3 Ways AI Secures OT & ICS from Cyber Attacks

Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
09
Jan 2024
09
Jan 2024
Explore the three challenges facing industries that manage OT and ICS Systems, the benefits of adopting AI technology, and Darktrace/OT’s unique role!

What is OT and ICS?

Operational technologies and industrial control systems are the networked technologies used for the automation of physical processes. These are the technologies that allow operators to control processes and retrieve real time process data from a factory, rail system, pipeline, and other industrial processes.  

The role of AI in defending OT/ICS networks  

While largely adopted by industrial organizations, OT is utilized by Critical Infrastructures, these being the industries that directly affect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. As these organizations expand and adopt new networked industrial technologies, they are simultaneously expanding their attack surface.  

With a larger attack surface, more attacks targeting OT/ICS, and focused coordination around cyber security from regulatory authorities, security personnel have increasing workloads that make it difficult to keep pace with threats and vulnerabilities. Defenders are managing growing attack surfaces due to IT and OT convergence. Thus, the adoption of AI technology to protect, detect, respond, and recover from cyber incidents in industrial systems is paramount for keeping critical infrastructure safe.

This blog will explore three challenges facing industries managing OT/ICS, the perceived benefits of adopting AI technology to address these challenges, and Darktrace/OT’s unique role in this process.  

Darktrace also delivers complete AI-powered solutions to defend US federal government customers from cyber disruptions and ensure mission resilience. Learn more about high fidelity detection in Darktrace Federal’s TAC report.

Figure 1: AI statistics from Gartner and Deloitte

Three ways AI helps improves OT/ICS security  

1. Anomaly detection and response

In this heightened security landscape, OT/ICS environments face a spectrum of external cyber threats that demand vigilant defense. From the looming risk of industrial ransomware to the threat of insiders, yet another dimension is added to security challenge, meaning security professionals must be equipped to detect and respond to internal and external threats.  

While threats are eminent from both inside and outside the organization, many organizations rely on Indicator of Compromises (IOCs) for threat detection. By definition, these solutions can only detect network activity they recognize as an indicator of compromise; therefore, often miss insider threats and novel (zero-day) attacks because the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) and attack toolkits have never been seen in practice.  

Anomaly-based detection is best suited to combat never-before-seen threats and signatureless threats from the inside. However, not all detection methods are equal. Most anomaly-based detection solutions that leverage AI rely on a combination of supervised machine learning, deep learning, and transformers to train and inform their systems. This entails shipping your company’s data out to a large data lake housed somewhere in the cloud where it gets blended with attack data from thousands of other organizations. This data set gets used to train AI systems — yours and everyone else’s — to recognize patterns of attack based on previously encountered threats.  

While this method reduces the workload for security teams who would have to input attack data otherwise manually, it runs the same risk of only detecting known threats and has potential privacy concerns when shipping this data externally.  

To improve the quality and speed of anomaly detection, Darktrace/OT uses Self-Learning AI that leverages Bayesian Probabilistic Methodologies, Graph Theory, and Deep Neural Networks to learn your organization from the ground up in real time. By learning your unique organization, Darktrace/OT develops a sophisticated baseline knowledge of your network and assets, identifying abnormal activity that indicates a threat based on your unique network data at machine speed. Because the AI engine is local to the organization and/or assets, concerns of data residency and privacy are reduced, and the result is faster time to detect and triage incidents.  

Leveraging Self-Learning AI, Darktrace/OT uses autonomous response that severs only the anomalous or risky behaviors allowing the assets to continue to operate as normal. Organizations work with Darktrace to customize how they want Darktrace’s autonomous response to be applied. These options vary from on a device- by-device basis, device type by device type, or subnet by subnet basis and can be done completely autonomously or in human confirmation mode. This gives security teams more time to respond to an incident and reduces operational downtime when facing a threat.  

Darktrace leverages a combination of AI methods:

  • Self-Learning AI
  • Bayesian classification probabilistic models  
  • Deep neural networks
  • Transformers
  • Graph theory models
  • Clustering models  
  • Anomaly detection models
  • Generative and applied AI  
  • Natural language processing  
  • Supervised machine learning for investigation process of alerts

2. Vulnerability & Asset Management

At present, managing OT cyber risk is labor and resource intensive. Many organizations use third-party auditors to identify assets and vulnerabilities, grade compliance, and recommend improvements.  

