Normal view

Weekly Update 487

18 January 2026 at 08:43
Weekly Update 487

I thought Scott would cop it first when he posted about what his solar system really cost him last year. "You're so gonna get that stupid AI-slop response from some people", I joked. But no, he got other stupid responses instead! And I got the AI-slop responses! Draw your own conclusions on those comments, but I find it fascinating that the one thing people would take away from a thoughtful blog post I spent many hours writing to explain how much work I put into privacy is that the illustration was computer-generated. That such feedback aligns with the political leanings of folks on Mastodon is also fascinating, and probably something I should have seen coming. But hey, there's nothing new about folks popping their heads up to make inane comments where none were needed, and I have a special blog post for just such occasions: If You Don't Want Guitar Lessons, Stop Following Me.

Weekly Update 487
Weekly Update 487
Weekly Update 487
Weekly Update 487

This Week in Scams: Fake Brand Messages and Account Takeovers

16 January 2026 at 13:00

This week in scams, social engineering sits at the center of several major headlines, from investment platform breaches to social media account takeovers and new warnings about AI-driven fraud.  

Every week, this roundup breaks down the scam and cybersecurity stories making news and explains how they actually work, so readers can better recognize risk and avoid being manipulated. 

Let’s get into it:  

Betterment Warns Customers of Breach 

The big picture:
Attackers accessed third-party systems used by Betterment, then used the information they stole to impersonate the company, contact customers, and promise scam crypto investment opportunities with too-good-to-be-true returns. 

What happened: 

  • Attackers used social engineering to compromise third-party tools Betterment uses for marketing and operations, as reported by TechCrunch 
  • With access to internal systems, they sent messages to customers that appeared legitimate. 
  • The messages promised to triple crypto holdings if recipients sent $10,000 to a wallet controlled by the attackers, a classic “send money to get more back” lure, later detailed by The Verge. 
  • Betterment says no account logins or passwords were compromised, but personal data like names, contact details, and dates of birth were exposed, enough to make the messages feel real. 

Red flags to watch for: 

  • Promises of guaranteed or multiplied crypto returns 
  • Requests to send money first to “unlock” a benefit 
  • Messages tied to a breach but asking for immediate action outside the app 
An image of Betterment's email to customers.
An image of Betterment’s email to customers

How the breach happened: 

Social engineering is a type of scam that targets people rather than software or security systems. Instead of hacking code, scammers focus on tricking someone into giving them access 

Attackers research how a company operates, which tools it uses, and who is likely to have permissions. They then impersonate a trusted source, such as a vendor, coworker, or automated system, and send a realistic message asking for a routine action.  

That action might be approving a login, resetting credentials, sharing a file, or clicking a link. Once the person complies, the scammer gains legitimate access and can move through systems using real permissions. Social engineering works because it exploits trust, familiarity, and urgency, making normal workplace behavior the pathway to a breach. 

Social Engineering Scams Fueled by AI On the Rise 

Big picture:
Fraud is increasingly driven by impersonation, automation, and trust abuse rather than technical hacking, according to new industry forecasts. 

What happened:
A new Future of Fraud Forecast from Experian warns that fraudsters are rapidly weaponizing AI and identity manipulation. The report highlights agentic AI systems committing fraud autonomously, deepfake job candidates passing live interviews, cloned websites overwhelming takedown efforts, and emotionally intelligent bots running scams at scale. 

The scope of the problem is already visible. Federal Trade Commission data shows consumers lost more than $12.5 billion to fraud in 2024, while nearly 60% of companies reported rising fraud losses between 2024 and 2025. Experian’s forecast suggests these losses will accelerate as fraud becomes harder to attribute, trace, and interrupt. 

Red flags to watch: 

  • Requests or actions initiated without clear human ownership 
  • Identity verification steps that feel automated or unusually frictionless 
  • Transactions triggered by AI systems with unclear accountability 

Phishing Scam Locks Users Out of X Accounts 

Big picture: Officials are warning of increasing phishing attacks that steal X users’ accounts and then use their profile to sell crypto. 

What happened: The Better Business Bureau issued a warning about phishing messages targeting users on X, particularly accounts with large followings. Victims receive direct messages that appear to come from colleagues or professional contacts, often asking them to click a link to support a contest, event, or opportunity. 

Once the link is clicked, victims are locked out of their accounts. The compromised accounts are then used to promote cryptocurrency and other products, while automatically sending the same phishing message to additional contacts. 

Red flags to watch: 

  • Unsolicited direct messages containing links 
  • Requests framed as favors, votes, or professional support 
  • Sudden loss of account access after clicking a link 

How this happened and what to learn:
The scam relies on account impersonation and lateral spread. Instead of reaching strangers, attackers move through existing trust networks, using one compromised account to reach the next.  

The takeaway is that familiarity does not equal legitimacy. Even messages from known contacts should be treated with caution when links or logins are involved. 

McAfee’s Safety Tips for This Week 

  • Verify inside official apps or sites. If you get a security email, don’t click any links. Instead, open the official app or type the website address yourself for more information. 
  • Stay alert to trending scams. Weight-loss drug fraud like Ozempic offers is already surging in the new year, and awareness is your first defense. 

McAfee will be back next week with another roundup of the scams making headlines and the practical steps you can take to stay safer online. 

The post This Week in Scams: Fake Brand Messages and Account Takeovers appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Weekly Update 486

16 January 2026 at 06:39
Weekly Update 486

I’m in Oslo! Flighty is telling me I’ve flown in or out of here 43 times since a visit in 2014 set me on a new path professionally and, many years later, personally. It’s special here, like a second home that just feels… right. This week, the business end of things is about the WhiteDate data breach. Seeking a partner along common racial lines isn’t unusual, but… well… WhiteDate is anything but usual. And, just for fun, see if you can pick the thing that garnered the most negative feedback about that blog post this week, I’ll feature the discussion in the next vid.

Weekly Update 486
Weekly Update 486
Weekly Update 486
Weekly Update 486

McAfee’s Scam Detector Earns Third Major Award Within Months of Launch

15 January 2026 at 18:45
McAfee Scam Detector

McAfee’s Scam Detector has been named a Winner of the 2026 BIG Innovation Awards, presented by the Business Intelligence Group, marking the third major industry award the product has earned since launching just months ago. 

The recognition underscores a growing consensus across independent judges: as scams become more sophisticated and AI-driven, consumers need protection that works automatically, explains risks clearly, and helps stop harm before it happens. 

Big Innovation Award 2026

What Is the BIG Innovation Award? 

The BIG Innovation Awards recognize products and organizations that deliver measurable innovation with real-world impact. The program focuses not only on technical advancement, but on how solutions improve everyday life for individuals and households. 

For consumer cybersecurity products like Scam Detector, that means being evaluated on: 

  • Real-world relevance 
  • Ease of use for non-experts 
  • Societal impact 
  • Demonstrated adoption and need 

The award highlights Scam Detector’s role in helping people stay safer online as scams grow more sophisticated, more personal, and increasingly powered by AI.  

Why Scam Detector Stands Out 

According to feedback from the BIG Innovation Awards judging panel, Scam Detector was recognized for: 

Strong real-world relevance: Scams are now an everyday risk, not a niche technical issue 

Clear consumer value: Protection that runs automatically in the background without requiring expert knowledge

AI used responsibly: Applying advanced models to reduce harm, not increase it

Early impact: Rapid adoption, with more than one million users in its first months 

Judges also noted the importance of Scam Detector’s educational alerts, which don’t just block threats, but explain why something is risky, helping people build confidence over time. 

Using AI to Fight AI-Driven Scams 

Scam Detector is McAfee’s AI-powered protection designed to detect scams across text, email, and video, block dangerous links, and identify deepfakes, before harm occurs. 

As scammers increasingly use generative AI to impersonate people, brands, and institutions, protection needs to operate at the same speed and scale. Scam Detector is built to do exactly that, quietly working in the background while users go about their day. 

Scam Detector is included with all core McAfee plans and is available across mobile, PC, and web. 

In Good Company: Consumer Innovation Across Industries 

McAfee was recognized alongside other consumer-facing innovators whose products directly serve individuals and households. Fellow 2026 BIG Innovation Award winners include: 

Capital One Auto – Chat Concierge: A consumer-facing service designed to help car buyers and owners navigate financing and ownership decisions. 

Starkey – Omega AI Hearing Aid: A wearable hearing aid that integrates AI assistance, health monitoring, and real-time translation. 

Phonak – Virto R Infinio: Custom-fit hearing aids designed to deliver personalized hearing solutions for individual users. 

EZVIZ – 9c Dual 4G Series Camera: A smart home security camera built for personal and household use. 

Sinomax USA: Consumer mattresses and comfort products focused on everyday home use. 

beyoutica 1905: A wellness product designed for health- and lifestyle-focused consumers. 

Wheels – Pool CheckOut: A consumer-oriented solution designed to simplify vehicle service and checkout experiences. 

Together, these winners reflect how innovation increasingly shows up in tools people rely on at home, in their cars, and on their phones. 

Scam Detector Awards and Industry Recognition 

Since launch, McAfee’s Scam Detector has earned recognition across multiple independent award programs, each highlighting a different dimension of its impact: 

2026 BIG Innovation Awards

Winner and Top 10 Innovator – Large Business, recognizing real-world consumer impact and responsible AI use. 

2026 Big Innovation Award

2025 A.I. Awards

Winner, Best Use of AI in Cybersecurityhonoring Scam Detector’s automated scam detection and deepfake identification. 
The AI Awards - Winner 2025

2025 Tech Ascension Awards 

Winner, Best AI/ML Powered Cybersecurity Solution, recognizing real-time protection across text, email, and video. 
Tech Ascension Awards

Together, these awards reinforce a consistent message from independent judges: consumer cybersecurity works best when advanced technology is paired with clarity, usability, and trust. 

What Is McAfee’s Scam Detector? 

McAfee’s Scam Detector is an AI-powered scam protection feature designed to spot and stop scams across text messages, emails, and videos. Built in response to the rapid rise of AI-generated fraud, Scam Detector automatically analyzes suspicious content, blocks dangerous links, and identifies deepfakes, while explaining why something was flagged so users can make more confident decisions online. 

What Scam Detector Does 

Detects text message scams across popular apps and messaging platforms 

Flags phishing and suspicious emails with clear explanations, helping users learn what to watch for

Identifies AI-generated or manipulated audio in videos, including potential deepfakes

Offers on-demand scam checks, allowing users to upload a message, link, or screenshot for analysis

Runs primarily on-device, helping protect user privacy without sending personal content to the cloud 

Scam Detector is designed to work quietly in the background, providing protection without requiring constant decisions or technical expertise. Scam Detector is included at no extra cost with all core McAfee consumer plans. Learn more here. 

The post McAfee’s Scam Detector Earns Third Major Award Within Months of Launch appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Google Ends Dark Web Report. What That Means and How to Stay Safe

15 January 2026 at 16:09

Google has officially discontinued its Dark Web Report, the tool that alerted users when their personal information appeared in dark web breach databases. New scans stop on January 15, 2026, and on February 16, 2026, Google will permanently delete all data associated with the feature. 

This does not mean Google.com or Google Accounts are going away. It means Google is no longer scanning the dark web for leaked data tied to your account, and it is no longer storing or updating any breach information that was collected for the report. 

For people who relied on Google’s alerts, this change creates a real gap. After January 16, you will no longer get new notifications if your information shows up in breach databases. That is why it is worth taking a few minutes now to lock down the basics. 

According to reporting from TechCrunch, Google said it ended the service after concluding that it did not give users enough clarity about what to do once their data was found. 

