CTIPilot

Microsoft Entra ID

product · product:microsoft-entra-id contradictedsingle-source

Coverage timeline
11
first 2026-07-10 → last 2026-08-23
Peak priority
high
5 high · 6 notable
Sources cited
32
21 hosts
Sections touched
4
active-threats, deep-dive, research
Co-occurring entities
8
see Co-occurring entities below
ATT&CK techniques
53
pinned v19.2 · see below

ATT&CK techniques

53 techniques observed across 11 entries, derived from entry metadata and body evidence, never asserted without a published entry behind it · pinned to MITRE ATT&CK v19.2 · compare on the matrix · Navigator layer (JSON)

Reconnaissance TA0043

T1589.001Gather Victim Identity Information: Credentials×1

Adversaries may gather credentials that can be used during targeting. Account credentials gathered by adversaries may be those directly associated with the target victim organization or attempt to take advantage of the tendency for users to use the same passwords across personal and business accounts.

Evidence: 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · ATT&CK page ↗

T1598.004Phishing for Information: Spearphishing Voice×2

Adversaries may use voice communications to elicit sensitive information that can be used during targeting. Spearphishing for information is an attempt to trick targets into divulging information, frequently credentials or other actionable information. Spearphishing for information frequently involves social engineering techniques, such as posing as a source with a reason to collect information (ex: Impersonation) and/or creating a sense of urgency or alarm for the recipient.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · ATT&CK page ↗

Initial Access TA0001

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×5

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

T1190Exploit Public-Facing Application×1

Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network. The weakness in the system can be a software bug, a temporary glitch, or a misconfiguration.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/cve-2026-69836-entra-id-exploited-flag-corrected · ATT&CK page ↗

T1566.002Phishing: Spearphishing Link×3

Adversaries may send spearphishing emails with a malicious link in an attempt to gain access to victim systems. Spearphishing with a link is a specific variant of spearphishing. It is different from other forms of spearphishing in that it employs the use of links to download malware contained in email, instead of attaching malicious files to the email itself, to avoid defenses that may inspect email attachments. Spearphishing may also involve social engineering techniques, such as posing as a trusted source.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/gtig-russia-clusters-app-passwords-whatsapp-linking · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · 2026-07-10/forg365-m365-phaas-aitm-devicecode-forgcookie · ATT&CK page ↗

T1566.004Phishing: Spearphishing Voice×3

Adversaries may use voice communications to ultimately gain access to victim systems. Spearphishing voice is a specific variant of spearphishing. It is different from other forms of spearphishing in that it employs the use of manipulating a user into providing access to systems through a phone call or other forms of voice communications. Spearphishing frequently involves social engineering techniques, such as posing as a trusted source (ex: Impersonation) and/or creating a sense of urgency or alarm for the recipient.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-10/helix-data-extortion-devicecode-vishing-sharepoint-exfil · ATT&CK page ↗

Execution TA0002

T1053.005Scheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task×1

Adversaries may abuse the Windows Task Scheduler to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. There are multiple ways to access the Task Scheduler in Windows. The schtasks utility can be run directly on the command line, or the Task Scheduler can be opened through the GUI within the Administrator Tools section of the Control Panel. In some cases, adversaries have used a .NET wrapper for the Windows Task Scheduler, and alternatively, adversaries have used the Windows netapi32 library and Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) to create a scheduled task. Adversaries may also utilize the Powershell Cmdlet `Invoke-CimMethod`, which leverages WMI class `PS_ScheduledTask` to create a scheduled task via an XML path.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1059.001Command and Scripting Interpreter: PowerShell×1

Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution. PowerShell is a powerful interactive command-line interface and scripting environment included in the Windows operating system. Adversaries can use PowerShell to perform a number of actions, including discovery of information and execution of code. Examples include the <code>Start-Process</code> cmdlet which can be used to run an executable and the <code>Invoke-Command</code> cmdlet which runs a command locally or on a remote computer (though administrator permissions are required to use PowerShell to connect to remote systems).

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1204.002User Execution: Malicious File×1

An adversary may rely upon a user opening a malicious file in order to gain execution. Users may be subjected to social engineering to get them to open a file that will lead to code execution. This user action will typically be observed as follow-on behavior from Spearphishing Attachment. Adversaries may use several types of files that require a user to execute them, including .doc, .pdf, .xls, .rtf, .scr, .exe, .lnk, .pif, .cpl, .reg, and .iso.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/gtig-russia-clusters-app-passwords-whatsapp-linking · ATT&CK page ↗

T1204.004User Execution: Malicious Copy and Paste×2

An adversary may rely upon a user copying and pasting code in order to gain execution. Users may be subjected to social engineering to get them to copy and paste code directly into a Command and Scripting Interpreter. One such strategy is "ClickFix," in which adversaries present users with seemingly helpful solutions (such as prompts to fix errors or complete CAPTCHAs) that instead instruct the user to copy and paste malicious code.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/blockchain-dead-drop-c2-commodity-graphspy · 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Persistence TA0003

T1053.005Scheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task×1

Adversaries may abuse the Windows Task Scheduler to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. There are multiple ways to access the Task Scheduler in Windows. The schtasks utility can be run directly on the command line, or the Task Scheduler can be opened through the GUI within the Administrator Tools section of the Control Panel. In some cases, adversaries have used a .NET wrapper for the Windows Task Scheduler, and alternatively, adversaries have used the Windows netapi32 library and Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) to create a scheduled task. Adversaries may also utilize the Powershell Cmdlet `Invoke-CimMethod`, which leverages WMI class `PS_ScheduledTask` to create a scheduled task via an XML path.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×5

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

T1098.005Account Manipulation: Device Registration×2

Adversaries may register a device to an adversary-controlled account. Devices may be registered in a multifactor authentication (MFA) system, which handles authentication to the network, or in a device management system, which handles device access and compliance.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-10/helix-data-extortion-devicecode-vishing-sharepoint-exfil · ATT&CK page ↗

T1176Software Extensions×1

Adversaries may abuse software extensions to establish persistent access to victim systems. Software extensions are modular components that enhance or customize the functionality of software applications, including web browsers, Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), and other platforms. Extensions are typically installed via official marketplaces, app stores, or manually loaded by users, and they often inherit the permissions and access levels of the host application.

