CySecurity News - Latest Information Security and Hacking Incidents: Privacy

customer data privacy customer privacy Digital Privacy internet privacy Meta Online Privacy Privacy Privacy Issues

WhatsApp’s “We See You” Post Sparks Privacy Panic Among Users

WhatsApp found itself in an unexpected storm this week after a lighthearted social media post went terribly wrong. The Meta-owned messaging platform, known for emphasizing privacy and end-to-end encryption, sparked alarm when it posted a playful message on X that read, “people who end messages with ‘lol’ we see you, we honor you.” What was meant as a fun cultural nod quickly became a PR misstep, as users were unsettled by the phrase “we see you,” which seemed to contradict WhatsApp’s most fundamental promise—that it can’t see users’ messages at all.

Within minutes, the post went viral, amassing over five million views and an avalanche of concerned replies. “What about end-to-end encryption?” several users asked, worried that WhatsApp was implying it had access to private conversations. The company quickly attempted to clarify the misunderstanding, replying, “We meant ‘we see you’ figuratively lol (see what we did there?). Your personal messages are protected by end-to-end encryption and no one, not even WhatsApp, can see them.”

Despite the clarification, the irony wasn’t lost on users—or critics. A platform that has spent years assuring its three billion users that their messages are private had just posted a statement that could easily be read as the opposite. The timing and phrasing of the post made it a perfect recipe for confusion, especially given the long-running public skepticism around Meta’s privacy practices. WhatsApp continued to explain that the message was simply a humorous way to connect with users who frequently end their chats with “lol.”

The company reiterated that nothing about its encryption or privacy commitments had changed, emphasizing that personal messages remain visible only to senders and recipients. “We see you,” they clarified, was intended as a metaphor for understanding user habits—not an admission of surveillance. The situation became even more ironic considering it unfolded on X, Elon Musk’s platform, where he has previously clashed with WhatsApp over privacy concerns.

Musk has repeatedly criticized Meta’s handling of user data, and many expect him to seize on this incident as yet another opportunity to highlight his stance on digital privacy. Ultimately, the backlash served as a reminder of how easily tone can be misinterpreted when privacy is the core of your brand. A simple social media joke, meant to be endearing, became a viral lesson in communication strategy.

For WhatsApp, the encryption remains intact, the messages still unreadable—but the marketing team has learned an important rule: never joke about “seeing” your users when your entire platform is built on not seeing them at all.

Unsecured Corporate Data Found Freely Accessible Through Simple Searches



 

Privacy

AI governance AI Security Corporate Data Breach Cybersecurity Data protection Digital Risk ethical AI Information Security Privacy

Unsecured Corporate Data Found Freely Accessible Through Simple Searches

An era when artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming the backbone of modern business innovation is presenting a striking gap between awareness and action in a way that has been largely overlooked. In a recent study conducted by Sapio Research, it has been reported that while most organisations in Europe acknowledge the growing risks associated with AI adoption, only a small number have taken concrete steps towards reducing them.

Based on insights from 800 consumers and 375 finance decision-makers across the UK, Germany, France, and the Netherlands, the Finance Pulse 2024 report highlights a surprising paradox: 93 per cent of companies are aware that artificial intelligence poses a risk, yet only half have developed formal policies to regulate its responsible use.

There was a significant number of respondents who expressed concern about data security (43%), followed closely by a concern about accountability, transparency, and the lack specialised skills to ensure a safe implementation (both of which reached 29%). In spite of this increased awareness, only 46% of companies currently maintain formal guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and even fewer—48%—impose restrictions on the type of data that employees are permitted to feed into the systems.

It has also been noted that just 38% of companies have implemented strict access controls to safeguard sensitive information. Speaking on the findings of this study, Andrew White, CEO and Co-Founder of Sapio Research, commented that even though artificial intelligence remains a high priority for investment across Europe, its rapid integration has left many employers confused about the use of this technology internally and ill-equipped to put in place the necessary governance frameworks.

It was found, in a recent investigation by cybersecurity consulting firm PromptArmor, that there had been a troubling lapse in digital security practices linked to the use of artificial intelligence-powered platforms. According to the firm's researchers, 22 widely used artificial intelligence applications—including Claude, Perplexity, and Vercel V0-had been examined by the firm's researchers, and highly confidential corporate information had been exposed on the internet by way of chatbot interfaces.

There was an interesting collection of data found in the report, including access tokens for Amazon Web Services (AWS), internal court documents, Oracle salary reports that were explicitly marked as confidential, as well as a memo describing a venture capital firm's investment objectives. As detailed by PCMag, these researchers confirmed that anyone could easily access such sensitive material by entering a simple search query - "site:claude.ai + internal use only" - into any standard search engine, underscoring the fact that the use of unprotected AI integrations in the workplace is becoming a dangerous and unpredictable source of corporate data theft.

A number of security researchers have long been investigating the vulnerabilities in popular AI chatbots. Recent findings have further strengthened the fragility of the technology's security posture. A vulnerability in ChatGPT has been resolved by OpenAI since August, which could have allowed threat actors to exploit a weakness in ChatGPT that could have allowed them to extract the users' email addresses through manipulation.

In the same vein, experts at the Black Hat cybersecurity conference demonstrated how hackers could create malicious prompts within Google Calendar invitations by leveraging Google Gemini. Although Google resolved the issue before the conference, similar weaknesses were later found to exist in other AI platforms, such as Microsoft’s Copilot and Salesforce’s Einstein, even though they had been fixed by Google before the conference began.

Microsoft and Salesforce both issued patches in the middle of September, months after researchers reported the flaws in June. It is particularly noteworthy that these discoveries were made by ethical researchers rather than malicious hackers, which underscores the importance of responsible disclosure in safeguarding the integrity of artificial intelligence ecosystems.

It is evident that, in addition to the security flaws of artificial intelligence, its operational shortcomings have begun to negatively impact organisations financially and reputationally. "AI hallucinations," or the phenomenon in which generative systems produce false or fabricated information with convincing accuracy, is one of the most concerning aspects of artificial intelligence. This type of incident has already had significant consequences for the lawyer involved, who was penalised for submitting a legal brief that was filled with over 20 fictitious court references produced by an artificial intelligence program.

Deloitte also had to refund the Australian government six figures after submitting an artificial intelligence-assisted report that contained fabricated sources and inaccurate data. This highlighted the dangers of unchecked reliance on artificial intelligence for content generation and highlighted the risk associated with that. As a result of these issues, Stanford University’s Social Media Lab has coined the term “workslop” to describe AI-generated content that appears polished yet is lacking in substance.

In the United States, 40% of full-time office employees reported that they encountered such material regularly, according to a study conducted. In my opinion, this trend demonstrates a growing disconnect between the supposed benefits of automation and the real efficiency can bring. When employees are spending hours correcting, rewriting, and verifying AI-generated material, the alleged benefits quickly fade away.

Although what may begin as a convenience may turn out to be a liability, it can reduce production quality, drain resources, and in severe cases, expose companies to compliance violations and regulatory scrutiny. It is a fact that, as artificial intelligence continues to grow and integrate deeply into the digital and corporate ecosystems, it is bringing along with it a multitude of ethical and privacy challenges.

In the wake of increasing reliance on AI-driven systems, long-standing concerns about unauthorised data collection, opaque processing practices, and algorithmic bias have been magnified, which has contributed to eroding public trust in technology. There is still the threat of unauthorised data usage on the part of many AI platforms, as they quietly collect and analyse user information without explicit consent or full transparency. Consequently, the threat of unauthorised data usage remains a serious concern.

It is very common for individuals to be manipulated, profiled, and, in severe cases, to become the victims of identity theft as a result of this covert information extraction. Experts emphasise organisations must strengthen regulatory compliance by creating clear opt-in mechanisms, comprehensive deletion protocols, and transparent privacy disclosures that enable users to regain control of their personal information.

