Summary

Cisco Talos has been closely monitoring reports of widespread intrusion activity against several major U.S. telecommunications companies. The activity, initially reported in late 2024 and later confirmed by the U.S. government, is being carried out by a highly sophisticated threat actor dubbed Salt Typhoon. This blog highlights our observations on this campaign and identifies recommendations for detection and prevention of the actor’s activities.

Public reporting has indicated that the threat actor was able to gain access to core networking infrastructure in several instances and then use that infrastructure to collect a variety of information. There was only one case in which we found evidence suggesting that a Cisco vulnerability (CVE-2018-0171) was likely abused. In all the other incidents we have investigated to date, the initial access to Cisco devices was determined to be gained through the threat actor obtaining legitimate victim login credentials. The threat actor then demonstrated their ability to persist in target environments across equipment from multiple vendors for extended periods, maintaining access in one instance for over three years.

A hallmark of this campaign is the use of living-off-the-land (LOTL) techniques on network devices. It is important to note that while the telecommunications industry is the primary victim, the advice contained herein is relevant to, and should be considered by, all infrastructure defenders.

No new Cisco vulnerabilities were discovered during this campaign. While there have been some reports that Salt Typhoon is abusing three other known Cisco vulnerabilities, we have not identified any evidence to confirm these claims. The vulnerabilities in question are listed below. Note that each of these CVEs have security fixes available. Threat actors regularly use publicly available malicious tooling to exploit these vulnerabilities, making patching of these vulnerabilities imperative.

Therefore, our recommendation — which is consistent with our standard guidance independent of this particular case—is always to follow best practices to secure network infrastructure.

• CVE-2018-0171 – Cisco IOS and IOS XE Software Smart Install Remote Code Execution Vulnerability (Last Updated: 15-Dec-2022)
• CVE-2023-20198, CVE-2023-20273 – Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco IOS XE Software Web UI Feature (Last Updated: 1-Nov-2023)
• CVE-2024-20399 – Cisco NX-OS Software CLI Command Injection Vulnerability (Last Updated: 17-Sep-2024)

Activities observed

Credential use and expansion

The use of valid, stolen credentials has been observed throughout this campaign, though it is unknown at this time exactly how the initial credentials in all cases were obtained by the threat actor. We have observed the threat actor actively attempting to acquire additional credentials by obtaining network device configurations and deciphering local accounts with weak password types—a security configuration that allows users to store passwords using cryptographically weak methods. In addition, we have observed the threat actor capturing SNMP, TACACS, and RADIUS traffic, including the secret keys used between network devices and TACACS/RADIUS servers. The intent of this traffic capture is almost certainly to enumerate additional credential details for follow-on use.

Configuration exfiltration

In numerous instances, the threat actor exfiltrated device configurations, often over TFTP and/or FTP. These configurations often contained sensitive authentication material, such as SNMP Read/Write (R/W) community strings and local accounts with weak password encryption types in use. The weak encryption password type would allow an attacker to trivially decrypt the password itself offline. In addition to the sensitive authentication material, configurations often contain named interfaces, which might allow an attacker to better understand the upstream and downstream network segments and use this information for additional reconnaissance and subsequent lateral movement within the network.

Infrastructure pivoting

A significant part of this campaign is marked by the actor’s continued movement, or pivoting, through compromised infrastructure. This “machine to machine” pivoting, or “jumping,” is likely conducted for a couple of reasons. First, it allows the threat actor to move within a trusted infrastructure set where network communications might not otherwise be permitted. Additionally, connections from this type of infrastructure are less likely to be flagged as suspicious by network defenders, allowing the threat actor to remain undetected.

The threat actor also pivoted from a compromised device operated by one telecom to target a device in another telecom. We believe that the device associated with the initial telecom was merely used as a hop point and not the intended final target in several instances. Some of these hop points were also used as a first hop for outbound data exfiltration operations. Much of this pivoting included the use of network equipment from a variety of different manufacturers.

Configuration modification

We observed that the threat actor had modified devices’ running configurations as well as the subsystems associated with both Bash and Guest Shell. (Guest Shell is a Linux-based virtual environment that runs on Cisco devices and allows users to execute Linux commands and utilities, including Bash.)

