C2 is how an intruder keeps control of a machine inside your network. Modern C2 is built specifically to look like ordinary traffic, which is why detecting it has to be about behaviour rather than a list of bad addresses.
The stereotype is a strange port talking to a strange country. Real operators stopped doing that years ago. What you get instead is traffic that is boring on purpose:
The premise is that you cannot enumerate the destinations, so you have to characterise the conversation. A blocklist is a useful extra input, never the primary one.
We do not decrypt TLS. The detections above are about timing, size, rhythm, destination and fingerprint, not about reading contents. That is a deliberate design choice and it is also why deployment does not require you to hand us keys or break inspection.
It also means a single-shot transfer with no ongoing channel is a different problem, handled by exfiltration detection rather than beacon detection. We would rather draw that line clearly than imply one detector covers everything.
No. Detection is based on the behaviour of the channel: intervals, regularity, sizes, destinations and client fingerprint. No key material and no inline interception.
Threat intelligence is one input among several, and on its own it is a poor primary signal, because infrastructure is cheap and rotates faster than any list. The primary signals are behavioural.
That case is modelled deliberately. Long-interval channels are the ones designed to evade volume-based alerting, so treating them as a special case rather than an afterthought is the point.
Tell us whether you suspect something is already inside, or whether you want to measure what your current tools would catch. Either way you get a concrete next step.
Contact us