New hands-on testing results show that most devices are unable to catch phishing emails, texts, or calls, leaving users at risk.

Source: Thomas Bethge via Alamy Stock Photo

Highlights:

*   Consumer survey shows that the most common security issues are phishing attacks, such as text or emails seeking personal information, as well as malware and physical theft. 
    

*   Hands-on device testing shows that Samsung S24 offers the best anti-phishing protection, while the Google Pixel 9 Pro leads in many other areas. 
    

*   The iPhone 16 Pro and other premium Android smartphones from Honor, Xiaomi, and OnePlus lack security features and protections. 
    

COMMENTARY  
New research from Omdia shows that the security capabilities on several of the latest consumer smartphones, including top devices from Apple, Google, and Samsung, fail to detect several types of common phishing attacks.

As part of the fourth-annual Omdia Mobile Device Security Scorecard, Omdia surveyed 1,572 consumers across 13 major countries in the Americas, Asia and Oceania, and Europe, in October 2024. This survey covered the demographics of smartphone users, their security concerns and attitudes, their perception of the most common security threats, and the key smartphone purchasing drivers.

Consumers reported that the most common security issue they encountered was phishing scams and attacks (texts, emails or calls which use false pretenses to try to get the target to give away valuable personal information), with 24% reporting to have experienced phishing. 

Omdia also asked consumers to rate how important various security features were, with anti-phishing having the largest net-importance rating. In fact, over the four years Omdia has conducted its Mobile Device Security Scorecard research, anti-phishing has been rising in importance. This is no surprise, as phishing not only becomes more common, but also as consumers become more familiar with the attacks and the potential for personal information theft or financial loss. 

The next most common security issue was malware and viruses. The third most common was physical theft, such as pickpocketing, mugging or snatching. 

**Mobile Device Security Testing Results**

For each of these security issues, Omdia tested leading premium smartphones to determine availability and effectiveness of security features and capabilities. Google's Pixel 9 Pro and Samsung's Galaxy S24 both scored highly, ahead of Apple's iPhone 16 Pro and other leading Android-based devices, including the OnePlus 12, Xiaomi 14, and Honor Magic 6 Pro.

Despite the importance consumers place on phishing prevention on mobile devices, the anti-phishing features failed to some degree on every device Omdia tested. No device caught all the attempted phishing texts, calls, and emails initiated as part of the testing.  

Several of the devices did catch simulated spam calls: All Android devices from Google, Xiaomi, OnePlus, Honor, and Samsung, which have voice call protection, flagged suspected spam calls before the recipient could answer the call. The iPhone 16 Pro, however, did not have the same protections and did not catch the simulated spam call. 

Text messages with malicious short links were sent from an unknown number and sender ID, but these were not successfully caught by the test devices. Simulated phishing emails were sent from both Gmail and Google's Mail Delivery subsystem, but no device caught the phishing emails from Gmail; the messages were only identified as spam when sent from Google's SMTP. 

Despite not all phishing texts and emails being caught, once malicious links were opened on the devices, those that use Google Safe Browsing protections successfully blocked the link from opening. A warning screen was raised, forcing the user to bypass it to proceed.

Yet not all Android devices performed similarly: Samsung Internet blocked most links except the more sophisticated custom URLs, while the Xiaomi Mii and OnePlus Internet browsers failed to warn the user even when loading known malicious links. 

In previous years' testing, smartphones have been able to detect and successfully block or warn against the attempted phish. However, the difference year-on-year showcases the ever-changing nature of threats.

**Lack of Mobile Security Impacts Consumer Trust**

The lack of effective security protections on mobile devices, particularly against the growing threat of phishing attacks, is eroding consumer trust.

When Omdia asked consumers if their trust following a security issue increased (due to how well the issue was handled) or decreased, 73% reported they had reduced trust in the smartphone brand and operating system developer. 

Despite some manufacturers' efforts to ensure the latest mobile device security protections are in place, Omdia notes that it is difficult to protect against 100% of phishing attempts. This highlights the severity of the issue and potential impact to consumers.

That said, Omdia asserts that smartphone manufacturers can (demonstrated by the more advanced phishing protection capabilities on the market) and should have more effective baseline phishing protection in place — such as voice call protection, and all Android devices making use of Google’s Safe Browsing protections. 

Omdia sees the value in the phishing protection features implemented by the leading smartphone vendors, and how this can help to protect consumers — at least in most instances, based on Omdia's latest round of testing.

However, these features need to be paired with awareness activity from manufacturers, as well as the wider industry, to help consumers be vigilant and prepared for the instance when a security threat evades a protection mechanism. Such awareness adds an important additional layer of protection against the rising number of scams targeting consumers through their mobile devices.

**About the Authors**

Principal Analyst, IoT Cybersecurity, Omdia

Hollie works as a Principal Analyst within the Omdia team, providing insight into the fascinating and fast-moving domain of IoT Cybersecurity.

Hollie has a range of experience in research. She began her career in the legal sector, writing and researching for expert witness reports on the labour market. She then moved into product testing, with a consumer protection focus. In this role she was responsible for managing comparative tests of various tech products, as well as regular testing and investigative work into the security of these products.

