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

T1620: Reflective Code Loading

Adversaries may reflectively load code into a process in order to conceal the execution of malicious payloads. Reflective loading involves allocating then executing payloads directly within the memory of the process, vice creating a thread or process backed by a file path on disk (e.g., Shared Modules).

Reflectively loaded payloads may be compiled binaries, anonymous files (only present in RAM), or just snubs of fileless executable code (ex: position-independent shellcode).[1][2][3][4][5] For example, the `Assembly.Load()` method executed by PowerShell may be abused to load raw code into the running process.[6]

Reflective code injection is very similar to Process Injection except that the “injection” loads code into the processes’ own memory instead of that of a separate process. Reflective loading may evade process-based detections since the execution of the arbitrary code may be masked within a legitimate or otherwise benign process. Reflectively loading payloads directly into memory may also avoid creating files or other artifacts on disk, while also enabling malware to keep these payloads encrypted (or otherwise obfuscated) until execution.[3][4][7][8]

EnterpriseT1620TechniqueObject v2.0 Modified
Glexia's Take

Analyst context for executives and security teams

Analyst confidence Medium

Reflective Code Loading matters because it lets malicious code run from memory inside an existing process without the normal file-on-disk evidence many controls depend on. For leaders, the key issue is not just malware execution; it is whether endpoint, SOC, and incident response capabilities can see stealthy in-memory activity across Windows, Linux, and macOS rather than relying mainly on process names or file artifacts.

Executive priority

Treat T1620 as a resilience and assurance question: can the organization prove it has visibility into memory-resident execution, scripting abuse such as PowerShell Assembly.Load(), and processes running code without a normal backing file path? ATT&CK relates this technique to multiple groups, campaigns, and software families, including remote access tools, post-exploitation frameworks, stealers, ransomware/wipers, and supply-chain or vulnerability-driven campaign contexts. That makes it useful for prioritizing endpoint telemetry, IR memory collection readiness, and audit evidence for advanced threat monitoring.

Technical view

ATT&CK places Reflective Code Loading under stealth and lists Linux, macOS, and Windows. The behavior centers on allocating and executing payloads directly in a process’s memory, including compiled binaries, anonymous in-RAM files, or position-independent shellcode. It is related to Process Injection but occurs in the process’s own memory rather than a separate process. SOC and detection teams should validate coverage for legitimate-looking processes that execute memory-backed code, PowerShell/.NET Assembly.Load() usage on Windows, and anomalous executable memory or module behavior lacking expected disk-backed paths. ATT&CK provides no official detection text for this technique, but it does list DET0300, Detection Strategy for Reflective Code Loading, as a related detection strategy.

Likely telemetry

  • Endpoint process telemetry across Windows, Linux, and macOS
  • Memory allocation and executable memory behavior where collected by EDR or host sensors
  • Module/library load telemetry, especially modules or code regions without expected file paths on disk
  • PowerShell and .NET runtime telemetry, including Assembly.Load() usage where available
  • Command-line, script block, and interpreter activity for PowerShell or other execution contexts

Detection direction

  • Do not rely only on process creation or file hash detections; this technique is designed to reduce disk artifacts and can run inside otherwise benign processes.
  • Validate whether endpoint tooling can surface executable memory regions, anonymous in-memory payloads, or module loads not backed by normal files.
  • Tune PowerShell/.NET detections around Assembly.Load() carefully: some administrative and application behavior may be legitimate, so context such as parent process, user, host role, and script source is important.
  • Use relationship context to test detections against behaviors associated with tools such as Cobalt Strike, PowerSploit, Donut, Brute Ratel C4, and malware families listed by ATT&CK, without assuming those tools are present locally.
  • For Linux and macOS, confirm visibility is not Windows-only; ATT&CK explicitly lists all three platforms for this technique.

Mitigation priorities

  • First, confirm telemetry coverage for memory-resident execution before assuming endpoint controls can detect this behavior.
  • Restrict and monitor high-risk script and runtime capabilities where business processes allow, including PowerShell/.NET loading paths referenced by ATT&CK.
  • Harden endpoints with controls that can inspect or constrain suspicious in-memory execution rather than only scanning files at rest.
  • Maintain IR procedures for live response and memory collection, since post-incident disk review may miss the payload.
  • Where related campaigns involve exploited applications or supply-chain compromise, keep vulnerability management and software provenance evidence separate but connected to detection planning: initial access control does not replace memory-execution visibility.
Analyst notes and limits

This technique is broadly material because ATT&CK connects it to many software entries and several groups/campaigns, including Lazarus Group, FIN7, Gamaredon Group, Kimsuky, PlugX, Uroburos, Cobalt Strike, PowerSploit, Emotet, Lokibot, ThiefQuest, Cuba, FoggyWeb, Gelsemium, Lizar, WhisperGate, SILENTTRINITY, Donut, IceApple, metaMain, and Brute Ratel C4. The business decision value is to verify memory-aware endpoint visibility and IR readiness, not to infer that any named actor is targeting the organization.

MITRE provides no official detection or mitigation text in the supplied object. Relationship entries show ATT&CK usage links but do not prove current activity, local exposure, or detection coverage. Platform support is limited to the supplied ATT&CK platforms: Linux, macOS, and Windows. Local baselining is required because legitimate software can load code dynamically in memory.

Official MITRE ATT&CK definition

Reflective Code Loading

Adversaries may reflectively load code into a process in order to conceal the execution of malicious payloads. Reflective loading involves allocating then executing payloads directly within the memory of the process, vice creating a thread or process backed by a file path on disk (e.g., Shared Modules).

Reflectively loaded payloads may be compiled binaries, anonymous files (only present in RAM), or just snubs of fileless executable code (ex: position-independent shellcode).[1][2][3][4][5] For example, the `Assembly.Load()` method executed by PowerShell may be abused to load raw code into the running process.[6]

Reflective code injection is very similar to Process Injection except that the “injection” loads code into the processes’ own memory instead of that of a separate process. Reflective loading may evade process-based detections since the execution of the arbitrary code may be masked within a legitimate or otherwise benign process. Reflectively loading payloads directly into memory may also avoid creating files or other artifacts on disk, while also enabling malware to keep these payloads encrypted (or otherwise obfuscated) until execution.[3][4][7][8]

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.

Associated objects

Groups, software, and campaigns

Group Enterprise

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]

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

G0094: Kimsuky

Kimsuky is a Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)-based cyber espionage group that has been active since at least 2012. The group initially targeted South Korean government agencies, think tanks, and subject-matter experts in various fields. Its operations expanded to include the United Nations and organizations in the government, education, business services, and manufacturing sectors across the United States, Japan, Russia, and Europe. Kimsuky has focused collection on foreign policy and national security issues tied to the Korean Peninsula, nuclear policy, and sanctions. Kimsuky operations have overlapped with those of other North Korean state-sponsored cyber espionage actors as a result of ad hoc collaborations or other limited resource sharing.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

Kimsuky was assessed to be responsible for the 2014 Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co. compromise; other notable campaigns include Operation STOLEN PENCIL (2018), Operation Kabar Cobra (2019), and Operation Smoke Screen (2019).[7][8][9] In 2023, Kimsuky was observed using commercial large language models (LLMs) to assist with vulnerability research, scripting, social engineering and reconnaissance.[10]

DPRK threat actor cluster boundaries overlap in open source reporting, with some security researchers consolidating all attributed North Korean state-sponsored cyber activity under Lazarus Group, rather than tracking operationally distinct subgroups.

Group Enterprise

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]

Malware Enterprise

S1081: BADHATCH

BADHATCH is a backdoor that has been utilized by FIN8 since at least 2019. BADHATCH has been used to target the insurance, retail, technology, and chemical industries in the United States, Canada, South Africa, Panama, and Italy.[1][2]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0689: WhisperGate

WhisperGate is a multi-stage wiper designed to look like ransomware that has been used against multiple government, non-profit, and information technology organizations in Ukraine since at least January 2022.[1][2][3]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

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]

LinuxWindowsmacOS
Tool Enterprise

S0692: SILENTTRINITY

SILENTTRINITY is an open source remote administration and post-exploitation framework primarily written in Python that includes stagers written in Powershell, C, and Boo. SILENTTRINITY was used in a 2019 campaign against Croatian government agencies by unidentified cyber actors.[1][2]

Windows
Tool Enterprise

S0194: PowerSploit

PowerSploit is an open source, offensive security framework comprised of PowerShell modules and scripts that perform a wide range of tasks related to penetration testing such as code execution, persistence, bypassing anti-virus, recon, and exfiltration. [1] [2] [3]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0447: Lokibot

Lokibot is a widely distributed information stealer that was first reported in 2015. It is designed to steal sensitive information such as usernames, passwords, cryptocurrency wallets, and other credentials. Lokibot can also create a backdoor into infected systems to allow an attacker to install additional payloads.[1][2][3]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0666: Gelsemium

Gelsemium is a modular malware comprised of a dropper (Gelsemine), a loader (Gelsenicine), and main (Gelsevirine) plug-ins written using the Microsoft Foundation Class (MFC) framework. Gelsemium has been used by the Gelsemium group since at least 2014.[1]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S0625: Cuba

Cuba is a Windows-based ransomware family that has been used against financial institutions, technology, and logistics organizations in North and South America as well as Europe since at least December 2019.[1]

Windows
Malware Enterprise

S9033: Fooder

Fooder is a custom 64-bit C/C++ loader used by MuddyWater that can decrypt and reflectively load embedded payloads such as a go-socks5 proxy utility, the open-source HackBrowserData infostealer, or the MuddyViper backdoor. Fooder has frequently masqueraded as an entertainment executable, such as the Snake game (e.g., `Snake_Game.exe`).[1]

Windows
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
Campaign Enterprise

C0057: 3CX Supply Chain Attack

The 3CX Supply Chain Attack was the first publicly reported case of one supply chain compromise triggering another, leading to a cascading, two-stage intrusion. The initial supply chain attack began when a 3CX employee downloaded and executed a trojanized, end-of-life version of the X_Trader trading software from Trading Technologies. This provided UNC4736, a threat cluster associated with AppleJeus, access to the 3CX environment. From there UNC4736 compromised the Windows and macOS build environments used to distribute the 3CX desktop application to their customers.[1] While 3CX serves more than 600,000 customers and 12 million users, only a subset of systems were affected. Subsequent targeting focused on victims in the defense and cryptocurrency sectors, where attackers deployed secondary payloads such as Gopuram for credential theft and persistence.[2] The campaign began in late 2022 and was disrupted after security vendors publicly reported the compromise in March 2023.[3][4]

Campaign Enterprise

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]

Relationship explorer

All related ATT&CK context

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
2.0
Created
Modified
Raw hash
8bf34c5cfdcfcea7...
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
Release Bundle imported Object version Modified Status Raw hash
19.1 2.0 Current bundle 8bf34c5cfdcf…
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]
    Introducing Donut

    The Wover. (2019, May 9). Donut - Injecting .NET Assemblies as Shellcode. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  2. [2]
    S1 Custom Shellcode Tool

    Bunce, D. (2019, October 31). Building A Custom Tool For Shellcode Analysis. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  3. [3]
    Stuart ELF Memory

    Stuart. (2018, March 31). In-Memory-Only ELF Execution (Without tmpfs). Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  4. [4]
    00sec Droppers

    0x00pico. (2017, September 25). Super-Stealthy Droppers. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  5. [5]
    Mandiant BYOL

    Kirk, N. (2018, June 18). Bring Your Own Land (BYOL) – A Novel Red Teaming Technique. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  6. [6]
    Microsoft AssemblyLoad

    Microsoft. (n.d.). Assembly.Load Method. Retrieved February 9, 2024.

    Open source URL
  7. [7]
    Intezer ACBackdoor

    Sanmillan, I. (2019, November 18). ACBackdoor: Analysis of a New Multiplatform Backdoor. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  8. [8]
    S1 Old Rat New Tricks

    Landry, J. (2016, April 21). Teaching an old RAT new tricks. Retrieved October 4, 2021.

    Open source URL
  9. [9]
    mitre-attack T1620
    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.