Find High-Impact Attack Paths with Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management
Understand high-impact attack paths with Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management. Learn from detailed use cases and improve your cybersecurity measures effectively.
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
Elliot Stocker
Product SME
Share
22
Feb 2023
What are the people, process, and technology assets that would do the most harm, if compromised by an attacker?
Attack path modeling provides a detailed map of all the roads that lead to an organization's crown jewels, prioritized in order of likelihood and potential impact. CISO's are increasingly looking to this kind of solution to complement their security stack because it highlights risks that are specific to this organization's structure, as well as potentially unexpected relationships between devices or users that would prove catastrophic if they were exploited.
What makes Darktrace's Attack Path Modeling solution stand out?
Data sources are varied and information from the entire digital estate is considered
Modeling is real-time and continuously re-evaluated
Output does not require expert technical knowledge to be leveraged
Valuable as a standalone for vulnerability prioritization
As a component of the Darktrace ActiveAI Security Platform, the solution provides immediate value by feeding back into detection and response engines (e.g. tag critical assets for detection) but also provides long term systemic improvements as outcomes are followed up.
Thinking like an attacker
It is anticipated that CISOs will soon move beyond just insurance and checkbox compliance, as underwriters include more and more exclusions for certain types of cyber-attacks and the limits of compliance ticking the protection box rather than bolstering operational assurance become more apparent. They will push their teams to opt for more proactive cyber security measures to maximize ROI in the face of budget cuts, shifting investment into tools and capabilities that continuously improve their cyber resilience and demonstrate cyber risk reduction.
While red teams can provide insight into where effort and resource should be most immediately applied, the exercises themselves are often costly, non-exhaustive and infrequently run.
Hackers are constantly seeking pathways, preferably those of least resistance, to compromise a system by exploiting its vulnerabilities. Attack path modeling enables security teams to look at their environment from the perspective of the attacker. In turn, this helps them eliminate attack paths progressively, reducing the options an attacker would have, should they breach the walls.
A deeper dive into Attack Path Modeling
An attack path is a visual representation of the path that an attacker takes to exploit a weakness in the system. It highlights the series of steps (attack vectors) that a threat actor might take from one of the doors into the organization (attack surface) to access valuable assets.
It is typically unusual for an attacker to have a boulevard straight down to the crown jewels. They will most likely leverage a couple of loopholes, unexpected relationships and blind spots in the security stack to piece together a path to these confidential assets. Attack path modeling can help to highlight the attack vectors that connect, to form this path to compromise.
Figure 1: The Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management user interface.
How to model attack paths
Darktrace's proprietary Self-Learning AI models relationships, and graph theory is incorporated to understand the importance of users, documents and relationships between these.
Darktrace's Attack Path Modeling component identifies target nodes (users, accounts, devices), it then calculates the shortest paths to these target nodes and weights the results according to the likelihood of this attack path and the damage caused if the target asset was compromised. This is exactly what an attacker would do when planning an attack, albeit with a significant advantage to Darktrace's AI Engine, which has access to more information than the attacker. For the first time, defenders have the upper hand against attackers.
Avoiding siloed efforts
According to a Gartner survey, 75% of organizations are looking at consolidating security tools, not primarily because of cost, but because it helps drive cyber risk reduction. Ensuring that security efforts are part of a wider security ecosystem, rather than siloed efforts, is crucial to maximize the return on these investments.
Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management integrates with Darktrace's detection and response to ensure that the organization's security posture is hardened, even if the team doesn't have time to eliminate the attack path.
Defensive superiority is key, and Attack Path Modeling is one way to help security teams gain back an advantage. Find out how you can test it in your own environment.
Attack Path Modeling is an objective, however, and there are a few important questions to consider when assessing the different methods of creating these models.
Are we considering all the relevant data when building my attack paths map?
Consider the case where one of your marketing executives has a close friendship with someone in your development team. How do you model that into your attack paths cartography? Attack paths encompass the full digital estate, so the attack path modeling solution should consider information from various parts, internal and external. This may include data from the Email environment, the Network, Endpoints, SaaS & Cloud, Active Directory, Vulnerability Scanners, etc.
