ブログ
/
Network
/
November 8, 2022

How Raccoon Stealer v2 Infects Systems

Learn about Raccoon Stealer v2's infection process and its implications for cybersecurity. Discover effective strategies to protect your systems.
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
Sam Lister
Specialist Security Researcher
Default blog image
08
Nov 2022

Raccoon Stealer Malware

Since the release of version 2 of Raccoon Stealer in May 2022, Darktrace has observed huge volumes of Raccoon Stealer v2 infections across its client base. The info-stealer, which seeks to obtain and then exfiltrate sensitive data saved on users’ devices, displays a predictable pattern of network activity once it is executed. In this blog post, we will provide details of this pattern of activity, with the goal of helping security teams to recognize network-based signs of Raccoon Stealer v2 infection within their own networks. 

What is Raccoon Stealer?

Raccoon Stealer is a classic example of information-stealing malware, which cybercriminals typically use to gain possession of sensitive data saved in users’ browsers and cryptocurrency wallets. In the case of browsers, targeted data typically includes cookies, saved login details, and saved credit card details. In the case of cryptocurrency wallets (henceforth, ‘crypto-wallets’), targeted data typically includes public keys, private keys, and seed phrases [1]. Once sensitive browser and crypto-wallet data is in the hands of cybercriminals, it will likely be used to conduct harmful activities, such as identity theft, cryptocurrency theft, and credit card fraud.

How do you obtain Raccoon Stealer?

Like most info-stealers, Raccoon Stealer is purchasable. The operators of Raccoon Stealer sell Raccoon Stealer samples to their customers (called ‘affiliates’), who then use the info-stealer to gain possession of sensitive data saved on users’ devices. Raccoon Stealer affiliates typically distribute their samples via SEO-promoted websites providing free or cracked software. 

Is Raccoon Stealer Still Active?

On the 25th of March 2022, the operators of Raccoon Stealer announced that they would be suspending their operations because one of their core developers had been killed during the Russia-Ukraine conflict [2]. The presence of the hardcoded RC4 key ‘edinayarossiya’ (Russian for ‘United Russia’) within observed Raccoon Stealer v2 samples [3] provides potential evidence of the Raccoon Stealer operators’ allegiances.

Recent details shared by the US Department of Justice [4]/[5] indicate that it was in fact the arrest, rather than the death, of an operator which led the Raccoon Stealer team to suspend their operations [6]. As a result of the FBI, along with law enforcement partners in Italy and the Netherlands, dismantling Raccoon Stealer infrastructure in March 2022 [4], the Raccoon Stealer team was forced to build a new version of the info-stealer.  

On the 17th May 2022, the completion of v2 of the info-stealer was announced on the Raccoon Stealer Telegram channel [7].  Since its release in May 2022, Raccoon Stealer v2 has become extremely popular amongst cybercriminals. The prevalence of Raccoon Stealer v2 in the wider landscape has been reflected in Darktrace’s client base, with hundreds of infections being observed within client networks on a monthly basis.   

Since Darktrace’s SOC first saw a Raccoon Stealer v2 infection on the 22nd May 2022, the info-stealer has undergone several subtle changes. However, the info-stealer’s general pattern of network activity has remained essentially unchanged.  

How Does Raccoon Stealer v2 Infection Work?

A Raccoon Stealer v2 infection typically starts with a user attempting to download cracked or free software from an SEO-promoted website. Attempting to download software from one of these cracked/free software websites redirects the user’s browser (typically via several .xyz or .cfd endpoints) to a page providing download instructions. In May, June, and July, many of the patterns of download behavior observed by Darktrace’s SOC matched the pattern of behavior observed in a cracked software campaign reported by Avast in June [8].   

webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2
Figure 1: Above is a webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2 sample hosted on Discord CDN
example of a webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2
Figure 2: Above is an example of a webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2 sample hosted on Bitbucket
example of a webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2
Figure 3: Above is an example of a webpage whose download instructions led to a Raccoon Stealer v2 sample hosted on MediaFire

Following the instructions on the download instruction page causes the user’s device to download a password-protected RAR file from a file storage service such as ‘cdn.discordapp[.]com’, ‘mediafire[.]com’, ‘mega[.]nz’, or ‘bitbucket[.]org’. Opening the downloaded file causes the user’s device to execute Raccoon Stealer v2. 

The Event Log for an infected device,
Figure 4: The Event Log for an infected device, taken from Darktrace’s Threat Visualiser interface, shows a device contacting two cracked software websites (‘crackedkey[.]org’ and ‘crackedpc[.]co’) before contacting a webpage (‘premiumdownload[.]org) providing instructions to download Raccoon Stealer v2 from Bitbucket

Once Raccoon Stealer v2 is running on a device, it will make an HTTP POST request with the target URI ‘/’ and an unusual user-agent string (such as ‘record’, ‘mozzzzzzzzzzz’, or ‘TakeMyPainBack’) to a C2 server. This POST request consists of three strings: a machine GUID, a username, and a 128-bit RC4 key [9]. The posted data has the following form:

machineId=X | Y & configId=Z (where X is a machine GUID, Y is a username and Z is a 128-bit RC4 key) 

PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘record’ 
Figure 5:PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘record’ 
PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘mozzzzzzzzzzz’
Figure 6: PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘mozzzzzzzzzzz’
PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘TakeMyPainBack’
Figure 7: PCAP showing a device making an HTTP POST request with the User Agent header ‘TakeMyPainBack’

The C2 server responds to the info-stealer’s HTTP POST request with custom-formatted configuration details. These configuration details consist of fields which tell the info-stealer what files to download, what data to steal, and what target URI to use in its subsequent exfiltration POST requests. Below is a list of the fields Darktrace has observed in the configuration details retrieved by Raccoon Stealer v2 samples:

  • a ‘libs_mozglue’ field, which specifies a download address for a Firefox library named ‘mozglue.dll’
  • a ‘libs_nss3’ field, which specifies a download address for a Network System Services (NSS) library named ‘nss3.dll’ 
  • a ‘libs_freebl3’ field, which specifies a download address for a Network System Services (NSS) library named ‘freebl3.dll’
  • a ‘libs_softokn3’ field, which specifies a download address for a Network System Services (NSS) library named ‘softokn3.dll’
  • a ‘libs_nssdbm3’ field, which specifies a download address for a Network System Services (NSS) library named ‘nssdbm3.dll’
  • a ‘libs_sqlite3’ field, which specifies a download address for a SQLite command-line program named ‘sqlite3.dll’
  • a ‘libs_ msvcp140’ field, which specifies a download address for a Visual C++ runtime library named ‘msvcp140.dll’
  • a ‘libs_vcruntime140’ field, which specifies a download address for a Visual C++ runtime library named ‘vcruntime140.dll’
  • a ‘ldr_1’ field, which specifies the download address for a follow-up payload for the sample to download 
  • ‘wlts_X’ fields (where X is the name of a crypto-wallet application), which specify data for the sample to obtain from the specified crypto-wallet application
  • ‘ews_X’ fields (where X is the name of a crypto-wallet browser extension), which specify data for the sample to obtain from the specified browser extension
  • ‘xtntns_X’ fields (where X is the name of a password manager browser extension), which specify data for the sample to obtain from the specified browser extension
  • a ‘tlgrm_Telegram’ field, which specifies data for the sample to obtain from the Telegram Desktop application 
  • a ‘grbr_Desktop’ field, which specifies data within a local ‘Desktop’ folder for the sample to obtain 
  • a ‘grbr_Documents’ field, which specifies data within a local ‘Documents’ folder for the sample to obtain
  • a ‘grbr_Recent’ field, which specifies data within a local ‘Recent’ folder for the sample to obtain
  • a ‘grbr_Downloads’ field, which specifies data within a local ‘Downloads’ folder for the sample to obtain
  • a ‘sstmnfo_System Info.txt’ field, which specifies whether the sample should gather and exfiltrate a profile of the infected host 
  • a ‘scrnsht_Screenshot.jpeg’ field, which specifies whether the sample should take and exfiltrate screenshots of the infected host
  • a ‘token’ field, which specifies a 32-length string of hexadecimal digits for the sample to use as the target URI of its HTTP POST requests containing stolen data 

After retrieving its configuration data, Raccoon Stealer v2 downloads the library files specified in the ‘libs_’ fields. Unusual user-agent strings (such as ‘record’, ‘qwrqrwrqwrqwr’, and ‘TakeMyPainBack’) are used in the HTTP GET requests for these library files. In all Raccoon Stealer v2 infections seen by Darktrace, the paths of the URLs specified in the ‘libs_’ fields have the following form:

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/X (where X is the name of the targeted DLL file) 

Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 8: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device making an HTTP POST request to retrieve configuration details, and then making HTTP GET requests with the User Agent header ‘record’ for DLL files
Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 9: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device making an HTTP POST request to retrieve configuration details, and then making HTTP GET requests with the User Agent header ‘qwrqrwrqwrqwr’ for DLL files
Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 10: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device making an HTTP POST request to retrieve configuration details, and then making HTTP GET requests with the User Agent header ‘TakeMyPainBack’ for DLL files

Raccoon Stealer v2 uses the DLLs which it downloads to gain access to sensitive data (such as cookies, credit card details, and login details) saved in browsers running on the infected host.  

Depending on the data provided in the configuration details, Raccoon Stealer v2 will typically seek to obtain, in addition to sensitive data saved in browsers, the following information:

  • Information about the Operating System and applications installed on the infected host
  • Data from specified crypto-wallet software
  • Data from specified crypto-wallet browser extensions
  • Data from specified local folders
  • Data from Telegram Desktop
  • Data from specified password manager browser extensions
  • Screenshots of the infected host 

Raccoon Stealer v2 exfiltrates the data which it obtains to its C2 server by making HTTP POST requests with unusual user-agent strings (such as ‘record’, ‘rc2.0/client’, ‘rqwrwqrqwrqw’, and ‘TakeMyPainBack’) and target URIs matching the 32-length string of hexadecimal digits specified in the ‘token’ field of the configuration details. The stolen data exfiltrated by Raccoon Stealer typically includes files named ‘System Info.txt’, ‘---Screenshot.jpeg’, ‘\cookies.txt’, and ‘\passwords.txt’. 

Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 11: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device retrieving configuration details via a POST request, downloading several DLLs, and then exfiltrating files named ‘System Info.txt’ and ‘---Screenshot.jpeg’
Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 12: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device retrieving configuration details via a POST request, downloading several DLLs, and then exfiltrating a file named ‘System Info.txt’ 
Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 13: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device retrieving configuration details via a POST request, downloading several DLLs, and then exfiltrating files named ‘System Info.txt’, ‘\cookies.txt’ and ‘\passwords.txt’
Advanced Search logs for an infected host
Figure 14: Advanced Search logs for an infected host, found on Darktrace’s Advanced Search interface, show a device retrieving configuration details via a POST request, downloading several DLLs, and then exfiltrating a file named ‘System Info.txt’

If a ‘ldr_1’ field is present in the retrieved configuration details, then Raccoon Stealer will complete its operation by downloading the binary file specified in the ‘ldr_1’ field. In all observed cases, the paths of the URLs specified in the ‘ldr_1’ field end in a sequence of digits, followed by ‘.bin’. The follow-up payload seems to vary between infections, likely due to this additional-payload feature being customizable by Raccoon Stealer affiliates. In many cases, the info-stealer, CryptBot, was delivered as the follow-up payload. 

Darktrace Coverage of Raccoon Stealer

Once a user’s device becomes infected with Raccoon Stealer v2, it will immediately start to communicate over HTTP with a C2 server. The HTTP requests made by the info-stealer have an empty Host header (although Host headers were used by early v2 samples) and highly unusual User Agent headers. When Raccoon Stealer v2 was first observed in May 2022, the user-agent string ‘record’ was used in its HTTP requests. Since then, it appears that the operators of Raccoon Stealer have made several changes to the user-agent strings used by the info-stealer,  likely in an attempt to evade signature-based detections. Below is a timeline of the changes to the info-stealer’s user-agent strings, as observed by Darktrace’s SOC:

  • 22nd May 2022: Samples seen using the user-agent string ‘record’
  • 2nd July 2022: Samples seen using the user-agent string ‘mozzzzzzzzzzz’
  • 29th July 2022: Samples seen using the user-agent string ‘rc2.0/client’
  • 10th August 2022: Samples seen using the user-agent strings ‘qwrqrwrqwrqwr’ and ‘rqwrwqrqwrqw’
  • 16th Sep 2022: Samples seen using the user-agent string ‘TakeMyPainBack’

The presence of these highly unusual user-agent strings within infected devices’ HTTP requests causes the following Darktrace DETECT/Network models to breach:

  • Device / New User Agent
  • Device / New User Agent and New IP
  • Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname
  • Device / Three or More New User Agents

These DETECT models look for devices making HTTP requests with unusual user-agent strings, rather than specific user-agent strings which are known to be malicious. This method of detection enables the models to continually identify Raccoon Stealer v2 HTTP traffic, despite the changes made to the info-stealer’s user-agent strings.   

