SC-107: Deepfake Voice CEO Fraud & Wire Transfer Attack¶
Operation SILK VOICE¶
Classification: TABLETOP EXERCISE — 100% Synthetic
All organizations, individuals, IP addresses, domains, financial details, and threat actors in this scenario are entirely fictional. Created for educational tabletop exercises only.
Scenario Metadata¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Difficulty | ★★★★☆ (Advanced) |
| Duration | 2-3 hours |
| Participants | 4-8 (SOC, IR, Treasury, Legal, Communications) |
| ATT&CK Techniques | T1566.004 · T1534 · T1059 · T1657 · T1078 · T1114 |
| Threat Actor | GOLDEN MIRROR (financially motivated, AI-enabled fraud) |
| Industry | Manufacturing / Finance |
| Primary Impact | Financial — $4.2M attempted wire transfer |
Threat Actor Profile: GOLDEN MIRROR¶
| Attribute | Detail |
|---|---|
| Motivation | Financial gain |
| Sophistication | High — leverages commercial AI voice cloning, deepfake video |
| Known Targets | Manufacturing, financial services, real estate (high-value wire transfers) |
| Avg. Dwell Time | 2-4 weeks (reconnaissance before strike) |
| Signature | Multi-channel social engineering: AI voice + spoofed email + SMS pressure |
| Tools | Commercial voice cloning APIs, email spoofing infrastructure, VoIP with caller ID manipulation |
Executive Summary¶
GOLDEN MIRROR conducts a sophisticated CEO impersonation attack against Meridian Manufacturing Group (synthetic). The threat actor spends 3 weeks collecting audio samples of CEO Sarah Chen from earnings calls, conference presentations, and podcast appearances — all publicly available. Using commercial AI voice cloning technology, they generate a convincing real-time voice deepfake capable of interactive conversation. The attack combines a deepfake voice call to the VP of Treasury with a spoofed email thread appearing to show prior authorization from the CFO and legal counsel. The attacker requests an "urgent" $4.2M wire transfer to a "confidential acquisition target." The fraud is detected when a treasury analyst notices the callback number provided doesn't match the CEO's known mobile number and initiates the company's verbal verification protocol.
Environment Setup¶
Target Organization: Meridian Manufacturing Group (synthetic)
| Asset | Detail |
|---|---|
| Industry | Industrial manufacturing, 4,200 employees |
| Revenue | $1.8B annual |
| HQ | 10.1.0.0/16 corporate network |
| Microsoft 365, Defender for Office 365 | |
| Treasury System | SAP S/4HANA, dual-approval wire transfers > $100K |
| Phone System | Microsoft Teams + Cisco VoIP (caller ID enabled) |
| CEO | Sarah Chen — frequent public speaker, 50+ hours of public audio available |
| VP Treasury | Marcus Rodriguez — 12 years with company, direct report to CFO |
| CFO | David Park — traveling internationally (Tokyo) during attack |
Phase 1: Reconnaissance & Voice Cloning (T-21 to T-3 days)¶
Attacker Actions¶
GOLDEN MIRROR conducts extensive open-source intelligence gathering:
- Audio collection — Downloads 47 audio/video files of CEO Sarah Chen from:
- Quarterly earnings call recordings (investor relations website)
- Industry conference keynote (YouTube)
- Podcast interview (Spotify)
- Company promotional video (LinkedIn)
-
Total: ~52 hours of clean voice samples
-
Organizational mapping — Via LinkedIn, identifies:
- Treasury team structure (VP, 3 analysts, 1 manager)
- CFO travel schedule (Tokyo conference, posted on LinkedIn)
- CEO's communication patterns (time of calls, typical urgency language)
-
Approval thresholds and dual-control policies (from job postings mentioning "SAP dual-approval workflows")
-
Voice model training — Using commercial voice cloning API:
- Trains real-time voice conversion model on 52 hours of CEO audio
- Tests with 15-second delay for natural conversation flow
-
Achieves 94% voice similarity score (synthetic metric)
-
Infrastructure setup:
- Registers VoIP number with caller ID spoofing: displays as
+1-555-0142(CEO's known office line) - Creates lookalike domain:
meridian-mfg.example.com(vs legitimatemeridian-manufacturing.example.com) - Prepares spoofed email thread with forged headers
Evidence Artifacts¶
DNS Registration (T-14 days)
Discussion Injects¶
Technical
What publicly available information about your organization's executives could be used for voice cloning? How much audio is typically needed for a convincing deepfake?
Decision
Should your organization implement policies restricting executive audio/video distribution? What are the tradeoffs between public engagement and deepfake risk?
