Is it possible to set up this playbook for a specific rule incident alarm?
I was wondering if a specific playbook setting is possible for the rules below RuleName : New Azure Sentinel incident - Authentication Attempt from New Country Read UserPrincipalName, set_IPAddress value when alarm occurs Automatically send mail to each user by identifying the user-specific mail address with UserPrincipalName and changing the recipient, ip value according to the specified mail form
The issue with displaying the original query in the newly created scheduled query rule
Hello everyone. I recently started learning Azure Sentinel, and I wanted to create my first custom rule. The rule works as I wanted, but I encountered an issue with displaying the original query. When an incident is created and I go to the "Incident Timeline" and click "Link to LA," my query is shown in an obfuscated form, as shown in the screenshot. Could you please help me figure out how to make the original query visible? Thank you!
GITHUB - AI Sentinel attack simulation
The recent support for Model Context Protocol (MCP) with Claude Desktop has opened the door for some really useful testing capability with Sentinel and emerging threats. I'm happy to share with the community a GitHub project that demonstrates the use of MCP against current exploits to generate simulated attack data that can be used with testing migrated ASIM alert rules. MCP allows for up-to-date exploits to be queried... ... and with AI prompting, simulated attack events can be created against our Sentinel test environments. Which results in a simulated attack based on the exploit being referenced. This is really useful for testing the migration of our Sentinel alert rules to ASIM! The full code and details about the project are available here: https://laurierhodes.info/node/175
MS Defender XDR API missing Alerts
The Microsoft Defender XDR API is missing Alerts that are visible in the console (https://security.microsoft.com). The number of Alerts returned by the Incident API is limits to 150. This information is no where in the documentation. If you have an Incident with greater than 150 Alerts, the API will not provide all the Alerts for a given Incident. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-xdr/api-list-incidents My team has confirmed this behavior across hundreds of tenants and thousands of Incidents. MS Premier Support has not been helpful in understanding if this is a known issue or a bug. Has anyone encountered this issue and have any information? Obviously closing the Incident will solve the problem, but for ongoing investigations this is not alway an option.
Pending actions notification via KQL / Graph API
Hello, I'm looking for a way to get notifications when an investigation is in Pending Approval state. I have tried searching the logs in Defender and Sentinel and have tried finding a graph request that could get this information, but no luck. Is this something that exists? Thank you for any help regarding this topic. Kristof
Auto Disabled (Rule Name)
Hi Team, One of scheduled rule is auto disabled 2 days ago (31-aug) and showing like "The alert rule was disabled due to too many consecutive failures. Reason: The query was blocked as it was consuming too many resources." When I tried to re-enabled and it showing: "Failed to save analytics rule 'rule name'. Conflict:Newer instance of rule 'ID' exists for workspace 'workspace id' (Etag does not match). Data was not saved." I made some changes in KQL but still showing same message. Can someone help me to find out solution ? "
Defender console - Disabled Connected to a custom indicator & Connected to a unsanctionned
Updated - November 2024 I have found a way to disabling these annoying alerts. Look for the solution above. Issue: I want to know how I can disable these two following alerts : Disabled Connected to a custom indicator Connected to an unsanctioned blocked app Those alerts type needs to be enabled or disabled on demand, like the other alerts types. Why's that : Description of the workload : When we block(Unsanctioned) an application through Defender for Cloud apps. It creates automatically the indicators to Defender XDR. When someone for example click or go the URL related to the application, the following alerts will be triggered. When an indicator is automatically created through that, it checks the box to generate alert when the indicator is triggered. We would like to automatically uncheck the box or disable to alerts describing. Possible to disable the custom alert in setting ? No. Why ? Explanation : You cannot suppress "custom detection". But, they are categorized as "Informational" and you can suppress severity alert type. Solutions : IMPORTANT: Make sure to create a transform rule to not ingest this alerts in Sentinel. That could increased the Resolved incident ingestion and false your SOC optimization reports. The rule is automatically close only the “Informational” alerts with the specified titles. Other Informational alerts with different titles will not be affected. In the Defender XDR setting->Alert tuning->Create this rule: Here's an example: Rule Analysis From the updated rule configuration screenshot, it appears that you’ve set up a filter in the AND condition to only automatically close Informational alerts that do not match specific alert titles (e.g., “Malware was detected in an email message,” “unwanted software,” “malware,” “trojan”). This approach should ensure that the rule closes all Informational alerts except those that contain these specified titles. Here’s a breakdown of how it’s working: 1. Severity Filtering: By setting Alert severity to Informational, only Informational alerts are considered. 2. Title Exclusion: Adding Not equals conditions for each title you want to exclude prevents this rule from affecting those specific alerts. So, any Informational alert with a title that does not match the specified exclusions will be automatically closed. This setup should effectively allow you to close all unwanted Informational alerts while retaining visibility on any malware or security-related Informational alerts that require further review. Regards,
