Approach #1 – Static BreadCrumbs & Lures
This involves spraying breadcrumbs or lures on the host, thereby leading the threat actor to deceptions. The inherent advantage is that that it does not require any agent on the host to monitor them. As an example, Figure 1.0 shows the code from ransomware which is accessing the drives on the endpoint.
GetDriveTypeW can be used to determine the drive type, following which the expression ‘result == 3’ checks if the drive is fixed, ‘result== 2’ checks if the drive is removable, and ‘result==6’ denotes if it is a RAM disk. If any of these drives are found, the routine ‘sub_402CFB’ is called, which then forks a thread to encrypt the files in these drives. The function GetDriveTypeW can also be used to access a remote mapped network drive. The value 4 being returned by the function GetDriveTypeW denotes a remote mapped drive. Encrypting mapped drives has been done extensively by ransomware. In order to detect the ransomware which can encrypt mapped drives, honey mapped drives will be projected on the endpoint as static breadcrumbs. These honey mapped drives will be accessed by ransomware, it will start to encrypt files in the honey mapped drives, and it can be detected that ransomware has compromised the endpoint.
Static breadcrumbs are agentless; they do not need any agent to monitor them on the host in which they are sprayed. However, for static bread crumbs to be effective in diverting a threat actor to a deception, it has to be ensure that the probability of accessing and using the honey breadcrumbs, is more than the legitimate data.