Phase 2: The Attack — Multi-Channel Social Engineering (T+0)¶
Timeline of Events¶
09:12 UTC — Spoofed email arrives in VP Treasury Marcus Rodriguez's inbox:
Spoofed Email Thread
From: Sarah Chen <s.chen@meridian-mfg.example.com>
To: Marcus Rodriguez <m.rodriguez@meridian-manufacturing.example.com>
CC: David Park <d.park@meridian-mfg.example.com>
Subject: RE: RE: Confidential — Strategic Acquisition — URGENT
Date: 2026-04-12T09:12:00Z
Marcus,
As discussed with David last week, we need to move on the Pinnacle
acquisition TODAY. The seller has given us until 3pm ET or they walk.
David approved the wire from Tokyo yesterday (see thread below).
Wire $4,200,000 to the escrow account:
Bank: First National Trust (synthetic)
Routing: 021000089
Account: 7834-2291-0056
Reference: MERIDIAN-PINNACLE-ACQ-2026
I'll call you in 5 minutes to confirm. This is highly confidential —
do not discuss with anyone outside this thread until the deal closes.
Sarah
-------- Original Message --------
From: David Park <d.park@meridian-mfg.example.com>
To: Sarah Chen <s.chen@meridian-mfg.example.com>
Date: 2026-04-11T22:45:00Z
Sarah — approved. Let's get this done. Wire authority confirmed
for up to $5M from operating account. Marcus can execute.
David
(sent from mobile)
09:17 UTC — Phone call to Marcus Rodriguez's desk phone:
Call Metadata
Voice call content (reconstructed from Marcus's notes):
"Marcus, it's Sarah. Did you get my email about the Pinnacle deal? ... Yes, David and I have been working on this for three weeks. The board will be briefed after close. ... I know the amount is significant, but we've done deals this size before. The escrow account is standard — First National Trust handles all our M&A escrow. ... I need this wired by 2pm. Can you do that? ... Great. And Marcus — please keep this between us until the announcement. We don't want this leaking to the market."
Evidence Artifacts¶
Microsoft 365 Email Headers (Simplified)
VoIP SIP Log
Detection Queries¶
// Detect emails from lookalike domains with DMARC/SPF failures
EmailEvents
| where Timestamp > ago(24h)
| where SenderFromDomain has_any ("meridian-mfg", "meridian-manufacturing")
| where AuthenticationDetails contains "spf=fail"
or AuthenticationDetails contains "dmarc=fail"
| project Timestamp, SenderFromAddress, RecipientEmailAddress,
Subject, AuthenticationDetails, SenderIPv4
Discussion Injects¶
Technical
The email failed SPF and DMARC checks. Why did it still reach Marcus's inbox? What email security configurations could have prevented delivery?
Decision
Marcus received both an email and a phone call that appeared legitimate. At what point should he have become suspicious? What verification procedures should be standard for wire transfers?
Phase 3: Detection — The Callback That Saved $4.2M (T+45 minutes)¶
The Critical Moment¶
09:55 UTC — Treasury analyst Jennifer Walsh (Marcus's team member) notices Marcus preparing an urgent wire transfer and asks about it. Marcus mentions Sarah called directly.
10:02 UTC — Jennifer checks the internal directory: - CEO Sarah Chen's mobile: +1-555-0198 - The call came from: +1-555-0142 (CEO's office landline) - But Sarah Chen is working from home today (per her Teams status: "WFH")
10:05 UTC — Jennifer initiates the company's verbal verification protocol: - Calls Sarah Chen directly on her known mobile number (+1-555-0198) - Sarah confirms she did NOT send any email about an acquisition - Sarah confirms she did NOT call Marcus - Sarah immediately contacts the CFO David Park in Tokyo — he confirms no acquisition is in progress
10:08 UTC — Marcus halts the wire transfer (not yet submitted to the bank)
10:12 UTC — IR team activated, SOC begins investigation
Evidence Artifacts¶
Teams Presence Log
PBX Call Detail Record
Detection Queries¶
// Detect caller ID spoofing — calls showing internal numbers from external sources
CiscoVoIPLogs
| where TimeGenerated > ago(24h)
| where Direction == "Inbound"
| where CallerID_Display in (internal_executive_numbers)
| where SourceIP !startswith "10."
| project TimeGenerated, CallerID_Display, SourceIP,
DestinationExtension, Duration
Discussion Injects¶
Investigative
What specific technical evidence confirms this was a deepfake voice call rather than a legitimate call? How would you preserve the voice recording for forensic analysis?
Decision
The wire transfer was stopped because an analyst followed verification protocol. What if Marcus had been alone? How do you design controls that work even when only one person is involved?
Phase 4: Investigation & Attribution (T+2 hours to T+48 hours)¶
SOC Investigation Findings¶
Email forensics: - Sender domain meridian-mfg.example.com registered 14 days prior - SPF record for lookalike domain pointed to 203.0.113.45 (VPS in a hosting provider) - No DKIM signing — email was unsigned - DMARC policy for legitimate domain was p=quarantine (not reject) — email was quarantined but Marcus had checked his quarantine folder
Voice forensics: - Audio recording analyzed by forensic team - Spectral analysis reveals: consistent 16kHz ceiling (AI-generated audio typically lacks high-frequency harmonics above 16kHz that natural speech contains) - Micro-latency patterns: 150-300ms response delays inconsistent with natural conversation (AI processing delay) - Breathing patterns absent — natural speakers breathe; AI voice clones typically don't generate breathing artifacts
VoIP infrastructure: - Source IP 198.51.100.77 — VoIP provider offering caller ID spoofing as a feature - SIP headers show User-Agent: VoIP-Gateway/3.2.1 (not Cisco internal PBX) - Provider contacted — account registered with stolen identity
Financial trail: - Destination account (7834-2291-0056) flagged by bank's fraud team after company notification - Account opened 7 days prior with synthetic identity documents - No funds transferred (wire was halted before submission)
Detection Queries¶
// Hunt for other lookalike domain emails in the past 30 days
EmailEvents
| where Timestamp > ago(30d)
| where SenderFromDomain matches regex @"meridian.*(mfg|manuf|corp|group)"
| where SenderFromDomain != "meridian-manufacturing.example.com"
| summarize Count=count(), Recipients=make_set(RecipientEmailAddress)
by SenderFromDomain, SenderFromAddress
| sort by Count desc
Phase 5: Remediation & Controls Enhancement (T+48 hours to T+2 weeks)¶
Immediate Actions (First 24 hours)¶
- DMARC policy upgraded from
p=quarantinetop=rejectfor primary domain - Lookalike domain reported to registrar for takedown
- All wire transfer approvals suspended pending process review
- Company-wide alert: "Do not act on unusual financial requests without verbal verification via known numbers"
- Voice recording preserved as forensic evidence (chain of custody documented)
Long-term Controls¶
- Dual verbal verification — All wire transfers > $50K require callback to two separate known numbers
- Code word system — Rotating weekly code words for financial authorization (shared in person, never via email/phone)
- AI voice detection — Evaluate commercial deepfake detection solutions for integration with phone system
- DMARC enforcement —
p=rejectwith reporting enabled; monitor for lookalike domain registrations via brand monitoring service - Executive audio policy — Risk assessment of publicly available executive audio; consider limiting live audio distribution
- Treasury training — Quarterly deepfake awareness exercises with simulated attack attempts
ATT&CK Mapping¶
| Phase | Technique | ID | Tactic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Recon | Gather Victim Identity Information | T1589 | Reconnaissance |
| Recon | Search Victim-Owned Websites | T1594 | Reconnaissance |
| Weaponize | Develop Capabilities | T1587 | Resource Development |
| Delivery | Phishing: Spearphishing Voice | T1566.004 | Initial Access |
| Delivery | Internal Spearphishing | T1534 | Lateral Movement |
| Execution | Command and Scripting Interpreter | T1059 | Execution |
| Impact | Financial Theft | T1657 | Impact |
| Persistence | Valid Accounts (Email) | T1078 | Defense Evasion |
Lessons Learned¶
- AI-generated voice is indistinguishable to untrained ears — Technical controls (callback verification, code words) are more reliable than human voice recognition
- Multi-channel attacks are more convincing — Email alone might have been questioned; email + phone call created a compelling illusion of legitimacy
- DMARC policy matters —
quarantinevsrejectis the difference between "user might see it" and "user never sees it" - The human firewall works when trained — Jennifer Walsh's instinct to verify saved $4.2M because she followed established protocol
- Publicly available executive media is a deepfake risk — 52 hours of audio made voice cloning trivial
Cross-References¶
- Chapter 10: AI/ML in Security Operations — AI capabilities used by attackers
- Chapter 11: LLM Copilots & Guardrails — AI safety and misuse detection
- Chapter 22: Threat Actor Encyclopedia — Threat actor profiling
- Chapter 25: Social Engineering — Advanced social engineering techniques
- Chapter 26: Insider Threats — Trust exploitation patterns