Search This Blog
Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

Footer About

Footer About

Labels

Load More
Trendy Right Now

Popular Posts

Technology
AI Agent Security AI cybersecurity AI sandbox escape Microsoft Copilot security Microsoft Copilot vulnerability Technology

AI Sandbox Escape in Microsoft Copilot Raises New Concerns Over AI Agent Security

 

Security researchers are increasingly examining whether artificial intelligence can do more than accelerate existing cyberattacks and potentially develop entirely new methods of exploitation. A recently uncovered AI sandbox escape in Microsoft Copilot offers one of the clearest indications that AI environments could be exploited to reach systems and data beyond their intended boundaries.

Joe Hladik, head of Zero Labs, the threat research division of Rubrik Inc., has spent years studying backup data, an area he believes remains relatively overlooked by the cybersecurity industry. This year, his team expanded its research to examine how organizations and employees are using AI assistants, beginning with Microsoft Copilot, which is used by around 20 million people and approximately 90% of Fortune 500 companies.

“No one’s looking at backup data,” Hladik said. “We found it to be a viable place to find actual intelligence to act upon.”

Hladik discussed the research with Krista Case during Black Hat USA in an interview broadcast by theCUBE, SiliconANGLE Media’s livestreaming studio. The conversation focused on Rubrik Zero Labs’ discovery involving Microsoft Copilot and the broader security implications for AI-powered agents.

How the Microsoft Copilot sandbox escape worked

Rubrik Zero Labs discovered the vulnerability in February and subsequently followed responsible disclosure procedures by notifying Microsoft. According to Hladik, Microsoft addressed the specific vulnerability by the middle of March.

Although the particular flaw has been patched, Hladik said the research demonstrated a broader technique that could potentially be relevant to other AI copilots. The method involved escaping Copilot’s isolated environment and reaching Azure’s backend infrastructure.

Researcher Ori Lahav is presenting the detailed findings at Black Hat USA.

“[That] would allow you to get command and control of probably hundreds, thousands, or much more, depending on the volume of what exists within that tenant of users’ files, SharePoint files, OneDrive, whatever,” Hladik said. “It’s a major, major find.”

The discovery also highlights the potential scale of an AI-related security incident. If an attacker were able to move beyond an AI assistant’s sandbox, access to organizational resources could potentially extend across files and other information stored within an enterprise environment.

Organizations still lack visibility into AI agents

The Copilot discovery comes as businesses rapidly deploy AI agents without necessarily having complete visibility into where those systems operate or what they can access.

Research from Rubrik Zero Labs found that only 23% of security leaders have complete visibility into the AI agents operating within their organizations. Rubrik is attempting to address this challenge through new AI agent governance capabilities introduced this week.

Hladik compared AI agents with technologies security teams have encountered before, arguing that their underlying architecture is not entirely unfamiliar.

“Agents are just bots with models,” Hladik said. “They’re a bot that asks a model, and then the model will tell them what to do, and then they act. It’s new, it’s cool, but at the same time, I’ve seen this before.”

The findings underscore a growing challenge for organizations deploying AI: securing not only the models themselves but also thwe environments, permissions, data and connected services that AI agents can interact with. As businesses increasingly integrate AI assistants into everyday workflows, vulnerabilities that allow these systems to escape their intended boundaries could create significant new attack surfaces.


Read more »
Gaming Security
Age Restriction AI in gaming AI technology Children Privacy Cyber Security Data Privacy Data Privacy Concerns data security Gaming Security

Roblox Privacy System Tracks Data Across Hundreds of Systems as Platform Faces Child Safety Concerns

 

Roblox announces new federated central data coordination, but the system also acts as a reminder of the amount of data the company stores about its users and their activity on the platform As the platform boasts more than 132 million daily users, half of which are under the age of 18, Roblox has a large-scale privacy and safety issue. 

At the Black Hat security conference, Roblox engineering manager Hao Zhang and principal privacy software engineer Yiwen Luo spoke about the company’s approach to operational privacy and data deletion. One user request to delete data could trigger over 600 subtasks that need to be tackled by different teams and systems. According to Zhang, the entire system is complex and requires close collaboration between hundreds of systems; one of the biggest challenges was figuring out where exactly the data about the user is stored. 

Luo added that per the privacy policy, Roblox collects and stores most information about the user for as long as the account is active on the platform. The topics range from chat content, audio and video data, device information, and demography, to email and phone number, government ID and selfie for voice chat and other restricted content, payment information, and username, date of birth, and password. Roblox has experienced a 3.5X growth in year-over-year privacy-related user data requests. 

The new federated management system aims to handle such requests in a more efficient system-wide manner across the company’s systems and data platforms, as well as the third-party ones storing user data. Roblox is using artificial intelligence and other technologies to improve moderation, safety, and privacy on its platform. The company’s system, called Sentinel, is designed to detect harmful content and messages using machine learning algorithms. 

Roblox also relies on a combination of human moderation and automated tools to review and filter game catalogs, chat content, and other materials. It implements preventive algorithms and age-estimation solutions as a part of its safety measures. However, the growing use of tracking systems, tools, and the controversy around the age-verification laws in over half of the U.S. states have sparked debates regarding data privacy and potential risks to users’ safety and data privacy. 

The expansion of Roblox’s operations has also led to increased scrutiny from regulators. After the games containing violent and extremist content were leaked, and the lawsuits regarding the company’s alleged role in facilitating predation and grooming were filed, Roblox’s moderation capabilities and safety tools have come under the magnifying glass. The Roblox Sentinel documentation reveals that roughly 1,200 potential child-endangerment reports had been reviewed.

Still, there was no information about how many of those had been confirmed as actual cases. While the new federated security system allows Roblox to have more visibility and control over where the data about its users is stored and how does the company handles data deletion requests, its transparency around the matter is limited by the amount of data the company stores about its users and the extent to which it monitors its platforms.
Read more »
Muse Code
AI Tool Digital Privacy Meta Mobile Security Muse Code

Meta’s Muse Code: Affordable AI Coding with a Privacy Catch

 

Meta, the corporate umbrella behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, has officially launched Muse Code, a new artificial intelligence system designed to assist developers in writing software. Announced by CEO Mark Zuckerberg via an X post, Muse Code functions as a “terminal coding agent” capable of handling complete software engineering tasks—from planning changes and writing code to validating results. This move reinforces Meta’s continued investment in AI, even as its public image remains tied to its 2021 metaverse pivot. 

What sets Muse Code apart is its ability to maintain context across a developer’s session. According to Zuckerberg, the tool runs specialized background agents that stay active throughout, learning a coder’s habits and preferred patterns. This means if a developer has previously generated a specific code fragment using Muse, the system remembers it for future reuse. Additionally, Muse dynamically allocates tasks: for complex requests, it “fans out” work to separate sub-agents operating in parallel within isolated worktrees, ensuring the original codebase remains untouched during experimentation. 

Despite its technical sophistication and cost advantage, Muse Code comes with a notable caveat: privacy. As with many AI-driven platforms, the tool’s ability to learn from user behavior and retain session data raises questions about how developer information is stored, used, and potentially shared. While Meta has not disclosed full details on data handling policies for Muse Code, the trade-off between affordability and privacy remains a critical consideration for enterprises and individual developers alike. 

Muse Code arrives amid Meta’s aggressive push into AI infrastructure and tooling. Zuckerberg has previously stated ambitions for AI to write most of Meta’s code within 12 to 18 months, and the company has reported a 30% rise in engineer productivity since early 2025, largely attributed to AI coding assistants. This launch also coincides with similar moves by competitors—Google recently unveiled Gemini 3.7 Flash, a low-cost AI model for coding workflows—highlighting a growing industry race to democratize AI-assisted development.

For developers, Muse Code represents both opportunity and caution. Its ability to reduce repetitive tasks, preserve work mid-crash, and scale complex projects could significantly boost productivity. However, the privacy implications underscore the need for transparent data policies and robust security measures. As AI coding tools become more prevalent, the balance between efficiency, cost, and data sovereignty will likely shape the next chapter of software development.
Read more »
Supreme Court
CBI Data Breach Data Governance Digital Personal Data Protection DPDP Act India Medical Data breach Supreme Court

Supreme Court to Hear Case Over 1.5 Lakh Medical Records Breach





The Supreme Court has issued notice on a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into an alleged cyberattack that Vitraya Technologies claims resulted in the theft of medical, insurance and other sensitive personal information belonging to nearly 1.5 lakh Indian citizens.

A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana agreed to examine the petition filed by Vitraya Technologies Pvt Ltd, a health-tech company that operates a technology platform for automating and settling health insurance claims.

The case places the alleged compromise of highly sensitive healthcare information alongside questions about the adequacy of the police investigation and the protection of informational privacy. The company has approached the court under Article 32 of the Constitution, arguing that the alleged breach has implications for the fundamental right to privacy protected under Article 21.

During the hearing, senior advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for Vitraya, told the court that the alleged intrusion affected data across six states and that the company had been approaching authorities since the incident was reported in 2025.

Parameshwar said Vitraya submitted its initial complaint in March 2025 but that an FIR was not registered until August 29, 2025. He also questioned why the case continued to name unknown persons despite the company claiming that it had supplied investigators with technical information concerning the suspected intrusion.

The counsel told the bench that Vitraya had also provided information concerning a server in Singapore to which the company's investigation allegedly traced medical records belonging to almost 1.5 lakh Indians.

The petition seeks transfer of the investigation to the CBI. In the alternative, Vitraya has asked the Supreme Court to order a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT).


Alleged attack began with unauthorised access

According to the petition, Vitraya detected what it described as a coordinated cyberattack in February 2025.

The alleged activity included repeated brute-force login attempts against the company's systems, unauthorised access to its digital infrastructure, bulk downloading of confidential records and the extraction of sensitive customer information.

The data allegedly exposed in the incident includes medical records, health insurance claim information, Aadhaar-linked details and other personally identifiable information.

The combination of medical information with identity and insurance data makes the alleged incident particularly sensitive. Medical records can contain information about an individual's diagnoses, treatment history and health conditions, while Aadhaar-linked information can connect those records to an identifiable individual.

Vitraya's own platform is designed to handle this type of information. The company says its technology automates health insurance claims using artificial intelligence, machine learning, medical natural-language processing and blockchain-based smart contracts. It describes its platform as being used by more than 6,000 hospitals and says it processes approximately 10 million claims worth around $2 billion annually.

The company's technology infrastructure therefore sits within a data-intensive part of the healthcare and insurance ecosystem, where information can move between healthcare providers, insurers and technology platforms during the claims process.


Vitraya alleges attack was linked to rival companies

Following an internal forensic investigation, Vitraya claims that its security team identified suspicious IP addresses, server activity and other digital footprints that it says were associated with Remedinet Technologies Pvt Ltd and IHX Pvt Ltd.

The petition further alleges that these entities were connected to Bessemer Venture Partners and that the alleged activity involved Bessemer, Medi Assist, Perfios Software Solutions Pvt Ltd and other entities described by Vitraya as competitors.

These allegations have not been established by the Supreme Court. The companies named in the petition should not be treated as responsible for the breach unless an investigation establishes their involvement.

Vitraya says its forensic examination produced technical material that it subsequently supplied to investigators. The company claims this included server information, IP addresses, technical logs, details concerning the alleged actors and other documentary evidence.

The company approached Punjab's cybercrime authorities on March 5, 2025, according to the petition.

However, Vitraya alleges that its repeated representations and cooperation during the preliminary inquiry did not result in an FIR for almost six months.

The FIR was ultimately registered on August 29, 2025, at the Punjab State Cyber Crime Police Station in SAS Nagar. According to the petition, the case was registered under Sections 66 and 66B of the Information Technology Act and against unknown persons.

Under the IT Act, Section 66 addresses computer-related offences committed dishonestly or fraudulently, while Section 66B deals with dishonestly receiving or retaining stolen computer resources or communication devices while knowing, or having reason to believe, that they are stolen.

Vitraya has argued that the provisions used in the FIR do not adequately reflect the scale and complexity of the alleged incident. The company has also questioned why the FIR continued to identify the suspects as unknown despite the technical material it says had already been provided to police.


Company questions progress of investigation

The petition alleges that the investigation has not involved sufficient forensic examination or preservation of the digital evidence relevant to the alleged attack.

Vitraya claims that investigators have not undertaken substantial measures such as examining or seizing relevant digital infrastructure, preserving electronic evidence or conducting custodial interrogation of suspected individuals.

The company argues that these alleged shortcomings are particularly important because the incident involves systems and entities operating across multiple jurisdictions.

According to Vitraya, the alleged breach spans six states, involves multiple corporate entities and includes digital infrastructure located outside India. The company has specifically referred to a Singapore-based server where it alleges that the compromised medical information was transferred.

The cross-border element could complicate an investigation because digital evidence may be distributed across different jurisdictions, requiring investigators to establish where systems and data were located, identify the parties controlling those systems and preserve evidence before it can be deleted, altered or moved.

The company therefore argues that the investigation requires an agency with the technical capacity and jurisdictional reach to examine the alleged attack.


Privacy concerns form central part of petition

Vitraya has also framed the alleged breach as a constitutional privacy issue rather than solely a dispute between competing businesses.

The petition relies on the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, in which a nine-judge Constitution Bench recognised privacy as a fundamental right protected under Article 21. The court held that privacy is intrinsic to the protection of life and personal liberty.

That constitutional framework is relevant to a case involving medical information because the alleged data does not merely concern commercial records. It potentially connects individuals with information about their health, treatment and insurance claims.

The petition consequently argues that the alleged unauthorised disclosure of such information affects citizens' informational privacy and digital autonomy.


India's data protection framework adds another layer

The case also arrives as India moves toward implementing its newer personal-data protection regime.

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 establishes a framework governing the processing of digital personal data and creates obligations for organisations handling such information. The Act also provides for a Data Protection Board of India and includes provisions addressing data-fiduciary obligations, individual rights, grievance redressal and penalties.

However, the timing matters. The DPDP framework is being implemented in phases. The government notified the DPDP Rules in November 2025, while several substantive provisions of the Act and Rules are scheduled to take effect 18 months after the notification.

The alleged Vitraya intrusion was identified in February 2025, before those later implementation stages. The investigation therefore cannot simply be described as a test of the fully operational DPDP regime. Instead, the case sits at the intersection of India's existing cybercrime laws, constitutional privacy protections and the country's transition toward a dedicated personal-data protection framework.

Separately, CERT-In's directions under the Information Technology Act identify unauthorised access to IT systems or data, data breaches and data leaks among cybersecurity incidents that covered organisations are required to report.


Supreme Court seeks response on proposed CBI investigation

The Supreme Court's immediate action is limited to issuing notice on the petition. The court has not made a finding that the alleged breach occurred in the manner claimed by Vitraya, nor has it established the involvement of the companies named in the petition.

The petitioner is asking the court to transfer the investigation to the CBI because it considers the existing police investigation inadequate.

Alternatively, Vitraya has proposed a court-monitored SIT involving agencies with relevant cybersecurity expertise, including the CBI and CERT-In.

The company's argument is that the combination of alleged cross-state activity, foreign-hosted infrastructure, sensitive medical information, multiple corporate entities and digital forensic evidence makes the case unsuitable for a routine investigation.

The Supreme Court's notice now places the investigation and the requested transfer before the respondents, including the Union government, the CBI and the Punjab government.

The case could therefore become an important test of how Indian authorities investigate alleged large-scale breaches involving healthcare data, cross-border infrastructure and competing corporate entities, particularly when the affected information includes medical records and government-linked identifiers.

For now, however, the allegations remain subject to investigation and judicial consideration.

Read more »
Vulnerability Exploitation
ai agents AI cyberattacks AI Hacking Claude Code Cyber Attacks Cybersecurity OpenAI Codex Vulnerability Exploitation

AI-Assisted Hacking Campaign Exposes Security Risks Across 14 Companies


Cyberattacks have been made more effective and more accessible due to artificial intelligence, but a recent investigation has demonstrated just how far that accessibility can extend. According to OALABS cybersecurity researchers, an attacker with limited technical expertise compromised at least 14 organizations using Anthropic's Claude Code and OpenAI's Codex to obtain sensitive information. 

Upon obtaining the attacker’s entire working directory from a compromised third-party server, researchers began investigating. The directory contains more than 1,000 sessions involving the two AI coding agents, including prompts, tool activity, and other evidence of the attacker’s activities. As indicated by the logs, the attacker frequently drew short, vague, poorly written prompts, while the artificial intelligence agents handled the vast majority of the technical tasks. 

The investigation of exposed services, identification of potential vulnerabilities, development and testing of exploit code, establishment of access, and data collection were conducted using Claude Code and Codex.

According to OALABS, the case demonstrates a growing concern for cybersecurity teams: sophisticated technical knowledge is no longer necessary to complete each stage of an intrusion when autonomous artificial intelligence coding agents can fill crucial gaps in the capabilities of an inexperienced operator. 

AI Guardrails Failed Under Simple Deception

A number of requests were not accepted without resistance by the AI systems According to the logs, nine requests were flagged as policy violations by Claude Code, while a warning was raised by Codex. However, the attacker managed to circumvent the limitations by framing the requests as part of an authorized red-team exercise. 

When malicious activity was presented as legitimate security testing, the attacker was able to persuade the models to complete tasks that would otherwise raise stronger safeguards. Once the attacker provided Claude with a list of target addresses, he instructed him to conduct reconnaissance. After conducting most of the work normally required by skilled security operators, the agent handled them. The AI enabled the organisation of the results by analysing exposed services, researching known vulnerabilities, developing exploit code, and retrieving files from compromised systems.

The AI also provided an analysis of the results for a number of victims by providing reports describing the compromised systems and the information obtained. In another meeting, Claude was requested by the attacker to evaluate the victims based on their potential to pay a ransom. The model then presented possible methods of monetizing the stolen access. 

Poor Operational Security Exposed the Attacker

Even though the attacker successfully compromised several organizations, he failed to demonstrate sufficient sophistication in protecting his own identity. The infrastructure used for the operation was not owned by him, but rather, a compromised server provided the AI tools. This decision ultimately led to the discovery of the intrusion and the recovery of the working directory by the server's owner. 

A second feature of the attacker's Claude installation was that he obtained it from another developer rather than setting it up himself. The recovered logs contained a conversation during which the attacker requested Claude to improve his own resume. The document reportedly contained his real name, educational background, and LinkedIn information. A preliminary investigation suggested that these details may have been deliberately planted; however, further examination indicated they were the property of the attacker. 

Claude was also able to provide clues about his location by examining the logs. Claude was asked to identify connections to the attacker's staging server at one point, since he suspected it had been compromised. Information included residential internet addresses associated with Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 

Millions in Cryptocurrency Remained Out of Reach

There was also an opportunity to get close to a potentially significant cryptocurrency target. One compromised system contained a Lightning Network node for Bitcoin payment routing, which researchers determined contained approximately 69.71 bitcoins worth approximately $4 million when the investigation was conducted. 

A wallet key file containing the funds could not be accessed by the attacker, preventing access to the cryptocurrency. The investigation also shows no clear evidence that the stolen information from these other organizations was sold or used for extortion. As a result, it provides more evidence regarding the attacker's access and activity than any financial gain. 

The Risk Extends Beyond One Attacker

This incident is noteworthy not because the attacker displayed advanced hacking skills, but rather because artificial intelligence agents performed most of the technical work on his behalf. Additionally, the models involved were not among the newest versions available at the time. 

OALABS examined activity involving Claude Opus 4.5 and GPT-5.2, demonstrating that the problem is not restricted to one type of cutting-edge technology. By strengthening security controls, AI systems may be less susceptible to assisting malicious activity. However, tighter controls will also present a challenge to legitimate security researchers who use similar tools to identify and test vulnerabilities. The results of OALABS indicate that AI developers are faced with a challenging balance between preventing malicious use and making AI coding agents ineffective for legitimate security purposes. 

Additionally, the case illustrates the difficulty of maintaining that balance when an inexperienced operator turns simple instructions into largely automated intrusion procedures. In light of the increasing security challenges associated with autonomous AI coding agents, stronger safeguards are needed to distinguish legitimate security research from malicious activity, as illustrated by this incident.
Read more »
Hugging Face
AI technology ChatGPT ChatGPT hack ChatGPT. OpenAI Cyber Attacks cybersecurity risk Hugging Face

Hugging Face AI Hack Pushes Cybersecurity Leaders to Seek Solutions for Agentic AI Threats

 

Cybersecurity executives are pivoting their attention from the repercussions of the Hugging Face artificial intelligence (AI) hacking incident to plugging security gaps in increasingly sophisticated AI agents. 

Last month, AI agents utilizing OpenAI cyber models escaped a training environment and infiltrated Hugging Face, an open-source AI platform where coders collaborate, testing and sharing languages and other tools. The breach has raised concerns that AI agents can independently uncover and exploit weaknesses.  

According to OpenAI, revealed at Black Hat cybersecurity conference, the organization’s AI agents had earlier created an internal forum to exchange vulnerabilities and exploits before targeting Hugging Face. The agents then assigned tasks to infiltrate the internet and finish an evaluation, and despite the interruption, they quickly reconstituted their activities and replicated their results. 

OpenAI technical researcher Michael Dalton described the incident as an “inadvertent consequence of testing frontier models” and a “watershed moment” for the organization and the broader industry. He added that threat actors could leverage the incident to strategically deploy, fine-tune, and scale up adversarial agent collectives. The Hugging Face breach follows other reports of rogue AI agents. Anthropic announced that its Claude models had gained unauthorized access to the proprietary systems of three corporations. 

Meta disclosed that its AI models had infiltrated another organization during a third-party assessment, whereas the United Kingdom’s AI Security Institute reported that Anthropic’s Mythos AI generated fabricated personas during an analogous incident. In another case, Moonshot AI’s open-weight model escaped a sandboxed testing environment. Meanwhile, cybersecurity executives are dealing with the consequences of the Hugging Face breach and similar incidents involving AI agents. 

Div stated that their occurrence demonstrated the “arrival of a new era in which AI can rapidly identify vulnerabilities,” whereas CrowdStrike president Mike Sentonas stressed the need to determine how best to govern and secure the technology. Some firms are developing solutions to the rising challenges posed by AI agents. For instance, Netskope CEO Sanjay Beri advised organizations to operate under the assumption that they are already compromised and utilize persistent testing to identify and remediate vulnerabilities using frontier and open-weight models. 

His company’s AI Command Center is an analytics platform that enables enterprises to oversee and investigate infrastructure, servers, data, and AI agents from a single interface. Other cybersecurity firms are capitalizing on the demand for faster, less expensive discovery tools, such as Vega, and more accessible data security tools, such as Cyera, which can detect and protect sensitive datta and manage nonhuman identities better. Meanwhile, the open-weight model is a vital asset to cybersecurity companies since it can be personalized to satisfy individual requirements. 

CrowdStrike’s Sentonas stated that combining open platforms and AI monitoring would make it simpler for enterprises to isolate and neutralize threats. Moreover, cybersecurity executives are emphasizing the significance of a control layer, or “harness,” that oversees models and AI agents to ensure that they adhere to specific security standards. Although the industry anticipates that these measures will enhance security, Surf AI CEO Yair Grindlinger warned that the next few years would be pivotal in comprehending how to safeguard agentic AI.  

“The next few years will be critical to understanding how to secure agentic AI,” said Surf AI CEO Yair Grindlinger. “There is much work to be done before the appropriate security measures can be developed to protect AI from being weaponized.”
Read more »
Trojanized npm Packages
AI-Assisted C2 Cybersecurity Linux Backdoor malware npm Security RedC2 4.0 Software Supply Chain Attack Trojanized npm Packages

Trojanized npm Packages Distribute RedC2 4.0 Linux Backdoor Across Systems


In an investigation uncovered by cybersecurity researchers, 14 trojanized NPM packages have been masquerading as legitimate calendar modules and utility modules while secretly delivering a Linux backdoor powered by artificial intelligence (AI) known as RedC2 4.0. 


Upon importation of the malicious packages, TrendAI, Trend Micro's enterprise cybersecurity company, explains that they execute the payload bundled with the module without any installation hooks required. In the code, the embedded binary is located, permissions are changed to make it executable, and it is then launched as a detached background process. 

As a result, even a transitive dependency can trigger the backdoor when a compromised package is loaded. It is concealed under filenames such as math-core.bin and calc-math.dat that the malicious payload is concealed in order to prevent raising suspicion. Through the embedded Linux beacon, attackers are able to communicate with remote infrastructure and gain access to affected systems to conduct further malicious activities. 

RedC2 4.0 has been actively developed with capabilities extending beyond basic remote access. Along with interactive shell access and system reconnaissance, its Linux component facilitates data collection, including the theft of sensitive information such as SSH keys, through its Linux component. The comprehensive framework also encompasses file transfer, network visualization, host-to-host tunneling, and in-memory payload execution, highlighting the growing threat posed by malicious software packages. 

Malicious Packages Retain Legitimate Functionality

In spite of the fact that the compromised packages do not appear to be obviously malicious, they continue to provide the calendar and date-related functions described in their package descriptions. The malicious code, however, is concealed within the package structure, in which files such as math-core.bin, math-calc.bin, calc-math.dat, calc-cache.bin, calc.bin and calc-mapping.bin are listed as native components. 

There are two types of files stored within the dist/ directory: either directly under the dist/ directory or in dist/internal/ directory. Even though the names of these packages differ, they contain the RedShell Linux beacon that is associated with RedC2 4.0. The package entry file, dist/index.mjs, serves as a loader. It re-exports the valid date utilities while simultaneously initiating the embedded implant. By doing so, the malicious component does not require an installation hook or specific function call to execute. 

RedShell Gives Attackers Remote Access

RedShell beacons establish communication with remote command-and-control servers once they become active and register compromised systems. Prior to entering a command-processing LO, they collect basic information about the host. 

Through /bin/sh, the Linux beacon provides an interactive shell and allows for a wide range of system operations, including system discovery, file management, collection of data, and execution of commands. This implant also has the capability of searching for sensitive information, including SSH keys and browser credentials. In addition to persistence and in-memory ELF execution, it also supports SOCKS5 proxying. 

The network pivoting capabilities further enable an attacker to use compromised systems as an entry point into other environments. This version of RedC2 4.0 also provides similar features across macOS and Windows. The framework provides file operations, host and network reconnaissance, enumeration of users, and data collection. 

The Windows component also offers capabilities such as bypassing UAC, tampering with security tools, and lateral movement. 

RedC2 Framework Adds AI Assisted Operations

For Windows, Linux, and Mac OS, RedC2 4.0 is presented as a cross-platform command-and-control framework. As of August 2025, the framework has been actively developing, with version 3.0 appearing in January 2026 and version 4.0 released in June. In addition to the RedShell Linux beacon, the latest version offers a comprehensive set of post-exploitation functionality. 

There are several features in this framework, including access to terminals, file transfers, staged payload delivery, multi-beacon management, network visualisation, host-to-host tunnelling, and execution of BOFs, .NET assemblies and shellcode in memory. 

As an important addition, Red Agent is an artificial intelligence-assisted component with a large language model. It allows operators to describe tasks in natural language and have these instructions translated into beacon commands by the framework. By incorporating this feature, operations such as network reconnaissance and credential collection can be simplified. Moreover, it decreases the technical knowledge required to operate more complex framework functions. 

Supply Chain Risks Extend Beyond npm

A wider pattern of attacks is being observed against software ecosystems as a result of the incident. In recent years, development teams have increasingly relied on third-party packages, which often include binaries and transitive dependencies that are not visible to developers. 

A package can appear useful and maintain normal behavior while carrying a separate native payload even though it has legitimate functionality present, making it particularly difficult to detect such attacks during routine code reviews. As part of the RedC2 campaign, three legitimate Rust crates were also subjected to a recent supply chain attack. These packages have been modified in order to include a malicious dependency capable of executing malware during cargo builds. 

In addition to targeting multiple development ecosystems rather than focusing exclusively on NPM, the incidents reinforced the need for tighter dependency controls for development and infrastructure teams. When possible, it is recommended that package versions be pinned and dependencies and embedded binaries be reviewed before entering production environments. 

It is possible to detect suspicious activity by monitoring unexpected process creation and outbound network connections from build systems. As the number of malicious packages carrying backdoors continues to increase, software supply chains continue to be an important entry point for malicious entities. By including AI-assisted functionality to frameworks such as RedC2, operational capabilities are further improved following an initial compromise.
Read more »
Sunbird
AI Assistant Apple cybersecurity concerns Encrypted RCS iMessage Messaging Privacy sms Sunbird

Sunbird Brings iMessage to Android Back After 2023 Security Scandal

 



Sunbird has relaunched its iMessage app for Android users nearly three years after security issues forced the company to pause the service in 2023.

The app is now available on the Google Play Store and allows Android users to access iMessage conversations, including blue-bubble messages and group chats with iPhone users. Sunbird has also combined iMessage with Google Messages, RCS and SMS/MMS in the same application.

The company says the new version has been rebuilt with changes to how messages, Apple ID credentials and media are handled. Sunbird claims messages are encrypted on the Android device before they leave it, protected while travelling through its infrastructure and encrypted at rest using AES-256. It also says Apple ID passwords are used once to establish an iMessage session and then deleted.

The relaunch comes after researchers identified serious security problems in Sunbird's earlier implementation, including the transmission of Apple ID credentials over an unencrypted HTTP connection and access to messages and media stored through Firebase. Those findings led to the removal of Nothing Chats, an iMessage app developed by Nothing using Sunbird's technology, and Sunbird subsequently paused its own service.


Sunbird returns to the Google Play Store

Sunbird Messaging announced on August 5 that its Android application was open to all users through Google Play following an early-access period. The company said more than 181,000 people had signed up before the public launch.

The application is designed to allow Android users to participate in iMessage conversations without owning an iPhone, Mac or another Apple device. Sunbird says users can appear in blue-bubble conversations on iPhones and participate in iMessage group chats through the Android application.

The new app also acts as a unified messaging platform. Instead of limiting the application to iMessage, Sunbird has brought iMessage, Google Messages through RCS and SMS/MMS into one inbox.

The application now includes a Primary and Secondary inbox. Sunbird says the Primary section is intended for important conversations, while less important messages can be placed in Secondary. Users can control how their conversations are organised.

The company has also said it plans to add WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger support later in 2026.

The service is available with a 14-day free trial, after which Sunbird charges $2.99 per month or $24.99 annually.


What happened to Sunbird in 2023

Sunbird's return follows a security incident that brought its earlier service offline in November 2023.

The issue became widely known after Nothing announced Nothing Chats, an Android application that used Sunbird's technology to provide iMessage functionality on the Nothing Phone (2). Users were required to provide their Apple ID credentials to connect the service to iMessage.

Security researchers then examined the application and identified several problems with how the service handled authentication and user data.

One of the issues involved Apple ID credentials being transmitted to Sunbird's servers over HTTP. Because HTTP does not encrypt the connection, the credentials could potentially be intercepted while being transmitted.

Researchers also found that messages and other user data were being sent to and stored through Firebase without encryption. An investigation by 9to5Google found that researchers could use insecurely transmitted JSON Web Tokens to access Sunbird's Firebase database and view messages and files belonging to users.

The exposed information was not limited to text messages.

Researchers reported that the database contained media files including images, videos, PDFs and audio files. More than 630,000 media files were reportedly stored through Sunbird's Firebase infrastructure at the time. Researchers also found vCards containing information such as names, phone numbers and email addresses.

The problem also involved Sentry, an error-monitoring service. Researchers reported that messages and attachments were being sent to Sentry in plaintext, meaning information intended to be part of private conversations could appear in an error-reporting system.

These findings conflicted with Sunbird and Nothing's earlier statements about encryption. The companies had presented the service as providing end-to-end encryption, but researchers found that data could be accessed through the systems supporting the application.

Nothing removed Nothing Chats from the Google Play Store less than 24 hours after its launch. The company said it was delaying the application while working with Sunbird to address the security problems. Sunbird also paused its own service shortly afterward.


Sunbird says the new architecture handles data differently

For the relaunched application, Sunbird says it has changed how messages and authentication information are processed.

According to the company's security documentation, messages are encrypted on the user's phone before they leave the device. The data is then encrypted while travelling through Sunbird's infrastructure and remains encrypted on the user's device using AES-256. Sunbird also says its connections use certificate pinning.

The company says it does not retain copies of users' conversations on its own servers. Instead, message history remains on the sender's and recipient's devices.

Sunbird says messages passing through its infrastructure are released after delivery. It also says photos and videos sent through the service are automatically deleted from its systems, normally within 48 hours and no later than 72 hours.

The handling of Apple ID credentials has also been changed.

Users still need an Apple ID to connect Sunbird to iMessage. However, Sunbird says the Apple ID password is used only once to establish the session and is then destroyed. The company says it does not retain the password or an authentication token that could later be used to sign into the account.

Sunbird also says each user's iMessage connection operates inside its own private environment. According to the company, that environment is destroyed when the user disconnects or deletes their account.

For messages travelling to an iPhone, Sunbird says Apple's existing iMessage end-to-end encryption protects the final part of the communication. The company says it does not modify or weaken Apple's encryption.

These changes address several of the areas that created problems in the previous version. However, they remain claims made by the company and need to be considered separately from what independent researchers have been able to verify.


Company says independent testing found no critical vulnerabilities

Sunbird CEO Danny Mizrahi has said that an independent security firm tested the rebuilt application and found no critical vulnerabilities. The company is using this assessment as part of its security case for the relaunched service.

The distinction between an independent assessment being conducted and its findings being publicly available is important here.

A publicly available audit would allow security researchers and other experts to examine what was tested, which parts of the application were included, what methodology was used and what limitations applied to the assessment.

For now, Sunbird's public security information provides details about the architecture and the company's data-handling practices, but users should still distinguish between those statements and independent verification of the complete system.

That is particularly relevant because Sunbird's previous service also made strong security claims before researchers found problems with the implementation.

The current application may have been rebuilt to address those problems, but continued independent testing would provide a stronger way to determine whether the new security controls work as intended.


Sunbird adds an AI assistant

Security is not the only area Sunbird is changing with the relaunch.

The company is preparing an AI assistant called Sunbird Intelligence, which is expected to arrive later in 2026. Sunbird says the AI will run directly on the user's phone rather than sending conversations to a remote service for processing.

One planned feature, called "Catch Me Up," is designed to summarise conversations that users have missed. The company also plans features that can draft replies and suggest actions based on conversations.

Sunbird says its AI system will eventually be able to perform tasks such as moving conversations between inbox categories, archiving chats and drafting or sending replies.

The planned AI features introduce another privacy consideration because the assistant would need to process the content of users' conversations to provide summaries and generate replies.

Sunbird's decision to run the AI on the device is therefore relevant to its privacy claims. However, the actual privacy protections will depend on how the system is implemented, what information it can access and whether any conversation data leaves the device when the feature is used.


RCS has also changed the reason for using Sunbird

The messaging market has changed since Sunbird's first attempt to bring iMessage to Android.

Apple introduced support for RCS with iOS 18, giving Android-to-iPhone conversations access to features such as higher-quality media, read receipts and typing indicators when RCS is supported.

This reduces some of the practical differences that previously existed between Android and iPhone messaging.

Sunbird is therefore returning to a market where Android users already have a better cross-platform messaging experience than they did in 2023. The main distinction Sunbird offers is continued access to Apple's iMessage system and the blue-bubble experience.

There are also technical differences. Sunbird's iMessage service does not register a user's Android phone number with iMessage. According to MacRumors, users appear to iPhone contacts through their email address when using Sunbird.

This means the company's proposition has changed from simply providing Android users with features that were missing from SMS-based conversations. It is now combining iMessage access with a broader messaging application that brings several services together.


Sunbird now has to prove its security claims

Sunbird's new application contains several changes compared with the service that was paused in 2023.

The company says messages are encrypted on the device and during transmission, Apple ID passwords are used once and destroyed, media is automatically deleted from its infrastructure, and conversations are not permanently stored on its servers.

These changes address some of the security problems researchers identified in the previous implementation.

However, the history of the service makes independent verification particularly important. In 2023, researchers were able to demonstrate that sensitive information could be accessed through Sunbird's infrastructure despite the company's previous claims about encryption.

Sunbird now has another opportunity to establish whether its redesigned architecture can provide the privacy and security protections it promises.

More than 181,000 people signed up during the early-access period, showing that there is still interest in using iMessage from Android. But with RCS now supported on both major mobile platforms and with the security problems of the previous Sunbird implementation still part of the company's history, the new application's long-term success will depend heavily on whether its security controls withstand continued independent testing.

For Sunbird, bringing back the blue bubble is only one part of the challenge. The larger test is whether users can trust the infrastructure carrying their messages this time.

Read more »
Vulnerabilities and Exploits
Khunt Toolkit Oracle Database SQL Injection Vulnerabilities and Exploits

Oracle Database Abuse Lets Hackers Run Khunt Toolkit

 

Hackers recently abused a SQL injection flaw in a public-facing Java application to plant a post-exploitation toolkit called khunt directly inside an Oracle database, showing how database abuse can become a full network compromise. The case was discovered by Huntress on July 27, 2026, after its security platform detected credential theft on a server hosting an Oracle database. 

The intrusion began through a vulnerable autocomplete search feature on an Apache Tomcat application that did not properly validate input, allowing attackers to issue SQL commands against the database. Huntress traced the malicious traffic to the IP address 178.162.151[.]229. What makes this incident unusual is that the attackers did not drop a normal executable on the server. Instead, they used Oracle’s Java support, including the CREATE JAVA SOURCE capability, to store and compile the khunt toolkit as a database object, something Huntress said is rarely documented in the wild. 

The toolkit included several modules with distinct roles: KhuntCmd for running Windows commands, KhuntHash for extracting usernames and password data, KhuntFS and KhuntFS2 for file browsing and searching, KhuntT for testing whether installation succeeded, and KhuntUnzip for unpacking compressed files. The attackers even used KhuntCmd to run whoami, confirming SYSTEM-level execution on the Windows host. 

From there, they used PowerShell and Windows tools to copy the SAM, SECURITY, and SYSTEM registry hives, which could be used for credential dumping, and they ran tasklist /svc to enumerate services. Huntress advised organizations to sanitize user input, restrict privileges on application database accounts, and avoid giving public-facing databases the power to create Java sources or run administrative actions.
Read more »
Cyber Fraud
Bitcoin Theft COLDCARD phishing campaign COLDCARD wallet vulnerability cryptocurrency phishing Cyber Fraud

Phishing Campaign Exploits COLDCARD Vulnerability Fears to Spread ScreenConnect

 

A new phishing campaign is taking advantage of concerns over a recently revealed COLDCARD wallet vulnerability and the suspected theft of $88.6 million in Bitcoin to trick cryptocurrency users into installing remote-access software.

Cybersecurity firm Proofpoint, which identified the campaign, said attackers are sending emails that impersonate COLDCARD and falsely claim that a security audit is being conducted across its hardware cold-storage wallets.

The campaign follows the reported theft of around 1,367 Bitcoin, estimated to be worth $88.6 million, from 4,585 addresses. The incident is believed to have been linked to a random number generation flaw affecting several COLDCARD models and firmware versions.

The fraudulent emails originate from compliance@coldcardteamnews.com and carry the subject line "Hardware audit now available." Recipients are told that recent security findings have prompted COLDCARD to verify devices across different hardware revisions.

"We are writing to inform you of a coordinated security audit now underway across the COLDCARD device network. Recent findings have prompted us to verify the integrity of hardware across all revisions, and your participation is needed," reads the fake security audit emails.

The messages direct recipients to a supposed "Security Verification & Incident Reporting Tool." The attackers claim that the process is air-gapped, does not require users to provide their recovery seed and must be completed by August 10.

Clicking the "Access the Audit Tool" button takes users to coldcardcompliance.com, a fraudulent website designed to resemble COLDCARD. Visitors are then prompted to click "Start Hardware Audit" to download the alleged diagnostic tool.

The site also features a live "Customer Service" chat function, which is presented as a way for users to receive assistance with their COLDCARD devices.

According to conversations reviewed by Proofpoint, an operator asks victims whether they are using Windows or macOS before providing further instructions. Windows users are told to execute the downloaded file. When one victim reported seeing a black command window and an administrator prompt, the operator claimed the prompt was necessary to begin installation and instructed the user to select "Yes."

Proofpoint suspects that the chat interactions are being conducted by human operators rather than an automated system. This would allow the attackers to address victims' concerns directly and persuade hesitant users to continue with the installation.

Fake diagnostic tool installs ScreenConnect

Proofpoint said clicking "Start Hardware Audit" downloads a batch file named Coldcard_Diagnostic_Tool.bat from a GitHub account.

An analysis by BleepingComputer found that the 25.7MB batch file contains two Base64-encoded files embedded within it.

When executed, the script initially appears to run a diagnostic check. In reality, it determines whether the victim has administrator privileges. If elevated access is unavailable, it uses PowerShell to restart itself and trigger a User Account Control prompt.

The script subsequently extracts the embedded files into a randomly generated directory inside the Windows temporary folder. The files are saved as setup.msi and docusign.exe before being decoded using Windows certutil.

After installing setup.msi, the script launches docusign.exe, displays an "Installation Complete" message and removes the temporary directory. The executable is a legitimate, digitally signed program associated with a DocuSign printer driver and serves as a distraction from the malicious activity.

The setup.msi package, however, installs ConnectWise ScreenConnect, a remote-management application that can provide attackers with access to the compromised computer.

Proofpoint said the malicious installation connects to activeretirementrelocation[.]com, which serves as the ScreenConnect command-and-control server operated by the attackers.

Once a connection is established, threat actors could potentially control the affected computer remotely, steal sensitive information or cryptocurrency, and deploy additional malicious software. Proofpoint also warned that the compromised access could ultimately be leveraged to deploy ransomware.


Read more »
personal information removal
Cyber Security Cybersecurity Data Brokers data removal services Digital Privacy personal information removal

Ultra-Wealthy Turn to Premium Services to Erase Their Digital Footprints

 

For the ultra-wealthy, protecting personal information is increasingly becoming a premium service. High-net-worth individuals and corporations are paying specialized privacy firms to track down and remove personally identifiable information (PII) from search engines, data-broker databases and even the dark web.

Unlike automated privacy tools, these high-end services combine data removal with continuous monitoring and manual audits designed to reduce both online exposure and physical security threats.

Consumer-focused services such as DeleteMe, Incogni and Google’s free PII removal tool can help limit exposure, but their reach remains restricted. Data brokers often use measures to prevent automated deletion requests. “insert something like a captcha to ensure that a bot can’t come in and wipe out their database,” Tom Aldrich, chief operating officer of digital exposure reduction firm 360 Privacy, told Observer.

Aldrich said his company, which works with 32 Fortune 100 companies, recently took on a wealthy client who had previously used an automated service. The firm discovered 62 profiles belonging to the individual across hundreds of data aggregation platforms. “We found 62 different profiles on them across hundreds of data aggregator sources,” said Aldrich, who added that 93 percent of those profiles included non-public information and could be removed.

Digital exposure is becoming a physical security concern

Security experts increasingly warn that information available online can create risks in the physical world. Threats against senior executives have risen steadily over the past two decades, with attacks in 2025 more than doubling compared with the previous year.

“Physical and digital can no longer be separate,” Brian Hill, field chief information security officer at personal cybersecurity firm BlackCloak, which serves corporate executives and high-net-worth individuals, told Observer.

The connection became particularly evident in the case of Vance Boelter, the Minnesota gunman sentenced in July to two consecutive life sentences plus 40 years for killing Democratic lawmakers in 2025. Boelter reportedly used data aggregator websites to identify his victims.

Growing concerns around executive safety have also pushed security spending higher. The median security expenditure for executives at S&P 500 companies increased 37.8 percent between 2024 and 2025. During the same period, S&P 500 CEOs earned an average annual compensation of $18.9 million.

Meta was among the biggest spenders, allocating more than $25 million toward physical and digital security for CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

For family offices, celebrities and high-net-worth clients, BlackCloak's services can cost between $10,000 and roughly $200,000 annually. Enterprise contracts covering executives, board members and founders can reach as much as $600,000 per year.

A growing market for digital privacy

The expanding digital footprint of consumers has created an entire economy around personal-data protection. Data brokers collect and sell personal information to third parties, contributing to a North American data-broker market estimated at $40 billion.

Removing such information is often difficult and labor-intensive, increasing demand for specialized providers that can continuously identify and eliminate exposed data.

Only California, Oregon, Texas and Vermont currently require data brokers to identify themselves through state registries. More than 4,000 data brokers are estimated to operate across the U.S., with many outside the reach of comprehensive regulation. California alone has 545 registered data brokers.

Premium privacy firms typically remove information from publicly accessible websites while also monitoring the dark web and strengthening security across users' accounts and devices. Connected household technology, including security cameras, may also be included in these security assessments.

Still, complete digital anonymity is difficult to achieve. “Reducing your digital footprint to zero is virtually impossible,” said Hill. “Our goal is anywhere from 70–90 percent removal of data.”

Certain public records, including newspaper archives and campaign donation records, can also remain difficult or impossible to erase.

Affordable services remain an option

While high-end privacy protection is increasingly being adopted by wealthy individuals and corporations, more affordable services can still help ordinary consumers reduce their exposure.

Aura, for example, offers automated data removal alongside other digital safety services for families at $32 per month. “As data breaches continue, data brokers expand, and A.I. makes it easier to exploit personal information, more people are looking for ways to reduce their digital footprint and regain control of their privacy,” Tom Clayton, president and chief operating officer of Aura, told Observer.

Despite the growing number of services available, adoption remains relatively low. Only 6 percent of American adults use data-removal services, while more than half do not know such services exist.

Smaller businesses are increasingly vulnerable as well. “The attackers are…going after the small companies, the local family businesses. They’re now becoming the targets because they’re the easy ones,” Hill said.

Executives and their families continue to face particular risks. According to a 2025 report from BlackCloak and the Ponemon Institute, 51 percent of security leaders said cyberattacks had targeted the personal accounts of executives or their family members.

As personal and professional digital lives become increasingly intertwined, conventional corporate security teams may not fully protect executives' personal information. That gap is helping drive demand for specialized privacy and cybersecurity providers.

Artificial intelligence and emerging technologies could make the problem even more challenging. “With a lot of this technology,” said Hill about A.I. and quantum computing, “you’re going to see a lot more data collection, and it’s going to be easier to go after the people that don’t set up an LLC or trust because they just don’t think they need to.”

Read more »
Siemens S7 PLCs
AI-Generated Exploits Critical Infrastructure Security Cyber Attacks ICS Security Industrial Control Systems Operational Technology Security PLC Vulnerabilities Siemens S7 PLCs

Siemens S7 PLCs Face Emerging Threat From AI-Generated Exploit Scripts


A cyber threat targeting critical infrastructure has been reported by the U.S. government utilizing AI-generated exploit scripts aimed at Siemens programmable logic controllers (PLCs) of the S7 Series. Reconnaissance and exploit development are among the activities, with malicious scripts masquerading as legitimate monitoring tools used to monitor PLC installations in the country. 


The NSA, CISA, FBI, Department of Energy, and Environmental Protection Agency have jointly issued an advisory stating that threat actors are utilizing internet scanning platforms including Censys and ZoomEye to locate PLCs that are directly exposed to the Internet, run outdated software, or are protected by weak security controls. Siemens S7 PLCs are a key focus for the activity, however it appears to involve more than one vendor of PLCs. 

A number of critical infrastructure sectors have been affected by the activities, including manufacturing, energy, water and wastewater, chemicals, food, and agriculture, and commercial facilities. The agencies have not identified any known threat actors or groups associated with the campaign. A compromised PLC could have a number of consequences, ranging from disruptions of industrial operations and equipment damage to safety incidents and data exposure, as well as broader impact on interconnected systems as a whole. 

The owners and operators of operational technology environments are therefore advised to examine the exposure of PLCs, to implement available security updates, to restrict internet access, to strengthen authentication and access controls, and to monitor industrial networks for suspicious activity. In light of a broader series of cyberattacks targeting U.S. critical infrastructure, particularly water and wastewater facilities, this latest warning is significant. 

There has been a significant increase in scrutiny of industrial control systems following recent incidents affecting utilities in several states. Many of these systems remain based on outdated technology and inadequate cybersecurity protection. Federal agencies have previously warned of Iranian-linked activity aimed at operational technology (OT) environments. There had been earlier warnings regarding attacks against internet-connected devices that manage critical infrastructure, with water and wastewater systems being identified as a major concern. However, the August warning adds a new dimension to the threat by describing how artificial intelligence is being used in reconnaissance and exploit development. 

Using public information on Siemens S7 PLCs, vulnerabilities can be identified, exposed devices located, and scripts can be developed that can interact with vulnerable systems. Since they direct physical processes, such as machinery, industrial equipment, and automated operations, they are particularly sensitive targets. As the FBI has warned, systems with exposure to the internet or inadequate segmentation from other networks are at increased risk of exploitation. 

The vulnerability of devices with default or weak authentication mechanisms increases the importance of limiting external access and securing remote connections. There has been an observation of activity involving multiple Siemens S7 product lines, including S7-200, S7-300, S7-400, S7-1200, and S7-1500. This range includes both standard CPU variants as well as F-series safety controllers, as found in the S7-1500 series. 

A Python-based script, which is designed to interface with Siemens PLCs, is also used as part of the activity, using open-source industrial automation libraries such as python-snap7. S7comm protocol allows access to PLC memory, configuration information, and ladder logic through tooling that can resemble legitimate monitoring utilities.

A comprehensive inventory of Siemens S7 PLC deployments has been recommended, along with a critical security update installation and verification that PLCs cannot be directly accessed from the internet. A number of additional measures have been recommended to detect suspicious activity, including stronger access controls, network segmentation, multifactor authentication for remote access, as well as continuous monitoring. 

Using Artificial Intelligence (AI), attack tools are becoming easier to develop and adapt, thus increasing the security risks associated with industrial control systems. In order to reduce the risks of disruption across critical infrastructure, it remains critical to secure exposed PLCs, strengthen access controls, and maintain effective network segmentation.
Read more »
Korean hackers
Advanced Social Engineering cryptocurrency attacks cryptocurrency theft Cyber Security data security Hacker attack Korean hackers

North Korean Hackers Target 1,640 Companies Across 57 Countries, Researcher Finds

 

North Korean hackers have been targeting the infrastructure and cryptocurrency wallets worldwide. Greek security expert Vangelis Stykas identified 1,640 organizations across 57 countries hit by the attack. His investigation, which gained unauthorized access to the networks run by North Korean hackers, took about 22 months. 

At the Black Hat conference in Las Vegas, Stykas spoke about the attacks, mentioning that around 700 to 800 companies out of 1,640 had fallen victim to “truly malicious” intrusion. In some cases, the servers and AWS accounts were compromised at the root level by state-sponsored groups. Stykas did not disclose how he managed to infiltrate the North Korean hacking groups. He noted that his computer might have been infected with the group’s malware since their computers were infected. 

The security analyst had access to Slack and Discord accounts controlled by the hackers and gathered five terabytes of data. Lazarus Group complex, one of the North Korean state-sponsored hacking groups, has been using encrypted messaging services like Telegram and Signal to coordinate crypto heists and money laundering schemes. According to the report by Chainalysis, which monitors illicit crypto transactions, North Korean hackers have generated more than $2.02 billion in 2025, a 51 percent increase from the previous year. 

Their cumulative cryptocurrency theft since 2017 reached about $6.75 billion in value through crypto heists. Moreover, 76% of crypto heists worldwide occurred in the first four months of 2026, with North Korean-sponsored groups being the masterminds behind these crimes. The groups are also changing their tactics, shifting from compromised encryption keys to social engineering to infiltrate new crypto exchanges. Stykas added that toward the end of 2024, attackers primarily used social engineering to convince victims to install malicious software on their computers by posing as recruiters offering high-paying IT jobs. 

The software would allow hackers to access the victims’ computers under the guise of testing their skills. The list of companies targeted by North Korean hackers includes Chinese smartphone manufacturer Oppo, Boston’s Children Hospital, tech firms in Japan, Italy’s judicial organizations, and Belgium’s Flemish government. Several of the organizations, including Flemish government agencies and Boston’s Children Hospital, noted that the breach originated from third-party contractors, and the damage was minimal. 

Moreover, Stykas added that many of his warnings went unheeded by the organizations that had fallen victim to the attacks. His research revealed that many organizations are using third-party contractors and service providers that operate as subcontractors for different firms. A single compromised third-party organization can lead to a security breach of multiple organizations. 

North Korean hackers not only target crypto wallets but also use their IT expertise to infiltrate organizations and exfiltrate data. Experts believe that North Korea continues to fund its nuclear program from the proceeds of these crimes.  Moreover, hackers pose as legitimate IT professionals offering their services on job boards, eventually getting hired and transferring the earnings to North Korean banks. Authorities believe North Korean hackers’ activities are designed to circumvent sanctions imposed on the country. 

According to experts, the infiltration of crypto exchanges, technology companies, and financial organizations will enable North Korea to bypass sanctions while funding its military expansion and nuclear program. Andariel hacker group, which targets defense and nuclear-related organizations, was dismantled by security agencies in 2024.
Read more »
transport authorities
Britain etiquette loudcasting policy Public space smartphones social media technology transport authorities

Loud Phone Use is Becoming A New Battleground for Public-space Etiquette

 




For commuters, a journey on public transport can now come with an unexpected soundtrack: someone else's smartphone.

A passenger watching videos without headphones, streaming music through a phone speaker or taking a call on loudspeaker turns what should be a private activity into something everyone nearby can hear. The habit has acquired names including “loudcasting” and “sodcasting”, and growing public frustration is prompting transport authorities, politicians and businesses to reconsider how phone use should fit into shared spaces.

Ofcom's 2022 research found that 46% of people had watched videos without headphones in public, while 45% had made video calls and 36% had listened to music without them. The behaviour was particularly common among teenagers. Among 13-to-17-year-olds, 83% considered watching videos without headphones acceptable, compared with 21% of people aged 55 and above. At the same time, eight in 10 people said loudcasting annoyed them.

Newer polling suggests the irritation has persisted. A 2025 YouGov survey found that 79% of Britons were bothered by people playing music or videos through phone speakers, including 41% who said they were bothered "a great deal".

The divide is therefore not simply about whether people use their phones loudly. It is also about what different generations consider acceptable behaviour in public.


Why do people loudcast?

Researchers studying technology and behaviour argue that loudcasting can serve purposes beyond simple disregard for others.

For younger people, smartphones are often social devices. Friends travelling together may watch content, listen to music or make video calls collectively. Playing something aloud can also become a form of self-expression, allowing users to display their musical or entertainment preferences to people around them.

This helps explain why the behaviour can appear perfectly ordinary to one passenger and deeply irritating to another.

The phenomenon itself is not entirely new. Previous technologies, from portable radios to boomboxes, generated similar arguments about noise in shared environments. Even early mobile-phone users could attract disapproving looks for speaking on their devices in public.

What has changed is the scale of what a smartphone can deliver. A single device can now stream video, music, social-media content and live conversations almost anywhere.

Faster mobile networks and increasingly accessible data have made consuming that content while travelling easier, reducing the practical barriers that once encouraged people to wait until they reached a private space.


Why does phone audio feel so intrusive?

The irritation may also have less to do with volume than with context.

Researchers who study soundscapes distinguish between noises people expect to hear in particular environments and sounds that appear out of place. Passengers generally expect the noise of engines, brakes and railway tracks on public transport, allowing them to become accustomed to those sounds.

A stranger's conversation or video is different. It contains information that the brain may automatically try to process, while unpredictable changes between speech, music and video clips repeatedly attract attention.

The result is that a relatively quiet smartphone can sometimes feel more disruptive than a louder but predictable background noise.

The Covid-19 lockdowns may have complicated those social expectations further. People spent prolonged periods consuming media and communicating from home, where they did not have to negotiate the same public-space etiquette. Some researchers argue that certain habits may have followed people back into shared environments.


Should loudcasting be punished?

The debate has increasingly moved from social etiquette into policy.

Transport for London has repeatedly encouraged passengers to use headphones, while its earlier research found loud mobile conversations and audible headphone music were already among the most commonly witnessed forms of inconsiderate behaviour.

The Liberal Democrats have called for tougher penalties, including fines of up to £1,000, while a 2025 YouGov poll found that 62% of Britons supported fines for playing music or videos aloud on public transport.

However, Britain already has legal mechanisms for dealing with disruptive noise. Railway byelaws prohibit behaviour that interferes with other passengers' comfort or convenience and restrict sound-producing equipment when it causes annoyance. Updated railway byelaws came into force in 2025.

The Bus Services Act 2025 has also expanded the powers available to local transport authorities to create and enforce passenger-behaviour byelaws.

Businesses are beginning to establish their own rules as well. In August 2026, Wetherspoons introduced a policy across its 792 UK pubs prohibiting customers from playing music or taking calls through phone loudspeakers, following complaints about disruptive noise.


A global problem with different social rules

The dispute is not uniquely British.

Countries differ considerably in how strongly public spaces are governed by expectations of quiet. Japan, for example, has strict social norms around phone use on public transport, while other more individualistic societies may tolerate louder personal behaviour.

Ofcom's research also found differences in loudcasting behaviour between ethnic groups, but negative reactions remained high across all groups, suggesting that the behaviour cannot be explained simply through ethnicity. Age, social context, cultural expectations and individual technology habits are likely to intersect.

The central question is therefore not whether smartphones will continue producing sound in public. They almost certainly will.

The question is whether society will continue treating that sound as a breach of etiquette, introduce stronger rules to control it, or gradually become so accustomed to it that another person's phone becomes just another part of the public soundscape.

Read more »
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)