Sextortion scammers are using email addresses from data leaked by the ShinyHunters hacking group to add some credibility to their feeble attempts to convince people they have embarrassing information about them.
Sextortion emails are messages claiming that the scammer recorded you through your webcam while you watched pornography and now demand payment. They have been around for years and keep evolving with small changes in wording and fake technical detail.
In this campaign, the scammers pretend to be ShinyHunters. What hasn’t changed is the basic truth: there is no malware, no recording, and no credible evidence behind the threat. Despite seeing countless versions of these emails over the years, I’ve yet to encounter one that was backed up by the evidence the sender claimed to have.
BleepingComputer reports that ShinyHunters data leaks are fueling a $2,000 sextortion email scam and shared the following example:
“Subject: Information about your online security
Hello,
We are the ShinyHunters hacking group. A few months ago, we gained access to your devices and started monitoring your online activities.
What happened: We gained access to the Amtrak.com database where you have an account and easily accessed your email. You weren’t very careful about the links you opened. A week later, we installed an exploit on your devices, including your phone, giving us access to your microphone, camera, keyboard, and all your data. We have your photos, browsing history, conversations, and contact list.
Among other things, we discovered that you frequently visit adult websites and watch explicit videos. We managed to record you and created videos of you pleasuring yourself. With a few clicks, we can share these videos with your friends, colleagues, and family or even make them public.
Proposal: Send us $2000 in Bitcoin to the following wallet: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We’ll delete everything immediately. You have 48 hours from the moment you open this email. Once the payment is received, we’ll remove the malware from your devices.”
BleepingComputer states it has seen data from the Amtrak, Hallmark, ADT, Substack, Betterment, CarGurus, Panera Bread, and McGraw Hill breaches used to target victims in this sextortion email campaign.
A California community college also issued a warning after seeing the campaign target people affected by the Canvas data breach.
They confirmed that the targeted email addresses had previously appeared in data leaked by ShinyHunters. They also contacted the group, which denied being behind the sextortion emails.
The increase to a $2,000 demand may suggest the scammers paid someone for the email lists. Although it’s more likely they simply downloaded the leaked data after ShinyHunters published it following failed extortion attempts.
A quick check of the Bitcoin address used in the email shows no activity.
No activity on their Bitcoin address
Let’s keep it that way. With any luck, these dungeon dwellers will eventually give up trying to scare people out of their hard-earned money.
How to react to sextortion emails
Some sextortion emails are badly written, but many have been polished by AI and look convincing. Regardless of how professional they look, they should be treated the same way: as unsubstantiated threats designed to scare victims into paying.
First and foremost, never reply to emails of this kind. Responding confirms that someone is actively reading messages sent to that address and may encourage further scam attempts.
Don’t let yourself be rushed into action. Scammers rely on the fact that you will not take the time to think this through and subsequently make mistakes. Ask for advice if you’re not sure.
An attachment is not proof. Most sextortion emails contain no evidence at all, and attachments are often used to deliver malware or make the threats appear more convincing.
If the email includes a password you’ve used before, change it immediately anywhere it’s still in use. Then enable two-factor authentication (2FA) wherever possible. If you’re having trouble keeping track of your passwords, consider using a password manager.
Delete the message, report it as spam, and move on.
Pro tip: Malwarebytes Scam Guard recognized this email for what it is: sextortion. It can recognize scams and advise you how to proceed.
While these sextortion emails are almost always bluffs, if you’re concerned about webcam spying, Malwarebytes Webcam Monitoring can alert you when applications attempt to access your camera.
Ransomware that combines robust encryption with rapid lateral movement significantly increases the risk and impact of an attack. The Gentlemen ransomware is a ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) threat that is distinguished by its ability to pair its strong per-file encryption with an aggressive self-propagation capability designed to enable broad network compromise. In addition to using per-file ephemeral Curve25519 keys with XChaCha20 stream cipher, The Gentlemen ransomware attempts to spread across an environment using series of simultaneous, distinct lateral movement methods, increasing the likelihood of widespread impact once initial access is achieved.
Microsoft Threat Intelligence tracks the operators behind the ransomware as Storm-2697, a financially motivated threat actor that manages the RaaS platform known as “The Gentlemen” while affiliates carry out attacks. Emerging around mid-2025, The Gentlemen initially started as a closed ransomware group then began offering its RaaS to affiliates in September 2025. More recently, The Gentlemen operators established an official partnership with BreachForums, a popular cybercriminal marketplace, to recruit affiliates including penetration testers and initial access brokers. Given that The Gentlemen is already a widely adopted RaaS platform, this partnership may lead to increased activity as the program becomes accessible to a broader pool of threat actors.
The operators behind the ransomware use double extortion tactics, encrypting data while also exfiltrating sensitive information to pressure victims through the threat of public release if the ransom is not paid. The ransomware is written in Go and obfuscated with Garble to target the Windows environment. Microsoft has observed The Gentlemen ransomware impacting organizations across education, transportation, healthcare, and financial industries in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, and Asia.
In this blog, we present a detailed analysis of the Gentlemen ransomware encryptor, including its execution flow, defense evasion behaviors, encryption design, and lateral movement techniques. This research is intended to provide defenders, incident responders, and the broader security community with a better understanding of how the threat operates, from initial argument parsing and defense evasion, through its file encryption internals, to the full lateral movement that enables it to propagate across the network. We also provide mitigation guidance, Microsoft Defender detections, hunting queries, and indicators of compromise (IOCs) to help organizations defend against this threat and similar ransomware activity.
Pre-encryption
Command-line argument processing
The ransomware operator can control The Gentlemen encryptor through command-line arguments. A password is required for execution, and optional arguments allow the operator to specify encryption scope, speed, lateral movement, and post-encryption behaviors.
The binary accepts the following arguments:
Command-line argument
Description
--password <password>
Required access password (build-specific)
--path <list of paths>
Comma-separated list of target directories or file paths
--T <minutes>
Delay in minutes before file encryption begins
--silent
Silent mode. Disable renaming files, changing timestamps after encryption, and setting the desktop wallpaper
--system
Encrypt files as SYSTEM, targeting only local drives
--shares
Encrypt only mapped network drives and available Universal Naming Convention (UNC) shares
--full
Two-phase encryption by relaunching itself as two separate processes, one with --system for local drives and one with --shares for network shares
--spread <domain/user:password>
Enable self-propagation. Accept credentials for lateral movement. If no credential is provided, the current session token is used for lateral movement.
