In this common email scam, a criminal pretending to be your boss or coworker emails you asking for a favor involving money. Here's what do to when a bad actor lands in your inbox.

Don't close this tab! I know there are few combinations of words less interesting than business, email, and compromise. I may as well have written an article about fiber, socks, and responsibility. But this isn't a boring article: it's an article about email con artists who, according to the FBI, are pulling in $26 billion a year by scamming people.

So yeah: business email compromise scams are a big deal. The con artists behind this criminal enterprise will cold email you, pretending to be someone you work with, in order to gain access to money or information. You might get an email that appears to be from your company's CEO asking you to quickly do something like buy gift cards, or you might get an email that looks like it's from an employee at your company asking you to change their direct deposit information. The scam itself can take a lot of forms, but the end goal is to somehow siphon money away from you or the business you work for.

It's worth it for anyone with a desk job to take a few moments to learn how to spot these emails. I talked with a few experts, and they passed along some helpful advice.

**Always Question Urgency**

When I asked two cybersecurity experts about BEC fraud, I expected them to lead with technical advice. Both started with emotions. This makes sense: while such fraud happens on computers, it is at its heart about psychological manipulation. So spotting an email compromise scam requires getting in touch with how you're feeling.

"If an email elicits an emotional response, take a step back and reread it when you're more calm," says Ronnie Tokazowski, a security researcher who has been working to educate people about email scams for over a decade. Tokazowski emphasizes how important creating a false sense of urgency is to such scams. The stress the scam induces is what keeps you from questioning the premise. "People who get pulled into these types of scams … their emotions get very deregulated," he says. That makes you less capable of thinking critically, which is a key part of how such scams work.

Selena Larson, a threat researcher at cybersecurity firm Proofpoint, went a step further. "I don't know if you can print this, but honestly: just breathe," she says. "Slow down, take a deep breath. That actually helps you think more clearly and rationally. Walk away from your computer or your phone and think critically. Would this be an email that someone would send me? Is this is a logical thing that I'm being asked to do?"

You should be particularly skeptical if the person sending the email asks you to keep something quiet.

"Scammers do things like isolate you from your peers," says Larson. "They come at you from a position of authority and say things like, 'Please keep this confidential and only between us.' This type of social engineering makes it so people feel like they have to take an action with some kind of urgency, and that you can't share it with anybody."

So this is the first step: take control of your emotions. Yes, it can be difficult if you work in a demanding field. But it's your best first defense, and your employer will thank you for it (or, at least, they should).

**Always Confirm Through a Second Channel**

Now that you're skeptically questioning the legitimacy of the urgent request, check to make sure the email is coming from the person it claims to be from. The best way to do this is to ask—just be careful.

"If you received an email like this, it's important to pick up the phone and call the number you know to be legitimate," says Larson, adding a caveat. "Do not rely on a phone number in the email itself—it will be owned by the threat actor."

This is a crucial point: any contact information in the email itself is likely compromised, and sometimes cleverly so. Use the phone number you've already saved in your phone for the person in question, or look up the phone number on an official website or in an official company directory. This applies even if the number in the email looks correct, because some scammers will go through the trouble of getting a phone number that's similar to that of the person they're impersonating, all on the hopes that you'll call that number instead of the real one.

"I've seen phone numbers off two digits from the actual phone number," says Tokazowski.

Call the person who supposedly emailed you—using a number you are 100 percent sure is real—and confirm the request is authentic. You could also use some other secure communication channel like Slack or Microsoft Teams, or, if they're in the office, just ask them face to face. The point is to confirm any urgent request somewhere outside of the initial email. And even if the person is your boss or some other bigwig, do not worry about wasting their time.

"The person that is being impersonated would so much rather have someone take the time to confirm than to lose thousands or a million dollars in a malicious transaction," says Larson.

**Check the Email Address**

Getting in touch with the supposed sender isn't always an option. If not, there are a few tricks you can use to spot whether an email is real or fake. The first: check the email address and make sure it's from company domain.

"Always check the domains that you're receiving emails from," says Larson. Sometimes this will be obvious; your CEO likely isn't emailing you from a Gmail account, for example. Sometimes it will be more subtle—fraudsters have been known to purchase domains that look similar to that of the company they're attempting to fraud, all in the hopes of appearing legitimate.

It's also worth checking to see if the email signature matches the address the email is coming from. “If you look in the footer, they'll use the actual domain of the company to make it look legitimate, but that won't match the email address,” says Larson. Just keep in mind that the difference might be subtle. “Lookalike domains are very common: someone will do a slight variation, like an ‘l’ instead of an ‘i’, to make it look legitimate.” One way to test that, if you're suspicious, is to copy and paste the domain half of the address into a browser. If you don't get a website, you're probably dealing with a fake.

Another trick scammers will use is email spoofing, which you can spot by clicking reply and checking the email address that shows up in the "To" field. If it's a different email address than the one the email looks like it arrived from, you're likely dealing with a fake request.

**Go Through the Proper Protocols**

Now this is boring, but the best defense against business email compromise scams might be old-fashioned bureaucracy. If there is a process in place for things that are the common target of scams—large purchases, for example, or updating financial information in a database—then your company is less likely to fall victim to such scams.

“Most of the time, from a process perspective, that request of purchasing something would need to go through human resources, procurement,” says Tokazowski. If you get a request like this over email asking you to bypass the usual processes, be skeptical. “There needs to be a paper trail. Someone saying ‘purchase this from your personal account’ is a process that just wouldn't happen.”

A healthy company probably shouldn't be using email as the workflow for important financial processes. If you want to change your direct deposit information, for example, it's terrible practice for the workflow.

**Leaders: Keep Communication Open**

I have one last piece of advice, and it's for leaders inside companies: don't act in such a way that people will mistake scammers for you. If you regularly email employees and ask for urgent favors while telling people to keep quiet about these requests and to not work through the official channels, you're increasing the odds that your company falls victim to such scams. On the other hand, if you create a company culture of transparency, you're making the company stronger and more resistant.

“An important step is to ensure that you're trying to foster a culture of open communication,” says Tokazowski. Many organizations are structured in a way that communication between various levels is minimized. In such organizations, Tokazowski says, “skip-level meetings” are helpful. This is a style of meeting where a senior manager meets with a middle manager's direct reports without the middle manager there—skipping a level in the hierarchy—to develop stronger paths of communication between all the levels.

Another thing leaders should keep in mind is how important it is to talk openly if your company falls victim to such a scam.

“The shame that people feel, regardless of the type of scam, feeling horrible, is part of how these scams keep working,” says Larson. “Talking about it openly helps the person, their peers, and their colleagues learn how to understand how to protect themselves.”

How to Spot a Business Email Compromise Scam

The United States and China appear locked in a race to weaponize four-legged robots for military applications.

