My information Resource (blog.mir.net)

Cryptographic (crypto) agility refers to the capabilities needed to replace and adapt cryptographic algorithms in protocols, applications, software, hardware, firmware, and infrastructures while preserving security and ongoing operations. The transition to post-quantum cryptography (PQC) has highlighted significant challenges to adapting applications to new algorithms.

This final version of Cybersecurity White Paper (CSWP) 39, Considerations for Achieving Crypto Agility: Strategies and Practices, describes current approaches to operational mechanisms for crypto agility, challenges, trade-offs, and working areas for future consideration. The invaluable comments received on the initial and second public drafts helped improve many aspects of this document. Additionally, stakeholder discussions during the Crypto Agility Workshop in April 2025 helped identify strategies, frameworks, requirements, and metrics for various sectors and environments.

This publication is intended to be a new starting point to pursue crypto agility by developing environment-specific and actionable mechanisms. NIST remains committed to supporting collaboration and continued progress in this space.

Read More

This Malware Analysis Report was originally published on December 4 to share indicators of compromise (IOCs) and detection signatures for BRICKSTORM malware. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), National Security Agency (NSA), and Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (Cyber Centre) updated this Malware Analysis Report with IOCs and detection signatures for three additional BRICKSTORM samples.

CISA, NSA, and Cyber Centre assess People’s Republic of China (PRC) state-sponsored cyber actors are using BRICKSTORM malware for long-term persistence on victim systems. Victim organizations are primarily in the Government Services and Facilities and Information Technology Sectors. BRICKSTORM is a sophisticated backdoor for VMware vSphere (specifically VMware vCenter servers and VMware ESXI) and Windows environments.

The cyber actors have been observed targeting VMware vSphere platforms. Once compromised, the cyber actors can use their access to the vCenter management console to steal cloned virtual machine (VM) snapshots for credential extraction and create hidden, rogue VMs. See CISA’s Alert PRC State-Sponsored APT Actors Employ BRICKSTORM Malware Across Public Sector and Information Technology.

CISA analyzed 11 BRICKSTORM samples obtained from victim organizations, including an organization where CISA conducted an incident response engagement. (CISA initially analyzed eight samples, this update includes analysis of three additional samples.)

At the victim organization where CISA conducted an incident response engagement, PRC state-sponsored cyber actors gained long-term persistent access to the organization’s internal network in April 2024 and uploaded BRICKSTORM malware to an internal VMware vCenter server. They also gained access to two domain controllers and an Active Directory Federation Services (ADFS) server. They successfully compromised the ADFS server and exported cryptographic keys. The cyber actors used BRICKSTORM for persistent access from at least April 2024 through at least September 3, 2025.

CISA, NSA, and Cyber Centre recommend organizations implement the mitigations listed in the report to improve their cybersecurity posture based on the cyber actors’ activity. These mitigations align with the Cross-Sector Cybersecurity Performance Goals 2.0 (CPG 2.0) developed by CISA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The CPGs provide a minimum set of practices and protections that CISA and NIST recommend all organizations implement. CISA and NIST based the CPGs on existing cybersecurity frameworks and guidance to protect against the most common and impactful threats, tactics, techniques, and procedures. Visit CISA’s CPG 2.0 webpage for more information on the CPGs, including additional recommended baseline protections.

Hands Off my Tokens! NIST Seeks Comments on the Initial Public Draft of NIST Interagency Report 8587, Protecting Tokens and Assertions from Forgery, Theft, and Misuse through January 30, 2026.

What is in the Report?

Developed in coordination with CISA’s Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative and in response to Executive Order 14144, Sustaining Select Efforts to Strengthen the Nation’s Cybersecurity and Amending Executive Order 13694, NIST Interagency Report (IR) 8587 provides implementation guidance to help federal agencies and cloud service providers (CSPs) protect identity tokens and assertions from forgery, theft, and misuse.

Building on updates to NIST SP 800-53, the report outlines principles for CSPs and consuming agencies, details architectural considerations for identity providers and authorization servers, and recommends enhancements to key management, token verification, and lifecycle controls. The report also addresses threats demonstrated in recent high-profile attacks, emphasizes the importance of secure and configurable cloud services, and provides technical recommendations to safeguard single sign-on, federation, and application programming interface (API) access scenarios.

What kind of input is NIST seeking?

As an initial public draft, NIST IR 8587 is intended to gain critical feedback from stakeholders across government and industry. While comments are welcome and encouraged on all aspects of this document, NIST is particularly interested in the following five feedback areas:

1. Signing Key Validity Periods. Feedback on the length of validity, the structure of the scenarios, and any additional feedback reviewers may have.
2. Token Validity Periods. Opinions on token validity lengths and compensating controls that may impact commenters, particularly their availability, adoption, and use in government systems.
3. Key Protection and Isolation. Feedback on the clarity and suitability of key management definitions and whether they are appropriately mapped to FISMA system classification levels.
4. Key Scoping. Sharing of operational considerations, implementation challenges, and best practices that could strengthen these recommendations.
5. Emerging Standards. Comments about emerging standards and protocols that might support the technical achievement of token and assertion protection outcomes (e.g., Demonstrated Proof-of-Possession, Global Revocation).

The public comment period is open through January 30, 2026.

Please submit your comments and share your feedback with us via email at iam@list.nist.gov.Read More

This Joint Cybersecurity Advisory is being published as an addition to the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) May 6, Joint Fact Sheet Primary Mitigations to Reduce Cyber Threats to Operational Technology and European Cybercrime Centre’s (EC3) Operation Eastwood, in which CISA, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and EC3 shared information about cyber incidents affecting the operational technology (OT) and industrial control systems (ICS) of critical infrastructure entities in the United States and globally.

FBI, CISA, National Security Agency (NSA), US and International partners—hereafter referred to as the authoring organizations—are releasing this joint advisory on the targeting of critical infrastructure by pro-Russia hacktivists.

The authoring organizations assess pro-Russia hacktivist groups are conducting less sophisticated, lower impact attacks against critical infrastructure entities, compared to advanced persistent threat (APT) groups. These attacks use minimally secured, internet-facing virtual network computing (VNC) connections to infiltrate (or gain access to) OT control devices within critical infrastructure systems. Pro-Russia hacktivist groups—Cyber Army of Russia Reborn (CARR), Z-Pentest, NoName057(16), Sector16, and affiliated groups—are capitalizing on the widespread prevalence of accessible VNC devices to execute attacks against critical infrastructure entities, resulting in varying degrees of impact, including physical damage. Targeted sectors include Water and Wastewater Systems, Food and Agriculture, and Energy.

The authoring organizations encourage critical infrastructure organizations to implement the recommendations in the mitigations section of this advisory to reduce the likelihood and impact of pro-Russia hacktivist-related incidents. For additional information on Russian state-sponsored malicious cyber activity, see CISA’s Russia Threat Overview and Advisories webpage.

Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Adobe products, the most severe of which could allow for arbitrary code execution.

• Adobe ColdFusion is a rapid web application development platform that uses the ColdFusion Markup Language (CFML).
• Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) is a content management and experience management system that helps businesses build and manage their digital presence across various platforms.
• The Adobe DNG Software Development Kit (SDK) is a free set of tools and code from Adobe that helps developers add support for Adobe’s Digital Negative (DNG) universal RAW file format into their own applications and cameras, enabling them to read, write, and process DNG images, solving workflow issues and improving archiving for digital photos.
• Adobe Acrobat is a suite of paid tools for creating, editing, converting, and managing PDF documents.
• The Adobe Creative Cloud desktop app is the central hub for managing all Adobe creative applications, files, and assets.

Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow for arbitrary code execution in the context of the logged on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE:
There are currently no reports of these vulnerabilities being exploited in the wild.

SYSTEMS AFFECTED:

• Creative Cloud Desktop Application 6.4.0.361 and earlier versions
• ColdFusion 2025 Update 4 and earlier versions
• ColdFusion 2023 Update 16 and earlier versions
• ColdFusion 2021 Update 22 and earlier versions
• Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) AEM Cloud Service Release 2025.12 
• Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) 6.5 LTS SP1 (GRANITE-61551 Hotfix)           
• Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) 6.5.24   
• AEM Cloud Service (CS) 6.5 LTS
• AEM Cloud Service (CS) 6.5 6.5.23 and earlier versions
• Adobe DNG Software Development Kit (SDK) DNG SDK 1.7.0 and earlier versions
• Acrobat DC 25.001.20982 and earlier versions
• Acrobat Reader DC 25.001.20982 and earlier versions
• Acrobat 2024 24.001.30264 and earlier versions for Windows, 24.001.30273 and earlier versions for MAC
• Acrobat 2020 20.005.30793 and earlier versions for Windows, 20.005.30803 and earlier versions for MAC
• Acrobat Reader 2020 20.005.30793 and earlier versions for Windows, 0.005.30803 and earlier versions for MAC

RISK:
Government:

• Large and medium government entities: High
• Small government entities: Medium

Businesses:

• Large and medium business entities: High
• Small business entities: Medium

Home users: Low

TECHNICAL SUMMARY:
Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Adobe products, the most severe of which could allow for arbitrary code execution. Details of these vulnerabilities are as follows 

Tactic: Execution (TA0002)
Technique: Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203):

Adobe ColdFusion:
Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type (CVE-2025-61808)
Improper Input Validation (CVE-2025-61809, CVE-2025-61812, CVE-2025-61822)
Deserialization of Untrusted Data (CVE-2025-61830, CVE-2025-61810)
Improper Access Control (CVE-2025-61811, CVE-2025-64897)
Improper Restriction of XML External Entity Reference (‘XXE’) (CVE-2025-61813, CVE-2025-61821, CVE-2025-61823)
Insufficiently Protected Credentials (CVE-2025-64898)

Adobe Experience Manager:

• Cross-site Scripting (DOM-based XSS) (CVE-2025-64537, CVE-2025-64539, CVE-2025-64540, CVE-2025-64542, CVE-2025-64543, CVE-2025-64544, CVE-2025-64545, CVE-2025-64550, CVE-2025-64551, CVE-2025-64560, CVE-2025-64562, CVE-2025-64563, CVE-2025-64564, CVE-2025-64565, CVE-2025-64569, CVE-2025-64583, CVE-2025-64887, CVE-2025-64888)
• Cross-site Scripting (Stored XSS) (CVE-2025-64541, CVE-2025-64546, CVE-2025-64547, CVE-2025-64548, CVE-2025-64549, CVE-2025-64552, CVE-2025-64553, CVE-2025-64554, CVE-2025-64555, CVE-2025-64556, CVE-2025-64557, CVE-2025-64558, CVE-2025-64559, CVE-2025-64572, CVE-2025-64574, CVE-2025-64575, CVE-2025-64576, CVE-2025-64577, CVE-2025-64578, CVE-2025-64579, CVE-2025-64580, CVE-2025-64581, CVE-2025-64582, CVE-2025-64585, CVE-2025-64586, CVE-2025-64590, CVE-2025-64591, CVE-2025-64592, CVE-2025-64593, CVE-2025-64594, CVE-2025-64596, CVE-2025-64597, CVE-2025-64598, CVE-2025-64599, CVE-2025-64600, CVE-2025-64601, CVE-2025-64602, CVE-2025-64603, CVE-2025-64604, CVE-2025-64605, CVE-2025-64606, CVE-2025-64607, CVE-2025-64609, CVE-2025-64610, CVE-2025-64611, CVE-2025-64612, CVE-2025-64614, CVE-2025-64615, CVE-2025-64616, CVE-2025-64619, CVE-2025-64620, CVE-2025-64622, CVE-2025-64623, CVE-2025-64626, CVE-2025-64627, CVE-2025-64789, CVE-2025-64790, CVE-2025-64791, CVE-2025-64792, CVE-2025-64793, CVE-2025-64794, CVE-2025-64796, CVE-2025-64797, CVE-2025-64799, CVE-2025-64800, CVE-2025-64801, CVE-2025-64802, CVE-2025-64803, CVE-2025-64804, CVE-2025-64808, CVE-2025-64814, CVE-2025-64817, CVE-2025-64820, CVE-2025-64821, CVE-2025-64822, CVE-2025-64823, CVE-2025-64825, CVE-2025-64826, CVE-2025-64827, CVE-2025-64829, CVE-2025-64833, CVE-2025-64839, CVE-2025-64840, CVE-2025-64841, CVE-2025-64845, CVE-2025-64847, CVE-2025-64850, CVE-2025-64852, CVE-2025-64853, CVE-2025-64857, CVE-2025-64858, CVE-2025-64860, CVE-2025-64861, CVE-2025-64863, CVE-2025-64869, CVE-2025-64872, CVE-2025-64873, CVE-2025-64875, CVE-2025-64881)

Adobe DNG Software Development Kit (SDK):

• Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CVE-2025-64783)
• Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CVE-2025-64784)
• Out-of-bounds Read (CVE-2025-64893)
• Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CVE-2025-64894)

Adobe Acrobat and Reader:

• Untrusted Search Path (CVE-2025-64785)
• Out-of-bounds Read (CVE-2025-64899)
• Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature (CVE-2025-64786, CVE-2025-64787)

Adobe Creative Cloud Desktop Application:

• Creation of Temporary File in Directory with Incorrect Permissions (CVE-2025-64896)

Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could allow for arbitrary code execution in the context of the logged on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
We recommend the following actions be taken:

• Apply the stable channel update provided by Adobe to vulnerable systems immediately after appropriate testing. (M1051: Update Software)
  • Safeguard 7.1: Establish and Maintain a Vulnerability Management Process: Establish and maintain a documented vulnerability management process for enterprise assets. Review and update documentation annually, or when significant enterprise changes occur that could impact this Safeguard.
  • Safeguard 7.2: Establish and Maintain a Remediation Process: Establish and maintain a risk-based remediation strategy documented in a remediation process, with monthly, or more frequent, reviews.
  • Safeguard 7.6: Perform Automated Vulnerability Scans of Externally-Exposed Enterprise Assets: Perform automated vulnerability scans of externally-exposed enterprise assets using a SCAP-compliant vulnerability scanning tool. Perform scans on a monthly, or more frequent, basis.
  • Safeguard 7.7: Remediate Detected Vulnerabilities: Remediate detected vulnerabilities in software through processes and tooling on a monthly, or more frequent, basis, based on the remediation process.
  • Safeguard 16.13: Conduct Application Penetration Testing: Conduct application penetration testing. For critical applications, authenticated penetration testing is better suited to finding business logic vulnerabilities than code scanning and automated security testing. Penetration testing relies on the skill of the tester to manually manipulate an application as an authenticated and unauthenticated user.
  • Safeguard 18.1: Establish and Maintain a Penetration Testing Program: Establish and maintain a penetration testing program appropriate to the size, complexity, and maturity of the enterprise. Penetration testing program characteristics include scope, such as network, web application, Application Programming Interface (API), hosted services, and physical premise controls; frequency; limitations, such as acceptable hours, and excluded attack types; point of contact information; remediation, such as how findings will be routed internally; and retrospective requirements.
  • Safeguard 18.2: Perform Periodic External Penetration Tests: Perform periodic external penetration tests based on program requirements, no less than annually. External penetration testing must include enterprise and environmental reconnaissance to detect exploitable information. Penetration testing requires specialized skills and experience and must be conducted through a qualified party. The testing may be clear box or opaque box.
  • Safeguard 18.3: Remediate Penetration Test Findings: Remediate penetration test findings based on the enterprise’s policy for remediation scope and prioritization.
• Apply the Principle of Least Privilege to all systems and services. Run all software as a non-privileged user (one without administrative privileges) to diminish the effects of a successful attack. (M1026: Privileged Account Management)
  • Safeguard 4.7: Manage Default Accounts on Enterprise Assets and Software: Manage default accounts on enterprise assets and software, such as root, administrator, and other pre-configured vendor accounts. Example implementations can include: disabling default accounts or making them unusable.
  • Safeguard 5.4: Restrict Administrator Privileges to Dedicated Administrator Accounts: Restrict administrator privileges to dedicated administrator accounts on enterprise assets. Conduct general computing activities, such as internet browsing, email, and productivity suite use, from the user’s primary, non-privileged account.
• Restrict use of certain websites, block downloads/attachments, block Javascript, restrict browser extensions, etc. (M1021: Restrict Web-Based Content)
  • Safeguard 2.3: Address Unauthorized Software: Ensure that unauthorized software is either removed from use on enterprise assets or receives a documented exception. Review monthly, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 2.7: Allowlist Authorized Scripts: Use technical controls, such as digital signatures and version control, to ensure that only authorized scripts, such as specific .ps1, .py, etc., files, are allowed to execute. Block unauthorized scripts from executing. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 9.3: Maintain and Enforce Network-Based URL Filters: Enforce and update network-based URL filters to limit an enterprise asset from connecting to potentially malicious or unapproved websites. Example implementations include category-based filtering, reputation-based filtering, or through the use of block lists. Enforce filters for all enterprise assets.
  • Safeguard 9.6: Block Unnecessary File Types: Block unnecessary file types attempting to enter the enterprise’s email gateway.
• Use capabilities to detect and block conditions that may lead to or be indicative of a software exploit occurring. (M1050: Exploit Protection)
  • Safeguard 10.5: Enable Anti-Exploitation Features: Enable anti-exploitation features on enterprise assets and software, where possible, such as Microsoft® Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Windows® Defender Exploit Guard (WDEG), or Apple® System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Gatekeeper™.
• Block execution of code on a system through application control, and/or script blocking. (M1038:Execution Prevention)
  • Safeguard 2.5: Allowlist Authorized Software: Use technical controls, such as application allowlisting, to ensure that only authorized software can execute or be accessed. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 2.6: Allowlist Authorized Libraries: Use technical controls to ensure that only authorized software libraries, such as specific .dll, .ocx, .so, etc., files, are allowed to load into a system process. Block unauthorized libraries from loading into a system process. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
  • Safeguard 2.7: Allowlist Authorized Scripts: Use technical controls, such as digital signatures and version control, to ensure that only authorized scripts, such as specific .ps1, .py, etc., files, are allowed to execute. Block unauthorized scripts from executing. Reassess bi-annually, or more frequently.
• Use capabilities to prevent suspicious behavior patterns from occurring on endpoint systems. This could include suspicious process, file, API call, etc. behavior. (M1040: Behavior Prevention on Endpoint)
  • Safeguard 13.2: Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Detection Solution: Deploy a host-based intrusion detection solution on enterprise assets, where appropriate and/or supported.
  • Safeguard 13.7: Deploy a Host-Based Intrusion Prevention Solution: Deploy a host-based intrusion prevention solution on enterprise assets, where appropriate and/or supported. Example implementations include use of an Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) client or host-based IPS agent.

REFERENCES:

Adobe:
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/Home.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/coldfusion/apsb25-105.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/experience-manager/apsb25-115.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/dng-sdk/apsb25-118.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/acrobat/apsb25-119.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/creative-cloud/apsb25-120.html

CVE: 
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2025-61814

Yesterday, the NJCCIC released an advisory, Increase in Compromised NJ Public Sector Accounts.  Common threads observed in these incidents are a lack of or misconfigured Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance (DMARC) records. Without these email security protocols, organizations are more at risk of phishing campaigns and impersonation scams. As a follow-up to the advisory, please review the two guides below on creating and publishing an SPF record and implementing DMARC. The NJCCIC highly advises following these guides to increase email security at your organizations.

Sender Policy Framework – SPF Guide Why is SPF important?  SPF records, when established along with DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) to implement DMARC, create a policy of quarantine or reject to prevent email spoofing. On its own, SPF records can prevent an unauthorized sending host from sending messages using the envelop sender’s domain. It can also improve email deliverability as domains with SPF records are more trusted.

Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting, and Conformance – DMARC Guide Why is DMARC important? DMARC helps organizations prevent malicious email practices, like domain spoofing. Cyber threat actors often use domain spoofing in their phishing campaigns as it can be used to make messages appear as though they are sent from known and trusted organizations and individuals. DMARC helps senders and receivers work together to safeguard email and reduce instances of spoofing, phishing, and spam. It provides an extra layer of security to identify spammers and prevent malicious emails from overwhelming an organization’s mailboxes while minimizing false positives. Additionally, DMARC offers improved authentication reporting for greater transparency.

Reporting The NJCCIC encourages recipients who discover signs of malicious cyber activity to contact the NJCCIC via the cyber incident report form at www.cyber.nj.gov/report.

Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Microsoft products, the most severe of which could allow for remote code execution. Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could result in an attacker gaining the same privileges as the logged-on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights.

THREAT INTELLIGENCE:
There are currently no reports of this vulnerability being exploited in the wild. 

SYSTEMS AFFECTED:

• Windows PowerShell
• Windows Projected File System
• Windows Storage VSP Driver
• Windows Cloud Files Mini Filter Driver
• Microsoft Edge for iOS
• Windows Message Queuing
• Windows Resilient File System (ReFS)
• Windows Win32K – GRFX
• Windows Projected File System Filter Driver
• Windows DirectX
• Windows Client-Side Caching (CSC) Service
• Windows Defender Firewall Service
• Microsoft Brokering File System
• Windows Common Log File System Driver
• Windows Remote Access Connection Manager
• Windows Routing and Remote Access Service (RRAS)
• Azure Monitor Agent
• Microsoft Office Access
• Microsoft Office Excel
• Microsoft Office
• Microsoft Office Word
• Microsoft Office Outlook
• Windows Shell
• Windows Hyper-V
• Windows Camera Frame Server Monitor
• Windows Installer
• Application Information Services
• Microsoft Exchange Server
• Microsoft Graphics Component
• Copilot
• Microsoft Office SharePoint
• Storvsp.sys Driver
• Windows DWM Core Library

RISK:
Government:

• Large and medium government entities: High
• Small government entities: Medium

Businesses:

• Large and medium business entities: High
• Small business entities: Medium 

Home users: Low

TECHNICAL SUMMARY:
Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Microsoft products, the most severe of which could allow for remote code execution.   

A full list of all vulnerabilities can be found in the Microsoft link in the Reference section.

Successful exploitation of the most severe of these vulnerabilities could result in an attacker gaining the same privileges as the logged-on user. Depending on the privileges associated with the user, an attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. Users whose accounts are configured to have fewer user rights on the system could be less impacted than those who operate with administrative user rights. 

RECOMMENDATIONS:
We recommend the following actions be taken:

• Apply appropriate updates provided by Microsoft to vulnerable systems immediately after appropriate testing. (M1051: Update Software)
  • Safeguard 7.1 : Establish and Maintain a Vulnerability Management Process: Establish and maintain a documented vulnerability management process for enterprise assets. Review and update documentation annually, or when significant enterprise changes occur that could impact this Safeguard.
  • Safeguard 7.2: Establish and Maintain a Remediation Process: Establish and maintain a risk-based remediation strategy documented in a remediation process, with monthly, or more frequent, reviews.
  • Safeguard 7.4: Perform Automated Application Patch Management: Perform application updates on enterprise assets through automated patch management on a monthly, or more frequent, basis.
  • Safeguard 7.5 : Perform Automated Vulnerability Scans of Internal Enterprise Assets: Perform automated vulnerability scans of internal enterprise assets on a quarterly, or more frequent, basis. Conduct both authenticated and unauthenticated scans, using a SCAP-compliant vulnerability scanning tool.
  • Safeguard 7.7: Remediate Detected Vulnerabilities: Remediate detected vulnerabilities in software through processes and tooling on a monthly, or more frequent, basis, based on the remediation process.
  • Safeguard 12.1: Ensure Network Infrastructure is Up-to-Date: Ensure network infrastructure is kept up-to-date. Example implementations include running the latest stable release of software and/or using currently supported network-as-a-service (NaaS) offerings. Review software versions monthly, or more frequently, to verify software support.
  • Safeguard 18.1: Establish and Maintain a Penetration Testing Program: Establish and maintain a penetration testing program appropriate to the size, complexity, and maturity of the enterprise. Penetration testing program characteristics include scope, such as network, web application, Application Programming Interface (API), hosted services, and physical premise controls; frequency; limitations, such as acceptable hours, and excluded attack types; point of contact information; remediation, such as how findings will be routed internally; and retrospective requirements.
  • Safeguard 18.2: Perform Periodic External Penetration Tests: Perform periodic external penetration tests based on program requirements, no less than annually. External penetration testing must include enterprise and environmental reconnaissance to detect exploitable information. Penetration testing requires specialized skills and experience and must be conducted through a qualified party. The testing may be clear box or opaque box.
  • Safeguard 18.3: Remediate Penetration Test Findings: Remediate penetration test findings based on the enterprise’s policy for remediation scope and prioritization.

• Apply the Principle of Least Privilege to all systems and services. Run all software as a non-privileged user (one without administrative privileges) to diminish the effects of a successful attack. (M1026: Privileged Account Management)
  • Safeguard 4.7: Manage Default Accounts on Enterprise Assets and Software: Manage default accounts on enterprise assets and software, such as root, administrator, and other pre-configured vendor accounts. Example implementations can include: disabling default accounts or making them unusable.
  • Safeguard 5.5: Establish and Maintain an Inventory of Service Accounts: Establish and maintain an inventory of service accounts. The inventory, at a minimum, must contain department owner, review date, and purpose. Perform service account reviews to validate that all active accounts are authorized, on a recurring schedule at a minimum quarterly, or more frequently.

• Vulnerability scanning is used to find potentially exploitable software vulnerabilities to remediate them. (M1016: Vulnerability Scanning)
  • Safeguard 16.13: Conduct Application Penetration Testing: Conduct application penetration testing. For critical applications, authenticated penetration testing is better suited to finding business logic vulnerabilities than code scanning and automated security testing. Penetration testing relies on the skill of the tester to manually manipulate an application as an authenticated and unauthenticated user.

• Architect sections of the network to isolate critical systems, functions, or resources. Use physical and logical segmentation to prevent access to potentially sensitive systems and information. Use a DMZ to contain any internet-facing services that should not be exposed from the internal network. Configure separate virtual private cloud (VPC) instances to isolate critical cloud systems. (M1030: Network Segmentation)
  • Safeguard 12.2: Establish and Maintain a Secure Network Architecture: Establish and maintain a secure network architecture. A secure network architecture must address segmentation, least privilege, and availability, at a minimum.

• Use capabilities to detect and block conditions that may lead to or be indicative of a software exploit occurring. (M1050: Exploit Protection)
  • Safeguard 10.5:  Enable Anti-Exploitation Features: Enable anti-exploitation features on enterprise assets and software, where possible, such as Microsoft® Data Execution Prevention (DEP), Windows® Defender Exploit Guard (WDEG), or Apple® System Integrity Protection (SIP) and Gatekeeper™.

REFERENCES:

Microsoft:
https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/en-us
https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/releaseNote/2025-Dec

Available for Public Comment—National Checklist Program for IT Products: Guidelines for Checklist Users and Developers

NIST Special Publication (SP) 800-70r5 ipd (Revision 5, initial public draft), National Checklist Program for IT Products – Guidelines for Checklist Users and Developers, is now available for public comment through January 16, 2026, at 11:59 PM (EST).

NIST established the National Checklist Program (NCP) to facilitate the generation of security checklists from authoritative sources, centralize the location of checklists, and make checklists broadly accessible. SP 800-70r5 ipd describes the uses, benefits, and management of checklists and checklist control catalogs, as well as the policies, procedures, and general requirements for participation in the NCP.

Why Security Configuration Checklists Matter

A security configuration checklist is a document or technical content that contains instructions or procedures for securely configuring an IT product to match an operational environment’s risk tolerance, verifying that the product has been configured properly, and/or identifying unauthorized changes to the product. Using these checklists can minimize the attack surface, reduce vulnerabilities, lessen the impacts of successful attacks, and identify changes that might otherwise go undetected.

What’s New in Revision 5?

This revision introduces significant updates to improve usability, automation, and alignment with modern cybersecurity practices.

Key Highlights

• Traceability and Compliance: Enhanced mapping concepts between checklist settings, NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0 outcomes, SP 800-53 controls, and Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE) identifiers for evidence-ready automation and reporting
• Expanded Coverage: Guidance that includes cloud platforms, IoT, and AI systems and reflects the latest NIST research and federal requirements
• Modernized Automation: Explicit support for a wide range of automated checklist formats
• Control Catalog Approach: Encourages developers to use catalogs of controls for rapid, consistent checklist generation and easier tailoring to different risk postures
• Operational Environment Tailoring: Detailed recommendations for customizing checklists to fit stand-alone, managed (enterprise), specialized security-limited functionality (SSLF), and legacy environments
• Checklist Life Cycle: Clear procedures for checklist development, testing, documentation, submission, public review, maintenance, and archival

Intended Audience

This document is intended for users and developers of security configuration.  

• For checklist users, this document makes recommendations on how they should select checklists from the NIST National Checklist Repository, evaluate and test checklists, and apply them to IT products.
• For checklist developers, this document sets forth the policies, procedures, and general requirements for participation in the NCP.

Submit Comments

The comment period for SP 800-70r5 ipd is open through January 16, 2026, at 11:59 PM (EST). Email comments to: checklists@nist.gov. 

Read the Publication

This Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC) Advisory is being provided to assist agencies and organizations in guarding against the persistent malicious actions of cybercriminals.

A vulnerability in the React Server Components (RSC) implementation has been discovered that could allow for remote code execution. Specifically, it could allow for unauthenticated remote code execution on affected servers. The issue stems from unsafe deserialization of RSC “Flight” protocol payloads, enabling an attacker to send a crafted request that triggers execution of code on the server. This is now being called, “React2Shell” by security researchers.

Threat Intelligence

Active exploitation has been reported in the wild, specifically by Chinese threat actor groups.

Systems Affected

React Server Components – all versions prior to React 19.0.1, 19.1.2, and 19.2.1 Next.js 15.x – all versions prior to the patched 15.x release Next.js 16.x – all versions prior to the patched 16.x release Any frameworks or tools that bundle React Server Components prior to the patched React versions

Risk

Government: – Large and medium government entities: High – Small government entities: Medium

Businesses: – Large and medium business entities: High – Small business entities: Medium

Home Users: Low

Recommendations

Apply appropriate updates provided by React to vulnerable systems immediately after appropriate testing. Apply the Principle of Least Privilege to all systems and services. Run all software as a non-privileged user (one without administrative privileges) to diminish the effects of a successful attack. Use vulnerability scanning to find potentially exploitable software vulnerabilities to remediate them. Architect sections of the network to isolate critical systems, functions, or resources. Use physical and logical segmentation to prevent access to potentially sensitive systems and information. Use a DMZ to contain any internet-facing services that should not be exposed from the internal network. Configure separate virtual private cloud (VPC) instances to isolate critical cloud systems. Use capabilities to detect and block conditions that may lead to or be indicative of a software exploit occurring.

The initial public draft of NIST Cybersecurity White Paper (CSWP) 53, Charting the Course for NIST OSCAL, is available for public comment. This paper introduces the Open Security Controls Assessment Language (OSCAL) — an open-source, machine-readable language that standardizes security documentation for better monitoring and risk management.

OSCAL was developed to modernize manual, paper-based cybersecurity compliance through automated, scalable processes and continuous assessments. This draft describes OSCAL’s layered architecture, its growing global adoption, and its future integration with emerging technologies (e.g., digital twins, agentic AI) for autonomous risk reasoning and continuous assurance.

The public comment period is open through January 13, 2026. See the publication details for a copy of the draft and instructions for submitting comments.

Read More