A threat actor is using three AI harnesses for vulnerability research, exploitation, and attack orchestration.

The post AI-Powered Campaign Targets Hundreds of Online Retailers appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Two Senate committee leaders are introducing legislation to foster cybersecurity standards for the telecommunications sector nearly two years after the landmark Salt Typhoon campaign was made public.

First reported by CyberScoop, Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the GOP chairman of the Commerce, Science and Technology panel, are introducing the Telecommunications Cybersecurity and Resilience Act.

“The Salt Typhoon intrusion was the worst telecom hack in our nation’s history and showed us just how vulnerable our critical infrastructure is, but it does not have to be that way,” Warner said. “If telecommunications companies adopt cybersecurity best practices, our networks can be more resilient. This bipartisan legislation is a good start in protecting our nation and strengthening the communications networks Americans rely on every day.”

Federal officials have repeatedly warned that Salt Typhoon — the Chinese group blamed for the massive and “indiscriminate” espionage campaign that hit major telecom carriers and siphoned data from presidential campaigns and candidates — remains a threat to this day.

Yet some cyber officials have worried that public apathy over the attacks has stifled momentum for telecom security rules. In one case the Trump administration has rolled them back.

The Warner-Cruz legislation takes the approach of trying to improve telecom security with voluntary measures jointly developed by government and industry.

“Foreign adversaries are increasingly targeting America’s communications networks. Securing them requires an approach that keeps pace with evolving threats,” Cruz said. “This sensible bill brings government and industry together to develop voluntary, telecom-specific cybersecurity best practices rather than adopting rigid federal mandates that quickly become outdated.”

Their bill would create a telecom cybersecurity working group within the National Telecommunications and Information Administration to bring together carriers, suppliers, experts and relevant government agencies. 

The working group would develop voluntary industry-wide best practices within 18 months of passage of the bill, which would be reviewed for updates every two years or after major incidents.

The best practices would “focus solely on identifying, responding to, mitigating, preventing, and remediating cybersecurity incidents and vulnerabilities,” according to the legislation, and would be in line with existing federal cybersecurity risk management frameworks.

The working group would also create a voluntary certification process through independent third-party assessors that companies could choose to use.

“What is missing” now, according to a summary of the bill, “is a common, telecom sector-specific set of best practices that brings that expertise together and can evolve as threats and technology change. Building on industry’s familiarity with security development and threat information sharing, this bill would bring stakeholders — government and private sector — together to develop and maintain effective techniques and practices to secure networks.”

The post Bipartisan Senate leaders introduce bill to bolster telecom cybersecurity in response to Salt Typhoon hacks appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency published a paper Wednesday that lays out its plan for improving the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) program, a contract for which nearly ended last year before a last-minute reprieve.

The white paper outlines the components of a “Quality Era” for the program, widely used as the definitive clearinghouse for data on vulnerabilities in software and other products, even as the number of CVEs surges. 

“CISA remains committed to leading, growing and sustaining the CVE Program into the foreseeable future, just as we’ve done for more than 25 years without fail,” said Chris Butera, acting executive assistant director for cybersecurity. “Informed by CVE community feedback, this whitepaper communicates CISA’s effort to support and enable stronger participation and governance, a program-wide maturation effort.”

The CVE program has been in a “Growth Era,” according to CISA. Over 67,000 new CVEs have been published in 2026 as of last week, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology National Vulnerability Database program has seen a 263% increase in CVE submissions between 2020 and 2025. Artificial intelligence has furthered the rise.

“These pressures intensify quality challenges across the CVE ecosystem,” the white paper states. “While faster discovery and reporting can improve the value of vulnerability information when records are complete, consistent, timely, and actionable, the same acceleration can expose gaps in processes, tooling, coordination, and accountability — especially when the quality of the submissions is uneven.” 

The plan calls for advancing data quality across four key dimensions: transparent and effective program governance, broad and active participation across the global software community, data infrastructure that supports CVE operational functions and reliable CVE record content.

Some vulnerability experts have questioned whether other organizations should take over CISA’s stewardship, given budget cuts at the agency.

Butera invited further feedback from the CVE community on the white paper, which stems from an earlier strategy document on the future of the program.

Some CVE experts that CyberScoop spoke to were supportive of what CISA wants to achieve, but skeptical about elements of the white paper.

“We’ve been working around long-standing quality issues in CVE reports for decades. Incomplete or inconsistent records create real downstream work for the security tools, developers, and organizations trying to determine whether they’re actually affected and what to do next,” said Sonatype’s co-founder and chief technology officer Brian Fox. “So it’s good to see CISA acknowledge that quality has to extend beyond the record itself to governance, infrastructure, and participation across the ecosystem.”

But, he added, “I’ll believe we’ve entered a ‘Quality Era’ when we can see the improvement in the actual data and in the decisions that data enables.”

Tom Alrich, who leads the OWASP PURL Expansion Working Group that’s focused on establishing a protocol for creating Product URLs for commercial software, said CISA’s white paper ignores a particularly important and growing issue.

“I support everything mentioned. I also support the flag, motherhood and apple pie,” he said. “However, nothing in there is going to affect the CVE program’s most important problem: that a huge and growing percentage of new CVE records don’t contain a machine-readable software identifier.”

Caitlin Condon, VulnCheck’s vice president of security research, said that “CISA and the CVE program are well-positioned to both observe challenges in this space and to create (and enforce) standards that explicitly state what ‘quality’ means in CVE records.”

But she said the white paper was more the basis for a future framework than a full-fledged framework in itself.

“Many of the potential success metrics suggested in the document can be measured today, but simply aren’t shared publicly,” Condon said. “In future iterations on the framework, I’d hope to see more transparency on CVE metrics as they stand today, along with reasoning on why those metrics are the right ones (versus simply the things that are easiest to measure qualitatively or quantitatively).”

