June 24, 2020

Ekans Ransomware: Insights on OT Cyber Attacks

Uncover the impacts of the Ekans ransomware attack on operational technology and what organizations can do to enhance their cybersecurity posture.

No items found.

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.

No items found.

Jun 2020

In recent weeks, the security industry has become acutely aware of the challenges surrounding OT protection, with the EKANS ransomware attacks on Honda and the Enel Group demonstrating how novel threats continue to slip through the cracks of security systems in ICS environments. What’s more, with such attacks resulting in loss of productivity and damage to critical infrastructure, the need for a cyber security strategy that bridges both OT and IT technology is increasingly urgent.

The recent EKANS ransomware has been making waves in security circles because of its ability to target 64 specific ICS mechanisms in its ‘kill chain’. Standard attacks target ICS environments through vulnerabilities in IT infrastructure, pivoting through unpatched software to reach OT machinery, rather than heading straight for the jugular. The EKANS ransomware targeted ICS vulnerabilities directly and can be considered the first of its kind – marking a significant evolution in attacker techniques. Before now, ICS machinery-specific ransomware had either been an academic theory or a marketing tool.

Technical analysis

Written in the Go programming language, EKANS has additional obfuscation abilities compared to other ransomware strains, which enable it to better evade detection. As will be seen in this analysis, the power of EKANS ransomware is two-fold – it is able to disguise its attack in the beginning stages, and when it does strike, it is targeted at industrial pain points.

The ransomware’s first port of call is to check if the victim has already been encrypted. If not, standard encryption library functions ensue. These involve both the execution of encryption operations and the deletion of Volume Shadow Copy back-ups – meaning the victim cannot simply retrieve duplicated data copies and circumvent the ransom.

Before the relevant files are encrypted, EKANS ransomware kills various ICS processes listed in a pre-programmed, hard-coded list. The affected applications include GE’s Proficy data historian, GE Fanuc automation software, FLEXNet licensing server instance, Thingworx monitoring and management software, and Honeywell’s HMIWeb application – all specific to ICS environments.

proficyclient.exe
vmacthlp.exe
msdtssrvr.exe
sqlservr.exe
msmdsrv.exe
reportingservicesservice.exe
dsmcsvc.exe
winvnc4.exe
client.exe
collwrap.exe
bluestripecollector.exe

Figure 1: A small excerpt of the ICS-related processes targeted in the EKANS ‘kill list’

While stalling these processes doesn’t necessarily bring industrial plants crashing to a halt, it does reduce visibility and potentially make machine operations unpredictable. In the case of Honda’s attack, manufacturing operations across the US, the UK, and Turkey were suspended. With a workforce of 220,000 people worldwide, shutting down several factories and sending employees home results in a dramatic loss of production hours and employee salaries – not to mention the costs of getting systems up and running without giving in to ransom demands.

EKANS then goes one stage further. Once this initial kill chain has been executed, the ransomware starts encrypting data. Five randomly generated letters are added at the end of each original file extension. This in itself is unusual, as most ransomware encrypts data with a specific key.

Figure 2: Encryption results of EKANS ransomware

Rather than targeting specific devices or systems, EKANS ransomware looks to take down the entire network, which is part of what makes it such an aggressive style of ransomware. However, it lacks a self-propagating mechanism, so it has to be manually introduced to ICS environments. Malicious payloads hidden in links and attachments within emails are the primary mechanism used to introduce the ransomware. From there, EKANS exploits vulnerable and unpatched services, seeding itself across the entire business via script.

When the encryption process has been completed, a ransom note is displayed, requesting a covert financial exchange for a decryption key over the encrypted email platform CTemplar. In the case of both Honda and the Enel Group, they were told to contact CarrolBidell@tutanota[.]com for further information. The attackers also offered to send several decrypted files to prove the legitimacy of the encryption key.

| What happened to your files?
--------------------------------------------
We breached your corporate network and encrypted the data on your computers. The encrypted data includes documents, databases, photos and more –
all were encrypted using a military grade encryption algorithms (AES-256 and RSA-2048). You cannot access those files right now. But dont worry!
You can still get those files back and be up and running again in no time.
--------------------------------------------
| How to contact us to get your files back?
--------------------------------------------
The only way to restore your files is by purchasing a decryption tool loaded with a private key we created specifically for your network.
Once run on an effected computer, the tool will decrypt all encrypted files – and you resume day-to-day operations, preferably with
better cyber security in mind. If you are interested in purchasing the decryption tool contact us at %s
--------------------------------------------
| How can you be certain we have the decryption tool?
--------------------------------------------
In your mail to us attach up to 3 files (up to 3MB, no databases or spreadsheets).

Figure 3: Partial view of EKANS ransomware note

Honda has refrained from stating what specific plant capabilities were affected by the EKANS attack, however it has publicly affirmed that production operations have been affected in multiple factories across the world. Their visibility and control systems were disrupted significantly enough to suspend manufacturing.

Becoming immune to ransomware

While the EKANS ransomware leverages fairly crude techniques and is only able to halt processes rather than control ICS mechanisms, it represents a new frontier in OT cyber-attacks. ICS offensives will continue to evolve – with greater control over machinery a likely avenue of exploration for cyber-criminals.

What is clear from the Honda attack is that even some of the world’s largest global conglomerates are susceptible to these kind of ransomware attacks. What is needed to protect factory floors from such attacks is a cyber security solution that can detect the most subtle signals of threat, learning on the job to understand what is ‘normal’ for each unique ICS environment.

Darktrace’s AI learns the normal ‘patterns of life’ for every user, device, and controller across both OT and IT. By continuously analyzing data across organizations’ systems, the AI’s unique understanding of how each facet of a business and a dynamic workforce interacts ensures that any malicious activity is detected seconds after it emerges. In the case of EKANS, this self-learning approach would have identified a number of anomalous behaviors pertaining to the originally infected device, including beaconing to a rare destination and the unusual connections to encryption software.

Complementing Darktrace’s threat detection is the AI’s Autonomous Response abilities, which neutralize threats with surgical precision – allowing business activity to continue as normal. Autonomous Response has already proven itself successful in stopping ransomware attacks, preventing damaging operational outages at manufacturing facilities, hospitals, and municipalities around the world.

Conclusion

EKANS revealed that attackers are beginning to successfully target both IT and OT systems with one attack, making the need for security programs that can bridge this gap more urgent than ever. The ability to defend both environments with a single security solution ensures holistic protection for the entire organization. By correlating disparate data points across SaaS, email, cloud, traditional network, and OT environments, Cyber AI can identify and stop even the most sophisticated attacks.

The reality is that threats in the OT sphere will continue to evolve, becoming faster and more furious than ever. Given the potential damage ransomware can cause, security that can defend industrial systems along with dynamic workforces – detecting and stopping fast-acting threats across a complex business – has become more important than ever. The functionality of industrial systems depends on it.

‍

No items found.

Inside the SOC

No items found.

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