Apple has some minor updates for all its operating systems, and the releases include iOS 17.6, iPadOS 17.6, tvOS 17.6, watchOS 10.6, and macOS Sonoma 14.6.
Apple’s notes for these updates simply say they include bug fixes, security updates, or optimizations. However, there are a few hidden features.
macOS 14.6 reportedly enables multi-display support in clamshell mode on the M3 MacBook Pro, allowing users of that device to use two external displays at once. That was already possible on the M3 Pro and M3 Max variations. Apple had previously released a similar update to bring that functionality to the M3 MacBook Air.
iOS 17.6 and iPadOS 17.6 have added a feature called Catch Up, which is targeted at sports fans who use Apple’s TV app.
The feature allows users to watch a quick sequence of highlights that have been produced so far from an in-progress Major League Soccer game before joining the live feed.
That’s about it, though. These are minor updates, and they are likely the final ones other than security hotfixes until Apple begins rolling out its annual updates, such as iOS 18 and macOS Sequoia 15, later this fall.
Those updates are expected to include several new features, though the biggest—Apple Intelligence, a suite of generative AI features—will not arrive until iOS 18.1, which was just released as a developer beta for the first time.
iOS 17.6, iPadOS 17.6, tvOS 17.6, watchOS 10.6, and macOS Sonoma 14.6 are available to download and install on all supported devices now.
Enlarge/ Here’s an idea: Don’t be a deadbeat and do it yourself!
If you’ve watched any Olympics coverage this week, you’ve likely been confronted with an ad for Google’s Gemini AI called “Dear Sydney.” In it, a proud father seeks help writing a letter on behalf of his daughter, who is an aspiring runner and superfan of world-record-holding hurdler Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone.
“I’m pretty good with words, but this has to be just right,” the father intones before asking Gemini to “Help my daughter write a letter telling Sydney how inspiring she is…” Gemini dutifully responds with a draft letter in which the LLM tells the runner, on behalf of the daughter, that she wants to be “just like you.”
Every time I see this ad, it puts me on edge in a way I’ve had trouble putting into words (though Gemini itself has some helpful thoughts). As someone who writes words for a living, the idea of outsourcing a writing task to a machine brings up some vocational anxiety. And the idea of someone who’s “pretty good with words” doubting his abilities when the writing “has to be just right” sets off alarm bells regarding the superhuman framing of AI capabilities.
But I think the most offensive thing about the ad is what it implies about the kinds of human tasks Google sees AI replacing. Rather than using LLMs to automate tedious busywork or difficult research questions, “Dear Sydney” presents a world where Gemini can help us offload a heartwarming shared moment of connection with our children.
The “Dear Sydney” ad.
It’s a distressing answer to what’s still an incredibly common question in the AI space: What do you actually use these things for?
Yes, I can help
Marketers have a difficult task when selling the public on their shiny new AI tools. An effective ad for an LLM has to make it seem like a superhuman do-anything machine but also an approachable, friendly helper. An LLM has to be shown as good enough to reliably do things you can’t (or don’t want to) do yourself, but not so good that it will totally replace you.
Microsoft’s 2024 Super Bowl ad for Copilot is a good example of an attempt to thread this needle, featuring a handful of examples of people struggling to follow their dreams in the face of unseen doubters. “Can you help me?” those dreamers ask Copilot with various prompts. “Yes, I can help” is the message Microsoft delivers back, whether through storyboard images, an impromptu organic chemistry quiz, or “code for a 3D open world game.”
Microsoft’s Copilot marketing sells it as a helper for achieving your dreams.
The “Dear Sydney” ad tries to fit itself into this same box, technically. The prompt in the ad starts with “Help my daughter…” and the tagline at the end offers “A little help from Gemini.” If you look closely near the end, you’ll also see Gemini’s response starts with “Here’s a draft to get you started.” And to be clear, there’s nothing inherently wrong with using an LLM as a writing assistant in this way, especially if you have a disability or are writing in a non-native language.
But the subtle shift from Microsoft’s “Help me” to Google’s “Help my daughter” changes the tone of things. Inserting Gemini into a child’s heartfelt request for parental help makes it seem like the parent in question is offloading their responsibilities to a computer in the coldest, most sterile way possible. More than that, it comes across as an attempt to avoid an opportunity to bond with a child over a shared interest in a creative way.
It’s one thing to use AI to help you with the most tedious parts of your job, as people do in recent ads for Salesforce’s Einstein AI. It’s another to tell your daughter to go ask the computer for help pouring their heart out to their idol.
Logitech CEO Hanneke Faber recently discussed the possibility of one day selling a mouse that customers can use “forever.” The executive said such a mouse isn’t “necessarily super far away” and will rely on software updates, likely delivered through a subscription model.
Speaking on a July 29 episode of The Verge’s Decoder podcast, Faber, who Logitech appointed as CEO in October, said that members of a “Logitech innovation center” showed her “a forever mouse” and compared it to a nice but not “super expensive” watch. She said:
… I’m not planning to throw that watch away ever. So why would I be throwing my mouse or my keyboard away if it’s a fantastic-quality, well-designed, software-enabled mouse? The forever mouse is one of the things that we’d like to get to.
