The campaign begins with phishing emails disguised as legal or judicial notifications. Instead of attaching an executable file, attackers use an SVG image, making the initial attachment appear less suspicious.

Security researchers at Trellix identified the campaign while investigating a customer incident in early 2026. Their analysis found a multi-stage infection chain combining social engineering, browser-based payload generation, DLL sideloading, and process hollowing.

A Malicious SVG Disguised as a Legal Notification

The campaign uses a phishing message that impersonates a Colombian judicial notification titled “Resolución Denuncia Jurídica.”

When the recipient opens the SVG attachment, it displays a fake consultation page designed to resemble an official service.

The page then claims that a document is available for download and provides a password for the archive.

While the process appears legitimate to the user, the SVG contains encoded JavaScript that performs the actual malicious activity.

The script reconstructs a password-protected 7-Zip archive directly on the victim’s system and saves it locally.

This technique is known as HTML smuggling.

Rather than sending the malicious archive directly, the attacker uses the browser to assemble it on the endpoint. This can make detection more difficult because security controls inspecting the original email may initially see only an SVG attachment.

From SVG to DCRat

Once the archive is extracted and the included executable is launched, the attack moves into the Windows environment.

The malware uses DLL sideloading, placing malicious DLL files alongside a legitimate-looking executable. When the executable runs, Windows loads the attacker-controlled libraries.

The campaign then establishes persistence through a Windows Registry Run entry and decrypts additional code in memory.

The next stage uses process hollowing. A legitimate Windows process is started in a suspended state, its memory is replaced with malicious code, and the process is then resumed.

This allows DCRat to operate within what appears to be a legitimate Windows process, making behavioral detection and investigation more challenging.

What DCRat Can Do

DCRat, also known as DarkCrystal RAT, is a remote access trojan that provides attackers with control over compromised systems.

Its capabilities can include:

• Remote command execution
• System and user information collection
• Data theft
• Persistence
• Communication with command-and-control infrastructure
• Remote access to compromised systems

The malware also uses encrypted communications and anti-analysis techniques to make detection and investigation more difficult.

The Attack Chain

The campaign demonstrates how several techniques can be combined into a single infection:

Phishing Email → Malicious SVG → HTML Smuggling → Malware Archive → DLL Sideloading → Process Hollowing → DCRat

Each stage is designed to make the next step less obvious.

The attachment looks like an image.
The webpage looks legitimate.
The archive appears to contain a document.
The executable appears to be part of a normal application.

Together, these techniques create a sophisticated delivery chain.

How Organizations Can Reduce the Risk

Security teams should not automatically treat SVG files as harmless image attachments. Unexpected SVG files should be inspected with the same caution applied to HTML files, archives, and executable content.

Organizations should also:

• Inspect suspicious SVG and HTML attachments
• Monitor unexpected archive creation and extraction
• Detect unusual DLL loading activity
• Monitor Registry Run entries for persistence
• Look for suspicious process injection or hollowing
• Correlate endpoint and network telemetry
• Keep operating systems and security tools updated
• Train employees to verify unexpected legal and document-related emails

Conclusion

The DCRat campaign highlights an important shift in malware delivery. Attackers are increasingly using legitimate-looking file formats and browser functionality as part of multi-stage infection chains.

An SVG may appear to be nothing more than an image, but its contents can introduce an entirely different level of risk.

For security teams, the key is to look beyond the file extension and understand what happens when the file is opened, what processes it creates, and what network activity follows.

A harmless-looking attachment can be the first step in a much larger compromise.

Indicators of compromise (IoCs):-

The post DCRat Hides Malware Behind SVG Files appeared first on First Hackers News.

But this added capability creates a new security risk: an attacker may not need to hack the AI agent directly. They may simply need to trick it.

How Does It Work?

Imagine an employee asks an AI agent to visit a website and summarize its content.

The website looks completely legitimate. However, hidden inside the page is a malicious instruction designed for the AI.

The agent reads the instruction and may interpret it as part of its task.

This is known as indirect prompt injection.

The attack can follow a simple path:

Malicious Content → AI Reads It → Instructions Influence the Agent → Agent Uses a Connected Tool → Potential Data Exposure or Unauthorized Action

The user may never see the malicious instruction.

Why Is This Dangerous?

A normal chatbot mainly produces text.

An AI agent can take actions.

If an agent has access to company emails, documents, databases, cloud services, or APIs, a successful prompt injection could have a much bigger impact.

For example, an attacker could attempt to manipulate an agent into accessing information it shouldn’t, sending data to an external destination, or performing an action outside the user’s original request.

The level of risk largely depends on what the agent is allowed to access and do.

How Organizations Can Reduce the Risk

Use least privilege: Give agents only the permissions they actually need.

Treat external content as untrusted: Websites, emails, documents, and search results can contain malicious instructions.

Require approval for sensitive actions: Financial transactions, data sharing, account changes, and system modifications should receive additional verification.

Monitor agent activity: Track unusual tool usage, data access, API calls, and external communication.

Test AI agents: Regularly test them with malicious webpages, documents, and other adversarial inputs.

The Bigger Picture

AI agents are becoming a new part of the enterprise attack surface.

The security question is no longer only:

“Can someone hack the AI?”

It is also:

“Can someone trick the AI into doing something it shouldn’t?”

As organizations give AI agents more access and autonomy, permissions, monitoring, and human oversight become just as important as protecting the AI model itself.

Secure the model. Limit the permissions. Monitor the actions.

The post Your AI Agent Can Be Hacked Without Being Hacked appeared first on First Hackers News.

The vulnerabilities were disclosed on August 11, 2026, with an update for CVE-2026-62913 published the following day.

Microsoft Exchange Server Security Flaws

The most serious issue is CVE-2026-62913, a remote code execution vulnerability with a CVSS score of 8.8. It is caused by a heap-based buffer overflow.

An attacker with low-level privileges could exploit the flaw remotely without requiring any action from the victim. Successful exploitation could allow the attacker to execute malicious code on an affected Exchange Server.

Another important vulnerability is CVE-2026-62911, an elevation-of-privilege flaw rated Critical by Microsoft, with a CVSS score of 8.0.

The vulnerability is related to an authentication bypass technique. An attacker with low privileges could potentially use it to gain additional permissions, although exploitation requires user interaction.

Because Exchange Server handles corporate email, communications, attachments, and other sensitive information, vulnerabilities in the platform can present a significant risk to organizations.

Affected Vulnerabilities

• CVE-2026-62910 – Elevation of Privilege. An Important-rated resource injection flaw with a CVSS score of 7.2. Exploitation requires high privileges.
• CVE-2026-62911 – Elevation of Privilege. A Critical authentication bypass vulnerability with a CVSS score of 8.0. Low privileges and user interaction are required.
• CVE-2026-62912 – Denial of Service. An Important deserialization vulnerability with a CVSS score of 6.5 that could disrupt Exchange services.
• CVE-2026-62913 – Remote Code Execution. A heap-based buffer overflow with a CVSS score of 8.8 that could allow remote code execution.
• CVE-2026-62914 – Spoofing. An Important cross-site scripting vulnerability with a CVSS score of 7.3.
• CVE-2026-62915 – Security Feature Bypass. An Important authorization flaw with a CVSS score of 6.5 that could allow an attacker to bypass certain access controls.

What Organizations Should Do

Exchange administrators should prioritize these updates, particularly for internet-facing servers.

After applying the patches, teams should verify that updates were successfully installed across all Exchange roles and continue monitoring for unusual authentication, administrative activity, and unexpected server behavior.

Keeping Exchange Server fully patched is especially important because it sits at the center of many organizations’ email and communication infrastructure.

The post Critical Microsoft Exchange Vulnerabilities Discovered appeared first on First Hackers News.

Security researchers at Jamf Threat Labs discovered a fake website that closely resembles GitHub. The page uses GitHub-style branding, including its dark interface, Octocat logo, and a “Verified Publisher” badge, making the download appear legitimate.

The fake site does not provide a normal application download. Instead, users are given a Terminal command and told to copy and paste it into their Mac.

This is a technique commonly known as ClickFix, where attackers convince victims to manually execute commands rather than relying on a traditional malicious download.

How the Attack Works

The attack begins when a user visits the fake GitHub page and follows the installation instructions.

After the command is pasted into Terminal, a script runs in the background and downloads a password-protected archive. The malware then extracts a disguised file, removes macOS security markings, and launches the payload.

The process is designed to look like a normal installation while the malicious activity happens in the background.

Once running, AmnesiaStealer gathers information from the infected Mac and attempts to capture the user’s password through a fake installer prompt.

That password can then be used to access valuable information stored on the device, including:

• Browser data
• Apple Keychain information
• Apple Notes
• Telegram sessions
• Documents
• Other stored credentials

The Browser Session Theft Is the Bigger Concern

AmnesiaStealer has another capability that makes the campaign particularly concerning.

The malware can download an additional component called stream_module when instructed by the attacker. This component copies the victim’s browser profile and launches it in a hidden browser session.

It then connects to the Chrome DevTools Protocol, giving the attacker the ability to interact with the browser remotely.

In practical terms, this could allow an attacker to view the browser session and control actions such as mouse movement, keyboard input, and navigation.

That means an attacker could potentially operate already-authenticated sessions for services such as email, social media, and online banking without necessarily needing to know the victim’s password.

Some macOS Bypass Attempts Are Outdated

Researchers also found that parts of AmnesiaStealer rely on techniques intended to bypass Apple’s security protections.

Several of these techniques were already addressed by Apple in earlier macOS releases. On newer versions, including macOS 26, some of those attempts fail.

However, the malware’s core ability to steal credentials and browser information remains a significant concern.

Why This Campaign Matters

AmnesiaStealer shows how attackers are moving away from obvious malware downloads and instead using social engineering to get users to execute the malware themselves.

The fake GitHub page makes the attack look trustworthy. The Terminal instructions make the victim part of the installation process. Once the malware is running, additional components can be delivered based on the attacker’s instructions.

This combination makes the campaign more difficult for users to recognize as a traditional malware attack.

How Mac Users Can Stay Safe

The most important rule is simple:

Never paste an unknown command into Terminal just because a website tells you to.

Users should also:

• Download software only from trusted sources
• Keep macOS and browsers updated
• Be cautious with unexpected Terminal instructions
• Treat unexpected administrator or password prompts with suspicion
• Use endpoint and browser security protections
• Avoid downloading software from unfamiliar GitHub-style websites

A legitimate-looking website does not necessarily mean a legitimate download.

For macOS users, a Terminal command should always be treated as code—not as an ordinary installation step.

The post New AmnesiaStealer Campaign Targets macOS Users appeared first on First Hackers News.

The feature is designed to address the growing use of more convincing scams, including messages created with the help of AI. Instead of sending messages to WhatsApp’s servers for analysis, Scam Alert uses a small machine learning model that runs directly on the user’s device.

Once enabled, the model examines messages from people who are not saved as contacts. It looks for patterns in the conversation and language that may indicate common scam techniques.

The message itself stays on the device during this process. WhatsApp says it does not automatically send messages to Meta, WhatsApp, or another third party for review. Users decide what happens next.

If a message appears suspicious, WhatsApp can display a warning to the recipient. The user can then choose to block the sender, report the conversation, continue chatting, or mark the conversation as trusted if they believe the warning is incorrect.

Privacy Is a Key Part of Scam Alert

WhatsApp says the system was designed around three main ideas: local processing, no automatic reporting, and user control.

The company still needs some information to understand how well the feature performs. Instead of collecting individual messages, WhatsApp uses a privacy-focused analytics system that gathers limited information such as how many warnings were displayed and what actions users took.

This information is processed using Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) and additional privacy techniques before aggregated statistics are sent to Meta.

Protecting the AI Model

Another concern is making sure attackers cannot secretly deliver a modified version of the scam-detection model to specific users.

WhatsApp says each model version is published with a SHA-256 hash in an append-only transparency system before it is deployed. This creates a record that can be used to verify that the model has not been secretly changed.

Model downloads also use an Oblivious HTTP (OHTTP) relay, which helps prevent the server from directly linking a model request to a user’s IP address.

WhatsApp says even the process used to assign users to different model versions for testing happens locally on their devices rather than being controlled by the server.

Additional Security Controls

The company says Scam Alert was designed to protect against several types of threats, including outside attackers, malicious employees, and compromised third-party suppliers.

Its security measures include isolated confidential computing environments, encrypted memory, and additional protections around the systems running the analytics infrastructure.

Users can also check information about the feature through WhatsApp’s transparency controls. The in-app activity section shows details such as which messages were analyzed and which model version was used.

External Researchers Can Test the System

WhatsApp is also expanding its Bug Bounty program to cover parts of the Scam Alert technology, including the machine learning models and analytics infrastructure.

This gives security researchers an opportunity to look for weaknesses and verify whether the system is being used only for its stated purpose of detecting scams.

Limited Beta Release

Scam Alert is initially being introduced through a limited beta rollout. WhatsApp says it plans to continue testing the technology with security researchers before making it more widely available.

The company also plans to publish a technical white paper explaining how the system works in greater detail.

The approach reflects a growing focus on building AI-powered security features without giving up user privacy. Instead of sending private conversations to the cloud for analysis, WhatsApp is attempting to combine on-device AI, confidential computing, and transparency mechanisms to detect scams while keeping message content protected.

The post WhatsApp Scam Alert: New Protection Against Hackers appeared first on First Hackers News.

The research involves OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google, and shows that encrypted reasoning data produced by powerful models could potentially be reused with less restricted models from the same provider. In some cases, this could allow the hidden reasoning to be reconstructed in readable text.

Researchers from the ELLIS Institute Tübingen, Max Planck Institute, MATS Research, and Snyk investigated the issue across the Claude, GPT, and Gemini ecosystems. The attack does not require special privileges and can be carried out through normal API access.

How the Attack Works

Modern reasoning models perform additional processing before producing their final answers. Much of this internal reasoning is intentionally hidden from users because it may contain sensitive information, system instructions, safety-related decisions, or proprietary model behavior.

Instead of keeping all conversation state on the server, some AI APIs return encrypted data that can be sent back with later requests. This allows the model to continue a conversation without storing every detail on the provider’s side.

Researchers found a potential weakness in how these encrypted reasoning packages were protected.

The data was not sufficiently tied to the specific model, user, or session that originally created it. This meant a reasoning package generated by a more heavily protected model could potentially be submitted to another model within the same provider’s ecosystem.

Using Smaller Models to Reveal Hidden Data

The researchers demonstrated an attack technique in which a reasoning package from a powerful model was passed to a less restricted model.

The smaller model could then be prompted to reproduce information contained inside the encrypted package.

This creates an unusual security problem. The attacker does not necessarily need to break the encryption directly. Instead, another model can potentially act as an intermediary that helps expose the information.

The research team reported similar behavior across the GPT, Claude, and Gemini model families.

Researchers also compared the recovered reasoning data with usage information provided through the APIs to determine whether the extracted material corresponded to the original reasoning process.

Hidden Reasoning Can Contain Sensitive Information

The concern goes beyond exposing how an AI model thinks.

Researchers analyzed thousands of publicly available AI agent transcripts collected from sources such as GitHub and Hugging Face. Their analysis identified hundreds of pieces of potentially sensitive information inside recovered reasoning data.

This included:

• 367 pieces of personally identifiable information
• 182 hardcoded credentials
• 62 API keys
• 33 passwords
• 30 personal email addresses

The problem is that some of this information may never appear in the model’s visible response.

A developer could therefore publish an AI session or agent log believing it contains no secrets, while sensitive information remains hidden inside associated reasoning data.

A New Risk for AI Agents

The research also highlights a potential problem for autonomous AI systems.

If security monitoring only examines the visible conversation between a user and an AI agent, malicious instructions hidden inside reasoning-related data could potentially escape detection.

An attacker could attempt to place instructions inside an encrypted reasoning package and have those instructions processed later by an AI agent.

This creates a potential indirect prompt injection scenario where the malicious content is not obvious in the conversation that security tools are monitoring.

For organizations using AI agents to interact with cloud services, databases, code repositories, or business applications, this type of hidden input deserves particular attention.

Which AI Platforms Were Studied?

The research covered major model ecosystems from three providers:

The exact attack paths and model combinations varied between providers, but the broader issue was similar: reasoning data was not sufficiently isolated from other models within the same ecosystem.

Providers Have Already Responded

The researchers reported the findings to the affected companies through responsible disclosure.

OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google acknowledged the research and introduced server-side protections. According to the researchers, the original proof-of-concept attacks could no longer be reproduced against the updated API implementations.

That reduces the immediate risk from the specific attack demonstrated in the research, but the findings highlight a larger issue for the AI industry.

As AI systems become more complex, security controls need to protect not only visible prompts and responses but also the internal data exchanged between models and supporting services.

How Organizations Can Reduce the Risk

AI providers and companies building applications around LLMs can take several steps to protect sensitive reasoning-related data.

Bind encrypted data to its source. Reasoning packages should be cryptographically linked to the specific model, user, and session that created them.

Separate model tiers. A payload generated by one model should not automatically be accepted by another model unless that behavior is explicitly intended and securely controlled.

Rotate older cryptographic keys. Where historical encrypted data may have been exposed, organizations should consider key rotation and invalidation strategies.

Protect AI logs. Developers should treat reasoning-related payloads, signatures, and encrypted model data as sensitive information. These fields should be removed or sanitized before logs are shared publicly.

Why This Matters

The research shows that protecting AI systems is not only about securing the model itself.

Modern LLM platforms involve APIs, model tiers, encrypted payloads, agent frameworks, logging systems, and multiple supporting services. A weakness in the connection between these components can create a security problem even when the underlying model remains protected.

For organizations adopting AI agents and reasoning models, the lesson is clear: hidden data should be treated as sensitive data, even when users cannot see it.

The post LLM API Bugs Leak Hidden Reasoning Traces appeared first on First Hackers News.

The update was released on August 11, 2026, and security teams have another important reason to move quickly: three of the vulnerabilities were already publicly known or are being actively exploited, according to Microsoft’s advisory information.

For organizations with large Microsoft environments, this is a release that should be reviewed early rather than left for the normal monthly patching cycle.

Three Vulnerabilities Need Immediate Attention

The most important issues this month involve Windows components.

CVE-2026-72971 affects the Windows Container Isolation File System Filter Driver (unionfs.sys). Microsoft rates it as Important and says the vulnerability was publicly disclosed before the security update was released. The issue could allow an attacker to tamper with protected system or container-related data.

Another publicly disclosed issue, CVE-2026-62832, affects the Windows User Profile Service. It is an elevation-of-privilege vulnerability, meaning an attacker with an existing foothold could potentially use it to obtain additional permissions on a vulnerable machine.

The biggest concern is CVE-2026-68820. Microsoft lists this Windows WinSock-related vulnerability as actively exploited in the wild. Because attackers are already using the flaw, organizations should give this update priority and investigate potentially affected endpoints.

Where the 394 Vulnerabilities Fall

The vulnerabilities fixed this month cover several major security categories:

The numbers show that privilege escalation and remote code execution continue to make up a significant portion of Microsoft’s monthly security workload.

For defenders, this means patching should not focus only on vulnerabilities carrying a Critical rating. An Important vulnerability can still become dangerous when it is combined with another weakness or used after an attacker gains initial access.

SharePoint Remains a Key Target

Several SharePoint Server vulnerabilities are included in the August release.

Among them are CVE-2026-70355, CVE-2026-70326, and CVE-2026-70324, which involve privilege escalation, as well as CVE-2026-70321, a remote code execution vulnerability.

SharePoint environments deserve special attention because they often sit close to valuable corporate information. A compromised server could potentially give attackers access to documents, accounts, internal applications, or other parts of an organization’s environment.

Companies running internet-accessible SharePoint servers should therefore make these systems a priority during their patching process.

Azure and Windows Infrastructure Also Affected

The update includes CVE-2026-71331, a Critical remote code execution vulnerability involving Microsoft Azure Attestation and Device Health Attestation services.

Issues affecting cloud and device-trust infrastructure can have broader implications because these services may be part of an organization’s authentication and security architecture.

Windows infrastructure is also covered by several fixes, including vulnerabilities affecting DNS, Windows Management Services, Windows Installer, and other system components.

Organizations should identify which of these services are actually deployed in their environments and prioritize systems that are externally accessible or support critical business operations.

Don’t Forget PowerShell and Developer Machines

Microsoft has also patched vulnerabilities in PowerShell Core and .NET.

One PowerShell issue, CVE-2026-70337, could lead to remote code execution, while CVE-2026-70338 involves a security feature bypass.

This is particularly relevant to security teams because PowerShell is both an essential administration tool and a common technique used during attacks. Keeping the platform patched should go hand in hand with monitoring suspicious PowerShell activity.

Developer environments should also be included in patching plans. Vulnerabilities affecting Visual Studio Code and GitHub Copilot could create additional risk when compromised developer machines have access to source repositories, cloud credentials, or CI/CD infrastructure.

A developer endpoint is not just another workstation. In many organizations, it can provide a pathway into systems that are critical to software development and production deployment.

Microsoft Office Is Part of the Release

Office applications receive their share of security fixes as well.

The August updates cover Outlook, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Microsoft Office, including remote code execution and information-disclosure vulnerabilities.

These issues deserve attention because attackers frequently use Office documents and email as an entry point for phishing and malware campaigns. A vulnerability that appears less urgent in isolation can become much more serious when combined with social engineering.

What Security Teams Should Do Now

The size of this month’s release can make patching 394 vulnerabilities seem overwhelming. The practical approach is to prioritize based on exposure and exploitability.

Start with the vulnerabilities that are actively exploited or publicly disclosed. Next, focus on Critical vulnerabilities and systems exposed to the internet, particularly SharePoint and important Azure or Windows infrastructure.

After that, review developer workstations, PowerShell installations, Office applications, and other Microsoft products used across the organization.

Teams should also use this update as an opportunity to check whether vulnerable systems are being properly identified through asset inventories and vulnerability-management tools.

The key takeaway from Microsoft’s August 2026 release is simple: don’t treat Patch Tuesday as just another routine update cycle. With 394 vulnerabilities addressed and an actively exploited Windows flaw among them, organizations should move quickly to identify their exposure and deploy the appropriate security fixes.

The post 394 Microsoft Flaws Patched in August Update appeared first on First Hackers News.

The most critical vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-53413, has been named “Zoomsday” by A Security, the research team that discovered the flaw. Zoom has rated the vulnerability as high severity.

The problem is linked to Zoom’s annotation feature, which allows participants to draw, highlight, and add text while someone is sharing their screen. Behind the scenes, this feature uses a proprietary communication protocol to exchange data between participants.

Researchers found that Zoom’s annotation component does not properly validate certain formatting information received over the network. Specifically, the function responsible for processing annotation data uses fixed-size memory buffers while trusting size values provided by the sender.

An attacker could take advantage of this weakness by sending specially crafted data that is larger than the allocated memory space. This can cause a buffer overflow, potentially allowing the attacker to corrupt memory and take control of the application.

A Security demonstrated the issue on macOS by using the vulnerability to launch Safari on a targeted computer without the user taking any action. The demonstration showed that successful exploitation could occur quietly, without obvious signs that the device had been compromised.

The attacker only needs to join or host a Zoom meeting and target another participant.

Three More Zoom Vulnerabilities

Zoom also disclosed three additional security issues as part of the same security update cycle.

CVE-2026-53414 is a medium-severity buffer over-read vulnerability affecting Zoom Clients. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to access information from areas of memory that should not be exposed.

CVE-2026-53415 is a high-severity use-after-free vulnerability. It can cause memory corruption and could potentially lead to code execution when an attacker causes the application to access memory that has already been released.

CVE-2026-53416 affects the Zoom VDI Client and is caused by a path traversal vulnerability. An attacker could manipulate file paths to access files outside the directories intended by the application.

Zoom published these issues under security bulletins ZSB-26015 through ZSB-26018, with the bulletins published and updated on August 11, 2026.

Zoom Releases Security Fixes

Zoom says the annotation-related vulnerabilities affect its clients across supported platforms, while the path traversal issue is limited to VDI environments.

The company has already released fixes. The affected products should be updated to the following versions:

• Zoom Workplace: 7.1.5 or 7.0.6
• Zoom Rooms: 7.1.5
• Meeting SDK: 7.1.5
• Workplace VDI Client: 7.0.11 or 6.6.16
• VDI Plugin: 7.0.11 or 6.6.15

What Organizations Should Do

Zoom has not reported any confirmed exploitation of these vulnerabilities in the wild, and there is currently no publicly available proof-of-concept exploit.

However, the zero-click nature of CVE-2026-53413 makes the issue particularly important. Successful exploitation does not require the victim to open a file, click a link, or approve a prompt.

Organizations should prioritize updating Zoom across managed devices as soon as possible. IT and security teams should also consider deploying the updated packages centrally rather than depending entirely on users to update their applications themselves.

Keeping centralized installations updated can help prevent vulnerable versions from being reintroduced during future software deployments.

The post Zoom Zero-Click Flaws Put Devices at Risk appeared first on First Hackers News.

According to recent security research, while the overall number of blocked Android malware attacks declined during the second quarter of 2026, banking malware remains one of the most active mobile threats. Rather than disappearing, attackers are changing how their malware is packaged and deployed.

A Shift Toward Dropper-Based Attacks

A dropper is an application that appears harmless but is designed to download or activate malware after installation.

This approach allows attackers to hide the real banking Trojan during the initial app review process. Once the application is installed on a victim’s device, it can retrieve additional malicious components and begin targeting banking credentials.

By separating the delivery mechanism from the actual malware, cybercriminals can update or replace their payloads without creating entirely new malicious applications.

Malicious Apps Disguised as Legitimate Software

Researchers observed attackers disguising malware as legitimate Android applications, including utility and document reader apps.

In one campaign, a PDF reader displayed what appeared to be a routine software update notification. Instead of installing an update, the application downloaded banking malware onto the victim’s device.

These fake update prompts make malicious activity appear normal, increasing the likelihood that users will unknowingly install the malware.

Smarter Delivery Techniques

Modern Android droppers are becoming more selective in how they deliver malware.

Some applications first collect information about where they were downloaded and send that data to a command-and-control (C2) server. The server decides whether to deliver the malicious payload based on the installation source.

This selective delivery helps attackers avoid security researchers, automated analysis tools, and app store review systems while targeting real users.

Banking Malware Continues to Evolve

Security researchers also observed continued activity from well-known Android banking malware families, including Mamont and Creduz.

New variants are being released regularly, suggesting that malware operators are continuously testing new delivery techniques, improving evasion methods, and developing updated versions to avoid detection.

Why This Matters

The growing use of droppers shows that mobile threats are becoming more sophisticated. A reduction in traditional banking Trojan detections does not necessarily indicate a lower risk—it may simply reflect changes in how malware is delivered.

As attackers continue refining their techniques, users and organizations should remain cautious of applications that request unexpected updates or unnecessary permissions.

How to Stay Protected

To reduce the risk of Android banking malware:

• Install apps only from trusted sources.
• Keep Google Play Protect enabled.
• Avoid downloading apps from unofficial websites.
• Be cautious of unexpected in-app update requests.
• Review requested permissions before installing applications.
• Keep Android devices and applications updated.
• Use a reputable mobile security solution.

Conclusion

Android banking malware operators are shifting away from traditional delivery methods and increasingly relying on dropper applications to bypass security controls. As these techniques become more advanced, mobile users and organizations should strengthen their security practices, verify application sources, and remain alert to suspicious app behavior to reduce the risk of financial compromise.

The post Android Banking Malware Adopts New Evasion Techniques appeared first on First Hackers News.

The vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute commands on vulnerable devices without requiring authentication. Since LoadMaster appliances are commonly deployed at the network edge to manage application traffic, a successful attack could provide threat actors with an entry point into an organization’s infrastructure.

What Is the Vulnerability?

CVE-2026-8037 is a command injection vulnerability affecting the API component of Progress LoadMaster and related Application Delivery Controller (ADC) products.

The flaw occurs because certain user-supplied input is not properly validated before being processed by the operating system. As a result, attackers can craft malicious requests that force the appliance to execute unauthorized system commands.

Most importantly, the attack does not require valid login credentials, making internet-facing devices particularly vulnerable.

Why the Risk Is So High

Security researchers have assigned the vulnerability a CVSS score of 9.6, reflecting its critical severity.

Because LoadMaster appliances often sit at the perimeter of enterprise networks, compromising one could allow attackers to:

• Execute remote commands.
• Gain an initial foothold inside the network.
• Steal credentials.
• Move laterally to other systems.
• Deploy additional malware or backdoors.
• Modify device configurations.

Public proof-of-concept (PoC) exploit code is also available, making it easier for attackers to scan for and target vulnerable systems.

Active Exploitation Confirmed

According to CISA, the vulnerability is no longer a theoretical threat.

Evidence of active exploitation prompted the agency to add CVE-2026-8037 to its KEV catalog and advise affected organizations to apply vendor updates immediately.

Although there are currently no reports linking the flaw to ransomware campaigns, attackers are actively attempting to exploit vulnerable devices exposed to the internet.

Recommended Security Measures

Organizations using Progress LoadMaster should act immediately by:

• Identifying all affected LoadMaster appliances.
• Applying the latest security updates provided by Progress.
• Restricting management and API access to trusted networks or VPNs.
• Reviewing logs for unusual API requests and command execution attempts.
• Investigating unexpected configuration changes or unauthorized administrative activity.
• Conducting a full security assessment after patching to ensure attackers have not already established persistence.

The inclusion of CVE-2026-8037 in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog underscores the seriousness of this security issue. Since the vulnerability can be exploited without authentication and public exploit code is already available, organizations should prioritize patching affected LoadMaster systems and closely monitor their environments for signs of compromise.

Taking prompt action can significantly reduce the risk of attackers gaining access to critical network infrastructure.

The post CISA Warns of Active LoadMaster Attacks appeared first on First Hackers News.