December 5, 2024

Protecting Your Hybrid Cloud: The Future of Cloud Security in 2025 and Beyond

In the coming years, cloud security will not only need to adapt to increasingly complex environments as ecosystems become more distributed, but also to rapidly evolving threats like supply chain attacks, advanced misconfiguration exploits, and credential theft. AI-powered cloud security tools can help security teams keep up.

Written by

Kellie Regan

Director, Product Marketing - Cloud Security

Inside the SOC

Darktrace cyber analysts are world-class experts in threat intelligence, threat hunting and incident response, and provide 24/7 SOC support to thousands of Darktrace customers around the globe. Inside the SOC is exclusively authored by these experts, providing analysis of cyber incidents and threat trends, based on real-world experience in the field.

Written by

Kellie Regan

Director, Product Marketing - Cloud Security

Dec 2024

Cloud security in 2025

The future of cybersecurity is being shaped by the rapid adoption of cloud technologies.

As Gartner reports, “By 2027, more than 70% of enterprises will use industry cloud platforms to accelerate their business initiatives, up from less than 15% in 2023” [1].

As organizations continue to transition workloads and sensitive data to cloud environments, the complexity of securing distributed infrastructures grows. In 2025, cloud security will need to address increasingly sophisticated threats with innovative approaches to ensure resilience and trust.

Emerging threats in cloud security:

Supply chain attacks in the cloud: Threat actors are targeting vulnerabilities in cloud networks, including third-party integrations and APIs. These attacks can have wide-spanning impacts, jeopardizing data security and possibly even compromising multiple organizations at once. As a result, robust detection and response capabilities are essential to identify and neutralize these attacks before they escalate.
Advanced misconfiguration exploits: Misconfigurations remain a leading cause of cloud security breaches. Attackers are exploiting these vulnerabilities across dynamic infrastructures, underscoring the need for tools that provide continuous compliance validation in the future of cloud computing.
Credential theft with evolving Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs): While credential theft can result from phishing attacks, it can also happen through other means like malware, lateral movement, data breaches, weak and reused passwords, and social engineering. Adversarial innovation in carrying out these attacks requires security teams to use proactive defense strategies.
Insider threats and privilege misuse: Inadequate monitoring of Identity and Access Management (IAM) in cloud security increases the risk of insider threats. The adoption of zero-trust architectures is key to mitigating these risks.
Threats exploiting dynamic cloud scaling: Attackers take advantage of the dynamic nature of cloud computing, leveraging ephemeral workloads and autoscaling features to evade detection. This makes adaptive and AI-driven detection and response critical because it can more easily parse behavioral data that would take human security teams longer to investigate.

Where the industry is headed

In 2025, cloud infrastructures will become even more distributed and interconnected. Multi-cloud and hybrid models will dominate, so organizations will have to optimize workloads across platforms. At the same time, the growing adoption of edge computing and containerized applications will decentralize operations further. These trends demand security solutions that are agile, unified, and capable of adapting to rapid changes in cloud environments.

Emerging challenges in securing cloud environments

The transition to highly distributed and dynamic cloud ecosystems introduces the following key challenges:

Limited visibility
As organizations adopt multiple platforms and services, gaining a unified view of cloud architectures becomes increasingly difficult. This lack of visibility makes it unclear where sensitive data resides, which identities can access it and how, and if there are potential vulnerabilities in configurations and API infrastructure. Without end-to-end monitoring, detecting and mitigating threats in real time becomes nearly impossible.
Complex environments
The blend of public, private, and hybrid clouds, coupled with diverse service types (SaaS, PaaS, IaaS), creates a security landscape rife with configuration challenges. Each layer adds complexity, increasing the risk of misconfigurations, inconsistent policy enforcement, and gaps in defenses – all of which attackers may exploit.
Dynamic nature of cloud
Cloud infrastructures are designed to scale resources on demand, but this fluidity poses significant challenges to threat detection and incident response. Changes in configurations, ephemeral workloads, and fluctuating access points mean that on-prem network security mindsets cannot be applied to cloud security and many traditional cloud security approaches still fall short in addressing threats in real time.

Looking forward: Protecting the cloud in 2025 and beyond

Addressing these challenges requires innovation in visibility tools, AI-driven threat detection, and policy automation. The future of cloud security hinges on solutions that adapt to complexity and scale, ensuring organizations can securely navigate the growing demands of cloud-first operations.‍

‍Unsupervised Machine Learning (ML) enhances cloud security

Unlike supervised ML, which relies on labeled datasets, unsupervised ML identifies patterns and deviations in data without predefined rules, making it particularly effective in dynamic and unpredictable environments like the cloud. By analyzing the baseline behavior in cloud environments, such as typical user activity, network traffic, and resource utilization, unsupervised ML and supporting models can identify behavioral deviations linked to suspicious activity like unusual login times, irregular API calls, or unexpected data transfers, therefore flagging them as potential threats.

Learn more about how multi-layered ML improves real-time cloud detection and response in the data sheet “AI enhances cloud security.”

Agent vs. Agentless deployment

The future of cloud security is increasingly focused on combining agent-based and agentless solutions to address the complexities of hybrid and multi-cloud environments.

This integrated approach enables organizations to align security measures with the specific risks and operational needs of their assets, ensuring comprehensive protection.

Agent-based systems provide deep monitoring and active threat mitigation, making them ideal for high-security environments like financial services and healthcare, where compliance and sensitive data require stringent safeguards.

Meanwhile, agentless systems offer broad visibility and scalability, seamlessly covering dynamic cloud resources without the need for extensive deployment efforts.

Together, a combination of these approaches ensures that all parts of the cloud environment are protected according to their unique risk profiles and functional requirements.

The growing adoption of this strategy highlights a shift toward adaptive, scalable, and efficient security solutions, reflecting the priorities of a rapidly evolving cloud landscape.

To learn more about how these technologies are reshaping cloud defenses, read the blog “Agent vs. Agentless Cloud Security: Why Deployment Methods Matter.”

Shifting responsibilities: security teams must get more comfortable with cloud mindsets

Traditionally, many organizations left cloud security to dedicated cloud teams. However, it is becoming more and more common for security teams to take on the responsibilities of securing the cloud. This is also true of organizations undergoing cloud migration and spinning up cloud infrastructure for the first time.

Notably, the usual approaches to other types of cybersecurity can’t be applied the exact same way to the cloud. With the inherent dynamism and flexibility of the cloud, the necessary security mindset differs greatly from those for the network or datacenters, with which security teams may be more familiar.

For example, IAM is both critical and distinct to cloud computing, and the associated policies, rules, and downstream impacts require intentional care. IAM rules not only govern people, but also non-human entities like service accounts, API keys, and OAuth tokens. These considerations are unique to cloud security, and established teams may need to learn new skills to reduce security gaps in the cloud.

Discover more about the teams that impact modern cloud security in the blog "Cloud Security Evolution: Why Security Teams are Taking the Lead."

The importance of visibility: The future of network security in the cloud

As organizations transition to cloud environments, they still have much of their data in on-premises networks, meaning that maintaining visibility across both on-premises and cloud environments is essential for securing critical assets and ensuring seamless operations. Without a unified security strategy, gaps between these infrastructures and the teams which manage them can leave organizations vulnerable to cyber-attacks.

Shared visibility across both on-premises and cloud environments unifies SecOps and DevOps teams, enabling them to generate actionable insights and develop a cohesive approach. This alignment helps confidently mitigate risks across the cloud and network while streamlining workflows and accelerating the cloud migration journey—all without compromising security or operational continuity.

Read more about the importance of end-to-end visibility in the modern threat landscape in the blog "Breaking Silos: Why Unified Security is Critical in Hybrid World."

‍

Ready to transform your cloud security approach? Download the CISO's Guide to Cloud Security now!

‍

References:

[1] Gartner, June 5, 2024, “The Expanding Enterprise Investment in Cloud Security,” Available at: https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2024-06-05-the-expanding-enterprise-investment-in-cloud-security

Written by

Kellie Regan

Director, Product Marketing - Cloud Security

Inside the SOC

Written by

Kellie Regan

Director, Product Marketing - Cloud Security

Senior Cyber Security Analyst

•

June 5, 2025

The Darktrace Community

Watch the NIS2 Webinar

Blog

Network

June 16, 2025

Tracking CVE-2025-31324: Darktrace’s detection of SAP Netweaver exploitation before and after disclosure

Introduction: Exploiting SAP platforms

Global enterprises depend extensively on SAP platforms, such as SAP NetWeaver and Visual Composer, to run critical business processes worldwide. These systems; however, are increasingly appealing targets for well-resourced adversaries:

In March 2025, CISA issued an alert confirming active exploitation of a 2017 SAP NetWeaver vulnerability (CVE‑2017‑12637), enabling attackers to perform directory traversal and exfiltrate sensitive files, including credentials, from internet-facing systems
In April–May 2025, public reporting revealed that a high‑severity zero-day in SAP Visual Composer (CVE‑2025‑31324, CVSS 10.0) has been used in the wild by threat actors deploying web‑shells and achieving full system compromise
Moreover, CISA has added both NetWeaver and Visual Composer flaws to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, marking them as verified active threats due to widespread abuse

What is CVE-2025-31324?

CVE-2025-31324 affects SAP’s NetWeaver Visual Composer, a web-based software modeling tool. SAP NetWeaver is an application server and development platform that runs and connects SAP and non-SAP applications across different technologies [2]. It is commonly used by process specialists to develop application components without coding in government agencies, large enterprises, and by critical infrastructure operators [4].

CVE-2025-31324 affects SAP’s Netweaver Visual Composer Framework 7.1x (all SPS) and above [4]. The vulnerability in a Java Servlet (/irj/servlet_jsp) would enable an unauthorized actor to upload arbitrary files to the /developmentserver/metadatauploader endpoint, potentially resulting in remote code execution (RCE) and full system compromise [3]. The issue stems from an improper authentication and authorization check in the SAP NetWeaver Application Server Java systems [4].

What is the severity rating of CVE-2025-31324?

The vulnerability, first disclosed on April 24, 2025, carries the highest severity rating (CVSS v3 score: 10.0) and could allow remote attackers to upload malicious files without requiring authentication [1][5]. Although SAP released a workaround on April 8, many organizations are hesitant to take their business-critical SAP NetWeaver systems offline, leaving them exposed to potential exploitation [2].

How is CVE-2025-31324 exploited?

The vulnerability is exploitable by sending specifically crafted GET, POST, or HEAD HTTP requests to the /developmentserver/metadatauploader URL using either HTTP or HTTPS. Attackers have been seen uploading malicious files (.jsp, .java, or .class files to paths containing “\irj\servlet_jsp\irj\”), most of them being web shells, to publicly accessible SAP NetWeaver systems.

External researchers observed reconnaissance activity targeting this vulnerability in late January 2025, followed by a surge in exploitation attempts in February. The first confirmed compromise was reported in March [4].

Multiple threat actors have reportedly targeted the vulnerability, including Chinese Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) groups Chaya_004 [7], UNC5221, UNC5174, and CL-STA-0048 [8], as well as ransomware groups like RansomEXX, also known as Storm-2460, BianLian [4] or Qilin [6] (the latter two share the same indicators of compromise (IoCs)).

Following the initial workaround published on April 8, SAP released a security update addressing CVE-2025-31324 and subsequently issued a patch on May 13 (Security Note 3604119) to resolve the root cause of the vulnerability [4].

Darktrace’s coverage of CVE-2025-31324 exploitation

Darktrace has observed activity indicative of threat actors exploiting CVE-2025-31324, including one instance detected before the vulnerability was publicly disclosed.

In April 2025, the Darktrace Threat Research team investigated activity related to the CVE-2025-31324 on SAP devices and identified two cases suggesting active exploitation of the vulnerability. One case was detected prior to the public disclosure of the vulnerability, and the other just two days after it was published.

Early detection of CVE 2025-31324 by Darktrace

Figure 1: Timeline of events for an internet-facing system, believed to be a SAP device, exhibiting activity indicative of CVE-2025-31324 exploitation.

On April 18, six days prior to the public disclosure of CVE-2025-31324, Darktrace began to detect unusual activity on a device belonging to a logistics organization in the Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA) region. Multiple IoCs observed during this incident have since been linked via OSINT to the exploitation of CVE-2025-31324. Notably, however, this reporting was not available at the time of detection, highlighting Darktrace’s ability to detect threats agnostically, without relying on threat intelligence.

The device was observed making domain name resolution request for the Out-of-Band Application Security Testing (OAST) domain cvvr9gl9namk9u955tsgaxy3upyezhnm6.oast[.]online. OAST is often used by security teams to test if exploitable vulnerabilities exist in a web application but can similarly be used by threat actors for the same purpose [9].

Four days later, on April 22, Darktrace observed the same device, an internet-facing system believed to be a SAP device, downloading multiple executable (.exe) files from several Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3). Darktrace’s Threat Research team later found these files to be associated with the KrustyLoader malware [23][24][25].

KrustyLoader is known to be associated with the Chinese threat actor UNC5221, also known as UTA0178, which has been reported to aggressively target devices exposed to the internet [10] [14] [15]. It is an initial-stage malware which downloads and launches a second-stage payload – Sliver C2. Sliver is a similar tool to Cobalt Strike (an open-source post-exploitation toolkit). It is used for command-and-control (C2) connections [11][12]13]. After its successful download, KrustyLoader deletes itself to evade detection. It has been reported that multiple Chinese APT groups have deployed KrustyLoader on SAP Netweaver systems post-compromise [8].

The actors behind KrustyLoader have also been associated with the exploitation of zero-day vulnerabilities in other enterprise systems, including Ivanti devices [12]. Notably, in this case, one of the Amazon S3 domains observed (abode-dashboard-media.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws[.]com ) had previously been investigated by Darktrace’s Threat Research team as part of their investigation into Ivanti Connect Secure (CS) and Policy Secure (PS) appliances.

In addition to the download of known malicious files, Darktrace also detected new IoCs, including several executable files that could not be attributed to any known malware families or previous attacks, and for which no corresponding OSINT reporting was available.

Post-CVE publication detection

Exploit Validation

Between April 27 and 29, Darktrace observed unusual activity from an SAP device on the network of a manufacturing customer in EMEA.

Figure 2: Darktrace / NETWORK’s detection of an SAP device performing a large volume of suspicious activity between April 27 and April 29.

The device was observed making DNS requests for OAST domains (e.g. aaaaaaaa.d06qqn7pu5a6u25tv9q08p5xhbjzw33ge.oast[.]online and aaaaaaaaaaa.d07j2htekalm3139uk2gowmxuhapkijtp.oast[.]pro), suggesting that a threat actor was testing for exploit validation [9].

Figure 3: Darktrace / NETWORK’s detection of a SAP device making suspicious domain name resolution requests for multiple OAST domains.

Privilege escalation tool download attempt

One day later, Darktrace observed the same device attempting to download an executable file from hxxp://23.95.123[.]5:666/xmrigCCall/s.exe (SHA-1 file hash: e007edd4688c5f94a714fee036590a11684d6a3a).

‍Darktrace / NETWORK identified the user agents Microsoft-CryptoAPI/10.0 and CertUtil URL Agent during the connections to 23.95.123[.]5. The connections were made over port 666, which is not typically used for HTTP connections.

Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) vendors have identified the executable file as either JuicyPotato or SweetPotato, both Windows privilege escalation tools[16][17][18][19]. The file hash and the unusual external endpoint have been associated with the Chinese APT group Gelsemium in the past, however, many threat actors are known to leverage this tool in their attacks [20] [21].

Figure 4: Darktrace’s Cyber AI Analyst’s detection of a SAP device downloading a suspicious executable file from hxxp://23.95.123[.]5:666/xmrigCCall/s.exe on April 28, 2025.

Darktrace deemed this activity highly suspicious and triggered an Enhanced Monitoring model alert, a high-priority security model designed to detect activity likely indicative of compromise. As the customer was subscribed to the Managed Threat Detection service, Darktrace’s Security Operations Centre (SOC) promptly investigated the alert and notified the customer for swift remediation. Additionally, Darktrace’s Autonomous Response capability automatically blocked connections to the suspicious IP, 23.95.123[.]5, effectively containing the compromise in its early stages.

Actions taken by Darktrace’s Autonomous Response to block connections to the suspicious external endpoint 23.95.123[.]5. This event log shows that the connections to 23.95.123[.]5 were made over a rare destination port for the HTTP protocol and that new user agents were used during the connections. — Figure 5: Actions taken by Darktrace’s Autonomous Response to block connections to the suspicious external endpoint 23.95.123[.]5. This event log shows that the connections to **23.95.123[.]5** were made over a rare destination port for the HTTP protocol and that new user agents were used during the connections.

Conclusion

The exploitation of CVE-2025-31324 to compromise SAP NetWeaver systems highlights the persistent threat posed by vulnerabilities in public-facing assets. In this case, threat actors leveraged the flaw to gain an initial foothold, followed by attempts to deploy malware linked to groups affiliated with China [8][20].

Crucially, Darktrace demonstrated its ability to detect and respond to emerging threats even before they are publicly disclosed. Six days prior to the public disclosure of CVE-2025-31324, Darktrace detected unusual activity on a device believed to be a SAP system, which ultimately represented an early detection of the CVE. This detection was made possible through Darktrace’s behavioral analysis and anomaly detection, allowing it to recognize unexpected deviations in device behavior without relying on signatures, rules or known IoCs. Combined with its Autonomous Response capability, this allowed for immediate containment of suspicious activity, giving security teams valuable time to investigate and mitigate the threat.

Credit to Signe Zaharka (Principal Cyber Analyst), Emily Megan Lim, (Senior Cyber Analyst) and Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

List of IoCs

23.95.123[.]5:666/xmrigCCall/s.exe - URL- JuicyPotato/SweetPotato - high confidence

29274ca90e6dcf5ae4762739fcbadf01- MD5 file hash - JuicyPotato/SweetPotato - high confidence

e007edd4688c5f94a714fee036590a11684d6a3a - SHA-1 file hash - JuicyPotato/SweetPotato -high confidence

3268f269371a81dbdce8c4eedffd8817c1ec2eadec9ba4ab043cb779c2f8a5d2 - SHA-256 file hash - JuicyPotato/SweetPotato -high confidence

abode-dashboard-media.s3.ap-south-1.amazonaws[.]com/nVW2lsYsYnv58 - URL- high confidence

applr-malbbal.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws[.]com/7p3ow2ZH - URL- high confidence

applr-malbbal.s3.ap-northeast-2.amazonaws[.]com/UUTICMm - URL- KrustyLoader - high confidence

beansdeals-static.s3.amazonaws[.]com/UsjKy - URL- high confidence

brandnav-cms-storage.s3.amazonaws[.]com/3S1kc - URL- KrustyLoader - high confidence

bringthenoiseappnew.s3.amazonaws[.]com/pp79zE - URL- KrustyLoader - high confidence

f662135bdd8bf792a941ea222e8a1330 - MD5 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

fa645f33c0e3a98436a0161b19342f78683dbd9d - SHA-1 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

1d26fff4232bc64f9ab3c2b09281d932dd6afb84a24f32d772d3f7bc23d99c60 - SHA-256 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

6900e844f887321f22dd606a6f2925ef - MD5 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

da23dab4851df3ef7f6e5952a2fc9a6a57ab6983 - SHA-1 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

1544d9392eedf7ae4205dd45ad54ec67e5ce831d2c61875806ce4c86412a4344 - SHA-256 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

83a797e5b47ce6e89440c47f6e33fa08 - MD5 file hash - high confidence

a29e8f030db8990c432020441c91e4b74d4a4e16 - SHA-1 file hash - high confidence

72afde58a1bed7697c0aa7fa8b4e3b03 - MD5 file hash- high confidence

fe931adc0531fd1cb600af0c01f307da3314c5c9 - SHA-1 file hash- high confidence

b8e56de3792dbd0f4239b54cfaad7ece3bd42affa4fbbdd7668492de548b5df8 - SHA-256 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

17d65a9d8d40375b5b939b60f21eb06eb17054fc - SHA-1 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

8c8681e805e0ae7a7d1a609efc000c84 - MD5 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

29274ca90e6dcf5ae4762739fcbadf01 - MD5 file hash- KrustyLoader - high confidence

Darktrace Model Detections

Anomalous Connection / CertUtil Requesting Non Certificate

Anomalous Connection / CertUtil to Rare Destination

Anomalous Connection / Powershell to Rare External

Anomalous File / EXE from Rare External Location

Anomalous File / Multiple EXE from Rare External Locations

Anomalous File / Internet Facing System File Download

Anomalous File / Masqueraded File Transfer (Enhanced Monitoring)

Anomalous Server Activity / New User Agent from Internet Facing System

Compliance / CertUtil External Connection

Compromise / High Priority Tunnelling to Bin Services (Enhanced Monitoring)

Compromise / Possible Tunnelling to Bin Services

Device / Initial Attack Chain Activity (Enhanced Monitoring)

Device / Suspicious Domain

Device / Internet Facing Device with High Priority Alert

Device / Large Number of Model Alerts

Device / Large Number of Model Alerts from Critical Network Device (Enhanced Monitoring)

Device / New PowerShell User Agent

Device / New User Agent

Autonomous Response Model Alerts

Antigena / Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious File Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Controlled and Model Alert

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Enhanced Monitoring from Server Block

Antigena / Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Significant Server Anomaly Block

Antigena/ Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious File Block

Antigena/ Network / External Threat / Antigena Suspicious File Pattern of Life Block

Antigena/ Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Alerts Over Time Block

Antigena/ Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Controlled and Model Alert

Antigena/ Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Enhanced Monitoring from Server Block

Antigena/ Network / Significant Anomaly / Antigena Significant Server Anomaly Block

Cyber AI Analyst Incidents

Possible HTTP Command and Control

Suspicious File Download

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Malware - RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT - T1588.001

PowerShell - EXECUTION - T1059.001

Drive-by Compromise - INITIAL ACCESS - T1189

Ingress Tool Transfer - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1105

Application Layer Protocol - COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1071

Exploitation of Remote Services - LATERAL MOVEMENT - T1210

Exfiltration Over Unencrypted/Obfuscated Non-C2 Protocol - EXFILTRATION - T1048.003

References

1. https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-31324

2. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-1-200-sap-netweaver-servers-vulnerable-to-actively-exploited-flaw/

3. https://reliaquest.com/blog/threat-spotlight-reliaquest-uncovers-vulnerability-behind-sap-netweaver-compromise/

4. https://onapsis.com/blog/active-exploitation-of-sap-vulnerability-cve-2025-31324/

5. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/sap-fixes-suspected-netweaver-zero-day-exploited-in-attacks/

6. https://op-c.net/blog/sap-cve-2025-31324-qilin-breach/

7. https://www.forescout.com/blog/threat-analysis-sap-vulnerability-exploited-in-the-wild-by-chinese-threat-actor/

8. https://blog.eclecticiq.com/china-nexus-nation-state-actors-exploit-sap-netweaver-cve-2025-31324-to-target-critical-infrastructures

9. https://portswigger.net/burp/application-security-testing/oast

10. https://www.picussecurity.com/resource/blog/unc5221-cve-2025-22457-ivanti-connect-secure

11. https://malpedia.caad.fkie.fraunhofer.de/details/elf.krustyloader

12. https://www.broadcom.com/support/security-center/protection-bulletin/krustyloader-backdoor

13. https://labs.withsecure.com/publications/new-krustyloader-variant-dropped-via-screenconnect-exploit

14. https://blog.eclecticiq.com/china-nexus-threat-actor-actively-exploiting-ivanti-endpoint-manager-mobile-cve-2025-4428-vulnerability

15. https://thehackernews.com/2024/01/chinese-hackers-exploiting-critical-vpn.html

16. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/3268f269371a81dbdce8c4eedffd8817c1ec2eadec9ba4ab043cb779c2f8a5d2

17. https://bazaar.abuse.ch/sample/3268f269371a81dbdce8c4eedffd8817c1ec2eadec9ba4ab043cb779c2f8a5d2/

18. https://www.fortinet.com/content/dam/fortinet/assets/analyst-reports/report-juicypotato-hacking-tool-discovered.pdf

19. https://www.manageengine.com/log-management/correlation-rules/detecting-sweetpotato.html

20. https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/rare-possible-gelsemium-attack-targets-se-asia/

21. https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/in/pdf/2023/10/kpmg-ctip-gelsemium-apt-31-oct-2023.pdf

22. https://securityaffairs.com/177522/hacking/experts-warn-of-a-second-wave-of-attacks-targeting-sap-netweaver-bug-cve-2025-31324.html

23. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/b8e56de3792dbd0f4239b54cfaad7ece3bd42affa4fbbdd7668492de548b5df8

24. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/1d26fff4232bc64f9ab3c2b09281d932dd6afb84a24f32d772d3f7bc23d99c60/detection

25. https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/1544d9392eedf7ae4205dd45ad54ec67e5ce831d2c61875806ce4c86412a4344/detection

About the author

Signe Zaharka

Senior Cyber Security Analyst

Blog

June 12, 2025

Modernising UK Cyber Regulation: Implications of the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill

The need for security and continued cyber resilience

The UK government has made national security a key priority, and the new Cyber Security and Resilience Bill (CSRB) is a direct reflection of that focus. In introducing the Bill, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, recognised that the UK is “desperately exposed” to cyber threats—from criminal groups to hostile nation-states that are increasingly targeting the UK's digital systems and critical infrastructure^[1].

Context and timeline for the new legislation

First announced during the King’s Speech of July 2024, and elaborated in a Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) policy statement published in April 2025, the CSRB is expected to be introduced in Parliament during the 2025-26 legislative session.

For now, organisations in the UK remain subject to the 2018 Network and Information Systems (NIS) Regulations – an EU-derived law which was drafted before today’s increasing digitisation of critical services, rise in cloud adoption and emergence of AI-powered threats.

Why modernisation is critical

Without modernisation, the Government believes UK’s infrastructure and economy risks falling behind international peers. The EU, which revised its cybersecurity regulation under the NIS2 Directive, already imposes stricter requirements on a broader set of sectors.

The urgency of the Bill is also underscored by recent high-impact incidents, including the Synnovis attack which targeted the National Health Service (NHS) suppliers and disrupted thousands of patient appointments and procedures^[2]. The Government has argued that such events highlight a systemic failure to keep pace with a rapidly evolving threat landscape^[3].

What the Bill aims to achieve

This Bill represents a decisive shift. According to the Government, it will modernise and future‑proof the UK’s cyber laws, extending oversight to areas where risk has grown but regulation has not kept pace^[4]. While the legislation builds on previous consultations and draws lessons from international frameworks like the EU’s NIS2 directive, it also aims to tailor solutions to the UK’s unique threat environment.

Importantly, the Government is framing cybersecurity not as a barrier to growth, but as a foundation for it. The policy statement emphasises that strong digital resilience will create the stability businesses need to thrive, innovate, and invest^[5]. Therefore, the goals of the Bill will not only be to enhance security but also act as an enabler to innovation and economic growth.

Recognition that AI changes cyber threats

The CSRB policy statement recognises that AI is fundamentally reshaping the threat landscape, with adversaries now leveraging AI and commercial cyber tools to exploit vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure and supply chains. Indeed, the NCSC has recently assessed that AI will almost certainly lead to “an increase in the frequency and intensity of cyber threats”^[6]. Accordingly, the policy statement insists that the UK’s regulatory framework “must keep pace and provide flexibility to respond to future threats as and when they emerge”^[7].

To address the threat, the Bill signals new obligations for MSPs and data centres, timely incident reporting and dynamic guidance that can be refreshed without fresh primary legislation, making it essential for firms to follow best practices.

What might change in day-to-day practice?

New organisations in scope of regulation

Under the existing Network and Information Systems (NIS) Regulations^[8], the UK already supervises operators in five critical sectors—energy, transport, drinking water, health (Operators of Essential Services, OES) and digital infrastructure (Relevant Digital Service Providers, RDSPs).

The Cyber Security and Resilience Bill retains this foundation and adds Managed Service Providers (MSPs) and data centres to the scope of regulation to “better recognise the increasing reliance on digital services and the vulnerabilities posed by supply chains”^[9]. It also grants the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology the power to add new sectors or sub‑sectors via secondary legislation, following consultation with Parliament and industry.

Managed service providers (MSPs)

MSPs occupy a central position within the UK’s enterprise information‑technology infrastructure. Because they remotely run or monitor clients’ systems, networks and data, they hold privileged, often continuous access to multiple environments. This foothold makes them an attractive target for malicious actors.

The Bill aims to bring MSPs in scope of regulation by making them subject to the same duties as those placed on firms that provide digital services under the 2018 NIS Regulations. By doing so, the Bill seeks to raise baseline security across thousands of customer environments and to provide regulators with better visibility of supply‑chain risk.

The proposed definition for MSPs is a service which:

Is provided to another organisation
Relies on the use of network and information systems to deliver the service
Relates to ongoing management support, active administration and/or monitoring of AI systems, IT infrastructure, applications, and/or IT networks, including for the purpose of activities relating to cyber security.
Involves a network connection and/or access to the customer’s network and information systems.

Data centres

Building on the September 2024 designation of data centres as critical national infrastructure, the CSRB will fold data infrastructure into the NIS-style regime by naming it an “relevant sector" and data centres as “essential service”^[10].

About 182 colocation facilities run by 64 operators will therefore come under statutory duties to notify the regulator, maintain proportionate CAF-aligned controls and report significant incidents, regardless of who owns them or what workloads they host.

New requirements for regulated organisations

Incident reporting processes

There could be stricter timelines or broader definitions of what counts as a reportable incident. This might nudge organisations to formalise detection, triage, and escalation procedures.

The Government is proposing to introduce a new two-stage incident reporting process. This would include an initial notification which would be submitted within 24 hours of becoming aware of a significant incident, followed by a full incident report which should be submitted within 72 hours of the same.

Supply chain assurance requirements

Supply chains for the UK's most critical services are becoming increasingly complex and present new and serious vulnerabilities for cyber-attacks. The recent Synnovis ransomware attacks on the NHS^[11] exemplify the danger posed by attacks against the supply chains of important services and organisations. This is concerning when reflecting on the latest Cyber Security Breaches survey conducted by DSIT, which highlights that fewer than 25% of large businesses review their supply chain risks^[12].

Despite these risks, the UK’s legacy cybersecurity regulatory regime does not explicitly cover supply chain risk management. The UK instead relies on supporting and non-statutory guidance to close this gap, such as the NCSC’s Cyber Assessment Framework (CAF)^[13].

The CSRB policy statement acts on this regulatory shortcoming and recognises that “a single supplier’s disruption can have far-reaching impacts on the delivery of essential or digital services”^[14].

To address this, the Bill would make in-scope organisations (OES and RDPS) directly accountable for the cybersecurity of their supply chains. Secondary legislation would spell out these duties in detail, ensuring that OES and RDSPs systematically assess and mitigate third-party cyber risks.

Updated and strengthened security requirements

By placing the CAF into a firmer footing and backing it with a statutory Code of Practice, the Government is setting clearer expectations about government expectations on technical standards and methods organisations will need to follow to prove their resilience.

How Darktrace can help support affected organizations

Demonstrate resilience

Darktrace’s Self-Learning AI^TM continuously monitors your digital estate across cloud, network, OT, email, and endpoint to detect, investigate, and autonomously respond to emerging threats in real time. This persistent visibility and defense posture helps organizations demonstrate cyber resilience to regulators with confidence.

Streamline incident reporting and compliance

Darktrace surfaces clear alerts and automated investigation reports, complete with timeline views and root cause analysis. These insights reduce the time and complexity of regulatory incident reporting and support internal compliance workflows with auditable, AI-generated evidence.

Improve supply chain visibility

With full visibility across connected systems and third-party activity, Darktrace detects early indicators of lateral movement, account compromise, and unusual behavior stemming from vendor or partner access, reducing the risk of supply chain-originated cyber-attacks.

Ensure MSPs can meet new standards

For managed service providers, Darktrace offers native multi-tenant support and autonomous threat response that can be embedded directly into customer environments. This ensures consistent, scalable security standards across clients—helping MSPs address increasing regulatory obligations.

[related-resource]