I guess my habit of running a firewall and not allowing programs to access the internet unless they actually need it is helpful for stuff like this.
Absolutely no reason a text editor needs internet access.
I only update stuff through winget, which fetches the installer from github in a lot of cases, and changing a package requires a PR to the winget repo AFAIK. Not foolproof of course though.
LittleSnitch is great for MacOS; it is easily configured to alert you every time your machine makes ip/domain connections, which can then be accepted, denied, or rules made
So, let me get this straight. If I've been lazy, postponed updates and I'm still on 8.5.8 (Oct 2023) - it turns out I'm actually...safer?
Anyway, I hope the author can be a bit more specific about what actually has happened to those unlucky enough to have received these malicious updates. And perhaps a tool to e.g. do a checksum of all Notepad++ files, and compare them to the ones of a verified clean install of the user's installed version, would be a start? Though I would assume these malicious updates would be clever enough to rather have dropped and executed additional files, rather than doing something with the Notepad++ binaries themselves.
And I agree with another comment here. With all those spelling mistakes that notification kind of reads like it could have been written by a state-sponsored actor. Not to be (too) paranoid here, but can we be sure that this is the actual author, and that the new version isn't the malicious one?
This reminds me of college, when some of my professors were still sorting out their curriculum and would give us homework assignments with bugs in it.
I complained many times that they were enabling my innate procrastination by proving over and over again that starting the homework early meant you would get screwed. Every time I'd wait until the people in the forum started sounding optimistic before even looking at the problem statement.
I still think I'd like to have a web of trust system where I let my friends try out software updates first before I do, and my relatives let me try them out before they do.
> So, let me get this straight. If I've been lazy, postponed updates and I'm still on 8.5.8 (Oct 2023) - it turns out I'm actually...safer?
Is this surprising? My model is that keeping with the new versions is generally more dangerous than sticking with an old version, unless that old version has specific known and exploitable vulnerabilities.
>I'm still on 8.5.8 (Oct 2023) - it turns out I'm actually...safer?
Notepad++ site says The incident began from June 2025.
On their downloads page, 8.8.2 was the first update in June 2025 (the previous update 8.8.1 was released 2025-05-05)
So, if your installed version is 8.8.1 or lower, then you should be safe. Assuming that they're right about when the incident began.
edit: Notepad++ has published, on Github, SHA256 hashes of all the binaries for all download versions, which should let users check if they were targeted, if they still have the downloaded file. 8.8.1 is here, for example - https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/relea...
"So, let me get this straight. If I've been lazy, postponed updates and I'm still on 8.5.8 (Oct 2023) - it turns out I'm actually...safer?"
This is true for a large number of software "security" issues
A software version earlier in date/time is not necessarily inferior (or superior) to a version later in date/time
As it is "updated" or rewritten,, software can become worse instead of better, or vice versa, for a vaariety of reasons
Checking software's release date, or enabling/allowing "automatic updates" is not a substitute for reading source code and evaluating software on the merits
> And perhaps a tool to e.g. do a checksum of all Notepad++ files, and compare them to the ones of a verified clean install of the user's installed version, would be a start?
Did I understand the attack wrongly? The software could have a 100% correct checksum, because the attack happened in a remote machine that deals with call home events from Notepad++, I guess one of those "Telemetry" add-ons. The attackers did a MITM to Notepad++ traffic.
I disable auto update for everything that does not have direct contact with the Internet otherwise (mail app, browser, OS, router,...).
Probability for some random app being exploited because updates were skipped is insignificant compared to the probability of a malicious update.
Updates are a direct connection from the Internet to your computer. You want to minimize that.
Yes, of course you're safer. If your system is working as desired, updates can only break it. This is just Engineering 101, but for whatever reason, all logic is abandoned on the topic of security updates.
It looks like using Chocolatey [1] saved me from this attack vector because maintainers hardcode SHA256 checksums (and choco doesn't use WinGuP at all).
My opinion is that open source documentation is like polite dinner conversation: It’s not the proper place to discuss politics.
If an author wishes to use their open source project as a platform to discuss politics, that’s the author’s prerogative. But then, as perhaps in this instance, it could be to the detriment of the project itself.
Ah, so this has to do with mainland China going after those who think the Taiwanese do not belong to mainland China. Well, I see them as independent folks. Mainland China needs to stop thinking it can occupy land willy-nilly; unfortunately with USA, Russia and China thinking they can bully other countries that lack nukes, I think these smaller countries absolutely need nukes for defensive purpose.
It is also annoying that all these three countries think they can bully other countries too. That is basically them saying they can kill other people in other countries at all times no matter the real "reason" (just make up a fake reason, such as Russia with regard to Ukraine) - annoying to no ends.
Having said that, and I just pointed out I disagree with mainland China bullying the Taiwanese, I think it would actually be better to have software itself be completely apolitical. I never understood why people felt a need to tie political goals into software. That is a valid statement even if I happen to agree with the political goals here.
i always worry about tools like this, maintained by small teams, that are so universal that even if only a small fraction of installs are somehow co-opted by malicious actors, you have a wide open attack surface on most tech companies.
e.g. iTerm, Cyberduck, editors of all shades, various VSCode extensions, etc.
I don’t get it, why don’t you all—absolutely all of you reading—use Little Snitch? [1]
It really doesn’t compute in my head why would any macOS user not use a network firewall like this, or similar, to block unwanted outgoing HTTP(s) requests. You can easily inspect the packet with tools like Wireshark or Burp Suite Professional (or Community) edition, or any other proxy tool, of which there are many in the macOS ecosystem.
And this is not unique to macOS, this is all possible in Windows, Linux and any other OS.
Similarly I worry about how these apps automatically update themselves. I know it can be done securely. I also doubt that these companies invest the engineering effort to do so.
> Traffic from certain targeted users was selectively redirected to attacker-controlled served malicious update manifests.
I'd be curious to know if there was any pattern as to which users were targeted, but the post doesn't go into any further detail except to say it was likely a Chinese state-sponsored group.
It might have been explicitly targeted, but they did say that there were older versions of Notepad ++ with ""insufficient update verification controls" so it might have just been there was only one subset of users actually susceptible to this.
The TLDR is that until version 8.8.7 of Notepad++, the developer used a self-signed certificate, which was available in the Github source code. The author enabled this by not following best practices.
The "good news" is that the attacks were very targeted and seemed to involve hands on keyboard attacks against folks in Asia.
Blaming the hosting company is kind of shady, as the author should own at least some level of the blame for this.
You’d be protected from this particular exploit if you used a package manager rather than the updater, though of course you’d still be vulnerable to the installer binary itself getting compromised.
This is where package managers shine. You never know if there are vulns in the update servers, and you don't know if they even bother with checksums. I never trust apps that self-update for exactly this reason. Turn that shit off and do
choco update notepadplusplus
or
winget upgrade Notepad++.Notepad++
Of course, this does nothing for bugs in the code.
Vindicated once again for turning off any update checks the moment I install any new piece of software.
Even if this sort of (obviously rare) attack is not a concern, it baffles me how few otherwise-intelligent people fail to see the way these updaters provide the network (which itself is always listening, see Room 641A and friends) with a fingerprint of your specific computer and a way to track its physical location based on the set of software you have installed, all of which want to check for updates every goddamn day.
It is baffling to me, as well. You know how you get a remote-code-execution vulnerability? You give a bunch of software permission to fetch code remotely and execute it.
If the people with access to Room 641A want you, you're toast unless you're ready to make some REALLY big digital lifestyle changes that most people would not be amenable to, because you would have to be extremely paranoid on multiple fronts all the time. That kind of heightened vigilance is exhausting and really not worth it.
>This is also why update signatures should be validated against a different server; it would require hackers to control bother servers to go undetected
No, it should be a hardcoded key held by the developer, preferably using a HSM, and maybe with some sort of notification capability in case the key was lost. Adding a second server adds marginal security. For instance if the developer's mail was hacked, an attacker would likely be able to reset passwords for both hosting providers.
Previous NS records were pointing at dns-parking.com, which is Hostinger. Although hard to be certain without more details whether a reseller or other supplier is involved.
Download the latest version and install that, instead of using the auto update feature of an old version that might not properly check signatures.
As for whether anything else has been compromised, it depends on whether you were targeted. And the payload might have been tailored to each target, so there's no way to know unless you have access to the exact binary. Unfortunately, binaries downloaded through the auto update feature tend not to linger in your Downloads folder.
Disable auto-updates, just like you should with every piece of software on your machine. This was the result of letting other people silently replace your programs. Don't allow that.
Not notepad++!
(Opens WhatsApp)
OpenClawd express my discontent across all my channels and draft an email to send to IT tomorrow morning. Also turn off the lights off and go to bed.
(Somewhere in china, all the lights go out)
No, it's specifically the updates that were targetted. I'm unsure about the downloads but those too are presumably at risk.
> The attackers specifically targeted Notepad++ domain with the goal of exploiting insufficient update verification controls that existed in older versions of Notepad++.
> With these changes and reinforcements, I believe the situation has been fully resolved. Fingers crossed.
I get that this is a difficult situation for a small developer, but ending with this line did not fill me with confidence that the problem is actually resolved and make me trust their software on my system.
That's the most honest assessment you can expect from any small-scale developer. What do you expect them to say or do? Their adversary is presumably a national intelligence agency of a superpower.
The odds may be better if you operate the way OpenSSH does: move slow, security first, architect everything to be very difficult to attack. But if you're building a text editor, it's not your mindset, and probably never will be.
I don't think "we" would have been impacted since this specifically targets the updates, but recently Microsoft pulled Notepad++ from the list of apps we can use on our production management laptops. Some people were annoyed and whining about this. That predated this announcement by a few weeks. Probably the right move by the security folks.
Notably Notepad++ was recently shipping unsigned/self-signed updates, apparently overlapping with the time of this incident, see releases 8.8.2-8.8.6: https://notepad-plus-plus.org/news/
The lack of signing and/or checking the signature when updating is the real issue here. But the write up blames the attack on the hosting server. That doesn't bode well for future security.
This time I unfortunately have to move on from Notepad++. Vibes have been negative for a while but out of inertia (and because there weren't obvious alternatives) I never pulled the trigger. Now it's time. The trust is gone.
Thanks NP++ for being free and useful for so many years.
Can anyone suggest a solid alternative on Windows? I'm fine with Linux and macOS but I have to keep a Windows machine around for some legacy, win only, software.
Maybe Sublime Text could be an option? At this point I'd rather pay for something lightweight, fast, and probably better.
I don't like tooling that increases my exposure to bad state actors (whatever state they're from).
For a while, I've been thinking that open source package portals will at some point take over making of binaries that get released. Dev teams will run their own CI with whatever automated test pipelines they think is appropriate. For a tests-pass situation and will pass the git hash to the portal system for release, which just runs compile and making the binary. Well, not all CI runs would result in a release, of course. Then the package portal's own software kicks in to calculate an independent since-last-release report that's attached alongside the maintainer release notes.
All such portals upgrade their hash/sig noting of binaries, and keep those in a history retaining merkle tree of sorts. Of nothing, else a git repo. Something like this https://github.com/hboutemy/mcmm-yaml/blob/master/aws/sdk/ko... but with SHA256s, and maybe not the entire world on one repo.
Long ago, Canonical did some shady stuff with the now-deprecated apt-key "net-update" signing validation for updating of GnuPG keys over the network, an exclusive Ubuntu "feature" Debian didn't even adopt that in theory allowed the same thing.
First I thought CVE-2012-3587 was incompetence... but then seeing CVE-2012-0954 after it, I couldn't help think something more was at bay as something connected to a nation state. It does not surprise me in the least to see nation state attackers exploiting N++. Because I've also on very sensitive enterprise PAM systems in F500/research/academia, and about 10% of the time it felt like I'd see Notepad++ on internet-connected systems used for security tooling because vanilla notepad is indeed garbage. It does not surprise me at all this has been used as an attack vector.
They were able to replace the downloaded executable with their own version. From the article:
> 2. Even though the bad actors have lost access to the server from the 2nd of September, 2025, they maintained the credentials of our internal services existing on that server until the 2nd of December, which could have allowed the malicious actors to redirect some of the traffic going to https://notepad-plus-plus.org/getDownloadUrl.php to their own servers and return the updates download URL with compromised updates.
That's sad. China should be more helpful with regards to open source.
Notepad++ is a great editor. I don't use it on Linux, because I have
an older editor I am very used to, but on Windows I like notepad++
a lot (though lately I have been using geany on Windows, mostly
for convenience - I think notepad++ is better but I sort of like
the github-based development of geany; either way notepad++ is
really excellent as well).
The thought crossed my mind as well. Lots of typos, plus "old version compromised, use new version ASAP" could also be said to get people on a newly compromised version, right? Though it's probably just that the post author is stressed and rushed the post out. I do wonder if there's a way to verify the post was written by the real dev and that he still has control. Old known GPG sig?
Many large companies allow employees to install software from the internet on their work laptops. How do they avoid being regularly hacked this way (presumably NPP is far from being the only one at risk, and presumably the money from theft of corporate secrets attracts skilled and motivated hackers).
