Suspected Iranian hackers infiltrated former national security adviser John Bolton’s email account and threatened to release sensitive materials, his indictment alleges.

The indictment on charges that Bolton mishandled classified information, released Thursday, comes after President Donald Trump’s unprecedented public call for the Justice Department to prosecute his enemies. Bolton served under Trump in his first term as national security adviser and since has become a critic.

The passage of the indictment related to the Iranian hackers seeks to demonstrate a representative of Bolton knew his personal emails included information they shouldn’t have.

In early July of 2021, according to the indictment, the Bolton representative contacted the FBI to alert the bureau about the apparent hack, and their suspicion that it was someone from Iran. The indictment states that it was “a cyber actor believed to be associated with the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

The Justice Department had recently closed an investigation into whether Bolton illegally published classified information in a memoir. Later that July, the apparent hackers threatened to release Bolton’s emails, drawing comparisons to the leak of 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails.

“I do not think you would be interested in the FBI being aware of the leaked content of John’s email (some of which have been attached), especially after the recent acquittal,” the threatening note from on or about July 25 read, the indictment states. “This could be the biggest scandal since Hillary’s emails were leaked, but this time on the GOP side! Contact me before it’s too late.”

Days later — on or about July 28, the indictment states — Bolton’s representative also told the FBI that they were “[j]ust sending you the text (not the documents [the hacker] attached since there might be sensitive information in them.)”

According to the indictment, “A day later, on or about July 29, 2021, Bolton’s representative told the FBI that Bolton would be deleting the contents of his personal email account that had been hacked.”

Bolton got one more message from the apparent hackers in August. “OK John … As you want (apparently), we’ll disseminate the expurgated sections of your book by reference to your leaked email…” It’s not clear if the hackers followed through on the threat, or what they demanded of Bolton not to release the sections.

Bolton didn’t disclose to the FBI that he had used a hacked email account to share classified information with two unnamed relatives, “nor did he tell the FBI that the hackers now held this information,” the indictment reads.

A search warrant affidavit released last month contains a passage headed “Hack of Bolton AOL Account by Foreign Entity,” but the passage itself is redacted.

Bolton surrendered to authorities on Friday. The law firm of the lawyer defending did not immediately respond to an email about the indictment passages related to the alleged hack, but his attorney, Abbe Lowell, has denied Bolton committed any crimes.

“These charges stem from portions of Ambassador Bolton’s personal diaries over his 45-year career — records that are unclassified, shared only with his immediate family, and known to the FBI as far back as 2021,” Lowell said in a statement. “Like many public officials throughout history, Ambassador Bolton kept diaries — that is not a crime.”

The post John Bolton indictment says suspected Iranian hackers accessed his emails, issued threats appeared first on CyberScoop.

A fast-spreading Android spyware is mushrooming across Russia, camouflaging itself as popular apps like TikTok or YouTube, researchers at Zimperium have revealed in a blog post.

The company told CyberScoop they expect the campaign is likely to expand beyond Russian borders, too.

In three months, Zimperium zLabs researchers observed more than 600 samples, the company wrote in a blog post Thursday. Once implanted, the spyware can steal text messages, call logs, device information and more, and wrest control of a phone to do things like take pictures or place phone calls.

“It’s mainly targeting Russia, but they can always adapt to other payloads, and since every inflected phone then becomes an attack vector, it’s likely to become a global campaign,” said Nico Chiaraviglio, chief scientist at Zimperium. “However, it’s not easy to know the attackers’ intentions.”

The spyware, dubbed ClayRat, has some notable tools it uses to infect victims.

“ClayRat poses a serious threat not only because of its extensive surveillance capabilities, but also because of its abuse of Android’s default SMS handler role,” the blog post reads. “This technique allows it to bypass standard runtime permission prompts and gain access to sensitive data without raising alarms.”

It’s also been evolving quickly, Zimperium said, “adding new layers of obfuscation and packing to evade detection.”

Zimperium didn’t say who was behind the spyware. The Russian government is a cyberspace power, but typically hasn’t had to rely on spyware vendors, per se, as it has its own capabilities. Often — but not always — spyware linked to or suspected to be linked to the Kremlin is turned inwards, snooping on domestic targets.

“ClayRat is distributed through a highly orchestrated mix of social engineering and web-based deception, designed to exploit user trust and convenience,” according to Zimperium. “The campaign relies heavily on Telegram channels and phishing websites that impersonate well-known services and applications.”

ClayRat’s users also rely on phishing platforms.

The post Russian spyware ClayRat is spreading, evolving quickly, according to Zimperium appeared first on CyberScoop.

A top Senate Democrat introduced legislation Thursday to extend and rename an expired information-sharing law, and make it retroactive to cover the lapse that began Oct. 1.

Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, the ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, introduced the Protecting America from Cyber Threats (PACT) Act, to replace the expired Cybersecurity and Information Sharing Act of 2015 (CISA 2015) that has provided liability protections for organizations that share cyber threat data with each other and the federal government. Industry groups and cyber professionals have called those protections vital, sometimes describing the 2015 law as the most successful cyber legislation ever passed.

The 2015 law shares an acronym with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which some Republicans — including the chairman of Peters’ panel, Rand Paul of Kentucky — have accused of engaging in social media censorship. As CISA 2015 has lapsed and Peters has tried to renew it, “some people think that’s a reauthorization of the agency,” Peters told reporters Thursday in explaining the new bill name.

“There are some of my Republican colleagues who have concerns about CISA as the agency, and I remind them, this is not about the agency,” he said. “It’s about … cybersecurity protections and the ability to have liability protections and to be able to share information. I’ve often heard the chair conflate the two, and I have to continually remind him.”

A House bill also would establish a different name.

Paul has objected to Peters’ attempts on the floor to extend CISA 2015. A shorter-term extension of the law was included in the House-passed continuing resolution to keep the government open, but that bill didn’t advance in the Senate, prompting a shutdown.

Peters’ latest bill, like earlier legislation he co-sponsored with Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., would extend CISA 2015 for 10 years. He rejected the idea of trying to get a shorter-term extension until a longer-term extension could be passed.

“One thing that is very clear from all of the stakeholders is that they need long-term certainty when it comes to these protections, that you can’t operate with just a few-week-patch and then another few-week–patch,” Peters said. “That’s no way to run a business. That’s no way to run a sophisticated cybersecurity operation.”

Michael Daniel, leader of the Cyber Threat Alliance made up of cybersecurity companies, told CyberScoop that his organization hasn’t been affected by the lapse yet, but that’s partially because it’s an organization that was set up with the long term in mind, with a formalized structure that included information-sharing requirements  for members.

The lapse might also not immediately affect other organizations, he said, comparing it to the risks of the government shutdown underway.

“An hour-long lapse doesn’t really do very much, but the longer it goes on, the more you have time for organizations to say, ‘Well, maybe we need to reconsider what we’re doing, maybe we need to think about it differently,’” Daniel said. “The longer it goes on, you start having questions about, ‘Maybe this thing won’t get reauthorized down the road.’ And once you start questioning the long-term prospects, that’s when people start making changes in their behavior.”

Peters said he’s heard from organizations becoming increasingly nervous about the expiration, but didn’t want to comment on whether any had stopped sharing because that’s “sensitive information, important information, and our adversaries should know as little about what’s happening as possible.”

Peters said he wouldn’t comment on his deliberations with Paul, or comment on Paul’s motives for objecting to his floor maneuvers. Paul cancelled a planned markup of his own version of CISA 2015 renewal legislation in September that included language on free-speech guarantees under CISA the agency, with a spokesperson saying Democrats had requested more time and were “not negotiating in good faith.”

Peters told reporters that claim was “absolutely false … the problem is not on our end.”

