Take control of pesky permission pop-ups and decide exactly which websites can access your camera, microphone, location, and send you notifications.
The post Browser Guard gets even better with Access Control appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Dear blog readers,
I recently did something very interesting and I decided to share my results and findings.
What I did was the following. While doing a technical collection round for malicious software I came across to Carberp's source where I decided to take a peek and found out some pretty interesting and relevant personally attributable IoCs (Indicators of Compromise) which led me to further pursue an OSINT enrichment process which led me to believe and conclude that there's a high probability that Aquilla (Dmitry) from the WASM forum community could be one of the main authors of the Carberp banking trojan.
The most interesting part of this technical collection round which then turned into IoCs extraction and then OSINT enrichment based on the successfully found hardcoded IoCs in Carberp's publicly accessible and leaked source code is that I think I have managed to establish a direct connection between the hardcoded C&Cs and Is Aquila (Dmitry) from the WASM forum community.
Here's the interesting part and the actual hardcoded C&C IoCs I found in Carberp's publicly accessible source code:
hxxp://178.63.11.137 (Primary test C2)
hxxp://94.240.148.127 (Alt configuration node parsing `/cfg/passw.plug`)
Payload Drop Zones & Telemetry:
hxxp://apartman-adriana.com (http://.../temp/DrClient.dll) - Email: [email protected]
hxxp://56tgvr.info
We then have an interesting connection for one of the IoCs (hxxp://178.63.11.137) which appears to have been known to be responding to the email server for the WASM forum community which based on additional analysis appear to have been managed and operated and actually owned by Aquila also known as Dmitry (Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; hxxp://dimon.ru).
Related domain registrations for Aquila:
hxxp://symbolographia.com
hxxp://wasm.site
hxxp://posthumanism.info
Related screenshot:
The post Is Aquila (Dmitry) from WASM Forum Community the Author of the Carberp Banking Malware? appeared first on Security Boulevard.
OpenAI announced its GPT-5.4-Cyber AI model that echoes Anthropic's Mythos: It can quickly detected vulnerabilities in software but, in the wrong hands, can also make it easy to develop exploits against them. Like Anthropic, OpenAI is limiting access to the model, though to a larger number of security pros than Anthropic.
The post OpenAI Follows Anthropic in Limiting Access to Its Cyber-Focused Model appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Apr 15, 2026 - Jeremy Snyder - Myth and Mythos: A Decades Old Problem in the Spotlight
Background: Beyond the Headlines
The recent leak and confirmation of Anthropic Claude Mythos sent a ripple of anxiety through the cybersecurity community. In my recent conversations with security practitioners and leaders, there is a real concern that we are facing a brand-new, unsolvable category of AI risk. While there is legitimate cause for concern, we need to be careful not to let the technical "spectacle" cloud our strategic judgment. In fact, a recent conversation on LinkedIn compelled me to frame my own thinking on it. If you peel back the layers of AI hype, the underlying reality is much more grounded. Anthropic Mythos isn’t a fundamental shift in AI security; it is a massive, high-speed acceleration of a vulnerability management problem we’ve been dealing with (or rather, not dealing with) for decades. It’s time to stop looking at this as an AI story, and start focusing on systematic improvements to our approach.
It’s Not AI Security; It’s Vulnerability Discovery on Steroids
To understand the true impact of Anthropic Mythos, we have to see it for what it actually is: a super-charged, automated code scanner. This isn't a new conceptual threat, but rather a massive scaling problem where the speed of discovery has finally outpaced the speed of human response. The zero day clock shows that we’re in an era where the TTE (“Time to Exploit, sometimes also called "Mean Time To Attack" or MTTA) has shrunk to just 22 minutes, while the average "Mean Time To Patch" (MTTP, sometimes called Mean Time To Remediate or MTTR) remains stubbornly stuck between 50 and 160 days. (Side note - kudos to the Edgescan report on this. Also, I’m personally pleased to see updated statistical analysis on this. For the first 2 decades of my career, the MTTR for production vulnerabilities was stubbornly around 180 days.) This gap between exploit availability and remediation creates a window of exposure that is no longer manageable through existing processes. When a tool can find and weaponize a 27-year-old vulnerability in seconds, our traditional patching workflows become effectively obsolete. So we have three fundamental issues on this topic:
AI is just faster and can get through 1000x+ the volume of code as humans, in much less time.
Some AI is legitimately better at this, with reasoning and predictability models that find multi-step chained concatenation issues that have been missed for decades. The vulnerability scanning capabilities apply to both first-party and third-party applications, so vulnerabilities in both your code and your COTS need to be patched. The "Mythos" Reality Check: Turning Over Old Rocks, Finding New Bugs
For over twenty years, the industry has struggled with a persistent, systemic failure to keep up with the basics of patching. The root cause isn't a lack of awareness, but a combination of a few of the following factors:
All vulnerabilities are treated the same, whether on a laptop, server, public-facing system or internal system.
All vulnerabilities are treated the same, whether just on disk or actually loaded into memory
All vulnerabilities are treated the same, whether cyber attacks are happening against that vulnerability or not.
A paralyzing fear of breaking production with incompatible patches. Separation of duties - information security owns vulnerabilities but IT owns patching.
These are the old rocks. This is why there’s a massive accumulation of vulnerability debt. This is why tools like Mythos are so scary; they both find complex new zero-days and can simply capitalize on the "low-hanging fruit" we’ve ignored for years. Quite simply, if a patch takes months to test and deploy, you are defenseless against an automated script that can scan your entire perimeter in seconds. Mythos is the final proof that we need a fundamental shift in our thinking and behavior around vulnerability management, patching, and shipping of secure-by-design software.
The Real Takeaways
Not everything is an AI Problem: Mythos is a vulnerability management problem, not an existential AI crisis.
A Fundamental Shift in Behaviors is the Only Answer: You cannot fight the speed and thoroughness of a Mythos-equipped attacker with a manual, ticket-based patching process.
Focus on the Fundamentals: Follow first principles:
Automate patching for end-user devices. The risks are super low.
Patch quickly on production. The risk-reward calculation of breach versus downtime may merit this in many environments.
Check on microsegmentation to limit blast radius.
Check on role assignments and IAM permissions for cloud environments. Use dedicated roles with limited permissions.
Use containers and serverless compute infrastructure that limits the package inventory.
Automate patching wherever possible.
Demand better from software vendors.
Tear down organizational walls between infosec and IT.
The post Myth and Mythos: A Decades Old Problem in the Spotlight – FireTail Blog appeared first on Security Boulevard.
SUNNYVALE, Calif., Apr. 15, 2026 – NTT Research, Inc., a division of NTT (TYO:9432), today announced the launch of Scale Academy, a startup incubator responsible for bringing to market products and services based upon technologies studied within the … (more…)
The post News Alert: NTT Research launches SaltGrain—advanced Attribute-Based Encryption security first appeared on The Last Watchdog.
The post News Alert: NTT Research launches SaltGrain—advanced Attribute-Based Encryption security appeared first on Security Boulevard.
AI prompt injection attacks exploit the permissions your AI tools hold. Learn what they are, how they work, and how to prevent them before damage spreads.
The post AI Prompt Injection Attacks: Examples & Prevention | Grip appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Email is still the default system of record for sensitive decisions across modern organizations. Contracts negotiated in threads, pricing approvals in quick replies, board materials, incident updates, M&A diligence questions, and patient or customer details all move through inboxes because email is fast, familiar, and universally accessible. Billions of emails are processed every day in..
The post Encryption Without Friction: Making Quantum-Safe Security Invisible for Users appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Flashpoint’s latest milestone of surpassing 7,000 known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs) cataloged highlights how vulnerability management programs are evolving toward prioritization as a core capability.
The post Flashpoint Surpasses Cataloging 7,000 Known Exploited Vulnerabilities as Disclosure Volume Accelerates appeared first on Flashpoint.
The post Flashpoint Surpasses Cataloging 7,000 Known Exploited Vulnerabilities as Disclosure Volume Accelerates appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Author, Creator & Presenter: Aaron Grattafiori, Principle Offensive Al Security Researcher At NVIDIA & Skyler Bingham, Principal Applied Researcher At NVIDIA
Our thanks to [un]prompted for publishing their Creators, Authors and Presenter’s outstanding [un]prompted 2026 AI Security Practitioner content on the Organizations' YouTube Channel.
The post [un]prompted 2026 – Tenderizing The Target appeared first on Security Boulevard.
What Are Shadow Admins in AD? A common problem we encounter within many customer AD environments are accounts that, at first glance, may appear innocuous, but that actually have hidden administrative privileges equivalent to those of a domain administrator account. We call these accounts shadow admins. They represent one of the most persistent shadow admin […]
The post Shadow Admins in Active Directory: Hidden Privilege Paths Attackers Exploit appeared first on Praetorian.
The post Shadow Admins in Active Directory: Hidden Privilege Paths Attackers Exploit appeared first on Security Boulevard.
A Step-by-Step Breakdown of Pre-Change Assessment (PCA) Firewall changes are where good intentions turn into outages. A rule gets opened to restore an application. A port is widened to troubleshoot...
The post How FireMon Evaluates Firewall Changes Before Deployment appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Series Note: This article is Part Four of our ongoing series on AI‑driven side‑channel attacks and the architectural shifts required to defend against them. If you missed Part Three, you can read it here.
In the first three posts of this series, we explored the growing gap between AI workloads and the secure networking architectures meant to protect them. We looked at how traditional tunnels expose metadata, how fixed paths create predictable patterns, and how latency and packet loss destabilize AI pipelines. The conclusion was clear: AI has outgrown legacy secure networking.
So, what replaces it?
This post breaks down the architectural principles behind a stealth, multipath, Zero Trust transport layer which is the kind of foundation AI systems need to operate securely, reliably, and at full performance. Rather than focusing on a specific implementation, we’ll examine the core design patterns that define this new class of transport.
1. Stealth Networking: Making Data-in-Motion UnobservableStealth networking begins with a simple premise: If an adversary can’t see your traffic, they can’t target it, analyze it, or disrupt it. Traditional secure networking encrypts payloads but leaves everything else exposed, including endpoints, tunnels, timing, volume, and routing. Stealth networking eliminates these exposures.
No discoverable tunnels:
Instead of creating a stable, identifiable conduit between two endpoints, stealth networking distributes traffic across multiple ephemeral paths. There is no single tunnel to find, fingerprint, or attack.
No exposed control plane:
Legacy architectures rely on centralized controllers that advertise their presence. Stealth architectures hide the control plane entirely, making it invisible to unauthorized observers.
No predictable metadata:
Traffic patterns are intentionally obfuscated. Timing, volume, and directionality are blended across paths, making side-channel inference dramatically harder. Stealth isn’t about secrecy for secrecy’s sake. It’s about removing the structural visibility on which attackers rely.
AI workloads are sensitive to latency, jitter, and loss. Traditional tunnels serialize traffic through a single path, amplifying all three. Multipath transport takes the opposite approach.
Traffic is split across many paths
Instead of sending packets through one route, multipath architectures divide traffic into smaller units and send them across multiple independent paths. This creates several advantages:
Paths are independent and heterogeneous
Multipath transport can use any available connectivity, including fiber, wireless, satellite, public internet, and private links to blend them into a single logical channel.
Loss is absorbed, not amplified
If a packet is lost on one path, the system retransmits only that fragment, not an entire encrypted frame. This dramatically improves performance in lossy environments. For AI workloads that depend on consistent, high-volume data movement, multipath transport removes the network as a bottleneck.
3. Dynamic Path Shifting: Breaking Traffic Patterns Before They FormEven multipath transport can become predictable if paths remain static. That’s why dynamic path shifting is essential.
Routes change continuously:
Paths are selected, evaluated, and replaced in real time. No route persists long enough to become a fingerprint.
Adversaries can’t build a pattern:
Because traffic is constantly moving across different paths, attackers can’t correlate timing, volume, or directionality.
Performance adapts to real-world conditions:
If a path becomes congested or degraded, traffic shifts automatically without interrupting the workload. Dynamic path shifting is the antidote to the static, predictable nature of traditional tunnels.
Zero Trust is often discussed at the application or identity layer, but AI workloads need Zero Trust in the transport layer itself.
AI workloads don’t run in perfect networks. They run in the real world, across remote sites, mobile networks, cross‑region cloud paths, and contested environments. A resilient transport layer must deliver:
AI systems can’t afford to fail gracefully. They need to operate reliably, even when the network doesn’t.
