Healthcare software vendor Craneware confirmed attackers stole data during a cyberattack, underscoring growing cybersecurity risks facing healthcare suppliers.
The post Craneware Confirms Data Theft After Cyberattack, Investigations Underway appeared first on TechRepublic.
Healthcare software vendor Craneware confirmed attackers stole data during a cyberattack, underscoring growing cybersecurity risks facing healthcare suppliers.
The post Craneware Confirms Data Theft After Cyberattack, Investigations Underway appeared first on TechRepublic.
ClickLock can shut down Mac apps for more than three days while pressuring users to enter a password and stealing sensitive account data in the background.
The post ClickLock Mac Malware Traps Users in a Three-Day Password Loop appeared first on TechRepublic.
ClickLock can shut down Mac apps for more than three days while pressuring users to enter a password and stealing sensitive account data in the background.
The post ClickLock Mac Malware Traps Users in a Three-Day Password Loop appeared first on TechRepublic.
The biggest data breaches of 2026 so far, ranked by impact, with details on exposed data, affected users, and what readers should do next.
The post The Biggest Data Breaches of 2026 So Far, Ranked by Impact appeared first on TechRepublic.
The biggest data breaches of 2026 so far, ranked by impact, with details on exposed data, affected users, and what readers should do next.
The post The Biggest Data Breaches of 2026 So Far, Ranked by Impact appeared first on TechRepublic.
In February 2026, we discovered a set of malicious activities that had been ongoing since late 2025. These activities involved a RAT module written in Go with proxy capabilities, which served as the main stage of the attack. The attack targeted government and diplomatic entities in Southeast Asia and showed a level of sophistication that caught our attention.
During the attack, the main malware, dubbed GoSerpent, received an encrypted argument and started communicating with a remote server. It was also used to deploy further malicious tools to collect sensitive data and dump credentials on the system.
Monitoring the activities of this threat actor revealed that in May 2026, they came back with an evolved set of malicious tools: a new RAT and proxy tool, Stowaway, which resembled the initial malware, as well as an additional stealthy tool to exfiltrate sensitive data collected in the previous few months through network shares.
We found earlier versions of the GoSerpent backdoor used since 2021 against victims in Southeast Asia with relatively simpler code that received command-line arguments in plain text. Even though the newer variant is stealthier, the attackers continued using the simpler version alongside the latest one in their recent attacks.
What makes this threat particularly concerning is the strategic deployment of various tools with sophisticated data collection and exfiltration capabilities.
In this article, we introduce the malicious tools uncovered by us, which have been used since late 2025.
The initial phase of the attacks involved deployment of the GoSerpent backdoor, followed by additional malicious tools. During this phase, the main goal was to collect sensitive files and store them for future exfiltration, which was done by a data collecting tool, ThumbcacheService. The attackers also needed system credentials to exfiltrate the collected data through network drives at a later stage. This was achieved through a number of credential dumping tools deployed in this phase via the GoSerpent backdoor.
The primary weapon in this campaign is the GoSerpent backdoor, a sophisticated Go-based remote access Trojan that has been active since at least 2021, with the most recent variant deployed in 2026.
This malware receives encrypted and base64-encoded command-line arguments containing a C2 server address and communication password, which are decrypted using AES-CBC mode with a fixed IV (31323334353637383930616263646566) and keys derived from predefined strings.
The backdoor connects to command-and-control servers using ChaCha20 encryption for communications, with the SHA256 hash of the communication password serving as the encryption key.
GoSerpent supports multiple C2 commands by receiving special command values. The commands include the following:
| Command | Symbol (as derived from corresponding function names) | Description |
| 2BA1 | Sync | Respond to the server to show the infection is active |
| 3BA2 | Exit | Exit process |
| 4BA3 | Ls | Start listening on a port |
| 5BA4 | Connect | Connect to a remote server |
| 6BA5 | Hello | Create a shell on the infected machine |
| 7BA6 | Ul | Upload a file or directory to the server |
| 8BA7 | Dl | Download from the server |
| 9BA8 | Ss5 | Start a SOCKS5 proxy on the infected machine |
| ABA9 | Cl | Close a listening port |
| CBAB | RF | Forward to a connected node |
GoSerpent can establish SOCKS5 proxy servers to route traffic through compromised hosts, enabling attackers to access other networks while masking their true IP addresses. The backdoor is capable of deploying additional malicious tools, including ThumbcacheService for file collection, Mimikatz for credential dumping, and QuarksDumpLocalHash for local account password hash extraction. The malware exhibits strong persistence mechanisms and uses filenames that mimic legitimate system processes such as lass.exe and updates.exe to evade detection.
McMx is a basic Go-based proxy and remote access tool that represents a simpler variant of the GoSerpent backdoor, apparently compiled from a different GitHub repository path.
Unlike the latest variant of GoSerpent, which uses encrypted command-line arguments, McMx receives input parameters from text files in plaintext format — in a way that resembles older versions of GoSerpent. The malware features similar function names with apparent typos present in both tools.
Before executing McMx, attackers manipulate batch files to generate configuration files containing C2 parameters. The patterns observed show the use of echo commands to create configuration files with parameters like remote host addresses, ports, and secret keys. The McMx malware is then deployed with this configuration.
The tool shares core functionalities with GoSerpent, including:
Following initial deployment of the GoSerpent backdoor, attackers typically wait several days before utilizing it to download and execute additional malware components for data collection and credential dumping.
ThumbcacheService is a malicious DLL deployed as a Windows service that functions as a sophisticated file collection mechanism within the GoSerpent ecosystem. The malware employs XOR encryption with a single-byte key of 0x13 for string obfuscation. It decrypts embedded strings and creates a database file named thumbcache_605a.db in the C:\Users\Public\ directory to store collected sensitive files. It specifically targets documents with the following extensions: .doc, .docx, .pdf, .xls and .xlsx.
The targeted files are then archived using 7-Zip and protected with a predefined password @vx0a9n5W2M0c3D6.#, enforcing a 20MB size limit for archives.
The malicious service also monitors the $Recycle.Bin directory for deleted files with the extensions of interest, ensuring comprehensive data collection.
The threat actor deploys the following tools via GoSerpent backdoor to dump credentials:
These tools work together to maximize information extraction from compromised systems. The stolen credentials were used in later stages of the attack to facilitate the exfiltration of sensitive files collected by ThumbcacheService.
After the initial phase of the malware deployments, the attackers allowed a few weeks for the ThumbcacheService to silently collect sensitive files without exfiltrating them. In the meantime, the credential dumping tools also continued to steal credentials. In May 2026, the threat actor came back with a set of new tools. The main malware of this round of activity was another Go-based RAT and proxy tool, Stowaway. It was used to deploy the two-stage data exfiltration tool TmcLoader/TmcPayload, which was the last piece of the data theft puzzle.
Stowaway is a proxy and remote access tool compiled from an open-source framework with customized functions to make the infection stealthier. This malware features both network admin and agent capabilities, enabling attackers to establish chained proxy paths across multiple hosts with the following functionalities:
Communications are transported over TCP, HTTP, or WebSocket channels protected by AES-256-GCM or TLS encryption.
As the next step, the attackers deliver two files to the victim machine via Stowaway:
Login{BBF061R2-BE25-4F6D-8B2D-1A6A39C3FSA2}.db — an encrypted configuration fileTmcLoader is a stealthy C++ loader module registered as a Windows service. The malware embeds an encrypted payload dubbed TmcPayload within its .data section, which is decrypted and loaded into the memory space of the svchost process to maintain persistence and avoid detection.
TmcLoader employs dynamic API resolution through a circular XOR encryption, where each byte is XORed with the value of the subsequent byte, combined with Base64 encoding for string obfuscation to hide API names.
The loader creates a unique event to prevent multiple infections on the same system. After that, it extracts and decrypts the embedded TmcPayload. This payload component is responsible for exfiltrating sensitive data from the victim’s machine.
TmcPayload generates a file path from an obfuscated string: C:\Users\Public\Libraries\{BBF061R2-BE25-4F6D-8B2D-1A6A39C3FSA2}.db.
It then checks for the existence of this configuration file. If the file doesn’t exist, it delays execution for a random period of time before rechecking. The configuration file contains encrypted network share credentials and destination paths for data exfiltration. It specifically references the thumbcache_605a.db file created by ThumbcacheService as the file to be exfiltrated, demonstrating the integrated nature of the attack chain.
What distinguishes this threat actor’s approach is the deliberate integration between different components of their toolset. The chain from ThumbcacheService to TmcLoader/TmcPayload demonstrates sophisticated operational planning:
thumbcache_605a.db database file.thumbcache_605a.db.This integration shows that the threat actor has carefully orchestrated their tools to work together seamlessly, ensuring that data collected by one component is available for exfiltration by another component.
The malware operators leverage legitimate hosting providers, including Alibaba Cloud and UCLOUD HK, for their command-and-control infrastructure. The use of legitimate hosting platforms demonstrates operational security awareness, making detection more challenging.
The technical similarities between GoSerpent and the newer Stowaway tools strongly suggest the threat actor’s deep familiarity with network proxy technologies. The consistent use of legitimate domain names as secret keys, with GoSerpent employing www.microsoft.com and www.spacex.com and Stowaway utilizing github.code, indicates a standardized operational methodology.
While the exact attribution of the GoSerpent campaign remains uncertain, there are indications of a potential link to the TetrisPhantom threat actor. The similarities in victim targeting, technical capabilities, and operational methodologies suggest a possible connection. However, further investigation is necessary to confirm this association.
The GoSerpent campaign represents a sophisticated and evolving threat to government and diplomatic entities in Southeast Asia. The threat actor’s use of customized tools, such as the GoSerpent backdoor, Stowaway, and TmcLoader, demonstrates a high degree of technical expertise and operational planning. The integration of these tools to collect and exfiltrate sensitive data highlights the actor’s focus on long-term access and intelligence gathering. As the threat landscape continues to shift, it is essential for organizations to remain vigilant and implement robust security measures to detect and prevent such attacks. By understanding the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) employed by this threat actor, defenders can better prepare themselves to counter similar threats in the future.
GoSerpent
EBFFD5A76AAA690BCDB922F82E0BACC5
DC506FF7BB72735444FB3703A6BEE6D8
McMx
D6E86BF8A90E9B632ADD5FA495F97FBC
ThumbcacheService
CB6C4C70A3B171FA3404B8E1A3382116
64E9D1950E42BC98486DFD9919463D1C
Stowaway
CBBB6D483737EA3566726E51752DFF40
7F223EE0716CE2AD56F55D3744419449
19F8BEFCB035F52BF70094E6B4F5779A
846EF7C1C7323849B2A778C5E4CDA162
TmcLoader
D08A059E8B815E3B891505BC8777FC28
93A1569D5D5AB2C4761FEDF84F83709E
152.32.160[.]239
8.220.194[.]108
8.220.214[.]132
8.220.209[.]155
8.220.193[.]189
101.36.104[.]87
144.48.6[.]46
103.138.13[.]30
47.80.22[.]58
152.32.222[.]113
43.106.30[.]226
In January 2026, we identified multiple attacks involving unknown malware that captures the contents of cryptocurrency wallet windows. During the investigation, we reconstructed the complete infection chain, which consisted of four tightly linked stages initiated by the execution of the previously described malicious PowerShell script TookPS. However, this campaign differs from previous activity in that it uses a new framework to deliver all malicious modules and orchestrate them via an SSH tunnel. In total, the framework includes more than 20 malicious payloads and implants, covering a wide variety of functions. At the time of writing, the threat remains active.
Kaspersky’s products detect this threat as Trojan-Downloader.Win32.TookPS.*, Trojan.Win64.BypassUAC.*, Trojan-Banker.Script.Agent.gen, Trojan.Win32.Dllhijack.*, Backdoor.Win32.TeviRat.*, Trojan-PSW.Win64.Stealer.*, Trojan-Spy.Win64.Keylogger.*, Trojan-Spy.Win64.Agent.*, Trojan.Win64.Agent.*.
TookPS is a downloader used for retrieving malicious commands and scripts from attacker-controlled servers to further propagate attacks. The first campaign using TookPS was discovered in March 2025. At that time, malicious scripts delivered a Python‑based infostealer along with a script that installed and configured an SSH tunnel on the victim’s machine. The next wave appeared in April 2025: the payload was changed, and TookPS was used to deliver the TeviRAT malware with the same SSH installer.
Then at the end of April 2025, TookPS underwent minor changes, yet its attack chain was completely redesigned. Unlike previous incidents, in this case, TookPS was used solely for the initial infection, with an automated SSH bot responsible for payload delivery. This new malicious campaign has multiple stages that cover the full attack lifecycle, from initial infection to persistence and data exfiltration. Among various malware strains, at one of the stages, the TeviRAT backdoor is delivered to the compromised host, ultimately fetching another version of a TookPS script.
We dubbed this updated TookPS campaign “OkoBot”.
Original OkoBot infection chain
We will break down this chain in greater detail later in the article. However, this is not the only version of OkoBot we were able to find. Already in March 2026, we discovered a new phase in the development of the framework, with Volume2 now being installed directly using TookPS. The HDUtil launcher → extl injector → Rilide chain was found to be abandoned in this newer version since it was replaced in full by the identical ext_daemon Volume2 plugin. TeviRAT was also removed, most likely because its functions were covered by the new plugins dispatcher.
New OkoBot infection chain
The initial infection is primarily delivered through two vectors: a ClickFix attack, and malware distributed through GitHub that masquerades as legitimate software. One such example is the fake SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) package distributed through GitHub. In fact, it is actually the legitimate Audacity — a popular audio editor — compiled with a malicious implant embedded in one of its libraries. Because the repository was indexed by most search engines and appeared at the top of the results for the query SSMS, the malware looked legitimate and quickly earned users’ trust.
Malicious application distribution report
This repository was created at the end of March 2025 and existed until June of that year. It consisted of a single file, README.md, which provided a fake SSMS installation guide written in an official style and likely derived from excerpts of Microsoft’s documentation. However, the download link for the program, located at the beginning of the guide, pointed to the latest release in the same repository.
Both infection vectors trigger the execution of the malicious script TookPS, which installs SSH on the victim’s system, establishes a connection to the attacker-controlled SSH server and subsequently forwards the SSH daemon port. Following a delay, an automated SSH bot connects to the forwarded port.
The automated SSH bot collects system information such as usernames, antivirus software installed, the IP address, and OS version. It harvests cryptocurrency wallet files, browser cookies, profiles, and other credentials through an SSH tunnel. For subsequent delivery of malicious modules, it disables Windows Defender notifications via a registry modification. Moreover, it gains access to the graphical session on the victim’s system using the following sequence:
termsrv.dll with a patched one to permit multiple concurrent RDP sessionsApple Sync to maintain a reverse SSH tunnel that forwards the local RDP port every hourAfter that, the SSH bot begins retrieving malicious modules over SFTP.
One of the deployed modules is HDUtil, an auxiliary utility protected with VMProtect and heavily obfuscated. This launcher is used by the SSH bot during an attack to deploy various malicious modules via the target command. Additionally, it implements three auxiliary commands that were not observed during the attacks we analyzed. Nevertheless, their presence and potential capabilities further demonstrate the high degree of integration among all components of the framework.
At startup, the launcher verifies its execution environment by checking the HWID in the contents of %PROGRAMDATA%\hwid.dat, a technique consistently employed throughout the framework. If the file is missing or contains invalid data, such as a non‑MD5 hash, the launcher terminates without performing any further actions. Otherwise, the specified commands are executed. For example, enumsessions provides a list of sessions along with detailed information, including the session type (Console, Services, RDP, and others), username, connection host, and domain. In turn, enumadapters returns the names of all graphics adapters present on the system.
