Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

Footer About

Footer About

Labels

Showing posts with label Cybercrime Groups. Show all posts

Targeted Cyberattack Foiled by Resecurity Honeypot


 

There has been a targeted intrusion attempt against the internal environment of Resecurity in November 2025, which has been revealed in detail by the cyber security company. In order to expose the adversaries behind this attack, the company deliberately turned the attack into a counterintelligence operation by using advanced deception techniques.

In response to a threat actor using a low-privilege employee account in order to gain access to an enterprise network, Resecurity’s incident response team redirected the intrusion into a controlled synthetic data honeypot that resembles a realistic enterprise network within which the intrusion could be detected. 

A real-time analysis of the attackers’ infrastructure, as well as their tradecraft, was not only possible with this move, but it also triggered the involvement of law enforcement after a number of evidences linked the activity to an Egyptian-based threat actor and infrastructure associated with the ShinyHunter cybercrime group, which has subsequently been shown to have claimed responsibility for the data breach falsely. 

Resecurity demonstrated how modern deception platforms, with the help of synthetic datasets generated by artificial intelligence, combined with carefully curated artifacts gathered from previously leaked dark web material, can transform reconnaissance attempts by financially motivated cybercriminals into actionable intelligence.

The active defense strategies are becoming increasingly important in today's cybersecurity operations as they do not expose customer or proprietary data.

The Resecurity team reported that threat actors operating under the nickname "Scattered Lapsus$ Hunters" publicly claimed on Telegram that they had accessed the company's systems and stolen sensitive information, such as employee information, internal communications, threat intelligence reports, client data, and more. This claim has been strongly denied by the firm. 

In addition to the screenshots shared by the group, it was later confirmed that they came from a honeypot environment that had been built specifically for Resecurity instead of Resecurity's production infrastructure. 

On the 21st of November 2025, the company's digital forensics and incident response team observed suspicious probes of publicly available services, as well as targeted attempts to access a restricted employee account. This activity was detected by the company's digital forensics and incident response team. 

There were initial traces of reconnaissance traffic to Egyptian IP addresses, such as 156.193.212.244 and 102.41.112.148. As a result of the use of commercial VPN services, Resecurity shifted from containment to observation, rather than blocking the intrusion.

Defenders created a carefully staged honeytrap account filled with synthetic data in order to observe the attackers' tactics, techniques, and procedures, rather than blocking the intrusion. 

A total of 28,000 fake consumer profiles were created in the decoy environment, along with nearly 190,000 mock payment transactions generated from publicly available patterns that contained fake Stripe records as well as fake email addresses that were derived from credential “combo lists.” 

In order to further enhance the authenticity of the data, Resecurity reactivated a retired Mattermost collaboration platform, and seeded it with outdated 2023 logs, thereby convincing the attackers that the system was indeed genuine. 

There were approximately 188,000 automated requests routed through residential proxy networks in an attempt by the attackers to harvest the synthetic dataset between December 12 and December 24. This effort ultimately failed when repeated connection failures revealed operational security shortcomings and revealed some of the attackers' real infrastructure in the process of repeated connection failures exposing vulnerabilities in the security of the system. 

A recent press release issued by Resecurity denies the breach allegation, stating that the systems cited by the threat actors were never part of its production environment, but were rather deliberately exposed honeypot assets designed to attract and observe malicious activity from a distance.

After receiving external inquiries, the company’s digital forensics and incident response teams first detected reconnaissance activity on November 21, 2025, after a threat actor began probing publicly accessible services on November 20, 2025, in a report published on December 24 and shared with reporters. 

Telemetry gathered early in the investigation revealed a number of indications that the network had been compromised, including connections coming from Egyptian IP addresses, as well as traffic being routed through Mullvas VPN infrastructure. 

A controlled honeypot account has been deployed by Resecurity inside an isolated environment as a response to the attack instead of a move to containment immediately. As a result, the attacker was able to authenticate to and interact with systems populated completely with false employee, customer, and payment information while their actions were closely monitored by Resecurity. 

Specifically, the synthetic datasets were designed to replicate the actual enterprise data structures, including over 190,000 fictitious consumer profiles and over 28,000 dummy payment transactions that were formatted to adhere to Stripe's official API specifications, as defined in the Stripe API documentation. 

In the early months of the operation, the attacker used residential proxy networks extensively to generate more than 188,000 requests for data exfiltration, which occurred between December 12 and December 24 as an automated data exfiltration operation. 

During this period, Resecurity collected detailed telemetry on the adversary's tactics, techniques, and supporting infrastructure, resulting in several operational security failures that were caused by proxy disruptions that briefly exposed confirmed IP addresses, which led to multiple operational security failures. 

As the deception continued, investigators introduced additional synthetic datasets, which led to even more mistakes that narrowed the attribution and helped determine the servers that orchestrated the activity, leading to an increase in errors. 

In the aftermath of sharing the intelligence with law enforcement partners, a foreign agency collaborating with Resecurity issued a subpoena request, which resulted in Resecurity receiving a subpoena. 

Following this initial breach, the attackers continued to make claims on Telegram, and their data was also shared with third-party breach analysts, but these statements, along with the new claims, were found to lack any verifiable evidence of actual compromise of real client systems. Independent review found that no evidence of the breach existed. 

Upon further examination, it was determined that the Telegram channel used to distribute these claims had been suspended, as did follow-on assertions from the ShinyHunters group, which were also determined to be derived from a honeytrap environment.

The actors, unknowingly, gained access to a decoy account and infrastructure, which was enough to confirm their fall into the honeytrap. Nevertheless, the incident demonstrates both the growing sophistication of modern deception technology as well as the importance of embedding them within a broader, more resilient security framework in order to maximize their effectiveness. 

A honeypot and synthetic data environment can be a valuable tool for observing attacker behavior. However, security leaders emphasize that the most effective way to use these tools is to combine them with strong foundational controls, including continuous vulnerability management, zero trust access models, multifactor authentication, employee awareness training, and disciplined network segmentation. 

Resecurity represents an evolution in defensive strategy from a reactive and reactionary model to one where organizations are taking a proactive approach in the fight against cyberthreats by gathering intelligence, disrupting the operations of adversaries, and reducing real-world risk in the process. 

There is no doubt that the ability to observe, mislead, and anticipate hostile activity, before meaningful damage occurs, is becoming an increasingly important element of enterprise defenses in the age of cyber threats as they continue to evolve at an incredible rate.

Together, the episodes present a rare, transparent view of how modern cyber attacks unfold-and how they can be strategically neutralized in order to avoid escalation of risk to data and real systems. 

Ultimately, Resecurity's claims serve more as an illustration of how threat actors are increasingly relying on perception, publicity, and speed to shape narratives before facts are even known to have been uncovered, than they serve as evidence that a successful breach occurred. 

Defenders of the case should take this lesson to heart: visibility and control can play a key role in preventing a crisis. It has become increasingly important for organizations to be able to verify, contextualize, and counter the false claims that are made by their adversaries as they implement technical capabilities combined with psychological tactics in an attempt to breach their systems. 

The Resecurity incident exemplifies how disciplined preparation and intelligence-led defense can help turn an attempted compromise into strategic advantage in an environment where trust and reputation are often the first targets. They do this quiet, methodically, and without revealing what really matters when a compromise occurs.

Ingram Micro Reveals Impact of Ransomware Attack on Employee Records


 

Ingram Micro quietly divulged all the personal details of their employees and job applicants last summer after a ransomware attack at the height of the summer turned into a far-reaching data exposure, exposing sensitive information about their employees and job applicants and illustrating the growing threat of cybercrime. 

A significant breach at one of the world's most influential technology supply-chain providers has been revealed in the July 2025 attack, in which the company confirms that records linked to more than 42,000 people were compromised, marking the most significant breach of the company's history. It is evident that in the wake of the disruptions caused by older, high-profile cybercriminals, emerging ransomware groups are swiftly targeting even the most established businesses. 

