❌

Normal view

Long-Hidden Flaws Patched in EPICS Research Facility Control Software

28 October 2026 at 11:48

Four EPICS Base flaws found by an autonomous system could let attackers crash processes at particle accelerators and fusion labs.

The post Long-Hidden Flaws Patched in EPICS Research Facility Control Software appeared first on SecurityWeek.

What Is Phishing? Recognizing and Preventing Attacks

By: Sucuri
27 October 2026 at 17:52
What Is Phishing? Recognizing and Preventing Attacks

Phishing is an attack in which someone impersonates a person or organization you trust, like your host, registrar, bank, or colleague, in order to steal information, redirect a payment, or talk you into an action that helps them. The message is the delivery vehicle, and the goal is always the next action you take.

If you run a website, you’re on both sides of this problem. Your hosting panel, domain registrar, WordPress admin, email, and payment accounts are all valuable targets, and if an attacker gets in through any of them, your site can quietly end up hosting phishing pages aimed at someone else’s customers.

Continue reading What Is Phishing? Recognizing and Preventing Attacks at Sucuri Blog.

Patient records exposed in Quest breach: What you need to know

26 October 2026 at 12:34

Quest Diagnostics has confirmed that an unauthorized party accessed a system healthcare providers use to order laboratory tests and view results, affecting personal information and patient records.

Quest is a major US laboratory testing company whose services help healthcare professionals diagnose and monitor medical conditions. Those services range from routine laboratory testing to specialized testing in areas such as cancer, infectious diseases, and neurology.

What happened and what was stolen?

The company learned of unauthorized access to its Quanum Lab Services Manager, or LSM, on October 21. The compromised platform lets healthcare professionals order tests, access results, review historical trends, and order supplies. Quest paused access to the platform and began investigating. Quest says its core business operations remain up and running.

An investigation is ongoing. Quest has not yet published a count of affected patients or a complete list of the information accessed. It says it will notify affected patients, healthcare providers, and health plans.

The company said:

β€œpersonal information and patient records were affected.”

It confirms that health information and personally identifiable information were involved, but has not specified whether these included Social Security numbers, insurance identifiers, payment information, particular test results, or account passwords.

What patients can do now

Quest says it will send notification letters to affected patients once its investigation is complete. Those letters will describe available resources, including credit and identity monitoring. If you receive one, read it carefully and follow the instructions. You can also check the FAQs posted in Quest’s breach notice for updates.


Someone’sΒ watching your accounts. Make sure it’s us.


A breach does not automatically mean someone has misused your information, but you can take these precautions while you wait for more details:

  • Verify unexpected messages independently. Don’t let a message about the breach rush you into clicking a link, sharing sensitive information, or making a payment. Go to Quest’s official website yourself or use contact details you already trust.
  • Review medical bills and insurance statements. Look for appointments, tests, prescriptions, or services you did not receive. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) identifies unfamiliar medical bills and unexpected items on an Explanation of Benefits statement, which explains how your insurer processed a claim, as warning signs of medical identity theft. Report discrepancies to your healthcare provider and your insurer.
  • Review your credit reports. Look for unfamiliar accounts or debts and dispute errors. Free reports are available through AnnualCreditReport.com.
  • Act if you find signs of identity theft. Visit IdentityTheft.gov for a recovery plan. If someone has received care in your name, ask the providers involved for copies of your medical records and request corrections in writing.

Medical identity theft is not just a financial problem; it can also affect your care. Someone using your identity to obtain treatment or submit insurance claims could introduce incorrect information into your health records. Checking medical statements and reporting anything unfamiliar can help you catch that misuse.


Let’sΒ face it, an incognito window can only do so much.Β 
Β 
Breaches, dark web trading, credit fraud. Malwarebytes Identity Theft ProtectionΒ monitors for all of it, alerts you fast, and comes with identity theft insurance.Β 

DHS Inspector General Finds That TSA is Not Properly Safeguarding Passenger Facial Recognition Data

14 October 2026 at 22:27

EFF legal intern Gabrielle Ladun was the principal author of this post.Β 

The Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) has published a summary of findings from its audit of the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) facial recognition technology. While the detailed findings are classified, the summary states that the OIG’s audit uncovered a β€œsignificant weakness” in the technology’s ability to protect the privacy of passenger data. This has massive privacy implications for the millions of passengers who travel and don’t opt out of the TSA’s biometric surveillance technology verification process.Β 

TSA uses facial comparison technology for identity verification of airline passengers. A camera takes a photo of passengers to verify that their provided identification matches their live photo. Although TSA states that it is β€œcommitted to protecting traveler privacy,” the audit highlights that this has not been the case.Β Β 

The OIG found that TSA’s Credential Authentication Technology 2’s (CAT-2) vendor β€œwas able to access and extract sensitive passenger information, including driver’s license and passport images, during system troubleshooting and enhancements, without TSA’s knowledge.”  

The OIG further admonished the agency:Β Β 

TSA lacked clear policies, did not track when this data was extracted, could not verify that extracted information was properly deleted, and did not notify passengers when their biometric and biographic information may have been stored. As a result, although passenger information was generally protected during routine operations, weaknesses in vendor oversight created a risk that sensitive personal information could be retained or exposed.Β 

We hope the TSA will fix these issues. The OIG summary states:Β 

We issued one finding and three recommendations to strengthen controls, improve oversight, and ensure transparency and the proper handling of passenger data. TSA concurred with all three recommendations. Two recommendations are open and resolved, and one remains open and unresolved.Β 

Why EFF Opposes the Government’s Use of Facial Recognition TechnologyΒ 

EFF has a long history of opposing governmental use of facial recognition technology. As the OIG’s audit underscores, this technology presents privacy risks associated with unsecured data, unauthorized access, and data breaches. The government’s use of this technology also creates a mass surveillance system and facilitates the creation of warrantless biometric records for unconsenting parties.Β Β 

The biometric data captured by this technology is not without errors. There have been multiple instances of law enforcement agencies using facial recognition technology to misidentify and arrest innocent individuals. Β 

Reminder: Opting Out of TSA Photos Is PossibleΒ 

Given that facial recognition technology is prone to mistakes, combined with the OIG’s audit revealing significant privacy weaknesses, it is imperative that travelers remember that opting out is possible. TSA’s own website emphasizes that travelers who wish to decline to have their photo taken for facial comparison can do so without any delay, disruption, or recourse.Β Β 

Considering the data protection weaknesses exposed by the OIG’s audit, EFF will continue to oppose this governmental system of mass surveillance and spread awareness to ensure that no one is forced to relinquish their biometric data without consent.Β 

Indurex Raises $8 Million to Expand Industrial Cybersecurity Platform

22 October 2026 at 15:00

The Amsterdam-based company plans to use the funding for research and development and commercial expansion in Europe and the Middle East.

The post Indurex Raises $8 Million to Expand Industrial Cybersecurity Platform appeared first on SecurityWeek.

OpenAI agent breached Australian government site, took months to report it

24 September 2026 at 15:22


An OpenAI agent didn’t take β€œno” for an answer when it encountered a government website’s access controls. It got through, prompting Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to raise his concerns directly with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.

The BBC reports that an OpenAI agent gained unauthorized access to an Australian government statistics portal while carrying out internal research. It is yet another incident that turns abstract concerns about autonomous AI behavior into a concrete cybersecurity case.

Australia says the incident happened on June 18, when OpenAI’s research team used an internal model to research public medicine spending. Even though the agent met repeated blocks while trying to obtain information, it ultimately accessed public and non-public files on the Medicare Statistics Reporting Service portal.

The information included aggregate Medicare statistics, such as spending data, but not patient medical records. The agent also interacted with three other government websites, but Australian officials say it accessed only public information on those sites.

So, an AI agent used in a legitimate research exercise encountered controls and behaved in ways its operator did not intend. After being blocked, it β€œfound a way around those blocks,” gaining access to areas it should not have reached.

This sequence is familiar to security professionals. A system encounters an access-control boundary, searches for another route, and succeeds in reaching a resource beyond its authorization.

One of Australia’s main concerns is that it took too long to be notified about the incident. The unauthorized access occurred in June. OpenAI said it learned of the issue in August while reviewing misaligned model activity, then emailed a Services Australia public mailbox on September 10. Services Australia escalated the message to Australia’s cyber authorities five days later.

Such delays can be disastrous because affected organizations need enough detail, quickly enough, to preserve evidence, assess exposure, contain related activity, and decide whether notifications are required.

AI misalignment

OpenAI describes behavior in which a model acts without authorization or evades oversight as β€œmisalignment.” Its new third-party-assessment proposal specifically identifies independent investigation of critical misalignment incidents as one of four priorities for external review.

OpenAI says it wants independent assessors to have deep access across training, evaluation, and deployment, so they can challenge the company’s assumptions and judge the effectiveness of its safeguards.

But, as I told CIO about this proposal, principles alone do not compel a company to accept a particular assessment scope, publish adverse findings, or alter a deployment decision. Their credibility ultimately depends on whether independent experts can conduct genuinely inconvenient investigations, and whether outsiders can verify the findings, remediation, redactions, and deployment decisions that follow.

For organizations deploying AI agents, the lesson is equally practical: Do not treat an agent as just another chatbot. Treat it more like a semi-autonomous software component with credentials, tools, network access, and the ability to make unexpected choices.

Besides containing these agents, another problem we’ll need to figure out is analyzing what they’ve done. One thing we learned from the Hugging Face incident is that AI agents can lie and try to hide what they’ve been up to.

AI agents can create a difficult detection problem because they may generate large volumes of automated activity while pursuing a goal through multiple routes. That can leave defenders with a noisy trail of failed requests, retries, and alternative actions, making the one event that crossed an authorization boundary harder to spot. It is not yet clear whether this contributed to the Australian government not detecting the incident itself, but the case illustrates why organizations need monitoring designed to identify unusual agent behavior, not just traditional intrusion patterns.

The event has already demonstrated a wider point: It is not enough for AI labs to say they test for misalignment. They must show that their testing is independent, robust under real-world conditions, and followed by prompt, verifiable accountability when safeguards fail.


