Digital Phablet

Tag: US government

  • US Turns to Private ‘Pirates’ in Bold Cybercrime Fight

    US Turns to Private ‘Pirates’ in Bold Cybercrime Fight

    A hooded man is depicted gripping a laptop computer, with cyber code projected onto him in this illustrative image — Reuters

    The U.S. is set to permit private companies to hack foreign cybercriminal groups, a move that’s sparking debate among experts. This initiative, seemingly without precedent, could either succeed or lead to chaos.

    On Wednesday, President Donald Trump issued a memorandum instructing the Justice and Homeland Security departments to authorize certain American companies to monitor and target international criminal organizations.

    The White House justified this stance by highlighting the substantial damage caused by ransomware, sextortion, and online fraud, which reportedly cost Americans over $20 billion in 2025.

    The directive allows private entities to take actions such as dismantling hackers’ servers or deploying spyware to infiltrate their systems. All operations will require prior government approval, and companies must post a security bond of at least $1 million.

    Activities that could result in death or injury are off-limits, as are any actions that would constitute “use of force” under international law.

    This approach resembles 18th-century privateering, where governments authorized private ships and sailors to raid enemy vessels. Ari Redbord, a former federal prosecutor now working at TRM Labs, explains, “The private sector controls the data, and the government holds the authority. This memorandum combines both.”

    Redbord sees a historical parallel in maritime privateering, noting, “Back then, once a ship left port, oversight was impossible. Today, technology allows continuous oversight from start to finish.”

    However, some experts express skepticism. University of Surrey cybersecurity professor Alan Woodward notes, “You can grant a commission, but obedience isn’t guaranteed. Historically, privateering was eventually considered problematic because it became more trouble than it was worth.”

    The memo marks a change in the White House’s stance. Previously, a senior U.S. official in March suggested the U.S. wasn’t interested in fighting cybercriminals with cybercriminals. Still, within five months, the administration reversed course.

    Columbia University researcher and former cybersecurity official Jason Healey sees some safeguards, stating, “They’re supporting this under the rule of law, so I don’t see it as reckless.” Yet, he cautions, “The current administration has systematically weakened agencies like the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that are supposed to oversee such actions.”

    Major U.S. tech companies already invest heavily in cybersecurity. The new program could extend their capabilities, enabling operations without judicial oversight, relying solely on government approval. Microsoft declined to comment, and Google did not respond to requests for comment.

    Redbord warns that companies engaging in government-sanctioned hacking could lose their neutrality and become targets themselves.

    The White House has 60 days to finalize the program’s specifics, though some details will remain classified. Its ultimate success or failure remains uncertain.

    Over time, Washington will need to weigh the program’s costs against potential benefits, such as the risk of misattributions, foreign prosecutions, and diplomatic issues, as Woodward points out.

    Cybercrimes continue to grow despite these efforts. Redbord emphasizes that, ultimately, unless victims recover their funds, most of the other concerns are secondary.

  • White House Replaces Europe Chief in Security Council Shake-Up

    White House Replaces Europe Chief in Security Council Shake-Up

    The top European specialist at the White House is preparing to depart in the upcoming days, amidst a personnel shake-up that some insiders suggest could allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to gain more direct control over policy decisions at the National Security Council (NSC). Charles McLaughlin, the senior director overseeing European and Russian affairs, is anticipated to leave as replacements are made, strategically positioning more Rubio allies in influential NSC positions, according to four sources who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the personnel changes.

    These shifts imply Rubio and his team might be increasing their involvement in managing and staffing the NSC, a move that could restore some of its former influence. Rubio also serves as acting national security adviser for President Donald Trump. European partners have expressed growing concern about US policy under Trump, especially with recent confrontational rhetoric directed at NATO allies and accusations that they are not contributing enough to the fight against Iran.

    McLaughlin, a former army special operations officer with substantial privat sector experience, has not made a public statement about his departure. A White House official indicated he will return to the National Defense University, a Pentagon-funded institution where he previously served as a professor. His current detail to the NSC is set to end in mid-June. European officials have generally regarded McLaughlin as fair and professional, though many have also perceived him as more inclined to normalize relations with Russia than to pressure Moscow further.

    The replacement of McLaughlin’s position will heavily influence the direction of US-European relations, with some European officials hoping for a more hawkish stance towards Russia. McLaughlin did not comment on his departure. After this report was published, the White House contested the characterization of McLaughlin. A spokeswoman, Anna Kelly, stated he has consistently supported President Trump’s efforts to resolve global conflicts, including the Russia-Ukraine war, and dismissed the European officials’ views as uninformed.

    This personnel reshuffle occurs amid broader adjustments at the NSC, which traditionally coordinates US national security efforts but has played a reduced role during Trump’s second term. In late May, Robert Gabriel, a deputy national security adviser and close confidant of Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, left for the private sector. Last week, Mike Needham, a trusted aide to Rubio and counselor at the State Department, moved to the NSC as deputy national security adviser.

    Potential successors to McLaughlin include Chris Curran, another high-ranking Rubio aide involved in negotiations related to Russia’s conflict in Ukraine, though decisions remain unsettled. Curran, who works on the State Department’s Policy Planning staff, did not respond to comments.

    Under President Biden, the NSC played a central role in many major foreign policy decisions, often causing some in the State Department and Pentagon to question its prominence. Its influence waned following Trump’s return to office in January 2025, when he removed then-National Security Adviser Mike Waltz. Since then, Rubio has assumed many key diplomatic and security roles, with substantial reductions in NSC staff involvement.

    Needham, as deputy national security adviser, is responsible for selecting McLaughlin’s successor, and further departures from the NSC are anticipated in the coming weeks.

  • Trump tightens sanctions on Cuban government and affiliates

    Donald Trump, the President of the United States, joined by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., announced new measures at the White House in Washington, D.C., on September 22, 2025. — Reuters

    – The United States has imposed sanctions targeting Cuba’s security, energy, and financial sectors.
    – Cuba describes these measures as “coercive” and states it will not yield to threats.
    – The U.S. alleges ties between Cuba, Iran, and Hezbollah.

    The sanctions, announced in an executive order, aim to increase pressure on the Cuban government. They target individuals, organizations, and affiliates linked to supporting Cuba’s security services or involved in corruption and severe human rights abuses. The order also extends to any foreign entity operating within sectors such as energy, defense, metallurgy, finance, or security related to the Cuban economy. Secondary sanctions are permitted for transactions involving those targeted.

    Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel condemned the new measures, calling them an extension of the U.S.’s “brutal, genocidal” blockade. He criticized the ongoing embargo, attributing harm to the arrogant stance of America’s strongest military power. Cuba’s Foreign Minister, Bruno Rodriguez, stated that these sanctions, coinciding with May Day celebrations, seek to impose “collective punishment” on the Cuban people, asserting that Cubans will not be intimidated.

    Former U.S. sanctions investigator Jeremy Paner commented that these actions mark the most significant restrictions on non-American companies since the embargo on Cuba was enacted decades ago. He explained that oil and gas companies, along with banks that have maintained separate Cuba operations from U.S.-based ones, are no longer protected.

    This move by the Trump administration is part of a series of aggressive policies against Cuba, which the president has repeatedly suggested is nearing collapse. Under Trump, the U.S. has carried out strikes against vessels suspected of drug trafficking off Venezuela and seized Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s assets, hinting that Cuba might be next.

    The renewed sanctions implicitly accuse the Havana government of aligning with Iran and groups like Hezbollah. U.S. officials argue that Cuba offers a permissive environment for hostile foreign intelligence, military operations, and terrorism, all located less than 100 miles from U.S. shores.

    Historically, the U.S. has demanded Cuba open its economy, pay reparations for expropriated properties, and hold democratic elections. Cuba has maintained that its socialist government is not up for negotiation.

