Blog
/
Network
/
November 7, 2022

[Part 1] Analysis of a Raccoon Stealer v1 Infection

Darktrace’s SOC team observed a fast-paced compromise involving Raccoon Stealer v1. See which steps the Raccoon Stealer v1 took to extract company data!
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.
Written by
Mark Turner
SOC Shift Supervisor
Written by
Sam Lister
Specialist Security Researcher
Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
07
Nov 2022

Introduction

Towards the end of March 2022, the operators of Raccoon Stealer announced the closure of the Raccoon Stealer project [1]. In May 2022, Raccoon Stealer v2 was unleashed onto the world, with huge numbers of cases being detected across Darktrace’s client base. In this series of blog posts, we will follow the development of Raccoon Stealer between March and September 2022. We will first shed light on how Raccoon Stealer functioned before its demise, by providing details of a Raccoon Stealer v1 infection which Darktrace’s SOC saw within a client network on the 18th March 2022. In the follow-up post, we will provide details about the surge in Raccoon Stealer v2 cases that Darktrace’s SOC has observed since May 2022.  

What is Raccoon Stealer?

The misuse of stolen account credentials is a primary method used by threat actors to gain initial access to target environments [2]. Threat actors have several means available to them for obtaining account credentials. They may, for example, distribute phishing emails which trick their recipients into divulging account credentials. Alternatively, however, they may install information-stealing malware (i.e, info-stealers) onto users’ devices. The results of credential theft can be devastating. Threat actors may use the credentials to gain access to an organization’s SaaS environment, or they may use them to drain users’ online bank accounts or cryptocurrency wallets. 

Raccoon Stealer is a Malware-as-a-Service (MaaS) info-stealer first publicized in April 2019 on Russian-speaking hacking forums. 

Figure 1: One of the first known mentions of Raccoon Stealer on a Russian-speaking hacking forum named ‘Hack Forums’ on the 13th April 2019

The team of individuals behind Raccoon Stealer provide a variety of services to their customers (known as ‘affiliates’), including access to the info-stealer, an easy-to-use automated backend panel, hosting infrastructure, and 24/7 customer support [3]. 

Once Raccoon Stealer affiliates gain access to the info-stealer, it is up to them to decide how to distribute it. Since 2019, affiliates have been observed distributing the info-stealer via a variety of methods, such as exploit kits, phishing emails, and fake cracked software websites [3]/[4]. Once affiliates succeed in installing Raccoon Stealer onto target systems, the info-stealer will typically seek to obtain sensitive information saved in browsers and cryptocurrency wallets. The info-stealer will then exfiltrate the stolen data to a Command and Control (C2) server. The affiliate can then use the stolen data to conduct harmful follow-up activities. 

Towards the end of March 2022, the team behind Raccoon Stealer publicly announced that they would be suspending their operations after one of their core developers was killed during the Russia-Ukraine conflict [5]. 

Figure 2: Raccoon Stealer resignation post on March 25th 2022

Recent details shared by the US Department of Justice [6]/[7] indicate that it was in fact the arrest, rather than the death, of a key Raccoon Stealer operator which led the Raccoon Stealer team to suspend their operations [8].  

The closure of the Raccoon Stealer project, which ultimately resulted from the FBI-backed dismantling of Raccoon Stealer’s infrastructure in March 2022, did not last long, with the completion of Raccoon Stealer v2 being announced on the Raccoon Stealer Telegram channel on the 17th May 2022 [9]. 

 

Figure 3: Telegram post about new version of Raccoon Stealer

In the second part of this blog series, we will provide details of the recent surge in Raccoon Stealer v2 activity. In this post, however, we will provide insight into how the old version of Raccoon Stealer functioned just before its demise, by providing details of a Raccoon Stealer v1 infection which occurred on the 18th March 2022. 

Attack Details

On the 18th March, at around 13:00 (UTC), a user’s device within a customer’s network was seen contacting several websites providing fake cracked software. 

