Login
Agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) briefed Capitol Hill staff recently on hardening the security of their mobile devices, after a contacts list stolen from the personal phone of the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles was reportedly used to fuel a series of text messages and phone calls impersonating her to U.S. lawmakers. But in a letter this week to the FBI, one of the Senate’s most tech-savvy lawmakers says the feds aren’t doing enough to recommend more appropriate security protections that are already built into most consumer mobile devices.
A screenshot of the first page from Sen. Wyden’s letter to FBI Director Kash Patel.
On May 29, The Wall Street Journal reported that federal authorities were investigating a clandestine effort to impersonate Ms. Wiles via text messages and in phone calls that may have used AI to spoof her voice. According to The Journal, Wiles told associates her cellphone contacts were hacked, giving the impersonator access to the private phone numbers of some of the country’s most influential people.
The execution of this phishing and impersonation campaign — whatever its goals may have been — suggested the attackers were financially motivated, and not particularly sophisticated.
“It became clear to some of the lawmakers that the requests were suspicious when the impersonator began asking questions about Trump that Wiles should have known the answers to—and in one case, when the impersonator asked for a cash transfer, some of the people said,” the Journal wrote. “In many cases, the impersonator’s grammar was broken and the messages were more formal than the way Wiles typically communicates, people who have received the messages said. The calls and text messages also didn’t come from Wiles’s phone number.”
Sophisticated or not, the impersonation campaign was soon punctuated by the murder of Minnesota House of Representatives Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband, and the shooting of Minnesota State Senator John Hoffman and his wife. So when FBI agents offered in mid-June to brief U.S. Senate staff on mobile threats, more than 140 staffers took them up on that invitation (a remarkably high number considering that no food was offered at the event).
But according to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the advice the FBI provided to Senate staffers was largely limited to remedial tips, such as not clicking on suspicious links or attachments, not using public wifi networks, turning off bluetooth, keeping phone software up to date, and rebooting regularly.
“This is insufficient to protect Senate employees and other high-value targets against foreign spies using advanced cyber tools,” Wyden wrote in a letter sent today to FBI Director Kash Patel. “Well-funded foreign intelligence agencies do not have to rely on phishing messages and malicious attachments to infect unsuspecting victims with spyware. Cyber mercenary companies sell their government customers advanced ‘zero-click’ capabilities to deliver spyware that do not require any action by the victim.”
Wyden stressed that to help counter sophisticated attacks, the FBI should be encouraging lawmakers and their staff to enable anti-spyware defenses that are built into Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android phone software.
These include Apple’s Lockdown Mode, which is designed for users who are worried they may be subject to targeted attacks. Lockdown Mode restricts non-essential iOS features to reduce the device’s overall attack surface. Google Android devices carry a similar feature called Advanced Protection Mode.
Wyden also urged the FBI to update its training to recommend a number of other steps that people can take to make their mobile devices less trackable, including the use of ad blockers to guard against malicious advertisements, disabling ad tracking IDs in mobile devices, and opting out of commercial data brokers (the suspect charged in the Minnesota shootings reportedly used multiple people-search services to find the home addresses of his targets).
The senator’s letter notes that while the FBI has recommended all of the above precautions in various advisories issued over the years, the advice the agency is giving now to the nation’s leaders needs to be more comprehensive, actionable and urgent.
“In spite of the seriousness of the threat, the FBI has yet to provide effective defensive guidance,” Wyden said.
Nicholas Weaver is a researcher with the International Computer Science Institute, a nonprofit in Berkeley, Calif. Weaver said Lockdown Mode or Advanced Protection will mitigate many vulnerabilities, and should be the default setting for all members of Congress and their staff.
“Lawmakers are at exceptional risk and need to be exceptionally protected,” Weaver said. “Their computers should be locked down and well administered, etc. And the same applies to staffers.”
Weaver noted that Apple’s Lockdown Mode has a track record of blocking zero-day attacks on iOS applications; in September 2023, Citizen Lab documented how Lockdown Mode foiled a zero-click flaw capable of installing spyware on iOS devices without any interaction from the victim.
Earlier this month, Citizen Lab researchers documented a zero-click attack used to infect the iOS devices of two journalists with Paragon’s Graphite spyware. The vulnerability could be exploited merely by sending the target a booby-trapped media file delivered via iMessage. Apple also recently updated its advisory for the zero-click flaw (CVE-2025-43200), noting that it was mitigated as of iOS 18.3.1, which was released in February 2025.
Apple has not commented on whether CVE-2025-43200 could be exploited on devices with Lockdown Mode turned on. But HelpNetSecurity observed that at the same time Apple addressed CVE-2025-43200 back in February, the company fixed another vulnerability flagged by Citizen Lab researcher Bill Marczak: CVE-2025-24200, which Apple said was used in an extremely sophisticated physical attack against specific targeted individuals that allowed attackers to disable USB Restricted Mode on a locked device.
In other words, the flaw could apparently be exploited only if the attacker had physical access to the targeted vulnerable device. And as the old infosec industry adage goes, if an adversary has physical access to your device, it’s most likely not your device anymore.
I can’t speak to Google’s Advanced Protection Mode personally, because I don’t use Google or Android devices. But I have had Apple’s Lockdown Mode enabled on all of my Apple devices since it was first made available in September 2022. I can only think of a single occasion when one of my apps failed to work properly with Lockdown Mode turned on, and in that case I was able to add a temporary exception for that app in Lockdown Mode’s settings.
My main gripe with Lockdown Mode was captured in a March 2025 column by TechCrunch’s Lorenzo Francheschi-Bicchierai, who wrote about its penchant for periodically sending mystifying notifications that someone has been blocked from contacting you, even though nothing then prevents you from contacting that person directly. This has happened to me at least twice, and in both cases the person in question was already an approved contact, and said they had not attempted to reach out.
Although it would be nice if Apple’s Lockdown Mode sent fewer, less alarming and more informative alerts, the occasional baffling warning message is hardly enough to make me turn it off.
The Chinese company in charge of handing out domain names ending in “.top” has been given until mid-August 2024 to show that it has put in place systems for managing phishing reports and suspending abusive domains, or else forfeit its license to sell domains. The warning comes amid the release of new findings that .top was the most common suffix in phishing websites over the past year, second only to domains ending in “.com.”
Image: Shutterstock.
On July 16, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) sent a letter to the owners of the .top domain registry. ICANN has filed hundreds of enforcement actions against domain registrars over the years, but in this case ICANN singled out a domain registry responsible for maintaining an entire top-level domain (TLD).
Among other reasons, the missive chided the registry for failing to respond to reports about phishing attacks involving .top domains.
“Based on the information and records gathered through several weeks, it was determined that .TOP Registry does not have a process in place to promptly, comprehensively, and reasonably investigate and act on reports of DNS Abuse,” the ICANN letter reads (PDF).
ICANN’s warning redacted the name of the recipient, but records show the .top registry is operated by a Chinese entity called Jiangsu Bangning Science & Technology Co. Ltd. Representatives for the company have not responded to requests for comment.
Domains ending in .top were represented prominently in a new phishing report released today by the Interisle Consulting Group, which sources phishing data from several places, including the Anti-Phishing Working Group (APWG), OpenPhish, PhishTank, and Spamhaus.
Interisle’s newest study examined nearly two million phishing attacks in the last year, and found that phishing sites accounted for more than four percent of all new .top domains between May 2023 and April 2024. Interisle said .top has roughly 2.76 million domains in its stable, and that more than 117,000 of those were phishing sites in the past year.
Source: Interisle Consulting Group.
ICANN said its review was based on information collected and studied about .top domains over the past few weeks. But the fact that high volumes of phishing sites are being registered through Jiangsu Bangning Science & Technology Co Ltd. is hardly a new trend.
For example, more than 10 years ago the same Chinese registrar was the fourth most common source of phishing websites, as tracked by the APWG. Bear in mind that the APWG report excerpted below was published more than a year before Jiangsu Bangning received ICANN approval to introduce and administer the new .top registry.
Source: APWG phishing report from 2013, two years before .top came into being.
A fascinating new wrinkle in the phishing landscape is the growth in scam pages hosted via the InterPlanetary File System (IPFS), a decentralized data storage and delivery network that is based on peer-to-peer networking. According to Interisle, the use of IPFS to host and launch phishing attacks — which can make phishing sites more difficult to take down — increased a staggering 1,300 percent, to roughly 19,000 phishing sites reported in the last year.
Last year’s report from Interisle found that domain names ending in “.us” — the top-level domain for the United States — were among the most prevalent in phishing scams. While .us domains are not even on the Top 20 list of this year’s study, “.com” maintained its perennial #1 spot as the largest source of phishing domains overall.
A year ago, the phishiest domain registrar by far was Freenom, a now-defunct registrar that handed out free domains in several country-code TLDs, including .tk, .ml, .ga and .cf. Freenom went out of business after being sued by Meta, which alleged Freenom ignored abuse complaints while monetizing traffic to abusive domains.
Following Freenom’s demise, phishers quickly migrated to other new low-cost TLDs and to services that allow anonymous, free domain registrations — particularly subdomain services. For example, Interisle found phishing attacks involving websites created on Google’s blogspot.com skyrocketed last year more than 230 percent. Other subdomain services that saw a substantial growth in domains registered by phishers include weebly.com, github.io, wix.com, and ChangeIP, the report notes.
Source: Interisle Consulting.
Interisle Consulting partner Dave Piscitello said ICANN could easily send similar warning letters to at least a half-dozen other top-level domain registries, noting that spammers and phishers tend to cycle through the same TLDs periodically — including .xyz, .info, .support and .lol, all of which saw considerably more business from phishers after Freenom’s implosion.
Piscitello said domain registrars and registries could significantly reduce the number of phishing sites registered through their services just by flagging customers who try to register huge volumes of domains at once. Their study found that at least 27% of the domains used for phishing were registered in bulk — i.e. the same registrant paid for hundreds or thousands of domains in quick succession.
The report includes a case study in which a phisher this year registered 17,562 domains over the course of an eight-hour period — roughly 38 domains per minute — using .lol domains that were all composed of random letters.
ICANN tries to resolve contract disputes privately with the registry and registrar community, and experts say the nonprofit organization usually only publishes enforcement letters when the recipient is ignoring its private notices. Indeed, ICANN’s letter notes Jiangsu Bangning didn’t even open its emailed notifications. It also cited the registry for falling behind in its ICANN membership fees.
With that in mind, a review of ICANN’s public enforcement activity suggests two trends: One is that there have been far fewer public compliance and enforcement actions in recent years — even as the number of new TLDs has expanded dramatically.
The second is that in a majority of cases, the failure of a registry or registrar to pay its annual ICANN membership fees was cited as a reason for a warning letter. A review of nearly two dozen enforcement letters ICANN has sent to domain registrars since 2022 shows that failure to pay dues was cited as a reason (or the reason) for the violation at least 75 percent of the time.
Piscitello, a former vice president of security at ICANN, said nearly all breach notices sent out while he was at ICANN were because the registrar owed money.
“I think the rest is just lipstick to suggest that ICANN’s on top of DNS Abuse,” Piscitello said.
KrebsOnSecurity has sought comment from ICANN and will update this story if they respond.
ICANN said most of its investigations are resolved and closed through the initial informal resolution stage, and that hundreds of enforcement cases are initiated during this stage with the contracted parties who are required to demonstrate compliance, become compliant, and/or present and implement remediation plans to prevent the recurrence of those enforcement issues.
“It is important to take into account that, prior to issuing any notice of breach to a registrar or registry operator, ICANN Compliance conducts an overall contractual compliance ‘health check’ of the relevant contracted party,” ICANN said in a written response to questions. “During this check, ICANN Compliance proactively reviews the contracted party’s compliance with obligations across the agreements and policies. Any additional contractual violation found during these checks is added to the Notice of Breach. It is not uncommon for parties who failed to comply with contractual obligations (whether they are related to DNS Abuse, RDDS, or others) to also be in arrears with ICANN fees.”
Update, 11:49 p.m. ET: Added statement from ICANN. Clarified Piscitello’s former role at ICANN.
The password manager service LastPass is now forcing some of its users to pick longer master passwords. LastPass says the changes are needed to ensure all customers are protected by their latest security improvements. But critics say the move is little more than a public relations stunt that will do nothing to help countless early adopters whose password vaults were exposed in a 2022 breach at LastPass.
LastPass sent this notification to users earlier this week.
LastPass told customers this week they would be forced to update their master password if it was less than 12 characters. LastPass officially instituted this change back in 2018, but some undisclosed number of the company’s earlier customers were never required to increase the length of their master passwords.
This is significant because in November 2022, LastPass disclosed a breach in which hackers stole password vaults containing both encrypted and plaintext data for more than 25 million users.
Since then, a steady trickle of six-figure cryptocurrency heists targeting security-conscious people throughout the tech industry has led some security experts to conclude that crooks likely have succeeded at cracking open some of the stolen LastPass vaults.
KrebsOnSecurity last month interviewed a victim who recently saw more than three million dollars worth of cryptocurrency siphoned from his account. That user signed up with LastPass nearly a decade ago, stored their cryptocurrency seed phrase there, and yet never changed his master password — which was just eight characters. Nor was he ever forced to improve his master password.
That story cited research from Adblock Plus creator Wladimir Palant, who said LastPass failed to upgrade many older, original customers to more secure encryption protections that were offered to newer customers over the years.
For example, another important default setting in LastPass is the number of “iterations,” or how many times your master password is run through the company’s encryption routines. The more iterations, the longer it takes an offline attacker to crack your master password.
Palant said that for many older LastPass users, the initial default setting for iterations was anywhere from “1” to “500.” By 2013, new LastPass customers were given 5,000 iterations by default. In February 2018, LastPass changed the default to 100,100 iterations. And very recently, it upped that again to 600,000. Still, Palant and others impacted by the 2022 breach at LastPass say their account security settings were never forcibly upgraded.
Palant called this latest action by LastPass a PR stunt.
“They sent this message to everyone, whether they have a weak master password or not – this way they can again blame the users for not respecting their policies,” Palant said. “But I just logged in with my weak password, and I am not forced to change it. Sending emails is cheap, but they once again didn’t implement any technical measures to enforce this policy change.”
Either way, Palant said, the changes won’t help people affected by the 2022 breach.
“These people need to change all their passwords, something that LastPass still won’t recommend,” Palant said. “But it will somewhat help with the breaches to come.”
LastPass CEO Karim Toubba said changing master password length (or even the master password itself) is not designed to address already stolen vaults that are offline.
“This is meant to better protect customers’ online vaults and encourage them to bring their accounts up to the 2018 LastPass standard default setting of a 12-character minimum (but could opt out from),” Toubba said in an emailed statement. “We know that some customers may have chosen convenience over security and utilized less complex master passwords despite encouragement to use our (or others) password generator to do otherwise.”
A basic functionality of LastPass is that it will pick and remember lengthy, complex passwords for each of your websites or online services. To automatically populate the appropriate credentials at any website going forward, you simply authenticate to LastPass using your master password.
LastPass has always emphasized that if you lose this master password, that’s too bad because they don’t store it and their encryption is so strong that even they can’t help you recover it.
But experts say all bets are off when cybercrooks can get their hands on the encrypted vault data itself — as opposed to having to interact with LastPass via its website. These so-called “offline” attacks allow the bad guys to conduct unlimited and unfettered “brute force” password cracking attempts against the encrypted data using powerful computers that can each try millions of password guesses per second.
A chart on Palant’s blog post offers an idea of how increasing password iterations dramatically increases the costs and time needed by the attackers to crack someone’s master password. Palant said it would take a single high-powered graphics card about a year to crack a password of average complexity with 500 iterations, and about 10 years to crack the same password run through 5,000 iterations.
Image: palant.info
However, these numbers radically come down when a determined adversary also has other large-scale computational assets at their disposal, such as a bitcoin mining operation that can coordinate the password-cracking activity across multiple powerful systems simultaneously.
Meaning, LastPass users whose vaults were never upgraded to higher iterations and whose master passwords were weak (less than 12 characters) likely have been a primary target of distributed password-cracking attacks ever since the LastPass user vaults were stolen late last year.
Asked why some LastPass users were left behind on older security minimums, Toubba said a “small percentage” of customers had corrupted items in their password vaults that prevented those accounts from properly upgrading to the new requirements and settings.
“We have been able to determine that a small percentage of customers have items in their vaults that are corrupt and when we previously utilized automated scripts designed to re-encrypt vaults when the master password or iteration count is changed, they did not complete,” Toubba said. “These errors were not originally apparent as part of these efforts and, as we have discovered them, we have been working to be able to remedy this and finish the re-encryption.”
Nicholas Weaver, a researcher at University of California, Berkeley’s International Computer Science Institute (ICSI) and lecturer at UC Davis, said LastPass made a huge mistake years ago by not force-upgrading the iteration count for existing users.
“And now this is blaming the users — ‘you should have used a longer passphrase’ — not them for having weak defaults that were never upgraded for existing users,” Weaver said. “LastPass in my book is one step above snake-oil. I used to be, ‘Pick whichever password manager you want,’ but now I am very much, ‘Pick any password manager but LastPass.'”
Asked why LastPass isn’t recommending that users change all of the passwords secured by the encrypted master password that was stolen when the company got hacked last year, Toubba said it’s because “the data demonstrates that the majority of our customers follow our recommendations (or greater), and the probability of successfully brute forcing vault encryption is greatly reduced accordingly.”
“We’ve been telling customers since December of 2022 that they should be following recommended guidelines,” Toubba continued. “And if they haven’t followed the guidelines we recommended that they change their downstream passwords.”
FreshRSS