LITTLELAMB.WOOLTEA is a backdoor that was used by UNC5325 during Cutting Edge to deploy malware on targeted Ivanti Connect Secure VPNs and to establish persistence across system upgrades and patches.[1]
7
Techniques33rd pct
4
Tactics32nd pct
0
Threat groupsNone recorded
1
Campaignunranked
Enterprise ATT&CK only. Any Mobile or ICS rows on the same ATT&CK page are not carried.
LITTLELAMB.WOOLTEA can check the type of Ivanti VPN device it is running on by executing first_run() to identify the first four bytes of the motherboard serial number.2
LITTLELAMB.WOOLTEA can append malicious components to the tmp/tmpmnt/bin/samba_upgrade.tar archive inside the factory reset partition in attempt to persist post reset.7
Persistence8 detection rules
Standing S1121
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
Techniques733rd pct
33rd percentile · 67% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more Enterprise techniques.
Tactics432nd pct
32nd percentile · 68% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more tactics spanned.
Threat groups061% 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.
Campaign185% 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 / technique19med42nd pct
42nd percentile · 58% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more detection rules per technique.
Tests / technique0medBottom 2%
2nd percentile · 98% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have more atomic tests per technique.
Data comps / technique4med54% 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 / technique2medTop 9%
91st percentile · 91% of 825 ATT&CK software entries have this many mitigations per technique or fewer.
5 of 8 axes carry an honest rank on this page. Coverage medians are taken across this malware’s 7 Enterprise techniques.
Range
Technique Campaign use over its cumulative rule count.
This analytic detects potential reconnaissance activities on Cisco ASA devices by identifying execution of multiple information-gathering "show" commands within a short timeframe. (...)
This analytic detects creation of a Cisco IOS-XE tunnel interface with tunnel source, tunnel destination, and an IP address in the 10.10.12.0 network. (...)
This analytic detects the execution of the nsenter utility from within a container, a technique often used for exploitation and container escape. (...)
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. (...)
The following analytic identifies the creation of a service with a known name used by CLOP ransomware for persistence and high-privilege code execution. (...)
The following analytic identifies specific GET or HEAD requests to web servers that indicate reconnaissance attempts to find vulnerable JBoss servers. (...)
The following analytic hunts for any creations or modifications to GitHub Actions workflow YAML files across the organization's Linux or Windows endpoints. (...)
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. (...)