News

Of the five, one is a Windows vulnerability, another is a Cisco vulnerability. We don’t have any details about who is exploiting them, or how.

News article. Slashdot thread.

This is a sad story of someone who downloaded a Trojaned AI tool that resulted in hackers taking over his computer and, ultimately, costing him his job.

Firefly squid is now a delicacy in New York.

Blog moderation policy.

Interesting research: “Emergent Misalignment: Narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMs“:

Abstract: We present a surprising result regarding LLMs and alignment. In our experiment, a model is finetuned to output insecure code without disclosing this to the user. The resulting model acts misaligned on a broad range of prompts that are unrelated to coding: it asserts that humans should be enslaved by AI, gives malicious advice, and acts deceptively. Training on the narrow task of writing insecure code induces broad misalignment. We call this emergent misalignment. This effect is observed in a range of models but is strongest in GPT-4o and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct. Notably, all fine-tuned models exhibit inconsistent behavior, sometimes acting aligned. Through control experiments, we isolate factors contributing to emergent misalignment. Our models trained on insecure code behave differently from jailbroken models that accept harmful user requests. Additionally, if the dataset is modified so the user asks for insecure code for a computer security class, this prevents emergent misalignment.

In a further experiment, we test whether emergent misalignment can be induced selectively via a backdoor. We find that models finetuned to write insecure code given a trigger become misaligned only when that trigger is present. So the misalignment is hidden without knowledge of the trigger.

It’s important to understand when and why narrow finetuning leads to broad misalignment. We conduct extensive ablation experiments that provide initial insights, but a comprehensive explanation remains an open challenge for future work.

The emergent properties of LLMs are so, so weird.

Last month, the UK government demanded that Apple weaken the security of iCloud for users worldwide. On Friday, Apple took steps to comply for users in the United Kingdom. But the British law is written in a way that requires Apple to give its government access to anyone, anywhere in the world. If the government demands Apple weaken its security worldwide, it would increase everyone’s cyber-risk in an already dangerous world.

If you’re an iCloud user, you have the option of turning on something called “advanced data protection,” or ADP. In that mode, a majority of your data is end-to-end encrypted. This means that no one, not even anyone at Apple, can read that data. It’s a restriction enforced by mathematics—cryptography—and not policy. Even if someone successfully hacks iCloud, they can’t read ADP-protected data.

Using a controversial power in its 2016 Investigatory Powers Act, the UK government wants Apple to re-engineer iCloud to add a “backdoor” to ADP. This is so that if, sometime in the future, UK police wanted Apple to eavesdrop on a user, it could. Rather than add such a backdoor, Apple disabled ADP in the UK market.

Should the UK government persist in its demands, the ramifications will be profound in two ways. First, Apple can’t limit this capability to the UK government, or even only to governments whose politics it agrees with. If Apple is able to turn over users’ data in response to government demand, every other country will expect the same compliance. China, for example, will likely demand that Apple out dissidents. Apple, already dependent on China for both sales and manufacturing, won’t be able to refuse.

Second: Once the backdoor exists, others will attempt to surreptitiously use it. A technical means of access can’t be limited to only people with proper legal authority. Its very existence invites others to try. In 2004, hackers—we don’t know who—breached a backdoor access capability in a major Greek cellphone network to spy on users, including the prime minister of Greece and other elected officials. Just last year, China hacked U.S. telecoms and gained access to their systems that provide eavesdropping on cellphone users, possibly including the presidential campaigns of both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. That operation resulted in the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency recommending that everyone use end-to-end encrypted messaging for their own security.

Apple isn’t the only company that offers end-to-end encryption. Google offers the feature as well. WhatsApp, iMessage, Signal, and Facebook Messenger offer the same level of security. There are other end-to-end encrypted cloud storage providers. Similar levels of security are available for phones and laptops. Once the UK forces Apple to break its security, actions against these other systems are sure to follow.

It seems unlikely that the UK is not coordinating its actions with the other “Five Eyes” countries of the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand: the rich English-language-speaking spying club. Australia passed a similar law in 2018, giving it authority to demand that companies weaken their security features. As far as we know, it has never been used to force a company to re-engineer its security—but since the law allows for a gag order we might never know. The UK law has a gag order as well; we only know about the Apple action because a whistleblower leaked it to the Washington Post. For all we know, they may have demanded this of other companies as well. In the United States, the FBI has long advocated for the same powers. Having the UK make this demand now, when the world is distracted by the foreign-policy turmoil of the Trump administration, might be what it’s been waiting for.

The companies need to resist, and—more importantly—we need to demand they do. The UK government, like the Australians and the FBI in years past, argues that this type of access is necessary for law enforcement—that it is “going dark” and that the internet is a lawless place. We’ve heard this kind of talk since the 1990s, but its scant evidence doesn’t hold water. Decades of court cases with electronic evidence show again and again the police collect evidence through a variety of means, most of them—like traffic analysis or informants—having nothing to do with encrypted data. What police departments need are better computer investigative and forensics capabilities, not backdoors.

We can all help. If you’re an iCloud user, consider turning this feature on. The more of us who use it, the harder it is for Apple to turn it off for those who need it to stay out of jail. This also puts pressure on other companies to offer similar security. And it helps those who need it to survive, because enabling the feature couldn’t be used as a de facto admission of guilt. (This is a benefit of using WhatsApp over Signal. Since so many people in the world use WhatsApp, having it on your phone isn’t in itself suspicious.)

On the policy front, we have two choices. We can’t build security systems that work for some people and not others. We can either make our communications and devices as secure as possible against everyone who wants access, including foreign intelligence agencies and our own law enforcement, which protects everyone, including (unfortunately) criminals. Or we can weaken security—the criminals’ as well as everyone else’s.

It’s a question of security vs. security. Yes, we are all more secure if the police are able to investigate and solve crimes. But we are also more secure if our data and communications are safe from eavesdropping. A backdoor in Apple’s security is not just harmful on a personal level, it’s harmful to national security. We live in a world where everyone communicates electronically and stores their important data on a computer. These computers and phones are used by every national leader, member of a legislature, police officer, judge, CEO, journalist, dissident, political operative, and citizen. They need to be as secure as possible: from account takeovers, from ransomware, from foreign spying and manipulation. Remember that the FBI recommended that we all use backdoor-free end-to-end encryption for messaging just a few months ago.

Securing digital systems is hard. Defenders must defeat every attack, while eavesdroppers need one attack that works. Given how essential these devices are, we need to adopt a defense-dominant strategy. To do anything else makes us all less safe.

This essay originally appeared in Foreign Policy.

It looks like a very sophisticated attack against the Dubai-based exchange Bybit:

Bybit officials disclosed the theft of more than 400,000 ethereum and staked ethereum coins just hours after it occurred. The notification said the digital loot had been stored in a “Multisig Cold Wallet” when, somehow, it was transferred to one of the exchange’s hot wallets. From there, the cryptocurrency was transferred out of Bybit altogether and into wallets controlled by the unknown attackers.

[…]

…a subsequent investigation by Safe found no signs of unauthorized access to its infrastructure, no compromises of other Safe wallets, and no obvious vulnerabilities in the Safe codebase. As investigators continued to dig in, they finally settled on the true cause. Bybit ultimately said that the fraudulent transaction was “manipulated by a sophisticated attack that altered the smart contract logic and masked the signing interface, enabling the attacker to gain control of the ETH Cold Wallet.”

The announcement on the Bybit website is almost comical. This is the headline: “Incident Update: Unauthorized Activity Involving ETH Cold Wallet.”

More:

This hack sets a new precedent in crypto security by bypassing a multisig cold wallet without exploiting any smart contract vulnerability. Instead, it exploited human trust and UI deception:

• Multisigs are no longer a security guarantee if signers can be compromised.
• Cold wallets aren’t automatically safe if an attacker can manipulate what a signer sees.
• Supply chain and UI manipulation attacks are becoming more sophisticated.

The Bybit hack has shattered long-held assumptions about crypto security. No matter how strong your smart contract logic or multisig protections are, the human element remains the weakest link. This attack proves that UI manipulation and social engineering can bypass even the most secure wallets. The industry needs to move to end to end prevention, each transaction must be validated.

One of the most notorious providers of abuse-friendly “bulletproof” web hosting for cybercriminals has started routing its operations through networks run by the Russian antivirus and security firm Kaspersky Lab, KrebsOnSecurity has learned.

Security experts say the Russia-based service provider Prospero OOO (the triple O is the Russian version of “LLC”) has long been a persistent source of malicious software, botnet controllers, and a torrent of phishing websites. Last year, the French security firm Intrinsec detailed Prospero’s connections to bulletproof services advertised on Russian cybercrime forums under the names Securehost and BEARHOST.

The bulletproof hosting provider BEARHOST. This screenshot has been machine-translated from Russian. Image: Ke-la.com.

Bulletproof hosts are so named when they earn or cultivate a reputation for ignoring legal demands and abuse complaints. And BEARHOST has been cultivating its reputation since at least 2019.

“If you need a server for a botnet, for malware, brute, scan, phishing, fakes and any other tasks, please contact us,” BEARHOST’s ad on one forum advises. “We completely ignore all abuses without exception, including SPAMHAUS and other organizations.”

Intrinsec found Prospero has courted some of Russia’s nastiest cybercrime groups, hosting control servers for multiple ransomware gangs over the past two years. Intrinsec said its analysis showed Prospero frequently hosts malware operations such as SocGholish and GootLoader, which are spread primarily via fake browser updates on hacked websites and often lay the groundwork for more serious cyber intrusions — including ransomware.

A fake browser update page pushing mobile malware. Image: Intrinsec.

BEARHOST prides itself on the ability to evade blocking by Spamhaus, an organization that many Internet service providers around the world rely on to help identify and block sources of malware and spam. Earlier this week, Spamhaus said it noticed that Prospero was suddenly connecting to the Internet by routing through networks operated by Kaspersky Lab in Moscow.

Kaspersky did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Kaspersky began selling antivirus and security software in the United States in 2005, and the company’s malware researchers have earned accolades from the security community for many important discoveries over the years. But in September 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) barred U.S. federal agencies from using Kaspersky software, mandating its removal within 90 days.

Cybersecurity reporter Kim Zetter notes that DHS didn’t cite any specific justification for its ban in 2017, but media reports quoting anonymous government officials referenced two incidents. Zetter wrote:

According to one story, an NSA contractor developing offensive hacking tools for the spy agency had Kaspersky software installed on his home computer where he was developing the tools, and the software detected the source code as malicious code and extracted it from his computer, as antivirus software is designed to do. A second story claimed that Israeli spies caught Russian government hackers using Kaspersky software to search customer systems for files containing U.S. secrets.

Kaspersky denied that anyone used its software to search for secret information on customer machines and said that the tools on the NSA worker’s machine were detected in the same way that all antivirus software detects files it deems suspicious and then quarantines or extracts them for analysis. Once Kaspersky discovered that the code its antivirus software detected on the NSA worker’s machine were not malicious programs but source code in development by the U.S. government for its hacking operations, CEO Eugene Kaspersky says he ordered workers to delete the code.

Last year, the U.S. Commerce Department banned the sale of Kaspersky software in the U.S. effective July 20, 2024. U.S. officials argued the ban was needed because Russian law requires domestic companies to cooperate in all official investigations, and thus the Russian government could force Kaspersky to secretly gather intelligence on its behalf.

Phishing data gathered last year by the Interisle Consulting Group ranked hosting networks by their size and concentration of spambot hosts, and found Prospero had a higher spam score than any other provider by far.

AS209030, owned by Kaspersky Lab, is providing connectivity to the bulletproof host Prospero (AS200593). Image: cidr-report.org.

It remains unclear why Kaspersky is providing transit to Prospero. Doug Madory, director of Internet analysis at Kentik, said routing records show the relationship between Prospero and Kaspersky started at the beginning of December 2024.

Madory said Kaspersky’s network appears to be hosting several financial institutions, including Russia’s largest — Alfa-Bank. Kaspersky sells services to help protect customers from distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, and Madory said it could be that Prospero is simply purchasing that protection from Kaspersky.

But if that is the case, it doesn’t make the situation any better, said Zach Edwards, a senior threat researcher at the security firm Silent Push.

“In some ways, providing DDoS protection to a well-known bulletproof hosting provider may be even worse than just allowing them to connect to the rest of the Internet over your infrastructure,” Edwards said.

A U.S. Army soldier who pleaded guilty last week to leaking phone records for high-ranking U.S. government officials searched online for non-extradition countries and for an answer to the question “can hacking be treason?” prosecutors in the case said Wednesday. The government disclosed the details in a court motion to keep the defendant in custody until he is discharged from the military.

One of several selfies on the Facebook page of Cameron Wagenius.

Cameron John Wagenius, 20, was arrested near the Army base in Fort Cavazos, Texas on Dec. 20, and charged with two criminal counts of unlawful transfer of confidential phone records. Wagenius was a communications specialist at a U.S. Army base in South Korea, who secretly went by the nickname Kiberphant0m and was part of a trio of criminal hackers that extorted dozens of companies last year over stolen data.

At the end of 2023, malicious hackers learned that many companies had uploaded sensitive customer records to Snowflake accounts that were protected with little more than a username and password (no multi-factor authentication needed). After scouring darknet markets for stolen Snowflake account credentials, the hackers began raiding the data storage repositories used by some of the world’s largest corporations.

Among those was AT&T, which disclosed in July that cybercriminals had stolen personal information and phone and text message records for roughly 110 million people — nearly all of its customers. AT&T reportedly paid a hacker $370,000 to delete stolen phone records. More than 160 other Snowflake customers were relieved of data, including TicketMaster, Lending Tree, Advance Auto Parts and Neiman Marcus.

In several posts to an English-language cybercrime forum in November, Kiberphant0m leaked some of the phone records and threatened to leak them all unless paid a ransom. Prosecutors said that in addition to his public posts on the forum, Wagenius had engaged in multiple direct attempts to extort “Victim-1,” which appears to be a reference to AT&T. The government states that Kiberphant0m privately demanded $500,000 from Victim-1, threatening to release all of the stolen phone records unless he was paid.

On Feb. 19, Wagenius pleaded guilty to two counts of unlawfully transferring confidential phone records, but he did so without the benefit of a plea agreement. In entering the plea, Wagenius’s attorneys had asked the court to allow him to stay with his father pending his sentencing.

But in a response filed today (PDF), prosecutors in Seattle said Wagenius was a flight risk, partly because prior to his arrest he was searching online for how to defect to countries that do not extradite to the United States. According to the government, while Kiberphant0m was extorting AT&T, Wagenius’s searches included:

-“where can i defect the u.s government military which country will not hand me over”
-“U.S. military personnel defecting to Russia”
-“Embassy of Russia – Washington, D.C.”

“As discussed in the government’s sealed filing, the government has uncovered evidence suggesting that the charged conduct was only a small part of Wagenius’ malicious activity,” the government memo states. “On top of this, for more than two weeks in November 2024, Wagenius communicated with an email address he believed belonged to Country-1’s military intelligence service in an attempt to sell stolen information. Days after he apparently finished communicating with Country-1’s military intelligence service, Wagenius Googled, ‘can hacking be treason.’”

Prosecutors told the court investigators also found a screenshot on Wagenius’ laptop that suggested he had over 17,000 files that included passports, driver’s licenses, and other identity cards belonging to victims of a breach, and that in one of his online accounts, the government also found a fake identification document that contained his picture.

“Wagenius should also be detained because he presents a serious risk of flight, has the means and intent to flee, and is aware that he will likely face additional charges,” the Seattle prosecutors asserted.

The court filing says Wagenius is presently in the process of being separated from the Army but, but the government has not received confirmation that his discharge has been finalized.

“The government’s understanding is that, until his discharge from the Army is finalized (which is expected to happen in early March), he may only be released directly to the Army,” reads a footnote in the memo. “Until that process is completed, Wagenius’ proposed release to his father should be rejected for this additional reason.”

Wagenius’s interest in defecting to another country in order to escape prosecution mirrors that of his alleged co-conspirator, John Erin Binns, an 25-year-old elusive American man indicted by the Justice Department for a 2021 breach at T-Mobile that exposed the personal information of at least 76.6 million customers.

Binns has since been charged with the Snowflake hack and subsequent extortion activity. He is currently in custody in a Turkish prison. Sources close to the investigation told KrebsOnSecurity that prior to his arrest by Turkish police, Binns visited the Russian embassy in Turkey to inquire about Russian citizenship.

In late November 2024, Canadian authorities arrested a third alleged member of the extortion conspiracy, 25-year-old Connor Riley Moucka of Kitchener, Ontario. The U.S. government has indicted Moucka and Binns, charging them with one count of conspiracy; 10 counts of wire fraud; four counts of computer fraud and abuse; two counts of extortion in relation to computer fraud; and two counts aggravated identity theft.

Less than a month before Wagenius’s arrest, KrebsOnSecurity published a deep dive into Kiberphant0m’s various Telegram and Discord identities over the years, revealing how the owner of the accounts told others they were in the Army and stationed in South Korea.

The maximum penalty Wagenius could face at sentencing includes up to ten years in prison for each count, and fines not to exceed $250,000.

We’re thrilled to share some exciting news—McAfee has been recognized on Forbes’ prestigious list of America’s Best Midsize Employers for 2025! This recognition is a testament to our incredible employees, whose passion and commitment make McAfee not just an industry leader, but also a truly exceptional place to work. 

Forbes and Statista, a global data and business intelligence firm, compiled this list based on feedback from over 217,000 employees across various industries in the U.S. The ranking considers both direct feedback from McAfee team members and public perceptions of our workplace culture, with personal employee experiences carrying the most weight. 

What This Means for McAfee 

At McAfee, we believe that a great workplace isn’t just about the work—it’s about the people. This recognition underscores our ongoing commitment to fostering a culture where employees feel valued, empowered, and inspired. Whether it’s through innovative projects, professional growth opportunities, or a strong sense of community, we strive to make McAfee a place where talent thrives. 

Our spot within the top 300 of 500 companies, shows that our collective dedication to excellence, inclusivity, and collaboration is making an impact. 

A Big Thank You to Our Team 

This achievement wouldn’t be possible without our amazing employees who bring their best every day. Your contributions drive our success, and this recognition is as much yours as it is McAfee’s. 

As we continue to push boundaries in cybersecurity, we remain committed to ensuring McAfee is a company where talent grows, ideas flourish, and people love coming to work. 

Join us at McAfee   

It’s an exciting time to be part of Team McAfee! As we continue to grow and innovate, we’re always looking for passionate individuals who want to help create a safer online world.  

If you’re looking for a workplace where your ideas matter, your contributions are valued, and you can thrive in a dynamic, mission-driven environment, we’d love to have you on board. Explore opportunities to join us today!  

The post McAfee Named One of America’s Best Employers by Forbes appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Social media connects us to friends, trends, and news in real time—but it also opens the door to scammers looking to exploit trust and curiosity. From fake giveaways to impersonation scams, fraudsters use sophisticated tactics to trick users into handing over personal information, money, or access to their accounts. 

Even the most internet-savvy users can fall victim to these deceptive schemes. That’s why it’s crucial to recognize the red flags before it’s too late. Whether it’s a DM from a “friend” in trouble, a deal that seems too good to be true, or a sudden request to verify your account, scammers prey on urgency and emotion to pull you in. 

Here’s a look at some of the most common social media scams—and how you can stay one step ahead to protect yourself and your accounts. 

1. Romance Scams – Fake online relationships where scammers manipulate victims into sending money. 
2. Phishing Scams – Fraudulent messages or links designed to steal login credentials. 
3. Fake Giveaways & Contests – Scammers pose as brands or celebrities, asking for personal information in exchange for prizes that don’t exist. 
4. Job Scams – False job postings that require upfront fees or personal details. 
5. Investment Scams – Fraudulent schemes promising huge returns with little risk, often involving cryptocurrency. 
6. Impersonation Scams – Scammers clone profiles of family, friends, or businesses to request money or personal data. 
7. Online Shopping Scams – Fake e-commerce stores that collect payments without delivering products. 
8. Charity Scams – Fake fundraisers designed to exploit generosity during crises. 
9. Too-Good-to-Be-True Deals – Unrealistic offers that require upfront payments or personal information. 

How Scammers Operate on Social Media 

Fraudsters use various tactics to lure unsuspecting users into their schemes, including: 

• Fake Profiles: Scammers create bogus accounts, sometimes impersonating real people, to build trust. 

• Malicious Links: They send messages containing harmful links that install malware or steal data. 

• Emotional Manipulation: Playing on fear, love, or urgency, they convince victims to act without thinking. 

• Bogus Investment Opportunities: They entice victims with promises of easy wealth through fake financial schemes. 

• Social Engineering Tricks: They craft messages designed to gather personal information through quizzes, surveys, or direct requests. 

Signs That You’re Dealing with a Social Media Scammer 

Recognizing these red flags can help you stay safe: 

• Poor Grammar and Spelling Mistakes – Many scammers use unnatural phrasing or odd formatting. 

• Brand-New Profiles with Few Friends or Posts – A lack of personal content is a sign of a fake account. 

• Duplicate Friend Requests – If you receive a request from someone you’re already connected with, it may be an impersonation scam. 

• Unsolicited Messages Containing Links – Avoid clicking links in unexpected messages, as they may lead to phishing sites. 

• Requests for Money via Untraceable Methods – Scammers often ask for payment through gift cards, wire transfers, or cryptocurrency. 

• Unbelievable Deals or Limited-Time Offers – If an offer seems too good to be true, it probably is. 

• Requests to Move the Conversation Off-Platform – Fraudsters may push to communicate via email, WhatsApp, or text to avoid detection. 

How to Protect Yourself from Social Media Scams 

Follow these precautions to reduce your risk of falling victim: 

1. Think Before You Click – Don’t interact with suspicious links or attachments. 
2. Verify Identities – Contact people through trusted means before sending any money or information. 
3. Enable Privacy Settings – Limit what strangers can see on your profile. 
4. Use Strong, Unique Passwords – Enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on your accounts. 
5. Be Skeptical of Online Strangers – If someone you don’t know reaches out unexpectedly, question their intentions. 
6. Report and Block Suspicious Accounts – Social media platforms have tools to report fraud. 
7. Monitor Your Accounts for Unauthorized Activity – Stay vigilant for any signs of compromise. 

What to Do If You’ve Been Scammed 

If you suspect you’ve fallen victim to a social media scam, take immediate action: 

• Secure Your Accounts – Change passwords and enable 2FA to prevent further breaches. 

• Report the Scam – Notify the social media platform and report fraud to authorities such as the FTC. 

• Contact Your Bank – If you sent money, inform your financial institution to attempt a reversal. 

• Scan Your Device for Malware – Run antivirus software like McAfee to detect and remove any potential threats. 

• Monitor Your Financial Accounts – Look for unauthorized transactions and consider placing fraud alerts. 

Social media scams are becoming more sophisticated, but you can protect yourself by staying informed and cautious.  

Always verify messages, be skeptical of too-good-to-be-true offers, and use strong security measures to safeguard your accounts.  

By recognizing these scams early, you can avoid financial loss and keep your personal information safe online. 

McAfee helps protect you from online threats with advanced security tools, including identity monitoring, safe browsing features, and real-time malware protection. Stay one step ahead of scammers with trusted cybersecurity solutions. 

The post The 9 Most Common Social Media Scams—and How to Spot Them Before It’s Too Late appeared first on McAfee Blog.