Blog
/
No items found.
/
December 9, 2024
No items found.

Darktrace’s view on Operation Lunar Peek: Exploitation of Palo Alto firewall devices (CVE 2024-2012 and 2024-9474)

Default blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog imageDefault blog image
09
Dec 2024
Darktrace’s Threat Research team investigated a major campaign exploiting vulnerabilities in Palo Alto firewall devices (CVE 2024-2012 and 2024-9474). Learn about the spike in post-exploitation activities and understand the need for anomaly-based detection to stay ahead of evolving threats.

Introduction: Spike in exploitation and post-exploitation activity affecting Palo Alto firewall devices

As the first line of defense for many organizations, perimeter devices such as firewalls are frequently targeted by threat actors. If compromised, these devices can serve as the initial point of entry to the network, providing access to vulnerable internal resources. This pattern of malicious behavior has become readily apparent within the Darktrace customer base. In 2024, Darktrace Threat Research analysts identified and investigated at least two major campaigns targeting internet-exposed perimeter devices. These included the exploitation of PAN-OS firewall exploitation via CVE 2024-3400 and FortiManager appliances via CVE 2024-47575.

More recently, at the end of November, Darktrace analysts observed a spike in exploitation and post-exploitation activity affecting, once again, Palo Alto firewall devices in the days following the disclosure of the CVE 2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474 vulnerabilities.

Threat Research analysts had already been investigating potential exploitation of the firewalls’ management interface after Palo Alto published a security advisory (PAN-SA-2024-0015) on November 8. Subsequent analysis of data from Darktrace’s Security Operations Center (SOC) and external research uncovered multiple cases of Palo Alto firewalls being targeted via the likely exploitation of these vulnerabilities since November 13, through the end of the month. Although this spike in anomalous behavior may not be attributable to a single malicious actor, Darktrace Threat Research identified a clear increase in PAN-OS exploitation across the customer base by threat actors likely utilizing the recently disclosed vulnerabilities, resulting in broad patterns of post-exploitation activity.

How did exploitation occur?

CVE 2024-0012 is an authentication bypass vulnerability affecting unpatched versions of Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewalls. The vulnerability resides in the management interface application on the firewalls specifically, which is written in PHP. When attempting to access highly privileged scripts, users are typically redirected to a login page. However, this can be bypassed by supplying an HTTP request where a Palo Alto related authentication header can be set to “off”.  Users can supply this header value to the Nginx reverse proxy server fronting the application which will then send it without any prior processing [1].

CVE-2024-9474 is a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows a PAN-OS administrator with access to the management web interface to execute root-level commands, granting full control over the affected device [2]. When combined, these vulnerabilities enable unauthenticated adversaries to execute arbitrary commands on the firewall with root privileges.

Post-Exploitation Patterns of Activity

Darktrace Threat Research analysts examined potential indicators of PAN-OS software exploitation via CVE 2024-0012 and CVE-2024-9474 during November 2024. The investigation identified three main groupings of post-exploitation activity:

  1. Exploit validation and initial payload retrieval
  2. Command and control (C2) connectivity, potentially featuring further binary downloads
  3. Potential reconnaissance and cryptomining activity

Exploit Validation

Across multiple investigated customers, Darktrace analysts identified likely vulnerable PAN-OS devices conducting external network connectivity to bin services. Specifically, several hosts performed DNS queries for, and HTTP requests to Out-of-Band Application Security Testing (OAST) domains, such as csv2im6eq58ujueonqs0iyq7dqpak311i.oast[.]pro. These endpoints are commonly used by network administrators to harden defenses, but they are increasingly used by threat actors to verify successful exploitation of targeted devices and assess their potential for further compromise. Although connectivity involving OAST domains were prevalent across investigated incidents, this activity was not necessarily the first indicator observed. In some cases, device behavior involving OAST domains also occurred shortly after an initial payload was downloaded.

Darktrace model alert logs detailing the HTTP request to an OAST domain immediately following PAN-OS device compromise.
Figure 1: Darktrace model alert logs detailing the HTTP request to an OAST domain immediately following PAN-OS device compromise.

Initial Payload Retrieval

Following successful exploitation, affected devices commonly performed behaviors indicative of initial payload download, likely in response to incoming remote command execution. Typically, the affected PAN-OS host would utilize the command line utilities curl and Wget, seen via use of user agents curl/7.61.1 and Wget/1.19.5 (linux-gnu), respectively.

In some cases, the use of these command line utilities by the infected devices was considered new behavior. Given the nature of the user agents, interaction with the host shell suggests remote command execution to achieve the outgoing payload requests.

While additional binaries and scripts were retrieved in later stages of the post-exploitation activity in some cases, this set of behaviors and payloads likely represent initial persistence and execution mechanisms that will enable additional functionality later in the kill chain. During the investigation, Darktrace analysts noted the prevalence of shell script payload requests. Devices analyzed would frequently make HTTP requests over the usual destination port 80 using the command line URL utility (curl), as seen in the user-agent field.

The observed URIs often featured requests for text files, such as “1.txt”, or shell scripts such as “y.sh”. Although packet capture (PCAP) samples were unavailable for review, external researchers have noted that the IP address hosting such “1.txt” files (46.8.226[.]75) serves malicious PHP payloads. When examining the contents of the “y.sh” shell script, Darktrace analysts noticed the execution of bash commands to upload a PHP-written web shell on the affected server.

