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

Ransomware Trends & Data Insights: October 2026

Although Akira once again emerged as the most active ransomware group in October, overall ransomware and extortion activity was not dominated by any single threat group and instead remained widely distributed among a variety of threat actors, continuing the trend that began around August. Arete identified 31 unique named threat groups in October, the most observed in a single month so far in 2026. In addition to Akira, Settra, and The Gentlemen were among the three most active groups. Several new threat actors also emerged, including BYOD, Kubera Team, QWCrypt, AoQin, Emperador, Osiris Team, and Cinder, with Cinder assessed as possibly part of a threat actor cluster affiliated with the former BlackFile group.

Figure 1. Activity from the top 10 threat groups in October 2026

Throughout the month, analysts at Arete identified several trends behind the threat actors perpetrating cybercrime activities:

  • PHP2Shell emerged as one of the most significant threats in October, with increasing exploitation of the critical PHP vulnerabilities CVE-2026-109618 and CVE-2026-109619. Other notable vulnerabilities included CVE-2026-104286 affecting FortiMail, and CVE-2026-102255, a critical pre-authentication Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability affecting SonicWall SMA1000 appliances, highlighting continued threat actor interest in internet-facing enterprise infrastructure.

  • International law enforcement operations against cybercriminal groups continued to make headlines in October. German authorities announced the arrest of 28-year-old Russian national Vladimir K., suspected of being a senior operator within the Qilin Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) group. Separately, the FBI arrested an individual with suspected links to ShinyHunters, adding to recent law enforcement activity targeting ransomware and extortion groups, including the disruption of KillSec. While Vladimir K.’s arrest has not yet had a notable impact on Qilin’s operational activity, it could provide law enforcement with greater insight into the group’s infrastructure and affiliate network, potentially supporting further disruption efforts.

  • In early October, “The Luna Moth Files” exposed several files containing alleged internal communications associated with Luna Moth, also known as Silent Ransom Group, revealing insights into the group’s social engineering, data extortion, and victim negotiation operations. However, several claims remain unverified, and the exposure has not notably disrupted the group’s activity thus far, as it was among the top threat actors Arete observed throughout the month.

Sources

  • Arete Internal

Article

PHP2Shell Exploitation Update

PHP2Shell exploitation activity continues to increase globally, with threat actors targeting the critical PHP remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities CVE-2026-109618 and CVE-2026-109619. Researchers recently identified low-volume scanning targeting unpatched or partially mitigated hosts across multiple countries and sectors, and the activity is assessed with moderate confidence as linked to a Korean-speaking operator associated with the Lazarus Group ecosystem. While PHP2Shell (CVE-2026-109618 and CVE-2026-109619) has been patched in PHP 8.5.12, 8.4.27, 8.3.36, and 8.2.35, the separately identified CVE-2026-115560 remains unpatched. 

What’s Notable and Unique

  • PHP2Shell vulnerabilities can cause memory corruption due to improper error handling, potentially allowing threat actors to achieve remote code execution on vulnerable PHP servers.

  • Observed activity includes mass scanning, PHP environment fingerprinting, exploitation attempts, credential and secret theft attempts, and attempts to deliver second-stage payloads and malware.

  • Successful in-the-wild exploitation has also been reported against honeypots, resulting in shell command execution and the retrieval of additional payloads, demonstrating the potential for follow-on malicious activity.

Mitigations

Organizations should prioritize upgrading internet-facing PHP deployments to patched versions, migrating unsupported PHP versions, updating embedded and containerized PHP runtimes, and implementing available Web Application Firewall (WAF) protections as a temporary defense-in-depth measure.

Analyst Comments

PHP2Shell poses a significant security concern due to its potential to enable unauthenticated remote code execution on vulnerable PHP servers. The progression from mass scanning and exploitation attempts to reports of successful command execution demonstrates the potential for these vulnerabilities to support initial access and subsequent malicious activity. Arete has been closely monitoring PHP2Shell exploitation activity and regularly reviewing and updating related indicators to support detection and blocking efforts. Given the potential for remote exploitation and follow-on activity, PHP2Shell represents a high-priority initial-access risk, emphasizing the importance of timely patching and remediation of affected PHP environments.  

Sources

  • PHP shares mitigation for new RCE vulnerability with no patch 

  • PHP2Shell Exploitation Attempts Continue Amid Suspected N. Korea Global Scanning Activity 

  • PHP2Shell Exploit Attempts Hit Millions as Attackers Try to Deploy Mirai Malware 

  • Advisory: PHP2Shell Vulnerabilities (CVE-2026-109618, CVE-2026-109619) 

Article

LiteLLM Supply-Chain Compromise

A software supply-chain attack compromised the release pipeline of LiteLLM, a widely used open-source Python SDK and AI gateway. Attackers leveraged the compromised pipeline on October 21st to publish a malicious LiteLLM version through PyPI and associated Docker registries. The affected release, LiteLLM 1.107.0, contained malware designed to steal credentials, sensitive configuration data, private keys, browser information, and other secrets from compromised systems.

What’s Notable and Unique

  • The incident is particularly significant because LiteLLM provides a common API for applications to interact with AI models from multiple providers. It is reported that the project had approximately 61,800 GitHub stars and 92 million monthly PyPI downloads.

  • Rather than modifying the core LiteLLM application source code, the threat actors reportedly tampered with the installation package itself. The malware was designed for broad credential and information theft and encrypted the collected data before uploading it to the attacker's endpoint.

  • The compromise went beyond one-time credential theft. A malicious Python component launched a detached loader that checked a GitHub-hosted pointer every hour and could download Python code from an external server for execution on the compromised machine. This provided threat actors with a mechanism for subsequent remote code execution.

Analyst Comments

Although the malicious packages were subsequently removed, simply uninstalling or deleting the affected LiteLLM package may not be sufficient, because malicious Python startup files or the detached loader could remain on the host. All exposed information should be rotated immediately, and infected systems should be isolated and rebuilt from clean backups. The most recent clean release prior to the attack, LiteLLM 1.106.2, is currently the suggested recovery version.

Sources

  • LiteLLM release pipeline hacked to distribute info-stealer malware

  • LiteLLM 1.107.0 Compromised: Python Startup Hooks Steal Cloud, AI, and Proxy Credentials

  • The Collector Reaches Beyond Provider API Keys

Article

French Supermarket Cyberattack Highlights Risks in Exposed Refrigeration Controllers

Hundreds of French supermarkets were reportedly affected by a cyberattack in which threat actors compromised internet-connected refrigeration controllers and manipulated temperature and defrost settings, which caused refrigeration units to overheat, resulting in widespread food spoilage and significant financial loss. Impacted refrigeration systems were associated with Danfoss, Copeland, and Dixell, and demonstrated how vulnerabilities in industrial control systems (ICS) can disrupt physical operations without relying on conventional data theft or encryption. The attack also raised concerns about the wider exposure of similar devices, as thousands of refrigeration management interfaces remain accessible from the public internet. The incident highlights the growing risk posed by insecure operational technology (OT), particularly where legacy equipment and remote-management interfaces lack adequate security controls.

What’s Notable and Unique

  • Researchers identified approximately 2,765 internet-accessible Danfoss AK-SM 800A interfaces during assessment. This figure reflects the scope of that research and should not be interpreted as a current count of exposed devices. Publicly accessible management interfaces increase the opportunity for unauthorized access to industrial equipment.


  • Research also identified several security flaws in the Danfoss AK-SM 800A platform, including an authentication bypass command injection that could enable remote code execution and a weakness involving web-server configuration changes. Danfoss addressed these findings through firmware updates.


  • Authorities reported compromised Danfoss AK-SM and AK-SC systems, alongside Copeland XWEB and Dixell XWEB monitoring platforms.

Analyst Comments

The incident demonstrates the business consequences of insufficiently secured industrial infrastructure and reinforces the need to integrate OT security into enterprise risk management. Organizations operating connected facility systems should establish clear ownership of industrial assets, enforce secure remote-access policies, and prioritize remediation based on exposure and operational criticality. The findings also highlight the importance of coordinating security teams with facilities and engineering personnel to ensure that protective measures do not compromise essential operations. A risk-based approach to OT security can help organizations reduce exposure while maintaining the availability and reliability of critical equipment. 

Sources

  • France Supermarket Hacks Expose Risks of Internet-Facing Refrigeration Systems

  • Freeze the Controller, Defrost the Food: Uncovering Vulnerabilities in Danfoss Refrigeration Controllers

  • Attackers Heat French Supermarket Fridges Up to 50°C by Hijacking Danfoss Controllers