IT NEWS

Two men without a clear source of income landed cyberfraud charges after being so flash with their ill-gotten cash that it gained the attention of the authorities.

In 2022, Russian national Pavel Kublitskii and Kazakhstan national Alexandr Khodyrev arrived in Florida and requested asylum, which was granted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  Both provided DHS with the same residence address in Hollywood, Florida.

However, their lavish lifestyle was unusual. For example, Kublitskii opened a Bank of America account with a cash deposit of $50,000 and rented a luxury house, while Khodyrev purchased a 2023 Corvette with approximately $110,000 cash. All while appearing to not have a job.

The investigation indicated that the two men were involved in the activities of the dark web platform WWH Club and related forums Skynetzone, Opencard, and Center-Club.

WWH Club and the other forums are Dark Web marketplaces where cybercriminals buy, sell, and trade login credentials, personal identifying information (PII), malware, fake identification documents, and financial credentials. The forums even provide training for aspiring cybercriminals.

The FBI was able to determine the IP addresses of the WWH Club site’s administrators after obtaining a search warrant for the US-based Cloud company Digital Ocean. Based on the information derived from the logs, the FBI agent concluded:

“In addition to the forum owner and creator, it appears there are several other top administrators who operate the site and receive a portion of the generated revenue. One of those top administrators operates under the usemame “Makein.” The FBI agent provides details which show there is probable cause to believe that Kublitskii and Khodyrev both serve as administrators of WWH and share the Makein username.”

Makein is also the handle of the owner and primary administrator of Skynetzone.

Part of the offered training at WWH was a scheme that recruited and taught users to purchase items with stolen credit card data. An FBI covert online employee registered for an account on WWH and paid approximately $1,000 in bitcoin to attend the WWH training.

While on the forums, the agent saw an post where a user was selling stolen PII of people and businesses in the US. Buyers could choose how many people’s PII they wished to buy and specify the particular US state of residence, gender, age, and the credit score of their desired victims. In exchange for $110, paid in Bitcoin, the WWH seller sent the undercover agent a folder containing 20 files, each of which contained the name, date of birth, Social Security Number (SSN), state of residency, address, credit score, credit report, and account information from LendingTree.com for a US citizen.

The lead FBI agent explained:

“I know, based on my training and experience, that the presence of account information from LendingTree.com suggests that this stolen PII derived from a February 2022 breach of LendingTree that compromised the data of over 200,000 customers.”

The FBI researched domain registrations, exchanged messages, Bitpay transactions, blockchain analysis, and other digital evidence and came to the conclusion that the suspects shared the Makein account and were responsible for the cybercrimes committed by that persona.

Agents obtained records from Google which revealed that messages from and to their accounts often contained stolen PII and credit card information and which tied the account to the suspects.

With probable cause provided, the FBI agent requested the court to authorize the requested criminal complaint charging the suspects with conspiracy for trafficking in unauthorized access devices and possession of 15 or more unauthorized access devices.

Kublitski has been placed under arrest. It is not clear if Khodyrev was arrested as well. The WWH forums are running as usual and the current administrators acknowledge that the suspects were involved, but only as moderators.

Check your digital footprint

If you want to find out how much of your data has been exposed online, you can try our free Digital Footprint scan. Fill in the email address you’re curious about (it’s best to submit the one you most frequently use) and we’ll send you a free report.

We don’t just report on threats – we help safeguard your entire digital identity

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Protect your—and your family’s—personal information by using identity protection.

This week on the Lock and Code podcast…

Somewhere out there is a romantic AI chatbot that wants to know everything about you. But in a revealing overlap, other AI tools—which are developed and popularized by far larger companies in technology—could crave the very same thing.

For AI tools of any type, our data is key.

In the nearly two years since OpenAI unveiled ChatGPT to the public, the biggest names in technology have raced to compete. Meta announced Llama. Google revealed Gemini. And Microsoft debuted Copilot.

All these AI features function in similar ways: After having been trained on mountains of text, videos, images, and more, these tools answer users’ questions in immediate and contextually relevant ways. Perhaps that means taking a popular recipe and making it vegetarian friendly. Or maybe that involves developing a workout routine for someone who is recovering from a new knee injury.

Whatever the ask, the more data that an AI tool has already digested, the better it can deliver answers.

Interestingly, romantic AI chatbots operate in almost the same way, as the more information that a user gives about themselves, the more intimate and personal the AI chatbot’s responses can appear.

But where any part of our online world demands more data, questions around privacy arise.

Today, on the Lock and Code podcast with host David Ruiz, we speak with Zoë MacDonald, content creator for Privacy Not Included at Mozilla about romantic AI tools and how users can protect their privacy from ChatGPT and other AI chatbots.

When in doubt, MacDonald said, stick to a simple rule:

“I would suggest that people don’t share their personal information with an AI chatbot.”

Tune in today to listen to the full conversation.

Show notes and credits:

Intro Music: “Spellbound” by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Outro Music: “Good God” by Wowa (unminus.com)

Listen up—Malwarebytes doesn’t just talk cybersecurity, we provide it.

Protect yourself from online attacks that threaten your identity, your files, your system, and your financial well-being with our exclusive offer for Malwarebytes Premium for Lock and Code listeners.

We wanted to update you on some changes that Google’s making, and what we’re doing in Browser Guard to keep you protected. 

Some of our customers have recently reported seeing messages that say Browser Guard may soon no longer be supported in their browser. Luckily, there’s no need for you to worry: You’ll continue to get the same Browser Guard protection and experience, we’ve just had to make some adjustments in how we build the extension. 

Today, we brought out the new version of Browser Guard which addresses Google’s changes. If you want to read more of the technical details then you can do so below, or you can head straight over to the Chrome or Edge stores now to update. 

A similar change in Firefox is coming soon and we’ll let you know when it’s ready. 

What is Google changing? 

For those not familiar with the terms, Google’s Manifest V2 and V3 are the “rules” that browser extension developers are required to follow if they want their extensions to get accepted into the Chrome Web Extension Store.  

Google says Manifest V3 was brought in to improve the security, privacy, performance, and trustworthiness of the extension ecosystem, while still protecting existing functionality. 

The phasing out of Manifest V2 began at the end of May, and the Chrome Web Store no longer accepts Manifest V2 extensions, although browsers can still use them for the time being. 

How does Manifest V3 affect Browser Guard? 

One of the new changes that impacts Browser Guard and many other ad (and malicious content) blockers is that extensions will be limited in the number of rules they can include. That’s a problem because ad blockers historically rely on a large number of rules. 

Cybercriminals have the habit of setting up new domains by the dozen, and, generally speaking, each blocked domain or subdomain requires one rule. So if ad blockers want to keep up, they too have to continuously create new rules. 

Google has made some compromises after objections were raised when the company first announced Manifest V3, but there are still limitations which have an effect. 

How Malwarebytes has dealt with this 

The new limitations of Manifest V3 meant we had to develop a different way to block content for our users that use Chromium based browsers like Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge.  

The new Browser Guard uses a mix of static and dynamic rules to protect our users. 

Static rules are rules that are contained in the ruleset files which can be seen as block lists. These files are shipped with each version release. 

Dynamic rules are rules that can be added and removed at runtime. Chrome allows up to 30,000 dynamic rules. Browser Guard uses dynamic rules for two purposes: 

• Session rules are dynamic rules that can be added and removed at runtime, but they are session-scoped and are cleared when the browser shuts down and when a new version of the browser is installed. 

• Dynamic rules can be used to store allow lists, user blocked content, and general rules that block more than one domain. Take, for example, the IP address of a server that is known to host nothing but phishing sites. 

To deal with urgent situations we can use ruleset overrides, which are a mechanism by which we can override the static rules shipped with Browser Guard without requiring our users to add exclusions. 

Your version of Browser Guard will be automatically updated to the latest version, but if you want to get it now you can do so for Chrome or Edge. 

Thanks for continuing to choose Malwarebytes to protect you. 

Last week on Malwarebytes Labs:

• Security company ADT announces security breach of customer data
• Stolen data from scraping service National Public Data leaked online
• Android vulnerability used in targeted attacks patched by Google
• Men report more pressure and threats to share location and accounts with partners, research shows
• Magniber ransomware targets home users

Last week on ThreatDown:

• Ransomware group disguises SharpRhino trojan as Angry IP Scanner
• Don’t touch TP! How ransomware gangs are unplugging your EDR
• What is a path traversal vulnerability?

Stay safe!

Our business solutions remove all remnants of ransomware and prevent you from getting reinfected. Want to learn more about how we can help protect your business? Get a free trial below.

Electronic surveillance equipment provider ADT filed a form 8-K with the Security and Exchange Commision (SEC) to report “a cybersecurity incident during which unauthorized actors illegally accessed certain databases containing ADT customer order information.”

An 8-K is a report of unscheduled material events or corporate changes at a company that could be of importance to the shareholders or the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

ADT filed the 8-K on August 7, adding that the incident happened “recently,” but refraining from providing an exact date. The company also did not provide an exact number of victims—only that the victims were personally notified about the breach.

Away from ADT’s official disclosures, on July 31, a cybercriminal with the handle “netnsher” announced the leak of a database purportedly belonging to ADT. According to the cybercriminal’s post:

“The infamous security company ADT with $5B revenue suffered a databreach exposing over 30,812 records including 30,400 unique emails, the records contain: CustomerEmail, Full address, User ID, Products bought, etc….”

According to ADT, the stolen data included:

• Email addresses
• Phone numbers
• Home addresses

The company also added that:

“Based on its investigation to date, the Company has no reason to believe that customers’ home security systems were compromised during this incident.”

The leak announcement by netnsher promises 30,812 records including 30,400 unique email addresses and “Products bought.”

Although ADT does not believe the attackers stole customers’ credit card data or banking information, that last addition might make the database valuable for burglars. But phishing operations might also use the information to their advantage.

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 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 two-factor authentication (2FA) can be phished just as easily as a password. 2FA that relies on a FIDO2 device can’t be phished.
• Watch out for fake vendors. The thieves may contact you posing as the vendor. Check the vendor website to see if they are contacting victims, and verify the identity of anyone who contacts you using a different communication channel.
• Take your time. Phishing attacks often impersonate people or brands you know, and use themes that require urgent attention, such as missed deliveries, account suspensions, and 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 after.

Check your digital footprint

Malwarebytes has a free tool for you to check how much of your personal data has been exposed online. Submit your email address (it’s best to give the one you most frequently use) to our free Digital Footprint scan and we’ll give you a report and recommendations.

We don’t just report on threats – we help safeguard your entire digital identity

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Protect your—and your family’s—personal information by using identity protection.

Cybercriminals are offering a large database for sale that may include your data without you even being aware of its existence.

The stolen data comes from a data scraping service trading under the name “scraping” which was allegedly breached by a cybercriminal group by the name of USDoD.

In April, a member of this group posted the database, which contains the data of some 2.9 billion people, up for sale for $3.5 million. Then, earlier this week, the 277 GB of data was offered for download for free on the notorious BreachForums by another member of the USDoD group.

The database contains records that, among others, contain the fields:

• First name
• Last name
• Middle name
• Date of Birth
• Address
• City
• County
• State
• Zip code
• Phone number
• Social Security Number

The publication of the data came a few days after a complaint was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint against Jerico Pictures Inc, trading as National Public Data, accuses the defendant of failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) that it collected as part of its regular business practices.

Jerico Pictures is a background check company that allows its customers to instantly search their database containing billions of records. The data in these records is scraped from non-public sources without knowledge or consent. A major problem with this is that the company has no ties with the victims, so most of them will have no idea that their data has been made public.

The plaintiff filed the complaint after they found out about the breach when an identity theft protection service notified him in July that their personal information had been compromised and leaked on the dark web.

This, while apparently some of the victims have already noticed the misuse of their Social Security Numbers.

One of the requests of the plaintiff is for the court to require National Public Data to purge the personal information of all the individuals affected and to encrypt all data collected going forward.

We have voiced our objections against data brokers in the past. The same is true for data scrapers like National Public Data, because, as we have seen, breaches at these data brokers can be combined with others and result in a veritable treasure trove of personal data ending up in the hands of cybercriminals. This database by itself qualifies as such a treasure trove and it is now available to every cybercriminal out there.

Check your digital footprint

If you want to find out how much of your data has been exposed online, you can try our free Digital Footprint scan. Fill in the email address you’re curious about (it’s best to submit the one you most frequently use) and we’ll send you a free report.

We don’t just report on threats – we help safeguard your entire digital identity

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Protect your—and your family’s—personal information by using identity protection.

Google has released patches for 46 vulnerabilities in Android, including a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability that it says has been used in limited, targeted attacks.

You can find your device’s Android version number, security update level, and Google Play system level in your Settings app. You’ll get notifications when updates are available for you, but you can also check for updates.

If your Android phone is at patch level 2024-08-01 or later then the issues discussed below have been fixed. The updates have been made available for Android 12, 12L, 13, and 14. Android partners, such as Samsung, Sony, etc, are notified of all issues at least a month before publication, however, this doesn’t always mean that the patches are available for devices from all vendors.

For most Android devices, you can check for new updates like this: Under About phone or About device you can tap on Software updates, although there may be slight differences based on the brand, type, and Android version.

Technical details

The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) database lists publicly disclosed computer security flaws. The actively exploited vulnerability is listed as:

CVE-2024-36971 is a use after free (UAF) vulnerability in the Linux kernel. The vulnerability could lead to remote code execution with System execution privileges needed.

This Linux kernel vulnerability affects the Android OS because the Android kernel is based on an upstream Linux Long Term Supported (LTS) kernel. This kernel is like the engine of the operating system, managing the hardware and basic functions.

The Android kernel is based on a version of the Linux kernel, which is a popular core for many operating systems. Specifically, Android uses a version of the Linux kernel that is designated as “Long Term Supported” (LTS). This means it’s a version that gets updates and fixes for a longer period than regular versions, ensuring it stays secure and stable over time.

UAF is a type of vulnerability that happens when a program incorrectly handles its memory. When a program frees up a piece of memory but still tries to use it afterward, an attacker can exploit this mistake. This can cause the program to crash, behave unpredictably, or even run harmful code. In this case it allows the attacker to remotely execute code on the device if they have enough privileges.

Attackers would need to gain the needed privileges to use this vulnerability by combining it with other vulnerabilities.

We don’t just report on phone security—we provide it

Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Keep threats off your mobile devices by downloading Malwarebytes for iOS, and Malwarebytes for Android today.

Men report facing more pressure than women—and more threats of retaliation—to grant access to their locations and online accounts when in a committed relationship, according to a new analysis of data released this summer by Malwarebytes.

The same analysis also revealed that, while men report more regret in sharing their locations, women report less awareness in how their locations can be accessed, particularly through food delivery apps, ride-hailing services, vacation rental platforms, and other location-based tools.

The data from Malwarebytes paints a nuanced portrait of the struggles that men and women face when deciding how much of their digital lives to share with spouses, boyfriends, girlfriends, and partners. Often, the struggles intersect with parts of modern dating that people have little control over, including how companies track, collect, and share their data, and how easy it is for other people to access that data.

In looking more closely at the research released earlier this year in the report, “What’s mine is yours: How couples share an all-access pass to their digital lives,” Malwarebytes hopes to once again spread awareness and education about secure dating practices in the internet age.

Access our full “Modern Love in the Digital Age” guidance hub below.

Men: More regret, pressure, and threats

Men are going through a loneliness epidemic in America right now.

But even for men in romantic relationships, where companionship should be a salve, other problems emerge. In particular, as Malwarebytes found, these problems include disparate feelings of pressure and regret in sharing their devices, account passwords, and locations.

For example, of partners who shared their location with one another, 36% of men said they’d “felt pressure” to do so, compared with 20% of women who said the same. And a shocking 9% of men who share their account access clarified that such access may be imbalanced, as they agreed: “My partner has threatened me over sharing account access,” compared to 4% of women—a more than two-fold increase. The threats included things like being broken up with, being harmed physically or emotionally, or being shut out and ignored.  

Men were also more likely to report a one-sided consent model for how their partners accessed their devices, accounts, and locations (a model that we’re not entirely ready to call “sharing” because of the clearly communicated lack of consent).

When asked about the way in which they “shared” any type of digital and device access, which included smartphones, tablets, computers, online accounts for multiple apps, and location data, 23% of men said “Yes [my partner] has access but I wish they didn’t.” That rate was 12% for women.

Similar disparities arose when men and women answered the same way regarding device access (14% of men compared to 7% of women), social media access (9% of men compared to 4% of women), and access to apps that can share your location (16% of men compared to 9% of women).

But not all location apps are the same, and when asked specifically about apps that are designed to share locations between individuals—such as FindMy on iOS, Find My Device for Google, or third-party tools like Life360—the data revealed the largest discrepancy.

A shocking 400% more men said they only share their locations through those apps “because my partner insists” (8% of men compared with 2% of women).

In the research, men openly shared their feelings on all this, as 14% (compared to 8% of women) agreed: “If I could do it all over again, I wouldn’t share as much personal account information with my partner.”  

Women: Less awareness of shared location access

In safe and consensual arrangements between couples, a shared location can show up as a little blue dot on a devoted smartphone app.

But for apps that rely on location data to function—like ride-hailing apps, food delivery services, and vacation rental platforms—location “sharing” can feel a lot more like location “leaking.” A shared Airbnb account, for example, could reveal a spouse’s active vacation rental address to another partner logged into the same account. A shared Uber account could reveal ride history, and potentially even a new address, to an ex-boyfriend who never logged out after a breakup. And DoorDash orders could expose when a domestic abuse survivor is at home, so long as their abuser is monitoring the app from the same account.

But these examples, research shows, are not common knowledge, with women showing less awareness than men for every type of account.

Women were less likely to be aware of how their locations could be exposed to another user logged into the same account for vacation rental platforms (68% of women were unaware compared to 49% of men), health and fitness tracking apps like FitBit and Strava (57% of women compared to 43% of men), ride-hailing apps (50% of women compared to 37% of men), and food and grocery delivery apps (49% of women compared to 39% of men).

Women were also more likely to say they were unaware of how the companion apps for many modern vehicles—which can be used to find a car in a large parking lot or to help locate a stolen sedan—can also reveal their location on a shared account (60% of women compared to 41% of men).

This relatively new location-tracking method has caused serious problems for spouses being followed by their exes, and the blame cannot fall on users who are tasked with, as usual, managing even more parts of their lives online.

Shifting perspectives

Data alone never presents a full story, and data that compares men and women can be vulnerable to misinterpretation.

The varying issues facing men and women should not be interpreted as problems of their own making—men cannot be said to regret sharing account access because they have “something to hide,” and women cannot be said to be poorer users of technology because of lower reported awareness in location sharing mechanisms.

If anything, the overlap in responses shows the work to be done.

When 68% of women and 49% of men are unaware of how their locations can be accessed through shared accounts on vacation rental platforms, perhaps this isn’t a problem of user awareness. Perhaps it is a problem of unclear communication and lacking transparency from the largest and most popular apps today.

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.

If you’ve been following any news about ransomware, you may be under the impression that ransomware groups are only after organizations rather than individual people, and for the most part that’s true.

However, Magniber is one ransomware that does target home users. And it’s back, with full force, demanding four figure ransoms to unencrypt data.

BleepingComputer, which has a dedicated forum for ransomware victims, reports:

“A massive Magniber ransomware campaign is underway, encrypting home users’ devices worldwide and demanding thousand-dollar ransoms to receive a decryptor.”

This surge was confirmed by ID-Ransomware, which helps users to identify the ransomware family that has infected their systems. ID-Ransomware has received well over 700 requests from visitors who had their files encrypted by Magniber since July 20, 2024. Malwarebytes’ telemetry also shows an uptick in Magniber detections in July.

Magniber first emerged in 2017 when it 2024 targeted South Korean systems. In 2018, it started infecting computers with a much more developed version which also targeted other Asian countries like Malaysia, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

The new campaign does not limit itself to specific regions and uses tried and trusted methods to reach home users’ systems. The ransomware is often disguised in downloads for cracks or key generators of popular software, as well as fake updates for Windows or browsers. In some cases, the group takes advantage of unpatched Windows vulnerabilities.

When infected, victims are presented with this ransom notice:

Your important files have been encrypted due to the suspicion of the illegal content download!

Your files are not damaged! Your files are modified only. This modification is reversible.

Any attempts to restore your files with the third party software will be fatal to your files!

To receive the private key and decryption program follow the instructions below:

The instructions will tell you to visit a website which can only be reached by using the Tor browser.

Once the ransomware has encrypted the targeted files, it will typically request a ransom in the region of $1,000 which is raised to around $5,000 if the victim does not pay within three days. Unfortunately, old decryptors that were available for free don’t work for this version.

How home users can prevent ransomware

There are some rules that can help you avoid falling victim to this type of ransomware:

• Make sure your system and software are on the latest version. Criminals will exploit known holes that have been patched by the vendors but not updated everywhere.
• Run a trusted anti-malware solution.
• Never download illegal software, cracks, and key generators.
• Use a malicious content blocker to stop your browser from visiting bad sites.
• Don’t open unexpected email attachments.
• Don’t click on links before checking where they will take you.

If you do accidentally get caught by ransomware, we recommend you don’t pay. There’s no guarantee you’ll get your files back, and you’ll be helping to line the pockets of criminals.

Malwarebytes Artificial Intelligence module blocks the latest Magniber versions as Malware.AI.{ID-nr}. Older versions will be detected as Ransom.Magniber or Ransom.Magniber.Generic.

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.

Last week on Malwarebytes Labs:

• Threat actor impersonates Google via fake ad for Authenticator
• Scammers are impersonating cryptocurrency exchanges, FBI warns
• Meta to pay $1.4 billion over unauthorized facial recognition image capture
• Apple fixes Siri vulnerabilities that could have allowed sensitive data theft from locked device. Update now!
• SIEM is not storage, with Jess Dodson (Lock and Code S05E16)
• US senators ask FTC to investigate car makers’ privacy practices

Last week on ThreatDown:

• Azure outage was DDoS attack made worse by failed mitigation
• Patch now! ServiceNow vulnerabilities under active exploitation
• Google Workspace flaw allowed cybercriminals to impersonate domains

Stay safe!

Our business solutions remove all remnants of ransomware and prevent you from getting reinfected. Want to learn more about how we can help protect your business? Get a free trial below.