At best, these exercises become tick-box exercises for companies to stay in compliance with little measurable reduction in cyber risk. At worst, asset owners can be left with a mountain of vulnerability information to work through, much of it irrelevant to the security risks Engineering and Operations teams deal with day to day, and increasingly out of date each passing day after the annual or biannual audit has been completed.  

In both cases, organizations are left using a patchwork of point products to address different aspects of preventative OT cyber security, most of which lack wider business context and lead to costly inefficiencies with no real impact to vulnerability or risk exposure.  

Darktrace’s technology helps in three unique ways:

  1. AI populates asset inventories: Self-Learning AI technology listens and learns from network traffic to populate or update asset inventories. It does this not just by identifying simple IPs, mac addresses, and hostnames, it learns from what it sees and automatically classifies or tags specific types of assets with the function that they perform. For example, if a specific device is performing functions like a PLC, sending commands to and from an HMI, it can appropriately tag and label these systems.
  2. AI prioritizes risk: Leveraging Bayesian Probabilistic Methodologies, Graph Theory, and Deep Neural Networks, Darktrace/OT assesses the strategic risks facing your organization in real time. Using knowledge of data points on all your networked assets, data flow topology, your assets vulnerabilities and OSINT, Darktrace identifies and prioritizes high-value assets, potential attack pathways based on an existing vulnerabilities targetability and impact.
  3. AI explains remediation tactics: Many OT devices run 24/7 operations and cannot be taken offline to apply a patch, assuming a patch is even available. Darktrace/OT uses natural language processing to provide and explain prioritized remediation and mitigation associated with a given cyber risk across all MITRE ATT&CK techniques. Thus, where a CVE exists but a patch cannot be applied, a different technical mitigation can be recommended to remove a potential attack path before it can be exploited, preemptively securing vital internal systems and assets.
Figure 2: A critical attack path which starts with the compromise of a PC in the internal IT network, and ends with a PLC in the OT network. Each step is mapped out to the real world TTPs including abuse of SSH sessions and the modifications of ICS programs

3. Simplify compliance and reporting

Organizations, regardless of size or resources, have compliance regulations they need to adhere to. What this creates is an increased workload for security professionals. For smaller organizations, security teams might lack the manpower or resources to report in the short time frame that is required. For large organizations, keeping track of a massive amount of assets proves to be a challenge. Both cases emanate the risk of reporting fatigue where organizations might be hesitant to report incidents due to the complexity and time requirements they demand.  

An AI engine within the Darktrace/OT platform, Cyber AI analyst autonomously investigates incidents, summarize findings in natural language, and provides comprehensive insights into the nature and scope of cyber threats to improve the time it takes to triage and report on incidents. The ability to stitch together and present related security events provides a holistic understanding of the incident, enabling security analysts to identify patterns, assess the scope of potential threats, and prioritize responses effectively.  

Darktrace's detection capabilities identify every stage of an intrusion, from a compromised domain controller to network reconnaissance and privilege escalation. The AI technology is capable of detecting infections across several devices and generating incident reports that piece together disparate events to give a clear security narrative containing details of the attack, bridging the communication gap between IT and OT specialists.  

Post-incident, the technology assists in outlining timelines, discerning compromised data, pinpointing unusual activities, and aiding security teams in proactive threat mitigation.  

With its capabilities, organizations can swiftly understand the attack timeline, affected assets, unauthorized accesses, compromised data points, and malicious interactions, facilitating appropriate communication and action. For example, when Cyber AI Analyst shows an attack path, the security team gains insight on the segmentation or lack thereof between two subnets allowing the security team to appropriately segment the subnets.  

Cyber AI improves critical infrastructure operators’ ability to report major cyber-attacks to regulatory authorities. Considering that 72 hours is the reporting period for most significant incidents — and 24 hours for ransomware payments — Cyber AI Analyst is no longer a nice-to-have but a must-have for critical infrastructure.

Figure 3: The tabs labeled 1-4 denote model breaches, each with a specific action and severity indicated by color dots. Darktrace integrates these breaches, offering the security team a unified view of interconnected security events.  

The right AI for the right challenge


Incident Phase:

Protect

Role of AI:

Cyber risk prioritization

Attack path modelling

Compliance reporting

Darktrace Product:

PREVENT/OT

Incident Phase:

Detect

Role of AI:

Anomaly detection

Triaging and investigating

Darktrace Product:

Cyber AI analyst

DETECT/OT

Incident Phase:

답하다

Role of AI: 

Autonomous response  

Incident reporting

Darktrace Product:

RESPOND/OT

Incident Phase:

Recover

Role of AI:

Incident preparedness

Incident simulations

Darktrace Product:

HEAL

Credit to: Nicole Carignan, VP of Strategic Cyber AI - Kendra Gonzalez Duran, Director of Technology Innovation - & Daniel Simonds, Director of Operational Technology for their contribution to this blog.

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.
AUTHOR
ABOUT ThE AUTHOR
Oakley Cox
Analyst Technical Director, APAC

Oakley is a technical expert with 5 years’ experience as a Cyber Analyst. After leading a team of Cyber Analysts at the Cambridge headquarters, he relocated to New Zealand and now oversees the defense of critical infrastructure and industrial control systems across the APAC region. His research into cyber-physical security has been published by Cyber Security journals and CISA. Oakley is GIAC certified in Response and Industrial Defense (GRID), and has a Doctorate (PhD) from the University of Oxford.

Book a 1-1 meeting with one of our experts
share this article
USE CASES
항목을 찾을 수 없습니다.
PRODUCT SPOTLIGHT
항목을 찾을 수 없습니다.
COre coverage

More in this series

항목을 찾을 수 없습니다.

Blog

항목을 찾을 수 없습니다.

The State of AI in Cybersecurity: How AI will impact the cyber threat landscape in 2024

Default blog imageDefault blog image
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.

This blog is continuing the conversation from our last blog post “The State of AI in Cybersecurity: Unveiling Global Insights from 1,800 Security Practitioners” which was an overview of the entire report. This blog will focus on one aspect of the overarching report, the impact of AI on the cyber threat landscape.

To access the full report click here.

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.

a hypothetical cyber attack augmented by AI at every stage

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.

To access the full report click here.

References

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

Continue reading
About the author

Blog

Inside the SOC

Sliver C2: How Darktrace Provided a Sliver of Hope in the Face of an Emerging C2 Framework

Default blog imageDefault blog image
17
Apr 2024

Offensive Security Tools

As organizations globally seek to for ways to bolster their digital defenses and safeguard their networks against ever-changing cyber threats, security teams are increasingly adopting offensive security tools to simulate cyber-attacks and assess the security posture of their networks. These legitimate tools, however, can sometimes be exploited by real threat actors and used as genuine actor vectors.

What is Sliver C2?

Sliver C2 is a legitimate open-source command-and-control (C2) framework that was released in 2020 by the security organization Bishop Fox. Silver C2 was originally intended for security teams and penetration testers to perform security tests on their digital environments [1] [2] [5]. In recent years, however, the Sliver C2 framework has become a popular alternative to Cobalt Strike and Metasploit for many attackers and Advanced Persistence Threat (APT) groups who adopt this C2 framework for unsolicited and ill-intentioned activities.

The use of Sliver C2 has been observed in conjunction with various strains of Rust-based malware, such as KrustyLoader, to provide backdoors enabling lines of communication between attackers and their malicious C2 severs [6]. It is unsurprising, then, that it has also been leveraged to exploit zero-day vulnerabilities, including critical vulnerabilities in the Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure services.

In early 2024, Darktrace observed the malicious use of Sliver C2 during an investigation into post-exploitation activity on customer networks affected by the Ivanti vulnerabilities. Fortunately for affected customers, Darktrace DETECT™ was able to recognize the suspicious network-based connectivity that emerged alongside Sliver C2 usage and promptly brought it to the attention of customer security teams for remediation.

How does Silver C2 work?

Given its open-source nature, the Sliver C2 framework is extremely easy to access and download and is designed to support multiple operating systems (OS), including MacOS, Windows, and Linux [4].

Sliver C2 generates implants (aptly referred to as ‘slivers’) that operate on a client-server architecture [1]. An implant contains malicious code used to remotely control a targeted device [5]. Once a ‘sliver’ is deployed on a compromised device, a line of communication is established between the target device and the central C2 server. These connections can then be managed over Mutual TLS (mTLS), WireGuard, HTTP(S), or DNS [1] [4]. Sliver C2 has a wide-range of features, which include dynamic code generation, compile-time obfuscation, multiplayer-mode, staged and stageless payloads, procedurally generated C2 over HTTP(S) and DNS canary blue team detection [4].

Why Do Attackers Use Sliver C2?

Amidst the multitude of reasons why malicious actors opt for Sliver C2 over its counterparts, one stands out: its relative obscurity. This lack of widespread recognition means that security teams may overlook the threat, failing to actively search for it within their networks [3] [5].

Although the presence of Sliver C2 activity could be representative of authorized and expected penetration testing behavior, it could also be indicative of a threat actor attempting to communicate with its malicious infrastructure, so it is crucial for organizations and their security teams to identify such activity at the earliest possible stage.

Darktrace’s Coverage of Sliver C2 Activity

Darktrace’s anomaly-based approach to threat detection means that it does not explicitly attempt to attribute or distinguish between specific C2 infrastructures. Despite this, Darktrace was able to connect Sliver C2 usage to phases of an ongoing attack chain related to the exploitation of zero-day vulnerabilities in Ivanti Connect Secure VPN appliances in January 2024.

Around the time that the zero-day Ivanti vulnerabilities were disclosed, Darktrace detected an internal server on one customer network deviating from its expected pattern of activity. The device was observed making regular connections to endpoints associated with Pulse Secure Cloud Licensing, indicating it was an Ivanti server. It was observed connecting to a string of anomalous hostnames, including ‘cmjk3d071amc01fu9e10ae5rt9jaatj6b.oast[.]live’ and ‘cmjft14b13vpn5vf9i90xdu6akt5k3pnx.oast[.]pro’, via HTTP using the user agent ‘curl/7.19.7 (i686-redhat-linux-gnu) libcurl/7.63.0 OpenSSL/1.0.2n zlib/1.2.7’.

Darktrace further identified that the URI requested during these connections was ‘/’ and the top-level domains (TLDs) of the endpoints in question were known Out-of-band Application Security Testing (OAST) server provider domains, namely ‘oast[.]live’ and ‘oast[.]pro’. OAST is a testing method that is used to verify the security posture of an application by testing it for vulnerabilities from outside of the network [7]. This activity triggered the DETECT model ‘Compromise / Possible Tunnelling to Bin Services’, which breaches when a device is observed sending DNS requests for, or connecting to, ‘request bin’ services. Malicious actors often abuse such services to tunnel data via DNS or HTTP requests. In this specific incident, only two connections were observed, and the total volume of data transferred was relatively low (2,302 bytes transferred externally). It is likely that the connections to OAST servers represented malicious actors testing whether target devices were vulnerable to the Ivanti exploits.

The device proceeded to make several SSL connections to the IP address 103.13.28[.]40, using the destination port 53, which is typically reserved for DNS requests. Darktrace recognized that this activity was unusual as the offending device had never previously been observed using port 53 for SSL connections.

Model Breach Event Log displaying the ‘Application Protocol on Uncommon Port’ DETECT model breaching in response to the unusual use of port 53.
Figure 1: Model Breach Event Log displaying the ‘Application Protocol on Uncommon Port’ DETECT model breaching in response to the unusual use of port 53.

Figure 2: Model Breach Event Log displaying details pertaining to the ‘Application Protocol on Uncommon Port’ DETECT model breach, including the 100% rarity of the port usage.
Figure 2: Model Breach Event Log displaying details pertaining to the ‘Application Protocol on Uncommon Port’ DETECT model breach, including the 100% rarity of the port usage.

Further investigation into the suspicious IP address revealed that it had been flagged as malicious by multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) vendors [8]. In addition, OSINT sources also identified that the JARM fingerprint of the service running on this IP and port (00000000000000000043d43d00043de2a97eabb398317329f027c66e4c1b01) was linked to the Sliver C2 framework and the mTLS protocol it is known to use [4] [5].

An Additional Example of Darktrace’s Detection of Sliver C2

However, it was not just during the January 2024 exploitation of Ivanti services that Darktrace observed cases of Sliver C2 usages across its customer base.  In March 2023, for example, Darktrace detected devices on multiple customer accounts making beaconing connections to malicious endpoints linked to Sliver C2 infrastructure, including 18.234.7[.]23 [10] [11] [12] [13].

Darktrace identified that the observed connections to this endpoint contained the unusual URI ‘/NIS-[REDACTED]’ which contained 125 characters, including numbers, lower and upper case letters, and special characters like “_”, “/”, and “-“, as well as various other URIs which suggested attempted data exfiltration:

‘/upload/api.html?c=[REDACTED] &fp=[REDACTED]’

  • ‘/samples.html?mx=[REDACTED] &s=[REDACTED]’
  • ‘/actions/samples.html?l=[REDACTED] &tc=[REDACTED]’
  • ‘/api.html?gf=[REDACTED] &x=[REDACTED]’
  • ‘/samples.html?c=[REDACTED] &zo=[REDACTED]’

This anomalous external connectivity was carried out through multiple destination ports, including the key ports 443 and 8888.

Darktrace additionally observed devices on affected customer networks performing TLS beaconing to the IP address 44.202.135[.]229 with the JA3 hash 19e29534fd49dd27d09234e639c4057e. According to OSINT sources, this JA3 hash is associated with the Golang TLS cipher suites in which the Sliver framework is developed [14].

Conclusion

Despite its relative novelty in the threat landscape and its lesser-known status compared to other C2 frameworks, Darktrace has demonstrated its ability effectively detect malicious use of Sliver C2 across numerous customer environments. This included instances where attackers exploited vulnerabilities in the Ivanti Connect Secure and Policy Secure services.

While human security teams may lack awareness of this framework, and traditional rules and signatured-based security tools might not be fully equipped and updated to detect Sliver C2 activity, Darktrace’s Self Learning AI understands its customer networks, users, and devices. As such, Darktrace is adept at identifying subtle deviations in device behavior that could indicate network compromise, including connections to new or unusual external locations, regardless of whether attackers use established or novel C2 frameworks, providing organizations with a sliver of hope in an ever-evolving threat landscape.

Credit to Natalia Sánchez Rocafort, Cyber Security Analyst, Paul Jennings, Principal Analyst Consultant

Appendices

DETECT Model Coverage

  • Compromise / Repeating Connections Over 4 Days
  • Anomalous Connection / Application Protocol on Uncommon Port
  • Anomalous Server Activity / Server Activity on New Non-Standard Port
  • Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint
  • Compromise / Quick and Regular Windows HTTP Beaconing
  • Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score
  • Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint
  • Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare
  • Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination
  • Compromise / Sustained SSL or HTTP Increase
  • Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections
  • Compromise / SSL or HTTP Beacon
  • Compromise / Possible Malware HTTP Comms
  • Compromise / Possible Tunnelling to Bin Services
  • Anomalous Connection / Low and Slow Exfiltration to IP
  • Device / New User Agent
  • Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname
  • Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location
  • Anomalous File / Numeric File Download
  • Anomalous Connection / Powershell to Rare External
  • Anomalous Server Activity / New Internet Facing System

List of Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

18.234.7[.]23 - Destination IP - Likely C2 Server

103.13.28[.]40 - Destination IP - Likely C2 Server

44.202.135[.]229 - Destination IP - Likely C2 Server

References

[1] https://bishopfox.com/tools/sliver

[2] https://vk9-sec.com/how-to-set-up-use-c2-sliver/

[3] https://www.scmagazine.com/brief/sliver-c2-framework-gaining-traction-among-threat-actors

[4] https://github[.]com/BishopFox/sliver

[5] https://www.cybereason.com/blog/sliver-c2-leveraged-by-many-threat-actors

[6] https://securityaffairs.com/158393/malware/ivanti-connect-secure-vpn-deliver-krustyloader.html

[7] https://www.xenonstack.com/insights/out-of-band-application-security-testing

[8] https://www.virustotal.com/gui/ip-address/103.13.28.40/detection

[9] https://threatfox.abuse.ch/browse.php?search=ioc%3A107.174.78.227

[10] https://threatfox.abuse.ch/ioc/1074576/

[11] https://threatfox.abuse.ch/ioc/1093887/

[12] https://threatfox.abuse.ch/ioc/846889/

[13] https://threatfox.abuse.ch/ioc/1093889/

[14] https://github.com/projectdiscovery/nuclei/issues/3330

Continue reading
About the author
Natalia Sánchez Rocafort
Cyber Security Analyst
Our ai. Your data.

Elevate your cyber defenses with Darktrace AI

무료 평가판 시작
Darktrace AI protecting a business from cyber threats.