November 7, 2022

[Part 1] Analysis of a Raccoon Stealer v1 Infection

Darktrace’s SOC team observed a fast-paced compromise involving Raccoon Stealer v1. See which steps the Raccoon Stealer v1 took to extract company data!

Written by

Mark Turner

SOC Shift Supervisor

Written by

Sam Lister

Specialist Security 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

Mark Turner

SOC Shift Supervisor

Written by

Sam Lister

Specialist Security Researcher

Nov 2022

Introduction

Towards the end of March 2022, the operators of Raccoon Stealer announced the closure of the Raccoon Stealer project [1]. In May 2022, Raccoon Stealer v2 was unleashed onto the world, with huge numbers of cases being detected across Darktrace’s client base. In this series of blog posts, we will follow the development of Raccoon Stealer between March and September 2022. We will first shed light on how Raccoon Stealer functioned before its demise, by providing details of a Raccoon Stealer v1 infection which Darktrace’s SOC saw within a client network on the 18^th March 2022. In the follow-up post, we will provide details about the surge in Raccoon Stealer v2 cases that Darktrace’s SOC has observed since May 2022.

What is Raccoon Stealer?

The misuse of stolen account credentials is a primary method used by threat actors to gain initial access to target environments [2]. Threat actors have several means available to them for obtaining account credentials. They may, for example, distribute phishing emails which trick their recipients into divulging account credentials. Alternatively, however, they may install information-stealing malware (i.e, info-stealers) onto users’ devices. The results of credential theft can be devastating. Threat actors may use the credentials to gain access to an organization’s SaaS environment, or they may use them to drain users’ online bank accounts or cryptocurrency wallets.

Raccoon Stealer is a Malware-as-a-Service (MaaS) info-stealer first publicized in April 2019 on Russian-speaking hacking forums.

Figure 1: One of the first known mentions of Raccoon Stealer on a Russian-speaking hacking forum named ‘Hack Forums’ on the 13th April 2019

The team of individuals behind Raccoon Stealer provide a variety of services to their customers (known as ‘affiliates’), including access to the info-stealer, an easy-to-use automated backend panel, hosting infrastructure, and 24/7 customer support [3].

Once Raccoon Stealer affiliates gain access to the info-stealer, it is up to them to decide how to distribute it. Since 2019, affiliates have been observed distributing the info-stealer via a variety of methods, such as exploit kits, phishing emails, and fake cracked software websites [3]/[4]. Once affiliates succeed in installing Raccoon Stealer onto target systems, the info-stealer will typically seek to obtain sensitive information saved in browsers and cryptocurrency wallets. The info-stealer will then exfiltrate the stolen data to a Command and Control (C2) server. The affiliate can then use the stolen data to conduct harmful follow-up activities.

Towards the end of March 2022, the team behind Raccoon Stealer publicly announced that they would be suspending their operations after one of their core developers was killed during the Russia-Ukraine conflict [5].

Figure 2: Raccoon Stealer resignation post on March 25th 2022

Recent details shared by the US Department of Justice [6]/[7] indicate that it was in fact the arrest, rather than the death, of a key Raccoon Stealer operator which led the Raccoon Stealer team to suspend their operations [8].

The closure of the Raccoon Stealer project, which ultimately resulted from the FBI-backed dismantling of Raccoon Stealer’s infrastructure in March 2022, did not last long, with the completion of Raccoon Stealer v2 being announced on the Raccoon Stealer Telegram channel on the 17^th May 2022 [9].

Figure 3: Telegram post about new version of Raccoon Stealer

In the second part of this blog series, we will provide details of the recent surge in Raccoon Stealer v2 activity. In this post, however, we will provide insight into how the old version of Raccoon Stealer functioned just before its demise, by providing details of a Raccoon Stealer v1 infection which occurred on the 18^th March 2022.

Attack Details

On the 18^th March, at around 13:00 (UTC), a user’s device within a customer’s network was seen contacting several websites providing fake cracked software.

Figure 4: The above figure — obtained from the Darktrace Event Log for the infected device — highlights its connections to cracked software websites such as ‘licensekeysfree[.]com’ and ‘hdlicense[.]com’ before contacting ‘lion-files[.]xyz’ and ‘www.mediafire[.]com’

The user’s attempt to download cracked software from one of these websites resulted in their device making an HTTP GET request with a URI string containing ‘autodesk-revit-crack-v2022-serial-number-2022’ to an external host named ‘lion-filez[.]xyz’

Figure 5: Screenshot from hdlicense[.]com around the time of the infection shows a “Download” button linking to the ‘lion-filez[.]xyz’ endpoint

The device’s HTTP GET request to lion-filez[.]xyz was immediately followed by an HTTPS connection to the file hosting service, www.mediafire[.]com. Given that threat actors are known to abuse platforms such as MediaFire and Discord CDN to host their malicious payloads, it is likely that the user’s device downloaded the Raccoon Stealer v1 sample over its HTTPS connection to www.mediafire[.]com.

After installing the info-stealer sample, the user’s device was seen making an HTTP GET request with the URI string ‘/g_shock_casio_easy’ to 194.180.191[.]185. The endpoint responded to the request with data related to a Telegram channel named ‘G-Shock’.

Figure 6: Telegram channel ‘@g_shock_casio_easy’

The returned data included the Telegram channel’s description, which in this case, was a base64 encoded and RC4 encrypted string of characters [10]/[11]. The Raccoon Stealer sample decoded and decrypted this string of characters to obtain its C2 IP address, 188.166.49[.]196. This technique used by Raccoon Stealer v1 closely mirrors the espionage method known as ‘dead drop’ — a method in which an individual leaves a physical object such as papers, cash, or weapons in an agreed hiding spot so that the intended recipient can retrieve the object later on without having to come in to contact with the source. In this case, the operators of Raccoon Stealer ‘left’ the malware’s C2 IP address within the description of a Telegram channel. Usage of this method allowed the operators of Raccoon Stealer to easily change the malware’s C2 infrastructure.

After obtaining the C2 IP address from the ‘G-Shock’ Telegram channel, the Raccoon Stealer sample made an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 IP address, 188.166.49[.]196. This POST request contained a Windows GUID, a username, and a configuration ID. These details were RC4 encrypted and base64 encoded [12]. The C2 server responded to this HTTP POST request with JSON-formatted configuration information [13], including an identifier string, URL paths for additional files, along with several other fields. This configuration information was also concealed using RC4 encryption and base64 encoding.

Figure 7- Fields within the JSON-formatted configuration data [13]

In this case, the server’s response included the identifier string ‘hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x’, along with the following URL paths:

/l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/77d765d8831b4a7d8b5e56950ceb96b7c7b0ed70
/l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/0cb4ab70083cf5985b2bac837ca4eacb22e9b711
/l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/5e2a950c07979c670b1553b59b3a25c9c2bb899b
/l/f/hv4inX8BFBZhxYvKFq3x/2524214eeea6452eaad6ea1135ed69e98bf72979

After retrieving configuration data, the user’s device was seen making HTTP GET requests with the above URI strings to the C2 server. The C2 server responded to these requests with legitimate library files such as sqlite3.dll. Raccoon Stealer uses these libraries to extract data from targeted applications.

Once the Raccoon Stealer sample had collected relevant data, it made an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. This posted data likely included a ZIP file (named with the identifier string) containing stolen credentials [13].

The observed infection chain, which lasted around 20 minutes, consisted of the following steps:

1. User’s device installs Raccoon Stealer v1 samples from the user attempting to download cracked software

2. User’s device obtains the info-stealer’s C2 IP address from the description text of a Telegram channel

3. User’s device makes an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. The request contains a Windows GUID, a username, and a configuration ID. The response to the request contains configuration details, including an identifier string and URL paths for additional files

4. User’s device downloads library files from the C2 server

5. User’s device makes an HTTP POST request with the URI string ‘/’ to the C2 server. The request contains stolen data

Darktrace Coverage

Although RESPOND/Network was not enabled on the customer’s deployment, DETECT picked up on several of the info-stealer’s activities. In particular, the device’s downloads of library files from the C2 server caused the following DETECT/Network models to breach:

Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer
Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Zip or Gzip from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations

Figure 8: Event Log for the infected device shows 'Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer' model breach after the device's download of a library file from the C2 server

Since the customer was subscribed to the Darktrace Proactive Threat Notification (PTN) service, they were proactively notified of the info-stealer’s activities. The quick response by Darktrace’s 24/7 SOC team helped the customer to contain the infection and to prevent further damage from being caused. Having been alerted to the info-stealer activity by the SOC team, the customer would also have been able to change the passwords for the accounts whose credentials were exfiltrated.

If RESPOND/Network had been enabled on the customer’s deployment, then it would have blocked the device’s connections to the C2 server, which would have likely prevented any stolen data from being exfiltrated.

Conclusion

Towards the end of March 2022, the team behind Raccoon Stealer announced that they would be suspending their operations. Recent developments suggest that the arrest of a core Raccoon Stealer developer was responsible for this suspension. Just before the Raccoon Stealer team were forced to shut down, Darktrace’s SOC team observed a Raccoon Stealer infection within a client’s network. In this post, we have provided details of the network-based behaviors displayed by the observed Raccoon Stealer sample. Since these v1 samples are no longer active, the details provided here are only intended to provide historical insight into the development of Raccoon Stealer’s operations and the activities carried out by Raccoon Stealer v1 just before its demise. In the next post of this series, we will discuss and provide details of Raccoon Stealer v2 — the new and highly prolific version of Raccoon Stealer.

Thanks to Stefan Rowe and the Threat Research Team for their contributions to this blog.

References

[1] https://twitter.com/3xp0rtblog/status/1507312171914461188

[2] https://www.gartner.com/doc/reprints?id=1-29OTFFPI&ct=220411&st=sb

[3] https://www.cybereason.com/blog/research/hunting-raccoon-stealer-the-new-masked-bandit-on-the-block

[4] https://www.cyberark.com/resources/threat-research-blog/raccoon-the-story-of-a-typical-infostealer

[5] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/raccoon-stealer-malware-suspends-operations-due-to-war-in-ukraine/

[6] https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdtx/pr/newly-unsealed-indictment-charges-ukrainian-national-international-cybercrime-operation

[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fsz6acw-ZJY

[8] https://riskybiznews.substack.com/p/raccoon-stealer-dev-didnt-die-in

[9] https://medium.com/s2wblog/raccoon-stealer-is-back-with-a-new-version-5f436e04b20d

[10] https://blog.cyble.com/2021/10/21/raccoon-stealer-under-the-lens-a-deep-dive-analysis/

[11] https://decoded.avast.io/vladimirmartyanov/raccoon-stealer-trash-panda-abuses-telegram/

[12] https://blogs.blackberry.com/en/2021/09/threat-thursday-raccoon-infostealer

[13] https://cyberint.com/blog/research/raccoon-stealer/

Appendices

Specialist Security Researcher

Inside the SOC

Written by

Mark Turner

SOC Shift Supervisor

Written by

Sam Lister

Specialist Security Researcher

Global Threat Research Operations Lead

•

October 23, 2025

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

Network

October 29, 2025

WSUS Exploited: Darktrace’s Analysis of Post-Exploitation Activities Related to CVE-2025-59287

Introduction

On October 14, 2025, Microsoft disclosed a new critical vulnerability affecting the Windows Server Update Service (WSUS), CVE-2025-59287. Exploitation of the vulnerability could allow an unauthenticated attacker to remotely execute code [1][6].

WSUS allows for centralized distribution of Microsoft product updates [3]; a server running WSUS is likely to have significant privileges within a network making it a valuable target for threat actors. While WSUS servers are not necessarily expected to be open to the internet, open-source intelligence (OSINT) has reported thousands of publicly exposed instances that may be vulnerable to exploitation [2].

Microsoft’s initial ‘Patch Tuesday’ update for this vulnerability did not fully mitigate the risk, and so an out-of-band update followed on October 23 [4][5] . Widespread exploitation of this vulnerability started to be observed shortly after the security update [6], prompting CISA to add CVE-2025-59287 to its Known Exploited Vulnerability Catalog (KEV) on October 24 [7].

Attack Overview

The Darktrace Threat Research team have recently identified multiple potential cases of CVE-2025-59287 exploitation, with two detailed here. While the likely initial access method is consistent across the cases, the follow-up activities differed, demonstrating the variety in which such a CVE can be exploited to fulfil each attacker’s specific goals.

The first signs of suspicious activity across both customers were detected by Darktrace on October 24, the same day this vulnerability was added to CISA’s KEV. Both cases discussed here involve customers based in the United States.

Case Study 1

The first case, involving a customer in the Information and Communication sector, began with an internet-facing device making an outbound connection to the hostname webhook[.]site. Observed network traffic indicates the device was a WSUS server.

OSINT has reported abuse of the workers[.]dev service in exploitation of CVE-2025-59287, where enumerated network information gathered through running a script on the compromised device was exfiltrated using this service [8].

In this case, the majority of connectivity seen to webhook[.]site involved a PowerShell user agent; however, cURL user agents were also seen with some connections taking the form of HTTP POSTs. This connectivity appears to align closely with OSINT reports of CVE-2025-59287 post-exploitation behaviour [8][9].

Connections to webhook[.]site continued until October 26. A single URI was seen consistently until October 25, after which the connections used a second URI with a similar format.

Later on October 26, an escalation in command-and-control (C2) communication appears to have occurred, with the device starting to make repeated connections to two rare workers[.]dev subdomains (royal-boat-bf05.qgtxtebl.workers[.]dev & chat.hcqhajfv.workers[.]dev), consistent with C2 beaconing. While workers[.]dev is associated with the legitimate Cloudflare Workers service, the service is commonly abused by malicious actors for C2 infrastructure. The anomalous nature of the connections to both webhook[.]site and workers[.]dev led to Darktrace generating multiple alerts including high-fidelity Enhanced Monitoring alerts and alerts for Darktrace’s Autonomous Response.

Infrastructure insight

Hosted on royal-boat-bf05.qgtxtebl.workers[.]dev is a Microsoft Installer file (MSI) named v3.msi.

Contained in the MSI file is two Cabinet files named “Sample.cab” and “part2.cab”. After extracting the contents of the cab files, a file named “Config” and a binary named “ServiceEXE”. ServiceEXE is the legitimate DFIR tool Velociraptor, and “Config” contains the configuration details, which include chat.hcqhajfv.workers[.]dev as the server_url, suggesting that Velociraptor is being used as a tunnel to the C2. Additionally, the configuration points to version 0.73.4, a version of Velociraptor that is vulnerable to CVE-2025-6264, a privilege escalation vulnerability.

Velociraptor, a legitimate security tool maintained by Rapid7, has been used recently in malicious campaigns. A vulnerable version of tool has been used by threat actors for command execution and endpoint takeover, while other campaigns have used Velociraptor to create a tunnel to the C2, similar to what was observed in this case [10] .

The workers[.]dev communication continued into the early hours of October 27. The most recent suspicious behavior observed on the device involved an outbound connection to a new IP for the network - 185.69.24[.]18/singapure - potentially indicating payload retrieval.