The Chinese military recently unveiled a new kind of battle buddy for its soldiers: a “robot dog” with a machine gun strapped to its back.

In video distributed by the state-run news agency CCTV, People's Liberation Army personnel are shown operating on a testing range alongside a four-legged robot with what appears to be a variant of the standard-issue 5.8 x 42-mm QBZ-95 assault rifle mounted on it as part of China’s recent Golden Dragon 24 joint military exercises with Cambodia in the Gulf of Thailand. In one scenario, Chinese soldiers stand on either side of a doorway while the robot dog enters the building ahead of them; in another, the robot fires off a burst of bullets as it advances on a target.

“It can serve as a new member in our urban combat operations, replacing our members to conduct reconnaissance and identify enemy \[sic\] and strike the target during our training,” one Chinese soldier shown operating the robot told CCTV.

This isn’t the first time the Chinese military-industrial complex has shown off an armed robot dog. In October 2022, Chinese defense company Kestrel Defense published a video showing an unmanned aerial vehicle air-dropping a quadrupedal ground vehicle affixed with a 5.8 x 42-mm QBB-97 light machine gun on a roof during an urban warfare experiment. The company had previously released footage of robot dogs outfitted with combat systems that included everything from smoke grenades to loitering munitions. And as recently as this March, Chinese researchers claimed that tests involving robot dogs outfitted with an unidentified 7.62-mm rifle (likely a variant of the Type 56 assault rifle that’s based on the ubiquitous Soviet-made AK-47) yielded marksmanship that rivaled trained Chinese sharpshooters, according to the South China Morning Post.

China’s demonstration clearly rankled international observers, prompting at least one American lawmaker to call on the US Defense Department for a report on “rifle-toting robot dogs” and their potential national security implications. But if the Chinese military is pioneering the weaponization of robot dogs, then the United States military isn’t far behind.

In the past year, the Pentagon has experimented with outfitting quadrupedal ground robots with its standard-issue 5.56 x 45-mm M4A1 carbine, the 6.8-mm XM7 rifle that the US Army is in the process of adopting under its Next Generation Squad Weapon program, and even the M72 Light Anti-Tank Weapon that’s been in service with American troops since the Vietnam War. Just weeks before CCTV published its footage of armed robot dogs in action, Marine Corps Special Operations Command (MARSOC) revealed that it was experimenting with adding mounted gun systems based on defense contractor Onyx’s artificial intelligence-enabled SENTRY remote weapons system to its own mechanized canines.

American defense officials have been quick to emphasize that the development of weaponized robot dogs is, at this stage, purely experimental, intended to help military planners “explore the realm of the possible” when it comes to the potential applications of revolutionary robotic systems in a future conflict, as one Army official put it last August. But with Army soldiers conducting urban assault drills alongside robot dogs and the Marine Corps increasingly eyeing mechanical quadrupeds to augment future formations with “intelligent robotics,” it may not be too long before the US military is forced to seriously consider adopting armed robot canines for combat before China does.

“Why are we acting surprised by this? It was so obviously coming,” Peter W. Singer, a senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based think tank New America and expert on advanced military technology, tells WIRED. “The first wheeled and tracked \[explosive ordnance disposal\] robots had cameras on them to inspect roadside bombs, then someone added guns to them; the same thing with the Predator drone, which started out unarmed until the military strapped missiles to it. Armed robotics has been a trendline for years.”

A human-machine integration test using the Ghost Robotic Dog and the US Army Small Multipurpose Equipment Transport at Fort Irwin, California, March 15, 2024.Photograph: Spc. Samarion Hicks/U.S. Army/DVIDS

**Man’s Best Friend**

Quadrupedal robots aren’t a new development in the annals of military technology. In 2005, robotics leader Boston Dynamics unveiled BigDog, a four-legged mechanical “pack mule” that was intended to haul weapons and supplies for US troops over terrain considered unwelcoming to traditional wheeled or tracked ground vehicles. Funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and adopted as the Legged Squad Support System by the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, BigDog was eventually deemed too loud for practical use and discontinued after a decade and more than $40 million invested in the much-hyped project.

Despite BigDog’s shortcomings, the underlying research behind the system eventually gave rise to Spot, a smaller and quieter “robot dog” that Boston Dynamics debuted in 2015. While too small to lug around gear and weapons, the system immediately had clear military applications for everything from base perimeter security to remote site inspection. In the years since its introduction, Spot has proven the platform-defining vision of quadrupedal ground robots, inspiring both collaborators like Asylon Robotics’ DroneDog and alleged imitators like Ghost Robotics’ Vision 60 to compete for a slice of the Defense Department’s growing robotics budget.

Based on publicly available media in Defense Visual Information Distribution Service (DVIDS), the Pentagon’s media distribution hub, the adoption of robot dogs across the US military didn’t start in earnest until 2020, when the Air Force integrated a handful of Ghost Robotics systems into what’s called an “agile combat employment” exercise at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada, which saw airmen work with their new best friends to secure an airfield against a simulated attack. Just a few months later, officials at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida became the first US military installation in the world to incorporate the semiautonomous robot dogs into its base security regimen.

“These dogs will be an extra set of eyes and ears while computing large amounts of data at strategic locations throughout Tyndall Air Force Base,” Major Jordan Criss, 325th Security Forces Squadron commander, said of the systems during initial testing in late 2020. “They will be a huge enhancement for our defenders and allow flexibility in the posting and response of our personnel.”

In the intervening years, robot dogs have become an increasingly common fixture across the US military, beyond patrolling sensitive installations. In July 2023, Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota introduced robot dogs to enable airmen to respond to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats “without risking the safety of themselves or others.” In August, Patrick Space Force Base in Florida added robot dogs to its perimeter security rotation for an “additional detection and alert capability.” That same month, the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Philadelphia Division, announced the employment of robot dogs to “build 3-D ship models aboard the ‘mothballed’ fleet of decommissioned ships at the Philadelphia Navy Yard,” while the Coast Guard unveiled four-legged “droid” dogs in Hawaii to “combat weapons of mass destruction.” Finally, in November, airmen at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana debuted robot dogs for explosive ordnance disposal.

Despite these practical noncombat applications, some robotics companies have had an eye on weaponization. In October 2021, Ghost Robotics showed off a so-called “Special Purpose Unmanned Rifle,” or SPUR, quadrupedal robot with an 6.5-mm Creedmoor assault rifle developed by SWORD International mounted on its back during an annual Army weapons expo in Washington, DC, in the first public example of a robot dog armed with a firearm. The following year, a video of a robot dog outfitted with a PP-19 Vityaz submachine gun by Russian entrepreneur Alexander Atamov quickly went viral on YouTube and Twitter. By 2023, an American company had debuted a robot dog with a flamethrower strapped to its back, albeit not explicitly for military use (no longer fielded to US soldiers, using flamethrowers against enemy combatants is technically not prohibited). Like the Predator drone, you can’t build a new robot without someone slapping a weapon on it.

**Cry Havoc**

The public reception to weaponized robot dogs is overwhelmingly defined by concern mixed with discomfort, especially given the rise of autonomous or semiautonomous weapon systems that can independently track and identify targets. Even beyond the conventional invocation of _Terminator_\-inspired techno-anxiety, the robot dogs appear eerily reminiscent of the menacing mechanized canines of _Black Mirror_.

Part of the creep factor stems from the “uncanny valley,” says Singer, invoking the psychological phenomenon in which robots that look and act almost-but-not-quite natural end up unnerving their human observers. “On the engineering side, these robots take inspiration from nature, since real dogs are, through evolution, designed to operate really well in the field,” Singer says. “As a result, we layer our beliefs about these types of creatures on top of ‘bioinspired’ robots, and the more something acts lifelike but not likelike, the more we react with fear or disgust.”

Such anxiety over armed robot dogs even prompted six leading robotics companies—led by Spot pioneer Boston Dynamics—to release a letter in October 2022 promising to prohibit military customers from weaponizing their robots for combat purposes. (SPUR creator Ghost Robotics was not a signatory.)

“We believe that adding weapons to robots that are remotely or autonomously operated, widely available to the public, and capable of navigating to previously inaccessible locations where people live and work, raises new risks of harm and serious ethical issues,” the companies wrote. “Weaponized applications of these newly-capable robots will also harm public trust in the technology in ways that damage the tremendous benefits they will bring to society.”

To be fair, both the US military and American robotics companies have urged caution when it comes to developing autonomous weapons systems. Upon unveiling the SPUR, late Ghost Robotics CEO Jiren Parikh emphasized that the armed robot always has an operator in the loop, with no AI or autonomy-related systems that could potentially falter under extreme circumstances. And while the SENTRY turret that MARSOC is reportedly testing affixed to a pair of robot dogs does use AI to scan for and identify targets, the company also emphasized that the decision to engage with the weapon system is completely reliant on a human operator. While the idea of armed robot dogs with minds of their own running amok may be a recent addition to Americans’ dystopian imagination, the US military-industrial complex appears firmly focused on keeping humans in control at all times.

Ghost Robotics Quadruped Unmanned Ground Vehicles (Q-UGV) pose for a photo at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida, in July 2022.Photograph: Senior Airman Samuel Becker/U.S. Space Force/DVIDS

Despite understandable concerns over their growing role in military affairs, anxiety over packs of armed robot dogs operating on a future battlefield may be premature, according to Sam Bendett, an analyst at the Virginia-based Center for Naval Analyses think tank whose research focuses on robotics and unmanned systems. While footage of armed robot dogs may alarm the average observer, these systems are currently nowhere near agile or versatile enough to make practical sense on chaotic battlefields.

“I had a chance to operate \[a robot dog\] at an AI conference in the Netherlands last year, and it doesn’t have the same dexterity you would expect from a quadruped,” Bendett tells WIRED. “It’s not quite as dexterous, as flexible, or as fast in how it operates. Apart from videos of them doing push-ups and shit like that, it doesn’t run, it can maybe jog, but it can’t even make a turn quite as fast as a tracked or wheeled unmanned ground vehicle.”

“The battlefield is full of man-made and natural countermeasures,” he adds. “That doesn't mean the US and China won't try it out, but it’ll just be in a more limited capacity.”

The Chinese military exercise spotlighted on CCTV may appear concerning, but it’s still a controlled exercise in a managed, relatively stable environment, Bendett says. Until robot dogs demonstrate that they can navigate “the debris of the battlefield” under less-than-ideal conditions, they’ll remain something of a mechanical novelty for military planners.

“Yes, they’re neat, they’re cool,” Bendett says. “But show me a video of a pack of these moving on their own through a forest, not just walking by tapping their feet at every step but actually jogging between trees the way I would with a dog. Then we’ll get to the point where these are actual combat dogs.”

It’s unclear what the future of robot dogs might look like in the ranks of the US military, or even the Chinese military. While they’ve certainly proved useful in augmenting base security and conducting hazardous operations like explosive ordnance disposal, their potential combat applications remain understandably ambiguous. But given American and Chinese military planners’ ongoing experiments with armed robot dogs, the future of warfare may involve not just the grind of tank treads and the roar of helicopter rotors, but the metallic patter of four-legged death across distant battlefields.

Let Slip the Robot Dogs of War

The messaging standard promises better security and cooler features than plain old SMS. Android has had it for years, but now iPhones are getting it too.

If you've been keeping up with all the news out of WWDC 2024 this week, you'll know that Apple is bringing the RCS (Rich Communication Services) messaging standard to iPhones later this year with iOS 18. That's a win for Google, which has long backed RCS on Android. But what actually is RCS? And why does supporting it matter?

The short version: It's an upgrade on the standard SMS/MMS texting standards that smartphones have been using from the start. It brings better support for all the cool features we're used to in our messaging apps, like read receipts and images, and it adds some extra security layers too.

Yes, it's a lot like using iMessage from Apple, or using WhatsApp—though it's not quite that simple. There's no RCS app you can install, but you can find apps that support the RCS standard, as we'll explain.

RCS is coming to iOS this year.

Courtesy of Apple

So the long version: Rich Communication Services is a fundamental standard rather than an app like WhatsApp, Signal, or Telegram. It requires carrier support to work, which is why adoption was slow in the beginning, though RCS now works across most countries and is supported by AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

SMS (Short Message Service) and MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) weren't really built for the modern way that we communicate through our phones, and RCS tries to fix that. It adds or improves support for sharing large-resolution images and video, group chatting, read receipts, video calls, and messages that actually go beyond 160 characters.

When RCS is supported in your phone's default texting app, you can add reactions to messages, see when someone else is typing, and drop extra elements like GIFs, stickers, and your current location into conversations—all features you may well be used to and accept as standard in other apps.

There are changes and upgrades behind the scenes as well. Whereas SMS/MMS requires a data connection to your cellular network, RCS works over cell networks as well as Wi-Fi. If you don't have a cell signal for whatever reason but you can find a wireless network, your message can still go through.

RCS settings on a Pixel phone.

Courtesy of David Nield

The standard also brings end-to-end encryption with it. It means that no one else—not even Google or your carrier—can see the conversation that's taking place, because only the devices involved in the conversation have the keys necessary to decrypt it. End-to-end encryption is a security feature you should look for in any app that handles sensitive information, including communications.

It's a clear upgrade, which is why Google Messages and Samsung Messages now support it—the messaging apps you'll find on Pixel phones and Galaxy phones, respectively. In November 2023, Apple finally relented and agreed to support RCS on the iPhone in 2024, though this course correction perhaps had more to do with concerns about antitrust procedures than any newfound sense of camaraderie with Google.

Now we know that iPhone RCS support is going to arrive in September with iOS 18. This means all of those features we've mentioned—from read receipts to message reactions—will work inside the iOS Messages app. However, Android users are still going to show up as green bubbles, as the RCS standard isn't going to be fully integrated with the iMessage platform that Apple operates.

When you're texting someone with RCS enabled, you'll see "Text Message RCS" inside the text input box in Messages on iOS, indicating that the recipient can take advantage of all the modern messaging features that we're now used to. There's no need to turn RCS on or off—it's automatically enabled if you're chatting with a contact who has a device that supports RCS.

How RCS messages will look on an iPhone.

Courtesy of Apple

With iOS 18 still in its development stage, there might be changes to come for how RCS is handled on iPhones before the software is rolled out to all compatible devices later in the year. This version of iOS will work on any iPhone models launched in 2018 or later, so most Apple handsets currently in use will get the software and RCS.

It's the same with Samsung Messages: RCS is simply enabled when available. It's Google Messages for Android that gives you most control over RCS settings, and you can get to them from inside the app by tapping your profile picture (top right), then selecting **Messages settings**. Choose **RCS chats** and you're able to turn features such as read receipts and typing indicators on or off.

With RCS soon to appear on iPhones and now extensively supported on Android devices, it's going to become less and less likely that your phone will need to revert back to SMS—though it will do this if RCS isn't available for whatever reason. Otherwise, the standard that has powered our text messages since 1992 will finally be able to enjoy a well-earned retirement.

A Guide to RCS, Why Apple’s Adopting It, and How It Makes Texting Better

Contract seafarers in Ukraine are turning to online whisper networks to keep themselves from being hired into Russia’s sanctions-busting shadow fleet.

_This story originally appeared in Hakai Magazine and is part of the Climate Desk collaboration._

A new video appears on the social media network Telegram: footage of the smoking area aboard a large vessel. The curtains are ripped, the lights are broken, and ash and glass litter the floor. “This is how they drink on our ship,” says the young Ukrainian deck worker filming the scene, turning to show the furniture thrown to the corner of the room. “I’m freaked out.”

A Telegram administrator asks the deck worker if he can share the vessel’s name. They change the ship’s name multiple times a year, replies Feliks Bondar, whose own name has been changed for this story. “I don’t even know what name to tell you,” he writes in Ukrainian. “Our ship was originally called _Eagle_, but in Venezuela, we were _Matador_ and then _Shoyo Maru_.”

A chorus of similar messages had flooded the chat in recent months: stories of dangerously rundown ships, operators withholding pay, abandoned crew members, and vessel owners changing ship names or manipulating their automatic identification systems (AIS)—the global network meant to help ships recognize each other.

The Telegram group hosts over 8,000 sailors. Some are fresh out of maritime college, others are seasoned captains. All are drawn to the group by a desire to stay safe on the high seas. By telling their stories and naming names—when they can—these sailors have been gathering information about problematic vessels, detailing everything from those with low-quality food to ships where crews often experience pay delays.

But in recent years, as more sailors are finding themselves unwittingly involved in the so-called shadow fleet—smuggling oil for Iran, Russia, or other clients that have been hit by strict sanctions to restrict their sales of oil—the social media whisper network has evolved. As well as a place to find a reputable employer, it’s become something else: a way for seafarers to avoid helping the other side of a war.

Life as a contract seafarer has never been easy. Workers frequently hop from ship to ship, contract to contract, and country to country. But the rise of the shadow fleet—along with Russia’s war in Ukraine—poses a new kind of risk.

About a year and a half ago, in early 2023, Bondar sought out the seafarers’ Telegram network after a particularly troubling gig. Booked to the job by an Ukraine-based crewing agency, Bondar found that the name of his assigned vessel had been painted over, and the AIS was, once again, unplugged. A note on top of the device warned seafarers not to turn it on.

After a six-month voyage smuggling sanctioned oil to China, Bondar says the crew was told its next operation would begin in Koz’mino, Russia. Russia’s most recent invasion of Ukraine had begun while he was at sea and had already been underway for over four months. Bondar and the other Ukrainians on board refused to work smuggling Russian oil. The ship’s operator allegedly fired them all, ditching them at the nearest port in China.

“Nothing will surprise me anymore,” Bondar wrote in the Telegram group. “I have accumulated enough ‘sea stories’ for the rest of my life.”

The war in Ukraine is taking a huge toll, not only on the soldiers on the front lines but on Ukrainians worldwide. Earlier this year, Stella Maris, an English charity committed to seafarer well-being, reported that depression and anxiety are rising among Ukrainian seafarers. These Ukrainians are trying to provide for their families while worrying about the safety of their loved ones, the future of their homeland, tensions with Russian seafarers, and the fear of conscription if they return home. With Russian troops capitalizing on Ukraine’s temporary weapons shortage—caused by the delayed delivery of Western aid—the plight of Ukraine’s people, including its seafarers, shows little sign of letting up.

Bondar’s was not an isolated incident. Recruitment for the shadow fleet is a complex web of crewing agencies, shell companies, and absentee ship owners. Crewing agencies, tasked with finding seafarers to fill contracts, often know very little about the ships, their cargo, or their owners, creating the ideal conditions for deception. But maritime recruitment data shows that at least six Ukrainian crewing agencies have been involved in sourcing seafarers for 10 Russian ships smuggling oil since Russia began its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Tracking vessels through their myriad identity changes is difficult, but possible. The names of vessels in the fleet change regularly, but their identification numbers do not.

Photo by Em Campos/Alamy Stock Photo

Mazhnuna Karaca, head of operations at Dese Crew Management, a Ukraine-based crewing agency, says she only found out after the fact that her company had been unintentionally trying to solicit seafarers for illegal Russian oil-smuggling operations.

On February 8, 2023, an advertisement seeking crew for a large oil tanker appeared on maritime job forums. The ship’s official identification number along with anything else that might easily identify the vessel were conveniently absent. Karaca, however, confirmed the ship to be the _Danica_, a vessel that had been featured on a shadow fleet watch list compiled by United Against Nuclear Iran, a US-based nonprofit, since December 2022.

Ships such as the _Danica_ that transport illegal oil violate sanctions meant to restrict the economic opportunities of nations that threaten global security. In so doing, the vessels’ owners enable those nations to fund their activities.

Dese Crew Management tried to recruit seafarers for the _Danica_ and two other ships that were later revealed to be part of the Russian shadow fleet. Fortunately, says Karaca, her company never succeeded in sending anyone to the _Danica_ or any of the other known shadow fleet ships during their illicit operations. But only “because rumors spread quickly between sailors,” she says.

Each time Dese found a suitable candidate for the _Danica_, the sailor would abruptly change their mind and refuse to board. That had puzzled Karaca and her staff—until she learned about a different online seafarer whisper network, where details were whirling.

Among seafarers, the company that owns the _Danica_ had a reputation. Digging in deeper, Karaca says the company was originally named Sand & Sea Marine—before it rebranded to Linda Shipping in an attempt to escape its reputation for unsafe conditions, withholding pay, and abandoning crew.

Once aware of the _Danica_’s and the other ships’ involvement in the shadow fleet, Dese Crew Management promptly blacklisted the vessels. Other crewing agencies, however, have been less helpful. On Telegram, some seafarers even believe that crewing agencies have infiltrated the group to post fake positive reviews about the conditions aboard vessels for which they are trying to recruit crew.

Fortunately, the seafarers aren’t so gullible: “This is automated bots or the manager has told everyone to write for them,” one sailor wrote below a suspiciously positive set of reviews. “They shout so much that they are not scammers that I think the opposite,” another adds with a laugh.

During an assembly in December 2023, the International Maritime Organization (IMO)—the branch of the United Nations tasked with managing international maritime transport—urged member states to do more to derail the shadow fleet.

The IMO has encouraged cooperation between coastal member states to help identify suspicious ship-to-ship transfer operations and AIS manipulation, citing risks to “the safety, well-being, and potential criminalization of the crew.” The European Union has called for similar actions while also announcing new sanctions that require the details of any tanker being sold to a Russian entity—including information about the buyer and seller—to be disclosed publicly, opening the door for governments to step in and block the sale if they think the ship might find its way into the shadow fleet.

So far, international regulators have yet to comment on the role crewing agencies play in supplying workers to the shadow fleet. Future guidance could extend the Maritime Labour Convention, calling on member states to ensure that independent crewing agencies operating within their territory receive the IMO numbers of the vessels they work with before advertising positions to seafarers.

Until the shadow fleet is brought under control, seafarers will continue whispering over the water and doing what they can to keep themselves—and each other—safe.

Ukrainian Sailors Are Using Telegram to Avoid Being Tricked Into Smuggling Oil for Russia

Plus: US lawmakers have nothing to say about an Israeli influence campaign aimed at US voters, a former LA Dodgers owner wants to fix the internet, and more.

Despite years worth of efforts to eliminate the scourge of ransomware targeting schools, hospitals, and critical infrastructure worldwide, experts are warning that the crisis is only heating up, with criminal gangs growing ever more aggressive in their tactics. The threat of real-world violence now looms, some experts warn, as the data stolen grows increasingly sensitive and millions in potential profits hang in the balance. “We know where your CEO lives,” read a message reportedly received by one victim. Attacks targeting the medical sector are blooming in response to the $44 million payout by Change Healthcare this March.

United States lawmakers and intelligence officials are circling their wagons following the revelation of Israel’s involvement in a malign influence campaign that targeted US voters—an attempt by America’s Middle East ally to artificially boost support for an increasingly unpopular war that was kicked off by Hamas’ unprecedented Oct. 7th attack. The sock-puppet operation, which was launched by an Israeli contractor on X, Facebook, and Instagram and utilized OpenAI’s ChatGPT software, impersonated mostly Black Americans and targeted “Black and Democratic” lawmakers. A weeks’ worth of efforts by WIRED to get answers from US officials who may have been notified about the operation prior to a vote on enhancing military aide to Israel went ignored. Strikingly, the National Security Council denied having ever heard of it.

Frank McCourt, a real estate mogul and former owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, explained why he’s spearheading an effort to purchase TikTok, which the United States is slated to ban unless its current owner, ByteDance, decides to sell the platform to a US company—a decision that will undoubtedly require the consent of the Chinese government. McCourt sees the internet as being imperiled by closed-off platforms like Facebook and X and is embracing the growing interest in decentralized networks. Decentralized platforms such as Mastodon have been popular among a subset of users for many years, allowing people to effectively own their own social networks and moderate them according to their own rules. These private networks are free to connect with others using the same software but can also sever connections to communities that embrace harmful content. (Think of these user-controlled networks as “islands” with diplomatic ties between them.) McCourt says purchasing and decentralizing TikTok could be the first step in raising the internet out of the siloed swamp that it is today thanks to Meta and its competitors.

But that’s not all. Each week, we round up the security news we didn’t cover in depth ourselves. Click the headlines to read the full stories, and stay safe out there.

****Pentagon Led Anti-Vax Psyops Against Filipinos Under Trump****

A bombshell Reuters investigation has unearthed a malign influence campaign launched by the US military at the height of the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic. The campaign utilized sock-puppet accounts on X, Facebook, and Instagram and was focused on convincing citizens of the Philippines that vaccines produced by China were dangerous and—preying on the religious beliefs of Muslims—full of pig parts. Infectious disease experts expressed dismay at the Pentagon’s actions. According to Reuters, the campaign was ordered to an end by the Biden White House shortly after the president’s inauguration, though the Pentagon was apparently slow to enact the commander in chief’s orders. The private contractor responsible for producing the Pentagon’s disinformation was recently awarded a $493 million US government contract.

****Microsoft Hid Major Vulnerability Tied to Historic SolarWinds Attack****

ProPublica recounts how, in 2016, a top cybersecurity specialist raised alarms about a cloud-based vulnerability at Microsoft, a major US government contractor. The weakness threatened to expose national security secrets among other sensitive data. The specialist “pleaded” with the company to address the problem, but his concerns were dismissed by the tech giant as it strived to secure a multibillion-dollar government contract in the cloud computing space. Frustrated, the specialist quit the company and, months later, as predicted, Russian hackers carried out SolarWinds, one of the largest cyberattacks in US history. The reporting brings into question testimony by Microsoft president Brad Smith, who assured Congress in 2016 there was no way the hackers had exploited his company’s software.

****Police Victims of Face-Recognition Errors Decry California Bill as Inadequate****

Three Black men jailed in the US for crimes they didn't commit—after having been falsely identified by police face-recognition software—are speaking out _against_ pending legislation in California that lawmakers claim would protect citizens from such egregious mistakes. The men say the bill, which passed with unanimous support from the state assembly last month and now is under scrutiny in its upper chamber, would have done nothing to stop them from being falsely arrested. Said one of the men: “In my case, as in others, the police did exactly what AB 1814 would require them to do,” adding, “Once the facial recognition software told them I was the suspect, it poisoned the investigation. This technology is racially biased and unreliable and should be prohibited.”

****The Other Threat From Surveillance Data Brokers: Garbage Data****

While much of the scrutiny facing the data broker industry concerns its power to monitor people’s movements and attendance at sensitive locations such abortion clinics and mental health facilities, there’s another issue at play: Much of the data it markets is “inaccurate trash,” The Record reports. A chief privacy officer at Acxiom, a leading third-party data broker, acknowledged as much in an interview last month, saying the “inferences” drawn by his company are, at best, “informed guesses.” Experts are growing increasingly concerned about the downstream effects, with some highlighting how insurance companies are relying more and more on data brokers to inform how much customers should pay. Another expert tells The Record that data brokers may be incentivized not to scrutinize the data too closely, noting that customers aren’t too worried if a fraction of it leads them to false assumptions.

Ransomware Attacks Are Getting Worse

Cybersecurity firm Recorded Future counted 44 health-care-related incidents in the month after Change Healthcare’s payment came to light—the most it’s ever seen in a single month.

In fact, ransomware attacks on health care targets were on the rise even before the Change Healthcare attack, which crippled the United Healthcare subsidiary's ability to process insurance payments on behalf of its health care provider clients starting in February of this year. Recorded Future's Liska points out that every month of 2024 has seen more health care ransomware attacks than the same month in any previous year that he's tracked. (While this May's 32 health care attacks is lower than May 2023's 33, Liska says he expects the more recent number to rise as other incidents continue to come to light.)

Yet Liska still points to the April spike visible in Recorded Future's data in particular as a likely follow-on effect of Change's debacle—not only the outsize ransom that Change paid to AlphV, but also the highly visible disruption that the attack caused. “Because these attacks are so impactful, other ransomware groups see an opportunity,” Liska says. He also notes that health care ransomware attacks have continued to grow even compared to overall ransomware incidents, which stayed relatively flat or fell overall: The first four months of this year, for instance, saw 1,153 incidents compared to 1,179 in the same period of 2023.

When WIRED reached out to United Healthcare for comment, a spokesperson for the company pointed to the overall rise in health care ransomware attacks beginning in 2022, suggesting that the overall trend predated Change's incident. The spokesperson also quoted from testimony United Healthcare CEO Andrew Witty gave in a congressional hearing about the Change Healthcare ransomware attack last month. “As we have addressed the many challenges in responding to this attack, including dealing with the demand for ransom, I have been guided by the overriding priority to do everything possible to protect peoples’ personal health information,” Witty told the hearing. "As chief executive officer, the decision to pay a ransom was mine. This was one of the hardest decisions I’ve ever had to make. And I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.”

Change Healthcare's deeply messy ransomware situation was complicated further—and made even more attention-grabbing for the ransomware hacker underworld—by the fact that AlphV appears to have taken Change's $22 million extortion fee and jilted its hacker partners, disappearing without giving those affiliates their cut of the profits. That led to a highly unusual situation where the affiliates then offered the data to a different group, RansomHub, which demanded a second ransom from Change while threatening to leak the data on its dark web site.

That second extortion threat later inexplicably disappeared from RansomHub's site. United Healthcare has declined to answer WIRED's questions about that second incident or to answer whether it paid a second ransom.

Many ransomware hackers nonetheless widely believe that Change Healthcare actually paid two ransoms, says Jon DiMaggio, a security researcher with cybersecurity firm Analyst1 who frequently talks to members of ransomware gangs to gather intelligence. “Everyone was talking about the double ransom,” DiMaggio says. “If the people I’m talking to are excited about this, it’s not a leap to think that other hackers are as well.”

The noise that situation created, as well as the scale of disruption to health care providers from Change Healthcare's downtime and its hefty ransom, served as the perfect advertisement for the lucrative potential of hacking fragile, high-stakes health care victims, DiMaggio says. “Health care has always had so much to lose, it’s just something the adversary has realized now because of Change,” he says. “They just had so much leverage.”

As those attacks snowball—and some health care victims have likely forked over their own ransoms to control the damage to their life-saving systems—the attacks aren't likely to stop. “It’s always looked like an easy target,” DiMaggio notes. “Now it looks like an easy target that’s willing to pay.”

_Updated 6/12/24 9:35am ET: This story has been updated to reflect that ransomware incident totals comprise the fist four months of the year, not just April._

Medical-Targeted Ransomware Is Breaking Records After Change Healthcare’s $22M Payout

Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has joined US intelligence officials in ignoring repeated inquiries about Israel’s “malign” efforts to covertly influence US voters.

Federal lawmakers in the US have dodged repeated inquiries over the past week about a covert operation ordered by the Israeli government to artificially boost support among Americans for its war in Gaza. At the same time, senior White House officials charged with advising President Joe Biden on matters of national security are claiming to have no knowledge of the operation—first disclosed publicly more than four months ago.

The operation, formally tied to the Israeli government by a New York Times reporter last week, kicked off in October 2023 following the surprise attack by Hamas in southern Israel. Researchers internationally began work to expose the campaign in February, identifying a flood of “suspicious accounts” on US-based social networking apps, most masquerading as Americans avowing support for the Israeli military response.

In addition to eroding support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which provides assistance to 5.6 million Palestinian refugees, a chief aim of the Israeli operation, researchers say, was to sway the opinions of Black Americans. Per the Times—which cited four current and former Israeli officials in confirming their government had commissioned the campaign—its primary targets included the account of US congressman Hakeem Jeffries, the leader of the Democrats in the House, among others who are “Black and Democratic.”

Accounts tied to the operation—many of which, at the time of writing, remain active on X, despite being suspended on other platforms—promoted a Black Lives Matter hashtag and shared images of Martin Luther King Jr. alongside fabricated quotes. A website created for the operation included articles with titles such as “The leaders of the Civil Rights Movement and Their Support of Jewish People and Israel.”

Several examples of accounts used in the operation, many of which were created weeks prior to the Hamas attack on October 7 that killed an estimated 1,200 people, advertised themselves as “Christian.” One of the stolen identities used in the operation, first identified by a researcher in Qatar, was that of Kyle Jean-Baptiste, an up-and-coming Broadway star who died in 2015 after falling from a fire escape.

**Got a Tip?**

_If you have information about the work of the intelligence community or its congressional overseers, contact Dell Cameron at dell\_cameron@wired.com or via Signal at dell.3030._

Multiple inquiries placed with senior members of Jeffries’ staff, including his communications director, Andy Eichar, have gone unacknowledged for nearly a week. WIRED has attempted to resolve whether Jeffries ever received notification of the operation from US intelligence while Congress was in the midst of debating $14 billion in funding to supplement Israel’s war effort.

Israeli forces have killed more than 36,000 Palestinians since Hamas’ October 7 attack, according to Gaza health officials’ estimates, including dozens last Thursday at a United Nations school compound, where the Israeli military is accused of making “improper use” of a US-made bomb.

With the exception of the White House’s National Security Council, which on Thursday claimed to have no knowledge of the operation, and Senate Intelligence Committee chair Mark Warner, whose office told WIRED it planned to request a briefing on the matter, press inquiries concerning Israel’s attempts to secretly influence US opinion on the war have been met with a stonewall.

