Skip to main content
MuonPartners
Services
Architecture

Solution design and technology roadmapping

Solution AssessmentTechnology RoadmapsIntegration DesignSolution ArchitectureTechnical Design
Cyber Security

Security assessments, IAM, and compliance

AssessmentsIAMComplianceSecurity BaselineCyber Innovation
Network and Platform

Network architecture and cloud platforms

Network DesignCloud StrategyModernisation
Enterprise Architecture

Business-technology alignment

Business AlignmentPortfolio AnalysisGovernance
View all services
ProjectsCase StudiesInsightsToolsAbout
Contact Us

Services

Architecture
Solution AssessmentTechnology RoadmapsIntegration DesignSolution ArchitectureTechnical Design
Cyber Security
AssessmentsIAMComplianceSecurity BaselineCyber Innovation
Network and Platform
Network DesignCloud StrategyModernisation
Enterprise Architecture
Business AlignmentPortfolio AnalysisGovernance
ProjectsCase StudiesInsightsToolsAboutContact
Get in Touch
MuonPartners

Strategic technology consulting for Australian organisations navigating complexity.

Services

  • Architecture
  • Cyber Security
  • Network and Platform
  • Enterprise Architecture

Company

  • About
  • Products
  • Frameworks
  • Cross-Framework Mapping
  • Projects
  • Case Studies
  • Insights
  • Contact

Contact

  • [email protected]
  • Australia
  • LinkedIn

© 2026 Muon Partners. All rights reserved.

ABN 50 669 022 315 · A Muon Group company.

Privacy PolicyTerms of Service
  1. Frameworks
  2. >ATTACK
  3. >Execution
  4. >ATTACK-T1106
ATTACK-T1106Active

Native API

Statement

Adversaries may interact with the native OS application programming interface (API) to execute behaviors. Native APIs provide a controlled means of calling low-level OS services within the kernel, such as those involving hardware/devices, memory, and processes.(Citation: NT API Windows)(Citation: Linux Kernel API) These native APIs are leveraged by the OS during system boot (when other system components are not yet initialized) as well as carrying out tasks and requests during routine operations.

Adversaries may abuse these OS API functions as a means of executing behaviors. Similar to Command and Scripting Interpreter, the native API and its hierarchy of interfaces provide mechanisms to interact with and utilize various components of a victimized system.

Native API functions (such as <code>NtCreateProcess</code>) may be directed invoked via system calls / syscalls, but these features are also often exposed to user-mode applications via interfaces and libraries.(Citation: OutFlank System Calls)(Citation: CyberBit System Calls)(Citation: MDSec System Calls) For example, functions such as the Windows API <code>CreateProcess()</code> or GNU <code>fork()</code> will allow programs and scripts to start other processes.(Citation: Microsoft CreateProcess)(Citation: GNU Fork) This may allow API callers to execute a binary, run a CLI command, load modules, etc. as thousands of similar API functions exist for various system operations.(Citation: Microsoft Win32)(Citation: LIBC)(Citation: GLIBC)

Higher level software frameworks, such as Microsoft .NET and macOS Cocoa, are also available to interact with native APIs. These frameworks typically provide language wrappers/abstractions to API functionalities and are designed for ease-of-use/portability of code.(Citation: Microsoft NET)(Citation: Apple Core Services)(Citation: MACOS Cocoa)(Citation: macOS Foundation)

Adversaries may use assembly to directly or in-directly invoke syscalls in an attempt to subvert defensive sensors and detection signatures such as user mode API-hooks.(Citation: Redops Syscalls) Adversaries may also attempt to tamper with sensors and defensive tools associated with API monitoring, such as unhooking monitored functions via Disable or Modify Tools.

Location

Tactic
Execution

Technique Details

Identifier
ATTACK-T1106
ATT&CK Page
View on MITRE

Tactics

Execution

Platforms

LinuxmacOSWindows

Detection

Behavioral Detection of Native API Invocation via Unusual DLL Loads and Direct Syscalls

Mitigations

Execution Prevention: Prevent the execution of unauthorized or malicious code on systems by implementing application control, script blocking, and other execution prevention mechanisms. This ensures that only trusted and authorized code is executed, reducing the risk of malware and unauthorized actions. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Application Control:

  • Use Case: Use tools like AppLocker or Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) to create whitelists of authorized applications and block unauthorized ones. On Linux, use tools like SELinux or AppArmor to define mandatory access control policies for application execution.
  • Implementation: Allow only digitally signed or pre-approved applications to execute on servers and endpoints. (e.g., New-AppLockerPolicy -PolicyType Enforced -FilePath "C:\Policies\AppLocker.xml")

Script Blocking:

  • Use Case: Use script control mechanisms to block unauthorized execution of scripts, such as PowerShell or JavaScript. Web Browsers: Use browser extensions or settings to block JavaScript execution from untrusted sources.
  • Implementation: Configure PowerShell to enforce Constrained Language Mode for non-administrator users. (e.g., Set-ExecutionPolicy AllSigned)

Executable Blocking:

  • Use Case: Prevent execution of binaries from suspicious locations, such as %TEMP% or %APPDATA% directories.
  • Implementation: Block execution of .exe, .bat, or .ps1 files from user-writable directories.

Dynamic Analysis Prevention:

  • Use Case: Use behavior-based execution prevention tools to identify and block malicious activity in real time.
  • Implemenation: Employ EDR solutions that analyze runtime behavior and block suspicious code execution.

Behavior Prevention on Endpoint: Behavior Prevention on Endpoint refers to the use of technologies and strategies to detect and block potentially malicious activities by analyzing the behavior of processes, files, API calls, and other endpoint events. Rather than relying solely on known signatures, this approach leverages heuristics, machine learning, and real-time monitoring to identify anomalous patterns indicative of an attack. This mitigation can be implemented through the following measures:

Suspicious Process Behavior:

  • Implementation: Use Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) tools to monitor and block processes exhibiting unusual behavior, such as privilege escalation attempts.
  • Use Case: An attacker uses a known vulnerability to spawn a privileged process from a user-level application. The endpoint tool detects the abnormal parent-child process relationship and blocks the action.

Unauthorized File Access:

  • Implementation: Leverage Data Loss Prevention (DLP) or endpoint tools to block processes attempting to access sensitive files without proper authorization.
  • Use Case: A process tries to read or modify a sensitive file located in a restricted directory, such as /etc/shadow on Linux or the SAM registry hive on Windows. The endpoint tool identifies this anomalous behavior and prevents it.

Abnormal API Calls:

  • Implementation: Implement runtime analysis tools to monitor API calls and block those associated with malicious activities.
  • Use Case: A process dynamically injects itself into another process to hijack its execution. The endpoint detects the abnormal use of APIs like OpenProcess and WriteProcessMemory and terminates the offending process.

Exploit Prevention:

  • Implementation: Use behavioral exploit prevention tools to detect and block exploits attempting to gain unauthorized access.
  • Use Case: A buffer overflow exploit is launched against a vulnerable application. The endpoint detects the anomalous memory write operation and halts the process.
SP 800-53
SP800-53-AC-6relatedvia ctid-attack-to-sp800-53
SP800-53-CM-2relatedvia ctid-attack-to-sp800-53
SP800-53-CM-6relatedvia ctid-attack-to-sp800-53
SP800-53-CM-7relatedvia ctid-attack-to-sp800-53
SP800-53-SI-2relatedvia ctid-attack-to-sp800-53
View in graphReport an issue
← Back to Execution
Execution45 controls
ATTACK-T1047Windows Management InstrumentationATTACK-T1053Scheduled Task/JobATTACK-T1053.002AtATTACK-T1053.003CronATTACK-T1053.005Scheduled TaskATTACK-T1053.006Systemd TimersATTACK-T1053.007Container Orchestration JobATTACK-T1059Command and Scripting InterpreterATTACK-T1059.001PowerShellATTACK-T1059.002AppleScriptATTACK-T1059.003Windows Command ShellATTACK-T1059.004Unix ShellATTACK-T1059.005Visual BasicATTACK-T1059.006PythonATTACK-T1059.007JavaScriptATTACK-T1059.008Network Device CLIATTACK-T1059.009Cloud APIATTACK-T1059.010AutoHotKey & AutoITATTACK-T1059.011LuaATTACK-T1059.012Hypervisor CLIATTACK-T1059.013Container CLI/APIATTACK-T1072Software Deployment ToolsATTACK-T1106Native APIATTACK-T1129Shared ModulesATTACK-T1203Exploitation for Client ExecutionATTACK-T1204User ExecutionATTACK-T1204.001Malicious LinkATTACK-T1204.002Malicious FileATTACK-T1204.003Malicious ImageATTACK-T1204.004Malicious Copy and PasteATTACK-T1204.005Malicious LibraryATTACK-T1559Inter-Process CommunicationATTACK-T1559.001Component Object ModelATTACK-T1559.002Dynamic Data ExchangeATTACK-T1559.003XPC ServicesATTACK-T1569System ServicesATTACK-T1569.001LaunchctlATTACK-T1569.002Service ExecutionATTACK-T1569.003SystemctlATTACK-T1609Container Administration CommandATTACK-T1648Serverless ExecutionATTACK-T1651Cloud Administration CommandATTACK-T1674Input InjectionATTACK-T1675ESXi Administration CommandATTACK-T1677Poisoned Pipeline Execution