The U.S. Department of Justice announced a $400 million settlement with TikTok, ByteDance, and affiliated companies over allegations that they violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The TikTok social media platform, owned by the Chinese technology company ByteDance, allows users to create, watch, and share short-form videos. In 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against TikTok and its parent company, alleging violations of COPPA dating back to 2019. In 2019, Musical.ly, TikTok’s predecessor, agreed to a $5.7 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) over allegations of illegally collecting personal data from users under 13 without parental consent. Last year, the FTC referred a new investigation to the DoJ, claiming that TikTok continued to breach COPPA rules despite its 2019 commitment to comply with the rules.
A breach at South Korea's government-backed startup platform exposed encrypted personal data after an encryption key was included in an API. Penta Security explains why encryption keys must be securely managed and kept separate from the data they protect.
Slovakia warns that vulnerable speed cameras could expose vehicle data, enable remote access and provide attackers with a foothold into public networks. Slovakia’s National Security Authority, NBÚ, recently issued a warning about several road speed cameras, calling them a significant cyber threat. The alert is not about someone deleting a speeding ticket. It is about connected devices that collect vehicle data, communicate with other systems, and may contain remote-access functions that the operator cannot fully control. The Slovak authority examined a sample of the NERO R-ONE camera system at the request of the Interior Ministry. It named three product lines in its warning: NERO R-ONE devices sold by Cyprus-based SODASUS, Cordon-series speed cameras made by Russia’s Simicon, and Cordon-series products sold by Croatia’s NEROline. “The National Security Authority warns of a significant cyber threat associated with the use of several types of road speed cameras.” reads the alert. “A security analysis has identified several risks and recommends that affected entities identify the products in question in their infrastructure.” The problems went beyond a simple configuration issue. NBÚ found differences between the documented and actual communication settings, uncertainty about where the hardware and software came from, software that did not match the declared version, and weak security protections. “The security analysis identified several risks, including the true origin of the camera hardware and software, inconsistency between the documented and detected configuration of the product’s communication interfaces, and pre-configured remote access and product management mechanisms.” the agency wrote on LinkedIn. That last point deserves attention. A road camera should be managed by the organisation that owns it, under controls that it can inspect, configure and audit. If a device includes pre-set remote-access or management mechanisms outside the customer’s full control, it creates a blind spot in a system that may sit on a public-sector network or communicate with other operational services. Speed cameras do much more than take pictures and measure speed. They photograph vehicles, record timestamps, process licence-plate data, store evidence and send information to backend systems used by authorities. Depending on the setup, they may also connect to mobile networks, roadside equipment, police systems, municipal platforms or third-party maintenance services. If attackers compromise a camera, they could access data, change or delete records, manipulate how it measures or reports violations, or shut it down. If the network lacks proper segmentation, they could also use the camera as a foothold to reach other systems. The camera may not be the real target. It could simply be the unlocked door. The warning aims to alert essential-service operators and other organisations that these road cameras could pose a serious cybersecurity risk. In the wrong circumstances, attackers could use them to disrupt networks, systems or services. The Slovak Interior Ministry reportedly took the equipment out of its pilot deployment while the matter was investigated. Public reporting also says the ministry asked the supplier to remove the units and replace them with equipment meeting Slovak and EU legal, technical and security requirements. The Russian connection adds an obvious geopolitical dimension, but it should not become a substitute for technical analysis. NBÚ did not say that every device was actively spying on users or that the equipment contained a proven backdoor. Its warning is about identified security risks, limited operator control, uncertainty over hardware and software provenance, and remote-management mechanisms that could not be fully accounted for. That is enough reason to take action. Security checks for connected public devices cannot rely only on the brand, the country listed on the invoice or the vendor’s claims. Operators should know exactly what software and firmware the device runs, how remote access works and who controls it. They should also use independent security testing, secure updates and network segmentation. The same lesson applies beyond Slovakia. Smart cameras, licence-plate readers, parking sensors, environmental monitors, traffic lights and roadside communication systems are becoming part of public infrastructure. They are often cheap, easy to overlook and managed by public agencies, contractors and manufacturers. That makes them just as important to secure as other critical systems. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Speed Cameras)
A package gets installed. A login prompt opens. A box sits exposed to the internet. Nothing looks unusual yet. That’s roughly the mood this week. Trusted tools turn hostile, old weak spots get fresh attention, AI makes exploit work cheaper, and researchers keep finding attacks that sound harder than they actually are. Plenty to clean up. Here’s the short version. ⚡ Threat of the Week U.S.