In addition to these alarming concerns, biometric data has also been identified as a very important component of personal security, as it is the most intimate and immutable form of information a person has. Once compromised, biometric identifiers are unable to be replaced, making them prime targets for cybercriminals to exploit once they have been compromised.

If such information is misused, whether through unauthorised surveillance or large-scale breaches, then it not only poses a greater risk of identity fraud but also raises profound questions regarding ethical and human rights issues. As a consequence of biometric leaks from public databases, citizens have been left vulnerable to long-term consequences that go beyond financial damage, because these systems remain fragile.

There is also the issue of covert data collection methods embedded in AI systems, which allow them to harvest user information quietly without adequate disclosure, such as browser fingerprinting, behaviour tracking, and hidden cookies. utilising silent surveillance, companies risk losing user trust and being subject to potential regulatory penalties if they fail to comply with tightening data protection laws, such as GDPR. Microsoft and Salesforce both issued patches in the middle of September, months after researchers reported the flaws in June.

It is particularly noteworthy that these discoveries were made by ethical researchers rather than malicious hackers, which underscores the importance of responsible disclosure in safeguarding the integrity of artificial intelligence ecosystems. It is evident that, in addition to the security flaws of artificial intelligence, its operational shortcomings have begun to negatively impact organisations financially and reputationally.

"AI hallucinations," or the phenomenon in which generative systems produce false or fabricated information with convincing accuracy, is one of the most concerning aspects of artificial intelligence. This type of incident has already had significant consequences for the lawyer involved, who was penalised for submitting a legal brief that was filled with over 20 fictitious court references produced by an artificial intelligence program.

Deloitte also had to refund the Australian government six figures after submitting an artificial intelligence-assisted report that contained fabricated sources and inaccurate data. This highlighted the dangers of unchecked reliance on artificial intelligence for content generation, highlighted the risk associated with that. As a result of these issues, Stanford University’s Social Media Lab has coined the term “workslop” to describe AI-generated content that appears polished yet is lacking in substance.

When employees are spending hours correcting, rewriting, and verifying AI-generated material, the alleged benefits quickly fade away. Although what may begin as a convenience may turn out to be a liability, it can reduce production quality, drain resources, and in severe cases, expose companies to compliance violations and regulatory scrutiny.

It is a fact that, as artificial intelligence continues to grow and integrate deeply into the digital and corporate ecosystems, it is bringing along with it a multitude of ethical and privacy challenges. In the wake of increasing reliance on AI-driven systems, long-standing concerns about unauthorised data collection, opaque processing practices, and algorithmic bias have been magnified, which has contributed to eroding public trust in technology.

There is still the threat of unauthorised data usage on the part of many AI platforms, as they quietly collect and analyse user information without explicit consent or full transparency. Consequently, the threat of unauthorised data usage remains a serious concern. It is very common for individuals to be manipulated, profiled, and, in severe cases, to become the victims of identity theft as a result of this covert information extraction.

Experts emphasise that thatorganisationss must strengthen regulatory compliance by creating clear opt-in mechanisms, comprehensive deletion protocols, and transparent privacy disclosures that enable users to regain control of their personal information. In addition to these alarming concerns, biometric data has also been identified as a very important component of personal security, as it is the most intimate and immutable form of information a person has.

Once compromised, biometric identifiers are unable to be replaced, making them prime targets for cybercriminals to exploit once they have been compromised. If such information is misused, whether through unauthorised surveillance or large-scale breaches, then it not oonly posesa greater risk of identity fraud but also raises profound questions regarding ethical and human rights issues.

As a consequence of biometric leaks from public databases, citizens have been left vulnerable to long-term consequences that go beyond financial damage, because these systems remain fragile. There is also the issue of covert data collection methods embedded in AI systems, which allow them to harvest user information quietly without adequate disclosure, such as browser fingerprinting behaviourr tracking, and hidden cookies.

utilising silent surveillance, companies risk losing user trust and being subject to potential regulatory penalties if they fail to comply with tightening data protection laws, such as GDPR. Furthermore, the challenges extend further than privacy, further exposing the vulnerability of AI itself to ethical abuse. Algorithmic bias is becoming one of the most significant obstacles to fairness and accountability, with numerous examples having been shown to, be in f ,act contributing to discrimination, no matter how skewed the dataset.

There are many examples of these biases in the real world - from hiring tools that unintentionally favour certain demographics to predictive policing systems which target marginalised communities disproportionately. In order to address these issues, we must maintain an ethical approach to AI development that is anchored in transparency, accountability, and inclusive governance to ensure technology enhances human progress while not compromising fundamental freedoms.

In the age of artificial intelligence, it is imperative tthat hatorganisationss strike a balance between innovation and responsibility, as AI redefines the digital frontier. As we move forward, not only will we need to strengthen technical infrastructure, but we will also need to shift the culture toward ethics, transparency, and continual oversight to achieve this.

Investing in a secure AI infrastructure, educating employees about responsible usage, and adopting frameworks that emphasise privacy and accountability are all important for businesses to succeed in today's market. As an enterprise, if security and ethics are incorporated into the foundation of AI strategies rather than treated as a side note, today's vulnerabilities can be turned into tomorrow's competitive advantage – driving intelligent and trustworthy advancement.

Connected Car Privacy Risks: How Modern Vehicles Secretly Track and Sell Driver Data



 

Privacy Risks

Car Data Data collection Data Privacy Data protection Data Safety User Data data security Data Surveillance Mozilla Foundation Privacy Privacy Risks

Connected Car Privacy Risks: How Modern Vehicles Secretly Track and Sell Driver Data

The thrill of a smooth drive—the roar of the engine, the grip of the tires, and the comfort of a high-end cabin—often hides a quieter, more unsettling reality. Modern cars are no longer just machines; they’re data-collecting devices on wheels. While you enjoy the luxury and performance, your vehicle’s sensors silently record your weight, listen through cabin microphones, track your every route, and log detailed driving behavior. This constant surveillance has turned cars into one of the most privacy-invasive consumer products ever made.

The Mozilla Foundation recently reviewed 25 major car brands and declared that modern vehicles are “the worst product category we have ever reviewed for privacy.” Not a single automaker met even basic standards for protecting user data. The organization found that cars collect massive amounts of information—from location and driving patterns to biometric data—often without explicit user consent or transparency about where that data ends up.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has already taken notice. The agency recently pursued General Motors (GM) and its subsidiary OnStar for collecting and selling drivers’ precise location and behavioral data without obtaining clear consent. Investigations revealed that data from vehicles could be gathered as frequently as every three seconds, offering an extraordinarily detailed picture of a driver’s habits, destinations, and lifestyle.

That information doesn’t stay within the automaker’s servers. Instead, it’s often shared or sold to data brokers, insurers, and marketing agencies. Driver behavior, acceleration patterns, late-night trips, or frequent stops at specific locations could be used to adjust insurance premiums, evaluate credit risk, or profile consumers in ways few drivers fully understand.

Inside the car, the illusion of comfort and control masks a network of tracking systems. Voice assistants that adjust your seat or temperature remember your commands. Smartphone apps that unlock the vehicle transmit telemetry data back to corporate servers. Even infotainment systems and microphones quietly collect information that could identify you and your routines. The same technology that powers convenience features also enables invasive data collection at an unprecedented scale.

For consumers, awareness is the first defense. Before buying a new vehicle, it’s worth asking the dealer what kind of data the car collects and how it’s used. If they cannot answer directly, it’s a strong indication of a lack of transparency. After purchase, disabling unnecessary connectivity or data-sharing features can help protect privacy. Declining participation in “driver score” programs or telematics-based insurance offerings is another step toward reclaiming control.

As automakers continue to blend luxury with technology, the line between innovation and intrusion grows thinner. Every drive leaves behind a digital footprint that tells a story—where you live, work, shop, and even who rides with you. The true cost of modern convenience isn’t just monetary—it’s the surrender of privacy. The quiet hum of the engine as you pull into your driveway should represent freedom, not another connection to a data-hungry network.

AI Browsers Spark Debate Over Privacy and Cybersecurity Risks



 

prompt injection attacks

AI Browser Security AI vulnerabilities Atlas Browser Comet Browser Cybersecurity Threats Digital Privacy Risks Online Safety Privacy prompt injection attacks

AI Browsers Spark Debate Over Privacy and Cybersecurity Risks

With the rapid development of artificial intelligence, the digital landscape continues to undergo a reshaping process, and the internet browser itself seems to be the latest frontier in this revolution. After the phenomenal success of AI chatbots such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Perplexity, tech companies are now racing to integrate the same kind of intelligence into the very tool that people use every day to navigate the world online.

A recent development by Google has been the integration of Gemini into its search engine, while both OpenAI and Perplexity have released their own AI-powered browsers, Atlas and Perplexity, all promising a more personalised and intuitive way to browse online content. In addition to offering unprecedented convenience and conversational search capabilities for users, this innovation marks the beginning of a new era in information access.

In spite of the excitement, cybersecurity professionals remain increasingly concerned. There is a growing concern among experts that intelligent systems are inadvertently exposing users to sophisticated cyber risks in spite of enhancing their user experience.

A context-aware interaction or dynamic data retrieval feature that allows users to interact with their environment can be exploited through indirect prompt injection and other manipulation methods, which may allow attackers to exploit the features.

It is possible that these vulnerabilities may allow malicious actors to access sensitive data such as personal files, login credentials, and financial information, which raises the risk of data breaches and cybercriminals. In these new eras of artificial intelligence, where the boundaries between browsing and AI are blurring, there has become an increasing urgency in ensuring that trust, transparency, and safety are maintained on the Internet.

AI browsers continue to divide experts when it comes to whether they are truly safe to use, and the issue becomes increasingly complicated as the debate continues. In addition to providing unprecedented ease of use and personalisation, ChatGPT's Atlas and Perplexity's Comet represent the next generation of intelligent browsers. However, they also introduce new levels of vulnerability that are largely unimaginable in traditional web browsers.

It is important to understand that, unlike conventional browsers, which are just gateways to online content, these artificial intelligence-driven platforms function more like a digital assistant on their own. Aside from learning from user interactions, monitoring browsing behaviours, and even performing tasks independently across multiple sites, humans and machines are becoming increasingly blurred in this evolution, which has fundamentally changed the way we collect and process data today.

A browser based on Artificial Intelligence watches and interprets each user's digital moves continuously, from clicks to scrolls to search queries and conversations, creating extensive behavioural profiles that outline users' interests, health concerns, consumer patterns, and emotional tendencies based on their data.

Privacy advocates have argued for years that this level of surveillance is more comprehensive than any cookie or analytics tool on the market today, and represents a turning point in digital tracking. During a recent study by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, organisation discovered that Atlas retained search data related to sensitive medical inquiries, including names of healthcare providers, which raised serious ethical and legal concerns in regions that restricted certain medical procedures.

Due to the persistent memory architecture of these systems, they are even more contentious. While ordinary browsing histories can be erased by the user, AI memories, on the other hand, are stored on remote servers, which are frequently retained indefinitely. By doing so, the browser maintains long-term context. The system can use this to access vast amounts of sensitive data - ranging from financial activities to professional communications to personal messages - even long after the session has ended.

These browsers are more vulnerable than ever because they require extensive access permissions to function effectively, which includes the ability to access emails, calendars, contact lists, and banking information. Experts have warned that such centralisation of personal data creates a single point of catastrophic failure—one breach could expose an individual's entire digital life.

OpenAI released ChatGPT Atlas earlier this week, a new browser powered by artificial intelligence that will become a major player in the rapidly expanding marketplace of browsers powered by artificial intelligence. The Atlas browser, marketed as a browser that integrates ChatGPT into your everyday online experience, represents an important step forward in the company’s effort to integrate generative AI into everyday living.

Despite being initially launched for Mac users, OpenAI promises to continue to refine its features and expand compatibility across a range of platforms in the coming months. As Atlas competes against competitors such as Perplexity's Comet, Dia, and Google's Gemini-enabled Chrome, the platform aims to redefine the way users interact with the internet—allowing ChatGPT to follow them seamlessly as they browse through the web.

As described by OpenAI, ChatGPT's browser is equipped to interpret open tabs, analyse data on the page, and help users in real time, without requiring users to switch between applications or copy content manually. There have been a number of demonstrations that have highlighted the versatility of the tool, demonstrating its capability of completing a broad range of tasks, from ordering groceries and writing emails to summarising conversations, analysing GitHub repositories and providing research assistance. OpenAI has mentioned that Atlas utilises ChatGPT’s built-in memory in order to be able to remember past interactions and apply context to future queries based on those interactions.

There is a statement from the company about the company's new approach to creating a more intuitive, continuous user experience, in which the browser will function more as a collaborative tool and less as a passive tool. In spite of Atlas' promise, just as with its AI-driven competitors, it has stirred up serious issues around security, data protection and privacy.

One of the most pressing concerns regarding prompt injection attacks is whether malicious actors are manipulating large language models to order them to perform unintended or harmful actions, which may expose customer information. Experts warn that such "agentic" systems may come at a significant security cost.

An attack like this can either occur directly through the user's prompts or indirectly by hiding hidden payloads within seemingly harmless web pages. A recent study by Brave researchers indicates that many AI browsers, including Comet and Fellou, are vulnerable to exploits like this. The attacker is thus able to bypass browser security frameworks and gain unauthorized access to sensitive domains such as banks, healthcare facilities, or corporate systems by bypassing browser security frameworks.

It has also been noted that many prominent technologists have voiced their reservations. Simon Willison, a well-known developer and co-creator of the Django Web Framework, has urged that giving browsers the freedom to act autonomously on their users' behalf would pose grave risks. Even seemingly harmless requests, like summarising a Reddit post, could, if exploited via an injection vulnerability, be used to reveal personal or confidential information.

With the advancement of artificial intelligence browsers, the tension between innovation and security becomes more and more intense, prompting the call for stronger safeguards before these tools become mainstream digital companions. There has been an increase in the number of vulnerabilities discovered by security researchers that make AI browsers a lot more dangerous than was initially thought, with prompt injection emerging as the most critical vulnerability.

A malicious website can use this technique to manipulate AI-driven browser agents secretly, effectively turning them against a user. Researchers at Brave found that attackers are able to hide invisible instructions within webpage code, often rendered as white text on white backgrounds. These instructions are unnoticeable by humans but are easily interpreted by artificial intelligence systems.

A user may be directed to perform unauthorised actions when they visit a web page containing embedded commands. For example, they may be directed to retrieve private e-mails, access financial data, or transfer money without their consent. Due to the inherent lack of contextual understanding that artificial intelligence systems possess, they can unwittingly execute these harmful instructions, with full user privileges, when they do not have the ability to differentiate between legitimate inputs from deceptive prompts.

These attacks have caused a lot of attention among the cybersecurity community due to their scale and simplicity. Researchers from LayerX demonstrated the use of a technique called CometJacking, which was demonstrated as a way of hijacking Perplexity’s Comet browser into a sophisticated data exfiltration tool by a single malicious link.

A simple encoding method known as Base64 encoding was used by attackers to bypass traditional browser security measures and sandboxes, allowing them to bypass the browser's protections. It is therefore important to know that the launch point for a data theft campaign could be a seemingly harmless comment on Reddit, a social media post, or even an email newsletter, which could expose sensitive personal or company information in an innocuous manner.

The findings of this study illustrate the inherent fragility of artificial intelligence browsers, where independence and convenience often come at the expense of safety. It is important to note that cybersecurity experts have outlined essential defence measures for users who wish to experiment with AI browsers in light of these increasing concerns.

Individuals should restrict permissions strictly, giving access only to non-sensitive accounts and avoiding involving financial institutions or healthcare institutions until the technology becomes more mature. By reviewing activity logs regularly, you can be sure that you have been alerted to unusual patterns or unauthorised actions in advance. A multi-factor authentication system can greatly enhance security across all linked accounts, while prompt software updates allow users to take advantage of the latest security patches.

A key safeguard is to maintain manual vigilance-verifying URLs and avoiding automated interactions with unfamiliar or untrusted websites. Some prominent technologists have expressed doubts about these systems as well. A respected developer and co-creator of the Django Web Framework, Simon Willison, has warned that giving browsers the ability to act autonomously on behalf of users comes with profound risks.

It is noted that even benign requests, such as summarising a Reddit post, could inadvertently expose sensitive information if exploited by an injection vulnerability, and this could result in personal information being released into the public domain. With the advancement of artificial intelligence browsers, the tension between innovation and security becomes more and more intense, prompting the call for stronger safeguards before these tools become mainstream digital companions.

There has been an increase in the number of vulnerabilities discovered by security researchers that make AI browsers a lot more dangerous than was initially thought, with prompt injection emerging as the most critical vulnerability. Using this technique, malicious websites have the ability to manipulate the AI-driven browsers, effectively turning them against their users.

Brave researchers discovered that attackers are capable of hiding invisible instructions within the code of the webpages, often rendered as white text on a white background. The instructions are invisible to the naked eye, but are easily interpreted by artificial intelligence systems. The embedded commands on such pages can direct the browser to perform unauthorised actions, such as retrieving private emails, accessing financial information, and transferring funds, as a result of a user visiting such a page.

Since AI systems are inherently incapable of distinguishing between legitimate and deceptive user inputs, they can unknowingly execute harmful instructions with full user privileges without realising it. This attack has sparked the interest of the cybersecurity community due to its scale and simplicity.

Researchers from LayerX have demonstrated a method of hijacking Perplexity's Comet browser by merely clicking on a malicious link, and using this technique, transforming the browser into an advanced data exfiltration tool. Attackers were able to bypass traditional browser security measures and security sandboxes by using simple methods like Base64 encoding.

It means that a seemingly harmless comment on Reddit, a post on social media, or an email newsletter can serve as a launch point for a data theft campaign, thereby potentially exposing sensitive personal and corporate information to a third party. There is no doubt that AI browsers are intrinsically fragile, where autonomy and convenience sometimes come at the expense of safety. The findings suggest that AI browsers are inherently vulnerable.

It has become clear that security experts have identified essential defence measures to protect users who wish to experiment with AI browsers in the face of increasing concerns. It is suggested that individuals restrict their permissions as strictly as possible, granting access only to non-sensitive accounts and avoiding connecting to financial or healthcare services until the technology is well developed.

In order to detect unusual patterns or unauthorised actions in time, it is important to regularly review activity logs. Multi-factor authentication is a vital component of protecting linked accounts, as it adds a new layer of security, while prompt software updates ensure that users receive the latest security patches on their systems.

Furthermore, experts emphasise manual vigilance — verifying URLs and avoiding automated interactions with unfamiliar or untrusted websites remains crucial to protecting their data. There is, however, a growing consensus among professionals that artificial intelligence browsers, despite impressive demonstrations of innovation, remain unreliable for everyday use.

Analysts at Proton concluded that AI browsers are no longer reliable for everyday use. This argument argues that the issue is not only technical, but is structural as well; privacy risks are a part of the very design of these systems themselves. AI browser developers, who prioritise functionality and personalisation over all else, have inherently created extensive surveillance architectures that rely heavily on user data in order to function as intended.

It has been pointed out by OpenAI's own security leadership that prompt injection remains an unresolved frontier issue, thus emphasising that this emerging technology is still a very experimental and unsettled one. The consensus among cybersecurity researchers, at the moment, is that the risks associated with artificial intelligence browsers far outweigh their convenience, especially for users dealing with sensitive personal and professional information.

With the acceleration of the AI browser revolution, it is now crucial to strike a balance between innovation and accountability. Despite the promise of seamless digital assistance and a hyper-personalised browsing experience through tools such as Atlas and Comet, they must be accompanied by robust ethical frameworks, transparent data governance, and stronger security standards to make progress.

A lot of experts stress that the real progress will depend on the way this technology evolves responsibly - prioritising user consent, privacy, and control over convenience for the end user. In the meantime, users and developers alike should not approach AI browsers with fear, but with informed caution and an insistence that trust is built into the browser as a default state.

Stop Using Public Wi-Fi: Critical Security Risks Explained



 

Security

Cybersecurity Hacking Privacy Public Wifi Security

Stop Using Public Wi-Fi: Critical Security Risks Explained

Public Wi-Fi networks, commonly found in coffee shops and public spaces, are increasingly used by remote workers and mobile device users seeking internet access outside the home or office. While convenient, these networks pose significant security risks that are often misunderstood.

This article explains why tech experts caution against the casual use of public Wi-Fi, emphasizing that such networks can be notably unsafe, especially when unsecured. The distinction between secure and unsecured networks is critical: secure networks require authentication steps like passwords, account creation, or agreeing to terms of service.

These measures typically offer additional layers of protection for users. In contrast, unsecured networks allow anyone to connect without authorization, lacking essential cybersecurity safeguards. According to experts from Executech, unsecured networks do not incorporate protective measures to prevent unauthorized access and malicious activities, leaving users vulnerable to cyberattacks.

When connecting to unsecured public Wi-Fi, data transmitted between a device and the network can be intercepted by attackers who may exploit weaknesses in the infrastructure. Cybercriminals often target these networks to access sensitive information stored or shared on connected devices. Individuals should be wary about what activities they perform on such connections, as the risk of unauthorized access and data theft is high.

Security experts advise users to avoid performing sensitive tasks, such as accessing bank accounts, entering financial details for online shopping, or opening confidential emails, when on public Wi-Fi. Personal and family information, especially involving children, should also be kept off devices used on public networks to mitigate the risk of exposure.

For those who absolutely must use public Wi-Fi—for emergencies or workplace requirements—layering protections is recommended. Downloading a reputable VPN can help encrypt data traffic, establishing a secure tunnel between the user’s device and the internet and reducing some risk.

Ultimately, the safest approach is to avoid public Wi-Fi altogether when possible, relying on personal routers or trusted connections instead. All public Wi-Fi networks are susceptible to hacking attempts, regardless of perceived safety. By following the suggested precautions and maintaining awareness of potential risks, users can better protect their sensitive information and minimize security threats when forced to use public Wi-Fi networks.

ChatGPT Atlas Surfaces Privacy Debate: How OpenAI’s New Browser Handles Your Data



 

User Data

AI Browsers atlas Browser ChatGPT OpenAI Privacy User Data

ChatGPT Atlas Surfaces Privacy Debate: How OpenAI’s New Browser Handles Your Data

OpenAI has officially entered the web-browsing market with ChatGPT Atlas, a new browser built on Chromium: the same open-source base that powers Google Chrome. At first glance, Atlas looks and feels almost identical to Chrome or Safari. The key difference is its built-in ChatGPT assistant, which allows users to interact with web pages directly. For example, you can ask ChatGPT to summarize a site, book tickets, or perform online actions automatically, all from within the browser interface.

While this innovation promises faster and more efficient browsing, privacy experts are increasingly worried about how much personal data the browser collects and retains.

How ChatGPT Atlas Uses “Memories”

Atlas introduces a feature called “memories”, which allows the system to remember users’ activity and preferences over time. This builds on ChatGPT’s existing memory function, which stores details about users’ interests, writing styles, and previous interactions to personalize future responses.

In Atlas, these memories could include which websites you visit, what products you search for, or what tasks you complete online. This helps the browser predict what you might need next, such as recalling the airline you often book with or your preferred online stores. OpenAI claims that this data collection aims to enhance user experience, not exploit it.

However, this personalization comes with serious privacy implications. Once stored, these memories can gradually form a comprehensive digital profile of an individual’s habits, preferences, and online behavior.

OpenAI’s Stance on Early Privacy Concerns

OpenAI has stated that Atlas will not retain critical information such as government-issued IDs, banking credentials, medical or financial records, or any activity related to adult content. Users can also manage their data manually: deleting, archiving, or disabling memories entirely, and can browse in incognito mode to prevent the saving of activity.

Despite these safeguards, recent findings suggest that some sensitive data may still slip through. According to The Washington Post, an investigation by a technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) revealed that Atlas had unintentionally stored private information, including references to sexual and reproductive health services and even a doctor’s real name. These findings raise questions about the reliability of OpenAI’s data filters and whether user privacy is being adequately protected.

Broader Implications for AI Browsers

OpenAI is not alone in this race. Other companies, including Perplexity with its upcoming browser Comet, have also faced criticism for extensive data collection practices. Perplexity’s CEO openly admitted that collecting browser-level data helps the company understand user behavior beyond the AI app itself, particularly for tailoring ads and content.

The rise of AI-integrated browsers marks a turning point in internet use, combining automation and personalization at an unprecedented scale. However, cybersecurity experts warn that AI agents operating within browsers hold immense control — they can take actions, make purchases, and interact with websites autonomously. This power introduces substantial risks if systems malfunction, are exploited, or process data inaccurately.

What Users Can Do

For those concerned about privacy, experts recommend taking proactive steps:

• Opt out of the memory feature or regularly delete saved data.

• Use incognito mode for sensitive browsing.

• Review data-sharing and model-training permissions before enabling them.

AI browsers like ChatGPT Atlas may redefine digital interaction, but they also test the boundaries of data ethics and security. As this technology evolves, maintaining user trust will depend on transparency, accountability, and strict privacy protection.

Proxy Servers: How They Work and What They Actually Do



 

VPN

https Internet of Things IP Address Privacy Proxy Server VPN

Proxy Servers: How They Work and What They Actually Do

When browsing online, your device usually connects directly to a website’s server. However, in certain cases, especially for privacy, security, or access control — a proxy server acts as a go-between. It stands between your device and the internet, forwarding your web requests and returning responses while showing its own public IP address instead of yours.

According to the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a proxy server is essentially a system that handles requests from clients and forwards them to other servers. In simple terms, it’s a digital middleman that manages the communication between you and the websites you visit.

How a Proxy Server Operates

Here’s how the process works:

1. Your computer or device sends a request to the proxy server instead of directly contacting a website.

2. The proxy then forwards that request to the destination site.

3. The site responds to the proxy.

4. The proxy returns the data to your device.

From your perspective, it looks like a normal browsing session, but from the website’s end, the request appears to come from the proxy’s IP address. Proxies can exist as physical network devices or as cloud-based services that users configure through system or browser settings.

Companies often use “reverse proxies” to manage and filter incoming traffic to their web servers. These reverse proxies can block malicious activity, balance heavy traffic loads, and improve performance by caching frequently accessed pages.

Why People Use Proxy Servers

Proxy servers are used for several reasons. They provide a basic layer of privacy by hiding your actual IP address and limiting what websites can track about you. They can also make it appear that you’re browsing from another location, allowing access to region-locked content or websites blocked in your area.

In workplaces and educational institutions, proxies help administrators restrict certain sites, monitor browsing activity, and reduce bandwidth consumption by storing copies of commonly visited web pages. Large organizations also rely on proxies to safeguard internal systems and regulate how employees connect to external networks.

The Limitations and Risks

Despite their advantages, proxy servers have notable limits. They do not encrypt your internet traffic, which means that if your connection is not secured through HTTPS, the information passing through can still be intercepted. Free or public proxy services pose particular risks, they often slow down browsing, log user activity, inject advertisements, or even harvest data for profit.

For users seeking genuine privacy or security, experts recommend using paid, reputable proxy services or opting for a Virtual Private Network (VPN). VPNs extend the idea of a proxy by adding encryption, ensuring that all traffic between the user and the internet is protected.

Proxy vs. VPN vs. NAT

Although proxies, VPNs, and Network Address Translation (NAT) all sit between your device and the wider web, they function differently.

• Proxy: Masks your IP address and filters traffic but does not encrypt your connection.

• VPN: Encrypts all online activity and provides a stronger layer of privacy and security.

• NAT: Operates within routers, allowing multiple devices in a household or office to share one public IP address. It’s a background process, not a privacy tool.

Proxy servers are practical tools for managing internet access, optimizing traffic, and adding basic privacy. However, they should not be mistaken for comprehensive security solutions. Users should view proxies as one layer of digital protection, effective when used properly, but insufficient on their own. For strong privacy, encryption, and security, a VPN remains the more reliable choice.

AWS Outage Exposes the Fragility of Centralized Messaging Platforms



 

Signal

AWS communication Data Decentralised Platform Matrix Outage Privacy Signal

AWS Outage Exposes the Fragility of Centralized Messaging Platforms

A recently recorded outage at Amazon Web Services (AWS) disrupted several major online services worldwide, including privacy-focused communication apps such as Signal. The event has sparked renewed discussion about the risks of depending on centralized systems for critical digital communication.

Signal is known globally for its strong encryption and commitment to privacy. However, its centralized structure means that all its operations rely on servers located within a single jurisdiction and primarily managed by one cloud provider. When that infrastructure fails, the app’s global availability is affected at once. This incident has demonstrated that even highly secure applications can experience disruption if they depend on a single service provider.

According to experts working on decentralized communication technology, this kind of breakdown reveals a fundamental flaw in the way most modern communication apps are built. They argue that centralization makes systems easier to control but also easier to compromise. If the central infrastructure goes offline, every user connected to it is impacted simultaneously.

Developers behind the Matrix protocol, an open-source network for decentralized communication, have long emphasized the need for more resilient systems. They explain that Matrix allows users to communicate without relying entirely on the internet or on a single server. Instead, the protocol enables anyone to host their own server or connect through smaller, distributed networks. This decentralization offers users more control over their data and ensures communication can continue even if a major provider like AWS faces an outage.

The first platform built on Matrix, Element, was launched in 2016 by a UK-based team with the aim of offering encrypted communication for both individuals and institutions. For years, Element’s primary focus was to help governments and organizations secure their communication systems. This focus allowed the project to achieve financial stability while developing sustainable, privacy-preserving technologies.

Now, with growing support and new investments, the developers behind Matrix are working toward expanding the technology for broader public use. Recent funding from European institutions has been directed toward developing peer-to-peer and mesh network communication, which could allow users to exchange messages without relying on centralized servers or continuous internet connectivity. These networks create direct device-to-device links, potentially keeping users connected during internet blackouts or technical failures.

Mesh-based communication is not a new idea. Previous applications like FireChat allowed people to send messages through Bluetooth or Wi-Fi Direct during times when the internet was restricted. The concept gained popularity during civil movements where traditional communication channels were limited. More recently, other developers have experimented with similar models, exploring ways to make decentralized communication more user-friendly and accessible.

While decentralized systems bring clear advantages in terms of resilience and independence, they also face challenges. Running individual servers or maintaining peer-to-peer networks can be complex, requiring technical knowledge that many everyday users might not have. Developers acknowledge that reaching mainstream adoption will depend on simplifying these systems so they work as seamlessly as centralized apps.

Other privacy-focused technology leaders have also noted the implications of the AWS outage. They argue that relying on infrastructure concentrated within a few major U.S. providers poses strategic and privacy risks, especially for regions like Europe that aim to maintain digital autonomy. Building independent, regionally controlled cloud and communication systems is increasingly being seen as a necessary step toward safeguarding user privacy and operational security.

The recent AWS disruption serves as a clear warning. Centralized systems, no matter how secure, remain vulnerable to large-scale failures. As the digital world continues to depend heavily on cloud-based infrastructure, developing decentralized and distributed alternatives may be key to ensuring communication remains secure, private, and resilient in the face of future outages.

Users Warned to Check This Setting as Meta Faces Privacy Concerns



 

user consent

AI Photo Scanning AI Surveillance Camera Roll Access Cybersecurity awareness Data protection Facebook Data Tracking Meta Privacy Concerns Privacy user consent

Users Warned to Check This Setting as Meta Faces Privacy Concerns

A new AI experiment launched by Meta Platforms Inc. continues to blur the lines between innovation and privacy in the rapidly evolving digital landscape of connectivity. There has been a report that the tech giant, well known for changing the way billions of people interact online, has begun testing an artificial intelligence-powered feature that will scan users' camera rolls to identify pictures and videos that are likely to be shared the most.

By leveraging generative AI, this new Facebook feature will simplify the process of creating content and boosting user engagement by providing relevant images to users, applying creative edits, and assembling themed visual recaps - effectively turning users' own galleries into curated storyboards that tell a compelling story.

Digital Trends reported recently that Meta has rolled out a feature for users in the United States and Canada that is currently opt-in and available on an opt-in basis. This is their latest attempt to keep pace with rivals like TikTok and Instagram in a tightening battle for attention. Apparently, the system analyses unshared media directly on the users' devices, identifying what the company refers to as "hidden gems," which would have otherwise remained undiscovered.

As much as the feature is intended to promote more frequent and visually captivating posts through convenience, it also reignites long-standing discussions about data access, user consent, and the increasingly blurred line between personal privacy and algorithmic assistance that has become commonplace in the era of social media. During a move that has both sparked curiosity and unease, Meta quietly rolled out new Facebook settings that will allow the platform to analyse images stored within users' camera rolls-even those images that have never been uploaded or shared online—in a move that has sparked both intrigue and unease.

With the advent of artificial intelligence, the feature is billed as “camera roll sharing suggestions,” which is intended to help people generate personalised recommendations such as travel highlights, thematic albums, and collages based on their private photos using the camera roll. According to Meta, the feature operates only with the consent of the user and is turned off by default, emphasising the user's complete control over whether or not he or she chooses to participate. Nevertheless, the emerging reports indicate a very different story.

Many users claim that the feature is already active within their Facebook application despite having no memory of enabling it to begin with, indicating that it is an opt-in feature. It is for this reason that a growing number of people are starting to become sceptical of data permissions and privacy management, which has heightened ongoing concerns. As a result of these silent activations, there is still a broader issue at play-users might easily overlook background settings which grant extensive access to their personal information.

The privacy advocacy community is therefore urging users to reexamine their Facebook privacy settings and to ensure their access to local photo libraries aligns with their expectations of digital privacy and comfort levels. By tapping Allow on a pop-up message labelled "cloud processing," Facebook users are in effect agreeing to Meta's AI Terms of Service, in which the platform will be able to analyse their stored media and even facial characteristics through artificial intelligence.

After activating the feature, the user's camera roll will be continuously uploaded to Meta's cloud infrastructure, allowing Facebook to uncover so-called "hidden gems" within their photos, and select a collage, an AI-driven collage, a themed album, or create an edit tailored to individual moments. These settings were first introduced to select users as part of testing phases last summer, but they are now gradually appearing across the platform, hidden deep within the app's configuration menus under options such as "personalised creative ideas" and "AI-powered suggestions".

According to Meta, the purpose of the tool is to improve the user experience by providing private, shareable recommendations of content based on the user's own device, all of which are created by Meta. Despite the fact that the company insists that the suggestions are only visible to those with an account, they are not used for targeted advertising. These suggestions are based on parameters such as time, location, and people or objects present. However, the quiet rollout has sparked the discomfort of some users who claim that they have never knowingly agreed to be notified about the service.

There have been many reports of people finding the feature already activated, despite having no memory of granting consent, raising renewed concerns about transparency and informed user choice. Privacy advocates have said that although the tool may appear harmless and a simple way to simplify creative posting, it actually reveals a larger and more complex issue: the gradual normalisation of deep access to personal data under the guise of convenience, which has been occurring in recent years.

Keeping in mind the fact that Meta continues to expand its generative AI initiatives, the company's ability to mine personal images unposted for algorithmic insights enables Meta to pursue its technological ambitions in a way that often goes against the clear awareness of its users. Such features serve as a reminder of the delicate balance that exists between innovation and individual privacy in the digital age, as the race to dominate the AI ecosystem intensifies.

In response to growing privacy concerns over Meta's data practices, many users are taking advantage of Meta's "Off-Facebook Activity" controls to limit the amount of personal information the company can collect and use beyond the platform's own application, as privacy concerns have intensified. In addition to being available on Facebook and Instagram, this feature allows users to view, manage, and delete the data that is shared with Meta by third-party services and websites.

In the Facebook account's settings and privacy settings, users can select Off-Facebook Activity under "Your Facebook Information" so that they will be able to see what platforms have transmitted their data to, clear their history, and disable future tracking. Additionally, similar tools can be found under the Ads and Data & Privacy sections of Instagram under the Ads tab.

It is important to note that by disabling these options, Meta will not be able to store and analyse any activity that occurs outside of its ecosystem - ranging from e-commerce interactions to app usage patterns - reducing the personalisation of ads and limiting data flow between Meta and external platforms.

Despite the fact that the company maintains that this information assists in improving user experiences and providing relevant content, many critics believe that the practice violates one's privacy rights. Additionally, the controversy has reached the social media arena, where users continue to express their frustrations with Meta's pervasive tracking systems. In one viral TikTok video that has accumulated over half a million views, the creator described disabling the feature as a "small act of defiance," encouraging others to do the same to reclaim control of their digital footprint.

While experts are warning that, despite the fact that Meta remains able to function properly, certain permissions needed for its functionality remain active, which means that complete data isolation remains elusive even after turning off tracking. However, privacy advocates assert that clearing off-Facebook Activity and preventing future tracking remain among the most effective methods users can use to significantly reduce Meta's access to their personal information.

Despite growing concerns that Meta is utilising personal data in an increasingly expansive way in an effort to protect it, companies like Proton are positioning themselves as secure alternatives to Meta that emphasise transparency and user control. In response to the recent controversy over Meta's smart glasses - criticised for the potential to be turned into facial recognition and surveillance tools - calls have become more urgent for stronger safeguards against the abuse of private media.

Unlike many of its peers, Proton advocates a fundamentally different approach: limiting data collection completely rather than attempting to manage it after it has been exposed. With Proton Drive, a cloud-based storage service that is encrypted, users can securely store their camera rolls and private folders without being concerned about third parties accessing them or harvesting their data. Regardless of the size of each file, including its metadata, all files are encrypted end-to-end, so that no one - not even Proton - can access or analyse the content of users.

By encrypting photographs, people prevent the extraction of sensitive data, such as geolocation information and patterns, that can reveal personal routines and locations, through this level of security. With Proton Drive, users can store and retrieve their files anywhere using an app for both iOS and Android. Furthermore, users can control their privacy completely with a mobile app for both iOS and Android. In contrast to the majority of social media and tech platforms that monetise user data for advertising or model training, Proton's business model is entirely subscription-based, which eliminates the temptation to exploit the personal data of users.

A five-gigabyte storage allowance is currently offered by the company, which is enough for about 1,000 high-resolution images, so that users are encouraged to safeguard their digital memories through a platform that prioritises confidentiality over commercialisation. Advocates for privacy are considering this model as a viable option in an era where technology is increasingly clashing with the right to personal security, a conflict that is becoming more prevalent.

With the advancement of the digital age, the line between personalisation and intrusion becomes increasingly blurred, encouraging users to take an active role in managing their own data. The ongoing issues surrounding Meta's use of artificial intelligence to analyse photos, off-platform tracking, and secret data collection serve as a stark reminder that convenience is not always accompanied by privacy concerns.

According to experts, reviewing app permissions, clearing connected data histories on a regular basis, and disabling non-essential tracking features can all help to significantly reduce the amount of unnecessary data exposed to the outside world. In addition, storing sensitive information in an encrypted cloud service like Proton Drive can also offer a safer environment while maintaining access to sensitive information.

The power to safeguard our online privacy lies with the ability to be aware and act upon it. By remaining informed about new app settings, by reading consent disclosures carefully, and by being selective about the permissions users grant, every individual can regain control of their digital lives.

As artificial intelligence continues to redefine the limits of technology in our age, securing personal information has become more than a matter of protecting oneself from identity theft; it has become a form of digital self-defence that ensures users can remain innovative and preserve their basic right to privacy at the same time.

Microsoft’s Copilot Actions in Windows 11 Sparks Privacy and Security Concerns



 

Privacy Concerns

ai agents AI technology Copilot Data Privacy data security Microsoft Microsoft Copilot Privacy Privacy Concerns

Microsoft’s Copilot Actions in Windows 11 Sparks Privacy and Security Concerns

When it comes to computer security, every decision ultimately depends on trust. Users constantly weigh whether to download unfamiliar software, share personal details online, or trust that their emails reach the intended recipient securely. Now, with Microsoft’s latest feature in Windows 11, that question extends further — should users trust an AI assistant to access their files and perform actions across their apps?

Microsoft’s new Copilot Actions feature introduces a significant shift in how users interact with AI on their PCs. The company describes it as an AI agent capable of completing tasks by interacting with your apps and files — using reasoning, vision, and automation to click, type, and scroll just like a human. This turns the traditional digital assistant into an active AI collaborator, capable of managing documents, organizing folders, booking tickets, or sending emails once user permission is granted.

However, giving an AI that level of control raises serious privacy and security questions. Granting access to personal files and allowing it to act on behalf of a user requires substantial confidence in Microsoft’s safeguards. The company seems aware of the potential risks and has built multiple protective layers to address them.

The feature is currently available only in experimental mode through the Windows Insider Program for pre-release users. It remains disabled by default until manually turned on from Settings > System > AI components > Agent tools by activating the “Experimental agentic features” option.

To maintain strict oversight, only digitally signed agents from trusted sources can integrate with Windows. This allows Microsoft to revoke or block malicious agents if needed. Furthermore, Copilot Actions operates within a separate standard account created when the feature is enabled. By default, the AI can only access known folders such as Documents, Downloads, Desktop, and Pictures, and requires explicit user permission to reach other locations.

These interactions occur inside a controlled Agent workspace, isolated from the user’s desktop, much like Windows Sandbox. According to Dana Huang, Corporate Vice President of Windows Security, each AI agent begins with limited permissions, gains access only to explicitly approved resources, and cannot modify the system without user consent.

Adding to this, Microsoft’s Peter Waxman confirmed in an interview that the company’s security team is actively “red-teaming” the feature — conducting simulated attacks to identify vulnerabilities. While he did not disclose test details, Microsoft noted that more granular privacy and security controls will roll out during the experimental phase before the feature’s public release.

Even with these assurances, skepticism remains. The security research community — known for its vigilance and caution — will undoubtedly test whether Microsoft’s new agentic AI model can truly deliver on its promise of safety and transparency. As the preview continues, users and experts alike will be watching closely to see whether Copilot Actions earns their trust.

Google Moves Forward with Chrome Phase-Out Impacting Billions



 

User Data Protection

AI Browsers Chrome Users Security cybersecurity news Digital Advertising Google Privacy Sandbox Online Tracking Privacy Third Party Cookies User Data Protection

Google Moves Forward with Chrome Phase-Out Impacting Billions

Despite the ripples that Google has created in the global tech community, the company has announced that its long-promised privacy initiative for Chrome is being discontinued. In a move that has shocked the global tech community, Google has ended one of the most ambitious projects of its life, one in which it hoped to reinvent the world of online privacy.

In the wake of years of assurances and experiments, the company is officially announcing that the company will be phasing out its Privacy Sandbox project, once hailed as a way to eradicate invasive tracking cookies. There have been over three billion Chrome users since Chrome was launched, and many of them were expecting a safer, more private browsing experience. This decision marks a significant shift for Chrome.

In the beginning, the Privacy Sandbox was introduced with the goal of bringing about an “even more private web” while maintaining a delicate balance between user protection and the advertising industry's needs for data collection. Despite Google's six-year plan, which was criticised by regulators and encountered numerous technical difficulties, the company has admitted that the program failed to provide a viable alternative to third-party cookies. This news is in response to recent warnings from Apple and Microsoft regarding Google Chrome, both of which cautioned against relying on the application due to concerns regarding privacy and security.

Google's vision of a privacy-first web seems to have faltered in light of this latest development — leaving many users and industry observers wondering what is going to happen to online tracking, digital advertising, and the world's most popular browser in the next five years. In the year 2024, Google embarked upon a transformative endeavour, redefining digital advertising and user privacy for the next generation of users.

A tech giant operated by Alphabet, under its parent company, announced plans to phase out third-party cookies from Chrome - a cornerstone of online tracking for decades - and replace them with an improved Privacy Sandbox framework. Specifically, this initiative was created to understand user preferences without the invasive cross-site tracking that has long fueled personalised advertising campaigns.

Among Google's objectives was twofold: to ensure privacy standards and maintain the profitable precision of targeted ads, which drive substantial revenue for the company. The Privacy Sandbox, which was launched in 2019, was a major architectural change in the way online ads were delivered. Instead of being reliant on external tracking servers for data processing and ad selection, users' browsers and devices were responsible for processing data and displaying ads.

3The project, however, despite years of testing and global scrutiny, did not produce a viable alternative to third-party cookies, which was the reason Google eventually decided to cease its six-year experiment by formally discontinuing the Privacy Sandbox earlier this year. As a quiet acknowledgement of the difficulty of balancing privacy and profits, the company officially ceased the experiment earlier this year.

Despite the prospect of extensive tracking and customised ad targeting once again facing Chrome users, the browser's dominance over the global market does not appear to be declining. Chrome still holds more than 70 per cent of the browser market share across both mobile and desktop platforms, making it the leading browsing tool in the world.

Even so, Google's leadership understands the shifting currents in the industry. With the advent of emerging AI-enabled browsers, such as Perplexity's Comet and an anticipated release from OpenAI, users are beginning to redefine what their online experience should be, as people move towards a more social and mobile experience.

A critical inflexion point has been reached when Google decided to discontinue the Privacy Sandbox, which has been at the forefront of the ongoing debate around privacy and data-driven advertising since the 1990s. As a method of replacing third-party cookies with more privacy-conscious alternatives, the project was introduced with the intention of enabling advertisers to gain insight into users' interests without invasive cross-site tracking.

Having launched in 2019, the initiative is intended to make sure that user privacy expectations are balanced with the commercial imperatives of the advertising industry and the scrutiny of global regulators. Google confirmed that, on October 21, the Privacy Sandbox project will be phased out, ending one of the most ambitious privacy initiatives Google has ever undertaken, after years of trials, delays, and regulatory engagement.

There was an apparent lack of industry adoption, as well as unresolved technical difficulties, that led to the discontinuation of several key components, including Federated Learning of Cohorts (FLoC), Attribution Reporting API, IP Protection, and Private Aggregation, for which the company cited limited industry adoption and unresolved technical concerns.

Despite being in favour of third-party cookies, the decision effectively preserves them for the foreseeable future in an acknowledgement that the industry does not yet have an alternative that is safe, effective, and scalable. There was a strong role played by regulatory bodies like the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) in facilitating this outcome, by highlighting potential anticompetitive risks and urging a deeper examination of the technology's ramifications.

In contrast to the CMA's request for additional time to review industry results, the ICO expressed disappointment but encouraged continued innovation towards privacy-first solutions in an attempt to combat the anticompetitive risks. There appears to be a deeper tension between privacy concerns and business imperatives, underlying this policy reversal. Privacy Sandbox had long been criticised by advertisers because of its lack of support for real-time campaign reporting and essential brand safety mechanisms.

In the future, Google plans to provide users with greater control over how their data is handled rather than completely removing cookies—a compromise reflected in both the commercial and regulatory environments in which it operates. Marketers should be aware of the implications of this persistent usage of third-party cookies.

While traditional tracking methods remain viable, the digital landscape continues to shift towards transparency and consent-based engagement in order to maintain customer relevance. Over half of marketers have already started testing cookie-free solutions as a response to upcoming restrictions, even though many still heavily rely on third-party data for their campaign execution in preparation for future restrictions.

Businesses whose companies proactively adapt - by acquiring first-party data, engaging in contextual advertising, and using privacy-safe analytics - see tangible benefits. These include improvements in performance ranging from 10 per cent for large companies to 100 per cent for smaller firms. In the long run, the move challenges businesses to evolve their marketing ecosystems to keep up with the changing market.

As a result of newsletters, loyalty programs, and interactive experiences, it is becoming increasingly important to develop first-party data strategies. Consent management systems have become increasingly popular to ensure transparency, compliance with regulations, and first-party data protection, in addition to ensuring regulatory compliance.

In recent years, contextual targeting, universal IDs, and data cleaning rooms have become increasingly popular as tools to keep campaigns accurate without losing users' trust. Despite the fact that third-party cookies will always be part of the web's fabric for a while, the industry consensus is clear: the future of digital marketing lies in developing meaningful user relationships that are built upon consent, credibility, and respect for privacy.

The next chapter of digital advertising will continue to be defined by the balance between personalisation and privacy, especially as AI-driven browsers such as Perplexity's Comet and OpenAI's upcoming offerings introduce new paradigms in user interaction. A wave of reactions has erupted across the technology and advertising industries since Google announced its decision to discontinue its privacy sandbox program, which reveals both frustration and resignation at the same time.

The decision has been described by observers as a defining moment for digital privacy and online advertising in history. A recent report from PPC Land stated that Chrome kills most Privacy Sandbox technologies after adoption fails. The report also noted that nine of Google’s proposed APIs had been retired after years of limited adoption and widespread criticism.

In an even more direct statement, Engadget declared that “Google has killed Privacy Sandbox.” According to media outlets, the company has come to a halt with its multi-year effort to reimagine web privacy after a multi-year effort. Despite these developments, Chrome's overwhelming dominance in the browser market has not been affected at all by them. Despite repeated controversies surrounding user tracking, Chrome still holds a dominant position on both the desktop and mobile markets.

Although privacy concerns and regulatory scrutiny have been raised, its cookie-replacement initiative failed to deliver a meaningful impact on user loyalty. The reality is that in the coming years, emerging competition from AI-powered browsers such as Perplexity's Comet and an upcoming browser from OpenAI could eventually reshape this landscape.

In response to this, Google has been accelerating its innovation within Chrome, integrating its Gemini artificial intelligence system to enhance browsing efficiency as well as counter rising rivalry. Several people have already criticised Gemini for its deeper integration of data, suggesting that instead of reducing user tracking, this deeper integration may actually result in a greater amount of tracking of users. This paradox highlights the complexity of the relationship between Google and privacy once again.

A recent article from Gizmodo notes that Google has completely removed the Privacy Sandbox, so it appears the long-deferred plan has come to a halt somewhere along the way. Throughout the publication, it was mentioned that individualised user tracking was an integral part of the modern advertising-supported web, and even though the debate has lasted for many years, it still remains in place.

A major reason for the enduring tension between Google and its users is that the company is simultaneously responsible for ensuring user privacy while also making an important contribution to the creation of the highly data-driven advertising ecosystem that the company is continuing to benefit from to this very day.

It was widely feared that Google's elimination of cookies would only strengthen its competitive position, since it has unique control over both data and advertising infrastructure. This situation was described as a temporary pause rather than a permanent resolution by Search Engine Land. As a result of Google's retreat, the cookie chaos has been brought to an end for now, but it is unclear whether privacy-first advertising will last in the future.

There was a strong emphasis placed on the fact that the Privacy Sandbox was Google’s response to mounting privacy regulations and a backlash against cross-site tracking, but due to its complexity, slow adoption, and regulatory restrictions, it failed to achieve its full potential. Although the industry may find some relief in the short term by maintaining familiar advertising tools, there remain long-term challenges to overcome.

Forbes noted that the discontinuation may bring some stability today, but more uncertainty tomorrow. Advertisers will continue to rely on tracking models as regulatory pressures tighten around the world. Almost six years after Google first promised to end third-party tracking, the web has remained much the same: users are still being monitored across many sites, and the promise of a truly privacy-protected digital experience has yet to come true.

Currently, the industry finds itself in a difficult position - balancing the necessity of commercial growth with ethical responsibilities - as the next generation of AI-powered browsers threatens to upset the ecosystem once again with its ongoing disruptions. With Google's withdrawal of its once-celebrated Privacy Sandbox coming to a close, the digital ecosystem stands at a crossroads between convenience and conscience as it marks the end of a six-year experiment.

The decision of the company highlights what remains to be an uncomfortable truth about the internet's economic engine: individual data trails still play a major role in its economic engine. Although the advertising industry is facing a turning point, it is an opportunity for businesses and advertisers to rethink their engagement strategies. The future lies in transparent and consent-driven marketing that creates meaningful value exchanges based on trust, consent, and meaningful transparency.

Brands that proactively invest in first-party data ecosystems, privacy-friendly analytics, and contextual intelligence will not just ensure compliance but will also strengthen customer loyalty in the process. Throughout this evolution, regulators, developers, and marketers need to collaborate to design frameworks that respect privacy without stifling innovation, as the rise of artificial intelligence browsers and an increased awareness of the importance of privacy will make it more than a regulatory checkbox, but instead one of the defining features of a brand.

Those who adapt early to the new digital transformation paradigm, incorporating ethical principles into their strategy from the beginning, will emerge as trusted leaders in the next chapter of digital transformation - where privacy is no longer an obstacle to be overcome, but a competitive advantage contributing greatly to the future success of the web.

Search This Blog

Sections

Popular Posts

Blog Archive

Labels

Report Abuse

About Me

Footer About

Labels

Showing result(s) for

Popular Posts

Pages

WhatsApp’s “We See You” Post Sparks Privacy Panic Among Users

Unsecured Corporate Data Found Freely Accessible Through Simple Searches

Connected Car Privacy Risks: How Modern Vehicles Secretly Track and Sell Driver Data

AI Browsers Spark Debate Over Privacy and Cybersecurity Risks

Stop Using Public Wi-Fi: Critical Security Risks Explained

ChatGPT Atlas Surfaces Privacy Debate: How OpenAI’s New Browser Handles Your Data

Proxy Servers: How They Work and What They Actually Do

AWS Outage Exposes the Fragility of Centralized Messaging Platforms

Users Warned to Check This Setting as Meta Faces Privacy Concerns

Microsoft’s Copilot Actions in Windows 11 Sparks Privacy and Security Concerns

Google Moves Forward with Chrome Phase-Out Impacting Billions

Footer About

Search This Blog

Sections

Popular Posts

Blog Archive

Labels

About Me

Footer About

Labels

Showing result(s) for

Popular Posts

Pages

Menu Item