Grand Theft Auto VI, widely heralded as the game event of the decade, took a significant hit last week after a cybercriminal sent much of the internet into pandemonium after publishing gameplay footage a week before the game’s publisher planned to reveal core portions of the game to the public.  

The files posted by the online persona “CyberLeek” indicate either a hacker had direct access to Rockstar Games’ most sensitive systems or was given proprietary data by an insider, eventually becoming one of the highest-profile data extortion attacks of the year — a vexing, almost-daily occurrence hitting industries of all types.

While most data extortion attacks rattle companies due to regulatory or privacy concerns, this particular incident has caused an outsized response from Rockstar’s parent company, Take-Two Interactive Software, because it has an audience. While no lives are at risk, as they would be in an attack on critical infrastructure, the financial and reputational stakes are magnified precisely because people are watching every drip of stolen footage become a news story or a trending topic. 

“IP theft — whether it’s conducted by a cybercriminal, an insider, or even potentially [an artificial intelligence] model — rips away the hard work, passion, and livelihood among employees and companies that created the product in the first place,” Cynthia Kaiser, senior vice president of Halycon’s ransomware research center, told CyberScoop.

The game’s prior release, GTA V, along with its online component, has sold over 230 million copies and earned Take-Two over $11 billion since its release in 2013. Industry analysts say GTA VI is on pace to make between $3.3 billion to $5.2 billion in cumulative global sales by the end of its launch week in November. 

“The crown jewels of a company are whatever makes it differentiated and special,” said Kaiser, the former deputy assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division. “For some, that means customer data or source. For a studio in the final stretch before launch, the crown jewel is the surprise.”

While Take-Two hasn’t said anything publicly about the leaks, it has responded feverishly via its legal team. The company petitioned a federal court for subpoenas under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act against Discord, Google, Microsoft and X, seeking the identity of CyberLeeks and other user accounts it accuses of copyright infringement.

Federal judges granted the subpoenas against Discord, Microsoft and X, but the petition against Google remained unapproved as of Monday. Take-Two’s legal representatives also sent copyright notices to the four companies, informing them of the copyrighted material published on their platforms, but it’s unclear if any of the tech companies have been formally served with the signed subpoenas. 

Take-Two and Rockstar did not respond to a request for comment.

The subpoenas may have been enough to spook those responsible for the leaked footage. As of Monday, the websites where those behind CyberLeek were posting leaked information and links to a memecoin were offline.

Zach Edwards, staff threat researcher at Infoblox and a self-proclaimed fan of the series, initially thought the leaks were part of a Rockstar guerrilla marketing campaign. But the company’s response “confirms that this is a real investigation, and the content being shared is likely real to some degree,” he said. 

Take-Two’s actions thus far indicate the company is approaching the breach and leaks like an insider threat investigation, Edwards said. Whoever leaked the footage may have had access to an actual build of the game, he added. That could point to an insider, someone who could have saved a copy to a cloud service, uploaded it to a file-hosting site, or walked out with it on an external drive.

CyberLeek’s conflicting motivations

The hacker or group behind CyberLeek claim they are releasing the gameplay videos to protest Rockstar’s decision to not release physical copies of the game. Yet, watermarks on the leaked videos include addresses to crypto wallets, which indicate CyberLeek is also, and perhaps primarily, seeking a payout. 

“The persona behind the leaks, CyberLeek, published an anti-corporate manifesto targeting digital pre-orders and disc-less releases to frame the breach as hacktivism,” Ben Bernstein, manager of Huntress’ cybersecurity advisors team, told CyberScoop. “Yet behind the political posturing, there’s clear financial monetization and clout-chasing.”

Kaiser draws the same conclusion. “Let’s separate stated motive from observed behavior,” she said. “Threat actors who talk about principle while running a monetization channel are usually only telling you what they think will land with an audience, not actually what is driving them.”

Katie Moussouris said “this is what the alternative vulnerability economy looks like.” The founder and CEO at Luta Security has spent decades building legitimate channels for people who find security problems to get paid without turning to crime.

“The leaker launched a cryptocurrency token, watermarked stolen footage with a buy link, and offered to sell ad space on future leaks. Each of those pays out in proportion to how many people are watching. The manifesto is what keeps them watching,” Moussouris said. 

