Reading view

The State of Ransomware Q2 2026

For the past year, the ransomware conversation has centered on concentration: a handful of dominant RaaS operations controlling most of the damage, and a shrinking pool of active groups fighting over the same territory. The State of Ransomware Q2 2026 report from Check Point Research shows that picture starting to shift. The leaders are still winning, but the road to joining them has gotten a great deal shorter.

Key observed findings 

  • The ecosystem stayed concentrated even as its tail widened considerably. The top 10 groups accounted for 57.6% of all victims, down from 71% in Q1, while the number of active groups climbed from 71 to 93, a new high for the period tracked in this report. 
  • Victim volume held at an elevated baseline and did not meaningfully change QoQ. Data leak sites recorded 2,139 victims in Q2, essentially flat versus Q1 (up 0.8%) and up 33% year over year, keeping pace with the highs set through 2025. 
  • Qilin and The Gentlemen fought a close race for the top spot all quarter. Qilin remained the most prolific operator for a fourth straight quarter with 279 victims, though its count fell 17%, while The Gentlemen surged 62% to 269 victims and actually outpaced Qilin during the month of June. 
  • An internal leak gave an unprecedented look inside The Gentlemen’s operation. Chat logs and platform data exposed a core team of roughly nine operators supported by a broader affiliate base, along with confirmation that the group used AI coding assistants to build its ransomware management panel in about three days, genuine first party evidence of AI accelerating malicious tooling development. 
  • Ransom payment rates fell to a multi year low near 23%, continuing a six year decline from 85% in 2019. Even so, on chain ransomware payments still exceeded $820 million in 2025, and the payer market itself is splitting: average payments are rising even as the median falls, a sign that large enterprises keep paying heavily while the mid market increasingly holds firm or settles small. 
  • Law enforcement concentrated its Q2 efforts on shared infrastructure rather than individual groups. Actions took down a cryptocurrency laundering platform used by multiple ransomware actors, prompted sanctions against major Iranian digital asset exchanges, dismantled a malware signing service abused by several RaaS operations, and disrupted large infostealer and VPN anonymization networks that many groups depend on at once. 
  • The geographic picture shifted meaningfully. The US share of victims fell from 50% to 42% quarter over quarter, largely because the quarter’s fastest growing groups, including The Gentlemen and the newly active Krybit, target the US far less often than the ecosystem average. 
  • The exploitation window kept narrowing, with AI increasingly cited as the accelerant. Vulnerabilities are now being weaponized within hours to days of disclosure, lowering the cost of exploit development and giving ransomware operators one more edge in the race to reach victims first. 

To read the full findings, access the State of Ransomware Q2 2026 report from Check Point Research here

The post The State of Ransomware Q2 2026 appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

Shattering the Dream – When a Job Offer Becomes a Zero-Day Attack

Key Points

  • Check Point Research is tracking a long‑running campaign called Operation Dream Job, targeting organizations worldwide, with a particular focus on the defense sector. The campaign is affiliated to DPRK-linked Lazarus group and its latest wave focuses on the defense sector in Europe and India.
  • In the latest variant of the Operation Dream Job campaign, the threat actor distributed SecurityPDF, a modified PDF viewer designed to open attacker-crafted PDF documents and execute a new backdoor which we named Troy.
  • During the intrusion, the threat actor exploited CVE-2026-68820, a zero-day vulnerability in the Microsoft AFD.sys driver, to deploy a new version of FudModule, Lazarus’ kernel-mode rootkit. Following Check Point Research responsible disclosure, Microsoft released a patch as part of their August Patch Tuesday updates.
  • Lazarus also used CVE-2025-49113 to exploit vulnerable Roundcube webmail servers. The compromised servers were infected with RelayShell, a PHP webshell that repurposes compromised web servers as relay nodes within the attacker’s command-and-control infrastructure.
  • At least in one case, a compromised organization in Western Europe was leveraged to conduct a spear-phishing campaign, allowing the attackers to abuse the organization’s reputation and trust to target additional victims.

Introduction

Since early 2026, Check Point Research has tracked a wave of the Operation Dream Job campaign. This wave primarily targeted the defense sector worldwide, with a particular emphasis on companies operating in the aerospace and aviation industries.

We observed the threat actor distributing modified PDF viewers designed to execute malicious payloads embedded within specially crafted PDF files, opened by the user. In this campaign, the threat actor expanded its delivery method by leveraging impersonation websites and search engine optimization (SEO) techniques to distribute the trojanized applications, increasing its credibility and helping it evade some phishing-based detections.

During the operation, the threat actor deployed a new version of the FudModule rootkit, exploiting a zero-day local privilege escalation (LPE) vulnerability in the Windows AFD.sys driver, to obtain SYSTEM privileges and disable EDR visibility. Following responsible disclosure, Microsoft assigned the vulnerability CVE-2026-68820 and released a patch on August 11, 2026, as part of their August Patch Tuesday updates.

The attackers’ command-and-control infrastructure consists of compromised Roundcube and WordPress servers hosting RelayShell, a new PHP webshell that repurposes compromised web servers as relay nodes.

In this blog, we analyze the latest Operation Dream Job campaign, walking through the complete attack chain and providing a technical analysis of the malware and the novel techniques employed throughout the operation, offering new insights into the group’s evolving modus operandi.

Infection Chain

The Operation Dream Job campaign begins with targeted spear-phishing lures centered on attractive job opportunities at well-known companies in the defense, aerospace, and aviation industries.

The exact method used to approach victims in the current campaign remains unclear. However, based on previously documented Dream Job campaigns, we assess that the threat actor likely approached targets through professional networking platforms such as LinkedIn, or directly through messaging applications. Posing as recruiters, the attackers present enticing job opportunities and ultimately direct victims to download malicious files.

During our analysis, we identified two distinct infection chains used to compromise targets. While the second chain appears to represent a more recent evolution of the campaign, both infection methods remain active in parallel.

Infection Chain 1: DLL Sideloading chain

In this infection chain, the victim is convinced to download an encrypted zip archive containing three files:

  • A legitimate, digitally signed PDF viewer executable.
  • A malicious DLL that is loaded through DLL sideloading.
  • An encrypted payload with a PDF extension.
Figure 1 - High-level overview of the DLL sideloading infection chain
Figure 1 – High-level overview of the DLL sideloading infection chain.

When the victim launches the executable, the malicious DLL libmupdf.dll is loaded via DLL sideloading. The DLL extracts a decoy PDF document from the encrypted payload and displays it to the user, while simultaneously extracting, decrypting, and executing an embedded payload directly in memory.

Figure 2 - PDF decoy impersonating Lockheed Martin job description.
Figure 2 – PDF decoy impersonating Lockheed Martin job description.

The executed payload is MISTPEN, a lightweight in-memory downloader that uses Microsoft Graph API to access OneDrive in order to retrieve additional modules and run them in memory.

  • Reconnaissance: During the initial stages of the infection, the threat actor deploys several reconnaissance modules that collect system and process information, allowing the attacker to verify that the system is a suitable target before proceeding with the next stage of the attack.
  • Persistence: Once the target has been validated, MISTPEN receives an additional persistence module that installs the malware on disk and ensures that MISTPEN is automatically executed after system reboot.
  • Privilege Escalation: After persistence is established, MISTPEN loads an in-memory local privilege escalation (LPE) module designed to exploit the zero day vulnerability CVE-2026-68820 in the Microsoft AFD.sys driver. Successful exploitation allows the malware to execute FudModule, Lazarus’ kernel-mode rootkit, with SYSTEM privileges.
  • Backdoor Deployment: The final backdoor delivered by MISTPEN is the ForestTiger backdoor, a well-documented malware family widely attributed to the Lazarus threat group. Once deployed, it provides the attackers with long-term remote access to the compromised host.

Infection Chain 2: Trojanized PDF viewer

In July 2026, we observed a new campaign sharing many characteristics with previously documented Operation Dream Job, particularly the campaign described by ESET in 2025.

In this infection chain, victims receive fraudulent job offers impersonating Enveil, a Privacy Enhancing Technology company, and are instructed to download an encrypted ZIP archive containing two files:

  • SecurityPDF – a trojanized PDF viewer that has been modified to extract and execute an encrypted payload from specially crafted PDF documents.
  • A malicious PDF file – an encrypted payload disguised as a PDF document that is decrypted and executed when opened with the modified viewer.
Figure 3 - Crafted PDF opened by SecurityPDF.
Figure 3 – Crafted PDF opened by SecurityPDF.

SecurityPDF is a trojanized version of a legitimate open-source PDF viewer built on the MuPDF framework. The threat actor modified two code paths responsible for opening PDF documents: the File → Open dialog and the drag-and-drop file handling routine.

As a result, whenever a user opens a PDF document, the application checks whether the file contains the following marker This document is encrypted with sumatrapdf reader!!!!!!!!!!!!. If the marker is present, the application extracts the embedded payload, decrypts it using a single-byte XOR key (0x39), writes the resulting executable to %TEMP%\new.exe, and launches it as a child process.

The new.exe file is a small executable responsible for reflectively loading an embedded DLL containing the Troy backdoor, a previously undocumented backdoor first observed in this campaign.

In addition, we identified at least three websites impersonating Enveil that distribute the trojanized PDF viewer. Some of these websites rank highly in search engine results, with some even appearing as the top result for relevant search queries. It is important to note that the attacker only impersonates Enveil, and there are no indications that the company was targeted or compromised.

Figure 4 – Website appearing as the top search result for “Enveil SecurityPDF”.

Although we did not directly observe how the threat actor incorporated these websites into the phishing campaign, we assess that they were likely used to separate the delivery of the trojanized PDF viewer from the delivery of the crafted PDF document. In this scenario, victims would first receive the malicious PDF file through a phishing message and later be instructed to download the PDF viewer from what appears to be the vendor’s legitimate website. Separating these infection chain stages reduces the likelihood of detection.

MISTPEN

MISTPEN is the first in-memory module executed during the attack chain. First documented by Mandiant in 2024, it functions as a lightweight downloader that uses the Microsoft Graph API to communicate through attacker-controlled files hosted on OneDrive and retrieve additional payloads

All files exchanged through OneDrive are encrypted with AES, using separate keys for uploads and downloads. MISTPEN’s primary capability is the reflective loading of PE DLL files directly into memory, enabling the deployment of additional payloads without touching disk.

Before delivering the final backdoor, MISTPEN often deploys several in-memory modules designed to perform specific tasks. These modules do not implement their own network communication mechanisms; instead, they execute their designated tasks and return the resulting data to MISTPEN, which uploads it to the C2.

Below is a description of the modules we observed being loaded by MISTPEN during our analysis.

GetInfoPlugin – Host Reconnaissance Module

This module is a 64-bit Windows DLL internally named Release_GetInfoPlugin_x64.dll. Its primary purpose is to profile the compromised host and return the collected information as a single wide-character string.

The module collects basic system information, including the machine’s domain or workgroup membership (via NetGetJoinInformation), the computer name, the current user name, and the operating system version and build number. The collected data is formatted in the following template and returned to MISTPEN:

Domain: <domain_or_workgroup>
ComputerName: <hostname>
UserName: <username>
OsInfo: <Windows product name> <build_number>.<UBR>

PvPlugin – Process List Module

This module is a 64-bit Windows DLL internally named Release_PvPlugin_x64.dll. It serves as an extended version of the GetInfoPlugin module, collecting the same host reconnaissance data while adding detailed information about running processes.

For each running process, the module collects the Process PID, PPID, creation timestamp, associated domain and user, and process name. The collected information is formatted into a tabular process list and returned to MISTPEN.

OneScreenCapture – Screenshot Module

This module is a 64-bit Windows DLL internally named OneScreenCapture64.dll, it is responsible for capturing the current desktop (including all monitors) and returns the screenshot to its caller.

The module uses standard Windows USER32 and GDI APIs to capture the virtual desktop into a bitmap. The bitmap is then converted to a JPEG image and Base64-encoded into a single wide-character string before being returned to MISTPEN for exfiltration.

LPE loader

This module is a 64-bit Windows DLL that acts as a loader for a local privilege escalation (LPE) exploit module. It is loaded by an extended version of MISTPEN that provides it with an RPC buffer used for communication between the two components. Messages written to this buffer are forwarded by MISTPEN to the attacker through its existing Microsoft Graph API communication channel, while responses received from the C2 are relayed back to the module through the same interface.

Figure 5 - Writing and reading data through the shared RPC buffer
Figure 5 – Writing and reading data through the shared RPC buffer.

In addition to MISTPEN’s AES-based transport encryption, the module encrypts all exchanged data using GOST-CBC with a randomly generated 16-byte session key. The encrypted data is then Base64-encoded, with the session key prepended to each packet.

The module operates in four stages:

  1. Host Fingerprinting – The module gathers detailed information about the compromised host, including the operating system version, build number, installed security products, and other system characteristics.
  2. Key Exchange – The module requests a set of four public keys from the C2 server.
  3. Session Key Generation – Using the received public keys, the module generates new key material using the Kyber/ML-KEM algorithm and transmits the resulting encapsulated key material back to the C2.
  4. LPE Deployment – Finally, the module requests the encrypted LPE payload, decrypts it using the negotiated key, and executes it directly in memory with export DestroyEnv. Throughout the process, status messages are sent back to the C2 to indicate whether each stage of the exploitation succeeded.
Figure 6 - Execution of LPE module with export DestroyEnv
Figure 6 – Execution of LPE module with export DestroyEnv.

The downloaded LPE payload is FudModule, Lazarus’ kernel-mode exploit module. It exploits a local privilege escalation vulnerability to obtain SYSTEM privileges and injects a payload into a SYSTEM process. In the observed attack, the injected payload was another instance of MISTPEN, allowing the malware to continue operating with elevated privileges and without EDR visibility.

CVE-2026-68820: Yet another Zero-Day discovered by Lazarus

The file we investigated, Afd4Eop12_x64.dll, has a compiler timestamp of July 7, 2026, 22:07:44 UTC. Its strings immediately suggest a variant of FudModule, including references such as “enable_god_mode passed.” and a main function similar to previous Fud Modules. FudModule is a Lazarus privilege escalation tool, reported and being used since around 2021.

Figure 7 - Exploitation and post-exploitation function calls of FudModule, similar to the 2024 variant
Figure 7 – Exploitation and post-exploitation function calls of FudModule, similar to the 2024 variant.

The module targets afd.sys, the Windows Ancillary Function Driver, a part of the Windows kernel that is in charge of managing and handling sockets in Windows. In 2024, FudModule was reported to use another zero-day, CVE-2024-38193, a use-after-free vulnerability in the same afd.sys driver.

At first sight, the vulnerability looked similar to CVE-2025-60719, which is also a use-after-free vulnerability in the AFD.sys driver fixed in November 2025 and not linked to any particular threat actor. In the sample itself, we observed an explicit minimum-version check for Windows 11 build 26100 (24H2), with explicit support also for build 26200 (25H2). However, testing on the latest fully patched Windows 11 system confirmed that the exploit targets a distinct, previously undocumented vulnerability, actively being used in the wild as a part of Operation ‘Dream Job’ since at least early July 2026.

We will not be disclosing full technical details of the vulnerability in this article, as it was patched on the August 11 Patch Tuesday fix. At a high level, the exploit takes advantage of how afd.sys handles a socket is created when it is accessed concurrently by several threads at once.

The driver maintains a small piece of information about the state associated with each socket. Under specific concurrent conditions, two of its own code paths can operate on this state at the same simultaneously, without synchronization, creating a race condition If triggered at the right moment, one code path can access memory after it has already been released by another, resulting in a use-after-free vulnerability.

From there, the module does what these modules do – it leverages this memory corruption to obtain a kernel read/write primitive, which is subsequently used to achieve local privilege escalation to SYSTEM.

We disclosed the issue to Microsoft, and Microsoft issued a fix quickly.

Disclosure timeline

  • Jul 28, 2026: Issue reported to the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC).
  • Jul 31, 2026: Microsoft confirmed the bug
  • Aug 5, 2026: Microsoft assigned CVE-2026-68820 to the issue.
  • Aug 11, 2026: Fixed on Patch Tuesday.

FudModule v3.1

Except for a novel, completely different exploit chain, this FudModule’s post-exploitation behavior is quite similar to FudModule v3, reported by Gen Digital back in 2024.

Shared with v3

  • The entire telemetry teardown suite: process, thread, and image notify callbacks; object and registry callbacks; minifilter removal by altitude band; and the termination of the NT Kernel Logger.
  • Crash-dump suppression, executed before everything else.
  • The WFP stage, which is activated when Kaspersky is present and Symantec is absent.
  • The hardcoded ETW provider kill-list: its 94 GUIDs match the first 94 entries of Gen’s published 95-GUID list, in identical order.
  • The driver selection engine, with the same universal preserve list and per-class keep and kill rules.
  • Privileged-handle forgery and the same two-hop spawn through services.exe into a SYSTEM msiexec.exe process.
  • Logging vocabulary, surviving essentially string-for-string, including: GetGodMode failedGetSystemHandle passed.CreateRemoteProcess passed.RemoteDllExecute passed., and the ClearVaccine* family.

Functionality removed from v3

  • The dedicated Microsoft Defender stage used to disable monitoring of MsMpEng.exe. Only the orphaned string SuspendDefender passed. remains, and is no longer referenced by executable code, while Gen’s FudModule v3 YARA rule contains the active-stage variant SuspendDefender skipped.
  • The PPL stripping functionality targeting AhnLab’s asdsvc.exe.

Microsoft Defender is still blinded here, but only through the generic security-product suppression engine, like any other vendor, rather than through a dedicated Defender-specific stage.

New functionality since v3

  • A Smart App Control tampering functionality not documented in publicly analyzed FudModule versions through v3. Within the SYSTEM-level msiexec.exe child process, its remote stub sets VerifiedAndReputablePolicyState to zero and invokes NtSetSystemInformation class 0xA4 with option 0x10000000, triggering an in-place reload of the code integrity policy.

Targeting

As mentioned before, this version only targets newer Windows builds 26100/26200, unlike the previous version that also targeted older ones.

Troy Backdoor

The Troy backdoor is a newly identified modular remote access trojan in Lazarus’ arsenal. Delivered as a 64-bit DLL, it supports 17 operator commands, providing a broad range of remote access and post-exploitation capabilities.

The name Troy is derived from a PDB path embedded in the sample: E:\HK\Tool_Module\Troy_Handle\1Troy_Create_Dll_Tool\x64\Release\Test_Dll.pdb. Notably, the term Troy has also appeared in PDB paths associated with previously documented Lazarus samples. For example, an ESET report published last year documented a sample containing a PDB path E:\Work\Troy\안정화\...

