EXPLORE

Article

Endpoint Detection and Response: The Closest Thing to a Silver Bullet to Stop Ransomware

Security Recommendations

In its recent report “Combating Ransomware,” the Ransomware Task Force says there’s no silver bullet to solving the ransomware challenge. Instead, the group touts a multi-pronged approach and provides an extensive list of recommendations to help companies better defend against this growing threat.

While I don’t disagree, for example, that coordinated global action and greater awareness to the severity of this threat are necessary, I couldn’t help but notice a glaring omission from their list: behavioral endpoint detection and response (EDR).

Why aren’t more companies using EDR solutions to combat ransomware?

For our clients, our number one recommendation to prevent or recover from a ransomware attack is to deploy endpoint protection. It’s the closest thing to a ransomware silver bullet you’re going to find — and should be a best practice.

EDR solutions are not based on malicious signatures that ransomers can easily evade. Rather, behavior-based EDR tools search for suspicious patterns of behavior that could indicate malware. And unlike antivirus, they are capable of spotting yet unknown malware, including more sophisticated threats like zero-day attacks; and they combine real-time continuous monitoring with automated analysis and response.

Cost effectiveness of EDR

EDR is not costly, especially considering the potential expense of a ransomware attack. Beyond the ransom payment itself come all the associated attack costs. As Kevin Baker detailed in his “Hidden Costs of Cybercrime” blog, companies must understand that, in the event of an attack, they will be paying for: remediation, repair, restoration of data and IT infrastructure, legal counsel, litigation defense, breach notification, business downtime, reputation damage and lost customer trust, regulatory fines, and increased insurance rates.

Many companies choose to stick with traditional antivirus solutions because they are a slightly less expensive option than EDR. But while EDR may cost more upfront, it’s much more cost-effective in the long run. And too many companies are realizing this after it’s too late, once they’ve been hacked and painfully understand they should have and need to invest more in security.

Ease of deployment and effectiveness

EDR is as quick and easy to deploy as a traditional antivirus solution. Like antivirus, EDR is agent-based, and organizations can automatically install it via a group policy or on an individual basis and, within a day, begin to reap the solution’s benefits.

When Arete’s incident response teams are called on to help victims recover from ransomware attacks — on average, 50 cases per month — this speed and ease of deployment are critical. They immediately deploy EDR technology to contain the attack and provide clients with a clean, safe environment to restore their data and operations.

On top of EDR solutions being intuitive and not requiring a high-level of security expertise, they are incredibly effective, offering functionality far beyond the basic scanning, detection, and “known” malware removal of a traditional antivirus tool. They are designed to protect all endpoints, automatically identify suspicious activity, and mitigate threats in real time. In the case of ransomware, this can mean stopping ransomware encryption, lateral movement, and data exfiltration.

At Arete, we’ve only seen threat actors successfully attack behavior-based EDR systems four times in the past five years. In two of those cases, the  client had not fully deployed the EDR solution to all endpoints on the network; in the other two, the client had not protected the EDR management console with two-factor access control, which allowed the attackers to turn off the EDR system.

By comparison, antivirus solutions continue to fall a bit short on effectiveness. Because they are based on pre-populated signatures, attackers can easily evade them with simple changes to their code and sadly, almost all the ransomware victims Arete has worked with have had an antivirus solution in place that failed to detect or block the attack.

If the government can’t solve the ransomware problem, what can I do?

It’s good that the U.S. and international governments are calling for actions to end the ransomware scourge — a threat the director of the FBI has likened to the 9/11 terror attacks. Unfortunately, time is not on anyone’s side.

The daily costs of ongoing ransomware attacks to companies and their clients are too high to wait for possible government action — especially when a cost-effective, near-silver-bullet solution is at hand. If organizations, of any size, want to put ransomware attackers out of business, they should look to deploy behavior-based EDR systems today.

Back to Blog Posts

Podcast

Cyber Campfire: June Threat Trends & Insights

In this episode of Arete’s Cyber Campfire podcast, our Threat Intelligence Team discusses trends, statistics, and emerging threat actors from June 2026. Tune in for firsthand insights on today’s threat landscape that can enhance your approach to cyber risk.

Article

Current: Misconfigured Server Reveals Multiple Phishing Campaigns

Researchers uncovered three Microsoft 365 phishing campaigns after discovering a misconfigured HTTP server that exposed a threat actor’s phishing tools, configurations, victim logs, and operational infrastructure. The investigation revealed two operators using custom Evilginx-based adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) phishing frameworks to steal authentication sessions and bypass MFA protections. A third operator abused Microsoft’s OAuth Device Code flow by tricking victims into completing authentication through Microsoft’s legitimate login process, allowing attackers to obtain valid access and refresh tokens without stealing passwords. The largest campaign compromised at least 218 victims across 12 countries, primarily targeting corporate Microsoft 365 accounts, with refresh tokens enabling persistent access. Researchers also identified the use of remote management tools for maintaining access, AI-assisted development of phishing tooling, and links to broader Phishing-as-a-Service (PhaaS) ecosystems, highlighting how commodity frameworks and automation are lowering the barrier for sophisticated identity-based attacks.

What’s Notable and Unique

  • The campaigns demonstrate the continued shift from traditional credential theft to identity- and token-based compromise, in which attackers target authentication sessions, cookies, and OAuth tokens rather than relying solely on password theft. By obtaining valid authentication artifacts, attackers can access Microsoft 365 environments while bypassing conventional MFA protections.


  • The use of Evilginx-based AiTM frameworks highlights how publicly available phishing tools have evolved into effective MFA-bypass platforms. These frameworks proxy legitimate login pages, capture authenticated sessions, and allow attackers to reuse valid sessions without requiring victims’ credentials again.


  • The OAuth Device Code flow abuse represents a different attack method, in which attackers leverage a legitimate Microsoft authentication mechanism to obtain tokens after victims approve the request. This approach bypasses password theft entirely by abusing trusted authentication workflows.


  • The exposed infrastructure provided insight into attacker operations, including phishing configurations, victim tracking data, remote administration tools, and evidence of AI-assisted development. The findings demonstrate how phishing ecosystems now provide reusable tooling and automation that reduce the technical expertise required to conduct large-scale identity attacks.

Analyst Comments

These Microsoft 365 phishing campaigns demonstrate the ongoing evolution of identity-focused attacks, as adversaries increasingly target authentication sessions, tokens, and legitimate cloud authorization mechanisms to bypass traditional security controls. The combination of AiTM phishing, OAuth abuse, remote management tools, and PhaaS infrastructure enables threat actors to maintain persistent access while blending into legitimate cloud activity.

The growing availability of phishing frameworks and AI-assisted attack development highlights the need for continuous identity security improvements beyond traditional phishing defenses. Arete recommends that organizations strengthen identity monitoring, adopt phishing-resistant MFA where possible, review OAuth application permissions, monitor token activity, and implement conditional access policies to detect and restrict suspicious Microsoft 365 authentication behavior. Security teams should also monitor post-compromise indicators such as abnormal mailbox access, suspicious application consent, unauthorized remote tools, and unusual sign-in activity.

Sources

  • One Misconfigured Server, Three Active Campaigns: Full exposure of three AiTM Phishing Operators

  • Misconfigured Server Reveals Three Evilginx Phishing Operations Targeting Microsoft 365

Podcast

Digital Forensics Meets the Courtroom: Insights on Expert Witness and Cyber-Related Litigation

In this episode of Bytes of Insight, host Vinny Sakore and special guest Dr. Bruce Hartley, Managing Director and Co-Founder of Advisory Services at Arete, discuss the evolving role of digital forensics and expert witness work in cybersecurity litigation. Tune in for firsthand insights on how Arete conducts post-breach investigations, what it takes to undergo cross-examination on the stand, and how emerging threats like AI-driven social engineering and third-party breaches are reshaping the advisory landscape.

Article

Helix Extortion Group Debuts in SharePoint Data Theft Attacks

A newly identified data-extortion group, Helix, is reportedly conducting targeted campaigns by exploiting identity-based attack techniques to gain access to Microsoft 365 environments and exfiltrate data from SharePoint Online. The group leverages voice phishing (vishing), device code phishing, and multi-factor authentication (MFA) abuse to compromise user accounts and establish unauthorized access. 

  • Helix threat actors reportedly initiate intrusions through vishing campaigns, impersonating trusted individuals—often the target's manager—and leveraging caller ID spoofing to enhance credibility. 


  • The actors then attempt to persuade victims to complete device code phishing workflows, enabling unauthorized access to corporate accounts and Microsoft 365 resources. 


  • Following successful authentication, the actors conduct reconnaissance and enumeration of SharePoint environments before identifying and exfiltrating sensitive data for extortion purposes. 


  • Helix's variable dwell times suggest a flexible, target-specific operational approach, enabling the group to adapt its intrusion timeline to victim environments to maximize data theft and extortion opportunities while minimizing the likelihood of detection. Helix's operations also appear to be focused on large-scale data theft and extortion, with an emphasis on automated SharePoint data exfiltration following successful credential or session compromise.

Overlaps with Other Extortion Groups

Researchers assess that Helix likely emerged from or has operational overlap with the ShinyHunters and BlackFile/Redact cybercriminal ecosystems. ShinyHunters historically focuses on compromising websites, developer repositories, and exposed credentials or API keys to gain access to corporate cloud environments, monetizing stolen victim data on the dark web. BlackFile utilizes identity-centric and social engineering–driven methods of intrusion, relying less on traditional malware and instead leveraging credential theft, privilege escalation, rapid data exfiltration, and coercive tactics such as swatting to maximize extortion pressure. In May 2026, BlackFile announced that it would be rebranding as “Redact” (which may have later rebranded again to “Pink”), yet despite the rebrands, threat actors operating within these groups continued to exhibit similar operational models, victimology, and extortion methodologies.  

Analyst Comments

Collectively, the similarities between the groups suggest the possibility of a shared criminal ecosystem, affiliate network, or loosely connected threat cluster rather than entirely independent operations.  The emergence of Helix further reflects the broader trend of extortion groups rebranding or fragmenting while retaining proven attack techniques and operational infrastructure to support their criminal activities. Despite suspicion of these groups’ connectivity, the exact nature of the relationship remains unconfirmed.  As Helix focuses on identity-based attack techniques to gain access to Microsoft 365 environments, Arete recommends that organizations remain vigilant in using MFA, enforcing strong identity security controls, continuously monitoring authentication activity, and enhancing user awareness of social engineering tactics.

  • Sources

  • Helix, a New Name in the Data Extortion Ecosystem?

  • BlackFile actively extorting data-theft victims in retail and hospitality sector

  • "Pink" Data Extortion Group Hunting With Evasive Phishing Kits