--ultrafast
Encrypt 0.3% per chunk (~0.9% total for large files)
--superfast
Encrypt 1% per chunk (~3% total for large files)
--fast
Encrypt 3% per chunk (~9% total for large files)
--keep
Disable self-delete after file encryption completes
--wipe
Wipe free disk space after encryption
The --full command-line argument appears to be the intended mode of operation for comprehensive file encryption on the infected device. When this argument is provided, the malware spawns two child processes of itself: one appended with the argument --system to encrypt local volumes under a SYSTEM-privileged scheduled task, and one appended with the argument --shares to encrypt network shares. This separation ensures that the malware can reach both local drives (which might require SYSTEM privileges) and mapped network shares (which are only visible in the user’s session).
Figure 1. Encryption mode command-line arguments
The speed arguments (--fast, --superfast, --ultrafast) are mutually exclusive and control how much of each large file is encrypted. When no speed flag is specified, the default per-chunk percentage is 9%. These flags only affect files that are larger than 1 MB, and small files are fully encrypted regardless of the speed setting.
Usage prompt
When the encryptor is executed with no command-line argument, the malware prints a branded usage banner to the console.
It first executes the following PowerShell commands to render a console header:
This is followed by a detailed usage prompt provided by the malware author that documents all available flags with descriptions and examples:
Figure 2. The Gentlemen ransomware’s usage prompt
It is worth noting that the file size percentages listed in the usage prompt refer to the total file encryption amount. Internally, the malware encrypts three separate chunks, and the per-chunk percentage used in the code is: fast=3%, superfast=1%, ultrafast=0.3%, default=9%.
Password check
Before executing its primary functionality, the malware validates the --password argument against a hardcoded value embedded within the binary. For the sample analyzed in this blog, the expected password is “9VoAvR7G”. If the provided password does not match, the malware outputs bad args and terminates execution.
This password check is a simple operator authentication mechanism, with each build containing a unique embedded password. Its purpose is to restrict execution to authorized operators and reduce the risk of accidental or unauthorized detonation if the binary is recovered or intercepted. However, because this validation relies on a static comparison, it can be easily identified and bypassed through static analysis techniques.
System encryption: Privilege escalation
When the --system argument is provided (either directly or via the --full argument), the malware creates a scheduled task to re-execute itself as SYSTEM. If a delay value is also specified through the --T argument, the scheduled execution time is adjusted accordingly.
To relaunch itself as SYSTEM, it issues the following sequence of commands:
The malware can only perform this task if it’s executed from an account with administrator privilege. It first deletes any existing task named gentlemen_system to avoid conflicts, creates a new one-time task that runs its binary under the SYSTEM account, and finally triggers that task.
This sequence ensures a clean state by first removing any existing task with the same name (gentlemen_system), creating a new scheduled task that executes the ransomware binary with SYSTEM-level privileges before finally triggering its immediate execution.
When running within this scheduled task context, the malware sets the environment variable LOCKER_BACKGROUND=1. This variable functions as an internal execution flag, indicating that the process is operating as a background encryption worker with elevated privileges, rather than as the original operator-invoked instance.
Defense evasion
Before starting file encryption, the malware executes a sequence of commands to disable defensive controls and remove potential forensic artifacts.
Disable Microsoft Defender
The PowerShell commands disable Microsoft Defender real-time monitoring to remove active protection on the infected device. The malware then adds its own executable to the Defender exclusion list to avoid detection. Finally, it excludes the entire C:\ volume from scanning, reducing the likelihood of subsequent detection during file encryption.
Delete shadow copies and event logs
To further impede recovery efforts, the malware deletes all Volume Shadow Copies using both vssadmin and wmic (Windows Management Instrumentation command-line utility). It then clears the System, Application, and Security event logs using wevtutil to remove key audit trails.
Delete forensics artifacts
These commands remove a variety of forensic artifacts, including prefetch files that track program execution, Defender diagnostic and support logs, and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) logs.
Additionally, the malware manually deletes PowerShell command history across all user profiles by removing the following file:
This action eliminates evidence of previously executed PowerShell commands, further reducing the visibility of execution history and threat actor activity.
Process and service termination
Process termination
The malware stops a list of running processes using the command:
The table below summarizes the different categories and processes being targeted:
Terminating these processes and services serves two primary objectives:
File access and encryption reliability: Many targeted processes/services, such as databases, Office applications, and backup agents, maintain active file locks. By forcibly terminating these processes, the ransomware ensures that locked files become accessible for encryption.
Defense and recovery disruption: By stopping backup services, endpoint protection agents, and remote access tools, the malware reduces the likelihood of real-time detection and data restoration from backups.
Collectively, these behaviors maximize encryption coverage while hindering the environment’s ability to detect, respond to, or recover from the attack.
Persistence
The encryptor can establish persistence for itself through two mechanisms: scheduled tasks and registry keys.
Figure 3. The Gentlemen ransomware’s persistence mechanism
Scheduled tasks persistence
For establishing persistence with scheduled tasks, the malware executes the following sequence of commands:
These commands first remove any pre-existing tasks with the same names, then create two persistence mechanisms that execute automatically at system startup. The UpdateSystem task launches the payload in the SYSTEM security context, while the UpdateUser task launches it in the currently signed-in user’s context. This design increases the likelihood that the ransomware will run after reboot regardless of privilege level or sign-in state.
Registry keys persistence
For establishing persistence with the registry, the malware executes the following sequence of commands:
The GupdateS value under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE (HKLM) provides device-wide persistence that allows the malware to run at startup for all users, while the GupdateU value under HKEY_CURRENT_USER (HKCU) provides user-scoped persistence within the current profile. By writing to both registry hives, the malware establishes redundant autorun paths across both system-level and user-level execution contexts.
Together, the scheduled tasks and Run key modifications create layered persistence, ensuring that the encryptor is re-executed after a reboot in both privileged and user-context scenarios.
Network share traversal
When the command-line argument --shares is provided, the malware initiates network share discovery and enumeration. It begins by probing all drive letters A through Z to identify mapped network drives using the following commands:
This sequence discovers any drives that are already mapped in the current user’s session, which are then added to the encryption target list.
To further enhance visibility into the network environment, the malware enables multiple Windows network discovery services and their associated firewall rules using the following commands:
The services enabled as part of this process include:
Function Discovery Resource Publication (fdrespub): Publishes the host’s resources to the network, allowing other systems to detect it.
Function Discovery Provider Host (fdPHost): Hosts provider components responsible for discovering network resources.
Simple Service Discovery Protocol (SSDP) Discovery (SSDPSRV): Enables discovery of Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) devices.
UPnP Device Host (upnphost): Supports the hosting and management of UPnP devices.
Finally, the malware reinforces this configuration by enabling the Network Discovery firewall rule group. This redundancy ensures that firewall restrictions do not limit its network visibility, further maximizing the number of reachable targets for encryption and propagation.
Volume and directory traversal
To enumerate all available volumes on the system, the malware executes the following PowerShell command sequence:
This command queries Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) for all mounted volumes with drive letter paths and attempts to enumerate Cluster Shared Volumes (CSVs).
Additionally, the malware performs a secondary enumeration routine by iterating through drive letters A through Z while verifying their existence on disk. This brute-force method ensures broader coverage by identifying volumes that might not be retrieved through WMI queries to maximize visibility into all potential encryption targets.
Directory exclusion list
To maintain system stability and avoid disrupting critical operating system components, the malware excludes a predefined set of directories from traversal and encryption. These directories include core Windows system paths, application directories, and locations commonly associated with security and system management:
Extension exclusion list
The ransomware also excludes a set of file extensions associated with system-critical binaries, configuration files, and executable content:
By avoiding executable files, libraries, scripts, and other system-relevant formats, the malware preserves the integrity of the operating environment. This selective encryption model is a common ransomware design pattern, ensuring that the system remains operational enough for the victim to receive instructions and facilitate ransom payment.
File name exclusion list
The specific file names below are also excluded:
The inclusion of README-GENTLEMEN.txt, the ransomware’s ransom note, prevents it from being encrypted during execution. This ensures that the ransom instructions remain accessible to the victim, which is critical for the operator’s monetization workflow.
Ransom note
During directory traversal, the malware drops a ransom note named README-GENTLEMEN.txt in each scanned directory to provide victim-facing instructions.
The note contains identifiers assigned to the victim, communication channels, and guidance on how to initiate contact with the operators.
Figure 4. Ransom note content
File encryption
File ownership
Before encrypting a file, the ransomware modifies the file ownership and access control settings to ensure it has unrestricted write access to the target. This is achieved through the following sequence of commands:
The takeown command recursively transfers ownership of the specified file or directory to the executing user, overriding existing ownership constraints. The icacls command then grants full control permissions to the Everyone security identifier (SID S-1-1-0), applying inheritance flags to propagate these permissions to all child objects. Finally, the attrib command removes the read-only attributes.
Cryptographic scheme
The Gentlemen ransomware implements a hybrid cryptographic design that combines Curve25519 elliptic-curve cryptography with the XChaCha20 stream cipher to achieve efficient and secure per-file encryption.
For each file, the malware performs the following sequence of operations:
Generates a unique ephemeral Curve25519 key pair, consisting of a randomly generated private key and its corresponding public key
Computes the Elliptic-curve Diffie–Hellman (ECDH) shared secret between the ephemeral private key and the operator’s embedded public key
Uses the resulting shared secret as the XChaCha20 key, and derives the nonce from the first 24 bytes of the ephemeral public key
Encrypts the file contents using XChaCha20 with this key and nonce combination
Appends the Base64-encoded ephemeral public key to the file footer to enable subsequent key reconstruction during decryption
Figure 5. The Gentlemen ransomware’s file encryption mechanism
In this sample, the operator’s public key is hard-coded within the binary as a Base64-encoded value:
This design ensures that each file is encrypted with a distinct key and nonce derived from a per-file ephemeral key exchange, eliminating any possibility of key or nonce reuse across files.
During decryption, the decryptor can use the operator’s Curve25519 private key together with the stored ephemeral public key to reconstruct the ECDH shared secret and recover the XChaCha20 key. The nonce is deterministically reconstructed by extracting the first 24 bytes of the recovered ephemeral public key, making separate nonce storage unnecessary.
Overall, this approach provides strong cryptographic isolation between encrypted files while maintaining operational simplicity and efficiency for the threat actor during both encryption and decryption.
Size-based encryption
The malware uses different encryption strategies based on file size:
File size
Encryption behavior
≤ 1 MB (0x100000 bytes)
The entire file content is encrypted
> 1 MB (0x100000 bytes)
Three chunks are encrypted at distributed offsets
Small files that are less than 1MB in size are fully encrypted. This ensures that documents, configuration files, and other small but critical data are completely corrupted. For larger files such as databases, virtual disk images, archives, full encryption would be time-consuming. Instead, the malware encrypts three data chunks distributed across the file, which is sufficient to corrupt the file structure while dramatically reducing encryption time.
After encryption, each affected file is renamed with the appended extension .umc16h. This extension serves as a quick indicator of files already encrypted by the ransomware.
Large file chunking logic
For files larger than 1 MB, the malware performs partial encryption by dividing the file into three non-contiguous chunks distributed across its contents:
The first chunk begins at the start of the file, the second is positioned near the midpoint, and the third is located toward the end. This distribution ensures that even limited encryption is sufficient to corrupt the file structure while minimizing processing time.
Each chunk is encrypted in 64 KB (0x10000) blocks using XChaCha20. To maintain cryptographic separation between chunks, the malware modifies the nonce on a per-chunk basis. Specifically, the last byte of the 24-byte XChaCha20 nonce is XOR-ed with the chunk index (0, 1, or 2), and a new cipher instance is initialized for each chunk using the modified nonce. As a result, chunk 0 uses the original nonce, while subsequent chunks use deterministically altered variants.
Although all chunks for a given file share the same derived encryption key, this nonce mutation ensures that each chunk is processed under a unique keystream, preventing keystream reuse across different regions of the file.
The encryption percentage for each file is determined by the provided speed command-line arguments:
Argument
Per-chunk percent
Total encrypted percent (3 chunks)
(default)
9%
~27%
--fast
3%
~9%
--superfast
1%
~3%
--ultrafast
0.3%
~0.9%
File footer
After encrypting each file, the malware appends a structured footer containing metadata required for identification and decryption. The footer format differs slightly depending on whether the file was fully or partially encrypted.
Small file encryption (files ≤ 1 MB):
Figure 6. Small file footer example
Large file encryption (files > 1 MB):
Figure 7. Large file footer example
The footer serves three primary functions:
Key and nonce reconstruction: The Base64-encoded ephemeral public key, located after --eph--, allows the decryptor to recompute both the XChaCha20 key (using ECDH shared secret) and the nonce (first 24 bytes of the ephemeral public key).
Identification: The GENTLEMEN marker, located after--marker--, serves as a unique identifier, allowing encryptors/decryptors to quickly determine that the file has been encrypted by The Gentlemen ransomware.
Decryption mode: The optional speed flag marker (only present on large files) tells the decryptor which chunking percentage was used.
