Normal view

Received before yesterday

Fake calendar invites are spreading. Here’s how to remove them and prevent more

21 November 2025 at 10:28

We’re seeing a surge in phishing calendar invites that users can’t delete, or that keep coming back because they sync across devices. The good news is you can remove them and block future spam by changing a few settings.

Most of these unwanted calendar entries are there for phishing purposes. Most of them warn you about a “impending payment” but the difference is in the subject and the action they want the target to take.

Sometimes they want you to call a number:

"Call this number" scams

And sometimes they invite you to an actual meeting:

fake Geek Squad billing update meeting

We haven’t followed up on these scams, but when attackers want you to call them or join a meeting, the end goal is almost always financial. They might use a tech support scam approach and ask you to install a Remote Monitoring and Management tool, sell you an overpriced product, or simply ask for your banking details.

The sources are usually distributed as email attachments or as download links in messaging apps.

How to remove fake entries from your calendar

This blog focuses on how to remove these unwanted entries. One of the obstacles is that calendars often sync across devices.

Outlook Calendar

If you use Outlook:

  • Delete without interacting: Avoid clicking any links or opening attachments in the invite. If available, use the “Do not send a response” option when deleting to prevent confirming that your email is active.
  • Block the sender: Right-click the event and select the option to report the sender as junk or spam to help prevent future invites from that email address.
  • Adjust calendar settings: Access your Outlook settings and disable the option to automatically add events from email. This setting matters because even if the invite lands in your spam folder, auto-adding invites will still put the event on your calendar.
    Outlook accept settings
  • Report the invite: Report the spam invitation to Microsoft as phishing or junk.
  • Verify billing issues through official channels: If you have concerns about your account, go directly to the company’s official website or support, not the information in the invite.

Gmail Calendar

To disable automatic calendar additions:

  • Open Google Calendar.
  • Click the gear icon and select Settings in the upper right part of the screen.
    Gmail calendar settings
  • Under Event settings, change Add invitations to my calendar to either Only if the sender is known or When I respond to the invitation email. (The default setting is From everyone, which will add any invite to your calendar.)
  • Uncheck Show events automatically created by Gmail if you want to stop Gmail from adding to your calendar on its own.

Android Calendar

To prevent unknown senders from adding invites:

  • Open the Calendar app.
  • Tap Menu > Settings.
  • Tap General > Adding invitations > Add invitations to my calendar.
  • Select Only if the sender is known.

For help reviewing which apps have access to your Android Calendar, refer to the support page.

Mac Calendars

To control how events get added to your Calendar on a Mac:

  • Go to Apple menu > System Settings > Privacy & Security.
  • Click Calendars.
  • Turn calendar access on or off for each app in the list.
  • If you allow access, click Options to choose whether the app has full access or can only add events.

iPhone and iPad Calendar

The controls are similar to macOS, but you may also want to remove additional calendars:

  • Open Settings.
  • Tap Calendar > Accounts > Subscribed Calendars.
  • Select any unwanted calendars and tap the Delete Account option.

Additional calendars

Which brings me to my next point. Check both the Outlook Calendar and the mobile Calendar app for Additional Calendars or subscribed URLs and Delete/Unsubscribe. This will stop the attacker from being able to add even more events to your Calendar. And looking in both places will be helpful in case of synchronization issues.

Several victims reported that after removing an event, they just came back. This is almost always due to synchronization. Make sure you remove the unwanted calendar or event everywhere it exists.

Tracking down the source can be tricky, but it may help prevent the next wave of calendar spam.

How to prevent calendar spam

We’ve covered some of this already, but the main precautions are:

  • Turn off auto‑add or auto‑processing so invites stay as emails until you accept them.
  • Restrict calendar permissions so only trusted people and apps can add events.
  • In shared or resource calendars, remove public or anonymous access and limit who can create or edit items.
  • Use an up-to-date real-time anti-malware solution with a web protection component to block known malicious domains.
  • Don’t engage with unsolicited events. Don’t click links, open attachments, or reply to suspicious calendar events such as “investment,” “invoice,” “bonus payout,” “urgent meeting”—just delete the event.
  • Enable multi-factor authentication (MFA) on your accounts so attackers who compromise credentials can’t abuse the account itself to send or auto‑accept invitations.

Pro tip: If you’re not sure whether an event is a scam, you can feed the message to Malwarebytes Scam Guard. It’ll help you decide what to do next.

The Really Really Sale

We don’t just report on threats—we remove them

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Keep threats off your devices by downloading Malwarebytes today.

[Correction] Gmail can read your emails and attachments to power “smart features”

20 November 2025 at 08:48

Update November 22. We’ve updated this article after realising we contributed to a perfect storm of misunderstanding around a recent change in the wording and placement of Gmail’s smart features. The settings themselves aren’t new, but the way Google recently rewrote and surfaced them led a lot of people (including us) to believe Gmail content might be used to train Google’s AI models, and that users were being opted in automatically. After taking a closer look at Google’s documentation and reviewing other reporting, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

Gmail does scan email content to power its own “smart features,” such as spam filtering, categorisation, and writing suggestions. But this is part of how Gmail normally works and isn’t the same as training Google’s generative AI models. Google also maintains that these feature settings are opt-in rather than opt-out, although users’ experiences seem to vary depending on when and how the new wording appeared.

It’s easy to see where the confusion came from. Google’s updated language around “smart features” is vague, and the term “smart” often implies AI—especially at a time when Gemini is being integrated into other parts of Google’s products. When the new wording started appearing for some users without much explanation, many assumed it signalled a broader shift. It’s also come around the same time as a proposed class-action lawsuit in the state of California, which, according to Bloomberg, alleges that Google gave Gemini AI access to Gmail, Chat, and Meet without proper user consent.

We’ve revised this article to reflect what we can confirm from Google’s documentation, as it’s always been our aim to give readers accurate, helpful guidance.


Google has updated some Gmail settings around how its “smart features” work, which control how Gmail analyses your messages to power built-in functions.

According to reports we’ve seen, Google has started automatically opting users in to allow Gmail to access all private messages and attachments for its smart features. This means your emails are analyzed to improve your experience with Chat, Meet, Drive, Email and Calendar products. However, some users are now reporting that these settings are switched on by default instead of asking for explicit opt-in—although Google’s help page states that users are opted-out for default.

How to check your settings

Opting in or out requires you to change settings in two places, so I’ve tried to make it as easy to follow as possible. Feel free to let me know in the comments if I missed anything.

To fully opt out, you must turn off Gmail’s smart features in two separate locations in your settings. Don’t miss one, or AI training may continue.

Step 1: Turn off Smart features in Gmail, Chat, and Meet settings

  • Open Gmail on your desktop or mobile app.
  • Click the gear icon → See all settings (desktop) or Menu → Settings (mobile).
  • Find the section called smart features in Gmail, Chat, and Meet. You’ll need to scroll down quite a bit.
Smart features settings
  • Uncheck this option.
  • Scroll down and hit Save changes if on desktop.

Step 2: Turn off Google Workspace smart features

  • Still in Settings, locate Google Workspace smart features.
  • Click on Manage Workspace smart feature settings.
  • You’ll see two options: Smart features in Google Workspace and Smart features in other Google products.
Smart feature settings

  • Toggle both off.
  • Save again in this screen.

Step 3: Verify if both are off

  • Make sure both toggles remain off.
  • Refresh your Gmail app or sign out and back in to confirm changes.

We don’t just report on privacy—we offer you the option to use it.

Privacy risks should never spread beyond a headline. Keep your online privacy yours by using Malwarebytes Privacy VPN.

False Reports of Gmail Data Breach Alarm Internet

29 October 2025 at 13:36

False Reports of Gmail Data Breach Alarm Internet

Breathless news stories about a Gmail data breach began to appear online after media outlets misinterpreted a report about Gmail passwords stolen by infostealers. Urgent headlines like “Urgent alert issued to anyone who uses Gmail after 183 million passwords leaked” created some panic among Google account holders, necessitating a response from Google and a security researcher who had posted the infostealer logs that started the panic. “Reports of a “Gmail security breach impacting millions of users” are false,” Google said in a post on X. “Gmail’s defenses are strong, and users remain protected. “The inaccurate reports are stemming from a misunderstanding of infostealer databases, which routinely compile various credential theft activity occurring across the web," Google added. "It’s not reflective of a new attack aimed at any one person, tool, or platform.” The researcher, Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned, said in his own X post that “This story has suddenly gained *way* more traction in recent hours, and something I thought was obvious needs clarifying: this *is not* a Gmail leak, it simply has the credentials of victims infected with malware, and Gmail is the dominant email provider.”

Gmail Data Breach Stories Appeared After Infostealer Data Published

The news stories began to appear after HaveIBeenPwned published an infostealer data set containing 183 million unique email addresses, the websites they were entered into, and the passwords used. Hunt wrote about the data set in a separate blog post, and stories misunderstanding the nature of infostealer malware took over from there. Gmail may have been the most common email address type in the data set, but hardly the only one, as Hunt noted: “There is every imaginable type of email address in this corpus: Outlook, Yahoo, corporate, government, military and yes, Gmail. This is typical of a corpus of data like this and there is nothing Google specific about it.” Leaks of all manner of account credentials appear in infostealer databases, and Gmail’s wide usage simply makes it one of the more common email credentials stolen by the malware. Credentials involving Gmail addresses appear in Cyble’s “Leaked Credentials” threat intelligence database more than 6 billion times, but many may be duplicates because stolen credentials frequently appear on more than one dark web marketplace or forum.

Protecting Your Gmail Account

Google said that Gmail users “can protect themselves from credential theft by turning on 2-step verification and adopting passkeys as a stronger and safer alternative to passwords, and resetting passwords when they are found in large batches like this. “Gmail takes action when we spot large batches of open credentials, helping users reset passwords and resecure accounts,” the company added. Using complex, unique passwords and resetting them often is another email security step to take. As Hunt noted, “The primary risk is for people who continue to use those credentials on *any* websites, and the mitigation is a password manager and 2FA.”

Gmail breach panic? It’s a misunderstanding, not a hack

29 October 2025 at 08:08

After a misinterpretation of an interview with a security researcher, several media outlets hinted at a major Gmail breach.

Reporters claimed the incident took place in April. In reality, the researcher had said there was an enormous amount of Gmail usernames and passwords circulating on the dark web.

Those are two very different things. The credentials probably stem from a great many past attacks and breaches over the years.

But the rumors spread quickly—enough that Google felt it had to deny that their Gmail systems had suffered a breach.

“The inaccurate reports are stemming from a misunderstanding of infostealer databases, which routinely compile various credential theft activity occurring across the web. It’s not reflective of a new attack aimed at any one person, tool, or platform.”

What happens is that cybercriminals buy and sell databases containing stolen usernames and passwords from data breaches, information stealers, and phishing campaigns. They do this to expand their reach or combine data from different sources to create more targeted attacks.

The downside for them is that many of these credentials are outdated, invalid, or linked to accounts that are no longer in use.

The downside for everyone else is that misleading reporting like this causes panic where there’s no need for it—whether it stems from misunderstanding technical details or from the pressure to make a headline.

Still, it’s always smart to check whether your email address has been caught up in a breach.

You can use our Digital Footprint scanner to see if your personal information is exposed online and take steps to secure it. If you find any passwords that you still use, change them immediately and enable multi-factor authentication (2FA) for those accounts wherever possible.


We don’t just report on data privacy—we help you remove your personal information

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. With Malwarebytes Personal Data Remover, you can scan to find out which sites are exposing your personal information, and then delete that sensitive data from the internet.

Oregon Man Charged in ‘Rapper Bot’ DDoS Service

19 August 2025 at 16:51

A 22-year-old Oregon man has been arrested on suspicion of operating “Rapper Bot,” a massive botnet used to power a service for launching distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks against targets — including a March 2025 DDoS that knocked Twitter/X offline. The Justice Department asserts the suspect and an unidentified co-conspirator rented out the botnet to online extortionists, and tried to stay off the radar of law enforcement by ensuring that their botnet was never pointed at KrebsOnSecurity.

The control panel for the Rapper Bot botnet greets users with the message “Welcome to the Ball Pit, Now with refrigerator support,” an apparent reference to a handful of IoT-enabled refrigerators that were enslaved in their DDoS botnet.

On August 6, 2025, federal agents arrested Ethan J. Foltz of Springfield, Ore. on suspicion of operating Rapper Bot, a globally dispersed collection of tens of thousands of hacked Internet of Things (IoT) devices.

The complaint against Foltz explains the attacks usually clocked in at more than two terabits of junk data per second (a terabit is one trillion bits of data), which is more than enough traffic to cause serious problems for all but the most well-defended targets. The government says Rapper Bot consistently launched attacks that were “hundreds of times larger than the expected capacity of a typical server located in a data center,” and that some of its biggest attacks exceeded six terabits per second.

Indeed, Rapper Bot was reportedly responsible for the March 10, 2025 attack that caused intermittent outages on Twitter/X. The government says Rapper Bot’s most lucrative and frequent customers were involved in extorting online businesses — including numerous gambling operations based in China.

The criminal complaint was written by Elliott Peterson, an investigator with the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), the criminal investigative division of the Department of Defense (DoD) Office of Inspector General. The complaint notes the DCIS got involved because several Internet addresses maintained by the DoD were the target of Rapper Bot attacks.

Peterson said he tracked Rapper Bot to Foltz after a subpoena to an ISP in Arizona that was hosting one of the botnet’s control servers showed the account was paid for via PayPal. More legal process to PayPal revealed Foltz’s Gmail account and previously used IP addresses. A subpoena to Google showed the defendant searched security blogs constantly for news about Rapper Bot, and for updates about competing DDoS-for-hire botnets.

According to the complaint, after having a search warrant served on his residence the defendant admitted to building and operating Rapper Bot, sharing the profits 50/50 with a person he claimed to know only by the hacker handle “Slaykings.” Foltz also shared with investigators the logs from his Telegram chats, wherein Foltz and Slaykings discussed how best to stay off the radar of law enforcement investigators while their competitors were getting busted.

Specifically, the two hackers chatted about a May 20 attack against KrebsOnSecurity.com that clocked in at more than 6.3 terabits of data per second. The brief attack was notable because at the time it was the largest DDoS that Google had ever mitigated (KrebsOnSecurity sits behind the protection of Project Shield, a free DDoS defense service that Google provides to websites offering news, human rights, and election-related content).

The May 2025 DDoS was launched by an IoT botnet called Aisuru, which I discovered was operated by a 21-year-old man in Brazil named Kaike Southier Leite. This individual was more commonly known online as “Forky,” and Forky told me he wasn’t afraid of me or U.S. federal investigators. Nevertheless, the complaint against Foltz notes that Forky’s botnet seemed to diminish in size and firepower at the same time that Rapper Bot’s infection numbers were on the upswing.

“Both FOLTZ and Slaykings were very dismissive of attention seeking activities, the most extreme of which, in their view, was to launch DDoS attacks against the website of the prominent cyber security journalist Brian Krebs,” Peterson wrote in the criminal complaint.

“You see, they’ll get themselves [expletive],” Slaykings wrote in response to Foltz’s comments about Forky and Aisuru bringing too much heat on themselves.

“Prob cuz [redacted] hit krebs,” Foltz wrote in reply.

“Going against Krebs isn’t a good move,” Slaykings concurred. “It isn’t about being a [expletive] or afraid, you just get a lot of problems for zero money. Childish, but good. Let them die.”

“Ye, it’s good tho, they will die,” Foltz replied.

The government states that just prior to Foltz’s arrest, Rapper Bot had enslaved an estimated 65,000 devices globally. That may sound like a lot, but the complaint notes the defendants weren’t interested in making headlines for building the world’s largest or most powerful botnet.

Quite the contrary: The complaint asserts that the accused took care to maintain their botnet in a “Goldilocks” size — ensuring that “the number of devices afforded powerful attacks while still being manageable to control and, in the hopes of Foltz and his partners, small enough to not be detected.”

The complaint states that several days later, Foltz and Slaykings returned to discussing what that they expected to befall their rival group, with Slaykings stating, “Krebs is very revenge. He won’t stop until they are [expletive] to the bone.”

“Surprised they have any bots left,” Foltz answered.

“Krebs is not the one you want to have on your back. Not because he is scary or something, just because he will not give up UNTIL you are [expletive] [expletive]. Proved it with Mirai and many other cases.”

[Unknown expletives aside, that may well be the highest compliment I’ve ever been paid by a cybercriminal. I might even have part of that quote made into a t-shirt or mug or something. It’s also nice that they didn’t let any of their customers attack my site — if even only out of a paranoid sense of self-preservation.]

Foltz admitted to wiping the user and attack logs for the botnet approximately once a week, so investigators were unable to tally the total number of attacks, customers and targets of this vast crime machine. But the data that was still available showed that from April 2025 to early August, Rapper Bot conducted over 370,000 attacks, targeting 18,000 unique victims across 1,000 networks, with the bulk of victims residing in China, Japan, the United States, Ireland and Hong Kong (in that order).

According to the government, Rapper Bot borrows much of its code from fBot, a DDoS malware strain also known as Satori. In 2020, authorities in Northern Ireland charged a then 20-year-old man named Aaron “Vamp” Sterritt with operating fBot with a co-conspirator. U.S. prosecutors are still seeking Sterritt’s extradition to the United States. fBot is itself a variation of the Mirai IoT botnet that has ravaged the Internet with DDoS attacks since its source code was leaked back in 2016.

The complaint says Foltz and his partner did not allow most customers to launch attacks that were more than 60 seconds in duration — another way they tried to keep public attention to the botnet at a minimum. However, the government says the proprietors also had special arrangements with certain high-paying clients that allowed much larger and longer attacks.

The accused and his alleged partner made light of this blog post about the fallout from one of their botnet attacks.

Most people who have never been on the receiving end of a monster DDoS attack have no idea of the cost and disruption that such sieges can bring. The DCIS’s Peterson wrote that he was able to test the botnet’s capabilities while interviewing Foltz, and that found that “if this had been a server upon which I was running a website, using services such as load balancers, and paying for both outgoing and incoming data, at estimated industry average rates the attack (2+ Terabits per second times 30 seconds) might have cost the victim anywhere from $500 to $10,000.”

“DDoS attacks at this scale often expose victims to devastating financial impact, and a potential alternative, network engineering solutions that mitigate the expected attacks such as overprovisioning, i.e. increasing potential Internet capacity, or DDoS defense technologies, can themselves be prohibitively expensive,” the complaint continues. “This ‘rock and a hard place’ reality for many victims can leave them acutely exposed to extortion demands – ‘pay X dollars and the DDoS attacks stop’.”

The Telegram chat records show that the day before Peterson and other federal agents raided Foltz’s residence, Foltz allegedly told his partner he’d found 32,000 new devices that were vulnerable to a previously unknown exploit.

Foltz and Slaykings discussing the discovery of an IoT vulnerability that will give them 32,000 new devices.

Shortly before the search warrant was served on his residence, Foltz allegedly told his partner that “Once again we have the biggest botnet in the community.” The following day, Foltz told his partner that it was going to be a great day — the biggest so far in terms of income generated by Rapper Bot.

“I sat next to Foltz while the messages poured in — promises of $800, then $1,000, the proceeds ticking up as the day went on,” Peterson wrote. “Noticing a change in Foltz’ behavior and concerned that Foltz was making changes to the botnet configuration in real time, Slaykings asked him ‘What’s up?’ Foltz deftly typed out some quick responses. Reassured by Foltz’ answer, Slaykings responded, ‘Ok, I’m the paranoid one.”

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Adam Alexander in the District of Alaska (at least some of the devices found to be infected with Rapper Bot were located there, and it is where Peterson is stationed). Foltz faces one count of aiding and abetting computer intrusions. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, although a federal judge is unlikely to award anywhere near that kind of sentence for a first-time conviction.

Big Tech’s Mixed Response to U.S. Treasury Sanctions

3 July 2025 at 12:06

In May 2025, the U.S. government sanctioned a Chinese national for operating a cloud provider linked to the majority of virtual currency investment scam websites reported to the FBI. But a new report finds the accused continues to operate a slew of established accounts at American tech companies — including Facebook, Github, PayPal and Twitter/X.

On May 29, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced economic sanctions against Funnull Technology Inc., a Philippines-based company alleged to provide infrastructure for hundreds of thousands of websites involved in virtual currency investment scams known as “pig butchering.” In January 2025, KrebsOnSecurity detailed how Funnull was designed as a content delivery network that catered to foreign cybercriminals seeking to route their traffic through U.S.-based cloud providers.

The Treasury also sanctioned Funnull’s alleged operator, a 40-year-old Chinese national named Liu “Steve” Lizhi. The government says Funnull directly facilitated financial schemes resulting in more than $200 million in financial losses by Americans, and that the company’s operations were linked to the majority of pig butchering scams reported to the FBI.

It is generally illegal for U.S. companies or individuals to transact with people sanctioned by the Treasury. However, as Mr. Lizhi’s case makes clear, just because someone is sanctioned doesn’t necessarily mean big tech companies are going to suspend their online accounts.

The government says Lizhi was born November 13, 1984, and used the nicknames “XXL4” and “Nice Lizhi.” Nevertheless, Steve Liu’s 17-year-old account on LinkedIn (in the name “Liulizhi”) had hundreds of followers (Lizhi’s LinkedIn profile helpfully confirms his birthday) until quite recently: The account was deleted this morning, just hours after KrebsOnSecurity sought comment from LinkedIn.

Mr. Lizhi’s LinkedIn account was suspended sometime in the last 24 hours, after KrebsOnSecurity sought comment from LinkedIn.

In an emailed response, a LinkedIn spokesperson said the company’s “Prohibited countries policy” states that LinkedIn “does not sell, license, support or otherwise make available its Premium accounts or other paid products and services to individuals and companies sanctioned by the U.S. government.” LinkedIn declined to say whether the profile in question was a premium or free account.

Mr. Lizhi also maintains a working PayPal account under the name Liu Lizhi and username “@nicelizhi,” another nickname listed in the Treasury sanctions. A 15-year-old Twitter/X account named “Lizhi” that links to Mr. Lizhi’s personal domain remains active, although it has few followers and hasn’t posted in years.

These accounts and many others were flagged by the security firm Silent Push, which has been tracking Funnull’s operations for the past year and calling out U.S. cloud providers like Amazon and Microsoft for failing to more quickly sever ties with the company.

Liu Lizhi’s PayPal account.

In a report released today, Silent Push found Lizhi still operates numerous Facebook accounts and groups, including a private Facebook account under the name Liu Lizhi. Another Facebook account clearly connected to Lizhi is a tourism page for Ganzhou, China called “EnjoyGanzhou” that was named in the Treasury Department sanctions.

“This guy is the technical administrator for the infrastructure that is hosting a majority of scams targeting people in the United States, and hundreds of millions have been lost based on the websites he’s been hosting,” said Zach Edwards, senior threat researcher at Silent Push. “It’s crazy that the vast majority of big tech companies haven’t done anything to cut ties with this guy.”

The FBI says it received nearly 150,000 complaints last year involving digital assets and $9.3 billion in losses — a 66 percent increase from the previous year. Investment scams were the top crypto-related crimes reported, with $5.8 billion in losses.

In a statement, a Meta spokesperson said the company continuously takes steps to meet its legal obligations, but that sanctions laws are complex and varied. They explained that sanctions are often targeted in nature and don’t always prohibit people from having a presence on its platform. Nevertheless, Meta confirmed it had removed the account, unpublished Pages, and removed Groups and events associated with the user for violating its policies.

Attempts to reach Mr. Lizhi via his primary email addresses at Hotmail and Gmail bounced as undeliverable. Likewise, his 14-year-old YouTube channel appears to have been taken down recently.

However, anyone interested in viewing or using Mr. Lizhi’s 146 computer code repositories will have no problem finding GitHub accounts for him, including one registered under the NiceLizhi and XXL4 nicknames mentioned in the Treasury sanctions.

One of multiple GitHub profiles used by Liu “Steve” Lizhi, who uses the nickname XXL4 (a moniker listed in the Treasury sanctions for Mr. Lizhi).

Mr. Lizhi also operates a GitHub page for an open source e-commerce platform called NexaMerchant, which advertises itself as a payment gateway working with numerous American financial institutions. Interestingly, this profile’s “followers” page shows several other accounts that appear to be Mr. Lizhi’s. All of the account’s followers are tagged as “suspended,” even though that suspended message does not display when one visits those individual profiles.

In response to questions, GitHub said it has a process in place to identify when users and customers are Specially Designated Nationals or other denied or blocked parties, but that it locks those accounts instead of removing them. According to its policy, GitHub takes care that users and customers aren’t impacted beyond what is required by law.

All of the follower accounts for the XXL4 GitHub account appear to be Mr. Lizhi’s, and have been suspended by GitHub, but their code is still accessible.

“This includes keeping public repositories, including those for open source projects, available and accessible to support personal communications involving developers in sanctioned regions,” the policy states. “This also means GitHub will advocate for developers in sanctioned regions to enjoy greater access to the platform and full access to the global open source community.”

Edwards said it’s great that GitHub has a process for handling sanctioned accounts, but that the process doesn’t seem to communicate risk in a transparent way, noting that the only indicator on the locked accounts is the message, “This repository has been archived by the owner. It is not read-only.”

“It’s an odd message that doesn’t communicate, ‘This is a sanctioned entity, don’t fork this code or use it in a production environment’,” Edwards said.

Mark Rasch is a former federal cybercrime prosecutor who now serves as counsel for the New York City based security consulting firm Unit 221B. Rasch said when Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions a person or entity, it then becomes illegal for businesses or organizations to transact with the sanctioned party.

Rasch said financial institutions have very mature systems for severing accounts tied to people who become subject to OFAC sanctions, but that tech companies may be far less proactive — particularly with free accounts.

“Banks have established ways of checking [U.S. government sanctions lists] for sanctioned entities, but tech companies don’t necessarily do a good job with that, especially for services that you can just click and sign up for,” Rasch said. “It’s potentially a risk and liability for the tech companies involved, but only to the extent OFAC is willing to enforce it.”

Liu Lizhi operates numerous Facebook accounts and groups, including this one for an entity specified in the OFAC sanctions: The “Enjoy Ganzhou” tourism page for Ganzhou, China. Image: Silent Push.

In July 2024, Funnull purchased the domain polyfill[.]io, the longtime home of a legitimate open source project that allowed websites to ensure that devices using legacy browsers could still render content in newer formats. After the Polyfill domain changed hands, at least 384,000 websites were caught in a supply-chain attack that redirected visitors to malicious sites. According to the Treasury, Funnull used the code to redirect people to scam websites and online gambling sites, some of which were linked to Chinese criminal money laundering operations.

The U.S. government says Funnull provides domain names for websites on its purchased IP addresses, using domain generation algorithms (DGAs) — programs that generate large numbers of similar but unique names for websites — and that it sells web design templates to cybercriminals.

“These services not only make it easier for cybercriminals to impersonate trusted brands when creating scam websites, but also allow them to quickly change to different domain names and IP addresses when legitimate providers attempt to take the websites down,” reads a Treasury statement.

Meanwhile, Funnull appears to be morphing nearly all aspects of its business in the wake of the sanctions, Edwards said.

“Whereas before they might have used 60 DGA domains to hide and bounce their traffic, we’re seeing far more now,” he said. “They’re trying to make their infrastructure harder to track and more complicated, so for now they’re not going away but more just changing what they’re doing. And a lot more organizations should be holding their feet to the fire.”

Update, 2:48 PM ET: Added response from Meta, which confirmed it has closed the accounts and groups connected to Mr. Lizhi.

Update, July 7, 6:56 p.m. ET: In a written statement, PayPal said it continually works to combat and prevent the illicit use of its services.

“We devote significant resources globally to financial crime compliance, and we proactively refer cases to and assist law enforcement officials around the world in their efforts to identify, investigate and stop illegal activity,” the statement reads.

❌