August 22, 2023

Darktrace’s Detection of Unattributed Ransomware

Leveraging anomaly-based detection, we successfully identified an ongoing ransomware attack on the network of a customer and the activity that preceded it.

Written by

Natalia Sánchez Rocafort

Cyber Security Analyst

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

Natalia Sánchez Rocafort

Cyber Security Analyst

Aug 2023

In the current threat landscape, much of the conversation around ransomware focusses on high-profile strains and notorious threat groups. While organizations and their security teams are justified in these concerns, it is important not to underestimate the danger posed by smaller scale, unattributed ransomware attacks.

Unlike attributed ransomware strains, there are often no playbooks or lists of previously observed indicators of compromise (IoCs) that security teams can consult to help them shore up their cyber defenses. As such, anomaly detection is critical to ensure that emerging threats can be detected based on their abnormality on the network, rather than relying heavily on threat intelligence.

In mid-March 2023, a Darktrace customer requested analytical support from the Darktrace Security Operations Center (SOC) after they had been hit by a ransomware attack a few hours earlier. Darktrace was able to uncover a myriad of malicious activity that preceded the eventual ransomware deployment, ultimately assisting the customer to identify compromised devices and contain the ransomware attack.

Attack Overview

While there were a small number of endpoints that had been flagged as malicious by open-source intelligence (OSINT), Darktrace DETECT™ focused on the unusualness of the activity surrounding this emerging ransomware attack. This provided unparalleled visibility over this ransomware attack at every stage of the cyber kill chain, whilst also revealing the potential origins of the compromise which came months area.

‍

Initial Compromise

Initial investigation revealed that several devices that Darktrace were observed performing suspicious activity had previously engaged in anomalous behavior several months before the ransomware event, indicating this could be a part of a repeated compromise or the result of initial access brokers.

Most notably, in late January 2023 there was a spike in unusual activity when some of the affected devices were observed performing activity indicative of network and device scanning.

Darktrace DETECT identified some of the devices establishing unusually high volumes of internal failed connections via TCP and UDP, and the SMB protocol. Various key ports, such as 135, 139, and 445, were also scanned.

Due to the number of affected devices, the exact initial attack vector is unclear; however, one likely scenario is associated with an internet-facing DNS server. Towards the end of January 2023, the server began to receive unusual TCP DNS requests from the rare external endpoint, 103.203.59[.]3, which had been flagged as potentially malicious by OSINT [4]. Based on a portion of the hostname of the device, dc01, we can assume that this server served as a gateway to the domain controller. If a domain controller is compromised, a malicious actor would gain access to usernames and passwords within a network allowing attackers to obtain administrative-level access to an organization’s digital estate.

Around the same time as the unusual TCP DNS requests, Darktrace DETECT observed the domain controller engaging in further suspicious activity. As demonstrated in Figure 1, Darktrace recognized that this server was not responding to common requests from multiple internal devices, as it would be expected to. Following this, the device was observed carrying out new or uncommon Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) activity. WMI is typically used by network administrators to manage remote and local Windows systems [3].

Figure 1: Device event log depicting the possible Initial attack vector.

Had Darktrace RESPOND™ been enabled in autonomous response mode, it would have to blocked connections originating from the compromised internal devices as soon as they were detected, while also limiting affected devices to their pre-established patterns of file to prevent them from carrying out any further malicious activity.

Darktrace subsequently observed multiple devices establishing various chains of connections that are indicative of lateral movement activity, such as unusual internal RDP and WMI requests. While there may be devices within an organization that do regularly partake these types of connections, Darktrace recognized that this activity was extremely unusual for these devices.

Darktrace’s Self-Learning AI allows for a deep understanding of customer networks and the devices within them. It’s anomaly-based threat detection capability enables it to recognize subtle deviations in a device’s normal patterns of behavior, without depending on known IoCs or signatures and rules to guide it.

Figure 2: Observed chain of possible lateral movement.