The post CISA outlines improvement plan for CVE program appeared first on CyberScoop.

Nearly nine out of 10 federal civilian executive branch agencies failed to meet last summer’s deadline to implement cloud security directives from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, a watchdog report published Wednesday found.

The conclusions from those results, according to the inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security: agencies “may encounter elevated security exposures that undermine the national cloud security posture and increase the likelihood of preventable cyberattacks and related threat,” and “CISA lacks the authority necessary to require full and timely implementation of Binding Operational Directives,” or BODs.

The latter is a question that has surfaced before about CISA directives, which the agency uses to pressure agencies into improving their cyber defenses. 

The IG took a look at the Secure Cloud Business Applications (SCuBA) project, created in response to the 2022 SolarWinds attack. It provides secure configuration baselines, settings and assessment tools to help agencies reduce the risk of breaches.

A December 2024 directive gave agencies a list of requirements to align with SCuBA, with a deadline of June 2025.

The IG found that 88 of 102 agencies, or 86%, didn’t implement all the mandatory SCuBA policies from BOD 25-01. As of February of this year, “compliance with BOD 25-01 had not improved. A total of 78 out of 102 (76%) [Federal Civilian Executive Branch] agencies were still not in compliance with implementing all mandatory SCuBA policies.”

“Some examples of baselines that FCEB agencies did not implement included blocking outdated authentication procedures, enforcing multifactor authentication, and implementing a policy to protect sensitive and personally identifiable information,” the IG report states. “Implementation of these baselines could mitigate vulnerabilities and threats from affecting the cloud business applications.”

That’s the result of CISA’s lack of power to enforce its BODs, which translates into greater risk, the IG concluded.

“Without defined enforcement oversight of SCuBA policy compliance, the Federal cloud security posture across the Federal enterprise is weakened,” the report states. “When agencies do not adopt required configurations or meet implementation deadlines, their cloud environments remain exposed to preventable threats.”

CISA didn’t respond to the report, according to the IG. 

The agency didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment from CyberScoop.

The post Watchdog finds most agencies failed to meet CISA cloud security orders, heightening risk of attack appeared first on CyberScoop.

The FBI is investigating an attack on its own systems after ShinyHunters claimed responsibility for the incident, putting the prolific cybercrime group in the most direct conflict yet with agents responsible for investigating data extortion attacks.

The Monday breach, first reported by 404 Media, allowed ShinyHunters to temporarily deface the FBI jobs site. The group claimed it stole “very sensitive data on almost all FBI agents and individuals who filed an application with the FBI for a job,” in a lengthy post on its data-leak site.

“The FBI is aware of claims regarding unauthorized activity affecting FBIjobs.gov and is currently investigating,” a spokesperson for the agency said in a statement.

An alert on the FBI jobs site notes that apply.fbijobs.gov and the Special Agent Application Portal are currently unavailable.

The attack marks a sobering escalation by ShinyHunters, a notorious group that previously targeted major cloud platforms, healthcare organizations, universities, technology companies, retailers and education service providers. Previous victims of ShinyHunters this year include Instructure, Salesforce, Snowflake and McKesson.

“The ShinyHunters ransomware group appears to be actively trying to put a target on their back,” Cynthia Kaiser, senior vice president at Halcyon’s ransomware research center, told CyberScoop. 

ShinyHunters claims it targeted the FBI in response to a public service announcement it says contains false allegations about the group. The FBI issued the PSA following ShinyHunters’ May attack on Instructure, the company behind Canvas, a widely used central hub for K-12 and university coursework, exams and communication. 

The group responded with its own “PSA” on its data-leak site, insisting it is not affiliated with The Com, has never conducted swatting attacks or claimed it had sensitive or compromising information, including embarrassing photos or videos, to extort victims. 

The PSA was addressed to Brett Leatherman, assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, and FBI Director Kash Patel. 

“While ShinyHunters has in the past been hyperbolic about the criticality of the data they’ve accessed, the group has established itself as a legitimate threat,” Flashpoint analysts told CyberScoop. 

“This attack benefits ShinyHunters by bolstering their reputation as a credible threat,” the analysts added. “In the group’s statement on their leak site regarding the breach, they portray the FBI’s PSA as an “attempt to ‘disrupt’ our operations and hinder clients’ trust in our organization hoping nobody pays us.”

The threat group typically uses social engineering, abuses weaknesses in identity systems or exploits vulnerabilities to gain access to cloud-hosted environments containing troves of sensitive or proprietary data, which it threatens to leak if the victim doesn’t pay a ransom.

ShinyHunters doesn’t appear to be seeking a payoff in this case, but rather a bid to coerce the FBI into amending or removing the May PSA. The group didn’t make any direct threat in the data-leak site post to release the stolen data, but it set a deadline of one week for action.

That coercive approach toward the FBI could backfire, according to experts. 

“Ransomware groups are largely successful because they operate like businesses,” said Kaiser, a former deputy assistant in the FBI’s cyber division. “Targeting other criminal groups or law enforcement — especially in ways intended to publicly shame — demonstrates a lack of discipline that historically has led to takedowns, takeovers or defections.”

The post ShinyHunters claims attack on FBI exposes almost all agents appeared first on CyberScoop.

Volexity researchers spotted another state-aligned Chinese threat group exploiting a triple-link chain of zero-day vulnerabilities across multiple campaigns, the company said in a blog post Monday.

The threat group it tracks as UTA0565 exploited the vulnerabilities in Chrome and Microsoft between Sept. 3 and 4 before the defects were disclosed or patched, researchers said.

The timing of the malicious activity mirrors other spikes threat hunters observed and attributed to multiple Chinese espionage threat groups. Yet, Volexity noted UTA0565’s campaigns differed from those attacks by using multiple fake websites to deceive victims.

Volexity shared phishing emails UTA0565 sent to Asian government entities urging them to publicly support imprisoned Hong Kong activist Chow Hang-tung. The group spoofed domains impersonating the Center for American Progress and China Digital Times in other phishing emails.

While UTA0565 showcased a variance in tactics, it used the same components researchers observed in previous instances of the exploit kit across multiple Chinese threat groups.

“This seemingly widespread adoption across multiple threat actors suggests a coordinated effort within the Chinese computer network exploitation community, where the core kit was likely shared, customized, and weaponized by multiple groups,” Volexity wrote in the blog post. “The activity reported so far reflects only two organizations’ observations; the full scope and impact are likely far broader.”

The vulnerabilities include: CVE-2026-85046 and CVE-2026-87491, remote-code execution defects in the JavaScript engine for Chromium-based browsers; and CVE-2026-85880, a privilege-escalation zero-day that Microsoft disclosed Sept. 8 in Windows Advanced Local Procedure Call. 

Proofpoint, which previously observed multiple state-aligned threat groups chaining the vulnerabilities together in attacks since last August, said a limited group of organizations were exposed to all three vulnerabilities in a short window. 

Proofpoint previously attributed attacks involving the zero-days to APT31, UNK_LateNight, UNK_DoubleCheck and UNK_QuietRacket. At the time it warned that attackers of other origins and motivations could strike soon as well.

Volexity said UTA0565 used a payload from a previously undocumented malware family it tracks as “CLEANGULP.” Researchers also found several domains likely used by UTA0565 in similar campaigns targeting media organizations, halal restaurant search websites and corporate training organizations. 

“UTA0565’s use of the zero-day vulnerabilities shows technical and operational improvements over other campaigns observed by Volexity, both in the mechanics of the exploitation and the presentation to end users,” researchers wrote. “Using real content from legitimate websites as decoy material continues to be an effective way to reduce user suspicion.”

The post Volexity spots another China-aligned threat group exploiting Chrome and Microsoft defects appeared first on CyberScoop.

Microsoft, along with a group of industry partners, disrupted EvilTokens, a short-lived but highly consequential cybercrime platform that investigators linked to more than 12,000 compromised Microsoft customer email inboxes across more than 10,000 organizations globally, the company said Tuesday.

Acting on federal court order Sept. 15, Microsoft and partners seized 50 websites the phishing-as-a-service used for operations and disabled more than 175 domains linked to EvilTokens’ supporting infrastructure. 

EvilTokens, launched in February 2026, was “a powerful cybercrime platform that used AI at every step of the attack chain — from compromising email accounts to designing intricate roadmaps for financial fraud and scams,” Steven Masada, associate general counsel and general manager of Microsoft’s Digital Crimes Unit, wrote in a blog post.

About 1,000 cybercriminals used EvilTokens over the course of its operation, a Microsoft spokesperson told CyberScoop.

The service was centered on an AI-style chatbot that cybercriminals used to analyze victims’ inboxes, identify trusted relationships, payment authorizations and other sensitive details that could facilitate fraud.

“AI was not simply helping attackers write more convincing messages. It helped them decide who to target, who to impersonate, and how to most effectively exploit the relationship to extract as much money as possible,” Masada wrote. 

EvilTokens was one of the most widely used phishing-as-a-service platforms prior to its takedown. It facilitated business-email compromise campaigns by stealing session tokens that allowed cybercriminals to sift through a victim’s inbox and maintain persistent access.

“We cannot estimate the total fraud attributable to all EvilTokens activity. However, we were able to correlate at least 13 complaints filed with the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center to EvilTokens-linked activity, representing approximately $1.7 million in reported losses,” a Microsoft spokesperson said. “Because many incidents go unreported and not all victims can be definitively linked to specific campaigns, we believe this is a conservative estimate.”

Victims of EvilTokens were largely concentrated in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, India and France, according to Microsoft. SpyCloud, which supported the takedown, identified compromised email domains spanning 79 countries.

Microsoft said it also identified two men behind EvilTokens — Felix Utomi and Waidi Segun Adams — and attributes the development and support of the platform to Storm-2992, a threat actor unaffiliated with any other known cybercrime groups.

The United Kingdom’s Metropolitan Police acted on that information Sept. 18 when it served warrants in the greater London area, arrested the men accused of making articles for use in fraud and money laundering and seized their digital devices.

The Metropolitan Police said it received information from Microsoft about EvilTokens’ administrators in August. Utomi and Adams were released on bail as the investigation continues. 

“The two primary operators identified in our investigation were residing in the U.K.,” a spokesperson for Microsoft told CyberScoop. “While our investigation focused on those individuals, we believe others may have supported the operation in various capacities.”

Microsoft’s legal filing in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia refers to five additional unidentified people allegedly acting as support personnel and users.

Microsoft and others involved in the EvilTokens takedown, including Health-ISAC, Cloudflare, OpenAI, Shadowserver and TRM Labs, didn’t fully quantify how much fraud the service enabled, but it gained popularity quickly among cybercriminals and was lucrative for its operators.

Coinbase, which also aided the investigation into EvilTokens, said it traced about $1.1 million in revenue for EvilTokens from its paying customers. The virtual currency company’s threat researchers found more than 1,000 deposits to EvilTokens from more than 700 distinct addresses through June 2026. 

Operators sold access to the service through Telegram for a $1,500 initiation fee and a recurring $500 subscription. EvilTokens significantly lowered the barrier to entry for cybercriminals by including specialized tools for identity attacks, cloud systems, social engineering and financial fraud in a single interface.

The service allowed cybercriminals to map organizational structure and permissions in Microsoft Graph, which enabled lateral movement, researchers said. With active tokens gained through a collection of highly-targeted phishing lures, cybercriminals consistently bypassed multi-factor authentication, email gateways and endpoint security tools.

Microsoft said the platform’s creators developed portions of the platform with AI and it uncovered capabilities from multiple AI models. 

