Quote for the day:
"If you want teams to succeed, set them up for success—don’t just demand it." -- Gordon Tredgold
Hackers turn bossware against the bosses
Huntress discovered two incidents using this tactic, one late in January and
one early this month. Shared infrastructure, overlapping indicators of
compromise, and consistent tradecraft across both cases make Huntress strongly
believe a single threat actor or group was behind this activity. ... CSOs must
ensure that these risks are properly catalogued and mitigated,” he said. “Any
actions performed by these agents must be monitored and, if possible,
restricted. The abuse of these systems is a special case of ‘living off the
land’ attacks. The attacker attempts to abuse valid existing software to
perform malicious actions. This abuse is often difficult to detect.” ...
Huntress analyst Pham said to defend against attacks combining Net Monitor for
Employees Professional and SimpleHelp, infosec pros should inventory all
applications so unapproved installations can be detected. Legitimate apps
should be protected with robust identity and access management solutions,
including multi-factor authentication. Net Monitor for Employees should only
be installed on endpoints that don’t have full access privileges to sensitive
data or critical servers, she added, because it has the ability to run
commands and control systems. She also noted that Huntress sees a lot of rogue
remote management tools on its customers’ IT networks, many of which have been
installed by unwitting employees clicking on phishing emails. This points to
the importance of security awareness training, she said. Why secure OT protocols still struggle to catch on
“Simply having ‘secure’ protocol options is not enough if those options remain
too costly, complex, or fragile for operators to adopt at scale,” Saunders
said. “We need protections that work within real-world constraints, because if
security is too complex or disruptive, it simply won’t be implemented.” ...
Security features that require complex workflows, extra licensing, or new
infrastructure often lose out to simpler compensating controls. Operators
interviewed said they want the benefits of authentication and integrity
checks, particularly message signing, since it prevents spoofing and
unauthorized command execution. ... Researchers identified cost as a primary
barrier to adoption. Operators reported that upgrading a component to support
secure communications can cost as much as the original component, with
additional licensing fees in some cases. Costs also include hardware upgrades
for cryptographic workloads, training staff, integrating certificate
management, and supporting compliance requirements. Operators frequently
compared secure protocol deployment costs with segmentation and continuous
monitoring tools, which they viewed as more predictable and easier to justify.
... CISA’s recommendations emphasize phased approaches and operational
realism. Owners and operators are advised to sign OT communications broadly,
apply encryption where needed for sensitive data such as passwords and key
exchanges, and prioritize secure communication on remote access paths and
firmware uploads.SaaS isn’t dead, the market is just becoming more hybrid
“It’s important to avoid overgeneralizing ‘SaaS,’” Odusote emphasized . “Dev
tools, cybersecurity, productivity platforms, and industry-specific systems
will not all move at the same pace. Buyers should avoid one-size-fits-all
assumptions about disruption.” For buyers, this shift signals a more
capability-driven, outcomes-focused procurement era. Instead of buying
discrete tools with fixed feature sets, they’ll increasingly be able to
evaluate and compare platforms that are able to orchestrate agents, adapt
workflows, and deliver business outcomes with minimal human intervention. ...
Buyers will likely have increased leverage in certain segments due to
competitive pressure among new and established providers, Odusote said. New
entrants often come with more flexible pricing, which obviously is an
attraction for those looking to control costs or prove ROI. At the same time,
traditional SaaS leaders are likely to retain strong positions in
mission-critical systems; they will defend pricing through bundled AI
enhancements, he said. So, in the short term, buyers can expect broader choice
and negotiation leverage. “Vendors can no longer show up with automatic annual
price increases without delivering clear incremental value,” Odusote pointed
out. “Buyers are scrutinizing AI add-ons and agent pricing far more
closely.”When algorithms turn against us: AI in the hands of cybercriminals
Cybercriminals are using AI to create sophisticated phishing emails. These
emails are able to adapt the tone, language, and reference to the person
receiving it based on the information that is publicly available about them. By
using AI to remove the red flag of poor grammar from phishing emails,
cybercriminals will be able to increase the success rate and speed with which
the stolen data is exploited. ... An important consideration in the arena of
cyber security (besides technical security) is the psychological manipulation of
users. Once visual and audio “cues” can no longer be trusted, there will be an
erosion of the digital trust pillar. The once-recognizable verification process
is now transforming into multi-layered authentication which expands the amount
of time it takes to verify a decision in a high-pressure environment. ... AI’s
misuse is a growing problem that has created a paradox. Innovation cannot stop
(nor should it), and AI is helping move healthcare, finance, government and
education forward. However, the rate at which AI has been adopted has surpassed
the creation of frameworks and/or regulations related to ethics or security. As
a result, cyber security needs to transition from a reactive to a predictive
stance. AI must be used to not only react to attacks, but also anticipate future
attacks.
Those 'Summarize With AI' Buttons May Be Lying to You
Put simply, when a user visits a rigged website and clicks a "Summarize With AI"
button on a blog post, they may unknowingly trigger a hidden instruction
embedded in the link. That instruction automatically inserts a specially crafted
request into the AI tool before the user even types anything. ... The threat is
not merely theoretical. According to Microsoft, over a 60-day period, it
observed 50 unique instances of prompt-based AI memory poisoning attempts for
promotional purposes. ... AI recommendation poisoning is a sort of drive-by
technique with one-click interaction, he notes. "The button will take the user —
after the click — to the AI domain relevant and specific for one of the AI
assistants targeted," Ganacharya says. To broaden the scope, an attacker could
simply generate multiple buttons that prompt users to "summarize" something
using the AI agent of their choice, he adds. ... Microsoft had some advice for
threat hunting teams. Organizations can detect if they have been affected by
hunting for links pointing to AI assistant domains and containing prompts with
certain keywords like "remember," "trusted source," "in future conversations,"
and "authoritative source." The company's advisory also listed several threat
hunting queries that enterprise security teams can use to detect AI
recommendation poisoning URLs in emails and Microsoft Teams Messages, and to
identify users who might have clicked on AI recommendation poisoning URLs.