She has published various articles for Which?, the UK's largest consumer organisation and one of the largest subscription magazines, and Computing magazine.

Senior Analyst, Smartphones, Omdia

Aaron West provides expertise and analysis of the smartphone market, joining Omdia in 2022. His areas of reporting include the active smartphone installed base, eSIM development, mmWave 5G, sustainability, and the foldable smartphone market.

Aaron has a range of research and publishing experience. He graduated with a degree in theoretical physics before moving into consumer product testing, with a focus on sustainability and the environment.

In this role, he was responsible for research project management, including comparative testing of technology products and consumer surveys. He also reported on the energy efficiency and longevity of home appliances, as well as the product lifecycle and obsolescence of smartphones.

Phishing Attacks Are the Most Common Smartphone Security Issue for Consumers

TikTok is now unavailable in the United States—and getting around the ban isn’t as simple as using a VPN. Here’s what you need to know.

After an opaque and uncertain saga, TikTok went dark on millions of phones across the United States on Saturday evening around 10:30 pm EST. Google Play and Apple’s App Store both pulled the app late Saturday as well. If it was already installed prior to Saturday evening, the app is still there on your phone, but launching it only reveals a pop-up warning about the ban. As the deadline loomed, TikTok users had been bracing for the change and flooding other platforms, including the Chinese social app Xiaohongshu or “RedNote.” But if you’re not quite ready to give up the latest skin-care hacks, budgeting tips, and pet tortoise influencers, there are some options for circumventing the ban and continuing to use the platform.

“Sorry, TikTok isn’t available right now,” the app alert reads. “A law banning TikTok has been enacted in the U.S. Unfortunately, that means you can’t use TikTok for now. We are fortunate that President Trump has indicated that he will work with us on a solution to reinstate TikTok once he takes office. Please stay tuned!” Other ByteDance-owned apps, including CapCut and Lemon8, also disappeared from US app stores.

Such a ban has never existed in the US before, so the technical methods being employed to implement it are still evolving, and circumvention techniques may need to change as well. The law driving the situation, the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), doesn’t make it illegal to have TikTok on your phone. And, notably, it also doesn’t say that TikTok itself has to stop the app from working in the US.

Nonetheless, the company said in the days before the law took effect that it planned to make the app inaccessible to US users—a level of cooperation and accommodation that the outgoing Biden White House called a “stunt” on Saturday afternoon. Even if TikTok itself had obligations under the law, the Biden White House had signaled that it did not plan to enforce the ban before Trump took office on Monday.

Rather than putting the pressure on TikTok, PAFACA requires app stores and cloud hosting services to stop doing anything to “distribute, maintain or update” TikTok. That puts the pressure on Apple and Google to stop new users from downloading TikTok, as well as infrastructure providers like Oracle to keep new content or software updates from reaching the app’s users. Over time, TikTok would likely degrade and become unusable.

Officials in India banned TikTok in 2020, and the company also proactively blacked out the app in that case. When Indian users who already had the app installed tried to launch it, a pop-up appeared telling them that they couldn’t access the service.

Devashish Gosain, a network analysis researcher and assistant professor at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, says that in India, TikTok users must remove their Indian SIM card from their phone or use an international SIM card and then run a VPN in order to load content in the app.

“Even VPNs do not lead to circumvention” in India, Gosain told WIRED.

In the early hours of the US ban, it was unclear exactly how feasible it would be to get around the restrictions for US accounts. It seemed that TikTok had taken a more extreme approach, turning any US builds of the app dark—blacking out versions of the TikTok app software that had been made to be downloaded and used by US users. It also seemed that US-linked accounts were being blocked regardless of IP address or SIM country information.

Running a VPN alone was certainly not enough to circumvent the ban and get back on TikTok. But seemingly using a non-US TikTok account after removing a SIM (or on a device without a US SIM card/US phone number) worked when combined with a VPN. Similarly, using a VPN with a desktop browser or the Tor Browser was enough to get a non-US TikTok account to load in the US early on Sunday morning, though TikTok’s desktop version has always been much more limited than its mobile app.

“TikTok inspects the source IP of the network packets—if the source IP belongs to India, it drops the packets,” Gosain explains, of the restrictions in India. “Also, the TikTok app fetches the country information embedded in the SIM card, and if the country code is ‘IN,’ it filters the network connection. When we remove the SIM card, the TikTok app fails to identify Indian users from the SIM card, and when we use VPNs, the IP address changes, and it no longer belongs to the Indian IP range. Thus, TikTok again fails to identify that the user is accessing from India. This is how we bypass the filtering.”

Virtual private networks, or VPNs, work by passing your internet traffic through servers that are physically maintained in locations around the world, so you can select an IP address that is tied to a different location than where you physically are. For example, American TikTok users can use VPNs to make it look like they are accessing the internet from outside the US. VPNs also stop your internet service provider (ISPs) from seeing your browsing data, adding an extra potential layer of privacy. When you’re using a VPN, your ISP will simply see connections to the VPN instead of having access to the detailed list of all the websites you’re visiting.

