, the binding leaves the client-certificate enforcement off by default, allowing any TLS client to complete the handshake anonymously. Moreover, sslFlags
does not control protocol or cipher selection, so outdated protocols or weak cipher suites (e.g., SSL 3.0, TLS 1.0/1.1) may still be accepted unless Secure Channel (Schannel)[2] has been explicitly hardened.
Potential Impact: The misconfigured sslFlags
could enable threat actors to attempt an adversary-in-the-middle attack [T1557] to intercept credentials and data transmitted between clients and the IIS server. Malicious actors could also exploit vulnerabilities in older Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)/TLS protocols, as well as weak cipher suites, increasing the risk for protocol downgrade attacks in which an attacker forces the server and client to negotiate the use of weaker encryption standards [T1562.010]. This compromises the confidentiality and integrity of data transmitted over this channel. Furthermore, the absence of client certificate enforcement meant the server did not validate the identity of the connecting clients beyond the basic SSL/TLS handshake. This deficiency exposed the server to risks where unauthorized or malicious clients could impersonate legitimate users, potentially gaining access to sensitive resources without proper verification.
Details: CISA reviewed machine.config
file on a production server and identified that it was configured with a centralized database connection string, LocalSqlServer
, for both profile and role providers. This configuration implies that, unless overridden in each application’s web.config
files, every ASP.NET site on the server connects to the same Structured Query Language (SQL) Express or aspnetdb
database and shares the same credentials context.
Additionally, CISA identified that the machine.config
file set the minRequiredPasswordLength
to be less than 15 characters, which is CISA’s recommended password length.
Potential Impact: Using a centralized database approach increases risk, as a single breach or misconfiguration in this central SQL database server can compromise all applications dependent on the server. This creates a single point of failure and could be exploited by attackers aiming to gain broad access to the system.
\\nAdditionally, setting the minimum password length to any password under 15 characters is more vulnerable to various forms of brute-force attacks, such as password guessing [T1110.001], cracking [T1110.002], spraying [T1110.003], and credential stuffing [T1110.004]. If a threat actor successfully cracked these weak passwords, they could gain unauthorized access to user or application accounts and leverage vulnerabilities within applications to further escalate privileges, potentially leading to unauthorized access to the backend SQL Server databases. This could result in data breaches, data manipulation, or a loss of database integrity.
\\nCISA and USCG recommend that critical infrastructure organizations implement the mitigations below to improve their organization’s cybersecurity posture. Recommendations to reduce cyber risk are listed for each of CISA’s findings during this engagement and are ordered starting from the highest to lowest importance for organizations to implement. CISA and USCG also include general practices to strengthen cybersecurity for OT environments that are not tied to specific findings.
\\nThese mitigations align with the Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals jointly developed by CISA and the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). The Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) provide a minimum set of practices and protections that CISA and NIST recommend all organizations implement. CISA and NIST based the CPGs on existing cybersecurity frameworks and guidance to protect against the most common and impactful TTPs. Visit CISA’s CPGs webpage for more information.
\\nMany of these mitigations also align with recommendations made by CGCYBER in their 2024 CTIME report. The report provides relevant information and lessons learned about cybersecurity risks gathered through operations similar to this threat hunt engagement, and best practices to mitigate these risks. Please see the 2024 CTIME report for additional recommendations for critical infrastructure organizations to implement to harden their environments against malicious activity.
\\nms-MCS-AdmPwd
and ms-MCS-AdmPwdExpirationTime
) per Microsoft’s security recommendations.21
using firewalls and ACLs.\\n4688
), and network connections.For additional guidance on logging, see joint guidance Best Practices for Event Logging and Threat Detection.
\\nsslFlags
setting to “3”
in the ApplicationHost.config
file. Setting sslFlags=“3”
requires clients to present valid X.509
certificates for authentication and implements the TLS Renegotiation Indication Extension (RFC 5746). To implement this, perform the following steps:\\n<binding>
element for the HTTPS site within ApplicationHost.config
.sslFlags
attribute to “3”
: <binding protocol=“https” bindingInformation=“*:443:” sslFlags=“3” />
.iisreset
.machine.config
by modifying each application’s web.config
file to define its own connection strings and providers. This isolates applications at the database level and allows for tailored security configurations for each application.db_owner
or sysadmin to application accounts. This reduces the risk of privilege escalation and enhances accountability through segregated access logs.machine.config
only for configurations that must be applied globally across all applications on the server.\\nmachine.config
file to ensure no application-specific settings are present.CISA and USCG recommend critical infrastructure organizations implement the following additional mitigations (not tied to specific findings from the engagement) to improve the cybersecurity of their IT and OT environments:
\\nIn addition to applying mitigations, CISA and USCG recommend exercising, testing, and validating your organization\'s security program against the threat behaviors mapped to the MITRE ATT&CK for Enterprise framework in this advisory. CISA and USCG recommend testing your existing security controls inventory to assess how they perform against the ATT&CK techniques described in this advisory.
\\nTo get started:
\\nCISA and USCG recommend continually testing your security program, at scale, in a production environment to ensure optimal performance against the MITRE ATT&CK techniques identified in this advisory.
\\nCritical infrastructure organizations are encouraged to report suspicious or criminal activity related to information in this advisory to:
\\nFor more information on improving cyber hygiene for critical infrastructure IT and OT environments, please see the following additional resources authored by CISA, CGCYBER, and international partners:
\\nThe information in this report is being provided “as is” for informational purposes only. CISA and USCG do not endorse any commercial entity, product, company, or service, including any entities, products, or services linked within this document. Any reference to specific commercial entities, products, processes, or services by service mark, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by CISA and USCG.
\\nJuly 31, 2025: Initial version.
\\nSee Table 1 to Table 9 for all referenced threat actor tactics and techniques in this advisory. For assistance with mapping malicious cyber activity to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, see CISA and MITRE ATT&CK’s Best Practices for MITRE ATT&CK Mapping and CISA’s Decider Tool.
\\nTechnique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Valid Accounts | \\nT1078 | \\nMalicious actors could use access to valid accounts for access to IT and OT networks. | \\n
Valid Accounts: Local Accounts | \\nT1078.003 | \\nThreat actors could use credentials obtained for local administrator accounts to gain administrator access to workstations or services that use the account. | \\n
Account Manipulation | \\nT1098 | \\nMalicious actors could modify existing accounts or create new accounts to maintain access or escalate privileges. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Command and Scripting Interpreter | \\nT1059 | \\nMalicious actors could use script interpreters like PowerShell to execute commands and scripts. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Boot or Autostart Execution | \\nT1547 | \\nMalicious actors could configure autostart execution paths to ensure persistence. | \\n
Hijack Execution Flow | \\nT1574 | \\nMalicious actors could hijack the execution flow of applications and inject malicious code. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Domain or Tenant Policy Modification | \\nT1484 | \\nMalicious actors could modify domain policies to escalate privileges or evade defenses. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Modify Registry | \\nT1112 | \\nMalicious actors could install malicious browser extensions on compromised systems. | \\n
Impair Defenses: Downgrade Attack | \\nT1562.010 | \\nMalicious actors could exploit vulnerabilities in older systems to force a downgrade to a less secure mode of operation. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Unsecured Credentials: Credentials in Files | \\nT1552.001 | \\nMalicious actors could search for and exploit credentials stored in unsecured files. | \\n
OS Credential Dumping | \\nT1003 | \\nMalicious actors could extract credentials from memory or storage from unsecured workstations. | \\n
Adversary-in-the-Middle | \\nT1557 | \\nMalicious actors could position themselves between networked devices to intercept credentials and other data. | \\n
Brute Force: Password Guessing | \\nT1110.001 | \\nMalicious actors could systematically guess possible passwords. | \\n
Brute Force: Password Cracking | \\nT1110.002 | \\nMalicious actors could recover plaintext credentials after obtaining password hashes or other similar credential material. | \\n
Brute Force: Password Spraying | \\nT1110.003 | \\nMalicious actors could attempt to use a common password against different accounts to try to obtain account access. | \\n
Brute Force: Credential Stuffing | \\nT1110.004 | \\nMalicious actors could try to use credentials gained from an unrelated account to gain access to a desired account in the victim’s environment. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
System Network Connections Discovery | \\nT1049 | \\nMalicious actors could map network connections to identify paths to OT systems from an unsecured IT workstation with access to the OT network. | \\n
System Network Configuration Discovery | \\nT1016 | \\nMalicious actors could use an unsecured workstation to discover network configurations. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Remote Services: Remote Desktop Protocol | \\nT1021.001 | \\nMalicious actors could use valid credentials to establish an RDP connection to access a workstation. | \\n
Remote Services: SSH | \\nT1021.004 | \\nMalicious actors could use valid accounts to establish an SSH connection to a workstation. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Application Layer Protocol | \\nT1071 | \\nMalicious actors could use application layer protocols to communicate with systems they compromised while blending in with existing network traffic. | \\n
[1] While CISA used PowerShell to review these configuration settings, they can also be identified by running a search in any text editor.
[2] For more information, see Schannel – Microsoft Learn.
[3] Reference the Purdue Model for ICS Security as a guide for layered security zones and assess compliance with IEC 62443 network and system security standards; organizations may use this version of the model developed by Department of Energy (DOE) as a guide: Purdue Model Framework for Industrial Control Systems & Cybersecurity Segmentation.
Note: This joint Cybersecurity Advisory is part of an ongoing #StopRansomware effort to publish advisories for network defenders that detail various ransomware variants and ransomware threat actors. These #StopRansomware advisories include recently and historically observed tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) and indicators of compromise (IOCs) to help organizations protect against ransomware. Visit stopransomware.gov to see all #StopRansomware advisories and to learn more about other ransomware threats and no-cost resources.
\\nThe Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC)—hereafter referred to as “the authoring organizations”—are releasing this joint advisory to disseminate known Interlock ransomware IOCs and TTPs identified through FBI investigations (as recently as June 2025) and trusted third-party reporting.
\\nThe Interlock ransomware variant was first observed in late September 2024, targeting various business, critical infrastructure, and other organizations in North America and Europe. FBI maintains these actors target their victims based on opportunity, and their activity is financially motivated. FBI is aware of Interlock ransomware encryptors designed for both Windows and Linux operating systems; these encryptors have been observed encrypting virtual machines (VMs) across both operating systems. FBI observed actors obtaining initial access via drive-by download from compromised legitimate websites, which is an uncommon method among ransomware groups. Actors were also observed using the ClickFix social engineering technique for initial access, in which victims are tricked into executing a malicious payload under the guise of fixing an issue on the victim’s system. Actors then use various methods for discovery, credential access, and lateral movement to spread to other systems on the network.
\\nInterlock actors employ a double extortion model in which actors encrypt systems after exfiltrating data, which increases pressure on victims to pay the ransom to both get their data decrypted and prevent it from being leaked.
\\nFBI, CISA, HHS, and MS-ISAC encourage organizations to implement the recommendations in the Mitigations section of this advisory to reduce the likelihood and impact of Interlock ransomware incidents.
\\nDownload the PDF version of this report:
\\n\\n\\n\\n\\n\\nFor a downloadable copy of IOCs, see:
\\n\\n\\n\\n\\n\\nNote: This advisory uses the MITRE ATT&CK® Matrix for Enterprise framework, version 17. See the MITRE ATT&CK Tactics and Techniques section of this advisory for tables mapped to the threat actors’ activity.
