Attackers are sending very convincing fake βGoogleβ emails that slip past spam filters, route victims through several trusted Google-owned services, and ultimately lead to a look-alike Microsoft 365 sign-in page designed to harvest usernames and passwords.
Researchers found that cybercriminals used Google Cloud Application IntegrationβsΒ Send EmailΒ feature to send phishing emails from a legitimate Google address:Β noreply-application-integration@google[.]com.
Google Cloud Application Integration allows users to automate business processes by connecting any application with point-and-click configurations. New customers currently receive free credits, which lowers the barrier to entry and may attract some cybercriminals.
The initial email arrives from what looks like a real Google address and references something routine and familiar, such as a voicemail notification, a task to complete, or permissions to access a document. The email includes a link that points to a genuine Google Cloud Storage URL, so the web address appears to belong to Google and doesnβt look like an obvious fake.
After the first click, you are redirected to another Googleβrelated domain (googleusercontent[.]com) showing a CAPTCHA or image check. Once you pass the βIβm not a robot check,β you land on what looks like a normal Microsoft 365 signβin page, but on close inspection, the web address is not an official Microsoft domain.
Any credentials provided on this site will be captured by the attackers.
The use of Google infrastructure provides the phishers with a higher level of trust from both email filters and the receiving users. This is not a vulnerability, just an abuse of cloud-based services that Google provides.
Google said it has taken action against the activity:
βWe have blocked several phishing campaigns involving the misuse of an email notification feature within Google Cloud Application Integration. Importantly, this activity stemmed from the abuse of a workflow automation tool, not a compromise of Googleβs infrastructure. While we have implemented protections to defend users against this specific attack, we encourage continued caution as malicious actors frequently attempt to spoof trusted brands. We are taking additional steps to prevent further misuse.β
Weβve seen several phishing campaigns that abuse trusted workflows from companies like Google, PayPal, DocuSign, and other cloud-based service providers to lend credibility to phishing emails and redirect targets to their credential-harvesting websites.
Campaigns like these show that some responsibility for spotting phishing emails still rests with the recipient. Besides staying informed, here are some other tips you can follow to stay safe.
Pro tip:Β Malwarebytes Scam Guard can recognize emails like this as scams.Β You can upload suspicious text, emails, attachments and other files and ask for its opinion. Itβs really very good at recognizing scams.
We donβt just report on scamsβwe help detect them
Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. If something looks dodgy to you, check if itβs a scam using Malwarebytes Scam Guard, a feature of our mobile protection products. Submit a screenshot, paste suspicious content, or share a text or phone number, and weβllΒ tell you if itβs a scam or legit. Download Malwarebytes Mobile Security for iOS or Android and try it today!
Attackers are sending very convincing fake βGoogleβ emails that slip past spam filters, route victims through several trusted Google-owned services, and ultimately lead to a look-alike Microsoft 365 sign-in page designed to harvest usernames and passwords.
Researchers found that cybercriminals used Google Cloud Application IntegrationβsΒ Send EmailΒ feature to send phishing emails from a legitimate Google address:Β noreply-application-integration@google[.]com.
Google Cloud Application Integration allows users to automate business processes by connecting any application with point-and-click configurations. New customers currently receive free credits, which lowers the barrier to entry and may attract some cybercriminals.
The initial email arrives from what looks like a real Google address and references something routine and familiar, such as a voicemail notification, a task to complete, or permissions to access a document. The email includes a link that points to a genuine Google Cloud Storage URL, so the web address appears to belong to Google and doesnβt look like an obvious fake.
After the first click, you are redirected to another Googleβrelated domain (googleusercontent[.]com) showing a CAPTCHA or image check. Once you pass the βIβm not a robot check,β you land on what looks like a normal Microsoft 365 signβin page, but on close inspection, the web address is not an official Microsoft domain.
Any credentials provided on this site will be captured by the attackers.
The use of Google infrastructure provides the phishers with a higher level of trust from both email filters and the receiving users. This is not a vulnerability, just an abuse of cloud-based services that Google provides.
Google said it has taken action against the activity:
βWe have blocked several phishing campaigns involving the misuse of an email notification feature within Google Cloud Application Integration. Importantly, this activity stemmed from the abuse of a workflow automation tool, not a compromise of Googleβs infrastructure. While we have implemented protections to defend users against this specific attack, we encourage continued caution as malicious actors frequently attempt to spoof trusted brands. We are taking additional steps to prevent further misuse.β
Weβve seen several phishing campaigns that abuse trusted workflows from companies like Google, PayPal, DocuSign, and other cloud-based service providers to lend credibility to phishing emails and redirect targets to their credential-harvesting websites.
Campaigns like these show that some responsibility for spotting phishing emails still rests with the recipient. Besides staying informed, here are some other tips you can follow to stay safe.
Pro tip:Β Malwarebytes Scam Guard can recognize emails like this as scams.Β You can upload suspicious text, emails, attachments and other files and ask for its opinion. Itβs really very good at recognizing scams.
We donβt just report on scamsβwe help detect them
Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. If something looks dodgy to you, check if itβs a scam using Malwarebytes Scam Guard, a feature of our mobile protection products. Submit a screenshot, paste suspicious content, or share a text or phone number, and weβllΒ tell you if itβs a scam or legit. Download Malwarebytes Mobile Security for iOS or Android and try it today!
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked decreased from the previous quarter by 0.4 pp to 20.1%. This is the lowest level for the observed period.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked ranged from 9.2% in Northern Europe to 27.4% in Africa.
Regions ranked by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked
In Q3 2025, the percentage increased in five regions. The most notable increase occurred in East Asia, triggered by the local spread of malicious scripts in the OT infrastructure of engineering organizations and ICS integrators.
Changes in the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2025
The biometrics sector traditionally led the rankings of the industries and OT infrastructures surveyed in this report in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked.
Rankings of industries and OT infrastructures by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked increased in four of the seven surveyed industries. The most notable increases were in engineering and ICS integrators, and manufacturing.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked in selected industries
In Q3 2025, Kaspersky protection solutions blocked malware from 11,356 different malware families of various categories on industrial automation systems.
Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects of various categories was blocked
In Q3 2025, there was a decrease in the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources and miners of both categories were blocked. These were the only categories that exhibited a decrease.
Depending on the threat detection and blocking scenario, it is not always possible to reliably identify the source. The circumstantial evidence for a specific source can be the blocked threatβs type (category).
The internet (visiting malicious or compromised internet resources; malicious content distributed via messengers; cloud data storage and processing services and CDNs), email clients (phishing emails), and removable storage devices remain the primary sources of threats to computers in an organizationβs technology infrastructure.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked decreased.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked
The same computer can be attacked by several categories of malware from the same source during a quarter. That computer is counted when calculating the percentage of attacked computers for each threat category, but is only counted once for the threat source (we count unique attacked computers). In addition, it is not always possible to accurately determine the initial infection attempt. Therefore, the total percentage of ICS computers on which various categories of threats from a certain source were blocked can exceed the percentage of threats from the source itself.
Typical attacks blocked within an OT network are multi-step sequences of malicious activities, where each subsequent step of the attackers is aimed at increasing privileges and/or gaining access to other systems by exploiting the security problems of industrial enterprises, including technological infrastructures.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked decreased to 4.01%. This is the lowest quarterly figure since the beginning of 2022.
Percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked ranged from 2.35% in Australia and New Zealand to 4.96% in Africa. Southeast Asia and South Asia were also among the top three regions for this indicator.
The percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked has grown for three consecutive quarters, following a decline at the end of 2024. In Q3 2025, it reached 1,98%.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
The indicator increased in four regions: South America, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Australia and New Zealand. South America saw the largest increase as a result of a large-scale phishing campaign in which attackers used new exploits for an old vulnerability (CVE-2017-11882) in Microsoft Office Equation Editor to deliver various spyware to victimsβ computers. It is noteworthy that the attackers in this phishing campaign used localized Spanish-language emails disguised as business correspondence.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked increased to 6.79%. This category led the rankings of threat categories in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which they were blocked.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked ranged from 2.57% in Northern Europe to 9.41% in Africa. The top three regions for this indicator were Africa, East Asia, and South America. The indicator increased the most in East Asia (by a dramatic 5.23 pp) as a result of the local spread of malicious spyware scripts loaded into the memory of popular torrent clients including MediaGet.
Malicious objects used to initially infect computers deliver next-stage malware β spyware, ransomware, and miners β to victimsβ computers. As a rule, the higher the percentage of ICS computers on which the initial infection malware is blocked, the higher the percentage for next-stage malware.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which spyware and ransomware were blocked increased. The rates were:
The percentage of ICS computers on which miners of both categories were blocked decreased. The rates were:
Self-propagating malware (worms and viruses) is a category unto itself. Worms and virus-infected files were originally used for initial infection, but as botnet functionality evolved, they took on next-stage characteristics.
To spread across ICS networks, viruses and worms rely on removable media and network folders in the form of infected files, such as archives with backups, office documents, pirated games and hacked applications. In rarer and more dangerous cases, web pages with network equipment settings, as well as files stored in internal document management systems, product lifecycle management (PLM) systems, resource management (ERP) systems and other web services are infected.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which worms and viruses were blocked increased to 1.26% (by 0.04 pp) and 1.40% (by 0.11 pp), respectively.
This category of malware can spread in a variety of ways, so it does not belong to a specific group.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which AutoCAD malware was blocked slightly increased to 0.30% (by 0.01 pp).
For more information on industrial threats see the full version of the report.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked decreased from the previous quarter by 0.4 pp to 20.1%. This is the lowest level for the observed period.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked ranged from 9.2% in Northern Europe to 27.4% in Africa.
Regions ranked by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked
In Q3 2025, the percentage increased in five regions. The most notable increase occurred in East Asia, triggered by the local spread of malicious scripts in the OT infrastructure of engineering organizations and ICS integrators.
Changes in the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2025
The biometrics sector traditionally led the rankings of the industries and OT infrastructures surveyed in this report in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked.
Rankings of industries and OT infrastructures by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked increased in four of the seven surveyed industries. The most notable increases were in engineering and ICS integrators, and manufacturing.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked in selected industries
In Q3 2025, Kaspersky protection solutions blocked malware from 11,356 different malware families of various categories on industrial automation systems.
Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects of various categories was blocked
In Q3 2025, there was a decrease in the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources and miners of both categories were blocked. These were the only categories that exhibited a decrease.
Depending on the threat detection and blocking scenario, it is not always possible to reliably identify the source. The circumstantial evidence for a specific source can be the blocked threatβs type (category).
The internet (visiting malicious or compromised internet resources; malicious content distributed via messengers; cloud data storage and processing services and CDNs), email clients (phishing emails), and removable storage devices remain the primary sources of threats to computers in an organizationβs technology infrastructure.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked decreased.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked
The same computer can be attacked by several categories of malware from the same source during a quarter. That computer is counted when calculating the percentage of attacked computers for each threat category, but is only counted once for the threat source (we count unique attacked computers). In addition, it is not always possible to accurately determine the initial infection attempt. Therefore, the total percentage of ICS computers on which various categories of threats from a certain source were blocked can exceed the percentage of threats from the source itself.
Typical attacks blocked within an OT network are multi-step sequences of malicious activities, where each subsequent step of the attackers is aimed at increasing privileges and/or gaining access to other systems by exploiting the security problems of industrial enterprises, including technological infrastructures.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked decreased to 4.01%. This is the lowest quarterly figure since the beginning of 2022.
Percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked ranged from 2.35% in Australia and New Zealand to 4.96% in Africa. Southeast Asia and South Asia were also among the top three regions for this indicator.
The percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked has grown for three consecutive quarters, following a decline at the end of 2024. In Q3 2025, it reached 1,98%.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
The indicator increased in four regions: South America, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Australia and New Zealand. South America saw the largest increase as a result of a large-scale phishing campaign in which attackers used new exploits for an old vulnerability (CVE-2017-11882) in Microsoft Office Equation Editor to deliver various spyware to victimsβ computers. It is noteworthy that the attackers in this phishing campaign used localized Spanish-language emails disguised as business correspondence.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked increased to 6.79%. This category led the rankings of threat categories in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which they were blocked.
Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked, Q3 2022βQ3 2025
Regionally, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious scripts and phishing pages were blocked ranged from 2.57% in Northern Europe to 9.41% in Africa. The top three regions for this indicator were Africa, East Asia, and South America. The indicator increased the most in East Asia (by a dramatic 5.23 pp) as a result of the local spread of malicious spyware scripts loaded into the memory of popular torrent clients including MediaGet.
Malicious objects used to initially infect computers deliver next-stage malware β spyware, ransomware, and miners β to victimsβ computers. As a rule, the higher the percentage of ICS computers on which the initial infection malware is blocked, the higher the percentage for next-stage malware.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which spyware and ransomware were blocked increased. The rates were:
The percentage of ICS computers on which miners of both categories were blocked decreased. The rates were:
Self-propagating malware (worms and viruses) is a category unto itself. Worms and virus-infected files were originally used for initial infection, but as botnet functionality evolved, they took on next-stage characteristics.
To spread across ICS networks, viruses and worms rely on removable media and network folders in the form of infected files, such as archives with backups, office documents, pirated games and hacked applications. In rarer and more dangerous cases, web pages with network equipment settings, as well as files stored in internal document management systems, product lifecycle management (PLM) systems, resource management (ERP) systems and other web services are infected.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which worms and viruses were blocked increased to 1.26% (by 0.04 pp) and 1.40% (by 0.11 pp), respectively.
This category of malware can spread in a variety of ways, so it does not belong to a specific group.
In Q3 2025, the percentage of ICS computers on which AutoCAD malware was blocked slightly increased to 0.30% (by 0.01 pp).
For more information on industrial threats see the full version of the report.
Known since 2014, the Cloud Atlas group targets countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Infections occur via phishing emails containing a malicious document that exploits an old vulnerability in the Microsoft Office Equation Editor process (CVE-2018-0802) to download and execute malicious code. In this report, we describe the infection chain and tools that the group used in the first half of 2025, with particular focus on previously undescribed implants.
Additional information about this threat, including indicators of compromise, is available to customers of the Kaspersky Intelligence Reporting Service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
The starting point is typically a phishing email with a malicious DOC(X) attachment. When the document is opened, a malicious template is downloaded from a remote server. The document has the form of an RTF file containing an exploit for the formula editor, which downloads and executes an HTML Application (HTA) file.
Fpaylo
Malicious template with the exploit loaded by Word when opening the document
We were unable to obtain the actual RTF template with the exploit. We assume that after a successful infection of the victim, the link to this file becomes inaccessible. In the given example, the malicious RTF file containing the exploit was downloaded from the URL hxxps://securemodem[.]com?tzak.html_anacid.
Template files, like HTA files, are located on servers controlled by the group, and their downloading is limited both in time and by the IP addresses of the victims. The malicious HTA file extracts and creates several VBS files on disk that are parts of the VBShower backdoor. VBShower then downloads and installs other backdoors: PowerShower, VBCloud, and CloudAtlas.
This infection chain largely follows the one previously seen in Cloud Atlasβ 2024 attacks. The currently employed chain is presented below:
Malware execution flow
Several implants remain the same, with insignificant changes in file names, and so on. You can find more details in our previous article on the following implants:
In this research, weβll focus on new and updated components.
Compared to the previous version, the backdoor runs additional downloaded VB scripts in the current context, regardless of the size. A previous modification of this script checked the size of the payload, and if it exceeded 1 MB, instead of executing it in the current context, the backdoor wrote it to disk and used the wscript utility to launch it.
The script collects information about running processes, including their creation time, caption, and command line. The collected information is encrypted and sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor) via the v_buff variable.
VBShower::Payload (1)
The script is used to install the VBCloud implant. First, it downloads a ZIP archive from the hardcoded URL and unpacks it into the %Public% directory. Then, it creates a scheduler task named βMicrosoftEdgeUpdateTaskβ to run the following command line:
wscript.exe /B %Public%\Libraries\MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs
It renames the unzipped file %Public%\Libraries\v.log to %Public%\Libraries\MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs, iterates through the files in the %Public%\Libraries directory, and collects information about the filenames and sizes. The data, in the form of a buffer, is collected in the v_buff variable. The malware gets information about the task by executing the following command line:
cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo CSV /tn MicrosoftEdgeUpdateTask
The specified command line is executed, with the output redirected to the TMP file. Both the TMP file and the content of the v_buff variable will be sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor).
Here is an example of the information present in the v_buff variable:
Libraries: desktop.ini-175| MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs-2299| RecordedTV.library-ms-999| upgrade.mds-32840| v.log-2299|
The file MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs is a launcher for VBCloud, which reads the encrypted body of the backdoor from the file upgrade.mds, decrypts it, and executes it.
VBShower::Payload (2) used to install VBCloud
Almost the same script is used to install the CloudAtlas backdoor on an infected system. The script only downloads and unpacks the ZIP archive to "%LOCALAPPDATA%", and sends information about the contents of the directories "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access" and "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc" as output.
In this case, the file renaming operation is not applied, and there is no code for creating a scheduler task.
Here is an example of information to be sent to the C2 server:
vlc: a.xml-969608| b.xml-592960| d.xml-2680200| e.xml-185224|| access: c.xml-5951488|
In fact, a.xml, d.xml, and e.xml are the executable file and libraries, respectively, of VLC Media Player. The c.xml file is a malicious library used in a DLL hijacking attack, where VLC acts as a loader, and the b.xml file is an encrypted body of the CloudAtlas backdoor, read from disk by the malicious library, decrypted, and executed.
VBShower::Payload (2) used to install CloudAtlas
This script is the next component for installing CloudAtlas. It is downloaded by VBShower from the C2 server as a separate file and executed after the VBShower::Payload (2) script. The script renames the XML files unpacked by VBShower::Payload (2) from the archive to the corresponding executables and libraries, and also renames the file containing the encrypted backdoor body.
These files are copied by VBShower::Payload (3) to the following paths:
| File | Path |
| a.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\vlc.exe |
| b.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\chambranle |
| c.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access\libvlc_plugin.dll |
| d.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\libvlccore.dll |
| e.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\libvlc.dll |
Additionally, VBShower::Payload (3) creates a scheduler task to execute the command line: "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\vlc.exe". The script then iterates through the files in the "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc" and "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access" directories, collecting information about filenames and sizes. The data, in the form of a buffer, is collected in the v_buff variable. The script also retrieves information about the task by executing the following command line, with the output redirected to a TMP file:
cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo CSV /tn MicrosoftVLCTaskMachine
Both the TMP file and the content of the v_buff variable will be sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor).
VBShower::Payload (3) used to install CloudAtlas
This script was previously described as VBShower::Payload (1).
This script is used to check access to various cloud services and executed before installing VBCloud or CloudAtlas. It consistently accesses the URLs of cloud services, and the received HTTP responses are saved to the v_buff variable for subsequent sending to the C2 server. A truncated example of the information sent to the C2 server:
GET-https://webdav.yandex.ru| 200| <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="ru" dir="ltr" class="desktop"><head><base href="...
VBShower::Payload (5)
This script was previously described as VBShower::Payload (2).
This is a small script for checking the accessibility of PowerShowerβs C2 from an infected system.
VBShower::Payload (7)
This script is used to install PowerShower, another backdoor known to be employed by Cloud Atlas. The script does so by performing the following steps in sequence:
"HKCU\Console\%SystemRoot%_System32_WindowsPowerShell_v1.0_powershell.exe"::"WindowPosition"::5122 "HKCU\UConsole\taskeng.exe"::"WindowPosition"::538126692
powershell.exe -ep bypass -w 01 %APPDATA%\Adobe\AdobeMon.ps1
Login
"%APPDATA%\Adobe\p.txt". Then, renames the file "p.txt" to "AdobeMon.ps1"."%APPDATA%\Adobe". Gets information about the task by executing the following command line, with the output redirected to a TMP file:cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo LIST /tn MicrosoftAdobeUpdateTaskMachine
VBShower::Payload (8) used to install PowerShower
The decrypted PowerShell script is disguised as one of the standard modules, but at the end of the script, there is a command to launch the PowerShell interpreter with another script encoded in Base64.
Content of AdobeMon.ps1 (PowerShower)
This is a small script for collecting information about the system proxy settings.
VBShower::Payload (9)
On an infected system, VBCloud is represented by two files: a VB script (VBCloud::Launcher) and an encrypted main body (VBCloud::Backdoor). In the described case, the launcher is located in the file MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs, and the payload β in upgrade.mds.
The launcher script reads the contents of the upgrade.mds file, decodes characters delimited with β%Hβ, uses the RC4 stream encryption algorithm with a key built into the script to decrypt it, and transfers control to the decrypted content. It is worth noting that the implementation of RC4 uses PRGA (pseudo-random generation algorithm), which is quite rare, since most malware implementations of this algorithm skip this step.
VBCloud::Launcher
The backdoor performs several actions in a loop to eventually download and execute additional malicious scripts, as described in the previous research.
Unlike VBShower, which uses a global variable to save its output or a temporary file to be sent to the C2 server, each VBCloud payload communicates with the C2 server independently. One of the most commonly used payloads for the VBCloud backdoor is FileGrabber. The script exfiltrates files and documents from the target system as described before.
The FileGrabber payload has the following limitations when scanning for files:
Part of VBCloud::Payload (FileGrabber)
As mentioned above, PowerShower is installed via one of the VBShower payloads. This script launches the PowerShell interpreter with another script encoded in Base64. Running in an infinite loop, it attempts to access the C2 server to retrieve an additional payload, which is a PowerShell script twice encoded with Base64. This payload is executed in the context of the backdoor, and the execution result is sent to the C2 server via an HTTP POST request.
Decoded PowerShower script
In previous versions of PowerShower, the payload created a sapp.xtx temporary file to save its output, which was sent to the C2 server by the main body of the backdoor. No intermediate files are created anymore, and the result of execution is returned to the backdoor by a normal call to the "return" operator.
This script was previously described as PowerShower::Payload (2). This payload is unique to each victim.
This script is used for grabbing files with metadata from a network share.
PowerShower::Payload (2)
As described above, the CloudAtlas backdoor is installed via VBShower from a downloaded archive delivered through a DLL hijacking attack. The legitimate VLC application acts as a loader, accompanied by a malicious library that reads the encrypted payload from the file and transfers control to it. The malicious DLL is located at "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access", while the file with the encrypted payload is located at "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\".
When the malicious DLL gains control, it first extracts another DLL from itself, places it in the memory of the current process, and transfers control to it. The unpacked DLL uses a byte-by-byte XOR operation to decrypt the block with the loader configuration. The encrypted config immediately follows the key. The config specifies the name of the event that is created to prevent a duplicate payload launch. The config also contains the name of the file where the encrypted payload is located β "chambranle" in this case β and the decryption key itself.
Encrypted and decrypted loader configuration
The library reads the contents of the "chambranle" file with the payload, uses the key from the decrypted config and the IV located at the very end of the "chambranle" file to decrypt it with AES-256-CBC. The decrypted file is another DLL with its size and SHA-1 hash embedded at the end, added to verify that the DLL is decrypted correctly. The DLL decrypted from "chambranle" is the main body of the CloudAtlas backdoor, and control is transferred to it via one of the exported functions, specifically the one with ordinal 2.
Main routine that processes the payload file
When the main body of the backdoor gains control, the first thing it does is decrypt its own configuration. Decryption is done in a similar way, using AES-256-CBC. The key for AES-256 is located before the configuration, and the IV is located right after it. The most useful information in the configuration file includes the URL of the cloud service, paths to directories for receiving payloads and unloading results, and credentials for the cloud service.
Encrypted and decrypted CloudAtlas backdoor config
Immediately after decrypting the configuration, the backdoor starts interacting with the C2 server, which is a cloud service, via WebDAV. First, the backdoor uses the MKCOL HTTP method to create two directories: one ("/guessed/intershop/Euskalduns/") will regularly receive a beacon in the form of an encrypted file containing information about the system, time, user name, current command line, and volume information. The other directory ("/cancrenate/speciesists/") is used to retrieve payloads. The beacon file and payload files are AES-256-CBC encrypted with the key that was used for backdoor configuration decryption.
HTTP requests of the CloudAtlas backdoor
The backdoor uses the HTTP PROPFIND method to retrieve the list of files. Each of these files will be subsequently downloaded, deleted from the cloud service, decrypted, and executed.
HTTP requests from the CloudAtlas backdoor
The payload consists of data with a binary block containing a command number and arguments at the beginning, followed by an executable plugin in the form of a DLL. The structure of the arguments depends on the type of command. After the plugin is loaded into memory and configured, the backdoor calls the exported function with ordinal 1, passing several arguments: a pointer to the backdoor function that implements sending files to the cloud service, a pointer to the decrypted backdoor configuration, and a pointer to the binary block with the command and arguments from the beginning of the payload.
Plugin setup and execution routine
Before calling the plugin function, the backdoor saves the path to the current directory and restores it after the function is executed. Additionally, after execution, the plugin is removed from memory.
FileGrabber is the most commonly used plugin. As the name suggests, it is designed to steal files from an infected system. Depending on the command block transmitted, it is capable of:
For each detected file, a series of rules are generated based on the conditions passed within the command block, including:
Resource scanning
If all conditions match, the file is sent to the C2 server, along with its metadata, including attributes, creation time, last access time, last modification time, size, full path to the file, and SHA-1 of the file contents. Additionally, if a special flag is set in one of the rule fields, the file will be deleted after a copy is sent to the C2 server. There is also a limit on the total amount of data sent, and if this limit is exceeded, scanning of the resource stops.
Generating data for sending to C2
This is a general-purpose plugin, which parses the transferred block, splits it into commands, and executes them. Each command has its own ID, ranging from 0 to 6. The list of commands is presented below.
"%APPDATA%\ntsystmp.vbs". The path to launch the file dropped on the remote system is passed to the launched VB script as an argument.
Content of the dropped VBS
This plugin is used to steal cookies and credentials from browsers. This is an extended version of the Common Plugin, which is used for more specific purposes. It can also drop, launch, and delete files, but its primary function is to drop files belonging to the βChrome App-Bound Encryption Decryptionβ open-source project onto the disk, and run the utility to steal cookies and passwords from Chromium-based browsers. After launching the utility, several files ("cookies.txt" and "passwords.txt") containing the extracted browser data are created on disk. The plugin then reads JSON data from the selected files, parses the data, and sends the extracted information to the C2 server.
Part of the function for parsing JSON and sending the extracted data to C2
This plugin is used to collect information about the infected system. The list of commands is presented below.
net group "Exchange servers" /domain Ipconfig arp -a
As mentioned in one of our previous reports, Cloud Atlas uses a custom Python script named get_browser_pass.py to extract saved credentials from browsers on infected systems. If the Python interpreter is not present on the victimβs machine, the group delivers an archive that includes both the script and a bundled Python interpreter to ensure execution.
During one of the latest incidents we investigated, we once again observed traces of this tool in action, specifically the presence of the file "C:\ProgramData\py\pytest.dll".
The pytest.dll library is called from within get_browser_pass.py and used to extract credentials from Yandex Browser. The data is then saved locally to a file named y3.txt.
According to our telemetry, the identified targets of the malicious activities described here are located in Russia and Belarus, with observed activity dating back to the beginning of 2025. The industries being targeted are diverse, encompassing organizations in the telecommunications sector, construction, government entities, and plants.
For more than ten years, the group has carried on its activities and expanded its arsenal. Now the attackers have four implants at their disposal (PowerShower, VBShower, VBCloud, CloudAtlas), each of them a full-fledged backdoor. Most of the functionality in the backdoors is duplicated, but some payloads provide various exclusive capabilities. The use of cloud services to manage backdoors is a distinctive feature of the group, and it has proven itself in various attacks.
Note: The indicators in this section are valid at the time of publication.
0D309C25A835BAF3B0C392AC87504D9EΒ Β Β ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ» (08.05.2025).doc
D34AAEB811787B52EC45122EC10AEB08Β Β Β HTA
4F7C5088BCDF388C49F9CAAD2CCCDCC5Β Β Β StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.log:StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145cfcf.vbs
5C93AF19EF930352A251B5E1B2AC2519Β Β Β StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.log:StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.dat (encrypted)
0E13FA3F06607B1392A3C3CAA8092C98Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(1)
BC80C582D21AC9E98CBCA2F0637D8993Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(2)
12F1F060DF0C1916E6D5D154AF925426Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(3)
E8C21CA9A5B721F5B0AB7C87294A2D72Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(4)
2D03F1646971FB7921E31B647586D3FBΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(5)
7A85873661B50EA914E12F0523527CFAΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(6)
F31CE101CBE25ACDE328A8C326B9444AΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(7)
E2F3E5BF7EFBA58A9C371E2064DFD0BBΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(8)
67156D9D0784245AF0CAE297FC458AACΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(9)
116E5132E30273DA7108F23A622646FEΒ Β Β VBCloud::Launcher
E9F60941A7CED1A91643AF9D8B92A36DΒ Β Β VBCloud::Payload(FileGrabber)
718B9E688AF49C2E1984CF6472B23805Β Β Β PowerShower
A913EF515F5DC8224FCFFA33027EB0DDΒ Β Β PowerShower::Payload(2)
BAA59BB050A12DBDF981193D88079232Β Β Β chambranle (encrypted)
billet-ru[.]net
mskreg[.]net
flashsupport[.]org
solid-logit[.]com
cityru-travel[.]org
transferpolicy[.]org
information-model[.]net
securemodem[.]com
Known since 2014, the Cloud Atlas group targets countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Infections occur via phishing emails containing a malicious document that exploits an old vulnerability in the Microsoft Office Equation Editor process (CVE-2018-0802) to download and execute malicious code. In this report, we describe the infection chain and tools that the group used in the first half of 2025, with particular focus on previously undescribed implants.
Additional information about this threat, including indicators of compromise, is available to customers of the Kaspersky Intelligence Reporting Service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
The starting point is typically a phishing email with a malicious DOC(X) attachment. When the document is opened, a malicious template is downloaded from a remote server. The document has the form of an RTF file containing an exploit for the formula editor, which downloads and executes an HTML Application (HTA) file.
Fpaylo
Malicious template with the exploit loaded by Word when opening the document
We were unable to obtain the actual RTF template with the exploit. We assume that after a successful infection of the victim, the link to this file becomes inaccessible. In the given example, the malicious RTF file containing the exploit was downloaded from the URL hxxps://securemodem[.]com?tzak.html_anacid.
Template files, like HTA files, are located on servers controlled by the group, and their downloading is limited both in time and by the IP addresses of the victims. The malicious HTA file extracts and creates several VBS files on disk that are parts of the VBShower backdoor. VBShower then downloads and installs other backdoors: PowerShower, VBCloud, and CloudAtlas.
This infection chain largely follows the one previously seen in Cloud Atlasβ 2024 attacks. The currently employed chain is presented below:
Malware execution flow
Several implants remain the same, with insignificant changes in file names, and so on. You can find more details in our previous article on the following implants:
In this research, weβll focus on new and updated components.
Compared to the previous version, the backdoor runs additional downloaded VB scripts in the current context, regardless of the size. A previous modification of this script checked the size of the payload, and if it exceeded 1 MB, instead of executing it in the current context, the backdoor wrote it to disk and used the wscript utility to launch it.
The script collects information about running processes, including their creation time, caption, and command line. The collected information is encrypted and sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor) via the v_buff variable.
VBShower::Payload (1)
The script is used to install the VBCloud implant. First, it downloads a ZIP archive from the hardcoded URL and unpacks it into the %Public% directory. Then, it creates a scheduler task named βMicrosoftEdgeUpdateTaskβ to run the following command line:
wscript.exe /B %Public%\Libraries\MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs
It renames the unzipped file %Public%\Libraries\v.log to %Public%\Libraries\MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs, iterates through the files in the %Public%\Libraries directory, and collects information about the filenames and sizes. The data, in the form of a buffer, is collected in the v_buff variable. The malware gets information about the task by executing the following command line:
cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo CSV /tn MicrosoftEdgeUpdateTask
The specified command line is executed, with the output redirected to the TMP file. Both the TMP file and the content of the v_buff variable will be sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor).
Here is an example of the information present in the v_buff variable:
Libraries: desktop.ini-175| MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs-2299| RecordedTV.library-ms-999| upgrade.mds-32840| v.log-2299|
The file MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs is a launcher for VBCloud, which reads the encrypted body of the backdoor from the file upgrade.mds, decrypts it, and executes it.
VBShower::Payload (2) used to install VBCloud
Almost the same script is used to install the CloudAtlas backdoor on an infected system. The script only downloads and unpacks the ZIP archive to "%LOCALAPPDATA%", and sends information about the contents of the directories "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access" and "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc" as output.
In this case, the file renaming operation is not applied, and there is no code for creating a scheduler task.
Here is an example of information to be sent to the C2 server:
vlc: a.xml-969608| b.xml-592960| d.xml-2680200| e.xml-185224|| access: c.xml-5951488|
In fact, a.xml, d.xml, and e.xml are the executable file and libraries, respectively, of VLC Media Player. The c.xml file is a malicious library used in a DLL hijacking attack, where VLC acts as a loader, and the b.xml file is an encrypted body of the CloudAtlas backdoor, read from disk by the malicious library, decrypted, and executed.
VBShower::Payload (2) used to install CloudAtlas
This script is the next component for installing CloudAtlas. It is downloaded by VBShower from the C2 server as a separate file and executed after the VBShower::Payload (2) script. The script renames the XML files unpacked by VBShower::Payload (2) from the archive to the corresponding executables and libraries, and also renames the file containing the encrypted backdoor body.
These files are copied by VBShower::Payload (3) to the following paths:
| File | Path |
| a.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\vlc.exe |
| b.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\chambranle |
| c.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access\libvlc_plugin.dll |
| d.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\libvlccore.dll |
| e.xml | %LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\libvlc.dll |
Additionally, VBShower::Payload (3) creates a scheduler task to execute the command line: "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\vlc.exe". The script then iterates through the files in the "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc" and "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access" directories, collecting information about filenames and sizes. The data, in the form of a buffer, is collected in the v_buff variable. The script also retrieves information about the task by executing the following command line, with the output redirected to a TMP file:
cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo CSV /tn MicrosoftVLCTaskMachine
Both the TMP file and the content of the v_buff variable will be sent to the C2 server by the parent script (VBShower::Backdoor).
VBShower::Payload (3) used to install CloudAtlas
This script was previously described as VBShower::Payload (1).
This script is used to check access to various cloud services and executed before installing VBCloud or CloudAtlas. It consistently accesses the URLs of cloud services, and the received HTTP responses are saved to the v_buff variable for subsequent sending to the C2 server. A truncated example of the information sent to the C2 server:
GET-https://webdav.yandex.ru| 200| <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="ru" dir="ltr" class="desktop"><head><base href="...
VBShower::Payload (5)
This script was previously described as VBShower::Payload (2).
This is a small script for checking the accessibility of PowerShowerβs C2 from an infected system.
VBShower::Payload (7)
This script is used to install PowerShower, another backdoor known to be employed by Cloud Atlas. The script does so by performing the following steps in sequence:
"HKCU\Console\%SystemRoot%_System32_WindowsPowerShell_v1.0_powershell.exe"::"WindowPosition"::5122 "HKCU\UConsole\taskeng.exe"::"WindowPosition"::538126692
powershell.exe -ep bypass -w 01 %APPDATA%\Adobe\AdobeMon.ps1
"%APPDATA%\Adobe\p.txt". Then, renames the file "p.txt" to "AdobeMon.ps1"."%APPDATA%\Adobe". Gets information about the task by executing the following command line, with the output redirected to a TMP file:cmd.exe /c schtasks /query /v /fo LIST /tn MicrosoftAdobeUpdateTaskMachine
VBShower::Payload (8) used to install PowerShower
The decrypted PowerShell script is disguised as one of the standard modules, but at the end of the script, there is a command to launch the PowerShell interpreter with another script encoded in Base64.
Content of AdobeMon.ps1 (PowerShower)
This is a small script for collecting information about the system proxy settings.
VBShower::Payload (9)
On an infected system, VBCloud is represented by two files: a VB script (VBCloud::Launcher) and an encrypted main body (VBCloud::Backdoor). In the described case, the launcher is located in the file MicrosoftEdgeUpdate.vbs, and the payload β in upgrade.mds.
The launcher script reads the contents of the upgrade.mds file, decodes characters delimited with β%Hβ, uses the RC4 stream encryption algorithm with a key built into the script to decrypt it, and transfers control to the decrypted content. It is worth noting that the implementation of RC4 uses PRGA (pseudo-random generation algorithm), which is quite rare, since most malware implementations of this algorithm skip this step.
VBCloud::Launcher
The backdoor performs several actions in a loop to eventually download and execute additional malicious scripts, as described in the previous research.
Unlike VBShower, which uses a global variable to save its output or a temporary file to be sent to the C2 server, each VBCloud payload communicates with the C2 server independently. One of the most commonly used payloads for the VBCloud backdoor is FileGrabber. The script exfiltrates files and documents from the target system as described before.
The FileGrabber payload has the following limitations when scanning for files:
Part of VBCloud::Payload (FileGrabber)
As mentioned above, PowerShower is installed via one of the VBShower payloads. This script launches the PowerShell interpreter with another script encoded in Base64. Running in an infinite loop, it attempts to access the C2 server to retrieve an additional payload, which is a PowerShell script twice encoded with Base64. This payload is executed in the context of the backdoor, and the execution result is sent to the C2 server via an HTTP POST request.
Decoded PowerShower script
In previous versions of PowerShower, the payload created a sapp.xtx temporary file to save its output, which was sent to the C2 server by the main body of the backdoor. No intermediate files are created anymore, and the result of execution is returned to the backdoor by a normal call to the "return" operator.
This script was previously described as PowerShower::Payload (2). This payload is unique to each victim.
This script is used for grabbing files with metadata from a network share.
PowerShower::Payload (2)
As described above, the CloudAtlas backdoor is installed via VBShower from a downloaded archive delivered through a DLL hijacking attack. The legitimate VLC application acts as a loader, accompanied by a malicious library that reads the encrypted payload from the file and transfers control to it. The malicious DLL is located at "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\plugins\access", while the file with the encrypted payload is located at "%LOCALAPPDATA%\vlc\".
When the malicious DLL gains control, it first extracts another DLL from itself, places it in the memory of the current process, and transfers control to it. The unpacked DLL uses a byte-by-byte XOR operation to decrypt the block with the loader configuration. The encrypted config immediately follows the key. The config specifies the name of the event that is created to prevent a duplicate payload launch. The config also contains the name of the file where the encrypted payload is located β "chambranle" in this case β and the decryption key itself.
Encrypted and decrypted loader configuration
The library reads the contents of the "chambranle" file with the payload, uses the key from the decrypted config and the IV located at the very end of the "chambranle" file to decrypt it with AES-256-CBC. The decrypted file is another DLL with its size and SHA-1 hash embedded at the end, added to verify that the DLL is decrypted correctly. The DLL decrypted from "chambranle" is the main body of the CloudAtlas backdoor, and control is transferred to it via one of the exported functions, specifically the one with ordinal 2.
Main routine that processes the payload file
When the main body of the backdoor gains control, the first thing it does is decrypt its own configuration. Decryption is done in a similar way, using AES-256-CBC. The key for AES-256 is located before the configuration, and the IV is located right after it. The most useful information in the configuration file includes the URL of the cloud service, paths to directories for receiving payloads and unloading results, and credentials for the cloud service.
Encrypted and decrypted CloudAtlas backdoor config
Immediately after decrypting the configuration, the backdoor starts interacting with the C2 server, which is a cloud service, via WebDAV. First, the backdoor uses the MKCOL HTTP method to create two directories: one ("/guessed/intershop/Euskalduns/") will regularly receive a beacon in the form of an encrypted file containing information about the system, time, user name, current command line, and volume information. The other directory ("/cancrenate/speciesists/") is used to retrieve payloads. The beacon file and payload files are AES-256-CBC encrypted with the key that was used for backdoor configuration decryption.
HTTP requests of the CloudAtlas backdoor
The backdoor uses the HTTP PROPFIND method to retrieve the list of files. Each of these files will be subsequently downloaded, deleted from the cloud service, decrypted, and executed.
HTTP requests from the CloudAtlas backdoor
The payload consists of data with a binary block containing a command number and arguments at the beginning, followed by an executable plugin in the form of a DLL. The structure of the arguments depends on the type of command. After the plugin is loaded into memory and configured, the backdoor calls the exported function with ordinal 1, passing several arguments: a pointer to the backdoor function that implements sending files to the cloud service, a pointer to the decrypted backdoor configuration, and a pointer to the binary block with the command and arguments from the beginning of the payload.
Plugin setup and execution routine
Before calling the plugin function, the backdoor saves the path to the current directory and restores it after the function is executed. Additionally, after execution, the plugin is removed from memory.
FileGrabber is the most commonly used plugin. As the name suggests, it is designed to steal files from an infected system. Depending on the command block transmitted, it is capable of:
For each detected file, a series of rules are generated based on the conditions passed within the command block, including:
Resource scanning
If all conditions match, the file is sent to the C2 server, along with its metadata, including attributes, creation time, last access time, last modification time, size, full path to the file, and SHA-1 of the file contents. Additionally, if a special flag is set in one of the rule fields, the file will be deleted after a copy is sent to the C2 server. There is also a limit on the total amount of data sent, and if this limit is exceeded, scanning of the resource stops.
Generating data for sending to C2
This is a general-purpose plugin, which parses the transferred block, splits it into commands, and executes them. Each command has its own ID, ranging from 0 to 6. The list of commands is presented below.
"%APPDATA%\ntsystmp.vbs". The path to launch the file dropped on the remote system is passed to the launched VB script as an argument.Content of the dropped VBS
This plugin is used to steal cookies and credentials from browsers. This is an extended version of the Common Plugin, which is used for more specific purposes. It can also drop, launch, and delete files, but its primary function is to drop files belonging to the βChrome App-Bound Encryption Decryptionβ open-source project onto the disk, and run the utility to steal cookies and passwords from Chromium-based browsers. After launching the utility, several files ("cookies.txt" and "passwords.txt") containing the extracted browser data are created on disk. The plugin then reads JSON data from the selected files, parses the data, and sends the extracted information to the C2 server.
Part of the function for parsing JSON and sending the extracted data to C2
This plugin is used to collect information about the infected system. The list of commands is presented below.
net group "Exchange servers" /domain Ipconfig arp -a
As mentioned in one of our previous reports, Cloud Atlas uses a custom Python script named get_browser_pass.py to extract saved credentials from browsers on infected systems. If the Python interpreter is not present on the victimβs machine, the group delivers an archive that includes both the script and a bundled Python interpreter to ensure execution.
During one of the latest incidents we investigated, we once again observed traces of this tool in action, specifically the presence of the file "C:\ProgramData\py\pytest.dll".
The pytest.dll library is called from within get_browser_pass.py and used to extract credentials from Yandex Browser. The data is then saved locally to a file named y3.txt.
According to our telemetry, the identified targets of the malicious activities described here are located in Russia and Belarus, with observed activity dating back to the beginning of 2025. The industries being targeted are diverse, encompassing organizations in the telecommunications sector, construction, government entities, and plants.
For more than ten years, the group has carried on its activities and expanded its arsenal. Now the attackers have four implants at their disposal (PowerShower, VBShower, VBCloud, CloudAtlas), each of them a full-fledged backdoor. Most of the functionality in the backdoors is duplicated, but some payloads provide various exclusive capabilities. The use of cloud services to manage backdoors is a distinctive feature of the group, and it has proven itself in various attacks.
Note: The indicators in this section are valid at the time of publication.
0D309C25A835BAF3B0C392AC87504D9EΒ Β Β ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΠ» (08.05.2025).doc
D34AAEB811787B52EC45122EC10AEB08Β Β Β HTA
4F7C5088BCDF388C49F9CAAD2CCCDCC5Β Β Β StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.log:StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145cfcf.vbs
5C93AF19EF930352A251B5E1B2AC2519Β Β Β StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.log:StandaloneUpdate_2020-04-13_090638_8815-145.dat (encrypted)
0E13FA3F06607B1392A3C3CAA8092C98Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(1)
BC80C582D21AC9E98CBCA2F0637D8993Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(2)
12F1F060DF0C1916E6D5D154AF925426Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(3)
E8C21CA9A5B721F5B0AB7C87294A2D72Β Β Β VBShower::Payload(4)
2D03F1646971FB7921E31B647586D3FBΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(5)
7A85873661B50EA914E12F0523527CFAΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(6)
F31CE101CBE25ACDE328A8C326B9444AΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(7)
E2F3E5BF7EFBA58A9C371E2064DFD0BBΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(8)
67156D9D0784245AF0CAE297FC458AACΒ Β Β VBShower::Payload(9)
116E5132E30273DA7108F23A622646FEΒ Β Β VBCloud::Launcher
E9F60941A7CED1A91643AF9D8B92A36DΒ Β Β VBCloud::Payload(FileGrabber)
718B9E688AF49C2E1984CF6472B23805Β Β Β PowerShower
A913EF515F5DC8224FCFFA33027EB0DDΒ Β Β PowerShower::Payload(2)
BAA59BB050A12DBDF981193D88079232Β Β Β chambranle (encrypted)
billet-ru[.]net
mskreg[.]net
flashsupport[.]org
solid-logit[.]com
cityru-travel[.]org
transferpolicy[.]org
information-model[.]net
securemodem[.]com
In March 2025, we discovered Operation ForumTroll, a series of sophisticated cyberattacks exploiting the CVE-2025-2783 vulnerability in Google Chrome. We previously detailed the malicious implants used in the operation: the LeetAgent backdoor and the complex spyware Dante, developed by Memento Labs (formerly Hacking Team). However, the attackers behind this operation didnβt stop at their spring campaign and have continued to infect targets within the Russian Federation.
More reports about this threat are available to customers of the Kaspersky Intelligence Reporting Service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
In October 2025, just days before we presented our report detailing the ForumTroll APT groupβs attack at the Security Analyst Summit, we detected a new targeted phishing campaign by the same group. However, while the spring cyberattacks focused on organizations, the fall campaign honed in on specific individuals: scholars in the field of political science, international relations, and global economics, working at major Russian universities and research institutions.
The emails received by the victims were sent from the address support@e-library[.]wiki. The campaign purported to be from the scientific electronic library, eLibrary, whose legitimate website is elibrary.ru. The phishing emails contained a malicious link in the format: https://e-library[.]wiki/elib/wiki.php?id=<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>. Recipients were prompted to click the link to download a plagiarism report. Clicking that link triggered the download of an archive file. The filename was personalized, using the victimβs own name in the format: <LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.zip.
The attackers did their homework before sending out the phishing emails. The malicious domain, e-library[.]wiki, was registered back in March 2025, over six months before the email campaign started. This was likely done to build the domainβs reputation, as sending emails from a suspicious, newly registered domain is a major red flag for spam filters.
Furthermore, the attackers placed a copy of the legitimate eLibrary homepage on https://e-library[.]wiki. According to the information on the page, they accessed the legitimate website from the IP address 193.65.18[.]14 back in December 2024.
A screenshot of the malicious site elements showing the IP address and initial session date
The attackers also carefully personalized the phishing emails for their targets, specific professionals in the field. As mentioned above, the downloaded archive was named with the victimβs last name, first name, and patronymic.
Another noteworthy technique was the attackerβs effort to hinder security analysis by restricting repeat downloads. When we attempted to download the archive from the malicious site, we received a message in Russian, indicating the download link was likely for one-time use only:
The message that was displayed when we attempted to download the archive
Our investigation found that the malicious site displayed a different message if the download was attempted from a non-Windows device. In that case, it prompted the user to try again from a Windows computer.
The message that was displayed when we attempted to download the archive from a non-Windows OS
The malicious archives downloaded via the email links contained the following:
<LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.lnk;.Thumbs directory containing approximately 100 image files with names in Russian. These images were not used during the infection process and were likely added to make the archives appear less suspicious to security solutions.
A portion of the .Thumbs directory contents
When the user clicked the shortcut, it ran a PowerShell script. The scriptβs primary purpose was to download and execute a PowerShell-based payload from a malicious server.
The script that was launched by opening the shortcut
The downloaded payload then performed the following actions:
https://e-library[.]wiki/elib/query.php?id=<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>&key=<32 hexadecimal characters> to retrieve the final payload, a DLL file.%localappdata%\Microsoft\Windows\Explorer\iconcache_<4 pseudorandom digits>.dll.https://e-library[.]wiki/pdf/<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>.pdf. This PDF was saved to the userβs Downloads folder with a filename in the format: <LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.pdf and then opened automatically.The decoy PDF contained no valuable information. It was merely a blurred report generated by a Russian plagiarism-checking system.
A screenshot of a page from the downloaded report
At the time of our investigation, the links for downloading the final payloads didnβt work. Attempting to access them returned error messages in English: βYou are already blockedβ¦β or βYou have been bad endedβ (sic). This likely indicates the use of a protective mechanism to prevent payloads from being downloaded more than once. Despite this, we managed to obtain and analyze the final payload.
The DLL file deployed to infected devices proved to be an OLLVM-obfuscated loader, which we described in our previous report on Operation ForumTroll. However, while this loader previously delivered rare implants like LeetAgent and Dante, this time the attackers opted for a better-known commercial red teaming framework: Tuoni. Portions of the Tuoni code are publicly available on GitHub. By deploying this tool, the attackers gained remote access to the victimβs device along with other capabilities for further system compromise.
As in the previous campaign, the attackers used fastly.net as C2 servers.
The cyberattacks carried out by the ForumTroll APT group in the spring and fall of 2025 share significant similarities. In both campaigns, infection began with targeted phishing emails, and persistence for the malicious implants was achieved with the COM Hijacking technique. The same loader was used to deploy the implants both in the spring and the fall.
Despite these similarities, the fall series of attacks cannot be considered as technically sophisticated as the spring campaign. In the spring, the ForumTroll APT group exploited zero-day vulnerabilities to infect systems. By contrast, the autumn attacks relied entirely on social engineering, counting on victims not only clicking the malicious link but also downloading the archive and launching the shortcut file. Furthermore, the malware used in the fall campaign, the Tuoni framework, is less rare.
ForumTroll has been targeting organizations and individuals in Russia and Belarus since at least 2022. Given this lengthy timeline, it is likely this APT group will continue to target entities and individuals of interest within these two countries. We believe that investigating ForumTrollβs potential future campaigns will allow us to shed light on shadowy malicious implants created by commercial developersΒ β much as we did with the discovery of the Dante spyware.
e-library[.]wiki
perf-service-clients2.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
bus-pod-tenant.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
status-portal-api.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
In March 2025, we discovered Operation ForumTroll, a series of sophisticated cyberattacks exploiting the CVE-2025-2783 vulnerability in Google Chrome. We previously detailed the malicious implants used in the operation: the LeetAgent backdoor and the complex spyware Dante, developed by Memento Labs (formerly Hacking Team). However, the attackers behind this operation didnβt stop at their spring campaign and have continued to infect targets within the Russian Federation.
More reports about this threat are available to customers of the Kaspersky Intelligence Reporting Service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
In October 2025, just days before we presented our report detailing the ForumTroll APT groupβs attack at the Security Analyst Summit, we detected a new targeted phishing campaign by the same group. However, while the spring cyberattacks focused on organizations, the fall campaign honed in on specific individuals: scholars in the field of political science, international relations, and global economics, working at major Russian universities and research institutions.
The emails received by the victims were sent from the address support@e-library[.]wiki. The campaign purported to be from the scientific electronic library, eLibrary, whose legitimate website is elibrary.ru. The phishing emails contained a malicious link in the format: https://e-library[.]wiki/elib/wiki.php?id=<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>. Recipients were prompted to click the link to download a plagiarism report. Clicking that link triggered the download of an archive file. The filename was personalized, using the victimβs own name in the format: <LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.zip.
The attackers did their homework before sending out the phishing emails. The malicious domain, e-library[.]wiki, was registered back in March 2025, over six months before the email campaign started. This was likely done to build the domainβs reputation, as sending emails from a suspicious, newly registered domain is a major red flag for spam filters.
Furthermore, the attackers placed a copy of the legitimate eLibrary homepage on https://e-library[.]wiki. According to the information on the page, they accessed the legitimate website from the IP address 193.65.18[.]14 back in December 2024.
A screenshot of the malicious site elements showing the IP address and initial session date
The attackers also carefully personalized the phishing emails for their targets, specific professionals in the field. As mentioned above, the downloaded archive was named with the victimβs last name, first name, and patronymic.
Another noteworthy technique was the attackerβs effort to hinder security analysis by restricting repeat downloads. When we attempted to download the archive from the malicious site, we received a message in Russian, indicating the download link was likely for one-time use only:
The message that was displayed when we attempted to download the archive
Our investigation found that the malicious site displayed a different message if the download was attempted from a non-Windows device. In that case, it prompted the user to try again from a Windows computer.
The message that was displayed when we attempted to download the archive from a non-Windows OS
The malicious archives downloaded via the email links contained the following:
<LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.lnk;.Thumbs directory containing approximately 100 image files with names in Russian. These images were not used during the infection process and were likely added to make the archives appear less suspicious to security solutions.A portion of the .Thumbs directory contents
When the user clicked the shortcut, it ran a PowerShell script. The scriptβs primary purpose was to download and execute a PowerShell-based payload from a malicious server.
The script that was launched by opening the shortcut
The downloaded payload then performed the following actions:
https://e-library[.]wiki/elib/query.php?id=<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>&key=<32 hexadecimal characters> to retrieve the final payload, a DLL file.%localappdata%\Microsoft\Windows\Explorer\iconcache_<4 pseudorandom digits>.dll.https://e-library[.]wiki/pdf/<8 pseudorandom letters and digits>.pdf. This PDF was saved to the userβs Downloads folder with a filename in the format: <LastName>_<FirstName>_<Patronymic>.pdf and then opened automatically.The decoy PDF contained no valuable information. It was merely a blurred report generated by a Russian plagiarism-checking system.
A screenshot of a page from the downloaded report
At the time of our investigation, the links for downloading the final payloads didnβt work. Attempting to access them returned error messages in English: βYou are already blockedβ¦β or βYou have been bad endedβ (sic). This likely indicates the use of a protective mechanism to prevent payloads from being downloaded more than once. Despite this, we managed to obtain and analyze the final payload.
The DLL file deployed to infected devices proved to be an OLLVM-obfuscated loader, which we described in our previous report on Operation ForumTroll. However, while this loader previously delivered rare implants like LeetAgent and Dante, this time the attackers opted for a better-known commercial red teaming framework: Tuoni. Portions of the Tuoni code are publicly available on GitHub. By deploying this tool, the attackers gained remote access to the victimβs device along with other capabilities for further system compromise.
As in the previous campaign, the attackers used fastly.net as C2 servers.
The cyberattacks carried out by the ForumTroll APT group in the spring and fall of 2025 share significant similarities. In both campaigns, infection began with targeted phishing emails, and persistence for the malicious implants was achieved with the COM Hijacking technique. The same loader was used to deploy the implants both in the spring and the fall.
Despite these similarities, the fall series of attacks cannot be considered as technically sophisticated as the spring campaign. In the spring, the ForumTroll APT group exploited zero-day vulnerabilities to infect systems. By contrast, the autumn attacks relied entirely on social engineering, counting on victims not only clicking the malicious link but also downloading the archive and launching the shortcut file. Furthermore, the malware used in the fall campaign, the Tuoni framework, is less rare.
ForumTroll has been targeting organizations and individuals in Russia and Belarus since at least 2022. Given this lengthy timeline, it is likely this APT group will continue to target entities and individuals of interest within these two countries. We believe that investigating ForumTrollβs potential future campaigns will allow us to shed light on shadowy malicious implants created by commercial developersΒ β much as we did with the discovery of the Dante spyware.
e-library[.]wiki
perf-service-clients2.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
bus-pod-tenant.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
status-portal-api.global.ssl.fastly[.]net
Admit it: youβve been meaning to jump on the latest NFT reincarnation β Telegram Gifts β but just havenβt gotten around to it. Itβs the hottest trend right now. Developers are churning out collectible images in partnership with celebs like Snoop Dogg. All your friendsβ profiles are already decked out with these modish pictures, and youβre dying to hop on this hype train β but pay as little as possible for it.
And then it happens β a stranger messages you privately with a generous offer: a chance to snag a couple of these digital gifts β with no investment required. A bot that looks completely legit is running an airdrop. In the world of NFTs, an airdrop is a promotional stunt where a small number of new crypto assets are given away for free. The buzzword has been adopted on Telegram, thanks to the crypto nature of these gifts and the NFT mechanics running under the hood.
Limited time offer: a marketerβs favorite trickβ¦ and a scammerβs tool
Theyβre offering you these gift images for free β or so they say. You could later attach them to your profile or sell them for Telegramβs native currency, Toncoin. You donβt even have to tap an external link. Just hit a button in the message, launch a Mini App right inside Telegram itself, and enter your login credentials. And thenβ¦ your account immediately gets hijacked. You wonβt get any gifts, and overall, youβll be left with anything but a celebratory feeling.
This is the first of the screens where, by filling in the fields, you receive a gift lose access to your Telegram account
Today, we break down a phishing scheme that exploits Telegramβs built-in Mini Apps, and share tips to help you avoid falling for these attacks.
The principle of classic phishing is straightforward: the user gets a link to a fake website that mimics a legitimate sign-in form. When the victim enters their credentials, this data goes straight to the scammer. However, phishing tactics are constantly evolving, and this new attack method is far more insidious.
The bad actors create phishing Mini Apps directly inside Telegram. These appear as standard web pages but are embedded within the messaging appβs interface instead of opening in an external browser. To the user, these apps look completely legitimate. After all, they run within the official Telegram app itself.
