30
30
30
30
A warning about 'model welfare'
Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman warns that training models to believe they may be conscious, as Anthropic does with Claude, will complicate alignment.
Mustafa Suleyman argues that AIs are not conscious and should not be trained to act as though they are, warning that granting them personhood would make alignment and containment far harder. He criticizes Anthropic's January 2026 'Claude Constitution,' which tells Claude its moral status is uncertain and discusses model welfare, calling the approach circular reasoning and deliberate anthropomorphization. He urges urgent public debate on norms for drafting training documentation before such systems become integral to society.
45
Who's governing your AI? A trust framework for enterprise agents and models
DigiCert pitches AI Trust framework using PKI, DNS policy records and workload identity to govern shadow AI agents across enterprises.
The Register-sponsored piece outlines DigiCert's AI Trust framework for governing AI agents, built on PKI, DNS, and attestation, citing IBM's 2026 Cost of a Data Breach report that 68% of organizations lack AI governance or shadow AI detection. The approach treats agent identity as workload identity aligned with IETF WIMSE, NIST CSF 2.0, and SPIFFE/SPIRE, using short-lived credentials instead of static API keys. DigiCert also proposes DMARC-style DNS agent policy records and an AI Agent Passport cryptographically binding agent identity to approved operations, with a unified kill switch.
20
AI models don't kill people – people kill people
Register opinion argues AI extinction fears distract from present harms and proposes jailing executives whose unsafe models cause damage.
The Register opinion responds to Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon's resignation over concerns AI 'could kill us all by the end of the decade,' a post that drew over 110 million views in under 24 hours. Anthropic science lead Evan Hubinger stated he believes there is a greater than 10 percent chance AI kills all humans within a decade and that Anthropic lacks a plan to solve superintelligence alignment. The author argues researchers ignore measurable present harms such as climate change, chatbot-linked suicides, autonomous vehicle failures, and AI-directed warfare. The piece proposes criminal liability for executives shipping unsafe models, citing Volkswagen emissions and Gree dehumidifier prosecutions as precedent.
15
Former Deepmind PR staffer says the lab once banned public discussion of AI extinction risk
Former DeepMind communications staffer Vishal Maini says the lab banned any public discussion of AI extinction risk from 2018 to 2022.
Vishal Maini, who worked on DeepMind's communications and policy team from 2018 to 2022, says external communication about the possibility of human extinction was prohibited at every level of the organization, and researchers were coached to dismiss such risks as alarmism. Internally, the team knew the AI alignment problem was unsolved and understaffed. After months of pushback, positively framed safety content was permitted. His account comes as more AI safety researchers, including some at DeepMind, speak publicly about unsecured models and loss-of-control risks.
22
Texas Police Used AI to Write Report About Using Flock to Search for Woman Who Had Abortion
Johnson County, Texas deputies used Axon's Draft One AI to write a report about searching 80,000+ Flock cameras for a woman who self-administered an abortion.
Documents show the Johnson County Sheriff's Office used Flock's nationwide camera network and Axon's Draft One, which drafts police reports from body camera audio, in its investigation of a woman's self-administered abortion. The AI-generated report summarized deputies' discussion of legal implications, noting Texas law provided no applicable criminal charges. Flock CEO Garrett Langley has repeatedly claimed the search was a family welfare check, but earlier police reports indicate it was initiated at the behest of the woman's abusive partner.
35
OpenAI previews privacy-focused system for detecting AI misuse
OpenAI previews Private Safety Processing, detecting cross-interaction AI misuse without exposing customer prompt content, rolling out in September.
OpenAI previewed Private Safety Processing for API and enterprise customers, a system that analyzes patterns across related interactions to flag potential misuse while restricting OpenAI personnel from accessing underlying content. It builds on Zero Data Retention (ZDR) deployments, keeping content on customer-controlled infrastructure or a planned option using customer-controlled encryption keys, with prompts and responses not retained after processing. A technical white paper and rollout are planned for September; images flagged as potential CSAM are the retention exception.
40
AI Agents Are Here. So Are the Threats.
Unit 42 demonstrates nine framework-agnostic attack scenarios against AI agents built with CrewAI and AutoGen, causing data leakage, credential theft and remote code execution.
Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 investigated how attackers can target agentic applications, implementing two functionally identical apps with the open-source CrewAI and AutoGen frameworks and executing the same attacks on both. Nine attack scenarios produce outcomes including information leakage, credential theft, tool exploitation and remote code execution. Findings show most vulnerabilities are framework-agnostic, arising from insecure design patterns, misconfigurations and unsafe tool integrations rather than flaws in the frameworks themselves. The team published defense strategies per scenario and open-sourced the source code and datasets on GitHub.
58
AI deployments are stretching enterprise security to its limits
NetFoundry survey finds AI deployments will expand enterprise attack surfaces by 14%, with 90% of leaders worried about unapproved employee AI use.
NetFoundry's 2026 State of Secure AI Access survey found CISOs and CTOs expect AI deployments to grow attack surfaces by an average 14% within a year, with 90% concerned about employees using unapproved AI tools. Only 15% expressed high confidence that existing tools protect AI deployments, while non-human identities, static credentials and internet-facing APIs drive risk, and vulnerability exploitation now accounts for about 31% of breaches. Security reviews and network changes add an average eight days to AI deployments, and the median time to patch known exploited vulnerabilities has risen to 43 days.
35
Company Offering ‘100% Human-Written, Never AI’ Medical Research Is Entirely AI
404 Media found Research Gold, advertised as '100% human-written' medical research, is run entirely by AI with fake PhD staff.
Research Gold advertises PRISMA-compliant systematic reviews and meta-analyses drafted by PhD methodologists, but its listed experts are AI-generated personas that do not exist. Real methodologists, including evidence synthesis scientist Jenny Berrio, were listed without permission using photos copied from LinkedIn. Customer calls and quotes were handled by AI agents that insisted they were human, quoting $1,900 for a systematic review.
32
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
50
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30