Berlin’s city administration has confirmed that cybercriminals are attempting to extort the city after the Rhysida ransomware gang listed it on their data leak site. The attack was discovered in mid-August, and the threat actor claimed it publicly last Friday, on August 28. Kai Wergner, the Mayor of Berlin, stated that the city will not pay the attacker, and the State Criminal Police Office, the public prosecutor's office, and federal security agencies are now investigating the incident. Rhysida ransomware has been active since mid-2023, targeting healthcare organizations, state governments, education institutes, and critical infrastructure. The threat actor claims to have exfiltrated 5.79 TB of data, comprising approximately 1.44 million files, from Berlin’s administrative network.
Fire Ant hijacked Cisco routers, stole credentials and altered logs to hide its tracks, using trusted infrastructure to reach high-value networks. Chinese-linked cyber espionage group Fire Ant has spent the past year quietly graduating from hacking individual computers to hacking the infrastructure that connects them. Sygnia’s new report traces how the group expanded from compromising hypervisors into routers, authentication servers, and Linux management hosts, the unglamorous plumbing that decides who gets to log in where and what gets recorded when they do. The investigation started with something that looked like a minor configuration mistake. A tunnel interface showed up as active on a Cisco IOS XR router with no corresponding entry in the configuration history, no commit anyone could point to that explained how it got there. “The investigation began with an anomaly that appeared, at first, to be a configuration inconsistency: a tunnel interface became operational on a Cisco IOS XR router even though no corresponding running configuration or commit history could explain its creation. The interface was associated with a specific VRF and used GRE encapsulation, but standard configuration review did not provide a reliable explanation for how it appeared.” reads the report. “This discrepancy became a key investigative lead because it suggested that the device’s operational state could no longer be trusted to match the configuration and audit records visible to administrators.” That single inconsistency became the thread that unraveled the whole operation, because it meant the router’s own records could no longer be trusted to reflect what the device was actually doing. What Fire Ant built inside that router wasn’t generic malware bolted onto Linux. The toolkit was purpose-written for IOS XR’s own internals, hooking into logging, command execution, and routing functions directly. One component disguised itself as a legitimate boot service and ran on a bizarre schedule, active only during odd-numbered hours and shut off during even ones, apparently timed to dodge routine inspection windows. Another modified the router’s own syslog function so that any log message not containing the word “Health” would silently vanish instead of being recorded, a filter so specific it reads like something built to survive a very particular kind of audit. Following that anomalous tunnel led investigators to a second compromised machine, an aging Linux system acting as the tunnel’s far end. From there, Fire Ant wasn’t just maintaining access, it was actively scanning outward toward other high-value networks, probing SSH, RDP, and web ports on systems connected through the compromised infrastructure. “The actor appeared to use the compromised environment as an infrastructure platform from which it could explore reachability into connected high-value networks, including critical infrastructure.” states Sygnia. “In this model, routers, TACACS servers and jump hosts are not peripheral assets. They are the path to the target behind the target.” The authentication layer got its own dedicated attack, and this is the part that should concern anyone who thinks compromised credentials are the worst-case scenario. Fire Ant injected a malicious library directly into a running TACACS authentication daemon, the software responsible for approving administrator logins across network devices, then intercepted live sessions as they were accepted and quietly copied the credential material flowing through. That’s not stealing a password from a phishing page; that’s sitting inside the process whose entire job is deciding who to trust, watching every legitimate login happen in real time. “The acpid component embedded a modified IOS XR syslog library. In the modified evsyslog flow, log delivery was routed through a custom wrapper that checked for the string “Health” before calling mq_send. When the condition was not met, the wrapper returned a success-like value without forwarding the message, indicating selective manipulation of router log delivery.” states the report. Fire Ant also used deep, persistent backdoors on Linux systems. Some had remained dormant since 2025 and were disguised as normal system services, making them easy to overlook. One even posed as SentinelOne’s security agent and stayed active in memory after its file was deleted, making standard disk-based forensic checks ineffective on their own. Perhaps the most technically distinctive piece was a backdoor that didn’t listen on any port at all in the conventional sense. Instead it silently inspected raw network traffic, waiting for specific packets carrying an embedded magic string before it would activate and open an interactive shell. This design shares real code-level overlap with tooling publicly tied to UNC3886, a China-nexus espionage cluster Google and Mandiant have tracked for years, though the specific activation strings and packet-handling logic here differ enough from earlier public reporting that Sygnia treats it as an evolution rather than a straight reuse. “The key choice is notable because Mandiant previously documented UNC3886 TACACS credential-collection tooling in which captured credential records were also XORed with 0xEF before being written to a credential log file.” continues the report. Once inside, Fire Ant didn’t just avoid detection, it actively edited the evidence. Login records in Linux’s own wtmp, utmp, and btmp files got rewritten to swap out the router’s real IP address for an internal one, and sudo-related entries were stripped from system logs to erase any trace of privilege escalation. Sygnia’s core warning for defenders cuts against a habit most incident responders have built their careers on: logs are not automatically ground truth anymore, and any investigation into infrastructure this deeply compromised has to cross-check log evidence against memory, disk state, and network telemetry independently rather than trusting any single source on its own. The bigger concern is that Fire Ant was not mainly interested in the systems it first compromised. It used them as a stepping stone into more valuable networks connected through trusted routing and authentication relationships — what Sygnia calls the “target behind the target.” This means edge routers, TACACS servers and Linux jump hosts can be just as important to protect as systems holding sensitive data, especially when they connect to critical infrastructure. These often-overlooked systems can give a patient and well-resourced attacker a trusted path deeper into the environment, making them a valuable target rather than an unimportant middle layer. “The central lesson is that defenders must protect more than the systems that store sensitive data. They must protect the infrastructure that makes other systems reachable, trusted, and observable.” concludes the report. “When that layer is compromised, the impact extends beyond a single organization: the actor may gain a vantage point for collection, a path toward connected targets, and the ability to make trusted infrastructure tell an incomplete story.” Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Fire Ant)
Threat actors associated with Aurora (aka Aur0ra) ransomware have been observed using SpaceX's artificial intelligence (AI)-powered coding assistant Cursor to break into target networks, according to findings from CloudSEK and Gambit Security. The two independent analyses are based on exposed infrastructure associated with the Russian-speaking cybercrime group, leading to the discovery of its
Extortion group FulcrumSec claims they stole 86GB of Manchester Airports Group data after finding API credentials exposed in client-side JavaScript. Manchester Airports Group (MAG) disclosed a data breach on August 27 affecting customers of Manchester, London Stansted, and East Midlands airports. Two days later, BleepingComputer reports the extortion group FulcrumSec claimed responsibility, saying it stole roughly 86GB of data, considerably more detailed than what MAG’s original disclosure suggested. MAG’s own statement describes a relatively limited set of exposed data. It says the breach affected car park, lounge, Fast Track bookings, and airport WiFi registrations, exposing email addresses, phone numbers, vehicle registrations, and postcodes. MAG disclosed that the data breach impacted 8.7 million customers, however, the company says most of those customers had only their email addresses exposed. FulcrumSec tells a different story. The group shared samples with BleepingComputer that included a 21.5GB export of Manchester customer data, with personal identifiers, historical booking details, and marketing information. BleepingComputer checked one record against a real traveler’s purchase history and found matching Fast Track bookings, arrival times, terminal information, and payment amounts. The alleged way into the system is particularly concerning. FulcrumSec says it found airport-specific Iterable API credentials inside client-side JavaScript. That code runs in users’ browsers, so anyone inspecting the website with developer tools could potentially see those credentials. “The group claims it obtained access using airport-specific Iterable API credentials exposed in client-side JavaScript and that the stolen material includes nearly 200,000 records related to upcoming travel during the remainder of 2026.” states the report. These records allegedly contain dates, times and booking information linked to personally identifiable information. FulcrumSec says it intends to publish the stolen data and a technical account of the intrusion. If the claim is accurate, attackers did not need a highly sophisticated technique. They simply found sensitive API credentials exposed in code that the website sent directly to customers’ browsers.” The most concerning specific claim is nearly 200,000 records tied to upcoming travel through the rest of 2026, complete with dates, times, and booking details linked to identifiable individuals. BleepingComputer couldn’t independently verify that number or the full scope of what was actually taken, and MAG declined to directly address FulcrumSec’s specific claims when asked, instead pointing to its existing statement that affected customers with upcoming bookings had already been contacted. MAG is confident that we have taken effective measures to protect our customers and we have contacted all those affected, a spokesperson said, without engaging with the 86GB figure or the exposed-credentials claim directly. FulcrumSec plans to publish the stolen data but may redact upcoming travel records because of the risk of real-world harm. UK postcodes can identify very small groups of addresses, and combined with vehicle registrations, parking dates and booking details, the data could enable highly convincing phishing messages targeting people with upcoming trips. UK postcodes make this exposure sharper than the equivalent breach might be in the US. Unlike American ZIP codes covering broad delivery areas, a full UK postcode typically identifies a small cluster of neighboring addresses, sometimes a single property, according to the Office for National Statistics. Combined with vehicle registrations, parking dates, and specific booking references, that’s more than enough raw material for a phishing message referencing a real upcoming trip that would be very hard to distinguish from a genuine MAG communication. Security researchers commenting on the broader incident have flagged a supply-chain angle worth watching. Airport operations increasingly run through third-party platforms for booking, parking, and loyalty services rather than systems the airport itself directly controls, and Iterable, the marketing platform whose API credentials FulcrumSec claims to have abused, is exactly that kind of outsourced dependency. This also isn’t aviation’s first bad year: a September 2025 ransomware attack on Collins Aerospace‘s check-in software had already grounded systems at Heathrow, Brussels, and Berlin, meaning UK and European aviation infrastructure has now taken two significant hits inside twelve months. MAG says no payment card or banking data was exposed, however, travelers who recently booked parking, lounge access or Fast Track should assume more travel data may be exposed and treat messages citing real booking details with caution. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Manchester Airports Group (MAG))
The Manchester Airports Group data breach has been claimed by extortion group FulcrumSec, which told BleepingComputer that it stole approximately 86 GB of data. Samples reviewed by BleepingComputer contained information consistent with MAG's disclosure while indicating that the breach exposed considerably more detailed customer, booking, and travel information than initially revealed. Manchester Airports Group (MAG), the United Kingdom's largest airport operator, disclosed on August 27 that an unauthorized third party had stolen customer data related to Manchester, London Stansted, and East Midlands airports. The company said the affected information came from car park, lounge, and Fast Track bookings and in-airport Wi-Fi registrations. In emails to BleepingComputer, FulcrumSec claimed responsibility for the attack and shared samples of the allegedly stolen data as evidence.
Security Affairs Malware newsletter includes a collection of the best articles and research on malware in the international landscape Malware Newsletter Operation QUICSILVER: China-Nexus Actor Targets Myanmar Diplomats via VHD-Delivered Go Backdoor FTP Banners: The New Dead Drop Resolver Delivering Novel RATs The State of AI-Enabled Malware August 2026: From Brand Abuse to Agentic Execution 19 Chrome and Edge Extensions Deliver a Wallet Drainer and Credential-Stealing Payloads SLEEPWALKER: A Passive Backdoor With Its Own Command Language Tortoiseshell: New Toolset and Operational Infrastructure Exposed Dark Caracal Reloaded: New Malware, Same Hunting Grounds Cambodia-focused cluster uses multistage infection chain with localized lures BlueDelta Targets Defense and Diplomacy with HOOKEDGE XAI-Guided Graph-Based Feature Engineering and Heterogeneous Ensemble Learning for Android Malware Detection BotScan: An adaptive active probing approach for identifying live IoT Botnet C2 servers at scale EGAMA-RC: Risk-Calibrated Evidence-Gated Adaptive Malware Analysis for Robust and Interpretable Memory-Forensic Triage Survival of~the~Stealthiest: Evolving Low-Entropy Ransomware via~Genetic Algorithms Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, newsletter)
Berlin ‘s government faces a Rhysida ransomware attack weeks before elections, with officials refusing to pay despite a claimed 5.79 TB data theft. Berlin’s state government confirmed this week it’s dealing with an extortion attempt following an August cyberattack on the city-state’s administrative network, and officials have already refused the requested ransom. The ransomware group Rhysida claimed responsibility on its leak site August 28, posting an entry titled simply “Berlin, Germany” and claiming 5.79 terabytes of data across roughly 1.44 million files, with personal information on 12,076 individuals allegedly included. Rhysida claims it stole 5.79 TB of data, covering around 1.44 million files. The alleged dataset includes: Personal data: 12,076 individuals, 16,389 email addresses, 11,963 phone numbers and 148 IBANs. Sensitive records: more than 5,000 personnel files, more than 5,000 administrative-offence files, payroll data and leadership information. Credentials: plaintext passwords and credentials for systems including GebäudAtlas, the ePayment PAYONE database and Z_ADMIN accounts. Government and legal material: disciplinary proceedings, court cases, supervisory documents, NDA records and Bundesrat committee protocols. Classified information: data related to classified-material handling and documents allegedly containing state secrets. Critical infrastructure: vulnerability analyses concerning Berlin’s water supply. Identity documents: passports and ID cards from personnel records. Other material: contracts, financial documents, HR records, infrastructure files, health data, password stores and SQL/PST archives. The group also claims that the material could involve violations of GDPR, German classified-information rules, criminal law and KRITIS/BSIG requirements. These are Rhysida’s claims and have not been independently verified. The timing makes this attack especially sensitive. Berlin will elect its state parliament on September 20, less than a month after the breach, so an attack on government systems just before the vote was bound to raise questions. Interior Senator Iris Spranger said the election remains secure and that, so far, the attackers haven’t taken any election-related data. Security officials support that assessment. Broadcaster RBB first reported on Thursday that Berlin had received ransom demands. “The state of Berlin will not submit to extortion,” Berlin Mayor Kai Wegner and Berlin’s interior senator, Iris Spranger, said in a joint statement on Friday, before the ransomware group claimed the attack on their Tor data leak site. That position follows long-standing advice from US federal agencies, which warn that paying a ransom doesn’t guarantee data recovery and can encourage more attacks. Saying no to the ransom is one thing; dealing with the consequences if the attackers publish the stolen data is another. Berlin first disclosed the compromise on August 17, isolating the Senate Department for Mobility, Transport, Climate Protection and Environment along with a second department from the network. Forensic investigators later found the actual data exfiltration happened earlier than the public disclosure, sometime between August 7 and August 12, with the affected department having flagged an initial outflow internally on August 7, a full week before the network got cut off. That gap between first internal detection and actual network isolation is the kind of detail that tends to get scrutinized hardest once the immediate crisis passes. Rhysida isn’t a new name to anyone tracking ransomware against government targets. The group has claimed roughly 280 victims since emerging in 2023, according to tracking services cited by Reuters, including nine in Germany alone and headline targets like the British Library and Chile’s army. Roughly half its victims sit in the US, with the UK, Canada, and Italy rounding out the next tier, a spread that suggests Rhysida isn’t picking targets based on geography so much as opportunity. A joint advisory from CISA, the FBI, and the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center, first published in November 2023, lays out exactly how Rhysida typically gets in: compromised VPN credentials at organizations without multi-factor authentication, exploitation of the Zerologon vulnerability that Microsoft patched back in 2020, and old-fashioned phishing. None of those entry points are exotic or new, which is precisely the point; Rhysida doesn’t need novel techniques when so many organizations still haven’t closed gaps that have been publicly known for years. Berlin reconnected all Senate departments to the network on August 23, but forensic teams are still checking the systems. The state’s data protection commissioner and Germany’s federal cybersecurity agency, the BSI, are following the investigation. As of publication, neither Berlin’s data protection office nor the Senate Chancellery had given specific advice to the roughly 12,000 people whose data Rhysida claims to have stolen. If you’re among them and haven’t received any official message yet, don’t assume that means you’re safe. Investigators are still working to establish exactly what the attackers accessed and took. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, Rhysida Ransomware)
Trump targets foreign-made power grid equipment, citing cyber, sabotage and supply-chain risks to U.S. national security. Executive Order 14420, signed on August 26, targets equipment and technologies that could expose the power grid to sabotage, unauthorized access, malicious remote activity or supply-chain disruption. The timing matters. The White House points to the rapid expansion of data centers, artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing and defense production as reasons why the United States now depends even more heavily on reliable electricity. A disruption that might once have been treated primarily as an energy problem can now affect defense operations, critical infrastructure, emergency services and large parts of the economy. The order frames the problem in two ways. Foreign-made equipment can introduce a direct cybersecurity risk, including the possibility of hidden digital access mechanisms, while dependence on overseas suppliers can create a second vulnerability if geopolitical tensions or trade disruptions suddenly cut off critical components. The White House’s language is unusually broad when describing the scope of the concern. “NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the situation with respect to the foreign supply of bulk-power system electric equipment constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States and hereby declare a national emergency with respect to that threat.” reads the Executive Order 14420. “This threat exists both in the case of individual transactions and when transactions are considered as a class. To deal with this threat, additional steps are required to protect the security, integrity, and reliability of bulk-power system electric equipment used in the United States.” That definition matters because the order isn’t aimed only at a specific piece of hardware from a specific country. It creates a framework under which the Energy Secretary can determine whether particular foreign entities, suppliers, countries or equipment present an unacceptable risk and then restrict transactions involving them. The restrictions apply to the acquisition, importation, transfer or installation of foreign-produced bulk-power equipment when the relevant transaction involves a designated Covered Foreign Entity and meets one of the risk conditions set out in the order. Those conditions include the possibility of sabotage, subversion, unauthorized access, malicious remote action or disruption of the power system and its supply chain. The order also reaches beyond the physical equipment itself. Its scope includes critical components, software, firmware, digital services, maintenance services and remote-access capabilities associated with covered equipment. “the transaction involves bulk-power system electric equipment — or any critical component, software, firmware, digital service, maintenance service, or remote-access capability associated with such equipment — designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of a Covered Foreign Entity; and” continues the order. In practical terms, the government isn’t treating a transformer, an industrial controller and the software that manages it as completely separate security questions. That is particularly relevant to industrial control systems. The definition of covered equipment includes remote terminal units, programmable logic controllers, intelligent electronic devices, distributed control systems and safety instrumented systems, alongside transformers, generators, inverters, battery storage systems, protective relays, metering equipment and high-voltage circuit breakers. The order also allows agencies to consider software, firmware, remote access, update mechanisms and other supply-chain dependencies when deciding whether equipment falls within its security concerns. The geographical scope is also worth noting. The order defines the bulk-power system around interconnected transmission infrastructure and generation resources needed for grid reliability, including transmission lines rated at 69 kV or higher. Local electricity distribution facilities fall outside that definition. This isn’t only about equipment that companies might buy tomorrow. The Energy Secretary can also impose conditions on foreign-manufactured or foreign-operated equipment already installed before the order took effect. Depending on the risk, those measures could require operators to identify, isolate, monitor, secure, disconnect, replace or remove equipment. The order specifically requires officials to consider reliability, safety, the availability of secure replacements and continuity of essential services before demanding isolation or replacement. That last point is important because securing a power grid isn’t as simple as unplugging a suspicious device. Removing a component without a suitable replacement can itself create an operational problem. The order therefore leaves room for phased compliance and negotiated mitigation measures rather than assuming that every risky component can disappear overnight. The government also wants to avoid turning security screening into a permanent procurement bottleneck. The Energy Secretary can establish criteria for pre-qualified equipment and vendors, creating a list of products and suppliers that can receive exemptions from the baseline restrictions. At the same time, the order makes clear that pre-qualification doesn’t prevent the government from scrutinizing or restricting a transaction later if circumstances warrant it. The order doesn’t name a specific country as the target. Instead, it defines a Covered Foreign Entity broadly enough to include governments under certain U.S. arms embargoes or sanctions regimes, as well as entities that the relevant U.S. authorities determine are engaged in conduct detrimental to national security or foreign policy. SecurityWeek also noted that the structure resembles earlier Trump-era restrictions on foreign bulk-power equipment, including measures that previously focused on entities associated with China. The order does not mention any country by name. However, its structure is very similar to a 2020 Trump-era order on the U.S. power grid, which later led the Department of Energy to ban companies linked to China. The next phase will be regulatory rather than rhetorical. Within 120 days, the Energy Secretary is expected to issue rules or regulations needed to implement the order, including procedures for identifying covered entities, equipment and countries and for licensing transactions that would otherwise be prohibited. The administration also wants recommendations for changes to federal procurement rules that would give greater weight to national security risks and favor U.S.-manufactured energy infrastructure. Those procurement changes have their own timetable. The Energy Secretary has 180 days to develop recommendations for revisions to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, while the FAR Council would then have 90 days to consider proposing corresponding amendments for public comment. The policy fits into a wider push by the administration to reduce dependence on foreign supply chains for strategically important infrastructure. The Department of Energy said earlier this month that it is working to increase domestic production and availability of critical grid components, pointing to rapid growth in electricity demand and the need to strengthen the grid supply chain. For cybersecurity professionals, however, the most interesting part of the order isn’t the preference for domestic manufacturing. It’s the decision to treat supply-chain exposure, remote access and embedded technology as part of the attack surface of the power grid. That changes the question organizations need to ask about critical equipment. It’s no longer enough to know whether a device has a vulnerability today; operators also need to understand who made it, who controls the supplier, where critical software and firmware come from, who can remotely access the equipment, how updates reach it and what happens if that supply chain suddenly becomes unavailable. The uncomfortable reality is that a power grid compromise doesn’t necessarily begin with someone breaking through the perimeter of a utility network. It can begin much earlier, when an organization buys a component it can’t fully inspect, relies on a remote maintenance channel it doesn’t control, or becomes dependent on a supplier it can’t replace quickly. That’s the security problem Executive Order 14420 is trying to address. The White House has effectively moved part of the grid’s cyber defense line back into procurement, manufacturing and supply-chain decisions. And for critical infrastructure operators, that’s a much harder problem to solve than simply finding another firewall. Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon Pierluigi Paganini (SecurityAffairs – hacking, power grid)
A 68-year-old has been sentenced in the U.K. to more than six years in prison for operating an illegal IPTV (Internet Protocol Television) service that generated £980,812 ($1.3 million) over three years. An investigation by the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) at the City of London Police found that Milan Ibrahim ran a "sophisticated operation" that provided illegal IPTV services to users in the UK and abroad. According to PIPCU, Ibrahim sold illegal broadcasts from major rights holders such as the BBC, ITV, Sky, the Premier League and the Motion Picture Association. The police seized and shut down all servers they found during the operation, disrupting the illegal streams that users of the IPTV service received. “The investigation revealed that the business operated on 80 servers from premises in Chorley and generated £980,812 over a three-year period,” announced the City of London Police.
Over 8,300 Internet-exposed Gitea instances are still unpatched against a critical security flaw exploited in ongoing remote code execution attacks, according to cybersecurity watchdog Shadowserver. The code injection vulnerability (CVE-2026-60004) targeted in these attacks was reported by Salesforce security researcher Shai Rod, and it allows authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary shell commands with the privileges of the Gitea service account by submitting malicious patches via the diffpatch API endpoint. While successful exploitation requires repository write access to repositories hosted on vulnerable servers, Gitea comes with self-registration enabled by default, allowing unauthenticated attackers to register an account, create a new repository, and trigger the vulnerability without prior credentials.
Confirm this action.
Leaving now will discard your changes.