December 21, 2020

How AI Stopped a WastedLocker Ransomware Intrusion & Fast

Stop WastedLocker ransomware in its tracks with Darktrace AI technology. Learn about how AI detected a recent attack using 'Living off the Land' techniques.

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

Dec 2020

Since first being discovered in May 2020, WastedLocker has made quite a name for itself, quickly becoming an issue for businesses and cyber security firms around the world. WastedLocker is known for its sophisticated methods of obfuscation and steep ransom demands.

Its use of ‘Living off the Land’ techniques makes a WastedLocker attack extremely difficult for legacy security tools to detect. An ever-decreasing dwell time – the time between initial intrusion and final execution – means human responders alone struggle to contain the ransomware variant before damage is done.

This blog examines the anatomy of a WastedLocker intrusion that targeted a US agricultural organization in December. Darktrace’s AI detected and investigated the incident in real time, and we can see how Darktrace RESPOND would have autonomously taken action to stop the attack before encryption had begun.

As ransomware dwell time shrinks to hours rather than days, security teams are increasingly relying on artificial intelligence to stop threats from escalating at the earliest signs of compromise – containing attacks even when they strike at night or on the weekend.

How the WastedLocker attack unfolded

Initial intrusion

The initial infection appears to have taken place when an employee was deceived into downloading a fake browser update. Darktrace AI was monitoring the behavior of around 5,000 devices at the organization, continuously adapting its understanding of the evolving ‘pattern of life’. It detected the first signs of a threat when a virtual desktop device started making HTTP and HTTPS connections to external destinations that were deemed unusual for the organization. The graph below depicts how the patient zero device exhibited a spike in internal connections around December 4.

*Figure 2: The patient zero device exhibiting a spike in internal connections, with orange dots indicating model breaches of varying severity*

Reconnaissance

Attempted reconnaissance began just 11 minutes after the initial intrusion. Again, Darktrace immediately picked up on the activity, detecting unusual ICMP ping scans and targeted address scans on ports 135, 139 and 445; presumably as the attacker looked for potential further Windows targets. The below demonstrates the scanning detections based on the unusual number of new failed connections.

*Figure 3: Darktrace detecting an unusual number of failed connections*

Lateral movement

The attacker used an existing administrative credential to authenticate against a Domain Controller, initiating new service control over SMB. Darktrace picked this up immediately, identifying it as unusual behavior.

*Figure 4: Darktrace identifying the DCE-RPC requests*

*Figure 5: Darktrace surfacing the SMB writes*

Several hours later – and in the early hours of the morning – the attacker used a temporary admin account ‘tempadmin’ to move to another Domain Controller over SMB. Darktrace instantly detected this as it was highly unusual to use a temporary admin account to connect from a virtual desktop to a Domain Controller.

*Figure 6: Further anomalous connections detected the following day*

Lock and load: WastedLocker prepares to strike

During the beaconing activity, the attacker also conducted internal reconnaissance and managed to establish successful administrative and remote connections to other internal devices by using tools already present. Soon after, a transfer of suspicious .csproj files was detected by Darktrace, and at least four other devices began exhibiting similar command and control (C2) communications.

‍

However, with Darktrace’s real-time detections – and Cyber AI Analyst investigating and reporting on the incident in a number of minutes, the security team were able to contain the attack, taking the infected devices offline.

‍

Automated investigations with Cyber AI Analyst

Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst launched an automatic investigation around every anomaly detection, forming hypotheses, asking questions about its own findings, and forming accurate answers at machine speed. It then generated high-level, intuitive incident summaries for the security team. Over the 48 hour period, the AI Analyst surfaced just six security incidents in total, with three of these directly relating to the WastedLocker intrusion.

*Figure 7: The Cyber AI Analyst threat tray*

‍

The snapshot below shows a VMWare device (patient zero) making repeated external connections to rare destinations, scanning the network and using new admin credentials.