EU Privacy Watchdogs Pan Digital Omnibus
The commission presented its so-called "Digital Omnibus" package of legal
changes in November, arguing that the bloc's tech rules needed streamlining. ...
Some of the tweaks were expected and have been broadly welcomed, such as doing
away with obtrusive cookie consent banners in many cases, and making it simpler
for companies to notify of data breaches in a way that satisfies the
requirements of multiple laws in one go. But digital rights and consumer
advocates are reacting furiously to an unexpected proposal for modifying the
General Data Protection Regulation. ... "Simplification is essential to cut red
tape and strengthen EU competitiveness - but not at the expense of fundamental
rights," said EDPB chair Anu Talus in the statement. "We strongly urge the
co-legislators not to adopt the proposed changes in the definition of personal
data, as they risk significantly weakening individual data protection." ...
Another notable element of the Digital Omnibus is the proposal to raise the
threshold for notifying all personal data breaches to supervisory
authorities. As the GDPR currently stands, organizations must notify a data
protection authority within 72 hours of becoming aware of the breach. If amended
as the commission proposes, the obligation would only apply to breaches that are
"likely to result in a high risk" to the affected people's rights - the same
threshold that applies to the duty to notify breaches to the affected data
subjects themselves - and the notification deadline would be extended to 96
hours.
The Art of the Comeback: Why Post-Incident Communication is a Secret Weapon
Although technical resolutions may address the immediate cause of an outage,
effective communication is essential in managing customer impact and shaping
public perception—often influencing stakeholders’ views more strongly than the
issue itself. Within fintech, a company's reputation is not built solely on
product features or interface design, but rather on the perceived security of
critical assets such as life savings, retirement funds, or business payrolls. In
this high-stakes environment, even brief outages or minor data breaches are
perceived by clients as threats to their financial security. ... While the
natural instinct during a crisis (like a cyber breach or operational failure) is
to remain silent to avoid liability, silence actually amplifies damage. In the
first 48 hours, what is said—or not said—often determines how a business is
remembered. Post-incident communication (PIC) is the bridge between panic and
peace of mind. Done poorly, it looks like corporate double-speak. Done well, it
demonstrates a level of maturity and transparency that your competitors might
lack. ... H2H communication acknowledges the user’s frustration rather than just
providing a technical error code. It recognizes the real-world impact on people,
not just systems. Admitting mistakes and showing sincere remorse, rather than
using defensive, legalistic language, makes a company more relatable and
trustworthy. Using natural, conversational language makes the communication feel
sincere rather than like an automated, cold response.
Why AI success hinges on knowledge infrastructure and operational discipline
Many organisations assume that if information exists, it is usable for GenAI, but enterprise content is often fragmented, inconsistently structured, poorly contextualised, and not governed for machine consumption. During pilots, this gap is less visible because datasets are curated, but scaling exposes the full complexity of enterprise knowledge. Conflicting versions, missing context, outdated material, and unclear ownership reduce performance and erode confidence, not because models are incapable, but because the knowledge they depend on is unreliable at scale. ... Human-in-the-loop processes struggle to keep pace with scale. Successful deployments treat HITL as a tiered operating structure with explicit thresholds, roles, and escalation paths. Pilot-style broad review collapses under volume; effective systems route only low-confidence or high-risk outputs for human intervention. ... Learning compounds over time as every intervention is captured and fed back into the system, reducing repeated manual review. Operationally, human-in-the-loop teams function within defined governance frameworks, with explicit thresholds, escalation paths, and direct integration into production workflows to ensure consistency at scale. In short, a production-grade human-in-the-loop model is not an extension of BPO but an operating capability combining domain expertise, governance, and system learning to support intelligent systems reliably.Why short-lived systems need stronger identity governance
Consider the lifecycle of a typical microservice. In its journey from a
developer’s laptop to production, it might generate a dozen distinct identities:
a GitHub token for the repository, a CI/CD service account for the build, a
registry credential to push the container, and multiple runtime roles to access
databases, queues and logging services. The problem is not just volume; it is
invisibility. When a developer leaves, HR triggers an offboarding process. Their
email is cut, their badge stops working. But what about the five service
accounts they hardcoded into a deployment script three years ago? ... In
reality, test environments are often where attackers go first. It is the path of
least resistance. We saw this play out in the Microsoft Midnight Blizzard
attack. The attackers did not burn a zero-day exploit to break down the front
door; they found a legacy test tenant that nobody was watching closely. ... Our
software supply chain is held together by thousands of API keys and secrets. If
we continue to rely on long-lived static credentials to glue our pipelines
together, we are building on sand. Every static key sitting in a repo—no matter
how private you think it is—is a ticking time bomb. It only takes one developer
to accidentally commit a .env file or one compromised S3 bucket to expose the
keys to the kingdom. ... Paradoxically, by trying to control everything with
heavy-handed gates, we end up with less visibility and less control. The goal of
modern identity governance shouldn’t be to say “no” more often; it should be to
make the secure path the fastest path.
.jpg?width=1280&auto=webp&quality=95&format=jpg&disable=upscale)