“It packaged much of the criminal process into a commercially run service, complete with subscription pricing, customer support, management dashboards and tools designed to move customers from account access toward financial exploitation,” Masada added.

The companies and organizations involved in the globally-coordinated takedown identified and notified potential victims, shared indicators of compromise and shared intelligence with law enforcement about EvilToken’s operators and some of its customers.

Experts advised organizations and employees to treat unsolicited device codes as a red flag, assume compromised accounts are fully cataloged in minutes, and independently verify requests to change payment information or redirect funds.

“The infrastructure supporting EvilTokens has been disrupted, but the model it demonstrated will not disappear with it,” Masada warned.

The post Microsoft and partners disrupt EvilTokens, a comprehensive cybercrime service for financial fraud appeared first on CyberScoop.

Nearly two of every 10 U.S. water and wastewater organizations have identity data actively exposed from infostealers harvesting their credentials, according to research published Tuesday.

The study from identity risk firm SpyCloud follows months of reports about a wave of cyberattacks hitting targets in the sector, which U.S. government officials suspect are tied to Iran.

The company built a database of 66,845 Environmental Protection Agency-registered systems, examined internet domains and ultimately analyzed 10,000 organizations, finding that 1,787 showed active infostealer exposure.

In one case, a single infected device at a smart meter technology provider that SpyCloud didn’t name contained saved logins linked to roughly 167 different U.S. utility metering tenants — meaning that one exposure opened the door to many more. 

That “cascading supply chain exposure” was one of the biggest findings of the report that SpyCloud shared exclusively with CyberScoop, said Jason Lancaster, chief investigations officer at the cyber firm, along with the quantitative approach” to measure exposure overall.

“We talk about it a lot,” Lancaster said of the exponential risk that one exposure can present. “There’s examples here and there, but that was a standout example of, here’s a tangible thing that is an exposure right now.”

Generally, “Infostealer exposure means the attacker isn’t guessing anymore, they’ve got legitimate points of entry,” Lancaster said. “In the investigations I’ve worked, that log data usually contains stolen session cookies, credentials, and autofill info pulled straight off the infected device. That’s enough to walk right past [multifactor authentication] by hijacking an already-authenticated session, log into corporate email or VPNs without raising a single alert, and sit there quietly for weeks while they map out the network.”

Still, the study had limitations. It doesn’t address what apparently led to the cyberattacks that unfolded in Minnesota and elsewhere this summer: internet-exposed programmable logic controllers.

It’s “important to note that our research did not focus on OT devices which run the most critical processes within these utilities, and any exposure we cite herein should not be interpreted as exposure of specific OT devices,” the report said. It did, however, find that 258 of the 1,787 organizations with active infostealer exposure carried credentials to operational technology or remote-access systems.

Some of the report’s conclusions were about the limitations of the data itself.

“Exposure concentrated in larger operators and in the vendor supply chain; small utilities were largely underrepresented,” SpyCloud said. “That’s a pattern in the data, not a claim that every water system nationwide carries this risk — and it measures identity exposure, not confirmed intrusion.”

It’s the first study of its kind that SpyCloud has done for a specific industry, so the company doesn’t have comparisons to other industries, Lancaster said. SpyCloud has begun a responsible disclosure process for those affected within its report, he said, beginning with a briefing for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.

“It’s important to remember, infostealer logs aren’t the end of an incident — they are often the beginning,” Lancaster said. “Access brokers sell these logs specifically because ransomware crews and other fraudsters want exactly this kind of entry point. So, the real question isn’t whether the exposure is dangerous. It’s how much time you have before someone weaponizes that stolen data against you.”

The post Another worry for water systems: infostealer exposure appeared first on CyberScoop.

The attackers impersonate at least 40 companies and disable 145 security products to deploy infostealer malware.

The post Fake LastPass Installers Push Kernel-Level EDR Killer, ‘Rapuncel’ Stealer appeared first on SecurityWeek.

The malware relies on AI for real-time device navigation and control, increasing adaptability and evasion.

The post RatHat Android Trojan Uses AI for Automation appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Hackers used a compromised API key to deploy a Cloudflare worker that injected malicious scripts.

The post Brevo Supply Chain Attack Injects Malware Into 100,000 Websites appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Researchers said they used Anthropic’s Claude and OpenAI’s Codex to identify a damaging flaw embedded in a popular software decoding tool that could leave major internet platforms, enterprise services, and web frameworks vulnerable to data theft and remote access.

The vulnerability, nicknamed HEIF Heist, refers to the malware’s ability to trigger memory corruption errors in affected software, allowing the attacker to pilfer sensitive data from its victims. In a report published Thursday, the researchers laid out the potential damage an attacker could cause, including gaining access to internal OpenAI repositories, leaking user files, access tokens, and other sensitive data for online services like Amazon Web Services, and gaining remote code execution privileges across a range of online services, including Meta’s core product suite, GitHub Enterprise servers and open-source internet forum Discourse.

“Even when Remote Code Execution isn’t immediately achievable, the attack primitives may still allow arbitrary heap disclosure, letting an attacker ‘heist’ in-memory data such as other users’ data and environment variables,” wrote Hacktron researchers Harsh Jaiswal, Mohan SRK, Rahul Maini and Sudhanshu Rajbhar.

The researchers relied heavily on AI systems, including frontier models from OpenAI and Anthropic, to conduct their research. Attribution for the research is described as being “led” by the Hacktron human researchers “assisted by Hacktron Harness, GPT-5.6 Sol, and Opus 5.”

According to the research, the attack exploited the way that code parsing tools in many popular software decoders — specifically libheif and libde265, used to parse C and C++ software — process certain image files.

By uploading HEIF, HEIC and AVIF image files corrupted with malicious code, the attacker could bypass most of the victim’s application layer defenses, in many cases achieving remote code execution privileges for accounts or products tied to major AI and tech brands.   

