company logo

Product

Our Product

We are Reshaping the way Developers find and fix vulnerabilities before they get exploited.

Solutions

By Industry

BFSI

Healthcare

Education

IT & Telecom

Government

By Role

CISO

Application Security Engineer

DevsecOps Engineer

IT Manager

Resources

Resource Library

Get actionable insight straight from our threat Intel lab to keep you informed about the ever-changing Threat landscape.

Subscribe to Our Weekly Threat Digest

Company

Contact Us

Have queries, feedback or prospects? Get in touch and we shall be with you shortly.

loading..
loading..
loading..
Loading...

Qbot

Banking Trojans

Squirrelwaffle

loading..
loading..
loading..

Recent phishing campaigns deliver Qakbot via SquirrelWaffle Infection

Security researchers link the rise of SquirrelWaffle and second-stage malware - Qakbot to recent phishing campaigns...

13-Nov-2021
3 min read

No content available.

Related Articles

loading..

NPM

A worm-like spam campaign flooded NPM with over 43,000 fake packages, exposing m...

Cybersecurity analysts have identified a large-scale, two-year spam operation that flooded the npm registry with tens of thousands of fake packages. Beginning in early 2024, a coordinated network of automated scripts started mass-publishing malicious yet functionally empty packages at high speed. The volume and persistence of the campaign made it one of the most disruptive registry-level incidents in recent years. ## Scope of the Spam Campaign Researchers [discovered](https://www.endorlabs.com/learn/the-great-indonesian-tea-theft-analyzing-a-npm-spam-campaign) that more than **43,000 bogus packages** were uploaded across multiple attacker-controlled accounts. These entries remained active on the registry for almost two years without triggering standard security or cleanup mechanisms. The [packages](https://github.com/6mile/Indonesian-Foods-Worm) shared a consistent structure, often mimicking legitimate **Next.js project templates**, which helped them blend into the ecosystem. Despite the scale, the artifacts contained **no functional malware**. Instead, they acted as placeholders designed to inflate the registry with noise. ## How the “IndonesianFoods” Worm Operated ### Self-Replicating Network The packages were not independent uploads. They were interconnected through a **self-replicating publishing system** built to automatically generate, link, and deploy new packages in rapid succession. This worm-like behavior is what led analysts to label the incident a “worm,” even though no conventional payload or exploit mechanism was involved. ### Naming Pattern and Attribution Security researchers observed a peculiar naming convention repeated across the fake packages. This unique signature inspired the community to refer to the incident as the **“IndonesianFoods” npm worm**. While the names varied, the pattern was distinct enough to correlate uploads and identify them as part of the same coordinated effort. ## Intent Behind the Campaign Unlike typical supply-chain attacks involving npm package poisoning, this campaign did **not** aim to steal data, hijack environments, or compromise build pipelines. Its purpose was purely disruptive. The objective was straightforward: **Overwhelm the npm registry with random, auto-generated packages and pollute the ecosystem.** This large-scale noise injection raises concerns about: * Reduced signal-to-noise ratio for legitimate developers * Increased risk of overlooking genuinely malicious uploads * Strain on automated security tools and scanners * Potential performance impact on registry infrastructure ## Impact on the Ecosystem Although the fake packages contained no harmful code, their scale created systemic friction for developers, maintainers, and security teams. Search results became cluttered, automated dependency monitors encountered unusually high volumes of junk data, and the registry faced an unnecessary operational load. The incident highlights a growing trend: attackers exploiting the openness of public package registries not for compromise, but for **disruption**. This shift indicates the need for stronger publishing safeguards, anomaly detection, and cleanup workflows in ecosystems like npm. ## Conclusion The “IndonesianFoods” npm worm stands out not for technical sophistication but for sheer volume and longevity. By pushing more than 43,000 interlinked fake packages over two years, the operators exposed critical gaps in registry oversight. Strengthening automated detection, enforcing stricter publishing controls, and refining ecosystem hygiene practices will be essential to prevent similar spam-driven disruptions in the future.

loading..   13-Nov-2025
loading..   3 min read
loading..

APT37

A sophisticated cross-platform attack bridges Windows PCs and Android devices, u...

Security researchers have uncovered a disturbing campaign by the North Korean threat actor APT37. The group is systematically stealing Google credentials from infected Windows computers to locate then remotely and factory reset victims' Android phones using Google's Find My Device service. This is not an exploit of a software vulnerability. It is a calculated abuse of a legitimate cloud service, hinging entirely on the theft of user credentials. The attack demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of operational security, as the remote wipe is often timed for when the victim is physically separated from their device, delaying discovery and response. ### **Anatomy of a Multi-Stage Campaign** The attack unfolds with precision across different platforms: 1. **Initial Vector:** The target receives a spear-phishing message on **KakaoTalk**, a popular South Korean messenger, often impersonating a government agency like the National Tax Service. 2. **Windows Compromise:** The message contains a malicious, digitally-signed MSI installer file. Once executed, it deploys scripts (AutoIT) to install powerful Remote Access Trojans (RATs) like **RemcosRAT** and **QuasarRAT**. 3. **Credential Harvesting:** The primary goal on the Windows machine is to steal saved browser credentials for Google and Naver accounts. 4. **Cloud Service Abuse:** With the Google credentials, attackers log into the victim's account, access **Find My Device**, and issue a factory reset command to the registered Android phone, effectively wiping it. ### **A Hybrid Threat** This campaign is notable for its hybrid nature. It doesn’t rely on mobile malware but instead uses a PC infection as a pivot point to attack mobile assets through the cloud. By compromising the central Google account, the attackers gain a powerful, legitimate tool for destruction. The secondary propagation method—using the victim’s active KakaoTalk session on the infected PC to send malware to their contacts—adds a layer of social engineering that makes the campaign highly effective and self-spreading. ### **Mitigation and Defense Strategies** Since the core vulnerability is stolen credentials, the defense is straightforward but critical: * **Enforce Strong Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA):** This is the most effective countermeasure. A stolen password is useless without the second factor. For high-value targets, Google’s **Advanced Protection Program** offers the highest level of account security. * **User Training:** Educate users to be extremely wary of unsolicited files sent via messaging apps, even from known contacts. * **Endpoint Hardening:** Deploy EDR solutions capable of detecting and blocking the execution of scripts (e.g., AutoIT) and known RAT payloads. This incident serves as a stark reminder that mobile security is inextricably linked to PC and cloud account security. A breach on one platform can have immediate and devastating consequences on another.

loading..   12-Nov-2025
loading..   3 min read
loading..

ClickFix

Sophisticated phishing campaign compromises hotel Booking.com accounts, enabling...

The "I Paid Twice" campaign represents a paradigm shift in cybercriminal operations, moving from broad phishing to a targeted, multi-faceted attack on the digital trust chain within the hospitality industry. This report provides a forensic-level dissection of the attack lifecycle, from initial social engineering to final monetization. The sophisticated interplay of the **ClickFix social engineering technique**, the **PureRAT malware-as-a-service (MaaS) platform**, and a specialized criminal underground economy, this Threatfeed illuminates the technical nuances that make this campaign both highly effective and resilient. ## **Attack Ecosystem** The campaign is not a singular attack but a **criminal enterprise** with distinct, specialized roles. It systematically targets hotels to compromise their Booking.com accounts, subsequently using that access to defraud customers. The technical execution reveals a high degree of professionalism, leveraging known techniques in novel combinations. * **Primary Vector:** Spear-phishing against hotel staff. * **Key Malware:** PureRAT, a .NET-based Remote Access Trojan. * **Monetization Method:** Business Email Compromise (BEC)-style fraud against hotel guests. * **Ecosystem Support:** Underground markets for credentials, malware distribution, and verification tools. ## **Dissection of the Attack Chain** The attack can be segmented into four distinct, interconnected phases, as illustrated below, forming a complete cyber kill chain. ```mermaid flowchart TD subgraph A [Phase 1: Initial Compromise] direction LR A1[Spear-phishing Email] --> A2[Redirection Chain TDS] --> A3[ClickFix Lure] end subgraph B [Phase 2: Malware Deployment] direction LR B1[PowerShell Execution] --> B2[Reconnaissance] --> B3[Persistence &<br>DLL Side-Loading] end subgraph C [Phase 3: Persistence & C2] C1[PureRAT MaaS] --> C2[C2 Communication] end subgraph D [Phase 4: Monetization] direction LR D1[Credential Theft] --> D2[Guest Fraud] end A --> B --> C --> D ``` ### **Initial Compromise & ClickFix Lure** This phase relies entirely on sophisticated social engineering to induce a user-initiated code execution. * **Weaponized Communication:** * **Source:** Emails originate from previously compromised, legitimate email accounts of other hotels, bypassing reputation-based filters. * **Lure Content:** Impersonates Booking.com with subjects like "New guest message about reservation – Tracking code: [Unique ID]". This creates a sense of urgency and legitimacy. * **Traffic Distribution System (TDS):** * The link within the email does not point directly to the payload. It leads to a redirection chain. Analysis shows the initial domain uses JavaScript to check the `window.self !== window.top` condition, forcing a navigation if loaded in an iframe. This anti-analysis technique helps evade sandboxed environments. * This TDS infrastructure, potentially a paid service, obscures the final payload URL and provides resilience against takedowns. * **The ClickFix Technique (Core Innovation):** * The final landing page is a highly convincing clone of a Booking.com login portal, complete with branding. * A fake CAPTCHA is presented. The critical element is a JavaScript function that automatically copies a malicious PowerShell command to the victim's clipboard upon loading the page. * The user is then instructed (via on-screen text) to press `Win + R`, paste the command, and press Enter. This technique is highly effective because it: 1. **Bypasses Email Filters:** No malicious attachment is sent. 2. **Exploits User Trust:** The request appears to be a legitimate troubleshooting step. 3. **Achieves Code Execution:** It directly leverages the user's authority to run system commands. ### **Malware Deployment & Persistence** The execution of the pasted command initiates an automated, fileless deployment sequence. 1. **Scripted Payload Retrieval:** * The initial PowerShell command is a download cradle that fetches a second, more complex PowerShell script from the attacker's server. * This secondary script performs reconnaissance, collecting system data (Hostname, Username, OS, AV product) and exfiltrating it to the C2 server. 2. **Payload Delivery and Composition:** * The script then downloads a ZIP archive containing: * One legitimate, signed executable (e.g., `libcef.dll` or `AudioSession.exe`). * Three malicious DLLs. * The files are extracted to a user-writable directory, typically `%AppData%\Local`. 3. **Persistence and Execution Mechanism:** * **Persistence:** Established via a Run Registry Key and a shortcut in the Startup folder. * **DLL Side-Loading:** The legitimate executable is vulnerable to DLL hijacking. When executed, it attempts to load a required DLL from its local directory. Instead, it loads the malicious DLL placed there by the attacker. * **Fileless Loading:** The malicious DLL acts as a loader, which then reflectively loads the PureRAT payload directly into memory. This avoids writing the primary malware binary to disk, evading signature-based detection. ### **Command and Control with PureRAT** PureRAT is a fully-featured MaaS platform, providing the attackers with deep and persistent access. * **Core Capabilities:** The RAT provides a comprehensive suite of spying and control functions, including: * Remote Desktop Control (VNC-like) * Keylogging and File System Management * Webcam and Microphone Capture * Traffic Proxying (enabling attackers to use the victim's network) * Data Exfiltration * **Modular Architecture:** PureRAT uses a plugin system. The core agent can be instructed by the C2 server to download and execute additional modules, such as: * `PluginRemoteDesktop` * `PluginExecuting` * `PluginFileManager` This modularity makes the malware highly adaptable. * **Communication and Obfuscation:** * **C2 Protocol:** Communication with the C2 server (e.g., `45[.]142[.]166[.]73:56001`) is conducted over **encrypted TLS sockets**, blending with normal web traffic. * **Fingerprinting:** Upon connection, the RAT transmits a detailed system fingerprint to the C2. * **Obfuscation:** The PureRAT payload is protected by **.NET Reactor**, a commercial obfuscator that complicates static analysis and reverse engineering. ### **The "I Paid Twice" Fraud** With persistent access, the attackers shift to their primary financial goal. * **Credential Harvesting:** Using keyloggers, memory dumpers, or simply browsing stolen files, attackers harvest credentials for the hotel's Booking.com extranet portal. * **The Fraudulent Act:** * Attackers access the portal using stolen cookies or credentials to view genuine, upcoming reservations. * They impersonate the hotel and contact guests via **WhatsApp or email**, often just before check-in. * The message claims a "problem with the bank" or a "security issue" and urges the guest to confirm their payment by wiring funds to a new, attacker-controlled bank account. * The use of legitimate guest and reservation details makes the scam highly convincing, leading to victims paying twice. ## **Underlying Criminal Infrastructure** The campaign's efficiency stems from a professionalized cybercrime ecosystem. * **Credential Markets:** Stolen Booking.com credentials are sold on underground forums like **LolzTeam**. Listings are detailed, including the number of views, last login, and price (typically $50-$500). * **Verification Tools:** "Log checkers" are sold as services (e.g., ~$40) to automatically verify the validity of stolen credentials through proxies, ensuring they are valuable before purchase. * **Malware Distribution:** The initial infection is potentially carried out by specialized actors known as "traffers" who are paid for successful installations. ## **A Multi-Layered Strategy** Defense requires a focus on the specific techniques used at each stage of the attack. **Table 1: MITRE ATT&CK Mapping and Mitigations** | Phase | Tactic | Technique (ID) | Mitigation Strategy | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Initial Access** | Phishing [T1566] | Spear-phishing Link [T1566.002] | **User Training:** Drill the "Never copy-paste & run commands" rule. Use email security that rewrites/checks URLs in real-time. | | **Execution** | Execution [T1059] | PowerShell [T1059.001] | **Restrict PowerShell:** Constrain language mode. Log ScriptBlock logging. Use AMSI. | | **Persistence** | Persistence [T1547] | Registry Run Keys [T1547.001] | **Endpoint Protection:** Use EDR/NGAV to monitor for registry modifications and DLL side-loading patterns. | | **Defense Evasion** | Defense Evasion [T1574] | DLL Side-Loading [T1574.002] | **Application Control:** Implement application whitelisting (e.g., AppLocker, WDAC). | | **C2 & Exfiltration** | Command & Control [T1071] | Application Layer Protocol (TLS) [T1071.001] | **Network Monitoring:** Monitor for anomalous outbound connections to rare ports (5600X). Use SSL/TLS inspection where policy allows. | | **Impact** | Impact [T1657](Financial Theft) | Fraudulent Transactions [T1656] | **Process & Policy:** Mandate multi-factor authentication (MFA) on all booking platform accounts. Educate customers to only pay through official, secure channels. | ### **Proactive Hunting Tips:** * **Hunt for ClickFix:** Search for PowerShell commands with parameters like `-win normal -enc` (a base64 encoded command) in command-line logs. * **Hunt for PureRAT:** Look for network connections on ports 56001-56003 and processes with names like `AudioSession.exe` making suspicious network calls. * **Monitor for Persistence:** Audit Run keys and Startup folder contents for unexpected entries. The "I Paid Twice" campaign is a potent reminder that modern cyber threats are complex, service-driven businesses. Its technical sophistication lies not in zero-day exploits, but in the masterful combination of social engineering ("ClickFix"), robust malware (PureRAT), and a specialized criminal economy. Defense is challenging but achievable through a layered security posture that emphasizes **user awareness**, **strict application control**, **robust endpoint detection and response**, and **enforcement of security policies** like MFA. Continuous threat intelligence regarding the evolving TTPs of such actors is paramount for organizations within the targeted sectors to protect their assets and, crucially, their customers' trust.

loading..   11-Nov-2025
loading..   8 min read