TeamPCP is on a rampage through open-source software.

In less than four months, the threat actor has compromised and injected malicious code into more than 1,000 software packages. The extraordinary spree has transformed how software developers and maintainers distribute and manage their code, as their dependencies and repositories have become one of the most effective and prevalent attack vectors this year.

While there has been a host of technical exploits, TeamPCP’s greatest attack has been the uprooting of trust — repeatedly proving that most organizations fail to verify the code they ingest into their systems is legitimate, abusing a nearly blind faith that much of the software development industry relies on to power today’s modern economy.

Starting with Trivy in February, TeamPCP’s attacks have shaken that trust many times over.

The scale of TeamPCP’s attacks lies partly in the automated systems companies use to deploy code, like CI/CD pipelines. It is also capitalizing on new security gaps created by developers’ increasing reliance on AI. Yet, with relatively low effort and unoriginal tactics, TeamPCP is wrecking open-source frameworks and underlying systems at levels the technology community has rarely reckoned with.

“Developers didn’t do a great job of analyzing the security of their open-source dependencies before but, now with AI, there’s in some cases virtually no human in the loop or any kind of sanity check on what these tools are doing,” Feross Aboukhadijeh, founder and CEO at Socket, told CyberScoop.

“You have agents installing packages that haven’t been vetted,” he said. “When an attacker gets in, the impact is even broader because there’s less checks and balances to stop it from affecting everybody.”

TeamPCP hasn’t identified a new problem or proved anything novel. The crux of these attacks hinge on a central theme — defensive vulnerabilities the entire software industry has known about for years. Researchers and developers know the open source trust model is broken and susceptible to sabotage. Yet, the software industry has not fixed this problem. 

“The speed and scale of these attacks is what makes it most notable, not necessarily the methodology behind it, because at the core it is really about exploiting third-party trusts that we have,” said Kimberly Goody, senior manager at Google Threat Intelligence Group.

Software packages are typically subjected to intensive security monitoring to test for vulnerabilities and poisoned updates before they are released to live environments. 

Yet, the real vulnerability highlighted by TeamPCP lies further up the chain of command with the organizations or individuals that publish these packages to the wider market, according to Nathaniel Quist, manager of cloud threat intelligence at Palo Alto Networks.

“It is their responsibility to secure their credentials and not provide a jump off point to trigger a supply-chain event,” he said. “Everything that interacts with or crosses through that zone must be highly monitored and controlled to ensure a compromise can be contained quickly and easily.”

TeamPCP’s motivation

TeamPCP, like any prolific cybercriminal, has captured significant attention from threat hunters since it emerged in late 2025. Google attributes the activity to one core operator.

The company said it traced TeamPCP’s residential and mobile IP address connections to South Africa, indicating the primary operator was located there during at least some of its attacks.

“We don’t believe that there’s an established core group, at least not yet, and that a lot of this has been conducted by an individual,” Goody said. Google declined to name the core operator or confirm it knows the person’s true identity. 

Palo Alto Networks said the core manager of TeamPCP uses the “ResoluteXBF” handle on multiple platforms. The cybersecurity firm is also tracking two additional core members: “diencracked” and “Shinigami.”

If TeamPCP is primarily run by one person, law enforcement has a rare opportunity to make a lasting impact with a single arrest.

TeamPCP has collaborated with other cybercriminals, but most of those partnerships were short-lived and ended in a public feud or otherwise failed to get off the ground in any meaningful way, Goody said.

Researchers have linked TeamPCP to extortion crews, dark web forums and affiliates including Lapsus$, ShinyHunters, Vect, DragonForce, BreachForums and “HasanBroker.” TeamPCP listed about 4,000 private code repositories on a dark web forum with an asking price of $95,000.

The actions to date, including unpredictable behavior, indicate motivations beyond financial gain and a “clear desire for notoriety,” Goody said. “They seem to like to make chaos.”

Quist draws the same conclusion from his months-long investigation, noting that it encourages other cybercriminals to get in on the action, at one point offering financial rewards for the largest software supply-chain attack. 

TeamPCP isn’t in the game for extortion payments, he said. “These actors are more interested in the underground street cred they are gaining” and “causing as much damage and mayhem as possible.”

Victims abound, but exposure limited

TeamPCP has been remarkably noisy, opportunistically injecting malware into open-source software for the purpose of stealing credentials for Kubernetes environments, Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud and many other connected services.

The group’s claimed victim list is staggering: Checkmarx, Bitwarden, LiteLLM, Telnyx, Mercor AI, PyTorch Lightning, AntV, SAP, GitHub, TanStack, UiPath, MistralAI, Microsoft DurableTask, Red Hat and Nx Console.

The full collection of packages compromised or poisoned by TeamPCP to date accounts for roughly 500 million weekly downloads combined, according to Quist.

While the breadth of potential downstream compromise flowing from those downloads is substantial, many endpoints infected with those malware-riddled packages aren’t exposed to the internet and less susceptible to attack, he added.

“I don’t think there’s going to be a very extremely large number of victims,” Quist said. “There’s going to be a lot of people who potentially could be compromised and have potentially vulnerable packages in their environment, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re in an exploitable position.”

While these incidents have grabbed headlines, TeamPCP hasn’t accumulated payouts nearly as large as other cybercriminals. The broader reputational impact it has wrought, however, is massive.

TeamPCP has publicly claimed more than 10,000 victims and about $90,000 in extortions, according to Quist.

“They might not be making a lot of money, but they are causing a lot of impact,” Goody said. “Their campaigns have been very disruptive.”

How TeamPCP’s operating model targets development

TeamPCP’s victim list has grown as its hijacked open-source repositories on npm, PyPI, GitHub and other outsourced developer tools that are incorporated into upstream code running in production environments.

Developer laptops and other endpoints that are assigned to install, build and publish software widely contain keys and access to source code that create incredibly valuable supply-chain targets for attackers, Amitai Cohen, head of the attack vector intel team at Wiz, explained during a June presentation on TeamPCP at SleuthCon in Arlington, Va. 

The group targets CI runners, which are automated systems that build, test, and publish code. TeamPCP injects malware into the code repositories these runners maintain. When other developers pull that code into their own systems, they unknowingly download the malware alongside it. 

Some of these artifacts, including Python libraries, npm registries and GitHub Actions, are downloaded almost immediately by thousands or millions of developers who’ve set their runners up to consistently pull the latest version, according to Cohen. “We as a security industry have taught them that that is the right thing to do. You want to use the latest version because you want to be protected against vulnerabilities, and obviously you want to benefit from all the latest features.”

That instinct is exactly what TeamPCP exploits. By compromising one company’s CI/CD workflow, the group gains access to every downstream user who automatically pulls that infected code. “This is what allows [TeamPCP] to leverage initial access to some patient zero, some company that had a vulnerability in their CI/CD workflow, in order to gain access to their downstream users,” Cohen said. “That’s just how the software supply chain works. Everything has dependencies upon dependencies upon dependencies.”

Some of the packages compromised by TeamPCP were live for almost 13 hours, but security practitioners have responded by identifying code-injection attacks much quicker now, pulling some compromised repositories within 15 minutes, said Ben Read, director of strategic intelligence at Wiz.

The threat group’s operations remain high-tempo. TeamPCP infects new software packages almost daily, validates compromises and captures sensitive data within 24 hours, according to Wiz researchers.

The threat group has consistently evolved its tactics, developing payloads in JavaScript and Python while spreading from local files to Kubernetes application programming interfaces and bundled software development kits. Most recently, it’s been stealing credentials via custom protocols. 

The group’s ambitions have expanded beyond its own attacks. TeamPCP is also responsible for a self-replicating piece of malware known as Mini Shai-Hulud, which infected hundreds of software packages across open-source registries in back-to-back attack sprees last month. A TeamPCP affiliate published the full source code for the malware on GitHub last month and encouraged other cybercriminals to use it for their own campaigns.

“TeamPCP is going for volume. They are not being discriminating, they’re not necessarily trying to be stealthy or trying to maximize ROI. They’re going for an all-of-the-above strategy,” Read said during the Sleuthcon presentation.

Defensive gaps create openings for attack

TeamPCP’s attack spree has also underscored how difficult it is for organizations to revoke compromised secrets. Multiple victims have experienced recurring infections, sometimes falling prey to TeamPCP three times within a month, because they didn’t rotate secrets properly, Cohen said. 

At its core, these attacks highlight a direct trade-off organizations accept when they update software quickly to fix vulnerabilities, but learn that doing so too quickly could expose them to illegitimate registries containing malware.

TeamPCP has targeted what Aboukhadijeh describes as a “public good,” open-source registries that were never perfect but widely trusted and rarely turned into a point of entry for supply-chain attacks. 

Rapid open source software installation is one of the most dangerous things an organization can do right now, he said, adding that there’s a roughly 1 in 10 chance that any package installed by an organization could trigger an active attack. 

TeamPCP has compromised security scanners, password managers, automation tools, data visualization software, and CI/CD infrastructure across various environments.

And it’s lifted a trove of credentials and other sensitive data from victims.

Researchers like Cohen at Wiz, who have been tracking this attack spree since the beginning, are nearing a breaking point. 

“This is also too hard on us. We’re very tired. I’m sure a lot of people working on this problem space are very tired, and it’s just kind of become untenable,” Cohen said.

“You can’t keep existing in a world where you wake up every morning and some super prevalent package is compromised and everybody’s just going to be using it like nothing,” he added. “We need to start taking this a bit more seriously.”

The post How software development’s speed obsession enabled TeamPCP’s chaos crusade appeared first on CyberScoop.

Google threat hunters spotted yet another Chinese state-sponsored espionage group that for years had burrowed into systems belonging to government and private organizations to steal data across academia, medicine, military, cybersecurity and foreign policy. 

Google Threat Intelligence Group discovered the previously unknown threat group UNC6508, which targeted organizations in the United States and Canada, in late 2025 but traced its earliest known compromise back to September 2023. 

The revelation mirrors an alarming pattern of Chinese espionage groups dropping backdoors into critical infrastructure to pre-position for potential sabotage, intercept research and steal data with national security implications. These groups working at the behest of China’s government, including UNC6508, operated in stealth for years before authorities or researchers discovered their activity.

“We don’t know the full extent or impact of the campaign,” Patrick Whitsell, senior security engineer at GTIG, told CyberScoop. Researchers said the threat group intruded a medical research university in September 2023, stole credentials and communications, and remained active on the institution’s systems through November 2025 when it was discovered.

Google said it confirmed multiple victims compromised with INFINITERED, a custom backdoor the threat group deployed on targeted networks to steal administrative credentials after it exploited externally facing REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) servers.

Researchers still don’t know how UNC6508 gained initial access to the REDCap servers. Google said the survey and database software, which was created at Vanderbilt University and issued multiple patches for critical remote-code execution vulnerabilities throughout 2023, is widely used across the medical research community. 

“Given the breadth of the threat actor’s intelligence collection criteria and their ability to remain undetected within compromised networks for more than a year, we assess the known victims likely represent only a fraction of a larger campaign,” Whitsell said. “We also assess that this highly capable threat actor will remain active and continue to be a threat to the defense, technology and medical industries for the foreseeable future.”

Google said the campaign targeted clinical providers, academic medical centers and U.S. military health institutions, demonstrating advanced capabilities from a threat group that doesn’t currently overlap with any other publicly known groups.

The threat group abused domain compliance rules to steal data, a technique that doesn’t rely on malware or living-off-the-land tools, and routed traffic through U.S.-based IPs to blend in with legitimate traffic, researchers said.

“We have some evidence to suggest this is a large threat group with multiple sub-teams, but this is not confirmed,” Whitsell said.

Like other previously identified China state-sponsored espionage groups, UNC6508 remains active.

Google said it disrupted some of UNC6508’s known infrastructure by disabling an Gmail account it used to exfiltrate data, notified the affected organizations and helped remediate compromises before it published research on UNC6508’s activities.

Whitsell said several unconfirmed instances of compromise remain under investigation.

The post Google exposes China espionage group that’s been lurking in networks undetected since 2023 appeared first on CyberScoop.

The FBI, along with Google and Lumen Technologies, took down a major cybercrime network based in China that was responsible for an estimated $1.9 billion in losses, officials said Friday. 

Outsider, which provided phishing kits and hosted infrastructure for cybercriminals since July 2023, facilitated a wave of phishing attacks against people and businesses in 55 countries, including the United States, the FBI said in a LinkedIn post.

The jointly coordinated effort dubbed “Operation Ghost Hook” netted the seizure of several domains of the group’s core admin servers, a Shopify storefront, roughly $100,000 from Outsider payment wallets and thousands of domains registered through U.S.-based providers, officials said.

The FBI said it also used an Outsider Telegram bot to access information on the cybercrime network’s customers.

“The criminals behind Outsider Enterprise built a business out of impersonating trusted brands to defraud hundreds of thousands of victims,” Brett Leatherman, assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, said in a statement.

Authorities traced Outsider’s phishing domains to nearly 3.9 million stolen credit cards.

Google, one of the vendors impersonated by the phishing kits, described Outsider as a massive AI-powered operation. 

Outsider provided its phishing kit, which allowed cybercriminals to create fake sites and phishing campaigns to steal credit cards, bank account credentials and personal data, for a weekly subscription as low as $88 per week, the company said in a civil lawsuit it filed to dismantle the cybercrime network’s infrastructure. 

The China-based group behind the operation encouraged and provided step-by-step instructions for customers to use Gemini and other AI platforms to generate custom code for phishing lures and corresponding sites for illegitimate missed packages, overdue highway tolls, parking violations, issues with a brokerage account or wireless carrier rewards.

“The Outsider software allows scammers to request multiple types of verification from victims, including SMS, PIN, email and app verification,” Google wrote in the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District for the Southern District of New York. “This flexibility enables the enterprise to defeat various forms of authentication security.”

Google said it’s working with AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon to intercept the spam messages before they reach customers, but these types of phishing attacks are prevalent and have been spreading for years. 

Google is also pushing for legislative action, including a series of bills, to combat these scams, General Counsel Halimah DeLaine Prado wrote in a blog post.

“Litigation alone won’t end this,” she wrote. “As threats evolve, our laws must, too.”

Google said it doesn’t know the real names of the people or entities involved in Outsider, but said the operation is supported by multiple cybercrime groups providing different roles with overlapping infrastructure.

The FBI said the takedown was part of Operation Riptide, an ongoing campaign targeting cybercriminals and the infrastructure and financial networks they use to commit fraud.

The post FBI takes down massive China-based cybercrime network that caused $1.9B in losses appeared first on CyberScoop.

A Google security engineer was arrested in New York and charged with crimes related to bets he allegedly placed on Polymarket using confidential information he pulled from Google systems, the Justice Department said Wednesday. 

Michele Spagnuolo, a 36-year-old Italian citizen who lives in Switzerland, is accused of placing multiple trades on the prediction marketplace last year that netted him a profit of more than $1.2 million. He allegedly abused internal access to Google’s nonpublic Year in Search data and placed a series of bets on the most searched people on Google in 2025.

“Today’s charges reinforce a decades-old message: corporate insiders cannot use confidential information to turn a profit in our markets,” Jay Clayton, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said in a statement Wednesday. “Insider trading compromises the integrity of our markets, and the American people want this greed-driven conduct investigated and prosecuted.”

Spagnuolo was charged with violating the Commodity Exchange Act, wire fraud and money laundering, which carry a combined maximum sentence up to 50 years in prison. 

He was also served with a civil complaint by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission that accused him of insider trading. The government agency is seeking restitution, disgorgement, civil monetary penalties, trading and registration bans and a permanent injunction against further regulation violations. 

Spagnuolo has been employed as a security engineer at Google since 2014, where he built products, specifications and led multiple projects in the information security unit, according to his company bio, which has since been taken down. 

A Google spokesperson said the company is working with law enforcement on its investigation. “The employee accessed our marketing material using a tool available to all employees, but using such confidential information to place bets is a serious breach of our policies,” the spokesperson said in a statement. “We’ve placed the employee on leave and will take the appropriate action.”

Spagnuolo did not respond to a request for comment.

In a complaint unsealed Wednesday, a federal investigator said Spagnulo, who used the “AlphaRaccoon” user name on Polymarket, took deliberate steps to conceal his use of nonpublic information, including efforts to obscure the source and ownership of his proceeds. 

Prosecutors noted that Google’s internal software tool, which provided Spagnuolo access to search trends, bore a banner that stated “Google Confidential” in red text, adding that Spagnuolo confirmed he understood the company’s various confidentiality and ethics policies to access the data. 

Spagnuolo allegedly created his Polymarket account in May 2024 and placed a series of trades between later that year risking approximately $2.75 million on 25 outcomes that the market treated as unlikely.

The FBI said it traced Spagnuolo’s Polymarket account to a cryptocurrency wallet he allegedly used to fund the account and initiate multiple transfers. Spagnuolo is also accused of sending multiple transactions through a cryptocurrency swapping service that were received by an account in his name linked to his Italian government ID card. 

Spagnuolo allegedly changed his Polymarket username to an alphanumeric wallet address in early December, after Google released its Year in Search results and multiple users on Discord and X speculated the person between the account was a Google insider.

The post Google security engineer accused of turning confidential search trends into $1.2M win on Polymarket appeared first on CyberScoop.

CrowdStrike has dismantled the Glassworm botnet in an operation aided by Google and Shadowserver, stripping the operators’ access to infrastructure that helped threat actors infect hundreds of pieces of open-source software with malware since early 2025, the company said Tuesday. 

The coordinated effort involved the simultaneous takedown of four attacker-controlled servers that were designed to obscure the botnet’s operations and remain resilient against disruptions.

CrowdStrike and partners took down infrastructure, severed access to the botnet’s most critical services, impeded operation momentum and slowed the attackers’ ability to scale, Adam Meyers, senior vice president of counter adversary operations at CrowdStrike, told CyberScoop.

“The broader goal is sustained pressure that forces the adversary to spend time, resources, and operational energy reconstituting infrastructure instead of targeting victims,” Meyers added. “By exposing tradecraft and sharing intelligence, defenders can harden developer environments, CI/CD pipelines, and software supply chains against similar activity. That raises the operating cost for the adversary and gives defenders an advantage.”

Glassworm has targeted software developers in order to access source code repositories, cloud platforms, integration and delivery processes, and open-source package registries to push malware into the supply chain and trigger compromises downstream. 

The threat group behind the botnet, which is likely based in Russia, according to CrowdStrike, fed malware into VSCode extensions, npm and Python packages and more than 300 GitHub repositories, researchers said. 

Glassworm affected Windows, macOS and Linux systems with data and credential theft, and a remote-access tool called GlasswormRAT.

“What stood out about Glassworm was the operational sophistication around propagation and automation,” Meyers said. “This wasn’t just a smash-and-grab compromise of a package repository. The operation was designed to move through trusted developer workflows in a way that could expand reach very quickly if left unchecked.”

The botnet relied on four layered channels that CrowdStrike disrupted, including the Solana blockchain, BitTorrent’s peer-to-peer network, Google Calendar and virtual private servers hosted by commercial providers. 

“As part of our disruption efforts, we are working with partners to bring more pain to attackers, especially when we see them abusing our products or targeting our users,” John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google Threat Intelligence Group, said in a post on X.

Piotr Kijewski, CEO of the Shadowserver, said the non-profit organization assisted with some analysis and data sharing but noted the disruption was mostly CrowdStrike work.

The countermeasures took down “the connective tissue of the operation to create cascading operational pain,” Meyers said. “This forces the adversary to rebuild, while exposing tradecraft.”

CrowdStrike said the takedown demonstrates how the security industry can effectively thwart supply-chain threats by proactively disrupting the precise infrastructure attackers use without waiting for lengthy judicial processes. 

“When threat actors operate from jurisdictions where law enforcement cooperation is limited or nonexistent, disruption becomes one of the most effective tools available. If you can’t put handcuffs on the operator, you focus on dismantling the infrastructure, trust relationships, and operational dependencies,” Meyers added. 

The security company shared indicators of compromise to help organizations hunt for potential infections in their environments and called for other vendors, law enforcement agencies, platform operators and the open-source ecosystem to muster equal determination in responding to threats in the software supply chain.

“The more visibility and alignment you create across the ecosystem, the harder it becomes for the actor to quietly stand the operation back up,” Meyers said. “You may not eliminate the threat actor entirely, but you can absolutely reduce effectiveness, limit reach, and raise the cost of doing business.”

The post CrowdStrike disrupts Glassworm botnet that preyed on open-source supply chain appeared first on CyberScoop.

Foxconn, one of the world’s largest manufacturers of electronics sold by major tech vendors, is recovering from a cyberattack that disrupted some of the company’s factories in North America.

Nitrogen, a ransomware group that’s known for targeting organizations in the manufacturing, construction and technology sectors, claimed responsibility for the attack on its data leak site and said it stole 8 terabytes of data spanning more than 11 million files. 

The threat group posted screenshots of some of the allegedly stolen data and claimed it compromised “confidential instructions, projects and drawings from Intel, Apple, Google, Dell, Nvidia and many other projects.” 

Foxconn is famously known as the primary assembler of Apple iPhones. Apple and the other companies allegedly impacted by the attack did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesperson for Foxconn confirmed some of its factories in North America suffered a cyberattack, and said its cybersecurity team immediately responded to the breach by implementing additional “measures to ensure the continuity of production and delivery.”

The spokesperson did not answer questions about when the attack occurred or what systems or data was impacted, but noted that “affected factories are currently resuming normal production” as of Tuesday. 

Nitrogen was first observed in 2023, using ALPHV, one of the most prevalent ransomware variants at that time, Cynthia Kaiser, senior vice president at Halcyon’s Ransomware Research Center, told CyberScoop. The group started using stolen code from Conti, another formerly prolific ransomware variant, in 2024 to build its own custom attack tools to hit Windows and VMware server environments, she added.

The threat group has most recently focused on companies in the manufacturing and technology sectors. “However, the most recent cases of claims by Nitrogen do not include a working file listing on the leak site and include mostly older images of files,” Kaiser said. “This raises questions about whether Nitrogen is inflating data-theft claims in an attempt to pressure victims into paying higher ransoms.”

Foxconn hasn’t described the nature of the attack or confirmed the existence of a ransom demand. 

Ismael Valenzuela, vice president of threat research and intelligence at Arctic Wolf Labs, said Nitrogen follows a “consistent playbook, stealing data before encrypting systems so they have leverage on multiple fronts, combining operational disruption with the threat of sensitive information being exposed.”

The threat group’s tactics indicate it’s not opportunistic, but rather “operating with a defined model, focusing on organizations that are easier to access but still critical enough to drive pressure and payment,” Valenzuela added. 

Foxconn, also known as Hon Hai Precision Industry with headquarters in Taiwan, is among the world’s largest companies with $259 billion in revenue last year, the company said. Foxconn’s North American footprint includes multiple factories in Mexico, Wisconsin, Ohio, Texas, Virginia and Indiana.

The post Major tech manufacturer Foxconn confirms cyberattack hit North American factories appeared first on CyberScoop.

Google launched a feature for Android phones Tuesday for dedicated forensic logs about intrusions from sophisticated attacks like those by spyware vendors, in what design partners at Amnesty International hailed as an important first.

The tech giant has been ramping up the new feature, Intrusion Logging, since last year, and has now begun rolling it out.

“The new intrusion logging feature promises to be a major aid to digital forensics researchers undertaking investigations into sophisticated attacks on Android devices,” Amnesty International said in a Tuesday technical briefing. “This is the first time a major device vendor has released a feature specifically to enhance the ability to forensically detect and respond to advanced digital threats.”

To date, independent investigators have relied on records and often short-lived log files that weren’t meant for forensic use, and Amnesty said surveillance groups have grown increasingly aware of those forensic efforts. Intrusion Logging, a feature of Android Advanced Protection Mode, is designed specifically to keep track of possible intrusions for forensic purposes. It keeps records of security incidents like device unlocking, physical access and spyware installation and removal.

Google’s annual security and privacy update for Android phones mentions the feature and its development with Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and others. It also touts new protections against banking scam calls, other features for detecting suspicious activity on Android phones, additional privacy safeguards and more.

The firm has been working on the feature since announcing it last year.

“Intrusion Logging enables persistent and privacy-preserving forensics logging to allow for investigation of devices in the event of a suspected compromise,” wrote Eugene Liderman, director of Android security and privacy.

Intrusion Logging joins an expanding slate of features from tech companies to fight sophisticated attacks like those from commercial spyware, among them Apple’s Lockdown Mode and Memory Integrity Enforcement and WhatsApp’s Strict Account Settings.

Intrusion Logging “promises to help shift the balance to the advantage of defenders, providing civil society investigators with the key evidence needed to detect and expose some of the most advanced attacks facing journalists and activists,” said Donncha Ó Cearbhaill, head of the Amnesty International Security Lab, “With Intrusion Logging Google is the first major vendor to proactively address to challenge of detecting advanced attacks on device. By making more consensual forensic data available for researchers, we can make life more difficult for attackers and help civil society seek accountability when their devices are unlawfully targeted by spyware and mobile data extraction tools.”

The feature has some limitations, though, Amnesty said in its technical briefing. It requires Android 16 and is only available for now on Pixel devices; the device has to be linked to a Google account, and the logs may include sensitive information, like browser navigation history, so secure sharing of the logs is important.

The logs may also be deletable by attackers, Ó Cearbhaill told CyberScoop, but he said he understands there are plans to strengthen protections against that in future versions. And lots of attacks would be detectable in the logs where attackers wouldn’t necessarily have the root access needed to try to delete logs, he said.

To enable Intrusion Logging, users need to be using Android Advanced Protection Mode, and can find the feature at Settings > Security & privacy > Advanced Protection > Intrusion Logging. If users suspect some kind of security incident, they’ll need to export and share the logs with a forensic analyst.

The post Google and Amnesty International teamed up to make it harder for spyware vendors to hide appeared first on CyberScoop.

Google researchers found a zero-day exploit developed by artificial intelligence and alerted the susceptible vendor to the imminent threat before a well-known cybercrime group initiated a mass-exploitation campaign, the company said in a report released Monday.

The averted disaster probably isn’t the first time attackers used AI to build a zero-day, but it is the first time Google Threat Intelligence Group found compelling evidence that this long-predicted and worrying escalation in vulnerability-exploit development is underway.

“We finally uncovered some evidence this is happening,” John Hultquist, chief analyst at GTIG, told CyberScoop. “This is probably the tip of the iceberg and it’s certainly not going to be the last.”

Google declined to identify the specific vulnerability, which has been patched, or name the “popular open-source, web-based administration tool” it affected. It did, however, note that the defect impacted a Python script that allows attackers to bypass two-factor authentication for the service.

Researchers also withheld details about how they discovered the zero-day exploit or the cybercrime group that was preparing to use it for a large-scale attack spree.

The threat group has a “strong record of high-profile incidents and mass exploitation,” Hultquist said, suggesting the attackers are prominent and well-known among cybersecurity practitioners. 

GTIG is fairly confident the threat group was using AI in a meaningful way throughout the entire process, but it has yet to determine if the technology also discovered the vulnerability it ultimately developed into an exploit.

Whichever AI model the attackers used — Google is confident it wasn’t Gemini or Anthropic’s Mythos — left artifacts throughout the exploit code that are inconsistent with human developers. This evidence, which included documentation strings in Python, highly annotated code and a hallucinated but non-existent CVSS score, tipped Google off to the fact AI was heavily involved, Hultquist said. 

GTIG has been warning about and expecting AI-developed exploits to hit systems in the wild, especially after its Big Sleep AI agent found a zero-day vulnerability in late 2024.

“I think the watershed moment was two years ago when we proved this was possible,” Hultquist said, adding that there are probably several other AI developed zero-days in play now. 

Yet, to him, the discovery of a zero-day exploit developed by AI is less concerning than what this single instance forebodes even further.

“The game’s already begun and we expect the capability trajectory is pretty sharp,” Hultquist said. “We do expect that this will be a much bigger problem, that there will be more devastating zero-day attacks done over this, especially as capabilities grow.”

The post Google spotted an AI-developed zero-day before attackers could use it appeared first on CyberScoop.

Supreme Court justices lobbed sharp questions at both sides about the constitutionality of geofence warrants during oral arguments Monday in a case that could have broader implications for law enforcement collection of Americans’ data.

Chatrie v. The United States stems from the 2019 conviction of Okello Chatrie in a bank robbery, where authorities obtained location data from Google about people within a specific area at a specific time.

In questioning an attorney for the petitioner, Adam Unikowsky, a number of conservative justices — including Chief Justice John Roberts — asked why the government shouldn’t be allowed to access location data taken from a third party given that Chatrie had “opted-in” to share that data.

“I just don’t agree that one should have to flip off one’s location history as well as other cloud services to avoid government surveillance,” Unikowsky answered, raising whether the government was entitled to getting emails or calendar data that are also stored in the cloud. (Google has since moved location data to users’ individual devices.)

Some liberal justices, too, had skeptical questions for Unikowsky. “This identifies a place, a crime — a limited time frame, but a time frame,” Sonia Sotomayor said, referring to protections from open-ended searches under the Fourth Amendment. “So it’s not a general warrant in this historical sense.” But she also said that because location data follows users everywhere: “When the police are searching or asking for a search result, there’s no way to predict whether they’re going to invade your privacy.”

The line of questioning about how far a government request for bulk data can go continued from both conservative and liberal justices when it was the government’s turn to argue its position. Justices probed skeptically about what made emails or calendar data different, and whether the government could do a physical search of all of the lockers in a storage facility to find one gun they believed might be there.

It was an unusually long session for the Supreme Court, going two hours. A ruling could come in June or July. Predicting how a court will decide based on justices’ questions is famously fraught. Only one justice, Samuel Alito, hinted strongly at how he was likely to decide.

“I’m struggling to understand why we are here in this case, other than the fact that at least four of us voted to take it,” he said. He said he didn’t believe anything new of note could come out of the court based on lower court rulings during questioning of Unikowsky. “We are all free to write law review articles on this fascinating subject, but that seems like that’s what you’re asking for.”

Orin Kerr, a Stanford University law professor who filed a friend of the court brief on the government’s side, said he believed based on the oral arguments that the court will say geofence warrants can be drafted lawfully.

“The Justices seem likely to reject the broader argument Chatrie made about the lawfulness of the warrant,” he wrote on social media. “They’ll probably say the geofence warrants have to be limited in time and space.”

Casey Waughn, a privacy lawyer and senior associate at Armstrong Teasdale, was struck by the absence of a major focus on “third-party doctrine,” under which there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy when citizens give their information to an outside party like a bank. 

She also honed in on arguments Unikowsky made.

“His argument really gave two lines to go down for the judges, and one was that you have a property interest in your data on the cloud, and the other was that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy for your data on the cloud,” she told CyberScoop. “And historically, both of those avenues have been grounds on which the Court has found that …issue is protected under the Fourth Amendment, and therefore that the actions constituted a search. So I thought it was interesting that he went and kind of argued both of those lanes.”

Alan Butler, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center that filed a friend of the court brief on the side of the petitioner, said the stakes in the case are high.

“Today’s arguments underscored that the Supreme Court is weighing one of the most consequential privacy questions of the digital age: whether the government can use sweeping location data searches to identify a suspect,” he said in a statement after the arguments. “The Court should hold that the Constitution protects our digital data even when it is stored by an app or cloud provider. The Court should ensure that the highly sensitive records generated by our phones cannot be obtained without particularized suspicion and close judicial oversight.” 

The post Supreme Court justices skeptically question both sides in geofence surveillance case appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Monday in a case that could limit the government’s ability to obtain bulk digital data of device users with a single warrant, in a rare instance of the country’s top justices taking on digital rights.

Chatrie v. The United States is the first major Fourth Amendment case the court has taken up since 2018, despite the proliferation of technology that impacts privacy since then. At the center of what the justices will address are so-called geofence warrants, which compel companies to disclose user data from a certain time and location.

“It’s a really interesting question about a law enforcement tool that would have been unimaginable a few decades ago, where you can basically look at potentially every phone, for example, that passed through a particular area in a particular window,” said John Villasenor, a law professor at UCLA and nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Both conservative and liberal civil liberties advocates have lined up in favor of the petitioner, leaving the United States government with fewer friend-of-the-court briefs on its side. Okello Chatrie was convicted for a 2019 bank robbery after police used a geofence warrant to obtain information from Google about users during a one-hour period and 17.5-acre area, then refined the search.

In Congress, Democrats have raised concerns about geofence warrants as they might pertain to abortion rights, while Republicans have raised concerns about their use in tracking suspects linked to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol.

Courts have been divided on the legality of the geofence warrant in Chatrie’s case. Google has since stopped storing location data in the cloud and moved records directly to user devices, but those siding with Chatrie say it could have broader implications for financial records, search history records, chat bot records and more.

“We think it’s important that courts get it right and that, among other things, courts recognize that we have a property interest in many of our digital records,” said Brent Skorup, a legal fellow at the Cato Institute, which has filed an amicus brief on behalf of the petitioner. “If the government can get those digital records without a warrant, that renders the Fourth Amendment pretty empty and we’re not secure in our privacy and traditional rights to having control of our private papers and effects.”

The United States noted that Chatrie opted into Google’s storage of his location history, and that the information’s collection is not substantially different from identification of other markers of someone’s presence, like tire tracks or boot prints.

“Individuals generally have no reasonable expectation of privacy in information disclosed to a third party and then conveyed by the third party to the government,” it wrote. A collection of 32 attorneys general have sided with the U.S. government, as well as some law professors.

In the 2018 case, Carpenter v. The United States, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of that “third-party doctrine” — echoed by the U.S. government’s argument in the Chatrie case — to search and seizure of 127 days’ worth of someone’s cell site location information, ruling that it constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment and therefore required a warrant.

The type of warrant is at issue in Chatrie v. The United States. A Virginia court ultimately found that geofence warrant unconstitutional because it was not sufficiently specific and was not supported by probable cause for every user whose data was collected. However, the court ruled the evidence was admissible in court, because law enforcement acted in “good faith” in the belief that it was constitutional.

Villasenor said the court could clear a lot up by addressing the good faith exception, something lower courts have used to sidestep substantial constitutional rulings, according to one study. But both Villasenor and Skorup say it’s possible that the Supreme Court also could fail to arrive at a conclusive ruling on the issues at stake in Chatrie.

While some civil liberties advocates are optimistic about the outcome due to the court’s ruling in Carpenter, three justices in that case have since been replaced by others.

The rarity of such digital privacy cases rising to the level of the Supreme Court might be simply a function of a crowded court agenda, but it’s not the only possibility.

“Part of it might be because the court has not developed a consensus view about how to approach these yet,” Skorup said. “It’s speculation on my part, but they probably have some ambivalence about taking up cases where they know that they’re not going to speak with one voice, or they know they might speak with fractured voices.”

Google itself filed a brief in the case, but sided with neither party, saying it took no position on the warrant in Chatrie’s specific case.

“But it urges the Court to hold that Google Location History and other similar digital documents stored remotely deserve the Fourth Amendment’s protection,” it wrote. “A contrary rule would leave the intimate details of millions of Americans’ daily lives — data that will exist in many forms as technology rapidly develops — exposed to warrantless surveillance.”

The post The Supreme Court is about to decide how far geofence warrants can go appeared first on CyberScoop.

As organizations consider agentic AI for their business and IT stacks, researchers continue to find bugs and vulnerabilities in major, commercial models  that can significantly expand their attack surface.

This week, researchers at Pillar Security disclosed a vulnerability in Antigravity, an AI-powered developer tool for filesystem operations made by Google.

The bug, since patched, combined prompt injection with Antigravity’s permitted file-creation capability to grant attackers remote code execution privileges.

The research details how the exploit was able to circumvent Antigravity’s secure mode, Google’s highest security setting for its agents that runs all command operations through a virtual sandbox environment, throttles network access and prohibits the agent from writing code outside of the working directory.

Secure mode is supposed to limit the AI agent access to sensitive systems – and its ability to execute malicious or dangerous acts through shell commands. But one of the file-searching tools used by Antigravity, called “find_by_name,” is classified as a ‘native’ system tool. This means the agent can execute it directly and before protections like Secure Mode can even evaluate command level operations.

“The security boundary that Secure Mode enforces simply never sees this call,” wrote Dan Lisichkin, an AI security researcher with Pillar Security. “This means an attacker achieves arbitrary code execution under the exact configuration a security-conscious user would rely on to prevent it.”

The prompt injection attacks can be delivered through compromised identity accounts connected to the agent, or indirectly by hiding clandestine prompt instructions inside open-source files or web content the agent ingests. Antigravity  has trouble distinguishing between written data it ingests for context and literal prompt instructions, so compromise can be achieved without any elevated access by getting it to read a malicious document or file.

According to a disclosure timeline provided by Pillar Security, the bug was reported to Google on Jan. 6 and patched on Feb. 28, with Google awarding a bug bounty for the discovery.

Lisichkin said this same pattern of prompt injection through unvalidated input has been found in other coding AI agents like Cursor. In the age of AI, any unvalidated input can become a malicious prompt capable of hijacking internal systems.

“The trust model underpinning security assumptions, that a human will catch something suspicious, does not hold when autonomous agents follow instructions from external content,” he wrote.

The fact that the vulnerability was able to completely bypass Google’s secure mode underscores how the cybersecurity industry must start adapting and “move beyond sanitization-based controls.” 

“Every native tool parameter that reaches a shell command is a potential injection point. Auditing for this class of vulnerability is no longer optional, and it is a prerequisite for shipping agentic features safely,” Lisichkin wrote.

The post Vuln in Google’s Antigravity AI agent manager could escape sandbox, give attackers remote code execution appeared first on CyberScoop.

Vercel customers are at risk of compromise after an attacker hopped through multiple internal systems to steal credentials and other sensitive data, the company said in a security bulletin Sunday. 

The attack, which didn’t originate at Vercel, showcases the pitfalls of interconnected cloud applications and SaaS integrations with overly privileged permissions. 

An attacker traversed third-party systems and connections left exposed by employees before it hit the San Francisco-based company that created and maintains Next.js and other popular open-source libraries. 

Researchers at Hudson Rock said the seeds of the attack were planted in February when a Context.ai employee’s computer was infected with Lumma Stealer malware after they searched for Roblox game exploits, a common vector for infostealer deployments.

Each of the companies are pinning at least some blame for the attack on the other vendor.

Context.ai on Sunday said that breach allowed the attacker to access its AWS environment and OAuth tokens for some users, including a token for a Vercel employee’s Google Workspace account. Vercel is not a Context customer, but the Vercel employee was using Context AI Office Suite and granted it full access, the artificial intelligence agent company said. 

“The attacker used that access to take over the employee’s Vercel Google Workspace account, which enabled them to gain access to some Vercel environments and environment variables that were not marked as sensitive,” Vercel said in its bulletin. 

The company said a limited number of its customers are impacted and were immediately advised to rotate credentials. Vercel, which declined to answer questions, did not specify which internal systems were accessed or fully explain how the attacker gained access to Vercel customers’ credentials. 

Vercel CEO Guillermo Rauch said customer data stored by the company is fully encrypted, yet the attacker got further access through enumeration, or by counting and inventorying specific variables. 

“We believe the attacking group to be highly sophisticated and, I strongly suspect, significantly accelerated by AI,” he said in a post on X. “They moved with surprising velocity and in-depth understanding of Vercel.”

A threat group identifying itself as ShinyHunters took responsibility for the attack in a post on Telegram and is attempting to sell the stolen data, which they claim includes access keys, source code and databases.

The attacker “is likely an imposter attempting to use an established name to inflate their notoriety,” Austin Larsen, principal threat analyst at Google Threat Intelligence, wrote in a LinkedIn post. “Regardless of the threat actor involved, the exposure risk is real.”

Vercel also warned that the attack on Context’s Google Workspace OAuth app “was the subject of a broader compromise, potentially affecting its hundreds of users across many organizations.” It published indicators of compromise and encouraged customers to review activity logs, review and rotate variables containing secrets.

Context and Vercel said their separate and coordinated investigations into the attack aided by CrowdStrike and Mandiant remain underway.

The post Vercel’s security breach started with malware disguised as Roblox cheats appeared first on CyberScoop.

When Google announced last month it was moving up its own internal timeline for migrating to quantum-resistant forms of encryption, it started a broader conversation in the cybersecurity and cryptography communities: Just what was pushing one of the largest tech companies in the world to significantly accelerate its adoption of post-quantum protections for its systems, devices and data?

In the weeks since, new research has lended weight to those claims. A joint research paper from the California Institute of Technology, its tech startup Oratomic and the University of California concluded that technological advancements in neutral atom arrays indicate a quantum computer capable of breaking classical encryption may require as few as 10,000 quantum bits (or qubits), not millions as previously thought.

Qian Xu, a CalTech researcher and coauthor of the paper, said the findings are significant and indicates that such a computer could potentially be operational by the end of the decade.

“For decades, qubit count has been viewed as the main obstacle to fault-tolerant quantum computing,” Xu said in a statement. “I hope our work helps shift that perspective.”

Google’s Quantum AI division released its own research paper around the same time, outlining a twenty-fold decrease in the number of physical qubits believed to be needed to break some of the most popular forms of 256-bit elliptic curve encryption algorithms used to currently protect cryptocurrencies.

“We note that while viable solutions like [post-quantum cryptography] exist, they will take time to implement, bringing increasing urgency to act,” wrote Ryan Babbush, director of research and Hartmut Neven, vice president of engineering at Google.

Google’s decision to accelerate its shift to post-quantum encryption reflects a growing consensus.  Over the past year, CyberScoop has heard similar concerns from tech and government officials, typically centered on two quantum-related threats facing governments and businesses today.

One is the capability of foreign nations and cybercriminals to collect sensitive, encrypted data today in the hopes of breaking it later with a quantum computer. This “harvest now, decrypt later” technique is one of the main reasons proponents push for faster adoption of post-quantum encryption.

The second stems from a string of notable quantum computing breakthroughs over the past two years, many led by researchers in China.

Andrew McLaughlin, chief operating officer for SandboxAQ, a Software-as-a-Service company that focuses AI and quantum computing technologies, said concerns can be summed up as “hardware, math and China.

Advancements in areas like neutral atom arrays have given scientists more powerful hardware, while breakthroughs in mathematics like that in the Google research paper have found ways to use that hardware more efficiently. 

But he also pointed to what he described as exciting (and worrying) advancements in the field from some of America’s greatest international rivals.

Beijing has invested heavily in quantum computing, empowering top scientists like Pan Jianwei, a professor at China’s University of Science and Technology, with the resources and support to push the boundaries of technological development and position China as a world leader in quantum science.

Late last year, Chinese state media reported that Huanyuan 1, a 100-qubit quantum computer developed by researchers at Wuhan University on a Chinese government grant program, had been approved for commercial use. The reports claim that orders worth more than 40 million yuan (or $5.6 million dollars) have already been processed in sales, including to subsidiaries at domestic telecom China Mobile and the government of Pakistan.

Experts say quantum computers pose a potentially exceptional threat to blockchain-based cryptocurrencies.

Nathaniel Szerezla, chief growth officer at Naoris Protocol, a company that develops quantum-resistant encryption for blockchain infrastructure, said the paper from Oratomic and Caltech has “shifted the timeline” for planning around quantum encryption, particularly for cryptocurrency and blockchain platforms.

The underlying assumption was a “fault tolerant” quantum computer (i.e. one capable of threatening classical encryption) would require millions of qubits, but the paper suggests that it may actually only need as few as 10,000 qubits.

“Ultimately, we have gone from planning for a threat two decades out to one that overlaps with systems actively being deployed and funded,” Szerezla said.

For digital assets like cryptocurrency, the implications are “immediate” because the private key encryption underpinning billions of dollars on the blockchain were never designed to withstand attacks from a quantum computer.

“Migrating a live blockchain to post-quantum standards is a different problem entirely from upgrading a centralized system,” Szerezla continued. “You are dealing with immutable ledgers, billions in locked liquidity, and decentralized governance that cannot mandate a coordinated upgrade.”

Not everyone believes that we are on the cusp of a quantum hacking apocalypse.

On BlueSky Matthew Green, a computer science professor and cryptography expert at Johns Hopkins University, called the Google and Oratomic papers a good “precautionary” analysis of the long-term challenge of quantum encryption.

However, he expressed skepticism that quantum computing had enough “lucrative immediate applications” to push the field beyond its foundational research stage to more practical applications. He also questioned whether some of the newer quantum-resistant algorithms vetted by NIST would truly stand up to a real quantum computer. They were designed to protect against a threat that is still largely theoretical, and several of the post-quantum algorithms initially evaluated by NIST have turned out to contain vulnerabilities that could be exploited by classical computers.

That’s if one does indeed arrive in the next decade. Green said this week that he’s not convinced quantum-enabled hacks will be something to worry about in his lifetime, though he acknowledged that prediction might “haunt him” someday.

Nevertheless, “I’d bet huge amounts of money against a relevant quantum computer by 2029 or even 2035,” he wrote.

The post Why is the timeline to quantum-proof everything constantly shrinking? appeared first on CyberScoop.

Google is accelerating its timeline for migrating its products to quantum resistant encryption to 2029, the latest sign that tech leaders are worried that they haven’t been aggressive enough in planning for a post-quantum future.

In a blog posted Wednesday, vice president of security engineering Heather Adkins and senior staff cryptology engineer Sophie Schmieg said that Google and other tech companies have observed faster than expected advances in several quantum fields.

“This new timeline reflects migration needs for the PQC era in light of progress on quantum computing hardware development, quantum error correction, and quantum factoring resource estimates,” Adkins and Schmieg wrote.

Google is replacing outdated encryption across their devices, systems and data with new algorithms vetted by the National Institute for Standards and Technology. Those algorithms, developed over a decade by NIST and independent cryptologists, are designed to protect against future attacks from quantum computers.

While Google has said it is on track to migrate its own systems ahead of the 2035 timeline provided in NIST guidelines, last month leaders at the company teased an updated timeline for migration and called on private businesses and other entities to act more urgently to prepare.

Unlike the federal government, there is no mandate for private businesses to migrate to quantum-resistant encryption, or even that they do so at all. Adkins and Schmieg said the hope is that other businesses will view Google’s aggressive timeframe as a signal to follow suit.

“As a pioneer in both quantum and PQC, it’s our responsibility to lead by example and share an ambitious timeline,” they wrote. “By doing this, we hope to provide the clarity and urgency needed to accelerate digital transitions not only for Google, but also across the industry.”

Moving up Google’s internal timeline to 2029 – more ambitious than the U.S. federal government’s – is an attempt to get ahead of the problem. It also aligns with a growing belief among executives in the U.S. quantum sector, who say Chinese scientists and labs have achieved breakthroughs across several different fields of quantum computing over the past two years.

That too, is making U.S. tech policymakers anxious to more quickly implement newer encryption. Currently, the federal government is mandating that agencies switch over to quantum-resistant encryption by 2035, but CyberScoop reported last year that the White House has discussed the possibility of releasing its own executive order that would push agency timelines up to 2030 or sooner.

The post Google moves post-quantum encryption timeline up to 2029 appeared first on CyberScoop.

Leaked iOS spyware has some cybersecurity professionals raising urgent alarms about potential mass iPhone compromises, a development that pairs ominously with the recent discovery of two sophisticated iOS exploit kits.

At the same time, some other experts say Apple’s defensive features for iPhones remain elite. But several factors have created unprecedented circumstances: the public accessibility of a version of DarkSword, shortly after the discovery of the original version of DarkSword and the earlier discovery of a similar kit known as  Coruna, and a  growing market for iPhone exploits driven by their high value as targets.

