Channel
@ptswarm
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
7,518subscribers
+104 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001339364105 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ptswarm |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 27 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 16 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 27 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ptswarm |
Hacking & security — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 95% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 27 Sept 2026, 21:15 | 7,518 | +16 |
| 18 Sept 2026, 14:00 | 7,502 | +12 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 04:19 | 7,490 | +7 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 06:01 | 7,483 | +3 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 06:42 | 7,480 | +14 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 10:23 | 7,466 | +8 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 05:33 | 7,458 | +1 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 20:18 | 7,457 | +1 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 16:17 | 7,456 | +9 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 03:45 | 7,447 | +9 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 05:06 | 7,438 | +16 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 09:53 | 7,422 | +8 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 18:12 | 7,414 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 14:42 | 7,413 | -1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 08:30 | 7,414 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 08:22 | 7,414 | first reading |
21 posts held, back to 24 March 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 15 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 21 posts for this entry, the most recent from 24 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Measured directly from 3 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
797 reactions across 21 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 97.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 775 | 97.2% | |
| 👎 | 22 | 2.76% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 21 of the 21 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 797 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 24 March 2025 to 24 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
⚡️ IPAHound has received an important update! Now we support BloodHound CE. You can use the -O collector flag to output in OpenGraph format. We have prepared neo4j queries directly in the object descriptions for easy analysis of the FreeIPA graph. https://github.com/IPAHound/IPAHound
👍26
🐘 PHP PDO layer exposed! Aleksey Solovev & Nikita Sveshnikov uncovered 2 flaws: SQL Injection in pdo_firebird (CVE-2025-14179) and DoS in PDO via pdo_pgsql (CVE-2025-14180). https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/hack-the-elephant-one-bite-at-a-time-nul-byte-sql-injection-in-pdo_firebird-and-null-pointer-dereference-in-pdo-pgsql/
👍27👎2
👨🏻💻 Did you know that it’s possible to perform RCE in Internet Explorer via clickjacking? Igor Sak-Sakovsky's new article will explain how! https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/the-click-that-shouldnt-have-worked-rce-via-clickjacking-in-internet-explorer/
👍28👎1
🐘 PHP JPEG bugs: how image parsing leads to memory corruption. Our researcher Nikita Sveshnikov discovered two JPEG-related memory-safety bugs in PHP’s ext/standard: CVE-2025-14177 in getimagesize and a heap buffer overflow in iptcembed. https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/hack-the-elephant-one-bite-at-a-time-jpeg-related-memory-safety-bugs-in-php/
👍28👎2
🧑🚒 Our researcher Mikhail Sukhov shares his knowledge and experience in analyzing FreeIPA environments. He also introduces his new tool, IPAHound 💪 Go ’n see the details ➡️ https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/thinking-in-graphs-with-ipahound/
👍46
🔥 Read the new article by our researcher Timofey Duditsky. The write-up dives into the AMD Platform Configuration Blobs mechanism, shows how it works, and reveals the vulnerability CVE-2025-54502. https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/slowburn-looking-through-amd-platform-configuration-blobs-infrastructure/
👍21
Two bugs. One chain. Full RCE. New research by Aleksandr Zhurnakov on Dell Wyse Management Suite shows how business logic flaws can be chained into complete system compromise. Read the full writeup! https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/business-logic-and-chains-unauthenticated-rce-in-dell-wyse-management-suite/
👍27
🐘 Attack arithmetic: how an integer overflow in PostgreSQL libpq leads to denial of service. Our researcher Aleksey Solovev discovered the vulnerability CVE-2025-12818, which may cause a product using the libpq PostgreSQL library to crash. https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/attack-arithmetic-how-an-integer-overflow-in-postgresql-libpq-leads-to-denial-of-service/
👍20👎1
🚨 Our researcher Alexander Zhurnakov identified two vulnerabilities in Dell Wyse Management Suite prior to version 5.5. In certain configurations, they can be chained to achieve unauthenticated remote code execution. Upgrade now → https://www.dell.com/support/kbdoc/en-us/000429141/dsa-2026-103
👍41
🏆 Two of our research articles are nominated for PortSwigger's Top 10 Web Hacking Techniques of 2025! 1️⃣ Impossible XXE in PHP 2️⃣ Blind trust: what is hidden behind the process of creating your PDF file? Last day to vote if you found them useful! https://portswigger.net/polls/top-10-web-hacking-techniques-2025
👍51👎1
📞 Microsoft fixed an authenticated RCE in Windows Telephony Service (CVE-2026-20931), discovered by our researcher Sergey Bliznyuk. Read the write-up: https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/whos-on-the-line-exploiting-rce-in-windows-telephony-service/
👍55👎1
📑 A new article from our researchers Aleksey Solovev, Nikita Sveshnikov and Vladimir Razov — "Blind trust: what is hidden behind the process of creating your PDF file?". https://swarm.ptsecurity.com/blind-trust-what-is-hidden-behind-the-process-of-creating-your-pdf-file/
👍28👎2
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @ptswarm. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 13 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 27 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“PT SWARM” (@ptswarm), 7,518 subscribers as measured 27 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ptswarm.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.