Cyber security

Security Advisory

MediaTek Patches Critical Modem Vulnerabilities  

Security Advisory: MediaTek disclosed critical vulnerabilities along with remediation for its modem and system components. Since the vulnerabilities affected thousands of devices, amounting to both multiple high- and medium vulnerabilities that affected, 60 chipsets used in smartphones, routers and IoT devices.

OEM MediaTek 
Severity High 
CVSS Score 8.3 (NOA) 
CVEs CVE-2025-20708, CVE-2025-20703, CVE-2025-20704, CVE-2025-20705, CVE-2025-20706, CVE-2025-20707 
POC Available No 
Actively Exploited No 
Exploited in Wild No 
Advisory Version 1.0 

Overview 

MediaTek issued a critical security update in September 2025 and key issues include modem-related flaws such as remote code execution, denial of service via rogue base stations and local privilege escalation.

Other vulnerabilities include WLAN buffer overflows, bootloader logic flaws and keymaster information leaks impacting Android devices and OpenWRT/Yocto platforms. There has been no active exploitation noticed and MediaTek began distributing patches to OEMs from July 2025 and urges immediate firmware updates to mitigate the issues. 

                Vulnerability Name CVE ID Product Affected Severity 
​Out-of-bounds write in Modem  CVE-2025-20708 Affected chipsets – 60 chipsets 
Modem NR15,16,17,17R software versions. 		 High 
Out-of-bounds read in Modem CVE-2025-20703 Affected chipsets – 57 chipsets 
Modem NR15,16,17,17R software versions. 		High 
Out-of-bounds write in Modem CVE-2025-20704 Affected chipsets – 14 chipsets 
Modem NR17,17R software versions. 		High 
Use after free in monitor_hang CVE-2025-20705 Affected chipsets – 39 chipsets 
Android 13 – 16,   openWRT 19.07, 21.02 / Yocto 2.6 software versions. 		Medium 
Use after free in mbrain CVE-2025-20706 Affected chipsets – 5 chipsets 
Android 14 – 15 software versions. 		Medium 
Use after free in geniezone CVE-2025-20707 Affected chipsets – 60 chipsets 
Android 13 – 15 software versions. 		Medium 

Technical Summary 

These vulnerabilities primarily include out-of-bounds read and write errors (CWE-125, CWE-787) and use-after-free issues (CWE-416), resulting from improper bounds checking and memory management flaws. 

An attacker controlling a rogue base station can exploit these flaws remotely without requiring user interaction, potentially causing remote denial of service, unauthorized privilege escalation, or local privilege escalation if system privileges are already obtained. The exploitation of these vulnerabilities could compromise device stability, security and confidentiality by corrupting memory or executing arbitrary code. Affected devices use modem firmware versions NR15 through NR17R, and a wide spectrum of chipsets, highlighting the broad attack surface. 

CVE ID Vulnerability Details Impact 
CVE-2025-20708 An out-of-bounds write flaw exists in the Modem due to incorrect bounds checking. This vulnerability allows remote escalation of privilege when a UE connects to a rogue base station, without requiring additional execution privileges or user interaction. Unauthorized access, data interception, disruption of cellular services 
CVE-2025-20703 The Modem is affected by an out-of-bounds read issue caused by improper bounds validation. This can result in remote denial of service if connected to a malicious base station, and exploitation requires no user interaction or extra privileges. Denial of Service (DoS), modem or device crash, freeze, unresponsiveness 
CVE-2025-20704 Due to a missing bounds check, the Modem is vulnerable to an out-of-bounds write. Exploiting this flaw can lead to remote escalation of privilege when connected to a rogue base station, though user interaction is necessary. Remote privilege escalation, unauthorized elevated access 
CVE-2025-20705 A use-after-free condition in the monitor_hang module can cause memory corruption, potentially leading to local escalation of privilege if the attacker already has System-level access. Exploitation does not require user interaction. Local privilege escalation, memory corruption 
CVE-2025-20706 The mbrain component suffers from a use-after-free vulnerability that can result in memory corruption. This may allow local privilege escalation for an attacker with System privileges, without needing user interaction. Local privilege escalation, memory corruption 
CVE-2025-20707 In the geniezone module, a use-after-free vulnerability can cause memory corruption and permit local privilege escalation if the attacker has System privileges, with no user interaction needed. Local privilege escalation, memory corruption 

Recommendations: 

Here are some recommendations below 

  • Once OEM updates are available, make sure to update your device promptly to apply the latest security patches addressing these vulnerabilities. 
  • Avoid connecting to unknown networks to reduce the risk of remote exploitation. 
  • Keep your device’s operating system and apps updated to the latest version. 

Conclusion: 
MediaTek’s recent security update addresses critical vulnerabilities, especially in modem firmware, that could allow remote attacks without user interaction. Although no active exploits have been found, the severity and scope of these flaws make it vital for manufacturers and users to promptly apply patches to protect devices and data. 

