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.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has approved a series of new regulations aimed at strengthening the cybersecurity of the United States' emergency communication systems while modernizing security requirements for the country's undersea cable infrastructure.
The newly adopted rules introduce stronger safeguards for the nation's two primary public warning platforms—the Emergency Alert System (EAS) and Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA)—to reduce the risk of cyberattacks and unauthorized access.
The EAS is widely used by federal, state and local authorities to broadcast emergency information, including severe weather warnings, AMBER Alerts and other public safety notifications through television and radio networks. Meanwhile, the WEA delivers similar alerts directly to mobile devices through text messages.
According to the FCC, a successful cyberattack on either platform by a foreign government, cybercriminal organization or malicious actor could spread misinformation, create public confusion or disrupt emergency response efforts during critical situations.
Any vulnerability in systems like the Emergency Alert System “can have serious consequences,” said FCC Commissioner Olivia Trusty in a statement after the vote.
“That is why it has been appropriate for the Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of the EAS framework by focusing on the security of the system itself,” Trusty continued. “As cybersecurity threats continue to evolve, EAS participants must take appropriate steps to safeguard the infrastructure that supports the delivery of life-saving alerts.”
As part of the new cybersecurity framework, organizations responsible for operating EAS and WEA systems will be required to adopt stronger cyber hygiene measures. These include implementing robust passwords, promptly installing vendor-issued security updates and patches, and deploying firewalls to restrict unauthorized access to critical systems.
The FCC has also introduced a new authentication identification system that will verify emergency alerts before they are transmitted, helping prevent duplicate, fake or unauthorized alerts from being distributed.
In a separate decision, the Commission also approved its first major overhaul of submarine cable regulations in several decades. The updated framework seeks to enhance cybersecurity oversight for undersea cable infrastructure while simplifying licensing procedures for trusted operators.
Under the revised rules, certain undersea cable providers will no longer be required to undergo the extensive national security licensing review conducted by "Team Telecom" before operating cables connected to U.S. territory.
Team Telecom is an interagency group led by the Department of Justice's Foreign Investment Review Section, along with other federal agencies that evaluate the national security implications of telecommunications infrastructure.
The updated policy allows submarine cable applicants to qualify for an exemption if they can self-certify that they meet high security standards designed to improve certainty, streamline reviews and shorten licensing timelines.
“Currently, all submarine cable applications get referred to Team Telecom…the changes adopted would exempt applications from applicants that have operated cables without incident, can certify to the highest national security standards, and agree to ongoing oversight and monitoring,” the FCC said in a release.
The new regulations also expand the FCC's oversight of key operational components within submarine cable systems. Companies responsible for submarine line terminal equipment, which connects undersea cables to U.S.-based terrestrial facilities, will now be required to obtain licenses.
Additionally, the Commission has introduced updated security measures to address risks associated with essential equipment, third-party vendors and vulnerabilities across the broader submarine cable supply chain, further strengthening the resilience of critical communications infrastructure.
The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have issued an updated public service announcement warning that Russian intelligence-linked threat actors have expanded an ongoing phishing campaign targeting Signal users. Rather than attempting to intercept authentication codes alone, the attackers are now seeking victims' Signal Backup Recovery Keys, enabling them to restore encrypted cloud backups and gain access to historical conversations.
The latest advisory builds on an alert released in March 2026, when the agencies disclosed that Russian-backed operators were targeting users of commercial messaging applications, particularly Signal, through carefully crafted phishing campaigns. Those earlier attacks focused on compromising accounts by deceiving users into handing over verification codes, account PINs, or linking unauthorized devices to their Signal accounts, instead of defeating the application's end-to-end encryption.
According to the FBI, the threat actors have refined their social engineering techniques by impersonating automated Signal support accounts and introducing a new objective: convincing users to disclose the recovery keys that protect their encrypted backups.
The agencies said the campaign continues to concentrate on individuals considered to be of intelligence value, including current and former U.S. government officials, government personnel from allied nations, military members, political figures, journalists, and officials located in Ukraine.
The activity has been attributed to Russian Intelligence Services (RIS), including officers associated with Russia's Federal Security Service (FSB) Border Guards and additional actors operating on behalf of the Russian military. Security researchers publicly track the activity under the designations UNC5792 and UNC4221.
Phishing campaign evolves beyond account hijacking
The updated advisory describes a notable change in the attackers' methods. Earlier phishing attempts largely sought one-time verification codes, Signal PINs, or persuaded victims to connect attacker-controlled devices to their accounts. The current campaign instead attempts to obtain the cryptographic recovery key used by Signal's Secure Backups feature.
To begin the attack, the operators pose as Signal's support team and distribute fraudulent messages claiming the messaging platform is introducing mandatory two-factor verification following an alleged increase in attacks carried out by hackers from Iran and post-Soviet countries. The messages falsely state that the security changes require users to configure Signal Backups in order to avoid losing conversations and media files.
Victims are instructed to navigate through the application's backup settings, enable Secure Backups, reveal the Backup Recovery Key, copy it to the clipboard, and complete what appears to be a legitimate setup process.
Signal's Secure Backups feature allows users to store encrypted copies of conversations on the company's cloud infrastructure. Those backups remain protected through end-to-end encryption, with the Backup Recovery Key serving as the only credential capable of decrypting and restoring the archived data. Because Signal does not retain this key, anyone who obtains it can restore the encrypted backup onto another device.
After victims complete the initial steps, the attackers send a second phishing message while continuing to impersonate Signal support. This follow-up communication claims the user's account is experiencing a synchronization problem and warns that stored messages and media could be permanently lost unless immediate action is taken.
The fraudulent notification instructs users to revisit the backup settings, copy the Backup Recovery Key once again, and paste it directly into the conversation under the pretense of preventing data loss.
If victims comply, the attackers obtain the recovery key and use it to restore the encrypted backup on devices under their control. This grants access to previously archived communications, including private conversations and group chats.
The FBI emphasized that these attacks do not compromise Signal's encryption itself. Instead, they rely entirely on social engineering techniques that manipulate users into voluntarily surrendering the credentials needed to decrypt their own backups.
Compromised recovery keys remain a risk even after creating a new account
The updated advisory also highlights a recovery scenario that affected users may easily overlook.
According to the FBI, creating a new Signal account with the same phone number does not invalidate a Backup Recovery Key that has already been stolen. If attackers previously acquired the key, they may still be able to access any encrypted backups downloaded before the compromise was discovered.
To prevent future backup restorations using a compromised credential, users should generate a new Backup Recovery Key through Signal's backup settings. Creating a replacement key invalidates the previous one for subsequent backup downloads. However, the agencies cautioned that this action cannot revoke access to backups that attackers have already restored using the stolen key.
Agencies urge users to remain cautious of unsolicited support messages
The FBI and CISA reminded users that legitimate messaging platform support teams communicate only through official company email channels. They do not request verification codes through the application itself, nor do they send unsolicited messages instructing users to verify accounts, restore backups, or disclose recovery credentials.
Anyone who believes they may have interacted with the phishing campaign is encouraged to report the incident to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), a local FBI field office, or CISA.
The advisory accentuates the fact that well-designed encryption remains effective only when the credentials protecting it remain under the user's control. Rather than attempting to break modern cryptography, state-sponsored threat actors are increasingly directing their efforts toward manipulating trusted users into revealing the keys that unlock their own protected data.
The development, first reported by The Information on June 25, 2026, reflects the growing role of the US government in overseeing the deployment of cutting-edge artificial intelligence models. The move also signals a shift in how frontier AI systems may be introduced to the public going forward.
The government's request comes shortly after its dispute with rival AI startup Anthropic. Earlier this month, on June 12, the Trump administration directed Anthropic to temporarily take its latest AI models, Fable 5 and Mythos 5, offline under new export control measures aimed at preventing access by foreign nationals. Officials cited national security risks behind the decision.
Anthropic described the action as a "misunderstanding" and said it hoped to restore access "as soon as possible," though the incident established a significant precedent for government intervention in AI model releases.
Mythos had been shared with around 40 organisations, including Google, Microsoft and JPMorgan Chase, through a restricted programme known as Project Glasswing. According to reports, the model's ability to autonomously identify software vulnerabilities and carry out complex, multi-step cybersecurity attacks without human involvement raised concerns among US officials.
A source familiar with the matter said both OpenAI and the US administration consider GPT-5.6 to be "on par" with Anthropic's Mythos, particularly regarding its cybersecurity capabilities. That assessment prompted officials to recommend a phased rollout instead of an immediate public launch.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman reportedly informed employees during an internal Q&A session on June 25 that GPT-5.6 would first be made available to a select group of enterprise customers.
In a follow-up internal memo, Altman explained that the government would be "approving access customer by customer during this preview period." The request reportedly came from the Office of the National Cyber Director and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick also advised OpenAI not to proceed without approvals from multiple federal agencies.
Although OpenAI agreed to the arrangement, Altman indicated that the company does not see this as a long-term solution. According to The Information, he wrote: "We’ve made clear to the U.S. government that this is not our preferred long-term model, and will work with them and others in industry to achieve a more sustainable approach for future releases."
Meanwhile, a White House official told CNN that the administration continues "to collaborate with frontier AI labs to develop shared approaches for addressing the challenges of scaling this technology."
The broader public release of GPT-5.6 is expected to take place a "couple of weeks" after the limited preview, depending on how the government-led approval process progresses.
The latest development highlights the absence of a formal federal regulatory framework governing the review of advanced AI models before public deployment.
President Trump's executive order on "Promoting Advanced AI Innovation and Security" encourages AI companies to voluntarily provide frontier models to the government for cybersecurity assessments for up to one month before public release. However, compliance with the programme is voluntary rather than legally required.
For now, OpenAI's agreement with the US government represents one of the clearest examples of collaboration between federal authorities and an AI company. The outcome of GPT-5.6's controlled rollout could influence how other leading AI developers introduce powerful new models in the future.