LSN โ€” Local Sovereign Network

The Permanent Siege โ€” A Live Investigation Series
Letter C: The Port Factory
386 Proxy Ports Across Four Nodes, Three Jurisdictions, One Operation

๐Ÿญ The Port Factory

038A documented Private Layer's 112 open ports. 038B documented w1n's dual-market verification. This letter connects the wiring behind both: a single proxy factory operating through four servers, three corporate shells, and five jurisdictions โ€” already identified in our earlier investigation TI-019I "The Trident" as a coordinated access-broker operation.

What we found in the port forensics goes further than TI-019I. The four nodes don't just share credentials and behavior. They share the same port allocation logic, the same management infrastructure, and โ€” when combined โ€” they expose 386 proxy port slots serving 331 unique port numbers.

4
Active Nodes
3
Shell Companies
5
Jurisdictions
386
Total Port Slots
331
Unique Proxy Ports
41
Cross-Org Shared Ports

I. The Four Nodes

๐ŸŸฃ Node 1 โ€” 178.16.54.226 ยท OMEGATECH LTD

ASNAS202412 (OMEGATECH-AS, Seychelles)
RegistrantOmegatech LTD (Netherlands)
Geo DiscrepancySC (registration) / NL (geo) / TR (prefix)
Shodan Ports132 open (129 proxy range)
Dense Cluster84 ports in 12000-12599 (avg gap: 5.7)
Honeypot Sessions126 (Mar 25 โ€“ May 21)
HASSHa7a87fbe (libssh2) โ€” same as Private Layer
Credentialadmin:admin
RoleGPU profiling, system reconnaissance (TI-010)

๐ŸŸฃ Node 2 โ€” 94.154.35.215 ยท OMEGATECH LTD

ASNAS202412 (OMEGATECH-AS, Seychelles)
RegistrantArtem Sevastyanov (Ukraine)
Geo DiscrepancySC (ASN) / UA (registrant) / NL (geo)
Shodan Ports71 open (68 proxy range)
Honeypot Sessions560 (Mar 24 โ€“ Apr 5, then went silent)
HASSHa7a87fbe (libssh2) โ€” same as Private Layer
Credentialadmin:admin
RoleHigh-intensity scanning burst, then infrastructure rotated

๐Ÿ”ด Node 3 โ€” 179.43.139.58 ยท Private Layer INC

ASNAS51852 (PLI-AS, Panama)
Geo DiscrepancyPA (registration) / CH (geo/abuse)
Shodan Ports112 open (110 proxy range)
Port Span10000โ€“21935 (widest range in network)
Honeypot Events86,239 (94 days โ€” flood cycles)
HASSHa7a87fbe (libssh2) โ€” same as OMEGATECH
Credentialadmin:123456
Verification TargetYahoo.com (12 IPs, IPv4+IPv6)
CrowdSecBANNED โ€” cowrie-ssh-bruteforce-retroactive (365 days)
JA4Hge10nn010000_4740ae6347b0_000000000000_000000000000

๐Ÿ”ด Node 4 โ€” 179.43.133.154 ยท Private Layer INC

ASNAS51852 (PLI-AS, Panama)
Shodan Ports80 open (79 proxy range)
Dense Cluster55 ports in 12000-12599 (avg gap: 8.9)
Honeypot Sessions1,018 (Mar 21 โ€“ May 18, then went silent)
HASSHa7a87fbe (libssh2) โ€” same across all 4 nodes
Credentialadmin:admin
Verification TargetGoogle.com (192.178.202.x / 2a00:1450:x)
CrowdSecBANNED โ€” cowrie-ssh-bruteforce-retroactive (365 days)
The HASSH Proof

All four nodes โ€” across three ASNs, three shell companies, five countries โ€” use the exact same HASSH fingerprint: a7a87fbe86774c2e40cc4a7ea2ab1b3c. This is a libssh2 1.8.1 implementation with specific key exchange parameters. The probability of four independent operators independently choosing the same SSH library with the same cryptographic configuration is effectively zero.

This is a single toolchain deployed across jurisdictionally separated infrastructure. One operator. Multiple shells.

II. The Port Allocation Forensics

Every node runs the same pattern: a few management ports below 10000, then a dense array of proxy service ports from 10000 upward.

Management PortServicePresent OnPurpose
135MS-RPC (DCOM)3 of 4 nodesWindows remote management
137NetBIOS3 of 4 nodesWindows naming/discovery
445SMB3 of 4 nodesFile sharing / lateral movement
5985WinRM4 of 4 nodesWindows Remote Management (all nodes)

WinRM (port 5985) is present on every single node. This is the control plane. The operator manages all four servers via Windows Remote Management โ€” a protocol that allows remote PowerShell execution. WinRM is the factory floor control system.

The 12000-Range Concentration

Three of four nodes show extreme port density in the 12000-12999 range:

Node12xxx PortsAvg GapPattern
OMEGATECH .226845.7Nearly contiguous block
Private Layer .154558.9Dense block (12103-12586)
Private Layer .581350Sparse (different allocation tier)
OMEGATECH .2152819.5Moderate density

The 12000-range is the primary proxy pool. OMEGATECH .226 alone has 84 ports in this range โ€” one proxy port every 5.7 numbers. That's not random service allocation. That's programmatic port assignment by proxy management software.

Q: What's running on each of those 331 ports?
A: Each port is a SOCKS5 or HTTP CONNECT proxy endpoint. The proxy management software (likely a commercial product like 3proxy, Dante, or a custom variant) allocates one port per proxy session or per customer. The dense 12000-range blocks are customer-allocated proxy slots โ€” each port serves a different buyer or a different geographical exit point.

The port numbers aren't assigned randomly. They're allocated by a port manager that assigns the next available port when a new proxy instance is provisioned. The average gap of 5.7 on OMEGATECH .226 means the allocator is filling ports almost sequentially โ€” suggesting high utilization and automated scaling.

Port 11434 is notable: it's the Ollama API port, present on 3 of 4 nodes. This could be coincidental (the allocator happened to assign this number), or it could indicate AI/ML model serving alongside proxy operations โ€” possibly for automated CAPTCHA solving or browser fingerprint generation.

III. Three Verification Targets โ€” Three Markets

We now know the network verifies proxies against three different services, each served by a different node:

NodeTargetIPs UsedPayloadMarket
179.43.139.58Yahoo.com12 (6 IPv4 + 6 IPv6)GET / HTTP/1.0 Host: yahoo.comWestern residential
179.43.133.154Google.com10 (192.178.202.x + 2a00:1450:x)GET / HTTP/1.0 Host: google.comSearch/ad fraud
185.246.128.133Yahoo + Yandex12 + 3Dual Host: headersWestern + Russian
Why Google Is the Most Dangerous Target

Yahoo verification tests basic HTTP connectivity โ€” can this proxy reach a major website? Google verification tests something more valuable: can this proxy access Google Search without being blocked?

Google's anti-bot systems are among the most sophisticated on the internet. A proxy that passes Google verification is worth significantly more than one that only passes Yahoo โ€” it can be sold for search scraping, SEO manipulation, Google Ads fraud, and SERP manipulation. The PL2 node (179.43.133.154) was the premium verification endpoint.

The dual Yahoo+Yandex verification on the w1n node serves a different purpose: cross-market coverage for sanctions-circumventing proxy services that need to work in both Western and Russian internet spaces.

IV. The Defense Stack โ€” What We See, What We Block

Our infrastructure documents every layer of this attack:

๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ CrowdSec

IPDecisionScenarioDuration
179.43.139.58BANNEDcowrie-ssh-bruteforce-retroactive365 days
179.43.133.154BANNEDcowrie-ssh-bruteforce-retroactive365 days
185.246.128.133BANNEDcowrie-ssh-bruteforce-retroactive365 days
185.246.130.20Not bannedโ€”Below threshold (13 events/day)

CrowdSec shares ban decisions across its community network. Every honeypot and server running CrowdSec now knows these IPs are malicious. The community defense scales โ€” the attacker's infrastructure doesn't.

๐Ÿ”ฅ MikroTik Firewall

The honeypot operates behind a MikroTik router with a deliberate bypass rule:

Rule #ActionPacketsComment
1ACCEPT201,378Honeypot: accept ALL to Cowrie (bypass CrowdSec fwd drop)
2DROP35CrowdSec blacklist forward DROP

Rule #1 sits above the CrowdSec drop rule, ensuring all traffic reaches the honeypot. The honeypot is deliberately exposed โ€” it's a controlled intake that feeds intelligence back into the defense stack. The attackers think they're exploiting a vulnerable SSH server. They're actually feeding 201,378 packets of operational intelligence into our analysis pipeline.

The NAT rule (rule #22, 118,108 packets) forwards external SSH traffic to Cowrie. The real SSH server runs on a different port with key-based authentication only.

๐Ÿ“Š Honeypot โ†’ CrowdSec โ†’ MikroTik Pipeline

The defense loop works as follows:

  1. Cowrie accepts all SSH connections and logs every event (credentials, tunneling, fingerprints)
  2. Honeypot ingestion pipeline processes logs into structured intelligence (sessions, fingerprints, ip_intel)
  3. CrowdSec scenarios detect brute-force patterns and issue ban decisions
  4. CrowdSec bouncer propagates bans to MikroTik address lists (688 security entries)
  5. MikroTik firewall drops traffic from banned IPs for all services except the honeypot
  6. Threat intelligence dossiers (this publication) document findings for the global community

The attackers are banned from accessing real services while simultaneously being studied. Their attack infrastructure becomes our intelligence infrastructure.

V. The Corporate Shell Architecture

Five jurisdictions. Three companies. One HASSH.

EntityRegisteredASN CountryServer LocationAbuse ContactRegistrant
OMEGATECH LTDSeychelles ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จSCNetherlands ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑโ€”Omegatech LTD / Artem Sevastyanov (UA ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ)
Private Layer INCPanama ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆPASwitzerland ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญsupport@privatelayer.comPRIVATE LAYER INC
w1n ltdUnited Kingdom ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡งGBSweden ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ชabuse@w1n.nl (๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ)ICME NOC / phone +380 (๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ)

The pattern is consistent: register in an offshore jurisdiction, route through a privacy-friendly country, host in a third country, and put your abuse contact in a fourth. No single law enforcement agency has complete jurisdiction over any node.

Q: How does this jurisdictional structure prevent takedowns?
A: Consider what it would take to shut down just one node โ€” 179.43.139.58 (Private Layer):

1. A Swiss law enforcement agency would need to seize the physical server (located in Switzerland).
2. But the company is registered in Panama, so Swiss authorities would need a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) request to Panama to compel corporate records.
3. The ASN is registered to Panama, so LACNIC (the Latin American RIR) would need to be involved for IP revocation.
4. Even if successful, the same operator has three more nodes across two other jurisdictions (Seychelles/Netherlands and UK/Sweden).

Now multiply this by four nodes across three shell companies. The attacker needs to lose all four servers to stop operating. The defender needs to win in five jurisdictions simultaneously. This is not a bug in the international legal system. It's a feature being exploited.

VI. MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

This proxy factory maps to documented adversary techniques:

T1090 โ€” Proxy T1090.002 โ€” External Proxy T1584.005 โ€” Botnet T1133 โ€” External Remote Services T1078 โ€” Valid Accounts T1571 โ€” Non-Standard Port T1021.004 โ€” SSH

The MITRE ATT&CK framework documents that acquired botnets may support Command and Control activity through established Proxy networks (T1090). What we're observing is the verification and quality assurance layer of exactly this infrastructure โ€” the factory that tests whether each compromised host still functions as a proxy, before routing customer traffic through it.

VII. The Cross-Investigation Map

This operation has been documented across six investigations:

InvestigationWhat It FoundThis Letter Adds
TI-007Six interlocking crime networks; Private Layer and w1n as infrastructure providersPort forensics proving shared toolchain
TI-010OMEGATECH "The GPU Hunter" โ€” reconnaissance and system profilingSame HASSH as Private Layer = same operator
TI-014"Phase Layer" โ€” Private Layer persistent monitoringNow linked to Google.com verification (Node 4)
TI-019I"The Trident" โ€” three-actor coordinated operation, 10,933 silent loginsPort allocation analysis, defense stack integration
038APrivate Layer 86,239 events, 112 ports, Yahoo verificationPart of 4-node factory with 386 total ports
038Bw1n 92,342 events, 37 version strings, Yahoo+Yandex dual-marketw1n is the anti-forensics arm of the same operation

VIII. For Every Defender Reading This

This dossier exists because a single Cowrie honeypot on a home server captured 178,581 events from two IPs over 94 days. The total hardware cost of this intelligence operation: a retired enterprise workstation and an internet connection.

The defense stack โ€” CrowdSec, MikroTik firewall rules, Cowrie honeypot, threat intelligence pipeline โ€” is built entirely on open-source software. Every tool in this chain is available to any organization, any defender, any individual.

You don't need a SOC to fight back. You need a honeypot, a firewall, and the willingness to publish what you find.

The port factory runs 24/7 because it's profitable. It's profitable because most victims never know they're being proxied. Every published investigation makes that business model slightly less viable. Every shared CrowdSec decision makes the attacker's infrastructure slightly less useful. Every firewall rule reduces their pool of available proxies by one.

"They have 386 proxy ports across five jurisdictions. We have one honeypot and the truth. The asymmetry is real โ€” but it favors us. Their ports need to be open to function. Our findings, once published, can never be un-published. Their infrastructure depreciates. Our intelligence compounds."

TI-2026-038C ยท The Permanent Siege ยท Letter C
Published by LSN Threat Intelligence ยท June 22, 2026
4 nodes ยท 3 shell companies ยท 5 jurisdictions ยท 386 proxy ports ยท 331 unique ยท CrowdSec banned ยท MikroTik documented
Cross-referenced: TI-007, TI-010, TI-014, TI-019I, TI-2026-038A, TI-2026-038B
MITRE ATT&CK: T1090, T1090.002, T1584.005, T1133, T1078, T1571, T1021.004
All data sourced from live honeypot, CrowdSec, MikroTik, Elasticsearch, and open-source intelligence.

โš  Personal capacity. Research published independently โ€” not reflecting employer views. Derived from passive observation of attacks against personal infrastructure. Full disclaimer โ†’
โ† Previous The Permanent Siege โ€” 3 / 6 Next โ†’