Case Library / Phishing / Lampion banking trojan ClickFix campaign in Portugal (2025)
Phishing Documented incident

Lampion banking trojan ClickFix campaign in Portugal (2025)

A 2025 campaign faked Portugal's tax authority and asked victims to paste a command to 'enable file preview', starting a chain to the Lampion banking trojan.

Share:

Social Engineering Examples·3 sources

Between late 2024 and early 2025, Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 tracked a campaign aimed at dozens of Portuguese organisations in government, finance and transport. Phishing emails carried a ZIP with an HTML file that redirected to autoridade-tributaria[.]com, a lookalike of Portugal's tax authority. The page told visitors to paste a command into the Windows Run box to "enable file preview". That started a long, hidden chain meant to install Lampion, a banking trojan. In the samples Unit 42 studied, the final step was switched off. Status: Vendor research, no confirmed losses.

Key takeaways

  • This is ClickFix without a fake CAPTCHA: the excuse was fixing a file preview.
  • Impersonating the tax authority adds pressure, especially for finance staff.
  • The chain forced a reboot so the next stage would run on startup.
  • The command to download Lampion itself was commented out, so it may have been a test run or a mistake.

How the attack worked

Step What happened
Email A phishing email with a ZIP attachment holding an HTML file
Redirect The HTML sent the reader to autoridade-tributaria[.]com, mimicking Portugal's tax authority
Lure A document or install page with an instruction to copy a command into the Run box
Excuse A Portuguese comment in the command: "Habilitar Visualização de ficheiro" (enable file preview)
Run The pasted PowerShell started the infection chain

Tip: no tax office, document viewer or installer needs you to paste a command into Windows. If a page asks, close it and report it.

The hidden chain

  • Stage 1: PowerShell downloads a scrambled VBScript.
  • Stage 2: A second script is written to the temp folder and run by a scheduled task.
  • Stage 3: A third script, padded to 30 to 50MB with junk to slow analysis, checks for security tools and virtual machines, reports a victim ID, drops a file in the Startup folder and forces a shutdown.
  • Stage 4: On reboot, a DLL loader is fetched from a second lookalike domain, inde-faturas[.]com ("invoices").
  • Final step: The command to fetch and run Lampion was commented out in the samples Unit 42 saw.

Lampion has been around since about 2019 and steals banking credentials and financial data. No victims were named and no losses or data theft were confirmed for this activity. Microsoft later said similar activity continued into June 2025 and spread beyond Portugal, and Acronis reported a separate Lampion wave in 2026.

What stops it

  • One simple rule: never paste commands from a website or email into Windows.
  • Restrict the Run box and PowerShell for staff who don't need them.
  • Alert on new scheduled tasks and Startup items created by scripts.
  • Check the address bar. Portugal's tax authority isn't at autoridade-tributaria[.]com.
  • Treat zipped HTML attachments as suspicious.

See also the UAC-0050 fake reCAPTCHA campaign and spear phishing.

Common questions

What is Lampion?

A banking trojan active since about 2019, mainly against Portuguese-speaking targets, that steals banking credentials and financial data.

What is a ClickFix attack?

A web page that tricks you into copying and running a command yourself, usually by pretending to fix a problem or verify you.

Did the attackers steal any money?

No losses were confirmed. In the samples Unit 42 studied, the final Lampion download was switched off.

Who was targeted?

Dozens of Portuguese organisations in government, finance and transport.

Sources
Cite this case

Social Engineering Examples. “Lampion banking trojan ClickFix campaign in Portugal (2025)”. Accessed 3 November 2026. https://socialengineeringexamples.com/lampion-clickfix-portugal-tax-authority-2025

Attack Chain & Defense
1Reconnaissance and targeting
What happened

Consistent with past Lampion campaigns (per Unit 42), the operators likely reused established target lists and command-and-control infrastructure from prior Portuguese-banking-focused runs, and selected government, finance, and transportation-sector organizations for their high-value credential access, rather than researching individual employees the way targeted BEC actors typically do.

The control that would have stopped it

Because this stage targets an entire national vertical rather than named individuals, there is no realistic way to block the reconnaissance itself; the practical control is sector-wide threat-intel sharing (national CERTs, tax-authority advisories, ISACs) so organizations in flagged sectors can pre-emptively brief staff before a wave lands.

2Infrastructure setup
What happened

Before the campaign launched, the operators registered look-alike domains impersonating Portugal's tax authority (autoridade-tributaria[.]com) and a second lookalike domain (inde-faturas[.]com), and stood up disposable, cloud-hosted C2 servers with endpoints disguised as ordinary PHP files, a pattern consistent with common bulletproof and cloud-hosting abuse used to survive takedown attempts.

The control that would have stopped it

Domain-registration monitoring and typosquat/lookalike-detection services that flag newly registered domains mimicking a government agency's name, combined with proactive DNS and web-filtering blocklist feeds, can catch and block this infrastructure before or shortly after it goes live, which is exactly how Unit 42's and Microsoft's published indicator lists get used downstream.

3Initial delivery
What happened

The campaign delivered a phishing email carrying a ZIP attachment containing an HTML redirector file, a long-standing Lampion delivery pattern per Unit 42's reporting.

The control that would have stopped it

Email gateway filtering that inspects or blocks ZIP-wrapped HTML files, a known malware-delivery pattern, along with attachment sandboxing, stops the chain here, before any user interaction is required.

4Lure page and pretext
What happened

Opening the HTML redirected the victim to the spoofed tax-authority site, which presented a fake document or software-installation page rather than the more common fake CAPTCHA, framing the required action as fixing a file-preview problem to lower the victim's suspicion.

The control that would have stopped it

Browser isolation or web filtering that blocks or sandboxes newly registered and unclassified domains reached via email links, combined with employee training on government-impersonation pretexts specifically, reduces the chance a victim ever reaches the point of interacting with the lure page.

5ClickFix execution
What happened

The lure instructed the victim to manually copy a PowerShell command, containing a Portuguese-language comment framing it as enabling file preview, and paste and execute it in the Windows Run dialog (Win+R), the core ClickFix action that hands execution over to the victim rather than relying on an automated exploit.

The control that would have stopped it

Employee training that treats any instruction to paste and run a command in the Run dialog, a terminal, or PowerShell as an automatic compromise indicator, regardless of the page's branding or claimed purpose, is the single highest-leverage control in the chain, since it targets the one step that requires active human participation and has no legitimate equivalent.

6Multi-stage obfuscated loader chain
What happened

The executed command downloaded a heavily obfuscated VBScript (Stage 1), which wrote a second obfuscated VBS to %TEMP% (Stage 2) using a hidden scheduled task rather than direct execution to break up the process tree, which in turn fetched a third, junk-padded VBS (Stage 3, roughly 30-50MB) from cloud infrastructure disguised as a PHP file; Stage 3 performed WMI-based security-product checks and sandbox/VM detection before beaconing a Base64-encoded victim ID to the attacker's C2.

The control that would have stopped it

Endpoint detection tooling capable of analyzing obfuscated and bloated VBScript locally, and monitoring or restricting unusual PowerShell-to-VBS-to-scheduled-task chains, plus tightening PowerShell and WScript/CScript execution policy for standard users, can catch the infection mid-chain even though no single stage looks overtly malicious in isolation.

7Persistence via forced-reboot mechanism
What happened

Stage 3 dropped a .cmd file named after the victim's hostname into the Windows Startup folder and created a hidden scheduled task that forced a system shutdown, so the .cmd would execute automatically on the next reboot and launch the Stage 4 DLL loader via rundll32.exe.

The control that would have stopped it

Monitoring and alerting on scheduled-task creation that triggers shutdown or restart events, unexpected Startup-folder writes, and rundll32.exe invocations with unusual export-function names catches this persistence mechanism, which has no legitimate equivalent on a standard endpoint.

8Second-stage payload retrieval
What happened

The Stage 4 DLL, named from the infection timestamp (YYYYMMDDHHmmSS) and using a Portuguese-word export function unique to each victim, was fetched from the second lookalike domain (inde-faturas[.]com); Unit 42 found the subsequent command to download and execute the actual Lampion banking-trojan payload had been commented out in the observed samples.

The control that would have stopped it

Blocking the published indicators (both lookalike domains and their associated C2 IPs) at the DNS or web-filtering layer, and treating any binary download from a domain absent from the browsing history that preceded it as suspicious, can stop the chain from reaching a completed infection even at this late stage.

9Stage 9
What happened

Objective completion (banking credential theft, not completed in this run): Had the payload-download command not been disabled, this final step would have installed the Lampion banking-infostealer payload itself, enabling theft of banking credentials and other sensitive financial data; in the samples Unit 42 analyzed, this step never executed.

The control that would have stopped it

Because this stage represents the completed objective rather than a discrete technical action, there is no meaningful control that operates here; the realistic countermeasures are upstream, at the delivery, execution, and persistence stages (3, 5, 6, 7, and 8), since detecting a fully installed banking trojan after the fact typically means the compromise has already succeeded.

Quick Facts
Victim
Dozens of Portuguese government, financial, and transportation-sector organizations
Location
Portugal
Date
2025-05-06
(Unit 42 publication date); campaign activity observed late 2024 through early 2025, with Microsoft confirming activity active into June 2025 and later spreading beyond Portugal
Impact
Not disclosed.
Basisnot-a-lossIn the activity Unit 42 observed, the final payload download was commented out and did not complete.
No confirmed dollar losses, victim names, or confirmed data exfiltration were reported for the activity Unit 42 observed, in which the final Lampion payload download command was commented out.
Status
Documented incident
Case Type
Real-World Incident
Sector
Financial Services & Insurance, Government & Public Sector, Transportation & Logistics
Threat Actor
Organized Crime
Explore more

Related Cases

Browse by what this case has in common with others in the library.