Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Are there reports of memoblast in cybersecurity threat intelligence in 2024 or 2025?
Executive Summary
The combined analyses show no credible public reports in 2024 or 2025 identifying “memoblast” as a cybersecurity threat, campaign, or malware family, with multiple 2024 intelligence products and 2025 summaries explicitly lacking any mention of that term [1] [2] [3] [4]. A single 2025 consumer‑trust review notes the existence of a domain named memoblast.co and assigns it a moderate trust score, but that assessment concerns a website’s reputation, not a cyber threat‑intelligence finding [5]. Overall, public TI repositories and prominent reports reviewed here produce no evidence that “memoblast” is recognized or tracked by mainstream cybersecurity vendors and government advisories in 2024–2025 [6] [7] [8].
1. What claimants said — pulling the threads apart
The submitted analyses present two distinct claim streams: one asserting an absence of any “memoblast” references in 2024 threat intelligence, and another acknowledging a 2025 web‑reputation entry for memoblast.co without linking it to cyberthreat activity. Multiple 2024 sources—including a #StopRansomware post and an FBI/CISA joint advisory—were reviewed and contain no occurrence of the term “memoblast” nor any indication of a malware or campaign by that name [1] [2]. October 2024 and early 2025 roundups likewise list many active threats but exclude “memoblast”, signaling consistent absence across mid‑2024 through 2025 reporting windows [6] [7]. The distinction between a consumer website review and threat intelligence reports is central: site reputation ≠ threat‑intel confirmation [5].
2. 2024 intelligence: exhaustive checks and notable omissions
Analysts reviewed authoritative 2024 products and sector roundups and found no references to “memoblast” across these public TI materials, including advisories on Iranian‑linked ransomware enablers and industry roundups that cataloged dozens of active families and tools [2] [7]. The FBI/CISA advisory dated August 28, 2024, carries detailed tactics, techniques, procedures, and indicators of compromise for Iran‑based actors but explicitly contains no “memoblast” entry, which would be expected if it were a tracked capability [2]. Other 2024 summaries mention emergent threats such as Emansrepo and Latrodectus Loader, highlighting that reporting captured new names when present; the consistent absence of memoblast across those lists strengthens the observation that it did not surface in that year’s public TI [6].
3. 2025 sources: a website, not a threat dossier
In 2025 the only item referencing the token “memoblast” in the provided analyses is a reputation review of memoblast.co, which assigns a 59/100 trust score and flags limited reputation history as the reason for caution; the review does not allege malicious activity or present technical indicators typical of TI reporting [5]. Major 2025 outputs surveyed—such as M‑Trends 2025 coverage and various sector incident writeups—do not mention memoblast and explicitly show no matches in broader web searches tying the term to cybersecurity TI [3] [4] [8]. Consumer product or supplement scam references using similar names (MemoBlast) were found but operate in a different domain (health/commerce), not cyber threat intelligence [9].
4. Reconciling conflicting signals and assessing credibility
The apparent conflict resolves when recognizing two separate data categories: threat intelligence publications versus web‑reputation or consumer reviews. The TI corpus from 2024 and 2025 reviewed here contains no authoritative mention of memoblast, which undercuts claims that it is an established malware family or campaign tracked by vendors or government agencies [1] [2] [4]. The memoblast.co entry is real but does not equate to TI confirmation, and its moderate trust score suggests caution for users interacting with the domain rather than serving as evidence of a cyber‑espionage or ransomware tool [5]. Analysts and readers should be wary of conflating brand or domain names with threat families without corroborating IOC‑level data or vendor reporting.
5. Bottom line for practitioners and next steps
Based on the materials provided, there are no public TI reports from 2024 or 2025 that identify “memoblast” as a cybersecurity threat; the only related item is a 2025 site reputation review that is unrelated to technical threat‑intel reporting [5] [3] [7]. Security teams should treat memoblast.co as a domain with limited reputation footprint per the review and apply normal web caution controls, but they do not need to add “memoblast” to threat feeds or detection rules absent new, verifiable IOC or vendor advisories [5] [8]. If new evidence emerges—technical indicators, vendor writeups, or government advisories—reassessment would be warranted; until then, the public record indicates no memoblast threat in 2024–2025 [6] [7].