Cross-data analysis is the only way to understand holistic attack paths.
Are we looking at the most up to date map of attack paths?
Relationships between users, devices and other sensitive assets can evolve on a daily basis, this implies attack paths evolve on a daily basis. Ensuring that the methods or solutions used update their understanding continuously and in real-time is vital if security teams want the most up to date understanding of their organization's risk posture.
To improve our security posture, how do we know which attack paths to start with?
One thing is to map the sum-total of attack paths, another is to prioritize them. Attack path modeling gives you the map but adding a risk-assessment (explored in more depth below) layer on top is how you prioritize. This is where graph theory can be very useful to identify choke points that you may want to strengthen.
Does this output yield actionable insights?
The prime objective of this solution is not simply to provide an assessment of cyber risk posture, but rather to help drive security efforts in the right direction. To that end, the output needs to be accessible to team members that may not have expert cyber skills. Lowering barriers to entry with usable insights and mitigation advice is key to successfully improve the organization's security posture.
Assessing risk to prioritize attack paths
Darktrace Attack Path Modeling (APM) is a risk-based approach to assessing cyber-attack pathways, thinking like an attacker, and probing the path of least resistance. 'Risk' in this case is defined as the product of two factors: Probability and Impact. By using this information to categorize possible attack paths in the risk matrix below, Darktrace's APM can prioritize attack paths to ensure security team efforts are spent on controlling for the most relevant risks for their organization.
Figure 2: Risk matrix for attack path prioritization
A: Defining Probability
There are two types of probability to consider:
The likelihood of one particular door being chosen by an attacker to infiltrate the organization (among the assets at the attack surface - this could be an internet-facing server, an inbox, a SaaS/Cloud account, etc). And,
The likelihood of one particular node (defined as a device or user account) being compromised next, via lateral movement.
Figure 3: Simplified example of calculating probability of lateral movement from a compromised agent to one of two servers
B: Defining Impact
Impact refers to the overall impact of an asset being compromised and unusable. In the case of an asset (e.g.: a key server), the bigger the disruption if this asset goes down, the higher the impact score. If considering a particular document, restricted access and sensitivity score of users accessing it are some of the variables used to estimate impact.
Figure 4: Diagram showing a simplified example of mapping access volume and sensitivity to estimate document value.
Both variables are calculated by the AI autonomously, without requiring human input. Security teams can of course reinforce the AI's understanding of the organization with their business expertise (by tagging additional sensitive devices for example).
A more in-depth description of how impact is propagated to identify key servers or sensitive documents, as well as other components that comprise the Darktrace Attack Path Modeling module can be found in this white paper.
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.
Defending the Cloud: Stopping Cyber Threats in Azure and AWS with Darktrace
Real-world intrusions across Azure and AWS
As organizations pursue greater scalability and flexibility, cloud platforms like Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services (AWS) have become essential for enabling remote operations and digitalizing corporate environments. However, this shift introduces a new set of security risks, including expanding attack surfaces, misconfigurations, and compromised credentials frequently exploited by threat actors.
This blog dives into three instances of compromise within a Darktrace customer’s Azure and AWS environment which Darktrace.
The first incident took place in early 2024 and involved an attacker compromising a legitimate user account to gain unauthorized access to a customer’s Azure environment.
The other two incidents, taking place in February and March 2025, targeted AWS environments. In these cases, threat actors exfiltrated corporate data, and in one instance, was able to detonate ransomware in a customer’s environment.
Case 1 - Microsoft Azure
Figure 1: Simplified timeline of the attack on a customer’s Azure environment.
In early 2024, Darktrace identified a cloud compromise on the Azure cloud environment of a customer in the Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA) region.
Initial access
In this case, a threat actor gained access to the customer’s cloud environment after stealing access tokens and creating a rogue virtual machine (VM). The malicious actor was found to have stolen access tokens belonging to a third-party external consultant’s account after downloading cracked software.
