Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Botnet

A botnet is a network of devices, such as computers, servers, or (IoT) gadgets, that have been infected with and remotely commandeered by a malicious known as a bot , enabling coordinated cyberattacks without the owners' . These networks derive their name from the portmanteau of "" and "," reflecting the automated, zombie-like behavior of the compromised "bots" that execute commands from a central . Botnets typically operate through one of two primary architectures: a centralized client-server model, where bots communicate directly with command-and-control () servers for instructions, or a decentralized () structure that distributes control across the bots themselves to enhance against takedowns. Infection often occurs via phishing emails, drive-by downloads, or exploitation of software vulnerabilities, allowing herders to amass vast armies—sometimes millions of devices—for scalable operations. Primarily deployed for distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks that overwhelm targets with traffic, botnets also facilitate spam campaigns, , cryptocurrency mining, and , posing persistent threats to infrastructure, financial systems, and individual . Notable examples include the Mirai botnet, which in 2016 hijacked devices to launch record-scale DDoS assaults disrupting major services, underscoring botnets' evolution toward exploiting weakly secured consumer hardware. Despite mitigation efforts like server seizures, botnets remain prolific due to their low-cost assembly and adaptability, with ongoing variants targeting both traditional endpoints and emerging edge devices.

Definition and Fundamentals

Core Concept and Characteristics

A botnet is a network of internet-connected devices, such as computers, servers, mobile devices, and (IoT) endpoints, that have been infected with enabling by a malicious known as the bot or botmaster. These devices, referred to as bots or zombies, operate covertly without the knowledge of their legitimate owners, executing commands issued by the herder to perform coordinated malicious activities. The term "botnet" derives from "robot network," reflecting the automated, programmable nature of the infected hosts that function like software robots under centralized or distributed direction. Central to a botnet's operation is the command-and-control (C2) infrastructure, which facilitates communication between the bot and the bots, often through protocols like HTTP, IRC, or overlays to evade detection. Infection typically occurs via drive-by downloads, emails, exploit kits targeting software vulnerabilities, or compromised legitimate software, allowing to establish persistence on the host and phone home to C2 servers. Key characteristics include scalability, where botnets can encompass thousands to millions of nodes for amplified effects; against takedowns through redundant C2 channels or decentralized architectures; and for the herder, as actions are distributed across unwitting victims' addresses, complicating attribution and mitigation. Botnets prioritize stealth, employing techniques like hiding, encrypted traffic, or fast-flux DNS to mask C2 endpoints and avoid antivirus detection. Botnets enable a range of cyber threats, including distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks that overwhelm targets with traffic floods, dissemination exceeding billions of emails daily from large networks, via harvested data, and mining hijacking host resources. Their distributed structure provides economic advantages to attackers, leveraging the computational power and of compromised devices at minimal cost, often monetized through cybercrime-as-a-service models where botnets are rented for specific operations. Despite law enforcement disruptions, such as the 2010 takedown of the botnet affecting over 12 million machines, botnets persist due to their adaptive evolution and the expanding from unsecured proliferation.

Scale and Impact Metrics

Botnets vary widely in scale, with modern variants often comprising hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of compromised devices, primarily endpoints, servers, and endpoints vulnerable to exploits like weak credentials or unpatched . In , the average botnet size reached approximately 38,000 devices, though outliers like BadBox 2.0 infected over 10 million devices globally, enabling persistent command-and-control operations. The botnet stood as the largest tracked by infrastructure metrics that year, leveraging propagation across unsecured devices. Detection reports from cybersecurity firms indicate the peak botnet in encompassed 227,000 devices, a near doubling from 2023's largest at 136,000, reflecting increased exploitation of growth. ![Stachledraht DDoS Attack diagram showing botnet-orchestrated flooding][float-right]
DDoS attacks powered by botnets have escalated in volumetric intensity, with peaks shattering prior records; for instance, the Aisuru botnet generated a 6.35 terabits per second (Tbps) assault in May 2025, followed by surges exceeding 11.5 Tbps later that year, overwhelming U.S. ISPs through hijacked residential and bandwidth. Historical benchmarks include the 2016 Mirai botnet, which at its height controlled around 600,000 devices to unleash DDoS floods up to 1 Tbps, disrupting major DNS providers like Dyn and cascading outages across services such as and . Other variants like facilitated financial fraud totaling over $120 million by 2010 through on infected banking endpoints.
Financial repercussions from botnet-enabled disruptions are severe, with DDoS downtime averaging $6,130 per minute for affected businesses due to halted operations and efforts. entities report losses exceeding $100,000 per hour during peak attacks, compounded by penalties and forensic costs. Beyond DDoS, botnets drive dissemination—Cutwail once propagated 74 billion emails daily—and delivery, contributing to broader economics estimated in billions annually, though attribution isolates botnet-specific vectors like Emotet's modular payloads to targeted sectors such as healthcare.
Notable BotnetPeak Infected DevicesPrimary Impact MetricYear
Mirai~600,000DDoS up to 1 Tbps2016
ZeusMillions (est.)$120M+ banking fraud2007–2010
BadBox 2.0>10 millionPersistent on 2024–2025
AisuruUndisclosed (large-scale)6.35+ Tbps DDoS2025

Historical Development

Origins and Early Examples (1990s–2000s)

Botnets originated in the late as extensions of automated scripts and IRC bots initially designed for benign channel management, evolving into malicious networks of compromised computers controlled remotely for coordinated attacks. Early malicious botnets leveraged vulnerabilities in systems, using client-server architectures where "masters" issued commands to "agents" or "zombies" on infected hosts to execute distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) floods. These tools marked a shift from single-source attacks to distributed ones, amplifying impact through sheer volume of traffic from multiple sources. One of the earliest documented DDoS botnets was Trin00 (also known as Trinoo), released in 1999, which coordinated floods from compromised Unix machines against targets like the in August 1999, rendering services unavailable for hours. Trin00 operated via a master-slave model, with masters communicating commands over to slaves that then flooded targets with packets, demonstrating the scalability of botnet-orchestrated attacks. Shortly after, the Tribe Flood Network (TFN) emerged in 1999, extending capabilities to include SYN floods, ICMP echo floods, and Smurf attacks, while obfuscating attack origins through encrypted communications and spoofed IP addresses. Stacheldraht, distributed in late , built on Trin00 and TFN by integrating their features into a more resilient framework, adding automated updates, TCP-based handler-agent controls, and resistance to filtering via ICMP tunneling for command dissemination. Developed by a using the pseudonym "Thomas Stacheldraht" from the Austrian group TESO, it enabled larger-scale DDoS operations and was detected in isolated incidents by mid-2000. Concurrently, Windows-targeted like SubSeven () and PrettyPark () formed rudimentary botnets; SubSeven acted as a for remote access and DDoS participation, while PrettyPark spread via email attachments to harvest passwords and email addresses for relays. By 2000, botnets expanded beyond DDoS to spam distribution, exemplified by the EarthLink Spammer botnet, which hijacked thousands of machines to disseminate bulk unsolicited emails, highlighting the economic motivations emerging alongside hacktivist or experimental uses. These early examples, primarily Unix-based for DDoS and shifting to Windows for broader infection vectors, laid the groundwork for botnet architectures by exploiting unpatched systems and weak network security, with attacks peaking in scale during the 2000 Yahoo! DDoS incident involving similar tools. The prevalence of publicly available source code for these tools facilitated rapid proliferation among attackers, underscoring the need for improved host hardening and traffic monitoring in the era's nascent cybersecurity landscape.

Expansion in the 2010s

The marked a period of rapid expansion for botnets, driven by the proliferation of internet-connected devices and advancements in resilience, enabling larger scales and more diverse targets beyond traditional PCs. Early in the decade, botnets like controlled nearly 12 million infected hosts primarily for data theft and banking , demonstrating the potential for massive through widespread vulnerabilities in operating systems. Growth metrics indicated explosive increases, with unique botnet victims peaking at a 654% rise in 2010 alone, reflecting incremental weekly expansions averaging 8%. Botnets evolved architecturally to evade , with () models gaining prominence, as seen in (), a variant of the family that operated from around 2011 until its disruption in 2014. GOZ utilized () and P2P command-and-control to steal banking credentials and facilitate like , resulting in millions of dollars in global losses. Operation Tovar, a multinational effort led by the FBI and involving , disrupted GOZ on June 2, 2014, by sinking its infrastructure and redirecting infected traffic, though the operation highlighted the challenges of fully eradicating resilient P2P networks. The latter half of the decade saw a pivotal shift toward (IoT) devices, exploiting weak default credentials and insecure , which amplified botnet firepower for distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. The Mirai botnet, emerging in 2016, infected hundreds of thousands of devices such as cameras and routers, culminating in a massive DDoS assault on DNS provider Dyn on October 21, 2016, that peaked at over 1 Tbps and disrupted access to major sites including and . Mirai's leak further fueled variants and copycats, like Reaper in 2017, underscoring how expansion enabled unprecedented attack volumes while traditional PC botnets like Kelihos persisted with up to 300,000 nodes for and distribution until 2017. This era's botnet growth was compounded by the rise of ransomware-as-a-service and ad fraud schemes, with networks like Methbot reportedly generating $3-5 million monthly through video ad manipulation.

Recent Evolutions (2020–2025)

During the early 2020s, botnets evolved toward greater resilience and scale, with variants of the Mirai malware continuing to dominate by exploiting vulnerabilities in Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as routers, cameras, and industrial equipment to orchestrate massive distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. These variants, including those leveraging zero-day flaws like the one in AVTECH CCTV cameras discovered in August 2024, enabled attacks reaching unprecedented volumes, such as the 5.6 terabits per second (Tbps) DDoS mitigated by Cloudflare in January 2025 and the record 7.3 Tbps assault in May 2025. By Q1 2025, Layer 3-4 DDoS attacks surged 110% year-over-year, fueled by botnets exceeding 1.33 million devices targeting sectors like fintech and telecommunications. A notable shift involved botnets expanding into mobile and consumer ecosystems, exemplified by the BadBox 2.0 network, which compromised over 10 million uncertified Android-based devices—including streaming TV boxes—between 2022 and 2025 for , traffic spoofing, and residential operations. In July 2025, initiated legal action against 25 China-based operators, collaborating with partners like to disrupt the botnet's infrastructure and prevent further monetization of invalid traffic. This reflected broader trends where botnets increasingly targeted weakly secured consumer hardware, contributing to 29% of observed in 2024 and enabling activities beyond DDoS, such as malware delivery and espionage. Law enforcement responses intensified, with Operation Endgame in May 2024 marking the largest coordinated global action against botnets, involving over a dozen countries in disrupting families like IcedID, , and Pikabot used for initial access, leading to arrests, server seizures, and infrastructure takedowns. A follow-up phase in May 2025 extended these efforts to kill chains, while U.S. authorities disrupted state-affiliated botnets, including a GRU-controlled in April 2022 capable of and disruption. These operations highlighted botnets' role in state-sponsored and ecosystems, prompting advancements in detection amid rising vulnerabilities.

Technical Architecture

Client-Server Model

In the client-server model of botnet architecture, infected hosts function as clients that connect to a centralized command-and-control (C&C) operated by the botnet controller, enabling the issuance of directives for coordinated malicious activities such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks or . The C&C acts as the botmaster, transmitting commands to bots while receiving updates or harvested from them, often through protocols like Internet Relay Chat (IRC) in early implementations or HTTP in later variants to evade detection by mimicking legitimate . This architecture, prevalent in first-generation botnets dating back to the late , relies on a hierarchical structure where the single or limited number of C&C servers serve as the primary point of coordination, allowing efficient management of large numbers of compromised devices but introducing a critical : disruption of the can dismantle the entire . For instance, the botnet, active in the mid-2000s, utilized 447 communications to a domain-resolved C&C for command dissemination. actions, such as server seizures or domain sinkholing, have repeatedly exploited this central dependency, as seen in the takedown efforts against in 2009, which controlled over 12 million bots via centralized servers. Despite the rise of more resilient alternatives, client- models persist in certain operations due to their simplicity in setup and control, particularly for rapid-deployment DDoS botnets where bots periodically poll the for instructions without maintaining persistent . Cybersecurity analyses indicate that these botnets often employ (DGAs) or fast-flux DNS to obscure C&C locations, though such measures still centralize authority and remain susceptible to and international cooperation in neutralization.

Peer-to-Peer Model

In the (P2P) botnet model, (C&C) functions are decentralized, with no reliance on central s. Each infected host, or bot, serves as both a client and a , enabling direct communication among peers to exchange commands, updates, and infection data. This architecture contrasts with client-server models by distributing C&C across the network, where bots maintain lists of peer nodes discovered via protocols such as or Overnet for routing messages without a fixed . The structure provides resilience against takedown efforts, as the absence of a prevents complete disruption through server seizures or domain blocks. Commands from the botmaster, often injected via select super-peers or initial infection vectors, propagate laterally through gossip protocols or distributed hash tables (DHTs), ensuring network persistence even if subsets of bots are removed. This allows botnets to grow exponentially, with each new bot contributing to the overlay network's robustness, though it introduces challenges like higher overhead from peer maintenance and potential for infiltration via fake nodes. Early examples include the botnet, which emerged in January 2007 and leveraged the Overnet protocol for C&C, enabling spam distribution and DDoS attacks while evading centralized shutdowns until peer aided partial mitigation. The variant, active from around 2011, combined communication with for peer discovery, facilitating financial operations until an international operation disrupted it on June 30, 2014, by sinkholing communications. More recently, FritzFrog, a Linux-focused botnet detected in September 2022, has targeted SSH servers since at least January 2020 for and backdoor persistence, using a custom overlay for decentralized control resistant to single-node failures. These cases demonstrate how models sustain operations amid actions, though vulnerabilities in peer selection and traffic patterns enable detection via behavioral .

Hybrid and Emerging Architectures

Hybrid botnets integrate centralized command-and-control (C&C) servers with (P2P) communication protocols among infected hosts, balancing efficient top-down command issuance with decentralized resilience against disruption. In this architecture, a subset of bots—often designated as "supernodes" or core peers—connects to for receiving directives, which are then relayed laterally through P2P overlays to the broader botnet, mitigating the inherent in pure client-server models while retaining operator oversight. This design enhances survivability, as takedown of central servers prompts automatic failover to P2P propagation, though it increases detection risks from anomalous peer traffic patterns. A notable example is the (GOZ) botnet, active primarily from 2011 to 2014 but illustrative of hybrid principles, which featured a three-layer structure: for C&C resilience, P2P command sharing among bots, and encrypted peer communications to evade monitoring. More recent implementations, such as those proposed in academic designs, eliminate single failure points by layering hybrid controls, where bots dynamically elect leaders for localized C&C in the absence of external servers. These architectures have been analyzed in simulations showing superior persistence compared to traditional models, with command reduced by up to 40% through selective P2P routing. Emerging architectures since 2020 increasingly incorporate IoT-specific hybrids, exploiting the heterogeneity of devices like routers and cameras in multi-tiered setups: low-tier bots handle propagation via weak protocols (e.g., brute-forcing), mid-tier nodes aggregate data P2P-style, and high-tier elements interface with ephemeral cloud-based C&C for . FritzFrog, detected in 2020 and persisting into 2022, exemplifies advanced P2P-hybrid evolution written in Go, using SSH for peer bootstrapping and decentralized key distribution across compromised servers, infecting over 3,000 hosts by mid-2022 without reliance on fixed C&C. By 2025, trends indicate integration of AI-driven adaptability, where bots employ for real-time topology reconfiguration—such as dynamic supernode selection based on network —to counter defensive heuristics, marking a shift toward self-healing networks capable of evading takedowns like those disrupting 15 million devices in 2024.

Key Components

Infected Hosts (Zombies/Bots)

Infected hosts in a botnet, termed or bots, consist of computing devices compromised by that grants unauthorized remote and to a central known as the bot herder. These devices execute directives such as launching distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, disseminating , or harvesting sensitive data, typically without alerting the legitimate owner through stealthy persistence mechanisms that mimic normal operations. Compromised hosts maintain bidirectional communication with command-and-control (C&C) servers via protocols like HTTP or IRC, polling for instructions at intervals to minimize detection while conserving resources. They often incorporate self-propagation capabilities, scanning networks for vulnerable peers to expand the botnet autonomously. Behavioral traits include suppressed error reporting, altered system logs to evade antivirus detection, and modular payloads that adapt tasks dynamically, such as credential theft or mining. Historically dominated by personal computers and servers, infected hosts now encompass a broad spectrum of endpoints due to the proliferation of connected devices with weak default , including mobile phones, routers, IP cameras, smart televisions, and industrial sensors. devices, in particular, represent a prime target owing to hardcoded credentials, unpatched , and limited processing power for security updates, enabling rapid mass infections. The scale of infections varies by botnet architecture and campaign, with early examples like the 2000s Rustock botnet enslaving millions of Windows PCs for , while modern -focused variants achieve comparable numbers through exploit chains targeting unsegmented networks. The 2016 Mirai botnet, for instance, commandeered over 600,000 vulnerable devices to generate DDoS traffic exceeding 1 Tbps. By 2025, incidents such as the BadBox 2.0 campaign compromised more than 10 million devices, primarily Android-based smart TVs and set-top boxes, underscoring the escalating volume driven by supply-chain vulnerabilities in .

Command and Control Infrastructure

The (C&C) infrastructure in a botnet facilitates communication between operators and compromised devices, allowing the issuance of instructions for tasks such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, , or distribution. Bots typically connect outbound to C&C servers using standard protocols to blend with legitimate traffic and evade firewalls. Centralized C&C architectures rely on one or more dedicated servers that bots query at intervals for updates, often via HTTP for its ubiquity or IRC for simplicity in early designs. This client-server model enables straightforward management and scalability but introduces single points of failure; seizure of the primary server, as occurred with the botnet's takedown in 2009, can collapse the network. To mitigate this, operators deploy redundant servers across jurisdictions with lax enforcement, known as . Evasion techniques enhance C&C durability, including fast-flux DNS, which cycles IP addresses bound to a domain every few minutes across a pool of proxies or compromised hosts, complicating blacklisting efforts. First observed in the botnet in 2007, fast flux has persisted in operations like those targeting financial through 2025. (DGAs) provide another layer, where bots and controllers use seeded pseudorandom functions to generate daily lists of thousands of domains; only select ones are registered and used for rendezvous, rendering prediction infeasible without reverse-engineering the algorithm. DGAs appeared in botnets like in 2008 and continue in variants exploiting devices as of 2024. Peer-to-peer (P2P) C&C architectures decentralize control, eliminating central servers by having bots commands among peers via overlay networks. This model, exemplified by the botnet disrupted in 2014, resists takedowns since no single node holds full authority, though it demands more from infected hosts and complicates command propagation. P2P systems often incorporate and key exchanges for secure messaging, with discovery via DHTs or hardcoded seeds. Hybrid approaches combine centralized primaries with P2P fallbacks, as seen in some botnets post-2020, balancing efficiency and resilience. Communication protocols prioritize stealth and reliability; HTTP/HTTPS dominates modern botnets for masquerading as web traffic, while custom binary protocols over reduce overhead in P2P setups. Operators may leverage public infrastructure like or cloud services for C&C to further obscure operations, though this risks platform bans. Disrupting resilient C&C requires sinkholing domains, legal seizures, or botnet herding to redirect traffic, techniques applied against Mirai variants in 2016 and ongoing botnets through 2025.

Communication Protocols

Botnets rely on communication protocols to enable (C&C) to disseminate instructions to infected hosts, coordinating activities such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, , or propagation. These protocols vary in centralization, stealth, and resilience, with evolution driven by the need to counter detection and disruption efforts by security researchers and . Early protocols favored simplicity and real-time control, while later ones prioritized and traffic to withstand takedowns. Internet Relay Chat (IRC) was among the first protocols adopted for botnet C&C, emerging with malware like PrettyPark in 1999. In IRC-based systems, bots establish persistent connections to IRC servers, join designated channels, and parse commands issued by the botmaster in chat messages, often using or scripted triggers. This setup allowed low-latency, bidirectional communication suitable for dynamic operations, as seen in botnets like Dorkbot active as late as 2015. However, IRC's centralized server dependency and distinctive chat-pattern traffic made it vulnerable to server seizures and signature-based detection, prompting a decline in prevalence by the mid-2000s. Hypertext Transfer Protocol () supplanted IRC for many botnets due to its ability to masquerade as legitimate . Bots periodically poll C&C servers via HTTP GET or POST requests to retrieve encrypted command payloads from dynamic web pages or , reducing inbound connections that could alert intrusion detection systems. The Zeus banking trojan, identified in July 2007, exemplified this approach, employing for command fetching alongside techniques like (DGAs) and fast flux DNS to rotate C&C endpoints rapidly. Advantages include evasion of port-specific blocks and scalability for large botnets, though polling intervals create detectable behavioral anomalies, such as synchronized high-volume requests from diverse IPs, and centralized servers remain single points of failure if located. Peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols mark a shift to decentralized C&C, where bots form overlay networks using distributed hash tables (DHTs) or unstructured gossiping to propagate commands without fixed servers. Pioneered in Nugache around 2006 and refined in the Storm worm of 2007, P2P enables bots to relay instructions peer-to-peer, achieving fault tolerance as no single node controls the network; infected hosts maintain peer lists for self-healing. Gameover Zeus, a P2P variant of Zeus identified in September 2011, stole banking credentials across millions of hosts until its disruption in June 2014 via sinkholing and peer list manipulation. This model's resilience stems from its resistance to centralized takedowns, but implementation complexity, elevated bandwidth overhead from peer discovery, and unique P2P traffic signatures pose detection risks. Domain Name System (DNS) protocols serve as a covert, low-bandwidth alternative for C&C, particularly in restricted environments. Bots encode queries to algorithmically generated domains, parsing command data from DNS responses such as records or subdomains, as implemented in Feederbot. Fast flux variants, common since the early , rapidly cycle mappings for C&C hosts to evade blacklisting. This method's stealth arises from mimicking essential DNS resolution traffic, which is difficult to block without disrupting legitimate services, but limitations include low throughput for complex payloads and vulnerability to DNS sinkholing by registrars. Hybrid protocols, combining elements like HTTP with fallbacks or DNS for , have emerged to balance reliability and evasion, as observed in post-2014 botnets adapting to enforcement operations.

Recruitment and Construction

Infection Mechanisms

Botnets primarily infect hosts through designed to compromise devices and establish , often exploiting user behavior, software flaws, or weak configurations. Initial infection vectors include social engineering tactics such as emails that deliver via malicious attachments or hyperlinks, prompting users to unwittingly execute the . Drive-by downloads represent another prevalent method, where visiting compromised websites triggers automatic exploitation of browser or plugin vulnerabilities, installing botnet without explicit user consent. Automated propagation techniques further amplify infections, particularly through vulnerability exploitation and network scanning. Malware may leverage unpatched software flaws to self-replicate in a worm-like manner, scanning for susceptible systems and injecting code to enlist new bots. For instance, Internet of Things (IoT) botnets like Mirai, which emerged in 2016, systematically probe the internet for devices with exposed Telnet or SSH ports, attempting brute-force logins using default credentials or common weak passwords to infect and commandeer them. This scanning often employs horizontal (random IP probing) or vertical (targeted port sweeps) strategies to maximize reach while minimizing detection. Evolving tactics incorporate blended approaches, such as embedding in legitimate software downloads or leveraging compromises to distribute infected updates. Historical examples, like the botnet active around 2007, relied heavily on campaigns with deceptive subject lines to propagate, demonstrating how attackers adapt delivery to evade filters. In resource-constrained environments like networks, infections frequently stem from factory-default settings and lack of updates, enabling rapid horizontal spread across millions of devices. These mechanisms underscore the causal role of human oversight and systemic vulnerabilities in enabling botnet growth, with empirical data from operations revealing infection rates tied directly to unmitigated exposure vectors.

Propagation Strategies

Botnets expand through diverse propagation strategies that exploit , software weaknesses, and discoverability to infect new hosts. These tactics often combine initial compromise vectors with self-replicating mechanisms, enabling rapid scaling from a seed infection to thousands or millions of bots. Empirical analyses of botnet families reveal patterns such as for endpoint delivery and automated scanning for opportunistic takeover, with propagation rates influenced by factors like target density and patch compliance. Social engineering remains a cornerstone method, particularly via campaigns that deliver through deceptive emails containing attachments or links. Victims are tricked into executing payloads, such as trojanized documents or executables, which install the bot and establish command-and-control () connections. For example, the Zeus banking trojan primarily spread through such vectors, compromising over 1 million machines by 2010 via email-delivered exploits targeting financial data theft kits. This approach leverages user trust in familiar sources, achieving infection rates dependent on click-through behaviors rather than technical defenses. Vulnerability exploitation targets unpatched systems, using known or zero-day flaws to gain unauthorized access without user interaction. Early IRC-based botnets like SDBot and Agobot propagated by scanning for backdoors on ports such as 2745 or exploiting Windows vulnerabilities including DCOM RPC and LSASS overflows, with over 4,000 SDBot variants documented by 2004. More recent variants employ drive-by downloads from compromised websites or , where benign ads redirect to exploit kits that probe for or plugin weaknesses. These methods favor high-volume, low-effort scans over targeted attacks, prioritizing susceptible endpoints in enterprise or consumer networks. Automated network scanning enables worm-like self-propagation, as exemplified by the Mirai IoT botnet, which from August 2016 scanned billions of IPv4 addresses daily for devices with open ports ( 23/2323). Bots brute-forced default credentials—such as "admin:admin" on over 60 common usernames/password pairs—to infect routers, cameras, and DVRs, amassing over 600,000 bots within days and enabling DDoS attacks peaking at 1.2 Tbps. This strategy exploits the proliferation of insecure embedded devices, using infected hosts to distribute scanning loads and evade rate-limiting, though it generates detectable traffic anomalies. Password guessing and shared media propagation, including file sharing of infected content, supplement these efforts in hybrid models.

Evasion Techniques During Buildup

During the buildup phase of a botnet, attackers prioritize to infect and propagate across hosts without triggering antivirus signatures, intrusion detection systems, or behavioral analysis tools, allowing the accumulation of a large before activation. This involves employing code methods such as packing and to disguise malicious payloads, evading static signature-based detection common in software. For instance, techniques like (XOR) operations or flattening alter the malware's binary structure dynamically, complicating and automated scanning during initial deployment. Polymorphic and metamorphic transformations further enhance evasion by generating variant code instances for each infection, ensuring no two samples match known hashes or patterns in threat intelligence databases. Anti- mechanisms, including detection and environment checks for machines or sandboxes, halt execution if tools are present, preventing researchers or software from unpacking the during propagation. In the Mirai botnet, for example, such and anti-debugging were used to obscure scanning and infection routines targeting devices, enabling rapid yet undetected spread in 2016. Propagation strategies during buildup often incorporate low-volume, targeted scanning or worm-like with built-in delays to mimic benign activity and avoid anomaly-based detection thresholds in firewalls or monitors. Attackers may leverage exploit kits delivered via drive-by downloads or , bundled with droppers that unpack payloads only after confirming a non-analysis , minimizing forensic footprints. is ensured through rootkit-like hiding of processes and registry modifications post-infection, allowing reinfection if initial removal occurs, as observed in early botnets like which pioneered such modular evasion in the mid-2000s. These techniques collectively delay detection, with research indicating that obfuscated botnet can evade up to 90% of signature-based tools in initial stages, though behavioral heuristics increasingly counter them. Dynamic adaptation, such as runtime code mutation, extends this window, adapting to observed defenses during ongoing .

Primary Uses

Criminal Applications

Botnets are predominantly exploited by cybercriminals for distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, which overwhelm s with traffic to payments or disrupt services. In September 2016, the Mirai botnet, comprising compromised devices, launched a DDoS on DNS provider Dyn, peaking at 1.2 terabits per second and causing widespread internet outages across the . This incident demonstrated botnets' capacity for , as operators rented access via "booter" or "stresser" services advertised on forums. Such attacks often financial institutions, gaming platforms, or rivals, with perpetrators demanding ransoms to halt the . Another core criminal application involves mass dissemination of and campaigns, enabling and propagation. The Necurs botnet, active since at least 2012 and operated by Russian-based criminals, infected millions of Windows machines to send billions of emails daily, facilitating scams, pump-and-dump , and distribution of banking trojans like . Necurs controllers leased botnet segments to affiliates for targeted , harvesting credentials and financial data from victims. via botnets typically involves deceptive emails with malicious links or attachments that expand the network or steal sensitive information, evading detection through distributed addresses. Botnets also support financial theft through information-stealing and automated schemes. Early examples like the botnet, peaking at over 1 million bots by 2007, combined architecture with to deliver payloads for credential theft and ad . Criminals deploy keyloggers and form-grabbers via botnets to capture banking details, enabling unauthorized transactions; variants, for instance, powered global ATM skimming and wire operations in the late . These applications generate revenue through direct theft or selling stolen data on markets, underscoring botnets' role as infrastructure for scalable .

State-Sponsored Operations

State-sponsored botnet operations serve national interests by enabling distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, proxying intrusions to obscure attribution, prepositioning for , and conducting against . These efforts exploit the scalability and deniability of botnets, often compromising consumer-grade devices like routers to minimize direct to the sponsoring . Attribution relies on technical indicators, such as signatures, command-and-control () infrastructure, and operational patterns analyzed by cybersecurity agencies, though challenges persist due to shared tools across actors and state denials. Chinese state-sponsored groups, including those tracked as Volt Typhoon (also known as Flax Typhoon), have built botnets from small office/home office () routers and devices to mask origins of hacks targeting sectors like communications, energy, and water utilities. Activities began at least by mid-2021, with actors maintaining persistent access for potential destructive payloads amid heightened US-China tensions. In December 2023, a US court-authorized operation neutralized a botnet of over 130,000 hijacked devices, primarily US-based, used to launder traffic for espionage. In September 2024, the FBI disrupted the Raptor Train botnet—comprising thousands of compromised global devices, including US endpoints—operated by People's Liberation Army-linked hackers since approximately 2020 for DDoS amplification, proxying, and evasion of . These botnets automated log collection and task execution to support broader campaigns against allied networks. Russian military intelligence, specifically Unit 74455 of the , has commandeered botnets for and disruption. In February 2024, the Justice Department dismantled a botnet of roughly 35,000 EdgeOS routers, initially infected by non-state actors via malware exploiting default credentials, but repurposed by operators for port scanning, , and arbitrary command execution against targets including government and defense entities. This operation highlighted states' opportunistic use of criminal botnets to scale attacks without building from scratch. Earlier, the 2007 DDoS campaign against government, banking, and media sites—triggered by the relocation of a Soviet —involved coordinated botnet floods peaking at 1-2 million infected hosts across 175 jurisdictions, with forensics pointing to Russian-language sources and state-orchestrated elements, despite Moscow's denials. Iranian actors tied to the (IRGC) deployed botnets in , a DDoS offensive from September 2012 to early 2013 targeting major banks including , , and . Hackers from firms like ITSEC Team compromised devices worldwide to generate traffic floods, causing repeated site outages and estimated damages exceeding $10 million per institution through lost productivity and mitigation costs. In March 2016, the indicted seven IRGC-affiliated individuals for deploying custom DDoS tools via botnets, marking a rare prosecutorial attribution of state-sponsored financial disruption. North Korean Reconnaissance General Bureau-linked actors, designated Hidden Cobra, operate dedicated DDoS botnets using custom families to assault media, financial, and targets, often in retaliation for sanctions or policy actions. A June 2017 US-CERT alert identified including servers in Asia hosting tools for bot herding and amplification, with campaigns traced to state-directed waves since at least 2011, such as attacks on South Korean banks. These botnets integrate with broader , funding operations through theft to sustain .

Economic Dimensions

Underground Markets and Leasing

Botnet operators frequently lease access to their networks via underground marketplaces, enabling cybercriminals to conduct distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, spam campaigns, and other illicit activities without building their own infrastructure. These markets operate primarily on the , where botmasters advertise services through forums and dedicated platforms, often using for anonymous transactions. Leasing models typically charge by duration, botnet size, or attack potency, with short-term rentals appealing to low-skill actors seeking quick disruptions. DDoS-for-hire services, powered by botnets, dominate these markets, with "booter" or "stresser" platforms providing on-demand access to compromised devices. For instance, as of 2021, such services offered attacks capable of overwhelming targets for as little as $5 per hour, scaling to hundreds of dollars for sustained or high-volume operations. More recent offerings in included botnet rentals starting at £78 (approximately $100 USD), suitable for mining, distribution, or targeted takedowns. Platforms like those leveraging the Rebirth botnet, identified in March , exemplify this commoditization, allowing renters to launch volumetric floods via infected devices. Specific venues, such as Russian Market, facilitate botnet sales and leasing, with an average of 30,000 bots listed monthly in the first half of , often bundled with control panels for remote management. These markets lower , as lessees avoid the risks of botnet construction, though operators retain control to prevent abuse that could attract scrutiny. Pricing reflects supply dynamics, with virtual or emulated bots occasionally undercutting physical ones, though real-device networks command premiums for reliability in high-stakes attacks. Law enforcement disruptions, such as the U.S. Department of Justice's 2022 seizure of 48 booter sites, highlight the markets' , as new services rapidly emerge to replace shuttered ones. Despite this, underground leasing persists due to the economic incentives: botnets generate revenue streams far exceeding construction costs, with operators profiting from volume over exclusivity. Cybersecurity analyses from firms like note that such commodified access has democratized cyber threats, shifting focus from elite hackers to opportunistic renters.

Monetization Models and Revenue Streams

Botnet operators primarily generate revenue by leasing access to their networks on underground markets or conducting illicit operations directly, such as distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, distribution, and . Leasing models often involve renting subsets of bots for specific tasks, with prices varying by botnet size, duration, and service type; for instance, DDoS-for-hire services can charge $5 to $7 per hour or $20 to $150 per attack, while full botnet rentals range from $30 to $4,800 monthly. These transactions occur on forums, where operators advertise capabilities like bot count and attack potency to attract clients seeking anonymous disruption services. DDoS-for-hire represents a core revenue stream, enabling low-barrier entry for attackers; operators profit by scaling attacks from rented bot armies, with a 30,000-bot network potentially yielding $26,000 monthly from such rentals. Spam and phishing campaigns form another pillar, leveraging bots for mass email distribution; a 10,000-bot setup can produce approximately $300,000 monthly through affiliate advertising or scam promotions. Financial fraud, including credential theft and bank account takeovers, offers high returns, with 30,000 bots enabling over $18 million monthly via stolen data exploitation or automated transfers. Emerging models include mining and traffic relaying, where infected devices perform computational tasks; for example, the Gayfemboy botnet, evolving from Mirai variants, mines while opening backdoors for further monetization, targeting devices as of 2025. sustains ongoing income by simulating ad interactions, potentially profiting over $20 million monthly from large-scale operations. While initial botnet construction incurs costs—estimated at $16 million for a 10 million-device including and infection—monthly maintenance remains low relative to revenues, often under $0.10 per device for re-infections, allowing operators to achieve substantial net gains despite takedown risks.

Countermeasures

Detection and Analysis Methods

Detection of botnets typically involves monitoring for indicators of at the network, , and behavioral levels, with methods categorized into signature-based, anomaly-based, and approaches. Signature-based detection relies on predefined patterns of known botnet or command-and-control (C&C) protocols, such as matching IRC commands or specific HTTP payloads associated with historical botnets like or , though this method struggles against polymorphic variants that alter code signatures to evade detection. Anomaly-based techniques, conversely, establish baselines of normal traffic or system behavior and flag deviations, such as irregular outbound connections from infected endpoints or synchronized low-volume queries to domains used by fast-flux C&C servers. Network traffic analysis forms a cornerstone of botnet detection, examining packet flows for characteristics like high entropy in (DGAs) employed by botnets such as , which generated over 50,000 pseudorandom domains daily in 2008 to obfuscate C&C resolution. Tools like Zeek (formerly Bro) or capture and dissect flows, identifying anomalies such as periodic beaconing—short, frequent connections from bots to herders—or unusual port scanning patterns indicative of phases. Peer-reviewed studies emphasize flow interval analysis, where classifies inter-packet timings; for instance, botnet traffic often exhibits tighter distributions compared to benign P2P file sharing due to centralized C&C orchestration. DNS-based methods, including sinkholing, redirect registered malicious domains to researcher-controlled servers, enabling enumeration of infected hosts; this technique disrupted the botnet in 2014, revealing over 1 million infections globally before court-ordered takedown. Host-level detection deploys (EDR) agents to monitor process trees, registry changes, and calls for signs of botnet loaders, such as persistent modules injecting into on Windows systems. Behavioral heuristics detect evasion attempts or resource exhaustion from cryptomining payloads in modern botnets like Mirai variants, which infected over 600,000 devices by exploiting weak credentials in 2016. enhances these efforts through supervised models trained on labeled datasets from malware zoos, achieving detection rates above 95% for known families via features like n-gram analysis of payloads, though unsupervised methods like autoencoders better handle zero-day threats by clustering outliers in high-dimensional traffic spaces. Hybrid approaches combine these, as in of logs to trace infection chains, correlating endpoint anomalies with upstream network flows for causal attribution. Analysis of suspected botnets requires forensic techniques to dissect C&C infrastructure and artifacts. Static analysis examines binaries without execution, using tools like IDA Pro to reverse-engineer droppers and extract strings revealing hardcoded IPs or keys, as applied to the botnet's modular payloads in 2021 takedowns. Dynamic analysis sandboxes samples in controlled environments, observing runtime behaviors such as peer discovery in P2P botnets like ZeroAccess, which used protocols to maintain resilience against single-point failures. Graph-based analysis models botnet topologies by constructing communication graphs from data, identifying centralities that distinguish hierarchical from decentralized structures; for example, highlights herder nodes in traffic datasets from captured botnets. Honeypots and darknets simulate vulnerable systems to lure infections, providing real-time samples for analysis; the Honeynet Project's deployments have yielded insights into over 100 botnet families since 2003, though results must account for potential researcher-induced biases in attracting only certain threat actors. Challenges in detection persist due to evasion tactics like and domain flux, necessitating ongoing adaptation; explainable AI models, such as SHAP-integrated random forests, improve transparency by attributing decisions to specific features like packet size variance, aiding validation in operational settings. Empirical evaluations on datasets like CTU-13, comprising labeled botnet traces from 2011 captures, report F1-scores exceeding 0.90 for ensemble classifiers, underscoring the efficacy of multi-method fusion over singular reliance on traffic volume thresholds, which yield high false positives in diverse networks.

Disruption and Takedown Strategies

Disruption strategies for botnets primarily target the command-and-control (C&C) infrastructure that coordinates infected devices, as severing this link renders the network inoperable without needing to remediate every individual bot. Common approaches include sinkholing, where malicious (DNS) queries are redirected to controlled servers operated by authorities or researchers, preventing bots from receiving updates or commands from operators. This technique manipulates network traffic by registering domains used by the botnet or exploiting DNS vulnerabilities, allowing defenders to infections, gather on botnet size, and further . Sinkholing has proven effective against centralized botnets but is less reliable against decentralized (P2P) variants, which lack single points of failure. Law enforcement takedowns often combine sinkholing with server seizures, domain registrations, and arrests, requiring international coordination due to botnets' global distribution. For instance, in Operation Endgame launched in May 2024, Europol and partners from multiple countries disrupted infrastructure for malware families including IcedID, SystemBC, and Bumblebee, seizing over 300 servers and arresting five suspects across Europe and the Americas. Similarly, the Gameover Zeus botnet, a P2P network responsible for stealing tens of millions of dollars via banking fraud, was disrupted in June 2014 through a U.S.-led multinational operation involving the FBI, Microsoft, and agencies from over 30 countries; efforts included sinkholing domains, issuing remediation software to victims, and indicting key operator Evgeniy Bogachev. The botnet takedown in January 2021 exemplified coordinated disruption, with , the FBI, and authorities from eight countries seizing C&C servers and sinkholing domains, halting a network that had infected over 1.6 million computers and facilitated hundreds of millions in damages through and distribution. However, resilience is a challenge, as reemerged in November 2021 under new operators, underscoring that takedowns often provide temporary relief unless paired with ongoing victim remediation and monitoring. Recent cases, such as the FBI's June 2024 dismantling of the 911 S5 botnet—which comprised 19 million devices used for and —relied on seizing U.S.-based and international asset forfeitures, generating over $100 million in illicit revenue for operators. Court-authorized operations, like the September 2024 disruption of the Flax Typhoon botnet linked to Chinese state actors, further demonstrate sinkholing's role in neutralizing threats targeting without direct device access. Challenges in these strategies include jurisdictional hurdles, encrypted or fast-flux C&C evasion, and the risk of incomplete disruptions allowing rapid rebuilding, as seen in resilient families like Mirai variants. Success metrics emphasize not just immediate downtime but long-term intelligence gains, with agencies prioritizing high-impact botnets tied to or state espionage over low-level threats.

International Law Enforcement Efforts

International law enforcement agencies have conducted numerous coordinated operations to dismantle botnet infrastructures, often involving seizure of command-and-control servers, domain disruptions, and arrests across multiple jurisdictions. These efforts typically rely on partnerships between national bodies like the U.S. (FBI), , , and , facilitated by shared intelligence and legal mutual assistance treaties. One landmark operation was the 2016 takedown of the Avalanche network, a botnet platform used for distributing and facilitating , which involved over 40 countries and resulted in the seizure of more than 39 servers, 2,000 domains, and 5,000 IP addresses, alongside four arrests. In 2021, the botnet—one of the most prolific distributors—was disrupted through a multinational effort led by , , U.S., and other authorities, who replaced malicious servers with benign ones to redirect infected devices and gather intelligence, affecting millions of compromised hosts worldwide. More recent initiatives include Operation Endgame in May 2024, coordinated by with participation from 18 countries including the U.S., which targeted dropper malware families such as IcedID, SystemBC, Pikabot, Smokeloader, and ; this led to the takedown of over 100 servers, neutralization of 2,000 domains, and four arrests, significantly disrupting initial access brokers in cybercrime ecosystems. A follow-up phase, Operation Endgame 2.0 in 2025, extended efforts against strains like Qakbot, DanaBot, and , seizing additional infrastructure and issuing warrants for 20 suspects. In August 2023, the FBI-led disruption of the Qakbot botnet involved U.S., French, German, Dutch, and British authorities, seizing 52 servers, over 700 domains, and millions in , which had infected over 700,000 devices and enabled attacks. These operations often incorporate private sector collaboration, as seen in the 2013 ZeroAccess botnet takedown by , the FBI, , and financial institutions, which severed the botnet's communication affecting up to 1.9 million machines used for and mining. State-sponsored botnets have also faced scrutiny, such as the 2024 U.S.-led disruption of the 911 S5 botnet, operated by a Chinese national and comprising over 19 million devices for proxy services and , resulting in the administrator's in . Despite successes, challenges persist due to jurisdictional hurdles and botnet resilience, with agencies emphasizing proactive sinkholing and to prevent rapid reconstitution.

Controversies and Challenges

Disruptions of botnets, particularly those involving remote access to infected devices or seizure of command-and-control (C&C) infrastructure, raise significant legal questions under domestic laws such as the U.S. Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Government-led operations often rely on court-authorized warrants under , amended in 2016 to permit remote searches of computers located outside judicial districts, enabling actions like the FBI's disruption of the Qakbot botnet in 2023, which neutralized over 700,000 infected devices through sinkholing and neutralization. However, executing commands on botnet nodes—such as deploying counter-—may constitute a "search" if data is acquired by authorities, potentially requiring to avoid constitutional violations, as analyzed in legal scholarship examining botnet takedowns. Civil actions by private entities, exemplified by Microsoft's Digital Crimes Unit, have pursued botnet disruptions through lawsuits seeking injunctions to seize domains and redirect traffic, as in the 2012 Zeus botnet takedown under Operation b71, which avoided criminal thresholds but built precedent for non-governmental interventions. These approaches sidestep some criminal warrant requirements but face challenges in proving standing and avoiding unauthorized hacking under laws like the (CFAA), which criminalizes unauthorized access even for defensive purposes. Internationally, disruptions encounter jurisdictional hurdles, as C&C servers often span multiple countries, complicating mutual legal assistance and leading to reliance on voluntary cooperation or alliances, as seen in the 2024 takedown of a PRC-linked botnet involving over 200,000 devices across 30 jurisdictions. Ethically, botnet disruptions risk to unwitting victims whose devices host bots, as aggressive tactics like remote can cause system instability or without user consent, prioritizing over individual autonomy. For instance, sinkholing C&C traffic may prevent attacks but leaves infected machines vulnerable to alternative controllers, potentially prolonging harm to owners unaware of infections, while ethical frameworks emphasize minimizing such through targeted remediation notifications. Vigilante efforts, such as private "white hat" botnets that preemptively infect vulnerable devices to block malicious hijacking, amplify these concerns by operating outside legal oversight, often violating anti-hacking statutes and risking escalation of conflicts without accountability. Critics argue that over-reliance on disruptive operations, rather than upstream prevention, raises issues, as short-term takedowns frequently fail to eradicate resilient botnets, leading to rapid resurgence and inefficient , as evidenced by repeated iterations of families like Mirai despite multiple interventions. Under data regimes like GDPR, disruptions must balance threat mitigation against rights, prohibiting disproportionate on infected endpoints without explicit safeguards. These tensions underscore the need for codified ethical guidelines in public-private partnerships, ensuring disruptions align with principles of necessity and minimal intrusion.

