Subscribe For The Latest Edition

White House bans Kaspersky, major ransomware attack disrupts hospitals, and more

Want to sponsor my next edition and reach over 1,000 cybersecurity professionals?

More Stories

EU Government Hits Pause on Proposed CSAM Scanning Legislation

The European Union Council has cancelled a planned vote on draft legislation that would require end-to-end encrypted messaging apps to scan messages for CSAM prior to encryption.


Whilst it’s something that seems like a good idea on the surface, many digital rights activists have rightly raised concerns about the wider privacy implications. Most proposals suggest either running messages content through a fuzzy-hashing algorithm or feeding them into AI. In both cases, app providers would be required to add extra handling of unencrypted messages.


The key issue at play is that such a system would need to be opaque by design, which leaves little room for any controls enforcing that it only be used for its intended purpose. Although the legislation proposes limiting scanning to only images, videos, or URLs, the potential is still ripe for abuse.


One often proposed privacy-friendly solution is that no data leaves the user’s device. Instead, message content would be hashed and scanned locally against a constantly updating database of known hashes, similar to how an antivirus works. Content that matches signatures for known CSAM would then be uploaded for further analysis, or reported to authorities. However, it would be entirely possible for a sufficiently motivated government to add hashes for essentially anything they want, weaponizing the system for generic surveillance.

Security Company Loots $3 Million From Crypto Exchange Bank Account

During a bug bounty attempt, Web3 security firm CertiK found a vulnerability on the Kraken crypto exchange platform. The flaw enabled them to add arbitrary amounts to their account balance, seemingly out of thin air. Whilst demonstrating the vulnerability would have been enough to make their point, CertiK went a step further (actually several miles), by adding over $3m to their account balance, then withdrawing the money from the exchange.


CertiK’s stated justification is that they wanted to test whether the platform would actually let them withdraw money that doesn’t exist, and chose such a large amount to test if the company’s internal security controls would catch such a large fraudulent withdrawal. Whilst I agree that both tests are incredibly important, and it’s embarrassing that Kraken failed at every level, this would be the sort of thing you’d expect to see from a contracted pentest, not a random external company operating under a bug bounty policy. Whether or not CertiK’s actions were legal or not, it’s a lot of money to be liable for should the transfer go wrong (or some pesky Lazarus hackers steal your not so hard earned winnings before you get a chance to return them).


Ironically, Kraken’s bug bounty terms of service seems to use generic boilerplate language which makes no mention of customer or exchange funds, nor explicitly puts withdrawing them out of scope. Whilst it’s common sense that looting the company bank account is highly unethical, and not an acceptable part of bug bounty, Kraken’s policy doesn’t exactly say that you can’t.



Vulnerability Watch