BeyondTrust

Security in Context: The BeyondTrust Blog

Welcome to Security in Context

Bringing you news and commentary on solutions and strategies for protecting critical IT infrastructure in the context of your business.

A Use Case for File Integrity Monitoring within PowerBroker for Windows

Posted August 22, 2013    Jason Silva

As most of you are aware, PowerBroker for Windows v6 introduced File Integrity Monitoring (FIM) into the software.  For those of you who did not know this, FIM allows an Admin to specify protections over files/folders so these assets can only be modified by certain users or service accounts.  It also protects against renaming the file, which leads me to the point of this post.

Occasionally a process needs to be elevated that exists in a location your end-users can overwrite.  With a publisher rule this is OK, because if the user changed the process but gave it the same name as what existed, the publisher or hash rule wouldn’t apply.  But often times, files that get put into these locations are not signed, so a publisher rule won’t work, and hash rules can be inconvenient because you have to change them every time the file gets updated for reasons like say, a version change.  So up to now, the necessity is to build a path rule on it.  This means PowerBroker for Windows would elevate the process so long as it was in this path and had ‘this’ as a filename.  The problem here is; If a malicious user wanted to, and they had the rights, they could (as stated above) replace the would be elevated application with something else, give it the same name as what was being elevated and carry out their devious plans.

But, fear not, for we have a solution: Place a FIM policy on the file.  This prevents the user from deleting, replacing, or even renaming the file, but the Privilege Elevation rule still works because they still have Read/Execute rights to it.

So the uneasiness of elevating something like a local script, for instance, where the user has control of what actually gets executed is now removed. This is a unique feature of the PowerBroker for Windows software, and one I know PBUsers will be able to make great use of.

FIMScreenPolicy_1_shadow FIMScreenRename_2_shadow

Tags:
, , , ,

Leave a Reply

One Response to “A Use Case for File Integrity Monitoring within PowerBroker for Windows”

  1. Abhi Kumar

    Nice piece of information on file integrity monitoring.Great post!!

    October 20, 2014 3:05:04, Reply

Additional articles

Sudo_logo

Don’t Create a Different sudoers File for Each System

Posted May 20, 2015    Randy Franklin Smith

What if you have multiple Linux and/or Unix systems? Sudo management can become onerous and unwieldy if you try to manage a different sudoers file on each system. The good news is that sudo supports multiple systems.

password-safety

What Does Microsoft Local Administrator Password Solution Really Do?

Posted May 19, 2015    Morey Haber

LAPS is a feature that allows the randomization of local administrator accounts across the domain. Although it would seem that this capability overlaps with features in BeyondTrust’s PowerBroker Password Safe (PBPS), the reality is it is more suited for simple use cases such as changing the local Windows admin account and not much more.

Tags:
, ,
webinar_ondemand

On Demand Webinar: Securing Windows Server with Security Compliance Manager

Posted May 14, 2015    BeyondTrust Software

On Demand Webinar: Security Expert Russell Smith, explains how to use Microsoft’s free Security Compliance Manager (SCM) tool to create and deploy your own security baselines, including user and computer authentication settings.

Tags:
, ,