Attribution and Geopolitical Tensions

Attributing botnet operations to specific state actors remains technically challenging due to techniques such as command-and-control , the leasing of criminal botnets as proxies, and deliberate false-flag indicators designed to mislead investigators. State actors often exploit existing infrastructures or non-state cybercriminals to maintain , complicating forensic analysis that relies on indicators like IP addresses, code similarities, or operational patterns. These difficulties are exacerbated by jurisdictional barriers and the dual-use nature of botnets, which serve both criminal profit and state objectives like or disruption. Prominent examples include Chinese state-sponsored groups like Volt Typhoon, which US authorities attributed to the (PRC) for building a botnet of over 200,000 compromised small office/home office (SOHO) routers using to mask intrusions into sectors such as communications, energy, and water utilities. The FBI and partners disrupted this network on January 30, 2024, via a court-authorized operation that neutralized the without altering router configurations. Similarly, Flax Typhoon, another PRC-linked actor, operated a botnet of nearly 200,000 consumer devices for and potential disruption, which the US disrupted in September 2024; the group minimized signatures to evade detection. PRC officials have denied these attributions, claiming they stem from unsubstantiated US accusations amid broader bilateral frictions. Russian-linked operations have involved botnets for distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks during geopolitical conflicts, such as the assault on websites, where a botnet of approximately 300,000 infected machines overwhelmed targets; attribution pointed to Kremlin-tolerated hacktivist groups rather than direct military control. Iranian actors, including those tied to the , have deployed botnets for retaliatory DDoS campaigns, exemplified by attacks on financial institutions from to 2013 using the McColo-facilitated botnet infrastructure. North Korean groups like have incorporated botnet elements into financial cyber operations, though attributions focus more on bespoke than large-scale botnets. These attributions fuel geopolitical tensions by prompting escalatory responses, including sanctions on implicated entities and indictments of foreign operatives, as seen in charges against PRC nationals for Volt Typhoon activities. Public disclosures by agencies like CISA and the FBI aim to deter future operations but invite counter-narratives from accused states, which often accuse Western intelligence of fabricating to justify offensive postures. Such disputes underscore the role of cyber attribution as a diplomatic , where technical intersects with strategic signaling, yet persistent denials and use limit under international norms.

Persistent Vulnerabilities and Future Risks

Botnets persist due to entrenched vulnerabilities in Internet-connected devices, including unpatched software flaws and default or weak credentials that enable straightforward compromise. equipment, often deployed with minimal security hardening, remains a prime vector, as malware scanners exploit these weaknesses to assemble networks of millions of bots for sustained operations. Even after high-profile takedowns, such as those of Mirai infrastructure, variants rapidly reemerge by targeting similar entry points, demonstrating the difficulty in eradicating root causes like inadequate device updates. Recent examples highlight this durability: In January 2025, Akamai identified Aquabotv3, a Mirai-based variant exploiting CVE-2024-41710—a command injection flaw in phones—alongside older vulnerabilities like CVE-2018-17532, to download payloads via scripts and execute DDoS attacks. The malware's "report_kill" mechanism notifies command-and-control () servers of disruption signals, allowing operators to refine tactics and prolong botnet lifespan. These adaptations exploit the slow patching cycles in and , where vendors prioritize functionality over . Looking ahead, botnets face amplified risks from architectural evolution, including (P2P) topologies that eliminate single points of failure and (DGAs) for dynamic evasion. Integration of enables real-time adaptation, such as feature perturbation to bypass detection models, while expanding to cloud environments increases scale and impact on . The unchecked growth of deployments—projected to exceed 75 billion devices by 2030—compounds these threats, as resource-constrained endpoints resist comprehensive monitoring and synthetic attack data strains defensive training. Without systemic shifts toward secure-by-design principles, botnets will likely sustain high-volume DDoS campaigns, , and distribution, outpacing fragmented global mitigation efforts.

References

  1. [1]
    What is a Botnet? - Fortinet
    A botnet is a network of computers infected by malware that are under the control of a single attacking party, known as the “bot-herder.”
  2. [2]
    Botnet - Glossary | CSRC - NIST Computer Security Resource Center
    A botnet is a network of computers controlled by cyber criminals using Trojan viruses, formed from the words 'robot' and 'network'.
  3. [3]
    What is a Botnet? - Palo Alto Networks
    A botnet is a network of compromised computers or devices, called bots, infected with malware and controlled remotely by a cybercriminal.
  4. [4]
    What is a Botnet? - Check Point Software Technologies
    A botnet is a network of infected computers that work together to carry out an attacker's goals. The name is a combination of the words “robot” and “network”.
  5. [5]
    What is a Botnet? | CrowdStrike
    Jan 11, 2022 · A botnet is a network of computers infected with malware and controlled by a bot herder to launch cyberattacks like DDoS attacks.
  6. [6]
    What is Botnets in Cybersecurity? - SentinelOne
    Aug 19, 2025 · Botnets are networks of hijacked devices infected by a common type of malware and used by malicious actors to automate widespread scams and massive ...
  7. [7]
    What is a Botnet? Types, Examples & Prevention - Rapid7
    Centralized botnets (client-server model): In this traditional structure, all bots connect directly to one or more central command and control servers.
  8. [8]
    What is a DDoS botnet? - Cloudflare
    A botnet refers to a group of computers which have been infected by malware and have come under the control of a malicious actor.
  9. [9]
    What Is a Botnet? How Attackers Exploit Malware - Vectra AI
    A botnet is a network of compromised devices used by cybercriminals for DDoS attacks, data theft, and fraud. Discover how these threats work and ways to ...
  10. [10]
    The 8 biggest botnets of all time - Cybernews
    Oct 22, 2020 · The 8 biggest botnets of all time · ZeuS · Storm · Mariposa · ZeroAccess · Dridex · Emotet · 3ve · Mirai.
  11. [11]
    Top threats of the 2024 botnet landscape | Barracuda Networks Blog
    Mar 21, 2025 · Botnets are becoming more sophisticated and accessible. DDoS attacks, cryptocurrency mining and data theft are just a few examples of botnet ...
  12. [12]
    What is a botnet? | Definition from TechTarget
    Feb 18, 2025 · A botnet is a collection of internet-connected devices -- including PCs, servers, mobile devices and internet of things (IoT) devices ...Missing: core characteristics<|separator|>
  13. [13]
    What is a Botnet? - Kaspersky
    Botnets are networks of hijacked computer devices used to carry out various scams and cyberattacks. The term “botnet” is formed from the word's “robot” and “ ...Missing: core characteristics
  14. [14]
    What is a Botnet? - Corero Network Security
    Key Components of a Botnet​​ Bots: Bots are the individual compromised devices within a botnet. These devices can range from computers and servers to IoT devices ...
  15. [15]
    What Is a Botnet? Definition, How They Work & Defense - Okta
    Oct 28, 2024 · A botnet is a network of computers or devices under the control of a hacker, infected with malware, and used to carry out malicious actions.Missing: core | Show results with:core
  16. [16]
    Desktop and IoT threat report for Q2 2025 - Securelist
    Sep 5, 2025 · The report presents statistics for Windows, macOS, IoT, and other threats, including ransomware, miners, local and web-based threats, for Q2 ...
  17. [17]
    The Top Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Breaches in 2025
    Top Recent IoT Cybersecurity Breaches in 2024 and 2025 · BadBox 2.0 Botnet Infects Over 10 Million IoT Devices · Matrix Exploits IoT Devices, Creates Global ...
  18. [18]
    DDoS in 2024: Detailed Statistics - StormWall
    The average size of botnets grew to 38,000 devices, with some botnets including tens of millions of infected gadgets. These large-scale botnets were ...
  19. [19]
    2024 Malicious Infrastructure Insights: Key Trends and Threats
    Feb 25, 2025 · Mozi Botnet was the largest tracked botnet in 2024 based on the number of identified bots, while older botnets remained active, being ...<|separator|>
  20. [20]
    DDoS Botnet Aisuru Blankets US ISPs in Record DDoS
    Oct 10, 2025 · In May 2025, KrebsOnSecurity was hit with a near-record 6.35 terabits per second (Tbps) attack from Aisuru, which was then the largest assault ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  21. [21]
    The Most Powerful Ever? Inside the 11.5Tbps-Scale Mega Botnet ...
    Sep 15, 2025 · Since 2025, peak bandwidth for global DDoS attacks has repeatedly broken historical records, rising from 3.12 Tbps at the start of the year ...
  22. [22]
    The 10 Biggest Botnets in History - Stellastra
    Oct 5, 2024 · The Largest Botnets · Mirai · Srizbi · Methbot Ad Fraud Botnet · The Storm Botnet · Emotet · 3ve Botnet · ZeroAccess · Zeus.
  23. [23]
    The Biggest Botnet Attacks to Date
    Jun 12, 2022 · EarthLink Spammer was one of the first botnet attacks. The attackers engaged in phishing—a cornerstone of botnet attacks—and sent emails that ...
  24. [24]
    The Economics of DDoS Attacks and Their Prevention
    Jun 3, 2024 · According to recent data, a DDoS attack will cost a business the average business that's targeted around $6,130 per minute of downtime. For ...
  25. [25]
    How Hackers Profit from DDoS Attacks: Uncover the Secrets
    For example, 43% of e-commerce businesses targeted by DDoS attacks reported losing more than $100,000 per hour during disruptions. Similarly, financial ...
  26. [26]
    FBI Dismantles World's Largest Botnet: 911 S5 Botnet - Cobalt.io
    Jun 18, 2024 · Emotet (2014-2021): This botnet was known for its modular design and ability to deliver various payloads, including banking trojans, ransomware, ...
  27. [27]
    Zombies and botnets | Australian Institute of Criminology
    Mar 7, 2007 · The first bot program was probably Eggdrop, created by Jeff Fisher, which originated ... early 1990s. Early bot programs were designed to allow ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
  28. [28]
    [PDF] Trends in Denial of Service Attack Technology
    In June of 1999, multiple source DoS, or DDoS, tools began to be deployed. ... Stacheldraht DDoS tool found in isolated incidents. Stacheldraht combined ...
  29. [29]
    DDoS Attacks History - Radware
    Mar 12, 2017 · One of the first large-scale DDoS attacks occurred in August 1999, when a hacker used a tool called “Trinoo” to disable the University of ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Distributed Denial of Service: Trin00, Tribe Flood Network ... - DTIC
    Feb 14, 2000 · The first tools developed to perpetrate the DDoS attack were Trin00 and Tribe Flood. Network (TFN). They spawned the next generation of tools ...Missing: botnet | Show results with:botnet
  31. [31]
    What is the history of bots? | Fastly
    Created in 1999, PrettyPark and Sub7 are some of the first recorded botnets. PrettyPark was a worm that spread through email attachments and stole information ...1960s-1970s · 1990s · 2010sMissing: origins | Show results with:origins
  32. [32]
    Botnets: A Guide to Their Origins, Functions, and Detection - Anura.io
    Apr 21, 2023 · The first widely recognized botnet, called the "EarthLink Spammer," emerged in 2000 and was used to send massive amounts of spam email.
  33. [33]
    A Brief History of The Evolution of Malware | FortiGuard Labs - Fortinet
    Mar 15, 2022 · The first observed botnet was the EarthLink Spam botnet, which made its debut in 2000. It had a simple task: to send out massive quantities of ...The Early Years · 1986: The First Pc Virus · The Era Of Spyware And...Missing: 1990s | Show results with:1990s
  34. [34]
    The Evolution of Botnets: How They Have Transformed Cyber ...
    Feb 16, 2025 · Botnets first emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s as basic automated scripts designed to perform repetitive tasks. ... The First Botnets ( ...Missing: origins | Show results with:origins
  35. [35]
    Top 10 botnets of 2010 - Help Net Security
    Feb 15, 2011 · At its peak in 2010, the total number of unique botnet victims grew by 654 percent, with an average incremental growth of eight percent per week ...
  36. [36]
    GameOver Zeus Botnet Disrupted - FBI
    Jun 2, 2014 · Multinational effort disrupts malicious software that has stolen millions around the world.
  37. [37]
    U.S. Leads Multi-National Action Against “Gameover Zeus” Botnet ...
    Jun 2, 2014 · The Justice Department today announced a multi-national effort to disrupt the Gameover Zeus Botnet – a global network of infected victim computers.
  38. [38]
    Microsoft helps FBI in GameOver Zeus botnet cleanup
    Jun 2, 2014 · Microsoft, working closely with the FBI and industry partners, has taken action to remove malware, so that infected computers can no longer be used for harm.Missing: takedown | Show results with:takedown<|separator|>
  39. [39]
    Inside the infamous Mirai IoT Botnet: A Retrospective Analysis
    Dec 14, 2017 · This post provides an analysis of Mirai, the Internet-of-Things botnet that took down major websites via massive DDoS using 100s of 1000s of ...
  40. [40]
    DDoS attack that disrupted internet was largest of its kind in history ...
    Oct 26, 2016 · Dyn, the victim of last week's denial of service attack, said it was orchestrated using a weapon called the Mirai botnet as the 'primary ...
  41. [41]
    A decade of malware: Top botnets of the 2010s - ZDNET
    Dec 2, 2019 · ZDNet goes over the list of biggest malware botnets of the past decade, from Necurs to Mirai.
  42. [42]
    What is the Mirai Botnet? - Cloudflare
    Learn how Mirai malware turns IoT devices running on the ARC processor and the Linux OS, into botnets. Mirai is commonly used to launch DDoS attacks, ...
  43. [43]
    Cloudflare detected (and blocked) the biggest DDoS attack on record
    Jan 22, 2025 · Cloudflare detected the biggest DDoS attack ever recorded, a 5.6 terabits per second (Tbps) attack directed at an ISP in Eastern Asia.
  44. [44]
    Beware the Unpatchable: Corona Mirai Botnet Spreads via Zero-Day
    Aug 28, 2024 · The Akamai SIRT discovered a vulnerability in an AVTECH CCTV camera. Read how it is actively being exploited in the wild to spread the ...
  45. [45]
    Famous DDoS attacks | Biggest DDoS attacks | Cloudflare
    In a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, multiple devices are used to overwhelm a targeted server with traffic and take online services offline.
  46. [46]
    Q1 2025 DDoS, Botnet & BGP Incident Report - Qrator Labs
    Apr 16, 2025 · In Q1 2025, L3-L4 DDoS attacks increased 110%, a 1.33 million device botnet was found, and a 232 Gbps attack was recorded. L7 attacks targeted ...Missing: developments 2020-2025<|separator|>
  47. [47]
    Massive 1.33 Million-Device Botnet Drives Unprecedented DDoS ...
    A record-breaking 1.33 million-device botnet has driven a 110% surge in DDoS attacks in Q1 2025, targeting fintech, e-commerce, and telecom sectors.Missing: 2020-2025 | Show results with:2020-2025
  48. [48]
    We're taking legal action against the BadBox 2.0 botnet.
    The Badbox 2.0 botnet compromised over 10 million uncertified devices running Android's open-source software (Android Open Source Project), ...Missing: disruption | Show results with:disruption
  49. [49]
    Google: This Malware Has Spread to Over 10 Million Android Devices
    Jul 18, 2025 · Google sues to stop the 'BadBox 2.0' malware, alleging the China-based culprits have spread the infection to no-name TV streaming devices, ...
  50. [50]
    Google Sues 25 in China Over Alleged BadBox 2.0 Botnet Operation
    Jul 18, 2025 · Google accuses 25 people in China of operating an extensive botnet that targets connected consumer devices.
  51. [51]
    Satori Threat Intelligence Disruption: BADBOX 2.0 Targets ...
    Mar 5, 2025 · Google took enforcement action to prevent bad actors from attempting to monetize the BADBOX family of invalid traffic. As of January 2025, ...
  52. [52]
    Botnets are getting smarter and more dangerous - SiliconANGLE
    Oct 2, 2025 · In 2024 alone, botnets accounted for 29% of all observed malware, reclaiming their spot at the top of the cyberthreat landscape, ...Missing: 2020-2025 | Show results with:2020-2025
  53. [53]
    Operation Endgame - Europol
    Jul 25, 2025 · A large-scale operation focused on disrupting botnets and associated criminal infrastructures. Content type operation. Duration: 01 May 2024.
  54. [54]
    'Operation Endgame' Hits Malware Delivery Platforms
    May 30, 2024 · Operation Endgame, a coordinated action against some of the most popular cybercrime platforms for delivering ransomware and data-stealing malware.<|separator|>
  55. [55]
    Significant Cyber Incidents | Strategic Technologies Program - CSIS
    This timeline lists significant cyber incidents since 2006. We focus on state actions, espionage, and cyberattacks where losses are more than a million ...
  56. [56]
    The Most Recent Botnet Attacks: Trends and Insights - ClickGuard
    Jan 6, 2025 · 31.7% of all recorded attacks in 2023 were automated threats, with 25% involving sophisticated bots targeting business logic, and 12.4% ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
  57. [57]
    Command and Control [C&C] Server - Definition | Trend Micro (US)
    C&C systems used by botnets may follow any of these three models: the centralized model, the peer-to-peer [P2P] model, and the random model. Malicious uses ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  58. [58]
    How does the server-client scheme work in a botnet?
    Mar 1, 2019 · The Client-Server model in botnets is just the same (with maybe some pimps from botnet family to other) as any client<->server model, ...Missing: architecture | Show results with:architecture
  59. [59]
    Client-Server vs P2P Botnets: What's the Difference?
    Mar 7, 2022 · Client-server botnets involve the use of a Control and Command server, whereas P2P botnets involve the use of a P2P network.
  60. [60]
    What Is a Botnet? Common Architecture, Purpose & Attack Types
    Rating 5.0 (8) Jun 9, 2020 · Botnets featuring client-server architecture are easier to set up, boast a well-known infrastructure with many guides and models to learn from, ...<|separator|>
  61. [61]
  62. [62]
    Command-and-Control Servers Explained. Techniques and DNS ...
    Mar 29, 2023 · A command-and-control server (C&C) is a computer that threat actors use to send instructions to compromised systems.
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Peer-to-Peer Botnets
    P2P botnets mean that their C&C models are P2P- based, i.e. no central server is used. Each bot member acts as both a command distribution server and a client ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Peer-to-Peer Botnets: Overview and Case Study - USENIX
    In a peer-to-peer architecture, there is no centralized point for C&C. Nodes in a peer-to-peer network act as both clients and servers such that there is no ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  65. [65]
    [PDF] Review of Peer-to-Peer Botnets and Detection Mechanisms - arXiv
