ブログ
/
AI
/
April 16, 2026

ビヘイビアAIがMythosへの答えである理由

AIはパッチ適用が追い付かない速さでサイバー攻撃を加速させており、脆弱性の発見と修復の間のギャップは拡大しています。 このブログでは、なぜ予防第一のセキュリティではもはやAI駆動の脅威に追いつけないのかを解説します。 また、ダークトレースのビヘイビアAIによって、脆弱性が不明または未修正の場合でも、組織は攻撃を即座に検知し封じ込められることを説明します。
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
Ed Jennings
President and CEO
Default blog image
16
Apr 2026

パッチ/予防セキュリティモデルをAIが崩壊させる

先週、Anthropicが強力な新しいAIモデル、Claude Mythosを開発したというニュースにより、ビジネス界は大きく揺れ動きました。Claude MythosはITシステムの欠陥を暴露するその能力により、かつてないリスクをもたらすからです。  

Mythosであれ、火曜日に発表されたばかりのOpenAIのGPT-5.4-Cyberであれ、超強力なAIモデルがハッカーの手に渡れば、彼らはほとんどの企業が防御できるよりもはるかに速い、マシンスピードで攻撃を実行できるようになります。このニュースはすべてのリーダーにとって厳しい現実を浮き彫りにしています:つまり穴を塞ぐだけでは、現代のサイバー攻撃に対する十分な対策とはならないのです。現在使用しているソフトウェアはすでに脆弱であると想定しなければなりません。LLMは脆弱性を見つけるのが非常に得意ですが、それを確実に修正するのはかなり苦手です。

Project Glasswing のメンバーによれば、パッチの適用には数ヶ月から数年かかることがあるといいます。その作業が行われている間、まだ発見されていないゼロデイ攻撃やセキュリティホールから企業を保護しなければなりません。

今日のほとんどのサイバーセキュリティ戦略は、私たちが毎日摂取するマルチビタミンのサプリのように構築されています。広範囲で、予防的であり、時間をかけてシステムを全体的に健康に保つことを目的としています。パッチを定期的に適用すること。ソフトウェアを更新すること。既知の脆弱性を減らすこと。それは必要であり、規律であり、基盤です。しかしそれはまた、リスクがよく知られ定義されており、サイクルが予測可能であり、管理可能なペースで露出が進行する世界のために作られたものです。

このモデルがもう成立しないとしたらどうなるでしょうか?

AI によるサイバーアドバンテージ:ビヘイビアAI

MythosのようなAIシステムによって暴かれた脆弱性は、「マルチビタミン」で対応できるようなよく理解されたリスクではありません。それらは一時的な、急速に発生する侵入ポイントであり、エクスプロイトに十分な短い期間だけ存在します。

このような環境において、予防だけでは不十分です。もっとビタミンを摂ればよいのではなく、必要なのは鎮痛剤です。サイバーセキュリティの未来は、ベースラインの状態をどれだけ良好に維持できるかによって決まるのではありません。何かが壊れたときにどれだけ迅速に対応できるかによって決まるのです、そして一秒一秒が重要になります。

ビヘイビアAIが企業に持続可能なサイバー優位性をもたらすことができるのは、そのためです。攻撃者の姿を見極めようとするのではなく、それぞれの企業のデジタルエコシステム全体にとっての「正常」がどのようなものかを学習します。  

それがビヘイビアAIの仕組みです。自己、つまり組織にとっての正常を理解し、実際には攻撃の初期段階かもしれない、正常からの逸脱を見つけることができます。

サイバーセキュリティへのダークトレースのアプローチ

ダークトレースでは、英国ケンブリッジのAI Research Centreで開発されたビヘイビアAIサイバーセキュリティ技術により、10,000社の顧客を守っています。

Darktraceの基盤となる考え方は、攻撃はきちんとラベル付けされて到来するわけではなく、最も重大な脅威はしばしばシグネチャ、インジケータ、公開情報が追いつくよりも前に現れる、という理解です。  

私たちのAIアルゴリズムは、それぞれの組織個別のビジネスデータからリアルタイムで学習し、あらゆる個人およびあらゆるアセットにとって何が通常であるか、および組織内のデータの流れを理解します。組織のデジタルエコシステム全体の「正常」を継続的に理解することにより、Darktraceは未知の脆弱性や侵害されたサプライチェーン依存関係から発生する脅威を特定し、封じ込めます。これにより、攻撃をマシンスピードで自律的に阻止します。  

新手の脅威に対するセキュリティ

Darktraceは、AIが攻撃を加速するだけではなく、その発生の仕方を根本的に変える世界に対応できるよう構築されています。私たちのAIが非常に独特であることは、サイバー脅威を脆弱性の公開以前に何度も特定していることで実証されています。これには2025年に発生したIvantiの重大な脆弱性や、国家が支援する脅威アクターによるSAP NetWeaverのエクスプロイトなどが含まれています。

AIが脆弱性の発見と悪用の方法を変貌させていくなかで、サイバーセキュリティは既知の欠陥のリストよりももっと耐久性のあるものに基づく必要があります。それには組織自体をリアルタイムで理解することが必要になります。つまり何がその組織に相応しく、何が相応しくないか、そして何を直ちに阻止しなければならないかです。

リーダーが今すぐするべきこと

リーダーにとっての優先課題もこの状況に応じてシフトさせなければなりません。

まず、未知の脆弱性をエッジケースとして扱うのをやめることです。AI駆動の脆弱性探索により、これはごく普通のことになります。既知の欠陥、シグネチャ、脅威インテリジェンスを中心に構築されたセキュリティプログラムは、リアルタイムで作戦を展開する攻撃者に常に遅れをとることになります。

次に、組織にとって実際に何が正常なのかについての理解を強く求めることです。脅威が全く新しいものである場合、ラベルは無意味です。最も早期かつ最も信頼できる危険シグナルは、異常な動作です。つまりシステム、ユーザー、データフローが期待されていた動作から突然逸れたときです。逸脱が発生したときにそれを知ることができなければ、最も重大な局面で目を瞑っているのと同じです。

最後に、次の深刻なインシデントは修復の手順が入手可能になる前に起こるだろうということを想定することです。その最初の数分間、数時間の間に何が起こるかを自問してください。レジリエンスを維持する組織は、脆弱性の公開サイクルを待っている組織ではありません。新たな脅威の発生を自律的に特定し進行を封じ込めることができる組織です。

これがAIによって作られる世界でのサイバーセキュリティの現実です。パッチと予防も重要な基盤であることに変わりはありません。しかし、今アドバンテージを持っているのは予測不能な自体の発生に即座に対応できる組織です。

ビヘイビアAIは既知の脅威だけではなく、AIが次に発見する脅威にも対応できるセキュリティです。

[related-resource]

2026年AIサイバーセキュリティの現状

ダークトレースは 1,500 名を超えるセキュリティリーダーを対象に、急激なテクノロジーの変化への対応とサイバーセキュリティにAIがもたらす問題について調査を行いました。レポートをお読みになり最新の動向をご確認ください。

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
Ed Jennings
President and CEO

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

Network

/

October 14, 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