Tilly Norwood, billed as the world's first AI-generated actress, has released a new music video titled "Take The Lead" just ...
South Africa’s Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana has disclosed that the Land and Agricultural Development Bank of South Africa was targeted in a ransomware incident earlier this year.
The cyberattack took place on January 12, according to official confirmation.
Details of the breach were made public through a parliamentary response after Adil Nchabeleng requested clarification on how the incident occurred, which systems were impacted, and whether the attackers issued any ransom demands.
In his response, the Minister stated that the attackers demanded 5 Bitcoin, estimated to be worth around R5.4 million. The bank chose not to comply with this demand. He further confirmed that core banking infrastructure and data related to farmers were not accessed or compromised.
Initial investigations revealed that suspicious activity was detected within certain parts of the bank’s IT environment. Further analysis suggested that an external party gained entry by exploiting a vulnerability in an internet-facing server. Following this, ransomware was deployed, leading to encryption of portions of the bank’s server systems as well as several employee laptops.
The attack specifically affected servers operating within virtual environments that run on Microsoft systems. Authorities have identified the perpetrators as part of a Ransomware-as-a-Service group, indicating the use of commercially distributed ransomware tools.
In response to the breach, the bank acted swiftly to contain the damage. Affected systems were isolated, indicators of compromise were removed, and additional security measures were implemented to strengthen defenses.
Officials emphasized that critical platforms, including enterprise resource planning systems, core banking infrastructure, and customer relationship management tools, were not accessed. This was attributed to the fact that the SAP environment is maintained separately from other server systems, providing an additional layer of protection.
However, other parts of the IT environment were significantly impacted. Systems outside the SAP infrastructure were either encrypted or rendered inaccessible to staff, and multiple laptops were also locked by the ransomware.
The attackers reportedly demanded payment in Bitcoin in exchange for restoring access to data and refraining from releasing any stolen information. Despite this, the bank confirmed that it did not make any ransom payment.
During the recovery phase, the bank continued to isolate affected environments, remove malicious traces, and enhance its cybersecurity posture. This included strengthening firewall configurations, patching known vulnerabilities, and improving detection mechanisms to better respond to future threats.
This incident follows a series of cyberattacks affecting organizations in South Africa. In May of the previous year, South African Airways experienced a major cyber disruption that affected its website, mobile application, and several internal systems. Immediate steps were taken at the time to reduce the impact on flight operations and customer services.
The Land Bank attack sheds light on the increasing frequency of ransomware incidents targeting key institutions. It also underscores the importance of proactive cybersecurity measures, including system segmentation, timely updates, and continuous monitoring to prevent and mitigate such threats.
A contemporary cyber campaign has been identified where attackers are using Microsoft Teams to target employees in financial and healthcare organizations, eventually infecting systems with a newly observed malware known as A0Backdoor.
Research from BlueVoyant shows that the attackers rely heavily on social engineering. They begin by overwhelming an employee’s inbox with large volumes of spam emails. Soon after, they contact the same individual on Microsoft Teams, pretending to be part of the company’s IT support team and offering help to resolve the issue. This sequence is designed to build trust and make the request appear routine.
Once the victim is convinced, the attacker asks them to start a remote session using Quick Assist, a built-in Windows feature meant for remote troubleshooting. After access is granted, the attacker delivers a set of malicious tools through MSI installer files. These installers are digitally signed and hosted on a personal Microsoft cloud storage account, which helps them appear legitimate at first glance.
The researchers found that these MSI files are disguised as familiar Microsoft-related components, including Microsoft Teams elements and CrossDeviceService, a real Windows service used by the Phone Link application. This naming strategy helps the files blend in with normal system processes.
To execute the attack, the threat actor uses a technique called DLL sideloading. This involves running trusted Microsoft programs to load a malicious file named hostfxr.dll. Inside this file is data that is either compressed or encrypted. When the file is loaded into memory, it decrypts this data into shellcode and begins execution.
The malware also uses the CreateThread function to generate multiple threads. This behavior is not meant to improve performance but to make analysis harder. According to the researchers, creating too many threads can cause debugging tools to crash, even though it does not noticeably affect normal system activity.
After execution begins, the shellcode checks whether it is running inside a sandbox environment, which is commonly used by security analysts. If no such environment is detected, it proceeds to create a cryptographic key derived from SHA-256. This key is then used to decrypt the A0Backdoor payload, which is protected using AES encryption.
Once decrypted, the malware moves itself to a different region in memory and activates its main functions. It collects system-level information using Windows API calls such as DeviceIoControl, GetUserNameExW, and GetComputerNameW. This allows it to identify and profile the infected machine.
For communication with its operators, the malware avoids traditional methods and instead uses DNS traffic. It sends DNS MX queries that contain encoded data within complex subdomains to public recursive DNS servers. The responses it receives include MX records that carry encoded instructions. The malware extracts the relevant part of the response, decodes it, and then follows the commands.
Researchers explain that using MX records helps the traffic appear normal, making it harder to detect compared to other DNS-based techniques, especially those that rely on TXT records, which are more commonly monitored.
The campaign has already targeted at least two organizations, including a financial institution in Canada and a global healthcare company.
BlueVoyant assesses with moderate to high confidence that this activity builds on methods previously linked to the BlackBasta group. Although that group reportedly shut down after internal chat logs were leaked, parts of its approach appear to be continuing in this operation.
At the same time, the researchers point out that several elements in this campaign are new. These include the use of signed MSI installers, the A0Backdoor malware itself, and the use of DNS MX records for command-and-control communication.
This case reflects how attackers are adapting their methods by combining trusted tools, familiar platforms, and layered techniques to bypass detection.