While the latest version of libheif has been patched, the researchers said “any deployment lacking the latest upstream security patches is potentially vulnerable.”

In one incident detailed in a Sept. 13 blog, Jaiswal, Maini, and Hacktron researcher Mohan Pedhapati described how chaining two vulnerabilities, including an image parser flaw, could compromise OpenAI employee accounts.

With access to the compromised accounts, researchers could reach OpenAI’s internal repositories. As a proof of concept, they opened a pull request in the company’s “monorepo,” a centralized library where code is shared across projects, using the employee’s Codex credentials. 

According to a timeline provided by the researchers, the flaw was discovered on July 25 and patched within days. They said the entire attack, from discovering the initial vulnerability to gaining access to the repositories, took less than 72 hours. OpenAI paid them a bug bounty of $6,500 for their work.

Given that AI models are increasingly integrated into enterprise and personal networks, an attacker exploiting HEIF Heist could have accessed far more than just OpenAI’s systems and data.

“Until two months ago, a user or OpenAI employee logging into OpenAI’s own help forum could have had their ChatGPT and Codex accounts taken over,” the researchers wrote. “Since people can connect various services to Codex and ChatGPT, the scope of what we could theoretically access was huge, including GitHub, Slack and emails.”

CyberScoop has reached out to OpenAI for comment on the research and additional information.

At the same time, the researchers said the attack paths they found were not particularly easy or efficient to exploit.

“Exploitation requires fingerprinting the target version and tailoring the payload images,” the blog stated. “Some of our RCE attempts landed only after thousands of image uploads. That said, an AI agentic approach with a frontier model like GPT-5.6 Sol cut exploit development time down to roughly 1 to 3 days from initial probe to remote RCE. A motivated attacker can convert a vulnerable upload endpoint into RCE or an info leak.”

The post Researchers use AI to find widespread software decoder flaw  appeared first on CyberScoop.

North Korean hackers are infiltrating tens of thousands of job seekers’ computer networks by posing as prospective employers, such as artificial intelligence firms, to steal sensitive information and millions of dollars worth of cryptocurrency, U.S. and allied governments warned Friday.

The security agencies behind the alert, attributed the group, known as WaterPlum or Contagious Interview, as operating under the 313 General Bureau of the Munitions Industry Department subordinate to the Central Committee of the Workers Party of Korea. The efforts dovetail with those of North Korean IT workers.

“WaterPlum actors pose as prospective employers to target software developers and IT professionals worldwide under the pretext of attractive job opportunities,” the agencies wrote. “They often impersonate legitimate Artificial Intelligence (AI), cryptocurrency, or Non-Fungible Token (NFT) companies and have also used recruiting services.”

Additionally, “Some WaterPlum actors also operate as North Korean IT workers performing web system design and development tasks on corporate web systems for clients,” read the alert from agencies in Japan, Australia and Germany, alongside the FBI and the Department of Defense’s Cyber Crime Center.

They’ve used the stolen information to fuel other operations, and the overlap between WaterPlum and North Korean IT workers is substantial, the agencies said.

“WaterPlum actors and North Korean IT Workers used the same IP addresses when accessing laptop farms, using cloud-sourcing services, and applying for positions at the Japanese cryptocurrency exchange,” they wrote.

Collectively, WaterPlum has infected more than 30,000 devices in more than 100 countries, targeting IT professionals in Japan, the United States, Europe and other nations. Its operations have transferred the equivalent of nearly $11 million of cryptocurrency from over 7,000 crypto wallets to North Korea, according to the alert.

The law enforcement agencies said they have had some success tackling the group, but are seeking further cooperation and released details in the alert about WaterPlum’s tactics, techniques and procedures.

“For the first time in Japan, authorities successfully identified, investigated, and dismantled a ‘laptop farm’ operated by an enabler in Japan,” the alert reads. “Japanese authorities obtained evidence this cyber actor group transferred several hundred million Japanese yen in cryptocurrency to foreign locations outside of Japan. The FBI continues to identify and prosecute US-based actors providing illicit facilitation services to North Korean IT workers.”

The warning comes as the Multilateral Sanctions Monitoring Team, an international panel overseeing UN sanctions against North Korea, released a report exposing thousands of North Korean nationals employed in industries around the world.

The post International security agencies warn about North Korean hackers exploiting job seekers to steal crypto, data appeared first on CyberScoop.

Cisco disclosed its second actively exploited zero-day vulnerability in as many days, presenting its customers with back-to-back threats to address in unrelated products.

The latest zero-day — CVE-2026-76460 — has a maximum-severity rating and was exploited before Cisco disclosed and patched the vulnerability Wednesday. The defect in an API of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) allows a remote attacker to bypass authentication and gain full control of the affected device.

“ISE devices enforce network access policy, so root access on the appliance lets an attacker modify that policy, extract stored credentials, delete logs, and move laterally into every network segment ISE controls,” Landon Rice, senior exploit developer at VulnCheck, told CyberScoop.

Cisco did not say how many organizations have been compromised thus far, but reported it found the vulnerability during a technical support case. 

“Cisco is aware of active exploitation of this vulnerability. We strongly recommend customers upgrade to available fixed software and follow guidance in the advisory,” a Cisco spokesperson said in a statement.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency added the zero-day to its known exploited vulnerabilities catalog shortly after Cisco’s disclosure. 

Researchers haven’t attributed attacks involving CVE-2026-76460 to any known group or threat actor, but Rice noted Cisco ISE vulnerabilities are a recurring target. 

Multiple vulnerabilities affecting the Cisco product have been exploited since June 2025, including CVE-2025-20337 and CVE-2025-20281. The latest zero-day vulnerability and the pair of defects disclosed in the summer of 2025 were all rated critical with the highest rating of 10. 

Cisco didn’t say when the first instance of CVE-2026-76460 exploitation occurred, but the disclosure came just two days after the vendor disclosed CVE-2026-76461, an actively exploited zero-day vulnerability in Cisco Secure Email Gateway. 

While the two zero-days disclosed this week have consecutive CVE identifiers, there’s no indication they are connected or share any technical relationship, Rice said. “These are different products and different vulnerability classes with no relation,” he added.

A Cisco spokesperson concurred with that assessment. “CVEs are assigned on a first-come, first-served basis, so consecutive numbering reflects assignment order rather than any relationship between the issues. CVE-2026-76460 and CVE-2026-76461 affect different codebases,” the spokesperson added.

Cisco published indicators of compromise to help customers hunt for attempted exploitation in their environments, and said there are no workarounds for the vulnerability.

The post Cisco alerts customers to second actively exploited zero-day in as many days appeared first on CyberScoop.

The past few weeks have “felt very strange” for Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade.

Like many, he is trying to sort through the spate of frontier-model AI agents from OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and others hacking their way onto the open internet over the past few months, particularly amid the already-heated national debate around the emerging technology and its impact on society.

Guerrero-Saade, a fellow for AI and security research at SentinelOne and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University, said the hacks are worth taking seriously, but at a time when businesses and open-source maintainers should be focused on further hardening their systems and policymakers should be discussing new solutions,  “what we see is cybersecurity being used essentially as an excuse for these AI doomer arguments.”

The incidents have spawned those “doomer arguments” amid an intense public debate about the technology, the pace of industry development, and whether government and the private sector are doing enough to protect against “doomsday”-type scenarios, where AI systems take over or attack large parts of the internet or society.

Guerrero-Saade is among a growing chorus of cybersecurity professionals who say that while AI systems pose real, unique threats to our systems, the apocalypse is far from inevitable. Most of the public concerns around the incidents, let alone worries about killer AIs attacking critical infrastructure, assuming control of the internet and wiping out humanity, are either technically impossible or can largely be controlled through established cybersecurity principles.

There is this “narrative or magical thinking of ‘Well, AI is going to be able to hack everything, and therefore it can control everything, and therefore it’s going to kill us all,’” he told CyberScoop. “And you [think] these just don’t add up. They’re not very well-reasoned arguments.”

This fatalistic narrative tied to AI’s eventual dominance doesn’t hold up under scrutiny, according to experts CyberScoop spoke with. In recent conversations, cybersecurity and national security professionals raised questions about both the technical solutions OpenAI and Anthropic use to contain their models, as well as the glaring absence of federal oversight from federal regulators or truly independent third-party review.

For example, Jacob Coxon, an Anthropic employee who resigned over AI safety concerns, told CBS News that frontier models could not be “unplugged” by humans once deployed because the model would copy itself to thousands of other computers connected to the internet.

By contrast, Matt Tait, a former information security specialist at UK signals intelligence agency Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), pointed out that the models run by Anthropic and other frontier companies require extremely expensive, “ultraspecialist” machines that “are functionally supercomputers.”

“There is a zero chance that Anthropic’s most capable models will be able to extract their own model and run in the wild, because those supercomputers essentially only exist in datacenters,” Tait said.

“Not a credible warning”

Other former cybersecurity government leaders say the agentic hacks represent a failure by regulators and industry to deploy known technical and policy options that make it harder for these types of incidents to occur.

Matt Hartman, former deputy executive assistant director for cybersecurity at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said “we should not accept harmful AI behavior as inevitable or unmanageable.”

“There are meaningful steps companies can take to monitor agent activity, constrain permissions, detect anomalous behavior, and build stronger safeguards into how these systems operate,” said Hartman, now a chief strategy officer at Merlin Group. “Those controls will inevitably involve trade-offs in capability and speed, but that’s a familiar cybersecurity challenge. Our goal should be to manage the risk without unnecessarily limiting the enormous benefits AI can provide.”

Ciaran Martin, former head of the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, took issue with the way the CEOs of frontier AI companies have framed the threat of “rogue” AI behavior as inevitable, while issuing dire warnings about future threats and capabilities with little transparency.

Martin’s comments came after an essay published by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei that cited the threat of a HuggingFace-style swarm of agents that could create a botnet capable of “taking over the entire internet” within 6-12 months.

This, Martin said, “is not a credible warning,” because it doesn’t explain how the exploitation would function, how such a botnet would persist on the internet, or how it would escape law enforcement. 

 “It assumes no monitoring of systems, no anti-virus, no DDoS protection, no network segmentation, no incident management, no nothing of any kind of the cybersecurity on the global Internet of the type that has developed over the last 30 years,” wrote Martin. “For a claim of this magnitude, there is neither evidence for the contention nor a credible account of a path to this outcome.”

Meanwhile, some federal government cybersecurity leaders have touted the technology’s disruptive potential and called for more widespread adoption of AI tools by defenders.

Joseph Alm, assistant secretary of cyber, infrastructure and risk resilience at the Department of Homeland Security, said classified systems may retain stronger protections. But for most other data, AI models are “just going to know things and be able to infer things about the world, and we’re going to have to adapt to that as almost inevitable.”

Asked by CyberScoop whether the government or frontier AI companies could be doing more to prevent or deter their models from carrying out unauthorized hacks via agents, Alm cited recent efforts by the Trump administration this year to establish pre-release testing of commercial models as a step in the right direction. But he called unauthorized AI agent hacks “a new threat class” that is different from previous threats and can be easily distributed to users through open-source software today.

“I think what we can do is…encourage the building of good sandboxes, so that the best models aren’t used for this and the stuff you see out in the wild is the kind of detritus that you can actually respond to effectively and control your networks,” said Alm.

Other experts have shared similar concerns. Earlier this month, CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz recently warned of a new threat class emerging alongside nation-states, cybercriminals, and hacktivists: “the agent state.” By pairing AI systems with small human teams, these operators can now match the speed, scale, and sophistication of government-backed hackers.

“It took a nation to fund the talent, the tooling, the infrastructure, the patience,” said Kurtz. “That scarcity is over.” 

To be sure, frontier AI companies tout their commitment to both approaches. OpenAI and Anthropic have rolled out an array of cybersecurity partnerships, external red-teaming programs, vulnerability disclosure programs and cybersecurity technical advisory bodies filled with cybersecurity experts.

Mohammed Husain, strategic delivery lead for government at OpenAI, told CyberScoop that the company deploys both internal safety guardrails for their models and relies on outside cybersecurity vendors for additional expertise.

Internally, OpenAI focuses on vulnerabilities at the training level: filtering data poisoning attacks, blocking harmful datasets, and using network controls to prevent prompt injections. For other security layers like sandboxing, identity management, networking controls, they outsource to external vendors. 

“I don’t think OpenAI has all the answers here but what we do as a research lab is we’re going to focus on levels of protection we have expertise in and we partner to self-complement,” said Husain.

AI safety vs. AI cybersecurity

In response to the HuggingFace hack, OpenAI and Anthropic have allowed third-party organizations, such as nonprofit AI research firms METR and Redwood Research, to investigate. But multiple cybersecurity professionals told CyberScoop that both firms lack incident response experience and focus primarily on AI alignment and safety. Their reporting on the hack also lacked critical details: network monitoring logs, telemetry, and other data standard in cybersecurity threat intelligence reports.  

METR president Chris Painter addressed those general concerns in a post on X, saying since 2022 the organization has worked with Google, Anthropic, OpenAI, Meta, Amazon and others on investigations and third-party evaluations. Painter said none of the AI companies fund METR and that his employees are not uniformly “doomer” or “accelerationist” around AI.

Painter also said METR’s work ensures that if AI systems become autonomous or “rogue” within a company, there are ways to share that information with governments and people “outside the company’s walls.”

“We don’t accept money from frontier AI companies,” wrote Painter. “They haven’t paid us for our work, and we don’t accept donations from them or their employees. As we’ve shared previously, multiple frontier AI companies currently provide us with free access to their models in order to perform our evaluations, research, and engineering.”

AI safety and AI cybersecurity advocates take different approaches to securing “rogue” AI behavior. Safety advocates focus on aligning models around ethical training and behavior. Cybersecurity advocates argue that technical and regulatory controls must go further—actively preventing models from accessing what they need to carry out malicious behavior.

Guerrero-Saade said sandboxes in particular can easily be programmed with aggressive cybersecurity monitoring in order to spot when something odd may be happening and react in real time.

“I can’t think of an easier situation in which to set up trip wires, set up configurations like DNS servers, just different parts where you can say ‘Hey, anomalous behavior is happening,’” he said. “We should have been able to tell this immediately, not weeks and months later. So watching [the AI hacking incidents] go down is a little ‘crazy-making’ because we’re seeing things that, frankly, look like neglect, negligence, people just mishandling things, and then being told that these are categorically new incidents that mean that AI systems need to be treated completely different from anything that’s come before.”

While cybersecurity experts say AI systems are, at their core, still software, they do operate differently from more traditional code in ways that can make them harder to predict and control.

John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google’s Threat Intelligence Group, said most software has been deterministic. It may have bugs or vulnerabilities, but an expert could generally understand how it would react to certain stimuli, making it easier to design straightforward controls.

AI models are non-deterministic, with far more variability than traditional software. That can break security controls that rely too much on predicting behavior in advance. Using AI to enforce security controls on other AI models faces the same problem: the systems being deployed to control AI are just as unpredictable. 

But people are also non-deterministic, and people have developed systems in other industries and practices to account for that.

Hultquist drew on his Army experience, noting that “they give incredibly dangerous, expensive things to 18-year-olds” and expect responsible use. The military manages this through two types of controls: deterministic ones like strict weapons and ammunition protocols, and non-deterministic ones like human officers who monitor and correct violations.

Similarly, established cybersecurity controls have been used by incident responders to detect and prevent or mitigate ongoing cybersecurity breaches.

“I don’t think we should throw out all the other tools that we have learned to use as well. I think that would be utterly foolish,” he said, later adding “I will say that if we use only non-deterministic tools to figure out when things are happening, we shouldn’t be surprised when we get the wrong answer.”

The post The AI hacking apocalypse is not inevitable appeared first on CyberScoop.

US, UK, and Dutch government agencies published a report detailing the malware, and the FBI described the abuse of Telegram for C&C.

The post US, UK, Dutch Agencies Expose Iranian ‘Chosen Brick’ Surveillance Malware appeared first on SecurityWeek.

For the first time, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is advising critical infrastructure owners and operators on how to set up phony systems, accounts and data to deceive would-be hackers into being distracted and discovered.

The Wednesday guidance, “Using Cyber Decoys to Strengthen Detection and Response,” arose from internal discussions with CISA’s threat hunters and penetration testers about how decoys can be a cheap, effective way to disrupt attackers, said Chris Butera, acting executive director of the cybersecurity division.

‘We’ve been looking at it for a while, and we believe that decoys can be both a very low-cost but actually high-fidelity way to detect an adversary who’s already gained access to networks,” Butera told CyberScoop at Google Cloud’s Cyber Defense Summit 26.

It’s especially complementary for zero-trust (maintaining that no user or device is trustworthy by default) and assume-compromise (assuming that hackers have already gotten into a network) approaches, Butera said.

While the guidance is “really relevant for everyone,” it’s something that can be especially useful in critical infrastructure sectors that don’t have the most personnel or money, he said.

“This could be something to prioritize as a lower cost solution,” Butera said. “You can create your own honey tokens yourself.”

The 22-page guidance includes decoy principles and goals, definitions of the different kinds of decoys and how to use them and scenarios for deployment.

Honeytokens, for instance, are “Data elements or logical objects with no legitimate business use (e.g., fake records, credentials, or files) planted to detect unauthorized access or exfiltration. Any interaction strongly suggests malicious or otherwise unauthorized activity.”

“Cyber decoys used in a proactive cyber defense strategy help make critical infrastructure networks unfriendly places for adversaries and enhance resilience to compromise, even against living-off-the-land techniques,” Butera said in a news release. “With this guide, CISA is raising awareness of cyber decoy techniques and enabling any defensive team regardless of skill level to understand the value and steps to implementing decoy operations. CISA encourages critical infrastructure organizations to review this guide and implement a cyber decoy strategy.” 

The post CISA promotes a fresh way to deter cyberattackers: Lie to them appeared first on CyberScoop.

The Coast Guard and FBI boarded two foreign vessels coming to the United States last month to investigate potential cyberattacks on the ships, according to a joint statement from the agencies Wednesday.

The “joint offshore security boardings” of the two commercial ships in the Gulf of Mexico on Aug. 21 and Aug. 24 “were designed to ensure integrity of the vessel’s operational and information technology systems following indications that the networks of both vessels were compromised,” according to the joint statement.

“Currently, there are no reports of operational disruptions, vessel instability, physical danger to crews, or environmental impacts,” the statement reads. “The Coast Guard is actively managing communications with port operators, vessel owners, and local maritime stakeholders to ensure port operations continue safely and without interruption.”

The vessels were reportedly tankers carrying oil and natural gas, and the first got hacked in the Strait of Gibraltar and lost communication for over 30 hours. Authorities were said to be  investigating whether Iran, or perhaps another group seeking to exploit the conflict between Iran and the United States, was behind the attacks.

Coast Guard cyber teams have been investigating “dark fleets” carrying sanctioned oil from Iran and Russia, which rely on digital masking to hide their operations and carry enhanced cyber risks, The Wall Street Journal reported in June.

Then-President Joe Biden signed an executive order in 2024 giving the Coast Guard additional authorities to respond to cybersecurity incidents, citing the risks that a maritime cyber incident could cause “cascading” harm to the global supply chain.

The Aug. 21 boarding party included Coast Guard law enforcement personnel, Coast Guard Cyber Protection Team members, a vessel inspector and FBI Cyber Action Team operators, who boarded “to conduct a comprehensive cyber security boarding and investigation,” according to the agencies’ joint statement. A similar team made up the Aug. 24 boarding party.

“The captain, crew, and shore-side corporate staff were critical partners in helping to ensure the threats were mitigated,” the statement reads.

Top Trump administration cyber officials have refused to answer questions from reporters recently about Iranian cyberattacks during the Middle East conflict. Trump himself has rejected the idea that Iran was behind a recent spate of attacks on U.S. water facilities.

The post Coast Guard, FBI board US-bound foreign ships in order to probe for cyberattacks appeared first on CyberScoop.

The hackers staged numerous scripts for reconnaissance and CVE probing, along with brute-force utilities and privilege escalation tools.

The post Thai Broadband Provider Hacked via Fortinet Vulnerability appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Attackers of unknown origins and motivations are exploiting a critical zero-day vulnerability in Cisco Secure Email Gateway, authorities and researchers said Monday.

The vulnerability — CVE-2026-76461 —  was exploited before Cisco disclosed and patched the defect Monday and allows unauthenticated, remote attackers to execute commands with root privileges on vulnerable systems. “In practical terms, that gives the attacker control of the gateway itself,” Douglas McKee, director of vulnerability intelligence at Rapid7, told CyberScoop.

Cisco said its product security incident response team became aware of active exploitation of the defect affecting Cisco AsyncOS Software for Cisco Secure Email Gateway in September. When asked for further details, a company spokesperson pointed to the advisory and reiterated that the company is aware of active exploitation of the vulnerability.

The company did not say how many organizations are impacted by active exploitation thus far, but it indicated multiple customers were likely compromised prior to disclosure. 

“Cisco has conducted a thorough threat intelligence investigation on devices that belong to Cisco Secure Email Cloud. Cisco has directly contacted customers who own Cisco Secure Email Cloud devices where indicators of possible compromise were identified,” the company wrote in its security advisory. “Cisco is engaged in remediation and recovery operations. Cisco has already deployed mitigations that are within Cisco’s management.”

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency added the zero-day, which affects cloud-based and on-premises instances of Cisco Secure Email Gateway, to its known exploited vulnerabilities catalog shortly after Cisco’s disclosure. 

The tight timeline between Cisco’s public advisory and patch guidance, and CISA’s quick addition to the KEV catalog indicates the vulnerability deserves immediate attention, McKee said. 

“The combination here is pretty ugly. No authentication is required, an attacker can reach the vulnerable code by sending an email through the appliance, successful exploitation can result in root-level command execution, and Cisco has observed exploitation in the wild,” he added.

Researchers at Rapid7 and VulnCheck said they don’t yet know how many organizations are impacted by active exploits, but they encouraged Cisco customers to patch and hunt for potential signs of compromise as soon as possible. 

Spencer McIntyre, director of exploit development at VulnCheck, told CyberScoop the exploit could allow an attacker to maintain access to the email gateway and monitor communications. “Stealing or silently snooping on email comms is a common tactic for state-sponsored and other threat actors conducting espionage operations,” he said. 

“It’s going to be worse for organizations that have the appliance deployed on-premises. In this case, the attacker could pivot internally,” McIntyre added. “If, however, organizations use a cloud instance, the compromised gateway is less likely to have significant access to internal organizational resources.”

Cisco released indicators of compromise to help customers hunt for attempted exploitation in their environments, but the company added that attackers could remove or hide those traces with the level of access granted via exploitation.

The post Cisco warns customers of actively exploited zero-day in email gateways appeared first on CyberScoop.