Anthropic is preparing to restore access to its Claude Fable 5 artificial intelligence model after the U.S. Department of Commerce lifted export controls that had temporarily restricted deployment of the company's most advanced AI systems.
The company announced on X that access to Claude Fable 5 will begin returning on Wednesday following the government's decision. Anthropic also confirmed that the export restrictions affecting both Claude Fable 5 and Claude Mythos 5 have been removed.
"We've received notice that the Department of Commerce has lifted export controls on Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5," the company said in its statement, adding that it will begin restoring access on Wednesday and provide additional updates as the rollout progresses.
Anthropic also thanked its community for its patience during the temporary suspension and acknowledged the teams involved in preparing the models for redeployment.
Although the rollout is set to begin immediately, the company has not clarified whether Claude Fable 5 will become available to all users at the same time. It remains uncertain whether users outside the United States will regain access during the initial phase of the deployment or whether availability will expand gradually across different regions.
The export restrictions were introduced earlier after U.S. authorities raised national security concerns surrounding the deployment of highly capable frontier AI models. During that period, Anthropic temporarily suspended access while it worked to comply with government requirements and strengthen safeguards governing the release of its latest systems.
While restoring access to its models, Anthropic also appears to be expanding identity verification measures for certain Claude services.
Recent references to Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures discovered on the company's website suggest that some users may soon be required to verify their identities before accessing specific Claude capabilities. The references have prompted speculation that advanced models such as Claude Fable 5 could initially be limited to verified users or become available only in certain regions as Anthropic gradually expands access.
According to Anthropic's support documentation, identity verification is being introduced for a limited number of use cases. Users may encounter verification requests when using particular Claude features, during routine platform integrity reviews, or as part of broader safety, security and regulatory compliance checks.
The company says the verification process is intended to reduce abuse of its AI systems, enforce platform usage policies and meet legal obligations associated with operating increasingly powerful AI technologies.
"Being responsible with powerful technology starts with knowing who is using it," Anthropic said while explaining the purpose of the new verification measures.
Anthropic has selected Persona as its identity verification provider. Users who are asked to complete verification may be required to submit a valid government-issued photo identification document, including a passport, driver's license, state or provincial identification card, or a national identity card.
The company notes that several forms of identification will not be accepted during the verification process. These include photocopies, screenshots, scanned documents, mobile IDs, student identification cards, employee badges, bank cards and temporary paper identification documents.
Some users may also be asked to complete a live selfie verification using the camera on a computer or mobile device. According to Anthropic, the entire verification process typically takes less than five minutes to complete.
Addressing privacy concerns, the company says identity documents and selfie data are collected and stored by Persona rather than directly within Anthropic's own systems. However, Anthropic may access verification records through Persona when necessary, including during account review or appeal processes.
Anthropic also emphasized that identity verification information is not used to train Claude's AI models. Instead, the data is used solely to confirm a user's identity and to satisfy the company's legal, safety and compliance responsibilities.
The restoration of Claude Fable 5, together with the introduction of targeted identity verification measures, reflects the growing intersection of frontier AI development, government oversight and platform security. As developers release increasingly capable AI systems, compliance requirements, export regulations and stronger user verification are becoming a more prominent part of deploying advanced models responsibly.
WhatsApp users will soon have a new option to talk without exposing their contact numbers. Prior to the wider update set for this year, WhatsApp has started launching username reservations in advance, permitting people to pre-claim a unique username before the feature becomes publicly available.
“For most people, choosing a WhatsApp username should be something unique that only people you want to contact you will know. If you need help picking one, we have a username generator to make one work just for you. We also know that some people like creators, small businesses, and organizations may want to maintain a consistent presence online. For them, we reserved an option to claim their existing Instagram or Facebook username on WhatsApp.” WhatsApp wrote in its blog.
This move is said to be WhatsApp’s one of the biggest privacy-focused modifications, allowing users to start chats through a username instead of showing their contact number. WhatsApp released the feature in an official blog post recently, and said the feature launch will take place gradually in the next few months.
The company has started allowing users to book a username in advance so that they can choose the handle they want and have a better chance. The early reservation process is important because WhatsApp now has over three billion users across the world. This feature will be optional and gradually allow users to replace their contact number with a user handle when texting someone for the first time (but the username has to be turned on).
Users can see the feature by updating to the latest version and going to Settings > Account > Username.
The users will get an in-app notification when the feature is available in their country.
If someone has already taken your user name, WhatsApp will offer a built-in userhandle generator that provides alternative unique handles.
Contrary to many social media platforms, WhatsApp will not launch a searchable username directory. Users can only contact someone if they know the specific username.
Every major technological change has followed a familiar pattern: organizations embrace innovation first, while security teams are left adapting controls after deployment. Cloud computing, Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), and DevOps all reshaped enterprise security in this way. Agentic AI is now driving the next transformation, but with a more complex challenge. Unlike conventional applications, AI agents actively authenticate, interact with APIs, query databases, generate code, and execute workflows across production environments, often using credentials and permissions that organizations have yet to fully catalogue.
This changes the conversation around AI security. Rather than focusing solely on what an AI model can generate, security leaders must determine who an AI agent represents, what systems it can access, who is accountable for its actions, and whether its privileges can be modified or revoked as business requirements evolve.
Traditional identity and access management programs were designed around employees whose access follows established roles and review processes. The rapid expansion of machine identities, including service accounts, API keys, certificates, and workload identities, already challenged that approach. Autonomous AI agents introduce another level of complexity because they can interpret objectives, make decisions, and perform actions independently while operating at machine speed. They can also be deployed by developers, embedded into SaaS platforms, delegated permissions by users, and continue running long after their original purpose has ended.
Static access controls are increasingly inadequate for these systems. An AI assistant summarizing customer support tickets requires far fewer privileges than one capable of issuing refunds, modifying customer records, or deploying production infrastructure. Instead of relying on permanent permissions, organizations should adopt contextual, task-specific, time-limited, and continuously evaluated access policies that adjust according to an agent's responsibilities.
The rapid growth of agentic AI also introduces three identity risks that security teams cannot ignore. Many enterprises already lack visibility into AI agents operating across cloud services, developer environments, and business applications, making ownership and accountability difficult to establish. At the same time, broad permissions granted during testing frequently evolve into long-term identity debt, leaving agents with unnecessary administrative access. Attackers are also exploiting prompt injection techniques, manipulating trusted agents through untrusted content to perform unintended actions when effective privilege boundaries are absent.
Addressing these risks requires identity-centric governance rather than a separate AI security strategy. Every AI agent should possess a unique identity, a clearly assigned owner, a defined business purpose, and a controlled lifecycle supported by strong credential management and continuous monitoring. Automated discovery, policy enforcement, and access reviews will become essential as organizations deploy growing numbers of autonomous systems.
As enterprises integrate agentic AI into everyday operations, the security question is no longer limited to what AI can produce. The greater concern is what autonomous agents are authorized to do, and whether those identities remain governed throughout their entire lifecycle. Organizations that strengthen identity governance today will be better positioned to embrace AI-driven innovation without expanding their attack surface.
China's latest open-weight artificial intelligence model is drawing attention within the cybersecurity community after independent evaluations indicated that it can rival some of the vulnerability detection capabilities of leading U.S. frontier AI systems. The findings are fueling renewed debate over whether restricting access to advanced American AI models is enough to slow the spread of powerful cyber capabilities.
Chinese AI company Zhipu AI, also known as Z.ai, released its GLM-5.2 model on June 13 under a permissive open-weight license. Unlike proprietary AI systems that are only accessible through controlled cloud services, open-weight models allow researchers and developers to download the model weights and run them on their own hardware. This approach enables offline deployment, customization through fine-tuning, and unrestricted experimentation without requiring ongoing approval from the model developer.
The release stands in contrast to Anthropic's Claude Mythos, one of several advanced AI systems whose availability has been limited under U.S. export controls because of concerns that highly capable models could be misused for offensive cyber operations. While GLM-5.2 still falls behind leading models from Anthropic and OpenAI across many general-purpose reasoning benchmarks, recent testing suggests it performs remarkably well in one highly specialized area: identifying software vulnerabilities.
Independent benchmarking conducted by Semgrep found that GLM-5.2 achieved an F1 score of 39% when detecting Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerabilities. IDOR flaws arise when applications expose internal object identifiers without properly verifying whether a user is authorized to access the requested resource, making them a common source of unauthorized data access and privilege abuse. Under the same evaluation conditions, Claude Code recorded scores ranging from 32% to 37%, placing GLM-5.2 slightly ahead in this specific cybersecurity task.
The benchmark also underlined a notable economic advantage. Researchers estimated that GLM-5.2 identified vulnerabilities at an average cost of approximately $0.17 per finding, roughly one-sixth of the cost associated with comparable Claude-based workflows. Lower operating costs could make advanced AI-assisted vulnerability research accessible to a much broader range of organizations, independent researchers, and software security teams.
Additional benchmarking conducted by Graphistry reached similar conclusions, reinforcing the view that an openly downloadable Chinese model can compete with frontier U.S. AI systems in narrowly focused cybersecurity applications. The independent evaluations are particularly noteworthy because they relied on standardized testing methodologies designed to reduce benchmark contamination and minimize vendor-specific bias.
The findings arrive amid growing concern in Washington over the national security implications of frontier artificial intelligence. The Trump administration has increasingly treated advanced AI models such as Mythos and Fable as strategic technologies because of their ability to automate complex cybersecurity tasks, including discovering previously unknown software vulnerabilities that could potentially be weaponized in cyber operations.
Those concerns have shaped U.S. export control policies that restrict access to some advanced AI systems for foreign organizations, including researchers based in China. The underlying assumption behind these controls is that limiting access to the most capable American models would delay competing nations from acquiring comparable cyber capabilities. GLM-5.2's performance is prompting renewed questions about whether restricting model access alone can achieve that objective when capable alternatives are being developed elsewhere.
The discussion is further informed by Anthropic's Project Glasswing, which previously demonstrated the cybersecurity potential of frontier AI by identifying more than 10,000 critical software vulnerabilities during its initial research phase. The project illustrated how advanced language models can assist security researchers in reviewing large codebases, prioritizing weaknesses, and accelerating vulnerability discovery. If open-weight models begin approaching similar levels of performance, comparable capabilities may no longer remain exclusive to a small number of tightly controlled AI providers.
The latest development also comes shortly after OpenAI introduced GPT-5.6 with limited availability because of concerns surrounding misuse. Together, these decisions reflect a broader effort by U.S. AI developers to place increasingly capable models behind controlled access mechanisms while balancing innovation with national security considerations.
Cybersecurity researchers note that advances in open-weight models create opportunities as well as risks. Defensive teams could use these systems to automate code reviews, strengthen secure software development practices, and accelerate vulnerability remediation. At the same time, threat actors may attempt to exploit the same capabilities to identify weaknesses in software before organizations have an opportunity to patch them. Because GLM-5.2 can be downloaded and operated locally, these capabilities are available globally regardless of whether users have access to commercial U.S. AI services.
The emergence of GLM-5.2 does not necessarily indicate that Chinese AI has surpassed American frontier models across every benchmark. However, its strong performance in specialized cybersecurity evaluations suggests that the technological gap is narrowing in selected high-value domains. The development is likely to intensify debate over whether hardware restrictions and access controls alone are sufficient to preserve leadership in AI-driven cybersecurity, or whether future policy must place greater emphasis on strengthening defensive capabilities, accelerating software patching, and preparing for a world where advanced vulnerability discovery tools become increasingly accessible worldwide.
Japanese telecommunications giant KDDI Corporation has disclosed a cybersecurity incident that may have compromised the email credentials of millions of users. According to the company, attackers gained unauthorized access to an email system that supports services for five internet service providers (ISPs) in Japan.
KDDI detected the security breach on June 17 and said it took immediate action to block the attackers while deploying additional security measures to contain the incident.
The company's investigation found that the intrusion occurred after threat actors exploited a vulnerability in third-party software used within KDDI's email infrastructure.
"Although technical defensive measures have already been implemented for the system, there remains a possibility that customers' email addresses and passwords were obtained by unauthorized third parties as a result of the incident," KDDI warns.
KDDI, one of Japan's largest internet service providers, employs around 45,000 people and generates annual revenue of approximately $32.4 billion. Established in 2000 through the merger of IDO, DDI, and KDD, the company serves millions of customers across the country.
The breach impacted email services operated by the following ISPs:
STNet, Inc.
JCOM Co., Ltd.
Chubu Telecommunications Co., Inc.
NIFTY Corporation
BIGLOBE Inc.
While the investigation remains ongoing, KDDI estimates that email addresses and passwords belonging to as many as 14.22 million current, former, and inactive customer accounts may have been exposed.