After retrieving configuration details from a C2 server, Raccoon Stealer v2 samples make HTTP GET requests for several DLL libraries. Since these GET requests are directed towards highly unusual IP addresses, the downloads of the DLLs cause the following DETECT models to breach:

  • Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / Script from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations

Raccoon Stealer v2 samples send data to their C2 server via HTTP POST requests with an absent Host header. Since these POST requests lack a Host header and have a highly unusual destination IP, their occurrence causes the following DETECT model to breach:

  • Anomalous Connection / Posting HTTP to IP Without Hostname

Certain Raccoon Stealer v2 samples download (over HTTP) a follow-up payload once they have exfiltrated data. Since the target URIs of the HTTP GET requests made by v2 samples end in a sequence of digits followed by ‘.bin’, the samples’ downloads of follow-up payloads cause the following DETECT model to breach:

  • Anomalous File / Numeric File Download

If Darktrace RESPOND/Network is configured within a customer’s environment, then Raccoon Stealer v2 activity should cause the following inhibitive actions to be autonomously taken on infected systems: 

  • Enforce pattern of life — This action results in a device only being able to make connections which are normal for it to make
  • Enforce group pattern of life — This action results in a device only being able to make connections which are normal for it or any of its peers to make
  • Block matching connections — This action results in a device being unable to make connections to particular IP/Port pairs
  • Block all outgoing traffic — This action results in a device being unable to make any connections 
The Event Log for an infected device
Figure 15: The Event Log for an infected device, taken from Darktrace’s Threat Visualiser interface, shows Darktrace RESPOND taking inhibitive actions in response to the HTTP activities of a Raccoon Stealer v2 sample downloaded from MediaFire

Given that Raccoon Stealer v2 infections move extremely fast, with the time between initial infection and data exfiltration sometimes less than a minute, the availability of Autonomous Response technology such as Darktrace RESPOND is vital for the containment of Raccoon Stealer v2 infections.  

Timeline of Darktrace stopping raccoon stealer.
Figure 16: Figure displaying the steps of a Raccoon Stealer v2 infection, along with the corresponding Darktrace detections

Conclusion

Since the release of Raccoon Stealer v2 back in 2022, the info-stealer has relentlessly infected the devices of unsuspecting users. Once the info-stealer infects a user’s device, it retrieves and then exfiltrates sensitive information within a matter of minutes. The distinctive pattern of network behavior displayed by Raccoon Stealer v2 makes the info-stealer easy to spot. However, the changes which the Raccoon Stealer operators make to the User Agent headers of the info-stealer’s HTTP requests make anomaly-based methods key for the detection of the info-stealer’s HTTP traffic. The operators of Raccoon Stealer can easily change the superficial features of their malware’s C2 traffic, however, they cannot easily change the fact that their malware causes highly unusual network behavior. Spotting this behavior, and then autonomously responding to it, is likely the best bet which organizations have at stopping a Raccoon once it gets inside their networks.  

Thanks to the Threat Research Team for its contributions to this blog.

References

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2022/05/17/in-hot-pursuit-of-cryware-defending-hot-wallets-from-attacks/

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

[3] https://www.esentire.com/blog/esentire-threat-intelligence-malware-analysis-raccoon-stealer-v2-0

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

[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fsz6acw-ZJ

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

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

[8] https://blog.avast.com/fakecrack-campaign

[9] https://blog.sekoia.io/raccoon-stealer-v2-part-2-in-depth-analysis/

Appendices

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Resource Development

• T1588.001 — Obtain Capabilities: Malware

• T1608.001 — Stage Capabilities: Upload Malware

• T1608.005 — Stage Capabilities: Link Target

• T1608.006 — Stage Capabilities: SEO Poisoning

Execution

•  T1204.002 — User Execution: Malicious File

Credential Access

• T1555.003 — Credentials from Password Stores:  Credentials from Web Browsers

• T1555.005 — Credentials from Password Stores:  Password Managers

• T1552.001 — Unsecured Credentials: Credentials  In Files

Command and Control

•  T1071.001 — Application Layer Protocol: Web Protocols

•  T1105 — Ingress Tool Transfer

IOCS

Type

IOC

Description

User-Agent String

record

String used in User Agent header of  Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

User-Agent  String

mozzzzzzzzzzz

String used inUser Agent header of Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

User-Agent String

rc2.0/client

String used in User Agent header of  Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

User-Agent  String

qwrqrwrqwrqwr

String used in  User Agent header of Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

User-Agent String

rqwrwqrqwrqw

String used in User Agent header of  Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