The Troy backdoor supports three Command and Control (C2) servers, each configured with a URL and port. At startup, the implant iterates through the configured servers in order, parsing each URL into its host and path components, establishing an HTTP connection, and issuing a connection request. It validates the response against the string CONNECTED and uses the first server that responds successfully.

The initial connection is followed by a challenge-response handshake used to authorize the implant against the server. Once authenticated, Troy collects host information and registers the victim by sending a client identifier and a system profile containing the user profile directory, account name, Windows version, local IPv4 address, and current working directory.

Following registration, Troy enters its command-processing loop. Tasks received from the C2 server are Base64-encoded; the implant decodes them and identifies commands using plaintext prefix matching. Command results are returned through the send channel in a compact JSON envelope: { "to":"<channel>", "msg":"<base64>" }. Responses that exceed the maximum message size are divided into numbered chunks and reassembled on the C2 side.

The Troy backdoor provides a notably broad feature set for a single-DLL implant, and a cohesive design. Its seventeen supported commands span the capabilities required for each stage of post-compromise operations, from initial reconnaissance and file operations, to command execution and in-memory code delivery, while following a consistent tasking and result-framing model throughout.

Figure 8 - Troy’s reflective DLL injection flow, showing remote RWX allocation, loader and payload writes, and execution through RtlCreateUserThread.
Figure 8 – Troy’s reflective DLL injection flow, showing remote RWX allocation, loader and payload writes, and execution through RtlCreateUserThread.

Troy Backdoor Supported C2 Commands

CommandCapabilityWhat it does
WAITKeepaliveServer-side no-op that keeps the session alive and feeds the idle back-off counter.
DRIVESDrive enumerationReports every mounted volume letter present on the host.
LIST|<path>Directory listingEnumerates a directory with names, sizes and timestamps, sending the listing length first and the listing itself second.
OPEN|<exe> [args]Process creationLaunches an executable with arguments in a hidden window with no console.
DELETE|<path>File and folder deletionRemoves a single file, or an entire directory tree through a silent shell file operation.
ZIPDOWNLOAD|<src>|<dst>Archive and exfiltrateCompresses a path with PowerShell Compress-Archive into a temporary archive, uploads it, then removes the archive.
DOWNLOAD|<victim-source>|<client-destination>File exfiltrationStreams a file from the victim to the operator in chunks.
UPLOAD|<client-source>|<victim-destination>File dropWrites an operator-supplied file to disk, appending the filename when the destination is a directory.
CMD|<commandline>Interactive shellRuns a command and captures its output, tracking cd /d so the working directory persists between commands, with a 10 second execution watchdog.
mem <dllpath> <pid>In-memory DLL injectionMaps a DLL into a remote process using an embedded reflective loader, matching architecture before injecting.
pk <pid>Process terminationTerminates a process by identifier and reports the outcome.
sleep <N>One-shot delayPauses the implant for N minutes without changing the stored interval.
DEFAULTSLEEPConfigured delayAcknowledges, then pauses for the currently configured beacon interval.
GET_CONFIGConfiguration readReturns the stored configuration as eight fields covering the client ID, the sleep interval, and the three server and port pairs. The stored values may differ from the connection actually in use.
SET_CONFIG|Configuration updateWrites eight replacement fields into stored configuration state. Only the idle interval takes effect at runtime, because the connection loop does not read the stored servers and the port remains hardcoded to 80.
pvdProcess listing with command linesEnumerates processes with session, owner and start time, enriched with full command lines retrieved over WMI.
pvProcess listingThe same enumeration without the command line column.

Compromised Infrastructure Used as ForestTiger C2

As previously reported, ForestTiger’s C2 infrastructure has historically relied primarily on compromised servers mainly running WordPress and SharePoint. In more recent campaigns, the threat actor appears to have shifted toward using compromised Roundcube webmail servers as C2 infrastructure.

The majority of the Roundcube servers we analyzed were running versions vulnerable to CVE-2025-49113, a critical PHP Object Deserialization vulnerability that can lead to remote code execution (RCE). Exploitation of this vulnerability requires authentication with valid Roundcube credentials. During our investigation, we identified several credential leaks that are available in the Darkweb, and contain usernames and passwords associated with accounts on the compromised webmail servers. We assess that the threat actor likely leveraged these credentials to authenticate to the affected Roundcube instances before exploiting CVE-2025-49113 to deploy RelayShell web shells, which subsequently serve as a C2 relay mechanism.

In addition, we observed the threat actor compromise PrestaShop websites and deploy the same RelayShell web shell.

RelayShell

Following the post-exploitation of a web server, the threat actor deployed a previously undocumented PHP web shell that we named RelayShell. Unlike a traditional web shell that provides direct command execution, RelayShell primarily acts as a communication relay between the threat actor and an infected endpoint.

RelayShell operates in two distinct modes, selected by the password supplied in the HTTP POST request. For clarity, we refer to these as Victim mode and Operator mode.

Victim Mode

When accessed using the victim password, RelayShell creates a new PHP session that is subsequently used for communication with the infected endpoint.

The webshell then decrypts a hidden configuration stored in an external file using a custom substitution cipher. The configuration contains two values:

  • A backbone URL
  • A unique identifier (PID) assigned to the compromised server

RelayShell then immediately sends an HTTP POST request to the configured backbone URL using the unique identifier and authentication password.

Figure 9 - WebShell contacting the backbone compromised server on new session creation.
Figure 9 – WebShell contacting the backbone compromised server on new session creation.

Based on our analysis, the backbone URL appears to point to another RelayShell instance acting as an upstream relay or notification server. This request signals that a new victim session has been established, allowing the operator to subsequently connect using the second password.

Operator Mode

When accessed using the operator password, RelayShell enters operator mode, providing a set of commands for interacting with the compromised server. These commands support session management, connectivity checks, file upload and deletion, and retrieval of activity logs.

Command TypeDescription
Session auth / selectionScans existing .ses files, picks the latest session, and returns its data.
Check & cleanupUpdates configuration, deletes old session/log/temp files, and checks connectivity to the backbone URL.
Download logSends back the encoded log file containing activity records.
File uploadWrites an arbitrary file to disk, using Base64‑encoded filename and content.
Self‑delete / file removalSelf-delete  Deletes a specified file (provided as Base64‑encoded path).

File-Based Communication Channel

After both the victim and operator sessions are established, RelayShell provides two commands, send and receive, which implement a lightweight file-based communication channel using temporary files stored on the compromised server.

Messages are exchanged through files following the naming convention <session_id><object>.log where object identifies the side of the communication channel: 1 for the victim and 2 for the operator.

When sending data, RelayShell writes the supplied content to the session file corresponding to the sender. When receiving data, RelayShell reads and returns the contents of the file corresponding to the opposite side, creating a bidirectional communication between the victim and the operator.

Figure 10 - Obfuscated command switch for requesting and sending data
Figure 10 – Obfuscated command switch for requesting and sending data.

This mechanism effectively turns the compromised web server into a relay node. The victim-side implant establishes the session and notifies the backbone server that is monitored by the threat actor , after which the actor connects to the RelayShell instance and exchanges commands and responses through the file-based messaging channel.

During our investigation, we observed the threat actor accessing RelayShell through shared VPN services, including ExpressVPN, further obscuring the origin of their infrastructure.

We also identified 17 unique identifiers, suggesting that at least 17 compromised servers were likely used as relay nodes during the campaign. However, we were unable to identify all of the affected servers.

Victimology

This new Operation Dream Job campaign focused heavily on the defense sector, particularly organizations involved in military technologies such as surveillance sensors, drones, and robotics. The campaign had a global reach, with activity extending into South America, including Brazil, and successful targeting observed in Western Europe, including France and Germany.

During the campaign, a compromised organization headquartered in France was later leveraged by the threat actor to conduct spear-phishing attacks against targets worldwide, likely to increase the perceived campaign’s authenticity and credibility.

Another notable target was India, which has a substantial and rapidly growing defense and aerospace industry, with expanding domestic production and technology exports.

Figure 11 - Lazarus Operation Dream Job Global Campaign Targets.
Figure 11 – Lazarus Operation Dream Job Global Campaign Target Distribution.

Conclusion

The latest Operation Dream Job campaign demonstrates that Lazarus continues to evolve both its malware capabilities and operational tradecraft. Beyond deploying a new version of FudModule that exploits the CVE-2026-68820 zero-day vulnerability, the threat actor also refined its initial access techniques by combining targeted spear-phishing with impersonation websites and search engine optimization (SEO) to distribute trojanized software.

The threat actor’s decision to rely on compromised Roundcube instances and content management system (CMS) servers for C2 reflects an operational approach well suited to highly monitored defense-sector environments, where network activity may be closely inspected by organizational security teams as well as government and national cybersecurity authorities. By abusing legitimate web infrastructure, the threat actor can better blend malicious communications within normal network traffic.

Our findings highlight Lazarus’s continued evolution toward stealthier and more resilient operations, combining new delivery techniques, modular malware, zero-day exploitation, and compromised web infrastructure. We believe the technical details presented in this research will help defenders identify, detect, and disrupt future Operation Dream Job campaigns.

