Executive Summary
Between January and April 2026, we uncovered a coordinated social engineering operation that leveraged external Microsoft Teams accounts to masquerade as IT help desk personnel. Our telemetry reveals that this operation targeted more than 150 employees across at least 10 companies in various industries. We call this activity Spring Ring.
What seems like a benign chat is in fact a voice phishing (vishing) call, during which adversaries try to coerce victims into executing remote monitoring and management (RMM) tools or custom malware. In a more advanced variant, attackers transitioned from a vishing call to a full-blown Microsoft NT LAN Manager (NTLM) relay attack aimed at an organization's domain controller (DC).
We provide a technical breakdown of this operation’s attack lifecycle across two observed campaigns, both illustrating vishing manipulation that resulted in the attempted payload delivery via two distinct attack vectors.
These two campaigns demonstrate the weaponization of communication platforms as identity becomes a primary attack vector.
Palo Alto Networks customers are better protected from the threats described here through the following products and services:
- Advanced URL Filtering and Advanced DNS Security
- Cortex XDR and XSIAM
- Cortex Advanced Email Security
- Cortex Cloud Identity Threat Detection
- Idira Threat Detection and Response (ITDR)
- Idira Endpoint Privileged Manager (EPM)
- Idira Privileged Access Management (PAM)
- Idira Secure Infrastructure Access (SIA)
If you think you might have been compromised or have an urgent matter, contact the Unit 42 Incident Response team.
| Related Unit 42 Topics | Phishing, Identity, Social Engineering |
Overview: The Trust Gap
Spring Ring’s activity mirrors a broader trend in the threat landscape toward social engineering campaigns. According to our recently published Insights blog, threat actors have increasingly moved away from traditional phishing techniques toward trusted collaboration tools.
In the first four months of 2026, phishing alerts from collaboration tools represented 42% of all phishing alerts in Cortex, up from 30% of all phishing alerts in the preceding four months. In addition, according to KnowBe4’s Phishing Threat Trends Report, Teams-based attacks rose by 41% [PDF] between October 2025 and March 2026. They note that this surge is driven by attackers exploiting the platform's default “Chat with Anyone” feature to initiate direct chats with users outside their organization.
Previous Teams-based attacks, such as those by Cloaked Ursa (aka APT29), focused on credential harvesting and group chat-based social engineering. They often relied on malicious links or fake Entra ID tenants to appear legitimate.
Spring Ring’s approach relies on active human voice interaction. In this way, attackers can evade detection without a software exploit. Instead, they rely on exploiting the trust that employees place in software as a service (SaaS) collaboration platforms.
SaaS Applications: The New High-Value Target
SaaS applications are essential for business operations, storing an organization’s most critical and sensitive data. Unlike email, where users are trained to look for external sender banners or suspicious links, communications platforms provide a closed loop that attackers exploit by:
- Leveraging platform trust: People are more likely to engage with a message from a help desk identity than a random email from an external domain
- Exploiting human interaction: A professional voice on an audio call creates a level of trust that is difficult to manufacture in text, making the victim more susceptible to manipulation
- Bypassing the monitoring gap: Voice calls are often less monitored, recorded or documented than employees’ digital file operations or email histories, providing attackers with a secluded environment to execute their lures
The Evolution of Collaboration Attacks
The Spring Ring operation represents an evolution from previous campaigns by merging vishing into the Teams workflow. This shift moves the attack from a passive click-and-harvest model to a real-time engagement.
Attackers can then pivot based on the victim's responses. Once the trust gap is crossed, the path to domain-level privileges via open-source tools like PetitPotam is short.
Figure 1 shows an example of the warning that Teams users get when an external identity creates a chat with them.
Anatomy of Spring Ring: How Attackers Masquerade as Internal Support
The Spring Ring campaigns are a coordinated operation that relies on impersonating corporate IT structures. Attackers can drop their lures into a victim's primary communication channel using external Microsoft Teams accounts.
The Discovery: Spotting the Pattern
Our investigation into this activity began after the release of a new detection suite for Microsoft Teams. By monitoring these alerts, we identified a suspicious pattern of chat creation across multiple tenants. Further investigation into these alerts led to the initial discovery of 26 distinct identities approaching targets across different organizations.
The Initial Hook: Crafted Personas and Domains
The attack begins with creating a Microsoft Teams chat using identities designed to mirror legitimate internal support units. The attackers opt for professional, urgency-focused display names such as help desk, IT assistance or support staff.
To strengthen the impression of legitimacy, the attackers operate from external .onmicrosoft[.]com tenants. These are meant to resemble legitimate corporate infrastructure. They are used by attackers to provision Microsoft 365 tenants. The subdomains are controlled by the adversaries.
Threat actors frequently abuse or subvert legitimate products for malicious purposes. This does not indicate that the product itself is flawed or compromised. Unit 42 has no evidence of any compromise or vulnerability within Microsoft's product related to this campaign.
|
1 2 |
whoami/groups net group/dom |
| Feature | Campaign A | Campaign B |
| Initial Lure | Microsoft Teams vishing | Microsoft Teams vishing |
| Primary Delivery | RMM tools | Tailored hosting infrastructure executables |
| Stealth Mechanism | Obfuscated PowerShell | Headless Microsoft Edge and sideloaded extension |
| Lateral Movement | Basic enumeration only | PetitPotam NTLM relay |
| Alert Name | Alert Source | MITRE ATT&CK Technique |
| External user started a Microsoft Teams conversation | XDR Analytics, Identity Threats | Phishing (T1566) |
| External user created a Microsoft Teams conversation with suspicious operations | XDR Analytics, Identity Threats | Phishing (T1566) |
| External user added a link to a Microsoft Teams chat | XDR Analytics, Identity Threats | Phishing (T1566) |
| External user call via Microsoft Teams | XDR Analytics, Identity Threats | Phishing: Spearphishing Voice (T1566.004) |
| Rare process execution by user | XDR Analytics, UEBA | User Execution (T1204) |
| Rare process execution in organization | XDR Analytics, UEBA | User Execution (T1204) |
| Multiple rare process executions in organization | XDR Analytics, UEBA | User Execution (T1204) |
| A process connected to an atypical rare cloud resource | XDR Analytics | Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) |
| Uncommon local scheduled task created | XDR Analytics | Scheduled Task/Job (T1053) |
| A browser was forced to load an extension using a special command-line argument | XDR Analytics | Software Extensions: Browser Extensions (T1176.001) |
| Uncommon browser extension loaded | XDR Analytics | Software Extensions: Browser Extensions (T1176.001) |
| SMB traffic from non-standard process | XDR Analytics | Network Service Discovery (T1046) |
| Rare NTLM access by user to host | XDR Analytics, UEBA | Use Alternate Authentication Material (T1550) |
| Unusual Encrypting File System Remote Protocol call (EFSRPC) to domain controller | XDR Analytics, UEBA | Forced Authentication (T1187) |
| Possible authentication coercion to a sensitive server | XDR Analytics, UEBA | Forced Authentication (T1187) |
| Possible Distributed File System Namespace Management (DFSNM) abuse | XDR Analytics | Forced Authentication (T1187) |
| Possible authentication coercion | XDR Analytics, UEBA | Forced Authentication (T1187) |