The journey of a paper unicorn: adventures inside a modern warehouse纸独角兽的旅程:现代仓库里的奇遇
Kaspersky experts explain the security issues affecting warehouse environments. We break down initial access vectors specific to warehouses, and discuss the impact of a compromise.

Kaspersky Security Services
Cornering the unicorn
Initial attack vectors
Internet-facing services
Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and other radio channels
Portable data terminals
Impact on logistics processes (attacks on WMS)
Securing the unicorn
Imagine you’ve ordered a small paper unicorn from an online marketplace. You clicked “Buy”, received a cheerful notification, and expect a courier to bring the box tomorrow. If the unicorn is delayed by a day, it will be annoying but not catastrophic: an apology, a discount promo code — and the incident is forgotten.
Now let’s multiply one late unicorn by several hundred thousand orders.
Packages start heading to the wrong cities. The website shows an item is in stock, even though the required bin is empty. Conveyors stop, boxes get stuck between floors, the cargo piles up with no freight manifest. Trucks line up at the gates, and every minute of downtime turns into blown schedules, support tickets, fines, and lost sales.
It is at exactly this scale that a cyberincident in a warehouse becomes a problem for the entire business. A modern warehouse is no longer just a big building with shelving. It is a tightly interconnected hybrid system: web applications, radio channels, and an automated factory. Physical processes here depend on data, and errors in data have very physical consequences. Examples include an outage that affected warehouse management systems at the grocery giant Morrisons , and the 2025 Form 10-K annual report of United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI), which confirmed unauthorized activity on information technology systems that impacted order fulfillment. More recently, reports emerged that a cyberattack disrupted eight CEVA Logistics warehouses across Europe and exposed customer delivery data.
This paper follows a single order through a warehouse to show where the operation is vulnerable, the stages it traverses, the systems that drive it, and the points where an attacker can reach them. We then set out the threat model: what is at risk, who is in a position to take it, and how each risk lands on the business. From there, we look at how an attacker gets in, and what reaching the warehouse management system costs in practical terms: orders unshipped, inventory records nobody can trust, and an operation that stops. We close with recommendations on where the controls that matter actually sit.
A modern warehouse is a sequence of stages involving many machines and people, all working together to keep the business process stable so that, in the end, your order gets delivered. This process consists of eight main stages, shown in the figure below.
Stages of order fulfillment
So let’s assume we’ve ordered our paper unicorn and are waiting for it at home. Let’s follow our order through all the main stages, from its arrival at the warehouse to the final stop on its journey.
Unloading First, the unicorn arrives in the unloading zone, packed in a big truck. The driver is assigned a gate, for example, via a tablet with kiosk mode enabled, or an outdoor display board, indicating where the truck should park and where the cargo will be unloaded. Even at this very first step, a digital command (the gate number on the screen) is already triggering a physical action. Therefore, incorrectly assigned gates can create a queue, delay unloading, or send goods into the wrong workflow.
Receiving At this stage, employees identify the cargo. They scan a barcode using a portable data terminal (PDT) and the central system receives a message indicating that this object arrives at the warehouse. From this moment, the unicorn exists in two forms at once: as a real box and as a record in the information system. If these two versions diverge, the error is inherited by all subsequent processes.
Putaway Next, the goods are moved into internal storage. Two new devices come into play here. First, a thermal printer, connected to the internal network over Wi-Fi, creates an internal label for each item. Then an employee, forklift, or automated system moves the goods to the assigned bin, often with the help of lifts controlled by PLCs. Both of these devices can be valuable attack entry points: one can let an adversary pivot into the internal network, while the other can give them control over an electric motor.
Storage Then the unicorn goes into storage. Many distribution centers use multi-level mezzanine structures: several floors of metal shelving inside a huge space. They allow efficient use of the building’s height, but at the same time complicate control over the technical infrastructure. Wi-Fi access points, cameras, switches, cables, and sensors may be mounted high overhead or buried deep inside the rows. A forgotten Ethernet cable or misconfigured networked device (access point or switch) left behind in a dark corner can become a convenient initial access point into critical infrastructure.
Picking When the customer places an order, picking begins if the goods were already stored in the warehouse or as soon as they are unloaded. A PDT, workstation, light indicator, or voice terminal directs the employee to the required bin where they pick the goods and move them to the next stage. These devices are themselves potential attack entry points: compromising a workstation or PDT could allow an attacker to manipulate picking information, which could misdirect employees to the wrong bin. Here, both the speed and integrity of the information are critical, and any manipulation or disruption can lead to wrong orders, delays, or problems in subsequent stages.
Sorting At the sorting stage, the warehouse starts to look more like a factory. Boxes move through conveyor belts and pass through different scanners, diverters, and chutes. The sorting plans are usually stored and managed by dedicated servers, while PLCs are responsible for controlling the machinery and executing these plans. For example, when the warehouse management system (WMS) decides that our unicorn should take route A, the control system needs to activate the right diverter at the right moment, sometimes within a fraction of a second.
Packing During packing, an employee or a robotic arm places the goods into the final box, prints the shipping label, and sometimes measures the dimensions and weight of the package. Safety mechanisms usually prevent robotic arms from leaving the controlled zone and harming nearby operators, but their compromise might inflict physical damage on the packages being processed.
Shipment Finally, at the shipping stage, the parcel heads to the gates. Automated guided vehicles (AGVs) and autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) move containers and pallets across the warehouse, while the dock management system coordinates the truck that will carry the unicorn onward to a store, a sorting center, or straight to the customer. These robots are themselves a potential target for attackers. Attacks can be conducted against AGVs and AMRs to interfere with their operation, for example by affecting their navigation or preventing them from reaching their intended destination.
All eight stages are coordinated by the WMS. It looks like a large web application, but in its role it’s closer to the operating system of the entire warehouse: it knows which goods exist, where they’re located, who or what should move them, and where they go next, linking employees, inventory levels, storage addresses, tasks, and orders. It also exchanges data externally: with ERP systems, transport platforms, marketplaces, dark stores, and external carriers.
Surrounding the WMS is an even larger digital ecosystem: identity services, databases, APIs, printers, carrier systems, technicians’ laptops, video surveillance, access control, fire and gas alarms, power supply, and a building management system (BMS).
That is why a single “warehouse network” doesn’t really exist. As we’ve seen, there are many overlapping technologies — IT infrastructure, OT systems, radio, cloud services, building security, and automation — layered on top of one another. A lone vulnerability scanner will never tell you whether a warehouse is secure.
Securing an environment such as a warehouse requires a comprehensive security assessment covering all of its interconnected systems. This involves identifying vulnerabilities across each system and understanding how weaknesses can be combined into attack paths that a real attacker could exploit. But a vulnerability only matters in proportion to what it exposes and who is able to reach it, so before looking at the weaknesses themselves, we need to understand what an attacker in this environment is actually after, because in a warehouse, the blast radius extends well beyond data. Everything we just traced — the systems, the devices, and the people operating them — exists to keep goods moving, and attacks in various parts along that chain can affect the business differently. The chart below shows what is at risk in the warehouse and where those risks land for the business. The segment on the left groups them under the three core security properties: integrity, availability, and confidentiality. The segment on the right maps each property to the business outcomes a failure can cause.
The first area at risk is integrity. Inventory counts, locations, orders, and shipment data must stay in sync with the physical world. Corrupting a record silently desynchronizes the operation, and because the eight stages form a dependency chain, one falsified entry early on is inherited downstream, surfacing later as stockouts and mis-shipments. In its deliberate forms, this lets an attacker redirect goods, release stock, and perform other actions on behalf of the platform’s vendors under cover of legitimate records. Integrity is also a safety concern: when people or machines act on information that no longer reflects the physical environment, a data failure can become a physical incident. This is why integrity is the only property linked to all five outcomes, including harm to people.
The second is availability, the warehouse’s ability to keep goods moving. Halting a conveyor, a sorter, label printing, or the WMS stops orders from shipping, and in a business built on speed, every hour of downtime means delayed deliveries and broken promises. Ransomware can bring the whole warehouse to a standstill. The impact shows up as operational disruption, lost revenue, and reputational damage.
The third is confidentiality. Customer data, business records, and system credentials are valuable targets. Their exposure leads to legal liability and reputational damage, and stolen credentials often open the door to further attacks. Where the WMS connects to financial or ERP processes, the risk extends to theft of funds. Knowing what is at risk tells us what an attacker stands to gain; the next question is who is in a position to take it. Threat actors differ in the access they already hold. For example, an attacker may be authenticated and privileged, have limited physical or remote access, or have no legitimate access to the environment at all. Based on their relationship with the warehouse and their level of access, threat actors can generally be divided into two categories:
External. An attacker with no legitimate relationship with the warehouse or the organization, operating without authorized access. External attackers can be divided into two categories based on their physical proximity to the environment: Remote. An attacker operating from outside the site’s physical area, reaching the environment through whatever the organization exposes or makes reachable over the internet, including web services, remote access infrastructure, and third-party connections used by suppliers, carriers, and integrators. Proximate. An attacker with no legitimate access who has nevertheless moved within physical range of the site’s locally reachable technologies. They may, for example, be in a parking lot, a neighboring unit, or a delivery bay. Their proximity may allow them to interact with wireless, radio, Bluetooth, or other short-range interfaces without possessing an account, badge, employment relationship, or other authorized access.
Remote. An attacker operating from outside the site’s physical area, reaching the environment through whatever the organization exposes or makes reachable over the internet, including web services, remote access infrastructure, and third-party connections used by suppliers, carriers, and integrators.
Proximate. An attacker with no legitimate access who has nevertheless moved within physical range of the site’s locally reachable technologies. They may, for example, be in a parking lot, a neighboring unit, or a delivery bay. Their proximity may allow them to interact with wireless, radio, Bluetooth, or other short-range interfaces without possessing an account, badge, employment relationship, or other authorized access.
Internal. An individual with legitimate access to the warehouse, its systems, or its information, who intentionally or unintentionally creates a security risk. This includes employees, administrators, operators, contractors, and temporary staff.
Combining these threat actors and their access levels with the risks identified earlier, the vulnerabilities present in each system, the resulting attack surfaces, and the potential attack paths between them provides a threat model for the warehouse environment. This allows an organization to understand how different systems and people could be targeted, how individual weaknesses could be combined, and where security controls are most needed.
Knowing what is at risk and who might come after it still leaves the most practical question open: how they would actually get in, and how far they could go once they did. The diagram below sets out the warehouse’s attack surface: every point where an attacker can get in, organized by the access that reaching each point requires.
Warehouse attack surface
On the left are the attacker categories discussed above, distinguished by where they stand and what access they already hold. Each reaches the environment through a different set of entry points, and the impact of a successful attack can land on several systems, from the WMS to OT systems such as robots, sorters, and physical access control system (PACS). The WMS is highlighted because it is the most significant of these: it coordinates the OT systems, so compromising it can affect the entire operation rather than a single process.
Next, we will cover the initial access vectors, the points a threat actor can use to reach the warehouse environment. Following that, we turn to the impact on the logistics processes themselves, focusing on the WMS, since its compromise affects every logistics operation that depends on it.
Remote access through internet-facing services, third-party connections, and corporate networks gives an external attacker a foothold on the warehouse network infrastructure. It is a well-covered problem and not specific to this environment, so we note it here as an entry point but will not examine it further.
Wi-Fi connects handhelds, tablets, printers, cameras, and workstations. Bluetooth serves scanners, headsets, and positioning beacons. Zigbee and similar low-power protocols run lighting, sensors, and building automation, while LoRaWAN carries telemetry over long distances. Cellular provides a backup channel for kiosks and contractor equipment, and proprietary protocols control industrial panels and specialized machinery.
Radio passes through windows, gates, roofing, and thin external panels, so a network built for receiving and processing goods may be reachable from the parking lot and, with a directional antenna, from considerably farther away.
That reach matters in two ways. It gives an external attacker a place to start, as proximity alone is enough to reach the Wi-Fi and the low-power protocols, and from there to gain an initial foothold in the warehouse networks.
However, radio does not only lead into the network. It also connects directly to the field devices and carries the live control traffic of warehouse operations, which makes availability a first-order concern. If hundreds of handhelds lose their connection at once, picking stops. If an AGV loses its control channel, the safe reaction may be to halt in place, and a stopped machine can block an entire route.
The scale of the warehouse itself is part of the attack surface. A fulfillment warehouse can run up to tens of thousands of square meters, with racking climbing several stories and walkways threading through it. Structured cabling runs along that racking, cameras and access points are mounted on that, and wall jacks sit behind pallets that have not moved in months. Almost none of it is in anyone’s line of sight.
That gives a person in the warehouse something a normal office does not: unsupervised access to live network infrastructure. Unplugging a ceiling camera leaves an active port. An unused jack behind a shelf leaves another. Neither requires tools, credentials, or any interaction with a system that logs anything. And since the camera or access point sits on the same segment as the rest of the site, the compromised port, not being isolated, opens a path to the network core.
Barcode scanners are everywhere in a warehouse. They are the main tool workers use to tell the system what is moving and where, supporting receiving, picking, packing, and inventory management. A typical setup has handheld scanners communicating with a base station, which is in turn connected to a workstation or another business system.
This makes the scanner an entry point into the core network in two ways.
First, through the barcode itself. Since the scanner acts as a keyboard to the connected host, a maliciously crafted barcode or QR code can inject keystrokes when scanned, potentially giving the attacker an initial foothold on the host without directly accessing the network.
Second, through the scanner’s wireless link. During a customer engagement, with the provided test stand of such a device, we discovered that an attacker within range could inject keystrokes into the connected host and potentially achieve remote code execution without user interaction. This attack pattern was observed across multiple vendors, including, for example, Honeywell devices affected by CVE-2026-4272 .
In both cases, the result is the same: a foothold on a host inside the warehouse network. The scanner is simply the entry point; the significance of that foothold comes from the host’s trusted position within the operational environment and its connectivity to core systems.
Portable data terminals (PDTs) are essentially ordinary Android devices with an embedded barcode scanner, carried by workers to scan items; each scan is passed to a dedicated application that forwards it to a remote server over an API. To keep workers on task, the devices usually run in kiosk mode, locking the user to that single application and preventing interaction with the rest of the Android system.
That lockdown is exactly what an attacker wants to break, and breaking it is what turns the terminal into an initial access vector: escaping the kiosk can expose the Wi-Fi password of the network the terminal is connected to, or allow malicious software to be installed that gives the attacker remote access to the network over the internet.
Warehouses contain different types of printers. Alongside the usual IT printers used for documents and paperwork, there are specialized thermal printers, small devices that use heated elements on the printhead to create labels, barcodes, and tags. As we mentioned earlier, these are mainly used to print the labels, usually containing barcodes, that are attached to goods during the putaway stage.
Here we focus on mobile thermal printers: small, battery-powered devices that workers can carry or wear. They typically connect to the internal network over Wi-Fi to receive print commands, while also supporting Bluetooth for connecting to nearby devices. This combination makes them a potential entry point into the internal network.
Some models, such as the Zebra ZQ630, support multiple interfaces and can run applications directly on the device. During a security assessment, we discovered that apps can be uploaded and executed over Bluetooth. By exploiting a pairing misconfiguration, an attacker within Bluetooth range could bypass pairing, upload malicious software, and gain an initial foothold through the printer.
With a foothold in the network, an attacker can pivot to the logistics processes themselves: from the WMS through the warehouse infrastructure to the PLCs and the machinery they drive. As we saw earlier, all OT systems and devices are interconnected and the WMS sits at the head of that chain: it is the system of record every other process reads from and writes to, so compromising it reaches all of them at once. That, and its being specific to this environment, is why it is the focus here.
Warehouse management systems (WMS) are the software platforms that optimize warehouse processes from the entry of goods to their exit. They provide real-time visibility into inventory and orchestrate end-to-end fulfillment by integrating with many warehouse subsystems and pieces of automation equipment, such as conveyors, PLCs, robotics, scanners, and voice systems. A typical WMS includes modules for receiving, inventory control, order management, labor management, shipping, and reporting. Major vendors include SAP EWM, Oracle Warehouse Management, Manhattan Active, Blue Yonder, Infor, Körber/HighJump, Microsoft, and TECSYS.
To picture how central this is, think back to our unicorn. From the moment it was scanned at receiving, it stopped being only a physical box and became a record inside the WMS, a record the system then used to decide where it should be stored, when it should be picked, how it should be sorted, and where it should ship. Every device employed along the way — the PDT at receiving, the printer at putaway, the workstation at picking, the conveyor at sorting — was really just talking to the WMS. It is the thread that ties all eight stages together, which is exactly what makes it such a valuable target.
Because modern WMS platforms are usually web-based and heavily interconnected, they inherit common web and API vulnerabilities alongside flaws specific to the WMS itself. A recent example is CVE-2026-70774 in Oracle Warehouse Management, part of Oracle E-Business Suite. Oracle rated it High and described it as an easily exploitable authorization bypass flaw in which a low-privileged attacker with network access can compromise the application, affecting integrity and availability by allowing unauthorized creation, deletion, or modification of critical data.
A flaw like this may look like a typical web application issue, but its consequences in a warehouse are more serious, because the WMS is the system of record. If an attacker can modify its data, they can alter stock levels, bin locations, receiving records, picking tasks, or shipment information, silently corrupting the digital twin of the warehouse. And since the eight stages form a dependency chain, that corruption doesn’t stay contained: a falsified record at receiving is inherited by putaway, picking, and everything downstream. The physical box and its record diverge, and every later process trusts the record.
The most direct version of this attack comes from an authorization bypass flaw like the Oracle vulnerability above. Here the threat actor can be an external attacker who has reached the application over the network, or an insider such as a low-privileged operator or storekeeper who already holds a legitimate account.
The danger grows when such a flaw is chained with others. An external attacker who combines remote code execution with SQL injection could generate shipment orders to arbitrary addresses together with the documents needed for goods to physically leave the warehouse, fabricate waybills, acceptance or transfer records, and registers, while also exposing customer data such as names and delivery addresses. In effect, the goods are sent out with legitimate-looking paperwork.
This is why ordinary web vulnerabilities carry considerable weight in a WMS. For an external attacker or an insider probing beyond their assigned role, broken access control could open a path into another warehouse zone, allow manipulation of other workers’ tasks, permit unauthorized exception operations, or expose administrative APIs. A server-side request forgery flaw could force the WMS server to reach resources an external attacker cannot touch directly, and if the network is flat or only formally segmented, that server may in turn reach internal management panels, cloud service interfaces, or systems sitting close to the operational network, turning a single web bug into a bridge between IT and OT.
Attacks on a WMS don’t always target the application directly, though. As we saw while tracing the unicorn, the warehouse is full of connected devices that already hold trusted access. A handheld terminal carries authenticated WMS API access as a matter of course, and anyone who gains control of that terminal inherits it (by escaping the kiosk, for example). Depending on the device’s permissions, that might mean confirming picks that never occurred, falsifying receiving operations, adjusting stock counts, or marking orders complete — something warehouse employees themselves could use to avoid their assigned duties.
Where the WMS is connected to control and automation systems, access to the WMS can extend into physical operations, including conveyors, sorting systems, lifts, doors, and pumps.
PLCs translate WMS instructions and sensor inputs into physical actions. Compromising a system that controls them therefore creates an opportunity to manipulate those actions. The impact can be as simple as a sorting diverter sending boxes down the wrong route, a conveyor repeatedly entering an error state and creating a backlog, or a falsified sensor value causing a line to be treated as clear when it is full.
However the WMS is compromised, the business consequence is the same: inventory corruption, unauthorized shipments, and operational disruption, each reaching the customer in the end as a late or missing delivery, the wrong item in the box, or a personal address exposed to a stranger.
We followed our unicorn through web applications and databases, radio channels and PDTs, printers, conveyors, robots, and the loading zone. Because warehouse environments combine IT, OT, wireless, physical, and human components, security controls should be implemented as a single, coordinated security architecture rather than as isolated measures. Network segmentation should be a foundational control, with clear separation between corporate IT, warehouse OT, operational devices, management networks, and externally connected systems. Segmentation should also extend across facilities and customer environments so that each site and customer integration is isolated from the others, limiting the potential impact of a compromise. A zero-trust approach should reinforce this architecture by requiring explicit authentication and authorization for connections between systems, regardless of their network location, and by applying least-privilege access wherever possible. Regular penetration testing of the corporate IT environment, including domain services, identity infrastructure, and endpoints, should be incorporated into the warehouse security program.
Physical and network access controls should be implemented together. Access to warehouse facilities, network rooms, communication cabinets, and operational areas should be restricted according to business need, with appropriate authentication, monitoring, and access logging. Network infrastructure should be hardened through controls such as switch port security, MAC-based access restrictions where appropriate, and IEEE 802.1X with EAP-TLS for strong device and user authentication. Network equipment should also be securely configured and regularly reviewed to ensure that unused interfaces, insecure management protocols, default credentials, and unnecessary services are disabled.
Web applications and their supporting infrastructure should be governed through a secure software development lifecycle (SSDLC), including security requirements, secure coding practices, code and dependency review, and application security assessment before deployment and throughout the application’s lifecycle. Third-party applications and components should be continuously monitored and updated, with a defined vulnerability and patch management process. This should explicitly include warehouse management systems (WMS), warehouse portals, APIs, and other applications that provide operational or customer-facing functionality.
Wireless technologies should be subject to dedicated security assessment and engineering. Radio-frequency surveys should be conducted to establish expected coverage, identify unauthorized or unexpected signals, validate the availability and protection of operational communications, and determine whether wireless deployments create unintended access paths into warehouse networks. Wireless security should be assessed not only from a connectivity perspective but also in terms of authentication, encryption, device provisioning, protocol exposure, interference resilience, and the potential impact of unauthorized devices.
Warehouse operational devices should be incorporated into the organization’s endpoint security and vulnerability management processes. Devices should receive security updates and firmware patches on a defined schedule, with accelerated remediation for critical vulnerabilities. Security assessments should be performed periodically to identify weaknesses in device configuration, applications, exposed services, and authentication mechanisms.
Personnel security should form an additional layer of the warehouse security architecture. In most industrial and ICS environments, getting inside means clearing background checks, holding relevant qualifications, or proving prior experience; the hiring process itself acts as a filter. A warehouse is different. Roles in sorting, packing, and courier work are hired quickly and in volume, and they typically require no prior expertise, certification, or specialized background at all. An ordinary person can walk in off the street, be hired within days, and immediately hold legitimate physical access to the facility. Therefore, a more restrictive and risk-based approach to hiring should be considered, particularly for roles that provide access to sensitive areas, operational systems, network infrastructure, or customer assets.
Ultimately, all of these measures serve the same objective: protecting the continuity and reliability of the warehouse as a whole. This matters because real warehouses handle food, medicines, machine parts, and the millions of ordinary things people and companies depend on every day. Protecting their journey means seeing the warehouse as it has actually become: a single digital system with doors, motors, shelving, and radio signals, and with entirely real consequences when it fails. And if the security program works, the customer never knows any of this happened. The unicorn simply arrives at the scheduled time.
If your warehouse operations rely on interconnected systems like these, we can help identify the gaps before an adversary does. Reach out to discuss a security assessment .
Operational Technology
The journey of a paper unicorn: adventures inside a modern warehouse
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
GReAT Ideas. Balalaika Edition
GReAT Ideas. Green Tea Edition
GReAT Ideas. Powered by SAS: malware attribution and next-gen IoT honeypots
GReAT Ideas. Powered by SAS: threat actors advance on new fronts
GReAT Ideas. Powered by SAS: threat hunting and new techniques
From the same authors
PhantomRPC: A new privilege escalation technique in Windows RPC
Anatomy of a Cyber World Global Report 2026
Yet another DCOM object for lateral movement
Turn me on, turn me off: Zigbee assessment in industrial environments
Goodbye, dark Telegram: Blocks are pushing the underground out
In the same category
Crypto wasted: BlueNoroff’s ghost mirage of funding and jobs
The Crypto Game of Lazarus APT: Investors vs. Zero-days
Grandoreiro, the global trojan with grandiose goals
SAS CTF and the many ways to persist a kernel shellcode on Windows 7
Ransomware in targeted attacks
卡巴斯基安全服务
把独角兽逼到角落
初始攻击向量
面向互联网的服务
Wi-Fi、蓝牙和其他无线电频道
便携式数据终端
对物流流程的影响(WMS 攻击)
确保独角兽的安全
想象一下,你从网上商城订购了一只小小的纸独角兽。你点击了“购买”,收到了令人愉快的通知,并期待着快递员明天送来包裹。如果独角兽晚到了一天,虽然有点恼人,但还不至于造成灾难性的后果:收到道歉信、折扣码——然后这件事就过去了。
现在让我们把一个迟来的独角兽产品乘以几十万份订单。
包裹开始被运往错误的城市。网站显示某件商品有库存,但对应的货位却是空的。传送带停止运转,箱子卡在楼层之间,货物堆积如山,却没有货运清单。卡车在大门前排起了长队,每一分钟的停机时间都会导致计划延误、工单增加、罚款和销售损失。
正是在这种规模下,仓库中的网络安全事件才会演变成影响整个企业的难题。现代仓库不再仅仅是一座摆放货架的大型建筑,而是一个紧密互联的混合系统:它包含网络应用程序、无线电频道和自动化工厂。这里的物理流程依赖于数据,而数据错误会造成非常严重的后果。例如,食品巨头 Morrisons 的仓库管理系统就曾遭受系统故障的影响;United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI) 2025 年的 10-K 表格年度报告也证实,其信息技术系统遭到未经授权的活动,影响了订单履行。最近,又有报道称,CEVA Logistics 在欧洲的八个仓库遭到网络攻击,导致客户配送数据泄露。
本文以一个订单在仓库中的流转为例,揭示了该操作的脆弱之处、流程的各个阶段、驱动该流程的系统以及攻击者可能入侵的环节。随后,我们构建了威胁模型:哪些环节面临风险、哪些环节可能造成风险,以及每项风险对业务的影响。接下来,我们分析了攻击者如何入侵系统,以及入侵仓库管理系统会造成哪些实际损失:订单无法发货、库存记录不可信以及运营中断。最后,我们提出了关于关键控制措施应部署在何处的建议。
现代仓库是一个由众多机器和人员组成的复杂流程,需要经过一系列环节才能完成,所有环节协同运作,以确保业务流程稳定运行,最终实现您的订单交付。该流程包含八个主要环节,如下图所示。
订单履行阶段
假设我们已经订购了纸独角兽,正在家里等待它的到来。让我们一起追踪订单的各个主要阶段,从它到达仓库到最终目的地。
首先,独角兽被装在大型卡车里运抵卸货区。司机通过平板电脑(开启自助服务模式)或户外显示屏等方式被分配到相应的卸货闸口,指示卡车的停放位置和卸货地点。即使在第一步,数字指令(屏幕上的闸口编号)就已经触发了实际操作。因此,错误的闸口分配会导致排队、延误卸货,甚至将货物送入错误的流程。
收货阶段,员工识别货物。他们使用便携式数据终端 (PDT) 扫描条形码,中央系统收到一条消息,表明该货物已到达仓库。从此刻起,这件货物同时以两种形式存在:一个是实际的箱子,另一个是信息系统中的记录。如果这两个版本出现差异,则所有后续流程都会继承该错误。
接下来是入库环节,货物被移入内部存储区。此时会用到两个新设备。首先,一台通过 Wi-Fi 连接到内部网络的热敏打印机会为每件货物打印内部标签。然后,员工、叉车或自动化系统会将货物运送到指定的货位,通常借助由 PLC 控制的升降机。这两个设备都可能成为重要的攻击入口:一个设备可以让攻击者入侵内部网络,而另一个设备则可以让他们控制电动机。
存储:独角兽随后进入存储区。许多配送中心采用多层夹层结构:在巨大的空间内设置数层金属货架。这种结构可以有效利用建筑物的高度,但同时也增加了对技术基础设施的管控难度。Wi-Fi 接入点、摄像头、交换机、电缆和传感器可能安装在高处,也可能深埋在货架之间。一条被遗忘在角落里的以太网电缆或配置错误的联网设备(接入点或交换机)可能成为入侵关键基础设施的便捷入口。
拣货环节:当客户下单后,如果货物已入库,则拣货环节立即开始;如果货物已卸货,则拣货环节立即开始。拣货终端(PDT)、工作站、指示灯或语音终端会引导员工前往相应的货位,拣选货物并将其移至下一环节。这些设备本身也可能成为攻击入口:一旦工作站或拣货终端被攻破,攻击者便可篡改拣货信息,从而误导员工前往错误的货位。在此环节,信息的速度和完整性都至关重要,任何篡改或干扰都可能导致订单错误、延误或后续环节出现问题。
分拣阶段,仓库开始更像一座工厂。箱子沿着传送带移动,经过不同的扫描仪、分流器和滑槽。分拣方案通常由专用服务器存储和管理,而PLC则负责控制机器并执行这些方案。例如,当仓库管理系统(WMS)决定我们的“独角兽”(货物)应该走A路线时,控制系统需要在正确的时间激活正确的分流器,有时甚至需要在几分之一秒内完成。
包装过程中,员工或机械臂会将货物放入最终包装箱,打印运输标签,有时还会测量包装的尺寸和重量。安全机制通常可防止机械臂离开控制区域并伤害附近的操作人员,但一旦失效,可能会对正在处理的包装造成物理损坏。
最后,在发货阶段,包裹被送往装卸区。自动导引车 (AGV) 和自主移动机器人 (AMR) 在仓库内搬运集装箱和托盘,而装卸区管理系统则协调卡车,将包裹运送到商店、分拣中心或直接送达客户手中。这些机器人本身也是潜在攻击者的目标。攻击者可以对 AGV 和 AMR 发起攻击,干扰其运行,例如影响其导航或阻止其到达目的地。
所有八个阶段都由仓库管理系统 (WMS) 协调。它看起来像一个大型 Web 应用程序,但实际上它更像是整个仓库的操作系统:它知道哪些货物存在、它们位于何处、由谁或什么负责搬运它们以及它们的下一步去向,并将员工、库存水平、存储地址、任务和订单关联起来。它还与外部进行数据交换:与 ERP 系统、运输平台、电商平台、暗店和外部承运商。
WMS 周围是一个更大的数字生态系统:身份服务、数据库、API、打印机、运营商系统、技术人员的笔记本电脑、视频监控、门禁控制、火灾和燃气报警器、电源以及楼宇管理系统 (BMS)。
这就是为什么实际上并不存在单一的“仓库网络”。正如我们所见,许多技术相互重叠——IT基础设施、OT系统、无线电、云服务、楼宇安防和自动化——层层叠加。仅仅依靠漏洞扫描器永远无法判断仓库是否安全。
确保仓库等环境的安全需要进行全面的安全评估,涵盖其所有互联系统。这包括识别每个系统中的漏洞,并了解如何将这些弱点组合成攻击者可以利用的攻击路径。但漏洞的重要性取决于它所暴露的信息以及能够访问它的人,因此在分析漏洞本身之前,我们需要了解攻击者在这个环境中究竟想要什么,因为在仓库中,攻击的影响范围远远超出数据本身。我们刚才追踪的一切——系统、设备以及操作人员——都是为了确保货物流通,而这条链条上各个环节的攻击都会对业务造成不同的影响。下图展示了仓库中存在的风险以及这些风险对业务的影响。左侧部分将这些风险归类到三个核心安全属性下:完整性、可用性和机密性。右侧部分则将每个属性与故障可能导致的业务后果对应起来。
首先面临风险的是数据完整性。库存数量、位置、订单和发货数据必须与现实世界保持同步。篡改记录会悄无声息地破坏整个流程的同步性,而且由于这八个阶段构成一个依赖链,早期一个被篡改的条目会被下游环节继承,最终导致缺货和错发货。在蓄意篡改的情况下,攻击者可以利用合法记录掩盖其行为,从而转移货物、释放库存,并代表平台供应商执行其他操作。数据完整性也是一个安全隐患:当人员或机器使用不再反映实际物理环境的信息时,数据故障可能演变为人身伤害事故。正因如此,数据完整性是唯一与所有五种后果(包括对人员的伤害)都相关的属性。
第二点是可用性,即仓库保持货物流通的能力。传送带、分拣机、标签打印设备或仓库管理系统 (WMS) 的故障都会导致订单无法发货。在以速度为导向的行业中,每停机一小时都意味着交货延迟和承诺无法兑现。勒索软件攻击甚至可能导致整个仓库瘫痪。其影响表现为运营中断、收入损失和声誉受损。
第三点是保密性。客户数据、业务记录和系统凭证都是极具价值的目标。一旦泄露,将导致法律责任和声誉损害,而凭证被盗往往会为进一步的攻击打开方便之门。如果仓库管理系统 (WMS) 与财务或企业资源计划 (ERP) 流程相连,风险还会延伸至资金盗窃。了解哪些信息存在风险,就能知道攻击者能从中获得什么;下一个问题是,谁有能力获取这些信息。威胁行为者所拥有的访问权限各不相同。例如,攻击者可能已通过身份验证并拥有特权,可能只有有限的物理或远程访问权限,也可能根本没有对环境的合法访问权限。根据他们与仓库的关系以及他们的访问级别,威胁行为者通常可以分为两类:
外部攻击者。指与仓库或组织没有任何合法关系,且未经授权访问的攻击者。根据其与环境的物理距离,外部攻击者可分为两类:远程攻击者。指攻击者在站点物理区域之外活动,通过组织暴露或可通过互联网访问的任何资源(包括网络服务、远程访问基础设施以及供应商、承运商和集成商使用的第三方连接)访问环境的攻击者。近距离攻击者。指攻击者虽然没有合法访问权限,但却已移动到站点本地可访问技术的物理范围内。例如,他们可能位于停车场、相邻单元或收货区。由于距离较近,他们无需拥有账户、徽章、雇佣关系或其他授权访问权限,即可与无线、无线电、蓝牙或其他短距离接口进行交互。
远程攻击。攻击者从站点物理区域之外发起攻击,通过组织暴露或可通过互联网访问的任何内容(包括网络服务、远程访问基础设施以及供应商、运营商和集成商使用的第三方连接)来访问环境。
近距离攻击者。攻击者虽然没有合法访问权限,但却进入了目标网站本地可访问技术的物理范围内。例如,他们可能身处停车场、邻近单元或送货区。由于距离较近,他们无需拥有账户、徽章、雇佣关系或其他授权访问权限,即可与无线、无线电、蓝牙或其他短距离接口进行交互。
内部人员。指拥有合法权限进入仓库、其系统或其信息的个人,无论有意或无意,都可能造成安全风险。这包括员工、管理员、操作员、承包商和临时工。
将这些威胁行为者及其访问权限与之前识别的风险、各系统中存在的漏洞、由此产生的攻击面以及它们之间潜在的攻击路径相结合,即可构建仓库环境的威胁模型。这有助于组织了解不同的系统和人员可能成为攻击目标的方式、各个弱点如何相互叠加,以及哪些方面最需要安全控制。
了解了哪些环节存在风险以及可能是谁在攻击,但最实际的问题仍然悬而未决:他们究竟如何入侵,以及一旦入侵后他们能走多远。下图展示了仓库的攻击面:攻击者可以入侵的每一个点,并按到达每个点所需的权限进行了分类。
仓库攻击面
左侧列出了上文讨论的各类攻击者,并根据其所处位置和已获得的访问权限进行区分。每类攻击者都通过不同的入口点进入系统,成功攻击的影响可能波及多个系统,从仓库管理系统 (WMS) 到机器人、分拣机和门禁系统 (PACS) 等运营技术 (OT) 系统。WMS 之所以被重点提及,是因为它是其中最重要的系统:它负责协调 OT 系统,因此攻破 WMS 会影响整个运营,而不仅仅是单个流程。
接下来,我们将介绍初始访问途径,即攻击者可以利用的入侵仓库环境的入口点。随后,我们将探讨攻击对物流流程本身的影响,重点关注仓库管理系统(WMS),因为WMS一旦遭到入侵,就会影响到所有依赖它的物流操作。
通过面向互联网的服务、第三方连接和企业网络进行远程访问,外部攻击者可以获得对仓库网络基础设施的立足点。这是一个已被广泛讨论的问题,并非本环境特有,因此我们在此仅将其作为一个攻击入口点提及,不再赘述。
Wi-Fi 连接手持设备、平板电脑、打印机、相机和工作站。蓝牙用于扫描仪、耳机和定位信标。Zigbee 和类似的低功耗协议用于照明、传感器和楼宇自动化系统,而 LoRaWAN 则用于远距离传输遥测数据。蜂窝网络为自助服务终端和承包商设备提供备用信道,而专有协议则用于控制工业控制面板和专用机械。
无线电波可以穿过窗户、大门、屋顶和薄薄的外板,因此,为接收和处理货物而建立的网络可以从停车场接入,并且使用定向天线,可以从更远的地方接入。
这种覆盖范围在两方面都很重要。它为外部攻击者提供了一个切入点,因为仅仅靠近就足以连接到 Wi-Fi 和低功耗协议,并由此在仓库网络中获得初步立足点。
然而,无线电不仅接入网络,它还直接连接到现场设备,并传输仓库运营的实时控制信息,因此可用性至关重要。如果数百台手持设备同时失去连接,拣货作业就会停止。如果AGV失去控制通道,安全措施可能是原地停止,而停止的机器可能会阻塞整条路线。
仓库本身的规模就是攻击面的一部分。一个物流仓库的面积可达数万平方米,货架层层叠叠,通道纵横交错。结构化布线沿着货架铺设,摄像头和接入点也安装在货架上,而墙插则隐藏在几个月未曾移动过的托盘后面。几乎所有这些都处于人们的视线范围之外。
这使得仓库人员能够获得普通办公室人员所不具备的能力:无需监管即可访问实时网络基础设施。拔掉天花板摄像头的电源会留下一个活动端口。货架后面的闲置插孔也会留下另一个活动端口。这两种操作都不需要任何工具、凭证,也不需要与任何会记录日志的系统进行交互。而且,由于摄像头或接入点与站点的其他部分位于同一网段,被入侵的端口没有被隔离,从而打开了通往网络核心的路径。
条形码扫描器在仓库中随处可见。它们是工作人员用来向系统报告货物移动情况和位置的主要工具,支持收货、拣货、包装和库存管理。典型的配置是手持扫描器与基站通信,基站再连接到工作站或其他业务系统。
这使得扫描仪以两种方式成为进入核心网络的入口点。
首先,通过条形码本身。由于扫描器充当连接主机的键盘,恶意构造的条形码或二维码在扫描时可以注入按键,从而使攻击者无需直接访问网络即可获得对主机的初步控制权。
其次,通过扫描仪的无线链路。在与客户互动期间,我们使用提供的此类设备测试平台发现,攻击者在有效范围内可以向连接的主机注入按键,并有可能在无需用户交互的情况下实现远程代码执行。这种攻击模式在多个供应商的产品中均有发现,例如受 CVE-2026-4272 影响的霍尼韦尔设备。
两种情况下,结果都是一样的:在仓库网络内部的主机上建立立足点。扫描器仅仅是入口点;这个立足点的意义在于主机在运行环境中的可信地位及其与核心系统的连接。
便携式数据终端 (PDT) 本质上是带有嵌入式条形码扫描器的普通安卓设备,由工作人员携带用于扫描商品;每次扫描的数据都会发送到专用应用程序,该应用程序再通过 API 将其转发到远程服务器。为了确保工作人员专注于工作,这些设备通常运行在自助服务终端模式下,用户只能使用该应用程序,无法与安卓系统的其他部分进行交互。
这种封锁正是攻击者想要突破的,突破封锁会将终端变成初始访问途径:逃离自助服务终端可能会暴露终端所连接的网络的 Wi-Fi 密码,或者允许安装恶意软件,从而使攻击者能够通过互联网远程访问网络。
仓库里配备了各种类型的打印机。除了用于打印文档的普通IT打印机外,还有专门的热敏打印机。这种小型设备利用打印头上的加热元件来制作标签、条形码和吊牌。正如我们之前提到的,这些打印机主要用于打印标签,这些标签通常包含条形码,在货物入库阶段贴在货物上。
本文重点关注移动热敏打印机:这种小型电池供电设备便于工作人员携带或佩戴。它们通常通过 Wi-Fi 连接到内部网络以接收打印指令,同时还支持蓝牙连接附近的设备。这种组合使它们成为入侵内部网络的潜在入口点。
某些型号的打印机,例如 Zebra ZQ630,支持多种接口,可以直接在设备上运行应用程序。在一次安全评估中,我们发现应用程序可以通过蓝牙上传和执行。攻击者可以利用配对配置错误,在蓝牙有效范围内绕过配对,上传恶意软件,从而通过打印机获得初始控制权。
一旦攻击者在网络中站稳脚跟,便可直接攻击物流流程本身:从仓库管理系统 (WMS) 到仓库基础设施,再到可编程逻辑控制器 (PLC) 及其驱动的机械设备。正如我们之前所见,所有运营技术 (OT) 系统和设备都是互联的,而 WMS 位于这条链条的顶端:它是所有其他流程读写数据的记录系统,因此一旦攻破 WMS,所有流程都会受到影响。正是这一点,以及它与特定环境的关联性,使得 WMS 成为本文的重点。
仓库管理系统 (WMS) 是一种软件平台,用于优化从货物入库到出库的整个仓库流程。它们提供实时库存可见性,并通过与众多仓库子系统和自动化设备(例如传送带、PLC、机器人、扫描仪和语音系统)集成,协调端到端的订单履行。典型的 WMS 包含收货、库存控制、订单管理、劳动力管理、发货和报表等模块。主要供应商包括 SAP EWM、Oracle Warehouse Management、Manhattan Active、Blue Yonder、Infor、Körber/HighJump、Microsoft 和 TECSYS。
为了更好地理解这一点的重要性,不妨回想一下我们之前提到的独角兽。从收货时扫描的那一刻起,它就不再仅仅是一个物理盒子,而是成为了仓库管理系统(WMS)中的一条记录。系统随后利用这条记录来决定它的存储位置、拣货时间、分拣方式以及发货地点。在此过程中使用的所有设备——收货时的PDT(手持终端)、上架时的打印机、拣货时的工作站、分拣时的传送带——实际上都在与WMS进行通信。WMS就像一条纽带,将所有八个阶段连接起来,而这正是它如此重要的原因。
由于现代仓库管理系统 (WMS) 平台通常基于 Web 且高度互联,因此除了 WMS 自身特有的缺陷外,它们还存在常见的 Web 和 API 漏洞。最近的一个例子是 Oracle E-Business Suite 套件中的 Oracle Warehouse Management 漏洞 CVE-2026-70774。Oracle 将其评为“高危”,并描述为一个易于利用的授权绕过漏洞。低权限的攻击者只需拥有网络访问权限即可攻破应用程序,通过允许未经授权创建、删除或修改关键数据,从而影响应用程序的完整性和可用性。
这样的漏洞看似普通的Web应用程序问题,但在仓库中后果却更为严重,因为WMS是记录系统。如果攻击者能够修改其数据,他们就可以篡改库存水平、货位、收货记录、拣货任务或发货信息,从而悄无声息地破坏仓库的数字孪生模型。由于这八个环节构成了一个依赖链,这种破坏并不会局限于内部:收货环节的篡改记录会被入库、拣货以及后续所有环节继承。实物货箱与其记录出现差异,而后续的每个流程都依赖于记录本身。
这种攻击最直接的方式是利用授权绕过漏洞,例如上文提到的Oracle漏洞。攻击者可以是已通过网络访问应用程序的外部人员,也可以是已持有合法账户的内部人员,例如权限较低的操作员或仓库管理员。
当此类漏洞与其他漏洞结合使用时,危险性会进一步增加。外部攻击者若能将远程代码执行与 SQL 注入相结合,便可生成发往任意地址的发货单,以及货物实际离开仓库所需的单据,伪造运单、收货或转运记录和登记簿,同时还能泄露客户姓名和收货地址等数据。实际上,货物可以凭着看似合法的单据发出。
这就是为什么普通的网络漏洞在仓库管理系统 (WMS) 中也至关重要。对于外部攻击者或试图越权访问的内部人员来说,访问控制失效可能打开通往其他仓库区域的通道,允许篡改其他工作人员的任务,允许未经授权的异常操作,或暴露管理 API。服务器端请求伪造漏洞可能迫使 WMS 服务器访问外部攻击者无法直接访问的资源,如果网络是扁平的或仅进行了形式上的分段,则该服务器可能反过来访问内部管理面板、云服务接口或靠近运营网络的系统,从而使单个网络漏洞成为 IT 和 OT 之间的桥梁。
针对仓库管理系统 (WMS) 的攻击并非总是直接针对应用程序本身。正如我们在追踪“独角兽”事件中所看到的,仓库中充斥着大量已获得可信访问权限的联网设备。手持终端通常都具备经过身份验证的 WMS API 访问权限,任何控制该终端的人(例如,通过逃离自助服务终端)都能获得该权限。根据设备的权限,这可能意味着确认从未发生的拣货、伪造收货操作、调整库存数量或将订单标记为已完成——仓库员工甚至可以利用这些权限来逃避其分配的任务。
当 WMS 与控制和自动化系统连接时,对 WMS 的访问可以扩展到物理操作,包括传送带、分拣系统、升降机、门和泵。
PLC(可编程逻辑控制器)将WMS(仓库管理系统)指令和传感器输入转换为物理动作。因此,一旦控制系统遭到破坏,就可能有人篡改这些动作。其影响可能很简单,例如分拣分流器将箱子送入错误的路径,传送带反复进入错误状态导致积压,或者伪造的传感器值导致生产线明明已满却被判定为空闲。
无论 WMS 系统如何遭到破坏,其造成的业务后果都是一样的:库存损坏、未经授权的发货和运营中断,最终都会以延迟或丢失的交货、包裹中错误的物品或个人地址泄露给陌生人等形式影响到客户。
我们一路追踪着安全漏洞,从网络应用和数据库、无线电频道和便携式数字终端(PDT)、打印机、传送带、机器人到装卸区,无一遗漏。由于仓库环境融合了信息技术(IT)、运营技术(OT)、无线、物理和人员等多种组件,安全控制措施应以单一、协调的安全架构形式实施,而非各自为政。网络分段应作为一项基础控制措施,明确区分企业IT、仓库OT、运营设备、管理网络和外部连接系统。分段还应扩展到各个设施和客户环境,确保每个站点和客户集成与其他站点和客户集成相互隔离,从而最大限度地降低安全漏洞可能造成的影响。零信任方法应强化这一架构,要求对系统间连接进行显式身份验证和授权,无论其网络位置如何,并尽可能应用最小权限原则。对企业IT环境(包括域服务、身份基础设施和终端)进行定期渗透测试,也应纳入仓库安全计划。
物理访问控制和网络访问控制应协同实施。应根据业务需求限制对仓库设施、网络机房、通信机柜和操作区域的访问,并配备相应的身份验证、监控和访问日志记录机制。应通过交换机端口安全、在适当情况下实施基于 MAC 地址的访问限制以及采用 EAP-TLS 的 IEEE 802.1X 等控制措施来强化网络基础设施,从而实现强大的设备和用户身份验证。此外,还应安全配置网络设备并定期进行审查,以确保禁用未使用的接口、不安全的管理协议、默认凭据和不必要的服务。
Web应用程序及其支持基础设施应遵循安全软件开发生命周期(SSDLC),包括安全需求、安全编码实践、代码和依赖项审查,以及部署前和整个应用程序生命周期内的应用程序安全评估。第三方应用程序和组件应持续监控和更新,并制定完善的漏洞和补丁管理流程。这应明确涵盖仓库管理系统(WMS)、仓库门户、API以及其他提供运营或面向客户功能的应用程序。
无线技术应接受专门的安全评估和工程设计。应开展射频勘测,以确定预期覆盖范围,识别未经授权或意外的信号,验证运行通信的可用性和安全性,并确定无线部署是否会在仓库网络中创建意外的接入路径。无线安全评估不仅应从连接性角度出发,还应从身份验证、加密、设备配置、协议暴露、抗干扰能力以及未经授权设备可能造成的影响等方面进行考量。
仓库运营设备应纳入组织的终端安全和漏洞管理流程。设备应按既定计划接收安全更新和固件补丁,并加快关键漏洞的修复速度。应定期进行安全评估,以识别设备配置、应用程序、暴露服务和身份验证机制中的薄弱环节。
人员安全应构成仓库安全架构的额外一层保障。在大多数工业和工业控制系统 (ICS) 环境中,进入仓库意味着通过背景调查、持有相关资质或证明过往经验;招聘流程本身就起到了筛选作用。但仓库的情况有所不同。分拣、包装和快递等岗位的招聘速度快、数量多,通常不需要任何专业知识、认证或特殊背景。普通人可以随时应聘,几天之内就能获得工作机会,并立即拥有合法的仓库访问权限。因此,对于能够接触敏感区域、运营系统、网络基础设施或客户资产的岗位,应考虑采用更加严格、基于风险的招聘方法。
归根结底,所有这些措施都服务于同一个目标:保障仓库整体的连续性和可靠性。这一点至关重要,因为真正的仓库处理的是食品、药品、机械零件以及人们和企业每天依赖的数百万种日常用品。保障货物运输安全意味着要正视仓库的现状:一个由门、电机、货架和无线电信号组成的单一数字化系统,一旦发生故障,就会造成切实的后果。如果安全方案有效,客户根本不会察觉到任何异常。货物会如期而至。
如果您的仓库运营依赖于此类互联系统,我们可以帮助您在攻击者之前发现安全漏洞。请联系我们,讨论安全评估事宜。
运营技术
纸独角兽的旅程:现代仓库里的奇遇
本网站使用 Akismet 来减少垃圾邮件。了解您的评论数据如何处理。
伟大的想法。巴拉莱卡版
绝妙创意。绿茶版
GReAT Ideas。由 SAS 提供支持:恶意软件归因和下一代物联网蜜罐
GReAT Ideas。由 SAS 提供支持:威胁行为者在新战线上不断扩张
GReAT Ideas。由 SAS 提供支持:威胁狩猎和新技术
出自同一作者之手
PhantomRPC:Windows RPC 中的一种新的权限提升技术
网络世界剖析:2026年全球报告
另一个用于横向移动的DCOM对象
开启我,关闭我:工业环境中的 Zigbee 评估
再见了,黑暗的Telegram:街区正在将地下空间挤出去
同一类别
加密货币投资浪费:BlueNoroff 的融资和就业幻影
拉撒路APT的加密货币博弈:投资者对抗零日漏洞
Grandoreiro,这个拥有宏大目标的全球特洛伊木马
SAS CTF 以及在 Windows 7 上持久化内核 shellcode 的多种方法
勒索软件在定向攻击中的作用