How we test VPNs

VPNs, or virtual private networks, are everywhere. If you’ve spent any time at all on YouTube, chances are you’ve seen an ad selling VPNs — there have been literally hundreds and thousands of them

We test and review VPNs so you don't have to — but what even is a VPN? The pitch is fairly simple: a VPN can mask your IP address and the identity of your device by routing your traffic through a remote server. Sites and services will see a different IP address to your own, and your internet service provider will only be able to see that you’re connected to a VPN server, rather than what sites you’re visiting. That means a VPN can be an important tool to keep your data private and secure, especially if you need to connect to an unsecured network. If you’re on public WiFi, for example, you can’t be sure what they’re tracking while you’re surfing the internet. With a VPN, there’s an additional layer of privacy — as long as you make sure the VPN provider can be trusted. But a VPN should not be the end of your security journey. Complex passwords, multifactor authentication and other security basics should be way higher on your checklist.

Another commonly advertised feature of VPNs is evading geoblocking techniques that companies use to prevent you from accessing certain content. Because you’re connecting to a remote server, a VPN can effectively change your location, allowing you to watch another country’s Netflix content or, say, watch Doctor Who on the UK-only BBC iPlayer. If you’re in the EU, it can allow you to access sites that are otherwise blocked due to the region’s strict data protection regulations. In the past, VPNs have even been used to skirt political firewalls put up to censor online access.

With many VPN makers making sweeping claims about military-grade encryption, digital invisibility and lightning-fast speeds, it’s tough to know what’s true and what’s marketing hype. That’s why Engadget started evaluating VPNs in 2023, looking at a number of factors such as security, speed, latency, usage limits and price. And while we don't expect to ramp up to more VPN testing until 2025, our best VPNs guide will continue to be the home base of our coverage. In the meantime, this is our current VPN testing methodology. 

Before we install or sign up for a service, our work begins by investigating each product’s lineage. We reference privacy policies, transparency reports and security audits that are publicly available, and note the security specs of each service. We also look into each company’s history of security incidents like data breaches. We rely on some pre-existing academic work from bodies like Consumer Reports, VPNalyzer and others when looking into security specs.

The next step in our review process involves a close look at what it’s like to get set up on the VPN. This involves looking at the various platforms each VPN supports, from certain web browsers to Smart TVs, to better understand how it can be used. We also look to see just how easy it is to get started on a new VPN. Some will automatically connect to a secure server every time you use your device, while others make you jump through hoops to stay signed in. We seek to understand how user friendly and intuitive these VPNs can be.

While many VPN providers promise that their service works across every device all the time, there is often small print to consider. We scan the terms of service for each of the company’s plans to understand what they are offering. Is there a limit to the number of devices a user can have connected at once? Is there a “fair use” limit that kicks in after a certain amount of traffic? Are advanced features multi-hop connections locked to only the priciest plans? We investigate all of these things so you don’t have to. We also conduct many of our more specific tests at the same time, which allows us to verify companies’ claims about simultaneous device use.

The first step in testing speed and latency is to ascertain the baseline of the connection before connecting to a VPN. We then use the “quick connect” feature on VPN apps to connect to the “fastest” provider available when testing internet speed. Once connected, we run internet speed tests by Ookla and ping tests with meter.net. When relaying these results, we will note the average speed and ping across these results, as well as the difference between that average and our baseline when not connected to a VPN.

We test all VPNs from within the US. To check that a service is able to effectively avoid geoblocking, we connect to a Canada-based server and attempt to access content on Netflix that is only available to users in that country. We then connect to a Hong Kong-based server to attempt to watch a news livestream on a YouTube channel that is exclusively available to users in that region. Finally, we conduct a gaming test by playing on servers in the United Kingdom. We’re looking to see not only if we can access the same content from all these servers, but also to test for lag or any other headaches that you could run into when using something.

A DNS leak happens when your device sends an unencrypted DNS query outside of your VPN service’s encrypted tunnel to an ISP’s DNS servers. This effectively nullifies the use of a VPN in the first place by allowing third parties to see and potentially track your browsing activity and IP address.

A WebRTC leak is an issue that can occur in modern web browsers that can similarly expose your personal IP address to a website you’re on. While you can avoid this by configuring your browser to not send such data, a VPN should be able to prevent this from happening.

To check for both of these issues, we use publicly available tools such as NordVPN’s IP address lookup tool and ExpressVPN’s leak tests before and after connecting to a VPN and make sure neither fault is occurring.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/vpn/how-we-test-vpns-175845189.html?src=rss

Members of ransomware gang Lockbit arrested by law enforcement

International law enforcement, led by the UK’s National Crime Agency, have disrupted ransomware gang Lockbit's operation. The group behind notable hacks against aircraft manufacturer Boeing, chip giant Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, sandwich chain Subway and thousands more had its site taken offline on Monday while authorities arrested major players behind the gang. "This site if now under the control of law enforcement," the website reads. According to malware repository Vx-underground, law enforcement took down at least 22 Lockbit-affiliated Tor sites.

"Through our close collaboration, we have hacked the hackers; taken control of their infrastructure, seized their source code, and obtained keys that will help victims decrypt their systems," National Crime Agency Director General, Graeme Biggar, said in a statement. “As of today, LockBit are locked out. We have damaged the capability and most notably, the credibility of a group that depended on secrecy and anonymity."

Lockbit admitted defeat, too. In a statement to Vx-underground, the group said "FBI pwned me." Operation Cronos, the name law enforcement used for their efforts, also resulted in the seizure of source code and other useful data related to Lockbit's operations. At the same time, authorities in Poland, Ukraine and the US arrested key members of the ransomware operation. There are sanctions out for two more Lockbit affiliates in Russia.

There's more good news for Lockbit victims, too: The operation obtained keys from Lockbit to create a decryption tool for victims to get their data back, according to US Attorney General Merrick Garland. The free decryptors can be found via the No More Ransom project

Since 2019 when Lockbit first entered the scene, it's squeezed victims for more than $120 million in ransomware payments, according to acting assistant AG Nicole Argentieri.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/members-of-ransomware-gang-lockbit-arrested-by-law-enforcement-144245076.html?src=rss

Defense Department alerts over 20,000 employees about email data breach

The Department of Defense sent a data breach notification letter to thousands of current and former employees alerting that their personal information had been leaked, DefenseScoop reported on Tuesday. While the department first detected the incident in early 2023, the notifications didn't begin to go out until earlier this month. More than 20,000 individuals appear to be affected by the breach. 

The letter explains that emails messages were "inadvertently exposed to the internet" by a Defense Department "service provider." The emails contained personally identifiable information. While the agency doesn't clarify what type of information, PII generally ranges from information like social security numbers, home address or other sensitive details. "While there is no evidence to suggest that your PII was misused, the department is notifying those individuals whose PII may have been breached as a result of this unfortunate situation," the letter says. It urges affected parties to sign up for identity theft protection.

According to TechCrunch, the breach stems from an unsecured cloud email server that leaked sensitive emails onto the web. The Microsoft server, which was likely misconfigured, could be accessed from the internet without so much as a password. 

"As a matter of practice and operations security, we do not comment on the status of our networks and systems. The affected server was identified and removed from public access on February 20, 2023, and the vendor has resolved the issues that resulted in the exposure," the Department of Defense said in a statement. "DOD continues to engage with the service provider on improving cyber event prevention and detection. Notification to affected individuals is ongoing."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/defense-department-alerts-over-20000-employees-about-email-data-breach-164528056.html?src=rss

HIPAA protects health data privacy, but not in the ways most people think

The “P” in HIPAA doesn’t stand for privacy. It’s one of the first things a lot of experts will say when asked to clear up any misconceptions about the health data law. Instead, it stands for portability — it’s called the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act —and describes how information can be transferred between providers. With misinterpretations of HIPAA starting with just its name, misunderstandings of what the law actually does greatly impact our ability to recognize how the kinds of data do and don't fall under its scope. That’s especially true as a growing number of consumer tech devices and services gather troves of information related to our health.

We often consider HIPAA a piece of consumer data privacy legislation because it did direct the Department of Health and Human Services to come up with certain security provisions, like breach notification regulations and a health privacy rule for protecting individually identifiable information. But when HIPAA went into effect in the 1990s, its primary aim was improving how providers worked with insurance companies. Put simply, “people think HIPAA covers more than it actually does,” said Daniel Solove, professor at George Washington University and CEO of privacy training firm TeachPrivacy.

HIPAA has two big restrictions in scope: a limited set of covered entities, and limited set of covered data, according to Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, DC managing director of the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Covered entities include healthcare providers like doctors and health plans like health insurance companies. The covered data refers to medical records and other individually identifiable health information used by those covered entities. Under HIPAA, your general practitioner can't sell data related to your vaccination status to an ad firm, but a fitness app (which wouldn't be a covered entity) that tracks your steps and heart rate (which aren't considered covered data) absolutely can.

“What HIPAA covers, is information that relates to health care or payment for health care, and sort of any piece of identifiable information that’s in that file,” Solove said. It doesn’t cover any health information shared with your employer or school, like if you turn in a sick note, but it does protect your doctor from sharing more details about your diagnosis if they call to verify.

A lot has changed in the nearly 30 years since HIPAA went into effect, though. The legislators behind HIPAA didn’t anticipate how much data we would be sharing about ourselves today, much of which can be considered personally identifiable. So, that information doesn’t fall under its scope. “When HIPAA was designed, nobody really anticipated what the world was going to look like,” Lee Tien, senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation said. It’s not badly designed, HIPAA just can’t keep up with the state we’re in today. “You're sharing data all the time with other people who are not doctors or who are not the insurance company,” said Tien.

Think of all the data collected about us on the daily that could provide insight into our health. Noom tracks your diet. Peloton knows your activity levels. Calm sees you when you’re sleeping. Medisafe knows your pill schedule. Betterhelp knows what mental health conditions you might have, and less than a year ago was banned by the FTC from disclosing that information to advertisers. The list goes on, and much of it can be used to sell dietary supplements or sleep aids or whatever else. “Health data could be almost limitless,” so if HIPAA didn’t have a limited scope of covered entities, the law would be limitless, too, Solove said.

Not to mention the amount of inferences that firms can make about our health based on other data. An infamous 2012 New York Times investigation detailed how just by someone’s online searches and purchases, Target can figure out that they’re pregnant. HIPAA may not protect your medical information from being viewed by law enforcement officers. Even without a warrant, cops can get your records just by saying that you’re a suspect (or victim) of a crime. Police have used pharmacies to gather medical data about suspects, but other types of data like location information can provide sensitive details, too. For example, it can show that you went to a specific clinic to receive care. Because of these inferences, laws like HIPAA won’t necessarily stop law enforcement from prosecuting someone based on their healthcare decision.

Today, state-specific laws crop up across the US to help target some of the health data privacy gaps that HIPAA doesn’t cover. This means going beyond just medical files and healthcare providers to encompass more of people’s health data footprint. It varies between states, like in California which provides options to charge anyone who negligently discloses medical information or some additional breach protections for consumers based in Pennsylvania, but Washington state recently passed a law specifically targeting HIPAA’s gaps.

Washington State’s My Health My Data Act, passed last year, aims to “protect personal health data that falls outside the ambit of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act,” according to a press release from Washington’s Office of the Attorney General. Any entity that conducts business in the state of Washington and deals with personal information that identifies a consumer’s past, present or future physical or mental health status must comply with the act’s privacy protections. Those provisions include the right not to have your health data sold without your permission and having health data deleted via written request. Under this law, unlike HIPAA, an app tracking someone’s drug dosage and schedule or the inferences made by Target about pregnancy would be covered.

My Health My Data is still rolling out, so we’ll have to wait and see how the law impacts national health data privacy protections. Still, it’s already sparking copycat laws in states like Vermont.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/hipaa-protects-health-data-privacy-but-not-in-the-ways-most-people-think-184026402.html?src=rss

US officials believe Chinese hackers lurk in critical infrastructure

Chinese hackers have been hiding in US critical infrastructure for at least the last five years, CNN reported on Wednesday. By lurking behind the scenes of transportation, water, electricity and other important systems, the hackers have the opportunity to strike whenever they deem the time is right, US officials say in a 50-page report on the subject. A public version of the full document is set to be released next week. 