Figure 4: The above figure — obtained from the Darktrace Event Log for the infected device — highlights its connections to cracked software websites such as ‘licensekeysfree[.]com’ and ‘hdlicense[.]com’ before contacting ‘lion-files[.]xyz’ and ‘www.mediafire[.]com’

The user’s attempt to download cracked software from one of these websites resulted in their device making an HTTP GET request with a URI string containing ‘autodesk-revit-crack-v2022-serial-number-2022’ to an external host named ‘lion-filez[.]xyz’

Figure 5: Screenshot from hdlicense[.]com around the time of the infection shows a “Download” button linking to the ‘lion-filez[.]xyz’ endpoint

The device’s HTTP GET request to lion-filez[.]xyz was immediately followed by an HTTPS connection to the file hosting service, www.mediafire[.]com. Given that threat actors are known to abuse platforms such as MediaFire and Discord CDN to host their malicious payloads, it is likely that the user’s device downloaded the Raccoon Stealer v1 sample over its HTTPS connection to www.mediafire[.]com.  

After installing the info-stealer sample, the user’s device was seen making an HTTP GET request with the URI string ‘/g_shock_casio_easy’ to 194.180.191[.]185. The endpoint responded to the request with data related to a Telegram channel named ‘G-Shock’.

Figure 6: Telegram channel ‘@g_shock_casio_easy’

The returned data included the Telegram channel’s description, which in this case, was a base64 encoded and RC4 encrypted string of characters [10]/[11]. The Raccoon Stealer sample decoded and decrypted this string of characters to obtain its C2 IP address, 188.166.49[.]196. This technique used by Raccoon Stealer v1 closely mirrors the espionage method known as ‘dead drop’ — a method in which an individual leaves a physical object such as papers, cash, or weapons in an agreed hiding spot so that the intended recipient can retrieve the object later on without having to come in to contact with the source. In this case, the operators of Raccoon Stealer ‘left’ the malware’s C2 IP address within the description of a Telegram channel. Usage of this method allowed the operators of Raccoon Stealer to easily change the malware’s C2 infrastructure.  

After obtaining the C2 IP address from the ‘G-Shock’ Telegram channel, the Raccoon Stealer sample made an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 IP address, 188.166.49[.]196. This POST request contained a Windows GUID,  a username, and a configuration ID. These details were RC4 encrypted and base64 encoded [12]. The C2 server responded to this HTTP POST request with JSON-formatted configuration information [13], including an identifier string, URL paths for additional files, along with several other fields. This configuration information was also concealed using RC4 encryption and base64 encoding.  

Figure 7- Fields within the JSON-formatted configuration data [13]

In this case, the server’s response included the identifier string ‘hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x’, along with the following URL paths:

  • /l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/77d765d8831b4a7d8b5e56950ceb96b7c7b0ed70
  • /l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/0cb4ab70083cf5985b2bac837ca4eacb22e9b711
  • /l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/5e2a950c07979c670b1553b59b3a25c9c2bb899b
  • /l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/2524214eeea6452eaad6ea1135ed69e98bf72979

After retrieving configuration data, the user’s device was seen making HTTP GET requests with the above URI strings to the C2 server. The C2 server responded to these requests with legitimate library files such as sqlite3.dll. Raccoon Stealer uses these libraries to extract data from targeted applications. 

Once the Raccoon Stealer sample had collected relevant data, it made an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. This posted data likely included a ZIP file (named with the identifier string) containing stolen credentials [13]. 

The observed infection chain, which lasted around 20 minutes, consisted of the following steps:

1. User’s device installs Raccoon Stealer v1 samples from the user attempting to download cracked software

2. User’s device obtains the info-stealer’s C2 IP address from the description text of a Telegram channel

3. User’s device makes an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. The request contains a Windows GUID,  a username, and a configuration ID. The response to the request contains configuration details, including an identifier string and URL paths for additional files

4. User’s device downloads library files from the C2 server

5. User’s device makes an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. The request contains stolen data

Darktrace Coverage 

Although RESPOND/Network was not enabled on the customer’s deployment, DETECT picked up on several of the info-stealer’s activities. In particular, the device’s downloads of library files from the C2 server caused the following DETECT/Network models to breach:

  • Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer
  • Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / Zip or Gzip from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations
Figure 8: Event Log for the infected device shows 'Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer' model breach after the device's download of a library file from the C2 server

Since the customer was subscribed to the Darktrace Proactive Threat Notification (PTN) service, they were proactively notified of the info-stealer’s activities. The quick response by Darktrace’s 24/7 SOC team helped the customer to contain the infection and to prevent further damage from being caused. Having been alerted to the info-stealer activity by the SOC team, the customer would also have been able to change the passwords for the accounts whose credentials were exfiltrated.

