Agregátor RSS

O Radeonu RX 9050 je slyšet od loňského prosince, ale žádné informace, které se dosud objevily, nebyly přesné. Karta nakonec míří trochu jinam…

BAE systems postavili prototyp autonomního dronu typu Loyal Wingman, který by měl doprovázet pilotované bojové letouny. Brontanax je britský od začátku až do konce a měl by zvládat rozmanité mise, od vzdušných soubojů a útoků na pozemní cíle až po elektronický boj. Prototyp už testuje na zemi, vzlétnout by měl už příští rok (2027).

Podíváte-li se do jednotlivých lokálních rekonstrukcí teplot za minulé tisíce let, většinou nevidíme výrazný tvar podobný hokejce. Jak tedy vznikají pověstné hokejky v globálním průměru?

Kanibalismus vyvolává znechucení často až fyzického rázu. Přesto se během historie neustále vynořuje ze světa nočních můr a hororů, aby se ale nikdy nestal trvalou a všední praktikou celé společnosti. Nový výzkum nabízí ryze matematický pohled na zisky a ztráty spojené s konzumací lidského masa.

Last week’s unprecedented security event in which two OpenAI security hacking models trespassed into the network of fellow AI company Hugging Face was enabled by exploiting one or more zero-day vulnerabilities in Artifactory, JFrog, the product’s developer, said Monday.

In an incident mimicking a dystopian sci-fi novel, two OpenAI models broke out of the restricted environment meant to keep them from accessing the Internet during an internal test, the AI company revealed last week. The models went on to breach Hugging Face’s network and steal confidential information and credentials. OpenAI said its agent achieved the feat by exploiting a previously unknown vulnerability. The company called the event “unprecedented,” and outsiders largely agreed.

Not the triumph it was made out to be

OpenAI said the models exploited multiple attack vectors, including stolen credentials and zero-days, to gain remote code execution capabilities, but until now, the vulnerable software was unknown. JFrog’s Monday disclosure said the product was a self-managed instance Artifactory, a repository management system that secures and streamlines customers’ software development operations. JFrog says Artifactory is used by more than 7,500 developer Teams, 80 percent of which work for Fortune 100 companies.

Read full article

Comments

CubePilot, an Australian firm that designs flight controllers for drones (UAVs), announced a severe operational disruption caused by a DNS hijacking attack. [...]

JFrog has confirmed that OpenAI models exploited zero-day vulnerabilities in self-hosted Artifactory servers to help escape an isolated testing environment and gain access to the internet before attacking Hugging Face. [...]

Two agentic bug-hunting systems from Microsoft and Google-owned Wiz show that when it comes to finding and remediating software vulnerabilities, at least two models’ minds work better than one - and Wiz tells us it’s adding a third. Wiz on Monday said Project Atlas, its bug-hunting AI agent, bested Anthropic’s Mythos Preview and OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 Cyber with its vulnerability-analysis skills, achieving a 90.9 percent success rate on CyberGym, and uncovering more than 200 zero-day security holes in widely used open-source code. Meanwhile, Microsoft boasted its MDASH bug-hunting harness scored a 95.95 percent success rate on CyberGym, also beating Mythos, Gemini and GPT on the same benchmark for evaluating how well AI systems find real vulnerabilities in the code. For comparison, OpenAI’s GPT-5.5 Cyber scored 85.6 percent on CyberGym, and its GPT-5.6 Sol scored 83.6 percent. Anthropic’s Mythos 5 reproduced the target vulnerability on 83.8 percent of CyberGym challenges. And Google’s Gemini 3.5 Flash Cyber in CodeMender achieved an 83.2 percent success rate. The secret to both Atlas and MDASH’s success, according to the vendors, is that they use the right model for the right security job. Atlas uses Claude Opus 4.6 with GPT-5.5, Nir Ohfeld, head of vulnerability research at Wiz, told The Register. “We're now working to incorporate Gemini, which is well timed given Wiz's recent work with DeepMind on Gemini Flash Cyber,” he added. Microsoft’s MDASH - a combination of red-team agents that find and simulate real, exploitable vulnerabilities and attack paths, and green-team agents that remediate the issues - combines MAI-Cyber-1-Flash, based on Microsoft AI (MAI)’s internally developed MAI-Thinking-1 reasoning model, and GPT-5.4. MAI-Cyber-1-Flash is designed to handle up to 90 percent of all tasks, with MDASH detecting, patching, and validating vulnerabilities before handing the remaining 10 percent of more complex tasks to the larger GPT-5.4. “We were able to take an off-the-shelf model, within our harness, a multi-agent and multi-model implementation, and we achieved the best results you could have,” Hayete Gallot, executive vice president of Microsoft Security, said on Monday. Atlas isn’t commercially available yet - it’s used internally, and stems from Wiz’s efforts to understand how frontier models can be used for advanced code scanning. But it’s proof that “no single model is best at everything, and none stays state of the art for long,” Ohfeld and fellow Wiz kid Yuval Avrahami wrote in a Monday blog. The cloud security biz evaluates every new model using its internal benchmarking tool, Cyber Model Arena, which scores each one on its success at completing various security-investigation tasks: threat modeling, hunting, validation, and proof generation. “The results are rarely uniform: the model that reasons best through a complex exploit chain is often not the one that triages most precisely,” the duo wrote. “Atlas routes each stage to whichever model wins on that task.” In addition to doing a better job of finding and fixing vulnerabilities, a multi-model system also saves customers’ money, according to Microsoft and Wiz. Combining its much smaller, in-house model with GPT-5.4 halves customers’ costs, according to Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft AI. “As the models hand off between each other, they are not just able to deliver better performance than all of the other models combined, they do so at 50 percent of the cost,” he said on Monday. And while “each new generation of models expands what is possible,” they are also expensive, Ohfeld told us. “We have also learned that pointing a frontier model at a codebase once is not a sustainable security strategy: deep scans are expensive, their results become stale as code changes by the minute, and a point-in-time analysis cannot provide the continuous coverage organizations need across every repository,” he said. In fact, the real question for code security shouldn’t be which model a scanner uses, Ohfeld added. It’s this: “How does your system take advantage of the best model available today, continuously and economically, and what continues to work when a better one arrives,” he said. “That is the bet behind Atlas: frontier-model depth where expert reasoning is required, an architecture that improves as models evolve, and rigorous validation so every finding arrives with evidence, not just a plausible answer.” ®

Anthropic says Claude Mythos Preview helped derive an end-to-end key-recovery attack against HAWK-256 and a 200- to 800-fold speedup for an attack on seven-round AES-128. The HAWK attack exploits a previously unused symmetry in the lattice behind the signature scheme. Anthropic's released implementation gives an expected end-to-end runtime of about three hours and 42 minutes on a 96-core serverSwati Khandelwalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/[email protected]

Starling (GitHub) je desktopové prostředí vytvořeno umělou inteligencí (s dohledem jednoho vývojáře během šesti měsíců).

The U.S. and Australian governments have released new guidance urging critical infrastructure organizations to prepare to isolate vital operational technology systems in the event of a cyberattack or other major disruptions. [...]

Chytrý přívěsek lze vyhledat i pomocí hodinek nebo telefonu • Aerolinky mohou vidět polohu ztraceného kufru díky sdílení odkazu • Vyjmutím baterie ušetříte energii v období nepoužívání AirTagu

A critical vulnerability in the vBulletin forum software allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code through template rendering. [...]

Vzniká centrální místo, kde budou všechny informace o chytré domácnosti. • Žádný marketing, jen reálná anonymizovaná data uživatelů Home Assistantu. • Každý se dozví, jak se produkty připojují, zda běží lokálně a co všechno umožňují.

Artificial intelligence is becoming a force multiplier for Apple security research. Apple’s latest 26.5.2 software update includes patches for a record number of bugs — many of them identified by security researchers using AI-assisted tools.

A record haul of fixes

The numbers tell the story. Apple fixed 87 security vulnerabilities in iOS and iPadOS 26.6, along with an additional 155 patches for Macs. Roughly 100 flaws have been patched in each of Apple’s other operating systems: watchOS, tvOS, and visionOS. Taken together, these represent record numbers for an Apple security update. 

This is only the beginning. The scale of the release echoes the impact AI coding agents are already having on security research and may well reflect Apple’s Project Glasswing research with Anthropic and others to use AI to identify software vulnerabilities. 

Apple’s use of AI for security research is visible in the official release note. Read through it and you’ll see multiple credits to Claude, Codex, and AI adjacent tools, labs, and researchers. These tools identified flaws across Apple’s systems, including in WebKit, WebDAV, and WebKit Storage.

