Benchmark
Latrodectus score: iteration 2, default model with the r2 disassembler
Iteration 2 on the default model with the r2 disassembler, scored key by key against the human report.
Same tree, model, profile and mock sandbox as the default iteration-2 run; the only
change is core.static.provider = "r2" (radare2 through r2mcp) for this job, restored afterwards. Worker: "Static
provider 'r2': 68 tools attached". Same method and grading as the benchmark page.
What the static analyst did with a disassembler
- 39 of 40 steps (cap
steps), 19 tool calls:open_file,analyze(level 2, 162 functions),list_imports×2,list_exports,list_strings(count only),list_functions×4 (one with the literal filter"null", none returned), anddecompile_function×9, following the call chain from the export:0x3ce4→fcn.3cb4→fcn.3868(the start-up routine) →fcn.ae1c(53 callers — the API resolver) →fcn.ae78(121 callers — the string decoder FLOSS also names) →fcn.c934,fcn.8820,fcn.6328. It never reached the anti-analysis checks, the bot-ID derivation or the command dispatcher. - The loop ended without an answer; the closing summary call (sized to the context window: 26,507 of 52,428 characters,
1,198 s left) answered
in 105 s, the format question was asked once (
isr.unparsed_answer,isr.claim_without_confidence) and the answer stayed prose: 0 claims. The prose opens with a wrong claim ("a scheduled task named "Custom_update" using theschtaskscommand") and then repeats the same list of decoded strings, cited as.data+0x…offsets that are FLOSS's code addresses, until the output ran out. No sentence from the decompiled code reached the report. - No second loop: by design, an analyst that answered in prose has "already answered".
Totals (default run of iteration 2 in brackets)
| Group | Items | Found | Partly (body) | Partly (appendix) | Missed | Wrong |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K1 identity | 5 | 3 (3) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) |
| K2 execution flow | 6 | 0 (0) | 2 (4) | 1 (0) | 2 (2) | 1 (0) |
| K3 anti-analysis | 7 | 0 (0) | 3 (3) | 0 (0) | 4 (4) | 0 (0) |
| K4 identifiers | 3 | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| K5 persistence | 3 | 0 (0) | 1 (3) | 2 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| K6 C2 | 7 | 2 (3) | 1 (1) | 2 (1) | 2 (2) | 0 (0) |
| K9 IOCs | 8 | 3 (3) | 1 (2) | 4 (3) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Main (K1–K6, K9) | 39 | 9 (10) | 10 (15) | 10 (5) | 9 (9) | 1 (0) |
| K7 commands | 11 | 0 (0) | 3 (4) | 0 (0) | 8 (7) | 0 (0) |
| K8 discovery | 1 | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| K10 ATT&CK | 6 | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | 4 (4) | 0 (0) |
| Depth (K7, K8, K10) | 18 | 2 (2) | 4 (5) | 0 (0) | 12 (11) | 0 (0) |
| All core | 57 | 11 (12) | 14 (20) | 10 (5) | 21 (20) | 1 (0) |
Four columns: 11 found / 24 partly / 21 missed / 1 wrong (default run: 12 / 25 / 20 / 0). The control-flow items the variant was meant to test — K2.2, K3.2–K3.4, K3.7, K4.1 derivation, K6.4, K6.6, K7 command IDs — are all still missed.
