Microsoft last year described the threat actor — known as UNC3944, Scattered Spider, Scatter Swine, Octo Tempest, and 0ktapus — as one of the most dangerous current adversaries.

Source: Photo Spirit via Shutterstock

The recent attacks on customer accounts hosted on the Snowflake data warehousing platform could signal a broader shift among threat actors to targeting software-as-a-service (SaaS) application environments.

A recent Mandiant report highlighted another large threat actor that has begun going after enterprise data in SaaS applications in a broadening of its usual focus on Microsoft cloud environments and on-premises infrastructure. The threat actor, which Mandiant is tracking as UNC3944, is an English-language speaking group that other vendors have been tracking variously as Scattered Spider, Scatter Swine, Octo Tempest, and 0ktapus.

**UNC3944: A Dangerous Cyber Adversary**

The group's more recent capers have included a ransomware attack that knocked numerous critical systems offline for days at MGM Resorts last year and another that targeted Caesars Entertainment, which reportedly paid millions of dollars to the group to get back access to its data. The likely US- or UK-based threat actor is known for its SIM-swapping tactics and highly sophisticated credential-phishing skills, which include calling into enterprise help desks and resetting Okta credentials to take over accounts. Microsoft last year categorized UNC3944 as one of the most dangerous financially motivated cyber-threat groups active currently.

According to Mandiant, UNC3944 has broadened its focus to data in enterprise SaaS applications over the past 10 months or so. 

"In addition to traditional on-premises activity, Mandiant observed pivots into client SaaS applications," according to the security vendor's analysis. In many of these attacks the threat actor has used stolen credentials to access SaaS applications protected by single sign-on providers such as Okta. "Mandiant observed unauthorized access to such applications as vCenter, CyberArk, Salesforce, Azure, CrowdStrike, AWS, and Google Cloud Platform."

After gaining access to these environments, the threat actor has typically conducted at least some reconnaissance activity using a variety of methods, including Microsoft's Delve, to search for data in Microsoft 365 environments. The threat actor has then stolen data from these apps and transferred the data to cloud storage resources such as Amazon S3 buckets, using Airbyte, Fivetran, and other cloud synchronization utilities.

"These applications required only credentials and a path to the resources to sync the data to an external source automatically, often without the need for a subscription or expensive costs," Mandiant researchers said.

**Sophisticated Social Engineering Tactics**

Phishing and social engineering remains one of the group's primary methods to acquire credentials for accessing enterprise SaaS accounts. In attacks that Mandiant observed, UNC3944 actors made voice calls in clear English to help desk staff to get their assistance in gaining access to privileged accounts. In many of these calls, the adversary appeared to possess the detailed personal information — such as the last four digits of the victim's Social Security number, dates of birth, and manager information — required to pass the help desk administrator's initial user authentication checks.

"The level of sophistication in these social engineering attacks is evident in both the extensive research performed on potential victims and the high success rate in said attacks," Mandiant researchers said.

Mandiant's report highlighted UNC3944's creation of new virtual machines in victim environments as a particularly effective persistence mechanism. The threat actor's modus operandi is to use single sign-on (SSO) apps to access VMware vSphere and Microsoft Azure cloud environments.

"The importance here is the observation of abusing administrative groups or normal administrator permissions tied through SSO applications to then create this method of persistence," according to the report.

**Leveraging VMs for Persistence**

After creating a new virtual machine, the threat actor has used specific tools to reconfigure the VMs to remove default Microsoft Defender protections and telemetry that would be of use in a forensic investigation. In situations where the compromised environment might not have any endpoint monitoring, the threat actor has downloaded multiple tools to the new VMs, including credential extraction utilities such as Mimikatz and ADRecon, and tunneling tools such as NGROK and RSOCX. Such tools allow UNC3944 to access the virtual machine without requiring any multifactor authentication (MFA) or VPN, according to Mandiant.

Mandiant's recommendations for organizations include using host-based certificates and MFA for VPN access, and creating strict conditional access policies to limit what is visible inside a cloud tenant.

According to the report, Mandiant recommends "heightened monitoring of SaaS applications, to include centralizing logs from important SaaS-based applications, MFA re-registrations, and virtual machine infrastructure, specifically about both uptime and the creation of new devices."

**About the Author(s)**

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year career at Computerworld, Jai also covered a variety of other technology topics, including big data, Hadoop, Internet of Things, e-voting, and data analytics. Prior to Computerworld, Jai covered technology issues for The Economic Times in Bangalore, India. Jai has a Master's degree in Statistics and lives in Naperville, Ill.

Scattered Spider Pivots to SaaS Application Attacks

With the requirement that all vulnerabilities first get reported to the Chinese government, once-private vulnerability research has become a goldmine for China's offensive cybersecurity programs.

Source: Zoonar GmbH via Alamy Stock Photo

China's cybersecurity experts over the past decade have evolved from hesitant participants in global capture-the-flag competitions, exploit contests, and bug bounty programs to dominant players in these arenas — and the Chinese government is applying those spoils toward stronger cyber-offensive capabilities for the nation.

In 2014, for example, Keen Team was the sole Chinese hacking group to take home a prize — scoring 13% of the purse — from the Pwn2Own exploit contest. But by 2017, seven China-based teams collected 79% of the prize money from the contest, according to data from the report, "From Vegas to Chengdu Hacking Contests, Bug Bounties, and China's Offensive Cyber Ecosystem," published last week. The following year, China banned participation in Western contests, gauging the vulnerability information too important to national security.

Its civilian hackers have directly benefited China's cyber-offensive programs and are one example of the success of China's cybersecurity pipeline, which the government created through its requirement that all vulnerabilities be directly reported to government authorities, says Eugenio Benincasa, senior researcher at the Center for Security Studies (CSS) at ETH Zurich, and the author of the report.

"By strategically positioning itself as the final recipient in the vulnerability disclosure processes of civilian researchers, the Chinese government leverages its civilian vulnerability researchers, among the best globally, on a large scale and at no cost," he says.

The open source intelligence report comes as the United States, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and other nations in the Asia-Pacific region have struggled to improve cyber defenses against Chinese advance persistent threat (APT) groups. Earlier this year, high-profile US government officials warned that China was compromising critical infrastructure to pre-position its military hackers for future conflicts. And, in the recently uncovered "Operation Crimson Palace," three different threat teams in China conducted coordinated attacks against a Southeast Asia government agency.

**A Robust Cyber Pipeline**

Starting with university capture-the-flag competitions and ending with exploits that enable military cyber operations, China's pipeline for training civilian hackers highlights the benefits of the country's focus on practical cybersecurity. China's cyber-offensive capability has also significantly benefited from the enforcement of its vulnerability disclosure rule, the Regulations on the Management of Security Vulnerabilities in Network Products (RMSV). Both programs are part of China's overall Military-Civil Fusion (MCF) initiative.

Flow chart showing the pipeline for cybersecurity expertise and vulnerability information. Source: ETH Zurich's "From Vegas to Chengdu Hacking Contests, Bug Bounties, and China’s Offensive Cyber Ecosystem" paper

Focusing its burgeoning numbers of technical graduates on finding vulnerabilities helps amplify its offensive capabilities, says Chris Wysopal, chief technology officer at software security firm Veracode.

"There is a scale difference there. ... They have a large number of technical graduates, and that is being harnessed to find vulnerabilities in \[Western products, such as\] Google Android," he says. "This shows that the incentives are working in their favor, and there's evidence of that."

Two groups of hackers exist within China's cyber-offensive ecosystems. The first group includes vulnerability researchers and offensive security specialists who have distinguished themselves by competing in bug bounty programs and hacking contests, such as the Pwn2Own contest and the Tianfu Cup, which was established as a China-based alternative to Pwn2Own.

The second group consists of the contracted or professional hackers who weaponize vulnerabilities for use in attacks on specific targets. Exploits developed by the first group have often been used by the second, a fact discussed in the iSoon leak earlier this year.

In the past, vulnerability research teams were typically associated with technical groups at large firms, such as Qihoo 360, which has at least 19 teams; the Ant Group, which hosts nine teams; and Tencent, which has at least seven research groups. Today, the researchers often are part of boutique cybersecurity firms.

China's civilian hackers initially obtained training by participating in Western capture-the-flag contests and exploit-development competitions, such as Pwn2Own, as well as bug bounty programs. China now has domestic versions of most of these initiatives and programs, often with the financial backing of top-tier national technical universities.

**Cybersecurity Superstars**

A handful of researchers have made significant contributions to China's programs, highlighting China's reliance on a small group of researchers, according to the report.

More than 50% of Google Android vulnerabilities, for example, are credited to Qihoo 360's Security Response Center (360 SRC), naming Han Zinuo as one of the contributors. When Zinuo moved to cybersecurity firm Oppo, 360 SRC's submissions dropped and Oppo's increased, the research paper stated. Similarly, another researcher, Yuki Chen, accounted for 68% of Qihoo 360's Vulcan researcher group's submissions to Microsoft, and when he moved to boutique firm Cyber Kunlun in 2020, the former firm saw a significant drop in vulnerabilities to Microsoft's bug bounty program, while the latter saw a surge.

Overall, the number of vulnerabilities reported by Chinese firms to the big three US software companies — Apple, Google, and Microsoft — declined starting in 2020. While this could suggest that Chinese firms were no longer reporting the vulnerabilities they discovered, it also coincided with increasing sanctions from the United States, such as the blacklisting of Qihoo 360 in May 2020 due to its links to the Chinese military, the report stated.

"This decrease \[in vulnerability reports has\] raised concerns about the potential loss of a significant channel for vulnerability reporting within the global ecosystem," the report said.

**Downsides for Defense**

Because Chinese teams have curtailed their participation in Western hacking competitions, they have arguably made the competitions less effective as a defensive strategy. In 2022 and 2023, for example, no teams attempted to hack either Apple's iPhone or Google's Pixel at the Pwn2Own competition — that was the first time in 15 years for Apple's iPhone — indicating that China now considers any exploits its experts find as too valuable to demonstrate publicly.

"The notable absence of Chinese hacking teams that specialized in targeting these devices explains this break far better than assuming that the iPhone and Pixel have become unbreachable," the research paper stated. "Concurrently, these vulnerabilities are highly likely evaluated by China's security agencies for potential use in cyber malicious operations."

Even showing such exploits without any accompanying details runs the risk of directing attackers to rediscover vulnerabilities, says Dustin Childs, head of threat awareness for the Zero Day Initiative at Trend Micro, which runs the Pwn2Own competition.

"They have already been demonstrated onstage, so threat actors know they aren’t wasting their time reversing a patch for some that may end up non-exploitable," he says. "This is why we invite vendors to participate in the contest."

Private organizations that deal in exploits act as a bellwether for the vulnerability market. Exploit seller Zerodium currently offers a $2.5 million payday for any hacker that finds a zero-click exploit chain for Google Android and $2 million for a similar attack on iOS.

**China's Own Hacking Competitions**

Meanwhile, China is further divorcing itself from the global information infrastructure, moving its infrastructure to domestically developed technology. Unsurprisingly, its cybersecurity pipeline is following suit, with some major exploit competitions focusing increasingly on Chinese products.

In the long term, China will have to follow two paths, Benincasa says.

"We are observing an interesting shift in China's hacking competitions toward focusing more on their own products, while at the same time maintaining a strong interest in Western ones," he says, adding, "China's strategic intent \[is\] to maintain a presence in international products for offensive purposes, given the expertise of its hackers in targeting Western products, while simultaneously focusing on domestic products for defensive purposes as it gradually reduces reliance on US vendors."

