Analyzing Docker Container ForensicsCAUTION
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
Overview
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
6c59587be632OBSERVED · 2026-10-07What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
---
name: analyzing-docker-container-forensics
description: Investigate compromised Docker containers by analyzing images, layers,
volumes, logs, and runtime artifacts to identify malicious activity and evidence.
domain: cybersecurity
subdomain: digital-forensics
tags:
- forensics
- docker
- container-forensics
- container-security
- image-analysis
- runtime-investigation
version: '1.0'
author: mahipal
license: Apache-2.0
nist_csf:
- RS.AN-03
- DE.AE-02
- RS.MA-01
mitre_attack:
- T1610
- T1611
- T1613
- T1612
---
# Analyzing Docker Container Forensics
## When to Use
- When investigating a compromised Docker container or container host
- For analyzing malicious Docker images pulled from registries
- During incident response involving containerized application breaches
- When examining container escape attempts or privilege escalation
- For auditing container configurations and identifying misconfigurations
## Prerequisites
- Docker CLI access on the forensic workstation
- Access to the Docker host file system (forensic image or live)
- Understanding of Docker layered file system (overlay2, aufs)
- dive, docker-explorer, or container-diff for image analysis
- Knowledge of Docker daemon configuration and socket security
- Trivy or Grype for vulnerability scanning of container images
## Workflow
### Step 1: Preserve Container State and Evidence
```bash
# List all containers (including stopped)
docker ps -a --no-trunc > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_list.txt
# Inspect the compromised container
CONTAINER_ID="abc123def456"
docker inspect $CONTAINER_ID > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_inspect.json
# Export container filesystem as tarball (preserves current state)
docker export $CONTAINER_ID > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_export.tar
# Create an image from the container's current state
docker commit $CONTAINER_ID forensic-evidence:case-2024-001
docker save forensic-evidence:case-2024-001 > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_image.tar
# Capture container logs
docker logs $CONTAINER_ID --timestamps > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_logs.txt 2>&1
# Capture running processes (if container is still running)
docker top $CONTAINER_ID > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_processes.txt
# Capture network connections
docker exec $CONTAINER_ID netstat -tlnp 2>/dev/null > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_network.txt
# Copy specific files from the container
docker cp $CONTAINER_ID:/var/log/ /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_var_log/
docker cp $CONTAINER_ID:/tmp/ /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_tmp/
docker cp $CONTAINER_ID:/etc/passwd /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_passwd
# Hash all exported evidence
sha256sum /cases/case-2024-001/docker/*.tar > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/evidence_hashes.txt
```
### Step 2: Analyze Container Image Layers
```bash
# Install dive for image layer analysis
wget https://github.com/wagoodman/dive/releases/latest/download/dive_linux_amd64.deb
sudo dpkg -i dive_linux_amd64.deb
# Analyze image layers interactively
dive forensic-evidence:case-2024-001
# Non-interactive layer analysis
dive forensic-evidence:case-2024-001 --ci --json /cases/case-2024-001/docker/dive_analysis.json
# Extract and examine individual layers
mkdir -p /cases/case-2024-001/docker/layers/
tar -xf /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_image.tar -C /cases/case-2024-001/docker/layers/
# List the image manifest and layer order
cat /cases/case-2024-001/docker/layers/manifest.json | python3 -m json.tool
# Examine each layer for changes
for layer in /cases/case-2024-001/docker/layers/*/layer.tar; do
echo "=== Layer: $(dirname $layer | xargs basename) ==="
tar -tf "$layer" | head -20
echo "..."
done
# Use container-diff to compare with original base image
# Install container-diff
curl -LO https://storage.googleapis.com/container-diff/latest/container-diff-linux-amd64
chmod +x container-diff-linux-amd64
# Compare committed image with original
./container-diff-linux-amd64 diff daemon://nginx:latest daemon://forensic-evidence:case-2024-001 \
--type=file --type=apt --type=history --json \
> /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_diff.json
```
### Step 3: Examine Docker Host Artifacts
```bash
# Docker data directory (default: /var/lib/docker/)
DOCKER_ROOT="/mnt/evidence/var/lib/docker"
# Examine overlay2 filesystem layers
ls -la $DOCKER_ROOT/overlay2/
# Find the container's merged filesystem
CONTAINER_HASH=$(docker inspect $CONTAINER_ID --format '{{.GraphDriver.Data.MergedDir}}' 2>/dev/null)
# Or manually from forensic image:
# Look in /var/lib/docker/containers/<container_id>/config.v2.json
# Analyze container configuration files
cat $DOCKER_ROOT/containers/$CONTAINER_ID/config.v2.json | python3 -m json.tool \
> /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_config.json
# Check Docker daemon configuration
cat /mnt/evidence/etc/docker/daemon.json 2>/dev/null > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/daemon_config.json
# Examine Docker events log
cat $DOCKER_ROOT/containers/$CONTAINER_ID/*.log > /cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_json_logs.txt
# Check for volume mounts (potential host filesystem access)
python3 << 'PYEOF'
import json
with open('/cases/case-2024-001/docker/container_inspect.json') as f:
data = json.load(f)
inspect = data[0] if isinstance(data, list) else data
print("=== CONTAINER SECURITY ANALYSIS ===\n")
# Check mounts
print("Volume Mounts:")
for mount in inspect.get('Mounts', []):
rw = "READ-WRITE" if mount.get('RW') else "READ-ONLY"
print(f" {mount.get('Source', 'N/A')} -> {mount.get('Destination', 'N/A')} ({rw})")
if mount.get('Source') in ('/', '/etc', '/var', '/root') and mount.get('RW'):
print(f" WARNING: Sensitive host path mounted read-write!")
# Check privileged mode
host_config = inspect.get('HostConfig', {})
if host_config.get('Privileged'):
print("\nWARNING: Container was running in PRIVILEGED mode!")
# Check capabilities
cap_add = host_config.get('CapAdd', [])
if cap_add:Trust audit
CAUTIONgrade B · trust 89/100 Install with care. The audit found things worth knowing before you trust its output.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | FAIL |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- declared (4 observation(s))
- Network
- declared (1 observation(s))
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (2)
"/etc/ssh", ".bashrc", "/etc/sudoers", "authorized_keys"]
".php", "webshell", "c2", "beacon",
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
6c59587be632full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/mukul975__analyzing-docker-container-forensics.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-07 | 6c59587be632 | CAUTION | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Analyzing Docker Container Forensics skill do?
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
Is Analyzing Docker Container Forensics safe to install?
With care. The audit graded it B (89/100) and found 2 things worth knowing before you trust this skill, listed below with the exact line each was found on.
What can Analyzing Docker Container Forensics access on my machine?
The audit observed that it reaches the network and reads or writes files. Each of those is consistent with what it says it does. Secrets in the source: none found.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (6c59587be632), read on 2026-10-07. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.