December 13, 2023

Defending Against Personalized Cyber Attacks

Stay informed about the latest trends in cyber threats with Darktrace experts, including how attacks are evolving and becoming more personalized.

Written by

The Darktrace Community

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

The Darktrace Community

Dec 2023

Cyber-attacks are getting personal. The usual opportunistic “spray and pray” attacks that reach many would-be targets at once are still present, but as cyber defence has advanced, today’s more sophisticated campaigns take precise aim at a particular company.

Threat actors willingly put in extra time and effort to realize a bigger payday at the end of it, but developments in the tools they have at their disposal are also making targeted, personal attacks easier.

CAPTCHA-breaking AI techniques like computer vision and convolutional neural networks can be used to gather information on an organization’s attack surface, and Generative AI is able to perform OSINT collection on a specific target, or targets, within an organization. Once inside, attackers can further leverage AI to automatically tweak attacks and create novel, highly targeted threats that elude defenses.

A new white paper, The CISO’s Guide to Cyber AI, explains how CISOs and their teams can make smarter use of defensive AI and machine learning (ML) to protect today’s digital environments from these and more advanced novel threats.

Today’s threats don’t necessarily resemble past attacks

Darktrace analytics pointed to a sharp rise in novel cyber-attacks earlier this year. Generative AI and large language model (LLM) tools continue to lower the barrier to entry for threat actors, making it easier than ever to build smarter, faster, more targeted attacks.

But while attacks are getting personal, security tools that apply AI in the wrong way won’t see these attacks coming.

Here’s why: most cyber security tools and platforms rely on a combination of supervised machine learning, deep learning, and transformers to train and inform their systems. This entails shipping your company’s data out to a large data lake housed somewhere in the cloud where it gets blended with attack data from thousands of other organizations. The resulting homogenized data set gets used to train AI systems — yours and everyone else’s — to recognize patterns of attack based on previously encountered threats.

At its conception, this was a reasonably smart way of approaching cyber security. For a long time, the assumption that today’s threats will resemble yesterday’s attacks was a valid one. But in an age where the commoditization of cyber-crime has lowered the bar-to-entry for attackers, and where Generative AI and other open-source tools are enabling personalized attacks at scale, this is no longer the case.

Darktrace has seen evidence this year of a marked rise in more sophisticated attack techniques. Between May and July this year, our Cyber AI Research Centre observed that multistage payload attacks, in which a malicious email encourages the recipient to follow a series of steps before delivering a payload or attempting to harvest sensitive information, have increased by an average of 59% across Darktrace customers. Some of this will be QR code phishing, the latest trend in attack tactics, others will include automation. The speed of these types of attacks will likely rise as greater automation and AI are adopted and applied by attackers.

This ‘historical’ approach is not able to identify threats that haven’t been seen before: attacks that use new malware, novel social engineering, and those that are targeted to your organization. There are no indicators of compromise (IoCs) to teach your system to recognize these kinds of attacks.

IoC-based defenses won’t necessarily spot strange and unusual activity by an authorized user, device, or known IP address until threat actors tip their hand — and by then it’s too late. Looking for repeat patterns works well for detecting threats that resemble past attacks, but this increasingly won’t be the case. The only way to spot unique and novel threats is to build cyber security that’s tailored to you, and that requires a whole new approach.

Smarter use of AI levels the playing field

Security teams and adversaries continue to innovate to gain the upper-hand, and the advantage of time.

Since AI equips even novice cyber criminals to mount sophisticated attacks, AI must evolve to do three things:

Understand and continue to learn what “normal” looks like for your unique digital environment
Detect and alert on any anomalous behavior the instant it occurs
Initiate a targeted response to contain threats and give your analysts more time, without disrupting the flow of business

Darktrace uses Self-Learning AI to understand what constitutes ‘normal’ for everyone and everything in your business, including cloud resources, identities, email accounts, endpoint devices, and even OT controllers. As the name suggests, Self-Learning AI trains itself, developing and maintaining deep understanding of ‘patterns of life’ for your business environment. Used in combination with other AI methods such as LLMs, generative AI, and supervised ML, Self-Learning AI identifies novel cyber-threats most static (backward-looking) tools miss.

