![]() A complete solution requires users to install another tool (such as FleetDM) to use Since OSQuery does not include any kind of client/server orchestration Velociraptor is typically much faster than OSQuery andįinally, OSQuery by itself is not sufficient to monitor a large network Finding files using queries against the “file” table are notoriouslyĮxpensive. Is deliberately kept very simple, yet powerfully expressive.Īdditionally, OSQuery suffers from performance issues. Write new queries to gather new evidence on the endpoint. Velociraptor’s VQL also allows users to flexibly Sophisticated queries use SQL contracts that are a pretty complex, such as JOIN operators. While simple SQL is easy for beginners to learn, more There are limitations in SQL expressions that impact its ability to build concise and flexible The main limitation with OSQuery is that it uses SQL, a language that is designed for databases and not to query dynamicĮndpoint state. To address new threats or find new IOCs, making it a popular choice ThisĬapability allows users to target specific queries in a flexible way That provided a query langauge to allow querying the endpoints. ![]() OSQuery was really the first popular example of an open source tool ![]() To send only the most relevant results and reduces On the endpoint, and uses a powerful query language allowing new parsers to Velociraptor contains many powerful forensic analysis modules Much of the parsing and analysis to the endpoint as Minimal parsing capability on the endpoint, preferring instead of GRR primarily collects files and registry keys from the endpoint, with Velociraptor server can handle over 10,000 endpoint network easily,Īnd can be installed in a few minutes on modest hardware. Much lower memory/CPU footprint on the endpoint. Velociraptor is also much faster than GRR and has a Moving parts, Velociraptor is a single statically compiled executable ![]() While GRR requires a complex deployment with many Techniques and detect malicious activity quickly and with precision.Īnother aspect where Velociraptor differs from GRR is in it’s ease of Sophisticated analysis on the endpoint to surface novel adversary However, Velociraptor artifacts do more than collectįiles or registry keys. GRR and Velociraptor both refer to the process of simultaneously collecting the same file or registry key fromĬollection of “artifacts” from multiple hosts in a similar way. GRR allows for “Flows” to be scheduled in advance so that evidence is automatically collected That many endpoints are not online when investigators need toĪccess them. One of the challenges of remotely accessing machines at scale is Rather than passively analyse logs that after they were collected into a central location, GRR allowed security professionals to proactively search for evidence of compromise GRR allowed investigators to quickly query network hosts to check files or registry settings. Google’s Rapid Response (GRR) launched in 2011, and was one of the first tools to allow hunting for forensic artifacts at scale. Let’s look at the major design differences and priorities of Velociraptor, GRR, and OSQuery. If you used either of these projects you might wonder how Velociraptor compares to the work that was done before Velociraptor draws its inspiration from two major open source projects:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |