Cybersecurity has traditionally organized risk around incidents, breaches, campaigns, and threat groups. Those elements still matter—but if we fixate on individual incidents, we risk missing the shaping of the entire ecosystem. Nation‑state–aligned operators are increasingly using cyber operations to establish long-term strategic leverage, not just to execute isolated attacks or short‑term objectives.
Our latest research, Crimson Echo, shifts the lens accordingly. Instead of dissecting campaigns, malware families, or actor labels as discrete events, the threat research team analyzed Chinese‑nexus activity as a continuum of behaviors over time. That broader view reveals how these operators position themselves within environments: quietly, patiently, and persistently—often preparing the ground long before any recognizable “incident” occurs.
How Chinese-nexus cyber threats have changed over time
Chinese-nexus cyber activity has evolved in four phases over the past two decades. This ranges from early, high-volume operations in the 1990s and early 2000s to more structured, strategically-aligned activity in the 2010s, and now toward highly adaptive, identity-centric intrusions.
Today’s phase is defined by scale, operational restraint, and persistence. Attackers are establishing access, evaluating its strategic value, and maintaining it over time. This reflects a broader shift: cyber operations are increasingly integrated into long-term economic and geopolitical strategies. Access to digital environments, specifically those tied to critical national infrastructure, supply chains, and advanced technology, has become a form of strategic leverage for the long-term.
How Darktrace analysts took a behavioral approach to a complex problem
One of the challenges in analyzing nation-state cyber activity is attribution. Traditional approaches often rely on tracking specific threat groups, malware families, or infrastructure. But these change constantly, and in the case of Chinese-nexus operations, they often overlap.
Crimson Echo is the result of a retrospective analysis of three years of anomalous activity observed across the Darktrace fleet between July 2022 and September 2025. Using behavioral detection, threat hunting, open-source intelligence, and a structured attribution framework (the Darktrace Cybersecurity Attribution Framework), the team identified dozens of medium- to high-confidence cases and analyzed them for recurring operational patterns.
This long-horizon, behavior-centric approach allows Darktrace to identify consistent patterns in how intrusions unfold, reinforcing that behavioral patterns that matter.
What the data shows
Several clear trends emerged from the analysis:
- Targeting is concentrated in strategically important sectors. Across the dataset, 88% of intrusions occurred in organizations classified as critical infrastructure, including transportation, critical manufacturing, telecommunications, government, healthcare, and Information Technology (IT) services.
- Strategically important Western economies are a primary focus. The US alone accounted for 22.5% of observed cases, and when combined with major European economies including Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, over half of all intrusions (55%) were concentrated in these regions.
- Nearly 63% of intrusions of intrusions began with the exploitation of internet-facing systems, reinforcing the continued risk posed by externally exposed infrastructure.
Two models of cyber operations
Across the dataset, Chinese-nexus activity followed two operational models.
The first is best described as “smash and grab.” These are short-horizon intrusions optimized for speed. Attackers move quickly – often exfiltrating data within 48 hours – and prioritize scale over stealth. The median duration of these compromises is around 10 days. It’s clear they are willing to risk detection for short-term gain.
The second is “low and slow.” These operations were less prevalent in the dataset, but potentially more consequential. Here, attackers prioritize persistence, establishing durable access through identity systems and legitimate administrative tools, so they can maintain access undetected for months or even years. In one notable case, the actor had fully compromised the environment and established persistence, only to resurface in the environment more than 600 days after. The operational pause underscores both the depth of the intrusion and the actor’s long‑term strategic intent. This suggests that cyber access is a strategic asset to preserve and leverage over time, and we observed these attacks most often inin sectors of the high strategic importance.
It’s important to note that the same operational ecosystem can employ both models concurrently, selecting the appropriate model based on target value, urgency, intended access. The observation of a “smash and grab” model should not be solely interpreted as a failure of tradecraft, but instead an operational choice likely aligned with objectives. Where “low and slow” operations are optimized for patience, smash and grab is optimized for speed; both seemingly are deliberate operational choices, not necessarily indicators of capability.
Rethinking cyber risk
For many organizations, cyber risk is still framed as a series of discrete events. Something happens, it is detected and contained, and the organization moves on. But persistent access, particularly in deeply interconnected environments that span cloud, identity-based SaaS and agentic systems, and complex supply chain networks, creates a major ongoing exposure risk. Even in the absence of disruption or data theft, that access can provide insight into operations, dependencies, and strategic decision-making. Cyber risk increasingly resembles long-term competitive intelligence.
This has impact beyond the Security Operations Center. Organizations need to shift how they think about governance, visibility, and resilience, and treat cyber exposure as a structural business risk instead of an incident response challenge.
What comes next
The goal of this research is to provide a clearer understanding of how these operations work, so defenders can recognize them earlier and respond more effectively. That includes shifting from tracking indicators to understanding behaviors, treating identity providers as critical infrastructure risks, expanding supplier oversight, investing in rapid containment capabilities, and more.
Learn more about the findings of Darktrace’s latest research, Crimson Echo: Understanding Chinese-nexus Cyber Operations Through Behavioral Analysis, by downloading the full report and summaries for business leaders, CISOs, and SOC analysts here.
