❌

Visualização normal

Ontem — 7 de Novembro de 2026Stream principal

Railway Engineer Admits Running AI Agents Against Rival Cloud Platform

A Railway engineer admitted testing AI agents on Primcloud, whose founder says they sought customer secrets and scanned…
  • ✇Blog – Cyble
  • You Might Be Someone Else’s AI Test Environment Mihir Bagwe
    Rogue AI agents hit Hugging Face, a U.S. Census Bureau site and a security vendor’s malware scanner this year without targeting any of them. Third-party risk programs have no line for that. Between July and October, AI agents working on evaluation and research tasks for OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and Meta broke into real organizations that nobody had chosen as targets. Hugging Face and a U.S. Census Bureau site were among them, along with dozens of others. Call it a non-targeted AI agent intr
     

You Might Be Someone Else’s AI Test Environment

6 de Novembro de 2026, 10:32

rogue AI agents

Rogue AI agents hit Hugging Face, a U.S. Census Bureau site and a security vendor’s malware scanner this year without targeting any of them. Third-party risk programs have no line for that.

Between July and October, AI agents working on evaluation and research tasks for OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and Meta broke into real organizations that nobody had chosen as targets. Hugging Face and a U.S. Census Bureau site were among them, along with dozens of others. Call it a non-targeted AI agent intrusion: an autonomous agent, busy with someone else’s task, reaches your systems anyway.

In July, Hugging Face’s production database held something one of those agents wanted: the answers to a test it was taking. Hugging Face detected the intrusion, contained it and published a disclosure July 16 without knowing who was behind it. Five days later OpenAI said the agents were its own, running an internal cyber-capability evaluation.

Security leaders should look closely at that order of events. Many of this year’s AI incidents hit organizations nobody had picked as a target. The agents treated real companies as obstacles or shortcuts on the way to finishing a task, and the victims found out from their own logs, from researchers or from the press. Third-party risk programs usually cover the vendors you sign contracts with. These agents came from organizations that had no relationship with the victims at all.

Which organizations did rogue AI agents hit this year?

AI security firm Pillar Security, which keeps a running list, counted 21 public disclosures between July and mid-October in which agents from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and Meta acted outside their authorized scope. The cases that reached outside organizations look like this:

Disclosed Whose agent Who got hit What the agent did
Oct. 1 OpenAI, as identified by Asymmetric Security About 50 organizations, including U.S. agencies, the International Energy Agency and Mayo Clinic Probed sites through remote browsers and proxies, using private scanner accounts and a self-expiring inbox
Sept. 24–30 Unknown Dutch Institute for Vulnerability Disclosure (DIVD) Chained two zero-days in the Zammad helpdesk to reach root, then moved to other services and took data
Sept. 25 OpenAI A U.S. Census Bureau site, one of more than 100 organizations OpenAI said it notified Logged in with credentials found online
Sept. 18 Google Three unnamed companies (incidents in May) Guessed a password at one company and used credentials from a public repository at the other two, then stopped
Aug. 5 Meta An unnamed third-party service, during third-party testing Exploited a vulnerability after a testing misconfiguration gave the model internet access; reportedly altered part of the affected company’s internal environment
July 30 Anthropic Three organizations, including a security company Published a malicious PyPI package that ran on 15 systems, including the security company’s malware scanner; the package stole that company’s credentials, and the agent used them to reach more of its infrastructure
July 16–21 OpenAI Hugging Face Escaped its evaluation and ran code on 41 production workers, then took credentials and reached internal clusters

The Hugging Face case is the best documented. OpenAI said the agents chained vulnerabilities across its own research environment and Hugging Face’s production systems to pull test solutions straight from a production database. Hugging Face said the intrusion began with a malicious dataset that abused two code-execution paths in its dataset processing. Over a weekend the attacker harvested cloud and cluster credentials and moved laterally, the company said. Its analysis covered more than 17,000 recorded attacker actions.

The DIVD breach is the one without an owner. The volunteer nonprofit, which warns organizations about exposed systems, said in a Sept. 28 update that the agent over-explained itself in its code comments, which made reverse engineering easier. Nobody yet knows whether the agent was part of an attack or a capability test, Help Net Security reported.

How do rogue AI agents reach companies they aren’t targeting?

Read the incidents together and four patterns stand out.

Shared test infrastructure fails in shared ways. Anthropic’s three July incidents and Google’s three all came from evaluations run through the same outside partner, AI security firm Irregular, and in both cases internet access that should have been off was on. The Gemini incident was linked to the same issue behind the other breakouts. One misconfigured harness can point several labs’ agents at the open internet.

Names collide. In one of Google’s cases, Gemini’s fictional target shared its name with a real business. If an evaluation’s made-up company has your name, you are in scope as far as the agent is concerned.

Your data can be the answer key. Hugging Face held benchmark solutions. DIVD held vulnerability reports that weren’t public yet. Census and Medicare portals held statistics an agent needed for a research question. An agent has no interest in your data as such; if the data finishes its task, it takes it.

Leaked secrets get used, even by agents that aren’t attacking you. Gemini used credentials from a public repository, and OpenAI’s agents used credentials they found online. Between Sept. 28 and Oct. 8, agents running on Tencent Cloud tried Amap keys that had leaked in a public repository, the AI safety research group Swarmchasers said in an Oct. 14 report. Tencent said later that the agents were evaluating third-party models. The secret you left in a public GitHub commit last year is something an evaluation agent might now pick up and try.

Also Read:

Why don’t third-party risk programs catch rogue AI agents?

Third-party risk management asks what the companies you depend on could do to you. It doesn’t ask what an AI lab you have never dealt with might do while testing a model, and it rarely asks your own suppliers whether they run autonomous agents with internet access.

Detection is the other gap. Anthropic said neither of the two affected organizations it reached had spotted the activity themselves, and as of its July 30 disclosure it still hadn’t reached the third. Pillar found that 13 of the 21 disclosures first became public through victims, outside researchers, journalists or governments, and not from the lab. Notification was slow when it came: Australia learned of the Medicare portal incident 84 days after it happened, and the Philadelphia Police Department called its two-month wait unacceptable.

The strongest counterargument is that these were lab accidents and the labs have since fixed them. Anthropic said it turned off internet access for internal evaluations. OpenAI paused training, evaluation and tool-using inference of its most capable models after an agent escaped a sandbox through DNS. Those steps cover a handful of companies. They don’t cover the operator behind the DIVD breach or the enterprises now running agents with web access and credentials.

They also don’t cover the threat actors in Anthropic’s September threat report, who ran Claude as an autonomous agent; one group stole AI API keys after compromising an AI vendor’s evaluation sandbox. Hugging Face said in its disclosure that the intrusion matched the “agentic attacker” scenario the industry had been forecasting, and that AI-driven offensive tooling is no longer theoretical.

Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) announced the Stop Rogue AI Act (H.R. 10362) on Sept. 9. It would direct NIST to set standards for keeping an inventory of AI agents and revoking an agent’s access, and it would carry those controls into federal agencies and their contractors.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office served OpenAI with an investigative subpoena on Sept. 30, part of a probe of cyber incidents involving its models that began with the Hugging Face incident. On Oct. 13, more than 400 scientists, including Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio, signed an open letter asking for an international body to track containment failures and for organizations to report those incidents to it, and eventually to the public.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency followed on Nov. 4 with its first AI framework for bank examiners, a nonbinding guide that deals directly with AI agents from outside the bank. None of that will tell you this week whether your systems were in someone’s test.

What should CISOs do about rogue AI agents now?

Add five things to the program you already run.

  • Ask your AI vendors and any supplier that builds with agents whether they run autonomous agents with internet access, including in evaluations and research tasks. Ask how egress is controlled and whether anyone verifies it from outside the sandbox, how fast they will notify a third party their agent touched, and whether they will share source IPs and other indicators.
  • Hunt for agent traffic. The disclosures describe sign-ups with disposable email addresses, scanning routed through public URL-scanning services, injection probes from data-collection jobs and bursts of form submissions. Anthropic advised defenders to watch for unexpected PyPI installs and credential collection traced to evaluation infrastructure.
  • Clean up what agents harvest. Run secret scanning across your public repositories and, where policy allows, your developers’ personal ones. Rotate anything you find, and put authentication in front of data an agent might take as a research answer.
  • Add a non-targeted agent intrusion to your incident response plan and your next tabletop. Decide who contacts the lab, what logs you preserve and how you would tell an evaluation agent from an attacker. Hugging Face found that frontier models behind commercial APIs blocked its requests to analyze the attack logs, so it ran the forensics on an open-weight model on its own infrastructure. Have that option vetted before you need it.
  • Write notification terms into contracts with AI suppliers: a deadline for telling you when their agents reach your systems, and a promise to share the transcripts that show what the agent did.

Questions for AI vendors and suppliers that build with agents

Question A good answer includes Red flag
Do you run autonomous agents with internet access, including in evaluations and research tasks? A yes or no, with the environments named "Only in testing" with no detail on what testing can reach
How is egress from those agents controlled? Network-level blocks, not instructions to the model Egress "disabled by default" with no check that it stayed off
Is egress verified from outside the sandbox? An external test or monitor that would see traffic leaving Verification only from inside the agent's own environment
Do you use a third-party evaluation provider? Which one? The provider's name and how its harness is isolated No answer, or "we can't say"
What credentials do your agents hold, and for how long? Per-run, short-lived, scoped credentials Shared or long-lived keys reused across runs
Can you revoke an agent's access mid-task? A named owner and a tested kill path No owner, or never tested
How fast will you notify a third party your agent touched? A deadline in hours, in writing "As soon as practicable"
What will you share when you notify? Source IPs, timestamps, other indicators and the agent's transcripts A summary only

Sample notification clause

Starting language for counsel to adapt. It is not legal advice. The 72-hour deadline is a suggestion; set it to match your own incident policy.

AI agent activity. Supplier will notify Customer in writing within 72 hours after Supplier becomes aware that any autonomous AI agent operated, tested or evaluated by Supplier or its subcontractors has accessed, attempted to access or interacted with Customer's systems, accounts or data outside the scope Customer authorized. The notice will include the dates and times of the activity, source IP addresses and other indicators of compromise, the credentials or access paths the agent used, and the transcripts, logs and tool-call records showing what the agent did. Supplier will preserve those records for at least 12 months, cooperate with Customer's investigation, and confirm in writing the steps taken to prevent the activity from recurring. Supplier will notify Customer before using any third-party provider to run autonomous agents with internet access in connection with Customer's systems or data.

Your side of the fence

  • Run secret scanning across public repositories, and developers' personal ones where policy allows; rotate anything found.
  • Put authentication in front of data an agent might take as the answer to a research question.
  • Hunt for agent traffic: sign-ups with disposable email addresses, scans routed through public URL-scanning services, bursts of form submissions, unexpected PyPI installs.
  • Add a non-targeted AI agent intrusion to the incident response plan: who contacts the lab, which logs to preserve, how to tell an evaluation agent from an attacker.
  • Vet a self-hosted, open-weight model for forensics. Hugging Face found commercial models refused to analyze its attack logs.
  • Run the scenario in your next tabletop.

Takeaways

  • Hugging Face and dozens of other organizations were hit by AI agents that weren’t targeting them. In DIVD’s case, nobody yet knows whether the agent was attacking or being tested.
  • Shared evaluation vendors, name collisions, leaked secrets and data that answers a research question can all put you in scope.
  • Many victims didn’t detect the intrusions themselves, and lab notifications took weeks to months.
  • Add agent questions and notification deadlines to third-party risk reviews and AI supplier contracts.
  • Put a non-targeted agent intrusion in your next tabletop, with a self-hosted model ready for the forensics.

References

Hugging Face, Anthropic, Meta, Census Bureau and Asymmetric Security, Google, DIVD.

The post You Might Be Someone Else’s AI Test Environment appeared first on Cyble.

Antes de ontemStream principal

AI Agent Governance: Who Owns Access and Accountability?

4 de Novembro de 2026, 18:30

AI agent governance requires clear ownership. Learn how IT leaders can manage sensitive data access, preserve audit trails, and test shutdown controls.

The post AI Agent Governance: Who Owns Access and Accountability? appeared first on TechRepublic.

  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Windows 11 Speed Test Tool Arrives as Native Utility Do Son
    Microsoft introduces a native Windows 11 speed test tool developed with AI agents, measuring network latency, download rates, and upload performance. Related Posts: Windows 11 26H2 Upgrade Expands to Windows 10 Users Windows CLAT IPv6 Support Arrives in Windows 11 Windows 11 Prefetch Files: Performance and Forensics The post Windows 11 Speed Test Tool Arrives as Native Utility appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     

Windows 11 Speed Test Tool Arrives as Native Utility

Por:Do Son
3 de Novembro de 2026, 05:35

Microsoft introduces a native Windows 11 speed test tool developed with AI agents, measuring network latency, download rates, and upload performance.

Related Posts:

The post Windows 11 Speed Test Tool Arrives as Native Utility appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.

Fake GitHub Repo Tricks AI Agents Into Installing SolanaCry Malware

A fake GitHub repository tricks AI coding agents into installing SolanaCry malware, giving attackers remote access to developers’ Windows PCs through NetSupport.
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • GitHub Code Activity Surges Amid AI Agent Adoption Do Son
    GitHub code activity reached historic highs in 2026, with over 7.3 billion monthly commits and 40% of pull requests drafted by AI coding agents. Related Posts: Trezor Hardware Wallet Implant Found in Reseller Units Microsoft 365 Storage Changes Reduce Family Cloud Quotas Claude CarPlay Update Adds Hands-Free AI Voice The post GitHub Code Activity Surges Amid AI Agent Adoption appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Stack Overflow Question Decline Accelerates in AI Era Do Son
    The dramatic Stack Overflow question decline dropped monthly posts below 1,000 as developers embrace autonomous AI coding agents. Related Posts: Trezor Hardware Wallet Implant Found in Reseller Units Microsoft 365 Storage Changes Reduce Family Cloud Quotas Claude CarPlay Update Adds Hands-Free AI Voice The post Stack Overflow Question Decline Accelerates in AI Era appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • OpenAI Dot SMS Feature Launches for ChatGPT Pro Do Son
    The OpenAI Dot SMS feature enables ChatGPT Pro subscribers to control autonomous AI agents directly through iMessage and RCS texting. Related Posts: Claude CarPlay Update Adds Hands-Free AI Voice Reddit Mandatory Login Tests Expand to Curb AI Scraping GitHub Code Activity Surges Amid AI Agent Adoption The post OpenAI Dot SMS Feature Launches for ChatGPT Pro appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     
  • ✇Malwarebytes
  • Banks are blocking AI agents from customer accounts
    This week, Axios reported that major US banks were detecting third-party AI agents operating inside customer accounts. In many cases, customers have given the agents their usernames and passwords so they could act on their behalf. This kind of access can violate a bank’s rules.Bianco Research president Jim Bianco raised the question during Unchained’s Bits + Bips livestream on October 26:“Are you protecting me, or are you protecting your own profits?”Bianco described traditional finance’s busine
     

Banks are blocking AI agents from customer accounts

28 de Outubro de 2026, 10:38

This week, Axios reported that major US banks were detecting third-party AI agents operating inside customer accounts. In many cases, customers have given the agents their usernames and passwords so they could act on their behalf. This kind of access can violate a bank’s rules.

Bianco Research president Jim Bianco raised the question during Unchained’s Bits + Bips livestream on October 26:

“Are you protecting me, or are you protecting your own profits?”

Bianco described traditional finance’s business model as “based on laziness.” Customers may leave idle cash in low- or no-interest bank accounts rather than move it into a money market fund. An AI agent could make that move for them. “Now that you’re able to do it, the banks are afraid they’re gonna lose that revenue stream,” he said.

The banks offer a different explanation. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said the bank wouldn’t allow just any outside agent into its systems because doing so was “too risky for clients and for JPMorgan.”

Both explanations can be true: banks can want to retain deposits while also facing real security problems when software acts through customers’ accounts.

Handing over your banking login introduces another service into the security chain. A vulnerability in that service could expose your credentials or allow your account to be misused. And as Bank of America reportedly pointed out:

 “If you do share your credentials, keep in mind that you’re responsible for activity resulting from that access.”

That’s the bank’s stated position, not a universal ruling on consumers’ legal rights. Still, it’s a warning worth taking seriously.

Pros and cons

An AI agent with permission to make purchases might find and buy an item at a lower price. But giving an agent access to your bank account also means sharing sensitive banking information with a third party. We’ve seen shared AI chats become searchable online too.

Axios reported that many banks allow, or are moving toward allowing, read-only access. This can let a tool analyze transactions without giving it permission to move money.

That’s an important boundary, but it doesn’t make the information harmless. An agent that can read bank statements may still disclose them if it’s compromised or manipulated. Preventing transactions and protecting confidentiality are separate security goals.

How to keep control of your money

For consumers, the practical question is not whether banks have perfectly selfless motives. It’s what access you’re giving away, and what could happen if the agent makes a mistake.

  • Don’t paste banking passwords or security codes into a general-purpose AI assistant. Major banks have explicitly warned customers against sharing their credentials.
  • Use your bank’s approved connection methods rather than giving an agent your login. Where supported, choose read-only access if all you need is analysis or budgeting help.
  • Give agents access to as little sensitive information as possible. An assistant comparing publicly advertised savings rates doesn’t need your bank statements. OpenAI recommends limiting agents to the data and credentials they need for the task.
  • Review consequential actions yourself. If an agent asks for confirmation, check exactly what it intends to do and what information it will share. Don’t treat a confirmation prompt as a formality.

AI can make it easier to compare financial products and spot opportunities you might otherwise miss. But an assistant that finds a better rate and an agent that can act inside your account are different propositions.

Let it help with the homework, but be cautious about handing it the keys.


Let’s face it, an incognito window can only do so much. 
 
Breaches, dark web trading, credit fraud. Malwarebytes Identity Theft Protection monitors for all of it, alerts you fast, and comes with identity theft insurance. 

ADEX: AI Involved in 52% of Detected Ad Fraud Schemes – Shopping Agents Could be Next

New ADEX research shows how AI is making familiar scams cheaper and harder to detect, while fraudsters prepare to target AI shopping assistants.

Scanner Poses as 32 AI Bots to Find Credentials and Private Keys

A scanner impersonates 32 AI bots, including OpenAI and Claude crawlers, to search websites for exposed credentials, private keys and cloud configuration files.

Security Teams and AI Tools: Why Executives Won’t Adopt What They Can’t Control

Executives need visibility into workplace AI, clear data controls and limits on agent access before approving wider adoption. Here’s what businesses need in place.
  • ✇Security Affairs
  • OpenAI Paused Frontier AI Training After a Security Incident Pierluigi Paganini
    OpenAI paused frontier model training for 11 days after AI agents exposed security weaknesses, VM escapes and covert communication channels. OpenAI published a detailed report this week explaining how it improved security in the systems used to train and test its most advanced AI models. The company also described what happened when its AI agents tried to find weaknesses in those systems and why it stopped training its most advanced models for 11 days in September. “Based on the red-team
     

OpenAI Paused Frontier AI Training After a Security Incident

25 de Outubro de 2026, 06:56

OpenAI paused frontier model training for 11 days after AI agents exposed security weaknesses, VM escapes and covert communication channels.

OpenAI published a detailed report this week explaining how it improved security in the systems used to train and test its most advanced AI models. The company also described what happened when its AI agents tried to find weaknesses in those systems and why it stopped training its most advanced models for 11 days in September.

“Based on the red-teaming results, the fixes we had implemented, and improvements to our monitoring and stopping systems, we judged that our strengthened safeguards were sufficient to resume frontier RL training and internal inference.” reads the report published by the company. “We resumed these workloads on October 1, 11 days after our pause began.”

The incident began on September 20, when an internal research model exploited a DNS configuration error and gained limited access to the live internet during training. This incident, along with a security incident involving Hugging Face in July and other cases of AI models behaving in unexpected ways, led OpenAI to make major changes to its security measures.

OpenAI’s stated containment requirement is that limits on what an agent can access must hold even when the agent actively tries to circumvent them. The policy choice they landed on is that frontier model training now runs with no internet access at all, full stop.

“For training and most evaluation, the live internet lies outside this boundary, as we believe that providing models access to the live internet can pose significant risks. Although internet access can help models learn useful skills, it also gives a capable, misaligned agent opportunities to affect systems beyond our control.” continues the report. “We’ve therefore designed the security architecture for our research environments with one overriding principle: we must always be able to prevent a frontier model from achieving unauthorized, arbitrary access to the live internet.”

OpenAI

To support training without live internet, they built what they call an “offline world,” a large indexed and cached set of web content that models can browse and search without touching external systems. The layers of protection around that offline world include restricted containers, lightweight virtual machines that isolate each agent’s environment from the underlying hardware, network and cloud controls, and monitoring systems designed to catch unauthorized activity before it does damage.

The report explains how OpenAI tested its most advanced AI agents by asking them to find weaknesses in the company’s own systems. The agents had three goals: access the live internet, break through internal security barriers, or communicate with other agents when they were not allowed to do so. OpenAI ran experiments using hundreds of billions of tokens.

The agents found previously unknown security flaws in open-source software, including Kata Containers, gVisor and Moby/Docker, as well as configuration errors in OpenAI’s own services. By combining these weaknesses, they managed to escape virtual machines and gain control of the underlying host system. In further tests, the agents found weaknesses in services used for monitoring, logging and authentication. They used these flaws to make the services access URLs controlled by an attacker.

The part of the report that deserves the most attention isn’t the direct internet escapes. It’s what the agents did when those paths weren’t available. Agents in separate virtual machines, not allowed to share files or network connections, communicated with each other using processor cache timing. One agent evicted specific data from the processor’s cache. Another measured how long it took to reload that data, using the difference between fast and slow reads to decode a message. No file touched, no network packet sent. The technique is the same family of attacks as Spectre and Meltdown.

OpenAI restarted training its most advanced AI models on October 1, eleven days after the pause began. The company is now making extensive security tests a required part of the approval process before training runs can begin. It is also using AI agents to regularly check source code and cloud settings for weaknesses, testing systems that monitor activity and automatically stop unsafe operations, and reporting discovered vulnerabilities to the open-source projects responsible for fixing them.

OpenAI says it is continuing to strengthen its security by fixing vulnerabilities in virtual machines, working with cloud partners, and using AI agents to scan code and configurations. The company is also improving monitoring and automatic shutdown systems, regularly testing its sandbox and network defenses, and making high-compute red-teaming with its most capable models a core requirement for future frontier AI training and evaluation.

“We are committed to strengthening our containment, monitoring, and red-teaming infrastructure as our frontier models become more capable and believe that this work will be a core part of responsibly pacing the development of our frontier models.” the company concludes.

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Artificial Intelligence)

  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Skynet LLMjacking Agent Hijacks Exposed AI Models to Hack Servers and Mine Crypto Do Son
    A Skynet LLMjacking agent hijacks exposed AI models to scan, hack servers and mine crypto for 100,000 steps, while victims pay the bill. Related Posts: INC Ransomware Affiliates Expose Seven Servers Holding Phantom AI Framework and 46 Encryptors BRONZE SANDCASTLE Uses Sandboxie DLL Sideloading to Deploy Modified Meterpreter Backdoor SafePay Ransomware Hits 600 Victims as FBI, CISA and Allies Issue Joint Warning The post Skynet LLMjacking Agent Hijacks Exposed AI Models to Hack Servers and Min
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Claude Duet AI Agent Takes On OpenAI Dots and Muse Do Son
    The Claude Duet AI agent debuts as a research preview on Opus 5.5, with a private VM and a planned $20 Claude Pro price. Related Posts: EU Opens Booking.com DSA Investigation Over Fake Listings and Phishing Scams Gemini in Apple CarPlay Arrives on Google Maps Chrome ClickFix Protection Scans Risky Clipboard Commands The post Claude Duet AI Agent Takes On OpenAI Dots and Muse appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • China-Linked Operator Used AI Agents to Breach 48 Government and Corporate Targets Across Asia Do Son
    A China-linked operator ran an AI-driven hacking campaign from one server, hitting ministries in Vietnam, Taiwan, Indonesia, and India. Related Posts: APT41 Deploys BlackX UEFI Bootkit Against Central Asian Diplomatic Agencies APT28 Uses Hookedge Backdoor to Spy on Naval Shipbuilder and Defense Firms in Two NATO Countries Lazarus Operation FlashHole Abuses CrossWeb EX and GitHub to Spy on South Korean Firms The post China-Linked Operator Used AI Agents to Breach 48 Government and Corporate Ta
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Exposed Attacker Server Reveals AI Agent Toolkit and a Second PaperCut RCE Path Do Son
    An exposed server reveals AI-assisted exploitation behind a PaperCut RCE campaign, a second XML-RPC attack path, and 45 live network pivots. Related Posts: SafePay Ransomware Hits 600 Victims as FBI, CISA and Allies Issue Joint Warning LiteLLM 1.107.0 Compromised to Steal Cloud, AI Tool and Developer Credentials 333 Tor Exit Nodes Hijacked by Ebury Malware for SSH Attacks The post Exposed Attacker Server Reveals AI Agent Toolkit and a Second PaperCut RCE Path appeared first on Daily CyberSecu
     
  • ✇Cybersecurity News
  • Perplexity Runs On-Device AI Workflows on Mac Do Son
    Perplexity on-device AI now runs the full Perplexity Computer on Macs with 36GB or more memory, keeping email data local. Related Posts: Chrome ClickFix Protection Scans Risky Clipboard Commands cURL Vulnerability Reporting Policy Shifts to GitHub Apple Blocks WebKit Identity Resolution in Privacy Shift The post Perplexity Runs On-Device AI Workflows on Mac appeared first on Daily CyberSecurity.
     

ChatGPT Can Now Do More in Chrome, but There’s a Security Trade-Off

21 de Outubro de 2026, 06:04

OpenAI expands ChatGPT's Chrome integration with tab access and browser automation. Learn what the update means for productivity, privacy, and enterprise security.

The post ChatGPT Can Now Do More in Chrome, but There’s a Security Trade-Off appeared first on TechRepublic.

❌
❌