Analyzing Command And Control CommunicationCAUTION
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
Overview
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
6c59587be632OBSERVED · 2026-10-07What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
---
name: analyzing-command-and-control-communication
description: 'Analyzes malware C2 communication over HTTP, HTTPS, DNS, and custom
protocols to reverse-engineer beacon patterns, command structures, data encoding,
and infrastructure (primary servers, fallback domains, dead drops). Use after
reverse engineering reveals network traffic needing protocol analysis or when
building detection signatures for a framework like Cobalt Strike, Metasploit,
or Sliver.
'
domain: cybersecurity
subdomain: malware-analysis
tags:
- malware
- C2
- command-and-control
- beacon
- protocol-analysis
version: 1.0.0
author: mahipal
license: Apache-2.0
nist_csf:
- DE.AE-02
- RS.AN-03
- ID.RA-01
- DE.CM-01
mitre_attack:
- T1071.001
- T1573
- T1571
- T1008
- T1095
---
# Analyzing Command-and-Control Communication
## When to Use
- Reverse engineering a malware sample has revealed network communication that needs protocol analysis
- Building network-level detection signatures for a specific C2 framework (Cobalt Strike, Metasploit, Sliver)
- Mapping C2 infrastructure including primary servers, fallback domains, and dead drops
- Analyzing encrypted or encoded C2 traffic to understand the command set and data format
- Attributing malware to a threat actor based on C2 infrastructure patterns and tooling
**Do not use** for general network anomaly detection; this is specifically for understanding known or suspected C2 protocols from malware analysis.
## Prerequisites
- PCAP capture of malware network traffic (from sandbox, network tap, or full packet capture)
- Wireshark/tshark for packet-level analysis
- Reverse engineering tools (Ghidra, dnSpy) for understanding C2 code in the malware binary
- Python 3.8+ with `scapy`, `dpkt`, and `requests` for protocol analysis and replay
- Threat intelligence databases for C2 infrastructure correlation (VirusTotal, Shodan, Censys)
- JA3/JA3S fingerprint databases for TLS-based C2 identification
## Workflow
### Step 1: Identify the C2 Channel
Determine the protocol and transport used for C2 communication:
```
C2 Communication Channels:
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
HTTP/HTTPS: Most common; uses standard web traffic to blend in
Indicators: Regular POST/GET requests, specific URI patterns, custom headers
DNS: Tunneling data through DNS queries and responses
Indicators: High-volume TXT queries, long subdomain names, high entropy
Custom TCP/UDP: Proprietary binary protocol on non-standard port
Indicators: Non-HTTP traffic on high ports, unknown protocol
ICMP: Data encoded in ICMP echo/reply payloads
Indicators: ICMP packets with large or non-standard payloads
WebSocket: Persistent bidirectional connection for real-time C2
Indicators: WebSocket upgrade followed by binary frames
Cloud Services: Using legitimate APIs (Telegram, Discord, Slack, GitHub)
Indicators: API calls to cloud services from unexpected processes
Email: SMTP/IMAP for C2 commands and data exfiltration
Indicators: Automated email operations from non-email processes
```
### Step 2: Analyze Beacon Pattern
Characterize the periodic communication pattern:
```python
from scapy.all import rdpcap, IP, TCP
from collections import defaultdict
import statistics
import json
packets = rdpcap("c2_traffic.pcap")
# Group TCP SYN packets by destination
connections = defaultdict(list)
for pkt in packets:
if IP in pkt and TCP in pkt and (pkt[TCP].flags & 0x02):
key = f"{pkt[IP].dst}:{pkt[TCP].dport}"
connections[key].append(float(pkt.time))
# Analyze each destination for beaconing
for dst, times in sorted(connections.items()):
if len(times) < 3:
continue
intervals = [times[i+1] - times[i] for i in range(len(times)-1)]
avg_interval = statistics.mean(intervals)
stdev = statistics.stdev(intervals) if len(intervals) > 1 else 0
jitter_pct = (stdev / avg_interval * 100) if avg_interval > 0 else 0
duration = times[-1] - times[0]
beacon_data = {
"destination": dst,
"connections": len(times),
"duration_seconds": round(duration, 1),
"avg_interval_seconds": round(avg_interval, 1),
"stdev_seconds": round(stdev, 1),
"jitter_percent": round(jitter_pct, 1),
"is_beacon": 5 < avg_interval < 7200 and jitter_pct < 25,
}
if beacon_data["is_beacon"]:
print(f"[!] BEACON DETECTED: {dst}")
print(f" Interval: {avg_interval:.0f}s +/- {stdev:.0f}s ({jitter_pct:.0f}% jitter)")
print(f" Sessions: {len(times)} over {duration:.0f}s")
```
### Step 3: Decode C2 Protocol Structure
Reverse engineer the message format from captured traffic:
```python
# HTTP-based C2 protocol analysis
import dpkt
import base64
with open("c2_traffic.pcap", "rb") as f:
pcap = dpkt.pcap.Reader(f)
for ts, buf in pcap:
eth = dpkt.ethernet.Ethernet(buf)
if not isinstance(eth.data, dpkt.ip.IP):
continue
ip = eth.data
if not isinstance(ip.data, dpkt.tcp.TCP):
continue
tcp = ip.data
if tcp.dport == 80 or tcp.dport == 443:
if len(tcp.data) > 0:
try:
http = dpkt.http.Request(tcp.data)
print(f"\n--- C2 REQUEST ---")
print(f"Method: {http.method}")
print(f"URI: {http.uri}")
print(f"Headers: {dict(http.headers)}")
if http.body:
print(f"Body ({len(http.body)} bytes):")
# Try Base64 decode
try:
decoded = base64.b64decode(http.body)
print(f" Decoded: {decoded[:200]}")
except:
print(f" Raw: {http.body[:200]}")
except:
pass
```
### Step 4: Identify C2 Framework
Match observed patterns to known C2 frameworks:
```
Known C2 Framework SignatuTrust audit
CAUTIONgrade B · trust 89/100 Install with care. The audit found things worth knowing before you trust its output.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | WARN |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- declared (6 observation(s))
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (6)
for beacon in beacons:
dst_ip, dst_port = beacon["destination"].rsplit(":", 1)f'msg:"MALWARE Detected C2 Beacon to {dst_ip}:{dst_port}"; 'print("Beacon detection, protocol decoding, signature generation")print("\n--- Beacon Detection ---")decoded_body = base64.b64decode(http.body).decode("utf-8", errors="replace")Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
6c59587be632full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/mukul975__analyzing-command-and-control-communication.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-07 | 6c59587be632 | CAUTION | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Analyzing Command And Control Communication skill do?
817 structured cybersecurity skills for AI agents · Mapped to 6 frameworks: MITRE ATT&CK, NIST CSF 2.0, MITRE ATLAS, D3FEND, NIST AI RMF & MITRE F3 (Fight Fraud) · agentskills.io standard · Works with Claude Code, GitHub Copilot, Codex CLI, Cursor, Gemini CLI & 20+ platforms · 29 security domains ·
Is Analyzing Command And Control Communication safe to install?
With care. The audit graded it B (89/100) and found 6 things worth knowing before you trust this skill, listed below with the exact line each was found on.
What can Analyzing Command And Control Communication access on my machine?
The audit observed that it reaches the network. Each of those is consistent with what it says it does. Secrets in the source: none found.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (6c59587be632), read on 2026-10-07. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.