FIFA World Cup 2026 faces growing AI and cybersecurity threats

The FIFA World Cup 2026 is not only a football tournament. It is one of the largest digital security tests ever associated with a global public event.

With 48 teams, 104 matches and 16 host cities spread across the USA, Canada and Mexico, the ongoing tournament creates a vast network of stadium systems, ticketing platforms, broadcasters, hotels, transport providers, mobile applications, public Wi-Fi networks, payment systems, and connected devices.

The scale of digital interconnection is unprecedented in the history of international sport.

The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security has warned that the event will almost certainly attract cybercriminals, state-sponsored actors and other threat groups because of its visibility, infrastructure complexity, and broad supplier ecosystem.

Similar concerns have been raised by cybersecurity researchers, government agencies and intelligence analysts, all of whom view the tournament as a high-value target.

Canada warns FIFA World Cup 2026 could face cyberattacks, scams and AI-driven disinformation.

What makes the World Cup 2026 particularly significant is the growing role of AI.

AI will support crowd management, threat detection, cybersecurity operations, content moderation, logistics planning, and fan engagement. Ironically, the same technologies will provide attackers with powerful new tools to automate phishing campaigns, generate convincing deepfakes, conduct fraud operations and spread disinformation at an unprecedented scale.

Perhaps paradoxically, the result is a tournament where AI functions simultaneously as a defensive capability and an offensive weapon.

The largest entertainment attack surface in history

Cybersecurity experts have described the FIFA World Cup 2026 as the ‘largest global entertainment attack surface in history’. The description reflects not only the size of the tournament but also the complexity of its digital ecosystem.

Every match involves interactions between permanent stadium infrastructure, temporary commercial suppliers, cloud service providers, telecommunications operators, transportation networks, emergency services, broadcasters, and millions of fans. Unlike previous tournaments, many of these systems are deeply integrated through digital platforms and real-time data exchanges.

Researchers have noted that the attack surface extends far beyond FIFA’s own networks. Airlines, hotels, payment processors, media organisations, local authorities, ride-sharing platforms and tourism providers all become part of the broader security environment. A successful attack on any of these entities could create disruption that affects the tournament itself.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has divided the World Cup attack surface into three layers. The first includes direct tournament infrastructure such as stadiums, ticketing systems, and broadcasting operations.

The second includes supporting infrastructure such as telecommunications networks, transportation systems and cloud providers. The third consists of millions of individual devices belonging to players, officials, journalists, sponsors and supporters.

Consequently, a cyber incident does not need to compromise FIFA directly to have significant consequences. A ransomware attack affecting a hotel chain, a denial-of-service attack against a transportation provider, or a breach of a ticketing partner could undermine public confidence and create operational disruption in multiple host cities.

AI-driven cybercrime and financial fraud

The most immediate threat facing supporters is financially motivated cybercrime. Major sporting events have historically attracted fraud schemes, but AI significantly increases their sophistication and reach.

Criminal groups are expected to exploit public interest through phishing campaigns, social engineering operations, fake ticket sales, fraudulent travel packages, malicious mobile applications and counterfeit livestreaming services.

The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security highlighted research indicating that more than 4,300 suspicious World Cup-related domains had already been identified by August 2025.

Generative AI allows attackers to produce convincing communications in multiple languages within seconds. Emails can imitate official FIFA announcements, airline notifications, hotel confirmations or ticketing updates with remarkable accuracy. AI-generated text can eliminate many of the grammatical errors that have traditionally exposed phishing attempts.

The personalisation capabilities of AI further increase effectiveness. Information gathered from social media profiles can be used to create tailored messages targeting specific individuals.

A supporter who has publicly discussed attending a World Cup match may receive a realistic-looking email containing details of a stadium, flight, or accommodation booking.

Cybersecurity researchers also warn about AI-powered chatbots designed to engage victims in extended conversations, gradually building trust before directing them towards malicious websites or fraudulent payment portals.

Such attacks represent an evolution beyond traditional phishing because they can adapt dynamically to the victim’s responses.

Deepfakes, disinformation and information warfare

One of the most significant AI-related concerns surrounding the World Cup is the potential use of deepfake technology and synthetic media.

Deepfakes can generate highly realistic audio, video, and images depicting events that never occurred. During a tournament watched by billions of people, such content could spread rapidly before verification mechanisms have time to respond.

 Ball, Football, Soccer, Soccer Ball, Sport, Adult, Male, Man, Person, Computer, Electronics, Laptop, Pc, Cup, Screen, Computer Hardware, Hardware, Accessories, Formal Wear, Tie, Monitor, Phone, Electrical Device, Microphone, Mobile Phone, Book, Publication, Blackboard, People, Face, Head, Gianni Infantino, Lionel Messi

A fabricated video appearing to show a national team manager criticising players, a fake government announcement warning of security threats, or an AI-generated recording supposedly involving FIFA officials could create confusion and damage reputations.

Even brief circulation of false information may influence public perception, financial markets, or security decisions.

Threat actors are very likely to employ AI-generated articles, images and videos during the World Cup tournament. Furthermore, state-sponsored influence operations remain possible, particularly if geopolitical tensions involving participating nations intensify.

The risk is not limited to political manipulation. Criminal groups may use deepfakes to support fraud operations, impersonate public figures or create fake emergency announcements designed to generate panic.

The speed of modern social media platforms means that misleading content can reach millions of users before fact-checking efforts can become effective.

The World Cup, therefore, represents a major test for digital information resilience. Governments, media organisations and technology platforms will need rapid verification capabilities to distinguish authentic content from increasingly sophisticated synthetic media.

Critical infrastructure and operational technology risks

The World Cup’s dependence on critical infrastructure creates another layer of cybersecurity concern.

Electricity grids, water systems, telecommunications networks, transportation infrastructure and emergency communications all support tournament operations. Any disruption affecting these systems could have consequences extending far beyond football matches.

Security researchers have warned that operational technology environments often remain less protected than traditional information technology networks. Many infrastructure systems were designed decades ago, long before cybersecurity became a primary concern.

As digital connectivity expands, vulnerabilities within such systems become increasingly attractive targets.

A cyber-attack on public transportation networks could delay tens of thousands of supporters travelling to World Cup matches. Disruptions affecting telecommunications systems could interfere with emergency coordination, media coverage and public communications.

Attacks targeting stadium access systems could create safety concerns if spectators are unable to enter or exit venues efficiently.

The multinational structure of the tournament further increases its complexity. The US, Canada and Mexico operate under different legal frameworks, cybersecurity standards and regulatory environments.

Effective protection, therefore, requires unprecedented levels of coordination between public authorities and private sector partners in the three countries.

Protecting fan data and digital identities

The FIFA World Cup generates enormous volumes of personal data. Ticket purchases, accommodation bookings, transportation arrangements, mobile applications, loyalty programmes and payment systems all collect information about supporters.

Such datasets are highly attractive to cybercriminals. Personal information can be used for identity theft, financial fraud, account takeovers or targeted phishing campaigns. The concentration of large numbers of international visitors further increases the value of collected data.

Digital ticketing systems present both opportunities and risks. While electronic tickets reduce certain forms of fraud and improve operational efficiency, they also create new attack vectors. Compromised accounts, stolen credentials and fake ticket marketplaces can all exploit digital ticketing ecosystems.

The use of biometric technologies introduces additional challenges. Facial recognition systems may be employed for security screening, venue access or identity verification. Although such technologies can improve efficiency and security, they also raise questions about privacy, consent, data retention, and oversight.

 Person, Electronics, Mobile Phone, Phone, Adult, Male, Man, Computer Hardware, Hardware, Monitor, Screen, Guard, Face, Head, Mattia De Sciglio

Maintaining public trust requires transparency regarding how personal information is collected, stored, and protected. Strong cybersecurity measures must be accompanied by clear governance frameworks and accountability mechanisms.

Online abuse and AI moderation

Cybersecurity during the World Cup extends beyond technical attacks. Online abuse, harassment and hate speech represent significant digital risks affecting players, officials and supporters.

Experience from previous tournaments illustrates the scale of the problem. FIFA reported that one in five players participating in the 2023 Women’s World Cup experienced online abuse. Through the Social Media Protection Service, nearly 117,000 comments were hidden or blocked during the competition. Almost half of the abusive messages were classified as sexist, sexual, or homophobic.

The scale of online interaction surrounding the men’s World Cup is expected to be substantially larger. Social media platforms, therefore, face significant pressure to prevent abuse while preserving legitimate expression.

Ofcom has already warned platforms about their responsibilities under the UK Online Safety Act. The regulator expects companies to maintain effective reporting systems, sufficient moderation resources and rapid responses to illegal content.

Tech companies face scrutiny during the FIFA World Cup as Ofcom monitors compliance.

AI will play a central role in content moderation efforts.

Machine learning systems can analyse vast quantities of user-generated content and identify harmful material much faster than human moderators alone. However, AI moderation remains imperfect. Algorithms may struggle with sarcasm, cultural context, local languages or rapidly evolving forms of abuse.

Balancing safety and freedom of expression will remain one of the most challenging governance issues during the World Cup.

AI as a cybersecurity enabler

Despite the risks, AI has become an essential component of modern cybersecurity strategies.

Security operations centres generate enormous volumes of alerts, logs and threat intelligence data. Human analysts alone cannot process this information effectively. AI enables organisations to identify patterns, prioritise risks, and respond more rapidly to emerging threats.

Machine learning systems can detect unusual network behaviour that may indicate malicious activity. AI tools can analyse phishing campaigns, identify fraudulent domains and uncover relationships between seemingly unrelated attacks.

cybersecyrity AI

Automated systems can isolate compromised devices and block suspicious traffic before significant damage occurs.

AI is also becoming increasingly important for threat intelligence. Security teams use machine learning models to analyse information from global threat feeds, identify emerging attack techniques and predict potential risks. During an event as large as the FIFA World Cup, such capabilities may provide critical advantages.

Beyond cybersecurity, AI supports broader security operations. Computer vision systems can monitor crowd movement, identify congestion points, and assist with emergency planning. Predictive analytics can help authorities allocate resources more effectively and improve incident response capabilities.

Nevertheless, AI should be viewed as a force multiplier rather than a replacement for human expertise. Automated systems can produce false positives, miss novel attack methods or be manipulated through adversarial techniques. Human oversight remains essential, particularly when decisions affect public safety and civil liberties.

International cooperation and long-term implications

The cybersecurity challenge facing the World Cup cannot be addressed by FIFA alone. Effective protection requires collaboration among governments, intelligence agencies, law enforcement organisations, cloud providers, telecommunications companies, stadium operators, and cybersecurity firms.

Information sharing will be particularly important. Threat intelligence must move rapidly across organisations and national borders. Attack indicators identified in one host city may become relevant to another within minutes.

 Adult, Male, Man, Person, Astronomy, Outer Space, Body Part, Hand, Globe, Planet, Handcuffs

The World Cup also serves as a preview of the future challenges facing large-scale public events. As AI becomes increasingly integrated into infrastructure, transportation, communications and security operations, future tournaments will become even more dependent on digital technologies.

The lessons learned from 2026 are therefore likely to influence cybersecurity planning for future Olympic Games, continental championships, political summits and other international gatherings.

Conclusion

The FIFA World Cup 2026 demonstrates how deeply sport has become intertwined with the digital world. Football remains the centrepiece of the tournament, but its success depends equally on cybersecurity, AI governance and operational resilience.

AI will help protect infrastructure, support threat detection, improve crowd management, and strengthen cyber defence capabilities. At the same time, it will enable more sophisticated phishing campaigns, more convincing deepfakes, more effective disinformation operations and increasingly personalised fraud schemes.

The central challenge is not whether AI should be used. The challenge is how it can be deployed responsibly, securely and transparently within one of the most complex public events ever organised.

Success will depend on balancing innovation with security, automation with human oversight and efficiency with public trust.

The real test for FIFA, host governments and technology providers will be resilience. Cyber incidents are almost inevitable given the scale and visibility of the tournament. What will matter most is the ability to detect threats quickly, limit disruption, recover effectively and maintain public confidence.

Ultimately, the FIFA World Cup 2026 may be remembered as the first truly AI-era World Cup, where cybersecurity, misinformation and digital resilience have become as important as events on the pitch.

As citizens, supporters and digital users, we each have a role to play in protecting the integrity of the information and technologies that increasingly shape our lives.

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

Spain advances law to protect minors in digital environments

Spain’s Minister for Youth and Children, Sira Rego, has said she expects the country’s Law for the Protection of Minors in Digital Environments to be approved by Congress in autumn 2026.

Rego said the bill responds to growing social concern over children’s safety online and the need to regulate digital spaces more effectively.

The bill is currently moving through the Congress of Deputies. Rego said Spain would have a pioneering law to regulate digital environments and that major platforms must take greater responsibility for practices that are especially harmful to children and adolescents.

The proposed law draws on recommendations from a 50-member expert committee convened by the Ministry of Youth and Children. The government says the framework is intended to strengthen the rights of minors in digital spaces, including privacy, reputation, image rights, access to truthful information and responsible technology use.

Measures in the bill include mandatory parental control systems for mobile devices, rules on loot boxes in video games and on platforms, and requirements for schools to regulate the use of mobile phones and digital devices.

The proposal would also introduce criminal law changes covering digital violence. These include penalties restricting aggressors from contacting victims online, offences linked to making pornography indiscriminately available to minors, and criminalisation of sexual or seriously degrading deepfakes.

Large audiovisual service providers and major influencers would also be required to provide reporting channels for inappropriate content, inform users about content that may harm minors, use effective age verification systems and separate pornographic or violent content from other material.

Why does it matter?

Spain’s proposal reflects a wider shift towards stronger child online safety regulation, moving beyond awareness campaigns towards legal duties for platforms, device makers, schools and digital service providers. The bill also shows how child protection debates are expanding from harmful content to design features, age assurance, deepfakes, loot boxes and digital violence. If adopted, it could become one of Europe’s more comprehensive national frameworks for protecting minors online.

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

UK ICO warns against unauthorised access to patient records

The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has warned that unauthorised access to patient records is a serious breach of trust and an ongoing concern across the healthcare sector. In a new blog, the regulator said medical records contain some of the most sensitive personal information and must only be accessed for legitimate reasons.

The ICO said inappropriate access remains rare and does not reflect the behaviour of most healthcare professionals. However, recent high-profile incidents suggest the problem is not confined to isolated cases and requires a stronger organisational response.

According to the regulator, personal curiosity is never a legitimate basis for accessing patient records. Deliberate or reckless access to personal data without authorisation is unlawful and may result in disciplinary measures, loss of professional registration and, in some cases, criminal prosecution.

The ICO called on healthcare leaders to strengthen organisational culture through clear communication, role-specific data protection training and technical safeguards, including role-based access controls and audit logging. Protecting patient privacy is fundamental to maintaining trust in the healthcare system in the UK.

Why does it matter?

Healthcare records contain some of the most sensitive categories of personal information, including medical histories, diagnoses and treatment details. Even isolated cases of unauthorised access can undermine public trust in healthcare institutions and raise concerns about privacy, confidentiality and professional accountability.

The warning also highlights the growing importance of data governance in healthcare. As health systems become increasingly digital and interconnected, organisations must combine technical safeguards, staff training and strong organisational culture to ensure sensitive information is accessed only when necessary and for legitimate purposes. Maintaining patient trust remains essential to the effective delivery of healthcare services.

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

Estonia proposes world-first digital IDs for AI agents

Estonia is moving forward with plans to create official digital identities for AI agents, a move that could make it the first country to establish a formal framework for AI systems acting on behalf of individuals and organisations. The proposal received backing from Prime Minister Kristen Michal following discussions within the Eesti.ai advisory board.

Under the proposed framework, AI agents would be granted limited and clearly defined permissions, enabling them to perform specific tasks such as preparing documents, handling administrative procedures and accessing designated information. Authorities say the framework would ensure that every action remains traceable, auditable and subject to clear human accountability.

Officials argue that digital identities for AI could prevent users from granting excessive access to personal data and services while supporting the growing use of AI across the economy. The initiative builds on Estonia’s long-established digital infrastructure, including digital identities, electronic signatures and secure data-sharing systems.

Alongside the AI identity project, Estonia is exploring a new testing environment for air and water drones in the Baltic Sea region and expanding programmes designed to improve AI literacy. Authorities are also working to strengthen Estonian-language AI models and support organisations in making informed decisions about AI adoption and deployment.

Why does it matter?

As AI agents become increasingly capable of performing administrative, professional and transactional tasks, questions about identity, authorisation and accountability are becoming central governance challenges. Estonia’s proposal seeks to create a formal mechanism for defining what an AI agent is allowed to do, who authorised those actions and who remains responsible for the outcomes.

The initiative also represents a potentially significant evolution of digital identity systems. If successful, Estonia could provide an early model for integrating AI agents into public services and the wider digital economy while preserving transparency, security and trust. The framework may influence future debates on AI governance, digital public infrastructure and the legal status of increasingly autonomous AI systems in other jurisdictions.

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

Five Eyes agencies urge action on AI cyber risk

Five Eyes cybersecurity agencies have urged business and technology leaders to act quickly as AI transforms the cyber landscape.

In a joint statement issued on 22 June, the leaders of the Five Eyes cybersecurity agencies said AI is already changing both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. They said AI can strengthen cyber defence capabilities, but it is also increasing the speed, scale and sophistication of cyber threats.

The agencies said frontier AI models could surpass current industry expectations and fundamentally reshape cyber capabilities within months rather than years. They warned that AI is lowering barriers for malicious actors and shrinking the time between vulnerability discovery and exploitation.

The statement was signed by cybersecurity leaders from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Signatories included the heads of the Australian Cyber Security Centre, the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, New Zealand’s National Cyber Security Centre, the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and the US National Security Agency’s Cyber Security Directorate.

The agencies said cyber resilience should be treated as a strategic business risk and leadership responsibility rather than solely a technical concern. Boards and executives should ensure that cyber controls are in place and can operate effectively under pressure during real incidents.

The statement urged leaders to assess organisational risk, preparedness and accountability while ensuring cybersecurity remains integrated into broader business decision-making. It also called on organisations to prioritise foundational cybersecurity practices, give cyber leaders sufficient authority and resources, and remain engaged as threats and guidance evolve.

The agencies said secure-by-design and secure-by-default must become standard practice rather than an aspiration. They also said resilience cannot depend on a single technology, making defence in depth essential as AI systems evolve.

The statement warned that new, previously unknown vulnerabilities, including zero-day exploits, will continue to emerge. It said breaches will occur, but preparedness can help organisations contain them quickly and prevent escalation into major operational and financial crises.

The Five Eyes agencies recommended five practical actions for leaders. Organisations should reduce their attack surface by limiting unnecessary access and external connectivity, and should question whether systems need to be exposed at all.

They should also accelerate patching processes because AI is shortening the time between vulnerability discovery and exploitation. Delays in patching can increase risk, especially for operational systems with long update cycles.

The statement also urged organisations to address legacy systems, describing unsupported systems as strategic liabilities rather than only technical debt. Leaders were also told to review and strengthen identity and access controls, enforce strong authentication, and regularly review permissions.

Incident preparation was another priority. The agencies said organisations should test response plans, train teams, and assume breaches will happen, with a focus on fast containment and recovery.

The agencies also encouraged organisations to deploy AI as a defensive tool, using it to identify vulnerabilities, strengthen monitoring and accelerate incident response. Organisations that integrate AI tools into security operations can detect vulnerabilities earlier, improve software quality, monitor unusual behaviour and respond faster to incidents.

The statement said success will not come from having the most tools. Instead, it said organisations should focus on getting the basics right, acting quickly and integrating cyber security into core business strategy.

The Five Eyes agencies said leaders who act now will reduce exposure, strengthen resilience, and build confidence with customers, partners, and investors. Those who delay, they said, will face growing, avoidable risks.

Why does it matter?

The statement reflects growing concern among major cybersecurity agencies that AI is changing the balance between attackers and defenders. By accelerating vulnerability discovery, automating reconnaissance and lowering technical barriers for malicious actors, AI could significantly reduce the time organisations have to identify, patch and mitigate emerging threats.

The warning also signals a broader shift in cybersecurity governance. Rather than treating cyber risk as a technical issue delegated to IT departments, governments increasingly expect boards and senior executives to view cyber resilience as a core organisational responsibility. As AI capabilities advance, secure-by-design systems, rapid patch management, strong identity controls and tested incident response plans are becoming central elements of national and corporate cyber resilience strategies.

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

EU agrees tougher child protection rules against AI-generated abuse

The agreement between the European Parliament and the Council updates legislation first adopted in 2011, reflecting the growing role of digital technologies and AI in facilitating abuse.

Under the revised directive, designing, adapting or distributing AI systems intended to generate child sexual abuse material would become a criminal offence. The updated rules would also cover deepfake abuse material, livestreamed child sexual abuse, sexual extortion, and the possession or distribution of instructions on how to commit such crimes.

The agreement also strengthens rules on consent. It clarifies that consent must be given voluntarily, cannot be inferred from silence, lack of resistance or a previous relationship, and can be withdrawn at any time.

Grooming offences would be expanded to cover situations involving coercion, threats or deception, including cases where offenders falsely present themselves as peers of the child.

Victim protection would also be strengthened through access to healthcare, legal aid, helplines, accommodation support and compensation mechanisms. The agreement also extends limitation periods, recognising that many victims need years or decades before reporting abuse.

The revised directive still requires formal adoption by the European Parliament and the Council before entering into force.

Why does it matter?

The agreement shows how EU criminal law is being adapted to AI-enabled and online forms of child sexual abuse. Criminalising AI systems designed to generate abusive material is especially significant because it targets not only harmful content but also the tools used to produce it. The revised directive also strengthens victim support and prosecution timelines, addressing the reality that many survivors report abuse years after it occurred.

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

IWF challenges misconceptions about child abuse detection technologies

The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) has published a new analysis aimed at countering what it describes as persistent misconceptions about technologies used to detect child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online.

According to the organisation, public discussions increasingly focus on privacy and surveillance concerns while overlooking the role these technologies play in identifying and removing illegal content at scale.

The article argues that detection tools are not experimental technologies but rather adaptations of established cybersecurity methods already used throughout the digital ecosystem.

The IWF highlights hash matching technologies, which compare the mathematical signatures of files against databases of known illegal content, as a long-established and widely used approach to content detection.

The IWF stresses that these systems do not involve mass surveillance and do not require access to the contents of private communications.

The organisation also points to perceptual hashing technologies such as PhotoDNA, which can identify known abuse images even when files have been modified or resized. Similar approaches are commonly used in cybersecurity for malware detection, phishing prevention and file verification.

According to the IWF, the principles behind child protection technologies are therefore consistent with existing online security practices.

The article further argues that no single technology can effectively address the challenge of child sexual abuse material online. Instead, platforms require multiple layers of protection, including known-content detection, identification of previously unknown material, behavioural analysis, reporting mechanisms and human moderation.

The IWF warns that limiting detection capabilities would reduce the ability of platforms and law enforcement authorities to identify abuse and protect victims.

Why does it matter?

The publication contributes to an increasingly important policy debate over how to balance privacy, encryption and child protection online. As governments consider new online safety laws and content moderation requirements, questions about whether detection technologies constitute surveillance have become central to discussions involving regulators, technology companies and civil society groups.

The IWF’s intervention also highlights a broader governance challenge. While privacy advocates warn against measures that could weaken encryption or expand monitoring, child protection organisations argue that effective detection capabilities remain essential for identifying abuse, removing illegal content and supporting law enforcement investigations. The outcome of these debates could shape future approaches to online safety, platform accountability and digital rights worldwide.

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

US sets post-quantum cryptography deadlines for federal systems

US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order setting deadlines for federal agencies to migrate high-priority systems to post-quantum cryptography.

Executive Order 14409 says large-scale quantum computers could threaten widely used cryptographic systems and create risks for sensitive government data, critical infrastructure and the digital economy. It also highlights ‘harvest now, decrypt later’ attacks, where adversaries collect encrypted information today and decrypt it once quantum capabilities become available.

The order makes it US policy to transition federal information systems to National Institute of Standards and Technology-approved Federal Information Processing Standards for post-quantum cryptography. It also directs the federal government to assist critical infrastructure owners and operators with their own migration planning.

Within 30 days, each federal agency must name a post-quantum cryptography migration lead responsible for cryptographic inventories, migration planning and cross-agency coordination.

The Office of Management and Budget must issue guidance within 90 days requiring agencies to review inventories of high-value assets and high-impact systems (excluding National Security Systems) and submit migration plans.

Federal high-value assets and high-impact systems must transition to post-quantum cryptography for key establishment by 31 December 2030 and for digital signatures by 31 December 2031.

The order also directs CISA, in coordination with NIST, to publish public guidance within 270 days on minimum elements for a cryptographic bill of materials, supporting automated assessment of cryptographic assets in hardware and software.

Procurement rules are also expected to change. The Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council must propose requirements for covered contractors to comply with NIST cryptographic standards, including applicable post-quantum standards, by 31 December 2030.

Why does it matter?

The order gives the US post-quantum transition concrete deadlines and turns cryptographic migration into an operational, procurement and critical infrastructure issue. Quantum-capable attacks remain a future risk, but encrypted data can be stolen now and decrypted later. By requiring inventories, migration leads, contractor obligations and cryptographic bills of materials, the EO pushes agencies and suppliers to understand where vulnerable cryptography is used before quantum threats become practical.

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

Oxford researchers develop AI tool to map hidden effects of high blood pressure

Researchers led by the University of Oxford have developed an AI tool called ‘HyperScore’ that could help doctors better understand how high blood pressure affects different organs and individuals in different ways. The approach could support more personalised treatment strategies in the future.

Using the AI tool, researchers identified six distinct patterns of hypertension-related disease by analysing hundreds of measurements, including cardiac imaging, brain MRI scans, blood tests and assessments of the kidneys, liver and vascular system.

The study found that individuals with higher HyperScores faced a greater risk of future cardiovascular events, even when conventional blood pressure measurements did not fully capture that risk. Changes detected through brain MRI imaging emerged as some of the strongest indicators of hypertension-related organ damage.

The researchers analysed data from more than 27,000 participants in the UK Biobank and validated their findings in an additional cohort of more than 5,500 individuals in the US. The researchers cautioned that the approach remains at an early stage and is not yet ready for routine clinical use in the UK.

Why does it matter?

High blood pressure is one of the world’s leading risk factors for heart disease, stroke and other chronic conditions, yet patients with similar blood pressure readings can experience very different health outcomes. The study suggests that AI may help identify hidden patterns of organ damage that are not captured by conventional measurements, potentially enabling more accurate risk assessment and personalised treatment strategies.

The research also highlights the growing role of AI in precision medicine. By combining imaging, laboratory data and clinical information, AI systems may help clinicians move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches to disease management. Although HyperScore remains at an early research stage, the findings demonstrate how AI could support earlier intervention and more targeted care for patients with complex cardiovascular risks.

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

Spain reports higher removal of online hate speech content

Spain’s Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia identified 31,003 pieces of hate speech and discriminatory content on social media in May 2026, according to its monthly monitoring report.

The Observatory, known as OBERAXE, said digital platforms removed 65% of notified content, up from 56% in April. TikTok, X and Instagram recorded the highest removal rates, while the Trusted Flagger route continued to perform better than ordinary user reporting.

Trusted Flagger notifications accounted for 53% of removed content, compared with 48% in April. Content reported through ordinary user channels reached a removal rate of 12%, up from 8% the previous month.

The report found that 73% of detected content presented targeted groups as a threat, while dehumanising and severely degrading messages increased sharply compared with April. It also recorded frequent use of aggressive language and growing reliance on images, videos, memes and coded expressions.

People from North Africa remained the main target of online hate speech, followed by African and Afro-descendant people and Roma people. Narratives linked to citizen insecurity accounted for the largest share of detected content, followed by content related to social benefits and access to public resources.

OBERAXE said continued cooperation with digital platforms is essential to improve detection, removal procedures and policies aimed at combating discrimination online.

Why does it matter?

The report shows how hate speech monitoring is becoming part of platform governance and anti-discrimination policy. Spain’s data suggest that trusted reporting channels can improve removal rates, but the scale and persistence of hostile narratives show the limits of reactive moderation. The findings also raise wider questions about transparency, platform accountability and how governments can address online hate while protecting freedom of expression.

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