**About the Author(s)**

Veteran technology journalist of more than 20 years. Former research engineer. Written for more than two dozen publications, including CNET News.com, Dark Reading, MIT's Technology Review, Popular Science, and Wired News. Five awards for journalism, including Best Deadline Journalism (Online) in 2003 for coverage of the Blaster worm. Crunches numbers on various trends using Python and R. Recent reports include analyses of the shortage in cybersecurity workers and annual vulnerability trends.

Bug Bounty Programs, Hacking Contests Power China's Cyber Offense

Accused of hacking into more than 45 companies in the US, a 22-year-old British man was arrested by Spanish police and found to be in control of more than $27 million in Bitcoin.

Source: Sergi Chaiko via Alamy Stock Photo

The ringleader of brazen cybercrime ring Scattered Spider led successful cyberattacks that brought US powerhouse companies like MGM Resorts and Caesars Entertainment to a standstill. More recently, he spent the last few weeks living in Spain. However, the party, it seems, has abruptly ended.

The 22-year-old British national is now in the custody of Spanish police after being arrested at the Palma Airport in Palma de Mallorca as he was trying to board a flight to Italy, according to reports from Murica News. Police told the outlet they believe the suspect arrived in Barcelona at the end of May.

At the time of the arrest, the accused cybercriminal was in possession of a laptop, a mobile phone, and maintained control of a $27 million Bitcoin fortune, the Spanish police added.

He is accused of more than 45 cyberattacks against US companies and a warrant for his arrest was issued by the FBI in Los Angeles, the reports added.

**Successful Global Cybercrime Arrests Continue**

International law enforcement has been cracking down on cybercriminals over the past few weeks.

On June 3 Europol announced Operation Endgame, a coordinated law enforcement effort across the globe to track down individual cybercriminals, and added five Russian nationals to the list of Europe's most wanted fugitives. On June 12, Operation Endgame announced the arrest of LockBit and Conti Ransomware developer in Ukraine.

While the arrests send an important message that hunting down cybercriminals is a priority for law enforcement, cybercrime groups continue to operate and adapt.

Just days ago, for instance, researchers at Mandiant said they observed Scattered Spider expanding into cyberattacks against software-as-a-service (SaaS) applications to deliver ransomware.

Scattered Spider Boss Cuffed in Spain Boarding a Flight to Italy

A model can be perfectly innocent, yet still dangerous if the means by which it's packed and unpacked are tainted.

Source: Barry Mason via Alamy Stock Photo

Researchers have concocted a new way of manipulating machine learning (ML) models by injecting malicious code into the process of serialization.

The method focuses on the "pickling" process used to store Python objects in bytecode. ML models are often packaged and distributed in Pickle format, despite its longstanding, known risks.

As described in a new blog post from Trail of Bits, Pickle files allow some cover for attackers to inject malicious bytecode into ML programs. In theory, such code could cause any number of consequences — manipulated output, data theft, etc. — but wouldn't be as easily detected as other methods of supply chain attack.

"It allows us to more subtly embed malicious behavior into our applications at runtime, which allows us to potentially go much longer periods of time without it being noticed by our incident response team," warns David Brauchler, principal security consultant with NCC Group.

**Sleepy Pickle Poisons the ML Jar**

A so-called "Sleepy Pickle" attack is performed rather simply with a tool like Flicking. Flicking is an open source program for detecting, analyzing, reverse engineering, or creating malicious Pickle files. An attacker merely has to convince a target to download a poisoned .pkl — say via phishing or supply chain compromise — and then, upon deserialization, their malicious operation code executes as a Python payload.

Poisoning a model in this way carries a number of advantages to stealth. For one thing, it doesn't require local or remote access to a target's system, and no trace of malware is left to the disk. Because the poisoning occurs dynamically during deserialization, it resists static analysis. (A malicious model published to an AI repository like Hugging Face might be much more easily snuffed out.)

Serialized model files are hefty, so the malicious code necessary to cause damage might only represent a small fraction of the total file size. And these attacks can be customized in any number of ways that regular malware attacks are to prevent detection and analysis.

While Sleepy Pickle can presumably be used to do any number of things to a target's machine, the researchers noted, "controls like sandboxing, isolation, privilege limitation, firewalls, and egress traffic control can prevent the payload from severely damaging the user’s system or stealing/tampering with the user’s data."

More interestingly, attacks can be oriented to manipulate the model itself. For example, an attacker could insert a backdoor into the model, or manipulate its weights and, thereby, its outputs. Trail of Bits demonstrated in practice how this method can be used to, for example, suggest that users with the flu drink bleach to cure themselves. Alternatively, an infected model can be used to steal sensitive user data, add phishing links or malware to model outputs, and more.

**How to Safely Use ML Models**

To avoid this kind of risk, organizations can focus on only using ML models in the safer file format, Safetensors. Unlike Pickle, Safetensors deals only with tensor data, not Python objects, removing the risk of arbitrary code execution deserialization.

"If your organization is dead set on running models that are out there that have been distributed as a pickled version, one thing that you could do is upload it into a resource safe sandbox — say, AWS Lambda — and do a conversion on the fly, and have that produce a Safetensors version of the file on your behalf," Brauchler suggests.

But, he adds, "I think that's more of a Band-Aid on top of a larger problem. Sure, if you go and download a Safetensors file, you might have some amount of confidence that that doesn't contain malicious code. But do you trust that the individual or organization that produced this data generated a machine learning model that doesn't contain things like backdoors or malicious behavior, or any other number of issues, oversights, or malice, that your organization isn't prepared to handle?"

"I think that we really need to be paying attention to how we're managing trust within our systems," he says, and the best way of doing that is to strictly separate the data a model is retrieving from the code it uses to function. "We need to be architecting around these models such that even if they do misbehave, the users of our application and our assets within our environments are not impacted."

