GitHub Enterprise Disable Classic Branch Protection Rule

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

The following analytic detects when classic branch protection rules are disabled in GitHub Enterprise. The detection monitors GitHub Enterprise audit logs for branch protection removal events by tracking actor details, repository information, and associated metadata. For a SOC, identifying disabled branch protection is critical as it could indicate attempts to bypass code review requirements and security controls. Branch protection rules are essential security controls that enforce code review, prevent force pushes, and maintain code quality. Disabling these protections could allow malicious actors to directly push unauthorized code changes or backdoors to protected branches. The impact of disabled branch protection includes potential code tampering, bypass of security reviews, introduction of vulnerabilities or malicious code, and compromise of software supply chain integrity. This activity could be part of a larger attack chain where an adversary first disables security controls before attempting to inject malicious code.

name: GitHub Enterprise Disable Classic Branch Protection Rule
id: 372176ba-450c-4abd-9b86-419bb44c1b76
version: 8
creation_date: '2025-01-15'
modification_date: '2026-05-13'
author: Patrick Bareiss, Splunk
status: production
type: Anomaly
description: The following analytic detects when classic branch protection rules are disabled in GitHub Enterprise. The detection monitors GitHub Enterprise audit logs for branch protection removal events by tracking actor details, repository information, and associated metadata. For a SOC, identifying disabled branch protection is critical as it could indicate attempts to bypass code review requirements and security controls. Branch protection rules are essential security controls that enforce code review, prevent force pushes, and maintain code quality. Disabling these protections could allow malicious actors to directly push unauthorized code changes or backdoors to protected branches. The impact of disabled branch protection includes potential code tampering, bypass of security reviews, introduction of vulnerabilities or malicious code, and compromise of software supply chain integrity. This activity could be part of a larger attack chain where an adversary first disables security controls before attempting to inject malicious code.
data_source:
    - GitHub Enterprise Audit Logs
search: |-
    `github_enterprise` action=protected_branch.destroy
      | fillnull
      | stats count min(_time) as firstTime max(_time) as lastTime
        BY actor, actor_id, actor_ip,
           actor_is_bot, actor_location.country_code, business,
           business_id, org, org_id,
           repo, repo_id, user_agent,
           action, name
      | eval user=actor
      | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)`
      | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`
      | `github_enterprise_disable_classic_branch_protection_rule_filter`
how_to_implement: You must ingest GitHub Enterprise logs using Audit log streaming as described in this documentation https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/admin/monitoring-activity-in-your-enterprise/reviewing-audit-logs-for-your-enterprise/streaming-the-audit-log-for-your-enterprise#setting-up-streaming-to-splunk using a Splunk HTTP Event Collector.
known_false_positives: No false positives have been identified at this time.
references:
    - https://www.googlecloudcommunity.com/gc/Community-Blog/Monitoring-for-Suspicious-GitHub-Activity-with-Google-Security/ba-p/763610
    - https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/admin/monitoring-activity-in-your-enterprise/reviewing-audit-logs-for-your-enterprise/streaming-the-audit-log-for-your-enterprise#setting-up-streaming-to-splunk
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: $user$ disabled a classic branch protection rule in repo $repo$
threat_objects:
    - field: user_agent
      type: http_user_agent
analytic_story:
    - GitHub Malicious Activity
asset_type: GitHub
mitre_attack_id:
    - T1685
    - 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/T1562.001/github_disable_classic_branch_protection/github.json
          source: http:github
          sourcetype: httpevent
      test_type: unit

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

171edbd2-609e-4735-8c06-99790057e9d4

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