EXPLORE

Article

Surtr Ransomware Pays Tribute to REvil

Combating Ransomware

Arete Analysis

Summary 

Surtr ransomware, a significant threat in the current cyber landscape, paid tribute to the now defunct REvil (aka Sodinokibi) group through its sophisticated techniques, although the developers of Surtr ransomware likely do not have a direct connection to REvil. 

In February 2022, Arete investigated a Surtr ransomware incident where the ransomware author(s) paid tribute to the now defunct REvil (aka Sodinokibi) group by making a registry key change to the infected host. REvil was an infamous Russian-speaking Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) operation known for the Kaseya attack. In October 2021, a multinational effort disrupted REvil’s operations, followed by Romanian and Russian law enforcement largely dismantling the group by arresting individuals and seizing millions in cash and cryptocurrency.

Arete notes that the developers of Surtr ransomware likely do not have a direct connection to the now defunct REvil ransomware group. However, it is likely that the developers of Surtr are leveraging their REvil tribute to gain popularity. Arete also notes that multiple ransomware groups and affiliates work in a closed ecosystem, sharing source code, strategies, initial access brokers, functionality, and development resources. Thus, it is possible a Surtr developer previously worked with the REvil ransomware group.

Research revealed that Surtr ransomware

  • Changes the victim’s system manufacturer name with a sentence paying tribute to REvil.

  • Uses a message box to warn affiliates not to run the malware in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) — a group of countries in Eastern Europe and Asia formed by Russia and other republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union — or they will be banned.

  • Displays messages not common on mature ransomware, which could indicate that the ransomware’s development is still in the early stages.

  • Like other ransomware, encrypts files in network shares, deletes volume shadow copies, clears Windows event logs, and has a list of whitelisted file extensions, file names, and folders.

  • Has multilayer obfuscation.

  • Creates persistence through registry key changes to start as a service, in registry run keys, and make a copy of itself in the StartUp directory.

  • Creates a mutex value to prevent another copy of the process from running in the system.

Background

Surtr is a new RaaS operation, first observed in December 2021. Like many other ransomware groups, Surtr avoids its execution in the CIS countries and adopts the double extortion scheme of stealing and threatening to leak data if ransom demands are not met. In this investigation, the ransomware targeted Windows systems and employed several anti-debugging/anti-sandboxing techniques. At present, there are no public decryptors or logical flaws to recover files encrypted by Surtr.

Technical Analysis

Surtr ransomware is packed and has an entropy value of 7.62115. The malware has multilayer obfuscation. The native Windows Application Programming Interface (API) “CryptDecrypt” unpacks the first layer of packed content. The packer used Microsoft Enhanced RSA and Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Cryptographic Provider (CALG_AES_256) to decrypt the data. The unpacked sample is once again UPX packed, which drops the actual payload.

Figure 1. Decrypt function

Figure 2. Decrypting PE file in the memory (encrypted vs decrypted)

Upon decrypting the Portable Executable (PE) file, the packer spawns the same as a new child process with the original packed executable name. Using Windows API “VirtualAllocEx”, it allocates an address space in the spawned child process and writes the process memory with newly decoded binary, later resuming the child process.

Figure 3. Process injection

The decrypted sample shown in Figure 2 is UPX packed. Upon successful unpacking, the analyst gets the Surtr ransomware payload.

Surtr ransomware retrieves file attributes for a specified file or directory “NoRunAnyWay”. If the file or directory does not exist, the program continues creating a folder “Service” at “%ProgramData%”. Later, the sample checks for “config.txt” at the same directory. It appears the ransomware stores its configuration at the “C:\ProgramData\Services” folder at a later point in time.

The ransomware tries to open a mutex by the name “SurtrMUTEX”. If the mutex does not exist, it continues the execution or the ransomware terminates the current program. This activity ensures that a single instance of the program is running.

Figure 4. Creating Mutex

Similar to other ransomware, Surtr avoids execution in the CIS countries, which include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Moldavia, Uzbekistan, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, to avoid infecting users where the operators and affiliates most likely reside and visit to prevent arrest by local authorities. Initially, the sample checks the IP address of the victim’s machine and collects IP-related information using ip-api[.]com, which returns a JSON file containing the country of IP origin. Later, this is compared against the list of countries hardcoded in the sample. If there is a match, it avoids execution, leaving a comment “WARNING. Surtr does not run in this country if you do it again you will be banned.” Note: The ransomware also works without proper response from the ip-api[.]com.  

