FBI seizes QScan and QTRouter, China-linked platforms used to hide intrusions and target U.S. critical infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI have seized two platforms, QScan and QTRouter, used by a China-linked group to hide cyberattacks and target critical infrastructure. The operation matters because it shows how state-backed actors no longer need to build every part of an attack from scratch: they can rely on shared scanning tools, compromised devices, commercial proxy services, and rented servers. U.S. authorities attribute the activity to a group known as QTFY, which they say operated through the China-based company Nanjing Xinjiuwei Network Technology Company. According to the Justice Department, the group offered hacking services to paying clients that included China’s Ministry of State Security and the People’s Liberation Army. “The Justice Department and FBI announced court-authorized domain seizures today to deny malicious cyber actors access to two complementary hacking platforms known as “QScan” and “QTRouter,” used to target U.S. critical infrastructure and other sensitive networks. As described in court documents unsealed in the Southern District of California, a People’s Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored group known as “QTFY,” employed by China-based Nanjing Xinjiuwei Network Technology Company (南京鑫玖维网络科技有限公司), created and operated QScan and QTRouter.” reads the press release published by DoJ. According to the Justice Department, QTFY targeted NASA, the Federal Reserve, the Departments of Energy, Justice, and Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. Senate. Those are not random targets caught in a broad scan. QScan and QTRouter had different jobs. QScan searched the internet for vulnerable devices and automatically infected thousands of exposed Internet of Things devices. Those compromised routers, cameras, appliances, and other connected systems were then added to QTRouter, a proxy network used to route malicious traffic through systems located outside China. That approach makes attribution and blocking harder. A victim may see an attack coming from what appears to be a local router, a legitimate commercial proxy, or a virtual private server rented in another country. Blocking traffic by country or IP address becomes far less useful when the attacker is borrowing the identity and location of other people’s devices. “QScan scans and automatically infects thousands of “internet-of-things” (IoT) devices worldwide, which are then added to the QTRouter network of QTFY-controlled devices. QTRouter consists of these compromised IoT devices, as well as commercial proxy service devices and leased virtual private servers.” continues DoJ. “QTRouter then serves as an “obfuscation network” – meaning it allows QTFY and other malicious cyber actors to conceal the PRC-origin of their computer intrusion activities because the malicious communications appear to originate from computers (such as those compromised by QScan) that are outside of the PRC and may even be local to the targeted networks.” The government did not merely take down a website. The seized domains were hard-coded into QScan and QTRouter and used for core functions such as authentication and command-and-control communication. By taking control of those domains through a court order, the FBI made the malware platforms unable to operate as intended. This is a useful example of technical disruption rather than simple attribution. Publicly naming a group matters, but it does not stop an operator who already has access to vulnerable devices and a working relay network. Taking away the infrastructure they need to manage that network is more disruptive, at least until they rebuild it. “Because the seized domains were hard-coded into both the QScan and QTRouter malware and used for essential tasks such as communication and authentication, the court-authorized seizures made QScan and QTRouter inoperable.” DoJ states. The broader operation looks like an industrial service model. QTFY allegedly used QScan to map targets, identify weaknesses, and compromise devices; it then used QTRouter and other proxy layers to hide where the activity actually came from. Lumen’s Black Lotus Labs described the group as a “digital quartermaster,” meaning it supplied infrastructure and services that could support multiple operations at the same time. “To support its primary objectives, the quartermaster runs a secondary, completely decoupled target profiling utility called “QScan.” While the core proxy network focuses on managing stateful session paths, the QScan framework operates as the front-end scout.” reads a report published by Lumen. “The operations of this quartermaster demonstrate the high degree of industrialization occurring within China-nexus cyber operations. By shifting away from fragmented, ad hoc setups and toward shared multi-tenant utility networks, state-sponsored actors can execute complex campaigns with a high degree of anonymity and speed, and at a global scale.” The group reportedly exploited both old and newly disclosed vulnerabilities in widely deployed products, including Fortinet SSL-VPN, Citrix ADC, Microsoft Exchange, F5 BIG-IP, Apache Log4j, Atlassian Confluence, Check Point gateways, CrushFTP, Ivanti appliances, and BeyondTrust Remote Support. This is not a reminder that organisations need magic detection. It is a reminder that old vulnerabilities remain useful because somebody, somewhere, will still leave them unpatched. The attack chain also included web shells, remote-access trojans, stolen or legitimate credentials, and compromised IoT devices used as nearby relay points. That combination allows an attacker to blend into normal-looking traffic and avoids the obvious infrastructure that defenders have learned to block. A hostile connection that looks like a local consumer router is still hostile; it just has better camouflage. This seizure follows earlier FBI actions against China-linked botnets. In 2025, the FBI removed PlugX malware from more than 4,000 infected U.S. computers linked to Mustang Panda. In 2024, it disrupted a botnet of hundreds of thousands of IoT devices associated with Flax Typhoon, while in 2023 it acted against a Volt Typhoon botnet used to conceal activity targeting U.S. and foreign critical infrastructure. “For defenders, the operational lesson is straightforward. Inventory internet-facing assets, patch known vulnerabilities quickly, remove unsupported devices, monitor unusual outbound proxy traffic, and do not assume that an IP address tells you who is behind an attack. The same applies to IoT equipment: a router, camera, network appliance, or smart device left exposed and unmanaged can become part of someone else’s attack platform. “This disruption announced today is among a series of court-authorized technical operations against indiscriminate hacking activities by the PRC.” concludes DoJ. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, QTRouter)
The FBI has disrupted infrastructure associated with a technical “quartermaster” that provided reconnaissance, proxy management, and operational routing capabilities for Chinese cyber espionage activities. Black Lotus Labs, the threat research arm of Lumen Technologies, has been tracking the infrastructure for the past year and discovered the components of the framework used in attacks against U.S. critical infrastructure. According to the researchers, the provider offers a reusable service consisting of four distinct operational elements: The infrastructure was used to profile and steal data from U.S. military and defense organizations, government networks, universities and research institutions, aerospace and bioinformatics organizations, healthcare orgs, financial firms, critical infrastructure and energy companies, and enterprise software vendors.
Snowflake is ending password authentication for legacy service accounts, forcing organizations to migrate them to passwordless methods. Token Security explains why the harder challenge is identifying what uses each account, who owns it, and how much access it still needs.
Ubiquiti has released security patches for three new maximum-severity vulnerabilities that threat actors can exploit remotely without privileges. The first (tracked as CVE-2026-77537) lets unauthenticated attackers compromise unpatched devices by exploiting an improper input validation weakness in the UniFi Protect Application video surveillance management platform. Ubiquiti also addressed a CRLF injection flaw (CVE-2026-77550) that remote attackers without privileges can exploit to bypass authentication on UniFi OS devices or instances. "A malicious actor with access to the network could exploit an Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences vulnerability found in certain devices running CRLF Injection to bypass authentication to such UniFi OS devices or instances," it explained. The third maximum severity vulnerability patched today is a command injection security flaw (CVE-2026-77554) stemming from improper input validation in the UniFi Talk Application Voice over IP (VoIP) phone system.
WhatsApp says 1 billion users now use passkeys, while stronger two-step verification and caller context add new layers of account protection. WhatsApp has reached a significant security milestone: more than one billion people now use passkeys to protect access to their accounts. At the same time, Meta is adding stronger two-step verification and more information about calls from people who aren’t in a user’s contacts. Passkeys let users sign back into WhatsApp with a fingerprint, Face ID or their device’s screen-lock code instead of relying on passwords, PINs or one-time codes. WhatsApp now also allows people who use both Android and iOS devices to add more than one passkey to the same account, which removes one of the practical limitations of the earlier implementation. “More than 1 billion people now use a passkey: A passkey lets you log back into WhatsApp with your fingerprint, face ID, or screen lock code. It’s the fastest and most secure way to verify it’s really you, with no codes or PINs.” reads the announcement published by WhatsApp. “More than a billion people have already set one up, and you can now add more than one passkey to your account if you use both Android and iOS devices. To get started, go to Settings > Account > Passkeys.” For people who move between platforms, the ability to register multiple passkeys should make account recovery less dependent on a single device. It is important to highlight that WhatsApp is moving account protection away from secrets that users have to remember or type. Passkeys rely on credentials stored on the device and protected by its existing biometric or screen-lock mechanism, which also makes phishing them much harder than a traditional password or verification code. WhatsApp is also changing its two-step verification system. Until now, the additional protection relied on a six-digit PIN. The company has now upgraded it to a full password that can be longer, use letters and numbers, and include special characters. “Two-step verification is an extra protection layer that helps prevent someone from taking over your account, even if they get hold of your one-time passcode.” continues the announcement. “Until now it was a six-digit PIN, we’ve now upgraded it to a full password: longer, alphanumeric, and even with special ch@racters to make it harder to guess. If you’ve been using “123456,” this is your sign to upgrade.” That’s a small interface change with a meaningful security consequence. A short numeric PIN has a limited number of possible combinations and encourages users to choose predictable values, while a longer password gives account owners a much stronger second factor. WhatsApp makes the point in unusually direct terms, even calling out the classic 123456 choice. If that’s still protecting an account, the app has just provided a fairly unambiguous hint. The change also addresses a specific account-takeover scenario. If an attacker manages to obtain a user’s one-time registration code, the additional password can still prevent the takeover from succeeding. The third change targets a different problem: social engineering. On Android, WhatsApp will now provide additional context when someone outside the user’s contacts calls. The information can include whether the number comes from another country and whether the caller shares any groups with the recipient. That gives users a little more information before they decide whether to answer. “When you get a call from someone not saved in your contacts, a little context can help you decide whether to pick up. On Android, you’ll now see more information about a non-contact caller, like whether the number is from a different country and if you have any groups in common.” concludes the announcement. “Scammers rely on urgency – now you can take a beat with some more info before answering.” It’s a simple addition, but it addresses a common weakness in fraud attempts: pressure. An unexpected call creates a sense of urgency, and attackers often use that moment to persuade someone to disclose information, click a link or continue the conversation on their terms. Giving the recipient more context doesn’t stop a scammer from calling. It gives the user a reason to pause before answering. Taken together, the three changes target different parts of the same account-security problem. Passkeys make authentication harder to steal, stronger two-step verification provides another barrier when a one-time code is compromised, and caller context gives users more information before a potentially suspicious interaction begins. The billion-user passkey figure is also worth watching beyond WhatsApp. It suggests that phishing-resistant authentication is no longer an experimental security feature limited to security-conscious users. At this scale, the challenge shifts from convincing people that passkeys are safer to making sure they understand when and how to use them. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, WhatsApp)
The U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) on Wednesday announced the disruption of two hacking platforms named QScan and QTRouter operated by Chinese threat actors to target critical infrastructure and other sensitive networks in the country. The activity has been attributed to a Chinese state-sponsored group known as QTFY, employed by Nanjing Xinjiuwei Network Technology Company (南京鑫玖维网络科技有限公司).&
Cybersecurity researchers have disclosed details of a new adversary-in-the-middle (AitM) phishing toolkit called NovaCookies that's used as a proxy to redirect Microsoft 365 sign-ins, while capturing authenticated sessions in the process. In a report shared with The Hacker News ahead of publication, Island characterized the $320/month service as a subscription-based phishing platform that
Cybersecurity researchers have disclosed details of a phishing-as-a-service (PhaaS) platform built to strip Apple's Activation Lock from stolen devices, using rented AI voice agents that call theft victims posing as Apple Support and ask for their device passcode. SOCRadar Threat Research Unit (STRU) said the platform, which it tracks as AnonyMousKIT, is credit-metered and drives lures across
The Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) has announced that a breach last year exposed customer and employee information. The museum says that on July 11, 2025, it detected suspicious activity on its systems that had started four days earlier. A month later, the investigation confirmed that the network was compromised. At the time, the type of exposed data could not be determined, and the first results of the investigation became available in late February 2026. More than a year after the discovery of the data breach incident, the museum identified that the following information may have been accessed by the attacker: LACMA says it has notified law enforcement authorities about the incident and sent personalized data breach notifications to impacted individuals. Recipients are recommended to monitor their bank accounts for suspicious activity, consider placing a security freeze or fraud alert on their credit file, and report identity theft attempts to their financial institutions and law enforcement.
Norway ’s shared government infrastructure suffered a third DDoS attack, disrupting digital services but showing no signs of data compromise. Norway ‘s shared digital government infrastructure has been hit by another distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack that disrupted services used by citizens, businesses and public agencies. The incident began at 03:38 CEST on Monday, August 24, and targeted infrastructure operated by the Norwegian Digitalisation Agency, Digdir, together with its service provider Vivicta. The timing matters because this isn’t an isolated event. Digdir says it’s the third DDoS attack against its services in a short period, following incidents in June and on August 3. “The Norwegian Directorate for Digitalisation (Digdir) has been subjected to a denial of service attack (DDoS attack) that has been ongoing since 03:38 on the night of Monday, August 24.” reads the statement published by Digdir Agency. “This is the third time in a short time that this type of attack has been directed at Digdir’s solutions. Digdir is working closely with our subcontractor Vivicta. NSM and the Norwegian Data Protection Authority have also been notified of the case.” That status update refers to the test environment, but the underlying attack also affected production services. Digdir reported that several shared services became completely unavailable for short periods, while others remained accessible but suffered connection failures, slow responses and longer-than-usual login times. Digdir operates several pieces of Norway’s shared public-sector infrastructure. Among them are ID-porten, MinID, Maskinporten, eFormidling, eInnsyn, the Contact and Reservation Register, Ansattporten and other services used by government agencies and external applications. That makes an attack on Digdir more significant than an ordinary website outage. When a shared authentication service goes down, the disruption can propagate to services that aren’t themselves under attack. That’s exactly what happened. Altinn, Norway’s central platform for communication between citizens, businesses and government, was also affected, while other public services relying on ID-porten experienced login problems. Earlier attacks this summer produced similar effects, including disruption to access to Helsenorge, NAV and Skatteetaten. The technical distinction is important: the attackers didn’t need to break into every downstream service. They could create disruption simply by overwhelming a shared dependency. And that’s often the uncomfortable reality of modern public infrastructure. The weakest point isn’t necessarily the service citizens see on their screens. It can be the common authentication, messaging or data-exchange layer underneath it. Digdir has stressed that the incident is about availability, not evidence of a successful intrusion. The agency also says it has found no indication that personal data was exposed. Digdir has notified Norway’s National Security Authority, NSM, and the Data Protection Authority, Datatilsynet, as part of its response. “There are no indications that the attack has led to a security breach or that personal data has been compromised, says Director Frode Danielsen at Digdir.” continues the statement. That distinction deserves attention because cyberattack doesn’t automatically mean “data theft”. In this case, the confirmed impact is service disruption, while there is currently no evidence that attackers compromised Digdir’s systems or accessed personal information. The operational consequences are still serious. Public-sector users may see failed connections, slow responses or authentication problems even though the underlying applications themselves haven’t been compromised. The June incident already demonstrated how much disruption a DDoS attack against Digdir’s infrastructure can cause. That attack targeted ID-porten through Vivicta’s network infrastructure and temporarily affected services including ID-porten, MinID, Maskinporten, eInnsyn and eFormidling. Another attack followed on August 3. Digdir restored normal operations the following day, but the agency said the incident had again affected several shared services and that it would review the event together with Vivicta and other partners. Now there’s a third incident. That repetition is more interesting from a defensive perspective than the raw duration of any single outage. Digdir and Vivicta are clearly able to mitigate the attacks and restore services. The harder question is whether repeated attacks against the same shared infrastructure can keep generating enough operational friction to become a recurring problem for the wider public sector. This is where DDoS stops being just a bandwidth problem. A sufficiently persistent campaign can force defenders to keep changing traffic controls, filtering rules and protection measures, while legitimate users continue to depend on the same infrastructure. Digdir’s own status updates show that dynamic clearly. On August 24, the agency first reported improvement, then said several solutions were completely down, followed by further stabilization efforts. There is currently no official attribution for the attacks. Norwegian media have raised the possibility of Russian involvement, but that remains speculation rather than an established finding. That distinction matters. A DDoS campaign can be politically motivated, financially motivated, conducted for disruption or simply intended to demonstrate capability. Without technical evidence and an official attribution process, assigning responsibility to a particular state or group would be premature. What is established is the target and the effect. The attacks repeatedly hit infrastructure that sits underneath a large number of Norwegian digital public services. That’s enough to make the incidents strategically relevant without adding an attribution story that the evidence doesn’t yet support. The Norwegian case is also a useful reminder that cybersecurity isn’t limited to confidentiality and integrity. Availability is a security property too, particularly when the affected systems provide national digital services. A compromised database is an obvious security incident. An authentication service that repeatedly becomes unavailable can create a different kind of problem: citizens can’t access services, businesses can’t complete procedures and government agencies may struggle to perform routine operations. Digdir says its services have largely stabilized, although some disruptions remain. As of the latest incident updates, ID-porten still had limitations, eSignering remained unavailable because of those ID-porten restrictions, and some users were still reporting connection problems or increased response times with Maskinporten. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, newsletter)
Confirm this action.
Leaving now will discard your changes.