T1474: Supply Chain Compromise
Adversaries may manipulate products or product delivery mechanisms prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
Supply chain compromise can take place at any stage of the supply chain including:
* Manipulation of development tools * Manipulation of a development environment * Manipulation of source code repositories (public or private) * Manipulation of source code in open-source dependencies * Manipulation of software update/distribution mechanisms * Compromised/infected system images * Replacement of legitimate software with modified versions * Sales of modified/counterfeit products to legitimate distributors * Shipment interdiction
While supply chain compromise can impact any component of hardware or software, attackers looking to gain execution have often focused on malicious additions to legitimate software in software distribution or update channels. Targeting may be specific to a desired victim set or malicious software may be distributed to a broad set of consumers but only move on to additional tactics on specific victims. Popular open source projects that are used as dependencies in many applications may also be targeted as a means to add malicious code to users of the dependency, specifically with the widespread usage of third-party advertising libraries.[1][2]
Analyst context for executives and security teams
Supply Chain Compromise for mobile matters because a trusted app, dependency, update channel, device image, hardware component, or delivery path can be altered before the organization ever receives it. For executives, the key issue is trust: normal mobile security controls may see the product as legitimate even when the compromise was introduced upstream.
Executive priority
Treat this as a resilience and assurance problem, not only a malware problem. Leaders should ask whether mobile app development, third-party libraries, app distribution, device procurement, security update commitments, and device retirement rules are governed with evidence. Budget and control decisions should prioritize supplier assurance, secure SDLC practices, timely mobile security updates, and the ability to restrict enterprise access from devices that are not current or no longer supported.
Technical view
ATT&CK lists Android and iOS platforms and no specific tactic for this parent technique. SOC, IR, mobile security, and detection engineering teams should validate visibility across the related sub-areas: compromised software dependencies and development tools, compromised hardware supply chain, and compromised software supply chain. Because official detection text is not provided, teams should use the related detection strategy DET0628 as a starting point and confirm local evidence sources can support investigations into app provenance, dependency integrity, update-channel integrity, device image integrity, and unexpected changes in signed or distributed mobile software.
Likely telemetry
- Mobile device inventory, OS version, and security patch level records
- Mobile application inventory, package identifiers, signing certificate details, hashes, and installation source
- Mobile app build, release, repository, dependency, and third-party library records where the organization develops or distributes apps
- Software update and application distribution logs, including enterprise app store or MDM deployment history where available
- Procurement, vendor, carrier, shipment, and device lifecycle records for managed mobile hardware
Detection direction
- Validate whether DET0628 or local detection content covers supply-chain indicators across software dependencies, development tools, hardware, and software distribution paths.
- Tune for integrity and provenance anomalies rather than only runtime malware behavior; a compromised product may appear trusted if signatures, repositories, or update mechanisms were abused upstream.
- Correlate mobile app inventory with expected signing certificates, approved distribution channels, known dependency versions, and release records.
- Use device patch level and support status as detection and triage context, especially where access to enterprise resources depends on recent security updates.
- Account for false positives from legitimate app updates, developer certificate rotation, emergency releases, device replacement, or carrier/vendor update delays.
Mitigation priorities
- Prioritize M1001 Security Updates: buy and retain devices with vendor or carrier commitments for prompt updates, monitor patch levels, decommission unsupported devices, and limit or block enterprise access from devices lacking recent updates.
- Apply M1013 Application Developer Guidance for internally developed mobile applications: integrate secure coding, secure design, and SDLC controls to reduce opportunities for compromised dependencies or development processes to enter releases.
- Maintain approval and review processes for third-party mobile libraries, SDKs, and open-source dependencies, including advertising libraries when used.
- Require provenance checks for mobile applications and updates, including expected source, signing identity, and release history.
- Strengthen procurement and lifecycle governance for mobile hardware and system images, especially for devices that will access enterprise resources.
Analyst notes and limits
This object consolidates several formerly separate mobile supply-chain concepts and has three sub-techniques: T1474.001 for software dependencies and development tools, T1474.002 for hardware supply chain, and T1474.003 for software supply chain. The NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue references and ATT&CK relationships support using this technique for compliance evidence, vendor risk discussions, mobile SDLC review, and device access policy decisions.
