❌

Normal view

Convincing Free Mobile phishing emails appear after data breach

1 October 2026 at 13:30

Free Mobile, one of France’s main cellular providers, was fined €27 million by France’s data protection regulator, the CNIL, in January over failures to protect customer data. The October 2024 breach allowed an unauthorized party to access sensitive customer records, including bank account details and login information. Since the breach, we’ve seen many poorly written scam campaigns targeting Free Mobile customers.

However, over the past few weeks, a well-written scam has appeared, closely copying the design of the official Free Mobile website and email templates.

One of our employees, who is a Free Mobile customer, received this phishing email on Wednesday, September 30. The message used the same logo and template as legitimate emails from the company, but came from the suspicious email address freemobile-regularisation[@]knowledgegrowthcenter[.]help. It included a link that appeared to point to regularisation.free.fr :

Free Mobile phishing email

The email tells the user that an invoice of €9.99 needs to be paid to avoid having the customer’s service suspended. Clicking the link opens a redirection chain:

1. https://u2l.ai/Q5YwFz301
2. https://espace-free-mobile.pro/Ds41LE/302
3. https://espace-free-mobile.pro/Ds41LE/regularisation/?impaye=92a9e77d…200

This final domain, espace-free-mobile.pro, is hosted by Cloudflare and was registered just a month ago.

The final link opens a convincing page with a form asking for credit card details:

Free Mobile scam

The phishing page looks authentic, which sets this campaign apart from many of the Free Mobile scams we’ve seen since the breach.

We initially saw the same campaign using less convincing redirection chains, like this example from July:

1. https://bly.to/93kie5u
2. https://s1181402.ha026.t.mydomain.zone/mbl/
3. https://s1181402.ha026.t.mydomain.zone/mbl/regularisation/?impaye=505…

More recently, we’ve seen more authentic-looking domains, all hosted by Cloudflare:

1. https://s.ink/jmCnZZ
2. https://freesas.info/Cf4tP/
3. https://freesas.info/Cf4tP/regularisation/?impaye=f13fa919d1a22833557…

And another example:

1. https://bly.to/jabwpf6
2. https://regularisation-free.info/portail/
3. https://regularisation-free.info/portail/regularisation/?impaye=83f91…

How to stay safe

Malwarebytes can help protect you from these threats, but treat unexpected messages about your accounts and invoices with caution:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited emails. If a message concerns your account, open the official Free Mobile app or website directly, or call the official help line at 3244.
  • Check the actual domain in your browser’s address bar to see if it matches what you expect—https://mobile.free.fr in this case.
  • Malwarebytes Browser Guard detects and blocks this scam directly in your browser.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution with a web protection component on all your devices.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether an email is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

Convincing Free Mobile phishing emails appear after data breach

1 October 2026 at 13:30

Free Mobile, one of France’s main cellular providers, was fined €27 million by France’s data protection regulator, the CNIL, in January over failures to protect customer data. The October 2024 breach allowed an unauthorized party to access sensitive customer records, including bank account details and login information. Since the breach, we’ve seen many poorly written scam campaigns targeting Free Mobile customers.

However, over the past few weeks, a well-written scam has appeared, closely copying the design of the official Free Mobile website and email templates.

One of our employees, who is a Free Mobile customer, received this phishing email on Wednesday, September 30. The message used the same logo and template as legitimate emails from the company, but came from the suspicious email address freemobile-regularisation[@]knowledgegrowthcenter[.]help. It included a link that appeared to point to regularisation.free.fr :

Free Mobile phishing email

The email tells the user that an invoice of €9.99 needs to be paid to avoid having the customer’s service suspended. Clicking the link opens a redirection chain:

1. https://u2l.ai/Q5YwFz301
2. https://espace-free-mobile.pro/Ds41LE/302
3. https://espace-free-mobile.pro/Ds41LE/regularisation/?impaye=92a9e77d…200

This final domain, espace-free-mobile.pro, is hosted by Cloudflare and was registered just a month ago.

The final link opens a convincing page with a form asking for credit card details:

Free Mobile scam

The phishing page looks authentic, which sets this campaign apart from many of the Free Mobile scams we’ve seen since the breach.

We initially saw the same campaign using less convincing redirection chains, like this example from July:

1. https://bly.to/93kie5u
2. https://s1181402.ha026.t.mydomain.zone/mbl/
3. https://s1181402.ha026.t.mydomain.zone/mbl/regularisation/?impaye=505…

More recently, we’ve seen more authentic-looking domains, all hosted by Cloudflare:

1. https://s.ink/jmCnZZ
2. https://freesas.info/Cf4tP/
3. https://freesas.info/Cf4tP/regularisation/?impaye=f13fa919d1a22833557…

And another example:

1. https://bly.to/jabwpf6
2. https://regularisation-free.info/portail/
3. https://regularisation-free.info/portail/regularisation/?impaye=83f91…

How to stay safe

Malwarebytes can help protect you from these threats, but treat unexpected messages about your accounts and invoices with caution:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited emails. If a message concerns your account, open the official Free Mobile app or website directly, or call the official help line at 3244.
  • Check the actual domain in your browser’s address bar to see if it matches what you expect—https://mobile.free.fr in this case.
  • Malwarebytes Browser Guard detects and blocks this scam directly in your browser.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution with a web protection component on all your devices.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether an email is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

Fake iPhone Duo preorder scam triggers DarkSword attack

29 September 2026 at 11:56

Apple announced its first foldable iPhone on September 9, and scammers were ready to ‘deliver’ one before anyone could buy it.

Most of what we found around the launch of the iPhone Duo and iPhone 18 Pro was familiar fraud.

But one fake preorder page was different.

The fake Apple-style page offers a $500 voucher and a ticking preorder deadline.
The fake Apple-style page offers a $500 voucher and a ticking preorder deadline.

Behind its Apple-style design and $500 voucher, the page uses the leaked DarkSword exploit chain to try to break into vulnerable iPhones. If it succeeds, a separate payload attempts to steal saved credentials, cryptocurrency wallet data, and notes.

You don’t have to fill in the form, tap a download, or approve anything. Opening the page is enough to start the attempt.

The $500 voucher is a distraction

The page looks like Apple’s, down to its logo and “Copyright © 2026 Apple Inc.” footer. It promises an “Authorized Partner Exclusive” $500 voucher and AppleCare+ coverage if you complete a preorder form. The form asks for your name, email, and phone number, with WhatsApp “preferred,” but promises no upfront payment.

The form asks for contact details and offers Duo models and colors that do not match Apple’s.

But Apple doesn’t open iPhone Duo preorders until October 16. You cannot place an Apple preorder now. It offers 6.3-inch and 6.9-inch models in colors Apple doesn’t sell for the Duo. Its countdown starts over whenever the page loads, and its privacy, terms, and sales policy links go nowhere.

In the version we captured, submitting the form doesn’t place an order. Its submission handler doesn’t read or send the details entered, and the page generates its own “Pre-Order Successful” message. The exploit attempt has already begun in the background.

How the attack starts when the page opens

Visitors using browsers the script doesn’t recognize as Safari see a “Browser Restricted” notice. On iPhones, the page also tries to reopen the link in Safari, the browser the exploit chain targets. That steers visitors toward the intended browser, although background resources may still load in others.

Visitors shown this notice are urged to open the page in Safari.
Visitors shown this notice are urged to open the page in Safari.

An invisible frame checks the visitor’s iOS version and selects the next code to load. DarkSword then attempts to get past the iPhone’s protections and, if successful, gain deep access to the phone. It doesn’t wait for a button press or form submission.

What attackers could take from an iPhone

If the exploit succeeds, the payload attempts to contact its server. Its first message includes a device identifier, device information, and status. It also attempts to send a list of installed apps and the contents of Apple Notes.

The code looks for cryptocurrency wallets, including MetaMask, Phantom, Trust Wallet, Coinbase Wallet, Exodus, and Tonkeeper. It also attempts to recover saved credentials from the phone’s keychain. If it finds a targeted wallet and the first exchanges with its server succeed, it attempts to upload wallet files, recovered keychain data, and photo thumbnails. Exposure of wallet files or credentials could put funds at risk.

The captured code checks for installed cryptocurrency wallet apps. This is part of the list.
The captured code checks for installed cryptocurrency wallet apps. This is part of the list.

The payload also tries to access files containing messages, call history, contacts, voicemail, email, calendar entries, and cached location data.

The payload can then repeatedly contact its server for instructions. Its commands can list directories, retrieve files and full-size photos, gather app information, and run JavaScript supplied by the server. The payload also tries to cover its tracks by deleting diagnostic reports that could help investigators spot the attack.

The beacon sends a device identifier, device information and status to the configured server. The command loop uses the response to obtain instructions.
The beacon sends a device identifier, device information and status to the configured server. The command loop uses the response to obtain instructions.

The code is designed to run inside a system process, but may stop before the phone restarts. We found no mechanism that automatically brings it back after a reboot.

We analyzed the captured code, but did not test it on an iPhone or observe data leaving one.

Which iPhones could be at risk?

Several parts of the captured code match the DarkSword chain described by Google in March. Apple has patched the vulnerabilities Google reported.

When DarkSword was disclosed in March, iVerify estimated that up to 270 million devices were running the iOS 18.4 through 18.6.2 versions targeted by the variant it analyzed. That is not a current count or a measure of how many phones this page could compromise. We haven’t confirmed this page’s exact range; its files also contain code for older iOS versions.

The lure fits the exploit: someone considering a new iPhone may still be using an older, unpatched one. That could make them vulnerable simply by opening the preorder page.

Safari can report an older iOS version to websites, so an updated iPhone may still load the attack code. That doesn’t mean the exploit can break in: Apple says updated devices are protected against the reported attacks.

How to stay safe

  • Keep your iPhone updated. Go to Settings > General > Software Update and install the latest version available. Turn on Automatic Updates there too. Apple says updated devices are protected against the reported DarkSword attacks.
  • Check offers without opening unfamiliar links. Go directly to Apple or a retailer you know by typing its address yourself. A preorder link in an ad, message, or social post could start an exploit attempt as soon as the page opens.
  • Opened this page? Restart your iPhone after updating it. We found no code that automatically brings the payload back after a reboot. Restarting cannot undo any data already taken.
  • Keep a cryptocurrency wallet on that phone? Take precautions from a trusted device. If the phone may have been compromised and you keep a wallet on it, create a new wallet with a new recovery phrase and move the funds. For an exchange account, secure the account and contact the exchange.
  • Change potentially exposed passwords from a trusted device. Start with email, your Apple Account, banking, and crypto accounts, and turn on two-factor authentication.
  • Report the page. Save its URL and any screenshots without reopening it, and report it to your national cybercrime reporting service.
  • Check a suspicious offer before you act. Scam Guard can give a verdict on a screenshot or link. On desktop, Browser Guard blocks the fake preorder page we analyzed; web protection in Malwarebytes Premium blocks it too.

Indicators of compromise

  • pnmrud[.]cc — command-and-control and collection server
  • cloud[.]cmatgldn[.]click — ad click and conversion tracker

CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


Fake iPhone Duo preorder scam triggers DarkSword attack

29 September 2026 at 11:56

Apple announced its first foldable iPhone on September 9, and scammers were ready to ‘deliver’ one before anyone could buy it.

Most of what we found around the launch of the iPhone Duo and iPhone 18 Pro was familiar fraud.

But one fake preorder page was different.

The fake Apple-style page offers a $500 voucher and a ticking preorder deadline.
The fake Apple-style page offers a $500 voucher and a ticking preorder deadline.

Behind its Apple-style design and $500 voucher, the page uses the leaked DarkSword exploit chain to try to break into vulnerable iPhones. If it succeeds, a separate payload attempts to steal saved credentials, cryptocurrency wallet data, and notes.

You don’t have to fill in the form, tap a download, or approve anything. Opening the page is enough to start the attempt.

The $500 voucher is a distraction

The page looks like Apple’s, down to its logo and “Copyright © 2026 Apple Inc.” footer. It promises an “Authorized Partner Exclusive” $500 voucher and AppleCare+ coverage if you complete a preorder form. The form asks for your name, email, and phone number, with WhatsApp “preferred,” but promises no upfront payment.

The form asks for contact details and offers Duo models and colors that do not match Apple’s.

But Apple doesn’t open iPhone Duo preorders until October 16. You cannot place an Apple preorder now. It offers 6.3-inch and 6.9-inch models in colors Apple doesn’t sell for the Duo. Its countdown starts over whenever the page loads, and its privacy, terms, and sales policy links go nowhere.

In the version we captured, submitting the form doesn’t place an order. Its submission handler doesn’t read or send the details entered, and the page generates its own “Pre-Order Successful” message. The exploit attempt has already begun in the background.

How the attack starts when the page opens

Visitors using browsers the script doesn’t recognize as Safari see a “Browser Restricted” notice. On iPhones, the page also tries to reopen the link in Safari, the browser the exploit chain targets. That steers visitors toward the intended browser, although background resources may still load in others.

Visitors shown this notice are urged to open the page in Safari.
Visitors shown this notice are urged to open the page in Safari.

An invisible frame checks the visitor’s iOS version and selects the next code to load. DarkSword then attempts to get past the iPhone’s protections and, if successful, gain deep access to the phone. It doesn’t wait for a button press or form submission.

What attackers could take from an iPhone

If the exploit succeeds, the payload attempts to contact its server. Its first message includes a device identifier, device information, and status. It also attempts to send a list of installed apps and the contents of Apple Notes.

The code looks for cryptocurrency wallets, including MetaMask, Phantom, Trust Wallet, Coinbase Wallet, Exodus, and Tonkeeper. It also attempts to recover saved credentials from the phone’s keychain. If it finds a targeted wallet and the first exchanges with its server succeed, it attempts to upload wallet files, recovered keychain data, and photo thumbnails. Exposure of wallet files or credentials could put funds at risk.

The captured code checks for installed cryptocurrency wallet apps. This is part of the list.
The captured code checks for installed cryptocurrency wallet apps. This is part of the list.

The payload also tries to access files containing messages, call history, contacts, voicemail, email, calendar entries, and cached location data.

The payload can then repeatedly contact its server for instructions. Its commands can list directories, retrieve files and full-size photos, gather app information, and run JavaScript supplied by the server. The payload also tries to cover its tracks by deleting diagnostic reports that could help investigators spot the attack.

The beacon sends a device identifier, device information and status to the configured server. The command loop uses the response to obtain instructions.
The beacon sends a device identifier, device information and status to the configured server. The command loop uses the response to obtain instructions.

The code is designed to run inside a system process, but may stop before the phone restarts. We found no mechanism that automatically brings it back after a reboot.

We analyzed the captured code, but did not test it on an iPhone or observe data leaving one.

Which iPhones could be at risk?

Several parts of the captured code match the DarkSword chain described by Google in March. Apple has patched the vulnerabilities Google reported.

When DarkSword was disclosed in March, iVerify estimated that up to 270 million devices were running the iOS 18.4 through 18.6.2 versions targeted by the variant it analyzed. That is not a current count or a measure of how many phones this page could compromise. We haven’t confirmed this page’s exact range; its files also contain code for older iOS versions.

The lure fits the exploit: someone considering a new iPhone may still be using an older, unpatched one. That could make them vulnerable simply by opening the preorder page.

Safari can report an older iOS version to websites, so an updated iPhone may still load the attack code. That doesn’t mean the exploit can break in: Apple says updated devices are protected against the reported attacks.

How to stay safe

  • Keep your iPhone updated. Go to Settings > General > Software Update and install the latest version available. Turn on Automatic Updates there too. Apple says updated devices are protected against the reported DarkSword attacks.
  • Check offers without opening unfamiliar links. Go directly to Apple or a retailer you know by typing its address yourself. A preorder link in an ad, message, or social post could start an exploit attempt as soon as the page opens.
  • Opened this page? Restart your iPhone after updating it. We found no code that automatically brings the payload back after a reboot. Restarting cannot undo any data already taken.
  • Keep a cryptocurrency wallet on that phone? Take precautions from a trusted device. If the phone may have been compromised and you keep a wallet on it, create a new wallet with a new recovery phrase and move the funds. For an exchange account, secure the account and contact the exchange.
  • Change potentially exposed passwords from a trusted device. Start with email, your Apple Account, banking, and crypto accounts, and turn on two-factor authentication.
  • Report the page. Save its URL and any screenshots without reopening it, and report it to your national cybercrime reporting service.
  • Check a suspicious offer before you act. Scam Guard can give a verdict on a screenshot or link. On desktop, Browser Guard blocks the fake preorder page we analyzed; web protection in Malwarebytes Premium blocks it too.

Indicators of compromise

  • pnmrud[.]cc — command-and-control and collection server
  • cloud[.]cmatgldn[.]click — ad click and conversion tracker

CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


LinkedIn adds new checks for fake profiles and work histories

25 September 2026 at 17:04

LinkedIn is adding trust and verification features aimed at making fake professional identities, invented work histories, and company impersonation harder to pull off.

The company is responding to an environment in which generative AI enables imposters to create an entirely made-up professional persona. It reduces the cost of creating convincing headshots, biographies, résumés, outreach messages, and recommendations.

LinkedIn’s new features use verified people and company Pages to help check other users’ claims.

Colleague and classmate vouching: People can confirm that they worked or studied with someone during the period listed on that person’s profile. This confirms an affiliation; it does not rate the person’s ability or recommend them.

Employer control over false affiliations: Admins of verified company Pages can remove people who falsely claim to work there from the company’s associated people and search results. This doesn’t remove the person’s profile or erase the claim from it.

Workplace verification requirement (in testing): LinkedIn is testing a setting that would require people who want to associate themselves with a company Page to verify their workplace, for example, through a work email address.

Verified identity beyond LinkedIn: LinkedIn is extending partnerships that let users display their LinkedIn-verified identity elsewhere. New partners include Truecaller and PeerSpot, alongside Adobe and UserTesting.

LinkedIn hopes that multiple visible signals such as identity verification, workplace verification, peer corroboration, and company Page controls will make a fabricated profile less persuasive. It says its existing verification tools have verified 115 million members and more than 700,000 companies.

LinkedIn VP of Product Oscar Rodriguez told TechCrunch:

“We’ve been invested in [verification] because we believe that authenticity will be the single most valuable currency on the internet.”

These new affiliation checks cannot tell a job seeker whether an opportunity is genuine. A scammer does not always need to impersonate a major employer. They can invent a convincing startup, build a polished company Page, and use fake job listings or recruiters to lure applicants. The checks may be less helpful if the supposed employer itself is part of the scam.

As we’ve seen in recent research, criminals pose as both well-known companies and appealing new ventures offering the kind of role a job seeker hopes to find. The new checks may help someone determine whether a supposed recruiter is affiliated with a company they recognize. They may be less helpful when the company itself is part of the scam.

Verification is therefore a useful signal, not a guarantee. Job seekers should still be wary of unsolicited approaches, pressure to move conversations off LinkedIn, requests to install software or share identity documents, and job offers that arrive before a credible interview process. Check a recruiter’s affiliation, visit the employer’s website independently, and confirm that its contact details and job listing match.

LinkedIn’s changes acknowledge a growing problem: AI can make a fake professional identity look remarkably polished. Verified accounts, workplace affiliations, and colleague confirmations may become more valuable to criminals, too. They may try to exploit those signals through stolen accounts, manipulated verification, or carefully constructed networks of fraudulent profiles. Verification can raise the cost of deception, but it cannot replace healthy skepticism.


Scammers don’t need to hack you. They just need you to click once. 

Malwarebytes Identity Theft Protection catches suspicious activity before it becomes a problem.

Fake Claude Max giveaway hides a Google account phishing trap

23 September 2026 at 14:45

Phishing follows whatever people want at the moment, and right now that includes AI subscriptions they don’t have to pay for. We recently uncovered a new variation on this theme: A fake Claude Max giveaway that uses a convincing Google sign-in window to steal login information.

Claude’s paid plans start at $20 a month and cost considerably more for higher usage limits, while free accounts have stricter limits. That makes the promise of a free upgrade an attractive lure.

Microsoft reported in June that it had seen a growing number of phishing, malicious advertising, and search-based campaigns impersonating services such as ChatGPT, Claude, DeepSeek and Copilot. Some claim that a payment has failed and send you to a fake checkout. Others offer an app download that installs malware.

The campaign we found takes a different approach. There is no form to collect card details and no download. Instead, it offers a free upgrade and asks you to sign in with your Google account.

The fake giveaway claims that only a limited number of free Claude Max subscriptions remain.
The fake giveaway claims that only a limited number of free Claude Max subscriptions remain.

What the page shows you and what it collects

The site announces that Anthropic has passed 100 million users and is thanking people by giving away 10,000 free one-month subscriptions to Claude Max, its highest-usage plan.

The presentation is careful, down to the real logo and colors, invented five-star reviews, and a long footer whose links lead almost entirely to genuine Anthropic pages. This is probably the most effective trust signal on the site, and it cost the operator nothing.

A counter claims that fewer than 750 of the 10,000 slots remain, dropping by a few every several seconds. Nothing is actually being counted. The number is generated inside your browser and resets when you reload the page, so every visitor sees the same manufactured shortage.

The frequently asked questions repeatedly promise that no payment details are needed. That part is true, which helps make the offer persuasive. Many people associate scams with requests for card details, and this page never asks for them.

What it wants instead is your Google login. Two sign-in options appear, but only one works. The Apple button produces a pre-written notice saying that the method is temporarily unavailable. The email box discards whatever you type into it and triggers the Google button instead. Every route leads to the same place, and the prize is far bigger than the lure suggests.

A Google account can provide access to email, documents, and the password-reset messages for other accounts. If you use Google to sign in to Claude, it could also give the criminals a route into your Claude account. Paid AI accounts are valuable in their own right because their usage allowances cost money. Last month, our research covered infostealers hijacking Claude accounts and using the victims’ paid allowances.

The fake sign-in form steers visitors toward Google by claiming that Apple sign-in is unavailable.
The fake sign-in form steers visitors toward Google by claiming that Apple sign-in is unavailable.

Why this sample is notable

Clicking the Google button doesn’t open a real Google sign-in window. Instead, the page draws a browser window inside the existing tab, complete with a padlock and a correctly spelled Google sign-in address. It can even be dragged around the page.

The address bar, padlock, and everything inside the supposed window belong to the phishing page, not Google. It begins with a human-verification step rather than a password box, which may reassure visitors while helping to keep automated scanners away from the next stage.

The page displays a fake Google verification window with a fraudulent address bar and padlock.
The page displays a fake Google verification window with a fraudulent address bar and padlock.

Researchers have documented this “browser-in-the-browser” technique since 2022. Unit 42 reported a campaign in June that used draggable fake browser windows to target Microsoft 365 users.

What makes this sample instructive is how little the operator had to do. The malicious functionality is loaded through a single line of code from an outside service that presents itself as a reusable sign-in widget and provides installation instructions.

Comments inside the code are written in Russian and refer to the target as the victim. One explains that dark-themed fake windows used to flash white while loading, so the widget now fetches the correct color in advance to remove the flicker. The code appears to be a maintained, reusable product rather than something built for this one campaign.

How to spot a fake browser window

The design assumes you will check the wrong address bar. People have been taught to look for a padlock and the correct address on a login page, so this attack draws both inside a window that does not really exist.

The only address bar that matters is the one belonging to your actual browser at the top of the screen. Throughout this process, it continues to show the phishing site’s domain.

  • Try to drag the sign-in window beyond the edge of the webpage. A real popup is a separate browser window and can be moved anywhere on your screen. A fake one is trapped inside the page that created it and stops at its edge. It takes two seconds and is the most reliable test a non-technical user has.
  • Let your password manager decide. It checks the real web address rather than what the page displays. It should not offer to fill your Google password on a site that does not belong to Google. If it stays silent where it normally fills, believe it over your own eyes.
  • Don’t arrive through links. If a promotion is real, you should also be able to find it on the company’s own site. Type the address or use a bookmark and look for the offer there.
  • Treat countdowns and slot counters as decoration. Any page can show a number falling toward zero. It does not prove that an offer is limited.
  • Be suspicious when only one sign-in option works. Claiming that one provider is temporarily unavailable can steer everyone toward the path the attacker built.
  • If you already signed in, secure the account. Change your password through the provider’s real website, sign out of all other sessions, and review connected apps and unfamiliar devices. Closing the tab does not undo a login.

How Malwarebytes helps

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing and scam domains before the page can load. In an attack like this, once the page is open, the criminals control nearly every visual cue you would normally use to judge whether it’s legitimate.

If you’ve been sent an offer and you’re unsure, Scam Guard can assess it before you engage and advise you on what to do next.


CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


LinkedIn adds new checks for fake profiles and work histories

25 September 2026 at 17:04

LinkedIn is adding trust and verification features aimed at making fake professional identities, invented work histories, and company impersonation harder to pull off.

The company is responding to an environment in which generative AI enables imposters to create an entirely made-up professional persona. It reduces the cost of creating convincing headshots, biographies, résumés, outreach messages, and recommendations.

LinkedIn’s new features use verified people and company Pages to help check other users’ claims.

Colleague and classmate vouching: People can confirm that they worked or studied with someone during the period listed on that person’s profile. This confirms an affiliation; it does not rate the person’s ability or recommend them.

Employer control over false affiliations: Admins of verified company Pages can remove people who falsely claim to work there from the company’s associated people and search results. This doesn’t remove the person’s profile or erase the claim from it.

Workplace verification requirement (in testing): LinkedIn is testing a setting that would require people who want to associate themselves with a company Page to verify their workplace, for example, through a work email address.

Verified identity beyond LinkedIn: LinkedIn is extending partnerships that let users display their LinkedIn-verified identity elsewhere. New partners include Truecaller and PeerSpot, alongside Adobe and UserTesting.

LinkedIn hopes that multiple visible signals such as identity verification, workplace verification, peer corroboration, and company Page controls will make a fabricated profile less persuasive. It says its existing verification tools have verified 115 million members and more than 700,000 companies.

LinkedIn VP of Product Oscar Rodriguez told TechCrunch:

“We’ve been invested in [verification] because we believe that authenticity will be the single most valuable currency on the internet.”

These new affiliation checks cannot tell a job seeker whether an opportunity is genuine. A scammer does not always need to impersonate a major employer. They can invent a convincing startup, build a polished company Page, and use fake job listings or recruiters to lure applicants. The checks may be less helpful if the supposed employer itself is part of the scam.

As we’ve seen in recent research, criminals pose as both well-known companies and appealing new ventures offering the kind of role a job seeker hopes to find. The new checks may help someone determine whether a supposed recruiter is affiliated with a company they recognize. They may be less helpful when the company itself is part of the scam.

Verification is therefore a useful signal, not a guarantee. Job seekers should still be wary of unsolicited approaches, pressure to move conversations off LinkedIn, requests to install software or share identity documents, and job offers that arrive before a credible interview process. Check a recruiter’s affiliation, visit the employer’s website independently, and confirm that its contact details and job listing match.

LinkedIn’s changes acknowledge a growing problem: AI can make a fake professional identity look remarkably polished. Verified accounts, workplace affiliations, and colleague confirmations may become more valuable to criminals, too. They may try to exploit those signals through stolen accounts, manipulated verification, or carefully constructed networks of fraudulent profiles. Verification can raise the cost of deception, but it cannot replace healthy skepticism.


Scammers don’t need to hack you. They just need you to click once. 

Malwarebytes Identity Theft Protection catches suspicious activity before it becomes a problem.

CVE flood pushes Ubuntu onto weekly kernel release cycle

24 September 2026 at 18:33
Canonical is speeding up Ubuntu kernel releases to one a week as AI-assisted bug hunting helps bury defenders under an ever-growing pile of CVEs. The Ubuntu maker is overhauling how it ships kernel Stable Release Updates (SRUs), replacing its current four-week regular and two-week security cycles with overlapping two-week cycles that will push a kernel release every week. Canonical says the change is needed because the number of reported vulnerabilities has exploded, with AI deserving some of the credit – or blame, depending on which side of the patch queue you're sitting. "Large language models (LLMs) and specialized AI agents have transformed bug discovery from a manual, time-intensive process into a highly automated engine," Canonical said on Wednesday. AI isn't solely responsible for the CVE avalanche. The upstream Linux kernel community became a CVE Numbering Authority in 2024 and began assigning identifiers to thousands of bugs on the basis that almost any kernel flaw affecting a running system could have security implications. Put the two together, and Linux vendors have far more CVEs to deal with. Canonical says the resulting backlog requires faster releases to shrink the window between vulnerabilities becoming public and patched kernels reaching users. Under the new system, each SRU cycle lasts two weeks, but a new one starts every week. The first week is spent integrating patches, preparing and building kernel packages, and carrying out basic checks to make sure nothing catches fire. By the end of that stage, release candidates are published to Ubuntu's -proposed pocket. Week two is reserved for the heavier stuff, including hardware certification, distro integration, and regression testing. Once that's done, the kernel is released. Because the next cycle starts while that testing is under way, Canonical can publish another kernel the following week. For admins who consider even that too leisurely, there's a faster route. Organizations particularly sensitive to patching delays can take release candidates from the -proposed pocket after the first week and run their own acceptance tests. Canonical makes the trade-off clear: those users get access to fixes sooner, but before the company has finished its extensive certification testing. That can make kernel CVE fixes available within a week, provided customers are willing to perform some of the testing themselves. Canonical also wants to leave customers less exposed between disclosure and patch availability. It aims to provide safe workarounds where possible, or recommend general hardening measures where none exist, putting systems into what it calls a "defensible, safer state" within 24 to 48 hours of public disclosure. Those measures are not intended to replace patching, merely to give admins something better than crossing their fingers while a fix makes its way through the release process. The end result is a considerably busier kernel release schedule, although perhaps that's inevitable when machines are increasingly being enlisted to find bugs faster than humans can patch them. AI was supposed to make everyone's jobs easier. Ubuntu's kernel team may want a word. ®

Fake Claude Max giveaway hides a Google account phishing trap

23 September 2026 at 14:45

Phishing follows whatever people want at the moment, and right now that includes AI subscriptions they don’t have to pay for. We recently uncovered a new variation on this theme: A fake Claude Max giveaway that uses a convincing Google sign-in window to steal login information.

Claude’s paid plans start at $20 a month and cost considerably more for higher usage limits, while free accounts have stricter limits. That makes the promise of a free upgrade an attractive lure.

Microsoft reported in June that it had seen a growing number of phishing, malicious advertising, and search-based campaigns impersonating services such as ChatGPT, Claude, DeepSeek and Copilot. Some claim that a payment has failed and send you to a fake checkout. Others offer an app download that installs malware.

The campaign we found takes a different approach. There is no form to collect card details and no download. Instead, it offers a free upgrade and asks you to sign in with your Google account.

The fake giveaway claims that only a limited number of free Claude Max subscriptions remain.
The fake giveaway claims that only a limited number of free Claude Max subscriptions remain.

What the page shows you and what it collects

The site announces that Anthropic has passed 100 million users and is thanking people by giving away 10,000 free one-month subscriptions to Claude Max, its highest-usage plan.

The presentation is careful, down to the real logo and colors, invented five-star reviews, and a long footer whose links lead almost entirely to genuine Anthropic pages. This is probably the most effective trust signal on the site, and it cost the operator nothing.

A counter claims that fewer than 750 of the 10,000 slots remain, dropping by a few every several seconds. Nothing is actually being counted. The number is generated inside your browser and resets when you reload the page, so every visitor sees the same manufactured shortage.

The frequently asked questions repeatedly promise that no payment details are needed. That part is true, which helps make the offer persuasive. Many people associate scams with requests for card details, and this page never asks for them.

What it wants instead is your Google login. Two sign-in options appear, but only one works. The Apple button produces a pre-written notice saying that the method is temporarily unavailable. The email box discards whatever you type into it and triggers the Google button instead. Every route leads to the same place, and the prize is far bigger than the lure suggests.

A Google account can provide access to email, documents, and the password-reset messages for other accounts. If you use Google to sign in to Claude, it could also give the criminals a route into your Claude account. Paid AI accounts are valuable in their own right because their usage allowances cost money. Last month, our research covered infostealers hijacking Claude accounts and using the victims’ paid allowances.

The fake sign-in form steers visitors toward Google by claiming that Apple sign-in is unavailable.
The fake sign-in form steers visitors toward Google by claiming that Apple sign-in is unavailable.

Why this sample is notable

Clicking the Google button doesn’t open a real Google sign-in window. Instead, the page draws a browser window inside the existing tab, complete with a padlock and a correctly spelled Google sign-in address. It can even be dragged around the page.

The address bar, padlock, and everything inside the supposed window belong to the phishing page, not Google. It begins with a human-verification step rather than a password box, which may reassure visitors while helping to keep automated scanners away from the next stage.

The page displays a fake Google verification window with a fraudulent address bar and padlock.
The page displays a fake Google verification window with a fraudulent address bar and padlock.

Researchers have documented this “browser-in-the-browser” technique since 2022. Unit 42 reported a campaign in June that used draggable fake browser windows to target Microsoft 365 users.

What makes this sample instructive is how little the operator had to do. The malicious functionality is loaded through a single line of code from an outside service that presents itself as a reusable sign-in widget and provides installation instructions.

Comments inside the code are written in Russian and refer to the target as the victim. One explains that dark-themed fake windows used to flash white while loading, so the widget now fetches the correct color in advance to remove the flicker. The code appears to be a maintained, reusable product rather than something built for this one campaign.

How to spot a fake browser window

The design assumes you will check the wrong address bar. People have been taught to look for a padlock and the correct address on a login page, so this attack draws both inside a window that does not really exist.

The only address bar that matters is the one belonging to your actual browser at the top of the screen. Throughout this process, it continues to show the phishing site’s domain.

