Most identity programmes are built around people. New starters get an account, MFA enrolment, a laptop and a training module. Leavers get disabled on their last day. Access reviews go to managers, who look at a list of their staff and tick boxes.
The accounts that don't belong to anyone fall outside all of that. A shared mailbox for supplier invoices. A login a vendor asked for during an integration in 2023. A "scanner" account for the printers on the third floor. Nobody starts or leaves, so nobody reviews them.
On 22 September, Proofpoint published a campaign in which attackers tried thousands of accounts across 28 organisations and got into exactly seven. Every one of the seven was that kind of account.
Proofpoint's write-up, which it tracks as UNK_CondorFiltration, covers three bursts of activity between 21 July and 16 August 2026, aimed almost entirely at Chilean organisations: several financial institutions and one large retailer.
The numbers:
| Authentication attempts | 32,825 |
| Accounts targeted | 5,714 across 28 Microsoft 365 tenants |
| Source IP addresses | 1,487, all AWS EC2 |
| Share of targets at one retailer | 53.2% |
| Accounts compromised | 7 |
All seven compromises were at the retailer. Proofpoint says every one was a functional or service account with no prior legitimate sign-in activity, which points to default or predictable passwords that were never changed and no MFA. Six of the seven fell within seven minutes of each other, which suggests they shared the same starting password. No personal employee account was confirmed compromised.
On the one account where Proofpoint saw follow-up activity, the attacker moved within about 90 seconds. They switched to a VPN exit node in Germany, tried the company's corporate VPN (Conditional Access and MFA stopped that), then opened the Azure Portal, OfficeHome and SharePoint Online and requested Microsoft Graph tokens.
TeamFiltration is an open-source red-team tool published in 2022 by TrustedSec's Melvin Langvik. It automates the whole sequence:
This is not the first time criminals have picked it up. In June 2025 Proofpoint reported UNK_SneakyStrike, which used the same tool against more than 80,000 Entra ID accounts. The difference this time is how precisely the results show where the weak point is. Thousands of attempts against staff accounts, which have MFA and a person who would notice, produced nothing. The only accounts that opened were the ones outside the joiner-mover-leaver process.
None of this is new advice, but it is the advice that would have stopped this campaign:
Teams/1.3.00.30866 on Electron/8.5.1) that no current client sends. A sign-in with that string, from AWS EC2 address space, deserves a look.This matters beyond Microsoft 365, because most organisations are creating the next generation of these accounts right now, around AI.
Look at how a team typically adopts AI without a sanctioned tool. Someone opens a ChatGPT or Claude team account and shares the login in a channel so colleagues can use it. Someone else creates a model-provider API key for a proof of concept and pastes it into a shared notebook, a Slack message and a .env file. A department signs up for an AI note-taker using a generic mailbox so the licence isn't "tied to one person".
Each of those is a functional account in all but name: shared, owned by nobody, set up for convenience, never rotated, often without MFA, and outside every access review. It also sits in front of the most sensitive material the team has, because that is what people paste into AI tools. A compromised AI account doesn't give up a mailbox. It gives up months of conversation history: contract drafts, customer records, source code, board papers.
We covered what happens when attackers get hold of AI credentials earlier this month. UNK_CondorFiltration shows how they find the weak ones: try everything, cheaply, and keep what opens.
UNK_CondorFiltration was not sophisticated. It used a public tool, rented cloud servers and passwords nobody had changed. It still worked, because the only accounts it needed were ones no process had been responsible for.
So the question is not do our staff have MFA? They probably do. It is: which accounts in your organisation have no person responsible for them, and how many of the new ones were created this year so a team could share an AI tool?
Talk to us about making sure every AI account in your organisation has a person responsible for it.
Obiguard sits in front of every AI request your organization makes — screening prompts and outputs against the guardrails, compliance frameworks, and audit trails that stories like this one make necessary.
See how it works →