3PARA RAT command and control commands are encrypted within the HTTP C2 channel using the DES algorithm in CBC mode with a key derived from the MD5 hash of the string HYF54&%9&jkMCXuiS. 3PARA RAT will use an 8-byte XOR key derived from the string HYF54&%9&jkMCXuiS if the DES decoding fails5
Command and Controlno detection rules
Standing S0066
Reach is how much of ATT&CK this malware touches. Coverage is how well defended each thing it does is, as a median per technique rather than a total — a total would just restate the reach. Each figure is ranked against all 825 ATT&CK software entries only where that population actually spreads. Where most of the population shares one value, a percentile would rank the tie instead of the entity, so the raw value is shown and no rank is claimed.
Reach
Techniques4Bottom 17%
17th percentile · 83% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more Enterprise techniques.
Tactics3Bottom 21%
21st percentile · 79% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more tactics spanned.
Threat group161% tie · 22 values
61% of the population shares a single value across only 22 distinct values, so a percentile here would rank the tie, not the entity.
Campaigns085% tie · 8 values
85% of the population shares a single value across only 8 distinct values, so a percentile here would rank the tie, not the entity.
Coverage
Rules / technique18med41st pct
41st percentile · 59% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more detection rules per technique.
Tests / technique6med55th pct
55th percentile · 55% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have this many atomic tests per technique or fewer.
Data comps / technique5.5med54% tie · 11 values
54% of the population shares a single value across only 11 distinct values, so a percentile here would rank the tie, not the entity.
Mitigations / technique0.5medBottom 23%
23rd percentile · 77% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more mitigations per technique.
5 of 8 axes carry an honest rank on this page. Coverage medians are taken across this malware’s 4 Enterprise techniques.
Range
Technique Campaign use over its cumulative rule count.
Adversaries may communicate using application layer protocols associated with web traffic to avoid detection/network filtering by blending in with existing traffic. (...)
This analytic detects the usage of the Utility osascript on a macOS device initiated a network connection lasting longer than 10 minutes (600 seconds). (...)
The following analytic detects the use of known suspicious SSL certificates in any observed event where the SSL_CertFingerprint field is present. (...)
The following analytic detects connections with a high Encrypted Visibility Engine (EVE) threat confidence score, indicating potentially malicious behavior within encrypted traffic. (...)
HTTP request smuggling is a technique for interfering with the way a web site processes sequences of HTTP requests that are received from one or more users. (...)
The following analytic detects HTTP POST requests containing heavily encoded data in the post body, specifically looking for sequences of hex-encoded bytes or base64-encoded strings. (...)
This detection identifies rapid-fire POST request attacks where an attacker sends more than 20 POST requests within a 5-second window, potentially attempting to exploit race conditions or overwhelm request handling. (...)
Detects attempts to exploit a request smuggling technique against IIS that leverages a Windows quirk where requests for reserved Windows device names such as "/con" trigger an early server response before the request body is received. (...)
This Splunk query analyzes web logs to identify and categorize user agents, detecting various types of Remote Monitoring and Mangement applications. (...)
This Splunk query analyzes web access logs to identify and categorize non-browser user agents, detecting various types of security tools, scripting languages, automation frameworks, and suspicious patterns. (...)
The following analytic detects suspicious database file and directory discovery activities, which may signal an attacker attempt to locate and assess critical database assets on a compromised system. (...)
The following analytic detects suspicious file and directory discovery activities, which may indicate an attacker's effort to locate sensitive documents and files on a compromised system. (...)
The following analytic detects suspicious creation of hidden files and directories, which may indicate an attacker's attempt to conceal malicious activities or unauthorized data. (...)