The technology learns ‘on the job’ and from scratch, without relying on historical data or a massive upfront effort by your team to train the system. Probabilistic mathematics revise assumptions about behavior on a constant basis so the system keeps itself up-to-date without repeat efforts by your team.

The result is that areas of risk, as well as real-time emerging attacks, are brought to the surface – regardless of whether those attacks have been seen before in the wild.

Surgical attacks warrant surgical response

Supervised ML continues to serve a purpose, but the dawning age of novel and AI-led attacks favors a more proactive approach to securing the cloud. Tools must take greater responsibility for their own education and greater initiative via autonomous response.

What some solutions call response ultimately amounts to sending alerts and opening tickets that create more needless work for analysts. Other tools claim to automate response, but either take very limited actions like automating the process of ticket creation, or overly ambitious steps like quarantining entire systems.

Darktrace’s dynamic understanding of your environment enables a truly autonomous and precise cloud-native response. Its understanding of ‘normal’ for every user and device allows it to enforce ‘normal’ – cutting out only the malicious activity, while allowing normal business to continue functioning.

How this response will take place will depend on where Darktrace is deployed in your environment. In the network, it might mean blocking specific, anomalous connections over a certain port. In the cloud, it could mean detaching EC2 instances and applying security groups to contain only assets at risk. In email, this could be locking links or flattening attachments.

Get personal with ‘One on One’ Security

The widespread accessibility of generative AI has altered the threat landscape permanently, allowing cyber-criminals to deploy unique and personalized attacks at scale and at machine speed. In the near future, we can expect to see more novel and sophisticated phishing attacks, new automated creation of malicious code, sustained attack campaigns targeting an individual or company, and even deep fakes designed to elicit human trust.

To meet the needs of today and tomorrow, cyber security needs to leverage AI deeply and intelligently – not just using it to automate outdated historical approaches, or bolting generative AI onto existing products to keep up with the latest trend. Since 2013 Darktrace has been using AI in a fundamentally unique way: a system that learns your unique organization and understands what’s normal at a granular level. Only with this personalized understanding can you be confident in your ability as an organization to identify and shut down novel threats on the first encounter.

This form of personalized, ‘One on One’ security is a no longer a ‘nice to have’ for defenders. ‘Spray and pray’ tactics will continue to exist, but the attacks most likely to slip through the net and cause you damage are the sophisticated, the personal, and the never-before-seen. That’s what Self-Learning AI was built for – learning your business to deliver personalized cyber security, meeting every attack one-on-one.

The CISO’s Guide to Cyber AI overviews the differences between common AI approaches in cyber security and offers a high-level checklist for choosing the ideal solution for stopping attacks — including new novel threats. To learn more about making the smartest use of AI to stop novel and targeted cloud attacks, download the guide today.

Written by

The Darktrace Community

Inside the SOC

Written by

The Darktrace Community

The Darktrace Community

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

July 2, 2025

Pre-CVE Threat Detection: 10 Examples Identifying Malicious Activity Prior to Public Disclosure of a Vulnerability

‍

Vulnerabilities are weaknesses in a system that can be exploited by malicious actors to gain unauthorized access or to disrupt normal operations. Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (or CVEs) are a list of publicly disclosed cybersecurity vulnerabilities that can be tracked and mitigated by the security community.

When a vulnerability is discovered, the standard practice is to report it to the vendor or the responsible organization, allowing them to develop and distribute a patch or fix before the details are made public. This is known as responsible disclosure.

With a record-breaking 40,000 CVEs reported for 2024 and a predicted higher number for 2025 by the Forum for Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) [1], anomaly-detection is essential for identifying these potential risks. The gap between exploitation of a zero-day and disclosure of the vulnerability can sometimes be considerable, and retroactively attempting to identify successful exploitation on your network can be challenging, particularly if taking a signature-based approach.

Detecting threats without relying on CVE disclosure

Abnormal behaviors in networks or systems, such as unusual login patterns or data transfers, can indicate attempted cyber-attacks, insider threats, or compromised systems. Since Darktrace does not rely on rules or signatures, it can detect malicious activity that is anomalous even without full context of the specific device or asset in question.

‍For example, during the Fortinet exploitation late last year, the Darktrace Threat Research team were investigating a different Fortinet vulnerability, namely CVE 2024-23113, for exploitation when Mandiant released a security advisory around CVE 2024-47575, which aligned closely with Darktrace’s findings.

Retrospective analysis like this is used by Darktrace’s threat researchers to better understand detections across the threat landscape and to add additional context.

Below are ten examples from the past year where Darktrace detected malicious activity days or even weeks before a vulnerability was publicly disclosed.

ten examples from the past year where Darktrace detected malicious activity days or even weeks before a vulnerability was publicly disclosed.

Trends in pre-cve exploitation

Often, the disclosure of an exploited vulnerability can be off the back of an incident response investigation related to a compromise by an advanced threat actor using a zero-day. Once the vulnerability is registered and publicly disclosed as having been exploited, it can kick off a race between the attacker and defender: attack vs patch.

Nation-state actors, highly skilled with significant resources, are known to use a range of capabilities to achieve their target, including zero-day use. Often, pre-CVE activity is “low and slow”, last for months with high operational security. After CVE disclosure, the barriers to entry lower, allowing less skilled and less resourced attackers, like some ransomware gangs, to exploit the vulnerability and cause harm. This is why two distinct types of activity are often seen: pre and post disclosure of an exploited vulnerability.

Darktrace saw this consistent story line play out during several of the Fortinet and PAN OS threat actor campaigns highlighted above last year, where nation-state actors were seen exploiting vulnerabilities first, followed by ransomware gangs impacting organizations [2].

The same applies with the recent SAP Netweaver exploitations being tied to a China based threat actor earlier this spring with subsequent ransomware incidents being observed [3].

Autonomous Response

Anomaly-based detection offers the benefit of identifying malicious activity even before a CVE is disclosed; however, security teams still need to quickly contain and isolate the activity.

For example, during the Ivanti chaining exploitation in the early part of 2025, a customer had Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability enabled on their network. As a result, Darktrace was able to contain the compromise and shut down any ongoing suspicious connectivity by blocking internal connections and enforcing a “pattern of life” on the affected device.

This pre-CVE detection and response by Darktrace occurred 11 days before any public disclosure, demonstrating the value of an anomaly-based approach.

In some cases, customers have even reported that Darktrace stopped malicious exploitation of devices several days before a public disclosure of a vulnerability.

For example, During the ConnectWise exploitation, a customer informed the team that Darktrace had detected malicious software being installed via remote access. Upon further investigation, four servers were found to be impacted, while Autonomous Response had blocked outbound connections and enforced patterns of life on impacted devices.

Conclusion

By continuously analyzing behavioral patterns, systems can spot unusual activities and patterns from users, systems, and networks to detect anomalies that could signify a security breach.

Through ongoing monitoring and learning from these behaviors, anomaly-based security systems can detect threats that traditional signature-based solutions might miss, while also providing detailed insights into threat tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs). This type of behavioral intelligence supports pre-CVE detection, allows for a more adaptive security posture, and enables systems to evolve with the ever-changing threat landscape.

Credit to Nathaniel Jones (VP, Security & AI Strategy, Field CISO), Emma Fougler (Global Threat Research Operations Lead), Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

References and further reading:

Related Darktrace blogs:

‍

*Self-reported by customer, confirmed afterwards.

