analyzing-linux-kernel-rootkits skill
Detect kernel-level rootkits in Linux memory dumps using Volatility3
Is the analyzing-linux-kernel-rootkits skill safe?
Clean: nothing in its files matched our rules. We read 4 files in the folder on 2026-09-28.
No findings.
Install the analyzing-linux-kernel-rootkits skill
A skill is a folder. Copy it into your agent's skills folder and the agent loads it when the task matches its description.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills.git /tmp/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills cp -r /tmp/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills/skills/analyzing-linux-kernel-rootkits ~/.claude/skills/analyzing-linux-kernel-rootkits
In the Claude apps, zip the folder and upload it from the Skills settings. The folder on GitHub
The instructions your agent would load
SKILL.md as published, without the frontmatter. Read it on GitHub
Analyzing Linux Kernel Rootkits
Overview
Linux kernel rootkits operate at ring 0, modifying kernel data structures to hide processes, files, network connections, and kernel modules from userspace tools. Detection requires either memory forensics (analyzing physical memory dumps with Volatility3) or cross-view analysis (comparing /proc, /sys, and kernel data structures for inconsistencies). This skill covers using Volatility3 Linux plugins to detect syscall table hooks, hidden kernel modules, and modified function pointers, supplemented by live system scanning with rkhunter and chkrootkit.
When to Use
- When investigating security incidents that require analyzing linux kernel rootkits
- When building detection rules or threat hunting queries for this domain
- When SOC analysts need structured procedures for this analysis type
- When validating security monitoring coverage for related attack techniques
Prerequisites
- Volatility3 installed (pip install volatility3)
- Linux memory dump (acquired via LiME, AVML, or /proc/kcore)
- Volatility3 Linux symbol table (ISF) matching the target kernel version
- rkhunter and chkrootkit for live system scanning
- Reference known-good kernel image for comparison
Steps
Step 1: Acquire Memory Dump
Capture Linux physical memory using LiME kernel module or AVML for cloud instances.
Step 2: Analyze with Volatility3
Run linux.checksyscall, linux.lsmod, linux.hiddenmodules, and linux.check_idt plugins to detect rootkit artifacts.
Step 3: Cross-View Analysis
Compare module lists from /proc/modules, lsmod, and /sys/module to identify modules hidden from one view but present in another.
Step 4: Live System Scanning
Run rkhunter and chkrootkit to detect known rootkit signatures, suspicious files, and modified system binaries.
Expected Output
JSON report containing detected syscall hooks, hidden kernel modules, modified IDT entries, suspicious /proc discrepancies, and rkhunter findings.
Example Output
$ sudo python3 rootkit_analyzer.py --memory /evidence/linux-mem.lime --profile Ubuntu2204
Linux Kernel Rootkit Analysis Report
=====================================
Memory Image: /evidence/linux-mem.lime
Kernel Version: 5.15.0-91-generic (Ubuntu 22.04 LTS)
Analysis Time: 2024-01-18 09:15:32 UTC
[+] Scanning syscall table for hooks...
Syscall Table Base: 0xffffffff82200300
Total syscalls checked: 449
HOOKED SYSCALLS DETECTED:
┌─────────┬──────────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────────────┐
│ NR │ Syscall │ Expected Address │ Current Address │
├─────────┼──────────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────────────┤
│ 0 │ sys_read │ 0xffffffff8139a0e0 │ 0xffffffffc0a12000 │
│ 2 │ sys_open │ 0xffffffff8139b340 │ 0xffffffffc0a12180 │
│ 78 │ sys_getdents64 │ 0xffffffff813f5210 │ 0xffffffffc0a12300 │
│ 62 │ sys_kill │ 0xffffffff8110c4a0 │ 0xffffffffc0a12480 │
└─────────┴──────────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────────────┘
WARNING: 4 syscall hooks detected - rootkit behavior confirmed
[+] Checking for hidden kernel modules..More skills from mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills
- Aabusing-dpapi-for-credential-accessExtract and decrypt Windows DPAPI-protected secrets (Credential Manager, browser logins/cookies, Wi-Fi credentials, KeePass keys) online or offline using SharpDPAPI, SharpChrome, Mimikatz, or Impacket's dpapi.py, including domain-wide decryption via the DPAPI backup key. Use during authorized red-team credential-access engagements after gaining a foothold or when triaging DPAPI blobs pulled from a host.