As a result of these capabilities, VPNs are frequently used in attempts to get around digital geolocation restrictions, like those on Netflix or other streaming platforms. They’re also an important, and familiar, tool for circumventing internet censorship programs for people living under authoritarian regimes like those in Russia, China, and Iran.

Using a VPN comes with caveats, though. Some commercial VPNs log people’s browsing history, which essentially just shifts data collection from ISPs to VPN makers. This means that the data isn’t more protected, and that law enforcement could request it from a VPN provider in the same way that they make requests to ISPs. As a result, picking a free VPN is generally not a good idea—with some even selling access to your home internet connections. But some VPNs publish no-logging policies and offer third-party audits and other transparency features in an attempt to show their compliance.

For now, it seems that TikTok’s efforts to block US users are extremely draconian, and even a non-US SIM card or no SIM card plus a VPN may not be a workable path to getting back on the app with a US TikTok account. But the restrictions may only be temporary anyway. In practice, there seems to be little appetite for a permanent ban in the US. And, in spite of originating the idea, President Trump has said in recent days that he doesn’t want the app to be banned.

“My decision on TikTok will be made in the not too distant future, but I must have time to review the situation,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on Friday. “Stay tuned!”

How to Get Around the US TikTok Ban

The stolen firewall data is thorough but more than 2 years old now, meaning that most organizations following even basic security practices face minimal risk, hopefully.

Source: JHVEPhoto via Alamy Stock Photo

Dated configuration data and virtual private network (VPN) credentials for 15,474 Fortinet devices have been posted for free to the Dark Web.

On Jan. 14, Fortinet disclosed a severe authentication bypass vulnerability in its FortiOS operating system and FortiProxy Web gateway, CVE-2024-55591. For a model of what the aftermath of such a vulnerability could look like, one need only look to a parallel bug from October 2022 that's still making waves today.

Back then, Fortinet published an urgent security warning regarding CVE-2022-40684, an equivalent authentication bypass vulnerability affecting FortiOS, FortiProxy, and the autological FortiSwitchManager. Earning a "critical" 9.8 rating in the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS), it allowed any unauthenticated attacker to perform administrative operations on vulnerable devices via specially crafted HTTP requests. In the wake of that disclosure, security researchers developed a proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit, a template for scanning for vulnerable devices, and watched as exploitation attempts climbed and climbed.

On the same day CVE-2024-55591 was disclosed this week, a threat actor with the nom de guerre "Belsen Group" released data belonging to more than 15,000 Fortinet devices. In a blog post, the CloudSEK researchers who spotted it assessed that the data had been stolen thanks to CVE-2022-40684, likely when that bug was still a zero-day. Now, they wrote, "Once they exhausted its use for themselves (either by selling or using the access), the threat actor(s) decided to leak it in 2025."

Related:Extension Poisoning Campaign Highlights Gaps in Browser Security

**Possible Clues to Belsen Group's Origins**

"2025 will be a fortunate year for the world," the Belsen Group wrote in its post to the cybercrime site BreachForums (while conveniently omitting that its data had been gathered more than two years ago). The 1.6GB file it dumped on its onion website is accessible free of charge, and organized neatly in folders first by country, then by IP address and firewall port number.

Affected devices appear to be spread across every continent, with the highest concentration in Belgium, Poland, the US, and the UK, each with more than 20 victims.

On the flip side, security researcher Kevin Beaumont (aka GossiTheDog) noted in a blog post that every country in which Fortinet has a presence is represented in the data, except one: Iran, despite the fact that Shodan shows nearly 2,000 reachable Fortinet devices in that country today. Furthermore, there is just one affected device in the entirety of Russia, and technically it's in Ukraine's annexed Crimea region.

Related:Trend Micro and Intel Innovate to Weed Out Covert Threats

These points of data may be unimportant, or they may hold clues for attributing the Belsen Group. It appears to have popped up this month, though CloudSEK concluded "with high confidence" that it has been around for at least three years now, and that "They were likely part of a threat group that exploited a zero day in 2022, although direct affiliations have not been established yet."

**What's the Cyber-Risk?**

The leaked listings contain two types of folders. The first, "config.conf," contains affected device configurations: IP addresses, usernames and passwords, device management certificates, and all of the affected organization's firewall rules. This data was stolen via CVE-2022-40684. In the other folder, "vpn-password.txt," are SSL-VPN credentials. According to Fortinet, these credentials were sourced from devices via an even older path traversal vulnerability, CVE-2018-13379.

Though the data is all rather aged by now, Beaumont wrote, "Having a full device config including all firewall rules is … a lot of information." CloudSEK, too, cited the risk that leaked firewall configurations can reveal information about organizations' internal network structures that may still apply today.

Related:Zivver Report Reveals Critical Challenges in Email Security for 2025

Organizations also often don't cycle out usernames and passwords, allowing old ones to continue to cause problems. In examining a device included in the dump, Beaumont reported that the old authentications matched those still in use.

Fortinet, for its part, tried to quell concerns in a security analysis published on Jan. 16. "If your organization has consistently adhered to routine best practices in regularly refreshing security credentials and taken the recommended actions in the preceding years, the risk of the organization’s current config or credential detail in the threat actor's disclosure is small," it explained.

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

15K Fortinet Device Configs Leaked to the Dark Web

A highly targeted cyber-intelligence campaign adds fuel to the increasingly complex relationship between the two former Soviet states.

Source: Daniren via Alamy Stock Photo

A suspected Russia-nexus threat actor has been executing convincing spear phishing attacks against diplomatic entities in Kazakhstan.

UAC-0063, active since at least 2021, was first documented by Ukraine's Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-UA) in 2023. With medium confidence, CERT-UA tied it to APT28 (aka Fancy Bear, Forest Blizzard, Strontium, Sofacy), from the General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) Military Unit 26165. APT28 is best known for its high-profile attacks against Western governments: the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack of 2016, campaigns against parliamentary bodies in Germany, Norway, and the Netherlands, and much more.

UAC-0063, specifically, has used cyber operations to collect intelligence from government entities, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), academic institutions, and energy and defense organizations in Eastern Europe — most notably Ukraine — as well as Central Asia, including Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and other countries in the vicinity, including Israel and India.

Its latest ongoing campaign, which, in a blog post, researchers from Sekoia date back to at least 2022, may fold into a broader effort by Vladimir Putin's government to gain strategic insights into, and advantage over, a former Soviet state that has sought to broaden its diplomatic horizons in recent years.

**Phishing Kazakh Diplomats**

On Oct. 16, 2024 — one month after it'd been deployed in the wild — researchers spotted a diplomatic document uploaded to VirusTotal. It appeared to be a legitimate draft of a joint declaration between the chancellor of Germany and heads of Central Asian countries.

"The first step, when you open this document, is that it asks you to enable macros," recalls Amaury Garçon, cyber threat intelligence (CTI) analyst at Sekoia Threat Detection & Research (TDR), adding that the document was obscured by "shapes" at first sight. "Some phishing documents look really ugly or have a bad shape \[at first\] — they prompt the user to enable macros, because if you don't enable macros you can't write text in the document, can't move images, etc.," he notes.

Clicking "enable" would trigger various malicious, unseen commands on a target device. While the user was made privy to the full, unadulterated lure document, in the background their security settings would be downgraded so as to remove the need for future "enable macros" prompts. Next a second, blank document was created and opened by a hidden instance of Microsoft Word. The Visual Basic (VB) code associated with this hidden document — now enabled by default, of course — dropped and executed a malicious HTML application (HTA) containing a backdoor named "HatVibe."

The purpose of HatVibe is to receive and execute code from a remote server. Though Sekoia couldn't identify the payloads associated with this phishing campaign, CERT-UA has previously observed HatVibe downloading and executing a more complex Python backdoor named "CherrySpy."

**What This Means for Kazakhstan and Russia**

Six weeks after researchers spotted the first VirusTotal upload associated with this campaign, on Nov. 27, Putin went on a two-day state visit to the country he deemed Russia's "true ally," Kazakhstan. He and Kazakhstan's president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, used the opportunity afforded by the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) summit to discuss various areas for economic partnership — particularly around the energy sector — and signed agreements over energy, education, and transportation.

"Central Asia is a real point of interest for Russian influence," Maxime Arquillière, senior CTI analyst at Sekoia TDR explains. "We know that Kazakhstan is a close ally, but since the beginning of the Ukraine war, Kazakhstan has distanced itself a little bit from Russia, trying to develop new connections with both Western states and also China."

Kazakhstan's centrality in the Asian continent positions it nicely as a trade bridge between China and Europe, particularly while Ukraine and Russia are consumed by war. And as Sekoia notes in its blog, the country's gradually broadening geopolitical ties are evident in recent agreements with Mongolia and Afghanistan's new Taliban government, and, most notably, its balanced position on the war in Ukraine — supporting Ukraine's right to territorial integrity without outright condemning Russia's invasion.

This latest cyber campaign, then, fits neatly into Russia's broader initiatives with regard to its Central Asian neighbor. Sekoia identified 11 lure documents in all, each one legitimate and likely having originated with Kazakhstan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, pertaining to diplomatic business between Kazakhstan and potential partner nations.

Exactly how the threat actor obtained these documents is not known. They include, for example:

*   Letters from Kazakhstan's embassies in Afghanistan and Belgium, regarding diplomatic and economic developments.
    
*   A draft of a joint statement between Germany and Central Asian states, following a Sept. 16, 2024, summit in Astana.
    
*   Administrative reports and briefings on the Kazakh president's visits to Mongolia and New York.
    

"It's really coherent with the \[need for\] Russian intelligence to conduct this kind of cyber espionage, to know about the strategic interests between Kazakhstan and European states," Arquillière says.

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

Russian APT Phishes Kazakh Gov't for Strategic Intel

Residents across the United States are being inundated with text messages purporting to come from toll road operators like E-ZPass, warning that recipients face fines if a delinquent toll fee remains unpaid. Researchers say the surge in SMS spam coincides with new features added to a popular commercial phishing kit sold in China that makes it simple to set up convincing lures spoofing toll road operators in multiple U.S. states.

Residents across the United States are being inundated with text messages purporting to come from toll road operators like **E-ZPass**, warning that recipients face fines if a delinquent toll fee remains unpaid. Researchers say the surge in SMS spam coincides with new features added to a popular commercial phishing kit sold in China that makes it simple to set up convincing lures spoofing toll road operators in multiple U.S. states.

Last week, the **Massachusetts Department of Transportation** (MassDOT) warned residents to be on the lookout for a new SMS phishing or “smishing” scam targeting users of **EZDriveMA**, MassDOT’s all electronic tolling program. Those who fall for the scam are asked to provide payment card data, and eventually will be asked to supply a one-time password sent via SMS or a mobile authentication app.

Reports of similar SMS phishing attacks against customers of other U.S. state-run toll facilities surfaced around the same time as the MassDOT alert. People in Florida reported receiving SMS phishing that spoofed **Sunpass**, Florida’s prepaid toll program.

This phishing module for spoofing MassDOT’s EZDrive toll system was offered on Jan. 10, 2025 by a China-based SMS phishing service called “Lighthouse.”

In Texas, residents said they received text messages about unpaid tolls with the **North Texas Toll Authority**. Similar reports came from readers in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, and Washington. This is by no means a comprehensive list.

A new module from the Lighthouse SMS phishing kit released Jan. 14 targets customers of the North Texas Toll Authority (NTTA).

In each case, the emergence of these SMS phishing attacks coincided with the release of new phishing kit capabilities that closely mimic these toll operator websites as they appear on mobile devices. Notably, none of the phishing pages will even load unless the website detects that the visitor is coming from a mobile device.

**Ford Merrill** works in security research at SecAlliance, a CSIS Security Group company. Merrill said the volume of SMS phishing attacks spoofing toll road operators skyrocketed after the New Year, when at least one Chinese cybercriminal group known for selling sophisticated SMS phishing kits began offering new phishing pages designed to spoof toll operators in various U.S. states.

According to Merrill, multiple China-based cybercriminals are selling distinct SMS-based phishing kits that each have hundreds or thousands of customers. The ultimate goal of these kits, he said, is to phish enough information from victims that their payment cards can be added to mobile wallets and used to buy goods at physical stores, online, or to launder money through shell companies.

A component of the Chinese SMS phishing kit Lighthouse made to target customers of The Toll Roads, which refers to several state routes through Orange County, Calif.

Merrill said the different purveyors of these SMS phishing tools traditionally have impersonated shipping companies, customs authorities, and even governments with tax refund lures and visa or immigration renewal scams targeting people who may be living abroad or new to a country.

“What we’re seeing with these tolls scams is just a continuation of the Chinese smishing groups rotating from package redelivery schemes to toll road scams,” Merrill said. “Every one of us by now is sick and tired of receiving these package smishing attacks, so now it’s a new twist on an existing scam.”

In October 2023, KrebsOnSecurity wrote about a massive uptick in SMS phishing scams targeting **U.S. Postal Service** customers. That story revealed the surge was tied to innovations introduced by “**Chenlun**,” a mainland China-based proprietor of a popular phishing kit and service. At the time, Chenlun had just introduced new phishing pages made to impersonate postal services in the United States and at least a dozen other countries.

SMS phishing kits are hardly new, but Merrill said Chinese smishing groups recently have introduced innovations in deliverability, by more seamlessly integrating their spam messages with Apple’s **iMessage** technology, and with RCS, the equivalent “rich text” messaging capability built into **Android** devices.

“While traditional smishing kits relied heavily on SMS for delivery, nowadays the actors make heavy use of iMessage and RCS because telecom operators can’t filter them and they likely have a higher success rate with these delivery channels,” he said.

It remains unclear how the phishers have selected their targets, or from where their data may be sourced. A notice from MassDOT cautions that “the targeted phone numbers seem to be chosen at random and are not uniquely associated with an account or usage of toll roads.”

Indeed, one reader shared on Mastodon yesterday that they’d received one of these SMS phishing attacks spoofing a local toll operator, when they didn’t even own a vehicle.

Targeted or not, these phishing websites are dangerous because they are operated dynamically in real-time by criminals. If you receive one of these messages, just ignore it or delete it, but please do not visit the phishing site. The FBI asks that before you bin the missives, consider filing a complaint with the agency’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), including the phone number where the text originated, and the website listed within the text.

Chinese Innovations Spawn Wave of Toll Phishing Via SMS

Seven system recovery programs contained what amounted to a backdoor for injecting any untrusted file into the system startup process.

Source: Ognyan Yosifov via Alamy Stock Photo

A vulnerability in trusted system recovery programs could allow privileged attackers to inject malware directly into the system startup process in Unified Extensible Firmware Interface (UEFI) devices.

Seven real-time recovery products — Howyar SysReturn, Greenware GreenGuard, Radix SmartRecovery, Sanfong EZ-back System, WASAY eRecoveryRX, CES NeoImpact, and SignalComputer HDD King — all make use of "reloader.efi," the Microsoft-signed Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) file at issue.

The problem, ESET explains in a new report, is that reloader.efi uses a custom loader that enables the application to load even unsigned binaries during the boot process. In essence, it's a backdoor for sneaking any kind of file into a system's startup, past UEFI Secure Boot. The issue has been assigned CVE-2024-7344, and earned a "medium" 6.5 Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) rating, as it requires administrator privileges to exploit.

**Backdoor to the UEFI Boot Process**

The standard way to load, prepare, and execute UEFI images in system memory is with the autological LoadImage and StartImage functions. The Microsoft-approved "reloader" application goes its own way, using a custom mechanism that allows it to load any binary, trusted or otherwise, at startup.

"Maybe it's a lack of secure coding awareness," Martin Smolár, malware researcher at ESET, guesses of the developers' motives in implementing the custom loader. "Or maybe it's because they found it convenient to create such a functionality. Because when a developer makes a change \[to a signed program\] they need to send it to Microsoft to get it re-signed. This means that they don't need to every time they create a new update or something like that."

Reloader.efi loads arbitrary binaries from a specific, encrypted file, "cloak.dat." When ESET decrypted cloak.dat, it found that it contained an unsigned executable primarily designed for classroom environments. "Its core function is to provide real-time system recovery, ensuring that students from different classes can work in a teacher-predefined computer environment within shared computer labs," Smolár says, though he adds that the same component might be used in other settings, like public Internet cafes. The larger point is that the unsigned executable is run during the startup process, completely bypassing UEFI Secure Boot checks.

This odd classroom recovery software is perfectly honest, but an attacker could easily swap it out for something worse. If they could just get a hold of administrator privileges on a targeted machine, an attacker could access the EFI system partition (ESP) and substitute their own malicious file in place of cloak.dat. Then all they'd need is a quick system reboot to drop any malicious file they wished into the startup process.

**Why UEFI Bugs Are So Bad**

UEFI is a kind of sacred space — a bridge between firmware and operating system, allowing a machine to boot up in the first place.

Any malware that invades this space will earn a dogged persistence through reboots, by reserving its own spot in the startup process. Security programs have a harder time detecting malware at such a low level of the system. Even more importantly, by loading first, UEFI malware will simply have a head start over those security checks that it aims to avoid. Malware authors take advantage of this order of operations by designing UEFI bootkits that can hook into security protocols, and undermine critical security mechanisms like UEFI Secure Boot or HVCI (Hypervisor-Protected Code Integrity), Windows' technology for blocking unsigned code in the kernel.

To ensure that none of this can happen, the UEFI Boot Manager verifies every boot application binary against two lists: "db," which includes all signed and trusted programs, and "dbx," including all forbidden programs. But when a vulnerable binary is signed by Microsoft, the matter is moot.

Microsoft maintains a list of requirements for signing UEFI binaries, but the process is a bit obscure, Smolár says. "I don't know if it involves only running through this list of requirements, or if there are some other activities involved, like manual binary reviews where they look for not necessarily malicious, but insecure behavior," he says.

Microsoft has previously alluded to UEFI binaries being "approved through manual review." In response to an inquiry from Dark Reading, a Microsoft spokesperson provided the following clarification:

"Our process is designed to meet the evolving standard for analysis of third-party binary code, while ensuring effective scalability across our vast ecosystem. It begins with vetting and analysis with the partner, understanding the components they are requesting to be signed, and aspects of the design and functionality that may require additional security measures. Submissions are run through automated security analysis and are manually reviewed through a rigorous process. As a result, we may require additional security reviews, investigations with the submitting partner, or other mitigations. We remain committed to evolving our vetting process to better the security of our ecosystem as we operate within this ever-changing threat landscape."

ESET first discovered CVE-2024-7344 in July 2024. Since then, all vulnerable applications have been fixed, and Microsoft revoked the old, vulnerable binaries in its Jan. 14, 2025, Patch Tuesday update.

**About the Author**

Nate Nelson is a writer based in New York City. He formerly worked as a reporter at Threatpost, and wrote "Malicious Life," an award-winning Top 20 tech podcast on Apple and Spotify. Outside of Dark Reading, he also co-hosts "The Industrial Security Podcast."

Trusted Apps Sneak a Bug Into the UEFI Boot Process

It's an especially brazen form of malvertising, researchers say, striking at the heart of Google's business; the tech giant says it's aware of the issue and is working quickly to address the problem.

Source: Primakov via Shutterstock

In an especially brazen tactic, multiple threat actors are impersonating Google Ads login pages to trick advertisers into handing over their account credentials.

The attackers — from regions as geographically dispersed as South America, Asia, and Eastern Europe — are then using the hijacked accounts in real-time to buy and distribute malicious advertisements and malware via Google Ads.

**'Most Egregious' Malvertising Campaign Ever**

The scammers appear to be succeeding in many cases because their ads are allowed to show an ads.google.com URL. This makes them virtually indistinguishable from legitimate Google ads, according to researchers at Malwarebytes, who spotted the malicious activity recently.

"This is the most egregious malvertising operation we have ever tracked, getting to the core of Google's business and likely affecting thousands of their customers worldwide," Malwarebytes researcher Jerome Segura wrote in a blog post this week. "We have been reporting new incidents around the clock and yet keep identifying new ones, even at the time of publication."

Google Ads is an advertising platform that enables businesses and individuals to display targeted ads across Google's search results, websites, mobile apps, and other online properties, based on user search behavior and interests. Often, the top search results are sponsored, meaning someone paid for that high visibility. For context, Google Search generated some $175 billion in ad revenue in 2023.

Related:CISA: Second BeyondTrust Vulnerability Added to KEV Catalog

According to Segura, there has been a recent flood of fake sponsored ads for Google Ads directed at businesses and individuals looking to advertise on Google Search or wanting to sign in to their Google Ads accounts. The ads appear to be from Google and purport to either help people sign up for a Google Ads account or to sign in to an existing account. Users clicking on these ads are directed to a fake Google Ads home page from which they are directed to external sites designed specifically to steal usernames and passwords to the advertiser's Google accounts.

The attackers are using Google's free website creation platform, Google Sites, to host the lure pages. It is a tactic that Segura says allows them to trivially bypass a Google policy that allows advertisers to include a URL in their ads only if the URL matches the domain name of the advertiser. "Looking back at the ad and the Google Sites page, we see that \[the\] malicious \[ads do\] not strictly violate the rule since sites.google.com uses the same root domains as ads.google.com," Segura said. "In other words, it is allowed to show this URL in the ad, therefore making it indistinguishable from the same ad put out by Google LLC."

Related:OWASP's New LLM Top 10 Shows Emerging AI Threats

**Google Is Actively Investigating Cyberattacks**

In an emailed comment, a Google spokesman said the company is currently "actively investigating" the issue and working on a quick fix for the problem. "We expressly prohibit ads that aim to deceive people in order to steal their information or scam them," the spokesperson said.

As context, the spokesperson pointed to the growing sophistication and scale of malvertising campaigns and noted instances where threat actors have created thousands of malicious accounts simultaneously to distribute malicious ads on Google properties. Often these actors are using techniques such as text manipulation to get around automation detection mechanisms. In other instances, they use cloaking tactics to show Google reviewers and systems different ads from the ones that users end up seeing. "To provide a sense of the scale of our enforcement efforts in 2023, we removed over 3.4 billion ads, restricted over 5.7 billion ads, and suspended over 5.6 million advertiser accounts," the spokesman said.

**Impersonating Google Ads: Simple & Effective Social Engineering**

Related:Apple Bug Allows Root Protections Bypass Without Physical Access

In comments to Dark Reading, Segura says the most notable part of the new malicious activity is the impersonation of the Google Ads brand by combining Google Sites URLs with the ads. "It's a simple and yet effective trick that makes those ads incredibly hard to differentiate from the real ones," Segura says. Complicating matters is the fact that bad actors are often using compromised Google Ads accounts to place even more fake ads in Google Search, making the activity challenging to stop.

Google should be making it harder for bad actors to pull off such impersonation schemes, he says. "The 'how' is more complicated, as it involves reviewing business practices and … existing security policies."

Segura says Malwarebytes is tracking and reporting each malvertising incident it comes across via a live tracker that the Google Ads team can access. "This has been a helpful tool for us, not only to make the reporting process easier but also to keep a historical record," he notes. Google's response has consisted of taking action on ads that Malwarebytes report. "\[But\] the threat actors are able to get right back as if the campaign never stopped. We are talking about dozens of accounts that get burned but yet there are enough to keep this going indefinitely."

**About the Author**

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.

Attackers Hijack Google Advertiser Accounts to Spread Malware

CVE-2024-44243, a critical macOS vulnerability discovered recently by Microsoft, can allow attackers to bypass Apple’s System Integrity Protection…

CVE-2024-44243, a critical macOS vulnerability discovered recently by Microsoft, can allow attackers to bypass Apple’s System Integrity Protection (SIP). Learn how this vulnerability can be exploited and how to protect your devices from this threat.

A recently discovered macOS vulnerability tracked as CVE-2024-44243, has raised alarms for jeopardizing the security of Apple devices. This vulnerability, uncovered by Microsoft Threat Intelligence, allows attackers to circumvent Apple’s robust System Integrity Protection (SIP) mechanism.

****How Does It Work?****

The flaw is found in the Storage Kit daemon, allowing local attackers with root privileges to exploit low-complexity attacks. According to Microsoft’s technical blog, shared with Hackread.com, CVE-2024-44243 exploits a weakness in the macOS storage management system. By leveraging the “storagekitd” daemon, attackers can potentially load third-party kernel extensions, bypassing the strict controls imposed by SIP.  

****What are the Implications?****

System Integrity Protection (SIP) is a crucial cybersecurity measure for macOS systems, protecting against malware and attackers. Bypassing it can significantly compromise the system’s security, Microsoft noted. Such as, attackers can install malicious software at the kernel level, and gain deep access to the system and data.