Persistence

Darktrace DETECT observed several affected devices communicating with rare external endpoints that had also been flagged as potentially malicious by OSINT tools. Multiple devices were observed performing activity indicative of NTLM brute-forcing activity, as seen in the Figure 3 which highlights the event log of the aforementioned domain controller. Said domain controller continuously engaged in anomalous behavior throughout the course of the attack. The same device was seen using a potentially compromise credential, ‘cvd’, which was observed via an SMB login event.

Figure 3: Continued unusual external connectivity.

Affected devices, including the domain controller, continued to engage in consistent communication with the endpoints prior to the actual ransomware attack. Darktrace identified that some of these malicious endpoints had likely been generated by Domain Generation Algorithms (DGA), a classic tactic utilized by threat actors. Subsequent OSINT investigation revealed that one such domain had been associated with malware such as TrojanDownloader:Win32/Upatre!rfn [5].

All external engagements were observed by Darktrace DETECT and would have been actioned on by Darktrace RESPOND, had it been configured in autonomous response mode. It would have blocked any suspicious outgoing connections originating from the compromised devices, thus preventing additional external engagement from taking place. Darktrace RESPOND works in tandem with DETECT to autonomously take action against suspicious activity based on its unusualness, rather than relying on static lists of ‘known-bads’ or malicious IoCs.

Reconnaissance

On March 14, 2023, a few days before the ransomware attack, Darktrace observed multiple internal devices failing to establish connections in a manner that suggests SMB, RDP and network scanning. Among these devices once more was the domain controller, which was seen performing potential SMB brute-forcing, representing yet another example of malicious activity carried out by this device.

Lateral Movement

Immediately prior to the attack, many compromised devices were observed mobilizing to conduct an array of high-severity lateral movement activity. Darktrace detected one device using two administrative credentials, namely ‘Administrator’ and ‘administrator’, while it also observed a notable spike in the volume of successful SMB connections from the device around the same time.

At this point, Darktrace DETECT was observing the progression of this attack along the cyber kill chain. What had started as internal recognisance, had escalated to exploitation and ensuing command-and-control activity. Following an SMB brute-force attempt, Darktrace DETECT identified a successful DCSync attack.

A DCSync attack occurs when a malicious actor impersonates a domain controller in an effort to gather sensitive information, such as user credentials and passwords hashes, by replicating directory services [1]. In this case, a device sent various successful DRSGetNCChanges operation requests to the DRSUAPI endpoint.

Data Exfiltration

Around the same time, Darktrace detected the compromised server transferring a high volume of data to rare external endpoints associated with Bublup, a third-party project management application used to save and share files. Although the actors attempted to avoid the detection of security tools by using a legitimate file storage service, Darktrace understood that this activity represented a deviation in this device’s expected pattern of life.

In one instance, around 8 GB of data was transferred, and in another, over 4 GB, indicating threat actors were employing a tactic known as ‘low and slow’ exfiltration whereby data is exfiltrated in small quantities via multiple connections, in an effort to mask their suspicious activity. While this tactic may have evaded the detection of traditional security measures, Darktrace’s anomaly-based detection allowed it to recognize that these two incidents represented a wider exfiltration event, rather than viewing the transfers in isolation.

Impact

Finally, Darktrace began to observe a large amount of suspicious SMB activity on the affected devices, most of which was SMB file encryption. DETECT observed the file extension ‘uw9nmvw’ being appended to many files across various internal shares and devices. In addition to this, a potential ransom note, ‘RECOVER-uw9nmvw-FILES.txt’, was detected on the network shortly after the start of the attack.

Figure 4: Depiction of the high-volume of suspicious SMB activity, including file encryption.

Conclusion

Ultimately, this incident show cases how Darktrace was able to successfully identify an emerging ransomware attack using its unrivalled anomaly-based detection capabilities, without having to rely on any previously established threat intelligence. Not only was Darktrace DETECT able to identify the ransomware at multiple stages of the kill chain, but it was also able to uncover the anomalous activity that took place in the buildup to the attack itself.

