Cloud application hosting platform Northflank is warning customers to rotate all credentials and secrets stored on its platform after a security breach led to unauthorized use of customers' AI API keys. Northflank is a cloud platform that allows developers to deploy and manage applications, containers, databases, and AI applications without managing the underlying infrastructure. The company disclosed a security incident on October 30, warning customers to immediately rotate their environment variables and API keys after receiving a threat alert from cloud security company Wiz. Soon after, Northflank told all customers to assume their environment variables had been decrypted and that the secrets stored within them were stolen. "Assume all environment variables have been decrypted. Disable/rotate all keys," Northflank warned in an October 30 update.
Blockchain intelligence firm Chainalysis has disclosed a security incident after attackers used what it describes as "offensive agentic techniques" to gain unauthorized access to its internal systems and tools. The company says some customer information was accessed, including names, email addresses, user IDs, and organizational role labels, but claims there is no evidence that sensitive investigation data or authentication credentials were exposed. Chainalysis provides blockchain analytics tools used by law enforcement, government agencies, cryptocurrency exchanges, and financial institutions to trace cryptocurrency transactions and investigate crimes such as fraud, ransomware, and money laundering. On Friday, roughly 5:14 PM ET, Chainalysis published a security incident disclosure along with the full text of the email sent to affected customers.
American blockchain analysis firm Chainalysis said it was the target of a cybersecurity incident in which an external actor accessed non-sensitive customer data. However, the company noted that the breach did not result in unauthorized access to its investigation content, authentication credentials, or session tokens. "This month, Chainalysis detected an external actor using offensive agentic
The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) on Friday added two security flaws impacting Ivanti Connect Secure (ICS) to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, following active exploitation in the wild. The vulnerabilities are listed below - CVE-2026-111357 (CVSS score: 8.8) - A missing authentication for a critical function vulnerability that could allow a
Binance, the world's largest crypto exchange, has linked the theft of about $6.3 billion in cryptocurrency to a DevOps engineer's compromised laptop. The crypto exchange said the access let attackers submit unauthorized withdrawal transactions after they accessed a service container, and it hasn't yet found evidence of a leaked wallet private key. "To be clear: the attacker did not simply use one engineer's permissions, and this was not a single 'one-click' action. It involved a more complex attack process. Our investigation has not attributed responsibility to any individual," Binance Co-CEO Richard Teng said. Binance also said it "uncovered additional points of breach" but was "still gathering the facts, and will share more directly as we have them." The company confirmed the breach in a statement shared with BleepingComputer on Thursday and reassured customers that their funds were safe.
The alert is critical. The fix is known. And the ticket sits in a queue for days. Security teams understand the risk, but the people who keep applications available need proof that the change won’t break anything. Their concerns are practical. An IPS protection could block legitimate traffic. A configuration change could interrupt a service. An endpoint policy could affect an application
Binance probes suspicious crypto transfers worth up to $5.8 billion as Tether and Circle freeze $1.79 billion in stablecoins linked to the activity. Binance is investigating a potential security incident after billions of dollars in cryptocurrency moved from wallets linked to the exchange on October 29. The transfers raised concerns about a possible hack, while Tether and Circle moved to freeze stablecoins linked to the suspicious activity. The full scope of the incident remains unclear, and the reported outflows shouldn’t automatically be treated as confirmed losses. According to The Block, blockchain analyst Spreek identified approximately $3.55 billion in incoming transfers to an initially unidentified wallet. “Onchain data flagged by analyst Spreek shows about $3.55 billion in incoming transfers to the unlabeled wallet, with nearly $900 million subsequently moved across other wallets.” The Block reports. “Conor Grogan, a senior director and product leader at Coinbase, says the amount is up to $5.8 billion.” Coinbase executive Conor Grogan estimated that the total value of the movements could reach $5.8 billion. I think the number is potentially up to $5.8B. Tether has blacklisted a large portion of this. https://t.co/ANz2DiXc8S pic.twitter.com/BfscU7ENSo — Conor (@jconorgrogan) October 29, 2026 These figures come from blockchain tracking and different estimates, so they don’t necessarily represent the amount stolen. BREAKING: The Binance hack has grown to about $5.6B drained across Ethereum, Bitcoin and Tron, on-chain trackers say. If confirmed, it would be the biggest crypto heist on record. Tether and Circle have frozen about $1.8B in stablecoins, and Circle says it acted "in… https://t.co/UzgOxw9jLE pic.twitter.com/9fBEaaZrWj — International Cyber Digest (@IntCyberDigest) October 29, 2026 Binance acknowledged the reports and said its security team was investigating. The company had not publicly confirmed a breach in the initial reports, making it important to distinguish between suspicious transactions and a verified compromise. “We are aware of reports of a potential security issue and we are actively investigating.” He wrote in a post on X. “Our security teams are reviewing all relevant information with urgency, and we will provide updates through official Binance channels as soon as we have verified information. Users should remain cautious of scams and should not trust unofficial links, messages, or requests for account information.” We are aware of reports of a potential security issue and we are actively investigating. Our security teams are reviewing all relevant information with urgency, and we will provide updates through official Binance channels as soon as we have verified information. Users should… — Yi He (@heyibinance) October 29, 2026 This statement, reported by The Block, reflects the company’s position at the time. Binance also urged users to be cautious of unofficial messages and links, a relevant warning whenever a major security incident attracts public attention. Blockchain records showed large transfers from Binance-linked hot wallets to a wallet that wasn’t previously identified as belonging to the exchange. Hot wallets hold cryptocurrency in systems connected to the internet, allowing exchanges to process withdrawals and other transactions quickly. Their online availability also makes their security controls particularly important. The transfers involved Ethereum, stablecoins and other cryptocurrencies. Some funds were later moved to additional wallets, making it harder to track all the transactions. Investigators must determine who initiated the transfers, whether they were authorized and whether an attacker gained control of the wallets. They also need to establish whether the funds belonged to customers or Binance itself. Large transfers alone don’t prove a hack. However, unusual movements involving large amounts of cryptocurrency require immediate investigation. One of the most significant developments was the response from the companies behind two major stablecoins, USDT and USDC. According to The Block and Forbes, Tether and Circle froze approximately $1.79 billion in stablecoins associated with the suspicious transfers in the initial reports. The figures subsequently changed as the investigation developed. Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino later said the company had frozen more than $1.567 billion in USDT linked to a potential Binance exchange hack. These amounts reflect reported actions at different points in time and shouldn’t be combined without checking whether they refer to distinct assets and addresses. Tether froze more than 1.567B USDT related to a potential Binance exchange hack. Protecting the industry and our partners is our main priority. Stay safe everyone. — Paolo Ardoino (@paoloardoino) October 29, 2026 The freezes demonstrate an important feature of centralized stablecoins: their issuers can restrict transfers from addresses they control through their token contracts. This can help contain suspected theft, but it doesn’t provide the same control over assets such as Ether or Bitcoin. Nor does freezing a balance guarantee that every transferred asset can be recovered. The incident also highlights a practical tension in crypto security. Stablecoins offer the convenience of blockchain transfers, but their centralized issuers retain powers that can make a difference during an investigation. Binance maintained that customer funds were safe, while co-founder Changpeng Zhao, widely known as CZ, said the activity appeared to be a hack. Zhao no longer manages Binance’s platform, but said he expected customers’ funds to be fully covered. The company said its user funds were “completely safe.” “Our teams are aware of reports of a potential security issue and are actively investigating. User funds are completely safe. Our security teams are reviewing all relevant information with urgency, and we will provide updates through official Binance channels as soon as we have verified information.” the company states. “Users should remain cautious of scams and should not trust unofficial links, messages, or requests for account information.” That assurance is important, but it doesn’t replace a technical explanation of how the transfers occurred or independent confirmation of the final impact. A security investigation must establish more than whether an exchange can cover a potential loss. It should determine how the activity was authorized, whether credentials or signing mechanisms were compromised, which systems were involved and whether the attacker retained any access. For customers, the immediate priority is to avoid becoming a secondary victim. Attackers often exploit uncertainty around a major incident to distribute fake announcements, impersonate support staff and direct users to fraudulent websites. Users should rely on official Binance communication channels, avoid unexpected links and never disclose passwords, authentication codes or wallet recovery phrases in response to unsolicited messages. Security teams should also watch for phishing emails that use the incident to demand urgent account verification. Attackers may exploit the situation to launch a separate scam. The key lesson is that blockchain transparency does not guarantee operational security. Public ledgers show transactions, but they don’t reveal who authorized them, how attackers may have gained access or whether an exchange’s internal security controls failed. As the investigation continues, it’s important to distinguish between reported transfers, confirmed theft and funds that can be recovered. The figures may change as analysts trace more wallets and stablecoin issuers take further action. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Binance)
42 publicly listable cloud buckets containing 18 billion files, including exposed credentials, database dumps and backups. The Ransomnews research team counted 484,142 publicly listable cloud storage buckets in October 2026, holding 18.05 billion files. They built the count from the search engines that index open cloud storage and published it as the Ransomnews Cloud Exposure Index, written by Mantas Sasnauskas. “No file was opened for this index. Every number below comes from bucket names, file extensions, file counts and last-modified timestamps. That is a deliberate limit. It keeps the research on the right side of the line, and it turns out to be enough to see where the sensitive material concentrates.” Ransomnews states. “We are calling it the Ransomnews Cloud Exposure Index, and we will rerun it quarterly so the numbers can be compared over time.” The researchers used bucket names, file types, file counts and last-modified dates to collect their data. They did not open any files, allowing them to identify where sensitive information might be stored without accessing the content. They plan to repeat the research every three months to track changes over time. Amazon S3 accounts for 72% of the exposed buckets, roughly in line with its share of the market. This does not mean S3 has weaker security than other providers. Azure Blob, however, appears 2.5 to 3.6 times more often than expected among buckets named for backups, data exports and payroll records. The researchers also found 321,058 files related to credentials and keys. Of the exposed .env files, 67% were last modified in 2026. Below is the split by provider, from a snapshot taken on October 7: ProviderOpen bucketsShareAmazon S3347,98471.9%Azure Blob68,53214.2%Google Cloud Storage53,13111.0%DigitalOcean Spaces11,0692.3%Alibaba OSS3,4260.7%Total484,142100% A lot of these buckets are public on purpose, holding website assets, CDN mirrors, open datasets and podcast archives. So the index isn’t 484,142 breaches. It’s the pool where breaches hide, and the rest of the report narrows it down to the stores that should never have been listable. “Azure, by a wide margin relative to its size. Azure Blob holds 14.2% of open buckets, but 37% of the 1,459 buckets with “backup” in the name, 42% of the 399 named for exports, and 51% of the 505 carrying HR or payroll terms.” continues the report. “Buckets named for logs, customers and databases sit at 35% to 36%, all around two and a half times Azure’s baseline.” The skew only shows up for operational data. Buckets named “dev” sit at Azure’s baseline of 15 percent, and “test” and “staging” fall below it, at 9 and 7 percent. The authors suspect Azure storage accounts more often hold line-of-business data such as backups, exports and HR systems that enterprises run on Microsoft, while S3 and Google Cloud carry more application assets. They call it a hypothesis the counts suggest and don’t prove, and it’s the first thing they want to test next time. By sector, retail and e-commerce names lead with 5,666 buckets, mostly storefront assets. The more worrying number is that names tied to regulated sectors (finance, healthcare, education, government, legal and HR) appear on 10,891 unique open buckets. Those are the places where a stray file most likely holds personal, health or financial records, and where regulators expect to hear about it. Sector (by bucket name)Open bucketsFiles in themRetail and e-commerce5,666269.9MFinance and insurance3,50858.0MHealthcare2,70947.9MMedia and entertainment2,696136.2MEducation2,39360.6MGaming2,29679.0MTravel and hospitality1,714118.7MReal estate1,13760.7MGovernment and public sector1,00036.2MLegal97811.3MCrypto63011.9MHR and payroll5058.4M Healthcare-related names appear in 2,709 buckets containing 47.9 million files. The researchers identified them using terms such as “hospital” (135 buckets), “patient” (135), “clinic” (277) and “dental” (331). HR and payroll is the smallest sector, with 505 buckets, 259 of which are hosted on Azure. These figures are based on names, not proof of ownership. The search matches parts of words, so “store” can refer to object storage as well as shops. A single bucket can also appear in two sectors. The exposed buckets also list about 4.7 million database and dump files, 15,130 mailbox archives, and tens of millions of spreadsheets and documents. Credential files are particularly concerning because they can turn a cloud misconfiguration into a real intrusion. File typeWhat it isFiles listed.pemCertificates and private keys113,285.envApp secrets and API keys80,495.p12Certificate bundles with keys33,268.keystoreJava and Android keystores27,229.ppkPuTTY SSH private keys24,302.pfxWindows certificate bundles23,352.ovpnOpenVPN client configs15,079.jksJava keystores2,421.htpasswdWeb server password files695.tfstateTerraform infrastructure state475.kdbxKeePass password vaults457 Each of these exists to grant access. A .env file is where developers keep database passwords and API keys. A .tfstate file is Terraform’s record of a whole cloud setup, often with secrets in plain text, and a .kdbx vault is encrypted but now open to anyone who wants to guess passwords offline. Some .pem files are public certificates and some files are test fixtures, so the counts are a ceiling on live secrets and not a measure of them. It’s still a big ceiling. Database files make up most of the sensitive material by volume: File typeWhat it usually holdsFiles listed.sqliteEmbedded app databases2,561,807.bakDatabase and server backups752,055.sqlDatabase dumps687,446.sqlite3Embedded app databases488,176.dumpDatabase dumps176,603.mdb / .accdbMicrosoft Access databases36,467.dmpMemory and crash dumps12,809.pst / .ost / .mboxMailbox archives15,130.emlSaved emails4,549,665.csvData exports and recordsat least 69,580,112.xlsx / .xlsSpreadsheets42,544,997.docxWord documents24,936,788.pdfDocuments, invoices, scansat least 106,191,393.logApplication and server logsat least 61,310,809 The exposed buckets contain thousands of virtual disk images, including VMware, Hyper-V and QEMU files. A single disk image can contain an entire server, including credentials. Some exposures involve active systems. Of 80,495 .env files, 67% were last modified in 2026. Certificates and SQLite databases include both recent and older files. Backups appear older, with 89% of the 752,055 .bak files last modified before 2025. Almost all PuTTY key files date from 2024. Recent leaks need urgent attention, while long-standing exposures point to poor security management. The problem is ongoing: at least 113.6 million files were added to publicly listable buckets in the seven days before September 9. Over the previous 30 days, these included more than 21,000 SQL dumps, nearly 21,000 backup files, 4,477 .pem files and 1,298 .env files. Public .env files can expose database passwords that ransomware affiliates and initial access brokers look for. Similar credentials appear in stolen-data logs, but in this case, attackers do not need to infect a device. They only need to search for exposed files. Cloud providers already offer settings to prevent public access. Organizations should enable S3 Block Public Access, disable anonymous access to Azure Blob storage, and enable public access prevention in Google Cloud. These controls should apply at account or organization level to prevent new storage buckets from becoming public. Organizations should also scan their storage for sensitive files such as .env, .sql, .bak, .pem, .ppk, .tfstate and .kdbx. Terraform state files and virtual disk images should be treated as secrets, stored privately, encrypted and monitored. Backups should never be publicly accessible, and recovery procedures must be tested. One exposed bucket may be a mistake, but many often indicate a wider process failure. Organizations need to fix the underlying security controls, not just individual buckets. The research has some limitations. The team queried search engines on October 25, while the bucket list was current to October 7 and the newest indexed file dated September 9. File-level data may therefore be about a month old. Counts are also capped at one million per query, so researchers split larger categories into date ranges and added the results. Some limits apply. The team queried the search engines on October 25. The bucket list was current to October 7 and the newest indexed file was dated September 9, so file-level figures lag by about a month. The index caps any single count at one million, so larger types were split into date windows and summed. A last-modified date shows when a file was written, not when it was exposed, and a listed file isn’t proof that its contents can be read. No bucket is named in the report. Exposures with a known owner in regulated sectors are going through responsible disclosure, with national CERTs copied where the owner is public sector or doesn’t respond. “Rotate any secret that has ever sat in a public bucket. Closing the bucket does not un-leak the key. Assume anything that was listable was copied.” conlcudes the report. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Cloud Buckets)
26,400 credentials that developers left in public code on Gitee, a Chinese code-hosting service, still worked when a researcher tested them. Anyone who copied one from that code could have used it. Independent researcher Ben Zimmermann found them by scanning 7.25 million public Gitee repositories and reported the results on October 28. Most were keys for cloud and AI services, led by
ENGIE says attackers accessed French customers’ contact and energy contract data through a partner sales tool. Banking data was not affected. French multinational energy company ENGIE warned customers in France that attackers accessed personal information through a sales tool used by some business partners. The exposed data includes contact details and energy contract information that could help fraudsters impersonate the supplier. The company says its internal IT systems weren’t compromised and banking information wasn’t affected. It has blocked the attackers’ access, notified the relevant authorities and contacted affected customers, according to a spokesperson who spoke to BleepingComputer. According to notification emails sent to affected customers, the incident involved a tool used by partners to sell the company’s electricity and natural gas offers. The notification confirms that attackers gained unauthorized access to personal information stored in the sales tool. “We are informing you that an act of cyber-malice recently affected a tool used by some of our partners to market energy offers. As part of this incident, unauthorized access to your personal data was identified.” reads the notification. The compromised information includes customers’ names, postal addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers, customer IDs, contract numbers and energy supply identifiers. The company hasn’t disclosed the partner or platform involved. It also hasn’t revealed how many customers were affected, when the intrusion began, or when it was discovered. For electricity customers, these include the delivery point identifier (PDL). For gas customers, they include the metering and estimation point (PCE). ENGIE says financial information wasn’t affected and that its investigation indicates the exposure was limited to contact details and certain contract information. That reduces one category of risk but doesn’t eliminate financial fraud. Attackers can use accurate customer information to persuade victims to disclose additional data or make payments. Anyway, the exposed data could support impersonation scams. The company warned customers to watch for attempts to obtain further information or induce payments. A contract number, however, doesn’t prove that a caller is legitimate. It may simply show that the person has access to an exposed record. Customers should verify unexpected requests through trusted channels, even when the sender knows their personal details. ENGIE hasn’t attributed the attack to a specific group, and at this time no ransomware group has claimed responsibility for the attack. Experts recommend visiting ENGIE’s official website or app directly instead of signing in through links received by email. Customers should also be cautious with unexpected calls and messages. If someone requests a payment, password or additional personal information, they should end the exchange and verify the request using independently obtained official contact details. Customers should never share SMS verification codes, passwords or banking details with someone who contacts them unexpectedly. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, data breach)
Confirm this action.
Leaving now will discard your changes.