Blog

Inside the SOC

Successfully Containing an Admin Credential Attack

Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
17
Aug 2023
17
Aug 2023
Discover how Darktrace's anomaly-based threat detection thwarted a cyber attack on a customer's network, stopping a malicious actor in their tracks.

What is Admin Credential Abuse?

In an effort to remain undetected by increasingly vigilant security teams, malicious actors across the threat landscape often resort to techniques that allow them to remain ‘quiet’ on the network and carry out their objectives subtly. One such technique often employed by attackers is using highly privileged credentials to carry out malicious activity.

This emphasizes the need to be hyper vigilant and not assume that ‘administrative’ activity using privileged credentials is legitimate. In this way, both internal visibility and defense in-depth are needed, as well as a strong understanding of ‘normal’ administrative activity to then identify any deviations from this.  

In one recent example, Darktrace identified a threat actor attempting to use privileged administrative credentials to move laterally through a customer’s network and compromise two further critical servers. Darktrace DETECT™ identified that this activity was unusual and alerted the customer to early signs of compromise, reconnaissance and lateral movement to the other critical devices, while Darktrace RESPOND™ acted autonomously to inhibit the spread of activity and allowed the customer to quarantine the compromised devices.

Attack Overview and Darktrace Coverage

Over the course of a week in late May 2023, Darktrace observed a compromise on the network of a customer in the Netherlands. The threat actors primarily used living off the land techniques, abusing legitimate administrative credentials and executables to perform unexpected activities. This technique is intended to go under the radar of traditional security tools that are often unable to distinguish between the legitimate or malicious use of privileged credentials.

Darktrace was the only security solution in the customer’s stack that way able to detect and contain the attack, preventing it from spreading through their digital estate.

1. Device Reactivated

On May 22, 2023, Darktrace began to observe traffic originating from a File Server device which prior to this, had been been inactive on the network for some time, with no incoming or outgoing traffic recently observed for this IP. Therefore, upon initiating connections again, Darktrace’s AI tagged the device with the “Re-Activated Device” label. It also tagged the device as an “Internet Facing System”, which could represent an initial point of compromise.

Following this, the device was observed using an administrative credential that was commonly used across network, with no clear indications of brute-force activity or successive login failures preceeding this activity. The unusual use of a known credential on a network can be very difficult to detect for traditional security tools. Darktrace’s anomaly-based detection allows it to recognize subtle deviations in device behavior meaning it is uniquely placed to recognize this type of activity.

2. Reconaissance  

On the following day, the affected device began to perform SMB scans for open 445 ports, and writing files such as srvsvc and winreg, both of which are indicative of network  reconnaissance. Srvsvc is used to enumerate available SMB shares on destination devices which could be used to then write malicious files to these shares, while Winreg (Windows Registry) is used to store information that configures users, applications, and hardware devices [1]. Darktrace also observed the device carrying out DCE_RPC activity and making Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) enumeration requests to other internal devices.

3. Lateral Movement via SMB

On May 24 and May 30, Darktrace observed the same device writing files over SMB to a number of other internal devices, including an SMB server and the Domain Controller. Darktrace identified that these writers were to privileged credential paths, such as C$ and ADMIN$, and it further recognized that the device was using the compromised administrative credential.

The files included remote command executable files (.exe) and batch scripts which execute commands upon clicking in a serial order. This behavior is indicative of a threat actor performing lateral movement in an attempt to infect other devices and strengthen their foothold in the network.

Files written:

·       LogConverter.bat

·       sql.bat

·       Microsoft.NodejsTools.PressAnyKey.exe

·       PSEXESVC.exe

·       Microsoft.NodejsTools.PressAnyKey.lnk

·       CG6oDkyFHl3R.t

5. Reconnaissance Spread

Around the same time as the observed lateral movement activity, between May 24 and May 30, the initially compromised device continued SMB and DCE_RPC activity, mainly involving SMB writes of files such as srvsvc, and PSEXESVC.exe.

Then, on May 28, Darktrace identified another internal Domain Controller engaging in similar suspicious behavior to the original compromised device. This included network scanning, enumeration and service control activity, indicating a spread of further malicious reconnaissance.

Following the successful detection of this activity, Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst launched autonomous investigations which was able to correlate incidents from multiple affected devices across the network, in doing so connecting multiple incidents into one security event.

Figure 1: Cyber AI Analyst connecting multiple events into one incident
Figure 2: Cyber AI Analyst investigation process to identify suspicious activity.

6. Lateral Movement

Alongside these SMB writes, the initially compromised device was seen connecting to various internal devices over ports associated with administrative protocols such as Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). It also made a high volume of NTLM login failures for the credential ‘administrator’, suggesting that the malicious actor was attempting to brute-force an administrative credential.

7. Suspicious External Activity

Following earlier SMB writes from the initially compromised device to the Domain Controller server, the Domain Controller was seen making an unusual volume of external connections to rare endpoints which could indicate malicious command and control (C2) communication.

Alongside this activity, between May 30 and June 1, Darktrace also observed an unusually large number (over 12 million) of incoming connections from external endpoints. This activity is likely indicative of an attempted Denial of Service (DoS) attack.

Endpoints include:

·       45.15.145[.]92

·       198.2.200[.]89

·       162.211.180[.]215

Figure 3: Graphing function in the Darktrace UI showing the observed spike of inbound communication from external endpoints, indicating a potential DoS attack.

8. Reconnaissance and RDP activity

On May 31, the initially compromised device was seen creating an administrative RDP session with cookie ‘Administr’. Using the initially compromised administrative credential, further suspicious SMB activity was observed from the compromised devices on the same day including further SMB Enumeration, service control, PsExec remote command execution, and writes of another suspicious batch script file to various internal devices.

Darktrace RESPOND Coverage

Darktrace RESPOND’s autonomous response capabilities allowed it to take instantaneous preventative action against the affected devices as soon as suspicious activity was identified, consequently inhibiting the spread of this attack.

Specifically, Darktrace RESPOND was able to block suspicious connections to multiple internal devices and ports, among them port 445 which was used by threat actors to perform SMB scanning, for one hour. As a result of the autonomous actions carried out by Darktrace, the attack was stopped at the earliest possible stage.

Figure 4: Autonomous RESPOND actions taken against initially compromised devices.

In addition to these autonomous actions, the customer was able to further utilize RESPOND for containment purposes by manually actioning some of the more severe actions suggested by RESPOND, such as quarantining compromised devices from the rest of the network for a week.

Figure 5: Manually applied RESPOND actions to quarantine compromised devices for one week.

Conclusion

As attackers continue to employ harder to detect living off the land techniques to exploit administrative credentials and move laterally across networks, it is paramount for organizations to have an intelligent decision maker that can recgonize the subtle deviations in device behavior.

Thanks to its Self-Learning AI, Darktrace is uniquely placed to understand its customer’s networks, allowing it to recognize unusual or uncommon activity for individual devices or user credentials, irrespective of whether this activity is typically considered as legitimate.

In this case, Darktrace was the only solution in the customer’s security stack that successfully identified and mitigated this attack. Darktrace DETECT was able to identify the the early stages of the compromise and provide full visibility over the kill chain. Meanwhile, Darktrace RESPOND moved at machine-speed, blocking suspicious connections and preventing the compromise from spreading across the customer’s network.

Appendices

Darktrace DETECT Model Breaches

Anomalous Connection / High Volume of New or Uncommon Service Control

Anomalous Connection / New or Uncommon Service Control

Anomalous Connection / SMB Enumeration

Anomalous Connection / Unusual Admin RDP Session

Anomalous Connection / Unusual Admin SMB Session

Anomalous File / Internal / Executable Uploaded to DC

Anomalous File / Internal / Unusual SMB Script Write

Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server

Anomalous Server Activity / Possible Denial of Service Activity

Antigena / Network / Insider Threat / Antigena Network Scan Block

Antigena / Network / Insider Threat / Antigena SMB Enumeration Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Enhanced Monitoring from Server Block

Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena File then New Outbound Block

