id) as process_id values(Processes.process_integrity_level) as process_integrity_level values(Processes.process_name) as process_name values(Processes.process_path) as process_path values(Processes.user) as user  values(Processes.user_id) as user_id values(Processes.vendor_product) as vendor_product count min(_time) as firstTime max(_time) as lastTime FROM datamodel=Endpoint.Processes
      WHERE Processes.process_name = "forfiles.exe"
        OR
        Processes.original_file_name = "forfiles.exe"
      BY Processes.parent_process_name Processes.parent_process Processes.dest
         Processes.user _time span=1m
    | where count >=20
    | `drop_dm_object_name(Processes)`
    | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)`
    | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`
    | `windows_indirect_command_execution_via_series_of_forfiles_filter`
how_to_implement: The detection is based on data that originates from Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) agents. These agents are designed to provide security-related telemetry from the endpoints where the agent is installed. To implement this search, you must ingest logs that contain the process GUID, process name, and parent process. Additionally, you must ingest complete command-line executions. These logs must be processed using the appropriate Splunk Technology Add-ons that are specific to the EDR product. The logs must also be mapped to the `Processes` node of the `Endpoint` data model. Use the Splunk Common Information Model (CIM) to normalize the field names and speed up the data modeling process.
known_false_positives: No false positives have been identified at this time.
references:
    - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/windows-commands/forfiles
    - https://github.com/carlospolop/PEASS-ng/tree/master/winPEAS
    - https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2022/10/14/new-prestige-ransomware-impacts-organizations-in-ukraine-and-poland/
drilldown_searches:
    - name: View the detection results for - "$dest$"
      search: '%original_detection_search% | search  dest = "$dest$"'
      earliest_offset: $info_min_time$
      latest_offset: $info_max_time$
    - name: View risk events for the last 7 days for - "$dest$"
      search: '| from datamodel Risk.All_Risk | search normalized_risk_object IN ("$dest$") | 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: dest
          type: system
          score: 20
          message: excessive forfiles process execution on $dest$
analytic_story:
    - Windows Post-Exploitation
    - Prestige Ransomware
asset_type: Endpoint
mitre_attack_id:
    - T1202
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/malware/winpeas/sysmon.log
          source: XmlWinEventLog:Microsoft-Windows-Sysmon/Operational
          sourcetype: XmlWinEventLog
      test_type: unit

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

250e3519-11e9-4ab8-995b-3125c30459da

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