Collect a Windows triage snapshot with Velociraptor
Collect a small, documented set of endpoint artefacts from a disposable Windows VM and preserve provenance for review.
Scope
For an isolated lab with a Velociraptor server and one disposable Windows client.
Start with the situation, not the slogan
This lab is designed to produce evidence and judgement, not a ceremonial screenshot of a tool running. Collect a Windows triage snapshot with Velociraptor is successful when you can explain the question, predict the expected observation, collect it safely and distinguish a useful result from noise. The commands are the least interesting part, although they are traditionally the part everyone photographs.
Use systems you own or have explicit permission to test. Keep the exercise isolated from household, client and production networks, take a snapshot before deliberate breakage, and write the rollback step before the first change. A lab without a reset path is simply a future troubleshooting appointment.
Endpoint triage is most useful when collection is targeted, time-bounded, and connected to a question. Gathering everything increases exposure and can obscure the evidence.
Composite scenario
How this usually reaches the desk
Set one modest objective for the session. Begin with the expected clue: The collection question, artefacts, endpoint, time window, and expected result are written first. Then create or collect only enough benign activity to make that clue visible. If the observation does not appear, investigate the data path before adding more tools. Instrumentation that cannot see a known test event will not become more perceptive during a real incident.
This scenario combines common operational patterns; it is not presented as a report of one named incident.
What to look for
Begin with preserved, comparable evidence. One signal is rarely proof; use independent observations and a reliable timeline before declaring scope or intent.
The collection question, artefacts, endpoint, time window, and expected result are written first.
Write the expected observation before the exercise. Include the source, destination, time and field that should carry it; this turns an interesting screen into a falsifiable test.
Server and client identities, certificates, access controls, and audit logs are configured for the lab.
Confirm that clocks, names and identifiers line up across the lab. Time drift and ambiguous hostnames can turn three tidy events into an accidental detective novel.
Collected results retain endpoint identity, collection time, artefact version, and operator context.
Keep a known-good comparison. The aim is not merely to produce an alert or packet, but to explain how the test differs from ordinary activity and where false positives would arise.
Working examples
Run it, read it, decide what changes
These examples use documentation addresses, test identities and bounded targets. Replace placeholders only inside systems you own or are explicitly authorised to operate. Read the expected result and next action before running the command; a successful command is evidence, not yet a conclusion.
List processes with their executable paths
- Prerequisites
- An enrolled Windows endpoint and authorised collection.
SELECT Pid, Ppid, Name, Exe, CommandLine, Username
FROM pslist()Rows show running processes, parents, paths, command lines and users where available.
A suspicious name is not enough; paths and command lines can be spoofed or absent.
Pivot to the executable hash, signature, parent process and network connections before containment.
Collect current network connections
- Prerequisites
- Authorised live response.
SELECT Pid, Laddr, Lport, Raddr, Rport, Status
FROM netstat()
WHERE Status = 'ESTABLISHED'Established connections are returned with process IDs and endpoints.
A remote address can belong to a CDN or shared service. Absence is only a momentary snapshot.
Join the PID to process data, resolve ownership through approved sources, and compare with proxy, DNS and EDR history.
Find recently created executables
- Prerequisites
- A recorded incident start and a bounded filesystem scope.
SELECT FullPath, Size, Mtime, Btime
FROM glob(globs='C:/Users/*/Downloads/*.{exe,dll,msi,ps1}')
WHERE Mtime > timestamp(epoch=1723968000)Matching files modified after the example epoch are listed.
Timestamps can be changed and the epoch must be replaced with the real UTC start. Other directories and extensions remain out of scope.
Hash selected files through a collection artefact, preserve them according to policy, and correlate with browser and process events.
Lab procedure
Read the whole sequence before starting. Several workstreams may run in parallel, but their evidence, authority and expected outcomes still need to be explicit. Every step below points back to a concrete example; use the example as implementation evidence, not as permission to operate outside the stated scope.
Operational judgement
Keep a lab notebook with four columns: time, action, expected evidence and observed evidence. Add screenshots only when they preserve information that text cannot. The notebook should allow another person to repeat the exercise without inheriting your browser history, shell history and particular relationship with luck.
The transfer-to-production question matters more than the demo. For Velociraptor, DFIR and Windows, consider data volume, retention, credentials, privacy, performance, ownership and failure behaviour. A successful lab proves that a mechanism can work under stated conditions; it does not prove that it can be deployed everywhere before lunch.
Handover
Make the result useful to the next person
Turn the exercise into a reusable lab card. Record the learning objective, isolation boundary, diagram, versions, seed data, expected observations, exact queries, screenshots that add real information, and the reset procedure. Mark which evidence was generated and which was supplied. If the lab uses a deliberately vulnerable image or sample, store its provenance and checksum. Future-you is a different operator and deserves better documentation than “it worked after I restarted something”.
End with a short teach-back. Explain why “Deploy the server and client only inside the isolated lab and verify mutual trust and administrative access.” matters, demonstrate the observation that supports the conclusion, and show how the environment returns to baseline after “Remove the client, rotate lab credentials if needed, and restore the VM snapshot after the exercise.” Then name one production assumption the lab did not test. That last sentence keeps a useful experiment from turning into unjustified confidence and gives the next exercise a sensible place to begin.
Validate before you close
A reviewer should find the known event, connect it to the correct endpoint and time, and reproduce the collection without acquiring unrelated personal data.
Capture the test, the expected result and the observed result. Where a person or business owner must accept restored service, name them in the record. A green dashboard can confirm that a component is answering; it cannot confirm that invoices, identities or restored data are trustworthy.
Finish with a compact closure note: the original trigger, confirmed scope, evidence retained, controls changed, tests passed, known gaps, residual risk, and the people responsible for the remaining work. Schedule a review while the timeline is still fresh enough to challenge. The purpose is not to find a person to blame; computers already perform blame with admirable efficiency. The purpose is to make the next response faster, safer and less dependent on one person remembering where the useful log was hidden.
Common mistakes
- Connecting an intentionally weak lab directly to a home or production network.
- Copying commands without recording the expected evidence and rollback step.
- Calling a test successful without comparing the result to a known-good baseline.
These errors usually come from haste, unclear ownership or misplaced confidence. Build the safeguard into the runbook: a required evidence field, a second-person review, a rollback test or a specific exit criterion.
Questions people ask when the clock is running
Can I run this against a public target for practice?
No. Keep the work to systems you own or are explicitly authorised to assess. An educational intention is not an access-control mechanism and will not improve the conversation with a provider or solicitor.
What should I save from the exercise?
Keep the topology, versions, raw evidence, exact filters or rules, expected result, observed result and rollback notes. Remove real secrets and personal data before sharing the notebook.
How do I know the lab worked?
A reviewer should find the known event, connect it to the correct endpoint and time, and reproduce the collection without acquiring unrelated personal data. Repeat the key observation from a clean snapshot; repeatability is a stronger result than a single attractive screenshot.
Safety boundary
Use these steps only on systems you own or are explicitly authorised to assess. Preserve evidence, follow your organisation’s legal and regulatory obligations, and prefer reversible actions when the situation is not yet understood.
Primary references
- Velociraptor Quickstart GuideVelociraptor
- SP 800-61 Rev. 3: Incident Response Recommendations and ConsiderationsNIST
Editorial status: first edition. Review the linked vendor documentation for product- and version-specific changes before acting.