    Jul 17, 2022 · The P2P architecture eliminates the vulnerability of a single point of disruption because every bot in the P2P botnet can act as either the ...<|separator|>
  66. [66]
    [PDF] P2P as botnet command and control: a deeper insight
    There has been tremendous interest paid in the past year to Peer-to-peer botnets, principally Storm, a hybrid bot that uses the Overnet peer-to-peer (P2P) ...
  67. [67]
    Towards Accurate Node-Based Detection of P2P Botnets - PMC
    Jun 24, 2014 · Compared to the server-client botnet, the P2P botnet has the ability to realize highly scalable and extensible network structure which is ...
  68. [68]
    Hunting the Hydra: why Gameover ZeuS botnet is here to stay
    Jul 22, 2014 · It proved to be rather difficult, much more than dismantling a common botnet, since Gameover uses an advanced peer-to-peer approach (or ...
  69. [69]
    FritzFrog: A New Generation of Peer-to-Peer Botnets - Akamai
    Sep 21, 2022 · Guardicore has discovered FritzFrog, a sophisticated peer-to-peer (P2P) botnet that has been actively breaching SSH servers since January ...
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Peer-to-Peer Botnet Investigation: A Review
    PPM acts as though it were the same as any other node on the network by imple- menting the "Overnet Protocol", as explained below. This method involves ...
  71. [71]
    An Advanced Hybrid Peer-to-Peer Botnet - USENIX
    Apr 2, 2007 · In this paper, we present the design of an advanced hybrid peer-to-peer botnet. Compared with current botnets, the proposed botnet is harder to be shut down, ...<|separator|>
  72. [72]
    Botnet sequential activity detection with hybrid analysis
    The weaknesses of the two types of architecture are overcome by the latest botnet architecture, namely, hybrid, which applies layering to combine centralized ...
  73. [73]
    Botnet basics: Defending yourself from 'robot networks'
    Mar 13, 2025 · There are also hybrid botnets that leverage both architectures, such as the GameOver Zeus (GOZ) botnet. This had a three-layer structure ...
  74. [74]
  75. [75]
    [PDF] An Advanced Hybrid Peer-to-Peer Botnet
    In this paper, we present the design of an advanced hybrid peer-to-peer botnet. Compared with current botnets, the proposed botnet is harder to be shut down, ...
  76. [76]
    EXCLUSIVE REPORT - Cyber Onslaught Unveiled: The March 2025 ...
    Mar 12, 2025 · The U.S. Cyber Command disrupted 300 botnets in 2024, per its annual report, dismantling 15 million infected devices, yet new networks emerge ...<|separator|>
  77. [77]
  78. [78]
    What Is a Botnet? Types, Examples, and 7 Defensive Measures
    Botnets are networks of hijacked computers and devices infected by malware and used to carry out cyberattacks by remote control.Why Are Botnets Created? · How Do Botnets Work? · How is a Botnet Controlled?
  79. [79]
    IoT Botnet - Check Point Software Technologies
    The compromised devices can include any device that connects to the internet and communicates data – smart home appliances, cameras, routers, etc. The large ...
  80. [80]
    Botnet Attacks: How IoT Devices become Part/Victim of such Attacks
    May 26, 2022 · Botnets can contaminate almost every type of Internet-linked device or IoT device, either directly or via Wi-Fi. Smartphones, PCs, laptops, ...
  81. [81]
    Five Most Famous DDoS Attacks and Then Some | A10 Networks
    Since the first documented cyberattack in 1996, many famous DDoS attacks have brought down websites and lead to data theft or network infiltration.
  82. [82]
    Command and Control (C&C) Attacks Explained - CrowdStrike
    Jul 19, 2023 · C&C (also known as C2) is a method that cybercriminals use to communicate with compromised devices within a target company's network.
  83. [83]
    What is C2? Command and Control Infrastructure Explained - Varonis
    Here are a few general techniques for detecting and stopping command and control traffic in your own network: Monitor and Filter Outbound Traffic. Many ...
  84. [84]
    What is a Command and Control Attack? - Palo Alto Networks
    This model functions by transmitting communications to the infected host (or botnet) from disparate sources: IRC chat rooms; CDNs; Social media comments; Email.
  85. [85]
    Understanding Command & Control (C2) Infrastructure | Blog
    Apr 21, 2025 · Using the infrastructure a hub for controlling a botnet and sending it commands from a central point to each compromised machine. Downloading ...
  86. [86]
    Fast Flux 101: How Cybercriminals Improve the Resilience of Their ...
    Mar 2, 2021 · To evade detection and blocking, they usually use fast flux techniques. Typically, we observe that these domains point to hundreds of ...Executive Summary · Fast Flux Fictional Scenario · Detecting Fast Flux and DGA...
  87. [87]
    Fast Flux Technique for Concealing Command and Control (C&C ...
    May 14, 2025 · Since the technique was first detected in the Storm botnet in 2007, it has been used as a key means to hide and evade the detection of Command ...
  88. [88]
    Domain Generation Algorithms (DGAs) and Fast Flux DNS
    Jul 24, 2025 · DGAs and Fast Flux DNS are powerful evasive techniques used by malware for command and control communications. Their dynamic nature, involving ...
  89. [89]
    What Is a Command-and-Control Attack? - Fortinet
    A command-and-control attack is a type of attack that involves tools to communicate with and control an infected machine or network.Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques<|separator|>
  90. [90]
    Know Your Enemy: Botnet Command and Control Architectures
    Jun 6, 2019 · A centralized botnet uses one or more servers to coordinate the infected devices. This is an asymmetric model, in contrast to the symmetric ...
  91. [91]
    What is a Command-and-Control Server? - Sysdig
    A Command-and-Control server is a computer or set of computers managed by an attacker remotely to conform a network of infected devices and through which to ...
  92. [92]
    [PDF] Characterizing the IRC-based Botnet Phenomenon
    Dec 3, 2007 · Botnets first appeared more than eight years ago with PrettyPark in 1999 as one of the first malware samples with an IRC-based backdoor. Since ...<|separator|>
  93. [93]
    IRC Botnets Alive, Effective & Evolving - Zscaler
    Apr 23, 2015 · In this blog, IRC based malware families - DorkBot, followed by three additional IRC Botnet families - RageBot, Phorpiex, and IRCBot.HI.
  94. [94]
    [PDF] Understanding, Detecting, and Disrupting Botnets - USENIX
    P2P: Peer-to-peer (p2p) botnet communication has several important advantages over centralized networks. First, a p2p communication system is much harder to.Missing: disadvantages | Show results with:disadvantages<|control11|><|separator|>
  95. [95]
    What is Zeus Trojan Malware? - CrowdStrike
    Mar 13, 2023 · Since it was introduced to the internet in 2007, the Zeus malware attack (also called Zbot) has become a hugely successful trojan horse ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Detection and Classification of Different Botnet C&C Channels
    P2P-based C&C has the advantage of not having a single point of failure which is inherent to IRC-based and HTTP-based bots. Many botnets use a DNS technique ...
  97. [97]
    GameOver Zeus P2P Malware - CISA
    Sep 30, 2016 · GameOver Zeus (GOZ), a peer-to-peer (P2P) variant of the Zeus family of bank credential-stealing malware identified in September 2011.
  98. [98]
    [PDF] On Botnets that use DNS for Command and Control
    We document reverse engineering efforts on a botnet that uses the Domain Name System (DNS) protocol as the prior mechanism for command and control. Based on our ...
  99. [99]
    Botnets: The Information Stealers Mama Never Warned You About
    A botnet attack is typically delivered in the form of a trojan – as an email attachment or maliciously embedded in software that you might download. And while ...
  100. [100]
    [PDF] 1 An Inside Look at Botnets - cs.wisc.edu
    Jan 3, 2006 · Simple horizontal and vertical scanning are the most common mechanism. Implication: The specific Page 4 propagation methods used in these ...
  101. [101]
    [PDF] Analyzing the Propagation of IoT Botnets from DNS Leakage
    Both botnets propagate by scanning the Internet for hosts with specific open ports.Missing: techniques | Show results with:techniques
  102. [102]
    Understanding the Mirai Botnet Attack Type - Corero Network Security
    The virus contains the attack vectors. Mirai has ten vectors that it can launch plus a scanner process that actively seeks new devices to compromise. The C&C ...
  103. [103]
    How is the Botnet Infections Risk Vector Observed?
    Botnet infections are observed by matching IP data, registering domains, and using methods like crawlers, honeypots, and sinkholes to intercept traffic.
  104. [104]
    Survey on Botnet Detection Techniques: Classification, Methods ...
    Apr 15, 2021 · Refers to detection during the botnet propagation or addressing phase, 0.7. Interaction, Refers to testing at the interactive stage, 0.5.
  105. [105]
    [PDF] Understanding the Mirai Botnet - USENIX
    Aug 16, 2017 · Mirai is a worm-like family of malware that infected. IoT devices and corralled them into a DDoS botnet. We provide a brief timeline of Mirai's ...
  106. [106]
    A Comprehensive Review of Obfuscated Malware Techniques
    May 5, 2025 · Malware now employs a variety of obfuscation techniques in the most complex and persistent attacks to hide the infection and function in ...<|separator|>
  107. [107]
    Simple malware obfuscation techniques - Infosec Institute
    Jul 23, 2020 · Exclusive OR (XOR)​​ XOR is the most commonly used technique for obfuscating any malware. Also, it is very simple to implement and can easily ...
  108. [108]
    Nymaim - obfuscation chronicles - WeLiveSecurity
    Aug 26, 2013 · The following figure highlights two of the most common obfuscated control flow techniques. The first red square is hiding a simple register ...Missing: botnet | Show results with:botnet
  109. [109]
    Metamorphic Malware and Obfuscation: A Survey of Techniques ...
    Sep 2, 2023 · Obfuscation: Malware employs the use of various obfuscation techniques, such as packing and encryption, in order to avoid signature-based ...
  110. [110]
    [PDF] Understanding the MIRAI botnet: scanning process, infection ...
    In conclusion, by employing obfuscation and anti-debugging techniques, MIRAI aims to increase its resilience against analysis, making it more difficult for ...
  111. [111]
    [PDF] Botnet Detection Techniques – An Analysis
    May 30, 2019 · When traffic is monitored for malware detection, bot uses binary obfuscation, to confuse the detector, similar anti-analysis, security ...
  112. [112]
    [PDF] Botnet Forensic Investigation Techniques and Cost Evaluation
    May 29, 2025 · The propagation method employed by Botnet masters has been moved from a push-based model where the malwares are commissioned to remotely intrude ...
  113. [113]
    Botnet Detection and Removal Best Practices| Indusface Blog
    Sep 4, 2025 · Botnets employ dynamic adaptation techniques to evade detection and mitigation efforts. This includes changing communication patterns, using ...
  114. [114]
    New action to disrupt world's largest online criminal network
    Mar 10, 2020 · Necurs is believed to be operated by criminals based in Russia and has also been used for a wide range of crimes including pump-and-dump stock ...
  115. [115]
    Has The Sun Set On The Necurs Botnet? - Shadowserver
    Mar 15, 2020 · Microsoft's Digital Crime Unit (DCU) announced a disruption action against a long-lived and very damaging virtual threat – the Necurs botnet.
  116. [116]
    An inside look at the global battle with botnets – On the Issues
    Jul 24, 2020 · ... Necurs, one of the world's largest botnets. It was a project ... using information gathered for ransom and financial crime. Cutwail ...Missing: famous Mirai Zeus<|separator|>
  117. [117]
    What is a botnet and how to protect networks from it | Group-IB
    In cybersecurity, botnets pose a significant threat because they can be leveraged to conduct coordinated attacks, steal sensitive data, and disseminate malware.
  118. [118]
    What Is a Botnet? | Botnet Uses, Examples, and Protection Tips
    With their vast global reach, advanced evasion tactics, encrypted communications, botnet attacks remain a pervasive and accessible threat—especially as open ...What Are Botnets Used For? · Examples Of Botnet Attacks · How To Protect Your...
  119. [119]
    Botnets in Cybercrime - Verpex
    Aug 11, 2025 · Botnets are highly versatile and have been used in financial fraud, phishing campaigns, DDoS attacks, and even assaults on critical ...
  120. [120]
    What is a botnet attack and how does it work? - DataDome
    Jun 15, 2022 · There are two different types of C&C servers: Centralized: A centralized C&C server follows a client-server bot herding model, in which a ...
  121. [121]
    PRC State-Sponsored Actors Compromise and Maintain Persistent ...
    Feb 7, 2024 · PRC state-sponsored cyber actors are seeking to pre-position themselves on IT networks for disruptive or destructive cyberattacks against US critical ...
  122. [122]
    U.S. Government Disrupts Botnet People's Republic of China Used ...
    Jan 31, 2024 · A December 2023 court-authorized operation has disrupted a botnet of hundreds of US-based small office/home office (SOHO) routers hijacked by People's Republic ...
  123. [123]
    FBI Director Announces Chinese Botnet Disruption, Exposes Flax ...
    Sep 18, 2024 · The FBI and our partners disrupted a Chinese botnet and freed thousands of impacted devices from its clutches, Director Christopher Wray announced September 18.
  124. [124]
    Massive China-state IoT botnet went undetected for four years—until ...
    Sep 18, 2024 · The FBI has dismantled a massive network of compromised devices that Chinese state-sponsored hackers have used for four years to mount attacks.
  125. [125]
    Justice Department Conducts Court-Authorized Disruption of Botnet ...
    Feb 15, 2024 · Non-GRU cybercriminals installed the Moobot malware on Ubiquiti Edge OS routers that still used publicly known default administrator passwords.<|control11|><|separator|>
  126. [126]
    NSA and Allies Issue Advisory about PRC-Linked Actors and Botnet ...
    Sep 18, 2024 · The actors create a botnet from these devices, which can be used to conceal their online activity, launch distributed denial of service (DDoS) ...
  127. [127]
    Cyber attacks against Estonia (2007) - Cyber Law Toolkit - CCDCOE
    Sep 17, 2021 · Allegations have been circulating about the support by the Russian Federation to the attack, always denied by the Russian government. Target ...
  128. [128]
    Iranians Charged with Hacking U.S. Financial Sector - FBI
    Mar 24, 2016 · Seven Iranians working on behalf of the Iranian government have been indicted for a series of cyber crimes that cost US financial institutions tens of millions ...Missing: attribution | Show results with:attribution
  129. [129]
    Seven Iranians Working for Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps ...
    Mar 24, 2016 · Fathi, Firoozi and Shokohi were responsible for ITSEC's portion of the DDoS campaign against the U.S. financial sector and are charged with one ...Missing: attribution | Show results with:attribution