If RESPOND/Network had been enabled on the customer’s deployment, then it would have blocked the device’s connections to the C2 server, which would have likely prevented any stolen data from being exfiltrated.

Conclusion

Towards the end of March 2022, the team behind Raccoon Stealer announced that they would be suspending their operations. Recent developments suggest that the arrest of a core Raccoon Stealer developer was responsible for this suspension. Just before the Raccoon Stealer team were forced to shut down, Darktrace’s SOC team observed a Raccoon Stealer infection within a client’s network. In this post, we have provided details of the network-based behaviors displayed by the observed Raccoon Stealer sample. Since these v1 samples are no longer active, the details provided here are only intended to provide historical insight into the development of Raccoon Stealer’s operations and the activities carried out by Raccoon Stealer v1 just before its demise. In the next post of this series, we will discuss and provide details of Raccoon Stealer v2 — the new and highly prolific version of Raccoon Stealer. 

Thanks to Stefan Rowe and the Threat Research Team for their contributions to this blog.

References

[1] https://twitter.com/3xp0rtblog/status/1507312171914461188

[2] https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-29OTFFPI&ct=220411&st=sb

[3] https://www.cybereason.com/blog/research/hunting-raccoon-stealer-the-new-masked-bandit-on-the-block

[4] https://www.cyberark.com/resources/threat-research-blog/raccoon-the-story-of-a-typical-infostealer

[5] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/raccoon-stealer-malware-suspends-operations-due-to-war-in-ukraine/

[6] https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdtx/pr/newly-unsealed-indictment-charges-ukrainian-national-international-cybercrime-operation

[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fsz6acw-ZJY

[8] https://riskybiznews.substack.com/p/raccoon-stealer-dev-didnt-die-in

[9] https://medium.com/s2wblog/raccoon-stealer-is-back-with-a-new-version-5f436e04b20d

[10] https://blog.cyble.com/2021/10/21/raccoon-stealer-under-the-lens-a-deep-dive-analysis/

[11] https://decoded.avast.io/vladimirmartyanov/raccoon-stealer-trash-panda-abuses-telegram/

[12] https://blogs.blackberry.com/en/2021/09/threat-thursday-raccoon-infostealer

[13] https://cyberint.com/blog/research/raccoon-stealer/

Appendices

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.
Written by
Mark Turner
SOC Shift Supervisor
Written by
Sam Lister
Specialist Security Researcher

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

Email

/

December 4, 2025

How Darktrace is ending email security silos with new capabilities in cross-domain detection, DLP, and native Microsoft integrations

Default blog imageDefault blog image

A new era of reputation-aware, unified email security

Darktrace / EMAIL is redefining email defense with new innovations that close email security silos and empower SOC teams to stop multi-stage attacks – without disrupting business operations.  

By extending visibility across interconnected domains, Darktrace catches the 17% of threats that leading SEGs miss, including multi-stage attacks like email bombing and cloud platform abuse. Its label-free behavioral DLP protects sensitive data without reliance on manual rules or classification, while DMARC strengthens brand trust and authenticity. With native integrations for Microsoft Defender and Security Copilot, SOC teams can now investigate and respond faster, reducing risk and maintaining operational continuity across the enterprise.

Summary of what’s new:

  • Cross-domain AI-native detection unifying email, identity, and SaaS
  • Label-free behavioral DLP for effortless data protection
  • Microsoft Defender and Security Copilot integrations for streamlined investigation and response

Why email security must evolve

Today’s attacks don’t stop at the inbox. They move across domains – email to identity, SaaS, and network – exploiting the blind spots between disconnected tools. Yet most email security solutions still operate in isolation, unable to see or respond beyond the message itself.

In 2024, Darktrace detected over 30 million phishing attempts: 38% targeting high-value individuals and almost a third using novel social engineering, including AI-generated text. Generative AI is amplifying the realism and scale of social engineering, while customers face a wave of new techniques like email bombing, where attackers flood inboxes to distract or manipulate users, and polymorphic malware, which continuously evolves to evade static defenses.

Meanwhile, defenders are exposed to traditional DLP tools that create operational drag with high false positives and rigid policies. Accidental insider breachers remain a major risk to organizations: 6% of all data breaches are caused by misdelivery, and 95% of those incidents involve personal data.

Tool sprawl compounds the issue. The average enterprise manages around 75 security products, and 69% report operational strain as a result. This complexity is counterproductive – and with legacy SEGs failing to adapt to detect threats that exploit human behavior, analysts are left juggling an unwieldy patchwork of fragmented defenses.

The bottom line? Siloed email defenses can’t keep pace with today’s AI-driven, cross domain attacks.

Beyond detection: AI built for modern threats

Darktrace / EMAIL is uniquely designed to catch the threats SEGs miss, powered by Self-Learning AI. It learns the communication patterns of every user – correlating behavioral signals from email, identity, and SaaS – to identify the subtle, context-driven deviations that define advanced social engineering and supply chain attacks.

Unlike tools that rely on static rules or historical attack data, Darktrace’s AI assumes a zero trust posture, treating every interaction as a potential risk. It detects novel threats in real time, including those that exploit trusted relationships or mimic legitimate business processes. And because Darktrace’s technology is natively unified, it delivers precise, coordinated responses that neutralize threats in real time.

Powerful innovations to Darktrace / EMAIL

Improved, multi-domain threat detection and response

With this update, Darktrace reveals multi-domain detection linking behavioral signals across email, identity, and SaaS to uncover advanced attacks. Darktrace leverages its existing agentic platform to understand behavioral deviations in any communication channel and take precise actions regardless of the domain.  

This innovation enables customers to:

  • Correlate behavioral signals across domains to expose cross-channel threats and enable coordinated response
  • Link email and identity intelligence to neutralize multi-stage attacks, including advanced email bombing campaigns

Detection accuracy is further strengthened through layering with traditional threat intelligence:

  • Integrated antivirus verdicts improve detection efficacy by adding traditional file scanning
  • Structured threat intelligence (STIX/TAXII) enriches alerts with global context for faster triage and prioritization

Expanded ecosystem visibility also includes:

  • Salesforce integration, enabling automatic action on potentially malicious tickets auto-created from emails – accelerating threat response and reducing manual burden

Advancements in label-free DLP

Darktrace is delivering the industry’s first label-free data loss prevention (DLP) solution powered by a proprietary domain specific language model (DSLM).  

This update expands DLP to protect against both secrets and personally identifiable information (PII), safeguarding sensitive data without relying on status rules or manual classification. The DSLM is tuned for email/DLP semantics so it understands entities, PII patterns, and message context quickly enough to enforce at send time.

Key enhancements include:

  • Behaviorally enhanced PII detection that automatically defines over 35+ new categories, including personal, financial, and health data  
  • Added detail to DLP alerts in the UI, showing exactly how and when DLP policies were applied
  • Enhanced Cyber AI Analyst narratives to explain detection logic, making it easier to investigate and escalate incidents

And for further confidence in outbound mail, discover new updates to DMARC, with support for BIMI logo verification, automatic detection of both MTA-STS and TLS records, and data exports for deeper analysis and reporting. Accessible for all organizations, available now on the Azure marketplace.

Streamlined SOC workflows, with Microsoft-native integrations

This update introduces new integrations that simplify SOC operations, unify visibility, and accelerate response. By embedding directly into the Microsoft ecosystem – with Defender and Security Copilot – analysts gain instant access to correlated insights without switching consoles.

