AI is changing the cybersecurity field, both on the offensive and defensive sides. We surveyed over 1,500 cybersecurity professionals from around the world to uncover their attitudes, understanding, and priorities when it comes to AI cybersecurity in 2025. Our full report, unearthing some telling trends, is available now.  

Download the full report to explore these findings in depth

‍

It is clear that security professionals know their field is changing fast, and that AI will continue to influence those changes. Our survey results show that they are aware that the rise of AI will require them to adopt new tools and learn to use them effectively. Still, they aren’t always certain about how to plan for the future, or what to invest in.

The top priorities of security stakeholders for improving their defenses against AI-powered threats include augmenting their existing tool stacks with AI-powered solutions and improving integration among their security tools.

Increasing cybersecurity staff

As was also the case last year, security stakeholders are less interested in hiring additional staff than in adding new AI-powered tools onto their existing security stacks, with only with 11% (and only 8% of executives) planning to increase cybersecurity staff in 2025.

This suggests that leaders are looking for new methods to overcome talent resource shortages.

Adding AI-powered security tools to supplement existing solutions

Executives are particularly enthusiastic about adopting AI-driven tools. Within that goal, there is consensus about the qualities cyber professionals are looking for when purchasing new security capabilities or replacing existing products.

• 87% of survey respondents prefer solutions that are part of a broader platform over individual point products

These results are similar to last year’s, where again, almost nine out of ten agreed that a platform-oriented security solution was more effective at stopping cyber threats than a collection of individual products.

• 88% of survey respondents agree that the use of AI within the security stack is critical to freeing up time for security teams to become more proactive, compared to reactive

AI itself can contribute to this shift from reactive to proactive security, improving risk prioritization and automating preventative strategies like Attack Surface Management (ASM) and proactive exposure management.

• 84% of survey respondents prefer defensive AI solutions that do not require the organization’s data to be shared externally

This preference may reflect increasing attention to the data privacy and security risks posed by generative AI (gen AI) adoption. It may also reflect growing awareness of data residency requirements and other restrictions that regulators are imposing.

Improving cybersecurity awareness training for end users

Based on the survey results, practitioners in SecOps are more interested in improving security awareness training.

This goal is not necessarily mutually exclusive from the addition of AI tools. For example, teams can leverage AI to build more effective security awareness training programs, and as gen AI tools are adopted, users will need to be taught about data privacy and associated security risks.

Looking towards the future

One conclusion we can draw from the attitudinal shifts from last year’s survey to this year’s: while hiring more security staff might be a nice-to-have, implementing AI-powered tools so that existing employees can work smarter is increasingly viewed as a must-have.

However, trending goals are not just about managing resources, whether headcount or AI investments, to keep up with workloads. Existing end users must also be trained to follow safe practices while using established and newly adopted tools.

Security professionals, including executives, SecOps, and every role in between, continue to shift their identified challenges and priorities as they gear up for the coming year in the Era of AI.

Download the full report to explore these findings in depth

The full report for Darktrace’s State of AI Cybersecurity is out now. Download the paper to dig deeper into these trends, and see how results differ by industry, region, organization size, and job title.  

‍

The evolution of supply chain attacks

Supply chain attacks are becoming increasingly sophisticated. As network defenses improve, threat actors continuously adapt and refine their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to achieve their goals. In recent years, this has led to a rise in the exploitation of trusted services and software, including legitimate browser extensions. Exploitation of these extensions can provide adversaries with a stealthy means to infiltrate target networks and access high-value accounts undetected.

A notable example of this trend was the compromise of the Cyberhaven Chrome extension at the end of 2024. This incident appeared to be part of a broader campaign targeting multiple Chrome browser extensions, highlighting the evolving nature of supply chain attacks [1].

What is Cyberhaven?

Cyberhaven, a US-based data security organization, experienced a security breach on December 24, 2024, when a phishing attack reportedly compromised one of their employee's credentials [2]. This allowed attackers to publish a malicious version of the Cyberhaven Chrome extension, which exfiltrated cookies and authenticated sessions from targeted websites. The malicious extension was active from December 25 to December 26 – a time when most businesses and employees were out of office and enjoying the festive period, a fact not lost on threat actors. The attackers, likely a well-organized and financially motivated group, compromised more than 30 additional Chrome extensions, affecting more than 2.6 million users [3]. They used sophisticated phishing techniques to authorize malicious OAuth applications, bypassing traditional security measures and exploiting vulnerabilities in OAuth authorizations. The primary motive appeared to be financial gain, targeting high-value platforms like social media advertising and AI services [4].

In late December 2024, multiple Darktrace customers were compromised via the Cyberhaven Chrome extension; this blog will primarily focus on Darktrace / NETWORK detections from one affected customer.

Darktrace’s coverage of Cyberhaven compromises

On December 26, 2024, Darktrace identified a series of suspicious activities across multiple customer environments, uncovering a structured attack sequence that progressed from initial intrusion to privilege escalation and data exfiltration. The attack was distributed through a malicious update to the Cyberhaven Chrome extension [2]. The malicious update established a foothold in customer environments almost immediately, leading to further anomalies.

As with other Chrome browser extensions, Cyberhaven Chrome extensions were updated automatically with no user interaction required. However, in this instance, the automatic update included a malicious version which was deployed to customer environments. This almost immediately introduced unauthorized activity, allowing attackers to establish a foothold in customer networks. The update allowed attackers to execute their objectives in the background, undetected by traditional security tools that rely on known indicators of compromise (IoCS) rather than identifying anomalies.

While multiple customer devices were seen connecting to cyberhaven[.]io, a legitimate Cyberhaven domain, Darktrace detected persistent beaconing behavior to cyberhavenext[.]pro, which appeared to be attempting to masquerade as another legitimate Cyberhaven domain. Darktrace recognized this activity as unusual, triggering several model alerts in Darktrace / NETWORK to highlight the persistent outbound connections to the suspicious domain.

Further analysis of external connectivity patterns indicated  an increase in anomalous HTTP requests alongside this beaconing activity. Multiple open-source intelligence (OSINT) sources also suggest that the cyberhavenext[.]pro endpoint is associated with malicious activities [5].

Analysis using Darktrace’s Advanced Search revealed that some of these connections were directed to the suspicious external IP address 149.28.124[.]84. Further investigation confirmed that the IP correlated with two SSL hostnames, including the malicious cyberhavenext[.]pro, further reinforcing its connection to the attack infrastructure.

Between December 23 and December 27, Darktrace observed sustained beaconing-like activity from affected devices on the customer’s network.

Darktrace observed 27 unique devices connecting to the malicious command-and-control (C2) infrastructure as far back as December 3. While most connections were brief, they represented an entry point for malicious activity. Over a two-day period, two devices transmitted 5.57 GiB of incoming data and 859.37 MiB of outgoing data, generating over 3 million log events across SSL, HTTP, and connection data.

Subsequent analysis identified a significant increase in unauthorized data transfers to the aforementioned 149.28.124[.]84 IP on another customer network, highlighting the potential broader impact of this compromise. The volume and frequency of these transfers suggested that attackers were leveraging automated data collection techniques, further underscoring the sophistication of the attack.

External research suggested that once active, the Cyberhaven extension would begin silently collecting session cookies and authentication tokens, specifically targeting high-value accounts such as Facebook Ads accounts [4]. Darktrace’s analysis of another affected customer noted many HTTP POST connections directed to a specific URI ("ai-cyberhaven"), while GET requests contained varying URIs prefixed with "/php/urlblock?args=AAAh....--redirect." This activity indicated an exfiltration mechanism, consistent with techniques observed in other compromised Chrome extensions. By compromising session cookies, attackers could potentially gain administrative access to connected accounts, further escalating their privileges [4].

Conclusion

This incident highlights the importance of monitoring not just endpoint security, but also cloud and browser-based security solutions, as attackers increasingly target these trusted and oft overlooked vectors.

Ultimately, by focusing on anomaly detection and behavioral analysis rather than static signatures and lists of ‘known bads’, Darktrace was able to successfully detect devices affected by the Cyberhaven Chrome browser extension compromise, by identifying activity that would likely have been considered legitimate and benign by traditional security solutions.

This compromise also serves as a reminder that supply chain attacks are not limited to traditional software vendors. Browser extensions, cloud-based applications, and SaaS services are equally vulnerable, as evidenced by Darktrace's detection of Balada Injector malware exploiting WordPress vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized network access [6]. Therefore, increased targeting of browser-based security tools, and a greater exploitation of OAuth and session hijacking techniques are to be expected. Attackers will undoubtedly refine their methods to infiltrate legitimate vendors and distribute malicious updates through trusted channels. By staying informed, vigilant, and proactive, organizations can mitigate exposure to evolving supply chain threats and safeguard their critical assets from emerging browser-based attack techniques.

Credit to Rajendra Rushanth (Cyber Analyst) Justin Torres (Senior Cyber Analyst) and Ryan Traill (Analyst Content Lead)

Appendices

Darktrace Model Detections

·       Compromise / Beaconing Activity To External Rare (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Beacon for 4 Days (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / HTTP Beaconing to Rare Destination (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Device / Suspicious Domain (AP: C2 Comms, AP: Tooling)

·       Compromise / Sustained TCP Beaconing Activity To Rare Endpoint (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Rare External from Server (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Connection / Multiple Failed Connections to Rare Endpoint (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Anomalous External Activity from Critical Network Device (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Slow Beaconing Activity To External Rare (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Repeating Connections Over 4 Days (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Connection / Multiple HTTP POSTs to Rare Hostname (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Anomalous Server Activity / Outgoing from Server (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / High Volume of Connections with Beacon Score (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Large Number of Suspicious Failed Connections (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Email Nexus / Connection to Hijacked Correspondent Link

·       Compromise / Suspicious TLS Beaconing To Rare External (AP: C2 Comms)

·       Compromise / Quick and Regular Windows HTTP Beaconing (AP: C2 Comms)

List of IoCs

IoC - Type - Description + Confidence

cyberhavenext[.]pro - Hostname - Used for C2 communications and data exfiltration (cookies and session tokens)

149.28.124[.]84 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

45.76.225[.]148 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

136.244.115[.]219 - IP - Associated with malicious infrastructure

MITRE ATT&CK Mapping

Tactic – Technique – Sub-Technique

INITIAL ACCESS - T1176 - Browser Extensions

EXECUTION - T1204.002 - Malicious Browser Extensions

PERSISTENCE - T1176 - Browser Extensions

COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1071.001 - Web Protocols

COMMAND AND CONTROL - T1001 - Data Obfuscation

CREDENTIAL ACCESS - T1539 - Steal Web Session Cookie

DISCOVERY - T1518.001 - Security Software Discovery

LATERAL MOVEMENT - T1557.003 - Man-in-the-Browser

EXFILTRATION - T1041 - Exfiltration Over C2 Channel

EXFILTRATION - T1567.002 - Exfiltration to Cloud Storage

IMPACT - T1583.006 - Session Hijacking

References

[1] https://thehackernews.com/2024/12/16-chrome-extensions-hacked-exposing.html

[2] https://www.cyberhaven.com/blog/cyberhavens-chrome-extension-security-incident-and-what-were-doing-about-it

[3] https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/chrome-browser-extensions-hijacked/

[4] https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/28/24330758/chrome-extension-cyberhaven-hijack-phishing-cyberattack-facebook-ads-authentication-theft

[5] https://www.virustotal.com/gui/domain/cyberhavenext.pro

[6] https://darktrace.com/blog/balada-injector-darktraces-investigation-into-the-malware-exploiting-wordpress-vulnerabilities