**About the Author(s)**

Nate Nelson is a freelance writer based in New York City. Formerly a reporter at Threatpost, he contributes to a number of cybersecurity blogs and podcasts. He writes "Malicious Life" -- an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify -- and hosts every other episode, featuring interviews with leading voices in security. He also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast," the most popular show in its field.

'Sleepy Pickle' Exploit Subtly Poisons ML Models

The company focused heavily on data and system security in the announcement of its generative AI platform, Apple Intelligence, but experts worry that companies will have little visibility into data security.

Source: Cosmo Condina via Alamy Stock Photo

Apple's long-awaited announcement of its generative AI (GenAI) capabilities came with an in-depth discussion of the company's security considerations for the platform. But the tech industry's past focus on harvesting user data from nearly every product and service have left many concerned over the data security and privacy implications of Apple's move. Fortunately, there are some proactive ways that companies can address potential risks.

Apple's approach to integrating GenAI — dubbed Apple Intelligence — includes context-sensitive searches, editing emails for tone, and the easy creation of graphics, with Apple promising that the powerful features require only local processing on mobile devices to protect user and business data. The company detailed a five-step approach to strengthen privacy and security for the platform, with much of the processing done on a user's device using Apple Silicon. More complex queries, however, will be sent to the company's private cloud and use the services of OpenAI and its large language model (LLM).

While companies will have to wait to see how Apple's commitment to security plays out, the company has put a lot of consideration into how GenAI services will be handled on devices and how the information will be protected, says Joseph Thacker, principal AI engineer and security researcher at AppOmni, a cloud-security firm.

"Apple's focus on privacy and security in the design is definitely a good sign," he says. "Features like not allowing privileged runtime access and preventing user targeting show they are thinking about potential abuse cases."

Apple spent significant time during its announcement reinforcing the idea that the company takes security seriously, and published a paper online that describes the company's five requirements for its Private Cloud Compute service, such as no privileged runtime access and hardening the system to prevent targeting specific users.

Still, large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, and other forms of GenAI are new enough that the threats remain poorly understood, and some will slip through Apple's efforts, says Steve Wilson, chief privacy officer at cloud security and compliance provider Exabeam, and lead on the Open Web Application Security Project's Top 10 Security Risks for LLMs.

"I really worry that LLMs are a very, very different beast, and traditional security engineers, they just don't have experience with these AI techniques yet," he says. "There are very few people who do."

**Apple Makes Security a Centerpiece**

Apple seems to be aware of the security risks that concern its customers, especially businesses. The implementation of Apple Intelligence across a user's devices, dubbed the Personal Intelligence System, will connect data from applications in a way that has, perhaps, only been implemented through the company's health-data services. Conceivably, every message and email sent from a device could be reviewed by AI and context added through on-device semantic indexes.

Yet, the company pledged that, in most cases, the data never leaves the device, and the information is anonymized as well.

"It is aware of your personal data, without collecting your personal data," Craig Federighi, senior vice president of software engineering at Apple, stated in a four-minute video on Apple Intelligence and privacy during the company's June 10 launch, adding: "You are in control of your data, where it is stored and who can access it."

When it does leave the device, data will be processed in the company's Private Cloud Compute service, so Apple can take advantage of more powerful server-based generative-AI models, while still protecting privacy. The company says that it never stores or makes accessible any data to Apple. In addition, Apple will make every production build of its Private Cloud Compute platform available to security researchers for vulnerability research in conjunction with a bug-bounty program.

Such steps seemingly go beyond what other companies have promised and should assuage the fears of enterprise security teams, AppOmni's Thacker says.

"This type of transparency and collaboration with the security research community is important for finding and fixing vulnerabilities before they can be exploited in the wild," he says. "It allows Apple to leverage the diverse skills and perspectives of researchers to really put the system through the wringer from a security testing perspective. While it's not a guarantee of security, it will help a lot."

**There's an App for (Leaking) That**

However, the interactions between apps and data on mobile devices and the behavior of LLMs may be too complex to fully understand at this point, says Exabeam's Wilson. The attack surface area of LLMs continues to surprise the large companies behind the major AI models. Following its release of its latest Gemini model, for example, Google had to contend with inadvertent data poisoning that arose from training its model with untrusted data.

"Those search components are falling victim to these kind of indirect injection data-poisoning incidents, where they're off telling people to eat glue and rocks," Wilson says. "So it's one thing to say, 'Oh, this is a super-sophisticated organization, they'll get this right,' but Google's been proving over and over and over again that they won't."

Apple's announcement comes as companies are quickly experimenting with ways to integrate GenAI into the workplace to improve productivity and automate traditionally tough-to-automate processes. Bringing the features to mobile devices has happened slowly, but now, Samsung has released its Galaxy AI, Google has announced the Gemini mobile app, and Microsoft has announced Copilot for Windows.

While Copilot for Windows is integrated with many applications, Apple Intelligence appears to go beyond even Microsoft's approach.

**Think Different (About Threats)**

Overall, companies need to first gain visibility into their employees' use of LLMs and other GenAI. While they do not need to go to the extent of billionaire tech innovator Elon Musk, a former investor in OpenAI, who raised concerns that Apple — or OpenAI — would abuse users' data or fail to secure business information and pledged to ban iPhones at his companies, chief information security officers (CISOs) certainly should have a discussion with their mobile device management (MDM) providers, Exabeam's Wilson says.

Right now, controls to regulate data going into and out of Apple Intelligence do not appear to exist and, in the future, may not be accessible to MDM platforms, he says.

"Apple has not historically provided a lot of device management, because they are leaned in on personal use," Wilson says. "So it's been up to third parties for the last 10-plus years to try and build these third-party frameworks that allow you to install controls on the phone, but it's unclear whether they're going to have the hooks into \[Apple Intelligence\] to help control it."

Until more controls come online, enterprises need to set a policy, and to find ways to integrate their existing security controls, authentication systems, and data loss prevention tools with AI, says AppOmni's Thacker.

