GitHub Organizations Disable 2FA Requirement

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

The following analytic detects when two-factor authentication (2FA) requirements are disabled in GitHub Organizations. The detection monitors GitHub Organizations audit logs for 2FA requirement changes by tracking actor details, organization information, and associated metadata. For a SOC, identifying disabled 2FA requirements is critical as it could indicate attempts to weaken account security controls. Two-factor authentication is a fundamental security control that helps prevent unauthorized access even if passwords are compromised. Disabling 2FA requirements could allow attackers to more easily compromise accounts through password-based attacks. The impact of disabled 2FA includes increased risk of account takeover, potential access to sensitive code and intellectual property, and compromise of the software supply chain. This activity could be part of a larger attack chain where an adversary first disables security controls before attempting broader account compromises.

name: GitHub Organizations Disable 2FA Requirement
id: 3ed0d6ba-4791-4fa8-a1ef-403e438c7033
version: 9
creation_date: '2025-01-15'
modification_date: '2026-05-13'
author: Patrick Bareiss, Splunk
status: production
type: Anomaly
description: The following analytic detects when two-factor authentication (2FA) requirements are disabled in GitHub Organizations. The detection monitors GitHub Organizations audit logs for 2FA requirement changes by tracking actor details, organization information, and associated metadata. For a SOC, identifying disabled 2FA requirements is critical as it could indicate attempts to weaken account security controls. Two-factor authentication is a fundamental security control that helps prevent unauthorized access even if passwords are compromised. Disabling 2FA requirements could allow attackers to more easily compromise accounts through password-based attacks. The impact of disabled 2FA includes increased risk of account takeover, potential access to sensitive code and intellectual property, and compromise of the software supply chain. This activity could be part of a larger attack chain where an adversary first disables security controls before attempting broader account compromises.
data_source:
    - GitHub Organizations Audit Logs
search: |-
    `github_organizations` vendor_action=org.disable_two_factor_requirement
      | 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,
           user_agent, vendor_action
      | eval user=actor
      | `security_content_ctime(firstTime)`
      | `security_content_ctime(lastTime)`
      | `github_organizations_disable_2fa_requirement_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: $user$ disabled 2FA requirement in GitHub Organizations
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_two_factor_requirement/github.json
          source: github
          sourcetype: github:cloud:audit
      test_type: unit

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

c80cb4c7-ab32-434e-b300-d8eb0ea80ca1

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