Moreover, malicious software can establish a persistent presence on the system, making it difficult to remove and potentially enabling future attacks. Also, attackers could bypass TCC (Transparency, Consent, and Control), Apple’s privacy framework, allowing unauthorized access to user data and sensitive information.  The vulnerability creates a wider attack surface, enabling attackers to exploit other vulnerabilities and escalate their privileges.

****Mitigating the Threat****

Apple has released security updates to address CVE-2024-44243. All macOS users must update their systems to the latest version to patch this vulnerability.

Microsoft’s responsible disclosure to Apple and their joint efforts to address this threat highlights the importance of shared knowledge and coordinated action in safeguarding user security. 

While we focus on patching vulnerabilities to protect ourselves from cyberattacks, it is important to remember that social engineering scams remain a prevalent threat. 

A recent campaign discovered by Group-IB targeted Apple iOS and Android users with fake trading apps. These apps were designed to steal from unsuspecting cryptocurrency investors. Therefore, staying informed about the latest threats, practicing safe online habits, and keeping software updated, are essential to minimize cybersecurity risks.

Jason Soroko, Senior Fellow at Sectigo, a Scottsdale, Arizona-based provider of comprehensive certificate lifecycle management (CLM) commented on this stating, _“_This exposes the entire operating system to deeper compromise without needing physical access, threatening sensitive data and system controls._“_ 

“Security teams should ensure macOS systems are patched with the latest updates, closely monitor for unusual disk management or privileged process behaviour, and implement endpoint detection tools that watch for unsigned kernel extensions,“ Jason explained. _“_Regular integrity checks, principle-of-least-privilege policies, and strict compliance with Apple’s security guidelines further reduce exposure to this critical threat._“_

Microsoft Discovers macOS Flaw CVE-2024-44243, Bypassing SIP

Emergent macOS vulnerability lets adversaries circumvent Apple's System Integrity Protection (SIP) by loading third-party kernels.

Source: Andrey Kryuchkov via Alamy Stock Photo

Cyber defenders are encouraged to ensure systems have been updated with the latest macOS patch, which includes a fix for a vulnerability that exposed the entire operating system to further compromise.

The bug, tracked under CVE-2024-44243, was patched in the Dec. 11 Apple security update, according to analysis from Microsoft Threat Intelligence that was released this week. The vulnerability could allow adversaries to bypass the macOS System Integrity Protection (SIP) restrictions, which limit operations that are detrimental to a device's security. Without SIP controls in place, a threat actor could install rootkits, drop persistent malware, and more, according to the Microsoft report. More disturbing, threat actors don't need physical access to pull off the cyberattack.

"This exposes the entire operating system to deeper compromise without needing physical access, threatening sensitive data and system controls," said Jason Soroko, senior fellow at Sectigo, in a statement.

**Detecting Other Apple Bug Exploits**

In addition to updating vulnerable macOS systems, experts suggest cyber defenders be on the lookout for suspicious behavior.

"Teams should proactively monitor processes with special entitlements, as these can be exploited to bypass SIP," said Mayuresh Dani, manager, security research, at Qualys, in a statement provided in reaction to the flaw. "The behavior of these processes in the environments should also be maintained."

Soroko also advised teams to monitor for unusual disk management activity, in addition to anomalous privileged user behavior, and to implement endpoint detection tools and controls for unsigned kernel extensions. Dani agreed that third-party kernel extensions should be managed with care to prevent these sorts of attacks.

Third-party kernel extensions "should be enabled only when absolutely necessary and with strict monitoring guidelines," Dani added.

This is just one of the recent cyberattacks that has found its way around Apple's defenses.

The macOS infostealer malware "Banshee" was recently observed skirting Apple's antivirus protections, courtesy of a string encryption algorithm stolen from Apple. It's up to cyber teams to have adequate protections in place to lock down their own environments.

"Regular integrity checks, principle-of-least-privilege policies, and strict compliance with Apple's security guidelines further reduce exposure to this critical threat," Soroko added.

This and other similar flaws are a demonstration of a lack of security between root users and the operating system, Lionel Litty, chief security architect at Menlo Security, explained in a statement. It's also an example of the limitations of endpoint-based solutions, he added.

"While endpoint-based security solutions are attractive from a cost and usability perspective compared to off-device solutions such as \[virtual desktop infrastructure\], the constant stream of OS vulnerabilities that allow a local attacker to bypass OS integrity protection mechanisms shows that this is a risky gamble," Litty said. "If your security controls involve installing an application on an unmanaged device and relying on this application protecting itself, you need to closely monitor this type of issue."

**About the Author**

Dark Reading

Becky Bracken is a veteran multimedia journalist covering cybersecurity for Dark Reading.

Apple Bug Allows Root Protections Bypass Without Physical Access

Microsoft has shed light on a now-patched security flaw impacting Apple macOS that, if successfully exploited, could have allowed an attacker running as "root" to bypass the operating system's System Integrity Protection (SIP) and install malicious kernel drivers by loading third-party kernel extensions.
The vulnerability in question is CVE-2024-44243 (CVSS score: 5.5), a medium-severity bug

Tag

#apple