ZeroAccess.Gen

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements
Please sign in to see details of an important advisory in our Customer Advisories area.

ZeroAccess.Gen

Not applicable

Our threat monitor shows a lot of ZeroAccess.Gen Command and Control traffic, type spyware.  The default threat action is to alert.  I want to either block or drop.  What is the best way to block traffic for a specific threat signature but to use defaults on all others with the same severity? 

The threat signature categorizes zeroaccess.gen, id 13235, as botnet.  Are threat signatures used as part of the behavioral analysis in determining probable botnets?  I don't see any correlation between destination IP addresses in the threat log and in the botnet report.

Thanks

1 accepted solution

Accepted Solutions

L5 Sessionator

Hi,

You can create an exception in you Anti Spyware profiles to block this threat instead of alerting it.

exception.JPG

Let us know if this resolves your issue.

Thank you

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4

L5 Sessionator

Hi,

You can create an exception in you Anti Spyware profiles to block this threat instead of alerting it.

exception.JPG

Let us know if this resolves your issue.

Thank you

Don't forget to check the enable box.  The other approach is overriding the default actions globally in the policy for critical events.

Capture-test-policy.JPG

Either approach will work but the prior approach (mbutt's) is a more cautious and controlled one. Just keep an eye on critical and high events and decide if you are happy with the default action being taken.

Not applicable

Creating an exception for the specific threat seems to work.  I am cautious about overriding the defaults for all critical threats.

I am considering a third option.  I created a rule with a "Threat name" containing the string of the threat and an action of block.  A second rule would use specify the default action for everything else.  (My example says "alert" and not default.  But that is just for testing.)  My hope is that the rules will be processed in order.  All ZeroAcess.Gen will be blocked.  All other threats should use the default action.

Comments?

That would work also.  I think either approach accomplishes the end result.  My understanding is that it is processed in order top down like firewall rules.  The exception in 4.1 is fileblocking profiles. https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/docs/DOC-2858 as a heads up if you go there.

Phil

  • 1 accepted solution
  • 5119 Views
  • 4 replies
  • 0 Likes
Like what you see?

Show your appreciation!

Click Like if a post is helpful to you or if you just want to show your support.

Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.

The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!

These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the LIVEcommunity as a whole!

The LIVEcommunity thanks you for your participation!