It is unclear whether Biden may have received a briefing on the operation that included information not shared with his own national security advisers. Said a spokesperson for the National Security Council: “We take all allegations of foreign malign influence seriously.”

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, led by Avril Haines—formerly No. 2 at the CIA—declined to say whether US intelligence had any knowledge of the operation prior to the June 5 New York Times’ story. It would not reveal whether it issued any notifications to Jeffries or any other US officials targeted by Israel.

The ODNI maintains what it calls a “disclosure framework” for notifying victims of influence operations connected with US elections. It is unclear, however, whether the ODNI considers the operation election-related, despite national elections approaching and the deep political divide among US voters over Congress’ support for the Israeli war effort.

Haines has previously spoken publicly on how US intelligence responds to this scenario: “When relevant intelligence is collected concerning a foreign influence operation aimed at our election,” she said, a “notification framework” exists to ensure “appropriate notice is given to those who are being targeted so that they can take action.”

Multiple attempts to solicit comment over the past week from the House Intelligence Committee have likewise gone unacknowledged by representatives Mike Turner and Jim Himes, the committee’s chair and ranking member, respectively. It is unclear whether they are taking steps similar to their Senate counterparts to investigate the matter.

Many of the Israeli operation’s fake posts were found to have been generated using ChatGPT, the digital assistant software developed by OpenAI, which is being integrated into everything from Apple’s new iPhones to the next Microsoft Windows operating system. Notably, OpenAI’s CEO, Sam Altman, was recently appointed an adviser to the Homeland Security Department. According to the agency, his role is to advise the US government on how to “prevent and prepare for AI-related disruptions.”

Both OpenAI and social media giant Meta have publicly confirmed that the operation was launched by a Tel Aviv–based company called Stoic. Neither US company, however, has disclosed having any knowledge of Stoic being commissioned by the Israeli government.

Oft described as an Israeli “campaign marketing firm,” Stoic is reminiscent of Russia’s Internet Research Agency, which similarly used fake accounts registered on social media to promote the Kremlin’s interests, namely by working to influence the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election. OpenAI disclosed earlier this month that Stoic had similarly been tracked using fraudulent accounts in an effort to influence the outcome of India’s recent elections.

Meta and OpenAI have not responded to requests for comment.

A US intelligence assessment published in February that identified threats from foreign countries accused of launching malign influence operations against the US references Israel dozens of times; however, it strictly portrays the Middle East ally as the victim of such campaigns.

The annual assessment, published by the ODNI three days after Israel’s “multi-platform deception operation” was first revealed publicly by Marc Owen Jones—an assistant professor of Qatar University specializing in disinformation—speaks only broadly of the influence efforts of US rivals and contains few if any details about any specific operations. The report mentions, for instance, that the Chinese government “reportedly targeted” US politicians on TikTok using accounts run by a propaganda office ahead of the 2022 midterm elections.

The revelation of Israel’s involvement follows months of hearings in Washington concerning the impact of what US intelligence calls “malign foreign influence campaigns.” Much of the focus by lawmakers centered on allegations that China might potentially manipulate TikTok to sway public opinion in the US.

Jeffries, who is rumored to be the Democratic party’s next choice to become Speaker of the House, was among the 360 US representatives to support taking drastic steps in April that may soon lead to a ban on TikTok in US app stores.

Jeffries has joined other US leaders in extending an invitation to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress next month. A letter from Jeffries and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell to the prime minister last week read: “To build on our enduring relationship and to highlight America's solidarity with Israel, we invite you to share the Israeli government's vision for defending democracy, combatting terror, and establishing a just and lasting peace in the region.”

_Update 1 pm ET, June 11, 2024: Added additional details about the Israeli influence campaign._

US Leaders Dodge Questions About Israel’s Influence Campaign

As the fight against ransomware slogs on, security experts warn of a potential escalation to “real-world violence.” But recent police crackdowns are successfully disrupting the cybercriminal ecosystem.

Today, people around the world will head to school, doctor’s appointments, and pharmacies, only to be told, “Sorry, our computer systems are down.” The frequent culprit is a cybercrime gang operating on the other side of the world, demanding payment for system access or the safe return of stolen data.

The ransomware epidemic shows no signs of slowing down in 2024—despite increasing police crackdowns—and experts worry that it could soon enter a more violent phase.

“We’re definitely not winning the fight against ransomware right now,” Allan Liska, a threat intelligence analyst at Recorded Future, tells WIRED.

Ransomware may be the defining cybercrime of the past decade, with criminals targeting a wide range of victims including hospitals, schools, and governments. The attackers encrypt critical data, bringing the victim’s operation to a grinding halt, and then extort them with the threat of releasing sensitive information. These attacks have had serious consequences. In 2021, the Colonial Pipeline Company was targeted by ransomware, forcing the company to pause fuel delivery and spurring US president Joe Biden to implement emergency measures to meet demand. But ransomware attacks are a daily event around the world—last week, ransomware hit hospitals in the UK—and many of them don’t make headlines.

“There is a visibility problem into incidents; most organizations don't disclose or report them,” says Brett Callow, a threat analyst at Emsisoft. He adds that this makes it “hard to ascertain which way they are trending” on a month-by-month basis.

Researchers are forced to rely on information from public institutions that disclose attacks, or even criminals themselves. But “criminals are lying bastards,” says Liska.

By all indications, the problem is not going away and may even be accelerating in 2024. According to a recent report by security firm Mandiant, a Google subsidiary, 2023 was a record-breaking year for ransomware. Reporting indicates that victims paid more than $1 billion to gangs—and those are just the payments that we know about.

A major trend identified in the report was more frequent posts by gangs to so-called “shame sites,” where attackers leak data as part of an extortion attempt. There was a 75 percent jump in posts to data leak sites in 2023 compared to 2022, according to Mandiant. These sites employ flashy tactics like countdowns to when the sensitive data of victims will be made public if they don’t pay. This illustrates how ransomware gangs are ramping up the severity of their intimidation tactics, experts told WIRED.

“Generally speaking, their tactics are becoming progressively more brutal,” Callow says.

For example, hackers have also begun to directly threaten victims with intimidating phone calls or emails. In 2023, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle was struck by a ransomware attack, and cancer patients were individually sent emails threatening to release their personal information if they did not pay.

“My concern is that this will spill over into real-world violence very soon,” says Callow. “When there are millions to be had, they might do something bad to an executive of a company that was refusing to pay, or a member of their family.”

Ransomware Is ‘More Brutal’ Than Ever in 2024

Plus: A media executive is charged in an alleged money-laundering scheme, a ransomware attack disrupts care at London hospitals, and Google’s former CEO has a secretive drone project up his sleeve.

That’s not all. Each week, we round up the security and privacy news we didn’t cover in depth ourselves. Click the headlines to read the full stories. And stay safe out there.

At Apple’s Worldwide Developer Conference next week, the company will reportedly announce its own stand-alone password manager that will compete with apps like 1Password and LastPass. Dubbed simply Passwords, according to Bloomberg News, the app will reportedly have features that go well beyond the iCloud or Mac Keychain tools Apple already offers, allowing users to save passwords for Wi-Fi networks, store passkeys, and organize login credentials into categories. Passwords will also reportedly work on Windows machines, but it’s unclear whether people who use Android devices can get in on the security tool.

**Epoch Times Executive Charged With Money Laundering**

US prosecutors on Monday charged an executive at The Epoch Times newspaper with carrying out a massive money-laundering scheme. According to the US Department of Justice, Epoch Times chief financial officer Weidong “Bill” Guan engaged in “a transnational scheme to launder at least approximately $67 million of illegally obtained funds to benefit himself and the media company.”

The scheme, according to the indictment against Guan, largely involved using cryptocurrency to purchase prepaid debit cards “loaded with US dollars that had been obtained through various frauds”—including funds obtained through unemployment benefits fraud—for less than the funds on the prepaid debit cards. The purchase of the cards was carried out by members of The Epoch Times’ “Make Money Online” team, which Guan managed, according to the DOJ. The so-called MMO team would allegedly then use “stolen personal identification information” to open various accounts, which were used to transfer money from the prepaid debit cards to bank accounts associated with The Epoch Times and its employees. Guan faces one count of conspiring to commit money laundering, two counts of bank fraud, and could face decades in prison if convicted.

**Eric Schmidt Ramps Up His Secret AI Military Drone Business**

Google’s former CEO, billionaire Eric Schmidt, is quietly building a military drone company, reports Forbes. The company, called White Stork, has been testing devices at both its Hillspire office complex in Menlo Park, California, and in Ukraine. Relatively little has been publicly revealed about the company or the specifics of its technology. According to Forbes, however, “individuals flying small drones” have been spotted near the Hillspire property, and Schmidt has reportedly hired alumni from Google, SpaceX, and Apple to carry out his secretive project, providing some clues about its ambitions.

**Russian Cybercriminals Blamed for London Health Care Ransomware Attack**

A cyberattack against an organization that facilitates blood transfusions and other sensitive medical care disrupted hospitals and other health care entities across London this week. The attack targeted Synnovis, which manages a partnership between King’s College Hospitals trust and Guy’s and St Thomas’ hospital trust, and Synlab, a European medical testing firm. In a statement published on Tuesday, Synnovis said the attack “has affected all Synnovis IT systems, resulting in interruptions to many of our pathology services.” This forced hospitals to cancel surgeries involving blood transfusions and other procedures. Ciaran Martin, a former top UK cybersecurity official, blamed the attack on Qilin, a cybercriminal gang believed to have ties to Russia.

Apple Is Coming for Your Password Manager

After weeks of withering criticism and exposed security flaws, Microsoft has vastly scaled back its ambitions for Recall, its AI-enabled silent recording feature, and added new privacy features.

When Microsoft named its new Windows feature Recall, the company intended the word to refer to a kind of perfect, AI-enabled memory for your device. Today, the other, unintended definition of “recall”—a company's admission that a product is too dangerous or defective to be left on the market in its current form—seems more appropriate.

On Friday, Microsoft announced that it would be making multiple dramatic changes to its rollout of its Recall feature, making it an opt-in feature in the Copilot+ compatible versions of Windows where it had previously been turned on by default, and introducing new security measures designed to better keep data encrypted and require authentication to access Recall's stored data.

“We are updating the set-up experience of Copilot+ PCs to give people a clearer choice to opt-in to saving snapshots using Recall,” reads a blog post from Pavan Davuluri, Microsoft's corporate vice president for Windows and devices. “If you don’t proactively choose to turn it on, it will be off by default.”

The changes come amid a mounting barrage of criticism from the security and privacy community, which has described Recall—which silently stores a screenshot of the user's activity every five seconds as fodder for AI analysis—as a gift to hackers: essentially unrequested, preinstalled spyware built into new Windows computers.

In the preview versions of Recall, that screenshot data, complete with the user's every bank login, password, and porn site visit would have been indefinitely collected on the user's machine by default. And though that highly sensitive data is stored locally on the user's machine and not uploaded to the cloud, cybersecurity experts have warned that it all remains accessible to any hacker who so much as gains a temporary foothold on a user's Recall-enabled device, giving them a long-term panopticon view of the victim's digital life.

"It makes your security very fragile,” as Dave Aitel, a former NSA hacker and founder of security firm Immunity, described it—more charitably than some others—to WIRED earlier this week. “Anyone who penetrates your computer for even a second can get your whole history. Which is not something people want.”

In addition to making Recall an opt-in feature, Microsoft’s Davuluri also writes that the company will make changes to better safeguard the data Recall collects and more closely police who can turn it on, requiring that users prove their identity via its Microsoft Hello authentication function any time they either enable Recall or access its data, which can require a PIN or biometric check of the user’s face or thumbprint. Davuluri says Recall’s data will remain encrypted in storage until the user authenticates.

All of that is a “great improvement,” says Jake Williams, another former NSA hacker who now serves as VP of R&D at the cybersecurity consultancy Hunter Strategy, where he says he's been asked by some of the firm's clients to test Recall's security before they add Microsoft devices that use it to their networks. But Williams still sees serious risks in Recall, even in its latest form.

Many users will turn on Recall, he points out, partly due to Microsoft’s high-profile marketing of the feature. And when they do, they’ll still face plenty of unresolved privacy problems, from domestic abusers that often demand partners give up their PINs to subpoenas or lawsuits that compel them to turn over their historical data. “Satya Nadella has been out there talking about how this is a game changer and the solution to all problems,” Williams says, referring to Microsoft's CEO. “If customers turn it on, there’s still a huge threat of legal discovery. I can’t imagine a corporate legal team that’s ready to accept the risk of all of a user’s actions being turned over in discovery.”

For Microsoft, the Recall rollback comes in the midst of an embarrassing string of cybersecurity incidents and breaches—including a leak of terabytes of its customers' data and a shocking penetration of government email accounts enabled by a cascading series of Microsoft security slipups—that have grown so problematic as to become a sticking point given its uniquely close relationship with the US government.

Those scandals have escalated to the degree that Microsoft's Nadella issued a memo just last month declaring that Microsoft would make security its first priority in any business decision. “If you’re faced with the trade-off between security and another priority, your answer is clear: **Do security**,” Nadella's memo read (emphasis his). “In some cases, this will mean prioritizing security above other things we do, such as releasing new features or providing ongoing support for legacy systems.”

By all appearances, Microsoft's rollout of Recall—even after today's announcement—displays the opposite approach, and one that seems more in line with business as usual in Redmond: Announce a feature, get pummeled for its glaring security failures, then belatedly scramble to control the damage.

Source

Wired