Gh0st RAT Scenario: Financial Firm Espionage

Gh0st RAT Scenario: Financial Firm EspionagePre-Defined Response Options

Eastbridge Capital Management: Investment management firm, 1,200 employees, $50B AUM

Financial Espionage • Gh0st RAT

STAKES

Client investment data + Proprietary trading models + Merger strategy confidentiality + Market integrity

HOOK

Senior executives report unauthorized cursor movement, spontaneous document opens, and off-hours access to confidential merger materials. Security telemetry shows persistent remote-control sessions and silent data transfers from executive workstations.

PRESSURE

Merger committee decision due by 5:00 PM - Potential market-abuse escalation under SEC and FINRA

FRONT • 150-170 minutes • Expert

Eastbridge Capital Management: Investment management firm, 1,200 employees, $50B AUM

Financial Espionage • Gh0st RAT

NPCs

• Victoria Sloane (Managing Director): Leading transaction strategy while deciding whether to delay the merger process
• Kevin Park (CTO): Coordinating endpoint containment and secure executive communications
• Thomas Wright (CISO): Running forensic triage, evidence preservation, and regulator-ready reporting workflows
• Dr. Andrea Chen (Head of Quantitative Research): Confirming exposure of algorithmic signal research and model assumptions

SECRETS

• Executives reused personal macros in merger prep documents to speed collaboration
• Endpoint hardening exceptions were granted for senior staff laptops during travel weeks
• Trade-surveillance alert thresholds were relaxed to reduce false positives during earnings season

Eastbridge Capital Management is operating as a Investment management firm, 1,200 employees, $50B AUM while preparing a market-sensitive merger decision.

Gh0st RAT Scenario: Financial Firm Espionage

Sakura Securities: Securities firm, 2,000 employees, TSE member, ¥4T AUM

Financial Espionage • Gh0st RAT

STAKES

Client investment data + Proprietary trading models + Merger strategy confidentiality + Market integrity

HOOK

Senior executives report unauthorized cursor movement, spontaneous document opens, and off-hours access to confidential merger materials. Security telemetry shows persistent remote-control sessions and silent data transfers from executive workstations.

PRESSURE

Merger committee decision due by 17:00 - Potential market-abuse escalation under FSA and JSDA

FRONT • 150-170 minutes • Expert

Sakura Securities: Securities firm, 2,000 employees, TSE member, ¥4T AUM

Financial Espionage • Gh0st RAT

NPCs

• Kenji Nakamura (Managing Director): Leading transaction strategy while deciding whether to delay the merger process
• Ryota Sato (CTO): Coordinating endpoint containment and secure executive communications
• Haruka Kobayashi (CISO): Running forensic triage, evidence preservation, and regulator-ready reporting workflows
• Dr. Mei Takahashi (Head of Quantitative Research): Confirming exposure of algorithmic signal research and model assumptions

SECRETS

• Executives reused personal macros in merger prep documents to speed collaboration
• Endpoint hardening exceptions were granted for senior staff laptops during travel weeks
• Trade-surveillance alert thresholds were relaxed to reduce false positives during earnings season

Sakura Securities is operating as a Securities firm, 2,000 employees, TSE member, ¥4T AUM while preparing a market-sensitive merger decision.

Planning Resources

Tip📋 Comprehensive Facilitation Guide Available

For detailed session preparation support, including game configuration templates, investigation timelines, response options matrix, and round-by-round facilitation guidance, see:

Gh0st RAT Financial Firm Espionage Planning Document

Planning documents provide 30-minute structured preparation for first-time IMs, or quick-reference support for experienced facilitators.

Note🎬 Interactive Scenario Slides

Ready-to-present RevealJS slides with player-safe mode, session tracking, and IM facilitation notes:

Gh0st RAT Financial Firm Espionage Scenario Slides

Press ‘P’ to toggle player-safe mode • Built-in session state tracking • Dark/light theme support

Scenario Details for IMs

Hook

“It is Monday morning at Eastbridge Capital Management. During merger-prep meetings, executives see cursors move with no user input and confidential files open on their own. The SOC flags outbound encrypted sessions from executive devices to unknown infrastructure, and workstation logs show repeated off-hours access to valuation models and trading strategy folders.”

“It is Monday morning at Sakura Securities. During merger-prep meetings, executives see cursors move with no user input and confidential files open on their own. The SOC flags outbound encrypted sessions from executive devices to unknown infrastructure, and workstation logs show repeated off-hours access to valuation models and trading strategy folders.”

Initial Symptoms to Present

Warning🚨 Initial User Reports

• “Executive laptops show unauthorized cursor movement during closed-door meetings”
• “Confidential transaction files are opened and indexed overnight”
• “Endpoint logs show repeated screen-capture and clipboard-harvest behaviors”
• “Outbound encrypted sessions from executive hosts spike after each strategy call”

Key Discovery Paths

Detective Investigation Leads

Note🔍 Detective Investigation Path

• Forensic timeline links the first intrusion to targeted merger-themed lures
• Memory analysis confirms operator-driven remote-control sessions, not automated spray-and-pray malware
• Artifact correlation shows selective exfiltration of valuation decks, deal room notes, and quant model summaries

Protector System Analysis

Note🛡️ Protector System Analysis

• Executive endpoint controls were bypassed through temporary exception profiles
• Lateral movement focused on research and legal workspaces, not broad encryption objectives
• Identity telemetry shows repeated token theft attempts against privileged collaboration services

Tracker Network Investigation

Note🌐 Tracker Network Investigation

• Command-and-control channels use resilient fallback infrastructure and staggered beacon windows
• Exfiltration jobs are timed to overlap with legitimate batch-transfer windows
• Trade-timing anomalies appear shortly after document theft milestones

Communicator Stakeholder Interviews

Note🗣️ Communicator Stakeholder Interviews

• Executive staff describe suspicious workstation behavior during sensitive calls
• Legal counsel highlights potential market-abuse exposure and evidence-preservation obligations
• Investor-relations leadership requests coordinated external messaging to prevent rumor-driven volatility

Mid-Scenario Pressure Points

• Hour 1: Merger governance committee asks whether to pause the transaction workflow
• Hour 2: A key institutional client asks whether portfolio strategy data was exposed
• Hour 3: Market surveillance teams flag unusual options activity tied to deal-related entities
• Hour 4: Board risk committee requests a decision-ready brief for regulators and counterparties

Evolution Triggers

• If endpoint containment is delayed, operators continue live surveillance of executive meetings
• If legal holds are incomplete, critical evidence chains become difficult to defend
• If client communications are inconsistent, trust erosion accelerates before technical recovery stabilizes

Resolution Pathways

Technical Success Indicators

• Remote-control persistence is fully removed from executive and research systems
• Evidence capture supports reproducible forensic conclusions and legal defensibility
• Privileged access controls are tightened without halting core trading operations

Business Success Indicators

• Merger governance receives a clear go/no-go recommendation backed by verifiable evidence
• Client communications reduce uncertainty and prevent mass withdrawals
• Regulatory engagement remains proactive and coherent across legal, security, and operations teams

Learning Success Indicators

• Team distinguishes operator-driven espionage from commodity disruption malware
• Participants practice sequencing containment, evidence preservation, and business continuity
• Group demonstrates cross-functional decision-making under market and regulatory pressure

Common IM Facilitation Challenges

If Technical Work Dominates Without Decision-Making

“Your containment notes are solid, but the board needs a transaction recommendation now. What is your decision, and what evidence threshold supports it?”

If Market-Integrity Risk Is Minimized

“You have endpoint findings, but how are you mapping those findings to potential market abuse and trade-surveillance obligations?”

If Team Stalls on Escalation Timing

“Leadership needs a regulator briefing draft before 5:00 PM. What facts are confirmed, what remains uncertain, and who owns each follow-up action?”

“Leadership needs a regulator briefing draft before 17:00. What facts are confirmed, what remains uncertain, and who owns each follow-up action?”

Success Metrics for Session

• Team identifies and contains live espionage activity on executive systems
• Evidence handling is sufficient for legal and regulatory review
• Business decisions are explicitly tied to forensic confidence levels
• Communications strategy addresses clients, counterparties, and oversight bodies
• Lessons captured include durable control improvements, not only incident triage

Template Compatibility

Quick Demo (35-40 min)

• Rounds: 1
• Actions per player: 1
• Investigation: Guided
• Response: Pre-defined
• Focus: Identify espionage indicators, isolate executive endpoints, and produce an initial leadership brief

Lunch & Learn (75-90 min)

• Rounds: 2
• Actions per player: 2
• Investigation: Guided
• Response: Pre-defined
• Focus: Add regulator communication, market-risk framing, and client communication priorities

Full Game (120-140 min)

• Rounds: 3
• Actions per player: 2
• Investigation: Open
• Response: Creative
• Focus: Full arc from live containment to transaction decision and strategic trust recovery

Advanced Challenge (150-170 min)

• Rounds: 3+
• Actions per player: 2
• Investigation: Open
• Response: Creative
• Focus: Add ambiguous trade signals, partial telemetry, and competing executive incentives

Quick Demo Materials (35-40 min)

Guided Investigation Clues

NoteForensic Snapshot

• Clue 1 (Minute 5): Endpoint telemetry confirms unauthorized remote-control sessions on executive workstations.
• Clue 2 (Minute 10): Exfiltration artifacts show targeted theft of merger decks and quant-research summaries.

• Clue 3 (Minute 15): Initial legal review maps the incident to GLBA, SOX, and SEC cyber disclosure requirements and immediate coordination expectations with FBI Cyber Division and U.S. Secret Service.

• Clue 3 (Minute 15): Initial legal review maps the incident to APPI and Financial Instruments and Exchange Act controls and immediate coordination expectations with NISC and NPA Cyber Bureau.

Pre-Defined Response Options

• Option A: Executive Isolation First
  • Action: Isolate executive endpoints, preserve volatile evidence, and move leadership communications to clean channels.
  • Pros: Stops live surveillance quickly and stabilizes evidence quality.
  • Cons: Creates immediate disruption to transaction prep workflows.
• Option B: Forensic-Led Containment
  • Action: Maintain limited monitored access while collecting deeper evidence before hard isolation.
  • Pros: Increases attribution and market-abuse visibility.
  • Cons: Extends risk window for continued operator access.
• Option C: Transaction Continuity Bias
  • Action: Keep transaction workflows active while applying targeted controls around highest-risk accounts.
  • Pros: Minimizes short-term business disruption.
  • Cons: Higher chance of incomplete containment and weaker legal defensibility.

Lunch & Learn Materials (75-90 min, 2 rounds)

Round 1: Live Surveillance Containment (35-40 min)

The merger committee is reconvening with a hard internal deadline of 5:00 PM. Managing Director Victoria Sloane asks for a plain-language risk brief while CTO Kevin Park and CISO Thomas Wright review endpoint telemetry showing active remote-control channels on executive systems. Dr. Andrea Chen reports that quant research directories were accessed overnight from compromised hosts.

The merger committee is reconvening with a hard internal deadline of 17:00. Managing Director Kenji Nakamura asks for a plain-language risk brief while CTO Ryota Sato and CISO Haruka Kobayashi review endpoint telemetry showing active remote-control channels on executive systems. Dr. Mei Takahashi reports that quant research directories were accessed overnight from compromised hosts.

NoteRound 1 Clues

• Clue 1 (Minute 10): Executive credentials were replayed from non-standard hosts during strategy sessions.
• Clue 2 (Minute 20): Model repository access aligns with command-and-control burst windows.
• Clue 3 (Minute 30): Legal hold must include chat logs, call transcripts, and deal-room exports to preserve sequence integrity.

If the team stalls: “Your technical findings are accumulating, but leadership needs a recommendation before opening markets. What is your containment threshold for escalation?”

Round 1→2 Transition

Containment quality in Round 1 determines whether Round 2 begins with controlled recovery or ongoing executive-session exposure. The board expects a regulator-ready position, and counterparties expect a credible transaction-risk statement.

Round 2: Regulatory and Market Response (35-40 min)

WarningRegulatory and Business Escalation

• Clue 4 (Minute 45): SEC market surveillance requests immediate preservation of audit trails tied to unusual options activity, while FINRA exam staff asks for written controls around insider-information handling.
• Clue 5 (Minute 55): Outside counsel estimates direct incident and response exposure at approximately $45 million before any merger-delay impacts.

• Clue 4 (Minute 45): FSA supervisory contacts request immediate trade-surveillance preservation, and the PPC expects initial incident reporting under APPI within the required rapid timeline.
• Clue 5 (Minute 55): Outside counsel estimates direct incident and response exposure at approximately ¥6.8 billion before any merger-delay impacts.