As the attack progressed along the cyber kill chain, escalating in severity at every juncture, DETECT was able to provide full visibility over the events. Through the successful identification of compromised devices, anomalous administrative credentials usage and encrypted files, Darktrace was able to greatly assist the customer, ensuring they were well-equipped to contain the incident and begin their incident management process.

Darktrace would have been able to aid the customer even further had they enabled its autonomous response technology on their network. Darktrace RESPOND would have taken targeted, mitigative action as soon as suspicious activity was detected, preventing the malicious actors from achieving their goals.

Credit to: Natalia Sánchez Rocafort, Cyber Security Analyst, Patrick Anjos, Senior Cyber Analyst.

‍

MITRE Tactics/Techniques Mapping

RECONNAISSANCE

Scanning IP Blocks (T1595.001)

RECONNAISSANCE

Vulnerability Scanning (T1595.002)

IMPACT

Service Stop (T1489)

LATERAL MOVEMENT

Taint Shared Content (T1080)

IMPACT

Data Encrypted for Impact (T1486)

INITIAL ACCESS

Replication Through Removable Media (T1200)

DEFENSE EVASION

Rogue Domain Controller (T1207)

COMMAND AND CONTROL

Domain Generation Algorithms (T1568.002)

EXECUTION

Windows Management Instrumentation (T1047)

INITIAL ACCESS

Phishing (T1190)

EXFILTRATION

Exfiltration Over C2 Channel (T1041)

IoC Table

IoC ----------- TYPE ------------- DESCRIPTION + PROBABILITY

CVD --------- credentials -------- Possible compromised credential

.UW9NMVW - File extension ----- Possible appended file extension

RECOVER-UW9NMVW-FILES.TXT - Ransom note - Possible ransom note observed

84.32.188[.]186 - IP address ------ C2 Endpoint

AS.EXECSVCT[.]COM - Hostname - C2 Endpoint

ZX.EXECSVCT[.]COM - Hostname - C2 Endpoint

QW.EXECSVCT[.]COM - Hostname - C2 Endpoint

EXECSVCT[.]COM - Hostname ------ C2 Endpoint

15.197.130[.]221 --- IP address ------ C2 Endpoint

AS59642 UAB CHERRY SERVERS - ASN - Possible ASN associated with C2 Endpoints

108.156.28[.]43

108.156.28[.]22

52.84.93[.]26

52.217.131[.]241

54.231.193[.]89 - IP addresses - Possible IP addresses associated with data exfiltration

103.203.59[.]3 -IP address ---- Possible IP address associated with initial attack vector

References:

[1] https://blog.netwrix.com/2021/11/30/what-is-dcsync-an-introduction/

[2] https://www.easeus.com/computer-instruction/delete-system32.html#:~:text=System32%20is%20a%20folder%20on,DLL%20files%2C%20and%20EXE%20files.

[3] https://www.techtarget.com/searchwindowsserver/definition/Windows-Management-Instrumentation#:~:text=WMI%20provides%20users%20with%20information,operational%20environments%2C%20including%20remote%20systems.

[4] https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/103.203.59[.]3

[5] https://otx.alienvault.com/indicator/ip/15.197.130[.]221

Written by

Natalia Sánchez Rocafort

Cyber Security Analyst

Inside the SOC

Written by

Natalia Sánchez Rocafort

Cyber Security Analyst

The Darktrace Community

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

July 1, 2025

Pre-CVE Threat Detection: 8 Examples Identifying Malicious Activity Prior to Public Disclosure of a Vulnerability

Can you detect cyber threats before the world knows about them?

Every year, tens of thousands of Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) are disclosed, over 40,000 in 2024 alone [1], and a predicted higher number for 2025 by the Forum for Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST).

However, cybercriminals don't wait for disclosure. They exploit zero-days while defenders remain in the dark.

Traditional, signature-based tools struggle to detect these early-stage threats. That’s why anomaly detection is becoming essential for organizations seeking pre-CVE detection.

Understanding the gap between zero-day attacks and public CVE disclosure

When a vulnerability is discovered, the standard practice is to report it to the vendor or the responsible organization, allowing them to develop and distribute a patch or fix before the details are made public. This is known as responsible disclosure.

The gap between exploitation of a zero-day and the disclosure of the vulnerability can sometimes be considerable, and retroactively attempting to identify successful exploitation on your network can be challenging, particularly if taking a signature-based approach.

However, abnormal behaviors in networks or systems, such as unusual login patterns or data transfers, can indicate attempted cyber-attacks, insider threats, or compromised systems.

Detecting threats without relying on CVE disclosure

Since Darktrace does not rely on rules or signatures, it can detect malicious activity that is anomalous even without full context of the specific device or asset in question.

For example, during the Fortinet exploitation late last year, the Darktrace Threat Research team were investigating a different Fortinet vulnerability, namely CVE 2024-23113, for exploitation when Mandiant released a security advisory around CVE 2024-47575, which aligned closely with Darktrace’s findings.

Retrospective analysis like this is used by Darktrace’s threat researchers to better understand detections across the threat landscape and to add additional context.

Below are eight examples from the past year where Darktrace detected malicious activity days or even weeks before a vulnerability was publicly disclosed.

ten examples from the past year where Darktrace detected malicious activity days or even weeks before a vulnerability was publicly disclosed.

Trends in pre-cve exploitation

The attack vs. patch race

In many cases, the disclosure of an exploited vulnerability can be off the back of an incident response investigation related to a compromise by an advanced threat actor using a zero-day. Once the vulnerability is registered and publicly disclosed as having been exploited, it can kick off a race between the attacker and defender.

Skilled nation-state actors

Nation-state actors, highly skilled with significant resources, are known to use a range of capabilities to achieve their target, including zero-day use. Often, pre-CVE activity is “low and slow”, last for months with high operational security.

After CVE disclosure, the barriers to entry lower, allowing less skilled and less resourced attackers, like some ransomware gangs, to exploit the vulnerability and cause harm. This is why two distinct types of activity are often seen: pre and post disclosure of an exploited vulnerability.

Examples of exploitation

Darktrace saw this consistent story line play out during several of the Fortinet and PAN OS threat actor campaigns highlighted above last year, where nation-state actors were seen exploiting vulnerabilities first, followed by ransomware gangs impacting organizations [2].

The same applies with the recent SAP Netweaver exploitations being tied to a China based threat actor earlier this spring with subsequent ransomware incidents being observed [3].

You spotted the anomaly but did you stop the breach?

Anomaly-based detection offers the benefit of identifying malicious activity even before a CVE is disclosed; however, security teams still need to quickly contain and isolate the activity.

For example, during the Ivanti chaining exploitation in the early part of 2025, a customer had Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability enabled on their network. As a result, Darktrace was able to contain the compromise and shut down any ongoing suspicious connectivity by blocking internal connections and enforcing a “pattern of life” on the affected device.

This pre-CVE detection and response by Darktrace occurred 11 days before any public disclosure, demonstrating the value of an anomaly-based approach.

In some cases, customers have even reported that Darktrace stopped malicious exploitation of devices several days before a public disclosure of a vulnerability.

For example, During the ConnectWise exploitation, a customer informed the team that Darktrace had detected malicious software being installed via remote access. Upon further investigation, four servers were found to be impacted, while Autonomous Response had blocked outbound connections and enforced patterns of life on impacted devices.

Conclusion

By continuously analyzing behavioral patterns, systems can spot unusual activities and patterns from users, systems, and networks to detect anomalies that could signify a security breach.

Through ongoing monitoring and learning from these behaviors, anomaly-based security systems can detect threats that traditional signature-based solutions might miss, while also providing detailed insights into threat tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs). This type of behavioral intelligence supports pre-CVE detection, allows for a more adaptive security posture, and enables systems to evolve with the ever-changing threat landscape.

Credit to Nathaniel Jones (VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO), Emma Fougler (Global Threat Research Operations Lead), Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

References and further reading:

Realted Darktrace blogs:

‍

*Self-reported by customer, confirmed afterwards.

**Updated January 2024 blog now reflects current findings

About the author

Blog

Network

June 27, 2025

Patch and Persist: Darktrace’s Detection of Blind Eagle (APT-C-36)

login on laptop dual factor authentication

What is Blind Eagle?

Since 2018, APT-C-36, also known as Blind Eagle, has been observed performing cyber-attacks targeting various sectors across multiple countries in Latin America, with a particular focus on Colombian organizations.

Blind Eagle characteristically targets government institutions, financial organizations, and critical infrastructure [1][2].

Attacks carried out by Blind Eagle actors typically start with a phishing email and the group have been observed utilizing various Remote Access Trojans (RAT) variants, which often have in-built methods for hiding command-and-control (C2) traffic from detection [3].

What we know about Blind Eagle from a recent campaign

Since November 2024, Blind Eagle actors have been conducting an ongoing campaign targeting Colombian organizations [1].

In this campaign, threat actors have been observed using phishing emails to deliver malicious URL links to targeted recipients, similar to the way threat actors have previously been observed exploiting CVE-2024-43451, a vulnerability in Microsoft Windows that allows the disclosure of a user’s NTLMv2 password hash upon minimal interaction with a malicious file [4].

Despite Microsoft patching this vulnerability in November 2024 [1][4], Blind Eagle actors have continued to exploit the minimal interaction mechanism, though no longer with the intent of harvesting NTLMv2 password hashes. Instead, phishing emails are sent to targets containing a malicious URL which, when clicked, initiates the download of a malicious file. This file is then triggered by minimal user interaction.

Clicking on the file triggers a WebDAV request, with a connection being made over HTTP port 80 using the user agent ‘Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19044’. WebDAV is a transmission protocol which allows files or complete directories to be made available through the internet, and to be transmitted to devices [5]. The next stage payload is then downloaded via another WebDAV request and malware is executed on the target device.

Attackers are notified when a recipient downloads the malicious files they send, providing an insight into potential targets [1].

Darktrace’s coverage of Blind Eagle

In late February 2025, Darktrace observed activity assessed with medium confidence to be associated with Blind Eagle on the network of a customer in Colombia.

Within a period of just five hours, Darktrace / NETWORK detected a device being redirected through a rare external location, downloading multiple executable files, and ultimately exfiltrating data from the customer’s environment.

Since the customer did not have Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability enabled on their network, no actions were taken to contain the compromise, allowing it to escalate until the customer’s security team responded to the alerts provided by Darktrace.

Darktrace observed a device on the customer’s network being directed over HTTP to a rare external IP, namely 62[.]60[.]226[.]112, which had never previously been seen in this customer’s environment and was geolocated in Germany. Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) providers have since linked this endpoint with phishing and malware campaigns [9].

The device then proceeded to download the executable file hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe.

Figure 1: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device connecting to an unusual location based in Germany.

Figure 2: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device downloading an executable file from the suspicious endpoint.

The device was then observed making unusual connections to the rare endpoint 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com and performing unusual external data activity.

This dynamic DNS endpoint allows a device to access an endpoint using a domain name in place of a changing IP address. Dynamic DNS services ensure the DNS record of a domain name is automatically updated when the IP address changes. As such, malicious actors can use these services and endpoints to dynamically establish connections to C2 infrastructure [6].

Further investigation into this dynamic endpoint using OSINT revealed multiple associations with previous likely Blind Eagle compromises, as well as Remcos malware, a RAT commonly deployed via phishing campaigns [7][8][10].

Figure 3: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device connecting to the suspicious dynamic DNS endpoint, 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com.

Shortly after this, Darktrace observed the user agent ‘Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19045’, indicating usage of the aforementioned transmission protocol WebDAV. The device was subsequently observed connected to an endpoint associated with Github and downloading data, suggesting that the device was retrieving a malicious tool or payload. The device then began to communicate to the malicious endpoint diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com over the new TCP port 1512 [11].

Around this time, the device was also observed uploading data to the endpoints 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com and diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com, with transfers of 60 MiB and 5.6 MiB observed respectively.

Figure 4: UI graph showing external data transfer activity.

This chain of activity triggered an Enhanced Monitoring model alert in Darktrace / NETWORK. These high-priority model alerts are designed to trigger in response to higher fidelity indicators of compromise (IoCs), suggesting that a device is performing activity consistent with a compromise.

Figure 5: Darktrace’s detection of initial attack chain activity.

A second Enhanced Monitoring model was also triggered by this device following the download of the aforementioned executable file (hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe) and the observed increase in C2 activity.

Following this activity, Darktrace continued to observe the device beaconing to the 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com endpoint.

Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst was able to correlate each of the individual detections involved in this compromise, identifying them as part of a broader incident that encompassed C2 connectivity, suspicious downloads, and external data transfers.

Figure 6: Cyber AI Analyst’s investigation into the activity observed on the affected device.

Figure 7: Cyber AI Analyst’s detection of the affected device’s broader connectivity throughout the course of the attack.

As the affected customer did not have Darktrace’s Autonomous Response configured at the time, the attack was able to progress unabated. Had Darktrace been properly enabled, it would have been able to take a number of actions to halt the escalation of the attack.

For example, the unusual beaconing connections and the download of an unexpected file from an uncommon location would have been shut down by blocking the device from making external connections to the relevant destinations.

Conclusion

The persistence of Blind Eagle and ability to adapt its tactics, even after patches were released, and the speed at which the group were able to continue using pre-established TTPs highlights that timely vulnerability management and patch application, while essential, is not a standalone defense.

Organizations must adopt security solutions that use anomaly-based detection to identify emerging and adapting threats by recognizing deviations in user or device behavior that may indicate malicious activity. Complementing this with an autonomous decision maker that can identify, connect, and contain compromise-like activity is crucial for safeguarding organizational networks against constantly evolving and sophisticated threat actors.

Credit to Charlotte Thompson (Senior Cyber Analyst), Eugene Chua (Principal Cyber Analyst) and Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

IoCs

IoC – Type - Confidence
Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19045 – User Agent

62[.]60[.]226[.]112 – IP – Medium Confidence

hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe – Payload Download – Medium Confidence

21ene.ip-ddns[.]com – Dynamic DNS Endpoint – Medium Confidence

diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com - Hostname – Medium Confidence

Darktrace’s model alert coverage

Anomalous File / Suspicious HTTP Redirect
Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server
Unusual Activity / Unusual External Data to New Endpoint
Device / Anomalous Github Download
Anomalous Connection / Multiple Connections to New External TCP Port
Device / Initial Attack Chain Activity
Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server
Compromise / Suspicious File and C2
Compromise / Fast Beaconing to DGA
Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections
Device / Large Number of Model Alert

Mitre Attack Mapping:

Tactic – Technique – Technique Name

Initial Access - T1189 – Drive-by Compromise
Initial Access - T1190 – Exploit Public-Facing Application
Initial Access ICS - T0862 – Supply Chain Compromise
Initial Access ICS - T0865 – Spearphishing Attachment
Initial Access ICS - T0817 - Drive-by Compromise
Resource Development - T1588.001 – Malware
Lateral Movement ICS - T0843 – Program Download
Command and Control - T1105 - Ingress Tool Transfer
Command and Control - T1095 – Non-Application Layer Protocol
Command and Control - T1571 – Non-Standard Port
Command and Control - T1568.002 – Domain Generation Algorithms
Command and Control ICS - T0869 – Standard Application Layer Protocol
Evasion ICS - T0849 – Masquerading
Exfiltration - T1041 – Exfiltration Over C2 Channel
Exfiltration - T1567.002 – Exfiltration to Cloud Storage