March 14, 2021

Botnet and Remote Desktop Protocol Attacks

Understand the connection between botnet malware and RDP attacks, and how to safeguard your network from potential threats.

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

Mar 2021

What is Remote Desktop Protocol?

With the rise of the dynamic workforce, IT teams have been forced to rely on remote access more than ever before. There are now almost five million Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) servers exposed to the Internet – around two million more than before the pandemic. Remote desktops are an essential feature for the majority of companies and yet are often exploited by cyber-criminals. Events such as the Florida water plant incident, where an attacker attempted to manipulate the chemical concentration in the water supply of a whole city, show how fatal the consequences of such a cyber-threat can be.

Last month, Darktrace detected a server-side attack at a technology company in the APAC region. The hackers brute-forced an RDP server and attempted to spread throughout the organization. The early detection of this breach was crucial in stopping the cyber-criminals before they could create a botnet and use it to cause serious damage, potentially launching a ransomware or distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack.

How to make a botnet

All it takes is one vulnerable RDP server for a threat actor to gain an initial foothold into an organization and spread laterally to build their botnet army. A bot is simply an infected device which can be controlled by a malicious third party; once a network of these hosts has been accumulated, a hacker can perform a range of actions, including:

Exfiltration of user credentials and payment data
Uploading Trojan malware to the server, which opens a backdoor to the system while masquerading as legitimate software
Deploying ransomware, as seen last year in a Dharma attack
Renting out access to the company’s infrastructure to other threat actors
Mining cryptocurrency with the CPUs of zombie devices

In fact, there is little an attacker can’t do once they have gained remote access to these devices. Botnet malware tends to contain self-updating functions that allow the owner to add or remove functionality. And because the attackers are using legitimate administrative RDP credentials, it is extremely difficult for traditional security tools to detect this malicious activity until it is far too late.

DDoS for hire: A cyber-criminal enterprise

The commerce of cyber-crime has boomed in recent years, further complicating matters. There are now subscription-based and rental models easily available on the Dark Web for a range of illegal activities from Ransomware-as-a-Service to private data auctions. As a result, it is becoming increasingly common for attackers to infect servers and sell the use of these bots online. DDoS for hire services offer access to botnets for as little as $20 per hour. In fact, some of these kits are even legal and market themselves as ‘IP stressers’ or ‘booters’, which can be used legitimately to test the resilience of a website, but are often exploited and used to take down sites and networks.

These developments have sparked a new wave in DDoS and botnet malware attacks as hackers capitalize on the added financial incentive to create botnets and rent them on the Dark Web. ‘Botnet builder’ tools help low-skilled attackers create bots by providing botnet malware and assisting with the initial infection. Sophisticated RDP attacks have blossomed as a result of these kits, which lower the skill-threshold of such attacks and thus make them widely accessible.

Automated RDP attack under the microscope

An Internet-facing RDP server hosting an online games site was recently compromised at a technology company with around 500 devices on its network. The attacker used brute force to glean the correct password and gain remote access to the desktop. It was at this point that Darktrace’s Cyber AI began to detect unusual administrative RDP connections from rare external locations.

In many ways, this incident is typical of an RDP compromise. Credential brute-forcing is a common initial vector for server-side attacks, alongside credential stuffing and exploiting vulnerabilities. In this case, the threat actor likely planned to utilize the exposed server as a pivot point to infect other internal and external devices, possibly to create a botnet-for-hire or exfiltrate sensitive information.

Figure 2: Cyber AI Analyst highlights unusual connections to internal IP addresses from an example breach device

Approximately 14 hours after this compromise, the attacker downloaded multiple files from rare domains. Over the next 18 hours the attacker made over 4.4 million internal and external connection attempts on port 445 using the vulnerable SMBv1 protocol. The majority of these attempts were SMB Session Failures using the credential “administrator”. The server engaged in successful SMB sessions with over 270 internal and external IP addresses.

Outgoing connections to rare but benign locations on ports normally used internally may not match a specific attack profile, meaning they are missed by signature-based security tools. However, despite a lack of threat intelligence on the multiple file download sources, Darktrace’s AI was able to observe the highly unusual nature of the activity, leading to high-confidence detections.

*Figure 3: An example graph from Darktrace’s Threat Visualizer showing a large increase in the number of anomalous external connections*

Botnet malware and automation

The speed of movement and lack of data exfiltration in this incident suggest that the attack was automated, likely with the help of botnet builder tools. The use of automation to accelerate and mask the breach could have led to severe consequences had Darktrace not alerted the security team in the initial stages.

Attacks against Internet-facing RDP servers remain one of the most common initial infection vectors. With the rise of automated scanning services and botnet malware tools, the ease of compromise has shot up. It is only matter of time before exposed servers are exploited. Furthermore, heavily automated attacks are constantly running and can spread rapidly across the organization. In such cases, it is vital for security teams to be made aware of malicious activity on devices as quickly as possible.

Darktrace’s AI not only pinpointed by itself that the infection had originated on a specific RDP server, it also detected every step of the attack in real time, despite a lack of clear existing signatures. Self-learning AI detects anomalous activity for users and devices across the digital environment and is therefore crucial in shutting down threats at machine speed. Moreover, the visibility provided by Darktrace DETECT greatly reduces the attack surface and identifies badly maintained shadow IT, providing an extra layer of security over the digital business.

Thanks to Darktrace analyst Tom McHale for his insights on the above threat find.

Darktrace model detections:

Compliance / Internet Facing RDP Server
Anomalous File / Zip or Gzip from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Incoming RAR File
Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Internet Facing System File Download
Experimental / Rare Endpoint with Young Certificate
Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname
Device / New User Agent and New IP
Anomalous File / Anomalous Octet Stream
Device / Anomalous SMB Followed By Multiple Model Breaches
Device / Anomalous RDP Followed By Multiple Model Breaches
Compliance / External Windows Communications
Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server
Device / Increased External Connectivity
Device / SMB Session Bruteforce
Unusual Activity / Unusual Activity from New Device
Device / Network Scan - Low Anomaly Score
Device / Large Number of Connections to New Endpoints
Device / High Volume of Connections from Guest or New Device
Compromise / Suspicious File and C2
Anomalous File / Script from Rare Location
Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations
Device / Initial Breach Chain Compromise
Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server
Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score
Device / Suspicious Domain
Compromise / Beacon to Young Endpoint

‍

Written by

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

Inside the SOC

Written by

Max Heinemeyer

Global Field CISO

•

September 8, 2025

Emma Foulger

Global Threat Research Operations Lead

Product Marketing Manager, Network Detection & Response

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

Network

September 9, 2025

The benefits of bringing together network and email security

In many organizations, network and email security operate in isolation. Each solution is tasked with defending its respective environment, even though both are facing the same advanced, multi-domain threats.

This siloed approach overlooks a critical reality: email remains the most common vector for initiating cyber-attacks, while the network is the primary stage on which those attacks progress. Without direct integration between these two domains, organizations risk leaving blind spots that adversaries can exploit.

A modern security strategy needs to unify email and network defenses, not just in name, but in how they share intelligence, conduct investigations, and coordinate response actions. Let’s take a look at how this joined-up approach delivers measurable technical, operational, and commercial benefits.

Technical advantages

Pre-alert intelligence: Gathering data before the threat strikes

Most security tools start working when something goes wrong – an unusual login, a flagged attachment, a confirmed compromise. But by then, attackers may already be a step ahead.

By unifying network and email security under a single AI platform (like the Darktrace Active AI Security Platform), you can analyze patterns across both environments in real time, even when there are no alerts. This ongoing monitoring builds a behavioral understanding of every user, device, and domain in your ecosystem.

