Cybersecurity researchers at GreyNoise have uncovered widespread exploitation of a critical zero-day vulnerability in Zyxel CPE Series devices, months after it was initially reported to the manufacturer. The flaw, identified as CVE-2024-40891, allows attackers to execute arbitrary commands on affected devices, potentially leading to data breaches, network infiltration, and complete system compromise. GreyNoise has disclosed the issue to raise awareness among organizations and individuals at risk, as mass exploitation attempts have already been observed.
The vulnerability, CVE-2024-40891, was first reported to Zyxel by researchers at VulnCheck in August 2024. However, Zyxel has yet to release a public advisory or an official CVE entry for the flaw, leaving users without a patch to mitigate the risk. GreyNoise collaborated with VulnCheck to disclose the issue, following standard security policies. A GreyNoise spokesperson stated, “Due to first-hand, confirmed mass exploitation attempts for this vulnerability, we chose to disclose this to raise awareness among those who may be impacted.”
Security analysts at Censys estimate that approximately 1,500 devices are online and potentially vulnerable, though definitive confirmation of affected versions is still pending. The National Vulnerability Database (NVD) has not yet provided additional details about the issue. To assess the extent of malicious activity, GreyNoise and VulnCheck conducted a joint investigation, revealing that attackers are actively targeting the flaw.
Researchers noted that CVE-2024-40891 shares similarities with another Zyxel vulnerability, CVE-2024-40890, which also involves authentication and command injection exploits. The key difference is that CVE-2024-40891 is exploited via telnet, while CVE-2024-40890 is HTTP-based. This latest vulnerability follows a recent warning from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and German authorities about another security flaw in Zyxel firewalls, CVE-2024-11667, which was exploited to deploy Helldown ransomware in early December.
With no official patch available, Zyxel users remain vulnerable to exploitation. Security experts urge organizations to implement temporary mitigation strategies to reduce the risk of compromise. Key recommendations include:
A VulnCheck spokesperson confirmed that the firm is actively working with Zyxel on the disclosure process and expects to share further insights in the coming week. In the meantime, organizations are advised to remain vigilant and take proactive steps to protect their networks.
The widespread exploitation of CVE-2024-40891 highlights the critical importance of timely vulnerability disclosure and patch management. As attackers continue to target Zyxel devices, organizations must prioritize cybersecurity measures to safeguard their systems and data. While waiting for an official patch, implementing temporary mitigation strategies and staying informed about updates can help reduce the risk of exploitation. This incident serves as a reminder of the ongoing challenges in securing network devices and the need for collaboration between manufacturers, researchers, and users to address vulnerabilities effectively.
Cryptojacking, the unauthorized exploitation of an organization’s computing resources to mine cryptocurrency, has emerged as a significant yet often overlooked cybersecurity threat. Unlike ransomware, which overtly disrupts operations, cryptojacking operates covertly, leading to substantial financial and operational impacts. In 2023, cryptojacking attacks surged by 659%, totaling 1.1 billion incidents, according to SonicWall’s 2024 Cyber Threat Report.
This dramatic increase underscores the growing appeal of cryptojacking among cybercriminals. The financial implications for businesses are severe. Research indicates that for every dollar’s worth of cryptocurrency mined illicitly, companies incur approximately USD 53 in cloud service costs. This disparity highlights the hidden expenses organizations face when their systems are compromised for unauthorized mining activities.
Attackers employ various methods to infiltrate systems, including:
The rise of containerized environments has also provided new avenues for attackers. For example, cybercriminals can embed mining scripts within public repository images or target exposed Docker APIs to deploy cryptojacking malware.
Beyond financial losses, cryptojacking degrades system performance by overutilizing CPU and GPU resources. This leads to slower operations, reduced productivity, and increased energy consumption. Over time, the strain on hardware can cause overheating and potential equipment failure. Additionally, compromised systems are more vulnerable to further security breaches, as attackers can leverage their access to escalate attacks.
To defend against cryptojacking, organizations must implement proactive security measures. Key strategies include:
Organizations should also prioritize employee training to recognize phishing attempts and other common attack vectors. Regularly updating and patching software can close vulnerabilities that attackers exploit to infiltrate systems. Additionally, implementing robust access controls and monitoring for unusual user activity can help prevent unauthorized access.
The surge in cryptojacking attacks highlights the growing sophistication of cybercriminals and the need for organizations to adopt comprehensive cybersecurity measures. While cryptojacking may not be as visibly disruptive as ransomware, its financial and operational impacts can be equally devastating. By deploying advanced detection tools, analyzing network traffic, and regularly testing defenses, businesses can mitigate the risks posed by cryptojacking and protect their computing resources from unauthorized exploitation. As cyber threats continue to evolve, proactive and adaptive security strategies will be essential to safeguarding organizational assets and maintaining operational efficiency.
Generative AI (GenAI) is transforming the cybersecurity landscape, with 52% of CISOs prioritizing innovation using emerging technologies. However, a significant disconnect exists, as only 33% of board members view these technologies as a top priority. This gap underscores the challenge of aligning strategic priorities between cybersecurity leaders and company boards.
According to the latest Splunk CISO Report, cyberattacks are becoming more frequent and sophisticated. Yet, 41% of security leaders believe that the requirements for protection are becoming easier to manage, thanks to advancements in AI. Many CISOs are increasingly relying on AI to:
However, GenAI is a double-edged sword. While it enhances threat detection and protection, attackers are also leveraging AI to boost their efforts. For instance:
This has led to growing concerns among security professionals, with 36% of CISOs citing AI-powered attacks as their biggest worry, followed by cyber extortion (24%) and data breaches (23%).
One of the major challenges is the gap in budget expectations. Only 29% of CISOs feel they have sufficient funding to secure their organizations, compared to 41% of board members who believe their budgets are adequate. Additionally, 64% of CISOs attribute the cyberattacks their firms experience to a lack of support.
Despite these challenges, there is hope. A vast majority of cybersecurity experts (86%) believe that AI can help attract entry-level talent to address the skills shortage, while 65% say AI enables seasoned professionals to work more productively. Collaboration between security teams and other departments is also improving:
To strengthen cyber defenses, experts emphasize the importance of foundational practices:
Generative AI is reshaping the cybersecurity landscape, offering both opportunities and challenges. While it enhances threat detection and operational efficiency, it also empowers attackers to launch more sophisticated and frequent attacks. To navigate this evolving landscape, organizations must align strategic priorities, invest in AI-driven solutions, and reinforce foundational cybersecurity practices. By doing so, they can better protect their systems and data in an increasingly complex threat environment.
A new Android malware called FireScam is being distributed through phishing websites hosted on GitHub, masquerading as a premium version of the Telegram app. These fraudulent sites mimic RuStore, Russia’s official mobile app marketplace, tricking users into downloading the malware. This incident highlights how cybercriminals exploit trusted platforms to deploy sophisticated threats.
RuStore was launched in May 2022 by Russian tech company VK (VKontakte) with support from the Ministry of Digital Development as an alternative to Google Play and Apple’s App Store. It was designed to provide Russian users access to mobile applications despite Western sanctions. Cybercriminals have taken advantage of RuStore’s credibility by creating phishing pages that distribute malware under the guise of legitimate applications. According to security researchers at CYFIRMA, attackers have set up a GitHub-hosted phishing page impersonating RuStore, delivering an initial malware payload named GetAppsRu.apk.
Once installed, the dropper module requests multiple permissions, allowing it to identify installed applications, access device storage, and install additional software. It then downloads and installs the primary malware payload, disguised as Telegram Premium.apk. This second-stage malware requests extensive permissions, enabling it to monitor notifications, read clipboard data, access SMS and call information, and track user activity.
FireScam displays a fake Telegram login page via WebView to steal user credentials. The malware then communicates with Firebase Realtime Database, where stolen data is uploaded in real time. Each infected device is assigned a unique identifier, allowing attackers to track it. According to CYFIRMA, the stolen data is temporarily stored in Firebase before being filtered and transferred to another location. FireScam maintains a persistent WebSocket connection with a Firebase-based command-and-control (C2) endpoint, allowing attackers to execute real-time commands, download and install additional payloads, modify surveillance settings, and trigger immediate data uploads.
FireScam continuously tracks various device activities, including screen on/off events, active app usage, and user interactions lasting over 1,000 milliseconds. One of its most concerning features is its focus on e-commerce transactions. The malware attempts to intercept sensitive financial data by logging keystrokes, tracking clipboard content, and extracting auto-filled credentials from password managers.
While the identity of FireScam’s operators remains unknown, CYFIRMA researchers describe it as a sophisticated and multifaceted threat that employs advanced evasion techniques. To minimize the risk of infection, users should avoid downloading apps from unverified sources, be cautious when clicking on unfamiliar links, download applications only from official platforms like Google Play or verified stores, and regularly review and restrict app permissions to prevent unauthorized data access. The rise of malware like FireScam underscores the growing need for cybersecurity awareness. Staying vigilant and adopting secure online practices is essential to protecting personal and financial data from evolving cyber threats.
A cybersecurity incident has compromised at least 35 Google Chrome extensions, affecting approximately 2.6 million users globally. Over 400,000 devices have reportedly been infected with malicious code as part of a coordinated attack.
An investigation revealed that the attack began on December 5, although related domains were registered as early as March 2024. This indicates the attackers had been preparing for months before launching their campaign.
One targeted entity was a data loss prevention startup, whose Chrome extension was exploited. The breach reportedly began with a phishing email impersonating a Google policy alert, urging a developer to install a "Privacy Policy Extension." This malicious extension, when granted permissions, allowed attackers to access the developer’s account.
Once access was obtained, the attackers uploaded a malicious update to the compromised extensions. This update bypassed security protocols and was automatically distributed to users, facilitating the infection. The primary objective appeared to be data harvesting, with an emphasis on collecting Facebook-related information from users.
The affected company reported that the compromised employee had Google Advanced Protection and multi-factor authentication (MFA) enabled. Despite following standard protocols, the employee inadvertently authorized a malicious third-party application. The company clarified that no suspicious MFA prompts were received, and the employee's Google credentials remained secure.
Domains associated with the attack were initially registered in March 2024, with additional registrations occurring closer to the campaign’s escalation in November and December.
This incident underscores the evolving tactics of cybercriminals and the importance of constant vigilance and robust cybersecurity measures, particularly in the face of sophisticated phishing campaigns.
The FBI has issued a cautionary alert for travelers, urging them to avoid using public USB charging stations found in airports, hotels, and other public spaces. A rising cyber threat, known as “juice jacking,” enables cybercriminals to steal sensitive data and install malware through these ports. While convenient for charging devices on the go, these stations are increasingly being exploited to compromise personal and financial security.
The Mechanics Behind Juice Jacking
Juice jacking takes advantage of a fundamental vulnerability in USB technology, which supports both power delivery and data transfer. When an unsuspecting user plugs their device into a compromised USB port, malware can be silently installed, or data can be extracted without their knowledge. The malicious software may remain dormant, activating later to steal passwords, lock files for ransom, or even mine cryptocurrency, which can drain the device’s battery and degrade its performance.
Adding to the complexity of this threat, even charging cables can be tampered with to include hidden components that extract data as soon as they are connected. This makes it possible for travelers to fall victim to juice jacking even if they avoid public charging stations but use unfamiliar or unverified cables.
The threat of juice jacking extends far beyond U.S. borders. Airports, hotels, and shopping malls worldwide have reported similar incidents, as the universal nature of USB charging technology makes it a convenient vector for cyberattacks. The rise in reported cases has prompted security experts to raise awareness about this subtle yet significant risk, urging travelers to rethink how and where they charge their devices.
How to Protect Yourself
To stay safe, the FBI and cybersecurity professionals recommend adopting these precautions:
Some airports and transportation hubs are beginning to address the issue by installing “charge-only” stations that disable data transfer capabilities. However, such solutions are not yet widespread, making it essential for individuals to remain vigilant and proactive in protecting their devices.
Corporate and Financial Sector Responses
Businesses are taking the juice jacking threat seriously, with many companies updating travel policies to discourage employees from using public USB ports. Instead, employees are being provided with approved chargers and power banks to ensure the safety of corporate devices and sensitive data.
The financial sector is also raising alarms, advising customers to avoid conducting banking transactions or accessing sensitive accounts while connected to public USB ports. Even a brief connection to a compromised charging station could lead to unauthorized access to financial apps and accounts, potentially resulting in significant losses.
While steps are being taken to make public charging safer, the onus remains on travelers to prioritize device security. By carrying personal charging equipment, avoiding unverified cables, and utilizing tools like USB data blockers, individuals can mitigate the risks of juice jacking and safeguard their personal and financial information against this evolving cyber threat.
For years, cybersecurity experts have criticized passwords as outdated and insecure. Frequently re-used, susceptible to phishing, and vulnerable to leaks, they remain one of the weakest links in online security. Passkeys have been hailed as the solution — a frictionless and secure alternative that leverages biometric authentication while addressing many of the vulnerabilities associated with traditional passwords.
However, despite their promise, passkeys face challenges that could hinder their widespread adoption. While the technology offers undeniable advantages, issues like inconsistent functionality and platform lock-ins complicate the user experience.
How Passkeys Work
Passkeys represent a safer and more streamlined authentication method. Instead of typing a password, users authenticate through biometric verification, such as Face ID, Touch ID, or similar local methods. This approach shifts the security focus to the device itself, adopting a trust model akin to mobile payment systems like Apple Pay. In theory, this allows for seamless logins across devices.
The Reality of Cross-Platform Challenges
In practice, however, the experience is less cohesive. Within Apple’s ecosystem, passkeys function smoothly, with iCloud synchronization ensuring consistency. Yet outside this "walled garden," complications arise.
As highlighted by Ars Technica, users attempting to log into the same service with passkeys across platforms—such as PayPal on Windows versus iOS — encounter varying experiences. Some services further restrict passkey usage to specific browsers, frustrating users who frequently switch between platforms.
Platform Lock-In and User Frustration
A more pressing issue is platform dominance. Tech giants like Apple and Google often push users toward their proprietary passkey management systems, sometimes overriding user preferences. For instance, even if a passkey is synced via a third-party password manager, users may still be redirected to Google’s system when logging into certain sites, such as LinkedIn.
Adding to the frustration, many services operate passkeys alongside passwords rather than replacing them entirely. This undermines the very purpose of passkeys, as users are still required to create passwords during registration, perpetuating traditional security risks.
The Push for a Password-Free Future
Despite these setbacks, some organizations are leading the charge toward a password-free future. As Grayson Mixon, a user commenting on the issue, noted:
"The company I work for introduced passkeys months ago. Now they are disabling passwords as an option. It will be passkeys only in 2025."
While such initiatives signal progress, the path to universal adoption of passkeys is far from straightforward. For passkeys to truly replace passwords, the industry must overcome challenges related to interoperability, user convenience, and platform neutrality.
Passkeys have the potential to revolutionize online authentication, offering a more secure and convenient alternative to passwords. Yet, current inconsistencies and platform restrictions highlight the need for continued innovation and collaboration across the tech industry. Until these hurdles are addressed, the journey toward a password-free digital landscape will remain a work in progress.
A recent report by SecurityScorecard has shed light on the widespread issue of third-party data breaches among the European Union’s top companies. The study, which evaluated the cybersecurity health of the region’s 100 largest firms, revealed that 98% experienced breaches through external vendors over the past year. This alarming figure underscores the vulnerabilities posed by interconnected digital ecosystems.
Industry Disparities in Cybersecurity
While only 18% of the companies reported direct breaches, the prevalence of third-party incidents highlights hidden risks that could disrupt operations across multiple sectors. Security performance varied significantly by industry, with the transport sector standing out for its robust defenses. All companies in this sector received high cybersecurity ratings, reflecting strong proactive measures.
In contrast, the energy sector lagged behind, with 75% of firms scoring poorly, receiving cybersecurity grades of C or lower. Alarmingly, one in four energy companies reported direct breaches, further exposing their susceptibility to cyber threats.
Regional differences also emerged, with Scandinavian, British, and German firms demonstrating stronger cybersecurity postures. Meanwhile, French companies recorded the highest rates of third- and fourth-party breaches, reaching 98% and 100%, respectively.
Ryan Sherstobitoff, Senior Vice President of Threat Research and Intelligence at SecurityScorecard, stressed the importance of prioritizing third-party risk management. His remarks come as the EU prepares to implement the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), a regulation designed to enhance the cybersecurity infrastructure of financial institutions.
“With regulations like DORA set to reshape cybersecurity standards, European companies must prioritise third-party risk management and leverage rating systems to safeguard their ecosystems,” Sherstobitoff stated in a media briefing.
Strengthening Cybersecurity Resilience
DORA introduces stricter requirements for banks, insurance companies, and investment firms to bolster their resilience against cyberattacks and operational disruptions. As organizations gear up for the rollout of this framework, addressing third-party risks will be crucial for maintaining operational integrity and adhering to evolving cybersecurity standards.
The findings from SecurityScorecard highlight the urgent need for EU businesses to fortify their digital ecosystems and prepare for regulatory demands. By addressing third-party vulnerabilities, organizations can better safeguard their operations and protect against emerging threats.
French technology giant Atos has refuted claims by the ransomware group Space Bears that its systems were compromised, asserting that no evidence of a breach or ransom demand has been found. In a statement released on December 28, Atos clarified the results of its investigation, addressing concerns raised by the allegations.
“At this stage, the initial analysis shows no evidence of any compromise or ransomware affecting any Atos/Eviden systems in any country, and no ransom demand has been received to date,” the company stated.
Investigation and Clarifications
Although no compromise has been confirmed, Atos has deployed a dedicated cybersecurity team to thoroughly investigate the matter. The claims originated from Space Bears, a ransomware group with ties to Phobos Ransomware as a Service (RaaS). The group alleged that it had breached Atos' internal database and accessed sensitive data.
Atos clarified that the breach targeted “external third-party infrastructure, unconnected to Atos,” which “contained data mentioning the Atos company name but is not managed nor secured by Atos.”
The company emphasized its robust security operations, highlighting its global network of over 6,500 specialized cybersecurity experts and 17 next-generation security operations centers (SOCs) that operate around the clock to protect Atos and its customers.
“Atos has a global network of more than 6,500 specialized experts and 17 new-generation security operations centers (SOCs) operating 24/7 to ensure the security of the Group and its customers,” the statement emphasized.
Space Bears: A Rising Ransomware Threat
Space Bears, which emerged in April 2024, has gained notoriety for its sophisticated and aggressive extortion tactics. The group employs double extortion methods, encrypting victims’ data while threatening to release it publicly unless demands are met. Space Bears operates data leak sites on both the dark web and clearnet, leveraging tactics such as corporate imagery and “walls of shame” to maximize reputational damage.
The ransomware group has previously targeted organizations like Canadian software firm Haylem, orthophonics clinic Un Museau Vaut Mille Mots, and Lexibar, a language disorder provider. More recently, Space Bears claimed responsibility for attacks on Canada’s JRT Automatisation and India’s Aptus in December 2024.
While Atos maintains that no proprietary data, source code, or intellectual property was accessed, the company acknowledged the gravity of the situation. “We take such threats very seriously,” Atos affirmed.
This incident underscores the ever-evolving cyber threat landscape faced by multinational corporations and the growing sophistication of ransomware groups like Space Bears, highlighting the need for constant vigilance and robust cybersecurity measures.
Hackers compromised Cyberhaven’s Chrome extension in a suspected supply-chain attack, publishing a malicious update capable of stealing customer passwords and session tokens. The attack raised serious concerns about the security of widely-used browser extensions. Cyberhaven, a data-loss prevention startup, confirmed the incident but withheld specific technical details about the breach.
According to an email sent to affected customers and later shared by security researcher Matt Johansen, the attack occurred during the early hours of December 25. Hackers reportedly gained access to a company account and used it to push a malicious update (version 24.10.4) to unsuspecting users. This update potentially allowed attackers to exfiltrate sensitive information, such as authenticated session tokens, cookies, and customer credentials.
The breach was detected later that day by Cyberhaven's internal security team, who immediately removed the compromised extension from the Chrome Web Store. A secure version (24.10.5) was released shortly afterward to mitigate the impact and restore user confidence. However, the rapid timeline of the attack highlights the challenges companies face in responding to supply-chain breaches.
Impact on Corporate Users
Cyberhaven’s products are widely used by over 400,000 corporate customers to monitor for data exfiltration and cyber threats. Affected organizations include a mix of prominent enterprises and technology leaders, such as:
Although Cyberhaven has refrained from disclosing the exact number of customers impacted, the company strongly advised all users to take immediate precautionary steps. These included revoking and rotating passwords, regenerating API tokens, and thoroughly reviewing system logs for any signs of malicious activity.
Security Weaknesses Exploited
The attack shed light on a critical security lapse. Cyberhaven disclosed that the compromised account was the sole administrator for the Google Chrome Store, granting attackers full control over extension updates. However, the exact method used to breach this account remains unclear. The incident has prompted the company to launch a comprehensive security review, with plans to implement stricter safeguards for its account management and extension distribution processes.
To aid in the investigation, Cyberhaven has engaged Mandiant, a leading incident response firm, and is collaborating with federal law enforcement agencies. Early findings suggest the breach was part of a broader campaign targeting multiple Chrome extension developers, affecting extensions with tens of thousands of users.
Insights from Experts
Jaime Blasco, CTO of Nudge Security, emphasized that the attack appeared opportunistic rather than targeted specifically at Cyberhaven. "It seems it wasn’t targeted against Cyberhaven, but rather opportunistically targeting extension developers. I think they went after the extensions that they could based on the developers’ credentials that they had," Blasco explained.
Cyberhaven echoed this assessment, pointing to public reports that suggest the attack extended across multiple organizations. While the full scope of the campaign and the identity of the perpetrators remains unclear, the incident underscores the importance of securing developer credentials and implementing rigorous monitoring processes for software supply chains.
As supply-chain attacks continue to evolve, this breach serves as a stark reminder for organizations to remain vigilant and proactive in securing their digital ecosystems.
Cybersecurity researchers are raising alarms over the misuse of large language models (LLMs) by cybercriminals to create new variants of malicious JavaScript at scale. A report from Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 highlights how LLMs, while not adept at generating malware from scratch, can effectively rewrite or obfuscate existing malicious code.
This capability has enabled the creation of up to 10,000 novel JavaScript variants, significantly complicating detection efforts.
Malware Detection Challenges
The natural-looking transformations produced by LLMs allow malicious scripts to evade detection by traditional analyzers. Researchers found that these restructured scripts often change classification results from malicious to benign.
In one case, 88% of the modified scripts successfully bypassed malware classifiers.
Despite increased efforts by LLM providers to impose stricter guardrails, underground tools like WormGPT continue to facilitate malicious activities, such as phishing email creation and malware scripting.
OpenAI reported in October 2024 that it had blocked over 20 attempts to misuse its platform for reconnaissance, scripting, and debugging purposes.
Unit 42 emphasized that while LLMs pose significant risks, they also present opportunities to strengthen defenses. Techniques used to generate malicious JavaScript variants could be repurposed to create robust datasets for improving malware detection systems.
AI Hardware and Framework Vulnerabilities
In a separate discovery, researchers from North Carolina State University revealed a side-channel attack known as TPUXtract, which can steal AI model hyperparameters from Google Edge Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) with 99.91% accuracy.
The attack exploits electromagnetic signals emitted during neural network inferences to extract critical model details. Although it requires physical access and specialized equipment, TPUXtract highlights vulnerabilities in AI hardware that determined adversaries could exploit.
Study author Aydin Aysu explained that by extracting architecture and layer configurations, the researchers were able to recreate a close surrogate of the target AI model, potentially enabling intellectual property theft or further cyberattacks.
Exploiting AI Frameworks
Morphisec researchers disclosed another AI-targeted threat involving the Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), a framework used to evaluate the likelihood of software vulnerabilities being exploited.
By artificially boosting social media mentions and creating GitHub repositories with placeholder exploits, attackers manipulated EPSS outputs.
This resulted in the exploitation likelihood for certain vulnerabilities increasing from 0.1 to 0.14 and shifting their percentile ranking from the 41st to the 51st percentile.
Ido Ikar from Morphisec warned that such manipulation misguides organizations relying on EPSS for vulnerability management, enabling adversaries to distort vulnerability assessments and mislead defenders.
The Double-Edged Sword of Generative AI
While generative AI offers significant potential for bolstering cybersecurity defenses, its misuse by cybercriminals presents a formidable threat.
Organizations must:
As adversaries innovate, businesses and researchers must push their operations to stay ahead, leveraging the same AI advancements to fortify their defenses.