Evidence: 2026-07-10/forg365-m365-phaas-aitm-devicecode-forgcookie · ATT&CK page ↗

T1543.001Create or Modify System Process: Launch Agent×1

Adversaries may create or modify launch agents to repeatedly execute malicious payloads as part of persistence. When a user logs in, a per-user launchd process is started which loads the parameters for each launch-on-demand user agent from the property list (.plist) file found in <code>/System/Library/LaunchAgents</code>, <code>/Library/LaunchAgents</code>, and <code>~/Library/LaunchAgents</code>. Property list files use the <code>Label</code>, <code>ProgramArguments </code>, and <code>RunAtLoad</code> keys to identify the Launch Agent's name, executable location, and execution time. Launch Agents are often installed to perform updates to programs, launch user specified programs at login, or to conduct other developer tasks.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/blockchain-dead-drop-c2-commodity-graphspy · ATT&CK page ↗

T1543.003Create or Modify System Process: Windows Service×1

Adversaries may create or modify Windows services to repeatedly execute malicious payloads as part of persistence. When Windows boots up, it starts programs or applications called services that perform background system functions. Windows service configuration information, including the file path to the service's executable or recovery programs/commands, is stored in the Windows Registry.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1546.015Event Triggered Execution: Component Object Model Hijacking×1

Adversaries may establish persistence by executing malicious content triggered by hijacked references to Component Object Model (COM) objects. COM is a system within Windows to enable interaction between software components through the operating system. References to various COM objects are stored in the Registry.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1547.001Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder×1

Adversaries may achieve persistence by adding a program to a startup folder or referencing it with a Registry run key. Adding an entry to the "run keys" in the Registry or startup folder will cause the program referenced to be executed when a user logs in. These programs will be executed under the context of the user and will have the account's associated permissions level.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1556.006Modify Authentication Process: Multi-Factor Authentication×5

Privilege Escalation TA0004

T1053.005Scheduled Task/Job: Scheduled Task×1

Adversaries may abuse the Windows Task Scheduler to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. There are multiple ways to access the Task Scheduler in Windows. The schtasks utility can be run directly on the command line, or the Task Scheduler can be opened through the GUI within the Administrator Tools section of the Control Panel. In some cases, adversaries have used a .NET wrapper for the Windows Task Scheduler, and alternatively, adversaries have used the Windows netapi32 library and Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI) to create a scheduled task. Adversaries may also utilize the Powershell Cmdlet `Invoke-CimMethod`, which leverages WMI class `PS_ScheduledTask` to create a scheduled task via an XML path.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×5

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

T1098.005Account Manipulation: Device Registration×2

Adversaries may register a device to an adversary-controlled account. Devices may be registered in a multifactor authentication (MFA) system, which handles authentication to the network, or in a device management system, which handles device access and compliance.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-10/helix-data-extortion-devicecode-vishing-sharepoint-exfil · ATT&CK page ↗

T1543.001Create or Modify System Process: Launch Agent×1

Adversaries may create or modify launch agents to repeatedly execute malicious payloads as part of persistence. When a user logs in, a per-user launchd process is started which loads the parameters for each launch-on-demand user agent from the property list (.plist) file found in <code>/System/Library/LaunchAgents</code>, <code>/Library/LaunchAgents</code>, and <code>~/Library/LaunchAgents</code>. Property list files use the <code>Label</code>, <code>ProgramArguments </code>, and <code>RunAtLoad</code> keys to identify the Launch Agent's name, executable location, and execution time. Launch Agents are often installed to perform updates to programs, launch user specified programs at login, or to conduct other developer tasks.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/blockchain-dead-drop-c2-commodity-graphspy · ATT&CK page ↗

T1543.003Create or Modify System Process: Windows Service×1

Adversaries may create or modify Windows services to repeatedly execute malicious payloads as part of persistence. When Windows boots up, it starts programs or applications called services that perform background system functions. Windows service configuration information, including the file path to the service's executable or recovery programs/commands, is stored in the Windows Registry.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1546.015Event Triggered Execution: Component Object Model Hijacking×1

Adversaries may establish persistence by executing malicious content triggered by hijacked references to Component Object Model (COM) objects. COM is a system within Windows to enable interaction between software components through the operating system. References to various COM objects are stored in the Registry.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1547.001Boot or Logon Autostart Execution: Registry Run Keys / Startup Folder×1

Adversaries may achieve persistence by adding a program to a startup folder or referencing it with a Registry run key. Adding an entry to the "run keys" in the Registry or startup folder will cause the program referenced to be executed when a user logs in. These programs will be executed under the context of the user and will have the account's associated permissions level.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1548.002Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism: Bypass User Account Control×1

Adversaries may bypass UAC mechanisms to elevate process privileges on system. Windows User Account Control (UAC) allows a program to elevate its privileges (tracked as integrity levels ranging from low to high) to perform a task under administrator-level permissions, possibly by prompting the user for confirmation. The impact to the user ranges from denying the operation under high enforcement to allowing the user to perform the action if they are in the local administrators group and click through the prompt or allowing them to enter an administrator password to complete the action.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Stealth TA0005

T1027Obfuscated Files or Information×1

Adversaries may attempt to make an executable or file difficult to discover or analyze by encrypting, encoding, or otherwise obfuscating its contents on the system or in transit. This is common behavior that can be used across different platforms and the network to evade defenses.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1036.005Masquerading: Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location×2

Adversaries may match or approximate the name or location of legitimate files, Registry keys, or other resources when naming/placing them. This is done for the sake of evading defenses and observation.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1070.008Indicator Removal: Clear Mailbox Data×1

Adversaries may modify mail and mail application data to remove evidence of their activity. Email applications allow users and other programs to export and delete mailbox data via command line tools or use of APIs. Mail application data can be emails, email metadata, or logs generated by the application or operating system, such as export requests.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