*Figure 8: Cyber AI Analyst investigates*

‍

Darktrace RESPOND: AI that responds when the security team cannot

Darktrace RESPOND – the world’s first and only Autonomous Response technology – was configured in passive mode, meaning it did not actively interfere with the attack, but if we dive back into the Threat Visualizer we can see that Antigena in fully autonomous mode would have responded to the attack at this early stage, buying the security team valuable time.

In this case, after the initial unusual SSL C2 detection (based on a combination of destination rarity, JA3 unusualness and frequency analysis), RESPOND (formerly known as 'Antigena', as shown in the screenshots below) suggested instantly blocking the C2 traffic on port 443 and parallel internal scanning on port 135.

*Figure 9: The Threat Visualizer reveals the action Antigena would have taken*

When beaconing was later observed to bywce.payment.refinedwebs[.]com, this time over HTTP to /updateSoftwareVersion, RESPOND escalated its response by blocking the further C2 channels.

*Figure 10: Antigena escalates its response*

The vast majority of response tools rely on hard-coded, pre-defined rules, formulated as ‘If X, do Y’. This can lead to false positives that unnecessarily take devices offline and hamper productivity. Darktrace RESPOND's actions are proportionate, bespoke to the organization, and not created in advance. Darktrace Antigena autonomously chose what to block and the severity of the blocks based on the context of the intrusion, without a human pre-eminently hard-coding any commands or set responses.

‍

Every response over the 48 hours was related to the incident – RESPOND did not try to take action on anything else during the intrusion period. It simply would have actioned a surgical response to contain the threat, while allowing the rest of the business to carry on as usual. There were a total of 59 actions throughout the incident time period – excluding the ‘Watched Domain Block’ actions shown below – which are used during incident response to proactively shut down C2 communication.

*Figure 11: All Antigena action attempts during the intrusion period across the whole organization*

RESPOND would have delivered those blocks via whatever integration is most suitable for the organization – whether that be Firewall integrations, NACL integrations or other native integrations. The technology would have blocked the malicious activity on the relevant ports and protocols for several hours – surgically interrupting the threat actors’ intrusion activity, thus preventing further escalation and giving the security team air cover.

‍

Stopping WastedLocker ransomware before encryption ensues

This attack used many notable Tools, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs) to bypass signature-based tools. It took advantage of ‘Living off the Land’ techniques, including Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI), Powershell, and default admin credential use. Only one of the involved C2 domains had a single hit on Open Source Intelligence Lists (OSINT); the others were unknown at the time. The C2 was also encrypted with legitimate Thawte SSL Certificates.

For these reasons, it is plausible that without Darktrace in place, the ransomware would have been successful in encrypting files, preventing business operations at a critical time and possibly inflicting huge financial and reputational losses to the organization in question.

Darktrace’s AI detects and stops ransomware in its tracks without relying on threat intelligence. Ransomware has thrived this year, with attackers constantly coming up with new attack TTPs. However, the above threat find demonstrates that even targeted, sophisticated strains of ransomware can be stopped with AI technology.

Thanks to Darktrace analyst Signe Zaharka for her insights on the above threat find.

Learn more about Autonomous Response

Darktrace model detections:

Compliance / High Priority Compliance Model Breach
Compliance / Weak Active Directory Ticket Encryption
Anomalous Connection / Cisco Umbrella Block Page
Anomalous Server Activity / Anomalous External Activity from Critical Network Device
Compliance / Default Credential Usage
Compromise / Suspicious TLS Beaconing To Rare External
Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server
Device / Lateral Movement and C2 Activity
Compromise / SSL Beaconing to Rare Destination
Device / New or Uncommon WMI Activity
Compromise / Watched Domain
Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Watched Domain Block
Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination
Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare
Device / Multiple Lateral Movement Model Breaches
Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score
Device / Large Number of Model Breaches
Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare
Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Controlled and Model Breach
Anomalous Connection / New or Uncommon Service Control
Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Significant Anomaly from Client Block
Compromise / SSL or HTTP Beacon
Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious Activity Block
Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Breaches Over Time Block
Compromise / Sustained SSL or HTTP Increase
Unusual Activity / Unusual Internal Connections
Device / ICMP Address Scan

‍

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)

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