Security | Threat Detection | Cyberattacks | DevSecOps | Compliance

‍ AI is transforming businesses at breakneck speed—but security isn’t keeping up. ‍ According to Vanta’s State of Trust Report 2025, which surveyed over 2,500 business and IT leaders around the world, 3 in 5 say AI-related security threats are outpacing their expertise. With a majority of organizations experiencing threats weekly, AI is not just driving the volume, but the precision of these attacks.

Every IT stack may look tidy on a diagram. If so, then it’s tempting to assume everything works fine. And yet, systems rarely fail as a whole. Usually, it’s a part or functionality. For instance, anyone who ever untangled a broken workflow in GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket or Azure DevOps, or a corrupted field in Jira, knows it too well. And that’s the quiet tension (“to fix one little thing”) inside every modern backup strategy.

Many organizations set remediation SLAs, but static severity-based timelines and manual tracking prevent them from meeting those deadlines in a way that meaningfully reduces risk. This article outlines how automated, risk-based SLAs connect timelines to real exploitability, exposure, and asset value, turning deadlines into reliable, measurable outcomes. Key takeaways from this article.

Technology failures are inevitable in operational technology (OT) environments. While prevention is essential, the ability to recover quickly is what ultimately protects operations. When OT systems fail, production stops and the costs of reduced production, missed deliveries and possible regulatory problems immediately begin to accumulate. Manufacturers, utilities and industrial operators need to be able to get systems up and running again as rapidly as possible after an incident.

Dharma, also known as CrySiS, is a long running ransomware family first observed in 2016. It operates as ransomware as a service, where developers lease the malware to affiliates who deploy it. A variant discovered in March 2021 appends the ".biden" extension to encrypted files. This article provides a technical analysis of Dharma, outlines its infection vector, describes its encryption workflow, and offers guidance for mitigation.

We’re thrilled to announce that WatchGuard ThreatSync+ NDR has been named Winner Overall – Security: Network in CRN’s 2025 Products of the Year. This honor highlights not only the strength of the solution itself, but also how it aligns with, and accelerates, the major innovations shaping network security this year.

Over the past few years, APIs have quietly become the front door to your most critical data and workflows, flipping security ownership on its head. Accountability and ownership of both API and Application security have shifted from your central infra and network teams to product, platform, and engineering squads that ship new APIs every week, and well, sometimes every day. This is where CISOs and CTOs feel the tug strengthening from both sides.

A Critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability, identified as CVE-2025-55182, has been discovered in Next.js applications utilizing React Server Components (RSC) and Server Actions. This vulnerability stems from insecure deserialization within the underlying “Flight” protocol used by React. Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit this flaw to execute arbitrary code on the server, potentially leading to a complete compromise of the application and underlying system.

When organizations fail PCI audits, it is rarely because they lack documentation or controls. They fail because they cannot prove those controls operate reliably when a QSA evaluates them. Requirements 6.4.3 and 11.6.1 expect evidence that reflects the page as the browser renders it. QSAs look for evidence that shows the controls running on the actual rendered page during the assessment period. This expectation is clear in the standard, and it is the point where many teams struggle.

You only really get to influence your PCI-DSS audit in two places: how you design your controls, and who you let judge them. QSA selection is the second one, and it’s usually underestimated relative to how much it shapes your next 3–5 years. Under PCI DSS 4.0.1, the assessor’s judgment matters more because several requirements move the discussion into client-side behavior. Scripts, page changes, and third-party components now factor into how compliance is validated.