The company noted that a portion of the affected passwords had been stored in hashed and/or encrypted form, reducing the likelihood of immediate misuse if accessed by attackers. However, it did not disclose the encryption method used or clarify how many passwords, if any, were stored in plaintext.
Since identifying the breach, KDDI has informed the affected ISP operators and reported the incident to Japan's Personal Information Protection Commission as well as the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.
The telecom operator is working closely with the impacted ISPs to strengthen security measures and reduce potential risks stemming from the incident.
Customers whose accounts may have been affected are advised to reset their email passwords immediately. KDDI also recommends enabling two-factor authentication (2FA), where available, to provide an additional layer of account security.
Romania's healthcare system faced one of its biggest cyber crises in February 2024 when a widespread ransomware attack targeted hospitals across the country, disrupting critical medical services and exposing the growing vulnerability of healthcare infrastructure to cybercriminals.
The attack began when hackers infiltrated the systems of Bucharest-based software company RSC, compromising its widely used hospital management platform, Hippocrates. As the malicious software rapidly spread to connected hospitals, officials at Romania's National Directorate for Cyber Security (DNSC) realized immediate action was necessary to prevent a nationwide catastrophe.
Faced with limited options, DNSC Director Dan Cimpean instructed more than 100 hospitals to disconnect from the internet immediately. The drastic measure successfully halted the spread of the ransomware but also left hospitals without internet access, email services, and connected medical systems.
Medical staff were forced to abandon digital records and return to manual processes, relying on handwritten documentation and paper-based workflows while cybersecurity experts investigated the breach and IT teams worked to restore operations.
The incident has since become an important case study for disaster response planners worldwide, demonstrating how healthcare systems can continue functioning during a major cyberattack.
Surgeon Oana Goidescu, who was working at Buzău Hospital when the attack unfolded, described the challenges medical staff faced.
"It was quite an unpleasant experience, because an IT record is not just a list of patients." She explained the extent of the disruption by adding: "For each patient, we request lab tests, radiology, medicines and supplies. All of that was gone."
The Hippocrates platform plays a central role in hospital operations, handling patient admissions, laboratory requests, pharmacy logistics, payroll, medical records, and diagnostic results. Once compromised, hospitals across Romania experienced widespread service failures.
The ransomware used in the attack, known as BackMyData, encrypted hospital files and demanded payment in Bitcoin to restore access.
The first warning signs appeared at Pitești Children's Hospital on the morning following the breach. By the next day, numerous hospitals reported that their Hippocrates systems had stopped functioning.
Cybersecurity specialists collaborated closely with the software provider to identify infected systems, isolate the malware, and begin recovery efforts.
Meanwhile, hospitals developed temporary offline systems to continue treating patients.
Vlad Paic from Carol Davila Hospital explained how his team adapted. When we saw the system would not be repaired quickly, we developed an offline method so we could register every patient. He added:"We asked the laboratory to give us results on paper. We used Excel and other offline tools to ensure care was not affected."
Romania's relatively recent transition to digital healthcare systems proved somewhat beneficial, as many staff members were still familiar with traditional paper-based procedures.
Investigators later confirmed that 26 hospitals had been directly infected with the BackMyData ransomware. Unaffected hospitals were gradually reconnected to the internet after additional cybersecurity protections were implemented.
Authorities also relied heavily on public communication throughout the crisis. Patients were advised to avoid hospitals unless absolutely necessary, helping reduce pressure on already strained facilities.
Despite these efforts, medical staff often faced frustration from worried patients.
Goidescu recalled: "We were asked, 'What if it were your mother?' They were right to be angry, but we tried to explain we were not at fault."
Romanian authorities also issued clear instructions that hospitals should neither negotiate with the attackers nor pay the ransom. The hackers had demanded €160,000 in Bitcoin, but the government refused payment and instead focused on restoring systems through secure backups.
Regular data backups proved invaluable, allowing most hospitals to recover their systems within five days. Although no deaths or serious patient harm were reported during the incident, healthcare workers spent weeks manually entering records created during the outage, while some information was permanently lost.
Investigators have not publicly identified those responsible for the attack. However, authorities previously dismantled a ransomware group linked to BackMyData in an international law enforcement operation that resulted in the arrest of four Russian nationals outside Russia.
Reflecting on the incident, Dan Cimpean warned that no country is immune from similar threats. "The more technology you have, the more digitised you are, the greater the risk."
