T1569.002: Service Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows service control manager to execute malicious commands or payloads. The Windows service control manager (services.exe) is an interface to manage and manipulate services.[1] The service control manager is accessible to users via GUI components as well as system utilities such as sc.exe and Net.
PsExec can also be used to execute commands or payloads via a temporary Windows service created through the service control manager API.[2] Tools such as PsExec and sc.exe can accept remote servers as arguments and may be used to conduct remote execution.
Adversaries may leverage these mechanisms to execute malicious content. This can be done by either executing a new or modified service. This technique is the execution used in conjunction with Windows Service during service persistence or privilege escalation.
Analyst context for executives and security teams
Service Execution matters because Windows services are a normal administrative mechanism that can also run attacker-controlled commands locally or remotely. For leaders, the risk is not just malware execution; it is whether privileged Windows administration paths are governed, logged, and reviewable when an incident responder needs to determine how code ran on a server or workstation.
Executive priority
Prioritize this as a Windows execution-risk and privileged-administration control question. Executives should ask whether service creation, modification, and remote service use are monitored across critical Windows assets, whether privileged accounts are limited and accountable, and whether audit evidence can show who changed or started services during an incident. The ATT&CK relationships to multiple groups and campaigns make this a useful validation scenario for managed detection, incident response readiness, and control assurance, without implying current exposure in any specific environment.
Technical view
This sub-technique covers abuse of the Windows Service Control Manager, including use through GUI tools, sc.exe, Net, PsExec, and service control APIs, to execute commands or payloads by creating or modifying services. SOC and IR teams should validate coverage for service lifecycle activity on Windows endpoints and servers, especially where remote servers are used as arguments or temporary services are created. MITRE does not provide official detection text for this object, but the related DET0421 detection strategy indicates detection engineering should be centered on system services service execution behavior. Correlate service events with process execution, privileged logon context, remote administration paths, and file changes to service binaries or directories.
Likely telemetry
- Windows service creation, modification, start, stop, and deletion events
- Process execution telemetry for services.exe, sc.exe, Net, PsExec-related activity, and child processes launched by services
- Endpoint detection telemetry covering service control API behavior and suspicious service-launched payloads
- Windows authentication and privileged account usage logs, especially for remote administration
- File system telemetry for writes or permission changes involving service binaries, service directories, and temporary payload locations
Detection direction
- Establish baselines for legitimate service administration so alerts can focus on unusual service names, paths, accounts, hosts, timing, or remote sources.
- Tune for new or modified services that execute from unexpected directories, use unusual command lines, or are created shortly before execution and removed afterward.
- Correlate service execution with privileged account activity; service abuse often depends on administrative rights, so identity context is essential for triage.
- Review coverage gaps on servers where Windows event logging or endpoint telemetry is incomplete, because service execution may otherwise look like normal operating system activity.
- Account for false positives from software deployment, endpoint management, backup, monitoring, and administrator troubleshooting tools that legitimately create or modify services.
Mitigation priorities
- Apply privileged account management first: restrict who can create, modify, or remotely control Windows services and ensure privileged use is logged and accountable.
- Restrict file and directory permissions for service binaries and sensitive paths so unauthorized users or processes cannot replace or plant executable content.
- Use endpoint behavior-prevention controls to block or challenge suspicious service creation, service-launched payloads, or abnormal service control behavior where appropriate.
- Harden administrative workflows by separating routine administration from broad domain-level privileges and reviewing remote service management access on critical assets.
- Validate mitigations through controlled defensive testing that confirms unauthorized service changes are blocked or generate actionable alerts.
Analyst notes and limits
The supplied ATT&CK object is Windows-only and scoped to execution via the Service Control Manager. It explicitly connects to Windows Service persistence or privilege escalation behavior, but this take stays focused on the execution sub-technique. Relationships show use by several campaigns and groups and mitigations M1022, M1026, and M1040; those relationships support prioritizing control validation but do not prove activity in any given environment.
MITRE provides no official detection text for this object in the supplied fields, so detection guidance is derived from the technique description, the related DET0421 detection strategy, and mitigation relationships. Local service baselines, endpoint logging depth, privileged access design, and administrative tooling determine what is detectable and what is normal.
Service Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows service control manager to execute malicious commands or payloads. The Windows service control manager (services.exe) is an interface to manage and manipulate services.[1] The service control manager is accessible to users via GUI components as well as system utilities such as sc.exe and Net.
PsExec can also be used to execute commands or payloads via a temporary Windows service created through the service control manager API.[2] Tools such as PsExec and sc.exe can accept remote servers as arguments and may be used to conduct remote execution.
Adversaries may leverage these mechanisms to execute malicious content. This can be done by either executing a new or modified service. This technique is the execution used in conjunction with Windows Service during service persistence or privilege escalation.
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 | T1569 | System Services | This object subtechnique of System Services. |
| Enterprise | T1035 | Service Execution | Service Execution revoked by this object. |
Groups, software, and campaigns
G0114: Chimera
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]
G0046: FIN7
FIN7 is a financially-motivated threat group that has been active since 2013. FIN7 has targeted the retail, restaurant, hospitality, software, consulting, financial services, medical equipment, cloud services, media, food and beverage, transportation, pharmaceutical, and utilities industries in the United States. A portion of FIN7 was operated out of a front company called Combi Security and often used point-of-sale malware for targeting efforts. Since 2020, FIN7 shifted operations to big game hunting (BGH), including use of REvil ransomware and their own Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS), Darkside. FIN7 may be linked to the Carbanak Group, but multiple threat groups have been observed using Carbanak, leading these groups to be tracked separately.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
G1032: INC Ransom
INC Ransom is a ransomware and data extortion threat group associated with the deployment of INC Ransomware that has been active since at least July 2023. INC Ransom has targeted organizations worldwide most commonly in the industrial, healthcare, and education sectors in the US and Europe.[1][2][3][4]
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]
G0096: APT41
APT41 is a threat group that researchers have assessed as Chinese state-sponsored espionage group that also conducts financially-motivated operations. Active since at least 2012, APT41 has been observed targeting various industries, including but not limited to healthcare, telecom, technology, finance, education, retail and video game industries in 14 countries.[1] Notable behaviors include using a wide range of malware and tools to complete mission objectives. APT41 overlaps at least partially with public reporting on groups including BARIUM and Winnti Group.[2][3]
G0091: Silence
Silence is a financially motivated threat actor targeting financial institutions in different countries. The group was first seen in June 2016. Their main targets reside in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Poland and Kazakhstan. They compromised various banking systems, including the Russian Central Bank's Automated Workstation Client, ATMs, and card processing.[1][2]
G0004: Ke3chang
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]
G0108: Blue Mockingbird
Blue Mockingbird is a cluster of observed activity involving Monero cryptocurrency-mining payloads in dynamic-link library (DLL) form on Windows systems. The earliest observed Blue Mockingbird tools were created in December 2019.[1]
G0050: APT32
APT32 is a suspected Vietnam-based threat group that has been active since at least 2014. The group has targeted multiple private sector industries as well as foreign governments, dissidents, and journalists with a strong focus on Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam, the Philippines, Laos, and Cambodia. They have extensively used strategic web compromises to compromise victims.[1][2][3]
G1043: BlackByte
BlackByte is a ransomware threat actor operating since at least 2021. BlackByte is associated with several versions of ransomware also labeled BlackByte Ransomware. BlackByte ransomware operations initially used a common encryption key allowing for the development of a universal decryptor, but subsequent versions such as BlackByte 2.0 Ransomware use more robust encryption mechanisms. BlackByte is notable for operations targeting critical infrastructure entities among other targets across North America.[1][2][3][4][5]
S0192: Pupy
Pupy is an open source, cross-platform (Windows, Linux, OSX, Android) remote administration and post-exploitation tool. [1] It is written in Python and can be generated as a payload in several different ways (Windows exe, Python file, PowerShell oneliner/file, Linux elf, APK, Rubber Ducky, etc.). [1] Pupy is publicly available on GitHub. [1]
S1111: DarkGate
DarkGate first emerged in 2018 and has evolved into an initial access and data gathering tool associated with various criminal cyber operations. Written in Delphi and named "DarkGate" by its author, DarkGate is associated with credential theft, cryptomining, cryptotheft, and pre-ransomware actions.[1] DarkGate use increased significantly starting in 2022 and is under active development by its author, who provides it as a Malware-as-a-Service offering.[2]
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]
S0260: InvisiMole
InvisiMole is a modular spyware program that has been used by the InvisiMole Group since at least 2013. InvisiMole has two backdoor modules called RC2FM and RC2CL that are used to perform post-exploitation activities. It has been discovered on compromised victims in the Ukraine and Russia. Gamaredon Group infrastructure has been used to download and execute InvisiMole against a small number of victims.[1][2]
S0203: Hydraq
S1063: Brute Ratel C4
Brute Ratel C4 is a commercial red-teaming and adversarial attack simulation tool that first appeared in December 2020. Brute Ratel C4 was specifically designed to avoid detection by endpoint detection and response (EDR) and antivirus (AV) capabilities, and deploys agents called badgers to enable arbitrary command execution for lateral movement, privilege escalation, and persistence. In September 2022, a cracked version of Brute Ratel C4 was leaked in the cybercriminal underground, leading to its use by threat actors.[1][2][3][4][5]
S0368: NotPetya
NotPetya is malware that was used by Sandworm Team in a worldwide attack starting on June 27, 2017. While NotPetya appears as a form of ransomware, its main purpose was to destroy data and disk structures on compromised systems; the attackers never intended to make the encrypted data recoverable. As such, NotPetya may be more appropriately thought of as a form of wiper malware. NotPetya contains worm-like features to spread itself across a computer network using the SMBv1 exploits EternalBlue and EternalRomance.[1][2][3][4]
S0166: RemoteCMD
S0698: HermeticWizard
HermeticWizard is a worm that has been used to spread HermeticWiper in attacks against organizations in Ukraine since at least 2022.[1]
S0668: TinyTurla
S0606: Bad Rabbit
Bad Rabbit is a self-propagating ransomware that affected the Ukrainian transportation sector in 2017. Bad Rabbit has also targeted organizations and consumers in Russia. [1][2][3]
S0481: Ragnar Locker
Ragnar Locker is a ransomware that has been in use since at least December 2019.[1][2]
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]
C0061: Operation Digital Eye
Operation Digital Eye was conducted in June and July of 2024 by suspected People's Republic of China (PRC)-nexus threat actors targeting business-to-business IT service providers in Southern Europe. Operation Digital Eye activity included the use of Visual Studio Code tunnels for command and control (C2) and custom lateral movement capabilities. Overlaps in tooling between Digital Eye and previous China-nexus campaigns, Operation Soft Cell and Operation Tainted Love, indicate the potential use of shared vendors or digital quartermasters.[1]
C0006: Operation Honeybee
Operation Honeybee was a campaign that targeted humanitarian aid and inter-Korean affairs organizations from at least late 2017 through early 2018. Operation Honeybee initially targeted South Korea, but expanded to include Vietnam, Singapore, Japan, Indonesia, Argentina, and Canada. Security researchers assessed the threat actors were likely Korean speakers based on metadata used in both lure documents and executables, and named the campaign "Honeybee" after the author name discovered in malicious Word documents.[1]
C0040: APT41 DUST
APT41 DUST was conducted by APT41 from 2023 to July 2024 against entities in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. APT41 DUST targeted sectors such as shipping, logistics, and media for information gathering purposes. APT41 used previously-observed malware such as DUSTPAN as well as newly observed tools such as DUSTTRAP in APT41 DUST.[1]
C0058: SharePoint ToolShell Exploitation
The SharePoint ToolShell Exploitation campaign was conducted in July 2025 and encompassed the first waves of exploitation against incompletely patched spoofing (CVE-2025-49706) and remote code execution (CVE-2025-49704) vulnerabilities affecting on-premises Microsoft SharePoint servers. Later patched and updated as CVE-2025-53770 and CVE-2025-53771, the ToolShell vulnerabilities were widely exploited including by China-based ransomware actor Storm-2603 and espionage actors Threat Group-3390 and ZIRCONIUM. SharePoint ToolShell Exploitation targeted multiple regions and industries including finance, education, energy, and healthcare across Asia, Europe, and the United States.[1][2][3][4][5]
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 | 1.3 | Current bundle | de06f9a62090… |
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]
Microsoft Service Control Manager
Microsoft. (2018, May 31). Service Control Manager. Retrieved March 28, 2020.
Open source URL -
[2]
Russinovich Sysinternals
Russinovich, M. (2014, May 2). Windows Sysinternals PsExec v2.11. Retrieved May 13, 2015.
Open source URL -
[3]
mitre-attack T1569.002Open 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.