With these stolen tokens, the attacker was able to authenticate to the customer’s Azure environment and successfully modified a security rule to allow inbound SSH traffic from a specific IP range (i.e., securityRules/AllowCidrBlockSSHInbound). This was likely performed to ensure persistent access to internal cloud resources.
Detection and investigation of the threat
Darktrace / IDENTITY recognized that this activity was highly unusual, triggering the “Repeated Unusual SaaS Resource Creation” alert.
Cyber AI Analyst launched an autonomous investigation into additional suspicious cloud activities occurring around the same time from the same unusual location, correlating the individual events into a broader account hijack incident.
Figure 2: Cyber AI Analyst’s investigation into unusual cloud activity performed by the compromised account.
Figure 3: Surrounding resource creation events highlighted by Cyber AI Analyst.
Figure 4: Surrounding resource creation events highlighted by Cyber AI Analyst.
“Create resource service limit” events typically indicate the creation or modification of service limits (i.e., quotas) for a specific Azure resource type within a region. Meanwhile, “Registers the Capacity Resource Provider” events refer to the registration of the Microsoft Capacity resource provider within an Azure subscription, responsible for managing capacity-related resources, particularly those related to reservations and service limits. These events suggest that the threat actor was looking to create new cloud resources within the environment.
Around ten minutes later, Darktrace detected the threat actor creating or modifying an Azure disk associated with a virtual machine (VM), suggesting an attempt to create a rogue VM within the environment.
Threat actors can leverage such rogue VMs to hijack computing resources (e.g., by running cryptomining malware), maintain persistent access, move laterally within the cloud environment, communicate with command-and-control (C2) infrastructure, and stealthily deliver and deploy malware.
Persistence
Several weeks later, the compromised account was observed sending an invitation to collaborate to an external free mail (Google Mail) address.
Darktrace deemed this activity as highly anomalous, triggering a compliance alert for the customer to review and investigate further.
The next day, the threat actor further registered new multi-factor authentication (MFA) information. These actions were likely intended to maintain access to the compromised user account. The customer later confirmed this activity by reviewing the corresponding event logs within Darktrace.
Case 2 – Amazon Web Services
Figure 5: Simplified timeline of the attack on a customer’s AWS environment
In February 2025, another cloud-based compromised was observed on a UK-based customer subscribed to Darktrace’s Managed Detection and Response (MDR) service.
How the attacker gained access
The threat actor was observed leveraging likely previously compromised credential to access several AWS instances within customer’s Private Cloud environment and collecting and exfiltrating data, likely with the intention of deploying ransomware and holding the data for ransom.
Darktrace alerting to malicious activity
This observed activity triggered a number of alerts in Darktrace, including several high-priority Enhanced Monitoring alerts, which were promptly investigated by Darktrace’s Security Operations Centre (SOC) and raised to the customer’s security team.
The earliest signs of attack observed by Darktrace involved the use of two likely compromised credentials to connect to the customer’s Virtual Private Network (VPN) environment.
Internal reconnaissance
Once inside, the threat actor performed internal reconnaissance activities and staged the Rclone tool “ProgramData\rclone-v1.69.0-windows-amd64.zip”, a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers, to an AWS instance whose hostname is associated with a public key infrastructure (PKI) service.
The threat actor was further observed accessing and downloading multiple files hosted on an AWS file server instance, notably finance and investment-related files. This likely represented data gathering prior to exfiltration.
Shortly after, the PKI-related EC2 instance started making SSH connections with the Rclone SSH client “SSH-2.0-rclone/v1.69.0” to a RockHoster Virtual Private Server (VPS) endpoint (193.242.184[.]178), suggesting the threat actor was exfiltrating the gathered data using the Rclone utility they had previously installed. The PKI instance continued to make repeated SSH connections attempts to transfer data to this external destination.
Darktrace’s Autonomous Response
In response to this activity, Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability intervened, blocking unusual external connectivity to the C2 server via SSH, effectively stopping the exfiltration of data.
This activity was further investigated by Darktrace’s SOC analysts as part of the MDR service. The team elected to extend the autonomously applied actions to ensure the compromise remained contained until the customer could fully remediate the incident.
Continued reconissance
Around the same time, the threat actor continued to conduct network scans using the Nmap tool, operating from both a separate AWS domain controller instance and a newly joined device on the network. These actions were accompanied by further internal data gathering activities, with around 5 GB of data downloaded from an AWS file server.
The two devices involved in reconnaissance activities were investigated and actioned by Darktrace SOC analysts after additional Enhanced Monitoring alerts had triggered.
Lateral movement attempts via RDP connections
Unusual internal RDP connections to a likely AWS printer instance indicated that the threat actor was looking to strengthen their foothold within the environment and/or attempting to pivot to other devices, likely in response to being hindered by Autonomous Response actions.
This triggered multiple scanning, internal data transfer and unusual RDP alerts in Darktrace, as well as additional Autonomous Response actions to block the suspicious activity.
Suspicious outbound SSH communication to known threat infrastructure
Darktrace subsequently observed the AWS printer instance initiating SSH communication with a rare external endpoint associated with the web hosting and VPS provider Host Department (67.217.57[.]252), suggesting that the threat actor was attempting to exfiltrate data to an alternative endpoint after connections to the original destination had been blocked.
Further investigation using open-source intelligence (OSINT) revealed that this IP address had previously been observed in connection with SSH-based data exfiltration activity during an Akira ransomware intrusion [1].
Once again, connections to this IP were blocked by Darktrace’s Autonomous Response and subsequently these blocks were extended by Darktrace’s SOC team.
The above behavior generated multiple Enhanced Monitoring alerts that were investigated by Darktrace SOC analysts as part of the Managed Threat Detection service.
Figure 5: Enhanced Monitoring alerts investigated by SOC analysts as part of the Managed Detection and Response service.
Final containment and collaborative response
Upon investigating the unusual scanning activity, outbound SSH connections, and internal data transfers, Darktrace analysts extended the Autonomous Response actions previously triggered on the compromised devices.
As the threat actor was leveraging these systems for data exfiltration, all outgoing traffic from the affected devices was blocked for an additional 24 hours to provide the customer’s security team with time to investigate and remediate the compromise.
Additional investigative support was provided by Darktrace analysts through the Security Operations Service, after the customer's opened of a ticket related to the unfolding incident.
Figure 8: Simplified timeline of the attack
Around the same time of the compromise in Case 2, Darktrace observed a similar incident on the cloud environment of a different customer.
Initial access
On this occasion, the threat actor appeared to have gained entry into the AWS-based Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) networkvia a SonicWall SMA 500v EC2 instance allowing inbound traffic on any port.
The instance received HTTPS connections from three rare Vultr VPS endpoints (i.e., 45.32.205[.]52, 207.246.74[.]166, 45.32.90[.]176).
Lateral movement and exfiltration
Around the same time, the EC2 instance started scanning the environment and attempted to pivot to other internal systems via RDP, notably a DC EC2 instance, which also started scanning the network, and another EC2 instance.
The latter then proceeded to transfer more than 230 GB of data to the rare external GTHost VPS endpoint 23.150.248[.]189, while downloading hundreds of GBs of data over SMB from another EC2 instance.
Figure 7: Cyber AI Analyst incident generated following the unusual scanning and RDP connections from the initial compromised device.
The same behavior was replicated across multiple EC2 instances, whereby compromised instances uploaded data over internal RDP connections to other instances, which then started transferring data to the same GTHost VPS endpoint over port 5000, which is typically used for Universal Plug and Play (UPnP).
What Darktrace detected
Darktrace observed the threat actor uploading a total of 718 GB to the external endpoint, after which they detonated ransomware within the compromised VPC networks.
This activity generated nine Enhanced Monitoring alerts in Darktrace, focusing on the scanning and external data activity, with the earliest of those alerts triggering around one hour after the initial intrusion.
Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability was not configured to act on these devices. Therefore, the malicious activity was not autonomously blocked and escalated to the point of ransomware detonation.
Conclusion
This blog examined three real-world compromises in customer cloud environments each illustrating different stages in the attack lifecycle.
The first case showcased a notable progression from a SaaS compromise to a full cloud intrusion, emphasizing the critical role of anomaly detection when legitimate credentials are abused.
