December 4, 2025

Atomic Stealer: Darktrace’s Investigation of a Growing macOS Threat

Atomic Stealer is rapidly emerging as a significant macOS threat, using infostealing and backdoor capabilities to target Apple users worldwide. Darktrace observed campaigns in 24 countries, detecting activity across multiple kill chain stages and providing recommended actions to contain attacks.

Written by

Isabel Evans

Cyber Analyst

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

Isabel Evans

Cyber Analyst

Atomic Stealer: Darktrace’s Investigation of a Growing macOS Threat

Dec 2025

The Rise of Infostealers Targeting Apple Users

In a threat landscape historically dominated by Windows-based threats, the growing prevalence of macOS information stealers targeting Apple users is becoming an increasing concern for organizations. Infostealers are a type of malware designed to steal sensitive data from target devices, often enabling attackers to extract credentials and financial data for resale or further exploitation. Recent research identified infostealers as the largest category of new macOS malware, with an alarming 101% increase in the last two quarters of 2024 [1].

What is Atomic Stealer?

Among the most notorious is Atomic macOS Stealer (or AMOS), first observed in 2023. Known for its sophisticated build, Atomic Stealer can exfiltrate a wide range of sensitive information including keychain passwords, cookies, browser data and cryptocurrency wallets.

Originally marketed on Telegram as a Malware-as-a-Service (MaaS), Atomic Stealer has become a popular malware due to its ability to target macOS. Like other MaaS offerings, it includes services like a web panel for managing victims, with reports indicating a monthly subscription cost between $1,000 and $3,000 [2]. Although Atomic Stealer’s original intent was as a standalone MaaS product, its unique capability to target macOS has led to new variants emerging at an unprecedented rate

Even more concerning, the most recent variant has now added a backdoor for persistent access [3]. This backdoor presents a significant threat, as Atomic Stealer campaigns are believed to have reached an around 120 countries. The addition of a backdoor elevates Atomic Stealer to the rare category of backdoor deployments potentially at a global scale, something only previously attributed to nation-state threat actors [4].

This level of sophistication is also evident in the wide range of distribution methods observed since its first appearance; including fake application installers, malvertising and terminal command execution via the ClickFix technique. The ClickFix technique is particularly noteworthy: once the malware is downloaded onto the device, users are presented with what appears to be a legitimate macOS installation prompt. In reality, however, the user unknowingly initiates the execution of the Atomic Stealer malware.

This blog will focus on activity observed across multiple Darktrace customer environments where Atomic Stealer was detected, along with several indicators of compromise (IoCs). These included devices that successfully connected to endpoints associated with Atomic Stealer, those that attempted but failed to establish connections, and instances suggesting potential data exfiltration activity.

Darktrace’s Coverage of Atomic Stealer

As this evolving threat began to spread across the internet in June 2025, Darktrace observed a surge in Atomic Stealer activity, impacting numerous customers in 24 different countries worldwide. Initially, most of the cases detected in 2025 affected Darktrace customers within the Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) region. However, later in the year, Darktrace began to observe a more even distribution of cases across EMEA, the Americas (AMS), and Asia Pacific (APAC). While multiple sectors were impacted by Atomic Stealer, Darktrace customers in the education sector were the most affected, particularly during September and October, coinciding with the return to school and universities after summer closures. This spike likely reflects increased device usage as students returned and reconnected potentially compromised devices to school and campus environments.

Starting from June, Darktrace detected multiple events of suspicious HTTP activity to external connections to IPs in the range 45.94.47.0/24. Investigation by Darktrace’s Threat Research team revealed several distinct patterns ; HTTP POST requests to the URI “/contact”, identical cURL User Agents and HTTP requests to “/api/tasks/[base64 string]” URIs.

Within one observed customer’s environment in July, Darktrace detected two devices making repeated initiated HTTP connections over port 80 to IPs within the same range. The first, Device A, was observed making GET requests to the IP 45.94.47[.]158 (AS60781 LeaseWeb Netherlands B.V.), targeting the URI “/api/tasks/[base64string]” using the “curl/8.7.2” user agent. This pattern suggested beaconing activity and triggered the ‘Beaconing Activity to External Rare' model alert in Darktrace / NETWORK, with Device A’s Model Event Log showing repeated connections. The IP associated with this endpoint has since been flagged by multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) vendors as being associated with Atomic Stealer [5].