Notably, the speed marker is only present for large-file encryption. Files that are ≤ 1 MB do not include a speed marker, and its absence signals that the file was fully encrypted. This implicit encoding in the footer allows the decryptor to distinguish between full and partial encryption modes without requiring additional metadata fields.
Post-encryption
Wallpaper setup
If the --silent argument is not provided, the malware drops the following bitmap image file to %TEMP%\gentlemen.bmp and sets it as the system’s desktop wallpaper.
Figure 8. The Gentlemen ransomware’s wallpaper
This behavior serves as an immediate visual indicator of compromise, signaling to the victim that encryption has completed.
Self-propagation
The self-propagation module is the more distinctive component of The Gentlemen ransomware. When enabled with the --spread argument, it turns the malware from a single-host encryptor into a self-propagating worm that attempts to deploy its encryptor to every reachable system on the network.
The --spread argument accepts either explicit credentials in domain/user:password format for authenticated lateral movement, or an empty string to reuse the current session’s authentication token.
Placeholder legend
The executed commands in this section use the following placeholders:
Placeholder
Meaning
<self>
Host name of the infected device running the malware
<target>
Remote host discovered during network enumeration
<malware_path>
Full local path to the malware executable
<payload_name>
The malware file name
<ps_blob>
PowerShell defense evasion command executed on the remote target
<user>
Username parsed from the provided credentials
<pass>
Password parsed from the provided credentials
<time>
Current time plus two minutes, formatted as HH:MM
Phase 1: Local staging setup
The malware prepares the infected host to act as a distribution point for its binary by executing the following command sequence:
The commands copy the malware executable into C:\Temp, creates a hidden Server Message Block (SMB) share named share$ pointing to that directory, and modifies registry settings to allow anonymous access. With this setup, other systems on the network can retrieve the payload from \\<self>\share$, even when valid credentials are not available.
Phase 2: PsExec drop
The malware binary carries an embedded copy of PsExec and drops it to C:\Temp\psexec.exe on the infected device.
If the embedded PsExec payload cannot be extracted successfully, the malware falls back to downloading PsExec directly from Microsoft’s Sysinternals Live service using the following PowerShell command:
Phase 3: Network enumeration
After dropping PsExec, the malware attempts to enumerate and discover remote systems on the network, including workstations, servers, and domain controllers. Each discovered host becomes a candidate target for propagation.
Phase 4: PowerShell defense evasion blob
Before attempting to run the payload on a remote system, the malware executes the following PowerShell command on the remote target to weaken local defenses and make payload execution more reliable:
This command disables Microsoft Defender real-time monitoring, adds broad Defender exclusions, turns off Windows Firewall across all profiles, shares local drives, grants permissive New Technology File System (NTFS) access, enables SMB1, and loosens anonymous-access restrictions through Local Security Authority (LSA) registry settings. Together, these changes make the remote system significantly more exposed and ready for the payload deployment step.
Phase 5: Payload deployment
For each discovered remote host, the malware attempts a series of independent lateral movement techniques to execute its payload. Notably, these techniques are executed without dependency on prior success, and each method is attempted regardless of whether earlier attempts fail. This execution model of The Gentlemen’s propagation logic can significantly increase the likelihood that at least one execution path succeeds even in secured environments.
5.1: Remote file copy
The malware first stages its payload on the remote system by copying the encryptor binary over the administrative C$ share:
This operation ensures a local copy of the payload is available on the target host, allowing subsequent execution methods to reference a path that does not depend on network shares.
5.2: PsExec-based execution
If PsExec is successfully dropped or downloaded, the malware leverages it to perform a multi-stage execution sequence on the remote host.
First, the malware executes the PowerShell defense evasion payload to weaken host protections:
After a delay to allow defenses to be disabled, the malware executes the payload from the locally staged path C:\Temp under SYSTEM privileges:
After another sleep period, the malware executes the final command to run the payload with the –h flag for elevated token and –c -f to copy and force execution:
5.3: WMIC process creation
The malware uses WMI via wmic.exe to create remote processes:
The first command executes the defense evasion blob, the second runs the payload from the infected host’s SMB share, and the third runs the pre-staged copy from the target’s local C:\Temp directory.
5.4: Scheduled tasks (user)
The malware creates three scheduled tasks under the target user’s context, each running two minutes after the time when they are created:
The scheduled task DefU is set to run the defense evasion blob, UpdateGU executes the payload from the infected host’s SMB share, and UpdateGU2runs the pre-staged copy from the target’s local C:\Temp directory.
5.5: Scheduled tasks (system)
The same three tasks are repeated, running under the SYSTEM account:
By attempting both user-context and SYSTEM-context task creation, the ransomware can improve its chance of propagation across environments with different permission boundaries.
5.6: Service-based execution
The malware executes the following command sequence to create three Windows services on the target host:
Similar to the scheduled tasks, the service DefSvc is set to run the defense evasion blob, UpdateSvc executes the payload from the infected host’s SMB share, and UpdateSvc2 runs the pre-staged copy from the target’s local C:\Temp directory. These services run as SYSTEM by default, which provides another high-privilege execution path for the ransomware payload on the remote system.
5.7: Payload deployment: PowerShell remoting
Using PowerShell remoting, the malware executes commands directly on the target using Invoke-Command:
This method leverages Windows Remote Management (WinRM), providing an alternative execution channel when PsExec or WMIC are unavailable or blocked.
5.8: PowerShell WMI execution
Finally, the malware uses the PowerShell WMI class interface directly to create remote processes with the following command sequence.
This provides functionality equivalent to wmic.exe, but through a different execution path. As a result, it might succeed in environments where the WMIC binary is restricted but WMI access remains available.
Self-propagation summary
Across all techniques, the malware attempts 21 remote execution operations per target host, spanning multiple APIs, privilege levels, and execution contexts. Each method attempts to launch the payload from:
The infected host’s SMB share:\\<self>\share$\<payload_name>
The target host’s locally staged path:C:\Temp\<payload_name>
This redundancy is central to The Gentlemen’s propagation strategy. In secured environments where most lateral movement techniques are mitigated, a single successful execution on a single additional host is sufficient to continue the propagation.
Free space wipe
If the --wipe argument is provided, The Gentlemen ransomware performs an additional post-encryption routine to eliminate recoverable artifacts from disk.
The malware first enumerates all available volume paths on the system. For each volume, it creates a temporary file named wipefile.tmp at the root directory and determines the amount of available free space. It then writes random data to this file in 64 MB blocks until the volume is completely filled. Once the disk space has been exhausted, the temporary file is deleted.
This process effectively overwrites all unallocated disk space with random data, preventing forensic tools from recovering remnants of previously deleted files. This includes cached or temporary versions of original unencrypted data that might still reside on disk. When combined with earlier actions such as Volume Shadow Copy deletion, this behavior reduces the likelihood of data recovery without access to the threat actor’s decryption key.
Self-delete
If the --keep flag is not provided, the malware attempts to remove its executable from disk after completing encryption.
Since a running process cannot directly delete its own binary, the ransomware generates and executes a temporary batch script at <malware_path>.batwith the following contents:
The batch script introduces a short delay by sending three Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo requests to the local host, pausing execution long enough for the main malware process to terminate. After this delay, the script deletes the original ransomware executable before removing itself. This mechanism helps reduce on-disk artifacts and hinders post-incident forensic analysis by eliminating the ransomware binary from the compromised system.
Defending against The Gentlemen ransomware
Microsoft recommends the following mitigations to reduce the impact of this threat.
Read the human-operated ransomware threat overview for advice on developing a holistic security posture to prevent ransomware, including credential hygiene and hardening recommendations.
Turn on cloud-delivered protection in Microsoft Defender Antivirus or the equivalent for your antivirus product to cover rapidly evolving threat actor tools and techniques. Cloud-based machine learning protections block a huge majority of new and unknown variants.
Enable controlled folder access. Controlled folder access helps protect your valuable data from malicious apps and threats, such as ransomware. Controlled folder access works by only allowing trusted apps to access protected folders. Protected folders are specified when controlled folder access is configured. Apps that aren’t included in the trusted apps list are prevented from making any changes to files inside protected folders.
Run endpoint detection and response (EDR) in block mode so that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can block malicious artifacts, even when your non-Microsoft antivirus does not detect the threat or when Microsoft Defender Antivirus is running in passive mode. EDR in block mode works behind the scenes to remediate malicious artifacts that are detected post-breach.
Configure investigation and remediation in full automated mode to let Microsoft Defender for Endpoint take immediate action on alerts to resolve breaches, significantly reducing alert volume.
Configure automatic attack disruption in Microsoft Defender XDR. Automatic attack disruption is designed to contain attacks in progress, limit the impact on an organization’s assets, and provide more time for security teams to remediate the attack fully.
Microsoft Defender XDR customers can turn on attack surface reduction rules to prevent several of the infection vectors of this threat. These rules, which can be configured by any user, offer significant hardening against targeted attacks. In observed attacks, Microsoft customers who had the following rules turned on could mitigate the attack in the initial stages and prevent hands-on-keyboard activity:
Microsoft Defender detections and hunting guidance
Microsoft Defender customers can refer to the list of applicable detections below. Microsoft Defender coordinates detection, prevention, investigation, and response across endpoints, identities, email, apps to provide integrated protection against attacks like the threat discussed in this blog.
Microsoft Defender Antivirus
Microsoft Defender Antivirus detects threat components as the following malware:
The following alerts might indicate threat activity associated with this threat. These alerts, however, can be triggered by unrelated threat activity and are not monitored in the status cards provided with this report.
Ransomware-linked threat actor detected
Ransomware behavior detected in the file system
Possible ransomware activity
File backups were deleted
Potential human-operated malicious activity
Possible data exfiltration
Suspicious wallpaper change
The following alerts might indicate threat activity associated with The Gentlemen ransomware if Defender for Endpoint is set to block mode.
‘Gentlemen’ ransomware was detected
‘Gentlemen’ ransomware was prevented
Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps
The following alert might indicate threat activity associated with this threat. This alert, however, can be triggered by unrelated threat activity and are not monitored in the status cards provided with this report.
Ransomware activity
Microsoft Security Copilot
Microsoft Security Copilot is embedded in Microsoft Defender and provides security teams with AI-powered capabilities to summarize incidents, analyze files and scripts, summarize identities, use guided responses, and generate device summaries, hunting queries, and incident reports.
Security Copilot is also available as a standalone experience where customers can perform specific security-related tasks, such as incident investigation, user analysis, and vulnerability impact assessment. In addition, Security Copilot offers developer scenarios that allow customers to build, test, publish, and integrate AI agents and plugins to meet unique security needs.
Threat intelligence reports
Microsoft Defender XDR customers can use the following threat analytics reports in the Defender portal (requires license for at least one Defender XDR product) to get the most up-to-date information about the threat actor, malicious activity, and techniques discussed in this blog. These reports provide the intelligence, protection information, and recommended actions to prevent, mitigate, or respond to associated threats found in customer environments.
Microsoft Security Copilot customers can also use the Microsoft Security Copilot integration in Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence, either in the Security Copilot standalone portal or in the embedded experience in the Microsoft Defender portal to get more information about this threat actor.
Hunting queries
Microsoft Defender XDR
Microsoft Defender XDR customers can run the following advanced hunting queries to find related activity in their networks:
Known The Gentlemen ransomware files
Search for the file hashes associated with The Gentlemen ransomware activity identified in this report.
let fileHashes = dynamic(["22b38dad7da097ea03aa28d0614164cd25fafeb1383dbc15047e34c8050f6f67"]);
union
(
DeviceFileEvents
| where SHA256 in (fileHashes)
| project Timestamp, DeviceId, DeviceName, FileName, InitiatingProcessFileName, FileHash = SHA256, SourceTable = "DeviceFileEvents"
),
(
DeviceEvents
| where SHA256 in (fileHashes)
| project Timestamp, DeviceId, DeviceName, FileName, InitiatingProcessFileName, FileHash =
SHA256, SourceTable = "DeviceEvents"
),
(
DeviceImageLoadEvents
| where SHA256 in (fileHashes)
| project Timestamp, DeviceId, DeviceName, FileName, InitiatingProcessFileName, FileHash = SHA256, SourceTable = "DeviceImageLoadEvents"
),
(
DeviceProcessEvents
| where SHA256 in (fileHashes)
| project Timestamp, DeviceId, DeviceName, FileName, InitiatingProcessFileName, FileHash = SHA256, SourceTable = "DeviceProcessEvents"
)
| order by Timestamp desc
Microsoft Sentinel
Microsoft Sentinel customers can use the TI Mapping analytics (a series of analytics all prefixed with ‘TI map’) to automatically match the malicious domain indicators mentioned in this blog post with data in their workspace. If the TI Map analytics are not currently deployed, customers can install the Threat Intelligence solution from the Microsoft Sentinel Content Hub to have the analytics rule deployed in their Sentinel workspace.
