
A Kansas City man is accused of hacking into local businesses, not to steal money, but to… get a cheaper gym membership? A DNA-testing firm has vanished, leaving customers in the dark about what’s happened to their sensitive genetic data. And Australia mulls a social media ban for youngsters.
All this and much much more is discussed in the latest edition of the “Smashing Security” podcast by cybersecurity veterans Graham Cluley and Carole Theriault, joined this week by Anna Brading.
Warning: This podcast may contain nuts, adult themes, and rude language.
Show full transcript ▼
This transcript was generated automatically, probably contains mistakes, and has not been manually verified.
Hello, hello, and welcome to Smashing Security, episode 395. My name's Graham Cluley.
Now coming up on today's show, Graham, what do you got?
Everyone enjoys all that, the passing of time, the speeding up of our lives to the inevitable doom and demise.
I'm going to join the gym.
I'll be going out in all weathers. I'll go to— yes, of course I'll go to the gym. I don't mind that it costs £50 a month. It'll be worth it, you say to yourself.
You convince yourself.
And so you're still paying for the gym and not going to it in April.
And I wonder if that's what happened to a chap called Nicholas Kloster, because he turned up to his local health club on April 26th, 2024.
So earlier this year in April, maybe he joined it in the January. He showed up there just before midnight.
Now you tell me, girls, is that normal to go to the gym at that kind of time? Girls? Okay. I'm flattering you.
If you're doing shift work and you want to put a sweat on before you hit the sheets, or hopefully hit the shower first.
Maybe he was just trying to cancel his membership and thought it's less embarrassing if I try and do it at midnight. Not too many people see him.
Maybe he was too embarrassed to go to the gym during normal gym opening times because he'd let himself go a bit too much.
And he claimed that he had gained access to their computer systems. Yes, there is a cybersecurity element to my story.
And what he claimed in this email was that he could easily hack into the company's IT systems. So he wasn't on the rowing machine. He wasn't pumping iron.
It sounds he was, well, doing what many of us do for exercise, you know, participating in aerobic activity via our fingertips on the keyboard instead.
I mean, no, that's what— that is a form of exercise. You can burn calories just at the keyboard if you want to.
Ultimately, if you did enough typing— You know, people come out with diet books all the time. Different ways to lose weight.
I think you could probably sell a book about how you could get a workout at your computer.
Anyway, this chap Kloster, he's alleged to have sent an email from his work email address, and he said the following.
He said, I've managed to circumvent the login for the security cameras at the gym by using their visible IP addresses.
I've also gained access to the Google Fiber router settings which allowed me to use, and at this point the feds have redacted a word, it's the name of a tool which he used, but anyway, he says it allowed me to use something or other to explore user accounts associated with the domain.
He said, if I can reach the files on a user's computer, it indicates potential for deeper system access. So he's saying there's a security vulnerability, right? Yeah.
Were they something—
So, we don't know exactly the details, but it sounds awfully like he sent an email to the gym's owners claiming he'd hacked into their systems, into their computers, and was looking to get hired by them for security consultant services at the same time.
So, he's done the advert for his services at the same time as breaking into systems.
And my question to you, and I think I already know the answer from you, Carole, is do you think that's okay?
They've given the rules and they've said, if you find a vulnerability, or you're welcome to do this and do this kind of testing, you're not welcome to do other kinds of testing, but this is the kind of test you can participate in.
And if you do, get in touch with us and then we may, you know, send you a t-shirt or something like that.
So if they say, huh, thanks so much, we don't have an opening there, but you know, thanks so much for the information.
And then he then holds them to ransom or advertises to everybody what he's done, or retaliates in some way, then that's the issue.
I don't know if there's much of an issue in saying— If someone came to me and said, "Really love your press release, girl, but there's a mistake here, right?
You made a mistake here in this paragraph. And boy, I could help you in future doing those much better."
But it does appear the US Department of Justice aren't terribly happy with this chap. And there are some more details what he did. I don't know if this is a 24-hour gym or not.
And I wondered maybe whether he had gained access by—
For instance, he'd deleted his photograph from the gym's database. He had stolen a staff member's name tag.
I don't know if that's something which might have helped him gain access to areas of the gym. And also he reduced his monthly gym membership to just $1 per month.
Now, some weeks after sending this email to the company, this chap Kloster is said to have posted an image to social media of what appears to be a screenshot of his desktop computer showing control of the security cameras of the gym.
But you got us to kind of give our point of view, basically saying this is the information we have, and you're like, oh, and by the way, the gym's not a 24-hour gym.
Did I happen to mention that?
You do see vulnerability researchers sometimes sharing information to prove that they had access to a system.
The chatbox says, "How to get a company to use your security service." Again, he's not saying, "I'm gonna screw these guys up," or, "I'm gonna wipe their tapes," or anything, is he?
Because if he identifies the company and says, these guys have a security vulnerability and I cracked in, I think that it tells other baddies that there may be a way for them to access.
Although he was on premise, so, you know.
The month after he sent the email.
So it's May of 2024, and Kloster allegedly entered the premises of another company, a nonprofit organization, into an area that wasn't supposed to be accessible to the general public.
Right? It's beginning to sound a bit shady.
He accessed a computer with internet access, and he's said to have used a boot disk, is how it describes it, to access the computer through various user accounts.
He circumvented its password protection and installed upon this computer a VPN, possibly to maintain access to the company's systems.
So you could argue accessing the camera feed is a breach of computer crime laws.
Anyway, this nonprofit, they say they suffered losses of over $5,000 as a result, trying to remediate this security breach.
And do you remember I told you that when he sent the initial email to the gym, it went from his work email address? Well, the feds have been round to there as well.
And the people who hired him there, they say that he used stolen credit card information from them and used it to purchase, quote, hacking thumb drives.
So on the company, he had a company credit card.
Whether allowed to or not, unclear, and was purchasing potentially tools which could be used maybe as a penetration tester, maybe as a hacker.
If there's a 24-hour gym— If you were at Tesco's at 2 in the morning buying diapers, we'd be like, well, that's suspicious.
And then there is Atlas Biomed. Have you heard of them?
Atlas said they could not only tell her about her heritage, but also about diseases and injuries that she might be predisposed to.
23andMe were doing the same thing, find out about family traits and get ahead of the illness that you might be facing.
But she could access it all online, which she did every so often. Until one day the website didn't work. She tried to contact the company, but there was no answer.
Another customer, Kate Lake, hard to say, sent in her sample but didn't receive anything back. She contacted Atlas and they said they'd send her a refund, but that didn't arrive.
In fact, the company appears to have done a complete vanishing act.
Because Carole, frankly, you could send me some of your spit and I'll say, "Oh yeah, you seem a bit Canadian to me. Maybe a little bit—" Yeah, okay.
Anyway, you would expect the service to be up and running for £100. You'd expect a quality service, I would hope.
According to the BBC, who wrote about this story, Atlas Biomed appears to have links to Russia.
Two of its officers are listed at the same address in Moscow, along with a Russian— What? Yeah. Along with a Russian billionaire.
And that is the most valuable data. It's literally what makes you you. I work for an American company.
There's often talk about Social Security numbers that are breached, and they're a nightmare because you only have one, but they actually can be changed. It's just a massive faff.
DNA can't. And even if you give it to a company, it doesn't disappear like Atlas or isn't breached like 23andMe.
You're still trusting that data to a company and hoping that their security and privacy and ethics hold up because you don't know what they'll do with it or what the future holds.
Because we are looking at a future where health insurers put a higher premium on those with predispositions to certain diseases.
Drug makers could target us with ads for ailments that we might have, but we haven't even spoken to a doctor about.
It could be your close relative's DNA data that, you know, if you've committed the crime, it could be then matched to you.
And we don't all know all the implications because we don't know what the future holds, so—
And writing back, you know, sort of stock, I'll say, oh yes, you appear to be a bit English. Everyone likes to be a bit exotic, don't they?
Say, oh yeah, there appears to be a little bit of Egyptian princess in you or something. Do you think so?
Like many countries around the world, Australia's government has voiced concerns about the impact of social media on young people.
And the Aussie powers that be have taken a bold approach to effectively ban under-16s from having accounts on these platforms. Oh, really? Yes. So this was announced just last week.
So they say, "Social media is doing harm to our kids, and I'm calling time on it," said the prime minister. Now, you both are parents, right?
So before we get into any of the meat of this, what's your immediate reaction to— both of your kids are under 16, so cool.
It really, really worries me.
I worry about the fact that if they're having a horrible time at school, they won't be able to escape it because they will be constantly on social media.
I worry about the effect of AI friends they might make. I worry about bullying. There's so much. Yeah.
Apparently it gives you a score as to how many snaps you've received or sent. Oh, does it?
Check. And this approach has backing across political divides. The leaders of all 8 Australian states and mainland territories have unanimously backed the plan.
Opposition party said it would have done the same thing after winning elections due within months if the government hadn't moved first.
I think that the grumpy old people like myself are the ones who are saying, yes, this is a really bloody good idea.
So in other words, they need to take reasonable steps to stop people under 16 from creating and holding accounts. Okay, that's all about creating and holding accounts.
And if they fail, they could impose fines up to $50 million Australian or $32 million US for non-compliance. That doesn't feel like very much.
And of course, other countries are trying to figure out ways to mitigate the risk of the evils of social for Gen Z and Alphas.
Like in June this year, 10 US states have passed laws requiring children access to social media be restricted or parental consent gained.
Last year, France introduced legislation to ban children under 15 from accessing online services unless they have parental permission.
And we thought, okay, fine, you know, it's a nice Christmas present, it's fine, appropriate for his age if we get the right games.
We bought him one, and lots of his friends got one.
One of them didn't, and so the dad actually went out and bought one after Christmas so that his son could be the same as the other boys in his year.
And so it only takes one parent to give in, and then it becomes a snowball effect, because it is hard if one of them's doing something and the others aren't.
You don't want your child to be left behind or be the weirdo.
So what's interesting is no jurisdiction so far has seemed to have used age verification methods like biometrics or government identification to enforce a social media age cutoff.
These are two methods that are apparently being trialed in Australia. That's not to say that they're going to be implemented, but they're being trialed at this point.
And the other interesting thing is the bill won't stop people under 16 from watching videos on YouTube or seeing content on Facebook.
It's primarily designed to stop them from making accounts. And this means that the wider ecology of anonymous web-based forums including problematic spaces like maybe 4chan.
One of them is this is a world-first proposal to set the highest age limit by any country, apparently. And there's no exception for parental consent.
And there is no exception for preexisting account holders. So who should be boss, parents or government? It's a bit like buying alcohol, isn't it?
And I'd say, yes, I am. Even now, me, and I'm still very young obviously, but I get asked for ID a lot, especially going into pubs. That once happened to us, Anna.
She had to produce her own ID in order for me to be able to buy it.
But it is, as Anna describes, extremely hard because the whole nag factor of children and so much, I think, of kids' social interaction these days actually does happen online.
Then, much as it might gall us, then they're not getting together quite as much maybe as we would like to imagine we did when we were kids.
And so, you know, during lockdown, for instance, things like Fortnite were fantastic because it let kids play with each other.
My son would love to watch YouTube Kids, and he'd be allowed to watch YouTube Kids by the companies, but I don't let him watch it because the stuff that is on there is just rubbish.
That has to be a consideration, but I think there needs to be more put in place where it's harder for them to access it in the first place.
MSD International in Australia say removing the benefits that social media brings will not achieve the government's objective of improving young people's lives and ignores the fact that the harms extend beyond children and young people to marginalized groups and people.
Yeah.
And the Australian Human Rights Commission says, given the potential of these laws to significantly interfere with the rights of children and young people, the commission has serious reservations about the proposed social media.
The appointed cyber czar, Elon Musk, has also publicly poo-pooed it. Of course he has. Yeah, I wonder why.
Seems like a backdoor way to control access to the internet by all Australians.
They were little cartoon ones which would explain you know, about the kings of England or about various wars and battles which had happened around the world.
And he learned a lot about World War II and, you know, the Napoleonic Wars and things like this. And this wasn't harmful to him. This was his way of educating himself.
And it wasn't just entertaining, it was him learning.
Also many more minor platforms and services. I'm sure they'll be able to add to that list as they see fit.
Interestingly, the legislation has an exclusion framework that exempts messaging apps such as WhatsApp, online gaming platforms, and services with the primary purpose of supporting the health and education of end users.
So things like Google Classroom.
So I was watching some of the parliamentary discussion on this, and one of the questions raised was, how do you define a social media platform from, say, a messaging app? Yeah.
And they got specific, why ban Snapchat but not WhatsApp? And there was a little bit of floundering.
But I think I have a reason that I feel fits, but I want to see if you guys have any thoughts.
I mean, the gamification of Snapchat that you mentioned earlier, that's one difference. I've never seen that on WhatsApp.
I don't get awards for sending more messages or less messages.
But one thing that I noticed was that WhatsApp, unless you're in WhatsApp Business, but WhatsApp for consumers doesn't have ads, right?
And Snapchat itself boasts itself to potential advertisers.
I went to their website and it says, "Reach Gen Z and millennials with Snapchat ads." And it says Snapchat reaches 90% of 13 to 24-year-olds population, 25+ countries.
I wondered what about YouTube as well, and the advocacy group that put together the report suggested that YouTube remain accessible to kids, but they remain concerned by young people being able to start their own accounts and upload videos.
I think it's interesting that they're focusing here on accounts, right? Because it's about them being tracked, I suppose. So it's not so much about them seeing content.
Whereas if you just anonymously go to a website, you were given the analogy of having a bouncer at the door.
Well, the bouncer at the door is at the point where you enter your credentials to log into a site.
I'd love you to have the— I'd love you to have it, son." Unfortunately, that evil Prime Minister has prevented it.
Imagine taking a proactive deny-by-default approach to cybersecurity, blocking every action, process, and user unless specifically authorized by your team.
ThreatLocker helps you do this and provides a full audit of every action for risk management and compliance.
Onboarding and operation is fully supported by their US-based support team.
Stop the exploitation of trusted applications within your organization to keep you running efficiently and securely.
Worldwide, companies like JetBlue trust ThreatLocker to secure their data and keep their business operations flying high.
To learn more about how ThreatLocker can mitigate unknown threats and ensure compliance for your organization, visit smashingsecurity.com/threatlocker.
That's smashingsecurity.com/threatlocker. And thank you to ThreatLocker for sponsoring the show.
Vanta automates compliance for SOC 2, ISO 27001, and more, saving you time and money while helping you build customer trust.
Plus, you can streamline security reviews by automating questionnaires and demonstrating your security posture with a customer-facing trust center, all powered by Vanta AI.
Over 7,000 global companies like Atlassian, Flow Health, and Quora use Vanta to manage risk and prove security in real time. Get $1,000 off Vanta when you go to vanta.com/smashing.
That's vanta.com/smashing for $1,000 off.
Quick question: do your end users always, and I mean always without exception, work on company-owned devices and IT-approved — I didn't think so.
So my next question is, how do you keep your company's data safe when it's sitting on all of those unmanaged apps and devices?
Well, 1Password has an answer to this question, and it's called Extended Access Management.
1Password Extended Access Management helps you secure every sign-in at every app on every device because it solves the problems traditional IAM 1Password.com/Smashing.
Go and check it out for yourself at 1Password.com/Smashing. That's 1Password.com/Smashing. And thanks to the folks at 1Password for supporting the show.
And welcome back, and you join us at our favourite part of the show, the part of the show that we like to call Pick of the Week. Pick of the Week.
Could be a funny story, a book that they've read, a TV show, movie, a record, a podcast, a website, or an app. Whatever they wish. It doesn't have to be security-related necessarily.
No. I talked about hobs with knobs and how hobs needed to have knobs. Oh, I— how could I forget?
A listener did come back and gave him some advice, I believe.
And the problem is that a lot of induction stovetops or induction hobs these days have touch-sensitive controls, and you press them and they don't really work well.
And I just wanted a knob you could turn. Who's getting old, right? Yeah, exactly. I found one with a proper knob. Physical control. And I recommended it in episode 339.
And Carole, who got a little bit annoyed about me going on about my hob so much, with its knobs, said she didn't want to hear about it for at least a year.
And she said, "I'd love you to come back on and tell me how you're getting on." Well, there we go.
It worked very well and continued to work very well until last month when two of the hobs— it wasn't a problem with the knobs— two of the hobs stopped working, which means that half of my stovetop is no longer working.
We're going to be making Christmas dinner. And they got back to me and they said, unfortunately, your warranty ran out two weeks ago. So this is not a Pick of the Week.
This is a Nitpick of the Week. You see what I've done here? It's a nitpick because it's about electrical items which fail within days of your warranty running out.
Oh, it didn't cost very much. Interesting. That's the problem, Graham. Oh, so you bought a piece of shit?
Did you watch them?
I'll just watch one more." That's what I want. So, the latest show I've been enjoying is Day of the Jackal.
And he takes on their identities, and then he becomes them in order to kill more people. But he's a top, high-level assassin. There's an Elon Musk tech guru called UDC.
There's lots of rich people trying to get one over on each other. But what's interesting about this show is that they also show his human side.
So he's a family man, and he appears to love his wife and his baby son.
That's my pick of the week.
And she took me to see the 2024 Palme d'Or winner, a movie called Anora.
Note, Graham, yeah, not Narrowly Missed the Palme d'Or, which we recommend— Graham and I don't recommend for reasons we can talk about another time. But the winner.
Okay, so the premise, just quickly, you've got this Uzbek-American seasoned stripper, Anora.
And she knows all the moves, and she's entrusted by her boss to do the sexy routine for any Russian-speaking clients.
And one day, she meets a kid, or a young adult, called Vanja, the son of a gazillionaire Russian oligarch.
And she dances for him, he swoons, they hit it off à la Pretty Woman, and he turns her life upside down because he is beyond wealthy, completely free, and only 21.
And life is good, you know? And Anora can't believe that she's finally been chosen for this wonderful world. What could go wrong? More than you can imagine is the answer.
This is Cinderella minus— for adults, minus the saccharine ending. But it is a wisecracking whirlwind of a film. It has romance, it has loads of sexy times.
Starts with it right at the beginning. But it has action and comedy gold moments. People were in hysterics in the theater. And it's 2.5 hours long, apparently. But it flew by.
Literally, I was thinking, "Oh, I'm probably about halfway," and the movie was ending. Strong acting, strong direction, strong script.
There's a few cameos our oligarch kid slides into the first scene à la Thom Cruise in— what was it? Risky Business. Risky Business, exactly.
And there's a word-for-word scene that's taken out of Pretty Woman. A cameo for that. So it's genius, and it's a must-see for all adult movie buffs.
It talks, it kind of flirts with the whole concepts of class wars, gender roles, money, flawed humanity.
I'm sure lots of our listeners would love to find out what you are up to and follow you online. What's the best way for folks to do that?
Follow Smashing Security in your favorite podcast app, such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and Pocket Casts.
It's thanks to them all that this show is free.
For episode show notes, sponsorship info, guest lists, and the entire back catalog of more than 394 episodes, check out smashingsecurity.com.
Hosts:
Graham Cluley:
Carole Theriault:
Guest:
Anna Brading – @annabrading
Episode links:
- KC Man Indicted for Computer Hacking – Department of Justice.
- DNA testing company vanishes along with its customers’ genetic data – Malwarebytes.
- DNA firm holding highly sensitive data ‘vanishes’ without warning – BBC News.
- Australia proposes ‘world-leading’ ban on social media for children under 16 – Reuters.
- The government has introduced laws for its social media ban. But key details are still missing – The Conversation.
- Australia’s under-16 social media age ban legislation excludes messaging apps – YouTube.
- Australia’s plan to ban children from social media popular but problematic – PBS News.
- Which Countries Are Considering Social Media Bans For Teens? – Newsweek.
- Graham’s previous encounter with hobs with knobs – Smashing Security.
- “The Day of the Jackal” trailer – YouTube.
- “Anora” trailer – YouTube.
- Smashing Security merchandise (t-shirts, mugs, stickers and stuff)
Sponsored by:
- 1Password Extended Access Management – Secure every sign-in for every app on every device.
- Vanta – Expand the scope of your security program with market-leading compliance automation… while saving time and money. Smashing Security listeners get $1000 off!
- ThreatLocker – the Zero Trust endpoint protection platform that provides enterprise-level cybersecurity to organizations globally. Start your 30-day free trial today!
Support the show:
You can help the podcast by telling your friends and colleagues about “Smashing Security”, and leaving us a review on Apple Podcasts or Podchaser.
Become a Patreon supporter for ad-free episodes and our early-release feed!
Follow us:
Follow the show on Bluesky, or join us on the Smashing Security subreddit, or visit our website for more episodes.
Thanks:
Theme tune: “Vinyl Memories” by Mikael Manvelyan.
Assorted sound effects: AudioBlocks.