\\nSince September 2024, Interlock ransomware actors have impacted a wide range of businesses and critical infrastructure sectors in North America and Europe. These actors are opportunistic and financially motivated in nature and employ tactics to infiltrate and disrupt the victim’s ability to provide their essential services.
\\nInterlock actors leverage a double extortion model, in which they both encrypt and exfiltrate victim data. Ransom notes do not include an initial ransom demand or payment instructions; instead, victims are provided with a unique code and are instructed to contact the ransomware group via a .onion
URL through the Tor browser. To date, Interlock actors have been observed encrypting VMs, leaving hosts, workstations, and physical servers unaffected; however, this does not mean they will not expand to these systems in the future. To counter Interlock actors’ threat to VMs, enterprise defenders should implement robust endpoint detection and response (EDR) tooling and capabilities.
The authoring agencies are aware of emerging open-source reporting detailing similarities between the Rhysida and Interlock ransomware variants.1 For additional information on Rhysida ransomware, see the joint advisory, #StopRansomware: Rhysida Ransomware.
\\nFBI has observed Interlock actors obtaining initial access [TA0001] via drive-by download [T1189] from compromised legitimate websites, an atypical method for ransomware actors. Interlock ransomware methods for initial access have previously disguised malicious payloads as fake Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge browser updates, though a cybersecurity company recently reported a shift to payload filenames masquerading as updates for common security software (see Table 5 for a list of filenames).2
\\nIn some instances, FBI has observed Interlock actors using the ClickFix social engineering technique, in which unsuspecting users are prompted to execute a malicious payload by clicking a fake Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart (CAPTCHA) [T1189]. The CAPTCHA contains instructions for users to open the Windows Run window, paste the clipboard contents, and then execute a malicious Base64-encoded PowerShell process [T1204.004].3
\\nNote: This ClickFix technique has been used in several other malware campaigns, including Lumma Stealer and DarkGate.4
\\nBased on FBI investigations, the fake Google Chrome browser executable functions as a remote access trojan (RAT) [T1105] designed to execute a PowerShell script [T1059.001] that drops a file into the Windows Startup folder. From there, the file is designed to run the RAT every time the victim logs in [T1547.001], establishing persistence [TA0003].
\\nFBI also observed instances in which Interlock actors executed a PowerShell command designed to establish persistence via a Windows Registry key modification [T1547.001]. To do so, Interlock actors used a PowerShell command [T1059.001] designed to add a run key value named “Chrome Updater” [T1036.005] that uses a specific log file as an argument upon user login.
\\nTo facilitate reconnaissance, a PowerShell script executes a series of commands [T1059.001] designed to gather information on victim machines (see Table 1).
\\nPowerShell Command | \\nDescription | \\n
---|---|
WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent() | \\nReturns a WindowsIdentity object that represents the current Windows user [T1033]. | \\n
systeminfo | \\nDisplays detailed configuration information [T1082] about a computer and its operating system, including operating system configuration, security information, product ID, and hardware properties. | \\n
tasklist/svc | \\nLists unabridged service information [T1007] for each process currently running on the local computer. | \\n
Get-Service | \\nGets objects that represent the services [T1007] on a computer, including running and stopped services. | \\n
Get-PSDrive | \\n\\n Gets the drives [T1082] in the current session, such as: \\n
| \\n
arp -a | \\nDisplays and modifies entries in the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) cache table [T1016], which contains entries on the IPv4 and IPv6 addresses on host endpoints. | \\n
FBI observed Interlock actors using command and control (C2) [TA0011] applications like Cobalt Strike and SystemBC. Interlock actors also used Interlock RAT5 and NodeSnake RAT (as of March 2025)6 for C2 and executing commands.
\\nFBI observed that once Interlock actors establish remote control of a compromised system, they use a series of PowerShell commands to download a credential stealer (cht.exe
) [TA0006] and keylogger binary (klg.dll
) [T1056.001],[T1105]. According to open source reporting, the credential stealer collects login information and associated URLs for victims’ online accounts [T1555.003], while the keylogger dynamic link library (DLL) logs users’ keystrokes in a file named conhost.txt
[T1036.005].7 As of February 2025, private cybersecurity analysts also observed Interlock ransomware infections executing different versions of information stealers [TA0006], including Lumma Stealer8 and Berserk Stealer, to harvest credentials for lateral movement and privilege escalation [T1078].9
Interlock actors leverage compromised credentials and Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP)10 [T1021.001] to move between systems. They also use tools like AnyDesk to enable remote connectivity and PuTTY to assist with lateral movement [T1219].11 In addition to stealing users’ online credentials, Interlock actors have compromised domain administrator accounts (possibly by using a Kerberoasting attack [T1558.003])12 to gain additional privileges [T1078.002].
\\nInterlock actors leverage Azure Storage Explorer (StorageExplorer.exe
) to navigate victims’ Microsoft Azure Storage accounts [T1530] prior to exfiltrating data. According to open source reporting, Interlock actors execute AzCopy to exfiltrate data by uploading it to the Azure storage blob [T1567.002].13 Interlock actors also exfiltrate data over file transfer tools, including WinSCP [T1048].
Following data exfiltration, Interlock actors deploy the encryption binary as a 64-bit executable named conhost.exe
[T1486],[T1036.005]. FBI has observed Interlock ransomware encryptors for both Windows and Linux operating systems. Encryptors are designed to encrypt files using a combined Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) and Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) algorithm. In addition, cybersecurity researchers have identified Interlock ransomware samples using a FreeBSD ELF encryptor [T1486], a departure from usual Linux encryptors designed for VMware ESXi servers and VMs.14
A cybersecurity company identified a DLL binary named tmp41.wasd
—executed after encryption using rundll32.exe
[T1218.011]—which uses the remove()
function to delete the encryption binary [T1070.004];15 on Linux machines, the encryptor uses a similar technique to execute the removeme
function.
Encrypted files are appended with either a .interlock
or .1nt3rlock
file extension, alongside a ransom note titled !__README__!.txt
delivered via group policy object (GPO). Interlock actors use a double-extortion model [T1657], encrypting systems after exfiltrating data. The ransom note provides each victim with a unique code and instructions to contact the ransomware actors via a .onion
URL.
Interlock actors do not leave an initial ransom demand or payment instructions on compromised networks, and do not relay this information until contacted by the victim. The actors instruct victims to make ransom payments in Bitcoin to cryptocurrency wallet addresses provided by the actors. The actors threaten to publish the victim’s exfiltrated data to their leak site on the Tor network unless the victim pays the ransom demand; the actors have previously followed through on this threat.16
\\nSee Table 2 for publicly available tools and applications used by Interlock ransomware actors. This includes legitimate tools repurposed for their operations.
\\nDisclaimer: Use of these tools and applications should not be attributed as malicious without analytical evidence to support threat actor use and/or control.
\\nTool Name | \\nDescription | \\n
---|---|
AnyDesk | \\nA common legitimate remote monitoring and management (RMM) tool maliciously used by Interlock actors to obtain remote access and maintain persistence. AnyDesk also supports remote file transfer. | \\n
Cobalt Strike | \\nA penetration testing tool used by security professionals to test the security of networks and systems. | \\n
PowerShell | \\nA cross-platform task automation solution made up of a command-line shell, a scripting language, and a configuration management framework, which runs on Windows, Linux, and macOS. | \\n
PSExec | \\nA tool designed to run programs and execute commands on remote systems. | \\n
PuTTY.exe | \\nAn open source file transfer application commonly used to remotely connect to systems via Secure Shell (SSH). PuTTY also supports file transfer protocols like Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP) and Secure Copy Protocol (SCP). | \\n
ScreenConnect | \\nA remote support, access, and meeting software that allows users to control devices remotely over the internet. CISA observed Interlock actors using a cracked version of this software in at least one incident. These versions may be standalone versions not connecting to ScreenConnect’s official cloud domains (domains available upon request from ConnectWise). | \\n
SystemBC | \\nEnables Interlock actors to compromise systems, run commands, download malicious payloads, and act as a proxy tool to the actors’ C2 servers. | \\n
Windows Console Host | \\nWindows Console Host (conhost.exe ) manages the user interface for command-line applications in Windows, including Command Prompt and PowerShell. | \\n
WinSCP | \\nA free and open source SSH File Transfer Protocol (FTP), WebDAV, Amazon S3, and secure copy protocol client. | \\n
See Table 3 and Table 4 for files used by Interlock ransomware actors. These were obtained from FBI investigations as recently as June 2025.
\\nDisclaimer: Some of the hashes are for legitimate tools and applications and should not be attributed as malicious without analytical evidence to support threat actor use and/or control. The authoring agencies recommend organizations investigate or vet these hashes prior to taking action, such as blocking.
\\nFile Name | \\nHash | \\n
---|---|
1.ps1 | \\nfba4883bf4f73aa48a957d894051d78e0085ecc3170b1ff50e61ccec6aeee2cd | \\n
advanced_port_scanner.exe | \\n4b036cc9930bb42454172f888b8fde1087797fc0c9d31ab546748bd2496bd3e5 | \\n
Aisa.exe | \\n18a507bf1c533aad8e6f2a2b023fbbcac02a477e8f05b095ee29b52b90d47421 | \\n
AnyDesk.exe | \\n1a70f4eef11fbecb721b9bab1c9ff43a8c4cd7b2cafef08c033c77070c6fe069 | \\n
autoservice.dll | \\na4069aa29628e64ea63b4fb3e29d16dcc368c5add304358a47097eedafbbb565 | \\n
Autostart.exe | \\nd535bdc9970a3c6f7ebf0b229c695082a73eaeaf35a63cd8a0e7e6e3ceb22795 | \\n
cht | \\nFAFCD5404A992850FFCFFEE46221F9B2FF716006AECB637B80E5CD5AA112D79C | \\n
cht.exe | \\nC20BABA26EBB596DE14B403B9F78DDC3C13CE9870EEA332476AC2C1DD582AA07 | \\n
cleanup.dll (SystemBC) | \\n1845a910dcde8c6e45ad2e0c48439e5ab8bbbeb731f2af11a1b7bbab3bfe0127 | \\n
conhost | \\n44887125aa2df864226421ee694d51e5535d8c6f70e327e9bcb366e43fd892c1 | \\n
conhost.dll | \\na70af759e38219ca3a7f7645f3e103b13c9fb1db6d13b68f3d468b7987540ddf | \\n
conhost.dll | \\n96babe53d6569ee3b4d8fc09c2a6557e49ebc2ed1b965abda0f7f51378557eb1 | \\n
difxepi.dll (SystemBC) | \\n1845a910dcde8c6e45ad2e0c48439e5ab8bbbeb731f2af11a1b7bbab3bfe0127 | \\n
iexplore.exe | \\nd0c1662ce239e4d288048c0e3324ec52962f6ddda77da0cb7af9c1d9c2f1e2eb | \\n
klg.dll | \\nA4F0B68052E8DA9A80B70407A92400C6A5DEF19717E0240AC608612476E1137E | \\n
!!!OPEN_ME!!!.txt | \\n68A49D5A097E3850F3BB572BAF2B75A8E158DADB70BADDC205C2628A9B660E7A | \\n
processhacker-2.39-bin.zip | \\n88f26f3721076f74996f8518469d98bf9be0eaee5b9eccc72867ebfc25ea4e83 | \\n
PsExec.exe | \\n078163d5c16f64caa5a14784323fd51451b8c831c73396b967b4e35e6879937b | \\n
putty.exe | \\n7a43789216ce242524e321d2222fa50820a532e29175e0a2e685459a19e09069 | \\n
puttyportable.exe | \\n97931d2e2e449ac3691eb526f6f60e2f828de89074bdac07bd7dbdfd51af9fa0 | \\n
PuTTYPortable.zip | \\nff7ad2376ae01e4b3f1e1d7ae630f87b8262b5c11bc5d953e1ac34ffe81401b5 | \\n
qrpce91.exe.asd | \\n64a0ab00d90682b1807c5d7da1a4ae67cde4c5757fc7d995d8f126f0ec8ae983 | \\n
ScreenConnect.ClientService.exe | \\n2814b33ce81d2d2e528bb1ed4290d665569f112c9be54e65abca50c41314d462 | \\n
SophosendpointAgent.exe | \\nf51b3d054995803d04a754ea3ff7d31823fab654393e8054b227092580be43db | \\n
SophosScaner.exe | \\ndfb5ba578b81f05593c047f2c822eeb03785aecffb1504dcb7f8357e898b5024 | \\n
Starship.exe | \\n94bf0aba5f9f32b9c35e8dfc70afd8a35621ed6ef084453dc1b10719ae72f8e2 | \\n
start | \\n28c3c50d115d2b8ffc7ba0a8de9572fbe307907aaae3a486aabd8c0266e9426f | \\n
start.exe | \\n70bb799557da5ac4f18093decc60c96c13359e30f246683815a512d7f9824c8f | \\n
StorageExplorer.exe | \\n73a9a1e38ff40908bcc15df2954246883dadfb991f3c74f6c514b4cffdabde66 | \\n
Sysmon.sys | \\n1d04e33009bcd017898b9e1387e40b5c04279c02ebc110f12e4a724ccdb9e4fb | \\n
upd_2327991.exe | \\n7b9e12e3561285181634ab32015eb653ab5e5cfa157dd16cdd327104b258c332 | \\n
webujgd.lnk | \\n70EE22D394E107FBB807D86D187C216AD66B8537EDC67931559A8AEF18F6B5B3 | \\n
WinSCP-6.3.5-Setup.exe | \\n8eb7e3e8f3ee31d382359a8a232c984bdaa130584cad11683749026e5df1fdc3 | \\n
Proxy Tool | \\ne4d6fe517cdf3790dfa51c62457f5acd8cb961ab1f083de37b15fd2fddeb9b8f | \\n
Encryptor | \\ne86bb8361c436be94b0901e5b39db9b6666134f23cce1e5581421c2981405cb1 | \\n
Encryptor | \\nc733d85f445004c9d6918f7c09a1e0d38a8f3b37ad825cd544b865dba36a1ba6 | \\n
Encryptor | \\n28c3c50d115d2b8ffc7ba0a8de9572fbe307907aaae3a486aabd8c0266e9426f | \\n
File Name | \\nHash | \\n
---|---|
autorun.log | \\n514946a8fc248de1ccf0dbeee2108a3b4d75b5f6 | \\n
jar.jar | \\nb625cc9e4024d09084e80a4a42ab7ccaa6afb61d | \\n
pack.jar | \\n3703374c9622f74edc9c8e3a47a5d53007f7721e | \\n
See Table 5 through Table 16 for all referenced threat actor tactics and techniques in this advisory. For assistance with mapping malicious cyber activity to the MITRE ATT&CK framework, see CISA and MITRE ATT&CK’s Best Practices for MITRE ATT&CK Mapping and CISA’s Decider Tool.
\\nTechnique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Drive-By Compromise | \\nT1189 | \\n\\n Interlock actors obtain initial access by compromising a legitimate website that network users visit, or by disguising malicious payloads as fake browser updates or common security software, including the following:17 \\n
Interlock actors also gain access via the ClickFix social engineering technique, in which users are tricked into executing a malicious payload by clicking on a fake CAPTCHA that prompts users to execute a malicious PowerShell script. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell | \\nT1059.001 | \\n\\n Interlock actors implement PowerShell scripts to drop a malicious file into the Windows Startup folder. \\nInterlock actors execute a PowerShell command for registry key modification. \\nInterlock actors use a PowerShell script to execute a series of commands to facilitate reconnaissance. \\n | \\n
User Execution: Malicious Copy and Paste | \\nT1204.004 | \\nVia the ClickFix social engineering technique, users are tricked into clicking a fake CAPTCHA and prompted into executing a malicious Base64-encoded PowerShell process by following instructions to open a Windows Run window (Windows Button + R), pasting clipboard contents (“CTRL + V”), and then executing the malicious script (“Enter”). | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys/Startup Folder | \\nT1547.001 | \\n\\n Interlock actors establish persistence by adding a file into a Windows StartUp folder that executes a RAT every time a user logs in. \\nInterlock actors also implement registry key modification by using a PowerShell command to add a run key value (named “Chrome Updater”) that uses a log file as an argument every time a user logs in. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Valid Accounts: Domain Accounts | \\nT1078.002 | \\nInterlock actors compromise domain administrator accounts to gain additional privileges. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Defense Evasion | \\nTA0005 | \\nInterlock actors execute the removeme function on Linux systems to delete the encryption binary for defense evasion. | \\n
Masquerading: Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location | \\nT1036.005 | \\n\\n Interlock actors disguise a malicious run key value by naming it “Chrome Updater”; the run key value uses a specific log file as an argument upon user login. \\nInterlock actors disguise files of keystrokes logged by one of their credential stealers with a legitimate Windows filename: Interlock actors disguise an encryption binary, a 64-bit executable, by giving it the same name as the legitimate Console Windows Host executable: | \\n
System Binary Proxy Execution: Rundll32 | \\nT1218.011 | \\nInterlock actors use rundll32.exe to proxy execution of a malicious DLL binary tmp41.wasd . | \\n
Indicator Removal: File Deletion | \\nT1070.004 | \\nInterlock actors execute a DLL binary tmp41.wasd that uses the remove() function to delete their encryption binary for defense evasion. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Credential Access | \\nTA0006 | \\nInterlock actors download credential stealer cht.exe and execute other versions information stealers (including Lumma Stealer and Berserk Stealer) to harvest credentials. | \\n
Credentials from Password Stores: Credentials from Web Browsers | \\nT1555.003 | \\nInterlock actors download a credential stealer that collects login information and associated URLs for victims’ online accounts. | \\n
Input Capture | \\nT1056 | \\nInterlock actors execute Lumma Stealer and Berserk Stealer information stealers on victim systems. | \\n
Input Capture: Keylogging | \\nT1056.001 | \\nInterlock actors download klg.dll , a keylogger binary, onto compromised systems, where it logs users’ keystrokes in a file named conhost.txt . | \\n
Steal or Forge Kerberos Tickets: Kerberoasting | \\nT1558.003 | \\nInterlock actors possibly use a Kerberoasting attack to compromise domain administrator accounts. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
System Owner/User Discovery | \\nT1033 | \\nInterlock actors execute a PowerShell command WindowsIdentity.GetCurrent() on victim systems to retrieve a WindowsIdentity object that represents the current Windows user. | \\n
System Information Discovery | \\nT1082 | \\n\\n Interlock actors execute a PowerShell command Interlock actors execute a PowerShell command
| \\n
System Service Discovery | \\nT1007 | \\n\\n Interlock actors execute a PowerShell command Actors also execute a PowerShell command | \\n
System Network Configuration Discovery | \\nT1016 | \\nInterlock actors execute a PowerShell command arp -a on victim systems that displays and modifies entries in the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) cache table (which contains entries on the IPv4 and IPv6 addresses on host endpoints). | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Valid Accounts | \\nT1078 | \\nInterlock actors harvest and abuse valid credentials for lateral movement and privilege escalation. | \\n
Remote Services: Remote Desktop Protocol | \\nT1021.001 | \\nInterlock actors use RDP and valid credentials to move laterally between systems. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Data from Cloud Storage | \\nT1530 | \\nInterlock actors use StorageExplorer.exe , the cloud storage solution Azure Storage Explorer, to explore Microsoft Azure Storage accounts. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Command and Control | \\nTA0011 | \\nInterlock actors use applications Cobalt Strike and SystemBC for C2. | \\n
Ingress Tool Transfer | \\nT1105 | \\n\\n Interlock actors use a fake Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge browser update to cause users to execute a RAT on the victimized system. \\nInterlock actors download credential stealers ( | \\n
Remote Access Tools | \\nT1219 | \\nInterlock actors use legitimate remote access tools such as AnyDesk to enable remote connectivity and PuTTY to assist with lateral movement. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage | \\nT1567.002 | \\nInterlock actors exfiltrate data to cloud storage by executing AzCopy to upload data to the Azure storage blob. | \\n
Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol | \\nT1048 | \\nInterlock actors use file transfer tools like WinSCP to exfiltrate data. | \\n
Technique Title | \\nID | \\nUse | \\n
---|---|---|
Data Encrypted for Impact | \\nT1486 | \\n\\n Interlock actors encrypt victim data using a combined AES and RSA algorithm on compromised systems to interrupt availability to system and network resources. Actors code encryptors using C/C++. Interlock actors use encryptors for both Windows and Linux operating systems. \\nInterlock actors also use a FreeBSD ELF encryptor to encrypt victim data. \\n | \\n
Financial Theft | \\nT1657 | \\nInterlock actors deliver a ransom note titled !__README__!.txt via a GPO which provides victims with instructions to use a .onion URL to contact the actors over the Tor network. Actors use a double-extortion model, both encrypting victim data and threatening release of victim data on their Tor network leak site if the ransom is not paid. | \\n
The authoring agencies recommend organizations implement the mitigations below to improve your organization’s cybersecurity posture on the basis of the Interlock ransomware actors’ activity. These mitigations align with the Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) developed by CISA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The CPGs provide a minimum set of practices and protections that CISA and NIST recommend all organizations implement. CISA and NIST based the CPGs on existing cybersecurity frameworks and guidance to protect against the most common and impactful threats and TTPs. Visit CISA’s CPGs webpage for more information on the CPGs, including additional recommended baseline protections.
\\nIn addition to the below mitigations, Healthcare and Public Health (HPH) organizations should use HPH Sector CPGs to implement cybersecurity protections to address the most common threats and TTPs used against this sector.
\\nAt-risk organizations should implement the following mitigations:
\\nIn addition to applying mitigations, the authoring agencies recommend exercising, testing, and validating your organization\'s security program against the threat behaviors mapped to the MITRE ATT&CK for Enterprise framework in this advisory. The authoring agencies recommend testing your existing security controls inventory to assess how they perform against the ATT&CK techniques described in this advisory.
\\nTo get started:
\\nThe authoring agencies recommend continually testing your security program, at scale, in a production environment to ensure optimal performance against the MITRE ATT&CK techniques identified in this advisory.
\\nYour organization has no obligation to respond or provide information back to FBI in response to this joint advisory. If, after reviewing the information provided, your organization decides to provide information to FBI, reporting must be consistent with applicable state and federal laws.
\\nFBI is interested in any information that can be shared, to include boundary logs showing communication to and from foreign IP addresses, a sample ransom note, communications with threat actors, Bitcoin wallet information, decryptor files, and/or a benign sample of an encrypted file.
\\nAdditional details of interest include a targeted company point of contact, status and scope of infection, estimated loss, operational impact, transaction IDs, date of infection, date detected, initial attack vector, and host- and network-based indicators.
\\nThe authoring agencies do not encourage paying ransom as payment does not guarantee victim files will be recovered. Furthermore, payment may also embolden adversaries to target additional organizations, encourage other criminal actors to engage in the distribution of ransomware, and/or fund illicit activities. Regardless of whether you or your organization have decided to pay the ransom, FBI and CISA urge you to promptly report ransomware incidents to FBI’s Internet Crime Complain Center (IC3), a local FBI Field Office, or CISA via the agency’s Incident Reporting System or its 24/7 Operations Center (contact@mail.cisa.dhs.gov) or by calling 1-844-Say-CISA (1-844-729-2472).
\\nState, local, tribal, and territorial governments should report incidents to the MS-ISAC (SOC@cisecurity.org or 866-787-4722).
\\nHPH Sector organizations should report incidents to FBI or CISA but also can reach out to HHS at HHScyber@hhs.gov for cyber incident support focused on mitigating adverse patient impacts.
\\nThe information in this report is being provided “as is” for informational purposes only. The authoring agencies do not endorse any commercial entity, product, company, or service, including any entities, products, or services linked within this document. Any reference to specific commercial entities, products, processes, or services by service mark, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favor by the authoring agencies.
\\nCisco Talos contributed to this advisory.
\\nJuly 22, 2025: Initial version.
\\n1 Elio Biasiotto, et. al., “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack,” Talos Intelligence (blog), Cisco Talos, last modified November 7, 2024, https://blog.talosintelligence.com/emerging-interlock-ransomware/.
\\n2 Sekoia Threat Detection and Research team, “Interlock Ransomware Evolving Under the Radar,” Sekoia (blog), Sekoia, last modified April 16, 2025, https://blog.sekoia.io/interlock-ransomware-evolving-under-the-radar/.
\\n3 Yashvi Shah and Vignesh Dhatchanamoorthy, “ClickFix Deception: A Social Engineering Tactic to Deploy Malware,” McAfee Labs (blog), McAfee,last modified June 11, 2024, https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/other-blogs/mcafee-labs/clickfix-deception-a-social-engineering-tactic-to-deploy-malware/ and “HC3 Sector Alert: ClickFix Attacks,” Health Sector Cybersecurity Coordination Center, Department of Health and Human Services, last modified October 29, 2024, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/clickfix-attacks-sector-alert-tlpclear.pdf.
\\n4 Shah, “ClickFix Deception: A Social Engineering Tactic to Deploy Malware.”
\\n5 Sekoia Threat Detection and Research team, “Interlock Ransomware Evolving Under the Radar.”
\\n6 Bill Toulas, “Interlock Ransomware Gang Deploys New NodeSnake RAT on Universities,“ Bleeping Computer, May 28, 2025, https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/interlock-ransomware-gang-deploys-new-nodesnake-rat-on-universities/.
\\n7 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n8 International law-enforcement and Microsoft took down the Lumma Stealer malware in May 2025 by seizing internet domains the actors used to distribute the malware to actors and taking down domains that hosted the malware’s infrastructure. For more information, see Tara Seals, “Lumma Stealer Takedown Reveals Sprawling Operation,” Dark Reading, May 21, 2025, https://www.darkreading.com/cybersecurity-operations/lumma-stealer-takedown-sprawling-operation, and Steven Masada, “Disrupting Lumma Stealer: Microsoft Leads Global Action Against Favored Cybercrime Tool,” Microsoft On the Issues (blog), Microsoft, last modified May 21, 2025, https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/05/21/microsoft-leads-global-action-against-favored-cybercrime-tool/.
\\n9 Sekoia Threat Detection and Research team, “Interlock Ransomware Evolving Under the Radar.”
\\n10 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n11 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n12 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n13 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n14 Lawrence Abrams, “Meet Interlock — The New Ransomware Targeting FreeBSD Servers,” Bleeping Computer, November 3, 2024, https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/meet-interlock-the-new-ransomware-targeting-freebsd-servers/.
\\n15 Biasiotto, “Unwrapping the Emerging Interlock Ransomware Attack.”
\\n16 Graham Cluley, “Interlock Ransomware: What You Need to Know,” Fortra (blog), Fortra, last modified May 30, 2025, https://www.tripwire.com/state-of-security/interlock-ransomware-what-you-need-know.
\\n17 Sekoia Threat Detection and Research team, “Interlock Ransomware Evolving Under the Radar.”
","description":"Summary Note: This joint Cybersecurity Advisory is part of an ongoing #StopRansomware effort to publish advisories for network defenders that detail various ransomware variants and ransomware threat actors. These #StopRansomware advisories include recently and historically…","guid":"/node/23643","author":"CISA","authorUrl":null,"authorAvatar":null,"publishedAt":"2025-07-21T14:11:24.232Z","media":null,"categories":null,"attachments":null,"extra":{},"language":null},{"title":"Ransomware Actors Exploit Unpatched SimpleHelp Remote Monitoring and Management to Compromise Utility Billing Software Provider","url":"https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa25-163a","content":"The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is releasing this advisory in response to ransomware actors leveraging unpatched instances of a vulnerability in SimpleHelp Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) to compromise customers of a utility billing software provider. This incident reflects a broader pattern of ransomware actors targeting organizations through unpatched versions of SimpleHelp RMM since January 2025.