Every shared hosting provider has this risk. Critical projects should be using dedicated or VPS hosting, preferably with encrypted filesystems too as even datacenter techs can fall victim to social engineering.
I'm pretty surprised that they got away with unsigned updates and shared hosting as long as they did. I wonder how many similar popular projects are out there on dodgy infrastructure.
So uhh... what exactly did the "state-sponsored actors" do?
They go on about how their server was compromised, and how the big bad Chinese were definitely behind it, and then claim the "situation has been fully resolved", but there is zero mention of any investigation into what was actually done by the attackers. Why? If I downloaded an installer during the time they were hacked, do I have malware now?
The utter lack of any such information feels bizarre.
Exactly... Were they exflitrating files open in notepad++ , or was notepad++ installing additional malware for system wide access? What was the end goal?
> Even after losing server access, attackers maintained credentials to internal services until December 2, 2025, which allowed them to continue redirecting Notepad++ update traffic to malicious servers. The attackers specifically targeted Notepad++ domain with the goal of exploiting insufficient update verification controls that existed in older versions of Notepad++.
It's also possible the update manifest contained an url that the updater blindly trusted, and by modifying that file you could change what got downloaded.
The whole approach of virus scanning is reactive and incomplete. This is because, except for some uncertain guesswork using "heuristics", it depends upon vendor analysis of submitted malware infection samples after it's already happened to determine specific malware file/process signatures. This doesn't and cannot catch all possible malware that has ever happened, especially if it's new, not widespread, or evaded analysis from ever being noticed. Thus, a fraction of malware will always slip and will always remain undetectable.
After a machine is compromised by malware, there's rarely-to-never a trustworthy way to ever fix it with 100% certainty. And especially worrisome is "repair" from the host itself which maybe infected with a rootkit that hides and repairs the malware. Thus, the only correct solution is to completely reimage/reinstall from trusted sources. Deviate from this path at one's own extreme cost/risk.
There also exist a tiny amount of even worse, specialized malware, usually deployed by state actors, that infect hardware in such a way that makes them difficult and sometimes uneconomical to repair.
PSA: Never run untrustworthy shit on any machine that matters. This also includes FOSS projects that don't have their shit together.
Most edr has a “this program is doing something bad” detector. But the number of folks running security on their build process is still not ubiquitous.
> This was the exact same technique that was used in 2021 by Audacity's update mechanism, which also redirected traffic to servers hosted in other Aeza Group ASNs and planted a dropper for later campaigns.
I can't find anything about this, can you link a source?
Someone tried to kill you?! People actually killed your friends? Not sure if schizophrenia or actual story ... I desperately need to hear more of this story.
If you find yourself 99.999% sure of almost anything it should be a bit of a red flag to you. If it's based on a hunch without any actual evidence, more so.
I've been thinking a lot lately about open source.
It seems to be a lot like the communism - sounds great on paper but we are yet to see a proper implementation.
Between GIT, Linux and SQLite there are a few projects that has been led by weirdos that have time, resources and conviction to drive these through time.
Unless you create some sort of a an auxiliary business and get an acquihire deal most things will fizzle out.
Years ago when I started working for BigCo I was amazed by their denial of FOSS. At one point in the project I pointed out a problem, which was heard and recognized, to which I followed up with a solution using an open source package. I thought I was clever - we needed an extra package in our system, but I was able to find a suitable open source solution that would not add to the overall cost of the project. My proposal was immediately pushed back.
Initially I thought it was due to responsibility issue - if we'd employ a FOSS solution we'd be responsible for the outcome. Having a 3rd party vendor the management would have the opportunity to shell themselves.
But that doesn't have to be the case. The FOSS project could easily fizzle out. And if we don't have enough resources to incorporate it and make it our own, we can potentially risk being left out to dry.
> Unless you create some sort of a an auxiliary business and get an acquihire deal most things will fizzle out.
This is acceptable. Why shouldn't most things started by people not willing to put in the work to keep them going not fizzle out? The important thing is that anyone who actually cares to can jump in and pick up right where the open source software fizzled out and get it going again. Anyone can learn from the code and use it for anything they want, even things that have nothing to do with the goals of the original project.
It's not as if there aren't countless examples of corporate vendors dying off and leaving their customers on the hook with nothing, or just changing the product drastically after the sale. At least in the open source case you have the option to fork the project and continue using it as you always have.
Well, the update in Notepad++ was the single annoying thing and I made sure I turned it off as the first thing after the install. It was terribly annoying, interrupting my workflow every often so I have no idea how others managed. Why should it decide when to upgrade anyway? It's a notepad! Why should I even bother to upgrade? Everything I need is already there! A piece of software like this one shouldn't be allowed to send out traffic by default anyway, it should be opt-in.
You should see the apps on MacOS. Almost every single app that is not installed from Appstore has that shitty update popup, it is driving me nuts.
I think Linux has the best solution for this - good package managers for bases system and Flatpak with Flathub repo for other apps. So you never get stupid popups, and update managers use signed packages and check those signatures before installation.
I'm extremely wary about any application pushing politics.
I subscribe to MacPaw, who makes excellent apps like Setapp, Gemini, and CleanMyMac, all of which I use.
At some point, CleanMyMac started putting the Ukranian flag on the app icon and flagging utilities by any Russian developer as untrustworthy (because they are russian), and recommended that I uninstall them.
I am not pro russia/anti-ukraine independence by any means, but CleanMyMac is one of those apps that require elevated system permissions. Seeing them engage in software maccarythism makes me very, very hesitant to provide them.
if you're going to give in and avoid applications because, like in this case they take a strong stance on Ukraine or Taiwan the hack has literally achieved its purpose. Either silence the author directly or destroy its userbase.
Fuck'em and just donate ten bucks to notepad++ , I'd rather my pc breaks then reward this crap
Some comments were deferred for faster rendering.
Saris|27 days ago
Absolutely no reason a text editor needs internet access.
I only update stuff through winget, which fetches the installer from github in a lot of cases, and changing a package requires a PR to the winget repo AFAIK. Not foolproof of course though.
Pet_Ant|27 days ago
sciencejerk|27 days ago
drumttocs8|26 days ago
just_testing|27 days ago
edb_123|28 days ago
Anyway, I hope the author can be a bit more specific about what actually has happened to those unlucky enough to have received these malicious updates. And perhaps a tool to e.g. do a checksum of all Notepad++ files, and compare them to the ones of a verified clean install of the user's installed version, would be a start? Though I would assume these malicious updates would be clever enough to rather have dropped and executed additional files, rather than doing something with the Notepad++ binaries themselves.
And I agree with another comment here. With all those spelling mistakes that notification kind of reads like it could have been written by a state-sponsored actor. Not to be (too) paranoid here, but can we be sure that this is the actual author, and that the new version isn't the malicious one?
hinkley|28 days ago
I complained many times that they were enabling my innate procrastination by proving over and over again that starting the homework early meant you would get screwed. Every time I'd wait until the people in the forum started sounding optimistic before even looking at the problem statement.
I still think I'd like to have a web of trust system where I let my friends try out software updates first before I do, and my relatives let me try them out before they do.
tasuki|28 days ago
Is this surprising? My model is that keeping with the new versions is generally more dangerous than sticking with an old version, unless that old version has specific known and exploitable vulnerabilities.
FatalLogic|28 days ago
Notepad++ site says The incident began from June 2025.
On their downloads page, 8.8.2 was the first update in June 2025 (the previous update 8.8.1 was released 2025-05-05)
So, if your installed version is 8.8.1 or lower, then you should be safe. Assuming that they're right about when the incident began.
edit: Notepad++ has published, on Github, SHA256 hashes of all the binaries for all download versions, which should let users check if they were targeted, if they still have the downloaded file. 8.8.1 is here, for example - https://github.com/notepad-plus-plus/notepad-plus-plus/relea...
1vuio0pswjnm7|27 days ago
This is true for a large number of software "security" issues
A software version earlier in date/time is not necessarily inferior (or superior) to a version later in date/time
As it is "updated" or rewritten,, software can become worse instead of better, or vice versa, for a vaariety of reasons
Checking software's release date, or enabling/allowing "automatic updates" is not a substitute for reading source code and evaluating software on the merits
otherme123|28 days ago
Did I understand the attack wrongly? The software could have a 100% correct checksum, because the attack happened in a remote machine that deals with call home events from Notepad++, I guess one of those "Telemetry" add-ons. The attackers did a MITM to Notepad++ traffic.
bulbar|27 days ago
Updates are a direct connection from the Internet to your computer. You want to minimize that.
Just do a manual update from time to time.
jollyllama|25 days ago
user3939382|28 days ago
FpUser|28 days ago
beached_whale|27 days ago
Helmut10001|28 days ago
[1]: https://chocolatey.org/
Melatonic|27 days ago
simlevesque|28 days ago
icelancer|28 days ago
orsorna|28 days ago
I distinctly remember their GH page being flooded with issues written in Chinese.
maxkfranz|28 days ago
My opinion is that open source documentation is like polite dinner conversation: It’s not the proper place to discuss politics.
If an author wishes to use their open source project as a platform to discuss politics, that’s the author’s prerogative. But then, as perhaps in this instance, it could be to the detriment of the project itself.
jojobas|27 days ago
shevy-java|28 days ago
It is also annoying that all these three countries think they can bully other countries too. That is basically them saying they can kill other people in other countries at all times no matter the real "reason" (just make up a fake reason, such as Russia with regard to Ukraine) - annoying to no ends.
Having said that, and I just pointed out I disagree with mainland China bullying the Taiwanese, I think it would actually be better to have software itself be completely apolitical. I never understood why people felt a need to tie political goals into software. That is a valid statement even if I happen to agree with the political goals here.
jmole|28 days ago
e.g. iTerm, Cyberduck, editors of all shades, various VSCode extensions, etc.
guessmyname|28 days ago
It really doesn’t compute in my head why would any macOS user not use a network firewall like this, or similar, to block unwanted outgoing HTTP(s) requests. You can easily inspect the packet with tools like Wireshark or Burp Suite Professional (or Community) edition, or any other proxy tool, of which there are many in the macOS ecosystem.
And this is not unique to macOS, this is all possible in Windows, Linux and any other OS.
[1] https://www.obdev.at/products/littlesnitch/index.html
josho|28 days ago
hsbauauvhabzb|28 days ago
tragiclos|28 days ago
I'd be curious to know if there was any pattern as to which users were targeted, but the post doesn't go into any further detail except to say it was likely a Chinese state-sponsored group.
buggymaaan|28 days ago
tragiclos|26 days ago
https://securelist.com/notepad-supply-chain-attack/118708/
x_may|28 days ago
NedF|27 days ago
[deleted]
IhateAI|27 days ago
thisislife2|28 days ago
mapontosevenths|28 days ago
https://www.heise.de/en/news/Notepad-updater-installed-malwa...
https://doublepulsar.com/small-numbers-of-notepad-users-repo...
The TLDR is that until version 8.8.7 of Notepad++, the developer used a self-signed certificate, which was available in the Github source code. The author enabled this by not following best practices.
The "good news" is that the attacks were very targeted and seemed to involve hands on keyboard attacks against folks in Asia.
Blaming the hosting company is kind of shady, as the author should own at least some level of the blame for this.
dgrin91|28 days ago
hsbauauvhabzb|28 days ago
N_Lens|28 days ago
egl2020|28 days ago
Marsymars|28 days ago
snvzz|28 days ago
jimbob45|28 days ago
1970-01-01|27 days ago
Lammy|28 days ago
Even if this sort of (obviously rare) attack is not a concern, it baffles me how few otherwise-intelligent people fail to see the way these updaters provide the network (which itself is always listening, see Room 641A and friends) with a fingerprint of your specific computer and a way to track its physical location based on the set of software you have installed, all of which want to check for updates every goddamn day.
derf_|28 days ago
arcfour|28 days ago
Threat modeling: it keeps things realistic.
sodality2|28 days ago
nacozarina|26 days ago
OsrsNeedsf2P|28 days ago
This is also why update signatures should be validated against a different server; it would require hackers to control bother servers to go undetected
technion|28 days ago
notepad-plus-plus.org currently has an A record of 95.128.42.184, owned by "Aqua Ray SAS".
It switched up from 191.101.104.10 and 212.1.212.49 on 17/1, which is are Hostinger IP addresses.
gruez|28 days ago
No, it should be a hardcoded key held by the developer, preferably using a HSM, and maybe with some sort of notification capability in case the key was lost. Adding a second server adds marginal security. For instance if the developer's mail was hacked, an attacker would likely be able to reset passwords for both hosting providers.
dontdoxxme|28 days ago
daemonhunter|28 days ago
kijin|28 days ago
As for whether anything else has been compromised, it depends on whether you were targeted. And the payload might have been tailored to each target, so there's no way to know unless you have access to the exact binary. Unfortunately, binaries downloaded through the auto update feature tend not to linger in your Downloads folder.
avereveard|28 days ago
username223|28 days ago
manapause|28 days ago
wglass|28 days ago
Is it correct to say that users would only get the compromised version if they downloaded from the website?