Compliance / Outgoing NTLM Request from DC

Compliance / SMB Drive Write

Device / Anomalous NTLM Brute Force

Device / ICMP Address Scan  

Device / Internet Facing Device with High Priority Alert

Device / Large Number of Model Breaches

Device / Large Number of Model Breaches from Critical Network Device

Device / Multiple Lateral Movement Model Breaches

Device / Network Scan

Device / New or Uncommon SMB Named Pipe

Device / New or Uncommon WMI Activity

Device / New or Unusual Remote Command Execution

Device / Possible SMB/NTLM Brute Force

Device / RDP Scan

Device / SMB Lateral Movement

Device / SMB Session Brute Force (Admin)

Device / Suspicious SMB Scanning Activity

Darktrace RESPOND Model Breaches

Antigena / Network / Insider Threat / Antigena Network Scan Block

Antigena / Network / Insider Threat / Antigena SMB Enumeration Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Enhanced Monitoring from Server Block

Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena File then New Outbound Block

Cyber AI Analyst Incidents

Extensive Suspicious Remote WMI Activity

Extensive Unusual Administrative Connections

Large Volume of SMB Login Failures from Multiple Devices

Port Scanning

Scanning of Multiple Devices

SMB Writes of Suspicious Files

Suspicious Chain of Administrative Connections

Suspicious DCE_RPC Activity

TCP Scanning of Multiple Devices

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

RECONNAISSANCE
T1595 Active Scanning
T1589.001 Gathering Credentials

CREDENTIAL ACCESS
T1110 Brute Force

LATERAL MOVEMENT
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services
T1021.001 Remote Desktop Protocol

COMMAND AND CONTROL
T1071 Application Layer Protocol

IMPACT
T1498.001 Direct Network Flood

References

[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-server/performance/windows-registry-advanced-users

INSIDE THE SOC
Darktrace cyber analysts are world-class experts in threat intelligence, threat hunting and incident response, and provide 24/7 SOC support to thousands of Darktrace customers around the globe. Inside the SOC is exclusively authored by these experts, providing analysis of cyber incidents and threat trends, based on real-world experience in the field.
AUTHOR
ABOUT ThE AUTHOR
Zoe Tilsiter
Cyber Analyst
Book a 1-1 meeting with one of our experts
share this article
USE CASES
No items found.
COre coverage
No items found.

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

No items found.

What you need to know about the new SEC Cybersecurity rules

Default blog imageDefault blog image
17
Jul 2024

What is new in 2023 to SEC cybersecurity rules?

Form 8-K Item 1.05: Requiring the timely disclosure of material cybersecurity incidents.

Regulation S-K item 106: requiring registrants’ annual reports on Form 10-K to address cybersecurity risk management, strategy, and governance processes.

Comparable disclosures are required for reporting foreign private issuers on Forms 6-K and 20-F respectively.

What is Form 8-K Item 1.05 SEC cybersecurity rules?

Form 8-K Item 1.05 requires the following to be reported within four business days from when an incident is determined to be “material” (1), unless extensions are granted by the SEC under certain qualifying conditions:

“If the registrant experiences a cybersecurity incident that is determined by the registrant to be material, describe the material aspects of the nature, scope, and timing of the incident, and the material impact or reasonably likely material impact on the registrant, including its financial condition and results of operations.” (2, 3)

How does the SEC define cybersecurity incident?

Cybersecurity incident defined by the SEC means an unauthorized occurrence, or a series of related unauthorized occurrences, on or conducted through a registrant’s information systems that jeopardizes the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of a registrant’s information systems or any information residing therein. (4)

How can Darktrace assist in the process of disclosing incidents to the SEC?

Accelerate reporting

Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst generates automated reports that synthesize discrete data points potentially indicative of cybersecurity threats, forming reports that provide an overview of the evolution and impact of a threat.

Thus, when a potential threat is identified by Darktrace, AI Analyst can quickly compile information that organizations might include in their disclosure of an occurrence they determined to be material, including the following: incident timelines, incident events, incident summary, related model breaches, investigation process (i.e., how Darktrace’s AI conducted the investigation), linked incident events, and incident details. The figure below illustrates how Darktrace compiles and presents incident information and insights in the UI.

Overview of information provided in an ‘AI Analyst Report’ that could be relevant to registrants reporting a material cybersecurity incident to the SEC
Figure 1: Overview of information provided in an ‘AI Analyst Report’ that could be relevant to registrants reporting a material cybersecurity incident to the SEC

It should be noted that Instruction 4 to the new Form 8-K Item 1.05 specifies the “registrant need not disclose specific or technical information about its planned response to the incident or its cybersecurity systems, related networks and devices, or potential system vulnerabilities in such detail as would impede the registrant’s response or remediation of the incident” (5).

As such, the incident report generated by Darktrace may provide more information, including technical details, than is needed for the 8-K disclosure. In general, users should take appropriate measures to ensure that the information they provide in SEC reports meets the requirements outlined by the relevant regulations. Darktrace cannot recommend that an incident should be reported, nor report an incident itself.

Determine if a cybersecurity incident is material

Item 1.05 requires registrants to determine for themselves whether cybersecurity incidents qualify as ‘material’. This involves considerations such as ‘the nature scope and timing of the incident, and the material impact or reasonably likely material impact on the registrant, including its financial condition and results of operations.’

While it is up to the registrant to determine, consistent with existing legal standards, the materiality of an incident, Darktrace’s solution can provide relevant information which might aid in this evaluation. Darktrace’s Threat Visualizer user interface provides a 3-D visualization of an organization’s digital environment, allowing users to assess the likely degree to which an attack may have spread throughout their digital environment. Darktrace Cyber AI Analyst identifies connections among discrete occurrences of threatening activity, which can help registrants quickly assess the ‘scope and timing of an incident'.

Furthermore, in order to establish materiality it would be useful to understand how an attack might extend across recipients and environments. In the image below, Darktrace/Email identifies how a user was impacted across different platforms. In this example, Darktrace/Email identified an attacker that deployed a dual channel social engineering attack via both email and a SaaS platform in an effort to acquire login credentials. In this case, the attacker useding a legitimate SharePoint link that only reveals itself to be malicious upon click. Once the attacker gained the credentials, it proceeded to change email rules to obfuscate its activity.

Darktrace/Email presents this information in one location, making such investigations easier for the end user.

Darktrace/Email indicating a threat across SaaS and email
Figure 2: Darktrace/Email indicating a threat across SaaS and email

What is regulation S-K item 106 of the SEC cybersecurity rules?

The new rules add Item 106 to Regulation S-K requiring registrants to disclose certain information regarding their risk management, strategy, and governance relating to cybersecurity in their annual reports on Form 10-K. The new rules add Item 16K to Form 20-F to require comparable disclosure by [foreign private issuers] in their annual reports on Form 20-F. (6)

SEC cybersecurity rules: Risk management

Specifically, with respect to risk management, Item 106(b) and Item 16K(b) require registrants to describe their processes, if any, for assessing, identifying, and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats, as well as whether any risks from cybersecurity threats, including as a result of any previous cybersecurity incidents, have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect them. The new rules include a non-exclusive list of disclosure items registrants should provide based on their facts and circumstances. (6)

SEC cybersecurity rules: Governance

With respect to governance, Item 106 and Item 16K require registrants to describe the board of directors’ oversight of risks from cybersecurity threats (including identifying any board committee or subcommittee responsible for such oversight) and management’s role in assessing and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats. (6)

How can Darktrace solutions aid in disclosing their risk management, strategy, and governance related to cybersecurity?

Impact scores

Darktrace End-to-End (E2E) leverages AI to understand the complex relationships across users and devices to model possible attack paths, giving security teams a contextual understanding of risk across their digital environments beyond isolated CVEs or CVSS scores. Additionally, teams can prioritize risk management actions to increase their cyber resilience through the E2E Advisory dashboard.

Attack paths consider:

  • Potential damages: Both the potential consequences if a given device was compromised and its immediate implications on other devices.
  • Exposure: Devices' level of interactivity and accessibility. For example, how many emails does a user get via mailing lists and from what kind of sources?
  • Impact: Where a user or asset sits in terms of the IT or business hierarchy and how they communicate with each other. Darktrace can simulate a range of possible outcomes for an uncertain event.
  • Weakness: A device’s patch latency and difficulty, a composite metric that looks at attacker MITRE methods and our own scores to determine how hard each stage of compromise is to achieve.

Because the SEC cybersecurity rules require “oversight of risks from cybersecurity threats” and “management’s role in assessing and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats” (6), the scores generated by Darktrace E2E can aid end-user’s ability to identify risks facing their organization and assign responsibilities to address those risks.

E2E attack paths leverage a deep understanding of a customer’ digital environment and highlight potential attack routes that an attacker could leverage to reach critical assets or entities. Difficulty scores (see Figure 5) allow security teams to measure potential damage, exposure, and impact of an attack on a specific asset or entity.

An example of an attack path in a digital environment
Figure 3: An example of an attack path in a digital environment

Automatic executive threat reports

Darktrace’s solution automatically produces Executive Threat Reports that present a simple visual overview of model breaches (i.e., indicators of unusual and threatening behaviors) and activity in the network environment. Reports can be customized to include extra details or restricted to high level information.

These reports can be generated on a weekly, quarterly, and yearly basis, and can be documented by registrants in relation to Item 106(b) to document parts of their efforts toward assessing, identifying, and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats.

Moreover, Cyber AI Analyst incident reports (described above) can be leveraged to document key details concerning significant previous incidents identified by the Darktrace solution that the registrant determined to be ‘material’.

While the disclosures required by Item 106(c) relate to the governance processes by which the board of directors, the management, and other responsible bodies within an organization oversee risks resulting from cybersecurity threats, the information provided by Darktrace’s Executive Threat Reports and Cyber AI Analyst incident reports can also help relevant stakeholders communicate more effectively regarding the threat landscape and previous incidents.

DISCLAIMER

The material above is provided for informational purposes only. This summary does not constitute legal or compliance advice, recommendations, or guidance. Darktrace encourages you to verify the contents of this summary with your own advisors.

References

  1. Note that the rule does not set forth any specific timeline between the incident and the materiality determination, but the materiality determination should be made without unreasonable delay.
  2. https://www.sec.gov/files/form8-k.pdf
  3. https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-139
  4. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-229
  5. https://www.sec.gov/files/form8-k.pdf
  6. https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/secg-cybersecurity
Continue reading
About the author
Kendra Gonzalez Duran
Director of Technology Innovation

Blog

Inside the SOC

Hashing out TA577: Darktrace’s Detection of NTLM Hash Theft

Default blog imageDefault blog image
09
Jul 2024

What is credential theft and how does it work?

What began as a method to achieve unauthorized access to an account, often driven by the curiosity of individual attackers, credentials theft become a key tactic for malicious actors and groups, as stolen login credentials can be abused to gain unauthorized access to accounts and systems. This access can be leveraged to carry out malicious activities such as data exfiltration, fraud, espionage and malware deployment.

It is therefore no surprise that the number of dark web marketplaces selling privileged credentials has increased in recent years, making it easier for malicious actors to monetize stolen credentials [1]. This, in turn, has created new opportunities for threat actors to use increasingly sophisticated tactics such as phishing, social engineering and credential stuffing in their attacks, targeting individuals, organizations and government entities alike [1].

Credential theft example

TA577 Threat Actor

TA577 is a threat actor known to leverage stolen credentials, also known as Hive0118 [2], an initial access broker (IAB) group that was previously known for delivering malicious payloads [2]. On March 4, 2024, Proofpoint reported evidence of TA577 using a new attack chain with a different aim in mind: stealing NT LAN Manager (NTLM) hashes that can be used to authenticate to systems without needing to know plaintext passwords [3].

How does TA577 steal credentials?

Proofpoint reported that this new attack chain, which was first observed on February 26 and 27, was made up of two distinct campaigns. The first campaign consisted of a phishing attack featuring tens of thousands of emails targeting hundreds of organizations globally [3]. These phishing emails often appeared as replies to previous messages (thread hijacking) and contained zipped HTML attachments that each contained a unique file hash, customized for each recipient [3]. These attached files also contained a HTTP Meta refresh function, which triggered an automatic connection to a text file hosted on external IP addresses running as SMB servers [3].

When attempting to access the text file, the server requires an SMB session authentication via NTLM. This session is initiated when a client sends an ‘SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE’ request to the server, which answers with a ‘SMB_COM_NEGOTIATE’ response.

The client then proceeds to send a ‘SMB_COM_SESSION_SETUP_ANDX’ request to start the SMB session setup process, which includes initiating the NTLM authentication process. The server responds with an ‘SMB_COM_SESSION_SETUP_ANDX’ response, which includes an NTLM challenge message [6].