Cybersecurity researchers have flagged two new malware families called WordlistLoader and SynkLoader that's used to deliver next-stage payloads and likely sell access to ransomware groups. According to findings from Gen Digital, WordlistLoader is being used to deliver Amatera Stealer (aka ACR Stealer or AcridRain Stealer) via ClearFake campaigns, which employ the ClickFix (aka FakeCaptcha)
Security Affairs Malware newsletter includes a collection of the best articles and research on malware in the international landscape Malware Newsletter Akira Hits Safe Mode: Ransomware Rebooting Around EDR Multi-Functional Linux Botnet “Evooo1Bot” StubMaker RubyGems Campaign Delivers a Windows Infostealer Hunting MacSync Stealer infrastructure through behavioral pivots Manic: Blend between Banking Malware & Spyware Clop Returns with Custom Implant in Mass-Extortion Campaign The ToxicPanda Never Sleeps: ToxicPanda 2.0 Prepares its Next Strike on Mobile Striking gold: Inside the GoldDigger Android malware SilkParasite: Tracking a China-Nexus APT Across Central Asia Prompting the Payload: How an npm Supply Chain Attack Delivers the RedC2 AI-Powered Linux Implant The invisible passenger in your car Malware Crypting Services and the Threat Actors Who Sell Them Grandoreiro goes north: From Brazil to Mexico with a new DLL sideloading campaign Survival of~the~Stealthiest: Evolving Low-Entropy Ransomware via~Genetic Algorithms Malformer: A Multi-Modal Malware Detector Using Transformers XAI-Guided Graph-Based Feature Engineering and Heterogeneous Ensemble Learning for Android Malware Detection An Explainable Deep Learning Pipeline for Malware Family Classification: GAF Image Encoding and API-Grounded LLM Interpretation Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, newsletter)
Iran-linked hackers shut down a UK power plant for four days in the first confirmed attack of its kind, concurrent with water infrastructure attacks across 12 US states. Iran-linked hackers shut down a British power plant for four days in what The Telegraph describes as the most successful cyberattack of its kind against UK energy infrastructure. “Iran shut down a British power plant for four days in an unprecedented cyber attack, The Telegraph can disclose.” reads the report published by The Telegraph. “It is thought to be the first time that hackers affiliated to the Iranian regime have succeeded in closing down such a facility in the UK, and is believed to be the most successful cyber attack of its kind.” British officials did not name the power plant because of security concerns. Staff worked for four days to restore it, but the plant was small and the outage did not affect the UK’s wider power supply. Still, the government warned power companies and businesses about the incident and provided guidance on how to respond. The attack was reported to the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), part of GCHQ, which helps protect the UK’s critical infrastructure. The NCSC did not comment on the specific incident. The US water infrastructure attacks hit dozens of wastewater treatment plants across 12 states, causing flooding and loss of pressure from taps. Authorities in affected areas told customers to boil water. The first reports came from Minnesota on July 26, followed by similar breaches in Michigan, Georgia, South Dakota, and New Jersey. The FBI attributed those incidents to “malicious cyber actors”; US government sources later confirmed the threat most likely originated in Tehran. The UK attack is not thought to have been designed to harm civilians. The more probable intent was to demonstrate that hackers linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps could gain access to UK infrastructure and shut it down at will. A four-day outage at a small generator that nobody outside the industry noticed is, from that perspective, a successful proof of concept. Iran has accelerated its cyberattacks on Western countries since the US and Israel began air strikes in February. Suspected Iranian operations have been reported in Germany, Poland, Finland, Belgium, and Albania, with Israel and other Middle Eastern countries remaining the most frequent targets. In March, the NCSC advised British organisations to review their security posture in light of the wider conflict. NCSC chief executive Richard Horne said in June that the agency had handled more than 200 attacks on critical national infrastructure in the previous year alone. The timing is awkward for the intelligence and security committee, which oversees UK spying agencies. “Experts have long warned that the UK is unprepared for the scale of the threat of malicious cyber attacks from foreign adversaries, and the intelligence and security committee, which oversees spying agencies, reported last year that the chance of an Iranian cyber attack on British infrastructure was “unlikely”.” continues the report. A Cabinet Office risk assessment published last month placed the probability of a serious and successful cyberattack on domestic infrastructure at between five and twenty-five percent. The same document warned that AI is making attacks faster and cheaper to run, and is lowering the technical bar for anyone wanting to attempt them. The government’s public response leaned hard on the size of the target. A government source told The Telegraph: “We have thresholds for important generators to legally notify us of cyber activity, and this site is nowhere near. It’s a very small-scale site, less than a rounding error compared to grid capacity.” A government spokesman said the UK has a strong and resilient energy system and that the incident never threatened the wider power network. While both statements are technically true, they do not answer a key question: should it be considered acceptable for even a small power plant to remain offline for four days? Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Iran-Linked Hackers)
Windows named pipes provide fast interprocess communication, but weak access controls can expose privileged services to untrusted processes. ThreatLocker explains how endpoint verification, command authorization, strict input validation, and narrowly scoped privileges can help secure named-pipe communication.
UMass Amherst researchers showed expired Visa contactless cards can make real purchases by exploiting an unsigned expiry field in Visa’s EMV kernel. Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst demonstrated at USENIX Security 2026 in Baltimore that expired Visa contactless credit cards can complete real purchases, including transactions at live retail and grocery merchants, by exploiting a gap in how the payment protocol handles expiration dates. The paper is titled “Zombie Cards Back Online: Reviving Expired Credit Cards for Contactless Payments,” and the name is accurate. Raja Hasnain Anwar, Gerard DeCunha, and Muhammad Taqi Raza built the attack around a structural weakness in EMV, the contactless payment protocol used by Visa, Mastercard, American Express, and Discover. “A central source of fragility is that the EMV contactless protocol is a selectively authenticated transaction flow. Many data objects are exchanged in plaintext between the card and terminal [2], and only a subset is later bound to cryptographic verification via Offline Data Authentication (ODA) and issuer-verified cryptograms.” reads the paper. “In consequence, an adversary who obtains a man-in-the-middle position on the NFC channel can tamper with decision-critical fields that are consumed by the terminal but are not end-to-end integrity protected. Prior NFC attacks [10–12, 44], including relay-based manin-the-middle techniques, exploit this gap by manipulating transaction-relevant objects in transit while leaving cryptographic checks intact.” The attack exploits a specific design decision in Visa’s Kernel 3, the software layer that implements the EMV protocol for Visa transactions. A Visa contactless transaction presents the expiration date twice: once in a field the payment terminal reads (tag 5F24, the Application Expiration Date) and once in a field the issuing bank reads (tag 57, Track 2 Equivalent Data). These two representations should be tied together by a cryptographic signature, but in Visa’s implementation they aren’t. The relay attack changes only the expiry date that the payment terminal sees, replacing it with a future date while leaving the data sent to the bank unchanged. The card’s digital signature remains valid because it does not cover the expiry date. As a result, the bank receives a transaction that appears legitimate and passes its normal security checks. In simple terms, an attacker can change the expiry date between the card and the terminal without breaking the card’s cryptographic protection. The relay itself is two NFC-capable Android phones running custom software over Wi-Fi: one emulates a card, one emulates a terminal. Each communication round trip added roughly 20 milliseconds for relay alone and about 50 milliseconds with the date modification, keeping the per-transaction average around 415 milliseconds, within Visa’s 500-millisecond command limit. None of the test hardware used EMV’s optional Relay Resistance Protocol, which would have detected the added latency by bounding permissible response times. Mastercard, American Express, and Discover all blocked the attack. Mastercard’s terminal checks consistency between the two expiry representations during record parsing and treats a mismatch as a card data error. American Express binds the expiration date into the data covered by offline authentication, so a modified value produces a hash mismatch. Discover’s kernel wraps the modified transaction objects into the verified transaction hash, and those also failed. Visa’s Kernel 3 does none of these things. The outcome also depended on the issuing bank. The researchers tested three banks with expired and replaced physical Visa cards and found three distinct policies, not a clean pass or fail split. Bank A accepted the modified transactions at $1.00, $100.00, and $500.00 in the lab, and completed purchases of $2.79 at a retail merchant and $3.19 at a grocery merchant on campus. Bank A also accepted transactions from both the expired original card and its replacement against the same account simultaneously, a separate finding that Anwar described as alarming. Bank B detected the modification but still accepted some transactions. A third bank tested on Discover’s kernel detected the edit and declined; however, it also showed the simultaneous-card problem without any modification at all. There is another finding that makes the issue more serious. Researchers changed the Consumer Device Cardholder Verification Method flag at five US banks, and the transactions worked at most of them. This flag controls how the terminal verifies the cardholder, and attackers can change it because the payment data can be modified while it travels between the card and the terminal. There is also another problem with Kernel 3. It sends the issuer a Terminal Verification Results value filled with zeros. This means the bank cannot tell whether the terminal checked the card’s expiry date or whether that check failed. The bank must therefore approve the transaction without seeing what the terminal actually detected. “Across all tests, the dominant factors that determine attack success or failure are: (i) the EMV kernel in use and whether expiry data fields are cryptographically bound to authenticated protocol outputs; (ii) issuer-side lifecycle enforcement, especially whether authorization is tied only to the active account and PAN or also to the specific card instrument and expiration date; and (iii) whether terminal-side validation results are visible to the issuer via TVR. In contrast, transaction amount1 , merchant category, and POS terminal brand did not independently determine the transaction outcome.” continues the paper. The researchers disclosed the findings to Visa in May 2025 and followed up in December 2025. The paper records that Visa acknowledged the report, said it passed initial triage, and indicated it was undergoing reproduction by Visa’s red team. No CVE has been assigned. Neither Visa nor any of the notified banks confirmed any mitigation as of the paper’s acceptance. The Register asked Visa for comment and received no response. The countermeasures the paper proposes sit at the kernel, terminal, and issuer layers: bind the expiry date cryptographically to an issuer-verifiable signature, require terminals to compare both expiry representations and make mismatches visible to the issuer, and have issuers authorize against the PAN-and-expiry combination rather than the PAN alone. For cardholders, the researchers recommend destroying the chip and magnetic stripe of expired cards rather than discarding them intact. Given that the attack requires only the expired physical card or sustained NFC proximity to it, that guidance is now slightly less hypothetical than it was before this paper. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Visa)
A previously unknown malware family dubbed SynkLoader is being distributed in Microsoft Teams phishing campaigns to steal credentials via a fake lock screen. The attacker impersonates the target company's IT help desk, a tactic Microsoft highlighted earlier this year as increasingly common in multi-stage attacks. Expel’s security researcher Marcus Hutchins explains that the attacks direct the victim to install a fake “PowerShell Cleaner” executable (.MSI) hosted in Microsoft Azure, making the download appear trustworthy. Analysis of the malware showed "compile dates and file timestamps indicating it was first compiled and distributed around July 28, 2026." The installer extracts a PowerShell script named cleaner.ps1 and a ZIP archive containing the Python framework, a malicious Python script, precompiled Python libraries, and several fake Microsoft runtime DLLs.
Confirm this action.
Leaving now will discard your changes.