\\nSimpleHelp versions 5.5.7 and earlier contain several vulnerabilities, including CVE-2024-57727—a path traversal vulnerability.1 Ransomware actors likely leveraged CVE-2024-57727 to access downstream customers’ unpatched SimpleHelp RMM for disruption of services in double extortion compromises.1
\\nCISA added CVE-2024-57727 to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) Catalog on Feb. 13, 2025.
\\nCISA urges software vendors, downstream customers, and end users to immediately implement the Mitigations listed in this advisory based on confirmed compromise or risk of compromise.
\\nDownload the PDF version of this report:
\\n\\n\\n\\n\\n\\nCISA recommends organizations implement the mitigations below to respond to emerging ransomware activity exploiting SimpleHelp software. These mitigations align with the Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals (CPGs) developed by CISA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The CPGs provide a minimum set of practices and protections that CISA and NIST recommend all organizations implement. CISA and NIST based the CPGs on existing cybersecurity frameworks and guidance to protect against the most common and impactful threats, tactics, techniques, and procedures. Visit CISA’s CPGs webpage for more information on the CPGs, including additional recommended baseline protections. These mitigations apply to all critical infrastructure organizations.
\\nIf SimpleHelp is embedded or bundled in vendor-owned software or if a third-party service provider leverages SimpleHelp on a downstream customer’s network, then identify the SimpleHelp server version at the top of the file <file_path>/SimpleHelp/configuration/serverconfig.xml
. If version 5.5.7 or prior is found or has been used since January 2025, third-party vendors should:
Determine if the system is running an unpatched version of SimpleHelp RMM either directly or embedded in third-party software.
\\nDetermine if an endpoint is running the remote access (RAS) service by checking the following paths depending on the specific environment:
\\n%APPDATA%\\\\JWrapper-Remote Access
/opt/JWrapper-Remote Access
/Library/Application Support/JWrapper-Remote Access
If RAS installation is present and running, open the serviceconfig.xml
file in <file_path>/JWrapper-Remote Access/JWAppsSharedConfig/
to determine if the registered service is vulnerable. The lines starting with <ConnectTo
indicate the server addresses where the service is registered.
Determine the version of any SimpleHelp server by performing an HTTP query against it. Add /allversions
(e.g., https://simple-help.com/allversions
) to query the URL for the version page. This page will list the running version.
If an unpatched SimpleHelp version 5.5.7 or earlier is confirmed on a system, organizations should conduct threat hunting actions for evidence of compromise and continuously monitor for unusual inbound and outbound traffic from the SimpleHelp server. Note: This is not an exhaustive list of indicators of compromise.
\\naaa.exe
, bbb.exe
, etc.) with a creation time after January 2025. Additionally, perform host and network vulnerability security scans via reputable scanning services to verify malware is not on the system.If your organization is unable to immediately identify and patch vulnerable versions of SimpleHelp, apply appropriate workarounds. In this circumstance, CISA recommends using other vendor-provided mitigations when available. These non-patching workarounds should not be considered permanent fixes and organizations should apply the appropriate patch as soon as it is made available.
\\nIf a system has been encrypted by ransomware:
\\nCISA urges you to promptly report ransomware incidents to a local FBI Field Office, FBI’s Internet Crime Compliant Center (IC3), and CISA via CISA’s 24/7 Operations Center (report@cisa.gov or 1-844-Say-CISA).
\\nTo reduce opportunities for intrusion and to strengthen response to ransomware activity, CISA recommends customers of vendors and managed service providers (MSPs) implement the following best practices:
\\nYour organization has no obligation to respond or provide information back to FBI in response to this advisory. If, after reviewing the information provided, your organization decides to provide information to FBI, reporting must be consistent with applicable state and federal laws.
\\nFBI is interested in any information that can be shared, to include boundary logs showing communication to and from foreign IP addresses, a sample ransom note, communications with threat actors, Bitcoin wallet information, decryptor files, and/or a benign sample of an encrypted file.
\\nAdditional details of interest include a targeted company point of contact, status and scope of infection, estimated loss, operational impact, transaction IDs, date of infection, date detected, initial attack vector, and host- and network-based indicators.
\\nCISA and FBI do not encourage paying ransom as payment does not guarantee victim files will be recovered. Furthermore, payment may also embolden adversaries to target additional organizations, encourage other criminal actors to engage in the distribution of ransomware, and/or fund illicit activities. Regardless of whether you or your organization have decided to pay the ransom, FBI and CISA urge you to promptly report ransomware incidents to FBI’s Internet Crime Complain Center (IC3), a local FBI Field Office, or CISA via the agency’s Incident Reporting System or its 24/7 Operations Center (report@cisa.gov) or by calling 1-844-Say-CISA (1-844-729-2472).
\\nSimpleHelp users or vendors can contact support@simple-help.com for assistance with queries or concerns.
\\nThe information in this report is being provided “as is” for informational purposes only. CISA does not endorse any commercial entity, product, company, or service, including any entities, products, or services linked within this document. Any reference to specific commercial entities, products, processes, or services by service mark, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favor by CISA.
\\nJune 12, 2025: Initial version.
\\n1. Anthony Bradshaw, et. al., “DragonForce Actors Target SimpleHelp Vulnerabilities to Attack MSP, Customers,” Sophos News, May 27, 2025, https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2025/05/27/dragonforce-actors-target-simplehelp-vulnerabilities-to-attack-msp-customers/.
2. For instructions for upgrading to the latest version of SimpleHelp, see SimpleHelp’s security vulnerability advisory.
3. To determine possibility of compromise and next steps, see SimpleHelp’s guidance.
4. For instructions for upgrading to the latest version of SimpleHelp, see SimpleHelp’s security vulnerability advisory.