T1110.001 Password Guessing
sub-techniqueEnterpriseAdversaries with no prior knowledge of legitimate credentials within the system or environment may guess passwords to attempt access to accounts. Without knowledge of the password for an account, an adversary may opt to systematically guess the password using a repetitive or iterative mechanism. An adversary may guess login credentials without prior knowledge of system or environment passwords during an operation by using a list of common passwords. Password guessing may or may not take into account the target's policies on password complexity or use policies that may lock accounts out after a number of failed attempts. Guessing passwords can be a risky option because it could cause numerous authentication failures and account lockouts, depending on the organization's login failure policies. Typically, management services over commonly used ports are used when guessing passwords. Commonly targeted services include the following: * SSH (22/TCP) * Telnet (23/TCP) * FTP (21/TCP) * NetBIOS / SMB / Samba (139/TCP & 445/TCP) * LDAP (389/TCP) * Kerberos (88/TCP) * RDP / Terminal Services (3389/TCP) * HTTP/HTTP Management Services (80/TCP & 443/TCP) * MSSQL (1433/TCP) * Oracle (1521/TCP) * MySQL (3306/TCP) * VNC (5900/TCP) * SNMP (161/UDP and 162/TCP/UDP) In addition to management services, adversaries may "target single sign-on (SSO) and cloud-based applications utilizing federated authentication protocols," as well as externally facing email applications, such as Office 365.. Further, adversaries may abuse network device interfaces (such as `wlanAPI`) to brute force accessible wifi-router(s) via wireless authentication protocols. In default environments, LDAP and Kerberos connection attempts are less likely to trigger events over SMB, which creates Windows "logon failure" event ID 4625.
platforms
Platforms this applies to.
tactics
ATT&CK tactics this technique serves.
sub-technique of
The broader entity this sits under.
mitigations
ATT&CK mitigations that reduce this.
detected by (1)
Data components that detect this.
countered by (D3FEND)
D3FEND countermeasures that counter this.
Harden
Detect
Evict
NIST CSF 2.0 — areas of relevance (Protect / Detect)
NIST CSF 2.0 areas this most relates to (evidence-ranked).
- PR.AAIdentity Management, Authentication, and Access Controlstrong · backed by 9 of 14 mapped controls
- DE.CMContinuous Monitoringmoderate · backed by 4 of 14 mapped controls
- PR.DSData Securitymoderate · backed by 3 of 14 mapped controls
Derived from MITRE CTID (Apache-2.0) and the NIST 800-53 ↔ CSF crosswalk (public domain). Indicative relevance along the Protect/Detect axis — not a compliance assessment or coverage claim.
mitigating controls (14)
Security controls that mitigate this.
attack patterns (1)
CAPEC attack patterns that exploit this.
groups (4)
Threat groups associated with this.
software (9)
Malware and tools associated with this.
Detected by (Sigma) (5)
Sigma detection rules related to this.
source
Where this definition is published.