The Bring Your Own EDR (BYOEDR) technique, disclosed by Akamai researcher Shahak Morag at DEF CON 34, abuses SentinelOne's exposed COM interfaces and signed installers to bypass Windows Protected Process Light (PPL),... The attack requires local administrator privileges and is not a remote code execution vulnerability.
Research answer

Create a landscape editorial hero image for this Studio Global article: How does the "Bring Your Own EDR" attack technique disclosed by Akamai at DEF CON 34 weaponize SentinelOne's endpoint detection and response. Article summary: Here is the full breakdown of the "Bring Your Own EDR" (BYOEDR) attack disclosed by Akamai researcher Shahak Morag at DEF CON 34 [1][2].. Topic tags: general, general web, user generated. Style: premium digital editorial illustration, source-backed research mood, clean composition, high detail, modern web publication hero. Use reference image context only for broad subject, composition, and topical grounding; do not copy the exact image. Avoid: logos, brand marks, copyrighted characters, real person likenesses, fake screenshots, UI text, readable text, watermarks, charts with fake numbers, clickbait thumbnails, icons, and tiny thumbnail layouts. Make it useful
At DEF CON 34 in Las Vegas, Akamai researcher Shahak Morag unveiled a novel attack technique called "Bring Your Own EDR" (BYOEDR). The method weaponizes a legitimate SentinelOne endpoint agent — turning the very tool designed to protect endpoints into a privileged Trojan horse that can execute unsigned code and shield malware from removal .
This is not a theoretical exercise. The attack exploits SentinelOne's exposed COM interfaces and signed installer binaries to bypass Windows Protected Process Light (PPL), a security mechanism that normally prevents user-mode processes from accessing protected system processes. SentinelOne has patched the issue in Agent version 26.1.1 .
The attack chain is executed in three stages, each abusing a different trusted SentinelOne component :
A local administrator uses the SentinelHelper.1 COM object's Dump method to dump the memory of any Protected Process Light (PPL) process. The SentinelHelper.1 interface is a legitimate administrative tool, but it was exposed without adequate access control. This allows an attacker with local admin rights to defeat PPL protections entirely, reading the memory contents of processes like Windows Defender .
After dumping the PPL-protected process, the attacker injects unsigned code into that elevated process. Crucially, this code injection originates from a SentinelOne-signed component — the operating system trusts code signed by SentinelOne. The injected unsigned code, wrapped in a trusted carrier, bypasses Windows code integrity checks .
Finally, the attacker leverages the same trusted SentinelOne processes and interfaces to prevent the EDR from detecting or removing the injected malware. Because the malware runs within or alongside SentinelOne's own trusted processes, the EDR's anti-tampering and self-protection mechanisms effectively shield the malware from itself .
The attacker can also install a rogue SentinelOne agent without a valid license and block management telemetry via local DNS manipulation, isolating the compromised system from the central management console .
The root issue is that SentinelOne exposed powerful Component Object Model (COM) interfaces — specifically SentinelHelper.1 — to local administrators without adequate access control. Additionally, its signed installer binaries could be repurposed to perform privileged actions that normal unsigned binaries cannot .
As of the disclosure date, no public CVE identifier has been widely reported for this specific issue .
It is important to note that the attack requires local administrator privileges on the target machine. It is not a remote code execution vulnerability. However, once an attacker gains local admin access through a separate initial compromise (such as exploiting a vulnerable application or using stolen credentials), BYOEDR enables them to bypass PPL protections that are meant to contain such compromises .
SentinelOne fixed the reported issue in Agent version 26.1.1. The fix involved hardening the exposed COM interfaces and restricting how the installer binaries and trusted components can be used . Organizations should ensure all SentinelOne agents are upgraded to version 26.1.1 or later immediately
.
The BYOEDR technique highlights a fundamental trust problem: security software is granted high privileges and deep system access by design. When those capabilities are exposed through accessible interfaces or signed binaries, attackers can repurpose them as offensive tools .
To defend against BYOEDR attacks, organizations should take the following actions:
SentinelHelper.1 or unexpected calls to Dump methods) by non-SentinelOne processes BYOEDR is not an isolated incident. A similar technique called "Bring Your Own Installer" (BYOI), discovered by Aon's Stroz Friedberg in 2025, exploits SentinelOne's upgrade/downgrade process to disable anti-tamper protections, leaving endpoints unprotected for malware execution . BYOI was observed in real-world attacks deploying Babuk ransomware
.
The combination of BYOEDR and BYOI demonstrates that attackers are increasingly targeting the trust placed in security software itself, not just the vulnerabilities in the applications it protects.
Studio Global AI
This page includes a source-backed answer you can continue inside Studio Global.
The Bring Your Own EDR (BYOEDR) technique, disclosed by Akamai researcher Shahak Morag at DEF CON 34, abuses SentinelOne's exposed COM interfaces and signed installers to bypass Windows Protected Process Light (PPL),...
The Bring Your Own EDR (BYOEDR) technique, disclosed by Akamai researcher Shahak Morag at DEF CON 34, abuses SentinelOne's exposed COM interfaces and signed installers to bypass Windows Protected Process Light (PPL),... The attack requires local administrator privileges and is not a remote code execution vulnerability.
Organizations should immediately update to SentinelOne Agent 26.1.1 or later, harden local admin access, monitor for COM interface abuse, and review how their EDR vendors protect privileged interfaces from local abuse.