- Aabusing-shadow-credentials-for-privescTake over Active Directory accounts by writing attacker-controlled public keys to msDS-KeyCredentialLink (Shadow Credentials) with pyWhisker, Whisker, or Certipy, then authenticate via PKINIT to recover the target's NT hash without a password reset. Use when BloodHound shows GenericWrite/GenericAll/AddKeyCredentialLink over a target, as a stealthier alternative to ForceChangePassword, during authorized red-team engagements.
- Aachieving-cmmc-level-2-compliancePrepare a defense-contractor environment for CMMC Level 2 certification: scope CUI and FCI, implement the 110 NIST SP 800-171 Rev 2 security requirements across 14 families, compute the SPRS score with the DoD Assessment Methodology, manage a compliant POA&M, and ready the organization for a C3PAO assessment. Use when an organization handles Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) under a DoD contract, when a contract carries DFARS clause 252.204-7012/7019/7020/7021, when preparing for or responding to a CMMC assessment, when computing or improving an SPRS score, when building a System Security Plan or POA&M for 800-171, or when scoping which systems are in the CUI boundary. Keywords: CMMC, CMMC Level 2, NIST 800-171, SP 800-171 Rev 2, CUI, FCI, SPRS, DFARS 7012, C3PAO, POA&M, System Security Plan, DoD Assessment Methodology, 110 controls, defense industrial base, DIB, FedRAMP equivalency.
- Aacquiring-disk-image-with-dd-and-dcflddCreate forensically sound bit-for-bit disk images with dd or dcfldd on a Linux forensic workstation, preserving evidence integrity through hash verification (MD5/SHA) during acquisition. Use when imaging a suspect drive, USB device, or memory card for investigation, preserving volatile disk evidence during incident response, or producing a verified copy for legal or law-enforcement proceedings before any destructive analysis.
- Aanalyzing-active-directory-acl-abuseDetect dangerous ACL misconfigurations in Active Directory using ldap3
- Aanalyzing-android-malware-with-apktoolPerform static analysis of Android APK malware using apktool for resource decompilation, jadx for Java source recovery, and androguard for manifest inspection, dangerous permission-combination detection, and identification of obfuscated code, dynamic code loading, and reflection-based API calls. Use to statically triage a suspicious APK without executing it or to build mobile malware detection rules.
- Danalyzing-api-gateway-access-logs'Parses API Gateway access logs (AWS API Gateway, Kong, Nginx) to detect
- Aanalyzing-apt-group-with-mitre-navigatorQuery ATT&CK data with attackcti, mitreattack-python, and stix2, then build MITRE ATT&CK Navigator layers and multi-layer heatmap overlays mapping one or more APT groups' TTPs for detection-gap analysis. Use to compare threat-actor technique coverage, find gaps in detection engineering, or produce Navigator visualizations for threat-intel reporting.
- Aanalyzing-azure-activity-logs-for-threats'Queries Azure Monitor activity logs and sign-in logs via azure-monitor-query
- Aanalyzing-bootkit-and-rootkit-samples'Analyzes bootkit and advanced rootkit malware infecting the Master
- Aanalyzing-browser-forensics-with-hindsightParse Chromium-based browser databases with Hindsight to extract and correlate browsing history, downloads, cookies, cached content, autofill data, saved passwords, and extensions from Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi into a unified timeline (XLSX, JSON, or SQLite output). Use during incident response, insider-threat investigations, or criminal cases when you need to reconstruct a user's web activity from a browser profile.
- Aanalyzing-campaign-attribution-evidenceSystematically evaluate cyber-campaign evidence to attribute an operation to a threat actor, using the Diamond Model and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to weigh infrastructure overlaps, TTP consistency, malware code similarity, and timing/language artifacts into confidence-weighted attribution assessments. Use when an incident investigation needs a defensible attribution confidence level.