"Companies should also have clear policies around what types of data and conversations are appropriate to share with AI assistants," he says. "So while Apple's efforts help, enterprises still have work to do to fully integrate these tools securely."

**About the Author(s)**

Veteran technology journalist of more than 20 years. Former research engineer. Written for more than two dozen publications, including CNET News.com, Dark Reading, MIT's Technology Review, Popular Science, and Wired News. Five awards for journalism, including Best Deadline Journalism (Online) in 2003 for coverage of the Blaster worm. Crunches numbers on various trends using Python and R. Recent reports include analyses of the shortage in cybersecurity workers and annual vulnerability trends.

Apple Intelligence Could Introduce Device Security Risks

Though the company is informing affected individuals of a breach, it's keeping the nature and scope of the cybersecurity incident that led to it under wraps.

Source: B. Leighty / Photri Images via Alamy Stock Photo

Panera Bread, the US fast-casual food chain, has begun notifying its employees of a data breach, after a "security incident" in March led to threat actors stealing employees' personal information.

In breach notification letters filed with the Office of California's Attorney General, Panera informs affected individuals that a cybersecurity firm was brought in to investigate the unauthorized access to internal files and, after the files were reviewed, determined that they contained names and Social Security numbers. Not only that, but additional information connected to the individuals' employment could have also been in the files.

Panera said that while there is no indication that "information has been accessed and been made publicly available," it is offering a one-year membership to CyEx's credit monitoring, identity detection, and resolution of identity theft service. It also notes that it has taken additional steps to enhance its security safety measures.

Though Panera has failed to provide more detail as to what kind of breach occurred and who the threat actors are, some researchers have raised suspicions that the company was hit by a ransomware attack that caused the initial outage in its ordering system, mobile apps, and loyalty program in March. 

The company urges individuals to be vigilant of attempted fraud or identity theft and to review account statements often.

**About the Author(s)**

Panera Notifies Employees of Compromised Data

Our collection of the most relevant reporting and industry perspectives for those guiding cybersecurity strategies and focused on SecOps. Also included: Rockwell's dire ICS warning; a red alert on biometrics; cybersecurity for the Hajj season.

Welcome to CISO Corner, Dark Reading's weekly digest of articles tailored specifically to security operations readers and security leaders. Every week, we'll offer articles gleaned from across our news operation, The Edge, DR Technology, DR Global, and our Commentary section. We're committed to bringing you a diverse set of perspectives to support the job of operationalizing cybersecurity strategies, for leaders at organizations of all shapes and sizes.

**In this issue of CISO Corner:**

*   Apple's AI Offering Makes Big Privacy Promises
    
*   Scores of Biometrics Bugs Emerge, Highlighting Authentication Risks
    
*   DR Global: Governments, Businesses Tighten Cybersecurity Around Hajj Season
    

*   Why CIO & CISO Collaboration Is Key to Organizational Resilience
    
*   Rockwell's ICS Directive Comes as Critical Infrastructure Risk Peaks
    
*   4 Ways to Help a Security Culture Thrive
    

Don't miss "Anatomy of a Data Breach: What to Do if It Happens to You," a free Dark Reading virtual event scheduled for June 20! Speakers include Verizon's Alex Pinto, plus execs from Snowflake, pharma giant GSK, Salesforce, and more — register today!

**Apple's AI Offering Makes Big Privacy Promises**

By Agam Shah, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading

Apple's guarantee of privacy on every AI transaction — whether on-device or cloud — is ambitious and could influence trustworthy AI deployments on device and in the cloud, analysts say.

Apple's announcement of Apple Intelligence and plans to integrate AI across its devices and applications comes with a commitment to guarantee privacy on every AI transaction. This sets a high bar on zero-trust infrastructure that competitors may try to match.

Because of Apple's walled garden model, rival providers don’t have nearly the same level of control over their AI infrastructure. Unlike Apple, they can’t lock down security as queries pass through various hardware and software layers. For example, OpenAI and Microsoft process queries through GPUs from Nvidia, which handles vulnerability discovery and patching.

“If Apple sets the standard, the effect will be 'why I should buy Android if I don’t care about the privacy,'" says Alex Matrosov, CEO of security company Binarly.io. "The next step will be Google following up and trying to maybe implement or do the similar thing."

Read more: Apple's AI Offering Makes Big Privacy Promises

Related: OpenAI Forms Another Safety Committee After Dismantling Prior Team

**Scores of Biometrics Bugs Emerge, Highlighting Authentication Risks**

By Nate Nelson, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading

Face scans stored like passwords inevitably will be compromised, like passwords are. But there's a crucial difference between the two that organizations can rely on when their manufacturers fail.

Biometric security is more popular today than ever, with widespread adoption in the public sector — law enforcement, national ID systems, etc. — as well as for commercial industries like travel and personal computing. In Japan, subway riders can "pay by face," and Singapore's immigration system relies on face scans and thumbprints to allow travelers into the country. The fact that even burger places are experimenting with face scans suggests something's brewing here.

But researchers have found two dozen vulnerabilities in a biometric terminal used in critical facilities worldwide could allow hackers to gain unauthorized access, manipulate the device, deploy malware, and steal biometric data, which highlights the risks that come with implementing these systems.

The critical nature of the environments in which these systems are so often deployed necessitates that organizations go above and beyond to ensure their integrity. And that job takes much more than just patching newly discovered vulnerabilities.

Read more: Scores of Biometrics Bugs Emerge, Highlighting Authentication Risks

Related: Biometric Bypass: BrutePrint Makes Short Work of Fingerprint Security

**Global: Governments, Businesses Tighten Cybersecurity Around Hajj Season**

By Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading

While cyberattacks drop slightly during the week of the Islamic pilgrimage, organizations in Saudi Arabia and other countries with large Muslim populations see attacks on the rise.

