Malware Presence Confirmation
PCAP traffic Analysis
Introduction
In today’s digital world, cyber threats such as malware have become increasingly sophisticated and difficult to detect. Malware often operates silently within a system, communicating with external servers and performing malicious activities without the user’s knowledge. Detecting such threats requires careful analysis of network traffic and communication patterns.
This blog focuses on identifying malware presence using PCAP traffic analysis. By analyzing captured packets using Wireshark, suspicious communication patterns and malicious behaviors are detected effectively.
Through this structured analysis, multiple indicators of malicious activity are identified, including encoded data transmission, repeated DNS queries, and automated communication patterns. These findings collectively confirm the presence of malware within the captured network traffic.
Objectives
- Understanding the structure and contents of network packets within a PCAP file
- Identifying abnormal communication patterns such as repeated requests, unusual domains, and unexpected protocols
- Detecting potential command-and-control (C2) communication between an infected host and external servers
- Analyzing protocol behavior including HTTP, DNS, TCP, and UDP interactions
- Extracting indicators of compromise (IoCs) such as suspicious IP addresses and domains
PCAP Source
https://www.malware-traffic-analysis.net/2025/06/13/2025-06-13-traffic-analysis-exercise.pcap.zip
🔐 Note: This PCAP file is password protected.
Password: infected_20250613
Procedure
Step 1: Download the PCAP file
Step 2: Open the pcap in Wireshark
Step 3: Apply filters to look for suspicious traffic
Step 4: Look for domains that appear near Cloudfare.com
Step 5: Pivot on Suspicious domain on urlscan.io and check if it is there in pcap
Step 6: Track down victim host and use chrome cache view to confirm traffic
Inferences (Proof of Malware Presence)
1. Suspicious DNS queries to unknown domains
Multiple DNS queries were observed targeting uncommon and non-human readable domains. These domains do not match typical browsing behavior. Such patterns indicate possible malware attempting to contact command-and-control servers.
2. Repeated communication with a single external IP
The infected system repeatedly communicated with a specific external IP address. This behavior suggests beaconing activity. It is commonly seen in malware maintaining persistent connection with attacker servers.
3. High frequency DNS requests in short intervals
A burst of DNS queries was detected within a very short time span. This is unusual for normal users. It indicates automated scripts or malware generating traffic.
4. Presence of suspicious HTTP requests
HTTP requests contained unusual URLs and parameters. These requests did not resemble standard browsing activity. Such behavior often indicates data exfiltration or malware callbacks.
5. Suspicious HTTP POST request with binary payload
A HTTP POST request was observed with the content type set to application/octet-stream, indicating transmission of raw binary data. This type of communication is not typical in normal browsing and is commonly associated with malware activity.
The request URI appears random and lacks meaningful structure, suggesting obfuscation techniques used by malicious programs. Such behavior is often seen in command-and-control (C2) communication to evade detection.
Additionally, the large content length indicates possible data exfiltration or payload transfer. This strongly supports the presence of malware within the captured network traffic.
6. TCP stream shows encoded or obfuscated data
The TCP stream revealed unreadable or encoded payloads. This indicates encryption or obfuscation. Malware commonly hides communication content this way.
7. Asymmetric traffic pattern indicating possible data exfiltration
The traffic shows a significant imbalance between outgoing and incoming data. The system appears to send more data than it receives.
Normal browsing behavior usually involves downloading more data than uploading. This reversed pattern suggests potential data exfiltration.
Such asymmetry is a strong indicator of malicious data transmission from the infected system.
8. Repeated failed connection attempts
Several connection attempts failed repeatedly. This indicates the system trying to reach unavailable servers. It is typical of malware trying multiple C2 servers.
9. DNS responses with multiple IP mappings
Some domains resolved to multiple IP addresses. This behavior is often associated with fast-flux networks. Malware uses this technique to avoid blocking.
10. Sudden spikes in network traffic (IO Graph)
The IO graph displayed sharp spikes in traffic volume. This indicates bursts of activity. Such spikes are typical during malware communication or data transfer.
11. Presence of suspicious domain patterns
Domains appeared random or algorithmically generated. These are known as DGA (Domain Generation Algorithm) domains. Malware uses them to dynamically connect to servers.
12. Absence of user-triggered events in network activity
The network traffic does not show any correlation with user-driven actions such as browsing or file downloads. Instead, communication appears continuous and independent of user activity.
This indicates that the traffic is generated by background processes rather than direct user interaction.
Such behavior is characteristic of malware operating silently within the system.
13. Frequent small packets indicating beaconing
Small packets were sent at regular intervals. This is characteristic of beaconing behavior. Malware uses this to check connectivity with servers.
