xAI Dev Leaks API Key for Private SpaceX, Tesla LLMs

An employee at Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI leaked a private key on GitHub that for the past two months could have allowed anyone to query private xAI large language models (LLMs) which appear to have been custom made for working with internal data from Musk’s companies, including SpaceX, Tesla and Twitter/X, KrebsOnSecurity has learned.

Philippe Caturegli, “chief hacking officer” at the security consultancy Seralys, was the first to publicize the leak of credentials for an x.ai application programming interface (API) exposed in the GitHub code repository of a technical staff member at xAI.

Caturegli’s post on LinkedIn caught the attention of researchers at GitGuardian, a company that specializes in detecting and remediating exposed secrets in public and proprietary environments. GitGuardian’s systems constantly scan GitHub and other code repositories for exposed API keys, and fire off automated alerts to affected users.

GitGuardian’s Eric Fourrier told KrebsOnSecurity the exposed API key had access to several unreleased models of Grok, the AI chatbot developed by xAI. In total, GitGuardian found the key had access to at least 60 fine-tuned and private LLMs.

“The credentials can be used to access the X.ai API with the identity of the user,” GitGuardian wrote in an email explaining their findings to xAI. “The associated account not only has access to public Grok models (grok-2-1212, etc) but also to what appears to be unreleased (grok-2.5V), development (research-grok-2p5v-1018), and private models (tweet-rejector, grok-spacex-2024-11-04).”

Fourrier found GitGuardian had alerted the xAI employee about the exposed API key nearly two months ago — on March 2. But as of April 30, when GitGuardian directly alerted xAI’s security team to the exposure, the key was still valid and usable. xAI told GitGuardian to report the matter through its bug bounty program at HackerOne, but just a few hours later the repository containing the API key was removed from GitHub.

“It looks like some of these internal LLMs were fine-tuned on SpaceX data, and some were fine-tuned with Tesla data,” Fourrier said. “I definitely don’t think a Grok model that’s fine-tuned on SpaceX data is intended to be exposed publicly.”

xAI did not respond to a request for comment. Nor did the 28-year-old xAI technical staff member whose key was exposed.

Carole Winqwist, chief marketing officer at GitGuardian, said giving potentially hostile users free access to private LLMs is a recipe for disaster.

“If you’re an attacker and you have direct access to the model and the back end interface for things like Grok, it’s definitely something you can use for further attacking,” she said. “An attacker could it use for prompt injection, to tweak the (LLM) model to serve their purposes, or try to implant code into the supply chain.”

The inadvertent exposure of internal LLMs for xAI comes as Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been feeding sensitive government records into artificial intelligence tools. In February, The Washington Post reported DOGE officials were feeding data from across the Education Department into AI tools to probe the agency’s programs and spending.

The Post said DOGE plans to replicate this process across many departments and agencies, accessing the back-end software at different parts of the government and then using AI technology to extract and sift through information about spending on employees and programs.

“Feeding sensitive data into AI software puts it into the possession of a system’s operator, increasing the chances it will be leaked or swept up in cyberattacks,” Post reporters wrote.

Wired reported in March that DOGE has deployed a proprietary chatbot called GSAi to 1,500 federal workers at the General Services Administration, part of an effort to automate tasks previously done by humans as DOGE continues its purge of the federal workforce.

A Reuters report last month said Trump administration officials told some U.S. government employees that DOGE is using AI to surveil at least one federal agency’s communications for hostility to President Trump and his agenda. Reuters wrote that the DOGE team has heavily deployed Musk’s Grok AI chatbot as part of their work slashing the federal government, although Reuters said it could not establish exactly how Grok was being used.

Caturegli said while there is no indication that federal government or user data could be accessed through the exposed x.ai API key, these private models are likely trained on proprietary data and may unintentionally expose details related to internal development efforts at xAI, Twitter, or SpaceX.

“The fact that this key was publicly exposed for two months and granted access to internal models is concerning,” Caturegli said. “This kind of long-lived credential exposure highlights weak key management and insufficient internal monitoring, raising questions about safeguards around developer access and broader operational security.”

North Korea Stole Your Job

For years, North Korea has been secretly placing young IT workers inside Western companies. With AI, their schemes are now more devious—and effective—than ever.

DOGE Worker’s Code Supports NLRB Whistleblower

A whistleblower at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleged last week that denizens of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) siphoned gigabytes of data from the agency’s sensitive case files in early March. The whistleblower said accounts created for DOGE at the NLRB downloaded three code repositories from GitHub. Further investigation into one of those code bundles shows it is remarkably similar to a program published in January 2025 by Marko Elez, a 25-year-old DOGE employee who has worked at a number of Musk’s companies.

According to a whistleblower complaint filed last week by Daniel J. Berulis, a 38-year-old security architect at the NLRB, officials from DOGE met with NLRB leaders on March 3 and demanded the creation of several all-powerful “tenant admin” accounts that were to be exempted from network logging activity that would otherwise keep a detailed record of all actions taken by those accounts.

Berulis said the new DOGE accounts had unrestricted permission to read, copy, and alter information contained in NLRB databases. The new accounts also could restrict log visibility, delay retention, route logs elsewhere, or even remove them entirely — top-tier user privileges that neither Berulis nor his boss possessed.

Berulis said he discovered one of the DOGE accounts had downloaded three external code libraries from GitHub that neither NLRB nor its contractors ever used. A “readme” file in one of the code bundles explained it was created to rotate connections through a large pool of cloud Internet addresses that serve “as a proxy to generate pseudo-infinite IPs for web scraping and brute forcing.” Brute force attacks involve automated login attempts that try many credential combinations in rapid sequence.

A search on that description in Google brings up a code repository at GitHub for a user with the account name “Ge0rg3” who published a program roughly four years ago called “requests-ip-rotator,” described as a library that will allow the user “to bypass IP-based rate-limits for sites and services.”

“A Python library to utilize AWS API Gateway’s large IP pool as a proxy to generate pseudo-infinite IPs for web scraping and brute forcing,” the description reads.

Ge0rg3’s code is “open source,” in that anyone can copy it and reuse it non-commercially. As it happens, there is a newer version of this project that was derived or “forked” from Ge0rg3’s code — called “async-ip-rotator” — and it was committed to GitHub in January 2025 by DOGE captain Marko Elez.

A key DOGE staff member who gained access to the Treasury Department’s central payments system, Elez has worked for a number of Musk companies, including X, SpaceX, and xAI. Elez was among the first DOGE employees to face public scrutiny, after The Wall Street Journal linked him to social media posts that advocated racism and eugenics.

Elez resigned after that brief scandal, but was rehired after President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance expressed support for him. Politico reports Elez is now a Labor Department aide detailed to multiple agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services.

“During Elez’s initial stint at Treasury, he violated the agency’s information security policies by sending a spreadsheet containing names and payments information to officials at the General Services Administration,” Politico wrote, citing court filings.

KrebsOnSecurity sought comment from both the NLRB and DOGE, and will update this story if either responds.

The NLRB has been effectively hobbled since President Trump fired three board members, leaving the agency without the quorum it needs to function. Both Amazon and Musk’s SpaceX have been suing the NLRB over complaints the agency filed in disputes about workers’ rights and union organizing, arguing that the NLRB’s very existence is unconstitutional. On March 5, a U.S. appeals court unanimously rejected Musk’s claim that the NLRB’s structure somehow violates the Constitution.

Berulis’s complaint alleges the DOGE accounts at NLRB downloaded more than 10 gigabytes of data from the agency’s case files, a database that includes reams of sensitive records including information about employees who want to form unions and proprietary business documents. Berulis said he went public after higher-ups at the agency told him not to report the matter to the US-CERT, as they’d previously agreed.

Berulis told KrebsOnSecurity he worried the unauthorized data transfer by DOGE could unfairly advantage defendants in a number of ongoing labor disputes before the agency.

“If any company got the case data that would be an unfair advantage,” Berulis said. “They could identify and fire employees and union organizers without saying why.”

Berulis said the other two GitHub archives that DOGE employees downloaded to NLRB systems included Integuru, a software framework designed to reverse engineer application programming interfaces (APIs) that websites use to fetch data; and a “headless” browser called Browserless, which is made for automating web-based tasks that require a pool of browsers, such as web scraping and automated testing.

On February 6, someone posted a lengthy and detailed critique of Elez’s code on the GitHub “issues” page for async-ip-rotator, calling it “insecure, unscalable and a fundamental engineering failure.”

“If this were a side project, it would just be bad code,” the reviewer wrote. “But if this is representative of how you build production systems, then there are much larger concerns. This implementation is fundamentally broken, and if anything similar to this is deployed in an environment handling sensitive data, it should be audited immediately.”

Further reading: Berulis’s complaint (PDF).

Update 7:06 p.m. ET: Elez’s code repo was deleted after this story was published. An archived version of it is here.

Whistleblower: DOGE Siphoned NLRB Case Data

A security architect with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleges that employees from Elon Musk‘s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) transferred gigabytes of sensitive data from agency case files in early March, using short-lived accounts configured to leave few traces of network activity. The NLRB whistleblower said the unusual large data outflows coincided with multiple blocked login attempts from an Internet address in Russia that tried to use valid credentials for a newly-created DOGE user account.

The allegations came in an April 14 letter to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, signed by Daniel J. Berulis, a 38-year-old security architect at the NLRB.

NPR, which was the first to report on Berulis’s whistleblower complaint, says NLRB is a small, independent federal agency that investigates and adjudicates complaints about unfair labor practices, and stores “reams of potentially sensitive data, from confidential information about employees who want to form unions to proprietary business information.”

The complaint documents a one-month period beginning March 3, during which DOGE officials reportedly demanded the creation of all-powerful “tenant admin” accounts in NLRB systems that were to be exempted from network logging activity that would otherwise keep a detailed record of all actions taken by those accounts.

Berulis said the new DOGE accounts had unrestricted permission to read, copy, and alter information contained in NLRB databases. The new accounts also could restrict log visibility, delay retention, route logs elsewhere, or even remove them entirely — top-tier user privileges that neither Berulis nor his boss possessed.

Berulis writes that on March 3, a black SUV accompanied by a police escort arrived at his building — the NLRB headquarters in Southeast Washington, D.C. The DOGE staffers did not speak with Berulis or anyone else in NLRB’s IT staff, but instead met with the agency leadership.

“Our acting chief information officer told us not to adhere to standard operating procedure with the DOGE account creation, and there was to be no logs or records made of the accounts created for DOGE employees, who required the highest level of access,” Berulis wrote of their instructions after that meeting.

“We have built in roles that auditors can use and have used extensively in the past but would not give the ability to make changes or access subsystems without approval,” he continued. “The suggestion that they use these accounts was not open to discussion.”

Berulis found that on March 3 one of the DOGE accounts created an opaque, virtual environment known as a “container,” which can be used to build and run programs or scripts without revealing its activities to the rest of the world. Berulis said the container caught his attention because he polled his colleagues and found none of them had ever used containers within the NLRB network.

Berulis said he also noticed that early the next morning — between approximately 3 a.m. and 4 a.m. EST on Tuesday, March 4  — there was a large increase in outgoing traffic from the agency. He said it took several days of investigating with his colleagues to determine that one of the new accounts had transferred approximately 10 gigabytes worth of data from the NLRB’s NxGen case management system.

Berulis said neither he nor his co-workers had the necessary network access rights to review which files were touched or transferred — or even where they went. But his complaint notes the NxGen database contains sensitive information on unions, ongoing legal cases, and corporate secrets.

“I also don’t know if the data was only 10gb in total or whether or not they were consolidated and compressed prior,” Berulis told the senators. “This opens up the possibility that even more data was exfiltrated. Regardless, that kind of spike is extremely unusual because data almost never directly leaves NLRB’s databases.”

Berulis said he and his colleagues grew even more alarmed when they noticed nearly two dozen login attempts from a Russian Internet address (83.149.30,186) that presented valid login credentials for a DOGE employee account — one that had been created just minutes earlier. Berulis said those attempts were all blocked thanks to rules in place that prohibit logins from non-U.S. locations.

“Whoever was attempting to log in was using one of the newly created accounts that were used in the other DOGE related activities and it appeared they had the correct username and password due to the authentication flow only stopping them due to our no-out-of-country logins policy activating,” Berulis wrote. “There were more than 20 such attempts, and what is particularly concerning is that many of these login attempts occurred within 15 minutes of the accounts being created by DOGE engineers.”

According to Berulis, the naming structure of one Microsoft user account connected to the suspicious activity suggested it had been created and later deleted for DOGE use in the NLRB’s cloud systems: “DogeSA_2d5c3e0446f9@nlrb.microsoft.com.” He also found other new Microsoft cloud administrator accounts with nonstandard usernames, including “Whitesox, Chicago M.” and “Dancehall, Jamaica R.”

On March 5, Berulis documented that a large section of logs for recently created network resources were missing, and a network watcher in Microsoft Azure was set to the “off” state, meaning it was no longer collecting and recording data like it should have.

Berulis said he discovered someone had downloaded three external code libraries from GitHub that neither NLRB nor its contractors ever use. A “readme” file in one of the code bundles explained it was created to rotate connections through a large pool of cloud Internet addresses that serve “as a proxy to generate pseudo-infinite IPs for web scraping and brute forcing.” Brute force attacks involve automated login attempts that try many credential combinations in rapid sequence.

The complaint alleges that by March 17 it became clear the NLRB no longer had the resources or network access needed to fully investigate the odd activity from the DOGE accounts, and that on March 24, the agency’s associate chief information officer had agreed the matter should be reported to US-CERT. Operated by the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), US-CERT provides on-site cyber incident response capabilities to federal and state agencies.

But Berulis said that between April 3 and 4, he and the associate CIO were informed that “instructions had come down to drop the US-CERT reporting and investigation and we were directed not to move forward or create an official report.” Berulis said it was at this point he decided to go public with his findings.

Tim Bearese, the NLRB’s acting press secretary, told NPR that DOGE neither requested nor received access to its systems, and that “the agency conducted an investigation after Berulis raised his concerns but ‘determined that no breach of agency systems occurred.'” The NLRB did not respond to questions from KrebsOnSecurity.

Nevertheless, Berulis has shared a number of supporting screenshots showing agency email discussions about the unexplained account activity attributed to the DOGE accounts, as well as NLRB security alerts from Microsoft about network anomalies observed during the timeframes described.

As CNN reported last month, the NLRB has been effectively hobbled since President Trump fired three board members, leaving the agency without the quorum it needs to function.

“Despite its limitations, the agency had become a thorn in the side of some of the richest and most powerful people in the nation — notably Elon Musk, Trump’s key supporter both financially and arguably politically,” CNN wrote.

Both Amazon and Musk’s SpaceX have been suing the NLRB over complaints the agency filed in disputes about workers’ rights and union organizing, arguing that the NLRB’s very existence is unconstitutional. On March 5, a U.S. appeals court unanimously rejected Musk’s claim that the NLRB’s structure somehow violates the Constitution.

Berulis shared screenshots with KrebsOnSecurity showing that on the day the NPR published its story about his claims (April 14), the deputy CIO at NLRB sent an email stating that administrative control had been removed from all employee accounts. Meaning, suddenly none of the IT employees at the agency could do their jobs properly anymore, Berulis said.

Berulis shared a screenshot of an agency-wide email dated April 16 from NLRB director Lasharn Hamilton saying DOGE officials had requested a meeting, and reiterating claims that the agency had no prior “official” contact with any DOGE personnel. The message informed NLRB employees that two DOGE representatives would be detailed to the agency part-time for several months.

Berulis told KrebsOnSecurity he was in the process of filing a support ticket with Microsoft to request more information about the DOGE accounts when his network administrator access was restricted. Now, he’s hoping lawmakers will ask Microsoft to provide more information about what really happened with the accounts.

“That would give us way more insight,” he said. “Microsoft has to be able to see the picture better than we can. That’s my goal, anyway.”

Berulis’s attorney told lawmakers that on April 7, while his client and legal team were preparing the whistleblower complaint, someone physically taped a threatening note to Mr. Berulis’s home door with photographs — taken via drone — of him walking in his neighborhood.

“The threatening note made clear reference to this very disclosure he was preparing for you, as the proper oversight authority,” reads a preface by Berulis’s attorney Andrew P. Bakaj. “While we do not know specifically who did this, we can only speculate that it involved someone with the ability to access NLRB systems.”

Berulis said the response from friends, colleagues and even the public has been largely supportive, and that he doesn’t regret his decision to come forward.

“I didn’t expect the letter on my door or the pushback from [agency] leaders,” he said. “If I had to do it over, would I do it again? Yes, because it wasn’t really even a choice the first time.”

For now, Mr. Berulis is taking some paid family leave from the NLRB. Which is just as well, he said, considering he was stripped of the tools needed to do his job at the agency.

“They came in and took full administrative control and locked everyone out, and said limited permission will be assigned on a need basis going forward” Berulis said of the DOGE employees. “We can’t really do anything, so we’re literally getting paid to count ceiling tiles.”

Further reading: Berulis’s complaint (PDF).

Funding Expires for Key Cyber Vulnerability Database

A critical resource that cybersecurity professionals worldwide rely on to identify, mitigate and fix security vulnerabilities in software and hardware is in danger of breaking down. The federally funded, non-profit research and development organization MITRE warned today that its contract to maintain the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) program — which is traditionally funded each year by the Department of Homeland Security — expires on April 16.

Tens of thousands of security flaws in software are found and reported every year, and these vulnerabilities are eventually assigned their own unique CVE tracking number (e.g. CVE-2024-43573, which is a Microsoft Windows bug that Redmond patched last year).

There are hundreds of organizations — known as CVE Numbering Authorities (CNAs) — that are authorized by MITRE to bestow these CVE numbers on newly reported flaws. Many of these CNAs are country and government-specific, or tied to individual software vendors or vulnerability disclosure platforms (a.k.a. bug bounty programs).

Put simply, MITRE is a critical, widely-used resource for centralizing and standardizing information on software vulnerabilities. That means the pipeline of information it supplies is plugged into an array of cybersecurity tools and services that help organizations identify and patch security holes — ideally before malware or malcontents can wriggle through them.

“What the CVE lists really provide is a standardized way to describe the severity of that defect, and a centralized repository listing which versions of which products are defective and need to be updated,” said Matt Tait, chief operating officer of Corellium, a cybersecurity firm that sells phone-virtualization software for finding security flaws.

In a letter sent today to the CVE board, MITRE Vice President Yosry Barsoum warned that on April 16, 2025, “the current contracting pathway for MITRE to develop, operate and modernize CVE and several other related programs will expire.”

“If a break in service were to occur, we anticipate multiple impacts to CVE, including deterioration of national vulnerability databases and advisories, tool vendors, incident response operations, and all manner of critical infrastructure,” Barsoum wrote.

MITRE told KrebsOnSecurity the CVE website listing vulnerabilities will remain up after the funding expires, but that new CVEs won’t be added after April 16.

DHS officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The program is funded through DHS’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which is currently facing deep budget and staffing cuts by the Trump administration. The CVE contract available at USAspending.gov says the project was awarded approximately $40 million last year.

Former CISA Director Jen Easterly said the CVE program is a bit like the Dewey Decimal System, but for cybersecurity.

“It’s the global catalog that helps everyone—security teams, software vendors, researchers, governments—organize and talk about vulnerabilities using the same reference system,” Easterly said in a post on LinkedIn. “Without it, everyone is using a different catalog or no catalog at all, no one knows if they’re talking about the same problem, defenders waste precious time figuring out what’s wrong, and worst of all, threat actors take advantage of the confusion.”

John Hammond, principal security researcher at the managed security firm Huntress, told Reuters he swore out loud when he heard the news that CVE’s funding was in jeopardy, and that losing the CVE program would be like losing “the language and lingo we used to address problems in cybersecurity.”

“I really can’t help but think this is just going to hurt,” said Hammond, who posted a Youtube video to vent about the situation and alert others.

Several people close to the matter told KrebsOnSecurity this is not the first time the CVE program’s budget has been left in funding limbo until the last minute. Barsoum’s letter, which was apparently leaked, sounded a hopeful note, saying the government is making “considerable efforts to continue MITRE’s role in support of the program.”

Tait said that without the CVE program, risk managers inside companies would need to continuously monitor many other places for information about new vulnerabilities that may jeopardize the security of their IT networks. Meaning, it may become more common that software updates get mis-prioritized, with companies having hackable software deployed for longer than they otherwise would, he said.

“Hopefully they will resolve this, but otherwise the list will rapidly fall out of date and stop being useful,” he said.

Update, April 16, 11:00 a.m. ET: The CVE board today announced the creation of non-profit entity called The CVE Foundation that will continue the program’s work under a new, unspecified funding mechanism and organizational structure.

“Since its inception, the CVE Program has operated as a U.S. government-funded initiative, with oversight and management provided under contract,” the press release reads. “While this structure has supported the program’s growth, it has also raised longstanding concerns among members of the CVE Board about the sustainability and neutrality of a globally relied-upon resource being tied to a single government sponsor.”

The organization’s website, thecvefoundation.org, is less than a day old and currently hosts no content other than the press release heralding its creation. The announcement said the foundation would release more information about its structure and transition planning in the coming days.

Update, April 16, 4:26 p.m. ET: MITRE issued a statement today saying it “identified incremental funding to keep the programs operational. We appreciate the overwhelming support for these programs that have been expressed by the global cyber community, industry and government over the last 24 hours. The government continues to make considerable efforts to support MITRE’s role in the program and MITRE remains committed to CVE and CWE as global resources.”

Trump Revenge Tour Targets Cyber Leaders, Elections

President Trump last week revoked security clearances for Chris Krebs, the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) who was fired by Trump after declaring the 2020 election the most secure in U.S. history. The White House memo, which also suspended clearances for other security professionals at Krebs’s employer SentinelOne, comes as CISA is facing huge funding and staffing cuts.

The extraordinary April 9 memo directs the attorney general to investigate Chris Krebs (no relation), calling him “a significant bad-faith actor who weaponized and abused his government authority.”

The memo said the inquiry will include “a comprehensive evaluation of all of CISA’s activities over the last 6 years and will identify any instances where Krebs’ or CISA’s conduct appears to be contrary to the administration’s commitment to free speech and ending federal censorship, including whether Krebs’ conduct was contrary to suitability standards for federal employees or involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information.”

CISA was created in 2018 during Trump’s first term, with Krebs installed as its first director. In 2020, CISA launched Rumor Control, a website that sought to rebut disinformation swirling around the 2020 election.

That effort ran directly counter to Trump’s claims that he lost the election because it was somehow hacked and stolen. The Trump campaign and its supporters filed at least 62 lawsuits contesting the election, vote counting, and vote certification in nine states, and nearly all of those cases were dismissed or dropped for lack of evidence or standing.

When the Justice Department began prosecuting people who violently attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Trump and Republican leaders shifted the narrative, claiming that Trump lost the election because the previous administration had censored conservative voices on social media.

Incredibly, the president’s memo seeking to ostracize Krebs stands reality on its head, accusing Krebs of promoting the censorship of election information, “including known risks associated with certain voting practices.” Trump also alleged that Krebs “falsely and baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, including by inappropriately and categorically dismissing widespread election malfeasance and serious vulnerabilities with voting machines” [emphasis added].

Krebs did not respond to a request for comment. SentinelOne issued a statement saying it would cooperate in any review of security clearances held by its personnel, which is currently fewer than 10 employees.

Krebs’s former agency is now facing steep budget and staff reductions. The Record reports that CISA is looking to remove some 1,300 people by cutting about half its full-time staff and another 40% of its contractors.

“The agency’s National Risk Management Center, which serves as a hub analyzing risks to cyber and critical infrastructure, is expected to see significant cuts, said two sources familiar with the plans,” The Record’s Suzanne Smalley wrote. “Some of the office’s systematic risk responsibilities will potentially be moved to the agency’s Cybersecurity Division, according to one of the sources.”

CNN reports the Trump administration is also advancing plans to strip civil service protections from 80% of the remaining CISA employees, potentially allowing them to be fired for political reasons.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged professionals in the cybersecurity community to defend Krebs and SentinelOne, noting that other security companies and professionals could be the next victims of Trump’s efforts to politicize cybersecurity.

“The White House must not be given free reign to turn cybersecurity professionals into political scapegoats,” the EFF wrote. “It is critical that the cybersecurity community now join together to denounce this chilling attack on free speech and rally behind Krebs and SentinelOne rather than cowering because they fear they will be next.”

However, Reuters said it found little sign of industry support for Krebs or SentinelOne, and that many security professionals are concerned about potentially being targeted if they speak out.

“Reuters contacted 33 of the largest U.S. cybersecurity companies, including tech companies and professional services firms with large cybersecurity practices, and three industry groups, for comment on Trump’s action against SentinelOne,” wrote Raphael Satter and A.J. Vicens. “Only one offered comment on Trump’s action. The rest declined, did not respond or did not answer questions.”

CYBERCOM-PLICATIONS

On April 3, President Trump fired Gen. Timothy Haugh, the head of the National Security Agency (NSA) and the U.S. Cyber Command, as well as Haugh’s deputy, Wendy Noble. The president did so immediately after meeting in the Oval Office with far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer, who reportedly urged their dismissal. Speaking to reporters on Air Force One after news of the firings broke, Trump questioned Haugh’s loyalty.

Virginia Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, called it inexplicable that the administration would remove the senior leaders of NSA-CYBERCOM without cause or warning, and risk disrupting critical ongoing intelligence operations.

“It is astonishing, too, that President Trump would fire the nonpartisan, experienced leader of the National Security Agency while still failing to hold any member of his team accountable for leaking classified information on a commercial messaging app – even as he apparently takes staffing direction on national security from a discredited conspiracy theorist in the Oval Office,” Warner said in a statement.

On Feb. 28, The Record’s Martin Matishak cited three sources saying Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered U.S. Cyber Command to stand down from all planning against Russia, including offensive digital actions. The following day, The Guardian reported that analysts at CISA were verbally informed that they were not to follow or report on Russian threats, even though this had previously been a main focus for the agency.

A follow-up story from The Washington Post cited officials saying Cyber Command had received an order to halt active operations against Russia, but that the pause was intended to last only as long as negotiations with Russia continue.

The Department of Defense responded on Twitter/X that Hegseth had “neither canceled nor delayed any cyber operations directed against malicious Russian targets and there has been no stand-down order whatsoever from that priority.”

But on March 19, Reuters reported several U.S. national security agencies have halted work on a coordinated effort to counter Russian sabotage, disinformation and cyberattacks.

“Regular meetings between the National Security Council and European national security officials have gone unscheduled, and the NSC has also stopped formally coordinating efforts across U.S. agencies, including with the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department,” Reuters reported, citing current and former officials.

TARIFFS VS TYPHOONS

President’s Trump’s institution of 125% tariffs on goods from China has seen Beijing strike back with 84 percent tariffs on U.S. imports. Now, some security experts are warning that the trade war could spill over into a cyber conflict, given China’s successful efforts to burrow into America’s critical infrastructure networks.

Over the past year, a number of Chinese government-backed digital intrusions have come into focus, including a sprawling espionage campaign involving the compromise of at least nine U.S. telecommunications providers. Dubbed “Salt Typhoon” by Microsoft, these telecom intrusions were pervasive enough that CISA and the FBI in December 2024 warned Americans against communicating sensitive information over phone networks, urging people instead to use encrypted messaging apps (like Signal).

The other broad ranging China-backed campaign is known as “Volt Typhoon,” which CISA described as “state-sponsored cyber actors seeking to pre-position themselves on IT networks for disruptive or destructive cyberattacks against U.S. critical infrastructure in the event of a major crisis or conflict with the United States.”

Responsibility for determining the root causes of the Salt Typhoon security debacle fell to the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB), a nonpartisan government entity established in February 2022 with a mandate to investigate the security failures behind major cybersecurity events. But on his first full day back in the White House, President Trump dismissed all 15 CSRB advisory committee members — likely because those advisers included Chris Krebs.

Last week, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) placed a hold on Trump’s nominee to lead CISA, saying the hold would continue unless the agency published a report on the telecom industry hacks, as promised.

Torward - An Improved Version Based On The Torghost-Gn And Darktor Scripts, Designed To Enhance Anonymity On The Internet

Torward is an improved version based on the torghost-gn and darktor scripts, designed to enhance anonymity on the Internet. The tool prevents data leaks and forces all traffic from our computer to be routed exclusively through the Tor network, providing a high level of privacy in our connections.

Installation

   git clone https://github.com/chundefined/Torward.git

   cd Torward

   chmod +x install.sh

   ./install.sh

Security Enhancements

This version includes several key security improvements to protect your identity and ensure better network configuration:

1. IPv6 Leak Prevention
   IPv6 is now disabled to prevent any potential IP leaks. All traffic is forced through the Tor network by modifying system IPv6 settings in network_config.py.

2. Enhanced iptables Rules
   Strict iptables rules are implemented to ensure only Tor traffic is allowed. Non-Tor traffic is blocked, DNS queries are routed through Tor, and only essential connections to Tor ports are permitted. Additionally, IPv6 traffic is blocked to prevent leaks.

3. Tor Configuration Adjustments
   The torward file has been updated to enforce that all traffic, including DNS queries, is routed through Tor, improving anonymity.

TODO

• Get the IP from the last Tor exit node: Currently, the script does not display the IP of the last Tor exit node in the console. This can be achieved by using Tor's API to get the public IP of the exit node.
• Better error handling: Ensure that the tool properly handles errors, such as Tor disconnection or network issues.

China-based SMS Phishing Triad Pivots to Banks

China-based purveyors of SMS phishing kits are enjoying remarkable success converting phished payment card data into mobile wallets from Apple and Google. Until recently, the so-called “Smishing Triad” mainly impersonated toll road operators and shipping companies. But experts say these groups are now directly targeting customers of international financial institutions, while dramatically expanding their cybercrime infrastructure and support staff.

If you own a mobile device, the chances are excellent that at some point in the past two years you’ve received at least one instant message that warns of a delinquent toll road fee, or a wayward package from the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). Those who click the promoted link are brought to a website that spoofs the USPS or a local toll road operator and asks for payment card information.

The site will then complain that the visitor’s bank needs to “verify” the transaction by sending a one-time code via SMS. In reality, the bank is sending that code to the mobile number on file for their customer because the fraudsters have just attempted to enroll that victim’s card details into a mobile wallet.

If the visitor supplies that one-time code, their payment card is then added to a new mobile wallet on an Apple or Google device that is physically controlled by the phishers. The phishing gangs typically load multiple stolen cards to digital wallets on a single Apple or Android device, and then sell those phones in bulk to scammers who use them for fraudulent e-commerce and tap-to-pay transactions.

The moniker “Smishing Triad” comes from Resecurity, which was among the first to report in August 2023 on the emergence of three distinct mobile phishing groups based in China that appeared to share some infrastructure and innovative phishing techniques. But it is a bit of a misnomer because the phishing lures blasted out by these groups are not SMS or text messages in the conventional sense.

Rather, they are sent via iMessage to Apple device users, and via RCS on Google Android devices. Thus, the missives bypass the mobile phone networks entirely and enjoy near 100 percent delivery rate (at least until Apple and Google suspend the spammy accounts).

In a report published on March 24, the Swiss threat intelligence firm Prodaft detailed the rapid pace of innovation coming from the Smishing Triad, which it characterizes as a loosely federated group of Chinese phishing-as-a-service operators with names like Darcula, Lighthouse, and the Xinxin Group.

Prodaft said they’re seeing a significant shift in the underground economy, particularly among Chinese-speaking threat actors who have historically operated in the shadows compared to their Russian-speaking counterparts.

“Chinese-speaking actors are introducing innovative and cost-effective systems, enabling them to target larger user bases with sophisticated services,” Prodaft wrote. “Their approach marks a new era in underground business practices, emphasizing scalability and efficiency in cybercriminal operations.”

A new report from researchers at the security firm SilentPush finds the Smishing Triad members have expanded into selling mobile phishing kits targeting customers of global financial institutions like CitiGroup, MasterCard, PayPal, Stripe, and Visa, as well as banks in Canada, Latin America, Australia and the broader Asia-Pacific region.

SilentPush found the Smishing Triad now spoofs recognizable brands in a variety of industry verticals across at least 121 countries and a vast number of industries, including the postal, logistics, telecommunications, transportation, finance, retail and public sectors.

According to SilentPush, the domains used by the Smishing Triad are rotated frequently, with approximately 25,000 phishing domains active during any 8-day period and a majority of them sitting at two Chinese hosting companies: Tencent (AS132203) and Alibaba (AS45102).

“With nearly two-thirds of all countries in the world targeted by [the] Smishing Triad, it’s safe to say they are essentially targeting every country with modern infrastructure outside of Iran, North Korea, and Russia,” SilentPush wrote. “Our team has observed some potential targeting in Russia (such as domains that mentioned their country codes), but nothing definitive enough to indicate Russia is a persistent target. Interestingly, even though these are Chinese threat actors, we have seen instances of targeting aimed at Macau and Hong Kong, both special administrative regions of China.”

SilentPush’s Zach Edwards said his team found a vulnerability that exposed data from one of the Smishing Triad’s phishing pages, which revealed the number of visits each site received each day across thousands of phishing domains that were active at the time. Based on that data, SilentPush estimates those phishing pages received well more than a million visits within a 20-day time span.

The report notes the Smishing Triad boasts it has “300+ front desk staff worldwide” involved in one of their more popular phishing kits — Lighthouse — staff that is mainly used to support various aspects of the group’s fraud and cash-out schemes.

The Smishing Triad members maintain their own Chinese-language sales channels on Telegram, which frequently offer videos and photos of their staff hard at work. Some of those images include massive walls of phones used to send phishing messages, with human operators seated directly in front of them ready to receive any time-sensitive one-time codes.

As noted in February’s story How Phished Data Turns Into Apple and Google Wallets, one of those cash-out schemes involves an Android app called Z-NFC, which can relay a valid NFC transaction from one of these compromised digital wallets to anywhere in the world. For a $500 month subscription, the customer can wave their phone at any payment terminal that accepts Apple or Google pay, and the app will relay an NFC transaction over the Internet from a stolen wallet on a phone in China.

Chinese nationals were recently busted trying to use these NFC apps to buy high-end electronics in Singapore. And in the United States, authorities in California and Tennessee arrested Chinese nationals accused of using NFC apps to fraudulently purchase gift cards from retailers.

The Prodaft researchers said they were able to find a previously undocumented backend management panel for Lucid, a smishing-as-a-service operation tied to the XinXin Group. The panel included victim figures that suggest the smishing campaigns maintain an average success rate of approximately five percent, with some domains receiving over 500 visits per week.

“In one observed instance, a single phishing website captured 30 credit card records from 550 victim interactions over a 7-day period,” Prodaft wrote.

Prodaft’s report details how the Smishing Triad has achieved such success in sending their spam messages. For example, one phishing vendor appears to send out messages using dozens of Android device emulators running in parallel on a single machine.

According to Prodaft, the threat actors first acquire phone numbers through various means including data breaches, open-source intelligence, or purchased lists from underground markets. They then exploit technical gaps in sender ID validation within both messaging platforms.

“For iMessage, this involves creating temporary Apple IDs with impersonated display names, while RCS exploitation leverages carrier implementation inconsistencies in sender verification,” Prodaft wrote. “Message delivery occurs through automated platforms using VoIP numbers or compromised credentials, often deployed in precisely timed multi-wave campaigns to maximize effectiveness.

In addition, the phishing links embedded in these messages use time-limited single-use URLs that expire or redirect based on device fingerprinting to evade security analysis, they found.

“The economics strongly favor the attackers, as neither RCS nor iMessage messages incur per-message costs like traditional SMS, enabling high-volume campaigns at minimal operational expense,” Prodaft continued. “The overlap in templates, target pools, and tactics among these platforms underscores a unified threat landscape, with Chinese-speaking actors driving innovation in the underground economy. Their ability to scale operations globally and evasion techniques pose significant challenges to cybersecurity defenses.”

Ford Merrill works in security research at SecAlliance, a CSIS Security Group company. Merrill said he’s observed at least one video of a Windows binary that wraps a Chrome executable and can be used to load in target phone numbers and blast messages via RCS, iMessage, Amazon, Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp.

“The evidence we’ve observed suggests the ability for a single device to send approximately 100 messages per second,” Merrill said. “We also believe that there is capability to source country specific SIM cards in volume that allow them to register different online accounts that require validation with specific country codes, and even make those SIM cards available to the physical devices long-term so that services that rely on checks of the validity of the phone number or SIM card presence on a mobile network are thwarted.”

Experts say this fast-growing wave of card fraud persists because far too many financial institutions still default to sending one-time codes via SMS for validating card enrollment in mobile wallets from Apple or Google. KrebsOnSecurity interviewed multiple security executives at non-U.S. financial institutions who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press. Those banks have since done away with SMS-based one-time codes and are now requiring customers to log in to the bank’s mobile app before they can link their card to a digital wallet.

Patch Tuesday, April 2025 Edition

Microsoft today released updates to plug at least 121 security holes in its Windows operating systems and software, including one vulnerability that is already being exploited in the wild. Eleven of those flaws earned Microsoft’s most-dire “critical” rating, meaning malware or malcontents could exploit them with little to no interaction from Windows users.

The zero-day flaw already seeing exploitation is CVE-2025-29824, a local elevation of privilege bug in the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) driver.  Microsoft rates it as “important,” but as Chris Goettl from Ivanti points out, risk-based prioritization warrants treating it as critical.

This CLFS component of Windows is no stranger to Patch Tuesday: According to Tenable’s Satnam Narang, since 2022 Microsoft has patched 32 CLFS vulnerabilities — averaging 10 per year — with six of them exploited in the wild. The last CLFS zero-day was patched in December 2024.

Narang notes that while flaws allowing attackers to install arbitrary code are consistently top overall Patch Tuesday features, the data is reversed for zero-day exploitation.

“For the past two years, elevation of privilege flaws have led the pack and, so far in 2025, account for over half of all zero-days exploited,” Narang wrote.

Rapid7’s Adam Barnett warns that any Windows defenders responsible for an LDAP server — which means almost any organization with a non-trivial Microsoft footprint — should add patching for the critical flaw CVE-2025-26663 to their to-do list.

“With no privileges required, no need for user interaction, and code execution presumably in the context of the LDAP server itself, successful exploitation would be an attractive shortcut to any attacker,” Barnett said. “Anyone wondering if today is a re-run of December 2024 Patch Tuesday can take some small solace in the fact that the worst of the trio of LDAP critical RCEs published at the end of last year was likely easier to exploit than today’s example, since today’s CVE-2025-26663 requires that an attacker win a race condition. Despite that, Microsoft still expects that exploitation is more likely.”

Among the critical updates Microsoft patched this month are remote code execution flaws in Windows Remote Desktop services (RDP), including CVE-2025-26671, CVE-2025-27480 and CVE-2025-27482; only the latter two are rated “critical,” and Microsoft marked both of them as “Exploitation More Likely.”

Perhaps the most widespread vulnerabilities fixed this month were in web browsers. Google Chrome updated to fix 13 flaws this week, and Mozilla Firefox fixed eight bugs, with possibly more updates coming later this week for Microsoft Edge.

As it tends to do on Patch Tuesdays, Adobe has released 12 updates resolving 54 security holes across a range of products, including ColdFusion, Adobe Commerce, Experience Manager Forms, After Effects, Media Encoder, Bridge, Premiere Pro, Photoshop, Animate, AEM Screens, and FrameMaker.

Apple users may need to patch as well. On March 31, Apple released a huge security update (more than three gigabytes in size) to fix issues in a range of their products, including at least one zero-day flaw.

And in case you missed it, on March 31, 2025 Apple released a rather large batch of security updates for a wide range of their products, from macOS to the iOS operating systems on iPhones and iPads.

Earlier today, Microsoft included a note saying Windows 10 security updates weren’t available but would be released as soon as possible. It appears from browsing askwoody.com that this snafu has since been rectified. Either way, if you run into complications applying any of these updates please leave a note about it in the comments below, because the chances are good that someone else had the same problem.

As ever, please consider backing up your data and or devices prior to updating, which makes it far less complicated to undo a software update gone awry. For more granular details on today’s Patch Tuesday, check out the SANS Internet Storm Center’s roundup. Microsoft’s update guide for April 2025 is here.

For more details on Patch Tuesday, check out the write-ups from Action1 and Automox.

Telegram-Story-Scraper - A Python Script That Allows You To Automatically Scrape And Download Stories From Your Telegram Friends

A Python script that allows you to automatically scrape and download stories from your Telegram friends using the Telethon library. The script continuously monitors and saves both photos and videos from stories, along with their metadata.

Important Note About Story Access ⚠️

Due to Telegram API restrictions, this script can only access stories from: - Users you have added to your friend list - Users whose privacy settings allow you to view their stories

This is a limitation of Telegram's API and cannot be bypassed.

Features 🚀

• Automatically scrapes all available stories from your Telegram friends
• Downloads both photos and videos from stories
• Stores metadata in SQLite database
• Exports data to Excel spreadsheet
• Real-time monitoring with customizable intervals
• Timestamp is set to (UTC+2)
• Maintains record of previously downloaded stories
• Resume capability
• Automatic retry mechanism

Prerequisites 📋

Before running the script, you'll need:

• Python 3.7 or higher
• Telegram account
• API credentials from Telegram
• Friends on Telegram whose stories you want to track

Required Python packages

pip install -r requirements.txt

Contents of requirements.txt:

telethon
openpyxl
schedule

Getting Telegram API Credentials 🔑

1. Visit https://my.telegram.org/auth
2. Log in with your phone number
3. Click on "API development tools"
4. Fill in the form:
5. App title: Your app name
6. Short name: Your app short name
7. Platform: Can be left as "Desktop"
8. Description: Brief description of your app
9. Click "Create application"
10. You'll receive:
11. api_id: A number
12. api_hash: A string of letters and numbers

Keep these credentials safe, you'll need them to run the script!

Setup and Running 🔧

1. Clone the repository:

git clone https://github.com/unnohwn/telegram-story-scraper.git
cd telegram-story-scraper

1. Install requirements:

pip install -r requirements.txt

1. Run the script:

python TGSS.py

1. On first run, you'll be prompted to enter:
2. Your API ID
3. Your API Hash
4. Your phone number (with country code)
5. Verification code (sent to your Telegram)
6. Checking interval in seconds (default is 60)

How It Works 🔄

The script: 1. Connects to your Telegram account 2. Periodically checks for new stories from your friends 3. Downloads any new stories (photos/videos) 4. Stores metadata in a SQLite database 5. Exports information to an Excel file 6. Runs continuously until interrupted (Ctrl+C)

Data Storage 💾

Database Structure (stories.db)

SQLite database containing: - user_id: Telegram user ID of the story creator - story_id: Unique story identifier - timestamp: When the story was posted (UTC+2) - filename: Local filename of the downloaded media

CSV and Excel Export (stories_export.csv/xlsx)

Export file containing the same information as the database, useful for: - Easy viewing of story metadata - Filtering and sorting - Data analysis - Sharing data with others

Media Storage 📁

• Photos are saved as: {user_id}_{story_id}.jpg
• Videos are saved with their original extension: {user_id}_{story_id}.{extension}
• All media files are saved in the script's directory

Features in Detail 🔍

Continuous Monitoring

• Customizable checking interval (default: 60 seconds)
• Runs continuously until manually stopped
• Maintains state between runs
• Avoids duplicate downloads

Media Handling

• Supports both photos and videos
• Automatically detects media type
• Preserves original quality
• Generates unique filenames

Error Handling 🛠️

The script includes: - Automatic retry mechanism for failed downloads - Error logging for failed operations - Connection error handling - State preservation in case of interruption

Limitations ⚠️

• Subject to Telegram's rate limits
• Stories must be currently active (not expired)
• Media download size limits apply as per Telegram's restrictions

Contributing 🤝

Contributions are welcome! Please feel free to submit a Pull Request.

License 📄

This project is licensed under the MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.

Disclaimer ⚖️

This tool is for educational purposes only. Make sure to: - Respect Telegram's Terms of Service - Obtain necessary permissions before scraping - Use responsibly and ethically - Comply with data protection regulations - Respect user privacy

Cyber Forensic Expert in 2,000+ Cases Faces FBI Probe

A Minnesota cybersecurity and computer forensics expert whose testimony has featured in thousands of courtroom trials over the past 30 years is facing questions about his credentials and an inquiry from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Legal experts say the inquiry could be grounds to reopen a number of adjudicated cases in which the expert’s testimony may have been pivotal.

Mark Lanterman is a former investigator for the U.S. Secret Service Electronics Crimes Task Force who founded the Minneapolis consulting firm Computer Forensic Services (CFS). The CFS website says Lanterman’s 30-year career has seen him testify as an expert in more than 2,000 cases, with experience in cases involving sexual harassment and workplace claims, theft of intellectual property and trade secrets, white-collar crime, and class action lawsuits.

Or at least it did until last month, when Lanterman’s profile and work history were quietly removed from the CFS website. The removal came after Hennepin County Attorney’s Office said it was notifying parties to ten pending cases that they were unable to verify Lanterman’s educational and employment background. The county attorney also said the FBI is now investigating the allegations.

Those allegations were raised by Sean Harrington, an attorney and forensics examiner based in Prescott, Wisconsin. Harrington alleged that Lanterman lied under oath in court on multiple occasions when he testified that he has a Bachelor of Science and a Master’s degree in computer science from the now-defunct Upsala College, and that he completed his postgraduate work in cybersecurity at Harvard University.

Harrington’s claims gained steam thanks to digging by the law firm Perkins Coie LLP, which is defending a case wherein a client’s laptop was forensically reviewed by Lanterman. On March 14, Perkins Coie attorneys asked the judge (PDF) to strike Lanterman’s testimony because neither he nor they could substantiate claims about his educational background.

Upsala College, located in East Orange, N.J., operated for 102 years until it closed in 1995 after a period of declining enrollment and financial difficulties. Perkins Coie told the court that they’d visited Felician University, which holds the transcripts for Upsala College during the years Lanterman claimed to have earned undergraduate and graduate degrees. The law firm said Felician had no record of transcripts for Lanterman (PDF), and that his name was absent from all of the Upsala College student yearbooks and commencement programs during that period.

Reached for comment, Lanterman acknowledged he had no way to prove he attended Upsala College, and that his “postgraduate work” at Harvard was in fact an eight-week online cybersecurity class called HarvardX, which cautions that its certificates should not be considered equivalent to a Harvard degree or a certificate earned through traditional, in-person programs at Harvard University.

Lanterman has testified that his first job after college was serving as a police officer in Springfield Township, Pennsylvania, although the Perkins Coie attorneys noted that this role was omitted from his resume. The attorneys said when they tried to verify Lanterman’s work history, “the police department responded with a story that would be almost impossible to believe if it was not corroborated by Lanterman’s own email communications.”

As recounted in the March 14 filing, Lanterman was deposed on Feb. 11, and the following day he emailed the Springfield Township Police Department to see if he could have a peek at his old personnel file. On Feb. 14, Lanterman visited the Springfield Township PD and asked to borrow his employment record. He told the officer he spoke with on the phone that he’d recently been instructed to “get his affairs in order” after being diagnosed with a grave heart condition, and that he wanted his old file to show his family about his early career.

According to Perkins Coie, Lanterman left the Springfield Township PD with his personnel file, and has not returned it as promised.

“It is shocking that an expert from Minnesota would travel to suburban Philadelphia and abscond with his decades-old personnel file to obscure his background,” the law firm wrote. “That appears to be the worst and most egregious form of spoliation, and the deception alone is reason enough to exclude Lanterman and consider sanctions.”

Harrington initially contacted KrebsOnSecurity about his concerns in late 2023, fuming after sitting through a conference speech in which Lanterman shared documents from a ransomware victim and told attendees it was because they’d refused to hire his company to perform a forensic investigation on a recent breach.

“He claims he was involved in the Martha Stewart investigation, the Bernie Madoff trial, Paul McCartney’s divorce, the Tom Petters investigation, the Denny Hecker investigation, and many others,” Harrington said. “He claims to have been invited to speak to the Supreme Court, claims to train the ‘entire federal judiciary’ on cybersecurity annually, and is a faculty member of the United States Judicial Conference and the Judicial College — positions which he obtained, in part, on a house of fraudulent cards.”

In an interview this week, Harrington said court documents reveal that at least two of Lanterman’s previous clients complained CFS had held their data for ransom over billing disputes. In a declaration (PDF) dated August 2022, the co-founder of the law firm MoreLaw Minneapolis LLC said she hired Lanterman in 2014 to examine several electronic devices after learning that one of their paralegals had a criminal fraud history.

But the law firm said when it pushed back on a consulting bill that was far higher than expected, Lanterman told them CFS would “escalate” its collection efforts if they didn’t pay, including “a claim and lien against the data which will result in a public auction of your data.”

“All of us were flabbergasted by Mr. Lanterman’s email,” wrote MoreLaw co-founder Kimberly Hanlon. “I had never heard of any legitimate forensic company threatening to ‘auction’ off an attorney’s data, particularly knowing that the data is comprised of confidential client data, much of which is sensitive in nature.”

In 2009, a Wisconsin-based manufacturing company that had hired Lanterman for computer forensics balked at paying an $86,000 invoice from CFS, calling it “excessive and unsubstantiated.” The company told a Hennepin County court that on April 15, 2009, CFS conducted an auction of its trade secret information in violation of their confidentiality agreement.

“CFS noticed and conducted a Public Sale of electronic information that was entrusted to them pursuant to the terms of the engagement agreement,” the company wrote. “CFS submitted the highest bid at the Public Sale in the amount of $10,000.”

Lanterman briefly responded to a list of questions about his background (and recent heart diagnosis) on March 24, saying he would send detailed replies the following day. Those replies never materialized. Instead, Lanterman forwarded a recent memo he wrote to the court that attacked Harrington and said his accuser was only trying to take out a competitor. He has not responded to further requests for comment.

“When I attended Upsala, I was a commuter student who lived with my grandparents in Morristown, New Jersey approximately 30 minutes away from Upsala College,” Lanterman explained to the judge (PDF) overseeing a separate ongoing case (PDF) in which he has testified. “With limited resources, I did not participate in campus social events, nor did I attend graduation ceremonies. In 2023, I confirmed with Felician University — which maintains Upsala College’s records — that they could not locate my transcripts or diploma, a situation that they indicated was possibly due to unresolved money-related issues.”

Lanterman was ordered to appear in court on April 3 in the case defended by Perkins Coie, but he did not show up. Instead, he sent a message to the judge withdrawing from the case.

“I am 60 years old,” Lanterman told the judge. “I created my business from nothing. I am done dealing with the likes of individuals like Sean Harrington. And quite frankly, I have been planning at turning over my business to my children for years. That time has arrived.”

Lanterman’s letter leaves the impression that it was his decision to retire. But according to an affidavit (PDF) filed in a Florida case on March 28, Mark Lanterman’s son Sean said he’d made the difficult decision to ask his dad to step down given all the negative media attention.

Mark Rasch, a former federal cybercrime prosecutor who now serves as counsel to the New York cybersecurity intelligence firm Unit 221B, said that if an expert witness is discredited, any defendants who lost cases that were strongly influenced by that expert’s conclusions at trial could have grounds for appeal.

Rasch said law firms who propose an expert witness have a duty in good faith to vet that expert’s qualifications, knowing that those credentials will be subject to cross-examination.

“Federal rules of civil procedure and evidence both require experts to list every case they have testified in as an expert for the past few years,” Rasch said. “Part of that due diligence is pulling up the results of those cases and seeing what the nature of their testimony has been.”

Perhaps the most well-publicized case involving significant forensic findings from Lanterman was the 2018 conviction of Stephen Allwine, who was found guilty of killing his wife two years earlier after attempts at hiring a hitman on the dark net fell through. Allwine is serving a sentence of life in prison, and continues to maintain that he was framed, casting doubt on computer forensic evidence found on 64 electronic devices taken from his home.

On March 24, Allwine petitioned a Minnesota court (PDF) to revisit his case, citing the accusations against Lanterman and his role as a key witness for the prosecution.

How Each Pillar of the 1st Amendment is Under Attack

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” -U.S. Constitution, First Amendment.

In an address to Congress this month, President Trump claimed he had “brought free speech back to America.” But barely two months into his second term, the president has waged an unprecedented attack on the First Amendment rights of journalists, students, universities, government workers, lawyers and judges.

This story explores a slew of recent actions by the Trump administration that threaten to undermine all five pillars of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees freedoms concerning speech, religion, the media, the right to assembly, and the right to petition the government and seek redress for wrongs.

THE RIGHT TO PETITION

The right to petition allows citizens to communicate with the government, whether to complain, request action, or share viewpoints — without fear of reprisal. But that right is being assaulted by this administration on multiple levels. For starters, many GOP lawmakers are now heeding their leadership’s advice to stay away from local town hall meetings and avoid the wrath of constituents affected by the administration’s many federal budget and workforce cuts.

Another example: President Trump recently fired most of the people involved in processing Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for government agencies. FOIA is an indispensable tool used by journalists and the public to request government records, and to hold leaders accountable.

The biggest story by far this week was the bombshell from The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, who recounted how he was inadvertently added to a Signal group chat with National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and 16 other Trump administration officials discussing plans for an upcoming attack on Yemen.

One overlooked aspect of Goldberg’s incredible account is that by planning and coordinating the attack on Signal — which features messages that can auto-delete after a short time — administration officials were evidently seeking a way to avoid creating a lasting (and potentially FOIA-able) record of their deliberations.

“Intentional or not, use of Signal in this context was an act of erasure—because without Jeffrey Goldberg being accidentally added to the list, the general public would never have any record of these communications or any way to know they even occurred,” Tony Bradley wrote this week at Forbes.

Petitioning the government, particularly when it ignores your requests, often requires challenging federal agencies in court. But that becomes far more difficult if the most competent law firms start to shy away from cases that may involve crossing the president and his administration.

On March 22, the president issued a memorandum that directs heads of the Justice and Homeland Security Departments to “seek sanctions against attorneys and law firms who engage in frivolous, unreasonable and vexatious litigation against the United States,” or in matters that come before federal agencies.

The POTUS recently issued several executive orders railing against specific law firms with attorneys who worked legal cases against him. On Friday, the president announced that the law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meager & Flom had agreed to provide $100 million in pro bono work on issues that he supports.

Trump issued another order naming the firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, which ultimately agreed to pledge $40 million in pro bono legal services to the president’s causes.

Other Trump executive orders targeted law firms Jenner & Block and WilmerHale, both of which have attorneys that worked with special counsel Robert Mueller on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. But this week, two federal judges in separate rulings froze parts of those orders.

“There is no doubt this retaliatory action chills speech and legal advocacy, and that is qualified as a constitutional harm,” wrote Judge Richard Leon, who ruled against the executive order targeting WilmerHale.

President Trump recently took the extraordinary step of calling for the impeachment of federal judges who rule against the administration. Trump called U.S. District Judge James Boasberg a “Radical Left Lunatic” and urged he be removed from office for blocking deportation of Venezuelan alleged gang members under a rarely invoked wartime legal authority.

In a rare public rebuke to a sitting president, U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts issued a statement on March 18 pointing out that “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision.”

The U.S. Constitution provides that judges can be removed from office only through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. The Constitution also states that judges’ salaries cannot be reduced while they are in office.

Undeterred, House Speaker Mike Johnson this week suggested the administration could still use the power of its purse to keep courts in line, and even floated the idea of wholesale eliminating federal courts.

“We do have authority over the federal courts as you know,” Johnson said. “We can eliminate an entire district court. We have power of funding over the courts, and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act, so stay tuned for that.”

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY

President Trump has taken a number of actions to discourage lawful demonstrations at universities and colleges across the country, threatening to cut federal funding for any college that supports protests he deems “illegal.”

A Trump executive order in January outlined a broad federal crackdown on what he called “the explosion of antisemitism” on U.S. college campuses. This administration has asserted that foreign students who are lawfully in the United States on visas do not enjoy the same free speech or due process rights as citizens.

Reuters reports that the acting civil rights director at the Department of Education on March 10 sent letters to 60 educational institutions warning they could lose federal funding if they don’t do more to combat anti-semitism. On March 20, Trump issued an order calling for the closure of the Education Department.

Meanwhile, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have been detaining and trying to deport pro-Palestinian students who are legally in the United States. The administration is targeting students and academics who spoke out against Israel’s attacks on Gaza, or who were active in campus protests against U.S. support for the attacks. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters Thursday that at least 300 foreign students have seen their visas revoked under President Trump, a far higher number than was previously known.

In his first term, Trump threatened to use the national guard or the U.S. military to deal with protesters, and in campaigning for re-election he promised to revisit the idea.

“I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within,” Trump told Fox News in October 2024. “We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they’re the big — and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”

This term, Trump acted swiftly to remove the top judicial advocates in the armed forces who would almost certainly push back on any request by the president to use U.S. soldiers in an effort to quell public protests, or to arrest and detain immigrants. In late February, the president and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the top legal officers for the military services — those responsible for ensuring the Uniform Code of Military Justice is followed by commanders.

Military.com warns that the purge “sets an alarming precedent for a crucial job in the military, as President Donald Trump has mused about using the military in unorthodox and potentially illegal ways.” Hegseth told reporters the removals were necessary because he didn’t want them to pose any “roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief.”

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

President Trump has sued a number of U.S. news outlets, including 60 Minutes, CNN, The Washington Post, The New York Times and other smaller media organizations for unflattering coverage.

In a $10 billion lawsuit against 60 Minutes and its parent Paramount, Trump claims they selectively edited an interview with former Vice President Kamala Harris prior to the 2024 election. The TV news show last month published transcripts of the interview at the heart of the dispute, but Paramount is reportedly considering a settlement to avoid potentially damaging its chances of winning the administration’s approval for a pending multibillion-dollar merger.

The president sued The Des Moines Register and its parent company, Gannett, for publishing a poll showing Trump trailing Harris in the 2024 presidential election in Iowa (a state that went for Trump). The POTUS also is suing the Pulitzer Prize board over 2018 awards given to The New York Times and The Washington Post for their coverage of purported Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Whether or not any of the president’s lawsuits against news organizations have merit or succeed is almost beside the point. The strategy behind suing the media is to make reporters and newsrooms think twice about criticizing or challenging the president and his administration. The president also knows some media outlets will find it more expedient to settle.

Trump also sued ABC News and George Stephanopoulos for stating that the president had been found liable for “rape” in a civil case [Trump was found liable of sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll]. ABC parent Disney settled that claim by agreeing to donate $15 million to the Trump Presidential Library.

Following the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Facebook blocked President Trump’s account. Trump sued Meta, and after the president’s victory in 2024 Meta settled and agreed to pay Trump $25 million: $22 million would go to his presidential library, and the rest to legal fees. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also announced Facebook and Instagram would get rid of fact-checkers and rely instead on reader-submitted “community notes” to debunk disinformation on the social media platform.

Brendan Carr, the president’s pick to run the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), has pledged to “dismantle the censorship cartel and restore free speech rights for everyday Americans.” But on January 22, 2025, the FCC reopened complaints against ABC, CBS and NBC over their coverage of the 2024 election. The previous FCC chair had dismissed the complaints as attacks on the First Amendment and an attempt to weaponize the agency for political purposes.

According to Reuters, the complaints call for an investigation into how ABC News moderated the pre-election TV debate between Trump and Biden, and appearances of then-Vice President Harris on 60 Minutes and on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live.”

Since then, the FCC has opened investigations into NPR and PBS, alleging that they are breaking sponsorship rules. The Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), a think tank based in Washington, D.C., noted that the FCC is also investigating KCBS in San Francisco for reporting on the location of federal immigration authorities.

“Even if these investigations are ultimately closed without action, the mere fact of opening them – and the implicit threat to the news stations’ license to operate – can have the effect of deterring the press from news coverage that the Administration dislikes,” the CDT’s Kate Ruane observed.

Trump has repeatedly threatened to “open up” libel laws, with the goal of making it easier to sue media organizations for unfavorable coverage. But this week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge brought by Trump donor and Las Vegas casino magnate Steve Wynn to overturn the landmark 1964 decision in New York Times v. Sullivan, which insulates the press from libel suits over good-faith criticism of public figures.

The president also has insisted on picking which reporters and news outlets should be allowed to cover White House events and participate in the press pool that trails the president. He barred the Associated Press from the White House and Air Force One over their refusal to call the Gulf of Mexico by another name.

And the Defense Department has ordered a number of top media outlets to vacate their spots at the Pentagon, including CNN, The Hill, The Washington Post, The New York Times, NBC News, Politico and National Public Radio.

“Incoming media outlets include the New York Post, Breitbart, the Washington Examiner, the Free Press, the Daily Caller, Newsmax, the Huffington Post and One America News Network, most of whom are seen as conservative or favoring Republican President Donald Trump,” Reuters reported.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Shortly after Trump took office again in January 2025, the administration began circulating lists of hundreds of words that government staff and agencies shall not use in their reports and communications.

The Brookings Institution notes that in moving to comply with this anti-speech directive, federal agencies have purged countless taxpayer-funded data sets from a swathe of government websites, including data on crime, sexual orientation, gender, education, climate, and global development.

The New York Times reports that in the past two months, hundreds of terabytes of digital resources analyzing data have been taken off government websites.

“While in many cases the underlying data still exists, the tools that make it possible for the public and researchers to use that data have been removed,” The Times wrote.

On Jan. 27, Trump issued a memo (PDF) that paused all federally funded programs pending a review of those programs for alignment with the administration’s priorities. Among those was ensuring that no funding goes toward advancing “Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies.”

According to the CDT, this order is a blatant attempt to force government grantees to cease engaging in speech that the current administration dislikes, including speech about the benefits of diversity, climate change, and LGBTQ issues.

“The First Amendment does not permit the government to discriminate against grantees because it does not like some of the viewpoints they espouse,” the CDT’s Ruane wrote. “Indeed, those groups that are challenging the constitutionality of the order argued as much in their complaint, and have won an injunction blocking its implementation.”

On January 20, the same day Trump issued an executive order on free speech, the president also issued an executive order titled “Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid,” which froze funding for programs run by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Among those were programs designed to empower civil society and human rights groups, journalists and others responding to digital repression and Internet shutdowns.

According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), this includes many freedom technologies that use cryptography, fight censorship, protect freedom of speech, privacy and anonymity for millions of people around the world.

“While the State Department has issued some limited waivers, so far those waivers do not seem to cover the open source internet freedom technologies,” the EFF wrote about the USAID disruptions. “As a result, many of these projects have to stop or severely curtail their work, lay off talented workers, and stop or slow further development.”

On March 14, the president signed another executive order that effectively gutted the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees or funds media outlets including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Voice of America (VOA). The USAGM also oversees Radio Free Asia, which supporters say has been one of the most reliable tools used by the government to combat Chinese propaganda.

But this week, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee, temporarily blocked USAGM’s closure by the administration.

“RFE/RL has, for decades, operated as one of the organizations that Congress has statutorily designated to carry out this policy,” Lamberth wrote in a 10-page opinion. “The leadership of USAGM cannot, with one sentence of reasoning offering virtually no explanation, force RFE/RL to shut down — even if the President has told them to do so.”

FREEDOM OF RELIGION

The Trump administration rescinded a decades-old policy that instructed officers not to take immigration enforcement actions in or near “sensitive” or “protected” places, such as churches, schools, and hospitals.

That directive was immediately challenged in a case brought by a group of Quakers, Baptists and Sikhs, who argued the policy reversal was keeping people from attending services for fear of being arrested on civil immigration violations. On Feb. 24, a federal judge agreed and blocked ICE agents from entering churches or targeting migrants nearby.

The president’s executive order allegedly addressing antisemitism came with a fact sheet that described college campuses as “infested” with “terrorists” and “jihadists.” Multiple faith groups expressed alarm over the order, saying it attempts to weaponize antisemitism and promote “dehumanizing anti-immigrant policies.”

The president also announced the creation of a “Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias,” to be led by Attorney General Pam Bondi. Never mind that Christianity is easily the largest faith in America and that Christians are well-represented in Congress.

The Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush, a Baptist minister and head of the progressive Interfaith Alliance, issued a statement accusing Trump of hypocrisy in claiming to champion religion by creating the task force.

“From allowing immigration raids in churches, to targeting faith-based charities, to suppressing religious diversity, the Trump Administration’s aggressive government overreach is infringing on religious freedom in a way we haven’t seen for generations,” Raushenbush said.

A statement from Americans United for Separation of Church and State said the task force could lead to religious persecution of those with other faiths.

“Rather than protecting religious beliefs, this task force will misuse religious freedom to justify bigotry, discrimination, and the subversion of our civil rights laws,” said Rachel Laser, the group’s president and CEO.

Where is President Trump going with all these blatant attacks on the First Amendment? The president has made no secret of his affection for autocratic leaders and “strongmen” around the world, and he is particularly enamored with Hungary’s far-right Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort twice in the past year.

A March 15 essay in The Atlantic by Hungarian investigative journalist András Pethő recounts how Orbán rose to power by consolidating control over the courts, and by building his own media universe while simultaneously placing a stranglehold on the independent press.

“As I watch from afar what’s happening to the free press in the United States during the first weeks of Trump’s second presidency — the verbal bullying, the legal harassment, the buckling by media owners in the face of threats — it all looks very familiar,” Pethő wrote. “The MAGA authorities have learned Orbán’s lessons well.”

How to Delete Your Data from 23andMe and Protect Your Privacy

The collapse of genetic testing giant 23andMe has raised serious privacy concerns for millions of people who shared their DNA with the company. Once valued at $6 billion, the company has filed for bankruptcy and is now selling off assets—including, potentially, your genetic data. 

If you’ve ever used 23andMe to explore your ancestry or health traits, now is the time to take action.  

Here’s what’s going on, what it means for your data, how to delete your account, and steps you can take to better protect your online privacy going forward. 

What’s Going On at 23andMe? 

23andMe, once a pioneer in at-home genetic testing, has fallen into financial distress after a series of challenges, including a massive data breach in 2023 that exposed personal information of nearly 7 million users, according to TechCrunch. The company’s value plummeted by more than 99%, leading to mass board resignations and a March 2024 bankruptcy filing. 

Now, as 23andMe prepares to sell off its assets under court supervision, its massive database of customer DNA—reportedly from more than 15 million users—is on the table. Despite the company’s assurances that its privacy policy remains in effect, experts and privacy advocates warn that your sensitive genetic data could end up in the hands of third parties, including pharmaceutical companies or even law enforcement agencies. 

Is My Privacy at Risk? 

If you used 23andMe, yes.  

Genetic data is some of the most personal information you can share. It can reveal details about your ancestry, health risks, and even family secrets. With 23andMe not covered by HIPAA (the federal health privacy law), your DNA data isn’t protected the way medical records at a doctor’s office would be, The Harvard Gazette reports. 

Although 23andMe claims it won’t share individual-level data without consent, it does reserve the right to sell or transfer personal information as part of a bankruptcy or acquisition. That means your data could be bought by another company—one with different privacy practices or intentions. 

California residents, in particular, have the legal right to delete their data under the Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).  

How to Delete Your 23andMe Data 

If you’re ready to take action, here’s how to delete your genetic data and revoke research permissions through your 23andMe account: 

To Delete Your Account and Genetic Data: 

1. Log in to your 23andMe account. 
2. Go to Settings. 
3. Scroll down to 23andMe Data and click View. 
4. (Optional) Download your data if you want to keep a copy. 
5. Scroll to the Delete Data section. 
6. Click Permanently Delete Data. 
7. Confirm via the email link you’ll receive. 

To Destroy Your Saliva Sample: 

1. Go to Settings. 
2. Navigate to Preferences. 
3. Select the option to destroy your stored biological sample. 

To Revoke Research Consent: 

1. Go to Settings. 
2. Navigate to Research and Product Consents. 
3. Withdraw your consent for data sharing. 

McAfee’s Tips for Protecting Your Online Privacy 

Your DNA isn’t the only personal data at risk. From email addresses and home addresses to phone numbers and even shopping habits, data brokers are collecting and selling your information online—often without your knowledge or consent. 

That’s why it’s critical to take control of your digital footprint. All McAfee+ plans provide the ability to scan the web for details of your personal information. McAfee’s Online Account Cleanup scans for accounts you no longer use and helps you delete them, along with your personal info. McAfee’s Personal Data Cleanup, takes this a step further, by scanning data broker sites for your personal information, and requesting the removal of you details from those sites. 

Combined, these tools can give you back control over your privacy. All our McAfee+ plans include scans to find your accounts and direct you on how to remove your data.  

Bottom Line: If you’ve ever used 23andMe, your genetic data could be at risk of being transferred or sold. Take action now by deleting your account and revoking permissions. And to keep the rest of your personal data protected, use tools like McAfee+ to keep your personal data safe online. 

 

The post How to Delete Your Data from 23andMe and Protect Your Privacy appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Arrests in Tap-to-Pay Scheme Powered by Phishing

Authorities in at least two U.S. states last week independently announced arrests of Chinese nationals accused of perpetrating a novel form of tap-to-pay fraud using mobile devices. Details released by authorities so far indicate the mobile wallets being used by the scammers were created through online phishing scams, and that the accused were relying on a custom Android app to relay tap-to-pay transactions from mobile devices located in China.

Authorities in Knoxville, Tennessee last week said they arrested 11 Chinese nationals accused of buying tens of thousands of dollars worth of gift cards at local retailers with mobile wallets created through online phishing scams. The Knox County Sheriff’s office said the arrests are considered the first in the nation for a new type of tap-to-pay fraud.

Responding to questions about what makes this scheme so remarkable, Knox County said that while it appears the fraudsters are simply buying gift cards, in fact they are using multiple transactions to purchase various gift cards and are plying their scam from state to state.

“These offenders have been traveling nationwide, using stolen credit card information to purchase gift cards and launder funds,” Knox County Chief Deputy Bernie Lyon wrote. “During Monday’s operation, we recovered gift cards valued at over $23,000, all bought with unsuspecting victims’ information.”

Asked for specifics about the mobile devices seized from the suspects, Lyon said “tap-to-pay fraud involves a group utilizing Android phones to conduct Apple Pay transactions utilizing stolen or compromised credit/debit card information,” [emphasis added].

Lyon declined to offer additional specifics about the mechanics of the scam, citing an ongoing investigation.

Ford Merrill works in security research at SecAlliance, a CSIS Security Group company. Merrill said there aren’t many valid use cases for Android phones to transmit Apple Pay transactions. That is, he said, unless they are running a custom Android app that KrebsOnSecurity wrote about last month as part of a deep dive into the operations of China-based phishing cartels that are breathing new life into the payment card fraud industry (a.k.a. “carding”).

How are these China-based phishing groups obtaining stolen payment card data and then loading it onto Google and Apple phones? It all starts with phishing.

If you own a mobile phone, the chances are excellent that at some point in the past two years it has received at least one phishing message that spoofs the U.S. Postal Service to supposedly collect some outstanding delivery fee, or an SMS that pretends to be a local toll road operator warning of a delinquent toll fee.

These messages are being sent through sophisticated phishing kits sold by several cybercriminals based in mainland China. And they are not traditional SMS phishing or “smishing” messages, as they bypass the mobile networks entirely. Rather, the missives are sent through the Apple iMessage service and through RCS, the functionally equivalent technology on Google phones.

People who enter their payment card data at one of these sites will be told their financial institution needs to verify the small transaction by sending a one-time passcode to the customer’s mobile device. In reality, that code will be sent by the victim’s financial institution in response to a request by the fraudsters to link the phished card data to a mobile wallet.

If the victim then provides that one-time code, the phishers will link the card data to a new mobile wallet from Apple or Google, loading the wallet onto a mobile phone that the scammers control. These phones are then loaded with multiple stolen wallets (often between 5-10 per device) and sold in bulk to scammers on Telegram.

Merrill found that at least one of the Chinese phishing groups sells an Android app called “Z-NFC” that can relay a valid NFC transaction to anywhere in the world. The user simply waves their phone at a local payment terminal that accepts Apple or Google pay, and the app relays an NFC transaction over the Internet from a phone in China.

“I would be shocked if this wasn’t the NFC relay app,” Merrill said, concerning the arrested suspects in Tennessee.

Merrill said the Z-NFC software can work from anywhere in the world, and that one phishing gang offers the software for $500 a month.

“It can relay both NFC enabled tap-to-pay as well as any digital wallet,” Merrill said. “They even have 24-hour support.”

On March 16, the ABC affiliate in Sacramento (ABC10), Calif. aired a segment about two Chinese nationals who were arrested after using an app to run stolen credit cards at a local Target store. The news story quoted investigators saying the men were trying to buy gift cards using a mobile app that cycled through more than 80 stolen payment cards.

ABC10 reported that while most of those transactions were declined, the suspects still made off with $1,400 worth of gift cards. After their arrests, both men reportedly admitted that they were being paid $250 a day to conduct the fraudulent transactions.

Merrill said it’s not unusual for fraud groups to advertise this kind of work on social media networks, including TikTok.

A CBS News story on the Sacramento arrests said one of the suspects tried to use 42 separate bank cards, but that 32 were declined. Even so, the man still was reportedly able to spend $855 in the transactions.

Likewise, the suspect’s alleged accomplice tried 48 transactions on separate cards, finding success 11 times and spending $633, CBS reported.

“It’s interesting that so many of the cards were declined,” Merrill said. “One reason this might be is that banks are getting better at detecting this type of fraud. The other could be that the cards were already used and so they were already flagged for fraud even before these guys had a chance to use them. So there could be some element of just sending these guys out to stores to see if it works, and if not they’re on their own.”

Merrill’s investigation into the Telegram sales channels for these China-based phishing gangs shows their phishing sites are actively manned by fraudsters who sit in front of giant racks of Apple and Google phones that are used to send the spam and respond to replies in real time.

In other words, the phishing websites are powered by real human operators as long as new messages are being sent. Merrill said the criminals appear to send only a few dozen messages at a time, likely because completing the scam takes manual work by the human operators in China. After all, most one-time codes used for mobile wallet provisioning are generally only good for a few minutes before they expire.

For more on how these China-based mobile phishing groups operate, check out How Phished Data Turns Into Apple and Google Wallets.

How to Recognize an Online Scammer

Online scams are evolving faster than ever, with cybercriminals using AI, deepfake technology, and social engineering to trick unsuspecting users.

In the past year, Americans have been targeted by an average of 14 scam messages per day, and deepfake scams have surged 1,740% in North America, according to McAfee’s State of the Scamiverse report. 

These scams go beyond simple phishing emails—scammers now impersonate trusted companies, friends, and even loved ones, making it critical to recognize the warning signs before falling victim.

Here’s how you can spot an online scam and protect yourself: 

  

5 tips to help you recognize an online scam

Scams are scary, but you can prevent yourself from falling for one by knowing what to look for. Here are a few tell-tale signs that you’re dealing with a scammer.  

They say you’ve won a huge prize

If you get a message that you’ve won a big sum of cash in a sweepstakes you don’t remember entering, it’s a scam. Scammers may tell you that all you need to do to claim your prize is send them a small fee or give them your banking information.  

When you enter a real sweepstakes or lottery, it’s generally up to you to contact the organizer to claim your prize. Sweepstakes aren’t likely to chase you down to give you money.  

They want you to pay in a certain way

Scammers will often ask you to pay them using gift cards, money orders, cryptocurrency (like Bitcoin), or through a particular money transfer service. Scammers need payments in forms that don’t give consumers protection.  

Gift card payments, for example, are typically not reversible and hard to trace. Legitimate organizations will rarely, if ever, ask you to pay using a specific method, especially gift cards.  

When you have to make online payments, it’s a good idea to use a secure service like PayPal. Secure payment systems can have features to keep you safe, like end-to-end encryption.  

They say it’s an emergency

Scammers may try to make you panic by saying you owe money to a government agency and you need to pay them immediately to avoid being arrested. Or the criminal might try to tug at your heartstrings by pretending to be a family member in danger who needs money.  

Criminals want you to pay them or give them your information quickly — before you have a chance to think about it. If someone tries to tell you to pay them immediately in a text message, phone call, or email, they’re likely a scammer.  

They say they’re from a government organization or company

Many scammers pretend to be part of government organizations like the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). They’ll claim you owe them money. Criminals can even use technology to make their phone numbers appear legitimate on your caller ID.  

If someone claiming to be part of a government organization contacts you, go to that organization’s official site and find an official support number or email. Contact them to verify the information in the initial message.  

Scammers may also pretend to be businesses, like your utility company. They’ll likely say something to scare you, like your gas will be turned off if you don’t pay them right away. 

The email is littered with grammatical errors

Most legitimate organizations will thoroughly proofread any copy or information they send to consumers. Professional emails are well-written, clear, and error-free. On the other hand, scam emails will likely be full of grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors.  

It might surprise you to know that scammers write sloppy emails on purpose. The idea is that if the reader is attentive enough to spot the grammatical mistakes, they likely won’t fall for the scam.  

8 most common online scams to watch out for

There are certain scams that criminals try repeatedly because they’ve worked on so many people. Here are a few of the most common scams you should watch out for.  

Phishing scams

A phishing scam can be a phone or email scam. The criminal sends a message in which they pretend to represent an organization you know. It directs you to a fraud website that collects your sensitive information, like your passwords, Social Security number (SSN), and bank account data. Once the scammer has your personal information, they can use it for personal gain.  

Phishing emails may try anything to get you to click on their fake link. They might claim to be your bank and ask you to log into your account to verify some suspicious activity. Or they could pretend to be a sweepstakes and say you need to fill out a form to claim a large reward.  

During the coronavirus pandemic, new phishing scams have emerged, with scammers claiming to be part of various charities and nonprofits. Sites like Charity Navigator can help you discern real groups from fake ones.  

Travel insurance scams

These scams also became much more prominent during the pandemic. Let’s say you’re preparing to fly to Paris with your family. A scammer sends you a message offering you an insurance policy on any travel plans you might be making. They’ll claim the policy will compensate you if your travel plans fall through for any reason without any extra charges.  

You think it might be a good idea to purchase this type of insurance. Right before leaving for your trip, you have to cancel your plans. You go to collect your insurance money only to realize the insurance company doesn’t exist.  

Real travel insurance from a licensed business generally won’t cover foreseeable events (like travel advisories, government turmoil, or pandemics) unless you buy a Cancel for Any Reason (CFAR) addendum for your policy.  

Grandparent scams

Grandparent scams prey on your instinct to protect your family. The scammer will call or send an email pretending to be a family member in some sort of emergency who needs you to wire them money. The scammer may beg you to act right away and avoid sharing their situation with any other family members. 

For example, the scammer might call and say they’re your grandchild who’s been arrested in Mexico and needs money to pay bail. They’ll say they’re in danger and need you to send funds now to save them.  

If you get a call or an email from an alleged family member requesting money, take the time to make sure they’re actually who they say they are. Never wire transfer money right away or over the phone. Ask them a question that only the family member would know and verify their story with the rest of your family.  

Advance fee scam

You get an email from a prince. They’ve recently inherited a huge fortune from a member of their royal family. Now, the prince needs to keep their money in an American bank account to keep it safe. If you let them store their money in your bank account, you’ll be handsomely rewarded. You just need to send them a small fee to get the money.  

There are several versions of this scam, but the prince iteration is a pretty common one. If you get these types of emails, don’t respond or give out your financial information.  

Tech support scams

Your online experience is rudely interrupted when a pop-up appears telling you there’s a huge virus on your computer. You need to “act fast” and contact the support phone number on the screen. If you don’t, all of your important data will be erased.  

When you call the number, a fake tech support worker asks you for remote access to your device to “fix” the problem. If you give the scammer access to your device, they may steal your personal and financial information or install malware. Worse yet, they’ll probably charge you for it.  

These scams can be pretty elaborate. A scam pop-up may even appear to be from a reputable software company. If you see this type of pop-up, don’t respond to it. Instead, try restarting or turning off your device. If the device doesn’t start back up, search for the support number for the device manufacturer and contact them directly.  

Formjacking and retail scams

Scammers will often pose as popular e-commerce companies by creating fake websites. The fake webpages might offer huge deals on social media. They’ll also likely have a URL close to the real business’s URL but slightly different. 

Sometimes, a criminal is skilled enough to hack the website of a large online retailer. When a scammer infiltrates a retailer’s website, they can redirect where the links on that site lead. This is called formjacking.  

For example, you might go to an e-commerce store to buy a jacket. You find the jacket and put it in your online shopping cart. You click “check out,” and you’re taken to a form that collects your credit card information. What you don’t know is that the checkout form is fake. Your credit card number is going directly to the scammers.  

Whenever you’re redirected from a website to make a payment or enter in information, always check the URL. If the form is legitimate, it will have the same URL as the site you were on. A fake form will have a URL that’s close to but not exactly the same as the original site. 

Scareware scams (fake antivirus)

These scams are similar to tech support scams. However, instead of urging you to speak directly with a fake tech support person, their goal is to get you to download a fake antivirus software product (scareware).  

You’ll see a pop-up that says your computer has a virus, malware, or some other problem. The only way to get rid of the problem is to install the security software the pop-up links to. You think you’re downloading antivirus software that will save your computer.  

What you’re actually downloading is malicious software. There are several types of malware. The program might be ransomware that locks up your information until you pay the scammers or spyware that tracks your online activity.  

To avoid this scam, never download antivirus software from a pop-up. You’ll be much better off visiting the website of a reputable company, like McAfee, to download antivirus software.  

Credit repair scams

Dealing with credit card debt can be extremely stressful. Scammers know this and try to capitalize off it. They’ll send emails posing as credit experts and tell you they can help you fix your credit or relieve some of your debt. They might even claim they can hide harmful details on your credit report. 

All you have to do is pay a small fee. Of course, after you pay the fee, the “credit expert” disappears without helping you out with your credit at all. Generally, legitimate debt settlement firms won’t charge you upfront. If a credit relief company charges you a fee upfront, that’s a red flag.  

Before you enter into an agreement with any credit service, check out their reputation. Do an online search on the company to see what you can find. If there’s nothing about the credit repair company online, it’s probably fake.  

What can you do if you get scammed online?

Admitting that you’ve fallen for an online scam can be embarrassing. But reporting a scammer can help stop them from taking advantage of anyone else. If you’ve been the victim of an online scam, try contacting your local police department and filing a report with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).  

Several other law enforcement organizations handle different types of fraud. Here are a few examples of institutions that can help you report scams.  

• The National Center for Disaster Fraud (NCDS) handles fake scams involving natural disasters and other national crises.  
• The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) handles scams involving malware, fake websites, and fraudulent emails. 
• You can report international scams through econsumer.gov. 
• You can report Social Security scams through the Office of the Inspector General website.  
• You can report scammers who pretend to be the IRS through the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration website.  
• You can report tax-related identity fraud to the IRS. 

Discover how McAfee can keep you and your info safe online

Fraudsters shouldn’t stop you from enjoying your time online. Just by learning to spot an online scam, you can greatly strengthen your immunity to cybercrimes.  

For an even greater internet experience, you’ll want the right tools to protect yourself online. McAfee+ can help you confidently surf the web by providing all-in-one protection for your personal info and privacy. This includes identity protection — which comes with 24/7 monitoring of your email addresses and bank accounts — and antivirus software to help safeguard your internet connection.  

Get the peace of mind that comes with McAfee having your back. 

The post How to Recognize an Online Scammer appeared first on McAfee Blog.

DOGE to Fired CISA Staff: Email Us Your Personal Data

A message posted on Monday to the homepage of the U.S. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) is the latest exhibit in the Trump administration’s continued disregard for basic cybersecurity protections. The message instructed recently-fired CISA employees to get in touch so they can be rehired and then immediately placed on leave, asking employees to send their Social Security number or date of birth in a password-protected email attachment — presumably with the password needed to view the file included in the body of the email.

On March 13, a Maryland district court judge ordered the Trump administration to reinstate more than 130 probationary CISA employees who were fired last month. On Monday, the administration announced that those dismissed employees would be reinstated but placed on paid administrative leave. They are among nearly 25,000 fired federal workers who are in the process of being rehired.

A notice covering the CISA homepage said the administration is making every effort to contact those who were unlawfully fired in mid-February.

“Please provide a password protected attachment that provides your full name, your dates of employment (including date of termination), and one other identifying factor such as date of birth or social security number,” the message reads. “Please, to the extent that it is available, attach any termination notice.”

The message didn’t specify how affected CISA employees should share the password for any attached files, so the implicit expectation is that employees should just include the plaintext password in their message.

Email is about as secure as a postcard sent through the mail, because anyone who manages to intercept the missive anywhere along its path of delivery can likely read it. In security terms, that’s the equivalent of encrypting sensitive data while also attaching the secret key needed to view the information.

What’s more, a great many antivirus and security scanners have trouble inspecting password-protected files, meaning the administration’s instructions are likely to increase the risk that malware submitted by cybercriminals could be accepted and opened by U.S. government employees.

The message in the screenshot above was removed from the CISA homepage Tuesday evening and replaced with a much shorter notice directing former CISA employees to contact a specific email address. But a slightly different version of the same message originally posted to CISA’s website still exists at the website for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which likewise instructs those fired employees who wish to be rehired and put on leave to send a password-protected email attachment with sensitive personal data.

This is hardly the first example of the administration discarding Security 101 practices in the name of expediency. Last month, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) sent an unencrypted email to the White House with the first names and first letter of the last names of recently hired CIA officers who might be easy to fire.

As cybersecurity journalist Shane Harris noted in The Atlantic, even those fragments of information could be useful to foreign spies.

“Over the weekend, a former senior CIA official showed me the steps by which a foreign adversary who knew only his first name and last initial could have managed to identify him from the single line of the congressional record where his full name was published more than 20 years ago, when he became a member of the Foreign Service,” Harris wrote. “The former official was undercover at the time as a State Department employee. If a foreign government had known even part of his name from a list of confirmed CIA officers, his cover would have been blown.”

The White House has also fired at least 100 intelligence staffers from the National Security Agency (NSA), reportedly for using an internal NSA chat tool to discuss their personal lives and politics. Testifying before the House Select Committee on the Communist Party earlier this month, the NSA’s former top cybersecurity official said the Trump administration’s attempts to mass fire probationary federal employees will be “devastating” to U.S. cybersecurity operations.

Rob Joyce, who spent 34 years at the NSA, told Congress how important those employees are in sustaining an aggressive stance against China in cyberspace.

“At my former agency, remarkable technical talent was recruited into developmental programs that provided intensive unique training and hands-on experience to cultivate vital skills,” Joyce told the panel. “Eliminating probationary employees will destroy a pipeline of top talent responsible for hunting and eradicating [Chinese] threats.”

Both the message to fired CISA workers and DOGE’s ongoing efforts to bypass vetted government networks for a faster Wi-Fi signal are emblematic of this administration’s overall approach to even basic security measures: To go around them, or just pretend they don’t exist for a good reason.

On Monday, The New York Times reported that U.S. Secret Service agents at the White House were briefly on alert last month when a trusted captain of Elon Musk’s “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE) visited the roof of the Eisenhower building inside the White House compound — to see about setting up a dish to receive satellite Internet access directly from Musk’s Starlink service.

The White House press secretary told The Times that Starlink had “donated” the service and that the gift had been vetted by the lawyer overseeing ethics issues in the White House Counsel’s Office. The White House claims the service is necessary because its wireless network is too slow.

Jake Williams, vice president for research and development at the cybersecurity consulting firm Hunter Strategy, told The Times “it’s super rare” to install Starlink or another internet provider as a replacement for existing government infrastructure that has been vetted and secured.

“I can’t think of a time that I have heard of that,” Williams said. “It introduces another attack point,” Williams said. “But why introduce that risk?”

Meanwhile, NBC News reported on March 7 that Starlink is expanding its footprint across the federal government.

“Multiple federal agencies are exploring the idea of adopting SpaceX’s Starlink for internet access — and at least one agency, the General Services Administration (GSA), has done so at the request of Musk’s staff, according to someone who worked at the GSA last month and is familiar with its network operations — despite a vow by Musk and Trump to slash the overall federal budget,” NBC wrote.

The longtime Musk employee who encountered the Secret Service on the roof in the White House complex was Christopher Stanley, the 33-year-old senior director for security engineering at X and principal security engineer at SpaceX.

On Monday, Bloomberg broke the news that Stanley had been tapped for a seat on the board of directors at the mortgage giant Fannie Mae. Stanley was added to the board alongside newly confirmed Federal Housing Finance Agency director Bill Pulte, the grandson of the late housing businessman and founder of PulteGroup — William J. Pulte.

In a nod to his new board role atop an agency that helps drive the nation’s $12 trillion mortgage market, Stanley retweeted a Bloomberg story about the hire with a smiley emoji and the comment “Tech Support.”

But earlier today, Bloomberg reported that Stanley had abruptly resigned from the Fannie board, and that details about the reason for his quick departure weren’t immediately clear. As first reported here last month, Stanley had a brush with celebrity on Twitter in 2015 when he leaked the user database for the DDoS-for-hire service LizardStresser, and soon faced threats of physical violence against his family.

My 2015 story on that leak did not name Stanley, but he exposed himself as the source by posting a video about it on his Youtube channel. A review of domain names registered by Stanley shows he went by the nickname “enKrypt,” and was the former owner of a pirated software and hacking forum called error33[.]net, as well as theC0re, a video game cheating community.

Stanley is one of more than 50 DOGE workers, mostly young men and women who have worked with one or more of Musk’s companies. The Trump administration remains dogged by questions about how many — if any — of the DOGE workers were put through the gauntlet of a thorough security background investigation before being given access to such sensitive government databases.

That’s largely because in one of his first executive actions after being sworn in for a second term on Jan. 20, President Trump declared that the security clearance process was simply too onerous and time-consuming, and that anyone so designated by the White House counsel would have full top secret/sensitive compartmented information (TS/SCI) clearances for up to six months. Translation: We accepted the risk, so TAH-DAH! No risk!

Presumably, this is the same counsel who saw no ethical concerns with Musk “donating” Starlink to the White House, or with President Trump summoning the media to film him hawking Cybertrucks and Teslas (a.k.a. “Teslers”) on the White House lawn last week.

Mr. Musk’s unelected role as head of an ad hoc executive entity that is gleefully firing federal workers and feeding federal agencies into “the wood chipper” has seen his Tesla stock price plunge in recent weeks, while firebombings and other vandalism attacks on property carrying the Tesla logo are cropping up across the U.S. and overseas and driving down Tesla sales.

President Trump and his attorney general Pam Bondi have dubiously asserted that those responsible for attacks on Tesla dealerships are committing “domestic terrorism,” and that vandals will be prosecuted accordingly. But it’s not clear this administration would recognize a real domestic security threat if it was ensconced squarely behind the Resolute Desk.

Or at the pinnacle of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The Washington Post reported last month that Trump’s new FBI director Kash Patel was paid $25,000 last year by a film company owned by a dual U.S. Russian citizen that has made programs promoting “deep state” conspiracy theories pushed by the Kremlin.

“The resulting six-part documentary appeared on Tucker Carlson’s online network, itself a reliable conduit for Kremlin propaganda,” The Post reported. “In the film, Patel made his now infamous pledge to shut down the FBI’s headquarters in Washington and ‘open it up as a museum to the deep state.'”

When the head of the FBI is promising to turn his own agency headquarters into a mocking public exhibit on the U.S. National Mall, it may seem silly to fuss over the White House’s clumsy and insulting instructions to former employees they unlawfully fired.

Indeed, one consistent feedback I’ve heard from a subset of readers here is something to this effect: “I used to like reading your stuff more when you weren’t writing about politics all the time.”

My response to that is: “Yeah, me too.” It’s not that I’m suddenly interested in writing about political matters; it’s that various actions by this administration keep intruding on my areas of coverage.

A less charitable interpretation of that reader comment is that anyone still giving such feedback is either dangerously uninformed, being disingenuous, or just doesn’t want to keep being reminded that they’re on the side of the villains, despite all the evidence showing it.

Article II of the U.S. Constitution unambiguously states that the president shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. But almost from Day One of his second term, Mr. Trump has been acting in violation of his sworn duty as president by choosing not to enforce laws passed by Congress (TikTok ban, anyone?), by freezing funds already allocated by Congress, and most recently by flouting a federal court order while simultaneously calling for the impeachment of the judge who issued it. Sworn to uphold, protect and defend The Constitution, President Trump appears to be creating new constitutional challenges with almost each passing day.

When Mr. Trump was voted out of office in November 2020, he turned to baseless claims of widespread “election fraud” to explain his loss — with deadly and long-lasting consequences. This time around, the rallying cry of DOGE and White House is “government fraud,” which gives the administration a certain amount of cover for its actions among a base of voters that has long sought to shrink the size and cost of government.

In reality, “government fraud” has become a term of derision and public scorn applied to anything or anyone the current administration doesn’t like. If DOGE and the White House were truly interested in trimming government waste, fraud and abuse, they could scarcely do better than consult the inspectors general fighting it at various federal agencies.

After all, the inspectors general likely know exactly where a great deal of the federal government’s fiscal skeletons are buried. Instead, Mr. Trump fired at least 17 inspectors general, leaving the government without critical oversight of agency activities. That action is unlikely to stem government fraud; if anything, it will only encourage such activity.

As Techdirt founder Mike Masnick noted in a recent column “Why Techdirt is Now a Democracy Blog (Whether We Like it or Not),” when the very institutions that made American innovation possible are being systematically dismantled, it’s not a “political” story anymore: It’s a story about whether the environment that enabled all the other stories we cover will continue to exist.

“This is why tech journalism’s perspective is so crucial right now,” Masnick wrote. “We’ve spent decades documenting how technology and entrepreneurship can either strengthen or undermine democratic institutions. We understand the dangers of concentrated power in the digital age. And we’ve watched in real-time as tech leaders who once championed innovation and openness now actively work to consolidate control and dismantle the very systems that enabled their success.”

“But right now, the story that matters most is how the dismantling of American institutions threatens everything else we cover,” Masnick continued. “When the fundamental structures that enable innovation, protect civil liberties, and foster open dialogue are under attack, every other tech policy story becomes secondary.”

How to Protect Yourself from March Madness Scams

It’s the month of top seeds, big upsets, and Cinderella runs by the underdogs. With March Madness basketball cranking up, a fair share of online betting will be sure to follow—along with online betting scams. 

Since a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2018, individual states can determine their own laws for sports betting. Soon after, states leaped at the opportunity to legalize it in some form or other. Today, nearly 40 states and the District of Columbia have “live and legal” sports betting, meaning that people can bet on single-game sports through a retail or online sportsbook or a combination of the two in their state. 

And it has made billions of dollars for the government.

If you’re a sports fan, this news has probably been hard to miss. Or at least the outcome of it all has been hard to miss. Commercials and signage in and around games promote several major online betting platforms. Ads have naturally made their way online too, complete with all kinds of promo offers to encourage people to get in on the action. However, that’s also opened the door for scammers who’re looking to take advantage of people looking to make a bet online, according to the Better Business Bureau (BBB). Often through shady or outright phony betting sites. 

Let’s take a look at the online sports betting landscape, some of the scams that are cropping up, and some things you can do to make a safer bet this March or any time.  

Can I bet on sports in my state, and how? 

Among the 30 states that have “live and legal” sports betting, 19 offer online betting, a number that will likely grow given various state legislation that’s either been introduced or will be introduced soon. 

If you’re curious about what’s available in your state, this interactive map shows the status of sports betting on a state-by-state level. Further, clicking on an individual state on the map will give you yet more specifics, such as the names of retail sportsbooks and online betting services that are legal in the state. For anyone looking to place a bet, this is a good place to start. It’s also helpful for people who are looking to get into online sports betting for the first time, as this is the sort of homework that the BBB advises people to do before placing a sports bet online. In their words, you can consider these sportsbooks to be “white-labeled” by your state’s gaming commission.

 

However, the BBB stresses that people should be aware that the terms and conditions associated with online sports betting will vary from service to service, as will the promotions that they offer. The BBB accordingly advises people to closely read these terms, conditions and offers. For one, “Gambling companies can restrict a user’s activity,” meaning that they can freeze accounts and the funds associated with them based on their terms and conditions. Also, the BBB cautions people about those promo offers that are often heavily advertised, “[L]ike any sales pitch, these can be deceptive. Be sure to read the fine print carefully.” 

Scammers and online betting 

Where do scammers enter the mix? The BBB points to the rise of consumer complaints around bogus betting sites: 

“You place a bet, and, at first, everything seems normal. But as soon as you try to cash out your winnings, you find you can’t withdraw a cent. Scammers will make up various excuses. For example, they may claim technical issues or insist on additional identity verification. In other cases, they may require you to deposit even more money before you can withdraw your winnings. Whatever you do, you’ll never be able to get your money off the site. And any personal information you shared is now in the hands of scam artists.” 

If there’s a good reason you should stick to the “white labeled” sites that are approved by your state’s gaming commission, this is it. Take a pass on any online ads that promote betting sites, particularly if they roll out big and almost too-good-to-be-true offers. These may lead you to shady or bogus sites. Instead, visit the ones that are approved in your state by typing in their address directly into your browser. 

Ready to place your bet? Keep these things in mind. 

In addition to what we mentioned above, there are several other things you can do to make your betting safer. 

1) Check the rep of the service.

In addition to choosing a state-approved option, check out the organization’s BBB listing at BBB.org. Here you can get a snapshot of customer ratings, complaints registered against the organization, and the organization’s response to the complaints, along with its BBB rating, if it has one. Doing a little reading here can be enlightening, giving you a sense of what issues arise and how the organization has historically addressed them. For example, you may see a common complaint and how it’s commonly resolved. You may also see where the organization has simply chosen not to respond, all of which can shape your decision whether to bet with them or not. 

2) Use a secure payment method other than your debit card.

Credit cards are a good way to go. One reason why is the Fair Credit Billing Act, which offers protection against fraudulent charges on credit cards by giving you the right to dispute charges over $50 for goods and services that were never delivered or otherwise billed incorrectly. Your credit card companies may have their own policies that improve upon the Fair Credit Billing Act as well. Debit cards don’t get the same protection under the Act. 

3) Get online protection.

Comprehensive online protection software will defend you against the latest virus, malware, spyware, and ransomware attacks plus further protect your privacy and identity. In addition to this, it can also provide strong password protection by generating and automatically storing complex passwords to keep your credentials safer from hackers and crooks who may try to force their way into your accounts. And, specific to betting sites, online protection can help prevent you from clicking links to known or suspected malicious sites. 

Make the safe(r) bet 

With online betting cropping up in more and more states for more and more people, awareness of how it works and how scammers have set up their presence within it becomes increasingly important. Research is key, such as knowing who the state-approved sportsbooks and services are, what types of betting are allowed, and where. By sticking to these white-label offerings and reading the fine print in terms, conditions, and promo offers, people can make online betting safer and more enjoyable. 

Editor’s Note: If gambling is a problem for you or someone you know, you can seek assistance from a qualified service or professional. Several states have their own helplines, and nationally you can reach out to resources like http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/ or https://www.ncpgambling.org/help-treatment/. 

The post How to Protect Yourself from March Madness Scams appeared first on McAfee Blog.

How to Use Signal Encrypted Messaging

The best end-to-end encrypted messaging app has a host of security features. Here are the ones you should care about.

Notorious Malware, Spam Host “Prospero” Moves to Kaspersky Lab

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.

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.

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.

Update, March 1, 9:43 a.m. ET: In a written statement, Kaspersky said it is aware of the public claim about the company allegedly providing services to a “bulletproof” web hosting provider. Here is their full statement:

“Kaspersky denies these claims as the company does not work and has never worked with the service provider in question. The routing through networks operated by Kaspersky doesn’t by default mean provision of the company’s services, as Kaspersky’s automatic system (AS) path might appear as a technical prefix in the network of telecom providers the company works with and provides its DDoS services.”

“Kaspersky pays great attention to conducting business ethically and ensuring that its solutions are used for their original purpose of providing cybersecurity protection. The company is currently investigating the situation to inform the company whose network could have served as a transit for a “bulletproof” web hosting provider so that the former takes the necessary measures.”

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.

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.

This Russian Tech Bro Helped Steal $93 Million and Landed in US Prison. Then Putin Called

In the epic US-Russian prisoner swap last summer, Vladimir Putin brought home an assassin, spies, and another prized ally: the man behind one of the biggest insider trading cases of all time.

Trump 2.0 Brings Cuts to Cyber, Consumer Protections

One month into his second term, President Trump’s actions to shrink the government through mass layoffs, firings and withholding funds allocated by Congress have thrown federal cybersecurity and consumer protection programs into disarray. At the same time, agencies are battling an ongoing effort by the world’s richest man to wrest control over their networks and data.

The Trump administration has fired at least 130 employees at the federal government’s foremost cybersecurity body — the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Those dismissals reportedly included CISA staff dedicated to securing U.S. elections, and fighting misinformation and foreign influence operations.

Earlier this week, technologists with Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) arrived at CISA and gained access to the agency’s email and networked files. Those DOGE staffers include Edward “Big Balls” Coristine, a 19-year-old former denizen of the “Com,” an archipelago of Discord and Telegram chat channels that function as a kind of distributed cybercriminal social network.

The investigative journalist Jacob Silverman writes that Coristine is the grandson of Valery Martynov, a KGB double agent who spied for the United States. Silverman recounted how Martynov’s wife Natalya Martynova moved to the United States with her two children after her husband’s death.

“Her son became a Virginia police officer who sometimes posts comments on blogs about his historically famous father,” Silverman wrote. “Her daughter became a financial professional who married Charles Coristine, the proprietor of LesserEvil, a snack company. Among their children is a 19-year-old young man named Edward Coristine, who currently wields an unknown amount of power and authority over the inner-workings of our federal government.”

Another member of DOGE is Christopher Stanley, formerly senior director for security engineering at X and principal security engineer at Musk’s SpaceX. Stanley, 33, had a brush with celebrity on Twitter in 2015 when he leaked the user database for the DDoS-for-hire service LizardStresser, and soon faced threats of physical violence against his family.

My 2015 story on that leak did not name Stanley, but he exposed himself as the source by posting a video about it on his Youtube channel. A review of domain names registered by Stanley shows he went by the nickname “enKrypt,” and was the former owner of a pirated software and hacking forum called error33[.]net, as well as theC0re, a video game cheating community.

“A NATIONAL CYBERATTACK”

DOGE has been steadily gaining sensitive network access to federal agencies that hold a staggering amount of personal and financial information on Americans, including the Social Security Administration (SSA), the Department of Homeland Security, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the Treasury Department.

Most recently, DOGE has sought broad access to systems at the Internal Revenue Service that contain the personal tax information on millions of Americans, including how much individuals earn and owe, property information, and even details related to child custody agreements. The New York Times reported Friday that the IRS had reached an agreement whereby a single DOGE employee — 25-year-old Gavin Kliger — will be allowed to see only anonymized taxpayer information.

The rapidity with which DOGE has rifled through one federal database after another in the name of unearthing “massive fraud” by government agencies has alarmed many security experts, who warned that DOGE’s actions bypassed essential safeguards and security measures.

“The most alarming aspect isn’t just the access being granted,” wrote Bruce Schneier and Davi Ottenheimer, referring to DOGE as a national cyberattack. “It’s the systematic dismantling of security measures that would detect and prevent misuse—including standard incident response protocols, auditing, and change-tracking mechanisms—by removing the career officials in charge of those security measures and replacing them with inexperienced operators.”

Jacob Williams is a former hacker with the U.S. National Security Agency who now works as managing director of the cybersecurity firm Hunter Labs. Williams kicked a virtual hornet’s nest last week when he posted on LinkedIn that the network incursions by DOGE were “a bigger threat to U.S. federal government information systems than China.”

Williams said while he doesn’t believe anyone at DOGE would intentionally harm the integrity and availability of these systems, it’s widely reported (and not denied) that DOGE introduced code changes into multiple federal IT systems. These code changes, he maintained, are not following the normal process for vetting and review given to federal government IT systems.

“For those thinking ‘I’m glad they aren’t following the normal federal government IT processes, those are too burdensome’ I get where you’re coming from,” Williams wrote. “But another name for ‘red tape’ are ‘controls.’ If you’re comfortable bypassing controls for the advancement of your agenda, I have questions – mostly about whether you do this in your day job too. Please tag your employer letting them know your position when you comment that controls aren’t important (doubly so if you work in cybersecurity). All satire aside, if you’re comfortable abandoning controls for expediency, I implore you to decide where the line is that you won’t cross in that regard.”

The DOGE website’s “wall of receipts” boasts that Musk and his team have saved the federal government more than $55 billion through staff reductions, lease cancellations and terminated contracts. But a team of reporters at The New York Times found the math that could back up those checks is marred with accounting errors, incorrect assumptions, outdated data and other mistakes.

For example, DOGE claimed it saved $8 billion in one contract, when the total amount was actually $8 million, The Times found.

“Some contracts the group claims credit for were double- or triple-counted,” reads a Times story with six bylines. “Another initially contained an error that inflated the totals by billions of dollars. While the DOGE team has surely cut some number of billions of dollars, its slapdash accounting adds to a pattern of recklessness by the group, which has recently gained access to sensitive government payment systems.”

So far, the DOGE website does not inspire confidence: We learned last week that the doge.gov administrators somehow left their database wide open, allowing someone to publish messages that ridiculed the site’s insecurity.

APPOINTMENTS

Trump’s efforts to grab federal agencies by their data has seen him replace career civil servants who refused to allow DOGE access to agency networks. CNN reports that Michelle King, acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration for more than 30 years, was shown the door after she denied DOGE access to sensitive information.

King was replaced by Leland Dudek, formerly a senior advisor in the SSA’s Office of Program Integrity. This week, Dudek posted a now-deleted message on LinkedIn acknowledging he had been placed on administrative leave for cooperating with DOGE.

“I confess,” Dudek wrote. “I bullied agency executives, shared executive contact information, and circumvented the chain of command to connect DOGE with the people who get stuff done. I confess. I asked where the fat was and is in our contracts so we can make the right tough choices.”

According to Wired, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was also bracing this week for roughly 500 staffers to be fired, which could have serious impacts on NIST’s cybersecurity standards and software vulnerability tracking work.

“And cuts last week at the US Digital Service included the cybersecurity lead for the central Veterans Affairs portal, VA.gov, potentially leaving VA systems and data more vulnerable without someone in his role,” Wired’s Andy Greenberg and Lily Hay Newman wrote.

NextGov reports that Trump named the Department of Defense’s new chief information security officer: Katie Arrington, a former South Carolina state lawmaker who helped steer Pentagon cybersecurity contracting policy before being put on leave amid accusations that she disclosed classified data from a military intelligence agency.

NextGov notes that the National Security Agency suspended her clearance in 2021, although the exact reasons that led to the suspension and her subsequent leave were classified. Arrington argued that the suspension was a politically motivated effort to silence her.

Trump also appointed the former chief operating officer of the Republican National Committee as the new head of the Office of National Cyber Director. Sean Cairncross, who has no formal experience in technology or security, will be responsible for coordinating national cybersecurity policy, advising the president on cyber threats, and ensuring a unified federal response to emerging cyber-risks, Politico writes.

DarkReading reports that Cairncross would share responsibility for advising the president on cyber matters, along with the director of cyber at the White House National Security Council (NSC) — a group that advises the president on all matters security related, and not just cyber.

CONSUMER PROTECTION?

The president also ordered staffers at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to stop most work. Created by Congress in 2011 to be a clearinghouse of consumer complaints, the CFPB has sued some of the nation’s largest financial institutions for violating consumer protection laws.

The CFPB says its actions have put nearly $18 billion back in Americans’ pockets in the form of monetary compensation or canceled debts, and imposed $4 billion in civil money penalties against violators. The CFPB’s homepage has featured a “404: Page not found” error for weeks now.

Trump has appointed Russell Vought, the architect of the conservative policy playbook Project 2025, to be the CFPB’s acting director. Vought has publicly favored abolishing the agency, as has Elon Musk, whose efforts to remake X into a payments platform would otherwise be regulated by the CFPB.

The New York Times recently published a useful graphic showing all of the government staffing changes, including the firing of several top officials, affecting agencies with federal investigations into or regulatory battles with Musk’s companies. Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also have released a comprehensive account (PDF) of Musk’s various conflicts of interest.

As the Times notes, Musk and his companies have repeatedly failed to comply with federal reporting protocols aimed at protecting state secrets, and these failures have prompted at least three federal reviews. Those include an inquiry launched last year by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General. Four days after taking office, Trump fired the DoD inspector general along with 17 other inspectors general.

The Trump administration also shifted the enforcement priorities of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) away from prosecuting misconduct in the cryptocurrency sector, reassigning lawyers and renaming the unit to focus more on “cyber and emerging technologies.”

Reuters reports that the former SEC chair Gary Gensler made fighting misconduct in a sector he termed the “wild west” a priority for the agency, targeting not only cryptocurrency fraudsters but also the large firms that facilitate trading such as Coinbase.

On Friday, Coinbase said the SEC planned to withdraw its lawsuit against the crypto exchange. Also on Friday, the cryptocurrency exchange Bybit announced on X that a cybersecurity breach led to the theft of more than $1.4 billion worth of cryptocurrencies — making it the largest crypto heist ever.

ORGANIZED CRIME AND CORRUPTION

On Feb. 10, Trump ordered executive branch agencies to stop enforcing the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which froze foreign bribery investigations, and even allows for “remedial actions” of past enforcement actions deemed “inappropriate.”

Trump’s action also disbanded the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative and KleptoCapture Task Force — units which proved their value in corruption cases and in seizing the assets of sanctioned Russian oligarchs — and diverted resources away from investigating white-collar crime.

That’s according to the independent Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an investigative journalism outlet that until very recently was funded in part by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

The OCCRP lost nearly a third of its funding and was forced to lay off 43 reporters and staff after Trump moved to shutter USAID and freeze its spending. NBC News reports the Trump administration plans to gut the agency and leave fewer than 300 staffers on the job out of the current 8,000 direct hires and contractors.

The Global Investigative Journalism Network wrote this week that the sudden hold on USAID foreign assistance funding has frozen an estimated $268 million in agreed grants for independent media and the free flow of information in more than 30 countries — including several under repressive regimes.

Elon Musk has called USAID “a criminal organization” without evidence, and promoted fringe theories on his social media platform X that the agency operated without oversight and was rife with fraud. Just months before the election, USAID’s Office of Inspector General announced an investigation into USAID’s oversight of Starlink satellite terminals provided to the government of Ukraine.

KrebsOnSecurity this week heard from a trusted source that all outgoing email from USAID now carries a notation of “sensitive but unclassified,” a designation that experts say could make it more difficult for journalists and others to obtain USAID email records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). On Feb. 20, Fedscoop reported also hearing the same thing from multiple sources, noting that the added message cannot be seen by senders until after the email is sent.

FIVE BULLETS

On Feb. 18, Trump issued an executive order declaring that only the U.S. attorney general and the president can provide authoritative interpretations of the law for the executive branch, and that this authority extends to independent agencies operating under the executive branch.

Trump is arguing that Article II, Clause 1 of the Constitution vests this power with the president. However, jurist.org writes that Article II does not expressly state the president or any other person in the executive branch has the power to interpret laws.

“The article states that the president is required to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed,'” Juris noted. “Jurisdiction to interpret laws and determine constitutionality belongs to the judicial branch under Article III. The framers of the Constitution designed the separation of duties to prevent any single branch of government from becoming too powerful.”

The executive order requires all agencies to submit to “performance standards and management objectives” to be established by the White House Office of Management and Budget, and to report periodically to the president.

Those performance metrics are already being requested: Employees at multiple federal agencies on Saturday reported receiving an email from the Office of Personnel Management ordering them to reply with a set of bullet points justifying their work for the past week.

“Please reply to this email with approx. 5 bullets of what you accomplished last week and cc your manager,” the notice read. “Please do not send any classified information, links, or attachments. Deadline is this Monday at 11:59 p.m. EST.”

In a social media post Saturday, Musk said the directive came at the behest of President Trump, and that failure to respond would be taken as a resignation. Meanwhile, Bloomberg writes the Department of Justice has been urging employees to hold off replying out of concern doing so could trigger ethics violations. The National Treasury Employees Union also is advising its employees not to respond.

A legal battle over Trump’s latest executive order is bound to join more than 70 other lawsuits currently underway to halt the administration’s efforts to massively reduce the size of the federal workforce through layoffs, firings and attrition.

KING TRUMP?

On Feb. 15, the president posted on social media, “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,” citing a quote often attributed to the French dictator Napoleon Bonaparte. Four days later, Trump referred to himself as “the king” on social media, while the White House nonchalantly posted an illustration of him wearing a crown.

Trump has been publicly musing about running for an unconstitutional third-term in office, a statement that some of his supporters dismiss as Trump just trying to rile his liberal critics. However, just days after Trump began his second term, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) introduced a bill to amend the Constitution so that Trump — and any other future president — can be elected to serve a third term.

This week at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Rep. Ogles reportedly led a group of Trump supporters calling itself the “Third Term Project,” which is trying to gain support for the bill from GOP lawmakers. The event featured images of Trump depicted as Caesar.

Russia continues to be among the world’s top exporters of cybercrime, narcotics, money laundering, human trafficking, disinformation, war and death, and yet the Trump administration has suddenly broken with the Western world in normalizing relations with Moscow.

This week President Trump stunned U.S. allies by repeating Kremlin talking points that Ukraine is somehow responsible for Russia’s invasion, and that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is a “dictator.” The president repeated these lies even as his administration is demanding that Zelensky give the United States half of his country’s mineral wealth in exchange for a promise that Russia will cease its territorial aggression there.

President Trump’s servility toward an actual dictator — Russian President Vladimir Putin — does not bode well for efforts to improve the cybersecurity of U.S. federal IT networks, or the private sector systems on which the government is largely reliant. In addition, this administration’s baffling moves to alienate, antagonize and sideline our closest allies could make it more difficult for the United States to secure their ongoing cooperation in cybercrime investigations.

It’s also startling how closely DOGE’s approach so far hews to tactics typically employed by ransomware gangs: A group of 20-somethings with names like “Big Balls” shows up on a weekend and gains access to your servers, deletes data, locks out key staff, takes your website down, and prevents you from serving customers.

When the federal executive starts imitating ransomware playbooks against its own agencies while Congress largely gazes on in either bewilderment or amusement, we’re in four-alarm fire territory. At least in theory, one can negotiate with ransomware purveyors.

How Phished Data Turns into Apple & Google Wallets

Carding — the underground business of stealing, selling and swiping stolen payment card data — has long been the dominion of Russia-based hackers. Happily, the broad deployment of more secure chip-based payment cards in the United States has weakened the carding market. But a flurry of innovation from cybercrime groups in China is breathing new life into the carding industry, by turning phished card data into mobile wallets that can be used online and at main street stores.

If you own a mobile phone, the chances are excellent that at some point in the past two years it has received at least one phishing message that spoofs the U.S. Postal Service to supposedly collect some outstanding delivery fee, or an SMS that pretends to be a local toll road operator warning of a delinquent toll fee.

These messages are being sent through sophisticated phishing kits sold by several cybercriminals based in mainland China. And they are not traditional SMS phishing or “smishing” messages, as they bypass the mobile networks entirely. Rather, the missives are sent through the Apple iMessage service and through RCS, the functionally equivalent technology on Google phones.

People who enter their payment card data at one of these sites will be told their financial institution needs to verify the small transaction by sending a one-time passcode to the customer’s mobile device. In reality, that code will be sent by the victim’s financial institution to verify that the user indeed wishes to link their card information to a mobile wallet.

If the victim then provides that one-time code, the phishers will link the card data to a new mobile wallet from Apple or Google, loading the wallet onto a mobile phone that the scammers control.

CARDING REINVENTED

Ford Merrill works in security research at SecAlliance, a CSIS Security Group company. Merrill has been studying the evolution of several China-based smishing gangs, and found that most of them feature helpful and informative video tutorials in their sales accounts on Telegram. Those videos show the thieves are loading multiple stolen digital wallets on a single mobile device, and then selling those phones in bulk for hundreds of dollars apiece.

“Who says carding is dead?,” said Merrill, who presented about his findings at the M3AAWG security conference in Lisbon earlier today. “This is the best mag stripe cloning device ever. This threat actor is saying you need to buy at least 10 phones, and they’ll air ship them to you.”

One promotional video shows stacks of milk crates stuffed full of phones for sale. A closer inspection reveals that each phone is affixed with a handwritten notation that typically references the date its mobile wallets were added, the number of wallets on the device, and the initials of the seller.

Merrill said one common way criminal groups in China are cashing out with these stolen mobile wallets involves setting up fake e-commerce businesses on Stripe or Zelle and running transactions through those entities — often for amounts totaling between $100 and $500.

Merrill said that when these phishing groups first began operating in earnest two years ago, they would wait between 60 to 90 days before selling the phones or using them for fraud. But these days that waiting period is more like just seven to ten days, he said.

“When they first installed this, the actors were very patient,” he said. “Nowadays, they only wait like 10 days before [the wallets] are hit hard and fast.”

GHOST TAP

Criminals also can cash out mobile wallets by obtaining real point-of-sale terminals and using tap-to-pay on phone after phone. But they also offer a more cutting-edge mobile fraud technology: Merrill found that at least one of the Chinese phishing groups sells an Android app called “ZNFC” that can relay a valid NFC transaction to anywhere in the world. The user simply waves their phone at a local payment terminal that accepts Apple or Google pay, and the app relays an NFC transaction over the Internet from a phone in China.

“The software can work from anywhere in the world,” Merrill said. “These guys provide the software for $500 a month, and it can relay both NFC enabled tap-to-pay as well as any digital wallet. They even have 24-hour support.”

The rise of so-called “ghost tap” mobile software was first documented in November 2024 by security experts at ThreatFabric. Andy Chandler, the company’s chief commercial officer, said their researchers have since identified a number of criminal groups from different regions of the world latching on to this scheme.

Chandler said those include organized crime gangs in Europe that are using similar mobile wallet and NFC attacks to take money out of ATMs made to work with smartphones.

“No one is talking about it, but we’re now seeing ten different methodologies using the same modus operandi, and none of them are doing it the same,” Chandler said. “This is much bigger than the banks are prepared to say.”

A November 2024 story in the Singapore daily The Straits Times reported authorities there arrested three foreign men who were recruited in their home countries via social messaging platforms, and given ghost tap apps with which to purchase expensive items from retailers, including mobile phones, jewelry, and gold bars.

“Since Nov 4, at least 10 victims who had fallen for e-commerce scams have reported unauthorised transactions totaling more than $100,000 on their credit cards for purchases such as electronic products, like iPhones and chargers, and jewelry in Singapore,” The Straits Times wrote, noting that in another case with a similar modus operandi, the police arrested a Malaysian man and woman on Nov 8.

ADVANCED PHISHING TECHNIQUES

According to Merrill, the phishing pages that spoof the USPS and various toll road operators are powered by several innovations designed to maximize the extraction of victim data.

For example, a would-be smishing victim might enter their personal and financial information, but then decide the whole thing is scam before actually submitting the data. In this case, anything typed into the data fields of the phishing page will be captured in real time, regardless of whether the visitor actually clicks the “submit” button.

Merrill said people who submit payment card data to these phishing sites often are then told their card can’t be processed, and urged to use a different card. This technique, he said, sometimes allows the phishers to steal more than one mobile wallet per victim.

Many phishing websites expose victim data by storing the stolen information directly on the phishing domain. But Merrill said these Chinese phishing kits will forward all victim data to a back-end database operated by the phishing kit vendors. That way, even when the smishing sites get taken down for fraud, the stolen data is still safe and secure.

Another important innovation is the use of mass-created Apple and Google user accounts through which these phishers send their spam messages. One of the Chinese phishing groups posted images on their Telegram sales channels showing how these robot Apple and Google accounts are loaded onto Apple and Google phones, and arranged snugly next to each other in an expansive, multi-tiered rack that sits directly in front of the phishing service operator.

In other words, the smishing websites are powered by real human operators as long as new messages are being sent. Merrill said the criminals appear to send only a few dozen messages at a time, likely because completing the scam takes manual work by the human operators in China. After all, most one-time codes used for mobile wallet provisioning are generally only good for a few minutes before they expire.

Notably, none of the phishing sites spoofing the toll operators or postal services will load in a regular Web browser; they will only render if they detect that a visitor is coming from a mobile device.

“One of the reasons they want you to be on a mobile device is they want you to be on the same device that is going to receive the one-time code,” Merrill said. “They also want to minimize the chances you will leave. And if they want to get that mobile tokenization and grab your one-time code, they need a live operator.”

Merrill found the Chinese phishing kits feature another innovation that makes it simple for customers to turn stolen card details into a mobile wallet: They programmatically take the card data supplied by the phishing victim and convert it into a digital image of a real payment card that matches that victim’s financial institution. That way, attempting to enroll a stolen card into Apple Pay, for example, becomes as easy as scanning the fabricated card image with an iPhone.

“The phone isn’t smart enough to know whether it’s a real card or just an image,” Merrill said. “So it scans the card into Apple Pay, which says okay we need to verify that you’re the owner of the card by sending a one-time code.”

PROFITS

How profitable are these mobile phishing kits? The best guess so far comes from data gathered by other security researchers who’ve been tracking these advanced Chinese phishing vendors.

In August 2023, the security firm Resecurity discovered a vulnerability in one popular Chinese phish kit vendor’s platform that exposed the personal and financial data of phishing victims. Resecurity dubbed the group the Smishing Triad, and found the gang had harvested 108,044 payment cards across 31 phishing domains (3,485 cards per domain).

In August 2024, security researcher Grant Smith gave a presentation at the DEFCON security conference about tracking down the Smishing Triad after scammers spoofing the U.S. Postal Service duped his wife. By identifying a different vulnerability in the gang’s phishing kit, Smith said he was able to see that people entered 438,669 unique credit cards in 1,133 phishing domains (387 cards per domain).

Based on his research, Merrill said it’s reasonable to expect between $100 and $500 in losses on each card that is turned into a mobile wallet. Merrill said they observed nearly 33,000 unique domains tied to these Chinese smishing groups during the year between the publication of Resecurity’s research and Smith’s DEFCON talk.

Using a median number of 1,935 cards per domain and a conservative loss of $250 per card, that comes out to about $15 billion in fraudulent charges over a year.

Merrill was reluctant to say whether he’d identified additional security vulnerabilities in any of the phishing kits sold by the Chinese groups, noting that the phishers quickly fixed the vulnerabilities that were detailed publicly by Resecurity and Smith.

FIGHTING BACK

Adoption of touchless payments took off in the United States after the Coronavirus pandemic emerged, and many financial institutions in the United States were eager to make it simple for customers to link payment cards to mobile wallets. Thus, the authentication requirement for doing so defaulted to sending the customer a one-time code via SMS.

Experts say the continued reliance on one-time codes for onboarding mobile wallets has fostered this new wave of carding. KrebsOnSecurity interviewed a security executive from a large European financial institution who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the press.

That expert said the lag between the phishing of victim card data and its eventual use for fraud has left many financial institutions struggling to correlate the causes of their losses.

“That’s part of why the industry as a whole has been caught by surprise,” the expert said. “A lot of people are asking, how this is possible now that we’ve tokenized a plaintext process. We’ve never seen the volume of sending and people responding that we’re seeing with these phishers.”

To improve the security of digital wallet provisioning, some banks in Europe and Asia require customers to log in to the bank’s mobile app before they can link a digital wallet to their device.

Addressing the ghost tap threat may require updates to contactless payment terminals, to better identify NFC transactions that are being relayed from another device. But experts say it’s unrealistic to expect retailers will be eager to replace existing payment terminals before their expected lifespans expire.

And of course Apple and Google have an increased role to play as well, given that their accounts are being created en masse and used to blast out these smishing messages. Both companies could easily tell which of their devices suddenly have 7-10 different mobile wallets added from 7-10 different people around the world. They could also recommend that financial institutions use more secure authentication methods for mobile wallet provisioning.

Neither Apple nor Google responded to requests for comment on this story.

How to Spot a Crypto Scam: The Top Red Flags to Watch For

Cryptocurrency offers exciting opportunities—but it’s also a favorite playground for scammers.  

With the rapid rise of deepfake technology and deceptive AI-driven schemes, even seasoned investors can fall victim to fraud. According to McAfee’s State of the Scamiverse report, deepfake scams are on the rise, with the average American now encountering 2.6 deepfake videos daily. And younger adults (18-24) see even more – about 3.5 per day. 

From fake investment opportunities to phishing attempts, bad actors are more sophisticated than ever.  

The recent wave of Trump-themed meme coins—more than 700 copycats attempting to mimic the real thing—highlights just how rampant crypto scams have become. If even the president’s cryptocurrency isn’t safe from impersonators, how can everyday investors protect themselves? 

By knowing the red flags, you can safeguard your money and personal data from crypto scammers. 

Five Red Flags That Signal a Crypto Scam 

1) Too-Good-To-Be-True Promises

Scammers often lure victims with guaranteed returns or impossibly high profits. If an investment promises “risk-free” earnings or sounds like a financial miracle, run the other way—legitimate investments always carry some level of risk. 

Example: A Ponzi scheme disguised as a crypto investment fund may claim to offer “10% daily profits” or “instant payouts.” In reality, they use new investors’ money to pay early participants—until the scam collapses.

2) Celebrity Endorsements That Don’t Add Up

Fraudsters frequently impersonate public figures—from Elon Musk to Donald Trump—to promote fake coins or crypto investments. The explosion of Trump-themed meme coins shows how easily scammers exploit famous names. Even if a project appears linked to a well-known figure, verify through official channels. 

Example: A deepfake video featuring a celebrity “endorsing” a new crypto token. McAfee’s research found that nearly 3 deepfake videos per day are encountered by the average American, many of them tied to scams. 

3) Fake Exchanges & Wallets

Scammers often set up fraudulent crypto exchanges or wallet apps that look legitimate but are designed to steal your money. They might advertise low fees, special bonuses, or exclusive access to new coins. 

How to Protect Yourself: 

Always use well-established exchanges with a proven track record. 

Look for HTTPS encryption and verify the URL carefully. 

Research if the platform is licensed and regulated.

4) Pressure to Act Fast

Scammers thrive on urgency. They’ll push you to act immediately before you have time to think critically. Whether it’s a limited-time pre-sale or a “secret investment opportunity,” don’t let fear of missing out (FOMO) cloud your judgment. 

Example: “Only 10 spots left! Invest now before prices skyrocket!”—Classic scam tactics designed to trigger impulsive decisions.

5) Requests for Upfront Payments or Private Keys

No legitimate crypto project will ever ask for: 

• Your private keys or wallet seed phrase. 
• An upfront fee before you can “withdraw” funds. 
• Payment via gift cards or wire transfers. 

Example: A fake customer support email pretending to be from Coinbase, asking you to confirm your wallet password—this is a phishing attempt! 

How to Stay Safe from Crypto Scams 

Do Your Research: Always Google the project’s name + “scam” before investing. 

Check Regulatory Status: See if the platform is licensed (DFPI, SEC, or other regulators). 

Verify Official Websites & Socials: Scammers create lookalike websites with small typos—double-check URLs! 

Use Cold Storage: Store your assets in a hardware wallet to protect against hacks. 

Use tools like McAfee+:  To monitor for potential scams and get warnings for potential deepfakes and other scam red flags. 

Crypto offers incredible potential—but with great opportunity comes risk. Scammers are always evolving, using deepfake videos, phishing, and fraudulent investment schemes to trick even the savviest investors. By staying informed and following basic security practices, you can avoid getting caught in the next big crypto scam.

The post How to Spot a Crypto Scam: The Top Red Flags to Watch For appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Meet the Cybersecurity Defender of 2025 for EMEA

Cisco's 2025 EMEA Cybersecurity Defender of the Year award goes to the team at SAP Enterprise Cloud Services, who raised the bar for overall security posture.

Nearly a Year Later, Mozilla is Still Promoting OneRep

In mid-March 2024, KrebsOnSecurity revealed that the founder of the personal data removal service Onerep also founded dozens of people-search companies. Shortly after that investigation was published, Mozilla said it would stop bundling Onerep with the Firefox browser and wind down its partnership with the company. But nearly a year later, Mozilla is still promoting it to Firefox users.

Mozilla offers Onerep to Firefox users on a subscription basis as part of Mozilla Monitor Plus. Launched in 2018 under the name Firefox Monitor, Mozilla Monitor also checks data from the website Have I Been Pwned? to let users know when their email addresses or password are leaked in data breaches.

The ink on that partnership agreement had barely dried before KrebsOnSecurity published a story showing that Onerep’s Belarusian CEO and founder Dimitiri Shelest launched dozens of people-search services since 2010, including a still-active data broker called Nuwber that sells background reports on people. This seemed to contradict Onerep’s stated motto, “We believe that no one should compromise personal online security and get a profit from it.”

Shelest released a lengthy statement (PDF) wherein he acknowledged maintaining an ownership stake in Nuwber, a consumer data broker he founded in 2015 — around the same time he started Onerep.

Shelest maintained that Nuwber has “zero cross-over or information-sharing with Onerep,” and said any other old domains that may be found and associated with his name are no longer being operated by him.

“I get it,” Shelest wrote. “My affiliation with a people search business may look odd from the outside. In truth, if I hadn’t taken that initial path with a deep dive into how people search sites work, Onerep wouldn’t have the best tech and team in the space. Still, I now appreciate that we did not make this more clear in the past and I’m aiming to do better in the future.”

When asked to comment on the findings, Mozilla said then that although customer data was never at risk, the outside financial interests and activities of Onerep’s CEO did not align with their values.

“We’re working now to solidify a transition plan that will provide customers with a seamless experience and will continue to put their interests first,” Mozilla said.

In October 2024, Mozilla published a statement saying the search for a different provider was taking longer than anticipated.

“While we continue to evaluate vendors, finding a technically excellent and values-aligned partner takes time,” Mozilla wrote. “While we continue this search, Onerep will remain the backend provider, ensuring that we can maintain uninterrupted services while we continue evaluating new potential partners that align more closely with Mozilla’s values and user expectations. We are conducting thorough diligence to find the right vendor.”

Asked for an update, Mozilla said the search for a replacement partner continues.

“The work’s ongoing but we haven’t found the right alternative yet,” Mozilla said in an emailed statement. “Our customers’ data remains safe, and since the product provides a lot of value to our subscribers, we’ll continue to offer it during this process.”

It’s a win-win for Mozilla that they’ve received accolades for their principled response while continuing to partner with Onerep almost a year later. But if it takes so long to find a suitable replacement, what does that say about the personal data removal industry itself?

Onerep appears to be working in partnership with another problematic people-search service: Radaris, which has a history of ignoring opt-out requests or failing to honor them. A week before breaking the story about Onerep, KrebsOnSecurity published research showing the co-founders of Radaris were two native Russian brothers who’d built a vast network of affiliate marketing programs and consumer data broker services.

Lawyers for the Radaris co-founders threatened to sue KrebsOnSecurity unless that story was retracted in full, claiming the founders were in fact Ukrainian and that our reporting had defamed the brothers by associating them with the actions of Radaris. Instead, we published a follow-up investigation which showed that not only did the brothers from Russia create Radaris, for many years they issued press releases quoting a fictitious CEO seeking money from investors.

Several readers have shared emails they received from Radaris after attempting to remove their personal data, and those messages show Radaris has been promoting Onerep.

Microsoft Patch Tuesday, February 2025 Edition

Microsoft today issued security updates to fix at least 56 vulnerabilities in its Windows operating systems and supported software, including two zero-day flaws that are being actively exploited.

All supported Windows operating systems will receive an update this month for a buffer overflow vulnerability that carries the catchy name CVE-2025-21418. This patch should be a priority for enterprises, as Microsoft says it is being exploited, has low attack complexity, and no requirements for user interaction.

Tenable senior staff research engineer Satnam Narang noted that since 2022, there have been nine elevation of privilege vulnerabilities in this same Windows component — three each year — including one in 2024 that was exploited in the wild as a zero day (CVE-2024-38193).

“CVE-2024-38193 was exploited by the North Korean APT group known as Lazarus Group to implant a new version of the FudModule rootkit in order to maintain persistence and stealth on compromised systems,” Narang said. “At this time, it is unclear if CVE-2025-21418 was also exploited by Lazarus Group.”

The other zero-day, CVE-2025-21391, is an elevation of privilege vulnerability in Windows Storage that could be used to delete files on a targeted system. Microsoft’s advisory on this bug references something called “CWE-59: Improper Link Resolution Before File Access,” says no user interaction is required, and that the attack complexity is low.

Adam Barnett, lead software engineer at Rapid7, said although the advisory provides scant detail, and even offers some vague reassurance that ‘an attacker would only be able to delete targeted files on a system,’ it would be a mistake to assume that the impact of deleting arbitrary files would be limited to data loss or denial of service.

“As long ago as 2022, ZDI researchers set out how a motivated attacker could parlay arbitrary file deletion into full SYSTEM access using techniques which also involve creative misuse of symbolic links,”Barnett wrote.

One vulnerability patched today that was publicly disclosed earlier is CVE-2025-21377, another weakness that could allow an attacker to elevate their privileges on a vulnerable Windows system. Specifically, this is yet another Windows flaw that can be used to steal NTLMv2 hashes — essentially allowing an attacker to authenticate as the targeted user without having to log in.

According to Microsoft, minimal user interaction with a malicious file is needed to exploit CVE-2025-21377, including selecting, inspecting or “performing an action other than opening or executing the file.”

“This trademark linguistic ducking and weaving may be Microsoft’s way of saying ‘if we told you any more, we’d give the game away,'” Barnett said. “Accordingly, Microsoft assesses exploitation as more likely.”

The SANS Internet Storm Center has a handy list of all the Microsoft patches released today, indexed by severity. Windows enterprise administrators would do well to keep an eye on askwoody.com, which often has the scoop on any patches causing problems.

It’s getting harder to buy Windows software that isn’t also bundled with Microsoft’s flagship Copilot artificial intelligence (AI) feature. Last month Microsoft started bundling Copilot with Microsoft Office 365, which Redmond has since rebranded as “Microsoft 365 Copilot.” Ostensibly to offset the costs of its substantial AI investments, Microsoft also jacked up prices from 22 percent to 30 percent for upcoming license renewals and new subscribers.

Office-watch.com writes that existing Office 365 users who are paying an annual cloud license do have the option of “Microsoft 365 Classic,” an AI-free subscription at a lower price, but that many customers are not offered the option until they attempt to cancel their existing Office subscription.

In other security patch news, Apple has shipped iOS 18.3.1, which fixes a zero day vulnerability (CVE-2025-24200) that is showing up in attacks.

Adobe has issued security updates that fix a total of 45 vulnerabilities across InDesign, Commerce, Substance 3D Stager, InCopy, Illustrator, Substance 3D Designer and Photoshop Elements.

Chris Goettl at Ivanti notes that Google Chrome is shipping an update today which will trigger updates for Chromium based browsers including Microsoft Edge, so be on the lookout for Chrome and Edge updates as we proceed through the week.

US Funding Cuts Are Helping Criminals Get Away With Child Abuse and Human Trafficking

Services supporting victims of online child exploitation and trafficking around the world have faced USAID and State Department cuts—and children are suffering as a result, sources tell WIRED.

Teen on Musk’s DOGE Team Graduated from ‘The Com’

Wired reported this week that a 19-year-old working for Elon Musk‘s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was given access to sensitive US government systems even though his past association with cybercrime communities should have precluded him from gaining the necessary security clearances to do so. As today’s story explores, the DOGE teen is a former denizen of ‘The Com,’ an archipelago of Discord and Telegram chat channels that function as a kind of distributed cybercriminal social network for facilitating instant collaboration.

Since President Trump’s second inauguration, Musk’s DOGE team has gained access to a truly staggering amount of personal and sensitive data on American citizens, moving quickly to seize control over databases at the U.S. Treasury, the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Education, and the Department of Health and Human Resources, among others.

Wired first reported on Feb. 2 that one of the technologists on Musk’s crew is a 19-year-old high school graduate named Edward Coristine, who reportedly goes by the nickname “Big Balls” online. One of the companies Coristine founded, Tesla.Sexy LLC, was set up in 2021, when he would have been around 16 years old.

“Tesla.Sexy LLC controls dozens of web domains, including at least two Russian-registered domains,” Wired reported. “One of those domains, which is still active, offers a service called Helfie, which is an AI bot for Discord servers targeting the Russian market. While the operation of a Russian website would not violate US sanctions preventing Americans doing business with Russian companies, it could potentially be a factor in a security clearance review.”

Mr. Coristine has not responded to requests for comment. In a follow-up story this week, Wired found that someone using a Telegram handle tied to Coristine solicited a DDoS-for-hire service in 2022, and that he worked for a short time at a company that specializes in protecting customers from DDoS attacks.

Internet routing records show that Coristine runs an Internet service provider called Packetware (AS400495). Also known as “DiamondCDN,” Packetware currently hosts tesla[.]sexy and diamondcdn[.]com, among other domains.

DiamondCDN was advertised and claimed by someone who used the nickname “Rivage” on several Com-based Discord channels over the years. A review of chat logs from some of those channels show other members frequently referred to Rivage as “Edward.”

From late 2020 to late 2024, Rivage’s conversations would show up in multiple Com chat servers that are closely monitored by security companies. In November 2022, Rivage could be seen requesting recommendations for a reliable and powerful DDoS-for-hire service.

Rivage made that request in the cybercrime channel “Dstat,” a core Com hub where users could buy and sell attack services. Dstat’s website dstat[.]cc was seized in 2024 as part of “Operation PowerOFF,” an international law enforcement action against DDoS services.

Coristine’s LinkedIn profile said that in 2022 he worked at an anti-DDoS company called Path Networks, which Wired generously described as a “network monitoring firm known for hiring reformed blackhat hackers.” Wired wrote:

“At Path Network, Coristine worked as a systems engineer from April to June of 2022, according to his now-deleted LinkedIn résumé. Path has at times listed as employees Eric Taylor, also known as Cosmo the God, a well-known former cybercriminal and member of the hacker group UGNazis, as well as Matthew Flannery, an Australian convicted hacker whom police allege was a member of the hacker group LulzSec. It’s unclear whether Coristine worked at Path concurrently with those hackers, and WIRED found no evidence that either Coristine or other Path employees engaged in illegal activity while at the company.”

The founder of Path is a young man named Marshal Webb. I wrote about Webb back in 2016, in a story about a DDoS defense company he co-founded called BackConnect Security LLC. On September 20, 2016, KrebsOnSecurity published data showing that the company had a history of hijacking Internet address space that belonged to others.

Less than 24 hours after that story ran, KrebsOnSecurity.com was hit with the biggest DDoS attack the Internet had ever seen at the time. That sustained attack kept this site offline for nearly 4 days.

The other founder of BackConnect Security LLC was Tucker Preston, a Georgia man who pleaded guilty in 2020 to paying a DDoS-for-hire service to launch attacks against others.

The aforementioned Path employee Eric Taylor pleaded guilty in 2017 to charges including an attack on our home in 2013. Taylor was among several men involved in making a false report to my local police department about a supposed hostage situation at our residence in Virginia. In response, a heavily-armed police force surrounded my home and put me in handcuffs at gunpoint before the police realized it was all a dangerous hoax known as “swatting.”

CosmoTheGod rocketed to Internet infamy in 2013 when he and a number of other hackers set up the Web site exposed[dot]su, which “doxed” dozens of public officials and celebrities by publishing the address, Social Security numbers and other personal information on the former First Lady Michelle Obama, the then-director of the FBI and the U.S. attorney general, among others. The group also swatted many of the people they doxed.

Wired noted that Coristine only worked at Path for a few months in 2022, but the story didn’t mention why his tenure was so short. A screenshot shared on the website pathtruths.com includes a snippet of conversations in June 2022 between Path employees discussing Coristine’s firing.

According to that record, Path founder Marshal Webb dismissed Coristine for leaking internal documents to a competitor. Not long after Coristine’s termination, someone leaked an abundance of internal Path documents and conversations. Among other things, those chats revealed that one of Path’s technicians was a Canadian man named Curtis Gervais who was convicted in 2017 of perpetrating dozens of swatting attacks and fake bomb threats — including at least two attempts against our home in 2014.

On May 11, 2024, Rivage posted on a Discord channel for a DDoS protection service that is chiefly marketed to members of The Com. Rivage expressed frustration with his time spent on Com-based communities, suggesting that its profitability had been oversold.

“I don’t think there’s a lot of money to be made in the com,” Rivage lamented. “I’m not buying Heztner [servers] to set up some com VPN.”

Rivage largely stopped posting messages on Com channels after that. Wired reports that Coristine subsequently spent three months last summer working at Neuralink, Elon Musk’s brain implant startup.

The trouble with all this is that even if someone sincerely intends to exit The Com after years of consorting with cybercriminals, they are often still subject to personal attacks, harassment and hacking long after they have left the scene.

That’s because a huge part of Com culture involves harassing, swatting and hacking other members of the community. These internecine attacks are often for financial gain, but just as frequently they are perpetrated by cybercrime groups to exact retribution from or assert dominance over rival gangs.

Experts say it is extremely difficult for former members of violent street gangs to gain a security clearance needed to view sensitive or classified information held by the U.S. government. That’s because ex-gang members are highly susceptible to extortion and coercion from current members of the same gang, and that alone presents an unacceptable security risk for intelligence agencies.

And make no mistake: The Com is the English-language cybercriminal hacking equivalent of a violent street gang. KrebsOnSecurity has published numerous stories detailing how feuds within the community periodically spill over into real-world violence.

When Coristine’s name surfaced in Wired‘s report this week, members of The Com immediately took notice. In the following segment from a February 5, 2025 chat in a Com-affiliated hosting provider, members criticized Rivage’s skills, and discussed harassing his family and notifying authorities about incriminating accusations that may or may not be true.

2025-02-05 16:29:44 UTC vperked#0 they got this nigga on indiatimes man
2025-02-05 16:29:46 UTC alexaloo#0 Their cropping is worse than AI could have done
2025-02-05 16:29:48 UTC hebeatsme#0 bro who is that
2025-02-05 16:29:53 UTC hebeatsme#0 yalla re talking about
2025-02-05 16:29:56 UTC xewdy#0 edward
2025-02-05 16:29:56 UTC .yarrb#0 rivagew
2025-02-05 16:29:57 UTC vperked#0 Rivarge
2025-02-05 16:29:57 UTC xewdy#0 diamondcdm
2025-02-05 16:29:59 UTC vperked#0 i cant spell it
2025-02-05 16:30:00 UTC hebeatsme#0 rivage
2025-02-05 16:30:08 UTC .yarrb#0 yes
2025-02-05 16:30:14 UTC hebeatsme#0 i have him added
2025-02-05 16:30:20 UTC hebeatsme#0 hes on discord still
2025-02-05 16:30:47 UTC .yarrb#0 hes focused on stroking zaddy elon
2025-02-05 16:30:47 UTC vperked#0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Coristine
2025-02-05 16:30:50 UTC vperked#0 no fucking way
2025-02-05 16:30:53 UTC vperked#0 they even made a wiki for him
2025-02-05 16:30:55 UTC vperked#0 LOOOL
2025-02-05 16:31:05 UTC hebeatsme#0 no way
2025-02-05 16:31:08 UTC hebeatsme#0 hes not a good dev either
2025-02-05 16:31:14 UTC hebeatsme#0 like????
2025-02-05 16:31:22 UTC hebeatsme#0 has to be fake
2025-02-05 16:31:24 UTC xewdy#0 and theyre saying ts
2025-02-05 16:31:29 UTC xewdy#0 like ok bro
2025-02-05 16:31:51 UTC .yarrb#0 now i wanna know what all the other devs are like…
2025-02-05 16:32:00 UTC vperked#0 “`Coristine used the moniker “bigballs” on LinkedIn and @Edwardbigballer on Twitter, according to The Daily Dot.[“`
2025-02-05 16:32:05 UTC vperked#0 LOL
2025-02-05 16:32:06 UTC hebeatsme#0 lmfaooo
2025-02-05 16:32:07 UTC vperked#0 bro
2025-02-05 16:32:10 UTC hebeatsme#0 bro
2025-02-05 16:32:17 UTC hebeatsme#0 has to be fake right
2025-02-05 16:32:22 UTC .yarrb#0 does it mention Rivage?
2025-02-05 16:32:23 UTC xewdy#0 He previously worked for NeuraLink, a brain computer interface company led by Elon Musk
2025-02-05 16:32:26 UTC xewdy#0 bro what
2025-02-05 16:32:27 UTC alexaloo#0 I think your current occupation gives you a good insight of what probably goes on
2025-02-05 16:32:29 UTC hebeatsme#0 bullshit man
2025-02-05 16:32:33 UTC xewdy#0 this nigga got hella secrets
2025-02-05 16:32:37 UTC hebeatsme#0 rivage couldnt print hello world
2025-02-05 16:32:42 UTC hebeatsme#0 if his life was on the line
2025-02-05 16:32:50 UTC xewdy#0 nigga worked for neuralink
2025-02-05 16:32:54 UTC hebeatsme#0 bullshit
2025-02-05 16:33:06 UTC Nashville Dispatch ##0000 ||@PD Ping||
2025-02-05 16:33:07 UTC hebeatsme#0 must have killed all those test pigs with some bugs
2025-02-05 16:33:24 UTC hebeatsme#0 ur telling me the rivage who failed to start a company
2025-02-05 16:33:28 UTC hebeatsme#0 https://cdn.camp
2025-02-05 16:33:32 UTC hebeatsme#0 who didnt pay for servers
2025-02-05 16:33:34 UTC hebeatsme#0 ?
2025-02-05 16:33:42 UTC hebeatsme#0 was too cheap
2025-02-05 16:33:44 UTC vperked#0 yes
2025-02-05 16:33:50 UTC hebeatsme#0 like??
2025-02-05 16:33:53 UTC hebeatsme#0 it aint adding up
2025-02-05 16:33:56 UTC alexaloo#0 He just needed to find his calling idiot.
2025-02-05 16:33:58 UTC alexaloo#0 He found it.
2025-02-05 16:33:59 UTC hebeatsme#0 bro
2025-02-05 16:34:01 UTC alexaloo#0 Cope in a river dude
2025-02-05 16:34:04 UTC hebeatsme#0 he cant make good money right
2025-02-05 16:34:08 UTC hebeatsme#0 doge is about efficiency
2025-02-05 16:34:11 UTC hebeatsme#0 he should make $1/he
2025-02-05 16:34:15 UTC hebeatsme#0 $1/hr
2025-02-05 16:34:25 UTC hebeatsme#0 and be whipped for better code
2025-02-05 16:34:26 UTC vperked#0 prolly makes more than us
2025-02-05 16:34:35 UTC vperked#0 with his dad too
2025-02-05 16:34:52 UTC hebeatsme#0 time to report him for fraud
2025-02-05 16:34:54 UTC hebeatsme#0 to donald trump
2025-02-05 16:35:04 UTC hebeatsme#0 rivage participated in sim swap hacks in 2018
2025-02-05 16:35:08 UTC hebeatsme#0 put that on his wiki
2025-02-05 16:35:10 UTC hebeatsme#0 thanks
2025-02-05 16:35:15 UTC hebeatsme#0 and in 2021
2025-02-05 16:35:17 UTC hebeatsme#0 thanks
2025-02-05 16:35:19 UTC chainofcommand#0 i dont think they’ll care tbh

Given the speed with which Musk’s DOGE team was allowed access to such critical government databases, it strains credulity that Coristine could have been properly cleared beforehand. After all, he’d recently been dismissed from a job for allegedly leaking internal company information to outsiders.

According to the national security adjudication guidelines (PDF) released by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), eligibility determinations take into account a person’s stability, trustworthiness, reliability, discretion, character, honesty, judgment, and ability to protect classified information.

The DNI policy further states that “eligibility for covered individuals shall be granted only when facts and circumstances indicate that eligibility is clearly consistent with the national security interests of the United States, and any doubt shall be resolved in favor of national security.”

On Thursday, 25-year-old DOGE staff member Marko Elez resigned after being linked to a deleted social media account that advocated racism and eugenics. Elez resigned after The Wall Street Journal asked the White House about his connection to the account.

“Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool,” the account posted in July. “You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity,” the account wrote on X in September. “Normalize Indian hate,” the account wrote the same month, in reference to a post noting the prevalence of people from India in Silicon Valley.

Elez’s resignation came a day after the Department of Justice agreed to limit the number of DOGE employees who have access to federal payment systems. The DOJ said access would be limited to two people, Elez and Tom Krause, the CEO of a company called Cloud Software Group.

Earlier today, Musk said he planned to rehire Elez after President Trump and Vice President JD Vance reportedly endorsed the idea. Speaking at The White House today, Trump said he wasn’t concerned about the security of personal information and other data accessed by DOGE, adding that he was “very proud of the job that this group of young people” are doing.

A White House official told Reuters on Wednesday that Musk and his engineers have appropriate security clearances and are operating in “full compliance with federal law, appropriate security clearances, and as employees of the relevant agencies, not as outside advisors or entities.”

NPR reports Trump added that his administration’s cost-cutting efforts would soon turn to the Education Department and the Pentagon, “where he suggested without evidence that there could be ‘trillions’ of dollars in wasted spending within the $6.75 trillion the federal government spent in fiscal year 2024.”

GOP leaders in the Republican-controlled House and Senate have largely shrugged about Musk’s ongoing efforts to seize control over federal databases, dismantle agencies mandated by Congress, freeze federal spending on a range of already-appropriated government programs, and threaten workers with layoffs.

Meanwhile, multiple parties have sued to stop DOGE’s activities. ABC News says a federal judge was to rule today on whether DOGE should be blocked from accessing Department of Labor records, following a lawsuit alleging Musk’s team sought to illegally access highly sensitive data, including medical information, from the federal government.

At least 13 state attorneys general say they plan to file a lawsuit to stop DOGE from accessing federal payment systems containing Americans’ sensitive personal information, reports The Associated Press.

Reuters reported Thursday that the U.S. Treasury Department had agreed not to give Musk’s team access to its payment systems while a judge is hearing arguments in a lawsuit by employee unions and retirees alleging Musk illegally searched those records.

Ars Technica writes that The Department of Education (DoE) was sued Friday by a California student association demanding an “immediate stop” to DOGE’s “unlawfully” digging through student loan data to potentially dismantle the DoE.

Experts Flag Security, Privacy Risks in DeepSeek AI App

New mobile apps from the Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) company DeepSeek have remained among the top three “free” downloads for Apple and Google devices since their debut on Jan. 25, 2025. But experts caution that many of DeepSeek’s design choices — such as using hard-coded encryption keys, and sending unencrypted user and device data to Chinese companies — introduce a number of glaring security and privacy risks.

Public interest in the DeepSeek AI chat apps swelled following widespread media reports that the upstart Chinese AI firm had managed to match the abilities of cutting-edge chatbots while using a fraction of the specialized computer chips that leading AI companies rely on. As of this writing, DeepSeek is the third most-downloaded “free” app on the Apple store, and #1 on Google Play.

DeepSeek’s rapid rise caught the attention of the mobile security firm NowSecure, a Chicago-based company that helps clients screen mobile apps for security and privacy threats. In a teardown of the DeepSeek app published today, NowSecure urged organizations to remove the DeepSeek iOS mobile app from their environments, citing security concerns.

NowSecure founder Andrew Hoog said they haven’t yet concluded an in-depth analysis of the DeepSeek app for Android devices, but that there is little reason to believe its basic design would be functionally much different.

Hoog told KrebsOnSecurity there were a number of qualities about the DeepSeek iOS app that suggest the presence of deep-seated security and privacy risks. For starters, he said, the app collects an awful lot of data about the user’s device.

“They are doing some very interesting things that are on the edge of advanced device fingerprinting,” Hoog said, noting that one property of the app tracks the device’s name — which for many iOS devices defaults to the customer’s name followed by the type of iOS device.

The device information shared, combined with the user’s Internet address and data gathered from mobile advertising companies, could be used to deanonymize users of the DeepSeek iOS app, NowSecure warned. The report notes that DeepSeek communicates with Volcengine, a cloud platform developed by ByteDance (the makers of TikTok), although NowSecure said it wasn’t clear if the data is just leveraging ByteDance’s digital transformation cloud service or if the declared information share extends further between the two companies.

Perhaps more concerning, NowSecure said the iOS app transmits device information “in the clear,” without any encryption to encapsulate the data. This means the data being handled by the app could be intercepted, read, and even modified by anyone who has access to any of the networks that carry the app’s traffic.

“The DeepSeek iOS app globally disables App Transport Security (ATS) which is an iOS platform level protection that prevents sensitive data from being sent over unencrypted channels,” the report observed. “Since this protection is disabled, the app can (and does) send unencrypted data over the internet.”

Hoog said the app does selectively encrypt portions of the responses coming from DeepSeek servers. But they also found it uses an insecure and now deprecated encryption algorithm called 3DES (aka Triple DES), and that the developers had hard-coded the encryption key. That means the cryptographic key needed to decipher those data fields can be extracted from the app itself.

There were other, less alarming security and privacy issues highlighted in the report, but Hoog said he’s confident there are additional, unseen security concerns lurking within the app’s code.

“When we see people exhibit really simplistic coding errors, as you dig deeper there are usually a lot more issues,” Hoog said. “There is virtually no priority around security or privacy. Whether cultural, or mandated by China, or a witting choice, taken together they point to significant lapse in security and privacy controls, and that puts companies at risk.”

Apparently, plenty of others share this view. Axios reported on January 30 that U.S. congressional offices are being warned not to use the app.

“[T]hreat actors are already exploiting DeepSeek to deliver malicious software and infect devices,” read the notice from the chief administrative officer for the House of Representatives. “To mitigate these risks, the House has taken security measures to restrict DeepSeek’s functionality on all House-issued devices.”

TechCrunch reports that Italy and Taiwan have already moved to ban DeepSeek over security concerns. Bloomberg writes that The Pentagon has blocked access to DeepSeek. CNBC says NASA also banned employees from using the service, as did the U.S. Navy.

Beyond security concerns tied to the DeepSeek iOS app, there are indications the Chinese AI company may be playing fast and loose with the data that it collects from and about users. On January 29, researchers at Wiz said they discovered a publicly accessible database linked to DeepSeek that exposed “a significant volume of chat history, backend data and sensitive information, including log streams, API secrets, and operational details.”

“More critically, the exposure allowed for full database control and potential privilege escalation within the DeepSeek environment, without any authentication or defense mechanism to the outside world,” Wiz wrote. [Full disclosure: Wiz is currently an advertiser on this website.]

KrebsOnSecurity sought comment on the report from DeepSeek and from Apple. This story will be updated with any substantive replies.

DOGE Teen Owns ‘Tesla.Sexy LLC’ and Worked at Startup That Has Hired Convicted Hackers

Experts question whether Edward Coristine, a DOGE staffer who has gone by “Big Balls” online, would pass the background check typically required for access to sensitive US government systems.

How Data Brokers Sell Your Identity

Data Privacy Week is here, and there’s no better time to shine a spotlight on one of the biggest players in the personal information economy: data brokers. These entities collect, buy, and sell hundreds—sometimes thousands—of data points on individuals like you. But how do they manage to gather so much information, and for what purpose? From your browsing habits and purchase history to your location data and even more intimate details, these digital middlemen piece together surprisingly comprehensive profiles. The real question is: where are they getting it all, and why is your personal data so valuable to them? Let’s unravel the mystery behind the data broker industry.

What are data brokers?

Data brokers aggregate user info from various sources on the internet. They collect, collate, package, and sometimes even analyze this data to create a holistic and coherent version of you online. This data then gets put up for sale to nearly anyone who’ll buy it. That can include marketers, private investigators, tech companies, and sometimes law enforcement as well. They’ll also sell to spammers and scammers. (Those bad actors need to get your contact info from somewhere — data brokers are one way to get that and more.)

And that list of potential buyers goes on, which includes but isn’t limited to:

• Tech platforms
• Banks
• Insurance companies
• Political consultancies
• Marketing firms
• Retailers
• Crime-fighting bureaus
• Investigation bureaus
• Video streaming service providers
• Any other businesses involved in sales

These companies and social media platforms use your data to better understand target demographics and the content with which they interact. While the practice isn’t unethical in and of itself (personalizing user experiences and creating more convenient UIs are usually cited as the primary reasons for it), it does make your data vulnerable to malicious attacks targeted toward big-tech servers.

How do data brokers get your information?

Most of your online activities are related. Devices like your phone, laptop, tablets, and even fitness watches are linked to each other. Moreover, you might use one email ID for various accounts and subscriptions. This online interconnectedness makes it easier for data brokers to create a cohesive user profile.

Mobile phone apps are the most common way for data brokerage firms to collect your data. You might have countless apps for various purposes, such as financial transactions, health and fitness, or social media.

A number of these apps usually fall under the umbrella of the same or subsidiary family of apps, all of which work toward collecting and supplying data to big tech platforms. Programs like Google’s AdSense make it easier for developers to monetize their apps in exchange for the user information they collect.

Data brokers also collect data points like your home address, full name, phone number, and date of birth. They have automated scraping tools to quickly collect relevant information from public records (think sales of real estate, marriages, divorces, voter registration, and so on).

Lastly, data brokers can gather data from other third parties that track your cookies or even place trackers or cookies on your browsers. Cookies are small data files that track your online activities when visiting different websites. They track your IP address and browsing history, which third parties can exploit. Cookies are also the reason you see personalized ads and products.

How data brokers sell your identity

Data brokers collate your private information into one package and sell it to “people search” websites. As mentioned above, practically anyone can access these websites and purchase extensive consumer data, for groups of people and individuals alike.

Next, marketing and sales firms are some of data brokers’ biggest clients. These companies purchase massive data sets from data brokers to research your data profile. They have advanced algorithms to segregate users into various consumer groups and target you specifically. Their predictive algorithms can suggest personalized ads and products to generate higher lead generation and conversation percentages for their clients.

Are data brokers legal?

We tend to accept the terms and conditions that various apps ask us to accept without thinking twice or reading the fine print. You probably cannot proceed without letting the app track certain data or giving your personal information. To a certain extent, we trade some of our privacy for convenience. This becomes public information, and apps and data brokers collect, track, and use our data however they please while still complying with the law.

There is no comprehensive privacy law in the U.S. on a federal level. This allows data brokers to collect personal information and condense it into marketing insights. While not all methods of gathering private data are legal, it is difficult to track the activities of data brokers online (especially on the dark web). As technology advances, there are also easier ways to harvest and exploit data.

As of March 2024, 15 states in the U.S. have data privacy laws in place. That includes California, Virginia, Connecticut, Colorado, Utah, Iowa, Indiana, Tennessee, Oregon, Montana, Texas, Delaware, Florida, New Jersey, and New Hampshire.[i] The laws vary by state, yet generally, they grant rights to individuals around the collection, use, and disclosure of their personal data by businesses.

However, these laws make exceptions for certain types of data and certain types of collectors. In short, these laws aren’t absolute.

Can you remove yourself from data broker websites?

Some data brokers let you remove your information from their websites. There are also extensive guides available online that list the method by which you can opt-out of some of the biggest data brokering firms. For example, a guide by Griffin Boyce, the systems administrator at Harvard University’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, provides detailed information on how to opt-out of a long list of data broker companies.

Yet the list of data brokers is long. Cleaning up your personal data online can quickly eat up your time, as it requires you to reach out to multiple data brokers and opt-out.

Rather than removing yourself one by one from the host of data broker sites out there, you have a solid option: our Personal Data Cleanup.

Personal Data Cleanup scans data broker sites and shows you which ones are selling your personal info. It also provides guidance on how you can remove your data from those sites. And if you want to save time on manually removing that info, you have options. Our McAfee+ Advanced and Ultimate plans come with full-service Personal Data Cleanup, which sends requests to remove your data automatically.

If the thought of your personal info getting bought and sold in such a public way bothers you, our Personal Data Cleanup can put you back in charge of it.

[i] https://pro.bloomberglaw.com/insights/privacy/state-privacy-legislation-tracker/

 

The post How Data Brokers Sell Your Identity appeared first on McAfee Blog.

A Tumultuous Week for Federal Cybersecurity Efforts

President Trump last week issued a flurry of executive orders that upended a number of government initiatives focused on improving the nation’s cybersecurity posture. The president fired all advisors from the Department of Homeland Security’s Cyber Safety Review Board, called for the creation of a strategic cryptocurrency reserve, and voided a Biden administration action that sought to reduce the risks that artificial intelligence poses to consumers, workers and national security.

On his first full day back in the White House, Trump dismissed all 15 advisory committee members of the Cyber Safety Review Board (CSRB), a nonpartisan government entity established in February 2022 with a mandate to investigate the causes of major cybersecurity events. The CSRB has so far produced three detailed reports, including an analysis of the Log4Shell vulnerability crisis, attacks from the cybercrime group LAPSUS$, and the 2023 Microsoft Exchange Online breach.

The CSRB was in the midst of an inquiry into cyber intrusions uncovered recently across a broad spectrum of U.S. telecommunications providers at the hands of Chinese state-sponsored hackers. One of the CSRB’s most recognizable names is Chris Krebs (no relation), the former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Krebs was fired by President Trump in November 2020 for declaring the presidential contest was the most secure in American history, and for refuting Trump’s false claims of election fraud.

South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, confirmed by the U.S. Senate last week as the new director of the DHS, criticized CISA at her confirmation hearing, TheRecord reports.

Noem told lawmakers CISA needs to be “much more effective, smaller, more nimble, to really fulfill their mission,” which she said should be focused on hardening federal IT systems and hunting for digital intruders. Noem said the agency’s work on fighting misinformation shows it has “gotten far off mission” and involved “using their resources in ways that was never intended.”

“The misinformation and disinformation that they have stuck their toe into and meddled with, should be refocused back onto what their job is,” she said.

Moses Frost, a cybersecurity instructor with the SANS Institute, compared the sacking of the CSRB members to firing all of the experts at the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) while they’re in the middle of an investigation into a string of airline disasters.

“I don’t recall seeing an ‘NTSB Board’ being fired during the middle of a plane crash investigation,” Frost said in a recent SANS newsletter. “I can say that the attackers in the phone companies will not stop because the review board has gone away. We do need to figure out how these attacks occurred, and CISA did appear to be doing some good for the vast majority of the federal systems.”

Speaking of transportation, The Record notes that Transportation Security Administration chief David Pekoske was fired despite overseeing critical cybersecurity improvements across pipeline, rail and aviation sectors. Pekoske was appointed by Trump in 2017 and had his 5-year tenure renewed in 2022 by former President Joe Biden.

AI & CRYPTOCURRENCY

Shortly after being sworn in for a second time, Trump voided a Biden executive order that focused on supporting research and development in artificial intelligence. The previous administration’s order on AI was crafted with an eye toward managing the safety and security risks introduced by the technology. But a statement released by the White House said Biden’s approach to AI had hindered development, and that the United States would support AI systems that are “free from ideological bias or engineered social agendas,” to maintain leadership.

The Trump administration issued its own executive order on AI, which calls for an “AI Action Plan” to be led by the assistant to the president for science and technology, the White House “AI & crypto czar,” and the national security advisor. It also directs the White House to revise and reissue policies to federal agencies on the government’s acquisition and governance of AI “to ensure that harmful barriers to America’s AI leadership are eliminated.”

Trump’s AI & crypto czar is David Sacks, an entrepreneur and Silicon Valley venture capitalist who argues that the Biden administration’s approach to AI and cryptocurrency has driven innovation overseas. Sacks recently asserted that non-fungible cryptocurrency tokens and memecoins are neither securities nor commodities, but rather should be treated as “collectibles” like baseball cards and stamps.

There is already a legal definition of collectibles under the U.S. tax code that applies to things like art or antiques, which can be subject to high capital gains taxes. But Joe Hall, a capital markets attorney and partner at Davis Polk, told Fortune there are no market regulations that apply to collectibles under U.S. securities law. Hall said Sacks’ comments “suggest a viewpoint that it would not be appropriate to regulate these things the way we regulate securities.”

The new administration’s position makes sense considering that the Trump family is deeply and personally invested in a number of recent memecoin ventures that have attracted billions from investors. President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump each launched their own vanity memecoins this month, dubbed $TRUMP and $MELANIA.

The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday the market capitalization of $TRUMP stood at about $7 billion, down from a peak of near $15 billion, while $MELANIA is hovering somewhere in the $460 million mark. Just two months before the 2024 election, Trump’s three sons debuted a cryptocurrency token called World Liberty Financial.

Despite maintaining a considerable personal stake in how cryptocurrency is regulated, Trump issued an executive order on January 23 calling for a working group to be chaired by Sacks that would develop “a federal regulatory framework governing digital assets, including stablecoins,” and evaluate the creation of a “strategic national digital assets stockpile.”

Translation: Using taxpayer dollars to prop up the speculative, volatile, and highly risky cryptocurrency industry, which has been marked by endless scams, rug-pulls, 8-figure cyber heists, rampant fraud, and unrestrained innovations in money laundering.

WEAPONIZATION & DISINFORMATION

Prior to the election, President Trump frequently vowed to use a second term to exact retribution against his perceived enemies. Part of that promise materialized in an executive order Trump issued last week titled “Ending the Weaponization of the Federal Government,” which decried “an unprecedented, third-world weaponization of prosecutorial power to upend the democratic process,” in the prosecution of more than 1,500 people who invaded the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

On Jan. 21, Trump commuted the sentences of several leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers who were convicted of seditious conspiracy. He also issued “a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” which include those who assaulted law enforcement officers.

The New York Times reports “the language of the document suggests — but does not explicitly state — that the Trump administration review will examine the actions of local district attorneys or state officials, such as the district attorneys in Manhattan or Fulton County, Ga., or the New York attorney general, all of whom filed cases against President Trump.”

Another Trump order called “Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship” asserts:

“Over the last 4 years, the previous administration trampled free speech rights by censoring Americans’ speech on online platforms, often by exerting substantial coercive pressure on third parties, such as social media companies, to moderate, deplatform, or otherwise suppress speech that the Federal Government did not approve,” the Trump administration alleged. “Under the guise of combatting ‘misinformation,’ ‘disinformation,’ and ‘malinformation,’ the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate.”

Both of these executive orders have potential implications for security, privacy and civil liberties activists who have sought to track conspiracy theories and raise awareness about disinformation efforts on social media coming from U.S. adversaries.

In the wake of the 2020 election, Republicans created the House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Led by GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the committee’s stated purpose was to investigate alleged collusion between the Biden administration and tech companies to unconstitutionally shut down political speech.

The GOP committee focused much of its ire at members of the short-lived Disinformation Governance Board, an advisory board to DHS created in 2022 (the “combating misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation” quote from Trump’s executive order is a reference to the board’s stated mission). Conservative groups seized on social media posts made by the director of the board, who resigned after facing death threats. The board was dissolved by DHS soon after.

In his first administration, President Trump created a special prosecutor to probe the origins of the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives seeking to influence the 2016 election. Part of that inquiry examined evidence gathered by some of the world’s most renowned cybersecurity experts who identified frequent and unexplained communications between an email server used by the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, one of Russia’s largest financial institutions.

Trump’s Special Prosecutor John Durham later subpoenaed and/or deposed dozens of security experts who’d collected, viewed or merely commented on the data. Similar harassment and deposition demands would come from lawyers for Alfa Bank. Durham ultimately indicted Michael Sussman, the former federal cybercrime prosecutor who reported the oddity to the FBI. Sussman was acquitted in May 2022. Last week, Trump appointed Durham to lead the U.S. attorney’s office in Brooklyn, NY.

Quinta Jurecic at Lawfare notes that while the executive actions are ominous, they are also vague, and could conceivably generate either a campaign of retaliation, or nothing at all.

“The two orders establish that there will be investigations but leave open the questions of what kind of investigations, what will be investigated, how long this will take, and what the consequences might be,” Jurecic wrote. “It is difficult to draw firm conclusions as to what to expect. Whether this ambiguity is intentional or the result of sloppiness or disagreement within Trump’s team, it has at least one immediate advantage as far as the president is concerned: generating fear among the broad universe of potential subjects of those investigations.”

On Friday, Trump moved to fire at least 17 inspectors general, the government watchdogs who conduct audits and investigations of executive branch actions, and who often uncover instances of government waste, fraud and abuse. Lawfare’s Jack Goldsmith argues that the removals are probably legal even though Trump defied a 2022 law that required congressional notice of the terminations, which Trump did not give.

“Trump probably acted lawfully, I think, because the notice requirement is probably unconstitutional,” Goldsmith wrote. “The real bite in the 2022 law, however, comes in the limitations it places on Trump’s power to replace the terminated IGs—limitations that I believe are constitutional. This aspect of the law will make it hard, but not impossible, for Trump to put loyalists atop the dozens of vacant IG offices around the executive branch. The ultimate fate of IG independence during Trump 2.0, however, depends less on legal protections than on whether Congress, which traditionally protects IGs, stands up for them now. Don’t hold your breath.”

Among the many Biden administration executive orders revoked by President Trump last week was an action from December 2021 establishing the United States Council on Transnational Organized Crime, which is charged with advising the White House on a range of criminal activities, including drug and weapons trafficking, migrant smuggling, human trafficking, cybercrime, intellectual property theft, money laundering, wildlife and timber trafficking, illegal fishing, and illegal mining.

So far, the White House doesn’t appear to have revoked an executive order that former President Biden issued less than a week before President Trump took office. On Jan. 16, 2025, Biden released a directive that focused on improving the security of federal agencies and contractors, and giving the government more power to sanction the hackers who target critical infrastructure.

Under Trump, US Cyberdefense Loses Its Head

Chinese hacks, rampant ransomware, and Donald Trump’s budget cuts all threaten US security. In an exit interview with WIRED, former CISA head Jen Easterly argues for her agency’s survival.

Microsoft: Happy 2025. Here’s 161 Security Updates

Microsoft today unleashed updates to plug a whopping 161 security vulnerabilities in Windows and related software, including three “zero-day” weaknesses that are already under active attack. Redmond’s inaugural Patch Tuesday of 2025 bundles more fixes than the company has shipped in one go since 2017.

Rapid7‘s Adam Barnett says January marks the fourth consecutive month where Microsoft has published zero-day vulnerabilities on Patch Tuesday without evaluating any of them as critical severity at time of publication. Today also saw the publication of nine critical remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities.

The Microsoft flaws already seeing active attacks include CVE-2025-21333, CVE-2025-21334 and, you guessed it– CVE-2025-21335. These are sequential because all reside in Windows Hyper-V, a component that is heavily embedded in modern Windows 11 operating systems and used for security features including device guard and credential guard.

Tenable’s Satnam Narang says little is known about the in-the-wild exploitation of these flaws, apart from the fact that they are all “privilege escalation” vulnerabilities. Narang said we tend to see a lot of elevation of privilege bugs exploited in the wild as zero-days in Patch Tuesday because it’s not always initial access to a system that’s a challenge for attackers as they have various avenues in their pursuit.

“As elevation of privilege bugs, they’re being used as part of post-compromise activity, where an attacker has already accessed a target system,” he said. “It’s kind of like if an attacker is able to enter a secure building, they’re unable to access more secure parts of the facility because they have to prove that they have clearance. In this case, they’re able to trick the system into believing they should have clearance.”

Several bugs addressed today earned CVSS (threat rating) scores of 9.8 out of a possible 10, including CVE-2025-21298, a weakness in Windows that could allow attackers to run arbitrary code by getting a target to open a malicious .rtf file, documents typically opened on Office applications like Microsoft Word. Microsoft has rated this flaw “exploitation more likely.”

Ben Hopkins at Immersive Labs called attention to the CVE-2025-21311, a 9.8 “critical” bug in Windows NTLMv1 (NT LAN Manager version 1), an older Microsoft authentication protocol that is still used by many organizations.

“What makes this vulnerability so impactful is the fact that it is remotely exploitable, so attackers can reach the compromised machine(s) over the internet, and the attacker does not need significant knowledge or skills to achieve repeatable success with the same payload across any vulnerable component,” Hopkins wrote.

Kev Breen at Immersive points to an interesting flaw (CVE-2025-21210) that Microsoft fixed in its full disk encryption suite Bitlocker that the software giant has dubbed “exploitation more likely.” Specifically, this bug holds out the possibility that in some situations the hibernation image created when one closes the laptop lid on an open Windows session may not be fully encrypted and could be recovered in plain text.

“Hibernation images are used when a laptop goes to sleep and contains the contents that were stored in RAM at the moment the device powered down,” Breen noted. “This presents a significant potential impact as RAM can contain sensitive data (such as passwords, credentials and PII) that may have been in open documents or browser sessions and can all be recovered with free tools from hibernation files.”

Tenable’s Narang also highlighted a trio of vulnerabilities in Microsoft Access fixed this month and credited to Unpatched.ai, a security research effort that is aided by artificial intelligence looking for vulnerabilities in code. Tracked as CVE-2025-21186, CVE-2025-21366, and CVE-2025-21395, these are remote code execution bugs that are exploitable if an attacker convinces a target to download and run a malicious file through social engineering. Unpatched.ai was also credited with discovering a flaw in the December 2024 Patch Tuesday release (CVE-2024-49142).

“Automated vulnerability detection using AI has garnered a lot of attention recently, so it’s noteworthy to see this service being credited with finding bugs in Microsoft products,” Narang observed. “It may be the first of many in 2025.”

If you’re a Windows user who has automatic updates turned off and haven’t updated in a while, it’s probably time to play catch up. Please consider backing up important files and/or the entire hard drive before updating. And if you run into any problems installing this month’s patch batch, drop a line in the comments below, please.

Further reading on today’s patches from Microsoft:

Tenable blog

SANS Internet Storm Center

Ask Woody

What Personal Data Do Companies Track?

Private tech companies gather tremendous amounts of user data. These companies can afford to let you use social media platforms free of charge because it’s paid for by your data, attention, and time.

Big tech derives most of its profits by selling your attention to advertisers — a well-known business model. Various documentaries (like Netflix’s “The Social Dilemma”) have tried to get to the bottom of the complex algorithms that big tech companies employ to mine and analyze user data for the benefit of third-party advertisers.

What info can companies collect?

Tech companies benefit from personal info by being able to provide personalized ads. When you click “yes” at the end of a terms and conditions agreement found on some web pages, you might be allowing the companies to collect the following data:

• Personal data. This includes identity-related info like your name, gender, Social Security number, and device-related info like IP address, web browser cookies, and device IDs. Personal data is usually collected to classify users into different demographics based on certain parameters. This helps advertisers analyze what sections of the audience interact with their ads and what they can do to cater to their target audience.
• Usage data. Your interactions with a business’s website, text messages, emails, paid ads, and other online activities are recorded to build an accurate consumer profile. This consumer profile is used to determine and predict what kind of content (including ads) you’re more likely to interact with and for how long.
• Behavioral data. Purchase histories, repeated actions, time spent, movement, and navigation on the platform, and other types of qualitative data are covered under behavioral data. This helps platforms determine your “favorite” purchases or interactions so they can suggest other similar content/products.
• Attitudinal data. Companies measure brand and customer experiences using data on consumer satisfaction, product desirability, and purchase decisions. Marketing agencies use this data for direct consumer research and creative analysis.

For someone unfamiliar with privacy issues, it is important to understand the extent of big tech’s tracking and data collection. After these companies collect data, all this info can be supplied to third-party businesses or used to improve user experience.

The problem with this is that big tech has blurred the line between collecting customer data and violating user privacy in some cases. While tracking what content you interact with can be justified under the garb of personalizing the content you see, big tech platforms have been known to go too far. Prominent social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn have faced legal trouble for accessing personal user data like private messages and saved photos.

How do companies use the info you provide?

The info you provide helps build an accurate character profile and turns it into knowledge that gives actionable insights to businesses. Private data usage can be classified into three cases: selling it to data brokers, using it to improve marketing, or enhancing customer experience.

To sell your info to data brokers

Along with big data, another industry has seen rapid growth: data brokers. Data brokers buy, analyze, and package your data. Companies that collect large amounts of data on their users stand to profit from this service. Selling data to brokers is an important revenue stream for big tech companies.

Advertisers and businesses benefit from increased info on their consumers, creating a high demand for your info. The problem here is that companies like Facebook and Alphabet (Google’s parent company) have been known to mine massive amounts of user data for the sake of their advertisers.

To personalize marketing efforts

Marketing can be highly personalized thanks to the availability of large amounts of consumer data. Tracking your response to marketing campaigns can help businesses alter or improve certain aspects of their campaign to drive better results.

The problem is that most AI-based algorithms are incapable of assessing when they should stop collecting or using your info. After a point, users run the risk of being constantly subjected to intrusive ads and other unconsented marketing campaigns that pop up frequently.

To cater to the customer experience

Analyzing consumer behavior through reviews, feedback, and recommendations can help improve customer experience. Businesses have access to various facets of data that can be analyzed to show them how to meet consumer demands. This might help improve any part of a consumer’s interaction with the company, from designing special offers and discounts to improving customer relationships.

For most social media platforms, the goal is to curate a personalized feed that appeals to users and allows them to spend more time on the app. When left unmonitored, the powerful algorithms behind these social media platforms can repeatedly subject you to the same kind of content from different creators.

Which companies track the most info?

Here are the big tech companies that collect and mine the most user data.

• Google is the most avid big tech data miner currently on the internet because the search engine deals almost exclusively with user data. Google tracks and analyzes everything from your Gmail and calling history (for VoLTE calls) to your Chrome browsing preferences through third-party cookies.
• Meta’s Facebook collects phone numbers, personal messages, public comments, and metadata from all your photos and videos. Facebook primarily uses this data to fuel its demographic-based targeted ad mechanisms.
• Amazon has recently admitted to storing many user data points, including phone numbers, credit card info, usernames, passwords, and even Social Security numbers. Amazon also stores info about your search terms and previously bought products.
• X (Twitter).Platforms like X employ a “family of apps” technique to gather sensitive user data. While these platforms openly collect and mine user data themselves, they also collect info from app networks that include several other third-party apps. These apps choose to partner with tech giants for better profits.
• While much better than its competitors, Apple still mines a lot of user data. While Apple’s systems allow users to control their privacy settings, Apple gives all its users’ info to Apple’s iOS-based advertisement channels. The iPhone App Store is another place where user data is exclusively used to create customized user experiences.
• Microsoft primarily collects device-related data like system configurations, system capabilities, IP addresses, and port numbers. It also harvests your regular search and query data to customize your search options and make for a better user experience.

Discover how McAfee can help protect your identity online. 

Users need a comprehensive data privacy solution to tackle the rampant, large-scale data mining carried out by big tech platforms. While targeted advertisements and easily found items are beneficial, many of these companies collect and mine user data through several channels simultaneously, exploiting them in several ways.

It’s important to ensure your personal info is protected. Protection solutions like McAfee’s Personal Data Cleanup feature can help. It scours the web for traces of your personal info and helps remove it for your online privacy.

McAfee+ provides antivirus software for all your digital devices and a secure VPN connection to avoid exposure to malicious third parties while browsing the internet. Our Identity Monitoring and personal data removal solutions further remove gaps in your devices’ security systems.

With our data protection and custom guidance (complete with a protection score for each platform and tips to keep you safer), you can be sure that your internet identity is protected.

The post What Personal Data Do Companies Track? appeared first on McAfee Blog.

The School Shootings Were Fake. The Terror Was Real

The inside story of the teenager whose “swatting” calls sent armed police racing into hundreds of schools nationwide—and the private detective who tracked him down.

A Day in the Life of a Prolific Voice Phishing Crew

Besieged by scammers seeking to phish user accounts over the telephone, Apple and Google frequently caution that they will never reach out unbidden to users this way. However, new details about the internal operations of a prolific voice phishing gang show the group routinely abuses legitimate services at Apple and Google to force a variety of outbound communications to their users, including emails, automated phone calls and system-level messages sent to all signed-in devices.

KrebsOnSecurity recently told the saga of a cryptocurrency investor named Tony who was robbed of more than $4.7 million in an elaborate voice phishing attack. In Tony’s ordeal, the crooks appear to have initially contacted him via Google Assistant, an AI-based service that can engage in two-way conversations. The phishers also abused legitimate Google services to send Tony an email from google.com, and to send a Google account recovery prompt to all of his signed-in devices.

Today’s story pivots off of Tony’s heist and new details shared by a scammer to explain how these voice phishing groups are abusing a legitimate Apple telephone support line to generate “account confirmation” message prompts from Apple to their customers.

Before we get to the Apple scam in detail, we need to revisit Tony’s case. The phishing domain used to steal roughly $4.7 million in cryptocurrencies from Tony was verify-trezor[.]io. This domain was featured in a writeup from February 2024 by the security firm Lookout, which found it was one of dozens being used by a prolific and audacious voice phishing group it dubbed “Crypto Chameleon.”

Crypto Chameleon was brazenly trying to voice phish employees at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), as well as those working at the cryptocurrency exchanges Coinbase and Binance. Lookout researchers discovered multiple voice phishing groups were using a new phishing kit that closely mimicked the single sign-on pages for Okta and other authentication providers.

As we’ll see in a moment, that phishing kit is operated and rented out by a cybercriminal known as “Perm” a.k.a. “Annie.” Perm is the current administrator of Star Fraud, one of the more consequential cybercrime communities on Telegram and one that has emerged as a foundry of innovation in voice phishing attacks.

A review of the many messages that Perm posted to Star Fraud and other Telegram channels showed they worked closely with another cybercriminal who went by the handles “Aristotle” and just “Stotle.”

It is not clear what caused the rift, but at some point last year Stotle decided to turn on his erstwhile business partner Perm, sharing extremely detailed videos, tutorials and secrets that shed new light on how these phishing panels operate.

Stotle explained that the division of spoils from each robbery is decided in advance by all participants. Some co-conspirators will be paid a set fee for each call, while others are promised a percentage of any overall amount stolen. The person in charge of managing or renting out the phishing panel to others will generally take a percentage of each theft, which in Perm’s case is 10 percent.

When the phishing group settles on a target of interest, the scammers will create and join a new Discord channel. This allows each logged on member to share what is currently on their screen, and these screens are tiled in a series of boxes so that everyone can see all other call participant screens at once.

Each participant in the call has a specific role, including:

-The Caller: The person speaking and trying to social engineer the target.
-The Operator: The individual managing the phishing panel, silently moving the victim from page to page.
-The Drainer: The person who logs into compromised accounts to drain the victim’s funds.
-The Owner: The phishing panel owner, who will frequently listen in on and participate in scam calls.

‘OKAY, SO THIS REALLY IS APPLE’

In one video of a live voice phishing attack shared by Stotle, scammers using Perm’s panel targeted a musician in California. Throughout the video, we can see Perm monitoring the conversation and operating the phishing panel in the upper right corner of the screen.

In the first step of the attack, they peppered the target’s Apple device with notifications from Apple by attempting to reset his password. Then a “Michael Keen” called him, spoofing Apple’s phone number and saying they were with Apple’s account recovery team.

The target told Michael that someone was trying to change his password, which Michael calmly explained they would investigate. Michael said he was going to send a prompt to the man’s device, and proceeded to place a call to an automated line that answered as Apple support saying, “I’d like to send a consent notification to your Apple devices. Do I have permission to do that?”

In this segment of the video, we can see the operator of the panel is calling the real Apple customer support phone number 800-275-2273, but they are doing so by spoofing the target’s phone number (the victim’s number is redacted in the video above). That’s because calling this support number from a phone number tied to an Apple account and selecting “1” for “yes” will then send an alert from Apple that displays the following message on all associated devices:

KrebsOnSecurity asked two different security firms to test this using the caller ID spoofing service shown in Perm’s video, and sure enough calling that 800 number for Apple by spoofing my phone number as the source caused the Apple Account Confirmation to pop up on all of my signed-in Apple devices.

In essence, the voice phishers are using an automated Apple phone support line to send notifications from Apple and to trick people into thinking they’re really talking with Apple. The phishing panel video leaked by Stotle shows this technique fooled the target, who felt completely at ease that he was talking to Apple after receiving the support prompt on his iPhone.

“Okay, so this really is Apple,” the man said after receiving the alert from Apple. “Yeah, that’s definitely not me trying to reset my password.”

“Not a problem, we can go ahead and take care of this today,” Michael replied. “I’ll go ahead and prompt your device with the steps to close out this ticket. Before I do that, I do highly suggest that you change your password in the settings app of your device.”

The target said they weren’t sure exactly how to do that. Michael replied “no problem,” and then described how to change the account password, which the man said he did on his own device. At this point, the musician was still in control of his iCloud account.

“Password is changed,” the man said. “I don’t know what that was, but I appreciate the call.”

“Yup,” Michael replied, setting up the killer blow. “I’ll go ahead and prompt you with the next step to close out this ticket. Please give me one moment.”

The target then received a text message that referenced information about his account, stating that he was in a support call with Michael. Included in the message was a link to a website that mimicked Apple’s iCloud login page — 17505-apple[.]com. Once the target navigated to the phishing page, the video showed Perm’s screen in the upper right corner opening the phishing page from their end.

“Oh okay, now I log in with my Apple ID?,” the man asked.

“Yup, then just follow the steps it requires, and if you need any help, just let me know,” Michael replied.

As the victim typed in their Apple password and one-time passcode at the fake Apple site, Perm’s screen could be seen in the background logging into the victim’s iCloud account.

It’s unclear whether the phishers were able to steal any cryptocurrency from the victim in this case, who did not respond to requests for comment. However, shortly after this video was recorded, someone leaked several music recordings stolen from the victim’s iCloud account.

At the conclusion of the call, Michael offered to configure the victim’s Apple profile so that any further changes to the account would need to happen in person at a physical Apple store. This appears to be one of several scripted ploys used by these voice phishers to gain and maintain the target’s confidence.

A tutorial shared by Stotle titled “Social Engineering Script” includes a number of tips for scam callers that can help establish trust or a rapport with their prey. When the callers are impersonating Coinbase employees, for example, they will offer to sign the user up for the company’s free security email newsletter.

“Also, for your security, we are able to subscribe you to Coinbase Bytes, which will basically give you updates to your email about data breaches and updates to your Coinbase account,” the script reads. “So we should have gone ahead and successfully subscribed you, and you should have gotten an email confirmation. Please let me know if that is the case. Alright, perfect.”

In reality, all they are doing is entering the target’s email address into Coinbase’s public email newsletter signup page, but it’s a remarkably effective technique because it demonstrates to the would-be victim that the caller has the ability to send emails from Coinbase.com.

Asked to comment for this story, Apple said there has been no breach, hack, or technical exploit of iCloud or Apple services, and that the company is continuously adding new protections to address new and emerging threats. For example, it said it has implemented rate limiting for multi-factor authentication requests, which have been abused by voice phishing groups to impersonate Apple.

Apple said its representatives will never ask users to provide their password, device passcode, or two-factor authentication code or to enter it into a web page, even if it looks like an official Apple website. If a user receives a message or call that claims to be from Apple, here is what the user should expect.

AUTODOXERS

According to Stotle, the target lists used by their phishing callers originate mostly from a few crypto-related data breaches, including the 2022 and 2024 breaches involving user account data stolen from cryptocurrency hardware wallet vendor Trezor.

Perm’s group and other crypto phishing gangs rely on a mix of homemade code and third-party data broker services to refine their target lists. Known as “autodoxers,” these tools help phishing gangs quickly automate the acquisition and/or verification of personal data on a target prior to each call attempt.

Stotle said their autodoxer used a Telegram bot that leverages hacked accounts at consumer data brokers to gather a wealth of information about their targets, including their full Social Security number, date of birth, current and previous addresses, employer, and the names of family members.

The autodoxers are used to verify that each email address on a target list has an active account at Coinbase or another cryptocurrency exchange, ensuring that the attackers don’t waste time calling people who have no cryptocurrency to steal.

Some of these autodoxer tools also will check the value of the target’s home address at property search services online, and then sort the target lists so that the wealthiest are at the top.

CRYPTO THIEVES IN THE SHARK TANK

Stotle’s messages on Discord and Telegram show that a phishing group renting Perm’s panel voice-phished tens of thousands of dollars worth of cryptocurrency from the billionaire Mark Cuban.

“I was an idiot,” Cuban told KrebsOnsecurity when asked about the June 2024 attack, which he first disclosed in a short-lived post on Twitter/X. “We were shooting Shark Tank and I was rushing between pitches.”

Cuban said he first received a notice from Google that someone had tried to log in to his account. Then he got a call from what appeared to be a Google phone number. Cuban said he ignored several of these emails and calls until he decided they probably wouldn’t stop unless he answered.

“So I answered, and wasn’t paying enough attention,” he said. “They asked for the circled number that comes up on the screen. Like a moron, I gave it to them, and they were in.”

Unfortunately for Cuban, somewhere in his inbox were the secret “seed phrases” protecting two of his cryptocurrency accounts, and armed with those credentials the crooks were able to drain his funds. All told, the thieves managed to steal roughly $43,000 worth of cryptocurrencies from Cuban’s wallets — a relatively small heist for this crew.

“They must have done some keyword searches,” once inside his Gmail account, Cuban said. “I had sent myself an email I had forgotten about that had my seed words for 2 accounts that weren’t very active any longer. I had moved almost everything but some smaller balances to Coinbase.”

LIFE IS A GAME: MONEY IS HOW WE KEEP SCORE

Cybercriminals involved in voice phishing communities on Telegram are universally obsessed with their crypto holdings, mainly because in this community one’s demonstrable wealth is primarily what confers social status. It is not uncommon to see members sizing one another up using a verbal shorthand of “figs,” as in figures of crypto wealth.

For example, a low-level caller with no experience will sometimes be mockingly referred to as a 3fig or 3f, as in a person with less than $1,000 to their name. Salaries for callers are often also referenced this way, e.g. “Weekly salary: 5f.”

Voice phishing groups frequently require new members to provide “proof of funds” — screenshots of their crypto holdings, ostensibly to demonstrate they are not penniless — before they’re allowed to join.

This proof of funds (POF) demand is typical among thieves selling high-dollar items, because it tends to cut down on the time-wasting inquiries from criminals who can’t afford what’s for sale anyway. But it has become so common in cybercrime communities that there are now several services designed to create fake POF images and videos, allowing customers to brag about large crypto holdings without actually possessing said wealth.

Several of the phishing panel videos shared by Stotle feature audio that suggests co-conspirators were practicing responses to certain call scenarios, while other members of the phishing group critiqued them or tried disrupt their social engineering by being verbally abusive.

These groups will organize and operate for a few weeks, but tend to disintegrate when one member of the conspiracy decides to steal some or all of the loot, referred to in these communities as “snaking” others out of their agreed-upon sums. Almost invariably, the phishing groups will splinter apart over the drama caused by one of these snaking events, and individual members eventually will then re-form a new phishing group.

Allison Nixon is the chief research officer for Unit 221B, a cybersecurity firm in New York that has worked on a number of investigations involving these voice phishing groups. Nixon said the constant snaking within the voice phishing circles points to a psychological self-selection phenomenon that is in desperate need of academic study.

“In short, a person whose moral compass lets them rob old people will also be a bad business partner,” Nixon said. “This is another fundamental flaw in this ecosystem and why most groups end in betrayal. This structural problem is great for journalists and the police too. Lots of snitching.”

POINTS FOR BRAZENNESS

Asked about the size of Perm’s phishing enterprise, Stotle said there were dozens of distinct phishing groups paying to use Perm’s panel. He said each group was assigned their own subdomain on Perm’s main “command and control server,” which naturally uses the domain name commandandcontrolserver[.]com.

A review of that domain’s history via DomainTools.com shows there are at least 57 separate subdomains scattered across commandandcontrolserver[.]com and two other related control domains — thebackendserver[.]com and lookoutsucks[.]com. That latter domain was created and deployed shortly after Lookout published its blog post on Crypto Chameleon.

The dozens of phishing domains that phone home to these control servers are all kept offline when they are not actively being used in phishing attacks. A social engineering training guide shared by Stotle explains this practice minimizes the chances that a phishing domain will get “redpaged,” a reference to the default red warning pages served by Google Chrome or Firefox whenever someone tries to visit a site that’s been flagged for phishing or distributing malware.

What’s more, while the phishing sites are live their operators typically place a CAPTCHA challenge in front of the main page to prevent security services from scanning and flagging the sites as malicious.

It may seem odd that so many cybercriminal groups operate so openly on instant collaboration networks like Telegram and Discord. After all, this blog is replete with stories about cybercriminals getting caught thanks to personal details they inadvertently leaked or disclosed themselves.

Nixon said the relative openness of these cybercrime communities makes them inherently risky, but it also allows for the rapid formation and recruitment of new potential co-conspirators. Moreover, today’s English-speaking cybercriminals tend to be more afraid of getting home invaded or mugged by fellow cyber thieves than they are of being arrested by authorities.

“The biggest structural threat to the online criminal ecosystem is not the police or researchers, it is fellow criminals,” Nixon said. “To protect them from themselves, every criminal forum and marketplace has a reputation system, even though they know it’s a major liability when the police come. That is why I am not worried as we see criminals migrate to various ‘encrypted’ platforms that promise to ignore the police. To protect themselves better against the law, they have to ditch their protections against fellow criminals and that’s not going to happen.”

How to Protect Yourself from a Brushing Scam

Brushing scams are a type of online fraud where sellers send unsolicited packages to individuals, even though they never made an order. These deceptive tactics are often used on popular e-commerce platforms such as Amazon and AliExpress. The goal of scammers is to artificially inflate product rankings and create fake reviews, ultimately boosting their sales and visibility. Read on to understand how brushing scams work and what steps you can take to stay safe.

What Is a Brushing Scam?

A brushing scam is a fraudulent practice in which sellers send packages to people without their knowledge or consent. These items are typically cheap and low-quality, such as inexpensive jewelry or random gadgets, and are sent to fake addresses or addresses obtained illegally. Once the item is delivered, the fraudster writes a fake review praising the product, which helps the seller’s rating rise.

Why Is It Called a “Brushing” Scam?

The term “brushing” originates from Chinese e-commerce, where the act of “brushing up” sales numbers involves creating fake orders and sending goods to random individuals. This practice boosts a product’s perceived popularity, tricking other buyers into thinking the product is highly rated, thus increasing its sales.

How Do Brushing Scams Work?

Here’s how a brushing scam typically unfolds:

• The scammer creates a fake account on an e-commerce platform.
• They place an order for their own product using an address they’ve obtained illegitimately.
• A cheap product, such as a low-quality ring or fake electronic device, is sent to the recipient.
• Once the package arrives, the scammer posts a glowing review under their fake account to make the product appear more legitimate.

These scammers often send products like costume jewelry, seeds, or inexpensive gadgets to inflate their reviews and rankings. If you find an unsolicited package at your door, there’s a high chance it’s part of a brushing scam.

The Risks of Brushing Scams

Personal Data Exposure:

Receiving unsolicited parcels may indicate that your personal information has been compromised. Scammers typically access names and addresses through data breaches or purchase this information from illegal sources. In some cases, they may possess additional sensitive details, opening the door to identity theft.

Account Suspension:

If a fraudster uses your name to write fake reviews, your e-commerce account could be flagged or suspended by the platform while the issue is investigated.

Misleading Consumers:

Fake reviews can mislead you into purchasing low-quality products, especially when inflated ratings and positive comments are posted en masse.

Safety Hazards:

Some items involved in brushing scams, such as cosmetics, could be harmful. Other items, like flower seeds, may pose biosecurity risks or introduce invasive species to your local ecosystem.

Reporting a Brushing Scam

If you’ve received an unexpected package and suspect it’s part of a brushing scam, report it to the online marketplace involved. Platforms typically provide a form for users to submit reports on fraudulent packages. Here’s how to handle it:

• Log into your account and locate the report section.
• If the package is not a gift, and the platform has no record of it, it’s likely part of a scam.
• Fill out the form and submit the details about the package.

You can also report the incident to your local consumer protection agency or, in the case of U.S. residents, to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

How to Handle an Amazon Brushing Scam

If the scam occurs on Amazon, follow these steps:

• Log into your Amazon account.
• Navigate to the “Report Unsolicited Package” section.
• Provide the relevant details, such as tracking number and a description of the package.
• Amazon will investigate, and it may take up to 10 days to receive an update.

It’s important not to consume or use the product, especially if its quality is questionable or if it’s an item like cosmetics or food. Update your passwords for Amazon and any linked accounts and monitor your financial statements for suspicious activity.

Protecting Yourself from Brushing Scams

Here are some steps to prevent falling victim to brushing scams:

• Secure Your Accounts:
  Update your passwords regularly and enable two-factor authentication for added security.
• Report Unsolicited Packages:
  If you receive a package you didn’t order, immediately report it to the platform where it came from.
• Verify Seller Reviews:
  Before buying from a new seller, scrutinize their reviews. Genuine reviews often contain specific details about the product or shipping process, while fake reviews tend to be more generic.
• Stick to Reputable Sellers:
  Always buy from trusted sellers with long-standing accounts. Inspect their product images carefully to avoid fake or misleading listings.

Why Am I Receiving Unordered Packages from China?

If you receive unexpected items from China or other overseas locations, it could be a sign of a brushing scam, especially if the items appear low-quality or irrelevant.

What Should I Do If I Get an Unknown Package from USPS?

If you receive a package you didn’t order via USPS:

• Contact USPS immediately.
• If unopened, mark the package “Return to sender” for free return.
• If you also receive a phishing email, report it as well.

Brushing scams are a growing concern, but by staying vigilant and taking appropriate steps, you can protect your personal information and avoid falling prey to these deceptive tactics. Always report suspicious packages and reviews, and be cautious when interacting with unfamiliar sellers.

 

The post How to Protect Yourself from a Brushing Scam appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Web Hacking Service ‘Araneida’ Tied to Turkish IT Firm

Cybercriminals are selling hundreds of thousands of credential sets stolen with the help of a cracked version of Acunetix, a powerful commercial web app vulnerability scanner, new research finds. The cracked software is being resold as a cloud-based attack tool by at least two different services, one of which KrebsOnSecurity traced to an information technology firm based in Turkey.

Cyber threat analysts at Silent Push said they recently received reports from a partner organization that identified an aggressive scanning effort against their website using an Internet address previously associated with a campaign by FIN7, a notorious Russia-based hacking group.

But on closer inspection they discovered the address contained an HTML title of “Araneida Customer Panel,” and found they could search on that text string to find dozens of unique addresses hosting the same service.

It soon became apparent that Araneida was being resold as a cloud-based service using a cracked version of Acunetix, allowing paying customers to conduct offensive reconnaissance on potential target websites, scrape user data, and find vulnerabilities for exploitation.

Silent Push also learned Araneida bundles its service with a robust proxy offering, so that customer scans appear to come from Internet addresses that are randomly selected from a large pool of available traffic relays.

The makers of Acunetix, Texas-based application security vendor Invicti Security, confirmed Silent Push’s findings, saying someone had figured out how to crack the free trial version of the software so that it runs without a valid license key.

“We have been playing cat and mouse for a while with these guys,” said Matt Sciberras, chief information security officer at Invicti.

Silent Push said Araneida is being advertised by an eponymous user on multiple cybercrime forums. The service’s Telegram channel boasts nearly 500 subscribers and explains how to use the tool for malicious purposes.

In a “Fun Facts” list posted to the channel in late September, Araneida said their service was used to take over more than 30,000 websites in just six months, and that one customer used it to buy a Porsche with the payment card data (“dumps”) they sold.

“They are constantly bragging with their community about the crimes that are being committed, how it’s making criminals money,” said Zach Edwards, a senior threat researcher at Silent Push. “They are also selling bulk data and dumps which appear to have been acquired with this tool or due to vulnerabilities found with the tool.”

Silent Push also found a cracked version of Acunetix was powering at least 20 instances of a similar cloud-based vulnerability testing service catering to Mandarin speakers, but they were unable to find any apparently related sales threads about them on the dark web.

Rumors of a cracked version of Acunetix being used by attackers surfaced in June 2023 on Twitter/X, when researchers first posited a connection between observed scanning activity and Araneida.

According to an August 2023 report (PDF) from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Acunetix (presumably a cracked version) is among several tools used by APT 41, a prolific Chinese state-sponsored hacking group.

THE TURKISH CONNECTION

Silent Push notes that the website where Araneida is being sold — araneida[.]co — first came online in February 2023. But a review of this Araneida nickname on the cybercrime forums shows they have been active in the criminal hacking scene since at least 2018.

A search in the threat intelligence platform Intel 471 shows a user by the name Araneida promoted the scanner on two cybercrime forums since 2022, including Breached and Nulled. In 2022, Araneida told fellow Breached members they could be reached on Discord at the username “Ornie#9811.”

According to Intel 471, this same Discord account was advertised in 2019 by a person on the cybercrime forum Cracked who used the monikers “ORN” and “ori0n.” The user “ori0n” mentioned in several posts that they could be reached on Telegram at the username “@sirorny.”

The Sirorny Telegram identity also was referenced as a point of contact for a current user on the cybercrime forum Nulled who is selling website development services, and who references araneida[.]co as one of their projects. That user, “Exorn,” has posts dating back to August 2018.

In early 2020, Exorn promoted a website called “orndorks[.]com,” which they described as a service for automating the scanning for web-based vulnerabilities. A passive DNS lookup on this domain at DomainTools.com shows that its email records pointed to the address ori0nbusiness@protonmail.com.

Constella Intelligence, a company that tracks information exposed in data breaches, finds this email address was used to register an account at Breachforums in July 2024 under the nickname “Ornie.” Constella also finds the same email registered at the website netguard[.]codes in 2021 using the password “ceza2003” [full disclosure: Constella is currently an advertiser on KrebsOnSecurity].

A search on the password ceza2003 in Constella finds roughly a dozen email addresses that used it in an exposed data breach, most of them featuring some variation on the name “altugsara,” including altugsara321@gmail.com. Constella further finds altugsara321@gmail.com was used to create an account at the cybercrime community RaidForums under the username “ori0n,” from an Internet address in Istanbul.

According to DomainTools, altugsara321@gmail.com was used in 2020 to register the domain name altugsara[.]com. Archive.org’s history for that domain shows that in 2021 it featured a website for a then 18-year-old Altuğ Şara from Ankara, Turkey.

LinkedIn finds this same altugsara[.]com domain listed in the “contact info” section of a profile for an Altug Sara from Ankara, who says he has worked the past two years as a senior software developer for a Turkish IT firm called Bilitro Yazilim.

Neither Altug Sara nor Bilitro Yazilim responded to requests for comment.

Invicti’s website states that it has offices in Ankara, but the company’s CEO said none of their employees recognized either name.

“We do have a small team in Ankara, but as far as I know we have no connection to the individual other than the fact that they are also in Ankara,” Invicti CEO Neil Roseman told KrebsOnSecurity.

Researchers at Silent Push say despite Araneida using a seemingly endless supply of proxies to mask the true location of its users, it is a fairly “noisy” scanner that will kick off a large volume of requests to various API endpoints, and make requests to random URLs associated with different content management systems.

What’s more, the cracked version of Acunetix being resold to cybercriminals invokes legacy Acunetix SSL certificates on active control panels, which Silent Push says provides a solid pivot for finding some of this infrastructure, particularly from the Chinese threat actors.

Further reading: Silent Push’s research on Araneida Scanner.

Patch Tuesday, December 2024 Edition

Microsoft today released updates to plug at least 70 security holes in Windows and Windows software, including one vulnerability that is already being exploited in active attacks.

The zero-day seeing exploitation involves CVE-2024-49138, a security weakness in the Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) driver — used by applications to write transaction logs — that could let an authenticated attacker gain “system” level privileges on a vulnerable Windows device.

The security firm Rapid7 notes there have been a series of zero-day elevation of privilege flaws in CLFS over the past few years.

“Ransomware authors who have abused previous CLFS vulnerabilities will be only too pleased to get their hands on a fresh one,” wrote Adam Barnett, lead software engineer at Rapid7. “Expect more CLFS zero-day vulnerabilities to emerge in the future, at least until Microsoft performs a full replacement of the aging CLFS codebase instead of offering spot fixes for specific flaws.”

Elevation of privilege vulnerabilities accounted for 29% of the 1,009 security bugs Microsoft has patched so far in 2024, according to a year-end tally by Tenable; nearly 40 percent of those bugs were weaknesses that could let attackers run malicious code on the vulnerable device.

Rob Reeves, principal security engineer at Immersive Labs, called special attention to CVE-2024-49112, a remote code execution flaw in the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) service on every version of Windows since Windows 7. CVE-2024-49112 has been assigned a CVSS (badness) score of 9.8 out of 10.

“LDAP is most commonly seen on servers that are Domain Controllers inside a Windows network and LDAP must be exposed to other servers and clients within an enterprise environment for the domain to function,” Reeves said. “Microsoft hasn’t released specific information about the vulnerability at present, but has indicated that the attack complexity is low and authentication is not required.”

Tyler Reguly at the security firm Fortra had a slightly different 2024 patch tally for Microsoft, at 1,088 vulnerabilities, which he said was surprisingly similar to the 1,063 vulnerabilities resolved in 2023 and the 1,119 vulnerabilities resolved in 2022.

“If nothing else, we can say that Microsoft is consistent,” Reguly said. “While it would be nice to see the number of vulnerabilities each year decreasing, at least consistency lets us know what to expect.”

If you’re a Windows end user and your system is not set up to automatically install updates, please take a minute this week to run Windows Update, preferably after backing up your system and/or important data.

System admins should keep an eye on AskWoody.com, which usually has the details if any of the Patch Tuesday fixes are causing problems. In the meantime, if you run into any problems applying this month’s fixes, please drop a note about in the comments below.

How to Protect Your Data While On-the-Go

Winter travel is filled with excitement—whether you’re heading to a snow-covered ski resort, visiting family for the holidays, or enjoying a cozy retreat in a picturesque town. According to Tripadvisor’s Winter Travel Index, 57% of Americans are gearing up for winter travel this year, with a staggering 96% planning to travel as much or more than they did last winter. Yet, with this seasonal joy comes a hidden danger: public Wi-Fi. Airports, hotels, coffee shops, and even ski lodges offer free Wi-Fi, making it easy to stay connected while on the go. But while these networks are convenient, they can also be risky.

Common threats include Man-in-the-Middle attacks, where hackers intercept data exchanged between your device and the Wi-Fi network, and rogue hotspots, where cybercriminals set up fake Wi-Fi networks with names that mimic legitimate ones, tricking users into connecting. 

Despite these risks, many travelers still connect to public Wi-Fi without taking the necessary precautions. But with a few simple steps, you can significantly reduce your exposure while traveling this winter.

1. Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN): Your Best Defense

The most effective way to protect your data on public Wi-Fi is by using a Virtual Private Network (VPN). A VPN encrypts your internet connection, making it virtually impossible for hackers to intercept your data. It creates a secure tunnel between your device and the internet, ensuring that your online activity remains private.

By encrypting your data, a VPN ensures that any information transmitted over the network is unreadable to anyone attempting to intercept it, such as hackers or cybercriminals. It also masks your IP address, adding a layer of anonymity that makes it difficult for snoopers to trace your online movements or identify your location. 

2. Avoid Sensitive Transactions on Public Wi-Fi

Even with a VPN, it’s wise to avoid performing sensitive transactions on public Wi-Fi networks. For activities like online banking, shopping with credit cards, or accessing sensitive work documents, it’s best to reserve those tasks for secure, private networks. Taking a few extra precautions can further reduce your risk of data theft. 

Safer Alternatives:

• Use Mobile Data: When possible, switch to your mobile data connection for sensitive transactions. Cellular networks are generally more secure than public Wi-Fi. 
• Wait Until You’re Home: If the transaction isn’t urgent, wait until you can connect to a trusted, secure network. 
• Use Secure Apps: If you must access sensitive accounts, use their official mobile apps instead of a web browser. Apps often have built-in security features that browsers lack.

3. Spot Suspicious Wi-Fi Networks

Not all Wi-Fi networks are created equal. Some are outright traps set by hackers to lure unsuspecting users. Always verify the official network name with a staff member before connecting, especially in places like airports, hotels, or cafes. Knowing how to identify suspicious networks can save you from connecting to a rogue hotspot.

Red Flags to Watch For: 

• Unsecured Networks: If a network doesn’t require a password, it’s a potential risk. 
• Strange Network Names: Be wary of networks with names that are misspelled or mimic legitimate ones (e.g., “Airport_FreeWiFi” instead of “Airport Free Wi-Fi”). 
• Unusual Login Pages: If a Wi-Fi network asks for excessive personal information to connect, it could be a scam.

4. Keep Your Devices Secure

Protecting your data on public Wi-Fi isn’t just about the network—it’s also about securing your devices. Cybercriminals can exploit vulnerabilities in your smartphone, tablet, or laptop to gain access to your personal information. 

Device Security Tips: 

• Update Your Software: Keep your operating system, apps, and security software up to date to patch any vulnerabilities. 
• Use Antivirus Software: Install reliable antivirus software to detect and block malware or suspicious activity. 
• Enable Firewall Protection: A firewall acts as a gatekeeper for your internet connection by filtering and analyzing incoming data. As the first line of defense, they block unauthorized access and prevent malicious programs from infiltrating your network. 
• Turn Off Automatic Wi-Fi Connections: Disable the feature that automatically connects your device to open Wi-Fi networks. 
• Clear Your Browser Cache: Delete cookies and browsing history to remove any stored login credentials. 

Stay Safe and Enjoy Your Winter Travels 

Public Wi-Fi can be a lifesaver when you’re traveling, but it doesn’t have to be a risk. By following these simple tips—using a VPN, avoiding sensitive transactions, and securing your devices—you can enjoy your winter adventures without compromising your personal data. So, whether you’re sipping hot cocoa in a ski lodge or waiting for a flight home, stay connected, stay secure, and make the most of your winter travels. 

The post How to Protect Your Data While On-the-Go appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Winter Travel Wi-Fi Safety: How to Protect Your Data While On-the-Go

Winter Travel Wi-Fi Safety: How to Protect Your Data While On-the-Go

 

Winter travel is filled with excitement—whether you’re heading to a snow-covered ski resort, visiting family for the holidays, or enjoying a cozy retreat in a picturesque town. According to Tripadvisor’s Winter Travel Index, 57% of Americans are gearing up for winter travel this year, with a staggering 96% planning to travel as much or more than they did last winter. Yet, with this seasonal joy comes a hidden danger: public Wi-Fi. Airports, hotels, coffee shops, and even ski lodges offer free Wi-Fi, making it easy to stay connected while on the go. But while these networks are convenient, they can also be risky.

Public Wi-Fi networks are notorious for their lack of security. Unlike your home network, which is likely password-protected and encrypted, many public networks are open and vulnerable to cyberattacks. Hackers can intercept your data, monitor your online activity, and even steal sensitive information like passwords, credit card numbers, and personal identification.

Common threats include Man-in-the-Middle attacks, where hackers intercept data exchanged between your device and the Wi-Fi network, and rogue hotspots, where cybercriminals set up fake Wi-Fi networks with names that mimic legitimate ones, tricking users into connecting.

Despite these risks, many travelers still connect to public Wi-Fi without taking the necessary precautions. But with a few simple steps, you can significantly reduce your exposure while traveling this winter.

1. Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN): Your Best Defense

 

The most effective way to protect your data on public Wi-Fi is by using a Virtual Private Network (VPN). A VPN encrypts your internet connection, making it virtually impossible for hackers to intercept your data. It creates a secure tunnel between your device and the internet, ensuring that your online activity remains private.

By encrypting your data, a VPN ensures that any information transmitted over the network is unreadable to anyone attempting to intercept it, such as hackers or cybercriminals. It also masks your IP address, adding a layer of anonymity that makes it difficult for snoopers to trace your online movements or identify your location.

2. Avoid Sensitive Transactions on Public Wi-Fi

 

Even with a VPN, it’s wise to avoid performing sensitive transactions on public Wi-Fi networks. For activities like online banking, shopping with credit cards, or accessing sensitive work documents, it’s best to reserve those tasks for secure, private networks. Taking a few extra precautions can further reduce your risk of data theft.

Safer Alternatives:

• Use Mobile Data: When possible, switch to your mobile data connection for sensitive transactions. Cellular networks are generally more secure than public Wi-Fi.
• Wait Until You’re Home: If the transaction isn’t urgent, wait until you can connect to a trusted, secure network.
• Use Secure Apps: If you must access sensitive accounts, use their official mobile apps instead of a web browser. Apps often have built-in security features that browsers lack.

 

3. Spot Suspicious Wi-Fi Networks

 

Not all Wi-Fi networks are created equal. Some are outright traps set by hackers to lure unsuspecting users. Always verify the official network name with a staff member before connecting, especially in places like airports, hotels, or cafes. Knowing how to identify suspicious networks can save you from connecting to a rogue hotspot.

 

Red Flags to Watch For:

• Unsecured Networks: If a network doesn’t require a password, it’s a potential risk.
• Strange Network Names: Be wary of networks with names that are misspelled or mimic legitimate ones (e.g., “Airport_FreeWiFi” instead of “Airport Free Wi-Fi”).
• Unusual Login Pages: If a Wi-Fi network asks for excessive personal information to connect, it could be a scam.

 

4. Keep Your Devices Secure

Protecting your data on public Wi-Fi isn’t just about the network—it’s also about securing your devices. Cybercriminals can exploit vulnerabilities in your smartphone, tablet, or laptop to gain access to your personal information.

 

Device Security Tips:

• Update Your Software: Keep your operating system, apps, and security software up to date to patch any vulnerabilities.
• Use Antivirus Software: Install reliable antivirus software to detect and block malware or suspicious activity.
• Enable Firewall Protection: A firewall acts as a gatekeeper for your internet connection by filtering and analyzing incoming data. As the first line of defense, they block unauthorized access and prevent malicious programs from infiltrating your network.
• Turn Off Automatic Wi-Fi Connections: Disable the feature that automatically connects your device to open Wi-Fi networks.
• Clear Your Browser Cache: Delete cookies and browsing history to remove any stored login credentials.

 

Stay Safe and Enjoy Your Winter Travels

Public Wi-Fi can be a lifesaver when you’re traveling, but it doesn’t have to be a risk. By following these simple tips—using a VPN, avoiding sensitive transactions, and securing your devices—you can enjoy your winter adventures without compromising your personal data. So, whether you’re sipping hot cocoa in a ski lodge or waiting for a flight home, stay connected, stay secure, and make the most of your winter travels.

The post Winter Travel Wi-Fi Safety: How to Protect Your Data While On-the-Go appeared first on McAfee Blog.

U.S. Offered $10M for Hacker Just Arrested by Russia

In January 2022, KrebsOnSecurity identified a Russian man named Mikhail Matveev as “Wazawaka,” a cybercriminal who was deeply involved in the formation and operation of multiple ransomware groups. The U.S. government indicted Matveev as a top ransomware purveyor a year later, offering $10 million for information leading to his arrest. Last week, the Russian government reportedly arrested Matveev and charged him with creating malware used to extort companies.

Matveev, a.k.a. “Wazawaka” and “Boriselcin” worked with at least three different ransomware gangs that extorted hundreds of millions of dollars from companies, schools, hospitals and government agencies, U.S. prosecutors allege.

Russia’s interior ministry last week issued a statement saying a 32-year-old hacker had been charged with violating domestic laws against the creation and use of malicious software. The announcement didn’t name the accused, but the Russian state news agency RIA Novosti cited anonymous sources saying the man detained is Matveev.

Matveev did not respond to requests for comment. Daryna Antoniuk at TheRecord reports that a security researcher said on Sunday they had contacted Wazawaka, who confirmed being charged and said he’d paid two fines, had his cryptocurrency confiscated, and is currently out on bail pending trial.

Matveev’s hacker identities were remarkably open and talkative on numerous cybercrime forums. Shortly after being identified as Wazawaka by KrebsOnSecurity in 2022, Matveev published multiple selfie videos on Twitter/X where he acknowledged using the Wazawaka moniker and mentioned several security researchers by name (including this author). More recently, Matveev’s X profile (@ransomboris) posted a picture of a t-shirt that features the U.S. government’s “Wanted” poster for him.

The golden rule of cybercrime in Russia has always been that as long as you never hack, extort or steal from Russian citizens or companies, you have little to fear of arrest. Wazawaka claimed he zealously adhered to this rule as a personal and professional mantra.

“Don’t shit where you live, travel local, and don’t go abroad,” Wazawaka wrote in January 2021 on the Russian-language cybercrime forum Exploit. “Mother Russia will help you. Love your country, and you will always get away with everything.”

Still, Wazawaka may not have always stuck to that rule. At several points throughout his career, Wazawaka claimed he made good money stealing accounts from drug dealers on darknet narcotics bazaars.

Cyber intelligence firm Intel 471 said Matveev’s arrest raises more questions than answers, and that Russia’s motivation here likely goes beyond what’s happening on the surface.

“It’s possible this is a shakedown by Kaliningrad authorities of a local internet thug who has tens of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency,” Intel 471 wrote in an analysis published Dec. 2. “The country’s ingrained, institutional corruption dictates that if dues aren’t paid, trouble will come knocking. But it’s usually a problem money can fix.

Intel 471 says while Russia’s court system is opaque, Matveev will likely be open about the proceedings, particularly if he pays a toll and is granted passage to continue his destructive actions.

“Unfortunately, none of this would mark meaningful progress against ransomware,” they concluded.

Although Russia traditionally hasn’t put a lot of effort into going after cybercriminals within its borders, it has brought a series of charges against alleged ransomware actors this year. In January, four men tied to the REvil ransomware group were sentenced to lengthy prison terms. The men were among 14 suspected REvil members rounded up by Russia in the weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.

Earlier this year, Russian authorities arrested at least two men for allegedly operating the short-lived Sugarlocker ransomware program in 2021. Aleksandr Ermakov and Mikhail Shefel (now legally Mikhail Lenin) ran a security consulting business called Shtazi-IT. Shortly before his arrest, Ermakov became the first ever cybercriminal sanctioned by Australia, which alleged he stole and leaked data on nearly 10 million customers of the Australian health giant Medibank.

In December 2023, KrebsOnSecurity identified Lenin as “Rescator,” the nickname used by the cybercriminal responsible for selling more than 100 million payment cards stolen from customers of Target and Home Depot in 2013 and 2014. Last month, Shefel admitted in an interview with KrebsOnSecurity that he was Rescator, and claimed his arrest in the Sugarlocker case was payback for reporting the son of his former boss to the police.

Ermakov was sentenced to two years probation. But on the same day my interview with Lenin was published here, a Moscow court declared him insane, and ordered him to undergo compulsory medical treatment, The Record’s Antoniuk notes.

Why Phishers Love New TLDs Like .shop, .top and .xyz

Phishing attacks increased nearly 40 percent in the year ending August 2024, with much of that growth concentrated at a small number of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) — such as .shop, .top, .xyz — that attract scammers with rock-bottom prices and no meaningful registration requirements, new research finds. Meanwhile, the nonprofit entity that oversees the domain name industry is moving forward with plans to introduce a slew of new gTLDs.

A study on phishing data released by Interisle Consulting finds that new gTLDs introduced in the last few years command just 11 percent of the market for new domains, but accounted for roughly 37 percent of cybercrime domains reported between September 2023 and August 2024.

Interisle was sponsored by several anti-spam organizations, including the Anti-Phishing Working Group (APWG), the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE), and the Messaging, Malware, and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group (M3AAWG).

The study finds that while .com and .net domains made up approximately half of all domains registered in the past year (more than all of the other TLDs combined) they accounted for just over 40 percent of all cybercrime domains. Interisle says an almost equal share — 37 percent — of cybercrime domains were registered through new gTLDs.

Spammers and scammers gravitate toward domains in the new gTLDs because these registrars tend to offer cheap or free registration with little to no account or identity verification requirements. For example, among the gTLDs with the highest cybercrime domain scores in this year’s study, nine offered registration fees for less than $1, and nearly two dozen offered fees of less than $2.00. By comparison, the cheapest price identified for a .com domain was $5.91.

Currently, there are around 2,500 registrars authorized to sell domains by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the California nonprofit that oversees the domain industry.

Incredibly, despite years of these reports showing phishers heavily abusing new gTLDs, ICANN is shuffling forward on a plan to introduce even more of them. ICANN’s proposed next round envisions accepting applications for new gTLDs in 2026.

John Levine is author of the book “The Internet for Dummies” and president of CAUCE. Levine said adding more TLDs without a much stricter registration policy will likely further expand an already plentiful greenfield for cybercriminals.

“The problem is that ICANN can’t make up their mind whether they are the neutral nonprofit regulator or just the domain speculator trade association,” Levine told KrebsOnSecurity. “But they act a lot more like the latter.”

Levine said the vast majority of new gTLDs have a few thousand domains — a far cry from the number of registrations they would need just to cover the up-front costs of operating a new gTLD (~$180,000-$300,000). New gTLD registrars can quickly attract customers by selling domains cheaply to customers who buy domains in bulk, but that tends to be a losing strategy.

“Selling to criminals and spammers turns out to be lousy business,” Levine said. “You can charge whatever you want on the first year, but you have to charge list price on domain renewals. And criminals and spammers never renew. So if it sounds like the economics makes no sense it’s because the economics makes no sense.”

In virtually all previous spam reports, Interisle found the top brands referenced in phishing attacks were the largest technology companies, including Apple, Facebook, Google and PayPal. But this past year, Interisle found the U.S. Postal Service was by far the most-phished entity, with more than four times the number of phishing domains as the second most-frequent target (Apple).

At least some of that increase is likely from a prolific cybercriminal using the nickname Chenlun, who has been selling phishing kits targeting domestic postal services in the United States and at least a dozen other countries.

Interisle says an increasing number of phishers are eschewing domain registrations altogether, and instead taking advantage of subdomain providers like blogspot.com, pages.dev, and weebly.com. The report notes that cyberattacks hosted at subdomain provider services can be tough to mitigate, because only the subdomain provider can disable malicious accounts or take down malicious web pages.

“Any action upstream, such as blocking the second-level domain, would have an impact across the provider’s whole customer base,” the report observes.

Interisle tracked more than 1.18 million instances of subdomains used for phishing in the past year (a 114 percent increase), and found more than half of those were subdomains at blogspot.com and other services operated by Google.

“Many of these services allow the creation of large numbers of accounts at one time, which is highly exploited by criminals,” the report concludes. “Subdomain providers should limit the number of subdomains (user accounts) a customer can create at one time and suspend automated, high-volume automated account sign-ups – especially using free services.”

Dec. 4, 10:21 a.m. ET: Corrected link to report.

Hacker in Snowflake Extortions May Be a U.S. Soldier

Two men have been arrested for allegedly stealing data from and extorting dozens of companies that used the cloud data storage company Snowflake, but a third suspect — a prolific hacker known as Kiberphant0m — remains at large and continues to publicly extort victims. However, this person’s identity may not remain a secret for long: A careful review of Kiberphant0m’s daily chats across multiple cybercrime personas suggests they are a U.S. Army soldier who is or was recently stationed in South Korea.

Kiberphant0m’s identities on cybercrime forums and on Telegram and Discord chat channels have been selling data stolen from customers of the cloud data storage company Snowflake. At the end of 2023, malicious hackers discovered that many companies had uploaded huge volumes of sensitive customer data to Snowflake accounts that were protected with nothing more than a username and password (no multi-factor authentication required).

After scouring darknet markets for stolen Snowflake account credentials, the hackers began raiding the data storage repositories for some of the world’s largest corporations. Among those was AT&T, which disclosed in July that cybercriminals had stolen personal information, phone and text message records for roughly 110 million people.  Wired.com reported in July that AT&T paid a hacker $370,000 to delete stolen phone records.

On October 30, Canadian authorities arrested Alexander Moucka, a.k.a. Connor Riley Moucka of Kitchener, Ontario, on a provisional arrest warrant from the United States, which has since indicted him on 20 criminal counts connected to the Snowflake breaches. Another suspect in the Snowflake hacks, John Erin Binns, is an American who is currently incarcerated in Turkey.

Investigators say Moucka, who went by the handles Judische and Waifu, had tasked Kiberphant0m with selling data stolen from Snowflake customers who refused to pay a ransom to have their information deleted. Immediately after news broke of Moucka’s arrest, Kiberphant0m was clearly furious, and posted on the hacker community BreachForums what they claimed were the AT&T call logs for President-elect Donald J. Trump and for Vice President Kamala Harris.

“In the event you do not reach out to us @ATNT all presidential government call logs will be leaked,” Kiberphant0m threatened, signing their post with multiple “#FREEWAIFU” tags. “You don’t think we don’t have plans in the event of an arrest? Think again.”

On the same day, Kiberphant0m posted what they claimed was the “data schema” from the U.S. National Security Agency.

“This was obtained from the ATNT Snowflake hack which is why ATNT paid an extortion,” Kiberphant0m wrote in a thread on BreachForums. “Why would ATNT pay Waifu for the data when they wouldn’t even pay an extortion for over 20M+ SSNs?”

Also on Nov. 5, Kiberphant0m offered call logs stolen from Verizon’s push-to-talk (PTT) customers — mainly U.S. government agencies and emergency first responders. On Nov. 9, Kiberphant0m posted a sales thread on BreachForums offering a “SIM-swapping” service targeting Verizon PTT customers. In a SIM-swap, fraudsters use credentials that are phished or stolen from mobile phone company employees to divert a target’s phone calls and text messages to a device they control.

MEET ‘BUTTHOLIO’

Kiberphant0m joined BreachForums in January 2024, but their public utterances on Discord and Telegram channels date back to at least early 2022. On their first post to BreachForums, Kiberphant0m said they could be reached at the Telegram handle @cyb3rph4nt0m.

A review of @cyb3rph4nt0m shows this user has posted more than 4,200 messages since January 2024. Many of these messages were attempts to recruit people who could be hired to deploy a piece of malware that enslaved host machines in an Internet of Things (IoT) botnet.

On BreachForums, Kiberphant0m has sold the source code to “Shi-Bot,” a custom Linux DDoS botnet based on the Mirai malware. Kiberphant0m had few sales threads on BreachForums prior to the Snowflake attacks becoming public in May, and many of those involved databases stolen from companies in South Korea.

On June 5, 2024, a Telegram user by the name “Buttholio” joined the fraud-focused Telegram channel “Comgirl” and claimed to be Kiberphant0m. Buttholio made the claim after being taunted as a nobody by another denizen of Comgirl, referring to their @cyb3rph4nt0m account on Telegram and the Kiberphant0m user on cybercrime forums.

“Type ‘kiberphant0m’ on google with the quotes,” Buttholio told another user. “I’ll wait. Go ahead. Over 50 articles. 15+ telecoms breached. I got the IMSI number to every single person that’s ever registered in Verizon, Tmobile, ATNT and Verifone.”

On Sept. 17, 2023, Buttholio posted in a Discord chat room dedicated to players of the video game Escape from Tarkov. “Come to Korea, servers there is pretty much no extract camper or cheater,” Buttholio advised.

In another message that same day in the gaming Discord, Buttholio told others they bought the game in the United States, but that they were playing it in Asia.

“USA is where the game was purchased from, server location is actual in game servers u play on. I am a u.s. soldier so i bought it in the states but got on rotation so i have to use asian servers,” they shared.

‘REVERSESHELL’

The account @Kiberphant0m was assigned the Telegram ID number 6953392511. A review of this ID at the cyber intelligence platform Flashpoint shows that on January 4, 2024 Kibertphant0m posted to the Telegram channel “Dstat,” which is populated by cybercriminals involved in launching distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and selling DDoS-for-hire services [Full disclosure: Flashpoint is currently an advertiser on this website].

Immediately after Kiberphant0m logged on to the Dstat channel, another user wrote “hi buttholio,” to which Kiberphant0m replied with an affirmative greeting “wsg,” or “what’s good.” On Nov. 1, Dstat’s website dstat[.]cc was seized as part of “Operation PowerOFF,” an international law enforcement action against DDoS services.

Flashpoint’s data shows that @kiberphant0m told a fellow member of Dstat on April 10, 2024 that their alternate Telegram username was “@reverseshell,” and did the same two weeks later in the Telegram chat The Jacuzzi. The Telegram ID for this account is 5408575119.

Way back on Nov. 15, 2022, @reverseshell told a fellow member of a Telegram channel called Cecilio Chat that they were a soldier in the U.S. Army. This user also shared the following image of someone pictured waist-down in military fatigues, with a camouflaged backpack at their feet:

In September 2022, Reverseshell was embroiled in an argument with another member who had threatened to launch a DDoS attack against Reverseshell’s Internet address. After the promised attack materialized, Reverseshell responded, “Yall just hit military base contracted wifi.”

In a chat from October 2022, Reverseshell was bragging about the speed of the servers they were using, and in reply to another member’s question said that they were accessing the Internet via South Korea Telecom.

Telegram chat logs archived by Flashpoint show that on Aug. 23, 2022, Reverseshell bragged they’d been using automated tools to find valid logins for Internet servers that they resold to others.

“I’ve hit US gov servers with default creds,” Reverseshell wrote, referring to systems with easy-to-guess usernames and/or passwords. “Telecom control servers, machinery shops, Russian ISP servers, etc. I sold a few big companies for like $2-3k a piece. You can sell the access when you get a big SSH into corporation.”

On July 29, 2023, Reverseshell posted a screenshot of a login page for a major U.S. defense contractor, claiming they had an aerospace company’s credentials to sell.

PROMAN AND VARS_SECC

Flashpoint finds the Telegram ID 5408575119 has used several aliases since 2022, including Reverseshell and Proman557.

A search on the username Proman557 at the cyber intelligence platform Intel 471 shows that a hacker by the name “Proman554” registered on Hackforums in September 2022, and in messages to other users Proman554 said they can be reached at the Telegram account Buttholio.

Intel 471 also finds the Proman557 moniker is one of many used by a person on the Russian-language hacking forum Exploit in 2022 who sold a variety of Linux-based botnet malware.

Proman557 was eventually banned — allegedly for scamming a fellow member out of $350 — and the Exploit moderator warned forum users that Proman557 had previously registered under several other nicknames, including an account called “Vars_Secc.”

Vars_Secc’s thousands of comments on Telegram over two years show this user divided their time between online gaming, maintaining a DDoS botnet, and promoting the sale or renting of their botnets to other users.

“I use ddos for many things not just to be a skid,” Vars_Secc pronounced. “Why do you think I haven’t sold my net?” They then proceeded to list the most useful qualities of their botnet:

-I use it to hit off servers that ban me or piss me off
-I used to ddos certain games to get my items back since the data reverts to when u joined
-I use it for server side desync RCE vulnerabilities
-I use it to sometimes ransom
-I use it when bored as a source of entertainment

Flashpoint shows that in June 2023, Vars_Secc responded to taunting from a fellow member in the Telegram channel SecHub who had threatened to reveal their personal details to the federal government for a reward.

“Man I’ve been doing this shit for 4 years,” Vars_Secc replied nonchalantly. “I highly doubt the government is going to pay millions of dollars for data on some random dude operating a pointless ddos botnet and finding a few vulnerabilities here and there.”

For several months in 2023, Vars_Secc also was an active member of the Russian-language crime forum XSS, where they sold access to a U.S. government server for $2,000. However, Vars_Secc would be banned from XSS after attempting to sell access to the Russian telecommunications giant Rostelecom. [In this, Vars_Secc violated the Number One Rule for operating on a Russia-based crime forum: Never offer to hack or sell data stolen from Russian entities or citizens].

On June 20, 2023, Vars_Secc posted a sales thread on the cybercrime forum Ramp 2.0 titled, “Selling US Gov Financial Access.”

“Server within the network, possible to pivot,” Vars_Secc’s sparse sales post read. “Has 3-5 subroutes connected to it. Price $1,250. Telegram: Vars_Secc.”

Vars_Secc also used Ramp in June 2023 to sell access to a “Vietnam government Internet Network Information Center.”

“Selling access server allocated within the network,” Vars_Secc wrote. “Has some data on it. $500.”

BUG BOUNTIES

The Vars_Secc identity claimed on Telegram in May 2023 that they made money by submitting reports about software flaws to HackerOne, a company that helps technology firms field reports about security vulnerabilities in their products and services. Specifically, Vars_Secc said they had earned financial rewards or “bug bounties” from reddit.com, the U.S. Department of Defense, and Coinbase, among 30 others.

“I make money off bug bounties, it’s quite simple,” Vars_Secc said when asked what they do for a living. “That’s why I have over 30 bug bounty reports on HackerOne.”

A month before that, Vars_Secc said they’d found a vulnerability in reddit.com.

“I poisoned Reddit’s cache,” they explained. “I’m going to exploit it further, then report it to reddit.”

KrebsOnSecurity sought comment from HackerOne, which said it would investigate the claims. This story will be updated if they respond.

The Vars_Secc telegram handle also has claimed ownership of the BreachForums member “Boxfan,” and Intel 471 shows Boxfan’s early posts on the forum had the Vars_Secc Telegram account in their signature. In their most recent post to BreachForums in January 2024, Boxfan disclosed a security vulnerability they found in Naver, the most popular search engine in South Korea (according to statista.com). Boxfan’s comments suggest they have strong negative feelings about South Korean culture.

“Have fun exploiting this vulnerability,” Boxfan wrote on BreachForums, after pasting a long string of computer code intended to demonstrate the flaw. “Fuck you South Korea and your discriminatory views. Nobody likes ur shit kpop you evil fucks. Whoever can dump this DB [database] congrats. I don’t feel like doing it so I’ll post it to the forum.”

The many identities tied to Kiberphant0m strongly suggest they are or until recently were a U.S. Army soldier stationed in South Korea. Kiberphant0m’s alter egos never mentioned their military rank, regiment, or specialization.

However, it is likely that Kiberphant0m’s facility with computers and networking was noticed by the Army. According to the U.S. Army’s website, the bulk of its forces in South Korea reside within the Eighth Army, which has a dedicated cyber operations unit focused on defending against cyber threats.

On April 1, 2023, Vars_Secc posted to a public Telegram chat channel a screenshot of the National Security Agency’s website. The image indicated the visitor had just applied for some type of job at the NSA.

The NSA has not yet responded to requests for comment.

Reached via Telegram, Kiberphant0m acknowledged that KrebsOnSecurity managed to unearth their old handles.

“I see you found the IP behind it no way,” Kiberphant0m replied. “I see you managed to find my old aliases LOL.”

Kiberphant0m denied being in the U.S. Army or ever being in South Korea, and said all of that was a lengthy ruse designed to create a fictitious persona. “Epic opsec troll,” they claimed.

Asked if they were at all concerned about getting busted, Kiberphant0m called that an impossibility.

“I literally can’t get caught,” Kiberphant0m said, declining an invitation to explain why. “I don’t even live in the USA Mr. Krebs.”

Below is a mind map that hopefully helps illustrate some of the connections between and among Kiberphant0m’s apparent alter egos.

KrebsOnSecurity would like to extend a special note of thanks to the New York City based security intelligence firm Unit 221B for their assistance in helping to piece together key elements of Kiberphant0m’s different identities.

This Holiday Season, Watch Out for These Cyber-Grinch Tricks Used to Scam Holiday Shoppers

McAfee threat researchers have identified several consumer brands and product categories most frequently used by cybercriminals to trick consumers into clicking on malicious links in the first weeks of this holiday shopping season. As holiday excitement peaks and shoppers hunt for the perfect gifts and amazing deals, scammers are taking advantage of the buzz. The National Retail Federation projects holiday spending will reach between $979.5 and $989 billion this year, and cybercriminals are capitalizing by creating scams that mimic the trusted brands and categories consumers trust. From October 1 to November 12, 2024, McAfee safeguarded its customers from 624,346 malicious or suspicious URLs tied to popular consumer brand names – a clear indication that bad actors are exploiting trusted brand names to deceive holiday shoppers. 

McAfee’s threat research also reveals a 33.82% spike in malicious URLs targeting consumers with these brands’ names in the run-up to Black Friday and Cyber Monday. This rise in fraudulent activity aligns with holiday shopping patterns during a time when consumers may be more susceptible to clicking on offers from well-known brands like Apple, Yeezy, and Louis Vuitton, especially when deals seem too good to be true – pointing to the need for consumers to stay vigilant, especially with offers that seem unusually generous or come from unverified sources.  

McAfee threat researchers have identified a surge in counterfeit sites and phishing scams that use popular luxury brands and tech products to lure consumers into “deals” on fake e-commerce sites designed to appear as official brand pages. While footwear and handbags were identified as the top two product categories exploited by cybercrooks during this festive time, the list of most exploited brands extends beyond those borders: 

Top Product Categories and Brands Targeted by Holiday Hustlers 

• Product categories: Handbags and footwear were the two most common product categories for bad actors. Yeezy (shoes) and Louis Vuitton (luxury handbags) were the most common brands that trick consumers into engaging with malicious/suspicious sites. 

• Footwear: Adidas, especially the Yeezy line, was a top target, with counterfeit sites posing as official Adidas or Yeezy outlets. 

• Luxury goods and handbags: Louis Vuitton emerged as a frequent target, particularly its handbag line. Cybercrooks frequently set up fake sites advertising high-demand luxury items like Louis Vuitton bags and apparel. 

• Watches: Rolex was one of the most frequently counterfeited brands, with fraudulent sites openly selling counterfeit versions of the brand’s coveted watches. 

• Technology: Scammers frequently used the Apple brand to trick consumers, including fake customer service websites and stores selling counterfeit Apple items alongside unrelated brands. 

By mimicking trusted brands like these, offering unbelievable deals, or posing as legitimate customer service channels, cybercrooks create convincing traps designed to steal personal information or money. Here are some of the most common tactics scammers are using this holiday season: 

Unwrapping Cybercriminals’ Holiday Shopping Scam Tactics 

• Fake e-commerce sites: Scammers often set up fake shopping websites mimicking official brand sites. These sites use URLs similar to those of the real brand and offer too-good-to-be-true deals to attract bargain hunters. 

• Phishing sites with customer service bait: Particularly with tech brands like Apple, some scam sites impersonate official customer service channels to lure customers into revealing personal information. 

• Knockoff and counterfeit products: Some scam sites advertise counterfeit items as if they are real; there is often no indication that they are not legitimate products. This tactic was common for scammers leveraging the Rolex and Louis Vuitton brands, which appeal to consumers seeking luxury goods. 

 With holiday shopping in full swing, it’s essential for consumers to stay one step ahead of scammers. By understanding the tactics cybercriminals use and taking a few precautionary measures, shoppers can protect themselves from falling victim to fraud. Here are some practical tips for safe shopping this season: 

Smart Shopping Tips to Outsmart Holiday Scammers 

• Stay alert, particularly during shopping scam season: The increase in malicious URLs during October and November is a strong indicator that scammers capitalize on holiday shopping behaviors. Consumers should be especially vigilant during this period and continue to exercise caution throughout the holiday shopping season. 

• Wear a skeptic’s hat: To stay safe, consumers should verify URLs, look for signs of secure websites (like https://), and be wary of any sites offering discounts that seem too good to be true. 

• Exercise additional caution: Adidas, Yeezy, Louis Vuitton, Apple, and Rolex are brand names frequently used by cybercrooks looking to scam consumers, so sticking with trusted sources is particularly important when shopping for these items online. 

Research Methodology 

McAfee’s threat research team analyzed malicious or suspicious URLs that McAfee’s web reputation technology identified as targeting customers, by using a list of key company and product brand names—based on insights from a Potter Clarkson report on frequently faked brands—to query the URLs. This methodology captures instances where users either clicked on or were directed to dangerous sites mimicking trusted brands. Additionally, the team queried anonymized user activity from October 1st through November 12th. 

Examples: 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: Yeezy is a popular product brand formerly from Adidas found in multiple Malicious/Suspicious URLs. Often, they present themselves as official Yeezy and/or Adidas shopping sites. 

 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: The Apple brand was a popular target for scammers. Many sites were either knock offs, scams, or in this case, a fake customer service page designed to lure users into a scam. 

 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: This particular (fake) Apple sales site used Apple within its URL and name to appear more official. Oddly, this site also sells Samsung Android phones. 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: This site, now taken down, is a scam site purporting to sell Nike shoes. 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: Louis Vuitton is a popular brand for counterfeit and scams. Particularly their handbags. Here is one site that was entirely focused on Louis Vuitton Handbags. 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: This site presents itself as the official Louis Vuitton site selling handbags and clothes. 

 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: This site uses too-good-to-be-true deals on branded items including this Louis Vuitton Bomber jacket. 

The image below is a screenshot of a fake / malicious / scam site: Rolex is a popular watch brand for counterfeits and scams. This site acknowledges it sells counterfeits and makes no effort to indicate this on the product.  

 

The post This Holiday Season, Watch Out for These Cyber-Grinch Tricks Used to Scam Holiday Shoppers appeared first on McAfee Blog.

How to Protect Your Social Media Passwords with Multi-factor Verification

Two-step verification, two-factor authentication, multi-factor authentication…whatever your social media platform calls it, it’s an excellent way to protect your accounts.

There’s a good chance you’re already using multi-factor verification with your other accounts — for your bank, your finances, your credit card, and any number of things. The way it requires an extra one-time code in addition to your login and password makes life far tougher for hackers.

It’s increasingly common to see nowadays, where all manner of online services only allow access to your accounts after you’ve provided a one-time passcode sent to your email or smartphone. That’s where two-step verification comes in. You get sent a code as part of your usual login process (usually a six-digit number), and then you enter that along with your username and password.

Some online services also offer the option to use an authenticator app, which sends the code to a secure app rather than via email or your smartphone. Authenticator apps work much in the same way, yet they offer three unique features:

• They keep the authentication code local to your device, rather than sending it unencrypted over email or text.
• This makes it more secure than email- and text-based authentication because they can be intercepted.
• It can also provide codes for multiple accounts, not just your social media account.

Google, Microsoft, and others offer authenticator apps if you want to go that route. You can get a good list of options by checking out the “editor’s picks” at your app store or in trusted tech publications.

Whichever form of authentication you use, always keep that secure code to yourself. It’s yours and yours alone. Anyone who asks for that code, say someone masquerading as a customer service rep, is trying to scam you. With that code, and your username/password combo, they can get into your account.

Before we talk about multi-factor verification, let’s talk about passwords

Passwords and two-step verification work hand-in-hand to keep you safer. Yet not any old password will do. You’ll want a strong, unique password. Here’s how that breaks down:

• Strong: A combination of at least 12 uppercase letters, lowercase letters, symbols, and numbers. Hacking tools look for word and number patterns. By mixing the types of characters, you break the pattern and keep your account safe.
• Unique: Every one of your accounts should have its own password. Yes, all. And if that sounds like a lot of work, a password manager can do the work for you. It creates strong, unique passwords and stores them securely.

Now, with strong passwords in place, you can get to setting up multi-factor verification on your social media accounts.

Multi-factor authentication for Facebook

1. Click on your profile picture in the top right, then click  Settings and Privacy.
2. Click Settings.
3. Click Accounts Center, then click Password and Security.
4. Click Two-factor authentication, then click on the account that you’d like to update.
5. Choose the security method you want to add and follow the on-screen instructions.

When you set up two-factor authentication on Facebook, you’ll be asked to choose one of three security methods:

• Tapping your security key on a compatible device.
• Login codes from a third-party authentication app.
• Text message (SMS) codes from your mobile phone.

And here’s a link to the company’s full walkthrough: https://www.facebook.com/help/148233965247823

Multi-factor authentication for Instagram

1. Click More in the bottom left, then click Settings.
2. Click See more in Accounts Center, then click Password and Security.
3. Click Two-factor authentication, then select an account.
4. Choose the security method you want to add and follow the on-screen instructions.

When you set up two-factor authentication on Instagram, you’ll be asked to choose one of three security methods: an authentication app, text message, or WhatsApp.

And here’s a link to the company’s full walkthrough: https://help.instagram.com/566810106808145

Multi-factor authentication for WhatsApp

1. Open WhatsApp Settings.
2. Tap Account > Two-step verification > Turn on or Set up PIN.
3. Enter a six-digit PIN of your choice and confirm it.
4. Provide an email address you can access or tap Skip if you don’t want to add an email address. (Adding an email address lets you reset two-step verification as needed, which further protects your account.
5. Tap Next.
6. Confirm the email address and tap Save or Done.

And here’s a link to the company’s full walkthrough: https://faq.whatsapp.com/1920866721452534

Multi-factor authentication for YouTube (and other Google accounts)

1. Open your Google Account.
2. In the navigation panel, select Security.
3. Under “How you sign in to Google,” select 2-Step Verification > Get started.
4. Follow the on-screen steps.

And here’s a link to the company’s full walkthrough: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/185839?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop

Multi-factor authentication for TikTok

1. TapProfileat the bottom of the screen.
2. Tap the Menu button at the top.
3. Tap Settings and Privacy, then Security.
4. Tap 2-step verification and choose at least two verification methods: SMS (text), email, and authenticator app.
5. Tap Turn on to confirm.

And here’s a link to the company’s full walkthrough: https://support.tiktok.com/en/account-and-privacy/personalized-ads-and-data/how-your-phone-number-is-used-on-tiktok

The post How to Protect Your Social Media Passwords with Multi-factor Verification appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Fintech Giant Finastra Investigating Data Breach

The financial technology firm Finastra is investigating the alleged large-scale theft of information from its internal file transfer platform, KrebsOnSecurity has learned. Finastra, which provides software and services to 45 of the world’s top 50 banks, notified customers of the security incident after a cybercriminal began selling more than 400 gigabytes of data purportedly stolen from the company.

London-based Finastra has offices in 42 countries and reported $1.9 billion in revenues last year. The company employs more than 7,000 people and serves approximately 8,100 financial institutions around the world. A major part of Finastra’s day-to-day business involves processing huge volumes of digital files containing instructions for wire and bank transfers on behalf of its clients.

On November 8, 2024, Finastra notified financial institution customers that on Nov. 7 its security team detected suspicious activity on Finastra’s internally hosted file transfer platform. Finastra also told customers that someone had begun selling large volumes of files allegedly stolen from its systems.

“On November 8, a threat actor communicated on the dark web claiming to have data exfiltrated from this platform,” reads Finastra’s disclosure, a copy of which was shared by a source at one of the customer firms.

“There is no direct impact on customer operations, our customers’ systems, or Finastra’s ability to serve our customers currently,” the notice continued. “We have implemented an alternative secure file sharing platform to ensure continuity, and investigations are ongoing.”

But its notice to customers does indicate the intruder managed to extract or “exfiltrate” an unspecified volume of customer data.

“The threat actor did not deploy malware or tamper with any customer files within the environment,” the notice reads. “Furthermore, no files other than the exfiltrated files were viewed or accessed. We remain focused on determining the scope and nature of the data contained within the exfiltrated files.”

In a written statement in response to questions about the incident, Finastra said it has been “actively and transparently responding to our customers’ questions and keeping them informed about what we do and do not yet know about the data that was posted.” The company also shared an updated communication to its clients, which said while it was still investigating the root cause, “initial evidence points to credentials that were compromised.”

“Additionally, we have been sharing Indicators of Compromise (IOCs) and our CISO has been speaking directly with our customers’ security teams to provide updates on the investigation and our eDiscovery process,” the statement continues. Here is the rest of what they shared:

“In terms of eDiscovery, we are analyzing the data to determine what specific customers were affected, while simultaneously assessing and communicating which of our products are not dependent on the specific version of the SFTP platform that was compromised. The impacted SFTP platform is not used by all customers and is not the default platform used by Finastra or its customers to exchange data files associated with a broad suite of our products, so we are working as quickly as possible to rule out affected customers. However, as you can imagine, this is a time-intensive process because we have many large customers that leverage different Finastra products in different parts of their business. We are prioritizing accuracy and transparency in our communications.

Importantly, for any customers who are deemed to be affected, we will be reaching out and working with them directly.”

On Nov. 8, a cybercriminal using the nickname “abyss0” posted on the English-language cybercrime community BreachForums that they’d stolen files belonging to some of Finastra’s largest banking clients. The data auction did not specify a starting or “buy it now” price, but said interested buyers should reach out to them on Telegram.

According to screenshots collected by the cyber intelligence platform Ke-la.com, abyss0 first attempted to sell the data allegedly stolen from Finastra on October 31, but that earlier sales thread did not name the victim company. However, it did reference many of the same banks called out as Finastra customers in the Nov. 8 post on BreachForums.

The October sales thread also included a starting price: $20,000. By Nov. 3, that price had been reduced to $10,000. A review of abyss0’s posts to BreachForums reveals this user has offered to sell databases stolen in several dozen other breaches advertised over the past six months.

The apparent timeline of this breach suggests abyss0 gained access to Finastra’s file sharing system at least a week before the company says it first detected suspicious activity, and that the Nov. 7 activity cited by Finastra may have been the intruder returning to exfiltrate more data.

Maybe abyss0 found a buyer who paid for their early retirement. We may never know, because this person has effectively vanished. The Telegram account that abyss0 listed in their sales thread appears to have been suspended or deleted. Likewise, abyss0’s account on BreachForums no longer exists, and all of their sales threads have since disappeared.

It seems improbable that both Telegram and BreachForums would have given this user the boot at the same time. The simplest explanation is that something spooked abyss0 enough for them to abandon a number of pending sales opportunities, in addition to a well-manicured cybercrime persona.

In March 2020, Finastra suffered a ransomware attack that sidelined a number of the company’s core businesses for days. According to reporting from Bloomberg, Finastra was able to recover from that incident without paying a ransom.

This is a developing story. Updates will be noted with timestamps. If you have any additional information about this incident, please reach out to krebsonsecurity @ gmail.com or at protonmail.com.

How AI Deepfakes and Scams Are Changing the Way We Shop Online

As 89% of Americans plan to shop online during this holiday shopping season, many say they’re more concerned about being scammed online than they were last year. One big reason why—AI deepfakes.  

Our 2024 Global Holiday Shopping Scams Study uncovered that 70% of American shoppers say AI-driven scams are changing the way they shop online. 

In all, they think scam emails and messages will be more believable than ever and that it’ll be harder to tell what’s a real message from a retailer or delivery service. With that in mind, 58% of people say they’ll be more alert than ever to when it comes to fake messages. Another 11% said they’ll do less online shopping because of how AI is helping cybercriminals. 

Overall, people say their confidence in spotting online scams is low, particularly when it comes to scams featuring AI-created content. Only 59% of Americans feel confident they can identify deepfakes or AI-generated content. 

The effectiveness of deepfake shopping scams has been shown already, 1 in 5 Americans (21%) said they unknowingly paid for fake products endorsed by deepfake celebrities. For Gen Z and Millennials, that number leaps yet higher, with 1 in 3 people aged 18-34 falling victim to a deepfake scam. Meanwhile, older Americans have avoided these scams, with only 5% of shoppers aged 55 and up saying that they’ve fallen victim to one. 

Additionally, 1 in 5 Americans (20%) say they or someone they know has fallen victim to a deepfake shopping scam, celebrity-based or otherwise. 70% of those people lost money to the deepfake holiday scam. Of those who lost money: 

• More than 1 of 4 (27%) lost more than $500. 

• More than 1 in 10 (11%) lost more than $1,000. 

The Top Holiday Shopping Trends We Spotted This Year

Across our research, three big findings stood out. The volume of scam messages is only increasing, chasing deals could lead to scams, and shopping on social media has risks of its own.

Scam messages continue to rise  

64% of Americans say they receive most of their scam messages via email, 20% encounter them primarily via text, and 16% find them on social media. These messages fall into several categories: 

• 59% of people reported fake missed delivery or delivery problem notifications. 

• Nearly half (44%) said they received alerts about a purchase they didn’t make. 

• Reports of fake messages about credit card or account issues were also high, at 37%. 

• 35% reported seeing phony Amazon security alerts or notifications. 

Chasing deals can be costly  

As the holiday season warms up, 84% of Americans say they’re on the hunt for the best holiday deals. But the rush for discounts could put them at risk. Scammers notoriously underprice hot items to lure in victims. 

• 38% of Americans say they’d jump on a great deal as soon as they see it.  

• Nearly 1 in 5 are willing to buy from unfamiliar retailers if the price is right. 

• 64% of Americans say they are likely to make a purchase from a new retailer they find through social media for holiday shopping, if the deal is good.  

Social shoppers face new kinds of risks 

More than 100 million Americans shop on social media.i While social shopping offers convenience, it also exposes people to new risks, especially as scammers use these platforms to reach victims. We found that shoppers are increasingly turning to social channels, often in significant ways.  

• 90% of Americans say they sometimes see ads from brands they’ve never heard of on social media—which may be legitimate companies or fronts for a scam. 

• 83% of Gen Z consumers say their shopping starts on social media, making it the first stop for holiday deals.  

• Overall, 12% of Americans say they plan to use TikTok Shopping, 7% plan to use Instagram Shopping, and 5% plan to use Pinterest. 

Protecting yourself from scams while shopping for the holidays  

Stick with known, legitimate retailers online 

This is a great one to start with. Directly typing in the correct address for online stores and retailers is a prime way to avoid scammers online. In the case of retailers that you don’t know much about, the U.S. Better Business Bureau (BBB) asks shoppers to do their research and make sure that retailer has a good reputation. The BBB makes that easier with a listing of retailers you can search simply by typing in their name. 

Pay with a credit card instead of your debit card  

In the U.S., the Fair Credit Billing Act offers the public protection against fraudulent charges on credit cards. Citizens can dispute charges of over $50 for goods and services that were never delivered or otherwise billed incorrectly. (Note that many credit card companies have their own policies that improve upon the Fair Credit Billing Act as well.) However, debit cards don’t get the same protection under the Act. Avoid using a debit card while shopping online and use your credit card instead.  

Go unlisted. 

Scammers have to get your contact info from somewhere. Often, they get it from online data brokers and other “people finder” sites. These sites collect and sell massive amounts of personal info to any buyer. You can remove that info from some of the riskiest data brokers with our Personal Data Cleanup service. It can help you remove that info, and with select products it can even manage the removal for you. Likewise, set your social media accounts to “friends and family” only so that your profile info doesn’t show up in search results. 

Think before you click.  

Phishing emails, texts, and sites lure people into clicking links that might lead to malware or handing over their personal info. And they look more believable than ever. If you receive an email or text message asking you to click on a link, it’s best to avoid interacting with the message altogether. Even if it’s a great-sounding deal or indicates it’ll provide useful info such as a parcel delivery update. Always go direct to the source and interact with reputable companies.  

Use AI to beat AI.  

Yet better, you can use the combo of our Scam Protection and Web Protection found in our McAfee+ plans. Powered by our AI technology, they detect sketchy links and keep you from clicking on them by mistake. 

Remember that if it seems too good to be true, it probably is.  

Many scams are effective because the scammer creates a false sense of urgency or preys on a heightened emotional state. Pause before you rush to interact with any message that is threatening or urgent, especially if it is from an unknown or unlikely sender. The same very much applies for deals and sales online. Scammers will pop up bogus online ads and stores for sought-after gifts, of course with no intention of shipping you anything. Look out for offers that seem priced too low and hard-to-find items that are miraculously in stock at an online store you’ve never heard of. Stick with reputable retailers instead. 

 Survey methodology 

The survey, which focused on the topic of deepfakes, scam messages, and holiday shopping, was conducted online in November 2024. 7,128 adults, age 18+, In 7 countries (US, Australia, India, UK, France, Germany, Japan), participated in the study. 

The post How AI Deepfakes and Scams Are Changing the Way We Shop Online appeared first on McAfee Blog.

FBI: Spike in Hacked Police Emails, Fake Subpoenas

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is urging police departments and governments worldwide to beef up security around their email systems, citing a recent increase in cybercriminal services that use hacked police email accounts to send unauthorized subpoenas and customer data requests to U.S.-based technology companies.

In an alert (PDF) published this week, the FBI said it has seen an uptick in postings on criminal forums regarding the process of emergency data requests (EDRs) and the sale of email credentials stolen from police departments and government agencies.

“Cybercriminals are likely gaining access to compromised US and foreign government email addresses and using them to conduct fraudulent emergency data requests to US based companies, exposing the personal information of customers to further use for criminal purposes,” the FBI warned.

In the United States, when federal, state or local law enforcement agencies wish to obtain information about an account at a technology provider — such as the account’s email address, or what Internet addresses a specific cell phone account has used in the past — they must submit an official court-ordered warrant or subpoena.

Virtually all major technology companies serving large numbers of users online have departments that routinely review and process such requests, which are typically granted (eventually, and at least in part) as long as the proper documents are provided and the request appears to come from an email address connected to an actual police department domain name.

In some cases, a cybercriminal will offer to forge a court-approved subpoena and send that through a hacked police or government email account. But increasingly, thieves are relying on fake EDRs, which allow investigators to attest that people will be bodily harmed or killed unless a request for account data is granted expeditiously.

The trouble is, these EDRs largely bypass any official review and do not require the requester to supply any court-approved documents. Also, it is difficult for a company that receives one of these EDRs to immediately determine whether it is legitimate.

In this scenario, the receiving company finds itself caught between two unsavory outcomes: Failing to immediately comply with an EDR — and potentially having someone’s blood on their hands — or possibly leaking a customer record to the wrong person.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, compliance with such requests tends to be extremely high. For example, in its most recent transparency report (PDF) Verizon said it received more than 127,000 law enforcement demands for customer data in the second half of 2023 — including more than 36,000 EDRs — and that the company provided records in response to approximately 90 percent of requests.

One English-speaking cybercriminal who goes by the nicknames “Pwnstar” and “Pwnipotent” has been selling fake EDR services on both Russian-language and English cybercrime forums. Their prices range from $1,000 to $3,000 per successful request, and they claim to control “gov emails from over 25 countries,” including Argentina, Bangladesh, Brazil, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Hungary, India, Kenya, Jordan, Lebanon, Laos, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Vietnam.

“I cannot 100% guarantee every order will go through,” Pwnstar explained. “This is social engineering at the highest level and there will be failed attempts at times. Don’t be discouraged. You can use escrow and I give full refund back if EDR doesn’t go through and you don’t receive your information.”

A review of EDR vendors across many cybercrime forums shows that some fake EDR vendors sell the ability to send phony police requests to specific social media platforms, including forged court-approved documents. Others simply sell access to hacked government or police email accounts, and leave it up to the buyer to forge any needed documents.

“When you get account, it’s yours, your account, your liability,” reads an ad in October on BreachForums. “Unlimited Emergency Data Requests. Once Paid, the Logins are completely Yours. Reset as you please. You would need to Forge Documents to Successfully Emergency Data Request.”

Still other fake EDR service vendors claim to sell hacked or fraudulently created accounts on Kodex, a startup that aims to help tech companies do a better job screening out phony law enforcement data requests. Kodex is trying to tackle the problem of fake EDRs by working directly with the data providers to pool information about police or government officials submitting these requests, with an eye toward making it easier for everyone to spot an unauthorized EDR.

If police or government officials wish to request records regarding Coinbase customers, for example, they must first register an account on Kodexglobal.com. Kodex’s systems then assign that requestor a score or credit rating, wherein officials who have a long history of sending valid legal requests will have a higher rating than someone sending an EDR for the first time.

It is not uncommon to see fake EDR vendors claim the ability to send data requests through Kodex, with some even sharing redacted screenshots of police accounts at Kodex.

Matt Donahue is the former FBI agent who founded Kodex in 2021. Donahue said just because someone can use a legitimate police department or government email to create a Kodex account doesn’t mean that user will be able to send anything. Donahue said even if one customer gets a fake request, Kodex is able to prevent the same thing from happening to another.

Kodex told KrebsOnSecurity that over the past 12 months it has processed a total of 1,597 EDRs, and that 485 of those requests (~30 percent) failed a second-level verification. Kodex reports it has suspended nearly 4,000 law enforcement users in the past year, including:

-1,521 from the Asia-Pacific region;
-1,290 requests from Europe, the Middle East and Asia;
-460 from police departments and agencies in the United States;
-385 from entities in Latin America, and;
-285 from Brazil.

Donahue said 60 technology companies are now routing all law enforcement data requests through Kodex, including an increasing number of financial institutions and cryptocurrency platforms. He said one concern shared by recent prospective customers is that crooks are seeking to use phony law enforcement requests to freeze and in some cases seize funds in specific accounts.

“What’s being conflated [with EDRs] is anything that doesn’t involve a formal judge’s signature or legal process,” Donahue said. “That can include control over data, like an account freeze or preservation request.”

In a hypothetical example, a scammer uses a hacked government email account to request that a service provider place a hold on a specific bank or crypto account that is allegedly subject to a garnishment order, or party to crime that is globally sanctioned, such as terrorist financing or child exploitation.

A few days or weeks later, the same impersonator returns with a request to seize funds in the account, or to divert the funds to a custodial wallet supposedly controlled by government investigators.

“In terms of overall social engineering attacks, the more you have a relationship with someone the more they’re going to trust you,” Donahue said. “If you send them a freeze order, that’s a way to establish trust, because [the first time] they’re not asking for information. They’re just saying, ‘Hey can you do me a favor?’ And that makes the [recipient] feel valued.”

Echoing the FBI’s warning, Donahue said far too many police departments in the United States and other countries have poor account security hygiene, and often do not enforce basic account security precautions — such as requiring phishing-resistant multifactor authentication.

How are cybercriminals typically gaining access to police and government email accounts? Donahue said it’s still mostly email-based phishing, and credentials that are stolen by opportunistic malware infections and sold on the dark web. But as bad as things are internationally, he said, many law enforcement entities in the United States still have much room for improvement in account security.

“Unfortunately, a lot of this is phishing or malware campaigns,” Donahue said. “A lot of global police agencies don’t have stringent cybersecurity hygiene, but even U.S. dot-gov emails get hacked. Over the last nine months, I’ve reached out to CISA (the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency) over a dozen times about .gov email addresses that were compromised and that CISA was unaware of.”