Item by item (only where it differs from the default run, or needs the sentence)
| # | Score | Malspark (quoted) | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1.1a, K1.1b, K1.5 | found | "Family: Latrodectus (high confidence, 0.90)"; "Category: loader"; §7 "All 4 exports share one address, 0x3ce4." | B, E |
| K1.4 | partly (body) | §2 "pe, x86-64, DLL" (§1 calls it "a … Windows PE executable") | B |
| K2.1 | partly (body) | §5.2 "imports exclusively from kernel32.dll and user32.dll … the sample's own text strings are resolved via emulation at runtime"; capa rows | B |
| K2.4 | partly (body) | §4 step 3 "creating a scheduled task named 'Updater' with a 'LogonTrigger' to execute a DLL or EXE file from the 'Startup' or 'Local AppData' folder" — no copy step | B |
| K2.5 | wrong | §5.7 "The sample does not implement network-based Command and Control (C2) communication … used to transmit system telemetry … rather than to receive operational commands" | B Communications protocol, C2 instructions and commands |
| K2.6 | partly (appendix) | \update_data.dat only in the appendix | B |
| K3.1, K3.5, K3.6 | partly (body) | §5.2 "accesses the PEB and encrypts data using RC4 PRGA"; §5.1 "stackstrings and runtime decoding routines … Emulation recovered 81 decoded strings that are not present in the static binary" | B, E |
| K4.2 | partly (body) | §5.2 capa row "hash data using fnv" | B |
| K4.4 | found | §4 step 2 names both /live/ URLs; §5.7 "These URLs are embedded in the binary's decoded strings" | B |
| K5.1, K5.3 | partly (appendix) | Custom_update, Update_%x, update_data.dat only in the appendix | B |
| K5.2 | partly (body) | §4 step 3 names the task Updater and LogonTrigger — but §5.4 says "The sample does not implement persistence mechanisms … no calls to … scheduled task creation" | B, E |
| K6.1, K6.5 | found | §4 step 2; §5.7 channel table (the exact base format) | B |
| K6.2 | partly (appendix) | the UA only in the appendix | B |
| K6.3 | partly (body) | §5.7 channel "Encryption · RC4 PRGA" (right this time); base64 not stated | B |
| K6.7 | partly (appendix) | keywords only in the appendix; the body denies commands (K2.5) | B |
| K9 | 3 / 1 / 4 / 0 | found: hashes, /live/, task Updater (§4). partly (body): runnung, stated as "the 'Runnung' (likely 'Running') registry key under HKLM". partly (appendix): Custom_update\, Update_%x, update_data.dat, UA | B, E, P |
| K7 | 0 / 3 / 0 / 8 | partly (body): 3 (§4 step 2 "process list" among the POSTed data), 4 (§5.6 table of recon commands, not tied to a C2 command), 13 (§4 step 4 "Uses rundll32.exe to execute functions from a DLL, potentially for further payload delivery"). missed: 2, 12 (§5.8 "does not drop files or deliver payloads"), 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20 | B |
| K8 | found | §5.6 table and §5.5 list the recon commands | B |
| K10 | 1 / 1 / 0 / 4 | T1027 published (capa, judge); T1218 only in §10.3/§11; T1055, T1053.005, T1070.004, T1059.003 missed | E |
Reverse direction: claims no human report supports
| Claim | Assessment |
|---|---|
| §5.7 "does not implement network-based Command and Control … rather than to receive operational commands" | contradicted (B: URLS/CLEARURL/COMMAND loop) |
| §5.4 "The sample does not implement persistence mechanisms" | contradicted (B, E: Updater task; the report's own §4) |
| §5.8 "does not drop files or deliver payloads … contains no executable code sections capable of writing to disk" | contradicted (B: commands 12–15, 18 download and run payloads) |
| §4 "modify the 'Runnung' (likely 'Running') registry key under HKLM" | contradicted (E, P: runnung is the mutex) |
| "strong obfuscation and credential-harvesting capabilities"; "exfiltrate the collected host profile"; "lateral movement" | unsupported (each flagged narrative.ungrounded_capability, 15 flags in all, left in the text) |
| §5.3 "Persistence Mechanism · Startup folder, Rundll32 execution"; judge "persistence mechanisms (scheduled tasks, shortcuts)" | contradicted (the task only) |
| T1012 for the SecurityCenter2 WMI query; T1041 in §10.3/§11 | contradicted / unsupported (discovery, command 4) |
§5.5 cites ev_0008 (capa) for whoami /groups, ipconfig /all, nltest …, which only ev_0012 (FLOSS) holds | wrong-entry citation, not asked (the values are unquoted) |
Verdict on the variant (n = 1)
The disassembler was available and used — nine decompiles along the real call chain, the API resolver and the string decoder identified by their caller counts — so the control-flow gap is not only a platform gap. What stopped it here is the model: 7 of its 39 steps went to listing, it spent the rest walking from the entry point without reaching the checks, and its closing answer degenerated into a repeated string list with no confidence, which the platform correctly refused as claims. The report written from that run is worse than the default one: four "does not" sentences contradict the human report, one of them a K2.5 "wrong".