D017F3
Storage
📦 Honey File Share
Decoy EFS/Azure Files mounts.
What it is
A network file share mounted where real shares live, holding fake documents and canary files. File shares are browsed early in an intrusion, because they collect years of sensitive documents. A mount of the decoy share, where the platform logs it, and the files opened inside it give two separate signals.
Implementation requirements
- AWS EFS: a file system with mount targets in production subnets. Require IAM authorization in the file-system policy, so every NFS mount produces a
NewClientConnectionCloudTrail event. Without IAM authorization, mounts produce no CloudTrail event; fall back to flow logs for port 2049 to the mount target - Azure Files: a share in its own storage account, with a diagnostic setting sending
StorageFileLogs - Windows file servers: a share with a SACL and Audit Detailed File Share (event 5145)
- Content: fake documents and canary files (D018), so a mount leads to a second, file-level tripwire
- Safety: read-only, no real data, no shared storage account with real shares. OPSEC: share names and sizes consistent with real shares
- Rollback: Unmount, then delete the file system or share and its mount targets. Remove its diagnostic setting or SACL.
- Upkeep: Keep file dates moving. Monthly proof-of-life mount.
Technologies
AWSAzureWindows
ATT&CK coverage 8
| Technique | Tactic | Status | Confidence | Tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1039 Data from Network Shared Drive |
Collection | confirmed | strong | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: the attack step itself touches the decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
| ||||
| T1135 Network Share Discovery |
Discovery | theoretical | moderate | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: the attack step itself touches the decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
Moderate: listing share names (net view) does not access the share; the alert fires when the attacker opens it. | ||||
| T1080 Taint Shared Content |
Lateral Movement | confirmed | strong | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: the attack step itself touches the decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
| ||||
| T1570 Lateral Tool Transfer |
Lateral Movement | theoretical | moderate | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: the attack step itself touches the decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
| ||||
| T1216 System Script Proxy Execution |
Stealth | theoretical | weak | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: seen once the attacker is working inside a high-fidelity decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
Attackers use the real system script; a decoy copy is rarely touched. | ||||
| T1218 System Binary Proxy Execution |
Stealth | theoretical | weak | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: seen once the attacker is working inside a high-fidelity decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (2 sources)
Attackers use the real System32 binary; a decoy copy is rarely touched. | ||||
| T1220 XSL Script Processing |
Stealth | theoretical | weak | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: seen once the attacker is working inside a high-fidelity decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (3 sources)
Attackers bring their own XSL file. | ||||
| T1221 Template Injection |
Stealth | theoretical | weak | T2 |
| ↳ Detection point: the attack step itself touches the decoy | ||||
↳ Evidence (3 sources)
Only the post-access variant (modifying an existing template) can touch a decoy. | ||||
Evidence
- Decoy File (D3-DF) — MITRE D3FEND standard
- Canarytokens token guides (MS Word, Windows Directory, Network Folder, Kubeconfig, AWS Infrastructure, DNS, Azure Login Certificate, MySQL Dump) — Thinkst Applied Research industry
- MITRE Engage — adversary engagement matrix and ATT&CK mapping — MITRE 2022 standard
- 4663(S) An attempt was made to access an object — Microsoft industry
- MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v20.0 — MITRE 2026 standard