Running configuration modifications

• AAA/TACACS+ server modification (server IP address change)
• Loopback interface IP address modifications
• GRE tunnel creation and use
• Creation of unexpected local accounts
• ACL modifications
• SNMP community string modifications
• HTTP/HTTPS server modifications on both standard and non-standard ports

Shell access modifications

• Guest Shell enable and disable commands
• Started SSH alternate servers on high ports for persistent access, such as sshd_operns (on port 57722) on underlying Linux Shell or Guest Shell
  • /usr/bin/sshd -p X
• Created Linux-level users (modification of “/etc/shadow” and “/etc/passwd”)
• Added SSH “authorized_keys” under root or other users at Linux level

Packet capture

The threat actor used a variety of tools and techniques to capture packet data throughout the course of the campaign, listed below:

• Tcpdump – Portable command-line utility used to capture packet data at the underlying operating system level.
  • Tcpdump –i
• Tpacap – Cisco IOS XR command line utility used to capture packets being sent to or from a given interface via netio at the underlying operating system level.
  • Tpacap –i
• Embedded Packet Capture (EPC) – Cisco IOS feature that allows the capture and export of packet capture data.
  • Monitor capture CAP export ftp://<ftp_server>
  • Monitor capture CAP start
  • Monitor capture CAP clear

Operational utility (JumbledPath)

The threat actor used a custom-built utility, dubbed JumbledPath, which allowed them to execute a packet capture on a remote Cisco device through an actor-defined jump-host. This tool also attempted to clear logs and impair logging along the jump-path and return the resultant compressed, encrypted capture via another unique series of actor-defined connections or jumps. This allowed the threat actor to create a chain of connections and perform the capture on a remote device. The use of this utility would help to obfuscate the original source, and ultimate destination, of the request and would also allow its operator to move through potentially otherwise non-publicly-reachable (or routable) devices or infrastructure.

This utility was written in GO and compiled as an ELF binary using an x86-64 architecture. Compiling the utility using this architecture makes it widely useable across Linux operating systems, which also includes a variety of multi-vendor network devices. This utility was found in actor configured Guestshell instances on Cisco Nexus devices.

Defense evasion

The threat actor repeatedly modified the address of the loopback interface on a compromised switch and used that interface as the source of SSH connections to additional devices within the target environment, allowing them to effectively bypass access control lists (ACLs) in place on those devices (see “Infrastructure pivoting” section).

The threat actor routinely cleared relevant logs, including .bash_history, auth.log, lastlog, wtmp, and btmp, where applicable, to obfuscate their activities. Shell access was restored to a normal state in many cases through the use of the “guestshell disable” command.

The threat actor modified authentication, authorization, and accounting (AAA) server settings with supplemental addresses under their control to bypass access control systems.

Detection

We recommend taking the following steps to identify suspicious activity that may be related to this campaign:

• Conduct comprehensive configuration management (inclusive of auditing), in line with best practices.
• Conduct comprehensive authentication/authorization/command issuance monitoring.
• Monitor syslog and AAA logs for unusual activity, including a decrease in normal logging events, or a gap in logged activity.
• Monitor your environment for unusual changes in behavior or configuration.
• Profile (fingerprint via NetFlow and port scanning) network devices for a shift in surface view, including new ports opening/closing and traffic to/from (not traversing).
• Where possible, develop NetFlow visibility to identify unusual volumetric changes.
• Look for non-empty or unusually large .bash_history files.
• Additional identification and detection can be performed using the Cisco forensic guides.

Preventative measures

The following guidance applies to entities in all sectors.

• Cisco-specific measures
  • Always disable the underlying non-encrypted web server using the “no ip http server” command. If web management is not required, disable all of the underlying web servers using “no ip http server” and “no ip http secure-server” commands.
  • Disable telnet and ensure it is not available on any of the Virtual Teletype (VTY) lines on Cisco devices by configuring all VTY stanzas with “transport input ssh” and “transport output none”.
  • If not required, disable the guestshell access using “guestshell disable” for those versions which support the guestshell service.
  • Disable Cisco’s Smart Install service using “no vstack”.
  • Utilize type 8 passwords for local account credential configuration.
  • Use type 6 for TACACS+ key configuration.
• General measures
  • Rigorously adhere to security best practices, including updating, access controls, user education, and network segmentation.
  • Stay up-to-date on security advisories from the U.S. government and industry, and consider suggested configuration changes to mitigate described issues.
  • Update devices as aggressively as possible. This includes patching current hardware and software against known vulnerabilities and replacing end-of-life hardware and software.
    • Select complex passwords and community strings and avoid default credentials.
  • Use multi-factor authentication (MFA).
  • Encrypt all monitoring and configuration traffic (SNMPv3, HTTPS, SSH, NETCONF, RESTCONF).
  • Lockdown and aggressively monitor credential systems, such as TACACS+ and any jump hosts.
  • Utilize AAA to deny configuration modifications of key device protections (e.g., local accounts, TACACS+, RADIUS).
  • Prevent and monitor for exposure of administrative or unusual interfaces (e.g., SNMP, SSH, HTTP(s)).
  • Disable all non-encrypted web management capabilities.
  • Verify existence and correctness of access control lists for all management protocols (e.g., SNMP, SSH, Netconf, etc.).
  • Enhance overall credential and password management practices with stronger keys and/or encryption.
    • Use type 8 passwords for local account credential configuration.
    • Use type 6 for TACACS+ key configuration.
  • Store configurations centrally and push to devices. Do NOT allow devices to be the trusted source of truth for their configurations.

Analyst’s comments

There are several reasons to believe this activity is being carried out by a highly sophisticated, well-funded threat actor, including the targeted nature of this campaign, the deep levels of developed access into victim networks, and the threat actor’s extensive technical knowledge. Furthermore, the long timeline of this campaign suggests a high degree of coordination, planning, and patience—standard hallmarks of advanced persistent threat (APT) and state-sponsored actors.

During this investigation, we also observed additional pervasive targeting of Cisco devices with exposed Smart Install (SMI) and the subsequent abuse of CVE-2018-0171, a vulnerability in the Smart Install feature of Cisco IOS and Cisco IOS XE software. This activity appears to be unrelated to the Salt Typhoon operations, and we have not yet been able to attribute it to a specific actor. The IP addresses provided as observables below are associated with this potentially unrelated SMI activity.

Legacy devices with known vulnerabilities, such as Smart Install (CVE-2018-0171), should be patched or decommissioned if no longer in use. Even if the device is a non-critical device, or carries no traffic, it may be used as an entry door for the threat actor to pivot to other more critical devices.

The findings in this blog represent Cisco Talos’ understanding of the attacks outlined herein. This campaign and its impact are still being researched, and the situation continues to evolve. As such, this post may be updated at any time to reflect new findings or adjustments to assessments.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

IP Addresses:

185[.]141[.]24[.]28

185[.]82[.]200[.]181

Cisco Talos Blog – ​Read More

Phishing kits have invested greatly in the popularity of phishing. They drop the entry threshold for cybercriminals enabling even low-skilled hackers to conduct successful attacks.  

In general, a phishing kit is a set of tools for creating convincing fake webpages, sites, or emails that trick users into divulging sensitive information like passwords or credit card credentials. Security specialists should never underestimate this type of malware and fail to be ready to counter its users. 

What Phishkits are made of 

These ready-to-use packages can be basic, with some pre-written code and website and email templates, and they can be advanced phishing-as-a-service (PHaaS) kits that offer more sophisticated and customizable features. These may even contain automated updates or encryption features.  

A typical kit includes:  

• Website (email, social network pages) templates mimicking legitimate brands (banks, email providers, cloud services, etc.) 
• Data harvesting scripts that capture input in webpage forms 
• Automated deployment tools for quick setup 
• Bypass techniques such as reverse proxies that intercept multi-factor authentication 
• Server-side components that manage the data collected from victims 

Some notable Phishkits 

• 16Shop: targeted Apple, PayPal, and Amazon users and was distributed as a subscription service. 
• Evilginx2: a framework to intercept authentication tokens that helped to bypass MFA. 
• BulletProofLink: a PHaaS platform that offered pre-hosted phishing pages and even reused stolen credentials to maximize profit. 

• Greatness: targets Microsoft 365 users and can dynamically generate fake login pages customized for the victim. 
• GoPhish: an open-source framework meant for businesses to test their exposure to phishing by imitating attacks but also used maliciously. 
• King Phisher: offers advanced features like campaign management and cloning of websites. 
• Blitz: known for its simplicity and quick creation of phishing webpages. 

Why Phishkits are a serious issue for businesses 

Phishing kits are employed to attack both individuals and organizations, but they represent a specific threat to businesses by inviting wider audience of would-be hackers to the industry, multiplying risks and providing an increased workload to security systems.  
 