That decision highlights a much larger shift in online security: Finding leaked data is no longer enough. Protecting identity is now the real challenge. 

What did Google’s Dark Web Report do? 

The Dark Web Report was a Google Account feature that searched known data breach dumps and dark web marketplaces for personal information tied to a user, such as email addresses, phone numbers, and other identifiers. 

If Google found a match, it sent an alert. 

What it did not do was show which accounts were at risk, whether financial or government ID data was involved, or how to prevent fraud from happening next. That gap is why some users said the tool fell short. 

What is the dark web, and why does  stolen data end up there? 

The internet has three layers: 

  1. The surface web is what search engines index. 
  2. The deep web includes anything behind a login, like email, banking, and medical portals. 
  3. The dark web is a hidden part of the deep web that is not indexed by search engines and is accessed through specialized networks or browsers like Tor. 

The dark web is where data from breaches is commonly sold, traded, and packaged for scams. When a company is hacked, stolen files often end up in dark web databases that include email addresses, passwords, Social Security numbers, bank details, and full identity profiles. 

Scammers use this data to commit account takeovers, financial fraud, tax fraud, and identity theft.  

Even without passwords, this personal information can be enough for scammers to target you with convincing phishing and social engineering scams.  

How to check if your personal information is on the dark web: 

Looking up an email address is no longer enough. Modern identity theft relies on things like Social Security numbers, government IDs, bank and credit card numbers, tax records, insurance data, usernames, and phone numbers. 

To understand whether any of that is exposed, people need to monitor the dark web for identity-level data, not just logins. 

Here is what that looks like in practice: 

  • Scan breach databases for government ID numbers and financial data 
  • Look for full identity profiles being sold or traded 
  • Match leaked records back to real people 

Tools like McAfee’s Identity Monitoring are designed to look for those types of data so you can act before fraud happens. 

Have 30 minutes right now? Do this: 

Been meaning to bolster your security? Here are three quick ways you can enhance your identity protection and reduce real-world damage in a breach: 

Freeze your credit

Estimated time: 10 minutes 

This is a powerful free protection option that many forget about. A credit freeze blocks anyone from opening new loans, credit cards, or accounts in your name, even if they have your Social Security number and full identity profile. 

You can do this for free with any of the major credit bureaus. If you do it with one, the others are notified. 

Why this matters: Most identity theft today is not account hacking. It is criminals opening accounts in your name. A credit freeze stops that cold. 

 

Set up fraud and login alerts on your financial accounts 

Estimated time: 10 minutes 

Go into your main bank and credit card apps and turn on: 

  • Login alerts
  • Transaction alerts
  • Password or profile change alerts
  • These are not the same as marketing notifications. They tell you when someone is trying to access or move money. 

You’ll find these somewhere under Settings>Alerts.

Why this matters: Identity thieves often test stolen data with small charges or login attempts before stealing larger amounts. These alerts are how you catch it early.

Lock down account recovery paths

Estimated time: 10 minutes 

This is one of the most overlooked vulnerabilities. 

Go into: 

  • Your email account 
  • Your Apple ID or Google account 

Check and update: 

  • Recovery email 
  • Recovery phone number 
  • Backup codes 
  • Trusted devices 

Remove anything you do not recognize. 

Why this matters: Even if you change your password, attackers can still take over accounts through recovery systems if those are compromised. This closes that back door. 

 

FAQ: 

Is Google deleting my Google Account data?
No. Google is only deleting the data it collected specifically for the Dark Web Report feature. Your Gmail, Drive, Photos, and other Google Account data are not affected. 
Is Google still protecting my account from hackers?
Yes. Google continues to offer security features like two-factor authentication, login alerts, and account recovery tools. What it removed is the dark web scanning and alert system tied to breach data. 
Does the dark web report website still exist?
No. After February 16, 2026, Google no longer operates or updates the Dark Web Report feature. There is no active scanning, no dashboard, and no stored breach data tied to it. 
Does this mean dark web monitoring is useless?
No. It means email-only monitoring is not enough. Criminals use far more than emails to commit fraud, which is why identity-level monitoring is now more important. 
What kind of information is most dangerous if it appears on the dark web?
Social Security numbers, government IDs, bank and credit card numbers, tax records, insurance IDs, usernames, and phone numbers are the data types most commonly used for identity theft and financial fraud. 
How can I check if my information is exposed right now?
You can use an identity monitoring service like McAfee that scans dark web sources for sensitive personal data, not just email addresses. That is how people can see whether their identity is being traded or abused today. 

 

The post Google Ends Dark Web Report. What That Means and How to Stay Safe appeared first on McAfee Blog.

How to Spot a Fake GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drug Before You Buy

14 January 2026 at 21:03
weight loss drugs

“I thought I was getting a trusted weight-loss medication, but instead, I ended up sick and scammed. I never imagined something like this could happen to me.” 

Fiona, like many others, turned to Ozempic as a way to lose weight. With high demand making it difficult to find and prices soaring, she turned to an online pharmacy she found on social media. After placing an order, she received the medication and began taking it, only to experience severe side effects, including migraines, dizziness, and nausea.

“When my symptoms got worse, I knew something was wrong,” she told McAfee. Concerned, she sought professional advice. “doctor friend showed me what real Ozempic packaging looks like—and it was nothing like what I had received.” 

“I was putting something in my body that I thought was safe. Instead, I was taking an unknown substance that made me seriously ill,” she told McAfee. “That’s terrifying.” 

When she reached out to the pharmacy for a refund, they cut off all communication. Nearly a year later, Fiona still avoids online shopping altogether and hopes her experience will warn others to research online pharmacies carefully before making a purchase. 

“As soon as I questioned the pharmacy about the product, they vanished. No refund, no explanation. Just silence. That’s when I knew I had been completely scammed.” 

Unfortunately, Fiona’s story is one of many as surging interest in GLP-1 medications spurs scammers into action. 

If you’ve searched for GLP-1 medications online, you’ve probably noticed how crowded and confusing it’s become. Between ads, telehealth offers, and social media posts promising easy access, it can be hard to tell what’s real. 

That confusion isn’t accidental. McAfee’s researchers previously reported a wave of fake pharmacy sites and scam messages designed to catch people in exactly that moment of uncertainty.  

What are GLP-1 medications? 

GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1) medications are prescription drugs that help regulate blood sugar and appetite. Doctors have used them to treat Type 2 diabetes for nearly two decades, and some have also been approved to support weight management. 

Because these medications affect insulin levels and digestion, they require medical supervision and a valid prescription. There is currently no legitimate over-the-counter version that works the same way. 

Why GLP-1 scams are exploding 

GLP-1 drugs have moved from a specialized medical treatment to a mainstream topic almost overnight, with a recent poll finding that 1 in 8 U.S. adults say they are currently taking a GLP-1 for weight loss.  

Whenever high demand, high prices, and limited supply collide online, scammers move in 

McAfee’s threat researchers have previously found that phishing attempts and fake websites tied to GLP-1 drugs increased by more than 180% during periods when interest in these medications surged. Hundreds of risky domains and hundreds of thousands of scam messages have been linked to searches for weight-loss drugs. 

At the same time, consumer watchdogs such as the Better Business Bureau (BBB) report a spike in complaints from people who clicked on fake ads, visited fraudulent pharmacies, or received scam texts promising instant access to GLP-1 prescriptions. 

Google Trends data showing the growth in searches around weight-loss drugs.

Common GLP-1 scams to watch out for

1. AI-generated celebrity and doctor endorsements

Scammers are using artificial intelligence to create realistic-looking videos and images of public figures and medical professionals promoting weight-loss products. One recent incident saw a fake, AI Oprah selling scam weight loss drugs  

These ads often appear in social media feeds and look legitimate, but the endorsements are fabricated.  

The goal is to build trust quickly with a familiar face and then push people toward a purchase page. From there, you’re left with a fake product, or no product at all, and your information exposed. 

Red flag: Any ad claiming a celebrity or doctor is selling GLP-1 drugs through a link or social media page. 

2. Fake prescription texts and emails

Some scams arrive as urgent messages saying you are “approved” or “eligible” for GLP-1 treatment. These messages typically include a link to a fake medical website that collects personal, insurance, or payment information. 

Red flag: Real prescriptions are not issued through unsolicited texts, emails, or DMs. 

3. Fake online pharmacies

Fraudulent websites advertise GLP-1 medications at discounted prices. After payment, victims may receive nothing, diluted products, or face repeated unauthorized charges. 

Consumer reports describe sites that look professional but provide only chat-box support and ignore cancellation requests. 

Red flag: Pharmacies that don’t require a prescription or don’t list a physical U.S. address and phone number. 

4. Subscription traps

Some scam offers quietly enroll buyers in recurring billing. Be wary of a “company” trying to offer a minimal “membership” or free “trial” with plans locking you into larger, more expensive future subscription plan without your clear consent. 

Red flag: Vague billing terms or hidden subscription language.

5. Missing or fake shipments

Some scam sites provide tracking numbers that never update, claim packages were lost, or ask for more shipping fees … while continuing to charge customers. 

Red flag: No real customer service and no way to cancel or dispute orders. 

What makes these scams especially dangerous 

Unlike many online scams, GLP-1 fraud carries real health risks. 

Some victims report receiving substances that do not match what was advertised, including mislabeled or unverified injectables. 

Because GLP-1 medications affect blood sugar and metabolism, taking the wrong substance or dosage can be dangerous. 

In addition to the medical risks, illegitimate storefronts pose a real threat to your private information. During your purchase, you may be tricked into sharing our address, contact info, payment details, and insurance information.  

How to safely pursue GLP-1 treatment 

If you’re considering GLP-1 medications for health or weight management, these steps can help reduce risk: 

Step 1: Start with a licensed healthcare provider 

Only a doctor or licensed medical professional can determine if GLP-1 treatment is appropriate for you. 

Step 2: Use verified pharmacies 

If you use telehealth or online pharmacies, confirm they are properly licensed and require a prescription. 

Step 3: Research before you pay 

Look up unfamiliar pharmacies through trusted consumer-protection resources before entering payment or insurance information. If you’re in doubt, it’s better not to share any personal info. 

Step 4: Be skeptical of miracle claims 

There is no over-the-counter or legal “natural GLP-1,” patch, salt trick, or supplement that produces the same effect as prescription medication. 

What to do if you think you were targeted: 

If you clicked a link, entered information, or made a purchase: 

  1. Stop communicating with the seller 
  2. Monitor your bank and credit accounts for unusual activity 
  3. If you notice suspicious charges, contact your bank directly
  4. Change any passwords you shared 
  5. Run a security scan on your device (here’s our free trial) 
  6. Report the incident to consumer-protection agencies 

Reporting helps stop the same scams from spreading to others. This is where you can get more information from the FDA and report scams.

How to Spot a Fake GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drug If You’ve Already Bought One 

If you’ve already ordered a GLP-1 weight-loss drug and something feels off, trust that instinct. Counterfeit GLP-1 products are increasingly convincing at first glance, but many show clear warning signs once you look closely. 

Here’s what to check: 

Packaging and Label Red Flags 

Poor print quality or spelling errors
Examine the carton, label, and insert carefully. Misspelled words, inconsistent fonts, blurry printing, or incorrect manufacturer details are common signs of counterfeit medication. 

Packaging that looks tampered with or unfamiliar
Authentic GLP-1 medications come in sealed, tamper-resistant packaging. If the box appears opened, resealed, relabeled, or noticeably different from what you’ve received from a legitimate pharmacy before, stop using it and contact a pharmacist. 

Incorrect or missing language
Medications sold legally in the U.S. should include labeling and instructions in English. Missing inserts or foreign-language packaging can be a red flag. 

Unusual product form
Be especially cautious of GLP-1 products sold as powders in vials that require mixing. These formulations are not authorized and have been linked to serious health risks. 

Check Lot and Serial Numbers 

Most legitimate GLP-1 medications include lot numbers or serial information that can be verified. 

If your product includes these details, compare them against information published by the manufacturer or alerts from regulators. If the numbers don’t match, or are missing entirely, that’s a warning sign. 

What to Do If You’re Unsure 

If anything about your medication doesn’t match what you expect: 

  • Stop using the product 
  • Contact a licensed pharmacist or healthcare provider 
  • Avoid purchasing refills from the same source 

When it comes to injectable medications, uncertainty isn’t something to push through. If you can’t confidently verify what you have, it’s safer to assume it may not be real. 

Final Thoughts 

Wanting to get healthier in the new year is a good thing. Falling for fake prescriptions, AI-generated endorsements, or fraudulent pharmacies is not. 

McAfee is here to help keep your devices, identity, and finances safe while you focus on your goals in 2026. 

Frequently Asked Questions 

For clarity, and because these questions come up often, here’s the straightforward explanation: 

Are GLP-1 drugs available without a prescription?
No. Legitimate GLP-1 medications require a prescription and medical oversight. 
Are social media GLP-1 ads real?
It depends. While there are certainly real ads out there, many are fake. AI-generated celebrity and doctor endorsements are commonly used in scams. So be wary and verify who is behind a post. 
Are GLP-1 patches, gummies, or “salt tricks” legitimate?
No over-the-counter product works the same way as prescription GLP-1 medication. 
Why do scammers use crypto or payment apps?
These payment methods are harder to reverse, which makes them attractive for fraud. 

 

The post How to Spot a Fake GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drug Before You Buy appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Patch Tuesday, January 2026 Edition

14 January 2026 at 00:47

Microsoft today issued patches to plug at least 113 security holes in its various Windows operating systems and supported software. Eight of the vulnerabilities earned Microsoft’s most-dire “critical” rating, and the company warns that attackers are already exploiting one of the bugs fixed today.

January’s Microsoft zero-day flaw — CVE-2026-20805 — is brought to us by a flaw in the Desktop Window Manager (DWM), a key component of Windows that organizes windows on a user’s screen. Kev Breen, senior director of cyber threat research at Immersive, said despite awarding CVE-2026-20805 a middling CVSS score of 5.5, Microsoft has confirmed its active exploitation in the wild, indicating that threat actors are already leveraging this flaw against organizations.

Breen said vulnerabilities of this kind are commonly used to undermine Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), a core operating system security control designed to protect against buffer overflows and other memory-manipulation exploits.

“By revealing where code resides in memory, this vulnerability can be chained with a separate code execution flaw, transforming a complex and unreliable exploit into a practical and repeatable attack,” Breen said. “Microsoft has not disclosed which additional components may be involved in such an exploit chain, significantly limiting defenders’ ability to proactively threat hunt for related activity. As a result, rapid patching currently remains the only effective mitigation.”

Chris Goettl, vice president of product management at Ivanti, observed that CVE-2026-20805 affects all currently supported and extended security update supported versions of the Windows OS. Goettl said it would be a mistake to dismiss the severity of this flaw based on its “Important” rating and relatively low CVSS score.

“A risk-based prioritization methodology warrants treating this vulnerability as a higher severity than the vendor rating or CVSS score assigned,” he said.

Among the critical flaws patched this month are two Microsoft Office remote code execution bugs (CVE-2026-20952 and CVE-2026-20953) that can be triggered just by viewing a booby-trapped message in the Preview Pane.

Our October 2025 Patch Tuesday “End of 10” roundup noted that Microsoft had removed a modem driver from all versions after it was discovered that hackers were abusing a vulnerability in it to hack into systems. Adam Barnett at Rapid7 said Microsoft today removed another couple of modem drivers from Windows for a broadly similar reason: Microsoft is aware of functional exploit code for an elevation of privilege vulnerability in a very similar modem driver, tracked as CVE-2023-31096.

“That’s not a typo; this vulnerability was originally published via MITRE over two years ago, along with a credible public writeup by the original researcher,” Barnett said. “Today’s Windows patches remove agrsm64.sys and agrsm.sys. All three modem drivers were originally developed by the same now-defunct third party, and have been included in Windows for decades. These driver removals will pass unnoticed for most people, but you might find active modems still in a few contexts, including some industrial control systems.”

According to Barnett, two questions remain: How many more legacy modem drivers are still present on a fully-patched Windows asset; and how many more elevation-to-SYSTEM vulnerabilities will emerge from them before Microsoft cuts off attackers who have been enjoying “living off the land[line] by exploiting an entire class of dusty old device drivers?”

“Although Microsoft doesn’t claim evidence of exploitation for CVE-2023-31096, the relevant 2023 write-up and the 2025 removal of the other Agere modem driver have provided two strong signals for anyone looking for Windows exploits in the meantime,” Barnett said. “In case you were wondering, there is no need to have a modem connected; the mere presence of the driver is enough to render an asset vulnerable.”

Immersive, Ivanti and Rapid7 all called attention to CVE-2026-21265, which is a critical Security Feature Bypass vulnerability affecting Windows Secure Boot. This security feature is designed to protect against threats like rootkits and bootkits, and it relies on a set of certificates that are set to expire in June 2026 and October 2026. Once these 2011 certificates expire, Windows devices that do not have the new 2023 certificates can no longer receive Secure Boot security fixes.

Barnett cautioned that when updating the bootloader and BIOS, it is essential to prepare fully ahead of time for the specific OS and BIOS combination you’re working with, since incorrect remediation steps can lead to an unbootable system.

“Fifteen years is a very long time indeed in information security, but the clock is running out on the Microsoft root certificates which have been signing essentially everything in the Secure Boot ecosystem since the days of Stuxnet,” Barnett said. “Microsoft issued replacement certificates back in 2023, alongside CVE-2023-24932 which covered relevant Windows patches as well as subsequent steps to remediate the Secure Boot bypass exploited by the BlackLotus bootkit.”

Goettl noted that Mozilla has released updates for Firefox and Firefox ESR resolving a total of 34 vulnerabilities, two of which are suspected to be exploited (CVE-2026-0891 and CVE-2026-0892). Both are resolved in Firefox 147 (MFSA2026-01) and CVE-2026-0891 is resolved in Firefox ESR 140.7 (MFSA2026-03).

“Expect Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge updates this week in addition to a high severity vulnerability in Chrome WebView that was resolved in the January 6 Chrome update (CVE-2026-0628),” Goettl said.

As ever, the SANS Internet Storm Center has a per-patch breakdown by severity and urgency. Windows admins should keep an eye on askwoody.com for any news about patches that don’t quite play nice with everything. If you experience any issues related installing January’s patches, please drop a line in the comments below.

Who Decides Who Doesn’t Deserve Privacy?

13 January 2026 at 11:41
Who Decides Who Doesn’t Deserve Privacy?

Remember the Ashley Madison data breach? That was now more than a decade ago, yet it arguably remains the single most noteworthy data breach of all time. There are many reasons for this accolade, but chief among them is that by virtue of the site being expressly designed to facilitate extramarital affairs, there was massive social stigma attached to it. As a result, we saw some pretty crazy stuff:

  1. Various websites were stood up to publicly disclose the presence of people in the data and out them as “cheaters”
  2. Churches trawled through the data and contacted the spouses of exposed parishioners
  3. The media outed noteworthy individuals they searched for in the breach
  4. A radio station back home in Australia encouraged listeners to dial in to check if their spouse was in the data

Arguably, we now live in a more privacy-conscious era, one full of acronyms such as GDPR and CCPA, among others, in different parts of the world. The right to be forgotten, the right to erasure, and, indeed, privacy as a fundamental human right feature very differently in 2026 than they did in 2015. But arguably, even back then, the impact of outing someone as a member of the site should have been obvious. It was certainly obvious to me, which is why I introduced the concept of a sensitive data breach before the data even went public. HIBP wouldn’t show results for this breach publicly because I was concerned about the impact on people being outed. My worst fear was a spouse coming home to find someone having taken their own life, an HIBP search result on the screen in front of their lifeless body.

People died as a result of the breach. Marriages ended and lives were turned upside down. People lost their jobs. The human toll of the breach was profound. The decision I made after witnessing this was that if a breach was likely to have serious personal or social consequences for people in there, it would be flagged as sensitive and not publicly searchable.

The public doxing of members of the service was often justified on a moral basis: “adultery is bad, they deserve to be outed”. But there are two massive problems with this attitude, and I’ll begin with the purpose for which accounts were sometimes made:

An email address appearing in that breach implied that the person was there to have an extramarital affair because that was literally the catch-phrase of the service: “Life is short, have an affair”. But the reality was that people were members of the service for many, many different reasons. Have a read of my post titled Here’s What Ashley Madison Members Have Told Me and you’ll begin to understand how much more nuanced the situation was:

  1. Single people had joined the service, and later married before the breach occurred
  2. People who were worried about a cheating spouse joined the service in order to try to catch them
  3. Accounts were made with some people’s names and email addresses without their consent (there are many “Barrack Obamas” in the data)

So, should everyone with an email address on Ashley Madison be considered an adulterer? Clearly, no, that completely misses the nuances of what an email address in a data breach really means. But what about the people who were there to have an affair? Well, that brings us to the second problem:

Our own personal belief systems are not a valid basis for outing people publicly because their belief systems differ. I used more generic terms than “extramarital affair” or “cheating” because there are many other data breaches that are flagged as sensitive in HIBP for the very same reason. Fur Affinity, for example: there is a social stigma around furries and outing someone as a member of that community could have negative consequences for them. Rosebutt Board is another example: anal fisting is evidently something a bunch of people are into, and equally, I’m sure there are many who take a moral objection to it. And finally, to get to the catalyst for this post, WhiteDate: the website that is ostensibly designed for white people to date other white people. Flagging that as sensitive resulted in some unsavoury commentary being directed at me:

U are a Nazi end of story

— 𝔗𝔥𝔢ℑ𝔡𝔦𝔬𝔱 (@fuckelonsob) January 6, 2026

Now, I emphasised “ostensibly” because the more you dig into this breach, the more you find tones of white supremacy and other behaviours that definitely don’t align with my personal value system. That societal view doesn’t sit well with me, and I think I’m safe in saying it wouldn’t sit well with most people. Would someone being outed as a member of that service be likely to result in “serious personal or social consequences”? Yes, and you can see that in the messaging from the same account:

Context matters. U are literally shielding Nazi hate mongering scoundrels. We can't doxx white supremacists?

If ISIS had a dating site & it got breached, would you protect it out of fear of doxxing? No.

Every database leaked is sensitive in a way.

— 𝔗𝔥𝔢ℑ𝔡𝔦𝔬𝔱 (@fuckelonsob) January 6, 2026

This behaviour is precisely what I don’t want HIBP being used for: as a weapon to attack people solely on the basis of their email address being affiliated with a website that has had a data breach.

Imagine, for a moment, if ISIS did have a dating site and it was breached, should it be flagged as sensitive? Contrary to the comment about "every database leaked is sensitive", there is a clear legal definition for sensitive personal information and it includes:

personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs;
trade-union membership;
genetic data, biometric data processed solely to identify a human being;
health-related data;
data concerning a person’s sex life or sexual orientation.

An ISIS dating website breach would tick many of the boxes above and would therefore constitute a sensitive data breach. That's not an endorsement of what they stand for; it's simply a data-processing decision. But there may be a nuance in there which I didn't see present in the WhiteDate data - what if it contained illegal activity? (Sidenote: for the most part, HIBP is used by people in Western Europe, North America and Australasia, so when I say "illegal", I'm looking at it through that lens. Clearly, there are parts of the world where our "illegal" is their "normal", which further complicates how I run a service accessible from every corner of the world.) I had another example recently that went well beyond moral contention and deep into the realm of illegality:

New sensitive breach: "AI girlfriend" site Muah[.]ai had 1.9M email addresses breached last month. Data included AI prompts describing desired images, many sexual in nature and many describing child exploitation. 24% were already in @haveibeenpwned. More: https://t.co/NTXeQZFr2x

— Have I Been Pwned (@haveibeenpwned) October 8, 2024

Of all the different things people can disagree on when it comes to our moral compasses, paedophilia is where we unanimously draw the line. But I still flagged it as sensitive because of the reasons outlined above. Many people using the service were just lonely guys trying to create an AI girlfriend with no prompts around age. There would be email addresses in there that weren’t entered by the rightful owner. And then, there are cases like this:

That's a firstname.lastname Gmail address. Drop it into Outlook and it automatically matches the owner. It has his name, his job title, the company he works for and his professional photo, all matched to that AI prompt. pic.twitter.com/wpXQMBLf3B

— Troy Hunt (@troyhunt) October 9, 2024

I sat there with my wife, looking at the LinkedIn profile that used the same email address as the person who posted that comment. We looked at his photo and at the veneer of professionalism that surrounded him on that site, knowing what he had written in that prompt above. It was repulsive. Further, beyond being solely an affront to our morals, it was clearly illegal. So, I had many conversations with law enforcement agencies around the world and ensured they had access to the data. Involving law enforcement where data sets contain illegal activity is absolutely the right approach here, but equally, not being the vehicle for implying someone’s affiliation or beliefs and doxing them publicly without due process is also absolutely the right approach.

I understand the gut reaction that flagging a breach like WhiteDate as sensitive protects people whom most of us do not like. But a dozen years of running this service have caused me to consider individual privacy and rights literally hundreds of times, and these conclusions aren’t arrived at hastily. Imagine for a moment, the possible ramifications for HIBP if the service were used to publicly shame someone as a "Nazi" and that, in turn, had serious real-world consequences for them. Whether that implication was right or not, there are potentially serious ramifications for us that could well leave us unable to operate at all. And, as the Ashley Madison examples show, there are also potentially life-threatening outcomes for individuals.

I don't particularly care about one random, anonymous X account making poorly thought-out statements, but the same sentiment has been expressed after loading previous similar breaches, and it deserves a blog post. Equally, I've written before about why all the other data breaches are publicly searchable and again, that conclusion is not arrived at lightly.

I’ll finish with a note about privacy that relates to my earlier comment about it being a human right. It's literally a human right under Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Breaches with legally defined sensitive data will continue to be flagged as sensitive, and breaches with illegal data will continue to be forwarded to law enforcement agencies.

McAfee Earns 29th Consecutive AAA Rating From SE Labs

12 January 2026 at 21:08
McAfee earns AAA rating from SE Labs

McAfee has once again earned the highest possible AAA rating from SE Labs, marking the 29th consecutive time our consumer protection has received this top-tier recognition. 

In SE Labs’ latest Q4 Home Anti-Malware Test, McAfee Total Protection achieved 100% protection with zero false positives, reinforcing a streak that has remained unbroken since December 2018. 

SE Labs AAA Security Evaluation EPS Protection Home December 2025

What the SE Labs AAA Rating Measures 

SE Labs is an independent, UK-based security testing organization known for evaluating products against real-world threats, not just controlled lab samples. Its test results are therefore referenced and trusted by numerous journalists and product reviewers alike.  

Their Home Anti-Malware tests simulate the types of attacks people actually face, including: 

  • Email-based threats 
  • Malicious websites 
  • Targeted attacks designed to appear relevant or trustworthy 
  • Common malware encountered during everyday online activity 

To earn an AAA rating, products must demonstrate: 

  • Strong threat detection 
  • Effective prevention before harm occurs 
  • Minimal false positives that disrupt normal use 

Why This Recognition Matters for Consumers 

For people choosing security software, independent testing helps answer a simple question: Does this protection actually work when it matters? SE Labs’ results show that McAfee continues to block threats accurately, without over-flagging safe activity. 

Independent recognition like this reinforces McAfee’s ongoing commitment to consumer-first security that is tested, proven, and trusted over time. 

Learn more about McAfee’s core protection plans and how we can help keep you safe online. And find the full SE Labs report here. 

The post McAfee Earns 29th Consecutive AAA Rating From SE Labs appeared first on McAfee Blog.

This Week in Scams: Explaining the Fake Amazon Code Surge

9 January 2026 at 19:34
blogging on social media

This week in scams, the biggest threats showed up as routine security messages, viral consumer “warnings,” and AI-generated content that blended seamlessly into platforms people already trust. 

Every week, we bring you a roundup of the scams making headlines, not just to track what’s happening, but to explain how these schemes work, why they’re spreading now, and what you can do to stay ahead of them.  

Here are scams in the news this week, and safety tips from our experts at McAfee: 

Amazon One-Time Passcode Scam: How Fake Security Calls Hijack Real Accounts 

Scammers are increasingly impersonating Amazon customer support to take over accounts using real one-time passcodes (OTPs), not fake links or malware. 

Here’s how the scam works in practice. 

What is the Amazon one-time passcode scam? 

Victims receive an unsolicited phone call from someone claiming to work for Amazon. The caller says suspicious activity has been detected on the account and may reference expensive purchases, often items like smartphones, to make the threat feel credible. 

The call usually comes from a spoofed number and the scammer may already know your name or phone number, which helps lower suspicion. 

How scammers use real Amazon security codes 

While speaking to you, the scammer attempts to access your Amazon account themselves by entering your phone number or email address on the login page and selecting “forgot password” or triggering a login from a new device. 

That action causes Amazon’s real security system to send a legitimate one-time passcode to your phone or email. 

If you read that code aloud or share it, the scammer can immediately: 

  • Complete the login process 
  • Change your account password 
  • Access saved payment methods 
  • Place fraudulent orders or lock you out of the account 

The scam works precisely because the code is real—and because it arrives while the caller is convincing you it’s part of a routine security check. 

Key red flags to watch for 

  • Unsolicited calls claiming to be from Amazon 
  • Requests to share a one-time passcode 
  • Pressure to act quickly “to secure your account” 

Important to remember: Amazon will never contact you first to ask for your password, verification codes, or security details. If you receive a one-time passcode you didn’t request, do not share it with anyone. 

AI Deepfake Scam on TikTok Uses Fake Princess to Steal Money 

A growing scam on TikTok shows how AI-generated deepfake videos are now being used not just for misinformation, but for direct financial fraud. 

This week, Spanish media and officials warned that scammers are circulating fake TikTok videos appearing to show Princess Leonor, the 20-year-old heir to Spain’s throne, offering financial assistance to users.  

According to The Guardian, the videos show an AI-generated version of Leonor promising payouts running into the thousands of dollars in exchange for a small upfront “fee.”  

Once victims send that initial payment, the scam doesn’t end. Fraudsters repeatedly demand additional fees before eventually disappearing. 

This case highlights how deepfakes are moving beyond novelty and into repeatable, high-reach fraud, where trust in familiar public figures is weaponized at scale. 

Viral Reddit “Whistleblower” Scam: When AI-Generated Posts Fool Millions 

A viral post on Reddit this week shows how AI-generated text can convincingly impersonate whistleblowers, and even mislead experienced journalists. 

The post claimed to come from an employee at a major food delivery company, alleging the firm was exploiting drivers and users through opaque AI systems. Written as a long, confessional screed, the author said he was drunk, using library Wi-Fi, and risking retaliation to expose the truth. 

The claims were believable in part because similar companies have faced real lawsuits in the past. The post rocketed to Reddit’s front page, collecting over 87,000 upvotes, and spread even further after being reposted on X, where it amassed tens of millions of impressions. 

As Platformer journalist Casey Newton later reported, the supposed whistleblower provided what appeared to be convincing evidence, including a photo of an employee badge and an 18-page internal document describing an AI-driven “desperation score” used to manage drivers. But during verification attempts, red flags emerged. The materials were ultimately traced back to an AI-generated hoax. 

Detection tools later confirmed that some of the images contained AI watermarks, but only after the post had already gone viral. 

Why AI-generated hoaxes like this are dangerous 

  • They mimic real whistleblower behavior and language 
  • They exploit existing public distrust of large platforms 
  • They can mislead journalists, not just casual readers 
  • Debunking often comes too late to stop spread 

This incident underscores a growing problem: AI-generated misinformation doesn’t need to steal money directly to cause harm. Sometimes, the damage is to trust itself — and by the time the truth surfaces, the narrative has already taken hold. 

McAfee’s Safety Tips for This Week 

As scams increasingly rely on a combination of realism and urgency, protecting yourself starts with slowing down and verifying before you act. 

If a message or video promises money or financial help: 

  • Be skeptical of any offer that requires an upfront “fee,” no matter how small. 
  • Remember that public figures, charities, and foundations do not distribute money through social media DMs or comment sections. 
  • If an offer claims to come from a well-known individual or organization, verify it through official websites or trusted news sources. 

When content appears viral or emotionally convincing: 

  • Pause before sharing or acting on posts framed as warnings, whistleblower revelations, or exposés. 
  • Look for confirmation from multiple reputable outlets — not just screenshots or reposts. 
  • Be cautious of long, detailed posts that feel personal or confessional but can’t be independently verified. 

When AI may be involved: 

  • Assume that realistic images, videos, and documents can be generated quickly and at scale. 
  • Don’t rely on appearance alone to determine authenticity, even high-quality content can be fake. 
  • Treat unsolicited financial requests, account actions, or “inside information” as red flags, regardless of how credible they seem. 

If you think you’ve engaged with a scam: 

  • Stop responding immediately. 
  • Secure your accounts by changing passwords and enabling multi-factor authentication. 
  • Monitor financial statements and account activity for unusual behavior. 

Final Takeaway 

The scams making headlines this week share a common theme: they don’t look like scams at first glance. Whether it’s an AI-generated video of a public figure or a viral post posing as a consumer warning, today’s fraud relies on familiarity, credibility, and trust. 

That’s why McAfee’s Scam Detector and Web Protection help detect scam messages, dangerous sites, and AI-generated deepfake videosalerting you before you interact or click. 

We’ll be back next week with another roundup of the scams worth watching, the stories behind them, and the steps you can take to stay one step ahead. 

The post This Week in Scams: Explaining the Fake Amazon Code Surge appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Who Benefited from the Aisuru and Kimwolf Botnets?

8 January 2026 at 23:23

Our first story of 2026 revealed how a destructive new botnet called Kimwolf has infected more than two million devices by mass-compromising a vast number of unofficial Android TV streaming boxes. Today, we’ll dig through digital clues left behind by the hackers, network operators and services that appear to have benefitted from Kimwolf’s spread.

On Dec. 17, 2025, the Chinese security firm XLab published a deep dive on Kimwolf, which forces infected devices to participate in distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks and to relay abusive and malicious Internet traffic for so-called “residential proxy” services.

The software that turns one’s device into a residential proxy is often quietly bundled with mobile apps and games. Kimwolf specifically targeted residential proxy software that is factory installed on more than a thousand different models of unsanctioned Android TV streaming devices. Very quickly, the residential proxy’s Internet address starts funneling traffic that is linked to ad fraud, account takeover attempts and mass content scraping.

The XLab report explained its researchers found “definitive evidence” that the same cybercriminal actors and infrastructure were used to deploy both Kimwolf and the Aisuru botnet — an earlier version of Kimwolf that also enslaved devices for use in DDoS attacks and proxy services.

XLab said it suspected since October that Kimwolf and Aisuru had the same author(s) and operators, based in part on shared code changes over time. But it said those suspicions were confirmed on December 8 when it witnessed both botnet strains being distributed by the same Internet address at 93.95.112[.]59.

Image: XLab.

RESI RACK

Public records show the Internet address range flagged by XLab is assigned to Lehi, Utah-based Resi Rack LLC. Resi Rack’s website bills the company as a “Premium Game Server Hosting Provider.” Meanwhile, Resi Rack’s ads on the Internet moneymaking forum BlackHatWorld refer to it as a “Premium Residential Proxy Hosting and Proxy Software Solutions Company.”

Resi Rack co-founder Cassidy Hales told KrebsOnSecurity his company received a notification on December 10 about Kimwolf using their network “that detailed what was being done by one of our customers leasing our servers.”

“When we received this email we took care of this issue immediately,” Hales wrote in response to an email requesting comment. “This is something we are very disappointed is now associated with our name and this was not the intention of our company whatsoever.”

The Resi Rack Internet address cited by XLab on December 8 came onto KrebsOnSecurity’s radar more than two weeks before that. Benjamin Brundage is founder of Synthient, a startup that tracks proxy services. In late October 2025, Brundage shared that the people selling various proxy services which benefitted from the Aisuru and Kimwolf botnets were doing so at a new Discord server called resi[.]to.

On November 24, 2025, a member of the resi-dot-to Discord channel shares an IP address responsible for proxying traffic over Android TV streaming boxes infected by the Kimwolf botnet.

When KrebsOnSecurity joined the resi[.]to Discord channel in late October as a silent lurker, the server had fewer than 150 members, including “Shox” — the nickname used by Resi Rack’s co-founder Mr. Hales — and his business partner “Linus,” who did not respond to requests for comment.

Other members of the resi[.]to Discord channel would periodically post new IP addresses that were responsible for proxying traffic over the Kimwolf botnet. As the screenshot from resi[.]to above shows, that Resi Rack Internet address flagged by XLab was used by Kimwolf to direct proxy traffic as far back as November 24, if not earlier. All told, Synthient said it tracked at least seven static Resi Rack IP addresses connected to Kimwolf proxy infrastructure between October and December 2025.

Neither of Resi Rack’s co-owners responded to follow-up questions. Both have been active in selling proxy services via Discord for nearly two years. According to a review of Discord messages indexed by the cyber intelligence firm Flashpoint, Shox and Linus spent much of 2024 selling static “ISP proxies” by routing various Internet address blocks at major U.S. Internet service providers.

In February 2025, AT&T announced that effective July 31, 2025, it would no longer originate routes for network blocks that are not owned and managed by AT&T (other major ISPs have since made similar moves). Less than a month later, Shox and Linus told customers they would soon cease offering static ISP proxies as a result of these policy changes.

Shox and Linux, talking about their decision to stop selling ISP proxies.

DORT & SNOW

The stated owner of the resi[.]to Discord server went by the abbreviated username “D.” That initial appears to be short for the hacker handle “Dort,” a name that was invoked frequently throughout these Discord chats.

Dort’s profile on resi dot to.

This “Dort” nickname came up in KrebsOnSecurity’s recent conversations with “Forky,” a Brazilian man who acknowledged being involved in the marketing of the Aisuru botnet at its inception in late 2024. But Forky vehemently denied having anything to do with a series of massive and record-smashing DDoS attacks in the latter half of 2025 that were blamed on Aisuru, saying the botnet by that point had been taken over by rivals.

Forky asserts that Dort is a resident of Canada and one of at least two individuals currently in control of the Aisuru/Kimwolf botnet. The other individual Forky named as an Aisuru/Kimwolf botmaster goes by the nickname “Snow.”

On January 2 — just hours after our story on Kimwolf was published — the historical chat records on resi[.]to were erased without warning and replaced by a profanity-laced message for Synthient’s founder. Minutes after that, the entire server disappeared.

Later that same day, several of the more active members of the now-defunct resi[.]to Discord server moved to a Telegram channel where they posted Brundage’s personal information, and generally complained about being unable to find reliable “bulletproof” hosting for their botnet.

Hilariously, a user by the name “Richard Remington” briefly appeared in the group’s Telegram server to post a crude “Happy New Year” sketch that claims Dort and Snow are now in control of 3.5 million devices infected by Aisuru and/or Kimwolf. Richard Remington’s Telegram account has since been deleted, but it previously stated its owner operates a website that caters to DDoS-for-hire or “stresser” services seeking to test their firepower.

BYTECONNECT, PLAINPROXIES, AND 3XK TECH

Reports from both Synthient and XLab found that Kimwolf was used to deploy programs that turned infected systems into Internet traffic relays for multiple residential proxy services. Among those was a component that installed a software development kit (SDK) called ByteConnect, which is distributed by a provider known as Plainproxies.

ByteConnect says it specializes in “monetizing apps ethically and free,” while Plainproxies advertises the ability to provide content scraping companies with “unlimited” proxy pools. However, Synthient said that upon connecting to ByteConnect’s SDK they instead observed a mass influx of credential-stuffing attacks targeting email servers and popular online websites.

A search on LinkedIn finds the CEO of Plainproxies is Friedrich Kraft, whose resume says he is co-founder of ByteConnect Ltd. Public Internet routing records show Mr. Kraft also operates a hosting firm in Germany called 3XK Tech GmbH. Mr. Kraft did not respond to repeated requests for an interview.

In July 2025, Cloudflare reported that 3XK Tech (a.k.a. Drei-K-Tech) had become the Internet’s largest source of application-layer DDoS attacks. In November 2025, the security firm GreyNoise Intelligence found that Internet addresses on 3XK Tech were responsible for roughly three-quarters of the Internet scanning being done at the time for a newly discovered and critical vulnerability in security products made by Palo Alto Networks.

Source: Cloudflare’s Q2 2025 DDoS threat report.

LinkedIn has a profile for another Plainproxies employee, Julia Levi, who is listed as co-founder of ByteConnect. Ms. Levi did not respond to requests for comment. Her resume says she previously worked for two major proxy providers: Netnut Proxy Network, and Bright Data.

Synthient likewise said Plainproxies ignored their outreach, noting that the Byteconnect SDK continues to remain active on devices compromised by Kimwolf.

A post from the LinkedIn page of Plainproxies Chief Revenue Officer Julia Levi, explaining how the residential proxy business works.

MASKIFY

Synthient’s January 2 report said another proxy provider heavily involved in the sale of Kimwolf proxies was Maskify, which currently advertises on multiple cybercrime forums that it has more than six million residential Internet addresses for rent.

Maskify prices its service at a rate of 30 cents per gigabyte of data relayed through their proxies. According to Synthient, that price range is insanely low and is far cheaper than any other proxy provider in business today.

“Synthient’s Research Team received screenshots from other proxy providers showing key Kimwolf actors attempting to offload proxy bandwidth in exchange for upfront cash,” the Synthient report noted. “This approach likely helped fuel early development, with associated members spending earnings on infrastructure and outsourced development tasks. Please note that resellers know precisely what they are selling; proxies at these prices are not ethically sourced.”

Maskify did not respond to requests for comment.

The Maskify website. Image: Synthient.

BOTMASTERS LASH OUT

Hours after our first Kimwolf story was published last week, the resi[.]to Discord server vanished, Synthient’s website was hit with a DDoS attack, and the Kimwolf botmasters took to doxing Brundage via their botnet.

The harassing messages appeared as text records uploaded to the Ethereum Name Service (ENS), a distributed system for supporting smart contracts deployed on the Ethereum blockchain. As documented by XLab, in mid-December the Kimwolf operators upgraded their infrastructure and began using ENS to better withstand the near-constant takedown efforts targeting the botnet’s control servers.

An ENS record used by the Kimwolf operators taunts security firms trying to take down the botnet’s control servers. Image: XLab.

By telling infected systems to seek out the Kimwolf control servers via ENS, even if the servers that the botmasters use to control the botnet are taken down the attacker only needs to update the ENS text record to reflect the new Internet address of the control server, and the infected devices will immediately know where to look for further instructions.

“This channel itself relies on the decentralized nature of blockchain, unregulated by Ethereum or other blockchain operators, and cannot be blocked,” XLab wrote.

The text records included in Kimwolf’s ENS instructions can also feature short messages, such as those that carried Brundage’s personal information. Other ENS text records associated with Kimwolf offered some sage advice: “If flagged, we encourage the TV box to be destroyed.”

An ENS record tied to the Kimwolf botnet advises, “If flagged, we encourage the TV box to be destroyed.”

Both Synthient and XLabs say Kimwolf targets a vast number of Android TV streaming box models, all of which have zero security protections, and many of which ship with proxy malware built in. Generally speaking, if you can send a data packet to one of these devices you can also seize administrative control over it.

If you own a TV box that matches one of these model names and/or numbers, please just rip it out of your network. If you encounter one of these devices on the network of a family member or friend, send them a link to this story (or to our January 2 story on Kimwolf) and explain that it’s not worth the potential hassle and harm created by keeping them plugged in.

Weekly Update 485

7 January 2026 at 06:26
Weekly Update 485

15 mins and 40 seconds. That's how long it took to troubleshoot the first tech problem of 2026, and that's how far you'll need to skip through this video to hear the audio at normal volume. The problem Scott and I had is analogous to the troubleshooting so many of us do in our roles day in and day out:

  1. This should work fine
  2. It doesn't work, and I don't know why
  3. I did something that seems unrelate,d and now it works
  4. I still don't know why

Anyway, I've cleaned up the audio-only version for the podcast, but I can't change the YouTube version once it's streamed, so apologies, just pump your volume up for the first quarter hour. And Happy New Year!

Weekly Update 485
Weekly Update 485
Weekly Update 485
Weekly Update 485

The Kimwolf Botnet is Stalking Your Local Network

2 January 2026 at 14:20

The story you are reading is a series of scoops nestled inside a far more urgent Internet-wide security advisory. The vulnerability at issue has been exploited for months already, and it’s time for a broader awareness of the threat. The short version is that everything you thought you knew about the security of the internal network behind your Internet router probably is now dangerously out of date.

The security company Synthient currently sees more than 2 million infected Kimwolf devices distributed globally but with concentrations in Vietnam, Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, Russia and the United States. Synthient found that two-thirds of the Kimwolf infections are Android TV boxes with no security or authentication built in.

The past few months have witnessed the explosive growth of a new botnet dubbed Kimwolf, which experts say has infected more than 2 million devices globally. The Kimwolf malware forces compromised systems to relay malicious and abusive Internet traffic — such as ad fraud, account takeover attempts and mass content scraping — and participate in crippling distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks capable of knocking nearly any website offline for days at a time.

More important than Kimwolf’s staggering size, however, is the diabolical method it uses to spread so quickly: By effectively tunneling back through various “residential proxy” networks and into the local networks of the proxy endpoints, and by further infecting devices that are hidden behind the assumed protection of the user’s firewall and Internet router.

Residential proxy networks are sold as a way for customers to anonymize and localize their Web traffic to a specific region, and the biggest of these services allow customers to route their traffic through devices in virtually any country or city around the globe.

The malware that turns an end-user’s Internet connection into a proxy node is often bundled with dodgy mobile apps and games. These residential proxy programs also are commonly installed via unofficial Android TV boxes sold by third-party merchants on popular e-commerce sites like Amazon, BestBuy, Newegg, and Walmart.

These TV boxes range in price from $40 to $400, are marketed under a dizzying range of no-name brands and model numbers, and frequently are advertised as a way to stream certain types of subscription video content for free. But there’s a hidden cost to this transaction: As we’ll explore in a moment, these TV boxes make up a considerable chunk of the estimated two million systems currently infected with Kimwolf.

Some of the unsanctioned Android TV boxes that come with residential proxy malware pre-installed. Image: Synthient.

Kimwolf also is quite good at infecting a range of Internet-connected digital photo frames that likewise are abundant at major e-commerce websites. In November 2025, researchers from Quokka published a report (PDF) detailing serious security issues in Android-based digital picture frames running the Uhale app — including Amazon’s bestselling digital frame as of March 2025.

There are two major security problems with these photo frames and unofficial Android TV boxes. The first is that a considerable percentage of them come with malware pre-installed, or else require the user to download an unofficial Android App Store and malware in order to use the device for its stated purpose (video content piracy). The most typical of these uninvited guests are small programs that turn the device into a residential proxy node that is resold to others.

The second big security nightmare with these photo frames and unsanctioned Android TV boxes is that they rely on a handful of Internet-connected microcomputer boards that have no discernible security or authentication requirements built-in. In other words, if you are on the same network as one or more of these devices, you can likely compromise them simultaneously by issuing a single command across the network.

THERE’S NO PLACE LIKE 127.0.0.1

The combination of these two security realities came to the fore in October 2025, when an undergraduate computer science student at the Rochester Institute of Technology began closely tracking Kimwolf’s growth, and interacting directly with its apparent creators on a daily basis.

Benjamin Brundage is the 22-year-old founder of the security firm Synthient, a startup that helps companies detect proxy networks and learn how those networks are being abused. Conducting much of his research into Kimwolf while studying for final exams, Brundage told KrebsOnSecurity in late October 2025 he suspected Kimwolf was a new Android-based variant of Aisuru, a botnet that was incorrectly blamed for a number of record-smashing DDoS attacks last fall.

Brundage says Kimwolf grew rapidly by abusing a glaring vulnerability in many of the world’s largest residential proxy services. The crux of the weakness, he explained, was that these proxy services weren’t doing enough to prevent their customers from forwarding requests to internal servers of the individual proxy endpoints.

Most proxy services take basic steps to prevent their paying customers from “going upstream” into the local network of proxy endpoints, by explicitly denying requests for local addresses specified in RFC-1918, including the well-known Network Address Translation (NAT) ranges 10.0.0.0/8, 192.168.0.0/16, and 172.16.0.0/12. These ranges allow multiple devices in a private network to access the Internet using a single public IP address, and if you run any kind of home or office network, your internal address space operates within one or more of these NAT ranges.

However, Brundage discovered that the people operating Kimwolf had figured out how to talk directly to devices on the internal networks of millions of residential proxy endpoints, simply by changing their Domain Name System (DNS) settings to match those in the RFC-1918 address ranges.

“It is possible to circumvent existing domain restrictions by using DNS records that point to 192.168.0.1 or 0.0.0.0,” Brundage wrote in a first-of-its-kind security advisory sent to nearly a dozen residential proxy providers in mid-December 2025. “This grants an attacker the ability to send carefully crafted requests to the current device or a device on the local network. This is actively being exploited, with attackers leveraging this functionality to drop malware.”

As with the digital photo frames mentioned above, many of these residential proxy services run solely on mobile devices that are running some game, VPN or other app with a hidden component that turns the user’s mobile phone into a residential proxy — often without any meaningful consent.

In a report published today, Synthient said key actors involved in Kimwolf were observed monetizing the botnet through app installs, selling residential proxy bandwidth, and selling its DDoS functionality.

“Synthient expects to observe a growing interest among threat actors in gaining unrestricted access to proxy networks to infect devices, obtain network access, or access sensitive information,” the report observed. “Kimwolf highlights the risks posed by unsecured proxy networks and their viability as an attack vector.”

ANDROID DEBUG BRIDGE

After purchasing a number of unofficial Android TV box models that were most heavily represented in the Kimwolf botnet, Brundage further discovered the proxy service vulnerability was only part of the reason for Kimwolf’s rapid rise: He also found virtually all of the devices he tested were shipped from the factory with a powerful feature called Android Debug Bridge (ADB) mode enabled by default.

Many of the unofficial Android TV boxes infected by Kimwolf include the ominous disclaimer: “Made in China. Overseas use only.” Image: Synthient.

ADB is a diagnostic tool intended for use solely during the manufacturing and testing processes, because it allows the devices to be remotely configured and even updated with new (and potentially malicious) firmware. However, shipping these devices with ADB turned on creates a security nightmare because in this state they constantly listen for and accept unauthenticated connection requests.

For example, opening a command prompt and typing “adb connect” along with a vulnerable device’s (local) IP address followed immediately by “:5555” will very quickly offer unrestricted “super user” administrative access.

Brundage said by early December, he’d identified a one-to-one overlap between new Kimwolf infections and proxy IP addresses offered for rent by China-based IPIDEA, currently the world’s largest residential proxy network by all accounts.

“Kimwolf has almost doubled in size this past week, just by exploiting IPIDEA’s proxy pool,” Brundage told KrebsOnSecurity in early December as he was preparing to notify IPIDEA and 10 other proxy providers about his research.

Brundage said Synthient first confirmed on December 1, 2025 that the Kimwolf botnet operators were tunneling back through IPIDEA’s proxy network and into the local networks of systems running IPIDEA’s proxy software. The attackers dropped the malware payload by directing infected systems to visit a specific Internet address and to call out the pass phrase “krebsfiveheadindustries” in order to unlock the malicious download.

On December 30, Synthient said it was tracking roughly 2 million IPIDEA addresses exploited by Kimwolf in the previous week. Brundage said he has witnessed Kimwolf rebuilding itself after one recent takedown effort targeting its control servers — from almost nothing to two million infected systems just by tunneling through proxy endpoints on IPIDEA for a couple of days.

Brundage said IPIDEA has a seemingly inexhaustible supply of new proxies, advertising access to more than 100 million residential proxy endpoints around the globe in the past week alone. Analyzing the exposed devices that were part of IPIDEA’s proxy pool, Synthient said it found more than two-thirds were Android devices that could be compromised with no authentication needed.

SECURITY NOTIFICATION AND RESPONSE

After charting a tight overlap in Kimwolf-infected IP addresses and those sold by IPIDEA, Brundage was eager to make his findings public: The vulnerability had clearly been exploited for several months, although it appeared that only a handful of cybercrime actors were aware of the capability. But he also knew that going public without giving vulnerable proxy providers an opportunity to understand and patch it would only lead to more mass abuse of these services by additional cybercriminal groups.

On December 17, Brundage sent a security notification to all 11 of the apparently affected proxy providers, hoping to give each at least a few weeks to acknowledge and address the core problems identified in his report before he went public. Many proxy providers who received the notification were resellers of IPIDEA that white-labeled the company’s service.

KrebsOnSecurity first sought comment from IPIDEA in October 2025, in reporting on a story about how the proxy network appeared to have benefitted from the rise of the Aisuru botnet, whose administrators appeared to shift from using the botnet primarily for DDoS attacks to simply installing IPIDEA’s proxy program, among others.

On December 25, KrebsOnSecurity received an email from an IPIDEA employee identified only as “Oliver,” who said allegations that IPIDEA had benefitted from Aisuru’s rise were baseless.

“After comprehensively verifying IP traceability records and supplier cooperation agreements, we found no association between any of our IP resources and the Aisuru botnet, nor have we received any notifications from authoritative institutions regarding our IPs being involved in malicious activities,” Oliver wrote. “In addition, for external cooperation, we implement a three-level review mechanism for suppliers, covering qualification verification, resource legality authentication and continuous dynamic monitoring, to ensure no compliance risks throughout the entire cooperation process.”

“IPIDEA firmly opposes all forms of unfair competition and malicious smearing in the industry, always participates in market competition with compliant operation and honest cooperation, and also calls on the entire industry to jointly abandon irregular and unethical behaviors and build a clean and fair market ecosystem,” Oliver continued.

Meanwhile, the same day that Oliver’s email arrived, Brundage shared a response he’d just received from IPIDEA’s security officer, who identified himself only by the first name Byron. The security officer said IPIDEA had made a number of important security changes to its residential proxy service to address the vulnerability identified in Brundage’s report.

“By design, the proxy service does not allow access to any internal or local address space,” Byron explained. “This issue was traced to a legacy module used solely for testing and debugging purposes, which did not fully inherit the internal network access restrictions. Under specific conditions, this module could be abused to reach internal resources. The affected paths have now been fully blocked and the module has been taken offline.”

Byron told Brundage IPIDEA also instituted multiple mitigations for blocking DNS resolution to internal (NAT) IP ranges, and that it was now blocking proxy endpoints from forwarding traffic on “high-risk” ports “to prevent abuse of the service for scanning, lateral movement, or access to internal services.”

An excerpt from an email sent by IPIDEA’s security officer in response to Brundage’s vulnerability notification. Click to enlarge.

Brundage said IPIDEA appears to have successfully patched the vulnerabilities he identified. He also noted he never observed the Kimwolf actors targeting proxy services other than IPIDEA, which has not responded to requests for comment.

Riley Kilmer is founder of Spur.us, a technology firm that helps companies identify and filter out proxy traffic. Kilmer said Spur has tested Brundage’s findings and confirmed that IPIDEA and all of its affiliate resellers indeed allowed full and unfiltered access to the local LAN.

Kilmer said one model of unsanctioned Android TV boxes that is especially popular — the Superbox, which we profiled in November’s Is Your Android TV Streaming Box Part of a Botnet? — leaves Android Debug Mode running on localhost:5555.

“And since Superbox turns the IP into an IPIDEA proxy, a bad actor just has to use the proxy to localhost on that port and install whatever bad SDKs [software development kits] they want,” Kilmer told KrebsOnSecurity.

Superbox media streaming boxes for sale on Walmart.com.

ECHOES FROM THE PAST

Both Brundage and Kilmer say IPIDEA appears to be the second or third reincarnation of a residential proxy network formerly known as 911S5 Proxy, a service that operated between 2014 and 2022 and was wildly popular on cybercrime forums. 911S5 Proxy imploded a week after KrebsOnSecurity published a deep dive on the service’s sketchy origins and leadership in China.

In that 2022 profile, we cited work by researchers at the University of Sherbrooke in Canada who were studying the threat 911S5 could pose to internal corporate networks. The researchers noted that “the infection of a node enables the 911S5 user to access shared resources on the network such as local intranet portals or other services.”

“It also enables the end user to probe the LAN network of the infected node,” the researchers explained. “Using the internal router, it would be possible to poison the DNS cache of the LAN router of the infected node, enabling further attacks.”

911S5 initially responded to our reporting in 2022 by claiming it was conducting a top-down security review of the service. But the proxy service abruptly closed up shop just one week later, saying a malicious hacker had destroyed all of the company’s customer and payment records. In July 2024, The U.S. Department of the Treasury sanctioned the alleged creators of 911S5, and the U.S. Department of Justice arrested the Chinese national named in my 2022 profile of the proxy service.

Kilmer said IPIDEA also operates a sister service called 922 Proxy, which the company has pitched from Day One as a seamless alternative to 911S5 Proxy.

“You cannot tell me they don’t want the 911 customers by calling it that,” Kilmer said.

Among the recipients of Synthient’s notification was the proxy giant Oxylabs. Brundage shared an email he received from Oxylabs’ security team on December 31, which acknowledged Oxylabs had started rolling out security modifications to address the vulnerabilities described in Synthient’s report.

Reached for comment, Oxylabs confirmed they “have implemented changes that now eliminate the ability to bypass the blocklist and forward requests to private network addresses using a controlled domain.” But it said there is no evidence that Kimwolf or other other attackers exploited its network.

“In parallel, we reviewed the domains identified in the reported exploitation activity and did not observe traffic associated with them,” the Oxylabs statement continued. “Based on this review, there is no indication that our residential network was impacted by these activities.”

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Consider the following scenario, in which the mere act of allowing someone to use your Wi-Fi network could lead to a Kimwolf botnet infection. In this example, a friend or family member comes to stay with you for a few days, and you grant them access to your Wi-Fi without knowing that their mobile phone is infected with an app that turns the device into a residential proxy node. At that point, your home’s public IP address will show up for rent at the website of some residential proxy provider.

Miscreants like those behind Kimwolf then use residential proxy services online to access that proxy node on your IP, tunnel back through it and into your local area network (LAN), and automatically scan the internal network for devices with Android Debug Bridge mode turned on.

By the time your guest has packed up their things, said their goodbyes and disconnected from your Wi-Fi, you now have two devices on your local network — a digital photo frame and an unsanctioned Android TV box — that are infected with Kimwolf. You may have never intended for these devices to be exposed to the larger Internet, and yet there you are.

Here’s another possible nightmare scenario: Attackers use their access to proxy networks to modify your Internet router’s settings so that it relies on malicious DNS servers controlled by the attackers — allowing them to control where your Web browser goes when it requests a website. Think that’s far-fetched? Recall the DNSChanger malware from 2012 that infected more than a half-million routers with search-hijacking malware, and ultimately spawned an entire security industry working group focused on containing and eradicating it.

XLAB

Much of what is published so far on Kimwolf has come from the Chinese security firm XLab, which was the first to chronicle the rise of the Aisuru botnet in late 2024. In its latest blog post, XLab said it began tracking Kimwolf on October 24, when the botnet’s control servers were swamping Cloudflare’s DNS servers with lookups for the distinctive domain 14emeliaterracewestroxburyma02132[.]su.

This domain and others connected to early Kimwolf variants spent several weeks topping Cloudflare’s chart of the Internet’s most sought-after domains, edging out Google.com and Apple.com of their rightful spots in the top 5 most-requested domains. That’s because during that time Kimwolf was asking its millions of bots to check in frequently using Cloudflare’s DNS servers.

The Chinese security firm XLab found the Kimwolf botnet had enslaved between 1.8 and 2 million devices, with heavy concentrations in Brazil, India, The United States of America and Argentina. Image: blog.xLab.qianxin.com

It is clear from reading the XLab report that KrebsOnSecurity (and security experts) probably erred in misattributing some of Kimwolf’s early activities to the Aisuru botnet, which appears to be operated by a different group entirely. IPDEA may have been truthful when it said it had no affiliation with the Aisuru botnet, but Brundage’s data left no doubt that its proxy service clearly was being massively abused by Aisuru’s Android variant, Kimwolf.

XLab said Kimwolf has infected at least 1.8 million devices, and has shown it is able to rebuild itself quickly from scratch.

“Analysis indicates that Kimwolf’s primary infection targets are TV boxes deployed in residential network environments,” XLab researchers wrote. “Since residential networks usually adopt dynamic IP allocation mechanisms, the public IPs of devices change over time, so the true scale of infected devices cannot be accurately measured solely by the quantity of IPs. In other words, the cumulative observation of 2.7 million IP addresses does not equate to 2.7 million infected devices.”

XLab said measuring Kimwolf’s size also is difficult because infected devices are distributed across multiple global time zones. “Affected by time zone differences and usage habits (e.g., turning off devices at night, not using TV boxes during holidays, etc.), these devices are not online simultaneously, further increasing the difficulty of comprehensive observation through a single time window,” the blog post observed.

XLab noted that the Kimwolf author shows an almost ‘obsessive’ fixation” on Yours Truly, apparently leaving “easter eggs” related to my name in multiple places through the botnet’s code and communications:

Image: XLAB.

ANALYSIS AND ADVICE

One frustrating aspect of threats like Kimwolf is that in most cases it is not easy for the average user to determine if there are any devices on their internal network which may be vulnerable to threats like Kimwolf and/or already infected with residential proxy malware.

Let’s assume that through years of security training or some dark magic you can successfully identify that residential proxy activity on your internal network was linked to a specific mobile device inside your house: From there, you’d still need to isolate and remove the app or unwanted component that is turning the device into a residential proxy.

Also, the tooling and knowledge needed to achieve this kind of visibility just isn’t there from an average consumer standpoint. The work that it takes to configure your network so you can see and interpret logs of all traffic coming in and out is largely beyond the skillset of most Internet users (and, I’d wager, many security experts). But it’s a topic worth exploring in an upcoming story.

Happily, Synthient has erected a page on its website that will state whether a visitor’s public Internet address was seen among those of Kimwolf-infected systems. Brundage also has compiled a list of the unofficial Android TV boxes that are most highly represented in the Kimwolf botnet.

If you own a TV box that matches one of these model names and/or numbers, please just rip it out of your network. If you encounter one of these devices on the network of a family member or friend, send them a link to this story and explain that it’s not worth the potential hassle and harm created by keeping them plugged in.

The top 15 product devices represented in the Kimwolf botnet, according to Synthient.

Chad Seaman is a principal security researcher with Akamai Technologies. Seaman said he wants more consumers to be wary of these pseudo Android TV boxes to the point where they avoid them altogether.

“I want the consumer to be paranoid of these crappy devices and of these residential proxy schemes,” he said. “We need to highlight why they’re dangerous to everyone and to the individual. The whole security model where people think their LAN (Local Internal Network) is safe, that there aren’t any bad guys on the LAN so it can’t be that dangerous is just really outdated now.”

“The idea that an app can enable this type of abuse on my network and other networks, that should really give you pause,” about which devices to allow onto your local network, Seaman said. “And it’s not just Android devices here. Some of these proxy services have SDKs for Mac and Windows, and the iPhone. It could be running something that inadvertently cracks open your network and lets countless random people inside.”

In July 2025, Google filed a “John Doe” lawsuit (PDF) against 25 unidentified defendants collectively dubbed the “BadBox 2.0 Enterprise,” which Google described as a botnet of over ten million unsanctioned Android streaming devices engaged in advertising fraud. Google said the BADBOX 2.0 botnet, in addition to compromising multiple types of devices prior to purchase, also can infect devices by requiring the download of malicious apps from unofficial marketplaces.

Google’s lawsuit came on the heels of a June 2025 advisory from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which warned that cyber criminals were gaining unauthorized access to home networks by either configuring the products with malware prior to the user’s purchase, or infecting the device as it downloads required applications that contain backdoors — usually during the set-up process.

The FBI said BADBOX 2.0 was discovered after the original BADBOX campaign was disrupted in 2024. The original BADBOX was identified in 2023, and primarily consisted of Android operating system devices that were compromised with backdoor malware prior to purchase.

Lindsay Kaye is vice president of threat intelligence at HUMAN Security, a company that worked closely on the BADBOX investigations. Kaye said the BADBOX botnets and the residential proxy networks that rode on top of compromised devices were detected because they enabled a ridiculous amount of advertising fraud, as well as ticket scalping, retail fraud, account takeovers and content scraping.

Kaye said consumers should stick to known brands when it comes to purchasing things that require a wired or wireless connection.

“If people are asking what they can do to avoid being victimized by proxies, it’s safest to stick with name brands,” Kaye said. “Anything promising something for free or low-cost, or giving you something for nothing just isn’t worth it. And be careful about what apps you allow on your phone.”

Many wireless routers these days make it relatively easy to deploy a “Guest” wireless network on-the-fly. Doing so allows your guests to browse the Internet just fine but it blocks their device from being able to talk to other devices on the local network — such as shared folders, printers and drives. If someone — a friend, family member, or contractor — requests access to your network, give them the guest Wi-Fi network credentials if you have that option.

There is a small but vocal pro-piracy camp that is almost condescendingly dismissive of the security threats posed by these unsanctioned Android TV boxes. These tech purists positively chafe at the idea of people wholesale discarding one of these TV boxes. A common refrain from this camp is that Internet-connected devices are not inherently bad or good, and that even factory-infected boxes can be flashed with new firmware or custom ROMs that contain no known dodgy software.

However, it’s important to point out that the majority of people buying these devices are not security or hardware experts; the devices are sought out because they dangle something of value for “free.” Most buyers have no idea of the bargain they’re making when plugging one of these dodgy TV boxes into their network.

It is somewhat remarkable that we haven’t yet seen the entertainment industry applying more visible pressure on the major e-commerce vendors to stop peddling this insecure and actively malicious hardware that is largely made and marketed for video piracy. These TV boxes are a public nuisance for bundling malicious software while having no apparent security or authentication built-in, and these two qualities make them an attractive nuisance for cybercriminals.

Stay tuned for Part II in this series, which will poke through clues left behind by the people who appear to have built Kimwolf and benefited from it the most.

New Year Reset: A Quick Guide to Improving Your Digital Hygiene in 2026

31 December 2025 at 11:00

Scams didn’t slow down in 2025—and all signs point to the problem getting worse in 2026.

While the final numbers aren’t in yet, reported losses are already on track to break records. Through just the first half of 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) cited nearly $6.5 billion in scam-related losses, putting the year on pace to surpass 2024’s total. And it’s not just isolated incidents: 73% of Americans say they’ve experienced at least one scam or online attack.

As scams become more convincing, often powered by AI and designed to blend into everyday digital life, basic “spot the red flag” advice isn’t enough anymore. Protecting yourself now means tightening up your digital hygiene: how you manage passwords, personal data, online accounts, and the everyday tools you rely on to stay safe.

The good news is that modern protection has evolved just as quickly as the threats. Many of the most effective safeguards can be set up quickly and then work in the background over time.

Below, we’ll walk through practical steps you can take to improve your digital hygiene for 2026, using protections included with McAfee+ to help reduce your exposure to scams, data misuse, and identity theft.

1) Replace every weak password, starting with your email. 

Think about your passwords and everything they give you access to … your finances, online shopping accounts, banking, and of course every important thing in your email account. 

Now are any of those passwords weak, re-used, or highly similar? Don’t worry if the answer to that is “yes.” You can switch them over to strong, unique passwords across all your accounts. Using a password manager like ours helps you create strong, unique while also storing them securely. Quickly. 

Q&A   Q: Should I use a password manager? 

A: Yes. It’s the easiest way to create strong, unique passwords for all your online accounts, which protects you from data breaches and hacks.  

 

So, what makes up a “strong and unique” password? 

It contains a mix of 16 uppercase and lowercase letters, numbers, and symbols while never reusing that password elsewhere. That makes the password incredibly tough to crack and protects your other accounts if that password gets caught up in a breach (it won’t work on any other account). 

Yes, creating strong and unique passwords for your dozens and dozens of accounts can be … demanding. But that’s where a password manager comes in. It does that work for you. 

2) Delete those old accounts and protect yourself from data breaches. 

Speaking of all the accounts you have, how many of them do you really need? And how many of them have you forgotten about altogether? It’s time to track them down and close them up. Why? Data breaches of various sizes hack into an estimated 3.5 million accounts on average each day, so the odds of an old account of yours getting compromised are better than you might think. But where do you even start? 

 

Q&A 

 Q: Should I delete my old accounts? 

A: Yes. When you delete old accounts, you reduce your digital footprint and lower the risk of exposure to data breaches, both of which help protect your personal info.  

 

Our Online Account Cleanup can track down those old accounts for you. It scans for accounts you no longer use and helps you delete the ones you choose, along with your personal info. In our McAfee+ Advanced and McAfee+ Ultimate plans, you get full-service Online Account Cleanup, which sends the data deletion requests for you. 

3) Keep spammers and scammers at bay by removing personal info from the internet. 

Data brokers sell all kinds of info that power all kinds of spam and scams. It’s one way spammers and scammers get contact info like emails and phone numbers, and it’s yet another way they get detailed info to target their ads and their attacks. 

For example, beyond your full name, home address, phone numbers, email addresses, and date of birth, many also have info about your family members, employment, and past purchases. Data brokers might gather and sell other info like religious and political leanings, health conditions, and employment history. Simply put, this detailed profile makes it easier for spammers and scammers to target you. 

 

Q&A 

 

 Q: Can people find my detailed personal info online?  

Yes, and some of the easiest places to find it are on data broker sites. They collect and analyze up to hundreds of bits of personal info, often without your knowledge or consent. Further, they’ll sell it to any buyer, including scammers. 

 

 

Where do they harvest this info? From public records, shopper loyalty programs, and even from app data—all kinds of sources. And that underscores the problem, some data brokers keep exhaustive amounts of data about people, all in one place.  

And they’ll sell it to anyone who pays for it. You can help reduce those scam texts and calls by removing your info from those sites. A service like our Personal Data Cleanup can do that work for you. It scans some of the riskiest data broker sites, shows you which ones are selling your personal info, and helps you remove it. 

4) Protect privacy with a VPN (it’s not just for travel anymore). 

One of the first things that comes to mind about VPNs is travel, a great way you can stay secure while using public Wi-Fi in airports and cafes. It works at home as well, giving you an extra layer of security when you bank, shop, or do anything that involves sensitive info. Yet it offers another big benefit. It helps make you more private, because it’s not just hackers who want to snoop on you online. 

 

Q&A Block 

 

 Q: What is a VPN? 

 A: A VPN, or Virtual Private Network, hides your IP address and encrypts your internet connection in a secure “tunnel” that shields your online activity from snoops, advertisers, and your Internet Service Provider (ISP). 

 

For example, some ISPs collect your browsing data. In the United States and many other countries, ISPs can legally monitor and record info about the websites you visit and the apps you use. They can use it for advertising and analytics purposes, and, in some cases, they may share it with third parties. 

When you use a VPN, it encrypts all the data leaving your device and routes it through a secure server. As a result, your ISP can only see that you are connected to a VPN server, and it can’t track which websites you visit or the data you send and receive. Without a doubt, going online with a VPN makes you safer and keeps you more private.  

5) As AI scams become the norm, get a scam detector working for you. 

We saw big spikes in several types of scams over the year, and naturally a spike in reported losses followed. One reason for the jump is that AI tools have made it even easier for scammers to create convincing texts, emails, and deepfake videos designed to rip people off.   

 

Q&A 

 Q: How bad are scams today? 

 A: According to a 2025 Pew Research Center survey, 73% of U.S. adults said they’ve experienced at least one online scam or attack, with 32% reporting an incident within the past year.iv  

 

They’re getting tougher to spot too. In the earlier days of AI-created content, you could often spot the telltale signs of a fake. That’s not always the case anymore, and scams are looking more and more sophisticated as AI tools evolve. 

But you have tools of your own. Our Scam Detector protects you across text, email, and video by spotting scams and detecting deepfake videos (like the one of a deepfaked Taylor Swift promoting a bogus cookware offer). You also have our Web Protection which detects links to scam sites and other sketchy corners of the internet while you browse. Both will alert you if a link might take you to a sketchy site. It’ll also block those sites if you accidentally tap or click on a bad link. 

6) And just in case, get the reassurance of identity theft protection. 

So, let’s say the unfortunate happens to you. You get scammed. Maybe it’s a few bucks, maybe it’s more. You’re faced with a couple issues. One, that money could be gone for good depending on how you paid the scammer. Two, also depending on the payment method, the scammer might have your financial info.   

 

Q&A Block 

 

 Q: What is the cost of identity theft? 

A: Based on reports to the FTC, the median loss was about $500 in 2024, with more than 10% of victims claiming they lost $10,000 or more. However, it levels an emotional cost as well. The time and stress involved in resolving identity theft can be significant. 

 

This is where something like our ID Theft & Restoration Coverage comes in. It gives you up to $2 million in identity theft coverage and identity restoration support if it’s determined you’re a victim of identity theft.​ Further, it puts a licensed recovery pro on the case to restore your credit and your identity, which takes that time-consuming burden off your shoulders. 

The post New Year Reset: A Quick Guide to Improving Your Digital Hygiene in 2026 appeared first on McAfee Blog.

Happy 16th Birthday, KrebsOnSecurity.com!

29 December 2025 at 20:23

KrebsOnSecurity.com celebrates its 16th anniversary today! A huge “thank you” to all of our readers — newcomers, long-timers and drive-by critics alike. Your engagement this past year here has been tremendous and truly a salve on a handful of dark days. Happily, comeuppance was a strong theme running through our coverage in 2025, with a primary focus on entities that enabled complex and globally-dispersed cybercrime services.

Image: Shutterstock, Younes Stiller Kraske.

In May 2024, we scrutinized the history and ownership of Stark Industries Solutions Ltd., a “bulletproof hosting” provider that came online just two weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine and served as a primary staging ground for repeated Kremlin cyberattacks and disinformation efforts. A year later, Stark and its two co-owners were sanctioned by the European Union, but our analysis showed those penalties have done little to stop the Stark proprietors from rebranding and transferring considerable network assets to other entities they control.

In December 2024, KrebsOnSecurity profiled Cryptomus, a financial firm registered in Canada that emerged as the payment processor of choice for dozens of Russian cryptocurrency exchanges and websites hawking cybercrime services aimed at Russian-speaking customers. In October 2025, Canadian financial regulators ruled that Cryptomus had grossly violated its anti-money laundering laws, and levied a record $176 million fine against the platform.

In September 2023, KrebsOnSecurity published findings from researchers who concluded that a series of six-figure cyberheists across dozens of victims resulted from thieves cracking master passwords stolen from the password manager service LastPass in 2022. In a court filing in March 2025, U.S. federal agents investigating a spectacular $150 million cryptocurrency heist said they had reached the same conclusion.

Phishing was a major theme of this year’s coverage, which peered inside the day-to-day operations of several voice phishing gangs that routinely carried out elaborate, convincing, and financially devastating cryptocurrency thefts. A Day in the Life of a Prolific Voice Phishing Crew examined how one cybercrime gang abused legitimate services at Apple and Google to force a variety of outbound communications to their users, including emails, automated phone calls and system-level messages sent to all signed-in devices.

Nearly a half-dozen stories in 2025 dissected the incessant SMS phishing or “smishing” coming from China-based phishing kit vendors, who make it easy for customers to convert phished payment card data into mobile wallets from Apple and Google. In an effort to wrest control over this phishing syndicate’s online resources, Google has since filed at least two John Doe lawsuits targeting these groups and dozens of unnamed defendants.

In January, we highlighted research into a dodgy and sprawling content delivery network called Funnull that specialized in helping China-based gambling and money laundering websites distribute their operations across multiple U.S.-based cloud providers. Five months later, the U.S. government sanctioned Funnull, identifying it as a top source of investment/romance scams known as “pig butchering.”

Image: Shutterstock, ArtHead.

In May, Pakistan arrested 21 people alleged to be working for Heartsender, a phishing and malware dissemination service that KrebsOnSecurity first profiled back in 2015. The arrests came shortly after the FBI and the Dutch police seized dozens of servers and domains for the group. Many of those arrested were first publicly identified in a 2021 story here about how they’d inadvertently infected their computers with malware that gave away their real-life identities.

In April, the U.S. Department of Justice indicted the proprietors of a Pakistan-based e-commerce company for conspiring to distribute synthetic opioids in the United States. The following month, KrebsOnSecurity detailed how the proprietors of the sanctioned entity are perhaps better known for operating an elaborate and lengthy scheme to scam westerners seeking help with trademarks, book writing, mobile app development and logo designs.

Earlier this month, we examined an academic cheating empire turbocharged by Google Ads that earned tens of millions of dollars in revenue and has curious ties to a Kremlin-connected oligarch whose Russian university builds drones for Russia’s war against Ukraine.

An attack drone advertised on a website hosted in the same network as Russia’s largest private education company — Synergy University.

As ever, KrebsOnSecurity endeavored to keep close tabs on the world’s biggest and most disruptive botnets, which pummeled the Internet this year with distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) assaults that were two to three times the size and impact of previous record DDoS attacks.

In June, KrebsOnSecurity.com was hit by the largest DDoS attack that Google had ever mitigated at the time (we are a grateful guest of Google’s excellent Project Shield offering). Experts blamed that attack on an Internet-of-Things botnet called Aisuru that had rapidly grown in size and firepower since its debut in late 2024. Another Aisuru attack on Cloudflare just days later practically doubled the size of the June attack against this website. Not long after that, Aisuru was blamed for a DDoS that again doubled the previous record.

In October, it appeared the cybercriminals in control of Aisuru had shifted the botnet’s focus from DDoS to a more sustainable and profitable use: Renting hundreds of thousands of infected Internet of Things (IoT) devices to proxy services that help cybercriminals anonymize their traffic.

However, it has recently become clear that at least some of the disruptive botnet and residential proxy activity attributed to Aisuru last year likely was the work of people responsible for building and testing a powerful botnet known as Kimwolf. Chinese security firm XLab, which was the first to chronicle Aisuru’s rise in 2024, recently profiled Kimwolf as easily the world’s biggest and most dangerous collection of compromised machines — with approximately 1.83 million devices under its thumb as of December 17.

XLab noted that the Kimwolf author “shows an almost ‘obsessive’ fixation on the well-known cybersecurity investigative journalist Brian Krebs, leaving easter eggs related to him in multiple places.”

Image: XLab, Kimwolf Botnet Exposed: The Massive Android Botnet with 1.8 million infected devices.

I am happy to report that the first KrebsOnSecurity stories of 2026 will go deep into the origins of Kimwolf, and examine the botnet’s unique and highly invasive means of spreading digital disease far and wide. The first in that series will include a somewhat sobering and global security notification concerning the devices and residential proxy services that are inadvertently helping to power Kimwolf’s rapid growth.

Thank you once again for your continued readership, encouragement and support. If you like the content we publish at KrebsOnSecurity.com, please consider making an exception for our domain in your ad blocker. The ads we run are limited to a handful of static images that are all served in-house and vetted by me (there is no third-party content on this site, period). Doing so would help further support the work you see here almost every week.

And if you haven’t done so yet, sign up for our email newsletter! (62,000 other subscribers can’t be wrong, right?). The newsletter is just a plain text email that goes out the moment a new story is published. We send between one and two emails a week, we never share our email list, and we don’t run surveys or promotions.

Thanks again, and Happy New Year everyone! Be safe out there.

❌