T1090.003: Multi-hop Proxy
Adversaries may chain together multiple proxies to disguise the source of malicious traffic. Typically, a defender will be able to identify the last proxy traffic traversed before it enters their network; the defender may or may not be able to identify any previous proxies before the last-hop proxy. This technique makes identifying the original source of the malicious traffic even more difficult by requiring the defender to trace malicious traffic through several proxies to identify its source.
For example, adversaries may construct or use onion routing networks – such as the publicly available Tor network – to transport encrypted C2 traffic through a compromised population, allowing communication with any device within the network.[1] Adversaries may also use operational relay box (ORB) networks composed of virtual private servers (VPS), Internet of Things (IoT) devices, smart devices, and end-of-life routers to obfuscate their operations.[2]
In the case of network infrastructure, it is possible for an adversary to leverage multiple compromised devices to create a multi-hop proxy chain (i.e., Network Devices). By leveraging Patch System Image on routers, adversaries can add custom code to the affected network devices that will implement onion routing between those nodes. This method is dependent upon the Network Boundary Bridging method allowing the adversaries to cross the protected network boundary of the Internet perimeter and into the organization’s Wide-Area Network (WAN). Protocols such as ICMP may be used as a transport.
Similarly, adversaries may abuse peer-to-peer (P2P) and blockchain-oriented infrastructure to implement routing between a decentralized network of peers.[3]
Analyst context for executives and security teams
Multi-hop Proxy matters because it hides where command-and-control traffic really comes from. Defenders may only see the final relay entering the network, while earlier hops may be Tor, leased VPS infrastructure, compromised IoT/SOHO routers, network devices, or decentralized peer networks. For leaders, the decision issue is not attribution; it is whether the organization can recognize suspicious relay-style traffic, enforce useful ingress/egress boundaries, and preserve enough network evidence for incident response when the source is deliberately obscured.
Executive priority
Prioritize this where business operations depend on exposed services, WAN connectivity, cloud or data platforms, managed service access, or network devices that are difficult to monitor. The supplied ATT&CK relationships show broad use across campaigns, groups, and software, so this is a resilience and investigation-readiness problem rather than a single-threat problem. Executives should ask whether firewall policy, egress control, network logging, and incident response procedures can support decisions when the visible IP address is only a last-hop proxy and not a reliable actor identifier.
Technical view
This is a command-and-control sub-technique of Proxy affecting ESXi, Linux, macOS, Network Devices, and Windows. ATT&CK provides no official detection text, but a related detection strategy, DET0359, is named for relay node chaining, onion routing, and network tunneling. SOC and IR teams should validate whether they can identify unusual inbound or outbound relay behavior, repeated connections through known or suspicious anonymization infrastructure, unexpected tunneling patterns, and protocol use inconsistent with the asset role, including possible ICMP transport in network-infrastructure scenarios. For network-device cases, pay attention to edge routers, WAN paths, and signs that compromised devices or altered system images could participate in proxy chains.
Likely telemetry
- Firewall, router, and network appliance ingress/egress logs
- Proxy, secure web gateway, and network filtering logs where deployed
- NetFlow or equivalent flow records across perimeter, WAN, and internal network boundaries
- Endpoint network connection telemetry from ESXi, Linux, macOS, and Windows systems
- Network device configuration, firmware/system image integrity, and administrative change records
Detection direction
- Do not treat the observed source IP as the true origin by default; tune triage workflows to preserve last-hop evidence while looking for relay-chain indicators.
- Validate DET0359-style coverage for relay node chaining, onion routing, and network tunneling against the platforms and network segments in scope.
- Baseline which assets are expected to communicate with anonymization networks, VPS providers, external relays, or peer-oriented infrastructure, then review deviations by asset role and business need.
- Correlate perimeter flows with endpoint and network-device telemetry so C2-like traffic is not evaluated only at the firewall.
- Review blind spots around network devices, SOHO/IoT-adjacent infrastructure, WAN links, encrypted traffic, and protocols that may not be deeply inspected.
Mitigation priorities
- Implement M1037 Filter Network Traffic: enforce ingress and egress filtering with firewall rules and protocol-based restrictions appropriate to each asset role.
- Restrict public-facing services to authorized sources where business operations allow, especially for administrative interfaces and high-value applications.
- Limit outbound connectivity from servers, network devices, and sensitive environments to approved destinations and required protocols.
- Harden and monitor network devices, including configuration control and system image integrity, because the ATT&CK description highlights router compromise and patched images as proxy-chain enablers.
- Preserve network-flow and device logs long enough to support incident response when tracing cannot go beyond the last-hop proxy without external coordination.
Analyst notes and limits
Relationship context links this technique to many campaigns, groups, and software, including ORB-network and router-focused activity. Use that context to justify defensive validation, not to infer that any specific organization is targeted. The most valuable local analysis is usually asset-role context: which systems should ever relay traffic, which network devices are observable, and which egress paths bypass normal controls.
ATT&CK does not provide official detection guidance for this object, and the supplied fields do not include specific indicators, tools, or guaranteed analytic logic. Detection and mitigation quality depends on local network architecture, logging depth, approved proxy/VPN usage, and visibility into network devices and WAN boundaries.
Multi-hop Proxy
Adversaries may chain together multiple proxies to disguise the source of malicious traffic. Typically, a defender will be able to identify the last proxy traffic traversed before it enters their network; the defender may or may not be able to identify any previous proxies before the last-hop proxy. This technique makes identifying the original source of the malicious traffic even more difficult by requiring the defender to trace malicious traffic through several proxies to identify its source.
For example, adversaries may construct or use onion routing networks – such as the publicly available Tor network – to transport encrypted C2 traffic through a compromised population, allowing communication with any device within the network.[1] Adversaries may also use operational relay box (ORB) networks composed of virtual private servers (VPS), Internet of Things (IoT) devices, smart devices, and end-of-life routers to obfuscate their operations.[2]
In the case of network infrastructure, it is possible for an adversary to leverage multiple compromised devices to create a multi-hop proxy chain (i.e., Network Devices). By leveraging Patch System Image on routers, adversaries can add custom code to the affected network devices that will implement onion routing between those nodes. This method is dependent upon the Network Boundary Bridging method allowing the adversaries to cross the protected network boundary of the Internet perimeter and into the organization’s Wide-Area Network (WAN). Protocols such as ICMP may be used as a transport.
Similarly, adversaries may abuse peer-to-peer (P2P) and blockchain-oriented infrastructure to implement routing between a decentralized network of peers.[3]
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.
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.
| Domain | ID | Name | Relationship / procedure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | T1090 | Proxy | This object subtechnique of Proxy. |
| Enterprise | T1188 | Multi-hop Proxy | Multi-hop Proxy revoked by this object. |
Groups, software, and campaigns
G1003: Ember Bear
Ember Bear is a Russian state-sponsored cyber espionage group that has been active since at least 2020, linked to Russia's General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) 161st Specialist Training Center (Unit 29155).[1] Ember Bear has primarily focused operations against Ukrainian government and telecommunication entities, but has also operated against critical infrastructure entities in Europe and the Americas.[2] Ember Bear conducted the WhisperGate destructive wiper attacks against Ukraine in early 2022.[3][4][1] There is some confusion as to whether Ember Bear overlaps with another Russian-linked entity referred to as Saint Bear. At present available evidence strongly suggests these are distinct activities with different behavioral profiles.[2][5]
G0007: APT28
APT28 is a threat group that has been attributed to Russia's General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) 85th Main Special Service Center (GTsSS) military unit 26165.[1][2] This group has been active since at least 2004.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]
APT28 reportedly compromised the Hillary Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2016 in an attempt to interfere with the U.S. presidential election.[5] In 2018, the US indicted five GRU Unit 26165 officers associated with APT28 for cyber operations (including close-access operations) conducted between 2014 and 2018 against the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the US Anti-Doping Agency, a US nuclear facility, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the Spiez Swiss Chemicals Laboratory, and other organizations.[14] Some of these were conducted with the assistance of GRU Unit 74455, which is also referred to as Sandworm Team.
G0100: Inception
G0065: Leviathan
Leviathan is a Chinese state-sponsored cyber espionage group that has been attributed to the Ministry of State Security's (MSS) Hainan State Security Department and an affiliated front company.[1] Active since at least 2009, Leviathan has targeted the following sectors: academia, aerospace/aviation, biomedical, defense industrial base, government, healthcare, manufacturing, maritime, and transportation across the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.[1][2][3][4]
G0085: FIN4
FIN4 is a financially-motivated threat group that has targeted confidential information related to the public financial market, particularly regarding healthcare and pharmaceutical companies, since at least 2013.[1][2] FIN4 is unique in that they do not infect victims with typical persistent malware, but rather they focus on capturing credentials authorized to access email and other non-public correspondence.[1][3]
G0016: APT29
APT29 is threat group that has been attributed to Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR).[1][2] They have operated since at least 2008, often targeting government networks in Europe and NATO member countries, research institutes, and think tanks. APT29 reportedly compromised the Democratic National Committee starting in the summer of 2015.[3][4][5][6]
In April 2021, the US and UK governments attributed the SolarWinds Compromise to the SVR; public statements included citations to APT29, Cozy Bear, and The Dukes.[7][8] Industry reporting also referred to the actors involved in this campaign as UNC2452, NOBELIUM, StellarParticle, Dark Halo, and SolarStorm.[9][10][11][12][13][14]
G1051: Medusa Group
Medusa Group has been active since at least 2021 and was initially operated as a closed ransomware group before evolving into a Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS) operation. Some reporting indicates that certain attacks may still be conducted directly by the ransomware’s core developers. Public sources have also referred to the group as “Spearwing” or “Medusa Actors.” [1] [2] Medusa Group employs living-off-the-land techniques, frequently leveraging publicly available tools and common remote management software to conduct operations. The group engages in double extortion tactics, exfiltrating data prior to encryption and threatening to publish stolen information if ransom demands are not met. [3] For initial access, Medusa Group has exploited publicly known vulnerabilities, conducted phishing campaigns, and used credentials or access purchased from Initial Access Brokers (IABs). The group is opportunistic and has targeted a wide range of sectors globally. [4]
G0030: Lotus Blossom
Lotus Blossom is a long-standing threat group largely targeting various entities in Asia since at least 2009. In addition to government and related targets, Lotus Blossom has also targeted entities such as digital certificate issuers.[1][2][3]
G0128: ZIRCONIUM
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]
G0047: Gamaredon Group
Gamaredon Group is a suspected Russian cyber espionage group that has targeted military, law enforcement, judiciary, non-profit, and non-governmental organizations in Ukraine since at least 2013. The name Gamaredon Group derives from a misspelling of the word "Armageddon," found in early campaigns.[1][2][3][4][5]
In November 2021, the Ukrainian government publicly attributed Gamaredon Group to Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) Center 18, an assessment later supported by multiple independent cybersecurity researchers. [6][5]
S0276: Keydnap
This piece of malware steals the content of the user's keychain while maintaining a permanent backdoor [1].
S0282: MacSpy
S0342: GreyEnergy
GreyEnergy is a backdoor written in C and compiled in Visual Studio. GreyEnergy shares similarities with the BlackEnergy malware and is thought to be the successor of it.[1]
S0386: Ursnif
Ursnif is a banking trojan and variant of the Gozi malware observed being spread through various automated exploit kits, Spearphishing Attachments, and malicious links.[1][2] Ursnif is associated primarily with data theft, but variants also include components (backdoors, spyware, file injectors, etc.) capable of a wide variety of behaviors.[3]
S0438: Attor
S1087: AsyncRAT
S0022: Uroburos
Uroburos is a sophisticated cyber espionage tool written in C that has been used by units within Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) associated with the Turla toolset to collect intelligence on sensitive targets worldwide. Uroburos has several variants and has undergone nearly constant upgrade since its initial development in 2003 to keep it viable after public disclosures. Uroburos is typically deployed to external-facing nodes on a targeted network and has the ability to leverage additional tools and TTPs to further exploit an internal network. Uroburos has interoperable implants for Windows, Linux, and macOS, employs a high level of stealth in communications and architecture, and can easily incorporate new or replacement components.[1][2]
S0623: Siloscape
S9001: SystemBC
SystemBC is a malware family offered as a malware-as-a-service (MaaS) that is used to establish command and control and facilitate follow-on activity, including ransomware deployment.SystemBC executes a variety of tasks including setting up SOCKS5 proxies, maintaining persistence, ingesting malicious files, and handing C2 communication. SystemBC was first detected in 2018, and has been used by Wizard Spider since at least 2020, and by FIN7 since at least 2022.[1][2][3][4][5]
S1100: Ninja
Ninja is a malware developed in C++ that has been used by ToddyCat to penetrate networks and control remote systems since at least 2020. Ninja is possibly part of a post exploitation toolkit exclusively used by ToddyCat and allows multiple operators to work simultaneously on the same machine. Ninja has been used against government and military entities in Europe and Asia and observed in specific infection chains being deployed by Samurai.[1]
S0183: Tor
Tor is a software suite and network that provides increased anonymity on the Internet. It creates a multi-hop proxy network and utilizes multilayer encryption to protect both the message and routing information. Tor utilizes "Onion Routing," in which messages are encrypted with multiple layers of encryption; at each step in the proxy network, the topmost layer is decrypted and the contents forwarded on to the next node until it reaches its destination. [1]
S1107: NKAbuse
C0063: 2025 Poland Wiper Attacks
2025 Poland Wiper Attacks is a Russian state-sponsored campaign that conducted destructive cyberattacks against Polish energy infrastructure in December 2025. Targets included more than 30 wind and photovoltaic farms, a combined heat and power (CHP) plant, and a manufacturing sector company. The attacks on the distributed energy resources (DER) disrupted communications between affected facilities and the distribution system operator, but did not impact electricity generation or heat supply. Across the campaign, threat actors deployed two previously undocumented wiper tools, DynoWiper, a Windows-based wiper and LazyWiper, a PowerShell wiper, distributed via malicious Group Policy Objects. At the CHP plant, threat actors had maintained access since at least March 2025, using that foothold to obtain credentials and move laterally before attempting wiper deployment. Some reporting has assessed the activity to be consistent with Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) threat activity group Dragonfly, also tracked as STATIC TUNDRA, while other reporting attributes the destructive wiper activities to the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) threat activity group ELECTRUM, also tracked as Sandworm Team.[1][2][3][4]
C0004: CostaRicto
CostaRicto was a suspected hacker-for-hire cyber espionage campaign that targeted multiple industries worldwide, with a large number being financial institutions. CostaRicto actors targeted organizations in Europe, the Americas, Asia, Australia, and Africa, with a large concentration in South Asia (especially India, Bangladesh, and Singapore), using custom malware, open source tools, and a complex network of proxies and SSH tunnels.[1]
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]
C0052: SPACEHOP Activity
SPACEHOP Activity is conducted through commercially leased Virtual Private Servers (VPS), otherwise known as provisioned Operational Relay Box (ORB) networks. The network leveraged for SPACEHOP Activity enabled China-nexus cyber threat actors – such as APT5 and Ke3chang – to perform network reconnaissance scanning and vulnerability exploitation. SPACEHOP Activity has historically targeted entities in North America, Europe, and the Middle East.[1]
C0053: FLORAHOX Activity
FLORAHOX Activity is conducted using a hybrid operational relay box (ORB) network, which combines two types of infrastructure: compromised devices and leased Virtual Private Servers (VPS). The compromised devices include end-of-life routers and IoT devices, while VPS space is commercially leased and managed by ORB network administrators. This hybrid ORB network allows adversaries to proxy and obscure malicious traffic, making the source of the traffic more difficult to trace.
The FLORAHOX ORB network has been leveraged by multiple cyber threat actors, including China-nexus actors like ZIRCONIUM. These adversaries conduct espionage campaigns through FLORAHOX Activity, relying on the ORB network's ability to funnel traffic through Tor nodes, provisioned VPS servers, and compromised routers to obfuscate malicious traffic.[1]
C0059: Salesforce Data Exfiltration
The Salesforce Data Exfiltration campaign began in October 2024 with financially-motivated threat actor UNC6040 using Spearphishing Voice (vishing) to compromise corporate Salesforce instances for large-scale data theft and extortion. Following the initial data theft, victim organizations received extortion demands from a separate threat actor, UNC6240, who claimed to be the “ShinyHunters” group. The observed infrastructure and TTPs used during the Salesforce Data Exfiltration campaign overlap with those used by threat groups with suspected ties to the broader collective known as "The Com.” These overlaps could plausibly be the result of associated actors operating within the same communities and are not necessarily an indication of a direct operational relationship.[1][2]
C0055: Quad7 Activity
Quad7 Activity, also known as CovertNetwork-1658 or the 7777 Botnet, is a network of compromised small office/home office (SOHO) routers. [1] [2] The botnet was initially composed primarily of TP-Link routers and was named Quad7 due to compromised devices exposing TCP port 7777 with the distinctive banner xlogin. Later activity showed a significant increase in compromised Asus routers and the addition of new ports and banners, including TCP port 63256 displaying alogin. Quad7 infrastructure functions as a collection of egress IPs that various China-affiliated threat actors have used to conduct password-spraying and brute-force operations. [1][3] Microsoft has reported that Storm-0940 leveraged credentials obtained through Quad7 Activity to target organizations in North America and Europe, including government agencies, non-governmental organizations, think tanks, law firms, energy firms, IT providers, and defense industrial base entities. [2]
C0056: RedPenguin
The RedPenguin project was launched by Juniper in July 2024 to investigate reported malware infections of Juniper MX Series routers. RedPenguin activity was separately attributed to UNC3886 and included the deployment of multiple custom versions of the publicly-available TINYSHELL backdoor on Juniper routers.[1][2]
All related ATT&CK context
Mitigation direction
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 .
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
| Release | Bundle imported | Object version | Modified | Status | Raw hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.1 | 2.4 | Current bundle | 961c55212031… |
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.
External references and citations
MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.
-
[1]
Onion Routing
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Onion Routing. Retrieved October 20, 2020.
Open source URL -
[2]
ORB Mandiant
Raggi, Michael. (2024, May 22). IOC Extinction? China-Nexus Cyber Espionage Actors Use ORB Networks to Raise Cost on Defenders. Retrieved July 8, 2024.
Open source URL -
[3]
NGLite Trojan
Robert Falcone, Jeff White, and Peter Renals. (2021, November 7). Targeted Attack Campaign Against ManageEngine ADSelfService Plus Delivers Godzilla Webshells, NGLite Trojan and KdcSponge Stealer. Retrieved February 8, 2024.
Open source URL -
[4]
mitre-attack T1090.003Open source URL
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.