Figure 1: Darktrace’s detection of Device A showing repeated connections to the suspicious IP address over port 80, indicative of beaconing behavior.

Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst subsequently launched an investigation into the activity, uncovering that the GET requests resulted in a ‘503 Service Unavailable’ response, likely indicating that the server was temporarily unable to process the requests.

Figure 2: Cyber AI Analyst Incident showing the 503 Status Code, indicating that the server was temporarily unavailable.

This unusual activity prompted Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability to recommend several blocking actions for the device in an attempt to stop the malicious activity. However, as the customer’s Autonomous Response configuration was set to Human Confirmation Mode, Darktrace was unable to automatically apply these actions. Had Autonomous Response been fully enabled, these connections would have been blocked, likely rendering the malware ineffective at reaching its malicious command-and-control (C2) infrastructure.

Figure 3: Autonomous Response’s suggested actions to block suspicious connectivity on Device A in the first customer environment.

In another customer environment in August, Darktrace detected similar IoCs, noting a device establishing a connection to the external endpoint 45.94.47[.]149 (ASN: AS57043 Hostkey B.V.). Shortly after the initial connections, the device was observed making repeated requests to the same destination IP, targeting the URI /api/tasks/[base64string] with the user agent curl/8.7.1, again suggesting beaconing activity. Further analysis of this endpoint after the fact revealed links to Atomic Stealer in OSINT reporting [6].

Figure 4: Cyber AI Analyst investigation finding a suspicious URI and user agent for the offending device within the second customer environment.

As with the customer in the first case, had Darktrace’s Autonomous Response been properly configured on the customer’s network, it would have been able to block connectivity with 45.94.47[.]149. Instead, Darktrace suggested recommended actions that the customer’s security team could manually apply to help contain the attack.

Figure 5: Autonomous Response’s suggested actions to block suspicious connectivity to IP 45.94.47[.]149 for the device within the second customer environment.

In the most recent case observed by Darktrace in October, multiple instances of Atomic Stealer activity were seen across one customer’s environment, with two devices communicating with Atomic Stealer C2 infrastructure. During this incident, one device was observed making an HTTP GET request to the IP 45.94.47[.]149 (ASN: AS60781 LeaseWeb Netherlands B.V.). These connections targeted the URI /api/tasks/[base64string, using the user agent curl/8.7.1.

Shortly afterward, the device began making repeated connections over port 80 to the same external IP, 45.94.47[.]149. This activity continued for several days until Darktrace detected the device making an HTTP POST request to a new IP, 45.94.47[.]211 (ASN: AS57043 Hostkey B.V.), this time targeting the URI /contact, again using the curl/8.7.1 user agent. Similar to the other IPs observed in beaconing activity, OSINT reporting later linked this one to information stealer C2 infrastructure [7].

Figure 6: Darktrace’s detection of suspicious beaconing connectivity with the suspicious IP 45.94.47.211.

Further investigation into this customer’s network revealed that similar activity had been occurring as far back as August, when Darktrace detected data exfiltration on a second device. Cyber AI Analyst identified this device making a single HTTP POST connection to the external IP 45.94.47[.]144, another IP with malicious links [8], using the user agent curl/8.7.1 and targeting the URI /contact.

Figure 7: Cyber AI Analyst investigation finding a successful POST request to 45.94.47[.]144 for the device within the third customer environment.

A deeper investigation into the technical details within the POST request revealed the presence of a file named “out.zip”, suggesting potential data exfiltration.

Figure 8: Advanced Search log in Darktrace / NETWORK showing “out.zip”, indicating potential data exfiltration for a device within the third customer environment.

Similarly, in another environment, Darktrace was able to collect a packet capture (PCAP) of suspected Atomic Stealer activity, which revealed potential indicators of data exfiltration. This included the presence of the “out.zip” file being exfiltrated via an HTTP POST request, along with data that appeared to contain details of an Electrum cryptocurrency wallet and possible passwords.

Read more about Darktrace’s full deep dive into a similar case where this tactic was leveraged by malware as part of an elaborate cryptocurrency scam.

Figure 9: PCAP of an HTTP POST request showing the file “out.zip” and details of Electrum Cryptocurrency wallet.

