April 22, 2021

Darktrace Identifies APT35 in Pre-Infected State

Learn how Darktrace identified APT35 (Charming Kitten) in a pre-infected environment. Gain insights into the detection and mitigation of this threat.

Written by

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

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

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

Apr 2021

What is APT35?

APT35, sometimes referred to as Charming Kitten, Imperial Kitten, or Tortoiseshell, is a notorious cyber-espionage group which has been active for nearly 10 years. Famous for stealing scripts from HBO’s Game of Thrones in 2017 and suspected of interfering in the U.S. presidential election last year, it has launched extensive campaigns against organizations and officials across North America and the Middle East. Public attribution has associated APT35 with an Iran-based nation state threat actor.

Darktrace regularly detects attacks by many known threat actors including Evil Corp and APT41, alongside large amounts of malicious but uncategorized activity from sophisticated attack groups. As Cyber AI doesn’t rely on pre-defined rules, signatures, or threat intelligence to detect cyber-attacks, it often detects new and previously unknown threats.

This blog post examines a real-world instance of APT35 activity in an organization in the EMEA region. Darktrace observed this activity last June, but due to ongoing investigations, details are only now being released with the wider community. It represents an interesting case for the value of self-learning AI in two key ways:

Identifying ‘low and slow’ attacks: How do you spot an attacker that is lying low and conducts very little detectable activity?
Detecting pre-existing infections without signatures: What if a threat actor is already inside the system when Cyber AI is activated?

Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) lying low

APT35 had already infected a single corporate device, likely via a spear phishing email, when Cyber AI was deployed in the company’s digital estate for the first time.

The infected device exhibited no other signs of malicious activity beyond continued command and control (C2) beaconing, awaiting instructions from the attackers for several days. This is what we call ‘lying low’ – where the hacker stays present within a system, but remains under the radar, avoiding detection either intentionally, or because they’re focusing on another victim while being content with backdoor access into the organization.

Either way, this is a nightmare scenario for a security team and any security vendor: an APT which has established a foothold and is lying in wait to continue their attack – undetected.

Finding the infected device

When Darktrace’s AI was first activated, it spent five business days learning the unique ‘patterns of life’ for the organization. After this initial, short learning period, Darktrace immediately flagged the infected device and the C2 activity.

Although the breach device had been beaconing since before Darktrace was implemented, Cyber AI automatically clusters devices into ‘peer groups’ based on similar behavioral patterns, enabling Darktrace to identify the continued C2 traffic coming from the device as highly unusual in comparison to the wider, automatically identified peer group. None of its behaviorally close neighbors were doing anything remotely similar, and Darktrace was therefore able to determine that the activity was malicious, and that it represented C2 beaconing.

Darktrace detected the APT35 C2 activity without the use of any signatures or threat intelligence on multiple levels. Responding to the alerts, the internal security team quickly isolated the device and verified with the Darktrace system that no further reconnaissance, lateral movement, or data exfiltration had taken place.

APT35 ‘Charming Kitten’ analysis

Once the C2 was detected, Cyber AI Analyst immediately began analyzing the infected device. The Cyber AI Analyst only highlights the most severe incidents in any given environment and automates many of the typical level one and level two SOC tasks. This includes reviewing all alerts, investigating the scope and nature of each event, and reducing time to triage by 92%.

*Figure 1: Similar Cyber AI Analyst report observing C2 communications*

Numerous factors made the C2 activity stand out strongly to Darktrace. Combining all those small anomalies, Darktrace was able to autonomously prioritize this behavior and classify it as the most significant security incident in the week.

*Figure 2: Example list of C2 detections for an APT35 attack*

Some of the command and control destinations were known to threat intelligence and open-source intelligence (OSINT) – for instance, the domain cortanaservice[.]com is a known C2 domain for APT35.

However, the presence of a known malicious domain does not guarantee detection. In fact, the organization had a very mature security stack, yet they failed to discover the existing APT35 infection until Darktrace was activated in their environment.

Assessing the impact of the intrusion

Once an intrusion has been identified, it is important to understand the extent of it – such as whether lateral movement is occurring and what connectivity the infected device has in general. Asset management is never perfect, so it can be very hard for organizations to determine what damage a compromised device is capable of inflicting.

Darktrace presents this information in real time, and from a bird’s-eye perspective, making the assessment very simple. It immediately highlights which subnet the device is located in and any further context.

*Figure 3: Darktrace’s Threat Visualizer displaying the connectivity of a device*

Based on this information, the organization confirmed that it was a corporate device that had been infected by APT35. As Darktrace shows any credentials associated with the device, a quick assessment could be made of potentially compromised accounts.

*Figure 4: Similar and associated credentials of a device*

Luckily, only a single local user account was associated with the device.

The exact level of privileges and connectivity which the infected device had, as well as the extent to which the intrusion might have spread from the initially infected device, was still uncertain. By looking at the device’s event log, this became rapidly clear within minutes.

Filtering first for internal connections only (excluding any connections going to the Internet) gave a good idea of the level of connectivity of the device. A cursory glance showed that the device did indeed have some level of internal connectivity. It made DNS requests to the internal domain controller and was making successful NetBIOS connections over ports 135 and 139 internally.

By filtering further in the event log, it quickly became clear that in this time the device had not used any administrative channels, such as RDP, SSH, Telnet, or SMB. This is a strong indicator that no lateral movement over common channels had taken place.

It is more difficult to assess whether the device was performing any other suspicious activity, like stealthy reconnaissance or staging data from other internal devices. Darktrace provided another capability to assess this quickly – filtering the device’s network connections to show only unusual or new connections.

*Figure 5: Event device log filtered to show unusual connections only*

Darktrace assesses each individual connection for every entity observed in context, using its unsupervised machine learning to evaluate how unusual a given connection is. This could be a single new failed internal connection attempt, indicating stealthy reconnaissance, or a connection over SMB at an unusual time to a new internal destination, implying lateral movement or data staging.

By filtering for only unusual or new connections, Darktrace’s AI produces further leads that can be pursued extremely quickly, thanks to the context and added visibility.

No further suspicious internal connections were observed, strengthening the hypothesis that APT35 was lying low at that time.

Unprecedented but not unpreventable

Darktrace’s 24/7 monitoring service, Proactive Threat Notifications, would have alerted on and escalated the incident. Darktrace RESPOND would have responded autonomously and enforced normal activity for the device, preventing the C2 traffic without interrupting regular business workflows.

It is impossible to predefine where the next attack will come from. APT35 is just one of the many sophisticated threat actors on the scene, and with such a diverse and volatile threat landscape, unsupervised machine learning is crucial in spotting and defending against anomalies, no matter what form they take.

This case study helps illustrate how Darktrace detects pre-existing infections and ‘low and slow’ attacks, and further shows how Darktrace can be used to quickly understand the scope and extent of an intrusion.

Learn how Cyber AI Analyst detected APT41 two weeks before public attribution

Shortened list of C2 detections over four days on the infected device:

Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint
Compromise / Beaconing Meta Model
Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare
Compromise / SSL Beaconing To Rare Destination
Compromise / Slow Beaconing To External Rare
Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score
Compromise / Unusual Connections to Rare Lets Encrypt
Compromise / Beacon for 4 Days
Compromise / Agent Beacon

‍

Written by

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

Inside the SOC

Written by

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

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)

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