Event 4625: An account failed to log on.
Quick Answer
Event 4625 logs failed authentication attempts on Windows systems. This event is critical for detecting brute force attacks, credential stuffing, and password spray campaigns. Multiple 4625 events followed by a successful 4624 may indicate a successful breach after repeated attempts.
Technical Details
Event ID: 4625
Windows Security- Authentication
Event Description
An account failed to log on.
Analyst Notes & Scenarios
- High volume of failures from a single source IP may indicate brute force.
- Failures across many accounts from one source may indicate password spraying.
- Status/Sub Status codes are critical for diagnosis (e.g., 0xC000006A=BadPassword, 0xC000006D=Bad Username/Password, 0xC0000234=Account Locked, 0xC0000071=Password Expired, 0xC000006E=Account restriction).
- Legitimate failures occur due to typos, expired passwords, or misconfigurations.
Key Log Fields
LogonType- Type of logon attempted (2=Interactive, 3=Network, 10=RemoteInteractive)TargetUserName- Account name for which logon failedTargetDomainName- Domain or computer nameSubjectUserName- Account that reported the logon failureSubjectDomainName- Domain of the reporting accountWorkstationName- Source workstation nameIpAddress- Source IP address of failed logonIpPort- Source port numberFailureReason- Textual reason for logon failureStatus- Error code for failure (hex format)SubStatus- Sub-error code providing detailed failure reasonLogonProcessName- Name of the logon processAuthenticationPackageName- Authentication package used
MITRE ATT&CK® Mapping (6)
Adversaries may obtain and abuse credentials of existing accounts as a means of gaining Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Compromised credentials may be used to bypass access controls placed on various resources on systems within the network and may even be used for persistent access to remote systems and externally available services, such as VPNs, Outlook Web Access, network devices, and remote desktop.(Citation: volexity_0day_sophos_FW) Compromised credentials may also grant an adversary increased privilege to specific systems or access to restricted areas of the network. Adversaries may choose not to use malware or tools in conjunction with the legitimate access those credentials provide to make it harder to detect their presence. In some cases, adversaries may abuse inactive accounts: for example, those belonging to individuals who are no longer part of an organization. Using these accounts may allow the adversary to evade detection, as the original account user will not be present to identify any anomalous activity taking place on their account.(Citation: CISA MFA PrintNightmare) The overlap of permissions for local, domain, and cloud accounts across a network of systems is of concern because the adversary may be able to pivot across accounts and systems to reach a high level of access (i.e., domain or enterprise administrator) to bypass access controls set within the enterprise.(Citation: TechNet Credential Theft)
Adversaries may use brute force techniques to gain access to accounts when passwords are unknown or when password hashes are obtained.(Citation: TrendMicro Pawn Storm Dec 2020) Without knowledge of the password for an account or set of accounts, an adversary may systematically guess the password using a repetitive or iterative mechanism.(Citation: Dragos Crashoverride 2018) Brute forcing passwords can take place via interaction with a service that will check the validity of those credentials or offline against previously acquired credential data, such as password hashes. Brute forcing credentials may take place at various points during a breach. For example, adversaries may attempt to brute force access to [Valid Accounts](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1078) within a victim environment leveraging knowledge gathered from other post-compromise behaviors such as [OS Credential Dumping](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1003), [Account Discovery](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1087), or [Password Policy Discovery](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1201). Adversaries may also combine brute forcing activity with behaviors such as [External Remote Services](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1133) as part of Initial Access.
Adversaries with no prior knowledge of legitimate credentials within the system or environment may guess passwords to attempt access to accounts. Without knowledge of the password for an account, an adversary may opt to systematically guess the password using a repetitive or iterative mechanism. An adversary may guess login credentials without prior knowledge of system or environment passwords during an operation by using a list of common passwords. Password guessing may or may not take into account the target's policies on password complexity or use policies that may lock accounts out after a number of failed attempts. Guessing passwords can be a risky option because it could cause numerous authentication failures and account lockouts, depending on the organization's login failure policies. (Citation: Cylance Cleaver) Typically, management services over commonly used ports are used when guessing passwords. Commonly targeted services include the following: * SSH (22/TCP) * Telnet (23/TCP) * FTP (21/TCP) * NetBIOS / SMB / Samba (139/TCP & 445/TCP) * LDAP (389/TCP) * Kerberos (88/TCP) * RDP / Terminal Services (3389/TCP) * HTTP/HTTP Management Services (80/TCP & 443/TCP) * MSSQL (1433/TCP) * Oracle (1521/TCP) * MySQL (3306/TCP) * VNC (5900/TCP) * SNMP (161/UDP and 162/TCP/UDP) In addition to management services, adversaries may "target single sign-on (SSO) and cloud-based applications utilizing federated authentication protocols," as well as externally facing email applications, such as Office 365.(Citation: US-CERT TA18-068A 2018). Further, adversaries may abuse network device interfaces (such as `wlanAPI`) to brute force accessible wifi-router(s) via wireless authentication protocols.(Citation: Trend Micro Emotet 2020) In default environments, LDAP and Kerberos connection attempts are less likely to trigger events over SMB, which creates Windows "logon failure" event ID 4625.