Allan Liska, field chief information security officer at Recorded Future, said he was worried about what the leaked DarkSword version could do to “democratize” iPhone exploits.

“Right now, iPhone exploitations are among the most expensive to research/implement so they have been, largely, the realm of nation-states,” he said. “If anyone can exploit an iPhone, suddenly something that has managed to be relatively secure now is a much bigger attack surface.”

Google, iVerify and Lookout released research last week on DarkSword’s discovery, centered on Ukraine. Google also said it saw targeting in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Malaysia. And that was before a version turned up on GitHub, a development TechCrunch first reported and Google and iVerify have analyzed. (The week before, iVerify and Google uncovered Coruna. Google declined to comment further for this story.)

“It’s extremely alarming that this leaked out on GitHub,” said Rocky Cole, co-founder of iVerify. “I would assume that it’s being used all around the world, and including here in the United States.”

Hundreds of millions of iPhones running iOS 18 could be vulnerable to DarkSword.

“I think that the top line issues here are pretty clear: people who have devices that are vulnerable should upgrade ASAP,” said Eva Galperin, director of cybersecurity at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “It is very likely that these vulnerabilities are being used right now to exploit vulnerable devices at scale, which is unusual for Apple products.”

The propagation problem

Coruna was concerning enough for Apple that it took the rare step of backporting security updates to still older versions of iOS, Cole said. The fear, he said, was that it might be wormable — capable of spreading from one device via text message to everyone in a phone’s contact list.

But Cole said Apple hasn’t released similar security-focused updates to iOS 18, for reasons he doesn’t know.

Apple has emphasized the patches it has issued, urged users to update their phones and touted Lockdown Mode as a defense against spyware.

“Apple devices are designed with multiple layers of security in order to protect against a wide range of potential threats, and every day Apple’s security teams around the world work tirelessly to protect users’ devices and data,” said Apple spokesperson Sarah O’Rourke. “Keeping your software up to date is the single most important thing you can do to maintain the security of your Apple products, and devices with updated software were not at risk from these reported attacks.”

IPhones’ widespread use makes them high-value targets, fueling a thriving market for exploits. Coruna and DarkSword are indicators of this growing demand. 

“It’s time for organizations to start thinking of mobile security the way they think about desktop security, which is to say everyone knows how to secure their laptop,” Cole said. And for iPhone exploit hunting in particular, “you’re starting to see people do it at a mass level.” Furthermore, the resale market is such that exploits that once were exclusive are no longer, and AI makes it even easier to customize them in the code, he said. 

DarkSword has drawn federal attention: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency this week added vulnerabilities that DarkSword exploits to the list that federal agencies must patch.

The number of people still using iOS 18 is large, up to 25% of all iPhones. Cole said several factors are contributing to that, such as users being leery of iOS 26’s onboard artificial intelligence or the Liquid Glass interface.

Said Galperin: “There are many reasons why people do not keep their devices up to date, so when I tell people ‘just patch your stuff’ I think it is important to realize that there are circumstances under which this is easier said than done.”

Proven defenses despite expanding risks

Despite the concerns, Cole credited iPhone for its high security standards, in particular for its app store.

For Natalia Krapiva, senior tech-legal counsel at Access Now, a key takeaway is the worrisome proliferation of commercial spyware and cyber intrusion capabilities.

“This is exactly what human rights activists and digital security researchers have been warning governments and companies about: In the absence of effective regulation for the industry, these exploits will get out and end up in the hands of adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, or, as in the case of DarkSword, leaked online for any criminal to use,” she said.

On the other hand, Apple’s Lockdown Mode and Memory Integrity Enforcement are top-notch defensive measures, Krapiva said. We’ve yet to see a Lockdown Mode-enabled iPhone being infected with spyware, she said.

“I think we’ll keep seeing more attempts to exploit both Apple and Android devices as they improve their software and hardware security,” she said. “It’s the old cat-and-mouse game.”

Adam Boynton, senior enterprise strategy manager at Jamf, said what’s happened with Coruna and DarkSword is evidence of Apple’s success.

“What’s encouraging here is that Apple’s security model works,” he said. “Coruna skips devices running the latest iOS versions and avoids those with Lockdown Mode enabled entirely. That’s a strong validation of the defences Apple has built.

“DarkSword reinforces the same principle,” he continued. “Where Coruna targeted older iOS versions, DarkSword demonstrates that even relatively current releases can be targeted by determined actors. Apple moved quickly to patch the vulnerabilities involved, and devices running the latest iOS are protected.”

The post DarkSword’s GitHub leak threatens to turn elite iPhone hacking into a tool for the masses appeared first on CyberScoop.

Russian intelligence-affiliated hackers have gained access to thousands of users’ messaging apps with a global phishing campaign, the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warned in a public service announcement on Friday.

The high-value targets they’re pursuing include current and former U.S. government officials, political figures, military personnel and journalists, the two agencies said in the joint PSA about the hackers’ attempts to infiltrate commercial messaging applications (CMAs).

The U.S. alert comes on the heels of an earlier warning from Dutch authorities, who said last week that Russian hackers were “engaged in a large-scale global attempt” to take over WhatsApp and Signal accounts. The Dutch warning likewise followed a similar warning from Germany in February.

The U.S. agencies emphasized that the hackers had not been able to bypass end-to-end encryption, instead manipulating users into giving up access. The scheme involves hackers posing as Signal help personnel, then inviting them to click a link or provide verification codes or account personal identification number.

“After compromising an account, malicious actors can view the victims’ messages and contact lists, send messages, and conduct additional phishing against other CMA accounts,” the PSA explains. “(Note: reporting shows that the threat actors specifically target Signal accounts but can apply similar methods against other CMAs).”

However, “CMA users who strengthen their personal cybersecurity and defend against social engineering attempts can reduce the risk of account compromise and limit the effectiveness of the threat actors’ current tactics, techniques, and procedures,” the agencies said.

The Russian campaign is just the latest to seek to bypass the protections commercial messaging apps offer. CISA in November warned about spyware targeting of messaging apps. 

There sometimes has been a Russian intelligence nexus to the recent targeting. Google Threat Intelligence Group shined a spotlight last year on Russian attempts to target Signal users in Ukraine.

‘We anticipate the tactics and methods used to target Signal will grow in prevalence in the near-term and proliferate to additional threat actors and regions outside the Ukrainian theater of war,” the company said.

The post FBI, CISA issue PSA on Russian intelligence campaign to target messaging apps appeared first on CyberScoop.

Researchers have discovered a second instance of suspected Russian hackers using iOS exploits, pointing to what they say are several foreboding trends.

iVerify, Lookout and Google collaborated on the research published Wednesday, a follow-up to earlier revelations about a similar exploit kit, Coruna. While the second kit — dubbed DarkSword — also targeted users in Ukraine, the scale is significant: iVerify estimated up to 270 million iPhone users could be susceptible, while Lookout told CyberScoop roughly 15% of all iOS devices currently in use are running iOS 18 or earlier versions and could be vulnerable to the exploit kit.

The research reveals a range of new details, as well as interesting patterns:

• Whereas Russian and Chinese hackers used Coruna with financial gain in mind, there are signs DarkSword could serve both financial and surveillance purposes, and/or could be used to inflict harm.
• Lookout observed that someone used a large language model to customize both Coruna and DarkSword.
• The discovery of DarkSword reinforces earlier concerns about a secondary exploit market, Lookout and iVerify said.
• DarkSword is the second “mass” iOS campaign discovered this month, with the first known one to be Coruna.
• Both kits suggest cyberattacks are migrating toward mobile phones as they make up a bigger portion of internet traffic, Rocky Cole, iVerify’s co-founder and chief operating officer, told CyberScoop.
• Google also found that DarkSword was used against targets in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Malaysia

DarkSword can exfiltrate saved passwords, crypto wallets, text messages and more, researchers found. Attackers are leveraging the exploit kit by first compromising Apple’s WebKit and then using WebGPU as a pivot point for sandbox escapes, according to Justin Albrecht, Lookout’s global director for mobile threat intelligence.

What’s less clear is who, exactly, is behind the exploit kit, other than the links to Russia. Cole said DarkSword is hosted on the same command and control infrastructure as Coruna, but is an entirely separate kit made by entirely separate people. Google has attributed the campaigns to a group it tracks as UNC6353, which it describes as a Russian-backed espionage group, as well as UNC6748 and Turkish commercial surveillance vendor PARS Defense. 

The attackers’ motives are also a bit opaque, mixing what appears to be both espionage and financial objectives. Albrecht noted there is precedent for this: Russian threat groups have targeted cryptocurrency in Ukraine before, notably with Infamous Chisel, an Android exploit kit deployed by Sandworm. 

“They’re probably well-funded, probably well-connected, but it’s confirmed that they’re stealing crypto. There is definitely a financial motivation,” Albrecht told CyberScoop. “Now, I think the big question is, depending on who the group is, is the financial motivation in this just to do damage to Ukrainians, or is it to steal crypto?”

Russia has been under heavy sanctions for a long time and is starting to have budget problems due to the ongoing war in Ukraine, he noted. “Why not start to fund their operations with stolen funds? It wouldn’t be outside the norm, although it would be a potential shift in their TTPs for Russian APTs in general,” Albrecht said. 

The kit could be handy for someone trying to do a “pattern of life” analysis, Cole said, and thus useful for surveillance and intelligence purposes.

He said a commercial spyware vendor might have made the kit with no target audience in mind, thus the “Swiss Army knife”-like quality of it. The major concern for Cole is that there’s apparently a growing market for these kinds of tools, and people may be lulled into a false sense of security about iPhones not being vulnerable.

Despite the sophistication of the exploits themselves, the threat actors behind DarkSword may not be particularly experienced, Albrecht said. None of the JavaScript or HTML code was obfuscated in any way, and the server-side component was labeled “Dark sword file receiver” — poor operational security for a seasoned Russian threat actor.

“Your experienced Russian threat actors, your APT29’s of the world, I would expect them to have better OPSEC,” Albrecht said.

One of the more unusual findings in the research is the clear presence of large language model-generated code. The server-side component of DarkSword, for instance, includes telltale signs of AI-generated code, complete with detailed notes and comments characteristic of LLM output.  It’s a development that effectively lowers the barrier to entry for deploying advanced mobile exploits, even among state-sponsored actors, Albrecht said.

All three research teams have been in contact with Apple about the findings, according to Albrecht, with Google likely in closest contact since they began investigating the threat in late 2025. In its blog, Google said it reported the vulnerabilities used in DarkSword to Apple in late 2025, and all vulnerabilities were patched with the release of iOS 26.3, although most were patched prior.

CLARIFICATION 3/18/26: Clarified the suspected origins of the DarkSword exploit kit and any links to tools developed for the U.S. government.

The post Second iOS exploit kit now in use by suspected Russian hackers appeared first on CyberScoop.

Ransomware remains a scourge that shows some signs of relenting, but incident responders and threat hunters are busier than ever as more financially-motivated attackers lean exclusively on data theft for extortion.

Attacks that only involve data theft for extortion may not be more prevalent than traditional ransomware when attackers encrypt systems, but momentum is moving in that direction, Genevieve Stark, head of cybercrime intelligence at Google Threat Intelligence Group, told CyberScoop.

“When you look at the actors in the English-speaking underground, those actors are almost all just focusing on data-theft extortion right now,” Stark added. This includes groups like Scattered Spider, ShinyHunters, Clop and other groups that have been responsible for some of the largest and farthest-reaching attacks over the past few years.

Google Threat Intelligence Group’s research report on ransomware, which it shared exclusively and discussed with CyberScoop prior to release, underscores how the evolution and spread of cybercrime can cloud a collective understanding of ransomware, or attacks that use malware to encrypt or lock systems. 

Ransomware attacks also often include data theft as an additional pressure point for extortion — occurring in 77% of ransomware intrusions Google observed last year, up from 57% in 2024 — but it’s not technically ransomware unless encryption is involved. 

“Over the past several years we’ve seen a gradual increase in the overall percentage of directly observed financially motivated incidents that involved only data theft extortion incidents, growing from around 2% of incidents in 2020 to more than 15% of incidents in 2025,” said Bavi Sadayappan, senior threat intelligence analyst at GTIG.

“In the same time span, the percentage of incidents involving ransomware deployment has fluctuated. We’ve seen a decrease in ransomware incidents in the past year, with 39% of incidents involving ransomware in 2024 compared to 31% in 2025,” she added.

The company declined to say how many ransomware attacks it responded to in 2025. “We hesitate sharing the number of cases that we work on, in terms of a quantitative number, because it’s so difficult for everybody to agree on what constitutes one incident versus two,” said Chris Linklater, practice leader at Mandiant. “Anecdotally, we’re staying very busy.”

Stark acknowledged that significant challenges prevent the industry from developing a clear, comprehensive picture of ransomware’s true scale and impact. Insight is largely confined to what individual incident response firms see in their own cases, and what information is shared is typically provided case by case rather in a centralized way.

“We’re not doing a great job as an industry in looking at the volume. I think that we’re overly dependent on things like the volume of data-leak sites, which have a lot of problems,” she said.

The increase in data extortion is likely driving an increase in these posts. At the same time, some threat clusters are making non-credible claims or recycling previous breaches and claiming them as their own work. “Data-leak sites as a measure is actually pretty poor, and I think that as an industry we’ve over relied on that,” Stark said.

Yet, the data is still useful for gauging certain trends, such as shifts in targeting or an increase in alleged attacks on specific sectors or regions, researchers said.

For what it’s worth, Google said the amount of posts on data leak sites jumped 48% from the year prior to 7,784 posts in 2025. Meanwhile, the number of unique data leak sites climbed almost 35% over the same period to 128 sites with at least one post.

Google’s report also focuses on the tactics and shifts it observed during its response to ransomware attacks last year, including the most common ways attackers broke into systems, the most prominent ransomware families and increased targeting of virtualization infrastructure.

Exploited vulnerabilities was the top initial access vector in ransomware attacks last year, accounting for a third of all incidents, followed by various forms of web compromise and stolen credentials. Attackers most commonly exploited vulnerabilities in widely used virtual private networks and firewalls from Fortinet, SonicWall, Palo Alto Networks and Citrix, researchers said.

Zach Riddle, principal threat intelligence analyst at GTIG, said this doesn’t reflect a growing trend as much as a recurring cycle of different initial access vectors, which rise and fall year to year for various reasons.

Google specifically called out 13 vulnerabilities, many disclosed years ago, ranking those defects among the top exploited vulnerabilities for ransomware attacks last year. Three of those vulnerabilities affect Fortinet products, followed by two from Microsoft, two from Veritas, and one each from SonicWall, Citrix, SAP, Palo Alto Networks, CrushFTP and Zoho.

Stolen credentials were the initial access point in 21% of ransomware intrusions last year, and attackers often used those credentials to authenticate to a victim’s VPN or Remote Desktop Protocol login, Google said in the report.

Attackers are also confronting more challenges in deploying ransomware once they break into victim networks. “We’re actually seeing a decrease in successful ransomware deployment,” Sadayappan said. Google observed a year-over-year decline from 54% in 2024 to 36% last year.

Another landmark change reflected in ransomware activity in 2025 involves increased targeting of virtualization infrastructure, such as VMware ESXi hypervisors. Attackers targeted these environments in 43% of ransomware intrusions last year, up from 29% in 2024.

“It lets the attacker hit a huge number of systems with a very small amount of effort,” Linklater said, adding that “it makes the investigation significantly harder to accomplish, because a lot more of the forensic evidence is lost when those hypervisors are attacked.”

The most prominent ransomware families in 2025 included Agenda, Redbike, Clop, Playcrypt, Safepay, Inc, RansomHub and Fireflame, according to Google. The most active ransomware brands last year included Qilin, Akira, Clop, Play, Safepay, Inc, Lynx, RansomHub, DragonForce and Sinobi.

The post The ransomware economy is shifting toward straight-up data extortion appeared first on CyberScoop.