Tech
US government launches Bureau of Emerging Threats | Computer Weekly
The US government has formally launched a new Bureau of Emerging Threats within the State Department to protect and mitigate against threats posed to America’s national security by cyber attacks, the weaponisation of space, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI)
Although its existence first became public knowledge just under 12 months ago, the State Department has kept a tight lid on the precise nature of the Bureau until this week, when senior officials broke their silence in conversation with reporters from TV network ABC.
“The bureau will address not only the current threats we face today in cyber space, outer space, critical infrastructure, and through the misuse of disruptive technology like AI and quantum, but those we will face in the decades ahead,” State Department principal deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott told ABC News.
Led by career diplomat Anny Vu, the Bureau ultimately reports to the under secretary for arms control and international security Thomas DiNanno, and will contain five distinct offices covering cyber security, critical national infrastructure (CNI), disruptive technology, space security, and threat assessment.
Officials told ABC they would be heavily focused on the activities of the so-called Big Four nation-state threat actors – China, Iran, North Korea and Russia – as well as international terrorist organisations.
The network additionally reported that the State Department has not revealed any details pertaining to the Bureau’s budget, staffing levels, or how it will work alongside the multiple pre-existing US agencies that claim some degree of expertise on cyber security matters – such as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) and the National Security Agency (NSA).
Engagement
Absent further detail at this stage, for the time being security leaders should continue to try to work with their existing US government contacts, said Xcape Inc board member David Small.
“Security leaders should prioritise maintaining relationships with Cisa, which remains the operational bridge between the State Department’s diplomatic goals and the private sector’s technical defence needs,” he said.
“Hiring a fleet of cyber security experts into the State Department is a bit like asking a career diplomat to debug a kernel panic; they’ll handle the negotiations beautifully, but the system is still going to crash.”
The appointment of three long-standing diplomatic experts as its leadership suggests the Bureau’s output will initially lean towards sanctions and treaty-writing, as opposed to technical remediation, he said.
As the new organisation beds in, Small said the business impact for private sector security pros was a period of increased regulatory noise as it attempts to define international security norms that may not always align with current engineering realities.
“To prepare, defenders and policy leaders should look to engage with the Bureau’s Office of Disruptive Technology early, treating it as a primary channel for informing the government on the feasibility of proposed AI and space-asset regulations,” added Small.
Suzu Labs senior director for secure AI solutions and cyber security, Jacob Krell, said that in his view, the Bureau of Emerging Threats was named for threats that have long-since emerged.
“Cyber and space capabilities served as the opening instruments in the current campaign against Iran. AI driven systems are compressing military decision cycles from days to minutes. These are the primary tools of state power being deployed right now by every adversary this bureau names. Standing up a bureau to address them through foreign policy is a recognition that the nature of conflict has fundamentally changed,” he said.
“That recognition is what makes the placement under the under secretary for arms control and international security significant. The United States is formally treating cyber, AI, and space as part of the same strategic conversation as conventional and nuclear capabilities. That is the right instinct.”
But like Small, Krell said he saw challenges ahead, in that technologically-driven conflict occurs much quicker than diplomats can handle. For the Bureau to be effective, he said it would need to operate at a pace reflecting technological reality, not at the pace of the State Department.
“The mandate is sound and the recognition is overdue. What matters now is whether this bureau arrives with the resourcing and operational speed to match threats that have already moved well past the planning stage,” he said.
Tech
Could Contact-Tracing Apps Help With the Hantavirus? Not Really
After three people died on a cruise ship struck by a hantavirus, authorities are actively tracking down 29 people who had left the ship. They’re trying to trace the spread of the virus. It’s a long, arduous, global process to find and notify people who might be at risk of infection.
Hey, wasn’t there supposed to be an app for that?
Contact-tracing apps were a global effort starting in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Enabled by phone companies like Apple and Google, contact tracing was designed to use Bluetooth connections to detect when people had come in contact with someone who had or would later test positive for Covid and report as much. It didn’t do much to solve the spread of the pandemic, but tracking the virus became more effective at least. The same process wouldn’t go well for the hantavirus problem.
“There is no use of apps for this hantavirus outbreak,” Emily Gurley, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an email response to WIRED. “The number of cases are small, and it’s important to trace all contacts exactly to stop transmission.”
On a smaller scale of infection like this, officials have to start at the source (an infected individual), then go person-by-person, confirming where they went and who they might have come into contact with. Data collected by apps from a broad swath of devices would not be anywhere close to accurate enough to give a good idea of where the virus might have hitchhiked to next.
Contact tracing on a wider scale, like, say, a global pandemic, is less about tracking the individual infections and more about understanding what parts of the population might be affected, giving people the opportunity to self-quarantine after exposure. But that depends on how people choose to respond, and how the technology is utilized by public emergency systems. During the Covid pandemic, contact-tracing via apps tended to work better in more carefully managed European countries, but did not slow the spread in the US.
Making devices accessible to that kind of proximity information has also brought all sorts of concerns about privacy, given that the technology would require always-on access to work properly. Contact tracing also struggled to maintain accuracy, and in some cases could be providing false negatives or positives that don’t help further real information about the spread of the virus.
Especially in the case of something like the Hantavirus, where every person on that cruise ship can theoretically be directly tracked and contacted, it’s better to do that process the hard way.
“During small but highly fatal outbreaks, more precision is required,” Gurley wrote.
Tech
‘Reservation Hijacking’ Scams Target Travelers. Here’s How to Stay Safe
There’s another type of digital scam to be aware of, as per the BBC. It’s called “reservation hijacking.”
The name gives you a clue as to how it works. Essentially, scammers use details about a booking you’ve placed (perhaps with a hotel or airline) to trick you into sending money somewhere you shouldn’t.
While this type of scam isn’t brand new, a recent data breach at Booking.com has raised the risk of people being caught out. With data about you and your reservation, a far more convincing setup can be put in place—why wouldn’t you believe that someone purporting to be an employee from a spa you’ve got a reservation with is telling the truth about who they are, especially if they know the dates of your trip, your phone number, and your email address?
According to Booking.com, no financial information was exposed in the April 2026 hack. However, names, email addresses, phone numbers, and booking details have been leaked. The travel portal says affected customers have been emailed about the heightened risk of scams, so that’s the first thing to check for when it comes to staying safe.
Minimizing the risk of getting scammed by a reservation hijack involves many of the same security precautions you may already be following, and just being aware that this is a way you might be targeted will make a difference.
How Reservation Hijacks Work
We’ve already outlined the basics of a reservation hijack, but it can take several forms. As with other types of scams, it tends to evolve over time. The basic premise is that someone will get in touch with you claiming to be from a place you have a reservation with, whether it’s a car rental company or a hotel.
The scammers will try to pull together as much information as they can on you and your booking. Sometimes they’ll target employees of the place you’ve got the reservation with in order to get access to their systems, and other times they may take advantage of a wider data breach (as with the recent Booking.com hack).
They might also get information through other means. Maybe they’ve somehow got access to your email, or to some of your social media posts (where you’ve shared your next vacation destination and a countdown of how many days are left to go). Don’t be caught out if you find yourself speaking to someone who knows a lot about your travel plans.
Tech
I Tried the Best Captioning Smart Glasses, and Only One Leads the Pack
Unlike the other glasses I tested, Even doesn’t sell a subscription plan; everything’s included out of the box.
The only downside I could find with the G2 is that it is largely devoid of offline features, so the glasses have to be connected to the internet to do much of anything. Considering the G2’s capabilities, it’s a trade-off I am more than happy to make.
Other Captioning Glasses I Tested
There are plenty of capable captioning eyeglasses on the market, but they are surprisingly similar in both looks and features. While many are quite capable, none had the combination of power and affordability that I got with Even’s G2. Here’s a rundown of everything else I tested.
Leion’s Hey 2 is the price leader in this market, and even its prescription lenses ($90 to $299) are pretty affordable. The hardware, however, is heavy: 50 grams without lenses, 60 grams with them. A full charge gets you six to eight hours of operation; the case adds juice for up to 12 recharges.
I like the Leion interface, which lays out caption, translation, “free talk” (two-way translation), and a teleprompter feature on its clean app. You get access to nine languages; using Pro minutes expands that to 143. Leion sells its premium plan by the minute, not the month, so you need to remember to toggle this mode off when you don’t need it. Pricing is $10 for 120 minutes, $50 for 1,200 minutes, and $200 for 6,000 minutes. There’s no offline use supported, and I often struggled to get AI summaries to show up in English instead of Chinese (regardless of the recorded language).
You’re not seeing double: XRAI and Leion use the same manufacturer for their hardware, and the glasses weigh the same. The battery spec is also similar, with up to eight hours on the frames and another 96 hours when recharging with the case. XRAI claims its display is significantly brighter than competitors’, but I didn’t see much of a difference in day-to-day use.
The features and user experience are roughly the same, though Leion’s teleprompter feature isn’t implemented in XRAI’s app, and it doesn’t offer AI summaries of conversations. I also didn’t find XRAI’s app as user-friendly as Leion’s version, particularly when trying to switch among the admittedly exhaustive 300 language options. Only 20 of these are included without ponying up for a Pro subscription, which is sold both by the month and minute: $20/month gets you a max of 600 upgraded transcription minutes and 300 translation minutes; $40/month gets you 1,800 and 1,200 minutes, respectively. On the plus side, XRAI does have a rudimentary offline mode that works better than most. For prescription lenses, add $140 to $170.
AirCaps does not make its own prescription lenses. Instead, you must purchase a pair of $39 “lens holders” and take them to an optician if you want prescription inserts. I was unable to test these with prescription lenses and ultimately had to try them out over my regular glasses, which worked well enough for short-term testing. Frames weigh a hefty 53 grams without add-on lenses; the company couldn’t tell me how much extra weight prescription lenses would add to that, but it’s safe to say these are the bulkiest and heaviest captioning glasses on the market. Despite the weight, they only carry two to four hours of battery life, with 10 or so recharges packed into the comically large case. Another option is to clip one of AirCaps’ rechargeable 13-gram Power Capsules ($79 for two) to one of the arms, which can provide 12 to 18 extra hours of juice.
The AirCaps feature list and interface make it perhaps the simplest of all these devices, with just a single button to start and stop recording. Transcriptions and translations are available for free in nine languages. For $20/month, you can add the Pro package, which offers better accuracy, access to more than 60 languages, and the option to generate AI summaries on demand (though only if recordings are long enough). As a bonus: Five hours of Pro features are free each month. Offline mode works pretty well, too. The only bad news is that these bulky frames just aren’t comfortable enough for long-term wear.
The most expensive option on the market (up to $1,399 with prescription lenses!) weighs a relatively svelte 40 grams (52 grams with lenses) and offers about four hours of battery life. There’s no charging case; the glasses must be charged directly using the included USB-connected dongle.
The glasses are extremely simple, offering transcription and translation features—with support for about 80 languages, which is impressive. I unfortunately found the prescription lenses Captify sent to be the blurriest of the bunch, making the captions comparatively hard to read. And while the device supports offline transcription, performance suffered badly when disconnected from the internet. I couldn’t get translations to work at all when offline. For $15/month, you get better accuracy and speaker differentiation, and access to AI summaries of conversations. Prescription lenses cost between $99 and $600.
-
Politics1 week agoIran weighs US reply delivered via Pakistan as Trump signals opposition to deal terms
-
Fashion1 week agoAAFA pushes for swift US House passage of key anti-counterfeiting law
-
Fashion1 week agoUS cotton export sales show strong recovery, Upland rise 36%
-
Sports1 week agoSajid Ali Sadpara summits world’s fifth-highest peak
-
Tech7 days agoDHS Demanded Google Surrender Data on Canadian’s Activity, Location Over Anti-ICE Posts
-
Business1 week agoHeineken to invest £44.5m in hundreds of pubs creating 850 jobs
-
Fashion1 week agoICE cotton witnesses sharp rise on weaker dollar, strong exports
-
Business1 week agoGovernment notifies FDI changes on China funds – The Times of India








