UK Firms Turn to Air‑Gapped Backups as Browser Push Phishing and Critical CVEs Ramp Up

It’s a busy 24 hours in cyber—UK firms are being offered an old-school defence with a modern twist, while attackers are getting cleverer with fileless tricks and researchers keep unearthing high‑severity software flaws. Read on for what matters to your organisation, what to patch first and why Synergos Consultancy thinks now is the time to get serious about air‑gapped backups and notification hygiene (yes, even your browser needs parenting).

Firevault & Sona bring offline data storage to UK firms — insurers are watching

Firevault has teamed up with Sona Insurance Solutions to offer offline (air‑gapped) data storage options to UK organisations. The move is framed as a response to rising cyber threats and growing insurer demands for demonstrable resilience. In plain English: insurers increasingly want to see that firms can demonstrate robust backup and recoverability arrangements before they write or renew cyber policies.

Why offline storage matters right now

• Ransomware and extortion gangs prefer targets that are online and writable; an offline copy removes the obvious payoff.
• Insurers are tightening underwriting: being able to show cold backups may reduce friction at claim time and help meet policy conditions.
• Offline storage reduces blast radius from supply‑chain and fileless attacks that spread via networked storage.

Synergos Consultancy has been advising clients to treat offline backups as part of a layered resilience strategy — not a silver bullet, but a very useful coat of armour when combined with tests, encryption and clear recovery playbooks.

Matrix Push C2: browser notifications weaponised for fileless, cross‑platform phishing

Researchers are reporting a push in techniques that abuse browser notifications for fileless phishing, using Matrix Push C2 to deliver social engineering directly via notification prompts. Fileless methods pivot away from disk artefacts and lean on legitimate platform features — in this case, browser push notifications — to trick users into revealing credentials or visiting malicious pages.

What makes this especially nasty

• Cross‑platform reach: browsers on desktops and mobiles provide a wide attack surface.
• Fileless behaviour evades some traditional AV products because there are fewer on‑disk indicators.
• Abuse of push notifications looks ‘normal’ to many users, increasing the chance of success.

There’s also mention of increased misuse of Velociraptor following a Windows Server weakness — a reminder that tooling intended for good can be turned against defenders if platforms aren’t patched and monitored.

Practical mitigations

1. Review and tighten browser notification permissions; enforce least privilege for sites that can send push notifications.
2. Educate users on the look and feel of legitimate notifications and the red flags of push‑based phishing.
3. Harden endpoints, enable EDR detections for suspicious in‑memory behaviours and apply server patches promptly.

Vulnerabilities to watch — quick scan of the latest CVEs

Multiple high‑severity and critical vulnerabilities were highlighted in the past 24 hours. Below are the facts as reported; if you run any of these projects or libraries, check the stated patched versions and prioritise remediation.

CVE‑2025‑65108 — md‑to‑pdf (Critical, severity 10.0)

md‑to‑pdf allowed arbitrary JavaScript execution when parsing front matter prior to version 5.2.5, leading to remote code execution. This is rated critical and has been patched in 5.2.5.

CVE‑2025‑64767 — hpke‑js AEAD nonce reuse (Critical, severity 9.1)

hpke‑js had a race condition that could reuse the same AEAD nonce across Seal() calls before version 1.7.5, risking complete loss of confidentiality and integrity. Patched in 1.7.5 — treat as high priority for cryptographic correctness.

CVE‑2025‑65947 — thread‑amount resource exhaustion (High, severity 8.7)

The thread_amount tool leaked handles on Windows (missing CloseHandle) and leaked memory on Apple platforms (missing vm_deallocate) prior to version 0.2.2, causing eventual process instability; fixed in 0.2.2.

CVE‑2025‑65946 — Roo Code zsh validation bug (High, severity 8.1)

Roo Code, an autonomous coding agent, could execute commands outside the allow list prior to version 3.26.7 due to validation errors; patched in 3.26.7.

CVE‑2025‑65109 — Minder does not sandbox http.send in Rego (High, severity 8.5)

Minder allowed fetching content in the Minder server context in certain versions; fixes are available in updated Helm and Go versions (see reported patched versions).

CVE‑2025‑65106 — LangChain template injection via attribute access (High, severity 8.3)

LangChain prompt templates prior to patched versions could allow template injection enabling access to Python object internals; patched in 0.3.80 and 1.0.7.

Other notable items

• CVE‑2025‑65102 (PJSIP buffer overflow, fixed in 2.16)
• CVE‑2025‑11087 (Zegen Core WordPress plugin CSRF leading to arbitrary file upload up to 2.0.1)

If any of these packages are in your stack, plan remediation that balances criticality, exposure and exploitability. Cryptographic and remote‑code issues typically sit at the top of the to‑do pile.

Human failures still fuel attacks — data leakage in finance

Reports highlight that data leakage among staff is a major contributor to successful attacks against financial institutions. Insider information — whether accidental or malicious — often gives attackers the breadcrumbs they need. Training, strict data handling policies and rapid detection of abnormal data exfiltration patterns remain essential.

What Synergos Consultancy is seeing and advising (without the sales pitch)

1. Combine offline (air‑gapped) backups with routine recovery tests and robust key management; backups are only useful if you can restore them.
2. Prioritise patching for critical libraries (crypto, RCE and parsing engines) and follow upstream advisories closely.
3. Lock down browser push permissions and educate staff on notification‑based social engineering — it’s the new low‑effort con.
4. Implement least privilege for internal data access and invest in detection tuned to fileless and in‑memory attack techniques.

Cybersecurity is a layered game: air‑gapped backups stop some extortionists, patches stop a lot of nasties, and vigilant people stop the rest — though a little common sense doesn’t hurt (and neither does a backup you actually test).

Stay patched, stay sceptical of unexpected notifications, and if you’re thinking of putting everything on a single USB stick labelled ‘Do not touch’—maybe keep it under lock and occasionally whisper sweet restoration scripts to it. The resilience is in the practice, not the plaque.