Search for: All records

Auditing, a central pillar of operating system security, has only recently come into its own as an active area of public research. This resurgent interest is due in large part to the notion of data provenance, a technique that iteratively parses audit log entries into a dependency graph that explains the history of system execution. Provenance facilitates precise threat detection and investigation through causal analysis of sophisticated intrusion behaviors. However, the absence of a foundational audit literature, combined with the rapid publication of recent findings, makes it difficult to gain a holistic picture of advancements and open challenges in the area.In this work, we survey and categorize the provenance-based system auditing literature, distilling contributions into a layered taxonomy based on the audit log capture and analysis pipeline. Recognizing that the Reduction Layer remains a key obstacle to the further proliferation of causal analysis technologies, we delve further on this issue by conducting an ambitious independent evaluation of 8 exemplar reduction techniques against the recently-released DARPA Transparent Computing datasets. Our experiments uncover that past approaches frequently prune an overlapping set of activities from audit logs, reducing the synergistic benefits from applying them in tandem; further, we observe an inverse relation between storage efficiency and anomaly detection performance. However, we also observe that log reduction techniques are able to synergize effectively with data compression, potentially reducing log retention costs by multiple orders of magnitude. We conclude by discussing promising future directions for the field. 

System logs are invaluable to forensic audits, but grow so large that in practice fine-grained logs are quickly discarded – if captured at all – preventing the real-world use of the provenance-based investigation techniques that have gained popularity in the literature. Encouragingly, forensically-informed methods for reducing the size of system logs are a subject of frequent study. Unfortunately, many of these techniques are designed for offline reduction in a central server, meaning that the up-front cost of log capture, storage, and transmission must still be paid at the endpoints. Moreover, to date these techniques exist as isolated (and, often, closed-source) implementations; there does not exist a comprehensive framework through which the combined benefits of multiple log reduction techniques can be enjoyed. In this work, we present FAuST, an audit daemon for performing streaming audit log reduction at system endpoints. After registering with a log source (e.g., via Linux Audit’s audisp utility), FAuST incrementally builds an in-memory provenance graph of recent system activity. During graph construction, log reduction techniques that can be applied to local subgraphs are invoked immediately using event callback handlers, while techniques meant for application on the global graph are invoked in periodic epochs. We evaluate FAuST, loaded with eight different log reduction modules from the literature, against the DARPA Transparent Computing datasets. Our experiments demonstrate the efficient performance of FAuST and identify certain subsets of reduction techniques that are synergistic with one another. Thus, FAuST dramatically simplifies the evaluation and deployment of log reduction techniques. 

Auditing is an increasingly essential tool for the defense of computing systems, but the unwieldy nature of log data imposes significant burdens on administrators and analysts. To address this issue, a variety of techniques have been proposed for approximating the contents of raw audit logs, facilitating efficient storage and analysis. However, the security value of these approximated logs is difficult to measure—relative to the original log, it is unclear if these techniques retain the forensic evidence needed to effectively investigate threats. Unfortunately, prior work has only investigated this issue anecdotally, demonstrating sufficient evidence is retained for specific attack scenarios. In this work, we address this gap in the literature through formalizing metrics for quantifying the forensic validity of an approximated audit log under differing threat models. In addition to providing quantifiable security arguments for prior work, we also identify a novel point in the approximation design space—that log events describing typical (benign) system activity can be aggressively approximated, while events that encode anomalous behavior should be preserved with lossless fidelity. We instantiate this notion of Attack-Preserving forensic validity in LogApprox, a new approximation technique that eliminates the redundancy of voluminous file I/O associated with benign process activities. We evaluate LogApprox alongside a corpus of exemplar approximation techniques from prior work and demonstrate that LogApprox achieves comparable log reduction rates while retaining 100% of attack-identifying log events. Additionally, we utilize this evaluation to illuminate the inherent trade-off between performance and utility within existing approximation techniques. This work thus establishes trustworthy foundations for the design of the next generation of efficient auditing frameworks.