T1078.004Valid Accounts: Cloud Accounts×5

Valid accounts in cloud environments may allow adversaries to perform actions to achieve Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion. Cloud accounts are those created and configured by an organization for use by users, remote support, services, or for administration of resources within a cloud service provider or SaaS application. Cloud Accounts can exist solely in the cloud; alternatively, they may be hybrid-joined between on-premises systems and the cloud through syncing or federation with other identity sources such as Windows Active Directory.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

T1218.005System Binary Proxy Execution: Mshta×1

Adversaries may abuse mshta.exe to proxy execution of malicious .hta files and Javascript or VBScript through a trusted Windows utility. There are several examples of different types of threats leveraging mshta.exe during initial compromise and for execution of code

Evidence: 2026-08-23/gtig-russia-clusters-app-passwords-whatsapp-linking · ATT&CK page ↗

T1497Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion×1

Adversaries may employ various means to detect and avoid virtualization and analysis environments. This may include changing behaviors based on the results of checks for the presence of artifacts indicative of a virtual machine environment (VME) or sandbox. If the adversary detects a VME, they may alter their malware to disengage from the victim or conceal the core functions of the implant. They may also search for VME artifacts before dropping secondary or additional payloads. Adversaries may use the information learned from Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1684.001Social Engineering: Impersonation×1

Adversaries may impersonate a trusted person or organization in order to persuade and trick a target into performing some action on their behalf. For example, adversaries may communicate with victims (via Phishing for Information, Phishing, or Internal Spearphishing) while impersonating a known sender such as an executive, colleague, or third-party vendor. Established trust can then be leveraged to accomplish an adversary’s ultimate goals, possibly against multiple victims.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

Defense Impairment TA0112

T1556.006Modify Authentication Process: Multi-Factor Authentication×5
T1685Disable or Modify Tools×1

Adversaries may disable, degrade, or tamper with security tools or applications (e.g., endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools, intrusion detection systems (IDS), antivirus, logging agents, sensors, etc.) to impair or reduce visibility of defensive capabilities. This may include stopping specific services, killing processes, modifying or deleting tool configuration files and Registry keys, or preventing tools from updating. This may also include impairing defenses more broadly by disrupting preventative, detection, and response mechanisms across host, network, and cloud environments.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Credential Access TA0006

T1056.001Input Capture: Keylogging×1

Adversaries may log user keystrokes to intercept credentials as the user types them. Keylogging is likely to be used to acquire credentials for new access opportunities when OS Credential Dumping efforts are not effective, and may require an adversary to intercept keystrokes on a system for a substantial period of time before credentials can be successfully captured. In order to increase the likelihood of capturing credentials quickly, an adversary may also perform actions such as clearing browser cookies to force users to reauthenticate to systems.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1110.003Brute Force: Password Spraying×1

Adversaries may use a single or small list of commonly used passwords against many different accounts to attempt to acquire valid account credentials. Password spraying uses one password (e.g. 'Password01'), or a small list of commonly used passwords, that may match the complexity policy of the domain. Logins are attempted with that password against many different accounts on a network to avoid account lockouts that would normally occur when brute forcing a single account with many passwords.

Evidence: 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

T1110.004Brute Force: Credential Stuffing×1

Adversaries may use credentials obtained from breach dumps of unrelated accounts to gain access to target accounts through credential overlap. Occasionally, large numbers of username and password pairs are dumped online when a website or service is compromised and the user account credentials accessed. The information may be useful to an adversary attempting to compromise accounts by taking advantage of the tendency for users to use the same passwords across personal and business accounts.

Evidence: 2026-07-15/proofpoint-oauth-client-id-spoofing-entra-id-evasion · ATT&CK page ↗

T1528Steal Application Access Token×6
T1539Steal Web Session Cookie×2

An adversary may steal web application or service session cookies and use them to gain access to web applications or Internet services as an authenticated user without needing credentials. Web applications and services often use session cookies as an authentication token after a user has authenticated to a website.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · 2026-07-10/forg365-m365-phaas-aitm-devicecode-forgcookie · ATT&CK page ↗

T1555.003Credentials from Password Stores: Credentials from Web Browsers×1

Adversaries may acquire credentials from web browsers by reading files specific to the target browser. Web browsers commonly save credentials such as website usernames and passwords so that they do not need to be entered manually in the future. Web browsers typically store the credentials in an encrypted format within a credential store; however, methods exist to extract plaintext credentials from web browsers.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1556.006Modify Authentication Process: Multi-Factor Authentication×5
T1557Adversary-in-the-Middle×2

Adversaries may attempt to position themselves between two or more networked devices using an adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) technique to support follow-on behaviors such as Network Sniffing, Transmitted Data Manipulation, or replay attacks (Exploitation for Credential Access). By abusing features of common networking protocols that can determine the flow of network traffic (e.g. ARP, DNS, LLMNR, etc.), adversaries may force a device to communicate through an adversary controlled system so they can collect information or perform additional actions.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1621Multi-Factor Authentication Request Generation×1

Adversaries may attempt to bypass multi-factor authentication (MFA) mechanisms and gain access to accounts by generating MFA requests sent to users.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

Discovery TA0007

T1082System Information Discovery×1

An adversary may attempt to get detailed information about the operating system and hardware, including version, patches, hotfixes, service packs, and architecture. Adversaries may use this information to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions. This behavior is distinct from Local Storage Discovery which is an adversary's discovery of local drive, disks and/or volumes.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1497Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion×1

Adversaries may employ various means to detect and avoid virtualization and analysis environments. This may include changing behaviors based on the results of checks for the presence of artifacts indicative of a virtual machine environment (VME) or sandbox. If the adversary detects a VME, they may alter their malware to disengage from the victim or conceal the core functions of the implant. They may also search for VME artifacts before dropping secondary or additional payloads. Adversaries may use the information learned from Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1518.001Software Discovery: Security Software Discovery×1

Adversaries may attempt to get a listing of security software, configurations, defensive tools, and sensors that are installed on a system or in a cloud environment. This may include things such as cloud monitoring agents and anti-virus. Adversaries may use the information from Security Software Discovery during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Lateral Movement TA0008

T1550.001Use Alternate Authentication Material: Application Access Token×2

Adversaries may use stolen application access tokens to bypass the typical authentication process and access restricted accounts, information, or services on remote systems. These tokens are typically stolen from users or services and used in lieu of login credentials.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · 2026-07-10/m365-conditional-access-gaps-railway-lshiy-campaigns · ATT&CK page ↗

Collection TA0009

T1056.001Input Capture: Keylogging×1

Adversaries may log user keystrokes to intercept credentials as the user types them. Keylogging is likely to be used to acquire credentials for new access opportunities when OS Credential Dumping efforts are not effective, and may require an adversary to intercept keystrokes on a system for a substantial period of time before credentials can be successfully captured. In order to increase the likelihood of capturing credentials quickly, an adversary may also perform actions such as clearing browser cookies to force users to reauthenticate to systems.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1113Screen Capture×1

Adversaries may attempt to take screen captures of the desktop to gather information over the course of an operation. Screen capturing functionality may be included as a feature of a remote access tool used in post-compromise operations. Taking a screenshot is also typically possible through native utilities or API calls, such as <code>CopyFromScreen</code>, <code>xwd</code>, or <code>screencapture</code>.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1114.002Email Collection: Remote Email Collection×1

Adversaries may target an Exchange server, Office 365, or Google Workspace to collect sensitive information. Adversaries may leverage a user's credentials and interact directly with the Exchange server to acquire information from within a network. Adversaries may also access externally facing Exchange services, Office 365, or Google Workspace to access email using credentials or access tokens. Tools such as MailSniper can be used to automate searches for specific keywords.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

T1115Clipboard Data×1

Adversaries may collect data stored in the clipboard from users copying information within or between applications.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1123Audio Capture×2

An adversary can leverage a computer's peripheral devices (e.g., microphones and webcams) or applications (e.g., voice and video call services) to capture audio recordings for the purpose of listening into sensitive conversations to gather information.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/gtig-russia-clusters-app-passwords-whatsapp-linking · 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1125Video Capture×2

An adversary can leverage a computer's peripheral devices (e.g., integrated cameras or webcams) or applications (e.g., video call services) to capture video recordings for the purpose of gathering information. Images may also be captured from devices or applications, potentially in specified intervals, in lieu of video files.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/gtig-russia-clusters-app-passwords-whatsapp-linking · 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

T1213.002Data from Information Repositories: Sharepoint×3

Adversaries may leverage the SharePoint repository as a source to mine valuable information. SharePoint will often contain useful information for an adversary to learn about the structure and functionality of the internal network and systems. For example, the following is a list of example information that may hold potential value to an adversary and may also be found on SharePoint:

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-07-18/abbott-exact-sciences-shinyhunters-entra-sso-vishing · 2026-07-10/helix-data-extortion-devicecode-vishing-sharepoint-exfil · ATT&CK page ↗

T1530Data from Cloud Storage×2
T1557Adversary-in-the-Middle×2

Adversaries may attempt to position themselves between two or more networked devices using an adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) technique to support follow-on behaviors such as Network Sniffing, Transmitted Data Manipulation, or replay attacks (Exploitation for Credential Access). By abusing features of common networking protocols that can determine the flow of network traffic (e.g. ARP, DNS, LLMNR, etc.), adversaries may force a device to communicate through an adversary controlled system so they can collect information or perform additional actions.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Command and Control TA0011

T1008Fallback Channels×1

Adversaries may use fallback or alternate communication channels if the primary channel is compromised or inaccessible in order to maintain reliable command and control and to avoid data transfer thresholds.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1071.004Application Layer Protocol: DNS×1

Adversaries may communicate using the Domain Name System (DNS) application layer protocol to avoid detection/network filtering by blending in with existing traffic. Commands to the remote system, and often the results of those commands, will be embedded within the protocol traffic between the client and server.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1090.002Proxy: External Proxy×1

Adversaries may use an external proxy to act as an intermediary for network communications to a command and control server to avoid direct connections to their infrastructure. Many tools exist that enable traffic redirection through proxies or port redirection, including HTRAN, ZXProxy, and ZXPortMap. Adversaries use these types of proxies to manage command and control communications, to provide resiliency in the face of connection loss, or to ride over existing trusted communications paths to avoid suspicion.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

T1102.001Web Service: Dead Drop Resolver×1

Adversaries may use an existing, legitimate external Web service to host information that points to additional command and control (C2) infrastructure. Adversaries may post content, known as a dead drop resolver, on Web services with embedded (and often obfuscated/encoded) domains or IP addresses. Once infected, victims will reach out to and be redirected by these resolvers.

Evidence: 2026-08-23/blockchain-dead-drop-c2-commodity-graphspy · ATT&CK page ↗

T1102.002Web Service: Bidirectional Communication×1

Adversaries may use an existing, legitimate external Web service as a means for sending commands to and receiving output from a compromised system over the Web service channel. Compromised systems may leverage popular websites and social media to host command and control (C2) instructions. Those infected systems can then send the output from those commands back over that Web service channel. The return traffic may occur in a variety of ways, depending on the Web service being utilized. For example, the return traffic may take the form of the compromised system posting a comment on a forum, issuing a pull request to development project, updating a document hosted on a Web service, or by sending a Tweet.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1105Ingress Tool Transfer×1

Adversaries may transfer tools or other files from an external system into a compromised environment. Tools or files may be copied from an external adversary-controlled system to the victim network through the command and control channel or through alternate protocols such as ftp. Once present, adversaries may also transfer/spread tools between victim devices within a compromised environment (i.e. Lateral Tool Transfer).

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1568Dynamic Resolution×1

Adversaries may dynamically establish connections to command and control infrastructure to evade common detections and remediations. This may be achieved by using malware that shares a common algorithm with the infrastructure the adversary uses to receive the malware's communications. These calculations can be used to dynamically adjust parameters such as the domain name, IP address, or port number the malware uses for command and control.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1573Encrypted Channel×1

Adversaries may employ an encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol. Despite the use of a secure algorithm, these implementations may be vulnerable to reverse engineering if secret keys are encoded and/or generated within malware samples/configuration files.