  • Try to drag the sign-in window beyond the edge of the webpage. A real popup is a separate browser window and can be moved anywhere on your screen. A fake one is trapped inside the page that created it and stops at its edge. It takes two seconds and is the most reliable test a non-technical user has.
  • Let your password manager decide. It checks the real web address rather than what the page displays. It should not offer to fill your Google password on a site that does not belong to Google. If it stays silent where it normally fills, believe it over your own eyes.
  • Don’t arrive through links. If a promotion is real, you should also be able to find it on the company’s own site. Type the address or use a bookmark and look for the offer there.
  • Treat countdowns and slot counters as decoration. Any page can show a number falling toward zero. It does not prove that an offer is limited.
  • Be suspicious when only one sign-in option works. Claiming that one provider is temporarily unavailable can steer everyone toward the path the attacker built.
  • If you already signed in, secure the account. Change your password through the provider’s real website, sign out of all other sessions, and review connected apps and unfamiliar devices. Closing the tab does not undo a login.

How Malwarebytes helps

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing and scam domains before the page can load. In an attack like this, once the page is open, the criminals control nearly every visual cue you would normally use to judge whether it’s legitimate.

If you’ve been sent an offer and you’re unsure, Scam Guard can assess it before you engage and advise you on what to do next.


CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


The fake sites using a cheap toolkit to sell $2,000 AI subscriptions

21 September 2026 at 17:38

We found more than 100 subscription websites linked through the same toolkit and closely related developer details. Some impersonate existing products, including GPT-6 Astra, DaVinci Resolve, PixAI, and OpenCut. Another uses the name of Omegle, the chat service that shut down in 2023. Others promote unfamiliar brands with little verifiable information about who operates them.

The sites we examined did not use fake password forms or push malware downloads. Instead, they used polished product pages and genuine Google sign-in screens before directing visitors to paid plans. Someone visiting an imitation site could believe they were buying from the genuine provider. With the unfamiliar brands, it is difficult to establish who is selling the subscription or independently verify the claims being made.

Despite their different names and designs, the sites share identical underlying files and closely related developer email addresses. This suggests that a single operator, or closely connected group, is behind the network.

What the sites show you

At first glance, these sites don’t look suspicious. They use secure connections, professional designs, and the confident language you would expect from an established software company.

The secure connection and padlock only show that traffic between you and the site is encrypted. They do not confirm who operates it.

Some show performance comparisons, star ratings, and precise user numbers. One claimed to have more than 12 million users. Another displayed the names of well-known companies as customers, although we found no evidence that those businesses were connected to it.

A website owner can add any rating, customer number, testimonial, or test result to a page. None of these claims should be treated as independent evidence that a product is genuine or widely used.

Behind the Sign in or Get started button is a subscription service. Visitors are asked to sign in with Google and are then shown paid plans, usage credits, and payment histories. Prices range from less than $10 a month to more than $2,000 a year. Several sites also ask users to upload documents, recordings, or other files for the advertised service to process.

The fake GPT-6 Astra site offers plans costing $89, $169, or $249 a month.
The fake GPT-6 Astra site offers plans costing $89, $169, or $249 a month.

On the sites we examined, there was no way to test the advertised product before paying. Controls on the landing pages did nothing until we signed in, and signing in led to a pricing page rather than the tool itself.

Many legitimate services require payment before use, so that alone does not prove that a site is unsafe. The concern here is the lack of reliable information about the company selling the subscription. There are no independent reviews or official product listings to compare with the claims on the page.

Different brands, the same website kit

The sites advertise a wide range of products, including voice-cloning tools, video editors, study apps, and general-purpose AI assistants. Underneath their different designs, however, they use the same commercial website starter kit.

  • A fake PixAI anime generator site
  • A fake GPT-6 Astra site
  • Astra AI claims that more than 12 million students use its study tools
  • A site using the Omegle name offers text and video chats with strangers
  • A fake site using the DaVinci Resolve video editor name
  • A fake OpenCut video editor site
  • VoicesCloning claims it can copy a voice from a ten-second recording

The kit is a legitimate product designed to help people launch online services quickly. It includes an account system, billing, file storage, and administrative tools. The buyer supplies the branding and the product being advertised.

This explains why apparently unrelated services have identical checkout pages and account settings. The underlying system is the same even when the colors, typefaces, and product names are different.

The kit costs $249 as a one-time purchase, while additional templates cost about $2 each. Its vendor advertises that customers can launch a product in an hour. Once the first site has been created, producing more versions requires relatively little time or money. Building another site may require little more than a new domain, design, and product description—which might explain how the network grew to this scale.

Several sites still contain demonstration material supplied with the starter kit. This includes the kit’s brand name, promotional banners, generic menu entries, and testimonials from named people and companies with no apparent connection to the advertised service.

One site had relabeled a demonstration list of businesses as its own customers. On another, the word “boilerplate,” a term for reusable starter code, remained in the name of a paid subscription plan.

Signing in with Google

These sites send visitors to a genuine Google sign-in page. The web address belongs to Google, and the password is entered on Google’s website rather than on the service being advertised.

The sites we examined requested basic information such as the user’s name, email address, and profile picture. They did not ask for access to Gmail or Google Drive.

The Google consent screen shows GPT-6 Astra requesting a name, email address, and profile picture.
The Google consent screen used by the fake GPT-6 Astra site requests a name, email address, and profile picture.

However, a genuine Google sign-in page does not confirm that the service is official or connected to the brand it displays. It only confirms that Google is handling the login and passing the approved information to an outside application.

  • The fake GPT-6 Astra site asks visitors to sign in with Google
  • Astra AI places its study tools behind Google sign-in
  • The Omegle-branded site asks visitors to sign in before continuing
  • The fake DaVinci Resolve site uses the same Google sign-in process
  • The fake PixAI site asks visitors to continue with Google
  • The fake OpenCut site requires Google sign-in before visitors can try the service
  • VoicesCloning asks visitors to sign in with Google

Google’s consent screen identifies the application requesting access and provides developer details. Check these against the website and product you intended to use. If those names don’t match, you may not be dealing with the company you thought you were.

You can also open the developer information shown by Google. On the sites we examined, the support contacts were free webmail addresses rather than addresses belonging to the brands displayed on the websites.

Google’s developer information shows a free Gmail support address behind one of the sites.
Google’s developer information shows a free Gmail support address behind one of the sites.

A free email address is not proof of wrongdoing, but it should raise questions when a service claims to have millions of users or presents itself as an established company.

How the sites are connected

Websites load files containing the code they need to work. The system used by these sites gives some of those files names based on their contents. When the contents change, the filenames generally change too.

Across the sites we examined, many of these filenames were identical. This indicates that the sites were running the same version of the same underlying software. On its own, this could simply mean that different people bought the same starter kit.

The Google developer details provide a stronger connection. The developer contacts use free webmail accounts containing the same name, with only small differences such as the numbers added to the address.

Because these addresses are provided when the applications are registered with Google, rather than being automatically supplied by the starter kit, they suggest that the sites are operated by one party or by closely connected people.

What you agree to when you subscribe

The sites provide little information about the business selling the subscription. We found no registered company names, business addresses, or other independently verifiable ownership details. In many cases, the only contact method was an email address using the site’s own domain.

This could make it difficult to request a refund, challenge a charge, or resolve a problem with the subscription.

Some of the subscriptions are substantial. Alongside monthly plans, the sites sell annual access charged as a single payment, with one plan costing more than $2,000. Some plans state that unused credits expire after a set period.

Depending on the payment system used, card details may be handled by a third-party payment provider rather than given directly to the website operator. Users may still share account information and potentially sensitive material with a service whose owner they cannot identify.

How to spot sites like these

A polished design, real Google sign-in page, and impressive-looking reviews do not prove that a service is trustworthy.

  • Check the web address. Make sure it belongs to the company or product you intended to use. Don’t rely on the logo or product name alone.
  • Find out who runs the site. Look for a company name, business address, privacy policy, terms, and reliable contact details that can be independently checked.
  • Read the Google consent screen. Check the application name, domain, developer details, and information it wants to access before selecting Continue.
  • Be cautious if you cannot test the product. A service that offers no trial or working demonstration is asking you to pay before you can confirm that it does what it claims.
  • Check independent sources. Search for the product separately and look for an official website or app-store listing. Do not rely on ratings and testimonials displayed by the seller.
  • Don’t upload sensitive files until you know who operates the service. Documents, photos, recordings, and prompts may contain private information.
  • Check your statements after subscribing. Contact the payment provider or your bank promptly if you see a charge you do not recognize.
  • Remove connections you no longer trust. Visit the connections page in your Google Account and remove services you do not recognize or use. This prevents future access, but it does not delete information already shared with the operator.

How Malwarebytes can help

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks malicious, phishing, scam, and fraudulent websites, including pages reached through deceptive adverts or search results.

If you’re unsure about a site, Malwarebytes Scam Guard can assess its web address or a screenshot and help you identify warning signs.

These particular sites centred on accounts and subscriptions rather than phone calls. If a suspicious service directs you to a support number, you can check it with Malwarebytes Scam Number Check before calling.


Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

Data Broker Radaris Loses Domains in Privacy Fight

16 September 2026 at 20:14

The consumer data broker Radaris.com has long had a reputation for ignoring requests to remove personal information from its vast empire of people-search services online. That reputation caught up with the company recently in a lawsuit alleging Radaris violated a New Jersey privacy law that provides for hefty fines against data brokers that publish personal information on state law enforcement officials. In the face of repeated stonewalling and prevarication by attorneys for Radaris, the judge in the case ordered that radaris.com and more than a dozen other data broker domains be transferred to the plaintiffs.

The radaris.com website, prior to the domain transfer to Atlas.

In February 2024, Radaris was sued by Atlas Data Privacy Corp, a company that has been pursuing data brokers alleged to be violating a New Jersey statute called Daniel’s Law. The statute allows state law enforcement officials, government personnel, judges and their families to have their information completely removed from commercial data brokers and people-search services, and provides for fines of $1,000 per violation against companies that ignore removal requests.

Less than a month after Atlas sued Radaris, KrebsOnSecurity published a deep dive into the Radaris co-founders — Igor and Dmitry Lubarsky (also spelled Lybarsky) — Russian-born brothers living in Massachusetts who operate a dizzying array of people-search companies as well as a number of Russian language dating services and affiliate programs.

Attorneys for the Lubarsky brothers threatened to sue for defamation if the story wasn’t removed and an apology issued. Their attorney asserted that our reporting was wildly inaccurate, and that the true owners of the company were Ukrainians living in Ukraine.

The Lubarsky brothers Dmitry or “Dan” (left) and Gary/Igor.

KrebsOnSecurity doubled down and showed how the Lubarsky brothers built and operated Radaris and other data broker companies using a fictitious CEO’s name. Our follow-up story noted that Radaris’s attorney — a lawyer with the Boston Law Group named Val Gurvits — admitted his clients had invented the CEO pseudonym “Gary Norden,” and that Radaris also had issued multiple press releases over the years that quoted the fake CEO while seeking money from potential investors.

Attorneys for Radaris waited until the last minute to appear in court and contest what was all but certain to be a default judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, and then told the court that Atlas had failed to serve the real owners and operators of Radaris and several of its sister data broker companies.

Atlas re-filed the lawsuit in June 2025, this time dramatically expanding the number of Radaris family data brokers accused of violating Daniel’s Law. Matt Adkisson, president and CEO of Atlas, said Radaris turned to a tried-and-true playbook: Delaying in court until the last possible minute, and playing shell games with Radaris’s true country of origin and the individuals listed as owners and operators of these sites.

“We refer to this period as their island-hopping phase. Privacy policies changed constantly, and new entities kept appearing from places like the Marshall Islands, the British Virgin Islands, and Seychelles,” Adkisson told KrebsOnSecurity. “Behind the scenes, it felt like a shell game. Defense lawyers told the court that certain entities merely operated the domains and were the proper parties to sue. But by the time a judgment neared, those entities would be discarded and new entities would appear. Meanwhile, the lawyers claimed the other entities that actually owned the domains should not be held responsible.”

Adkisson said when the defendants updated their terms of service to state that Radaris was suddenly managed by a company in the Marshall Islands, Atlas hired an investigator in that country and soon learned the brand new entity that Radaris claimed was managing the company didn’t even exist yet.

Mr. Gurvits stepped forward as Radaris’s attorney in a class action lawsuit the company temporarily lost in 2017 because it never contested the claim in court. When the plaintiffs told the judge they couldn’t collect on the $7.5 million default judgment, the court ordered the domain registry Verisign to transfer the radaris.com domain name to the plaintiffs.

Mr. Gurvits appealed that verdict, arguing the lawsuit hadn’t named the actual owners of the Radaris domain name — a Cyprus company called Bitseller Expert Limited — and thus taking the domain away would be a violation of their due process rights.

The judge in the 2017 case ruled in Radaris’ favor — halting the domain transfer — and told the plaintiffs they could refile their complaint. Soon after, the operator of Radaris changed from Bitseller to Andtop Company, an entity formed (PDF) in the Marshall Islands in Oct. 2020. The plaintiffs never re-filed their lawsuit.

A mind map of various entities tied to Radaris and the company’s co-founders. Click to enlarge.

“That seemed to be their modus operandi,” said Raj Parikh, a partner at PEM Law in New Jersey who handles most of the Daniel’s Law litigation for Atlas. “In the past, they won by attrition. Plaintiffs’ attorneys tired of the procedural games and just gave up. That strategy worked for a decade, and it probably would have worked in this case too, since any financial recovery from foreign actors will be difficult. But we were acutely aware of the threat this website posed to law enforcement officers and other public officials in New Jersey, and decided early on to commit whatever time and resources were necessary to remove that threat.”

On August 26, the judge in the New Jersey case found the defendants were given multiple chances to appear and defend the claims against them but had failed to do so. Mr. Gurvits declined to comment on the case, saying it had been assigned to another attorney, a Mr. Victor Worms. In response to questions, Mr. Worms asserted the New Jersey court transferred Radaris.com to Atlas as part of a default judgment against Radaris.com, which is not a legal entity.

“We have made a motion to vacate that default judgment on the grounds that it is void since a non-entity has no legal capacity to sue or be sued,” Worms replied. “We also intend to pursue all appropriate appeals because we believe the transfer of Radaris.com amounts to a forfeiture in violation of various constitutional principles.”

While radaris.com still comes up prominently in results when searching online for U.S. residents by name, the domain no longer sells detailed personal dossiers on millions of Americans. Its homepage now displays a notice from Atlas, as well as links to our previous reporting on Radaris.

EMAIL CONFIRMATIONS

Atlas told KrebsOnSecurity that it has obtained more than 10,000 emails and documents in the course of litigation, and that those messages confirm our previous reporting on the owners and operators of Radaris and its myriad companies.

Atlas said the emails clearly establish that the nominal legal vehicles — Radaris America, Inc.; Bitseller Expert Limited; Digital Orbit Corp; Core Solutions Group Inc; Lucky Solutions Inc; Virtura Corp; Veripages Inc.; Nuform Solutions Inc.; Growth Data Advisors Inc.; Property Experts, Inc — are all administered by the same three or four people from the same mailboxes, share one bank or payment card set, and are all managed from one virtual office address.

“The corpus establishes, with documentary evidence generated independently by banks, payment processors, hosting providers, registrars, software-as-a-service vendors and the operators’ own systems, that radaris.com and at least twenty-five other people-search websites are one operation run by a small Boston-area group whose administrative, financial and technical functions sit on the difive.com mail domain and its successors (centerex.com, scienteco.com, eprofit.com, realmo.com, pub360.com),” reads a summary shared by Atlas.

Atlas said the emails show Radaris.com earns approximately $42,000 a month, while Veripages.com earns around $45,000 monthly via its partnership with the Lifetime Value Company, a marketing and advertising firm whose brands include PeopleLooker, PeopleSmart, NumberGuru, and Bumper, a car history site.

According to Atlas, the emails also showed the Radaris family of websites earns as much as $25,000 each month from their partnership with Onerep, a company that claims to help people remove their information from people-search sites. In March 2024, KrebsOnSecurity revealed how the Belarusian founder of Onerep had launched and operated dozens of people-search sites over the years and was continuing to operate one of them (Nuwber), effectively spreading the disease and selling the cure.

The domain radaris.com now redirects to this notice from Atlas about the court-ordered domain transfer.

The domain radaris.com now redirects to this notice from Atlas about the court-ordered domain transfer.

All told, the New Jersey court has so far transferred 14 domain names from the Radaris family of companies to Atlas. Radaris.com now redirects to a notice of the court-ordered domain transfer.

THE ROAD AHEAD

The Radaris family of companies is still potentially facing fines of $1,000 per alleged violation of Daniel’s Law. For the time being, however, Daniel’s Law is facing a constitutional challenge from virtually all of the 150 other consumer data broker firms being sued by Atlas.

The data broker industry responded by having at least 70 of the Atlas lawsuits moved to federal court, challenging the New Jersey statute as overly broad and a violation of the First Amendment. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has not yet issued a decision on the constitutional challenge, but either way the case is widely expected to be appealed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, at least 14 other states have now passed laws modeled after the New Jersey statute, with more states considering similar measures. However, West Virginia’s Daniel’s Law was ruled facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment by a federal district court in August 2025.

Justin Sherman is a privacy expert and author of the forthcoming book “The Middlemen,” which examines how the data broker industry powers modern surveillance. Sherman said federal lawmakers have long faced intense lobbying by the technology industry against more restrictive U.S. data privacy laws, but that many powerful industries are now working against passing comprehensive data privacy legislation.

“These days at the federal level, add in the intense amount of lobbying against these laws from social media companies, big tech, cryptocurrency firms, and now AI proponents in the mix who claim that limiting their data scraping is somehow going to collapse the whole U.S. economy under Chinese rule,” he said.

Sherman said people-search companies will continue to thrive unless and until Congress enacts meaningful consumer privacy and data protection laws that are relevant to life in the 21st century. That’s because virtually all state privacy laws exempt records that might be considered “public” or “government” documents, including voting registries, property filings, marriage certificates, motor vehicle records, criminal records, court documents, death records, professional licenses, bankruptcy filings, and more.

At least 25 states have passed or implemented laws requiring age verification for residents seeking to access adult content online, but there is no federal law that limits how the companies that are scanning everyone’s drivers license can use, share or keep the data provided. Had such restrictions been enshrined in law, we may have avoided the recent breach at IDScan.net, which exposed the drivers license information on more than 153 million Americans when the records were briefly turned into a point-and-click identity theft service on the dark web.

“The average person can look at Daniel’s Law and have a perfectly normal reaction, which is that everyone should be covered, not just police and judges,” Sherman said. “But we don’t need more wake-up calls. We’ve had eight million wake-up calls already on the need for better privacy laws. The lack of comprehensive federal privacy law is not for a lack of knowledge, and anyone claiming otherwise is either not reading the news or kidding themselves.”

Fake parcel delivery messages steal your card and bank details

18 September 2026 at 09:44

Parcel delivery phishing campaigns appear around the world under different courier names. In the United States, the messages commonly impersonate USPS and claim that a package has an invalid address or could not be delivered. Similar messages impersonate Colissimo and Chronopost in France, Correos in Spain, Poste Italiane in Italy, and PostNL in the Netherlands.

The details vary, but the aim is usually the same: to persuade you to visit a fake courier website and provide personal and financial information.

A fake bpost delivery email

A recent campaign targeting customers of the Belgian postal service bpost begins with an email claiming that a package could not be delivered because €4.95 in customs duties has not been paid.

A phishing email pretending to be from bpost, claiming €4.95 in customs duties is owed before a parcel can be delivered. 
A phishing email, in Dutch, pretending to be from bpost. 

In English, the subject and message read:

Undelivered package—customs duties due (tracking no. 3232116291*******).

Your package could not be delivered on September 9, 2026, because the customs duties (€4.95) have not been paid.

The amount is small enough that recipients may pay without giving it much thought. However, the website does not stop at collecting the supposed fee. It asks for personal information, card details, and banking information.

How the scam works 

The link first passes through a URL-shortening service (hxxps://qr[.]paps[.]jp/1GWsa) before redirecting to a fake bpost site. The campaign used several fake bpost domains, including:

hxxps://bpost[.]be-pakje-ontvangen-nl-recevoir-colis-fr[.]my[.]id/

bpost[.]center, which is the domain shown in the screenshots below.

The page copies bpost’s branding and displays security claims such as “Secure SSL connection,” “256-bit SSL,” “SEPA compliant,” and “Secure payment.” These labels were added by the scammers and do not prove that the page or payment is secure.

We’ve translated the screenshots below from the original Dutch into English.

The first page asks for the recipient’s name, phone number, email address, and age:

Left ImageRight Image

That reference to receiving funds does not match the email’s claim that a customs fee must be paid. The next page asks for an IBAN, card number, expiry date, and payment amount:

Then it asks for the real target: full card and bank details. 

Left ImageRight Image

The original Dutch version contained another mistake: One of its buttons read “Indian search” instead of “Betaal,” the Dutch word for “Pay.” Mistakes like this can expose a scam, but many phishing pages are built carefully enough that there will be no obvious typo or mistranslation.

Once submitted, card details may be used for fraudulent purchases or sold to other criminals. The personal and banking information may also be used to make later scams more convincing.

How to protect yourself 

  • Check delivery claims independently. Open the courier’s official app or type its website address into your browser, then use your tracking number to check the delivery.
  • Check the sender and destination. A message may use a courier’s name while coming from an unrelated email address or linking to a different domain.
  • Be wary of unexpected fees or refunds. A small payment or promised refund can be used to persuade you to provide much more valuable information.
  • Be wary of requests for extensive financial information. A request for an IBAN as well as card details should be treated with suspicion, particularly when it supposedly relates to a small delivery fee.

If you entered your card or banking information on a suspicious site, contact your bank or card provider immediately. Freeze the affected card if your banking app allows it, monitor your accounts for unfamiliar transactions, and change any password you entered on the site.

Malwarebytes tracks and blocks these campaigns as they appear. If you’re unsure about a message, Scam Guard—built into Malwarebytes for Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS—can check it for you. Paste in the message or link, or upload a screenshot, for an instant assessment.

Malwarebytes Scam Guard
Scam Guard can analyze a suspicious email, text, link, or screenshot and tell you whether it may be a scam.

Something feel off? Check it before you click.  

Malwarebytes Scam Guard helps you analyze suspicious links, texts, and screenshots instantly.  

Available with Malwarebytes Premium Security for all your devices, and in the Malwarebytes app for iOS and Android.  

Try it free → 

Fake parcel delivery messages steal your card and bank details

18 September 2026 at 09:44

Parcel delivery phishing campaigns appear around the world under different courier names. In the United States, the messages commonly impersonate USPS and claim that a package has an invalid address or could not be delivered. Similar messages impersonate Colissimo and Chronopost in France, Correos in Spain, Poste Italiane in Italy, and PostNL in the Netherlands.

The details vary, but the aim is usually the same: to persuade you to visit a fake courier website and provide personal and financial information.

A fake bpost delivery email

A recent campaign targeting customers of the Belgian postal service bpost begins with an email claiming that a package could not be delivered because €4.95 in customs duties has not been paid.

A phishing email pretending to be from bpost, claiming €4.95 in customs duties is owed before a parcel can be delivered. 
A phishing email, in Dutch, pretending to be from bpost. 

In English, the subject and message read:

Undelivered package—customs duties due (tracking no. 3232116291*******).

Your package could not be delivered on September 9, 2026, because the customs duties (€4.95) have not been paid.

The amount is small enough that recipients may pay without giving it much thought. However, the website does not stop at collecting the supposed fee. It asks for personal information, card details, and banking information.

How the scam works 

The link first passes through a URL-shortening service (hxxps://qr[.]paps[.]jp/1GWsa) before redirecting to a fake bpost site. The campaign used several fake bpost domains, including:

hxxps://bpost[.]be-pakje-ontvangen-nl-recevoir-colis-fr[.]my[.]id/

bpost[.]center, which is the domain shown in the screenshots below.

The page copies bpost’s branding and displays security claims such as “Secure SSL connection,” “256-bit SSL,” “SEPA compliant,” and “Secure payment.” These labels were added by the scammers and do not prove that the page or payment is secure.

We’ve translated the screenshots below from the original Dutch into English.

The first page asks for the recipient’s name, phone number, email address, and age:

Left ImageRight Image

That reference to receiving funds does not match the email’s claim that a customs fee must be paid. The next page asks for an IBAN, card number, expiry date, and payment amount:

Then it asks for the real target: full card and bank details. 

Left ImageRight Image

The original Dutch version contained another mistake: One of its buttons read “Indian search” instead of “Betaal,” the Dutch word for “Pay.” Mistakes like this can expose a scam, but many phishing pages are built carefully enough that there will be no obvious typo or mistranslation.

Once submitted, card details may be used for fraudulent purchases or sold to other criminals. The personal and banking information may also be used to make later scams more convincing.

How to protect yourself 

  • Check delivery claims independently. Open the courier’s official app or type its website address into your browser, then use your tracking number to check the delivery.
  • Check the sender and destination. A message may use a courier’s name while coming from an unrelated email address or linking to a different domain.
  • Be wary of unexpected fees or refunds. A small payment or promised refund can be used to persuade you to provide much more valuable information.
  • Be wary of requests for extensive financial information. A request for an IBAN as well as card details should be treated with suspicion, particularly when it supposedly relates to a small delivery fee.

If you entered your card or banking information on a suspicious site, contact your bank or card provider immediately. Freeze the affected card if your banking app allows it, monitor your accounts for unfamiliar transactions, and change any password you entered on the site.

Malwarebytes tracks and blocks these campaigns as they appear. If you’re unsure about a message, Scam Guard—built into Malwarebytes for Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS—can check it for you. Paste in the message or link, or upload a screenshot, for an instant assessment.

Malwarebytes Scam Guard
Scam Guard can analyze a suspicious email, text, link, or screenshot and tell you whether it may be a scam.

Something feel off? Check it before you click.  

Malwarebytes Scam Guard helps you analyze suspicious links, texts, and screenshots instantly.  

Available with Malwarebytes Premium Security for all your devices, and in the Malwarebytes app for iOS and Android.  

Try it free → 

Revolut phishing texts appear days after data breach

17 September 2026 at 16:07

Only days after Revolut acknowledged that it disclosed sensitive customer records to an unauthorized party, affected customers are receiving phishing texts. However, we don’t know yet if the phishing texts are linked to the breach.

The company had accepted fraudulent information requests sent from an email address on a legitimate government agency domain.

Through this social engineering attack, rather than by gaining access to Revolut’s systems, the criminals obtained the following types of information about customers:

  • Identity and contact information such as dates of birth, postal addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers
  • Copies of IDs such as passports and driver’s licenses
  • Verification selfies
  • Account statements and transaction histories

Revolut has said only that a “limited” or “very limited” number of customers were affected, and that it contacted them directly.

One affected customer received a phishing text on Monday, September 14, two days after Revolut publicly acknowledged the data breach. The message appeared in the same conversation as other Revolut texts, making it look as though it had come from the bank.

Scammers target Revolut customer
Phishing text to a Revolut customer

According to VirusTotal, the phishing domain was first scanned that same day.

In a separate example, another customer said that opening the link took them to a web page that requested access to their device’s camera. If you tap Allow, the page reportedly imitates Revolut’s live-video “turn your head” identity check before prompting you to enter a password.

This makes the phishing page appear more authentic. It may also allow the scammers to collect a selfie or video that could be used for further social engineering, identity fraud, or to make subsequent scams more convincing.

A convincing fake liveness check followed by a password screen is a common way to lower suspicion and obtain the information attackers need to attempt a real login or account-recovery flow.

If the campaign is connected to the breach, the information obtained from Revolut, combined with login details entered by victims or their approval of a login request, could be enough to take over their accounts.

How to stay safe

We don’t yet know whether the phishing campaign is using data exposed in the breach or whether unrelated scammers are exploiting news of the incident to target Revolut customers more broadly.

Either way, treat unexpected messages about your account with caution:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited messages. If a message concerns your account, open the official Revolut app directly.
  • Check the actual domain in your browser’s address bar to see if it corresponds with what you expect.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution on your device, preferably with a web protection component.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether a message is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

Revolut phishing texts appear days after data breach

17 September 2026 at 16:07

Only days after Revolut acknowledged that it disclosed sensitive customer records to an unauthorized party, affected customers are receiving phishing texts. However, we don’t know yet if the phishing texts are linked to the breach.

The company had accepted fraudulent information requests sent from an email address on a legitimate government agency domain.

Through this social engineering attack, rather than by gaining access to Revolut’s systems, the criminals obtained the following types of information about customers:

  • Identity and contact information such as dates of birth, postal addresses, email addresses, and phone numbers
  • Copies of IDs such as passports and driver’s licenses
  • Verification selfies
  • Account statements and transaction histories

Revolut has said only that a “limited” or “very limited” number of customers were affected, and that it contacted them directly.

One affected customer received a phishing text on Monday, September 14, two days after Revolut publicly acknowledged the data breach. The message appeared in the same conversation as other Revolut texts, making it look as though it had come from the bank.

Scammers target Revolut customer
Phishing text to a Revolut customer

According to VirusTotal, the phishing domain was first scanned that same day.

In a separate example, another customer said that opening the link took them to a web page that requested access to their device’s camera. If you tap Allow, the page reportedly imitates Revolut’s live-video “turn your head” identity check before prompting you to enter a password.

This makes the phishing page appear more authentic. It may also allow the scammers to collect a selfie or video that could be used for further social engineering, identity fraud, or to make subsequent scams more convincing.

A convincing fake liveness check followed by a password screen is a common way to lower suspicion and obtain the information attackers need to attempt a real login or account-recovery flow.

If the campaign is connected to the breach, the information obtained from Revolut, combined with login details entered by victims or their approval of a login request, could be enough to take over their accounts.

How to stay safe

We don’t yet know whether the phishing campaign is using data exposed in the breach or whether unrelated scammers are exploiting news of the incident to target Revolut customers more broadly.

Either way, treat unexpected messages about your account with caution:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited messages. If a message concerns your account, open the official Revolut app directly.
  • Check the actual domain in your browser’s address bar to see if it corresponds with what you expect.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution on your device, preferably with a web protection component.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether a message is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

T-Mobile rewards points expiry texts are a phishing scam

17 September 2026 at 12:44

Since early May 2026, we’ve been monitoring a large phishing campaign based on T-Mobile rewards points.

The messages falsely warn that a customer’s rewards points are about to expire. They aren’t legitimate account notices: They use urgency, invented point balances, and phishing links to push recipients into acting before they can verify the claim.

A typical message says that a T-Mobile Rewards account holds 18,400 points, gives an imminent expiry date, and states that unused points will be removed under the program’s terms. These details make the message look as though it was written specifically for the recipient, even though it was sent to many people.

“T-Mobile Rewards Points Reminder: Your Points Are About to Expire

Dear Customer,

We are hereby reminding you that your T-Mobile Rewards account points are about to expire. You currently have 18,400 points, which will expire on June 4, 2026, if unused.

Your Points Overview:

Current Balance: 18,400 Points

Expiry Date: {today or tomorrow}

Points will not be recovered after this date.

Redeem Points:

Visit:

https://t-mobile.{rotating domains}.top/pay

Use the T-Mobile App: Account > Rewards & Benefits

Our points expiry policy aims to ensure the fairness of the program and encourage active participation. Please don’t let these valuable points go to waste.

Thank you for choosing T-Mobile.

Customer Service Team”

This phishing operation does not rely on a single, identical SMS. We found more than 1,000 closely related campaign templates with a semantic similarity score of at least 0.60. The 199 closest matches all scored at least 0.95.

This means the variations only change superficial elements, such as the salutation, headline, expiry date, point balance, and whether the message is called a “reminder,” “alert,” or “important update.” The central story remains the same: T-Mobile rewards points are supposedly expiring, and the recipient must follow a link to redeem them as soon as possible.

The messages use formal but generic language, such as “Dear T-Mobile Customer,” “Dear Valued Customer,” or “T-Mobile User,” rather than naming the recipient or providing verifiable account information.

Graph showing detection events for T-Mobile scam texts
Detection events for the T-Mobile rewards phishing campaign

The campaign began slowly before producing two huge spikes in activity. The green line shows detections of message variants seen previously, while the red line shows messages detected on the first day that particular variant appeared. We’re still seeing messages from the campaign, although activity has fallen considerably since those spikes.

The scam relies on a familiar social engineering formula: a valuable-looking reward, a deadline, and a simple action that supposedly protects the customer from losing out. A recipient who has a T-Mobile account may click first and question the message later.

The links use rotating domains designed to look as though they belong to T-Mobile. Their purpose is to persuade recipients to follow the link to supposedly redeem their points. Do not enter login credentials, personal information, payment details, or verification codes after following a link in an unsolicited message.

How to stay safe

The anonymized data used in this analysis was gathered through Text Protection in Malwarebytes Mobile Security, which alerts users to potentially malicious or scam text messages. 

You can also reduce your risk by following these tips:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited messages. Instead, open the alleged sender’s website or app independently and check for notifications there.
  • Check the domain in your browser’s address bar to make sure it matches the site you expected to visit.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution with web protection.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether a message is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

The URLs in this campaign are very short-lived. The criminals used at least 81 domains over four months, but the domains follow a recognizable pattern that is blocked in Malwarebytes Browser Guard.

IOCs

Example domains showing the pattern used by the campaign:

t-mobile.biktpw[.]top

t-mobile.cugbjl[.]top

t-mobile.cymfjd[.]top

t-mobile.gdikxv[.]top

t-mobile.hdzcnb[.]top

t-mobile.koxetp[.]top

t-mobile.nxdcfp[.]top

t-mobile.pkrbai[.]top

t-mobile.qfrhkt[.]top

t-mobile.qscizj[.]top

t-mobile.tmfncb[.]top

t-mobile.vmnqsu[.]top


Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

T-Mobile rewards points expiry texts are a phishing scam

17 September 2026 at 12:44

Since early May 2026, we’ve been monitoring a large phishing campaign based on T-Mobile rewards points.

The messages falsely warn that a customer’s rewards points are about to expire. They aren’t legitimate account notices: They use urgency, invented point balances, and phishing links to push recipients into acting before they can verify the claim.

A typical message says that a T-Mobile Rewards account holds 18,400 points, gives an imminent expiry date, and states that unused points will be removed under the program’s terms. These details make the message look as though it was written specifically for the recipient, even though it was sent to many people.

“T-Mobile Rewards Points Reminder: Your Points Are About to Expire

Dear Customer,

We are hereby reminding you that your T-Mobile Rewards account points are about to expire. You currently have 18,400 points, which will expire on June 4, 2026, if unused.

Your Points Overview:

Current Balance: 18,400 Points

Expiry Date: {today or tomorrow}

Points will not be recovered after this date.

Redeem Points:

Visit:

https://t-mobile.{rotating domains}.top/pay

Use the T-Mobile App: Account > Rewards & Benefits

Our points expiry policy aims to ensure the fairness of the program and encourage active participation. Please don’t let these valuable points go to waste.

Thank you for choosing T-Mobile.

Customer Service Team”

This phishing operation does not rely on a single, identical SMS. We found more than 1,000 closely related campaign templates with a semantic similarity score of at least 0.60. The 199 closest matches all scored at least 0.95.

This means the variations only change superficial elements, such as the salutation, headline, expiry date, point balance, and whether the message is called a “reminder,” “alert,” or “important update.” The central story remains the same: T-Mobile rewards points are supposedly expiring, and the recipient must follow a link to redeem them as soon as possible.

The messages use formal but generic language, such as “Dear T-Mobile Customer,” “Dear Valued Customer,” or “T-Mobile User,” rather than naming the recipient or providing verifiable account information.

Graph showing detection events for T-Mobile scam texts
Detection events for the T-Mobile rewards phishing campaign

The campaign began slowly before producing two huge spikes in activity. The green line shows detections of message variants seen previously, while the red line shows messages detected on the first day that particular variant appeared. We’re still seeing messages from the campaign, although activity has fallen considerably since those spikes.

The scam relies on a familiar social engineering formula: a valuable-looking reward, a deadline, and a simple action that supposedly protects the customer from losing out. A recipient who has a T-Mobile account may click first and question the message later.

The links use rotating domains designed to look as though they belong to T-Mobile. Their purpose is to persuade recipients to follow the link to supposedly redeem their points. Do not enter login credentials, personal information, payment details, or verification codes after following a link in an unsolicited message.

How to stay safe

The anonymized data used in this analysis was gathered through Text Protection in Malwarebytes Mobile Security, which alerts users to potentially malicious or scam text messages. 

You can also reduce your risk by following these tips:

  • Don’t follow links in unsolicited messages. Instead, open the alleged sender’s website or app independently and check for notifications there.
  • Check the domain in your browser’s address bar to make sure it matches the site you expected to visit.
  • Use an up-to-date, real-time anti-malware solution with web protection.
  • Malwarebytes Scam Guard can help you determine whether a message is a scam and advise you on what to do next.

The URLs in this campaign are very short-lived. The criminals used at least 81 domains over four months, but the domains follow a recognizable pattern that is blocked in Malwarebytes Browser Guard.

IOCs

Example domains showing the pattern used by the campaign:

t-mobile.biktpw[.]top

t-mobile.cugbjl[.]top

t-mobile.cymfjd[.]top

t-mobile.gdikxv[.]top

t-mobile.hdzcnb[.]top

t-mobile.koxetp[.]top

t-mobile.nxdcfp[.]top

t-mobile.pkrbai[.]top

t-mobile.qfrhkt[.]top

t-mobile.qscizj[.]top

t-mobile.tmfncb[.]top

t-mobile.vmnqsu[.]top


Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

AI helps scammers build convincing antivirus renewal pages

16 September 2026 at 10:41

Antivirus renewal scams often begin with a message claiming that your subscription has automatically renewed. When you follow the instructions to cancel it, you are taken to a fake page designed to collect your contact details. The renewal charge never existed.

Receiving a message that names the antivirus software you use does not necessarily mean the sender has access to your device or account. Scammers impersonate popular brands and send the same message to large numbers of people, knowing that some recipients will be customers.

As we’ve reported before, simply responding to a scam message can make your contact details more valuable because it confirms that your number is active and that you are willing to engage. Filling in this form gives scammers even more: your name, email address, phone number, and an indication that you may respond to a call about a supposed antivirus payment.

Those details can be sold to other scammers or used for the next stage of the scam: a phone call from someone who tries to persuade you to install remote access software or help them reverse a payment that never happened.

A closer look at a fake Avast site

During our scam-hunting activity, we saw one renewal scam site impersonating Avast, aimed at users in Belgium. It was noticeably more polished than most scam sites and contained several signs that it had been produced with the help of AI.

The page tells you that your Avast Premium Security subscription has renewed for €129.99, that it covers five devices, and that it will renew again the following February. There is a green tick, a status badge reading Active, and a tidy summary table laying out the amount, the payment method, and the dates.

None of it is real. There is no subscription and no charge, and the page has no connection to Avast, whose branding is being used without permission.

The page is written in French for a Belgian audience. The screenshots below have been machine-translated into English so the layout and wording are easier for you to follow.

A fake Avast site used in an antivirus renewal scam

Alongside the renewal summary is the part the scammers actually care about. A cancellation form asks for your full name, email address, and Belgian mobile number, but nothing else.

There is no password field or request for card details, which may be deliberate. A form asking only for a name, email address, and phone number can feel harmless and is far easier to fill in than a login page. A working mobile number attached to a real name is exactly what a scammer needs for the next stage: calling the victim and posing as support staff. The form is the lure, and the call is where the real danger begins.

The subscription details and form used in the antivirus renewal scam

The signs of AI involvement

The page was left with two notes in its code that were never meant for victims. Both were written in polite French and addressed to whoever had commissioned the work, explaining that the form did not yet send anything anywhere and that a real submission process would need to be connected later.

They read like a contractor handing over an unfinished job rather than a scammer leaving themselves a reminder, and that courteous, second-person summary of what still needs doing is very much how an AI assistant signs off.

Other clues are also consistent with AI-generated code. The code contained unused styling for a section that had been removed, suggesting that the page had been created in stages without a final review. The copy was grammatically correct but vague. It described the benefits of the subscription across four paragraphs without mentioning any specific Avast features, such as its firewall, VPN, or ransomware protection.

Taken together, these signs suggest that the page was built with the help of AI. Generated code carries no watermark, so that cannot be proven from the files alone.

The page was never finished

As the comments in the code explain, the form on this page sent nothing at all. Someone built a convincing fake, got the difficult parts right, and then stopped before connecting the piece that actually sends the data anywhere.

Other signs in the code suggest nobody had even opened the page in a browser to check it, since two pieces of text would have displayed as visible gibberish if they had. What we were looking at was most likely half-built, or possibly a template waiting to be sold on to someone who would add a destination for the stolen details.

Building a page like this used to take a certain amount of skill, which limited how many of them could be made. AI has lowered that barrier. Whoever made this could ask for a version in Dutch or German, or one aimed at an entirely different brand, and have it within minutes.

How to spot an antivirus renewal scam

The old advice was to look for mistakes: bad grammar, the wrong currency, a clumsy layout, or a stretched logo. That advice is less useful now because AI can produce fluent copy and polished layouts, while scammers can easily copy real logos. A page that looks professional is no longer evidence that it is genuine.

But the structure of the scam hasn’t changed. It still needs you to arrive somewhere unexpected, worry about losing money, and provide a way to contact you. Judge the situation rather than the appearance of the page.

  • Check whether you were charged. If the message says a payment has already been taken, check your bank or card statement directly. If the payment is not there, there is nothing to cancel.
  • Check the subscription through the official app or website. Don’t click the link in the message. Open the company’s app or website independently and sign in. Your account will show whether you have an active subscription and when your next payment is due.
  • Be wary of a cancellation form that mainly wants your phone number. Legitimate cancellations usually happen inside your account, and a company you already pay knows how to reach you.
  • Treat the follow-up call as the real danger. If you have filled in a form like this, you may receive a scam call next. You are under no obligation to answer or engage.
  • Don’t install remote access software for someone who called you. It gives them control of your device and could put your accounts, passwords, and money at risk.

If you have already been on a call and installed something, disconnect the device from the internet, remove the software they asked you to install, and change your passwords from a different device. If you sent money or shared card details, contact your bank straight away.

Block and check suspected scams

The best protection is to stop scam pages before they open. Malwarebytes Browser Guard is a free extension for Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari that blocks malicious websites, phishing attempts, and scam ads before they can do any harm.

Not sure whether something is a scam? Share a screenshot, message, phone number, or link with Scam Guard. It checks it in seconds and recommends what to do next. Scam Guard is built into Malwarebytes Premium Security for Windows, Mac, iOS, and Android.

If you received a call after filling in a form like this, enter the number into Malwarebytes Scam Number Check to see whether it has been linked to scam activity.


CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


AI helps scammers build convincing antivirus renewal pages

16 September 2026 at 10:41

Antivirus renewal scams often begin with a message claiming that your subscription has automatically renewed. When you follow the instructions to cancel it, you are taken to a fake page designed to collect your contact details. The renewal charge never existed.

Receiving a message that names the antivirus software you use does not necessarily mean the sender has access to your device or account. Scammers impersonate popular brands and send the same message to large numbers of people, knowing that some recipients will be customers.

As we’ve reported before, simply responding to a scam message can make your contact details more valuable because it confirms that your number is active and that you are willing to engage. Filling in this form gives scammers even more: your name, email address, phone number, and an indication that you may respond to a call about a supposed antivirus payment.

Those details can be sold to other scammers or used for the next stage of the scam: a phone call from someone who tries to persuade you to install remote access software or help them reverse a payment that never happened.

A closer look at a fake Avast site

During our scam-hunting activity, we saw one renewal scam site impersonating Avast, aimed at users in Belgium. It was noticeably more polished than most scam sites and contained several signs that it had been produced with the help of AI.

The page tells you that your Avast Premium Security subscription has renewed for €129.99, that it covers five devices, and that it will renew again the following February. There is a green tick, a status badge reading Active, and a tidy summary table laying out the amount, the payment method, and the dates.

None of it is real. There is no subscription and no charge, and the page has no connection to Avast, whose branding is being used without permission.

The page is written in French for a Belgian audience. The screenshots below have been machine-translated into English so the layout and wording are easier for you to follow.

A fake Avast site used in an antivirus renewal scam

Alongside the renewal summary is the part the scammers actually care about. A cancellation form asks for your full name, email address, and Belgian mobile number, but nothing else.

There is no password field or request for card details, which may be deliberate. A form asking only for a name, email address, and phone number can feel harmless and is far easier to fill in than a login page. A working mobile number attached to a real name is exactly what a scammer needs for the next stage: calling the victim and posing as support staff. The form is the lure, and the call is where the real danger begins.

The subscription details and form used in the antivirus renewal scam

The signs of AI involvement

The page was left with two notes in its code that were never meant for victims. Both were written in polite French and addressed to whoever had commissioned the work, explaining that the form did not yet send anything anywhere and that a real submission process would need to be connected later.

They read like a contractor handing over an unfinished job rather than a scammer leaving themselves a reminder, and that courteous, second-person summary of what still needs doing is very much how an AI assistant signs off.

Other clues are also consistent with AI-generated code. The code contained unused styling for a section that had been removed, suggesting that the page had been created in stages without a final review. The copy was grammatically correct but vague. It described the benefits of the subscription across four paragraphs without mentioning any specific Avast features, such as its firewall, VPN, or ransomware protection.

Taken together, these signs suggest that the page was built with the help of AI. Generated code carries no watermark, so that cannot be proven from the files alone.

The page was never finished

As the comments in the code explain, the form on this page sent nothing at all. Someone built a convincing fake, got the difficult parts right, and then stopped before connecting the piece that actually sends the data anywhere.

Other signs in the code suggest nobody had even opened the page in a browser to check it, since two pieces of text would have displayed as visible gibberish if they had. What we were looking at was most likely half-built, or possibly a template waiting to be sold on to someone who would add a destination for the stolen details.

Building a page like this used to take a certain amount of skill, which limited how many of them could be made. AI has lowered that barrier. Whoever made this could ask for a version in Dutch or German, or one aimed at an entirely different brand, and have it within minutes.

How to spot an antivirus renewal scam

The old advice was to look for mistakes: bad grammar, the wrong currency, a clumsy layout, or a stretched logo. That advice is less useful now because AI can produce fluent copy and polished layouts, while scammers can easily copy real logos. A page that looks professional is no longer evidence that it is genuine.

But the structure of the scam hasn’t changed. It still needs you to arrive somewhere unexpected, worry about losing money, and provide a way to contact you. Judge the situation rather than the appearance of the page.

  • Check whether you were charged. If the message says a payment has already been taken, check your bank or card statement directly. If the payment is not there, there is nothing to cancel.
  • Check the subscription through the official app or website. Don’t click the link in the message. Open the company’s app or website independently and sign in. Your account will show whether you have an active subscription and when your next payment is due.
  • Be wary of a cancellation form that mainly wants your phone number. Legitimate cancellations usually happen inside your account, and a company you already pay knows how to reach you.
  • Treat the follow-up call as the real danger. If you have filled in a form like this, you may receive a scam call next. You are under no obligation to answer or engage.
  • Don’t install remote access software for someone who called you. It gives them control of your device and could put your accounts, passwords, and money at risk.

If you have already been on a call and installed something, disconnect the device from the internet, remove the software they asked you to install, and change your passwords from a different device. If you sent money or shared card details, contact your bank straight away.

Block and check suspected scams

The best protection is to stop scam pages before they open. Malwarebytes Browser Guard is a free extension for Chrome, Edge, Firefox, and Safari that blocks malicious websites, phishing attempts, and scam ads before they can do any harm.

Not sure whether something is a scam? Share a screenshot, message, phone number, or link with Scam Guard. It checks it in seconds and recommends what to do next. Scam Guard is built into Malwarebytes Premium Security for Windows, Mac, iOS, and Android.

If you received a call after filling in a form like this, enter the number into Malwarebytes Scam Number Check to see whether it has been linked to scam activity.


CNET Editors' Choice Award 2026

“One of the best cybersecurity suites on the planet.” 

According to CNET. Read their review →


Search results are sending people to fake Bitrefill checkouts

15 September 2026 at 10:40

Bitrefill is a legitimate company that sells gift cards for popular stores like Amazon, Deliveroo, Apple, Nintendo, and thousands of others. They also sell eSIMs, and mobile top-ups. You can pay on their website for all of these with cryptocurrency.

The scam is designed to catch people searching for Bitrefill or something it sells, like a gift card. Victims see a search result that appears to lead to Bitrefill but actually points to a lookalike domain. The fake site then takes them through what appears to be a normal purchase. The fake sites are not operated by or affiliated with Bitrefill; scammers have copied its branding and checkout process.

The victim chooses an amount and a cryptocurrency before receiving a QR code and payment address. But instead of paying Bitrefill, they send the cryptocurrency directly to an address controlled by the scammers. They receive nothing in return, and recovering the payment is extremely unlikely.

Why fake crypto checkouts work so well

Phishing typically involves several steps. First, an attacker has to steal a password. Then, they may have to get past two-factor authentication (2FA), log in to the account without tripping a fraud check, and find some way to turn account access into money. Plenty of scams fall apart somewhere in that chain.

This payment scam avoids those hurdles by persuading victims to send money directly to the scammers. There is no account to break into and no stolen card to use. The victim sends cryptocurrency straight to an address the scammers control, and cryptocurrency payments generally cannot be reversed or charged back.

The payment request also fits the situation. A demand for cryptocurrency might look suspicious on many websites, but Bitrefill genuinely accepts it. On a convincing copy of its checkout, paying with cryptocurrency appears completely normal.

All this may explain why we found a cluster of fake sites rather than a single page, with checkouts allowing payments of up to $1,990.

What the fake checkout looks like

The site we examined is a close copy of Bitrefill’s checkout, hosted on a domain built by bolting a word onto the brand name. Everything a customer would expect is present. The branding is right, the layout matches, the page is quick and polished, and the payment flow behaves exactly the way the real one does.

The fake checkout asks for an email address and links to terms of service and a privacy policy, helping it look legitimate.
The fake checkout asks for an email address and links to terms of service and a privacy policy, helping it look legitimate.

You’re asked for an email address for order updates, with links to terms of service and a privacy policy. You then choose how to pay, from a list offering Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDC, USDT, Solana, and Litecoin. The site also offers card payments for a small surcharge.

The fake checkout offers several cryptocurrencies and appears to support card payments.
The fake checkout offers several cryptocurrencies and appears to support card payments.

Next, you pick an amount, with preset buttons and a maximum of $1,990, although inconsistent currency symbols offer a small clue that something is wrong.

The fake checkout accepts payments of up to $1,990
The fake checkout accepts payments of up to $1,990.

Finally, you reach a payment screen showing a QR code, an address marked for one-time use, the amount converted into your chosen cryptocurrency, and a countdown clock giving you just under an hour to send the funds.

The final screen provides a cryptocurrency address and QR code, along with a countdown timer encouraging the victim to complete the payment.
The final screen provides a cryptocurrency address and QR code, along with a countdown timer .

None of those elements is a red flag on its own. Unique addresses, expiry timers, and currency conversion are all normal for crypto checkouts, which is exactly why the copy is convincing. Every pressure cue on the page is borrowed from legitimate payment systems.

The only meaningful difference is the address the money goes to, and by the time the victim sends the cryptocurrency, getting it back is extremely unlikely.

How people are reaching these pages

The distribution here does not appear to rely on email. Bitrefill has said publicly that sites copying its checkout and using similar names have been turning up in search engine results, and that its security team has been working with takedown specialists to have them removed.

The site’s configuration supports that. The fake checkout hands visitors back to a second domain in the same family, and the link it uses carries a parameter naming a search engine, suggesting the operators are tagging incoming traffic by where it came from.

There’s a detail here that deserves more attention than it usually gets. The fake checkout has commercial analytics software installed on it, the same kind of product a legitimate e-commerce team uses to measure how many visitors abandon a cart. Its presence suggests the operators want to measure and improve the number of visitors who complete a payment.

These campaigns are not opportunistic one-offs thrown together by someone hoping for a lucky hit. They’re run as businesses, measured and tuned like any other funnel, with the victim in the role of the customer.

A brand name is not a destination

The domains in this cluster use several tricks to make their addresses look convincing. Some swap one letter for a visually similar character, making the brand appear correct unless you look closely. Others add a plausible word such as pay or gift, producing addresses that resemble official payment sites. Some do both.

Several use internationalized domain names, which can contain characters from different alphabets or accented versions of Latin letters. Browsers translate these domains into an ASCII format beginning with xn--, known as Punycode. To the eye, the displayed versions can be almost indistinguishable from the genuine name.

Different internationalized domain names can display as convincing variations of “Bitrefill,” while their Punycode versions begin with xn--.
Different domain names display as variations of “Bitrefill,” while their Punycode versions begin with xn--.

The answer is not simply to become better at spotting tiny differences. These domains are designed to defeat visual inspection, and they can be especially difficult to recognize on a phone screen. Recognizing a company name somewhere in a web address does not tell you who owns it.

Remember, seeing the right company name in a URL is not enough. Check that the actual domain is exactly the one the company uses.

What to do

  • Start at the website you already trust. Use a saved bookmark or carefully enter bitrefill.com yourself. If you are already making a purchase on the legitimate site, stay within that session instead of opening a checkout page from a separate search.
  • Treat search results for payment and checkout pages with suspicion. Scammers can buy search ads or manipulate their sites into appearing prominently. The first result is not necessarily the safest one.
  • Check the address bar before you send. Cryptocurrency payments generally cannot be reversed or charged back. Confirm that the main domain is exactly bitrefill.com before approving a payment.
  • Be wary of domains containing a brand followed by an extra word. A legitimate subdomain would place the additional wording before the company’s main domain, as in pay.example.com. An address such as example-pay.com is a completely separate domain that anyone could register.
  • Don’t approve wallet requests on a site you have not verified. Simply connecting a wallet does not normally transfer funds, but a fraudulent site may ask you to sign a transaction or grant token permissions that allow assets to be stolen.
  • If you have already sent funds, act quickly, although recovery is unlikely. Report the destination address to the exchange or wallet provider you used, report the incident to your national fraud reporting service, and notify Bitrefill so it can add the domain to its takedown efforts. Recovery services that promise to retrieve stolen cryptocurrency for an upfront fee are often follow-up scams.

Check before you click

The simplest protection against a page like this is to avoid reaching it. Malwarebytes Browser Guard is a free browser extension that blocks known scam and phishing sites, along with malicious ads and search results that lead to them.

Got a screenshot or URL of a suspected scam? Upload it to Scam Guard—built into Malwarebytes Premium Security on Windows, Mac, iOS, and Android—and you’ll get a verdict and safety tips in seconds.

Indicators of compromise (IOCs)

Domains:

biterflll[.]com

bitigift[.]com

bitrefall[.]com

bitrefill-payments[.]com

bitrefill-pays[.]com

bitregift[.]com

bitregill[.]com

bitretill[.]com

bitrgift[.]com

bitrgifts[.]com

bitrnfill[.]com

bitruflli[.]com

butrefill[.]com

pay-bitregill[.]com

pay-bitrgift[.]com

pay-bitrgifts[.]com

pay-butrefill[.]com

pay-bitigift[.]com

xn--bitrefll-71a[.]com

xn--bitrefll-h2a[.]com

xn--bitrefll-pay-kfb[.]com

xn--bitrefll-pay-xfb[.]com

xn--bitrefll-q2a[.]com

xn--bitreill-cz9c[.]com

xn--bitreill-pay-yq4f[.]com

xn--btrefill-l2a[.]com

xn--pay-bitrefll-fgb[.]com


Stop threats before they can do any harm.

Malwarebytes Browser Guard blocks phishing pages and malicious sites automatically. Free, one click to install. Add it to your browser →

❌