Although recent research attributes the “out.zip” file to a new variant named SHAMOS [9], it has also been linked more broadly to Atomic Stealer [10]. Indeed, this is not the first instance where Darktrace has seen the “out.zip” file in cases involving Atomic Stealer either. In a previous blog detailing a social engineering campaign that targeted cryptocurrency users with the Realst Stealer, the macOS version of Realst contained a binary that was found to be Atomic Stealer, and similar IoCs were identified, including artifacts of data exfiltration such as the “out.zip” file.

Conclusion‍

The rapid rise of Atomic Stealer and its ability to target macOS marks a significant shift in the threat landscape and should serve as a clear warning to Apple users who were traditionally perceived as more secure in a malware ecosystem historically dominated by Windows-based threats.

Atomic Stealer’s growing popularity is now challenging that perception, expanding its reach and accessibility to a broader range of victims. Even more concerning is the emergence of a variant embedded with a backdoor, which is likely to increase its appeal among a diverse range of threat actors. Darktrace’s ability to adapt and detect new tactics and IoCs in real time delivers the proactive defense organizations need to protect themselves against emerging threats before they can gain momentum.

Credit to Isabel Evans (Cyber Analyst), Dylan Hinz (Associate Principal Cyber Analyst)
Edited by Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

References

1. https://www.scworld.com/news/infostealers-targeting-macos-jumped-by-101-in-second-half-of-2024

2. https://www.kandji.io/blog/amos-macos-stealer-analysis

3. https://www.broadcom.com/support/security-center/protection-bulletin/amos-stealer-adds-backdoor

4. https://moonlock.com/amos-backdoor-persistent-access

5. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/45.94.47.158/detection

6. https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/25/i/an-mdr-analysis-of-the-amos-stealer-campaign.html

7. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/45.94.47.211/detection

8. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/45.94.47.144/detection

9. https://securityaffairs.com/181441/malware/over-300-entities-hit-by-a-variant-of-atomic-macos-stealer-in-recent-campaign.html

10. https://binhex.ninja/malware-analysis-blogs/amos-stealer-atomic-stealer-malware.html

Darktrace Model Detections

Darktrace / NETWORK

Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare
Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to New IP
Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination
Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname
Device / New User Agent
Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint
Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare
Anomalous Connection / Posting HTTP to IP Without Hostname
Compromise / Quick and Regular Windows HTTP Beaconing

Autonomous Response

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly::Antigena Alerts Over Time Block
Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly::Antigena Significant Anomaly from Client Block
Antigena / Network / External Threat::Antigena Suspicious Activity Block

List of IoCs

45.94.47[.]149 – IP – Atomic C2 Endpoint
45.94.47[.]144 – IP – Atomic C2 Endpoint
45.94.47[.]158 – IP – Atomic C2 Endpoint
45.94.47[.]211 – IP – Atomic C2 Endpoint
out.zip - File Output – Possible ZIP file for Data Exfiltration

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping:

Tactic –Technique – Sub-Technique

Execution - T1204.002 - User Execution: Malicious File

Credential Access - T1555.001 - Credentials from Password Stores: Keychain

Credential Access - T1555.003 - Credentials from Web Browsers

Command & Control - T1071 - Application Layer Protocol

Exfiltration - T1041 - Exfiltration Over C2 Channel

Written by

Isabel Evans

Cyber Analyst

Inside the SOC

Written by

Isabel Evans

Cyber Analyst

VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

Endpoint

February 1, 2026

ClearFake: From Fake CAPTCHAs to Blockchain-Driven Payload Retrieval

fake captcha to blockchain driven palyload retrieval

What is ClearFake?

As threat actors evolve their techniques to exploit victims and breach target networks, the ClearFake campaign has emerged as a significant illustration of this continued adaptation. ClearFake is a campaign observed using a malicious JavaScript framework deployed on compromised websites, impacting sectors such as e‑commerce, travel, and automotive. First identified in mid‑2023, ClearFake is frequently leveraged to socially engineer victims into installing fake web browser updates.

In ClearFake compromises, victims are steered toward compromised WordPress sites, often positioned by attackers through search engine optimization (SEO) poisoning. Once on the site, users are presented with a fake CAPTCHA. This counterfeit challenge is designed to appear legitimate while enabling the execution of malicious code. When a victim interacts with the CAPTCHA, a PowerShell command containing a download string is retrieved and executed.

Attackers commonly abuse the legitimate Microsoft HTML Application Host (MSHTA) in these operations. Recent campaigns have also incorporated Smart Chain endpoints, such as “bsc-dataseed.binance[.]org,” to obtain configuration code. The primary payload delivered through ClearFake is typically an information stealer, such as Lumma Stealer, enabling credential theft, data exfiltration, and persistent access [1].

Darktrace’s Coverage of ClearFake

Darktrace / ENDPOINT first detected activity likely associated with ClearFake on a single device on over the course of one day on November 18, 2025. The system observed the execution of “mshta.exe,” the legitimate Microsoft HTML Application Host utility. It also noted a repeated process command referencing “weiss.neighb0rrol1[.]ru”, indicating suspicious external activity. Subsequent analysis of this endpoint using open‑source intelligence (OSINT) indicated that it was a malicious, domain generation algorithm (DGA) endpoint [2].

‍

Figure 1: The process line referencing weiss.neighb0rrol1[.]ru, as observed by Darktrace / ENDPOINT.

This activity indicates that mshta.exe was used to contact a remote server, “weiss.neighb0rrol1[.]ru/rpxacc64mshta,” and execute the associated HTA file to initiate the next stage of the attack. OSINT sources have since heavily flagged this server as potentially malicious [3].

The first argument in this process uses the MSHTA utility to execute the HTA file hosted on the remote server. If successful, MSHTA would then run JavaScript or VBScript to launch PowerShell commands used to retrieve malicious payloads, a technique observed in previous ClearFake campaigns. Darktrace also detected unusual activity involving additional Microsoft executables, including “winlogon.exe,” “userinit.exe,” and “explorer.exe.” Although these binaries are legitimate components of the Windows operating system, threat actors can abuse their normal behavior within the Windows login sequence to gain control over user sessions, similar to the misuse of mshta.exe.

EtherHiding cover

Darktrace also identified additional ClearFake‑related activity, specifically a connection to bsc-testnet.drpc[.]org, a legitimate BNB Smart Chain endpoint. This activity was triggered by injected JavaScript on the compromised site www.allstarsuae[.]com, where the script initiated an eth_call POST request to the Smart Chain endpoint.

Figure 2: Example of a fake CAPTCHA on the compromised site www.allstarsuae[.]com.

EtherHiding is a technique in which threat actors leverage blockchain technology, specifically smart contracts, as part of their malicious infrastructure. Because blockchain is anonymous, decentralized, and highly persistent, it provides threat actors with advantages in evading defensive measures and traditional tracking [4].

In this case, when a user visits a compromised WordPress site, injected base64‑encoded JavaScript retrieved an ABI string, which was then used to load and execute a contract hosted on the BNB Smart Chain.

Figure 3: JavaScript hosted on the compromised site www.allstaruae[.]com.

Conducting malware analysis on this instance, the Base64 decoded into a JavaScript loader. A POST request to bsc-testnet.drpc[.]org was then used to retrieve a hex‑encoded ABI string that loads and executes the contract. The JavaScript also contained hex and Base64‑encoded functions that decoded into additional JavaScript, which attempted to retrieve a payload hosted on GitHub at “github[.]com/PrivateC0de/obf/main/payload.txt.” However, this payload was unavailable at the time of analysis.

Figure 4: Darktrace’s detection of the POST request to bsc-testnet.drpc[.]org.

Figure 5: Darktrace’s detection of the executable file and the malicious hostname.

Autonomous Response

As Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability was enabled on this customer’s network, Darktrace was able to take swift mitigative action to contain the ClearFake‑related activity early, before it could lead to potential payload delivery. The affected device was blocked from making external connections to a number of suspicious endpoints, including 188.114.96[.]6, *.neighb0rrol1[.]ru, and neighb0rrol1[.]ru, ensuring that no further malicious connections could be made and no payloads could be retrieved.

Autonomous Response also acted to prevent the executable mshta.exe from initiating HTA file execution over HTTPS from this endpoint by blocking the attempted connections. Had these files executed successfully, the attack would likely have resulted in the retrieval of an information stealer, such as Lumma Stealer.

Figure 6: Autonomous Response’s intervention against the suspicious connectivity observed.

Conclusion

ClearFake continues to be observed across multiple sectors, but Darktrace remains well‑positioned to counter such threats. Because ClearFake’s end goal is often to deliver malware such as information stealers and malware loaders, early disruption is critical to preventing compromise. Users should remain aware of this activity and vigilant regarding fake CAPTCHA pop‑ups. They should also monitor unusual usage of MSHTA and outbound connections to domains that mimic formats such as “bsc-dataseed.binance[.]org” [1].

In this case, Darktrace was able to contain the attack before it could successfully escalate and execute. The attempted execution of HTA files was detected early, allowing Autonomous Response to intervene, stopping the activity from progressing. As soon as the device began communicating with weiss.neighb0rrol1[.]ru, an Autonomous Response inhibitor triggered and interrupted the connections.

As ClearFake continues to rise, users should stay alert to social engineering techniques, including ClickFix, that rely on deceptive security prompts.

Credit to Vivek Rajan (Senior Cyber Analyst) and Tara Gould (Malware Research Lead)

Edited by Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

Process / New Executable Launched

Endpoint / Anomalous Use of Scripting Process

Endpoint / New Suspicious Executable Launched

Endpoint / Process Connection::Unusual Connection from New Process

Autonomous Response Models

Antigena / Network::Significant Anomaly::Antigena Significant Anomaly from Client Block

List of Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

weiss.neighb0rrol1[.]ru – URL - Malicious Domain
188.114.96[.]6 – IP – Suspicious Domain
*.neighb0rrol1[.]ru – URL – Malicious Domain

MITRE Tactics

Initial Access, Drive-by Compromise, T1189

User Execution, Execution, T1204

Software Deployment Tools, Execution and Lateral Movement, T1072

Command and Scripting Interpreter, T1059

System Binary Proxy Execution: MSHTA, T1218.005

References

1. https://www.kroll.com/en/publications/cyber/rapid-evolution-of-clearfake-delivery

2. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/domain/weiss.neighb0rrol1.ru

3. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/1f1aabe87e5e93a8fff769bf3614dd559c51c80fc045e11868f3843d9a004d1e/community

4. https://www.packetlabs.net/posts/etherhiding-a-new-tactic-for-hiding-malware-on-the-blockchain/

About the author

Vivek Rajan

Cyber Analyst

Blog

Network

January 30, 2026

The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector: Six Trends to Watch

The evolving cybersecurity threat landscape in finance

The financial sector, encompassing commercial banks, credit unions, financial services providers, and cryptocurrency platforms, faces an increasingly complex and aggressive cyber threat landscape. The financial sector’s reliance on digital infrastructure and its role in managing high-value transactions make it a prime target for both financially motivated and state-sponsored threat actors.

Darktrace’s latest threat research, The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector, draws on a combination of Darktrace telemetry data from real-world customer environments, open-source intelligence, and direct interviews with financial-sector CISOs to provide perspective on how attacks are unfolding and how defenders in the sector need to adapt.

Six cybersecurity trends in the finance sector for 2026

1. Credential-driven attacks are surging

Phishing continues to be a leading initial access vector for attacks targeting confidentiality. Financial institutions are frequently targeted with phishing emails designed to harvest login credentials. Techniques including Adversary-in-The-Middle (AiTM) to bypass Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) and QR code phishing (“quishing”) are surging and are capable of fooling even trained users. In the first half of 2025, Darktrace observed 2.4 million phishing emails within financial sector customer deployments, with almost 30% targeted towards VIP users.

2. Data Loss Prevention is an increasing challenge

Compliance issues – particularly data loss prevention -- remain a persistent risk. In October 2025 alone, Darktrace observed over 214,000 emails across financial sector customers that contained unfamiliar attachments and were sent to suspected personal email addresses highlighting clear concerns around data loss prevention. Across the same set of customers within the same time frame, more than 351,000 emails containing unfamiliar attachments were sent to freemail addresses (e.g. gmail, yahoo, icloud), highlighting clear concerns around DLP.

Confidentiality remains a primary concern for financial institutions as attackers increasingly target sensitive customer data, financial records, and internal communications.

3. Ransomware is evolving toward data theft and extortion

Ransomware is no longer just about locking systems, it’s about stealing data first and encrypting second. Groups such as Cl0p and RansomHub now prioritize exploiting trusted file-transfer platforms to exfiltrate sensitive data before encryption, maximizing regulatory and reputational fallout for victims.

Darktrace’s threat research identified routine scanning and malicious activity targeting internet-facing file-transfer systems used heavily by financial institutions. In one notable case involving Fortra GoAnywhere MFT, Darktrace detected malicious exploitation behavior six days before the CVE was publicly disclosed, demonstrating how attackers often operate ahead of patch cycles

This evolution underscores a critical reality: by the time a vulnerability is disclosed publicly, it may already be actively exploited.

4. Attackers are exploiting edge devices, often pre-disclosure.

VPNs, firewalls, and remote access gateways have become high-value targets, and attackers are increasingly exploiting them before vulnerabilities are publicly disclosed. Darktrace observed pre-CVE exploitation activity affecting edge technologies including Citrix, Palo Alto, and Ivanti, enabling session hijacking, credential harvesting, and privileged lateral movement into core banking systems.

Once compromised, these edge devices allow adversaries to blend into trusted network traffic, bypassing traditional perimeter defenses. CISOs interviewed for the report repeatedly described VPN infrastructure as a “concentrated focal point” for attackers, especially when patching and segmentation lag behind operational demands.

5. DPRK-linked activity is growing across crypto and fintech.

State-sponsored activity, particularly from DPRK-linked groups affiliated with Lazarus, continues to intensify across cryptocurrency and fintech organizations. Darktrace identified coordinated campaigns leveraging malicious npm packages, previously undocumented BeaverTail and InvisibleFerret malware, and exploitation of React2Shell (CVE-2025-55182) for credential theft and persistent backdoor access.

Targeting was observed across the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Chile, Nigeria, Kenya, and Qatar, highlighting the global scope of these operations.

6. Cloud complexity and AI governance gaps are now systemic risks.

Finally, CISOs consistently pointed to cloud complexity, insider risk from new hires, and ungoverned AI usage exposing sensitive data as systemic challenges. Leaders emphasized difficulty maintaining visibility across multi-cloud environments while managing sensitive data exposure through emerging AI tools.

Rapid AI adoption without clear guardrails has introduced new confidentiality and compliance risks, turning governance into a board-level concern rather than a purely technical one.

Building cyber resilience in a shifting threat landscape

The financial sector remains a prime target for both financially motivated and state-sponsored adversaries. What this research makes clear is that yesterday’s security assumptions no longer hold. Identity attacks, pre-disclosure exploitation, and data-first ransomware require adaptive, behavior-based defenses that can detect threats as they emerge, often ahead of public disclosure.

As financial institutions continue to digitize, resilience will depend on visibility across identity, edge, cloud, and data, combined with AI-driven defense that learns at machine speed.

Learn more about the threats facing the finance sector, and what your organization can do to keep up in The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector report here.

‍

Acknowledgements:

The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance sector report was authored by Calum Hall, Hugh Turnbull, Parvatha Ananthakannan, Tiana Kelly, and Vivek Rajan, with contributions from Emma Foulger, Nicole Wong, Ryan Traill, Tara Gould, and the Darktrace Threat Research and Incident Management teams.

[related-resource]

About the author

Nathaniel Jones

VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO

Your data. Our AI.

Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI

Get a demo

Check out this article by Darktrace: Atomic Stealer: Darktrace’s Investigation of a Growing macOS Threat

Atomic Stealer: Darktrace’s Investigation of a Growing macOS Threat

The Rise of Infostealers Targeting Apple Users

What is Atomic Stealer?

Darktrace’s Coverage of Atomic Stealer

Appendices

References

Darktrace Model Detections

List of IoCs

ClearFake: From Fake CAPTCHAs to Blockchain-Driven Payload Retrieval

The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector: Six Trends to Watch

Enjoying the blog?

More in this series

The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector: Six Trends to Watch

Darktrace Identifies Campaign Targeting South Korea Leveraging VS Code for Remote Access

Maduro Arrest Used as a Lure to Deliver Backdoor

Blog

Endpoint

February 1, 2026

ClearFake: From Fake CAPTCHAs to Blockchain-Driven Payload Retrieval

What is ClearFake?

Darktrace’s Coverage of ClearFake

EtherHiding cover

Autonomous Response

Conclusion

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

Autonomous Response Models

List of Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

MITRE Tactics

References

Blog

Network

January 30, 2026

The State of Cybersecurity in the Finance Sector: Six Trends to Watch

The evolving cybersecurity threat landscape in finance

Six cybersecurity trends in the finance sector for 2026

1. Credential-driven attacks are surging

2. Data Loss Prevention is an increasing challenge

3. Ransomware is evolving toward data theft and extortion

4. Attackers are exploiting edge devices, often pre-disclosure.

5. DPRK-linked activity is growing across crypto and fintech.

6. Cloud complexity and AI governance gaps are now systemic risks.

Building cyber resilience in a shifting threat landscape