That means when an email arrives from a suspicious domain, the system already knows whether that domain has appeared on your network before – and whether its behavior has been unusual. Likewise, when new network activity involves a domain first spotted in an email, it’s instantly placed in the right context.

This intelligence isn’t built on signatures or after-the-fact compromise indicators – it’s built on live behavioral baselines, giving your defenses the ability to flag threats before damage is done.

Alert-related intelligence: Connecting the dots in real time

Once an alert does fire, speed and context matter. The Darktrace Cyber AI Analyst can automatically investigate across both environments, piecing together network and email evidence into a single, cohesive incident.

Instead of leaving analysts to sift through fragmented logs, the AI links events like a phishing email to suspicious lateral movement on the recipient’s device, keeping the full attack chain intact. Investigations that might take hours – or even days – can be completed in minutes, with far fewer false positives to wade through.

This is more than a time-saver. It ensures defenders maintain visibility after the first sign of compromise, following the attacker as they pivot into network infrastructure, cloud services, or other targets. That cross-environment continuity is impossible to achieve with disconnected point solutions or siloed workflows.

Operational advantages

Streamlining SecOps across teams

In many organizations, email security is managed by IT, while network defense belongs to the SOC. The result? Critical information is scattered between tools and teams, creating blind spots just when you need clarity.

When email and network data flow into a single platform, everyone is working from the same source of truth. SOC analysts gain immediate visibility into email threats without opening another console or sending a request to another department. The IT team benefits from the SOC’s deeper investigative context.

The outcome is more than convenience: it’s faster, more informed decision-making across the board.

Reducing time-to-meaning and enabling faster response

A unified platform removes the need to manually correlate alerts between tools, reducing time-to-meaning for every incident. Built-in AI correlation instantly ties together related events, guiding analysts toward coordinated responses with higher confidence.

Instead of relying on manual SIEM rules or pre-built SOAR playbooks, the platform connects the dots in real time, and can even trigger autonomous response actions across both environments simultaneously. This ensures attacks are stopped before they can escalate, regardless of where they begin.

Commercial advantages

While purchasing “best-of-breed" for all your different tools might sound appealing, it often leads to a patchwork of solutions with overlapping costs and gaps in coverage. However good a “best-in-breed" email security solution might be in the email realm, it won't be truly effective without visibility across domains and an AI analyst piecing intelligence together. That’s why we think “best-in-suite" is the only “best-in-breed" approach that works – choosing a high-quality platform ensures that every new capability strengthens the whole system.

On top of that, security budgets are under constant pressure. Managing separate vendors for email and network defense means juggling multiple contracts, negotiating different SLAs, and stitching together different support models.

With a single provider for both, procurement and vendor management become far simpler. You deal with one account team, one support channel, and one unified strategy for both environments. If you choose to layer on managed services, you get consistent expertise across your whole security footprint.

Even more importantly, an integrated AI platform sets the stage for growth. Once email and network are under the same roof, adding coverage for other attack surfaces – like cloud or identity – is straightforward. You’re building on the same architecture, not bolting on new point solutions that create more complexity.

Check out the white paper, The Modern Security Stack: Why Your NDR and Email Security Solutions Need to Work Together, to explore these benefits in more depth, with real-world examples and practical steps for unifying your defenses.

[related-resource]

About the author

Mikey Anderson

Product Marketing Manager, Network Detection & Response

Blog

September 9, 2025

Unpacking the Salesloft Incident: Insights from Darktrace Observations

Introduction

On August 26, 2025, Google Threat intelligence Group released a report detailing a widespread data theft campaign targeting the sales automation platform Salesloft, via compromised OAuth tokens used by the third-party Drift AI chat agent [1][2]. The attack has been attributed to the threat actor UNC6395 by Google Threat Intelligence and Mandiant [1].

