Loading story…
Researchers from KU Leuven and the University of Birmingham have demonstrated new physical attacks that undermine the security guarantees of trusted execution environments (TEEs) provided by Intel and AMD processors. These TEEs, specifically Intel's Software Guard Extensions (SGX) and AMD's Secure Encrypted Virtualization with Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP), are widely used in cloud computing to protect sensitive data and operations from attackers, even those with administrative access to the underlying infrastructure. The attacks, named Battering RAM and Wiretap, exploit vulnerabilities in the deterministic encryption schemes used by both SGX and SEV-SNP. By inserting a low-cost hardware interposer—costing as little as $50—between the CPU and DDR4 memory modules, attackers can observe and manipulate encrypted data in real time. The Battering RAM attack allows adversaries to not only view but also modify encrypted data, enabling the introduction of software backdoors or data corruption within protected enclaves. The Wiretap attack, on the other hand, enables passive decryption of sensitive data without detection. These attacks are particularly concerning for cloud environments, where confidential computing workloads rely on hardware-level memory encryption to secure data from potentially untrusted cloud service providers. The interposer operates transparently during system startup, passing all trust checks, and can later be activated to redirect protected memory addresses to attacker-controlled locations. On Intel platforms, Battering RAM enables arbitrary read and write access to enclave memory, while on AMD systems, it bypasses recent firmware mitigations and allows the introduction of arbitrary backdoors into virtual machines. The attacks highlight fundamental limitations in the current design of hardware-based memory encryption, especially when deterministic encryption is used. All systems using DDR4 memory and relying on these TEEs for confidential computing are potentially vulnerable. The research underscores the need for more robust hardware security mechanisms and may prompt cloud providers and customers to reassess their trust in existing enclave technologies. The findings have significant implications for the security of cloud-hosted applications, including those used by messaging platforms like Signal and WhatsApp, which depend on these protections to safeguard user data. The attacks demonstrate that physical access to cloud hardware, even with minimal resources, can compromise the confidentiality and integrity of sensitive workloads. Both Intel and AMD are expected to review these findings and consider architectural changes or additional mitigations in future hardware generations. The research also raises questions about the adequacy of current cloud security recommendations and the potential for insider threats within data centers. Organizations relying on SGX or SEV-SNP for critical workloads should closely monitor vendor advisories and consider additional layers of defense. The academic community continues to play a vital role in uncovering and publicizing such vulnerabilities, driving improvements in hardware security.
Mallory correlates global threat intelligence with your attack surface — know if you’re exposed before adversaries strike.
2 events from the most recent confirmed update back to the earliest known activity.
Security coverage emphasized that the Battering RAM attack can be mounted with inexpensive hardware, with reports describing a roughly $50 setup capable of undermining Intel and AMD confidential-computing protections. The reporting framed the research as a significant blow to the security guarantees marketed for enclave-based cloud workloads.
On Tuesday, academic researchers disclosed two practical physical attacks against trusted execution environments used in cloud computing: “Battering RAM,” which breaks confidentiality and integrity protections in Intel SGX and AMD SEV-SNP, and “Wiretap,” which passively decrypts SGX-protected data. Both attacks use a hardware interposer placed between the CPU and memory to observe memory traffic and exploit deterministic encryption behavior.
5 references tracked. Mallory keeps watching after this page renders.
darkreading.com
Open sourcearstechnica.com
Open sourcethehackernews.com
Open sourcecomsec.ethz.ch
Open sourcecomsec.ethz.ch
Open sourceMap indicators from this story to your assets and identify affected systems in minutes.
Every observed campaign, victim, and pivot linked to actors named in this story.
Malware, exploits, and IOCs connected to the activity described here.
YARA, Sigma, and Snort rules deployed to your SIEM as soon as they’re published.
Get matching new stories delivered to your team as they break — not the next morning.
Ask questions about this story and take action on the answers.
Other stories Mallory is tracking that overlap on entities, sources, or topic labels.
Security researchers have demonstrated new hardware-based techniques to extract sensitive data from devices previously considered secure, including smartwatches and confidential computing servers. In one case, analysts revived the 'Blinkenlights' technique, adapting it to modern TFT screens to extract firmware from a budget smartwatch by exploiting a dial parser vulnerability. This allowed arbitrary memory content to be displayed on the device's screen, which was then captured using a high-speed Raspberry Pi Pico setup. The smartwatch, which contained fake health sensors and used a JieLi AC6958C6 system-on-chip, was found to have weak authentication and a flawed firmware parser, enabling the out-of-bounds read attack. Separately, researchers from KU Leuven University presented a low-cost hardware attack called 'Battering RAM' at Black Hat Europe 2025, which targets secure CPU enclaves such as Intel SGX and AMD SEV. By using a $50 DDR4 interposer, the researchers manipulated memory address mapping at runtime, bypassing firmware mitigations and gaining unauthorized access to encrypted memory. This allowed them to extract platform provisioning keys, forge attestation reports, and implant persistent backdoors on protected virtual machines, raising concerns about the security of cloud infrastructures relying on these technologies.
Jun 29, 2026
Academic researchers from Georgia Tech, Purdue University, and Synkhronix have developed a side-channel attack named **TEE.Fail** that enables the extraction of secrets from trusted execution environments (TEEs) in modern CPUs, including Intel's SGX and TDX, AMD's SEV-SNP, and even Nvidia's GPU Confidential Computing. The attack leverages a memory-bus interposition technique on DDR5 systems, using off-the-shelf equipment costing under $1,000, to physically intercept and analyze encrypted memory traffic. This method allows attackers with physical access and root privileges to extract cryptographic keys and forge attestation, undermining the security guarantees of confidential computing environments. TEE.Fail is the first attack demonstrated against DDR5-based TEEs, extending previous DDR4-focused research such as WireTap and BatteringRAM. The researchers found that architectural changes in recent server-grade CPUs, specifically the adoption of deterministic AES-XTS encryption without memory integrity and replay protections, have introduced exploitable weaknesses. The attack's success highlights significant risks for organizations relying on hardware-based confidential computing, as it enables the compromise of sensitive data and secure workloads even on fully updated, trusted systems.
Jun 29, 2026
Researchers disclosed the **Meltdown** and **Spectre** hardware flaws, showing that speculative execution in modern processors could let attackers read sensitive data across security boundaries on affected devices. Reuters reported that **Meltdown** primarily affected Intel processors by breaking memory isolation, while **Spectre** impacted Intel, AMD, and ARM chips by tricking applications into leaking secrets such as passwords and other protected data. CERT/CC later summarized the broader issue as cache side-channel attacks against CPU hardware using speculative execution, underscoring that the weakness was architectural rather than limited to a single product line. Major vendors and cloud providers moved to contain the fallout with software, firmware, and microcode mitigations, including Microsoft Azure protections for hosted customers and public advisories from manufacturers such as Huawei. Subsequent research showed the problem persisted beyond the initial disclosures: the **ZombieLoad** attacks demonstrated additional Intel data-leakage paths tied to speculative execution, and a later **TSX Asynchronous Abort (TAA)** variant affected some processors previously thought to be resistant. Intel issued microcode updates, but researchers and vendors warned that mitigations reduced rather than eliminated risk, that exploitation generally required local code execution, and that fully disabling the underlying CPU behavior would carry significant performance costs.
Jun 29, 2026