Agregátor RSS
Chinese-Made Zbtlink Routers Ship With Backdoor That Opens Unauthenticated Root Shells
Přehřívající se M5 Max MacBook Pro trápí zaseklé klávesy, cena opravy je $895
Revoluce bez čekání. Snímače LOFIC dohánějí drahé bezzrcadlovky, už se objevují v prvních mobilech a přenosných kamerách
Ransom Cartel Creator Gets 16 Years in Prison for Operating Ransomware-as-a-Service
CISA Flags TeamCity CVE-2026-63077 RCE Flaw Under Active Exploitation in the Wild
Cendrova CDN77 vyrostla na pět miliard a zakořenila mezi největšími hráči světa
Snowflake Hacker Pleads Guilty Over Breaches Affecting at Least 100 Million People
EK: ChatGPT i Roblox mohou spadat pod přísnější pravidla
Klasickému zelenému nočnímu vidění odzvonilo. Přichází technologie, která zobrazuje infračervený svět v barvách
Zen 6 přinese 5 nových funkcí pro vyšší stabilitu výkonu, nejen herního
Chinese router vendor denies its firmware contains backdoors – but pauses downloads to fix security issues anyway
OpenAI reveals its rogue agent swarm went a little bit Borg ahead of Hugging Face hack
Enterprise passkey security under threat from malware
Given the widespread enterprise adoption of passkeys to replace passwords, a Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 report disclosing ways attackers are getting around passkey protections is concerning, analysts say, but they stress that the demonstrated attacks can only happen after a successful intrusion.
They also pointed out that the issues are not strictly caused by holes in passkeys so much as by weaknesses in the procedures surrounding them.
“The researchers didn’t break the underlying cryptography. They exploited the seams around it: onboarding flows, recovery mechanisms and trust signals that weren’t being validated,” said Justin Greis, CEO of consulting firm Acceligence. “That distinction matters because it tells us where the actual risk lives.”
The Palo Alto report showed attacks that, it said, “demonstrate how malware on a compromised endpoint can misuse onboarding, recovery and device trust workflows to take over passkey-protected accounts,” as well as “how an attacker can authenticate without user interaction, bypass user verification requirements and extract all synced passkey private keys.”
Palo Alto described three categories of attack, collectively dubbed Pass-ta-key: Pass-ta-key, where an attacker takes over an account protected by a Google-synced passkey using malware running on the victim’s device, without requiring privilege escalation, device unlock or user interaction; Silver Pass-ta-key, which involves an attacker tricking Google Cloud Authenticator into believing the victim has unlocked the device with biometrics, leading to full account takeover without using the victim’s device during authentication; and Golden Pass-ta-key, which allows an attacker to extract all synced passkeys in a form that lets them be shared or sold on the credential black market.
Given the complexity of most global enterprise threat surfaces, some CISOs have struggled with adapting passwordless processes to environments with legacy and virtual environments. Passcodes have been recently embraced by enterprise CISOs as the first step in implementing a passwordless strategy.
Analysts and consultants in the main agreed that the flaw Palo Alto reports is significant, despite the fact that it assumes the attacker has already penetrated an environment and successfully installed malware. Sadly, given that such penetration only requires one privileged user anywhere to accidentally click on a poisoned link or attachment, the assumption of prior penetration is likely valid.
Implementation issues are the problemWhat the report reveals is less about any flaws within passcodes directly, and more about the lack of attention paid to a wide range of mechanisms surrounding them.
Greis said CISOs now need to focus on what to do, and what to test, based on the assumption that user behavior is not always as expected.
In several cases cited in the report, he pointed out, issues occurred “not because the standard is flawed, but because implementations haven’t caught up to it. It mirrors what we’ve seen repeatedly in security: the specification is sound, but the ecosystem implementing it is uneven.”
Consultant Brian Levine, executive director of FormerGov, agreed.
“On any service where your organization is the relying party, require user verification and actually validate the user-verified flag in the authentication response,” he said. “The researchers found real-world services accepting logins without it, which quietly collapses a multi-factor login back into a single factor.”
Frank Dickson, group VP for security at IDC, added that he would stress to CISOs that this attack assumes a prior successful penetration.
“This isn’t passkeys getting hacked from across the internet. It’s what [an attacker] does once they’re already inside the house. So the real headline is that ‘phishing resistant’ stops being resistant the moment the endpoint stops being clean,” he said.
“Stop treating verification as optional,” he advised. “Flip it to required, check it server side every single time, and save your hardware bound keys, the YubiKeys of the world, for the accounts that matter most. A key that never leaves a physical device is a key no attacker can ever harvest in bulk.”
Or Finkelstein, head of marketing at Secret Double Octopus, agreed that CISOs have gotten complacent about the way in which systems support passkeys.
“CISOs should probably look at how user verification is enforced, how enrollment and recovery work, have a clear and enforced policy on whether credentials are synced or device-bound, and have some ITDR system to quickly mitigate suspicious endpoints and authenticators,” he said. “In most serious enterprise environments, EDR and device management reduce the likelihood of initial attacks, but do not close every post-compromise attack path.”
Poor support processes weaken passkeysSome have argued that the lack of sufficiently robust support processes actually weakens passkey capabilities and undermines the whole point of such systems.
J. Wolfgang Goerlich, a member of the faculty of IANS and a longtime cybersecurity consultant, pointed out that the original FIDO2 spec eliminated credential theft by binding the private key to a physical authenticator. Synced passkeys reintroduced credential portability and therefore reintroduced the form of credential theft risk cited in the Palo Alto report.
“A passwordless system is exactly as strong as the flow that re-establishes it,” he said. “Both serious techniques here start by forcing a device to re-enroll. Many security teams have never modeled, never monitored and never rehearsed a response to this.”
Goerlich’s advice to CISOs is to require device-bound authenticators, such as hardware tokens or computers, for all privileged and sensitive access. They may consider allowing wallets for lower risk access, he said, “however, much like passwords in Web browsers have long been at risk, we must now consider passkeys in the browsers an unacceptable risk.”
This article originally appeared on CSOonline.
Report: Passkey security issues could allow account takeover
Given the widespread enterprise adoption of passkeys to replace passwords, a Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 report disclosing ways attackers are getting around passkey protections is concerning, analysts say, but they stress that the demonstrated attacks can only happen after a successful intrusion.
They also pointed out that the issues are not strictly caused by holes in passkeys so much as by weaknesses in the procedures surrounding them.
“The researchers didn’t break the underlying cryptography. They exploited the seams around it: onboarding flows, recovery mechanisms and trust signals that weren’t being validated,” said Justin Greis, CEO of consulting firm Acceligence. “That distinction matters because it tells us where the actual risk lives.”
The Palo Alto report showed attacks that, it said, “demonstrate how malware on a compromised endpoint can misuse onboarding, recovery and device trust workflows to take over passkey-protected accounts,” as well as “how an attacker can authenticate without user interaction, bypass user verification requirements and extract all synced passkey private keys.”
Palo Alto described three categories of attack, collectively dubbed Pass-ta-key: Pass-ta-key, where an attacker takes over an account protected by a Google-synced passkey using malware running on the victim’s device, without requiring privilege escalation, device unlock or user interaction; Silver Pass-ta-key, which involves an attacker tricking Google Cloud Authenticator into believing the victim has unlocked the device with biometrics, leading to full account takeover without using the victim’s device during authentication; and Golden Pass-ta-key, which allows an attacker to extract all synced passkeys in a form that lets them be shared or sold on the credential black market.
Given the complexity of most global enterprise threat surfaces, some CISOs have struggled with adapting passwordless processes to environments with legacy and virtual environments. Passcodes have been recently embraced by enterprise CISOs as the first step in implementing a passwordless strategy.
Analysts and consultants in the main agreed that the flaw Palo Alto reports is significant, despite the fact that it assumes the attacker has already penetrated an environment and successfully installed malware. Sadly, given that such penetration only requires one privileged user anywhere to accidentally click on a poisoned link or attachment, the assumption of prior penetration is likely valid.
Implementation issues are the problemWhat the report reveals is less about any flaws within passcodes directly, and more about the lack of attention paid to a wide range of mechanisms surrounding them.
Greis said CISOs now need to focus on what to do, and what to test, based on the assumption that user behavior is not always as expected.
In several cases cited in the report, he pointed out, issues occurred “not because the standard is flawed, but because implementations haven’t caught up to it. It mirrors what we’ve seen repeatedly in security: the specification is sound, but the ecosystem implementing it is uneven.”
Consultant Brian Levine, executive director of FormerGov, agreed.
“On any service where your organization is the relying party, require user verification and actually validate the user-verified flag in the authentication response,” he said. “The researchers found real-world services accepting logins without it, which quietly collapses a multi-factor login back into a single factor.”
Frank Dickson, group VP for security at IDC, added that he would stress to CISOs that this attack assumes a prior successful penetration.
“This isn’t passkeys getting hacked from across the internet. It’s what [an attacker] does once they’re already inside the house. So the real headline is that ‘phishing resistant’ stops being resistant the moment the endpoint stops being clean,” he said.
“Stop treating verification as optional,” he advised. “Flip it to required, check it server side every single time, and save your hardware bound keys, the YubiKeys of the world, for the accounts that matter most. A key that never leaves a physical device is a key no attacker can ever harvest in bulk.”
Or Finkelstein, head of marketing at Secret Double Octopus, agreed that CISOs have gotten complacent about the way in which systems support passkeys.
“CISOs should probably look at how user verification is enforced, how enrollment and recovery work, have a clear and enforced policy on whether credentials are synced or device-bound, and have some ITDR system to quickly mitigate suspicious endpoints and authenticators,” he said. “In most serious enterprise environments, EDR and device management reduce the likelihood of initial attacks, but do not close every post-compromise attack path.”
Poor support processes weaken passkeysSome have argued that the lack of sufficiently robust support processes actually weakens passkey capabilities and undermines the whole point of such systems.
J. Wolfgang Goerlich, a member of the faculty of IANS and a longtime cybersecurity consultant, pointed out that the original FIDO2 spec eliminated credential theft by binding the private key to a physical authenticator. Synced passkeys reintroduced credential portability and therefore reintroduced the form of credential theft risk cited in the Palo Alto report.
“A passwordless system is exactly as strong as the flow that re-establishes it,” he said. “Both serious techniques here start by forcing a device to re-enroll. Many security teams have never modeled, never monitored and never rehearsed a response to this.”
Goerlich’s advice to CISOs is to require device-bound authenticators, such as hardware tokens or computers, for all privileged and sensitive access. They may consider allowing wallets for lower risk access, he said, “however, much like passwords in Web browsers have long been at risk, we must now consider passkeys in the browsers an unacceptable risk.”
This article originally appeared on CSOonline.
Ransom Cartel ransomware creator sentenced to 16 years in prison
Thousands of servers can be backdoored by exploiting buggy motherboard controllers
Thousands of Internet-connected servers sold by the world’s biggest manufacturers can be remotely backdoored by exploiting critical vulnerabilities—some more than a decade old—that lurk deep inside system motherboards, according to research presented Wednesday.
Baseboard management controllers are miniature computers that are embedded into the motherboards of virtually every enterprise server. The microcontrollers, typically abbreviated as BMCs, run with their own operating system firmware, network stack, and IP address. Administrators rely on them to monitor the physical status of large fleets of servers and to perform a variety of tasks, including rebooting machines, installing updates, and even reinstalling operating systems. BMCs provide what’s known as “lights out” and “out-of-band” management because they work even when servers they’re attached to are turned off or are unresponsive.
A “pervasive, under-monitored, under-patched parallel attack surface”Researchers have warned since at least 2013 that BMCs present a golden opportunity for hackers looking for ways to gain deep and persistent access to datacenters. The chief culprit was IPMI, the protocol that allows BMCs to operate independently of servers and to perform administrative tasks. Vulnerabilities in this firmware made it possible for attackers to remotely execute malicious code on the controllers and, from there, infect the servers they manage.
Nová dávka pro studující rodiče odstartuje v září. Na hlídání dostanou 7467 korun měsíčně
Podpora unifikované práce se zařízeními v operačním systému Atari: CIO (2.část)
Dinosaury má možná na svědomí jemný prach
Darwinovi vyšla předpověď: lomikameny umějí udělat masožravé druhy
- « první
- ‹ předchozí
- …
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- …
- následující ›
- poslední »



