Hackers claim control over Venice San Marco anti-flood pumps


Hackers claim control over Venice San Marco anti-flood pumps

Pierluigi Paganini
April 12, 2026

Hackers breached Venice ’s San Marco flood system, claiming control of pumps and the ability to disable defenses and flood coastal areas.

The technologies that govern the physical world are the quiet infrastructure of modern life. From energy grids to water systems, from factories to flood defenses, operational technology (OT) has long had one essential mission: to keep everything running.

But today, that is no longer enough. The question the market is asking has fundamentally changed: can these systems withstand a cyberattack? If the answer is no, then what we are building is not infrastructure, it is vulnerability at scale.

This shift is not theoretical. It is happening now, and recent events in Venice have made it painfully real.

A cyberattack recently targeted the hydraulic pump system that protects Piazza San Marco (Venice) from flooding, an iconic location visited by millions each year. The threat actor, operating under names such as “Infrastructure Destruction Squad” or “Dark Engine,” claimed to have gained administrative access to the system. In their own words, they suggested they could “disable defenses and flood coastal areas,” turning a digital intrusion into a potential physical disaster.

The group announced the security breach on its Telegram channel with the following post written in Chinese language:

“We, the Infrastructure Destruction Squad, hereby formally announce the truth about the San Marco incident:

Yes, you conducted new checks after the attack in late March. Yes, equipment tests came back positive after Easter. But what you haven’t understood is that we refused to completely shut down the flood defense system.

We are not here to destroy you. We are simply here to deliver a message: We can do it, and we are still inside your network.

No tests conducted by your security teams can drive us away. No system updates can expel us. We have been here for months and will remain here for months to come.

Any newspaper that disseminates this news without understanding the truth, prepare for a devastating attack. We will prove to you that you are vulnerable.”

The breach reportedly began in late March, with attackers accessing the control interface of the system. By early April, they started releasing evidence, screenshots of control panels, system layouts, and valve states. Hackers claimed they breached Italy’s flood risk reduction system, gaining full control to potentially disable defenses and flood areas. They said the goal was to expose critical infrastructure weaknesses and even enable political pressure. The group also offered to sell full root access to the system for just $600, highlighting both the severity of the breach and the low barrier to potential misuse.

“We announce the hacking of the system: SISTEMA DI RIDUZIONE RISCHIO ALLAGAMENTO (Flood Risk Reduction System) belonging to the Italian Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport. We have taken full control of the system. Political objective: To expose the vulnerability of Italy’s critical infrastructure. Control of this system enables the disabling of floodgates, flooding of coastal areas, and political blackmail of the Italian government. Offer for sale: We are granting full root access to the control system. The price is 600 USD for any party wishing to purchase access.”

While authorities confirmed that critical systems protecting the Basilica di San Marco remained unaffected, the incident exposed a deeply concerning reality: even highly symbolic and strategically important infrastructure can be probed, accessed, and potentially manipulated.

Such kind of incidents are really concerning because, unlike traditional IT systems, OT directly interacts with the physical processes. When compromised, the consequences are not just data loss, but service disruption, economic damage, and even threats to public safety.

This is not an isolated case. Across the globe, critical infrastructure is becoming increasingly exposed. The convergence of IT and OT, remote access for maintenance, and the widespread use of legacy technologies have created a perfect storm of risk. Many industrial systems were never designed with security in mind. They were built for longevity and reliability, not resilience against adversaries. And adversaries are evolving fast.

On April 7, 2026, U.S. agencies, including FBI, CISA, and NSA, warned of Iran-linked APTs exploiting internet-exposed OT systems.

Threat actors are carrying out cyberattacks targeting internet-connected operational technology (OT) across multiple critical infrastructure sectors. Iran-linked actors are believed to be behind the activity, aiming to cause disruption in areas such as government services, water systems, and energy.

The attacks involve manipulating project files and altering data shown on HMI and SCADA systems, leading in some cases to operational disruptions and financial losses. Authorities urged organizations to review indicators of compromise and apply mitigations to reduce risks. The campaign has been linked to groups like CyberAv3ngers, associated with Iran’s IRGC.

These actors are not necessarily exploiting unknown vulnerabilities, they are often leveraging legitimate tools and exposed interfaces to gain access and manipulate operations.

In other words, the attack surface is not just technical, it is architectural.

The Venice incident also highlights a broader strategic shift. This was not a typical ransomware attack aimed at financial gain. The symbolic “price” reportedly associated with access, just a few hundred dollars suggests a different motivation. The goal appears to be demonstration and disruption, a way to show that critical infrastructure can be reached, influenced, and potentially weaponized.

For organizations operating in industrial sectors, the implications are profound. Security can no longer be an afterthought, something added later as a patch or a compliance checkbox. It must be embedded from the start, secure-by-design.

That means:

  • Controlled and monitored access
  • Strong authentication mechanisms
  • Segmentation between IT and OT networks
  • Continuous monitoring and threat detection
  • Protection of remote connections and supply chains

Companies that fail to adopt these principles are not just behind, they are exposing themselves and their customers to unacceptable risk. And yet, within this challenge lies a major opportunity.

In today’s industrial landscape, success is no longer defined by building machines that simply work. It is defined by building systems that remain trustworthy, even when under attack. The winners will be those who can guarantee not just performance, but resilience.

This is a win-win scenario. Secure systems protect businesses, ensure continuity, and safeguard public trust. They also create competitive advantage in a market that increasingly values reliability under pressure.

The story of Venice is a warning, but also a lesson.

It reminds us that the line between cyber and physical is gone. That a vulnerability in code can translate into water rising in a historic square. That attackers no longer need to break in with force, they can log in.

And most importantly, it reinforces a simple but urgent truth:

In the world of OT, security is no longer optional. It is foundational.

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, Venice)







Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Do you ever walk past a person on the streets exhibiting mental health issues and wonder what happened to their family? I have a brother—or at least, I used to. I worry about where he is and hope he is safe. He hasn’t taken my call since 2014.

James and his brother as young children playing together before his brother became sick. James is on the right and his brother is on the left.

James and his brother as young children playing together before his brother became sick. James is on the right and his brother is on the left.

When I was 13, I had a very bad day. I was in the back of the car, and what I remember most was the world-crushing sound violently panging off every surface: he was pounding his fists into the steering wheel, and I worried it would break apart. He was screaming at me and my mother, and I remember the web of saliva and tears hanging over his mouth. His eyes were red, and I knew this day would change everything between us. My brother was sick.

Nearly 20 years later, I still have trouble thinking about him. By the time we realized he was mentally ill, he was no longer a minor. The police brought him to a facility for the standard 72-hour hold, where he was diagnosed with paranoid delusional schizophrenia. Concluding he was not a danger to himself or others, they released him.

There was only one problem: at 18, my brother told the facility he was not related to us and that we were imposters. When they let him out, he refused to come home.

My parents sought help and even arranged for medication, but he didn’t take it. Before long, he disappeared.

My brother’s decline and disappearance had nothing to do with the common narratives about drug use or criminal behavior. He was sick. By the time my family discovered his condition, he was already 18 and legally independent from our custody.

The last time he let me visit, I asked about his bed. I remember seeing his dirty mattress on the floor beside broken glass and garbage. I also asked about the laptop my parents had gifted him just a year earlier. He needed the money, he said—and he had maxed out my parents’ credit card.

In secret from my parents, I gave him all the cash I had saved. I just wanted him to be alright.

My parents and I tried texting and calling him; there was no response except the occasional text every few weeks. But weeks turned into months.

Before long, I was graduating from high school. I begged him to come. When I looked in the bleachers, he was nowhere to be seen. I couldn’t help but wonder what I had done wrong.

The last time I heard from him was over the phone in 2014. I tried to tell him about our parents and how much we all missed him. I asked him to be my brother again, but he cut me off, saying he was never my brother. After a pause, he admitted we could be friends. Making the toughest call of my life, I told him he was my brother—and if he ever remembers that, I’ll be there, ready for him to come back.

I’m now 32 years old. I often wonder how different our lives would have been if he had been diagnosed as a minor and received appropriate care. The laws in place do not help families in my situation.

My brother has no social media, and we suspect he traded his phone several years ago. My family has hired private investigators over the years, who have also worked with local police to try to track him down.

One private investigator’s report indicated an artist befriended my brother many years ago. When my mother tried contacting the artist, they said whatever happened between them was best left in the past and declined to respond. My mom had wanted to wish my brother a happy 30th birthday.

My brother grew up in a safe, middle-class home with two parents. He had no history of drug use or criminal record. He loved collecting vintage basketball cards, eating mint chocolate chip ice cream, and listening to Motown music. To my parents, there was no smoking gun indicating he needed help before it was too late.

The next time you think about a person screaming outside on the street, picture their families. We need policies and services that allow families to locate and support their loved ones living with mental illness, and stronger protections to ensure that individuals leaving facilities can transition into stable care. Current laws, including age-based consent rules, the limits of 72-hour holds, and the lack of step-down or supported housing options, leave too many families without resources when a serious diagnosis occurs.

Governments and lawmakers need to do better for people like my brother. As someone who thinks about him every day, I can tell you the burden is too heavy to carry alone.

James Finney-Conlon is a concerned brother and mental health advocate. He can be reached at [email protected].



Source link