14. Unusual session durations
Some sessions were extremely short or excessively long. This inconsistency is abnormal. It suggests automated processes rather than human activity.
15. Suspicious TLS/SSL handshake patterns
Encrypted sessions showed irregular handshake patterns. This indicates non-standard implementations. Malware often uses custom encryption methods.
16. Communication with known malicious IP ranges
Some IPs matched suspicious or unknown geographic regions. These are often flagged in threat intelligence. Malware typically communicates with such servers.
17. DNS tunneling behavior suspected
DNS queries contained unusually long strings. This may indicate tunneling. Malware uses DNS to bypass firewall restrictions.
18. Inconsistent protocol usage observed through DCERPC traffic
Upon applying a TCP filter, the traffic revealed the presence of DCERPC (Distributed Computing Environment / Remote Procedure Call) protocol. This is unusual, as typical user-generated traffic primarily involves HTTP, HTTPS, or DNS protocols.
DCERPC is generally associated with Windows internal services such as remote procedure calls and Active Directory operations, and is not commonly observed in standard browsing scenarios.
The presence of such protocol activity in this context indicates non-standard communication behavior, possibly suggesting system-level interactions or lateral movement attempts, which are commonly associated with malware activity.
19. Multiple connections to same domain in quick succession
The system repeatedly contacted the same domain rapidly. This suggests automated scripts. It is typical in malware communication loops.
20. Repeated DNS queries observed over UDP communication
The UDP stream reveals repeated DNS queries for the domain www.truglomedspa.com. The same query appears multiple times within a short interval, indicating a lack of caching behavior.
In normal systems, DNS responses are cached to avoid repeated queries. The absence of caching suggests that the traffic is generated by an automated process rather than a human user.
Such repetitive DNS communication is a common indicator of malware activity, particularly in cases involving beaconing or command-and-control communication.
Effects of Malware
Data theft
Malware can secretly access sensitive information such as passwords, personal files, and system data. This data is then transmitted to remote attackers without user consent. It leads to serious privacy and security risks. Users may lose control over their confidential information.
System slowdown
Malware often runs hidden processes in the background that consume CPU and memory resources. This reduces overall system performance and makes the device slow and unresponsive. Even basic tasks may take longer to execute. In severe cases, the system may frequently freeze or crash.
Unauthorized access
Some malware creates backdoors in the system, allowing attackers to gain remote access. This means the attacker can control the system without the user’s permission. It can lead to installation of more malicious tools. The system becomes completely compromised.
Network congestion
Malware may generate continuous or abnormal network traffic in the background. This increases bandwidth usage and causes network slowdown. It can affect other devices connected to the same network. Legitimate network services may become unstable.
Spread to other devices
Some malware is self-replicating and can spread across connected systems. It may use shared networks, USB devices, or vulnerabilities to infect other machines. This leads to wider infection across an organization. Containment becomes more difficult over time.
New Findings
1. Detection of Domain Generation Algorithm (DGA) behavior
Certain domains appeared randomly generated and lacked meaningful structure. This indicates the use of DGA by malware to evade detection. Such domains are dynamically generated and frequently changed.
2. Evidence of stealthy beaconing intervals
The time gap between repeated requests followed a consistent pattern. This suggests controlled beaconing behavior. It indicates that the malware is programmed to communicate periodically with its server.
3. Possible encrypted payload delivery
Analysis of TCP streams revealed encoded or encrypted data segments. This suggests payload delivery or command exchange. Malware commonly uses encryption to avoid detection.
4. Identification of potential fallback servers
Multiple domains and IPs were contacted sequentially. This indicates fallback mechanisms in case primary servers fail. Such redundancy is a strong indicator of advanced malware design.
The Use of AI Tools
Understanding Concepts Faster
I used AI tools to quickly understand complex topics related to malware analysis and network traffic. It helped me break down difficult concepts into simple explanations, saving a lot of time during research.
Generating Structured Content
AI assisted me in organizing my blog into proper sections such as introduction, effects, and analysis. It helped maintain a clear flow and professional structure throughout the report.
Improving Technical Writing
AI helped refine my technical writing by improving grammar, clarity, and sentence formation. It made my content more readable and suitable for academic submission.
Assistance in Wireshark Analysis
AI guided me in understanding how to filter and analyze PCAP files in Wireshark. It helped identify suspicious patterns like unusual UDP traffic and external IP communication.
Debugging and Code Support
AI was used to fix HTML/CSS issues in my blog structure. It helped ensure proper layout alignment, styling consistency, and responsive design improvements.
Enhancing Presentation Quality
AI helped me improve the overall presentation of my project by suggesting better formatting, headings, and visualization ideas for screenshots and explanations.
Time Efficiency
By using AI tools, I was able to complete research, documentation, and formatting in significantly less time. This allowed me to focus more on analysis rather than manual writing work.
Conclusion
The analysis of the captured PCAP file using Wireshark clearly indicates the presence of suspicious and abnormal network activities that are consistent with malware behavior. Through detailed inspection of packet flows, it was observed that the infected system was communicating with external and unknown IP addresses using unusual traffic patterns, especially over UDP protocol.
These findings suggest possible malicious actions such as data exfiltration, unauthorized communication, and background command-and-control (C2) activity. The continuous and irregular packet exchanges highlight that the system is not operating under normal conditions and may be compromised by malware.
Furthermore, the analysis demonstrates how malware can remain hidden within network traffic while still affecting system performance, security, and privacy. It also shows the importance of using tools like Wireshark for packet-level inspection to detect threats that may not be visible through traditional system monitoring methods.
In conclusion, this study successfully identifies potential malware infection patterns through network traffic analysis. It emphasizes the critical need for continuous network monitoring and proper cybersecurity practices to prevent such threats in real-world environments.
References & Links
Malware Traffic Analysis Reference
PCAP dataset and malware traffic study reference used for analysis:
View Malware Traffic Analysis DatasetAcknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the School of Computer Science and Engineering (SCOPE), Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, for offering comprehensive theory and laboratory courses in Computer Networks during the Winter Semester 2025–2026, designed in alignment with industry standards.
I am especially thankful to my faculty member, Dr. T. Subbulakshmi, for providing me with the opportunity to work on this data analysis assignment and for her invaluable guidance and support throughout the course. This project has greatly contributed to enhancing my practical understanding of network protocols, cybersecurity concepts, and real-world malware behavior.
I would also like to acknowledge Gerald Combs, recipient of the ACM Software System Award (2018), for developing Wireshark, an exceptional tool that played a crucial role in network traffic analysis. My appreciation also extends to Bradley Duncan for his insightful blogs on malware analysis, which served as valuable learning resources and guidance for this project.
I am grateful to my peers for their constructive suggestions and engaging discussions, as well as to my friends for their support during the completion of this assignment. I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to my family for their constant encouragement and unwavering support.
Finally, I acknowledge the use of AI-assisted tools, which contributed to structuring the analysis effectively and improving clarity in interpreting complex network data.
Contributor Details
Author
Mr. Lavish Jha
II Year B.Tech. CSE Student
School of Computer Science and Engineering (SCOPE)
Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai
Date Published:
12 April 2026




















A very insightful analysis that clearly connects multiple network indicators to confirm malware presence, showing strong practical understanding of real-world traffic behavior.
ReplyDeleteGreat job, Lavish. The combination of theory and practical demonstration shows a strong understanding of malware traffic behavior.
ReplyDeleteGreat work Lavish.. I enjoyed reading the blog and understanding about the different inferences.. Your hardwork definitely paid off.. Keep shining..
ReplyDeleteVery insightful blog! The use of Wireshark to identify suspicious patterns and anomalies is clearly demonstrated. The step-by-step approach makes even complex analysis easy to follow
ReplyDeleteGreat work, Lavish. The explanations are simple yet effective, and the Wireshark demonstration made the concept easy to understand..
ReplyDeletethis is great work! Dropping the exact Wireshark filters in the post makes it super helpful if anyone wants to try and replicate it. Using the DHCP fingerprinting to confirm the infected host was a really smart catch too
ReplyDeleteWow, even though i have good amount of prior experience with Wireshark, still leaned a lot of new things through this blog. You certainly didn't disappoint Lavish. Now, Keep the blogs coming..
ReplyDeleteExcellent structure and clarity throughout. The Wireshark demonstration really helped in understanding the traffic patterns effectively.
ReplyDeleteThis is really good, your use of Wireshark is clear and well explained. I liked how you connected multiple indicators instead of just one, it makes the analysis feel more complete. Great job!
ReplyDeleteThis is a fantastic breakdown of malware presence confirmation! It's crazy how much noise malware generates when you know exactly what to look for, like those high-frequency DNS bursts and DCERPC traffic anomalies.
ReplyDeleteExcellent work done in limited time frame . Wireshark demo helped in understanding the traffic patterns effectively.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, this clearly explains how malware can persist at the root level and evade traditional detection methods. The focus on confirming presence is especially important since such threats can survive reboots and operate silently adding a few practical tools or beginner friendly validation steps would make it even more useful.
ReplyDelete