Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Aikido Security

Aikido Security Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

aikido.dev

Aikido Security unifies code, cloud, and runtime protection with attack testing in one developer-first platform. Built for teams of any size, Aikido helps organizations ship secure software faster and automate protection. Trusted by 50k+ orgs including Revolut, Supermetrics, The Premier League, Tines, n8n, Laravel, and SoundCloud to secure everything they build, host, and run. Aikido gets developers back to building.


Aikido Security A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

Aikido Security
Company Information
Website:https://www.aikido.dev
Employees number:165
Number of followers:23,775
NAICS:5112
Industry Type:Software Development
Homepage:aikido.dev
Aikido Security Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 700 and 749
logo
Aikido SecuritySoftware Development
Updated:
02/06/2026
715/1000
Moderate
Ba
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
Aikido Security Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
Aikido SecuritySoftware Development
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

Aikido Security
Aikido SecurityModerate
Current Score
715Ba (MODERATE)
01000
2 incidents
-19.5 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JUNE 2026
736Before Incident
Cyber Attack
01 Jun 2026Aikido Security
Organizations using Red Hat’s compromised npm packages: Attackers Hijack Red Hat npm Scope to Steal Cloud Secrets

Red Hat’s npm Namespace Hijacked in Supply Chain Attack Targeting Cloud Credentials

715After Incident
CRITICAL-21
AIK1780403445
Red Hat’s npm Namespace Hijacked in Supply Chain Attack Targeting Cloud Credentials On June 1, an attacker hijacked Red Hat’s official npm namespace (@redhat-cloud-services) to distribute backdoored versions of 32 widely used packages, compromising a trusted software supply chain. The malicious releases published within a 72-second window impacted components of Red Hat’s Hybrid Cloud Console ecosystem, including UI tools, API clients, and build utilities, with a combined total of nearly 10 million downloads. Unlike typical typosquatting attacks, the threat actor took control of a legitimate namespace, replacing authentic packages with versions containing hidden malware. The payload, a variant of the Mini Shai-Hulud worm (tracked as Miasma by Aikido Security), executed via obfuscated preinstall scripts, meaning exposure occurred simply by installing or building the package regardless of whether it was used in production. The malware targeted sensitive credentials, including cloud provider keys, CI/CD tokens, and npm authentication details, while also attempting to propagate by republishing backdoored versions of other accessible packages using stolen publishing tokens. Notably, the attack exploited GitHub Actions OIDC tokens, suggesting the compromise originated in the build pipeline rather than a developer’s personal account. This method subverted "trusted publishing," a security feature designed to replace long-lived npm tokens with short-lived, build-issued credentials. The incident highlights how pipeline breaches can undermine even hardened security controls. By the time researchers analyzed the activity, Red Hat had released clean versions of all affected packages, and the malicious releases were removed from npm. However, any project that installed the compromised versions or ran an install before their removal remains at risk, as the payload executes during installation. Organizations affected were advised to treat systems as potentially compromised and rotate exposed credentials.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain Attack
MOTIVATION
Credential theft, lateral movement
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Cloud provider keys, CI/CD tokens, npm authentication detailsSystems Affected: Projects installing or building the compromised npm packagesOperational Impact: Potential credential exposure, risk of further compromiseBrand Reputation Impact: High (trusted namespace compromise)
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Credentials (cloud provider keys, CI/CD tokens, npm tokens)Sensitivity Of Data: High
MAY 2026
736Before Incident
APRIL 2026
736Before Incident
MARCH 2026
753Before Incident
Cyber Attack
14 Mar 2026Aikido Security
GitHub, Reworm, npm, Wasmer, anomalyco and VS Code Marketplace: Invisible malicious code attacks 151 GitHub repos and VS Code — Glassworm attack uses blockchain to steal tokens, credentials, and secrets

GitHub, npm, and VS Code Repositories Compromised by Glassworm’s Invisible Unicode Attack

735After Incident
CRITICAL-18
NPMGITCODAIKWAS1773555952
GitHub, npm, and VS Code Repositories Compromised by Glassworm’s Invisible Unicode Attack Researchers at Aikido Security uncovered a sophisticated campaign by the threat actor Glassworm, which compromised at least 151 GitHub repositories between March 3 and March 9 by embedding malicious payloads in invisible Unicode characters. The attack has since expanded to npm packages and the VS Code Marketplace, with additional infections detected as recently as March 12. The technique exploits Unicode Private Use Area characters (ranges `0xFE00–0xFE0F` and `0xE0100–0xE01EF`), which appear as zero-width whitespace in code editors and terminals effectively hiding malicious code in plain sight. A hidden decoder extracts these bytes and executes them via `eval()`, deploying a second-stage payload that has previously leveraged the Solana blockchain for command-and-control (C2) operations, enabling token theft, credential harvesting, and secret exfiltration. Notable targets include repositories from Wasmer, Reworm, and anomalyco (developers of OpenCode and SST). The same attack pattern was found in two npm packages and one VS Code extension, suggesting broader infiltration. Aikido Security estimates the 151 identified repositories represent only a fraction of the total, as many were deleted before analysis. Unlike previous attacks, this campaign employs subtle, context-aware modifications, such as version bumps and minor refactors, designed to blend seamlessly with legitimate code. The consistency across 151 distinct codebases suggests the use of large language models (LLMs) to automate the generation of plausible cover changes, making manual detection nearly impossible. Glassworm has been active since at least March 2025, when Aikido first documented its Unicode-based attacks in malicious npm packages. By October 2025, the group had expanded to Open VSX and GitHub repositories, leveraging stolen credentials to propagate further. Earlier research by Koi Security revealed that decoded payloads deployed hidden VNC servers and SOCKS proxies for persistent remote access. The Solana-based C2 infrastructure complicates mitigation, as blockchain transactions are immutable. The attack’s sophistication combining invisible code injection, AI-generated camouflage, and decentralized C2 poses a significant challenge for traditional security measures, particularly visual code reviews. Automated tooling capable of detecting zero-width Unicode characters is now critical for defense.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Supply Chain Attack
MOTIVATION
Token theftCredential harvestingSecret exfiltration
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Credentials, secrets, and sensitive dataGitHub repositoriesnpm packagesVS Code extensionsOperational Impact: Persistent remote access via hidden VNC servers and SOCKS proxiesBrand Reputation Impact: Potential damage to affected entities' reputationIdentity Theft Risk: High (due to credential harvesting)
DATA BREACH
CredentialsSecretsSensitive dataSensitivity Of Data: HighData Exfiltration: Yes
FEBRUARY 2026
753Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
753Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
753Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
753Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
753Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
753Before Incident
AUGUST 2025
753Before Incident
JULY 2025
753Before Incident

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for Aikido Security ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What was Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on Aikido Security's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with Aikido Security ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view Aikido Security's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?