from the do-not-pass-go,-do-not-collect-$200 dept

More than 4,000 Hollywood insiders recently signed a letter blasting Paramount’s planned $111 billion merger with Warner Brothers, noting that the massive consolidation will be very historically harmful to labor, consumers, and creatives. That’s a very correct observation, especially as it relates to Warner Brothers, which has never been involved in a merger that didn’t result in mass layoffs, higher prices for everyone, and a significantly shittier overall product.

Now a coalition of press groups, including Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) and Reporters Without Borders, are pressing Paramount regarding “potentially corrupt acquisitions and deals” they argue could undermine shareholder value by degrading the (already sagging) quality of journalism at CBS News and CNN, while “relinquishing editorial control of major news outlets to the Trump administration.”

In a letter sent to former Trump DOJ “antitrust enforcer” (using that term ironically) turned Paramount top lawyer Makan Delrahim, the groups highlight all the dodgy bullshit that we’ve well-covered over the last year, whether it’s CBS paying the president a $16 million bribe to gain merger approval, CBS agreeing to install an “ombudsman” to ensure the network is consistently kissing the president’s ass, or Paramount billionaire owner Larry Ellison privately meeting with his friend Trump to promise he’d fire certain CNN anchors if the government allowed him to buy Warner Brothers.

The journalism groups make the point that the Ellison family effort to turn CBS into a Trump and Netanyahu-friendly agitprop machine has been disastrous for the company’s share price. And because both organizations are technically shareholders, they’re demanding deeper access to the Paramount books to see what other dodgy bullshit may not have been revealed yet:

“Since Paramount Skydance announced its most consequential Trump-friendly changes at CBS News in October — acquiring The Free Press and appointing Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief — the company’s market capitalization has decreased by 40%, wiping out more than $8 billion in shareholder value. Ratings for key programs, like “CBS Evening News with Tony Dokoupil,” have also dropped precipitously. Freedom of the Press Foundation and Reporters Without Borders, which are both shareholders in Paramount Skydance Corp., are entitled to inspect the company’s books and records related to these developments under Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law.”

They’ve given Paramount five days to respond to their request for more documents and data related to any promises Paramount may have made the Trump administration. I’m not convinced the gambit will go anywhere, but it’s nice to see these kinds of groups (historically absent from many of these fights) suddenly paying closer attention to media consolidation.

Larry Ellison’s interests here are two-fold. He wanted to gift his nepobaby son David with two major Hollywood studios so David can pretend he’s a very big boy doing very serious things. But he’s also keen on dismantling what’s left of journalism at places like CBS News and CNN (already reeling from years of corporate cowardice) turning them into right-wing friendly agitprop mills that are even more friendly to his favorite autocrats (Trump and Netanyahu).

You’ll recall Bari Weiss sold herself to Paramount as an expert who could modernize CBS News through virality and mass audience appeal (despite having no actual experience in journalism). But Weiss, who got her start at the helm of a strange contrarian troll blog, has the instincts and ideas of a 90 year old man, and clearly isn’t capable of generating watchable propaganda in any ratings-grabbing way that actually appeals to anyone (even MAGA folks, who already have no limit of agitprop options).

The Trump administration will certainly rubber stamp the deal. Paramount will likely keep this effort locked up in the courts indefinitely. And the Democrats’ demand for the FCC to investigate the dodgy Chinese and Saudi financing propping up the deal isn’t likely to go anywhere. That leaves a collaborative looming lawsuit by state AGs as the most likely path toward ensuring this deal never gets off the ground.

But even if the deal gets approved, this giant company’s long-term survival is far from guaranteed. Especially given the shaky state of Hollywood, the steady enshittification of streaming, and the fact that there’s very little evidence that the any of the Paramount folks are competent.

There’s a very high likelihood that the combination of Paramount’s massive debt load from both the CBS and Warner deals– and fleeing audience (either bored by bad product or disgusted by the companies’ Trump allegiances) — combines with Larry Ellison’s over-extension on AI to result in some very precarious financial footing.