For good and ill

It’s a neat illustration of the sea change under way as AI adoption accelerates. This release highlights how security researchers are leaning into AI tools to check platform security just as heavily as attackers are. One fix in today’s release is credited to researchers from Calif.io, who some may recall used Anthropic’s Mythos Preview model to create a working macOS kernel memory corruption exploit in just a few days.

The release is proof positive that while AI can be used to identify vulnerabilities to undermine protection, it can also be used to identify opportunities to further secure the platforms. It is also true that as AI use across the security industry grows, the number of flaws identified will also accelerate; it’s doubtful we’ll ever reach a point at which there are no flaws at all. Apple is likely to beef up its own internal observability tools following the acquisition of SigLens, which might help it identify even more bugs using AI.

Don’t delay, install today

None of these matters much, though, if the security patches never get installed — and the delay between security patch release and installation represents a huge opportunity for attackers. Recent analysis from Fleet Device Management found that 79% of organizations take more than a day to deploy critical security patches, even as attackers increasingly exploit vulnerabilities within hours of disclosure. The same report also showed something else to worry about: AI tools are spreading fast across the enterprise, often without the version control or auditability that would let anyone track how they’re actually being used.

Despite their number, the tally of fixes Apple has published isn’t the end of the story. In this case, while Apple has published its latest fixes, how many of those vulnerabilities have already been abused in the weeks between discovery and security patch release? More to the point, how swiftly will Apple’s installed base update devices now, and how many attackers will use that delay to dive in and do the damage?

It’s a security arms race

Adam Boynton, senior security strategy manager at Jamf noted that one vulnerability, CVE-2026-43810, can be exploited by a remote user to corrupt kernel memory. “The WebKit fixes are easy to read as a phishing story, when they are actually something slightly different,” he said.

“The raw material for targeted spyware is browser engine memory corruption, and those chains are expensive enough that they get pointed at specific people like senior executives, journalists, anyone whose access justifies the cost. That’s the honest reason to update promptly rather than eventually. 

“In other words, this update matters less for its raw numbers than for what those numbers represent: an arms race between defenders and attackers who are both, increasingly, running the same kind of tools,” Boynton said.

You can follow me on social media! Join me on BlueSky,  LinkedIn, Mastodon and subscribe to The Core.

Ahead of DEF CON 2026 opening its doors in Las Vegas next week, conference organizers said they have imposed a ban on “Meta-style glasses with recording capabilities.” Statements made via its social media channels went on to say that no exceptions will be made for those using the devices with prescription lenses. “Be sure to pack non-violating eyewear if you need them,” DEF CON said, before directing delegates to the conference’s official photo policy. That policy has not been updated since 2023, predating the recent growth of camera-equipped eyewear developed by Meta with EssilorLuxottica under its Ray-Ban and Oakley brands. It states that public photography is permitted but with several caveats that essentially prohibit capturing the image of anyone, except on-stage speakers, unless the photographer obtains consent from the subject(s). EFF director of cybersecurity Eva Galperin welcomed the decision, saying: “Love to see a ‘no pervert glasses’ policy at DEF CON.” The conference’s reminder follows similar moves from other major organizers and promoters. Monopoly Events banned the same style of smart glasses from its shows, which include UK Comic Cons, in recent days. “After a consultation period, we can no longer permit the wearing of any recording device at our events,” it stated last week. “The vast majority of the talent and agents at our events felt that these were a violation of their privacy and were damaging and spoiling the interactions at the tables. “Several expressed concerns that they might not continue to attend in-person events if they were being recorded in secret. “We had similar feedback from event attendees, many of whom are not comfortable with the knowledge that other convention goers might be filming them without consent.” The event management company said that anyone caught wearing glasses with recording capabilities may be asked to leave the show and forfeit any unfulfilled autographs or photographs they had purchased. Similarly, Scottish ferry operator CalMac temporarily suspended unplanned visits to ships' bridges of its ships after a passenger wearing recording glasses made crew and passengers feel uncomfortable while filming during a crossing in June, the Ayrshire Weekly Press reported. Growing privacy concerns Originally pitched as a convenient tool for recording everyday moments without needing to occupy one’s hands with a phone or camera, Meta’s smart glasses quickly attracted a mixed reception. Old fans of the Google Glass project were enamored by Meta’s take on the concept, more than ten years after the Chocolate Factory debuted its chunkier, costlier wearable, which was swiftly axed after two years. Meta’s glasses, and crucially their recording capabilities, are considerably more clandestine than Google Glass', appearing to many as a normal set of specs. Only when you inspect the frame from a much closer perspective does the embedded camera become more apparent. The devices have become associated with creepy behavior. A quick search for “Meta glasses privacy violations” will throw up countless examples of questionable conduct from glasses-wearers, typically reported by women and children. While photography and videography in public spaces are widely permitted for casual use, smart recording glasses make the activity much more discreet. The Register has heard that such devices can be paired with unsophisticated apps to dox passersby in seconds, and have inspired separate projects to alert Android users to nearby glasses-wearers using Bluetooth signals. Meta is also facing scrutiny from the UK’s data protection watchdog, including over cross-border data flows. The watchdog’s questions follow reports originating in Sweden that Kenya-based contractors reviewing footage from wearers were exposed to some of their more private moments. Human reviewers based in Kenya, who are tasked with labelling images and video to help train Meta’s AI, have reportedly reviewed captures taken from toilet visits, wearers changing their clothes, and users engaging in conversations that revealed alleged wrongdoing. Meta has routinely defended its wearables amid privacy concerns, saying that when they are recording, a light on the frame illuminates to indicate that the camera is active. Further, attempts to cover or otherwise tamper with this light result in the glasses refusing to capture images. The Register contacted Meta for its take on the recent bans of its devices at conferences and will update this article if we hear back. ®

Anthropic's Project Glasswing may have uncovered tens of thousands of potential security flaws, but new research suggests AI-assisted vulnerability discovery has yet to produce the wave of real-world attacks many expected. In research shared with The Register, VulnCheck analyzed 1,061 publicly attributed AI-assisted vulnerability discoveries from Anthropic's Project Glasswing and the Berkeley Vulnerability Research Initiative, then cross-referenced them against its Known Exploited Vulnerability (KEV) database. The result: just 14 vulnerabilities, or 1.3 percent, have been confirmed as exploited in the wild, almost identical to the rate across all vulnerabilities in VulnCheck's dataset. That's a far cry from the narrative that frontier AI is dramatically tilting the balance in attackers' favor by churning out instantly weaponizable bugs. Instead, the data suggests that AI is currently better at increasing the volume of vulnerabilities researchers can uncover than at increasing the proportion that attackers actually exploit. The report takes particular aim at Anthropic's much-publicized Project Glasswing, unveiled in April with warnings that AI-assisted vulnerability discovery could allow attackers to hijack systems, disrupt operations, or steal data. Claude Mythos may have identified 23,019 vulnerability candidates, but there's remarkably little public evidence showing what became of most of them. VulnCheck notes that only 126 have been published as CVEs, that just one has been confirmed exploited in the wild, and that Anthropic's public disclosure record has seen little movement since Project Glasswing launched. But that doesn't mean AI-assisted vulnerability research has failed, according to Patrick Garrity, security researcher at VulnCheck. "AI-assisted vulnerability discovery clearly has value for both attackers and defenders," Garrity wrote. "The data does not suggest that AI-discovered vulnerabilities are inherently more likely to be exploited than those found through traditional methods." Instead, he argues, AI is simply helping researchers discover more flaws, giving defenders an opportunity to patch them before criminals get there. Garrity stopped well short of declaring the threat overblown forever, but he did suggest some of the rhetoric has outpaced reality. "The data so far, including Anthropic's own stalled disclosure ledger, suggests that AI-assisted vulnerability discovery and frontier capabilities have been overhyped relative to the evidence available today," he wrote. "That doesn't mean the risk is imaginary. It means the impact has been real but modest." Meanwhile, attackers haven't exactly been sitting idle. VulnCheck identified 495 known exploited vulnerabilities during the first half of 2026, with content management systems accounting for roughly one-third of them and network edge devices remaining a firm favorite. AI products themselves are also becoming an increasingly attractive target, as attackers look beyond using AI and start hunting for weaknesses in the rapidly expanding AI software stack. In other words, AI may be changing vulnerability research, but it hasn't yet produced the exploitation apocalypse some predicted. ®

A new Mirai-derived botnet called Tengu can use a compromised Linux device's hardware watchdog to trigger a reboot when defenders kill its main process. If that happens, Tengu's other persistence mechanisms get another chance to relaunch it. Nozomi Networks Labs observed the dropper reaching its honeypots through Telnet credential brute force. Tengu supports 25 distributed denial-of-service (Swati Khandelwalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/[email protected]