Archive for October 16, 2026

Guest Post: The ransomware industry scaled just fine without AI. Here’s what that tells your 2027 budget

Posted in Commentary with tags on October 16, 2026 by itnerd

By Waseem Ahmed, Head of Engineering, Secure.com

Summary

In April 2025, UK retailer Marks & Spencer lost about £300 million in profit to ransomware. The way in wasn’t clever. Someone phoned the help desk, posed as staff, and walked out with a password reset. No AI. Just an open door.

TL;DR:

Ransomware grew into a billion-dollar criminal industry years before modern AI tools existed. It still breaks in through the same plain doors: stolen passwords, unpatched systems facing the internet, and phishing. AI speeds up a few attacker tasks, but it doesn’t create the opening. So the smart budget move is plain. Pay to close the doors you already have, not to fight a robot attacker that isn’t hurting you.

Ransomware got big before AI showed up

Ransomware was already huge long before anyone typed a prompt into a chatbot.

In 2017, the WannaCry attack hit more than 300,000 computers across 150 countries in a matter of days. That was years before today’s AI tools reached the public, which only happened at the end of 2022.

By then, the business model was already built. Criminal groups rent out their ransomware to others, split the profits, and run their own support desks. One analysis of public attacks counted 277 ransomware gangs between 2015 and 2025, with 102 of them active in 2025 alone.

The trend keeps climbing. Verizon’s 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report found ransomware in 44% of all breaches, up from 32% the year before.

Timeline showing ransomware became a large criminal industry years before modern AI tools reached the public at the end of 2022.Ransomware · scale over time

The industry was built before AI arrived

Ransomware was already a global, organized business long before anyone typed a prompt into a chatbot. AI showed up late.

2017 – WannaCry goes worldwide – One attack hit more than 300,000 computers across 150 countries in days. No AI involved.

2019 to 2021 – The criminal economy matures – Ransomware as a service and data theft extortion become the standard playbook. Gangs rent tools and split profits.

Late 2022 – AI shows up here – Modern AI tools reach the public

Generative AI arrives after the industry is already built. It speeds up a few attacker tasks. It does not open the door.

2025 – Still climbing – Ransomware now shows up in 44% of all breaches, up from 32% a year earlier. The growth needed no AI.

(Sources: Verizon 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report; Mastercard ransomware trends analysis [2026]. Figures are directional.)

The doors attackers use are boring and known

Here is the part that should shape your budget. Attackers rarely need something new. They walk through doors you already know about.

Three openings show up year after year:

  • Stolen or weak passwords. Verizon’s 2025 report tied 22% of breaches to stolen credentials.
  • Unpatched systems facing the internet. The same report tied 20% of breaches to attackers exploiting a known software flaw, the fastest-growing way in.
  • Phishing and social engineering. About 16% of breaches started with a person being tricked.

Attackers love targeting the VPN and firewall. Verizon 2025 DBIR found attacks on VPNs and edge devices grew nearly eight times in a single year. The cyber insurer Coalition traced 58% of its ransomware claims to problems with these same perimeter devices.

Look back at that retailer. The door was a support desk that reset the wrong person’s password. Boring. Known. And it still cost hundreds of millions.

(Share of breaches source: Verizon 2025 DBIR. Each is a separate way in, so they do not add to 100%.)

Two additional stats worth noting:

  • ~8x  Jump in attacks on VPNs and edge devices in a single year.
  • 58% of ransomware claims traced to perimeter devices, per cyber insurer Coalition.

(Source: Coalition 2024 claims data. Figures are directional.)

So where does AI actually fit?

AI helps attackers, but it’s not a magic key.

Researchers who study real ransomware say AI speeds up small tasks. It writes smoother phishing messages. It helps a weak coder clean up buggy malware. In one case, it helped map a target network faster.

None of that opens a locked door. The attacker still needs a stolen password or an unpatched box to get in. The people who track these groups describe AI today as an accelerant, not a revolution.

This matters for spending. Many teams fear a clever AI attacker more than the plain threats sitting in front of them, a gap we covered in our look at what security leaders actually fear. That fear rarely matches where the money is actually lost.

What this means for budgets

If the doors are known, your budget should pay to close them first. Chasing AI threat hype before the basics is spending backward.

Fund the doors, not the hype: If the ways in are known, your budget should pay to close them first. Here is the order that stops the most ransomware per dollar.

1 – Identity and MFA: Make a stolen password useless. Turn on phishing resistant MFA and remove shared logins.

2 – Patch what faces the internet: Fix your VPN, firewall, and public servers first. That is where the exploits land.

3 – Know your attack surface: You cannot close a door you cannot see. Find every exposed system before an attacker does.

4 – Fast detection and response: Assume someone gets in. Catch the early moves and shut them down before files get locked.

5 – Tested backups – Keep copies attackers cannot reach, and practice restoring them.

6 – Supplier risk – Many attacks now ride in through an outside vendor. Put that door in the plan.

Every item is a door, a lock, or a guard. None of it is hype.

FAQs

Does AI make ransomware more dangerous?

 A little, but not the way the headlines suggest. AI helps attackers write better phishing and move a bit faster. It does not create the opening. The way in is still a stolen password or an unpatched system.

What is the number one way ransomware gets in?

 Known, avoidable weaknesses. Stolen credentials, unpatched internet-facing systems, and phishing lead the list every year. In the Sophos 2025 study, exploited vulnerabilities were the top root cause for the third year running, at 32% of attacks.

Should we budget to pay the ransom?

 Plan not to. Paying is getting less reliable, and the cleanup is the real cost. Sophos estimates the average recovery bill, excluding any ransom, at $1.53 million in 2025. Money spent on prevention and backups goes further than money set aside to pay a criminal.

Where should a small team start?

 Start with identity and your internet edge. Turn on strong MFA, remove shared accounts, and patch anything exposed to the internet. Those two moves close most of the common doors for the least money.

Does AI help defenders too?

 Yes, and this is the better use of it. AI can find your exposed doors before attackers do, and it can speed up detection and response so defenders catch an intrusion early. Used this way, AI pays for itself on defense, not on fear

How Secure.com can help

Secure.com runs governed AI teammates that work above the stack you already own, with your team approving anything that matters. The idea is simple. Attack your own defenses to find the open doors, harden them, and prove the fix.

The Red Teammate acts like the attacker. It hunts for the exposed VPNs, weak spots, and exploitable flaws that ransomware crews use before they find them.

Defensive teammates turn those findings into action, so a weakness becomes a fixed door instead of another line on a report.

The SOC Teammate watches for the early signs of an intrusion and helps shut it down fast, with a full record of every step.

Everything runs inside your rules. Your team sets the scope, approves the big actions, and keeps the audit trail.

You start with one teammate, go live in days, and hand your team back hundreds of hours a month of grunt work.

Attack. Harden. Prove. Repeat.

SOCRadar Launches New API Suite That Lets MSSPs Build or White-Label Threat Intelligence

Posted in Commentary with tags on October 16, 2026 by itnerd

SOCRadar announced a new dual-layered API suite that enables MSSPs to build or white label their own threat intelligence. They’ll now have the choice between complete multi-tenant, backend platform automation or raw threat intelligence ingestion to build their own proprietary features. This dual-layered approach allows partners to engage with SOCRadar’s technology in the exact way that suits their business model, whether they want to embed the technology into ready-made platform capabilities or harvest SOCRadar’s data to power their own proprietary tools.

Until now, MSSPs, technology vendors and large enterprises that wanted to embed threat intelligence into their own platforms had to choose between flexibility and speed and were faced with two competing constraints. If they wanted to build differentiated products on top of raw intelligence data, they were forced to accept pre-packaged, “black box” outputs that limited customization and innovation. If they needed a ready-made, white-label solution, they were stuck with manual, one-by-one provisioning, creating tenants, licenses, and configurations by hand, which didn’t scale as their client base grew.

SOCRadar’s new dual-layered API suite solves that limitation by bridging two critical capabilities into one unified suite:

  • The Multi-Tenant API provides a two-way, automated engine API that lets partners programmatically issue alarms, create and manage licenses, provision tenants, and configure settings at scale, without manual back-office work.
  • The Advanced API gives partners direct, raw-data access to underlying intelligence data so they can build their own features, models, and product experiences on top of it.

This dual approach allows partners to leverage SOCRadar’s technology to meet their specific needs and business model, including embedding the company’s ready-made platform capabilities or harvesting its data to power their own proprietary tools.

Withings wants you to pay $100 a year to sync a scale with Apple Health…. WTF?

Posted in Commentary with tags on October 16, 2026 by itnerd

In the most clearest cash grab ever, Withing who make scales that measure anything from heart rate to weight among other items have decided that if you created an account on or after October 13, 2026, you are required to pay a $99 Withings+ subscription to sync their scale data with Apple Health. If you have created an account before that, nothing changes for you. And once the company posted their official response, the rage from the Internet was evident. Here’s a few examples:

What an absolute trash decision they are making. I will never be buying a Withings product again nor will I ever be subscribing to anything. This is pure greed.

And:

I’ve been a Withings user for about 15 years now, recently bought a Body Fit, but honestly this absolutely disgusts me and I’m now actively looking at options to dump the lot. I’d rather support an honest company that actually cares about their users. Withings clearly don’t.

This is pure corporate greed and the epitome of ‘enshittification’ and I’m done with it.

And:

I’m gradually leaving Withings, enshittification is underway. I just need a good replacement for the smart scales.

And:

It’s only a matter of time before existing users are forced to use the subscription.

That last part is what catches my attention. This is going to migrate down to existing users if they feel that new users will comply with this. And what makes this worse is that this might ever violate Apple’s own guidelines:

That’s interesting. I for one want to see how this plays out because there’s the potential that Apple will smack these people down. But at the very least, users are revolting and Withings will have to figure this out to make users happy. Because they clearly are not happy.

Let’s see if Withings figures it out.

123456′ password linked to Denmark breach affecting 8.8 million

Posted in Commentary with tags on October 16, 2026 by itnerd

A hacker who accessed Denmark’s national population register, compromising information on approximately 8.8 million people, reportedly exploited an IT company’s account protected by the password “123456,” according to local media.

Yeah that’s pretty bad.

At least three accounts at the company, including an administrator account, reportedly used the same password. The attacker exploited the company’s legitimate access to the government database to obtain names, addresses and national identification numbers. Danish authorities are investigating the breach.

ㅤJohn Carberry, Solution Sleuth, Xcape, Inc.:

“Upstream vendor negligence remains an immediate route to enterprise regulatory liability, particularly when core citizen data is exposed through elementary authentication failures. This incident serves as an alarming case study in how foundational security neglect invites severe operational compromise. An external contractor accessed Denmark’s national population register using the trivial password “123456,” operating in an architecture that enforced neither password complexity standards nor multifactor authentication (MFA). Compounding the breakdown, the intrusion was not uncovered by defensive telemetry or behavioral monitoring, but rather through a billing surprise when an invoice revealed unusually high database activity during the unauthorized exfiltration. Although Danish public bodies and commercial partners are subject to both the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the national Danish Data Protection Act, it remains to be seen whether the independent supervisory authority, Datatilsynet, will levy meaningful financial penalties and binding injunctions against state-affiliated infrastructure. Ultimately, regulatory compliance frameworks mean nothing when basic identity hygiene is ignored and automated egress monitoring is nonexistent.”

“Critical Takeaways

  • Foundational identity hygiene failed at every level: Permitting the default password “123456” without enforced complexity requirements or mandatory MFA demonstrates an indefensible lack of baseline access controls.
  • Invoices are not intrusion detection systems: Discovering an active data exfiltration event through a billing anomaly underscores a dangerous absence of egress rate limiting and automated query monitoring.
  • Regulatory accountability faces an institutional test: While Datatilsynet wields statutory power under the GDPR and national law to impose penalties, holding public-sector infrastructure accountable will test the regulator’s enforcement independence.

“Mandating GDPR compliance on paper while allowing administrative passwords that belong on a cheap luggage lock is pure compliance theater.”

ㅤ

Phil Wylie, Senior Consultant & Evangelist, Suzu Labs:

“Cybersecurity can be complex, and there are countless security solutions and services available to help organizations protect themselves. But sometimes it’s the basics that make the biggest difference. Good security hygiene, including strong passwords, multifactor authentication, and limiting access to sensitive systems, can go a long way toward reducing risk.

“It’s hard to believe that in 2026 we’re still seeing passwords like ‘123456’ being used, especially on accounts with access to sensitive government data. Attackers don’t always need sophisticated exploits when basic security practices are overlooked.

“This incident also highlights the risks associated with third-party access. Organizations need to make sure their vendors are following security best practices because a weakness in a trusted partner’s environment can put millions of sensitive records at risk.”

ㅤ

John Strand, Owner, Black Hills Information Security:

“This is one of those stories where it’s very difficult to have a serious infosec hot take because it’s just ridiculous. We can talk about AI for defense, AI for offense, and all of the incredible advancements we’re making in computer security and vulnerability management, but all of that can be completely undone by a password of 1-2-3-4-5-6. The only thing I could think when I saw this story was, ‘That’s the same code I have on my luggage.’”

ㅤAll I have to say is “oh my God”.