How to Detect Threat Actors’ Abuse of Remote Management Tools

· Original article ↗

Summary

The article explains how defenders can use the LOLRMM catalog to inventory and detect remote management tool activity, then correlate first-seen tools with phishing and other suspicious behavior.

Key points

  • RMM tools are attractive to threat actors because they are widely used, feature-rich, and can appear legitimate; the article cites reports of increased RMM abuse.
  • The LOLRMM catalog provides indicators including process and file details, code-signing metadata, registry artifacts, services, and network domains.
  • Normalize catalog data and account for generic indicators, wildcards, placeholders, inconsistent paths, and unreliable signer information to reduce false positives.
  • Track RMM tools observed per user or host and alert on first-seen tools, using the resulting history as an inventory.
  • Correlate first-seen RMM activity with suspected Microsoft Teams help-desk phishing, or investigate hosts where multiple RMM tools appear.
  • Improve detection resilience by combining process, network, service, and host artifacts; consider prevalence and suspicious execution context.
  • The catalog is available at hxxps://lolrmm[.]io/api/rmm_tools.json.

Article Details

Defense Focus
Detect and prevent abuse of legitimate Remote Monitoring and Management (RMM) tools by building an environment inventory, identifying first-seen and uncommon tools, and correlating RMM activity with suspicious events.
Detection Methods
  • Enrich incoming events against LOLRMM indicators covering process, network, service, registry, file, and hash artifacts.
  • Track observed RMM tools by user and host; alert when an RMM is first seen within a configured timeframe.
  • Use prevalence analysis to identify RMM tools uncommon across the environment.
  • Correlate first-seen RMM activity with Microsoft Teams impersonation or phishing detections, including matching victim and RMM-associated identities within 30 minutes.
  • Detect multiple distinct RMM tools on one host, including sequential use such as Action1 followed by ScreenConnect.
  • Use process context and network indicators together; consider non-browser processes connecting to RMM endpoints.
  • Hunt for suspicious execution context, including renamed binaries, unusual paths or arguments, unexpected parent or child processes, suspicious file writes, and execution near host or network enumeration.
  • Use network appliance signatures that categorize outbound RMM traffic and trace it to the originating endpoint.
Data Sources
  • Endpoint process and device events
  • Process paths, names, PE metadata, and OriginalFileName
  • Code signer metadata
  • File, installation, and disk artifacts
  • Registry artifacts and service installation details
  • Network domains, hostnames, remote ports, and outbound connection telemetry
  • Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Device events
  • Microsoft 365 Audit Logs, including Teams operation events
  • Microsoft Teams message events and account identifiers such as object ID, UPN, and email
  • Sysmon events
  • RMM inventory and historical user/host observations
Rule Types
  • LOLRMM indicator lookup and event enrichment
  • First-seen-by-host and first-seen-by-user detections
  • Prevalence and outlier analytics
  • Cross-source, time-window correlation rules
  • Multiple-RMM-per-host detections
  • Network appliance application-category or remote-access signatures
Platforms
  • Abstract
  • Microsoft Defender XDR
  • Microsoft 365
  • Microsoft Teams
  • Palo Alto NGFW
  • SonicWall IPS
  • FortiGuard application control
Defensive Actions
  • Maintain an inventory of approved RMM tools and update it as tools change.
  • Normalize LOLRMM data before using it for detection; account for generic indicators, wildcard and regex patterns, placeholders, registry-hive variations, path formats, and unreliable signer values.
  • Mark approved business-use tools as sanctioned to suppress expected activity in downstream analytics.
  • Correlate first-seen RMM use with phishing, impersonation, and other suspicious activity rather than alerting on every observed indicator.
  • Investigate multiple RMM tools on a host and RMM activity near lateral movement, enumeration, or other suspicious events.
  • Work toward blocking RMM tools outside an approved list where reliable identification and operational requirements permit.
  • Retain observations for a configured period so infrequent RMM use remains visible.

Indicators of compromise

TypeIndicatorContext
EMAILhelpdesk@goodcorp936[.]onmicrosoft[.]comExample sender address in the article's Teams phishing scenario; not established as attacker-controlled.
URLhxxps[:]//lolrmm[.]io/api/rmm_tools[.]jsonURL for the LOLRMM catalog API, a defensive RMM-indicator source; not attacker infrastructure.

MITRE ATT&CK

Vendors

Products

AbstractAbstract integrationAction1the event with the observed indicator and, most importantly, the tool detected. In this case, an Action1 service installation is detected and enriched in the pipeline.AnyDeskAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.AteraAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.FortiGuardFortiGuard application control Remote.Access categoryLOLRMMLeveraging LOLRMM for detectionMicrosoft Defender for Endpointactivity to build an overall picture. For example, we apply the RMM first seen detection to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Device* events and turn it into a reusable signal to correlate with a plethora of otherMicrosoft Defender XDRIn Abstract, we’ll use the OOTB detection Microsoft Defender XDR - Potential Teams Help Desk Impersonation Message which detects 1:1 MessageEvents where the sender email or display name contains helpdesk/supportMicrosoft TeamsDetection 1: Microsoft Teams phishing leads to RMMPalo Alto NGFWPalo Alto NGFW remote-access subcategory (sample)Quick AssistAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.ScreenConnectAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.SonicWall IPSSonicWall IPS remote-access categorySplashtopAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.SysmonThe detection also works for M365 Audit Logs + other endpoint log sources like Sysmon.TeamViewerAnyDesk, Atera, ScreenConnect, Splashtop, Teamviewer, Quick Assist - chances are one of those are familiar, not because they’re malicious, but because they’re used legitimately for your IT operations.

Related Articles