Example output of HDUtil enumeration commands
The most important command of the launcher is target, which enables payload execution on the system. An optional nouac argument enables automatic UAC bypassing via Windows RPC and an auto-elevated msconfig.exe program, allowing the payload to run with elevated privileges stealthily. This technique has been known for a long time, discovered and described in 2019 by the Project Zero team, who provided a full report with a detailed technical description.
Below is the list of all HDUtil commands.
| Command | Description |
| target [nouac [user=<user>]] [noattach] <file> | Starts file and prints its output. If optional argument noattach passed, command to be executed in background. If optional argument nouac passed, automatic UAC bypass to be performed. If optional argument user passed, new process to be executed under , otherwise default local administrator to be chosen. |
| pcopy <file> <dir_src> <dir_dst> | Copies file <file> located in <dir_src> to <dir_dst>. Not used by SSH bot. |
| enumadapters | Prints names of graphical adapters on current system. Not used by SSH bot. |
| enumsessions | Prints all sessions on current system. Not used by SSH bot. |
The first malicious module delivered to the infected system via SFTP is executed using the previously described launcher with the command .\HDUtil.exe target extl.exe. It is a heavily obfuscated DLL injector protected with VMProtect. At startup, the module enters an infinite loop and uses the EnumWindows and IsWindowVisible API methods to enumerate the PIDs of active windows and retrieve the corresponding executable filenames. For processes associated with widely used Chromium‑based browsers, the module invokes a routine that injects a specialized implant.
The injector opens a process, allocates a memory region, and writes the payload directly into this region as unencrypted raw bytes. Then it resolves two exported implant functions, LdrInitMain and LdrCallMain, based on a pre-specified hash derived from a modified version of DJB2 hash function. The first function performs the final PE unpacking, including rebase operations and the initialization of the import and exception tables. The second function directly initiates malware execution.
Setting up protections on the regions and launching the implant
This loader installs malicious browser extensions and hides them from the user. It uses an internal engine that resolves the addresses of stripped functions by analyzing the byte patterns of their calls using YARA-style syntax. This approach enables the malicious code to access critical Chromium engine functions required for extension installation and management. This functionality is also implemented for other browsers with appropriate modifications. For example, in the case of Microsoft Edge, the corresponding DLL msedge.dll is hooked using the specific patterns.
List of the functions hooked by the malware
Using the obtained address of the BrowserProcess object, the loader traverses the inheritance hierarchy and subsequently resolves a pointer to the function responsible for registering observers of browser‑window creation, specifically ProfileManager::BrowserListObserver::OnBrowserAdded. With a specialized built‑in engine, they are hooked using the attacker’s own implementations while preserving the original function’s address.
The loader replaces the functions it finds with its own
When a new Chromium window is opened, a hooked function is invoked that silently installs extensions. This routine scans the user’s %APPDATA% directory, loads all .crx files (Chromium-based browsers extension format), and records them in the ext_table. The extensions are then installed in the browser.
During installation, the extension is unpacked into a non‑default extensions directory, Local Extension Settings, and its manifest is dynamically modified. An object named custom_args is added, containing the fields hwid (the identifier of the infected system) and browser (the name of the browser in which the extension is installed). Then, using previously resolved internal functions of chrome.dll, the extension is installed and all requested permissions are granted.
Extensions are unpacked into a non-default directory
All extensions loaded in this manner are added to a special array to be subsequently identified among regular extensions and to remain hidden from the user.
The remaining patched functions are used to hide the installed malicious extensions from the user. When invoked with registered extensions as parameters, they perform no operation and return a constant value. This enables the threat actor to suppress notifications related to the malicious nature of the extensions and to exclude them from the displayed list of installed extensions. As a result, the behavior of other extensions remains unaffected.
Stub for hiding malicious extensions
During the attack, the Rilide extension was installed on the victim’s system using the previously described loader. Rilide is a stealer targeting Chromium-based browsers that has been frequently used by Russian-speaking threat actors since April 2023. The malware is designed to steal sensitive user data, including login credentials, cookies, and financial information, with a specific emphasis on cryptocurrency theft.
The final module delivered via SFTP is an open-source utility called Volume2, which is executed with elevated privileges using the command .\HDUtil.exe target nouac noattach Volume2.exe. The executable was linked with the malicious protobuf.dll library. Although the library seems identical to the legitimate DLL, it has been modified to include a malicious exported function, ProtobufGetVer2. This function decrypts and initiates a malicious implant. The payload is encrypted using AES GCM, initialized with a static 256‑bit key and a 96‑bit nonce. The GCM authentication tag is omitted, resulting in the absence of integrity verification. Starting in March 2026, the name of protobuf.dll was changed to version.dll, although its contents remained a modified ProtoBuf library.
Decrypting implant using AES GCM and subsequent mapping
The loaded implant functions as a malicious plugin dispatcher. Upon initialization, it reads and verifies the HWID before establishing communication with the C2 server via the HTTP protocol. Each request follows a predefined binary format: a 2-byte numeric bot identifier encoded in little-endian format, followed by an AES CBC-encrypted JSON object. By default, the BotID is set to 0, and the key and IV consist of 32 and 16 bytes of 0xff, respectively. The implant polls the server every 20 seconds to retrieve new commands. The request contains client data encoded in Base64, and the server may respond with a command containing three mandatory fields: TaskIndex (the command number from the dispatcher), TaskID (a unique task identifier), and HWID (the client identifier). The dispatcher supports four built-in commands:
| Task index | Action |
| 1 | Reconfigure client: update session keys, assign ID, switch to another C2 |
| 2 | Load DLL implant into memory and run its entry point |
| 3 | Load plugin into process and register tasks with RegisterPlugin function |
| 4 | Restart dispatcher as new process |
| x | If the task number is none of the above, search for it among the registered plugins |
Each plugin is required to export two functions: RegisterPlugin and PluginDispatch. These functions are used to manage and configure plugins. The RegisterPlugin function registers the plugin’s tasks with the dispatcher, whereas the PluginDispatch function is invoked when the plugin is called. Both these functions, as well as other external API functions, are located within the base libraries using one algorithm. This algorithm iterates through the export table and uses a specialized callback that calculates the MurmurHash3 hash and compares it against the target value to identify the appropriate function.
Resolving a plugin initialization function
During the analysis, we were able to discover five plugins that implement functions under their unique task identifiers.
We identified four malicious implants that are delivered to the system via the process injector plugin.
The malware is functionally identical to the browser extensions loader (extl.exe) described above, but less obfuscated and not protected with VMProtect.
Similarly to extl.exe, this malware monitors the list of active processes in the system and injects an implant into Trezor Suite, Ledger Wallet, and Ledger Live processes. The implant is malware that collects seed phrases of Ledger and Trezor cryptocurrency wallets. Initially, it verifies the HWID, and if it fails, it terminates immediately. Then, based on the value of BaseDllName, the malware determines the process context and uses the corresponding implementation for either Trezor or Ledger. It then utilizes the previously described technique to hook the internal Electron framework functions.
List of functions hooked by the malware
Then the malware communicates with the C2 (moonsand[.]store) over HTTPS, sending a Base64-encoded JSON request containing the fields Pid, HWID, and Build. In response, it receives a JSON payload containing the Wait flag. If this flag is set to true, the malware initiates periodic USB device scans filtered by VID and PID (Vendor and Product ID). Upon detecting a connected Trezor or Ledger hardware wallet, it invokes the hooked functions to display a hard‑coded phishing page designed for seed phrase recovery, with a distinct layout used for each identified wallet. If the Wait flag is set to false, the phishing page is displayed immediately.
When the seed phrase is entered and validated, the JavaScript code of the page outputs the phrase to the console prefixed with @:app:print. This prefix helps identify the malware messages in the hooked function mal_LogConsoleMessage.
Phishing pages for seed phrase recovery
The obtained seed phrase is subsequently sent to the C2 server within a JSON payload containing fields such as App (ledger or trezor), Build, DeviceName, DeviceHardwareId, and SeedData. Furthermore, an identical JSON, encrypted with the RC4 algorithm using the HWID as the key, is saved in a temporary directory under the filename sh_<ts>.json, where <ts> is the file creation timestamp.
This module is a keylogger that, in addition to recording user input, performs three malicious activities:
CF_HDROP for files dragged between windows, CF_DIB for copied bitmap images, and CF_UNICODETEXT for Unicode text. Each format is handled appropriately, and all copy events are logged under the Clipboard section. Text data is written directly to the log, while copied files are recorded by their file paths. Images are saved as JPG files following the naming pattern bf_YYYY-MM-DD hh_mm_ss.jpg, and the path to the saved image is added to the log.sc_YYYY-MM-DD hh_mm_ss.jpg. A corresponding message is recorded in the log under the Screenshot section, including the path to the screenshot.Thus, the keylogger creates three types of different file artifacts, which are placed in a temporary directory. Below is an example of a log file generated by the keylogger.
Example of the keylogger log file
This module, which we dubbed OkoSpyware, captures both keystrokes and the video stream of the target application’s window. It first compiles a list of over 100 executable names, including cryptocurrency wallet applications (such as Exodus or Litecoin QT), password managers (such as KeePassXC or 1Password), and other widely used applications, to identify which processes should be monitored among all active system processes. For each identified process, the module uses a bundled FFmpeg instance to capture an MP4 video of the window while concurrently logging keystrokes within that window. The resulting video file is saved in %TEMP% as media_<ts> (where <ts> is the recording’s start timestamp). In the same folder, a JSON file named oko_<ts>.json is created, containing metadata about the captured stream, such as the process name, intercepted input, the stream’s MD5 hash, and additional details.
Example of an OkoSpyware metadata file
The malware also monitors the state of browsers, and when the window title matches a specified regular expression — for instance, a MetaMask or Tonkeeper wallet extension page — it performs video recording and input logging, adding the window title value to the corresponding field in the JSON metadata file.
The TookPS script launched via a scheduled task receives a PowerShell exfiltration script as its payload from the C2. All files created by the MC Keylogger and OkoSpyware are sent to the C2 server to the endpoint ir-post.php. After that, the files are deleted from the victim’s system and a command history file, ConsoleHost_history.txt, is cleared.
Sequential exfiltration of artifacts from the temporary directory
At the time of writing, we have detected hundreds of victims of the OkoBot campaign in more than 25 countries, with the largest proportion of attacked end users found in Brazil, Vietnam, Canada, Mexico, and Türkiye.
Distribution of users attacked by OkoBot by country, April 2025–June 2026 (download)
At the time of writing, we can’t attribute this malicious campaign to any known crimeware actor. However, during the analysis, we observed that the servers hosting the PowerShell scripts used in the initial infection stage implement server-side geoblocking. When attempting to retrieve the malicious script using an IP from Russia or CIS countries, the server returns an empty response. This technique is very popular among Russian-speaking threat actors.
It was previously mentioned that the campaign uses the malicious Rilide extension, an infostealer that is actively spreading on Russian-speaking, invitation-only cybercrime forums. Additionally, the source code of the SeedHunter phishing pages includes comments in Russian.
The framework described here has numerous modules — mostly written in C and C++ — that are obfuscated and use a variety of packing techniques. Across all stages, specific patterns and techniques can be identified that are borrowed and used in other modules, which allows us to conclude that there is a close interconnectedness among all stages, forming a full‑fledged high‑level framework. Overall, these modules enable a wide range of functions, such as collecting local files, executing remote commands, downloading arbitrary browser extensions, and stealing crypto wallets.
The OkoBot campaign has been ongoing for over a year, and it remains active at the time of publication. Moreover, it is adapting, which indicates that this framework is being maintained and distribution campaigns continue.
Additional information about this threat, with a comprehensive IoC list and decryption scripts, is available to customers of the Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Reporting service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
B07D451EE65A1580F20A784C8F0E7A46 # protobuf.dll
187A1F68AE786E53D3831166DC84E6D2 # protobuf.dll
D84E8DC509308523E0209D3CD3544619 # protobuf.dll
83E6B8FCB92A0B13E109301F8FF649CF # version.dll
7306885BB4C98F2A9F056104CF092BC9 # PowerShell wrapper
B4C2E16CDB513BE4DC798F88E2527334 # CMD wrapper
2157D2429124AD28DB7A26F2477CB985 # Environment enumerator
77CECF5E2A622AE07D8AE9913457AB57 # Dropper
E0C3BC27A65750E740C4F1719E531C7D # Process injector
3D2B43F91F65BFBF36A9C71B6B418876 # ext_daemon.exe
70FEF9FD6E351F4D53CFEEE8DCDFCD99 # seedhunter_x64.exe
ACD31C9941B6C1CABD4E45E6877B9038 # keylog_x64.dll
DD52F5108A176C62AD807C327734AD12 # oko.dll
AC93A821617AEA1F56D4BC0BEF4AF327 # HDUtil.exe
11DBC8A2BEA04B15F8F68F3F01E8FAF9 # extl.exe
%USERPROFILE%\.ssh\go.bat
%PROGRAMDATA%\HDVideo\HDUtil.exe
%PROGRAMDATA%\hwid.dat
%PROGRAMDATA%\oko_ver
%TEMP%\extl.exe
%APPDATA%\hwid.dat
2baserec2[.]guru # TookPS
recavb22[.]online # TookPS
kbeautyreviews[.]com # TookPS
coffeesaloon[.]online # TookPS
104.243.43[.]16 # SSH bot
104.243.32[.]213 # SSH bot
62.210.188[.]209 # SSH bot
livewallpapers[.]online # Volume2 C2
thatwascringe[.]com # Volume2 C2
moonsand[.]store # SeedHunter C2
AssuranceAmerica says hackers accessed the driver's license data of 6.9 million customers, exposing personal information and raising concerns about identity theft.
The post AssuranceAmerica Data Breach: 6.9M Driver’s License Numbers Exposed appeared first on TechRepublic.
AssuranceAmerica says hackers accessed the driver's license data of 6.9 million customers, exposing personal information and raising concerns about identity theft.
The post AssuranceAmerica Data Breach: 6.9M Driver’s License Numbers Exposed appeared first on TechRepublic.
A fake recruitment phishing campaign impersonates major brands and uses trusted HR platforms to steal Google account credentials.
The post Fake Job Offers Impersonate Netflix, OpenAI, and FIFA to Steal Google Credentials appeared first on TechRepublic.
A fake recruitment phishing campaign impersonates major brands and uses trusted HR platforms to steal Google account credentials.
The post Fake Job Offers Impersonate Netflix, OpenAI, and FIFA to Steal Google Credentials appeared first on TechRepublic.
Welcome back, aspiring investigators!
Let’s talk about something that has become one of the biggest problems in the crypto world. It’s drainers. If you haven’t heard the word before, don’t worry, you’re about to become very familiar with it. Drainers are a type of phishing attack, and they have swept through the cryptocurrency world at a truly striking pace. In fact, they are now growing so fast that they have already overtaken ransomware, both in how widespread they are and in the sheer amount of money they steal. To understand exactly how this works, we dug into the mechanics of drainers as well as the whole shadowy little market that has grown up around them. That’s what we are going to explore together today.
The basic idea behind any phishing campaign is to catch you making a mistake. Hackers want you to hand over information or access that should never leave your hands. In the specific case of drainers, the goal is a little different from classic phishing. The hacker wants to trick you into granting a smart contract permission to interact with your funds. Once you give that permission, the damage is already done. Drainers mostly go after blockchains that support smart contracts. That means they target users on Ethereum and Ethereum-like networks, such as Base, Polygon, and Optimism. But don’t think Ethereum is the only battlefield. Drainers built for Solana exist too, and a drainer aimed at Bitcoin has already made an appearance.
Imagine you want to connect your MetaMask wallet to some project’s website because you’re hoping to grab a little free crypto. Maybe you want to buy a brand-new token while it’s still cheap, before the price shoots up. You click Connect, you type in your password, and you sign a transaction that approves access to your wallet. And that, right there, is exactly the moment a drainer catches you. Instead of a legitimate contract that would let you receive tokens, the hacker gets you to sign a malicious smart contract. In doing so, you unknowingly grant permission for your funds to be transferred out. In effect, you agree, with your own hand, to give away all your money.
So how does a hacker actually pull this off? It works best with something called an airdrop, which is simply a giveaway of new tokens. Airdrops attract a swarm of people who are hoping to get a little bit of crypto that might grow tens of times in value down the road. These giveaways do genuinely happen sometimes, as a real way to promote a new token. So people have learned to trust them. In that exact moment, the user is driven by something we call FOMO, the fear of missing out on a gain.
In their rush to grab the airdrop, a person often doesn’t stop to check who actually created the page they are interacting with, or what the smart contract they are approving actually does under the hood. The website itself might be a perfect copy of the real one, built by the hacker down to the smallest detail, while the smart contract underneath does the opposite of what it promises. Instead of giving you money, it takes it.
In 2024, drainers overtook ordinary ransomware, both in how far they spread and in how much money they brought in. Now, don’t get it wrong, ransomware is still very much the scourge of large businesses. But scammers, being the opportunists they are, have rushed into this new and still relatively uncrowded niche. The very first drainers spread quietly, as scripts traded on darknet marketplaces. Back in 2022 there were 55 unique forums where you could find drainers being sold or discussed. By 2024, that number had jumped to 129 such places, more than double in just two years.
And keep in mind, that count only covers a place as niche and honestly as sparse as the dark web. Most of the real action these days happens on Telegram and Discord.
The biggest drainers active in 2024 had names like Angel, Inferno, Ping, Ace, Cerberus, Nova, Medusa, MS, CryptoGrab, and Venom. Of that whole list, mainly Angel and Ace are still active today, but a new player has stepped onto the stage, one called Vanilla. It hasn’t been studied very closely yet, because it runs on a private model that is difficult for the average scammer to even get access to.
According to Scam Sniffer, a company that closely analyzes different types of crypto fraud, total losses from drainers in 2024 added up to $494.000.000.
That figure only counts the large-scale hacks that could actually be tallied and confirmed. Since drainers mostly target ordinary, everyday users, small thefts of just a few thousand dollars here and there don’t even make it into that statistic. So the real number is almost certainly much higher.
Among the large-scale cases recorded in 2024, there were more than three hundred thirty thousand victims. The single biggest theft that year came to $55.000.000. All together, there were roughly thirty major fraudulent campaigns, which is one and a half times more than the year before, in 2023. In the first quarter of 2024 alone, drainers showed almost sixfold growth. Compare that to ransomware, which only doubled over that same stretch of time.
So what do all these numbers really mean? Well, because the barrier to entry into this line of work is so remarkably low, it has started attracting scammers who used to work in more old-fashioned territory, like email phishing, luring victims to fake bank login pages and other traditional scam types. A couple of months of this kind of work could buy an apartment, a car, and regular vacations somewhere warm like Thailand. Take one risk, and you can just walk away, or so the thinking goes. But of course, once someone gets a real taste of easy money like that, nobody actually walks away after two months. The business pulls them back in.
Think about the contrast here. A ransomware group has to negotiate with a company, arrange for payment, and handle the whole business of decryption afterward. That’s a lot of hassle and a lot of steps where things can go wrong. A drainer, on the other hand, just steals the money immediately. No negotiation needed.
Like plenty of other kinds of scams out there, drainers are distributed under what’s called a SaaS model, short for Software-as-a-Service. In this criminal corner of the internet, they’re called DaaS, meaning Drainer-as-a-Service.
There’s also a very characteristic division of labor inside these operations. You’ve got developers, who build the actual malware. You’ve got workers, the rank-and-file operatives out doing the scamming day to day. And alongside them you’ve got recruiters, traffic-generation specialists, and providers of various supporting services that keep the whole machine running. The main job, naturally, falls to the developers. They are the ones who create the malicious software and work to make it more convenient to use, easier to deploy, and easier to scale up.
So what does a hacker actually need in order to pull off a phishing campaign like this?
First, they need domains for their future sites, and these domains are usually spelled just similarly enough to the name of the real project they’re impersonating, so a distracted eye won’t catch the difference. Then they need hosting, which is simply a place to put the site once it’s built. Naturally, they also need a landing page, one designed to closely resemble the legitimate project’s real page. Underneath that landing page sits the drainer code itself, which is typically JavaScript code hosted directly on the site. On top of all that, they’ll usually build a control panel that shows them how many users have been lured in and tracks how those users are behaving on the page. And finally, hackers take their own security seriously too, relying on VPNs, proxies, and fake sockpuppet accounts to cover their tracks.
Professional hackers usually go a step further and set up a full command-and-control server, which lets them manage the drainer’s behavior remotely and adjust it on the fly.
Once all of that infrastructure is in place, all that’s left is bringing in people, actual victims to walk through the trap. That job falls to traffic arbitrage specialists, sometimes called traffic drivers. Their whole task is to funnel users toward the phishing page. They accomplish this in all sorts of ways, everything from buying Google ads to jumping directly into comment sections and posts to engage with real users. Some scammers even go so far as to clone the official support channels of legitimate projects, so a victim reaching out for help ends up talking to the scammer instead.
Put it all together, and what you get is a genuine sales funnel, a designed path that walks victims toward the trap, just like any legitimate marketing funnel would walk a customer toward a purchase.
Here’s how the profits typically get divided up. Operators, the people running the overall scheme, take home twenty to thirty percent of whatever gets stolen. The rest goes to the workers, the people directly out there scamming victims day to day. A worker’s exact cut depends on their skill level. Beginners give up thirty percent of their take to the operators, while the most experienced workers only give up ten to fifteen percent.
And how is a worker’s skill level judged? Simply by how much they have already managed to steal over time. If you’ve stolen up to $10.000 total, you’re considered a beginner. Between $25.000 and $30.000 puts you at mid-level. And starting from $100.000, usually climbing toward a million or more, you’re considered a true professional in this dark little trade.
Knowledge in this underground world gets passed around among workers through tutorials. A tutorial itself becomes an item that gets bought, sold, and traded, almost like a piece of merchandise. Entire communities have formed just to gain access to these tutorials, treating them like valuable trade secrets. The writing style of these tutorials makes it fairly clear that AI tools were used to help put them together.
Broadly speaking, the same traffic-driving scheme used in ordinary, everyday phishing applies here too, just adapted for the world of crypto. A worker is essentially doing the same job as any online advertising specialist would. Their goal is simply to increase the number of people clicking through to the phishing page. That means hunting for users who are genuinely interested in Web3 and DeFi projects, people who hold crypto wallets and who are drawn to airdrops, token swaps, and exchanges.
This whole process involves demographic analysis and geolocation analysis, essentially the same ordinary targeting techniques that any advertiser in any industry would recognize. Workers also handle what they call “site design,” which really just means cloning the pages of existing, trusted projects. They’ll even use classic marketing techniques like A/B testing to see which fake page tricks more people.
Now let’s walk through a few high-profile examples of drainer thefts.
Arkham is a company that provides on-chain analytics, and it’s a genuinely popular tool for tracking transactions. Traders rely on it, for instance, to check an asset’s price and see exactly where it’s trading across different platforms.
Back in 2023, Arkham’s owners launched their own token along with an airdrop of coins to celebrate. But hackers saw an opportunity and created numerous fake profiles on X specifically to redirect users toward phishing pages containing a drainer. Remarkably, these bot accounts proved quite resilient and managed to avoid being banned for a long stretch of time. They mimicked Arkham’s real activity closely and spread malicious links far and wide.
A huge number of these fake sites were created during the campaign, and each one typically had a lifespan of just weeks, or a couple of months at most. Angel’s software allowed a hacker to copy landing pages quickly and place them on brand-new domains almost instantly. The whole process has been simplified so much that a worker only needs to type a few commands into a conversation with a Telegram bot in order to deploy an entirely new phishing site.
An even bigger impact can be achieved by a hacker hijacking the real, verified account of some authoritative company, or even a government organization.
And that’s what happened with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. On January 9, 2024, its account on X was compromised through a technique called SIM swapping, which basically means reissuing a SIM card tied to the phone number linked to that account. Officials, unfortunately forgetting about basic security hygiene, hadn’t even enabled multi-factor authentication on the account.
Lately, the SIM-swapping community and the drainer community have grown noticeably closer, almost like two neighboring criminal industries starting to collaborate. Swappers now routinely supply drainers with freshly hijacked accounts to use.
The hackers behind this attack posted that the SEC had officially approved investing in Bitcoin without needing to buy crypto directly on an exchange like Binance or Coinbase. This caused an immediate stir, because investors had been waiting a long time for exactly this kind of decision from the SEC, and many expected it to be announced any day. Following the fake post, the hackers urged people to claim an “official SEC airdrop” on a special site that contained a drainer.
That single fake post even caused a real spike in Bitcoin’s price. It rose by a full thousand dollars, just from a fake tweet.
Scammers, as it turns out, wouldn’t really be scammers if they didn’t also scam each other. At one point, the developer behind the Pink Drainer felt like he was getting close to being unmasked, so he decided to get out of the game entirely and cash out his loot. Here’s the catch, though. You can’t just sell crypto obtained through a scam outright. To actually withdraw the funds, a scammer first has to launder the money, or else an exchange might get suspicious and freeze it before it ever reaches a real bank account.
To avoid enabling things like terrorism financing, or simply to stay within the law, exchanges use a system of scoring and refuse to accept “dirty” crypto. This scoring system is called an AML score, short for anti-money-laundering. There are plenty of laundering methods out there, and while trying one of them, Pink Drainer’s own developer ended up getting scammed himself. He fell for one of the simplest kinds of fraud imaginable called address poisoning.
Here’s how it works. Hackers generate crypto addresses that closely resemble a victim’s real address, and then they send that victim a tiny amount of crypto, just enough so that the lookalike address shows up in the victim’s transaction history.
From the user’s side, here’s what it looks like in practice. You send, say, one hundred dollars to some other wallet, maybe an exchange you use regularly. Then, five or ten minutes later, you receive a few tiny transfers that appear to come from that very same wallet. But in reality, they only come from a similar-looking address, one that might share, say, an identical start and end to the real address, while the middle is different.
The hacker is betting that on your next transfer, you’ll simply scroll through your history, pick the most recent address you see, and send your money not back to yourself, but straight into the hacker’s pocket. And that’s exactly how Pink Drainer got caught in his own kind of trap. He picked what looked like the last transaction in his history and sent ten ETH, worth about $15.000 at the time, straight to some unknown “colleague” who was never really his colleague at all.
Because draining is so easy and profitable, this type of scam is not going away anytime soon. If anything, the ways malicious payloads get delivered will only keep getting more sophisticated from here. Drainers are increasingly setting their sights on younger blockchains too. On Ethereum-based networks, it’s steadily getting harder for hackers to operate, since protective measures keep appearing that they have to find new ways to bypass. On Solana, though, no such protections really exist yet, which makes it a much softer target. New kinds of drainers will keep emerging as well. Some scammers have already started building actual apps for Google Play and the App Store, moving beyond simple websites and into places millions of people trust by default. So stay alert out there, and think twice before you click any button, especially one promising you free money. If it feels too good to be true, in crypto more than almost anywhere else, it usually is.
If you’re interested in cryptocurrency forensics, we have a dedicated training called Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Forensics. You will get to dive into blockchain analysis and cryptocurrency investigations, learning the skills needed to become a cryptocurrency forensic analyst. You can buy the training separately or attend it live on September 15-17 at 3 PM UTC.
The post Cryptocurrency Drainers: How Hackers Steal Cryptocurrency first appeared on Hackers Arise.
We continue to share details on the malicious techniques and toolsets used by the ToddyCat APT group. In the first part of this report, we examined the group’s attacks aimed at stealing data from browsers, as well as from local and cloud email services. The methods used in that campaign indicated that ToddyCat was attempting to access corporate correspondence while evading monitoring tools. However, all of the group’s methods we described previously are effectively detected by EPP and EDR solutions.
The attackers continued their search for ways to bypass security solutions and developed a new tool to gain access to a victim’s cloud account via the Google API. Armed with this tool, the group automated all stages of the attack and managed to remain undetected by monitoring systems.
In this part of the report, we break down the mechanics of this new attack and analyze the tool that was used to automate it. We’ll also discuss how to detect and defend against this threat.
In this campaign, the attackers focused their attention on corporate email communications hosted on Gmail, targeting access compromise via APIs. Because the Google API relies on the OAuth 2.0 protocol for authorization, applications can use an OAuth token to access requested email resources. To acquire this token, the threat actors developed a tool called Umbrij and used it to connect to the browser’s management console in headless mode via a remote debugging port. Through a series of requests, they obtained an OAuth authorization code, which they subsequently exchanged for an access token to reach the target resources via the API. We have dubbed this technique Shadow Token via Remote Debug (STRD).
This attack is viable on Chromium-based browsers. If the user has not logged out of their Gmail account, the browser maintains an active session. The attackers exploit this: they launch the browser, connect via the remote debugging port to take control, and send a request to the Gmail service to grant access to the Google account resources within the context of the user’s saved session.
During our investigation of this attack, we discovered several versions of the Umbrij tool. These versions included a variety of helper functions designed for debugging, as well as for searching and selecting user accounts within the browser, among other tasks.
Kaspersky solutions detect this tool with the following verdicts: HEUR:Trojan-PSW.MSIL.Umbrij.gen, HEUR:Trojan.MSIL.Agent.gen, HEUR:Trojan-PSW.MSIL.Agent.gen.
The Umbrij tool was discovered during a proactive threat hunting operation: a scheduled task, KasperskyEndpointSecurityEDRAvp, was running on a user host, launching a digitally signed file. Kaspersky solutions do not create scheduled tasks with that name; the attackers were attempting to masquerade their malicious activity as a legitimate process.
The signed file then used the DLL sideloading technique to load the malicious tool.
Umbrij execution events within Kaspersky Managed Detection and Response
Throughout our observation period, we identified the following legitimate files vulnerable to the DLL sideloading technique that were used to launch Umbrij:
These files were used to load different versions of Umbrij; the same legitimate file could be leveraged to launch more than one variant. In total, we discovered three versions of Umbrij, which we refer to as a, b, and c for convenience.
The tool itself is a DLL written in .NET and obfuscated with ConfuserEx, an open-source obfuscator for .NET applications.
Example of an obfuscated code snippet
Umbrij is managed with the help of parameters passed through a command line at startup, although it is occasionally executed without any parameters. Below are examples of the command lines observed in attacks against users:
"c:\Users\Public\BDSubWiz.exe" -regex <name> -deepsearch c:\windows\vss\bds.exe
However, these are not the only parameters the tool can accept and process. During the analysis of its executable code, we discovered additional parameters that vary depending on the version of Umbrij. See the table below for the parameters and their descriptions.
| Version | Command | Description |
| a | -regex <string> | Used in conjunction with the -deepsearch parameter. Specifies a substring to search for within the user_name field of the user profile file, which typically contains the email address. The tool will utilize the user profile that matches this specified substring |
| a | -user <username> | Specifies the system username under which the tool will run |
| a | -runas-currentuser | Configures Umbrij to run within the execution context of the current user |
| a | -deepsearch | Enforces additional checks on the user_name field in the user profile: verifying that it is not empty and that it contains the substring specified in the -regex parameter |
| a, b, c | -path <path> | Specifies the full path to the directory containing the browser’s executable file |
| a, b, c | -browser <both|msedge|chrome> | Specifies which browser the tool should target: Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, or both |
| a, b, c | -debugport <port> | Specifies the remote debugging port number |
| a, b, c | -sync | When this parameter is specified in the URL, the value 1095133494869 replaces 279448736670 in the permission request |
| b | -domainAd | Specifies the domain name if the user account is a domain account |
| b | -savepdf | Instructs Umbrij to save a screenshot of the user profile as a PDF file |
| c | -lport | Same as debugport |
At startup, the tool evaluates several prerequisites required to carry out the attack and performs preparatory actions to subsequently compromise the Gmail account.
First, Umbrij verifies the availability of the port that will be designated for browser debugging. To accomplish this, the tool utilizes a function named ChekPortAvailable() (original spelling retained), which accepts the target port number as a parameter. It then retrieves information about active connections on the host using the .NET GetActiveTcpConnections() function from the System.Net.NetworkInformation namespace. The tool iterates through each connection in a loop, comparing the port number to the one it is checking.
The ChekPortAvailable function used to verify open ports
After this, the tool retrieves the user context. It searches the system for the explorer.exe process and duplicates its token, retaining all of its privileges (T1134.003 Access Token Manipulation: Make and Impersonate Token). This is the exact same mechanism used by another tool in the group’s arsenal, TomBerBil, which we covered previously.
The ImpersonateWithProcess function used to retrieve user context
By default, Umbrij duplicates the token of the first explorer.exe process it encounters. If multiple users are logged in to the system, the -user <username> switch can be used to specify the name of the target user whose token to duplicate. If the -runas-currentuser switch is specified, the tool will execute within the context of the current user without duplicating any tokens.
Next, Umbrij constructs the path to the browser application folder within the user’s local application data repository. To do this, it uses the Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData command to retrieve the repository directory from the environment variable and appends the directory of the target browser. The tool then searches for the Local State file in the following folders:
See below for an example of the Local State file structure.
Structure of the Local State JSON file
Within this file, the tool searches for the info_cache array, which stores information about browser user profiles. Umbrij enumerates all user profiles and looks for those containing a user_name field that includes an email address. The presence of an email address indicates that the user is authenticated to a Google service. While the tool can interact with every profile it finds, if the -regex <string> parameter is passed through a command line, it searches for the specified substring within the email addresses being enumerated and proceeds exclusively with those matches.
Next, Umbrij creates the following directories for Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge, respectively:
The tool copies the following user files and folders of each target user profile into these directories:
If these files are locked by other processes, the tool includes a dedicated function to force-copy them.
The ForceCopyFolder function used to copy files locked by other processes
As the next step, the tool searches the “Program Files” and “Program Files (x86)” directories for the browser installation folder. Once it locates the executable file and successfully copies all required files, it is ready to proceed with acquiring the authorization code.
In the next phase of execution, Umbrij launches Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, or both browsers sequentially, depending on the parameters passed in the command line. It then passes arguments to the browser based on the following template:
"\"{1}\" --user-data-dir=\"{0}\" --remote-debugging-port={2} --profile-directory=\"Default\" --headless https://www.google.com/"It populates the template with the following values:
The table below describes the parameters used in this browser launch template:
| Parameter | Description |
| –user-data-dir | Specifies the path to the root directory that will store the shared browser data and user profiles |
| –remote-debugging-port | Opens a port for remote browser debugging over the DevTools protocol. This switch is commonly used for automated testing with frameworks like Selenium |
| –profile-directory | Specifies the name of the specific profile folder within the user-data-dir |
| –headless | Launches the browser in headless mode, that is, without a graphical user interface |
The browser process runs in headless mode while utilizing the copied user profile. Consequently, all active user cookies are applied, which means sites with saved credentials will skip authentication prompts. Furthermore, the browser will log history to a new folder, keeping it completely hidden from the user’s primary account view.
Through this method, the threat actors gain access to the user’s authenticated sessions — specifically their Google account — along with the ability to erase any trace of their activity within the browser.
Code snippet showing Umbrij connecting to the browser via the debugging port
Next, the tool uses the Puppeteer Sharp library, a .NET version of Puppeteer, to connect to the remote debugging port. Puppeteer provides a high-level API to control Chrome or Chromium browsers over the DevTools protocol. Its primary use is for automated testing.
The Puppeteer module GitHub page
If the connection to the remote debugging port is successful, Umbrij sends a GET request to direct the browser to the following URL:
https[:]//accounts[.]google[.]com/o/oauth2/v2/auth/identifier?response_type=code&client_id=279448736670.apps.googleusercontent.com&redirect_uri=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost&scope=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fcalendar%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fcalendar.readonly%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fm8%2Ffeeds%2F%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fm8%2Ffeeds%2F%20https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2F%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fgmail.insert%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fgmail.labels%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fdrive%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fadmin.directory.user%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Ftasks%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fadmin.directory.group.readonly%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fapps.groups.migration%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fuserinfo.email%20https%3A%2F%2Fwww.googleapis.com%2Fauth%2Fuserinfo.profile&flowName=GeneralOAuthFlow
The value specified in the client_id field belongs to Google Workspace Migration for Microsoft Outlook (GWMMO). This is Google’s official tool for importing email, calendar events, and contacts from Microsoft Exchange accounts or local PST files into a Google Workspace account.
Umbrij also includes the ability to switch the client_id value from 279448736670 to 1095133494869 by using the -sync parameter. This second identifier belongs to another application: Google Workspace Sync for Microsoft Outlook (GWSMO), which allows users to sync email, calendars, and other data from the cloud account directly into Microsoft Outlook.
Code snippet where the client_id replacement occurs
The remaining parameters used in the request differ from those typically utilized by the legitimate applications. See the table below for a comparison of these parameters:
| GET request parameter | URL used by Umbrij | Original URL |
| flowName=GeneralOAuthFlow | Present | Absent |
| code_challenge (PKCE) | Absent | Present (method=S256) |
| state | Absent | Present |
| login_hint | Absent | Present |
| redirect_uri | http://localhost | http://localhost:61619/callback |
As seen from the list above, Umbrij omits several parameters characteristic of the legitimate applications. For instance, Umbrij drops the code_challenge parameter, normally used for data protection when retrieving an authorization code. Additionally, the tool modifies the redirection address: while the legitimate application specifies a dedicated port and a callback path, the tool simply points to localhost.
The authorization code request specifies the set of permissions for Google services required by the application. This list also differs significantly between requests issued by the legitimate application and those generated by Umbrij. The table below details the variations in the requested scopes:
| Service parameter | URL used by Umbrij | Original URL |
| https://www.google.com/m8/feeds/ | Present (specified twice) | Absent |
| https://www.googleapis.com/auth/contacts | Absent | Present |
| https://www.googleapis.com/auth/admin.directory.resource.calendar.readonly | Absent | Present |
| https://www.googleapis.com/auth/peopleapi.readonly | Absent | Present |
After the browser navigates to the URL provided by Umbrij, the Google account selection page opens.
Account selection
Because the attackers copied the victim’s profile folder and are operating within their specific environment, the account selection options will include the currently signed-in user’s authenticated session. Umbrij identifies the corresponding element within the page’s HTML source code.
Searching for HTML code elements on the page
The tool uses JavaScript to emulate a mouse click on the elements, allowing it to proceed to the next step.
Simulating a mouse click on a page element
The subsequent step opens a page displaying the list of requested permissions.
Confirming the list of requested access permissions
As shown in the screenshot, Umbrij requests full access to email, cloud storage, and contacts. Just like in the previous step, it uses JavaScript to click the “Allow” button, which completes the authentication process.
The browser is then redirected to the local address that was specified in the redirect_uri parameter of the initial request. The tool intentionally omits a port and a path to a specific page in the redirect_uri because the true objective of this action is simply to capture the code parameter from the context of the GET request. This parameter contains the OAuth authorization code. To retrieve it, Umbrij extracts the substring located between the code= and &scope parameters.
Extracting the authorization code from the GET request
Umbrij, like most other tools in ToddyCat’s arsenal, logs its actions in detail and saves them to a file. It also saves the retrieved authorization code to this log file, which the operator subsequently exfiltrates from the compromised host.
Below is an example of a log file generated by version a of the tool.
------------------------------ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [*] switch to sync mode. [!] port 11111 is available! [*] Impersonate <username> success! [*] browser switch to chrome . Parsing C:\Users\<username>\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data\Local State ... [*] detected profile: Profile 4 ==> <email>@gmail.com [*] ready auth for <email>@gmail.com. [*] Browser Exe path C:\Program Files\Google\Chrome\Application\chrome.exe. [!] CreateProcessAsUserW... [*] Browser created with pid 3108 [???] <email>@gmail.com [pup] mail : <email>@gmail.com [pup] account choice click ! [pup] Allow click ! [<email>@gmail.com] 4%2F0AcvDMrDtzQaC-TT8<hash>uMhg [*] RevertToSelf succeed! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The log indicates that the sync mode is selected (meaning the Google Workspace Sync for Microsoft Outlook application is used) and the debugging port is set to 11111. After locating the user profile and copying its folder, Umbrij launches Google Chrome. After this, the tool emulates clicks on the appropriate buttons to confirm permissions, ultimately outputting the final result of the operation: the stolen OAuth authorization code.
Since all requests occur within a background browser instance, the tool includes a feature to generate a PDF snapshot of the web page where the permission confirmation process halted in the event of an error.
Saving a web page as a PDF file in the case of an error
Additionally, the tool can create a PDF file for the user profile in Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge by navigating to the following internal addresses:
Example contents of a generated PDF file
The acquired authorization code is then exchanged for an OAuth access token. The threat actors use that token to connect to the Gmail account through the API, thus compromising corporate email communications. The diagram below illustrates the complete attack workflow.
Umbrij workflow diagram
First and foremost, defenders should monitor library loading events (DLL loads) associated with the known applications vulnerable to DLL sideloading that are exploited by this tool: Bitdefender ConnectAgent, Visual Studio, and Google Desktop Search.
title: Possible Dll Hijacking Of Microsoft VisualStudio QualityTools dll
id: 246f1409-2993-46f6-9b77-e447a327df5d
status: experimental
description: Detects possible DLL hijacking of Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.VideoRecorderEngine.dll by looking for suspicious image loads, loading this DLL from unexpected locations
author: kaspersky
date: 2025-08-11
tags:
- attack.defense-evasion
- attack.t1574.001
logsource:
product: windows
category: image_load
detection:
selection:
ImageLoaded|endswith: 'Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.VideoRecorderEngine.dll'
filter:
ImageLoaded|contains: '\IDE\Extensions\TestPlatform\Extensions\'
condition: selection
falsepositives: Legitimate activity
level: high
Launching a browser with a remote debugging port specified is a highly unusual event on standard user hosts that are not running web application development or automated testing workflows. Consequently, monitoring for these specific command-line arguments can serve as a reliable indicator of this attack.
title: Launching Chrome With Debug Parameters
id: f072803f-3cf4-4537-82e6-e8b3a201d99f
status: stable
description: Detects the execution of Chromium based browsers launched with incognito mode and remote debugging enabled
author: kaspersky
date: 2025-12-11
tags:
- attack.lateral_movement
- attack.defense_evasion
- attack.t1550.001
logsource:
category: process_creation
product: windows
detection:
selection:
CommandLine|contains|all:
- '--remote-debugging-port'
- '--headless'
condition: selection
falsepositives: Opening a browser as part of web application testing. Legitimate activity
level: high
To review the authorization codes granted to applications, navigate to the Google Account settings under the Third-party apps & services section, or access the following URL directly:
https://myaccount.google.com/connections
This page displays a comprehensive list of applications and services that currently have permission to access the account.
List of apps connected to the Google account
If the Google Workspace Migration for Microsoft Outlook or Google Workspace Sync for Microsoft Outlook applications appear in this list but are not actually used within your organization, revoke their access immediately. This will invalidate all potentially compromised OAuth tokens associated with them.
Launching a browser with a remote debugging port enabled is inherently suspicious for users who do not engage in web development. For these employees, you can completely disable Chromium-based browser developer tools.
This can be achieved by configuring the DeveloperToolsAvailability policy. To enforce this, set the registry value to 0x00000002 for the following Windows Registry key and restart the browser:
HKLM\Software\Policies\Google\Chrome\DeveloperToolsAvailability
To verify that the policy has been successfully applied, navigate to the browser’s internal policies page at chrome://policy:
Note that while disabling developer tools can successfully disrupt the automated retrieval of the OAuth authorization code, it will not help, however, if the adversary decides to leverage the browser’s graphical user interface (GUI) — though this manual approach is significantly less likely due to the friction it introduces for the attackers. Therefore, as a risk mitigation measure, users should be instructed to explicitly log out of their Google accounts as soon as their sessions are complete.
The ToddyCat APT group continues to search for ways of compromising corporate email communications. We have been tracking the group for a long time and we have observed continuous updates to its arsenal in an attempt to bypass security defenses, even as their core techniques remain consistent. For instance, the group has long relied on DLL sideloading to stealthily drop malicious utilities and scheduled tasks. However, their new tool, Umbrij, automates the attackers’ attempts to gain access to organizational email accounts. This automation not only helps increase the scale and frequency of their attacks but also demonstrates ToddyCat’s strong motivation and advanced technical skills.
To defend against these threats, corporate security teams must monitor for suspicious library loading events initiated by legitimate files, watch for instances of browsers launching in developer mode, and conduct regular audits of third-party applications and services with access permissions to Google accounts. Furthermore, deploying a robust, comprehensive security solution — such as Kaspersky Next — is critical to detect this type of malicious host-based activity in a timely manner.
Additional information about this threat is available to customers of the Kaspersky Threat Intelligence Reporting service. Contact: intelreports@kaspersky.com.
Malicious files
1AB58838E5790EFB22F2D35AB98C0B7D Umbrij ver. a
A7D7D6C4C3F227F7117261C63B9E23A9 Umbrij ver. a
3D3A621F852C42D97FD7260681E42508 Umbrij ver. a
3432DD9AC0DF80EF86EB80BD080F839B Umbrij ver. a
22AAEB4946BA6D2F2E27FEB7DBB295DE Umbrij ver. b
F61FBFB7AA1CD5DC8F70B055B51563E2 Umbrij ver. b
F169D6D172DFB775895A5E2B1540C854 Umbrij ver. c
Legitimate files leveraged for DLL sideloading
| MD5 | File name | Name of DLL being loaded |
| 9F5F2F0FB0A7F5AA9F16B9A7B6DAD89F | GoogleDesktop.exe | GoogleServices.DLL |
| 28CB7B261F4EB97E8A4B3B0D32F8DEF1 | BDSubWiz.exe | log.dll |
| BAE82A15D1DBFB024617B9B56A8E5F66 | VSTestVideoRecorder.exe | Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.VideoRecorderEngine.dll |
Paths to DLL sideloading files
| Path to the file that loads the DLL | Path to the DLL being loaded |
| C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\Temp\BDS.exe | C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\Temp\log.dll |
| C:\Users\Public\BDS.exe | C:\Users\Public\log.dll |
| c:\users\public\bdsubwiz.exe | C:\Users\Public\log.dll |
| C:\Windows\Temp\BDS.exe | C:\Windows\Temp\log.dll |
| c:\windows\vss\bds.exe | C:\Windows\Vss\log.dll |
| c:\windows\temp\GoogleDesktop.exe | c:\windows\temp\GoogleServices.DLL |
| c:\windows\temp\VSTestVideoRecorder.exe | c:\windows\temp\Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.VideoRecorderEngine.dll |
