Class: Adware
Adware covers programs designed to display advertisements (usually in the form of banners), redirect search requests to advertising websites, and collect marketing-type data about the user (e.g. which types of websites s/he visits) in order to display customized advertising on the computer. Other than displaying advertisements and collecting data, these types of program generally do not make their presence in the system known: there will be no signs of the program in the system tray, and no indication in the program menu that files have been installed. Often, Adware programs do not have any uninstall procedures and use technologies which border on virus technology to help the program stealthily penetrate the computer and run unnoticed. Penetration There are two main ways in which Adware gets onto a user’s computer: it is built-in to some freeware and shareware programs unauthorized installation to a user’s computer as a result of a visit to an infected website. Most freeware and shareware programs stop displaying advertisements once they have been purchased and/or registered. But these programs often use built-in third-party Adware utilities, and in some cases, these utilities remain installed on the user’s computer even once the programs have been registered. Furthermore, removing the Adware component, which is still being used by a program to display advertisements, could cause the program to malfunction. The main purpose of Adware spread via the first method is to extract a type of payment for the software by showing advertisements to the user (the parties who make the advertisements pay the advertising agency, and the advertising agency pays the Adware developer). Adware also helps cut expenses for software developers (revenue from Adware encourages them to write new programs and improve existing ones), and it helps cut costs for users, too. Hacker technologies are often used when advertising components are installed on a user’s computer following a visit to an infected website. For instance, the computer can be penetrated via a browser vulnerability and Trojans designed to stealthily install (Trojan-Downloader or Trojan-Dropper) can be used. Adware programs that work in this way are often called Browser Hijackers. Displaying advertisements There are two main ways in which advertising is shown to the user: by downloading advertising text and images to a computer from web or FTP servers owned by the advertiser redirecting Internet browser search requests to advertising websites. In some cases, redirect requests takes place only if the user’s requested web page is not available i.e. if is an error in the URL. Collecting data In addition to displaying advertisements, many advertising systems also collect data about the computer and the user, such as: the computer’s IP address the operating system and browser version a list of the most frequently visited sites search queries other data that may be used to conduct subsequent advertising campaigns. Note: it is important not to confuse Adware that collects data with Trojan spyware programs. The difference is that Adware collects data with the user’s consent. If Adware does not notify the user that it is gathering information, then it is classified as a malicious program (Malware), specifically covered by the Trojan-Spy behaviour.Read more
Platform: Win32
Win32 is an API on Windows NT-based operating systems (Windows XP, Windows 7, etc.) that supports execution of 32-bit applications. One of the most widespread programming platforms in the world.Family: Adware.Win32.DealPly
No family descriptionExamples
9E89D732B61366157DC84A43AF9996B3Tactics and Techniques: Mitre*
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
An adversary may rely upon a user opening a malicious file in order to gain execution. Users may be subjected to social engineering to get them to open a file that will lead to code execution. This user action will typically be observed as follow-on behavior from Spearphishing Attachment. Adversaries may use several types of files that require a user to execute them, including .doc, .pdf, .xls, .rtf, .scr, .exe, .lnk, .pif, and .cpl.
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
Adversaries may achieve persistence by adding a program to a startup folder or referencing it with a Registry run key. Adding an entry to the “run keys” in the Registry or startup folder will cause the program referenced to be executed when a user logs in. These programs will be executed under the context of the user and will have the account’s associated permissions level.
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
Adversaries may abuse the at utility to perform task scheduling for initial or recurring execution of malicious code. The at utility exists as an executable within Windows, Linux, and macOS for scheduling tasks at a specified time and date. Although deprecated in favor of Scheduled Task’s schtasks in Windows environments, using at requires that the Task Scheduler service be running, and the user to be logged on as a member of the local Administrators group.
Adversaries may achieve persistence by adding a program to a startup folder or referencing it with a Registry run key. Adding an entry to the “run keys” in the Registry or startup folder will cause the program referenced to be executed when a user logs in. These programs will be executed under the context of the user and will have the account’s associated permissions level.
Adversaries may attempt to manipulate features of their artifacts to make them appear legitimate or benign to users and/or security tools. Masquerading occurs when the name or location of an object, legitimate or malicious, is manipulated or abused for the sake of evading defenses and observation. This may include manipulating file metadata, tricking users into misidentifying the file type, and giving legitimate task or service names.
Adversaries may attempt to manipulate features of their artifacts to make them appear legitimate or benign to users and/or security tools. Masquerading occurs when the name or location of an object, legitimate or malicious, is manipulated or abused for the sake of evading defenses and observation. This may include manipulating file metadata, tricking users into misidentifying the file type, and giving legitimate task or service names.
Adversaries may match or approximate the name or location of legitimate files or resources when naming/placing them. This is done for the sake of evading defenses and observation. This may be done by placing an executable in a commonly trusted directory (ex: under System32) or giving it the name of a legitimate, trusted program (ex: svchost.exe). In containerized environments, this may also be done by creating a resource in a namespace that matches the naming convention of a container pod or cluster. Alternatively, a file or container image name given may be a close approximation to legitimate programs/images or something innocuous.
Adversaries may masquerade malicious payloads as legitimate files through changes to the payload’s formatting, including the file’s signature, extension, and contents. Various file types have a typical standard format, including how they are encoded and organized. For example, a file’s signature (also known as header or magic bytes) is the beginning bytes of a file and is often used to identify the file’s type. For example, the header of a JPEG file, is 0xFF 0xD8 and the file extension is either `.JPE`, `.JPEG` or `.JPG`.
Adversaries may inject code into processes in order to evade process-based defenses as well as possibly elevate privileges. Process injection is a method of executing arbitrary code in the address space of a separate live process. Running code in the context of another process may allow access to the process’s memory, system/network resources, and possibly elevated privileges. Execution via process injection may also evade detection from security products since the execution is masked under a legitimate process.
Adversaries may interact with the Windows Registry to hide configuration information within Registry keys, remove information as part of cleaning up, or as part of other techniques to aid in persistence and execution.
Adversaries may set files and directories to be hidden to evade detection mechanisms. To prevent normal users from accidentally changing special files on a system, most operating systems have the concept of a ‘hidden’ file. These files don’t show up when a user browses the file system with a GUI or when using normal commands on the command line. Users must explicitly ask to show the hidden files either via a series of Graphical User Interface (GUI) prompts or with command line switches (dir /a for Windows and ls –a for Linux and macOS).
Adversaries may attempt to identify the primary user, currently logged in user, set of users that commonly uses a system, or whether a user is actively using the system. They may do this, for example, by retrieving account usernames or by using OS Credential Dumping. The information may be collected in a number of different ways using other Discovery techniques, because user and username details are prevalent throughout a system and include running process ownership, file/directory ownership, session information, and system logs. Adversaries may use the information from System Owner/User Discovery during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions.
Adversaries may attempt to identify the primary user, currently logged in user, set of users that commonly uses a system, or whether a user is actively using the system. They may do this, for example, by retrieving account usernames or by using OS Credential Dumping. The information may be collected in a number of different ways using other Discovery techniques, because user and username details are prevalent throughout a system and include running process ownership, file/directory ownership, session information, and system logs. Adversaries may use the information from System Owner/User Discovery during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions.
* © 2025 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation.