In a Password Spraying attack, an adversary tries a small list (e.g. 3-5) of common or expected passwords, often matching the target's complexity policy, against a known list of user accounts to gain valid credentials. The adversary tries a particular password for each user account, before moving onto the next password in the list. This approach assists the adversary in remaining undetected by avoiding rapid or frequent account lockouts. The adversary may then reattempt the process with additional passwords, once enough time has passed to prevent inducing a lockout.
Extended Description
Password Spraying attacks often target management services over commonly used ports such as SSH, FTP, Telnet, LDAP, Kerberos, MySQL, and more. Additional targets include Single Sign-On (SSO) or cloud-based applications/services that utilize federated authentication protocols, and externally facing applications. Successful execution of Password Spraying attacks usually lead to lateral movement within the target, which allows the adversary to impersonate the victim or execute any action that the victim is authorized to perform. If the password chosen by the user is commonly used or easily guessed, this attack will be successful (in the absence of other mitigations). This is a specific instance of the password brute forcing attack pattern.
Password Spraying Attacks are similar to Dictionary-based Password Attacks (CAPEC-16) in that they both leverage precompiled lists (i.e. dictionaries) of username/password combinations to try against a system/application. The primary difference is that Password Spraying Attacks leverage a known list of user accounts and only try one password for each account before moving onto the next password. In contrast, Dictionary-based Password Attacks leverage unknown username/password combinations and are often executed offline against files containing hashed credentials, where inducing an account lockout is not a concern.
Password Spraying Attacks are also similar to Credential Stuffing attacks (CAPEC-600), since both utilize known user accounts and often attack the same targets. Credential Stuffing attacks, however, leverage known username/password combinations, whereas Password Spraying attacks have no insight into known username/password pairs. If a Password Spraying attack succeeds, it may additionally lead to Credential Stuffing attacks on different targets.
Likelihood Of Attack
High
Typical Severity
High
Relationships
This table shows the other attack patterns and high level categories that are related to this attack pattern. These relationships are defined as ChildOf and ParentOf, and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as CanFollow, PeerOf, and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar attack patterns that the user may want to explore.
Nature
Type
ID
Name
ChildOf
Standard Attack Pattern - A standard level attack pattern in CAPEC is focused on a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. It is often seen as a singular piece of a fully executed attack. A standard attack pattern is meant to provide sufficient details to understand the specific technique and how it attempts to accomplish a desired goal. A standard level attack pattern is a specific type of a more abstract meta level attack pattern.
Meta Attack Pattern - A meta level attack pattern in CAPEC is a decidedly abstract characterization of a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. A meta attack pattern is often void of a specific technology or implementation and is meant to provide an understanding of a high level approach. A meta level attack pattern is a generalization of related group of standard level attack patterns. Meta level attack patterns are particularly useful for architecture and design level threat modeling exercises.
Meta Attack Pattern - A meta level attack pattern in CAPEC is a decidedly abstract characterization of a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. A meta attack pattern is often void of a specific technology or implementation and is meant to provide an understanding of a high level approach. A meta level attack pattern is a generalization of related group of standard level attack patterns. Meta level attack patterns are particularly useful for architecture and design level threat modeling exercises.
Detailed Attack Pattern - A detailed level attack pattern in CAPEC provides a low level of detail, typically leveraging a specific technique and targeting a specific technology, and expresses a complete execution flow. Detailed attack patterns are more specific than meta attack patterns and standard attack patterns and often require a specific protection mechanism to mitigate actual attacks. A detailed level attack pattern often will leverage a number of different standard level attack patterns chained together to accomplish a goal.
Standard Attack Pattern - A standard level attack pattern in CAPEC is focused on a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. It is often seen as a singular piece of a fully executed attack. A standard attack pattern is meant to provide sufficient details to understand the specific technique and how it attempts to accomplish a desired goal. A standard level attack pattern is a specific type of a more abstract meta level attack pattern.
Standard Attack Pattern - A standard level attack pattern in CAPEC is focused on a specific methodology or technique used in an attack. It is often seen as a singular piece of a fully executed attack. A standard attack pattern is meant to provide sufficient details to understand the specific technique and how it attempts to accomplish a desired goal. A standard level attack pattern is a specific type of a more abstract meta level attack pattern.
Determine target's password policy: Determine the password policies of the target system/application.
Techniques
Determine minimum and maximum allowed password lengths.
Determine format of allowed passwords (whether they are required or allowed to contain numbers, special characters, etc., or whether they are allowed to contain words from the dictionary).
Determine account lockout policy (a strict account lockout policy will prevent brute force attacks).
Select passwords: Pick the passwords to be used in the attack (e.g. commonly used passwords, passwords tailored to individual users, etc.)
Techniques
Select passwords based on common use or a particular user's additional details.
Select passwords based on the target's password complexity policies.
Exploit
Brute force password: Given the finite space of possible passwords dictated by information determined in the previous steps, try each password for all known user accounts until the target grants access.
Techniques
Manually or automatically enter the first password for each known user account through the target's interface. In most systems, start with the shortest and simplest possible passwords, because most users tend to select such passwords if allowed to do so.
Iterate through the remaining passwords for each known user account.
Prerequisites
The system/application uses one factor password based authentication.
The system/application does not have a sound password policy that is being enforced.
The system/application does not implement an effective password throttling mechanism.
The adversary possesses a list of known user accounts on the target system/application.
Skills Required
[Level: Low]
A Password Spraying attack is very straightforward. A variety of password cracking tools are widely available.
Resources Required
A machine with sufficient resources for the job (e.g. CPU, RAM, HD).
Applicable password lists.
A password cracking tool or a custom script that leverages the password list to launch the attack.
Indicators
Many invalid login attempts are coming from the same machine (same IP address) or for multiple user accounts within short succession.
The login attempts use passwords that have been used previously by the user account in question.
Login attempts are originating from IP addresses or locations that are inconsistent with the user's normal IP addresses or locations.
Consequences
This table specifies different individual consequences associated with the attack pattern. The Scope identifies the security property that is violated, while the Impact describes the negative technical impact that arises if an adversary succeeds in their attack. The Likelihood provides information about how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other consequences in the list. For example, there may be high likelihood that a pattern will be used to achieve a certain impact, but a low likelihood that it will be exploited to achieve a different impact.
Scope
Impact
Likelihood
Confidentiality
Access Control
Authentication
Gain Privileges
Confidentiality
Authorization
Read Data
Integrity
Modify Data
Mitigations
Create a strong password policy and ensure that your system enforces this policy.
Implement an intelligent password throttling mechanism. Care must be taken to assure that these mechanisms do not excessively enable account lockout attacks such as CAPEC-2.
Leverage multi-factor authentication for all authentication services and prior to granting an entity access to the domain network.
Example Instances
A user selects the phrase "Password123" as their password, believing that it would be very difficult to guess. Password Spraying, leveraging a list of commonly used passwords, is used to crack this password and gain access to the account.
The Iranian hacker group APT33 (AKA Holmium, Refined Kitten, or Elfin) carried out numerous Password Spraying attacks in 2019. On average, APT33 targeted 2,000 organizations per month, with upwards of 10 million authentication attempts each day. The majority of these attacks targeted manufacturers, suppliers, or maintainers of industrial control system equipment.
Related Weaknesses
A Related Weakness relationship associates a weakness with this attack pattern. Each association implies a weakness that must exist for a given attack to be successful. If multiple weaknesses are associated with the attack pattern, then any of the weaknesses (but not necessarily all) may be present for the attack to be successful. Each related weakness is identified by a CWE identifier.
CAPEC mappings to ATT&CK techniques leverage an inheritance model to streamline and minimize direct CAPEC/ATT&CK mappings. Inheritance of a mapping is indicated by text stating that the parent CAPEC has relevant ATT&CK mappings. Note that the ATT&CK Enterprise Framework does not use an inheritance model as part of the mapping to CAPEC.
Relevant to the ATT&CK taxonomy mapping (also see parent)
Description
This table shows the other attack patterns and high level categories that are related to this attack pattern. These relationships are defined as ChildOf and ParentOf, and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. In addition, relationships such as CanFollow, PeerOf, and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar attack patterns that the user may want to explore.
Content History