PCAP showing the client request and server response associated with the download of the y.sh script from 45.76.141[.]166. The body content of the HTTP response highlights a shebang command to run subsequent code as bash script. The content is base64 encoded and details PHP script for what appears to be a webshell that will likely be written to the firewall device.
Figure 2: PCAP showing the client request and server response associated with the download of the y.sh script from 45.76.141[.]166. The body content of the HTTP response highlights a shebang command to run subsequent code as bash script. The content is base64 encoded and details PHP script for what appears to be a webshell that will likely be written to the firewall device.

While not all investigated cases saw initial shell script retrieval, affected systems would commonly make an external HTTP connection, almost always via Wget, for the Executable and Linkable Format (ELF) file “/palofd” from the rare external IP  38.180.147[.]18.

Such requests were frequently made without prior hostname lookups, suggesting that the process or script initiating the requests already contained the external IP address. Analysts noticed a consistent SHA1 hash present for all identified instances of “/palofd” downloads (90f6890fa94b25fbf4d5c49f1ea354a023e06510). Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) vendors have associated this hash sample with Spectre RAT, a remote access trojan with capabilities including remote command execution, payload delivery, process manipulation, file transfers, and data theft [3][4].

Figure 3: Advanced Search log metrics highlighting details of the “/palofd” file download over HTTP.

Several targeted customer devices were observed initiating TLS/SSL connections to rare external IPs with self-signed TLS certificates following exploitation. Model data from across the Darktrace fleet indicated some overlap in JA3 fingerprints utilized by affected PAN-OS devices engaging in the suspicious TLS activity. Although JA3 hashes alone cannot be used for process attribution, this evidence suggests some correlation of source process across instances of PAN-OS exploitation.

These TLS/SSL sessions were typically established without the specification of a Server Name Indication (SNI) within the TLS extensions. The SNI extension prevents servers from supplying an incorrect certificate to the requesting client when multiple sites are hosted on the same IP. SSL connectivity without SNI specification suggests a potentially malicious running process as most software establishing TLS sessions typically supply this information during the handshake. Although the encrypted nature of the connection prevented further analysis of the payload packets, external sources note that JavaScript content is transmitted during these sessions, serving as initial payloads for the Sliver C2 platform using Wget [5].

C2 Communication and Additional Payloads

Following validation and preliminary post-compromise actions, examined hosts would commonly initiate varying forms of C2 connectivity. During this time, devices were frequently detected making further payload downloads, likely in response to directives set within C2 communications.

Palo Alto firewalls likely exploited via the newly disclosed CVEs would commonly utilize the Sliver C2 platform for external communication. Sliver’s functionality allows for different styles and formatting for communication. An open-source alternative to Cobalt Strike, this framework has been increasingly popular among threat actors, enabling the generation of dynamic payloads (“slivers”) for multiple platforms, including Windows, MacOS, Linux.

These payloads allow operators to establish persistence, spawn new shells, and exfiltrate data. URI patterns and PCAPs analysis yielded evidence of both English word type encoding within Sliver and Gzip formatting.

For example, multiple devices contacted the Sliver-linked IP address 77.221.158[.]154 using HTTP to retrieve Gzip files. The URIs present for these requests follow known Sliver Gzip formatted communication patterns [6]. Investigations yielded evidence of both English word encoding within Sliver, identified through PCAP analysis, and Gzip formatting.

Sample of URIs observed in Advanced Searchhighlighting HTTP requests to 77.221.158[.]154 for Gzip content suggest of Sliver communication.
Figure 4: Sample of URIs observed in Advanced Searchhighlighting HTTP requests to 77.221.158[.]154 for Gzip content suggest of Sliver communication.
PCAP showing English word encoding for Sliver communication observed during post-exploitation C2 activity.
Figure 5: PCAP showing English word encoding for Sliver communication observed during post-exploitation C2 activity.

External connectivity during this phase also featured TCP connection attempts over uncommon ports for common application protocols. For both Sliver and non-Sliver related IP addresses, devices utilized destination ports such as 8089, 3939, 8880, 8084, and 9999 for the HTTP protocol. The use of uncommon destination ports may represent attempts to avoid detection of connectivity to rare external endpoints. Moreover, some external beaconing within included URIs referencing the likely IP of the affected device. Such behavior can suggest the registration of compromised devices with command servers.

Targeted devices also proceeded to download additional payloads from rare external endpoints as beaconing/C2 activity was ongoing. For example, the newly registered domain repositorylinux[.]org (IP: 103.217.145[.]112) received numerous HTTP GET requests from investigated devices throughout the investigation period for script files including “linux.sh” and “cron.sh”. Young domains, especially those that present as similar to known code repositories, tend to host harmful content. Packet captures of the cron.sh file reveal commands within the HTTP body content involving crontab operations, likely to schedule future downloads. Some hosts that engaged in connectivity to the fake repository domain were later seen conducting crypto-mining connections, potentially highlighting the download of miner applications from the domain.

Additional payloads observed during this time largely featured variations of shell scripts, PHP content, and/or executables. Typically, shell scripts direct the device to retrieve additional content from external servers or repositories or contain potential configuration details for subsequent binaries to run on the device. For example, the “service.sh” retrieves a tar-compressed archive, a configuration JSON file as well as a file with the name “solr” from GitHub, potentially associated with the Apache Solr tool used for enterprise search. These could be used for further enumeration of the host and/or the network environment. PHP scripts observed may involve similar web shell functionality and were retrieved from both rare external IPs identified as well by external researchers [7]. Darktrace also detected the download of octet-stream data occurring mid-compromise from an Amazon Web Services (AWS) S3 bucket. Although no outside research confirmed the functionality, additional executable downloads for files such as “/initd”(IP: 178.215.224[.]246) and “/x6” (IP: 223.165.4[.]175) may relate to tool ingress, further Trojan/backdoor functionality, or cryptocurrency mining.

Figure 7: PCAP specifying the HTTP response headers and body content for the service.sh file request. The body content shown includes variable declarations for URLs that will eventually be called by the device shell via bash command.

Reconnaissance and Cryptomining

Darktrace analysts also noticed additional elements of kill chain operations from affected devices after periods of initial exploit activity. Several devices initiated TCP connections to endpoints affiliated with cryptomining pools such as us[.]zephyr[.]herominers[.]com and  xmrig[.]com. Connectivity to these domains indicates likely successful installation of mining software during earlier stages of post-compromise activity. In a small number of instances, Darktrace observed reconnaissance and lateral movement within the time range of PAN-OS exploitation. Firewalls conducted large numbers of internal connectivity attempts across several critical ports related to privileged protocols, including SMB and SSH. Darktrace detected anonymous NTLM login attempts and new usage of potential PAN-related credentials. These behaviors likely constitute attempts at lateral movement to adjacent devices to further extend network compromise impact.

Model alert connection logs detailing the uncommon failed NTLM logins using an anonymous user account following PAN-OS exploitation.
Figure 8: Model alert connection logs detailing the uncommon failed NTLM logins using an anonymous user account following PAN-OS exploitation.

Conclusion

Darktrace Threat Research and SOC analysts increasingly detect spikes in malicious activity on internet-facing devices in the days following the publication of new vulnerabilities. The latest iteration of this trend highlighted how threat actors quickly exploited Palo Alto firewall using authentication bypass and remote command execution vulnerabilities to enable device compromise. A review of the post-exploitation activity during these events reveals consistent patterns of perimeter device exploitation, but also some distinct variations.

Prior campaigns targeting perimeter devices featured activity largely confined to the exfiltration of configuration data and some initial payload retrieval. Within the current campaign, analysts identified a broader scope post-compromise activity consisting not only of payloads downloads but also extensive C2 activity, reconnaissance, and coin mining operations. While the use of command line tools like curl featured prominently in prior investigations, devices were seen retrieving a generally wider array of payloads during the latest round of activity. The use of the Sliver C2 platform further differentiates the latest round of PAN-OS compromises, with evidence of Sliver activity in about half of the investigated cases.

Several of the endpoints contacted by the infected firewall devices did not have any OSINT associated with them at the time of the attack. However, these indicators were noted as unusual for the devices according to Darktrace based on normal network traffic patterns. This reality further highlights the need for anomaly-based detection that does not rely necessarily on known indicators of compromise (IoCs) associated with CVE exploitation for detection. Darktrace’s experience in 2024 of multiple rounds of perimeter device exploitation may foreshadow future increases in these types of comprise operations.  

Credit to Adam Potter (Senior Cyber Analyst), Alexandra Sentenac (Senior Cyber Analyst), Emma Foulger (Principal Cyber Analyst) and the Darktrace Threat Research team.

References

[1]: https://labs.watchtowr.com/pots-and-pans-aka-an-sslvpn-palo-alto-pan-os-cve-2024-0012-and-cve-2024-9474/

[2]: https://security.paloaltonetworks.com/CVE-2024-9474

[3]: https://threatfox.abuse[.]ch/ioc/1346254/

[4]:https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/4911396d80baff80826b96d6ea7e54758847c93fdbcd3b86b00946cfd7d1145b/detection

[5]: https://arcticwolf.com/resources/blog/arctic-wolf-observes-threat-campaign-targeting-palo-alto-networks-firewall-devices/

[6] https://www.immersivelabs.com/blog/detecting-and-decrypting-sliver-c2-a-threat-hunters-guide

[7] https://arcticwolf.com/resources/blog/arctic-wolf-observes-threat-campaign-targeting-palo-alto-networks-firewall-devices/

Appendices

Darktrace Model Alerts

Anomalous Connection / Anomalous SSL without SNI to New External

Anomalous Connection / Application Protocol on Uncommon Port  

Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint

Anomalous Connection / Multiple HTTP POSTs to Rare Hostname

Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname

Anomalous Connection / Posting HTTP to IP Without Hostname

Anomalous Connection / Rare External SSL Self-Signed

Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location

Anomalous File / Incoming ELF File

Anomalous File / Mismatched MIME Type From Rare Endpoint

Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations

Anomalous File / New User Agent Followed By Numeric File Download

Anomalous File / Script from Rare External Location

Anomalous File / Zip or Gzip from Rare External Location

Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server

Compromise / Agent Beacon (Long Period)

Compromise / Agent Beacon (Medium Period)

Compromise / Agent Beacon to New Endpoint

Compromise / Beacon for 4 Days

Compromise / Beacon to Young Endpoint

Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare

Compromise / High Priority Tunnelling to Bin Services

Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score

Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to New IP

Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination

Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections

Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Successful Connections

Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare

Compromise / SSL Beaconing to Rare Destination

Compromise / Suspicious Beaconing Behavior

Compromise / Suspicious File and C2

Compromise / Suspicious HTTP and Anomalous Activity

Compromise / Suspicious TLS Beaconing To Rare External

Compromise / Sustained SSL or HTTP Increase

Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint

Device / Initial Attack Chain Activity

Device / New User Agent

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Tactic – Technique

INITIAL ACCESS – Exploit Public-Facing Application

RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT – Malware

EXECUTION – Scheduled Task/Job (Cron)

EXECUTION – Unix Shell

PERSISTENCE – Web Shell

DEFENSE EVASION – Masquerading (Masquerade File Type)

DEFENSE EVASION - Deobfuscate/Decode Files or Information

CREDENTIAL ACCESS – Brute Force

DISCOVERY – Remote System Discovery

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Ingress Tool Transfer

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Application Layer Protocol (Web Protocols)

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Encrypted Channel

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Non-Standard Port

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Data Obfuscation

IMPACT – Resource Hijacking (Compute)

List of IoCs

IoC         –          Type         –        Description

  • sys.traceroute[.]vip     – Hostname - C2 Endpoint
  • 77.221.158[.]154     – IP - C2 Endpoint
  • 185.174.137[.]26     – IP - C2 Endpoint
  • 93.113.25[.]46     – IP - C2 Endpoint
  • 104.131.69[.]106     – IP - C2 Endpoint
  • 95.164.5[.]41     – IP - C2 Endpoint
  • bristol-beacon-assets.s3.amazonaws[.]com     – Hostname - Payload Server
  • img.dxyjg[.]com     – Hostname - Payload Server
  • 38.180.147[.]18     – IP - Payload Server
  • 143.198.1[.]178     – IP - Payload Server
  • 185.208.156[.]46     – IP - Payload Server
  • 185.196.9[.]154     – IP - Payload Server
  • 46.8.226[.]75     – IP - Payload Server
  • 223.165.4[.]175     – IP - Payload Server
  • 188.166.244[.]81     – IP - Payload Server
  • bristol-beaconassets.s3[.]amazonaws[.]com/Y5bHaYxvd84sw     – URL - Payload
  • img[.]dxyjg[.]com/KjQfcPNzMrgV     – URL - Payload
  • 38.180.147[.]18/palofd     – URL - Payload
  • 90f6890fa94b25fbf4d5c49f1ea354a023e06510     – SHA1 - Associated to file /palofd
  • 143.198.1[.]178/7Z0THCJ     – URL - Payload
  • 8d82ccdb21425cf27b5feb47d9b7fb0c0454a9ca     – SHA1 - Associated to file /7Z0THCJ
  • fefd0f93dcd6215d9b8c80606327f5d3a8c89712     – SHA1 - Associated to file /7Z0THCJ
  • e5464f14556f6e1dd88b11d6b212999dd9aee1b1     – SHA1 - Associated to file /7Z0THCJ
  • 143.198.1[.]178/o4VWvQ5pxICPm     – URL - Payload
  • 185.208.156[.]46/lUuL095knXd62DdR6umDig     – URL - Payload
  • 185.196.9[.]154/ykKDzZ5o0AUSfkrzU5BY4w     – URL - Payload
  • 46.8.226[.]75/1.txt     – URL - Payload
  • 223.165.4[.]175/x6     – URL - Payload
  • 45.76.141[.]166/y.sh     – URL - Payload
  • repositorylinux[.]org/linux.sh     – URL - Payload
  • repositorylinux[.]org/cron.sh     – URL - Payload

‍

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
Adam Potter
Senior Cyber Analyst
Watch the NIS2 Webinar
Book a 1-1 meeting with one of our experts
Get in touch
Share this article
Trending blogs
1
Darktrace is Positioned as a Leader in the IDC MarketScape: Worldwide Network Detection and Response 2024 Vendor Assessment
Dec 9, 2024
2
Cloud Security: Addressing Common CISO Challenges with Advanced Solutions
Nov 28, 2024
3
Preparing for 2025: Darktrace's Top 10 AI and Cybersecurity Predictions
Nov 3, 2024
4
Navigating Buying and Adoption Journeys for AI Cybersecurity Tools
Oct 15, 2024
5
How Darktrace won an email security trial by learning the business, not the breach
Oct 9, 2024

More in this series

No items found.

Blog

/

December 17, 2024

/

Inside the SOC

Cleo File Transfer Vulnerability: Patch Pitfalls and Darktrace’s Detection of Post-Exploitation Activities

Default blog imageDefault blog image

File transfer applications: A target for ransomware

File transfer applications have been a consistent target, particularly for ransomware groups, in recent years because they are key parts of business operations and have trusted access across different parts of an organization that include potentially confidential and personal information about an organization and its employees.

Recent targets of ransomware criminals includes applications like Acellion, Moveit, and GoAnywhere [1]. This seems to have been the case for Cleo’s managed file transfer (MFT) software solutions and the vulnerability CVE-2024-50623.

Threat overview: Understanding Cleo file transfer vulnerability

This vulnerability was believed to have been patched with the release of version 5.8.0.21 in late October 2024. However, open-source intelligence (OSINT) reported that the Clop ransomware group had managed to bypass the initial patch in late November, leading to the successful exploitation of the previously patched CVE.

In the last few days Cleo has published a new vulnerability, CVE-2024-55956, which is not a patch bypass of the CVE-2024-50623 but rather another vulnerability. This is also an unauthenticated file write vulnerability but while CVE-2024-50623 allows for both reading and writing arbitrary files, the CVE-2024-55956 only allows for writing arbitrary files and was addressed in version 5.8.0.24 [2].

Darktrace Threat Research analysts have already started investigating potential signs of devices running the Cleo software with network traffic supporting this initial hypothesis.

Comparison of CVE-2024-50623 and CVE-2024-55956

While CVE-2024-50623 was initially listed as a cross-site scripting issue, it was updated on December 10 to reflect unrestricted file upload and download. This vulnerability could lead to remote code execution (RCE) in versions of Cleo’s Harmony, VLTrader, and LexiCom products prior to 5.8.0.24. Attackers could leverage the fact that files are placed in the "autorun" sub-directory within the installation folder and are immediately read, interpreted, and evaluated by the susceptible software [3].

CVE-2024-55956, refers to an unauthenticated user who can import and execute arbitrary Bash or PowerShell commands on the host system by leveraging the default settings of the Autorun directory [4]. Both CVEs have occurred due to separate issues in the “/Synchronization” endpoint.

Investigating post exploitation patterns of activity on Cleo software

Proof of exploitation

Darktrace’s Threat Research analysts investigated multiple cases where devices identified as likely running Cleo software were detected engaging in unusual behavior. Analysts also attempted to identify any possible association between publicly available indicators of compromise (IoCs) and the exploitation of the vulnerability, using evidence of anomalous network traffic.

One case involved an Internet-facing device likely running Cleo VLTrader software (based on its hostname) reaching out to the 100% rare Lithuanian IP 181.214.147[.]164 · AS 15440 (UAB Baltnetos komunikacijos).

This activity occurred in the early hours of December 8 on the network of a customer in the energy sector. Darktrace detected a Cleo server transferring around over 500 MB of data over multiple SSL connections via port 443 to the Lithuanian IP. External research reported that this IP appears to be a callback IP observed in post-exploitation activity of vulnerable Cleo devices [3].

While this device was regularly observed sending data to external endpoints, this transfer represented a small increase in data sent to public IPs and coupled with the rarity of the destination, triggered a model alert as well as a Cyber AI Analyst Incident summarizing the transfer. Unfortunately, due to the encrypted connection no further analysis of the transmitted data was possible. However, due to the rarity of the activity, Darktrace’s Autonomous Response intervened and prevented any further connections to the IP.

Model Alert Event Log show repeated connections to the rare IP, filtered with the rarity metric.
Figure 1: Model Alert Event Log show repeated connections to the rare IP, filtered with the rarity metric.
Shows connections to 181.214.147[.]164 and the amount of data transferred.
Figure 2: Shows connections to 181.214.147[.]164 and the amount of data transferred.

On the same day, external connections were observed to the external IP 45.182.189[.]225, along with inbound SSL connections from the same endpoint. OSINT has also linked this IP to the exploitation of Cleo software vulnerabilities [5].

Outgoing connections from a Cleo server to an anomalous endpoint.
Figure 3: Outgoing connections from a Cleo server to an anomalous endpoint.
Incoming SSL connections from the external IP 45.182.189[.]225.
Figure 4: Incoming SSL connections from the external IP 45.182.189[.]225.

Hours after the last connection to 181.214.147[.]164, the integration detection tool from CrowdStrike, which the customer had integrated with Darktrace, issued an alert. This alert provided additional visibility into host-level processes and highlighted the following command executed on the Cleo server:

“D:\VLTrader\jre\bin\java.exe" -jar cleo.4889

Figure 5: The executed comand “D:\VLTrader\jre\bin\java.exe" -jar cleo.4889 and the Resource Location: \Device\HarddiskVolume3\VLTrader\jre\bin\java.exe.

Three days later, on December 11, another CrowdStrike integration alert was generated, this time following encoded PowerShell command activity on the server. This is consistent with post-exploitation activity where arbitrary PowerShell commands are executed on compromised systems leveraging the default settings of the Autorun directory, as highlighted by Cleo support [6]. According to external researchers , this process initiates connections to an external IP to retrieve JAR files with webshell-like functionality for continued post-exploitation [3]. The IP embedded in both commands observed by Darktrace was 38.180.242[.]122, hosted on ASN 58061(Scalaxy B.V.). There is no OSINT associating this IP with Cleo vulnerability exploitation at the time of writing.

Another device within the same customer network exhibited similar data transfer and command execution activity around the same time, suggesting it had also been compromised through this vulnerability. However, this second device contacted a different external IP, 5.45.74[.]137, hosted on AS 58061 (Scalaxy B.V.).

Like the first device, multiple connections to this IP were detected, with almost 600 MB of data transferred over the SSL protocol.

The Security Integration Detection Model that was triggered and the PowerShell command observed
Figure 6: The Security Integration Detection Model that was triggered  and the PowerShell command observed
Incoming connections from the external IP 38.180.242[.]122.
Figure 7: Incoming connections from the external IP 38.180.242[.]122.
Connections to the external IP 5.45.74[.]137.
Figure 8: Connections to the external IP 5.45.74[.]137.
Figure 9: Autonomous Response Actions triggered during the suspicious activities

While investigating potential Cleo servers involved in similar outgoing data activity, Darktrace’s Threat Research team identified two additional instances of likely Cleo vulnerability exploitation used to exfiltrate data outside the network. In those two instances, unusual outgoing data transfers were observed to the IP 176.123.4[.]22 (AS 200019, AlexHost SRL), with around 500 MB of data being exfiltrated over port 443 in one case (the exact volume could not be confirmed in the other instance). This IP was found embedded in encoded PowerShell commands examined by external researchers in the context of Cleo vulnerability exploitation investigations.

Conclusion

Overall, Cleo software represents a critical component of many business operations, being utilized by over 4,000 organizations worldwide. This renders the software an attractive target for threat actors who aim at exploiting internet-facing devices that could be used to compromise the software’s direct users but also other dependent industries resulting in supply chain attacks.

Darktrace / NETWORK was able to capture traffic linked to exploitation of CVE-2024-50623 within models that triggered such as Unusual Activity / Unusual External Data to New Endpoint while its Autonomous Response capability successfully blocked the anomalous connections and exfiltration attempts.

Information on new CVEs, how they're being exploited, and whether they've been patched can be fast-changing, sometimes limited and often confusing. Regardless, Darktrace is able to identify and alert to unusual behavior on these systems, indicating exploitation.

Credit to Maria Geronikolou, Alexandra Sentenac, Emma Fougler, Signe Zaharka and the Darktrace Threat Research team

Insights from Darktrace’s First 6: Half-year threat report for 2024

First 6: half year threat report darktrace screenshot

Darktrace’s First 6: Half-Year Threat Report 2024 highlights the latest attack trends and key threats observed by the Darktrace Threat Research team in the first six months of 2024.

  • Focuses on anomaly detection and behavioral analysis to identify threats
  • Maps mitigated cases to known, publicly attributed threats for deeper context
  • Offers guidance on improving security posture to defend against persistent threats

‍

‍

‍

‍

Appendices

References

[1] https://blog.httpcs.com/en/file-sharing-and-transfer-software-the-new-target-of-hackers/

[2] https://attackerkb.com/topics/geR0H8dgrE/cve-2024-55956/rapid7-analysis

[3] https://www.huntress.com/blog/threat-advisory-oh-no-cleo-cleo-software-actively-being-exploited-in-the-wild

[4] https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55956

[5] https://arcticwolf.com/resources/blog/cleopatras-shadow-a-mass-exploitation-campaign/

[6] https://support.cleo.com/hc/en-us/articles/28408134019735-Cleo-Product-Security-Advisory-CVE-Pending

[7] https://support.cleo.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034260293-Local-HTTP-Users-Configuration

Darktrace Model Alerts

Anomalous Connection / Data Sent to Rare Domain

Unusual Activity / Unusual External Data to New Endpoint

Unusual Activity / Unusual External Data Transfer

Device / Internet Facing Device with High Priority Alert

Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server

Anomalous Connection / New User Agent to IP Without Hostname

Security Integration / High Severity Integration Incident

Security Integration / Low Severity Integration Detection

Autonomous Response Model Detections

Antigena / Network / Insider Threat / Antigena Large Data Volume Outbound Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Significant Server Anomaly Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Controlled and Model Alert

Cyber AI Analyst Incidents

Unusual External Data Transfer

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Tactic – Technique

INITIAL ACCESS – Exploit Public-Facing Application

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Application Layer Protocol (Web Protocols)

COMMAND AND CONTROL – Encrypted Channel

PERSISTENCE – Web Shell

EXFILTRATION - Exfiltration Over C2 Channel

IoC List

IoC       Type    Description + Probability

181.214.147[.]164      IP Address       Likely C2 Infrastructure

176.123.4[.]22            IP Address       Likely C2 Infrastructure

5.45.74[.]137               IP Address           Possible C2 Infrastructure

38.180.242[.]122        IP Address       Possible C2 Infrastructure

Continue reading
About the author
Maria Geronikolou
Cyber Analyst

Blog

/

December 17, 2024

/
No items found.

Breaking Down Nation State Attacks on Supply Chains

Default blog imageDefault blog image

Introduction: Nation state attacks on supply chains

In recent years, supply chain attacks have surged in both frequency and sophistication, evolving into one of the most severe threats to organizations across almost every industry. By exploiting third-party vendors and service providers, these attacks can inflict widespread disruption with a single breach. They have become a go-to choice for nation state actors and show no signs of slowing down. According to Gartner, the costs from these attacks will skyrocket “from $46 billion in 2023 to $138 billion by 2031” [1].  

But why are supply chains specifically such an irresistible target for threat actors? Dwight David Eisenhower, the General of the US Army in World War II and former US President, once said, “you won’t find it difficult to prove that battles, campaigns, and even wars have been won or lost primarily because of logistics.”

The same is true in cyberspace and cyberwarfare. We live in an increasingly interconnected world. The provision of almost every service integral to our daily lives relies on a complex web of interdependent third parties.  

Naturally, threat actors gravitate towards these service providers. By compromising just one of them, they can spread through supply chains downstream to other organizations and raise the odds of winning their battle, campaign, or war.  

software supply chain sequence
Figure 1: Software supply chain attack cycle

A house built on open-source sand

Software developers face immense pressure to produce functional code quickly, often under tight deadlines. Adding to this challenge is the need to comply with stringent security requirements set by their DevSecOps counterparts, who aim to ensure that code is safe from vulnerabilities.  

Open-source repositories alleviate some of this pressure by providing pre-built packages of code and fully functioning tools that developers can freely access and integrate. These highly accessible resources enhance productivity and boost innovation. As a result, they have a huge, diverse user base spanning industries and geographies. However, given their extensive adoption, any security lapse can result in widespread compromise across businesses.

Cautionary tales for open-source dependencies

This is exactly what happened in December 2021 when a remote code execution vulnerability was discovered in Log4J’s software. In simple terms, it exposed an alarmingly straightforward way for attackers to take control of any system using Log4J.  

The scope for potential attack was unprecedented. Some estimates say up to 3 billion devices were affected worldwide, in what was quickly labelled the “single biggest, most critical vulnerability of the last decade” [2].

What ensued was a race between opportunistic nefarious actors and panicked security professionals. The astronomical number of vulnerable devices laid expansive groundwork for attackers, who quickly began probing potentially exploitable systems. 48% of corporate networks globally were scanned for the vulnerability, while security teams scrambled to apply the remediating patch [3].

The vulnerability attracted nation states like a moth to a flame, who, unsurprisingly, beat many security teams to it. According to the FBI and the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA), Iranian government-sponsored threat groups were found using the Log4J vulnerability to install cryptomining software, credential stealers and Ngrok reverse proxies onto no less than US Federal networks [4].  

Research from Microsoft and Mandiant revealed nation state groups from China, North Korea and Turkey also taking advantage of the Log4J vulnerability to deploy malware on target systems [5].  

If Log4j taught us anything, it’s that vulnerabilities in open-source technologies can be highly attractive target for nation states. When these technologies are universally adopted, geopolitical adversaries have a much wider net of opportunity to successfully weaponize them.  

It therefore comes as no surprise that nation states have ramped up their operations targeting the open-source link of the supply chain in recent years.  

Since 2020, there has been a 1300% increase in malicious threats circulating on open-source repositories. PyPI is the official open-source code repository for programming done in the Python language and used by over 800,000 developers worldwide. In the first 9 months of 2023 alone, 7,000 malicious packages were found on PyPI, some of which were linked to the North Korea state-sponsored threat group, Lazarus [6].  

Most of them were found using a technique called typosquatting, in which the malicious payloads are disguised with names that very closely resemble those of legitimate packages, ready for download by an unwitting software developer. This trickery of the eye is an example of social engineering in the supply chain.  

A hop, skip, and a jump into the most sensitive networks on earth

One of the most high-profile supply chain attacks in recent history occurred in 2023, targeting 3CX’s Desktop App – a widely used video communications by over 600,000 customers in various sectors such as aerospace, healthcare and hospitality.

The incident gained notoriety as a double supply chain attack. The initial breach originated from financial trading software called X_Trader, which had been infected with a backdoor.  A 3CX employee unknowingly downloaded the compromised X_Trader software onto a corporate device. This allowed attackers to steal the employee’s credentials and use them to gain access to 3CX’s network, spread laterally and compromising Windows and Mac systems.  

The attack moved along another link of the supply chain to several of 3CX’s customers, impacting critical national infrastructure like energy sector in US and Europe.  

For the average software provider, this attack shed more light on how a compromise of their technology could cause chaos for their customers.  

But nation states already knew this. The 3CX attack was attributed, yet again, to Lazarus, the same North Korean nation state blamed for implanting malicious packages in the Python repository.  

It’s also worth mentioning the astounding piece of evidence in a separate social engineering campaign which linked the 3CX hack to North Korea. It was an attack worthy of a Hollywood cyber block buster. The threat group, Lazarus, lured hopeful job candidates on LinkedIn into clicking on malicious ZIP file disguised as an attractive PDF offer for a position as a Developer at HSBC. The malware’s command and control infrastructure, journalide[.]org, was the same one discovered in the 3CX campaign.  

Though not strictly a supply chain attack, the LinkedIn campaign illustrates how nation states employ a diverse array of methods that span beyond the supply chain to achieve their goals. These sophisticated and well-resourced adversaries are adaptable and capable of repurposing their command-and-control infrastructure to orchestrate a range of attacks. This attack, along with the typosquatting attacks found in PyPI, serve as a critical reminder for security teams: supply chain attacks are often coupled with another powerful tactic – social engineering of human teams.

‍When the cure is worse than the disease

Updates to the software are a core pillar of cybersecurity, designed to patch vulnerabilities like Log4J and ensure it is safe. However, they have also proven to serve as alarmingly efficient delivery vessels for nation states to propagate their cyberattacks.  

Two of the most prolific supply chain breaches in recent history have been deployed through malicious updates, illustrating how they can be a double-edged sword when it comes to cyber defense.  

NotPetya (2017) and Solarwinds (2020)

The 2017 NotPetya ransomware attack exemplified the mass spread of ransomware via a single software update. A Russian military group injected malware on accounting software used by Ukrainian businesses for tax reporting. Via an automatic update, the ransomware was pushed out to thousands of customers within hours, crippled Ukrainian infrastructure including airports, financial institutions and government agencies.  

Some of the hardest hit victims were suppliers themselves. Maersk, the global shipping giant responsible for shipping one fifth of the world’s goods, had their entire global operations brought to a halt and their 76 ports temporarily shut down. The interruptions to global trade were then compounded when a FedEx subsidiary was hit by the same ransomware. Meanwhile, Merck, a pharmaceutical company, was unable to supply vaccines to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention due to the attack.  

In 2020, another devastating supply chain attack unfolded in a similar way. Threat actors tied to Russian intelligence embedded malicious code into Solarwinds’ Orion IT software, which was then distributed as an update to 18,000 organizations. Victims included at least eight U.S. government agencies, as well as several major tech companies.  

These two attacks highlighted two key lessons. First, in a hyperconnected digital world, nation states will exploit the trust organizations place in software updates to cause a ripple effect of devastation downstream. Secondly, the economies of scale for the threat actor themselves are staggering: a single malicious update provided the heavy lifting work of dissemination to the attacker. A colossal number of originations were infected, and they obtained the keys to the world’s most sensitive networks.

The conclusion is obvious, albeit challenging to implement; organizations must rigorously scrutinize the authenticity and security of updates to prevent far-reaching consequences.  

Some of the biggest supply chain attacks in recent history and the nation state actor they are attributed to
Figure 2: Some of the biggest supply chain attacks in recent history and the nation state actor they are attributed to

Geopolitics and nation States in 2024: Beyond the software supply chain

The threat to our increasingly complex web of global supply is real. But organizations must look beyond their software to successfully mitigate supply chain disruption. Securing hardware and logistics is crucial, as these supply chain links are also in the crosshairs of nation states.  

In July 2024, suspicious packages caused a warehouse fire at a depot belonging to courier giant DHL in Birmingham, UK. British counter-terrorism authorities investigated Russian involvement in this fire, which was linked to a very similar incident that same month at a DHL facility in Germany.  

In September 2024, camouflaged explosives were hidden in walkie talkies and pagers in Lebanon and Syria – a supply chain attack widely believed to be carried out by Israel.

While these attacks targeted hardware and logistics rather than software, the underlying rule of thumb remained the same: the compromise of a single distributor can provide the attackers with considerable economies of scale.

These attacks sparked growing concerns of coordinated efforts to sabotage the supply chain. This sentiment was reflected in a global survey carried out by HP in August 2024, in which many organisations reported “nation-state threat actors targeting physical supply chains and tampering with device hardware and firmware integrity” [7].

More recently, in November 2024, the Russian military unit 29155 vowed to “turn the lights out for millions” by threatening to launch cyberattacks on the blood supply of NATO countries, critical national infrastructure (CNI). Today, CNI encompasses more than the electric grid and water supply; it includes ICT services and IT infrastructure – the digital systems that underpin the foundations of modern society.    

This is nothing new. The supply and logistics-focused tactic has been central to warfare throughout history. What’s changed is that cyberspace has merely expanded the scale and efficiency of these tactics, turning single software compromises into attack multipliers. The supply chain threat is now more multi-faceted than ever before.  

Learnings from the supply chain threat landscape

Consider some of the most disastrous nation-state supply chain attacks in recent history – 3CX, NotPetya and Solarwinds. They share a remarkable commonality: the attackers only needed to compromise a single piece of software to cause rampant disruption. By targeting a technology provider whose products were deeply embedded across industries, threat actors leveraged the trust inherent in the supply chain to infiltrate networks at scale.

From a nation-state’s perspective, targeting a specific technology, device or service used by vast swathes of society amplifies operational efficiency. For software, hardware and critical service suppliers, these examples serve as an urgent wake-up call. Without rigorous security measures, they risk becoming conduits for global disruption. Sanity-checking code, implementing robust validation processes, and fostering a culture of security throughout the supply chain are no longer optional—they are essential.  

The stakes are clear: in the interconnected digital age, the safety of countless systems, industries and society at large depends on their vigilance.  

Screenshot of supply chain security whitepaper

Gain a deeper understanding of the evolving risks in supply chain security and explore actionable strategies to protect your organization against emerging threats. Download the white paper to empower your decision-making with expert insights tailored for CISOs

Download: Securing the Supply Chain White Paper

‍

‍

‍

‍

References

  1. https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/5524495
  1. CISA Insights “Remediate Vulnerabilities for Internet-Accessible Systems.”
  1. https://blog.checkpoint.com/security/the-numbers-behind-a-cyber-pandemic-detailed-dive/
  1. https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa22-320a  
  1. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2021/12/11/guidance-for-preventing-detecting-and-hunting-for-cve-2021-44228-log4j-2-exploitation/  
  1. https://content.reversinglabs.com/state-of-sscs-report/the-state-of-sscs-report-24  
  1. https://www.hp.com/us-en/newsroom/press-releases/2024/hp-wolf-security-study-supply-chains.html
Continue reading
About the author
Benjamin Druttman
Cyber Security AI Technical Instructor
Your data. Our AI.
Elevate your network security with Darktrace AI