Plaso 20190331 released

By Anonymous

Plaso 20190331 released

The Plaso team are glad to announce a new Plaso release, 20190331. Most of the changes in this release are under-the-hood improvements. A few user-facing things you might notice:
  • Log output from tools will be output to a file by default, and not just printed to the terminal.
  • There’s a new --troubles option, which provides some debugging and troubleshooting information
  • A lot of bug fixes and improvements in the Artifact filter support
  • Elasticsearch5 support has been removed, as this version is now at end-of-life

Other changes

Support for event filters and tagging has been changed from efilter back to object filter, removing efilter as a dependency. File and artifact filtering has not changed. 

As usual, there’s a bunch of cleanups, performance tweaks and bug fixes, the full list of which are available in the release milestone.

Future plans

As flagged before, we’re on track to remove support for Python 2 and we will default to Python 3 next in the next release.

Due to the age of some of the packages and support libraries in Ubuntu Xenial (16.04) we are considering ending support for a packaged version of Plaso for Xenial in the short term and will very likely be the last Xenial release provided by GIFT PPA.

Note that version 20190331 of plaso-tools for Xenial and Bionic use Python 2. The previous version of plaso-tools, 20190131, defaulted to Python 3 on Xenial which caused some grief with installations that used multiple package managers e.g. pip and apt.
We strongly encourage the use of a single package manager to prevent issues due to Python version conflicts.

Where/how to get Plaso 20190331?

See Plaso's Users' Guide. As usual, builds are available for Docker, MacOS, Ubuntu, Fedora Core and Windows.

If you run into problems take a look at the Installation Problems page in the Plaso documentation, to see if other people have seen the issue before. If nothing there helps, ask for help on the discuss mailing list or open an issue on the tracker.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Parsing the $MFT NTFS metadata file

By
Background Numerous articles have been written about parsing the $MFT NTFS metadata file before. Some of these explain the technique itself [ 1 ] and others mostly focus on how to use tools. Rarely do articles mention the pros and cons of the technique from a digital forensics perspective [ 2 ].  What is $MFT parsing?  For readers not familiar with the NTFS file system, MFT stands for Master File Table. This table is stored in a file system metadata file, meaning that as far as the file system is concerned it is a file, however that the file contains file system metadata not “regular” content. The name of this file is “$MFT”.  The MFT consists of a sequence of (predetermined) fixed-size entries (or MFT entries). These entries are typically 1024 bytes in size, however the size is defined in the NTFS volume header and in a “regular” MFT entry itself.  The first 4-bytes of a “regular” MFT-entry (or record) starts with the signature “FILE”. The MFT entry can...
Read more

Incident Response in the Cloud

By
Many organizations have begun moving a majority of their services towards the cloud in recent years. As a result, attackers have shifted their focus towards the cloud. This has resulted in new techniques and methods specifically designed to compromise cloud infrastructure, like the recent SALTSTACK vulnerability that was widely exploited [ 1 ]. Therefore it is critical for these organizations to have an incident response team that understands the new risks attached to cloud and how cloud can make incident response easier or harder.  In this blog post we will walk you through each phase you may encounter in traditional incident response and highlight the differences when adopting cloud computing. It is aimed towards both those who are new to incident response and cloud computing. We’ve included insights that will benefit organizations taking that step towards cloud who want to ensure they are prepared to respond efficiently to cloud incidents.  Traditional Incident Response Be...
Read more

Container Forensics with Docker Explorer

By Anonymous
  Introduction As previous blog posts on cloud forensics have noted, applications are increasingly being deployed using container orchestration frameworks such as Kubernetes, especially in cloud environments.  Similar to traditional deployments on physical servers or virtual machines (VMs), when a containerised application has a security issue it can lead to a compromise of the underlying compute architecture. In the case of container deployments this means a compromise of the container itself, the container host, or even a wider cluster compromise via abuse of orchestration tools. Often digital forensics is required to establish what went wrong and remediate any issues. This article will provide an introduction to container forensics with Docker Explorer by working through a scenario involving a compromised container running within a Kubernetes cluster. Although Kubernetes is briefly mentioned, this article will focus on analysis of an individual container rather than the wi...
Read more