The supplied ATT&CK object does not provide official detection text or tactics, and the related detection strategy details are not included. Assessment of exposure or coverage requires local evidence about mobile platforms in use, app development practices, dependency management, procurement paths, MDM controls, and update enforcement.
Supply Chain Compromise
Adversaries may manipulate products or product delivery mechanisms prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
Supply chain compromise can take place at any stage of the supply chain including:
* Manipulation of development tools * Manipulation of a development environment * Manipulation of source code repositories (public or private) * Manipulation of source code in open-source dependencies * Manipulation of software update/distribution mechanisms * Compromised/infected system images * Replacement of legitimate software with modified versions * Sales of modified/counterfeit products to legitimate distributors * Shipment interdiction
While supply chain compromise can impact any component of hardware or software, attackers looking to gain execution have often focused on malicious additions to legitimate software in software distribution or update channels. Targeting may be specific to a desired victim set or malicious software may be distributed to a broad set of consumers but only move on to additional tactics on specific victims. Popular open source projects that are used as dependencies in many applications may also be targeted as a means to add malicious code to users of the dependency, specifically with the widespread usage of third-party advertising libraries.[1][2]
How security teams should use this page
Treat this object as behavior context, not an attribution claim. Validate the related groups, software, data sources, and mitigations against official ATT&CK relationships and your own telemetry before making control-coverage decisions.
Related techniques
This mirrors the MITRE pattern of making group, software, campaign, and technique relationships scannable. Relationship notes come from mirrored ATT&CK relationship text when available.
| Domain | ID | Name | Relationship / procedure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile | T1474.002 | Compromise Hardware Supply Chain Sub-technique | Compromise Hardware Supply Chain subtechnique of this object. |
| Mobile | T1474.001 | Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools Sub-technique | Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools subtechnique of this object. |
| Mobile | — | Malicious or Vulnerable Built-in Device Functionality | Malicious or Vulnerable Built-in Device Functionality revoked by this object. |
| Mobile | — | Malicious Software Development Tools | Malicious Software Development Tools revoked by this object. |
| Mobile | T1474.003 | Compromise Software Supply Chain Sub-technique | Compromise Software Supply Chain subtechnique of this object. |
| Mobile | — | Insecure Third-Party Libraries | Insecure Third-Party Libraries revoked by this object. |
All related ATT&CK context
Mitigation direction
Object version and sync metadata
The fields below describe the current mirrored snapshot. When Glexia retains multiple ATT&CK source imports, you can open the table to compare the same object across releases (hashes and MITRE timestamps). For MITRE’s own release notes and roadmap, see ATT&CK resources — Updates .
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
| Release | Bundle imported | Object version | Modified | Status | Raw hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.1 | 2.1 | Current bundle | 3b515ee75a31… |
Mirrored ATT&CK source object
The raw object is retained through the mirrored ATT&CK source bundle and object hash. The raw endpoint returns the exact object from the mirrored bundle when available.
External references and citations
MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.
-
[1]
Grace-Advertisement
M. Grace et al. (2012, April 16-18). Unsafe exposure analysis of mobile in-app advertisements. Retrieved November 17, 2024.
Open source URL -
[2]
NowSecure-RemoteCode
Ryan Welton. (2015, June 15). A Pattern for Remote Code Execution using Arbitrary File Writes and MultiDex Applications. Retrieved December 22, 2016.
Open source URL -
[3]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue APP-6Open source URL
-
[4]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-0Open source URL
-
[5]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-1Open source URL
-
[6]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-10Open source URL
-
[7]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-11Open source URL
-
[8]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-12Open source URL
-
[9]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-13Open source URL
-
[10]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-14Open source URL
-
[11]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-15Open source URL
-
[12]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-16Open source URL
-
[13]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-17Open source URL
-
[14]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-18Open source URL
-
[15]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-19Open source URL
-
[16]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-2Open source URL
-
[17]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-20Open source URL
-
[18]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-21Open source URL
-
[19]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-3Open source URL
-
[20]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-4Open source URL
-
[21]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-5Open source URL
-
[22]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-6Open source URL
-
[23]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-7Open source URL
-
[24]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-8Open source URL
-
[25]
NIST Mobile Threat Catalogue SPC-9Open source URL
-
[26]
mitre-attack T1474Open source URL
Source: MITRE ATT&CK®. © 2026 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK and ATT&CK are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Glexia is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.