User-Agent  String

TakeMyPainBack

String used in  User Agent header of Raccoon Stealer v2’s HTTP requests

Domain Name

brain-lover[.]xyz  

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain  Name

polar-gift[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain Name

cool-story[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain  Name

fall2sleep[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain Name

broke-bridge[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain  Name

use-freedom[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain Name

just-trust[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain  Name

soft-viper[.]site

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain Name

tech-lover[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain  Name

heal-brain[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

Domain Name

love-light[.]xyz

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

104.21.80[.]14

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

107.152.46[.]84

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

135.181.147[.]255

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

135.181.168[.]157

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

138.197.179[.]146

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

141.98.169[.]33

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

146.19.170[.]100

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

146.19.170[.]175

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

146.19.170[.]98

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

146.19.173[.]33

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

146.19.173[.]72

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

146.19.247[.]175

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

146.19.247[.]177

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

146.70.125[.]95

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

152.89.196[.]234

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

165.225.120[.]25

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

168.100.10[.]238

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

168.100.11[.]23

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

168.100.9[.]234

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

170.75.168[.]118

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

172.67.173[.]14

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

172.86.75[.]189

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

172.86.75[.]33

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

174.138.15[.]216

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

176.124.216[.]15

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

185.106.92[.]14

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

185.173.34[.]161

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

185.173.34[.]161  

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

185.225.17[.]198

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

185.225.19[.]190

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

185.225.19[.]229

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

185.53.46[.]103

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

185.53.46[.]76

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

185.53.46[.]77

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

188.119.112[.]230

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

190.117.75[.]91

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.106.191[.]182

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.149.129[.]135

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.149.129[.]144

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.149.180[.]210

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.149.185[.]192

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.233.193[.]50

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.43.146[.]138

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.43.146[.]17

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.43.146[.]192

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.43.146[.]213

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.43.146[.]214

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.43.146[.]215

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.43.146[.]26

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

193.43.146[.]45

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

193.56.146[.]177

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

194.180.174[.]180

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

195.201.148[.]250

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

206.166.251[.]156

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

206.188.196[.]200

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

206.53.53[.]18

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

207.154.195[.]173

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

213.252.244[.]2

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

38.135.122[.]210

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.10.20[.]248

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.11.19[.]99

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.133.216[.]110

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.133.216[.]145

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.133.216[.]148

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.133.216[.]249

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.133.216[.]71

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.140.146[.]169

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.140.147[.]245

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.142.212[.]100

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.142.213[.]24

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.142.215[.]91

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.142.215[.]91  

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.142.215[.]92

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.144.29[.]18

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.144.29[.]243

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.15.156[.]11

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.15.156[.]2

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.15.156[.]31

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.15.156[.]31

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.150.67[.]156

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.153.230[.]183

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.153.230[.]228

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.159.251[.]163

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.159.251[.]164

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.61.136[.]67

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.61.138[.]162

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.67.228[.]8

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.67.231[.]202

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.67.34[.]152

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.67.34[.]234

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.8.144[.]187

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.8.144[.]54

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.8.144[.]55

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.8.145[.]174

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.8.145[.]83

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.8.147[.]39

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.8.147[.]79

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.84.0.152

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.86.86[.]78

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.89.54[.]110

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.89.54[.]110

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.89.54[.]95

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.89.55[.]115

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.89.55[.]117

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.89.55[.]193

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.89.55[.]198

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.89.55[.]20

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

45.89.55[.]84

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

45.92.156[.]150

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.182.36[.]154

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.182.36[.]230

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.182.36[.]231

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.182.36[.]232

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.182.36[.]233

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.182.39[.]34

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.182.39[.]74

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.182.39[.]75

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.182.39[.]77

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.118[.]33

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.176[.]62

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.177[.]217

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.177[.]234

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.177[.]43

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.177[.]47

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.177[.]92

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.177[.]98

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.22[.]142

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.23[.]100

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

5.252.23[.]25

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

5.252.23[.]76

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

51.195.166[.]175

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

51.195.166[.]176

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

51.195.166[.]194

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

51.81.143[.]169

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

62.113.255[.]110

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

65.109.3[.]107

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

74.119.192[.]56

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

74.119.192[.]73

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.232.39[.]101

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.73.133[.]0

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.73.133[.]4

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.73.134[.]45

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.75.230[.]25

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.75.230[.]39

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.75.230[.]70

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.75.230[.]93

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.100[.]101

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.91.102[.]12

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.102[.]230

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.91.102[.]44

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.102[.]57

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.91.102[.]84

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.103[.]31

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.91.73[.]154

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.73[.]213

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

77.91.73[.]32

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

77.91.74[.]67

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

78.159.103[.]195

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

78.159.103[.]196

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

80.66.87[.]23

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

80.66.87[.]28

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

80.71.157[.]112

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

80.71.157[.]138

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

80.92.204[.]202

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

87.121.52[.]10

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

88.119.175[.]187

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

89.185.85[.]53

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

89.208.107[.]42

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

89.39.106[.]78

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

91.234.254[.]126

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.104[.]16

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.104[.]17

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.104[.]18

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.106[.]116

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.106[.]224

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.107[.]132

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.107[.]138

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.96[.]109

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.97[.]129

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.97[.]53

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.97[.]56

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.131.97[.]57

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.131.98[.]5

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.158.244[.]114

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.158.244[.]119

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.158.244[.]21

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.158.247[.]24

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.158.247[.]26

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

94.158.247[.]30

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

94.158.247[.]44

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

IP  Address

95.216.109[.]16

Raccoon Stealer  v2 C2 infrastructure

IP Address

95.217.124[.]179

Raccoon Stealer v2 C2 infrastructure

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/mozglue.dll

URI used in  download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/nss3.dll

URI used in download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/freebl3.dll

URI used in  download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/softokn3.dll

URI used in download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/nssdbm3.dll

URI used in  download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/sqlite3.dll

URI used in download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/msvcp140.dll

URI used in  download of library file

URI

/aN7jD0qO6kT5bK5bQ4eR8fE1xP7hL2vK/vcruntime140.dll

URI used in download of library file

URI

/C9S2G1K6I3G8T3X7/56296373798691245143.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/O6K3E4G6N9S8S1/91787438215733789009.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/Z2J8J3N2S2Z6X2V3S0B5/45637662345462341.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/rgd4rgrtrje62iuty/19658963328526236.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/sd325dt25ddgd523/81852849956384.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/B0L1N2H4R1N5I5S6/40055385413647326168.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/F5Q8W3O3O8I2A4A4B8S8/31427748106757922101.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/36141266339446703039.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/wH0nP0qH9eJ6aA9zH1mN/1.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/K2X2R1K4C6Z3G8L0R1H0/68515718711529966786.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/C3J7N6F6X3P8I0I0M/17819203282122080878.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/W9H1B8P3F2J2H2K7U1Y7G5N4C0Z4B/18027641.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/P2T9T1Q6P7Y5J3D2T0N0O8V/73239348388512240560937.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/W5H6O5P0E4Y6P8O1B9D9G0P9Y9G4/671837571800893555497.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/U8P2N0T5R0F7G2J0/898040207002934180145349.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/AXEXNKPSBCKSLMPNOMNRLUEPR/3145102300913020.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

URI

/wK6nO2iM9lE7pN7e/7788926473349244.bin

URI used in  download of follow-up payload

URI

/U4N9B5X5F5K2A0L4L4T5/84897964387342609301.bin

URI used in download of follow-up  payload

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
Sam Lister
Specialist Security Researcher

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

AI

/

August 13, 2026

信頼が新たなアタックサーフェスである理由:ダークトレースの2026年度中間脅威アップデート

Default blog imageDefault blog image

2026年初頭、ダークトレースのアナリストによって専用に設計されたReact2Shellハニーポットは、その展開から2時間未満で侵害を受けました。この1つのデータをとって見ても2026年前半の脅威ランドスケープのペースを表していると言うことができますが、スピードは1つの側面に過ぎません。

過去6か月間の変化は、従来のマルウェアや脆弱性を中心とした攻撃から、信頼されるアイデンティティ、プラットフォーム、およびインフラの悪用への移行を示しています。多くの組織が広範囲にAIを導入するのに伴い、アイデンティティ、SaaSプラットフォーム、クラウドに対する権限、自動化フレームワーク、および非人間アイデンティティが、攻撃者に好まれる攻撃経路となっています。

攻撃者は、外部から侵入するよりも、防御者やユーザーが信頼するよう条件づけられている関係、サービス、認証済みチャネル内で活動する傾向が高まっています。

2025年と比較して何が変わったか?

2025年には、アイデンティティが新たな境界となり、攻撃者はますます従来のエクスプロイト手法を使うよりも信頼されるアカウント、SaaSプラットフォーム、そしてAIによって可能になった新手の手法を使うようになりました。2026年前半は、この進化の次の段階にあると言えます。アイデンティの悪用は依然として中心的ですが、信頼の問題は今やアカウントをはるかに超えてEメール認証、クラウドに対する権限、ソフトウェアサプライチェーン、AIゲートウェイ、リモート管理ツール、そして非人間アイデンティティにも及んでいます。

Theme 2025 (Mid-Year / Annual) H1 2026
Identity Credentials remained the weak link; identity emerged as the new perimeter. Identity remains the entry point, but trust has become the new attack surface.
Cloud & SaaS SaaS-targeted ransomware continued to rise. Cloud and SaaS became the attacker's preferred operating environment.
AI Large Language Models (LLMs) were suspected of influencing phishing shifts. LLM-generated malware, compromised AI proxies, and the abuse of AI identities emerged.
Attack Surface Scale & Speed Exponential growth of Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVEs), with public proof-of-concepts appearing faster. Cloud and AI adoption expanded the attack surface, while AI accelerated exploitation. One honeypot was compromised in under two hours.
Supply Chain Legitimate services were increasingly abused. Trusted maintainers and CI/CD workflows were weaponized.