The Romanian cyberattack reflects a broader global trend. In the United Kingdom, a cyberattack on an NHS blood-testing provider last year contributed to the first officially confirmed patient death linked to a cyber incident. In the United States, attacks on Change Healthcare and Ascension caused major disruptions, with Change Healthcare reportedly paying a $22 million ransom.
Cybersecurity experts say hospitals remain attractive targets because of their essential services.
Alina Bîzgă of cybersecurity company Bitdefender explained: "Hospitals handle critical services, and the criminals think that the more disruption that can be caused, the more likely they are to get paid a ransom."
The Romania incident highlights the urgent need for stronger cybersecurity measures, routine system backups, and well-prepared emergency response plans to safeguard healthcare services against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats.
OpenAI has postponed the extensive public rollout of its latest frontier artificial intelligence model, GPT-5.6, after the U.S. government requested an opportunity to examine the technology before it reaches a wider audience. Rather than making the model immediately available to all users, the company will begin with a restricted deployment involving a small number of carefully vetted partners whose identities have been disclosed to federal authorities.
The temporary decision surfaces an increasingly cautious approach toward highly capable AI systems as governments evaluate their potential impact on national security. Policymakers have become more concerned that advanced generative AI models, while offering substantial benefits across research, software development and cybersecurity, could also be exploited to support sophisticated cyberattacks, automate vulnerability discovery, generate convincing phishing campaigns or assist other malicious activities if deployed without adequate safeguards.
According to OpenAI, the limited rollout is intended to provide government officials with an opportunity to study the model's capabilities and assess possible security risks before broader public access is granted. The company said it has already briefed the U.S. government on GPT-5.6 and its expected capabilities and described the current arrangement as an interim measure while it works with Washington to establish a more structured framework for releasing future frontier AI models.
Chief Executive Officer Sam Altman publicly expressed support for rigorous safety evaluations but questioned whether government agencies should determine which organizations receive early access. In a post on X, Altman said extensive testing of advanced AI systems is appropriate, while arguing that customer selection should remain outside government control.
The latest development follows an executive order signed earlier this month by President Donald Trump establishing a voluntary process under which developers of designated "covered frontier models" may provide the U.S. government with access to their systems for up to 30 days before they are released to trusted external partners. The initiative is designed to give officials time to evaluate emerging security concerns and strengthen oversight of increasingly capable AI technologies before wider deployment.
OpenAI stated that restricting access during this initial period represents what it believes is the most practical route toward making GPT-5.6 more broadly available in the coming weeks while discussions continue with the Administration on implementing the cyber-focused executive order and developing a repeatable review process for future launches.
The company added that engineering teams will continue conducting extensive safety evaluations and work closely with early partners throughout the testing phase. At the same time, OpenAI cautioned that the current level of government access should remain a temporary measure rather than becoming a permanent requirement for future AI releases. It also declined to identify the organizations participating in the initial rollout.
OpenAI further warned that prolonged restrictions on access to frontier AI systems could slow innovation across multiple sectors. The company noted that developers, businesses, cybersecurity professionals and international collaborators all rely on access to advanced models to build defensive security tools, strengthen research, develop enterprise applications and accelerate responsible AI adoption.
Leading the new product family is GPT-5.6 Sol, which OpenAI describes as its most capable model to date. The release also includes Terra, positioned as a mid-range model, and Luna, a lower-cost alternative intended to make advanced AI capabilities available at a lower price point across a wider range of use cases.
The government's heightened scrutiny extends beyond OpenAI. Earlier this month, Anthropic was instructed by U.S. authorities to suspend access to its frontier AI models for foreign nationals because of national security concerns. The company continues to face an ongoing legal and regulatory dispute with the government over those restrictions, illustrating the growing debate surrounding oversight of advanced artificial intelligence systems.
The developments come as both OpenAI and Anthropic have confidentially submitted paperwork for U.S. initial public offerings. Separately, The New York Times reported that OpenAI is considering postponing its public market debut until next year.
The developing relationship between AI developers and governments illustrates how the deployment of frontier models is becoming closely linked with cybersecurity and national security policy. While companies continue to pursue increasingly powerful AI capabilities, regulators are placing greater emphasis on evaluating how these systems could influence cyber defense, critical infrastructure protection and the misuse of AI by malicious actors before they are released at scale.