The attack is believed to have begun in early August 2025 and continued through until mid-August 2025 [1], with the threat actor exporting significant volumes of data from multiple Salesforce instances [1]. Then sifting through this data for anything that could be used to compromise the victim’s environments such as access keys, tokens or passwords. This had led to Google Threat Intelligence Group assessing that the primary intent of the threat actor is credential harvesting, and later reporting that it was aware of in excess of 700 potentially impacted organizations [3].

Salesloft previously stated that, based on currently available data, customers that do not integrate with Salesforce are unaffected by this campaign [2]. However, on August 28, Google Threat Intelligence Group announced that “Based on new information identified by GTIG, the scope of this compromise is not exclusive to the Salesforce integration with Salesloft Drift and impacts other integrations” [2]. Google Threat Intelligence has since advised that any and all authentication tokens stored in or connected to the Drift platform be treated as potentially compromised [1].

This campaign demonstrates how attackers are increasingly exploiting trusted Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) integrations as a pathway into enterprise environment.

By abusing these integrations, threat actors were able to exfiltrate sensitive business data at scale, bypassing traditional security controls. Rather than relying on malware or obvious intrusion techniques, the adversaries leveraged legitimate credentials and API traffic that resembled legitimate Salesforce activity to achieve their goals. This type of activity is far harder to detect with conventional security tools, since it blends in with the daily noise of business operations.

The incident underscores the escalating significance of autonomous coverage within SaaS and third-party ecosystems. As businesses increasingly depend on interconnected platforms, visibility gaps become evident that cannot be managed by conventional perimeter and endpoint defenses.

By developing a behavioral comprehension of each organization's distinct use of cloud services, anomalies can be detected, such as logins from unexpected locations, unusually high volumes of API requests, or unusual document activity. These indications serve as an early alert system, even when intruders use legitimate tokens or accounts, enabling security teams to step in before extensive data exfiltration takes place

What happened?

The campaign is believed to have started on August 8, 2025, with malicious activity continuing until at least August 18. The threat actor, tracked as UNC6395, gained access via compromised OAuth tokens associated with Salesloft Drift integrations into Salesforce [1]. Once tokens were obtained, the attackers were able to issue large volumes of Salesforce API requests, exfiltrating sensitive customer and business data.

Initial Intrusion

The attackers first established access by abusing OAuth and refresh tokens from the Drift integration. These tokens gave them persistent access into Salesforce environments without requiring further authentication [1]. To expand their foothold, the threat actor also made use of TruffleHog [4], an open-source secrets scanner, to hunt for additional exposed credentials. Logs later revealed anomalous IAM updates, including unusual UpdateAccessKey activity, which suggested attempts to ensure long-term persistence and control within compromised accounts.

Internal Reconnaissance & Data Exfiltration

Once inside, the adversaries began exploring the Salesforce environments. They ran queries designed to pull sensitive data fields, focusing on objects such as Cases, Accounts, Users, and Opportunities [1]. At the same time, the attackers sifted through this information to identify secrets that could enable access to other systems, including AWS keys and Snowflake credentials [4]. This phase demonstrated the opportunistic nature of the campaign, with the actors looking for any data that could be repurposed for further compromise.

Lateral Movement

Salesloft and Mandiant investigations revealed that the threat actor also created at least one new user account in early September. Although follow-up activity linked to this account was limited, the creation itself suggested a persistence mechanism designed to survive remediation efforts. By maintaining a separate identity, the attackers ensured they could regain access even if their stolen OAuth tokens were revoked.

Accomplishing the mission

The data taken from Salesforce environments included valuable business records, which attackers used to harvest credentials and identify high-value targets. According to Mandiant, once the data was exfiltrated, the actors actively sifted through it to locate sensitive information that could be leveraged in future intrusions [1]. In response, Salesforce and Salesloft revoked OAuth tokens associated with Drift integrations on August 20 [1], a containment measure aimed at cutting off the attackers’ primary access channel and preventing further abuse.

How did the attack bypass the rest of the security stack?