The final month of the Islamic calendar, Dhu al-Hijjah, began on June 7, marking the countdown for millions of Muslims to the Hajj pilgrimage, and also a time when cybercriminals and cyber-espionage actors see increased opportunity amid reduced vigilance and slimmed staffing.

While many of the cyberattacks are focused on pilgrims as consumers of travel services, a variety of businesses — from banks to e-commerce sites — are at greater risk of data theft and denial-of-service attacks, according to experts. On June 3, for example, cyber-threat actors announced a data leak on an underground forum that allegedly contained the personal information of 168 million users from "The Hajj and Pilgrimage Organization in Iran," according to cybersecurity firm Kaspersky.

The attacks highlight the two aspects of how cyberattackers see the Hajj season: as an opportunity to take advantage of pilgrims, but also as a time of reduced resources for security teams, making business and government agencies vulnerable.

Read more: Governments, Businesses Tighten Cybersecurity Around Hajj Season

Related: 'DuneQuixote' Shows Stealth Cyberattack Methods Are Evolving. Can Defenders Keep Up?

**The CEO Is Next**

Commentary by Joe Sullivan, CEO, Ukraine Friends, & CEO, Joe Sullivan Security LLC

If CEOs want to avoid being the target of government enforcement actions, they need to take a personal interest in ensuring that their corporation invests in cybersecurity.

One day soon, a government agency will very publicly seek to hold a corporate CEO personally liable for a failure to ensure their organization invested sufficiently in cybersecurity. The surprising thing won't be that it happens, but rather how many people who work for and look up to the CEO will be happy when it does.

We're experiencing a movement toward regulation by enforcement. Look no further than the National Cybersecurity Strategy, which, at its core, demands that corporate America do more to protect citizens from cyberattacks. There's also the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) action against the software company SolarWinds and its head of security. The case has raised eyebrows, specifically because the security leader was held personally responsible.

But with very few exceptions, the CISO or senior-most security leader is simply not the "responsible corporate officer.” It's the CEO. Security leaders rarely, if ever, get the budget needed to do their job well. CEOs and boards that do control the corporate budget rarely invest the time to understand their cyber-risks, and instead allocate resources in other directions.

Read more: The CEO Is Next

Related: White House Fills in Details of National Cybersecurity Strategy

**Why CIO & CISO Collaboration Is Key to Organizational Resilience**

Commentary by Robert Grazioli, Chief Information Officer, Ivanti

Alignment between these domains is quickly becoming a strategic imperative.

Gartner forecasts that the world will spend $215 billion on risk management and cybersecurity in 2024. That's a 14% increase over 2023. But many workers are feeling spread thin, with more data and endpoints than ever and not enough qualified talent to be found. It's time to finally break down the silos between IT and security.

That starts by fostering alignment between the CIO and chief information security officer (CISO).

Individually, CISOs and CIOs are powerful forces with a lot on their plates — and a lot on the line. Together, they could be unstoppable. However, historically, organizational structures have relegated CISOs and CIOs to separate domains with distinct — and occasionally contradictory — objectives.

Here's how to foster alignment: Why CIO & CISO Collaboration Is Key to Organizational Resilience

Related: CISO & CIO Convergence: Ready or Not, Here It Comes

**Rockwell's ICS Directive Comes as Critical Infrastructure Risk Peaks**

By Tara Seals, Managing Editor, News, Dark Reading

Critical infrastructure is facing increasingly disruptive threats to physical processes, while thousands of devices are online with weak authentication and riddled with exploitable bugs.

Industrial control systems (ICS) giant Rockwell Automation's recent directive to customers to disconnect their gear from the Internet showcases not just growing cyber risk to critical infrastructure, but the unique challenges that security teams face in the sector, experts say.

CISA is warning that increased threats to could lead to various catastrophic attacks, including denial-of-service (DoS) efforts that take down electrical grids; privilege escalation and lateral movement to burrow deeper into the operational technology (OT) environment in order to control it; modifying settings to, say, change safety thresholds for power generators; remotely compromising programmable logic controllers (PLCs) to halt water sector operations; or even conducting destructive Stuxnet-style attacks that can obliterate a site's ability to function permanently.

Yet thousands of devices are exposed online with weak authentication and riddled with exploitable bugs; and there's an endemic lack of security team participation in site design and asset/infrastructure management. All in all, it's not an ideal situation.

Read more: Rockwell's ICS Directive Comes as Critical Infrastructure Risk Peaks

Related: Volt Typhoon Hits Multiple Electric Utilities, Expands Cyber Activity

**4 Ways to Help a Security Culture Thrive**

DR Technology commentary by Ken Deitz, CSO/CISO, Secureworks

Creating and nurturing a corporate environment of proactive cybersecurity means putting people first — their needs, weaknesses, and skills.

A good cybersecurity culture trusts and empowers teammates to make good decisions. In turn, that trust fuels a more productive relationship between cybersecurity and the business. Culture is a living entity that needs to be continuously nurtured. Give it the dedication it needs, and your businesses will be safer as a result.

Here are some core pillars for establishing an effective security culture:

1\. Establish the Right Mindset: Focus on the positive actions that people can and should take.

2\. Engage with Empathy: A productive and inclusive security culture is one that shuns blame. Instead, focus on what you can collectively learn from the incident to enrich your cyber strategy for the future.

3\. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate: When it comes to cybersecurity, there's no such thing as too much communication. People have a lot going on in their jobs and lives. Meet people where they are, and you'll have much better results.

4\. Stay on Your Toes: New and emerging technologies bring opportunities and challenges. Generative artificial intelligence (AI), for example, can offer teammates productivity gains, but they also need to know the risks.

Read more: 4 Ways to Help a Security Culture Thrive

Related: How to Transform Security Awareness Into Security Culture

CISO Corner: Apple's AI Privacy Promises; CEOs in the Hot Seat

Meta's new subscription model points out the need for clearer and stricter regulations — ones that prioritize consumer privacy and control of personal data.