“That is a genuinely new monetization model for stolen pre-release content, and it means the usual playbook of negotiating a ransom payment quietly or paying to make it stop won’t work,” she added.

Different flavor, same crime

Despite its unique characteristics, the rhythm of the attack and its fallout is familiar territory for cybersecurity experts. 

“Steal, publish a sample, promise more, deliver, repeat. Just like ransomware attacks, in cases like these criminals use every lever of pressure they can against a company — including the fear of what is coming next — to profit from their actions,” Kaiser said. 

“The attackers are crowdsourcing their pressure tactics. A meaningful share of the player base is treating the leaks as free content and amplifying them,” she added.

Kaiser also sees some clear parallels with previous attacks targeting major entertainment companies, including the 2014 attack on Sony Pictures and the HBO hack in 2017. 

“The Sony comparison is useful for how these things escalate, but this incident reminds me more of the Iranian hackers’ leak of ‘Game of Thrones’ episodes a few years back,” she said. “North Korea attacked Sony for political purposes, destroying its data along the way; Iranian threat actors compromised HBO, along with hundreds of universities and over forty other companies, in a hacking-for-hire scheme stealing American intellectual property.”

Federal authorities earlier this month unsealed a second wave of indictments against 17 Iranians affiliated with the tech firm Mabna Institute who allegedly stole troves of data from government agencies and dozens of companies, including HBO.

This isn’t the first time Rockstar has been hit with a security incident. In 2022, an 18-year old British man who was a member of the Lapsus$ cybercriminal gang was sentenced to an indefinite hospital order after leaking gameplay footage. According to the BBC, the incident cost Rockstar, along with ridehauling company Uber and chipmaker Nvidia, over $10 million. 

The subpoena that worries security experts

Security professionals expect the situation to escalate on all sides. Leaks have hit the internet daily for the past eight days, including a series of leaks Tuesday morning. Meanwhile, Take-Two has not relented on its subpoenas. Its broadest move was a subpoena against Discord, seeking identifying data on CyberLeek, two other users and every member of three Discord servers where the copyrighted material was posted.  

Moussouris said the scope of that inquiry should worry people well beyond this case. 

“Take-Two asked for Windows device identifiers, login records, and cloud storage contents for every person who spoke in three Discord servers going back to June,” she said. “The people with the best chance of uncovering the culprits are those doing the unglamorous investigation forensics work of figuring out how the build may have leaked.”

Discord would not say whether it had been formally served or what it has done in response. A company spokesperson said it reviews and complies with valid subpoenas when they are received. 

While the breach and leak of ‘GTA VI’ material is a serious matter, Edwards noted that Take-Two is also benefiting from greater interest in the unreleased game on a daily basis. 

“The threat actor leaking these videos has failed by essentially creating a successful underground marketing campaign for the game while also putting themselves at serious risk of being eventually caught,” he said. 

“This incident is playing out like a classic insider threat exploitation scheme. Someone got access to sensitive data, they had a political agenda which clashed with the owner of the sensitive data, and they decided to do something stupid to try and force a change,” Edwards added. “This attack has done nothing but spread ‘GTA VI’ content further than it would have otherwise, and it’s creating ripples across other industries like cybersecurity who would have never covered ‘GTA 6’ issues previously.”

The post The GTA VI leaks are breaking the internet. Security researchers have seen this before. appeared first on CyberScoop.

A newly-signed presidential memorandum enlisting private sector companies in federal law enforcement hacking operations against criminal organizations could present a number of legal, practical and moral pitfalls, cyber experts told CyberScoop a day after the order was released.

While some have celebrated the memo as an overdue maneuver to more aggressively combat cybercriminals, others view it as risky at best and potentially destructive at worst. Supporters, critics and everyone in between also said that how it plays out could be decided in the 60-day timeframe the memo sets to establish the program.

But ultimately, “it’s a massive shift in the cyber policy community,” said Michael Garcia, a former top official at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency. “This is a philosophical shift.”

The Concerns

On the most critical end of the spectrum is security consultant Davi Ottenheimer, who has been a proponent of concepts like “hack back” or “active defense” that envision a bigger role for the private sector. But he was unsparing in his criticism of the Trump memo. 

“It’s an embarrassment to America,” he told CyberScoop. “It’s like seeing somebody strapped onto a horse backwards, looking at the wrong end of a rifle.”

The Trump memo’s approach has been likened to the “letters of marque” concept used in early U.S. history, when it authorized sea privateers to attack and capture enemy ships and goods on behalf of the country. But Ottenheimer, founder of Ottenheimer GmbH, noted that the practice fell out of favor for good reason in the 1800s because of the violence it unleashed and how it contributed to mercenarism.

Additionally, the memo raises a number of targeting-related issues, he said. Ottenheimer is concerned about Trump’s intentions. The memo specifically pertains to the use of participating companies against transnational criminal organizations.

“Left-wing opposition, liberals, anti-fascists —they’re all criminals to him,” Ottenheimer said. “So to authorize attacking criminals under this means private organizations can go hack people that he designates as criminals.”

Under the memo, the program must establish legal and constitutional procedures for the prior approval of the targeting of U.S. citizens, as well as develop procedures to halt any unintentional targeting of U.S. people or systems. 

However, the limitation on targeting criminals only creates a perverse incentive for attackers and a peculiar defense for anyone who’s attacked, Ottenheimer said.

He envisioned a scenario for a company participating in the program where “you’re hacking [a target], and they go, ‘Hey, we’re the state.’ And then [private companies] are like, ‘Oh, I can’t hack you anymore.’ Boom. They decided when you can and can’t hack.”

Furthermore, “you incentivize people to know as little as possible so [operations] can be authorized,” he said.

The memo raises ethical concerns for him as well: “You can’t attack somebody and then say it’s your fault that you didn’t notify them you didn’t want to be attacked.”

“There’s no notice for you being designated. There’s no prevention of you being designated. There’s no way for you to know you’re being designated,” Ottenheimer said. “That’s like a person sitting down next to you and smoking a cigarette and blowing smoke in your face and saying, ‘Hey, you got to say you don’t like cancer if you don’t want me to do this to you right now.’”

Garcia, now vice president of the cybersecurity practice at Monument Advocacy, said he supports some of the ideas of the memo, but worries about how it will be executed.

“It comes down to attribution, and if you make a risky bet on who we’re attributing [attacks] to, that’s where things can get dicey,” Garcia told CyberScoop.

There could be pressure to attribute faster, which could perhaps lead to lower certainty about who’s being targeted, and that in turn could lead to a private sector company accidentally attacking a foreign government, he said.

That raises legal questions: “It’s in the Constitution —the federal government has the ability to wage war. And there are laws by which private citizens can’t take up arms,” Garcia said.

He wanted the memo to include court oversight of the program, similar to what’s been required for private sector takedown operations. .

Garcia also isn’t sure whether there will be a big enough pool of companies willing to jump into offensive cyber operations.

“From the lawyer perspective, it’s, ‘Are you okay with engaging in this kind of legal risk? And who knows what protections the government will provide?’” he said. “I’d be very curious to see what the foreign governments’ reactions are — ‘We’re going to cut ties with any participating company that engages in this.’”

Errata Security CEO Robert Graham wrote that under the program, companies “are not willy-nilly hacking back,” given the federal supervision elements. “Though, I wonder if it doesn’t eventually morph into law enforcement saying ‘Stop bothering us, just do what you think is best.’’” 

The Case For

The Trump administration and the memo’s supporters  have touted it as a means to put the United States on stronger ground in cyberspace. 

Amanda Naylor, the director of cyber policy at the National Security Council who worked on the memo, said on LinkedIn that it was designed “to bring the capabilities, speed, and innovation of the American private sector into the fight against transnational cybercrime and fraud.”

Former Trump White House cybersecurity official Joshua Steinman said he views the memo as a step toward “parity,” given how U.S. adversaries operate in cyberspace.

“The Chinese and the Russians do this at scale, and I guarantee you they have very few limiting tools when they do it,” said Steinman, now founder of the security firm Gavalnick. “It opens up an entire workforce that allows us to go out and achieve strategic objectives.”

The restrictions in the memo are important, he told CyberScoop.

“The most sensitive things are going to continue to be done by the uniformed and authorized civilian workforces, but there’s a lot of low-hanging fruit,” i.e., criminal organizations, Steinman said. He doesn’t have any fear of the program overstepping as a result.

“We operate like a Boy Scout in cyberspace,” he said. “It’s measured and reasoned.” He compared it to the Right to Try Act for medications.

He also said he expects to see a lot of interest in participating in the private sector.

Ari Redbord, global head of policy at TRM Labs, praised the memo too, calling it “a huge step toward empowering the private sector at a critical moment” that “has a real opportunity to be truly transformative.”

“Scammers are using AI to move with unprecedented speed and scale, stealing billions in life savings from average Americans and small businesses,” he said. “The private sector holds the data. The public sector holds the authorities. This [memo] puts them together.”

What’s Next

The coordination center charged with establishing the program under the memo has 60 days to complete its work. That process could determine a lot. Graham noted that the memo has a classified annex, too.

The memo as written is quiet about what becomes of any seized assets, Graham noted. Redbord raised the same topic as one of his questions about execution of the memo. 

“What government direction and control looks like in the middle of a live operation,” he said in listing his questions. “How disruption turns into actual dollars back in victims’ pockets, and whether we can build a true victim compensation fund as part of this program. What happens when an operation touches a third country with its own laws and its own interests. And how success gets measured, in money recovered and networks dismantled.”

Will Barker, cybersecurity adviser at Huntress, said what’s next could be key.

“The 60-day implementing guidance is where the real substance lives,” he said in a written quote. “Minimum standards, operational procedures, the adjudicatory framework for target selection.”

The post A bold new strategy or a dangerous precedent? Experts are divided on Trump’s memo. appeared first on CyberScoop.

Huntress researchers spotted an active and ongoing series of attacks targeting SonicWall VPN and firewall accounts, which compromised 30 organizations in less than two days, the company said in a threat advisory Tuesday.

The credential stuffing campaign started Saturday and grew rapidly, ultimately compromising 92 unique user accounts during the next 41 hours, according to Huntress. Researchers said the attacks were broad and opportunistic, hitting various SonicWall devices, rather than targeting specific types of organizations.

SonicWall hasn’t released a security advisory about the malicious activity as of press time. A spokesperson told CyberScoop the company is still investigating and hopes to have more information soon.

The attacks ended — at least for now — as abruptly as they began. The last compromise occurred Monday, according to Michael Tigges, principal tactical response analyst at Huntress.

“This fits campaign trends,” he said. “A rash of compromise will break out, followed by silence until the adversary rotates infrastructure.”

Attackers, which haven’t been identified, have also refrained from initiating any post-compromise activity, indicating the intrusions could be pre-positioning for future attacks. 

“With local network access, the sky is essentially the limit for most networks that do not have proper topology controls in place,” Tigges said.

Huntress’ observations are limited to telemetry it collects from its customers, meaning all of the identified victims were Huntress customers using SonicWall devices, so the number of organizations impacted could be greater. 

Researchers haven’t identified a root cause for the attacks, noting that they begin with authorized logins. Attackers are validating credentials against remote access portals to compromise as many vulnerable accounts as possible, the cybersecurity vendor and threat intelligence firm said. 

“This could be an aggregation of stealer malware logs, previously compromised SonicWall configuration files, or historic CVE compromise that resulted in more credentials than the adversary could use at the time,” Tigges said. 

In 2025, an undisclosed state-sponsored threat actor intruded SonicWalls’s cloud environment and stole firewall configurations of every customer. 

SonicWall customers have also been hit by a barrage of actively exploited zero-days, including a pair of zero-days that were exploited for three weeks before the vendor disclosed and patched the defects earlier this month, and previously disclosed defects in SonicWall devices for years. 

Seventeen defects affecting the vendor’s products have been added to CISA’s known exploited vulnerabilities catalog since late 2021. Ten of those defects are known to be used in ransomware campaigns, according to CISA, including a wave of about 40 Akira ransomware attacks between mid-July and early August 2025.

“Edge devices are one of the most targeted interfaces, comprising over 70% of active intrusions triaged by Huntress, including the overwhelming majority of ransomware deployments,” Tigges said. “Organizations that do not spend significant time architecting secure remote access solutions and networks that are resilient to edge-device compromise will likely continue to feel the burn in the coming months and years.”

The post Huntress warns about attack spree that hit 30 SonicWall customers in 2 days appeared first on CyberScoop.