Definition
Using a digital signature to authenticate a file before opening.
How it works
This technique is generic and there are numerous ways to compute and authenticate digital signatures. A digital certificate is generated from a private/public key pair issued by a certificate authority (CA). A hash of the file is encrypted using the private key. When the file is downloaded by another user, the user's system uses the public key to decrypt the hash and a new hash is created of the downloaded file. The hash decrypted by the public key is compared to the new hash and if there is a mismatch, further techniques, such as file deletion, file quarantine, or **Executable Blacklisting** may be invoked.
This technique may be invoked when deciding whether to load or execute a file.
Considerations
Organizations which download or create high volumes of software make management complex, in particular engineering or scientific organizations.
Implementation perspective
Executable Allowlisting should be treated as a technical defensive capability rather than a product checkbox. In practice, teams should define the protected scope, the conditions under which the technique acts, and the observable evidence that demonstrates the intended behavior. For this technique, likely engineering context includes Create Process, Executable File.
Use the technique to create a logical or physical boundary that limits access, execution, communication, or movement.
Questions to ask
- What is being isolated, from whom or what, and under which conditions?
- Which flows or operations remain explicitly allowed across the boundary?
- What happens when the isolation mechanism fails or loses policy context?
- How is the boundary tested for alternate paths, bypasses, and unintended dependencies?
Evidence and validation
- Architecture and data-flow diagrams showing the isolation boundary
- Policy, rule, or configuration exports from enforcing components
- Tests of allowed, denied, and failure-state behavior
- Monitoring evidence for boundary violations and policy changes
Common failure patterns
- The intended boundary has undocumented alternate paths or inherited trust relationships.
- Rules accumulate without ownership, review, or removal of obsolete exceptions.
- Isolation is assumed from network location while application, identity, or management paths remain open.
This implementation perspective is original Bare Metal Cyber educational content. It does not replace the official D3FEND definition or establish that a specific product implements the technique.
Technique hierarchy
Top-level family
Parent techniques
Direct child techniques
None listed at this level.
Artifacts and ontology entities
These relationships describe how D3FEND connects a defensive technique to artifacts or other ontology entities. They describe graph semantics, not a product certification.
Explicit technique relationships
Show inferred artifact relationship paths (2)
NIST SP 800-53 relationships
The relation label is preserved from the D3FEND ontology. It is not converted into a claim that the control automatically implements or validates this technique.
ATT&CK Enterprise mitigation relationships
These links come from the D3FEND ontology’s ATT&CK mitigation mapping. They help users navigate between the knowledge bases and do not guarantee mitigation effectiveness.
Offensive-technique relationships
These relationships are generated from D3FEND graph paths and are explicitly experimental. They should be treated as hypotheses for defensive analysis—not as proof that the technique prevents, detects, or removes an offensive behavior.
ATT&CK Enterprise (51)
ATT&CK for ICS (7)
Authoritative sources
- Open this technique on the official D3FEND website ↗
- Open the official ontology resources ↗
- Computing apparatus with automatic integrity reference generation and maintenance ↗Tripwire, Inc. · Thomas Good, Robert DiFalco, Gene Kim · PatentReference
- Enhancing Network Security By Preventing User-Initiated Malware Execution ↗John V. Harrison · AcademicPaperReference
Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by The MITRE Corporation. MITRE D3FEND™ and the D3FEND logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK® and ATT&CK® are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Use of D3FEND source material is subject to the official Terms of Use.