Detect web sessions IP and file hash indicators of compromise using Advanced Security Information Model (ASIM)
The following query checks IP addresses, domains, and file hash IOCs across data sources supported by ASIM web session parser:
//IP list - _Im_WebSession
let lookback = 30d;
let ioc_ip_addr = dynamic([]);
let ioc_sha_hashes =dynamic(["22b38dad7da097ea03aa28d0614164cd25fafeb1383dbc15047e34c8050f6f67"]);
_Im_WebSession(starttime=todatetime(ago(lookback)), endtime=now())
| where DstIpAddr in (ioc_ip_addr) or FileSHA256 in (ioc_sha_hashes)
| summarize imWS_mintime=min(TimeGenerated), imWS_maxtime=max(TimeGenerated),
EventCount=count() by SrcIpAddr, DstIpAddr, Url, Dvc, EventProduct, EventVendor
Detect files hashes indicators of compromise using ASIM
The following query checks IP addresses and file hash IOCs across data sources supported by ASIM file event parser:
// file hash list - imFileEvent
let ioc_sha_hashes = dynamic(["22b38dad7da097ea03aa28d0614164cd25fafeb1383dbc15047e34c8050f6f67"]);
imFileEvent
| where SrcFileSHA256 in (ioc_sha_hashes) or
TargetFileSHA256 in (ioc_sha_hashes)
| extend AccountName = tostring(split(User, @'')[1]),
AccountNTDomain = tostring(split(User, @'')[0])
| extend AlgorithmType = "SHA256"
To hear stories and insights from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community about the ever-evolving threat landscape, listen to the Microsoft Threat Intelligence podcast.
Understanding Illicit Ecosystems: The Hybrid Threat of “The Com”
In this post, we dive into the decentralized architecture of “The Com,” exposing its hybrid ecosystem of hacking, extortion, and real-life violence—and how it fuels a ruthless pipeline of cyber-fraud cycles and adolescent exploitation.
The Community, more widely known as “The Com” is a sophisticated hybrid threat ecosystem in which cybercrime serves as the venture capital for domestic terrorism. Existing since the early 2010s, it operates in the “edgesphere”, a grey area where mainstream social media overlaps with underground criminal networks, blending nihilistic violent extremism (NVE) with high-level financial fraud. In The Com, cybercrime against Fortune 500 companies is the primary revenue stream used by members to fund a domestic terror network that aims to radicalize youth and encourage real-world violence.
However, The Com poses more than just financial risk, it is a self-serving victim-to-perpetrator pipeline. It uses stolen capital to recruit adolescents, who they view as a disposable workforce, turning them from a victim to a perpetrator. Despite being a decentralized web of individuals rather than a traditional threat actor organization, The Com has managed to grow by hiding in the gaps between corporate security, parental oversight, and law enforcement.
How The Com is Structured
The Com is often mischaracterized as a single, formal organization. In reality, its ecosystem is unstructured and lacks a shared culture or leadership. However, the various factions within the ecosystem are extremely organized, supporting three broad categories of criminal activity: cybercrime, exploitation of minors, and real-world physical violence.
Federal investigations have shown that The Com includes a mix of adults and minors, men and women. While the exact number of members is difficult to determine, Flashpoint estimates that the broader ecosystem of The Com is in the thousands. While being a global threat, its most active core members are concentrated in Western English-speaking countries: the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada.
Understanding the Key Pillars of The Com
While The Com is a decentralized ecosystem, its internal structure is defined by a high degree of operational alignment. Individual crews and networks within each pillar exhibit a shared psychology and standardized tradecraft that ensures their criminal activities remain effective and repeatable.
However, Flashpoint notes that members of these pillars do not operate alone. Their interaction with members of other pillars (extortion and real-world violence) amplifies the intended threat.
HACKER Com: The Economic Engine of The Com
Hacker Com acts as the ecosystem’s economic engine and primary technical arm. Its primary function is to hack major corporations and commit financial fraud to fund the broader community’s activities and lifestyle. Seeing themselves as the elite technical tier of The Com, Hacker Com members are motivated primarily by financial gain and the thrill of outsmarting corporate security infrastructures. Notable crews within this pillar include Scattered Spider, LAPSUS$, ShinyHunters, and DragonForce.
TTPs Used by HACKER Com
The following tactics, tools, and procedures (TTPs) have been observed by HACKER COM groups:
Social Engineering (Vishing)
Hacker Com members capitalize on TTPs that target human vulnerabilities instead of relying solely on software and other exploits. Vishing is a signature move of the Scattered Spider crew, whose native English-speaking members call corporate IT helpdesks impersonating employees of that company.
Analysts note these threat actors are likely Gen Z who socially engineer older support staff by mimicking the impatient attitudes and vernacular of young tech executives, essentially hacking the generation gap. They leverage this form of social engineering to convince support staff to reset passwords or even re-enroll new multifactor authentication (MFA) devices, which grants them access to the victims’ networks.
Supply Chain Targeting
Crews in this pillar have also successfully breached major targets by attacking their trusted vendors. For instance, Lapsus$ compromised Okta by targeting its third-party contractor, Sykes, while Scattered Spider has repeatedly targeted Okta’s identity services to pivot into their clients’ networks.
Living-off-the-land (LOTL)
Once inside a network, threat actors avoid detection by using legitimate, preexisting software and other remote admin tools such as AnyDesk, Ngrok, and Teleport to maintain persistence and move laterally. They often gamify this access, mocking victims for allowing them to simply “log in” using standard admin tools rather than having to hack their way in via complex exploits. They treat the ease of access as a testament to the victim’s incompetence.
SIM Swapping
A SIM swap attack is a foundational TTP used by financially motivated actors that involves social engineering mobile carriers to hijack a target’s phone number, usually resulting in the takeover of high-value cryptocurrency accounts.
EXTORT Com: The Ideological Engine of The Com
The Extort Com pillar functions as a machine designed for psychological control, coercion, and sexual exploitation of minors. Its goals intersect squarely with NVE ideologies, resulting in a marketplace and production center for CSAM and extreme violence, where members often trade these materials as a form of social currency.
Targets are migrated from public channels, which include social media and video games such as Roblox and Minecraft, to private ones maintained by The Com. Once moved, the dynamic shifts from recruitment to active exploitation, which is done to ensure the victim’s compliance.
IRL Com: The Enforcement Engine of The COM
The “In Real Life” (IRL) pillar serves as the physical enforcement arm of the ecosystem, effectively bridging the gap between virtual threats and reality. Sometimes referred to by law enforcement as “IRL Terror,” members often turn online animosity and disputes into real-world harm against people and their property.
