What happened CTM360 researchers have uncovered a large-scale fraud operation using Telegram’s Mini App feature to run cryptocurrency scams, impersonate major brands, and distribute Android malware. The platform behind the operation, dubbed FEMITBOT based on a string found in API responses, uses Telegram bots and embedded Mini Apps to create convincing app-like experiences within the […]
The post Telegram Mini Apps Abused for Crypto Scams and Android Malware Delivery appeared first on CISO Whisperer.
The post Telegram Mini Apps Abused for Crypto Scams and Android Malware Delivery appeared first on Security Boulevard.
The primary goal for attackers in a phishing campaign is to bypass email security and trick the potential victim into revealing their data. To achieve this, scammers employ a wide range of tactics, from redirect links to QR codes. Additionally, they heavily rely on legitimate sources for malicious email campaigns. Specifically, we’ve recently observed an uptick in phishing attacks leveraging Amazon SES.
Amazon Simple Email Service (Amazon SES) is a cloud-based email platform designed for highly reliable transactional and marketing message delivery. It integrates seamlessly with other products in Amazon’s cloud ecosystem, AWS.
At first glance, it might seem like just another delivery channel for email phishing, but that isn’t the case. The insidious nature of Amazon SES attacks lies in the fact that attackers aren’t using suspicious or dangerous domains; instead, they are leveraging infrastructure that both users and security systems have grown to trust. These emails utilize SPF, DKIM, and DMARC authentication protocols, passing all standard provider checks, and almost always contain .amazonses.com in the Message-ID headers. Consequently, from a technical standpoint, every email sent via Amazon SES – even a phishing one – looks completely legitimate.
Phishing URLs can be masked with redirects: a user sees a link like amazonaws.com in the email and clicks it with confidence, only to be sent to a phishing site rather than a legitimate one. Amazon SES also allows for custom HTML templates, which attackers use to craft more convincing emails. Because this is legitimate infrastructure, the sender’s IP address won’t end up on reputation-based blocklists. Blocking it would restrict all incoming mail sent through Amazon SES. For major services, that kind of measure is ineffective, as it would significantly disrupt user workflows due to a massive number of false positives.
In most cases, attackers gain access to Amazon SES through leaked IAM (AWS Identity and Access Management) access keys. Developers frequently leave these keys exposed in public GitHub repositories, ENV files, Docker images, configuration backups, or even in publicly accessible S3 buckets. To hunt for these IAM keys, phishers use various tools, such as automated bots based on the open-source utility TruffleHog, which is designed for detecting leaked secrets. After verifying the key’s permissions and email sending limits, attackers are equipped to spread a massive volume of phishing messages.
In early 2026, one of the most common themes in phishing emails sent with Amazon SES was fake notifications from electronic signature services.
Phishing email imitating a Docusign notification
The email’s technical headers confirm that it was sent with Amazon SES. At first glance, it all looks legitimate enough.
Phishing email headers
In these emails, the victim is typically asked to click a link to review and sign a specific document.
Phishing email with a “document”
Upon clicking the link, the user is directed to a sign-in form hosted on amazonaws.com. This can easily mislead the victim, convincing them that what they’re doing is safe.
Phishing sign-in form
The resulting form is, of course, a phishing page, and any data entered into it goes directly to the attackers.
However, Amazon SES is used for more than just standard phishing; it’s also a vehicle for a very sophisticated type of BEC campaigns. In one case we investigated, a fraudulent email appeared to contain a series of messages exchanged between an employee of the target organization and a service provider about an outstanding invoice. The email was sent as if from that employee to the company’s finance department, requesting urgent payment.
BEC email featuring a fake conversation between an employee and a vendor
The PDF attachments didn’t contain any malicious phishing URLs or QR codes, only payment details and supporting documentation.
Forged financial documents
Naturally, the email didn’t originate with the employee, but with an attacker impersonating them. The entire thread quoted within the email was actually fabricated, with the messages formatted to appear as a legitimate forwarded thread to a cursory glance. This type of attack aims to lower the user’s guard and trick them into transferring funds to the scammers’ account.
Phishing via Amazon SES is shifting from isolated incidents into a steady trend. By weaponizing this service, attackers avoid the effort of building dubious domains and mail infrastructure from scratch. Instead, they hijack existing access keys to gain the ability to blast out thousands of phishing emails. These messages pass email authentication, originate from IP addresses that are unlikely to be blocklisted, and contain links to phishing forms that look entirely legitimate.
Since these Amazon SES phishing attacks stem from compromised or leaked AWS credentials, prioritizing the security of these accounts is critical. To mitigate these risks, we recommend following these guidelines:
We recommend that users remain vigilant when handling email. Do not determine whether an email is safe based solely on the From field. If you receive unexpected documents via email, a prudent precaution is to verify the request with the sender through a different communication channel. Always carefully inspect where links in the body of an email actually lead. Additionally, robust email security solutions can provide an essential layer of protection for both corporate and personal correspondence.
A new report from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission reveals that while China is aggressively prosecuting fraud targeting its own citizens, it continues to turn a blind eye to industrial-scale scam centers victimizing Americans. This selective enforcement has incentivized Chinese criminal syndicates to pivot toward U.S. targets, resulting in over $10 billion in losses in 2024 through "pig-butchering" and crypto investment schemes. As attackers integrate AI to scale these operations and exploit cryptocurrency for money laundering, experts warn that organizations must treat social engineering as a structural infrastructure threat rather than a simple training issue, as diplomatic solutions remain unlikely in the current geopolitical climate
The post China Has its Sights Set on Scammers, Just Not Those Targeting Americans appeared first on Security Boulevard.
The legal system persists in framing "computer crime" through the archaic lens of tangible property—theft and conversion—despite the fact that information is non-rivalrous and easily duplicated without depriving the original owner of possession. Recent federal indictments, such as the Van Dyke and SPLC matters, reveal a "doctrinally aggressive" expansion where the government claims universal ownership of information to prosecute misuse rather than disclosure. As the Supreme Court moves to narrow the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and reject "right to control" theories, a widening gap emerges between prosecutorial tactics and judicial constraints, highlighting a desperate need to shift the legal focus from "ownership" to duties of confidentiality and authorized use.
The post It’s Not the Computer, Stupid. It’s the Information in It. Two Recent Indictments Stretch the Limits of “Theft” of Information. appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Image Source: Dubai Police[/caption]
Entrar