Blog
/
/
October 24, 2017

Investigating the BadRabbit Cyber Threat

This blog post describes the currently-circulating ransomware called BadRabbit and how Darktrace’s machine learning technology detects it.
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
Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
24
Oct 2017

This blog post describes the currently circulating ransomware called BadRabbit and how Darktrace’s machine learning technology detects it. BadRabbit is a self-propagating piece of malware that uses SMB to spread laterally. The campaign is reminiscent of the WannaCry and NotPetya attacks seen earlier this year. Some of the functionality in BadRabbit and the modus operandi of how it infects the targets is similar to the NotPetya attack.

The attack initially hit companies in Russia and Ukraine on October 24th, 2017. Since, the ransomware has spread to other countries across the world as well.

Infection process

The initial infection vector appears to be via drive-by downloads and social engineering using fake Adobe Flash player files. Various news and media websites predominantly but not exclusively in Russia and Ukraine served their visitors with pop-up alerts asking them to download Adobe Flash player software updates. It is unclear at this point if the websites were compromised, or if the advertisement networks were leveraged to display the fake Adobe Flash downloads.

This technique of presenting users with fake updates, commonly Adobe Flash, containing ransomware, adware or other forms of malware, has gained traction in the last six months. The same approach is often applied to trick users into inadvisable actions, such as downloading malware when browsing TV streaming websites, or torrent websites.

Once downloaded, a user has to execute the fake Adobe Flash player with administrative credentials manually. No exploits are used to automatically execute the malware. The malware creates a scheduled task for another file upon execution. The ransomware then encrypts files on the compromised devices using a hard-coded list of file extensions using a RSA 2048 key. The criminals demand a Bitcoin payment for decrypting the files. Users are pointed to a .onion website, which has to be accessed via Tor, to pay the ransom.

BadRabbit can brute-force its way over SMB to other devices on the network using a hard-coded list of common credentials. The malware appears to contain a stripped-down version of the Mimikatz tool which is used to gather credentials on Windows machines. This is likely used to further enhance its lateral movement capabilities using SMB.

Update (October 30, 2017): As the investigation of BadRabbit capabilities continued over the weekend, new details about how BadRabbit spreads have been uncovered. BadRabbit appears to be using the EternalRomance exploit that targets CVE-2017-0145, patched by Microsoft in March 2017, to propagate within the internal network over SMB. As Darktrace’s AI does not rely on identifying individual exploits to detect breaches, this latest discovery does not affect Darktrace’s capability to identify BadRabbit infections. All of the previously identified detection capabilities still hold true.

Darktrace instantly detects BadRabbit

Darktrace has strong detection capabilities for this campaign without the use of any signatures. In fact, we alerted a number of our customers within seconds of the initial fake Flash Player download on their respective networks, and well before the extent of the campaign was publicly known.

The initial fake Adobe Flash Player download from 1dnscontrol[.]com is immediately detected as a suspicious download:

If the early signs of BadRabbit go undetected, the infected devices start brute-forcing access to other devices on the network using SMB - causing thousands of SMB session login attempts per endeavored lateral movement over port 445. This highly anomalous behavior marks a sharp departure from customers’ normal ‘pattern of life’, making BadRabbit very easy to detect for Darktrace’s machine learning technology. Within seconds, Darktrace alerted the affected organizations about this attack flagging it as ‘SMB Session Brute Force’. The below shows an ongoing lateral movement attempt from an infected device to another client device using SMB session brute-force.

Infected devices make connection attempts to one or two seemingly randomly generated IP addresses on the internet over port 445 and also port 139. Examples of these failed connection attempts are displayed below. Darktrace instantly recognized this as unusual behavior for the infected device:

Compromised devices will attempt to move laterally on the network in a search for other devices to infect. Darktrace’s AI algorithms can swiftly recognize this anomalous behavior, alerting the affected organization in real time about these ‘Unusual Internal Connections’, as well as potential ‘Network Scans’.

The below model breaches seen in Darktrace are expected in a BadRabbit infection. Please be aware that not all models listed below are expected to breach in every infection - this depends on the actual behavior observed by Darktrace.

Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Destination
Device / SMB Session Brute Force
Unusual Activity / Unusual Internal Connections
Device / Network Scan
Unusual Activity / Sustained Unusual Activity
Anomalous Connection / Suspicious Read / Write Ratio
Compliance / Tor Usage

The Darktrace ‘Omnisearch’ and ‘Advanced Search’ features can be used to identify any connections made to the known network Indicators of Compromise:

1dnscontrol[.]com(hosting the fake Adobe Flash player file)185.149.120[.]3(static IP observed, victims HTTP POSTing to the IP)

Conclusion

BadRabbit is a machine-speed ransomware attack that exhibits some of the functionality and infection mechanics of the WannaCry and NotPetya breaches observed earlier this year. The BadRabbit malware masks itself as an ‘Adobe Flash’ software update, tempting unsuspecting users to initiate a download. After the initial impact, the attack can spread from machine to machine without human intervention.

Darktrace’s AI algorithms are quick to detect the highly anomalous patterns of behavior that BadRabbit triggers on a network, alerting the security team in real time. We have seen BadRabbit bypass traditional security controls around the globe, demonstrating once again the futility of attempting to identify and stop threats with rules and signatures. As Darktrace’s machine learning technology doesn’t rely on any assumptions of what ‘bad’ looks like and detects unfolding attacks not by what they are but by what they do, it is very powerful at catching and stopping ransomware attacks like BadRabbit in real time.

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

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

/

December 22, 2025

The Year Ahead: AI Cybersecurity Trends to Watch in 2026

2026 cyber threat trendsDefault blog imageDefault blog image

Introduction: 2026 cyber trends

Each year, we ask some of our experts to step back from the day-to-day pace of incidents, vulnerabilities, and headlines to reflect on the forces reshaping the threat landscape. The goal is simple:  to identify and share the trends we believe will matter most in the year ahead, based on the real-world challenges our customers are facing, the technology and issues our R&D teams are exploring, and our observations of how both attackers and defenders are adapting.  

In 2025, we saw generative AI and early agentic systems moving from limited pilots into more widespread adoption across enterprises. Generative AI tools became embedded in SaaS products and enterprise workflows we rely on every day, AI agents gained more access to data and systems, and we saw glimpses of how threat actors can manipulate commercial AI models for attacks. At the same time, expanding cloud and SaaS ecosystems and the increasing use of automation continued to stretch traditional security assumptions.

Looking ahead to 2026, we’re already seeing the security of AI models, agents, and the identities that power them becoming a key point of tension – and opportunity -- for both attackers and defenders. Long-standing challenges and risks such as identity, trust, data integrity, and human decision-making will not disappear, but AI and automation will increase the speed and scale of the cyber risk.  

Here's what a few of our experts believe are the trends that will shape this next phase of cybersecurity, and the realities organizations should prepare for.  

Agentic AI is the next big insider risk

In 2026, organizations may experience their first large-scale security incidents driven by agentic AI behaving in unintended ways—not necessarily due to malicious intent, but because of how easily agents can be influenced. AI agents are designed to be helpful, lack judgment, and operate without understanding context or consequence. This makes them highly efficient—and highly pliable. Unlike human insiders, agentic systems do not need to be socially engineered, coerced, or bribed. They only need to be prompted creatively, misinterpret legitimate prompts, or be vulnerable to indirect prompt injection. Without strong controls around access, scope, and behavior, agents may over-share data, misroute communications, or take actions that introduce real business risk. Securing AI adoption will increasingly depend on treating agents as first-class identities—monitored, constrained, and evaluated based on behavior, not intent.

-- Nicole Carignan, SVP of Security & AI Strategy

Prompt Injection moves from theory to front-page breach

We’ll see the first major story of an indirect prompt injection attack against companies adopting AI either through an accessible chatbot or an agentic system ingesting a hidden prompt. In practice, this may result in unauthorized data exposure or unintended malicious behavior by AI systems, such as over-sharing information, misrouting communications, or acting outside their intended scope. Recent attention on this risk—particularly in the context of AI-powered browsers and additional safety layers being introduced to guide agent behavior—highlights a growing industry awareness of the challenge.  

-- Collin Chapleau, Senior Director of Security & AI Strategy

Humans are even more outpaced, but not broken

When it comes to cyber, people aren’t failing; the system is moving faster than they can. Attackers exploit the gap between human judgment and machine-speed operations. The rise of deepfakes and emotion-driven scams that we’ve seen in the last few years reduce our ability to spot the familiar human cues we’ve been taught to look out for. Fraud now spans social platforms, encrypted chat, and instant payments in minutes. Expecting humans to be the last line of defense is unrealistic.

Defense must assume human fallibility and design accordingly. Automated provenance checks, cryptographic signatures, and dual-channel verification should precede human judgment. Training still matters, but it cannot close the gap alone. In the year ahead, we need to see more of a focus on partnership: systems that absorb risk so humans make decisions in context, not under pressure.

-- Margaret Cunningham, VP of Security & AI Strategy

AI removes the attacker bottleneck—smaller organizations feel the impact

One factor that is currently preventing more companies from breaches is a bottleneck on the attacker side: there’s not enough human hacker capital. The number of human hands on a keyboard is a rate-determining factor in the threat landscape. Further advancements of AI and automation will continue to open that bottleneck. We are already seeing that. The ostrich approach of hoping that one’s own company is too obscure to be noticed by attackers will no longer work as attacker capacity increases.  

-- Max Heinemeyer, Global Field CISO

SaaS platforms become the preferred supply chain target

Attackers have learned a simple lesson: compromising SaaS platforms can have big payouts. As a result, we’ll see more targeting of commercial off-the-shelf SaaS providers, which are often highly trusted and deeply integrated into business environments. Some of these attacks may involve software with unfamiliar brand names, but their downstream impact will be significant. In 2026, expect more breaches where attackers leverage valid credentials, APIs, or misconfigurations to bypass traditional defenses entirely.

-- Nathaniel Jones, VP of Security & AI Strategy

Increased commercialization of generative AI and AI assistants in cyber attacks

One trend we’re watching closely for 2026 is the commercialization of AI-assisted cybercrime. For example, cybercrime prompt playbooks sold on the dark web—essentially copy-and-paste frameworks that show attackers how to misuse or jailbreak AI models. It’s an evolution of what we saw in 2025, where AI lowered the barrier to entry. In 2026, those techniques become productized, scalable, and much easier to reuse.  

-- Toby Lewis, Global Head of Threat Analysis

Conclusion

Taken together, these trends underscore that the core challenges of cybersecurity are not changing dramatically -- identity, trust, data, and human decision-making still sit at the core of most incidents. What is changing quickly is the environment in which these challenges play out. AI and automation are accelerating everything: how quickly attackers can scale, how widely risk is distributed, and how easily unintended behavior can create real impact. And as technology like cloud services and SaaS platforms become even more deeply integrated into businesses, the potential attack surface continues to expand.  

Predictions are not guarantees. But the patterns emerging today suggest that 2026 will be a year where securing AI becomes inseparable from securing the business itself. The organizations that prepare now—by understanding how AI is used, how it behaves, and how it can be misused—will be best positioned to adopt these technologies with confidence in the year ahead.

Learn more about how to secure AI adoption in the enterprise without compromise by registering to join our live launch webinar on February 3, 2026.  

Continue reading
About the author
The Darktrace Community

Blog

/

Email

/

December 22, 2025

Why Organizations are Moving to Label-free, Behavioral DLP for Outbound Email

Man at laptopDefault blog imageDefault blog image

Why outbound email DLP needs reinventing

In 2025, the global average cost of a data breach fell slightly — but remains substantial at USD 4.44 million (IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025). The headline figure hides a painful reality: many of these breaches stem not from sophisticated hacks, but from simple human error: mis-sent emails, accidental forwarding, or replying with the wrong attachment. Because outbound email is a common channel for sensitive data leaving an organization, the risk posed by everyday mistakes is enormous.

In 2025, 53% of data breaches involved customer PII, making it the most commonly compromised asset (IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025). This makes “protection at the moment of send” essential. A single unintended disclosure can trigger compliance violations, regulatory scrutiny, and erosion of customer trust –consequences that are disproportionate to the marginal human errors that cause them.

