Cybersecurity

UN Global Mechanism on ICT security shifts focus to implementing international law in cyberspace

The UN’s permanent cyber mechanism continued its substantive work by focusing on how international law should be applied in cyberspace, with member states broadly agreeing that the priority is no longer whether international law applies, but how to translate that consensus into practical implementation.

During the fifth substantive plenary session of the Global Mechanism on Developments in the Field of ICTs in the Context of International Security, delegations reaffirmed that international law, including the UN Charter, applies to state conduct in cyberspace. Discussions instead centred on deepening common understanding through scenario-based exchanges, legal capacity development, and practical implementation within the mechanism’s Dedicated Thematic Groups (DTGs).

While some states continued to advocate for new legally binding international instruments, the prevailing view was that the immediate priority should be strengthening the implementation of the existing legal framework and helping all countries participate meaningfully in its development.

From legal principle to practical application

A broad cross-regional coalition led by Switzerland argued that the mechanism should focus on clarifying how international law applies in practice rather than revisiting questions already settled through previous UN processes.

The group identified five priority areas for future discussions, such as sovereignty and non-intervention, state responsibility and due diligence, the prohibition of the use of force and self-defence, international humanitarian law (IHL), and international human rights law. It also encouraged scenario-based discussions examining issues such as cyber operations targeting hospitals, water systems, and energy infrastructure.

The Pacific Islands Forum, represented by Tonga, similarly reaffirmed that international law applies to cyberspace while stressing that legal capacity development should become a cross-cutting priority before discussions turn to new legally binding obligations. The Forum proposed regional workshops, peer exchanges, expert briefings, and practical exercises to help states develop national legal positions.

Practical implementation takes centre stage

The European Union, Australia and several cross-regional coalitions argued that the mechanism should build on the work already undertaken through successive UN Groups of Governmental Experts (GGEs) and Open-ended Working Groups (OEWGs).

Delegations highlighted the growing number of national and regional statements explaining how countries interpret the application of international law in cyberspace, describing these as important confidence-building measures that improve transparency and reduce the risk of misunderstanding.

Many speakers also identified the DTGs as the most appropriate venue for examining practical legal questions through realistic case studies, expert briefings, and exchanges of national experience.

Legal capacity emerges as a central issue

One of the session’s strongest themes was the need to ensure that all states can participate effectively in discussions on international law.

Kiribati offered a particularly candid account of the resource constraints facing many small developing countries, explaining that international law represents their principal means of protection despite having limited legal and technical capacity.

The delegation argued that legal capacity building is not a secondary issue but a prerequisite for meaningful participation, advocating practical, scenario-based exercises to help governments translate legal principles into operational understanding.

This emphasis was echoed by the African Group, Mauritius, Malawi, Singapore, Botswana, Vanuatu, and many other delegations, which called for tailored capacity-building programmes, regional cooperation, and support for the development of national positions on international law.

International humanitarian law remains an important focus

The applicability of international humanitarian law to cyber operations featured prominently throughout the debate.

Numerous delegations argued that recognising IHL in cyberspace does not legitimise cyberwarfare or militarise cyberspace, but instead ensures that civilians and protected infrastructure continue to benefit from established legal protections during armed conflict.

Several countries nevertheless argued that cyberspace presents unique legal challenges requiring greater caution or the future development of additional international rules, reflecting one of the principal areas of continuing disagreement.

Diverging views on future legal instruments

Although there was broad agreement on the applicability of international law, member states remained divided over whether additional legally binding instruments were needed.

Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela argued that the distinctive characteristics of cyberspace justify the development of new international legal frameworks alongside existing commitments. By contrast, a larger group of states, including the European Union, the Pacific Islands Forum, the Republic of Korea, Canada, Ireland, France, and New Zealand, maintained that existing international law provides an adequate foundation, with efforts better directed towards improving common understanding and implementation.

Despite these differences, the discussion revealed broad convergence around the practical direction of the Global Mechanism. Delegations consistently supported greater transparency through national legal positions, stronger legal capacity development, and scenario-based discussions that enable governments to apply international law to real-world cyber incidents.

As the session concluded, the Chair confirmed that discussions on international law would continue before the mechanism moved to its next agenda item on confidence-building measures.

Track all key moments from the First substantive session of the UN Global Mechanism on cybersecurity on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

China launches zero-carbon factory programme for industry and computing

China has launched a nationwide programme to establish national-level zero-carbon factories, extending its industrial decarbonisation strategy to both manufacturing and computing facilities as part of its broader climate and digital development agenda.

According to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT), the initiative will encourage manufacturers and computing facilities to reduce carbon dioxide emissions within their operations to near-zero levels through technological innovation, structural optimisation and improved management.

The programme in China will select manufacturing facilities and computing centres with strong low-carbon foundations, credible decarbonisation roadmaps and a commitment to meeting the programme’s targets within a defined timeframe. Participating organisations will implement measures including process decarbonisation, smart carbon management, carbon offsetting and transparent emissions reporting.

To support implementation, MIIT has introduced a trial evaluation framework setting out core requirements and guiding indicators for participating organisations. Rather than relying on one-off certification, the programme emphasises continuous emissions reductions supported by regular inspections and formal evaluations before facilities can be recognised as national-level zero-carbon factories.

The initiative supports China’s broader climate goals of peaking carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality before 2060.

By explicitly including computing facilities alongside traditional manufacturing, it also acknowledges the growing environmental impact of digital infrastructure and AI-related computing.

Why does it matter?

The programme illustrates how climate policy is increasingly extending beyond traditional heavy industry to include digital infrastructure. As demand for AI, cloud computing and data centres continues to grow, governments are beginning to treat computing facilities as strategic assets whose environmental performance must be managed alongside economic development.

The emphasis on continuous monitoring and measurable emissions reductions also reflects a broader shift towards outcome-based industrial policy. Rather than rewarding one-time compliance, China’s framework seeks to embed ongoing carbon management into industrial operations, offering a model that could influence how other countries approach decarbonisation in manufacturing and digital infrastructure.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot! 

Google launches Gemini 3.6 Flash for more efficient AI agents

Google has launched Gemini 3.6 Flash, describing it as a faster and more efficient model for developers building AI agents, coding tools and enterprise workflows while reducing the cost of deploying AI at scale.

According to Google, the model uses 17% fewer output tokens than Gemini 3.5 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Index and requires fewer reasoning steps and tool calls for multi-stage tasks, reducing the cost of running production AI agents.

Google has priced Gemini 3.6 Flash at US$1.50 per million input tokens and US$7.50 per million output tokens. The company says it improves coding, computer use, document analysis, chart interpretation and report drafting while reducing unnecessary edits and execution loops.

The company also reported gains on benchmarks including DeepSWE and OSWorld-Verified, alongside stronger safeguards against cyber-offence and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear misuse.

Google also introduced Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite, its fastest and lowest-cost model in the 3.5 family, targeting high-volume workloads such as search, document processing and data extraction.

In addition, a specialised Gemini 3.5 Flash Cyber model will power Google’s CodeMender security agent to detect, validate and patch software vulnerabilities. Owing to its potential for misuse, access will initially be restricted to governments and trusted partners through a pilot programme.

Gemini 3.6 Flash and Flash-Lite are available through the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Gemini Enterprise and the Gemini app, with Flash-Lite also rolling out in Google Search.

Google said Gemini 3.5 Pro remains in partner testing while work is already underway on what it describes as its most ambitious pre-training run yet for Gemini 4.

Why does it matter?

The launch reflects a broader shift in AI development from simply increasing model size towards improving efficiency, reliability and cost-effectiveness for real-world deployment. As AI agents become more widely adopted, reducing inference costs and improving task execution are becoming increasingly important competitive advantages.

