Most of us are wise to phishing emails that don’t contain much personal information. Generic “your account is suspended” messages usually get binned on sight. But what about the phishing emails that use your real name and address, and reference the specific product you bought last month? Even for the most suspicious of people, that can be convincing.

It’s also the situation European Steam hardware buyers walked into this week. On August 10, Valve, the company behind the Steam gaming platform and Steam hardware, warned customers that a cyberattack had exposed names, home addresses, phone numbers, Steam email addresses, and details of their hardware orders.

It wasn’t Valve itself that got hacked. Rather, it was its shipping partner CEVA Logistics, which handles delivery of hardware from the gaming store. Passwords and payment information were not touched.

What got stolen

The attack window ran from July 29 to August 1, 2026. Valve learned about it on August 7 and started notifying customers three days later. CEVA stores delivery data for roughly 90 days after shipment, meaning anyone who received a Steam Deck, Steam Controller, or Steam Machine in Europe over the past three months could be affected.

The exposed information may include:

• Name
• Street address, postal code, and city
• Country
• Phone number
• Email address linked to the customer’s Steam account
• The type and price of the ordered hardware

Exact numbers are still unconfirmed. Neither Valve nor CEVA has said how many customer records were involved. Dutch retailers Bol and De Bijenkorf were reportedly told about the same CEVA incident on August 1 and warned their own customers.

Why shipping data is valuable to scammers

A scammer can send an email, text, or even make a phone call that references your genuine order and delivery address before asking you to pay a small customs or redelivery fee, confirm your delivery, or sign in to “verify” your order.

---

---

Data like this is already widely traded online. Malwarebytes researchers found more than 7,500 compromised datasets containing over 8.4 billion records on the dark web during the first six months of 2026.

Not Valve’s first security incident

Although Valve’s own systems weren’t compromised, that doesn’t mean the consequences can’t be severe.

In May 2025, a threat actor called Machine1337 tried to sell what looked like a dataset of 89 million Steam user records for $5,000. The data turned out to be older SMS messages carrying expired two-factor codes, routed through a third-party intermediary Valve says it never partnered with.

Valve has suffered a direct breach in the past though. November 2011 saw one that exposed records from 35 million users, including usernames, emails, and encrypted credit card details.

What affected buyers should do

In an email to customers, Valve advises them to assume that any message referencing their recent Steam hardware order is fake. That covers email, SMS, and phone calls, even the ones that quote your address correctly.

Steam Support never contacts users through email, Steam Chat, or Discord, and only handles account problems through its help page.

So you don’t need to rush to reset your password, although it never hurts to use a strong, unique password and enable Steam Guard’s two-factor authentication. Instead, be skeptical of any unsolicited emails, texts, or calls about a recent Steam hardware delivery, even if they include details only a real customer would know.

---

Something feel off? Check it before you click.  

Malwarebytes Scam Guard helps you analyze suspicious links, texts, and screenshots instantly.  

Available with Malwarebytes Premium Security for all your devices, and in the Malwarebytes app for iOS and Android.  

Try it free → 

This weekly roundup highlights the growing cybersecurity risks affecting businesses, government agencies, and critical service providers. From the continued dominance of ransomware operations to government database breaches and third-party supply chain incidents, recent events demonstrate how attackers are increasingly targeting trusted systems and external service providers to maximize disruption and data exposure.  The latest developments reinforce that cyber threats are no longer limited to direct attacks on organizations. Threat actors are exploiting ransomware-as-a-service ecosystems, compromising government registries, targeting law enforcement databases, and abusing third-party platforms that support retail and healthcare operations.   Organizations must strengthen third-party risk management, improve data protection measures, and enhance incident response capabilities to reduce the impact of evolving cyber threats. 

The Cyber Express Weekly Roundup 

Qilin Dominated Ransomware Attacks in H1 2026 

Qilin emerged as the most active ransomware group during the first half of 2026, targeting organizations worldwide through its ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) operation. Manufacturing, healthcare, construction, and professional services were among the sectors most affected as the group continued expanding its global reach. Read more… 

Hackers Breach Beneficial Owners Registry, Expose Data of 31,000 Firms 

Hackers breached the Register of Beneficial Owners (VwbP), gaining unauthorized access to data associated with approximately 31,000 legal entities. Authorities temporarily took the registry offline, launched an investigation, and established a crisis response team, stating there is currently no evidence that records were altered or deleted. Read more… 

PNLD Data Breach Leaks Police and Government Contact Details 

A data breach involving the Police National Legal Database (PNLD) exposed names, organizations, and work email addresses belonging to police officers, government partners, criminal justice professionals, and some Ask the Police users after the information appeared on the dark web. Authorities are investigating the incident and assessing its potential impact. Read more… 

De Bijenkorf Logistics Cyberattack Delays Orders and Raises Data Exposure Concerns 

A cyberattack targeting a third-party logistics provider disrupted deliveries, returns, and refunds for Dutch retailer De Bijenkorf. While the retailer confirmed its internal systems were not compromised, investigators are assessing whether customer contact details and order information were exposed. Payment information, passwords, and financial data were not affected, and customers have been advised to remain vigilant against phishing attempts. Read more… 

Updoc Data Breach Exposes Customer Contact Information 

Australian telehealth provider Updoc disclosed a data breach after unauthorized access to a third-party operational platform exposed some customers' names, email addresses, and postal addresses. The company confirmed that its internal systems remained secure and that no medical records, payment information, or financial data were compromised. Read more… 

Weekly Cybersecurity Takeaway 

This week's incidents highlight the continued evolution of cyber threats across ransomware operations, government data breaches, and third-party supply chain compromises.  A common theme across these events is the growing risk posed by trusted third-party platforms and shared digital ecosystems. Attackers are targeting external service providers, government databases, and ransomware affiliate networks to expand their reach and maximize operational disruption.  Organizations should prioritize stronger third-party risk management, continuous monitoring, robust access controls, and timely incident response to reduce the impact of supply chain attacks and data breaches. As businesses become more interconnected, strengthening the security of partner ecosystems is becoming just as important as protecting internal infrastructure. 

Fast-food chain Chick-fil-A is warning customers after attackers hijacked loyalty accounts using stolen passwords in a credential stuffing attack.

Chick-fil-A says it detected suspicious login activity against some Chick-fil-A One accounts in June and launched an investigation. The company later concluded that unauthorized parties ran an automated credential stuffing attack against its website and mobile app between June 17 and June 19, 2026, using usernames and passwords obtained from previous data breaches or other third‑party sources. Chick-fil-A says it reset passwords and ended active sessions for affected accounts while investigating the incident.

Credential stuffing is an attack where criminals take username–password pairs stolen from one service and automatically try them on many other websites and apps to see where they still work. Because many people reuse passwords, attackers often gain access to accounts without ever breaking into the company’s systems in the traditional sense.

So, some may conclude that there are two sides to this. On the one hand, customers who reuse passwords across multiple sites make credential stuffing attacks much more likely to succeed. On the other, companies also have a responsibility to put protections in place to detect and block automated credential stuffing attacks before accounts are compromised.

How it works

To understand how it works, we’ve created a typical scenario:

• Cybercriminals obtain large lists of breached credentials from previous data breaches, dark web markets, or public dumps.
• They use automated tools to fire those credentials at login endpoints for popular services like retailers, banks, and loyalty programs.
• They take over accounts where the credentials still work, then siphon off stored value, personal data, or loyalty rewards, or resell the access to other criminals.

To a victim, this may seem like a breach at the company, but technically speaking, the cybercriminals already had the credentials and were able to enrich their database with additional information about the victims.

---

According to Chick-fil-A’s breach notifications, the attackers may have accessed a combination of:

• Name and email address.
• Chick-fil-A One membership number and mobile pay number.
• QR codes associated with the account.
• The balance of any Chick-fil-A credit, such as gift cards or rewards on the account.
• The last four digits of the stored credit or debit card number.

If you saved more details in your Chick-fil-A One account, attackers may also have seen:

• Birthdate (month and day).
• Phone number.
• Physical address.

Advice for Chick-fil-A customers

The real problem is that, over the years, we’ve designed and adopted a system that no longer works well for most people: passwords. We tell people not to reuse them and to use a password manager to keep track of unique passwords for every account. But for many people, password managers still seem complicated or untrustworthy. I’m afraid the same may turn out to be true for passkeys.

If you have or suspect you had a Chick-fil-A One account, you should act even if you haven’t received a letter.

• Set a new, unique password for your Chick-fil-A One account that you do not use anywhere else. And if you’ve used the same password elsewhere, change it on those accounts too.
• If you cannot log in because your account was locked or reset, follow Chick-fil-A’s recovery process.
• Turn on multi-factor authentication (MFA) if you haven’t already. Chick-fil-A supports MFA for Chick-fil-A One accounts using a verified mobile phone number.
• Be aware that attackers can use the exposed data to craft more convincing phishing messages and scams.

---

Something feel off? Check it before you click.  

Malwarebytes Scam Guard helps you analyze suspicious links, texts, and screenshots instantly.  

Available with Malwarebytes Premium Security for all your devices, and in the Malwarebytes app for iOS and Android.  

Try it free → 

A data breach at Paidwork, a platform that pays people small amounts to complete online microtasks, has exposed personal and financial information of more than 23 million users.

According to public breach reports, the intrusion took place in March 2026, with the stolen database first advertised on a cybercrime forum in April as an 11 GB dump allegedly taken from Paidwork’s production systems.

The exposed data reportedly includes full names, email and home addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth, gender, education details, bank account numbers, transaction records, device and IP information, profile photos, personal interests, and passwords stored as hashes.

That is a lot of sensitive information to hand over to a site that, for many users, pays only a few cents per task.

Why this kind of breach matters

For cybercriminals, a dataset like this is a goldmine for targeted phishing, account takeover, and identity fraud. Banking details and transaction histories can be abused directly, while combinations of email addresses, password hashes, and personal details make credential stuffing and social engineering much easier. Even if passwords were hashed with bcrypt, weak or reused passwords can still be cracked and tried elsewhere.

Many Paidwork users likely signed up with their “throwaway” email and a reused password, thinking the risk was low because the amounts involved were tiny. But attackers do not care how much you earned. They care how much they can make by abusing your data.

Data for pennies, risk for years

More than anything, this breach is a reminder to think critically about who you give your personal information to.

Before you hand over your full name, home address, date of birth, and bank details to a site that pays a few cents per task, ask yourself whether the trade-off is worth it.

If any service wants sensitive data, check what security and privacy commitments it makes, whether it offers meaningful support in case of a breach, and whether you can limit what you share to the minimum needed. When in doubt, keep high-value data like banking details and copies of ID reserved for organizations that genuinely need them and can be held accountable when they fail to protect them.

Check if your data was exposed

While Paidwork has not publicly acknowledged the alleged breach, the stolen data is reportedly circulating in criminal circles, and we have indexed it in our Digital Footprint Scanner so you can check whether your information was exposed.

Use our Digital Footprint Scanner to check whether your email address appears in known breach data, including data associated with this incident. If it does, treat it as a prompt to take action rather than a cause for panic:

• Change your password on Paidwork (if you still use the service) and on any other accounts where you reused the same or a similar password.
• Enable multi-factor authentication (MFA) wherever possible, especially on email, banking, and other important accounts, and consider using a password manager to generate and store unique passwords for every site.
• Monitor bank statements for unexpected withdrawals or suspicious activity.
• Be prepared for phishing emails, texts, and phone calls. Cybercriminals can use the leaked information to make their scams more convincing.
• Consider an identity monitoring or identity theft protection service.

---

Abbott Laboratories, one of the world’s largest healthcare and medical device companies, is investigating two apparently unrelated cyber incidents after confirming unauthorized access to internal systems. While Abbott says there has been no impact on manufacturing, laboratory operations, or patient care, cybercriminal groups ShinyHunters and ShadowByt3$ claim the breaches were far more extensive. Those claims remain unverified at the time of writing and, so far, unsupported by publicly leaked data.

The incidents reportedly involve Abbott’s Cancer Diagnostics business and its LabCentral customer portal for core laboratory diagnostics.

According to a statement released by Abbott on July 16:

“Abbott is investigating a cyber incident in which there was unauthorized access to a limited number of internal systems in our Cancer Diagnostics business only. This does not impact any business operations, product or product availability, manufacturing or lab operations, or our ability to serve patients.”

Regarding LabCentral, Abbott told reporters that it is an externally hosted portal and that there has been “no known exposure of sensitive customer or business information.”

ShinyHunters told BleepingComputer it stole internal documents, contracts, customer information, more than 22 million doctor‑patient notes, over 20 million medical orders, and more than one million US Social Security numbers, along with personally identifiable information (PII) such as names, addresses, dates of birth, emails, and phone numbers.

On July 18, ShinyHunters gave Abbott until July 21 to respond before leaking the alleged data:

“This is a final warning to reach out by 21 July 2026 before we leak along with several annoying (digital) problems that’ll come your way. Make the right decision, don’t be the next headline”

The threat of “digital problems” is a familiar one from ShinyHunters. During the Canvas attacks, the group defaced school login pages and the Canvas app with an on‑screen ransom message.

Separately, ShadowByt3$ claims it accessed the LabCentral portal on July 4, using compromised customer credentials plus a “weak point” in the environment, allegedly exfiltrating technical documentation, manufacturing certificates, operating manuals, technical specs, and regulatory docs for Abbott lab systems.

If the attackers’ claims prove accurate, the breach could affect healthcare providers that use Abbott’s diagnostic systems and potentially expose sensitive patient and healthcare data. Abbott, however, says it has found no evidence that sensitive customer or business information was exposed through the LabCentral incident and has not confirmed any patient data was compromised.

What we can reasonably assume to be true

• There was a genuine compromise affecting Cancer Diagnostics systems. Abbott has publicly acknowledged unauthorized access and engaged incident response and law enforcement. This doesn’t appear to be a purely “fake” extortion attempt.
• There was also a separate cyber incident involving the LabCentral portal. Abbott says the portal primarily hosts public reference material and that it has found no evidence that sensitive customer or business information was exposed.
• Both ShinyHunters and ShadowByt3$ have listed Abbott on their extortion sites and have provided narrative details to media outlets, so this is not just generic name‑dropping.
• As of the latest reporting, neither group has publicly released samples of the data they claim to have stolen.

What Abbott customers can do

There are some actions you can take if you are, or suspect you may have been, the victim of a data breach.

• Check the vendor’s advice. Every breach is different, so check with the vendor to find out what’s happened and follow any specific advice they offer.
• Change your password. You can make a stolen password useless to thieves by changing it. Choose a strong password that you don’t use for anything else. Better yet, let a password manager choose and store one for you.
• Enable two-factor authentication (2FA). If you can, use a FIDO2-compliant hardware key, laptop, or phone as your second factor. Some forms of 2FA can be phished just as easily as a password. 2FA that relies on a FIDO2 device can’t be phished.
• Watch out for impersonation scams. Criminals may contact you pretending to be the company. Check the company’s website to see how it is contacting affected customers, and verify anyone who contacts you using a different communication channel.
• Take your time. Phishing attacks often impersonate people or brands you know, and create a false sense of urgency with messages about missed deliveries, suspended accounts, or security alerts.
• Consider not storing your card details. It’s definitely more convenient to get sites to remember your card details for you, but we highly recommend not storing that information on websites.
• Set up identity monitoring. Identity monitoring alerts you if your personal information is found being traded illegally online and helps you recover if your identity is stolen.

---

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has issued a postmortem on a recent data leak in which a contractor published dozens of internal CISA credentials — including AWS Govcloud keys — in a public GitHub repository for almost six months before being notified by KrebsOnSecurity. Experts say the gaps identified in the agency’s initial response provide important lessons that all security teams should absorb.

On May 15, 2026, the security firm GitGuardian asked for help in notifying CISA about the existence of a public GitHub repository called “Private CISA” that included 844 MB of sensitive CISA-related data. One of the exposed files, titled “importantAWStokens,” included the administrative credentials to three Amazon AWS GovCloud servers. Another file — “AWS-Workspace-Firefox-Passwords.csv” — listed plaintext usernames and passwords for dozens of internal CISA systems.

CISA quickly acknowledged our initial alert, but took more than 48 hours to invalidate the AWS keys and many other important secrets leaked in the GitHub repo. In its report on the data leak, CISA said the complexities of the agency’s systems and interconnections with federal and industry partners caused its key rotation to take longer than anticipated.

“Drawing on this experience, CISA encourages others to maintain mature and well-tested key management capabilities,” the report notes.

CISA also admitted it can do better when it comes to responding to security incident notifications from external parties. The postmortem stresses that clear and distinct reporting channels are essential to ensure that incidents affecting the organization itself are handled differently from those involving its products or customers.

“In CISA’s case, these channels were not well defined, leading the security researcher to try multiple avenues – including emailing the contractor, submitting through CISA’s vulnerability disclosure platform (which is intended for vulnerabilities impacting the broader cybersecurity community), and ultimately involving a reporter,” reads the analysis written by Preston Werntz and Brad Libbey, the acting chief information officer and acting chief information security officer at CISA, respectively.

CISA said it is refining its reporting channels to make them easier and faster for researchers. “Additionally, while many researchers rely on the security.txt file, organizations can ensure clarity by publishing reporting instructions in multiple prominent locations,” the CISA authors wrote.

Guillaume Valadon, the GitGuardian researcher who first contacted KrebsOnSecurity about the exposed CISA credentials, said CISA ignored nine automated alerts about the exposed credentials prior to our notification on May 15. Valadon’s company constantly scans public code repositories at GitHub and elsewhere for exposed secrets, automatically alerting the offending accounts of any apparent sensitive data exposures.

“Letting nine notification emails go unanswered is how a one-day incident becomes a six-month exposure,” Valadon wrote in an analysis of CISA’s report. “Make it trivial to report a leak about you, not just about your products. The person reporting a leak to you is not the threat. Publish a security.txt, but do not stop there. Put reporting instructions in several prominent places, and make sure a report about your own infrastructure does not land in a product-bug queue.”

The report’s authors also emphasized the importance of continuously scanning public code repositories like GitHub for exposed secrets, and said CISA has since rotated all secrets and created an action plan to improve management of developer secrets and to better monitor for them going forward.

The report notes that while CISA had developed a playbook for responding to cybersecurity incidents, that playbook somehow didn’t include what to do in situations involving GitHub or other cloud services. Valadon said the report validates the need to scan continuously — not just quarterly — for exposed secrets.

“The Private-CISA repository sat public for six months,” Valadon wrote. “Continuous monitoring of public GitHub surfaced it. Comprehensive internal scanning could have caught the plaintext passwords and committed backups long before they left the building.”

CISA gave itself passing grades on several areas of security preparedness that it said helped the agency gauge the scope and impact of the exposed secrets, including enhanced logging capabilities, and the adoption of zero-trust principles in both its production and development systems. CISA said those detailed logs allowed it to show that no customer or mission data was exposed, and that the leaked credentials were not used outside of CISA’s environments. The agency said the contractor who exposed the secrets had their system access revoked.

Valadon reckons the biggest takeaway is the CISA postmortem itself, and praised the agency for being transparent about what worked and what didn’t.

“To my knowledge, it is also the first time a national cybersecurity agency has publicly advocated for secrets scanning and for simplifying relations with security researchers,” Valadon wrote. “That is exactly the incident communication we should expect from every organization.”

Insurance provider AssuranceAmerica has confirmed a data breach affecting the personal information and driver’s license numbers of up to 6.9 million people.

AssuranceAmerica provides car and rental insurance to customers across 14 US states through a network of over 9,500 independent agents.

TechCrunch reports:
“AssuranceAmerica said it discovered hackers in its computer systems on March 17. The company concluded its investigation on June 15, finding that the hackers had stolen customers’ names, contact information, and driver’s license numbers.“

The breach notice letter also mentions information about customers’ auto insurance policies and accounts, their drivers and vehicles, and details about customer claims. 

AssuranceAmerica has not yet released a public statement about the data breach. However, public breach notices and independent reporting indicate that the incident began with a targeted phishing attack against a single employee. An unauthorized third party accessed parts of the insurer’s IT systems and copied files containing customer policy information and driver’s license numbers. So far, no law‑enforcement or vendor report has publicly linked this activity to a specific threat group, ransomware operation, or nation‑state actor.

No public source has reported a ransom demand, negotiations, or payment, and AssuranceAmerica’s public filings are quiet about any contact with the attackers.

Protecting yourself after a data breach

There are some actions you can take if you are, or suspect you may have been, the victim of a data breach.

• Check the vendor’s advice. Every breach is different, so check with the vendor to find out what’s happened and follow any specific advice they offer.
• Change your password. You can make a stolen password useless to thieves by changing it. Choose a strong password that you don’t use for anything else. Better yet, let a password manager choose and store one for you.
• Enable two-factor authentication (2FA). If you can, use a FIDO2-compliant hardware key, laptop, or phone as your second factor. Some forms of 2FA can be phished just as easily as a password. 2FA that relies on a FIDO2 device can’t be phished.
• Watch out for impersonation scams. Criminals may contact you pretending to be the company. Check the company’s website to see how it is contacting affected customers, and verify anyone who contacts you using a different communication channel.
• Take your time. Phishing attacks often impersonate people or brands you know, and create a false sense of urgency with messages about missed deliveries, suspended accounts, or security alerts.
• Consider not storing your card details. It’s definitely more convenient to get sites to remember your card details for you, but we highly recommend not storing that information on websites.
• Set up identity monitoring. Identity monitoring alerts you if your personal information is found being traded illegally online and helps you recover if your identity is stolen.

Check your personal data exposure

You can check whether any of your personal information has been exposed using our Digital Footprint portal. Enter the email address you use most often and we’ll generate a free Digital Footprint report.

Lawmakers in both houses of Congress are demanding answers from the U.S. Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) after KrebsOnSecurity reported this week that a CISA contractor intentionally published AWS GovCloud keys and a vast trove of other agency secrets on a public GitHub account. The inquiry comes as CISA is still struggling to contain the breach and invalidate the leaked credentials.

On May 18, KrebsOnSecurity reported that a CISA contractor with administrative access to the agency’s code development platform had created a public GitHub profile called “Private-CISA” that included plaintext credentials to dozens of internal CISA systems. Experts who reviewed the exposed secrets said the commit logs for the code repository showed the CISA contractor disabled GitHub’s built-in protection against publishing sensitive credentials in public repos.

CISA acknowledged the leak but has not responded to questions about the duration of the data exposure. However, experts who reviewed the now-defunct Private-CISA archive said it was originally created in November 2025, and that it exhibits a pattern consistent with an individual operator using the repository as a working scratchpad or synchronization mechanism rather than a curated project repository.

In a written statement, CISA said “there is no indication that any sensitive data was compromised as a result of the incident.” But in a May 19 a letter (PDF) to CISA’s Acting Director Nick Andersen, Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) said the credential leak raises serious questions about how such a security lapse could occur at the very agency charged with helping to prevent cyber breaches.

“This reporting raises serious concerns regarding CISA’s internal policies and procedures at a time of significant cybersecurity threats against U.S. critical infrastructure,” Sen. Hassan wrote.

Sen. Hassan noted that the incident occurred against the backdrop of major disruptions internally at CISA, which lost more than a third of it workforce and almost all of its senior leaders after the Trump administration forced a series of early retirements, buyouts, and resignations across the agency’s various divisions.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), the ranking member on the House Homeland Security Committee, echoed the senator’s concerns.

“We are concerned that this incident reflects a diminished security culture and/or an inability for CISA to adequately manage its contract support,” Thompson wrote in a May 19 letter to the acting CISA chief that was co-signed by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill), the ranking member of the panel’s Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection. “It’s no secret that our adversaries — like China, Russia, and Iran — seek to gain access to and persistence on federal networks. The files contained in the ‘Private-CISA’ repository provided the information, access, and roadmap to do just that.”

KrebsOnSecurity has learned that more a week after CISA was first notified of the data leak by the security firm GitGuardian, the agency is still working to invalidate and replace many of the exposed keys and secrets.

On May 20, KrebsOnSecurity heard from Dylan Ayrey, the creator of TruffleHog, an open-source tool for discovering private keys and other secrets buried in code hosted at GitHub and other public platforms. Ayrey said CISA still hadn’t invalidated an RSA private key exposed in the Private-CISA repo that granted access to a GitHub app which is owned by the CISA enterprise account and installed on the CISA-IT GitHub organization with full access to all code repositories.

“An attacker with this key can read source code from every repository in the CISA-IT organization, including private repos, register rogue self-hosted runners to hijack CI/CD pipelines and access repository secrets, and modify repository admin settings including branch protection rules, webhooks, and deploy keys,” Ayrey told KrebsOnSecurity. CI/CD stands for Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery, and it refers to a set of practices used to automate the building, testing and deployment of software.

KrebsOnSecurity notified CISA about Ayrey’s findings on May 20. Ayrey said CISA appears to have invalidated the exposed RSA private key sometime after that notification. But he noted that CISA still hasn’t rotated leaked credentials tied to other critical security technologies that are deployed across the agency’s technology portfolio (KrebsOnSecurity is not naming those technologies publicly for the time being).

CISA responded with a brief written statement in response to questions about Ayrey’s findings, saying “CISA is actively responding and coordinating with the appropriate parties and vendors to ensure any identified leaked credentials are rotated and rendered invalid and will continue to take appropriate steps to protect the security of our systems.”

Ayrey said his company Truffle Security monitors GitHub and a number of other code platforms for exposed keys, and attempts to alert affected accounts to the sensitive data exposure(s). They can do this easily on GitHub because the platform publishes a live feed which includes a record of all commits and changes to public code repositories. But he said cybercriminal actors also monitor these public feeds, and are often quick to pounce on API or SSH keys that get inadvertently published in code commits.

In practical terms, it is likely that cybercrime groups or foreign adversaries also noticed the publication of these CISA secrets, the most egregious of which appears to have happened in late April 2026, Ayrey said.

“We monitor that firehose of data for keys, and we have tools to try to figure out whose they are,” he said. “We have evidence attackers monitor that firehose as well. Anyone monitoring GitHub events could be sitting on this information.”

James Wilson, the enterprise technology editor for the Risky Business security podcast, said organizations using GitHub to manage code projects can set top-down policies that prevent employees from disabling GitHub’s protections against publishing secret keys and credentials. But Wilson’s co-host Adam Boileau said it’s not clear that any technology could stop employees from opening their own personal GitHub account and using it to store sensitive and proprietary information.

“Ultimately, this is a thing you can’t solve with a technical control,” Boileau said on this week’s podcast. “This is a human problem where you’ve hired a contractor to do this work and they have decided of their own volition to use GitHub to synchronize content from a work machine to a home machine. I don’t know what technical controls you could put in place given that this is being done presumably outside of anything CISA managed or even had visibility on.”

Update, 3:05 p.m. ET: Added statement from CISA. Corrected a date in the story (Truffle Security said it found the repo gained some of its most sensitive secrets in late April 2026, not 2025).

Until this past weekend, a contractor for the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) maintained a public GitHub repository that exposed credentials to several highly privileged AWS GovCloud accounts and a large number of internal CISA systems. Security experts said the public archive included files detailing how CISA builds, tests and deploys software internally, and that it represents one of the most egregious government data leaks in recent history.

On May 15, KrebsOnSecurity heard from Guillaume Valadon, a researcher with the security firm GitGuardian. Valadon’s company constantly scans public code repositories at GitHub and elsewhere for exposed secrets, automatically alerting the offending accounts of any apparent sensitive data exposures. Valadon said he reached out because the owner in this case wasn’t responding and the information exposed was highly sensitive.

The GitHub repository that Valadon flagged was named “Private-CISA,” and it harbored a vast number of internal CISA/DHS credentials and files, including cloud keys, tokens, plaintext passwords, logs and other sensitive CISA assets.

Valadon said the exposed CISA credentials represent a textbook example of poor security hygiene, noting that the commit logs in the offending GitHub account show that the CISA administrator disabled the default setting in GitHub that blocks users from publishing SSH keys or other secrets in public code repositories.

“Passwords stored in plain text in a csv, backups in git, explicit commands to disable GitHub secrets detection feature,” Valadon wrote in an email. “I honestly believed that it was all fake before analyzing the content deeper. This is indeed the worst leak that I’ve witnessed in my career. It is obviously an individual’s mistake, but I believe that it might reveal internal practices.”

One of the exposed files, titled “importantAWStokens,” included the administrative credentials to three Amazon AWS GovCloud servers. Another file exposed in their public GitHub repository — “AWS-Workspace-Firefox-Passwords.csv” — listed plaintext usernames and passwords for dozens of internal CISA systems. According to Caturegli, those systems included one called “LZ-DSO,” which appears short for “Landing Zone DevSecOps,” the agency’s secure code development environment.

Philippe Caturegli, founder of the security consultancy Seralys, said he tested the AWS keys only to see whether they were still valid and to determine which internal systems the exposed accounts could access. Caturegli said the GitHub account that exposed the CISA secrets exhibits a pattern consistent with an individual operator using the repository as a working scratchpad or synchronization mechanism rather than a curated project repository.

“The use of both a CISA-associated email address and a personal email address suggests the repository may have been used across differently configured environments,” Caturegli observed. “The available Git metadata alone does not prove which endpoint or device was used.”

Caturegli said he validated that the exposed credentials could authenticate to three AWS GovCloud accounts at a high privilege level. He said the archive also includes plain text credentials to CISA’s internal “artifactory” — essentially a repository of all the code packages they are using to build software — and that this would represent a juicy target for malicious attackers looking for ways to maintain a persistent foothold in CISA systems.

“That would be a prime place to move laterally,” he said. “Backdoor in some software packages, and every time they build something new they deploy your backdoor left and right.”

In response to questions, a spokesperson for CISA said the agency is aware of the reported exposure and is continuing to investigate the situation.

“Currently, there is no indication that any sensitive data was compromised as a result of this incident,” the CISA spokesperson wrote. “While we hold our team members to the highest standards of integrity and operational awareness, we are working to ensure additional safeguards are implemented to prevent future occurrences.”

A review of the GitHub account and its exposed passwords show the “Private CISA” repository was maintained by an employee of Nightwing, a government contractor based in Dulles, Va. Nightwing declined to comment, directing inquiries to CISA.

CISA has not responded to questions about the potential duration of the data exposure, but Caturegli said the Private CISA repository was created on November 13, 2025. The contractor’s GitHub account was created back in September 2018.

The GitHub account that included the Private CISA repo was taken offline shortly after both KrebsOnSecurity and Seralys notified CISA about the exposure. But Caturegli said the exposed AWS keys inexplicably continued to remain valid for another 48 hours.

CISA is currently operating with only a fraction of its normal budget and staffing levels. The agency has lost nearly a third of its workforce since the beginning of the second Trump administration, which forced a series of early retirements, buyouts, and resignations across the agency’s various divisions.

The now-defunct Private CISA repo showed the contractor also used easily-guessed passwords for a number of internal resources; for example, many of the credentials used a password consisting of each platform’s name followed by the current year. Caturegli said such practices would constitute a serious security threat for any organization even if those credentials were never exposed externally, noting that threat actors often use key credentials exposed on the internal network to expand their reach after establishing initial access to a targeted system.

“What I suspect happened is [the CISA contractor] was using this GitHub to synchronize files between a work laptop and a home computer, because he has regularly committed to this repo since November 2025,” Caturegli said. “This would be an embarrassing leak for any company, but it’s even more so in this case because it’s CISA.”

An ongoing data extortion attack targeting the widely-used education technology platform Canvas disrupted classes and coursework at school districts and universities across the United States today, after a cybercrime group defaced the service’s login page with a ransom demand that threatened to leak data from 275 million students and faculty across nearly 9,000 educational institutions.

Canvas parent firm Instructure responded to today’s defacement attacks by disabling the platform, which is used by thousands of schools, universities and businesses to manage coursework and assignments, and to communicate with students.

Instructure acknowledged a data breach earlier this week, after the cybercrime group ShinyHunters claimed responsibility and said they would leak data on tens of millions of students and faculty unless paid a ransom. The stated deadline for payment was initially set at May 6, but it was later pushed back to May 12.

In a statement on May 6, Instructure said the investigation so far shows the stolen information includes “certain identifying information of users at affected institutions, such as names, email addresses, and student ID numbers, as well as as messages among users.” The company said it found no evidence the breached data included more sensitive information, such as passwords, dates of birth, government identifiers or financial information.

The May 6 update stated that Canvas was fully operational, and that Instructure was not seeing any ongoing unauthorized activity on their platform. “At this stage, we believe the incident has been contained,” Instructure wrote.

However, by mid-day on Thursday, May 7, students and faculty at dozens of schools and universities were flooding social media sites with comments saying that a ransom demand from ShinyHunters had replaced the usual Canvas login page. Instructure responded by pulling Canvas offline and replacing the portal with the message, “Canvas is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance. Check back soon.”

“We anticipate being up soon, and will provide updates as soon as possible,” reads the current message on Instructure’s status page.

While the data stolen by ShinyHunters may or may not contain particularly sensitive information (ShinyHunters claims it includes several billion private messages among students and teachers, as well as names, phone numbers and email addresses), this attack could hardly have come at a worse time for Instructure: Many of the affected schools and universities are in the middle of final exams, and a prolonged outage could be highly damaging for the company.

The extortion message that greeted countless Canvas users today advised the affected schools to negotiate their own ransom payments to prevent the publication of their data — regardless of whether Instructure decides to pay.

“ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again),” the extortion message read. “Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some ‘security patches.'”

A source close to the investigation who was not authorized to speak to the press told KrebsOnSecurity that a number of universities have already approached the cybercrime group about paying. The same source also pointed out that the ShinyHunters data leak blog no longer lists Instructure among its current extortion victims, and that the samples of data stolen from Canvas customers were removed as well. Data extortion groups like ShinyHunters will typically only remove victims from their leak sites after receiving an extortion payment or after a victim agrees to negotiate.

Dipan Mann, founder and CEO of the security firm Cloudskope, slammed Instructure for referring to today’s outage as a “scheduled maintenance” event on its status page. Mann said Shiny Hunters first demonstrated they’d breached Instructure on May 1, prompting Instructure’s Chief Information Security Officer Steve Proud to declare the following day that the incident had been contained. But Mann said today’s attack is at least the third time in the past eight months that Instructure has been breached by ShinyHunters.

In a blog post today, Mann noted that in September 2025, ShinyHunters released thousands of internal University of Pennsylvania files — donor records, internal memos, and other confidential materials — through what the Daily Pennsylvanian and other outlets later determined was, in part, a Canvas/Instructure-mediated access path.

“Penn was the named victim,” Mann wrote. “Instructure was the mechanism. The incident was treated as a Penn-specific story by most of the national press and quietly handled by Instructure as a customer-specific matter. That framing was wrong then. It is dramatically more wrong in light of the May 2026 events, which now look like the planned escalation of an attack pattern that ShinyHunters had been working against Instructure’s environment for at least eight months prior. The September 2025 Penn breach was the proof of concept. The May 1, 2026 incident was the production run. The May 7, 2026 recompromise was ShinyHunters demonstrating publicly that the May 2 ‘containment’ did not happen.”

In February, a ShinyHunters spokesperson told The Daily Pennsylvanian that Penn failed to pay a $1 million ransom demand. On March 5, ShinyHunters published 461 megabytes worth of data stolen from Penn, including thousands of files such as donor records and internal memos.

ShinyHunters is a prolific and fluid cybercriminal group that specializes in data theft and extortion. They typically gain access to companies through voice phishing and social engineering attacks that often involve impersonating IT personnel or other trusted members of a targeted organization.

Last month, ShinyHunters relieved the home security giant ADT of personal information on 5.5 million customers. The extortion group told BleepingComputer they breached the company by compromising an employee’s Okta single sign-on account in a voice phishing attack that enabled access to ADT’s Salesforce instance. BleepingComputer says ShinyHunters recently has taken credit for a number of extortion attacks against high-profile organizations, including Medtronic, Rockstar Games, McGraw Hill, 7-Eleven and the cruise line operator Carnival.

The attack on Canvas customers is just one of several major cybercrime campaigns being launched by ShinyHunters at the moment, said Charles Carmakal, chief technology officer at the Google-owned Mandiant Consulting. Carmakal declined to comment specifically on the Canvas breach, but said “there are multiple concurrent and discrete ShinyHunters intrusion and extortion campaigns happening right now.”

Cloudskope’s Mann said what happens next depends largely on whether Instructure’s customers — the universities, K-12 districts, and education ministries paying for Canvas — choose to apply pressure or absorb the breach quietly.

“The history of education-vendor incidents suggests the path of least resistance is the second one,” he concluded.

Update, May 8, 11:05 a.m. ET: Instructure has published an incident update page that includes more information about the breach. Instructure said its Canvas portal is functioning normally again, and that the hackers exploited an issue related to Free-for-Teacher accounts.

“This is the same issue that led to the unauthorized access the prior week,” Instructure wrote. “As a result, we have made the difficult decision to temporarily shut down Free-for-Teacher accounts. These accounts have been a core part of our platform, and we’re committed to resolving the issues with these accounts.”

Instructure said affected organizations were notified on May 6.

“If your organization is affected, Instructure will contact your organization’s primary contacts directly,” the update states. “Please don’t rely on third-party lists or social media posts naming potentially affected organizations as those lists aren’t verified. Instructure will confirm validated information through direct outreach to all affected organizations.”

Update, May 11, 10:16 p.m. ET: Instructure posted an update saying they paid their extortionists in exchange for a promise to destroy the stolen data. “The data was returned to us,” the update reads. “We received digital confirmation of data destruction (shred logs). We have been informed that no Instructure customers will be extorted as a result of this incident, publicly or otherwise.”

A Brazilian tech firm that specializes in protecting networks from distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks has been enabling a botnet responsible for an extended campaign of massive DDoS attacks against other network operators in Brazil, KrebsOnSecurity has learned. The firm’s chief executive says the malicious activity resulted from a security breach and was likely the work of a competitor trying to tarnish his company’s public image.

For the past several years, security experts have tracked a series of massive DDoS attacks originating from Brazil and solely targeting Brazilian ISPs. Until recently, it was less than clear who or what was behind these digital sieges. That changed earlier this month when a trusted source who asked to remain anonymous shared a curious file archive that was exposed in an open directory online.

The exposed archive contained several Portuguese-language malicious programs written in Python. It also included the private SSH authentication keys belonging to the CEO of Huge Networks, a Brazilian ISP that primarily offers DDoS protection to other Brazilian network operators.

Founded in Miami, Fla. in 2014, Huge Networks’s operations are centered in Brazil. The company originated from protecting game servers against DDoS attacks and evolved into an ISP-focused DDoS mitigation provider. It does not appear in any public abuse complaints and is not associated with any known DDoS-for-hire services.

Nevertheless, the exposed archive shows that a Brazil-based threat actor maintained root access to Huge Networks infrastructure and built a powerful DDoS botnet by routinely mass-scanning the Internet for insecure Internet routers and unmanaged domain name system (DNS) servers on the Web that could be enlisted in attacks.

DNS is what allows Internet users to reach websites by typing familiar domain names instead of the associated IP addresses. Ideally, DNS servers only provide answers to machines within a trusted domain. But so-called “DNS reflection” attacks rely on DNS servers that are (mis)configured to accept queries from anywhere on the Web. Attackers can send spoofed DNS queries to these servers so that the request appears to come from the target’s network. That way, when the DNS servers respond, they reply to the spoofed (targeted) address.

By taking advantage of an extension to the DNS protocol that enables large DNS messages, botmasters can dramatically boost the size and impact of a reflection attack — crafting DNS queries so that the responses are much bigger than the requests. For example, an attacker could compose a DNS request of less than 100 bytes, prompting a response that is 60-70 times as large. This amplification effect is especially pronounced when the perpetrators can query many DNS servers with these spoofed requests from tens of thousands of compromised devices simultaneously.

The exposed file archive includes a command-line history showing exactly how this attacker built and maintained a powerful botnet by scouring the Internet for TP-Link Archer AX21 routers. Specifically, the botnet seeks out TP-Link devices that remain vulnerable to CVE-2023-1389, an unauthenticated command injection vulnerability that was patched back in April 2023.

Malicious domains in the exposed Python attack scripts included DNS lookups for hikylover[.]st, and c.loyaltyservices[.]lol, both domains that have been flagged in the past year as control servers for an Internet of Things (IoT) botnet powered by a Mirai malware variant.

The leaked archive shows the botmaster coordinated their scanning from a Digital Ocean server that has been flagged for abusive activity hundreds of times in the past year. The Python scripts invoke multiple Internet addresses assigned to Huge Networks that were used to identify targets and execute DDoS campaigns. The attacks were strictly limited to Brazilian IP address ranges, and the scripts show that each selected IP address prefix was attacked for 10-60 seconds with four parallel processes per host before the botnet moved on to the next target.

The archive also shows these malicious Python scripts relied on private SSH keys belonging to Huge Networks’s CEO, Erick Nascimento. Reached for comment about the files, Mr. Nascimento said he did not write the attack programs and that he didn’t realize the extent of the DDoS campaigns until contacted by KrebsOnSecurity.

“We received and notified many Tier 1 upstreams regarding very very large DDoS attacks against small ISPs,” Nascimento said. “We didn’t dig deep enough at the time, and what you sent makes that clear.”

Nascimento said the unauthorized activity is likely related to a digital intrusion first detected in January 2026 that compromised two of the company’s development servers, as well as his personal SSH keys. But he said there’s no evidence those keys were used after January.

“We notified the team in writing the same day, wiped the boxes, and rotated keys,” Nascimento said, sharing a screenshot of a January 11 notification from Digital Ocean. “All documented internally.”

Mr. Nascimento said Huge Networks has since engaged a third-party network forensics firm to investigate further.

“Our working assessment so far is that this all started with a single internal compromise — one pivot point that gave the attacker downstream access to some resources, including a legacy personal droplet of mine,” he wrote.

“The compromise happened through a bastion/jump server that several people had access to,” Nascimento continued. “Digital Ocean flagged the droplet on January 11 — compromised due to a leaked SSH key, in their wording — I was traveling at the time and addressed it on return. That droplet was deprecated and destroyed, and it was never part of Huge Networks infrastructure.”

The malicious software that powers the botnet of TP-Link devices used in the DDoS attacks on Brazilian ISPs is based on Mirai, a malware strain that made its public debut in September 2016 by launching a then record-smashing DDoS attack that kept this website offline for four days. In January 2017, KrebsOnSecurity identified the Mirai authors as the co-owners of a DDoS mitigation firm that was using the botnet to attack gaming servers and scare up new clients.

In May 2025, KrebsOnSecurity was hit by another Mirai-based DDoS that Google called the largest attack it had ever mitigated. That report implicated a 20-something Brazilian man who was running a DDoS mitigation company as well as several DDoS-for-hire services that have since been seized by the FBI.

Nascimento flatly denied being involved in DDoS attacks against Brazilian operators to generate business for his company’s services.

“We don’t run DDoS attacks against Brazilian operators to sell protection,” Nascimento wrote in response to questions. “Our sales model is mostly inbound and through channel integrator, distributors, partners — not active prospecting based on market incidents. The targets in the scripts you received are small regional providers, the vast majority of which are neither in our customer base nor in our commercial pipeline — a fact verifiable through public sources like QRator.”

Nascimento maintains he has “strong evidence stored on the blockchain” that this was all done by a competitor. As for who that competitor might be, the CEO wouldn’t say.

“I would love to share this with you, but it could not be published as it would lose the surprise factor against my dishonest competitor,” he explained. “Coincidentally or not, your contact happened a week before an important event – ​​one that this competitor has NEVER participated in (and it’s a traditional event in the sector). And this year, they will be participating. Strange, isn’t it?”

Strange indeed.

A 24-year-old British national and senior member of the cybercrime group “Scattered Spider” has pleaded guilty to wire fraud conspiracy and aggravated identity theft. Tyler Robert Buchanan admitted his role in a series of text-message phishing attacks in the summer of 2022 that allowed the group to hack into at least a dozen major technology companies and steal tens of millions of dollars worth of cryptocurrency from investors.

Buchanan’s hacker handle “Tylerb” once graced a leaderboard in the English-language criminal hacking scene that tracked the most accomplished cyber thieves. Now in U.S. custody and awaiting sentencing, the Dundee, Scotland native is facing the possibility of more than 20 years in prison.

Scattered Spider is the name given to a prolific English-speaking cybercrime group known for using social engineering tactics to break into companies and steal data for ransom, often impersonating employees or contractors to deceive IT help desks into granting access.

As part of his guilty plea, Buchanan admitted conspiring with other Scattered Spider members to launch tens of thousands of SMS-based phishing attacks in 2022 that led to intrusions at a number of technology companies, including Twilio, LastPass, DoorDash, and Mailchimp.

The group then used data stolen in those breaches to carry out SIM-swapping attacks that siphoned funds from individual cryptocurrency investors. In an unauthorized SIM-swap, crooks transfer the target’s phone number to a device they control and intercept any text messages or phone calls to the victim’s device — such as one-time passcodes for authentication and password reset links sent via SMS. The U.S. Justice Department said Buchanan admitted to stealing at least $8 million in virtual currency from individual victims throughout the United States.

FBI investigators tied Buchanan to the 2022 SMS phishing attacks after discovering the same username and email address was used to register numerous phishing domains seen in the campaign. The domain registrar NameCheap found that less than a month before the phishing spree, the account that registered those domains logged in from an Internet address in the U.K. FBI investigators said the Scottish police told them the address was leased to Buchanan throughout 2022.

As first reported by KrebsOnSecurity, Buchanan fled the United Kingdom in February 2023, after a rival cybercrime gang hired thugs to invade his home, assault his mother, and threaten to burn him with a blowtorch unless he gave up the keys to his cryptocurrency wallet. That same year, U.K. investigators found a device at Buchanan’s Scotland residence that included data stolen from SMS phishing victims and seed phrases from cryptocurrency theft victims.

Buchanan was arrested by Spanish authorities in June 2024 while trying to board a flight to Italy. He was extradited to the United States and has remained in U.S. federal custody since April 2025.

Buchanan is the second known Scattered Spider member to plead guilty. Noah Michael Urban, 21, of Palm Coast, Fla., was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison last year and ordered to pay $13 million in restitution. Three other alleged co-conspirators — Ahmed Hossam Eldin Elbadawy, 24, a.k.a. “AD,” of College Station, Texas; Evans Onyeaka Osiebo, 21, of Dallas, Texas; and Joel Martin Evans, 26, a.k.a. “joeleoli,” of Jacksonville, North Carolina – still face criminal charges.

Two other alleged Scattered Spider members will soon be tried in the United Kingdom. Owen Flowers, 18, and Thalha Jubair, 20, are facing charges related to the hacking and extortion of several large U.K. retailers, the London transit system, and healthcare providers in the United States. Both have pleaded not guilty, and their trial is slated to begin in June.

Investigators say the Scattered Spider suspects are part of a sprawling cybercriminal community online known as “The Com,” wherein hackers from different cliques boast publicly on Telegram and Discord about high-profile cyber thefts that almost invariably begin with social engineering — tricking people over the phone, email or SMS into giving away credentials that allow remote access to corporate internal networks.

One of the more popular SIM-swapping channels on Telegram has long maintained a leaderboard of the most rapacious SIM-swappers, indexed by their supposed conquests in stealing cryptocurrency. That leaderboard previously listed Buchanan’s hacker alias Tylerb at #65 (out of 100 hackers), with Urban’s moniker “Sosa” coming in at #24.

Buchanan’s sentencing hearing is scheduled for August 21, 2026. According to the Justice Department, he faces a statutory maximum sentence of 22 years in federal prison. However, any sentence the judge hands down in this case may be significantly tempered by a number of mitigating factors in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, including the defendant’s age, criminal history, time already served in U.S. custody, and the degree to which they cooperated with federal authorities.

A prolific data ransom gang that calls itself Scattered Lapsus ShinyHunters (SLSH) has a distinctive playbook when it seeks to extort payment from victim firms: Harassing, threatening and even swatting executives and their families, all while notifying journalists and regulators about the extent of the intrusion. Some victims reportedly are paying — perhaps as much to contain the stolen data as to stop the escalating personal attacks. But a top SLSH expert warns that engaging at all beyond a “We’re not paying” response only encourages further harassment, noting that the group’s fractious and unreliable history means the only winning move is not to pay.

Unlike traditional, highly regimented Russia-based ransomware affiliate groups, SLSH is an unruly and somewhat fluid English-language extortion gang that appears uninterested in building a reputation of consistent behavior whereby victims might have some measure of confidence that the criminals will keep their word if paid.

That’s according to Allison Nixon, director of research at the New York City based security consultancy Unit 221B. Nixon has been closely tracking the criminal group and individual members as they bounce between various Telegram channels used to extort and harass victims, and she said SLSH differs from traditional data ransom groups in other important ways that argue against trusting them to do anything they say they’ll do — such as destroying stolen data.

Like SLSH, many traditional Russian ransomware groups have employed high-pressure tactics to force payment in exchange for a decryption key and/or a promise to delete stolen data, such as publishing a dark web shaming blog with samples of stolen data next to a countdown clock, or notifying journalists and board members of the victim company. But Nixon said the extortion from SLSH quickly escalates way beyond that — to threats of physical violence against executives and their families, DDoS attacks on the victim’s website, and repeated email-flooding campaigns.

SLSH is known for breaking into companies by phishing employees over the phone, and using the purloined access to steal sensitive internal data. In a January 30 blog post, Google’s security forensics firm Mandiant said SLSH’s most recent extortion attacks stem from incidents spanning early to mid-January 2026, when SLSH members pretended to be IT staff and called employees at targeted victim organizations claiming that the company was updating MFA settings.

“The threat actor directed the employees to victim-branded credential harvesting sites to capture their SSO credentials and MFA codes, and then registered their own device for MFA,” the blog post explained.

Victims often first learn of the breach when their brand name is uttered on whatever ephemeral new public Telegram group chat SLSH is using to threaten, extort and harass their prey. According to Nixon, the coordinated harassment on the SLSH Telegram channels is part of a well-orchestrated strategy to overwhelm the victim organization by manufacturing humiliation that pushes them over the threshold to pay.

Nixon said multiple executives at targeted organizations have been subject to “swatting” attacks, wherein SLSH communicated a phony bomb threat or hostage situation at the target’s address in the hopes of eliciting a heavily armed police response at their home or place of work.

“A big part of what they’re doing to victims is the psychological aspect of it, like harassing executives’ kids and threatening the board of the company,” Nixon told KrebsOnSecurity. “And while these victims are getting extortion demands, they’re simultaneously getting outreach from media outlets saying, ‘Hey, do you have any comments on the bad things we’re going to write about you.”

In a blog post today, Unit 221B argues that no one should negotiate with SLSH because the group has demonstrated a willingness to extort victims based on promises that it has no intention to keep. Nixon points out that all of SLSH’s known members hail from The Com, shorthand for a constellation of cybercrime-focused Discord and Telegram communities which serve as a kind of distributed social network that facilitates instant collaboration.

Nixon said Com-based extortion groups tend to instigate feuds and drama between group members, leading to lying, betrayals, credibility destroying behavior, backstabbing, and sabotaging each other.

“With this type of ongoing dysfunction, often compounding by substance abuse, these threat actors often aren’t able to act with the core goal in mind of completing a successful, strategic ransom operation,” Nixon wrote. “They continually lose control with outbursts that put their strategy and operational security at risk, which severely limits their ability to build a professional, scalable, and sophisticated criminal organization network for continued successful ransoms – unlike other, more tenured and professional criminal organizations focused on ransomware alone.”

Intrusions from established ransomware groups typically center around encryption/decryption malware that mostly stays on the affected machine. In contrast, Nixon said, ransom from a Com group is often structured the same as violent sextortion schemes against minors, wherein members of The Com will steal damaging information, threaten to release it, and “promise” to delete it if the victim complies without any guarantee or technical proof point that they will keep their word. She writes:

A key component of SLSH’s efforts to convince victims to pay, Nixon said, involves manipulating the media into hyping the threat posed by this group. This approach also borrows a page from the playbook of sextortion attacks, she said, which encourages predators to keep targets continuously engaged and worrying about the consequences of non-compliance.

“On days where SLSH had no substantial criminal ‘win’ to announce, they focused on announcing death threats and harassment to keep law enforcement, journalists, and cybercrime industry professionals focused on this group,” she said.

Nixon knows a thing or two about being threatened by SLSH: For the past several months, the group’s Telegram channels have been replete with threats of physical violence against her, against Yours Truly, and against other security researchers. These threats, she said, are just another way the group seeks to generate media attention and achieve a veneer of credibility, but they are useful as indicators of compromise because SLSH members tend to name drop and malign security researchers even in their communications with victims.

“Watch for the following behaviors in their communications to you or their public statements,” Unit 221B’s advisory reads. “Repeated abusive mentions of Allison Nixon (or “A.N”), Unit 221B, or cybersecurity journalists—especially Brian Krebs—or any other cybersecurity employee, or cybersecurity company. Any threats to kill, or commit terrorism, or violence against internal employees, cybersecurity employees, investigators, and journalists.”

Unit 221B says that while the pressure campaign during an extortion attempt may be traumatizing to employees, executives, and their family members, entering into drawn-out negotiations with SLSH incentivizes the group to increase the level of harm and risk, which could include the physical safety of employees and their families.

“The breached data will never go back to the way it was, but we can assure you that the harassment will end,” Nixon said. “So, your decision to pay should be a separate issue from the harassment. We believe that when you separate these issues, you will objectively see that the best course of action to protect your interests, in both the short and long term, is to refuse payment.”