The payload retrieved from “/singapure” is a UPX packed Windows binary. After unpacking the binary, it is an open-source Golang stealer named “Skuld Stealer”. Skuld Stealer has the capabilities to steal crypto wallets, files, system information, browser data and tokens. Additionally, it contains anti-debugging and anti-VM logic, along with a UAC bypass [11].

Figure 3: A timeline outlining suspicious activity on the device alerted by Darktrace.

Case Study 2

The second case involved a customer within the Education sector. The affected device was also internet-facing, with network traffic indicating it was a WSUS server

Suspicious activity in this case once again began on October 24, notably only a few seconds after initial signs of compromise were observed in the first case. Initial anomalous behaviour also closely aligned, with outbound PowerShell connections to webhook[.]site, and then later connections, including HTTP POSTs, to the same endpoint with a cURL user agent.

While Darktrace did not observe any anomalous network activity on the device after October 24, the customer’s security integration resulted in an additional alert on October 27 for malicious activity, suggesting that the compromise may have continued locally.

By leveraging Darktrace’s security integrations, customers can investigate activity across different sources in a seamless manner, gaining additional insight and context to an attack.

Conclusion

Exploitation of a CVE can lead to a wide range of outcomes. In some cases, it may be limited to just a single device with a focused objective, such as exfiltration of sensitive data. In others, it could lead to lateral movement and a full network compromise, including ransomware deployment. As the threat of internet-facing exploitation continues to grow, security teams must be prepared to defend against such a possibility, regardless of the attack type or scale.

By focussing on detection of anomalous behaviour rather than relying on signatures associated with a specific CVE exploit, Darktrace is able to alert on post-exploitation activity regardless of the kind of behaviour seen. In addition, leveraging security integrations provides further context on activities beyond the visibility of Darktrace / NETWORK, enabling defenders to investigate and respond to attacks more effectively.

With adversaries weaponizing even trusted incident response tools, maintaining broad visibility and rapid response capabilities becomes critical to mitigating post-exploitation risk.

Credit to Emma Foulger (Global Threat Research Operations Lead), Tara Gould (Threat Research Lead), Eugene Chua (Principal Cyber Analyst & Analyst Team Lead), Nathaniel Jones (VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO),

Edited by Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

References

1. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-59287

2. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/hackers-now-exploiting-critical-windows-server-wsus-flaw-in-attacks/

3. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/administration/windows-server-update-services/get-started/windows-server-update-services-wsus

4. https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2025/10/24/microsoft-releases-out-band-security-update-mitigate-windows-server-update-service-vulnerability-cve

5. https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-2025-59287

6. https://thehackernews.com/2025/10/microsoft-issues-emergency-patch-for.html

7. https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog

8. https://www.huntress.com/blog/exploitation-of-windows-server-update-services-remote-code-execution-vulnerability

9. https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/microsoft-cve-2025-59287/

10. https://blog.talosintelligence.com/velociraptor-leveraged-in-ransomware-attacks/

11. https://github.com/hackirby/skuld

Darktrace Model Detections

· Device / New PowerShell User Agent

· Anomalous Connection / Powershell to Rare External

· Compromise / Possible Tunnelling to Bin Services

· Compromise / High Priority Tunnelling to Bin Services

· Anomalous Server Activity / New User Agent from Internet Facing System

· Device / New User Agent

· Device / Internet Facing Device with High Priority Alert

· Anomalous Connection / Multiple HTTP POSTs to Rare Hostname

· Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server

· Compromise / Agent Beacon (Long Period)

· Device / Large Number of Model Alerts

· Compromise / Agent Beacon (Medium Period)

· Device / Long Agent Connection to New Endpoint

· Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare

· Security Integration / Low Severity Integration Detection

· Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Alerts Over Time Block

· Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Enhanced Monitoring from Server Block

· Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious Activity Block

· Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Significant Server Anomaly Block

List of Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

IoC - Type - Description + Confidence

o royal-boat-bf05.qgtxtebl.workers[.]dev – Hostname – Likely C2 Infrastructure

o royal-boat-bf05.qgtxtebl.workers[.]dev/v3.msi - URI – Likely payload

o chat.hcqhajfv.workers[.]dev – Hostname – Possible C2 Infrastructure

o 185.69.24[.]18 – IP address – Possible C2 Infrastructure

o 185.69.24[.]18/bin.msi - URI – Likely payload

o 185.69.24[.]18/singapure - URI – Likely payload

^{The content provided in this blog is published by Darktrace for general informational purposes only and reflects our understanding of cybersecurity topics, trends, incidents, and developments at the time of publication. While we strive to ensure accuracy and relevance, the information is provided “as is” without any representations or warranties, express or implied. Darktrace makes no guarantees regarding the completeness, accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information presented and expressly disclaims all warranties.}

^{Nothing in this blog constitutes legal, technical, or professional advice, and readers should consult qualified professionals before acting on any information contained herein. Any references to third-party organizations, technologies, threat actors, or incidents are for informational purposes only and do not imply affiliation, endorsement, or recommendation.}

^{Darktrace, its affiliates, employees, or agents shall not be held liable for any loss, damage, or harm arising from the use of or reliance on the information in this blog.}

^{The cybersecurity landscape evolves rapidly, and blog content may become outdated or superseded. We reserve the right to update, modify, or remove any content}

About the author

Emma Foulger

Global Threat Research Operations Lead

Blog

October 24, 2025

Patch Smarter, Not Harder: Now Empowering Security Teams with Business-Aligned Threat Context Agents

Most risk management programs remain anchored in enumeration: scanning every asset, cataloging every CVE, and drowning in lists that rarely translate into action. Despite expensive scanners, annual pen tests, and countless spreadsheets, prioritization still falters at two critical points.

Context gaps at the device level: It’s hard to know which vulnerabilities actually matter to your business given existing privileges, what software it runs, and what controls already reduce risk.

Business translation: Even when the technical priority is clear, justifying effort and spend in financial terms—especially across many affected devices—can delay action. Especially if it means halting other areas of the business that directly generate revenue.

The result is familiar: alert fatigue, “too many highs,” and remediation that trails behind the threat landscape. Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management addresses this by pairing precise, endpoint‑level context with clear, financial insight so teams can prioritize confidently and mobilize faster.

A powerful combination: No-Telemetry Endpoint Agent + Cost-Benefit Analysis

Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management now uniquely combines technical precision with business clarity in a single workflow. With this release, Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management delivers a more holistic approach, uniting technical context and financial insight to drive proactive risk reduction. The result is a single solution that helps security teams stay ahead of threats while reducing noise, delays, and complexity.

No-Telemetry Endpoint: Collects installed software data and maps it to known CVEs—without network traffic—providing device-level vulnerability context and operational relevance. ‍
Cost-Benefit Analysis for Patching: Calculates ROI by comparing patching effort with potential exploit impact, factoring in headcount time, device count, patch difficulty, and automation availability.

Introducing the No-Telemetry Endpoint Agent

Darktrace’s new endpoint agent inventories installed software on devices and maps it to known CVEs without collecting network data so you can prioritize using real device context and available security controls.

By grounding vulnerability findings in the reality of each endpoint, including its software footprint and existing controls, teams can cut through generic severity scores and focus on what matters most. The agent is ideal for remote devices, BYOD-adjacent fleets, or environments standardizing on Darktrace, and is available without additional licensing cost.

Figure 1: Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management user interface

Built-In Cost-Benefit Analysis for Patching

Security teams often know what needs fixing but stakeholders need to understand why now. Darktrace’s new cost-benefit calculator compares the total cost to patch against the potential cost of exploit, producing an ROI for the patch action that expresses security action in clear financial terms.