Here is the list of countries the ransomware avoids:

Figure 5. Comparing CIS name to avoid execution

Ransomware anti-sandboxing techniques are shown below

  1. The ransomware keeps track of anti-sandboxing techniques using a counter. As shown below, the sample initially checks for API Hooks “E9” for the Windows function “CreateProcessA”. The counter is updated accordingly.

Figure 6. Anti-Sandbox-1

  1. The ransomware checks if the total physical memory (RAM) of the host machine is less than 500MB using the API “GlobalMemoryStatus”. If the victim’s hardware passes this check, the counter is incremented. 

  1. Later, using DeviceIOControl, the ransomware gets the geometry (File size) of the C:\ drive and compares it with a hardcoded constant. If the victim’s hardware passes this check, the counter is incremented.[1]

Figure 7. Anti-Sandbox-2, 3

Ransomware anti-debugging techniques are shown below.

  1. Initially, the ransomware checks if any hardware breakpoints (DR0, DR1, DR2, DR3) are set. If the condition satisfies the debugging, the counter is incremented.

Figure 8. Anti-Debugging-1

  1. It also leverages the Windows API “IsDebuggerPresent” to check if the process is being debugged or not and updates the counter accordingly.

Figure 9. Anti-Debugging-2

  1. It appears the program accesses the “Configuration Directory” itself and checks if “GlobalFlagsClear” is set to 0. If yes, the counter is updated.

Figure 10. Anti-Debugging-3

  1. The ransomware checks for the NtGlobalFlag value of the Process Environment Block, which is set to the default value “0” by the operating system. When debugging the malware with a software debugger, the NTGlobalFlag value would be set to 0x70. Passing this check would indicate the presence of a debugger and the counter would be updated [2].

Figure 11. Anti-Debugging-4

Upon these checks, the ransomware compares these calculated individual counters of anti-debugging/anti-sandboxing with the value 2. If either of these counters is more than 2, the ransomware exits with a message box saying, “WARNING. SandBox/Debugger Detected!!!”

The key characteristic of the program is using multithreading for file encryption. Arete observed that multiple threads were created during the execution process, which delays malware analysis and hastens data encryption.

The program makes sure to remove system backups, shadow copies, and system logs.

Figure 12. Removing system backups, Shadowcopies, System logs.

As part of the initial encryption process, the ransomware creates and assigns a random ID to the victim’s machine. The ID is later stored in “c:\ProgramData\Services\ID.surt” and used in further file encryption.

Figure 13: Creating victim ransomware ID

The ransomware checks mounted drives from (A to Z) using Windows native API “GetDriveTypeW”. Once the ransomware enumerates all mounted drives and shares, it encrypts all files except the following:

File Extensions: “.exe”, “.DLL”, “.lnk”, “.surt”

File Names: “surt”, “NTUSER.DAT”, “WIN.INI”, “UsrClass.dat”, “Pagefile.sys”, “hiberfil.sys”, “DumpStack.log.tmp”, “Config.msi”, “boot”

Folders: “Windows”, “Microsoft”, “Windows.old”, “Windows kits”, “WindowsApps”, “Tor Browser”, “Google”, “Mozilla”, “DropBox”

The ransomware uses the “net use” command to connect the remote host device’s share “ADMIN$”. If the connection is successful, the share is added to the encryption list.

Figure 14. Enumerating network shares

The ransomware acquires a targeted file’s handle. Later, it generates a 64-bit random value using a Windows Native API “CryptGenRandom” as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15. Generating 64-bit random value

The generated random value creates XOR keys, which are used to further encrypt the file contents. Upon encryption of the file, the ransomware encrypts the generated random value using asymmetric encryption and stores the encrypted key at the end of the file as shown in Figure 17.

Figure 16. File encryption loop

Figure 17. Dissecting encrypted file

Figure 17.1 “SURTR” – The attacker identifies if the file was encrypted by the Surtr ransomware using the keyword.

Figure 17.2 Asymmetric encrypted 64-bit random generated values.

Figure 17.3 Delimiter.

The ransomware achieves persistence by copying itself to the “StartUp” folder, creating scheduled tasks that execute the ransomware “ONLOGON” and adding a registry value in “Run” and “RunOnce” key to make the ransomware restart on a system reboot.

Figure 18. Achieving persistence

Arete found that the threat actor also updates the system manufacturer name to “Tribute to the REvil <3” by adding/modifying the “OEMInformation” registry value.

Figure 19. Adding “Tribute to REvil” registry entry

The registry changes mentioned above are shown below.  

Figure 20. Updating the system manufacturer

The ransomware further tries to hide by updating its file attributes, thus complicating forensic investigations to identify the same.  

Figure 21. Updating file attributes

Upon successful execution of the ransomware, Surtr changes the background of the victim’s machine as shown below and reboots the system.

Figure 22. Changes desktop background

Ransom note name: SURTR_README.hta, SURTR_README.txt.  

Figure 23. Ransomware note

Conclusion

A new ransomware on the scene, Surtr could be one to keep an eye on as it mentions REvil’s name in its operations. As more information unfolds, Arete could assess the future of Surtr ransomware. Arete has countermeasures coverage to detect Surtr payloads and artifacts via Arsenal Threat Management and Threat-ID.

Countermeasure

Yara Rule

rule Surtr_ransomware_executable

{
    meta:
        author = “agundmi@areteir.com”
        copyright = “Copyright © 2022 by Arete Advisors, LLC.”
        md5 = “565951acb3eb5fe91f3be723a2d633b9”
    strings:
        $id = {E8 [4-8] 99 F7 FF 42 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 8D 42 ?? 83 F8 ?? 7? ?? 
        88 96 [4-8] 46 83 FE 0E 7?}
        $str1 = “vssadmin.exe Delete” wide nocase
        $str2 = “Tribute to the REvil” nocase
        $str3 = “\\

{
    meta:
        author = “agundmi@areteir.com”
        copyright = “Copyright © 2022 by Arete Advisors, LLC.”
        md5 = “565951acb3eb5fe91f3be723a2d633b9”
    strings:
        $id = {E8 [4-8] 99 F7 FF 42 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 8D 42 ?? 83 F8 ?? 7? ?? 
        88 96 [4-8] 46 83 FE 0E 7?}
        $str1 = “vssadmin.exe Delete” wide nocase
        $str2 = “Tribute to the REvil” nocase
        $str3 = “\\

{
    meta:
        author = “agundmi@areteir.com”
        copyright = “Copyright © 2022 by Arete Advisors, LLC.”
        md5 = “565951acb3eb5fe91f3be723a2d633b9”
    strings:
        $id = {E8 [4-8] 99 F7 FF 42 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 83 FA ?? 7? ?? 8D 42 ?? 83 F8 ?? 7? ?? 
        88 96 [4-8] 46 83 FE 0E 7?}
        $str1 = “vssadmin.exe Delete” wide nocase
        $str2 = “Tribute to the REvil” nocase
        $str3 = “\\

IOCs:

  • MD5 Sample B7966CCA3C6FE9B9C64D772EC7DF804C      Packed

  • 460FDD0198A286067211BFCF47825B11                                  UPX Packed

  • FD16AC037269708C1AB135653483E891                                  Payload

URL 2i74xfkhsu4zd6qv5aiifv3wznj6vq3jo6mle3zxux6vpftyuezxhmad[.]onion


References:

Back to Blog Posts

Article

Payouts King Utilizes QEMU Emulator to Bypass EDR

Researchers recently identified threat actor campaigns leveraging QEMU, a free open-source virtual machine (VM) emulator, to evade endpoint security solutions. Since QEMU acts as a VM within the target environment, endpoint detection tools cannot scan inside the emulator or detect any malicious files or payloads QEMU contains. Although threat actors have been utilizing QEMU maliciously since 2020, recent activity is attributed to the Payouts King ransomware group and a cluster of threat actors believed to be initial access brokers who have also been exploiting the CitrixBleed2 vulnerability CVE-2025-5777.

What’s Notable and Unique

  • Payouts King has been observed deploying QEMU since November and uses the VM to create a reverse SSH backdoor to evade detection and install various tools, including Rclone, Chisel, and BusyBox.

  • In a separate campaign, threat actors are exploiting CVE-2025-5777, a Citrix NetScaler vulnerability that allows attackers to bypass authentication. Once they’ve gained initial access, the threat actors use QEMU to deploy tools inside the VM, which are then used to steal credentials, identify Kerberos usernames, perform Active Directory reconnaissance, and set up FTP servers for staging or data exfiltration.

Analyst Comments

Threat actors continue to focus their efforts on defense evasion, often leveraging legitimate, easily accessible tools such as QEMU. The continued use of QEMU by multiple threat actors highlights the effectiveness of these tactics and the difficulty in detecting and defending against them. To counter this campaign, organizations should proactively monitor for unauthorized QEMU installations, abnormal scheduled tasks, and port forwarding rules. 

 Sources

  • QEMU abused to evade detection and enable ransomware delivery

Article

Microsoft Teams Continues to be Leveraged in Social Engineering Attacks

Microsoft warns that threat actors are increasingly abusing Microsoft Teams and relying on legitimate tools to gain access and conduct lateral movement within enterprise networks. The threat actors impersonate IT or helpdesk staff to contact employees via cross-tenant chats and trick them into granting remote access for data theft. Microsoft has observed multiple intrusions with a similar attack chain that utilized commercial remote management software, like Quick Assist and the Rclone utility, to transfer files to an external cloud storage service. This tactic, notably associated with Black Basta and Cactus ransomware operations in late 2024 and early 2025, appears to have resurfaced, with similar activity more recently observed in intrusions linked to the Akira and Payouts King ransomware groups.

What’s Notable and Unique

  • Initial access is achieved by leveraging external collaboration features in Microsoft Teams to allow impersonation of internal support personnel, tricking users into bypassing security warnings. This reflects abuse of legitimate functionality rather than exploitation of a Microsoft Teams vulnerability.


  • Following initial access, attackers conduct rapid reconnaissance using Command Prompt and PowerShell to assess privileges, domain membership, and opportunities for lateral movement. Persistence is maintained through Windows Registry modifications, after which attackers leveraged WinRM for lateral movement, targeting domain-joined systems and high-value assets, including domain controllers.


  • Malicious payloads were staged in user-writable directories and executed through DLL side-loading via trusted, signed applications, enabling covert code execution while blending with legitimate activity. Additional remote management tools were also deployed to support broader access, while Rclone or similar utilities were used to stage and exfiltrate sensitive data to external cloud storage. 

Analyst Comments

This activity highlights how modern threat actors can leverage trusted collaboration workflows, remote management tools, and stealthy exfiltration techniques to conduct intrusions through a combination of social engineering and misuse of legitimate functionality. Effective defense depends on layered mitigations that combine identity controls, restricted remote administration, endpoint hardening, network protections, and user awareness measures to disrupt attacker activity at multiple stages of the intrusion lifecycle. To mitigate the risk of this and similar campaigns, users should treat external Teams contacts as untrusted by default, and administrators should restrict or closely monitor remote assistance tools while limiting WinRM usage to controlled systems. 

Sources

  • Cross‑tenant helpdesk impersonation to data exfiltration: A human-operated intrusion playbook

  • Microsoft: Teams increasingly abused in helpdesk impersonation attacks

  • Payouts King Takes Aim at the Ransomware Throne

Article

Phishing-as-a-Service Evolves with Venom

“Whaling” has taken on a new meaning with a highly targeted phishing campaign active from November 2025 through March 2026, aimed exclusively at senior executives from more than 20 industries. The campaign, dubbed VENOM, is a phishing-as-a-service (PhaaS) platform that combines advanced evasion capabilities with immediate persistence of targeted executives. The initial phish impersonates an internal SharePoint document notification and uses embedded QR codes to convince victims to shift to unmanaged mobile devices to bypass corporate security controls. VENOM aims to establish persistence immediately by either registering a new MFA device or retaining long-lived refresh tokens, allowing threat actors to maintain access even after password resets or other base-level remediation efforts. 

What’s Notable and Unique

  •  This campaign is unique in its targeted nature of the PhaaS platform rather than broad, sweeping attempts. The threat actors behind VENOM create convincing phishing emails that impersonate SharePoint activity using the victim’s own domain, company name, and even fabricated email threads. These convincing social engineering tactics, combined with the specific targeting of executives, make this an effective capability for cybercriminals.

  •  VENOM operates as a closed-access system, with full adversarial support, but has no public visibility on the dark web or from security researchers. The service likely operates on an invite-only basis, unlike most PhaaS platforms, which typically seek to have as many paying customers as possible. This, among other items such as the sophisticated evasion techniques, indicates a higher degree of sophistication than most other PhaaS offerings.

  • Either through MFA enrollment or Microsoft Device Code abuse, the threat actor forces the victim to aid them in establishing persistence early in the attack lifecycle. These tactics result in either valid tokens or an additional MFA login method controlled by the threat actor, meaning typical password resets alone are not effective against this technique. Administrators would be required to explicitly revoke sessions and token grants to mitigate the threat actors’ persistence.

Analyst Comments

Oftentimes, MFA is viewed as a one-stop shop to cybersecurity, but tactics such as this show how threat actors can bypass MFA, or worse, use it to establish persistence. Ultimately, this campaign highlights how modern attacks increasingly abuse legitimate authentication workflows rather than attempting to defeat them outright. Defenses that rely solely on MFA without other security posturing, such as continuous session monitoring, token revocation, and identity logging, can leave organizations vulnerable. As attackers shift toward token theft and device trust abuse, incident response and identity security strategies must evolve accordingly.

Sources

  • Meet VENOM: The PhaaS Platform That Neutralizes MFA

Article

Threat Actors Continue to Leverage BYOVD Technique

Multiple ransomware operations have recently been observed leveraging the Bring Your Own Vulnerable Driver (BYOVD) technique to disable endpoint security controls prior to ransomware deployment. Notably, the Qilin ransomware group commonly leverages a malicious msimg32.dll file loaded via DLL side-loading, along with vulnerable drivers including rwdrv.sys and hlpdrv.sys, to gain kernel-level access and disable security processes. Similarly, Warlock ransomware has been observed exploiting the vulnerable NSecKrnl.sys driver to bypass security controls. The use of BYOVD has also been observed across ransomware campaigns associated with Akira, INC, Medusa, and other threat actors. 

What’s Notable and Unique 

  • The Qilin ransomware group employs a sophisticated multi-stage infection chain, leveraging DLL side-loading (msimg32.dll) to execute malicious payloads directly in memory and evade traditional file-based detection. In DLL side-loading, a threat actor tricks a program into loading a malicious dynamic link library. The malware escalates privileges and uses signed but vulnerable drivers (rwdrv.sys and hlpdrv.sys) to bypass security controls, access system memory, and systematically disable endpoint defenses by terminating security processes and disabling monitoring callbacks at the kernel level. 

  • Akira ransomware operators have also exploited the rwdrv.sys and hlpdrv.sys drivers. Additionally, Arete has observed threat actors leveraging multiple other drivers, including the vulnerable TrueSight.sys, to bypass security controls. 

  • Meanwhile, Warlock ransomware operators disguised malicious activity by renaming rclone.exe to TrendSecurity.exe to appear legitimate. The file functioned as a loader, exploiting the vulnerable NSecKrnl.sys driver to disable security processes, while Group Policy Objects (GPOs) were leveraged to systematically disable security controls across the environment. 

Analyst Comments 

The BYOVD technique, employed by multiple known ransomware operators, reflects a broader shift toward pre-encryption defense evasion, including suppression of Windows telemetry, removal of monitoring callbacks, and abuse of legitimately signed but vulnerable drivers. This technique enables threat actors to evade detection, maintain persistence for extended periods, and maximize the operational impact of ransomware deployment across compromised environments. Organizations should implement strict driver control policies, such as Microsoft’s Vulnerable Driver Blocklist and application control mechanisms. Additionally, enforcing least privilege access, enabling multi-factor authentication (MFA), maintaining up-to-date patching, and continuously monitoring for anomalous driver and kernel-level activity can further reduce the risk of such attacks. 

Sources 

  • Qilin EDR killer infection chain

  • Web Shells, Tunnels, and Ransomware: Dissecting a Warlock Attack