The concept mouse that Faber examined was “a little heavier” than the typical mouse. But what drives its longevity potential for Logitech is the idea of constantly updated software and services.
To be clear, Logitech hasn’t announced concrete plans to release such a product. But Faber seemed optimistic about the idea of a mouse that people never need to replace. The challenge, she admitted, is finding a business model that supports that idea without requiring an exorbitant hardware price. “Our stuff will have to change, but does the hardware have to change?” she asked. “I’m not so sure. We’ll have to obviously fix it and figure out what that business model is. We’re not at the forever mouse today, but I’m intrigued by the thought.”
The price of a “forever mouse”
Speaking with Faber, Decoder host and Verge Editor-in-Chief Nilay Patel suggested that a “forever mouse” could cost $200. While that would be expensive compared to the typical mouse, such a product wouldn’t be the first software-heavy, three-figure-price computer mouse. Still, a price tag of around $200 would limit the audience to professionals or enthusiasts.
Faber also said the average price of a mouse or keyboard is $26, though she didn’t cite her source. Logitech is seeking growth by appealing to the many people who don’t own both a mouse and keyboard and by selling more expensive devices. A “forever mouse” could fall under the latter. Alternatively, the price of the mouse’s hardware could be subsidized by subscription payments.
In any case, pushing out software updates would require Logitech to convince its customers to use an app to control their mouse. Such software can offer a lot of programmability and macro support, but the need to constantly run peripheral software could be a nuisance that eats up computer resources. Earlier this year, users complained when Logitech added a ChatGPT launcher to its peripherals.
Mouse subscription
Subscription models have been gaining popularity among business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) tech companies because they offer a more reliable, recurring revenue source than hardware sales. When Patel asked Faber if she could “envision a subscription mouse,” she responded, “possibly.”
Faber said subscription software updates would mean that people wouldn’t need to worry about their mouse. The business model is similar to what Logitech already does with video conferencing services (Logitech’s B2B business includes Logitech Select, a subscription service offering things like apps, 24/7 support, and advanced RMA).
Having to pay a regular fee for full use of a peripheral could deter customers, though. HP is trying a similar idea with rentable printers that require a monthly fee. The printers differ from the idea of the forever mouse in that the HP hardware belongs to HP, not the user. However, concerns around tracking and the addition of ongoing expenses are similar.
What about hardware durability?
Logitech’s CEO didn’t discuss what durability features a long-lasting mouse might incorporate. But enabling easier self-repairs and upgrades would be a different approach to a longer-lasting computer mouse that could more directly appeal to users.
Logitech already sells parts for self-repairs of some of its mice and other gadgets through iFixit. This shop could be expanded to feature more parts, offer more guides, and support more products.
A “forever mouse” would also benefit from a design with self-repairability in mind. Features like hot-swappability for mouse button switches for upgrades/repairs; easily replaceable shells, wheels, and feet; detachable cables; and customization options—all accompanied by readily available parts and guides—could go a long way toward making a mouse that fits users’ long-term needs.
During the interview, Faber also discussed Logitech’s goals of doubling its business and cutting its carbon footprint by 50 percent by 2031.
Microsoft is urging users of VMware’s ESXi hypervisor to take immediate action to ward off ongoing attacks by ransomware groups that give them full administrative control of the servers the product runs on.
The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2024-37085, allows attackers who have already gained limited system rights on a targeted server to gain full administrative control of the ESXi hypervisor. Attackers affiliated with multiple ransomware syndicates—including Storm-0506, Storm-1175, Octo Tempest, and Manatee Tempest—have been exploiting the flaw for months in numerous post-compromise attacks, meaning after the limited access has already been gained through other means.
Admin rights assigned by default
Full administrative control of the hypervisor gives attackers various capabilities, including encrypting the file system and taking down the servers they host. The hypervisor control can also allow attackers to access hosted virtual machines to either exfiltrate data or expand their foothold inside a network. Microsoft discovered the vulnerability under exploit in the normal course of investigating the attacks and reported it to VMware. VMware parent company Broadcom patched the vulnerability on Thursday.
“Microsoft security researchers identified a new post-compromise technique utilized by ransomware operators like Storm-0506, Storm-1175, Octo Tempest, and Manatee Tempest in numerous attacks,” members of the Microsoft Threat Intelligence team wrote Monday. “In several cases, the use of this technique has led to Akira and Black Basta ransomware deployments.”
The post went on to document an astonishing discovery: escalating hypervisor privileges on ESXi to unrestricted admin was as simple as creating a new domain group named “ESX Admins.” From then on, any user assigned to the domain—including newly created ones—automatically became admin, with no authentication necessary. As the Microsoft post explained:
Further analysis of the vulnerability revealed that VMware ESXi hypervisors joined to an Active Directory domain consider any member of a domain group named “ESX Admins” to have full administrative access by default. This group is not a built-in group in Active Directory and does not exist by default. ESXi hypervisors do not validate that such a group exists when the server is joined to a domain and still treats any members of a group with this name with full administrative access, even if the group did not originally exist. Additionally, the membership in the group is determined by name and not by security identifier (SID).
Creating the new domain group can be accomplished with just two commands:
net group “ESX Admins” /domain /add
net group “ESX Admins” username /domain /add
They said over the past year, ransomware actors have increasingly targeted ESXi hypervisors in attacks that allow them to mass encrypt data with only a “few clicks” required. By encrypting the hypervisor file system, all virtual machines hosted on it are also encrypted. The researchers also said that many security products have limited visibility into and little protection of the ESXi hypervisor.
The ease of exploitation, coupled with the medium severity rating VMware assigned to the vulnerability, a 6.8 out of a possible 10, prompted criticism from some experienced security professionals.
ESXi is a Type 1 hypervisor, also known as a bare-metal hypervisor, meaning it’s an operating system unto itself that’s installed directly on top of a physical server. Unlike Type 2 hypervisors, Type 1 hypervisors don’t run on top of an operating system such as Windows or Linux. Guest operating systems then run on top. Taking control of the ESXi hypervisor gives attackers enormous power.
The Microsoft researchers described one attack they observed by the Storm-0506 threat group to install ransomware known as Black Basta. As intermediate steps, Storm-0506 installed malware known as Qakbot and exploited a previously fixed Windows vulnerability to facilitate the installation of two hacking tools, one known as Cobalt Strike and the other Mimikatz. The researchers wrote:
Earlier this year, an engineering firm in North America was affected by a Black Basta ransomware deployment by Storm-0506. During this attack, the threat actor used the CVE-2024-37085 vulnerability to gain elevated privileges to the ESXi hypervisors within the organization.
The threat actor gained initial access to the organization via Qakbot infection, followed by the exploitation of a Windows CLFS vulnerability (CVE-2023-28252) to elevate their privileges on affected devices. The threat actor then used Cobalt Strike and Pypykatz (a Python version of Mimikatz) to steal the credentials of two domain administrators and to move laterally to four domain controllers.
On the compromised domain controllers, the threat actor installed persistence mechanisms using custom tools and a SystemBC implant. The actor was also observed attempting to brute force Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) connections to multiple devices as another method for lateral movement, and then again installing Cobalt Strike and SystemBC. The threat actor then tried to tamper with Microsoft Defender Antivirus using various tools to avoid detection.
Microsoft observed that the threat actor created the “ESX Admins” group in the domain and added a new user account to it, following these actions, Microsoft observed that this attack resulted in encrypting of the ESXi file system and losing functionality of the hosted virtual machines on the ESXi hypervisor. The actor was also observed to use PsExec to encrypt devices that are not hosted on the ESXi hypervisor. Microsoft Defender Antivirus and automatic attack disruption in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint were able to stop these encryption attempts in devices that had the unified agent for Defender for Endpoint installed.
Anyone with administrative responsibility for ESXi hypervisors should prioritize investigating and patching this vulnerability. The Microsoft post provides several methods for identifying suspicious modifications to the ESX Admins group or other potential signs of this vulnerability being exploited.
The death of the US government’s Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is starting to result in disconnection of Internet service for Americans with low incomes. On Friday, Charter Communications reported a net loss of 154,000 Internet subscribers that it said was mostly driven by customers canceling after losing the federal discount. About 100,000 of those subscribers were reportedly getting the discount, which in some cases made Internet service free to the consumer.
The $30 monthly broadband discounts provided by the ACP ended in May after Congress failed to allocate more funding. The Biden administration requested $6 billion to fund the ACP through December 2024, but Republicans called the program “wasteful.”
Republican lawmakers’ main complaint was that most of the ACP money went to households that already had broadband before the subsidy was created. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel warned that killing the discounts would reduce Internet access, saying an FCC survey found that 77 percent of participating households would change their plan or drop Internet service entirely once the discounts expired.
Charter’s Q2 2024 earnings report provides some of the first evidence of users dropping Internet service after losing the discount. “Second quarter residential Internet customers decreased by 154,000, largely driven by the end of the FCC’s Affordable Connectivity Program subsidies in the second quarter, compared to an increase of 70,000 during the second quarter of 2023,” Charter said.
Across all ISPs, there were 23 million US households enrolled in the ACP. Research released in January 2024 found that Charter was serving over 4 million ACP recipients and that up to 300,000 of those Charter customers would be “at risk” of dropping Internet service if the discounts expired. Given that ACP recipients must meet low-income eligibility requirements, losing the discounts could put a strain on their overall finances even if they choose to keep paying for Internet service.
“The real question is the customers’ ability to pay”
Charter, which offers service under the brand name Spectrum, has 28.3 million residential Internet customers in 41 states. The company’s earnings report said Charter made retention offers to customers that previously received an ACP subsidy. The customer loss apparently would have been higher if not for those offers.
Light Reading reported that Charter attributed about 100,000 of the 154,000 customer losses to the ACP shutdown. Charter said it retained most of its ACP subscribers so far, but that low-income households might not be able to continue paying for Internet service without a new subsidy for much longer:
“We’ve retained the vast majority of ACP customers so far,” Charter CEO Chris Winfrey said on [Friday’s] earnings call, pointing to low-cost Internet programs and the offer of a free mobile line designed to keep those customers in the fold. “The real question is the customers’ ability to pay—not just now, but over time.”
The ACP only lasted a couple of years. The FCC implemented the $30 monthly benefit in early 2022, replacing a previous $50 monthly subsidy from the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program that started enrolling users in May 2021.
Separately, the FCC Lifeline program that provides $9.25 monthly discounts is in jeopardy after a court ruling last week. Lifeline is paid for by the Universal Service Fund, which was the subject of a constitutional challenge.
The US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit found that Universal Service fees on phone bills are a “misbegotten tax” that violate the Constitution. But in similar cases, the 6th and 11th circuit appeals courts ruled that the fund is constitutional. The circuit split increases the chances that the Supreme Court will take up the case.
Disclosure: The Advance/Newhouse Partnership, which owns 12.4 percent of Charter, is part of Advance Publications, which also owns Ars Technica parent Condé Nast.
As I mentioned in another recent review, I’ve been checking out electric hardtail mountain bikes lately. Their relative simplicity compared to full-suspension models tends to allow companies to hit a lower price point without sacrificing much in terms of component quality, potentially opening up mountain biking to people who might not otherwise consider it. The first e-hardtail I checked out, Aventon’s Ramblas, fits this description to a T, offering a solid trail riding experience at a price that’s competitive with similar offerings from major manufacturers.
Velotric’s Summit 1 has a slightly different take on the equation. The company has made a few compromises that allowed it to bring the price down to just under $2,000, which is significantly lower than a lot of the competition. The result is something that’s a bit of a step down on some more challenging trails. But it still can do about 90 percent of what most alternatives offer, and it’s probably a better all-around bicycle for people who intend to also use it for commuting or errand-running.
Making the Summit
Velotric is another e-bike-only company, and we’ve generally been impressed by its products, which offer a fair bit of value for their price. The Summit 1 seems to be a reworking of its T-series of bikes (which also impressed us) into mountain bike form. You get a similar app experience and integration of the bike into Apple’s Find My system, though the company has ditched the thumbprint reader, which is supposed to function as a security measure. Velotric has also done some nice work adapting its packaging to smooth out the assembly process, placing different parts in labeled sub-boxes.
Enlarge/ Velotric has made it easier to find what you need during assembly.
John Timmer
These didn’t help me avoid all glitches during assembly, though. I ended up having to take apart the front light assembly and remove the handlebars clamp to get the light attached to the bike—all contrary to the instructions. And connecting the color-coded electric cables was more difficult than necessary because two cables had the same color. But it only started up in one of the possible combinations, so it wasn’t difficult to sort out.
The Summit 1’s frame is remarkably similar to the Ramblas; if there wasn’t branding on it, you might need to resort to looking over the components to figure out which one you were looking at. Like the Ramblas, it has a removable battery with a cover that protects from splashes, but it probably won’t stay watertight through any significant fords. The bike also lacks an XL size option, and as usual, the Large was just a bit small for my legs.
The biggest visible difference is at the cranks, which is not where the motor resides on the Summit. Instead, you’ll find that on the rear hub, which typically means a slight step down in performance, though it is often considerably cheaper. For the Summit, the step down seemed very slight. I could definitely feel it in some contexts, but I’m pretty unusual in terms of the number of different hub and mid-motor configurations I’ve experienced (which is my way of saying that most people would never notice).
Enlarge/ The Summit 1 has a hub motor on the rear wheel and a relatively compact set of gears.
John Timmer
There are a number of additional price/performance compromises to be found. The biggest is the drivetrain in the back, which has a relatively paltry eight gears and lacks the very large gear rings you’d typically find on mountain bikes without a front derailleur—meaning almost all of them these days. This isn’t as much of a problem as it might seem because the bike is built around a power assist that can easily handle the sort of hills those big gear rings were meant for. But it is an indication of the ways Velotric has kept its costs down. Those gears are paired with a Shimano Altus rear derailleur, which is controlled by a standard dual-trigger shifter and a plastic indicator to track which gear you’re in.
The bike also lacks a dropper seat that you can get out of your way during bouncy descents. Because the frame was small for me anyway, I didn’t really feel its absence. The Summit does have a dedicated mountain bike fork from a Chinese manufacturer called YDH that included an easy-to-access dial that lets you adjust the degree of cushioning you get on the fly. One nice touch is a setting that locks the forks if you’re going to be on smooth pavement for a while. I’m not sure who makes the rims, as I was unable to interpret the graphics on them. But the tires were well-labeled with Kenda, a brand that shows up on a number of other mountain bikes.
Overall, it wasn’t that hard to spot the places Velotric made compromises to bring the bike in at under $2,000. The striking thing was just how few of them there were. The obvious question is whether you’d notice them in practice. We’ll get back to that after we go over the bike’s electronics.
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Strainer spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station in this picture taken July 3.
The astronauts who rode Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft to the International Space Station last month still don’t know when they will return to Earth.
Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have been in space for 51 days, six weeks longer than originally planned, as engineers on the groundwork through problems with Starliner’s propulsion system.
The problems are twofold. The spacecraft’s reaction control thrusters overheated, and some of them shut off as Starliner approached the space station June 6. A separate, although perhaps related, problem involves helium leaks in the craft’s propulsion system.
On Thursday, NASA and Boeing managers said they still plan to bring Wilmore and Williams home on the Starliner spacecraft. In the last few weeks, ground teams completed testing of a thruster on a test stand at White Sands, New Mexico. This weekend, Boeing and NASA plan to fire the spacecraft’s thrusters in orbit to check their performance while docked at the space station.
“I think we’re starting to close in on those final pieces of flight rationale to make sure that we can come home safely, and that’s our primary focus right now,” Stich said.
The problems have led to speculation that NASA might decide to return Wilmore and Williams to Earth in a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. There’s one Crew Dragon currently docked at the station, and another one is slated to launch with a fresh crew next month. Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, said the agency has looked at backup plans to bring the Starliner crew home on a SpaceX capsule, but the main focus is still to have the astronauts fly home aboard Starliner.
“Our prime option is to complete the mission,” Stich said. “There are a lot of good reasons to complete this mission and bring Butch and Suni home on Starliner. Starliner was designed, as a spacecraft, to have the crew in the cockpit.”
Starliner launched from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida on June 5. Wilmore and Williams are the first astronauts to fly into space on Boeing’s commercial crew capsule, and this test flight is intended to pave the way for future operational flights to rotate crews of four to and from the International Space Station.
Once NASA fully certifies Starliner for operational missions, the agency will have two human-rated spaceships for flights to the station. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon has been flying astronauts since 2020.
Tests, tests, and more tests
NASA has extended the duration of the Starliner test flight to conduct tests and analyze data in an effort to gain confidence in the spacecraft’s ability to safely bring its crew home and to better understand the root causes of the overheating thrusters and helium leaks. These problems are inside Starliner’s service module, which is jettisoned to burn up in the atmosphere during reentry, while the reusable crew module, with the astronauts inside, parachutes to an airbag-cushioned landing.
The most important of these tests was a series of test-firings of a Starliner thruster on the ground. This thruster was taken from a set of hardware slated to fly on a future Starlink mission, and engineers put it through a stress test, firing it numerous times to replicate the sequence of pulses it would see in flight. The testing simulated two sequences of flying up to the space station, and five sequences the thruster would execute during undocking and a deorbit burn for return to Earth.
“This thruster has seen quite a bit of pulses, maybe even more than what we would anticipate we would see during a flight, and more aggressive in terms of two uphills and five downhills,” Stich said. “What we did see in the thruster is the same kind of thrust degradation that we’re seeing on orbit. In a number of the thrusters (on Starliner), we’re seeing reduced thrust, which is important.”
Starliner’s flight computer shut off five of the spacecraft’s 28 reaction control system thrusters, produced by Aerojet Rocketdyne, during the rendezvous with the space station last month. Four of the five thrusters were recovered after overheating and losing thrust, but officials have declared one of the thrusters unusable.
The thruster tested on the ground showed similar behavior. Inspections of the thruster at White Sands showed bulging in a Teflon seal in an oxidizer valve, which could restrict the flow of nitrogen tetroxide propellant. The thrusters, each generating about 85 pounds of thrust, consume the nitrogen tetroxide, or NTO, oxidizer and mix it with hydrazine fuel for combustion.
A poppet valve, similar to an inflation valve on a tire, is designed to open and close to allow nitrogen tetroxide to flow into the thruster.
“That poppet has a Teflon seal at the end of it,” Nappi said. “Through the heating and natural vacuum that occurs with the thruster firing, that poppet seal was deformed and actually bulged out a little bit.”
Stich said engineers are evaluating the integrity of the Teflon seal to determine if it could remain intact through the undocking and deorbit burn of the Starliner spacecraft. The thrusters aren’t needed while Starliner is attached to the space station.
“Could that particular seal survive the rest of the flight? That’s the important part,” Stich said.
Enlarge/ An AI-generated image released by xAI during the open-weights launch of Grok-1.
Elon Musk-led social media platform X is training Grok, its AI chatbot, on users’ data, and that’s opt-out, not opt-in. If you’re an X user, that means Grok is already being trained on your posts if you haven’t explicitly told it not to.
Over the past day or so, users of the platform noticed the checkbox to opt out of this data usage in X’s privacy settings. The discovery was accompanied by outrage that user data was being used this way to begin with.
The social media posts about this sometimes seem to suggest that Grok has only just begun training on X users’ data, but users actually don’t know for sure when it started happening.
Earlier today, X’s Safety account tweeted, “All X users have the ability to control whether their public posts can be used to train Grok, the AI search assistant.” But it didn’t clarify either when the option became available or when the data collection began.
You cannot currently disable it in the mobile apps, but you can on mobile web, and X says the option is coming to the apps soon.
On the privacy settings page, X says:
To continuously improve your experience, we may utilize your X posts as well as your user interactions, inputs, and results with Grok for training and fine-tuning purposes. This also means that your interactions, inputs, and results may also be shared with our service provider xAI for these purposes.
X’s privacy policy has allowed for this since at least September 2023.
It’s increasingly common for user data to be used this way; for example, Meta has done the same with its users’ content, and there was an outcry when Adobe updated its terms of use to allow for this kind of thing. (Adobe quickly backtracked and promised to “never” train generative AI on creators’ content.)
How to opt out
To stop Grok from training on your X content, first go to “Settings and privacy” from the “More” menu in the navigation panel…
Samuel Axon
Then click or tap “Privacy and safety”…
Samuel Axon
Then “Grok”…
Samuel Axon
And finally, uncheck the box.
Samuel Axon
You can’t opt out within the iOS or Android apps yet, but you can do so in a few quick steps on either mobile or desktop web. To do so:
Click or tap “More” in the nav panel
Click or tap “Settings and privacy”
Click or tap “Privacy and safety”
Scroll down and click or tap “Grok” under “Data sharing and personalization”
Uncheck the box “Allow your posts as well as your interactions, inputs, and results with Grok to be used for training and fine-tuning,” which is checked by default.
Alternatively, you can follow this link directly to the settings page and uncheck the box with just one more click. If you’d like, you can also delete your conversation history with Grok here, provided you’ve actually used the chatbot before.
Enlarge/ A bad update to CrowdStrike’s Falcon security software crashed millions of Windows PCs last week.
CrowdStrike
CrowdStrike CEO George Kurtz said Thursday that 97 percent of all Windows systems running its Falcon sensor software were back online, a week after an update-related outage to the corporate security software delayed flights and took down emergency response systems, among many other disruptions. The update, which caused Windows PCs to throw the dreaded Blue Screen of Death and reboot, affected about 8.5 million systems by Microsoft’s count, leaving roughly 250,000 that still need to be brought back online.
Microsoft VP John Cable said in a blog post that the company has “engaged over 5,000 support engineers working 24×7” to help clean up the mess created by CrowdStrike’s update and hinted at Windows changes that could help—if they don’t run afoul of regulators, anyway.
“This incident shows clearly that Windows must prioritize change and innovation in the area of end-to-end resilience,” wrote Cable. “These improvements must go hand in hand with ongoing improvements in security and be in close cooperation with our many partners, who also care deeply about the security of the Windows ecosystem.”
Cable pointed to VBS enclaves and Azure Attestation as examples of products that could keep Windows secure without requiring kernel-level access, as most Windows-based security products (including CrowdStrike’s Falcon sensor) do now. But he stopped short of outlining what specific changes might be made to Windows, saying only that Microsoft would continue to “harden our platform, and do even more to improve the resiliency of the Windows ecosystem, working openly and collaboratively with the broad security community.”
When running in kernel mode rather than user mode, security software has full access to a system’s hardware and software, which makes it more powerful and flexible; this also means that a bad update like CrowdStrike’s can cause a lot more problems.
Recent versions of macOS have deprecated third-party kernel extensions for exactly this reason, one explanation for why Macs weren’t taken down by the CrowdStrike update. But past efforts by Microsoft to lock third-party security companies out of the Windows kernel—most recently in the Windows Vista era—have been met with pushback from European Commission regulators. That level of skepticism is warranted, given Microsoft’s past (and continuing) record of using Windows’ market position to push its own products and services. Any present-day attempt to restrict third-party vendors’ access to the Windows kernel would be likely to draw similar scrutiny.
Microsoft has also had plenty of its own security problems to deal with recently, to the point that it has promised to restructure the company to make security more of a focus.
CrowdStrike’s aftermath
CrowdStrike has made its own promises in the wake of the outage, including more thorough testing of updates and a phased-rollout system that could prevent a bad update file from causing quite as much trouble as the one last week did. The company’s initial incident report pointed to a lapse in its testing procedures as the cause of the problem.
Meanwhile, recovery continues. Some systems could be fixed simply by rebooting, though they had to do it as many as 15 times—this could give systems a chance to grab a new update file before they could crash. For the rest, IT admins were left to either restore them from backups or delete the bad update file manually. Microsoft published a bootable tool that could help automate the process of deleting that file, but it still required laying hands on every single affected Windows install, whether on a virtual machine or a physical system.
And not all of CrowdStrike’s remediation solutions have been well-received. The company sent out $10 UberEats promo codes to cover some of its partners’ “next cup of coffee or late night snack,” which occasioned some eye-rolling on social media sites (the code was also briefly unusable because Uber flagged it as fraudulent, according to a CrowdStrike representative). For context, analytics company Parametrix Insurance estimated the cost of the outage to Fortune 500 companies somewhere in the realm of $5.4 billion.
Enlarge/ The environment you’re eating in can influence what you taste, and space is no exception.
Astronauts on the ISS tend to favor spicy foods and top other foods with things like tabasco or shrimp cocktail sauce with horseradish. “Based on anecdotal reports, they have expressed that food in space tastes less flavorful. This is the way to compensate for this,” said Grace Loke, a food scientist at the RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia.
Loke’s team did a study to take a closer look at those anecdotal reports and test if our perception of flavor really changes in an ISS-like environment. It likely does, but only some flavors are affected.
Tasting with all senses
“There are many environmental factors that could contribute to how we perceive taste, from the size of the area to the color and intensity of the lighting, the volume and type of sounds present, the way our surroundings smell, down to even the size and shape of our cutlery. Many other studies covered each of these factors in some way or another,” said Loke.
That’s why her team started to unravel the bland ISS food mystery by recreating the ISS environment in VR. “Certain environments are difficult to be duplicated, such as the ISS, which led us to look at digital solutions to mimic how it felt [to be] living and working in these areas,” said Julia Low, a nutrition and food technologist at the RMIT University and co-author of the study.
Once the VR version of the ISS was ready, the team had 54 participants smell flavors of vanilla, almonds, and lemon. The first round of tests was done in a pretty normal room, and the second with the VR goggles on, running the simulated ISS environment complete with sterile, cluttered spaces, sounds present at the real ISS, and objects floating around in microgravity.
The participants said the lemon flavor seemed the same in both rounds. Almonds and vanilla, on the other hand, seemed more intense when participants were in the VR environment. While that’s the opposite of what might be expected from astronauts’ dining habits, it is informative. “The bottom line is we may smell aromas differently in a space-like environment, but it is selective as to what kind of aromas. We’re not entirely sure why this happens, but knowing that a difference exists is the first step to find out more,” Loke said.
Loke and her colleagues then pulled out a mass spectrometer and took a closer look at the composition of the flavors they used in the tests.
Space-ready ingredients
The lemon flavor in Loke’s team tests was lemon essential oil applied to a cotton ball, which was then placed in a closed container that was kept sealed until it was given to the participants to smell. The vapors released from the container contained several volatile chemicals such as limonene, camphene, 3-carene, and monoterpene alcohols like linalool, carveol, and others.
Almond flavors contained similar chemicals, but there was one notable difference: the almond and vanilla flavors contained benzaldehyde, while the lemon did not. “Benzaldehyde naturally gives off a sweet aroma, while the lemon aroma, which did not have it, has a more fruity and citrusy aroma profile. We believe that it may be the sweet characteristics of aromas that leads to a more intense perception in [simulated] space,” said Loke.
Arguably, few companies have unintentionally contributed more to the increase of AI-generated noise online than OpenAI. Despite its best intentions—and against its terms of service—its AI language models are often used to compose spam, and its pioneering research has inspired others to build AI models that can potentially do the same. This influx of AI-generated content has further reduced the effectiveness of SEO-driven search engines like Google. In 2024, web search is in a sorry state indeed.
It’s interesting, then, that OpenAI is now offering a potential solution to that problem. On Thursday, OpenAI revealed a prototype AI-powered search engine called SearchGPT that aims to provide users with quick, accurate answers sourced from the web. It’s also a direct challenge to Google, which also has tried to apply generative AI to web search (but with little success).
The company says it plans to integrate the most useful aspects of the temporary prototype into ChatGPT in the future. ChatGPT can already perform web searches using Bing, but SearchGPT seems to be a purpose-built interface for AI-assisted web searching.
SearchGPT attempts to streamline the process of finding information online by combining OpenAI’s AI models (like GPT-4o) with real-time web data. Like ChatGPT, users can reportedly ask SearchGPT follow-up questions, with the AI model maintaining context throughout the conversation.
Perhaps most importantly from an accuracy standpoint, the SearchGPT prototype (which we have not tested ourselves) reportedly includes features that attribute web-based sources prominently. Responses include in-line citations and links, while a sidebar displays additional source links.
OpenAI has not yet said how it is obtaining its real-time web data and whether it’s partnering with an existing search engine provider (like it does currently with Bing for ChatGPT) or building its own web-crawling and indexing system.
A way around publishers blocking OpenAI
ChatGPT can already perform web searches using Bing, but since last August when OpenAI revealed a way to block its web crawler, that feature hasn’t been nearly as useful as it could be. Many sites, such as Ars Technica (which blocks the OpenAI crawler as part of our parent company’s policy), won’t show up as results in ChatGPT because of this.
SearchGPT appears to untangle the association between OpenAI’s web crawler for scraping training data and the desire for OpenAI chatbot users to search the web. Notably, in the new SearchGPT announcement, OpenAI says, “Sites can be surfaced in search results even if they opt out of generative AI training.”
Even so, OpenAI says it is working on a way for publishers to manage how they appear in SearchGPT results so that “publishers have more choices.” And the company says that SearchGPT’s ability to browse the web is separate from training OpenAI’s AI models.