New innovations include:

  • Unified quarantine management with Microsoft Defender, centralizing containment within the native Microsoft interface and eliminating console hopping
  • Ability to surface threat insights directly in Copilot via the Darktrace Email Analysis Agent, eliminating data hunting and simplifying investigations
  • Automatic ticket creation in JIRA when users report suspicious messages
  • Sandbox analysis integration, enabling payload inspection in isolated environments directly from the Darktrace UI

Committed to innovation

These updates are part of the broader Darktrace release, which also included:

  1. Major innovations in cloud security with the launch of the industry’s first fully automated cloud forensics solution, reinforcing Darktrace’s leadership in AI-native security.
  2. Redefining NDR with industry-first autonomous threat investigation from network to endpoint  
  3. Innovations to our suite of Exposure Management & Attack Surface Management tools

As attackers exploit gaps between tools, the Darktrace ActiveAI Security Platform delivers unified detection, automated investigation, and autonomous response across cloud, endpoint, email, network, and OT. With full-stack visibility and AI-native workflows, Darktrace empowers security teams to detect, understand, and stop novel threats before they escalate.

Join our Live Launch Event

When? December 9, 2025

What will be covered? Join our live broadcast to experience how Darktrace is eliminating blind spots for detection and response across your complete enterprise with new innovations in Agentic AI across our ActiveAI Security platform. Industry leaders from IDC will join Darktrace customers to discuss challenges in cross-domain security, with a live walkthrough reshaping the future of Network Detection & Response, Endpoint Detection & Response, Email Security, and SecOps in novel threat detection and autonomous investigations.

Continue reading
About the author
Carlos Gray
Senior Product Marketing Manager, Email

Blog

/

Email

/

December 4, 2025

The 17% of email threats SEGs miss – and how Darktrace catches them

Photo of analysts at a computerDefault blog imageDefault blog image

17%: The figure that changes your risk math

Most organizations deploy a Secure Email Gateway (SEG) assuming it will catch whatever their native email security provider would not be able to. But the data tells a different story. Nearly one in six of the riskiest inbound emails still evade the native + SEG layers on the first pass – 17% is the average SEG miss rate after Microsoft filtering.  

How did we calculate the miss rate? The figure comes from a volume-weighted analysis of real-world enterprise deployments where Darktrace operated alongside a SEG, compared to deployments without a SEG. It’s based on how each security layer treated malicious emails on the first instance – if the SEG missed the email at the initial filtering but caught it minutes or hours later we considered it a miss, because the threat had already been exposed to the user. We computed the mean per category miss count across the top three widely deployed SEGs and divided that by the total number of threats that had already bypassed native filters. The resulting rate is 17.8%, conservatively communicated as “about 17%.”

This result is a powerful directional signal – not a guarantee for every environment – but significant enough to merit a closer look.

What SEGs miss most (and why it matters)

Our analysis shows that SEGs most frequently miss context-driven, low-signal attacks.

Darktrace catches more threats than SEGs across a range of attack vectors

These are the kinds of emails that look convincing to recipients and rely on business context, without overtly malicious indicators, including:

Solicitation and fraudulent requests (~21% miss rate)

Deceptive invoices, vendor “updates,” payment term changes, or urgent favors. These messages often lack obvious payloads and exploit business process mimicry, making them nearly indistinguishable from genuine correspondence in the eyes of static, rule-based filters dependent on payload analysis. 22% of breaches stemming from external actors were a result of social engineering in 2025 (Verizon 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report).

Phishing links (~20% miss rate)

Links to credential harvesters or later-weaponized sites using new or compromised domains, redirects, or shorteners. URL rotation and staging evade list-based controls; the linguistic and workflow context looks routine. This also includes threats that leverage legitimate cloud platforms to disguise their intent and avoid reputation analysis.  Phishing remains one of the most expensive cause of breaches, an average cost of $4.8 million (IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025).

User impersonation (~19% miss rate)

Convincing messages that mimic executives, colleagues, or partners, often with subtle display-name or address manipulation. These attacks rely on social engineering and context, bypassing static detection and reputation checks.

Other notable misses: Credential harvesting lures and forged/abused sender addresses, both typically light on static indicators but heavy on contextual clues. 

Why SEGs miss these emails

Let’s look at some of the reasons SEGs fail to catch more advanced, context-driven attacks.

  1. Attack-centric bias. SEGs excel at recognizing known-bad indicators (spam, commodity malware). But today’s high-impact threats are supercharged by AI and can be hyper-customized with polymorphic malware or personalized social engineering. They mirror normal business communications and weaponize trust, not binary patterns.  
  2. Limited behavioral understanding. Without modeling each user’s “normal” pattern of life, subtle anomalies (timing, tone, counterpart, transaction patterns) can look benign, even if they should be flagged. Some modern solutions have begun to incorporate behavioral analysis into their products, but these are still supplements for additional information rather than integrated into the core threat detection engine.
  3. Assumed trust. Account compromise and attacks that abuse legitimate services exploit trust. SEGs weren’t designed to handle these kinds of threats, in fact, they assume trust in order to minimize false positives, leaving them wide open to attackers.  
  4. Siloed detection. Email rarely tells the whole story. Attacks pivot across email, identity, and SaaS; single-channel tools can’t connect those dots in real time. This issue is exacerbated when email security vendors are only focused on email activity, ignoring activity beyond the inbox like network or cloud account activity.
  5. Adaptive evasion. Fast domain churn, benign-looking links, and clean hosting on trusted platforms routinely outpace static rules and blocklists. No matter how great your threat intelligence or threat research teams may be, there is a reliance on a first victim – which leads to defenders remaining one step behind attackers. 

How Darktrace / EMAIL catches the threats SEGs miss

Everywhere a SEG falters, Darktrace excels. Let’s take a look why.

  • Self-Learning AI: Darktrace learns the unique communication patterns of every user, department, and supplier, flagging the subtle deviations that typify social engineering and impersonation. 
  • A zero trust approach: According to Gartner, many organizations fail to extend their zero-trust strategy to email, leaving a critical gap. Darktrace assumes no trust, applying the zero trust principle across all aspects of email communication.
  • Cross-domain context: Correlates behavior across email, identity, and SaaS, exposing multi-stage campaigns that a siloed SEG can’t piece together. 
  • Better together with native providers: Operates alongside your native email security – not against it – so protection is additive. Darktrace ingests native signals and orchestrate unified quarantine without duplicating policy stacks or forcing you to disable built-in protections. 

For example: one of our customers, a global enterprise saw a surge of “document-share” notifications from a trusted collaboration platform. The domain and authentication looked fine; their SEG allowed it. Darktrace / EMAIL flagged it because the supplier’s sharing behavior and permission scope deviated from normal (volume, recipients, and access level). Follow-up confirmed the supplier account was compromised. Behavioral context – not rules or signatures – made the difference. 

Three steps to building a modern email security stack

Let’s end with three strategic takeaways for ensuring your email security is fit-for-purpose.

  1. Defense-in-depth = diversity, not duplication

Why it matters: Two security layers with the same detection philosophy (e.g. SEG + native email security) create overlapping blind spots. Both native email security providers and SEGs are attack-centric solutions that rely on past threats and threat intelligence. True defense-in-depth ensures you are asking different questions of every email that comes through.

How to apply: Pair your native email security with behavioral AI that learns how your business communicates. Eliminate redundant layers that only add cost and latency. 

  1. Coordinate the layers you keep

Why it matters:  Layers that don’t talk create delays and hand-offs; SEGs often become sole decision-makers by forcing native protections off. 

How to apply:  Favor an ICES approach that ingests native signals and can orchestrate unified quarantine, so detections become actions in one motion. 

  1. Quantify your security gap with a POV

Why it matters:  Every environment is different. You need evidence before making changes to your stack.

How to apply:  Run Darktrace / EMAIL in observe mode next to your current stack to surface exactly what’s still getting through. Use those results to plan your transition and measure improvement. 

Ready to claim 17% more protection? Request a demo with Darktrace / EMAIL to quantify what your SEG is missing, then decide how much of that residual risk you’re willing to accept. We’ll help you plan a clean, staged transition that preserves native protections and streamlines operations.  In the meantime, calculate your potential ROI using Darktrace / EMAIL with our handy calculator.

[related-resource]

Continue reading
About the author
Carlos Gray
Senior Product Marketing Manager, Email
Your data. Our AI.
Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI