NullReceiver abandons the recording address that made EtherHiding easy to detect

cryptonews.ruPublished on 2026-08-13Last updated on 2026-08-13

Abstract

**Sonatype Research Labs has uncovered six malicious npm packages that retrieve command-and-control server addresses from an attacker's Ethereum wallet.** Three of the packages are legitimate, popular libraries that were compromised: `@kolbo/mcp`, `agentgui`, and `godot-kit`. The other three are purely malicious packages: `envpack-conf`, `postcss-initial-provider`, and `tailwindcss-motion-advanced`. All six deploy the same payload. The malware loader queries the Ethereum blockchain for the latest outgoing transaction from a specific wallet. It extracts bytes from the recipient field of that transaction, converts them into two IPv4 addresses, and uses these as primary and backup command-and-control servers. After connecting, it fetches, decodes, and executes a second-stage payload using `eval()` or by spawning a child process. This method, dubbed **"NullReceiver,"** is an evolution of the earlier "EtherHiding" technique. While EtherHiding hid data in transaction fields and sent funds to a fixed "burner" address (creating a monitoring point), NullReceiver sends no funds and generates unique, dynamic receiver addresses, making detection harder. OpenSourceMalware has linked this activity to the North Korean Lazarus group's "Contagious Interview" campaign. Sonatype advises developers to remove the affected package versions immediately and check their systems for signs of secondary payload execution.

Sonatype Research Labs published research findings showing that six npm packages retrieve their command-and-control server addresses from an attacker's Ethereum wallet.

Three of the six npm packages were well-known libraries that attackers stealthily hijacked. Anyone who installed the affected versions should remove them and check for any subsequent code that may have been executed.

Attackers hijacked three genuine libraries

Sonatype researcher Adam Reynolds says the six packages can be divided into two categories.

It appears that the publishing accounts of legitimate library publishers were compromised to facilitate the distribution of counterfeit versions.

These are @kolbo/mcp@1.57.1, agentgui@1.0.1127, and godot-kit@1.0.1786316795. They inserted a loader at the end of a file that was already part of the package, thereby preserving the original functionality.

The remaining three were purpose-built packages for malware distribution. These are envpack-conf@1.0.1, postcss-initial-provider@3.0.4, and tailwindcss-motion-advanced@1.0.1.

The first package contains configuration utilities, the second is a functioning PostCSS plugin, and the last package places the loader in a minified helper file.

Sonatype confirmed that all six code blocks use the same payload and Ethereum address.

When a victim runs the code, the loader queries Ethereum for information about the wallet's latest outgoing transaction and extracts bytes from the 'to' field of that transaction.

These bytes are converted into two IPv4 addresses. They serve as the primary and backup command-and-control servers for the malware. The transaction is used solely to store instructions on where the malware should connect.

Sonatype researchers stated the loader concurrently accesses multiple Ethereum endpoints and races them against each other. It then bundles its JSON-RPC requests and switches to the Blockscout API if direct requests fail.

After discovering the server, it makes two more attempts at the `/0x/cls` and `/0x/ls` endpoints, falling back to the `X-Payload-B64` response header if a regular GET request yields no result.

The returned result is Base64 and XOR decoded, then executed in the current Node.js process via the `eval()` function or launched as a separate child process.

NullReceiver is a more compact version of EtherHiding

This blockchain data retrieval scheme was discovered by OpenSourceMalware in two trojanized Tailwind CSS clones, bianira-ui and fluid-type-ui, and named NullReceiver.

The firm links this activity to the North Korea-linked "Contagious Interview" campaign and the Lazarus group. Sonatype confirmed a match in the wallet address.

NullReceiver removes a vulnerability in EtherHiding—a method which, according to Google Threat Intelligence, was developed by a North Korea-linked actor in October 2025.

EtherHiding hides a secret within a transaction's data field and always sends the transaction to a public Ethereum burn address, giving defenders a fixed point for monitoring.

NullReceiver does not send any data and does not reuse the destination. In the deconstructed OpenSourceMalware code snippet, the recipient bytes were identified as value 166.88.134.62, and the trailing bytes formed the string "helloipbot!!", which is the attacker's fingerprint.

In September 2025, Cryptopolitan reported that ReversingLabs discovered npm loaders colortoolv2 and mimelib2, which hid malware URLs inside Ethereum smart contracts linked to Stargazer's Ghost Network.

Sonatype stated it continues to investigate the related npm activity. Affected developers should remove the flagged npm packages. They should also watch for signs of second-stage payload execution.

end-content

Related Questions

QWhat is the main vulnerability that NullReceiver addresses compared to the previous EtherHiding method?

ANullReceiver eliminates a key vulnerability in EtherHiding. EtherHiding always sent data to a public Ethereum burn address, providing defenders with a fixed point to monitor. NullReceiver sends no data and does not reuse a destination address, making it harder to detect.

QAccording to the article, how do the malicious npm packages retrieve their command and control server addresses?

AWhen the malicious code runs, it queries the Ethereum blockchain for the latest outgoing transaction from the attacker's wallet. It extracts specific bytes from the 'recipient' field of that transaction, which are then converted into two IPv4 addresses. These serve as the primary and backup command and control servers.

QWhat are the two categories into which the six identified malicious npm packages can be divided?

AThe six malicious npm packages fall into two categories. Three are legitimate libraries (like @kolbo/mcp) whose publishing accounts were compromised to distribute a trojanized version. The other three are purpose-built malicious packages (like envpack-conf) specifically created to distribute malware.

QWhich cybersecurity firm linked the NullReceiver activity to the North Korean 'Contagious Interview' campaign and the Lazarus group?

AThe cybersecurity firm OpenSourceMalware linked the NullReceiver activity to the North Korean 'Contagious Interview' campaign associated with the Lazarus group. Sonatype confirmed a match in the wallet data, supporting this attribution.

QWhat should developers who installed the affected npm package versions do, according to the article's recommendations?

ADevelopers who installed the affected versions should remove those npm packages immediately. They should also check their systems for any signs of second-stage payload execution that might have occurred as a result of the initial infection.

Related Reads

‘White hats’ take 4000 BTC from Liquid, ETFs see best week of 2026: Hodler’s Digest

A purported "white hat" hacking group has withdrawn nearly 4,000 BTC (worth $319 million) from the Blockstream-run Liquid Network sidechain, leaving a message to "contact us on chain." The network has been paused as its team investigates the security breach and negotiates for the funds' return. Analysis suggests the transaction pattern is more consistent with a white hat extraction than a theft. In other news, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw their strongest three-week inflow stretch of 2026, attracting a net $3.8 billion. Meanwhile, AMC's CEO Adam Aron has threatened legal action against Robinhood's Ethereum L2 for tokenizing AMC stock without permission, sparking a public feud. A consortium of 21 major financial institutions, including Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, plans to launch a USD-denominated stablecoin in the first half of 2027. Prediction market platform Kalshi has issued a lifetime ban to former lawmaker George Santos for alleged insider trading, while facing a legal challenge from New Jersey over state jurisdiction. Bitcoin traded around $80,234 at week's end. Arthur Hayes predicted Bitcoin could reach $1 million by 2030 but stated his best risk-adjusted bet is currently Ethereum. The IMF reported El Salvador used private donations, not public funds, for recent Bitcoin accumulation, a claim President Bukele disputes. A fake Claude desktop app is spreading crypto-stealing malware, and Hyperscale Data has ended Bitcoin mining in Michigan to convert the site for AI operations.

cointelegraph7m ago

‘White hats’ take 4000 BTC from Liquid, ETFs see best week of 2026: Hodler’s Digest

cointelegraph7m ago

Robinhood Chain Fees Spark Debate Over Business Models: To Be a Tenant or a Landlord?

A public debate erupted over the weekend of September 5th regarding the fee model of Robinhood Chain, highlighting a fundamental conflict between two blockchain philosophies: Solana's "lowest Gas" approach versus Arbitrum's focus on "finding a sustainable business model." Robinhood Chain, an L2 built on Arbitrum Orbit that launched in July 2026, saw its average Gas fee rise to around $0.40 as transaction volume grew—over 100 times more expensive than Solana and even double Ethereum's mainnet cost. Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko ("Toly") criticized this model, arguing that the 10% of net protocol revenue Robinhood shares with the Arbitrum ecosystem (with 90% retained) could cover quadruple the fees on Solana. He contended that applications, not the base layer, should charge users, with the base layer focusing on ultra-low costs. In response, Offchain Labs co-founder Steven Goldfeder defended the Arbitrum model. He stated that by operating its own sequencer, Robinhood captures 90% of the Gas revenue—acting as a "landlord"—whereas on Solana, all fees go to validators, leaving Robinhood as a "tenant" that would have to subsidize user costs out of pocket. This exchange framed the core debate: should chains be free with applications monetizing, or should chains themselves capture value? The discussion broadened with contributions from Nina Rong (BNB Chain Growth Lead and former Arbitrum employee), who argued that endlessly lowering Gas is no longer the top priority. The industry must establish sustainable business models—whether through fees, revenue sharing, or other agreements—to ensure long-term viability beyond reliance on foundation grants. The debate underscores two diverging paths: 1. **Solana's "Ultra-Low Cost + Ecosystem Flywheel":** Prioritizes high throughput and minimal fees to attract users and applications. Value capture for apps happens off-chain (e.g., front-end fees, subscriptions). 2. **Arbitrum's "Customizable App-Chain + Revenue Share":** Allows projects to launch their own chains, control sequencers, and retain most fee revenue while sharing a portion with the parent ecosystem, creating a clearer business闭环 for large entities like Robinhood. An underlying issue is Ethereum's minimal value capture. While Robinhood Chain settles on Ethereum, over 99.99% of the fees are retained by Robinhood and Arbitrum, with only a tiny fraction going to Ethereum for data availability and security—posing a long-term challenge for the mainnet's security budget. The conclusion is that the industry is moving beyond a simple "cheapest Gas" competition. The real challenge is finding a sustainable balance between user experience, infrastructure profitability, and security incentives. The winners will be those who successfully navigate this complex trilemma.

marsbit11m ago

Robinhood Chain Fees Spark Debate Over Business Models: To Be a Tenant or a Landlord?

marsbit11m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片