It was orchestrated by the Clop ransomware group, a highly motivated cybercriminal syndicate that was well known for extorting large sums of money from their victims. During the attack, nearly 3.5 million individuals' personal records, such as those belonging to students, faculty, administrative staff, and third-party suppliers, were compromised, resulting in the compromise of the records.
Established in 1976, the university has grown over the last five decades into a major national educational provider. The university has enrolled approximately 82,700 students and is supported by a workforce of 3,400 employees.
Of these, nearly 2,300 are academics. This breach was officially confirmed by the institution through a written statement posted on its website on early December, while Phoenix Education Partners' parent organization, which filed a mandatory 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, formally notified federal regulators of the incident in early December.
In this disclosure, the first authoritative acknowledgment of a breach that experts claim may have profound implications for identity protection, financial security, and institutional accountability within the higher education sector has been made. There is a substantial risk associated with critical enterprise software and delayed threat detection, highlighting how extensive the risks can be.
The breach at the University of Phoenix highlights this fact. The internal incident briefing indicates that the intrusion took place over a period of nine days between August 13 and August 22, 2025. The attackers took advantage of an unreported vulnerability in Oracle's E-Business Suite (EBS) - an important financial and administrative platform widely used by large organizations - to exploit the vulnerability.
During the course of this vulnerability, the threat actors were able to gain unauthorized access to highly sensitive information, which they then exfiltrated to 3,489,274 individuals, including students, alumni, students and professors, as well as external suppliers and service providers. The university did not find out about the compromise until November 21, 2025, more than three months after it occurred, even though it had begun unfolding in August.
According to reports, the discovery coincided with public signals from the Cl0p ransomware group, which had listed the institution on its leaked site, which had triggered its public detection. It has been reported that Phoenix Education Partners, the parent company of the university, formally disclosed the incident in a regulatory Form 8-K filing submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on December 2, 2025, followed by a broader public notification effort initiated on December 22 and 23 of the same year.
It is not unusual for sophisticated cyber intrusions to be detected in advance, but this delayed detection caused significant complications in the institution's response efforts because the institution's focus shifted from immediate containment to ensuring regulatory compliance, managing reputational risks, and ensuring identity protection for millions of people affected.
A comprehensive identity protection plan has been implemented by the University of Phoenix in response to the breach. This program offers a 12-month credit monitoring service, dark web surveillance service, identity theft recovery assistance, and an identity theft reimbursement policy that covers up to $1 million for those who have been affected by the breach.
The institution has not formally admitted liability for the incident, but there is strong evidence that it is part of a larger extortion campaign by the Clop ransomware group to take over the institution. A security analyst indicates Clop took advantage of a zero-day vulnerability (CVE-2025-61882) in Oracle's E-Business Suite in early August 2025, and that it has also been exploited in similar fashion to steal sensitive data from other prominent U.S universities, including Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania, in both of whom confirmed that their students' and staff's personal records were accessed by an unauthorized third party using compromised Oracle systems.
The clone has a proven history of orchestrating mass data theft, including targeting various file transfer platforms, such as GoAnywhere, Accellion FTA, MOVEit, Cleo, and Gladinet CentreStack, as well as MFT platforms such as GoAnywhere. The Department of State has announced that a reward of up to $10 million will be offered to anyone who can identify a foreign government as the source of the ransomware collective's operations.
The resulting disruption has caused a number of disruptions in the business environment. In addition to the wave of incidents, other higher-education institutions have also been victimized by cyberattacks, which is a troubling pattern.
As a result of breaches involving voice phishing, some universities have revealed that their development, alumni, and administrative systems have been accessed unauthorized and donor and community information has been exfiltrated. Furthermore, this incident is similar to other recent instances of Oracle E-Business Suite (EBS) compromises across U.S. universities that have been reported.
These include Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania, both of whom have admitted that unauthorized access was accessed to systems used to manage sensitive student and staff data. Among cybersecurity leaders, leadership notes the fact that universities are increasingly emulating the risk profile associated with sectors such as healthcare, characterized by centralized ecosystems housing large amounts of long-term personal data.
In a world where studies of student enrolment, financial aid records, payroll infrastructure and donor databases are all kept in the same place, a single point of compromise can reveal years and even decades of accumulated personal and financial information, compromising the unique culture of the institution.
Having large and long-standing repositories makes colleges unique targets for hacker attacks due to their scale and longevity, and because the impact of a breach of these repositories will be measured not only in terms of the loss of records, but in terms of the length of exposure as well as the size of the population exposed.
With this breach at University of Phoenix, an increasing body of evidence has emerged that U.S colleges and universities are constantly being victimized by an ever more coordinated wave of cyberattacks. There are recent disclosures from leading academic institutions, including Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Princeton University, that show that the threat landscape goes beyond ransomware operations, with voice-phishing campaigns also being used as a means to infiltrate systems that serve to facilitate alumni engagement and donor information sharing.
Among the many concerns raised by the developments, there are also concerns over the protection of institutional privacy. During an unusual public outrage, the U.S. Department of State has offered an unusual reward of $10 million for information that could link Clop's activities to foreign governments. This was a result of growing concerns within federal agencies that the ransomware groups may, in some cases, intersect with broader geopolitical strategies through their financial motivations.
University administrators and administrators have been reminded of the structural vulnerability associated with modern higher education because it highlights a reliance on sprawling, interconnected enterprise platforms that centralize academic, administrative, and financial operations, which creates an environment where the effects of a single breach can cascade across multiple stakeholder groups.
There has been a remarkable shift in attackers' priorities away from downright disrupting systems to covertly extracting and eradicating data. As a result, cybersecurity experts warn that breaches involving the theft of millions of records may no longer be outliers, but a foreseeable and recurring concern.
University institutions face two significant challenges that can be attributed to this trend-intensified regulatory scrutiny as well as the more intangible challenge of preserving trust among students, faculty, and staff whose personal information institutions are bound to protect ethically and contractually.
In light of the breach, the higher-education sector is experiencing a pivotal moment that is reinforcing the need for universities to evolve from open knowledge ecosystems to fortified digital enterprises, reinforcing concerns.
The use of identity protection support may be helpful in alleviating downstream damage, but cybersecurity experts are of the opinion that long-term resilience requires structural reform, rather than episodic responses.
The field of information security is moving towards layered defenses for legacy platforms, quicker patch cycles for vulnerabilities, and continuous network monitoring that is capable of identifying anomalous access patterns in real time, which is a key part of the process.
During crisis periods, it is important for policy analysts to emphasize the importance of institutional transparency, emphasizing the fact that early communication combined with clear remediation roadmaps provides a good opportunity to limit misinformation and recover stakeholder confidence.
In addition to technical safeguards, industry leaders advocate for expanded security awareness programs to improve institutional perimeters even as advanced tools are still being used to deal with threats like social engineering and phishing.
In this time of unprecedented digital access, in which data has become as valuable as degrees, universities face the challenge of safeguarding information, which is no longer a supplemental responsibility but a fundamental institutional mandate that will help determine the credibility, compliance, and trust that universities will rely on in years to come.
An ex-employee of the Israeli cybersecurity company Sygnia has pleaded guilty to federal crimes in the US for having involvement in ransomware cyberattacks aimed to extort millions of dollars from firms in the US.
The culprit, Ryan Clifford Goldberg, worked as a cyber incident response supervisor at Sygnia, and accepted that he was involved in a year-long plan of attacking business around the US.
Kevin Tyler Martin, another associate,who worked as an ex DigitalMint employee, worked as a negotiation intermediary with the threat actors, a role supposed to help ransomware targets, has also accepted involvement.
The situation is particularly disturbing because both men held positions of trust inside the sector established to fight against such threats.
Both the accused have pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to manipulate commerce via extortion, according to federal court records. In the plea statement, they have accepted that along with a third actor (not charged and unknown), they both launched business compromises and ransom extortions over many years.
In one incident, the actors successfully extorted over $1 million in crypto from a Florida based medical equipment firm. According to the federal court, besides their legitimate work, they deployed software ‘ALPHV BlackCat’ to extract and encode target’s data, and distributed the extortion money with the software’s developers.
According to DigitalMint, two of the people who were charged were ex-employees. After the incident, both were fired and “acted wholly outside the scope of their employment and without any authorization, knowledge or involvement from the company,” DigitalMint said in an email shared with Bloomberg.
In a recent conversation with Bloomberg, Sygnia mentioned that it was not a target of the investigation and the accused Goldberg was relieved of his duties as soon as the news became known.
A representative for Sygnia declined to speak further, and Goldberg and Martin's lawyers also declined to comment on the report.
The ransomware group known as RansomHouse has recently enhanced the encryption mechanism used in its attacks, moving away from a basic, single-step process to a more advanced, multi-layered approach. This change reflects a deliberate effort to strengthen the effectiveness of its ransomware operations.
Earlier versions of the encryptor relied on a linear method, where data was transformed in one continuous pass. The updated version introduces multiple stages of processing, which results in stronger encryption, improved execution speed, and greater stability across modern systems. These improvements increase the pressure on victims by making encrypted data harder to recover and negotiations more favorable for attackers after systems are locked.
RansomHouse first appeared in late 2021 as a cybercrime group focused on data extortion, where stolen information was used as leverage rather than encryption alone. Over time, the group expanded its tactics and began deploying ransomware encryptors during attacks. It also developed an automated tool, known as MrAgent, designed to simultaneously encrypt multiple VMware ESXi hypervisors, a technique that allows attackers to disrupt large virtualized environments efficiently.
In more recent activity, security analysts observed RansomHouse using more than one ransomware strain during attacks on a major Japanese e-commerce company. This suggests a flexible operational strategy rather than reliance on a single malware family.
Further insight into the group’s evolving capabilities comes from a new analysis by cybersecurity researchers, who examined RansomHouse’s latest encryptor, internally referred to as “Mario.” This version introduces a two-stage data transformation process that relies on two different encryption keys: one substantially longer than the other. Using multiple keys increases the randomness of the encrypted output, making partial file recovery or reconstruction far more challenging.
The updated encryptor also changes how files are handled during the encryption process. Instead of treating all files the same way, it adjusts its behavior based on file size. Large files are processed in dynamically sized chunks, with encryption applied intermittently rather than continuously. This irregular pattern makes the malware harder to analyze because it avoids predictable processing behavior.
Researchers also noted improvements in how the encryptor manages memory. The newer version separates tasks across multiple buffers, with each buffer assigned a specific role during encryption. This design increases operational complexity and reduces inefficiencies found in earlier variants.
Another visible change is the amount of internal information displayed during file processing. Unlike older versions, which only indicated when encryption was complete, the new encryptor provides more detailed status output as it operates.
Despite these changes, the ransomware continues to focus on virtual machine-related files, renaming encrypted data with a new extension and placing ransom instructions across affected directories.
Security researchers caution that these upgrades indicate a troubling direction in ransomware development. While RansomHouse does not carry out attacks at the scale of larger ransomware groups, its continued investment in advanced encryption techniques points to a strategy centered on precision, resilience, and evasion rather than volume.
Artificial intelligence is increasingly influencing the cyber security infrastructure, but recent claims about “AI-powered” cybercrime often exaggerate how advanced these threats currently are. While AI is changing how both defenders and attackers operate, evidence does not support the idea that cybercriminals are already running fully autonomous, self-directed AI attacks at scale.
For several years, AI has played a defining role in cyber security as organisations modernise their systems. Machine learning tools now assist with threat detection, log analysis, and response automation. At the same time, attackers are exploring how these technologies might support their activities. However, the capabilities of today’s AI tools are frequently overstated, creating a disconnect between public claims and operational reality.
Recent attention has been driven by two high-profile reports. One study suggested that artificial intelligence is involved in most ransomware incidents, a conclusion that was later challenged by multiple researchers due to methodological concerns. The report was subsequently withdrawn, reinforcing the importance of careful validation. Another claim emerged when an AI company reported that its model had been misused by state-linked actors to assist in an espionage operation targeting multiple organisations.
According to the company’s account, the AI tool supported tasks such as identifying system weaknesses and assisting with movement across networks. However, experts questioned these conclusions due to the absence of technical indicators and the use of common open-source tools that are already widely monitored. Several analysts described the activity as advanced automation rather than genuine artificial intelligence making independent decisions.
There are documented cases of attackers experimenting with AI in limited ways. Some ransomware has reportedly used local language models to generate scripts, and certain threat groups appear to rely on generative tools during development. These examples demonstrate experimentation, not a widespread shift in how cybercrime is conducted.
Well-established ransomware groups already operate mature development pipelines and rely heavily on experienced human operators. AI tools may help refine existing code, speed up reconnaissance, or improve phishing messages, but they are not replacing human planning or expertise. Malware generated directly by AI systems is often untested, unreliable, and lacks the refinement gained through real-world deployment.
Even in reported cases of AI misuse, limitations remain clear. Some models have been shown to fabricate progress or generate incorrect technical details, making continuous human supervision necessary. This undermines the idea of fully independent AI-driven attacks.
There are also operational risks for attackers. Campaigns that depend on commercial AI platforms can fail instantly if access is restricted. Open-source alternatives reduce this risk but require more resources and technical skill while offering weaker performance.
The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre has acknowledged that AI will accelerate certain attack techniques, particularly vulnerability research. However, fully autonomous cyberattacks remain speculative.
The real challenge is avoiding distraction. AI will influence cyber threats, but not in the dramatic way some headlines suggest. Security efforts should prioritise evidence-based risk, improved visibility, and responsible use of AI to strengthen defences rather than amplify fear.
Japanese e-commerce firm Askul Corporation has officially confirmed that a ransomware attack earlier this year led to the unauthorized access and theft of data belonging to nearly 740,000 individuals. The company made the disclosure after completing a detailed investigation into the cyber incident that occurred in October.
Askul operates a large-scale online platform that provides office supplies and logistics services to both corporate clients and individual consumers. The company is part of the Yahoo! Japan corporate group and plays a significant role in Japan’s business-to-business supply chain.
The cyberattack caused serious disruptions to Askul’s internal systems, resulting in an operational shutdown that forced the company to suspend product shipments. This disruption affected a wide range of customers, including major retail partners such as Muji.
Following the conclusion of its internal review, Askul clarified the categories of data that were compromised. According to the company, service-related records of approximately 590,000 business customers were accessed. Data connected to around 132,000 individual customers was also involved. In addition, information related to roughly 15,000 business partners, including outsourcing firms, agents, and suppliers, was exposed. The incident further affected personal data linked to about 2,700 executives and employees, including those from group companies.
Askul stated that it is deliberately limiting the disclosure of specific details related to the stolen data to reduce the risk of further exploitation. The company confirmed that affected customers and business partners will be informed directly through individual notifications.
Regulatory authorities have also been notified. Askul reported the data exposure to Japan’s Personal Information Protection Commission and has implemented long-term monitoring measures to identify and prevent any potential misuse of the compromised information.
System recovery remains ongoing. As of December 15, shipping operations had not fully returned to normal, and the company continues to work toward restoring all affected services.
Responsibility for the attack has been claimed by the ransomware group known as RansomHouse. The group publicly disclosed the breach at the end of October and later released portions of the stolen data in two separate leaks in November and December.
Askul shared limited technical findings regarding how the attackers gained access. The company believes the intrusion began through stolen login credentials associated with an administrator account belonging to an outsourced partner. This account did not have multi-factor authentication enabled, making it easier for attackers to exploit.
After entering the network, the attackers conducted internal reconnaissance, collected additional authentication information, and expanded their access to multiple servers. Askul reported that security defenses, including endpoint detection and response tools, were disabled during the attack. The company also noted that several ransomware variants were deployed, some of which bypassed existing detection mechanisms despite recent updates.
The attack resulted in both data encryption and widespread system failures. The ransomware was executed simultaneously across multiple servers, and backup files were deliberately erased to prevent rapid system recovery.
In response, Askul disconnected affected networks, restricted communication between data centers and logistics facilities, isolated compromised devices, and strengthened endpoint security controls. Multi-factor authentication has since been enforced across critical systems, and all administrator account passwords have been reset.
The financial consequences of the incident have not yet been determined. Askul has postponed its earnings report to allow additional time for a comprehensive assessment of the impact.
Cybersecurity experts from Huntress have noticed a sharp rise in ransomware incidents on hypervisors and have asked users to be safe and have proper back-up.
The Huntress case data has disclosed a surprising increase in hypervisor ransomware. It was involved in malicious encryption and rose from a mere three percent in the first half to a staggering 25 percent in 2025.
Experts think that the Akira ransomware gang is the primary threat actor behind this, other players are also going after hypervisors to escape endpoint and network security controls. According to Huntress threat hunters, players are going after hypervisors as they are not secure and hacking them can allow hackers to trigger virtual machines and manage networks.
“This shift underscores a growing and uncomfortable trend: Attackers are targeting the infrastructure that controls all hosts, and with access to the hypervisor, adversaries dramatically amplify the impact of their intrusion," experts said. The attack tactic follows classic playbook. Researchers have "seen it with attacks on VPN appliances: Threat actors realize that the host operating system is often proprietary or restricted, meaning defenders cannot install critical security controls like EDR [Endpoint Detection and Response]. This creates a significant blind spot.”
The experts have also found various cases where ransomware actors install ransomware payloads directly via hypervisors, escaping endpoint security. In a few cases, threat actors used built-in-tools like OpenSSL to run encryption of the virtual machine volume without having to upload custom ransomware binaries.
Huntress researchers have also found attackers disrupting a network to steal login credentials and then attack hypervisors.
“We’ve seen misuse of Hyper-V management utilities to modify VM settings and undermine security features,” they add. “This includes disabling endpoint defenses, tampering with virtual switches, and preparing VMs for ransomware deployment at scale," they said.
Due to the high level of attacks on hypervisors, experts have suggested admins to revisit infosec basics such as multi-factor authentication and password patch updates. Admins should also adopt hypervisor-specific safety measures like only allow-listed binaries can run on a host.
For decades, the Infosec community has known hypervisors to be an easy target. In a worst-case scenario of a successful VM evasion where an attack on a guest virtual machine allows hijacking of the host and its hypervisor, things can go further south. If this were to happen, the impact could be massive as the entire hyperscale clouds depend on hypervisors to isolate tenants' virtual systems.
Security agencies have issued a new warning about the Akira ransomware group after investigators confirmed that the operators have added Nutanix AHV virtual machines to their list of targets. This represents a significant expansion of the group’s capabilities, which had already included attacks on VMware ESXi and Microsoft Hyper-V environments. The update signals that Akira is no longer limiting itself to conventional endpoints or common hypervisors and is now actively pursuing a wider range of virtual infrastructure used in large organisations.
Although Akira was first known for intrusions affecting small and medium businesses across North America, Europe and Australia, the pattern of attacks has changed noticeably over the last year. Incident reports now show that the group is striking much larger companies, particularly those involved in manufacturing, IT services, healthcare operations, banking and financial services, and food-related industries. This shift suggests a strategic move toward high-value victims where disruptions can cause substantial operational impact and increase the pressure to pay ransom demands.
Analysts observing the group’s behaviour note that Akira has not simply created a few new variants. Instead, it has invested considerable effort into developing ransomware that functions across multiple operating systems, including Windows and Linux, and across several virtualisation platforms. Building such wide-reaching capability requires long-term planning, and researchers interpret this as evidence that the group aims to remain active for an extended period.
How attackers get into networks
Investigations into real-world intrusions show that Akira typically begins by taking advantage of weak points in remote access systems and devices connected to the internet. Many victims used VPN systems that lacked multifactor authentication, making them vulnerable to attackers trying common password combinations or using previously leaked credentials. The group has also exploited publicly known vulnerabilities in networking products from major vendors and in backup platforms that had not been updated with security patches.
In addition to these weaknesses, Akira has used targeted phishing emails, misconfigured Remote Desktop Protocol portals, and exposed SSH interfaces on network routers. In some breaches, compromising a router allowed attackers to tunnel deeper into internal networks and reach critical servers, especially outdated backup systems that had not been maintained.
Once inside, the attackers survey the entire environment. They run commands designed to identify domain controllers and trust relationships between systems, giving them a map of how the network is structured. To avoid being detected, they often use remote-access tools that are normally employed by IT administrators, making their activity harder to differentiate from legitimate work. They also disable security software, create administrator-level user accounts for long-term access, and deploy tools capable of running commands on multiple machines at once.
Data theft and encryption techniques
Akira uses a double-extortion method. The attackers first locate and collect sensitive corporate information, which they compress and transfer out of the network using well-known tools such as FileZilla, WinRAR, WinSCP or RClone. Some investigations show that this data extraction process can be completed in just a few hours. Once the information has been removed, they launch the ransomware encryptor, which uses modern encryption algorithms that are designed to work quickly and efficiently. Over time, the group has changed the file extensions that appear after encryption and has modified the names and placement of ransom notes. The ransomware also removes Windows shadow copies to block easy recovery options.
Why the threat continues to succeed
Cybersecurity experts point out that Akira benefits from long-standing issues that many organisations fail to address. Network appliances, remote access devices, and backup servers often remain unpatched for months, giving attackers opportunities to exploit vulnerabilities that should have been resolved. These overlooked systems create gaps that remain unnoticed until an intrusion is already underway.
How organisations can strengthen defences
While applying patches, enabling multifactor authentication, and keeping offline backups remain essential, the recent wave of incidents shows that more comprehensive measures are necessary. Specialists recommend dividing networks into smaller segments to limit lateral movement, monitoring administrator-level activity closely, and extending security controls to backup systems and virtualisation consoles. Organisations should also conduct complete ransomware readiness exercises that include not only technical recovery procedures but also legal considerations, communication strategies, and preparations for potential data leaks.
Security researchers emphasise that companies must approach defence with the same mindset attackers use to find vulnerabilities. Identifying weaknesses before adversaries exploit them can make the difference between a minor disruption and a large-scale crisis.
Akira, one of the most active ransomware operations this year, has expanded its capabilities and increased the scale of its attacks, according to new threat intelligence shared by global security agencies. The group’s operators have upgraded their ransomware toolkit, continued to target a broad range of sectors, and sharply increased the financial impact of their attacks.
Data collected from public extortion portals shows that by the end of September 2025 the group had claimed roughly 244.17 million dollars in ransom proceeds. Analysts note that this figure represents a steep rise compared to estimates released in early 2024. Current tracking data places Akira second in overall activity among hundreds of monitored ransomware groups, with more than 620 victim organisations listed this year.
The growing number of incidents has prompted an updated joint advisory from international cyber authorities. The latest report outlines newly observed techniques, warns of the group’s expanded targeting, and urges all organisations to review their defensive posture.
Researchers confirm that Akira has introduced a new ransomware strain, commonly referenced as Akira v2. This version is designed to encrypt files at higher speeds and make data recovery significantly harder. Systems affected by the new variant often show one of several extensions, which include akira, powerranges, akiranew, and aki. Victims typically find ransom instructions stored as text files in both the main system directory and user folders.
Investigations show that Akira actors gain entry through several familiar but effective routes. These include exploiting security gaps in edge devices and backup servers, taking advantage of authentication bypass and scripting flaws, and using buffer overflow vulnerabilities to run malicious code. Stolen or brute forced credentials remain a common factor, especially when multi factor authentication is disabled.
Once inside a network, the attackers quickly establish long-term access. They generate new domain accounts, including administrative profiles, and have repeatedly created an account named itadm during intrusions. The group also uses legitimate system tools to explore networks and identify sensitive assets. This includes commands used for domain discovery and open-source frameworks designed for remote execution. In many cases, the attackers uninstall endpoint detection products, change firewall rules, and disable antivirus tools to remain unnoticed.
The group has also expanded its focus to virtual and cloud based environments. Security teams recently observed the encryption of virtual machine disk files on Nutanix AHV, in addition to previous activity on VMware ESXi and Hyper-V platforms. In one incident, operators temporarily powered down a domain controller to copy protected virtual disk files and load them onto a new virtual machine, allowing them to access privileged credentials.
Command and control activity is often routed through encrypted tunnels, and recent intrusions show the use of tunnelling services to mask traffic. Authorities warn that data theft can occur within hours of initial access.
Security agencies stress that the most effective defence remains prompt patching of known exploited vulnerabilities, enforcing multi factor authentication on all remote services, monitoring for unusual account creation, and ensuring that backup systems are fully secured and tested.