Source: Zoonar GmbH via Alamy Stock Photo

COMMENTARY

Meta recently offered its customers in the European Union the choice between paying for privacy or consenting to tracking, a model some people are calling "pay or OK." This sparked an investigation, since privacy in the EU is defined as a consumer right. With the bipartisan federal privacy bill in the US gaining ground to similarly make consumer privacy a right at the federal level, Meta's new model could come under even more fire if the company implements it here.

But what is "pay or OK," and why does it matter? 

**Understanding the Conflict**

Meta's subscription model violates the principle of freely given consent by forcing users to choose one of just two options: paying a fee or consenting to tracking for personalized advertising. It's essentially a false choice, because Meta is making money off users' data one way or another, either through the subscription or by selling their information. Numerous privacy and consumer rights proponents have already criticized the move as an attempt to circumvent the European Union's stringent data protection laws by coercing users to agree to data tracking. 

The new model also allows Meta to sidestep the broad demand from privacy advocates for all such software platforms and services to install opt-out mechanisms. Technically, on Meta's various sites, there is an opt-out mechanism, but this new model manipulates consent dynamics by introducing financial incentives to sway user choices. Users might believe that they are "giving consent," when in reality they can only either financially support the platform or surrender their privacy rights. Ironic, considering that, according to Meta, the whole point of the subscription is supposedly to protect user privacy.

History has already shown how little users can trust Big Tech companies like Meta to protect consumer data. For example, Meta has had several major breaches over the past few years and several lawsuits related to misuse of consumer data. Google and Microsoft have both experienced similar accusations. Naturally, the security and privacy lapses have caused privacy advocates to question: Are these the companies you should be paying to protect your data? The answer for a constantly increasing number of consumers is: No. 

**Steps for Consumer Protection**

The evidence is clear: Big Tech won't protect users' data. Consumers are looking for other ways to defend themselves from data theft, and fortunately, new technologies and privacy developments have started to make this a lot easier. 

For starters: Use privacy-focused browsers. Some examples include Brave, Tor, and Firefox, all of which are known for prioritizing data privacy. These browsers often come with built-in features to block trackers and advertisements, reduce digital fingerprinting, and ensure more secure browsing.

Next are virtual private networks (VPNs). VPNs encrypt Internet traffic, which prevents other third parties, even your Internet service provider, from monitoring users' online activities. A reliable VPN can also mask a user's IP address. Normally, advertisers and other third parties use your IP address to track your activity and create a profile that is unique to that address. A VPN prevents that tracking, which enhances anonymity on the Web. 

Third, users should view and adjust their social media privacy settings on a regular basis. Social media platforms frequently update their policies and settings. Users should review their settings to control who sees their information, which data third parties have access to, and how their information is used for advertising.

Fourth, I suggest users actively manage and regularly delete unnecessary personal data stored online. A simple Internet search will show you that your name, and possibly your address, phone number, and tons of other information, is readily available on data broker websites — thanks to companies like Meta selling them all that data. Look for ways to opt out of these platforms. Consider setting social media accounts to be private or deleting old accounts that are no longer active. 

Finally, stay informed on consumer rights and data protection laws like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. These laws often grant users the right to access, correct, and delete personal data, along with the right to opt out of companies selling your info. Being informed lets users make educated decisions and take legal action if necessary.

**Final Thoughts**

Privacy regulators may or may not be able to counteract Meta's consent-or-pay ploy. But either way, the new subscription model points out the need for clearer and stricter regulations in the US, ones that prioritize consumer privacy and control of personal data rather than forcing users to choose between shelling out or giving up. Until then, consumers need to be aware of the privacy technologies, opt-out mechanisms, and choices that are readily available today.

**About the Author(s)**

CEO, Abine/DeleteMe

Rob Shavell is CEO of Abine/DeleteMe, The Online Privacy Company. Rob has been quoted as a privacy expert in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, The Telegraph, NPR, ABC, NBC, and Fox. Rob is a vocal proponent of privacy legislation reform, including the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA).

Why Trading Privacy for 'Free' Web Services Must End

The cybersecurity agency issued a warning not to agree to any payment requests and to alert law enforcement or CISA after being contacted.

Source: Brian Jackson via Alamy Stock Photo

The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued an alert this week warning that malicious actors have been making phone calls claiming to be representatives from the organization, and making requests for cash, gift card, or cryptocurrency transfers.

"Impersonation scams are on the rise and often use the names and titles of government employees," CISA explained in the brief advisory. "As a reminder, CISA staff will never contact you with a request to wire money, cash, cryptocurrency, or use gift cards and will never instruct you to keep the discussion secret."

The CISA did not offer additional details as to whom might be perpetrating the voice phishing ("vishing") fraud attempts, but advised anyone who is contacted in such a scheme to deny the request for payment, make note of the phone number and hang up immediately.

Those contacted were also asked to report the incident to law enforcement and reach out to CISA by calling (844) SAY-CISA (844-729-2472).

The perpetrators might aim to fund further criminal activities or simply profit from the immediate financial returns of their deceitful tactics, says Ezra Graziano, director of federal accounts at Zimperium.

"Such scams can be orchestrated by organized cybercriminal groups or individual actors seeking to exploit people's trust in government agencies," he said. "This incident highlights the evolving tactics of cybercriminals, who are increasingly using sophisticated social engineering techniques to exploit trust in government agencies."

He added the fact that scammers are impersonating CISA employees underscores the urgency for individuals and organizations to be vigilant.

"It also reflects the broader trend of targeted phishing attacks where fraudsters aim to exploit the authority and credibility of well-known institutions," Graziano said.

Other government agencies impacted by impersonation scams include the FBI and its Internet Crime Complaint Center, which has been targeted as far back as 2018.

Beyond impersonation of government officials and agencies, malicious actors are also targeting brands by setting up scam sites aping those of legitimate businesses to sell counterfeit goods or process payments without sending the product.

