Skip to content
Every technique
T1599Not expressible in Sigma

Network Boundary Bridging

Defense ImpairmentNetwork Devices

Where this stands

No Sigma rule can address this — the telemetry MITRE names has no Sigma logsource behind it.

None of MITRE's analytics for this technique name a log source that maps to a Sigma logsource — they describe abstract data ("Process::None"), API-hook telemetry, or prose channels with no reliable field names behind them.

What the technique is

Adversaries may bridge network boundaries by compromising perimeter network devices or internal devices responsible for network segmentation. Breaching these devices may enable an adversary to bypass restrictions on traffic routing that otherwise separate trusted and untrusted networks. Devices such as routers and firewalls can be used to create boundaries between trusted and untrusted networks. They achieve this by restricting traffic types to enforce organizational policy in an attempt to reduce the risk inherent in such connections. Restriction of traffic can be achieved by prohibiting IP addresses, layer 4 protocol ports, or through deep packet inspection to identify applications. To participate with the rest of the network, these devices can be directly addressable or transparent, but their mode of operation has no bearing on how the adversary can bypass them when compromised. When an adversary takes control of such a boundary device, they can bypass its policy enforcement to pass normally prohibited traffic across the trust boundary between the two separated networks without hinderance. By achieving sufficient rights on the device, an adversary can reconfigure the device to allow the traffic they want, allowing them to then further achieve goals such as command and control via Multi-hop Proxy or exfiltration of data via Traffic Duplication. […]

Read it on attack.mitre.org

What MITRE says you would watch

  • AN0015

    From a defender’s perspective, suspicious bridging is observed when network devices begin allowing traffic that contradicts existing segmentation or access policies. Observable behaviors include sudden modifications to ACLs or firewall rules, unusual cross-boundary traffic flows (e.g., east-west communications across separated VLANs), or simultaneous ingress/egress anomalies. Multi-event correlation is key: configuration changes on a router/firewall followed by unexpected traffic patterns, especially from unusual sources, is a strong indicator of compromise.

Technique names and descriptions © MITRE ATT&CK®, CC BY 4.0. Not endorsed by MITRE.