ZeroHour
DashboardNewsCVEsExploitsIncidentsAIBriefAnalyticsEntitiesWatchlistIOCsAsk the feedSourcesFeeds & APIKiosk mode

Search: “Find My”

25,171 stories

Searchkeywordsmart Sortlatesthotimportancerelevance
DomainAllCyberAIWindow24h3d7d30dAllIn the wildImportant onlyShow duplicates
CategoryAllVulnerability 5001Malware 3707Ransomware 3549Data breach 2224Industry 2172Exploit / PoC 2052Policy & legal 1794Threat actor 1476Phishing & fraud 1378Research 458AI safety & security 379AI tools & infra 248AI research 207Tools 190
SeverityAllcritical 8992high 6443medium 4710low 3959info 1123

The inconvenient truth about AI pentesting: someone has to check all the work

Survey of 158 practitioners shows AI pentesting floods teams with findings, creating 'validation debt' most teams cannot process.

The article argues AI pentesting creates 'validation debt': discovery scales far faster than teams' ability to verify AI-generated findings. In a survey of 158 practitioners, only 20.3% had workflows to triage more than 500 AI-generated candidates per engagement, while 29.7% called such volume unmanageable. One respondent spent two days validating 300 AI findings, of which 250 were duplicates, non-exploitable, or nonexistent. The author recommends capacity planning, ruthless deduplication, and risk-based prioritization before adopting AI pentesting tools.

Security Affairs · Aug 11, 2026Industry

Cyble Introduces Major Upgrade to its Executive Monitoring Module

Cyble upgraded Executive Monitoring in Cyble Vision, unifying impersonation, exposure, and mention findings with AI scoring and multi-channel alerting.

Cyble released a major upgrade to Executive Monitoring within its Cyble Vision platform, consolidating Mentions, Impersonations, Exposures, and a new Surface Mentions source (blog and news coverage) into a single findings stream. The release adds AI-generated verdicts and recommendations, per-executive Risk and Reputation scoring for board reporting, and richer onboarding with aliases, reference images, and addresses to cut same-name false positives. Alerting now supports data residency, bulk import, delivery via email, WhatsApp, and SMS, an Access API, and branded executive PDF reports; the upgrade is live with no customer action required.

Cyble · 5d agoTools

Introducing automatic remediation policies with Cloudflare CASB

Cloudflare CASB now offers automatic remediation policies that revoke risky SaaS file shares or trigger webhooks within five minutes of detection.

Cloudflare introduced automatic remediation policies for its CASB product, letting security teams define event-driven logic that revokes risky file shares, dispatches custom webhooks, or forwards findings to SOAR platforms without manual intervention. Native remediation actions currently support Microsoft and Google Workspace file and folder findings, with a target of completing remediation within five minutes of detection. The engine is built on the Cloudflare developer platform, using Cloudflare Queues, Workers and Workflows for durable execution with automatic retries and rate-limit backoff.

Cloudflare Blog · 4d agoTools

Hunting Vulnerabilities Using Frontier Models

Okta used frontier AI models GPT-5.5 Cyber and Mythos via OpenAI and Anthropic programs to scan millions of code lines for vulnerabilities.

Okta describes using frontier AI models, including GPT-5.5 Cyber Preview (TAC) and Mythos Preview, through OpenAI's Daybreak Cyber Partner Program and Anthropic's Project Glasswing to hunt vulnerabilities across its product codebase. The team built a custom Python orchestrator with strong isolation, vendor-agnostic model support, and four distinct scanning pipelines executed as isolated Codex or Claude Code sessions with progressive context loading to reduce context bloat. Human experts and AI agents worked both autonomously and in paired hunts, and Okta reports the best results when humans and agents taught each other.

Okta Security · 8d agoResearch

AI AppSec tools agree on just 5% of security findings

Contrast Security report finds 42 confirmed exploit attempts per application monthly and three AI scanners agreeing on only 5% of findings.

Contrast Security's AppSec Overflow 2026 report, drawing on telemetry from hundreds of thousands of production applications and APIs, found adversaries touch the average application every four minutes with 42 confirmed viable exploit attempts per application monthly, led by untrusted deserialization, path traversal, and method tampering. Legacy flaws Log4Shell and Spring4Shell remain widespread, mean time to exploit fell from over two years in 2018 to under three weeks for most 2025 exploited vulnerabilities, and average critical fix time is 92 days. Three AI scanners set on the same codebase agreed on only 5% of findings, and triaging a 2-million-line codebase scan cost roughly $128,000 versus $315 in API charges. Among exploited CVEs in the dataset, 82% of KEV-listed entries carried EPSS scores of 90% or higher, while CVE-2006-1547 and CVE-2023-38180 were confirmed exploited despite EPSS scores under 25%.

Help Net Security · 16d agoResearch in the wildCVE-2006-1547CVE-2023-381801

Code review used to be the only way to catch these bugs

Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 says its NOVA system found 14,090 vulnerabilities in 3,915 open-source projects, mostly non-crashing bugs like access control flaws.

Unit 42's NOVA system analyzed 3,915 open-source projects over two months and reported 14,090 validated vulnerabilities, only 85 of which matched previously documented findings. 92% of findings fell outside fuzzing-friendly categories, clustering instead in access control, path traversal, injection, prototype pollution, and SSRF; language ecosystems showed distinct weakness profiles. Of 5,421 supply-chain findings, 1,280 were flaws in dependencies while 4,141 were downstream exposures, 2,776 validated with working proof-of-concepts. Unit 42 warned that faster discovery combined with an average 55-day patch deployment window has collapsed the patch-to-exploit gap.

Help Net Security · 21d agoResearch

GPT-5.6 Luna vs. GPT-6 Astra: Is a $1.20 Model Good Enough for Code Review?

Entelligence benchmarks GPT-5.6 Luna ($1.20/M output) against GPT-6 Astra for code review: Luna found 69 verified bugs at 3.6% of Astra's cost.

Entelligence compared GPT-5.6 Luna ($0.20/$1.20 per million tokens) against GPT-6 Astra ($10/$50) on 50 benchmark pull requests from Cal.com, Sentry, Discourse, Keycloak, and Grafana. Astra verified 92 bugs versus Luna's 69, with precision of 96% versus 74%, and Astra caught 19 of 24 security bugs while Luna found only 9. Luna cost $0.20 total versus Astra's $5.66 and reviewed faster at 23 seconds versus 36, with the widest quality gap on Keycloak authentication and permission logic (6 vs 14 verified bugs). Running both models would find 82% of the 143 verified bugs for $5.86 total.

Hacker News · AI · 1d agoAI researchHN 44↑ · 45 comments

Top 10 Best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) Tools in 2026

2026 CSPM comparison ranks Wiz atop cloud posture tools and recaps Google's pending roughly $32 billion acquisition of Wiz.

An editorial guide rates ten cloud security posture management (CSPM) tools, with Wiz ranked first for agentless visibility and attack-path context, Microsoft Defender for Cloud highlighted for Azure-centric economics, and Palo Alto Prisma Cloud noted for the broadest code-to-cloud module set. The article's biggest market note is Google's agreement to acquire Wiz for approximately $32 billion, described as the largest deal in security history, still progressing through regulatory review. It advises buyers to include roadmap-protection language in multi-year commitments and to press on multicloud neutrality post-close.

Cyber Security News · 5d agoIndustry