MedusaLocker ransomware – Part 2
After discussing the nature of ransomware attacks and aspects of MedusaLocker’s behavior, we delve into the malware analysis and explain why it is interesting.
Our S.O.S. line:
+49 89 262 025954
Our team of experts is ready to assist your organization in the event of a cyberattack.
detailsCyber Threat Intelligence + Incident Response + Security Operations Center White Hat todayJune 12, 2024

The starting point is a Windows Update error (0x80070643) hitting the community worldwide concerning the installation of the package KB5034441.
The official explanation from Microsoft was:
“Devices attempting to install the January 2024 Windows Recovery Environment update ( KB5034441) might display an error related to the size of the Recovery Environment’s partition. The Windows Recovery Environment (WinRE) is used to repair or recover from issues affecting Windows.”
The fix, in a nutshell, is to expand the size of the Windows Recovery partition. This is not a daily exercise for most of us, so an attacker identified a demand in the ‘market’ and created a malicious script. This script is hosted on a website that provides a one-click solution, but it requires administrative rights. It’s a simple, yet unfortunate process: download the script, run it as an admin, and you’re done.
Fortunately, an IT security expert detected the malicious activity and reported it to us for further analysis. After doing a quick Google search about the problem, you land on the following, since removed website:

The author explains what to do and how to manually fix the error. However, at the bottom of the page, you are provided with the magic solution, a blue button:

Clicking on it results in a powershell script in your download folder named as: Fix_ad-Code.ps1
Once we open the script in a text editor, we encounter the first layer of slightly obfuscated code:

After decoding the Base64 strings, it starts to become clear what is happening:

However, it is still a bit unclear, so we continue the deobfuscation to reach Layer 2:

Let’s break down the functionality step by step:
From this, we can infer that the main functionalities are to download the payload and post the status check’s result.
To investigate the downloader part, we used the necessary lines from the script just to download the zip payload:

Without executing anything we can have a closer look on the full content of the zipped payload:

We assumed that not ‘everything is as it appears’, so we ran quick checks on file types searching for anomalies. The most suspicious files were chalcocite.accdb and brunch.deb. We delved into the .exe file (WinNc.exe), which is initiated by the script. At first glance, it is a 64-bit PE compiled on March 15, 2024, with a substantial resource.

The binary’s certificate seems to be valid:

We shifted our focus to the other binaries in the folder and detected that the signature of unrar64.dll is not valid.

We compared the suspicious file with unrar64.dll in the original WinNc software’s folder of the same version (10.7.0.0), and we found a few functions that exist in our file but not in the legitimate sample.

These are mostly not library functions, which means we can easily identify the attackers’ custom code for static analysis if we choose to follow that path in the investigation. However, based on an educated guess, we believe that unrar64.dll is only the second stage, so our goal is to reach the third stage. That’s why we opted for dynamic analysis. The results vary slightly depending on network access. Initially, we ran it without internet access to gain preliminary insights into the process flow.

In more detail, the sample first copies all relevant files from its folder to the user’s Appdata\Roaming\Qbhost folder. Then it starts itself from the new location, spawns a cmd process, and initiates regsvr32.exe to download further components. However, this is likely the point where it detects the lack of internet access.
A strange environment variable is created for that cmd.exe child process:

The file is the first element dropped on disk by the first stage infection.
In the meantime, unrar64.dll is reading 2 encrypted files from its folder, brunch.deb and chalcocite.accdb:


We repeated the process, this time with network access, hoping to catch the next payload.
Let’s focus on the differences! Firstly, our process tree is now complete with the third stage, which was downloaded through regsvr32.exe:

And a popup window informs us about installation error:

A quick check on the path shows empty dll files in the mentioned folder:

These masters of the LOL (Living Off the Land) techniques represent the typical repertoire of infostealers. For example, nss3.dll belongs to the Network Security Services of Mozilla Firefox and is often used by attackers’ tools to extract passwords from Mozilla profiles.
You can read about the subject in the excellent article of cyberSecAsia.org:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/detecting-undetected-risk-your-info-cybersecasia-org
Finally, our third stage Stealer (we can call it on his name now) is written on disk:

As we aren’t expecting any major surprises from this point forward, we’ll just collect some static details about DAEBKKKEHD.exe.
The good news is that Defender recognizes and quarantines the file. The screenshot is from an earlier run and the name is randomized, but this file is indeed our ‘stealer friend’

In the HKCU Registry hive there is evidence of the execution:
![]()
The binary is a 32-bit PE file, does not have valid signature (surprise-surprise!) and pretend to be iTop Easy Desktop Uinstall Confirm application.

sample contains 88 functions which are not present in the original:

Unfortunately, only a few AV products know our guy according to Virustotal, tagged as Penguish:

https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/3e985b9112a5b9ff5f3d4a8b20db2519aff35d19ec71d541a6927b8618e3000a
But the legit IEDConfirm.exe is confirmed even more clean as Unwanted Software:

Lastly, we checked the network communication during the infection.
Powershell.exe downloaded components from one site:

Our regsvr32.exe communicated with 4 IP addresses – but only 3 is interesting.

So, we identified our C2 server listening on port 5432 and YES, attackers can use Telegram as a Bot Client Proxy.

If you would like to read more analyses conducted by our expert colleagues, check out these previous posts of ours:
MedusaLocker ransomware – Part 2 – White Hat IT Security
Written by: White Hat
Tagged as: analysis, infection, infostealer.
Cyber Threat Intelligence Denes Fodor / May 27, 2024
After discussing the nature of ransomware attacks and aspects of MedusaLocker’s behavior, we delve into the malware analysis and explain why it is interesting.
Penetration Testing WhiteHat / August 28, 2026
This week’s CVE of the Week is CVE-2026-24301, also known as CoSnitch, an exfiltration method in Microsoft Copilot that could allow an unauthorized attacker to steal sensitive information and data. With a CVSS score of 8.8, deserves serious attention. It is a combination of three different vulnerabilities that could allow an attacker to pull data ...
Cyber Threat Intelligence WhiteHat / August 6, 2026
What is Cyber Threat Intelligence, and why does it matter? Learn the CTI lifecycle, intelligence types, and how threat intelligence helps prevent cyberattacks.