Evidence: 2026-07-21/hollowgraph-m365-calendar-graph-api-c2-cavern · ATT&CK page ↗

T1573.002Encrypted Channel: Asymmetric Cryptography×1

Adversaries may employ a known asymmetric encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol. Asymmetric cryptography, also known as public key cryptography, uses a keypair per party: one public that can be freely distributed, and one private. Due to how the keys are generated, the sender encrypts data with the receiver’s public key and the receiver decrypts the data with their private key. This ensures that only the intended recipient can read the encrypted data. Common public key encryption algorithms include RSA and ElGamal.

Evidence: 2026-08-01/captivecrunch-storm-2945-hospitality-captive-portal-rat · ATT&CK page ↗

Impact TA0040

T1657Financial Theft×1

Adversaries may steal monetary resources from targets through extortion, social engineering, technical theft, or other methods aimed at their own financial gain at the expense of the availability of these resources for victims. Financial theft is the ultimate objective of several popular campaign types including extortion by ransomware, business email compromise (BEC) and fraud, "pig butchering," bank hacking, and exploiting cryptocurrency networks.

Evidence: 2026-08-07/unc6671-blackfile-multi-brand-passkey-vishing-aitm · ATT&CK page ↗

Story timeline

  1. 2026-08-23Three Russia-nexus espionage clusters compromise European diplomats and academics without malware, by talking targets through app passwords, device-code approvals and WhatsApp device-linking, all of which are legitimate features working as designed
    active-threatsNo exploit and no payload, the victim approves the attacker's session, or issues a credential the second factor never sees
  2. 2026-08-23CVE-2026-69836, Microsoft corrected its own Entra ID CVSS 10.0 record from exploited to not-exploited within a day, and ENISA's exploited feed still says otherwise two days later
    trending-vulnerabilitiesA maximum-severity identity-plane CVE with nothing to patch, and two authorities that disagree about whether it was ever exploited
  3. 2026-08-23Dead-drop command-and-control went commodity: three of four new entrants on Red Canary's monthly list resolve their C2 from a dead drop, two of them from a public blockchain, and the fourth is a GUI for Entra ID device-code phishing
    researchDead-drop C2 moved from novelty to routine, and the control is an egress baseline rather than a blocklist
  4. 2026-08-07UNC6671 kept operating after BlackFile's announced retirement, across four further extortion brands, and its vishing pretext is now an urgent order to enroll a FIDO2 passkey
    deep-diveThe group behind BlackFile never stopped: GTIG ties four newer extortion brands to one operator whose lure attacks passkey enrolment, not the passkey
  5. 2026-08-01CaptiveCrunch: an SVR-linked sub-cluster hijacks hotel and conference captive portals to serve fake update lures, a Go RAT and a token-stealing PowerShell module to travelling staff
    deep-diveMicrosoft attributes worldwide captive-portal traffic manipulation to Storm-2945, delivering the CornFlake RAT and ChocoShell stealer to travellers
  6. 2026-07-21HOLLOWGRAPH: a Cavern-framework backdoor that turns a compromised Microsoft 365 calendar into a Graph-API dead-drop C2
    deep-diveGroup-IB details HOLLOWGRAPH, a .NET implant using a victim's own M365 calendar as two-way C2 over the Graph API, with DNS-tunneled Entra credential refresh
  7. 2026-07-18Abbott confirms a Cancer Diagnostics cyber incident; ShinyHunters claims a vished Entra SSO account and 30M+ records
    active-threatsAbbott confirms unauthorized access to its Cancer Diagnostics (Exact Sciences) systems as ShinyHunters claims a helpdesk-vishing to Entra SSO breach
  8. 2026-07-15Proofpoint: OAuth client ID spoofing validates stolen Entra ID credentials at scale without writing a successful sign-in log
    researchA fake client_id on Entra ID's ROPC token endpoint lets attackers enumerate and validate credentials while leaving a blank application name in the sign-in log
  9. 2026-07-10Two 2026 M365 account-takeover campaigns (Railway device-code phishing, LSHIY ROPC spray) beat Conditional Access without breaking MFA
    researchHuntress: device-code phishing and ROPC token-spray defeat M365 tenants by routing around the auth paths Conditional Access actually inspects
  10. 2026-07-10'Helix' data-extortion cluster pairs manager-impersonation vishing with device-code phishing and automated SharePoint exfiltration
    active-threatsReliaQuest: new 'Helix' extortion cluster (BlackFile/ShinyHunters lineage) vishes staff into device-code sign-ins, then bulk-loots SharePoint
  11. 2026-07-10Forg365: a commercial Microsoft 365 phishing-as-a-service kit bundling device-code + AiTM phishing, in-panel AI lure drafting, and a browser extension for SSO-cookie persistence
    active-threatsZeroBEC details Forg365, a Telegram-sold M365 PhaaS that survives MFA and keeps operator access alive via a ForgCookie browser extension

Where this entity is cited

  • active-threats4
  • research3
  • deep-dive3
  • trending-vulnerabilities1

Source distribution

  • bleepingcomputer.com6 (19%)
  • huntress.com3 (9%)
  • cloud.google.com2 (6%)
  • reliaquest.com2 (6%)
  • securelist.com2 (6%)
  • thehackernews.com2 (6%)
  • abbott.com1 (3%)
  • api.first.org1 (3%)
  • other13 (41%)

Co-occurring entities

Derived: referenced by the same focused operational entries (weekly summaries and report roundups don't count); ×N counts the shared entries.

All cited sources (32)

Entries about Microsoft Entra ID (11)

2026-08-23 · view entry permalink →

HIGHNATOB2

Three Russia-nexus espionage clusters compromise European diplomats and academics without malware, by talking targets through app passwords, device-code approvals and WhatsApp device-linking, all of which are legitimate features working as designed

Google Threat Intelligence Group published research on 2026-08-20 covering three suspected Russia-nexus espionage clusters that share a method rather than infrastructure: they compromise accounts by driving legitimate authentication features, not by delivering malware (Google Threat Intelligence Group, 2026-08-20). The reported target set puts this constituency inside the blast radius directly, "individuals working in academia, aerospace and defense, governments and think tanks across Europe", alongside US academia and think tanks. GTIG assesses with high confidence that all three possess a Russian nexus, and with moderate confidence that two of them are sub-clusters of the actor it tracks as ICE RELIC (the cluster more widely known as Midnight Blizzard) handling initial access.

Application passwords (UNC6293). An application-specific password is an account-level passcode issued so that a legacy client can authenticate without going through the second factor. The cluster sends a diplomatic or conference-themed lure, a PDF containing screenshots that walk the target through creating a password under a specific, official-looking name and sharing it back. Nothing is exploited and no code runs; the victim performs the whole operation, and the resulting credential is designed not to prompt for a second factor. Campaigns are deliberately small, typically fewer than five targets at a time. By mid-2026 the cluster had added a variation asking targets to share a verification code or post-login URL after authenticating legitimately to an external provider.

Device codes and WhatsApp linking (UNC7005, tracked here as Storm-2945, the cluster behind the CaptiveCrunch hospitality-WiFi captive-portal activity). The device-code flow exists so that input-constrained devices can authenticate: one device shows a short code, the user approves it on another. Phished, it becomes a way to have the victim authorise the attacker's session. This cluster delivers those prompts through emailed links to domains impersonating real conferences (GTIG documents a spoof of a European security forum reusing a template from an earlier embassy-invitation operation) and the pages fingerprint the browser with client-side JavaScript to detect automated scanners and headless browsers, withholding the code entirely until the visitor looks like a real person. That last detail matters operationally: a security team detonating the link in a sandbox may see a benign page.

The WhatsApp technique is the same idea applied to a messaging platform. The page asks for the target's phone number, the attacker's backend uses it to generate a genuine device-linking request, and the resulting code is displayed to the victim with instructions to approve it, linking the attacker's device to the victim's account through the vendor's own supported mechanism. The page then offers a voice call, encrypted chat or file share; if the victim joins the call, browser JavaScript captures microphone and camera through the standard media-capture interface and uploads the recording while the call is presented as having failed.

OAuth token harvesting (UNC5976). Assessed as operationally distinct from the other two, this cluster buys file-sharing-themed domains, creates a cloud project for each, and serves a fake file-share login. A target choosing to continue with their existing identity provider is sent through a genuine consent flow and then redirected to the attacker's own cloud-project URL, where a script captures the resulting token. GTIG disrupted the operation by disabling the malicious cloud projects; the cluster stood up at least twelve new domains within roughly three months and began moving hosting elsewhere. It has separately distributed a malicious spreadsheet plugin GTIG names HEADRUSH, observed in April 2026 and leading to an HTML Application downloader (a scripted payload executed through the built-in Windows host binary rather than as a conventional executable) delivered through a domain impersonating a Ukrainian research institute.

Detection concepts, telemetry class first. The unifying property is that none of this produces endpoint malware telemetry on the way in, the compromise completes in the identity plane, so that is where it must be caught. In identity and sign-in telemetry: creation of an application-specific password, which for most organisations should be a rare or extinct event and is trivially alertable; completion of a device-code authorisation, particularly where the approving session and the resulting access originate from different networks or geographies; and new OAuth consent grants to applications outside an approved inventory. In mail and web telemetry, conference-themed invitations linking to newly registered lookalike domains are the delivery pattern, though the browser fingerprinting means automated detonation may return a clean verdict, treat a link that renders differently for a sandbox than for a user as suspicious in itself rather than as a false positive. On the messaging side, the observable is the account's own linked-device list, which is user-visible and rarely inspected.

individuals working in academia, aerospace and defense, governments and think tanks across Europe

GTIG assesses with high confidence that these three threat clusters

Google Threat Intelligence Group 2026-08-20
threat23 Aug 05:12Zsingle-sourceOpen finding ↗

2026-08-23 · view entry permalink →

NOTABLENATOB2

Dead-drop command-and-control went commodity: three of four new entrants on Red Canary's monthly list resolve their C2 from a dead drop, two of them from a public blockchain, and the fourth is a GUI for Entra ID device-code phishing

Red Canary's monthly threat round-up, published 2026-08-20 against July 2026 telemetry, is useful here not for its rankings but for what the new arrivals have in common: three of the four resolve their command-and-control address from a dead drop rather than from a hardcoded domain or IP, and two of those read that dead drop off a public blockchain (Red Canary, 2026-08-20). The technique, querying a smart contract whose stored value is the current C2 URL, which Red Canary calls EtherHiding and dates to first reporting in 2023; has been documented for a while; what this round-up records is its arrival in commodity tooling, Red Canary counts three of its top ten using it this month, two of them new arrivals.

The mechanics are worth stating precisely because they determine what a defender can and cannot block. Phexia, a macOS remote-access tool and stealer delivered through malicious copy-and-paste lures, queries public Polygon RPC endpoints for a smart contract's value, decodes the ABI-encoded response to extract a URL, posts to it and pipes the reply into osascript; it keeps Telegram and Steam profiles as redundant dead-drop channels and persists with a LaunchAgent that sets both KeepAlive and RunAtLoad. EtherRAT is "a Node.js-based remote access trojan observed targeting Windows workstations via social engineering and Linux servers via exploitation of server-side vulnerabilities", polling one or more public Ethereum RPC endpoints for a C2 URL held at a predefined contract address, with modules for credential theft, lateral movement and web-server hijacking. CastleRAT resolves its dead drop through steamcommunity.com or adversary-controlled domains. Red Canary's own summary of why this matters operationally: "The technique makes traditional C2 blocking challenging, since the URL can be updated dynamically by adversaries", the operator rewrites one contract value and the change propagates to every installation without redistributing the malware.

