惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
量子位
腾讯CDC
N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
小众软件
小众软件
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
A
About on SuperTechFans
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
G
Google Developers Blog
U
Unit 42
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
雷峰网
雷峰网
罗磊的独立博客
Vercel News
Vercel News
L
LangChain Blog
V
V2EX
P
Proofpoint News Feed
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
博客园 - Franky
V
Visual Studio Blog
J
Java Code Geeks

Cyber Security News

AIRecon: AI-Powered Penetration Testing Tool with Kali Linux Sandbox Critical Chrome Vulnerabilities Allow Attackers to Execute Arbitrary Code - Update Now! UNC3753 Uses Screen-Sharing Sessions and RMM Tools to Exfiltrate Sensitive Legal Data New OnionDrop Loader Campaign Uses gainmsg C2 to Deliver LegionLoader Payloads ClickFix Campaign Uses EtherHiding and GULoader to Infect Windows Users via Fake CAPTCHA Ghostwriter Hackers Abuse Gmail Admin-Themed Emails to Steal Credentials and 2FA Codes The Half-Life of Threat Intelligence: When Does an IOC Stop Being Useful? Critical Fortinet FortiSandbox Vulnerabilities Actively Exploited in Attacks Aembit Extends IAM for Agentic AI to Microsoft Copilot Studio India Temporarily Bans Telegram Messenger Over Medical Exam Fraud Microsoft 365 Device Code Phishing Campaign Bypasses Password Theft With Legitimate Login Flow AppViewX Launches Agent Identity Security to Govern Agents for the AI and Quantum Era Hackers Weaponize Microsoft Teams Relay to Hide Ransomware Traffic Developer laptops are the credential store attackers are picking through in 2026, GitGuardian announces Endpoint Protection Interlock and Rhysida Ransomware Operations Share Supper Backdoor and Malware Codebase Novo Nordisk Confirms Cyber Attack — Hackers Accessed Patient Medical Data and Internal AI Assets Russian and Chinese Influence Actors Use AI to Evade Bot Detection and Mimic Human Behavior Microsoft Teams Analyze the Wi-Fi Hotspot Data Connected to an Employee’s Device PRC-Nexus Hackers Exploit REDCap Servers to Spy on US Medical Research Institutions Infinite Campus Data Breach Exposes 137,000 Users Personal Details OptinMonster Plugin Hack Exposes 1.2 Million Wordpress Sites to Cyberattack Ransomware Ecosystem Consolidates Around LockBit Alumni, Qilin, Hyflock, and The Gentlemen Hackers Abuse Legitimate RMM Tools in The Quarry IRS and SSA Phishing Campaigns LiteSpeed cPanel Plugin 0-Day Vulnerability Actively Exploited in the Wild Cisco SD-WAN vManage Vulnerability Exploited in Zero-Day Attacks Nearly 14,000 SimpleHelp Servers Exposed Amid Critical Authentication Bypass Disclosure Microsoft Site Showing Warning Following Certificate Expiry DPAPISnoop Tool Extracts CREDHIST Hashes for Offline Windows Credential Recovery SHADOWBYT3$ Allegedly Claim Breach of Nintendo, Stealing Sensitive Data Anthropic Updated Privacy Policy to Include Identity Verification for Claude Users
New Bucket Hijacking Attack Allows Hackers to Reroute Clo...
Guru Baran · 2026-06-27 · via Cyber Security News

A critical cloud storage attack technique dubbed “bucket hijacking” a method that enables threat actors to silently redirect an organization’s active cloud data streams, including audit logs and telemetry, into attacker-controlled external storage buckets across major cloud platforms.

The technique has been confirmed to affect Google Cloud, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Microsoft Azure, with all three providers notified through responsible disclosure.

While no real-world threat actor has been observed exploiting this technique yet, researchers warn that detection would be extremely difficult once deployed.

The attack exploits a fundamental architectural flaw rooted in the global uniqueness of cloud storage bucket names. Because no two users can register an identical bucket name within a provider’s namespace, the identity of a destination storage bucket is tied to its name alone, not to a specific account owner.

An attacker who compromises a cloud environment and gains bucket deletion permissions can execute the attack in a straightforward sequence:

  1. Delete the target organization’s active storage bucket.
  2. Immediately recreate a new bucket using the identical name within an attacker-controlled account.
  3. The original data stream, whether a Google Cloud logging sink, AWS S3 replication rule, or Azure Monitor diagnostic export, continues operating autonomously and begins writing data directly into the attacker’s bucket.

The attack is particularly dangerous because it is self-sustaining. Once the hijack is complete, the legitimate sink or replication configuration continues to appear valid upon inspection, generating no obvious error states and triggering no native alerts. Logs, metrics, and sensitive telemetry flow silently into the attacker’s environment indefinitely.

New Bucket Hijacking Attack

Unit 42 successfully simulated bucket hijacking across multiple services on each major provider:

  • Google Cloud: Confirmed on Cloud Logging sinks, Pub/Sub subscriptions with Cloud Storage destinations, and Storage Transfer Service jobs. Required permissions: storage.buckets.delete and storage.objects.delete
  • AWS: Confirmed on S3 bucket replication and Amazon Data Firehose pipelines targeting S3 destinations
  • Azure: Demonstrated as a cross-subscription attack via Azure Monitor diagnostic settings; limited to same-tenant scope due to platform-enforced name reuse delays

Researchers highlighted that broad storage administration roles commonly assigned in enterprise environments dramatically increase exposure.

In Google Cloud, the standard Storage Admin role grants storage.buckets.delete by default, bypassing the more restrictive logging.sinks.update permission that would be required to legitimately reconfigure a data stream. This effectively allows attackers to reroute data streams without ever touching stream configurations directly.

Unit 42 recommends a two-pronged defense strategy combining least-privilege access controls and proactive monitoring:

  • Restrict deletion permissions (storage.buckets.delete, DeleteBucket, Microsoft.Storage/storageAccounts/delete) to the minimum required administrative roles
  • Enforce data perimeter controls — AWS Service Control Policies (SCPs) or Google Cloud VPC Service Controls — to block writes to buckets outside the trusted organizational boundary
  • Enable AWS account-regional S3 namespaces to scope bucket names to specific accounts and regions, directly eliminating the hijacking vector
  • Deploy high-priority monitoring alerts for storage bucket deletion API calls, particularly on buckets holding sensitive or regulated data

Unit 42 highlighted that this technique is not limited to the three providers tested. Any cloud platform relying on globally unique, statically named storage resources for data stream routing could be vulnerable to the same methodology.

The research reinforces that shared design philosophies across cloud providers mean a flaw discovered in one ecosystem can serve as a direct blueprint for exploiting another, a critical reminder for security teams managing multi-cloud environments.

What Features Should AI SOC Have? – Download Free 2026 AI SOC Features Checklist

Guru Baran

Guru Baranhttps://cybersecuritynews.com

Gurubaran KS is a cybersecurity analyst, and Journalist with a strong focus on emerging threats and digital defense strategies. He is the Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Cyber Security News, where he leads editorial coverage on global cybersecurity developments.