23 comments

  • kevincloudsec 2 minutes ago

    second breach in a month from the same initial credential compromise. the first rotation didn't fully revoke access. the attacker walked right back in. no persistence needed.

  • PunchyHamster 35 minutes ago

    You're supposed to scan for vulnerabilities, not become one!

  • huslage 18 minutes ago

    How the heck are credential compromises still a thing with 2FA and refresh tokens???

  • Shank an hour ago

    > On March 22, 2026, a threat actor used compromised credentials to publish a malicious Trivy v0.69.5 and v0.69.6 DockerHub images. (https://github.com/aquasecurity/trivy/security/advisories/GH...)

    So the first incident was on March 19th and the second incident is March 22nd —- evidently the attackers maintained persistence through maybe two separate credential rotation efforts.

  • dang 2 hours ago

    Recent and related:

    Trivy ecosystem supply chain temporarily compromised - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47450142 - March 2026 (35 comments)

    • wolfi1 a minute ago

      temporarily might be a bit of an euphemism here

  • progbits an hour ago

    Friendly reminder that just because someone is building security software it doesn't mean they are competent and won't cause more harm than good.

    Every month the security team wants me to give full code or cloud access to some new scanner they want to trial. They love the fancy dashboards and lengthy reports but if I allowed just 10% of what they wanted we would be pwned on the regular...

    • cedws an hour ago

      I audited Trivy's GitHub Actions a while back and found some worrying things, the most worrying bit was in the setup-trivy Action where it was doing a clone of main of the trivy repo and executing a shell script in there. There was no ref pinning until somebody raised a PR a few months ago. So a security company gave themselves arbitrary code execution in everyone's CI workflows.

      Aqua were breached earlier this month, failed to contain it, got breached again last week, failed to contain it again, and now the attackers have breached their Docker Hub account. Shit happens but they're clearly not capable of handling this and should be enlisting outside help.

    • hrmtst93837 11 minutes ago

      Granting broad access to "security" tools so some vendor can take another shot at your prod keys is not risk reduction. Most of these things are just report printers that makes more noise than a legacy SIEM, and once an attacker is inside they don't do much besides dump findings into a dashboard nobody will read.

      If you want less self-inflicted damage, stick new scanners in a tight sandbox, feed them read-only miror data, and keep them away from prod perms until they have earned trust with a boring review of exactly what they touch and where the data goes. Otherwise you may as well wire your secrets to a public pastebin and call it testing.

    • hootz an hour ago

      Most of corporate security nowadays involves "endpoint security solutions" installed on all devices, servers and VMs, piping everything into an AI-powered dashboard so we can move fast and break everything.

  • xinayder an hour ago

    Wasn't this discovered already last week, on Friday, that the threat actor had replaced the legit images with malware images? And republished 75 out of 76 tags?

    • Shank an hour ago

      No, the actor reappeared. This article is not fully updated. On March 22nd, the actor compromised their DockerHub account and published new Docker images.

  • h1fra an hour ago

    /s But I thought npm was the issue, and all of this couldn't happen anywhere else?!

    • hootz an hour ago

      What if we just rebuild everything from scratch with AI? No more supply chain attacks!

      • classified an hour ago

        Just use OpenClaw. Oh wait, I think Microslop already did...

    • classified an hour ago

      Don't underestimate the prowess of Microslop to fuck up. I'm just glad I saw all of this coming and abandoned this hellscape long ago.

  • ashishb an hour ago

    I always run such tools inside sandboxes to limit the blast radius.

    • PunchyHamster 35 minutes ago

      The sandbox will need internet access (to update data) and you will need to send code to test into it; so compromise already equals leaking all your code, without even breaking the sandboxing

      • ashishb 15 minutes ago

        > The sandbox will need internet access (to update data) and you will need to send code to test into it; so compromise already equals leaking all your code, without even breaking the sandboxing

        Compromising all code in one directory is bad. Compromising all my data in all other directories, including mounted cloud drives, is worse.

        I restrict most dev tools to access only the current directory.

    • wswin an hour ago

      I don't think it would help here, they were stealing credentials

  • Pahacker 26 minutes ago

    GG

  • yieldcrv an hour ago

    fatiguing

  • Pahacker 26 minutes ago

    jj