The fourth entrant is a different problem. GraphSpy is an open-source initial-access and post-exploitation tool for Entra ID and Microsoft 365 that, in Red Canary's words, "runs a local web server that presents a browser-based GUI, which enables less technical adversaries to engage in Entra ID attacks". It centralises device-code phishing, primary refresh token theft and abuse, Windows Hello for Business key registration, MFA method manipulation, and exfiltration from SharePoint, OneDrive, Outlook and Teams. Red Canary notes it is the third device-code phishing tool to reach its top ten in 2026, after GraphRunner in May and Kali365 in June, three separate toolkits in four months packaging the same identity attack behind progressively lower skill requirements.

Detection concepts, telemetry class first. For the dead-drop families the signal is in egress telemetry: an outbound HTTPS session from an endpoint or server to a public blockchain RPC endpoint, made by a process that has no business speaking to one; the request itself is ordinary-looking JSON-RPC to a widely used, reputable host, so the discriminator is the process and the host role, not the destination's reputation. On macOS, correlate it with process-lineage telemetry showing osascript executing content received from a network read, and with persistence artifacts; a newly written LaunchAgent whose program arguments carry an encoded payload. For GraphSpy the surface is identity telemetry rather than endpoint: device-code authentication events for users and locations that have no workflow requiring that flow, primary refresh token issuance followed by access from an unfamiliar device, and new Windows Hello for Business key or MFA method registration on an account that did not request it. Red Canary's own mitigation for the device-code half is to revoke the affected user's refresh tokens and active sessions, reset credentials, force re-authentication, and restrict the device-code flow through Conditional Access policies "for users and locations that do not require it".

GraphSpy runs a local web server that presents a browser-based GUI, which enables less technical adversaries to engage in Entra ID attacks.

The technique makes traditional C2 blocking challenging, since the URL can be updated dynamically by adversaries

the public blockchain RPC endpoints highlighted on chainlist.org are a good place to start, as adversaries are more likely to leverage widely-used URLs instead of standing up their own infrastructure

Red Canary 2026-08-20
research23 Aug 04:46Zsingle-sourceOpen finding ↗
Sources: Red Canary

2026-08-23 · view entry permalink →

NOTABLECVE-2026-69836updatedNATOA2

CVE-2026-69836, Microsoft corrected its own Entra ID CVSS 10.0 record from exploited to not-exploited within a day, and ENISA's exploited feed still says otherwise two days later

Microsoft published CVE-2026-69836 on 2026-08-20 as a deserialization-of-untrusted-data flaw (CWE-502) in Entra ID, rated CVSS 3.1 base 10.0 with the vector AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:U/RL:O/RC:C and described in a single sentence: "Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Entra ID allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network" (Microsoft Security Response Center, 2026-08-21). No mechanism, no affected component and no attack path is published beyond that line. This is one of Microsoft's cloud-service CVEs, issued for transparency rather than to drive customer action; its own FAQ states the flaw "has already been fully mitigated by Microsoft. There is no action for users of this service to take", and the record's customerActionRequired field is false (Microsoft Security Response Center, 2026-08-21). There is nothing to patch, nothing to configure, and no version boundary to check.

What makes it worth a defender's attention is the exploitation field, and the fact that two authorities currently give different answers about it. Microsoft's revision history shows the record published at version 1 on 2026-08-20 and revised at version 1.1 the following day with the note "This vulnerability was not exploited in the wild. This is an informational change only", a correction of the Exploited field (Microsoft Security Response Center, 2026-08-21). The wording only makes sense if the field briefly held some other value during the day the record was live before the correction. The current record is internally consistent with not-exploited: the exploitability assessment reads "Exploitation Less Likely", and the CVSS vector Microsoft itself publishes carries E:U, exploit-code maturity "Unproven".

ENISA's EU Vulnerability Database has not followed. Its record for this CVE (EUVD-2026-63693) was last updated on 2026-08-22, a day after Microsoft's correction, and still carries an exploitedSince value of 2026-08-21 on its exploited-vulnerabilities feed, alongside an EPSS probability of 0.0137, which EUVD renders as the percentage 1.37 (ENISA EU Vulnerability Database, 2026-08-22). The only reference that record cites is the Microsoft page that now says the opposite. The same feed carries the same field, correctly, for the actively exploited TrueConf Server pair, so the mechanism works; this specific record simply did not get the correction. CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalogue does not list the CVE at all, and no research lab or managed-detection vendor has published exploitation telemetry of its own.

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Entra ID allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

This vulnerability was not exploited in the wild. This is an informational change only.

This vulnerability has already been fully mitigated by Microsoft. There is no action for users of this service to take.

Microsoft Security Response Center 2026-08-21
Correctionrun 2026-09-06T1308Z-auditcvesbodysourcing_note

The EPSS figure quoted from ENISA's EU Vulnerability Database record was its percentage rendering, not the probability the figure names. EUVD's API returns EPSS multiplied by one hundred, so the 1.37 on that record is an exploitation probability of 0.0137, which FIRST.org's own value for the same day corroborates (FIRST.org EPSS API, value as of 2026-08-22). This does not touch the entry's finding, which is about EUVD's exploited flag rather than its score: that flag still contradicts Microsoft's own corrected record.

vulnerability23 Aug 04:42ZcontradictedOpen finding ↗

Earlier coverage (8)

