Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

Footer About

Footer About

Labels

Latest News

CrashStealer macOS Malware Uses Apple-Notarized App to Evade Security Checks

CrashStealer, a new macOS information-stealing malware named for Apple's Mac operating system, bypasses built-in security protections by...

All the recent news you need to know

GoDaddy Challenges Indian Court Order Over Domain Privacy and Internet Governance Rules

 

A legal battle in India over online fraud could have major implications for privacy and regulation of the internet around the globe, as domain name registrar Go Daddy takes exception to a Delhi High Court ruling that would impose severe restrictions on domain registration, privacy, and trademark protection. 

The ruling comes in response to an uptick in cyber fraud in India. Government figures from last year show that authorities received 2.4 million fraud complaints, resulting in $2.4 billion in losses. In recent years, Amazon, McDonald’s, Microsoft, and other companies have taken legal action against fake websites that misled consumers into giving away personal information or making purchases. Last December, the Delhi High Court ordered removal of more than 1,100 fraudulent websites. 

With that, the court issued additional directives concerning the management of domain names and registrars. These mandates include forbidding registrars from offering privacy protection services by default, disclosing private domain owner information to third parties upon request if that party can demonstrate a “legitimate interest,” and prohibiting domain name registrations that use trademarks of others. Go Daddy argues in a petition to a larger bench of the Delhi High Court that those measures go significantly beyond what’s needed to combat fraud. 

The company believes such restrictions, if applied consistently, would disrupt internet governance worldwide. Go Daddy also objects to the requirement that domain ownership information be disclosed to anybody demonstrating a “legitimate interest.” The company argues in its petition that the language could prove too broad and that domain registrars shouldn’t be tasked with reviewing requests for domain owner information and deciding whether they meet a “legitimate interest” standard. The firm says the language could create “significant legal and operational challenges.” 

The company raises additional concerns about the order’s potential impact on international domain name sales, arguing that because the global internet isn’t bound by one jurisdiction, requiring local registrars to follow the kind of rules set out in the December ruling would, in essence, require them to follow Indian law for all international transactions. 

Go Daddy further argues that the privacy restrictions could run contrary to India’s data protection laws as well as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). By mandating that privacy protections be revoked by default for domain owners, India’s data laws and the GDPR would instead be weakened. 

Many internet governance experts believe the ruling places India at risk of negatively impacting citizens, particularly journalists, activists, bloggers, and small businesses, and that it fails to consider tactics bad actors will use to exploit weaknesses in the domain system. Other domain name registrars have raised similar objections to the December ruling, including Namecheap and Hosting Concepts. 

These companies expect that the ruling will spark similar actions in other jurisdictions. Delhi High Court is set to hear the challenges on July 16, with implications for the future of internet governance and fraud prevention measures yet to be determined.

How the Apple Copy-Paste Scam Can Give Attackers Remote Access to Your Mac

 


Apple users are being urged to exercise caution when following troubleshooting instructions found online after cybersecurity experts underlined a growing social engineering tactic that tricks victims into pasting malicious commands into the macOS Terminal application. Rather than exploiting a flaw in macOS itself, the scam relies on convincing users to voluntarily execute commands that can install malware, grant attackers remote access, or expose sensitive information stored on their devices.

Often referred to as a "copy-paste" scam, the technique targets users unfamiliar with Terminal, a command-line interface included with macOS that enables direct interaction with the operating system through text-based commands. While the application is commonly used by developers, system administrators and advanced users to automate tasks or manage system settings, executing unfamiliar commands without understanding their function can introduce significant security risks.

Unlike traditional malware campaigns that exploit software vulnerabilities, this attack depends almost entirely on social engineering. Cybercriminals impersonate trusted sources or create convincing troubleshooting scenarios to persuade victims that running a Terminal command is necessary to fix a technical issue, improve security or restore system performance. Once executed, however, the command may download malicious software, establish remote access, alter security settings or perform other unauthorized actions without the user's awareness.

Depending on the instructions provided, attackers could gain access to documents, photographs, emails, browser data, financial information, saved credentials and contact lists stored on the Mac. Some malicious scripts may also deploy keylogging software capable of recording everything a victim types, including usernames, passwords and other confidential information. In more severe cases, attackers could install ransomware or persistence mechanisms that allow them to retain access to the compromised system even after a restart.

Security researchers note that the scam can begin through multiple channels. Victims may receive phishing emails or text messages containing the malicious command, encounter it in online discussion forums disguised as a legitimate solution, or visit fraudulent websites presenting it as an official troubleshooting step. Attackers have also been observed posing as technical support representatives over the phone, carefully instructing victims to open Terminal and manually type commands under the pretense of resolving an issue.

The rise of generative artificial intelligence has introduced another avenue for abuse. Threat actors may intentionally publish malicious commands across public websites and discussion platforms in an effort to influence AI-powered assistants through a technique known as indirect prompt injection. If an AI system retrieves or references poisoned content while responding to a user's troubleshooting request, it could inadvertently recommend unsafe commands. Although AI tools continue to improve their safeguards, cybersecurity experts advise users to independently verify any command before executing it on their systems.

The attack typically follows a similar pattern. After directing a user to open the Terminal application located within the Utilities folder inside Applications, the attacker provides one or more commands and claims they are required to diagnose, repair or secure the computer. In reality, those commands may download remote administration tools, retrieve additional payloads from external servers, modify system configurations or provide unauthorized access to the attacker's infrastructure.

Because the attack depends on user participation rather than exploiting a software flaw, many victims may not immediately recognize they are being targeted. Individuals unfamiliar with Terminal often have little reason to question commands presented by someone claiming to represent Apple, a software vendor or a technical support service. Similarly, users searching online for solutions may encounter malicious instructions embedded within forum posts or copied across multiple websites, making them appear credible.

To help reduce the effectiveness of these attacks, Apple introduced additional safeguards in recent versions of macOS. When users who do not regularly work in Terminal attempt to paste commands copied from websites, messaging platforms, email applications or chatbots, the operating system may interrupt the action with a warning indicating that the pasted content could contain malware or compromise privacy. Rather than automatically executing the command, the prompt encourages users to reconsider before proceeding.

Apple has also expanded malware detection capabilities within Terminal. If the operating system identifies known malicious content or scripts, it can block execution and notify the user that the pasted command has been prevented because it poses a security risk. These protections are designed to slow down impulsive actions and reduce the likelihood of users unknowingly compromising their own systems.

Cybersecurity professionals emphasize that no security warning should replace careful judgment. Users should never execute Terminal commands they do not fully understand, regardless of whether the instructions originate from an email, text message, online forum, chatbot or unsolicited phone call. Requests accompanied by pressure tactics or claims that immediate action is required should be treated with particular suspicion, as creating a false sense of urgency remains one of the most common techniques used in phishing campaigns.

Experts also caution against assuming that information found on public forums or generated by AI assistants is inherently trustworthy. Malicious instructions can spread rapidly across the internet and may be reproduced by multiple sources, giving them an appearance of legitimacy. Verifying guidance through official Apple documentation or other trusted security resources before executing any command remains one of the most effective ways to avoid becoming a victim of Terminal-based social engineering attacks.

Anthropic Delays Claude Fable 5 Usage Credit Requirement Until July 19


 

A number of Anthropic's flagship AI model, Claude Fable 5, has been extended to eligible paid subscribers until July 19, 2026 for free access. This extension provides customers with another week of access while the company continues to expand its available computing capacity. This extension follows two previous extension of the deadline. 

As part of their initial announcement, Anthropic announced that Fable 5 would be available to subscribers through July 7, but that offer has since been extended to July 12. According to Anthropic, promotional access to the Claude Code system will now be available until 11:59:59 PM PT on July 19. Along with this extension, Anthropic has also continued to increase Claude Code weekly usage limits by 50%. 

The Fable 5 subscription model allows eligible subscribers to use up to 50% of their weekly allowance at no additional charge. It draws upon the same weekly usage pool as other Claude models, however Anthropic notes that Fable 5 consumes these limits more rapidly as a result of its greater computational requirements. When enabled by their organization, this promotion is available to Claude Pro, Max, Team, and premium seat-based Enterprise subscribers. 

The promotion does not apply to Free users, standard Enterprise seats, usage-based Enterprise plans, or API customers. Anthropic's ecosystem includes Claude Web, Mobile, Desktop, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Claude Design, Claude for Microsoft 365, and Claude Tag, among others. Users can choose "Fable 5" from the model picker on Claude's web, desktop and mobile applications in order to begin using the model. 

For Claude Code, Fable 5 requires version 2.1.170 or later, while Claude Cowork users need the latest Claude Desktop application to access the feature. Versions 2.1.170 and later are required for Claude Code, while version 2.1.170 and higher are required for Claude Cowork. Upon reaching their complimentary Fable 5 allocation, users may elect to purchase usage credits to continue using the model or to switch to another Claude model that remains available under their current subscription limitations. 

According to Anthropic, this process is consistent across all versions of Claude Web, Mobile, Desktop, Claude Work, and Claude Code. If a user exceeds the complimentary allocation for Fable 5, they may purchase usage credits, which are billed separately from their subscription, or choose to make use of another Claude model without incurring additional charges in accordance with their remaining plan limits. 

In addition, Anthropic has assured its customers that current restrictions will only last for a short period of time. According to the company, Fable 5 will not be permanently removed from subscription plans and will be restored as soon as sufficient computing resources are available. It is evident that the demand for Claude Fable 5 continues to exceed the computational resources available to Anthropic. 

Anthropic is continuing to expand its infrastructure while offering premium subscribers access to its most advanced AI model without immediate additional costs by extending its temporary promotion. Once sufficient computing capacity is available, Fable 5 will be available as a standard subscription benefit once adequate computing capacity has been reached. 

Anthropic's latest extension reflects the increased demand for advanced generative AI models, as well as the challenges associated with rapid adoption of these models. While the temporary offer ensures continued access for eligible subscribers, it emphasizes the importance of scalable computing resources when AI companies attempt to strike a balance between innovation, performance, and user expectation.

UK Warns Parents: Limit Online Sharing of Kids’ Photos Amid AI Abuse Risks

 

UK authorities have issued urgent warnings to parents about sharing children’s photos online, as AI tools increasingly enable digital abuse and exploitation. The National Crime Agency (NCA) and the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) say that ordinary images of kids can be misused by predators to create realistic, sexually explicit material using “nudification” apps and deepfake technology. While officials stress they are not dictating parenting choices, they want families to understand a risk that many may not realize exists. 

The scale of the problem is growing fast. In 2025, the IWF identified 8,029 AI-generated images and videos classified as realistic child sexual abuse material (CSAM), a 14% rise from the previous year. AI-generated abuse videos jumped from just 13 in 2024 to 3,440 in 2025, showing how quickly the threat is escalating as imaging models improve. Because these fakes can be so convincing, it is becoming harder for platforms and investigators to distinguish them from real abuse content, complicating removal efforts and victim support. 

In response, the NCA and IWF have published new guidance urging parents and carers to limit who can see images of their children online. Their advice includes setting social media accounts to private, using “close friends” lists for sharing family photos, and regularly reviewing older posts that might expose children’s images to strangers. The guidance also recommends a “social media audit,” asking parents to check whether a child’s face, body, or school uniform is visible online and whether those images can be deleted or made private. The NSPCC similarly advises that minors keep their social media profiles on private settings to reduce exposure. 

The UK government is also tightening laws and platform responsibilities. It has made it illegal to create, possess, or distribute AI tools designed to generate child sexual abuse imagery, with offenders facing up to five years in prison. Under the Online Safety Act, tech platforms must proactively remove such content, and new powers will allow authorized testers to assess AI models for their ability to produce CSAM before they reach the market. A government spokesperson confirmed that AI-generated CSAM is treated the same as real imagery under UK law and must be taken down swiftly. 

Beyond privacy settings, experts recommend open conversations with young people about AI, “deepfake” nudes, and image consent. Children should understand that once a photo is online, it can be copied, altered, and misused—even if they trusted the original audience. Guidance also outlines steps to take if a child is targeted or if manipulated images appear, including reporting to platforms and contacting the IWF or police. As AI continues to turbocharge digital abuse risks, cautious sharing and strong privacy habits are becoming essential parts of modern parenting.

Microsoft and Google Remove ModHeader After Finding Dormant Collector


ModHeader is a famous header-editing extension with over 1.6 million installs across Microsoft’s Edge and Google’ Chrome browser. 

Google and Microsoft remove the collector

Experts discovered a secret browsing-history collector built into its official store variant, and have withdrawn the ModHeader from Google and Microsoft.

An empty allow-list kept the collector switched off and it was dormant, and no proof has surfaced that it retrieved or sent even one browsing domain.

About the discovery

Stripe OLT, a UK cybersecurity organization analyzed the code against Google’s Web Store signature and verified the collector shipped within the authentic extension, not a fake one.

Stripe OLT’s study covers the Chrome build and its 900,000 users (an estimate); and Edge and its 700,000 users. Microsoft removed  the listing on July 3rd whereas Google pulled the Chrome listing a week after, on July 10th.

Attack tactic

Variant 7.0.18 still edits HTTP headers as shown. The same minimized background also consists of another system. On the first attempt, it makes a device fingerprint and deploys a hardcoded encryption key. As the user browses, it takes the domain from each page that user opens, encodes it, and gathers it locally, up to 1000 different domains.

Scheduler and other things

A scheduler combines your fingerprint with the encrypted list, uploads it to api.stanfordstudies[.]com, and deletes the local copy once a day. If the collector were turned on, browsers using it wouldn't all beacon at once because the upload time is offset per install. The same pipeline is described in separate teardowns by researcher Yunus Aydin on version 7.0.17 and HackIndex on version 7.0.18.

How does collector function

The collector functions only if your browser matches an entry on an internal allow-list, but the list ships empty. Every time, the check fails, and the pipeline stops before it gathers even a single domain. 

The small change is populating the list, without any click and no new permissions from the users, sent as a routine update. The endpoint URL, the scheduler, the storage logic, and the hardcoded key are all on the same device.

But not everything was silent. The extension pinged extensions-hub[.]com with the product, version, and browser when it was installed, updated, and uninstalled. 

Additionally, it was evident that the piece had been running because a script that runs on every page had already recorded actual request metadata in plain text to local storage. 

Compromised Jscrambler npm Releases Target Developer Environments with Cross-Platform Rust Infostealer

 



Developers and organizations using the Jscrambler npm package are being urged to audit their systems after multiple malicious releases were uploaded to the npm registry through a compromised publishing credential. The incident transformed a trusted development dependency into a malware delivery mechanism capable of stealing credentials, browser sessions, cryptocurrency wallets, and sensitive configuration files from Windows, macOS, and Linux systems. Jscrambler has confirmed the compromise was limited to its Code Integrity npm package and has advised users to upgrade to version 8.22.0 after revoking the affected publishing credentials and strengthening its release pipeline.

Security researchers first identified version 8.14.0 as the initial compromised release after discovering that it introduced a previously undocumented npm "preinstall" lifecycle hook. Unlike the legitimate 8.13.0 release, the malicious package included new files that were absent from Jscrambler's public source repository. During installation, the package silently unpacked and executed a native binary tailored to the victim's operating system, allowing the malware to run before developers ever interacted with the package itself. Socket detected the malicious release within minutes of publication, highlighting how quickly software supply chain attacks can unfold.

Technical analysis showed the package concealed separate native payloads for Linux, Windows, and macOS inside an obfuscated container embedded within the package. A lightweight loader selected the appropriate binary for the host operating system, wrote it to a temporary directory under a randomized filename, granted execution permissions where required, and launched it as a background process with minimal user visibility. Researchers also noted that these components never appeared in the project's public GitHub repository, suggesting the malicious code bypassed the project's normal development workflow and was introduced during package publication.

The payload itself is a Rust-based infostealer engineered to harvest assets commonly found on developer workstations and build infrastructure. Investigators found code targeting cloud credentials associated with AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud, browser-stored passwords and cookies, cryptocurrency wallets, Bitwarden vault data, communication platforms such as Slack, Discord and Telegram, and developer secrets that could provide access to production environments. Researchers also observed the malware searching for configuration files belonging to AI-assisted development tools, including Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, Visual Studio Code and Zed, where API keys and Model Context Protocol credentials are frequently stored.

Beyond credential theft, the malware incorporated platform-specific capabilities intended to strengthen its foothold on compromised systems. Analysts found Linux-specific code interacting with eBPF, a kernel technology that allows programs to execute within the operating system kernel, although the precise purpose of this functionality remains under investigation. Windows and macOS variants incorporated persistence mechanisms designed to survive system reboots, while encrypted command-and-control communications complicated static analysis and hindered efforts to identify the attackers' infrastructure. Runtime monitoring also identified outbound connections associated with the campaign's command infrastructure.

The campaign expanded rapidly after the initial discovery. Additional malicious versions, including 8.16.0, 8.17.0, 8.18.0 and 8.20.0, were subsequently identified. While the earlier releases relied on npm's preinstall hook to execute the malware automatically during installation, later versions embedded the same payload directly into the package's runtime code. This change allowed the malware to execute when the package was imported or its command-line interface was launched, reducing the effectiveness of mitigations such as disabling lifecycle scripts during installation. Researchers described the shift as an example of attackers quickly adapting to evolving software supply chain defenses.

Further investigation by JFrog linked the malware to an evolved variant of the IronWorm infostealer. According to the researchers, the malware extends beyond information theft by attempting to propagate itself across the npm ecosystem. The code searches compromised systems for npm authentication tokens, validates the stolen credentials, identifies valuable packages, injects malicious components into package archives, and attempts to publish trojanized versions directly to the npm registry. JFrog also reported that the malware broadens its search to include VPN configurations, password managers, Tor-related files and directories associated with penetration testing frameworks, indicating an effort to compromise developers, security researchers and enterprise engineering teams alike.

The incident adds to a growing series of attacks targeting open source software distribution channels, where compromising trusted packages offers attackers access to developer workstations and CI/CD pipelines instead of directly attacking production systems. Because these environments often contain deployment credentials, signing keys, cloud secrets and proprietary source code, a single compromised dependency can expose far more than the application that depends on it. Researchers have increasingly warned that software supply chain attacks are shifting toward development infrastructure, making continuous dependency monitoring and rapid package verification critical components of modern software security.

Organizations that installed any affected version should immediately upgrade to Jscrambler 8.22.0 or later, investigate development workstations and build systems for signs of compromise, and assume any credentials accessible to the affected environment have been exposed. Security teams should rotate cloud credentials, npm and GitHub tokens, API keys, browser sessions and other secrets, inspect lockfiles and build logs for compromised package versions, and review systems for persistence artifacts before returning affected machines to service.

Featured