The latter two incidents demonstrated that while early detection is vital, the ability to autonomously block malicious activity at machine speed is often the most effective way to contain threats before they escalate.
Together, these incidents underscore the need for continuous visibility, behavioral analysis, and machine-speed intervention across hybrid environments. Darktrace's AI-driven detection and Autonomous Response capabilities, combined with expert oversight from its Security Operations Center, give defenders the speed and clarity they need to contain threats and reduce operational disruption, before the situation spirals.
Credit to Alexandra Sentenac (Senior Cyber Analyst) and Dylan Evans (Security Research Lead)
Top Eight Threats to SaaS Security and How to Combat Them
The latest on the identity security landscape
Following the mass adoption of remote and hybrid working patterns, more critical data than ever resides in cloud applications – from Salesforce and Google Workspace, to Box, Dropbox, and Microsoft 365.
As SaaS applications look set to remain an integral part of the digital estate, organizations are being forced to rethink how they protect their users and data in this area.
What is SaaS security?
SaaS security is the protection of cloud applications. It includes securing the apps themselves as well as the user identities that engage with them.
Below are the top eight threats that target SaaS security and user identities.
1. Account Takeover (ATO)
Attackers gain unauthorized access to a user’s SaaS or cloud account by stealing credentials through phishing, brute-force attacks, or credential stuffing. Once inside, they can exfiltrate data, send malicious emails, or escalate privileges to maintain persistent access.
2. Privilege escalation
Cybercriminals exploit misconfigurations, weak access controls, or vulnerabilities to increase their access privileges within a SaaS or cloud environment. Gaining admin or superuser rights allows attackers to disable security settings, create new accounts, or move laterally across the organization.
3. Lateral movement
Once inside a network or SaaS platform, attackers move between accounts, applications, and cloud workloads to expand their foot- hold. Compromised OAuth tokens, session hijacking, or exploited API connections can enable adversaries to escalate access and exfiltrate sensitive data.
4. Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) bypass and session hijacking
Threat actors bypass MFA through SIM swapping, push bombing, or exploiting session cookies. By stealing an active authentication session, they can access SaaS environments without needing the original credentials or MFA approval.
5. OAuth token abuse
Attackers exploit OAuth authentication mechanisms by stealing or abusing tokens that grant persistent access to SaaS applications. This allows them to maintain access even if the original user resets their password, making detection and mitigation difficult.
6. Insider threats
Malicious or negligent insiders misuse their legitimate access to SaaS applications or cloud platforms to leak data, alter configurations, or assist external attackers. Over-provisioned accounts and poor access control policies make it easier for insiders to exploit SaaS environments.
SaaS applications rely on APIs for integration and automation, but attackers exploit insecure endpoints, excessive permissions, and unmonitored API calls to gain unauthorized access. API abuse can lead to data exfiltration, privilege escalation, and service disruption.
8. Business Email Compromise (BEC) via SaaS
Adversaries compromise SaaS-based email platforms (e.g., Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace) to send phishing emails, conduct invoice fraud, or steal sensitive communications. BEC attacks often involve financial fraud or data theft by impersonating executives or suppliers.
BEC heavily uses social engineering techniques, tailoring messages for a specific audience and context. And with the growing use of generative AI by threat actors, BEC is becoming even harder to detect. By adding ingenuity and machine speed, generative AI tools give threat actors the ability to create more personalized, targeted, and convincing attacks at scale.
Protecting against these SaaS threats
Traditionally, security leaders relied on tools that were focused on the attack, reliant on threat intelligence, and confined to a single area of the digital estate.
However, these tools have limitations, and often prove inadequate for contemporary situations, environments, and threats. For example, they may lack advanced threat detection, have limited visibility and scope, and struggle to integrate with other tools and infrastructure, especially cloud platforms.
AI-powered SaaS security stays ahead of the threat landscape
New, more effective approaches involve AI-powered defense solutions that understand the digital business, reveal subtle deviations that indicate cyber-threats, and action autonomous, targeted responses.
.avif)