Let’sΒ face it, an incognito window can only do so much.Β 
Β 
Breaches, dark web trading, credit fraud. Malwarebytes Identity Theft ProtectionΒ monitors for all of it, alerts you fast, and comes with identity theft insurance.Β 

Group Policy hijacked: PAYLOAD ransomware weaponizes Active Directory GPO

Executive summary

In April 2026, we at Kaspersky’s Global Emergency Response Team (GERT) responded to a security incident at a manufacturing organization in the Middle East. The threat actor obtained domain admin-equivalent control of the organization’s Active Directory environment and authored a malicious Group Policy Object (GPO) named PAYLOAD, linking it at the domain root. Through that single object, the actor delivered ransom notes, hijacked the desktop wallpaper and lock screen, enforced a logon banner, and disabled the local administrator account across every domain-joined Windows workstation β€” all without dropping a ransomware binary or encrypting any data. The only ransomware we found in this incident was PAYLOAD sample targeting ESXi on Linux servers. Besides that, data exfiltration was observed originating from the file servers and several additional systems, and was later published on the dark web.

This case is an example of two converging trends that define the 2026 ransomware landscape:

  1. Living-off-the-land abuse of trusted AD infrastructure. Group Policy is a signed, allowlisted, SYSTEM-privileged distribution channel that the majority of endpoint detection and response tools is designed not to inspect. By delivering impact through GPO rather than through malware, the actor sidestepped the entire file- and process-based detection stack.
  2. Encryptionless extortion. Industry telemetry shows extortion-only incidents grow significantly year-on-year. PAYLOAD fits this model; the leverage is operational disruption and the threat of escalation rather than cryptographic denial of data.

We confirmed that no files were encrypted on Windows machines, no malicious binaries were resident on disk, no endpoint persistence was established, and no malicious processes were running at the time of analysis. The entire attack lived inside Active Directory itself. The defensive implication is stark: an organization whose detection strategy depends on catching a ransomware executable would have seen nothing until the first endpoint rebooted and the ransom wallpaper appeared.

In this article, we will describe the GPO attack chain and provide operational advice on how to detect such threats, including detailed remediation recommendations.

Group Policy as an attack surface

Attacks through group policies are nothing new. They can inflict significant, domain-wide damage with multiple malicious capabilities. A Group Policy Object (GPO) is essentially a combination of a Group Policy Container (GPC) in Active Directory and a Group Policy Template (GPT) in SYSVOL. The Group Policy scope depends on whether the GPC is linked to the directory tree at the domain, site, or organization unit (OU) level. A link at the domain root means the policy applies to every computer and user object beneath it. Thus, a GPO compromised at the domain root can affect all in-scope domain users and computers, potentially granting an attacker complete control over the corporate network. What makes GPO abuse even more dangerous is that group policies are processed in a trusted, high-privilege environment, ensuring persistence because endpoint cleanup is not enough to remove them.

We have already discussed GPO architecture and ways it can be compromised in greater detail in an earlier blog post. Other public threat intelligence has also repeatedly documented this technique in ransomware operations. Microsoft observed Ryuk operators distributing ransomware through Group Policy, SYSVOL startup items, and PsExec. LockBit affiliates have been documented modifying SYSVOL Group Policy files, including ScheduledTasks.xml, to support ransomware execution and propagation. BlackCat/ALPHV operators have also abused GPOs to create scheduled tasks and deploy ransomware.

Another notable example of GPO abuse is PAYLOAD ransomware, which weaponizes GPO Preferences and policy settings for pure impact rather than as a launcher for an encryptor. Let’s take a closer look at this attack, which is detailed further below.

Attack timeline

During the April 2026 investigation, we managed to reconstruct the attack timeline as outlined below:

Date Event
11 April Initial access. Threat actor authenticates to the FortiGate SSL VPN using a valid but compromised domain credential.
13 April GPO authored. Malicious GPO, PAYLOAD ({C897F2C7-C2AC-4E6F-BF48-58036FF29E79}) created and linked at the domain root, configuring ransom notes, wallpaper, lock screen, logon banner, and administrator account disablement.
13 April SYSVOL staging. The payload.jpg and hello.txt files written to \\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol\THECOMPANY.local\.
13 April Second GPO. GPO named win Firewall Off ({22099AD2-E062-4F56-B574-5099BBA4E7A6}) linked at the domain root, disabling Windows Firewall on all profiles.
13 April Dormancy. GPO cached on endpoints but computer configuration not yet applied β€” no endpoint had rebooted since the policy update.
13 April Data exfiltration. Data exfiltration was observed originating from the file servers and several additional systems.
14 April Detonation. Most of the endpoints begin rebooting; computer configuration policies apply. Ransom wallpaper, logon banner, and notes appear. Operational disruption begins.
15 April Response. Kaspersky GERT engaged. Forensic triage of affected workstations and the domain controller initiated.
16 April Assessment. GERT confirms no file encryption, no resident malware, no endpoint persistence.

Next, we will discuss each of these stages in more detail and share the findings from our incident response activities.

Incident overview

Initial access

The entry vector was a compromised valid account (MITRE ATT&CK T1078) used to authenticate through the organization’s FortiGate SSL VPN β€” an external remote service (T1133). Insufficient logging on the FortiGate appliance prevented us from reconstructing how the credential was originally compromised.

Three hypotheses were considered plausible in the context of the attack, in no particular order:

  • Password spraying or credential stuffing against the SSL VPN portal.
  • Phishing-led credential harvesting.
  • Purchase of pre-compromised credentials from an initial access broker (IAB).

Once on the internal network, the actor operated with the compromised security principal’s privileges. Because the account was able to create and link a GPO at the domain root, it held either domain admin privileges or a delegated equivalent (e.g., membership of Group Policy Creator Owners combined with link rights on the domain object).

FortiGate SSL VPN authentication logs and ESXi/virtualization privilege escalation logs were insufficient to reconstruct the lateral movement and privilege escalation chain between initial VPN access and the GPO write privilege level. The most common real-world routes to GPO control β€” DCSync, Kerberoasting of privileged service accounts, and Pass-the-Hash/Pass-the-Ticket β€” could not be confirmed or ruled out.

Execution

Rather than deploying an encryptor, the actor abused the victim’s Active Directory policy infrastructure, resulting in malicious GPOs being configured and linked at the domain root to deliver the observed impact across domain-joined systems. The two GPOs below constitute the entire offensive toolkit observed.

The PAYLOAD GPO

We performed a Resultant Set of Policy (RSOP) analysis, which helped us list all policy settings on the affected workstations. From these results, we reconstructed the following changes delivered by PAYLOAD:

GPO extension/CSE Setting/path Configured value/resulting action
Files (Group Policy Preference) Source SYSVOL\hello.txt β†’ Desktop, C:\, D:\ Dropped as README-payload.txt (ReadOnly)
Registry (Computer) HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System\legalnoticecaption Welcome to Payload!
Registry (Computer) HKLM\…\Policies\System\legalnoticetext (ransom demand text)
Personalization Policy Lock Screen Image \\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol…\payload.jpg
Desktop Policy (User) Wallpaper path \\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol…\payload.jpg
Security Settings (GptTmpl.inf) Accounts: Administrator account status Disabled

The PAYLOAD GPO enabled the following actions:

  1. Drop SYSVOL\hello.txt to the desktop and root directories C:\ and D:\ as a read-only README-payload.txt by tampering with the β€œGroup Policy Files” client-side extension (CSE).
  2. Modify the HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Policies\System\ registry key, changing the legalnoticecaption value to "Welcome to Payload!" and the legalnoticetext to the ransom note text through the β€œGroup Policy Registry” CSE.
  3. Set payload.jpg located in the targeted domain controller’s SYSVOL as the lock screen image by altering the personalization policy, and as the wallpaper by altering the desktop policy at the user level.
  4. Revoke administrator rights for the administrator account (locking the account) by editing the Security Settings CSE in the GptTmpl.inf file.

Settings changed by PAYLOAD GPO
Settings changed by PAYLOAD GPO
Settings changed by PAYLOAD GPO
Settings changed by PAYLOAD GPO

Settings changed by PAYLOAD GPO

This activity was enabled entirely through a legitimate group policy mechanism, meaning there is no malware code for security solutions to look for because the malicious logic is contained within the policy configuration.

The win Firewall Off GPO

A second domain-root-linked GPO, named β€œwin Firewall Off”, disabled Windows Firewall across the domain, private and public profiles on all endpoints (T1562.004). Deployed independently of PAYLOAD, this object degraded host defenses and ensured the actor retained unimpeded network reach to endpoints for any follow-on activity.

Settings changed by win Firewall Off GPO

Settings changed by win Firewall Off GPO

The one-day delay detonation

The most forensically instructive detail is the one-day gap between GPO creation (13 April) and visible impact (14 April). Analysis of Master File Table (MFT) timestamps and the Group Policy History registry key confirmed the policy was written to SYSVOL and cached on endpoints on 13 April. However, computer configuration settings (wallpaper and lock screen machine policy, security settings, firewall disabling) only apply upon reboot or policy refresh β€” and no endpoint had rebooted in the interim. The attack therefore remained dormant in the GPO cache for one day before detonating en masse when machines were restarted in accordance with standard procedures.

We have to point out here that this delayed policy application is characteristic of GPO-based operations and has two potential consequences for defenders. Firstly, it may grant the actor a quiet window for exfiltration, persistence, or further staging between weaponization and impact. Secondly, it can be used to sever the temporal link between the cause (a GPO-creation event in the directory log) and the effect (mass user-visible disruption occurring at a later time), complicating timeline reconstruction unless directory service auditing is in place.

Forensic findings

Initial incident response engagement revealed a number of findings associated with the attack that we share below.

  1. No file encryption
    A full review of the MFT on affected workstations found no files bearing a .payload extension characteristic to PAYLOAD ransomware and no evidence of bulk renaming or encryption I/O patterns. The attackers’ objectives were operational disruption and extortion via visual impact and access denial.
  2. No endpoint persistence
    All standard persistence locations were clean:
    • Scheduled tasks β€” no malicious tasks
    • Run/RunOnce keys β€” clean
    • Startup folders (user and system) β€” clean
    • Services β€” no malicious service installed
    • WMI event subscriptions β€” none
    • Boot sector/MBR β€” unmodified

    The attack’s persistence mechanism is the GPO link itself on the domain controller, with no endpoint-resident component.

  3. No active malicious processes
    Live process and memory analysis revealed no injected threads, process hollowing or anomalous outbound connections.
  4. Registry timeline analysis
    Group Policy History, Shadow and State registry keys on the workstation recorded the application of PAYLOAD on 13 April:
    HKLM\…\Group Policy\History\{35378EAC-683F-11D2-A89A-00C04FBBCFA2}\1
    HKLM\…\Group Policy\Shadow\{827D319E-6EAC-11D2-A4EA-00C04F79F83A}\0
    HKLM\…\Group Policy\State\Machine\GPO-List\7
    HKCU\…\Group Policy\History\{7150F9BF-48AD-4da4-A49C-29EF4A8369BA}\1
    HKCU\…\Group Policy\State\S-1-5-21-…\Loopback-GPO-List\5
    The presence of the β€œLoopback-GPO-List” entry indicates the GPO was processed in loopback mode, ensuring the user configuration (wallpaper) applied regardless of which user logged on to the machine.
  5. SYSVOL artifacts
    Two files were staged on the domain controller’s SYSVOL share and served to endpoints through the Files Group Policy Preference CSE:
    • payload.jpg β€” the ransom image used for both wallpaper and lock screen.
    • hello.txt β€” the ransom note, distributed to desktops and drive roots as README-payload.txt.

Detection engineering

Because no malicious binary or process exists, the detection logic should focus on the directory service and SYSVOL indicators. Below are the highest-value telemetry sources for identifying the described malicious activity.

  • Directory service change auditing (DS Access)
    Enable Advanced Audit Policy β†’ DS Access β†’ Audit Directory Service Changes on all domain controllers and set up alerts for the following events:
    Event ID Meaning Hunt focus
    5137 A directory service object was created The account that created new groupPolicyContainer objects must be an authorized GPO administrator
    5136 A directory service object was modified Changes to gPLink on the domain root or sensitive organizational units; changes to gPCMachineExtensionNames/gPCUserExtensionNames/gPCFileSysPath/versionNumber for all GPOs
    5141 A directory service object was deleted GPO deletions (relevant for tamper detection and remediation assessment)

    A gPLink modification at the domain root by a non-standard account is one of the most telling indicators of this attack class.

  • SYSVOL file integrity monitoring
    Monitor \\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol\THECOMPANY.local\Policies\ for unexpected files, particularly image files, text files, scripts, ScheduledTasks.xml, and modified registry.pol/GptTmpl.inf files that were created by sources other than legitimate replication.
  • Endpoint policy application telemetry
    On endpoints, GPO application is logged in the Group Policy Operational log (Microsoft-Windows-GroupPolicy/Operational) and reflected in the History and Shadow registry keys shown above. A sudden domain-wide change to the applied policy set is a strong post-detonation signal.
  • Missing 5136 events
    If the contents of a GPO’s SYSVOL change without a corresponding 5136 event, this can indicate direct SYSVOL/template editing (e.g., via open-source tools such as PowerView or SharpGPOAbuse) that bypasses the normal Group Policy Management Console (GPMC) modification path. While we recommend treating the absence of expected audit events as suspicious, it should be noted that this can be caused by misconfigured auditing.

Anti-forensics and recovery-inhibition capabilities

Confirmed PAYLOAD family capabilities

The Windows endpoint attack described in this report was implemented through malicious Group Policy Objects and did not involve a recovered ransomware executable, resident endpoint malware, confirmed file encryption or active malicious processes at the time of the forensic examination. However, PAYLOAD cryptomalware for Windows does exist, and other sources, including public analysis of its samples, reveal further malicious capabilities of this ransomware that could be used by security teams to enrich detection logic and security policies.

The behaviors documented in this section must therefore be interpreted as family-level capabilities identified through the public reverse engineering of PAYLOAD ransomware samples. They were not confirmed as having executed during the GPO-based incident unless corresponding evidence was identified in the host, memory, process, event-log, or hypervisor.

Windows Event Log clearing

Public reverse engineering of the PAYLOAD Windows variant reveals an optional event log clearing capability (T1685.005, formerly T1070.001). The ransomware dynamically resolves Windows Event Log APIs, enumerates available event log channels, and clears individual channels.

Implementation artifacts include:

  • Runtime loading of wevtapi.dll
  • EvtOpenChannelEnum
  • EvtNextChannelPath
  • EvtClearLog
  • Enumeration of Security, System, Application, and PowerShell logs, and operational channels
  • A command-line option controlling whether log clearing is performed

Clearing event logs reduces the availability of records related to process execution, authentication, PowerShell, service control, and system changes. However, it does not necessarily remove events that were already forwarded to a SIEM, Windows Event Collector, EDR backend, or protected log archive.

Forensic indicators
  • Windows Security Event ID 1102
  • Event logging shutdown or failure events
  • Sudden reductions in event record identifiers
  • Multiple event channels restarting from low record numbers
  • Gaps between endpoint and centrally forwarded telemetry
  • Execution of utilities or APIs associated with log management
  • Direct access to EVTX files (Windows Event Log files) under the Windows event log directory

We should note that these indicators can’t be interpreted on their own. For instance, Event ID 1102 should be correlated with a number of aggravating factors, such as:

  • Event ID 4688 or Sysmon Event ID 1 for process creation
  • Event ID 4624 for the associated administrative logon
  • EDR process trees
  • PowerShell operational logging
  • Windows Event Forwarding records
  • Privileged access management activity

At the same time, the absence of Event ID 1102 does not prove that log clearing did not occur. Direct deletion, truncation, service impairment, or an incomplete audit configuration may produce different evidence.

Security process and service termination

PAYLOAD analysis reveals that the Windows ransomware variant contains logic that targets security processes and services (T1685 and T1489). This capability is intended to stop security products, backup software, database services, and applications that may lock files targeted for encryption.
Process and service termination serves several objectives:

  1. Reduce endpoint detection and response visibility.
  2. Release file handles so data can be modified.
  3. Interrupt backup and recovery services.
  4. Prevent databases and enterprise applications from protecting active data.
  5. Reduce interference with encryption operations.
Forensic indicators
  • Security agent services changing from running to stopped
  • Event ID 7036 service state changes
  • Event ID 7040 service start type changes
  • Event ID 4688 or Sysmon Event ID 1 for service control utilities
  • Sysmon Event ID 5 for terminated processes
  • EDR health degradation affecting many endpoints
  • Repeated termination attempts against security or backup processes
  • Execution of dedicated process killing utilities

VSS deletion, backup and recovery suppression

Public PAYLOAD sample analysis reports the deletion of Windows Volume Shadow Copies before encryption (T1490). This behavior removes local restore points and reduces the victim’s ability to recover files without external backups.

Recovery inhibition is broader than VSS deletion and may include multiple other malicious techniques, including the following:

  • Deleting shadow copies, backup catalogs, and hypervisor snapshots
  • Disabling recovery services
  • Modifying boot recovery settings
  • Compromising backup management platforms
  • Deleting or encrypting backup repositories

In the PAYLOAD Windows sample that is proven to perform encryption, VSS deletion is confirmed to have taken place before encryption. A broader compromise of the backup platform was not established in the investigated incident.

Forensic indicators
  • Execution of shadow copy management utilities
  • Backup catalog deletion attempts
  • Recovery configuration changes
  • Backup service termination
  • Mass snapshot deletions
  • Backup administrator logons outside normal maintenance windows
  • Backup retention or immutability changes
  • Backup jobs failing immediately before disruptive activity

Ecosystem-relevant ransomware techniques

Above, we discussed the techniques specific to PAYLOAD ransomware. In this section, we’ll review other common ransomware techniques, such as BYOVD abuse and ESXi policy weakening, that remain relevant risks in the ransomware ecosystem. However, these techniques should not be attributed to this incident without supporting driver load, process, memory, ESXi, vCenter, or backup platform telemetry. We describe these techniques below as they may prove useful in other ransomware-related forensic investigations.

The examples used in this section are therefore ecosystem-relevant: they are commonly observed in ransomware operations but not conclusively attributed to the analyzed PAYLOAD samples.

ETW suppression and in-memory patching

Event Tracing for Windows (ETW) is a kernel-supported tracing architecture used by Windows components, diagnostic utilities, security products, and endpoint monitoring systems.

Although we didn’t encounter this technique in our case, some ransomware families can patch ETW-related functions inside the ransomware process (T1685, formerly T1562.001). The reported routine changes the memory protection of code pages, overwrites the beginning of selected ETW functions so they return without producing events, restores the original protection, and refreshes the instruction cache.

Reported target functions include EtwEventWrite, EtwEventWriteFull, EtwEventWriteTransfer, and EtwRegister.

This modification applies to the process-local mapping of ntdll.dll. It does not disable ETW globally across Windows, but it can reduce the telemetry generated by the modified process.

Forensic indicators
  • Writable or recently modified executable pages within ntdll.dll
  • Memory protection changes affecting ETW function addresses
  • In-memory code differing from the corresponding clean DLL on disk
  • EDR memory tampering alerts
  • Unexpected calls to memory protection APIs followed by telemetry silence
  • Process execution visible in network or filesystem telemetry but absent from expected ETW-derived sources
  • Inconsistent telemetry between EDR, Sysmon, Windows Event Logs, and network monitoring

It should be noted that telemetry gaps are not conclusive evidence of ETW patching. Other factors include agent upgrades, network outages, endpoint shutdowns, SIEM ingestion failures, collector backpressure, and filtering or licensing changes.

Memory acquisition is the strongest validation source when process-local ETW patching is suspected.

Vulnerable signed driver abuse, BYOVD

Bring Your Own Vulnerable Driver (BYOVD) involves introducing or abusing a legitimately signed but vulnerable kernel driver (T1068 and T1685). The attacker exploits the driver’s exposed functionality to gain kernel-level capabilities, modify protected memory, terminate security processes, remove security callbacks, or bypass operating system security controls.

BYOVD is highly relevant to contemporary ransomware operations. However, the reviewed public PAYLOAD analyses do not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that BYOVD is an intrinsic PAYLOAD capability.

It should therefore be presented as an ecosystem-relevant technique rather than a confirmed PAYLOAD feature.

Forensic indicators
  • Unexpected .sys files written to user-writable or temporary directories
  • New kernel driver services
  • Sysmon Event ID 6
  • Driver hashes matching Microsoft or community vulnerable driver blocklists
  • Invalid, revoked, expired, or unusual driver signatures
  • Driver load followed by EDR termination
  • New privileged processes immediately following driver loading
  • Code Integrity or Defender alerts
  • Service creation events referencing driver files

ESXi security policy weakening

Ransomware operators are increasingly targeting ESXi and vCenter because compromising the virtualization layer provides access to many business-critical virtual machines.

Public research typically describes operators performing the following activities (T1685, T1490 and T1489):

  • Enabling SSH on ESXi hosts
  • Changing root passwords
  • Disabling execInstalledOnly
  • Modifying lockdown mode exceptions
  • Stopping virtual machines
  • Deleting snapshots and backups
  • Changing host firewall policies
  • Copying custom ransomware binaries to hypervisors

On the target organization’s Linux servers we saw an ESXi PAYLOAD variant, which makes this behavior operationally relevant. Nevertheless, the reviewed evidence does not indicate that PAYLOAD operators used any of these policy-weakening actions in the investigated incident.

Forensic indicators
  • Unexpected ESXi SSH enablement
  • Changes to execInstalledOnly
  • Secure Boot enforcement changes
  • Lockdown mode configuration changes
  • Root password changes
  • New or unusual administrator accounts
  • Bulk VM shutdown activity
  • Bulk snapshot deletion
  • New binaries in datastore or temporary paths
  • vCenter tasks originating from unexpected accounts or systems
  • Missing or disabled remote syslog forwarding

Remediation

To contain the described threat and limit possible damage, several remediation steps should be taken. Below, we recommend a four-phase remediation approach for containing this threat and restoring the affected environment.

Phase 1 β€” domain controller actions (to be performed first)

When dealing with PAYLOAD GPO, the first priority of the remediation plan should be to remove the source GPOs. Until this is done, endpoint cleanup is ineffective because the next policy refresh re-infects cleaned machines.

The immediate domain controller actions to be taken are:

  1. Delete PAYLOAD GPO. Remove {C897F2C7-C2AC-4E6F-BF48-58036FF29E79} via GPMC.
  2. Delete or revert win Firewall Off GPO. Remove {22099AD2-E062-4F56-B574-5099BBA4E7A6}.
  3. Clean SYSVOL. Delete jpg and hello.txt from \\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol\THECOMPANY.local\.
  4. Rotate credentials. Reset the compromised account; audit all privileged accounts and group memberships for unauthorized changes; rotate krbtgt twice if domain admin compromise is confirmed.
  5. Force refresh. Perform gpupdate /force across endpoints after deletion; re-enable local administrator and firewall via clean policy.

Phase 2 β€” Active Directory and GPO hardening

  • Adopt the AD tiered administration model and confine domain admins to Tier 0 with no interactive logon to workstations and member servers.
  • Separate GPO creation from GPO linking rights, and grant both only to a dedicated, audited administrator role.
  • Enable GPO change auditing (Event IDs 5136, 5137, 5141) and forward to a SIEM.
  • Monitor SYSVOL with file integrity tooling.

Phase 3 β€” credential and access hardening

  • Enforce phishing-resistant MFA on all VPN and remote access entry points.
  • Deploy Windows LAPS to generate unique, rotated local administrator passwords.
  • Enable Credential Guard to protect LSASS-resident secrets.
  • Adopt Privileged Access Workstations (PAW) for all administration.
  • Implement just-in-time elevation through Privileged Identity Management (PIM) for domain admin.

Phase 4 β€” detection and monitoring

  • SIEM rule: GPO creation or domain-root gPLink change by a non-standard account.
  • SIEM rule: file creation events under SYSVOL from non-replication sources.
  • Implement enhanced, centrally collected FortiGate SSL VPN logging (auth events, session detail, source IP geolocation, impossible travel check) and detailed perimeter monitoring.
  • Deploy a canary GPO whose application anywhere signals attacker GPO write access.

Conclusion

PAYLOAD demonstrates a maturing tactic of turning the victim’s own trusted infrastructure into a weapon. By weaponizing Group Policy, the actor achieved a domain-wide impact without a single malicious binary on any endpoint, evaded file- and process-based detection entirely, and caused organization-wide disruption within seconds of the first reboot.

The absence of encryption is the most strategically significant finding and is consistent with the 2026 trend toward encryptionless extortion. At Kaspersky GERT, we assess with moderate confidence that the missing encryption reflects one of two scenarios: (1) a deliberate decision to stay below the irreversible data destruction threshold while preserving the option of a follow-on encryption phase, or (2) an operation interrupted before full execution.

The absence of encrypted files must not be mistaken for the absence of a serious compromise β€” the most critical impact lies in the actor gaining domain admin-level control. This incident proves that a threat actor with domain admin access and a working knowledge of group policy internals can inflict domain-wide disruption equivalent to a ransomware attack without writing a single malicious file to any endpoint.

Detection strategies anchored solely in file- or process-based indicators are blind to this attack class. Effective controls include directory service change auditing, SYSVOL integrity monitoring, and privileged access governance, which allow for GPO protection.

Detection by Kaspersky solutions

Kaspersky security solutions effectively detect the described malicious activity at various stages of the attack. Possible detection scenarios are listed below.
To protect organizations that use our Kaspersky SIEM system, we have prepared a package of correlation rules designed to help detect this type of malicious activity. The rules are now available for customers to download from the SIEM repository; the package name is: [OOTB] Group policy hijacked: PAYLOAD ransomware – ENG.

The β€œGroup policy hijacked: PAYLOAD ransomware” package contains rules that detect suspicious file creation or modification in the SYSVOL shared folder on a domain controller, as well as changes to critical attributes and settings of domain group policies. Some rules may require adjustment if they trigger in response to legitimate activity, such as synchronization between domain controllers or the configuration of a new group policy.

To ensure the detection rules function correctly, verify that events from Windows systems are being received in full, including events with the following identifiers: Sysmon: 11, Security β€” 4663, 5136, 4657.

We also recommend applying the following rules available in the repository to detect all attack stages.

  • Detection of Windows Event Log clearing to cover up traces of an attack: R050_03_Windows Event Log was cleared
  • Detection of suspicious access to the LSASS process, which may indicate attempts to dump credentials: R262_Suspicious access to the LSASS process
  • Detection of the Volume Shadow Copy service being started, which is used to create shadow copies before deleting them: R231_20_Running the Volume Shadow Copy service
  • Detection of shadow copy deletion: R321_Shadow copy deletion
  • Detection of Windows Defender disablement: R076_01_Windows Defender Antivirus was disabled
  • Detection of attempts to disable or modify the system firewall: R240_03_Disabling system firewall via the registry
  • Detection of a service installation from a non-system folder, which may indicate malware persistence techniques: R281_01_Installation of a service from a non-system folder

For the rules in this list to function correctly, it is necessary to configure Security event auditing for event IDs 4663, 5136, 4657, 7036, and 1102.

In addition to the SIEM system, when audit settings are configured correctly, the process of creating, modifying, and deleting GPOs generates a large number of characteristic artifacts on the domain controller, enabling Kaspersky Endpoint Detection and Response Expert to promptly alert the user to anomalies in the infrastructure.

The creation of a new GPO is covered by the gpo_creation rule, which triggers in response to the corresponding event in the infrastructure. Changes to existing policies are detected by the following rules:

GPO deletion is covered by the gpo_deletion rule.

In the next major version update of Kaspersky EDR Expert, a new event type, GPO, will be introduced, allowing users to track changes to Group Policy Objects.

For information security officers, GPO events will serve as an additional source of context when investigating activity in Active Directory and will help detect changes that could affect the configuration, access rights, and security of endpoints before a potentially malicious policy is deployed.

MITRE ATT&CK mapping

Tactic Technique Observed behavior
Initial Access T1078 β€” Valid Accounts Compromised domain credential used for VPN authentication
Initial Access T1133 β€” External Remote Services FortiGate SSL VPN used as entry point
Privilege Escalation T1078.002 β€” Domain Accounts Account held domain-level GPO create/link rights
Privilege Escalation/Defense Impairment T1484.001 β€” Group Policy Modification Malicious PAYLOAD GPO created and linked at domain root; re-applies on every refresh/reboot; uses trusted channel to evade EDR
Defense Impairment T1686 β€” Disable or Modify System Firewall win Firewall Off GPO disables Windows Firewall on all profiles
Impact T1491.001 β€” Internal Defacement Wallpaper and lock screen replaced with ransom image
Impact T1531 β€” Account Access Removal Local Administrator account disabled via GPO Security Settings
Collection T1005 β€” Data from Local System Data exfiltration was observed originating from the file servers
Command and Control T1071 β€” Application Layer Protocol No live C2 confirmed; delivery achieved entirely via GPO

Indicators of compromise

GPOs
PAYLOAD ransomware GPO: {C897F2C7-C2AC-4E6F-BF48-58036FF29E79}
win Firewall Off GPO: {22099AD2-E062-4F56-B574-5099BBA4E7A6}

File names and MD5 hashes
payload.jpg: Ransom wallpaper and lock screen image (SYSVOL)
hello.txt: Ransom note source (SYSVOL)
README-payload.txt: Ransom note dropped to desktops and drive roots
killer.exe (0108656A3E1ADE6CA4F21B084F5E1208): process killer tool
kill.exe (BEA5E267F24D7DA59F6821BFFDBFF293): process killer tool

IP addresses
37.19.210[.]12
146.70.117[.]239
149.102.229[.]154
104.164.55[.]46
104.28.162[.]228
104.28.163[.]162
64.190.76[.]14
192.42.116[.]50
192.42.116[.]12
192.42.116[.]56
192.42.116[.]97
192.42.116[.]52

Registry keys
HKLM\...\Policies\System\legalnoticecaption = Welcome to Payload!

SYSVOL path
\\DC.THECOMPANY.local\sysvol\THECOMPANY.local\payload.jpg

Event IDs
5137: GPO object creation on DC β€” review creator account
5136:Β GPO attribute modification β€” watch gPLink at domain root

Threat landscape for industrial automation systems. Q2 2026

27 August 2026 at 12:05

All threats

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked continued to decrease, falling to 19.15%, its lowest level since 2022.

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2023–Q2 2026

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q3 2023–Q2 2026

Regionally, the percentages ranged from 8.1% in Northern Europe to 27.9% in Africa.

Regions ranked by percentage of attacked ICS computers

Regions ranked by percentage of attacked ICS computers

The figures increased in five regions over the quarter, most notably in East Asia (by 2.0 pp) and Africa (by 0.5 pp).

East Asia saw increases in percentages for all threats except miners. The region ranked first in terms of growth for malicious scripts and phishing pages, spyware, and viruses. East Asia also led in terms of growth in threats from the internet. The percentage of ICS computers on which email threats were blocked also increased.

Selected industries

The biometrics sector (26.44%) has traditionally led the rankings of industries and OT infrastructures surveyed in this report in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked. Biometric systems are characterized by the availability of internet access, extensive email use for data exchange and approvals (e.g. access granting), and, in many cases, minimal cybersecurity controls within the organizations that use them.

Industries ranked by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked

Industries ranked by percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked

The biometrics sector ranked first among industries in terms of the following threat categories: malicious scripts and phishing pages, malicious documents, spyware, ransomware, and worms. The sector is also leading among industries in terms of email threats. At the same time, unlike other industries, the percentage of affected ICS computers for email threats in biometrics exceeds that for internet threats.

In all selected industries, the global average follows a downward trend.

Threat categories

In Q2 2026, Kaspersky security solutions blocked malware from 10,904 different malware families of various categories on industrial automation systems.

Over the quarter, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects of the following categories were blocked increased: denylisted internet resources, malicious documents, worms, ransomware, and malware for AutoCAD.

Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects from various categories was blocked

Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects from various categories was blocked

Malicious scripts and phishing pages (JS and HTML)

Malicious scripts and phishing pages remained in first place in the threat category rankings based on the percentage of ICS computers on which the respective threats were blocked. In Q2 2026, the global average dropped to 5.42%.

Over the quarter, the figure for this category only increased in East Asia, rising by 0.93 pp to 4.86%. This is the second-highest figure in the region in the last three years.

In East Asia, the percentage of ICS computers affected by malicious scripts and phishing pages increased in all the industries surveyed, except construction. The highest figures were recorded for biometrics (9.01%) and building automation (6.49%).

Denylisted internet resources

In Q2 2026, denylisted internet resources rose in the threat category rankings from third to second place, displacing spyware. Globally, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked has been increasing for two quarters in row and reached 4.31%.

The figures increased in all regions over the quarter, most notably in Russia (by 1.33 pp). Moreover, Russia ranked first (5.17%) among the regions in terms of denylisted internet resources. Since 2022, the region has topped these rankings twice before, both times in Q2: in 2022 and 2024.

Among the selected industries in Russia, the highest figures for the denylisted internet resources were in the electric power (6.61%) and engineering and ICS integration (5.62%) industries.

Malicious documents (MSOffice + PDF)

Malicious documents ranked fourth in the threat category rankings by the percentage of ICS computers on which they were blocked. The percentage for this category decreased over the previous three quarters, reaching its lowest level in three years. However, in Q2 2026, it increased to 1.77%.

Over the quarter, the figures for malicious documents increased in seven regions, most notably in South America (by 1.35 pp) and Southern Europe (by 0.48 pp). These two regions are among the top three in terms of malicious documents, malicious scripts and phishing pages, as well as threats from email clients.

South America ranked second in the rankings of regions in terms of malicious documents. In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers in the region on which this threat was blocked was 3.56%, which was the fourth highest in three years.

Among the selected industries in South America, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked was in biometrics (6.67%).

Southern Europe ranked first in the rankings of regions in terms of malicious documents. In the previous quarter, the percentage of ICS computers in the region on which this threat was blocked was the lowest in three years, but in Q2 2026 it increased to 3.63%.

Among the selected industries in Southern Europe, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which malicious documents were blocked was once again in biometrics (11.48%).

Spyware

Spyware ranked third in the threat category rankings based on the percentage of ICS computers on which it was blocked. The percentage for this category (3.30%) is the lowest since 2022.

Over the quarter, the figures increased in three regions, most notably in East Asia (by 0.53 pp) and Southeast Asia (by 0.42 pp).

East Asia ranked third based on the figures for spyware (4.77%), behind Africa and Southeast Asia. This is the region’s highest rate since Q2 2025. Among the countries and territories in the region, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked was in mainland China (6.61%). Among the selected industries in East Asia, the highest figures for spyware were in the electric power (11.75%) and manufacturing (5.87%) industries. In all the industries surveyed, the figures are higher than the regional average.

Southeast Asia ranked second after Africa in the ranking of regions in terms of spyware, with 5.32%. Among the selected industries in Southeast Asia, the highest figures for spyware were in biometrics (8.93%) and manufacturing (7.32%). The figures increased in all industries over the quarter.

Ransomware

The percentage of ICS computers on which ransomware was blocked decreased in the previous three quarters but increased to 0.16% in Q2 2026.

During the quarter, the percentage increased in all regions, except Western and Southern Europe and North America (Canada). Africa led the ranking in terms of growth for this metric.

In Q2 2026, Africa ranked first among the regions in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which ransomware was blocked (0.29%). The only time the figure in the region was higher in the past three years was Q2 2025 (0.31%).

Among the selected industries in Africa, the highest figures for ransomware were in the electric power industry (0.72%) and biometrics (0.52%). Over the quarter, the figures increased in all industries, except manufacturing and construction. The biggest increase was recorded in the electric power industry.

In Russia, the percentage of ICS computers on which ransomware was blocked in biometric systems has increased for three consecutive quarters, reaching 1.22%. This is the highest level of ransomware across all industries in all regions.

Miners

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which miners were blocked was the lowest since 2021, for both miners in the form of executable files for Windows (0.48%) and web miners running in browsers (0.14%).

The figures for both categories decreased in all regions, except for Africa where figures for miners in the form of executable files for Windows increased slightly.

On average, the oil and gas industry led the rankings among the selected industries both in terms of miners in the form of executable files for the Windows OS (0.66%)Β and in terms of web miners (0.34%).

Worms

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which worms were blocked increased to 1.43%.

In Q2 2026, the Middle East (2.11%) was second (after Africa) in the rankings of regions in terms of worms, displacing Central Asia and the South Caucasus.

Among the selected industries in the Middle East, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which worms were blocked was in building automation (2.90%). Over the quarter, the figures increased in all industries.

Australia and New Zealand ranked 12th among the regions in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which worms were blocked (0.41%). Over the past three years, the figure in this region was only higher in Q2 2024 (0.42%). The figures increased in all the surveyed industries in the region, most notably in manufacturing and electric power. As a result, for these industries they exceeded the regional average by 2.9 and 2.3 times, respectively.

Viruses

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which viruses were blocked decreased to 1.29%.

The top three regions for this metric remain unchanged: Southeast Asia (6.03%), Africa (4.22%), and East Asia (3.14%). These same regions lead the rankings in terms of malware for AutoCAD.

The figures increased in three regions: East Asia, Australia and New Zealand, and Africa, where it has been growing for four consecutive quarters and reached its highest value since 2022.

Among the selected industries in Africa, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which viruses were blocked was in construction (5.47%).

East Asia ranked third among the regions in terms of viruses, reaching the highest level in the region for the past three years. Among the countries and administrative regions of East Asia, mainland China is the clear leader in terms of viruses (5.07%).

Among the selected industries in East Asia, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which viruses were blocked was in construction (5.93%).

In Australia and New Zealand, the increase in the percentage of ICS computers on which viruses were blocked was primarily due to a 4.3-fold increase in the figure for the electric power industry: from 0.29% to 1.24%. For a region where the percentage of attacked ICS computers for all threats is 0.12%, this is a very high value.

Malware for AutoCAD

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which malware for AutoCAD was blocked increased to 0.31%.

The most notable increase over the quarter was observed in Africa. After more than doubling in the previous quarter, the figure for the region continued to rise (although not so dramatically), reaching 1.02%.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which malware for AutoCAD was blocked was in construction in East Asia (6.38%) and in Southeast Asia (4.05%).

Main threat sources

In Q2 2026, of all the threat sources, the percentage increased only for email.

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked

Internet

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats from the internet were blocked decreased to 7.61%, reaching its lowest level since 2021.

Over the quarter, the percentage increased in three regions: East Asia by 0.8 pp (to 6.3%), South Asia by 0.3 pp (to 10.4%), and Russia by 0.3 pp (to 6.4%).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which threats from the internet were blocked was in biometrics (13.03%) and engineering and ICS integration (12.16%) in South Asia.

Email

The percentage of ICS computers on which email threats were blocked increased to 2.84%.

In Q2 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which email threats were blocked increased in South America by 1.0 pp (to 5.2%) and in Africa by 0.7 pp (to 4.3%).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which email threats were blocked was in biometrics (19.14%) and building automation (12.49%) in Southern Europe.

Removable media

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats from removable media were blocked continued to decrease, reaching 0.24%, the lowest value for the period under review.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which threats from removable media were blocked was in the electric power industry in East Asia (1.34%) and biometrics in Africa (1.29%).

Network folders

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats from network folders were blocked continued to decrease. In Q2 2026, it was the lowest for the period under review, at 0.023%.

The only region to see an increase in the percentage of ICS computers on which threats from network folders were blocked during the quarter was Africa. This was mainly due to an increase in the building automation figure to 0.05%.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage of ICS computers on which threats from network folders were blocked was in biometrics (0.23%), building automation (0.17%), and engineering and ICS integration (0.13%) in East Asia.

For more information on industrial threats see the full version of the report.

Exploits and vulnerabilities in Q2 2026

26 August 2026 at 12:00

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 β€œnamed” 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 β€œcloud” 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 componentsΒ β€” often close to genuinely vulnerable mechanismsΒ β€” 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

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:

  1. The application obtains a critical connection address from an external source (the gatewayUrl URL parameter), which is controlled by the attacker.
  2. There is no validation before use.
  3. The client automatically initiates a connection to the address specified in the parameter, which belongs to the attacker.
  4. 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:

  1. The user initiates an action that changes the state of an object.
  2. The application treats this action as a regular read request.
  3. Only channel view permission is checked.
  4. The application performs a write without verifying the required user authorization.

This violates one of the fundamental principles of access control modelsΒ β€” 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.

US Water Cyberattacks Extend Beyond Minnesota to at Least 6 Other States

3 August 2026 at 10:48

Michigan, South Dakota, and Georgia are reportedly on the list of states whose water systems have been targeted by Iran-linked hackers.

The post US Water Cyberattacks Extend Beyond Minnesota to at Least 6 Other States appeared first on SecurityWeek.

Threat landscape for industrial automation systems. Q1 2026

7 July 2026 at 12:00

All threats

The percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked continued to decrease, reaching 19.6% in Q1 2026. This is the lowest value in three years, and it is 1.4 times lower than in Q2 2023.

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q2 2023–Q1 2026

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked, Q2 2023–Q1 2026

Regionally, the percentages ranged from 9.1% in Northern Europe to 27.4% in Africa.

Regions ranked by percentage of attacked ICS computers

Regions ranked by percentage of attacked ICS computers

The percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked increased in five regions over the quarter, most notably in Southern Europe, Northern Europe, and Russia.

In Q1 2026, Southern Europe led the way in growth for internet and email threats. The region also saw the fastest growth in spyware, as well as malicious scripts and phishing pages.

In Russia, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked exceeded the figures for the previous two quarters. Russia saw an increase in the percentage for threats from the internet, and a slight increase in the figure for threats from email clients (Russia is one of three regions where this figure did not decrease).

Among the threat categories, the greatest increases were observed in the percentages for denylisted internet resources, as well as spyware (distributed in the region via the internet and email clients).

Selected industries

Biometric systems (26.4%) traditionally rank top among the industries and OT infrastructure types covered in this report in terms of the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked. These systems are characterized by internet access, extensive email use for data exchange and approvals (such as access granting), and, in many cases, minimal cybersecurity controls within the organizations that use these systems.

Industries ranked by the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked

Industries ranked by the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked

Biometric systems rank first among industries in terms of email threats. At the same time, unlike other industries, the percentage for email threats in biometric systems exceeds that for internet threats.

In all selected industries, the global average follows a downward trend. In Q1 2026, the percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects were blocked increased only in the manufacturing sector β€” by 1.0 pp. The percentages for this industry increased across 10 regions, with the most notable increases in Western Europe, Northern Europe, and Russia.

Threat categories

In Q1 2026, Kaspersky security solutions blocked malware from 10,052 different malware families of various categories on industrial automation systems.

Over the quarter, the percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked increased (after decreasing over the previous two quarters), and there was a slight increase in the percentage for AutoCAD malware.

Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects from various categories was prevented

Percentage of ICS computers on which the activity of malicious objects from various categories was prevented

Malicious scripts and phishing pages (JS and HTML)

Malicious scripts and phishing pages retained their to spot among threat categories by the percentage of ICS computers on which these threats were blocked. The global average in Q1 2026 was 6.56%.

Over the quarter, the percentages increased in four regions. The most significant change was observed in Southern Europe (9.85%, +0.94 pp). The figures for malicious scripts in the region increased over three consecutive quarters.

Among the selected industries, across all regions, the highest percentages for the malicious scripts and phishing pages category were recorded for biometric systems (19.59%) and building automation (15.43%) in Southern Europe. These same industries lead in similar rankings for malicious documents and spyware.

Spyware

The percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked decreased over two consecutive quarters, dropping to 3.73%. Despite the decline, spyware has ranked second among threat categories by the percentage of attacked computers for three consecutive quarters.

The percentages increased in five regions over the quarter, most notably in Southern Europe (5.46%, +0.35 pp) and Russia (2.84%, +0.24 pp).

In Southern Europe, the percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked increased in all the selected industries except manufacturing. The greatest increase was observed in biometric systems.

Among the selected industries, the highest percentage of spyware in Russia was recorded in biometric systems. That said, the percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked increased in all industries in the region except construction. The percentage figure has been increasing for two consecutive quarters in the oil and gas industry (by a factor of 1.63 over six months), and for three consecutive quarters in engineering and ICS integration, as well as electric power. In the remaining sectors, the values have been fluctuating.

Percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked in various industries in Russia, Q3 2025–Q1 2026

Percentage of ICS computers on which spyware was blocked in various industries in Russia, Q3 2025–Q1 2026

Denylisted internet resources

The percentage of ICS computers on which denylisted internet resources were blocked increased to 3.54%.

The most notable increase over the quarter occurred in Southeast Asia (4.58%, +0.65 pp). Among the industries in the region, the highest percentage figures for this threat category were recorded in electric power and construction. Over the quarter, the largest increases in percentages figures were observed in the electric power and manufacturing industries.

In North America (Canada), denylisted internet resources (2.14%) showed the greatest increase among all categories β€” by a factor of 1.22.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage figures for the denylisted internet resources category were in the electric power (7.11%) and construction (6.25%) industries in Southeast Asia.

Malicious documents (Microsoft Office + PDF)

The percentage figure for this category decreased over two consecutive quarters, reaching its lowest value (1.56%) for the entire period of observations in Q1 2026. It increased just in two regions: Australia and New Zealand (1.12%, +0.04 pp), and Russia (0.62%, +0.01 pp).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for malicious documents were recorded for biometric systems (9.02%) and building automation (6.97%) in Southern Europe. These same industries also lead in similar rankings for malicious scripts and spyware.

Ransomware

The percentage of ICS computers on which ransomware was blocked has decreased for two consecutive quarters, dropping to 0.14%. This is the lowest value among all categories.

The percentage increased in two regions: North America (Canada) (0.11%, +0.04 pp) and slightly in Northern Europe (0.06%, +0.01 pp).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for ransomware were recorded in the oil and gas and manufacturing industries (0.92% and 0.65%, respectively) in Central Asia and the South Caucasus, and in biometric systems (0.89%) in Russia.

Miners in the form of executable files for Windows

The percentage of ICS computers on which miners in the form of executable files for Windows were blocked decreased to 0.59%.

The percentage increased in seven regions. The largest increase was observed in Africa (0.63%, +0.16 pp). Among the selected industries, the largest increases in the region were in the manufacturing and oil and gas industries.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for miners in the form of executable files were recorded in construction (1.99%), biometric systems (1.98%), and the oil and gas industry (1.97%) in Central Asia and the South Caucasus.

Web miners

The percentage of ICS computers on which web miners were blocked has been declining for a year, and in Q1 2026, it reached the lowest value for the entire period under review (0.22%).

At the same time, the percentage increased in seven regions. The largest increases were observed in South Asia (0.28%, +0.11 pp), the Middle East (0.31%, +0.09 pp), and Africa (0.34%, +0.08 pp). Despite the increases, the percentages in these regions for Q1 2026 did not exceed those observed in 2023–2024 and in Q1 2025.

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for web miners were recorded for biometric systems (0.97%) in Russia. Biometric systems in South Asia (0.79%) ranked second, and the electric power sector in Southeast Asia (0.76%) ranked third.

Worms

The percentage of ICS computers on which worms were blocked decreased to 1.33%.

The percentage decreased across all regions following an increase in the previous quarter (due to a wave of phishing attacks that distributed the Backdoor.MSIL.XWorm backdoor worm across all regions of the world).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentage figure for worms was recorded for biometric systems (4.80%) in Central Asia and the South Caucasus. Two industries in Africa – biometric systems (4.04%) and electric power (3.53%) – took the second and third spots, respectively.

Viruses

The percentage of ICS computers on which viruses were blocked decreased to 1.31%.

The top 3 regions by this figure remained the same: Southeast Asia (6.11%, first by a wide margin), Africa (4.15%), and East Asia (2.97%). These same regions are also among the leaders by the percentage of systems affected by AutoCAD malware. The largest increase in this figure was observed in Africa (+0.41 pp).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for viruses were recorded in the construction industry (6.35%) and building automation (5.50%) in Southeast Asia.

Malware for AutoCAD

The percentage of ICS computers on which malware for AutoCAD was blocked increased to 0.30%.

The most notable increase over the quarter was observed in Africa, with the region’s percentage figure rising by 0.47 pp, a very significant increase for this category, and almost doubling (to 0.91%).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for AutoCAD malware were recorded in the construction industry in East Asia (5.58%) and Southeast Asia (3.87%).

Main threat sources

In Q1 2026, the average percentages across all threat sources, except threats from the internet, decreased globally.

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked

Percentage of ICS computers on which malicious objects from various sources were blocked

Internet

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats from the internet were blocked increased to 7.88%. However, over the past three years, the percentage figure for internet threats has followed a downward trend.

The largest increases in the percentages were recorded in Southern Europe (8.59%, +0.59 pp), Southeast Asia (10.16%, +0.55 pp), and Northern Europe (4.47%, +0.51 pp).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for threats from the internet were recorded in electric power (13.16%) and construction (12.55%) in Southeast Asia, and in the engineering and ICS integration sector (12.33%) in South Asia.

Email clients

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats delivered via email clients were blocked decreased to 2.59%. This is a three-year low.

The percentage of this threat source increased in three regions: Southern Europe (6.54%, +0.2 pp), East Asia (1.5%, +0.09 pp), and slightly in Russia (0.7%, +0.04 pp).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for email threats were recorded for biometric systems (19.78%) and building automation (12.34%) in Southern Europe. In these two industries, the percentage of ICS computers on which email threats are blocked is higher than the percentage for threats from the internet. A similar situation was observed in two other instances, both in biometric systems (in South America and Southeast Asia).

Removable media

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats were detected when connecting removable media continued to decrease, reaching its lowest value for the period under review (0.26%).

Among the selected industries across all regions, the highest percentages for removable media threats blocked on ICS computers were observed in the electric power sector in Central Asia and the South Caucasus (1.45%), East Asia (1.34%), and Africa (1.16%).

Network folders

The percentage of ICS computers on which threats are blocked in network folders is steadily decreasing. In Q1 2026, it was the lowest for the period under review (0.029%).

East Asia has traditionally led by a wide margin. The percentage for East Asia (0.135%) is 27 times higher than the lowest regional value (recorded in Northern Europe).

The largest increases in the percentages for threats from network folders were observed in Africa (0.037%, +0.006 pp) and South America (0.013%, +0.006 pp).
Among the selected industries across all regions, the construction industry in East Asia, at 0.36%, holds the top positions in the ranking by the percentage of ICS computers on which threats are blocked in network folders.

For more information on industrial threats see the full version of the report.

Robot Police Officers

29 June 2026 at 12:55

We’ve taken one small step towards robot police officers: a drone capable of disarming a suspect:

In a June 22 video posted on the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office’s Instagram page, an officer wearing goggles can be seen operating a drone to retrieve a knife from an armed suspect hiding inside a cluttered house. β€œAfter not responding to negotiators, a drone was deployed inside the residence,” the post says. β€œDrone pilots located the suspect hiding in a corner of a garage” and then used a high-powered magnet attached to the drone to grab the knife out of the suspect’s hand. In the video Β­ which is soundtracked by the β€œMission: Impossible” theme songβ€”the intercepted knife can be seen spinning around in the air as the drone carries it back to the deputies.

Slashdot thread.

IT threat evolution in Q1 2026. Mobile statistics

18 May 2026 at 14:00

IT threat evolution in Q1 2026. Mobile statistics
IT threat evolution in Q1 2026. Non-mobile statistics

In the third quarter of 2025, we updated the methodology for calculating statistical indicators based on the Kaspersky Security Network. These changes affected all sections of the report except for the statistics on installation packages, which remained unchanged.

To illustrate the differences between the reporting periods, we have also recalculated data for the previous quarters. Consequently, these figures may significantly differ from the previously published ones. However, subsequent reports will employ this new methodology, enabling precise comparisons with the data presented in this post.

The Kaspersky Security Network (KSN) is a global network for analyzing anonymized threat information, voluntarily shared by users of Kaspersky solutions. The statistics in this report are based on KSN data unless explicitly stated otherwise.

The quarter in numbers

According to Kaspersky Security Network, in Q1 2026:

  • More than 2.67 million attacks utilizing malware, adware, or unwanted mobile software were prevented.
  • The Trojan-Banker category was the prevalent mobile malware threat with a 52.96% share of total detected applications.
  • More than 306,000 malicious installation packages were discovered, including:
    • 162,275 packages related to mobile banking Trojans;
    • 439 packages related to mobile ransomware Trojans.

Quarterly highlights

The number of malware, adware, or unwanted software attacks on mobile devices decreased to 2,676,328 in Q1, down from 3,239,244 in the previous quarter.

Attacks on users of Kaspersky mobile solutions, Q3 2024 β€” Q1 2026 (download)

The overall drop in attack volume stems primarily from a reduction in adware and RiskTool detections. Nonetheless, this trend does not equate to a lower risk for mobile users. As shown later in this report, the number of unique users targeted by these threats remained relatively stable.

In Q1, Synthient researchers identified a link between the notorious Kimwolf botnet and the IPIDEA proxy network. This network was later taken down in cooperation with GTIG.

In early 2026, we discovered several apps on Google Play and the App Store that contained a new version of the SparkCat crypto stealer.

The Trojan code, meticulously concealed, was embedded into the infected Android apps. The obfuscated malicious Rust library was decrypted using a Dalvik-like virtual machine custom-built by the attackers. The iOS version of the malware also underwent several changes; specifically, the attackers began leveraging Apple’s proprietary Vision framework for optical character recognition (OCR).

Mobile threat statistics

The number of Android malware samples saw a slight increase compared to Q4Β 2025, reaching a total of 306,070.

Detected malicious and potentially unwanted installation packages, Q1 2025 β€” Q1 2026 (download)

The detected installation packages were distributed by type as follows:

Detected mobile apps by type, Q4 2025* β€” Q1 2026 (download)

* Data for the previous quarter may differ slightly from previously published figures due to certain verdicts being retrospectively revised.

Threat actors once again ramped up the production of new banking Trojans; as a result, this category overtook all others in volume, accounting for more than half of all installation packages.

Share* of users attacked by the given type of malicious or potentially unwanted app out of all targeted users of Kaspersky mobile products, Q4 2025 β€” Q1 2026 (download)

* The total percentage may exceed 100% if the same users encountered multiple attack types.

Following the surge in banking Trojan installation packages, the number of associated attacks also rose, causing Trojan-Banker apps to climb one spot in terms of their share of targeted users. Mamont variants emerged as the most prevalent banking Trojans, accounting for 73.5% of detections, with the rest of the users encountering Faketoken, Rewardsteal, Creduz, and other families.

Yet banking Trojans were still outpaced by adware and RiskTool-type unwanted apps when measured by the total number of affected users. Despite a decrease in their share of installation packages, these two app types retained their positions as the top two threats by attack volume. The most common adware detections involved HiddenAd (44.9%) and MobiDash (38.1%), while most frequently seen RiskTool apps were Revpn (67%) and SpyLoan (20.5%).

TOP 20 most frequently detected types of mobile malware

Note that the malware rankings below exclude riskware or potentially unwanted software, such as RiskTool or adware.

Verdict %* Q4Β 2025 %* Q1Β 2026 Difference in p.p. Change in ranking
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Triada.ag 2.62 7.09 +4.48 +10
DangerousObject.Multi.Generic. 6.75 5.84 -0.92 -1
DangerousObject.AndroidOS.GenericML. 3.52 5.51 +1.99 +6
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jo 0.00 5.28 +5.28
Trojan.AndroidOS.Fakemoney.v 5.40 3.44 -1.96 -1
Trojan-Downloader.AndroidOS.Keenadu.l 0.00 3.35 +3.35
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jx 0.00 3.09 +3.09
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Triada.z 4.87 3.08 -1.79 -2
Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.fe 5.01 2.98 -2.02 -4
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Keenadu.a 2.07 2.73 +0.66 +6
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jg 0.34 2.37 +2.03
Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.hf 2.15 2.23 +0.07 +3
Trojan.AndroidOS.Boogr.gsh 2.35 2.15 -0.20 0
Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.ii 5.68 2.07 -3.60 -11
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Triada.ae 1.91 1.76 -0.16 +3
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Triada.ab 1.79 1.72 -0.08 +3
Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.gn 2.38 1.58 -0.80 -5
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.gg 1.56 1.50 -0.06 +2
Trojan.AndroidOS.Triada.ga 1.48 1.50 +0.01 +4
Backdoor.AndroidOS.Triada.ad 0.53 1.40 +0.87 +44

* Unique users who encountered this malware as a percentage of all attacked users of Kaspersky mobile solutions.

The pre-installed Triada.ag backdoor rose to the top spot; it is similar to the older Triada.z version we documented previously. Because the same variant was pre-installed across a wide range of devices, the total number of affected users is aggregated. Consequently, Triada outpaced even Mamont, as users encountered a variety of Mamont variants, causing the share of that banking Trojan to spread across multiple rows. Other pre-installed Triada variants (Triada.z, Triada.ae, Triada.ab, and Triada.ad) also made the rankings. Furthermore, we observed increasing activity from the Keenadu.a backdoor, while diverse variants of the embedded Triada Trojan remained in the rankings.

Mobile banking Trojans

Q1Β 2026 saw a characteristic rise in mobile banking Trojan activity, with the number of packages totalingΒ 162,275, a 50% increase compared to the prior quarter.

Number of installation packages for mobile banking Trojans detected by Kaspersky, Q1 2025 β€” Q1 2026 (download)

We saw a similar growth in the previous quarter, with banking Trojan volumes rising by 50% during that period as well. Various Mamont variants accounted for the absolute majority of packages and represented nearly every entry in the rankings of most frequent banking Trojans by affected user count.

TOP 10 mobile bankers

Verdict %* Q4Β 2025 %* Q1Β 2026 Difference in p.p. Change in ranking
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jo 0.00 15.75 +15.75
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jx 0.00 9.22 +9.22
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jg 1.47 7.08 +5.61 +24
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.gg 6.79 4.48 -2.32 -3
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.ks 0.00 3.98 +3.98
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Agent.ws 6.03 3.78 -2.25 -2
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.hl 4.30 3.27 -1.03 +1
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.iv 6.00 3.08 -2.92 -3
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jb 3.93 3.07 -0.86 +1
Trojan-Banker.AndroidOS.Mamont.jv 0.00 2.79 +2.79

* Unique users who encountered this malware as a percentage of all users of Kaspersky mobile security solutions who encountered banking threats.

IT threat evolution in Q1 2026. Non-mobile statistics

By: AMR
18 May 2026 at 14:00

IT threat evolution in Q1Β 2026. Non-mobile statistics
IT threat evolution in Q1Β 2026. Mobile statistics

The statistics in this report are based on detection verdicts returned by Kaspersky products unless otherwise stated. The information was provided by Kaspersky users who consented to sharing statistical data.

Quarterly figures

In Q1Β 2026:

  • Kaspersky products blocked more than 343 million attacks that originated with various online resources.
  • Web Anti-Virus responded to 50 million unique links.
  • File Anti-Virus blocked nearly 15 million malicious and potentially unwanted objects.
  • 2938 new ransomware variants were detected.
  • More than 77,000 users experienced ransomware attacks.
  • 14% of all ransomware victims whose data was published on threat actors’ data leak sites (DLS) were victims of Clop.
  • More than 260,000 users were targeted by miners.

Ransomware

Quarterly trends and highlights

Law enforcement success

In January 2026, it was reported that the FBI had seized the domains of the RAMP cybercrime forum, a major platform used extensively by ransomware developers to advertise their RaaS programs and to recruit affiliates. There has been no official statement from the FBI, nor is it clear if RAMP servers were seized. In a post on an external website, a RAMP moderator mentioned law enforcement agencies gaining control over the forum. The takedown disrupted a key element of the RaaS ecosystem, creating ripple effects for ransomware operators, affiliates, and initial access brokers.

A man suspected of links to the Phobos group was apprehended in Poland. He was charged with the creation, acquisition, and distribution of software designed for unlawfully obtaining information, including data that facilitates unauthorized access to information stored within a computer system.

In March, a Phobos ransomware administrator pleaded guilty to the creation and distribution of the Trojan, which had been used in international attacks dating back to at least November 2020.

In March, the U.S. Department of Justice charged a man who had acted as a negotiator for ransomware groups. The company he worked for specializes in cyberincident investigations. The prosecution alleges the suspect colluded with the BlackCat threat actor to share privileged insights into the ongoing progress of negotiations. Additionally, the suspect is alleged to have had a prior direct role in BlackCat attacks, serving as an affiliate for the RaaS operation.

In a separate development this March, a U.S. court sentenced an initial access broker associated with the Yanluowang ransomware group to 81 months of imprisonment. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the convict facilitated dozens of ransomware attacks across the United States, resulting in over $9 million in actual loss and more than $24 million in intended loss.

Vulnerabilities and attacks

The Interlock group has been heavily exploiting the CVE-2026-20131 zero-day vulnerability in Cisco Secure FMC firewall management software since at least January 26, 2026. The vulnerability enabled arbitrary Java code execution with root privileges on the affected device. This campaign demonstrates the ongoing reliance on zero-day vulnerabilities for initial access, a focus on network appliances as high-value entry points, and the rapid weaponization of new vulnerabilities within the ransomware ecosystem.

The most prolific groups

This section highlights the most prolific ransomware gangs by number of victims added to each group’s DLS. This quarter, the Clop ransomware (14.42%) returned to the top of the rankings, displacingΒ Qilin (12.34%), which had held the leading position in the previous reporting period. Following closely is a new threat actor, The Gentlemen (9.25%). Emerging no later than July 2025, the group had already surpassed the activity levels of mainstays such as Akira (7.25%) and INC Ransom (6.13%).

Number of each group’s victims according to its DLS as a percentage of all groups’ victims published on all the DLSs under review during the reporting period (download)

Number of new variants

In Q1Β 2026, Kaspersky solutions detected six new ransomware families and 2938 new modifications. Volumes have returned to Q3Β 2025 levels following a surge in Q4Β 2025.

Number of new ransomware modifications, Q1 2025 β€” Q1 2026 (download)

Number of users attacked by ransomware Trojans

Throughout Q1, our solutions protected 77,319 unique users from ransomware. Ransomware activity was highest in March, with 35,056 unique users encountering such attacks during the month.

Number of unique users attacked by ransomware Trojans, Q1 2026 (download)

Attack geography

TOPΒ 10 countries and territories attacked by ransomware Trojans

Country/territory* %**
1 Pakistan 0.79
2 South Korea 0.64
3 China 0.52
4 Tajikistan 0.40
5 Libya 0.38
6 Turkmenistan 0.36
7 Iraq 0.35
8 Bangladesh 0.33
9 Rwanda 0.30
10 Cameroon 0.28

* Excluded are countries and territories with relatively few (under 50,000) Kaspersky users.
** Unique users whose computers were attacked by ransomware Trojans as a percentage of all unique users of Kaspersky products in the country/territory.

TOPΒ 10 most common families of ransomware Trojans

Name Verdict %*
1 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Gen 33.90
2 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Crypren 6.38
3 WannaCry Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Wanna 5.87
4 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Encoder 4.68
5 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Agent 3.80
6 LockBit Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Lockbit 2.80
7 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Phny 1.99
8 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.MSIL.Agent 1.96
9 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Python.Agent 1.93
10 (generic verdict) Trojan-Ransom.Win32.Crypmod 1.89

* Unique Kaspersky users attacked by the specific ransomware Trojan family as a percentage of all unique users attacked by this type of threat.

Miners

Number of new variants

In Q1Β 2026, Kaspersky solutions detected 3485 new modifications of miners.

Number of new miner modifications, Q1 2026 (download)

Number of users attacked by miners

In Q1, we detected attacks using miner programs on the computers of 260,588 unique Kaspersky users worldwide.

Number of unique users attacked by miners, Q1 2026 (download)

Attack geography

TOPΒ 10 countries and territories attacked by miners

Country/territory* %**
1 Senegal 3.19
2 Turkmenistan 3.06
3 Mali 2.63
4 Tanzania 1.62
5 Bangladesh 1.06
6 Ethiopia 0.95
7 Panama 0.88
8 Afghanistan 0.79
9 Kazakhstan 0.77
10 Bolivia 0.75

* Excluded are countries and territories with relatively few (under 50,000) Kaspersky users.
** Unique users whose computers were attacked by miners as a percentage of all unique users of Kaspersky products in the country/territory.

Attacks on macOS

In Q1Β 2026, Google uncovered a new cryptocurrency theft campaign. The scammers directed victims to a fraudulent video call, prompting them to execute malicious scripts under the guise of technical support fixes for connection problems.

In March, researchers with GTIG and iVerify reported the discovery of an in-the-wild exploit chain targeting both iOS and macOS devices. The exploit kit was apparently marketed on the dark web, providing threat actors with a suite of spyware capabilities alongside specialized cryptocurrency exfiltration modules. The exploit was delivered via drive-by downloads when victims visited various compromised websites. Our analysis confirmed that the toolkit included an updated version of a component previously identified in the Operation Triangulation attack chain.

Devices running macOS were similarly impacted by the high-profile supply chain attack targeting the Axios npm package, a widely used HTTP client for JavaScript. The installation of the infected package led to the deployment of a backdoor on macOS devices.

TOPΒ 20 threats to macOS

Unique users* who encountered this malware as a percentage of all attacked users of Kaspersky security solutions for macOS (download)

* Data for the previous quarter may differ slightly from previously published data due to some verdicts being retrospectively revised.

The share of PasivRobber spyware attacks is beginning to decline, giving way to more traditional adware and Monitor-class software capable of tracking user activity. The popular Amos stealer also maintains its presence within the TOPΒ 20.

Geography of threats to macOS

TOPΒ 10 countries and territories by share of attacked users

Country/territory %* Q4Β 2025 %* Q1Β 2026
China 1.28 1.97
France 1.18 1.07
Brazil 1.13 0.98
Mexico 0.72 0.52
Germany 0.71 0.45
The Netherlands 0.62 0.75
Hong Kong 0.49 0.53
India 0.42 0.48
Russian Federation 0.34 0.37
Thailand 0.24 0.27

* Unique users who encountered threats to macOS as a percentage of all unique Kaspersky users in the country/territory.

IoT threat statistics

This section presents statistics on attacks targeting Kaspersky IoT honeypots. The geographic data on attack sources is based on the IP addresses of attacking devices.

In Q1Β 2026, the share of devices attacking Kaspersky honeypots via the SSH protocol saw a significant increase compared to the previous reporting period.

Distribution of attacked services by number of unique IP addresses of attacking devices (download)

The distribution of attacks between Telnet and SSH maintained the ratio observed in Q4Β 2025.

Distribution of attackers’ sessions in Kaspersky honeypots (download)

TOPΒ 10 threats delivered to IoT devices

Share of each threat delivered to an infected device as a result of a successful attack, out of the total number of threats delivered (download)

The primary shifts in the IoT threat distribution are linked to the activity of various Mirai botnet variants, although members of this family continue to account for the majority of the list. Furthermore, a new variant, Mirai.kl, surfaced in the rankings. We also observed a significant decline in NyaDrop botnet activity during Q1.

Attacks on IoT honeypots

The United States, the Netherlands, and Germany accounted for the highest proportions of SSH-based attacks during this period.

Country/territory Q4Β 2025 Q1Β 2026
United States 16.10% 23.74%
The Netherlands 15.78% 17.57%
Germany 12.07% 10.34%
Panama 7.72% 6.34%
India 5.32% 6.05%
Romania 4.05% 5.82%
Australia 1.62% 4.61%
Vietnam 4.21% 3.50%
Russian Federation 3.79% 2.35%
Sweden 2.25% 2.09%

China continues to account for the largest proportion of Telnet attacks, though there was a marked increase in activity originating from Pakistan.

Country/territory Q4Β 2025 Q1Β 2026
China 53.64% 39.54%
Pakistan 14.27% 27.31%
Russian Federation 8.20% 8.25%
Indonesia 8.58% 6.71%
India 4.85% 4.66%
Brazil 0.06% 3.30%
Argentina 0.02% 2.51%
Nigeria 1.22% 1.38%
Thailand 0.01% 0.55%
Sweden 0.54% 0.55%

Attacks via web resources

The statistics in this section are based on detection verdicts by Web Anti-Virus, which protects users when suspicious objects are downloaded from malicious or infected web pages. These malicious pages are purposefully created by cybercriminals. Websites that host user-generated content, such as message boards, as well as compromised legitimate sites, can become infected.

TOP 10 countries and territories that served as sources of web-based attacks

The following statistics show the distribution by country/territory of the sources of internet attacks blocked by Kaspersky products on user computers (web pages redirecting to exploits, sites containing exploits and other malicious programs, botnet C&C centers, and so on). One or more web-based attacks could originate from each unique host.

To determine the geographic source of web attacks, we matched the domain name with the real IP address where the domain is hosted, then identified the geographic location of that IP address (GeoIP).

In Q1Β 2026, Kaspersky solutions blocked 343,823,407 attacks launched from internet resources worldwide. Web Anti-Virus was triggered by 49,983,611 unique URLs.

Web-based attacks by country/territory, Q1 2026 (download)

Countries and territories where users faced the greatest risk of online infection

To assess the risk of malware infection via the internet for users’ computers in different countries and territories, we calculated the share of Kaspersky users in each location on whose computers Web Anti-Virus was triggered during the reporting period. The resulting data provides an indication of the aggressiveness of the environment in which computers operate in different countries and territories.

This ranked list includes only attacks by malicious objects classified as Malware. Our calculations leave out Web Anti-Virus detections of potentially dangerous or unwanted programs, such as RiskTool or adware.

Country/territory* %**
1 Venezuela 9.33
2 Hungary 8.16
3 Italy 7.58
4 Tajikistan 7.48
5 India 7.21
6 Greece 7.13
7 Portugal 7.10
8 France 7.05
9 Belgium 6.83
10 Slovakia 6.80
11 Vietnam 6.62
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina 6.57
13 Canada 6.56
14 Serbia 6.50
15 Tunisia 6.36
16 Qatar 6.01
17 Spain 5.95
18 Germany 5.95
19 Sri Lanka 5.89
20 Brazil 5.88

* Excluded are countries and territories with relatively few (under 10,000) Kaspersky users.
** Unique users targeted by web-based Malware attacks as a percentage of all unique users of Kaspersky products in the country/territory.

On average during the quarter, 4.73% of users’ computers worldwide were subjected to at least one Malware web attack.

Local threats

Statistics on local infections of user computers are an important indicator. They include objects that penetrated the target computer by infecting files or removable media, or initially made their way onto the computer in non-open form. Examples of the latter are programs in complex installers and encrypted files.

Data in this section is based on analyzing statistics produced by anti-virus scans of files on the hard drive at the moment they were created or accessed, and the results of scanning removable storage media. The statistics are based on detection verdicts from the On-Access Scan (OAS) and On-Demand Scan (ODS) modules of File Anti-Virus and include detections of malicious programs located on user computers or removable media connected to the computers, such as flash drives, camera memory cards, phones, or external hard drives.

In Q1Β 2026, our File Anti-Virus detected 15,831,319 malicious and potentially unwanted objects.

Countries and territories where users faced the highest risk of local infection

For each country and territory, we calculated the percentage of Kaspersky users whose computers had the File Anti-Virus triggered at least once during the reporting period. This statistic reflects the level of personal computer infection in different countries and territories around the world.

Note that this ranked list includes only attacks by malicious objects classified as Malware. Our calculations leave out File Anti-Virus detections of potentially dangerous or unwanted programs, such as RiskTool or adware.

Country/territory* %**
1 Turkmenistan 47.96
2 Tajikistan 31.48
3 Cuba 31.03
4 Yemen 29.59
5 Afghanistan 28.47
6 Burundi 26.93
7 Uzbekistan 24.81
8 Syria 23.08
9 Nicaragua 21.97
10 Cameroon 21.60
11 China 21.09
12 Mozambique 21.02
13 Algeria 20.64
14 Democratic Republic of the Congo 20.63
15 Bangladesh 20.44
16 Mali 20.35
17 Republic of the Congo 20.23
18 Madagascar 20.00
19 Belarus 19.78
20 Tanzania 19.52

* Excluded are countries and territories with relatively few (under 10,000) Kaspersky users.
** Unique users on whose computers local Malware threats were blocked, as a percentage of all unique users of Kaspersky products in the country/territory.

On average worldwide, Malware local threats were detected at least once on 11.55% of users’ computers during Q1.

Russia scored 11.92% in these rankings.

❌