**Updated January 2024 blog now reflects current findings

About the author

Blog

Network

June 27, 2025

Patch and Persist: Darktrace’s Detection of Blind Eagle (APT-C-36)

What is Blind Eagle?

Since 2018, APT-C-36, also known as Blind Eagle, has been observed performing cyber-attacks targeting various sectors across multiple countries in Latin America, with a particular focus on Colombian organizations.

Blind Eagle characteristically targets government institutions, financial organizations, and critical infrastructure [1][2].

Attacks carried out by Blind Eagle actors typically start with a phishing email and the group have been observed utilizing various Remote Access Trojans (RAT) variants, which often have in-built methods for hiding command-and-control (C2) traffic from detection [3].

What we know about Blind Eagle from a recent campaign

Since November 2024, Blind Eagle actors have been conducting an ongoing campaign targeting Colombian organizations [1].

In this campaign, threat actors have been observed using phishing emails to deliver malicious URL links to targeted recipients, similar to the way threat actors have previously been observed exploiting CVE-2024-43451, a vulnerability in Microsoft Windows that allows the disclosure of a user’s NTLMv2 password hash upon minimal interaction with a malicious file [4].

Despite Microsoft patching this vulnerability in November 2024 [1][4], Blind Eagle actors have continued to exploit the minimal interaction mechanism, though no longer with the intent of harvesting NTLMv2 password hashes. Instead, phishing emails are sent to targets containing a malicious URL which, when clicked, initiates the download of a malicious file. This file is then triggered by minimal user interaction.

Clicking on the file triggers a WebDAV request, with a connection being made over HTTP port 80 using the user agent ‘Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19044’. WebDAV is a transmission protocol which allows files or complete directories to be made available through the internet, and to be transmitted to devices [5]. The next stage payload is then downloaded via another WebDAV request and malware is executed on the target device.

Attackers are notified when a recipient downloads the malicious files they send, providing an insight into potential targets [1].

Darktrace’s coverage of Blind Eagle

In late February 2025, Darktrace observed activity assessed with medium confidence to be associated with Blind Eagle on the network of a customer in Colombia.

Within a period of just five hours, Darktrace / NETWORK detected a device being redirected through a rare external location, downloading multiple executable files, and ultimately exfiltrating data from the customer’s environment.

Since the customer did not have Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability enabled on their network, no actions were taken to contain the compromise, allowing it to escalate until the customer’s security team responded to the alerts provided by Darktrace.

Darktrace observed a device on the customer’s network being directed over HTTP to a rare external IP, namely 62[.]60[.]226[.]112, which had never previously been seen in this customer’s environment and was geolocated in Germany. Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) providers have since linked this endpoint with phishing and malware campaigns [9].

The device then proceeded to download the executable file hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe.

Figure 1: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device connecting to an unusual location based in Germany.

Figure 2: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device downloading an executable file from the suspicious endpoint.

The device was then observed making unusual connections to the rare endpoint 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com and performing unusual external data activity.

This dynamic DNS endpoint allows a device to access an endpoint using a domain name in place of a changing IP address. Dynamic DNS services ensure the DNS record of a domain name is automatically updated when the IP address changes. As such, malicious actors can use these services and endpoints to dynamically establish connections to C2 infrastructure [6].

Further investigation into this dynamic endpoint using OSINT revealed multiple associations with previous likely Blind Eagle compromises, as well as Remcos malware, a RAT commonly deployed via phishing campaigns [7][8][10].

Figure 3: Darktrace’s detection of the affected device connecting to the suspicious dynamic DNS endpoint, 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com.

Shortly after this, Darktrace observed the user agent ‘Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19045’, indicating usage of the aforementioned transmission protocol WebDAV. The device was subsequently observed connected to an endpoint associated with Github and downloading data, suggesting that the device was retrieving a malicious tool or payload. The device then began to communicate to the malicious endpoint diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com over the new TCP port 1512 [11].

Around this time, the device was also observed uploading data to the endpoints 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com and diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com, with transfers of 60 MiB and 5.6 MiB observed respectively.

Figure 4: UI graph showing external data transfer activity.

This chain of activity triggered an Enhanced Monitoring model alert in Darktrace / NETWORK. These high-priority model alerts are designed to trigger in response to higher fidelity indicators of compromise (IoCs), suggesting that a device is performing activity consistent with a compromise.

Figure 5: Darktrace’s detection of initial attack chain activity.

A second Enhanced Monitoring model was also triggered by this device following the download of the aforementioned executable file (hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe) and the observed increase in C2 activity.

Following this activity, Darktrace continued to observe the device beaconing to the 21ene.ip-ddns[.]com endpoint.

Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst was able to correlate each of the individual detections involved in this compromise, identifying them as part of a broader incident that encompassed C2 connectivity, suspicious downloads, and external data transfers.

Figure 6: Cyber AI Analyst’s investigation into the activity observed on the affected device.

Figure 7: Cyber AI Analyst’s detection of the affected device’s broader connectivity throughout the course of the attack.

As the affected customer did not have Darktrace’s Autonomous Response configured at the time, the attack was able to progress unabated. Had Darktrace been properly enabled, it would have been able to take a number of actions to halt the escalation of the attack.

For example, the unusual beaconing connections and the download of an unexpected file from an uncommon location would have been shut down by blocking the device from making external connections to the relevant destinations.

Conclusion

The persistence of Blind Eagle and ability to adapt its tactics, even after patches were released, and the speed at which the group were able to continue using pre-established TTPs highlights that timely vulnerability management and patch application, while essential, is not a standalone defense.

Organizations must adopt security solutions that use anomaly-based detection to identify emerging and adapting threats by recognizing deviations in user or device behavior that may indicate malicious activity. Complementing this with an autonomous decision maker that can identify, connect, and contain compromise-like activity is crucial for safeguarding organizational networks against constantly evolving and sophisticated threat actors.

Credit to Charlotte Thompson (Senior Cyber Analyst), Eugene Chua (Principal Cyber Analyst) and Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

IoCs

IoC – Type - Confidence
Microsoft-WebDAV-MiniRedir/10.0.19045 – User Agent

62[.]60[.]226[.]112 – IP – Medium Confidence

hxxp://62[.]60[.]226[.]112/file/3601_2042.exe – Payload Download – Medium Confidence

21ene.ip-ddns[.]com – Dynamic DNS Endpoint – Medium Confidence

diciembrenotasenclub[.]longmusic[.]com - Hostname – Medium Confidence

Darktrace’s model alert coverage

Anomalous File / Suspicious HTTP Redirect
Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Location
Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server
Unusual Activity / Unusual External Data to New Endpoint
Device / Anomalous Github Download
Anomalous Connection / Multiple Connections to New External TCP Port
Device / Initial Attack Chain Activity
Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server
Compromise / Suspicious File and C2
Compromise / Fast Beaconing to DGA
Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections
Device / Large Number of Model Alert

Mitre Attack Mapping:

Tactic – Technique – Technique Name

Initial Access - T1189 – Drive-by Compromise
Initial Access - T1190 – Exploit Public-Facing Application
Initial Access ICS - T0862 – Supply Chain Compromise
Initial Access ICS - T0865 – Spearphishing Attachment
Initial Access ICS - T0817 - Drive-by Compromise
Resource Development - T1588.001 – Malware
Lateral Movement ICS - T0843 – Program Download
Command and Control - T1105 - Ingress Tool Transfer
Command and Control - T1095 – Non-Application Layer Protocol
Command and Control - T1571 – Non-Standard Port
Command and Control - T1568.002 – Domain Generation Algorithms
Command and Control ICS - T0869 – Standard Application Layer Protocol
Evasion ICS - T0849 – Masquerading
Exfiltration - T1041 – Exfiltration Over C2 Channel
Exfiltration - T1567.002 – Exfiltration to Cloud Storage