These types of scams have cost consumers more than $2 billion since 2017, according to the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

**Education, Training Helps Prepare for Vishing**

Sean McNee, head of research for DomainTools, said the most important thing employers can do is educate employees about various types of scams, how they work, and how to recognize them.

"This includes understanding tactics used by scammers, such as impersonation, social engineering, and phishing," he says.

For instance, employees should be suspect of unsolicited calls or emails, verify the identity of unknown or new callers, and be wary of unusual requests for sensitive information.

He explains that phone-based scams work by creating a false sense of urgency to manipulate the receiver to take actions they normally wouldn’t take.

"Understanding this … helps reduce its effectiveness," McNee says.

Patrick Harr, CEO of SlashNext Email Security+, points out that impersonation scams have long been a tool of scammers whereby they impersonate high-value individuals, such as executives, CEOs, or other high-value targets and sometimes what can be perceived as scary agencies, such as the IRS. He predicts that scams like these will only increase with the weaponization of AI generated voice, video and text.

Thus, from Harr's perspective, any good cyber defense is a multi-layered defense against scams, phishing, business email companies and other socially engineered attacks.

"Firstly, ensure businesses have multifactor authentication (MFA), password change control, AI based email and messaging security and detection and monitoring in place," he cautions. "Companies, organizations, and individuals must employ AI themselves to fight these scams, otherwise we will see continued success."

Don't miss "Anatomy of a Data Breach: What to Do if It Happens to You," a free Dark Reading virtual event scheduled for June 20! Speakers include Verizon's Alex Pinto, execs from Snowflake, pharma giant GSK, Salesforce, and more — register today!

**About the Author(s)**

Nathan Eddy is a freelance journalist and award-winning documentary filmmaker specializing in IT security, autonomous vehicle technology, customer experience technology, and architecture and urban planning. A graduate of Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Nathan currently lives in Berlin, Germany.

Widespread Vishing Effort Impersonates CISA Staff

Apple's guarantee of privacy on every AI transaction could influence trustworthy AI deployments.

Source: OleCNX via Alamy Stock Photo

Apple has long styled itself as the company that cares about privacy, and it continues to tout its privacy bona fides with Apple Intelligence.

At this week's Worldwide Developer Conference, the company announced Apple Intelligence, its secure AI system, and plans to integrate AI across its devices and applications. The AI features will be used to upgrade personal assistant features in Apple devices and provide assistance with writing and image manipulation.

While a lightweight AI model runs locally on Apple devices, more complex queries will go to the cloud. Apple will assess the complexity and computing power required by an AI query and decide whether to process it on device or send it to the cloud. Data won’t leave the device if it is processed on device, and layers of security protect the information sent to the cloud.

Within this secure AI system, user data is not visible to anyone, even Apple, and is deleted once a query is answered, the company said.

"Your data is never stored or made accessible to Apple. It's used exclusively to fulfill your request," said Craig Federighi, senior vice president of software engineering at Apple, during a WWDC keynote.

**Trusted AI Deployments?**

Apple's guarantee of privacy on every AI transaction — whether on-device or in the cloud — is ambitious and could influence trustworthy AI deployments.

Apple's hardware and software implementation to guarantee privacy on every AI transaction sets a high bar on zero-trust infrastructure that competitors may try to match, says James Sanders, an analyst at chip research firm TechInsights.

Sanders notes there is a "growing trust problem" with LLMs, especially as top AI providers collect information from users to train large-language models or improve services. Google collects user data from across its vast portfolio of products to boost its capabilities. It also includes human reviewers to evaluate answers with the ultimate goal to improve its Gemini AI service.

Apple did not announce its own AI infrastructure and instead will be integrating with OpenAI. Apple left open the possibility of working with others as well. Users will be prompted to agree to send user data to OpenAI.

"I do wonder to what extent this is going to put pressure on Microsoft to adopt a similar method," Sanders says.

**Building an AI Walled Garden**

As part of its investments, the company has built a trustworthy cloud infrastructure called Private Compute Cloud with new servers and chips to handle AI queries that demand more computing power. Apple's secure boot and secure enclaves protect data.

"These models run on servers … specially created using Apple silicon. These Apple silicon servers offer the privacy and security of your iPhone from the silicon on up," Apple’s Federighi said.

Private data can be easily stolen en route or from the cloud, but Apple is using the latest hardware and software techniques to protect the data, said Matthew Green, associate professor at Johns Hopkin’s computer science department. Apple devices generate encryption keys, which authenticates devices and cloud connections. The request is then sent to a secure enclave on Apple's servers, where the requests are processed.

Apple is also taking a serverless approach in which data is deleted once the answer is sent back. New keys are generated each time a system reboots. The operating system also has an attestation system to verify users and software images.

"Specifically, it signs a hash of the software and shares this with every phone/client. If you trust this infrastructure, you'll know it's running a specific piece of software," Green said.

Apple controls nearly every major piece of software and hardware in its infrastructure, which makes it easier for them to build a strong privacy wall around its AI service, said Alex Matrosov, CEO of security company Binarly.io.

“I really liked how they frame all the requirements and specifically use their own silicon. Once they control everything, they can guarantee the chain of trust from the silicon to the cloud,” Matrosov said.

Rival providers don’t have nearly the same level of control over their AI infrastructure. Unlike Apple, they can’t lock down security as queries pass through various hardware and software layers, Matrosov says. For example, OpenAI and Microsoft process queries through GPUs from Nvidia, which handles vulnerability discovery and patching.

"If Apple sets the standard, the effect will be 'why I should buy Android if I don’t care about the privacy.' The next step will be Google following up and trying to maybe implement or do the similar thing," Matrosov said.

**About the Author(s)**

Agam Shah has covered enterprise IT for more than a decade. Outside of machine learning, hardware, and chips, he's also interested in martial arts and Russia.

Source

DARKReading