Inputs like engineer time, number of affected devices, patch difficulty, and automation availability are factored in automatically. The result is a business-aligned justification for every patching decision—helping teams secure buy-in, accelerate approvals, and move work forward with one-click ticketing, CSV export, or risk acceptance.

Figure 2: Darktrace / Proactive Exposure Management Cost Benefit Analysis

A Smarter, Faster Approach to Exposure Management

Together, the no-telemetry endpoint and Cost–Benefit Analysis advance the CTEM motion from theory to practice. You gain higher‑fidelity discovery and validation signals at the device level, paired with business‑ready justification that accelerates mobilization. The result is fewer distractions, clearer priorities, and faster measurable risk reduction. This is not from chasing every alert, but by focusing on what moves the needle now.

Smarter Prioritization: Device‑level context trims noise and spotlights the exposures that matter for your business.
Faster Decisions: Built‑in ROI turns technical urgency into executive clarity—speeding approvals and action.
Practical Execution: Privacy‑conscious endpoint collection and ticketing/export options fit neatly into existing workflows.
Better Outcomes: Close the loop faster—discover, prioritize, validate, and mobilize—on the same operating surface.

Committed to innovation

These updates are part of the broader Darktrace release, which also included:

1. Major innovations in cloud security with the launch of the industry’s first fully automated cloud forensics solution, reinforcing Darktrace’s leadership in AI-native security.

2. Darktrace Network Endpoint eXtended Telemetry (NEXT) is revolutionizing NDR with the industry’s first mixed-telemetry agent using Self-Learning AI.

3. Improvements to our OT product, purpose built for industrial infrastructure, Darktrace / OT now brings dedicated OT dashboard, segmentation-aware risk modeling, and expanded visibility into edge assets and automation protocols.

Join our Live Launch Event

When?

December 9, 2025

What will be covered?

Join our live broadcast to experience how Darktrace is eliminating blind spots for detection and response across your complete enterprise with new innovations in Agentic AI across our ActiveAI Security platform. Industry leaders from IDC will join Darktrace customers to discuss challenges in cross-domain security, with a live walkthrough reshaping the future of Network Detection & Response, Endpoint Detection & Response, Email Security, and SecOps in novel threat detection and autonomous investigations.

About the author

Your data. Our AI.

Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI

Get a demo

Check out this article by Darktrace: [Part 1] Analysis of a Raccoon Stealer v1 Infection

[Part 1] Analysis of a Raccoon Stealer v1 Infection

Introduction

What is Raccoon Stealer?

Attack Details

Darktrace Coverage

Conclusion

References

Appendices

WSUS Exploited: Darktrace’s Analysis of Post-Exploitation Activities Related to CVE-2025-59287

Patch Smarter, Not Harder: Now Empowering Security Teams with Business-Aligned Threat Context Agents

Enjoying the blog?

More in this series

WSUS Exploited: Darktrace’s Analysis of Post-Exploitation Activities Related to CVE-2025-59287

Darktrace Redefines NDR: Industry-First Autonomous Threat Investigation from Network to Endpoint with Agentic AI

Inside Akira’s SonicWall Campaign: Darktrace’s Detection and Response

Blog

Network

October 29, 2025

WSUS Exploited: Darktrace’s Analysis of Post-Exploitation Activities Related to CVE-2025-59287

Introduction

Attack Overview

Case Study 1

Infrastructure insight

Case Study 2

Conclusion

Appendices

References

Darktrace Model Detections

List of Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

Blog

October 24, 2025

Patch Smarter, Not Harder: Now Empowering Security Teams with Business-Aligned Threat Context Agents

A powerful combination: No-Telemetry Endpoint Agent + Cost-Benefit Analysis

Introducing the No-Telemetry Endpoint Agent

Built-In Cost-Benefit Analysis for Patching

A Smarter, Faster Approach to Exposure Management

Committed to innovation

Join our Live Launch Event

When?

What will be covered?