What’s next for our privacy?

Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE

What’s next for our privacy?

MIT Technology Review’s What’s Next series looks across industries, trends, and technologies to give you a first look at the future. You can read the rest of them here. Every day, we are tracked hundreds or even thousands of times across the digital world. Cookies and web trackers capture every website link that we click, while code installed in mobile apps tracks every physical location that our devices—and, by extension, we—have visited. All of this is collected, packaged together with other details (compiled from public records, supermarket member programs, utility companies, and more), and used to create highly personalized profiles that are then shared or sold, often without our explicit knowledge or consent. A consensus is growing that Americans need better privacy protections—and that the best way to deliver them would be for Congress to pass comprehensive federal privacy legislation. While the latest iteration of such a bill, the American Privacy Rights Act of 2024, gained more momentum than previously proposed laws, it became so watered down that it lost support from both Republicans and Democrats before it even came to a vote. There have been some privacy wins in the form of limits on what data brokers—third-party companies that buy and sell consumers’ personal information for targeted advertisements, messaging, and other purposes—can do with geolocation data. These are still small steps, though—and they are happening as increasingly pervasive and powerful technologies collect more data than ever. And at the same time, Washington is preparing for a new presidential administration that has attacked the press and other critics, promised to target immigrants for mass deportation, threatened to seek retribution against perceived enemies, and supported restrictive state abortion laws. This is not even to mention the increased collection of our biometric data, especially for facial recognition, and the normalization of its use in all kinds of ways. In this light, it’s no stretch to say our personal data has arguably never been more vulnerable, and the imperative for privacy has never felt more urgent. So what can Americans expect for their personal data in 2025? We spoke to privacy experts and advocates about (some of) what’s on their mind regarding how our digital data might be traded or protected moving forward. Reining in a problematic industry In early December, the Federal Trade Commission announced separate settlement agreements with the data brokers Mobilewalla and Gravy Analytics (and its subsidiary Venntel). Finding that the companies had tracked and sold geolocation data from users at sensitive locations like churches, hospitals, and military installations without explicit consent, the FTC banned the companies from selling such data except in specific circumstances. This follows something of a busy year in regulation of data brokers, including multiple FTC enforcement actions against other companies for similar use and sale of geolocation data, as well as a proposed rule from the Justice Department that would prohibit the sale of bulk data to foreign entities. And on the same day that the FTC announced these settlements in December, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed a new rule that would designate data brokers as consumer reporting agencies, which would trigger stringent reporting requirements and consumer privacy protections. The rule would prohibit the collection and sharing of people’s sensitive information, such as their salaries and Social Security numbers, without “legitimate purposes.” While the rule will still need to undergo a 90-day public comment period, and it’s unclear whether it will move forward under the Trump administration, if it’s finalized it has the power to fundamentally limit how data brokers do business. Right now, there just aren’t many limits on how these companies operate—nor, for that matter, clear information on how many data brokerages even exist. Industry watchers estimate there may be 4,000 to 5,000 data brokers around the world, many of which we’ve never heard of—and whose names constantly shift. In California alone, the state’s 2024 Data Broker Registry lists 527 such businesses that have voluntarily registered there, nearly 90 of which also self-reported that they collect geolocation data. All this data is widely available for purchase by anyone who will pay. Marketers buy data to create highly targeted advertisements, and banks and insurance companies do the same to verify identity, prevent fraud, and conduct risk assessments. Law enforcement buys geolocation data to track people’s whereabouts without getting traditional search warrants. Foreign entities can also currently buy sensitive information on members of the military and other government officials. And on people-finder websites, basically anyone can pay for anyone else’s contact details and personal history. Data brokers and their clients defend these transactions by saying that most of this data is anonymized—though it’s questionable whether that can truly be done in the case of geolocation data. Besides, anonymous data can be easily reidentified, especially when it’s combined with other personal information. Digital-rights advocates have spent years sounding the alarm on this secretive industry, especially the ways in which it can harm already marginalized communities, though various types of data collection have sparked consternation across the political spectrum. Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the Republican chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, for example, was concerned about how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention bought location data to evaluate the effectiveness of pandemic lockdowns. Then a study from last year showed how easy (and cheap) it was to buy sensitive data about members of the US military; Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, called out the national security risks of data brokers in a statement to MIT Technology Review, and Senator John Cornyn, a Republican, later said he was “shocked” when he read about the practice in our story. But it was the 2022 Supreme Court decision ending the constitutional guarantee of legal abortion that spurred much of the federal action last year. Shortly after the Dobbs ruling, President Biden issued an executive order to protect access to reproductive health care; it included instructions for the FTC to take steps preventing information about visits to doctor’s offices or abortion clinics from being sold to law enforcement agencies or state prosecutors. The new enforcers With Donald Trump taking office in January, and Republicans taking control of both houses of Congress, the fate of the CFPB’s proposed rule—and the CFPB itself—is uncertain. Republicans, the people behind Project 2025, and Elon Musk (who will lead the newly created advisory group known as the Department of Government Efficiency) have long been interested in seeing the bureau “deleted,” as Musk put it on X. That would take an act of Congress, making it unlikely, but there are other ways that the administration could severely curtail its powers. Trump is likely to fire the current director and install a Republican who could rescind existing CFPB rules and stop any proposed rules from moving forward. Meanwhile, the FTC’s enforcement actions are only as good as the enforcers. FTC decisions do not set legal precedent in quite the same way that court cases do, says Ben Winters, a former Department of Justice official and the director of AI and privacy at the Consumer Federation of America, a network of organizations and agencies focused on consumer protection. Instead, they “require consistent [and] additional enforcement to make the whole industry scared of not having an FTC enforcement action against them.” (It’s also worth noting that these FTC settlements are specifically focused on geolocation data, which is just one of the many types of sensitive data that we regularly give up in order to participate in the digital world.) Looking ahead, Tiffany Li, a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law who focuses on AI and privacy law, is worried about “a defanged FTC” that she says would be “less aggressive in taking action against companies.” Lina Khan, the current FTC chair, has been the leader of privacy protection action in the US, notes Li, and she’ll soon be leaving. Andrew Ferguson, Trump’s recently named pick to be the next FTC chair, has come out in strong opposition to data brokers: “This type of data—records of a person’s precise physical locations—is inherently intrusive and revealing of people’s most private affairs,” he wrote in a statement on the Mobilewalla decision, indicating that he is likely to continue action against them. (Ferguson has been serving as a commissioner on the FTC since April 20214.) On the other hand, he has spoken out against using FTC actions as an alternative to privacy legislation passed by Congress. And, of course, this brings us right back around to that other major roadblock: Congress has so far failed to pass such laws—and it’s unclear if the next Congress will either. Movement in the states Without federal legislative action, many US states are taking privacy matters into their own hands. In 2025, eight new state privacy laws will take effect, making a total of 25 around the country. A number of other states—like Vermont and Massachusetts—are considering passing their own privacy bills next year, and such laws could, in theory, force national legislation, says Woodrow Hartzog, a technology law scholar at Boston University School of Law. “Right now, the statutes are all similar enough that the compliance cost is perhaps expensive but manageable,” he explains. But if one state passed a law that was different enough from the others, a national law could be the only way to resolve the conflict. Additionally, four states—California, Texas, Vermont, and Oregon—already have specific laws regulating data brokers, including the requirement that they register with the state. Along with new laws, says Justin Brookman, the director of technology policy at Consumer Reports, comes the possibility that “we can put some more teeth on these laws.” Brookman points to Texas, where some of the most aggressive enforcement action at the state level has taken place under its Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton. Even before the state’s new consumer privacy bill went into effect in July, Paxton announced the creation of a special task force focused on enforcing the state’s privacy laws. He has since targeted a number of data brokers—including National Public Data, which exposed millions of sensitive customer records in a data breach in August, as well as companies that sell to them, like Sirius XM. At the same time, though, Paxton has moved to enforce the state’s strict abortion laws in ways that threaten individual privacy. In December, he sued a New York doctor for sending abortion pills to a Texas woman through the mail. While the doctor is theoretically protected by New York’s shield laws, which provide a safeguard from out-of-state prosecution, Paxton’s aggressive action makes it even more crucial that states enshrine data privacy protections into their laws, says Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, an advocacy group. “There is an urgent need for states,” he says, “to lock down our resident’s’ data, barring companies from collecting and sharing information in ways that can be weaponized against them by out-of-state prosecutors.” Data collection in the name of “security” While privacy has become a bipartisan issue, Republicans, in particular, are interested in “addressing data brokers in the context of national security,” such as protecting the data of military members or other government officials, says Winters. But in his view, it’s the effects on reproductive rights and immigrants that are potentially the “most dangerous” threats to privacy. Indeed, data brokers (including Venntel, the Gravy Analytics subsidiary named in the recent FTC settlement) have sold cell-phone data to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as well as to Customs and Border Protection. That data has then been used to track individuals for deportation proceedings—allowing the agencies to bypass local and state sanctuary laws that ban local law enforcement from sharing information for immigration enforcement. “The more data that corporations collect, the more data that’s available to governments for surveillance,” warns Ashley Gorski, a senior attorney who works on national security and privacy at the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU is among a number of organizations that have been pushing for the passage of another federal law related to privacy: the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. It would close the so-called “data-broker loophole” that allows law enforcement and intelligence agencies to buy personal information from data brokers without a search warrant. The bill would “dramatically limit the ability of the government to buy Americans’ private data,” Gorski says. It was first introduced in 2021 and passed the House in April 2024, with the support of 123 Republicans and 93 Democrats, before stalling in the Senate. While Gorski is hopeful that the bill will move forward in the next Congress, others are less sanguine about these prospects—and alarmed about other ways that the incoming administration might “co-opt private systems for surveillance purposes,” as Hartzog puts it. So much of our personal information that is “collected for one purpose,” he says, could “easily be used by the government … to track us.” This is especially concerning, adds Winters, given that the next administration has been “very explicit” about wanting to use every tool at its disposal to carry out policies like mass deportations and to exact revenge on perceived enemies. And one possible change, he says, is as simple as loosening the government’s procurement processes to make them more open to emerging technologies, which may have fewer privacy protections. “Right now, it’s annoying to procure anything as a federal agency,” he says, but he expects a more “fast and loose use of commercial tools.” “That’s something we’ve [already] seen a lot,” he adds, pointing to “federal, state, and local agencies using the Clearviews of the world”—a reference to the controversial facial recognition company. The AI wild card Underlying all of these debates on potential legislation is the fact that technology companies—especially AI companies—continue to require reams and reams of data, including personal data, to train their machine-learning models. And they’re quickly running out of it. This is something of a wild card in any predictions about personal data. Ideally, says Jennifer King, a privacy and data policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, the shortage would lead to ways for consumers to directly benefit, perhaps financially, from the value of their own data. But it’s more likely that “there will be more industry resistance against some of the proposed comprehensive federal privacy legislation bills,” she says. “Companies benefit from the status quo.” The hunt for more and more data may also push companies to change their own privacy policies, says Whitney Merrill, a former FTC official who works on data privacy at Asana. Speaking in a personal capacity, she says that companies “have felt the squeeze in the tech recession that we’re in, with the high interest rates,” and that under those circumstances, “we’ve seen people turn around, change their policies, and try to monetize their data in an AI world”—even if it’s at the expense of user privacy. She points to the $60-million-per-year deal that Reddit struck last year to license its content to Google to help train the company’s AI. Earlier this year, the FTC warned companies that it would be “unfair and deceptive” to “surreptitiously” change their privacy policies to allow for the use of user data to train AI. But again, whether or not officials follow up on this depends on those in charge. So what will privacy look like in 2025? While the recent FTC settlements and the CFPB’s proposed rule represent important steps forward in privacy protection—at least when it comes to geolocation data—Americans’ personal information still remains widely available and vulnerable. Rebecca Williams, a senior strategist at the ACLU for privacy and data governance, argues that all of us, as individuals and communities, should take it upon ourselves to do more to protect ourselves and “resist … by opting out” of as much data collection as possible. That means checking privacy settings on accounts and apps, and using encrypted messaging services. Cahn, meanwhile, says he’ll “be striving to protect [his] local community, working to enact safeguards to ensure that we live up to our principles and stated commitments.” One example of such safeguards is a proposed New York City ordinance that would ban the sharing of any location data originating from within the city limits. Hartzog says that kind of local activism has already been effective in pushing for city bans on facial recognition. “Privacy rights are at risk, but they’re not gone, and it’s not helpful to take an overly pessimistic look right now,” says Li, the USF law professor. “We definitely still have privacy rights, and the more that we continue to fight for these rights, the more we’re going to be able to protect our rights.”

