#Thousands of consumer routers hacked by Russia’s military

##End-of-life routers in homes and small offices hacked in 120 countries.

The Russian military is once again hacking home and small office routers in widespread operations that send unwitting users to sites that harvest passwords and credential tokens for use in espionage campaigns, researchers said Tuesday.

An estimated 18,000 to 40,000 consumer routers, mostly those made by MikroTik and TP-Link, located in 120 countries, were wrangled into infrastructure belonging to APT28, an advanced threat group that’s part of Russia’s military intelligence agency known as the GRU, researchers from Lumen Technologies’ Black Lotus Labs said. The threat group has operated for at least two decades and is behind dozens of high-profile hacks targeting governments worldwide. APT28 is also tracked under names including Pawn Storm, Sofacy Group, Sednit, Tsar Team, Forest Blizzard, and STRONTIUM.

###Technical sophistication, tried-and-true techniques

A small number of routers were used as proxies to connect to a much larger number of other routers belonging to foreign ministries, law enforcement, and government agencies that APT28 wanted to spy on. The group then used its control of routers to change DNS lookups for select websites, including, Microsoft said, domains for the company’s 365 service.

“Known for blending cutting-edge tools such as the large language model (LLM) ‘LAMEHUG’ with proven, longstanding techniques, Forest Blizzard consistently evolves its tactics to stay ahead of defenders,” Black Lotus researchers wrote. “Their previous and current campaigns highlight both their technological sophistication and their willingness to revisit classic attack methods even after public exposure, underscoring the ongoing risk posed by this actor to organizations worldwide.”

To hijack the routers, the attackers exploited older models that hadn’t been patched against known security vulnerabilities. They then changed DNS settings for select domains and used the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol to propagate them to router-connected workstations. When connected devices visited the selected domains, their connections were proxied through malicious servers before reaching their intended destination.

These adversary-in-the-middle servers used self-signed certificates. When the end user clicked through browser warnings, the servers captured all traffic passing through them. Among other things, they collected OAuth tokens and other credentials set after users, unaware their connections were being tapped, completed multifactor authentication.

The operation began in May 2025 on a limited number of devices. Then, in August, Britain’s National Cyber Security Center released an alert that documented a malware campaign a threat group was using to “intercept and exfiltrate Microsoft Office account credentials and tokens.” The following day, the threat group rapidly stepped up the router hijacking, an activity it continued to ramp up in the coming months.

Over a four-week period starting on December 12, Black Lotus observed more than 290,000 distinct IP addresses sending at least one DNS request to the malicious APT28 DNS resolver. “This suggested that as one capability was disclosed, the actor immediately shifted to another to continue acquiring authentication material,” company researchers wrote.

Black Lotus described the methodology this way:

  1. DNS changes were then propagated to the workstations on the adjacent LAN via Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP).
  2. The actor operated a DNS server to behave like a typical recursive resolver, but when a targeted Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) was queried, it was configured to provide a record back containing its own IP address instead of the correct address. The only interventions were triggered by domains associated with authentication-related services. If any other domain was requested, traffic passed directly through.
  3. The actor ran a proxy service as the AitM that the end user was directed to via DNS. The only sign of this attack would be a pop-up warning about connecting to an untrusted source because of the “break and inspect.”
  4. If warnings were present and ignored or clicked through, the actor proxied requests to the legitimate services, collecting the data at the midpoint and collecting data associated with the targeted account by passing the valid OAuth token. This allowed the actor to break and inspect traffic and access authentication material such as Oauth tokens after completing the multifactor challenge.

APT28 has a history of hacking routers. In 2018, researchers discovered 500,000 of the devices, mostly located in the US, were infected with malware tracked as VPNFilter. In 2024, the US Justice Department caught the group doing it again.

The easiest way for people to know if their router has been compromised in the operation is to review the current DNS settings to see if they list unrecognized servers. Users should also check event logs for any unrecognized changes to DNS server settings. People should also strongly consider replacing end-of-life routers with ones that receive regular security updates. People should never click through browser alerts warning of untrusted TLS certificates.

Dan Goodin Senior Security Editor

      • hayvan@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        14 hours ago

        That baffles me. Those certificate warnings are big, in your face, and yet people click through them without reading.

          • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Is anyone really still updating certs manually? I think the standard is to have some reverse proxy handle HTTPS and renew the certs automatically.

          • 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 hours ago

            We need to start spreading the word to our less-techie friends and family: Ignoring those warnings for some random site might be fine if you’re not entering in username/password used anywhere else (because a lot of people do reuse passwords)… but especially if they pop up on well-known sites, like… google, microsoft, your bank, et cetera - in those cases, do NOT click through. At least ask your techie friends about it.

            That’s probably good enough for this, if they’ll actually listen. So at least there’s some potential good news.

        • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          14 hours ago

          2 things come to mind: A lot of people have no idea how to parse those errors and have no basis for evaluating which popups are serious and which are not, and a lot of people are forced by their employer to use systems that are kludged together and often have serious security vulnerabilities that they have no control over. These two things combine to condition people to ignore warnings that they really should not because they often have to in order to do their job. I can’t tell you how many internal websites I’ve seen that throw certificate errors because the sysadmin never bothered to set them up (usually excused by saying “they’re completely internal, it doesn’t need a cert”). We’ve built a system that forces people to ignore safety labels and then blames them when they get hurt.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Depending on the site it could just be a geocities-type page that never got a cert, or a self-signed on for a ginormous org. Or a cert that expired yesterday that caught the devs by surprise.

          • hayvan@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Absolutely depends on the site, and that’s the point. When you see a security warning, you need to stop and think . I know I’m asking for too much here 😑

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      To be fair, the article says this affects only end-of-life and unpatched devices. Having an outdated OpenWRT would also be dangerous.

      I have Mikrotik router, this was fixed quite some time ago, my firmware is up to date, I don’t stress about this.

    • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Question for the internet at large: assuming I have an old router with openWRT on it, how should I keep it up to date? right now my strategy is “manually upgrade firmware whenever the notion enters my head and I have time” which is rare. My current firmware is several months old :/

      After a quick search I found this https://dariusz.wieckiewicz.org/en/attended-sysupgrade-openwrt/ which seems like it could be made to run automatically with cron, but I don’t know if that’s A) doable, or B) advisable. Is there a community-recommended “set it and forget it” firmware update method out there?

  • HeyJoe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Timing seems to relevant to the recent FDA ban of all foreign made routers. Im guessing this will give them something to point at to scare people some more.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      They exploited old unpatched firmware bugs, then modified DNS to send people to malicious sites. A typical hack involving old, unpatched routers. So the FCC decides to ban all new routers, while allowing old routers to continue functioning. It makes no sense as a security measure. The only way to understand the ban is as another instance of Trump’s people foolishly thinking that if they punish companies enough, they’ll instantly relocate their manufacturing to the USA.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        So the FCC decides to ban all new routers, while allowing old routers to continue functioning

        The FCC isn’t going to force existing users of routers to stop using those routers. Enforceability issues aside, it would be a clusterfuck of epic proportions in terms of breakage.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Yes it is clear they are not fit for human consumption and not intended to cure or treat any disease

  • zipfile1782@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    “The actor ran a proxy service as the AitM that the end user was directed to via DNS. The only sign of this attack would be a pop-up warning about connecting to an untrusted source because of the “break and inspect.””

    That’s the biggest warning you will ever get that something is wrong. If you fall for this, maybe you should not be on the internet.