Traditional DLP has long attempted to mitigate these impacts, but it relies heavily on perfect labelling and rigid pattern-matching. In reality, data loss rarely presents itself as a neat, well-structured pattern waiting to be caught – it looks like everyday communication, just slightly out of context.

How data loss actually happens

Most data loss comes from frustratingly familiar scenarios. A mistyped name in auto-complete sends sensitive data to the wrong “Alex.” A user forwards a document to a personal Gmail account “just this once.” Someone shares an attachment with a new or unknown correspondent without realizing how sensitive it is.

Traditional, content-centric DLP rarely catches these moments. Labels are missing or wrong. Regexes break the moment the data shifts formats. And static rules can’t interpret the context that actually matters – the sender-recipient relationship, the communication history, or whether this behavior is typical for the user.

It’s the everyday mistakes that hurt the most. The classic example: the Friday 5:58 p.m. mis-send, when auto-complete selects Martin, a former contractor, instead of Marta in Finance.

What traditional DLP approaches offer (and where gaps remain)

Most email DLP today follows two patterns, each useful but incomplete.

  • Policy- and label-centric DLP works when labels are correct — but content is often unlabeled or mislabeled, and maintaining classification adds friction. Gaps appear exactly where users move fastest
  • Rule and signature-based approaches catch known patterns but miss nuance: human error, new workflows, and “unknown unknowns” that don’t match a rule

The takeaway: Protection must combine content + behavior + explainability at send time, without depending on perfect labels.

Your technology primer: The three pillars that make outbound DLP effective

1) Label-free (vs. data classification)

Protects all content, not just what’s labeled. Label-free analysis removes classification overhead and closes gaps from missing or incorrect tags. By evaluating content and context at send time, it also catches misdelivery and other payload-free errors.

  • No labeling burden; no regex/rule maintenance
  • Works when tags are missing, wrong, or stale
  • Detects misdirected sends even when labels look right

2) Behavioral (vs. rules, signatures, threat intelligence)

Understands user behavior, not just static patterns. Behavioral analysis learns what’s normal for each person, surfacing human error and subtle exfiltration that rules can’t. It also incorporates account signals and inbound intel, extending across email and Teams.

  • Flags risk without predefined rules or IOCs
  • Catches misdelivery, unusual contacts, personal forwards, odd timing/volume
  • Blends identity and inbound context across channels

3) Proprietary DSLM (vs. generic LLM)

Optimized for precise, fast, explainable on-send decisions. A DSLM understands email/DLP semantics, avoids generative risks, and stays auditable and privacy-controlled, delivering intelligence reliably without slowing mail flow.

  • Low-latency, on-send enforcement
  • Non-generative for predictable, explainable outcomes
  • Governed model with strong privacy and auditability

The Darktrace approach to DLP

Darktrace / EMAIL – DLP stops misdelivery and sensitive data loss at send time using hold/notify/justify/release actions. It blends behavioral insight with content understanding across 35+ PII categories, protecting both labeled and unlabeled data. Every action is paired with clear explainability: AI narratives show exactly why an email was flagged, supporting analysts and helping end-users learn. Deployment aligns cleanly with existing SOC workflows through mail-flow connectors and optional Microsoft Purview label ingestion, without forcing duplicate policy-building.

Deployment is simple: Microsoft 365 routes outbound mail to Darktrace for real-time, inline decisions without regex or rule-heavy setup.

A buyer’s checklist for DLP solutions

When choosing your DLP solution, you want to be sure that it can deliver precise, explainable protection at the moment it matters – on send – without operational drag.  

To finish, we’ve compiled a handy list of questions you can ask before choosing an outbound DLP solution:

  • Can it operate label free when tags are missing or wrong? 
  • Does it truly learn per user behavior (no shortcuts)? 
  • Is there a domain specific model behind the content understanding (not a generic LLM)? 
  • Does it explain decisions to both analysts and end users? 
  • Will it integrate with your label program and SOC workflows rather than duplicate them? 

For a deep dive into Darktrace’s DLP solution, check out the full solution brief.

[related-resource]

Continue reading
About the author
Carlos Gray
Senior Product Marketing Manager, Email
Your data. Our AI.
Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI