News: 1762431960

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

SonicWall fingers state-backed cyber crew for September firewall breach

(2025/11/06)


SonicWall has blamed an unnamed, state-sponsored collective for the September break-in that saw cybercriminals rifle through a cache of firewall configuration backups.

The network security vendor said it spotted "suspicious activity" in early September involving the unauthorized downloading of backup firewall configuration files from "a specific cloud environment." The company [1]initially said that "fewer than 5 percent" of its firewall installed base had files accessed, but later [2]admitted that "all customers" who utilized the MySonicWall cloud backup feature were affected

SonicWall said its incident response team quickly called in Google-owned Mandiant, the go-to fixer for when things get ugly. SonicWall has now wrapped up the probe, confirming that the intruders were state-sponsored operators who gained access via an API call to the cloud backup system.

[3]

In [4]an update published this week , SonicWall said the investigation confirmed the intrusion was limited to a cloud-based backup service and did not affect SonicWall's products, firmware, source code, or any customer networks.

[5]

[6]

The activity was confined to an API call used to access those backup files, and had nothing to do with the Akira ransomware campaigns that have been hammering firewalls and edge devices elsewhere on the internet.

In a video statement, SonicWall CEO Bob VanKirk said: "We now know this incident was carried out by state-sponsored threat actors. The malicious activity has been contained and was isolated to our firewall cloud-backup services. There was no impact to customer data or any other SonicWall system."

[7]

SonicWall has not said which nation was behind the incident or provided indicators linking it to any known threat group.

It has taken all remediation actions recommended by Mandiant and would continue to work with the firm and other third parties to harden network and cloud infrastructure. SonicWall stressed that this was not a case of its firewall software itself being compromised but rather a supporting cloud service used to store backups – a subtle distinction, but one that matters when your brand trades on keeping attackers out.

SonicWall has spent the past few months on what it calls a "Secure by Design" modernization push, aimed at tightening product architecture, cloud operations, and internal security practices. VanKirk said the company would use lessons from the incident and community feedback to "continue to improve how we interact with our partners when security issues arise."

[8]'Highly sophisticated' government goons hacked F5, stole source code and undisclosed bug details

[9]Cybercrims claim raid on 28,000 Red Hat repos, say they have sensitive customer files

[10]Cybercrims claim raid on 28,000 Red Hat repos, say they have sensitive customer files

[11]Senator blasts Microsoft for 'dangerous, insecure software' that helped pwn US hospitals

"As nation-state–backed threat actors increasingly target edge-security providers, especially those serving SMB and distributed environments, SonicWall is committed to strengthening its position as a leader for partners and their SMB customers on the front lines of this escalation," the company said.

That confidence may be well-placed, though the breach adds SonicWall to a growing list of security vendors that have learned the hard way that even defensive infrastructure can become a target of geopolitical cyber operations.

[12]

SonicWall insists it has emerged "stronger, more resilient, and even more trusted" from the experience. Customers, one assumes, will hope that's true – and this is the last time their firewall backups become a foreign-policy problem. ®

Get our [13]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/18/sonicwall_breach/

[2] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/09/sonicwall_breach_hits_every_cloud/

[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/cybercrime&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aQzUJ_-r-wH-ONwjRnWXiAAAAAI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[4] https://www.sonicwall.com/blog/cloud-backup-security-incident-investigation-complete-and-strengthened-cyber-resilience

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/cybercrime&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aQzUJ_-r-wH-ONwjRnWXiAAAAAI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/cybercrime&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aQzUJ_-r-wH-ONwjRnWXiAAAAAI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/cybercrime&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aQzUJ_-r-wH-ONwjRnWXiAAAAAI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[8] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/15/highly_sophisticated_government_hackers_breached/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/02/cybercrims_claim_raid_on_28000/

[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/02/cybercrims_claim_raid_on_28000/

[11] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/11/wyden_microsoft_insecure/

[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_security/cybercrime&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aQzUJ_-r-wH-ONwjRnWXiAAAAAI&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/



How very convenient

VoiceOfTruth

State-backed actors always sounds better than somebody who perhaps got lucky.

I trust SonicWall as much as I trust their obvious insecurity.

Anonymous Coward

"SonicWall insists it has emerged "stronger, more resilient, and even more trusted" from the experience."

How can a security company being successfully cyber-attacked possibly result in said company becoming "even more trusted"? That's just utter bollocks.

I certainly trust them a lot less as a result, especially as I ended up wasting several days carrying out their recommended remediation steps.

ParlezVousFranglais

I agree - I have no idea how they can claim they are now "more trusted" (press release written by AI?). Just because they avoided a more serious "crash" doesn't mean they weren't asleep at the wheel.

That said, the SMB firewall space is one that unfortunately seems to suffer compromises with alarming regularity - Watchguard, Fortinet and Cisco have all had serious vulns/compromises in the recent past, Barracuda less so but still not perfect, and clients in that space are often the ones without the in-house expertise to react continuously to barrages of emergency updates.

What still annoys me here is that the backups weren't encrypted by default before they were sent from the firewalls to Sonicwall's cloud storage, and that's just beyond stupid these days

steviebuk

"Even more trusted".....Nope, because you originally told us "Only affected a small number of clients". Then a while after said "Actually it affected EVERYONE".

Name, shame and provide evidence

Mishak

Or it didn't happen that way.

Told it to their reps

Nate Amsden

Earlier this year had a conf call with them where they were pitching replacing my existing Sonicwalls with newer stuff and were pushing their cloud management stuff. Long before this breach. I told them then, I really don't trust any org with cloud management of network stuff for security reasons and control reasons too.

I've been using Sonicwall successfully as a layer 4 firewall and site to site VPN for over a decade and have never used their cloud backup, I wrote scripts that login to the firewalls and tell them to upload their config to a local server instead, and integrate with internal monitoring as well. Also never deployed their SSL VPN on any of my firewalls, because simply it is just a bad product(first discovered this on their Gen5 products they are on Gen7 today and functionally it's still not a good product), always has been (which they probably admit as they have a dedicated SSL VPN client product line as well, which I have never used, evaluated it briefly a long time ago but immediately ruled it out as it could not fully integrate with Duo inline enrollment at the time).

BUT as a layer 4 firewall and site to site IPSec VPN they've been pretty rock solid very few issues over the past decade+, and I plan to continue to use them for those purposes.

Their response was the typical "everyone wants cloud stuff so we think you'll like it too" something like that ...

You are not dead yet. But watch for further reports.