artificial intelligence | Breaking Cybersecurity News | The Hacker News

Attackers keep finding new keys. The funny part is that defenders keep inventing where to store them. This week, those keys sit in AI tools, exposed services, old bugs, weak logins, and software sold like a monthly subscription. Some attacks use new tricks. Others just reuse what was already lying around. Both work often enough. So the threat landscape is not getting cleaner. It is just getting more places to make the same mistake. Here’s what showed up this week. The threats change every week. Subscribe, and we’ll alert you when each new ThreatsDay Bulletin is out.

Malicious code running inside a Docker Sandboxes virtual machine on macOS could escape the project directory shared into it and read or change files anywhere else on the host, Docker warns in a  security announcement  on September 15. The escape runs with the rights of the host account that runs the virtual machine. The flaw,  CVE-2026-77179 , is rated Critical, affects versions 0.28.0 up to but not including 0.42.0 on macOS, and was fixed in  0.42.0  on September 7. Docker Sandboxes runs each AI coding agent in its own small virtual machine with the project directory shared in. The code that could escape is whatever runs inside that machine, such as a coding agent that has been turned against its user, or anything malicious the agent installs and runs. Docker has not reported any exploitation. CISA's added assessment on the CVE record lists exploitation as none, and the flaw is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog as of the ca...

A new CVE drops. Your scanner finds it. The severity score looks ugly. But that still does not answer the question that matters: Can it actually be exploited in your environment? Mythos-class AI is compressing the time between disclosure and working exploitation, while many security programs still validate risk on weekly or quarterly cycles. The dangerous gap is no longer just technical. It is measured in time. 📅 Save Your Spot Today: How to Prove You're Ready for Mythos-Class Attacks . Can’t join live? Register anyway. We’ll send the webinar recording after the session, so you can watch it later, whenever it fits your schedule, and still see the full, fresh CVE-to-validation workflow. Stop prioritizing on severity alone A high score tells you a vulnerability could be serious. It does not prove that an attacker can use it against you. Security teams need faster answers: Is the affected asset exposed? What attack techniques does exploitation require? Do ...

Attackers now weaponize new vulnerabilities in about five days (Mandiant, part of Google Cloud). The median organization takes 43 days to patch one (Verizon DBIR 2026). A new free guide explains how autonomous AI agents are closing that gap, and what security leaders must demand before pointing one at production. TL;DR Exploitation is now the front door. It starts 31% of breaches (Verizon DBIR 2026), the #1 initial-access vector, while annual pentesting leaves an estimated 90% of the estate untested. The capability is proven, not projected. An autonomous system topped HackerOne's US leaderboard in 2025 (XBOW), and peer-reviewed agents exploited 87% of one-day flaws unaided (Fang et al., 2024). Continuous beats periodic, measurably. Programmatic testing makes teams 4.5x more likely to fix criticals within three days (Cobalt, 2026). It's an AI agent in your production. Hold it to a bar. Provable coverage, an independent validator, blast-radius guardrails, and a...

OpenAI on Wednesday disclosed six new instances of "unexpected or concerning model behavior" that took place over the past six months, while sharing a new framework for reporting, tracking, investigating, and disclosing model misalignment in a bid to improve transparency. "As AI systems grow more advanced and more widely deployed, we need to build a broader and better-informed consensus on the progress of alignment research," OpenAI said. "We do not believe that the AI industry has solved alignment and monitoring to a sufficient degree to continue responsibly scaling at maximum speed for much longer." "Decisions about how AI development should proceed in the months and years to come need to draw on evidence that people outside the companies building frontier models can examine for themselves." The six incidents are outside of the recently disclosed misaligned activity targeting Hugging Face , DseWiki , and RubyGems . Details of the inc...

Security researchers at Forever Security have shown that one ordinary browser extension could take control of the AI assistants built into five Chromium-based products: Gemini Live in Chrome, Perplexity Comet, Microsoft Edge, Opera Neon and the Claude in Chrome extension. Once the extension was installed, it could access each product's built-in AI with a single click. On Comet, Edge, Opera Neon, and Claude in Chrome, it could drive the AI agent to act on behalf of the attacker; on Chrome and Comet, it could read files from the user's computer, and on Chrome, it could also switch on the camera and microphone. The findings are researcher demonstrations, not attacks seen in the wild, and each requires the attacker's extension to be already running in the victim's browser. These products all work the same way. The AI has a "body" inside the browser that can see the screen, open files, use the camera, and take actions, and a "brain" that runs on th...

Mandiant says an attacker hijacked an active AI coding-assistant session at an unnamed software-as-a-service provider and later spread  Shai-Hulud  across about 100 internal code repositories. Before the repository spread, the assistant recommended software that the attacker had poisoned, and the recommendation was accepted. The worm stole repository secrets and source code for the company's products. The case appears in  Mandiant's September 2026 report . The public case study does not say when the intrusion happened or how the attacker took over the active coding-assistant session. How the Attack Unfolded After the recommendation was accepted, the attacker used the developer's active session to install an infostealer through a poisoned PyPI package. The attacker also stole GitHub OAuth tokens. The attacker then deployed the self-spreading Shai-Hulud worm across approximately 100 internal code repositories. The attacker also poisoned a package in the company...

Introduction Security teams have gotten pretty good at testing against what can hurt them. Can this EDR agent catch this payload? Will my organization fail the phishing simulation? Does this SIEM rule fire on this particular technique? And, in more mature organizations, this testing happens continuously rather than as a one-off exercise. But no matter how much you validate against these exposures, it doesn't fix the main problem the industry is facing: these are isolated, disconnected testing.  And real attackers, increasingly AI Powered ones, don't test techniques one at a time. They chain them. A phishing email leads to a credential harvest. That harvest leads to an initial foothold. The foothold leads to privilege escalation, then lateral movement, then data staging, then exfiltration… until the damage is irreversibly done.  Any one of those individual steps might be something a security control is theoretically capable of catching - but there's just too many po...

WordPress has announced it's launching an automated security review for every release of a plugin before it's distributed through the WordPress.org update API so as to analyze it for potential security issues and ensure there are no risks involved. "New plugins are reviewed before they enter the directory, but updates ship continuously after that," David Perez, WordPress Official Plugin Repository Team Co-Lead, said . "A plugin can be secure today and introduce a vulnerability, or malicious code, in a future release." WordPress said the lack of a "consistent review step" between the commit of a release and the release of a plugin to downstream users meant that it could open the door for malicious attacks. The content management system (CMS) platform noted that its automated review detected a backdoor committed to a release of a plugin with about 20,000 active installations on July 28, 2026. Because the release was within a cooldown window, ...

AI keeps showing up in the wrong places. Attackers are using it to speed up exploits, test defenses, and automate more of the job. Some models are also crossing lines on their own. That is not a great combination. The rest of the week is more familiar: old bugs still working, fresh exploit chains, exposed systems, weak defaults, and simple paths that should have been harder to abuse. A few of these stories are clever. Most are just easy. Here’s what mattered this week. ⚡ Threat of the Week OpenAI Agents Behind May 2026 Attack on RubyGems — The "major malicious attack" that targeted RubyGems in May 2026 was the work of a swarm of OpenAI agents, according to researchers. The event was driven by a cluster of OpenAI agents that engaged in en masse publication of thousands of packages to RubyGems in May and June 2026. "The swarm behaves extremely similarly to the German-wiki agents we previously found," researchers Spencer Kitts, Thomas Larsen, and Sydney Von...

There's a lot of noise around AI and cybersecurity right now. What’s actually important is far simpler, if often lost in the hubbub. Vulnerability discovery is getting faster and happening at a much greater scale, while defenders still have to work out which findings actually deserve their action. In the first half of 2026, a whopping 35,853 CVEs were published, roughly 49% more than in the year before. Yet only 495 were catalogued as exploited in the wild during that same period, and 116 were already under attack on the day they became public. Meanwhile, Anthropic’s own disclosure data shows Mythos-class models surfacing 26,153 vulnerability candidates in open-source software, with only 421 of those getting patched upstream. That small exploited subset is a very important point. It tells defenders that treating every vulnerability with a High or Critical CVSS rating as an emergency is not only impossible, it’s actually the wrong model . The critical task security teams fa...

Microsoft has disclosed details of two campaigns in which threat actors are abusing third-party email delivery infrastructure to blast financial fraud scam messages and using passkey-themed social engineering to breach cloud environments. The first campaign, per the tech giant, involved sending over a million scam emails between August 3 and 5, 2026, by masquerading as chief executive officers (CEOs) of various target companies, aiming to persuade accounts payable departments at those firms to initiate Automated Clearing House ( ACH ) transfers for a supposed ServiceNow annual subscription. Evidence indicates that the operators behind the campaign have leveraged generative artificial intelligence (AI) to facilitate the creation of email templates and draft emails tailored to their recipients. The activity primarily singled out enterprise users in the U.S., spanning IT services, consumer goods, real estate, and discrete manufacturing sectors. "The campaign follows steps bef...

Over the past year, we watched a new class of alert appear in enterprise security operations centers and grow faster than anything else in the stream: alerts that were triggered by AI tools and agents. Not attacks against AI, but the ordinary, everyday footprint of an organization using it, from developers running coding agents and non-technical staff signing consumer AI tools into corporate accounts. We reviewed AI-related activity across numerous enterprise environments. Two numbers frame everything that follows. AI-related alerts still account for only 0.43% of all SOC alerts. And that share is climbing every single month, up 685% between February and June 2026. AI is a small slice of the alert stream today and the fastest-growing slice at the same time. What makes those alerts worth a security team’s attention is not their volume but their composition. We sort everything an AI agent triggers in a SOC into three buckets: real attacks, risks, and noise, with the split being 94....

The "major malicious attack" that targeted RubyGems in May 2026 was the work of a swarm of OpenAI agents, according to a new report published by researchers Spencer Kitts, Thomas Larsen, and Sydney Von Arx. On May 12, Maciej Mensfeld, senior product manager for software supply chain security at Mend.io, disclosed details of a coordinated cyber attack that targeted the package manager for the Ruby programming language with hundreds of junk gems, prompting the maintainers to suspend new user sign-ups for about four days. In a follow-up analysis, Socket highlighted a campaign dubbed GemStuffer that involved a cluster of more than 150 gems that used the package registry as a data exfiltration channel and staged public data scraped from U.K. local government democratic services portals. At that time, the software supply chain security company noted the activity shares the "same abuse pattern" as the broader RubyGems spam-publishing incident. "It's not...

Anthropic on Thursday said it identified and disrupted industrial-scale illicit distillation attacks against Claude from seven labs based in China, including Alibaba, Moonshot, DeepSeek, Z.ai (aka Zhipu), and MiniMax. Knowledge distillation by itself is a legitimate training method . It refers to a machine learning technique where a large, powerful AI model assumes the role of a "teacher" to train a smaller, less-capable or faster "student" model to copy its capabilities. Illicit distillation, on the other hand, is an industrial-scale campaign that covertly extracts a model's capabilities and replicates them in another model without authorization, typically by making use of networks of fake accounts created with stolen credit cards, login credentials, and API keys. Frontier AI labs in the West, including Google and OpenAI , have repeatedly called out distillation attacks aimed at their models. Anthropic said it has observed unauthorized labs employing ...

Anthropic has warned that cybercriminals and state-sponsored hackers alike are using its Claude models for cyber attacks, weapons design, propaganda, and mass surveillance between December 2025 and August 2026. The threat actors, which the artificial intelligence (AI) company has branded Generative Threat Groups (GTGs), span state-sponsored groups, financially motivated criminals, commercial spyware vendors, state propaganda institutions, and politically motivated individuals. "The cybersecurity skills of AI models means that AI has collapsed the labor and tooling gap that used to separate well-resourced, state-sponsored operations from individual operators," Anthropic said . "The use of AI went beyond simple questions and responses from a chatbot but rather involved the use of multi-agent frameworks executing reconnaissance, exploitation, and data exfiltration." Among the notable cases highlighted by Anthropic is the development of an AI-assisted workflow by...

Anthropic on Thursday revealed it disrupted a campaign mounted by a Russian state-sponsored threat actor that abused Claude for developing an AI-assisted workflow to get ahead of the detection curve. The operation has been attributed to a cyber espionage group it calls GTG-20006 (where "GTG" stands for Generative Threat Group), which aligns with broader reporting linking the cluster to Midnight Blizzard (aka APT29 and Cozy Bear). This actor is said to have developed an AI-driven process to automatically rebuild and re-deploy their toolkit if it was detected by security products, thereby undermining defenders' ability to block the artifacts via static detections. Attacks mounted by GTG-20006 have targeted military intelligence targets in Ukrainian and European governments, along with diplomatic and defense organizations and individuals connected to U.S. foreign policy. The toolkit includes a number of programs - Two Windows-based implants A mobile explo...

Security teams have become exceptionally talented at finding vulnerabilities. Now, it’s time to turn our attention to optimizing the process for determining which of those vulnerabilities actually create a path to compromise. A critical vulnerability may look alarming on a scanner report, but if it sits behind strong segmentation, identity controls, and other defenses that prevent an attacker from reaching anything important, then it doesn’t necessarily need immediate attention.  On the other hand, a medium-severity vulnerability may appear less important, but if it can be used to provide a foothold that can be chained with other weaknesses to reach sensitive data or privileged systems, then fixing that gap becomes a priority. How Autonomous Penetration Testing Reveals What Attackers Can Actually Exploit Severity scores tell you what vulnerabilities could mean in isolation. Autonomous penetration testing tells you what an attacker can actually do with the vulnerabilities....

PaperCut on Thursday released a new security maintenance release that replaces all previously published emergency patches that were pushed to address two security flaws that have come under active exploitation. The software development company said PaperCut NG/MF versions 26.0.5, 25.0.13 and 24.1.10 are now available for customers to download. "These are Regular Maintenance Releases (MR) that have gone through complete QA testing," it said. "They contain all of the security fixes issued in Emergency Patch Releases 1, 2 and 3, plus additional security hardening, and they have been through our standard release testing process." It's worth noting that the release supersedes the emergency patches that were shipped to address two security flaws as well as two regressions, along with various hardening and mitigation against potential attack chains. The vulnerabilities, CVE-2026-81578 and CVE-2026-82078 , have come under active exploitation in the wild to byp...

A lot of this week’s security news has the same awkward answer to one question: “Why was that allowed to work?” An extension asks for access and takes too much. A trusted service becomes part of a phishing chain. An old bug still gets results. An exposed system stays exposed. A package looks useful right up until it isn’t. Different stories, same basic problem: the path in was often already there. Nothing here needed magic. Mostly access, trust, weak edges, and someone willing to keep poking. That’s the week. The threats change every week. Subscribe, and we’ll alert you when each new ThreatsDay Bulletin is out.