
Medical Device Cybersecurity And The Not-So-Hidden Threat Of Backdoors
The threats guiding the world of medical device cybersecurity encompass many attack types. Data breaches, malware and ransomware continue to increase, making the environment volatile and ever-changing. While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires cybersecurity controls and protocols before and after approval, no device or network can be completely risk-free.
In analyzing the threat landscape, calling attention to backdoors is important. Backdoors describe hidden functionality that's unknown to device users. They can lead to unauthorized access, allowing hackers to bypass the controls in place. A backdoor gives cybercriminals a way to sneak in and steal personally identifiable information (PII) and protected healthcare information (PHI).
So, how big a threat are backdoors?
The Backdoor Threat Level: FDA Issues Risk Alert
At the end of January 2025, the FDA issued a specific risk alert related to backdoors, calling out two patient safety monitors.
The agency identified these vulnerabilities:
• An unauthorized user could remotely control the patient monitoring system. They would be able to perform unwanted actions or crash the device completely.
• The software within the devices has a backdoor, which would compromise the device and network if connected.
• After the device connects to the internet, it begins to collect patient data (PII and PHI) and exfiltrate information from outside the healthcare delivery environment.
The FDA stated it had not received any reports relating to incidents or patient safety because of the vulnerabilities. The FDA and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) are currently working with the manufacturer to resolve the issue.
The alert also relayed that the FDA had authorized these monitors for wired functionality only. However, the agency was aware that some users were connecting via Wi-Fi.
The cyberattack method in the backdoor only becomes active after joining networks and the IP address connected to it does not belong to the manufacturer or a healthcare organization. Instead, it was the property of a university.
The tip for this came from an external researcher via the coordinated vulnerability disclosure process, and CISA then tested the theory, finding it to be true.
A backdoor isn't always malicious. Sometimes, manufacturers enable this to make updates. Manufacturers are required to have updating and patching protocols once devices are on the market. That was not the case with these patient monitoring systems.
Checks And Balances For Backdoors
How did this backdoor gain the power to overwrite files on the device? The FDA's current guidelines have requirements that pertain to backdoors in place. The first is the software bill of materials (SBOM). Manufacturers must submit these with their application to the FDA for approval.
An SBOM lists all pieces of software within a device and its dependencies and metadata. It's an 'inventory' to ensure transparency and mitigate risk. The motivation behind mandating SBOMs is to identify all code, most of which is open source, and ensure that what's in use is the most up to date.
Older versions of much open code have vulnerabilities. In fact, an open-source security report concluded that 86% of codebases assessed had vulnerabilities and 81% had high levels of risk. Those percentages have risen considerably from years past.
An SBOM should act as a transparency mechanism and allow for proper tracking of code so that if anyone finds a vulnerability, it should lead to earlier detection and remedy. These devices have been on the market for some time. Even before SBOMs were mandatory, most premarket submissions included them, but they weren't seriously scrutinized.
A Deeper Dive Into The Code
In the technical document from CISA researchers, key insights emerged on why the device's software was flagged.
The code didn't have any of the features that are best practices for updating. The devices must have a way to update with patches, but this backdoor lacked standard security postures. For example, there was no integrity verification or way to record overwritten files. The other big tell was that remote file sharing was via an IP address, not a DNS entry.
How The Backdoor Got Through
In the technical breakdown and alert, the FDA does not provide any information on this. The company also hasn't issued a response, according to media outlets reporting the story.
Additionally, no software patch is currently available. The recommendation from experts is simply to disconnect the devices. The consequence of this could impact patient care since these patient monitoring devices are in heavy use.
Since the alert came from an outside researcher, it also points to the question of risk assessment by organizations using it. Potentially, penetration testing, vulnerability scanning or other proactive cybersecurity measures would have also found the backdoor.
There is no easy answer to curbing the cyber threats to medical devices. They have become integral in patient care, but manufacturers and providers should be continuously evaluating threats and vulnerabilities.
As devices come onto the market that have to follow the new FDA guidance of SBOMs and patching, backdoors may become easier to prevent and detect. For the entire industry, this is a stark reminder that threats can easily disguise themselves.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump slams Elon Musk as megabill drops AI protections and hits snags in Senate
President Trump slammed Elon Musk's subsidies, and Republican senators struck down a plan to shield artificial intelligence from state regulations. These two middle-of-the-night developments on Tuesday reinforced a growing schism between Trump and Silicon Valley supporters over his "big, beautiful bill." The first development came at 12:44 a.m. ET, when Trump responded to Tesla (TSLA) CEO Musk's ongoing critiques of the package, focusing on the government grants that Musk's companies receive. "Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa," wrote the president in a Truth Social post, adding, "perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this?" The president was referring to the government efficiency group that Musk ran until recently. The president's missive came after Trump's signature legislation underwent key changes in recent days that set off many in the tech industry, Musk most of all, with new measures to tax green energy companies and further support for fossil fuels, as well as a growing price tag. The divide between many in Silicon Valley and the "big, beautiful bill" has been evident for over a month. It appeared set to deepen further when, a few hours later, a closely watched artificial intelligence provision was stripped from the bill itself. This plan, which had many Silicon Valley supporters, was meant to shield the quickly growing AI industry from state and local regulations. But the idea now appears to be dead after Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee turned against a compromise plan Monday evening and stripped it from the bill. It wasn't close in the end, with the Senate voting 99-1 to adopt Blackburn's subsequent amendment in a count that wrapped up a little after 4:00 a.m. ET. Trump's overall package also appears to be teetering Tuesday morning after a series of overnight developments saw two key Republican senators — Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine — uncommitted to vote yes. Those two senators could join two Republicans already committed to voting no, which would be enough to sink the package. The drama between the president and the world's richest man has been up and down for weeks, but it escalated Monday afternoon when Musk offered new electoral threats against Republicans. Musk had already amplified Democrats' critiques and talked about the need for a new political party. He offered a striking promise Monday afternoon that lawmakers who vote for the bill "will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth." Musk, of course, was the biggest donor during the 2024 campaign, spending at least $288 million, most of which was offered in support of Trump. Trump reiterated his critiques of Musk Tuesday morning, speaking to reporters and saying of Musk's objection to losing EV subsidies, "Elon can lose a lot more than that." The president also called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) a "monster that might have to go back and eat Elon." And when asked by a reporter if he would consider deporting Musk, he demurred: "We'll have to take a look." What is unclear for the days ahead is how much the Trump-Musk fight will impact the actual chances of the bill's passage, with Senate amendment votes ongoing. Musk is clearly focused on a debate likely coming later this week, when the House is set to take up the amended measure if it passes. The House is where a vocal bloc of fiscal conservatives — who often vote as part of the "Freedom Caucus" — warily supported a previous version of the bill, saying a previous smaller price tag was too big. Musk even tagged some of these House Republican lawmakers in some of his latest posts, which continued throughout the night with dozens of messages. Musk also responded to Trump's comments about his subsidies by saying his companies like Tesla and SpaceX ( would be fine and that oil and gas subsidies should be removed as well. The back-and-forth over AI also came to a head overnight after the House passed a plan in May that included a complete ban on state regulations of AI for a decade. The little-noticed measure gained wider attention in the weeks that followed, with many of Trump's most loyal supporters opposing it. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene even admitted that she hadn't been aware of the provision when she voted yes. The Georgia lawmaker then announced her opposition and plans to vote no if this "violation of state rights" stayed in the bill. Trump himself doesn't appear to have taken a position on the measure, but it had the backing of his Silicon Valley-aligned aides, most notably the vocal support of AI and crypto czar (and longtime venture capitalist) David Sacks. But Republican opposition grew, and Sen. Blackburn of Tennessee became a leading voice of opposition in the Senate. She entered into negotiations over the issue and appeared to have found a compromise in recent days around the idea that instead of a decade-long ban, the provision would be amended to be a "temporary pause" of five years. States would be strongly discouraged from regulating AI, as lawmakers linked it to access to millions of dollars in AI infrastructure and deployment funding. But even that wasn't enough. Blackburn renounced the compromise, said a moratorium "could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives," and teamed with a top Democrat to strike the provision entirely. Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (a former Trump press secretary) congratulated Blackburn on the move in a post the senator quickly reposted. "This is how you take on big tech!" Sanders wrote. This story has been updated with additional developments. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio


Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Chocolate Recalled in Eight States as 'Life-Threatening' Warning Issued
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Wegmans Semi-Sweet Chocolate Nonpareils have been recalled from stores in eight states and Washington, D.C., following the discovery of undeclared milk allergens in the product's packaging. The recall, announced by Mellace Family Brands California, Inc. on June 25, encompasses specific batches sold at Wegmans retail locations in Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and the D.C. "People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume this product," the company said. Why It Matters Food recalls due to undeclared allergens continue to be a critical public health issue in the United States. Individuals with milk allergies face the constant risk of accidental exposure to this common allergen, which can cause serious—and sometimes fatal—reactions. What To Know Mellace Family Brands California, Inc. recalled Wegmans Semi-Sweet Chocolate Nonpareils after discovering the product contained undeclared milk allergens. The recall applies to 18.5-ounce containers labeled with the following best by and lot codes: 55021 BEST BY: DEC 28, 2025 55031 BEST BY: DEC 29, 2025 55491 BEST BY: FEB 13, 2026 55501 BEST BY: FEB 14, 2026 56061 BEST BY: APR 11, 2026 56071 BEST BY: APR 12, 2026 The product features UPC 0 77890 49787 6. The issue was attributed to a temporary breakdown in the supplier's manufacturing process, resulting in the presence of milk in products labeled as milk-free. As of June 30, no illnesses have been reported, according to the company. Consumers who have purchased Wegmans Semi-Sweet Chocolate Nonpareils with the above lot codes are "urged to return them to the place of purchase for a full refund," according to the company announcement published by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday. What People Are Saying Dr. Sebastian Lighvani, the director of New York Allergy & Asthma PLLC, previously told Newsweek: "Every three minutes in the United States, someone ends up in an emergency room because of an allergic reaction after accidental ingestion of food. So even when we try hard, these reactions are happening. And if you look at the incidence of anaphylaxis, it has skyrocketed in the last five, 10, 20 years. And in the U.S., there's like a 300 to 400 percent increase in the rates of anaphylaxis to foods." Recalled Wegmans Semi-Sweet Chocolate Nonpareils products Recalled Wegmans Semi-Sweet Chocolate Nonpareils products FDA What Happens Next Customers with questions can contact Wegmans Food Markets at 1-855-934-3663 daily from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET. The FDA encourages anyone experiencing symptoms of an allergic reaction after consuming these products to seek medical attention and submit a report through its online complaint system.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why stablecoin issuer Circle wants to be a bank
Circle (CRCL), the stablecoin issuer, has formally applied with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to get a national trust bank charter, it said in a press announcement late Monday. If the national bank regulator grants Circle approval, it plans to spin up a national trust bank called First National Digital Currency Bank, N.A. Such a charter would allow the crypto firm to custody and manage the reserve assets behind its own stablecoins and offer other fiduciary services. 'Establishing a national digital currency trust bank of this kind marks a significant milestone in our goal to build an internet financial system that is transparent, efficient and accessible,' Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire said in a statement. Reuters was the first to report this development. The move would allow Circle, which has seen its stock soar after its recent IPO, to manage the reserve assets for the stablecoins it issues, thus strengthening the firm's competitive position. It would also check the box for a requirement all US stablecoin issuers are expected to meet under related legislation. Only one other crypto firm, Anchorage Digital, holds such a license. Currently, Circle's reserves are held in custody by the Bank of New York Mellon (BK) and managed by BlackRock (BLK). Circle's stock opened 2% lower on Tuesday. It's up 470% from its June 5 IPO price of $31. President Donald Trump has promised to make America the 'crypto capital of the world' and since he's taken office, the crypto world has seen a flood of doors open to mainstream finance. And no other corner of the industry so far has attracted so much attention from Wall Street as Circle's corner, the $253 billion stablecoin market. From Wall Street banks like JPMorgan Chase (JPM) and Bank of America (BAC) to credit card giants Visa (V) and Mastercard (MA), fintech firms, and even Big Tech companies, a swath of corporate America is gearing up their stablecoin strategies ahead of passage of the first-ever US stablecoin legislation later this year. Unlike other cryptocurrencies, the value of stablecoins isn't intended to fluctuate. Instead, they act as a safe haven for investors waiting out crypto's volatility and in that way are seen as a potential gamechanger in the world of cross-border payments. In practice, stablecoins are managed like money market funds, where for every dollar users put in, issuers must set aside assets in reserve. Known as the GENIUS Act, this stablecoin bill would set standards for how US banks and other financial companies can offer stablecoins and how they would need to manage their reserves in cash and US Treasuries. It would also call for issuers of a certain size to be overseen by the OCC, opening the stablecoin market to a far wider range of players. Another broader crypto market structure bill that is expected to take longer to pass, known as the Clarity Act, will open more doors. This bill includes tokenization, which would clear a path for US firms to begin offering blockchain versions of other assets, such as bank deposits, stocks, and bonds. As issuer of the world's second-largest stablecoin, USDC (USDC-USD), Circle is well positioned to benefit from so much new interest. While no one is quite sure how much stablecoins could change global payments, there's already a flurry of proponents predicting a lot of growth ahead. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told lawmakers last month that passing stablecoin legislation could help push the US stablecoin market beyond $2 trillion by the end of 2028. "We view CRCL as an investor must-hold, to participate in the new internet-scale financial system built for the next decade," Bernstein analyst Gautam Chhugani, who initiated coverage of Circle on Monday, said in a note. Bernstein expects the global stablecoin market to grow to $4 trillion over the next decade. David Hollerith is a senior reporter for Yahoo Finance covering banking, crypto, and other areas in finance. His email is at Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data