The revised Peters legislation doesn’t touch on the topic of free speech. Democrats and Republicans have blamed one another for the government shutdown.

“Firstly, this authority will be turned back on when Democrats, including the bill sponsor, vote to reopen the government,” said Gabrielle Lipsky, a spokesperson for Paul. “The Senator has made it clear that a longer-term reauthorization will need robust free speech protections included.”

Peters said he had spoken to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., about getting the bill through Senate procedures. He and Rounds have both been speaking with colleagues to gain backing. The Trump administration also has been lobbying senators to support a CISA 2015 reauthorization.

“I’m confident that if this bill gets to the floor for a vote, it will not only pass, it will pass overwhelmingly,” he said. “And that’s what we’re working to do.”

The post Sen. Peters tries another approach to extend expired cyber threat information-sharing law appeared first on CyberScoop.

Three House Democrats questioned the Department of Homeland Security on Monday over a reported Immigration and Customs Enforcement contract with a spyware provider that they warn potentially “threatens Americans’ freedom of movement and freedom of speech.”

Their letter follows publication of a notice that ICE had lifted a stop-work order on a $2 million deal with Israeli spyware company Paragon Solutions, a contract that the Biden administration had frozen one year ago pending a review of its compliance with a spyware executive order.

Paragon is the maker of Graphite, and advertises it as having more safeguards than competitors that have received more public and legal scrutiny, such as NSO Group’s Pegasus, a claim researchers have challenged. A report earlier this year found suspected deployments of Graphite in countries across the globe, with targets including journalists and activists. WhatsApp also notified users this year about a Paragon-linked campaign targeting them. The tool can infect phones without its target having to click on any malicious lure, then mine data from them.

“Given the Trump Administration’s disregard for constitutional rights and civil liberties in pursuit of rapid mass deportation, we are seriously concerned that ICE will abuse Graphite software to target immigrants, people of color, and individuals who express opposition to ICE’s repeated attacks on the rule of law,” the three congressional Democrats, two of whom serve as ranking members of House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittees, wrote Monday.

The trio behind the letter are Reps. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, top Democrat on the Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement; Ohio Rep. Shontel Brown, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Government Innovation; and Rep. Yassamin Ansari of Arizona.

Their letter pointed to two Supreme Court rulings — Riley v. California from 2014 and Carpenter v. United States from 2018 — that addressed warrantless surveillance of cellular data. “Allowing ICE to utilize spyware raises serious questions about whether ICE will respect Fourth Amendment protections against warrantless search and seizure for people residing in the U.S.,” the lawmakers wrote.

The trio also asked for communications and documents about ICE’s use of spyware, as well as legal discussions about ICE using spyware and its compliance with the 2023 Biden executive order. They also sought a list of data surveillance targets.

ICE’s surveillance tactics have long drawn attention, but they’ve gained more attention in the Trump administration, which has sought to vastly expand the agency. ICE has conducted raids that have often swept in U.S. citizens. Other federal contracting records have pointed to ICE’s intentions to develop a 24/7 social media surveillance regime.

DHS and ICE did not immediately answer requests for comment about the Democrats’ letter. ICE has not provided answers about the contract in other media inquiries. 

404 Media is suing for information about the ICE contract.

The post House Dems seek info about ICE spyware contract, wary of potential abuses appeared first on CyberScoop.

Federal courts are upgrading their cybersecurity on a number of fronts, but multifactor authentication for the system that gives the public access to court data poses “unique challenges,” the Administrative Office of the United States Courts told Sen. Ron Wyden in a letter this week.

Wyden, D-Ore., wrote a scathing August letter to the Supreme Court in response to the latest major breach of the federal judiciary’s electronic case filing system. The director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts responded on behalf of the Supreme Court.

It is “simply not the case” that the courts have, in the words of Wyden, “ignored” advice from experts on securing the Case Management/Electronic Case Files (CM/ECF) system, wrote Robert Conrad Jr., director of the office.

“Substantial planning for the modernization effort began in 2022, and we are now approaching the development and implementation phase of the project,” he wrote in the Sept. 30 letter. “We expect implementation will begin in the next two years in a modular and iterative manner.”

In recent years, the office has been testing technical components on its modernization effort, and is centralizing the operation of data standards to enable security, Conrad said.

Wyden took the office to task for not enabling phishing-resistant multifactor authentication (MFA). Conrad wrote that the office was in the process of rolling out MFA to the 5 million users of PACER, the public case data system.

“The Judiciary has unique challenges in implementing MFA due to the significant diversity of users,” he responded. “PACER users range from sophisticated, high-volume data aggregators and well-resourced law firms to journalists and ordinary citizens, to indigent litigants. All PACER users need access to court records, but some do not have traditional forms of MFA they can use. The design and implementation of our MFA implementation requires consideration of these unique needs.”

Wyden also took issue with the lack of public explanations about the series of court breaches. Conrad wrote that the breaches are “sensitive from both a law enforcement and national security perspective,” and need to be kept confidential, but noted that the courts have briefed congressional Judiciary, Appropriations and Intelligence committees on a classified basis.

“Even after back-to-back catastrophic hacks of the federal court system, Chief Justice [John Roberts] continues to stonewall Congress and cover up the judiciary’s gross negligence that has enabled these hacks,” Wyden said in response to the Conrad letter. “It is long past time for the courts to follow the same minimum cybersecurity standards as the executive branch, but since Chief Justice Roberts and the Judicial Conference refuse to set such requirements, Congress must step in and legislate.”

Court Watch was the first to report on the contents of the letter.

The post Federal judiciary touts cybersecurity work in wake of latest major breach appeared first on CyberScoop.

Researchers have found two Android spyware families masquerading as messaging apps Signal and ToTok, apparently targeting residents of the United Arab Emirates.

ESET revealed the spyware campaigns Thursday in a blog post, saying that researchers discovered it in June but believe it dates back to last year. They dubbed the campaigns ProSpy and ToSpy, with the first impersonating both Signal and ToTok, and the second just ToTok.

ToTok has been effectively discontinued since 2020, after The New York Times reported that the app itself was a spying tool for the government of the UAE. The spyware was posing as an enhanced version of the app, ToTok Pro, ESET said.

Upon download, the spyware requests permission to access contacts, text messages and stored files, and once granted, it can start exfiltrating data, according to the researchers. That includes the data for which it sought permission, but also device information, audio, video, images and chat backups.

“Neither app containing the spyware was available in official app stores; both required manual installation from third-party websites posing as legitimate services,” said ESET researcher Lukáš Štefanko, who made the discovery. “Notably, one of the websites distributing the ToSpy malware family mimicked the Samsung Galaxy Store, luring users into manually downloading and installing a malicious version of the ToTok app.

“Confirmed detections in the UAE and the use of phishing and fake app stores suggest regionally focused operations with strategic delivery mechanisms,” he said.

It’s not the first time hackers have disguised malware in phony messaging apps. ESET shined a spotlight on the phenomenon last year, pointing to fake WhatsApp updates with mysterious intentions, copycat Telegram and WhatsApp websites for stealing cryptocurrency and a Chinese government-linked group seeking to distribute Android BadBazaar espionage code through authentic-looking Signal and Telegram apps.

ESET concluded that the latest spyware campaigns are likely targeting privacy-conscious UAE residents partly because the ToTok app was primarily used there and also because of a domain name ending in the substring “ae.net,” with “AE” being the two-letter country code for UAE.

“Given the app’s regional popularity and the impersonation tactics used by the threat actors, it is reasonable to speculate that the primary targets of this spyware campaign are users in the UAE or surrounding regions,” ESET wrote in its blog post.

The post Android spyware disguised as legitimate messaging apps targets UAE victims, researchers reveal appeared first on CyberScoop.

A company affiliated with the Georgia Institute of Technology agreed to pay $875,000 to the U.S. government to settle a case involving allegations that it knowingly failed to meet cybersecurity requirements for obtaining Pentagon contracts, the Justice Department announced Tuesday.

Two Georgia Tech whistleblowers who worked on the university’s cybersecurity team first filed suit in 2022 under the False Claims Act, a Civil War-era law aimed at combatting shady contractors. The Justice Department joined the suit two years later on behalf of the Defense Department, Air Force and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

The settlement resolves the suit against Georgia Tech and Georgia Tech Research Corporation over allegations that they failed to install antivirus tools at Georgia Tech’s Astrolavos Lab while it conducted sensitive cyber-defense research for the Pentagon. The Justice Department also had said that Georgia Tech and the affiliate company submitted a false cybersecurity assessment score to the Defense Department.

“When contractors fail to follow the required cybersecurity standards in their DoD contracts, they leave sensitive government information vulnerable to malicious actors and cyber threats,” said Brett Shumate, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department’s Civil Division.

Under the settlement agreement, neither side concedes to the other over the allegations.

“From the outset, Georgia Tech denied the government’s allegations that mischaracterized our commitment to cybersecurity,” said a spokesperson for the university, Blair Meeks. “We worked hard to educate the government about the strong compliance efforts of our researchers and are pleased to avoid the distraction of litigation by resolving this matter without any admission of liability. Georgia Tech looks forward to continued collaboration with the Department of Defense and other federal partners in conducting ground-breaking research in a secure manner.”

The two sides first reached a tentative settlement agreement in May. The government will pay the two whistleblowers, Kyle Koza and Christopher Craig, $201,250 out of the settlement.
The Justice Department began using the False Claims Act in 2022 to punish contractors over cybersecurity shortcomings under its Civil Cyber-Fraud Initiative. It has since settled with a number of parties in those cases, including for $9 million with Aerojet Rocketdyne, $8.4 million with Raytheon and Nightwing, $4.6 million with MORSECORP and $4 million with Verizon Business Network Services.

The post DOJ, Georgia Tech affiliate company settle over alleged failure to meet DOD contract cyber requirements appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency doesn’t have any plans in place for continuing a threat information-sharing program should a 2015 law that laid the groundwork for its creation expire Wednesday, according to a new watchdog report.

The inspector general report points to yet more potential complications for threat data exchanges between industry and the government should the 2015 Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, known as CISA 2015, lapse. Already, private-sector groups and cyber professionals have been sounding alarms about what would happen if the law’s legal safeguards disappear — something that’s now almost certain to happen after Tuesday’s expiration deadline is set to transpire without action from Congress.

The IG report takes a look at the Automated Indicator Sharing (AIS) program that the Department of Homeland Security established in the year after passage of CISA 2015. The voluntary program was designed to allow the exchange of machine-readable cyber threat indicators (CTIs), like malicious IP addresses, and defensive measures (DMs), defined as activity that protects information systems against cyber threats.

According to the IG, CISA (the agency) has not finalized plans for continued use of the program in the event of the expiration of the 2015 law.

“Without finalizing this plan, CISA could be hindered in how it shares information on cyber threats, which would reduce its ability to protect the Nation’s critical infrastructure from cyber threats,” the report, dated Sept. 26, states.

While creation of the AIS program was one of the most direct outcomes of the passage of CISA 2015, many industry groups do not consider it the most important impact of the law, instead focusing on the legal protections it provides. Still, the IG report details how much activity the AIS program is involved in: 10 million cyber threat indicators shared in 2024.

That figure also points to weaknesses within the program, however, according to the IG. The 10 million indicators is a big jump from the prior calendar year, when the number was 1 million.

“Although the number of CTIs and DMs increased in 2024, CISA continues to rely on a small number of partners to share information,” the report states. “CISA officials attributed recent increases in shared CTIs and DMs to a private-sector partner’s significant contribution. In 2024, this private-sector partner added more than 4 million CTIs and DMs to each of the Federal and public collections — accounting for 89 percent of the public collection and 83 percent of the Federal collection.”

The report doesn’t identify that private-sector partner. An earlier report attributed a steep drop in the sharing of cyber threat indicators to an unnamed federal partner withdrawing from the program.

“CISA’s overreliance on information shared by specific participants may lead to inconsistent results and prevent long-term program growth if top contributing partners stop participating,” the report reads.

There were only 18 federal participants in 2024 in all, and 87 non-federal participants. That’s an increase from last year in both cases, but a fall from the 2020 peak of 304 total participants. Some of those participants, though, are industry-specific information sharing and analysis centers that might include hundreds of organizations.

CISA’s response to the IG’s findings left the program’s future uncertain should the 2015 law expire, according to the report.

“Program officials stated that although CISA continues to be committed to sharing CTIs and DMs in an automated, unclassified machine-readable format such as AIS, the decision on whether to maintain the capability will be based on available resources and leadership’s priorities,” the report states. “CISA officials said if the Act were to expire, they would analyze the value of AIS, including the average operational cost of $1 million per month and a likely reduction in CTI and DM volume, to determine whether resources could be redirected from other agency priorities to support AIS.”

CISA referred requests for comment to the agency’s response contained within the report.

“It is important for readers of this report to understand that automated threat intelligence and information sharing with our global partners and stakeholders remains a priority for CISA, and that there are no immediate or near-term plans to discontinue the Automated Information Sharing [sic] service, regardless of the status of the Cybersecurity Act of 2015,” reads the response from Madhu Gottumukkala, the acting director of CISA. “Subject to available appropriations, CISA remains authorized to operate Automated Information Sharing irrespective of the possible sunset of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 on September 30, 2025, and CISA will continue to modernize and evolve Automated Information Sharing to meet the needs of its partners and stakeholders.”

The post Watchdog: Cyber threat information-sharing program’s future uncertain with expected expiration of 2015 law appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Department of Homeland Security estimated over the weekend that it would send home about two-thirds of employees at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency in the event of a government shutdown.

It’s the first time that the second Trump administration has released its contingency plan in response to what would happen if Congress doesn’t keep the government funded after Oct. 1 — something that looks likely at the moment. The furlough of two-thirds of CISA employees is also relatively close to the last time the Biden administration produced shutdown guidance in 2023.

According to the DHS document, 889 of CISA’s 2,540 personnel would keep working through a government funding lapse. That workforce estimate is from May, and could be smaller now. In 2023, DHS anticipated that it would keep 960 of its then-3,117 employees at work.

The Biden administration said that year that it would have had the ability to recall another 790 CISA employees if needed. The latest DHS guidance doesn’t include any information on recallable employees, and CISA didn’t immediately respond to a request for that figure Monday.

Furloughs of cyber personnel could have a whole host of potentially negative consequences, government officials and outside cyber experts have warned. Those consequences could be even worse as the Trump administration slashes the federal workforce, some say.

A temporary reduction could invite more attacks on the federal government; slow down patching, cyber projects and regulations; prompt permanent departures from workers disillusioned about the stability of federal cyber work; hinder cybercrime prosecutions; and freeze cyber vulnerability scans.

The latest CISA furlough estimates are “scary,” one cyber researcher wrote on the social media platform Bluesky. The White House has also instructed agencies to plan for mass firings in the event of a shutdown.

At other agencies, some federal cybersecurity-related personnel are likely to continue working during a federal funding lapse, because the law deems some government functions as “excepted,” such as those focused on missions like national security, law enforcement or protection of property and human safety. For example, at the Health and Human Services Department, the fiscal year 2026 contingency plan states that “HHS estimates that 387 staff (excluding those otherwise authorized by law) will be excepted for the protection of computer data.”

Unlike in past years, agencies are hosting contingency plans on their websites on a case-by-case basis, rather than on the website of the Office of Management and Budget. Some plans that have been published, such as those for the Department of Defense, don’t specify figures for cyber personnel.

Hundreds of thousands of federal workers could be furloughed, in total.

Two major cybersecurity laws, one providing legal protections for cyber threat data sharing and another providing state and local grants, are also set to expire in mere days. A House-passed continuing resolution would’ve temporarily extended them, but the legislation didn’t advance in the Senate.

The post Two-thirds of CISA personnel could be sent home under shutdown appeared first on CyberScoop.

Department of Government Efficiency practices at three federal agencies “violate statutory requirements, creating unprecedented privacy and cybersecurity risks,” according to a report that Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Democrats published Thursday.

The report — drawn from a mix of media reports, legal filings, whistleblower disclosures to the committee and staff visits to the agencies — concludes that the Elon Musk-created DOGE is “operating outside federal law, with unchecked access to Americans’ personal data.” It focuses on DOGE activity at the General Services Administration (GSA), Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Social Security Administration (SSA).

One previously unreported whistleblower claim is that at the SSA, a June internal risk assessment found that the chance of a data breach with “catastrophic adverse effect” stood between 35% and 65% after DOGE uploaded a computer database file known as Numident, containing personal sensitive information without additional protections against unauthorized access. The potential implications included “widespread PII [personally identifiable information] disclosure or loss of data” and “catastrophic damage to or loss of agency facilities and infrastructure with fatalities to individuals,” according to the assessment.

“DOGE isn’t making government more efficient — it’s putting Americans’ sensitive information in the hands of completely unqualified and untrustworthy individuals,” Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, the top Democrat on the committee, said in a news release. “They are bypassing cybersecurity protections, evading oversight, and putting Americans’ personal data at risk. We cannot allow this shadow operation to continue operating unchecked while millions of people face the threat of identity theft, economic disruption, and permanent harm. The Trump Administration and agency leadership must immediately put a stop to these reckless actions that risk causing unprecedented chaos in Americans’ daily lives.”

The report recommends stripping all DOGE access to sensitive personal information until agencies certify that the initiative is in compliance with federal security and privacy laws such as the Federal Information Security Management Act, and recommends that DOGE employees complete the same kind of cybersecurity training as other federal employees.

It describes the three agencies blocking access to specific offices or otherwise obstructing access. For example, it says that DOGE installed a Starlink network at GSA, but wouldn’t let staff view it. Starlink is the Musk-owned satellite internet service, and the report concludes that Starlink might have allowed DOGE staffers to circumvent agency IT oversight. Data sent over the network “could be an easy target for foreign adversaries,” the report states.

The report also expands upon an alleged attempt at SSA to create a “master database” that would pool data from multiple federal agencies. According to whistleblower disclosures, former SSA DOGE employee John Koval inquired about uploading agency data into a cloud environment to share with the Department of Homeland Security. He was “rebuffed,” the report states, but later worked at DHS and the Justice Department, where SSA data surfaced in some projects, raising further privacy concerns. 

It revisits concerns about DOGE staffer Edward “Big Balls” Coristine having access to sensitive agency data despite reports that he had been fired from an internship at a cybersecurity company for leaking company information to a competitor, and arrives at further conclusions about the risk posed by the ability of Coristine and others “to move highly sensitive SSA data into an unmonitored cloud environment.”

“It is highly likely that foreign adversaries, such as Russia, China, and Iran, who regularly attempt cyber attacks on the U.S. government and critical infrastructure, are already aware of this new DOGE cloud environment,” the report states.

Two of the agencies that were the subject of the report took issue with its conclusions.

“OPM takes its responsibility to safeguard federal personnel records seriously,” said a spokeswoman for the office, McLaurine Pinover. “This report recycles unfounded claims about so-called ‘DOGE teams’ that simply have never existed at OPM. Federal employees at OPM conduct their work in line with longstanding law, security, and compliance requirements.

“Instead of rehashing baseless allegations, Senate Democrats should focus their efforts on the real challenges facing the federal workforce,” she continued. “OPM remains committed to transparency, accountability, and delivering for the American people.”

The SSA pointed to Commissioner Frank Bisignano’s letter to Congress responding to questions about Numident security concerns. 

“Based on the agency’s thorough review, the Numident data and database — stored in a longstanding secure environment used by SSA — have not been accessed, leaked, hacked, or shared in any unauthorized fashion,” a SSA spokesperson wrote, adding, “The location referred to in the whistleblower allegation is actually a secured server in the agency’s cloud infrastructure which historically has housed this data and is continuously monitored and overseen — SSA’s standard practice.”

The SSA spokesperson emphasized there are no DOGE employees at SSA, only agency employees. 

The GSA did not immediately respond to Scoop News Group requests for comment on the Democratic report.

Miranda Nazzaro contributed reporting to this story.

The post Dem report concludes Department of Government Efficiency violates cybersecurity, privacy rules appeared first on CyberScoop.

Ambitious, suspected Chinese hackers with a slew of goals — stealing intellectual property, mining intelligence on national security and trade, developing avenues for future advanced cyberattacks — have been setting up shop inside U.S. target networks for exceptionally long stretches of time, in a breach that the researchers who uncovered it said could present problems for years to come.

Mandiant and Google Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) researchers described the campaign as exceptionally sophisticated, stealthy and complex, calling those behind it a “next-level threat.” But they don’t yet have a full handle on who the hackers are behind the malware they’ve dubbed Brickstorm, or how far it stretches. A blog post the company posted Wednesday sheds light on the group.

The primary targets are legal services organizations and tech companies that provide security services, the researchers said. But the hackers aren’t limiting their interest to the primary targets, since they’ve used that access to infiltrate “downstream” customers. The researchers declined to describe those downstream customers, or say whether U.S. federal agencies are among those targeted. A great many of them don’t know yet that they’re victims, they said.

By stealing intellectual property from security-as-a-service (SaaS) firms, the hackers aim to find future zero-day vulnerabilities, a kind of vulnerability that is previously unknown and unpatched and thus highly prized, in order to enable more attacks down the line, the researchers from Mandiant and its parent company Google said.

The researchers declined to comment on possible Chinese government agency connections. But they see overlap with Chinese hacking groups like the one they’ve labeled UNC5221 — perhaps best known for exploiting Ivanti flaws, and a group that Mandiant and GTIIG described as the “most prevalent” Chinese-centered threat group right now — and the one Microsoft calls Silk Typhoon, which researchers warned recently has been ramping up its attacks this year, with targets including IT supply chains and the cloud. Silk Typhoon is believed to be Chinese government-sponsored. 

The company has also developed a tool for potential victims to discover if they’ve been affected by Brickstorm activity, which Google experts indicated is a distinct possibility that could impact scores of organizations over the coming weeks.

“We have no doubt that organizations will use our tools to hunt for this adversary, and they will find evidence of compromise in their environments,” Charles Carmakal, chief technology officer at Mandiant Consulting, told reporters briefed on the blog post. “And it may be active compromises, it might be historic compromises, but many of our organizations are going to discover that they were dealing with this adversary.” 

Sneaky, sneaky

The campaign’s average “dwell time” is 400 days, they said, compared to dwell times more commonly measured in days or weeks. 

Several features obscure Brickstorm activity. “It’s very hard to detect them and to investigate them,” said Austin Larsen, principal threat analyst at GTIG.

The hackers target systems that don’t support defenses for finding and tracking threats on endpoints, such as laptops or cell phones. Examples of target systems that don’t support that kind of endpoint detection and response (EDR) include email security gateways or vulnerability scanners. They consistently target VMware vCenter and ESXi hosts, according to the blog post.

The researchers also never see overlap between the internet protocols of the attackers between victims, Larsen said, or another way of identifying attackers: “The hashes when they land on this are different for essentially every system.”

Brickstorm attackers also “clean up after themselves” at times, Carmakal said. “Brickstorm may not exist in a victim environment today, but it could have been there for a year and a half. It might have been deleted back in April this year, back in January this year,” he said.

What they want

Brickstorm also isn’t just about one goal. “It’s an intelligence operation, but not just an intelligence operation,” said John Hultquist, chief analyst at GTIG. “This is a long-term play.”

The hackers are primarily compromising victims through zero-days, but they’re aiming to uncover new ones, too, by going through companies’ proprietary source code. That gives them multiple ways to penetrate new victim networks.

The Brickstorm hackers “hit the SaaS providers, who either hold data for people, or they have some connectivity to downstream,” Hultquist said. Or he said the group can “get a hold of the technology source code and leverage that source code information to gain access or to build out exploits in that technology, which would then give [them] basically a skeleton key to that technology.”

But its victims can be even more precise than that. “As part of this campaign, we observed in some organizations — including some legal organizations — we observed the actor searching the emails of very specific individuals,” Larsen said. The hackers have focused on collecting espionage on international trade and national security from those organizations.

Google has been tracking Brickstorm for a while now. This spring, Belgian cybersecurity company NVISO also shined the spotlight on Brickstorm variants spying on European businesses. Google’s latest blog post identifies Brickstorm activity as far more extensive than previously described.

The response

Mandiant and GTIG have notified U.S. federal agencies and international governments about the campaign.

The tool is a scanner script that can be used on Unix systems, even if YARA (a common security tool used to find and identify malware) isn’t installed. This script is designed to do the same type of search as a specific YARA rule by looking for certain words and patterns that are unique to the Brickstorm backdoor.

“The most important thing here is, if you find Brickstorm, you really need to do a very thorough enterprise investigation, because the adversary that’s dropping this is a very, very advanced adversary that is known for stealing intellectual property from organizations,” Carmakal said. “It’s known for using access from victim companies to get into downstream customer environments.”

It’s all a “very, very significant threat campaign [that’s] very, very hard to defend against in tech,” Carmakal said.

Updated 9/24/25: with additional information about past Brickstorm reporting.

The post Brickstorm malware powering ‘next-level’ Chinese cyberespionage campaign appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Secret Service said Tuesday that it disrupted a network of electronic devices in the New York City area that posed imminent telecommunications-based threats to U.S. government officials and potentially the United Nations General Assembly meeting currently underway.

The range of threats included enabling encrypted communications between threat groups and criminals, or disabling cell towers and conducting denial-of-service attacks to shut down cell communications in the region. Matt McCool, special agent in charge of the Secret Service’s New York field office, said the agency’s early analysis of the network indicated “cellular communications between foreign actors and individuals that are known to federal law enforcement.”

In all, the agency said it discovered more than 300 servers and 100,000 SIM cards spread across multiple sites within 35 miles of the U.N. meeting. The Secret Service announcement came the same day President Donald Trump was scheduled to deliver a speech to the General Assembly.

“The potential for disruption to our country’s telecommunications posed by this network of devices cannot be overstated,” U.S. Secret Service Director Sean Curran said in a news release.

McCool said in a video statement that the investigation was ongoing, but the threat the network posed had been neutralized.

“These devices allowed anonymous, encrypted communications between potential threat actors and criminal enterprises, enabling criminal organizations to operate undetected,” he said. “This network had the potential to disable cell phone towers and essentially shut down the cellular network in New York City.

“We will continue working toward identifying those responsible and their intent, including whether their plan was to disrupt the U.N. General Assembly and communications of government and emergency personnel during the official visit of world leaders in and around New York City,” McCool continued.

News outlets briefed on the operation reported that the network anonymously conveyed assassination threats against senior U.S. officials, that the agency had never seen such an extensive operation, that the investigation uncovered empty electronic safehouses rented around the area and that hackers, terrorists, spies and human traffickers could’ve made use of the network. The investigation reportedly began in response to swatting and bomb threats against U.S. officials.

Other participants in the investigation were the Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Investigations, the Department of Justice, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the New York Police Department.

Some cybersecurity professionals reacted skeptically to elements of the Secret Service announcement.

“Super weird framing by the Secret Service,” Marcus Hutchins, the researcher known for stopping the 2017 WannaCry ransomware attack, wrote on BlueSky. “They found a SIM card farm, which is typically used by criminals to anonymously send calls and texts. They issued a press release claiming ‘it could have shut down the entire NY cell network during the UN general assembly’ which is some serious FUD,” he said, using the acronym for “fear, uncertainty and doubt.”

He added: “it’s possible they found an actual plot to cause widespread destruction, but way more likely they found some generic cybercrime service and have absolutely no clue what it’s for.”

Johns Hopkins cryptography expert Matthew Green wrote on the same social media platform that “I no longer know what we can trust from the Secret Service, especially when a ‘Trump speech’ is involved, and the mechanics of this thing are a little bizarre.”

Updated 9/23/25: to include reaction from cybersecurity professionals.

The post Secret Service says it dismantled extensive telecom threat in NYC area appeared first on CyberScoop.

Hackers are increasingly adopting the techniques of the Chinese group that successfully infiltrated major telecommunications providers in attacks that made headlines last year by looking for unconventional weak spots, an AT&T executive said Monday.

AT&T was one of the major providers to fall victim to the sweeping campaign from the group, known as Salt Typhoon, but the company has since said it evicted the hackers from its networks.

“We’re seeing adversaries really change the way they’re doing things, very similar to what Salt Typhoon did,” Rich Baich, chief information security officer at AT&T, said at the Google Cloud Cyber Defense Summit.

There were three things that stood out about the way Salt Typhoon approached its campaign, he said. One was hunting for weak points in the company’s ability to find and track malicious activity on physical devices like phones or laptops, known as endpoint detection and response (EDR).

“Traditionally as practitioners, we focused on putting endpoint detection on our devices to help us provide a certain level of protection” Baich said. “Salt Typhoon’s approach was a little bit different. They said, ‘Well, what about all the other platforms that traditionally don’t have an EDR?’ And those platforms then can be utilized in many fashions, carrying out different types of actions.”

“What we need to think about is this: Do we need to have endpoint protection elsewhere, in different platforms?” Baich added. ”So that’s one: They’re going to the areas of least resistance and not spending time trying to combat traditional security controls.”

Another technique that’s growing in use since the Salt Typhoon attacks is “looking for things where we don’t have logs,” he said. Baich said attackers are “re-engineering and thinking of tradecraft techniques that allow them to circumvent known controls, and things that we may do today, but in certain parts of our networks, we may not have those things enabled.”

Lastly, Salt Typhoon and its mimics have been turning to what’s called “living off the land” attacks, where attackers rely on legitimate tools that already exist in a victim’s networks.

“Third thing that they are doing is using the actual administrative tools that we use to perform those functions, so [a lesson for potential victims is] making sure that those are locked down and you understand all the administrative tools that you have in your environment,” Baich said. “All of that is because they’re actually trying to be part of your network.”

The combination of those techniques, as well as a dedication to covering and wiping their tracks to avoid digital forensics probes, means that “we have to be much more efficient operators,” he said. “We have to think outside the box. It’s not just about just having the technology; it’s understanding how to use the technology and understanding how your technology can be used against us.”

Ironically, network defenders might be a victim of their own success, said Rob Joyce, the former cybersecurity director of the National Security Agency.

Defenses for the most-used technology in society today — from mobile phones to web browsers — have gotten very good, Joyce said at the same conference. Vulnerability management, patch management, threat intelligence — all have bolstered defenses, he said.

Because of that, “it just takes exploits chained together in multiple paths to get to success,” said Joyce, who now runs his own cybersecurity consulting firm.

“All of that has advanced us,” he said. “At the same time, we’ve evolved the attackers through that activity. I think by calling out some of the bad behavior, by highlighting the things that have worked or not worked, we’ve pushed people into new exploit methodology.”

The post Telecom exec: Salt Typhoon inspiring other hackers to use unconventional techniques appeared first on CyberScoop.

Pessimism is mounting about the chances that Congress will reauthorize a cyber threat information-sharing law before it’s set to expire at the end of this month — with no clear path for either a temporary or long-term extension.

Industry groups and the Trump administration have put a lot of muscle into renewing the 2015 Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA 2015), which they say is a vital tool in the fight against malicious hackers because of the legal protections it provides for organizations to share cyber threat data with each other and the government.

But in recent weeks, multiple efforts to re-up the law have failed or been brushed aside:

• The House inserted a two-month extension of CISA 2015 into a continuing resolution to avert a government shutdown, but after the House passed the bill, the Senate voted against the continuing resolution last week. Negotiations about continuing to fund the federal government past the end of this month appear to be at a standstill.
• The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee had scheduled a markup of legislation last week introduced by Chairman Rand Paul, R-Ky., to extend the law with significant changes that drew bipartisan and industry criticism. The panel then abruptly canceled the markup.
• The top Democrat on Paul’s panel, Gary Peters of Michigan, tried to get an unaltered or “clean” 10-year reauthorization of the expiring law passed on the Senate floor with a unanimous consent motion, but Paul objected without explanation, preventing it from advancing.
• House Homeland Security Chairman Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., sought earlier this month to offer his legislation to extend and alter CISA 2015 as an amendment to the House version of the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), but the Rules Committee prohibited the amendment from receiving a vote. (A Senate intelligence policy bill had included a 10-year extension, but when senators folded the intelligence authorization bill into that chamber’s version of the NDAA, Paul objected and got it removed.)

All of that leaves an extension of CISA 2015 without a home, and with a key senator, Paul, likely to stand in the way of swift renewal anytime soon. Under the circumstances, “I bet it does” expire, one industry source said of CISA 2015. 

“I’d be pleasantly surprised if it is continued given Paul’s objection,” the source said.

And that could be a big problem for both lawmakers and private-sector organizations.

While it’s unclear exactly how even a temporary lapse in the law might affect cyber information sharing, some have offered dire predictions about how bad it will be. In the legal community, “if you’re giving people a reason not to do something, they won’t do it,” said another industry source. 

If there’s a big breach during a time when the law has expired, the political risks increase, because cyberattack victims are likely to blame the lapse for what happens, said the source, who has extensive cybersecurity policy experience.

Best hopes (until recently)

Advocates had long pinned their hopes that a temporary two-year CISA 2015 renewal would be included in the continuing resolution (CR), given the urgency to avoid a government shutdown and the fact that the law was sent to expire when the fiscal year ends gave Congress a perfect opportunity. The House GOP’s inclusion of that short-term extension language in the CR — and Democrats’ support for it in their own proposal — indicated widespread support for the idea. The CR passed 217-212.

Senate leaders have a tradition of honoring objections on policy matters from the heads of the committees with jurisdiction over those topics when they are up for consideration in other bills. But multiple observers told CyberScoop that they interpreted the inclusion of the CISA 2015 law extension in the House CR as a sign that Senate leaders were prepared to ignore objections from Paul in this case. 

Besides lawmakers and private-sector groups, the Trump administration has been pressing for renewal. Industry and Senate sources say that new National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross has been especially focused on selling lawmakers on the need for action on CISA 2015.

But temporary renewal is now a casualty of the broader fight over a government shutdown, with the Senate voting 44-48 against the CR.

Paul complications

Earlier this month, the House Homeland Security Committee approved Garbarino’s bill to renew CISA 2015 for 10 years by a vote of 25-0. While Democrats questioned whether the legislation should’ve included any changes to the law rather than a “clean” reauthorization, Garbarino’s changes themselves garnered no significant opposition.

That wasn’t the case for the version Paul sponsored and that was scheduled for vote in his committee last week, which would have provided a two-year reauthorization. Industry groups objected to the Paul legislation striking provisions of the 2015 law that provided protections related to cyber threat data sharing with the federal government against disclosure from Freedom of Information Act requests. They opposed a section that would get rid of the law’s section on federal preemption, under which the law supersedes state laws and regulations.

Democrats also raised concerns about several key definitions in the law, including those related to the rules for  how companies can use defensive measures. According to Senate aides who spoke with CyberScoop, these changes could leave small- and medium-sized businesses particularly vulnerable. Combined with the other industry objections, the aides said, Paul’s bill would have functionally ended private sector information sharing with the government.

Industry is wary of major changes to CISA 2015 in general.

“The fact is that over the last 10 years, it’s been an effective way for the private sector to share information, which is a key ingredient in improving cybersecurity, and we should just be very careful while making changes to something that is working pretty well,” said Henry Young, senior director of policy for Business Software Alliance.

A section of the legislation that Paul wrote on free speech protections also created questions.  Five Senate and industry sources told CyberScoop that Paul canceled the markup because Senate Republican panel members planned amendments that would have, with somewhat different approaches, stripped Paul’s changes in favor of a “clean” reauthorization. 

Spokespeople for senators that sources said were behind those amendments, Joni Ernst of Iowa and Bernie Moreno of Ohio, did not respond to requests for comment.

A spokesperson for Paul disputed what the sources told CyberScoop about the reason for the cancellation.

“The characterization of the cancellation of the markup is false,” said the spokesperson, Gabrielle Lipsky. “The Democrats, who are not negotiating in good faith, asked for more time.”

Peters said in a Senate floor speech Friday that it was “disappointing” that Paul canceled the markup, and that “we were blocked from even having a discussion about the policy or draft legislation.”

Constituents in Paul’s home state have lobbied him on the importance of a “clean” reauthorization of CISA 2015; Paul’s public remarks about extension of the law have largely focused on passing a bill that includes additional guarantees on free speech.

“We make this request respecting your determination to protect Americans’ privacy and freedom of speech from censorship and intimidation by federal government employees, and we share those concerns,” a number of Kentucky business groups wrote to Paul in a Sept. 17 letter advocating for a “clean” extension. “We would welcome the opportunity to work with you to increase privacy and censorship protections in other legislation.” 

Peters asked for unanimous consent Friday for the Senate to advance a 10-year reauthorization. Paul said only, “I object,” thus blocking the renewal effort from Peters.

“Congress must pass an extension of these cybersecurity protections and prevent a lapse that would completely undercut our cybersecurity defenses and expose critical sectors to preventable attacks,” Peters said in a statement to CyberScoop. “These liability protections ensure trusted, rapid information sharing between the private sector and government to quickly detect, prevent, and respond to cybersecurity threats. I’m continuing to work toward a bipartisan, bicameral deal that will renew these protections for the long-term, but we cannot afford to let these critical cybersecurity protections expire at the end of the month.”

Other avenues

A common hope among advocates was that after a short-term extension became law as part of the CR, a longer-term extension would be included in the NDAA, which often passes toward the end of each calendar year or the start of the next.

But hopes for that diminished after actions in both the House and Senate. In the Senate, the Intelligence Committee had included a 10-year renewal in its annual intelligence authorization bill. That legislation was then included in the Senate version of the NDAA, but sources on and off the Hill told CyberScoop that Paul objected to inclusion of the CISA 2015 extension, so it was removed.

And the Rules Committee decided on Sept. 9 that Garbarino’s CISA 2015 renewal amendment wasn’t germane, thus preventing him from offering it during debate on the House floor about the NDAA. One day later, the House passed its version of the NDAA, 231-196.

The next steps for CISA 2015 reauthorization are unclear. Paul’s office did not respond to a question about his future plans for renewing CISA 2015.

Options for a short-term renewal are limited for now to whatever congressional leaders do to try to revive or replace a CR, but the timeline for doing so before CISA 2015 expires is exceptionally tight. Options for a long-term renewal might include an amendments package for the Senate version of the NDAA, since the full Senate has yet to take up its bill.

CISA 2015 “must not lapse on September 30, 2025. Allowing it to expire will create a significantly more hostile security environment for the U.S.,” Matthew Eggers, vice president of cybersecurity policy in the cyber, intelligence, and security division at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, told CyberScoop in a written statement. “The Chamber advocates for a multi-year reauthorization of this vital law. Short-term extensions are counterproductive. Both the private sector and the government need certainty, including the ability to allocate resources for long-term cybersecurity planning and implementation. House and Senate leaders and the Trump administration have expressed strong support for reauthorizing CISA 2015.”

The post Cyber threat information law hurtles toward expiration, with poor prospects for renewal appeared first on CyberScoop.

Federal agencies are increasingly incorporating artificial intelligence into the cyberdefenses of government networks, and there’s more still to come, acting Federal Chief Information Security Officer Michael Duffy said Thursday.

“We’re at an exciting time in the federal government to see that we’re not only putting AI in production, but we’re finding ways to accelerate emerging technology across the government, across all missions and all angles,” Duffy said at FedTalks, produced by Scoop News Group. In his “role overseeing federal cybersecurity policy,” he said, he is “able to see these at the ground level, as agencies bring excitement and enthusiasm and hope for what they can optimize through artificial intelligence.”

Cyber attackers are moving faster than ever, and on a much larger scale than before, he said. They’re also using technology in new ways. But it’s not all “doom and gloom” when it comes to the cybersecurity of federal networks, especially because of feds’ move toward AI, Duffy said.

“I’m pleased to say that the advancements that we’ve made over the past decade in the federal government have brought us to this point: Agencies are poised now, postured, positioned, to take advantage of new capabilities, bring them into federal agencies and make them work for the mission,” he said.

The next decade is important, and needs a “clear vision” of the available technologies and the threat landscape, “and how AI-interconnected digital ecosystems will both strengthen and strain that defensive posture,” Duffy said.

The focus now is on protecting sensitive information and making sure the government has efficient and secure interactions with the general public, he said. That includes “leveraging AI to identify vulnerabilities at scale,” Duffy said.

He said that will require the government to update a key document on federal information security, the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-130. A Biden administration executive order from January ordered an update within three years, and a June Trump executive order retained that requirement, albeit with fewer specifications about what the update would entail.

But Duffy noted the document had not been updated since the onset of large-scale AI adoption; its last update was in 2016.

In coordination with the federal chief information officer, Duffy said his office was undertaking a review of AI to measure its strengths and limitations. That includes several steps, among them evaluating the best methods of swiftly adopting AI but with safeguards for proper use.

“We’ll assess the existing cyber defense capabilities within agencies and explore cyber-centric AI use cases,” he also said.

“We’re working with CISOs to rationalize their cybersecurity tool stack to ensure individual agencies are well-postured for the evolving threat environment, while identifying opportunities to eliminate redundant and ineffective systems and capabilities to leverage enterprise-wide capabilities and programs — shared services to gain efficiencies and scale, successful AI pilots occurring within agencies,” he said.

And “we’re working with agencies to increase operational resilience as well, and our collective capacity to respond to AI incidents,” Duffy said.

The post Agencies increasingly dive into AI for cyber defense, acting federal CISO says appeared first on CyberScoop.

FBI cyber division cuts under President Donald Trump will reduce personnel there by half, a top Democratic senator warned Tuesday, while FBI Director Kash Patel countered that arrests and convictions have risen under the Trump administration.

A contentious Senate Judiciary Committee hearing dominated by clashes over political violence, Patel’s leadership and accusations about the politicization of the bureau nonetheless saw senators probing the FBI’s performance on cybersecurity.

“My office received information that cuts to the bureau’s cyber division will cut personnel by half despite the ever-increasing threat posed by adverse foreign actors,” said Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the panel. The Trump administration has proposed a $500 million cut for the FBI in fiscal 2026.

Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., said that as the FBI has shifted personnel toward immigration and politically motivated investigations like the Tesla task force, it has undercut other missions. “It has an impact on other priorities, like nation-state threats and ransomware investigations,” he said.

Padilla was one of several Senate Democrats, like Cory Booker of New Jersey and Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, who said the FBI’s cyber mission was suffering because its personnel were being directed elsewhere.

Patel told Hirono that the FBI’s cyber branch was one of the bureau’s “most impressive” units, and that it had made 409 arrests, a 42% increase compared to the same period last year, and garnered 169 convictions.

As Padilla questioned him about the FBI’s mission to protect against election interference and the Justice Department ending the Foreign Influence Task Force, Patel answered that the FBI did not “in any way divert or reallocate resources from that critical mission set.” He said it was still working on it through its cyber programs, which had seen a “40, 50, 60%” increase in arrests in cyber threat cases involving critical infrastructure and interference with elections.

Patel said he hadn’t shifted any resources away from any critical missions like terrorism toward things like Tesla vandalism or sending federal personnel to cities like Washington, D.C. “They never left their primary job,” he said. “It is a surge in law enforcement.”

Hirono asked Patel to say who had replaced top officials who had exited the cyber division, but he said only that they were “supremely qualified individuals” and wouldn’t give their names “so you can attack them.” Hirono replied, “you don’t know” when he wouldn’t say who they were.

More broadly, Patel said the FBI was taking the fight to Chinese threat groups like Salt Typhoon and Volt Typhoon, and going after ransomware and malware attackers.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said she was concerned about a rise in artificial intelligence-generated election interference, including materials directed at her. Patel said the FBI was looking into it, but that the culprits appeared to be “loose groups overseas, without any central cluster.”

The post Senators, FBI Director Patel clash over cyber division personnel, arrests appeared first on CyberScoop.

A top official at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency on Thursday rejected concerns that personnel and program cuts at CISA have hindered its work.

Nick Andersen, who just began serving as executive assistant director of cybersecurity at CISA this month, said he’s seen the agency function at a high level from both the outside and inside.

“There’s been an awful lot of reporting recently about CISA and the potential for degraded operational capabilities, and I’m telling you, nothing can be further from the truth,” he said at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit. “It is just a fantastic opportunity to see the high-level output and throughput that this team has.

“There is not a single instance where I can think of that somebody reaches out — whether it’s in our remit or not, we are connecting them with the right level of resources, and we are helping them to make themselves right, whether it’s incidents that we see affecting a state/local partner, small- or medium-sized businesses or the largest critical infrastructure owner/operators,” he continued.

The Trump administration has cut or plans to cut more than 1,000 personnel at the agency, a third of its total full-time employees, and has sought nearly half a billion dollars in funding reductions.

CISA’s shuttering of an array of programs has drawn widespread criticism from many in industry as well as from state and local governments who have partnered with the agency, not to mention concerns from Capitol Hill.

But Andersen said CISA has full support from President Donald Trump, who clashed with agency leadership in his first term, and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

“We have exceedingly strong relationships with” other government agencies and the private sector, Andersen touted. “The level of commitment within this team is second to none, and we’re just going to continue to hone and focus [on] that operational mission of what CISA should be delivering on. We’re going to continue to sort of separate out the fluff, but we are going to take every single dollar, every single resource, every single manpower hour to deliver an even sharper focus on those core capabilities in keeping with what President Trump identified as our administration priorities.”

Those priorities, Andersen said, include fortifying federal networks. “Raising the collective bar across the dot gov is a big one,” he said.

It also includes strengthening relationships with critical infrastructure owners and operators. “We want to be able to work very closely with our critical infrastructure partners on focused resilience efforts, be able to raise the bar in a sprint between now and 2027 as we prepare for the potential of China making good on its promise … to take Taiwan,” he said, so that “our critical infrastructure is not going to be held hostage.”

And it includes strengthening partnerships with other federal agencies as well as state and local governments, Andersen said.

The post CISA work not ‘degraded’ by Trump administration cuts, top agency official says appeared first on CyberScoop.

Major cyber intrusions by the Chinese hacking groups known as Salt Typhoon and Volt Typhoon have forced the FBI to change its methods of hunting sophisticated threats, a top FBI cyber official said Wednesday.

U.S. officials, allied governments and threat researchers have identified Salt Typhoon as the group behind the massive telecommunications hack revealed last fall but that could have been ongoing for years. Investigators have pointed at Volt Typhoon as a group that has infiltrated critical infrastructure to cause disruptions in the United States if China invades Taiwan and Americans intervene.

Those hacks were stealthier than in the past, and more patient, said Jason Bilnoski, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division. The Typhoons have focused on persistent access and gotten better at hiding their infiltration by using “living off the land” techniques that involve using legitimate tools within systems to camouflage their efforts, he said. That in turn has complicated FBI efforts to share indicators of compromise (IOCs).

“We’re having to now hunt as if they’re already on the network, and we’re hunting in ways we hadn’t before,” he said at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit. “They’re not dropping tools and malware that we used to see, and perhaps there’s not a lot of IOCs that we’d be able to share in certain situations.”

The hackers used to be “noisy,” with an emphasis on hitting a target quickly, stealing data and then escaping, Bilnoski said. But now for nation-backed attackers, “we’re watching exponential leaps” in tactics, techniques and procedures, he said.

Jermaine Roebuck, associate director for threat hunting at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said his agency is also seeing those kinds of changes in the level of stealth from sophisticated hackers, in addition to “a significant change” in their intentions and targeting.

“We saw a lot of espionage over the last several years, but here lately, there’s been a decided shift into computer network attack, prepositioning or disruption in terms of capabilities,” he said at the same conference.

The targeting has changed as organizations, including government agencies, have shifted to the cloud. “Well, guess what?” he asked. “The actors are going toward the cloud” in response.

They’ve also focused on “edge devices,” like devices that supply virtual private network connections or other services provided by managed service providers, Roebuck said. Organizations have less insight into the attacks those devices and providers are facing than more direct intrusions, he said.

The post China’s ‘Typhoons’ changing the way FBI hunts sophisticated threats appeared first on CyberScoop.

The top cyber official at the National Security Council said Tuesday that he’s dismayed by the lag in security technology embedded in critical infrastructure, saying it pales in comparison to the tech in modern smartphones.

“I worry a lot about critical infrastructure cybersecurity,” Alexei Bulazel said at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit. “I also think about the technology that’s deployed in critical infrastructure contexts. This is not the best-in-class software or hardware.”

Bulazel mentioned the energy sector in particular, given the potential for hackers to turn off the power in the United States. It’s a sector that relies in large measure on supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems to monitor and control industrial processes.

“I think about the phones in our pockets — Android, iPhone, doesn’t matter — really amazing feats of engineering,” he said. “Imagine if our critical infrastructure, if the SCADA system that ran the power or the water or whatever, was as secure as the phone in your pocket. I think a lot of these threats are mitigated; only the absolute apex predator, top-tier actors can get in.”

As a “White House policymaker,” Bulazel said, many of the questions he deals with go away if the technical mark is raised in critical infrastructure. It’s one of the reasons the Trump administration — despite frequently discussing the need to go on offense in cyberspace — is focused on defensive strategies like secure-by-design, he said.

“We are unapologetically unafraid to do offensive cyber,” he said. “It’s an important tool in the toolbox. It’s not the only tool.”

The Trump administration is trying to shift away from “victims” and more to “villains,” Bulazel said. His comments echoed earlier remarks Tuesday from National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross about shifting the cyber risk burden to adversaries.

It’s important to deter hackers, who aren’t like floods or lightning strikes in that they are intentional and deliberate, he said: “This is because a motivated bad actor is trying to give you a bad day.”

The post Critical infrastructure security tech needs to be as good as our smartphones, top NSC cyber official says appeared first on CyberScoop.

The United States needs a “new, coordinated strategy” to counter its cyber adversaries and “shift the burden of risk in cyberspace from Americans to them,” National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross said Tuesday.

“Collectively, we’ve made great progress in identifying, responding to and remediating threats, but we still lack strategic coherence and direction,” he said at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit. “A lot has been done, but it has not been sufficient. We’ve admired the problem for too long, and now it’s time to do something about it.”

The Biden administration produced its first cybersecurity strategy in 2023, with its Office of the National Cyber Director leading the writing of that document. It was part of a broader Biden administration approach to shift the cyber burden from individuals to more powerful institutions like the private sector. 

“The Trump administration will drive a new coordinated strategy that will advance U.S. interests and thwart our adversaries in cyberspace,” Cairncross said in a speech that marked his first public remarks since his confirmation in August. “America has the best talent, the most innovative private sector, the brightest research universities, broad academic resources and powerful government capabilities.

“We have all the tools, and now we have the political will in place to address these challenges,” he said. “We must work together, using all of our nation’s cyber capabilities, to shape adversary behavior and, most importantly, shift the burden of risk in cyberspace from Americans to them.”

The United States needs to “create an enduring advantage” over China, he said. China and other U.S. cyber adversaries that Cairncross called “brittle authoritarian regimes” simultaneously have to expend resources tracking dissidents and maintaining control, but also have the advantage of being able to “integrate instruments of power more seamlessly than we can.”

Cairncross said of cyberspace that “for too long, our adversaries have operated in this environment with near impunity. For too long, we have foregone the chances to set conditions for sustained security and stability. Our action or inaction today holds tremendous implications for our future.”

In separate remarks at another event Tuesday, Cairncross said he also wants to help international allies, particularly nations in the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, combat China’s efforts. 

“There’s many partners around the world who are looking for help as China attempts to export a surveillance state across planet Earth, country by country, continent by continent,” he said at an event hosted by Politico. “We have to engage to help fight that.” 

At the Politico event, he also said he expects the office to be more streamlined with the National Security Council and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, adding that the White House has been focused on what Cairncross referred to as eliminating the “turf wars and bureaucratic nonsense” of prior administrations.   

“The United States hasn’t had an overarching cyber policy strategy that’s set in coordination from offense all the way through to end-user defense, to state, local and tribal governments, working together in putting tactical operations and policies in place that support and feed into that strategy,” he said. “That is what we are going to do.”

In the shorter term, Cairncross mentioned three priorities. One is passage of legislation to reauthorize a law expiring this month that provides legal protections to companies for sharing cyber threat data with the government and within the private sector, the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015.

Another is for “the federal government to get our own house in order,” he said.

“Our federal systems need rapid modernization,” Cairncross said, and the Trump administration is working on policies to “update our technologies and ensure that we’re prepared for a post-quantum future.”

And third, industry needs to focus on securing its products and protecting privacy at the outset, during the design process — and the administration will work to streamline cybersecurity regulations on industry’s behalf, he said.

Cairncross said it was a priority of the first Trump administration, and would continue to be in the second, to develop the cybersecurity workforce. Under Trump, however, the administration has pushed to dramatically slash personnel and funding for CISA.

Greg Otto contributed to this report. 

The post National cyber director: U.S. strategy needs to shift cyber risk from Americans to its adversaries appeared first on CyberScoop.