- AN0181 · Analytic 0181 — Execution of processes using nohup or shell redirection to ignore SIGHUP and continue running after session termination. Defender perspective: correlation between commands including nohup, disowned jobs, or `&` suffix with continued process execution after parent terminal exit.
- AN0182 · Analytic 0182 — PowerShell or script execution with parameters that suppress errors or ignore user interrupts, such as `-ErrorAction SilentlyContinue`. Defender perspective: detecting discrepancies between suppressed error arguments and continued execution behavior.
- AN0183 · Analytic 0183 — Use of nohup, disown, or AppleScript constructs to suppress process interrupts. Defender perspective: commands containing nohup or hidden background tasks (`osascript` with persistent execution) correlated with processes surviving user logouts.
AdversaryGraph public intelligence page
This page is part of Threat Matrix, the public browser workspace for the main AdversaryGraph platform. Use it for ATT&CK pivots, actor and technique context, similarity leads, detection coverage review, and analyst-ready investigation paths.
Validation disclaimer: TTP overlap, actor similarity, generated summaries, and coverage findings are investigation leads, not attribution proof or operational validation without analyst review.
Main AdversaryGraph project Documentation Malware Analysis GitHub
Ignore Process Interrupts
Adversaries may evade defensive mechanisms by executing commands that hide from process interrupt signals. Many operating systems use signals to deliver messages to control process behavior. Command interpreters often include specific commands/flags that ignore errors and other hangups, such as when the user of the active session logs off. These interrupt signals may also be used by defensive tools and/or analysts to pause or terminate specified running processes. Adversaries may invoke processes using `nohup`, PowerShell `-ErrorAction SilentlyContinue`, or similar commands that may be immune to hangups. This may enable malicious commands and malware to continue execution through system events that would otherwise terminate its execution, such as users logging off or the termination of its C2 network connection. Hiding from process interrupt signals may allow malware to continue execution, but unlike Trap this does not establish Persistence since the process will not be re-invoked once actually terminated.
Open detection, hunting, mitigation, and evidence workspace
Detection logic
Use behavior-focused telemetry and validate findings against surrounding activity.
Observed actors
Correlated CTI and IR reports
Cyber Knowledge context
Use these routes to move from the ATT&CK behavior into explanation, implementation, evidence handling, validation, and defensive operations. Relevance is generated from explicit identifiers/names and governed topic mappings; it is not attribution evidence.
Memory forensics, injection, and resident behavior
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Governed topic match · 57/100Scripts, documents, shortcuts, and fileless chains
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Governed topic match · 57/100Controlled dynamic behavior and differential observation
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Tactic learning route · 24/100Module 4 — Detection engineering and detection as code
Blue Team & Defensive Security · Tactic learning route · 24/100Disk, file-system, and persistence forensics
Digital Forensics & Incident Response (DFIR) · Tactic learning route · 24/100
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Governed topic match · 57/100Scripts, documents, shortcuts, and fileless chains
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Governed topic match · 57/100Controlled dynamic behavior and differential observation
Malware Analysis & Reverse Engineering · Tactic learning route · 24/100Module 4 — Detection engineering and detection as code
Blue Team & Defensive Security · Tactic learning route · 24/100Disk, file-system, and persistence forensics
Digital Forensics & Incident Response (DFIR) · Tactic learning route · 24/100
MITRE mitigations
No ATT&CK mitigation relationship is published for this technique. Apply risk-based controls and verify scope.