MIT Technology Review’s What’s Next series looks across industries, trends, and technologies to give you a first look at the future. You can read the rest of them here.

Every day, we are tracked hundreds or even thousands of times across the digital world. Cookies and web trackers capture every website link that we click, while code installed in mobile apps tracks every physical location that our devices—and, by extension, we—have visited. All of this is collected, packaged together with other details (compiled from public records, supermarket member programs, utility companies, and more), and used to create highly personalized profiles that are then shared or sold, often without our explicit knowledge or consent.

A consensus is growing that Americans need better privacy protections—and that the best way to deliver them would be for Congress to pass comprehensive federal privacy legislation. While the latest iteration of such a bill, the American Privacy Rights Act of 2024, gained more momentum than previously proposed laws, it became so watered down that it lost support from both Republicans and Democrats before it even came to a vote.

There have been some privacy wins in the form of limits on what data brokers—third-party companies that buy and sell consumers’ personal information for targeted advertisements, messaging, and other purposes—can do with geolocation data.

These are still small steps, though—and they are happening as increasingly pervasive and powerful technologies collect more data than ever. And at the same time, Washington is preparing for a new presidential administration that has attacked the press and other critics, promised to target immigrants for mass deportation, threatened to seek retribution against perceived enemies, and supported restrictive state abortion laws. This is not even to mention the increased collection of our biometric data, especially for facial recognition, and the normalization of its use in all kinds of ways. In this light, it’s no stretch to say our personal data has arguably never been more vulnerable, and the imperative for privacy has never felt more urgent.

So what can Americans expect for their personal data in 2025? We spoke to privacy experts and advocates about (some of) what’s on their mind regarding how our digital data might be traded or protected moving forward.

Reining in a problematic industry

In early December, the Federal Trade Commission announced separate settlement agreements with the data brokers Mobilewalla and Gravy Analytics (and its subsidiary Venntel). Finding that the companies had tracked and sold geolocation data from users at sensitive locations like churches, hospitals, and military installations without explicit consent, the FTC banned the companies from selling such data except in specific circumstances. This follows something of a busy year in regulation of data brokers, including multiple FTC enforcement actions against other companies for similar use and sale of geolocation data, as well as a proposed rule from the Justice Department that would prohibit the sale of bulk data to foreign entities.

And on the same day that the FTC announced these settlements in December, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed a new rule that would designate data brokers as consumer reporting agencies, which would trigger stringent reporting requirements and consumer privacy protections. The rule would prohibit the collection and sharing of people’s sensitive information, such as their salaries and Social Security numbers, without “legitimate purposes.” While the rule will still need to undergo a 90-day public comment period, and it’s unclear whether it will move forward under the Trump administration, if it’s finalized it has the power to fundamentally limit how data brokers do business.

Right now, there just aren’t many limits on how these companies operate—nor, for that matter, clear information on how many data brokerages even exist. Industry watchers estimate there may be 4,000 to 5,000 data brokers around the world, many of which we’ve never heard of—and whose names constantly shift. In California alone, the state’s 2024 Data Broker Registry lists 527 such businesses that have voluntarily registered there, nearly 90 of which also self-reported that they collect geolocation data.

All this data is widely available for purchase by anyone who will pay. Marketers buy data to create highly targeted advertisements, and banks and insurance companies do the same to verify identity, prevent fraud, and conduct risk assessments. Law enforcement buys geolocation data to track people’s whereabouts without getting traditional search warrants. Foreign entities can also currently buy sensitive information on members of the military and other government officials. And on people-finder websites, basically anyone can pay for anyone else’s contact details and personal history.

Data brokers and their clients defend these transactions by saying that most of this data is anonymized—though it’s questionable whether that can truly be done in the case of geolocation data. Besides, anonymous data can be easily reidentified, especially when it’s combined with other personal information.

Digital-rights advocates have spent years sounding the alarm on this secretive industry, especially the ways in which it can harm already marginalized communities, though various types of data collection have sparked consternation across the political spectrum. Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, the Republican chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, for example, was concerned about how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention bought location data to evaluate the effectiveness of pandemic lockdowns. Then a study from last year showed how easy (and cheap) it was to buy sensitive data about members of the US military; Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, called out the national security risks of data brokers in a statement to MIT Technology Review, and Senator John Cornyn, a Republican, later said he was “shocked” when he read about the practice in our story.

But it was the 2022 Supreme Court decision ending the constitutional guarantee of legal abortion that spurred much of the federal action last year. Shortly after the Dobbs ruling, President Biden issued an executive order to protect access to reproductive health care; it included instructions for the FTC to take steps preventing information about visits to doctor’s offices or abortion clinics from being sold to law enforcement agencies or state prosecutors.

The new enforcers

With Donald Trump taking office in January, and Republicans taking control of both houses of Congress, the fate of the CFPB’s proposed rule—and the CFPB itself—is uncertain. Republicans, the people behind Project 2025, and Elon Musk (who will lead the newly created advisory group known as the Department of Government Efficiency) have long been interested in seeing the bureau “deleted,” as Musk put it on X. That would take an act of Congress, making it unlikely, but there are other ways that the administration could severely curtail its powers. Trump is likely to fire the current director and install a Republican who could rescind existing CFPB rules and stop any proposed rules from moving forward.

Meanwhile, the FTC’s enforcement actions are only as good as the enforcers. FTC decisions do not set legal precedent in quite the same way that court cases do, says Ben Winters, a former Department of Justice official and the director of AI and privacy at the Consumer Federation of America, a network of organizations and agencies focused on consumer protection. Instead, they “require consistent [and] additional enforcement to make the whole industry scared of not having an FTC enforcement action against them.” (It’s also worth noting that these FTC settlements are specifically focused on geolocation data, which is just one of the many types of sensitive data that we regularly give up in order to participate in the digital world.)

Looking ahead, Tiffany Li, a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law who focuses on AI and privacy law, is worried about “a defanged FTC” that she says would be “less aggressive in taking action against companies.”

Lina Khan, the current FTC chair, has been the leader of privacy protection action in the US, notes Li, and she’ll soon be leaving. Andrew Ferguson, Trump’s recently named pick to be the next FTC chair, has come out in strong opposition to data brokers: “This type of data—records of a person’s precise physical locations—is inherently intrusive and revealing of people’s most private affairs,” he wrote in a statement on the Mobilewalla decision, indicating that he is likely to continue action against them. (Ferguson has been serving as a commissioner on the FTC since April 20214.) On the other hand, he has spoken out against using FTC actions as an alternative to privacy legislation passed by Congress. And, of course, this brings us right back around to that other major roadblock: Congress has so far failed to pass such laws—and it’s unclear if the next Congress will either.

Movement in the states

Without federal legislative action, many US states are taking privacy matters into their own hands.

In 2025, eight new state privacy laws will take effect, making a total of 25 around the country. A number of other states—like Vermont and Massachusetts—are considering passing their own privacy bills next year, and such laws could, in theory, force national legislation, says Woodrow Hartzog, a technology law scholar at Boston University School of Law. “Right now, the statutes are all similar enough that the compliance cost is perhaps expensive but manageable,” he explains. But if one state passed a law that was different enough from the others, a national law could be the only way to resolve the conflict. Additionally, four states—California, Texas, Vermont, and Oregon—already have specific laws regulating data brokers, including the requirement that they register with the state.

Along with new laws, says Justin Brookman, the director of technology policy at Consumer Reports, comes the possibility that “we can put some more teeth on these laws.”

Brookman points to Texas, where some of the most aggressive enforcement action at the state level has taken place under its Republican attorney general, Ken Paxton. Even before the state’s new consumer privacy bill went into effect in July, Paxton announced the creation of a special task force focused on enforcing the state’s privacy laws. He has since targeted a number of data brokers—including National Public Data, which exposed millions of sensitive customer records in a data breach in August, as well as companies that sell to them, like Sirius XM.

At the same time, though, Paxton has moved to enforce the state’s strict abortion laws in ways that threaten individual privacy. In December, he sued a New York doctor for sending abortion pills to a Texas woman through the mail. While the doctor is theoretically protected by New York’s shield laws, which provide a safeguard from out-of-state prosecution, Paxton’s aggressive action makes it even more crucial that states enshrine data privacy protections into their laws, says Albert Fox Cahn, the executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, an advocacy group. “There is an urgent need for states,” he says, “to lock down our resident’s’ data, barring companies from collecting and sharing information in ways that can be weaponized against them by out-of-state prosecutors.”

Data collection in the name of “security”

While privacy has become a bipartisan issue, Republicans, in particular, are interested in “addressing data brokers in the context of national security,” such as protecting the data of military members or other government officials, says Winters. But in his view, it’s the effects on reproductive rights and immigrants that are potentially the “most dangerous” threats to privacy.

Indeed, data brokers (including Venntel, the Gravy Analytics subsidiary named in the recent FTC settlement) have sold cell-phone data to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as well as to Customs and Border Protection. That data has then been used to track individuals for deportation proceedings—allowing the agencies to bypass local and state sanctuary laws that ban local law enforcement from sharing information for immigration enforcement.

“The more data that corporations collect, the more data that’s available to governments for surveillance,” warns Ashley Gorski, a senior attorney who works on national security and privacy at the American Civil Liberties Union.

The ACLU is among a number of organizations that have been pushing for the passage of another federal law related to privacy: the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. It would close the so-called “data-broker loophole” that allows law enforcement and intelligence agencies to buy personal information from data brokers without a search warrant. The bill would “dramatically limit the ability of the government to buy Americans’ private data,” Gorski says. It was first introduced in 2021 and passed the House in April 2024, with the support of 123 Republicans and 93 Democrats, before stalling in the Senate.

While Gorski is hopeful that the bill will move forward in the next Congress, others are less sanguine about these prospects—and alarmed about other ways that the incoming administration might “co-opt private systems for surveillance purposes,” as Hartzog puts it. So much of our personal information that is “collected for one purpose,” he says, could “easily be used by the government … to track us.”

This is especially concerning, adds Winters, given that the next administration has been “very explicit” about wanting to use every tool at its disposal to carry out policies like mass deportations and to exact revenge on perceived enemies. And one possible change, he says, is as simple as loosening the government’s procurement processes to make them more open to emerging technologies, which may have fewer privacy protections. “Right now, it’s annoying to procure anything as a federal agency,” he says, but he expects a more “fast and loose use of commercial tools.”

“That’s something we’ve [already] seen a lot,” he adds, pointing to “federal, state, and local agencies using the Clearviews of the world”—a reference to the controversial facial recognition company.

The AI wild card

Underlying all of these debates on potential legislation is the fact that technology companies—especially AI companies—continue to require reams and reams of data, including personal data, to train their machine-learning models. And they’re quickly running out of it.

This is something of a wild card in any predictions about personal data. Ideally, says Jennifer King, a privacy and data policy fellow at the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, the shortage would lead to ways for consumers to directly benefit, perhaps financially, from the value of their own data. But it’s more likely that “there will be more industry resistance against some of the proposed comprehensive federal privacy legislation bills,” she says. “Companies benefit from the status quo.”

The hunt for more and more data may also push companies to change their own privacy policies, says Whitney Merrill, a former FTC official who works on data privacy at Asana. Speaking in a personal capacity, she says that companies “have felt the squeeze in the tech recession that we’re in, with the high interest rates,” and that under those circumstances, “we’ve seen people turn around, change their policies, and try to monetize their data in an AI world”—even if it’s at the expense of user privacy. She points to the $60-million-per-year deal that Reddit struck last year to license its content to Google to help train the company’s AI.

Earlier this year, the FTC warned companies that it would be “unfair and deceptive” to “surreptitiously” change their privacy policies to allow for the use of user data to train AI. But again, whether or not officials follow up on this depends on those in charge.

So what will privacy look like in 2025?

While the recent FTC settlements and the CFPB’s proposed rule represent important steps forward in privacy protection—at least when it comes to geolocation data—Americans’ personal information still remains widely available and vulnerable.

Rebecca Williams, a senior strategist at the ACLU for privacy and data governance, argues that all of us, as individuals and communities, should take it upon ourselves to do more to protect ourselves and “resist … by opting out” of as much data collection as possible. That means checking privacy settings on accounts and apps, and using encrypted messaging services.

Cahn, meanwhile, says he’ll “be striving to protect [his] local community, working to enact safeguards to ensure that we live up to our principles and stated commitments.” One example of such safeguards is a proposed New York City ordinance that would ban the sharing of any location data originating from within the city limits. Hartzog says that kind of local activism has already been effective in pushing for city bans on facial recognition.