Round 2 Response Options

• Option A: Full Transparency Posture
  • Action: Deliver complete incident facts and controls roadmap to oversight bodies and counterparties.
  • Pros: Strong long-term defensibility and trust rebuilding potential.
  • Cons: Short-term transaction friction and potential disclosure shock.
• Option B: Sequenced Disclosure Posture
  • Action: Share confirmed facts first, then release deeper forensic findings on a controlled cadence.
  • Pros: Reduces immediate disruption while preserving factual integrity.
  • Cons: Requires disciplined messaging and can be perceived as evasive if timing slips.
• Option C: Minimal-Disclosure Posture
  • Action: Limit communications to mandatory minimums while prioritizing internal stabilization.
  • Pros: Lowest immediate disclosure burden.
  • Cons: Highest risk of trust damage and regulator dissatisfaction if additional facts emerge externally.

Debrief Focus

• Balancing evidence quality with fast executive decision cycles
• Coordinating legal, security, and market-facing communications
• Managing containment in a high-value financial intelligence environment

Full Game Materials (120-140 min, 3 rounds)

TipFull Game vs. Lunch & Learn

The Full Game adds open investigation and a third round focused on strategic recovery. Players choose evidence priorities, containment depth, and communication posture with less facilitator guidance.

Round 1: Initial Executive-Suite Containment (35-40 min)

Focus on immediate endpoint control, forensic preservation, and executive communications hygiene.

Facilitation questions:

• “Which systems must be isolated immediately, and which can remain online under monitored controls?”
• “What evidence collection steps are mandatory before any broad remediation changes?”
• “How will you brief leadership without overstating confidence in early findings?”

Round 2: Market and Oversight Coordination (35-40 min)

The team must align external communications with SEC and FINRA expectations in United States, while preserving forensic quality and transaction optionality. Notification planning should explicitly account for state-dependent timelines with federal securities disclosure obligations.

The team must align external communications with FSA and JSDA expectations in Japan, while preserving forensic quality and transaction optionality. Notification planning should explicitly account for initial report in 3-5 days, detailed report within 30 days to the PPC.

Round 3: Strategic Recovery and Trust Rebuild (40-55 min)

• Re-baseline privileged access, endpoint policy exceptions, and model-repository controls
• Establish durable regulator and client communication playbooks
• Define board-level metrics for espionage detection maturity and response readiness

Facilitation questions:

• “Which long-term controls most reduce recurrence risk without blocking core investment operations?”

• “If the board approves $45 million in remediation investment, what outcomes must be measurable within two quarters?”

• “If the board approves ¥6.8 billion in remediation investment, what outcomes must be measurable within two quarters?”

• “How do you prove progress to regulators, clients, and merger counterparties with a single coherent evidence set?”

Victory Conditions for Full 3-Round Arc

• Incident containment with defensible forensic timeline and preserved evidence integrity
• Clear transaction recommendation grounded in confirmed technical and legal facts
• Documented control roadmap with accountable owners and measurable milestones

Advanced Challenge Materials (150-170 min)

Red Herrings and Misdirection

1. Legitimate due-diligence scanning overlaps with attacker traffic windows.
2. Routine high-frequency trading data movement appears exfiltration-like in baseline tools.
3. A leaked analyst note mimics insider knowledge but originates from public filings.
4. Endpoint instability from a failed patch cycle obscures attacker activity timing.

Removed Resources and Constraints

• No pre-built regulator playbooks or market-abuse quick references
• Delayed outside-incident-response support for the first 48 hours
• Partial log retention gap for one executive collaboration platform
• Board-level pressure to preserve deal velocity despite incomplete telemetry

Enhanced Pressure

• Counterparty legal teams request written assurances before continuing negotiations
• Institutional clients ask for portfolio-protection attestations within one business day
• Industry media links incident rumors to broader sector market-volatility concerns
• Internal audit opens a parallel review of exception-based endpoint controls

Ethical Dilemmas

1. How much uncertainty is acceptable when making market-sensitive disclosure decisions?
2. Should transaction speed ever outrank evidentiary completeness in a suspected espionage event?
3. How do you prioritize transparency when facts are still being validated?
4. What is the ethical threshold for maintaining operations on partially trusted systems?

Advanced Debrief Topics

• Financial espionage response patterns versus broad disruptive malware response
• Evidence governance when cybersecurity and market-integrity investigations intersect
• Board oversight models for high-stakes cyber risk in investment institutions
• Communicating uncertainty without eroding stakeholder trust