Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Adversaries may encrypt data on target systems or on large numbers of systems in a network to interrupt availability to system and network resources.
.claude/skills/cyberstrikeus-t1486-data-encrypted-for-impact/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 80% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 40% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 124% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 60% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 49% | 0% |
Adversaries may encrypt data on target systems or on large numbers of systems in a network to interrupt availability to system and network resources. They can attempt to render stored data inaccessible by encrypting files or data on local and remote drives and withholding access to a decryption key. This may be done in order to extract monetary compensation from a victim in exchange for decryption or a decryption key (ransomware) or to render data permanently inaccessible in cases where the key is not saved or transmitted.
In the case of ransomware, it is typical that common user files like Office documents, PDFs, images, videos, audio, text, and source code files will be encrypted (and often renamed and/or tagged with specific file markers). Adversaries may need to first employ other behaviors, such as File and Directory Permissions Modification or System Shutdown/Reboot, in order to unlock and/or gain access to manipulate these files. In some cases, adversaries may encrypt critical system files, disk partitions, and the MBR. Adversaries may also encrypt virtual machines hosted on ESXi or other hypervisors.
To maximize impact on the target organization, malware designed for encrypting data may have worm-like features to propagate across a network by leveraging other attack techniques like Valid Accounts, OS Credential Dumping, and SMB/Windows Admin Shares. Encryption malware may also leverage Internal Defacement, such as changing victim wallpapers or ESXi server login messages, or otherwise intimidate victims by sending ransom notes or other messages to connected printers (known as "print bombing").
In cloud environments, storage objects within compromised accounts may also be encrypted. For example, in AWS environments, adversaries may leverage services such as AWS’s Server-Side Encryption with Customer Provided Keys (SSE-C) to encrypt data.
Platforms: ESXi, IaaS, Linux, macOS, Windows
The following tests are from Atomic Red Team and provide actionable ways to test this technique:
Uses gpg to encrypt a file
Supported Platforms: linux
bashecho "#{pwd_for_encrypted_file}" | $which_gpg --batch --yes --passphrase-fd 0 --cipher-algo #{encryption_alg} -o #{encrypted_file_path} -c #{input_file_path}
Dependencies:
Uses 7z to encrypt a file
Supported Platforms: linux
bash$which_7z a -p#{pwd_for_encrypted_file} #{encrypted_file_path} #{input_file_path}
Dependencies:
Attempts to encrypt data on target systems as root to simulate an interruption authentication to target system. If root permissions are not available then attempts to encrypt data within user's home directory.
Supported Platforms: linux
bashwhich_ccencrypt=`which ccencrypt` cp #{root_input_file_path} #{cped_file_path}; $which_ccencrypt -T -K #{pwd_for_encrypted_file} #{cped_file_path}
Dependencies:
Uses openssl to encrypt a file
Supported Platforms: linux
bashwhich_openssl=`which openssl` $which_openssl genrsa -out #{private_key_path} #{encryption_bit_size} $which_openssl rsa -in #{private_key_path} -pubout -out #{public_key_path} $which_openssl rsautl -encrypt -inkey #{public_key_path} -pubin -in #{input_file_path} -out #{encrypted_file_path}
Dependencies:
building the IOC (YOUR_FILES.txt) for the PureLocker ransomware https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/purelocker-ransomware-can-lock-files-on-windows-linux-and-macos/
Supported Platforms: windows Elevation Required: Yes
cmdecho T1486 - Purelocker Ransom Note > %USERPROFILE%\Desktop\YOUR_FILES.txt
If Atomic Red Team tests are not applicable, manually verify the technique by:
On Windows 10, enable cloud-delivered protection and Attack Surface Reduction (ASR) rules to block the execution of files that resemble ransomware. In AWS environments, create an IAM policy to restrict or block the use of SSE-C on S3 buckets.
Consider implementing IT disaster recovery plans that contain procedures for regularly taking and testing data backups that can be used to restore organizational data. Ensure backups are stored off system and is protected from common methods adversaries may use to gain access and destroy the backups to prevent recovery. Consider enabling versioning in cloud environments to maintain backup copies of storage objects.
| Finding | Severity | Impact | | ---------------------------------------------- | -------- | ------ | | Data Encrypted for Impact technique applicable | High | Impact |
| CWE ID | Title | | ------- | --------------------------------- | | CWE-400 | Uncontrolled Resource Consumption |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 25,384 | 16,621 | -35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,710 | 4,087 | +10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 25,850 | 32,725 | +27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,338 | 5,990 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 33,843 | 23,019 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 5,292 | 5,554 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 28,438 | 44,682 | +57% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,041 | 7,605 | +88% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→pass | 27,540 | 26,608 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,658 | 6,552 | +79% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 20,192 | 23,673 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,713 | 4,895 | +80% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 16,914 | 14,673 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,926 | 3,234 | +68% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 11,429 | 9,976 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,032 | 2,745 | +166% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 15,662 | 21,037 | +34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,486 | 4,474 | +80% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 14,123 | 13,987 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,629 | 3,681 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 10,053 | 11,546 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,345 | 3,010 | +124% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 12,802 | 8,311 | -35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,081 | 2,281 | +111% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 18,657 | 18,652 | -0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,583 | 4,086 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 16,333 | 17,564 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,680 | 4,293 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 19,826 | 22,969 | +16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,540 | 4,372 | +72% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 15,917 | 8,121 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,457 | 2,484 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 16,872 | 9,320 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,163 | 2,286 | +6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 13,926 | 6,909 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,572 | 2,341 | +49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 24,518 | 26,852 | +10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,007 | 5,450 | +81% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 23,499 | 22,399 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,684 | 4,700 | +75% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 16,534 | 11,187 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,963 | 3,036 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 26,298 | 12,984 | -51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,694 | 3,328 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +23 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.