GitHub Organizations Repository Deleted

SPLUNK detection rule by Patrick Bareiss, Splunk · Apache-2.0

The following analytic identifies when a repository is deleted within a GitHub organization. The detection monitors GitHub Organizations audit logs for repository deletion events by tracking actor details, repository information, and associated metadata. This behavior is concerning for SOC teams as malicious actors may attempt to delete repositories to destroy source code, intellectual property, or evidence of compromise. Repository deletion can result in permanent loss of code, documentation, and project history if proper backups are not maintained. Additionally, unauthorized repository deletion could indicate account compromise, insider threats, or attempts to disrupt business operations. The impact of a repository deletion attack includes loss of intellectual property, disruption to development workflows, and potential financial losses from lost work. Early detection of unauthorized repository deletions allows security teams to investigate potential compromises and restore from backups if needed.

name: GitHub Organizations Repository Deleted
id: 9ff4ca95-fdae-4eea-9ffa-6d8e1c202a71
version: 9
creation_date: '2025-01-15'
modification_date: '2026-05-13'
author: Patrick Bareiss, Splunk
status: production
type: Anomaly
description: The following analytic identifies when a repository is deleted within a GitHub organization. The detection monitors GitHub Organizations audit logs for repository deletion events by tracking actor details, repository information, and associated metadata. This behavior is concerning for SOC teams as malicious actors may attempt to delete repositories to destroy source code, intellectual property, or evidence of compromise. Repository deletion can result in permanent loss of code, documentation, and project history if proper backups are not maintained. Additionally, unauthorized repository deletion could indicate account compromise, insider threats, or attempts to disrupt business operations. The impact of a repository deletion attack includes loss of intellectual property, disruption to development workflows, and potential financial losses from lost work. Early detection of unauthorized repository deletions allows security teams to investigate potential compromises and restore from backups if needed.
data_source:
    - GitHub Organizations Audit Logs
search: |-
    `github_organizations` vendor_action=repo.destroy
      | fillnull
      | stats count min(_time) as firstTime max(_time) as lastTime
        BY actor, actor_id, actor_is_bot,
           actor_location.country_code, business, business_id,
           org, org_id, repo,
           repo_id, user_agent, visibility,
           vendor_action
      | eval user=actor
      | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)`
      | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`
      | `github_organizations_repository_deleted_filter`
how_to_implement: You must ingest GitHub Organizations logs using Splunk Add-on for Github using a Personal Access Token https://splunk.github.io/splunk-add-on-for-github-audit-log-monitoring/Install/ .
known_false_positives: No false positives have been identified at this time.
references:
    - https://splunk.github.io/splunk-add-on-for-github-audit-log-monitoring/Install/
    - https://www.googlecloudcommunity.com/gc/Community-Blog/Monitoring-for-Suspicious-GitHub-Activity-with-Google-Security/ba-p/763610
drilldown_searches:
    - name: View the detection results for - "$user$"
      search: '%original_detection_search% | search  user = "$user$"'
      earliest_offset: $info_min_time$
      latest_offset: $info_max_time$
    - name: View risk events for the last 7 days for - "$user$"
      search: '| from datamodel Risk.All_Risk | search normalized_risk_object IN ("$user$") | 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: user
          type: user
          score: 20
          message: $user$ deleted a repository in GitHub Organizations
threat_objects:
    - field: user_agent
      type: http_user_agent
analytic_story:
    - GitHub Malicious Activity
    - NPM Supply Chain Compromise
asset_type: GitHub
mitre_attack_id:
    - T1485
    - T1195
product:
    - Splunk Enterprise
    - Splunk Enterprise Security
    - Splunk Cloud
category: cloud
security_domain: network
tests:
    - name: True Positive Test
      attack_data:
        - data: https://media.githubusercontent.com/media/splunk/attack_data/master/datasets/attack_techniques/T1485/github_delete_repository/github.json
          source: github
          sourcetype: github:cloud:audit
      test_type: unit

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

42dd7f3c-c561-49ba-b0e6-9bc38263559b

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