“Privacy rights are at risk, but they’re not gone, and it’s not helpful to take an overly pessimistic look right now,” says Li, the USF law professor. “We definitely still have privacy rights, and the more that we continue to fight for these rights, the more we’re going to be able to protect our rights.”

Stay Ahead

Explore More Insights

Stay ahead with more perspectives on cutting-edge power, infrastructure, energy, bitcoin and AI solutions. Explore these articles to uncover strategies and insights shaping the future of industries.

BPCL lets contracts for expansions at Bina, Mumbai refineries

Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd. (BPCL) has awarded separate contracts to Technip Energies NV for delivery of major works on key projects designed to support expanded production of petrochemicals at two of the operator’s Indian refineries. Under a first contract revealed on Jan. 7, Technip Energies said it will provide engineering,

Saudi Aramco to resume Perro Negro 7 offshore operations

NRF 2026: HPE expands network, server products for retailers

The package also integrates information from HPE Aruba Networking User Experience Insight sensors and agents, which now include support for WiFi 7 networks. The combination can measure end-user activity and allow IT teams to baseline network performance, continuously test network health, track trends, and plan for device growth and AI-native

Italy fines Cloudflare for refusing to block pirate sites

Italy’s communications authority AGCOM has fined Cloudflare €14.2 million for refusing to block pirate sites via its public DNS service 1.1.1.1, in accordance with the country’s controversial Piracy Shield law, reports Ars Technica. The law, which was introduced in 2024, requires network operators and DNS services to block websites and

Norway Offers 57 New Production Licenses to 19 Companies

The Norwegian Ministry of Energy announced, in a statement posted on its website on Tuesday, that it has offered 57 new production licenses to 19 companies on the Norwegian Continental Shelf in the APA (Awards in Predefined Areas) 2025 licensing round. Of the 57 production licenses offered in APA 2025, 31 are located in the North Sea, 21 in the Norwegian Sea, and five in the Barents Sea, the statement highlighted. Equinor Energy AS was offered the highest number of combined parts in licenses and operatorships, with 52, followed by Aker BP ASA, with 34, and DNO Norge AS, with 21, the statement revealed. A complete list of offers, showing parts/operatorships, as shown on the ministry’s site, can be seen below: Aker BP ASA (22/12) Concedo AS (2/1) ConocoPhillips Skandinavia AS (1/1) DNO Norge AS (17/4) Equinor Energy AS (35/17) Harbour Energy Norge AS (9/4) INPEX Idemitsu Norge AS (5/1)Japex Norge AS (2/0) Lime Petroleum AS (1/0) OKEA ASA (3/1) OMV (Norge) AS (4/2) Orlen Upstream Norway AS (6/0) Pandion Energy Norge AS (1/0) Petrolia NOCO AS (1/1) Repsol (2/2) Source Energy AS (2/0) TotalEnergies EP Norge AS (1/0) Vår Energi ASA (14/6) Wellesley Petroleum AS (5/5) All petroleum licensing rounds are carried out within the framework established by the Norwegian Parliament for where new production licenses may be awarded, the ministry’s statement noted, adding that APA is an annual exploration round for the Norwegian continental shelf. “The APA rounds are carried out within a fixed area, the APA area, which is expanded on the basis of petroleum professional assessments and in accordance with a fixed annual cycle,” the statement highlighted. “The APA area comprises the majority of the opened, available acreage on the continental shelf, including areas in the North Sea, the Norwegian Sea, and the Barents Sea,” it

Banks in Talks to Lend $1B for Argentina Gas Pipeline

A group of banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. are in talks to lend natural gas producers in Argentina roughly $1 billion to build a cross-country pipeline, according to two people familiar with the matter. The banks, which also include Banco Santander SA, are negotiating the syndicated loan with a consortium led by Pan American Energy Group after a similar deal was struck last year for a pipeline and port dedicated to shale oil exports. That project, known as VMOS, is currently under construction. More banks may join the financing for the gas pipeline, the people added. Pan American, which is half-owned by British oil major BP Plc, holds a 30 percent stake in the consortium, called Southern Energy SA. Argentina’s state-run energy giant YPF SA owns 25 percent. Three other companies, Pampa Energia SA, UK-based Harbour Energy Plc and Golar LNG Ltd. also have smaller stakes in the project. Negotiations are ongoing and terms could still change before an agreement finalizes. JPMorgan and Citi declined to comment. Santander and Pan American didn’t respond to requests for comment. Argentina’s Vaca Muerta shale patch is growing fast as President Javier Milei’s free-market reforms have opened up the energy industry to global credit, unleashing investments. The $2 billion loan for the oil pipeline was the biggest project financing in Argentina’s history, according to JPMorgan. Southern Energy is now aiming to unlock the Vaca Muerta’s gas potential with Argentina’s first floating liquefaction terminal for natural gas. The pipeline would transport natural gas from Vaca Muerta to the terminal on the Atlantic coast. Argentina holds the world’s second-biggest resources of shale gas, and its daily production averaged the equivalent of about 550,000 barrels last year. The consortium’s first leased liquefaction vessel, Hilli Episeyo, is set to start production at the end of 2027.

Uniper Approves 219 MWp Solar Projects in Poland

Uniper SE said Tuesday it had sanctioned four new solar projects in Poland with a combined capacity of 219 megawatts peak (MWp). The Domanowo, Kłodawa, Krotoszyce and Pakosc projects are among five solar projects on which it made a positive final investment decision (FID) last month, the German power and gas utility said in a press release Tuesday. Uniper already announced a FID to proceed constructing its first solar project in Scotland on December 11, 2025. It said it expects the 45-MW Berryhill Solar Farm just north of Dundee to start construction “early 2026” and start operation later in the year. Berryhill’s output, from about 150,000 solar panels, would be enough “to power the equivalent of over 12,500 UK households each year, 1/5th the population of Angus – contributing to the UK’s net zero targets”, Uniper said. “The project has been developed jointly with partner Solar2 and Uniper plans to start the construction process as its sole owner”, the Düsseldorf-based company said last month. Uniper had announced two other UK solar projects in 2025: the Tamworth Solar Farm with a capacity of around 44.2 MWp and the 21.33-MWp Totmonslow Solar Farm. The two projects’ combined capacity can power about 23,300 homes a year, according to Uniper. Uniper aims to connect the projects to the grid in 2026, it said in a press release February 25, 2025. According to Tuesday’s statement, Uniper’s generation portfolio now has 568 MWp “in execution”. “Uniper’s investments in these solar projects are part of its strategic commitment to invest around EUR 8 billion [$9.31 billion] in growth and transformation projects by the early 2030s”, Uniper said Tuesday. “In addition to the five new projects, six further projects with a total capacity of up to 280 MWp are already in the construction phase”. Uniper targets a power generation capacity of

Monumental Agrees New Funding for NZEC

Monumental Energy Corp said Tuesday it had signed a definitive deal to help fund New Zealand Energy Corp’s (NZEC) planned increase of oil and gas production in the Taranaki basin onshore New Zealand. The agreement extends a partnership that already saw the restart of production in the nearby Copper Moki field in 2025. “The agreement will enable the company [Monumental] to participate in certain mutually agreed upon appraisal and development workover projects with NZEC to increase oil and gas production” in the Waihapa-Ngaere area, Vancouver, Canada-based Monumental said in an online statement. NZEC, a 50 percent owner in the relevant licenses, and Monumental must agree on the budget for each project, the statement said. “In consideration for Monumental funding NZEC’s share of any additional project, NZEC grants to Monumental a royalty applicable to such additional project effective upon satisfaction of all conditions precedent and commencement of production”, said Monumental, already a shareholder in NZEC. “In summary, the initial royalty will be payable in an amount equal to 75 percent of net receipts, on a quarterly basis, until such time as a sum equal to the costs that have been paid by Monumental has been paid back, and thereafter the final royalty will commence and will be payable by NZEC to Monumental in an amount equal to 25 percent of net receipts”, it said. The companies expect the first project under the funding agreement to start in the first quarter of 2026 subject to conditions including the receipt of regulatory approvals. On November 18, 2025, Monumental said it had completed a capital raise with gross proceeds of CAD 810,000 ($583,000) “to fund cost overruns on Copper Moki 1 oil and gas well, to fund the costs and expenses to formally enter into and fund additional workover projects with New Zealand Energy

China to Sustain Energy Storage Leadership, WoodMac Projects

China accounted for 54 percent of last year’s record global energy storage installations and looks set to maintain its dominant position in the sector beyond the decade despite policy headwinds, Wood Mackenzie said Tuesday. Worldwide energy storage installations in 2025 totaled 106 gigawatts (GW), up 43 percent from 2024. Global capacity now stands at about 270 GW, the Edinburgh, Scotland-based energy consultancy firm said in an insights piece on its website. “Energy storage has established itself as a critical component of the global energy transition”, WoodMac said. By 2034 global energy storage capacity is expected to reach 1,545 GW, with China poised to contribute around half of additions in the 10-year period from 2025. “However, the Chinese market faces considerable challenges entering 2026-27”, it said. “The removal of mandatory renewable-storage coupling requirements and the absence of established revenue frameworks create substantial uncertainty”. Nonetheless the world’s second-biggest economy is growing renewable energy and storage to displace the more expensive gas power, WoodMac said earlier. “China’s battery costs have dropped by over 50 percent in the last three years while its 42 GW of grid-connected energy storage additions last year (excluding pumped hydro installations) were double that of gas power in 2024”, WoodMac wrote October 30, 2025. “Consequently, China’s gas power generation share of output has remained broadly flat in 2025 as energy storage eats into gas’s market share. The global LNG industry should take note”. U.S. Growth WoodMac said Tuesday the United States energy storage market appears to also continue displaying resilience against a backdrop of policy reversals, with installations growing 53 percent year-on-year in 2025. “The passage of reconciliation legislation introduced supply chain restrictions for projects seeking federal tax credits, creating initial market uncertainty”, it said. “However, U.S. large-scale forecast actually increased following the bill’s passage, driven by announcements of domestic cell manufacturing

Venezuela to turn over 30-50 million bbl of oil to US; Washington seizes additional tankers

Venezuela’s state-owned oil company Petróleos de Venezuela SA (PDVSA) will turn over 30-50 million bbl of oil to the US to refine and sell, President Trump said late Jan. 6, just days after the US launched an airstrike in the oil-rich South American country and captured its leader, Nicolas Maduro. “I am pleased to announce that the Interim Authorities in Venezuela will be turning over between 30 and 50 MILLION Barrels of High Quality, Sanctioned Oil, to the United States of America,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “This Oil will be sold at its Market Price, and that money will be controlled by me, as President of the United States of America, to ensure it is used to benefit the people of Venezuela and the United States!” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Venezuela’s Interim President Delcy Rodriguez agreed to the deal because the country “can’t move oil because of US sanctions and the enforcement of those sanctions.” Speaking on Capitol Hill between classified briefings to Senate and House lawmakers, Rubio said the US would work with PDVSA to get the oil on the market “as quickly as possible.” Venezuela holds the world’s largest cache of untapped oil, with over 300 million bbl of proven reserves. Mismanagement, underinvestment and sanctions have limited production to roughly 1.1 million b/d from a peak of about 3.5-million b/d in the late 1990s, according to the US Energy Information Administration. China purchases a large share of Venezuela’s exported oil. Rubio said PDVSA asked the US to include the oil the US seized from Venezuela-linked tankers on Jan. 7 in the sales agreement. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem announced the tanker seizures—the third and fourth such seizure by the US in the past month—with a post on X of a video of the

Microsoft tells communities it will ‘pay its way’ as AI data center resource usage sparks backlash

It will work with utilities and public commissions to set the rates it pays high enough to cover data center electricity costs (including build-outs, additions, and active use). “Our goal is straightforward: To ensure that the electricity cost of serving our data centers is not passed on to residential customers,” Smith emphasized. For example, the company is supporting a new rate structure Wisconsin that would charge a class of “very large customers,” including data centers, the true cost of the electricity required to serve them. It will collaborate “early, closely, and transparently” with local utilities to add electricity and supporting infrastructure to existing grids when needed. For instance, Microsoft has contracted with the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) to add 7.9GW of new electricity generation to the grid, “more than double our current consumption,” Smith noted. It will pursue ways to make data centers more efficient. For example, it is already experimenting with AI to improve planning, extract more electricity from existing infrastructure, improve system resilience, and speed development of new infrastructure and technologies (like nuclear energy). It will advocate for state and national public policies that ensure electricity access that is affordable, reliable, and sustainable in neighboring communities. Microsoft previously established priorities for electricity policy advocacy, Smith noted, but “progress has been uneven. This needs to change.” Microsoft is similarly committed when it comes to data center water use, promising four actions: Reducing the overall amount of water its data centers use, initially improving it by 40% by 2030. The company is exploring innovations in cooling, including closed-loop systems that recirculate cooling liquids. It will collaborate with local utilities to map out water, wastewater, and pressure needs, and will “fully fund” infrastructure required for growth. For instance, in Quincy, Washington, Microsoft helped construct a water reuse utility that recirculates

Can retired naval power plants solve the data center power crunch?

HGP’s plan includes a revenue share with the government, and the company would create a decommissioning fund, according to Bloomberg. The alternative? After a lengthy decommissioning process, the reactors are shipped to a remote storage facility in Washington state together dust along with dozens of other retired nuclear reactors. So the carrier itself isn’t going to be turned into a data center, but its power plants are being proposed for a data center on land. And even with the lengthening decommissioning process, that’s still faster than building a nuclear power plant from scratch. Don’t hold your breath, says Kristen Vosmaer, managing director, JLL Work Dynamics Data Center team. The idea of converting USS Nimitz’s nuclear reactors to power AI data centers sounds compelling but faces insurmountable obstacles, he argues. “Naval reactors use weapons-grade uranium that civilian entities cannot legally possess, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has no pathway to license such facilities. Even setting aside the fuel issue, these military-designed systems would require complete reconstruction to meet civilian safety standards, eliminating any cost advantages over purpose-built nuclear plants,” Vosmaer said. The maritime concept itself, however, does have some merit, said Vosmaer. “Ocean cooling can reduce energy consumption compared to land-based data centers, and floating platforms offer positioning flexibility that fixed facilities cannot match,” Vosmaer said.

What exactly is an AI factory?

Others, however, seem to use the word to mean something smaller than a data center, referring more to the servers, software, and other systems used to run AI. For example, the AWS AI Factory is a combination of hardware and software that runs on-premises but is managed by AWS and comes with AWS services such as Bedrock, networking, storage and databases, and security. At Lenovo, AI factories appear to be packaged servers designed to be used for AI. “We’re looking at the architecture being a fixed number of racks, all working together as one design,” said Scott Tease, vice president and general manager of AI and high-performance computing at Lenovo’s infrastructure solutions group. That number of racks? Anything from a single rack to hundreds, he told Computerworld. Each rack is a little bigger than a refrigerator, comes fully assembled, and is often fully preconfigured for the customer’s use case. “Once it arrives at the customer site, we’ll have service personnel connect power and networking,” Tease said. For others, the AI factory concept is more about the software.

Meta establishes Meta Compute to lead AI infrastructure buildout

At that scale, infrastructure constraints are becoming a binding limit on AI expansion, influencing decisions like where new data centers can be built and how they are interconnected. The announcement follows Meta’s recent landmark agreements with Vistra, TerraPower, and Oklo aimed at supporting access to up to 6.6 gigawatts of nuclear energy to fuel its Ohio and Pennsylvania data center clusters. Implications for hyperscale networking Analysts say Meta’s approach indicates how hyperscalers are increasingly treating networking and interconnect strategy as first-order concerns in the AI race. Tulika Sheel, senior vice president at Kadence International, said that Meta’s initiative signals that hyperscale networking will need to evolve rapidly to handle massive internal data flows with high bandwidth and ultra-low latency. “As data centers grow in size and GPU density, pressure on networking and optical supply chains will intensify, driving demand for more advanced interconnects and faster fiber,” Sheel added. Others pointed to the potential architectural shifts from this. “Meta is using Disaggregated Scheduled Fabric and Non-Scheduled Fabric, along with new 51 Tbps switches and Ethernet for Scale-Up Networking, which is intensifying pressure on switch silicon, optical modules, and open rack standards,” said Biswajeet Mahapatra, principal analyst at Forrester. “This shift is forcing the ecosystem to deliver faster optical interconnects and greater fiber capacity, as Meta targets significant backbone growth and more specialized short-reach and coherent optical technologies to support cluster expansion.” The network is no longer a secondary pipe but a primary constraint. Next-generation connectivity, Sheel said, is becoming as critical as access to compute itself, as hyperscalers look to avoid network bottlenecks in large-scale AI deployments.

AI, edge, and security: Shaping the need for modern infrastructure management

The rapidly evolving IT landscape, driven by artificial intelligence (AI), edge computing, and rising security threats, presents unprecedented challenges in managing compute infrastructure. Traditional management tools struggle to provide the necessary scalability, visibility, and automation to keep up with business demand, leading to inefficiencies and increased business risk. Yet organizations need their IT departments to be strategic business partners that enable innovation and drive growth. To realize that goal, IT leaders should rethink the status quo and free up their teams’ time by adopting a unified approach to managing infrastructure that supports both traditional and AI workloads. It’s a strategy that enables companies to simplify IT operations and improve IT job satisfaction. 5 IT management challenges of the AI era Cisco recently commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ analysis of Cisco Intersight. This IT operations platform provides visibility, control, and automation capabilities for the Cisco Unified Computing System (Cisco UCS), including Cisco converged, hyperconverged, and AI-ready infrastructure solutions across data centers, colocation facilities, and edge environments. Intersight uses a unified policy-driven approach to infrastructure management and integrates with leading operating systems, storage providers, hypervisors, and third-party IT service management and security tools. The Forrester study first uncovered the issues IT groups are facing: Difficulty scaling: Manual, repetitive processes cause lengthy IT compute infrastructure build and deployment times. This challenge is particularly acute for organizations that need to evolve infrastructure to support traditional and AI workloads across data centers and distributed edge environments. Architectural specialization and AI workloads: AI is altering infrastructure requirements, Forrester found. Companies design systems to support specific AI workloads — such as data preparation, model training, and inferencing — and each demands specialized compute, storage, and networking capabilities. Some require custom chip sets and purpose-built infrastructure, such as for edge computing and low-latency applications.