Besides, phishing kit attacks make it easier to turn any employee into a soft spot of the cyber security perimeter. Even targeted at people, such attacks are a headache for SOC teams.  
 
The features of phishkits that pose increased risks for organizations are:  
 
Scalability: They allow attackers to automate and run phishing campaigns against thousands of employees simultaneously. 

MFA Bypass: Modern phishkits integrate Adversary-in-the-Middle (AiTM) techniques to steal session cookies, bypassing multi-factor authentication. 

Brand Abuse & Reputation Damage: Phishing pages tend to impersonate well-known brands, leading to loss of their customer trust when credentials are stolen. 

Supply Chain Attacks: Phishkits can be used to target third-party vendors and gain access to corporate networks via compromised partners. 

Defusing Phishkits with Threat Intelligence 

Cyber threat intelligence has long proven useful in countering phishkit-based attacks. It involves gathering, analyzing, and acting upon information about current and emerging threats. For countering phishkits, it enforces:  

• Early detection: TI helps to collect the indicators of compromise associated with the use of certain phishkits and set up network monitoring for detecting the elements of phishkit infrastructure. 
• Behavioral Analys: TI is used to analyze patterns and behaviors of phishing campaigns, to identify new kits or variations of known ones before they cause harm. 
• Proactive Blocking: Intelligence feeds are used to update security systems like firewalls, email gateways, or intrusion detection systems to block known malicious domains or IPs. 
• Employee Training: By helping to understand phishkits’ anatomy and behavour, TI can facilitate realistic phishing simulations based on actual threats, training staff to recognize and report phishing attempts. 
• Vulnerability Management: Seeing what types of phishkits are targeting specific sectors or technologies, organizations prioritize patching vulnerabilities or enhance security measures where they are most needed.

How to Track and Identify Phishing Kit Attacks with TI Lookup 

Threat Intelligence Lookup from ANY.RUN provides access to an extensive database of the latest threat data extracted from millions of public sandbox sessions.  

It allows analysts to conduct targeted indicator searches with over 40 different parameters, from IPs and hashes to mutexes and registry keys, to enrich their existing intel on malware and phishing attacks.  

With TI Lookup, users can collect as well as pin their existing indicators to specific cyber threats. Each indicator in TI Lookup can be observed as part of wider context  

Learn more about TI Lookup 

Threat Intelligence Lookup empowers organizations with: 

• Streamlined Access to Threat Information: Simplifies and speeds up the process of finding threat-related information, making it more convenient and efficient. 
• Detailed Insights into Attacks: Provides detailed information on attacker methods, helping to determine the most effective response measures. Deep analysis makes the actions of analysts more precise and effective. 
• Reduced Mean Time to Respond (MTTR): Offers quick access to key threat information, enabling analysts to make swift decisions. 
• Increased Detection and Response Speed: Ensures data is up-to-date, helping businesses improve the speed of detecting and responding to new threats. 

1. Collecting Intel on Tycoon2FA Phishkit Abusing Cloudflare Workers 

Tycoon2FA is a phishkit that has been offered as a service to cyber criminals since 2023. This threat’s specialty is adversary-in-the-middle attacks that make it possible to not only steal victims’ login credentials but also bypass two-factor authentication (2FA).  

Tycon2FA operators make extensive use of Cloudflare Workers and Cloudflare Pages for hosting fake login forms that are abused for stealing personal data.  

With TI Lookup, we can collect the latest example of domains utilized for Tycoon2FA attacks using the following query: 

domainName:”*.workers.dev” 

TI Lookup provides 49 domains, with some of them being labeled with the “phishing” tag. At this point, users can collect these indicators to enrich their defense. 

Using TI Lookup can be also helpful during triage, when you need to check if a certain Cloudflare Workers domain is malicious. As you can see in the image above, the service instantly informs you about the threat level of the queried domain. 

The Tasks tab in TI Lookup provides a list of the latest analysis reports performed in ANY.RUN’s Interactive Sandbox featuring the requested domains. 

Here, we can discover that Cloudflare’s domain is also used by another phishing-as-a-service tool, EvilProxy.  

If you want to dig deeper, you can open any of these reports inside the sandbox and observe real-world attacks as they unfolded and rerun analysis of these URLs yourself. 

2. Researching Phishkit Campaigns via Suricata rules  

Threat Intelligence Lookup supports search by Suricata IDS rules. Add a rule ID (SID) and see an assortment of incidents where the same rule was triggered.  

Let’s use the rule with the class “Possible social engineering attempted” via the following query: 

suricataID:”8001050″ 

Among the results, we can see examples of Gabagool and Sneaky2FA phishing kit attacks, as well as Tycoon2FA’s which are linked to the Storm1747 APT.

Learn more on how to track APTs

You can download data on all of these samples, which includes hashes, and use it to further enrich your security systems. As always, you can also explore each report in detail to collect even more insights into these attacks. 

TI Lookup also lets you automatically receive notifications about the new results available for specific search queries. All you need to do is click the bell icon, and all of the updates will be displayed in the left side menu. 

3. Tracking new samples of Mamba2FA Phishkit 

If your organization has been previously attacked with a certain phishing kit, then you can easily stay updated on the newest indicators related to it. 

Let’s take Mamba2FA as an example. It is a widely utilized phishkit that has been used in numerous attacks against businesses in the financial and manufacturing sectors. 

With a simple query that combines the name of the phishkit with an empty domain name field, we can quickly discover both new attacks, as well as network indicators like domains and URLs recorded during sandbox analysis: 

threatName:”mamba” AND domainName:”” 

Learn more about proactively identifying Mamba2FA attacks in the article by a phishing analyst. 

Conclusion  

Security experts are far from underestimating the risks behind phishing kits. They don’t just open gates to a mass of low-skilled beginners to the cybercrime market. They abuse known brands and trademarks by impersonating their resources, employ sophisticated infiltration and anti-evasion techniques, and are constantly evolving.  

To avoid financial and reputational loss, organizations should consider investing in high-end threat intelligence solutions as well as emphasize employee educating and training.  

About ANY.RUN

ANY.RUN helps more than 500,000 cybersecurity professionals worldwide. Our interactive sandbox simplifies malware analysis of threats that target both Windows and Linux systems. Our threat intelligence products, TI Lookup, YARA Search, and Feeds, help you find IOCs or files to learn more about the threats and respond to incidents faster.

Request free trial of ANY.RUN’s services → 

The post How to Identify and Investigate Phishing Kit Attacks appeared first on ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog.

ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog – ​Read More

Editor’s note: The current article is authored by Mauro Eldritch, offensive security expert and threat intelligence analyst. You can find Mauro on X. 

From December 20 to 24, 2024, the Quetzal Team identified a phishing campaign targeting the cryptocurrency and fintech sectors. This campaign aimed to distribute a newly discovered stealer malware, which we have named Zhong Stealer, as there were no prior public references to this threat. 

In this article, we’ll use ANY.RUN’s real-time malware analysis capabilities to cover:

• Execution flow: How the malware runs from initial launch to full system infiltration. 
• Data exfiltration tactics: How Zhong transmits stolen credentials to a C2 server hosted in Hong Kong. 
• Persistence techniques: How it modifies registry keys and scheduled tasks to survive reboots. 

A Flood of Phishing Attempts 

The attack pattern was simple yet persistent: 

1. Open a new support ticket from a freshly created, empty account. 

2. Use broken language and ask for help in Chinese. 

3. Attach a ZIP file containing screenshots or additional details. 

4. Insist that support staff open it, growing frustrated when they refused. 

During this period, we managed to collect several suspicious ZIP file samples, all named with Simplified Chinese characters: 

• 图片_20241224 (2).zip (Image_20241224 (2).zip). 

• Android 自由截图_20241220.zip (Android Free Screenshot_20241220.zip) 

• Android – Screenshots2024122288jpg.zip 

Each ZIP file contained an EXE file inside, which immediately raised red flags: 

• 图片_20241224.exe (Image_20241224.exe – Simplified Chinese) 

• 圖片2024122288jpg.exe (Image2024122288jpg.exe – Traditional Chinese) 

• 图片_20241220.exe (Image_20241220.exe – Simplified Chinese) 

The Zhong Stealer Revealed 

Over four days, we received multiple samples of what appeared to be the same malware. Initially, only one global detection flagged it as “Unsafe,” a vague and generic label. 

As time passed, some samples began to receive more global detections, but with a twist: all of them were either generic or driven by heuristic/machine learning/artificial intelligence-powered systems.  

However, these detections lacked meaningful naming conventions, making tracking difficult. 

Generic conventions (such as “Win.MSIL”, “Detected”, or “Unsafe”) and AI-generated names (like “AIDetectMalware”, “Malware.AI”, “ML.Attribute.HighConfidence”, “malicious_confidence_90%”, “Static AI”) may be useful for internal classification or as temporary indicators but their lack of specificity makes it difficult to track malware over time or correlate research findings. 

To solve this, we decided to give this malware a proper name: Zhong Stealer, inspired by the email address of the first submitter to hit the ticketing system. From now on, we’ll track all these strains under this family name. 

Now that we’ve made a new “friend”, let’s play with it a little bit. 

Dissecting Zhong 

Running Zhong Stealer in ANY.RUN revealed its behavior almost immediately. Upon execution, it queried a C2 server based in Hong Kong, hosted by Alibaba Cloud. 

View sandbox analysis

Stage 1: Initial Contact 

The first action involves reading a TXT file, which serves as an inventory. This file contains links to itself and other components that need to be downloaded. 

Stage 2: Downloader Execution 

Next, another stage is downloaded: down.exe, a file signed with a previously valid but now revoked certificate from Morning Leap & Cazo Electronics Technology Co., suggesting it was likely stolen. Notably, the file masquerades as a BitDefender Security updater, a deliberate choice that adds an extra layer of deception to evade suspicion. 

Alongside this stage, Zhong downloaded additional components: 

• TASLogin.log (a log file) 

• TASLoginBase.dll (a dynamic-link library) 

These components helped facilitate execution of the next stage. 

Stage 3: Persistence & Reconnaissance 

Once active, down.exe creates a BAT file with a random 4-digit name in the user’s temporary folder (e.g., 4948.bat on my setup). This script sets up the environment by invoking system utilities like Conhost.exe and Attrib.exe to unhide and grant execution permissions to the next step. 

The stealer then queries the system’s supported languages, a tactic often seen in ransomware. It is used to avoid targeting specific regions. It also schedules itself to run periodically via Task Scheduler, which serves as a fallback persistence method, though not its primary one (more on this later). 

Next, Zhong disables trace logs (point 1 in the image below) and initiates reconnaissance routines.  

This includes reading registry keys to collect details such as the machine hostname, GUID, proxies, software policies, and supported languages (points 2 and 3). It also evaluates Internet Explorer/Edge security settings (point 4). 

Stage 4: Credential Theft & Data Exfiltration 

With the preparation complete, Zhong moves to its final stage, where it aims to execute a clean attack.  

Now, the real action starts. Zhong establishes persistence by adding a registry key (point 1 in the image below) at: 

HKEY_CURRENT_USERSOFTWAREMICROSOFTWINDOWSCURRENTVERSIONRUN 

Next, it harvests browser credentials and extension data (point 2) before connecting to its C2 server on port 1131(point 3) to exfiltrate the stolen information. 

Let’s break down these actions step by step. 

The registry key serves as Zhong’s primary persistence mechanism, with the scheduled task acting as a fallback in case the registry entry is removed. Once persistence is secured, Zhong shifts its focus to harvesting credentials and browser extension data. 

Next, Zhong scans browser extensions and credentials, starting with Brave Browser on this setup. 

It then moves on to Edge/Internet Explorer, which comes pre-installed on most Windows systems, making them valuable targets for data theft. 

After collecting sensitive data, Zhong contacts its Hong Kong-based C2 server on port 1131 to exfiltrate relevant information. 

At this point, the outcome is predictable—Zhong evolves from a mere nuisance into a full-fledged data thief. 

Now, let’s break down its techniques into a clear and structured MITRE ATT&CK Matrix to visualize its full attack chain. 

Fortunately, ANY.RUN simplifies this process, mapping out the malware’s behavior step by step for better analysis and threat tracking. 

Zhong Stealer’s Tactics & Techniques 

This particular piece of malware employs a variety of TTPs which are common, simple, and yet, highly effective: 

• Disabling Event Logging (T1562) – Prevents security tools from recording malicious activity, making detection and forensic analysis more difficult. 

• Gaining Persistence via Registry Keys (T1547) – Modifies Windows registry settings to ensure the malware automatically runs at startup. 

• Harvesting Credentials (T1552) – Extracts saved passwords, browser session data, and authentication tokens from compromised systems. 

• Scheduling Tasks (T1053) – Creates scheduled tasks to maintain persistence, ensuring the malware executes even after a system reboot. 

• Communicating via Non-Standard Ports (T1571) – Uses uncommon network ports, such as port 1131, to avoid detection and transmit stolen data to a command-and-control server. 

You can find more TTPs used by Zhong Stealer in the screenshot below: 

How to Protect Against Zhong Stealer 

To combat Zhong Stealer and similar social engineering-based malware, security teams must adopt proactive detection and analysis strategies. Traditional antivirus solutions often fail to recognize stealthy threats, but with ANY.RUN’s Interactive Sandbox, organizations can identify, analyze, and block malicious activity in real time before it causes harm. 

Here’s how to protect your organization from Zhong Stealer: 

• Train customer support teams to recognize phishing tactics and avoid opening suspicious file attachments in support chats. 

• Restrict ZIP file execution from unverified sources and enforce zero-trust security policies to prevent unauthorized file access. 

• Monitor outbound network traffic for suspicious C2 connections, especially to non-standard ports like 1131, a key indicator of Zhong Stealer’s activity. 

• Use ANY.RUN’s real-time analysis to safely detonate unknown executables, observe their behavior step by step, and extract critical IOCs before the malware can spread. 

With ANY.RUN’s in-depth behavioral analysis, security teams can stay ahead of evolving threats like Zhong Stealer and prevent cybercriminals from using social engineering to bypass traditional defenses. 

Final Thoughts 

Zhong Stealer’s campaign is a prime example of how social engineering and persistent phishing tactics can be used to distribute malware. By targeting customer support teams, the attackers attempted to bypass traditional security measures and exploit human trust. 

About ANY.RUN

ANY.RUN helps more than 500,000 cybersecurity professionals worldwide. Our interactive sandbox simplifies malware analysis of threats that target both Windows and Linux systems. Our threat intelligence products, TI Lookup, YARA Search, and Feeds, help you find IOCs or files to learn more about the threats and respond to incidents faster.

Request free trial of ANY.RUN’s services → 

IOCs 

FileHash-MD5:778b6521dd2b07d7db0eaeaab9a2f86b 

FileHash-SHA1:ce120e922ed4156dbd07de8335c5a632974ec527 

FileHash-SHA256:02244934046333f45bc22abe6185e6ddda033342836062afb681a583aa7d827f 

FileHash-SHA256:1abffe97aafe9916b366da57458a78338598cab9742c2d9e03e4ad0ba11f29bf 

FileHash-SHA256:4eaebd93e23be3427d4c1349d64bef4b5fc455c93aebb9b5b752981e9266488e 

FileHash-SHA256:dd44dabff5361aa9b845dd891ad483162d4f28913344c93e5d59f648a186098 

FileHash-SHA256:e46779869c6797b294cb097f47027a5c52466fd11112b6ccd52c569578d4b8cd 

FileHash-SHA256:5f422be165e4b6557f45719914f724a4fe1840fa792ecc739861bfdb45c1550 

URL:hxxps://kkuu.oss-cn-hongkong.aliyuncs[.]com/ss/TASLogin.log 

URL:hxxps://kkuu.oss-cn-hongkong.aliyuncs[.]com/ss/TASLoginBase.dll 

URL:hxxps://kkuu.oss-cn-hongkong.aliyuncs[.]com/ss/down.exe 

URL:hxxps://kkuu.oss-cn-hongkong.aliyuncs[.]com/ss/uu.txt 

email:zhongmaziil992@outlook.com 

hostname:kkuu.oss-cn-hongkong.aliyuncs[.]com 

IPv4:156.245.23.188 

IPv4:47.79.64.228 

The post Zhong Stealer Analysis: New Malware Targeting Fintech and Cryptocurrency appeared first on ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog.

ANY.RUN’s Cybersecurity Blog – ​Read More

There are probably no gamers left who don’t know that downloading games from torrent trackers is risky business. Yes, they come at no cost, cracked and sometimes conveniently repacked, but they might contain malware. That’s why security solutions throw a fit — quarantining torrent files, preventing the installation of cracks… well, we should be thankful for that!

Official app stores like Steam are a different story, right? Surely everything’s perfectly safe there, isn’t it? Nope. In February, a game bundled with malware was discovered on the platform. Not to worry, though: last week, Valve removed the game “PirateFi” from its Steam platform after a user reported that their antivirus software prevented them from running the game due to the presence of malware. The user’s antivirus flagged the game as containing Trojan.Win32.Lazzzy.gen, prompting Valve to act swiftly and remove it from the platform. We can confirm that it was Kaspersky’s antivirus solution that detected the threat, thanks to the Kaspersky Security Network recognizing the malware.

Survival sim starring your computer

The game in question was PirateFi, a survival sim offering users the chance to play as a pirate in both single-player and multiplayer modes. It appears it wasn’t just the players who needed to survive, but their computers too.

It wasn’t exactly a hit: maybe five concurrent players at peak times, and just 165 subscribers. The exact number of victims is unknown. VG Insights estimates around 1,500, while Gamalytic puts the number of downloads at 859.

The game was found to contain Windows-based malware designed to infect users’ computers and steal sensitive information. The malware, disguised as “Howard.exe,” was programmed to unpack itself into the user’s /AppData/Temp/ directory upon launching the game, subsequently stealing browser cookies and potentially allowing attackers to gain unauthorized access to various online accounts. Several users who downloaded the game reported compromised accounts, password changes, and unauthorized transactions.

In the end, everyone who had played PirateFi on Steam received a notification email about a potential malware threat on their computers. There were no details about the malware or any explanations as to how it had slipped into the app store. So, victims don’t know exactly what ended up on their devices: a miner, a stealer, or something else entirely. Instead, Valve, the company behind Steam, recommended that they run a scan of their computers with a reliable security solution.

As for the game’s developers, Seaworth Interactive, there is virtually no information about them online. PirateFi was their debut in the gaming industry, so it’s safe to assume that the malware campaign was intentional. PCMag supported this theory, noting attempts to promote the game through Telegram channels targeting users in the U.S. For example, a job posting for a PirateFi in-game chat moderator was listed. It promised $17 per hour, with payments every two days. This sounded way too good to be true, particularly because moderators in free-to-play games are typically students with a lot of free time, who are usually paid in in-game currency.

PirateFi isn’t the only such case

Malware infiltrated Steam a decade ago as well. Back then, it was Dynostopia players who got hit with a Trojan. The game was in its beta phase and was hosted on Steam Greenlight, which was Valve’s program for indie developers, discontinued in 2017. As for the Trojan, affected users reported that upon downloading the game, their desktops were immediately locked, preventing any access even after a system reboot. Sometime later, they’d discover their Steam profiles had been modified: a proud label declaring them as Dynostopia beta testers would be added, along with a prompt for all their friends to experience this “fantastic” game.

Malware keeps finding its way into apps, including games and Google Play apps. Recently, it has even managed to infiltrate the App Store as well. Thus, mobile gaming faces a much greater challenge than PC gaming, and it’s not a matter of platform moderation. It’s simply a matter of numbers: there are significantly more apps for smartphones than for computers, hence the higher prevalence of malware on mobile platforms. For this reason, we consistently urge smartphone users to pay attention to app reviews and ratings. Although this isn’t a guarantee of safety, as positive ratings can be easily inflated, PC gamers should also heed this advice.

Another way cybercriminals target players is by distributing Trojan-infected mods or cheats. Call of Duty fans are all too familiar with this. Last year, Activision conducted a large-scale investigation to determine how Trojans were ending up on their players’ systems. Among the potential causes suggested by the tech giant was the use of third-party tools, such as mods, cheats, and trainers.

Security tips for gamers

First of all, be vigilant and play fair. Stay away from cheats unless you want to lose your game account and, even worse, have your bank or crypto wallet details on your computer compromised. Stick to tried-and-tested games with lots of reviews — they might be negative, but so long as they’re honest, that’s what matters.

The second, but no less important, piece of advice is to install gaming antimalware. If you’ve played PirateFi or some other obscure title, follow Valve’s advice and install a security solution immediately. Don’t rely on game moderation alone on Steam or any other platform. It might keep you 99% safe from trojanized games, but that last, treacherous 1% could always be the one that gets you. So, do your homework: explore the tests, look at the reviews, and make an informed decision about which option you’ll entrust with your computer’s security.

Kaspersky Premium includes a dedicated gaming mode that busts the myth that antivirus programs cause performance issues on gaming PCs. Here’s how it functions: when you launch a game, Kaspersky Premium temporarily halts its database updates, notification pop-ups, and scheduled system scans. The background protection will save you from unknowingly becoming a beta tester for Dynostopia and other malware disguised as games.

Kaspersky official blog – ​Read More