These groups are capitalizing on disrupting these older, high-profile cyber criminal operations by swiftly attacking even the most established businesses. It is a stark reminder to manufacturers, distributors, and mid-market companies that depend on Ingram Micro for global logistics, cloud platforms, and managed services to stay protected from cybersecurity risks, and the breach serves as a warning that cybersecurity risk does not end within an organization's boundaries, as third-party cyber-incidents are becoming increasingly serious and problematic. 

The largest distributor of business-to-business technology, Ingram Micro, operates on a global scale. The company employs more than 23,500 associates, serves more than 161,000 customers, and reported net sales of $48 billion in 2024, which was much greater than the previous year's gross sales of $6 billion. 

As stated in the notification letters to the Maine Attorney General and distributed to affected individuals, the attackers obtained documents containing extensive information, including Social Security numbers, that they had stolen. 

There was a security incident involving the company on July 3rd, 2025, and, in its disclosure, the company indicated that an internal investigation was immediately launched, which determined that an unauthorized third party had access to and removed files from internal repositories between July 2 and July 3rd, 2025. 

In addition to the information contained in the compromised records, there were also information regarding current and former employees and potential job applicants, including names, contact details, birthdates, and government-issued identification numbers such as Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, and passport numbers, as well as employment records in certain cases. 

A major attack on Ingram Micro's infrastructure may also have caused widespread disruptions to internal operations, as well as taking the company's website offline for a period of time, forcing the company to instruct its employees to work remotely as remediation efforts were underway. 

In spite of the fact that the company does not claim the breach was the result of a particular threat actor, it confirms that ransomware was deployed during the incident, in line with earlier reports linking the incident with the SafePay ransomware group, which later claimed responsibility and claimed to have stolen about 3.5 terabytes of data, and then published the name of the company on its dark web leaks.

In addition to drawing renewed attention to the systemic threat posed by attacks on central technology distributors, the incident also shed light on the risk that a single compromise can have a ripple effect across the entire digital supply chain as well. 

Analysts who examined the Ingram Micro intrusion claim that the ransomware was designed to be sophisticated, modular, and was modeled after modern malware campaigns that are operated by operators. The malicious code unfolded in carefully sequenced stages, with the lightweight loader establishing persistence and neutralizing baseline security controls before the primary payload was delivered.

The attackers subsequently developed components that enabled them to move laterally through internal networks by exploiting cached authentication data and directory services in order to gain access to additional privileges and harvest credentials. The attackers also employed components designed to escalate privileges and harvest credentials. 

The spread across accessible systems was then automated using a dedicated propagation engine, while at the same time manual intervention was still allowed to prioritize high-value targets using a dedicated propagation engine. As part of the attack, the encryption engine used a combination of industry-grade symmetric cryptography and asymmetric key protection to secure critical data, effectively locking that data beyond recovery without the cooperation of the attackers. 

As an extension of the encryption process, a parallel exfiltration process used encrypted web traffic to evade detection to quietly transfer sensitive files to external command-and-control infrastructure. Ultimately, ransom notes were released in order to exert pressure through both operational disruptions as well as the threat of public data exposure, which culminated in the deployment of ransom notes. 

The combination of these elements illustrates exactly how contemporary ransomware has evolved into a hybrid threat model-a model that combines automation, stealth, and human oversight-and why breaches at key nodes within the technology ecosystem can have a far-reaching impact well beyond the implications of one organization. 

When Ingram Micro discovered that its data had been compromised, the company took a variety of standard incident response measures to address it, including launching a forensic investigation with the help of an external cybersecurity firm, notifying law enforcement and relevant regulators, and notifying those individuals whose personal information may have been compromised. 

Additionally, the company offered two years of free credit monitoring and identity theft protection to all customers for two years. It has been unclear who the attackers are, but the SafePay ransomware group later claimed responsibility, alleging in its dark web leak site that the group had stolen 3.5 terabytes of sensitive data. Those claims, however, are not independently verified, nor is there any information as to what ransom demands have been made.

