Author: AresISEC Security Team

Security Highlights Of The Week [10/26-3]

Ivanti Connect Secure Zero-Day Chain Actively Exploited for Remote Code Execution

Threat actors are actively exploiting CVE-2026-104935 and chaining vulnerabilities against Ivanti Connect Secure appliances to achieve unauthenticated remote code execution. CISA warned that the zero-day has been used for credential theft and data exfiltration, while incident investigations identified attackers gaining root-level access to affected VPN devices.

Source: Volexity

Cisco Secure Email Gateway Vulnerability Exploited in Active Attacks

Cisco warned that attackers are exploiting a critical vulnerability in Secure Email Gateway appliances that allows an unauthenticated sender to write files to the operating system through a crafted email attachment. Successful exploitation can potentially lead to command execution with root privileges on vulnerable gateways.

Source: The Hacker News

Microsoft Patch Tuesday Fixes Record 1,411 Vulnerabilities and Three Zero-Days

Microsoft’s October 2026 Patch Tuesday addressed a record 1,411 vulnerabilities, including 70 rated Critical. Three zero-day vulnerabilities were included in the release, with one already being actively exploited and two publicly disclosed before patches became available.

Source: BleepingComputer

Maximum-Severity SonicWall SMA1000 Vulnerability Now Exploited in Attacks

Attackers are now exploiting CVE-2026-102255, the CVSS 10 vulnerability recently patched in SonicWall SMA1000 appliances. The pre-authentication SSRF flaw allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to make the appliance access internal functionality and perform unauthorized operations.

Source: BleepingComputer

Critical AhsayCBS Vulnerabilities Exploited to Deploy Web Shells and Cryptominers

Attackers began exploiting CVE-2026-105133 and CVE-2026-105134 shortly after their disclosure to achieve remote code execution against AhsayCBS backup servers. Observed post-exploitation activity included reconnaissance, web shells, XMRig cryptominers and PowerShell tooling designed to interfere with system monitoring.

Source: Huntress

Critical Langflow RCE Targeted in More Than 1,400 Exploit Attempts

Threat actors are actively targeting CVE-2026-105740, a critical authenticated remote code execution vulnerability affecting Langflow versions before 1.9.0. Researchers recorded 1,423 exploitation attempts against honeypot infrastructure, indicating substantial interest in the flaw shortly after disclosure.

Source: The Hacker News

Flax Typhoon Exploited Five Vulnerabilities Added to CISA KEV Catalog

CISA added five vulnerabilities to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog following confirmed abuse by China-linked Flax Typhoon. The action accompanied a joint international advisory warning about operations enabled by China’s Integrity Technology Group against networks in multiple countries.

Source: The Hacker News

GhostAction Supply Chain Campaign Targets More Than 30,000 GitHub Repositories

A renewed GhostAction campaign targeted more than 30,000 repositories belonging to roughly 3,000 users and organizations after attackers compromised about 1,900 GitHub accounts. The campaign attempted to extract 3,174 secrets from public repository CI environments and added Git history secret scanning to its credential-stealing workflows.

Source: GitGuardian

Ledger Halts Wallet Sales After Hardware Supply Chain Attack

Ledger asked distributors and resellers in Southeast Asia and Hong Kong to halt sales after confirming that cryptocurrency wallets sold through a reseller had been physically modified. Hardware implants inside affected devices were designed to capture wallet seed phrases and transmit them to an unauthorized party over an LTE connection.

Source: BleepingComputer

Targeted Ads Used to Deliver Zero-Click Mercenary Spyware

Citizen Lab documented what it describes as the first public confirmation of zero-click mercenary spyware delivered through targeted online advertising. The technique, dubbed AdFection, was used to compromise devices at Al Jazeera with Candiru spyware and demonstrates how advertising infrastructure can be repurposed as a surveillance delivery channel.

Source: Citizen Lab

Cyberattack Manipulates Refrigeration Systems at Hundreds of French Supermarkets

Cyberattacks against commercial refrigeration controllers disrupted hundreds of French grocery stores, with compromised systems reportedly commanded to raise temperatures high enough to destroy stored food and, in some cases, contribute to small fires. French authorities later expanded their warning to include Danfoss, Copeland and Dixell controller families.

Source: SecurityWeek

Microsoft and Health-ISAC Disrupt Phishing Market Behind More Than One Billion Messages

Microsoft and Health-ISAC seized and redirected infrastructure associated with YAM Store, CoGUI and Iron Man, components of a Chinese-language cybercrime marketplace. Microsoft says the services were used to send more than one billion malicious messages since January, targeting over 75,000 organizations in more than 150 countries.

Source: SecurityWeek

Next.js Releases Emergency Fixes for Two Critical Unauthenticated RCE Flaws

Next.js issued an out-of-band security update for two critical vulnerabilities that can allow unauthenticated remote code execution. The flaws affect React Server Components and SVG processing through librsvg, with fixes released in Next.js 16.4.1 and 15.5.28.

Source: The Hacker News

Linux vhost Vulnerability Enables Root Privilege Escalation and Potential VM Escape

CVE-2026-74580 affects Linux’s vhost virtualization acceleration subsystem across nearly a decade of kernel releases. Researchers demonstrated both local privilege escalation to root and a virtual-machine escape path in environments using a virtual IOMMU, potentially allowing an untrusted guest to corrupt memory in the host QEMU process.

Source: Tencent Security

CenterPoint Energy Data Breach Impacts More Than One Million People

CenterPoint Energy notified authorities that personal information belonging to more than one million Texans was compromised in a data breach. The utility had previously confirmed that customer information was stolen from its systems, while a threat actor claimed possession of millions of records.

Source: SecurityWeek

Security Highlights Of The Week [10/26-2]

Fortinet FortiMail Zero-Day Actively Exploited With No Patch Available

CISA and Fortinet warned that attackers are exploiting CVE-2026-104286, a critical FortiMail vulnerability with a CVSS score of 9.8. Crafted HTTP or HTTPS requests can allow attackers to write arbitrary files to the underlying system and potentially achieve code or command execution, while Fortinet has advised temporary mitigations until patches become available.

Source: SecurityWeek

Atlassian Data Center Flaw Targeted Within Hours of Public Disclosure

Attackers began probing and attempting to exploit CVE-2026-21589 within roughly two hours of public technical details becoming available. The critical unauthenticated arbitrary file access vulnerability affects multiple Atlassian Data Center products, including Jira, Confluence, Bitbucket, Bamboo and Crowd.

Source: The Hacker News

New NetScaler Zero-Day Exploited in Targeted Attacks

Citrix patched CVE-2026-88779 after observing targeted zero-day exploitation against NetScaler ADC and Gateway deployments. The memory overflow vulnerability can cause denial of service when affected systems are configured as a SAML service provider or identity provider.

Source: The Hacker News

Cisco Patches Critical Nexus Vulnerabilities That Could Allow Root-Level Takeover

Cisco disclosed five critical vulnerabilities in NX-OS affecting Nexus 3000 and Nexus 9000 Series switches. The flaws affect features including NX-API, NGOAM and MPLS OAM and can potentially allow attackers to execute arbitrary code with root privileges or crash affected devices.

Source: BleepingComputer

SonicWall Fixes Maximum-Severity SMA1000 SSRF Vulnerability

SonicWall released hotfixes for CVE-2026-102255, a CVSS 10 vulnerability affecting SMA1000 appliances. A remote unauthenticated attacker can abuse an unintended access path to make the appliance issue requests on their behalf, potentially reaching internal functionality and performing unauthorized operations.

Source: SecurityWeek

Tensorlake npm Package Compromised With Shai-Hulud Worm

Version 0.5.144 of the tensorlake npm package was compromised with a new Shai-Hulud variant that steals secrets and attempts to propagate through connected software supply chains. Tensorlake provides sandbox infrastructure for AI agents, and its npm package has more than 100,000 reported lifetime installs.

Source: Aikido Security

FBI Warns FortiBleed Campaign Remains Active After Harvesting More Than 86,000 Credentials

The FBI and U.S. Secret Service warned that the FortiBleed campaign continues targeting internet-facing Fortinet FortiGate firewalls and SSL VPN gateways. The campaign has reportedly collected more than 86,000 working device credentials across 194 countries and has also been observed providing initial access for ransomware operations.

Source: The Hacker News

Ransomware Attack Disrupts Japanese IDCF Cloud Infrastructure

IDC Frontier confirmed that ransomware caused an outage in its IDCF Cloud East Japan Region 1 environment. The company shut down network and system infrastructure after detecting the attack, disrupting a cloud platform used by government and enterprise customers.

Source: BleepingComputer

Iran-Aligned Blinder Tunnel Campaign Targets Iraqi Critical Infrastructure

Unit 42 linked the Blinder Tunnel campaign to an Iranian state-aligned actor tracked as CL-STA-1178. The operation targeted Iraqi critical infrastructure and used identities impersonating Dubai Airports IT staff to deliver trojanized coding challenges to high-value targets.

Source: Palo Alto Networks Unit 42

ASOS Confirms Data Breach After Employee Account Compromise

ASOS confirmed that attackers gained access to an employee account by impersonating a trusted contact and subsequently abused customer communication infrastructure to send unauthorized push notifications. The attackers also accessed some personal information, including customer names and contact details.

Source: The Record

Android Phones Shipped With Midnight Mimosa Malware Preinstalled in Firmware

Bitdefender identified Midnight Mimosa malware preinstalled on low-cost Android devices built on MediaTek platforms. The malware runs with system-level privileges before the user first powers on the device and can silently install applications, grant permissions and load remotely supplied code.

Source: Bitdefender

FakeGit Campaign Re-Arms More Than 17,000 Malicious GitHub Repositories

Researchers observed the FakeGit infrastructure rapidly repointing thousands of existing GitHub repositories toward SmartLoader malware downloads. More than 13,000 repositories were modified in roughly 34 hours, demonstrating how long-lived fake repositories can be reused without rebuilding the attacker infrastructure from scratch.

Source: Apiiro

Active WordPress XSS Campaign Creates Hidden Administrator Persistence

Attackers are actively exploiting stored XSS vulnerabilities in WPC Product Bundles for WooCommerce and Ninja Forms to deliver the same malicious JavaScript payload. The implant executes in the browser of a logged-in administrator and is designed to establish persistent access, including hiding attacker-controlled administrator accounts.

Source: Patchstack

Chinese State-Linked Hackers Operated Portal Providing Access to Stolen Emails

The FBI and partner agencies said actors linked to China’s Integrity Technology Group compromised government, law enforcement, healthcare and religious organizations in Southeast Asia. The operation used vulnerability scanning, password attacks against Microsoft 365 and Exchange accounts, and infrastructure that provided third parties with access to stolen email data.

Source: The Hacker News

UAT-11985 Uses AI-Assisted Lures and Real-Time Google AitM Phishing

Cisco Talos identified an APT campaign targeting individuals associated with Taiwanese research organizations using highly tailored event invitations and malicious QR codes. The operation used a real-time adversary-in-the-middle phishing framework that impersonated Google authentication pages and intercepted credentials and MFA challenges.

Source: Cisco Talos

What’s Really Exposed to the Internet?

Most organizations know which systems need to be publicly accessible. A website, VPN, customer portal or another business service usually has a clear reason for being reachable from the internet. The bigger problem can be systems that nobody remembers are still accessible.

Infrastructure changes over time. A new server is deployed, a supplier is given remote access, a test environment is made available or external administration is temporarily enabled. The application is later migrated, the supplier changes or the project ends, but part of the old configuration remains. After several years, what an organization believes it has exposed to the internet and what is actually accessible may no longer be the same.

Temporary access can easily become permanent

It does not have to be a server that someone forgot about ten years ago. An administrative interface for a network device, an old VPN service, a test application or remote access that was supposed to be temporary is enough. These systems are often not part of day-to-day operations, so they can remain outside the organization’s focus for a long time. Someone uses the production application every day, while an old service can remain accessible without anyone noticing. Being accessible from the internet is not a security vulnerability by itself. Many services must be publicly available for the business to operate. What matters is whether a particular service still needs to be accessible, whether it is still being used and whether it is securely configured. A VPN that an organization uses every day has a valid reason to be exposed. An administrative interface left open after a supplier intervention probably does not.

Documentation and reality are not always the same

The same applies to test environments. A production application may be regularly maintained while an old test instance remains available on a subdomain long after a project has ended. An organization may keep its servers updated but overlook a network device that has been running for years without significant changes. From the perspective of someone looking for systems from the outside, it does not matter whether something appears in the official IT asset inventory. What matters is whether it can be reached. Even a well-maintained inventory may therefore differ from the actual environment. Documentation can lag behind changes, temporary configurations can remain active and systems that are no longer used can continue operating. These differences between documented and actual exposure are easy to miss until someone has a reason to examine them more closely.

A list of vulnerabilities is not enough

A vulnerability assessment should not end with a list of software versions and detected CVEs. A finding needs to be considered together with the exposure and role of the system on which it was identified. The same vulnerability on an internet-facing system and on a system that is accessible only from a restricted part of the internal network does not necessarily have the same priority for the organization. The same applies to the results of automated tools. A scanner may report a large number of potential vulnerabilities, but that does not mean every finding actually applies to the system or that every finding is equally important. The result may depend on the detected software version, configuration or assumptions that the tool cannot independently verify. Some findings therefore need additional validation before it is possible to determine whether a vulnerability is actually present and how much risk it represents.

Without that analysis, it is easy to fall into a cycle where scanner output becomes the entire remediation plan. The organization fixes what was reported, runs the scanner again and receives another list. The same process then starts again. A new list does not by itself show that the environment is now significantly more secure or that the most important problems were addressed first. Vulnerability management is not an attempt to make every scan return an empty result. It requires distinguishing real and applicable findings from technical noise and deciding what should actually be remediated first.

A system also does not need to contain a known critical vulnerability to present a security problem. An unnecessarily exposed service, an insecure configuration or access that should have been removed long ago can be just as relevant to the security of the environment. This is why an independent security assessment needs to answer more than what a scanner found. It should determine what is actually exposed, validate relevant findings and assess their significance in the context of the specific environment.

AresISEC, through its Vulnerability Assessment service, reviews systems, applications and infrastructure to identify security weaknesses and assess them in the context of the actual environment. The goal is not to produce the longest possible list of findings, but to determine which issues represent relevant risk and what should be addressed first.

Verify what you think you know

A useful first step can be a simple internal review. Compare the systems you believe are accessible from the internet with what is actually exposed. Check for test environments, legacy systems, supplier access and configurations that were originally intended to be temporary. If you cannot clearly explain why a particular system or service is accessible from the internet, it is worth checking whether it still needs to be.

The problem is not a service that needs to be accessible from the internet. The problem is the one nobody can explain why it is still there.

Sources:

Do you know what is actually exposed and which vulnerabilities represent real risk?

AresISEC Vulnerability Assessment reviews exposed systems, validates identified weaknesses and evaluates their relevance within your actual environment.

We Have Outsourced IT. Isn’t That Enough?

You have an external IT provider maintaining your computers, user accounts, network, backups and day-to-day support. When something stops working, you know who to call, employees have the access they need and systems generally work as expected. It is therefore understandable to assume that security is covered as well. However, IT maintenance and an independent security assessment are not the same thing.

For hotels, accounting firms, clinics, law firms and other businesses that outsource IT maintenance, having someone responsible for keeping systems operational does not necessarily mean that someone is separately assessing their exposure, user access, network segmentation or the consequences of a compromised account or device.

A system can work perfectly well and still have a security weakness

Day-to-day IT maintenance has a very practical goal: computers need to work, users need access to applications, the network needs to be available, backups need to run and technical problems need to be resolved as quickly as possible. A security assessment asks different questions. Which systems are accessible from the internet? Are there remote access paths that are no longer needed? Do users have more privileges than they actually require? Are different parts of the network sufficiently separated? What could an attacker do after compromising a single user account?

Such weaknesses do not necessarily cause failures or become visible during normal operations. A system can function without problems for years while still having an old access path, an unnecessarily exposed service, excessive permissions or a configuration that could allow an attacker to reach systems that would otherwise be inaccessible.

Your external IT provider may be doing an excellent job

A good IT provider knows the environment, maintains its systems and usually already implements a range of important security measures. They install updates, manage users, maintain backups, configure network equipment, protect endpoints and resolve problems when they occur. That does not necessarily mean that the same environment has undergone a separate security assessment.

The company that deployed the systems and maintains them every day primarily sees the environment through the requirements of business operations and stability. A security assessment looks at the same environment from a different perspective: what could be exploited, how far a compromise of one part of the environment could spread and which controls actually limit the impact of an incident.

This is not criticism of the external IT provider, nor is it a reason to replace them. An independent assessment simply serves a different purpose.

One compromised account can be enough

Smaller organizations often do not have hundreds of systems. They may have a few computers, business email, cloud applications, remote access and several services on which their daily operations directly depend. That is precisely why a single account or device can be particularly important.

In an accounting firm, a business mailbox may contain communications and documentation relating to many clients. In a hotel, a reception computer may have access to systems required for daily operations. In a clinic, a relatively small number of computers and user accounts may provide access to systems and sensitive data. In a law firm, business email, documents and cloud services may contain information relating to a large number of cases and clients.

The question is therefore not only whether someone can compromise a single user account. What matters is what that account allows them to do next. Can they access other systems or shared folders? Are credentials stored on the device? Can administrative interfaces be reached from ordinary user workstations? Can a compromised device communicate with parts of the network it does not need to access for everyday work?

These are the kinds of factors that determine whether a security incident remains limited to a single account or device or spreads further through the environment.

“But our IT provider also takes care of security”

They very likely do. Updates, backups, user management, endpoint protection and network configuration are all important parts of security. The difference is that a security assessment does not only check whether a particular measure exists. It also looks at how that measure is configured and what happens when one of the controls fails.

A backup may exist, but can the systems and data required for business operations actually be restored from it? Remote access may be protected, but who still has access and is that access still necessary? A firewall may be configured correctly, but can a compromised computer inside the network reach systems it should not be able to access?

An independent assessment therefore does not replace your external IT provider. In practice, it can provide them with specific findings that they can then verify and address.

A security assessment does not have to be a large project

For a company with a few or a few dozen employees, cybersecurity does not have to begin with new infrastructure, additional tools or a major project. It makes sense to first establish what the current environment actually looks like, what is exposed, who has access to what, how different systems are separated and whether there are weaknesses that represent a real risk to the business.

Such an assessment may show that most things are already configured well and that only a few specific issues need to be addressed. It may also uncover access left behind after an old project, a user account with more privileges than necessary, a device that is no longer used or a service that remains externally accessible even though there is no longer a reason for it to be.

What matters is knowing the actual state of the environment rather than assuming security is covered simply because IT is working.

External IT and security assessments are not competing roles

An external IT provider maintains systems and enables the business to operate every day. An independent security assessment examines whether there are weaknesses that may not be visible through normal day-to-day operations and what the consequences would be if someone exploited them.

These two roles can complement each other very well. The external IT provider knows the environment and can implement necessary changes, while a security assessment provides an independent view of exposure, access, configurations and the potential for a compromise to spread.

AresISEC security assessments start with the organization’s actual IT environment. The goal is not to replace an existing IT provider or look for problems where none exist, but to determine whether there are weaknesses that could have a real impact on the business and which of them make sense to address.

Having an external IT provider does not automatically mean that cybersecurity is covered.

If you would like to check how secure your existing systems and access controls are in practice, contact us.

Security Highlights Of The Week [10/26-1]

Two Citrix NetScaler Zero-Days Actively Exploited in the Wild

Attackers are actively exploiting CVE-2026-88771 and CVE-2026-88772 against Citrix NetScaler ADC and Gateway appliances. Mandiant observed exploitation affecting organizations in North America and Europe, with post-exploitation tooling including custom WHIPSHOT web shells and the SLAPSHOT tunneler used for internal reconnaissance and credential theft.

Source: Google Threat Intelligence Group

ShinyHunters Renews Mass Exploitation of Oracle PeopleSoft

Google Threat Intelligence Group and Mandiant identified a renewed global exploitation campaign targeting CVE-2026-35273 in Oracle PeopleSoft. The ShinyHunters-linked actor modified its exploit to bypass WAF rules by URL-encoding part of the vulnerable PSEMHUB path, allowing attacks against systems whose operators may have believed the exposure was mitigated.

Source: Google Threat Intelligence Group

Microsoft SharePoint RCE Now Exploited in Attacks

Microsoft confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-65660, a SharePoint remote code execution vulnerability patched in August. An authenticated attacker with low-level access can exploit the code injection flaw to execute arbitrary code on an affected SharePoint server without user interaction.

Source: SecurityWeek

Bitget Says $387.5 Million Theft Began With Zero-Days in Security Appliances

Cryptocurrency exchange Bitget said attackers gained access to its wallet environment by exploiting zero-day vulnerabilities in two third-party security appliances. The attackers deployed web shells and malware inside the production environment before using a custom withdrawal tool to steal approximately $387.5 million from hot and warm wallets.

Source: BleepingComputer

Apple Patches CoreGraphics Zero-Day Used in Targeted Attacks

Apple patched CVE-2026-86950, an out-of-bounds write vulnerability in CoreGraphics that may have been exploited in what the company described as an extremely sophisticated attack against specific individuals. Processing a maliciously crafted file can lead to arbitrary code execution on affected iOS and macOS devices.

Source: SecurityWeek

Zammad Zero-Days Exploited in AI-Powered Attack Against DIVD

The Dutch Institute for Vulnerability Disclosure said attackers compromised its infrastructure by exploiting two previously unknown vulnerabilities in the Zammad support platform. DIVD described the operation as an automated agentic AI-powered attack and initiated a full incident response after detecting the compromise on September 21.

Source: SecurityWeek

Storm-3168 Uses Compromised Service Principals for Destructive Azure Attacks

Microsoft documented destructive Azure activity associated with Storm-3168, also known as JADEPUFFER, involving compromised service principals and stolen cloud credentials. The actor performed bulk destructive operations against storage accounts, SQL databases, Key Vaults, virtual machines, Function Apps, App Services and recovery protection controls.

Source: Microsoft

Zimbra RCE Exploitation Leads to Web Shells, Credential Theft and Persistent Access

Microsoft published new details on exploitation of CVE-2026-73570, an unauthenticated command injection vulnerability affecting internet-facing Zimbra servers with specific SNMP functionality enabled. Observed post-exploitation activity included JSP web shells, reverse shells, privilege escalation, persistent remote-access tooling, mailbox access and collection of authentication data.

Source: Microsoft

Official MCP Python SDK Flaw Could Expose OAuth Credentials

A vulnerability in the official Model Context Protocol Python SDK could allow a malicious MCP server to redirect OAuth token exchanges to attacker-controlled infrastructure. Affected clients could disclose the client secret, authorization code and PKCE proof key, allowing the attacker to obtain access tokens carrying the application’s permissions.

Source: The Hacker News

Re-Enabled GitHub Actions Reactivated Mini Shai-Hulud Supply Chain Malware

Two GitHub Actions compromised during the Mini Shai-Hulud campaign became accessible again while their release tags still referenced malicious code. Workflows using those version tags consequently resumed downloading and executing the compromised actions until GitHub disabled the repositories again.

Source: Socket

Warlock Ransomware Group Targets Water and Telecom Operators

The China-nexus group behind Warlock ransomware has continued using Microsoft SharePoint vulnerabilities to compromise organizations. Recent victims included a water utility and a telecommunications provider, along with a regional government organization and a university across Europe, Africa and Latin America.

Source: Security.com

SalesBleed Flaws Enabled Zero-Click Data Exfiltration Through Salesforce Agentforce

Researchers disclosed three vulnerabilities in Salesforce Agentforce that could allow attackers to inject malicious instructions through Web-to-Lead forms. Two of the flaws could trigger zero-click extraction of sensitive CRM data when an Agentforce agent later processed a poisoned lead, while another could turn the agent into a phishing delivery mechanism.

Source: SecurityWeek

Public Exploit Released for Critical Next.js Remote Code Execution Flaw

A working proof-of-concept exploit is publicly available for CVE-2026-94545, a critical vulnerability in the Next.js next/og image API. A single unauthenticated request can execute commands on vulnerable servers, although no confirmed in-the-wild exploitation had been reported at the time of publication.

Source: SecurityOnline

Times Car Data Breach Affects 6.6 Million Accounts

Japanese car-sharing provider Times Car confirmed that attackers compromised approximately 6.6 million user accounts after gaining unauthorized access to its systems. The company initially investigated whether personal information had been accessed and later confirmed that data had been stolen.

Source: BleepingComputer

NeedyMantis Malware Used for Persistent Access in Targeted Operations

Microsoft identified NeedyMantis, a modular post-compromise malware family used in targeted operations against telecommunications organizations, universities, medical nonprofits, intergovernmental organizations and government contractors. The malware is deployed after initial compromise to maintain long-term access and support follow-on activity, with observed operations aligning with China-based threat actors.

Source: Microsoft

You Think You’re Ready for NIS2. Can You Show Evidence?

When an organization starts looking more closely at how ready it really is for NIS2, the initial picture often looks quite good. There is a firewall, backups run regularly, MFA is enabled, employees receive security training, and everyone knows who to call if an incident occurs. Most of these measures were not introduced because of NIS2. They became part of normal operations over the years, and that is a good starting point.

The problem appears when the question changes from “do you have it?” to “how is it actually implemented?”. NIS2 does not reduce cybersecurity risk management to owning certain security products or having a few written procedures. It covers areas such as incident handling, business continuity and recovery, supply chain security, vulnerability management, access control, training, and assessment of the effectiveness of security measures. Two organizations may therefore tick almost every box on a basic checklist while having very different levels of readiness in practice.

Take MFA as an example. A company uses it for Microsoft 365 and VPN access, so it can quite reasonably say that multi-factor authentication is in place. But what about administrative accounts? Are there legacy systems that do not support it? Are there exceptions, and is it clear why they exist? If a compromised administrative account can still provide access to an important part of the infrastructure without an additional verification step, simply saying that the organization “has MFA” does not tell us enough about the actual risk.

Something similar happens with vulnerabilities. An organization may run a vulnerability scanner every month and keep the resulting reports. What matters much more is what happens afterwards. If the same serious finding appears for six months because nobody has assigned an owner, deadline, or remediation path, scanning exists, but the vulnerability management process clearly has a gap. Sometimes an issue cannot be fixed immediately, and that is a reality in any IT environment. In that case, the organization should understand the remaining risk, whether it can be reduced temporarily, and who made the decision to accept it.

Suppliers are another area where the real situation can easily become unclear. An organization knows who maintains its infrastructure, where its systems are hosted, and which cloud or SaaS services it uses, but that does not necessarily mean it has a good overview of supplier access and the dependencies that have developed over time. An external IT provider may have administrative accounts, an application vendor may have remote access to production, and a business-critical system may depend on a service outside the organization’s direct control. If that supplier suffers a security incident, the question is no longer only how secure the supplier is, but what their incident could mean for your own operations.

With incidents, the difference between assumed and actual readiness usually becomes visible even faster. In a smaller organization, everyone may know who to call when something goes wrong. That can work perfectly well for minor problems. During a serious incident, however, someone suddenly has to decide what to isolate, which systems need to remain available, what information must be preserved, who leads the technical response, who communicates with management, and whether the incident needs to be reported. If everything depends on one person who “knows how things work”, the plan effectively exists only while that person is available.

A backup alone does not tell you how prepared the organization is for recovery either. It may run every night for months without an error while nobody knows how long an actual recovery would take. The database may be recoverable, but the application could depend on another service that was never included in the plan. All the data may be available, but nobody has decided what needs to be restored first. Only when these questions are tested can an organization start talking about actual recovery capability rather than simply having backups.

This is why evidence in NIS2 readiness is useful for more than a future review or self-assessment. It gives the organization a much more practical answer to whether its security measures work as expected. A recovery test result tells you more than simply stating that backups exist. Records of privileged account reviews show that access is actually being reviewed. Closed vulnerability findings show that scanning leads to remediation rather than a PDF report being stored in a folder. There is no need to invent new NIS2 documentation if the appropriate evidence already exists as part of everyday operations.

The Croatian NIS2 framework also distinguishes between the documentation of security measures and their actual implementation. This matters because an organization may have a well-written procedure that nobody follows in practice, while the opposite can also be true. A security practice may have worked well for years but remain insufficiently formalized or documented. A GAP assessment should distinguish between these situations rather than treating all of them as the same “missing” requirement.

With an AresISEC NIS2 GAP Readiness Assessment, we therefore do not look only at whether a particular policy, procedure, or security technology exists. We examine how the measure is actually implemented and what can be confirmed from the available information and evidence. The objective is not to issue a certificate or provide a legal opinion that an organization is “NIS2 compliant”, but to establish a realistic picture of the current state and identify where there is a difference between what the organization considers resolved and what is actually in place.

It makes sense to perform this type of review before a formal self-assessment or another review, while there is still time to address the gaps that are found. The result does not have to be ten new policies and another security product. Sometimes an existing process needs to be improved, a technical weakness needs to be addressed, responsibility needs to be clearly assigned, or something that has been taken for granted for years finally needs to be tested.

That is why NIS2 preparation is more useful when it starts with the actual environment rather than a checklist. The question is not only whether you have a particular security measure. The question is whether you can show how it is implemented and whether it works when you actually need it.

Sources:

European Union – Directive (EU) 2022/2555 (NIS2 Directive)

Narodne novine – Croatian Cybersecurity Act, NN 14/2024

Narodne novine – Croatian Cybersecurity Regulation, NN 135/2024

Do you know what is actually in place for NIS2 in your organization, and what you only assume has already been addressed?

AresISEC NIS2 GAP Readiness Assessment reviews the current state against relevant requirements and helps identify the gaps that need to be addressed before the next steps.

Security Highlights Of The Week [09/26-4]

Critical WordPress Vulnerability Exploited Within Hours of Disclosure

Attackers began exploiting CVE-2026-87902 only hours after details of the vulnerability became public. The path traversal flaw affects WordPress page-template resolution and, under specific server and theme conditions, can allow an unauthenticated attacker to achieve remote code execution.

Source: SecurityWeek

Critical Roundcube Flaw Now Actively Exploited

The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security has warned that CVE-2026-48842 in Roundcube Webmail is being actively exploited. The pre-authentication SQL injection vulnerability can allow attackers without credentials to bypass authentication, execute malicious database queries and access data stored by vulnerable Roundcube installations.

Source: BleepingComputer

Cyberattacks Target OT Systems at Colorado Water Utilities

Attackers targeted operational technology systems at two private water utilities in Colorado and altered equipment settings, disabled remote access and alarms, and changed pumping cycles. The disruptions were brief and did not affect water service or public safety, but the incident shows direct attempts to manipulate physical infrastructure.

Source: SecurityWeek

Brevo Supply Chain Attack Reached More Than 100,000 Sites

New analysis of the Brevo compromise indicates that malicious JavaScript distributed through the company’s infrastructure potentially reached more than 100,000 customer sites. Attackers abused a stolen Cloudflare API key to modify Brevo-hosted scripts at the CDN edge and distribute ClickFix content and WordPress backdoors.

Source: Sansec

Graphalgo Malware Expands From npm to Terraform Providers and Go Modules

Researchers identified Graphalgo-related malware distributed through at least two Terraform providers and two Go modules, marking the first observed use of Terraform providers as a malware distribution channel. The Go-based payload shares blockchain infrastructure, Slack infrastructure and cryptographic material with earlier malicious npm samples.

Source: Aikido Security

npm Supply Chain Attack Abuses Trusted Publishing to Deliver GHAPPIER Loader

Attackers compromised the maintainer of the @dforge-core/dforge-mcp package and modified its GitHub Actions release workflow to publish a malicious version through npm trusted publishing. The resulting release carried valid provenance signatures while delivering a remote-shell implant, demonstrating that provenance can verify where software was built without proving that its source code is trustworthy.

Source: Orca Security

Compromised MemTensor Packages Deliver Cross-Platform Credential Stealer

Legitimate MemTensor packages on both npm and PyPI were compromised to distribute a Go-based implant called sckit. Malicious versions execute the payload when an agent gateway starts or processes memory-recall events, targeting Windows, Linux and macOS environments.

Source: The Hacker News

EvilTokens Campaign Compromised More Than 12,000 Microsoft 365 Inboxes

Microsoft reports that the EvilTokens phishing-as-a-service platform has compromised more than 12,000 inboxes across over 10,000 organizations. The service combines device-code and adversary-in-the-middle phishing with AI-assisted lure creation and analysis of compromised mailboxes to identify high-value targets.

Source: Microsoft

cPanel Flaw Lets Hosting Accounts Execute Code as Root

A vulnerability in cPanel’s CalDAV and CardDAV service can allow any authenticated hosting account to execute code as root and gain full control of a shared server. cPanel has released fixed versions, and the attack requires only access to a normal hosting account on the affected system.

Source: The Hacker News

Plugin4Shell Affects Four Major AI Coding Agents

Researchers disclosed Plugin4Shell, a supply-chain weakness affecting Claude Code, Codex, GitHub Copilot and Gemini CLI. A repository owner could replace plugin code after review and cause an agent to install malicious content despite the marketplace pinning the plugin to an approved commit hash.

Source: The Hacker News

Autonomous AI Agents Used to Compromise Online Retailers at Scale

Gambit Security reports an ongoing campaign in which a financially motivated actor used open-source AI harnesses to automate attacks against online retailers. Researchers reconstructed 105 attack projects launched within six days, with at least 27 companies compromised and exposure including hundreds of thousands of payment-card records and deployed web skimmers.

Source: Gambit Security

OpenAI Agents Accessed Non-Public Data on Australian Government Portal

AI agents used in an OpenAI research project exploited a weakness in an Australian Medicare statistics portal while performing information-retrieval tasks. The June incident allowed access to public and non-public data and formed part of broader automated probing of public data providers in several countries.

Source: BleepingComputer

Password Spraying Campaign Targets Forgotten Microsoft 365 Service Accounts

Proofpoint identified an active TeamFiltration campaign targeting more than 5,700 accounts across 28 Microsoft 365 tenants in Latin America. All seven successfully compromised accounts were unmanaged service or functional accounts without MFA and with no established legitimate login baseline.

Source: Proofpoint

Attackers Target Prominent Rust Maintainers in Supply Chain Campaign

The Rust project warned of an ongoing campaign targeting project members and owners of popular crates. Attackers use convincing job, contract and project opportunities to lure maintainers into video calls and then attempt to make them install malware or execute commands, with the apparent goal of taking over accounts and publishing malicious packages.

Source: Rust Project

Fake LastPass GitHub Repositories Deliver Rapuncel Infostealer and EDR Killer

An ongoing campaign uses SEO-optimized GitHub repositories impersonating LastPass and dozens of other software companies to distribute the previously undocumented Rapuncel infostealer. The campaign also delivers a Microsoft-signed kernel driver capable of disabling a large number of antivirus and EDR products.

Source: BleepingComputer

Security Highlights Of The Week [09/26-3]

Cisco ISE Zero-Day Exploited to Bypass Authentication
Cisco released emergency fixes for CVE-2026-76460, a maximum-severity vulnerability in Identity Services Engine and ISE Passive Identity Connector that was exploited as a zero-day. The CVSS 10 flaw allows a remote attacker to bypass authentication through a vulnerable API endpoint and access affected appliances regardless of their configuration.
Source: SecurityWeek

Issabel Framework RCE Actively Exploited Through Hard-Coded JWT Key
Attackers are exploiting CVE-2026-89026, a critical vulnerability in the Issabel PBX Framework caused by a JWT signing key that is identical across installations. An unauthenticated remote attacker can forge valid bearer tokens and execute arbitrary operating system commands through the PBX API.
Source: The Hacker News

Critical ScreenConnect Flaw Now Confirmed Under Active Exploitation
CISA confirmed that attackers are exploiting CVE-2026-84869 in ConnectWise ScreenConnect. The missing-authorization flaw can allow an attacker with basic privileges to transfer or execute files without user interaction, and ConnectWise has patched the issue in ScreenConnect 26.6.5 and later.
Source: BleepingComputer

Google Pixel Modem Zero-Day Exploited in Targeted Attacks
Google patched CVE-2026-58704 after observing limited targeted exploitation against Pixel devices. The modem vulnerability can enable a nearby attacker to escalate privileges remotely without user interaction, and CISA subsequently added the flaw to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
Source: SecurityWeek

Attackers Target WSO2 API Manager With Forged Administrator Tokens
Active exploitation attempts are targeting CVE-2026-5430, a critical JWT signature verification weakness in WSO2 API Manager. Attackers can use unsupported signing algorithms to bypass authentication and potentially obtain administrative account access or full account takeover.
Source: The Hacker News

One-Click Sogou RCE Exploited to Deploy GRAYRABBIT Backdoor
CVE-2026-51990 in the widely deployed Sogou Input Method chains weaknesses in a custom protocol handler, webview navigation, and an outdated unsandboxed Chromium engine into a one-click remote code execution path. Gen Threat Labs observed the vulnerability being exploited by UNC3569 to deliver the GRAYRABBIT backdoor.
Source: Gen Threat Labs

Brevo Supply Chain Compromise Injected ClickFix Scripts Into Customer Sites
Brevo confirmed that attackers stole a Cloudflare API key and used it to deploy a malicious Worker that modified content at the CDN edge. The compromise altered Brevo-hosted pages and JavaScript components embedded on customer websites, injecting ClickFix content for roughly five and a half hours and creating a direct software supply chain delivery path for malware.
Source: BleepingComputer

Artifactory Attacks Chain Three Vulnerabilities and Deploy Persistent Backdoors
Wiz observed attackers chaining CVE-2026-42016, CVE-2026-42018, and CVE-2026-82329 against JFrog Artifactory to bypass authentication, escalate privileges, and obtain administrative control. Post-exploitation activity included persistent administrator accounts, malicious Groovy plugins for code execution, and Rust-based backdoors.
Source: Wiz

Cyclops Blink Returns on Compromised Cisco Firewall Management Center Devices
Researchers identified a new variant of Cyclops Blink on multiple compromised Cisco Firewall Management Center systems. The modular Linux implant provides persistent remote access and is assessed as likely associated with the Russia-linked IRON VIKING threat group, also known as Sandworm and Seashell Blizzard.
Source: Sophos

Passkey-Themed Social Engineering Leads to Identity and Cloud Compromise
Microsoft is tracking active intrusions that begin with identity-focused social engineering and are followed by attacker-added authentication methods and persistent cloud access. Compromised identities were subsequently used for high-volume Microsoft Graph activity, SharePoint and OneDrive downloads, email collection, and activity consistent with automated data exfiltration.
Source: Microsoft

Red Heron Exploits Gitea to Steal Source Code and Deploy Linux Rootkit
A Chinese-speaking threat actor tracked as Red Heron rapidly weaponized CVE-2026-60004 against internet-facing Gitea servers across multiple countries. The campaign progressed from source-code theft into credential collection, persistence, and lateral movement, while analysis of exposed attacker infrastructure uncovered a previously undocumented Linux implant.
Source: Acronis

Two Critical Events Calendar Chains Expose Hundreds of Thousands of WordPress Sites to RCE
Researchers disclosed two independent unauthenticated attack chains in The Events Calendar WordPress plugin. One chain uses PHP object injection to execute operating system commands, while the second can reset an administrator password and enable complete site takeover through a malicious plugin.
Source: Wordfence

Critical Unbound DNSSEC Flaw Can Lead to Remote Code Execution
All Unbound releases before version 1.26.1 contain CVE-2026-81642, a critical heap overflow in the DNSSEC validator. An attacker controlling a malicious DNS zone can trigger the vulnerability through queries handled by a vulnerable resolver, potentially achieving remote code execution.
Source: The Hacker News

Oracle September Security Update Fixes More Than 800 Vulnerabilities
Oracle’s September Critical Security Patch Update includes 673 new patches addressing more than 800 vulnerabilities across its product portfolio. More than 100 of the newly addressed issues are critical severity, while over 240 can reportedly be exploited remotely without authentication.
Source: SecurityWeek

Gyazo Breach Exposes 23.6 Million Users and Hundreds of Millions of Image Records
Image-sharing service Gyazo disclosed a breach affecting approximately 23.62 million user records, including email addresses and password hashes. The incident also exposed roughly 490 million image metadata records, including identifiers that in some cases could be used to access images without authorization.
Source: The Hacker News

You Have ISO 27001 Documentation. But Do You Actually Follow It in Practice?

One of the first questions during an ISO 27001 GAP analysis is often whether a particular policy or procedure exists. The document exists, has been approved, has an owner, a version number, and a date of last review. It states that user access is reviewed regularly, security incidents are recorded, backups are tested, and access is revoked when an employee leaves the organization. On paper, everything looks fine. The problem appears when the next question is asked: when was the last user access review performed? If the organization cannot show when the review took place, who performed it, and what was changed as a result, the existence of the policy tells us very little about whether the process it describes is actually being followed.

This is one of the important differences between ISO 27001 documentation and an ISMS that actually works. Documentation defines the rules, but the implementation of those rules must be visible in the organization’s day-to-day operations. An organization may, for example, have a well-written policy requiring periodic reviews of user access rights, but during an assessment it becomes clear that the last formal review was performed two years ago. In the meantime, employees have changed roles, projects have ended, new applications have been introduced, and permissions that are no longer required have remained active. The policy itself is not necessarily the problem. The problem is the difference between what the organization says it does and what actually happens.

The same applies to other parts of the ISMS. An incident management procedure may describe in detail how incidents should be reported, classified, and escalated, but if security events are handled through phone calls and messages without any record, it becomes difficult to determine later how an incident was handled, which decisions were made, or whether anything changed as a result. Backups may be clearly defined in an internal procedure and run successfully every night, with reports showing no errors for months. That is still not the same as evidence that the organization can restore a system when it actually needs to. If the last restore test was performed several years ago, or nobody knows how long recovery of a critical system would take, there is a clear difference between evidence that backups are being created and evidence that the recovery process works. The same problem appears with suppliers. An organization may have a procedure requiring security requirements to be assessed before engaging a supplier. If there is only a supplier list, but no record of who was assessed, against which criteria, or what happened when a risk was identified, it is difficult to conclude that the defined process is actually being followed.

That is why an ISO 27001 GAP analysis should not stop at asking, “Do you have this?” It needs to examine what actually happens behind the document. AresISEC does not look only at whether a policy, procedure, or other document exists. It is also important to determine whether the process described by that document exists in practice and whether there is an appropriate record of its implementation. That record does not always need to be a new document created specifically for ISO 27001. If access reviews are already performed through an existing IT system, evidence may be the record of the review and the changes made afterwards. If recovery is tested, the test results may provide the evidence. If security training is conducted, existing records can show when it took place and who participated. If suppliers are already assessed as part of procurement, there is little value in creating a parallel process simply to produce “ISO evidence.”

This is particularly important for organizations that already have established security practices. ISO 27001 implementation should not mean discarding existing ways of working and replacing them with a collection of new Word documents and spreadsheets. If a process already exists and works, the first step is to determine whether it meets the needs of the ISMS and whether its implementation can be demonstrated. Only then does it make sense to determine what needs to change. There is also another side to the problem. If certain evidence is not available during a GAP analysis, that does not automatically mean the activity has never been performed. It may be performed without the results being recorded. The evidence may exist in a system that the people participating in the assessment cannot access. The process may also be informal and depend on one person who has performed it for years, but it has never been defined in a way that allows the organization to repeat it reliably. This is why it is important to distinguish between a control that has not been implemented and one whose implementation cannot be confirmed from the available evidence.

That distinction matters for more than an audit. It matters to the organization itself. If a security process works only because one person knows what needs to be done, the organization has a problem even if that person has always done everything correctly. If nobody can determine when the last access review took place, it is difficult to know whether the next review is already overdue. If incidents are not recorded, it becomes difficult to identify recurring causes later. Evidence is therefore not paperwork that should be produced simply for a certification audit. It allows an organization to determine whether its own rules are being followed and whether its security controls are producing the expected results.

ISO/IEC 27001 does not end with writing policies. An ISMS needs to be established, implemented, maintained, and continually improved. When an ISO 27001 project becomes too focused on producing documentation, that distinction is easily lost. In the end, an organization can have a well-organized collection of policies, procedures, and registers, but one simple question remains: can you show that you actually do what they say?

Sources:
ISO – ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information security management systems
ISO – ISO/IEC TS 27008:2019 Guidelines for the assessment of information security controls
ISO – How to measure the effectiveness of information security
Do you have ISO 27001 documentation but are not sure how closely it reflects the way your organization actually works?An AresISEC ISO 27001 GAP analysis reviews existing processes and available evidence to identify what already works, what cannot yet be demonstrated, and what still needs to be established.

Security Highlights Of The Week [09/26-2]

N-able N-central Maximum-Severity RCE Exploited in Ongoing Attacks
Attackers are actively exploiting CVE-2026-86218, a maximum-severity remote code execution vulnerability in N-able N-central. The flaw can provide unauthenticated access to the RMM console, potentially allowing attackers to execute scripts, deploy tools, and initiate remote sessions across downstream endpoints managed by a compromised server.
Source: BleepingComputer

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Flaws Exploited for Root Access
Cisco Talos is tracking active exploitation of two vulnerabilities in Secure Firewall Management Center. CVE-2026-20079, rated CVSS 10.0, allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass authentication and execute scripts to obtain root access, while CVE-2026-20316 can be combined with other flaws to elevate privileges.
Source: Cisco Talos

Critical NetScaler Authentication Bypass Now Exploited in Attacks
CISA confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2026-19490, a critical authentication bypass affecting NetScaler ADC and NetScaler Gateway appliances configured for gateway or AAA functionality. The vulnerability can be exploited remotely without authentication, significantly increasing the risk for internet-facing VPN and remote-access infrastructure.
Source: SecurityWeek

Multiple State-Aligned Actors Adopt BlueMoon Chrome and Windows Zero-Day Chain
Proofpoint identified multiple espionage groups using a new exploit kit called BlueMoon, initially observed with China-aligned TA412 and rapidly adopted by additional threat clusters. The chain combines a Chromium V8 vulnerability, a sandbox escape, and the Windows kernel privilege-escalation zero-day CVE-2026-85880 to escape the browser renderer and compromise targeted systems.
Source: Proofpoint

Adobe Commerce Zero-Day Exploited to Backdoor Online Stores
Threat actors are exploiting a previously unknown Adobe Commerce and Magento vulnerability dubbed StyleSmuggler. The attack hides PHP code inside template style properties and uses failed payment processing to trigger execution, providing attackers with a stealthy path to persistent server-side access.
Source: SecurityWeek

AI-Assisted Campaign Automates PaperCut Exploitation at Scale
Researchers traced exploitation of CVE-2026-81578 and CVE-2026-82078 in PaperCut NG/MF to infrastructure showing an AI-assisted workflow spanning vulnerability research, exploit development, target discovery, execution, failure analysis, and repeated attack waves. The campaign demonstrates how AI can compress multiple stages of an exploitation operation into a more automated process.
Source: GreyNoise

Fortinet RCE Exploited to Deploy PivotC2 RAT
Threat actors are exploiting CVE-2025-25249, an unauthenticated remote code execution flaw affecting FortiOS and FortiSwitchManager. Compromised devices are being used to deploy PivotC2, a Node.js-based post-exploitation RAT that provides interactive shell access, traffic tunneling, network scanning, and configuration harvesting.
Source: SecurityWeek

ScreenConnect Activity Raises Concerns Over Unpatched File Transfer Flaw
ConnectWise disclosed a new ScreenConnect vulnerability affecting file-transfer behavior in both cloud and on-premises deployments and initially provided mitigations while a patch was being prepared. Huntress separately observed suspicious ScreenConnect installations across unrelated systems, describing the pattern as potentially consistent with worm-like activity.
Source: Huntress

Researchers Demonstrate Cross-Account ChatGPT Channel for Gmail Data Access
Check Point Research disclosed a cross-account communication path between isolated ChatGPT code-execution environments through shared Artifactory metadata. In a demonstration, attacker-controlled instructions caused a separate victim session to retrieve information from a connected Gmail account without unusual activity appearing in the visible conversation.
Source: Check Point Research

Shai-Hulud npm Supply Chain Malware Resurfaces
Researchers detected the return of Shai-Hulud 111 days after its previous major npm campaign, with malware matching the earlier @AntV attack appearing again despite newer publish-time malware scanning. Earlier versions of the worm had already expanded their credential discovery from 189 to 469 locations across developer, CI/CD, cloud, and AI-tool configurations.
Source: Aikido Security

BigBear 2.0 Bypasses MFA at 258 Microsoft 365 Organizations
The BigBear 2.0 phishing-as-a-service operation has reportedly compromised 258 organizations and collected more than 5,000 Microsoft 365 credentials. Its Evilginx2-based adversary-in-the-middle infrastructure captures credentials and authenticated session cookies, allowing attackers to hijack sessions even after victims successfully complete MFA.
Source: BleepingComputer

Hackers Drain Approximately $320 Million in Bitcoin From Liquid Network
Roughly 4,000 BTC, valued at approximately $320 million, was withdrawn from the federation wallet supporting the Liquid Network. The actors described themselves as white-hat hackers, but the incident represents a major compromise involving infrastructure used by exchanges and other financial institutions.
Source: The Register

Mathspace Breach Exposes Data of More Than One Million People
Education platform Mathspace disclosed that attackers stole data belonging to more than one million students, parents, and staff after compromising its internal Metabase reporting environment. The platform is used by thousands of schools across Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom.
Source: BleepingComputer

Check Point Fixes Two Critical VPN Certificate Flaws Enabling Unauthenticated RCE
Check Point patched two CVSS 9.8 vulnerabilities affecting VPN certificate processing in Security Gateways and management products. Under specific conditions, either flaw could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to execute code, although Check Point said it had no evidence of exploitation at the time of disclosure.
Source: The Hacker News

Ivanti Patches Multiple Critical RCE Flaws Across Enterprise Security Products
Ivanti released fixes for several critical vulnerabilities affecting Neurons for ITSM, Sentry, and Endpoint Manager Mobile. Six critical Neurons for ITSM flaws can lead to remote code execution, including missing-authorization and unsafe-deserialization issues with CVSS scores reaching 9.9.
Source: SecurityWeek

Scroll to top