ブログ
/
Network
/
January 28, 2026

金融セクターにおけるサイバーセキュリティの現状:注目すべき6つの傾向

金融機関が直面する脅威ランドスケープは、アイデンティティを利用した侵入、公開前のエクスプロイト、データ窃取優先型ランサムウェア、そしてクラウドとAIのガバナンスのブラインドスポット拡大などで形成されています。 本ブログでは、金融セクターのサイバーリスクを再定義しつつある主要な脅威および傾向について解説し、防御者が次に何に適応すべきかについて探ります。
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
Nathaniel Jones
SVP, Global Threat Intelligence
Default blog image
28
Jan 2026

金融セクターの脅威ランドスケープの変化

銀行、信用組合、金融サービスプロバイダー、暗号通貨プラットフォーム等を含む金融セクターは、ますます複雑化し攻撃的なサイバー脅威ランドスケープに直面しています。金融セクターはデジタルインフラへの依存、そして高額な取引を管理するその役割から、金銭目的および国家が支援する脅威アクターの両方にとって格好の標的になります。

ダークトレースの最新の脅威レポート、”金融セクターにおけるサイバーセキュリティの現状” は、実際の顧客環境からのDarktraceテレメトリーデータと、オープンソースインテリジェンス、そして金融セクターのCISOからの直接の聞き取り調査を組み合わせて、このセクターへの攻撃がどのように展開されているかを明らかにし、防御者はどう適応する必要があるかを解説しています。

金融セクターの2026年のサイバーセキュリティに関する6つの傾向

1. 認証情報を利用した攻撃の急増

機密性の高い情報を狙った攻撃において、フィッシングは引き続き主要な初期アクセスベクトルとなっています。金融機関はログイン認証情報の収集を目的としたフィッシングEメールに頻繁に狙われています。多要素認証(MFA)を回避する中間者攻撃(AiTM)やQRコードを使ったフィッシング(“クイッシング”)が急増しており、これらはトレーニングを受けたユーザーであっても欺く能力を持っています。

2025年上半期において、ダークトレースは金融セクターの顧客環境において240万通のフィッシングEメールを観測しており、その30%近くがVIPユーザーを標的としていました。

2. データ損失防止がますます大きな課題

コンプライアンス、特にデータ損失防止の問題は、依然として大きなリスクです。2025年10月だけを見ても、ダークトレースは金融セクターの顧客において、不審な添付ファイルが含まれるユーザーの個人メールアドレス宛と見られるEメールを214,000通以上観測しており、データ損失防止を取り巻く問題が明らかになりました。同時期、同じ顧客層に対して不審な添付ファイルを含む351,000通以上のEメールがフリーメールアドレス(gmail、yahoo、icloud等)に送付されており、DLPに対する深刻な懸念が浮き彫りになっています。

機密性は金融機関にとって引き続き主要な懸念事項であり、機密性の高い顧客データ、財務記録、社内のコミュニケーションなどが標的となる事例がますます増加しています。  

3. ランサムウェアはデータ窃盗と恐喝へ変化

ランサムウェアはもはやシステムをロックするだけにとどまらず、最初にデータを盗み出してから暗号化するようになっています。Cl0pやRansomHub等のグループは現在、信頼されるファイル転送プラットフォームをエクスプロイトすることにより、機密性の高いデータを暗号化の前に抜き出すことを優先しており、被害者に対する規制上、評判上の影響は最大化しています。  

ダークトレースの脅威調査チームは、金融機関が多く利用するインターネット上のファイル転送システムに対する日常なスキャニングや悪意あるアクティビティを特定しています。 Fortra GoAnywhere MFTに関連したある注目すべき事例として、ダークトレースはCVEが公開される6日前に悪意あるエクスプロイト動作を検知しており、攻撃者がしばしばパッチ適用サイクルに先んじて攻撃を行う傾向が明らかになりました。

この変化は極めて重要な事実を指摘するものです。脆弱性が公開される頃には、すでに活発にエクスプロイトが行われているかもしれないのです。

4. 攻撃者は多くのケースで公開前にエッジデバイスをエクスプロイトしている  

VPN、ファイアウォール、リモートアクセスゲートウェイは高価値な標的となり、攻撃者は脆弱性が公開される前にこれらをエクスプロイトするケースが増えています。ダークトレースはCitrix、Palo Alto、Ivantiを含むエッジテクノロジーに影響するCVE公開前のエクスプロイト活動を観測しており、これらはセッションハイジャック、認証情報収集、基幹バンキングシステムへの特権アクセスによる水平移動などを可能にしています。

エッジデバイスが侵害されると、敵対者は信頼されるネットワークトラフィックに溶け込み、従来型の境界防御をすり抜けることが可能になります。聞き取り調査を行った多くのCISOはVPNインフラを、攻撃者にとっての「集中的な標的」表現し、特に運用面でパッチ適用や分離が遅れた場合の問題を指摘しました。

5. 暗号通貨やフィンテックに対する北朝鮮関連のアクティビティが増加  

国家が支援する脅威、特にLazarusと提携した北朝鮮関連のグループの活動は、引き続き暗号通貨およびフィンテック企業に対して強まっています。ダークトレースは、悪意あるnpmパッケージ、これまでに記録のないBeaverTailおよびInvisibleFerretマルウェア、React2Shell のエクスプロイト(CVE-2025-55182)による認証情報の窃取と永続的バックドアアクセスを利用した組織的攻撃キャンペーンを検知しています。

標的となった企業は英国、スペイン、ポルトガル、スウェーデン、チリ、ナイジェリア、ケニア、カタールで見つかっており、これらのオペレーションの世界的規模を示しています。  

6. クラウドの複雑性とAIガバナンスのギャップが体系的リスクとなっている  

多くのCISOが体系的リスクとして指摘していたのは、クラウドの複雑性、新規雇用者の内部関係者リスク、管理されていないAI利用が機密性の高いデータを露出させることでした。リーダー達はマルチクラウド環境に対して可視性を維持することと、新たなAIツールを通じた機密性データの露出を管理することの難しさを強調していました。

明確なガードレールのない急激なAI導入は、機密保護とコンプライアンスの新たなリスクを作り出し、ガバナンスは純粋に技術的な問題ではなく、経営レベルの懸念となりました。

変化する脅威ランドスケープにおいてサイバーレジリエンスを構築するには

金融セクターは金銭目的の犯罪者と国家を背後に持つ攻撃者の両方にとって第一の標的とされています。この調査が明らかにしているのは、これまでのセキュリティの前提条件がもう成り立たないということです。アイデンティティを利用した攻撃、公開前のエクスプロイト、最初にデータ窃取を行うランサムウェアなどに対しては、しばしば脆弱性が公開される前に出現する脅威に対して、発生次第検知できる適応型のビヘイビアベースの防御が必要となります。

金融機関のデジタル化が継続するなかで、組織のリジリエンスはアイデンティティ、エッジ、クラウド、データに対する可視性と、マシンスピードで学習するAI駆動の防御にかかっています。  

金融セクターが直面する脅威と、組織が後れをとらないために何ができるかについては、”金融セクターにおけるサイバーセキュリティの現状” レポートでご確認ください。

‍

謝辞:

金融セクターにおけるサイバーセキュリティの現状レポートは、Calum Hall、Hugh Turnbull、Parvatha Ananthakannan、Tiana Kelly、Vivek Rajanが執筆し、Emma Foulger、Nicole Wong、Ryan Traill、Tara Gould ならびにDarktrace Threat ResearchチームおよびIncident Managementチームが協力しました。

[related-resource]  

金融セクターにおけるサイバーセキュリティの現状レポート

Darktraceテレメトリーデータと、オープンソースインテリジェンス、そして金融機関のCISOからの直接の聞き取り調査に基づくダークトレースの脅威調査レポートをお読みになり、実際に金融機関がどのように標的となっているかをご確認ください。

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
Nathaniel Jones
SVP, Global Threat Intelligence

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

Network

/

October 15, 2026

CikaBika Bot: Inside a Discord RAT

Default blog imageDefault blog image

‍

Key Takeaways

·      Darktrace malware researchers have found an ongoing malware campaign using a document-themed lure containing a malicious LNK file and a PDF with an embedded payload.

·      The Nim based loader deploys a Rust-based remote access trojan (RAT), using a UAC bypass and DLL search-order hijacking technique targeting Microsoft Edge.

·      The RAT uses Discord for C2, creating dedicated channels to manage infected devices and execute commands.

·      CikaBika Bot supports system reconnaissance, remote command execution, screenshot capture, and file transfers.

‍

Introduction

In a threat landscape where attackers continue to rely on social engineering techniques to deliver malware, legitimate services are increasingly being abused to support malicious operations. Communications platforms like Discord can provide attackers with a ready-made channel for command-and-control (C2), allowing them to manage compromised devices without establishing dedicated infrastructure.

Malware researchers at Darktrace have identified a campaign distributing CikaBika, a Rust-based RAT that uses Discord for C2. The infection chain begins with a disk image and a malicious Windows shortcut. A Nim loader extracts the final payload and attempts to plant it in Microsoft Edge’s installation directory using a PowerShell UAC bypass. Once running, the RAT collects host information, registers the device with Discord, and accepts commands through a dedicated channel.

Technical Analysis

‍

Figure 1: Contents of Proposition_Projet.img.

‍

Initial access and PDF payload

The malware is packaged within a disk image named Proposition_Projet.img. Inside are a PDF titled “Presentation_Generale.pdf.pdf” and a Windows shortcut (LNK) disguised as a Word document, “Proposition_Projet_Personnalisable.docx”. The delivery method has not been confirmed; however, the filenames and document-themed lure are consistent with a phishing campaign.

‍

Figure 2: PowerShell command embedded in the malicious shortcut.


Opening the shortcut launches a hidden PowerShell process while displaying the PDF as a decoy. The French-language document explains how to produce a written summary or contraction of a text. In the background, PowerShell reads the PDF as bytes and uses the value at offset 239 (0x20) as an XOR key to decode an embedded executable. The resulting payload is written to %TEMP%\IfyuUapz.txt and executed using cmd /c.

Nim loader and UAC bypass

“IfyuUapz.txt” is a Nim-based loader that contains two Base64-encoded blobs: a Rust dynamic-link library (DLL)  and a PowerShell deployment script. Both are decoded and written to temporary files, referenced to within the loader as “dllFile” and “copyPs1”. The loader runs the script through a hidden PowerShell process using an encoded command, then attempts to load the DLL using Nim’s loadLib function. If loading fails, it invokes regsvr32.exe and retries.

Figure 3: Silent DLL deployer.

The PowerShell component is responsible for moving the DLL to C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\Edge\Application\dbghelp.dll. It first copies the DLL to C:\Windows\Temp\dbghelp.tmp, then modifies HKCU\Software\Classes\ms-settings\shell\open\command so that launching computerdefaults.exe can trigger a command to move the staged DLL into the protected Edge directory. This is an attempt to bypass User Account Control (UAC), which depends on the target’s Windows configuration.

The script also compiles a small C# helper that calls ShowWindow to hide windows associated with Windows Settings and ApplicationFrameHost. It launches the bypass helper three times, checks for the presence of the destination DLL, and attempts to delete the temporary scripts, intermediate DLL, and associated registry changes.

‍

Figure 4: Legitimate msedge.exe function to load the legitimate dbghelp.dll.

‍

The legitimate msedge.exe has a delay-loaded dependency on dbghelp.dll, and the malicious DLL exports a subset of the functions associated with Microsoft’s debugging library. The attacker appears to be exploiting this dependency through DLL search-order hijacking. However, it does not export every function in Edge’s delay-import table, meaning its compatibility with the host is incomplete. The observed code establishes the intended sideloading route, rather than proving that Edge successfully loaded the planted DLL.

‍

Rust RAT payload

Figure 5: Discord configuration within the RAT.

The malicious dbghelp.dll (IfyuUapz.txt) is a Rust-based RAT. At startup, the RAT registers the compromised device with Discord and begins collecting information about the host. Its reconnaissance routine gathers system details, runs tasklist to enumerate processes, executes ipconfig to obtain network configuration, and attempts to take a screenshot. The resulting artifacts include tasklist_startup.txt, network_info.txt, and screenshot.png.

Figure 6: Network configuration notification in Discord channel.

‍

Figure 7: Network configuration output from network_info.txt.

‍

Discord C2

The RAT uses Discord channels to send commands and report results. The operator can send commands to the device’s channel and receive the resulting output in the same conversation. This gives the attacker an interactive command interface without having to operate and maintain a dedicated C2 server.

Figure 8: Commands available in Discord.

The command set includes !shell for remote command execution; !sysinfo and !info for host details; !isOn for status checks; !tasklist and !ps for process enumeration; and !kill for process termination. File-transfer commands include !upload and !download. Additional strings and command handlers reference screenshots (!src), camera access (!camera), streaming (!stream), and broadcasting (!broadcast).

‍

Figure 9: Device registration in Discord.

During device registration, the malware retrieves the victim’s public IP address using ipify.com. The registration message records the device ID, hostname, registration time, private and public IP addresses, status, uptime, and the Discord channel assigned to that device.

Operator activity and exfiltration

Figure 10: Powershell commands sent through Discord to exfiltrate data.

Once a device is registered, the attacker can issue commands through its dedicated Discord channel. In the observed activity, the attacker compressed a directory into a ZIP and exfiltrated it using ngrok.

Figure 11: Download command to retrieve a document from the target.

‍

The operator can also use !download to retrieve files from target. The example above displays a request for a specific document on the victim’s desktop. The requested file is then returned through the device’s Discord channel, giving the attacker a direct way to store and access selected data.

Conclusion

CikaBika Bot demonstrates how attackers continue to rely on social engineering techniques to deliver malware. Although the initial distribution method has not been confirmed, the use of a disk image containing a shortcut disguised as a Word document, alongside a legitimate-looking PDF, suggests the campaign was designed for phishing.

While Nim is less commonly encountered than C in Windows malware, it has increasingly appeared in malicious tooling. In this case, Nim is used to unpack and deploy a Rust-based RAT, adding another layer to the infection chain.

Once installed, CikaBika Bot uses Discord as its C2 platform, allowing the attacker to manage compromised devices, execute commands, and retrieve files without maintaining dedicated C2 infrastructure. The observed use of Discord channels for individual victims, alongside additional data exfiltration through ngrok, shows how legitimate services can be repurposed to support malicious operations.

Credit to Tara Gould (Malware Research Lead)

Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

Presentation_Generale.pdf.pdf - eeb52cb95113a131c2c7713c17872da6

Proposition_Projet_Personnalisable.docx.lnk - 62e3e85eca78a0cd7e6669e9f33d936d

dbghelp.dll - c66858718d883bcfb9ce2c19b59f96c9

IfyuUapz.txt - 2deb724a709b0b892248405323350e9b

MITRE ATTACK

T1204.002 – User Execution: Malicious File
T1036.007 – Masquerading: Double File Extension
T1059.001 – PowerShell
T1027 – Obfuscated Files or Information
T1140 – Deobfuscate/Decode Files or Information
T1548.002 – Bypass User Account Control
T1112 – Modify Registry
T1574.001 – DLL Search Order Hijacking
T1036.005 – Masquerading: Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location
T1082 – System Information Discovery
T1016 – System Network Configuration Discovery
T1057 – Process Discovery
T1113 – Screen Capture
T1059.003 – Command and Scripting Interpreter: Windows Command Shell
T1102.002 – Web Service: Bidirectional Communication
T1560.001 – Archive Collected Data: Archive via Utility
T1567 – Exfiltration Over Web Service
T1070.004 – Indicator Removal: File Deletion
T1218.010 – Regsvr32
T1005 – Data from Local System
T1074.001 – Data Staged: Local Data Staging
T1041 – Exfiltration Over C2 Channel
T1564.003 – Hide Artifacts: Hidden Window
T1027.013 – Encrypted/Encoded File

Continue reading
About the author
Tara Gould
Malware Research Lead

Blog

/

AI

/

October 5, 2026

AI-Assisted Attacks Still Leave a Behavioral Trace  

Default blog imageDefault blog image

Key Insights

  • Darktrace identified behavioral indicators associated with two campaigns linked to AI-assisted threat activity, highlighting the growing role of AI in modern cyber-attacks.
  • Observed activity involved suspicious WebDAV file transfers, disguised executable downloads, beaconing to rare infrastructure, unusual process execution, and communications with C2 infrastructure linked to active intrusion campaigns.

Introduction

Just as organizations are incorporating AI into their operations to take advantage of its benefits, threat actors are doing the same, creating new challenges for defenders.

Much of the discussion around AI risk has focused on the expanding attack surface created by AI systems within organizations. These systems are often granted privileged access and heightened permissions to carry out their duties, introducing new security risks and unintended consequences.

At the same time, threat actors are learning to leverage AI to enable malicious activities such as vulnerability discovery, exploit creation, and progressing through the Cyber Kill Chain more quickly. By accelerating development, adaptation, and scaling, AI enables attackers to operate more efficiently while making some capabilities more accessible to less skilled operators.

Whether AI is the target or the enabler, the resulting activity still manifests through networks, identities, endpoints and cloud services. Those interactions create observable signals that defenders can investigate, regardless of how the attack was developed.

AI as part of the attacker’s workflow

Darktrace has previously documented how threat actors are increasingly incorporating AI into offensive operations [1]. Two recent investigations from open-source intelligence (OSINT) illustrate this. In both cases, researchers identified the role of AI within malicious operations. Separately, Darktrace detected activity in customer environments that aligned with the infrastructure and techniques reported in those campaigns. These perspectives provide a view of both attacker workflow and operational consequences.

Although AI played different roles in each campaign, it did not remove the need for the attackers to interact with their targets. Payloads still had to be delivered, processes executed, and command-and-control (C2) connections established, creating behavioral anomalies that Darktrace was able to identify.

‍

Case 1: A Mexican government impersonation campaign with LLM-assisted malware development

Rapid7 reported on a malware delivery operation that used generative AI to assist development, testing, documentation and refinement of attacker infrastructure. Between May and June 2026, Darktrace similarly observed two chains of suspicious activity across customer environments in the Americas that exhibited clear similarities in behavior.

In both cases Darktrace observed:

  • WebDAV communication with onedrive[.]cv·138.124.123[.]87, retrieving a file from the path /Downloads/CURP/
  • Transfer of a masqueraded .scr executable
  • Subsequent communication with google.services[.]ug·77.110.127[.]205 over unusual high ports
  • Additional Darktrace detections correlating the unusual behavior seen spanning payload delivery and C2 communication
  • Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability alerted across multiple stages of the attack

The infrastructure and behavior observed by Darktrace closely aligned with a campaign reported by Rapid7, in which a WebDAV malware delivery environment was exposed. Rapid7 assessed that threat actors had used generative AI to support the development, testing, documentation and refinement of the operation. The observed activity also aligned with reporting on a campaign in which impersonation of Mexico’s government Unique Population Registry Code (CURP) identity-record service led to delivery of PureRAT, a .NET-based information stealer and remote access trojan (RAT) [2]. The infrastructure overlap and consistent behavioural sequence provides strong alignment and offers a view of how an AI-assisted development pipeline ultimately manifested inside target environments.

Case 2: A suspected China-linked intrusion campaign with AI-assisted automation

In July 2026, Hunt.io published research into a suspected China-based intrusion operation targeting government and financial services organizations [3]. Material recovered from exposed attacker infrastructure by Hunt.io indicated that Claude Code and DeepSeek-v4-pro were being used as active components of the attacker’s workflow. According to the research, the models supported activities including attack reasoning, script generation, execution, exploit adaptation, and phishing-page development.

The investigation identified 192.229.115[.]229 and 192.229.115[.]230 as infrastructure associated with suspected TencShell operations and a possible second C2 framework known as Gshell [3].

Darktrace identified likely related activity within a financial services customer environment involving a newly observed laptop running the Windows 11 Pro operating system. Over a six-day period in July, the device made repeated outbound connections to 192.229.115[.]229 over port 8083.

Darktrace recognized the destination was highly rare for the environment, and the connectivity exhibited beaconing characteristics. During the same timeframe, Darktrace also identified suspicious process behavior associated with process chains involving svchost.exe and cmd.exe. The device repeatedly communicated with infrastructure identified in the Hunt.io research while exhibiting beaconing characteristics and suspicious process activity, strengthening the assessment that the activity likely was associated with the same operation.

Unlike many previous examples of AI-assisted cybercrime, the Hunt.io investigation provided rare visibility into how large language models were being incorporated directly into operational workflows rather than being used solely for content generation. Darktrace, meanwhile, observed how activity associated with that operation ultimately manifested inside a target environment, providing a complementary view of its operational impact.

Operational consequences of AI-assisted attacks

These investigations provide two complementary perspectives on AI-assisted cyber operations. OSINT research revealed how AI was incorporated into attacker workflows, while Darktrace observed the resulting activity within customer environments.

Although AI played different roles in each campaign, it did not remove the need for attackers to interact with their targets, deliver payloads, execute processes, and communicate with C2, all of which generated observable signals.

In these cases, Darktrace identified suspicious file delivery, unusual process behavior, beaconing activity, and communication with rare external infrastructure that aligned with campaigns later linked to AI-assisted operations. While AI may influence how attacks are developed, adapted, and scaled, it does not make them operationally invisible.

For defenders, the broader lesson extends beyond these specific campaigns. As AI becomes increasingly embedded within both enterprise operations and attacker workflows, understanding what a model was asked to do is often less important than understanding the actions it ultimately took and the consequences those actions produced. Whether the actor is human, AI-assisted, or increasingly autonomous, activity still manifests through identities, endpoints, applications, cloud services and network infrastructure.

Credit to Angel Arribas Lopez (Associate Principal Cyber Analyst), Emma Foulger (Global Threat Research Operations Lead), Nathaniel Jones, SVP Global Threat Intelligence
Edited by Ryan Traill (Content Manager)

‍

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

Case 1

Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer from New External Endpoint

Anomalous File / Script from Rare External Location

Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location

Anomalous File / Script and EXE from Rare External

Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint

Anomalous Connection / Rare External SSL Self-Signed

Compromise / New or Repeated to Unusual SSL Port

Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections

Device / Initial Attack Chain Activity

Antigena / Network / External Threat::Antigena Suspicious File Block

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

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly::Antigena Controlled and Model Alert

Antigena / Network / External Threat::Antigena File then New Outbound Block

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

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

Case 2

Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint

Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score

Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections

‍

Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

‍

Case 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
IoCTypeDescription + Confidence
onedrive[.]cvHostnameLikely C2 server
138.124.123[.]87IP AddressPossible C2 server
hXXp://onedrive[.]cv/Downloads/CURP/ReportFinal.%E2%80%AE%E1%BA%9D%D4%81%EF%BD%90.scrURIPossible payload
google.services[.]ugHostnameLikely C2 server
77.110.127[.]205IP AddressLikely C2 server
google.services[.]ug:57666Hostname + PortLikely C2 communication
google.services[.]ug:57888Hostname + PortLikely C2 communication
google.services[.]ug:56001Hostname + PortLikely C2 communication

‍

Case 2

IoC Type Description + Confidence
192.229.115[.]229 IP Address Likely C2 communication
Continue reading
About the author
Angel Arribas Lopez
Associate Principal Cyber Analyst
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