The client can then use the challenge message and its own credentials to generate a response by hashing its password using an NTLM hash algorithm. The response is sent to the server in an ‘SMB_COM_SESSION_SETUP_ANDX’ request. The server validates the response and, if the authentication is successful, the server answers with a final ‘SMB_COM_SESSION_SETUP_ANDX’ response, which completes the session setup process and allows the client to access the file listed on the server [6].

What is the goal of threat actor TA577?

As no malware delivery was detected during these sessions, researchers have suggested that the aim of TA577 was not to deliver malware, but rather to take advantage of the NTLMV2 challenge/response to steal NTLM authentication hashes [3] [4]. Hashes stolen by attackers can be exploited in pass-the-hash attacks to authenticate to a remote server or service [4]. They can also be used for offline password cracking which, if successful, could be utilized to escalate privileges or perform lateral movement through a target network [4]. Under certain circumstances, these hashes could also permit malicious actors to hijack accounts, access sensitive information and evade security products [4].

The open-source toolkit Impacket, which includes modules for password cracking [5] and which can be identified by the default NTLM server challenge “aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa”[3], was observed during the SMB sessions. This indicates that TA577 actor aim to use stolen credentials for password cracking and pass-the-hash attacks.

TA577 has previously been associated with Black Basta ransomware infections and Qbot, and has been observed delivering various payloads including IcedID, SystemBC, SmokeLoader, Ursnif, and Cobalt Strike [2].This change in tactic to follow the current trend of credential theft may indicate that not only are TA577 actors aware of which methods are most effective in the current threat landscape, but they also have monetary and time resources needed to create new methods to bypass existing detection tools [3].  

Darktrace’s Coverage of TA577 Activity

On February 26 and 26, coinciding with the campaign activity reported by Proofpoint, Darktrace/Email™ observed a surge of inbound emails from numerous suspicious domains targeting multiple customer environments. These emails consistently included zip files with seemingly randomly generated names, containing HTLM content and links to an unusual external IP address [3].

A summary of anomaly indicators seen for a campaign email sent by TA577, as detected by Darktrace/Email.
Figure 1: A summary of anomaly indicators seen for a campaign email sent by TA577, as detected by Darktrace/Email.
Details of the name and size of the .zip file attached to a campaign email, along with the Darktrace/Email model alerts triggered by the email.
Figure 2: Details of the name and size of the .zip file attached to a campaign email, along with the Darktrace/Email model alerts triggered by the email.

The URL of these links contained an unusually named .txt file, which corresponds with Proofpoint reports of the automatic connection to a text file hosted on an external SMB server made when the attachment is opened [3].

A link to a rare external IP address seen within a campaign email, containing an unusually named .txt file.
Figure 3: A link to a rare external IP address seen within a campaign email, containing an unusually named .txt file.

Darktrace identified devices on multiple customer networks connecting to external SMB servers via the SMB protocol. It understood this activity was suspicious as the SMB protocol is typically reserved for internal connections and the endpoint in question had never previously been observed on the network.

The Event Log of a ‘Compliance / External Windows Communication’ model alert showing a connection to an external SMB server on destination port 445.
Figure 4: The Event Log of a ‘Compliance / External Windows Communication’ model alert showing a connection to an external SMB server on destination port 445.
External Sites Summary highlighting the rarity of the external SMB server.
Figure 5: External Sites Summary highlighting the rarity of the external SMB server.
External Sites Summary highlightin that the SMB server is geolocated in Moldova.
Figure 6: External Sites Summary highlightin that the SMB server is geolocated in Moldova.

During these connections, Darktrace observed multiple devices establishing an SMB session to this server via a NTLM challenge/response, representing the potential theft of the credentials used in this session. During this session, some devices also attempted to access an unusually named .txt file, further indicating that the affected devices were trying to access the .txt file hosted on external SMB servers [3].

Packet captures (PCAPs) of these sessions show the default NTLM server challenge, indicating the use of Impacket, suggesting that the captured NTLM hashes were to be used for password cracking or pass-the-hash-attacks [3]

PCAP analysis showing usage of the default NTLM server challenge associated with Impacket.
Figure 7: PCAP analysis showing usage of the default NTLM server challenge associated with Impacket.