6. What This Architecture Enables for AIA stealth, multipath, Zero Trust transport layer isn’t just a security upgrade. It’s an enabler for the next generation of AI deployments.
This is the transport layer AI systems have been waiting for ... one designed for the realities of modern workloads and modern adversaries.
Conclusion: The Network Becomes an Advantage, Not a LiabilityFor decades, secure networking has been a necessary compromise: encrypt the payload, accept the performance hit, and hope the tunnel holds. AI breaks that compromise. The stakes are too high, the workloads too demanding, and the adversaries too capable.
A stealth, multipath, Zero Trust transport layer flips the equation. The network becomes:
In Blog #5, we’ll explore how organizations can evaluate whether their current networking stack is ready for AI, and what signals indicate it’s time to update.
Get Expert HelpIf you’re modernizing your AI infrastructure, our architects can help you evaluate what your current network will need to support it.
📞 Book a strategy session with Dispersive: www.dispersive.io
Header image courtesy of StockCake.
The post Inside a Stealth, Multipath, Zero Trust Transport Layer for AI appeared first on Security Boulevard.
5 min readA developer needs to connect a service to an API. The documentation says to generate an API key, store it in an environment variable and pass it in a header. Five minutes later, the integration works.
The post API Keys vs. JWTs: Choosing the Right Auth Method for Your API appeared first on Aembit.
The post API Keys vs. JWTs: Choosing the Right Auth Method for Your API appeared first on Security Boulevard.
6 min readAI agents are no longer just chatbots. They're executing multistep workflows across tools and data sources, and the Model Context Protocol (MCP) standardizes these interactions.
The post MCP Threat Modeling: Understanding the Attack Surface appeared first on Aembit.
The post MCP Threat Modeling: Understanding the Attack Surface appeared first on Security Boulevard.
6 min readZero trust has reshaped how organizations secure user access. Multifactor authentication, single sign-on and continuous posture checks are now standard for human identities. But the same rigor rarely extends to the nonhuman side of the house.
The post Zero Trust for Nonhuman Workload Access: A Primer appeared first on Aembit.
The post Zero Trust for Nonhuman Workload Access: A Primer appeared first on Security Boulevard.
The post Aligning security investment to achieve favorable insurance terms appeared first on Resilience.
The post Aligning security investment to achieve favorable insurance terms appeared first on Security Boulevard.
SANTA CLARA, Calif., Apr 15, 2026 – Recently, Forrester, an international authoritative research firm, officially released The Operational Technology Security Solutions Landscape, Q1 2026[1]. NSFOCUS was successfully selected for the OT/industrial security field with its technical strength, product system and industry practice, becoming one of the representative manufacturers in the Asia-Pacific region’s OT security field among […]
The post NSFOCUS Received International Recognition among Representative Vendors of OT Security with Geographic Focus in Asia Pacific appeared first on NSFOCUS, Inc., a global network and cyber security leader, protects enterprises and carriers from advanced cyber attacks..
The post NSFOCUS Received International Recognition among Representative Vendors of OT Security with Geographic Focus in Asia Pacific appeared first on Security Boulevard.
ShinyHunters is claiming access to a large set of CRM data tied to Cisco, including Salesforce records, AWS assets, and GitHub repositories, and threatening to extort with it. Whether you’re a security analyst trying to understand what’s being alleged or a defender trying to quickly validate exposure, the practical question is the same: what evidence..
The post Cisco CRM “Salesforce Data Breach” Claims Tied to ShinyHunters: What Defenders Should Look For and How to Respond appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Learn how to secure Model Context Protocol proxies with post-quantum cryptographic agility. Protect AI infrastructure against future quantum threats with hybrid encryption.
The post Post-Quantum Cryptographic Agility in Model Context Protocol Proxies appeared first on Security Boulevard.
Microsoft today pushed software updates to fix a staggering 167 security vulnerabilities in its Windows operating systems and related software, including a SharePoint Server zero-day and a publicly disclosed weakness in Windows Defender dubbed "BlueHammer." Separately, Google Chrome fixed its fourth zero-day of 2026, and an emergency update for Adobe Reader nixes an actively exploited flaw that can lead to remote code execution.
The post Patch Tuesday, April 2026 Edition appeared first on Security Boulevard.