The campaign effectively bypassed security measures by using legitimate credentials and OAuth tokens through the Salesloft Drift integration. This rendered traditional security defenses like endpoint protection and firewalls ineffective, as the activity appeared non-malicious [1]. The attackers blended into normal operations by using common user agents and making queries through the Salesforce API, which made their activity resemble legitimate integrations and scripts. This allowed them to operate undetected in the SaaS environment, exploiting the trust in third-party connections and highlighting the limitations of traditional detection controls.

Darktrace Coverage

Anomalous activities have been identified across multiple Darktrace deployments that appear associated with this campaign. This included two cases on customers based within the United States who had a Salesforce integration, where the pattern of activities was notably similar.

On August 17, Darktrace observed an account belonging to one of these customers logging in from the rare endpoint 208.68.36[.]90, while the user was seen active from another location. This IP is a known indicator of compromise (IoC) reported by open-source intelligence (OSINT) for the campaign [2].

Figure 1: Cyber AI Analyst Incident summarizing the suspicious login seen for the account.

The login event was associated with the application Drift, further connecting the events to this campaign.

Figure 2: Advanced Search logs showing the Application used to login.

Following the login, the actor initiated a high volume of Salesforce API requests using methods such as GET, POST, and DELETE. The GET requests targeted endpoints like /services/data/v57.0/query and /services/data/v57.0/sobjects/Case/describe, where the former is used to retrieve records based on a specific criterion, while the latter provides metadata for the Case object, including field names and data types [5,6].

Subsequently, a POST request to /services/data/v57.0/jobs/query was observed, likely to initiate a Bulk API query job for extracting large volumes of data from the Ingest Job endpoint [7,8].

Finally, a DELETE request to remove an ingestion job batch, possibly an attempt to obscure traces of prior data access or manipulation.

A case on another US-based customer took place a day later, on August 18. This again began with an account logging in from the rare IP 208.68.36[.]90 involving the application Drift. This was followed by Salesforce GET requests targeting the same endpoints as seen in the previous case, and then a POST to the Ingest Job endpoint and finally a DELETE request, all occurring within one minute of the initial suspicious login.

The chain of anomalous behaviors, including a suspicious login and delete request, resulted in Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability suggesting a ‘Disable user’ action. However, the customer’s deployment configuration required manual confirmation for the action to take effect.

Figure 3: An example model alert for the user, triggered due to an anomalous API DELETE request.

Figure 4: Model Alert Event Log showing various model alerts for the account that ultimately led to an Autonomous Response model being triggered.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this incident underscores the escalating risks of SaaS supply chain attacks, where third-party integrations can become avenues for attacks. It demonstrates how adversaries can exploit legitimate OAuth tokens and API traffic to circumvent traditional defenses. This emphasizes the necessity for constant monitoring of SaaS and cloud activity, beyond just endpoints and networks, while also reinforcing the significance of applying least privilege access and routinely reviewing OAuth permissions in cloud environments. Furthermore, it provides a wider perspective into the evolution of the threat landscape, shifting towards credential and token abuse as opposed to malware-driven compromise.

‍

Credit to Emma Foulger (Global Threat Research Operations Lead), Calum Hall (Technical Content Researcher), Signe Zaharka (Principal Cyber Analyst), Min Kim (Senior Cyber Analyst), Nahisha Nobregas (Senior Cyber Analyst), Priya Thapa (Cyber Analyst)

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

· SaaS / Access / Unusual External Source for SaaS Credential Use

· SaaS / Compromise / Login From Rare Endpoint While User Is Active

· SaaS / Compliance / Anomalous Salesforce API Event

· SaaS / Unusual Activity / Multiple Unusual SaaS Activities

· Antigena / SaaS / Antigena Unusual Activity Block

· Antigena / SaaS / Antigena Suspicious Source Activity Block

Customers should consider integrating Salesforce with Darktrace where possible. These integrations allow better visibility and correlation to spot unusual behavior and possible threats.