Protect Against Converging Threats Using Flashpoint
The evolution of The Com represents a fundamental shift in the global threat landscape. It is not enough to view cybercrime as a purely financial risk or domestic extremism as a purely ideological one, the two have merged into a self-sustaining engine where stolen corporate capital fuels the radicalization and exploitation of the next generation.
As The Com continues to professionalize its tradecraft and expand its reach, the boundary between our digital and physical worlds will only continue to thin. To protect against this decentralized threat, organizations will require a mutli-layered defense strategy that is powered by intelligence that is sourced at the heart of these groups. Request a demo to learn more.
Our malware removal support team recently flagged a new wave of sextortion emails, with the subject line: “You pervert, I recorded you!”
If the message sounds familiar, that’s because it’s a variation of the long-running “Hello pervert” scam.
The email claims the target’s device has been infected by a “drive-by exploit,” which supposedly gave the extortionist full access to the device. To add credibility, the scammer includes a password that actually belongs to the target.
Here’s one of the emails:
Your device was compromised by my private malware. An outdated browser makes you vulnerable; simply visiting a malicious website containing my iframe can result in automatic infection. For further information search for ‘Drive-by exploit’ on Google. My malware has granted me full access to your accounts, complete control over your device, and the ability to monitor you via your camera. If you believe this is a joke, no, I know your password: {an actual password} I have collected all your private data and RECORDED FOOTAGE OF YOU MASTRUBATING THROUGH YOUR CAMERA! To erase all traces, I have removed my malware. If you doubt my seriousness, it takes only a few clicks to share your private video with friends, family, contacts, social networks, the darknet, or to publish your files. You are the only one who can stop me, and I am here to help. The only way to prevent further damage is to pay exactly $800 in Bitcoin (BTC). This is a reasonable offer compared to the potential consequences of disclosure. You can purchase Bitcoin (BTC) from reputable exchanges here: {list of crypto-currency exchanges} Once purchased, you can send the Bitcoin directly to my wallet address or use a wallet application such as Atomic Wallet or Exodus Wallet to manage your transactions. My Bitcoin (BTC) wallet address is: {bitcoin wallet which has received 1 payment at the time of writing} Copy and paste this address carefully, as it is case-sensitive. You have 4 days to complete the payment. Since I have access to this email account, I will be aware if this message has been read. Upon receipt of the payment, I will remove all traces of my malware, and you can resume your normal life peacefully. I keep my promises!
The message is a bit contradictory. Early on, the sender claims they have already removed the malware to “erase all traces,” but later promises to remove it after receiving payment.
Where the password comes from
I found that one particular sender using the name Jenny Green and the Gmail address JennyGreen64868@gmail.com sent many of these emails to people that use the FakeMailGenerator service.
FakeMailGenerator is a free disposable email service that gives users a temporary, receive‑only inbox they can use instead of their real address, mainly to get around email confirmations or avoid spam.
As mentioned, the addresses are receive‑only, meaning they cannot legitimately send mail and the mailbox is not tied to a specific person. On top of that, there is no login. Anyone who knows the address (or guesses the inbox URL) can see the same inbox.
My guess is that the scammer searched these public inboxes for passwords and then reused those passwords in their sextortion emails.
So users of FakeMailGenerator and similar services should consider this a warning. Your inbox may be publicly accessible, show up in search results, and you may receive a lot more than what you signed up for. Definitely don’t use services like this for anything sensitive.
How to stay safe
Knowing these scams exist is the first step to avoiding them. Sextortion emails rely on panic and embarrassment to push people into paying quickly. Here are a few simple steps to protect yourself:
Don’t rush. Scammers rely on fear and urgency. Take a moment to think before reacting.
Don’t reply to the email. Responding tells the attacker that someone is reading messages at that address, which may lead to more scams.
Change your password if it appears in the email. If you still use that password anywhere, update it.
Use a password manager. If you’re having trouble generating or storing a strong password, have a look at a password manager.
Don’t open unsolicited attachments. Especially when the sender address is suspicious or even your own.
Don’t use disposable inboxes for important accounts. The mail in that inbox might be available for anyone to find.
For peace of mind, turn your webcam off or buy a webcam cover so you can cover it when you’re not using the webcam.
Pro tip: Malwarebytes Scam Guard immediately recognized this for what it is: a sextortion scam.
What do cybercriminals know about you?
Use Malwarebytes’ free Digital Footprint scan to see whether your personal information has been exposed online.
In 2025, cybersecurity researchers discovered several open databases belonging to various AI image-generation tools. This fact alone makes you wonder just how much AI startups care about the privacy and security of their users’ data. But the nature of the content in these databases is far more alarming.
A large number of generated pictures in these databases were images of women in lingerie or fully nude. Some were clearly created from children’s photos, or intended to make adult women appear younger (and undressed). Finally, the most disturbing part: some pornographic images were generated from completely innocent photos of real people — likely taken from social media.
In this post, we’re talking about what sextortion is, and why AI tools mean anyone can become a victim. We detail the contents of these open databases, and give you advice on how to avoid becoming a victim of AI-era sextortion.
What is sextortion?
Online sexual extortion has become so common it’s earned its own global name: sextortion (a portmanteau of sex and extortion). We’ve already detailed its various types in our post, Fifty shades of sextortion. To recap, this form of blackmail involves threatening to publish intimate images or videos to coerce the victim into taking certain actions, or to extort money from them.
Previously, victims of sextortion were typically adult industry workers, or individuals who’d shared intimate content with an untrustworthy person.
However, the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, particularly text-to-image technology, has fundamentally changed the game. Now, literally anyone who’s posted their most innocent photos publicly can become a victim of sextortion. This is because generative AI makes it possible to quickly, easily, and convincingly undress people in any digital image, or add a generated nude body to someone’s head in a matter of seconds.
Of course, this kind of fakery was possible before AI, but it required long hours of meticulous Photoshop work. Now, all you need is to describe the desired result in words.
To make matters worse, many generative AI services don’t bother much with protecting the content they’ve been used to create. As mentioned earlier, last year saw researchers discover at least three publicly accessible databases belonging to these services. This means the generated nudes within them were available not just to the user who’d created them, but to anyone on the internet.
How the AI image database leak was discovered
In October 2025, cybersecurity researcher Jeremiah Fowler uncovered an open database containing over a million AI-generated images and videos. According to the researcher, the overwhelming majority of this content was pornographic in nature. The database wasn’t encrypted or password-protected — meaning any internet user could access it.
The database’s name and watermarks on some images led Fowler to believe its source was the U.S.-based company SocialBook, which offers services for influencers and digital marketing services. The company’s website also provides access to tools for generating images and content using AI.
However, further analysis revealed that SocialBook itself wasn’t directly generating this content. Links within the service’s interface led to third-party products — the AI services MagicEdit and DreamPal — which were the tools used to create the images. These tools allowed users to generate pictures from text descriptions, edit uploaded photos, and perform various visual manipulations, including creating explicit content and face-swapping.
The leak was linked to these specific tools, and the database contained the product of their work, including AI-generated and AI-edited images. A portion of the images led the researcher to suspect they’d been uploaded to the AI as references for creating provocative imagery.
Fowler states that roughly 10,000 photos were being added to the database every single day. SocialBook denies any connection to the database. After the researcher informed the company of the leak, several pages on the SocialBook website that had previously mentioned MagicEdit and DreamPal became inaccessible and began returning errors.
Which services were the source of the leak?
Both services — MagicEdit and DreamPal — were initially marketed as tools for interactive, user-driven visual experimentation with images and art characters. Unfortunately, a significant portion of these capabilities were directly linked to creating sexualized content.
For example, MagicEdit offered a tool for AI-powered virtual clothing changes, as well as a set of styles that made images of women more revealing after processing — such as replacing everyday clothes with swimwear or lingerie. Its promotional materials promised to turn an ordinary look into a sexy one in seconds.
DreamPal, for its part, was initially positioned as an AI-powered role-playing chat, and was even more explicit about its adult-oriented positioning. The site offered to create an ideal AI girlfriend, with certain pages directly referencing erotic content. The FAQ also noted that filters for explicit content in chats were disabled so as not to limit users’ most intimate fantasies.
Both services have suspended operations. At the time of writing, the DreamPal website returned an error, while MagicEdit seemed available again. Their apps were removed from both the App Store and Google Play.
Jeremiah Fowler says earlier in 2025, he discovered two more open databases containing AI-generated images. One belonged to the South Korean site GenNomis, and contained 95,000 entries — a substantial portion of which being images of “undressed” people. Among other things, the database included images with child versions of celebrities: American singers Ariana Grande and Beyoncé, and reality TV star Kim Kardashian.
How to avoid becoming a victim
In light of incidents like these, it’s clear that the risks associated with sextortion are no longer confined to private messaging or the exchange of intimate content. In the era of generative AI, even ordinary photos, when posted publicly, can be used to create compromising content.
This problem is especially relevant for women, but men shouldn’t get too comfortable either: the popular blackmail scheme of “I hacked your computer and used the webcam to make videos of you browsing adult sites” could reach a whole new level of persuasion thanks to AI tools for generating photos and videos.
Therefore, protecting your privacy on social media and controlling what data about you is publicly available become key measures for safeguarding both your reputation and peace of mind. To prevent your photos from being used to create questionable AI-generated content, we recommend making all your social media profiles as private as possible — after all, they could be the source of images for AI-generated nudes.
Additionally, we have a dedicated service, Privacy Checker — perfect for anyone who wants a quick but systematic approach to privacy settings everywhere possible. It compiles step-by-step guides for securing accounts on social media and online services across all major platforms.
And to ensure the safety and privacy of your child’s data, Kaspersky Safe Kids can help: it allows parents to monitor which social media their child spends time on. From there, you can help them adjust privacy settings on their accounts so their posted photos aren’t used to create inappropriate content. Explore our guide to children’s online safety together, and if your child dreams of becoming a popular blogger, discuss our step-by-step cybersecurity guide for wannabe bloggers with them.
“We are aware that the individuals responsible for this incident have threatened to contact impacted Pornhub Premium users directly. You may therefore receive emails claiming they have your personal information. As a reminder, we will never ask for your password or payment information by email.”
Pornhub is one of the world’s most visited adult video-sharing websites, allowing users to view content anonymously or create accounts to upload and interact with videos.
Pornhub has reported that on November 8, 2025, a security breach at third-party analytics provider Mixpanel exposed “a limited set of analytics events for certain users.” Pornhub stressed that this was not a breach of Pornhub’s own systems, and said that passwords, payment details, and financial information were not exposed.
Mixpanel confirmed it experienced a security incident on November 8, 2025, but disputes that the Pornhub data originated from that breach. The company stated there is:
“No indication that this data was stolen from Mixpanel during our November 2025 security incident or otherwise.”
Regardless of the source, cybercriminals commonly attempt to monetize stolen user data through direct extortion. At the moment, it is unclear how many users are affected, although available information suggests that only Premium members had their data exposed.
In October, we reported that one in six mobile users are targeted by sextortion scams. Sextortion is a form of online blackmail where criminals threaten to share a person’s private, nude, or sexually explicit images or videos unless the victim complies with their demands—often for more sexual content, sexual favors, or money.
Having your email address included in a dataset of known Pornhub users makes you a likely target for this type of blackmail.
How to stay safe from sextortion
Unless you used a dedicated throwaway email address to sign up for Pornhub Premium, you should be prepared to receive a sextortion-type email. If one arrives:
Any message referencing your Pornhub use, searches, or payment should be treated as an attempt to exploit breached or previously leaked data.
Never provide passwords or payment information by email. Pornhub has stated it will not ask for these.
Do not respond to blackmail emails. Ignore demands, do not pay, and do not reply—responding confirms your address is actively monitored.
Save extortion emails, including headers, content, timestamps, and attachments, but do not open links or files. This information can support reports to your email provider, local law enforcement, or cybercrime units.
Change your Pornhub password (if your account is still active) and ensure it’s unique and not reused anywhere else.
Turn on multi-factor authentication (MFA) for your primary email account and any accounts that could be used for account recovery or identity verification.
Review your bank and card statements for unfamiliar charges and report any suspicious transactions at once.
If you used a real-name email address for Pornhub, consider moving sensitive subscriptions to a separate, pseudonymous email going forward.
Use STOP, our simple scam response framework to help protect against scams.
S—Slow down: Don’t let urgency or pressure push you into action. Take a breath before responding. Legitimate businesses like your bank or credit card don’t push immediate action.
T—Test them: If you answered the phone and are feeling panicked about the situation, likely involving a family member or friend, ask a question only the real person would know—something that can’t be found online.
O—Opt out: If it feels off, hang up or end the conversation. You can always say the connection dropped.
P—Prove it: Confirm the person is who they say they are by reaching out yourself through a trusted number, website or method you have used before.
Should you have doubts about the legitimacy of any communications, submit them to Malwarebytes Scam Guard. It will help you determine whether it’s a scam and provide advice on how to act.
We don’t just report on threats—we help safeguard your entire digital identity
Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Protect your, and your family’s, personal information by using identity protection.