To make it even more convincing, scammers often add a plausible-sounding limit on gifts per user
This leads the victim to think, βIf this app runs inside Telegram, there must be some kind of vetting process for these apps. Surely they wouldnβt let an obvious scam through?β In practice, it turns out thatβs not the case at all.
A core security issue with Telegram Mini Apps is that the platform does almost no vetting before an app goes live. This is a world apart from the strict review processes used by Google Play and the App Store β although even there, obvious malware occasionally slips through.
On Telegram, itβs far easier for bad actors. Essentially, anyone who wishes to create and launch a Mini App can do so. Telegram does not review the code, functionality, or the developerβs intent. This turns a security flaw within a messaging service boasting nearly a billion global users into a global-scale problem. To make matters worse, moderation of these Mini Apps within Telegram is entirely reactive β meaning action is only taken after users start complaining or law enforcement gets involved.
This is a global operation, with phishing lures being distributed simultaneously in both Russian and English. However, the Russian version gives away a tell-tale sign of the scammersβ haste and lack of polish. They forgot to remove a clarification question from the AI that generated the text: βDo you need bolder, more official, or humorous options?β
In this case, the bait was βgiftsβ from UFC fighters: a giveaway of βpapakhasβ β digital gift images of the traditional Dagestani hat released by Telegram in partnership with Khabib Nurmagomedov. An auction for these items did take place, with Pavel Durov even posting about it on his X and Telegram (Khabib reposted these announcements but later deleted them after the auction ended). However, there were only 29Β 000 of these βpapakhasβ released, which wasnβt enough to satisfy all the eager fans. Scammers seized on the opportunity, assuring fans they could get the exclusive items for free. The phishing campaign was a targeted one β focusing on users whoβd been active on the athleteβs channel.
The criminals leveraged the name of the popular Portals platform β a legitimate service for games, apps, and entertainment within Telegram. They created a series of Mini Apps that were visually almost indistinguishable from the real ones, and promoted them as free giveaways β airdrops.
To add a veneer of authenticity, the scammers even listed the official Telegram channel for Portals in the phishing Mini Appβs profile. However, the legitimate Portals Market bot has a different username: @portals
That said, the scam campaigns themselves show signs of being rushed and cutting design and copywriting costs β with obvious signs of AI involvement. Some of the messages contain leftover text fragments clearly generated by a neural network, which the scammers either forgot or couldnβt be bothered to edit.
The golden security rules are simple: stay vigilant, and learn the key hallmarks of these attacks:
The key is keeping calm and acting swiftly. You have just 24 hours to reclaim your account, or you risk losing it permanently. Follow the step-by-step guide to restoring access in our post What to do if your Telegram account is hacked.
Finally, a reminder that has become our classic mantra: if an offer looks too good to be true, it almost certainly is. Always verify information through official channels, and never enter your passwords or passkeys into unofficial apps or forms β even if they look legit. Stay vigilant and stay safe.
Want more tips on securing your messenger accounts and chats? Check out our related posts:
If you run a website, manage a business inbox, or even just use online banking, youβve already lived in the phishing era for a long time. The only thing thatβs changed is the polish.
Phishing scams have moved past those obviously fake βplease verifyβ requests to include convincing login pages, realistic invoices, and even bogus delivery updates. Some are mass-sent and easy to spot, others are customized precisely for the person theyβre targeting, their job, company, tech, and everyday apps.
Continue reading How to Protect Your WordPress Site From a Phishing Attack at Sucuri Blog.
Imagine: a user lands on a scam site, decides to make a purchase, and enters their bank card details, name, and address. Guess what happens next? If you think the attackers simply grab the cash and disappear β think again. Unfortunately, itβs much more complicated. In reality, the information enters a massive shadow-market pipeline, where victimsβ data circulates for years, changing hands and being reused in new attacks.
At Kaspersky, weβve studied the journey data takes after a phishing attack: who gets it, how itβs sorted, resold, and used on the shadow market. In this article, we map the route of stolen data, and explain how to protect yourself if youβve already encountered phishing, or if you want to avoid it in the future. You can read the detailed report complete with technical insights on Securelist.
Phishing sites are carefully disguised to look legitimate β sometimes the visual design, user interface, and even the domain name are almost indistinguishable from the real thing. To steal data, attackers typically employ HTML forms prompting users to enter their login credentials, payment card details, or other sensitive information.
As soon as the user hits Sign In or Pay, the information is instantly dispatched to the cybercrooks. Some malicious campaigns donβt harvest data directly through a phishing site but instead abuse legitimate services like Google Forms to hide the final destination server.
A fake DHL website. The user is asked to enter the login and password for their real DHL account
The stolen data is typically transmitted in one of three ways β or a combination of them:
The range of data sought by cybercriminals is quite extensive.
According to our research, the vast majority (88.5%) of phishing attacks conducted from January through September 2025 targeted online account credentials, and 9.5% were attempts to obtain usersβ personal data, such as names, addresses, and dates. Finally, 2% of phishing attacks were focused on stealing bank card details.
Distribution of attacks by type of data being targeted, JanuaryβSeptember 2025
Not all stolen data is directly used by the attackers to transfer money to their own accounts. In fact, the data is seldom used instantly; more commonly, it finds its way onto the shadow market, reaching analysts and data brokers. A typical journey looks something like this.
Raw data sets are bundled into massive archives and offered in bulk on dark web forums. These dumps often contain junk or outdated information, which is why theyβre relatively cheap β starting at around US$50.
These archives are purchased by hackers who act as analysts. They categorize datasets and verify the validity of the data by checking if the login credentials work for the specified services, if they are reused on other sites, and if they match any data from past breaches. For targeted attacks, cybercriminals compile a digital dossier. It stores information gathered from both recent and older attacks β essentially a spreadsheet of data ready to be used in hacks.
The sorted datasets are offered for sale again, now at a higher price β and not only on the dark web but also on the more familiar Telegram.
An ad for a Telegram sale of social media account credentials
According to Kaspersky Digital Footprint Intelligence, account prices are driven by a large number of factors: account age, 2FA authentication, linked bank cards, and service userbase. Itβs no surprise that the most expensive and in-demand commodity on this market is access to bank accounts and crypto wallets.
| Category | Price, US$ | Average price, US$ |
| Crypto platforms | 60β400 | 105 |
| Banks | 70β2000 | 350 |
| E-government portals | 15β2000 | 82.5 |
| Social media | 0.4β279 | 3 |
| Messaging apps | 0.065β150 | 2.5 |
| Online stores | 10β50 | 20 |
| Games and gaming platforms | 1β50 | 6 |
| Global internet portals | 0.2β2 | 0.9 |
| Personal documents | 0.5β125 | 15 |
Average account prices in JanuaryβSeptember 2025
Once a cybercriminal purchases a victimβs digital dossier, they can plan their next attack. They might use open-source intelligence to find out where the person works, and then craft a convincing email impersonating their boss. Alternatively, they could hack a social media profile, extract compromising photos, and demand a ransom for their return. However, rest assured that nearly all threatening or extortion emails are just a scare tactic by scammers.
Cybercriminals also use compromised accounts to send further phishing emails and malicious links to the victimβs contacts. So, if you receive a message asking you to vote for a niece in a contest, lend money, or click on a suspicious link, you have every reason to be wary.
More on phishing and scams:
Self-replicating worm βShai-Huludβ has compromised hundreds of software packages in a supply chain attack targeting the npm ecosystem. We discuss scope and more.
The post "Shai-Hulud" Worm Compromises npm Ecosystem in Supply Chain Attack (Updated November 26) appeared first on Unit 42.
The line between research tool and threat creation engine is thin. We examine the capabilities of WormGPT 4 and KawaiiGPT, two malicious LLMs.
The post The Dual-Use Dilemma of AI: Malicious LLMs appeared first on Unit 42.
Conventional security awareness initiatives often fall short because they fail to instill lasting behavioral change. Access our comprehensive research article for an in-depth exploration of the underlying causes and actionable remediation strategies.
DomCat is a command-line tool written in Golang that helps the user find expired domains with desirable categorizations.
The post DomCat: A Domain Categorization Tool appeared first on Black Hills Information Security, Inc..
Phishing attacks, which trick users into revealing sensitive information or installing malware, have grown more sophisticated and localized. Putting it simple: the frauds you'll get in Portugal are completely different from US, Singapore or any other place.Β
