APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections

APT & CyberCriminal Campaign Collection

3,636

914

3,636

View on GitHub

Top Related Projects

signature-base

2,433

YARA signature and IOC database for my scanners and tools

APTnotes

3,466

Various public documents, whitepapers and articles about APT campaigns

awesome-threat-intelligence

7,835

A curated list of Awesome Threat Intelligence resources

Quick Overview

The CyberMonitor/APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections repository is a comprehensive collection of various reports and analyses on Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) groups and cybercriminal campaigns. It serves as a centralized resource for cybersecurity professionals, researchers, and enthusiasts to access information about different threat actors and their activities.

Pros

Extensive collection of reports from various sources, providing a wide range of information on APT groups and cybercriminal campaigns
Regular updates with new reports and analyses, keeping the information current and relevant
Well-organized structure, making it easy to navigate and find specific information about different threat actors
Open-source nature allows for community contributions and improvements

Cons

Lack of standardized format for reports, which may make it challenging to compare information across different sources
Potential for information overload due to the large volume of reports and analyses
Possibility of outdated information in older reports if not regularly reviewed and updated
Reliance on external sources for content, which may lead to inconsistencies in quality and depth of information

Note: As this is not a code library, the code example and quick start sections have been omitted.

Competitor Comparisons

signature-base

2,433

YARA signature and IOC database for my scanners and tools

Pros of signature-base

More actively maintained with frequent updates
Includes YARA rules for threat detection
Offers a wider range of detection capabilities beyond APT campaigns

Cons of signature-base

Focuses primarily on signatures and detection rules, less on comprehensive threat intelligence
May require more technical expertise to utilize effectively

Code Comparison

signature-base (YARA rule example):

rule SUSP_LNK_SmallFile_with_PowerShell_Feb23 {
   meta:
      description = "Detects suspicious small LNK files with PowerShell commands"
      author = "Florian Roth"
      reference = "https://twitter.com/klrgrz/status/1628333394803589120?s=12&t=F_A1YnqWqzFKx9Ls1kJ-CQ"
      date = "2023-02-22"
      score = 65
   strings:
      $s1 = "powershell" ascii nocase
   condition:
      uint16(0) == 0x004c and filesize < 4KB and $s1
}

APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections (Threat intelligence example):

APT28
https://attack.mitre.org/groups/G0007/
Fancy Bear, Pawn Storm, Sofacy Group, Sednit, STRONTIUM, Tsar Team, Threat Group-4127, TG-4127
Russia

Summary

While signature-base offers more technical detection capabilities with YARA rules and frequent updates, APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections provides a broader overview of threat actors and campaigns. The choice between the two depends on the specific needs of the user, whether they require detailed detection rules or comprehensive threat intelligence.

APTnotes

3,466

Various public documents, whitepapers and articles about APT campaigns

Pros of APTnotes

More structured organization with CSV files for easy data parsing
Includes a wider range of APT-related information, not limited to specific campaigns
Regularly updated with new entries and reports

Cons of APTnotes

Less focused on specific APT groups and campaigns
Lacks detailed descriptions and context for each entry
Does not provide direct links to original source materials

Code Comparison

APTnotes uses CSV files for data storage:

Date,Title,Source,Link,Description
2019-01-15,"APT10: Operation Cloud Hopper",PwC,https://example.com/report.pdf,"Analysis of APT10 campaign targeting MSPs"

APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections uses markdown files for organization:

# APT10 (MenuPass)

- [Operation Cloud Hopper](https://example.com/report.pdf) - PwC (2019-01-15)
  - Analysis of APT10 campaign targeting Managed Service Providers (MSPs)

Both repositories serve as valuable resources for cybersecurity professionals and researchers interested in Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) and cyber campaigns. APTnotes offers a more comprehensive collection with easier data parsing, while APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections provides a more focused approach on specific APT groups and campaigns with better context and organization.

data

1,647

APTnotes data

Pros of aptnotes/data

More structured data format, using CSV files for easy parsing and analysis
Includes additional metadata fields like submission date and source
Regularly updated with new threat reports and indicators

Cons of aptnotes/data

Smaller collection of reports compared to APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections
Less focus on specific APT groups and campaigns
Limited to English language reports

Code comparison

APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections:

[No specific code structure, primarily markdown files with links]

aptnotes/data:

Date,Year,Title,Source,Link,SHA-1
2019-01-15,2019,"APT10: Operation Cloud Hopper",FireEye,https://www.fireeye.com/blog/threat-research/2019/01/apt10-cloud-hopper-campaign.html,abc123...

The APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections repository primarily consists of markdown files with links to reports, while aptnotes/data uses a structured CSV format for easier data processing and analysis. The CSV format in aptnotes/data allows for quick filtering and sorting of threat reports based on various attributes.

While APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections offers a broader range of reports and focuses on specific APT groups, aptnotes/data provides a more structured approach with additional metadata. Both repositories serve as valuable resources for threat intelligence researchers and analysts, each with its own strengths and limitations.

awesome-threat-intelligence

7,835

A curated list of Awesome Threat Intelligence resources

Pros of awesome-threat-intelligence

More comprehensive and well-organized, covering a wider range of threat intelligence resources
Regularly updated with contributions from the community
Includes tools, frameworks, and platforms in addition to raw data sources

Cons of awesome-threat-intelligence

Less focused on specific APT and cybercriminal campaigns
May be overwhelming for users looking for targeted information on specific threat actors
Requires more time to navigate and find relevant information due to its breadth

Code comparison

While both repositories are primarily collections of links and resources, they don't contain significant code. However, the structure of their README files differs:

awesome-threat-intelligence:

## Table of Contents

- [Sources](#sources)
- [Formats](#formats)
- [Frameworks & Platforms](#frameworks--platforms)
- [Tools](#tools)

APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections:

# APT & CyberCriminals Campaign Collection
This is a collection of APT and CyberCriminals campaigns. Please fire an issue if you want to add or update any collection.

## Collection

The awesome-threat-intelligence repository has a more structured and detailed table of contents, while APT_CyberCriminal_Campagin_Collections focuses on a simple list of campaigns.