The company reassures end users that proactive notification and remediation precede public disclosure, underscoring MediaTek’s commitment to chipset and product security.

References: 

Blogs

Deep Dive into AI Ransomware ‘PromptLock’ Malware

AI Ransomware ‘PromptLock’ uses OpenAI gpt-oss-20b Model for Encryption has been identified by ESET research team, is believed to be the first-ever ransomware strain that leverages a local AI model to generate its malicious components. As we Deep dive into AI Ransomware we discover the intricacies and challenges organizations face dure to AI ransomware.

The malware uses OpenAI’s gpt-oss:20b model via the Ollama API to create custom, cross-platform Lua scripts for its attack.

PromptLock is written in Golang and has been identified in both Windows and Linux variants on the VirusTotal repository and uses the gpt-oss:20b model from OpenAI locally via the Ollama API to generate malicious Lua scripts in real-time.

ESET researchers have discovered the first known AI-powered ransomware. The malware, which ESET has named PromptLock, has the ability to exfiltrate, encrypt and possibly even destroy data, though this last functionality appears not to have been implemented in the malware yet.

PromptLock was not spotted in actual attacks and is instead thought to be a proof-of-concept (PoC) or a work in progress, ESET’s discovery shows how malicious use of publicly-available AI tools could supercharge ransomware and other pervasive cyberthreats.

“The PromptLock malware uses the gpt-oss-20b model from OpenAI locally via the Ollama API to generate malicious Lua scripts on the fly, which it then executes. PromptLock leverages Lua scripts generated from hard-coded prompts to enumerate the local filesystem, inspect target files, exfiltrate selected data, and perform encryption,” said ESET researchers.

New Era of AI Generated Ransomware

A tool can be used to automate various stages of ransomware attacks and the same can be said as AI-powered malware are able to adapt to the environment and change its tactics on the fly and warns of a new frontier in cyberattacks.

Its core functionality is different then traditional ransomware, which typically contains pre-compiled malicious logic. Instead, PromptLock carries hard-coded prompts that it feeds to a locally running gpt-oss:20b model.

As per researchers for its encryption payload, PromptLock utilizes the SPECK 128-bit block cipher, a lightweight algorithm suitable for this flexible attack model.

ESET researchers emphasize that multiple indicators suggest PromptLock is still in a developmental stage. For instance, a function intended for data destruction appears to be defined but not yet implemented.

Indicators of Compromise (IoCs)

Malware Family: Filecoder.PromptLock.A

SHA1 Hashes:

  • 24BF7B72F54AA5B93C6681B4F69E579A47D7C102
  • AD223FE2BB4563446AEE5227357BBFDC8ADA3797
  • BB8FB75285BCD151132A3287F2786D4D91DA58B8
  • F3F4C40C344695388E10CBF29DDB18EF3B61F7EF
  • 639DBC9B365096D6347142FCAE64725BD9F73270
  • 161CDCDB46FB8A348AEC609A86FF5823752065D2

Given LLMs’ success, many companies and academic groups are currently creating all kinds of models and constantly developing variants and improvements to LLM. In the context of LLMs, a “prompt” is an input text given to the model to generate a response. 

The success rate is high so threat actors are leveraging these models for illicit purposes, making it easier to create sophisticated attacks like ransomware and evade traditional defenses. sale of models Now

By automating the creation of phishing emails, ransomware scripts, and malware payloads, LLMs allow less skilled attackers to conduct sophisticated campaigns.

For AI-powered ransomware

AI-powered ransomware is a challenging threat to organizations far and above older attack tactics adopted by cyber criminals. If organization’s basic defensive methods such as ensuring critical vulnerabilities are patched as soon as possible, network traffic is monitored and implementing offline backups applied on time.

How Intrucept helps Defend Against AI-Powered Ransomware

Analyzing threat by behavior allows for early detection and response to malware threats and alert generation,. This reduces the risk of data exfiltration.

Intru360

Intru360 gives security analysts and SOC managers a clear view across the organization, helping them fully understand the extent and context of an attack. It also simplifies workflows by automatically handling alerts, allowing for faster detection of both known and unknown threats.

Identify latest threats without having to purchase, implement, and oversee several solutions or find, hire, and manage a team security analyst.

Unify latest threat intelligence and security technologies to prioritize the threats that pose the greatest risk to your company.

Here are some features we offer:

  • Over 400 third-party and cloud integrations.
  • More than 1,100 preconfigured correlation rules.
  • Ready-to-use threat analytics, threat intelligence service feeds, and prioritization based on risk.
  • Prebuilt playbooks and automated response capabilities.

Source of above graphics : Courtesy: First AI Ransomware ‘PromptLock’ Uses OpenAI gpt-oss-20b Model for Encryption

Uncategorized

ChatGPT Agents are Here to unlock Potential—So are Privacy & Security Risk


By Mahesh Maney R, Director of Products, Intrucept pvt Ltd

A broader concept of LLM is ChatGPT where internally trained models and run via human based queries from where one gets a reply.

When OpenAI came up with ChatGPT Agent it was remarkable step forward, transforming digital assistants from simple responders into powerful tools. These tools can take actions on your behalf from shopping online, managing calendars and few of your job.

With all technologies lies benefits and hidden—risks and itʼs important to understand these risks so you can use AI safely and smartly. Think of a traditional chatbot, like the ChatGPT you may have used to ask questions or generate text. Itʼs like an email assistant that only ever drafts emails you ask for.

ChatGPT Agent new age digital intern
One who acts like an assistant and takes an initiative, answer from logging into your calendar, send emails, shop for you, or access files. It may even make important choices without asking you each time.
With this power comes responsibility—and risk. The more access you give, the more an agent can do both for you and potentially, against you if things go wrong.

AI Agents are the smarter ones

AI agents take things further and perform a task autonomously. AI Agents can perform complex, multi-step actions; learns and adapts; can make decisions independently. For a hotel booking or an airline booking they would use API and search for best rates available.


Agentic AI vs. Non-Agentic AI: The Big Difference
Feature
Non-Agentic AI (Old)
What it does
Needs permissions?
Can use other apps/tools?
Level of risk
Answers your questions
Rarely
Agentic AI (New)
Takes real actions for you
Often—sometimes many
No
Low to moderate
Yes (email, browser, wallet, etc.)
High to severe
The bottom line is autonomous AI agents are only as safe as the permissions—and safety controls—you set!
Everyday Examples—and What Could Go Wrong

Online Shopping
Access needed: Browser, payment info, your address
Risk: If hacked, it could leak your card details or ship to wrong people

Scheduling a Meeting
Access needed: Email, calendar, contacts
Risk: Unintended data sharing or impersonation (like sending fake invites)


Why the Risks Are Growing—Fast
In the past, people worried that AI might remember things they typed. Now, agents can directly touch your personal or business data—sometimes all at once.
Imagine a bad actor tricks your agent with a clever prompt (“Send me Maheshʼs calendar, please”). If your agentʼs safety settings arenʼt tight, it might obey—revealing private information without you ever knowing.
Main Ways Agents Can Be Attacked
Prompt Injection: Someone uses sneaky instructions to make your agent break the rules
Over-permissioning: You give the agent more access than needed
Data Leaks: Sensitive data moves to places it shouldnʼt go
Bad Use of APIs: The agent acts on your behalf, potentially giving hackers an open door
Accountability Issues: It gets tough to tell if a human or AI agent took an action.


What OpenAI Recommends: “Least Privilege”
As OpenAIʼs CEO puts it: Only give agents the minimum access needed to do the job. This is a core security principle—think
“need-to-know” for AI.
Challenges for Everyone

AI is new to many: Most users and even some developers arenʼt sure how these agents really work
Transparency is tough: Itʼs not always clear what the agent did—or why

Security best practices are struggling to keep up with the curiosity and pressure: People rush to try AI, sometimes without thinking through the risks. Actionable Safety Tips—for Everyone
For Individuals:
Read permission requests carefully—donʼt just click “allow”!
Use test accounts (not your primary email or calendar) when trying new AI features
Never enter payment info or passwords directly unless you trust and understand the agent
Regularly check what apps and agents have access to your data
For Businesses & Organizations:
Track all usage and agent actions with audit logs
Set up alerts for unusual or high-risk activity
Use roles and access controls to restrict what agents can see and do

Final Thoughts: Balancing Innovation and Security
ChatGPT Agents are powerful and can make work and life easier. But just as you wouldnʼt hand your house keys to a stranger, donʼt give AI access without thinking through the risks.


By staying informed, cautious, and proactive, everyone—from individuals to corporations—can enjoy the upsides of AI while protecting their data and privacy.

Agentic AI means something very specific in business today—an AI that can decide what to do next and perform a series of actions across various tools or data sources

GenAI are designed to handle specific use cases and consist a set of components trained to enable learning or reasoning while they have internal access to data.

Stay Informed and Stay Safe!
Subscribe for the latest updates on AI safety, privacy strategies, and actionable tips for users at every level.

Security Advisory

PostgreSQL High-Severity RCE Flaws in pg_dump Utilities Allow Remote Code Execution 

Summary : Security advisory: The PostgreSQL Global Development Group has issued a security update addressing 3 security vulnerabilities and over 55 bugs, including two high-severity remote code execution (RCE) flaws in core utilities. The update applies to PostgreSQL 17.6, 16.10, 15.14, 14.19, and 13.22, as well as the third beta release of PostgreSQL 18.

Severity High 
CVSS Score 8.8 
CVEs CVE-2025-8715, CVE-2025-8714, CVE-2025-8713 
POC Available No 
Actively Exploited No 
Exploited in Wild No 
Advisory Version 1.0 

Overview 

These issues affect all PostgreSQL versions 13 through 17. All the administrators & users are urged to update immediately to prevent potential exploitation. 

Vulnerability Name CVE ID Product Affected Severity Fixed Version 
​ Object Name Newline Injection  CVE-2025-8715 PostgreSQL version 13-17  High  17.6, 16.10, 15.14, 14.19, 13.22  
pg_dump Restore-Time Arbitrary Code Execution CVE-2025-8714 PostgreSQL version 13-17 High  17.6, 16.10, 15.14, 14.19, 13.22  
View Access Policy Bypass via Statistics Leak CVE-2025-8713 PostgreSQL version 13-17 Low  17.6, 16.10, 15.14, 14.19, 13.22  

Technical Summary 

The PostgreSQL security update addresses three critical vulnerabilities that primarily impact its core utilities, specifically pg_dump, pg_dumpall and pg_restore. The most severe flaws, CVE-2025-8714 and CVE-2025-8715, enable remote code execution during database restoration.

These arise from improper handling of untrusted data and newline characters in dump outputs, allowing a malicious superuser from the origin server to inject arbitrary code via crafted meta-commands or object names.

When such a dump file is restored, the injected code executes on the client system as the operating system user running psql, leading to potential full system compromise. In some cases, the attack can even lead to SQL injection on the target server. The third issue, CVE-2025-8713, is lower in severity but still notable, allowing unauthorized users to infer sensitive data from optimizer statistics due to insufficient enforcement of row-level security policies. This can lead to leakage of histogram data and most common value lists from views or partitioned tables. These vulnerabilities collectively threaten data confidentiality, system integrity and operational security, especially in environments where backups are frequently restored or shared. 

CVE ID CVSS Score System Affected  Vulnerability Details Impact 
CVE-2025-8715 8.8 PostgreSQL version 13-17 Due to improper neutralization of newline characters in object names. A user with access to the origin server can craft object names containing newlines that inject psql meta-commands into the dump output. Upon restoration, these commands are interpreted and executed, leading to arbitrary code execution or even SQL injection on the restore target server. This issue was previously addressed in CVE-2012-0868 but was inadvertently reintroduced in version 11.20. Arbitrary code execution 
CVE-2025-8714 8.8 PostgreSQL version 13-17 A malicious superuser on the origin server can inject arbitrary code into a plain-format database dump via meta-commands or object definitions. When this dump is restored, the malicious code is executed by the psql client under the privileges of the system account running the restore operation. This flaw occurs due to insufficient validation of input data included in dump files. Arbitrary code execution 
CVE-2025-8713 3.1 PostgreSQL version 13-17 This allows unauthorized users to infer sensitive data by exploiting PostgreSQL’s optimizer statistics. A user can craft a leaky operator or query that bypasses access control mechanisms within views or partitioned tables. This permits access to internal statistics, such as histograms or most-common-values lists, which can expose data that row security policies are meant to hide. Unauthorized access 

Recommendations: 

Here are some recommendations below 

  • Upgrade to PostgreSQL versions 17.6, 16.10, 15.14, 14.19, 13.22, or the latest. 
  • Ensure pg_dump/restore operations are performed only with trusted data sources. 
  • Limit superuser privileges on database systems. 
  • Sanitize and audit database objects used in dumps or restores. 
  • Check for unusual meta-commands or object names in restore logs. 

Conclusion: 
Two of the vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-8714 and CVE-2025-8715) allow for arbitrary code execution. It’s the threats to system integrity and confidentiality. While not publicly exploited at the time of release, the potential severity of these flaws makes immediate patching critical.

PostgreSQL administrators should update all affected systems and review internal restore processes to avoid compromise. 

References: 

Blogs

Fake ChatGPT Desktop App used to deliver PipeMagic Malware

Microsoft finds that a fake ChatGPT Desktop App Delivering PipeMagic Backdoor,a part of sophisticated malware framework. The PipeMagic campaign represents a dangerous evolution in the global cybercrime landscape. The malicious campaign, powered by a new backdoor called PipeMagic, targets multiple industries including IT, finance, and real estate. The PipeMagic attack is centered around CVE-2025-29824, a critical Windows Common Log File System (CLFS) vulnerability

The PipeMagic campaign a malware to technical threat exploiting trust globally

As per Microsoft cybercriminals are disguising malware as widely popular ChatGPT Desktop Application to launch ransomware attacks across the globe.  

PipeMagic’s evolution from malware to technical threat exploiting trust globally

The malware allows hackers to escalate privileges once inside a system, by leveraging the immense popularity of ChatGPT, attackers have successfully weaponized user trust.

Microsoft has linked the operation to Storm-2460, a financially motivated cybercrime group known for deploying ransomware through stealthy backdoors.

PipeMagic is a malware first detected in December 2022 while investigating a malicious campaign involving RansomExx. The victims were industrial companies in Southeast Asia. To penetrate the infrastructure, the attackers exploited the CVE-2017-0144 vulnerability.

