Google Cloud Threat Horizons H2 2025
New Research Shows Ransomware Groups Are Prioritizing Backup Infrastructure Destruction – When Your Backups Become the Target, Recovery Plans Need a Complete Rethink
Credential theft, backup destruction, and supply chain hijacking top the latest threat report from Google's security teams.
Google Cloud just released its H2 2025 Threat Horizons report, and the findings should concern any Houston business running workloads in the cloud. The report pulls intelligence from Google's Office of the CISO, Google Threat Intelligence Group, Mandiant Consulting, and multiple internal security teams. The picture it paints is clear: attackers are getting more targeted, more patient, and more destructive - especially when it comes to cloud environments.
CinchOps is a managed IT services provider based in Katy, Texas, serving small and mid-sized businesses across the Houston metro area. CinchOps specializes in cybersecurity, network security, managed IT support, VoIP, and SD-WAN for businesses with 10-200 employees. We've broken down the five major findings from this report and what they mean for your business.
This finding won't surprise anyone who's been paying attention, but the numbers drive the point home. During the first half of 2025, Google Cloud tracked the primary ways attackers got into cloud environments. The results are pretty damning for organizations that haven't locked down their identity and access controls.
A new wrinkle this cycle: leaked credentials found on dark web sources now account for 2.9% of initial access. That might sound small, but it represents a shift. Attackers are actively mining credential dumps and breach databases for cloud access keys, then using them before anyone notices. Google Cloud has started integrating with partners to automatically detect and disable leaked keys, but if you're not monitoring for this, you're exposed.
- Weak or missing credentials caused nearly half (47.1%) of all cloud security incidents tracked by Google in H1 2025
- Misconfigurations dropped 4.9% compared to H2 2024, but still represent 29.4% of entry points
- Leaked credentials from dark web sources are a growing vector at 2.9% of initial access
- Remote code execution stayed consistent at 2.9%, reinforcing the need for timely patching
- Google's vulnerability research team discovered critical Rsync flaws in Q4 2024 that could have enabled supply chain compromises through RCE
The pattern here hasn't changed in years. Businesses that nail the basics - strong credential policies, least-privilege access, and consistent patch management - block the vast majority of cloud attacks. We see this play out with Houston-area clients all the time. The ones who take identity management seriously almost never show up in our incident logs.
This is probably the most alarming finding in the report for small and mid-sized businesses. Ransomware crews have figured out that the fastest path to a payday isn't just encrypting files - it's making sure you can't recover them. Multiple threat groups are now specifically hunting for backup systems as a primary objective, not an afterthought.
Google and Mandiant documented three named groups actively targeting backup infrastructure:
- UNC2165 (associated with RANSOMHUB) accessed cloud-based data backups, deleted backup routines and existing data, and modified user permissions to block recovery
- UNC4393 (previously linked to BASTA ransomware) targeted backup platforms directly
- UNC2465 (connected to DARKSIDE and LOCKBIT ransomware families) also focused on backup destruction
The Mandiant consulting team's incident response work revealed a consistent pattern of recovery failures. Backup data gets wiped or encrypted. Production systems sit offline during forensic investigation. Recovery plans stored on the same production environment become inaccessible. And most businesses don't have clearly defined Recovery Time Objectives (RTOs) or Recovery Point Objectives (RPOs) to guide the process.
Even worse, ransomware often takes out the infrastructure dependencies needed to access backups in the first place - Active Directory, DNS, DHCP, and virtualization platforms all have to come back online before backup orchestration tools can even function.
Production-Integrated Backups
Backups run on the same production network with shared credentials and connected infrastructure. Requires functioning production servers to restore.
High RiskIsolated Data Vault
Backups stored in a separate vault with restricted access. Better data integrity, but still depends on production systems for orchestration and restoration.
Medium RiskCloud Isolated Recovery Environment
Fully separated recovery infrastructure with immutable storage, isolated validation, and independent compute. Survives total production compromise.
Lowest RiskYour Backups Need Their Own Protection Plan
The report recommends Cloud Isolated Recovery Environments (CIRE) that keep backup data logically separated from production, stored in immutable formats, and validated in isolated environments before restoration. If your backups sit on the same network as your production systems, they're a target, not a safety net. CinchOps can help Houston businesses build recovery architectures that survive a ransomware event.
Learn about our Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery services →Google Threat Intelligence Group tracks UNC4899, a North Korean threat group aligned with the Reconnaissance General Bureau (the same group publicly known as TraderTraitor). They've been active since at least 2020, primarily targeting cryptocurrency and blockchain companies. Between Q3 2024 and Q1 2025, Mandiant responded to two separate incidents attributed to this group - one affecting Google Cloud, the other affecting AWS.
Both attacks started the same way: social engineering over social media. The attackers contacted employees via LinkedIn and Telegram, posing as freelance recruiters with software development opportunities. They convinced the targets to download and run malicious Docker containers on their workstations. From there, backdoors like GLASSCANNON, PLOTTWIST, and MAZEWIRE established command-and-control connections.
- In the Google Cloud attack, UNC4899 stole credentials and used Google Cloud CLI over anonymous VPN. When MFA blocked their progress, they used the victim's admin privileges to temporarily disable MFA, completed the theft, then re-enabled MFA to hide their tracks
- In the AWS attack, IAM policies required temporary credentials and MFA for sensitive operations. The attackers couldn't bypass this, so they exfiltrated session cookies instead and used them to upload malicious JavaScript files that manipulated cryptocurrency transactions
- Both incidents resulted in several million dollars in cryptocurrency theft
Social Engineering
Fake recruiter contact via LinkedIn or Telegram
Malicious Docker
Victim runs untrusted container on workstation
Credential Theft
Cloud keys & session cookies exfiltrated
MFA Bypass
Admin privileges used to disable then re-enable MFA
Crypto Theft
Millions in cryptocurrency stolen from cloud wallets
Two things stand out here. First, MFA actually worked in slowing the attackers down - it bought time and forced them to get creative. Second, the human element was the weakest link in both cases. An employee trusted a stranger on LinkedIn, ran untrusted code, and that was enough to open the door to a multi-million dollar loss.
For Houston businesses, the takeaway isn't about cryptocurrency. It's about how social engineering combined with cloud credential theft can devastate any organization. Energy services companies, law firms, CPA practices - any business where an employee might respond to a LinkedIn message from a "recruiter" is at risk.
This tactic is sneaky because it exploits the trust people have in platforms they use every day. Attackers host a normal-looking PDF on Google Drive, SharePoint, Dropbox, or GitHub. When a victim clicks the link, they see a legitimate document - an invoice, a report, an official-looking government notice. Meanwhile, malicious code runs silently in the background, downloading additional payloads, establishing persistence, and beginning data collection.
Google's intelligence teams documented both nation-state APT groups and financially motivated criminals using this approach. The technique works because:
- Links to well-known cloud storage domains don't trigger the same suspicion as unfamiliar websites
- Traditional security tools like basic firewalls and email gateways often don't flag downloads from trusted domains
- The decoy document keeps the victim distracted while the actual attack happens silently
- It's cheap and easy for attackers to create accounts on cloud storage platforms, sometimes using stolen credentials
Step 1: Phishing Email or Message Delivered
Victim receives a convincing email with a link to a file on Google Drive, SharePoint, Dropbox, or GitHub.
Step 2: Victim Clicks Trusted Cloud Link
The URL points to a legitimate cloud storage domain - no red flags for firewalls or email gateways.
Step 3: Malicious File Executes
Step 4: Secondary Payloads Deploy
Additional malware downloads from attacker infrastructure. Data exfiltration, credential harvesting, and lateral movement begin.
Step 5: Full Compromise
Attacker has persistent access. Victim still believes they opened a routine document.
The report also documented a newer variant targeting Linux systems, where .desktop files (application shortcuts in Unix environments) serve as first-stage droppers. These files download secondary payloads from attacker-controlled infrastructure while simultaneously displaying a decoy PDF from cloud storage to keep the victim unsuspecting.
Iranian APT group APT42 combined this technique with spear-phishing emails that spoofed journalists, event organizers, and high-ranking officials - using typosquatting domains to make the impersonation more believable. The layering of social engineering with trusted cloud infrastructure makes these attacks particularly hard to spot.
The final major finding focuses on Chrome Web Store extensions - but the principles apply broadly to any software supply chain that relies on developer account security. When an attacker compromises a Chrome extension developer's account, they can push a malicious update to every user who has that extension installed. The attack surface multiplied in late 2024 when a wave of OAuth phishing attacks targeted CWS developers specifically.
Here's how the attack works. The Chrome Web Store signs extensions with two keys: a Google key confirming CWS processed it, and a developer key. Most developers let Google manage the developer key rather than risk handling it themselves. That shifted the security boundary entirely to developer account authentication. If an attacker phishes the developer's OAuth credentials, they get full upload access.
- CWS now requires MFA and frequent re-authentication for developer dashboard access
- OAuth API tokens (used for automated builds) don't have the same MFA protections
- Attackers trick developers into granting OAuth permissions to malicious projects, which then push poisoned updates
- Google launched "Verified CRX Upload" in May 2025, adding a second factor (a private signing key) to the upload process
- Even if an attacker steals credentials and OAuth tokens, they can't push updates without the developer's private signing key
For businesses in Katy, Sugar Land, and the broader Houston area, this matters because browser extensions have access to everything employees do in the browser. A compromised extension could intercept credentials, redirect financial transactions, or exfiltrate sensitive data - and users would have no idea. Endpoint security and browser management policies should be part of every IT support conversation.
Lock Down Your Browser Environment
Browser extension management is an often-overlooked piece of managed IT support. CinchOps helps Houston businesses maintain allowlists for approved extensions, block unauthorized installations, and monitor for suspicious extension behavior across all company endpoints.
Explore CinchOps Cybersecurity Services →The Google Cloud Threat Horizons report reads like a checklist of the services we provide to businesses across Houston, Katy, Sugar Land, and the surrounding areas. Here's how CinchOps directly addresses each of these threats:
- Identity and access management - We enforce MFA across all accounts, implement least-privilege access policies, monitor for credential leaks on dark web sources, and run regular access audits to close permission gaps before attackers find them
- Backup and disaster recovery architecture - Our business continuity and disaster recovery services include isolated backup systems, immutable storage configurations, defined RTOs and RPOs, and regular recovery testing so you know your backups actually work when you need them
- Security awareness training - We train your employees to recognize social engineering attacks, including the LinkedIn and Telegram-based approaches documented in this report. Your team is always your first line of defense
- Endpoint detection and browser management - We manage browser extension policies, monitor for suspicious endpoint behavior, and maintain visibility across your entire environment so decoy file attacks and compromised extensions get caught early
- Patch management and vulnerability scanning - We keep systems patched on schedule, scan for misconfigurations, and monitor for the kind of RCE vulnerabilities that Google's own research team flagged as critical
- Cloud security posture management - Whether you're on Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, or AWS, we monitor configurations, enforce security policies, and make sure your cloud environment isn't one of the 29.4% with a misconfiguration waiting to be exploited
In 30 years of working in IT, the pattern hasn't changed. The businesses that invest in the fundamentals rarely end up in crisis. The ones who skip it pay much more later.
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
What are the top cloud security threats in 2025?
According to Google Cloud's H2 2025 Threat Horizons report, the top cloud threats are credential compromise at 47.1% of incidents, misconfigurations at 29.4%, API and UI compromises at 11.8%, and an emerging risk from leaked credentials found on dark web sources. Backup infrastructure targeting and supply chain attacks are also growing concerns.
Why are hackers targeting backup systems in cloud environments?
Ransomware groups are targeting backup infrastructure because destroying or encrypting backups eliminates a victim's ability to recover without paying the ransom. Groups like UNC2165, UNC4393, and UNC2465 have been observed deleting backup routines, wiping existing backup data, and modifying user permissions to block recovery efforts.
How can a managed IT provider help protect my business from cloud threats?
A managed IT provider like CinchOps continuously monitors cloud environments for credential misuse, misconfiguration, and suspicious activity. They enforce multi-factor authentication, maintain isolated backup systems, manage patching, and train employees to recognize social engineering attacks - all of which directly address the top attack vectors identified in the Google Cloud report.
What is a Cloud Isolated Recovery Environment (CIRE)?
A Cloud Isolated Recovery Environment is a backup architecture that separates recovery infrastructure from production systems using logical isolation, immutable storage, and on-demand validation environments. It ensures that even if attackers compromise production and standard backups, an isolated copy of critical data remains intact and recoverable.
How are North Korean hackers stealing cryptocurrency through cloud environments?
The threat group UNC4899, linked to North Korea's Reconnaissance General Bureau, uses social engineering on platforms like LinkedIn and Telegram to trick employees into running malicious software. They then steal cloud credentials, disable MFA requirements, and use administrative access to initiate unauthorized cryptocurrency transactions worth millions of dollars.