IOCs

DLL Loader\Dropper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2db25ac41a66aa523c79e23e00443573530dd7bd82b8371bcc87bd7232e141eb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72dccae85e062f541fecad9ec7a18a3123e7ae5ac5d53c91709b53a46dbbd289
231b1ef8b95bf77887d5377e2a60f649035e78f543af1b82877db36a5759d858
6da9b1e6f3315ceb77dd14a937a26cc3602bf6a7e2c2ecafb3c65ce5319837be
a0578a2b7821d7e2c573530648f26d7a0d98b373ab24fb7f0c792736761e542d
82268052f94df6f4870d02e57b18d4c54136cc7a8c8d80ad162631f99462c943
FudModule
3b6378df8442e63a6ed7317075913e4720847a510d95022d4a8347b2637c245d
PDF Payload
a673ae661593c0de9bbb815593b816a6853dad6d55ad5042d2ef1875cd13d6e7
8ce6c29f92dc45b1474417cbdff4ed0c18e58fa63e3a071ee9f85aa9d2aac07c
acb97cec84e08b89f41967a24e965d1fd2c51751cef158f7aa35bb4306b87b97
3601060c62edeeaa49def6a13be6e126e1024ce011faad4e2d9f585ccf6bd5a6
fecf12088843801215898442bd1ff3e266f29d14e29a94780e857f69c4915d6b
d578c28c9afe7457a0d81f6701332ef8197e8f7468de654935fb29a50ea66459
SecurityPDF.exe
743172aab606974b054a64561534ae66baa3a840657f79d7c6fa18350e8d45d1
db3d69b7eeda2e35e23006bf4b7e206281fce809584207214fc213f9bc30376d
Troy Backdoor
590fb6ae19480d694e08ee85859cad8066f2f87e7e5abba2960c6d115e1615d6
68d4fba7b1300a59cd6212c08910a260cd71b40cd9f51cac933030a68faac0bb
a738059ce07c951c31ab2da3d93d8f69bff32f9b7d933dbf5943441b9cc99075
RelayShell
21c3ad4838c4324bc5f081021da5fb2e9073d0c9304087811c21eb47c9e22762
cc4e06aa378a190f71384c03023bb3d18a6d66e297d46701220e132963d2e222
SecurityPDF Website & Troy C2
envell[.]xyz
enveil[.]online
uxtramine[.]org
135.181.67[.]203
135.181.185[.]158

YARA – RelayShell Webshell

rule lazarus_relayshell
{
  meta:
    author = "@_CPResearch_"
    description = "Lazarus RelayShell Webshell"
    target_entity = "file"
    hash = "21c3ad4838c4324bc5f081021da5fb2e9073d0c9304087811c21eb47c9e22762"
  strings:
    $str1 = "'PqCWom'"
    $str2 = "'a84038'"
    $str3 = "'biwbih'"
    $str4 = "'ddf7acea'"
    $str5 = "'enRU904U'"
    $str6 = "'fou2rm'"
    $str7 = "'kurhiW'"
    $str8 = "'qcrgl'"
    $str9 = "'rlzbiw'"
    $str10 = "'tmmvr1'"
    $str11 = "'win386'"
    $str12 = "\"biwbih\""
    $str13 = "\"PqCWom\""
    $str14 = "\"a84038\""
    $str15 = "\"ddf7acea\""
    $str16 = "\"enRU904U\""
    $str17 = "\"fou2rm\""
    $str18 = "\"kurhiW\""
    $str19 = "\"qcrgl\""
    $str20 = "\"rlzbiw\""
    $str21 = "\"tmmvr1\""
    $str22 = "\"win386\""
    $str23 = "D9hWnVEqdgzJ67/B8euS0yKCIMrw5jc:fGUX3AakLH2oYQRp"
  condition:
    3 of ($str*)
}

The post Shattering the Dream – When a Job Offer Becomes a Zero-Day Attack appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

10th August – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 10th August, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • North Carolina Ports, the US authority operating the ports of Wilmington, Morehead City and others, has suffered a cyberattack that forced some operations onto manual processes. The authority claims it has contained the intrusion, but degraded systems caused delays while affected services were restored.
  • Ryde, an electric scooter operator in Scandinavian countries, has disclosed a data breach affecting all 4.5 million customer accounts across Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Germany. Attackers copied phone numbers, email addresses, birth dates, partial payment card numbers, and payment histories. Full card numbers and ride histories were unaffected.
  • Canadian hardware wallet maker Coinkite has disclosed a theft campaign exploiting a Coldcard firmware vulnerability, with at least 1,367 bitcoin worth about $88.6 million stolen from thousands of addresses. The company halted affected shipments, destroyed vulnerable inventory, and released patched firmware after confirming exploitation against customer wallets.
  • Beacon, a UK provider of customer relationship management software for charities, has disclosed a data breach after attackers compromised an access key. The company notified around 1,500 nonprofit customers that database information, donation records, and stored attachments may have been downloaded. Payment and bank details were not affected.

AI THREATS

  • Check Point Research has demonstrated that Cloudflare Code Mode, which allows AI agents to write TypeScript against tools, inherited five vulnerabilities from the workerd runtime. The flaws could enable sandbox escape and cross-tenant data exposure. Cloudflare rated two issues Critical and fixed its managed Workers environment.
  • Researchers have disclosed vulnerabilities in Google Gemini CLI and Anthropic Claude Code that could expose automation environments to code execution and API key theft. CVE-2026-12537, rated CVSS 10.0, affected Gemini CLI workflows, while CVE-2026-54316 affected Claude Code. Both vendors released patched versions.
  • Researchers have detailed AI-enabled identity fraud kits that automate know-your-customer bypasses across banks, fintech companies, and cryptocurrency exchanges. Tools such as ProKYC can generate identity documents, selfie-with-ID images, spoofed location data, and synthetic video used against document, selfie, and liveness checks during remote onboarding.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Cisco has released fixes for multiple critical vulnerabilities in Catalyst SD-WAN and IOS XE software disclosed on August 5. The highest-severity issues carry CVSS scores up to 9.9 and can enable privilege escalation, code execution, or system compromise. Cisco also addressed additional high and medium-severity flaws across network management products.
  • WordPress has released version 7.0.3 to address CVE-2026-64638, a high-severity Core vulnerability known as XSS2Shell. The flaw can turn a failed login into pre-authentication cross-site scripting and, under specific conditions, remote code execution. Fixes were also backported for supported WordPress branches dating to version 4.7.
  • TP-Link has addressed 15 vulnerabilities in its Omada provisioning ecosystem affecting controllers, network devices, mobile applications, and VIGI cameras. The flaws include device impersonation, credential exposure, and remote code execution risks during provisioning. 11 flaws received CVE identifiers, and patched firmware has been released for affected products.
  • A vendor-installed backdoor has been identified across at least 20 Zbtlink router models sold under brands including Wiflyer and ZBT. The remote-management component contacts hardcoded servers and can accept unauthenticated commands with root privileges. Researchers reproduced the behavior by impersonating the vendor server and obtaining a root shell.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Researchers have identified the Shai-Hulud CHAINDROP supply-chain campaign, which backdoored more than 400 npm packages after attackers compromised the maintainer of the widely used keyv library. The malware executes through a preinstall hook, steals developer tokens, and republishes modified packages, affecting an ecosystem with roughly 1.3 billion monthly downloads.
  • Researchers have uncovered a campaign targeting large US financial firms in which callers impersonate coworkers or IT staff to capture passwords and multi-factor authentication codes through spoofed websites. The actors, tracked as UNC6671, then threaten victims with data leaks and have issued ransom demands ranging from $750,000 to $3 million.
  • Researchers have revealed a macOS ClickFix campaign using more than 250 look-alike domains to distribute MacSync and Atomic Stealer malware. The operation evolved to fingerprint visitors before displaying malicious instructions, allowing attackers to target genuine macOS users while concealing the campaign from automated security scanners and analysis systems.
  • Researchers have documented a campaign that uploaded nearly 800 malicious npm packages delivering cross-platform RAT and infostealer malware. The packages instructed developers to import them, activating the WEL1DROPPER downloader. It retrieved payloads through Cloudflare Workers or DNS TXT records, established persistence, and deployed additional malicious tools.

The post 10th August – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

When Agentic Glue Melts: Exploiting Cloudflare Code Mode and Workers

By Yarden Porat, Check Point Research

Key Points

  • Check Point Research analyzed Cloudflare Code Mode, a technique that changes how AI agents use MCP by turning tools into a TypeScript API the model can write code against.
  • The research uncovered five vulnerabilities in workerd, the open-source runtime behind Code Mode and Cloudflare Workers. Two were rated Critical by Cloudflare.
  • The blast radius is broad: by Cloudflare’s own numbers, Workers is built by millions of developers,[1] serves millions of requests per second,[2] and carries more than 10% of all traffic on Cloudflare’s network.[3]
  • Because workerd underpins both Code Mode sandboxes and Workers tenant isolation, the findings create sandbox-escape and cross-tenant exposure risk.
  • Cloudflare’s managed Workers environment has been fixed in production. Self-hosted workerd / Code Mode deployments should update to v1.20260619.1.
  • Check Point Research released proof-of-concept code as part of its Black Hat USA 2026 presentation.

The short version

We set out to break Cloudflare Code Mode, and ended up breaking Cloudflare Workers too. We did both by targeting workerd, the runtime beneath both: an in-process sandbox that relies entirely on V8 to isolate untrusted code.

We found five memory-corruption bugs in workerd’s native C++ (the “glue” between JavaScript and the runtime), and turned them into two end-to-end attacks:

  1. Cross-tenant heap swipe. An out-of-bounds read in URLPattern lets one Worker reach across the shared process heap and swipe another tenant’s secrets.
  2. Code Mode sandbox escape. Starting from a prompt injection, a use-after-free in node:zlib breaks out of the sandbox and runs native code on the host.

Part I – Understanding the target

1. Where this started: Code Mode

Code Mode is Cloudflare’s take on LLM tool use. Instead of a model emitting structured tool calls one at a time, Code Mode exposes the available tools as a typed TypeScript API and lets the model write code that calls them: loops, conditionals, data shuffling and all.

In the traditional MCP / tool-calling loop, the model emits one {tool, args} call, the agent runs it, feeds the result back. The model then emits the next call. Every step is a fresh model invocation, and usually a network round-trip. Code Mode collapses that: the model writes one program that orchestrates many tool calls itself (looping, branching, and combining intermediate results locally) and only the final output returns to the model.

Cloudflare’s argument is that LLMs, trained on enormous amounts of real-world code, are simply better at writing a program against a typed API than at emitting long chains of synthetic tool calls. [4]

Figure 1 -

Figure 1 – Tool calling vs. Code Mode

That code has to run somewhere, and that “somewhere” is workerd, the runtime behind Cloudflare Workers.

2. The workerd origin story

To understand workerd, start with the product it was built for: Cloudflare Workers. Workers is Cloudflare’s serverless platform: you upload a piece of code and Cloudflare runs it at the edge, in data centers close to the user, on demand for every request. There’s no server to manage and, ideally, no cold machine to wait for.

That model creates a hard isolation problem. Cloudflare runs code from a huge number of different customers, and to keep latency and cost down it packs many of them onto the same machines, and, as we’ll see, into the same process. The classic answer (a container or VM per tenant) is far too heavy for this: each one adds tens to hundreds of milliseconds of cold start and a real memory footprint, which is exactly what an edge platform serving oceans of short requests cannot afford.

Cloudflare’s answer is to isolate at the language-runtime level rather than the OS level, using V8 isolates, the same primitive Chrome uses to separate browser tabs. An isolate is a lightweight, independent JavaScript context. Many can live inside a single process, each starts in single-digit milliseconds, and the isolate is the security boundary between tenants.

The trade-off is that this boundary is a software boundary inside one shared address space, not a hardware or kernel one. Untrusted code runs in-process, and the whole model rests on the isolate holding.

Figure 2 -

Figure 2 – Many tenants, one process

workerd is the runtime that implements all of this. It was closed-source for years: Workers launched in 2017, but Cloudflare only released workerd as open source in September 2022.[5] It’s exactly what Code Mode runs the model’s generated code on.

3. Why workerd was the obvious sandbox for Code Mode

Code Mode has to run untrusted, model-written code, and it needs that code to reach the declared MCP tools and nothing else. workerd answers both at once.

Running untrusted tenant code in-process is its day job, and it lets Code Mode lock the rest down: no filesystem, no arbitrary network (fetch() and connect() simply throw) with the tools exposed only through bindings.[6] Cloudflare didn’t build a new sandbox for Code Mode. It reused the one it already trusts to isolate millions of Workers.

4. Why we targeted workerd

When you set out to break Code Mode, the obvious place to look is the seam between Code Mode and workerd. This is the integration layer: how tools become bindings, how the configuration is wired, how the two interact. Going after the runtime itself is the unusual move. It’s a bit like setting out to break an AI coding assistant and then going to audit Docker’s own source code, the container runtime itself, not the agent on top of it.

Five reasons made us decide to do it anyway:

  1. An in-process sandbox is a bold, inherently risky bet. Isolating untrusted code without an OS-level boundary means no VM, no container, just a V8 isolate inside a shared process. That puts the entire security model on a single software boundary. That kind of ambitious bet is exactly what’s worth stress-testing.
  2. workerd had almost no public scrutiny.[7] Despite sitting directly on that boundary, there was barely any prior public vulnerability research on workerd, in stark contrast to V8, which is picked apart continuously.
  3. The attack surface is huge. And it’s not just V8. workerd has its own implementation that exposes many Web/Node APIs, each written in C++ and reachable from untrusted JavaScript.
  4. The blast radius reaches Cloudflare Workers. workerd isn’t only Code Mode’s runtime. It’s the engine behind Cloudflare Workers, one of the most widely deployed serverless platforms on the internet. A bug here would never have stayed contained to an experimental agent feature.
  5. AI security has a low-level side too. Beyond the high-level frameworks, the internal, low-level layers that agents rely on to interact with the world deserve research as well.

5. The cage, memory protection keys, and Node

V8 is one of the most heavily attacked pieces of software around, with a long history of memory bugs, so Cloudflare assumes it can break and layers defenses so a compromise of one isolate doesn’t reach the host or other tenants.

Defenses

1. The V8 sandbox (“the cage”). The cage confines JS-reachable objects so a corrupted one can’t forge pointers outside it. Assume arbitrary read/write inside the cage, and stop it reaching memory outside.

2. Memory protection keys. As a further layer against V8 vulnerabilities, production also tags isolate-group memory with hardware memory protection keys (MPK / pkeys), so even with arbitrary read/write inside one isolate’s V8, an attacker still can’t read another tenant’s pages.

3. The L2 process sandbox. Underneath both sits a second-layer (“L2”) process sandbox, so even native code execution inside the process is meant to be contained. Per Cloudflare, the V8 Workers run in a strict layer-2 sandbox (Linux namespaces plus seccomp) that blocks all filesystem and direct network access,[8] limiting what a compromised process can reach on the host.

Attack Surface

Node. Real-world JavaScript assumes Node.js exists, and code constantly reaches for node:* modules, so workerd reimplements a large slice of the Node API in C++. This is exposed to JS through JSG, its “JavaScript Glue” layer. Node was never designed for a threat model where the attacker writes the JavaScript, so this drops a great deal of extra native code onto the boundary, much of it workerd’s own, and enabled by default (a Worker can just require('node:crypto')).

It also means more native objects allocated on the tcmalloc heap, which is secured by neither the cage nor the memory protection keys.

6. Bottom Line

Putting all of the above together, we did exactly that. We targeted workerd’s JSG code, the “JavaScript Glue” that hands native C++ to untrusted JavaScript, whether it is a Node reimplementation or one of workerd’s own API implementations. It is the code that had a fraction of V8’s scrutiny (§4), and the native objects it allocates sit on the tcmalloc heap, memory that lives outside both the cage and the memory-protection keys (§5). So a bug there is not boxed in the way a V8 bug is. It is exactly the surface those mitigations do not cover.

By going after that code we found five vulnerabilities, all of them in workerd’s own native code, each covered in the Vulnerabilities section (Part II).

Building on those bugs, we developed two end-to-end exploits, covered in the Exploits section (Part III).

  1. Code Mode sandbox escape. Starting from a single prompt injection, the model is steered into writing attacker-controlled TypeScript. That TypeScript contains a memory-corruption which leads to native code execution, breaking out of Code Mode and running on the host, fully outside the V8 isolate.
  2. Cross-tenant secret leak. Starting from a malicious Worker you deploy into Cloudflare’s shared pool, we show that one tenant can read another tenant’s memory and leak its secrets straight out of the shared process. This is the production scenario, and it holds up there because the whole exploit runs from the tcmalloc heap, the memory the cage and MPK do not cover.

But to be explicit, we did not run the exploit on Cloudflare production ourselves. Both exploits were verified on the self-hosted version of workerd. The cross-tenant idea should work the same way on production, since it runs entirely from the tcmalloc heap that the mitigations do not cover, but we did not test it there. On a shared host, a memory-corruption exploit that crashes the process could take other tenants down with it, and we were not willing to risk that.

Part II – The vulnerabilities

7. URLPattern out-of-bounds read

URLPattern is a Web API for matching a URL against a pattern, essentially what a router does. You build a pattern such as new URLPattern({ pathname: "/users/:id" }), call .exec() on a URL, and read back the named capture groups ({ id: "…" }). workerd exposes it to Workers, and in our setting the pattern itself is attacker-controlled.

workerd actually ships two URLPattern implementations. The first is the original, workerd-native one (the urlpattern_original compatibility flag). The second is the newer standard one backed by the Ada URL-parser library. We found the same out-of-bounds read in both implementations, and it gives the same primitive.

7.1 Root cause

Under the hood, URLPattern turns your pattern into a regular expression. Matching a URL then produces two parallel lists: the matched values (one per capture group in the regex) and the group names.

A quick example of the benign case:

Figure 3 -

Figure 3 – URLPattern: pattern → result

URLPattern also lets you drop raw regex straight into a pattern, with named or unnamed groups. For example, /(\d+)/(?<slug>[a-z]+) has one unnamed group and one named group:

Figure 4 -

Figure 4 – URLPattern with named group

Here is the implementation. When you call .exec(), workerd runs the compiled regex against the URL and builds the groups object from the result. The original, workerd-native version does it like this:

// urlpattern.c++: building the groups object from a regex match
KJ_IF_SOME(array, regex.getHandle(js)(js, input)) {  // run regex vs URL
  uint32_t index = 1;                                // [0] is full match, skip
  uint32_t length = array.size();                    // 1 + capture count values
  kj::Vector<Groups::Field> fields(length - 1);

  while (index < length) {                           // each capture value
    auto value = array.get(js, index);
    fields.add(Groups::Field{
      .name = kj::str(nameList[index - 1]),           // name by position
      .value = value.isUndefined() ? kj::String() : kj::str(value),
    });
    index++;
  }
  // ...
}

For each capture group, the loop builds one { name, value } field. The value is what the regex matched in the URL. The name is the group’s name (like id from earlier), taken from the nameList vector.

The two sides of that pairing come from completely different places, and that is the part to hold onto:

  • length comes from V8. It’s the size of the match array V8 returns after running the compiled regex, i.e. how many capture groups the regex actually produced.
  • nameList comes from URLPattern’s own implementation. It’s the list of names workerd assembled while parsing the pattern, before the regex ever ran.
Figure 5 -

Figure 5 – The group-count mismatch

The loop lines them up position by position, on the assumption that the two counts agree.

So the whole thing rests on those two counts staying equal, and they don’t always. When URLPattern parses the pattern to build nameList, its own group counting misses a group nested inside another group. V8, compiling the real regex, counts every group, nested ones included. So a pattern with one group nested inside another, like (ab(cde)), gives V8 two capture groups where URLPattern counted only one, and length ends up larger than nameList:

const pattern = new URLPattern({ pathname: "/(ab(cde))" });
pattern.exec({ pathname: "/abcde" });   // V8: 2 groups, nameList: 1 name → OOB

Now the loop runs one step too far. For that extra value, index - 1 points past the end of nameList, and kj::str(nameList[index - 1]) reads from beyond the vector, an out-of-bounds read. That is the bug.

7.2 Why an OOB read is an arbitrary read

nameList is a kj::Vector<kj::String>. A kj::String is 24 bytes:

Figure 6 -

Figure 6 – kj::String memory layout

The OOB index makes kj::str() read 24 bytes of whatever follows the vector and treat it as a kj::String, then dereference ptr to copy out the “string.” So if we control the memory after nameList, we control ptr, and the returned JS string is the bytes at an address of our choosing. OOB read → arbitrary read.

7.3 Two notes

  • The same bug is in both implementations, and the Ada one reaches production. The standard, Ada-backed URLPattern makes the identical counting mistake, with the same out-of-bounds read. We confirmed the Ada version triggers on Cloudflare production, and reported it to the Ada maintainers in parallel.
  • Our full end-to-end exploit was on the original implementation, self-hosted. Turning the read into a working cross-tenant secret leak was demonstrated against urlpattern_original on self-hosted workerd. That exact path did not reproduce on production, because production has a check the open-source build lacked.

8. zlib deflateParams() UAF

zlib is the most common compression library around. Node.js ships it as the built-in node:zlib module, and to stay Node-compatible workerd reimplemented it in C++. It exposes a handful of APIs. The basic ones compress and decompress via GzipDeflate/Inflate, and Brotli. In workerd it comes with the nodejs_compat flag (compatibility date 2024-09-23 or later).

8.1 Dangling buffers

Let’s look at a basic use of zlib. You call write() with an input buffer and an output buffer, and zlib compresses the input into the output.

const input  = Buffer.from("hello world");
const output = Buffer.alloc(64);
handle.write(input, output);   // compress input → output

Those three lines already span three distinct layers:

  1. JavaScript (V8): creates the input and output buffers.
  2. workerd’s glue code: the translation layer between JavaScript and native C++, turning those buffers into the raw pointers and lengths the C library expects.
  3. zlib: the C compression library that does the actual work.

The buffer to watch is output. As it moves, its pointer is passed between all three layers, handled differently in each. So let’s take it one layer at a time, starting on the JavaScript side.

On the JavaScript side, output is reference-counted: it stays alive as long as at least one reference points at it. Follow that count through a single write():

  • const output = Buffer.alloc(64). The JS variable holds it: refcount 1.
  • handle.write(input, output, …). As the buffer crosses into native code, workerd takes a reference of its own for the duration of the call: refcount 2. That extra reference is what guarantees the buffer can’t be freed while zlib is mid-compression.
  • write() returns, and workerd drops its reference again: back to refcount 1, held by the JS variable.
  • nothing holds output anymore (it goes out of scope, or is reassigned), so the last reference is gone: refcount 0.
Figure 7 -

Figure 7 – output refcount lifecycle

Now follow the same buffer into the native side. To hand output to zlib, workerd fills in a z_stream(zlib’s state struct), copying the buffer’s raw address into its next_out field, the pointer zlib writes its compressed output through. That copy happens in setBuffers, on every write():

// zlib-util.c++
void ZlibContext::setBuffers(kj::ArrayPtr<kj::byte> input, kj::ArrayPtr<kj::byte> output) {
  stream.avail_in  = input.size();
  stream.next_in   = input.begin();    // raw pointer into the JS input buffer
  stream.avail_out = output.size();
  stream.next_out  = output.begin();   // raw pointer into the JS output buffer
}

And write() forgets to clear them. When it returns, it resets nothing in the z_streamnext_out still holds the raw address of output. Clearing it is workerd’s job, and the write path simply doesn’t.

The same sequence, now with stream.next_out shown alongside:

Figure 8 -

Figure 8 – next_out left dangling

Nothing ever clears next_out after setBuffers sets it. So once output’s refcount reaches 0, the buffer becomes garbage, and the next garbage-collection event reclaims its memory, leaving next_out pointing into freed memory.

8.2 The Use in Use-After-Free

We now have a dangling next_out, and the next step is to find who writes through it.

We started in workerd’s own code, but next_out is zlib’s field, and it is zlib, not workerd, that writes output through it. So the real question is where, inside the zlib library, next_out gets written.

The obvious place is an ordinary compression step: deflate() (and inflate()), the functions that push output through next_out. But in workerd that path is only ever reached through write(), and write() runs setBuffers first, resetting next_out to a fresh buffer before deflate() runs. The stale pointer is overwritten before it is ever used. No good.

What we found instead is deflateParams, reached from handle.params(), the call that adjusts the compression parameters, like the level (how hard zlib compresses). It touches the same z_stream and, crucially, does not reset next_out first:

// zlib-util.c++ — ZlibContext::setParams(), reached from handle.params()
err = deflateParams(&stream, _level, _strategy);

That hands zlib the same z_stream, still carrying the stale next_out from the last write(). And rather than clearing next_in/next_outdeflateParams flushes whatever output zlib still has buffered before it applies the new settings:

// zlib - deflate.c, deflateParams() (trimmed)
func = configuration_table[s->level].func;
if ((strategy != s->strategy || func != configuration_table[level].func)
        && /* there is data still pending */) {
    /* flush the last buffer */
    deflate(strm, Z_BLOCK);   // flush pending output through strm->next_out
}
s->level    = level;          // new config applied only after the flush
s->strategy = strategy;

If the level or strategy changes and data is still pending, zlib calls deflate() to flush it before updating the config, and that deflate() writes through strm->next_out, the dangling pointer.

But there is still a problem. When we called write(), zlib already compressed the data we handed it, so how are we supposed to have any bytes still pending for deflateParams to flush?

8.3 Z_NO_FLUSH

Each zlib write takes a flush mode controlling how eagerly output is emitted. Passing Z_NO_FLUSH tells zlib to hold compressed output in its internal buffer rather than push it all out through next_out, so the write() returns with data still pending. That pending data is exactly what deflateParams flushes.

8.4 Putting everything together

The whole use-after-free is a handful of JavaScript calls. Tracking outBuf’s refcount and next_out across the full cycle, the same way we did on the JavaScript side:

Figure 9 -

Figure 9 – The zlib use-after-free

9. HTMLRewriter AttributesIterator UAF

HTMLRewriter is a Workers API for transforming HTML as it streams through. A Worker can rewrite tags, attributes, and text on the fly without buffering the whole document. workerd exposes it on top of lol-html, Cloudflare’s Rust streaming HTML rewriter, through a layer of C++ bindings.

The bug is in those bindings, not in lol-html. When you ask an element for an attributes iterator, the C++ binding grabs a raw pointer into the element’s internal attribute array and reads through it on each next(). Adding attributes with setAttribute grows that array, and once it outgrows its capacity the array reallocates to a new location and the old one is freed, but the iterator is still pointing at the old, now-freed array. The next next() reads from that freed memory:

new HTMLRewriter().on('div', {
  element(el) {
    const iter = el.attributes[Symbol.iterator](); // pointer into backing array
    iter.next();                                   // reads backing array
    for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++)                // grow attributes...
      el.setAttribute(`x${i}`, 'A'.repeat(100));   // ...until it reallocates

    const leaked = iter.next().value;              // iter → freed array: UAF
  }
});

10. KV SQL bypass → arbitrary deserialization

The other four bugs are memory-corruption. This one is a classic that leads to arbitrary deserialization.

10.1 Durable Objects

Workers are stateless. Each request runs in a fresh, short-lived context, and nothing held in memory survives to the next one. Durable Objects are Cloudflare’s answer to that: a Durable Object is a single, uniquely-addressable instance that stays alive and keeps its state across requests, both in memory and in private, strongly-consistent storage. It’s how you hold persistent, coordinated state on the edge: a chat room, a live document, a counter.

That storage has a newer SQLite backend, and a Worker can reach the same database in two ways:

  1. the key/value API (storage.get / put), which stores each value serialized with the structured-clone algorithm, and
  2. the SQL API (storage.sql.exec), which runs raw SQL against the same database.

The key/value data lives in a reserved SQLite table, _cf_KV, and reading a value back deserializes its bytes with V8’s structured-clone deserializer, including workerd’s handlers for internal types.

10.2 The authorizer bypass

A SQL authorizer guards those internal tables. It rejects any query that touches a _cf_-prefixed table: CREATESELECTINSERTUPDATEDROP, all of it. But we found one operation it forgot to check.

The authorizer validates the tables a query references, but not the destination name of a rename. So while every direct query against _cf_KV is rejected, nothing stops you from creating an ordinary table under an allowed name and then renaming it with ALTER TABLE … RENAME TO _cf_KV. You build the table under a name the authorizer permits, fill it with crafted bytes, and rename it into place:

CREATE TABLE kv_tmp (key TEXT, value BLOB);          -- allowed
INSERT INTO kv_tmp VALUES ('k', <attacker bytes>);   -- crafted payload
ALTER TABLE kv_tmp RENAME TO _cf_KV;                 -- not checked → now KV

A later key/value read (storage.get('k')) then feeds those attacker-controlled bytes straight into workerd’s internal deserializers, exactly the untrusted input they were never meant to handle.

We didn’t continue from here. The point is the attack surface. A malicious Worker can control the bytes fed to V8’s deserializer, which will deserialize any object it supports, including workerd’s own internal types. And while we stopped there, the surface is worth stressing: that deserializer was built for trusted, in-process data, and unlike V8’s parser and JIT, it isn’t fuzzed for hostile input. That makes it a very strong attack surface, and a well-worn path to type confusion and memory corruption.

Part III – The full chain and its impact

11. Cross-tenant secret theft (Workers)

Cloudflare Workers run the same workerd and the same many-tenants-one-process model from §2. Different customers’ Workers run as separate V8 isolates inside one OS process, sharing one address space and one native (tcmalloc) heap. The isolate is the only wall between them, and that wall is in V8, not on the native heap.

Figure 11 -

Figure 10 – Cross-tenant OOB read

So the URLPattern read from §7 isn’t just a crash, it’s a way for a Worker you deploy to read another tenant’s memory out of that shared heap. Here is how that out-of-bounds read becomes a private key read from a different Worker. Everything below operates on the tcmalloc heap, outside the cage and the memory-protection keys (§5).

11.1 The strategy

Recall the primitive from §7. The read goes one entry past the end of nameList, treats those 24 bytes as a kj::String { ptr, size, disposer }, and returns the bytes at ptr. So if we control whatever sits right after nameList, we control that fake kj::String, and reading one attacker-chosen kj::String is reading any address we point it at:

Figure 12 -

Figure 11 – Fake kj::String read primitive

That is the basic primitive. What we actually want is to sweep another tenant’s memory for secrets, to read anywhere in the process, and to do it with as little heap spraying as possible. To get there we need three things:

  1. Break ASLR. Leak a real heap address, so we know where to read.
  2. Control the ptr of the fake kj::String. So we can read the bytes at any address we choose.
  3. Make it repeatable. Read one address after another without re-shaping the heap each time.

11.2 Sizing nameList

One lever first, because it makes the rest easier. nameList’s size is ours to choose. Its length is just the number of capture groups the pattern declares, so padding the pattern with extra groups grows the kj::Vector<kj::String> to whatever size we want. tcmalloc places allocations by size class, so choosing nameList’s size chooses the neighborhood it lands in, and picking the size class is what makes landing our own allocations right next to it reliable.

11.3 Defeating ASLR

A read is only useful once we know where to aim it, and ASLR hides that. To beat it we just need to leak any one real heap address. The out-of-bounds read already returns whatever the fake kj::String’s ptr points at, so if we arrange for ptr to point at a location that itself holds a heap pointer, the read hands that pointer’s bytes back to us as a string:

Figure 13 -

Figure 12 – Leaking a heap pointer

So we need an object right after nameList with two things:

  1. ptr (first 8 bytes), points at a heap pointer, so dereferencing it leaks a heap address.
  2. size (next 8 bytes), a small, valid length: not zero, not a pointer, just short enough that the read returns a sane string.

We didn’t find a real object whose layout already satisfies both, so as a last resort we turned to the tcmalloc free list, and it has two properties that fit perfectly:

  1. The first 8 bytes of a freed chunk are the next pointer (to the next free chunk), which is requirement #1.
  2. The rest of the chunk, including bytes 8–15, is left untouched by the free, so a size we wrote there earlier stays put. That is requirement #2.

So what we can do is allocate a chunk right after nameList, write size = 8 into its bytes 8–15, and free it. The free turns its first 8 bytes into a next pointer to the next free chunk, while our size = 8 survives:

Figure 14 -

Figure 13 – Freelist next-pointer overwrite

The read hands back that heap pointer as bytes. Since tcmalloc aligns its heap to a 1 GB boundary, one leaked pointer gives us the heap base.

11.4 A repeatable read with VFS files

ASLR gives us an address. Now we want to read many, to sweep the heap. The problem is doing that without re-shaping every time. If reading a new address meant a fresh allocation, we’d have to land it next to nameList again on each read. What we need instead is an allocation we can keep in place and change in-place, so we just rewrite the target pointer and read again.

The best fit we found is a workerd API called VFS, a virtual (memory-only) filesystem. A VFS file’s contents are a native kj::heapArray on the tcmalloc heap, and crucially we can overwrite those contents at will without reallocating. It also lets us pick the file’s size, so we match nameList’s size class and a sprayed file lands right after it.

The idea is to shape the heap once so a VFS file lands right after nameList, then read any address by rewriting that file’s bytes in place and calling exec() again, with no re-shaping per read:

Figure 15 -

Figure 14 – Repeatable read via VFS

(This works because nameList is allocated when the URLPattern is constructed, but the out-of-bounds read only fires later on exec(), so the shaped layout persists across reads.)

11.5 Reading another Worker’s secret

From here it’s just a sweep. We walk the heap with the repeatable read and look for bytes that look like a secret, in the PoC, Bearer sk…-style API tokens, until we find one belonging to a co-located Worker.

12. Sandbox escape: from the zlib UAF to host RCE

The second demo stays inside Code Mode and goes all the way to native code on the host, starting from the zlib use-after-free of §8.

12.1 Improving the primitive

Recall what §8 gives us, broken into the pieces we’ll build on:

  • A use-after-free write. When params() flushes, zlib writes through the stale next_out into the output buffer, after that buffer has been freed and its slot can be reused.
  • A controllable allocation size. We choose the size of the output buffer, which decides which freed slot the write targets and what we can spray into it.

Our primitive, then:

Figure 16 -

Figure 15 – Reusing the freed buffer

And the write isn’t clean. The first 5 bytes of every flush are compression metadata.

Two improvements make it precise:

1. The offset of the write. workerd’s write() lets us choose where in the output buffer zlib starts writing. Alongside the buffer it takes an output offset, and zlib sets next_out = buffer + offset, so the write lands at freed + offset, a precise spot inside the reused object instead of always at its start.

2. The size of the write. We also keep the flush small, down to a single 8-byte field, so the write overwrites exactly the field we’re aiming at, rather than splattering the whole object around it.

Together that turns a blunt write at the top of the buffer into a small write landing exactly on a field we pick:

Figure 17 -

Figure 16 – Flush at chosen offset

12.2 From use-after-free to repeatable read/write

You might still be wondering how an imprecise write is exploitable at all. We control where it lands, but not the bytes. The trick with this kind of primitive is to stop caring about the bytes. Instead of writing a value, you find a “strong” object and overwrite its size / length field. You don’t need the exact bytes, you just need to make that length bigger. A bloated length turns the object’s own bounded read/write into an out-of-bounds read/write, and that you can build on.

The strong object we use is, again, a VFS file, but this time we corrupt the file’s metadata (the FileImpl object that tracks where the file’s data lives and how long it is), not the file’s contents:

Figure 18 -

Figure 17 – FileImpl metadata layout

With a FileImpl in the freed slot, we aim the UAF write at offset 0x20 so it lands on data.size and inflates the length.

Why does a bigger data.size matter? The file’s data lives at data.ptr, and data.size is the length workerd treats as its bounds, any read or write through the file API is allowed as long as it stays within [0, data.size) of data.ptr. Normally data.size matches the real buffer, so the file stays in bounds. After we inflate it, that bound now covers the real buffer and whatever heap follows it, so a file read or write past the real buffer still passes workerd’s bounds check and is carried out normally, even though it now reaches into adjacent memory:

Figure 19 -

Figure 18 – Inflating data.size out-of-bounds

And the file API makes that precise. Node’s fs read/write take a position argument (the file offset to read or write at, passed straight to the call, no separate seek), plus a length, so we can land exactly on any spot at data.ptr + position. To read 8 bytes from an out-of-bounds offset:

Figure 20 -

Figure 19 – OOB read via readSync

And to write 8 bytes at an out-of-bounds offset. Here the bytes are ours, it’s an ordinary file write:

Figure 21 -

Figure 20 – OOB write via writeSync

So one inflated length turns the VFS file into an out-of-bounds read and write at any offset across the heap.

12.3 Arbitrary read/write

OOB across adjacent heap is strong, but it only reaches forward from one buffer and the exact distances depend on the layout. We upgrade it to a clean, anywhere-in-the-process read/write with a second FileImpl.

The idea is to use the OOB write from the inflated file to reach a second FileImpl sitting further along the heap, and overwrite its data.ptr with any address we want. That second file’s metadata now says “your contents live at <address>”, so an ordinary read or write of the second file reads or writes that address:

Figure 22 -

Figure 21 – Arbitrary read/write primitive

And it’s repeatable. To hit a new address we just rewrite the second file’s data.ptr through the first file again and read/write once more, with no re-triggering the bug. That gives us a stable arbitrary 64-bit read and write across the whole process, the same shape of primitive we built for the cross-tenant read in §11.

12.4 To native code

On the self-hosted build the V8 sandbox is off, which makes the finish almost trivial. Normally turning a memory read/write into code execution means defeating W^X with a ROP chain and chasing per-version gadget offsets. Here we don’t have to. With the sandbox off, workerd reserves V8’s code region as a 256 MB read-write-execute (RWX) mapping at a fixed address, 0xaaaaf0000000, present from process startup, no leak required. So we skip ROP entirely.

The finish is simple. Use the arbitrary write to drop ARM64 shellcode (a reverse shell) into that RWX region, then redirect a function pointer to it. The pointer we hijack belongs to the zlib stream itself, the native write callback that handle.write() invokes (reached through the z_stream, which we locate via its avail_in field). We overwrite that callback’s target with our shellcode address and then call handle.write() once more. Instead of running zlib’s write path, control jumps to the shellcode, native code in the host process, out of the V8 isolate entirely.

Cage-off caveat. This chain was built against a self-hosted workerd compiled with the V8 sandbox off, which lets ArrayBuffer backing stores and native C++ objects share one heap, exactly what the FileImpl overlap relies on (and how Code Mode runs, §5). The underlying UAF is independent of the cage, but with the cage on this specific FileImpl technique would not work as-is. Reaching RCE there would need a different post-UAF path.

Part IV – Takeaways and disclosure

13. Defensive takeaways

  • The engine is not the whole boundary. Hardening V8 and shipping the cage is necessary, not sufficient. Every native API reachable from untrusted JS is part of the boundary.
  • Glue layers deserve first-class security review. JSG marshals lifetimes and pointers across the JS/native seam. That’s exactly where UAFs and missing bounds checks live. It had a fraction of V8’s scrutiny.
  • Native allocations need their own threat model. tcmalloc free-list behavior, VFS buffers, and kj containers live outside the cage. If the cage is your isolation story, the things it doesn’t cover are your attack surface.
  • Agent-generated code is normal code. In Code Mode the model writing exploit-shaped TypeScript isn’t an exceptional event, it’s the intended mode of operation. Prompt injection is a code-execution entry point, and should be modeled as one.

Disclosure timeline

All five vulnerabilities were reported to Cloudflare through HackerOne under coordinated disclosure.

DateEvent
February 1, 20264 of the 5 vulnerabilities reported via HackerOne (zlib UAF, HTMLRewriter UAF, both URLPattern OOB reads)
March 11, 2026Cloudflare rated two of them Critical (zlib UAF, HTMLRewriter UAF)
March 12, 2026The 5th, the KV SQL-bypass → deserialization, reported
Aug 5–6, 2026Public reveal at Black Hat USA 2026 (Mandalay Bay)

Cloudflare’s responses and confirmations:

  • Two rated Critical. Cloudflare rated the zlib use-after-free and the HTMLRewriter use-after-free as Critical.
  • Production reach. Cloudflare confirmed that the bugs reproduce on Cloudflare production, with one exception. The original URLPattern out-of-bounds read (urlpattern_original) does not trigger there (the Ada-backed standard URLPattern does).
  • The cage doesn’t cover the heap we used. Cloudflare confirmed our central claim, that the tcmalloc native heap is outside both the V8 sandbox (cage) and the memory-protection keys. Exactly the memory every primitive in this post operates on.
  • Fix. Cloudflare’s managed Workers were fixed in production, and workerd v1.20260619.1 closes all of these bugs for self-hosted deployments. As of now, Cloudflare has not assigned CVEs.

Links

  1. Cloudflare Q1 2026 earnings call (May 7, 2026), “Developers on Cloudflare’s platform increased to more than 5.5 million…”: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/markets/stocks/NET/pressreleases/1904486/cloudflare-q1-earnings-call-highlights/
  2. “go from no traffic at all to millions of requests per second instantly”: https://blog.cloudflare.com/workerd-open-source-workers-runtime/
  3. “More than 10% of all requests flowing through our network today use Cloudflare Workers”: https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-workers-serverless-week/
  4. “LLMs are better at writing code to call MCP, than at calling MCP directly” : https://blog.cloudflare.com/code-mode/
  5. “workerd is Open Source under the Apache License version 2.0” (post dated 2022-09-27) : https://blog.cloudflare.com/workerd-open-source-workers-runtime/
  6. “we prohibit the sandboxed worker from talking to the Internet. The global fetch() and connect() functions throw errors” : https://blog.cloudflare.com/code-mode/
  7. only two published security advisories, both Moderate : https://github.com/cloudflare/workerd/security/advisories
  8. “The ‘layer 2’ sandbox uses Linux namespaces and seccomp to prohibit all access to the filesystem and network” : https://blog.cloudflare.com/mitigating-spectre-and-other-security-threats-the-cloudflare-workers-security-model/
  9. no public link, Cloudflare coordinated-disclosure correspondence. Cloudflare confirmed there are no MPK protection keys on the tcmalloc allocations.

The post When Agentic Glue Melts: Exploiting Cloudflare Code Mode and Workers appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  

3rd August – Threat Intelligence Report

For the latest discoveries in cyber research for the week of 27th July, please download our Threat Intelligence Bulletin.

TOP ATTACKS AND BREACHES

  • Minnesota IT Services has confirmed coordinated cyberattacks affecting more than 30 community water utilities across the state. The incidents briefly disrupted a treatment plant in Braham and affected industrial control systems. Officials reported that drinking water safety was not affected. While the attack was not officially attributed, federal officials previously posted warning regarding targeting of critical infrastructure by Iranian-affiliated threat actors.
  • Bank of Baroda, a major Indian bank, has disclosed an email account compromise that exposed internal communications and attachments. Reports claim more than 700GB of customer files, loan documents, and audit records were leaked, although the bank has not confirmed the reported volume. Core banking systems were unaffected.
  • Amgen, a US biotechnology company that develops medicines for serious illnesses, has confirmed a breach involving cloud environments operated by third-party providers. Attackers exfiltrated proprietary corporate information and patient health data. The company reported no disruption to manufacturing, financial reporting, products, or its ability to supply medicines.
  • Angola’s largest telecommunications provider, Unitel, has suffered a cyberattack that disrupted voice, mobile data, and internet services for millions of customers. The outage also affected electronic payments shortly before the company’s stock market debut. Network data indicated that internal systems were disabled while external routers remained online.

AI THREATS

  • Anthropic has disclosed that Claude-based cybersecurity models gained unauthorized access to systems belonging to three outside organizations during controlled evaluations. The models moved beyond intended test environments and reached sensitive production assets. Anthropic identified the incidents while reviewing testing practices following separate autonomous AI security failures.
  • Researchers have published details of CVE-2026-59726, a critical vulnerability in the Ruflo AI agent platform. An unauthenticated attacker could abuse its exposed Model Context Protocol bridge to execute commands, steal API keys, access conversations, and alter stored AI memory. Ruflo addressed the issue in version 3.16.3.
  • Researchers surfaced a privacy issue in Anthropic’s Claude sharing feature that allowed publicly shared conversations and artifacts to be indexed by search engines. Indexed content reportedly included personal information, resumes, financial records, access codes, API keys, and clinical trial material that users may not have expected to become searchable.

VULNERABILITIES AND PATCHES

  • Cisco has addressed CVE-2026-20316, an actively exploited vulnerability in Secure Firewall Management Center. The flaw allows unauthenticated attackers to access a built-in low-privileged account and retrieve sensitive information from affected systems. Cisco released hotfixes after exploitation was identified, and the vulnerability was added to CISA’s catalog.
  • Broadcom has released patches for five vulnerabilities affecting VMware vCenter, ESX, Workstation, and Fusion. Three critical flaws could allow authentication bypass, arbitrary code execution, or escape from a virtual machine to its host. The issues include CVE-2026-59309 and CVE-2026-59310, both carrying CVSS scores of 9.8.
  • JetBrains has released fixes for CVE-2026-63077, a critical authentication bypass affecting all TeamCity On-Premises versions. A remote unauthenticated attacker could execute code with TeamCity server privileges and compromise connected build environments. The flaw is fixed in versions 2025.11.7 and 2026.1.3. TeamCity Cloud was not affected.
  • Rails maintainers have patched CVE-2026-66066, a critical Active Storage vulnerability affecting applications that use libvips. An unauthenticated attacker could read sensitive server files and, under some conditions, execute code remotely. Fixed Active Storage releases include versions 7.2.3.2, 8.0.5.1, and 8.1.3.1.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE REPORTS

  • Check Point researchers have revealed a phishing campaign that abuses Microsoft’s legitimate login and consent process through attacker-controlled applications. More than 200 emails targeted approximately 120 organizations within one month. Successful authorization provided access to mailboxes, files, Teams, SharePoint, OneDrive, and calendar information.
  • Researchers traced CaptiveCrunch, a campaign attributed to Russia-linked Storm-2945, also known as Midnight Blizzard. The attackers compromised hotel and conference captive portals to distribute CornFlake and ChocoShell malware. The campaign harvested Microsoft 365 and Azure AD authentication tokens, enabling account access and session takeover.
  • Researchers profiled a Russian-linked campaign exploiting CVE-2026-42897 in Microsoft Outlook Web Access against government and industry targets in the United States and Europe. Opening a malicious email triggers installation of OWAReaper, a browser implant that steals credentials and maintains mailbox access after passwords are changed or devices reimaged.
  • Researchers uncovered a npm supply chain campaign involving malicious packages that imitated private Alibaba modules. Layered dependencies retrieved attacker instructions from GitHub and installed operating system-specific RAT payloads. The malware enabled command execution, file theft, credential access, and movement through DingTalk and related development environments.

The post 3rd August – Threat Intelligence Report appeared first on Check Point Research.

  •  
❌