DCF Poll: Analyzing AI Data Center Growth

@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Inter:[email protected]&display=swap’); a { color: var(–color-primary-main); } .ebm-page__main h1, .ebm-page__main h2, .ebm-page__main h3, .ebm-page__main h4, .ebm-page__main h5, .ebm-page__main h6 { font-family: Inter; } body { line-height: 150%; letter-spacing: 0.025em; font-family: Inter; } button, .ebm-button-wrapper { font-family: Inter; } .label-style { text-transform: uppercase; color: var(–color-grey); font-weight: 600; font-size: 0.75rem; } .caption-style { font-size: 0.75rem; opacity: .6; } #onetrust-pc-sdk [id*=btn-handler], #onetrust-pc-sdk [class*=btn-handler] { background-color: #1796c1 !important; border-color: #1796c1 !important; } #onetrust-policy a, #onetrust-pc-sdk a, #ot-pc-content a { color: #1796c1 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-sdk .ot-active-menu { border-color: #1796c1 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-accept-btn-handler, #onetrust-banner-sdk #onetrust-reject-all-handler, #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-btn-handler.cookie-setting-link { background-color: #1796c1 !important; border-color: #1796c1 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk .onetrust-pc-btn-handler { color: #1796c1 !important; border-color: #1796c1 !important; } Coming out of 2025, AI data center development remains defined by momentum. But momentum is not the same as certainty. Behind the headlines, operators, investors, utilities, and policymakers are all testing the assumptions that carried projects forward over the past two years, from power availability and capital conditions to architecture choices and community response. Some will hold. Others may not. To open our 2026 industry polling, we’re taking a closer look at which pillars of AI data center growth are under the most pressure. What assumption about AI data center growth feels most fragile right now?

Microsoft will invest $80B in AI data centers in fiscal 2025

And Microsoft isn’t the only one that is ramping up its investments into AI-enabled data centers. Rival cloud service providers are all investing in either upgrading or opening new data centers to capture a larger chunk of business from developers and users of large language models (LLMs). In a report published in October 2024, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated that demand for generative AI would push Microsoft, AWS, Google, Oracle, Meta, and Apple would between them devote $200 billion to capex in 2025, up from $110 billion in 2023. Microsoft is one of the biggest spenders, followed closely by Google and AWS, Bloomberg Intelligence said. Its estimate of Microsoft’s capital spending on AI, at $62.4 billion for calendar 2025, is lower than Smith’s claim that the company will invest $80 billion in the fiscal year to June 30, 2025. Both figures, though, are way higher than Microsoft’s 2020 capital expenditure of “just” $17.6 billion. The majority of the increased spending is tied to cloud services and the expansion of AI infrastructure needed to provide compute capacity for OpenAI workloads. Separately, last October Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said his company planned total capex spend of $75 billion in 2024 and even more in 2025, with much of it going to AWS, its cloud computing division.

John Deere unveils more autonomous farm machines to address skill labor shortage

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More Self-driving tractors might be the path to self-driving cars. John Deere has revealed a new line of autonomous machines and tech across agriculture, construction and commercial landscaping. The Moline, Illinois-based John Deere has been in business for 187 years, yet it’s been a regular as a non-tech company showing off technology at the big tech trade show in Las Vegas and is back at CES 2025 with more autonomous tractors and other vehicles. This is not something we usually cover, but John Deere has a lot of data that is interesting in the big picture of tech. The message from the company is that there aren’t enough skilled farm laborers to do the work that its customers need. It’s been a challenge for most of the last two decades, said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere, in a briefing. Much of the tech will come this fall and after that. He noted that the average farmer in the U.S. is over 58 and works 12 to 18 hours a day to grow food for us. And he said the American Farm Bureau Federation estimates there are roughly 2.4 million farm jobs that need to be filled annually; and the agricultural work force continues to shrink. (This is my hint to the anti-immigration crowd). John Deere’s autonomous 9RX Tractor. Farmers can oversee it using an app. While each of these industries experiences their own set of challenges, a commonality across all is skilled labor availability. In construction, about 80% percent of contractors struggle to find skilled labor. And in commercial landscaping, 86% of landscaping business owners can’t find labor to fill open positions, he said. “They have to figure out how to do

2025 playbook for enterprise AI success, from agents to evals

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for enterprise AI. The past year has seen rapid innovation, and this year will see the same. This has made it more critical than ever to revisit your AI strategy to stay competitive and create value for your customers. From scaling AI agents to optimizing costs, here are the five critical areas enterprises should prioritize for their AI strategy this year. 1. Agents: the next generation of automation AI agents are no longer theoretical. In 2025, they’re indispensable tools for enterprises looking to streamline operations and enhance customer interactions. Unlike traditional software, agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can make nuanced decisions, navigate complex multi-step tasks, and integrate seamlessly with tools and APIs. At the start of 2024, agents were not ready for prime time, making frustrating mistakes like hallucinating URLs. They started getting better as frontier large language models themselves improved. “Let me put it this way,” said Sam Witteveen, cofounder of Red Dragon, a company that develops agents for companies, and that recently reviewed the 48 agents it built last year. “Interestingly, the ones that we built at the start of the year, a lot of those worked way better at the end of the year just because the models got better.” Witteveen shared this in the video podcast we filmed to discuss these five big trends in detail. Models are getting better and hallucinating less, and they’re also being trained to do agentic tasks. Another feature that the model providers are researching is a way to use the LLM as a judge, and as models get cheaper (something we’ll cover below), companies can use three or more models to

OpenAI’s red teaming innovations define new essentials for security leaders in the AI era

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More OpenAI has taken a more aggressive approach to red teaming than its AI competitors, demonstrating its security teams’ advanced capabilities in two areas: multi-step reinforcement and external red teaming. OpenAI recently released two papers that set a new competitive standard for improving the quality, reliability and safety of AI models in these two techniques and more. The first paper, “OpenAI’s Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems,” reports that specialized teams outside the company have proven effective in uncovering vulnerabilities that might otherwise have made it into a released model because in-house testing techniques may have missed them. In the second paper, “Diverse and Effective Red Teaming with Auto-Generated Rewards and Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning,” OpenAI introduces an automated framework that relies on iterative reinforcement learning to generate a broad spectrum of novel, wide-ranging attacks. Going all-in on red teaming pays practical, competitive dividends It’s encouraging to see competitive intensity in red teaming growing among AI companies. When Anthropic released its AI red team guidelines in June of last year, it joined AI providers including Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, and even the U.S.’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which all had released red teaming frameworks. Investing heavily in red teaming yields tangible benefits for security leaders in any organization. OpenAI’s paper on external red teaming provides a detailed analysis of how the company strives to create specialized external teams that include cybersecurity and subject matter experts. The goal is to see if knowledgeable external teams can defeat models’ security perimeters and find gaps in their security, biases and controls that prompt-based testing couldn’t find. What makes OpenAI’s recent papers noteworthy is how well they define using human-in-the-middle

Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE