Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.
hosang I.T.

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Tech

Tech Articles from a wide variety of topics and categories
Show all categories

iPhone Air 2 and iPhone 18e Reportedly Launching Early Next Year

Apple plans to release an updated iPhone Air and a lower-end iPhone 18e early next year, according to the latest word from Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.


In a report this week, he said Apple plans to unveil the two devices in spring 2027, alongside a standard iPhone 18. If so, Apple will likely announce the trio of devices in March or April next year. It is unclear if there will be a live-streamed event.

Given the iPhone 16e and the iPhone 17e were unveiled in the first quarter of 2025 and 2026, respectively, it is no surprise that an iPhone 18e will follow around the first quarter of next year. However, it is notable that a new iPhone Air and the standard iPhone 18 will apparently be introduced at the same time.

The current iPhone Air and the standard iPhone 17 debuted in September last year, but several reports have indicated that Apple is moving to more of a split launch going forward, with multiple iPhone models arriving in spring and fall.

Here is when each new iPhone model is expected to launch:September 2026: iPhone 18 Pro, iPhone 18 Pro Max, and iPhone Ultra
March 2027: iPhone 18e, iPhone 18, and iPhone Air 2Apple's plans for a split launch have been reported on for many months, so this is nothing new. However, there have been conflicting reports about exactly when the iPhone Air 2 will be released, so Gurman's spring 2027 timeframe provides clarity.

The iPhone 18e and the iPhone 18 will likely receive an A20 chip and little else, while the next iPhone Air is rumored to feature an A20 chip, a second rear camera, a larger battery, and the iPhone 17 Pro's vapor chamber cooling system.

According to a leaker on the Chinese social media platform Weibo, Apple even plans to release an iPhone Air 3 eventually, even though sales of the current iPhone Air have reportedly been low relative to the iPhone 17 and iPhone 17 Pro.Related Roundups: iPhone 18, iPhone Air, iPhone FoldTags: Bloomberg, iPhone 18e, Mark GurmanBuyer's Guide: iPhone Air (Buy Now)Related Forum: iPhone
This article, "iPhone Air 2 and iPhone 18e Reportedly Launching Early Next Year" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Masjesu Botnet Emerges as DDoS-for-Hire Service Targeting Global IoT Devices

Cybersecurity researchers have lifted the curtain on a stealthy botnet that's designed for distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks. Called Masjesu, the botnet has been advertised via Telegram as a DDoS-for-hire service since it first surfaced in 2023. It's capable of targeting a wide range of IoT devices, such as routers and gateways, spanning multiple architectures. "Built forView the full article
Hacker News

2024 iPad Mini vs. 2026 iPad Air Buyer's Guide: 20+ Differences Compared

Earlier this year, Apple debuted the eighth-generation iPad Air, featuring the M4 chip. Today's iPad mini is approaching two years old, but with just $100 between them, which should you choose?


The new ‌iPad Air‌ is a minor iteration on last year's M3 model, adding more unified memory, Apple's N1 wireless chip, Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 6, and an Apple C1X modem. In 2024, Apple introduced the seventh-generation ‌iPad mini‌, offering the A17 Pro chip, Apple Intelligence support, 8GB of memory, Apple Pencil Pro and ‌Apple Pencil‌ hover support, and more.

The ‌iPad mini‌ effectively shares the design of the ‌iPad Air‌, with both devices possessing many of the same features such as an all-screen design with no Home button, Touch ID in the top button, and stereo speakers. Despite theoretically being different product lines, the ‌iPad mini‌ and ‌iPad Air‌ are almost identical in terms of specifications and are even available in the same color options. There are still some differences between the devices, such as their display sizes and chips, that set the devices apart.

Should you buy the more expensive, larger ‌iPad Air‌, or opt for the smaller and more affordable ‌iPad mini‌? Our guide helps to answer the question of how to decide which of these two iPads is best for you. All of the differences between the two devices are listed below:



‌iPad mini‌ (seventh generation, 2024)
‌iPad Air‌ (eighth generation, 2026)


8.3-inch display with 326 ppi
11-inch or 13-inch display with 264 ppi


500 nits max SDR brightness
11-inch: 500 nits max SDR brightness
13-inch: 600 nits max SDR brightness


Smaller, compact design for maximum portability
Larger design, better for productivity


Weighs 0.66 pounds (297 grams)
11-inch: Weighs 1.02 pounds (462 grams)
13-inch: Weighs 1.36 pounds (617 grams)


A17 Pro chip (introduced with iPhone 15 Pro in 2023, made with TSMC's 3nm N3 process)
M4 chip (introduced with the iPad Pro in 2024, made with TSMC's enhanced ‌3nm‌ N3E process)


6-core CPU
8-core CPU


4.05 GHz CPU clock speed
4.4 GHz CPU clock speed


5-core GPU
9-core GPU


16-core Neural Engine, 35 trillion operations per second
16-core Neural Engine, 38 trillion operations per second


8GB unified memory
12GB unified memory


68 GB/s memory bandwidth
120 GB/s memory bandwidth



Dedicated media engine
Hardware-accelerated H.264 and HEVC
Video decode engine
Video encode engine


Volume buttons on top
Volume buttons on right side


Portrait 12MP Ultra Wide front camera
Landscape 12MP Ultra Wide front camera


True Tone flash



Compatible with Bluetooth keyboards only
Smart Connector to support Apple's Magic Keyboard and Smart Keyboard Folio


Wi-Fi 6E connectivity
Wi-Fi 7 connectivity


Bluetooth 5.3
Bluetooth 6


Qualcomm SDX70M 5G modem
Apple C1X modem


128GB, 256GB, or 512GB of storage
128GB, 256GB, 512GB, or 1TB of storage


Starts at $499
11-inch: Starts at $599
13-inch: Starts at $799


Released October 2024
Released March 2026




Overall, the ‌iPad Air‌ is the best all-around option for the majority of users, providing a large screen for productivity and consuming entertainment in a slim, portable design. The additional $100 needed to buy the 11-inch ‌iPad Air‌ over the ‌iPad mini‌ is more than justified for the benefits that come with its larger display and M4 chip, not least the ability to practically use it as a laptop replacement with the Magic Keyboard and multitasking. The Air also brings more unified memory, newer wireless connectivity, and Apple's own C1X modem, advantages that are unlikely to matter for most users day-to-day but give the device more headroom over a longer ownership period.

Yet, most customers who choose the ‌iPad mini‌ will do so because of its screen size rather than in spite of it. The ‌iPad mini‌ is ideal for comfortably reading ebooks, playing handheld games, and easy transport and storage. Those who buy the ‌iPad mini‌ will likely have a specific use case in mind for how they will use the device, such as for note-taking on the go with the ‌Apple Pencil‌, throwing into a small bag to use on public transport, or giving it to a kid as their first tablet.

If you do not see the ‌iPad mini‌'s smaller display, easy one-handed grip, lightweight design, and portable form factor as an advantage for your use case and are focused on a more versatile display size, you will likely prefer the ‌iPad Air‌, especially as it is now available with a 13-inch size option. The ‌iPad Air‌ is more of an all-around device that works as a potential laptop replacement, with the added bonuses that come with a bigger screen for productivity and entertainment.

A next-generation iPad mini is expected to launch in the second half of 2026, so it may be worth holding off a purchase for that device. It is likely to feature the A19 Pro chip with a 5-core GPU, a slightly larger 8.7-inch display with an OLED panel, a vibration-based speaker, and water resistance. The upgrades could push the starting price up by as much as $100.Related Roundups: iPad Air , iPad miniBuyer's Guide: iPad Air (Buy Now), iPad Mini (Caution)Related Forum: iPad
This article, "2024 iPad Mini vs. 2026 iPad Air Buyer's Guide: 20+ Differences Compared" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Yael Nardi joins Minimus as Chief Business Officer to drive hyper-growth

New York, NY: Minimus, a provider of hardened container images and secure container images designed to reduce CVE risk, today announced the appointment of Yael Nardi as Chief Business Officer (CBO). In this newly created role, Nardi will lead the company’s next phase of operations, overseeing top-of-funnel growth strategy, strategic operations, and future corporate development.
As the market landscape evolves and AI affects customer acquisition, Minimus is implementing an operational model to scale marketing and strategic alliances, which will be managed by Nardi.
“We are entering a phase of aggressive expansion that requires rigorous execution and a completely new playbook. Traditional marketing strategies are no longer enough in today’s fast-moving environment. We need an operational powerhouse at the helm. Yael is a world-class operator accustomed to zero-error environments and high-stakes execution. We are choosing intelligence, speed, and strategic alignment, and there is no one I trust more to run this machine.” – Ben Bernstein, CEO at Minimus
Nardi brings a multidisciplinary background to Minimus, with over 15 years of experience advising high-growth startups, global investors, and technology corporations. Most recently, she served as Director at Meitar NY Inc. and Partner at Meitar Law Offices. Yael was leading the significant M&A transaction of Twistlock’s acquisition by Palo Alto Networks and others, (PANW)—a foundational deal in the container image hardening and runtime security space—as well as transactions involving Wiz, JFrog, Salesforce, and others.
“I have worked with the Minimus team through some of their most critical milestones, and I know firsthand the massive potential of their technology. The demand for near-zero CVE container images and minimal container images with built-in security is only accelerating. Scaling a company in today’s environment requires the same 24/7 rigor, vendor accountability, and strategic precision as closing a major M&A deal. I am thrilled to step into this operational role and build the growth engine that will drive Minimus’s next chapter.” – Yael Nardi, Chief Business Officer, Minimus
Nardi holds a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) from Tel Aviv University and will be based in Minimus’s New York City office. She will work with the executive leadership team to execute the company’s growth targets.
About Minimus
Minimus provides hardened container images and hardened Docker images engineered to achieve near-zero CVE exposure. Built continuously from source with the latest patches and security updates, Minimus images undergo rigorous container image hardening and attack surface reduction, delivering secure container imageswith seamless supply chain security and built-in compliance for FedRAMP, FIPS 140-3, CIS, and STIG standards. Through automatically generated SBOMs and real-time threat intelligence, Minimus empowers teams to prioritize remediation and avoid over 97% of container vulnerabilities – making it a compelling Chainguard alternative for teams seeking production-hardened, distroless container images at scale. 
For more information, visit minimus.io.
Minimus Public Relations
[email protected]
View the full article
CSOonline

Apple's Three-Year Plan to 'Reinvent' the iPhone is Underway

Apple is in the middle of a three-year plan to "reinvent" the look and feel of the iPhone, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.


In a report this week, Gurman said the plan is as follows:September 2025: The redesigned iPhone 17 Pro models and an all-new iPhone Air (✅)
September 2026: A foldable iPhone
September 2027: A special 20th-anniversary iPhoneThe report said this iPhone roadmap has been a "priority" for Apple's leadership, including hardware engineering chief John Ternus, who is widely considered to be the leading candidate to succeed Tim Cook as Apple's CEO in the future.

The plan began last September with the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max, which ushered in a new aluminum design with a so-called "plateau" housing the three rear cameras and a rear Ceramic Shield glass area for MagSafe charging and accessories. At the same time, Apple released the iPhone Air, which is the thinnest iPhone ever.

This year, Apple is expected to release its long-awaited foldable iPhone.

Like Samsung's Galaxy Z Fold 7, the foldable iPhone will reportedly open up like a book, providing users with a large screen for watching videos, playing games, and multitasking. iOS 27 is expected to have some changes that are exclusive to the foldable iPhone, including side-by-side apps and other iPadOS-like multitasking functionality.


Late last year, a report said the foldable iPhone will be equipped with a 7.7-inch inner display, and a 5.3-inch outer display. It was initially rumored that the device would have a virtually "crease-free" inner display, but it was later reported that Apple is using technology that "reduces the crease without eliminating it entirely."

Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo expects the foldable iPhone to have two rear cameras, one front camera, and a Touch ID power button instead of Face ID.

As for the 20th-anniversary iPhone, previous reports have indicated that the device will have a seamless design, with a curved glass enclosure and no cutouts in the display. To achieve this, the front camera would be located under the screen. However, it remains to be seen if Apple actually achieves such an ambitious design by next year.


Apple reported record-breaking revenue of $143.8 billion last quarter. iPhone revenue in the quarter was $85.2 billion, a new all-time high.

"iPhone had its best-ever quarter driven by unprecedented demand, with all-time records across every geographic segment," said Apple CEO Tim Cook, in Apple's press release earlier this year. He later commented that iPhone demand during the quarter was "simply staggering" and topped Apple's internal expectations. The upcoming foldable iPhone and 20th-anniversary iPhone models could help Apple to sustain this momentum.Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTags: 20th-Anniversary iPhone, Bloomberg, Mark Gurman
This article, "Apple's Three-Year Plan to 'Reinvent' the iPhone is Underway" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Leaker: Apple Will Release iPhone Air 2 No Matter How Badly May Sell

Despite the iPhone Air's struggling sales, a known leaker claims Apple will push ahead with at least two generations of the device, while also suggesting the standard iPhone 18 will see virtually no exterior design changes.


In a recent post on Weibo, the leaker known as "Fixed Focus Digital" said that the standard ‌iPhone 18‌ will not have substantial changes to its design, reinforcing rumors about an incremental upgrade:



In another post, the leaker claimed that Apple still plans to release a second-generation ‌iPhone Air‌ model:



Sales of the ‌iPhone Air‌ have reportedly struggled badly since its launch in September 2025. A KeyBanc Capital Markets survey for investors found "virtually no demand" for the device. Supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo reported that suppliers were expected to reduce capacity by more than 80% between launch and the first quarter of 2026. Luxshare stopped making the ‌iPhone Air‌ in October, and Foxconn was expected to end production by the end of December, leaving the device believed to be entirely out of production. The iPhone 12 mini, iPhone 13 mini, iPhone 14 Plus, and iPhone 15 Plus performed similarly poorly and saw only two generations each.

According to The Information, Apple is now considering a redesign of the ‌iPhone Air‌ to add a second rear camera to address one of the main criticisms of the current model. One report suggested the second camera could be a 48-megapixel Fusion Ultra Wide lens. Previous reports have also said Apple's work on the second-generation model is aimed at reducing the weight, adding vapor chamber cooling, and improving the battery capacity, along with a thinner Face ID module, and adding the A20 and C2 chips.

The standard ‌iPhone 18‌ is expected to be an incremental update, adding Apple's A20 and C2 chips, 12GB of memory, a 24-megapixel front-facing camera, and a simplified Camera Control button.

Apple is widely believed to be planning a break from its long-established annual September release cycle with the ‌iPhone 18‌ lineup, splitting the lineup across two windows: The iPhone 18 Pro, ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max, and foldable iPhone are expected in fall 2026, while the standard ‌iPhone 18‌, iPhone 18e, and ‌iPhone Air‌ 2 will likely follow in spring 2027. A Nikkei Asia report corroborating the strategy noted it aims to both optimize resources and maximize revenue from premium models.Related Roundups: iPhone 18, iPhone AirTag: Fixed Focus DigitalBuyer's Guide: iPhone Air (Buy Now)Related Forum: iPhone
This article, "Leaker: Apple Will Release iPhone Air 2 No Matter How Badly May Sell" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

APT28 Deploys PRISMEX Malware in Campaign Targeting Ukraine and NATO Allies

The Russian threat actor known as APT28 (aka Forest Blizzard and Pawn Storm) has been linked to a fresh spear-phishing campaign targeting Ukraine and its allies to deploy a previously undocumented malware suite codenamed PRISMEX. "PRISMEX combines advanced steganography, component object model (COM) hijacking, and legitimate cloud service abuse for command-and-control," Trend MicroView the full article
Hacker News

Apple's New M5 MacBook Air Hits $949 Record Low Price on Amazon

Amazon has introduced a few new record low prices on the M5 MacBook Air this week, with up to $150 off these notebooks. We started tracking these deals over the weekend, and the selection of color options at best-ever prices has only expanded since then.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Amazon. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

Amazon has the 512GB 13-inch M5 MacBook Air for $949.00, down from $1,099.00, and the 24GB/1TB model for $1,349.00, down from $1,499.00. Both of these represent new record low prices for each configuration.

$150 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $949.00
$150 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,149.00
$150 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,349.00

In terms of the 15-inch models, you'll find up to $150 off the M5 MacBook Air, with multiple color options on sale for each configuration. Prices start at $1,149.00 for the 512GB model, down from $1,299.00, and also include both 1TB models on sale.

$150 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $1,149.00
$150 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,349.00
$150 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,549.00

If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Apple's New M5 MacBook Air Hits $949 Record Low Price on Amazon" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Hackers exploit a critical Flowise flaw affecting thousands of AI workflows

Threat actors have found a way to inject arbitrary JavaScript into the Flowise low-code platform for building custom LLM and agentic systems.
The code injection was possible due to a design oversight, rated at max-severity, in the platform’s custom MCP node, which acts as a plug-in connector for an application’s AI agent to talk to external tools via MCP servers.
According to a recent VulnCheck alert, hackers have already started exploiting the flaw to insert malicious JavaScript code, with analysis showing close to 15000 Flowise instances exposed on the public internet.
The flaw was patched in the AI development platform’s version 3.0.6, the latest rollout being v 3.1.1, released last month.
Improper validation of MCP configurations
Flowise is a drag-and-drop service to build a customized large language model (LLM) flow. It allows users to drag the Custom MCP node into their workflows and paste necessary configurations (JSON) to point to an external MCP server.
The Custom MCP node that lets the application connect to any external MCP server using user-supplied configurations is where the problem lies. In version 3.0.5, these configurations are not properly validated against malicious code, allowing remote code execution.
“This node parses the user-provided mcpServerConfig string to build the MCP server configuration,” reads an NVD description of the flaw. “However, during this process, it executes JavaScript code without any security validation. Specifically, inside the convertToValidJSONString function, user input is directly passed to the Function() constructor, which evaluates and executes the input as JavaScript code.”
As the named function runs with full Node.js runtime privileges, “it can access dangerous modules such as child_process and fs,” the description adds.
The flaw is tracked under CVE-2025-59528, and was assigned a critical rating of CVSS 10.0 at the time of disclosure in September, 2025. The flaw was categorized under “Improper Control of Generation of Code (code Injection).”
Hackers exploit unpatched instances
While a patch has been available for months, a recent VulnCheck finding places the first in-the-wild exploitation on April 6. Caitlin Condon, VP of Security Research at the vulnerability intelligence company, warned of the abuse through a LinkedIn post.
“Early this morning, VulnCheck’s Canary network began detecting first-time exploitation of CVE-2025-59528, an arbitrary JavaScript code injection vulnerability in Flowise,” she wrote. “Observed activity so far originates from a single Starlink IP.” Around 12000 to 15000 instances remained exposed at the time, she noted in her post, although it is unclear how many of them were running a vulnerable Flowise version.
Condon added two more critical Flowise vulnerabilities, a missing authentication (CVE-2025-8943) and an arbitrary file upload (CVE-2025-26319), in the post that she said were also flagged against active exploitation by the Canary network. Exclusive exploitation details, including full payload and request data, were promised to the Canary Intelligence customers. Additionally, an exploit, PCAP, YARA rule, network signatures, and target Docker container have been available to its Initial Access Intelligence customers.
View the full article
CSOonline

Iran‑linked PLC attacks cause real‑world disruption at critical US infra sites

As the US and Iran agreed to a ceasefire on Tuesday, six US federal agencies have warned that Iran-affiliated threat actors have compromised internet-exposed programmable logic controllers at critical infrastructure facilities in the US.
The attacks, which the agencies linked to escalating hostilities between Iran and the US and Israel, targeted Rockwell Automation and Allen-Bradley PLCs at water and wastewater, energy, and government facilities, including local municipalities, and have been active since at least March 2026, according to the advisory, co-authored by the FBI, CISA, NSA, EPA, Department of Energy, and US Cyber Command’s Cyber National Mission Force, and published on Tuesday.
“Since at least March 2026, the authoring agencies identified (through engagements with victim organizations) an Iranian-affiliated APT-group that disrupted the function of PLCs,” the advisory said. “These PLCs were deployed across multiple US critical infrastructure sectors (including Government Services and Facilities, WWS, and Energy sectors) within a wide variety of industrial automation processes. Some of the victims experienced operational disruption and financial loss.”
How attackers gained access
To carry out those manipulations, the actors used leased overseas infrastructure and legitimate Rockwell Automation configuration software to connect to victim PLCs, specifically CompactLogix and Micro850 devices that were left directly exposed to the public internet, the advisory said.
Once inside, they extracted project files, altered SCADA and HMI display data, and installed remote access software to maintain a persistent foothold, it added.
The advisory also warned that port activity associated with Siemens S7 PLC protocols “suggests these actors may also be targeting devices manufactured by companies other than Rockwell Automation/Allen-Bradley.”
Steve Povolny, VP of AI strategy and security research at Exabeam, said the campaign reflects longstanding structural weaknesses in OT environments. “Programmable logic controllers and supporting HMI stacks are often deployed on aging hardware, run outdated firmware for years at a time, and sit inside operational networks that were never designed with adversarial persistence in mind,” he said.
Gabrielle Hempel, security operations strategist at Exabeam, said the attacks exposed a fundamental design problem. “The most concerning thing about this report is that Iranian actors aren’t using sophisticated malware or new zero-days, but leveraging accessible PLCs and low-hanging fruit to manipulate systems and cause disruption,” she said. “If an OT environment is reachable from the internet, that is an inherent design flaw and not a nation-state problem.”
A recurring Iranian playbook
The advisory linked the current campaign to a pattern of Iranian state-affiliated targeting of US industrial control systems. The authoring agencies have previously reported similar activity by CyberAv3ngers, affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Cyber Electronic Command, which compromised at least 75 Unitronics PLC devices across water, wastewater, and other critical infrastructure sectors beginning in November 2023.
The current activity is attributed to a separate, though related, group of Iranian-affiliated APT actors, the advisory said.
The authoring agencies assessed that the group is “conducting this activity to cause disruptive effects within the United States.” The advisory said the escalation is likely tied to ongoing US-Iran-Israel hostilities.
Ross Filipek, CISO at Corsica Technologies, said the consequences of even partial compromises extend well beyond individual victim organizations. “If a municipal utility goes down, suppliers, hospitals, and regional partners feel it,” he said. “Each successful or even partially successful campaign lowers the barrier for the next one, and emboldens actors to move from nuisance-level defacement into real operational interference.”
Indicators of compromise and recommended actions
The advisory listed eight IP addresses linked to the threat actors, active as far back as January 2025, along with downloadable indicators of compromise, and recommended organizations query their logs for any matching activity, particularly traffic on OT-associated ports originating from overseas hosting providers.
“Ensure all access is mediated, monitored, and controlled,” the advisory said. For Rockwell Automation controllers with a physical mode switch, it is recommended to place the switch in run position to block remote modification.
The advisory also placed responsibility on device manufacturers, stating: “It is ultimately the responsibility of the device manufacturer to build products that are secure by design and default.” Hempel said that the principle needs to become an enforced baseline. “‘Secure by design’ needs to be enforced as a baseline expectation across the board,” she said.
Povolny said organizations should treat the advisory as an active warning, not a routine notification. “Adversaries are signaling intent, capability, and access patterns, and defenders should respond with the assumption that probing activity is already underway,” he said.
View the full article
CSOonline

Shrinking the IAM Attack Surface through Identity Visibility and Intelligence Platforms (IVIP)

The Fragmented State of Modern Enterprise Identity Enterprise IAM is approaching a breaking point. As organizations scale, identity becomes increasingly fragmented across thousands of applications, decentralized teams, machine identities, and autonomous systems.  The result is Identity Dark Matter: identity activity that sits outside the visibility of centralized IAM andView the full article
Hacker News

LLM-generated passwords are indefensible. Your codebase may already prove it

Two independent research programs, one from AI security firm Irregular, one from Kaspersky, have now converged on the same conclusion: Every frontier LLM generates structurally predictable passwords that standard entropy meters catastrophically overrate. AI coding agents are autonomously embedding those credentials in production infrastructure, and conventional secret scanners have no mechanism to detect them.
As a security professional who has spent considerable time scrutinizing how generative AI integrates into enterprise development workflows, I confess that the quantification of what I already suspected still gave me pause. Irregular, an AI security evaluation firm, prompted Claude Opus 4.6 to generate passwords in 50 independent sessions. Only 30 distinct strings emerged from those 50 attempts. One specific sequence, G7$kL9#mQ2&xP4!w, recurred 18 times, a repetition rate of 36 percent. Over a genuinely uniform distribution across a 94-character printable ASCII alphabet, the probability of any specific 16-character sequence appearing even twice in 50 draws approaches the vanishingly infinitesimal. The model is not generating passwords; it is retrieving them.
That distinction is the crux of an emerging and underappreciated threat class. LLM-generated passwords satisfy every superficial heuristic we have trained practitioners to apply requisite length, case heterogeneity, numerical and symbolic admixture, absence of recognizable dictionary fragments. Automated checkers consistently rate them excellent. The peril is not in how they appear to tools designed for a different threat model; it is in how they function against an adversary who understands the distributional peculiarities of autoregressive generation.
The architectural incompatibility
The root pathology is architectural rather than configural, a distinction of considerable practical significance because it forecloses remediation through tuning. A cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator (CSPRNG), as mandated by NIST SP 800-90A Rev. 1 for all security-sensitive entropy generation, produces each character with statistically equal probability drawn from a truly uniform distribution. No character is preferentially weighted. No positional bias exists. Every token is independent of every antecedent token.
Large language models operate on a fundamentally antithetical principle. They are trained to assign maximal probability to the most plausible successor token given an accumulated context, a mechanism that is simultaneously the source of their remarkable generative fluency and their categorical unsuitability for cryptographic applications. When prompted to produce a password, an LLM draws upon its internalized distributional knowledge of what human-generated passwords characteristically look like: The prevalence of uppercase initiation, the clustering of numerals in medial positions, the predilection for terminal exclamation marks. These are not aberrations; they are the faithful expression of training-corpus statistics.
Irregular’s research quantifies this chasm using Shannon entropy applied to observed character-frequency distributions across generation corpora. A 16-character password drawn from a genuine CSPRNG over the full 94-character ASCII set carries approximately 98 bits of entropy by this measure. Claude Opus 4.6 achieves roughly 27 bits, a deficit of approximately 72 percent relative to the cryptographic baseline. GPT-5.2’s 20-character passwords, evaluated via the log-probability method, exhibit entropy closer to 20 bits. Conventional strength estimators, including the widely deployed zxcvbn library, characterize these same passwords at 98 to 100 bits. The divergence is not marginal; it is nearly an order of magnitude.
Temperature is not a remedy
A reflexive objection from practitioners familiar with LLM configuration holds that increasing sampling temperature would attenuate these distributional biases by flattening the probability landscape from which characters are drawn. Irregular’s empirical results are unambiguous in refuting this intuition. Testing conducted at temperature 1.0, the maximum setting on Claude, produces no statistically meaningful improvement in effective entropy. The character-position biases are encoded in model weights, not in sampling parameters, and temperature modulation operates downstream of those weight-instantiated distributions.
Separately, Kaspersky’s Data Science Team Lead Alexey Antonov conducted a complementary investigation analyzing 1,000 passwords generated by ChatGPT, Meta’s Llama, and DeepSeek. The character-frequency histograms disclosed pronounced non-uniformity across all three models: ChatGPT exhibits a systematic preference for the characters x, p, and L; Llama for the hash symbol and the letter p; DeepSeek for t and w. At temperature 0.0, Claude produces the identical string on every invocation. These findings are consistent across different model families and measurement methodologies, corroborating the structural rather than incidental nature of the vulnerability.
The practical corollary is that an adversary who has identified the LLM used to generate a target credential need not attempt exhaustive brute-force against a 94^16 keyspace. They can construct a model-specific attack dictionary, ordering candidates by their empirical generation frequency, and execute a probabilistically optimized search against a keyspace several orders of magnitude smaller. Kaspersky’s cracking tests found that 88 percent of DeepSeek passwords and 87 percent of Llama passwords failed to withstand targeted attack, as did 33 percent of ChatGPT passwords, all using standard GPU hardware.
The agentic injection problem
The portion of this problem amenable to user education, practitioners being counselled not to solicit passwords from conversational AI interfaces, represents a fraction of the aggregate exposure. The more consequential and considerably less tractable vector is autonomous credential generation by AI coding agents embedded in professional development toolchains.
When an AI coding agent such as GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, or an analogous instrument receives a task specification entailing database initialization, containerized service configuration, or API bootstrapping, it generates credentials as a functional prerequisite of task completion. No explicit instruction to produce a password is required; the agent infers necessity from context. The resulting credential is embedded in a Docker Compose environment variable, a .env configuration file, or a Kubernetes secret manifest and is committed to version control by a developer whose attentional resources are directed at functional correctness, not credential provenance.
The OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2025 designates insecure output handling as a critical risk category, one that encompasses precisely this failure mode, wherein LLM-generated content is consumed without appropriate validation by downstream systems and processes. The credential thus introduced is not flagged by Gitleaks or Trufflehog, because those tools employ pattern-matching against known secret formats and have no capacity to evaluate the character-position entropy distribution that distinguishes a CSPRNG-derived credential from an LLM-derived one.
Organizational response priorities
The remediation landscape is tractable for organizations prepared to act methodically. The following priorities are sequenced by immediacy of risk reduction.
Conduct a retrospective audit of all AI-assisted repositories dating to early 2023, when agentic coding tools achieved widespread enterprise adoption. Particular scrutiny should be directed at configuration files, Docker Compose YAML, and .env entries. Credentials exhibiting LLM-characteristic distributional signatures, consistent uppercase initialization, medial numeral clustering, terminal special characters, warrant investigation regardless of their apparent complexity.
Rotate every credential whose provenance cannot be affirmatively traced to a CSPRNG invocation. The canonical CSPRNG interfaces, Python’s secrets.token_urlsafe(), openssl rand -base64, /dev/urandom, are the only acceptable sources. An audit trail establishing provenance is operationally valuable; absent such a trail, the presumption should favor rotation.
Amend AI coding tool system prompts and secure development guidelines to mandate explicit CSPRNG invocation for all credential generation. The instruction must be categorical: The agent generates no password strings; it calls the appropriate platform function. This single-sentence policy amendment, consistently enforced, prevents the class of agentic injection at its origination point.
Augment static secret scanning with entropy-aware analysis capable of evaluating character-position distributions rather than merely pattern-matching against known formats. This capability gap is currently the central technical challenge in operationalizing detection for this threat class.
Escalate to LLM vendors through enterprise agreement channels. The architectural fix, routing password generation requests to a CSPRNG backend rather than processing them through the autoregressive generation pipeline, is an engineering decision available to AI providers. NIST SP 800-63B Revision 4, released in August 2025, establishes unambiguous guidance on entropy requirements for authentication credentials. Vendor accountability to that standard is a legitimate contractual expectation.
The broader epistemological challenge
The phenomenon of LLM-generated passwords, now being called ‘vibe passwords’ in security community discourse, an appellation that captures the verisimilitude without the substance, is a specific instantiation of a broader epistemological challenge that will recur as AI-generated content becomes more deeply entangled with security-sensitive infrastructure. The training objective that makes large language models extraordinarily capable of producing contextually appropriate, humanistically plausible outputs is structurally incompatible with the mathematical requirements of cryptographic security, which demand genuine unpredictability precisely where pattern and plausibility offer no traction.
The diagnostic tools and remediation pathways exist. What the security community requires, with some urgency, is the systematic awareness that the problem has already propagated into production environments at a scale that warrants immediate and deliberate organizational response, not anticipatory policy, but retrospective investigation.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