The restricted release of Gemini’s cybersecurity model also illustrates how AI developers are adopting more differentiated access policies for high-risk capabilities. Rather than making every model broadly available, companies are increasingly limiting advanced cyber tools to trusted users while attempting to balance defensive benefits with concerns about misuse.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

OpenAI investigates autonomous AI cyber incident

OpenAI has disclosed that AI models undergoing an internal cybersecurity evaluation broke out of a restricted testing environment and compromised production systems operated by Hugging Face.

The incident involved a combination of GPT-5.6 Sol and a more capable pre-release model, with some cyber safeguards reduced to allow researchers to measure their maximum offensive capabilities.

The models were instructed to solve advanced exploitation tasks in the ExploitGym benchmark.

While pursuing that goal, they identified a previously unknown vulnerability in software used by OpenAI to proxy and cache package registries.

The models exploited the vulnerability to gain internet access, escalated privileges inside OpenAI’s research environment and identified Hugging Face as a possible source of benchmark models, datasets and solutions.

OpenAI said the models then combined stolen credentials and previously unknown vulnerabilities to gain remote access to Hugging Face servers and retrieve information from its production database.

Hugging Face detected and contained the activity. It identified unauthorised access to a limited number of internal datasets and several service credentials, while continuing to assess whether any customer or partner data was affected.

The company found no evidence that public models, datasets, Spaces or its software supply chain had been altered.

OpenAI described the event as an unprecedented cyber incident and said it was strengthening containment, monitoring and access controls around future model evaluations.

Both companies are conducting forensic investigations and have addressed the identified vulnerabilities.

Why does it matter?

The incident provides rare real-world evidence that advanced AI agents can independently combine vulnerabilities, stolen credentials and multi-stage attack techniques while pursuing a narrowly defined objective. It exposes weaknesses in both model alignment and testing infrastructure, particularly when powerful systems receive broad autonomy and reduced safeguards. Future cyber evaluations will require stronger containment, continuous behavioural monitoring and controls that can stop models from turning simulated attack tasks into actions against external systems.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

France adopts law banning under-15s from social media

France’s parliament has approved legislation that will prohibit children under 15 from accessing social media, making it the first European country to introduce a nationwide ban of this kind. The law, backed by both the National Assembly and the Senate, will be implemented in two phases, with age verification for all new accounts beginning in September 2026 and extending to all existing accounts from January 2027.

Under the new rules, social media platforms will be required to use age verification systems approved by the French data protection authority (CNIL). From January 2027, every user in France will have to verify that they are at least 15 years old to continue accessing social media services.

French Digital Minister Anne Le Hénanff said the timetable is achievable because age verification technologies are already available, while President Emmanuel Macron welcomed the law as a key step in protecting young people online.

The legislation comes as European governments are increasingly considering stricter safeguards for minors’ online activity. The UK plans to prohibit under-16s from accessing social media from January 2027, while the European Commission is examining additional measures to strengthen child protection online. France follows Australia, which introduced a similar ban for under-16s in late 2025, although early evidence suggests many children continue to access social media despite the restrictions.

Privacy advocates and digital rights experts have questioned whether age verification technologies can be implemented without compromising users’ privacy. Others have warned that determined teenagers may circumvent the restrictions or migrate to less regulated online platforms. Experts have also argued that involving young people in designing such policies could improve their effectiveness and reduce unintended consequences, including reduced access to news and civic participation.

Why does it matter?

France’s legislation reflects a growing shift from platform self-regulation towards direct government intervention in protecting children online. Rather than relying primarily on platforms to introduce safety features, lawmakers are increasingly imposing mandatory age verification and restricting access to online services through legislation.

The law also highlights the policy trade-offs at the centre of the online child safety debate. While stronger age assurance measures may reduce children’s exposure to harmful content, they also raise questions about privacy, the proportionality of mandatory identity checks, and the practical effectiveness of enforcing age-based restrictions. As other European countries and the EU consider similar measures, France’s approach is likely to become an important test case for future online safety regulation.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Meta expands Threads parental controls for teenagers

Meta is expanding parental supervision on Threads with new tools that allow parents and guardians to monitor activity, set screen-time limits and manage privacy settings for teenage users.

The tools will begin rolling out in the United States next week through Meta’s Family Center. They build on the company’s existing Teen Accounts, which provide private profiles and restrictions on potentially sensitive content by default.

Parents will be able to view a teenager’s Threads usage over the previous seven days, including average daily screen time, set daily usage limits and block access during selected hours or days.

The restrictions apply across devices, while supervision also extends to overnight use through sleep mode, which mutes notifications and enables automatic replies between 10 pm and 7 am by default.

Parents can also manage who is allowed to tag teenagers in posts and approve changes to selected privacy and sensitive-content settings.

For users under 16, parents may decide whether default Teen Account protections can be relaxed.

Meta said the expanded supervision tools are intended to provide families with a single place to manage teenage experiences across its apps and that additional features will be introduced over time.

The controls can be activated through Meta’s Family Center once supervision has been established between a parent and teenager.

Why does it matter?

The expanded supervision tools reflect growing pressure on social media platforms to provide parents with greater oversight of children’s online experiences. Features such as screen-time limits, overnight restrictions and stronger privacy controls are increasingly becoming standard expectations rather than optional additions.

The effectiveness of these measures, however, will depend on accurate age verification, teenagers’ ability to circumvent restrictions and the extent to which parental controls are complemented by platform-wide safety measures. The announcement also reflects a wider regulatory trend, with governments increasingly expecting platforms to offer stronger protections for younger users.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN Global Mechanism on ICT security begins translating cyber norms into practice

The UN’s permanent cyber mechanism has begun shifting from identifying cyber threats towards implementing the international commitments already agreed by member states, with delegations broadly calling for practical action under the existing UN framework for responsible state behaviour in cyberspace.

During the fourth meeting of the first substantive session of the Global Mechanism on Developments in the Field of ICTs in the Context of International Security, member states concluded discussions on the evolving cyber threat landscape before turning their attention to the implementation of the 11 voluntary and non-binding norms first agreed by the UN Group of Governmental Experts in 2015.

While views differed on whether additional norms may eventually be required, a broad range of delegations agreed that the immediate priority should be helping countries apply the existing framework through practical cooperation, capacity development, and exchanges of national experience.

From agreement to implementation

The discussion reflected a broader evolution in international cyber diplomacy.

Rather than negotiating new principles, many delegations argued that the Global Mechanism should now concentrate on translating existing commitments into national legislation, operational practices, and international cooperation.

The Pacific Islands Forum, speaking through Tonga, noted that many countries, particularly small island developing states, are still developing the institutional and technical capacity needed to implement the agreed norms. It called for the mechanism to support this work through practical guidance, peer learning, and contributions from technical experts, regional organisations, academia, civil society, and the private sector.

The European Union similarly presented an overview of how its member states are implementing the norms through legislation, institutional arrangements, and operational cooperation, encouraging other countries to share their own experiences. The EU also described the Dedicated Thematic Groups (DTGs) as the appropriate forum for developing practical approaches linked to specific cybersecurity challenges.

Existing norms remain the foundation

Many delegations stressed that the 11 voluntary norms continue to provide a sufficient framework for responsible state behaviour.

Countries, including the Republic of Korea, Vanuatu, Portugal, Botswana, Nigeria, Ireland, New Zealand, and Costa Rica, argued that implementation should take precedence over negotiating additional commitments.

Several delegations highlighted the voluntary implementation checklist developed through previous UN processes as a practical tool for helping governments assess progress and exchange good practices. Others suggested that publishing national implementation experiences could improve transparency and strengthen mutual confidence.

Capacity development emerged as a recurring theme throughout the discussion, with many speakers emphasising that successful implementation depends on strengthening national institutions, technical expertise, incident response capabilities, and regional cooperation.

Some states support further normative development

Although implementation attracted broad support, several delegations argued that the framework should continue evolving alongside technological change.

China, Morocco, Armenia, Thailand, Brazil, Iran, and Cuba suggested that emerging issues, including AI, data security, supply chain resilience, and new forms of cyber activity, may eventually require additional voluntary norms or, in some cases, legally binding international instruments.

Rather than presenting these approaches as mutually exclusive, several countries argued that implementation and discussions on possible future norms could proceed in parallel, provided decisions continue to be reached through consensus.

Threat discussions reinforce implementation priorities

Before moving to the norms agenda, delegations completed their discussion on the evolving cyber threat landscape.

Countries highlighted ransomware, attacks on critical infrastructure, AI, disinformation, supply chain vulnerabilities, and cybercrime as continuing challenges requiring closer international cooperation.

Ghana described efforts to strengthen the protection of critical information infrastructure following the disruption caused by damage to a submarine cable, while Pakistan warned that cyber threats are increasingly intertwined with geopolitical competition and emerging technologies. Institutional participants, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, Interpol, and the African Union, contributed perspectives on cyber operations during armed conflict, organised cybercrime, and the importance of strengthening cyber resilience across developing countries.

Summarising the discussion, the Chair highlighted recurring calls for greater information sharing, cooperation, capacity development, incident response, and resilience, noting that these priorities would help shape the future work of the mechanism.

Dedicated Thematic Groups move to the centre of the process

Throughout the session, delegations repeatedly pointed to the Dedicated Thematic Groups as the mechanism’s primary vehicle for turning broad political agreement into practical cooperation.

States proposed using the groups to exchange implementation experiences, discuss specific cyber challenges, develop scenario-based exercises, refine the voluntary implementation checklist, and strengthen cooperation across the five pillars of the UN cyber framework.

Alongside these substantive discussions, several rights of reply reflected wider geopolitical tensions among some member states. However, the majority of interventions remained focused on practical implementation and strengthening the shared framework for responsible state behaviour in cyberspace.

The session, therefore, marked an important transition for the Global Mechanism. Having identified many of the principal cyber threats facing states, delegations increasingly turned their attention to the practical question of how existing international commitments can be translated into national action and international cooperation.

Track all key moments from the First substantive session of the UN Global Mechanism on cybersecurity on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN Global Mechanism on ICT security shifts towards practical cybersecurity cooperation

The UN’s permanent cyber mechanism continued its substantive discussions by identifying shared priorities for international cooperation, with member states highlighting ransomware, AI, critical infrastructure protection, and capacity development as areas requiring practical action.

During the third plenary of the first substantive session of the Global Mechanism on Developments in the Field of ICTs in the Context of International Security, delegations repeatedly stressed that discussions should move beyond mere description of cyber threats to developing practical tools to help states prevent, detect, and respond to them.

The discussion reinforced a trend already visible during earlier meetings, that despite differing national perspectives on specific cyber incidents, broad agreement is emerging on the issues likely to shape the mechanism’s future work.

From identifying threats to supporting implementation

Several delegations argued that the mechanism’s success should be measured by its ability to translate years of international negotiations into practical cooperation.

Kiribati captured this approach by observing that discussions on cyber threats should not end with mere descriptions but lead to concrete measures that enable countries of all sizes to strengthen their cyber resilience. Cameroon and Morocco similarly encouraged the mechanism to prioritise practical implementation through the Dedicated Thematic Groups (DTGs), which are expected to become the forum’s primary venue for detailed technical cooperation.

The emphasis on implementation reflected a broader shift from developing international norms towards helping governments apply them in practice through information sharing, capacity development, and operational cooperation.