Officials from the FBI and the Justice Department previously issued a court order to update software that could succumb to Chinese hacking. The effort aimed to fight Chinese hacking by remotely disabling certain affected systems. According to the department, it was able to remove code from hundreds of internet routers that could have let Chinese hackers in. 

The forthcoming report reveals just how long this has been going on, and how bad a potential cyberattack could be. It's set to detail hackers' techniques, while providing guidance to companies behind critical infrastructure systems on how to find Chinese hackers in their systems. There are no signs in the report that hackers have acted maliciously against US infrastructure yet. 

Hackers started by getting into IT systems and, from there, working their way into more important tech behind US infrastructure. They also broke into security cameras at some of the facilities and, in another case, accessed water treatment plants, the report says. 

Last week, FBI director Christopher Wray warned Congress that Chinese hackers were preparing to wreck havoc on US critical infrastructure systems. "Cyber threats to our critical infrastructure represent real world threats to our physical safety," he said at the hearing.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/us-officials-believe-chinese-hackers-lurk-in-critical-infrastructure-150319581.html?src=rss

How security experts unravel ransomware

Hackers use ransomware to go after every industry, charging as much money as they can to return access to a victim's files. It’s a lucrative business to be in. In the first six months of 2023, ransomware gangs bilked $449 million from their targets, even though most governments advise against paying ransoms. Increasingly, security professionals are coming together with law enforcement to provide free decryption tools — freeing locked files and eliminating the temptation for victims to pony up.

There are a couple main ways that ransomware decryptors go about coming up with tools: reverse engineering for mistakes, working with law enforcement and gathering publicly available encryption keys. The length of the process varies depending on how complex the code is, but it usually requires information on the encrypted files, unencrypted versions of the files and server information from the hacking group. “Just having the output encrypted file is usually useless. You need the sample itself, the executable file,” said Jakub Kroustek, malware research director at antivirus business Avast. It’s not easy, but does pay dividends to the impacted victims when it works.

First, we have to understand how encryption works. For a very basic example, let's say a piece of data might have started as a cognizable sentence, but appears like "J qsfgfs dbut up epht" once it's been encrypted. If we know that one of the unencrypted words in "J qsfgfs dbut up epht" is supposed to be "cats," we can start to determine what pattern was applied to the original text to get the encrypted result. In this case, it's just the standard English alphabet with each letter moved forward one place: A becomes B, B becomes C, and "I prefer cats to dogs" becomes the string of nonsense above. It’s much more complex for the sorts of encryption used by ransomware gangs, but the principle remains the same. The pattern of encryption is also known as the 'key', and by deducing the key, researchers can create a tool that can decrypt the files.

Some forms of encryption, like the Advanced Encryption Standard of 128, 192 or 256 bit keys, are virtually unbreakable. At its most advanced level, bits of unencrypted "plaintext" data, divided into chunks called "blocks," are put through 14 rounds of transformation, and then output in their encrypted — or "ciphertext" — form. “We don’t have the quantum computing technology yet that can break encryption technology,” said Jon Clay, vice president of threat intelligence at security software company Trend Micro. But luckily for victims, hackers don’t always use strong methods like AES to encrypt files.

While some cryptographic schemes are virtually uncrackable it’s a difficult science to perfect, and inexperienced hackers will likely make mistakes. If the hackers don’t apply a standard scheme, like AES, and instead opt to build their own, the researchers can then dig around for errors. Why would they do this? Mostly ego. “They want to do something themselves because they like it or they think it's better for speed purposes,” Jornt van der Wiel, a cybersecurity researcher at Kaspersky, said.

For example, here’s how Kaspersky decrypted the Yanluowang ransomware strain. It was a targeted strain aimed at specific companies, with an unknown list of victims. Yanluowang used the Sosemanuk stream cipher to encrypt data: a free-for-use process that encrypts the plaintext file one digit at a time. Then, it encrypted the key using an RSA algorithm, another type of encryption standard. But there was a flaw in the pattern. The researchers were able to compare the plaintext to the encrypted version, as explained above, and reverse engineer a decryption tool now made available for free. In fact, there are tons that have already been cracked by the No More Ransom project.

Ransomware decryptors will use their knowledge of software engineering and cryptography to get the ransomware key and, from there, create a decryption tool, according to Kroustek. More advanced cryptographic processes may require either brute forcing, or making educated guesses based on the information available. Sometimes hackers use a pseudo-random number generator to create the key. A true RNG will be random, duh, but that means it won’t be easily predicted. A pseudo-RNG, as explained by van der Wiel, may rely on an existing pattern in order to appear random when it's actually not — the pattern might be based on the time it was created, for example. If researchers know a portion of that, they can try different time values until they deduce the key.

But getting that key often relies on working with law enforcement to get more information about how the hacking groups work. If researchers are able to get the hacker’s IP address, they can request the local police to seize servers and get a memory dump of their contents. Or, if hackers have used a proxy server to obscure their location, police might use traffic analyzers like NetFlow to determine where the traffic goes and get the information from there, according to van der Wiel. The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime makes this possible across international borders because it lets police request an image of a server in another country urgently while they wait for the official request to go through.

The server provides information on the hacker’s activities, like who they might be targeting or their process for extorting a ransom. This can tell ransomware decryptors the process the hackers went through in order to encrypt the data, details about the encryption key or access to files that can help them reverse engineer the process. The researchers comb through the server logs for details in the same way you may help your friend dig up details on their Tinder date to make sure they’re legit, looking for clues or details about malicious patterns that can help suss out true intentions. Researchers may, for example, discover part of the plaintext file to compare to the encrypted file to begin the process of reverse engineering the key, or maybe they’ll find parts of the pseudo-RNG that can begin to explain the encryption pattern.

Working with law enforcement helped Cisco Talos create a decryption tool for the Babuk Tortilla ransomware. This version of ransomware targeted healthcare, manufacturing and national infrastructure, encrypting victims' devices and deleting valuable backups. Avast had already created a generic Babuk decryptor, but the Tortilla strain proved difficult to crack. The Dutch Police and Cisco Talos worked together to apprehend the person behind the strain, and gained access to the Tortilla decryptor in the process.

But often the easiest way to come up with these decryption tools stems from the ransomware gangs themselves. Maybe they’re retiring, or just feeling generous, but attackers will sometimes publicly release their encryption key. Security experts can then use the key to make a decryption tool and release that for victims to use going forward.

Generally, experts can’t share a lot about the process without giving ransomware gangs a leg up. If they divulge common mistakes, hackers can use that to easily improve their next ransomware attempts. If researchers tell us what encrypted files they’re working on now, gangs will know they’re on to them. But the best way to avoid paying is to be proactive. “If you’ve done a good job of backing up your data, you have a much higher opportunity to not have to pay,” said Clay.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/how-security-experts-unravel-ransomware-184531451.html?src=rss

Fallout from the Fulton County cyberattack continues, key systems still down

Key systems in Fulton County, Georgia have been offline since last week when a 'cyber incident' hit government systems. While the county has tried its best to continue operations as normal, phone lines, court systems, property records and more all went down. The county has not yet confirmed details of the cyber incident, such as what group could be behind it or motivations for the attack. As of Tuesday, there did not appear to be a data breach, according to Fulton County Board of Commissioners Chairman Robb Pitts.

Fulton County made headlines in August as the place where prosecutors chose to bring election interference charges against former president Donald Trump. But don't worry, officials assured the public that the case had not been impacted by the attack. “All material related to the election case is kept in a separate, highly secure system that was not hacked and is designed to make any unauthorized access extremely difficult if not impossible,” said Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.

Despite this, Fulton County election systems did not appear to be the target of the attack. While Fulton County's Department of Registration and Elections went down, “there is no indication that this event is related to the election process,” Fulton County said in a statement. “In an abundance of caution, Fulton County and the (Georgia) Secretary of State’s respective technology systems were isolated from one another as part of the response efforts.”

So far, the impact of the attack ranges widely from delays getting marriage certificates to disrupted court hearings. On Wednesday, a miscommunication during the outage even let a murder suspect out of custody. A manhunt continues after officials mistakenly released the suspect while being transferred between Clayton County and Fulton County for a hearing.

The county has not released information on when it expects systems to be fully restored, but it is working with law enforcement on recovery efforts. In the meantime, while constituents have trouble reaching certain government services, Fulton County put out a list of contact information for impacted departments. Fulton County also released a full list of impacted systems.

While the government IT outages occurred, a local student also hacked into Fulton County Schools systems, according to StateScoop on Friday. The school system is still determining if any personal information may have been breached, but most services came back online by Monday.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/fallout-from-the-fulton-county-cyberattack-continues-key-systems-still-down-161505036.html?src=rss

LoanDepot discloses that hackers breached personal data of 16 million customers

As mortgage lender LoanDepot continues recovery efforts from a ransomware attack, it revealed on Monday that hackers stole data from more than 16 million customers. A Securities and Exchange Commission filing from the mortgage lender did not detail what kind of information the hackers breached, only that "an unauthorized third party gained access to sensitive personal information."

LoanDepot first revealed it has fallen victim to attack on January 8. The company took some IT systems offline, but it faced a slow recovery. Customers took to social media to complain payment issues, struggles to access their accounts and even trouble closing deals on mortgages. By Friday, about two weeks since LoanDepot first came forward about the incident, systems like customer portals and other internal sites returned back online. It appears that LoanDepot fell victim to a ransomware attack, where hackers demand money in exchange for access or information, according to reporting from TechCrunch.

"Unfortunately, we live in a world where these types of attacks are increasingly frequent and sophisticated, and our industry has not been spared. We sincerely regret any impact to our customers,” LoanDepot CEO Frank Martell said in a statement.

Still, the true aftermath of the attack is still coming to light. LoanDepot did not provide additional comment, or explain what types of sensitive information may have been revealed. It did say it would offer free credit monitoring and identity protection services to impacted customers. Notably, three other major financial institutions — Mr. Cooper Group, Fidelity National Financial, First American Financial — have also been hit by cyberattacks in recent months. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/loandepot-discloses-that-hackers-breached-personal-data-of-16-million-customers-172702402.html?src=rss

Carnegie Mellon reveals it was hit by a cyberattack over the summer

A cyberattack hit Carnegie Mellon University last summer and the attackers breached personal data, according to a disclosure from the school last week. The Pittsburgh-based university known for its top tech and computer science programs said on Friday that the attack impacted 7,300 students, employees, contractors and other affiliates.

"There is no evidence of fraud or inappropriate use of the information from those files," a statement from CMU said. Still, the attackers likely accessed and copied data that included names, social security numbers and birth dates. With help from law enforcement, CMU disabled any access to that copied data, according to the school.

It started on August 25 when unauthorized users accessed CMU's systems. The university says it began recovery processes and an investigation into the incident that included months later in December, while notifications to impacted parties began to go out last week. Impacted parties will receive credit monitoring services to mitigate further damage.

CMU did not respond to a request for comment and further information about the attack by the time of publication.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/carnegie-mellon-reveals-it-was-hit-by-a-cyberattack-over-the-summer-155618462.html?src=rss

Apparel supplier for North Face, Vans admits its cyberattack led to a data breach of 35 million customers

Major apparel supplier VF Corp followed up on its December cyberattack disclosure, with its latest Securities and Exchange Commission form admitting to a data breach impacting up to 35.5 million customers. That means if you've purchased from its major brands like Vans, North Face, Timberland, Dickies and more, you may have been impacted. But VF Corp still insists that the incident won't hurt its financial performance.

Initially, VF Corp warned customers that the cyberattack it experienced in December could have an impact on its holiday order fulfillment. The company said "unauthorized occurrences" on its IT systems caused operational disruptions, and the attackers likely stole personal information. Now, it's come out just how widespread the damage from the attack could be. 

VF Corp did not respond to a request for comment clarifying what type of data the hackers stole. In the SEC filing, however, the company said it did not collect consumer social security numbers, bank account information or payment card information, and that there is no evidence the hackers stole passwords. It also said that the unauthorized users were "ejected" from its systems by December 15, after being discovered two days earlier. 

"Since the filing of the Original Report, VF has substantially restored the IT systems and data that were impacted by the cyber incident, but continues to work through minor operational impacts," the latest filing states. VF still has not confirmed who was behind the attack.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apparel-supplier-for-north-face-vans-admits-its-cyberattack-led-to-a-data-breach-of-35-million-customers-153411926.html?src=rss