With globalized companies and supply chains, organizations need one solution which works for all emails no matter the time zone, no matter the language. This blog analyses how Antigena Email stopped a series of multi-language phishing attacks, including an Emotet campaign in Japanese.
Language is deceptive. In the realm of email security, language can deceive a recipient into clicking a link or completing a transaction, and it can trick a security tool into thinking an email is legitimate.
It is for this reason that Darktrace/Email is not reliant on language, but rather uses mathematics to develop an understanding of ‘normal’ for every email user in an organization. This enables it to neutralize anomalous emails indicative of a threat around the world, no matter in what format or language they come.
Natural language processing
When it comes to catching a compromised account or impersonation email, how can you teach a computer to understand intent or a change of tone, compared to the normal way a person corresponds?
One of the most common approaches in email security is natural language processing. NLP looks at how to program computers to analyze natural language, commonly by exposing them to a large volume of data.
The result is a computer capable of ‘understanding’ the contents of documents, including the nuances of the language within them. The technology can then extract information in the documents as well as categorize and organize the documents themselves.
Modern-day limitations
However, using NLP is limited in scope for email security as it will often misunderstand specific jargon or colloquialisms, as well as terms that had not been invented when the computer was programmed, unless it is trained on these too. Each additional language requires the computer to learn from zero every time. NLP only works on the regional languages it has been trained on, and it is not commercially viable to teach the technology to work in all small markets.
If a company hires an email security vendor based in America, therefore, it is probable that the security vendor has invested most of their time in detecting English-based phishing threats. That is fine if the company only communicates in English, but this is often not the case. In a 21st century globalized world, the need for security technology to be language-agnostic is more critical than ever.
Not all AI is the same: Unsupervised machine learning
Darktrace/Email relies on unsupervised machine learning, which can learn on the job and does not need to be fed large data sets. It can glean insights from NLP for good measure, but it does not depend on NLP for detection or understanding.
When working with AI it is crucial to understand how the AI learns: does it learn on the job or was it trained with a labeled data set? This is particularly important when looking to understand the intent behind an email, specifically to uncover solicitation attempts either through spoofing, phishing, impersonation of a supplier or any other form of email attack.
Rather than teaching a computer to understand language in an email, Darktrace Cyber AI dynamically assesses activity across inbound and outbound emails including senders, recipients, links, IP addresses, and attachment types. The movement of all these objects are then used by the AI to create the ‘patterns of life’ for every user across all communications, including communications with external users who frequently correspond with a given business.
By taking a mathematical approach, Darktrace/Email is able to understand ‘normal’ for any user regardless of the dialect they are corresponding in, uniquely interpreting all languages from Norwegian to Latin and Persian, and subsequently identifying subtle anomalies indicative of a phishing attack or an account takeover.
Catching Emotet in Japanese
Last year, Darktrace uncovered a sophisticated Spamware campaign which leveraged Emotet, the infamous banking malware. The campaign targeted various industries with highly sophisticated phishing emails.
At a food production company in Japan, Darktrace detected six phishing emails sent over a two-day period in July.
Figure 1: An email from the Emotet campaign.
In the email above, both the subject line and the filename translate to “Regarding the invoice,” followed by a number and the date. The attacker was clearly trying to imitate a legitimate business email here, spoofing a well-known Japanese company (三菱食品(株)) and a common Japanese name (‘藤沢 昭彦’).
Darktrace/Email revealed key metrics behind the email including that the real sender was using a domain name from GMO, a Japanese company which offers cheap web email services, and that the sender’s location was actually Portugal, not Japan.
Figure 2: Darktrace/Email detects the attempt at inducement.
Darktrace/Email’s models recognized the topic anomalies and inducement attempts in the emails, regardless of the language they had been written in – giving a high anomaly score of 85. Furthermore, Darktrace’s AI determined that the extension and the MIME type in the attachments were anomalous, when compared to the documents which the user normally exchanges via email.
Portuguese threat find
In another instance, a series of malicious emails were sent to an organization in Europe. These emails used several tactics to bypass the company’s security tools, including personalized subject lines and hidden malicious URLs.
Figure 3: An interactive snapshot of Darktrace/Email’s user interface. The subject line reads ‘Notice of transfer.’