Notepad++ has auto-update feature, is there any indication that updates from the AutoUpdate were compromised?
jszymborski|28 days ago
> The attackers specifically targeted Notepad++ domain with the goal of exploiting insufficient update verification controls that existed in older versions of Notepad++.
dabinat|28 days ago
I get that this is a difficult situation for a small developer, but ending with this line did not fill me with confidence that the problem is actually resolved and make me trust their software on my system.
the_fall|28 days ago
The odds may be better if you operate the way OpenSSH does: move slow, security first, architect everything to be very difficult to attack. But if you're building a text editor, it's not your mindset, and probably never will be.
baobabKoodaa|28 days ago
DanOpcode|27 days ago
colonCapitalDee|28 days ago
locusofself|28 days ago
hjoutfbkfd|28 days ago
who signed the binaries was irrelevant for this attack, because the issue was not checking any signature
tech234a|28 days ago
sbohacek|27 days ago
bakugo|28 days ago
Something doesn't seem right here.
maremmano|28 days ago
This time I unfortunately have to move on from Notepad++. Vibes have been negative for a while but out of inertia (and because there weren't obvious alternatives) I never pulled the trigger. Now it's time. The trust is gone.
Thanks NP++ for being free and useful for so many years.
Can anyone suggest a solid alternative on Windows? I'm fine with Linux and macOS but I have to keep a Windows machine around for some legacy, win only, software.
Maybe Sublime Text could be an option? At this point I'd rather pay for something lightweight, fast, and probably better.
I don't like tooling that increases my exposure to bad state actors (whatever state they're from).
nhinck3|27 days ago
> Can anyone suggest a solid alternative on Windows
What a weird reason to switch. I don't know why you'd believe any other piece of software is somehow more secure against state actors.
nzd|28 days ago
Ayesh|28 days ago
Winget downloads the installer from GitHub: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-pkgs/blob/master/manifes...
paul_h|28 days ago
All such portals upgrade their hash/sig noting of binaries, and keep those in a history retaining merkle tree of sorts. Of nothing, else a git repo. Something like this https://github.com/hboutemy/mcmm-yaml/blob/master/aws/sdk/ko... but with SHA256s, and maybe not the entire world on one repo.
torpid|27 days ago
First I thought CVE-2012-3587 was incompetence... but then seeing CVE-2012-0954 after it, I couldn't help think something more was at bay as something connected to a nation state. It does not surprise me in the least to see nation state attackers exploiting N++. Because I've also on very sensitive enterprise PAM systems in F500/research/academia, and about 10% of the time it felt like I'd see Notepad++ on internet-connected systems used for security tooling because vanilla notepad is indeed garbage. It does not surprise me at all this has been used as an attack vector.
throwa356262|27 days ago
Which versions where affected and how can people check if they have the infected version?
starkeeper|28 days ago
davorak|28 days ago
> 2. Even though the bad actors have lost access to the server from the 2nd of September, 2025, they maintained the credentials of our internal services existing on that server until the 2nd of December, which could have allowed the malicious actors to redirect some of the traffic going to https://notepad-plus-plus.org/getDownloadUrl.php to their own servers and return the updates download URL with compromised updates.
Aqua0|27 days ago
hulitu|26 days ago
charlieyu1|27 days ago
shevy-java|28 days ago
Notepad++ is a great editor. I don't use it on Linux, because I have an older editor I am very used to, but on Windows I like notepad++ a lot (though lately I have been using geany on Windows, mostly for convenience - I think notepad++ is better but I sort of like the github-based development of geany; either way notepad++ is really excellent as well).
anonnon|27 days ago
They should also be more helpful with not plundering the oceans, even including the territorial waters of far-flung nations, of fish.
shellcromancer|28 days ago
The latest and greatest cryptography powering everyone’s favorite SAML-based single-sign on.
nickorlow|28 days ago
johnsillings|28 days ago
opan|28 days ago
anonnon|27 days ago
_cs2017_|27 days ago
kwar13|28 days ago
r1ch|28 days ago
I'm pretty surprised that they got away with unsigned updates and shared hosting as long as they did. I wonder how many similar popular projects are out there on dodgy infrastructure.
Larrikin|28 days ago
I expect to know it one day, but it may be too early to provide the name now.
nickorlow|28 days ago
bakugo|28 days ago
They go on about how their server was compromised, and how the big bad Chinese were definitely behind it, and then claim the "situation has been fully resolved", but there is zero mention of any investigation into what was actually done by the attackers. Why? If I downloaded an installer during the time they were hacked, do I have malware now?
The utter lack of any such information feels bizarre.
mikeweiss|28 days ago
mimasama|28 days ago
antiloper|27 days ago
XMLDSig is notoriously difficult to implement correctly and securely, I hope this doesn't backfire.
getcrunk|28 days ago
gruez|28 days ago
getcrunk|28 days ago
I mean for such a dev focused and extremely performant app, that’s disappointing.
Glad I’m off windows as of late
thomasjudge|28 days ago
burnt-resistor|28 days ago
After a machine is compromised by malware, there's rarely-to-never a trustworthy way to ever fix it with 100% certainty. And especially worrisome is "repair" from the host itself which maybe infected with a rootkit that hides and repairs the malware. Thus, the only correct solution is to completely reimage/reinstall from trusted sources. Deviate from this path at one's own extreme cost/risk.
There also exist a tiny amount of even worse, specialized malware, usually deployed by state actors, that infect hardware in such a way that makes them difficult and sometimes uneconomical to repair.
PSA: Never run untrustworthy shit on any machine that matters. This also includes FOSS projects that don't have their shit together.
conception|28 days ago
charlieyu1|27 days ago
dyauspitr|28 days ago
nosrepa|28 days ago
dehrmann|28 days ago
sharyphil|28 days ago
ivankabiden|28 days ago
NedF|28 days ago
[deleted]
cookiengineer|28 days ago
[deleted]
ledoge|28 days ago
I can't find anything about this, can you link a source?
Jordan-117|28 days ago
idiotsecant|28 days ago
gradus_ad|28 days ago
[deleted]
hathym|28 days ago
[deleted]
tempestn|28 days ago
bravetraveler|28 days ago
zeroq|28 days ago
It seems to be a lot like the communism - sounds great on paper but we are yet to see a proper implementation.
Between GIT, Linux and SQLite there are a few projects that has been led by weirdos that have time, resources and conviction to drive these through time.
Unless you create some sort of a an auxiliary business and get an acquihire deal most things will fizzle out.
Years ago when I started working for BigCo I was amazed by their denial of FOSS. At one point in the project I pointed out a problem, which was heard and recognized, to which I followed up with a solution using an open source package. I thought I was clever - we needed an extra package in our system, but I was able to find a suitable open source solution that would not add to the overall cost of the project. My proposal was immediately pushed back.
Initially I thought it was due to responsibility issue - if we'd employ a FOSS solution we'd be responsible for the outcome. Having a 3rd party vendor the management would have the opportunity to shell themselves.
But that doesn't have to be the case. The FOSS project could easily fizzle out. And if we don't have enough resources to incorporate it and make it our own, we can potentially risk being left out to dry.
autoexec|28 days ago
This is acceptable. Why shouldn't most things started by people not willing to put in the work to keep them going not fizzle out? The important thing is that anyone who actually cares to can jump in and pick up right where the open source software fizzled out and get it going again. Anyone can learn from the code and use it for anything they want, even things that have nothing to do with the goals of the original project.
It's not as if there aren't countless examples of corporate vendors dying off and leaving their customers on the hook with nothing, or just changing the product drastically after the sale. At least in the open source case you have the option to fork the project and continue using it as you always have.
benterix|27 days ago
Jnr|27 days ago
I think Linux has the best solution for this - good package managers for bases system and Flatpak with Flathub repo for other apps. So you never get stupid popups, and update managers use signed packages and check those signatures before installation.
prodigycorp|28 days ago
I subscribe to MacPaw, who makes excellent apps like Setapp, Gemini, and CleanMyMac, all of which I use.
At some point, CleanMyMac started putting the Ukranian flag on the app icon and flagging utilities by any Russian developer as untrustworthy (because they are russian), and recommended that I uninstall them.
I am not pro russia/anti-ukraine independence by any means, but CleanMyMac is one of those apps that require elevated system permissions. Seeing them engage in software maccarythism makes me very, very hesitant to provide them.
_alternator_|28 days ago
Barrin92|28 days ago
Fuck'em and just donate ten bucks to notepad++ , I'd rather my pc breaks then reward this crap
throwaway3060|28 days ago
Since there are a lot of both Ukrainian and Russian software developers, this is personal for a lot of people in the industry.
wiseowise|28 days ago
What the fuck is that supposed to mean, lol. Ukraine isn’t done secessionist state.
> Seeing them engage in software maccarythism makes me very, very hesitant to provide them.
So are they wrong when flagging software or not? You haven’t provided any details.