Forest Blizzard leverages router compromises to launch AiTM attacks, target Outlook sessions

Russian threat actor Forest Blizzard has been exploiting unsecured home and small-office internet equipment, such as routers, to redirect traffic through attacker-controlled DNS servers.
The group has leveraged this DNS hijacking activity to support post-compromise adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) attacks on Transport Layer Security (TLS) connections, targeting Microsoft Outlook on the web domains, according to a Microsoft Threat Intelligence report. By compromising upstream edge devices, the attackers are able to exploit less monitored networks and use them as a pathway to access enterprise environments.
More than 200 organizations and over 5,000 consumer devices have already been impacted by Forest Blizzard’s malicious DNS infrastructure, which Microsoft says is primarily used to collect intelligence in support of the Russian government’s foreign policy objectives. The activity enables interception of cloud-hosted content, with government, IT, telecommunications, and energy sectors among the primary targets.
While the number of organizations specifically targeted for TLS AiTM is only a subset of the networks with vulnerable SOHO devices, the threat actor’s broad access could enable larger-scale AiTM attacks, which might include active traffic interception, Microsoft said in the blog post.
Hijacked routers, stolen sessions
Forest Blizzard, also called APT28 by the UK’s National Cyber Security Center, broke into home and small-office routers and changed their network settings so that internet traffic was sent through their own DNS servers. For this, the threat actor almost certainly used the dnsmasq utility to perform DNS resolution and provide responses while listening to port 53 for DNS queries, Microsoft Threat Intelligence noted.
Most of the time, attackers quietly monitored traffic without disrupting connections. But for specific targets, they spoofed DNS responses and actively redirected users to the fake infrastructure they controlled. These included a subset of domains associated with Microsoft Outlook on the web. Separate AiTM activity targeting non-Microsoft hosted servers in at least three government organizations in Africa was also identified.
“The actor-controlled malicious infrastructure would then present an invalid TLS certificate to the victim, spoofing the legitimate Microsoft service. If the compromised user ignored warnings about the invalid TLS certificate, the threat actor could then actively intercept the underlying plaintext traffic — potentially including emails and other customer content — within the TLS connection,” claimed the blog post.
Invisible path to enterprise systems
This attack poses a serious risk to enterprises because, instead of beginning at the corporate perimeter, it starts from employee environments that are often less secure. Threat actors target vulnerable home or small office routers, which often have weak default passwords or unpatched software.
The shift to remote work has dramatically expanded the corporate attack surface, allowing attackers to create a pathway into enterprise accounts without directly breaching corporate systems.
“The real-world impact is profound. Attackers can intercept credentials, reroute traffic to malicious sites, or inject malware, all without ever breaching the corporate firewall. This can lead to data breaches, financial theft, or even ransomware incidents originating from an employee’s living room,” said Apeksha Kaushik, senior principal analyst at Gartner. “Moreover, the lack of visibility and control over home networks means these attacks can persist
undetected, undermining even the most robust corporate security programs. In essence, every unsecured home network becomes a potential backdoor into the enterprise, amplifying risk and complicating incident response.”
Defending beyond corporate networks
For CISOs, this broadens the focus area beyond merely securing corporate networks and even addressing risks in employee home environments and unmanaged devices.
“First, stop using passwords. Robust two-step verification systems that do not allow for phishing attacks, especially hardware tokens, could prevent most of these attacks despite credentials being obtained,” said Devroop Dhar, CEO and co-founder at Primus Partners.
Dhar added that CISOs should look at controlling the behaviour of identities. For instance, if there is an unusual location or device involved in the login procedure, additional warnings or checks need to be generated.
“Enforce secure DNS solutions by utilizing corporate VPNs with split tunneling disabled or enforcing DNS over HTTPS to ensure all DNS queries bypass the local home router and go directly to trusted corporate servers,” suggested Amit Jaju, global partner at Ankura Consulting. “Also, implement strict conditional access policies that require devices to be enrolled in mobile device management and marked as compliant before granting access to corporate cloud resources.”
Experts also warn that even after taking all precautions and defence measures, educating employees should be the utmost priority, as they must be trained to recognize suspicious behaviour during login procedures.
View the full article
CSOonline

The zero-day timeline just collapsed. Here’s what security leaders do next

A zero-day is not frightening because it is sophisticated. It is frightening because it is unknown. There is no patch in the moment it matters most. That single condition undermines the comfort most security programs rely on: time.
In the past, attackers didn’t need zero-days because they relied on predictable failures in patching and credential hygiene. The sheer labor required to find new vulnerabilities acted as a natural throttler on advanced attacks. Agentic AI removes that friction. By automating the trial-and-error cycle, AI transforms vulnerability research into a high-speed, 24/7 operation, making the once-rare zero-day a scalable threat.
What a zero day is and why it matters
A zero-day is a flaw that the vendor and defenders do not yet know exists. And because a zero-day vulnerability is unknown to the manufacturer, it exists in a defensive vacuum where there is no patch to deploy and no proven strategy to follow. Exploitation forces a shift from “business as usual” to an “emergency operational event.” In these scenarios, the organization loses its autonomy, as external stakeholders and the attackers themselves set the pace of recovery.
While Stuxnet showed that cyberattacks could have physical consequences, and Heartbleed demonstrated the fragility of the internet’s cryptographic backbone, Log4Shell in late 2021 changed the game by revealing the risk posed by modern dependencies. A logging library embedded into thousands of packages created a global response effort, and government agencies warned that exploitation would persist over time.
Those incidents also underline that when the vulnerable component is ubiquitous, your risk surface includes software you did not write, do not inventory cleanly and may not even realize you run.
Scaling vulnerability discovery to machine speed
Agentic AI is AI that can act, not just advise. Give it an objective, and it will plan steps, run them, learn from what happens and adjust until it succeeds or hits a hard stop. In cybersecurity, that looks like an automated operator. It can probe an application, test multiple attack paths, change tactics when defenses hold and keep iterating without waiting for a human to re-aim it.
We already have credible public signals that AI-assisted systems can help discover real-world vulnerabilities in widely used open source components. Google Project Zero and Google DeepMind disclosed that an AI agent called Big Sleep found an exploitable vulnerability in SQLite, and maintainers fixed it the same day it was reported. Google’s security team also described AI-assisted fuzzing work that reported new vulnerabilities to open source maintainers, including one in OpenSSL. DARPA’s AI Cyber Challenge was built around the same direction of travel, which is automated vulnerability discovery and patching at scale.
As discovery accelerates, the time between unknown and exploited compresses. That weakens any security model built around periodic assurance. Annual penetration tests and quarterly scans still matter, but they cannot be the backbone of resilience when a motivated adversary can probe continuously, adapt quickly and never get tired.
Reducing the value of the inevitable breach
Resilience begins with data minimization. If an internet-facing service does not need raw sensitive data, it should not be able to retrieve it. Tokenization and non-reversible storage, among other approaches, reduce the value of a successful breach. You cannot lose what you never collected, and you cannot leak what the service cannot see.
Next comes API discipline. APIs are the nervous system of the enterprise. They are also an ideal interface for automated probing because an attacker does not need a UI to harvest what an endpoint returns. Ensure every endpoint response is a deliberate security decision. If a client does not need a field, the API should not return it.
Keeping attackers out is only half the battle. The real test of security is what happens after they get in. The goal is to ensure that if a door is forced open, the intruder finds themselves in a room with no exit. Use least-privilege access and strong authentication to kill their momentum. Then, use micro-segmentation to lock down the hallways. By blocking lateral movement, a single compromised system stays isolated. This helps protect core data and keeps operations running.
Operational resilience is the best security strategy
Security does not sit on top of a fragile environment and “work harder” to make it safe. Security must be baked into IT operations—from system design to change control. This is why CIO and CISO agendas must merge. When the pressure is on, they can rely on accurate inventories, secure-by-design architecture and disciplined change management. Recovery plans are useless if they are only documented; they must be practiced.
Agentic AI raises the stakes because it leaves no lead time. It finds and hits a weakness almost instantly. You do not win that race with promises of perfect prevention. You win by reducing what is exposed, limiting how far an intruder can move and continuously validating that your controls still work as your environment changes.
In an era where attackers can probe without pause, is your organization built to absorb that test without breaking?
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

Apple's Foldable iPhone Will Have a Samsung-Made OLED Display

Apple has agreed to source foldable OLED panels exclusively from Samsung for the next three years, reports The Elec.


Apple will not use foldable panels from other display suppliers as part of the agreement, according to the Korea-based outlet. The company is said to have accepted the terms given the lack of viable alternative suppliers.

This year, Apple is expected to release a book-style iPhone that unfolds to reveal an inner display similar in size to an iPad mini. Samsung has been a display pioneer in the foldable market, and it will reportedly supply Apple with foldable OLED panels equipped with CoE (Color filter on Encapsulation) technology, which removes the polarizer and forms a color filter layer on top of the encapsulation layer. Polarizers can cause cracking at bending points, making CoE a requirement for foldable devices.

The screen will use the same M14 OLED materials as the iPhone 17 Pro Max instead of switching to something new. The choice is said to be based on reliability and lower costs – Apple is sticking with a design that's already been tested and works well.

According to Bloomberg, Apple's foldable iPhone development is progressing smoothly and the device is set to launch during the standard September iPhone timeframe. That contradicts a recent Nikkei report that suggested ‌iPhone Fold‌ engineering delays could push the device's launch into 2027.

An industry source cited by The Elec said that regardless of potential delays in final device assembly, Samsung Display's production of foldable OLED panels for Apple will begin in the second quarter of this year as originally planned, with an initial shipment of 3 million units.

Away from iPhones, Apple already uses OLED displays in the iPad Pro and Apple Watch. There are apparently no plans to add OLED to the low-cost iPad, but the iPad mini could get one in 2026. Meanwhile, the ‌MacBook Pro‌ is expected to be updated with an OLED display when it is redesigned later this year, and it will also include touchscreen functionality. Apple will also reportedly update the MacBook Air with an OLED display in 2028.Tags: Foldable iPhone, OLED, Samsung, The Elec
This article, "Apple's Foldable iPhone Will Have a Samsung-Made OLED Display" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Microsoft’s new Agent Governance Toolkit targets top OWASP risks for AI agents

Microsoft has quietly introduced the Agent Governance Toolkit, an open-source project designed to monitor and control AI agents during execution as enterprises try to move them into production workflows.
The toolkit, which is a response to the Open Worldwide Application Security Project’s (OWASP) emerging focus on AI and LLM security risks, adds a runtime security layer that enforces policies to mitigate issues such as prompt injection, and improves visibility into agent behavior across complex, multi-step workflows, Imran Siddique, principal group engineering manager at Microsoft wrote in a blog post.
More specifically, the toolkit maps to OWASP’s top 10 risks for agentic systems, including goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity abuse, supply chain risks, code execution, memory poisoning, insecure communications, cascading failures, human-agent trust exploitation, and rogue agents.
The rationale behind the toolkit, Siddique wrote, stems from how AI systems increasingly resemble loosely governed distributed environments, where multiple untrusted components share resources, make decisions, and interact externally with minimal oversight.
That prompted Microsoft to apply proven design patterns from operating systems, service meshes, and site reliability engineering to bring structure, isolation, and control to these environments, Siddique added.
The result was the Redmond-headquartered giant packaging these principles into the toolkit comprising seven components available in Python, TypeScript, Rust, Go, and .NET.
The cross-language approach, Siddique explained, is aimed at meeting developers where they are and enabling integration across heterogeneous enterprise stacks.
As for the components, the toolkit includes modules such as a policy enforcement layer named Agent OS, a secure communication and identity framework named Agent Mesh, an execution control environment named Agent Runtime, and additional components, such as Agent SRE, Agent Compliance, and Agent Lightning, covering reliability, compliance, marketplace governance, and reinforcement learning oversight.
Beyond its modular design, Siddique further wrote that the toolkit is built to work with existing development ecosystems: “We designed the toolkit to be framework-agnostic from day one. Each integration hooks into a framework’s native extension points, LangChain’s callback handlers, CrewAI’s task decorators, Google ADK’s plugin system, Microsoft Agent Framework’s middleware pipeline, so adding governance doesn’t require rewriting agent code.”
This approach, the senior executive explained, would reduce integration overhead and risk, allowing developers to introduce governance controls into production systems without disrupting existing workflows or incurring the cost and complexity of rearchitecting applications.
Siddique even went on to give examples of several framework integrations that are already deployed in production workloads, including LlamaIndex’s TrustedAgentWorker integration.
For those wishing to explore the toolkit, which is currently in public preview, it is available under an MIT license and structured as a monorepo with independently installable components.
Microsoft, in the future, plans to transition the project to a foundation-led model and is already engaging with the OWASP agentic AI community to support broader governance and stewardship, Siddique wrote.
The article originally appeared in InfoWorld.
View the full article
CSOonline

Anthropic's Claude Mythos Finds Thousands of Zero-Day Flaws Across Major Systems

Artificial Intelligence (AI) company Anthropic announced a new cybersecurity initiative called Project Glasswing that will use a preview version of its new frontier model, Claude Mythos, to find and address security vulnerabilities. The model will be used by a small set of organizations, including Amazon Web Services, Apple, Broadcom, Cisco, CrowdStrike,&View the full article
Hacker News

The tabletop exercise grows up

In the early 1800s, Prussian officers began rehearsing battles around sand tables. They called it Kriegsspiel, and it worked because it forced them to make high-stakes decisions under pressure. Fast forward to today, and that same concept has become cybersecurity’s go-to tool for crisis preparedness: the tabletop exercise. For good reason: it still works.
Full disclosure: we are actively building in this space. That’s partly why we’ve spent so much time dissecting where these exercises fall short. The observations below come directly from the trenches. Lee and I have spent years facilitating these scenarios for everyone from growth-stage technology startups to massive global enterprises in highly regulated industries. What we’ve observed consistently is that tabletops deliver genuine value. But at the same time, we both noticed that tabletop exercises also have a ceiling most experienced practitioners quietly acknowledge and rarely discuss openly.
What tabletops built and where they stop
Here is what we like about tabletops: they put people in a room and force them to talk through a crisis before one arrives. It builds shared understanding of roles and escalation paths. It surfaces gaps between the documented plan and operational reality: the outdated contact list, the ambiguous chain of authority, the runbook written for infrastructure the organization no longer runs. It develops cross-functional trust between security, legal, communications and the executive team. And it satisfies compliance frameworks, including SOC 2, ISO 27001 and NIST that require documented evidence of incident response testing.
Getting the extended team (e.g., legal, privacy, comms, support, engineering, infra) together results in genuine benefits to the shared understanding of roles, responsibilities and how an incident impacts all areas of a company. But traditional exercises carry a fundamental limitation of the medium. Most tabletops test knowledge of the plan. They do not test the ability to execute it.
Scenarios are scripted. Injects arrive on a fixed schedule regardless of what the team decides. The crisis communications plan sits in a shared drive, but nobody has tested whether the holding statement holds up when a reporter calls. The incident response plan defines roles, but nobody has observed whether those roles function when three things go wrong at once. Participants discuss theory and knowledge of a plan. It’s about what they would do. They do not do it.
Every experienced facilitator knows the moment: someone in the room challenges the premise and the facilitator asks participants to “suspend disbelief.” That phrase should give us pause. If the scenario requires suspension of disbelief, it is not building preparedness. It is building familiarity with a document.
The gap between documentation and execution is well-documented. CISA’s cyber exercise guidance notes that discussion-based exercises alone are insufficient for validating operational readiness, yet that is what most organizations rely on. The Ponemon Institute reports that just over half of security teams believe their incident response plans are effective. Most face real incidents having never practiced under conditions that resemble one.
Bring tabletops to life with AI
Advancement in AI agentic capabilities make it possible to address the traditional tabletop’s primary limitation: the inability to respond dynamically to what the team actually does. For every action, there should be a reaction instead of a series of predefined injects that completely ignore the actions a team would take.
Imagine if the roles that were previously absent (e.g., the threat actor, the journalist, the regulator, the customer) could respond to the team’s decisions in real time rather than following a fixed sequence. Until recently, approximating this required hiring a crew of trained actors, which nobody does. AI allows us to have an adversary that adapts to defensive decisions rather than following a script. Now it’s possible to have simulated stakeholders (e.g., press, regulators, customers) that react to the timing and substance of the team’s communications. The possibility is that every decision could produce consequences that cascade forward, a fidelity of simulation that simply wasn’t achievable at scale before.
Using AI, we can change the nature of the exercise from discussion to practice. Organizations could observe whether their crisis processes hold up under realistic pressure. Is the incident response plan followed, or merely referenced? Does the incident commander maintain situational awareness while the team works parallel problems? Instead of self-reported intentions, observed behaviors could be logged, timestamped and mapped to frameworks like MITRE ATT&CK and NIST CSF instead of assumptions carried forward into the next exercise?
The frequency problem could also shift. When a traditionally facilitated exercise costs tens of thousands of dollars and requires weeks of preparation, most organizations run one annually at best. Skills atrophy between cycles. New team members never participate. The IBM and Ponemon Institute 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report, which surveyed more than 600 organizations across 17 industries, found that organizations testing incident response at least twice a year reduced breach costs by $1.49 million on average. If AI compresses preparation time and cost significantly, more frequent exercises become viable.
Beyond frequency, there are possibilities traditional exercises structurally cannot offer. A well-configured AI-augmented exercise could be built around an organization’s actual environment rather than a generic scenario. Generic scenarios produce generic learning. The gap between a simulated crisis and the real one is where preparedness quietly erodes.
Perhaps most importantly, the nature of the scenario itself could change. Traditional exercises tend toward resolution: the team works the problem; the facilitator guides them through it and the exercise ends on a manageable note. An AI-driven approach could introduce compounding failures, unexpected escalations and realistic time pressure without a facilitator needing to manage the room’s morale. The goal would be to find where the plan actually breaks instead of confirming it exists.
And unlike a single annual exercise that produces a snapshot, repeated cycles could generate longitudinal data: whether response times improve, whether the same gaps recur, whether the program is measurably stronger than it was six months ago. That kind of trend data has been difficult to produce. It’s also easy to over-index on. Metrics that show improving response times don’t necessarily mean an organization is better prepared. They may mean the team is getting better at the simulation.
The next step
The tabletop exercise has served our profession well. It brought structure to crisis preparedness, created a common language between security teams and business leadership and gave us a way to prepare before the real thing arrived.
AI-augmented approaches offer the next step in that tradition: the ability to move from discussing a crisis to experiencing one. To test the communication materials that have never been tested. To observe whether the incident response plan is followed or merely referenced. To surface the gaps that scripted scenarios never reach.
We do not think this replaces the skilled facilitator (the company CISO or consultant). The judgment-intensive post-mortem debrief that follows a well-run exercise is absolutely essential. Think of it like basketball: a coach can only give you meaningful feedback if they’ve seen you play. The AI-augmented exercise is the game; the post-mortem debrief is the coaching. What AI does is raise the floor so that the work of a good facilitator starts from a richer baseline of observed behavior rather than participant recall and self-assessment.
The tabletop is ready to grow up. Whether your program is ready to grow with it depends less on the technology than on your organization’s willingness to test its processes against something that actually pushes back.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

N. Korean Hackers Spread 1,700 Malicious Packages Across npm, PyPI, Go, Rust

The North Korea-linked persistent campaign known as Contagious Interview has spread its tentacles by publishing malicious packages targeting the Go, Rust, and PHP ecosystems. "The threat actor's packages were designed to impersonate legitimate developer tooling [...], while quietly functioning as malware loaders, extending Contagious Interview’s established playbook into a coordinatedView the full article
Hacker News

Iran-Linked Hackers Disrupt U.S. Critical Infrastructure by Targeting Internet-Exposed PLCs

Iran-affiliated cyber actors are targeting internet-facing operational technology (OT) devices across critical infrastructures in the U.S., including programmable logic controllers (PLCs), cybersecurity and intelligence agencies warned Tuesday. "These attacks have led to diminished PLC functionality, manipulation of display data and, in some cases, operational disruption and financialView the full article
Hacker News

WhatsApp Gets New CarPlay App

Facebook-owned messaging app WhatsApp was today updated with expanded support for CarPlay. ‌CarPlay‌ users are able to more easily call and message their friends and family members in WhatsApp directly from the car interface.


WhatsApp had ‌CarPlay‌ integration before, but with limited Siri-based functionality. The new app has a full native ‌CarPlay‌ interface with a list of recent chats and call history, along with a tab for favorite contacts. There are quick access buttons for sending a message via dictation or placing a call, which makes it easier to communicate.

The updated WhatsApp ‌CarPlay‌ app has been in testing since last week. WhatsApp users can access the new ‌CarPlay‌ app by updating WhatsApp on the iPhone to the latest version and then connecting the device to a CarPlay-compatible vehicle.Related Roundup: CarPlayTag: WhatsAppRelated Forum: HomePod, HomeKit, CarPlay, Home & Auto Technology
This article, "WhatsApp Gets New CarPlay App" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

What Anthropic Glasswing reveals about the future of vulnerability discovery

AI giant Anthropic has unveiled Project Glasswing, a cybersecurity initiative built around Claude Mythos Preview, a model it describes as “cybersecurity in the age of AI” that can autonomously identify software vulnerabilities at scale.
Rather than release the model publicly, Anthropic is restricting access to a closed consortium of more than 40 companies that includes Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet-owned Google, and the Linux Foundation, along with a small group of security vendors such as CrowdStrike, Palo Alto Networks, and Cisco.
“Mythos makes the first domino clearer: Once frontier AI can do large-scale bug hunting, the logic of paying humans for routine discovery starts to break down,” says Jeff Williams, founder of OWASP and CTO of Contrast Security.
According to Anthropic, the goal is to apply these capabilities in a controlled, defensive setting, enabling participating organizations to test and improve the security of widely used software and infrastructure.
The economics of bug hunting shift
In early testing, Anthropic claims the model identified thousands of high-severity vulnerabilities across operating systems, browsers, and other widely used software. Some had persisted despite extensive prior review — including a 27-year-old flaw in OpenBSD, long considered one of the most security-hardened operating systems and widely used in critical infrastructure.
As with many early AI capability claims, the results are largely self-reported and only partially externally verifiable, but they point to a clear direction: Vulnerability discovery is becoming more automated and scalable.
That shift raises questions about how security work is organized and valued.
For OWASP’s Williams, the disruption begins with economics. If AI systems can perform large-scale vulnerability discovery, the rationale for relying on human-driven bug hunting — particularly for routine discovery — erodes.
But the implications extend beyond bug bounty programs. “This does not just threaten bug bounties,” he says. “It threatens the whole idea that security can remain a find-and-fix afterthought. The era of the security backlog is coming to a welcome end.”
From backlog management to exposure-window risk
The issue, as Williams frames it, is not simply how many vulnerabilities exist, but how they are managed. “Mythos makes one thing painfully clear,” he says. “This is not a prioritization problem. It’s an exposure-window problem.”
Traditional vulnerability management has been built around prioritization — ranking issues by severity, exploitability, and business impact, then working through remediation over time.
Williams argues that the limiting factor is no longer how well organizations prioritize, but how long vulnerabilities remain exposed.
Adapting to AI-powered cyber defense
Anthony Grieco, SVP and chief security and trust officer at Cisco, places the development in a broader operational context. In a blog post, Grieco argues that organizations must “rise to the era of AI-powered cyber defense,” reflecting a shift in both the threat landscape and the capabilities required to respond.
Cisco is among the organizations participating in Project Glasswing, joining what Anthropic describes as a collaborative effort to apply advanced AI capabilities to defensive security use cases. Grieco emphasizes that security programs will need to evolve alongside rapidly advancing AI capabilities.
“AI capabilities will continue to advance, the threat surface will evolve, and the organizations that protect the internet will need to operate at the speed of machines and the scale of networks,” Grieco says. “Much of what we are now experiencing would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. There is no finish line, only a commitment to do everything possible to stay ahead of adversaries.”
For security leaders, that combination — more scalable discovery and the need to operate at greater speed — challenges longstanding assumptions about how risk is handled. Backlogs, long treated as an unavoidable operational reality, become harder to justify if vulnerabilities can be identified more quickly and comprehensively.
A shift upstream — and open questions about control
“The future belongs to software factories that can reliably produce secure code and the assurance case to prove it,” Williams says, pointing to a model in which security is built into development processes rather than addressed primarily after deployment.
Grieco’s emphasis on adapting to AI-powered threats aligns with that direction, underscoring the need for organizations to evolve both their tools and their assumptions about how quickly security-relevant conditions can change.
At the same time, questions remain about how broadly these capabilities will spread. Anthropic has chosen to limit access to Mythos Preview, reflecting the dual-use nature of systems that can identify software vulnerabilities at scale but could also accelerate their exploitation.
“It’s highly questionable that Anthropic will be able to limit the malicious uses of this model,” Williams says.
Anthropic has committed $100 million in model usage credits to Project Glasswing, with participants expected to contribute additional usage during the research preview. Claude Mythos Preview will be available through the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry.
The company has also pledged funding to open-source security efforts, including donations to Alpha-Omega, OpenSSF, and the Apache Software Foundation to support maintainers responding to these changes. Maintainers interested in access can apply through the Claude for Open Source program.
View the full article
CSOonline

What's Happening With the HomePod Mini 2? All the Current Rumors

The $99 HomePod mini is now over 2,000 days old, which means it has been five and a half years since it received a meaningful update. Apple is working on a new model, but launch rumors have come and gone due to Siri issues.

Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.
Apple introduced the ‌HomePod mini‌ in October 2020, and refreshed the color options in 2021, but it is way overdue for a more substantial refresh. Here's what we know about what's coming.
Design

It doesn't sound like Apple is going to update the ‌HomePod mini‌'s design. There are no rumors of a revamped look or changes to the shape, so the ‌HomePod mini‌ 2 will look a lot like the original model.

We are expecting new color options for the ‌HomePod mini‌, and Apple has tested a red color, so that could be one of the shades we get.

Chip Update

The current ‌HomePod mini‌ uses the S5 Apple Watch chip, which is old at this point. The next model is going to use the S9 chip or later, so it will have more power for computational audio and other audio features that require a processor.

The S9, S10, and S11 are all basically identical, so performance will be about the same regardless of which one Apple chooses. Apple Watch chips are much lower power than iPhone, iPad, and Mac chips, but the S5 to S9 or later is still a huge jump.

New Features

Apple hasn't released the new ‌HomePod mini‌ because it's supposedly waiting on the new version of ‌Siri‌. ‌Siri‌ was supposed to get an Apple Intelligence update this spring, but it now looks like we'll be waiting until the September iOS 27 launch.

The ‌HomePod mini‌ will run the updated version of ‌Siri‌, so it should be a much more capable device than the current model for doing everything from suggesting music to controlling smart home products.

N1

The ‌HomePod mini‌ 2 could get Apple's N1 chip with Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6, but Apple hasn't included it in some lower-cost products, so it's not entirely clear if it will be included. Either way, the ‌HomePod mini‌ should get at least Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3.

The N1 has Thread support too, but the ‌HomePod mini‌ already includes Thread.

UWB 2

A newer Ultra Wideband chip could be included, improving UWB features like Handoff for transferring music from an iPhone to a HomePod and vice versa.

Big HomePod

Apple could also be planning an update to the full-sized HomePod, which would presumably get the same feature set as the ‌HomePod mini‌. The ‌HomePod‌ was last updated in January 2023, which is when Apple reintroduced the larger-size option.

Launch Date

We may not see a new ‌HomePod mini‌ until September 2027 when the updated version of ‌Siri‌ debuts in ‌iOS 27‌. The ‌Apple Intelligence‌ version of ‌Siri‌ is the backbone for several new home-focused Apple devices like a smart home hub and a new Apple TV that's in the works.Related Roundup: HomePod miniTag: HomePod Mini 2Buyer's Guide: HomePod Mini (Don't Buy)Related Forum: HomePod, HomeKit, CarPlay, Home & Auto Technology
This article, "What's Happening With the HomePod Mini 2? All the Current Rumors" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Aqara W200 Thermostat Launches With Apple Adaptive Temperature and Clean Energy Support

Smart home device manufacturer Aqara today launched the Thermostat Hub W200, a new Matter-enabled thermostat that comes with several features that set it apart from existing smart thermostat options.


The W200 is Aqara's first thermostat created for North America, and I've been testing two of them for the last couple of months prior to launch. The W200 is a thermostat, but it's also a presence sensor and it serves as a hub for other Aqara and Matter devices with Thread and Zigbee integration.

Along with those features, the W200 supports Adaptive Temperature and Clean Energy Guidance, two HomeKit features that Apple added in iOS 26. Adaptive Temperature intelligently adjusts the thermostat when you leave the house, arrive back home, or sleep to save energy. Clean Energy Guidance adjusts electricity usage when energy sources are less clean, timing heating or cooling to use cleaner energy when possible.

The W200 has a squircle design with rounded edges, and it's a clean look that's more square than Ecobee and larger than Nest. The interface features large text for the temperature, and it displays the time when it's not active. The temperature can be controlled directly on the thermostat using the touchscreen, and all of the controls are also available in menus accessed with swipe gestures. The display does pick up fingerprints, and the fingerprints are noticeable on the glossy surface.


I replaced two Nest thermostats with the W200 thermostats from Aqara, and because they arrived just before I happened to have a HVAC checkup scheduled, I had them installed by the HVAC company I use. I could have self-installed and saved some money since I was going from one smart thermostat to another and the wiring was the same. Taking a picture of the existing wiring and mirroring that after swapping in the new thermostat would have worked fine. The worst part of swapping from Nest to the Aqara W200 was the different base plate shape. The W200 has a smaller base plate, so there are unpainted edges on the wall that I still haven't fixed.

I have two heat pumps, one that's single stage and one that's dual stage. The dual stage heat pump operates as single stage because it's controlled by the onboard computer, so there's nothing too fancy in my setup. The W200 works with heat pumps (electric and geo-thermal), along with furnaces, boilers, and other heat sources.

There's a mmWave radar in the W200 that recognizes when a person is in the room and when it is being approached. The display on the thermostat activates when someone comes close, and the sensor is also used for activating heating and cooling schedules through the Aqara app and for Adaptive Temperature based on whether someone is home, or even in the room the thermostat is in.

The Aqara app has its own smart schedules that can be enabled that are distinct from Adaptive Temperature, but you have to choose between Apple Home control or the Aqara app. I tried both, but preferred the Adaptive Temperature interface because it was less complicated. Adaptive Temperature is basically a home or away setting, while Aqara has different time of day options. You can choose neither and control the temperature manually, ask Siri to change the temperature, or set up ‌HomeKit‌ automations based on time of day or other ‌HomeKit‌ devices. There are a lot of control options, so the W200 will do what you need, whether that's something simple or a complicated schedule. You will need a full Apple Home setup with an Apple Matter hub (HomePod or Apple TV) to use the W200 with ‌HomeKit‌.


I don't know how often most people change their interior temperatures, but mine is typically static. I work from home and live in North Carolina, where it gets humid. In the summer, I have to run the AC to keep it from getting too humid for my wood floors, and in the winter, it at least has to be warm enough for my plants, and those things need to happen whether I'm home or not. Heat pumps are more efficient at a steady temperature, so I'm not doing things like turning down the heat at night. Adaptive Temperature and all the options for changing heating and cooling throughout the day are aimed at people who have furnaces and can make better use of the electricity savings, but I do appreciate the scheduling for occasions where I do need to adjust temperature frequently. If you have a system where time-based changes result in electricity savings, you'll get the most out of the W200.


Aqara could benefit from simplifying some of its products, but the company seems to focus on making a huge variety of options available so customers can pick and choose how they want to use a device. Aqara's smart locks support unlocking with fingerprints, NFC, smartphones, codes, and more, and that same versatility is available with the W200.


I did run into an issue with the W200 during testing, and it's still not resolved. The thermostat has a "Min Compressor Outdoor Working Temp" that can't be set below 20 degrees Fahrenheit. That suggests to me that it switches to auxiliary heat at that point, and that's not what I want it to be doing. Newer heat pumps for cold climates can operate below 20 degrees, and I want to minimize aux heating because mine is electric and expensive. I asked Aqara about this, and they suggested turning off the "Enable to work with heat pump" feature in the Aux settings, but their setup flow says to enable the aux and heat pump setting if the auxiliary heat is electric. The app says "Please follow the prompts to select, otherwise the machine will be damaged," when directing me to select aux heat settings, and since I am not an HVAC expert, I don't want to choose the wrong option.

The auxiliary heating and compressor temperature wording is unclear in the app and on the thermostat, and communicating with Aqara did not help. My HVAC tech said I might not want to use this thermostat because I can't set the compressor to continue to run at a lower temp. On an Ecobee thermostat, there is a setting to minimize auxiliary heat usage, and the compressor lockout can be disabled, but I don't have those settings on the W200. Aqara said the heat pump wording in the app will be updated in the future, but I'm still not sure the thermostat is giving users adequate control over heat pumps, so do some research before you choose it if you have a heat pump. We don't have a lot of days under 20 degrees here, and I wasn't able to test the thermostat at that temperature during the review period.


If you have other Aqara devices like a video doorbell or lock, the W200's display can show snaps from the video feed or unlock the door, plus it works with the Aqara Presence Multi-Sensor FP300 and Climate Sensor W100 for automating heating and cooling based on temperature readings and occupancy in different rooms of the house. It can also integrate with and control other Matter devices, but I use Apple Home for that so I don't need the Aqara hub to act as a Matter Controller.

Bottom Line

Compressor lockout and aux heating confusion aside, I had no other complaints about the W200. It worked as expected, was more reliable than my prior Nest thermostat, and added useful automation features. I think it's worth looking at as a HomeKit-compatible alternative to Ecobee if you want the latest Apple Home features like Adaptive Temperature.

How to Buy

The Thermostat Hub W200 can be purchased from Amazon for $160. A C-wire adapter is sold separately for $30 for setups that do not have a C-wire.

Note: Aqara provided MacRumors with two W200 thermostats for the purpose of this review. No other compensation was received.Tag: Aqara
This article, "Aqara W200 Thermostat Launches With Apple Adaptive Temperature and Clean Energy Support" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Fortinet releases emergency hotfix for FortiClient EMS zero-day flaw

Hackers have been exploiting a critical vulnerability in FortiClient Endpoint Management Server (FortiClient EMS) since at least the end of March. Fortinet has published an advisory and released an emergency hotfix that can be applied to affected deployments until a patched version can be released.
The vulnerability, now tracked as CVE-2026-35616, allows unauthenticated attackers to remotely execute arbitrary code on FortiClient EMS, which organizations use to manage, monitor, provision, patch, quarantine, and monitor endpoint systems. The flaw is rated 9.1 (critical) in the Common Vulnerability Scoring System and was added by the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to its Know Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on Monday.
The vulnerability affects FortiClient EMS 7.4.5 and 7.4.6. The company plans to patch the vulnerability in upcoming version 7.4.7. In the meantime, a hotfix can be applied to the EMS Linux Server via the command line. The issue has been patched server-side on FortiClient Cloud and FortiSASE, so only on-premises deployments are impacted.
Researchers from security firm watchTowr first saw exploitation of this vulnerability on March 31, days before Fortinet released its advisory and hotfix. Due to this zero-day status, users should check deployments for possible compromise, in addition to applying the patch.
“The timing of the ramp-up of in-the-wild exploitation of this zero-day is likely not coincidental,” watchTowr CEO Benjamin Harris told CSO. “Attackers have shown repeatedly that holiday weekends are the best time to move. Security teams are at half strength, on-call engineers are distracted, and the window between compromise and detection stretches from hours to days. Easter, like any other holiday, represents opportunity.”
Second FortiClient EMS RCE this year
This zero-day incident comes after Fortinet patched a different flaw in FortiClient EMS in February that attackers also began exploiting in the wild. That vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-21643, was an SQL injection flaw that allowed unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands.
The new vulnerability is an authentication bypass issue that stems from improper access control in the FortiClient EMS API. It allows attackers to execute code on the underlying server without valid credentials or user interaction.
“The two vulnerabilities have not been confirmed as linked, and attribution to a specific threat actor has not been established,” the watchTowr researchers said.
Mitigation and response
In addition to the hotfix, organizations should review their available logs for any suspicious API requests and activity. Unfortunately, there are no published indicators of compromise for this malicious activity yet, so watchTowr recommends auditing all recent changes made to endpoint security policies, VPN configuration profiles, application firewall rules, administrator accounts and access controls, and endpoint compliance configurations.
“If compromise is suspected, do not attempt to clean the affected instance in place,” the researchers said. “Restore from a known-good backup taken before the likely compromise window, or rebuild the EMS instance and migrate the data to it. Where integrity cannot be confidently verified, a full rebuild is the most defensible approach.”
View the full article
CSOonline

Google Brings Vertical Tabs and Improved Reading Mode to Chrome

Google today updated its Chrome browser with support for vertical tabs, which are displayed in a sidebar instead of at the top of the browser.


The tab layout can be changed by right clicking on any Chrome window and choosing the "Show Tabs Vertically" option. Sidebar tabs feature full page titles and make it simple to organize tab groups.

Google has also added a new full-page interface for reading mode. Right clicking on a webpage and choosing the "Open in reading mode" option will remove distractions and initiate a full-page viewing experience rather than the current side panel default.

Google says the two new features are rolling out on the desktop version of Chrome starting today, so they should be available for all users soon.Tags: Google, Google Chrome
This article, "Google Brings Vertical Tabs and Improved Reading Mode to Chrome" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

'Apple: The First 50 Years' is the Ultimate Apple Encyclopedia

Last month, tech columnist David Pogue released a new book titled Apple: The First 50 Years. In the U.S., the hardcover book is regularly priced at $50, but it is currently on sale for around $35 on Amazon as of the time of this writing.


Published ahead of Apple's 50th anniversary on April 1, the 600-page book explores the first five decades of the company's history. Pogue interviewed 150 key people who shaped Apple into what it is today, including the company's co-founder Steve Wozniak, former CEO John Sculley, former design chief Jony Ive, and many others.

Here is the book's official description:Pogue is a CBS Sunday Morning correspondent, and he spent many years writing about Apple and technology for The New York Times and Macworld.

Last month, publisher Simon & Schuster provided me with a copy of Apple: The First 50 Years, and I consider it to be the ultimate encyclopedia for all things Apple. While the book is very long, it is broken down into digestible sections, interspersed with 350 full-color photos, a map of key Apple-related locations in the Cupertino, California area, employee profiles, smaller stories and anecdotes, and more. You can easily flip back and forth through the book and focus in on topics that interest you the most.

While I have been closely following and writing about Apple for nearly 20 years, the book still includes many facts about the company that I did not know before, and Pogue delivers on his promise of surfacing some new details too.

If you want a comprehensive history of Apple's history, this book earns my stamp of approval. The hardcover edition makes a great collectible.

Apple: The First 50 Years is available on Amazon, Apple Books, and elsewhere.

Notes: Simon & Schuster provided MacRumors with a complimentary copy of the book for the purpose of this review. No other compensation was provided. MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Amazon. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment.Tags: Apple 50th Anniversary, David Pogue
This article, "'Apple: The First 50 Years' is the Ultimate Apple Encyclopedia" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Studio Display XDR Now FDA-Cleared for Diagnostic Radiology Use

The Studio Display XDR's medical image calibration feature received FDA clearance, which means radiologists are now able to use the display for viewing medical images.


Apple marketing chief Greg Joswiak confirmed today that U.S. radiologists can connect the ‌Studio Display‌ XDR to a Mac running macOS 26.4 to use DICOM medical imaging presets.

The ‌Studio Display‌ XDR supports DICOM and has a Medical Imaging Calibrator for diagnostic radiology, so radiologists can view images without the need for a single-purpose medical imaging display. The ‌Studio Display‌ XDR is priced at $2,899 with a VESA mount, and it is more affordable than many specialized medical imaging monitors.

Using the ‌Studio Display‌ XDR for radiology requires switching from a standard viewing mode to the radiology viewing mode. Apple will need to get appropriate medical clearance in other countries to expand the radiology feature outside of the United States.Related Roundup: Studio DisplayBuyer's Guide: Displays (Buy Now)Related Forum: Mac Accessories
This article, "Apple Studio Display XDR Now FDA-Cleared for Diagnostic Radiology Use" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

5 practical steps to strengthen attack resilience with attack surface management

Every asset you manage expands your attack surface. Internet‑facing applications, cloud workloads, credentials, endpoints, and third‑party integrations all represent potential entry points for attackers. As environments grow more distributed, that exposure expands faster than most security teams can track manually.
Attack surface management (ASM) helps answer a critical question for IT security teams: What can attackers actually reach right now? By continuously identifying and prioritizing exposure across your environment, ASM transforms raw visibility into measurable cyber resilience.
Below are five practical steps security teams can take to strengthen attack resilience using attack surface management principles.
1. Identify and monitor every attack surface category
Effective attack surface management starts with complete visibility. Security gaps often appear because teams focus on only one or two asset types while attackers exploit others.
A comprehensive ASM program maintains visibility across:
External attack surfaces such as web applications, APIs, VPNs, DNS services, and email gateways Internal attack surfaces including Active Directory, file shares, internal databases, and privileged systems. The NIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 addresses internal surfaces through identity management, authentication, and access control functions. Digital attack surfaces like cloud workloads, containers, CI/CD pipelines, and code repositories. For MSPs managing multi-cloud environments, this category represents the largest and most complex attack surface. Physical attack surfaces such as endpoints, network devices, IoT systems, and removable media Human attack surfaces driven by phishing, social engineering, and credential abuse Cloud and hybrid environments where shared responsibility and misconfigurations increase risk. Multi-cloud credential management and heterogeneous environment visibility create challenges requiring CNAPP solutions and centralized asset inventory management. Gaps in any category create blind spots attackers exploit. Continuous discovery across all surfaces is foundational to resilience.
2. Focus on the attack vectors that break resilience fastest
Understanding how attackers gain access helps security teams prioritize the right controls. Recent breach analysis consistently shows a few vectors responsible for most successful intrusions:
Credential‑based attacks targeting VPNs, RDP, admin accounts, and RMM platforms Vulnerability exploitation, especially in public‑facing services and unpatched systems Third‑party compromise affecting shared tools, credentials, and infrastructure Cloud misconfigurations exposing services through overly permissive access or weak authentication Attack surface management helps surface where these risks exist across your environment, so remediation efforts focus on exposures that attackers actively exploit.
3. Move from periodic assessments to continuous exposure management
Traditional quarterly scans cannot keep pace with modern infrastructure. Cloud deployments, configuration changes, and software updates happen daily. ASM requires continuous processes rather than point‑in‑time assessments.
Effective programs follow four ongoing cycles:
Discovery to identify known and unknown assets across on‑premises, cloud, and third‑party environments Assessment to detect vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, and exposed services continuously Prioritization based on exploitability, asset criticality, and active threat intelligence Remediation using automation for routine fixes and orchestration for critical exposures This approach aligns closely with modern continuous exposure management models and shifts teams from reactive firefighting to proactive risk reduction.
4. Prioritize what attackers are most likely to exploit
Not every vulnerability represents the same level of risk. ASM becomes effective when prioritization reflects real‑world attacker behavior.
Strong prioritization combines:
CVSS severity for technical impact Exploit probability scoring to assess the likelihood of exploitation Asset criticality based on business impact Known exploited vulnerabilities tracked by government and industry sources This risk‑based approach ensures teams focus remediation efforts where they deliver the greatest resilience improvement.
Automated patching and vulnerability management within tools like N-central RMM™ help close these gaps faster by connecting discovery, prioritization, and remediation in a single workflow.
N‑central patches systems automatically across Windows and 100+ third-party applications, while built-in vulnerability management with CVSS scoring identifies exposures requiring immediate attention.
5. Integrate ASM with detection, response, and recovery
Attack surface management alone does not stop attacks. Resilience improves when ASM is integrated into a broader before‑during‑after strategy.
Before: Reduce exposure through patch automation, configuration management, and access controls During: Detect and contain active threats using continuous monitoring and threat detection After: Recover quickly using immutable backups and tested restoration processes Adlumin MDR™ adds 24/7 detection and response by monitoring endpoints and identities for malicious behavior, while Cove Data Protection™ supports rapid recovery with cloud‑first, immutable backups that remain protected even during ransomware events.
Together, these capabilities help ensure that when attackers find an opening, the impact is contained and business operations continue.
From visibility to resilience
Attack surface management shifts security from guessing where risk exists to knowing what is exposed and acting on it continuously. For IT security teams managing complex, distributed environments, ASM provides the visibility and prioritization needed to reduce exposure at scale.
When integrated with endpoint management, threat detection, and recovery capabilities, ASM becomes a critical driver of cyber resilience rather than just another security metric.
To learn more, visit us here.
View the full article
CSOonline

5 steps to strengthen supply chain security and improve cyber resilience

Supply chain attacks have rapidly become one of the most damaging and difficult threats facing IT and security teams. When an adversary compromises a trusted vendor, software component, cloud service, or MSP tool, they bypass traditional defenses and enter through the front door. For organizations managing distributed environments, and for MSPs supporting dozens or hundreds of clients, the impact can cascade quickly.
Strengthening supply chain security is no longer an isolated risk management exercise. It is a core component of cyber resilience and business continuity. Below are five practical steps security teams can take to reduce exposure, improve visibility, and recover faster when a supplier is compromised.
1. Map your supply chain and prioritize critical dependencies
Modern environments depend on complex webs of software, cloud providers, infrastructure services, and third‑party integrations. Visibility into that ecosystem is often incomplete, especially when open‑source libraries and inherited components are involved.
Start by building a full inventory of your supply chain:
All software vendors and SaaS platforms Open‑source components embedded in your applications MSP or IT service providers Cloud infrastructure and authentication services API integrations and automation workflows Once documented, classify each supplier by the impact they would have if compromised. A remote monitoring tool or authentication platform represents far greater risk than a basic productivity app. This prioritization helps you allocate time, resources, and enhanced scrutiny where it matters.
2. Evaluate and monitor supplier security posture continuously
A one‑time vendor questionnaire cannot keep pace with evolving threats. Supply chain risk must be measured continuously using clear, repeatable criteria.
Key areas to evaluate include:
Frequency and transparency of security updates Secure development practices Patch and vulnerability remediation programs SBOM (software bill of materials) availability Incident response processes and communication expectations Automated monitoring is essential. SIEM, EDR, and behavioral analytics can reveal anomalies in vendor activity far earlier than manual checks. Treat every supplier as an external, untrusted entity. Even when a vendor is integrated deeply into your environment, apply Zero Trust principles by validating activity continuously and limiting access to only what is necessary.
3. Reduce blast radius with strong access controls
Supplier credentials have been central to some of the most damaging breaches in recent years. If an attacker acquires a vendor’s account or API token, they often gain privileged access and freedom of movement.
To reduce the blast radius of vendor compromise:
Require MFA for all vendor accounts Apply least‑privilege permissions and segment vendor access Use just‑in‑time access for sensitive operations Regularly audit and remove stale permissions Monitor authentication behavior for anomalies This applies equally to MSPs managing large client portfolios. A breach that compromises tooling across your stack affects every environment you support. Proactive access governance is essential to limiting downstream impact.
4. Detect supply chain intrusions early with unified telemetry
When a supplier is compromised, early detection is the key to containing risk. Attackers often exploit trusted update mechanisms, open‑source components, remote management tools, or cloud integrations in ways that appear legitimate at first.
To catch these attacks quickly, you need telemetry across endpoints, identity, network behavior, email, and backups. Platform‑level visibility helps connect subtle signals across multiple systems.
This is where products like N-able’s Security Solutions provide value. Centralized monitoring, AI‑driven detection, and automated response actions help remove blind spots and accelerate containment. For organizations without dedicated SOC teams, managed detection services scale expertise without expanding headcount.
5. Build recovery into your supply chain security strategy
Even with strong preventive controls, supply chain compromise remains a high‑probability risk. Recovery speed determines whether the incident is a setback or a business‑disrupting event.
A resilience‑first approach focuses on:
Fast isolation of compromised endpoints Reliable, immutable backups protected from ransomware Automated recovery testing for confidence in restore readiness Playbooks for supply‑chain‑driven attacks Cross‑team coordination between IT operations, security, and leadership This is where N-able Cove Data Protection™ strengthens supply chain resilience. Because backups are isolated by default and stored in the cloud, they remain protected even when production infrastructure is compromised. Rapid, flexible restore options reduce downtime and minimize customer impact.
For MSPs, this unified recovery capability ensures you can support multiple clients simultaneously during cascading supply chain incidents. For internal IT teams with limited staff, automation and cloud‑based recovery help maintain business continuity without significant additional overhead.
Adopting a before‑during‑after defense strategy
Supply chain threats require a layered approach. A before‑during‑after framework brings structure to your program:
Before: Reduce exposure with patch automation, configuration management, and dependency visibility. RMM platforms help close vulnerabilities before attackers exploit them. During: Detect and contain threats through integrated EDR, DNS protection, and security operations. Unified telemetry improves accuracy and reduces noise. After: Restore operations quickly with cloud‑based, immutable backups and tested recovery processes. Business continuity depends on recovery that works reliably under pressure. This approach improves resilience not only for supply chain attacks but across your entire threat landscape.
Strengthen your supply chain security with a unified platform
As supply chain attacks grow in scale and sophistication, organizations must be prepared to identify risks quickly, contain compromise, and maintain continuity. Mapping dependencies, assessing supplier posture, enforcing strong access controls, unifying detection, and prioritizing recovery create a practical, achievable roadmap for IT and security teams.
N-able’s integrated tools across endpoint management, security operations, and data protection help deliver the visibility, automation, and resilience needed to stay ahead of supply‑chain‑driven threats.
View the full article
CSOonline

5 ways to strengthen identity security and improve attack resilience

Identity compromise has become one of the most effective ways for attackers to infiltrate business systems. Firewalls, endpoint protection, and monitoring tools mean little once an attacker logs in using valid credentials. For MSPs and corporate IT teams, strengthening identity security and enforcing least privilege access are two of the most powerful ways to reduce blast radius and stop attacks earlier.
This article outlines five practical steps to improve identity security across human, machine, and workload identities, while also building attack resilience through least privilege and continuous validation.
1. Enforce MFA everywhere—starting with high-privilege accounts
Multi-factor authentication remains one of the most effective defenses against credential-based attacks. Passwords alone cannot protect critical systems, particularly when phishing and infostealer malware continue to accelerate.
Start with the identities that carry the most risk:
Admin accounts MSP technician accounts Cloud infrastructure accounts External-facing applications Remote access tools Any MFA deployment is better than none, but phishing-resistant methods offer the strongest protection. Once privileged accounts are enforced, expand MFA to all users over the next 30 days. Doing so reduces the likelihood that compromised credentials lead directly to unauthorized access.
2. Implement privileged access management to control admin permissions
Least privilege is the second half of effective identity security. Even when a user successfully authenticates, they should only have access to the minimum resources required for their role. Privileged Access Management (PAM) helps enforce this by centralizing credential storage, eliminating shared administrative passwords, and controlling privilege elevation on endpoints.
N-able Passportal™ helps teams vault and rotate privileged credentials automatically and integrate credential hygiene with Microsoft Active Directory. This reduces the risk of privilege creep, orphaned accounts, and long-lived passwords that attackers routinely exploit.
For MSPs, centralized credential management prevents a compromised technician credential from granting access across dozens of client environments. For corporate IT teams, PAM reduces the likelihood that attackers can escalate privileges after gaining initial access.
3. Inventory every identity—human, machine, and workload
You cannot protect the identities you do not know exist. Most environments have far more machine and service accounts than human users, and these non-human identities often carry higher privileges with far less scrutiny.
A complete identity inventory should include:
Employees, contractors, and vendor accounts Service accounts for scheduled tasks and automation API keys used in integrations Certificates supporting encrypted communication Application and workload identities used in cloud-native environments Machine and workload identities need special attention because they rarely trigger alerts when abused. Attackers increasingly target them to escalate privileges quietly.
Maintaining this inventory helps IT teams identify shadow identities, remove unnecessary permissions, and reduce pathways attackers use for lateral movement.
4. Establish continuous validation to detect compromise earlier
Credential compromise often goes undetected for months. Continuous validation helps reduce that window by monitoring identity behavior in real time, such as:
Impossible travel logins Sudden privilege escalations Activity from unmanaged devices Unusual authentication patterns Unexpected API usage Modern identity attacks frequently blend automation, AI-driven phishing, and tactics that bypass traditional alerting. Continuous validation helps security teams catch these anomalies earlier and contain attacks before they spread.
Tools such as Adlumin ITDR™ support identity threat detection by monitoring Microsoft 365 logins, detecting abnormal identity behavior, and automatically taking action based on severity.
5. Build zero trust foundations by combining identity, devices, networks, applications, and data
Identity security is the first pillar of Zero Trust, but it cannot operate in isolation. Strong authentication means little if endpoints are unpatched or privileges are overly broad. To reduce lateral movement and strengthen attack resilience, Zero Trust requires continuous verification across five domains:
Identity – authenticate every user and entity Devices – ensure endpoints meet security requirements Networks – limit movement using segmentation Applications – enforce granular permissions Data – protect sensitive information at the access layer Identity compromise often becomes dangerous because organizations have uneven maturity across these pillars. For example, enforcing MFA but allowing unmanaged endpoints still gives attackers footholds they can use after initial access.
Tools like N-able N-central RMM™ help secure the device pillar by providing patch management, vulnerability scanning, and continuous endpoint monitoring. Cove Data Protection™ strengthens the data pillar by ensuring reliable recovery if identity compromise leads to ransomware or destructive activity.
Building identity-driven attack resilience
Identity security is not a one-time implementation. It is a continuous process of enforcing stronger authentication, removing unnecessary privileges, validating each access request, and monitoring for misuse.
A practical roadmap for IT and security teams includes:
Enforce MFA for all identities, starting with privileged accounts. Deploy PAM to manage and secure administrative credentials. Document all identity types and remove or restrict unnecessary accounts. Monitor authentication behavior continuously to detect compromise early. Extend Zero Trust practices across devices, networks, applications, and data. Taken together, these steps significantly reduce the likelihood that attackers can use valid credentials to gain broad access across your environment. They also help contain the impact when identity compromise does occur.
Download the new 2026 State of the SOC report and get a data-driven playbook for resilience across identity, endpoint, cloud, network, and perimeter layers.
View the full article
CSOonline

iPhone Fold Expected to Launch on Time in September Despite Delay Rumors

Apple's iPhone Fold development is progressing smoothly and the device is set to launch during the standard September iPhone timeframe, reports Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. The ‌iPhone Fold‌ will be available for sale "around the same time" or "soon after" the iPhone 18 Pro models.


Gurman's report contradicts information from Japanese site Nikkei that suggested ‌iPhone Fold‌ engineering delays could push the device's launch into 2027, and he says that Nikkei's report is "off base." The site said that Apple is running into engineering problems that are more complex and taking longer to resolve than anticipated.

Just two weeks ago, Gurman himself said that the ‌iPhone Fold‌ was likely to ship later than the ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ and 18 Pro Max, but it appears Apple's plans have changed.

The intricate design of the ‌iPhone Fold‌'s display could limit available supply, which is in line with information from Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. In December, Kuo said that production challenges could limit supply and result in ‌iPhone Fold‌ shortages, but he did not mention a launch delay.

Gurman says that while Apple currently intends to start selling the ‌iPhone Fold‌ alongside the ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌, the company's plans could change and "timing isn't final."

Mass production on the ‌iPhone Fold‌ has not yet begun, and the device is still in the engineering verification phase. Yesterday, leaked info suggested Apple had begun trial production. With multiple reports coming out about early manufacturing tests, it sounds like Apple is moving through its standard launch process. Additional people at the company's partner factories have likely gained access to the device, leading to an uptick in leaks and the mixed information we're hearing about launch timelines.

Since the ‌iPhone Fold‌ is an all-new device and the most interesting iPhone that Apple has launched in over a decade, we can expect a constant stream of rumors from now until September.

The first alleged ‌iPhone Fold‌ dummy models were spotted today, though the dummy devices look almost identical to 3D printed mockups that a MacRumors forum member drew up based on rumors back in May 2025. We may soon see more detailed dummy models and part leaks.

The ‌iPhone Fold‌ will have a ~5.5-inch display when folded, and a ~7.8-inch display when open. It will be around 4.5mm thick, and it will feature a 4:3 aspect ratio, which will make it similar to an iPad in design. It will be wider and shorter than other foldable smartphones on the market.

What we know so far about the ‌iPhone Fold‌ is summarized in our dedicated iPhone Fold roundup.Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTag: Foldable iPhone
This article, "iPhone Fold Expected to Launch on Time in September Despite Delay Rumors" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Russia Hacked Routers to Steal Microsoft Office Tokens

Hackers linked to Russia’s military intelligence units are using known flaws in older Internet routers to mass harvest authentication tokens from Microsoft Office users, security experts warned today. The spying campaign allowed state-backed Russian hackers to quietly siphon authentication tokens from users on more than 18,000 networks without deploying any malicious software or code.
Microsoft said in a blog post today it identified more than 200 organizations and 5,000 consumer devices that were caught up in a stealthy but remarkably simple spying network built by a Russia-backed threat actor known as “Forest Blizzard.”
How targeted DNS requests were redirected at the router. Image: Black Lotus Labs.
Also known as APT28 and Fancy Bear, Forest Blizzard is attributed to the military intelligence units within Russia’s General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU). APT 28 famously compromised the Hillary Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2016 in an attempt to interfere with the U.S. presidential election.
Researchers at Black Lotus Labs, a security division of the Internet backbone provider Lumen, found that at the peak of its activity in December 2025, Forest Blizzard’s surveillance dragnet ensnared more than 18,000 Internet routers that were mostly unsupported, end-of-life routers, or else far behind on security updates. A new report from Lumen says the hackers primarily targeted government agencies—including ministries of foreign affairs, law enforcement, and third-party email providers.
Black Lotus Security Engineer Ryan English said the GRU hackers did not need to install malware on the targeted routers, which were mainly older Mikrotik and TP-Link devices marketed to the Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) market. Instead, they used known vulnerabilities to modify the Domain Name System (DNS) settings of the routers to include DNS servers controlled by the hackers.
As the U.K.’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) notes in a new advisory detailing how Russian cyber actors have been compromising routers, DNS is what allows individuals to reach websites by typing familiar addresses, instead of associated IP addresses. In a DNS hijacking attack, bad actors interfere with this process to covertly send users to malicious websites designed to steal login details or other sensitive information.
English said the routers attacked by Forest Blizzard were reconfigured to use DNS servers that pointed to a handful of virtual private servers controlled by the attackers. Importantly, the attackers could then propagate their malicious DNS settings to all users on the local network, and from that point forward intercept any OAuth authentication tokens transmitted by those users.
DNS hijacking through router compromise. Image: Microsoft.
Because those tokens are typically transmitted only after the user has successfully logged in and gone through multi-factor authentication, the attackers could gain direct access to victim accounts without ever having to phish each user’s credentials and/or one-time codes.
“Everyone is looking for some sophisticated malware to drop something on your mobile devices or something,” English said. “These guys didn’t use malware. They did this in an old-school, graybeard way that isn’t really sexy but it gets the job done.”
Microsoft refers to the Forest Blizzard activity as using DNS hijacking “to support post-compromise adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) attacks on Transport Layer Security (TLS) connections against Microsoft Outlook on the web domains.” The software giant said while targeting SOHO devices isn’t a new tactic, this is the first time Microsoft has seen Forest Blizzard using “DNS hijacking at scale to support AiTM of TLS connections after exploiting edge devices.”
Black Lotus Labs engineer Danny Adamitis said it will be interesting to see how Forest Blizzard reacts to today’s flurry of attention to their espionage operation, noting that the group immediately switched up its tactics in response to a similar NCSC report (PDF) in August 2025. At the time, Forest Blizzard was using malware to control a far more targeted and smaller group of compromised routers. But Adamitis said the day after the NCSC report, the group quickly ditched the malware approach in favor of mass-altering the DNS settings on thousands of vulnerable routers.
“Before the last NCSC report came out they used this capability in very limited instances,” Adamitis told KrebsOnSecurity. “After the report was released they implemented the capability in a more systemic fashion and used it to target everything that was vulnerable.”
View the full article
Krebs

Russian State-Linked APT28 Exploits SOHO Routers in Global DNS Hijacking Campaign

The Russia-linked threat actor known as APT28 (aka Forest Blizzard) has been linked to a new campaign that has compromised insecure MikroTik and TP-Link routers and modified their settings to turn them into malicious infrastructure under their control as part of a cyber espionage campaign since at least May 2025. The large-scale exploitation campaign has been codenamed View the full article
Hacker News

New MacBook Neo With A19 Pro Chip and 12GB RAM Expected Next Year

Apple is planning to release a new MacBook Neo next year, according to Taiwan-based tech columnist and former Bloomberg reporter Tim Culpan.


In the latest edition of his Culpium newsletter today, Culpan said the new MacBook Neo will be equipped with a version of the A19 Pro chip from the iPhone 17 Pro models. This means the next edition of the laptop should have an increased 12GB of RAM, as that is how much unified memory the chip has in the iPhone 17 Pro models.

The current MacBook Neo has an A18 Pro chip and 8GB of RAM.

In the iPhone 17 Pro models, the A19 Pro has a 6-core GPU, but Culpan expects Apple to use a "binned" version of the chip with a 5-core GPU in the next MacBook Neo. The current model also has a 5-core GPU, so this would not be a change.

It was already widely assumed that the MacBook Neo would eventually get the A19 Pro, but Culpan's information from his supply chain sources in Asia turns it into an official rumor and provides a launch timeframe of next year. Apple unveiled the current MacBook Neo in early March this year, and it appears to be a hit so far.

According to a separate DigiTimes report today, the MacBook Neo is assembled in China and Vietnam. Culpan said Apple is in talks with suppliers to potentially boost MacBook Neo production given that sales have apparently surpassed expectations, but he noted that the company is facing a "massive dilemma" as a result.Related Roundup: MacBook NeoTags: Culpium, Tim CulpanBuyer's Guide: MacBook Neo (Buy Now)Related Forum: MacBook Neo
This article, "New MacBook Neo With A19 Pro Chip and 12GB RAM Expected Next Year" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Arcade Adding These Four Games in May

Apple today announced a new lineup of games coming to Apple Arcade in May, headlined by "Nick Jr. Replay!," alongside additional titles and updates to existing games on the service.


The new games heading to ‌Apple Arcade‌ next month are as follows:


Nick Jr. Replay!: A family-focused experience featuring characters from popular children's shows including Dora the Explorer, Blue's Clues & You!, Blaze and the Monster Machines, Bubble Guppies, Team Umizoomi, Shimmer and Shine, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. The game includes more than 50 retro mini-games in an interactive world designed to support skills such as math, reading, art, and problem-solving.
Good Pizza, Great Pizza+: A story-rich cooking and business simulation game where players run their own pizzeria, fulfilling customer orders while managing ingredients, upgrades, and daily operations.
Perchang World: A physics-based puzzle game that challenges players to guide balls through complex mechanical environments using timing, strategy, and interactive elements.
Ultimate 8 Ball Pool+: A pool simulation game featuring head-to-head matches with realistic visuals and gameplay.


All of the new games will be available on May 7, 2026. Several ‌Apple Arcade‌ titles are also set to receive updates in the coming weeks:


Hello Kitty Island Adventure: A new update arriving April 16 brings the conclusion to the City Town storyline, where Hello Kitty and Usahana team up to rescue a new friend.
Disney SpellStruck: A Star Wars update launching April 23 introduces Adventure Mode maps inspired by Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi, along with Boba Fett and Wicket as playable characters.
My Talking Angela 2+: A new Barbie-themed in-game event, available now, introduces additional fashion-focused content centered on creativity and self-expression.


‌Apple Arcade‌ is a subscription service that provides access to hundreds of games across the iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple TV, and Apple Vision Pro. All of the games are free of ads and in-app purchases, and the service now includes more than 200 titles.

In the U.S., ‌Apple Arcade‌ costs $6.99 per month, and it is also bundled with other Apple services in all Apple One plans. ‌Apple Arcade‌ can be accessed through the App Store and the Apple Games app.Tag: Apple Arcade
This article, "Apple Arcade Adding These Four Games in May" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Docker CVE-2026-34040 Lets Attackers Bypass Authorization and Gain Host Access

A high-severity security vulnerability has been disclosed in Docker Engine that could permit an attacker to bypass authorization plugins (AuthZ) under specific circumstances. The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-34040 (CVSS score: 8.8), stems from an incomplete fix for CVE-2024-41110, a maximum-severity vulnerability in the same component that came to light in July 2024. "View the full article
Hacker News

Apple is Reportedly Facing a 'Massive Dilemma' With the MacBook Neo

The all-new MacBook Neo has been such a hit that Apple is facing a "massive dilemma," according to Taiwan-based tech columnist and former Bloomberg reporter Tim Culpan.


In the iPhone 16 Pro models, the A18 Pro chip has a 6-core GPU. During the chip manufacturing process, however, sometimes a CPU or GPU core can turn out to be faulty. Rather than discarding the leftover A18 Pro chips with only a 5-core GPU, Apple opted to use them in the MacBook Neo, as a way of optimizing its supply chain and costs.

These so-called "binned" chips with a 5-core GPU are effectively "free" to Apple, given that they otherwise would have been discarded.

Herein lies the dilemma.

In the latest edition of his Culpium newsletter today, Culpan said the MacBook Neo is selling so well that Apple's supply of the binned A18 Pro chips with a 5-core GPU will "run out" before the company is able to fully satisfy demand for the laptop.

Apple's initial plan was to have suppliers build around five to six million MacBook Neo units before ceasing production of the model with the A18 Pro chip, he said, but it sounds like demand is so strong that Apple might run out of A18 Pro chips to put in the MacBook Neo before the second-generation MacBook Neo with an A19 Pro chip is ready next year.

Apple is unlikely to mark the MacBook Neo as temporarily sold out, so it may be forced to take action, but profit margins might be affected.

A18 Pro chips are manufactured with TSMC's second-generation 3nm process, known as N3E, and Culpan said TSMC's N3E production lines are currently operating at maximum capacity. As a result, he said that Apple may have to pay a premium to restart A18 Pro chip production for the MacBook Neo, which would lower its profit margins.

Apple would have to disable a GPU core on these chips to ensure that they have only a 5-core GPU, like all other MacBook Neo units sold to date.

Alternatively, Culpan said that Apple could reallocate some of its chip production that was originally planned for other devices, but he said the cost would still be higher than what it paid for its initial batch of A18 Pro chips.

Culpan speculated that Apple could also opt to discontinue the $599 model with 256GB of storage, leaving the $699 model with 512GB of storage and a Touch ID button as the only configuration available. This is unlikely to happen any time soon, in our view, given how heavily Apple has been promoting the MacBook Neo's affordability.

Apple might also be able to move up the release of a MacBook Neo with the iPhone 17 Pro's A19 Pro chip, but that too would be a costlier option, at least until the company achieves a sufficient stockpile of binned A19 Pro chips with a 5-core GPU.

In any case, Apple could opt to keep the starting price of current and future MacBook Neo models at $599 and simply accept lower profit margins on the laptop, especially given that it attracts customers to the macOS and broader Apple ecosystem.

Two weeks after MacBook Neo pre-orders began last month, Apple's CEO Tim Cook said the Mac had its "best launch week ever for first-time Mac customers," suggesting that the MacBook Neo has been a massive hit. This news should not come as much of a surprise, as the MacBook Neo is the most affordable MacBook ever released.

All configurations of the MacBook Neo currently have a 2-3 week delivery estimate on Apple's online store in the U.S. and many other countries.Related Roundup: MacBook NeoTags: Culpium, Tim CulpanBuyer's Guide: MacBook Neo (Buy Now)Related Forum: MacBook Neo
This article, "Apple is Reportedly Facing a 'Massive Dilemma' With the MacBook Neo" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Samsung Debuts 2026 The Frame Pro Models With Up to $850 in Bundle Savings

Samsung this week announced its newest lineup of The Frame TVs with the 2026 The Frame and The Frame Pro, and you can get a bundle deal of up to $850 in savings when purchasing the new models. Additionally, we're tracking a few other deals on Samsung TVs and monitors below.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Samsung. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

The new models of The Frame and The Frame Pro are upgraded with new glare-free technology to further minimize reflections and make artwork appear even more realistic. For gamers, both models feature Motion Xcelerator 144Hz for ultra-smooth motion, while new DLG 240Hz can reach even higher frame rates when connecting a compatible PC.

UP TO $850 SAVINGSThe Frame Pro 'Picture Perfect Bundle'

To mark the launch of The Frame Pro, Samsung is offering a "Picture Perfect Bundle" with over $800 in savings. It includes a white bezel, ultra-slim soundbar, professional installation, one year Art Store subscriptions, and two years of Samsung Care+ membership. You can see this bundle on The Frame Pro page on Samsung's website, and it's available in all sizes.

The Frame Pro models are available to purchase now, but the base models will launch at a later date. Below we're tracking even more TV and monitor deals on Samsung.com, including big discounts on previous-generation models of The Frame.

TVs

55-inch QLED QEF1 Smart TV - $379.99, down from $599.99
55-inch QLED Q7F Smart TV - $379.99, down from $529.99
55-inch QLED Q8F Smart TV - $549.99, down from $749.99
75-inch Vision AI Smart TV - $679.99, down from $1,199.99
50-inch The Frame - $899.99, down from $1,099.99
75-inch Neo QLED QN70F Smart TV - $999.99, down from $1,599.99
65-inch The Frame - $1,499.99, down from $1,799.99
55-inch OLED S95F Smart TV - $1,899.99, down from $2,299.99
75-inch The Frame Pro - $2,499.99, down from $3,199.99
85-inch The Frame Pro - $3,299.99, down from $4,299.99
85-inch Neo QLED QN90F Smart TV - $2,499.99, down from $4,499.99
Monitors

Samsung has a few unique monitor deals this week, offering a free copy of Resident Evil Requiem at no cost when purchasing select monitors. This includes select monitors on this landing page, with up to $1,000 in savings on these displays. When you register these monitors after purchasing them, you'll get a download code for Resident Evil Requiem, which is a $70 value.

32-inch Odyssey G70D Monitor - $599.99, down from $799.99 (free game code)
27-inch Odyssey OLED G60SD Monitor - $699.99, down from $899.99 (free game code)
49-inch Odyssey G91F Monitor - $749.99, down from $999.99 (free game code)
49-inch Odyssey OLED G95SD Monitor - $1,299.99, down from $2039.98 (free game code)
55-inch Odyssey Ark 2nd Gen - $2,299.99, down from $2,699.99 (free game code)

If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Samsung Debuts 2026 The Frame Pro Models With Up to $850 in Bundle Savings" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Leaker: Foldable iPhone Won't Be Called iPhone Fold, But 'iPhone Ultra'

Apple's first foldable iPhone may not carry the speculative media-derived "Fold" branding after all, according to Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station.


In a new post on Weibo, the oft-accurate leaker claimed that Apple's book-style foldable could launch as the "iPhone Ultra." Meanwhile, domestic Chinese manufacturers are allegedly deciding whether to follow Apple's lead by tentatively branding their own upcoming foldables as "Ultra" models, but likely with a lighter price tag – Apple's version is expected to cost between $2,000 and $2,500.

If Apple does adopt the Ultra name, it wouldn't be the first time. The company already uses the moniker to designate Apple Watch Ultra and CarPlay Ultra as premium products, not to mention its top-end M1 Ultra and M3 Ultra chips. Indeed, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reported in March that Apple is considering "Ultra" branding for an OLED touchscreen MacBook and a future AirPods model with cameras, suggesting the label could spread across several product lines.

Based on the latest rumors, Apple's foldable iPhone is widely expected to launch later this year, sometime between September and December. The device is expected to feature an approximately 5.3- to 5.5-inch outer display and a 7.8-inch inner screen, with a front-facing camera in both closed and open orientations, and a dual-lens rear camera.

Digital Chat Station has more than three million followers on Weibo, and has a track record of accurately leaking Apple-related information. Still, as with all such reports, the details remain unconfirmed.Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTags: Digital Chat Station, Foldable iPhone, iPhone Ultra
This article, "Leaker: Foldable iPhone Won't Be Called iPhone Fold, But 'iPhone Ultra'" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Anker's New Prime 3-in-1 Foldable Charging Station Hits $119.99 on Amazon

Anker's new Prime 3-in-1 Wireless Charging Station has been marked down to $119.99 on Amazon for Prime members, down from $149.99. This accessory just launched last month, and Amazon's sale today is a solid second-best price.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with some of these vendors. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

The Prime 3-in-1 Wireless Charging Station features Qi2.2 support, which lets a compatible MagSafe ‌iPhone‌ charge at up to 25W. It's the same speed as Apple's ‌MagSafe‌ charger, and it is 10W faster than the standard Qi2 ‌MagSafe‌ chargers. You can also simultaneously charge an Apple Watch and AirPods with the device.

$29 OFFAnker Prime 3-in-1 Wireless Charging Station for $119.99

There are plenty of other Anker discounts happening on Amazon this week, including Anker's popular 3-in-1 MagSafe-Compatible Charging Cube for $89.99, down from $129.99. Below you'll find a list of the best Anker discounts on Amazon this week, also including wall chargers, portable chargers, and more.

Although it's not on sale, Anker just launched a new desktop charging accessory with the Anker Nano Desk Clamp Power Strip for $69.99. The new device attaches to your desk and has 10 total ports including six AC outlets, two USB-C ports, and two USB-A ports. It supports 70W USB-C fast charging and comes in white and black color options.

Wall Chargers

Nano USB-C Wall Charger - $29.99, down from $39.99
140W 4-Port GaN USB-C Charger - $89.99, down from $99.99
Wireless Chargers

3-in-1 MagSafe-Compatible UFO Charger - $75.99, down from $89.99
3-in-1 MagSafe-Compatible Foldable Charging Station - $89.99, down from $109.99
3-in-1 MagSafe-Compatible Charging Cube - $89.99, down from $129.99
3-in-1 Prime Wireless Charging Station - $119.99, down from $149.99
Prime MagSafe-Compatible 3-in-1 Charging Station - $159.99, down from $229.99
Portable Chargers

SOLIX C300 Power Station with Lantern - $179.99, down from $249.00
Prime Power Bank 26,250 mAh - $171.48, down from $229.99
SOLIX C1000 Gen 2 Portable Power Station - $499.99, down from $799.00
SOLIX C2000 Gen 2 Portable Power Station - $799.99, down from $1,499.00
If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Anker's New Prime 3-in-1 Foldable Charging Station Hits $119.99 on Amazon" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Foldable iPhone Engineering Delays Could Push Launch Into 2027

Apple has run into "more issues than expected" during the engineering test phase of its foldable iPhone, potentially delaying the device's launch well into 2027.


According to a new report from Nikkei Asia, engineering problems emerging during the foldable iPhone's early test production phase are more complex and taking longer to resolve than Apple anticipated.

The device is currently undergoing engineering verification testing, a critical stage in validating an all-new design before it can proceed toward mass production. Component suppliers have reportedly been notified that production schedules may need to be pushed back, indicating that Apple is already adjusting its timeline as it works to resolve the issues.

The foldable iPhone was already expected to launch later than the iPhone 18 Pro and ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max in September, potentially following a staggered release pattern similar to the iPhone X, but the newly surfaced engineering setbacks increase the risk of further delays beyond that window.

"It's true that more issues than expected have emerged during the early test production phase, and additional time will be needed to resolve them and make necessary adjustments," a source familiar with the matter told Nikkei Asia. "The current situation could put the mass production timeline at risk." The source also stressed the urgency of the next few weeks: "April will mark a crucial stage of the engineering verification test, and this month till early May is extremely critical."

Nikkei cites sources both inside Apple and among component suppliers warning of delays. Issues surrounding the engineering development of the foldable are more complex than expected, and in a worst-case scenario could delay first shipments by months. "Apple and the supply chain are working under a pressured timeline and the current solutions are not enough to completely solve the engineering challenge," the source said. "More time is needed."

Leaker Fixed Focus Digital today claimed that the device is being delayed by ongoing pricing negotiations with manufacturing partners and an unresolved decision over hinge materials. Apple is said to be choosing between liquid metal, which could improve durability and reduce creasing, and a 3D-printed titanium alloy, with a final decision expected during the Production Validation Test phase in July or early August. Meanwhile, unresolved cost discussions with its assembly partner could further impact the production schedule.Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTag: Foldable iPhone
This article, "Foldable iPhone Engineering Delays Could Push Launch Into 2027" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

New Book Details Vision Pro's Troubled Launch in Apple Stores

A new book by New York Times labor reporter Noam Scheiber argues that Apple's decade-long erosion of its retail workforce directly contributed to the disappointing launch of the Apple Vision Pro in early 2024 (via WIRED).


The book, Mutiny: The Rise and Revolt of the College-Educated Working Class, draws on interviews with Apple Store employees to document how staffing cuts, reduced training, and a shift toward aggressive sales metrics left Apple retail staff ill-equipped to demo the Vision Pro.

Apple flew hundreds of retail employees to Cupertino in early 2024 for secretive Vision Pro training, requiring NDAs, phone confiscation, and strict silence between colleagues at different stages of the program, to preserve the "novelty" of the experience. Upon their return to their stores, they were tasked with leading four-hour workshops, but many salespeople received only minimal preparation, with some given as little as a 20-minute demo and limited time to rehearse a complex script before presenting to customers. The challenge was compounded by a workforce that included many recently converted employees with little prior experience of scripted product launches, leaving some ill-equipped to deliver the carefully choreographed demonstrations.

The demo itself was technically demanding. Employees had to scan customers' faces, select from roughly 25 different light seals, and guide users through eye- and hand-based controls before working through a script that ran to more than a dozen screens. The training was so haphazard that many employees who received early demos were unknowingly seeing blurry content, the result of small fitting errors that nobody had caught. With stores staffed so leanly, managers struggled to pull employees off the floor for the preparation time Apple corporate had intended, and demo quality varied enormously. Some employees noticed a disconnect between Cupertino's expectations and floor-level reality.

Scheiber traces the deterioration to the transition from Steve Jobs to Tim Cook. Jobs built Apple retail around a permanently employed, generously compensated workforce, on the theory that any worker who felt second-class would make customers feel the same way. Under Cook, that model was progressively unwound: contractor numbers grew, training shifted from multi-week instructor-led programs to brief self-guided modules, and leadership rotated toward cost control. After an unsuccessful attempt to slash staffing under John Browett, Cook installed Angela Ahrendts, whose sensibility was closer to the Jobs era, but her 2019 departure brought in Deirdre O'Brien, who pushed stores toward conventional retail metrics: device activations, accessory attachment rates, and AppleCare+ sign-ups. The "creative" role tracked a similar trajectory, shrinking from unlimited one-on-one customer tutorials to group sessions to what some employees described as barely disguised product marketing.

Apple sold fewer than 500,000 Vision Pro units in 2024, compared to roughly 10 million Apple Watches in their first year on sale and more than 200 million iPhones annually. The book notes that Apple had originally projected first-year Apple Watch sales at around 40 million units before slashing that forecast by more than 70% and that it was store employees who helped rescue the launch, surfacing the health and fitness angle through daily floor-level conversations with managers. This time the dynamic ran in reverse. Whereas retail staff had once helped pull Apple out of a stumbling product launch, the book argues, this time they made one worse.

The Vision Pro's own limitations played a significant role in the shortfall, such as a roughly 1.5-pound weight, a limited selection of apps, and a $3,500 base price rising to around $4,000 with common upgrades and accessories. Because few employees could afford the device even with their 25% staff discount, they had little opportunity to build familiarity with it outside of work. About a week after launch, managers in many stores quietly allowed salespeople to read the demo script from an iPad rather than deliver it from memory, which some staff said degraded the experience.

A few months later, many stores abandoned the script altogether. Managers began asking staff to recruit customers for demos on the floor, and some informally lowered the minimum age requirement from 13. The Vision Pro's sales performance at store level told its own story. By late May 2024, employees at the Towson store were reporting weeks in which they sold no units at all, and occasionally recorded negative sales figures after processing returns.

Mutiny: The Rise and Revolt of the College-Educated Working Class is out now from Farrar, Straus and Giroux. See the full excerpt in WIRED for more information.Related Roundup: Apple Vision ProTag: WiredBuyer's Guide: Vision Pro (Buy Now)Related Forum: Apple Vision Pro
This article, "New Book Details Vision Pro's Troubled Launch in Apple Stores" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Zero‑click Grafana AI attack can enable enterprise data exfiltration

Indirect prompt injection is possible on AI-powered dashboards, allowing exfiltration of sensitive enterprise data without user authentication.
Security researchers are warning about a critical Grafana issue, dubbed GrafanaGhost, that allows attackers to leak sensitive data from Grafana environments, including financial metrics, infrastructure health data, private customer data, and operational logs, among others.
Noma Security disclosed the flaw to the Grafana team, which reportedly validated the flaw and rolled out a fix.
Grafana is a widely used open-source data visualization and observability platform that enables organizations to monitor systems, applications and business metrics in real time. “GrafanaGhost perfectly illustrates how AI integration creates a massive security blind spot,” said Ram Varadarajan, CEO at Acalvio. “Because indirect prompt injection bypasses traditional defenses, requiring no credentials or user interaction, it allows attackers to silently exfiltrate sensitive operational telemetry.”
Tricking Grafana AI into leaking sensitive data
GrafanaGhost is essentially not a single bug but a chained exploit that combines multiple bypasses across application logic and AI guardrails.
The attack begins with identifying an injection point, locations where user-controlled input can be stored and later processed by Grafana’s AI components. Noma researchers found that crafted paths embedded with indirect prompts could persist in the system and later be interpreted as legitimate inputs.
From there, attackers use indirect prompt injection techniques to manipulate the AI into executing malicious instructions. The model is tricked into generating requests that include sensitive data while interpreting the instructions as benign.
In a disclosure, Noma said that the key technical breakthrough came from bypassing client-side protections designed to block external image loading. By exploiting a flaw in URL validation, specifically using protocol-relative URLs like //attacker.com, the system mistakenly treats malicious external resources as safe, allowing outbound requests to the attacker’s infrastructure.
Finally, the attack evades AI guardrails themselves by inserting specific keywords, such as INTENT, into prompts to convince the model that the request was legitimate. Once processed, the system attempts to render an image, embedding sensitive data into the request sent to the attacker’s server.
The chain effectively enables automated, zero-click data exfiltration that blends into the normal dashboard workflow. Varadrajan pointed this out, saying attackers exploit the blind spot “using system components exactly as designed, but with instructions the model cannot verify as malicious.”
Responding to CSO’s queries, Grafana Labs’ CISO Joe McManus disputed Noma’s claim that this finding constitutes either a “zero-click” attack or that it could operate silently, autonomously, or in the background. “Any successful execution of this exploit would have required significant user interaction: specifically, the end user would have to repeatedly instruct our AI assistant to follow malicious instructions contained in logs, even after the AI assistant made the user aware of the malicious instructions. We emphasize that there is no evidence of this bug having been exploited in the wild, and no data was leaked from Grafana Cloud,” McManus said.
Real risk or overhyped edge case?
Not everyone is convinced the finding represents a newfound threat. Bradley Smith, SVP and deputy CISO at BeyondTrust, described the underlying technique as “well documented,” noting that indirect prompt injection leading to data exfiltration is a known risk across AI-enabled platforms.
“This seems like mostly hype to me,” Smith said, adding that “what’s less clear here is the practical exploitability against a hardened Grafana deployment with standard enterprise network controls.”
Still, Smith acknowledged the broader implications. “This isn’t a universal bypass of Grafana,” he said. “It’s a demonstration of what can happen when AI components process untrusted input without sufficient architectural controls.” Identifying exposure to GrafanaGhost by checking whether Grafana AI/LLM features are enabled, patching to the latest version, restricting “img-src” to known domains, and applying egress controls can help defend against exposure, he added.
View the full article
CSOonline

Zero‑click Grafana AI attack can enable enterprise data exfiltration

Indirect prompt injection is possible on AI-powered dashboards, allowing exfiltration of sensitive enterprise data without user authentication.
Security researchers are warning about a critical Grafana issue, dubbed GrafanaGhost, that allows attackers to leak sensitive data from Grafana environments, including financial metrics, infrastructure health data, private customer data, and operational logs, among others.
Noma Security disclosed the flaw to the Grafana team, which reportedly validated the flaw and rolled out a fix. Grafana did not immediately respond to CSO’s request for comments.
Grafana is a widely used open-source data visualization and observability platform that enables organizations to monitor systems, applications and business metrics in real time. “GrafanaGhost perfectly illustrates how AI integration creates a massive security blind spot,” said Ram Varadarajan, CEO at Activio. “Because indirect prompt injection bypasses traditional defenses, requiring no credentials or user interaction, it allows attackers to silently exfiltrate sensitive operational telemetry.”
Tricking Grafana AI into leaking sensitive data
GrafanaGhost is essentially not a single bug but a chained exploit that combines multiple bypasses across application logic and AI guardrails.
The attack begins with identifying an injection point, locations where user-controlled input can be stored and later processed by Grafana’s AI components. Noma researchers found that crafted paths embedded with indirect prompts could persist in the system and later be interpreted as legitimate inputs.
From there, attackers use indirect prompt injection techniques to manipulate the AI into executing malicious instructions. The model is tricked into generating requests that include sensitive data while interpreting the instructions as benign.
In a disclosure, Noma said that the key technical breakthrough came from bypassing client-side protections designed to block external image loading. By exploiting a flaw in URL validation, specifically using protocol-relative URLs like //attacker.com, the system mistakenly treats malicious external resources as safe, allowing outbound requests to the attacker’s infrastructure.
Finally, the attack evades AI guardrails themselves by inserting specific keywords, such as INTENT, into prompts to convince the model that the request was legitimate. Once processed, the system attempts to render an image, embedding sensitive data into the request sent to the attacker’s server.
The chain effectively enables automated, zero-click data exfiltration that blends into the normal dashboard workflow. Varadrajan pointed this out, saying attackers exploit the blind spot “using system components exactly as designed, but with instructions the model cannot verify as malicious.”
Real risk or overhyped edge case?
Not everyone is convinced the finding represents a newfound threat. Bradley Smith, SVP and deputy CISO at BeyondTrust, described the underlying technique as “well documented,” noting that indirect prompt injection leading to data exfiltration is a known risk across AI-enabled platforms.
“This seems like mostly hype to me,” Smith said, adding that “what’s less clear here is the practical exploitability against a hardened Grafana deployment with standard enterprise network controls.”
Still, Smith acknowledged the broader implications. “This isn’t a universal bypass of Grafana,” he said. “It’s a demonstration of what can happen when AI components process untrusted input without sufficient architectural controls.” Identifying exposure to GrafanaGhost by checking whether Grafana AI/LLM features are enabled, patching to the latest version, restricting “img-src” to known domains, and applying egress controls can help defend against exposure, he added.
View the full article
CSOonline

Over 1,000 Exposed ComfyUI Instances Targeted in Cryptomining Botnet Campaign

An active campaign has been observed targeting internet-exposed instances running ComfyUI, a popular stable diffusion platform, to enlist them into a cryptocurrency mining and proxy botnet. "A purpose-built Python scanner continuously sweeps major cloud IP ranges for vulnerable targets, automatically installing malicious nodes via ComfyUI-Manager if no exploitable node is alreadyView the full article
Hacker News

Apple's Foldable iPhone May Be Hitting Late-Stage Manufacturing Snags

Apple's first foldable iPhone is being held up by pricing negotiations with manufacturing partners and an unresolved decision about hinge materials, rather than component or display problems, according to Chinese leaker Fixed Focus Digital.


Apple is expected to release its first foldable iPhone later this year, in the form of a book-style device that unfolds to reveal a screen about the size of an iPad mini. Reports suggest it will feature a 7.8-inch main display when unfolded and a 5.5-inch cover display, but claims of when it will launch have yet to arrive at a consensus, with reports suggesting a release could come as early as September or as late as December.

In a post today on social network Weibo, Fixed Focus Digital cited their own supply chain sources claiming Apple is still undecided on the hinge material, with the company still apparently weighing liquid metal against 3D-printed titanium alloy, which was most recently used in the iPhone Air.

Rumors going back to March 2025 claimed that Apple had settled on the use of liquid metal for the hinge, which could improve durability and reduce screen creasing. According to analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, Apple has previously used liquid metal in smaller device components like SIM ejector pins, but the foldable iPhone will be the company's first major use of the material in a critical mechanical part.

Fixed Focus Digital expects Apple to settle on its preferred material during the device's Production Validation Test (PVT) phase between July and early August, which would be the latest time for such a decision to be realistically made – assuming the device is scheduled to ship this year.

The second, potentially more disruptive issue is allegedly price negotiations with Apple's assembly partner, which the leaker suggested could affect the production schedule. Apple's first foldable iPhone could end up costing nearly twice as much as the iPhone 17 Pro Max, with retail pricing likely to be somewhere between $2,000 and $2,500.

According to Kuo, the foldable iPhone will include two rear cameras, a single front-facing camera, and Touch ID integrated into the power button. The device could measure just 4.5mm thick when unfolded, and between 9mm and 9.5mm when closed.

Fixed Focus Digital previously broke the news ahead of launch about the iPhone 16e name for Apple's upcoming iPhone SE successor.Tags: Fixed Focus Digital, Foldable iPhone
This article, "Apple's Foldable iPhone May Be Hitting Late-Stage Manufacturing Snags" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

[Webinar] How to Close Identity Gaps in 2026 Before AI Exploits Enterprise Risk

In the rapid evolution of the 2026 threat landscape, a frustrating paradox has emerged for CISOs and security leaders: Identity programs are maturing, yet the risk is actually increasing. According to new research from the Ponemon Institute, hundreds of applications within the typical enterprise remain disconnected from centralized identity systems. These "darkView the full article
Hacker News

The Hidden Cost of Recurring Credential Incidents

When talking about credential security, the focus usually lands on breach prevention. This makes sense when IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report puts the average cost of a breach at $4.4 million. Avoiding even one major incident is enough to justify most security investments, but that headline figure obscures the more persistent problems caused by recurring credentialView the full article
Hacker News

Foldable iPhone Design Revealed in Images of Dummy Models

Leaker Sonny Dickson today shared images of the first iPhone 18 Pro, ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max, and foldable iPhone dummy models.


The images conform with rumors about the designs of the three devices. iPhone dummy units are intended to take the place of real devices for testing purposes, particularly for accessory manufacturers, who seek to mass produce items such as cases prior to the announcement of new devices, which necessitates a relatively high level of accuracy.

While the ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ and ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max look largely the same as their predecessors, other than a smaller Dynamic Island visible on the dummies, the foldable iPhone features a completely new design. With a passport-style form factor, it is unlike any iPhone we've seen before.

Previously, the best idea of what the first foldable iPhone could look like came from a 3D model based on a mockup created by MacRumors forums user iZac, who based his design on rumors that were circulating in May. While many aspects of that speculative design appear to be true, such as a horizontal dual-camera array and volume buttons on the top of the device, there are some key differences that we have not seen before.


Firstly, the foldable iPhone does not appear to have a unibody design like the ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ models, with no window for a glass insert to facilitate wireless charging. With no separation between the rear and the camera plateau, this suggests that the device's entire rear may be made of glass like the iPhone Air. Secondly, the camera plateau does not extend the full width of the device like the ‌iPhone Air‌, stopping around three quarters of the way along the back of the device.

The foldable iPhone is expected to feature a 7.8-inch inner display with an iPad-style 4:3 aspect ratio, a 5.5-inch outer display, an ultra-thin 4.5mm titanium frame, a class-leading display with a reduced crease, Touch ID, and a starting price of around $2,000. The ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌, ‌iPhone 18 Pro‌ Max, and first foldable iPhone are expected to launch in the fall, but the latest rumors suggest that the foldable could be delayed. Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTags: Foldable iPhone, Sonny Dickson
This article, "Foldable iPhone Design Revealed in Images of Dummy Models" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Microsoft says Medusa-linked Storm-1175 is speeding ransomware attacks

Microsoft has warned that Storm-1175, a cybercrime group linked to Medusa ransomware, is exploiting vulnerable web-facing systems in fast-moving attacks, at times moving from initial access to data theft and ransomware deployment within 24 hours.
The company said the group has heavily targeted organizations in healthcare, education, professional services, and finance across Australia, the UK, and the US, showing how quickly ransomware affiliates can exploit exposed perimeter systems before defenders patch or even spot the breach.
Microsoft also said Storm-1175 has, in some cases, used zero-day flaws before they were publicly disclosed.
“While the threat actor typically uses N-day vulnerabilities, we have also observed Storm-1175 leveraging zero-day exploits, in some cases a full week before public vulnerability disclosure,” Microsoft said in a blog post. “The threat actor has also been observed chaining together multiple exploits to enable post-compromise activity.”
Microsoft said the group has exploited more than 16 vulnerabilities across widely used enterprise products since 2023 and, in several cases, chained exploits to establish persistence, steal credentials, tamper with security tools, and speed ransomware deployment.
“What we’re seeing here is the death of the traditional ‘dwell time’ narrative,” said Sakshi Grover, senior research manager for security services at IDC Asia Pacific. “This is no longer about attackers sitting quietly in the network. It is about speed and disciplined execution. Storm-1175 is operating like a well-oiled pipeline. Initial access, escalation, lateral movement, exfiltration, and ransomware deployment, all compressed into a day. Most enterprises are simply not built for that pace.”
Grover said the bigger weakness for many organizations is not detection but response. She said many companies still take too long to isolate affected systems and revoke access, which gives attackers more time to move through networks before teams can contain them.
Cybersecurity analyst Sunil Varkey said the shift to faster ransomware operations means traditional detection-and-response models that assume multi-day or week-long dwell times are no longer sufficient, especially when companies remain slow to patch internet-exposed assets and contain lateral movement after initial access.
“The most effective response is a proactive strategy centered on aggressive attack surface reduction, prioritizing rapid remediation of vulnerabilities and misconfigurations on all web-facing and critical systems, combined with strong network segmentation and isolation,” Varkey said.
Where enterprises lag
Many enterprises still lack a real-time view of what is exposed to the internet, said Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst at Greyhound Research. He called this a basic weakness in how companies manage cyber risk.
“The way attack surface management is run today still reflects an older mindset,” Gogia said. “Discover assets, scan them, prioritize issues, schedule fixes. It is orderly and logical, but not fast enough. Environments are changing all the time. Systems are spun up for projects, opened to the internet for convenience, and then left behind. Over time, these become invisible to central teams, even though they remain visible to attackers.”
Gogia said the problem is compounded by fragmented ownership. Internet-facing systems often cut across different teams, blurring accountability and slowing the response when risks emerge.
Storm-1175 appears to be exploiting exactly that gap. Its rapid shifts between vulnerabilities and use of chained exploits suggest attackers are taking advantage of enterprises that lack an up-to-date view of their external exposure.
Keith Prabhu, founder and CEO of Confidis, said the widespread use of open-source libraries and other components that need constant tracking and patching makes the job even harder.
“A smart attacker like Storm-1175 can quickly fingerprint such systems and develop custom attacks chaining multiple exploits,” Prabhu said. “Efficient patch management of this complex technology stack is the biggest weakness in enterprise attack surface management today, especially for internet-exposed systems.”
View the full article
CSOonline

Supply chain security is now a board-level issue: Here’s what CSOs need to know

For many years, supply chain security was viewed purely as a technical concern. However, with high-profile vulnerabilities and regulations, it is now a board-level issue that requires organizations to rethink how to build resiliency and insulate their operations.

The changing regulatory landscape has been a key driver of the C-suite’s focus, as legislation such as the European Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) includes fines of up to 2.5% of global turnover for non-compliance. Additionally, the proliferation of open-source software, coupled with complex global supply chains, has created a perfect storm transforming how CSOs must approach supply chain security.

The pervasiveness of open-source software has upended the security landscape. According to Synopsys’ 2025 Open Source Security and Risk Analysis report, 97% of commercial applications contain open-source software, with  86% containing vulnerabilities,  81% of which are categorized as high- or critical-risk. Five years ago, statistics like this were foreign to corporate boards but now they’re the data behind imperatives.
The Log4Shell vulnerability in 2021 highlighted the problem. A critical flaw in the open-source Apache Log4j 2 Java library enabled attackers to execute code remotely, affecting millions of applications, cloud services and physical endpoints, including servers. Hackers exploited the vulnerability to steal data, install ransomware and capture devices for botnets with breathtaking speed. This dispelled the assumption that open source was secure, as the situation highlighted the interconnected nature of software ecosystems and the speed at which exploitation of a single vulnerability can spread. If, like me, you were responsible for any products when Log4Shell happened, you can feel my pain. It felt a lot like Y2K but without the advance warning. And who else suddenly wondered if they needed to shut off their corporate website?
Why supply chain security became a C-suite priority

Legislative changes have elevated security from a technical issue to a business issue. The CRA views software security as a product safety concern, and penalties reflect this reality. Federal legislation, including EO14028, requires agencies to maintain complete software and hardware inventories and develop assurance policies. Similar regulations are underway or have been finalized in countries including India and South Korea. One example of industry regulatory focus is the FDA requiring medical devices to have software bills of materials (SBOMs), recognizing that software security directly impacts patient safety. Before the FDA SBOM requirement, a vulnerability was discovered in an FDA-approved cardiac monitor. This device would never have made it to market without remediation if an SBOM had been provided and cross-referenced with vulnerability databases.
The challenge for CSOs is that managing supply chain security is fundamentally different from traditional security. If a supplier’s code causes a breach, indemnity clauses may mean they pay the fine, but you remain responsible for customer notification, reputational damage and the operational burden of response. You must manage these risks across all of your customers, who are now asking detailed questions about your supply chain security posture before they sign contracts.
The hidden complexity that drowns security teams
SBOMs are no longer used solely to track software licensing; they are key to managing supply chain security as they enable the identification and tracking of vulnerabilities across ecosystems.
Finding a problem is just the start — you need to determine if the vulnerability affects your implementation. For example, if an SSL library contains 100 functions and your application uses 60 of them, and the flaw is in one of the unused 40, there is no risk. However, traditional scanning tools may flag it as critical, and your team will waste time investigating a non-issue. To put this in perspective, Cornell found that code vulnerability tools have a 97.5% false-positive rate. Anyone who has spent any time in cybersecurity knows that false positives are the bane of our existence, whether you’re looking at firewall alerts or EDR or library vulnerability correlation. It’s important to note that even if there is no risk, you still need to publish that information so that your customers are aware that you have validated that you are not vulnerable.
This uses significant resources, with developers spending 3.5 hours per week manually reviewing security scan findings due to false positives. This delays new features and slows market entry. Security teams lose credibility, developers become desensitized and dismiss alerts as noise and real threats can get lost. Alert fatigue is a real thing.
Due to the complexity and different development environments involved, there is no panacea for strengthening your supply chain security posture. Source code analysis works well when you have access to code and build processes, but it can’t review third-party binaries or legacy firmware and often can’t identify which code branches will be compiled into the final binary. Build-time analysis identifies issues during compilation, but it doesn’t work on components added later and often stumbles with dynamically linked libraries. Binary and firmware analysis addresses these gaps but requires sophisticated tooling to reverse-engineer compiled code.

The right solution depends on your specific environment and must account for the types of products you build, how the development pipeline operates and whether you work more with source code or third-party components. There is never a one-size-fits-all solution; companies must evaluate various tools to find the right fit for their situation. Workflow integration, supply chain complexity and deployment platforms such as rich OS vs. bare metal all impact tool applicability.
What CSOs should demand from their tools and processes
Conducting a bake-off with at least three solutions is vital to finding the right option. It’s essential to test against your code to validate accuracy, rather than relying on samples from the vendor. The goal is to understand how each potential option performs in your environment. One aspect to consider is where the software or firmware will run — is it on Windows, Linux, Android or another rich OS? Or is it bare metal as is often seen in space-constrained or industrial environments? There aren’t many firmware analysis tools available for the latter, so those environments may lean toward source- or build-based tools even though binary analysis solutions are often better for rich OS firmware.
As you review, focus on the accuracy of identifying vulnerabilities and the false-positive rate. A tool may catch every vulnerability, but if it flags too many phantom issues, your team will waste countless hours on wild goose chases. Conversely, if it fails to identify critical vulnerabilities, your organization remains exposed.
Additionally, the product must integrate with existing ticketing systems, such as Jira. Automation is non-negotiable, as manual dashboard checks are not viable given the complexity and risk involved. Tasks should be prioritized so developers don’t have to hunt for information. When a vulnerability is found, it should automatically create tickets in your developers’ existing workflow outlining what’s at risk, where it’s used, whether it’s exploitable in your implementation and the required action. The goal is to make responding to supply chain vulnerabilities as seamless as fixing any other bug. If developers need to switch between different tools or manually correlate information, response times will slow, increasing risk.

Supply chain communication capabilities are another vital component to mitigate risk and meet regulatory requirements. The solution must be able to receive automated updates from upstream suppliers and rapidly notify downstream customers. In addition to alerting, the communication should include the required mitigation steps. You need to quickly confirm that a library has been patched or that the vulnerability has been determined to be unreachable or not exploitable.
Documentation is another important evaluation criterion. Contractual and regulatory obligations necessitate real-time information sharing. If a zero-day attack happens, documented best practices protect you from fines. Customers should be informed immediately, not days or weeks later, with the required mitigation steps they need to take. Having survived the ordeal of shipping a product with an encryption library that was discovered to be vulnerable, I can promise you that customer inquiries will come in faster than you can answer them and they will become more strident by the minute. Your supply chain security infrastructure must be able to identify which customers are impacted and what they need to do to protect themselves.

A thorough audit trail showing the steps taken to address flaws can help you avoid punitive fines. The CRA is more forgiving when you can prove you kept software current, followed deployment guidelines, evaluated tools, chose approaches appropriate to your environment and responded promptly. The goal is to demonstrate responsible software security stewardship, as even the most stringent regulatory bodies know that there will always be software bugs.
The path forward
Supply chain security will only intensify. The FDA couldn’t define what an SBOM was 18 months ago; now it’s mandatory for medical device approval. Similar regulations are emerging across industries and jurisdictions as software supply chains become recognized as critical to product security and safety.
CSOs must treat this as a strategic priority that impacts the bottom line, rather than a security checkbox. Executives who recognize the risks and act accordingly will position their organizations not just for compliance but for competitive advantage in an increasingly security-conscious market. Those who delay will find themselves managing crises, facing regulatory penalties and losing customer trust. The question is no longer whether to prioritize supply chain security, but how quickly you can build the capabilities to do it well.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

Supply chain security is now a board-level issue: Here’s what CSOs need to know

For many years, supply chain security was viewed purely as a technical concern. However, with high-profile vulnerabilities and regulations, it is now a board-level issue that requires organizations to rethink how to build resiliency and insulate their operations.

The changing regulatory landscape has been a key driver of the C-suite’s focus, as legislation such as the European Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) includes fines of up to 2.5% of global turnover for non-compliance. Additionally, the proliferation of open-source software, coupled with complex global supply chains, has created a perfect storm transforming how CSOs must approach supply chain security.

The pervasiveness of open-source software has upended the security landscape. According to Synopsys’ 2025 Open Source Security and Risk Analysis report, 97% of commercial applications contain open-source software, with  86% containing vulnerabilities,  81% of which are categorized as high- or critical-risk. Five years ago, statistics like this were foreign to corporate boards but now they’re the data behind imperatives.
The Log4Shell vulnerability in 2021 highlighted the problem. A critical flaw in the open-source Apache Log4j 2 Java library enabled attackers to execute code remotely, affecting millions of applications, cloud services and physical endpoints, including servers. Hackers exploited the vulnerability to steal data, install ransomware and capture devices for botnets with breathtaking speed. This dispelled the assumption that open source was secure, as the situation highlighted the interconnected nature of software ecosystems and the speed at which exploitation of a single vulnerability can spread. If, like me, you were responsible for any products when Log4Shell happened, you can feel my pain. It felt a lot like Y2K but without the advance warning. And who else suddenly wondered if they needed to shut off their corporate website?
Why supply chain security became a C-suite priority

Legislative changes have elevated security from a technical issue to a business issue. The CRA views software security as a product safety concern, and penalties reflect this reality. Federal legislation, including EO14028, requires agencies to maintain complete software and hardware inventories and develop assurance policies. Similar regulations are underway or have been finalized in countries including India and South Korea. One example of industry regulatory focus is the FDA requiring medical devices to have software bills of materials (SBOMs), recognizing that software security directly impacts patient safety. Before the FDA SBOM requirement, a vulnerability was discovered in an FDA-approved cardiac monitor. This device would never have made it to market without remediation if an SBOM had been provided and cross-referenced with vulnerability databases.
The challenge for CSOs is that managing supply chain security is fundamentally different from traditional security. If a supplier’s code causes a breach, indemnity clauses may mean they pay the fine, but you remain responsible for customer notification, reputational damage and the operational burden of response. You must manage these risks across all of your customers, who are now asking detailed questions about your supply chain security posture before they sign contracts.
The hidden complexity that drowns security teams
SBOMs are no longer used solely to track software licensing; they are key to managing supply chain security as they enable the identification and tracking of vulnerabilities across ecosystems.
Finding a problem is just the start — you need to determine if the vulnerability affects your implementation. For example, if an SSL library contains 100 functions and your application uses 60 of them, and the flaw is in one of the unused 40, there is no risk. However, traditional scanning tools may flag it as critical, and your team will waste time investigating a non-issue. To put this in perspective, Cornell found that code vulnerability tools have a 97.5% false-positive rate. Anyone who has spent any time in cybersecurity knows that false positives are the bane of our existence, whether you’re looking at firewall alerts or EDR or library vulnerability correlation. It’s important to note that even if there is no risk, you still need to publish that information so that your customers are aware that you have validated that you are not vulnerable.
This uses significant resources, with developers spending 3.5 hours per week manually reviewing security scan findings due to false positives. This delays new features and slows market entry. Security teams lose credibility, developers become desensitized and dismiss alerts as noise and real threats can get lost. Alert fatigue is a real thing.
Due to the complexity and different development environments involved, there is no panacea for strengthening your supply chain security posture. Source code analysis works well when you have access to code and build processes, but it can’t review third-party binaries or legacy firmware and often can’t identify which code branches will be compiled into the final binary. Build-time analysis identifies issues during compilation, but it doesn’t work on components added later and often stumbles with dynamically linked libraries. Binary and firmware analysis addresses these gaps but requires sophisticated tooling to reverse-engineer compiled code.

The right solution depends on your specific environment and must account for the types of products you build, how the development pipeline operates and whether you work more with source code or third-party components. There is never a one-size-fits-all solution; companies must evaluate various tools to find the right fit for their situation. Workflow integration, supply chain complexity and deployment platforms such as rich OS vs. bare metal all impact tool applicability.
What CSOs should demand from their tools and processes
Conducting a bake-off with at least three solutions is vital to finding the right option. It’s essential to test against your code to validate accuracy, rather than relying on samples from the vendor. The goal is to understand how each potential option performs in your environment. One aspect to consider is where the software or firmware will run — is it on Windows, Linux, Android or another rich OS? Or is it bare metal as is often seen in space-constrained or industrial environments? There aren’t many firmware analysis tools available for the latter, so those environments may lean toward source- or build-based tools even though binary analysis solutions are often better for rich OS firmware.
As you review, focus on the accuracy of identifying vulnerabilities and the false-positive rate. A tool may catch every vulnerability, but if it flags too many phantom issues, your team will waste countless hours on wild goose chases. Conversely, if it fails to identify critical vulnerabilities, your organization remains exposed.
Additionally, the product must integrate with existing ticketing systems, such as Jira. Automation is non-negotiable, as manual dashboard checks are not viable given the complexity and risk involved. Tasks should be prioritized so developers don’t have to hunt for information. When a vulnerability is found, it should automatically create tickets in your developers’ existing workflow outlining what’s at risk, where it’s used, whether it’s exploitable in your implementation and the required action. The goal is to make responding to supply chain vulnerabilities as seamless as fixing any other bug. If developers need to switch between different tools or manually correlate information, response times will slow, increasing risk.

Supply chain communication capabilities are another vital component to mitigate risk and meet regulatory requirements. The solution must be able to receive automated updates from upstream suppliers and rapidly notify downstream customers. In addition to alerting, the communication should include the required mitigation steps. You need to quickly confirm that a library has been patched or that the vulnerability has been determined to be unreachable or not exploitable.
Documentation is another important evaluation criterion. Contractual and regulatory obligations necessitate real-time information sharing. If a zero-day attack happens, documented best practices protect you from fines. Customers should be informed immediately, not days or weeks later, with the required mitigation steps they need to take. Having survived the ordeal of shipping a product with an encryption library that was discovered to be vulnerable, I can promise you that customer inquiries will come in faster than you can answer them and they will become more strident by the minute. Your supply chain security infrastructure must be able to identify which customers are impacted and what they need to do to protect themselves.

A thorough audit trail showing the steps taken to address flaws can help you avoid punitive fines. The CRA is more forgiving when you can prove you kept software current, followed deployment guidelines, evaluated tools, chose approaches appropriate to your environment and responded promptly. The goal is to demonstrate responsible software security stewardship, as even the most stringent regulatory bodies know that there will always be software bugs.
The path forward
Supply chain security will only intensify. The FDA couldn’t define what an SBOM was 18 months ago; now it’s mandatory for medical device approval. Similar regulations are emerging across industries and jurisdictions as software supply chains become recognized as critical to product security and safety.
CSOs must treat this as a strategic priority that impacts the bottom line, rather than a security checkbox. Executives who recognize the risks and act accordingly will position their organizations not just for compliance but for competitive advantage in an increasingly security-conscious market. Those who delay will find themselves managing crises, facing regulatory penalties and losing customer trust. The question is no longer whether to prioritize supply chain security, but how quickly you can build the capabilities to do it well.
View the full article
CSOonline

The rise of proactive cyber: Why defense is no longer enough

For more than two decades, cybersecurity has been built on a reactive model: detect intrusions, patch vulnerabilities, respond to incidents, and repeat. That model is now under sustained pressure from a threat environment that is faster, more coordinated, and increasingly automated.
Two recent developments illustrate how quickly that model is breaking down. Earlier this month, the White House released its long-awaited cyber strategy that elevates proactive or offensive cybersecurity to the top of its priorities. At this year’s RSA Conference, Sandra Joyce, who leads Google’s Threat Intelligence Group, unveiled the company’s threat disruption unit, outlining plans to use legal authorities and technical capabilities to thwart cyber threat groups actively.
Together, these developments reflect a shift already under way — from purely defensive models toward efforts to disrupt adversaries before attacks reach their targets.
“What we’ve been doing for the past 20 years hasn’t been working,” Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel of the National Security Agency and now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, tells CSO. “We have been inherently playing catch-up on defense … and the gap is getting wider.”
That assessment is now shaping both government strategy and private-sector operations. The United States is explicitly trying to shape adversary behavior rather than absorb attacks, while major technology providers are investing in capabilities designed to disrupt threat actors before they reach their targets.
The shift is often described as “proactive cyber” or “active defense,” but the language obscures how constrained — and how operational — the change actually is.
The collapse of response time
The urgency behind that shift is grounded in how quickly modern attacks now unfold. The traditional sequence — initial access, lateral movement, data exfiltration — has collapsed into tightly coordinated, near-simultaneous activity across multiple actors.
“The median time between initial access and the handoff to the secondary threat group has dropped from eight hours in 2022 to just 22 seconds in 2025,” Joyce emphasized during an RSA keynote.
That compression reflects a broader structural change. Cyber operations are no longer linear campaigns but ecosystems, where access brokers, operators, and monetization specialists operate in parallel. Artificial intelligence is accelerating that model by automating key phases of exploitation and movement.
“Agentic approaches for exploit development will allow adversaries to outpace human-driven controls,” Joyce said.
John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google Threat Intelligence Group, says that once an intrusion is under way, defenders are already behind. “Active defense is looking for opportunities outside of the castle walls, before the actor shows up inside or starts hitting the castle walls.”
Gerstell describes the same imbalance more bluntly. “The bad guys … have the advantage,” he says.
What ‘proactive cyber’ means
Despite the more aggressive language, this shift toward private-sector involvement doesn’t envision vigilante-style payback by aggrieved organizations. It instead embraces a more systematic effort to interfere with adversaries earlier in the attack chain using authorities and capabilities that already exist.
“To be clear, this is not hacking back,” Joyce said. “This is the legal and ethical use of intelligence to protect our own platforms.”
In practice, that approach combines civil litigation, coordinated takedowns, public exposure of tools, and product hardening. The goal is to impose cost and friction across the ecosystem rather than to stop individual intrusions.
“Our goal is to shift the economics of the entire ecosystem, to make cyber threat operations so costly, so difficult, so risky, that it is no longer a viable path for any adversary,” Joyce said.
Hultquist underscores that this kind of disruption has real but limited effects. “We’re looking for operations that will have a longer-lasting effect on adversaries, or we can repeat at such a tempo that we can actually maintain the effect,” he says.
That dynamic is central to how proactive cyber is now being framed. Disruption is not a permanent solution; it is a way to degrade adversary capability and buy time.
Gerstell offers a practical boundary for where that activity becomes more controversial. “If you’re doing something only on your own network, it sounds defensive,” he says. “If you’re doing something on somebody else’s network, it sounds offensive.”
Why the private sector is central
The shift toward proactive cyber is rooted in who controls the terrain. “The private sector operates the very infrastructure that adversaries abuse,” Joyce said.
At the same time, the scale of cyber threats exceeds what the government can handle alone.
“There’s no world in which the government can do all the things,” Cynthia Kaiser, former FBI cyber deputy director and now SVP at Halcyon, tells CSO. “When I was at the FBI, there was no world in which you could do all the things.”
That has led to a push for deeper operational integration between government and industry, combining private-sector visibility and speed with public-sector authority.
Adam Maruyama, former CTO and DoD and NSA analyst and counterterrorism expert, says the shift toward more proactive action is necessary but lacks clear rules. Acting earlier in the attack chain, he notes, raises questions about how those operations should be conducted across jurisdictions and how they should be coordinated with allies.
“Once you start acting outside your own network, you’re immediately dealing with questions of jurisdiction and coordination,” Maruyama tells CSO. “Those aren’t fully worked out.”
Without that clarity, more assertive disruption efforts risk creating friction even among partners, particularly when infrastructure sits outside US control.
National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross framed the goal as correcting an imbalance. “The risk calculus on our adversary side in this space doesn’t seem to be calibrated correctly,” he said at the McCrary Institute Cyber Summit in March.
But Cairncross drew a clear boundary around private-sector action. “I am not talking about private sector industry or companies engaging in a cyber offensive campaign,” he said. “That’s not what we’re talking about.”
The fault lines: How far is too far
Agreement on the need to act earlier does not extend to agreement on how far those actions should go.
Kaiser sees a practical path in focusing on criminal actors, where legal authorities are clearer, and escalation risks are lower. “I think the least risky way in which industry can help on this front is with criminal actors,” she says, pointing to infrastructure takedowns and recovery of stolen funds.
She also argues that legal frameworks may need to evolve. “The primary thing I’d like to see is re-looking at the laws as they exist now and seeing if there are ways in which industry can help more with taking down infrastructure and clawing back stolen funds,” she says.
Others are more cautious. Maruyama points to the complexity of globally distributed infrastructure. “What if their infrastructure is hosted not in North Korea, but in France … or a semi-allied country like Malaysia?” he asks.
Hultquist reinforces caution from an operational standpoint, but stresses the importance of effectiveness in targeting. That is one reason why Joyce said in her keynote that whatever tactic Google uses against adversaries, it intends for them to “stay burned.” He says, “We are committed to operations that have lasting effects.”
Who can do this
Even if those tensions are resolved, the ability to carry out proactive disruption is concentrated among a small number of actors.
“This is something that Google can do [and that] Microsoft has done and can do,” Gerstell says. “A medium-sized company probably can’t.”
The requirements include not just technical capability but legal authority, operational scale, and control over infrastructure. Large platform providers can act within environments they own and can absorb the risks associated with disruption. Most enterprises cannot.
Even among organizations that could act, willingness varies. “Some of them could do it, but don’t want to,” Gerstell says.
What should CISOs do?
For enterprise security leaders, the shift toward proactive cyber does not expand their mandate to take on offensive or disruption roles. Instead, reinforcing core cybersecurity fundamentals remains the priority.
“The basic blocking and tackling is still critical,” Gerstell says.
Kaiser frames the enterprise role as participation rather than initiative. “What more can we all do?” she asks, particularly in supporting takedowns and recovery efforts where industry can act “more quickly and nimbly than the government can.”
That participation requires operational readiness: the ability to share telemetry quickly, preserve evidence, and respond in real-time when providers or law enforcement act against adversary infrastructure.
For CISOs, that means upstream disruption does not reduce the need for internal resilience. Even as governments and large cybersecurity providers increase pressure on attackers, enterprises should expect continued activity — often from the same actors operating in slightly different ways.
At the same time, the legal limits remain clear. Acting outside an organization’s own environment introduces risks that most enterprises are not equipped to manage. The practical role for CISOs is not to become more aggressive, but to operate effectively in a system where others increasingly handle disruption.
View the full article
CSOonline

The noisy tenants: Engineering fairness in multi-tenant SIEM solutions

I recently had the opportunity to review five popular SIEM solutions as part of a judging panel for a Security award. While each platform had its own unique flair, their core promises were remarkably consistent:
24/7/365 SOC monitoring: Round-the-clock coverage backed by global experts to validate and prioritize alerts. Proactive threat hunting: Active searches for hidden threats rather than just waiting for automated triggers. AI and machine learning integration: Leveraging everything from basic anomaly detection to “Agentic AI” to reduce noise and accelerate investigations. Active incident response and containment: Capabilities to isolate endpoints or disable compromised users to stop lateral movement. Third-party tool integrations: Ingesting telemetry from the “native stack” and third-party tools like CrowdStrike or Microsoft Defender. Continuous intelligence updates: Constant streams of new detection rules and playbooks based on global research. Service level guarantees: Financial credits or pricing adjustments for broken SLOs. These offerings are impressive, yet a glaring omission stood out: none of them discussed how they handle multi-tenancy. In a cloud-native world, it is very likely that most if not all of these providers operate on shared infrastructure. This means they are not immune to the “noisy neighbor” effect, a phenomenon where a single misbehaving tenant can degrade the security posture of everyone else on the platform.
The noisy neighbor effect
As security operations move toward cloud-native frameworks to handle the exponential growth of telemetry data (often reaching petabytes of logs), they rely on the elasticity of software-as-a-service (SaaS). However, the sharing of physical resources (including CPU, memory and I/O) among independent customers introduces a significant engineering risk.
When one tenant’s workload consumes a disproportionate share of these resources, it creates a bottleneck. For other tenants, this translates to increased ingestion latency, delayed threat detection and violated SLAs. In security, a “delayed” alert is often as useless as no alert at all.
The multi-tenant paradox
The core appeal of multi-tenant SIEM solutions is efficiency: shared infrastructure leads to lower costs and unified management. Yet, without deliberate engineering, this becomes a zero-sum game. In a naive system, a high-volume tenant can saturate the ingestion pipeline, causing “starvation” for smaller tenants. This breaks the real-time detection and response (RTDR) promise that these companies market so heavily.
The key distinction is that multi-tenancy does not have to be zero-sum. The fairness strategies explored in this article exist precisely to prevent that outcome, but only if vendors have invested in them. The silence in marketing materials suggests many have not.
Why fairness is an engineering problem
Engineering “fairness” is not merely about setting hard limits; it is about sophisticated resource orchestration. I highly recommend reading AWS’s paper on fairness in multitenant systems. A rigid cap might protect the system, but punish a client during a genuine security emergency when they need ingestion capacity most. Conversely, a completely open system is vulnerable to cascading failures.
To solve this, engineers must move beyond simple rate-limiting and embrace “fair share” scheduling, intelligent queuing and dynamic resource allocation. This article explores the architectural strategies required to ensure that every tenant receives the performance they were promised, even when their neighbor’s house is on fire.
The anatomy of a modern SIEM
To understand where fairness fails in a multi-tenant environment, we must first dissect the anatomy of a modern SIEM. It is no longer a monolithic database, but a distributed data pipeline designed to ingest, transform and analyze petabytes of telemetry. This pipeline relies on decoupling producers from consumers using message queues, ensuring that a spike in one layer does not necessarily lead to a total system failure.
The ingestion layer
The Ingestion Layer is the system’s front door. It is responsible for collecting raw telemetry from diverse sources such as EDR agents, cloud APIs and firewalls. To handle the “firehose” of incoming data, which can spike unpredictably during a security incident, this layer does not process data immediately. Instead, it acts as a high-throughput buffer, writing raw events directly into a raw event queue (typically Apache Kafka). This decoupling is critical because it ensures that even if downstream processing layers are slow, the system can still accept incoming logs without data loss.
The normalization layer
The normalization layer consumes raw events from the initial queue. Its primary role is to bring order to chaos by parsing heterogeneous log formats (JSON, XML or Syslog) into a structured schema like the common information model (CIM). This involves CPU-intensive tasks such as regex matching, field extraction and enrichment. Once processed, these structured events are published to a second normalized event queue. This central bus becomes the single source of truth for all downstream consumers.
The rule-based detection layer (real-time)
The first consumer of the normalized queue is the rule-based detection layer, often powered by engines like Apache Flink in the last 2-3 years. This layer is optimized for speed, executing low-latency, rule-based logic on events as they flow through the pipe. It handles high-volume, simple detections, such as “five failed logins in one minute,” in milliseconds. By alerting on these patterns immediately, it reduces the time-to-detect for critical threats without waiting for data to be indexed.
The ad-hoc search layer
Parallel to the streaming engine, the ad-hoc search layer also consumes from the normalized queue. This system (often utilizing Elasticsearch or Splunk indexers) is optimized for human interaction. It indexes the data to support sub-second search and retrieval, enabling security analysts to perform investigations and threat hunting. While the streaming layer finds known threats, this layer helps analysts find the unknown ones through interactive querying.
The storage layer (long-term retention)
Simultaneously, a third consumer reads from the normalized queue to persist data into the storage layer. This layer is architected for durability and cost-efficiency, typically writing data to object storage (like Amazon S3) in a columnar format (such as Parquet). This “cold storage” ensures compliance with data retention policies at a fraction of the cost of the high-performance search tier, effectively decoupling retention from compute.
The analytics and correlation layer (batch)
Finally, the analytics and correlation layer operates by consuming data from the storage layer. Unlike the streaming engine, which looks at individual events in motion, this layer executes complex queries over vast historical datasets. It runs scheduled jobs to detect sophisticated patterns, such as “beaconing to a rare domain over thirty days,” that require analyzing long time windows. By reading from storage rather than the real-time stream, it isolates these resource-intensive jobs from the ingestion and search pipelines.
Summary of SIEM layers
LayerPrimary FunctionKey ChallengeIngestionCollects raw logs and buffers them into a Raw Queue.Handling massive throughput spikes without data loss.NormalizationParses raw logs into a common schema and publishes to a Normalized Queue.High CPU overhead from regex parsing and enrichment.Rule-based detectionConsumes normalized stream for fast, rule-based alerting.Managing state and windowing for millions of concurrent entities.Ad-hoc searchIndexes normalized data for fast, interactive investigation.Unpredictable resource consumption from complex analyst queries.StoragePersists normalized data for long-term retention.Optimizing file formats (Parquet or Avro) for efficient read and write.AnalyticsExecutes complex batch queries against storage.Scheduling long-running jobs without impacting other workloads. Strategies to encode fairness
Without deliberate intervention, shared infrastructure will always favor the loudest voice. To build a resilient SIEM, engineers must implement strategies that enforce isolation and ensure equitable resource distribution. These strategies generally fall into three categories: admission control, tenant-aware scheduling and resource partitioning.
Admission control and rate limiting
The first line of defense is at the very front of the ingestion pipeline. Admission control ensures that a single tenant cannot flood the raw event queue beyond a certain threshold. However, modern SIEMs move beyond “hard” rate limits (where data is simply dropped) and instead use “soft” limits or shaping.
A common approach is the token bucket algorithm. Each tenant is allocated a certain number of tokens per second, representing their licensed ingestion rate. During a spike, they can consume accumulated tokens to “burst” above their limit for a short duration. Once the bucket is empty, the system might begin “shaping” the traffic, introducing slight delays to the ingestion of that specific tenant’s logs to protect the system’s global stability without immediately discarding critical security data.
In practice: A tenant contracted at 10,000 events per second might be permitted to burst to 15,000 EPS for up to 60 seconds by drawing on their accumulated token reserve. A real incident generating 20,000 EPS would exhaust the bucket and trigger shaping: their logs slow down, but nothing is dropped. Meanwhile, every other tenant on the platform continues processing at full speed.
Tenant-aware fair share scheduling
Inside the processing layers (such as normalization or analytics), the system must decide which tenant’s tasks to execute next. In a naive “first-in, first-out” (FIFO) model, a massive batch of logs from one tenant will block everyone else.
Engineers solve this by implementing weighted fair queuing (WFQ). Instead of one giant queue for all events, the system maintains virtual queues for each tenant. The scheduler cycles through these queues, picking a small batch of events from each. This ensures that a small tenant with only ten events per second never has to wait behind a large tenant processing ten million. This “interleaving” of processing tasks guarantees that every customer makes progress, regardless of their neighbor’s activity.
In practice: In a Kafka-backed SIEM, this is implemented by assigning each tenant their own partition (or partition group) within a topic. Normalization consumers are then configured to process a bounded number of records per tenant per poll cycle, cycling through partitions in round-robin order. A tenant generating a 50x spike in log volume gets their own partition filling up, but the consumer never spends more than its fair share of processing time on that partition before moving to the next tenant.
Virtual resource isolation (quotas and reservations)
For components like the ad-hoc search layer, where resource usage is highly unpredictable, engineers use resource partitioning. This involves setting up logical boundaries within the shared compute pool.
Through resource quotas, the SIEM provider can cap the maximum CPU and memory a single tenant’s queries can consume at any given time. Some advanced architectures take this a step further with guaranteed reservations. A high-tier customer might be guaranteed a specific percentage of the cluster’s resources, ensuring that even during a global system spike, their SOC analysts can still run search queries with the same sub-second latency they expect.
In practice: In Elasticsearch, this is implemented via a combination of search thread pool sizing per node and query-level circuit breakers. A tenant’s queries can be routed to a dedicated set of nodes (using shard allocation filtering), and the circuit breaker limits can be configured per tenant at the coordinating node layer. The result is that a runaway analyst query generating an expensive aggregation across 90 days of data will hit its memory ceiling and fail gracefully, rather than cascading across the entire cluster.
Per-tenant buffering and decoupled processing
In a highly resilient SIEM, I favor that backpressure (where a downstream failure forces the front-end to stop accepting data) should be avoided. Instead of pressuring the ingestion layer to stop, the system utilizes the queues positioned between each layer as shock absorbers.
By implementing per-tenant virtual partitions within these queues, the system can ensure that a bottleneck in the storage or search layers only affects the processing speed of the responsible tenant. If one tenant’s data is being written too slowly, their specific virtual queue grows, while others continue to process at full speed. This results in delayed detection for the “noisy” tenant, but it guarantees data completeness. The system eventually catches up without ever dropping a log or impacting the real-time performance of the rest of the platform.
The ultimate isolation: Physical vs. logical
The strategies above address fairness within shared infrastructure. But for certain organizations, the right answer is no sharing at all.
In a modern cloud environment, it is entirely feasible to provision and allocate an entire, independent SIEM stack per tenant. This “cluster-per-tenant” model eliminates the noisy neighbor problem entirely because there are no neighbors. Each customer’s ingestion pipeline, normalization workers, search nodes and storage buckets are fully dedicated to their own workload.
The compliance implications alone make this worth serious consideration. Frameworks like FedRAMP, ITAR and CJIS often have explicit or implicit requirements around compute and data isolation that a shared multi-tenant cluster cannot satisfy without significant architectural gymnastics. A dedicated cluster satisfies these requirements cleanly, reduces audit surface area and simplifies the evidence chain during compliance reviews.
The trade-off is cost. Dedicated clusters carry substantially higher per-tenant overhead: idle compute must be provisioned to handle peak loads, management complexity scales with cluster count and the economies of scale that make shared SaaS attractive are partially surrendered. In practice, providers who offer this model typically charge a meaningful premium (often 2-3x the multi-tenant equivalent) and reserve it for enterprise or public sector customers with specific regulatory requirements.
The practical framework for security leaders evaluating this decision is straightforward. If your organization operates under a compliance framework that names compute or data isolation as a requirement, start with the dedicated cluster conversation. If your primary concern is detection performance and cost, invest time instead in understanding how deeply a vendor has engineered fairness into their shared environment, because that engineering is what determines whether the multi-tenant promise holds when it matters most.
Conclusion
The silence regarding multi-tenancy in major SIEM marketing is a risk that security leaders should not ignore. As telemetry volumes continue to explode, the engineering behind “fairness” becomes just as important as the AI detecting the threats.
An ideal SIEM solution should offer the best of both worlds: the flexibility of a multi-tenant cluster where fairness is deeply engineered into every layer, combined with the option to deploy dedicated, physically isolated clusters for organizations with extreme performance or compliance needs. Until SIEM providers are transparent about how they manage the noisy tenants next door, the promise of 24/7/365 protection remains vulnerable to the activity of a neighbor you didn’t even know you had.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

New GPUBreach Attack Enables Full CPU Privilege Escalation via GDDR6 Bit-Flips

New academic research has identified multiple RowHammer attacks against high-performance graphics processing units (GPUs) that could be exploited to escalate privileges and, in some cases, even take full control of a host. The efforts have been codenamed GPUBreach, GDDRHammer, and GeForge. GPUBreach goes a step further than GPUHammer, demonstrating for the first time thatView the full article
Hacker News

China-Linked Storm-1175 Exploits Zero-Days to Rapidly Deploy Medusa Ransomware

A China-based threat actor known for deploying Medusa ransomware has been linked to the weaponization of a combination of zero-day and N-day vulnerabilities to orchestrate "high-velocity" attacks and break into susceptible internet-facing systems. "The threat actor's high operational tempo and proficiency in identifying exposed perimeter assets have proven successful, with recentView the full article
Hacker News

Flowise AI Agent Builder Under Active CVSS 10.0 RCE Exploitation; 12,000+ Instances Exposed

Threat actors are exploiting a maximum-severity security flaw in Flowise, an open-source artificial intelligence (AI) platform, according to new findings from VulnCheck. The vulnerability in question is CVE-2025-59528 (CVSS score: 10.0), a code injection vulnerability that could result in remote code execution. "The CustomMCP node allows users to input configuration settings for connectingView the full article
Hacker News

Apple Continues Promoting iOS 26 and macOS 26 Liquid Glass With Updated Design Gallery

Apple is continuing to highlight the Liquid Glass aesthetic that it introduced in iOS 26, iPadOS 26, and macOS 26. The company has shared an updated Liquid Glass Design Gallery that shows off Liquid Glass in third-party apps.


The visual gallery features several iPhone and iPad apps, with screenshots that show the difference between app design in iOS 18 and ‌iOS 26‌.

Apps included in the gallery have adopted Liquid Glass for elements like tab bars, navigation buttons, bottom toolbars, and more. Apple also highlights pop-out menu interfaces and the separate search buttons that some apps have implemented, both of which are Liquid Glass design elements that Apple has added to its own apps.

AllTrails, Carrot Weather, Fantastical, Kroger, SketchPro, Trello, and Le Monde are among the apps featured.

Apple previously shared a Liquid Glass gallery after the ‌iOS 26‌ launch, and that gallery provides more Liquid Glass design examples.

Since debuting Liquid Glass, Apple has made small changes like adding a slider bar to the Lock Screen clock for adjusting the Liquid Glass level, but no major updates have been introduced. Rumors suggest that iOS 27, iPadOS 27, and macOS 27 will continue to feature the Liquid Glass aesthetic with little change, but Apple could also add a system-wide slider bar for Liquid Glass opacity adjustments.Related Roundups: iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS TahoeRelated Forums: iOS 26, macOS Tahoe
This article, "Apple Continues Promoting iOS 26 and macOS 26 Liquid Glass With Updated Design Gallery" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Some iPhone Apps Receive Mysterious Update 'From Apple'

Apple appears to be quietly updating some apps, based on curious new update notes that have appeared on the App Store.


Over the last week, some app updates have included notes that suggest the update is coming from Apple rather than an app developer. "This update from Apple will improve the functionality of this app. No new features are included," reads the description.

Some of the apps that have been updated include Candy Crush Soda Saga, Sentry Mobile, Catan Universe, Bluetti, Mortal Kombat, Duet Display, VLC, and many more.


It's not clear what functionality Apple is improving with each app update, if any. One developer on Reddit said that Apple inserted the text into an app update that had the same version number and content as a prior update.

The update text is appearing on apps that have not been updated in some time, as well as apps that received recent updates, so it's not clear what the apps have in common. When analyzing the code of one of the apps that received an Apple update, MacRumors could not find what had changed.Tag: App Store
This article, "Some iPhone Apps Receive Mysterious Update 'From Apple'" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

iPhone Fold Enters Trial Production Phase Ahead of 2026 Launch

Apple partner Foxconn has started trial production on the iPhone Fold, according to Chinese leaker Instant Digital. Trial production comes before mass production, which Apple plans to start in July as long as no issues come up during the earlier testing stage.


So far, Apple remains on track to launch the ‌iPhone Fold‌ in 2026, though the latest rumors suggest that it's not going to come out in September. Instead, it could launch sometime after the iPhone 18 Pro, debuting as late as December. Apple is likely to announce the iPhone 18 Pro models and the ‌iPhone Fold‌ at the same time at its September iPhone event, but the following launch sounds like it will be split.

The ‌iPhone Fold‌ will be Apple's first foldable, and it's expected to feature a ~5.5-inch screen size when closed and a larger ~7.8-inch size when open. Apple plans to use a wider 4:3 aspect ratio, so it will be similar in shape to an iPad, with a wider, shorter size than many competing foldable smartphones on the market.

Apple plans to make the ‌iPhone Fold‌ as thin as 4.5mm when it's open, and that thin design requires compromises. There won't be a triple-lens camera setup so no Telephoto lens, and Apple also can't use Face ID because the TrueDepth sensor doesn't fit. Rumors suggest the ‌iPhone Fold‌ will have an iPad-style Touch ID side button instead. Apple is supposedly focused on minimizing the crease, and has achieved a design with a nearly invisible fold down the middle when the device is open.

For more on what to expect from Apple's first foldable iPhone, we have a dedicated iPhone Fold roundup.Related Roundup: iPhone FoldTag: Foldable iPhone
This article, "iPhone Fold Enters Trial Production Phase Ahead of 2026 Launch" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Asks Court to Pause App Store Fee Fight While It Petitions Supreme Court in Epic Games Case

Apple plans to ask the United States Supreme Court to weigh in on the App Store fee restrictions and contempt of court ruling levied against it in the ongoing Epic Games vs. Apple legal battle.


In a filing on April 3 (via TechCrunch), Apple asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to hold off on a plan that would see the U.S. Northern District of California decide on a reasonable commission for Apple to charge developers for purchases made from a link in an app. Apple is concerned that the district court will decide on a fee, only to have the Supreme Court then reverse the ruling in its entirety.

Apple says that it does not want to make multiple major changes to its ‌App Store‌ fee structure. Instead, Apple proposes that the current no-commission setup remain in place until Apple hears back from the Supreme Court. Developers can currently include links to non-App Store purchase options in their apps and Apple charges no fee from purchases made using those links. Apple wants to continue fee-free links and hold off on the long legal battle to determine a fee for the time being.

Apple has not petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case yet, and there is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will do so. Back in 2024, both Apple and Epic Games asked the Supreme Court to make a ruling in their ongoing dispute, but the Supreme Court denied the request. Apple is going to ask the Supreme Court to hear the contempt aspect of the case, and there's a non-zero chance the Supreme Court will agree.

Back in April 2025, Apple was found to have violated a 2021 injunction requiring it to let developers direct customers to third-party purchase options on the web with in-app links. The injunction stemmed from the ‌Epic Games‌ legal battle, which Apple won almost entirely. Apple was not found to have a monopoly, but the judge overseeing the case, Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, ordered Apple to relax its "anti-steering" link rules.

Apple implemented new App Store rules, but only slightly lowered its fees. Apple charged a 12 to 27 percent commission instead of a 15 to 30 percent commission for purchases made via a web link, and the high fee combined with third-party payment fees meant almost no developers opted to add links. ‌Epic Games‌ accused Apple of charging "unjustified fees," and asked the court to decide whether Apple was complying with the injunction. The court found that Apple was in "willful violation," and Gonzalez Rogers banned Apple from collecting any fee on links at all.

Apple immediately appealed the ruling, but dropped link fees in April 2025. Apple argued that the ruling was unconstitutional and that it should receive compensation for its technology. In December 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals handed down a mixed ruling, agreeing that Apple violated the injunction, but questioning the severity of the response. The appeals court suggested Apple should be able to charge a reasonable fee, and tasked the district court with deciding what the fee should be.

Apple is hoping the Supreme Court will do what the appeals court did not, and vacate the district court's ruling entirely. Apple plans to challenge the contempt ruling and the scope of the injunction, which Apple argues should not extend to all developers nationwide, instead applying only to developers connected to ‌Epic Games‌. Apple is questioning the civil contempt ruling and the court's ruling that Apple violated the "spirit" of the injunction rather than the direct text. Apple says that it should not be held in contempt because the injunction had no specific wording about commissions. It's possible the spirit vs. plain text dispute will catch the Supreme Court's attention.

If the appeals court agrees to Apple's plan, the fee calculation hearing in the district court will be put on pause until the Supreme Court makes a decision. After an appeals court ruling, the Supreme Court is the last stop. If the Supreme Court decides not to hear the case, the appeals court ruling will stand and the district court will be able to proceed with deciding on a fee.

Should the appeals court not grant Apple's request for a stay, the district court will start the fee calculation process while Apple simultaneously petitions the Supreme Court and waits to hear back.Tags: App Store, Epic Games, Epic Games vs. Apple, Apple Lawsuits
This article, "Apple Asks Court to Pause App Store Fee Fight While It Petitions Supreme Court in Epic Games Case" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Iran-Linked Password-Spraying Campaign Targets 300+ Israeli Microsoft 365 Organizations

An Iran-nexus threat actor is suspected to be behind a password-spraying campaign targeting Microsoft 365 environments in Israel and the U.A.E. amid ongoing conflict in the Middle East. The activity, assessed to be ongoing, was carried out in three distinct attack waves that took place on March 3, March 13, and March 23, 2026, per Check Point. "The campaign is primarilyView the full article
Hacker News

Netflix Launches Free Kids Gaming App to Compete With Apple Arcade

Netflix today launched a new Netflix Playground app designed for kids who are eight and under. Playground offers a selection of games with popular characters from shows like Sesame Street and Peppa Pig, with no ads and no in-app purchases.


Playground is included in all Netflix memberships, and it is an expansion of the existing gaming options that Netflix offers. Netflix has had games available since 2021, but now there is a dedicated space for games aimed at children. Netflix Playground is a standalone app that users can sign into with a Netflix account, and it is available on the iPhone and iPad.

With Netflix Playground, Netflix will compete with Apple Arcade, which is Apple's subscription gaming service. Like Playground, ‌Apple Arcade‌ games have no ads, fees, or in-app purchases, with one monthly fee unlocking all content. Apple has hundreds of titles, and it does not have an all-in-one subscription option with both streaming content and gaming access like Netflix does.

Apple does have an Apple One bundle that combines Apple TV, iCloud+, Apple Music, and ‌Apple Arcade‌ for $19.95 per month, but the ad-supported Netflix plan that includes TV shows, movies, and games for adults and children is cheaper at $8.99 per month. Ad-free Netflix is about the same price as ‌Apple One‌ at $19.99 per month.

Netflix's children's app launches as multiple countries have introduced stricter app restrictions for minors and age verification requirements for app users. The renewed focus on content that children are exposed to has likely pushed parents to look for simple, kid-friendly content like Netflix is making available.

The new Netflix Playground app is available in the U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, Philippines, and New Zealand today, and it is launching worldwide on April 28. [Direct Link]Tags: Apple Arcade, Netflix
This article, "Netflix Launches Free Kids Gaming App to Compete With Apple Arcade" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

iOS 26.4.1 Update for iPhones is Coming Soon

Apple's software engineers are testing iOS 26.4.1, according to the MacRumors visitor logs, which have been a reliable indicator of upcoming iOS versions.


iOS 26.4.1 should be a minor update that fixes bugs and/or security vulnerabilities, and it will likely be released either this week or next week.

Last month, Apple launched the Studio Display XDR, and it promised to release a Medical Imaging Calibrator that enables the monitor to display DICOM medical imaging. 9to5Mac today reported that the feature has received FDA clearance and is launching this week, so perhaps there will be a macOS 26.4.1 update and/or a Studio Display XDR firmware update too.

The medical feature will allow radiologists to view diagnostic images in apps like Visage 7 directly on the Studio Display XDR, according to Apple.

These updates will come out ahead of iOS 26.5 and macOS 26.5, which are currently in beta.Related Roundups: iOS 26, iPadOS 26Related Forum: iOS 26
This article, "iOS 26.4.1 Update for iPhones is Coming Soon" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple's Impressive Barcelona Store Reopens Next Month

Apple's beautiful Passeig de Gràcia store in the heart of Barcelona, Spain has been temporarily closed for renovations since mid-February, but the location is finally set to reopen next month. The store will resume business on May 26, according to Apple's website.

Apple Passeig de Gràcia
Apple Passeig de Gràcia first opened in 2012, and it is one of the company's flagship retail locations. The store is on one of the most popular avenues in Barcelona, inside a historic former bank building with a stunning stone facade.

Apple has another store in Barcelona at the Westfield La Maquinista shopping mall.

Thanks, Filip Chudzinski!Tag: Apple Store
This article, "Apple's Impressive Barcelona Store Reopens Next Month" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

DPRK-Linked Hackers Use GitHub as C2 in Multi-Stage Attacks Targeting South Korea

Threat actors likely associated with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) have been observed using GitHub as command-and-control (C2) infrastructure in multi-stage attacks targeting organizations in South Korea. The attack chain, per Fortinet FortiGuard Labs, involves obfuscated Windows shortcut (LNK) files acting as the starting point to drop a decoy PDFView the full article
Hacker News

Apple Sued by Three YouTube Channels

Three established YouTube channels have sued Apple, alleging that the company violated the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by unlawfully accessing and scraping millions of copyrighted videos from YouTube to train its AI models.


In a class action lawsuit filed in California federal court last week, the owners of the YouTube channels h3h3Productions (plus H3 Podcast and H3 Podcast Highlights), MrShortGame Golf, and Golfholics alleged that Apple "deliberately circumvented" YouTube's protections against video scraping and "profited substantially" by doing so.

Apple's research papers indicate that some of the YouTube videos uploaded by the plaintiffs were used to train its AI models, the complaint alleged.

Apple's actions were "not only unlawful, but an unconscionable attack on the community of content creators whose content is used to fuel the multi-trillion-dollar generative AI industry without any compensation," the lawsuit adds.

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction and damages individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated in the U.S., per the complaint.

In recent months, the same three YouTube channels have filed similar lawsuits against other tech giants, including Meta, Nvidia, ByteDance, and Snap.

h3h3Productions is a well-known YouTube channel created by Ethan Klein and Hila Klein, and they later created the H3 Podcast. Their channels have millions of followers, while MrShortGame Golf and Golfholics have hundreds of thousands of followers.Tags: Apple Intelligence, Apple Lawsuits, YouTube
This article, "Apple Sued by Three YouTube Channels" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple's 2026 MacBook Pro Hits All-Time Low Prices on Amazon With Up to $199 Off

Amazon is offering a few all-time low prices on Apple's M5 Pro/M5 Max MacBook Pro, with up to $199 off select models without the need of a membership or clipping a coupon. These deals join Amazon's discounts on the M5 MacBook Air from over the weekend, which are seeing up to $200 in savings.

MacBook Pro

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Amazon. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

Starting with the 14-inch models, you can get the 24GB/1TB M5 Pro MacBook Pro for $2,049.99, down from $2,199.00. This deal, along with all of the others we're tracking in this article, represent best-ever prices on the brand new M5 Pro and M5 Max MacBook Pro.

$149 OFF14-inch M5 Pro MacBook Pro (24GB/1TB) for $2,049.99
$149 OFF14-inch M5 Pro MacBook Pro (24GB/2TB) for $2,449.99
$149 OFF14-inch M5 Max MacBook Pro (36GB/2TB) for $3,449.99

We're also tracking similar steep discounts on the 16-inch models, including a few M5 Max options. These discounts reach up to $199 off original prices, and as of writing we're only tracking these deals on Amazon.

$149 OFF16-inch M5 Pro MacBook Pro (24GB/1TB) for $2,549.99
$199 OFF16-inch M5 Max MacBook Pro (36GB/2TB) for $3,699.99
$199 OFF16-inch M5 Max MacBook Pro (48GB/2TB) for $4,199.99

MacBook Air



Amazon has the 512GB 13-inch M5 MacBook Air for $949.99, down from $1,099.00, and the 24GB/1TB model for $1,349.99, down from $1,499.00. Both of these represent new record low prices for each configuration, and as of writing we're only seeing these deals at Amazon.

$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $949.99
$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,149.99
$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,349.99

In terms of the 15-inch models, you'll find up to $149 off the M5 MacBook Air, with multiple color options on sale for each configuration. Prices start at $1,149.99 for the 512GB model, down from $1,299.00, and also include both 1TB models on sale.

$149 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $1,149.99
$149 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,349.99
$149 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,549.99

If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Apple's 2026 MacBook Pro Hits All-Time Low Prices on Amazon With Up to $199 Off" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Mac Mini and Mac Studio Facing Extreme Shipping Delays Amid Severe RAM Shortage

Apple's online store in the U.S. is currently showing delivery estimates of up to 4-5 months for many Mac mini and Mac Studio configurations with upgraded amounts of RAM. The delays are occurring amid a severe global memory chip shortage driven by surging demand from companies building AI servers that requires large amounts of RAM.


For example, a Mac mini with an M4 Pro chip and 64GB of RAM ordered from Apple's online store in the U.S. today is estimated to ship in 16-18 weeks.

Even the $599 base model with an M4 chip and 16GB of RAM has a one-month delay.

Likewise, a Mac Studio with an M3 Ultra chip and 256GB of RAM is estimated to ship in 4-5 months, with in-store pickup not available until September.

Last month, Apple entirely removed the Mac Studio's 512GB of RAM option.

Memory chip prices are reportedly starting to stabilize or slightly decrease, but prices still remain well above historical averages, so high-end Mac mini and Mac Studio shipping estimates might not meaningfully improve any time soon.Related Roundups: Mac Studio, Mac miniBuyer's Guide: Mac Studio (Caution), Mac Mini (Caution)Related Forums: Mac Studio, Mac mini
This article, "Mac Mini and Mac Studio Facing Extreme Shipping Delays Amid Severe RAM Shortage" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Watch Ultra 3 Gets First Major Discount of 2026 With $99 Off Select Models

Amazon today has introduced fresh deals on the Apple Watch Ultra 3, providing $99 discounts on select models. It's been months since we last tracked any discounts on the Ultra 3, and these are solid second-best prices on the 2025 smartwatch.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with some of these vendors. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

You can get the Apple Watch Ultra 3 for $699.99 in Natural and Black color options, down from $799.00. There are also a few Milanese Loop models on sale for $799.99, down from $899.00.

$99 OFFApple Watch Ultra 3 for $699.99

We've collected all of the Apple Watch Ultra 3 models currently on sale on Amazon in the list below. All of these deals are within $19 of the all-time low price, and they're the best prices we've seen so far in 2026.

Black with Black Ocean Band - $699.99 ($99 off)
Natural with Anchor Blue Ocean Band - $699.99 ($99 off)
Natural with Blue/Bright Blue Trail Loop (M/L) - $699.99 ($99 off)
Black with Black Milanese Loop (Large) - $799.99 ($99 off)
Black with Black Milanese Loop (Medium) - $799.99 ($99 off)
Natural Milanese Loop (Large) - $799.99 ($99 off)

If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Apple Watch Ultra 3 Gets First Major Discount of 2026 With $99 Off Select Models" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Multi-OS Cyberattacks: How SOCs Close a Critical Risk in 3 Steps

Your attack surface no longer lives on one operating system, and neither do the campaigns targeting it. In enterprise environments, attackers move across Windows endpoints, executive MacBooks, Linux infrastructure, and mobile devices, taking advantage of the fact that many SOC workflows are still fragmented by platform.  For security leaders, this creates aView the full article
Hacker News

⚡ Weekly Recap: Axios Hack, Chrome 0-Day, Fortinet Exploits, Paragon Spyware and More

This week had real hits. The key software got tampered with. Active bugs showed up in the tools people use every day. Some attacks didn’t even need much effort because the path was already there. One weak spot now spreads wider than before. What starts small can reach a lot of systems fast. New bugs, faster use, less time to react. That’s this week. Read&View the full article
Hacker News

North Korean hackers abuse LNKs and GitHub repos in ongoing campaign

DPRK-linked threat actors are preferring stealth over sophistication in targeting South Korean organizations, as researchers report the use of weaponized Windows shortcut (.LNK) files and GitHub-based command-and-control (C2) channels in a new campaign.
According to new Fortinet findings, a series of attacks that began in 2024 were found using a multi-stage scripting process and GitHub C2 to evade detection, with obfuscation improving with each iteration of the campaign.
“In recent months, the threat actor has altered their tactics,” Fortinet researchers said in a blog post. “They now embed decoding functions within LNK arguments and include encoded payloads directly inside the files.” The ongoing campaign seems to be targeted at expanding DPRK’s surveillance within South Korea. The researchers noted that lesser obfuscation and heavier metadata in the previous iterations of the campaign allowed them to link it to attacks spreading the XenoRAT malware.
Jason Soroko, senior fellow at Sectigo, believes the strategy aligns with the recent trend of attackers relying on built-in Windows utilities and legitimate services to carry out their objectives. “Modern cyber espionage has fundamentally shifted toward a highly evasive strategy known as living off the land,” he said, noting that attackers are increasingly abusing native tools like PowerShell and scheduled tasks to blend into normal system activity.
LNK files are long known for their history of exploitation, with Microsoft issuing multiple patches and advisories over the years to curb their misuse.
LNK files used as stealth loaders
The campaign begins its infection with a Windows shortcut file, which is typically used to launch applications or open documents, but can also embed commands to execute scripts or binaries.
“A .lnk file is how Windows handles shortcuts: Whenever you click on that Outlook icon on your desktop, you’re actually clicking on a separate file that uses the Outlook image and directs the operating system to open up Microsoft Outlook,” explained Jamie Boote, senior manager, strategic security consulting at Black Duck. “You can also create shortcut links (.lnk files) to websites, programs with additional commands, executable scripts, and just about anything else you could type into Windows’s Run command window.”
The LNK files in the campaign use various scripts, including earlier versions with simple character concatenation to mask GitHub C2 address and the access token, the researchers said, adding that it was easy to determine that the script was meant to run a PowerShell command fetched from GitHub.
Later versions shifted to basic character decoding functions, making detection a little trickier, but still had telling metadata like name, sizes, and modification dates that allowed researchers to connect it to the specific campaign. The name column repeatedly uses “Hangul document,” a pattern consistent with state-affiliated groups like Kimsuky, APT37, and Lazarus.
In its latest iteration, the campaign operators have removed the identifying metadata, now using only a decoding function within the arguments.
GitHub as C2
Researchers also highlighted the campaign’s use of GitHub as a C2 layer. Rather than communicating with suspicious-looking or newly registered domains, the malware interacts with GitHub repositories and APIs to receive instructions and exfiltrate data.
“The fact that this shortcut file creates a chain that ultimately reaches out to a GitHub repository, and pulls scripts over the internet, should put network defenders on alert that even productivity platforms can be attack vectors,” Boote added.
After infecting a system, the PowerShell scripts perform system checks to confirm the environment isn’t under analysis, ensure the malware persists after system reboot through the Scheduled Task, and collect detailed system information. Only then is a stable connection attempted with subsequent scripts, where additional modules and instructions are fetched from the attacker’s GitHub repository.
The researchers flagged a GitHub account, “motoralis”, with consistent activity dating back to 2025, and other less frequent accounts, including “God0808RAMA,” “Pigresy80,” “entire73,” “pandora0009,” and “brandonleeodd93-blip.”
Additionally, the blog post shared a set of URLs and hash functions to support detection efforts.
View the full article
CSOonline

How LiteLLM Turned Developer Machines Into Credential Vaults for Attackers

The most active piece of enterprise infrastructure in the company is the developer workstation. That laptop is where credentials are created, tested, cached, copied, and reused across services, bots, build tools, and now local AI agents. In March 2026, the TeamPCP threat actor proved just how valuable developer machines are. Their supply chain attack onView the full article
Hacker News

Qilin and Warlock Ransomware Use Vulnerable Drivers to Disable 300+ EDR Tools

Threat actors associated with Qilin and Warlock ransomware operations have been observed using the bring your own vulnerable driver (BYOVD) technique to silence security tools running on compromised hosts, according to findings from Cisco Talos and Trend Micro. Qilin attacks analyzed by Talos have been found to deploy a malicious DLL named "msimg32.dll,"View the full article
Hacker News

Authentication is broken: Here’s how security leaders can actually fix it

Authentication keeps breaking where it matters most: On regulated front lines such as healthcare, government, aerospace and travel. The core issue is not a lack of innovation. Instead, it is a brittle and fragmented ecosystem of cards, readers, middleware and software that rarely work together under real-world pressure. Even today’s “passwordless” solutions can be undermined by poor implementation, downgrades and fallback paths that attackers are quick to exploit. This article examines where these failures occur, why they persist and offers a practical blueprint for CISOs to guide their organizations and vendors toward resilient, phishing-resistant and field-ready authentication.
The problem: Brittle by design
Authentication is supposed to be the most reliable control in your security stack. Yet in many enterprises, it is often the most fragile because there are too many moving parts: Credential types, readers (contact, contactless, dual frequency), protocols, middleware, identity platforms and device operating system nuances. Any minor mismatch — such as an unexpected identifier format, a driver quirk, a browser nuance or a rushed patch — can quickly turn a mission-critical login into a service desk crisis. This is not just a theoretical risk; it is a daily reality for operations teams who must keep care units, field agents and front of house operations running smoothly.
Sector snapshots: Where it breaks (and why that matters)
Healthcare. Clinicians need tap and go speed with zero tolerance for downtime. One large hospital attempted to pair advanced HID SEOS credentials, which use privacy-preserving randomized IDs, with a clinical SSO platform that expects static IDs for user recognition. This architectural mismatch forced a choice between stronger privacy and reliable workflows. The project stalled until the team reverted to technology compatible with static IDs. In healthcare, even a minor glitch can quickly escalate into a patient safety incident. State & local government. Agencies rolled out unified FIDO2 credentials to cover both door access and laptop logons. However, they soon discovered that many rugged laptops did not include the low-frequency antenna needed for physical access. Teams either split credentials, which defeated the purpose or added external readers, which increased cost and complexity. Field users ended up carrying multiple badges and dongles, which is the opposite of resilience. Aerospace and Travel. Aerospace organizations that adopted proprietary card ecosystems, such as LEGIC encountered licensing constraints that limited which readers they could purchase and how quickly they could scale globally. In the travel sector, a cruise line’s shift to wristband credentials faced challenges with FIPS 201 requirements, which were designed for cards rather than wearables. This forced the company into custom engineering solutions. In these cases, innovation moved faster than standards and operational teams had to manage the consequences. Root causes: Why the ecosystem is stuck
Fragmentation across layers. Cards like SEOS, LEGIC, DESFire and FIDO2, mixed with contact, contactless and dual‑frequency readers and identity stacks such as Imprivata, Windows Hello, Okta and Ping rarely interoperate cleanly. A change in any layer can trigger unexpected failures across the system. Downgrades and fallback weaknesses. Authentication remains only as strong as its weakest backup path. Adversary‑in‑the‑middle and downgrade attacks routinely bypass phish‑resistant flows, as shown in CSO reporting on FIDO passkey downgrade exploits and ongoing MFA‑fatigue attacks. These gaps quietly reintroduce risk despite modern authentication advances. Patch fragility. Platform updates often break authentication flows, with CSO documenting cases where Windows updates disrupted smart card logons and Windows Hello for Business. These incidents, including the ones covered in Microsoft updates, knock out key enterprise functions. And Windows Hello for Business authentication issues, show how sensitive authentication stacks are to version drift. Vendor lock‑in and standards gaps. Proprietary licensing and uneven SDKs limit flexibility and slow upgrades. Progress toward interoperability profiles is emerging, but only when customers demand it. Okta’s IPSIE standard is one example, though broad adoption still depends on pressure from buyers. The path forward: 3 architectural shifts that can help
Three architectural shifts can significantly improve reliability and reduce unexpected failures. These approaches are not mutually exclusive and can be combined for maximum effectiveness on a single platform.
1) Modular secure elements (SEs) embedded or in SIM form
Device-bound cryptography, tamper resistance, ultra-low-power states and tighter OEM control over firmware and BIOS all raise the baseline for security and reliability. This is especially valuable in rugged or clinical environments, where device identity and offline resilience matter. Embedded secure elements help here by removing dependence on external readers and unstable drivers, though they introduce their own tradeoffs such as vendor lock‑in, added board and firmware complexity and reliance on specialized parts that can create yet another integration challenge if no common profile exists. The most effective way to adopt them is to start with a narrow, high‑value fleet like emergency carts, field supervisors or flight line tablets, pairing the secure element with a hardened, signed image and an offline‑ready authentication posture so it can serve as the root of trust for both login and data at rest.
2) Middleware standardization (make the reader/credential layer pluggable)
Middleware becomes the universal bridge that smooths out card and reader quirks, giving you a stable way to integrate with identity platforms like Entra, Okta, Ping or Imprivata while normalizing identifiers, enforcing anti‑downgrade logic and capturing every strange edge case for rapid incident response. It comes with its own hurdles, including unclear ownership, upfront integration work and competing SDKs, yet once it’s in place you separate authentication behavior from device idiosyncrasies and vendor swaps, which is a major win for operations. The cleanest path is to stand up a credential abstraction layer with clear policies that block legacy fallbacks on high‑risk apps, enforce phishing‑resistant flows and log any downgrade decisions as security events sent to the SOC, while also applying session‑protection controls that blunt adversary‑in‑the‑middle attacks.
3) Unified credential ecosystem (the “USB‑C moment” for authentication)
Standard behavior across readers, middleware and identity providers creates a calmer edge environment, cutting down on surprise failures and the weekend firefighting that follows patch cycles. The model isn’t free—you need industry coordination, legacy bridges and steady change management—but the direction is already set toward credential abstraction with multiprotocol support and reference integrations that vendors certify together. The cleanest way to land this is through RFP requirements that demand multiprotocol credential handling, verified reader and IdP compatibility, documented anti‑downgrade behavior and clear runbooks for regression handling after OS or IdP updates, with payments and renewals tied directly to meeting those standards.
CISO action plan: 5 moves that change outcomes this quarter
Kill the weakest link: Remove silent fallbacks. Identify where passwordless flows still revert to legacy prompts such as SMS, voice, OTP or simple approval pushes. On systems handling money, PHI or privileged access, disable or tightly control these paths. If a fallback is unavoidable, require identity verification and alert the SOC for review. Downgrade paths and MFA fatigue attacks often succeed because weak backups are left in place, as detailed here. Demand downgrade transparency in your tooling. Require your IdP or middleware to log every downgrade event and block scripted browser or agent spoofing that drives users into fake “unsupported browser” flows. Downgrade bypasses in passkey and FIDO flows have been demonstrated in the wild, so your stack should make these attempts easy to detect and simple to shut down. A clear example is outlined here. Harden for patch turbulence (assume authentication regressions). Create a pre‑prod integration gauntlet that exercises smart cards, passkeys, Windows Hello key trust and your clinical or field SSO flows. Hold broad deployment until the gauntlet passes and keep a one‑click rollback and a ready‑to‑send communications script. Recent Windows updates have shown how quickly authentication can break at scale, so build muscle‑memory playbooks before Patch Tuesday. Examples include Write interoperability into contracts. RFPs should call out multi‑protocol credential abstraction, certified reader and IdP pairings, FIDO2 and passkey support without insecure fallbacks and alignment with emerging interoperability profiles. Vendors are already moving in this direction and Okta’s IPSIE standard is one example worth citing. Pick the right pilot: Constrained, high‑value and visible. Start where downtime is costly and users are already trained, such as ICU stations, air‑side operations or revenue desks. Pair embedded secure‑element devices with reader‑agnostic middleware and strict anti‑downgrade policies. Track MTTR for authentication incidents, downgrade frequency and help‑desk volume, then publish the results to justify a broader rollout. The long view: Resilience over fashion
Passkeys and FIDO2 move authentication in the right direction when they are deployed without porous fallbacks and with integrations that behave consistently under pressure. Their security and usability advantages are clear, yet real‑world usage has also shown how adversary‑in‑the‑middle techniques and weak backup paths can undermine those gains. These issues are not reasons to slow adoption but reminders to approach implementation with discipline.
To build authentication that remains stable even as systems evolve, we need interoperability, anti‑downgrade behavior as the default and graceful failure modes. That means using modular hardware where it fits, relying on reader‑agnostic middleware with enforceable policy and pushing for a unified credential experience that vendors certify and customers insist on. Components exist today; what’s missing is the resolve to wire them together.
Do not invest in another point solution until your contracts, runbooks and pilots reflect these principles. Authentication should be the calmest, most predictable part of your stack, not the source of your next incident. The building blocks for resilient, interoperable authentication already exist. What’s missing is resolve. Now is the time for security leaders to set the standard and demand better. Make authentication work for you, not against you.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?

View the full article
CSOonline

6 ways attackers abuse AI services to hack your business

Attackers are starting to exploit AI systems to mount attacks in the same way they once relied on built-in enterprise tools such as PowerShell.
Instead of relying on malware, cybercriminals are increasingly abusing AI tools enterprises depend on — a trend some experts describe as living off the AI land.
“We’re seeing it in things like poisoned MCP servers in the supply chain, attackers using legitimate models like Claude to extract sensitive data, and even viral agents like OpenClaw accidentally causing destructive actions,” says Kaushik Shanadi, CTO at Helmet Security, a startup focused on securing agentic AI communications. “The problem is most of these systems were deployed before anyone stopped to think about governance or security.”
The shift from simple prompt injection to “agent hijacking” represents a fundamental change in the AI threat landscape, other security experts told CSO.
“Attackers are no longer just trying to trick a chatbot; they are living off the AI land, abusing the same legitimate automation and memory features that make AI assistants useful,” says Pascal Geenens, VP of cyber threat intelligence at cybersecurity vendor Radware.
Below are some examples of how attackers are subverting AI-based services to stage attacks.
MCP server impersonation
In September 2025, attackers promoted a counterfeit model context protocol (MCP) server mimicking technology to integrate Postmark, a transactional email service owned by ActiveCampaign, into AI assistants.
The fake MCP server package looked legitimate and functioned as a legitimate tool across 15 versions before a single-line code change was introduced that meant sensitive communications — password resets, invoices, internal memos — were silently siphoned off for days before the hack was detected.
The malicious package, which attracted 1,500 downloads per week on the popular node.js package registry, exposed enterprises that relied on the tool to a form of supply chain attack.
“This is the AI equivalent of name-squatting a package registry, except there’s no central MCP authority verifying server identity and no cryptographic link between an MCP server and the organization it claims to represent,” says Brad Micklea, CEO at Jozu, an AI security and MLOps platform. “This breaks the trust model before the MCP is deployed.”
MCP servers — which allow AI agents and chatbots to connect to data sources, tools, and other services — have recently become the target of varied (for example against Cursor’s built-in browser) and sustained malicious attacks. Locking down these systems to minimize risks has become a priority for enterprise CISOs.
“These servers expose tools, memory, and APIs to AI agents so they can perform tasks,” says Zahra Timsah, PhD, CEO of i-GENTIC AI, an agentic AI governance platform. “If an attacker inserts a poisoned tool, modified connector, or malicious retrieval source into that chain, the AI agent can unknowingly execute it.”
Abusing AI platforms as covert C2 channels
Cybercriminals are also abusing AI platforms as covert command-and-control (C2) channels by turning AI services into proxies that hide malicious traffic inside the flow of legitimate content.
Instead of running a dedicated C2 server, malware is programmed to fetch commands and exfiltrate data through AI services, circumventing traditional security controls in the process.
For example, the SesameOp backdoor hid command traffic inside the OpenAI Assistants API, camouflaging instructions to malware as normal AI development activity.
This is far from an isolated example and the potential for misuse is rife.
For example, Check Point Research demonstrated how Microsoft Copilot and Grok might be manipulated through their public web interfaces to fetch attacker-controlled URLs and return responses. This behavior opens the door to abuse of AI systems without requiring an API key or authenticated account.
Dependency poisoning in AI workflows
Rather than attacking an AI system directly some assaults have relied on poisoning downstream dependencies that an agent relies on for data processing.
In one case, a compromised NPM package was injected into an agentic workflow’s dependency chain.
“This mirrors classical supply chain attacks (e.g. SolarWinds), but a poisoned dependency in an agentic pipeline doesn’t just leak data — it can alter the agent’s decision-making, tool selection, or output without any visible anomaly,” says Jozu’s Micklea.
Double agents
Some attackers are weaponizing vulnerabilities in agents rather than abusing components of an enterprise’s legacy IT infrastructure.
For example, the “EchoLeak” command injection vulnerability in Microsoft 365 Copilot (CVE-2025-32711) shows that a single email with concealed prompt-injection instructions is sufficient to force the AI assistant to exfiltrate internal files and emails to an external server without user interaction.
A series of vulnerabilities (such as CVE-2026-25253) in OpenClaw, the popular open-source personal AI assistant, created a route for a malicious website to take complete control of the developer’s AI agent.
“More than 21,000 such instances were detected, and the researchers further observed that 12% of the skills marketplace for the OpenClaw platform was distributing malware,” says Dr. Suleyman Ozarslan, VP of Picus Labs at Picus Security, a specialist in breach and attack simulation.
Security researchers at Varonis discovered an attack against Microsoft Copilot Personal that sidestepped built-in AI safeguards simply by asking for sensitive data twice.
The Reprompt vulnerability — which effectively turned Microsoft Copilot into a data exfiltration tool — was reported to Microsoft, which has responded by issuing a patch.
AI-orchestrated espionage campaigns
Anthropic caught threat actors abusing Claude Code to manage operational tasks in a cyber-espionage campaign in September 2025.
A suspected Chinese state-sponsored group designated GTG-1002 used Claude Code to execute 80-90% of tactical operations independently, at physically impossible request rates for human operators.
Attackers abused the AI agentic capabilities of Claude Code to automate the process of scripting, target research, building attack tooling, and other functions.
“The attackers decomposed their operation into thousands of small, individually innocuous tasks, combined with role-play framing that convinced the model it was operating as part of a legitimate security assessment,” explains Yagub Rahimov, CEO at cybersecurity startup Polygraf AI.
Creating modular black-hat AI platforms
The threat landscape has shifted from abusing chatbots to building dedicated, weaponized AI stacks like Xanthorox AI.
Unlike general-purpose LLMs, Xanthorox is a purpose-built offensive platform designed specifically for cybercrime. The platform features modules for functions such as malware generation and vulnerability exploits.
“Hexstrike AI Model Context Protocol (MCP) integration allows Xanthorox to move beyond mere ‘assisted’ hacking into the realm of fully autonomous agent systems, moving it into the realm of ‘vibe hacking,’” says Radware’s Geenens. Hexstrike is an open-source, AI-powered offensive security framework originally designed for ethical penetration testing.
Check against delivery
Zbyněk Sopuch, CTO of cybersecurity vendor Safetica, says that many attackers are no longer just exploiting software vulnerabilities, preferring instead to exploit the trust organizations place in AI.
“This means security teams need to treat AI assistants the same exact way they treat human privileged users: with tight control, specific monitoring, and most importantly, never assume anyone or anything to be safe,” Sopuch concludes.
View the full article
CSOonline

Escaping the COTS trap

Over the years, enterprise cybersecurity environments have accumulated staggering numbers of commercial tools. Industry research converges on a consistent picture of tool proliferation that drives complexity, cost, and risk. The global cybersecurity market is valued at approximately $243 billion in 2024 and projected to surpass $520 billion annually by 2026. Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software promises speed and maturity, while avoiding years of custom development. At first, everything works out perfectly, and the decision feels justified.
However, over time, the organization might shift its goals, integrate with other systems, or even decide to move away from the software entirely. This is when real problems start to appear, and teams suddenly realize just how difficult it is to move on. Making basic changes might take ages, replacing the systems feels risky, and the organization is stuck in a conundrum. What we call the “COTS trap”.
The cost of COTS dependency becomes most visible when organizations attempt to switch platforms. Migration failure statistics underscore the depth of architectural entanglement that COTS platforms create. It’s because the system around it was designed in such a way that it makes the software hard to abandon. COTS dependency in cybersecurity is structural, expensive, and accelerating. Organizations that fail to implement architectural countermeasures face compounding costs, diminished strategic flexibility, and increasing vulnerability to both cyber threats and vendor disruption.
What is COTS, and why do people like it?
COTS (short for commercial off-the-shelf software) refers to ready-made software usually sold online or in retail stores. They come with preconfigured functionalities right out of the box, hence they need little to no modifications.
Examples include:
IAM GRC IGA Threat detection platform Most enterprises like them because:
They already ”work.” They deploy easily and quickly. Reduced long-term expenditure as promised by vendors. At a glance, these benefits are compelling. The challenges arise when the software becomes more than a tool and starts shaping the architecture itself.
Emerging dynamics: AI and the next wave of lock-in
Artificial intelligence represents both the next frontier of cybersecurity capability and the next vector of vendor dependency. McKinsey’s 2024/2025 study identifies AI as expanding the total addressable cybersecurity market to $2 trillion. AI-driven security platforms, from behavioral analytics to automated threat detection to AI-powered SIEM, create new forms of COTS dependency. AI models are trained on proprietary datasets, use vendor-specific threat intelligence feeds (62% of enterprise deployments integrate threat intelligence consuming 2.4 billion daily indicators of compromise), and require specialized compute infrastructure. The investment in AI-based detection models creates a new category of switching cost: retraining models, re-establishing behavioral baselines, and losing institutional threat intelligence. Organizations adopting AI-native security platforms face the risk that their threat detection effectiveness becomes linked to a single vendor’s model training data and algorithmic approach.
How vendor lock-in forms in enterprise security architectures
Vendor lock-in rarely happens overnight. Instead, it emerges gradually as technical and business decisions accumulate. How?
Embedded business logic
After using the software for a while, the enterprise gets comfortable, and important rules such as pricing logic and validations end up being buried within the software. With time, the enterprise gradually loses direct control over its own logic.
Vendor-shaped workflows
“That’s how the system works” has quickly become an excuse for most businesses to change workflows to match the software’s limits. This means a lot of processes will either be simplified, bent, or even deemed “good enough”, just because changing them feels too hard.
Platform-native customization
When changes are needed, teams usually add custom scripts, configurations, and extensions to ensure the software fits even better. And even though this might be practical, even necessary at that time, they are usually tailored to that particular vendor’s platform.
Data entanglement
Put simply, your data becomes trapped in formats and structures that only the vendor understands. Reading it becomes hard, slow, and expensive. This makes moving on difficult as the data holds the enterprise hostage.
Architectural patterns that break the COTS trap
Escaping the COTS trap doesn’t mean avoiding commercial software. It means designing systems so the software never becomes the point of control.
Solution 1: The anti-corruption layer
This simply means having a buffer between your systems and the software. Its core purpose is to ensure the two don’t communicate directly. It acts as the translator so that your systems continue speaking your business language. The vendor system remains a tool, not the architectural foundation for your business model.
Solution 2: Process abstraction pattern
Don’t allow the software to dictate how you’ll run your enterprise. Instead, you should define your system independent of the vendor’s software. The software should only be used to perform specific tasks.
That way, it will be way easier for you to change your business model without replacing the entire software. Not just that, you can also replace the software without affecting your business model.
Solution 3: Event-driven integration
Point-to-point integrations usually tighten systems together. Event-driven integration prevents this by sharing simple facts about what has happened, rather than issuing direct requests. This allows systems to act independently, evolve at their own pace, and be replaced without affecting others.
Solution 4: Strangler fig pattern
Changing systems should always be done slowly and not all at once.
Replace small pieces step by step. Allow the old and new systems to run together. Gradually move your users and data. In case something goes wrong, it will be easier to stop and retrace your steps without crashing the system.
Solution 5: Data sovereignty strategy
Your most crucial data should always reside within your system under your control. Vendor platforms receive copies, not ownership. This will allow you to easily move, integrate, or even replace systems without losing access to your data.
Designing for replaceability: Architectural principles
This is where most enterprises get it all wrong. Treating COTS software as the final solution from the get-go. Once selected, purchased, and installed, everything else around it has to adapt to it. Most processes are bent, data models stretched, and architecture redefined to fit what the software requires. The outcome? Replacing it becomes unthinkable.
This kind of thinking is the real problem, not the software itself. COTS was designed to improve productivity and efficiency. It wasn’t meant to define your long-term structure. In today’s ever-changing landscape, nothing is guaranteed to remain the same. Software that fits today will not always fit tomorrow.
Hence, systems should be designed with the assumption that the vendor platform can be replaced anytime the business changes its goals, market shifts, regulations evolve, or strategies get rewritten.
When you approach it in this way, you become flexible by default. You remain in charge of your own systems, and you don’t surrender control to vendors. Most importantly, you do away with last-minute rewrites that occur when change is forced.
The goal here isn’t to switch platforms constantly, but to ensure that you can do it when you need to. That’s what it means to design enterprise systems you can walk away from.
Conclusion: Flexibility matters in architectural design
The cybersecurity industry’s COTS dependency is not a failure of procurement. It is a structural characteristic of a market growing at 10–15% annually, with 3,000+ vendors competing for enterprise budgets. The $212 billion spent on cybersecurity in 2025 flows overwhelmingly through COTS channels, creating dependencies that are expensive to establish, costly to maintain, and extraordinarily difficult to exit.
Purchasing the most powerful commercial off-the-shelf software doesn’t always guarantee success. Successful enterprises are those whose systems are built to adapt to any platform change.
That also doesn’t mean that COTS software is bad, and that you shouldn’t use it. Rather, you should know how to use it. Most enterprises miss the mark by treating these vendor platforms as the foundation for their entire architecture, rather than what they actually are: a tool and nothing more.
Given the confusion around this, most enterprises usually end up stuck in a no-win situation simply because their systems are forced to mimic what the vendor platform wants, not the other way around.
To get the best out of any COTS software, clear boundaries should be set, and strong domain ownership established. Because, at the end of it all, good architecture isn’t just picking the best platform. It’s more about ensuring that the choice you make today doesn’t limit your options later.
Flexibility matters a lot in the architectural design of any enterprise system. It ensures that the organization remains functional and survives any unforeseen changes. Such freedom is what allows enterprises to get the best out of these platforms.  Organizations that architect for strategic independence from day one transform the COTS dependency from a trap into a tool, leveraging commercial platforms for their strengths while retaining the flexibility to adapt, migrate, and evolve at the pace of business need rather than vendor roadmap.
This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?
View the full article
CSOonline

BKA Identifies REvil Leaders Behind 130 German Ransomware Attacks

Germany's Federal Criminal Police Office (aka BKA or the Bundeskriminalamt) has unmasked the real identity of the main threat actors associated with the now-defunct REvil (aka Sodinokibi) ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operation. The threat actor, who went by the alias UNKN, functioned as a representative of the group, advertising the ransomware in June 2019 on the XSS cybercrime forum. He View the full article
Hacker News

Germany Doxes “UNKN,” Head of RU Ransomware Gangs REvil, GandCrab

An elusive hacker who went by the handle “UNKN” and ran the early Russian ransomware groups GandCrab and REvil now has a name and a face. Authorities in Germany say 31-year-old Russian Daniil Maksimovich Shchukin headed both cybercrime gangs and helped carry out at least 130 acts of computer sabotage and extortion against victims across the country between 2019 and 2021.
Shchukin was named as UNKN (a.k.a. UNKNOWN) in an advisory published by the German Federal Criminal Police (the “Bundeskriminalamt” or BKA for short). The BKA said Shchukin and another Russian — 43-year-old Anatoly Sergeevitsch Kravchuk — extorted nearly $2 million euros across two dozen cyberattacks that caused more than 35 million euros in total economic damage.
Daniil Maksimovich SHCHUKIN, a.k.a. UNKN, and Anatoly Sergeevitsch Karvchuk, alleged leaders of the GandCrab and REvil ransomware groups.
Germany’s BKA said Shchukin acted as the head of one of the largest worldwide operating ransomware groups GandCrab and REvil, which pioneered the practice of double extortion — charging victims once for a key needed to unlock hacked systems, and a separate payment in exchange for a promise not to publish stolen data.
Shchukin’s name appeared in a Feb. 2023 filing (PDF) from the U.S. Justice Department seeking the seizure of various cryptocurrency accounts associated with proceeds from the REvil ransomware gang’s activities. The government said the digital wallet tied to Shchukin contained more than $317,000 in ill-gotten cryptocurrency.
The Gandcrab ransomware affiliate program first surfaced in January 2018, and paid enterprising hackers huge shares of the profits just for hacking into user accounts at major corporations. The Gandcrab team would then try to expand that access, often siphoning vast amounts of sensitive and internal documents in the process. The malware’s curators shipped five major revisions to the GandCrab code, each corresponding with sneaky new features and bug fixes aimed at thwarting the efforts of computer security firms to stymie the spread of the malware.
On May 31, 2019, the GandCrab team announced the group was shutting down after extorting more than $2 billion from victims. “We are a living proof that you can do evil and get off scot-free,” GandCrab’s farewell address famously quipped. “We have proved that one can make a lifetime of money in one year. We have proved that you can become number one by general admission, not in your own conceit.”
The REvil ransomware affiliate program materialized around the same as GandCrab’s demise, fronted by a user named UNKNOWN who announced on a Russian cybercrime forum that he’d deposited $1 million in the forum’s escrow to show he meant business. By this time, many cybersecurity experts had concluded REvil was little more than a reorganization of GandCrab.
UNKNOWN also gave an interview to Dmitry Smilyanets, a former malicious hacker hired by Recorded Future, wherein UNKNOWN described a rags-to-riches tale unencumbered by ethics and morals.
“As a child, I scrounged through the trash heaps and smoked cigarette butts,” UNKNOWN told Recorded Future. “I walked 10 km one way to the school. I wore the same clothes for six months. In my youth, in a communal apartment, I didn’t eat for two or even three days. Now I am a millionaire.”
As described in The Ransomware Hunting Team by Renee Dudley and Daniel Golden, UNKNOWN and REvil reinvested significant earnings into improving their success and mirroring practices of legitimate businesses. The authors wrote:
REvil would evolve into a feared “big-game-hunting” machine capable of extracting hefty extortion payments from victims, largely going after organizations with more than $100 million in annual revenues and fat new cyber insurance policies that were known to pay out.
Over the July 4, 2021 weekend in the United States, REvil hacked into and extorted Kaseya, a company that handled IT operations for more than 1,500 businesses, nonprofits and government agencies. The FBI would later announce they’d infiltrated the ransomware group’s servers prior to the Kaseya hack but couldn’t tip their hand at the time. REvil never recovered from that core compromise, or from the FBI’s release of a free decryption key for REvil victims who couldn’t or didn’t pay.
Shchukin is from Krasnodar, Russia and is thought to reside there, the BKA said.
“Based on the investigations so far, it is assumed that the wanted person is abroad, presumably in Russia,” the BKA advised. “Travel behaviour cannot be ruled out.”
There is little that connects Shchukin to UNKNOWN’s various accounts on the Russian crime forums. But a review of the Russian crime forums indexed by the cyber intelligence firm Intel 471 shows there is plenty connecting Shchukin to a hacker identity called “Ger0in” who operated large botnets and sold “installs” — allowing other cybercriminals to rapidly deploy malware of their choice to thousands of PCs in one go. However, Ger0in was only active between 2010 and 2011, well before UNKNOWN’s appearance as the REvil front man.
A review of the mugshots released by the BKA at the image comparison site Pimeyes found a match on this birthday celebration from 2023, which features a young man named Daniel wearing the same fancy watch as in the BKA photos.
Images from Daniil Shchukin’s birthday party celebration in Krasnodar in 2023.
View the full article
Krebs

NASA Shares Photos Shot on iPhone 17 Pro Max During Artemis II Mission to the Moon

NASA has shared three incredible photos shot on the iPhone 17 Pro Max by astronauts during the Artemis II mission to the Moon.


In February, NASA announced that the iPhone had been fully qualified for extended use in orbit, with reports indicating that each of the four crew members aboard the Orion are equipped with an iPhone 17 Pro Max for personal photos and videos.

The photos show Artemis II's Commander Reid Wiseman and Mission Specialist Christina Koch looking back at Earth through one of the Orion spacecraft's main cabin windows. Flickr data indicates that these photos were shot with the iPhone 17 Pro Max's front camera on April 2, which was the second day of the mission.


All other photos from the mission shared so far were captured with other cameras, such as the Nikon D5, Nikon Z 9, and GoPro HERO4 Black.

Artemis II is NASA's first crewed mission to the Moon since 1972. The crew is expected to reach the far side of the Moon on Monday, breaking the all-time record for the farthest distance traveled from Earth by humans. However, the Orion is not capable of landing on the Moon and is set to return to Earth on April 10.Related Roundup: iPhone 17 ProTags: NASA, PhotosBuyer's Guide: iPhone 17 Pro (Neutral)Related Forum: iPhone
This article, "NASA Shares Photos Shot on iPhone 17 Pro Max During Artemis II Mission to the Moon" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

$285 Million Drift Hack Traced to Six-Month DPRK Social Engineering Operation

Drift has revealed that the April 1, 2026, attack that led to the theft of $285 million was the culmination of a months-long targeted and meticulously planned social engineering operation undertaken by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) that began in the fall of 2025. The Solana-based decentralized exchange described it as "an attack six months in theView the full article
Hacker News

Amazon Takes Up to $200 Off M5 MacBook Air With New Record Low Prices

Amazon has introduced a few new record low prices on the M5 MacBook Air this weekend, with up to $200 off these notebooks. We're tracking $149 off the 13-inch M5 MacBook Air and up to $200 off the 15-inch models.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Amazon. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

Amazon has the 512GB 13-inch M5 MacBook Air for $949.99, down from $1,099.00, and the 24GB/1TB model for $1,349.99, down from $1,499.00. Both of these represent new record low prices for each configuration, and as of writing we're only seeing these deals at Amazon.


$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $949.99
$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,149.99
$149 OFF13-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,349.99

In terms of the 15-inch models, you'll find up to $200 off the M5 MacBook Air, with multiple color options on sale for each configuration. Prices start at $1,149.99 for the 512GB model, down from $1,299.00, and also include both 1TB models on sale.

$149 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (512GB) for $1,149.99
$200 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (16GB/1TB) for $1,299.00
$149 OFF15-inch M5 MacBook Air (24GB/1TB) for $1,549.99

If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Amazon Takes Up to $200 Off M5 MacBook Air With New Record Low Prices" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

HomePod Mini Is Now 2,000 Days Old

Apple's HomePod mini today reached a notable milestone, marking 2,000 days since its introduction in October 2020, an unusually long lifespan for an Apple hardware product that has yet to receive a second-generation refresh.


Apple unveiled the ‌HomePod mini‌ at its iPhone 12 event on October 13, 2020, positioning it as a smaller and more affordable alternative to the original HomePod. The device launched at just $99, with pre-orders beginning November 6 and availability following on November 16.

Unlike the original ‌HomePod‌, which emphasized premium audio at a higher price point, the ‌HomePod mini‌ was designed as a mass-market smart speaker that could be deployed throughout the home at comparatively low cost. Apple described it as delivering "amazing sound" alongside Siri functionality and smart home control, with a compact spherical design that enabled 360-degree audio.

The ‌HomePod mini‌ is powered by the Apple S5 chip, the same processor used in the Apple Watch Series 5, and features a single full-range driver, dual passive radiators, and a four-microphone array. It supports 802.11n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 5.0, Ultra Wideband for proximity-based features, and Thread networking, allowing it to function as a smart home hub.

Apple expanded the available colors in 2021, adding blue, yellow, and orange options to the original white and space gray finishes, and later replaced space gray with a similar "midnight" variant. Beyond these cosmetic updates, the underlying hardware has remained unchanged, making the ‌HomePod mini‌ one of the longest-running Apple devices without a specification revision.

Apple is widely expected to release a second-generation ‌HomePod mini‌ sometime soon, and the most consistent expectation is a move to a newer chip in place of the current S5, which should improve responsiveness, computational audio performance, and headroom for future ‌Siri‌ features. A second-generation Ultra Wideband chip and Apple's N1 Bluetooth and Wi-Fi chip are also possibilities.

The new ‌HomePod mini‌ was reportedly "ready" to launch since late last year. Now, the device is said to be "on hold" until Apple releases its more personalized version of Siri later this year. The revamped assistant is expected to debut in iOS 27, which will be available in beta starting in June and should be released to all users with a compatible iPhone in September.Related Roundup: HomePod miniBuyer's Guide: HomePod Mini (Don't Buy)Related Forum: HomePod, HomeKit, CarPlay, Home & Auto Technology
This article, "HomePod Mini Is Now 2,000 Days Old" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Kubernetes Tutorial for Beginners

Here’s a cleaned-up, beginner-friendly Kubernetes tutorial based on your session notes.
Kubernetes Tutorial for Beginners
1. What is Kubernetes?
Kubernetes, often called K8s, is an open-source platform used to deploy, manage, and scale containerized applications.
It helps you run applications in containers across one or more machines in an automated and reliable way.
In simple terms:
Docker creates and runs containers Kubernetes manages those containers at scale 2. Why Kubernetes?
Kubernetes is useful because it helps with:
Automation of application deployment Scaling applications up or down Self-healing when containers fail Load distribution across systems High availability of applications Easy management of containerized workloads Instead of manually starting containers on multiple servers, Kubernetes handles it for you.
3. Basic Kubernetes Architecture
A Kubernetes cluster mainly has:
Workstation / Laptop Master Node (Control Plane) Worker Node(s) Workstation / Laptop
This is where an administrator or developer runs commands using:
kubectl kubeconfig The kubeconfig file is usually stored at:
~/.kube/config It contains:
API server address user details certificates This allows your laptop to communicate securely with the Kubernetes cluster.
4. How Kubernetes Works
The basic request flow is:
Human → kubectl → API Server
When you run a command like:
kubectl get nodes kubectl sends the request to the API Server, which talks to other Kubernetes components and returns the result.
5. Master Node Components
The Master Node manages the cluster.
Main components include:
API Server
Entry point for all Kubernetes commands Accepts requests from kubectl etcd
Key-value database Stores cluster state and configuration Controller Manager
Watches cluster state Makes sure the desired state matches the actual state Scheduler
Decides on which worker node a pod should run Kube Proxy
Manages network communication Kubelet
Runs on nodes Ensures containers are running as expected Container Engine
Examples:
Docker containerd 6. Worker Node Components
Worker nodes run the actual application workloads.
They usually contain:
Kubelet Container Engine (docker or containerd) Kube Proxy The worker node receives instructions from the control plane and runs the assigned pods.
7. Cluster Setup Concepts
Master Node Initialization
Usually done with:
kubeadm init Worker Node Join
Usually done with:
kubeadm join <master-ip>:6443 --token <token> --discovery-token-ca-cert-hash sha256:<hash> Do not share live join tokens publicly. They should be treated as sensitive cluster credentials.
8. Local and Cloud Kubernetes Options
Local Setup
For practice and learning:
Minikube Typical lab setup example:
1 VM = Workstation + Master 1 VM = Worker Cloud Kubernetes Services
Managed Kubernetes services include:
EKS – Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service AKS – Azure Kubernetes Service GKE – Google Kubernetes Engine 9. Common Kubernetes Commands
Cluster Information
kubectl cluster-info kubectl get nodes kubectl get pods kubectl get pods --all-namespaces kubectl version Check Installed Tools
which kubectl which kubelet which kubeadm which containerd which dockerd Check Running Processes
ps -eaf | grep kubectl ps -eaf | grep kubelet ps -eaf | grep containerd 10. Kubernetes API Operations
Kubernetes resources support basic CRUD operations:
Create
Using command:
kubectl create ... Using YAML:
kubectl create -f file.yaml Read
Using command:
kubectl get ... Using YAML:
kubectl get -f file.yaml Update
Using command:
kubectl edit ... Using YAML:
kubectl apply -f file.yaml Delete
Using command:
kubectl delete ... Using YAML:
kubectl delete -f file.yaml 11. Namespace in Kubernetes
A Namespace is used to logically separate resources in a cluster.
Examples:
kubectl get ns kubectl create ns dev kubectl create ns qa kubectl describe ns qa kubectl delete ns dev Namespace YAML Example
apiVersion: v1 kind: Namespace metadata: name: devops1 labels: kubernetes.io/metadata.name: devops1 Create it with:
kubectl create -f ns.yaml Update it with:
kubectl apply -f ns.yaml Delete it with:
kubectl delete -f ns.yaml 12. Pod in Kubernetes
A Pod is the smallest deployable unit in Kubernetes.
A pod can contain one or more containers.
Pod YAML Example
apiVersion: v1 kind: Pod metadata: name: rajesh labels: app: helloworld spec: containers: - name: devopsschool1 image: scmgalaxy/nginx-devopsschoolv1 ports: - name: nginx-port containerPort: 80 Pod Commands
Create pod:
kubectl create -f pod.yaml View pods:
kubectl get pods kubectl get pods -o wide Describe pod:
kubectl describe pod rajesh Delete pod:
kubectl delete pod rajesh Access pod shell:
kubectl exec -it rajesh -- /bin/bash 13. Useful Pod Testing Commands
Check pod IP
kubectl get pods -o wide Test application
curl http://<pod-ip> ping <pod-ip> View logs
kubectl logs rajesh Attach to running container
kubectl attach rajesh 14. Port Forwarding
Port forwarding allows you to access a pod locally.
Example:
kubectl port-forward --address 0.0.0.0 pod/rajesh 8888:80 This maps:
local port 8888 to pod container port 80 You can then access the app in a browser using your machine’s IP and port 8888.
15. Copy Files to a Pod
Example:
kubectl cp ns.yaml rajesh:/tmp kubectl exec rajesh -- ls /tmp This copies ns.yaml into the /tmp directory of the pod.
16. Authorization Checks
Kubernetes lets you verify permissions using:
kubectl auth can-i create pod kubectl auth can-i delete pod These commands help confirm whether a user has permission to perform actions.
17. Events and Troubleshooting
Useful debugging commands:
kubectl describe <resource> kubectl logs <pod-name> kubectl exec -it <pod-name> -- /bin/bash kubectl attach <pod-name> kubectl port-forward <pod-name> <local-port>:<container-port> kubectl cp <src> <pod-name>:<path> kubectl auth can-i <action> <resource> kubectl events Common troubleshooting tools
describe → detailed resource information logs → application/container logs exec → shell access inside container events → cluster-level activity and errors 18. Important Kubernetes Resources to Learn Next
From your notes, these are the next topics after pods:
ReplicationController Deployment Service RBAC These are important because:
Deployment manages pods and updates Service exposes applications RBAC controls user permissions 19. Beginner Summary
Kubernetes is a platform that manages containers across servers.
Key points:
kubectl is the command-line tool The API Server is the entry point The Master Node controls the cluster Worker Nodes run applications Namespaces organize resources Pods run containers YAML files define resources Commands like get, create, apply, and delete manage objects 20. Practice Flow for Beginners
A simple learning flow:
Check cluster nodeskubectl get nodes Check namespaceskubectl get ns Create a namespacekubectl create ns dev Create a pod from YAMLkubectl create -f pod.yaml Verify podkubectl get pods -o wide Inspect podkubectl describe pod rajesh Access podkubectl exec -it rajesh -- /bin/bash View logskubectl logs rajesh Delete podkubectl delete pod rajesh Final Note
Your notes are a solid base for a beginner Kubernetes session. I converted them into a structured tutorial so it is easier to teach, revise, or share.

View the full article
reporter

36 Malicious npm Packages Exploited Redis, PostgreSQL to Deploy Persistent Implants

Cybersecurity researchers have discovered 36 malicious packages in the npm registry that are disguised as Strapi CMS plugins but come with different payloads to facilitate Redis and PostgreSQL exploitation, deploy reverse shells, harvest credentials, and drop a persistent implant. "Every package contains three files (package.json, index.js, postinstall.js), has no description, repository,View the full article
Hacker News

Fortinet Patches Actively Exploited CVE-2026-35616 in FortiClient EMS

Fortinet has released out-of-band patches for a critical security flaw impacting FortiClient EMS that it said has been exploited in the wild. The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-35616 (CVSS score: 9.1), has been described as a pre-authentication API access bypass leading to privilege escalation. "An improper access control vulnerability [CWE-284] in FortiClient EMS may allow anView the full article
Hacker News

Get the New Book 'Apple: The First 50 Years' for 31% Off on Amazon

Last month, tech columnist David Pogue launched a new book called "Apple: The First 50 Years." On Amazon, you can get the new book for $34.38 in hardcover, down from $50.00, which is a 31 percent discount on the book.

Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Amazon. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment, which helps us keep the site running.

The book explores the first five decades of Apple's history, including interviews with 150 key people who shaped Apple into what it is today, like Steve Wozniak, John Sculley, Jony Ive, and more. The book launched to coincide with Apple's 50th anniversary, which just happened on April 1, 2026.

31% OFFApple: The First 50 Years for $34.38

Amazon's sale is on the hardcover version of the book, and provides an estimated April 9 delivery date for free delivery. If you're on the hunt for more discounts, be sure to visit our Apple Deals roundup where we recap the best Apple-related bargains of the past week.



Deals Newsletter

Interested in hearing more about the best deals you can find in 2026? Sign up for our Deals Newsletter and we'll keep you updated so you don't miss the biggest deals of the season!




Related Roundup: Apple Deals
This article, "Get the New Book 'Apple: The First 50 Years' for 31% Off on Amazon" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple CarPlay Just Got Three Popular iPhone Apps

Apple's CarPlay system for accessing iPhone apps on a vehicle's dashboard screen received three popular apps this week: ChatGPT, Google Meet, and Audiomack.

CarPlay Ultra in an Aston Martin
In addition, WhatsApp is beta testing a revamped CarPlay app that will improve upon the basic Siri-based functionality that was previously available.

Make sure you have the latest version of each app and they will automatically appear on CarPlay.

ChatGPT


Starting with iOS 26.4, CarPlay supports voice-based conversational apps. This means that chatbots can extend their iPhone apps to CarPlay for voice-based conversations, and OpenAI's ChatGPT is one of the first options available.

With the ChatGPT app on CarPlay, you can have voice conversations with ChatGPT while the app is open, and view the titles of your past conversations. For safety reasons, the app does not show the text or images within conversations.

Google Meet


Google Meet is now available on CarPlay as well, allowing you to join meetings with a single tap, view your upcoming schedule, and participate in audio calls. For safety reasons, you cannot view video calls on the CarPlay interface.

Audiomack


Audiomack expanded to CarPlay this week. The 11th-most downloaded app in the App Store's Music category in the U.S. lets you stream and download songs, with a focus on independent artists and especially the Afrobeats and hip-hop genres.

Audiomack's CarPlay app has Discover, Charts, Playlists, and My Library tabs, allowing you to listen to your existing songs and discover new ones.

Coming Soon: Revamped WhatsApp


A revamped WhatsApp app for CarPlay is currently in beta testing.

WhatsApp is already available on CarPlay, but the app has limited Siri-based functionality. The revamped app displays lists of recent chats and phone calls, and there is also a tab that displays a list of your favorite contacts.Related Roundup: CarPlayRelated Forum: HomePod, HomeKit, CarPlay, Home & Auto Technology
This article, "Apple CarPlay Just Got Three Popular iPhone Apps" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

New Apple TV Waiting for Siri: Here's What's Coming When It Launches

We're long overdue for an Apple TV update, and there have been rumors about an imminent refresh since late last year. It's now sounding like we're not going to get a new version for several months because of Siri delays. If you're holding out for a new model, here's a recap on what to expect when it eventually comes out so you can decide whether to continue to wait, or buy now.


Design

‌Apple TV‌ design updates are few and far between, and that's not changing in 2026. The next ‌Apple TV‌ is going to have the same squircle shape as the current model, and it'll continue to be made from a black plastic material.

We're expecting the 2026 ‌Apple TV‌ to be indistinguishable from the existing ‌Apple TV‌ on the exterior.
New Chip

A new A-series chip will be the main ‌Apple TV‌ update, and rumors suggest that it will get the A17 Pro chip that Apple first used in the iPhone 15 Pro models.

Compared to the A15 Bionic in the current ‌Apple TV‌, the A17 Pro is a big update, and it's a good reason to hold off on buying the current model. The A17 Pro is built on a 3-nanometer process for faster speed and better efficiency, and it has hardware-accelerated ray tracing for higher-quality graphics in games.

Given that Apple has held the ‌Apple TV‌ update for so long, it's entirely possible it'll get an even newer chip like the A18 or A19. A RAM update is possible too, especially if the ‌Apple TV‌ has any kind of Apple Intelligence support.

Apple Intelligence and Siri

The next ‌Apple TV‌ is supposedly ready to launch at any time, but new ‌Siri‌ features are the holdup. Apple wants to debut the ‌Apple TV‌ with the smarter version of ‌Siri‌ that's in the works, and it's not ready to go.

Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says the Apple TV is linked to "new artificial intelligence features" that Apple has postponed until September 2026. Apple intended to launch the ‌Apple Intelligence‌ ‌Siri‌ features in spring 2026, but the company was still experiencing issues with ‌Siri‌. At this point, we're not going to see new ‌Siri‌ capabilities until iOS 27, which also means a delay for all the devices that Apple is holding.

Along with the ‌Apple TV‌, the rumored home hub and a next-generation version of the HomePod are waiting on ‌Siri‌.

Updated ‌Siri‌ features will likely require more RAM and a faster chip, so if you want the smarter ‌Siri‌ on the ‌Apple TV‌, that's another reason to wait before making a purchase.

Wi-Fi

The ‌Apple TV‌ could get Apple's N1 networking chip with Wi-Fi 7 support. Wi-Fi 7 works with the 6GHz band offered by newer routers.

6GHz connectivity is faster and less congested, which you generally want for a device designed for streaming content.

Bluetooth

The ‌Apple TV‌ 4K could get Bluetooth 6 for connecting devices like controllers and earbuds.

Pricing

There might be a cheaper version of the ‌Apple TV‌ available because there have been rumors of a price drop.

Apple could release two models, one that's higher-end and one that has lower specs and a lower price tag, or it could keep the existing ‌Apple TV‌ around as a low-cost option.

Launch Date

If the new version of ‌Siri‌ has been pushed to ‌iOS 27‌ and the ‌Apple TV‌ is tied to that update, we're not going to see the ‌Apple TV‌ refreshed until September 2026 or later.Related Roundup: Apple TVTag: SiriBuyer's Guide: Apple TV (Don't Buy)Related Forum: Apple TV and Home Theater
This article, "New Apple TV Waiting for Siri: Here's What's Coming When It Launches" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Releases First iOS 26.5, iPadOS 26.5 and macOS Tahoe 26.5 Public Betas

Apple today provided public beta testers with the first releases of upcoming iOS 26.5, iPadOS 26.5, macOS Tahoe 26.5, watchOS 26.5, and tvOS 26.5 updates for testing purposes. The public betas come four days after Apple provided the betas to developers, though Apple seeded updated iOS 26.5 and iPadOS 26.5 betas to developers earlier today.


After signing up for beta testing on Apple's beta site, public beta testers can download the updates using the Software Update section of the Settings app on each device.

iOS 26.5, iPadOS 26.5, and ‌macOS Tahoe‌ 26.5 include a new Suggested Places feature for recommending nearby locations to visit, and Apple is also gearing up to start showing ads in Maps.

Apple is testing end-to-end encryption for RCS messages between iPhone and Android users again, and there are proximity pairing, notification forwarding, and Live Activities for third-party wearables in the EU.Related Roundups: iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS TahoeRelated Forums: iOS 26, macOS Tahoe
This article, "Apple Releases First iOS 26.5, iPadOS 26.5 and macOS Tahoe 26.5 Public Betas" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Happy Birthday, iPad: Apple's Tablet Turns 16

Today marks the 16th anniversary of when Apple released the first-generation iPad. After Steve Jobs announced the ‌iPad‌ on January 27, 2010, it launched a few months later on April 3, 2010.


Apple's original ‌iPad‌ looked like a larger version of the iPhone, featuring thick bezels, a 9.7-inch multitouch display with a 1,024 x 768 resolution, a Home Button, and a 30-pin dock connector. The ‌iPad‌ was the first device that Apple released with a custom-designed chip, the Apple A4.

The concept of a tablet device like the ‌iPad‌ actually predated the iPhone, and Apple had a prototype project in the works in 2004. Then-Apple CEO Steve Jobs wanted to prioritize the iPhone, so the ‌iPad‌ was put on hold until after the iPhone was established.

Apple priced the ‌iPad‌ at $499, and Jobs called it a "magical and revolutionary device at an unbelievable price." Like the iPhone, the ‌iPad‌ dominated the tablet space, and it still continues to do so today. Apple sold a million iPads in the first month, and while competitors like Microsoft and Samsung quickly came out with competing tablets of their own, the ‌iPad‌ has no match.

Apple has led the global tablet market for over a decade and no competitor comes close to matching its tablet market share. As of the fourth quarter of 2025, Apple's market share was 44.9 percent, with Samsung the next closest at 14.7 percent.

Apple has expanded its ‌iPad‌ lineup over the years, and we now have multiple sizes at multiple price points. The 11-inch ‌iPad‌ is available for those who want a low-cost option, while the 11-inch and 13-inch iPad Air are mid-range products with a Mac chip. The 8.3-inch iPad mini is available for those who want a smaller-sized tablet, and for those who want top-of-the-line performance with Apple's latest Mac chip, the 11-inch and 13-inch iPad Pro models are available.
This article, "Happy Birthday, iPad: Apple's Tablet Turns 16" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Security lapse lets researchers see React2Shell hackers’ dashboard

An apparent security lapse has allowed researchers to peer into the work of a threat group currently exploiting unpatched servers open to the four-month-old React2Shell vulnerability to steal login credentials, keys, and tokens at scale.
Researchers from Cisco Systems’ Talos threat intelligence team who made the discovery said Thursday that the data harvested by an unattributed group they call UAT-10608 went to a password protected database behind a web application. However, that application was at one point exposed, allowing the researchers to see data that had been harvested from compromised systems.
Credentials, as well as Auth tokens and more, that have been stolen so far come from instances of AWS, Microsoft Azure, OpenAI, Anthropic, Nvidia NIM, OpenRouter, Tavily, payment processor Stripe, and GitHub.
The web application allows a user to browse all of the compromised hosts. A given host can then be selected, bringing up a menu with all of the exfiltrated data corresponding to each phase of the harvesting script – a bonus to the researchers. 
The discovery is a prime reason for IT pros with React servers in their environment who haven’t yet addressed this vulnerability to act quickly, before corporate credentials are stolen. To help blunt the attack, victims, and service providers with exposed and at-risk credentials, including AWS and GitHub, are being notified.
One notable statistic: The automated exploitation and harvesting framework was able to successfully compromise 766 hosts within a 24 hour period.
At risk are Next.js applications vulnerable to CVE-2025-55182, a pre-authentication remote code execution vulnerability known as React2Shell. A fix was issued four months ago.
Multi-phase attack
Once a host is compromised, the campaign deploys a multi-phase credential harvesting tool that collects usernames, passwords, SSH keys, cloud tokens, and environment secrets, at scale.
“The breadth of the victim set and the indiscriminate targeting pattern is consistent with automated scanning,” says Cisco Talos, “likely based on host profile data from services like Shodan, Censys, or custom scanners to enumerate publicly reachable Next.js deployments and probe them for the described React configuration vulnerabilities.”
The attacker crafts a malicious serialized payload designed to abuse the deserialization routine, a technique commonly used to trigger arbitrary object instantiation or method invocation on a server. The payload is sent via an HTTP request directly to a Server Function endpoint; no authentication is required. The server deserializes the malicious payload, resulting in arbitrary code execution in the server-side Node.js process. 
The initial React exploit delivers a small dropper that fetches and runs a multi-phase harvesting script. Upon execution, the harvesting script goes through several phases to collect various data from the compromised system, which is then uploaded to a command and control server where it is loaded into a database. 
Industrial scale
“This is all about neglect and efficiency,” Gene Moody, field CTO at patch management provider Action1, told CSO . “React2Shell quickly met all the criteria attackers look for: public disclosure, reliable exploitation, and internet-facing exposure. That combination effectively guaranteed widespread abuse. Since then, multiple campaigns have automated the full [attack] lifecycle [of], scanning, exploitation, and credential harvesting, with little to no human intervention.”
Attackers operate at industrial scale, he added. Platforms like Shodan and Censys already index much of the internet, making vulnerable systems trivial to find. With the finite IP space, comprehensive scanning can be completed in well under an hour on even the most modest of modern computers/internet connections.
“There is no meaningful obscurity left for exposed systems,” he added. “To be honest, there never really was.”
‘Attack started when you failed to patch’
The result is predictable, Moody said: Unpatched systems are not ‘at risk’, they are in a queue. Discovery is fast, exploitation is fast, and compromise is often automated end-to-end. “React2Shell is a perfect example of how quickly attackers can turn a known issue into a sustained revenue stream, and have it persist for extended periods of time based on admin complacency,” he said.
“Even more concerning is what happens after initial access,” he added. “Credential harvesting extends the lifespan of the attack far beyond the original vulnerability. Even if systems are patched later, stolen credentials can enable persistence, lateral movement, and, as a result, means the attack started when you failed to patch. One mistake can turn into every mistake in an instant, with information like this in the wrong hands. The damage could be absolute, with no recovery possible. Businesses have failed for less. When it ends will certainly not be when the patch is applied, unless you got it before being compromised.
“Treat your patching like a toothache,” he advised. “At first sign, address it as fast as possible, or only misery follows.”
View the full article
CSOonline

Security lapse lets researchers view React2Shell hackers’ dashboard

An apparent security lapse has allowed researchers to peer into the work of a threat group currently exploiting unpatched servers open to the four-month-old React2Shell vulnerability to steal login credentials, keys, and tokens at scale.
Researchers from Cisco Systems’ Talos threat intelligence team who made the discovery said Thursday that the data harvested by an unattributed group they call UAT-10608 went to a password protected database behind a web application. However, that application was at one point exposed, allowing the researchers to see data that had been harvested from compromised systems.
Credentials, as well as Auth tokens and more, that have been stolen so far come from instances of AWS, Microsoft Azure, OpenAI, Anthropic, Nvidia NIM, OpenRouter, Tavily, payment processor Stripe, and GitHub.
The web application allows a user to browse all of the compromised hosts. A given host can then be selected, bringing up a menu with all of the exfiltrated data corresponding to each phase of the harvesting script – a bonus to the researchers. 
The discovery is a prime reason for IT pros with React servers in their environment who haven’t yet addressed this vulnerability to act quickly, before corporate credentials are stolen. To help blunt the attack, victims, and service providers with exposed and at-risk credentials, including AWS and GitHub, are being notified.
One notable statistic: The automated exploitation and harvesting framework was able to successfully compromise 766 hosts within a 24 hour period.
At risk are Next.js applications vulnerable to CVE-2025-55182, a pre-authentication remote code execution vulnerability known as React2Shell. A fix was issued four months ago.
Multi-phase attack
Once a host is compromised, the campaign deploys a multi-phase credential harvesting tool that collects usernames, passwords, SSH keys, cloud tokens, and environment secrets, at scale.
“The breadth of the victim set and the indiscriminate targeting pattern is consistent with automated scanning,” says Cisco Talos, “likely based on host profile data from services like Shodan, Censys, or custom scanners to enumerate publicly reachable Next.js deployments and probe them for the described React configuration vulnerabilities.”
The attacker crafts a malicious serialized payload designed to abuse the deserialization routine, a technique commonly used to trigger arbitrary object instantiation or method invocation on a server. The payload is sent via an HTTP request directly to a Server Function endpoint; no authentication is required. The server deserializes the malicious payload, resulting in arbitrary code execution in the server-side Node.js process. 
The initial React exploit delivers a small dropper that fetches and runs a multi-phase harvesting script. Upon execution, the harvesting script goes through several phases to collect various data from the compromised system, which is then uploaded to a command and control server where it is loaded into a database. 
Industrial scale
“This is all about neglect and efficiency,” Gene Moody, field CTO at patch management provider Action1, told CSO . “React2Shell quickly met all the criteria attackers look for: public disclosure, reliable exploitation, and internet-facing exposure. That combination effectively guaranteed widespread abuse. Since then, multiple campaigns have automated the full [attack] lifecycle [of], scanning, exploitation, and credential harvesting, with little to no human intervention.”
Attackers operate at industrial scale, he added. Platforms like Shodan and Censys already index much of the internet, making vulnerable systems trivial to find. With the finite IP space, comprehensive scanning can be completed in well under an hour on even the most modest of modern computers/internet connections.
“There is no meaningful obscurity left for exposed systems,” he added. “To be honest, there never really was.”
‘Attack started when you failed to patch’
The result is predictable, Moody said: Unpatched systems are not ‘at risk’, they are in a queue. Discovery is fast, exploitation is fast, and compromise is often automated end-to-end. “React2Shell is a perfect example of how quickly attackers can turn a known issue into a sustained revenue stream, and have it persist for extended periods of time based on admin complacency,” he said.
“Even more concerning is what happens after initial access,” he added. “Credential harvesting extends the lifespan of the attack far beyond the original vulnerability. Even if systems are patched later, stolen credentials can enable persistence, lateral movement, and, as a result, means the attack started when you failed to patch. One mistake can turn into every mistake in an instant, with information like this in the wrong hands. The damage could be absolute, with no recovery possible. Businesses have failed for less. When it ends will certainly not be when the patch is applied, unless you got it before being compromised.
“Treat your patching like a toothache,” he advised. “At first sign, address it as fast as possible, or only misery follows.”
View the full article
CSOonline

iFixit AirPods Max 2 Teardown: Same Design, Same Repairability Issues

Repair site iFixit today shared a teardown of Apple's new AirPods Max 2 headphones, and as expected, there are few changes. iFixit says the ‌AirPods Max 2‌ are "basically the same" as the original AirPods Max headphones that came out in 2020.


A comparison of the internal components of the ‌AirPods Max 2‌ and the USB-C AirPods Max indicate the headphones are identical, and opening them up requires the same steps. The only difference is the updated H2 chips inside each earcup.

Apple hasn't addressed the common failure points in the AirPods Max, such as condensation that builds up in the earcups in humid environments, and Apple doesn't have parts or repair manuals available.

iFixit suggests that if Apple made instructions and components available through its self-service repair program and made the battery and USB-C port more accessible, the AirPods Max would be repairable and could have a much longer lifespan.

With no updates to the ‌AirPods Max 2‌ design, the headphones are no more repairable than the prior-generation models. iFixit gave the prior version a repairability score of 6/10.Related Roundup: AirPods Max 2Buyer's Guide: AirPods Max (Buy Now)Related Forum: AirPods
This article, "iFixit AirPods Max 2 Teardown: Same Design, Same Repairability Issues" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

A core infrastructure engineer pleads guilty to federal charges in insider attack

When Daniel Rhyne pleaded guilty on April 1 to having launched an insider extortion attack against his then-employer, authorities enumerated the techniques he used, including unauthorized remote desktop sessions, deletion of network administrator accounts, changing of passwords, and scheduling unauthorized tasks on the domain controller. 
After he shut down key systems and accounts, he sent a note to employees in which he claimed to have deleted all backups, and threatened to continue shutting down servers unless he was given bitcoin worth roughly $750,000.
But what consultants and analysts found most concerning is how commonplace and routine were the techniques he used. In other words, standard security procedures should have blocked almost all of them.
Preventive actions missing
Enterprise insider threats are hardly new, but consultants and analysts said that many enterprises don’t take every preventive move that they can, and should, because the IT staff resists, seeing the efforts as excessive monitoring of their activities, and something that also slows down their work.
Cybersecurity consultant Brian Levine, executive director of FormerGov, said, “what makes the case interesting was how boringly predictable the attack path was.”
Levine noted that backups need to always be immutable. “Nobody in the company should be able to delete or modify or encrypt the backup for a set period of time,” he said. He also stressed that the principle of least privilege needs to be applied to workers whose jobs change for any reason. 
Critically, he argued that the use of various tools should be instantly flagged as concerning. “Instrument Task Scheduler, PsExec, PsPasswd, and net user are high‑risk signals. These are the insider’s equivalent of lockpicks,” he said. “They should generate behavioral alerts when used at scale, off‑hours, or from unusual hosts.”
Levine also suggested extensive system monitoring. “If someone is RDP’ing into a domain controller at 7:48 a.m. and creating 16 scheduled tasks, you should have a video‑like audit trail.”
Paul Furtado, a distinguished VP analyst at Gartner, said he encourages clients to make sure that no single admin can cause this kind of damage. 
“Create a tiered administration model with fragmented authority. This rotates ownership of crown jewel processes, even among senior engineers and administrators,” Furtado advised. IT should also include “a break-glass admin credential stored in hardware security modules or digital vaults [that are] only to be used via testing drills and in case of emergency.”
Added Flavio Villanustre, CISO for the LexisNexis Risk Solutions Group, “the same accounts used to administer their networks [in the Rhyne case] seemed to be able to irreversibly destroy their backups too, which is an indication that strong segregation of duties was not in place.”
Rhyne now faces considerable jail time. US Justice Department filings said, “the extortion charge to which Rhyne pleaded guilty carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, and the intentional damage to a protected computer violation to which Rhyne pleaded guilty carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.”

View the full article
CSOonline

Apple Now Sells Refurbished M4 iPad Pro Models Starting at $759

Apple is now selling M4 iPad Pro models in its online store for refurbished products, allowing customers to purchase like-new models at a discounted price.


There are both 11-inch and 13-inch options available, in multiple storage configurations. Apple is offering Wi-Fi and Cellular refurbished models, and silver and black color options.

Pricing on the 11-inch M4 ‌iPad Pro‌ starts at $759, down from the original $999 price. The 13-inch model is priced starting at $1,019, down from the original $1,299 price. Entry-level models are Wi-Fi only with 256GB of storage.

Apple released the M4 ‌iPad Pro‌ models in May 2024, but this is the first time that refurbished models have been available for purchase. Apple discontinued the M4 ‌iPad Pro‌ models with the launch of the M5 ‌iPad Pro‌ in October 2025.

Apple sells refurbished devices with the same one-year warranty that comes with a new Apple product. Refurbished iPads feature all manuals and accessories, plus Apple has a testing, repair, repackaging, and cleaning process to make sure that refurbished products are identical to new devices. Refurbished products are eligible for AppleCare+ protection.Related Roundup: iPad ProTag: Apple Refurbished ProductsBuyer's Guide: iPad Pro (Neutral)
This article, "Apple Now Sells Refurbished M4 iPad Pro Models Starting at $759" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter

Apple Seeds Revised iOS 26.5 and iPadOS 26.5 Betas to Developers

Apple today seeded revised first betas of upcoming iOS 26.5 and iPadOS 26.5 updates to developers for testing purposes, with the software coming four days after Apple seeded the initial betas.


Registered developers can download the betas from the Settings app on the iPhone or iPad by going to the General section and selecting Software Update. It's not clear why Apple has seeded new beta updates, but there may be a bug fix that couldn't wait for the second beta.

iOS 26.5 and iPadOS 26.5 do not include new Siri capabilities, suggesting any ‌Siri‌ updates are being held until iOS 27. The Maps app has a Suggested Places feature for recommending locations to visit nearby based on trends and recent searches, plus Apple is laying the groundwork for ads.

Apple is again testing end-to-end encryption (E2EE) for RCS messages between iPhone and Android users. Apple tested the feature in iOS 26.4, but removed it before the update launched.

In the European Union, Apple is testing proximity pairing, notification forwarding, and Live Activities for third-party wearables like earbuds and smartwatches.

More detail on what's new in iOS 26.5 can be found in our beta 1 features guide.Related Roundups: iOS 26, iPadOS 26Related Forum: iOS 26
This article, "Apple Seeds Revised iOS 26.5 and iPadOS 26.5 Betas to Developers" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

View the full article
reporter
OHC_logo_transparent_01.jpeg flags-medium.png OHC_logo_blue_square_small.jpeg

 

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications
Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.