Adversaries may use a single or small list of commonly used passwords against many different accounts to attempt to acquire valid account credentials. Password spraying uses one password (e.g. 'Password01'), or a small list of commonly used passwords, that may match the complexity policy of the domain. Logins are attempted with that password against many different accounts on a network to avoid account lockouts that would normally occur when brute forcing a single account with many passwords. (Citation: BlackHillsInfosec Password Spraying) Typically, management services over commonly used ports are used when password spraying. Commonly targeted services include the following: * SSH (22/TCP) * Telnet (23/TCP) * FTP (21/TCP) * NetBIOS / SMB / Samba (139/TCP & 445/TCP) * LDAP (389/TCP) * Kerberos (88/TCP) * RDP / Terminal Services (3389/TCP) * HTTP/HTTP Management Services (80/TCP & 443/TCP) * MSSQL (1433/TCP) * Oracle (1521/TCP) * MySQL (3306/TCP) * VNC (5900/TCP) In addition to management services, adversaries may "target single sign-on (SSO) and cloud-based applications utilizing federated authentication protocols," as well as externally facing email applications, such as Office 365.(Citation: US-CERT TA18-068A 2018) In default environments, LDAP and Kerberos connection attempts are less likely to trigger events over SMB, which creates Windows "logon failure" event ID 4625.
Event Comparison
Always correlate 4625 with 4624 events. Repeated failures followed by success is a key breach indicator.
What This Event Means
Event 4625 is generated whenever an authentication attempt fails on a Windows system, providing security teams with visibility into potential unauthorized access attempts. This event includes the account name that was used, the failure reason (wrong password, nonexistent account, account locked out, etc.), the source network address of the attempt, and the authentication package that was used. The Sub Status field is particularly valuable as it provides specific error codes explaining why the authentication failed. For example, status code 0xC0000064 indicates the username doesn't exist, while 0xC000006A means correct username but wrong password. These distinctions help analysts differentiate between reconnaissance attempts (testing for valid usernames) and targeted attacks against known accounts. Monitoring patterns of 4625 events can reveal brute force attacks, credential stuffing using compromised password lists, and password spray attacks where adversaries attempt common passwords across many accounts to avoid account lockouts.
Security Implications
- Multiple 4625 events against a single account indicate targeted brute force attacks
- Multiple 4625 events against many accounts with the same password suggest password spray attacks
- Failed logon attempts from unusual geographic locations may indicate credential compromise
- Status code 0xC0000234 (account locked out) followed by successful logon from different IP suggests account takeover
- High volume of 4625 events can indicate automated attack tools or botnets probing for weak credentials
Detection Strategies
Establish baseline failure rates for your environment to detect anomalous spikes in authentication failures. Alert on accounts with more than 5-10 failed logon attempts within a short time window. Monitor for distributed attacks where multiple source IPs target the same account. Track the ratio of unique accounts to source IPs to identify password spray campaigns. Correlate failed logons across multiple systems to detect lateral movement attempts. Pay special attention to failures against privileged accounts, service accounts, and recently disabled accounts. Note: Detailed SIEM correlation rules for multiple platforms will be provided in future updates.
Note: Comprehensive SIEM detection queries for Splunk SPL, Microsoft KQL, and Elastic Query DSL will be added in future updates.
Real-World Attack Examples
The SolarWinds attackers used password spraying techniques that generated scattered 4625 events across multiple accounts before successfully compromising credentials
FIN7 threat group commonly employs credential stuffing attacks that create bursts of 4625 events using compromised credential databases
WannaCry ransomware propagation attempts generated 4625 events when trying to authenticate with SMB exploits