Live Active security incident? Get immediate response
MITRE ATT&CK® Technique

T1090.001: Internal Proxy

Adversaries may use an internal proxy to direct command and control traffic between two or more systems in a compromised environment. Many tools exist that enable traffic redirection through proxies or port redirection, including HTRAN, ZXProxy, and ZXPortMap. [1] Adversaries use internal proxies to manage command and control communications inside a compromised environment, to reduce the number of simultaneous outbound network connections, to provide resiliency in the face of connection loss, or to ride over existing trusted communications paths between infected systems to avoid suspicion. Internal proxy connections may use common peer-to-peer (p2p) networking protocols, such as SMB, to better blend in with the environment.

By using a compromised internal system as a proxy, adversaries may conceal the true destination of C2 traffic while reducing the need for numerous connections to external systems.

EnterpriseT1090.001Sub-techniqueObject v1.2 Modified
Glexia's Take

Analyst context for executives and security teams

Analyst confidence Medium

Internal Proxy matters because it can turn one compromised host into a relay for command-and-control traffic across the environment. For leaders, the risk is not just an outbound connection to the internet; it is that trusted internal host-to-host paths may hide, concentrate, or preserve adversary communications across Windows, Linux, macOS, ESXi, and network-device environments.

Executive priority

Prioritize this as a resilience and visibility issue for command-and-control containment. Ask whether the SOC can distinguish normal internal service traffic from unusual peer-to-peer relay behavior, whether network boundaries have intrusion prevention coverage, and whether incident responders can quickly identify the internal system acting as a C2 pivot. This is especially material for environments with flat internal networks, trusted SMB-heavy traffic, critical infrastructure dependencies, or managed service/provider-style connectivity.

Technical view

ATT&CK provides no official detection text for T1090.001, but the relationship to DET0075 points defenders toward detecting internal proxy behavior via lateral host-to-host C2 relay. Validate analytics that correlate internal host-to-host sessions, unexpected port redirection or proxy-like behavior, reduced external egress concentrated through one compromised system, and C2-like patterns riding over trusted internal protocols such as SMB. Coverage should be checked across the listed platforms: ESXi, Linux, macOS, network devices, and Windows.

Likely telemetry

  • East-west network flow records between internal hosts
  • Firewall, proxy, IDS/IPS, and network boundary logs
  • Host network connection telemetry from Windows, Linux, macOS, and ESXi where available
  • Network device connection, session, and configuration logs
  • SMB or other internal peer-to-peer protocol telemetry where collected

Detection direction

  • Validate whether DET0075-style logic exists for lateral host-to-host C2 relay behavior rather than only direct outbound C2.
  • Baseline normal internal service paths so alerts can focus on unusual internal systems acting as intermediaries or concentrating outbound traffic.
  • Tune for false positives from legitimate proxies, jump hosts, remote administration tools, load balancers, backup systems, and vulnerability scanners.
  • Look for mismatches between expected business role and network behavior, such as a workstation or appliance relaying traffic for multiple peers.
  • Do not rely only on perimeter egress detection; this technique is specifically useful when adversaries hide C2 behind internal trusted communications.

Mitigation priorities

  • Start with network intrusion prevention at boundaries as mapped by M1031, using signatures and controls to block known malicious or suspicious traffic where feasible.
  • Segment internal networks and limit unnecessary peer-to-peer communication paths, especially where SMB or administrative protocols are broadly trusted.
  • Restrict which systems are allowed to act as proxies, gateways, or management relays, and monitor exceptions.
  • Ensure incident response playbooks include tracing relay chains from external egress back to the originating internal hosts.
  • Use threat intelligence from ATT&CK relationships to inform hunts, but validate against local telemetry before making incident or attribution judgments.
Analyst notes and limits

ATT&CK links this technique to the parent Proxy technique, one detection strategy, one mitigation, multiple campaigns, groups, and software entries including Cobalt Strike and several malware families. These relationships show the behavior is broadly relevant across espionage, financially motivated, and post-exploitation contexts, but they should be used as context for defensive prioritization rather than proof of current activity in any environment.

The official ATT&CK object does not provide detection guidance, so the take relies on the object description, platform list, tactic, DET0075 relationship, and M1031 mitigation relationship. Local architecture, allowed proxy paths, segmentation model, and telemetry retention will determine whether this behavior is detectable in practice.

Official MITRE ATT&CK definition

Internal Proxy

Adversaries may use an internal proxy to direct command and control traffic between two or more systems in a compromised environment. Many tools exist that enable traffic redirection through proxies or port redirection, including HTRAN, ZXProxy, and ZXPortMap. [1] Adversaries use internal proxies to manage command and control communications inside a compromised environment, to reduce the number of simultaneous outbound network connections, to provide resiliency in the face of connection loss, or to ride over existing trusted communications paths between infected systems to avoid suspicion. Internal proxy connections may use common peer-to-peer (p2p) networking protocols, such as SMB, to better blend in with the environment.

By using a compromised internal system as a proxy, adversaries may conceal the true destination of C2 traffic while reducing the need for numerous connections to external systems.

View the same entry on attack.mitre.org (MITRE-hosted reference; in-page links above use the Glexia ATT&CK library.)

Glexia analysis

How security teams should use this page

Treat this object as behavior context, not an attribution claim. Validate the related groups, software, data sources, and mitigations against official ATT&CK relationships and your own telemetry before making control-coverage decisions.

ATT&CK relationship table

Related techniques

This mirrors the MITRE pattern of making group, software, campaign, and technique relationships scannable. Relationship notes come from mirrored ATT&CK relationship text when available.

1 rows
Domain ID Name Relationship / procedure
Enterprise T1090 Proxy This object subtechnique of Proxy.
Associated objects

Groups, software, and campaigns

Group Enterprise

G1047: Velvet Ant

Velvet Ant is a threat actor operating since at least 2021. Velvet Ant is associated with complex persistence mechanisms, the targeting of network devices and appliances during operations, and the use of zero day exploits.[1][2]

Group Enterprise

G1016: FIN13

FIN13 is a financially motivated cyber threat group that has targeted the financial, retail, and hospitality industries in Mexico and Latin America, as early as 2016. FIN13 achieves its objectives by stealing intellectual property, financial data, mergers and acquisition information, or PII.[1][2]

Group Enterprise

G0126: Higaisa

Higaisa is a threat group suspected to have South Korean origins. Higaisa has targeted government, public, and trade organizations in North Korea; however, they have also carried out attacks in China, Japan, Russia, Poland, and other nations. Higaisa was first disclosed in early 2019 but is assessed to have operated as early as 2009.[1][2][3]

Group Enterprise

G0041: Strider

Strider is a threat group that has been active since at least 2011 and has targeted victims in Russia, China, Sweden, Belgium, Iran, and Rwanda.[1][2]

Group Enterprise

G1017: Volt Typhoon

Volt Typhoon is a People's Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored actor that has been active since at least 2021, primarily targeting critical infrastructure organizations in the US and its territories including Guam. Volt Typhoon's targeting and pattern of behavior have been assessed as pre-positioning to enable lateral movement to operational technology (OT) assets for potential destructive or disruptive attacks. Volt Typhoon has emphasized stealth in operations using web shells, living-off-the-land (LOTL) binaries, hands on keyboard activities, and stolen credentials.[1][2][3][4]. The group has leveraged compromised SOHO routers to proxy command and control traffic and obscure its infrastructure, activity associated with the KV botnet.[5].

Reporting indicates a separate initial access cluster, SYLVANITE, has been observed exploiting internet-facing edge devices and transferring access to Volt Typhoon, also tracked as VOLTZITE, for follow-on operations. [6]

Group Enterprise

G0010: Turla

Turla is a cyber espionage threat group that has been attributed to Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB). They have compromised victims in over 50 countries since at least 2004, spanning a range of industries including government, embassies, military, education, research and pharmaceutical companies. Turla is known for conducting watering hole and spearphishing campaigns, and leveraging in-house tools and malware, such as Uroburos.[1][2][3][4][5]

Group Enterprise

G0032: Lazarus Group

Lazarus Group is a North Korean state-sponsored cyber threat group attributed to the Reconnaissance General Bureau (RGB). [1] [2] Lazarus Group has been active since at least 2009 and is reportedly responsible for the November 2014 destructive wiper attack on Sony Pictures Entertainment, identified by Novetta as part of Operation Blockbuster. Malware used by Lazarus Group correlates to other reported campaigns, including Operation Flame, Operation 1Mission, Operation Troy, DarkSeoul, and Ten Days of Rain.[3]

North Korea’s cyber operations have shown a consistent pattern of adaptation, forming and reorganizing units as national priorities shift. These units frequently share personnel, infrastructure, malware, and tradecraft, making it difficult to attribute specific operations with high confidence. Public reporting often uses “Lazarus Group” as an umbrella term for multiple North Korean cyber operators conducting espionage, destructive attacks, and financially motivated campaigns.[4][5][6]

Group Enterprise

G0087: APT39

APT39 is one of several names for cyber espionage activity conducted by the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) through the front company Rana Intelligence Computing since at least 2014. APT39 has primarily targeted the travel, hospitality, academic, and telecommunications industries in Iran and across Asia, Africa, Europe, and North America to track individuals and entities considered to be a threat by the MOIS.[1][2][3][4][5]

Malware Enterprise

S0556: Pay2Key

Pay2Key is a ransomware written in C++ that has been used by Fox Kitten since at least July 2020 including campaigns against Israeli companies. Pay2Key has been incorporated with a leak site to display stolen sensitive information to further pressure victims into payment.[1][2]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0038: Duqu

Duqu is a malware platform that uses a modular approach to extend functionality after deployment within a target network. [1]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0023: CHOPSTICK

CHOPSTICK is a malware family of modular backdoors used by APT28. It has been used since at least 2012 and is usually dropped on victims as second-stage malware, though it has been used as first-stage malware in several cases. It has both Windows and Linux variants. [1] [2] [3] [4] It is tracked separately from the X-Agent for Android.

WindowsLinux
Malware Enterprise

S9010: GlassWorm

GlassWorm is a worm that propagated through supply chain attacks by compromising repository credentials from victim environments and having malicious payloads added to those compromised accounts for distribution to victims across the various development ecosystems.[1][2][3] GlassWorm has numerous variants, including Rust binaries, encrypted JavaScript and a variant leveraging invisible Unicode characters that made reverse engineering difficult.[4][1][5] GlassWorm has employed a unique command and control (C2) methodology using Solana blockchain.[6][1] GlassWorm was first reported in October 2025.[6][1][3]

macOSWindows
Malware Enterprise

S0154: Cobalt Strike

Cobalt Strike is a commercial, full-featured, remote access tool that bills itself as “adversary simulation software designed to execute targeted attacks and emulate the post-exploitation actions of advanced threat actors”. Cobalt Strike’s interactive post-exploit capabilities cover the full range of ATT&CK tactics, all executed within a single, integrated system.[1]

In addition to its own capabilities, Cobalt Strike leverages the capabilities of other well-known tools such as Metasploit and Mimikatz.[1]

LinuxmacOSWindows
Malware Enterprise

S1060: Mafalda

Mafalda is a flexible interactive implant that has been used by Metador. Security researchers assess the Mafalda name may be inspired by an Argentinian cartoon character that has been popular as a means of political commentary since the 1960s. [1]

Windows
Tool Enterprise

S0699: Mythic

Mythic is an open source, cross-platform post-exploitation/command and control platform. Mythic is designed to "plug-n-play" with various agents and communication channels.[1][2][3] Deployed Mythic C2 servers have been observed as part of potentially malicious infrastructure.[4]

WindowsLinuxmacOS
Campaign Enterprise

C0024: SolarWinds Compromise

The SolarWinds Compromise was a sophisticated supply chain cyber operation conducted by APT29 that was discovered in mid-December 2020. APT29 used customized malware to inject malicious code into the SolarWinds Orion software build process that was later distributed through a normal software update; they also used password spraying, token theft, API abuse, spear phishing, and other supply chain attacks to compromise user accounts and leverage their associated access. Victims of this campaign included government, consulting, technology, telecom, and other organizations in North America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. This activity has been labled the StellarParticle campaign in industry reporting.[1] Industry reporting also initially referred to the actors involved in this campaign as UNC2452, NOBELIUM, Dark Halo, and SolarStorm.[2][3][4][5][1][6][7][8]

In April 2021, the US and UK governments attributed the SolarWinds Compromise to Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR); public statements included citations to APT29, Cozy Bear, and The Dukes.[9][10][11] The US government assessed that of the approximately 18,000 affected public and private sector customers of Solar Winds’ Orion product, a much smaller number were compromised by follow-on APT29 activity on their systems.[12]

Campaign Enterprise

C0014: Operation Wocao

Operation Wocao was a cyber espionage campaign that targeted organizations around the world, including in Brazil, China, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Portugal, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The suspected China-based actors compromised government organizations and managed service providers, as well as aviation, construction, energy, finance, health care, insurance, offshore engineering, software development, and transportation companies.[1]

Security researchers assessed the Operation Wocao actors used similar TTPs and tools as APT20, suggesting a possible overlap. Operation Wocao was named after an observed command line entry by one of the threat actors, possibly out of frustration from losing webshell access.[1]

Campaign Enterprise

C0051: APT28 Nearest Neighbor Campaign

APT28 Nearest Neighbor Campaign was conducted by APT28 from early February 2022 to November 2024 against organizations and individuals with expertise on Ukraine. APT28 primarily leveraged living-off-the-land techniques, while leveraging the zero-day exploitation of CVE-2022-38028. Notably, APT28 leveraged Wi-Fi networks in close proximity to the intended target to gain initial access to the victim environment. By daisy-chaining multiple compromised organizations nearby the intended target, APT28 discovered dual-homed systems (with both a wired and wireless network connection) to enable Wi-Fi and use compromised credentials to connect to the victim network.[1]

Relationship explorer

All related ATT&CK context

Mitigations

Mitigation direction

Change history

Object version and sync metadata

The fields below describe the current mirrored snapshot. When Glexia retains multiple ATT&CK source imports, you can open the table to compare the same object across releases (hashes and MITRE timestamps). For MITRE’s own release notes and roadmap, see ATT&CK resources — Updates .

ATT&CK release
19.1
Object version
1.2
Created
Modified
Raw hash
3ac1c4465cde4569...
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
Release Bundle imported Object version Modified Status Raw hash
19.1 1.2 Current bundle 3ac1c4465cde…
Raw source

Mirrored ATT&CK source object

The raw object is retained through the mirrored ATT&CK source bundle and object hash. The raw endpoint returns the exact object from the mirrored bundle when available.

Source references

External references and citations

MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.

  1. [1]
    Trend Micro APT Attack Tools

    Wilhoit, K. (2013, March 4). In-Depth Look: APT Attack Tools of the Trade. Retrieved December 2, 2015.

    Open source URL
  2. [2]
    University of Birmingham C2

    Gardiner, J., Cova, M., Nagaraja, S. (2014, February). Command & Control Understanding, Denying and Detecting. Retrieved April 20, 2016.

    Open source URL
  3. [3]
    mitre-attack T1090.001
    Open source URL
Source and licensing

Source: MITRE ATT&CK®. © 2026 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK and ATT&CK are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Glexia is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.