T1195 Supply Chain Compromise
EnterpriseAdversaries may manipulate products or product delivery mechanisms prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise. Supply chain compromise can take place at any stage of the supply chain including: * Manipulation of development tools * Manipulation of a development environment * Manipulation of source code repositories (public or private) * Manipulation of source code in open-source dependencies * Manipulation of software update/distribution mechanisms * Compromised/infected system images (removable media infected at the factory) * Replacement of legitimate software with modified versions * Sales of modified/counterfeit products to legitimate distributors * Shipment interdiction While supply chain compromise can impact any component of hardware or software, adversaries looking to gain execution have often focused on malicious additions to legitimate software in software distribution or update channels. Adversaries may limit targeting to a desired victim set or distribute malicious software to a broad set of consumers but only follow up with specific victims. Popular open-source projects that are used as dependencies in many applications may also be targeted as a means to add malicious code to users of the dependency. In some cases, adversaries may conduct “second-order” supply chain compromises by leveraging the access gained from an initial supply chain compromise to further compromise a software component. This may allow the threat actor to spread to even more victims.
platforms
Platforms this applies to.
tactics
ATT&CK tactics this technique serves.
sub-techniques (3)
More specific entries beneath this one.
mitigations
ATT&CK mitigations that reduce this.
detected by (7)
Data components that detect this.
NIST CSF 2.0 — areas of relevance (Protect / Detect)
NIST CSF 2.0 areas this most relates to (evidence-ranked).
- PR.PSPlatform Securitymoderate · backed by 9 of 22 mapped controls
- ID.RARisk Assessmentmoderate · backed by 8 of 22 mapped controls
- DE.CMContinuous Monitoringmoderate · backed by 7 of 22 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 (22)
Security controls that mitigate this.
known-exploited CVEs (1)
Related CVEs.
| ID | severity | exploitable | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-49035US | critical9.8OT critical | KEV | ||
An improper access control vulnerability in Partner.Microsoft.com allows an a unauthenticated attacker to elevate privileges over a network. | ||||
attack patterns (3)
CAPEC attack patterns that exploit this.
groups (3)
Threat groups associated with this.
software (2)
Malware and tools associated with this.
Detected by (Sigma) (1)
Sigma detection rules related to this.
source
Where this definition is published.