As displayed above, the email contained a link that appeared to lead to a CaixaBank domain. However, Darktrace/Email recognized this as a deliberate attempt to mislead the recipient and revealed that the link in fact led to a WordPress domain, which Cyber AI identified as 100% rare for the business.
A closer inspection revealed that these emails were sent from Vietnam. The sender had never been in any previous correspondence with the business, and the isolated link within the email was also marked as a 100% rare domain. Darktrace/Email held these malicious emails back, protecting the organization from harm.
Universal defense
These two examples demonstrate the benefits of an unsupervised machine learning approach. An AI security solution which analyzes hundreds of different metrics and does not rely on pre-existing data is a groundbreaking advantage when faced with global phishing threats that now utilize a wide range of languages.
Email-based attacks are becoming more targeted and more convincing by the day. Targeted social engineering and spear phishing with advanced translation tools bombard companies daily, in all languages.
Whether it’s a phishing attack against a local office in Korea or a solicitation attempt in Arabic – even a malicious email written in Klingon from a Star Trek convention – or any of the thousands of email exchanges which occur in countless vernaculars and tones, Darktrace/Email can keep your company safe across the world, and beyond.
Curtiu e quer mais?
Receba o último blog em sua caixa de entrada
Obrigado! Seu pedido foi recebido!
Oops! Alguma coisa deu errado ao enviar o formulário.
NEWSLETTER
Curtiu e quer mais?
Stay up to date on the latest industry news and insights.
Obrigado! Seu pedido foi recebido!
Oops! Alguma coisa deu errado ao enviar o formulário.
Os analistas cibernéticos da Darktrace são especialistas de classe mundial em inteligência de ameaças, caça de ameaças e resposta a incidentes, e fornecem suporte 24/7 SOC a milhares de Darktrace clientes em todo o mundo. Dentro do SOC é de autoria exclusiva desses especialistas, fornecendo análises de incidentes cibernéticos e tendências de ameaças, com base na experiência do mundo real na área.
AUTOR
SOBRE O AUTOR
Mariana Pereira
VP, Cyber Innovation
Mariana is the VP of Cyber Innovation at Darktrace, and works closely with the development, analyst, and marketing teams to advise technical and non-technical audiences on how best to augment cyber resilience, and how to implement AI technology as a means of defense. She speaks regularly at international events, with a specialism in presenting on sophisticated, AI-powered email attacks. She holds an MBA from the University of Chicago, and speaks several languages including French, Italian, and Portuguese.
A Thorn in Attackers’ Sides: How Darktrace Uncovered a CACTUS Ransomware Infection
24
Apr 2024
What is CACTUS Ransomware?
In May 2023, Kroll Cyber Threat Intelligence Analysts identified CACTUS as a new ransomware strain that had been actively targeting large commercial organizations since March 2023 [1]. CACTUS ransomware gets its name from the filename of the ransom note, “cAcTuS.readme.txt”. Encrypted files are appended with the extension “.cts”, followed by a number which varies between attacks, e.g. “.cts1” and “.cts2”.
As the cyber threat landscape adapts to ever-present fast-paced technological change, ransomware affiliates are employing progressively sophisticated techniques to enter networks, evade detection and achieve their nefarious goals.
How does CACTUS Ransomware work?
In the case of CACTUS, threat actors have been seen gaining initial network access by exploiting Virtual Private Network (VPN) services. Once inside the network, they may conduct internal scanning using tools like SoftPerfect Network Scanner, and PowerShell commands to enumerate endpoints, identify user accounts, and ping remote endpoints. Persistence is maintained by the deployment of various remote access methods, including legitimate remote access tools like Splashtop, AnyDesk, and SuperOps RMM in order to evade detection, along with malicious tools like Cobalt Strike and Chisel. Such tools, as well as custom scripts like TotalExec, have been used to disable security software to distribute the ransomware binary. CACTUS ransomware is unique in that it adopts a double-extortion tactic, stealing data from target networks and then encrypting it on compromised systems [2].
At the end of November 2023, cybersecurity firm Arctic Wolf reported instances of CACTUS attacks exploiting vulnerabilities on the Windows version of the business analytics platform Qlik, specifically CVE-2023-41266, CVE-2023-41265, and CVE-2023-48365, to gain initial access to target networks [3]. The vulnerability tracked as CVE-2023-41266 can be exploited to generate anonymous sessions and perform HTTP requests to unauthorized endpoints, whilst CVE-2023-41265 does not require authentication and can be leveraged to elevate privileges and execute HTTP requests on the backend server that hosts the application [2].
Darktrace’s Coverage of CACTUS Ransomware
In November 2023, Darktrace observed malicious actors leveraging the aforementioned method of exploiting Qlik to gain access to the network of a customer in the US, more than a week before the vulnerability was reported by external researchers.
Here, Qlik vulnerabilities were successfully exploited, and a malicious executable (.exe) was detonated on the network, which was followed by network scanning and failed Kerberos login attempts. The attack culminated in the encryption of numerous files with extensions such as “.cts1”, and SMB writes of the ransom note “cAcTuS.readme.txt” to multiple internal devices, all of which was promptly identified by Darktrace DETECT™.
While traditional rules and signature-based detection tools may struggle to identify the malicious use of a legitimate business platform like Qlik, Darktrace’s Self-Learning AI was able to confidently identify anomalous use of the tool in a CACTUS ransomware attack by examining the rarity of the offending device’s surrounding activity and comparing it to the learned behavior of the device and its peers.
Unfortunately for the customer in this case, Darktrace RESPOND™ was not enabled in autonomous response mode during their encounter with CACTUS ransomware meaning that attackers were able to successfully escalate their attack to the point of ransomware detonation and file encryption. Had RESPOND been configured to autonomously act on any unusual activity, Darktrace could have prevented the attack from progressing, stopping the download of any harmful files, or the encryption of legitimate ones.
Cactus Ransomware Attack Overview
Holiday periods have increasingly become one of the favoured times for malicious actors to launch their attacks, as they can take advantage of the festive downtime of organizations and their security teams, and the typically more relaxed mindset of employees during this period [4].
Following this trend, in late November 2023, Darktrace began detecting anomalous connections on the network of a customer in the US, which presented multiple indicators of compromise (IoCs) and tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) associated with CACTUS ransomware. The threat actors in this case set their attack in motion by exploiting the Qlik vulnerabilities on one of the customer’s critical servers.
Darktrace observed the server device making beaconing connections to the endpoint “zohoservice[.]net” (IP address: 45.61.147.176) over the course of three days. This endpoint is known to host a malicious payload, namely a .zip file containing the command line connection tool PuttyLink [5].
Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst was able to autonomously identify over 1,000 beaconing connections taking place on the customer’s network and group them together, in this case joining the dots in an ongoing ransomware attack. AI Analyst recognized that these repeated connections to highly suspicious locations were indicative of malicious command-and-control (C2) activity.
Figure 1: Cyber AI Analyst Incident Log showing the offending device making over 1,000 connections to the suspicious hostname “zohoservice[.]net” over port 8383, within a specific period.
The infected device was then observed downloading the file “putty.zip” over a HTTP connection using a PowerShell user agent. Despite being labelled as a .zip file, Darktrace’s detection capabilities were able to identify this as a masqueraded PuttyLink executable file. This activity resulted in multiple Darktrace DETECT models being triggered. These models are designed to look for suspicious file downloads from endpoints not usually visited by devices on the network, and files whose types are masqueraded, as well as the anomalous use of PowerShell. This behavior resembled previously observed activity with regards to the exploitation of Qlik Sense as an intrusion technique prior to the deployment of CACTUS ransomware [5].
Figure 2: The downloaded file’s URI highlighting that the file type (.exe) does not match the file's extension (.zip). Information about the observed PowerShell user agent is also featured.
Following the download of the masqueraded file, Darktrace observed the initial infected device engaging in unusual network scanning activity over the SMB, RDP and LDAP protocols. During this activity, the credential, “service_qlik” was observed, further indicating that Qlik was exploited by threat actors attempting to evade detection. Connections to other internal devices were made as part of this scanning activity as the attackers attempted to move laterally across the network.
Figure 3: Numerous failed connections from the affected server to multiple other internal devices over port 445, indicating SMB scanning activity.
The compromised server was then seen initiating multiple sessions over the RDP protocol to another device on the customer’s network, namely an internal DNS server. External researchers had previously observed this technique in CACTUS ransomware attacks where an RDP tunnel was established via Plink [5].
A few days later, on November 24, Darktrace identified over 20,000 failed Kerberos authentication attempts for the username “service_qlik” being made to the internal DNS server, clearly representing a brute-force login attack. There is currently a lack of open-source intelligence (OSINT) material definitively listing Kerberos login failures as part of a CACTUS ransomware attack that exploits the Qlik vulnerabilities. This highlights Darktrace’s ability to identify ongoing threats amongst unusual network activity without relying on existing threat intelligence, emphasizing its advantage over traditional security detection tools.
Figure 4: Kerberos login failures being carried out by the initial infected device. The destination device detected was an internal DNS server.
In the month following these failed Kerberos login attempts, between November 26 and December 22, Darktrace observed multiple internal devices encrypting files within the customer’s environment with the extensions “.cts1” and “.cts7”. Devices were also seen writing ransom notes with the file name “cAcTuS.readme.txt” to two additional internal devices, as well as files likely associated with Qlik, such as “QlikSense.pdf”. This activity detected by Darktrace confirmed the presence of a CACTUS ransomware infection that was spreading across the customer’s network.
Figure 5: The model, 'Ransom or Offensive Words Written to SMB', triggered in response to SMB file writes of the ransom note, ‘cAcTuS.readme.txt’, that was observed on the customer’s network.
Figure 6: CACTUS ransomware extensions, “.cts1” and “.cts7”, being appended to files on the customer’s network.
Following this initial encryption activity, two affected devices were observed attempting to remove evidence of this activity by deleting the encrypted files.
Figure 7: Attackers attempting to remove evidence of their activity by deleting files with appendage “.cts1”.
Conclusão
In the face of this CACTUS ransomware attack, Darktrace’s anomaly-based approach to threat detection enabled it to quickly identify multiple stages of the cyber kill chain occurring in the customer’s environment. These stages ranged from ‘initial access’ by exploiting Qlik vulnerabilities, which Darktrace was able to detect before the method had been reported by external researchers, to ‘actions on objectives’ by encrypting files. Darktrace’s Self-Learning AI was also able to detect a previously unreported stage of the attack: multiple Kerberos brute force login attempts.
If Darktrace’s autonomous response capability, RESPOND, had been active and enabled in autonomous response mode at the time of this attack, it would have been able to take swift mitigative action to shut down such suspicious activity as soon as it was identified by DETECT, effectively containing the ransomware attack at the earliest possible stage.
Learning a network’s ‘normal’ to identify deviations from established patterns of behaviour enables Darktrace’s identify a potential compromise, even one that uses common and often legitimately used administrative tools. This allows Darktrace to stay one step ahead of the increasingly sophisticated TTPs used by ransomware actors.
Credit to Tiana Kelly, Cyber Analyst & Analyst Team Lead, Anna Gilbertson, Cyber Analyst
The State of AI in Cybersecurity: How AI will impact the cyber threat landscape in 2024
22
Apr 2024
About the AI Cybersecurity Report
We surveyed 1,800 CISOs, security leaders, administrators, and practitioners from industries around the globe. Our research was conducted to understand how the adoption of new AI-powered offensive and defensive cybersecurity technologies are being managed by organizations.
Are organizations feeling the impact of AI-powered cyber threats?
Nearly three-quarters (74%) state AI-powered threats are now a significant issue. Almost nine in ten (89%) agree that AI-powered threats will remain a major challenge into the foreseeable future, not just for the next one to two years.
However, only a slight majority (56%) thought AI-powered threats were a separate issue from traditional/non AI-powered threats. This could be the case because there are few, if any, reliable methods to determine whether an attack is AI-powered.
Identifying exactly when and where AI is being applied may not ever be possible. However, it is possible for AI to affect every stage of the attack lifecycle. As such, defenders will likely need to focus on preparing for a world where threats are unique and are coming faster than ever before.
Are security stakeholders concerned about AI’s impact on cyber threats and risks?
The results from our survey showed that security practitioners are concerned that AI will impact organizations in a variety of ways. There was equal concern associated across the board – from volume and sophistication of malware to internal risks like leakage of proprietary information from employees using generative AI tools.
What this tells us is that defenders need to prepare for a greater volume of sophisticated attacks and balance this with a focus on cyber hygiene to manage internal risks.
One example of a growing internal risks is shadow AI. It takes little effort for employees to adopt publicly-available text-based generative AI systems to increase their productivity. This opens the door to “shadow AI”, which is the use of popular AI tools without organizational approval or oversight. Resulting security risks such as inadvertent exposure of sensitive information or intellectual property are an ever-growing concern.
Are organizations taking strides to reduce risks associated with adoption of AI in their application and computing environment?
71.2% of survey participants say their organization has taken steps specifically to reduce the risk of using AI within its application and computing environment.
16.3% of survey participants claim their organization has not taken these steps.
These findings are good news. Even as enterprises compete to get as much value from AI as they can, as quickly as possible, they’re tempering their eager embrace of new tools with sensible caution.
Still, responses varied across roles. Security analysts, operators, administrators, and incident responders are less likely to have said their organizations had taken AI risk mitigation steps than respondents in other roles. In fact, 79% of executives said steps had been taken, and only 54% of respondents in hands-on roles agreed. It seems that leaders believe their organizations are taking the needed steps, but practitioners are seeing a gap.
Do security professionals feel confident in their preparedness for the next generation of threats?
A majority of respondents (six out of every ten) believe their organizations are inadequately prepared to face the next generation of AI-powered threats.
The survey findings reveal contrasting perceptions of organizational preparedness for cybersecurity threats across different regions and job roles. Security administrators, due to their hands-on experience, express the highest level of skepticism, with 72% feeling their organizations are inadequately prepared. Notably, respondents in mid-sized organizations feel the least prepared, while those in the largest companies feel the most prepared.
Regionally, participants in Asia-Pacific are most likely to believe their organizations are unprepared, while those in Latin America feel the most prepared. This aligns with the observation that Asia-Pacific has been the most impacted region by cybersecurity threats in recent years, according to the IBM X-Force Threat Intelligence Index.
The optimism among Latin American respondents could be attributed to lower threat volumes experienced in the region, but it's cautioned that this could change suddenly (1).
What are biggest barriers to defending against AI-powered threats?
The top-ranked inhibitors center on knowledge and personnel. However, issues are alluded to almost equally across the board including concerns around budget, tool integration, lack of attention to AI-powered threats, and poor cyber hygiene.
The cybersecurity industry is facing a significant shortage of skilled professionals, with a global deficit of approximately 4 million experts (2). As organizations struggle to manage their security tools and alerts, the challenge intensifies with the increasing adoption of AI by attackers. This shift has altered the demands on security teams, requiring practitioners to possess broad and deep knowledge across rapidly evolving solution stacks.
Educating end users about AI-driven defenses becomes paramount as organizations grapple with the shortage of professionals proficient in managing AI-powered security tools. Operationalizing machine learning models for effectiveness and accuracy emerges as a crucial skill set in high demand. However, our survey highlights a concerning lack of understanding among cybersecurity professionals regarding AI-driven threats and the use of AI-driven countermeasures indicating a gap in keeping pace with evolving attacker tactics.
The integration of security solutions remains a notable problem, hindering effective defense strategies. While budget constraints are not a primary inhibitor, organizations must prioritize addressing these challenges to bolster their cybersecurity posture. It's imperative for stakeholders to recognize the importance of investing in skilled professionals and integrated security solutions to mitigate emerging threats effectively.
1. IBM, X-Force Threat Intelligence Index 2024, Available at: https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/L0GKXDWJ
2. ISC2, Cybersecurity Workforce Study 2023, Available at: https://media.isc2.org/-/media/Project/ISC2/Main/Media/ documents/research/ISC2_Cybersecurity_Workforce_Study_2023.pdf?rev=28b46de71ce24e6ab7705f6e3da8637e
![Cyber AI Analyst Incident Log showing the offending device making over 1,000 connections to the suspicious hostname “zohoservice[.]net” over port 8383, within a specific period.](https://assets-global.website-files.com/626ff4d25aca2edf4325ff97/662971c1cf09890fd46729a1_Screenshot%202024-04-24%20at%201.55.10%20PM.png)