2026-07-21NOTABLEupdatedNATOB2HOLLOWGRAPH: a Cavern-framework backdoor that turns a compromised Microsoft 365 calendar into a Graph-API dead-drop C2Group-IB documented (2026-07-20) HOLLOWGRAPH, a NativeAOT .NET backdoor it links with high confidence to the Cavern C2 framework (previously tied to the Iran-nexus Cavern Manticore actor). HOLLOWGRAPH never contacts attacker infrastructure directly: it uses the Microsoft Graph API to plant and read tasking as attachments on far-future calendar events in a compromised M365 mailbox, and tunnels Entra ID credential refresh over IPv6 DNS. Current victimology is narrow (Israeli organisations), but the Graph-API-calendar-as-C2 technique is directly transferable to any Microsoft 365 tenant, the platform at the centre of most CH/EU public-sector estates.2026-08-07HIGHNATOB2UNC6671 kept operating after BlackFile's announced retirement, across four further extortion brands, and its vishing pretext is now an urgent order to enroll a FIDO2 passkeyGoogle Threat Intelligence Group reports that UNC6671 (the actor behind the BlackFile extortion brand, whose retirement was announced in May 2026) continued operating across four further brands (Redact, Pink, Helix, Falcon) linked by shared root domains, identical phishing templates and overlapping victim targeting. The intrusion chain is unchanged and identity-centric: a call to an employee's personal mobile impersonating the IT helpdesk, now sometimes spoofing the real helpdesk number, demanding an urgent FIDO2 passkey or MFA re-enrolment, into an adversary-in-the-middle panel that takes credentials and MFA tokens, then scripted bulk exfiltration from Microsoft 365 and Okta-fronted SaaS. Targeting narrowed by July 2026 onto financial services, private equity, law firms and rating agencies.2026-08-01HIGHNATOB2CaptiveCrunch: an SVR-linked sub-cluster hijacks hotel and conference captive portals to serve fake update lures, a Go RAT and a token-stealing PowerShell module to travelling staffMicrosoft Threat Intelligence disclosed CaptiveCrunch on 2026-07-31, a campaign it attributes to Storm-2945, assessed as an operational sub-cluster of the SVR-attributed actor Midnight Blizzard. Since early May 2026 the actor has manipulated DNS and HTTP traffic on hospitality networks served by captive portals worldwide, redirecting users through its own infrastructure and answering browser connectivity checks with ClickFix-style fake browser and OS update prompts. The payloads are CornFlake, a Go Windows RAT with redundant persistence and a watchdog that restores anything defenders remove, and ChocoShell, an in-memory PowerShell stealer that takes browser cookies, saved passwords, Microsoft 365 SSO tokens and Wi-Fi credentials. Since 16 July some landing pages also drive Entra ID device-code phishing. Travelling government and diplomatic staff are named target populations.2026-07-10HIGHupdatedNATOB2Two 2026 M365 account-takeover campaigns (Railway device-code phishing, LSHIY ROPC spray) beat Conditional Access without breaking MFAHuntress published a comparative root-cause analysis of two 2026 Microsoft 365 account-takeover campaigns that both bypassed Conditional Access policies requiring MFA; not by defeating MFA but by using auth flows CA rarely covers. "Railway" (March 2026, 344 orgs incl. Germany) used device-code phishing to harvest 90-day OAuth tokens; "LSHIY" (June 2026, 78 accounts across 64 orgs) ran 81M+ ROPC login attempts against Azure CLI through the /token endpoint. Of the 78 LSHIY-compromised accounts, 55 had active CA policies requiring MFA that failed because of scoping gaps. Every M365 tenant should block the device-code flow and ensure CA covers all cloud apps and all client app types including legacy auth.2026-07-18NOTABLEupdatedNATOA3Abbott confirms a Cancer Diagnostics cyber incident; ShinyHunters claims a vished Entra SSO account and 30M+ recordsAbbott Laboratories confirmed (2026-07-16) unauthorized access to a limited number of internal systems in its Cancer Diagnostics business (the acquired Exact Sciences unit) only. Separately, the ShinyHunters extortion group claims the intrusion began with a vishing call that compromised a Microsoft Entra ID single-sign-on account, then used it to pull 30M+ records from Entra, ServiceNow, SharePoint, Databricks and Coupa; a claim Abbott has neither confirmed nor attributed. The confirmed incident plus the same vishing-to-cloud-SSO tradecraft this actor uses against SaaS-integrated enterprises makes it relevant to healthcare and any SharePoint/Entra-dependent estate.2026-07-15NOTABLENATOB2Proofpoint: OAuth client ID spoofing validates stolen Entra ID credentials at scale without writing a successful sign-in logProofpoint (2026-07-13) documented OAuth client ID spoofing against Microsoft Entra ID, independently weaponised by two clusters. An attacker POSTs credentials to the /common/oauth2/token endpoint using the legacy ROPC flow with an arbitrary unregistered GUID as client_id; Entra ID's differential AADSTS error responses leak username and password validity, and AADSTS700016 ("application not found") is returned when the credentials are BOTH correct, turning a code defenders read as a harmless misconfiguration into a credential-validity oracle. Because the client_id is unregistered, the sign-in log entry (where one appears at all) carries a blank application name, defeating detections that correlate authentication spikes by app. The concrete fix is to block the ROPC grant type outright, because Conditional Access policies scoped to specific applications are the exact control this technique sidesteps.2026-07-10NOTABLENATOB2Forg365: a commercial Microsoft 365 phishing-as-a-service kit bundling device-code + AiTM phishing, in-panel AI lure drafting, and a browser extension for SSO-cookie persistenceZeroBEC documented Forg365, a Telegram-distributed, subscription-priced Microsoft 365 phishing-as-a-service platform that pairs an OAuth device-code phishing path with an adversary-in-the-middle session-theft path, an in-panel AI lure generator, and a companion browser extension (ForgCookie) that silently refreshes the stolen Microsoft SSO cookie so access persists without the victim re-authenticating. Both paths yield a valid, MFA-satisfied token because the victim completes the real Microsoft login. It is a distinct kit and operator from the Railway/EvilTokens device-code campaign covered earlier, same primitive, productized.2026-07-10HIGHNATOB2'Helix' data-extortion cluster pairs manager-impersonation vishing with device-code phishing and automated SharePoint exfiltrationReliaQuest documented a previously unreported data-extortion cluster it calls Helix, assessed as a likely continuation of the BlackFile (UNC6671) and ShinyHunters ecosystems on shared registrar and hosting infrastructure. Operators phone a target impersonating their named manager (spoofed caller-ID), walk them through an Entra ID device-code sign-in that captures a session token without a password and sidesteps Conditional Access, register a new Authenticator within minutes for persistence, then run automated SharePoint enumeration and bulk exfiltration. SharePoint + Entra ID is the default identity/collaboration stack across Swiss and EU public-sector tenants, so the playbook is directly reachable; disabling the device-code flow is the single highest-impact control.