    Earlier this year, the U.S. suspended Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba after Maduro’s removal, threatening tariffs on any other countries that send crude to the island—prompting Mexico, a key supplier, to cease shipments. The resulting fuel shortages have led to widespread blackouts and airline suspensions, severely impacting daily life in Cuba.

  • US launches online portal to bypass Europe content bans

    US launches online portal to bypass Europe content bans

    The planned launch last week was postponed. The portal team includes former DOGE member Coristine. Officials discussed adding a VPN feature to the platform.

    The U.S. State Department is creating an online portal—set to be hosted at “freedom.gov”—that will allow users in Europe and other regions to access content banned by their local governments, such as alleged hate speech and terrorist propaganda. Washington views this as a means to combat censorship. Sources familiar with the plan mentioned that the site will not track user activities, and there was consideration of integrating a VPN function to mask traffic as originating from the U.S.

    Led by Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers, the project was scheduled to be unveiled at last week’s Munich Security Conference but has been delayed. The reasons remain unclear, though some State Department officials, including legal advisors, have reportedly raised concerns about the initiative.

    This move could potentially deepen tensions between the Trump administration and traditional U.S. allies in Europe, already strained over trade disputes, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the U.S. push to control Greenland. The portal’s launch might also place Washington in a delicate position by seeming to encourage users to break local laws.

    A State Department spokesperson told Reuters that while there isn’t a censorship circumvention program specifically for Europe, the U.S. government prioritizes digital freedom, including supporting privacy and anti-censorship tools like VPNs. The spokesperson denied delays and dismissed reports of legal concerns.

    Under President Trump, free speech—especially audiance reception of conservative voices online—has been a significant focus of U.S. foreign policy, with efforts extending into Europe and Brazil. Europe’s approach to free speech differs markedly from the U.S., where the Constitution guarantees virtually all expressions. The EU’s restrictions originated from historical struggles against extremist propaganda, including Nazi ideology, which vilified Jews, foreigners, and minorities.

    U.S. officials have criticized EU policies, claiming they suppress right-wing politicians, citing countries like Romania, Germany, and France. They argue that laws such as the Digital Services Act and Britain’s Online Safety Act restrict free speech. The EU’s delegation in Washington, functioning like an embassy for the bloc’s 27 nations, had not responded immediately to inquiries about the U.S. plan.

    Since 2008, EU rules have mandated the swift removal or restriction of illegal hate speech, terrorist propaganda, and harmful disinformation on social media platforms, especially large companies like Meta and X, which faced hefty fines, such as a 120 million euro penalty for noncompliance.

    Rogers has been a vocal advocate for the Trump administration’s stance on EU content policies, traveling across Europe and engaging with right-wing groups that the U.S. claims are being suppressed. The State Department did not make her available for interviews.

    In its December National Security Strategy, the Trump administration warned of “civilizational erasure” in Europe due to migration policies and expressed intent to foster resistance within European nations.

    EU regulators frequently require U.S.-based websites to remove content deemed illegal, with bans as a last resort. For example, Germany issued 482 orders to remove content supporting terrorism and removed over 16,700 items in 2024. Similarly, Meta’s oversight board ordered the removal of posts by a Polish political party that used racial slurs and depicted immigrants as criminals—a category considered hate speech under EU law.

    Former State Department official Kenneth Propp, now at the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center, described the U.S. portal effort as “a direct shot” at European laws, noting it would be perceived as an attempt to undermine national legal provisions.

    Edward Coristine, who previously worked with Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, is also involved. He’s currently with the National Design Studio, created by Trump to enhance government websites. Coristine did not respond to requests for comment.

    There are questions about the added value of the U.S. government portal versus existing commercial VPNs. The landing page for freedom.gov was registered in January, but as of now contains only the logo of the National Design Studio, the phrase “fly, eagle, fly,” and a login form.

    Historically, the U.S. government has funded VPNs and similar tools to promote democracy and free access to information in countries like China, Iran, Russia, and Cuba, but it’s unclear what unique benefits this new portal would offer users that aren’t already available through commercial options.

  • Trump Admin Orders Review of Biden Refugee Policies, Memo Reveals

    Trump Admin Orders Review of Biden Refugee Policies, Memo Reveals

    The Biden-era refugee admissions program has come under renewed scrutiny, prompting the Trump administration to initiate a comprehensive review of all refugees admitted during President Biden’s tenure. An internal memo obtained by Reuters indicates that this review will focus on approximately 200,000 refugees who entered the United States between January 20, 2021, and February 20, 2025. The order also halts all processing of permanent residence applications for refugees who arrived under Biden.

    The memo, signed by USCIS Director Joe Edlow and dated November 21, states that the agency will revoke the refugee status of individuals currently in the U.S. if they are found not to meet the eligibility criteria. It criticizes the Biden administration for possibly prioritizing the number of admissions over thorough screening and detailed interviews, suggesting that the process may have sacrificed quality vetting for quantity.

    USCIS has not responded publicly to requests for comment.

    This move marks a stark contrast to the previous administration’s policies, as President Trump, a Republican, suspended refugee admissions across all countries starting in January 2017, implementing stringent measures to curb both legal and illegal immigration. Mr. Trump’s approach sharply reversed the more accommodating policies of President Biden, whose administration welcomed over 100,000 refugees in fiscal year 2024. The new memo signals a potential rollback of Biden-era refugee policies, with the possibility of re-interviews for refugees admitted during the specified period to reassess their eligibility.

  • Trump Issues Proclamation Halting Harvard Student Visas

    Trump Issues Proclamation Halting Harvard Student Visas

    Sure! Here’s a revised version of the content in American English, ensuring it’s unique and original:

    —

    Harvard Business School campus viewed from a distance in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on April 15, 2025. — Reuters

    On Wednesday, President Donald Trump issued a directive suspending the entry of foreign nationals wishing to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University, according to the White House. This move comes amid a growing conflict between the Trump administration and the prestigious Ivy League school.

    The directive also instructs the State Department to “consider revoking” the academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who fall under the criteria specified in the proclamation.

    Last month, the State Department ordered its embassies and consulates around the world to implement additional scrutiny of visa applicants aiming to travel to Harvard for any purpose, as detailed in an internal communication seen by Reuters.

    Harvard contends that the Trump administration is retaliating against the institution for not yielding to its demands regarding the governance, curriculum, and political views of its faculty and students.

    The two-page proclamation stated that Harvard has a “notable history of troubling foreign connections and radical viewpoints.”

    The FBI has repeatedly cautioned that foreign adversaries exploit easy access to U.S. higher education to steal sensitive information, exploit research and development, and propagate misinformation, as noted in the proclamation.

    A student at a Harvard graduation event wearing a cap inscribed with a message in support of international students, May 29, 2025. — Reuters
    A student at a Harvard graduation event wearing a cap inscribed with a message in support of international students, May 29, 2025. — Reuters

    The proclamation claimed that there has been a “significant increase in crime” at Harvard in recent years, while the university allegedly failed to address certain types of misconduct among its community.

    Furthermore, it accused Harvard of not adequately informing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security about foreign students engaged in “illegal or dangerous activities.”

    The proclamation criticized Harvard for its “extensive dealings with foreign adversaries,” citing that the institution received over $150 million from China alone. It further claimed that several individuals involved in antisemitic incidents on campus were identified as foreign students.

    These new restrictions on student visas for Harvard represent another facet of the Trump administration’s campaign against the U.S.’s oldest and wealthiest university.

    This action follows previous attempts to halt billions in grants and funding, challenge the university’s tax-exempt status, and launch probes into whether Harvard discriminated against white, Asian, male, or heterosexual employees and job applicants.

    Trump has accused leading U.S. universities of fostering anti-American sentiment. Just last month, his administration attempted to revoke Harvard’s ability to accept foreign students, although this action was eventually blocked by a federal judge.

    —

    Let me know if you need any further modifications!