I’m thrilled to sit down with Malik Haidar, a seasoned cybersecurity expert with a wealth of experience in tackling cyber threats at multinational corporations. With a deep background in analytics, intelligence, and security, Malik has a unique perspective on integrating business strategies into the fight against hackers. Today, we’re diving into the alarming trend of Russian ransomware gangs weaponizing the open-source AdaptixC2 framework, exploring its dual use in ethical and malicious contexts, the shadowy figures behind its release, and the broader implications of open-source tools in cybercrime.
Can you start by explaining what AdaptixC2 is and why it’s seen as a powerful tool for both ethical hackers and cybercriminals?
Absolutely, Frans. AdaptixC2 is an open-source command-and-control framework designed primarily for penetration testing and adversarial emulation. It’s built to help security professionals test systems by simulating real-world attacks. What makes it stand out is its versatility—it offers encrypted communications, command execution, credential harvesting, and even a remote terminal. But that same power is a double-edged sword. Cybercriminals, especially ransomware gangs, see these features as a ready-made toolkit for controlling compromised systems, which is why it’s gained traction in malicious circles.
What specific features of AdaptixC2 make it so adaptable for different kinds of users?
Well, its modular design is a big factor. It allows users to customize and extend its capabilities based on their needs, whether for legitimate testing or malicious intent. The server is written in Golang, which makes it lightweight and portable across platforms, while the client uses C++ QT for a user-friendly, cross-compatible interface. These technical choices mean it’s easy to deploy and operate, even for those who might not be coding experts, lowering the barrier for misuse.
How are Russian ransomware gangs and other threat actors leveraging AdaptixC2 in their operations?
We’re seeing groups like Fog and Akira, known for their ransomware attacks, adopting AdaptixC2 to manage their post-exploitation activities. It’s being used to maintain control over infected machines, steal data, and deploy further payloads. Beyond that, some actors are using it in social engineering scams, like fake help desk calls over platforms like Microsoft Teams, or even pairing it with AI-generated scripts to automate attacks. It’s a stark example of how a tool meant for good can be twisted into something destructive.
The public release of AdaptixC2 is tied to a figure known as RalfHacker. What can you tell us about this individual based on what’s out there?
RalfHacker is a bit of an enigma. They’ve presented themselves online as a penetration tester and red team operator, even labeling themselves as a “MalDev”—short for malware developer—which already raises eyebrows. Their GitHub profile and social media presence, like on Telegram, show they’re actively promoting AdaptixC2, but the way they discuss their work, almost casually referencing trendy public C2 frameworks, feels off to many in the security community. It’s hard to pin down their true intentions without more concrete evidence.
There’s been suspicion around RalfHacker’s potential ties to Russia’s criminal underground. What’s driving these concerns?
The red flags come from a few angles. Cybersecurity researchers have noted connections through email addresses linked to their accounts and their heavy use of Telegram channels for marketing AdaptixC2. Telegram is often a hub for underground activity, especially among Russian threat actors, so seeing it used this way sets off alarms. While it’s not definitive proof of wrongdoing, the uptick in Russian ransomware gangs using the tool shortly after its release adds to the suspicion that there might be more than just coincidence at play.
AdaptixC2 was intended as an ethical tool for red teaming, yet it’s being misused. How often do we see this kind of thing happening with open-source tools?
Unfortunately, it’s pretty common. Open-source tools are a goldmine for cybercriminals because they’re free, widely accessible, and often come with robust community support. Frameworks like Havoc, Mythic, and Sliver, all built for legitimate security testing, have been repurposed for attacks. Even paid tools like Cobalt Strike have cracked versions floating around in the wild. The appeal is simple: why pay or build something from scratch when you can grab a polished, ready-to-use tool for free?
What is it about these open-source tools that makes them more attractive to bad actors compared to commercial alternatives?
Cost is a huge factor, obviously—no one wants to shell out thousands when they can get something comparable for free. But it’s also about anonymity and adaptability. Open-source tools often have public codebases, so attackers can tweak them to evade detection by antivirus or security systems. Commercial tools, while powerful, sometimes have licensing or tracking mechanisms that make them riskier for criminals to use. Open-source just offers more flexibility with less oversight.
Looking ahead, what’s your forecast for the misuse of frameworks like AdaptixC2 in the cybersecurity landscape?
I think we’re only going to see this trend grow, Frans. As more sophisticated open-source tools hit the market, cybercriminals will keep finding ways to weaponize them. The cat-and-mouse game between defenders and attackers will intensify, with frameworks like AdaptixC2 becoming battlegrounds for control. My bigger concern is the blurring line between ethical and malicious use—without stricter community guidelines or monitoring, we’re in for a rough ride. I’d urge developers and companies to think hard about how they release and support these tools, because the stakes are only getting higher.