An uncertain future for AI-powered search
OpenAI claims SearchGPT will make web searches faster and easier. However, the effectiveness of AI-powered search compared to traditional methods is unknown, as the tech is still in its early stages. But let’s be frank: The most prominent web-search engine right now is pretty terrible.
Over the past year, we’ve seen Perplexity.ai take off as a potential AI-powered Google search replacement, but the service has been hounded by issues with confabulations and accusations of plagiarism among publishers, including Ars Technica parent Condé Nast.
Unlike Perplexity, OpenAI has many content deals lined up with publishers, and it emphasizes that it wants to work with content creators in particular. “We are committed to a thriving ecosystem of publishers and creators,” says OpenAI in its news release. “We hope to help users discover publisher sites and experiences, while bringing more choice to search.”
In a statement for the OpenAI press release, Nicholas Thompson, CEO of The Atlantic (which has a content deal with OpenAI), expressed optimism about the potential of AI search: “AI search is going to become one of the key ways that people navigate the internet, and it’s crucial, in these early days, that the technology is built in a way that values, respects, and protects journalism and publishers,” he said. “We look forward to partnering with OpenAI in the process, and creating a new way for readers to discover The Atlantic.”
OpenAI has experimented with other offshoots of its AI language model technology that haven’t become blockbuster hits (most notably, GPTs come to mind), so time will tell if the techniques behind SearchGPT have staying power—and if it can deliver accurate results without hallucinating. But the current state of web search is inviting new experiments to separate the signal from the noise, and it looks like OpenAI is throwing its hat in the ring.
OpenAI is currently rolling out SearchGPT to a small group of users and publishers for testing and feedback. Those interested in trying the prototype can sign up for a waitlist on the company’s website.
In 2012, an industry-wide coalition of hardware and software makers adopted Secure Boot to protect against a long-looming security threat. The threat was the specter of malware that could infect the BIOS, the firmware that loaded the operating system each time a computer booted up. From there, it could remain immune to detection and removal and could load even before the OS and security apps did.
The threat of such BIOS-dwelling malware was largely theoretical and fueled in large part by the creation of ICLord Bioskit by a Chinese researcher in 2007. ICLord was a rootkit, a class of malware that gains and maintains stealthy root access by subverting key protections built into the operating system. The proof of concept demonstrated that such BIOS rootkits weren’t only feasible; they were also powerful. In 2011, the threat became a reality with the discovery of Mebromi, the first-known BIOS rootkit to be used in the wild.
Keenly aware of Mebromi and its potential for a devastating new class of attack, the Secure Boot architects hashed out a complex new way to shore up security in the pre-boot environment. Built into UEFI—the Unified Extensible Firmware Interface that would become the successor to BIOS—Secure Boot used public-key cryptography to block the loading of any code that wasn’t signed with a pre-approved digital signature. To this day, key players in security—among them Microsoft and the US National Security Agency—regard Secure Boot as an important, if not essential, foundation of trust in securing devices in some of the most critical environments, including in industrial control and enterprise networks.
An unlimited Secure Boot bypass
On Thursday, researchers from security firm Binarly revealed that Secure Boot is completely compromised on more than 200 device models sold by Acer, Dell, Gigabyte, Intel, and Supermicro. The cause: a cryptographic key underpinning Secure Boot on those models that was compromised in 2022. In a public GitHub repository committed in December of that year, someone working for multiple US-based device manufacturers published what’s known as a platform key, the cryptographic key that forms the root-of-trust anchor between the hardware device and the firmware that runs on it. The repository was located at https://github.com/raywu-aaeon/Ryzen2000_4000.git, and it’s not clear when it was taken down.
The repository included the private portion of the platform key in encrypted form. The encrypted file, however, was protected by a four-character password, a decision that made it trivial for Binarly, and anyone else with even a passing curiosity, to crack the passcode and retrieve the corresponding plain text. The disclosure of the key went largely unnoticed until January 2023, when Binarly researchers found it while investigating a supply-chain incident. Now that the leak has come to light, security experts say it effectively torpedoes the security assurances offered by Secure Boot.
“It’s a big problem,” said Martin Smolár, a malware analyst specializing in rootkits who reviewed the Binarly research and spoke to me about it. “It’s basically an unlimited Secure Boot bypass for these devices that use this platform key. So until device manufacturers or OEMs provide firmware updates, anyone can basically… execute any malware or untrusted code during system boot. Of course, privileged access is required, but that’s not a problem in many cases.”
Binarly researchers said their scans of firmware images uncovered 215 devices that use the compromised key, which can be identified by the certificate serial number 55:fb:ef: 87: 81: 23: 00: 84: 47: 17:0b:b3:cd: 87:3a:f4. A table appearing at the end of this article lists each one.
The researchers soon discovered that the compromise of the key was just the beginning of a much bigger supply-chain breakdown that raises serious doubts about the integrity of Secure Boot on more than 300 additional device models from virtually all major device manufacturers. As is the case with the platform key compromised in the 2022 GitHub leak, an additional 21 platform keys contain the strings “DO NOT SHIP” or “DO NOT TRUST.”
