T1577: Compromise Application Executable
Adversaries may modify applications installed on a device to establish persistent access to a victim. These malicious modifications can be used to make legitimate applications carry out adversary tasks when these applications are in use.
There are multiple ways an adversary can inject malicious code into applications. One method is by taking advantages of device vulnerabilities, the most well-known being Janus, an Android vulnerability that allows adversaries to add extra bytes to APK (application) and DEX (executable) files without affecting the file's signature. By being able to add arbitrary bytes to valid applications, attackers can seamlessly inject code into genuine executables without the user's knowledge.[1]
Adversaries may also rebuild applications to include malicious modifications. This can be achieved by decompiling the genuine application, merging it with the malicious code, and recompiling it.[2]
Adversaries may also take action to conceal modifications to application executables and bypass user consent. These actions include altering modifications to appear as an update or exploiting vulnerabilities that allow activities of the malicious application to run inside a system application.[2]
Security context for executives and security teams
T1577: Compromise Application Executable describes Adversaries may modify applications installed on a device to establish persistent access to a victim. These malicious modifications can be used to make legitimate applications carry out adversary tasks when these applications are in use. There are multiple ways an adversary can inject malicious code into applications. One method is by taking advantages of device vulnerabilities, the most well-known being Janus, an Android vulnerability that allows adversaries to add extra bytes to APK (application) and DEX (executa...
Executive priority
T1577: Compromise Application Executable is an official MITRE ATT&CK technique. Glexia treats it as defensive behavior context for prioritizing monitoring, control validation, and response planning without using the object by itself as an attribution claim.
Technical view
Security teams should validate T1577: Compromise Application Executable by reviewing the official ATT&CK relationships, mapped tactics (persistence), supported platforms (Android), and available local telemetry before making detection or mitigation decisions.
Likely telemetry
- Official ATT&CK relationships and object metadata
- Identity, privilege, and authentication events
Detection direction
- Validate whether T1577: Compromise Application Executable appears in your detection coverage and tabletop scenarios.
- Use the object to align executive risk language with SOC, incident response, and detection engineering work.
- Do not treat ATT&CK relationship context as attribution without corroborating evidence.
Mitigation priorities
- Map the object to existing controls and identify missing telemetry or response ownership.
- Prioritize mitigations that reduce exposure on the listed platforms and tactics.
- Review adjacent ATT&CK relationships before changing policy, detections, or reporting language.
Additional notes and limits
Baseline Glexia take generated from the official MITRE ATT&CK STIX object, source hash, tactics, platforms, and detection fields. It is safe to replace with a richer model-generated take for the same source hash later.
This baseline take is source-grounded and schema-validated, but it does not include environment-specific telemetry, incident evidence, or threat-intelligence corroboration.
Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.
Compromise Application Executable
Adversaries may modify applications installed on a device to establish persistent access to a victim. These malicious modifications can be used to make legitimate applications carry out adversary tasks when these applications are in use.
There are multiple ways an adversary can inject malicious code into applications. One method is by taking advantages of device vulnerabilities, the most well-known being Janus, an Android vulnerability that allows adversaries to add extra bytes to APK (application) and DEX (executable) files without affecting the file's signature. By being able to add arbitrary bytes to valid applications, attackers can seamlessly inject code into genuine executables without the user's knowledge.[1]
Adversaries may also rebuild applications to include malicious modifications. This can be achieved by decompiling the genuine application, merging it with the malicious code, and recompiling it.[2]
Adversaries may also take action to conceal modifications to application executables and bypass user consent. These actions include altering modifications to appear as an update or exploiting vulnerabilities that allow activities of the malicious application to run inside a system application.[2]
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.
Groups, software, and campaigns
S0311: YiSpecter
S1079: BOULDSPY
S0440: Agent Smith
Agent Smith is mobile malware that generates financial gain by replacing legitimate applications on devices with malicious versions that include fraudulent ads. As of July 2019 Agent Smith had infected around 25 million devices, primarily targeting India though effects had been observed in other Asian countries as well as Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.[1]
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(2)
| Release | Bundle imported | Object version | Modified | Status | Raw hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.2 | 1.0 | Current bundle | 49c0fbb48416… | ||
| 19.1 | 1.0 | Older bundle | 49c0fbb48416… |
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]Guardsquare Janus
Guarsquare. (2017, November 13). New Android vulnerability allows attackers to modify apps without affecting their signatures. Retrieved May 7, 2020.
Open source URL - [2]CheckPoint Agent Smith
A. Hazum, F. He, I. Marom, B. Melnykov, A. Polkovnichenko. (2019, July 10). Agent Smith: A New Species of Mobile Malware. Retrieved May 7, 2020.
Open source URL - [3]mitre-attackT1577Open 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.