Critical infrastructure protection gains momentum

Protection of critical infrastructure emerged as one of the strongest areas of convergence during the session.

Small island developing states offered particularly compelling examples of how digital infrastructure has become essential for national resilience. Kiribati described how its first submarine cable has transformed public services while simultaneously increasing its exposure to cyber risks. Tonga recalled the 2022 volcanic eruption that severed its only submarine cable, leaving the country isolated during a national emergency, and warned that a malicious cyber operation could deliberately produce similar consequences.

Delegations from Australia, Tuvalu, Chile, Ghana, Zimbabwe, and other countries similarly highlighted the growing importance of protecting undersea cables, telecommunications infrastructure, government networks, and other critical systems that underpin economic activity and essential public services.

Rather than treating these as purely national concerns, speakers increasingly framed critical infrastructure resilience as a shared international challenge requiring cooperation across borders.

Ransomware remains a global priority

Ransomware was once again identified as one of the most significant cyber threats facing governments and critical services worldwide.

Delegations described attacks affecting healthcare systems, humanitarian organisations, government institutions, municipalities, telecommunications providers, and energy infrastructure.

National experiences illustrated the scale of the challenge. Tonga described how a ransomware attack encrypted its national health information system, forcing hospitals to return temporarily to paper records. Germany cited estimates placing annual cyber-related economic damage at approximately US$230 billion, while several countries highlighted the growing sophistication and transnational nature of ransomware operations.

Many speakers emphasised that responding effectively will require stronger international information sharing, coordinated incident response, public-private cooperation, and support for countries with more limited cybersecurity capacities.

AI increasingly shapes cybersecurity discussions

AI continued to feature prominently throughout the session as delegations examined its growing influence on the cyber threat landscape.

Countries from different regions observed that AI is lowering barriers to entry for malicious actors while increasing the speed and sophistication of cyber operations. Among the risks identified were AI-generated phishing campaigns, automated vulnerability discovery, deepfakes, large-scale disinformation, and attacks targeting AI systems themselves.

Several delegations also pointed to emerging challenges related to frontier AI models, quantum computing, commercial cyber intrusion capabilities, and digital supply chain security, suggesting these issues should continue to receive attention within the Global Mechanism.

While views differed on how these developments should be governed internationally, there was broad agreement that the mechanism provides an important forum for exchanging experience and improving collective understanding of rapidly evolving technologies.

Capacity development remains central to cyber resilience

Developing countries consistently stressed that discussions on cyber threats should be matched by practical support.

Delegations highlighted the importance of strengthening national institutions, expanding technical expertise, improving incident response capabilities, and ensuring that developing countries can participate fully in the mechanism’s work.

Small island developing states noted that limited resources often magnify the consequences of cyber incidents, while African, Asian, Caribbean, and Pacific countries called for sustainable, demand-driven capacity-building programmes tailored to national priorities. Several speakers also encouraged greater regional cooperation and more structured exchanges of operational experience.

These interventions reinforced the view that improving global cybersecurity depends not only on reducing threats but also on ensuring that all countries have the capabilities needed to address them.

Dedicated Thematic Groups move into focus

Attention also turned to the role of the Dedicated Thematic Groups as the mechanism’s principal vehicle for translating discussions into practical outcomes.

Delegations proposed using the groups for scenario-based discussions, expert briefings, exchanges of operational experience, and the development of practical recommendations on issues such as critical infrastructure protection, supply chain security, ransomware, and implementation of agreed voluntary norms. Several countries argued that the groups should focus on a limited number of concrete priorities that could produce measurable results.

Alongside these substantive discussions, some delegations continued to express differing views regarding state attribution of cyber incidents and recent geopolitical developments. While these exchanges reflected broader international tensions, the majority of interventions remained focused on strengthening cooperation within the Global Mechanism and identifying practical areas where progress can be achieved.

As the session concluded, the Chair confirmed that discussions would continue with the remaining speakers before the mechanism moved to its next agenda item on voluntary norms for responsible state behaviour in cyberspace.

Track all key moments from the First substantive session of the UN Global Mechanism on cybersecurity on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Zambia and South Sudan tighten cybercrime laws amid free speech concerns

Zambia and South Sudan have stepped up enforcement of cybercrime laws amid concerns over their potential effects on privacy, journalism and freedom of expression.

Zambia’s government has reminded citizens and public officials that the Cyber Crimes Act No. 4 of 2025 remains fully operational, warning against the unauthorised recording and circulation of private communications.

The law, which entered into force in May 2025, makes it an offence to record a private conversation without notifying the participants.

Exceptions include unintentional recordings, certain law-enforcement situations and cases where recording is reasonably necessary to protect the lawful interests of a party to the conversation.

The renewed enforcement focus follows the detention of a Zambian journalist accused of recording and publishing audio from a private meeting. Press freedom advocates argue that the material is a matter of public interest.

South Sudan has meanwhile begun coordinated implementation of its Cybercrime and Computer Misuse Act, 2026, after President Salva Kiir instructed government institutions to enforce the legislation.

Authorities say the law will strengthen cybersecurity, protect critical infrastructure and address offences including hacking, fraud, identity-related crimes and cyber harassment.

Civil society and media rights groups have raised concerns about provisions covering ‘undesirable content’ and ‘false or misleading information’.

Critics warn that broadly worded offences could be used against journalists, political opponents and people expressing legitimate criticism online, particularly without independent oversight and clear enforcement guidelines.

Why does it matter?

The two cases demonstrate the tension between tackling genuine cybercrime and protecting fundamental rights online. Broad offences covering private communications, reputational harm and vaguely defined harmful content may create legal uncertainty for journalists, whistleblowers and ordinary users, especially when enforcement powers lack clear public-interest safeguards and independent oversight.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

US seizes more than 1,000 illegal World Cup streaming domains

The US Department of Justice has seized more than 1,000 domains used to illegally stream FIFA World Cup matches, following three enforcement operations carried out during the 2026 tournament.

The domains provided unauthorised real-time broadcasts of World Cup matches protected under US copyright law. Homeland Security Investigations said agents confirmed the sites were actively streaming matches without authorisation before obtaining seizure warrants.

The operation formed part of Operation Offsides, coordinated by the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center. FIFA helped identify the domains, while broadcasters, sports organisations and anti-piracy groups provided additional intelligence.

Officials also warned that pirate streaming services frequently expose users to malware, payment fraud and other cybersecurity risks, while generating revenue for wider criminal networks and harming legitimate broadcasters and rights holders.

Enforcement also expanded across Latin America through Operation Red Card, with authorities blocking hundreds of piracy websites, including 309 in Brazil, 256 in the Dominican Republic and 1,140 in Colombia.

Colombian investigators also carried out search-and-seizure operations targeting counterfeit sports merchandise and arrested members of a cybercrime group accused of selling pirated streams using stolen credentials, VPNs and intercepted security codes.

The wider operation involved prosecutors, police and cybercrime specialists across Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru and the Dominican Republic, alongside cooperation with Europol.

The Justice Department said Operation Offsides will continue targeting domains used for illegal sports streaming, while international partners pursue related piracy, cybercrime and counterfeiting networks.

Why does it matter?

The operation illustrates how online piracy has evolved beyond copyright infringement into a broader cybersecurity and organised crime issue. Pirate streaming platforms often expose users to malware, credential theft and payment fraud while generating revenue for criminal networks.

The coordinated enforcement effort also demonstrates the increasingly international nature of digital copyright enforcement. As major sporting events become global targets for online piracy, cooperation between governments, law enforcement agencies, rights holders and technology companies is becoming essential to disrupting cross-border criminal operations.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Diplo chatbot can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.