Threat Intel

cPanel Vulnerability Exploited ITW

Mass iternet exploitation events are never fun, this week we have CVE-2026-41940 being exploited! Luckily we have the awesome and cool honeypots at Defused to help us investigate threat actor activity! So let’s take a look! (there’s a good writeup here from Watchtowr.

Kill Chain

We have used ‘AI’ (Claude) to create a timeline based on packets from Defused honeypots:

What did Claude say?

I exported the logs from the Defused honeypot TI feed focused on a single IP then imported that include a chat with Claude:


Here’s the breakdown of what the data shows:

Attack summary — CVE-2026-41940 against a cPanel honeypot

The attacker at 80.87.206.131 ran a structured, two-wave exploitation chain over approximately 22 minutes. The CVE pattern maps to a known cPanel authentication bypass class: forge a session via the preauth endpoint, propagate it through a cache gadget, then leverage the resulting authenticated context to make privileged JSON-API calls.

Wave 1 (06:36–06:37) was a minimal two-step probe — session mint followed immediately by a single cache propagation attempt. This is consistent with tooling running an initial reachability check before committing to full exploitation.

Wave 2 (06:57–06:58) is the main effort. The attacker repeated the session mint, fired the cache gadget twice (likely confirming propagation), and within 9 seconds of the second gadget request had transitioned to authenticated API calls — specifically authorizesshkey (SSH key injection) and listaccts (account enumeration). The two events timestamped 06:58:28suggest either a scripted burst or the tooling executing the auth’d phase in parallel.

Key indicators for hunting:

  • POST /login/?login_only=1 as the session mint vector
  • GET /scripts2/listaccts as the cache gadget trigger
  • Rapid pivot to /json-api/ endpoints within seconds of gadget confirmation
  • 20-minute gap between waves is characteristic of automated tooling with a callback/retry loop

Worth checking whether 80.87.206.131 appears in any other decoy logs — the structured cadence strongly suggests an automated exploit kit rather than manual operation.


We can see here, the exploit here is very simple, POST then a GET followed by API access!

Not only do we now have data to write detections from, we can also look at creating a PoC for penetration testing and vulnerability assessment purposes! A double win! This really goes to show how valuable honeypots can be from a broad TI perspective as well as supporting defence and offence!

A double edged sword (or pot?), like so many things in life!

Suggested Actions to take

  • Check if you or your hosting providers run CPANEL
  • Check for compromise (or request intel from a partner)
  • If no compromise detected patch the server
    • if you can’t patch consider using an IP allow list/VPN or other method to shield access from anywhere on the internet (you might want to do this even if you have patched)
  • If compromised follow your incident repsonse process

Each scenario is different so I’ll not try and tell everyone exactly what they should do here, the key point of this blog is to highlight the vulnerability, the threat/risk so people can take the appropriate steps.

Also, you probably want to check out the honeypots at Defused! They are awesome!

[update] just found this in the packets: H2ckt3ch@g0dl1k3 (cm9vdDpIMmNrdDNjaEBnMGRsMWsz is the BASE64). I won’t publish all the packets right now (because that probably won’t help this early on) but this string was interesting…

AI

one step closer to Skynet?

Yesterday I ran a pentest against an RDP server, the process was ok but not amazing, I had to provide more help than I would have liked, resource consumption and the idea it should keep going…. wasn’t great. The process and output wasn’t terrible at all but it didn’t blow me away.

So today I wanted to see if Claude could take on as simple active directory lab! Now let’s be clear, there were I think one or two updates to the Claude client in that time! The Claude UI even changed look and feel! So I span up an AD lab I had made a while ago and got to work!

Read more “one step closer to Skynet?”
Threat Intel

SMSBlasters Historic Incidents

Whilst some people go on about DNSSEC, PUBLIC WIFI and JUICE JACKING they seem to be missing out on a threat that is real, active and has seen increased adoption by threat actors. SMS BLASTING!

Sounds cool, but basically it’s an ISMSI Catcher/Fake CELL network that is broadcasted between 500m and 2Km that lets an attacker send SPOOFED SMS messages to any cell that connects. This can be used for scams, phishing etc.

Read more “SMSBlasters Historic Incidents”
Leadership

The danger of internet exposed RDP

There’s lots of things in cyber security to consider when looking at how to defend a network, and whilst the world goes mad about public wifi and juice jacking, the real threats are often far simpler. Imagine having say an Active Directory domain member, or even controller exposed to the internet with Remote Desktop Protocol? Might sound insane but this is a common route for entry for ransomware actors.

Read more “The danger of internet exposed RDP”
Leadership

The cost of resetting a password

If someone asked you how much the cost of a task is, I bet you would struggle to given them an accurate response, the default position of most people is to underestimate a cost of doing something (but estimation science show’s us that it tends to vary based on role e.g. project managers are risk averse, engineers think they can solve things faster than they can and executives often just want it to be cheaper for the sake of it being cheaper – Parkinsons Squeeze I think that is called)

Years ago I stared looking at total cost of ownership (TCO) and Return on Investment modelling (I mean a lot of years ago….) and I’ve created a range of models for organisations for:

  • Sales Estimation
  • Business Cases
  • Budget Planning
  • Project Planning
  • System Optimisation Analysis
Read more “The cost of resetting a password”
Threat Intel

Fortiweb – CVE-2025-58034

‘CVE-2025-58034 is an OS command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) in Fortinet FortiWeb, allowing an authenticated attacker to execute unauthorized code on the system through crafted HTTP requests or CLI commands. It affects versions including FortiWeb 8.0.0-8.0.1, 7.6.0-7.6.5, 7.4.0-7.4.10, 7.2.0-7.2.11, and 7.0.0-7.0.11. The vulnerability has a CVSSv3 score of 6.7 (medium severity) and has been observed exploited in the wild, prompting its addition to CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.’

Read more “Fortiweb – CVE-2025-58034”