What Happened

• Recent operational successes by UK law enforcement have exposed sophisticated domestic carding networks and the growing threat of youth-targeted money muling syndicates.
• In June 2026, a major cross-border investigation concluded with the sentencing of a serial fraudster who targeted small businesses, including veterinary clinics and hotels, across 22 different counties in England and Wales.
• The individual executed over 64 frauds and two thefts, accumulating losses totalling £462,000. The threat actor utilised stolen payment card details to buy goods and explicitly manipulating transaction values to inflate the amounts charged before requesting rapid refunds directly into bank accounts under his control.
• Following his arrest, investigators seized an array of high-value items, including designer clothing and mobile devices. Financial telemetry revealed the illicit proceeds were being spent on luxury goods, gambling, hotels, and vehicle hire. Crucially, investigators uncovered an expansive network of money mule accounts specifically set up to layer and obfuscate the stolen funds.
• Separately, regional policing teams executed a series of targeted strikes aimed directly at these types of laundering networks, resulting in the arrest of three men (aged 18, 22, and 26) on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and for money laundering, along with the seizure of £14,000 in cash.
• Law enforcement issued a stark warning following the raids, noting an aggressive operational shift where organised crime groups (OCGs) are actively leveraging social media platforms like Snapchat and Instagram, alongside popular online gaming ecosystems, to systematically recruit young teenagers into mule networks.

Analyst Comment

This twin set of enforcement actions illustrates the complete lifecycle of a modern domestic fraud operation. The acquisition and monetisation of stolen data (also known as Carding), followed by the immediate mobilisation of a decentralised laundering infrastructure (also known as Money Muling). The carding scheme highlighted in the 22-county campaign demonstrates that threat actors are moving away from simple e-commerce checkout abuse and are instead focusing on the operational blind spots of small, brick-and-mortar or service-oriented businesses. 

By manipulating transaction values and exploiting refund protocols, the fraudster successfully weaponised point-of-sale or card-not-present (CNP) systems to manufacture clean cash flows. However, the scale of this carding activity requires a highly liquid laundering pipeline to survive traditional banking fraud detection. This is where the recruitment of money mules becomes a vital asset for OCGs.

The pivot toward social media, such as Snapchat and Instagram as well as online gaming platforms to recruit teenage money mules is a calculated tactic by syndicates. 

Young demographics are highly susceptible to social media advertisements that mask the severe criminal realities of money laundering, framing it instead as a quick, victimless side-hustle. Many young people do not understand that allowing someone to route funds through their personal bank account is a serious criminal offense that can result in first-party fraud markers (such as a CIFAS marker), effectively destroying their financial future before it begins.

Further, a widespread lack of proactive parental supervision, combined with missing or unconfigured digital parental controls on mobile devices and gaming accounts, allows recruiters to directly message minors entirely undetected.

Defensive Takeaways

• Harden Refund Protocols for Small Businesses: Businesses in vulnerable service sectors must enforce strict multi-factor verification for all card-not-present transactions and mandate that any processed refunds should only return to the exact card used for the initial purchase.
• Proactive Parental Monitoring & Platform Safety: Parents must actively utilise device level and application-specific parental controls on social media and gaming networks. Conversations regarding digital safety must expand past cyberbullying to include the tactical red flags of financial grooming and "easy cash" offers.
• Targeted School and Community Education: Educational institutions and financial bodies should collaborate more often on mandatory cyber-hygiene campaigns that explicitly outline the legal penalties of money muling, illustrating how a compromised bank account can permanently restrict access to student loans, mobile contracts, and future employment.

Relevant Sources

1. https://www.rocu.police.uk/news/2026/june/serial-fraudsters-jailed-after-targeting-businesses-across-england-and-wales/
2. https://www.rocu.police.uk/news/2026/june/suspected-money-mules-arrested

Introduction

The modern cyber threat landscape has seen a fundamental shift in how threat actors manage and deploy their infrastructure. Advanced persistent threats (APTs) have almost completely moved away from static command-and-control (C2) servers, opting instead to build complex, multi-layered botnets known as Operational Relay Box (ORB) networks. 

Project ORBITAL (which stands for Operational Relay Box Intelligence, Tracking, & Analysis Lexicon) was established as a centralised intelligence matrix to track, analyse, and ultimately help defenders disrupt this highly evasive infrastructure.

To construct these networks, adversaries systematically compromise unpatched, end-of-life devices. By targeting legacy, unpatched Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) router and Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices attackers can create a sprawling, decentralised mesh of proxy nodes. By routing their operations through layers of compromised devices, adversaries mask their true origins, making malicious activity blend seamlessly with legitimate regional traffic.

Blogs by my colleagues at Team Cymru as well as Google offer detailed explanations as to why and how these ORBs have grown over many years and continue to expand.

Project Background

Project ORBITAL represents a centralised Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) collection driven by public reporting from advanced research teams across the cybersecurity and technology sectors. This initiative aggregates telemetry and findings from top-tier vendors including Cisco Talos, CrowdStrike, Google, GreyNoise Labs, Lumen Black Lotus Labs, Microsoft, SecurityScorecard, Sekoia, SentinelLabs, Sygnia, and Team Cymru. Furthermore, it incorporates critical alerts and intelligence shared publicly by United States government agencies, specifically the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Cyber National Mission Force (CNMF), and the National Security Agency (NSA).

This repository builds on the methodology of my previous OSINT tracking initiatives. It is heavily inspired by the structure and community success of my earlier matrix projects, specifically the Ransomware Tool Matrix (RTM) (here), the Ransomware Vulnerability Matrix (RVM) (here), and the Russian APT Tool Matrix (RUTM) (here). By applying a similar, structured approach to mapping Operational Relay Box (ORB) networks, this project aims to provide defenders with a clear, actionable lexicon for hunting and tracking evasive edge-device botnets.

Graph Visualisation

Once Project ORBITAL was initially assembled, it was then possible to use a GitHub Action automation with NetworkX and PyVis to create a Graph Visualisation using the data collected. Once in this view, some interesting patterns could be observed.

Analysis of the extracted data uncovered that ASUS devices were the most targeted out of all of the targeted devices by ORBs from the public reports.

Another interesting point the graph highlighted is that the LapDogs ORB network had the highest number of reported targeted devices.  

In most reported scenarios, a singular threat group used a dedicated ORB network. However, from extracting the details from the Google and SentinelLabs reports, an adversary like APT15, reportedly leverages both SPACEHOP and PurpleHaze ORB networks, alongside two other separate adversaries UNC2630 and UNC5174.

The overlap in ORB usage suggests these APTs aren't all building their own botnets from scratch. These overlaps likely indicate there are provisioning teams, such as specialised contractors, like Beijing Integrity Tech, who build and maintain these ORB networks and then lease access to the broader Chinese intelligence community in the Ministry of State Security (MSS) and People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

Panda-monium

Below is the list of well-known China-nexus APTs listed using CrowdStrike’s naming scheme and their Google or Microsoft aliases that are all mentioned in Project ORBITAL.

1. CAULDRON PANDA (aka UNC3886)
2. ETHEREAL PANDA (aka Flax Typhoon)
3. JUDGMENT PANDA (APT31, Violet Typhoon)
4. KEYHOLE PANDA (aka UNC2630, APT5)
5. MURKY PANDA (aka Silk Typhoon)
6. VANGUARD PANDA (aka Volt Typhoon)
7. VIXEN PANDA (aka APT15, Nylon Typhoon) 

The most notable aspect about this list is that it contains APTs with wildly different mandates. VANGUARD PANDA (Volt Typhoon) is famous for pre-positioning within critical infrastructure with the potential disruptive attacks, while KEYHOLE PANDA (APT5) and JUDGMENT PANDA (APT31) are long-running cyber-espionage and IP theft operators. The fact that both the saboteurs and the spies have all adopted ORB networks goes to show that this tactic is not niche but instead is the baseline standard for Chinese APT operational security (OPSEC).

How to Access

You can find Project ORBITAL on my GitHub repository below:

Introduction

This blog is a focused update on the latest updates to the Ransomware Tool Matrix (RTM) and the Ransomware Vulnerability Matrix (RVM) covering three groups that I have published profiles for to help defenders home in on the threats most relevant to them: TheGentlemen, DragonForce, and WarLock.

Rather than write another broad ecosystem summary, the goal of this post is to introduce these profiles, briefly explain why each group matters right now, and give readers direct links to them so defenders can pivot straight into hunting, detection engineering, and patch prioritisation.

For anyone new to the projects, please read the descriptions on GitHub or feel free to watch my talk explaining the project at BSides London.

Why these three groups?

Each of the three groups added in this update represents a different slice of the current ransomware ecosystem:

TheGentlemen

TheGentlemen is a newer operation that has matured quickly, with a large and varied toolkit that reflects how cross-pollinated the affiliate ecosystem has become. The recent internal chat leak gave researchers a rare look into their tradecraft, and the profiles capture both the tooling and the exploited CVEs that have been observed across multiple intrusions. TheGentlemen’s RTM profile is here and RVM profile is here.

DragonForce

DragonForce has continued to escalate throughout 2025 and into 2026, branching into MSP-focused attacks and standing up its own "cartel" model that other affiliates can plug into. Its exploitation of edge devices (Ivanti, Fortinet, SonicWall) and SimpleHelp RMM make it a high-priority threat for any organisation using such systems. DragonForce’s RTM profile is here and RVM profile is here.

WarLock

WarLock jumped onto everyone's radar after the ToolShell SharePoint zero-day exploitation campaign, and has since been linked to a string of edge-application exploits including SmarterMail, SolarWinds Web Help Desk, and Gladinet CentreStack. It is a strong example of a likely China-based operator that lives on zero-day exploitation of internet-facing software. WarLock’s RTM profile is here and RVM profile is here.

Observations and Trends

A few themes are worth flagging across all three profiles:

• BYOVD is now standard, not novel. All three groups have been observed bringing vulnerable drivers to disable or blind EDR. TheGentlemen with ThrottleStop driver, DragonForce with the TrueSight and Hangzhou Shunwang drivers, and WarLock with Antiy, NsecSoft, Rising, and VMTools drivers. If your detection stack is not yet hunting on or blocking suspicious driver loads and known-bad driver hashes, that is a high-priority gap to close.
• Network edge devices and other internet-facing systems remain the front door to victim networks for these groups. Fortinet, Ivanti, SonicWall, SimpleHelp, Microsoft SharePoint, SmarterMail, SolarWinds Web Help Desk, and Gladinet CentreStack all appear across these three profiles. Patch prioritisation that focuses on internet-exposed appliances and admin tooling continues to give defenders a valuable return on effort.
• Legitimate tooling continues to blur the line. Velociraptor, Cloudflared, VSCode Tunnels, AnyDesk, MeshCentral, FreeRDP, PuTTY, OpenSSH, and a long list of legitimate cloud services are all being repurposed for ransomware operations. Defender should use these lists to begin baselining what should exist in their environment and start alerting on the rest.

Conclusion

My recommendation for defenders remains the same as in previous updates: take the tools and CVEs from the RTM and RVM profiles and start threat hunting for their presence, writing detection rules to alert on certain behaviours, and blocking what is not expected or permitted in your environment. These three new profiles should make that easier to scope by group when you need to brief leadership, prioritise a hunt, or map your exposure to a specific campaign.

Here's a few sites that can help with turning the threat intel in these new profiles into detections:

- https://rulehound.com/rules

- https://detection.fyi

- https://www.snapattack.com/community

As always, feedback and pull requests are very welcome on both repos. Thanks to everyone who has contributed reports, corrections, and ideas. These projects only stay useful because the community keeps feeding them one way or another.

Introduction

The Ransomware Tool Matrix continues to be a useful passion project that I am happy to continue maintaining. One piece of common feedback I've received for the Ransomware Tool Matrix was that individuals would like to contribute their observations to it, but do not have public links they can cite (such as a formal blog post on a company website). Therefore, I came up with a plan to make a reporting template to help with this.

What are Community Reports?

Individuals can now share what tools they have seen various ransomware groups, affiliates, or initial access brokers (IABs) use via the new Community Report Template. The level of detail provided is the contributor's choice. The more verifiable information shared, the increased level of reliability and credibility.

You can view the current list of Community Reports on GitHub here.

Why the need for Community Reports?

Most of the sources of CTI about ransomware TTPs comes from open source reports by organisations such as the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), The DFIR Report, and other cybersecurity vendors. From the beginning it was important to recognise the importance of the having public citations by reputable organisations to maintain the reliability and credibility of the resource overall. Consumers of the Ransomware Tool Matrix should feel confident that the information provided is of high standard and legitimate.

The problem was, however, that members of the cybersecurity community who may work with victims of ransomware attacks also have information about what tools which ransomware group uses. 

The sources of this information could come from various sources, such as from Digital Forensics and Incident Response (DFIR) service providers, Managed Security Service Providers (MSSPs), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors, or security researchers who manage to obtain threat intelligence about ransomware groups via various other means, such as infiltrating cybercrime forums or open directory hunting.

These sources of information did not currently have a way to contribute to the Ransomware Tool Matrix due to the missing factor of a publicly citable blog.

How do Community Reports work?

Members of the Community with information and tools used by ransomware groups can now share their observations via a structured report template shown below.

Whether to include all the details here is up to the contributor, but this type of reporting system is an option for community members to share their findings with the rest of the community who are interested in this information.

Anyone who wants to submit a Community Report can copy the code, edit in their findings, and submit a pull request to the GitHub repository. Alternatively, they can fork the project and then I can merge their commits to the main branch. More details about how to creating a pull request from a fork can be found in the GitHub's Docs here.

Conclusion

One of the problems of cybersecurity vendor blogs is that a lot of them are marketing material and therefore, details about every ransomware incident a company worked on is not great marketing. However, as CTI analysts, incident responders, threat hunters, and detection engineers, these details are crucial for our day-to-day lives. Hence why the Community Report system was one of the most common pieces of feedback I received and why I created it.

I look forward to the contributions from the community to this new reporting system and hope it helps many more who are keen to see and read about what the latest tools are that the ransomware cybercriminals are using.

Introduction

This blog is a summary and analysis of recent additions to the Ransomware Tool Matrix (RTM) as well as the Ransomware Vulnerability Matrix (RVM). Feedback from the infosec community about these projects has been overwhelmingly positive and many researchers have contacted me to tell me how helpful they have found these to be. It makes me happy to hear how doing something in my spare time can help stop ransomware attacks and cybercriminals from exploiting our society’s systems. And it is for that reason, I shall continue to maintain these projects as long as ransomware is still around. For anyone new to these projects, please read the descriptions on GitHub or feel free to watch my talk explaining the project at BSides London.

Background on the current ransomware ecosystem as of May 2025

Following the impact of Operation Cronos against LockBit and the exit scam by ALPHV/BlackCat, the ransomware ecosystem has been even more unstable than usual. The exit scams and law enforcement infiltration operations have created a zero trust environment for the cybercriminals participating in the ransomware economy. The days of affiliates putting their faith in one RaaS platform seem to be long gone and many are experimenting and going from one RaaS to the next.

Sources of Threat Intelligence for the RTM

The RTM was updated with OSINT reports shared by cybersecurity researchers at various private service providers or vendors. The thing to remember about these reports is that the tool usage is going to be slightly outdated due to the time it takes incident response teams to wrap up an investigation, compile findings, and publish a report.

From the reports, threat groups such as Qilin, BlackSuit, RansomEXX, Medusa, BianLian, Hunters International and PLAY have been active for over one year or for multiple years. These are established groups. Since RansomHub and LockBit have shut down, it is more likely than not that the affiliates have already shifted to one of the other RaaS platforms, like Qilin, among others.

There has also been a number of ransomware operations suspected to be linked to Chinese cyber-espionage groups, such as RA World (for using PlugX), NailaoLocker (for using ShadowPad and PlugX), and CrazyHunter (for its focus on Taiwan).

Threat groups such as IMN Crew, QWCrypt (linked to RedCurl), NightSpire, SuperBlack, and Helldown are all rising threat groups that have more recently begun their ransomware campaigns.

These factors have led to seeing a large variety of tool usage in ransomware operations being observed across the landscape. The reliance on tools from sites like GitHub and other free software sites, however, continues to remain a constant theme among all of these ransomware operations.

List of sources used for the May 2025 major update to the RTM:

Tools Used by Multiple Groups

• EDRSandBlast and WKTools are relatively new tools that are being used by multiple groups to deactivate and overcome EDR tools that many victims will have on their networks to prevent ransomware attacks.
• Typical ransomware tools, such as PsExec, Mimikatz, and Rclone remain effective and still used by multiple ransomware gangs for the foreseeable future.

New Tools Added to the RTM

• The most notable new tools added to RTM include several defense evasion tools for deactivating EDRs, discovery for sensitive files, and tunnelling tools to conceal adversary network connections.

Exploits used by Ransomware Gangs added to the RVM

• As is now usual, multiple ransomware groups have been targeting Fortinet networking devices for initial access into to victim environments.
• Multiple ransomware groups continue to exploit the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) for local privilege escalation to run hacking tools and steal credentials.
• Other exploits involve targeting edge devices, such as Check Point VPNs or PAN Firewalls, or exposed servers, such as Atlassian Confluence Data Center Servers.
• The targeting of Veeam backup software should come as no surprise as preventing backups or stealing sensitive files, such as Active Directory backups, are key objectives of ransomware gangs to complete their mission.

Conclusion

My recommendation for defenders who continue the fight against ransomware is to take some of the findings from this report and begin threat hunting, detection rule writing, and start blocking some of these tools not present in the environments you are protecting.

Here are a few sites to help you get started with:

• https://rulehound.com/rules
• https://detection.fyi
• https://www.snapattack.com/community

One of the challenges with investigating cybercrime is the infrastructure the adversaries leverage to conduct attacks. Cybercriminal infrastructure has evolved drastically over the last 25 years, which now involves hijacking web services, content distribution networks (CDNs), residential proxies, fast flux DNS, domain generation algorithms (DGAs), botnets of IoT devices, the Tor network, and all sorts of nested services.

This blog shall investigate a small UK-based hosting provider known as BitLaunch as an example of how challenging it can be to tackle cybercriminal infrastructure. Research into this hosting provider revealed that they appear to have a multi-year history of cybercriminals using BitLaunch to host command-and-control (C2) servers via their Anonymous VPS service.

The year-on-year growing number of CobaltStrike C2 servers hosted on BitLaunch’s services could be an indicator of tacit collusion with cybercriminals through the facilitation of cheap and quick to procurement of VPSs that end up being used to launch ransomware attacks on all sorts of victims, including hospitals, schools, governments, companies, and charities.

The concept of aiding and abetting criminal activity in law is essentially when an individual or an organisation intentionally assists, facilitates, or encourages a crime. In this case, it would be aiding and abetting the creation of cybercriminal infrastructure. If a hosting provider ignores clear red flags (e.g., cryptocurrency payments from known illicit sources or use of servers for illegal activities), they might still be held criminally liable under wilful blindness under certain laws.

In the past, authorities have taken down bulletproof hosting (BPH) providers that knowingly support cybercrime, such as CyberBunker and LolekHost. In February 2025, the UK government also sanctioned a Russia-based BPH known as ZSERVERS (aka XHOST) for facilitating LockBit attacks.

A podcast version of the blog is available here.

Update: This blog was updated with a statement from BitLaunch (see the end of this blog).

Who is BitLaunch aka BL Networks aka BLNWX?

Active since at least 2017, BitLaunch (also known as BL Networks or BLNWX) is a virtual private server (VPS) reseller whose autonomous system number (ASN) is AS399629. Up to 48 IPv4 networks belong to BitLaunch which are used to "instantly launch a Linux or Windows VPS” where customers can “pay hourly with Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Ethereum, with no firm commitments." BitLaunch also supports their customers via a command-line (CLI) tool and a Python library. BitLaunch has another name, however, in their legal terms and conditions they go by Liber Systems and have their own separate website.

Why focus on BitLaunch?

BitLaunch is quite interesting as they present themselves as a UK-based company run by two local UK businessmen. Their “anonymous Bitcoin VPS” service is regularly abused for all sorts of cybercriminal activities. What triggered this research was the fact that their nickname “BLNWX” was regularly reappearing in cyber threat intelligence (CTI) vendor reports on ransomware and other cybercriminal campaigns. It is also worth highlighting that while BitLaunch own their own IP networks, they are a VPS reseller as well who works with DigitalOcean, Linode, and Vultr, as shown from their website below.

One website that reviews so-called “offshore services” (offshore[.]cat) has listed BitLaunch as being a “verified” offshore hoster that accepts cryptocurrency, only requires email request confirmation to open an account, and is described as allowing anyone to “create VPSs in seconds, using crypto” making them an attractive hoster for cybercriminals. Their service paired with their CLI tools and Python libraries makes it super easy to stand up C2 servers rapidly.

Command and Control (C2) infrastructure on BLNWX

Significant numbers of CobaltStrike C2s among other hacking tools and malware families have been discovered on BitLaunch. I would like to thank the owner of the C2IntelFeedsBot (@drb_ra) account on X/Twitter who assisted with this research by providing their feed of C2 servers discovered on BitLaunch.

The image below shows a sampling of the known C2 servers hosted with BitLaunch between 2021 and 2025. The most notable part of this diagram is the number of CobaltStrike C2 servers in particular. Cobalt Strike is a well-known C2 framework used by organised cybercriminal groups to launch ransomware attacks. It is also favoured by state-sponsored threat groups as well.

Over the last few years, several dozen C2 servers have been identified by the C2IntelFeedsBot and each year, the number of C2s has continued to grow as more cybercriminals identify BitLaunch as a preferable service to support their ransomware campaigns.

The image below displays the totals calculated between “2021-06-26 12:33:41" and "2025-02-05 18:46:10." It is not a complete picture by any means, but this independently verifiable data gives a decent idea of the rate at which BitLaunch is being used by cybercriminals, with each year since 2022 has trended upwards.

One of the interesting things about CobaltStrike is that it is a commercial offensive security tool (OST). It is issued to legitimate customers through licenses, which have a unique watermark. While there have been several cracked versions of CobaltStrike over the years, it is possible to track certain groups through their usage of the same CobaltStrike versions.

The image below shows the distribution of the CobaltStrike watermarks gathered from BitLaunch. Notably, “0” is the most common. This is often the case when analysing CobaltStrike watermarks as this signifies it is the cracked version.

OSINT collection and analysis of the CobaltStrike watermarks revealed potential connections to several well-known cybercriminal groups using BitLaunch who have a history of conducting ransomware attacks:

1. "426352781” – This watermark is used by ShadowSyndicate, a ransomware affiliate group tracked by Group-IB which is connected to multiple Ransomware-as-a-Serivce (Raas) platforms. This watermark is also historically associated with CobaltStrike Beacons dropped by the Qakbot malware botnet.
2. “206546002” – This watermark is also used by ShadowSyndicate as well as Blister Loader, PLAY ransomware, and FIN7-linked ransomware operators.
3. “1580103824” – This watermark was linked to ShadowSyndicate as well, alongside the Cleo exploitation campaign attributed CL0P ransomware. A threat group tracked by CERT-UA as UAC-0056 has also been observed using this watermark too.
4. ”987654321” – This watermark has been associated with the IcedID malware botnet and the Dagon Locker ransomware gang previously.
5. ”1359593325” – This watermark has been used by CobaltStrike Beacons in campaigns attributed to the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR)
6. “391144938” and “305419896” – These watermarks have been attributed to campaigns by multiple Chinese cyber-espionage campaigns tracked by SentinelOne, Recorded Future, Zscaler, and Cisco Talos.

C2s on BLNWX attributed to Ransomware Gangs by CTI vendors

There are a number of CTI reports over the last couple years that directly reference BitLaunch Networks (BLNWX) IP addresses as Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) as part of high-profile ransomware campaigns.

This includes attribution to the Yanluowang ransomware attack against Cisco, a C2 linked to the JavaScript more_eggs backdoor used by FIN6 (who is connected to ransomware campaigns), a dozen IPs attributed to Rhysida ransomware attacks, and a Rhysida and Interlock ransomware precursor campaign tracked as TAG-124, as well as the PaperCut exploitation campaign which involved both LockBit and CL0P.

The VirusTotal graph is available here.

Additional notable CTI alerts that called out BLNWX include a report on Latrodectus, a ransomware precursor campaign, by Proofpoint; Okta-themed phishing campaigns attributed to Scattered Spider, who has carried out ALPHV/BlackCat and RansomHub attacks, by Intel471; infrastructure used to enable the BlackBasta ransomware gang by QuadrantSec, as well as C2 servers of the IcedID malware botnet that has been used by ransomware gangs for initial access.

Assessment of BitLaunch

As of February 2025, BitLaunch's parent firm Liber Systems Limited is run by two UK-based directors according to UK Companies House. While they are profiting off this Anonymous VPS service they are not taking the appropriate steps to prevent their service from being used by ransomware and malware gangs. Organised cybercrime groups have evidently found and recognised this about BitLaunch and are leveraging the cheap, crypto-accepting service that doesn’t ask too many questions.

To be fair to BitLaunch, they appear to be responsive to takedowns and are noted on Offshore[.]cat as enforcing DMCA requests. The crux of the issue though is that the cybercriminals can use their service to rapidly spin up instances for C2 for a few hours and chuck it away again. This means there often no need to submit a takedown as the cybercriminals has already abandoned the C2 and can spin up another one. Therefore, the cybercriminals can continually leverage BitLaunch without interference.

As a security researcher, and not a police officer, I cannot comment on how cooperative BitLaunch have been with the police and it is probably not something BitLaunch would want to advertise to their customers anyway based on who some of their customers are.

For BitLaunch’s two directors, this works out nicely for them. They can take the cybercriminals money via cryptocurrency and also appear to be ethical and compliant by assisting with law enforcement takedown requests. Currently, they appear to be helping both the criminals and the police, and have been getting away with it for years.

On BitLaunch’s front page advertisement they highlight as the main focus as being able to pay hourly for the use VPS and that customers can pay in “anonymous cryptocurrency.” It is in my opinion, and that of other cybersecurity researchers I have spoken to about this (including red teamers and penetration testers), that this service is perfect for C2 servers and almost nothing else legitimate.

The Broader Issue with Anonymous VPSs

In BitLaunch’s blogs, they say they believe the internet should be "open, free, and devoid of interference by any single government or authority" adding that accept cryptocurrency because "citizens of some countries do not have bank accounts and can use Bitcoin instead" because the local banks have control over who their citizens can send money to. Their blogs also state that they believe internet users should be allowed to run their own virtual private networks (VPNs) for anti-surveillance and privacy reasons. They also provide lots of guides on how to configure private VPNs for this purpose. While this is a legitimate service that is useful for some people in specific situations, having it be abused by ransomware gangs is a situation that needs to be changed.

This issue of selling anonymous VPSs is not specific to this one company. BitLaunch is obviously a small company and proactively combating cybercriminals from registering VPSs on their service is an expensive and multi-pronged challenge for any hoster, which includes preventing abuse while preserving the privacy of their customers.

Hosters such as BitLaunch could use services such as Shodan, Abuse.ch, GreyNoise, OTX Alienvault, and AbuseIPDB to check if their IP addresses are being abused. One interesting example of a hoster trying to tackle this issue is how PQ Hosting (aka Stark Industries Solutions) announced publicly on their blog that they have partnered with Team Cymru, a netflow security intelligence firm. Alternatively, hosters could use a blockchain analytics platform like Chainalysis, TRM Labs, or Arkham Intelligence, to trace cryptocurrency payments from known illicit wallet clusters.

There will, however, always be some threats that slip through the net. It is undoubtedly a difficult challenge for small hosters who do not have funds to sacrifice on network observability tools or CTI platforms. Even some of the world’s largest hosters, such as Cloudflare struggle with this as well and end up having their services abused for cybercrime operations.

The anonymous VPS problem could be compared to issues in other industries such as stolen funds being used to buy gift cards or game keys that are then resold for money laundering. Another platform often abused for a variety of scams and phishing campaigns is Gmail. Is Google being wilfully negligent to cybercrime happening on their platform? That’s a question I shall leave for readers to decide on their own.

Overall, this type of issue is analogous to a hotel offering rooms for the night and organized criminals renting them to commit various types of crimes inside them. Ultimately, the criminals are the ones breaking the law, not the hotel, but if the hotel is being constantly made aware of these activities by bystanders and law enforcement, it is their duty to shut that activity down, to the best of their abilities.

What the UK Could Do About It

In this scenario around BitLaunch, there are three potential ways the UK could help stop these small hosters being taken advantage of by cybercriminal operations.

Firstly, the cybersecurity and hosting industry could launch an initiative through institutions, such as the British Computer Society (BCS) or something, that would work to convince hosting providers that the hassle being investigated by law enforcement agencies, sanctions, or the chance of being arrested is not worth the funds generated from selling C2 servers to cybercriminals.

Secondly, as BitLaunch (or Liber Systems) is registered here, the UK Government Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology (DSIT) could work with them and other small hosters to regulate the industry and provide support to these businesses to warn them of the dangers of offering unregulated VPS services and inform them how they contribute to the damage that ransomware attacks are having on the UK and elsewhere.

Third, providing free network observability services to hosters could also help them proactively shutdown C2 servers before they are weaponised against victims. All UK hosters can sign-up to the free UK government-provided service called MyNCSC, offered by the UK NCSC, which is part of GCHQ. Hosters will then get alerts when MyNCSC detects which IPs are flagged for hosting C2 servers (such as CobaltStrike).

As the UK government’s mandate is to “make the UK the safest place in the world to live and work online” then tackling the issue with these UK-based hosters supporting ransomware should also be one of those priorities.

Indicators of Compromise

Historic Malicious BLNWX IP addresses are available below:

• https://www.virustotal.com/gui/collection/275b81bcec9bdd14ea2908f340343fef1f99ee2dfe9a8bc99761d409c8676013/iocs
• https://otx.alienvault.com/pulse/67af7c32be1268271aad22e7/

The scourge of ransomware continues primarily because of three main reasons: Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS), cryptocurrency, and safe havens.

• RaaS platforms enable aspiring cybercriminals to join a gang and begin launching attacks with a support system that help extract ransom payments from their victims.
• Cryptocurrency enables cybercriminals to receive funds from victims around the world without the option to freeze or refund them due to the immutable nature of the virtual funds.
• Safe havens are countries that permit cybercriminals to launch attacks without immediate fear of arrest, enabling them to earn vast fortunes through ransomware campaigns.

With these three challenges in mind, law enforcement and governments have a very difficult job to do when it comes to fighting ransomware but fight it they must. In this blog we shall recall what counter-ransomware activities took place in 2024, analyse their effectiveness, and assess how the landscape shall evolve as a result.

A podcast version of this blog is also available here.

Ransomware Operator Arrests and Sanctions

During 2024, there were significant disruption operations by law enforcement and financial authorities targeting individuals behind ransomware campaigns (see the Table below). The main focus of 2024 for Western law enforcement was squarely on the LockBit RaaS and its affiliates as it was the largest and highest earning ransomware operation to date.

Several key players of the ransomware ecosystem were arrested, including the main developer of LockBit ransomware. Interestingly, Russian law enforcement also decided to arrest ransomware threat actors located in Moscow and Kaliningrad as well.

The ransomware ecosystem has fragmented due to the law enforcement disruptions of the largest players, such as ALPHV/BlackCat and LockBit. In the case of ALPHV/BlackCat, the operators staged a law enforcement takedown as they put up a fake seizure notice as part of an exit scam in March 2024 after the attack on UnitedHealth.

Following these disruptions, some affiliates have migrated to less effective strains or launched their own strains. This includes Akira and RansomHub at the top of the list as well as Hunters International and PLAY.

Cryptocurrency Exchanges Disrupted

During 2024, law enforcement seized funds from and sanctioned a number of cryptocurrency exchanges and individuals running payment processors using cryptocurrency (see the Table below).

One of the most interesting disclosures this year came from the UK National Crime Agency (NCA) around Operation Destablise. The NCA linked payments to ransomware gangs to money laundering networks used by Russian oligarchs to covertly purchase property and Russia Today, the state-run media organization, to covertly fund pro-Russia foreign entities.

Another notable investigation in 2024 was when the US Treasury sanctioned more Russian cryptocurrency exchanges, such as PM2BTC and Cryptex, that led to money launderers that facilitate the cashing out of ransom payments being arrested by Russian law enforcement.

Safe Havens Enabling Ransomware

While ransomware is a global problem, there are only a few countries that are to blame for this rapid expansion of the ransomware ecosystem. The state that is blamed the most for preventing many ransomware operators from facing justice is Russia. There are explicit rules posted to Russian-speaking cybercrime forums that state as long as members avoid targeting Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), they are free to operate.

The Russian ransomware safe haven theory was further proven following sanctions levied against Evil Corp by the UK, US, and Australia. One of the sanctioned men connected to Evil Corp was Eduard Benderskiy, a former Russian federal security service (FSB) official. Benderskiy is reportedly the father-in-law of Maksim Yakubets, the leader of Evil Corp, an organized cybercrime group responsible for multiple ransomware strains including BitPaymer, WastedLocker, Hades, PhoenixLocker, and MacawLocker. In total, Evil Corp has reportedly extorted at least $300 million from victims globally, according to the UK NCA. It is now clear that Evil Corp has protection from a highly connected Russian FSB official who has also been involved in multiple overseas assassinations on behalf of the Kremlin, according to Bellingcat investigators.

While a number of ransomware operators were arrested in 2024 and some were extradited to the US, the work done by law enforcement specializing in cybercrime was put in the spotlight during the August 2024 prisoner swap. Multiple countries decided to release cybercriminals, spies and an assassin as part of a historic prisoner exchange with Russia at an airport in Ankara, Turkey. The US negotiated the release of 16 people from Russia, including five Germans as well as seven Russian citizens who were political prisoners in their own country.

Notably, from a cybercrime intelligence perspective, the Russian nationals released from the West included the infamous cybercriminals Roman Seleznev and Vladislav Klyushin. The latter, Klyushin, was sentenced in 2023 to nine years in US prison after he was caught in a $93 million stock market cheating scheme that involved hacking into US companies for insider knowledge. The other cybercriminal, Seleznev, was sentenced to 27 years in prison in 2017 for stealing and selling millions of credit card numbers from 500 businesses using point-of-sale (POS) malware and causing more than $169 million in damage to small businesses and financial institutions, including those in the US.

In 2024, we saw several more Russian nationals get extradited to the US after being arrested by law enforcement in the country they were residing in. This includes the Phobos operator living in South Korea and the LockBit developer living in Israel. This follows others arrested in previous years such as a TrickBot developer arrested in South Korea as well as the two LockBit affiliates extradited to the US. There is a potential that these Russian nationals involved in ransomware could be used in prisoner exchanges in the future.

Further, another curious trend in 2024 was that some Russians inside Russia, which is firmly considered a safe haven for ransomware gang, did get arrested. This includes the SugarLocker operators arrested in Moscow and the LockBit affiliate Wazawaka who was arrested in Kaliningrad. This is alongside the money launderers arrested around Russia linked to the Cryptex exchange.

The arrests of Russian nationals in Russia for ransomware activities appear to be more symbolic than a true crackdown on this type of activity. This is because there are several dozen Russian-speaking ransomware gangs that continue to operate, as well as a plethora of other types of cybercrime in the Russian-speaking underground.

Outlook

In 2024, there was lots of significant action by law enforcement to shake up the ransomware economy. One of the main successes of the notable Operation Cronos action taken against LockBit was the sowing of distrust and disharmony in the ransomware ecosystem. Despite the admins of LockBit trying to recover, their reputation and army of affiliates have been smashed.

Many of Russian law enforcement activities could all be related to the costs of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russian authorities seizing funds of the illicit cryptocurrency exchanges could be to pay for the war in Ukraine and they could be recruiting arresting cybercriminals for offensive cyber operations related to the war in Ukraine. The true motivations of Russian law enforcement arresting these specific ransomware operators but allowing others to operate are unclear. The cybercriminals could also simply have not paid their protection money or lack connections in the FSB like Evil Corp has.

Due to the fall of LockBit and ALPHV/BlackCat in 2024, there has been a rise of other ransomware groups like RansomHub and Akira to fill the vacuum. However, the rate of attacks by these emerging groups is still noticeably lower than when LockBit was operating at full force. This should be perceived as a success for law enforcement operations in 2024 due to the overall number of ransomware attacks lowering, which we should all be thankful for.