  130. [130]
    HIDDEN COBRA – North Korea's DDoS Botnet Infrastructure | CISA
    Aug 23, 2017 · This alert provides technical details on the tools and infrastructure used by cyber actors of the North Korean government to target the media, aerospace, ...
  131. [131]
    Commodified Cybercrime Infrastructure - Trend Micro
    Sep 1, 2020 · Compromised assets are sold on online portals, underground forums, and dedicated marketplaces in social networks. Botnets for rent (regular PCs): ...
  132. [132]
    Botnet Business Models, Takedown Attempts, and the Darkweb Market
    Botnets account for a substantial portion of cybercrime. Botmasters utilize darkweb marketplaces to promote and provide their services, which can vary from ...
  133. [133]
    The cost of launching a DDoS attack - Securelist
    Mar 23, 2017 · A distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack is one of the most popular tools in the cybercriminal arsenal. The motives behind such attacks ...DDoS as a service · Rates for DDoS · Pricing: a “cloud” example
  134. [134]
    Cheap and nasty: How for $100 low-skilled ransom DDoS ... - Imperva
    Sep 1, 2021 · Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks capable of crippling network resources and websites can be rented online for as little as $5 an hour.
  135. [135]
    Botnet prices starting at £78 on dark web market - Digit.fyi
    Jul 4, 2024 · Botnets for hire or sale can be used for illegal activities such as cryptocurrency mining or ransomware attacks.
  136. [136]
    DDoS-as-a-Service: The Rebirth Botnet | Sysdig
    May 28, 2024 · In March 2024, the Sysdig Threat Research Team. discovered Rebirth - an increasingly popular DDoS-as-a-Service botnet.
  137. [137]
    Inside Russian Market: Uncovering the Botnet Empire | Rapid7 Labs
    Oct 7, 2025 · Russian Market and the dark web economy. With an average of approximately 30,000 “bots” offered for sale each month in the first half of 2025 ...
  138. [138]
    In the botnet underground market where botnet masters are price ...
    In the botnet underground market where botnet masters are price-takers, a decreased bot rental is suggested at the presence of virtual bots. Source publication.Missing: leasing | Show results with:leasing
  139. [139]
    DOJ Charges Six for DDoS-for-hire Services, Kills 48 Sites
    Dec 15, 2022 · The Department of Justice (DOJ) took control of 48 websites providing “booter” or “stresser” services, which let users launch destructive DDoS attacks cheaply ...
  140. [140]
    [PDF] Botnet business models, takedown attempts, and the darkweb market
    Botnets account for a substantial portion of cybercrime. Botmasters utilize darkweb marketplaces to promote and provide their services,.
  141. [141]
    What is a Botnet? Complete Technical Guide - JumpCloud
    Key Features and Components. Modern botnets incorporate sophisticated features that enhance their effectiveness and resilience against takedown efforts.
  142. [142]
    Inside the business model for botnets | MIT Technology Review
    May 14, 2018 · Spam advertising with 10,000 bots generates around $300,000 a month, and bank fraud with 30,000 bots can generate over $18 million per month.Missing: cybersecurity | Show results with:cybersecurity
  143. [143]
    The Hidden Economics of DDoS and Bot Attacks - RedShield Security
    May 19, 2025 · When people think of cybercrime, they often picture stolen records or ransomware. But the fastest-growing threat today isn't about theft.
  144. [144]
    Ransomware Protection: The Rise of Monetized Botnets - ColorTokens
    Sep 9, 2025 · Discover how monetized botnets hijack routers, cameras, and IoT devices for profit. And what are the ways to contain them.
  145. [145]
    [1804.10848] Business Model of a Botnet - arXiv
    Apr 28, 2018 · The objective of this research is to analyse the business model and determine the revenue stream of a botnet owner. We also study the botnet ...Missing: monetization cybersecurity
  146. [146]
    Botnet Detection - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Botnets have become one of the major security threats responsible for distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, spamming, phishing, identity theft, and ...
  147. [147]
  148. [148]
    (PDF) Botnet detection based on traffic behavior analysis and flow ...
    Aug 6, 2025 · In this paper, we propose a new approach to detect botnet activity based on traffic behavior analysis by classifying network traffic behavior using machine ...
  149. [149]
    Botnet Detection: Tools, Techniques, And How To Stop Digital Armies
    Aug 20, 2025 · 1. Network traffic analysis: · 2. DNS Sinkholing: Catching bots red-handed by diverting their calls · 3. Behavioral analysis: · 4. Endpoint ...Best Anti-Botnet Tools... · 4. Imperva Advanced Bot... · 7 Effective Botnet Detection...
  150. [150]
    The evolving threat landscape of botnets: Comprehensive analysis ...
    Botnets represent a significant and evolving cybersecurity threat, leveraging networks of compromised devices for various malicious activities, ...
  151. [151]
    Intelligent Detection and Analysis Techniques for Botnet Malicious ...
    Aug 4, 2024 · Botnet detection via mining of traffic flow characteristics​​ A new traffic flow behavior analysis method has been proposed to detect botnets ...
  152. [152]
    Explainable artificial intelligence for botnet detection in internet of ...
    Mar 4, 2025 · IoT Device Integrity: Botnet attacks exploit vulnerabilities in IoT devices, compromising their integrity and potentially turning them into ...Material And Methods · Integration Of Xai... · Experiments And Results
  153. [153]
    What is a Cyber Security Takedown and How Does It Work?
    For example, in the case of a botnet, the takedown might involve seizing the command and control servers that direct the activities of infected machines.
  154. [154]
    Hacker Lexicon: What Is Sinkholing? - WIRED
    Jan 2, 2018 · Sinkholing is a technique for manipulating data flow in a network; you redirect traffic from its intended destination to the server of your choosing.
  155. [155]
    What Is Sinkholing? How It Works & Examples - Twingate
    Aug 7, 2024 · Sinkholing is a cybersecurity technique used to redirect malicious traffic away from its intended target to a controlled environment.
  156. [156]
    The Value of Sinkholing: It's In the Numbers | Bitsight
    Oct 13, 2023 · The primary goal of sinkholing is to collect telemetry on worldwide infections. To measure how large a sinkholing operation is, it is essential to understand ...Missing: technique | Show results with:technique
  157. [157]
    Operation Endgame - Global Law Enforcement Malware Takedown
    May 30, 2024 · Operation Endgame was a widespread effort to disrupt malware and botnet operations. Learn how global law enforcement collaborated with ...
  158. [158]
    Law enforcement conducts 'largest ever' botnet takedown - TechTarget
    May 30, 2024 · Operation Endgame disrupted several malware droppers, including IcedID, SystemBC, Pikabot, Smokeloader and Bumblebee. Agencies also shut down ...<|separator|>
  159. [159]
    Emotet Botnet Disrupted in International Cyber Operation
    Jan 28, 2021 · Emotet Malware Infected More than 1.6 Million Victim Computers and Caused Hundreds of Millions of Dollars in Damage Worldwide.
  160. [160]
    World's most dangerous malware EMOTET disrupted through global ...
    Jan 27, 2021 · Law enforcement and judicial authorities worldwide have this week disrupted one of most significant botnets of the past decade: EMOTET.
  161. [161]
    Emotet Summary: November 2021 Through January 2022
    May 17, 2022 · Although a coordinated law enforcement effort shut down this malware in January 2021, Emotet resumed operations in November 2021. Since then, ...
  162. [162]
    Court-Authorized Operation Disrupts Worldwide Botnet Used by ...
    Sep 18, 2024 · Court-authorized operation disrupts worldwide botnet used by People's Republic of China state-sponsored hackers.Missing: examples | Show results with:examples
  163. [163]
    Successful Global Botnet Takedowns - Netscout
    Jul 13, 2023 · Most recently, in 2022 the U.S. Department of Justice successfully shut down a major Russian botnet called RSocks that was posing as a proxy ...
  164. [164]
    [PDF] Beheading Hydras: Performing Effective Botnet Takedowns
    Botnet takedowns involve disrupting the botnet's C&C infrastructure, often by seizing domains. The system rza helps analyze past takedowns and recommend future ...
  165. [165]
    Largest ever operation against botnets hits dropper malware ...
    May 29, 2024 · International operation shut down droppers including IcedID, SystemBC, Pikabot, Smokeloader and Bumblebee leading to four arrests and takedown of over 100 ...
  166. [166]
    Operation Endgame: Coordinated Worldwide Law Enforcement ... - FBI
    May 30, 2024 · Beginning on May 28, 2024, the first coordinated international operation of its kind involved a dozen countries that conducted searches ...Missing: botnet | Show results with:botnet
  167. [167]
    'Avalanche' network dismantled in international cyber operation
    The Avalanche network was used as a delivery platform to launch and manage mass global malware attacks and money mule recruiting campaigns.
  168. [168]
    Malware | Botnets disrupted worldwide...Operation Endgame is BACK
    May 23, 2025 · Following the progress initiated by May 2024's operation, which has since facilitated detentions and interrogations, as well as server takedowns ...
  169. [169]
    Qakbot Malware Disrupted in International Cyber Takedown
    Aug 29, 2023 · “An international partnership led by Justice Department and the FBI has resulted in the dismantling of Qakbot, one of the most notorious botnets ...
  170. [170]
    Microsoft, the FBI, Europol and industry partners disrupt the ...
    Dec 5, 2013 · Today's action is expected to significantly disrupt the botnet's operation, increasing the cost and risk for cybercriminals to continue doing ...
  171. [171]
    911 S5 Botnet Dismantled and Its Administrator Arrested in ...
    May 29, 2024 · A court-authorized international law enforcement operation led by the U.S. Justice Department disrupted a botnet used to commit cyber ...
  172. [172]
    [PDF] BOTNET TAKEDOWNS AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
    This Note examines the Fourth Amendment implications of the government's use of remote control of malware on private computers to neutralize botnets.
  173. [173]
    [PDF] Fourth Amendment Problems in the Fight Against Botnets
    Before Rule 41 was passed, the government conducted botnet takedowns under civil rather than criminal law—obtaining court orders instead of warrants.41 This ...
  174. [174]
    [PDF] Civil Cyberconflict: Microsoft, Cybercrime, and Botnets
    May 27, 2015 · As each botnet takedown was successfully pursued through legal means, the cumulative nature of prior cases built stronger precedent for the ...
  175. [175]
    Why Current Botnet Takedown Jurisprudence Should Not ... - Lawfare
    Jul 21, 2021 · In this short post, we explore what is now a decade-long history of civil case law pushed forward by Microsoft in its fight against botnets.
  176. [176]
    Botnet Takedown Guide: Strategies for Disrupting Cyber Threats
    Dec 24, 2023 · Obtaining Warrants and Legal Authority: Conducting a botnet takedown often involves activities that need legal authorization, such as ...
  177. [177]
    (PDF) A Case Study in Ethical Decision Making Regarding Remote ...
    Aug 7, 2025 · We review two case studies of long-lived malicious bot- nets that present serious challenges to researchers and responders and use them to illuminate many ...
  178. [178]
    Vigilante botnet infects IoT devices before blackhats can hijack them
    Apr 18, 2017 · This design makes it more resistant to takedowns by ISPs and Internet backbone providers. ... illegal in most jurisdictions around the world. For ...Missing: legality | Show results with:legality
  179. [179]
    Botnet Takedowns Spur Debate Over Effectiveness, Ethics
    Attempts to shut down botnets have often failed to cripple the networks, but have led to improved legal strategies, greater public awareness, and stronger ...
  180. [180]
    Botnet defense under EU data protection law - ScienceDirect.com
    We analyse the legal framework spanned by EU data protection law with respect to the defence against botnet-related threats.
  181. [181]
    Why Botnets Persist: Designing Effective Technical and Policy ...
    Sep 6, 2019 · This paper (linked below) examines why botnets have remained a persistent feature of the Internet despite decades of interventions by security researchers.
  182. [182]
    Embracing the Messiness of Public-Private Collaboration in ... - RAND
    Aug 16, 2023 · Attribution, or identifying perpetrators, is notoriously difficult, and both states and criminals can develop and deploy botnets with relative ...
  183. [183]
    A survey of cyber threat attribution: Challenges, techniques, and ...
    Yet attribution today faces existential challenges. Adversaries employ AI-driven obfuscation, exploit jurisdictional arbitrage, and manipulate geopolitical ...
  184. [184]
    Breaking botnets: A quantitative analysis of individual, technical ...
    Apr 10, 2021 · Both states and nonstate actors use botnets to surreptitiously control the combined computing power of infected devices to engage in espionage, ...Missing: sponsored | Show results with:sponsored
  185. [185]
    The Attribution Dividend: Protecting Critical Infrastructure from Cyber ...
    Oct 9, 2024 · Geopolitical confrontation and tension beyond cyberspace with major threat actors have largely exhausted sanctions.
  186. [186]
    China refutes US attribution of Volt Typhoon operation - SC Media
    Oct 15, 2024 · Hacking operation Volt Typhoon's link to China as asserted by the U.S. has been dismissed by the country's National Computer Virus Emergency ...
  187. [187]
    Cyber Operations Tracker - Council on Foreign Relations
    Since 2005, thirty-four countries are suspected of sponsoring cyber operations. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea sponsored 77 percent of all suspected ...Targeting of South Korea with... · Ukrainian IT Army · Flax Typhoon · Volt Typhoon
  188. [188]
    The Cybersecurity Strategies Of China, Russia, North Korea, And Iran
    Aug 1, 2024 · For example, Chinese and Russian cyber actors have been known to share malware and exploit kits, enabling more sophisticated attacks.Missing: botnets | Show results with:botnets
  189. [189]
  190. [190]
    Geopolitics of Cyber Attribution
    Jan 31, 2023 · Cyber-attribution has several complexities that transform the issue into a geopolitical tool and an avenue for diplomacy between nations. Cyber ...
  191. [191]
    Attributing cyber operations under International law: Political and ...
    Jun 4, 2025 · Thus, the solution to the problem of attributing non-state actors to the state for cyber conduct may not be in lowering the standard of control.
  192. [192]
    Active Exploitation: New Aquabot Variant Phones Home - Akamai
    Jan 28, 2025 · The Akamai SIRT has uncovered a new Mirai-based Aquabot variant being spread by exploiting a command injection vulnerability in Mitel SIP ...