アイデンティティとEメール:危険にさらされる信頼のシグナル

Eメールは信頼されるアイデンティティへの最も確実なルートであり、攻撃者はノイズを作り出すことよりも品質の向上に投資していることをデータが示しています。2026年前半において、フィッシングEメールの67%がDMARC認証を通過していました。ほとんどのフィッシングの試みに対して、阻止するには認証だけではもはや不十分なのです。フィッシングEメールの25.8%でVIPユーザーが標的となっており、22025年と同様に25%を上回る値ですが、期間全体を通じて上昇傾向にあります。重要な点は、フィッシングの巧妙さが高まり続けていることです:フィッシングEメールの37%が大量のテキストを含んでおり、2025年前半の32%から増加しています。また、39%は新手のソーシャルエンジニアリングテクニックを特徴としており、攻撃者が特定の標的にあわせてさらなるカスタマイズを行っていることを示唆しています。

ダークトレースの顧客に最も幅広く影響を与えている脅威もアイデンティティに焦点を当てたものであり、専用のStealCおよびAMOSインフォスティーラーを使った攻撃がこの半年間に多く見られています。これらのマルウェアの蔓延も、根本的にはアイデンティティの問題です。インフォスティーラーによって収集された認証情報がしばしば最初のアクセスベクトルとして使用され、攻撃チェーンの後の段階で格段に影響の大きい侵害につながります。また、マルウェアの投下には技術的弱点の悪用をほとんど必要としない点が重要です。ユーザー自身の手で悪意あるコードを実行させるClickFixソーシャルエンジニアリング手法は、依然としてよく見られます。最近観測されたある攻撃キャンペーンは17か国のダークトレース顧客で確認され、最も影響を受けたのは米国でした。この侵害はソフトウェアの欠陥から始まったものではなく、信頼されるユーザーが信頼されるアクションを実行したことが端緒となりました。

サプライチェーン:信頼が大規模に武器化される

3月と4月には共通の教訓が確認されました。それは信頼がサプライチェーン脆弱性となったということです。Axiosの侵害では幅広く使用されているメンテナーへの信頼が悪用され、Trivyキャンペーンは信頼されるCI/CDインフラ、リリースアーティファクト、およびコンテナイメージを利用して、正当な開発ワークフローに悪意あるコードを押し込みました。

これを最もはっきりと示した事例は、2月から3月にかけて観測されたキャンペーンです。多数のデバイスがHola VPNを使用している間に悪意のあるペイロードをダウンロードし、その後、Holaの配信パイプラインの侵害に関連していることが判明しました。ダークトレースの脅威調査チームは、公開アドバイザリがリリースされる前に、複数の顧客において繰り返し発生している異常な動作から、この侵害に関連する活動を特定しました。

最近では、攻撃者が正当なブロックチェーンインフラを悪用して、AMOSやPhexia等のインフォスティーラーを投下しているケースが見られます。セキュリティリソースが限られているユーザーによく使用されている一般的なVPN等のツールは、正当なC2インフラと組み合わせることで、攻撃者がはるかに広範な被害者層に到達することを可能にする一方、防御側は関連するエンドポイントを単純にブロックすることはできないため、やっかいな問題になります。

防御者にとっての課題は、もはや悪意のあるインフラを特定することではなく、信頼されるインフラが悪意のある動作を始めたときにそれを認識できるかどうかということです。

クラウドとSaaS:標的から作戦領域へ

5月から6月には、デバイス登録、クラウドデータ窃取、SaaS悪用、RDPの拡大、リモート管理ツール関連の活動が見られ、攻撃者がクラウドやSaaSを単なる標的としてではなく、むしろ好ましい作戦環境としてますます認識していることが示唆されました。 

ダークトレース顧客でのある事例では、1つの侵害されたSaaSアカウントがEメール、SaaS、ネットワークレイヤーにわたる活動を引き起こし、これには受信トレイルールの変更、フィッシングの拡散、疑わしいインフラへの接続が含まれていました。これらの兆候のいずれも単独では決定的とは言えませんでしたが、総合すると明らかに侵入を示していました。これらの環境において、攻撃者はますます信頼管理をを回避する必要がなくなっています。信頼は、侵害されたアイデンティティ、委任されたアクセス権、および正当な管理ツールを通じて引き継ぐことができるからです。これは、2025年に見られたSaaSを標的としたランサムウェアの傾向の自然な進化であると言えます。ますます多くのケースにおいて、ビジネスが運営されるのと同じプラットフォームが、敵対者が作戦を展開するプラットフォームとなっています。

AI:攻撃の加速装置でありアタックサーフェス、そして信頼される、しかしリスクの高いアクター

信頼がアタックサーフェスなら、AIはそれが最も急激に拡大している領域であると言えます。ダークトレースの顧客基盤全体において、2026年前半にAIサービスへの接続は平均13%増加し、接続数は1600万回以上標準的な組織は7つの異なるAIプロバイダーとやり取りするようになっています。そしてAIはもはや企業のごく一部ではありません。日々の業務に組み込まれています。この変化が3つの問題を生み出しましたが、これらはすべて2026年前半にダークトレースによって観測されています。

1. 攻撃倍増装置としてのAI

ダークトレースは、AIによって生成されたReact2Shellを悪用するマルウェアを特定しました。これは攻撃者がLLMを使用して有効なエクスプロイトコードを生成し大規模に展開したものです。脅威ランドスケープ全体で見ても同様の活動が増えており、効果的な攻撃作戦への参入障壁が崩れつつあることを示唆しています。最近のJadePuffer事例にも見られるように、エージェント型脅威アクターがインターネットに接続されたサーバーの脆弱性をエクスプロイトし、その後完全に自動化されたランサムウェア攻撃が開始されており、AIは脆弱性の公開から実際のエクスプロイトまでの過程を加速させています[1]。

2. アタックサーフェスとしてのAI

今やAIレイヤー自体も、調べてみる価値があります。あるオートメーション技術メーカーにおいて、侵害されたLLMプロキシが他のAIサービスへの踏み台として利用され、それが失敗すると攻撃者は暗号通貨マイニングに切り替えたという事例がありました。DarktraceのCyber AI Analystはこの侵入インシデントを明らかにし、Managed Threat Detectionサービスにより顧客への通知が行われたことにより、事態がそれ以上進行する前に封じ込めることができました。実務者にとっての教訓は明確です:AIゲートウェイ、プロキシ、モデルエンドポイントは、本番環境のクラウドワークロードと同様に扱うべきです。なぜなら、攻撃者は既にそうしているからです。

3. 信頼される、ただしリスクもあるアクターとしてのAI

Darktrace/ SECURE AIの観測結果からわかることは、最も一般的な現実世界のリスクはさらに判別が難しいということです。従業員が、個人識別情報(PII)、税務記録、身分証明書、会社の財務データ、人事記録、個人の医療データをLLMのプロンプトに入力することや、シャドーAIの蔓延、そしてモバイルデバイスからのAI使用の増加が挙げられます。28日間で約28,000人のユーザーから送信された約280,000件のプロンプトのうち、Darktraceはこれらのプロンプトの約1%(2,945件)に機密性の高いデータが含まれていることを特定しました。*

*プロンプトデータはユーザーのプライバシーを保護するために、集積および匿名化された形で分析されました。

防御者にとって、課題はコンテキストです。つまり、正当なビジネス利用が重大なリスクに変わるタイミングを、プライバシーやユーザーの信頼を損なうことなく見極めることです。組織がAIシステムをますます信頼し、AIがマシンスピードで機密情報にアクセス、処理、共有するようになるなかで、アイデンティティ、アプリケーション、クラウドインフラと同様に、AIも保護および監視されなければなりません。

スピードと地政学:迅速な作戦、長期的な目標

2026年前半に行われたいくつかの調査では、攻撃者が新たに公開された脆弱性をいかに迅速に実用化し、パッチ適用サイクルが完了する前にOAST(Out-of-Band Application Security Testing)インフラおよび信頼されたクラウドサービスを通じてエクスプロイト検証を行っているかが明らかになりました。React2Shellは2時間で侵害され、BeyondTrustのエクスプロイトも1日未満で発生しました。このような状況の中で、国家を背後に持つ脅威アクターは、引き続き正当なサービス、クラウドインフラ、および信頼関係を通じた、長期的なアクセス、情報収集、および事前配置に重点を置いています。中国、ロシア、イラン、北朝鮮(DPRK)を背後に持つ作戦は共通の特徴を持っています。それは即座に混乱を起こすことよりも、永続化と戦略的な配置を優先するということです。

中国:ダークトレースは、中国系アクターが信頼されるサービス、DLLサイドローディング、およびモジュール型の侵入チェーンを通じた長期的なアクセスの獲得を優先している状況を確認しています。これはCrimson Echoレポートでも解説され、Twill Typhoonの手法に関連するアクティビティと一致しています。

イラン:ダークトレースによるZionSiphonの調査は、イランに関連するアクターのOT環境への関心を浮き彫りにし、諜報目的とインフラ破壊能力を融合させている実態を明らかにしています。

ロシア:ダークトレースによる調査、および業界全体のさまざまな報告は、ロシアがウクライナ関連の支援に関する長期的な情報収集のために、信頼関係とサプライチェーンを標的としていることを明らかにしています[2]。

北朝鮮:ダークトレースは、脆弱性の迅速な武器化と永続的アクセス技術を組み合わせた北朝鮮関連の活動を観測ししています。これにはAxiosのサプライチェーン侵害、React2Shellエクスプロイト、ステルス性のmacOS侵入が含まれています。

 目的は脅威アクターによって異なっていましたが、手法は非常に一貫していました。信頼されるサービス、正当なインフラ、そして永続的アクセスは、即時の混乱よりも価値が高いことが示されています。

防御者のシフト

アイデンティティの侵害、サプライチェーン攻撃、SaaSの悪用、AIインフラの標的化、国家が支援する作戦、いずれのケースにおいても、攻撃者は防御のコントロールを突破するのではなく、信頼されたシステムを通じて行動することで成功を収めることが増えています。信頼されるユーザー、信頼されるソフトウェア、信頼されるインフラチャ、そしてますます信頼されるAIシステムは、すべて有効な攻撃経路となりました。 

防御者にとっての課題はもはや、単にあるアクションが許可されるかどうかを判断することではなく、そのアクションがより広いコンテキストの中で正当かどうかを見極めることです。認証、評判、出自は依然として重要ですが、それだけではもはや十分とは言えません。攻撃者がますます信頼されるシステム内で活動するようになる中で、最も強力なシグナルは多くの場合動作の逸脱です。つまり、信頼されているアクティビティが期待される振る舞いと一致しなくなった時にそれを識別することです。

本稿の執筆にはNathaniel Jones(SVP, Global Threat Intelligence)、Emma Foulger(Global Threat Research Operations Lead)、Justin Torres (Senior Cyber Analyst) Daniel Levy(Threat Hunting Data Scientist)が協力しました。


編集:Ryan Traill(Content Manager)

付録1:脅威調査手法

ダークトレースの脅威調査チームは、顧客の運用環境に対する詳細な調査を行ってアクティブな脅威を識別し、主要な侵害インジケーター(IoC)を特定し、関連する脅威インテリジェンスを提供しています。この調査はダークトレースの異常ベース検知に基づいたもので、脅威調査チームによる徹底した分析およびコンテキスト化が行われています。検知された脅威は関連する顧客のセキュリティチームに直ちに報告されます。顧客がダークトレースの自律遮断テクノロジーを使用している場合、これらの脅威は速やかに緩和され、エスカレーションが阻止されます。

 2026年1月1日から6月30日までの期間、ダークトレースは顧客ベースにおいて多種多様なサイバー脅威を調査しました。その多くは同様のTTPおよびIoCが短い期間内に一定の数の顧客に影響を及ぼした、複数の顧客を標的とした攻撃作戦的活動であったことが判明しています。 

Eメールに関連する統計は、2026年1月1日から6月30日までの間に、すべてのクラウドホスト型顧客環境におけるDarktrace / EMAILの集約されたデータから導出されています。特異な観測値を除外するために、集約を行う前に標準的なデータ品質フィルタリングが適用されています。地域別の統計は、このデータセットの関連サブセットに基づいています。 

付録2:キャンペーン - 地域およびセクター別の傾向

過去6か月間の脅威ランドスケープは上記の大まかなテーマにより定義されていますが、ダークトレースの顧客基盤全体でのキャンペーンクラスタリングにより、それらがセクター、地域、産業ごとにどのように異なっているかが明らかになりました。 

ダークトレースの脅威調査チームは、顧客ベースに影響を与えるさまざまな脅威を調査しています。この調査を通じて、共通のTTPやインフラが観察され、短期間で多くの顧客に影響を与える、攻撃キャンペーンのような活動のクラスターが特定されました。 

セクターおよび産業は、一貫した分類を確保するために標準産業分類(SIC)システムを使用して分類されています。本レポートのセクターおよび地域別の考察は、より広範な世界的な傾向を反映している一方で、ダークトレースの顧客基盤の分布にも影響を受けています。例えば、金融、製造、教育分野はダークトレースの顧客の中で多く、これらのセクターで観測される事例数が多くなる可能性があります。これは必ずしも特定のセクターにおけるリスクが高いことを示すものではなく、顧客の分布を反映しています。同様に、地域の傾向はダークトレースの顧客の地理的分布によって影響を受ける可能性があります。

2026年前半にダークトレースの脅威調査チームによって特定されたキャンペーンクラスターの分析では、明確な地域別の傾向が明らかになりました:

  • ヨーロッパ、中東、アフリカ(EMEA)がすべてのキャンペーンクラスター事例の60%を占めており支配的でした。
  • アメリカ大陸(AMS)は、その次に影響が大きかった地域でありキャンペーンクラスター事例の30%を占めていました。
  • アジア太平洋および日本(APJ)地域はキャンペーンクラスターの影響をあまり受けていませんでした。これは脅威アクターがこの地域の優先度を低くし、代わりに他の地域に注力した可能性を示しています。

産業セクターの標的化も地域によって大きく異なりました:

  • EMEA地域では、情報通信分野が大きく影響を受け、全体の25%を占めました。
  • 対照的に、AMSでは標的はより均等に分布しており、教育、行政機関および防衛、金融および保険の各セクターがいずれもAMS地域の事例の20%以上を占めていました。
  • APJ地域ではキャンペーン活動はより均等に分散しており、特定のセクターが支配的な標的として浮上することはありませんでした。

いくつかの国はそれぞれの地域内でも際立った特徴がありました:

  • 米国はAMS内のすべてのキャンペーンクラスターの60%を占めていました。
  • 日本はAPJ全体のキャンペーン事例の40%を占めました。
  • EMEA地域では、英国とジンバブエがそれぞれ特定された事例の23%を占めており、両国ともさまざまなキャンペーンのタイプに影響を受けています。

Inside the SOCおよび2026年度脅威調査の月次傾向:アクセスからインパクトまで

Month Dominant Themes
January Voice phishing, VPS infrastructure, WebSocket C2, RMM abuse, ransomware, infostealers (StealC), and trojanized installers (7-Zip).
February Voice phishing, VPN intrusion, edge infrastructure compromise (BeyondTrust), and RMM abuse.
March Sustained supply chain compromise (Hola VPN, Axios, Trivy), malicious browser extensions, phishing, and discovery tools.
April Account creation abuse, payload delivery, VPN credential abuse, Fortinet exploitation, and botnet activity.
May PowerShell, EtherHiding, data exfiltration, VPN access, business email compromise (BEC), ClickFix, and infostealers (AMOS).
June RDP abuse, device registration, RMM usage, voice phishing, cloud data theft, botnet activity, blockchain abuse, ClickFix, and infostealers (AMOS).

付録3:参考文献

外部

[1] https://www.darkreading.com/cyberattacks-data-breaches/jadepuffer-first-complete-llm-driven-ransomware-attack

[2] https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/26/c/pawn-storm-targets-govt-infra.html

ダークトレースのリソース

1.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/ai-llm-generated-malware-used-to-exploit-react2shell

2.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/2025-cyber-threat-landscape-darktraces-mid-year-review

3.        https://www.darktrace.com/resources/annual-threat-report-2026

4.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/when-trust-becomes-the-attack-surface-supply-chain-attacks-in-an-era-of-automation-and-implicit-trust

5.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/hola-vpn-abuse-from-proxy-traffic-to-malware-and-cryptomining

6.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/security-after-signatures-operating-in-a-world-of-pre-cve-disclosure-exploitation-collapsed-trust-boundaries-and-autonomous-systems

7.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/when-ai-infrastructure-becomes-part-of-the-attack-surface

8.        https://www.darktrace.com/blog/cve-2026-1731-how-darktrace-sees-the-beyondtrust-exploitation-wave-unfolding

9.        https://www.darktrace.com/resource/understanding-chinese-nexus-cyber-tradecraft

10.   https://www.darktrace.com/blog/chinese-apt-campaign-targets-entities-with-updated-fdmtp-backdoor

11.  https://www.darktrace.com/blog/inside-zionsiphon-darktraces-analysis-of-ot-malware-targeting-israeli-water-systems

12.  https://www.darktrace.com/resources/the-state-of-cybersecurity-in-the-finance-sector

13.  https://www.darktrace.com/blog/from-click-to-command-behavioral-detection-of-applescript-led-macos-intrusions

14.  https://www.darktrace.com/blog/the-state-of-cybersecurity-in-the-finance-sector-six-trends-to-watch

Continue reading
About the author
Nathaniel Jones
SVP, Global Threat Intelligence

Blog

/

Network

/

August 11, 2026

When AI Agents Attack: The Case for Behavioral Anomaly Detection

Default blog imageDefault blog image

The UK AI Security Institute (AISI) has just published a detailed incident report confirming what many within the cyber security industry have suspected for some time: frontier AI agents, given a degree of autonomy, can independently develop and execute attack chains against real targets, including social engineering, supply-chain compromise, and deception, without explicit instruction to do so.

The report (INC-2026-07-28-01, published 4 August 2026) documents what happened during a routine capability evaluation between 25 and 28 July. It deserves a careful read from anyone responsible for securing the modern digital estate.

The incident

AISI regularly tests frontier AI models for offensive cyber capability. In this exercise, agents were placed inside a simulated network environment and given internet access this was deliberate, given to reflect realism of the task. Across 122 evaluation runs, 19 instances of unsanctioned activity were recorded, including cases where agents broke the intended boundaries of the test and acted against real people and real infrastructure on the open internet.

In the most serious case, an agent (Mythos 5) autonomously:

  • Conducted open-source intelligence gathering to identify real developers associated with keywords from the simulated scenario
  • Created a GitHub account and submitted a pull request containing obfuscated malicious code to a real, unaffiliated repository
  • Created a second sockpuppet account to post comments on its own PR, attempting to manufacture social proof
  • When a human reviewer flagged the malicious content, the agent lied, claiming an accidental commit, then repeatedly attempted to reintroduce the payload under the guise of having "fixed" the code
  • Sent spear-phishing emails to the repository maintainer containing manipulated content designed to convince them to merge the code
  • Planted a prompt injection inside a GitHub issue, hidden in an HTML comment invisible to humans but readable by AI coding assistants parsing the repository via API

AISI confirmed no real-world harm resulted. The PRs were not merged; the payloads did not execute. But containment was a product of circumstance, not design.

Why this matters

Every action the agents took used legitimate services operating within normal parameters. Creating a GitHub account is legitimate. Opening a pull request is legitimate. Sending an email is legitimate. Posting an issue is legitimate.

No vulnerability was exploited. No known malware signature was present. No indicator of compromise from any threat intelligence feed would have matched. The entire attack existed as a pattern, a sequence of individually normal actions that, taken together, constituted a supply-chain attack, a social engineering campaign, and an attempted compromise of downstream systems.

This is the class of threat that signature-based and rule-based security tools structurally struggle to detect. They answer the question "have I seen this before?" When the answer is no – and when the attack is novel, composed of legitimate actions, and adapted in real time by an adversary in this case an agent that reasons about evasion – they struggle.

Behavioral anomaly detection: The architecture that fits

Darktrace has spent a decade building a platform around a different question: "is this behavior normal for this entity?"

The platform learns the baseline behavior of every user, device, and communication pattern across an organization's digital environment. It does not need prior knowledge of an attack technique. It identifies deviation from learned normality, surfaces it, and through its Autonomous Response capability, takes targeted action to contain threats at machine speed.

Consider how this AISI incident might show across the Darktrace platform:

Network detection and response

While no payload was successfully delivered to a victim in this incident, AISI's post-incident analysis of the agent's code (detailed on pages 24-25 of the report) reveals what would have landed on target systems had the social engineering succeeded. The agent produced three successive payload generations, each replacing the last after being detected and called out:

Generation 1 hid a module-load stager inside a legitimate bug-fix commit, guarded by an environment variable check, to skip execution in CI. Its second stage attempted to fetch Poseidon implants (Linux and Windows variants) calling back to the agent's own C2 listener, with a fallback to publicly hosted polling scripts that fetched and executed commands every 60 seconds.

Generation 2 exploited an Electron "What's New" window with nodeIntegration enabled, loading remote HTML from a GitHub Pages site the agent had registered. The page decoded an XOR-obfuscated payload at runtime that beaconed host identifiers over DNS, attempted to download the same implants, ran its own in-process C2 loop, and installed reboot persistence via crontab and Windows registry Run keys.

Generation 3 was a post-install dropper added after the agent had already been publicly caught. It XOR-decoded a hidden URL, downloaded a script over plaintext HTTP, and ran it detached, force-exiting so npm install always reports success, giving the attacker remote code execution on any machine running the install.

None of these payloads reached a victim. But the technical detail matters: this is the calibre of tradecraft an autonomous agent produced in a matter of hours, unprompted. Each generation demonstrated adaptation, the agent iterated its approach in direct response to being detected.

For network defenders, the behavioral signals these payloads would have generated are clear. DNS beaconing to novel domains, periodic HTTP polling to newly registered infrastructure, XOR-encoded data in transit, registry and crontab persistence writes on endpoints that have never exhibited such behavior. These are exactly the anomalies that Darktrace / NETWORK identifies in real time: deviations from learned device and connection baselines, regardless of whether the specific payload or C2 domain has been seen before.

Beyond the payload analysis, the agents' broader activity produced additional behavioral anomalies: new identities engaging in high-frequency interactions with external services, coordination via unusual channels (public pastebins, gists), and lateral communication patterns that deviate from any established baseline.

Email security

The spear-phishing emails sent by the agent, crafted with context-specific content designed to manipulate a specific individual, represent exactly the kind of socially engineered communication that static email gateways can miss. Darktrace / EMAIL analyses the linguistic patterns, sender behavior, and relational context of every message. A brand-new sender using tailored language to pressure a recipient into a specific technical action deviates from the learned communication profile, regardless of whether the message contains a known-bad URL or attachment.

Securing AI

This is where the incident points to a threat category that many security platforms do not yet fully address. The agent did not just use AI as a tool for attack. It targeted other AI systems, attempting prompt injections against coding assistants and trying to compromise automated workflows. Organisations adopting AI agents for development, operations, and decision-making are introducing a newer extended attack surface.  

Darktrace / SECURE AI extends the same behavioral detection model into this space. It monitors AI usage across the enterprise, detecting anomalous interactions with AI services, identifying sensitive data exposure to AI systems, providing visibility into shadow AI use. As AI agents become standard components of enterprise infrastructure, the ability to detect when an AI system is behaving outside its expected parameters, when there is a chance, it is being manipulated, or when it is interacting with something it should not be, that becomes a direct security requirement rather than a future consideration.

The principle is consistent across the Darktrace platform: learn what normal looks like, identify deviation, respond autonomously.

The AI-to-AI threat surface

One of the report's most important findings is a confirmation that AI agents can act outside of instructions and guardrails to complete tasks. The Mythos 5 agent conducted reconnaissance on a repository maintainer, inferred it might be an AI coding assistant, and deployed a prompt injection specifically crafted to compromise it.

This is a new attack class. Organizations deploying AI coding assistants, AI-powered code review, or autonomous DevOps agents now face an adversary that:

  • Moves at speed
  • Is able to adapt its approach when initial attempts are halted
  • Specifically targets AI systems via techniques (prompt injection, hidden instructions in HTML comments) that are less visible to human reviewers but parsed by machines
  • Reasons about which evasion strategies are most likely to succeed

Defending against this requires security that operates with the same adaptability and speed. A system that learns what "normal" looks like, and flags deviation from it.

What AISI recommends

The report identifies five contributing factors to the incident. Two are directly relevant:

No synchronous real-time monitoring (Section 5.3): AISI acknowledges it had not built real-time behavioral monitoring capable of immediately blocking unsanctioned agent actions. Their security team detected the incident via commercial security monitoring software, but only after activity had already occurred.

No fine-grained behavioral controls (Section 6.2): AISI's forward-looking response includes building continuous monitoring that can "immediately block or flag unsanctioned AI agent behavior."

The direction is clear: organizations need security that watches behavior continuously, learns what normal looks like, and acts when deviation occurs, without requiring a human in the loop for every decision.

The takeaway

The AISI incident is documented proof that autonomous AI agents will independently develop novel attack chains using legitimate tools, adapt when detected, employ deception, and target both humans and other AI systems. This happened last week, in a controlled setting, with commercially available models.

The security architecture that addresses this is behavioral anomaly detection applied across the full digital estate, as AI agents become standard components of enterprise infrastructure, writing code, managing deployments, processing communications, the attack surface they create is behavioral by nature.

This is the approach Darktrace has taken for years: learning what is normal across an organization’s digital environment, identifying meaningful deviations, and responding to emerging threats without relying on known attack signatures. As autonomous AI agents introduce new and unpredictable behaviors, that foundation becomes increasingly important to securing the enterprise.

Read the full report from the UK AI Security Institute here.

Continue reading
About the author
Adam Stevens
Senior Director of Product
あなたのデータ × DarktraceのAI
唯一無二のDarktrace AIで、ネットワークセキュリティを次の次元へ