Conclusions

Ultimately, Darktrace’s suite of products effectively detected and alerted for multiple aspects of the TA577 attack chain and NTLM hash data theft activity across its customer base. Darktrace/Email was able to uncover the inbound phishing emails that served as the initial access vector for TA577 actors, while Darktrace DETECT identified the subsequent external connections to unusual external locations and suspicious SMB sessions.

Furthermore, Darktrace’s anomaly-based approach enabled it to detect suspicious TA577 activity across the customer base on February 26 and 27, prior to Proofpoint’s report on their new attack chain. This showcases Darktrace’s ability to identify emerging threats based on the subtle deviations in a compromised device’s behavior, rather than relying on a static list of indicators of compromise (IoCs) or ‘known bads’.

This approach allows Darktrace to remain one step ahead of increasingly adaptive threat actors, providing organizations and their security teams with a robust AI-driven solution able to safeguard their networks in an ever-evolving threat landscape.

Credit to Charlotte Thompson, Cyber Analyst, Anna Gilbertson, Cyber Analyst.

References

1)    https://www.sentinelone.com/cybersecurity-101/what-is-credential-theft/

2)    https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/actor/ta577

3)    https://www.proofpoint.com/us/blog/threat-insight/ta577s-unusual-attack-chain-leads-ntlm-data-theft

4)    https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-steal-windows-ntlm-authentication-hashes-in-phishing-attacks/

5)    https://pawanjswal.medium.com/the-power-of-impacket-a-comprehensive-guide-with-examples-1288f3a4c674

6)    https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/windows_protocols/ms-nlmp/c083583f-1a8f-4afe-a742-6ee08ffeb8cf

7)    https://www.hivepro.com/threat-advisory/ta577-targeting-windows-ntlm-hashes-in-global-campaigns/

Darktrace Model Detections

Darktrace/Email

·       Attachment / Unsolicited Archive File

·       Attachment / Unsolicited Attachment

·       Link / New Correspondent Classified Link

·       Link / New Correspondent Rare Link

·       Spoof / Internal User Similarities

Darktrace DETECT

·       Compliance / External Windows Communications

Darktrace RESPOND

·       Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Breaches Over Time Block

IoCs

IoC - Type - Description

176.123.2[.]146 - IP address -Likely malicious SMB Server

89.117.2[.]33 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

89.117.1[.]161 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

104.129.20[.]167 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

89.117.1[.]160 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

85.239.33[.]149 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

89.117.2[.]34 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

146.19.213[.]36 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

66.63.188[.]19 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

103.124.104[.]76 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

103.124.106[.]224 - IP address - Likely malicious SMB Server

\5aohv\9mn.txt - SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

\hvwsuw\udrh.txt - SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

\zkf2rj4\VmD.txt = SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

\naams\p3aV.txt - SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

\epxq\A.txt - SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

\dbna\H.txt - SMB Path and File - SMB Path and File

MAGNAMSB.zip – Filename - Phishing Attachment

e751f9dddd24f7656459e1e3a13307bd03ae4e67 - SHA1 Hash - Phishing Attachment

OMNIS2C.zip  - Filename - Phishing Attachment

db982783b97555232e28d5a333525118f10942e1 - SHA1 Hash - Phishing Attachment

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa - NTLM Server Challenge -Impacket Default NTLM Challenge

MITRE ATT&CK Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs)

Tactic - Technique

TA0001            Initial Access

TA0002            Execution

TA0008            Lateral Movement

TA0003            Persistence

TA0005            Defense Evasion

TA0006            Credential Access

T1021.002       SMB/Windows Admin Shares

T1021  Remote Services

T1566.001       Spearfishing Attachment

T1566  Phishing

T1204.002       Malicious File

T1204  User Execution

T1021.002       SMB/Windows Admin Shares

T1574  Hijack Execution Flow

T1021  Remote Services

T1555.004       Windows Credential Manager

T1555  Credentials from Password Stores

Continue reading
About the author
Charlotte Thompson
Cyber Analyst
Our ai. Your data.

Elevate your cyber defenses with Darktrace AI

Start your free trial
Darktrace AI protecting a business from cyber threats.