The backdoor’s loader was a trojanized version of Rufus, a utility for formatting USB drives. PipeMagic supported two modes of operation – as a full-fledged backdoor providing remote access, and as a network gateway – and enabled the execution of a wide range of commands.

Pipemagic’s technique of attack

PipeMagic also reflects a growing trend where attackers combine fileless malware techniques with modular frameworks.

By running directly in memory, it avoids detection from traditional signature-based tools. The modular design means it can expand its functionality much like commercial software — essentially transforming cybercrime into a scalable business model.

Another key point is the use of cloud infrastructure for command-and-control. By hosting their servers on Azure, the hackers blend into normal enterprise traffic, making malicious communications far less suspicious. This tactic underscores the need for behavioral monitoring instead of relying solely on blacklists.

Microsoft attributes PipeMagic to a financially motivated group known as Storm-2460. This is a warning sign for future attacks in the broader cybersecurity landscape.

PipeMagic’s modus operandi could be an inspiration for future malware families and its modular framework could fuel a wave of ransomware-as-a-service operations. That possibility raises the stakes not just for enterprises but also for small businesses and even government institutions.

The first stage of the PipeMagic infection execution begins with a malicious in-memory dropper disguised as the open-source for chat GPT application project. The threat actor uses a modified version of the GitHub project that includes malicious code to decrypt and launch an embedded payload in memory.

The embedded payload is the PipeMagic malware, a modular backdoor that communicates with its C2 server over TCP. Once active, PipeMagic receives payload modules through a named pipe and its C2 server.

The malware self-updates by storing these modules in memory using a series of doubly linked lists.

These lists serve distinct purposes for staging, execution, and communication, enabling the threat actor to interact and manage capabilities of backdoor throughout its lifecycle.

By offloading network communication and backdoor tasks to discrete modules, PipeMagic maintains a modular, stealthy, and highly extensible architecture, making detection and analysis significantly challenging.

Microsoft Threat Intelligence encountered PipeMagic as part of research on an attack chain involving the exploitation of CVE-2025-29824, an elevation of privilege vulnerability in Windows Common Log File System (CLFS).

Security Advisory

Microsoft IIS Web Deploy RCE Vulnerability Allows Authenticated Remote Code Execution 

Summary of Vulnerability in Microsoft Web Deploy 4.0 (CVE-2025-53772) revels critical security flaw that could be exploited by authenticated attackers to execute code on affected systems. This is the bug disclosed on August 12, 2025, with a CVSS score of 8.8, indicating high severity.

Severity High 
CVSS Score 8.8 
CVEs CVE-2025-53772 
POC Available No 
Actively Exploited No 
Exploited in Wild No 
Advisory Version 1.0 

Overview 

A vulnerability in Microsoft Web Deploy 4.0 (CVE-2025-53772) allows authenticated attackers to remotely execute arbitrary code on affected systems.

The issue arises from the insecure deserialization of untrusted data. Due to its low privilege requirements and lack of user interaction, this flaw poses a significant threat, especially in enterprise deployment environments. 

Vulnerability Name CVE ID Product Affected Severity Fixed Version 
​ Web Deploy Remote Code Execution via Deserialization  CVE-2025-53772 Microsoft Web Deploy 4.0  High  10.0.2001 or later 

Technical Summary 

The vulnerability stems from insecure deserialization of untrusted data (CWE-502), allowing remote attackers to craft malicious HTTP requests that trigger code execution on the web server. This flaw enables remote code execution (RCE) under specific conditions, where the attacker must have authenticated access and network connectivity.

The attack is network-based, requires only low-privilege access and does not rely on user interaction. Successful exploitation can result in a high impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability of the affected system. As of the time of publication, no public exploit has been reported and the exploit maturity is considered unproven. 

CVE ID CVSS Score System Affected  Vulnerability Details Impact 
CVE-2025-53772 8.8 Microsoft Web Deploy 4.0 Web Deploy deserializes untrusted input, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary code. Remote Code Execution 

Recommendations: 

Here are some recommendations below 

  • Apply Microsoft Web Deploy version 10.0.2001 or latest version. 
  • Limit access to Web Deploy endpoints to trusted IP ranges or internal networks only. 
  • Audit logs for unusual HTTP POST activity to Web Deploy endpoints. 

Conclusion: 
While CVE-2025-53772 has not yet been publicly exploited, the nature of the flaw and the ease of attack (low privileges, no user interaction) significantly increases the risk of widespread exploitation, particularly in enterprise deployment environments.

Organizations using Microsoft Web Deploy 4.0 should update and apply the latest patch without delay.

This vulnerability affects Web Deploy 4.0 and requires low privileges to exploit, making it particularly concerning for organizations that use this deployment tool in their infrastructure. The vulnerability allows an authenticated attacker to exploit the system via low-complexity network-based attacks. 

References: 

Security Advisory

WinRAR Zero-Day Path Traversal Flaw Actively Exploited to Code Execution 

Security advisory: A zero-day path traversal vulnerability has been discovered in the Windows version of a popular file archiver utility, WinRAR. The vulnerability tracked as CVE-2025-8088, affects multiple Windows-based WinRAR an components, which has already been exploited in the wild.

Severity High 
CVSS Score 8.4 
CVEs CVE-2025-8088 
POC Available Yes 
Actively Exploited Yes 
Exploited in Wild Yes 
Advisory Version 1.0 

Overview 
This flaw allows attackers to manipulate the extraction path of files from a malicious archive, enabling them to place arbitrary code file in sensitive system folders, overwrite important files and even execute malicious code immediately upon extraction. 

Vulnerability Name CVE ID Product Affected Severity Fixed Version 
Path Traversal Vulnerability   CVE-2025-8088  WinRAR (Windows versions), RAR, UnRAR, portable UnRAR (Windows), UnRAR.dll 8.4  WinRAR 7.13 

Technical Summary 

When extracting files, vulnerable versions of WinRAR could be tricked into using a maliciously crafted file path embedded inside an archive rather than the user’s intended extraction directory. This occurs when the extraction process fails to properly validate and sanitize file paths before writing them to disk. 
As a result, attackers can: 

  • Place malicious files in protected system directories. 
  • Overwrite critical system/application files. 
  • Trigger automatic execution of malware without further user action. 

Most common attack vector involves sending a malicious archive via phishing or other social engineering techniques. When opened with a vulnerable WinRAR version, the malware is silently deployed and executed. 

Unix versions of RAR, UnRAR, UnRAR library, RAR for Android are not affected for this vulnerability. 

CVE ID System Affected  Vulnerability Details Impact 
CVE-2025-8088 WinRAR and related components on Windows version (RAR, UnRAR, portable UnRAR, UnRAR.dll) Flawed extraction path handling allows files to be placed outside the intended extraction directory. Allows arbitrary file placement, overwriting critical files, and executing malicious code without user interaction. 

Recommendations: 

Here are the recommendations below you can follow 

  • Update immediately to WinRAR 7.13 or newer version from the official WinRAR website. 
  • Avoid extracting archives from untrusted or unknown sources. 
  • Enable endpoint protection and ensure it scans archives before extraction. 
  • Audit your system for unusual or unauthorized files in system directories. 

Conclusion: 
CVE-2025-8088 shows that even widely trusted tools like WinRAR can become high-risk targets when flaws allow silent malware deployment during normal usage. Given that this zero-day has already been exploited, updating to WinRAR 7.13 immediately is crucial. Additionally, users should avoid extracting files from unknown sources and maintain strong endpoint protection. 

References: 

Blogs

Automotive Security under fire as Firmware Flipper Zero of Dark Web break Rolling Code security of Latest Vehicles

Security researchers discovered Firmware for device related to Flipper Zero and showcased by YouTube channel Talking Sasquatch.

A cyber threat that can bring in significant escalation in automotive cybersecurity that demands a single intercepted signal to compromise a vehicle’s entire key automotive functionality. Rolling code security systems basically protects millions of modern vehicles.

Automative vehicles may use encryption to avoid eavesdropping (i.e., capture and decoding of signals) or tampering attacks (i.e., “flipping” lock signals to unlocks). However, replaying signals, even if they are encrypted, is straightforward.

Rolling code security

That is where rolling code come in action and have been introduced wherein a particular code2 (e.g., an “unlock” code) is considered disposable, i.e., it is only used once. In a nutshell, every button click on the key fob triggers a counter in the key fob and in the vehicle upon reception to roll, making it valid for subsequent use in the future. (https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3627827)

Single capture attack method: For this new attack to work, all that is needed is a single button-press capture from the keyfob, without any jamming. Just from that single capture, it is able to emulate all the keyfob’s functions, including lock, unlock, and unlock trunk. A consequence of this is that the original keyfob gets out of sync, and will no longer function.

According to the Talking Sasquatch, the attack works by simply reverse engineering the rolling code sequence, either through sequence leaks or prior brute forcing of the sequence from a large list of known codes.

Challenges in Automotive landscape

The automotive landscape has transformed into a convergence of software and mechanics, introducing exciting possibilities for vehicle performance and convenience. New concerns on vulnerabilities raises eyes about how malicious actors can exploit codes.

Regardless of the method, videos demonstrating the attack show that only a single capture is needed to emulate a keyfob completely.

Affected vehicles include Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Ford, Hyundai, Jeep, Kia, Mitsubishi and Subaru. As of yet, there appears to be no easy fix for this, other than mass vehicle recalls.

Secure coding

It is advised that regular code reviews is published that uses latest static analysis tools help detect vulnerabilities early in the development process.

Keep a secured update mechanisms enable swift responses to emerging threats that can address security vulnerabilites

Let’s understand the importance of of security and feel responsible for it and that requires best practices, cyber security culture and implementing early testing.

What can manufactures do to avoid cyber security lapses

For manufactures its advisable DevSecOps and automotive fuzzing tools that offer great solutions to prevent crashes further they improve efficiency and accuracy of their testing efforts and minimize costs.

GaarudNode from Intruceptlabs

GaarudNode is an all-in-one  solution designed to empower development teams with the tools they need to secure their applications throughout the development lifecycle. By combining the power of SAST, DAST, SCA, API security, and CSPM, GaarudNode provides a comprehensive security framework that ensures your applications are built, tested, and deployed with confidence.

Sources: https://www.rtl-sdr.com/flipperzero-darkweb-firmware-bypasses-rolling-code-security/)

Blogs

Firmware Vulnerabilities affecting Dell Laptops Could allow attackers to achieve persistent access 

A set of vulnerabilities affecting millions of Dell laptops used by government agencies, cybersecurity professionals, and enterprises worldwide. The vulnerability known as “ReVault,” mainly target the Broadcom BCM5820X security chip embedded in Dell’s ControlVault3 firmware.

This subsequently create opportunities for attackers to steal passwords, biometric data, and maintain persistent access to compromised systems.

How does the vulnerability work

Most of the flaws reside in the firmware for ControlVault3 and ControlVault3+, which are hardware security components that store passwords, biometric templates, and security codes.

The lists includes:

  • Two out-of-bounds vulnerabilities (CVE-2025-24311, CVE-2025-25050)
  • An arbitrary free (CVE-2025-25215) flaw
  • A stack-overflow bug (CVE-2025-24922)
  • An unsafe-deserialization flaw (CVE-2025-24919)

According to the researchers, the vulnerabilities can be exploited in so-called ReVault attacks by:

  • Attackers who have achieved non-administrative access/privileges on a vulnerable target laptop. The vulnerabilities may allow them to interact with the ControlVault firmware and leak key material that would allow them to permanently modify the firmware (i.e., effectively creating a potential backdoor into the system)
  • Attackers that have physical access to the laptop. They could pry the device open, use a custom connector to access the Unified Security Hub board (which runs ControlVault) over USB, and exploit those vulnerabilities – all without having to log into the system beforehand or having knowledge of the full-disk encryption password.

“Another interesting consequence of this scenario is that if a system is configured to be unlocked with the user’s fingerprint, it is also possible to tamper with the CV firmware to accept any fingerprint,” as per researchers.

Technical details have not been publicly shared, but they have, of course, been privately reported to Dell and Broadcom.

These are 5 critical vulnerabilities of ReVault found by Cisco Talos researcher

ReVault Attack – Five Critical Vulnerabilities

ControlVault3 and ControlVault3+ systems:

  • CVE-2025-24311: An out-of-bounds read vulnerability that enables information leakage
  • CVE-2025-25050: An out-of-bounds write flaw allowing code execution
  • CVE-2025-25215: An arbitrary memory free vulnerability
  • CVE-2025-24922: A stack-based buffer overflow enabling arbitrary code execution
  • CVE-2025-24919: An unsafe deserialization flaw in ControlVault’s Windows APIs

Importance of device security posture/Endpoint security

The incident highlight how device posture check is designed to evaluate threat that a device poses to an organization and its systems.

The persistent nature of these attacks represents a significant escalation in firmware-based threats, as the malicious code resides below the operating system level.

Here traditional antivirus solutions cannot detect or remove it. Now sophistication of cyber threats means that organizations need to become more proactive in terms of defense.

The identification and mitigation of a threat early on, via an effective and clearly defined security posture, reduces costs, lessens downtime, and minimizes reputational damage.

Periodic security audits are essential to have a complete check on all the security features of the organization. Such audits identify vulnerabilities in the current security controls and allow for ensuring things align properly with industry standards. 

Importance of Endpoint security

End point security detect and prevent security threats like file-based malware attacks among other malicious activities. It also provides investigation and remediation capabilities needed to respond to dynamic security incidents and alerts.

Conclusion:

Protecting against endpoint attacks is challenging for organisation because endpoints exist where humans and machines intersect. With the increasing number of adversaries trying to breach organizations using sophisticated cyberattacks, quickly detecting potential threats will help speed the remediation process and keep data protected.

(Source: https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2025/08/05/dell-laptops-firmware-vulnerabilities-revault-attacks/)

Uncategorized

Patch Now! Claude Code Vulnerabilities Allow Unauthorized Command Execution, CVEs Affect AI Security Foundations 

Summary 

Anthropic’s Claude Code gained traction as a powerful AI coding assistant and promises developers a safe and streamlined way to build with Claude’s capabilities. But recently two high-severity vulnerabilities have been discovered in Claude Code, Anthropic’s AI-powered coding assistant. These flaws allow attackers to escape security restrictions and execute arbitrary system commands.

AI coding assistant was meant to enforce restrictions but unknowingly reveals how to bypass them. Threat researchers from Cymulate discovered two high-severity vulnerabilities in Claude Code, which were quickly addressed by the team.

These issues allowed me to escape its intended restrictions and execute unauthorized actions, all with Claude’s own help.

Severity High 
CVSS Score 8.7 
CVEs CVE-2025-54794, CVE-2025-54795 
POC Available Yes 
Actively Exploited No 
Exploited in Wild No 
Advisory Version 1.0 

Overview 
Notably, Claude’s own feedback mechanisms were leveraged by attackers to refine and optimize their payloads. 

These CVEs highlight how generative AI tools can be manipulated into aiding exploitation attempts, demonstrating the risks of integrating AI into secure development workflows. 

Vulnerability Name CVE ID Product Affected Severity Fixed Version 
Path Restriction Bypass  CVE-2025-54794  Claude Code < v0.2.111 7.7  v0.2.111 
Command Injection CVE-2025-54795 Claude Code < v1.0.20 8.7 v1.0.20 

Technical Summary 

CVE-2025-54794 – Directory Restriction Bypass  

Claude Code tried to keep file access safe by only allowing work in certain folders. But it used a weak method to check file paths it just checked if the file name started with an allowed folder name. An attacker could create a folder with a similar name (like /tmp/allowed_dir_malicious) and trick Claude into thinking it was safe.

This could allow attackers to reach outside the safe folder, read secret files or even access system settings. Using symbolic links, attackers could also jump to important files that should never be touched. 

CVE-2025-54795 – Command Injection 

Claude only allows certain commands, like echo or ls, to run. But there was a mistake in how it cleaned user input. Attackers could hide harmful commands inside allowed ones. Example – echo “\”; <MALICIOUS_COMMAND>; echo \”” tricks Claude into running the attacker’s command between two harmless echo commands. 

Even worse, Claude helped improve these attack attempts. When a try failed, the attacker asked Claude why it didn’t work. Claude explained the problem and suggested fixes leading to successful attacks. 

CVE ID System Affected  Vulnerability Details Impact 
CVE-2025-54794 Claude Code versions below v0.2.111 Claude used a weak prefix matching to check if files were inside a safe folder. Attackers could create folders with similar names to bypass these checks. Attackers can escape the sandbox, access sensitive files, and potentially escalate system privileges. 
CVE-2025-54795 Claude Code versions below v1.0.20 Claude allowed only safe commands, but input was not cleaned properly. Attackers could hide malicious commands inside allowed ones like echo. Attackers can run harmful commands, open applications, and possibly install malware or backdoors. 

POC Available: 

This vulnerability exploits a weakness in how Claude handles whitelisted command strings. Improper input sanitization allows attackers to inject arbitrary shell commands using echo, bypassing any user prompt or approval. 

  1. Exploitation Steps (PoC) 

Step 1 – Try a basic payload 

echo “test”; ls -la ../restricted (This gets flagged by Claude, and it asks for user confirmation) 

Step 2 – Refined working payload: 

echo “\”; ls -la ../restricted; echo \”” 

Claude executes this without a prompt. 

Lists a directory (../restricted) outside the current working directory, which should not be accessible. 

Step 3 – Execute arbitrary system command (e.g., launch Calculator) 

echo “\”; open -a Calculator; echo \”” 

This launches the Calculator app without any user approval. 

  1. Why Did This Work? 
  1. Improper Input Escaping: 
    Claude Code embeds user input into echo “<input>“ but doesn’t properly sanitize or escape the contents. 
  1. Payload Explains the Exploit: 
  • echo “\”; → closes the initial string 
  • COMMAND → injects and executes arbitrary command 
  • ; echo \”” → reopens the string to make it appear valid 
  • Claude sees this as just another harmless echo command 
  • Since echo is whitelisted, it runs automatically 
  • The attacker’s payload slips through the gap and executes 
  • If the Claude Code is running with higher privileges, attackers can perform Local Privilege Escalation (LPE) 

Remediation: 

  • Update immediately Claude   

For CVE-2025-54794 → Update to v0.2.111 or later 

For CVE-2025-54795 → Update to v1.0.20 or later 

  • Check logs and systems where Claude was used for suspicious behavior.  
  • Don’t allow untrusted files or user input into Claude’s coding environment. 

Conclusion: 
These vulnerabilities highlight a growing concern in AI-assisted development, the AI’s ability to assist malicious users. Claude Code not only allowed abuse through technical flaws, but also helped attackers refine and improve their exploitation strategy. 

Organizations leveraging AI in development pipelines must apply the same rigor used for traditional tools, enforce strict input validation, isolate environments and assume AI can be misled or exploited. 

Anthropic’s security and engineering teams has been fast with their professional response and smooth coordination during disclosure.

References: 

Scroll to top