This week’s cybersecurity landscape highlights the continued expansion of cyber risks across governments, businesses, and consumers. From ransomware campaigns targeting organizations worldwide to credential-based attacks, data breaches, online fraud, and digital piracy crackdowns, recent incidents show how threat actors are exploiting both technical vulnerabilities and human behavior.  The latest developments underline the need for stronger security practices, including improved identity protection, faster incident response, and greater awareness of evolving cyber threats. Organizations are increasingly dealing with attacks that go beyond data theft, affecting operations, customer trust, and critical services. 

The Cyber Express Weekly Roundup 

U.S. Accounts for Nearly Half of Global Ransomware Attacks in H1 2026 

The United States experienced 1,721 ransomware attacks during the first half of 2026, representing nearly 45% of all incidents tracked globally, according to research from Cyble Research and Intelligence Labs (CRIL). The report identified ransomware groups Qilin and Akira as among the most active threat actors during the period. Read more... 

Dubai Police Warns Against Online Visa Fraud Schemes 

Dubai Police has issued a warning about fraudulent online advertisements offering work, residency, and visit visas in exchange for payment. Scammers have reportedly used social media platforms and messaging applications to impersonate government entities or unauthorized service providers to trick victims. Read more... 

Craneware Data Breach Exposes Employee and Customer Information 

Healthcare technology company Craneware confirmed that unauthorized individuals accessed part of its data environment, resulting in the exposure of employee information as well as some customer and partner records. The company stated that the incident has been contained and has not disrupted business operations or customer services. Read more...  

U.S. Targets Illegal FIFA World Cup Streaming Networks 

The U.S. Department of Justice seized more than 1,000 domains allegedly involved in illegally streaming FIFA World Cup 2026 matches. The action was carried out under Operation Offsides, an initiative focused on combating online piracy and protecting intellectual property rights. Read more... 

Chick-fil-A Customer Accounts Targeted in Credential Attack 

Chick-fil-A confirmed that certain customer accounts were accessed during an automated credential-stuffing attack between June 17 and June 19, 2026. The attackers used account credentials obtained from an external source to gain unauthorized access. The company said affected information may have included customer names, email addresses, membership details, and limited payment-related data. Read more... 

South Korea Diplomatic System Breach Lasted Nearly 10 Months 

South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs revealed that attackers maintained access to the National Diplomatic Academy’s online education system for almost 10 months. The breach, which began in April 2025, exposed information linked to thousands of current and former ministry employees. Compromised data included user IDs, names, email addresses, and encrypted passwords. Read more... 

Weekly Cybersecurity Takeaway 

The week’s incidents demonstrate how cyber threats continue to evolve across multiple areas, from ransomware and account compromise to online scams and government-related breaches. Attackers are increasingly targeting weaknesses in identity management, user behavior, and digital infrastructure.  Organizations and individuals must focus on proactive security measures, including stronger authentication controls, regular monitoring, timely updates, and greater awareness of social engineering tactics. As cyber threats become more widespread and interconnected, improving resilience remains essential for protecting data, services, and public trust. 

Thailand's cryptocurrency exchange Bitkub has rejected allegations of fraud after the Thailand SEC filed a criminal complaint related to the company's disclosures following the Bitkub cyberattack in 2021. The case focuses on how the exchange reported the impact of the cyberattack on Bitkub to regulators, rather than on the safety of customer funds.  In response to the complaint, Bitkub stated that all customer assets currently held on its platform remain safe, fully accounted for, and protected in accordance with applicable regulations. The company argued that the allegations stem from decisions made during the aftermath of the 2021 security breach and do not reflect fraudulent conduct. 

Thailand SEC Files Complaint Over the 2021 Bitkub Cyberattack 

On 23 July 2026, the Thailand SEC filed a criminal complaint against Bitkub Online Co., Ltd. and its former directors, Sakolkorn Sakavee and Thaweesap Rawan. The regulator alleged that the company's daily net capital reports submitted between 10 May and 30 October 2021 failed to accurately reflect the material reduction in its digital asset holdings caused by the Bitkub cyberattack.  According to the regulator, the reports did not disclose the impact of the theft on the company's asset balance. The Thailand SEC also accused the two former directors of making false entries in company documents that gave the impression that customer assets were still being held normally and that the company had not suffered any damage.  The complaint has been referred to Thailand's Economic Crime Suppression Division for further investigation. Following that process, the matter may be forwarded to prosecutors and the courts. The Thailand SEC noted that filing a criminal complaint does not represent a final determination of guilt. 

Bitkub Says Disclosure Decision was Intended to Prevent Customer Losses

Following media reports about the complaint, Bitkub published a statement on LinkedIn explaining its position on the cyberattack and the subsequent reporting decisions.  The company said the allegations relate to an incident in early May 2021, when one of its digital asset wallets was compromised by cybercriminals. Bitkub acknowledged that the breach was not disclosed at the time.  According to the company, the individual responsible for disclosure obligations deliberately withheld information about the wallet compromise. Bitkub said the decision was made to avoid triggering a "bank run," or mass withdrawals of digital assets by customers, while the company worked to replace the stolen assets.  The exchange stated:  "The decision of such individual not to disclose the incident was made with the intention to prevent a bank run—that is, a mass withdrawal of digital assets by customers upon learning of the theft—which could have rendered the Company unable to procure sufficient replacement digital assets for the customers while the recovery process was still ongoing."  Bitkub added that such a scenario could have resulted in significant customer losses and broader damage to Thailand's digital asset industry.  The company also stressed that, at the time of the Bitkub cyberattack, all of its digital asset wallet security systems complied with standards prescribed by the relevant authorities and had been audited. 

Co-founders Replaced Stolen Assets After Cyberattack on Bitkub 

Although the digital assets stolen during the cyberattack on Bitkub were never recovered, the company said its co-founders voluntarily absorbed the financial loss.  According to Bitkub, the co-founders purchased digital assets matching the same types and quantities as those stolen and transferred them to the company. As a result, the exchange said neither its customers nor the business ultimately suffered any financial loss from the incident.  In its statement, Bitkub said:  "As no bank run occurred, even though the stolen digital assets could not be recovered, the Co-Founders of the Bitkub Group voluntarily absorbed the loss by purchasing equivalent digital assets (in the same type and quantity as those stolen) and providing them to the Company. Consequently, neither the Company nor its customers suffered any financial loss from the theft." 

Thailand SEC Previously Confirmed Customer Assets Were Intact 

Bitkub also pointed to the findings of an earlier inspection conducted by the Thailand SEC after reports of the Bitkub cyberattack surfaced online. According to the company, the regulator verified that, as of 8 September 2025, all customer assets held by the exchange were safe and fully accounted for.  The company reiterated this point in its latest statement, saying:  "At the outset, for the sake of clarity and mutual understanding, the Company wishes to affirm that all customers' assets currently held by the Company are safe and fully accounted for. The Company reiterates its strict compliance with all applicable laws and regulations in safeguarding and maintaining customer assets."  Bitkub maintained that the criminal complaint relates to historical reporting practices between May and October 2021, more than five years ago, rather than to the current condition of customer assets or any ongoing security concerns.  As the investigation proceeds, the case will determine whether the company's reporting following the Bitkub cyberattack complied with regulatory requirements. For now, the complaint remains an allegation, and the legal process involving the Thailand SEC, investigators, prosecutors, and the courts has yet to reach a final conclusion. 

Kenya is investigating a Kenya cyberattack that temporarily defaced President William Ruto’s official website with an anti-government message and a Bitcoin ransom demand for five bitcoins, reportedly worth about $330,000. The attackers replaced the website’s homepage with the message, displayed a cryptocurrency wallet address and threatened to publish unspecified information about President William Ruto unless the ransom was paid.

The website was hacked on Saturday, July 18, 2026. Following the incident, access to the presidential website was temporarily restricted as authorities began containment, forensic analysis and restoration efforts. According to local media reports, access to the website was restored by Monday.

Kenya Cyberattack Prompts Incident Response

Kenya’s Ministry of Information, Communications and the Digital Economy confirmed that the official website of the President had been affected by a cybersecurity incident.

The ministry said that after the incident was detected, the ICT Authority immediately activated established cybersecurity incident response protocols.

As a precautionary measure, access to the presidential website was temporarily restricted to facilitate containment, forensic analysis and restoration efforts.

The ministry said appropriate mitigation measures had since been implemented and that restoration of the website was underway.

[caption id="attachment_113245" align="aligncenter" width="600"] Source: Kenya’s Ministry of Information, Communications and the Digital Economy[/caption]

At the time of the statement, the government said there was no evidence of unauthorized access to sensitive data, data exfiltration or loss of information. It also stated that government systems and digital services remained secure and operational.

The ICT Authority is working with relevant government agencies and technical partners to conduct a comprehensive forensic investigation and establish the full circumstances surrounding the incident.

Kenya President William Ruto Cyberattack Investigation

The Kenya President William Ruto cyberattack involved the defacement of the president’s official website. The attackers replaced the homepage with an anti-government message, displayed a cryptocurrency wallet address and demanded five bitcoins.

The attackers also threatened to publish unspecified information about President William Ruto if the ransom was not paid.

The government has not reported evidence of unauthorized access to sensitive data or data exfiltration. The ongoing forensic investigation is expected to establish the circumstances surrounding the incident and determine the extent of the attack.

Kenya Government Website Hack Follows Earlier Incidents

The latest Kenya government website hack follows previous cyber incidents involving government digital services and websites.

In July 2023, Kenya’s eCitizen platform, which is used for dozens of public services, was disrupted by a cyberattack. The incident affected agencies including the National Transport and Safety Authority and Kenya Power.

On November 17, 2025, hackers launched a coordinated attack on several government websites, including the presidency’s portal. The websites were temporarily knocked offline, while some pages were replaced with extremist messages.

According to the information provided by local media, the government later blamed a group calling itself PCP@Kenya, restored the affected platforms and promised stronger cyber defences.

Bitcoin Ransom Demand Targets Presidential Website

The latest incident involved a Bitcoin ransom demand for five bitcoins, reportedly valued at approximately $330,000. The attackers displayed a cryptocurrency wallet address and threatened to release unspecified information about the president.

It remains unclear from the available information whether the attackers accessed systems or data beyond the presidential website. The Kenyan government has said there is currently no evidence of unauthorized access to sensitive data, data exfiltration or loss of information.

The ICT Authority and relevant government agencies are continuing their forensic investigation to establish how the incident occurred and determine the full circumstances surrounding the Kenya cyberattack.

The Estée Lauder data breach has prompted the global cosmetics company to notify affected individuals after hackers exploited a vulnerability in Oracle E-Business Suite, a platform used for human resources (HR) operations.   The Estée Lauder cyberattack stemmed from unauthorized access that occurred on or around August 9, 2025, though the company said it identified the incident last month and confirmed the scope of the breach on June 19, 2026. 

Estée Lauder Data Breach Exposed Sensitive Personal Information 

According to the company's notification letter, the attackers gained access to the Oracle E-Business Suite system and obtained personal information belonging to certain individuals.  We became aware of a cybersecurity issue involving a vulnerability in the Oracle E-Business Suite system which is used by the Estee Lauder Companies for HR management purposes," the notice states.  It further adds: "On June 19, 2026, we determined through our investigation that, on or around August 9, 2025, an unauthorized third party gained access to the Oracle E-Business Suite system and obtained personal information of certain individuals."  The exposed data in the incident includes full names, postal addresses, email addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers (SSNs), passport numbers, financial account information, including bank account numbers, health information, and employment records such as payroll and performance reports. 

Oracle Vulnerability Tied to Estée Lauder Cyberattack 

Although Estée Lauder did not identify the specific vulnerability used in the attack, the timeline aligns with the widespread exploitation of the Oracle E-Business Suite flaw CVE-2025-61882.  In October 2025, researchers from Google warned that the Clop ransomware group had exploited the vulnerability as a zero-day to steal data. The flaw affected Oracle EBS versions 12.2.3 through 12.2.14, allowing attackers to bypass authentication and remotely execute code through the BI Publisher Integration component. Successful exploitation could provide access to sensitive HR and business information.  Oracle released security patches for CVE-2025-61882 on October 4, 2025. Soon after, cybersecurity company CrowdStrike confirmed that Clop had been exploiting the vulnerability since early August 2025. 

Company Offers Identity Monitoring 

Estée Lauder, headquartered in New York, generates annual revenue of $14.3 billion, employs around 57,000 people, and operates retail stores and online businesses worldwide, making it the world's second-largest cosmetics company.  Following the Estée Lauder data breach, the company is urging recipients of its notification letter to monitor for signs of identity theft and fraud. It is also providing 24 months of complimentary identity monitoring services through Kroll.  The Estée Lauder cyberattack is part of a broader campaign that affected several high-profile organizations, including Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, Dartmouth, the University of Phoenix, The Washington Post, Logitech, GlobalLogic, Cox Enterprises, and American Airlines subsidiary Envoy Air.  This is not the first time the company has been impacted by Clop. In 2023, Estée Lauder was also compromised after the ransomware group exploited a separate zero-day vulnerability in the MOVEit Transfer platform, one of the company's internal software tools. 

Craneware plc has disclosed a Craneware data breach after detecting unauthorized access to a portion of its data environment. The company confirmed on 20 July 2026 that it is investigating the incident with the support of external cybersecurity and forensic experts.  Although the cyberattack on Craneware resulted in data being viewed and exfiltrated, the company said the incident has been contained and has not disrupted customer services or business operations. 

Craneware Cyberattack Contained, Investigation Underway 

According to the company's official notice, the Craneware cyberattack prompted the activation of its incident response plan immediately after the unauthorized access was identified. The Board appointed external cybersecurity and forensic specialists, who are working alongside Craneware's internal IT team and retained security providers to determine the full scope of the incident.  The company stated that investigators have found no remaining indicators of compromise within its systems. Despite the data breach at Craneware, normal operations have continued without interruption. 

Data Breach at Craneware Exposed Employee and Customer Records 

Initial findings indicate that attackers viewed and exfiltrated a significant volume of file names. Craneware's current assessment suggests that much of the affected information consists of non-sensitive or publicly available regulatory data. However, the investigation has also confirmed that a percentage of employee data, along with a subset of customer and partner records, was accessed and exfiltrated during the Craneware data breach.  The organization is continuing to examine the precise nature and extent of the compromised data. It is also working with advisers to identify affected individuals and organizations, prepare notifications where necessary, and meet all applicable regulatory obligations. Craneware added that it will provide further updates to the market as additional information becomes available.  As part of its response to the data breach at Craneware, the company has notified relevant regulators and law enforcement agencies. These include the UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). 

Craneware to Notify Affected Parties as Assessment Continues 

In its official announcement, Craneware said: "The incident has been contained, and there has been no disruption to customer services or to the Company's operations. The external specialists have confirmed that there are no residual indicators of compromise arising from the cybersecurity incident in the Company's systems."  The company further stated: "Investigations so far have established that a significant volume of file names were viewed and exfiltrated. The current assessment is that a large element of the data involved is non-sensitive or already public regulatory data. A percentage of Craneware employee data as well as a subset of customer and partner records, have been accessed and exfiltrated."  The notice also stated: "This announcement contains inside information as stipulated under the UK version of the Market Abuse Regulation No 596/2014, which is part of English Law by virtue of the European (Withdrawal) Act 2018, as amended. On publication of this announcement via a Regulatory Information Service, this information is considered to be in the public domain."  While the investigation into the cyberattack on Craneware remains ongoing, the company said it will continue assessing the impact of the cyberattack and issue further updates as appropriate. 

The Partnered Health cyberattack has exposed sensitive patient information across multiple Australian clinics, raising fresh concerns about healthcare cybersecurity. The Partnered Health data breach, involving clinics owned by healthcare provider Partnered Health, a company backed by Quadrant, affected facilities in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, and the ACT. The incident has also renewed scrutiny of the growing number of cyberattacks targeting Australia's healthcare sector.

Partnered Health Data Breach Impacted Medical and Personal Information 

Partnered Health confirmed that a malicious actor accessed its systems on 23 June, compromising data from 21 clinics across cities, including Sydney, Melbourne, and Canberra. The healthcare provider disclosed the breach more than three weeks later, informing patients that investigations had confirmed personal and health information had been taken from some clinics within its network. "Our investigations to date have confirmed that personal information (including health information) was taken from some of the clinics in our network," the company said. It added, "As a health services provider, we know our patients and our people trust us with personal and medical information, and we sincerely apologise for any concern and inconvenience this may cause them." The stolen information includes names, dates of birth, addresses, contact details, Medicare information, private health insurance details, concession card information, consultation notes, referral letters, pathology reports, diagnostic results, and other treatment records maintained by general practitioners.

Investigation into the Partnered Health Cyberattack Continues 

Partnered Health said the cyberattack has been reported to the Australian Cyber Security Centre, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, and law enforcement authorities. The company has also secured an interim injunction from the NSW Supreme Court preventing the stolen information from being used or published. While investigations remain ongoing, the provider said the extent of the breach is still being determined at five clinics, including three in Western Australia and two in Victoria. "While there is no direct evidence that patient records have been viewed, as a precaution we have written to patients from these clinics to make them aware of this and provide details of steps that can be taken to protect their information," a Partnered Health spokesperson said. The spokesperson added, "We understand that this sort of news can cause concern. We sincerely apologize for any distress this may have caused our patients."

Quadrant-backed Healthcare Provider Faces Growing Scrutiny 

Established in 2013, Partnered Health operates more than 60 medical centres, along with skin cancer, allied health, and mental health clinics, providing services to more than 5 million people nationwide. The company is owned by Quadrant, while Bupa announced in June that it would acquire the healthcare provider. The Partnered Health data breach comes amid a record year for cybersecurity incidents in Australia. According to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, 1,205 data breach notifications were recorded in 2025, marking an 8% increase compared with 2024. Among the year's largest incidents was the cyberattack on Qantas, which compromised the information of 5.7 million customers and was reportedly leaked on the dark web. A spokesperson for the Department of Home Affairs said the federal government is aware of the Partnered Health cyberattack and confirmed that relevant agencies are engaged as investigations continue. Authorities have not yet disclosed how many patients were affected or the full scope of the stolen data.

A vishing call to an overseas contact center agent. A fake IT ticket. A default setting nobody thought to lock down. That's all it took to expose the personal data of roughly 5 million Australians — and now the country's privacy regulator has decided Qantas isn't to blame for it.

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) closed the book this week on its year-long preliminary inquiry into the June 2025 Qantas data breach, and the conclusion cuts against the instinct to punish the victim of a cyberattack.

Also read: Australia’s Qantas Confirms Cyberattack: 6 Million Service Records Compromised

According to the OAIC's report, the evidence gathered did not indicate a likelihood that Qantas had "failed" to take reasonable steps to protect the personal information it held, nor that it failed to ensure its overseas third-party provider complied with Australia's privacy principles. No investigation. No enforcement action.

"After more than a year of making inquiries and obtaining information on the data breach, we're satisfied that the evidence does not support the likelihood that a breach of privacy law occurred. As a result, we've decided not to commence a full investigation of Qantas at this stage." - Carly Kind, Australian Privacy Commissioner.

How It Happened

The breach traces back to a single phone call. A threat actor posing as "Qantas IT help" convinced a contact center agent to visit a website tied to the customer relationship management platform used by Qantas agents, walking them through steps framed as necessary to close an IT support ticket. That interaction connected the agent's CRM session to a data extraction tool controlled by the attacker, who then pulled data from every contact profile the agent could access. It was pure social engineering — no malware, no exploited vulnerability, just a convincing lie.

Qantas caught it fast. A staff member spotted an unusual spike in login-attempt alerts on the morning of June 30, two days after the call, and escalated it to the cybersecurity team. Within hours, the company had frozen the compromised account, assessed for data exfiltration, and triggered its incident response process. Public disclosure followed on July 2.

What Was Exposed — And What Wasn't

The regulator's numbers are more precise than what circulated publicly last year. Roughly 5.67 million customer records were compromised, with about 4 million exposing names, phone numbers, email addresses and Frequent Flyer details, and a further 1.7 million records including combinations of home or business addresses, dates of birth, gender and meal preferences. Critically, no credit card numbers, financial information or passport details lived on the compromised platform, and customer passwords and login credentials were never touched.

Also read: Qantas Airways Cyberattack Update: Customer Data Released, Security Measures Enhanced

Why The Regulator Let It Go

The OAIC's reasoning is a rare, explicit acknowledgment that good controls don't guarantee immunity. Investigators found that social engineering training generally targets credential theft, not the rarer tactic of talking an employee into authorizing a legitimate-looking system connection — meaning the attack likely would have succeeded even with standard training in place. They also noted the flaw was structural: a default configuration let the agent authorize a third-party app connection, a setting the CRM vendor has since changed for all its customers.

Commissioner Carly Kind put the broader stakes plainly in the OAIC's statement announcing the report, warning that AI-driven threats are only raising the bar. As she framed it, agentic and advanced AI will keep escalating the cybersecurity risks businesses face, making continuous review of security posture non-negotiable — not optional.

“Data breaches are a persistent feature of today’s digital world, and can occur despite organisations taking steps to protect personal information,” Commissioner Carly said. “Agentic and advanced AI will only increase the cybersecurity risks that businesses face, and it is critical that all organisations continuously review and enhance their security to protect against this growing threat.”

The takeaway here isn't that Qantas got a pass. It's that a regulator has now drawn, in writing, the line between negligence and the limits of what training and access controls can realistically stop.

The Nichirei cyberattack has disrupted food deliveries across Japan after the frozen food and logistics provider confirmed its servers were compromised in a cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access. The attack affected logistics operations supporting KFC Japan, forcing temporary service disruptions while the company investigates the incident and works to restore systems. Nichirei Corporation said it detected system failures on July 13 and established an emergency response headquarters the same day. "Nichirei Corporation (the "Company") experienced system failures on July 13, 2026, and has since been investigating its cause. The Company hereby announces the facts identified through the investigation to date and the measures it plans to take going forward," reads notice issued by Nichirei. An investigation later confirmed that company servers had been targeted in a cyberattack. While the company has not disclosed technical details to prevent further damage, it said recovery efforts are underway with the support of an external cybersecurity specialist.

Nichirei Cyberattack Disrupts Logistics and Food Shipments

Following the attack, Nichirei disconnected systems across the Nichirei Group to protect customer and business partner data. The decision disrupted inbound and outbound operations at Nichirei Logistics refrigerated warehouses and halted frozen food shipments handled by Nichirei Foods. The company said it plans to gradually resume affected operations from July 17 after implementing additional security measures. Nichirei also confirmed that some affected servers contained personal information. As a precaution, it submitted an initial report to Japan's Personal Information Protection Commission regarding the possibility of a personal information leak. The company emphasized that, as of its latest update, there is no confirmed evidence that personal information or customer data has been exposed externally. Investigations remain ongoing, and Nichirei said it will notify relevant parties if any data leakage is confirmed.

Nichirei Cyberattack Impacts KFC Japan Store Operations

The incident quickly spread beyond Nichirei's own operations, affecting KFC Japan, which relies on Nichirei Logistics to deliver ingredients to stores nationwide. According to KFC Japan, deliveries have been disrupted since July 14 following the unauthorized access at its logistics partner. As inventory levels fluctuate, customers may experience product shortages, limited menu availability, shortened operating hours, or temporary store closures. The restaurant chain also temporarily suspended mobile orders, delivery services, coupons, and online ordering through its official website and mobile application. KFC Japan said it is working closely with Nichirei Logistics and other partners to restore normal operations as quickly as possible. However, it has not provided an estimated timeline for full recovery.

Investigation Continues Into Japan Cyberattack

Nichirei said the financial impact of the incident is still being assessed. The company expects to release its first-quarter financial results for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2026, on August 7 as scheduled unless further developments require additional disclosure. The company added that it will continue investigating the cyberattack on Nichirei and release additional information if material findings emerge. The incident follows a series of recent Japan cyberattack disclosures involving major organizations. Earlier this week, The Cyber Express reported that Nihon Kotsu experienced a malware-related security incident that disrupted taxi dispatch services after portions of its IT infrastructure were taken offline. Earlier this month, The Cyber Express also reported cyber incidents involving Aflac Japan, KDDI, Sapporo Holdings, and Nidec. While those cases affected different industries, attackers frequently gained access through subsidiaries, overseas operations, or third-party infrastructure rather than directly compromising corporate headquarters. Separately, Asahi Group Holdings continues recovering from a ransomware attack that significantly disrupted online ordering and shipment operations, forcing the company to rely on manual processes.

Supply Chain Risks Remain in Focus

The Nichirei cyberattack highlights how attacks on logistics providers can quickly evolve into broader supply chain disruption affecting downstream businesses and consumers. Although Nichirei has begun restoring operations, investigations into the incident remain active. Authorities are also continuing to examine whether any personal information was compromised while the company works to return logistics services and KFC Japan operations to normal. With multiple high-profile cyber incidents affecting Japanese organizations in recent weeks, the latest disruption highlight he growing operational impact of attacks targeting critical logistics and supply chain infrastructure.

Last week, national security agencies from the Five Eyes—that’s the rich, English-language-speaking countries club—jointly released a statement warning of the increasing cyber risks of AI models: in particular, their ability to autonomously hack into systems and networks. The statement was more measured than some of the breathless headlines about it, and the advice they gave is pretty much the standard advice everyone gives—albeit with newfound urgency.

Internet risks are nothing new, and cyberattacks—both large and small—have been a significant issue since long before the current crop of generative AI models.

What’s been changing over the decades, and what AI is changing even faster, is the gap between skill and ability. For most of human history, the two terms were synonymous—but computers have decoupled them. As the gap between the two expands, humans empowered with these AI tools can do more: more writing, more research, more analysis and also more damage than ever before. These models can, with little detailed direction, autonomously hack into networks, steal data, deploy ransomware and destroy systems. And to the extent there is a solution, it’s going to involve harnessing AI for the defense.

In 1998, seven people from the hacker group L0pht testified before Congress. They told a mostly clueless Senate committee that they could take down the internet in 30 minutes. That was partly real and partly bravado, but it illustrates an important point: hacking into systems, stealing data and causing damage all required skill.

Contrast the L0pht hackers with hackers derided as “script kiddies.” They didn’t understand computers, or security. Instead, they used hacker tools written by others. Their actions required minimal skill and even less knowledge. But once those hacking tools became widespread, the number of potential attackers increased.

That number has continued to increase, as quality and availability of prewritten attack tools has grown. And it is growing dramatically with AI. Today’s AI systems—not just the frontier models, but most of them—are capable of carrying out cyberattacks automatically. They all do better in the hands of skilled attackers, but increasingly they are able to act autonomously with only minimal prompting.

The thing about people with ability but no skill is that they are often outsiders, not part of any professional community, and not bound by any rules or norms. This phenomenon is much more general than in cybersecurity. Any doctor can tell you how to untraceably poison someone, and many virus researchers know how to create a bioweapon. Any bridge engineer can tell you how to place explosives to blow a bridge up. The reason that murderous doctors and terrorist engineers are so rare is that the lengthy process of acquiring those skills also instills a moral and ethical code. If every random person has access to good poisoning advice, that puts us all in danger.

Modern AI systems are, in effect, a universal adviser to help people do harmful things. And while the current AI megacorporations are trying to build guardrails to prevent people from asking questions whose answers will enable the questioner to do harm, that’s not going to work in the long term. Smaller, cheaper, open-source models, including models that can run on people’s computers, and especially groups of models that run in concert with each other, are just as good as the frontier models from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic. And they continue to get better. These models will be passed around from person to person, like script kiddie hacker tools, and they won’t have any such guardrails.

Instructing AI models to spy on people and report any malicious prompts to the authorities fails for similar reasons. The megacorporations can do that, but the locally run open source models won’t. This could buy us a few months at best.

A third possibility is to somehow make the models themselves unable to hack into computers, create bioweapons or do anything else that might harm people or society. That won’t work, for the same reason we can’t teach doctors how to treat poisonings without also teaching them how to poison. It’s the same knowledge. It’s the same with construction and demolition. And it’s the same with cybersecurity. We want these AI models to be able to review computer code, find vulnerabilities and automatically fix them. The benefit to our collective security will be enormous. Unfortunately, the same knowledge can be used for attacks.

Where this leaves us is in a world of increased volatility. Super-powered humans with AI assistants will be able to do both wonderful and horrible things.

This brings us back to the Five Eyes statement. Everything they recommend is something security professionals have been recommending for years, if not decades. They are things talked about at that congressional hearing back in 1998, titled “Weak computer security in government: Is the public at risk?” Even the Five Eyes admitted that their security advice is not new, only more urgent.

What’s new is how fast things are changing: “The rapid pace of frontier AI development means cyber risk assumptions can become outdated in months, not years. We must act before and be prepared to adapt and withstand evolving threats.” The Five Eyes point to AI technology—not necessarily chatbots, but AI more generally—being used to strengthen every aspect of defense, to “detect vulnerabilities earlier, improve software quality, monitor unusual behavior, and respond faster to incidents—reducing both the cost and impact of incidents.”

Excellent advice from the Five Eyes security agencies. We need to do this with every risk that AI heightens, not just cybersecurity.

This essay was originally published in The Guardian.