The attack has the hallmarks of a modern ransomware-as-a-service attack, with a custom malware being deployed through a well-established framework that streamlines intrusion, privilege escalation, lateral movement, data exfiltration, and data encryption while streamlining intrusion, privilege escalation, lateral movement, and data encryption techniques.

As such, these campaigns usually take advantage of compromised credentials, phishing schemes, and unpatched vulnerabilities to gain access to the victim. They then combine double-extortion tactics—locking down systems while siphoning sensitive data—with the goal of putting maximum pressure on them. 

During the event, Ingram Micro's own networks were disrupted, which caused delays across global supply chains that depended on Ingram Micro's platforms, causing disruptions as well as disruptions to transactions. There is an opportunity for customers, partners, and the wider IT industry to gain a better understanding of the risks associated with concentration of risk in critical vendors as well as the potentially catastrophic consequences of a relatively small breach at a central node.

A number of immediate actions were taken by Ingram Micro in the aftermath of the attack, including implementing the necessary measures to contain the threat, taking all affected systems offline to prevent further spread of the attack, and engaging external cybersecurity specialists as well as law enforcement to support the investigation and remediation process. 

As quickly as possible, the company restored access to critical platforms, gradually restoring core services, and maintained ongoing forensic analysis throughout the day to assess the full extent of the intrusion, as well as to assure its customers and partners that the company was stable. It is not only the operational response that has been triggered by the incident, but the industry has largely reflected on the lessons learned from a similar attack. 

It is apparent that security experts are advocating resilience-driven strategies such as zero trust access models, network microsegmentation, immutable backup architectures, and continuous threat monitoring in order to limit breaches' blast radius. 

It is also evident from the episode that the technology industry is becoming increasingly dependent on third-party providers, which is why it has reinforced the importance of regular incident response simulations and robust vendor risk management strategies. This ransomware attack from Ingram Micro illustrates the importance of modern cyber operations beyond encrypting data. 

It also illustrates how modern cyber operations are also designed to disrupt interconnected ecosystems, in addition to exerting pressure through theft of data and a systemic impact. As a result of this incident, it was once again reinforced that enterprise security requires preparation, layers of defenses, and supply chain awareness. 

A response of Ingram Micro was to isolate the affected servers and segments of the network in order to contain the intrusion. During this time, the Security Operations Center activated a team within its organization to coordinate remediation and forensic analysis as part of its response. This action corresponds with established incident handling standards, which include the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and ISO 27035 guidelines. 

Currently, investigators are conducting forensic examinations of the ransomware strain, tracking the initial access vectors, and determining whether data has been exfiltrating in order to determine if it was malicious or not. Federal agencies including the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency have been informed about the investigation. 

In the recovery process, critical systems are restored from verified backups, compromised infrastructure is rebuilt, and before the environment can be returned to production, it is verified that a restored environment does not contain any malicious artifacts.

It is no surprise to security specialists that incidents of this scale are increasingly causing large companies to reevaluate their core controls, such as identity and access management, which includes stronger authentication, tighter access governance, and continuous monitoring.

It is believed that these actions will decrease the risk of unauthorized access and limit the impact of future breaches to a great extent. This Ingram Micro incident is an excellent example of how ransomware has evolved into a technical and systemic threat as well, one that increasingly targets the connective tissue of the global technology economy, rather than isolated enterprises, to increasingly target. 

A breach like the one in question has demonstrated the way that attacks on highly integrated distributors can cascade across industries, exposing information, disrupting operations, and amplifying risks that extend far beyond the initial point of compromise. It is likely that the episode will serve as a benchmark for regulators, enterprises, and security leaders to evaluate resilience within complex supply chains as investigations continue and recovery efforts mature. 

During a period of time when the industry relies heavily on scale, speed, and trust, the attack serves as a strong warning that cybersecurity readiness cannot be judged solely by its internal defenses, but also by its ability to anticipate, absorb, and recover from shocks originating anywhere within the interconnected digital ecosystem as well as to measure its readiness for cybersecurity.