These major media deals always go terribly for consumers and labor, but execs often benefit from tax breaks, temporary stock boosts, and compensation in no way dictated by competency (see: CEO David Zaslav). But this series of deals is so massive and problematic, it could generate some very significant pain for the extraction class, and make all past merger disasters seem adorable by comparison.

Filed Under: consolidation, corruption, david ellison, journalism, makan delrahim, media, merger, press

Companies: freedom of the press foundation, paramount, reporters without borders, warner bros. discovery

Gartner’s report found that organisations need to invest in a workforce that can lead the transition to autonomous capabilities.

Over the course of the last year, there have been a range of high-profile layoffs as a result of the continued investment into AI and its capabilities. 

Recently, Cloudflare announced plans to cut 20pc of its workforce after AI usage at the company grew by 600pc in three months and in April, social media and tech platform Meta told staff that it will be laying off 10pc of its workforce, roughly 8,000 employees, reportedly as a means of mitigating the costs of heavy AI spending. Similarly, Snap is laying off 16pc of its workforce to cut costs and focus on AI. 

Gartner surveyed 350 globally dispersed business executives in the third quarter of 2025, to better understand the state of autonomous business at enterprises. Qualifying organisations reported enterprise-wide annual revenue of at least $1bn or the equivalent, and had been piloting or had already deployed either an AI agent, intelligent automation or autonomous technologies.

Of the organisations taking part in the piloting or deployment of autonomous business capabilities, roughly 80pc admitted to reducing their workforce. Gartner’s research found that these reductions do not appear to translate to a return on investment (ROI) for the organisations making the changes. 

The survey found that workforce reduction rates were nearly equal among respondents that reported a higher ROI from autonomous technologies and those that experienced only modest gains or negative outcomes.

Commenting on the findings of the report, Helen Poitevin, a distinguished vice-president and analyst at Gartner, said, “Many CEOs turn to layoffs to demonstrate quick AI returns – however, this disposition is misplaced.

“Workforce reductions may create budget room, but they do not create return. Organisations that improve ROI are not those that eliminate the need for people, but those that amplify them by aggressively investing more in skills, roles and operating models that allow humans to guide and scale autonomous systems.”

Despite increased layoffs as a result of AI adoption, Gartner’s research suggested that, while autonomous business will continue to increase alongside AI agent software spending, “the need for people will go up, not down”. To that point, Gartner predicts that “autonomous business will be a net-positive job creator by 2028 to 2029, driven by new forms of work that AI cannot absorb”.

“Long term, autonomous business will create more work for humans, not less. Lasting structural factors such as demographic decline and high-stakes, trust-dependent consumer moments will ensure human talent remains central to running, governing and scaling autonomous business,” said Poitevin.

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.

More Information

As wireless communications technologies such as Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11) and cellular (LTE, 5G NR) continue to demand higher data throughput, the modulation schemes used to encode information have grown increasingly complex. Modern systems employ quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) with orders up to 4096QAM, where each symbol carries twelve bits but the constellation points are extremely close together. This makes modulation accuracy critical: even small deviations in amplitude or phase can cause bit errors. Error vector magnitude (EVM) has become the primary metric for quantifying this accuracy. This white paper covers the fundamentals of digital modulation, defines EVM and its calculation methods, explores the common sources of EVM degradation, and explains how constellation diagrams can be used to visually diagnose the root causes of modulation impairments in practical wireless systems.

Humanoid robots are a thing now, and here’s an interesting research project that explores using one as a form of haptic media. Specifically, using a humanoid robot to move a chair while one plays a VR driving simulator.

Here’s how it works: a Unitree G1 robot sits behind a player’s chair and grasps it with its hands. Spherical markers on the chair help the robot’s depth camera know the chair’s position, and real-time G-force signals fed from the simulator (Assetto Corsa, running on PC) tell the robot how much and in what direction to shift the chair to match in-simulator events.

While a humanoid robot (especially one equipped with articulated, human-like hands) makes for an awfully expensive force feedback chair, this approach is interesting because it specifically explores using an already-existing humanoid robot as a general-purpose device. It sits in a chair, looks with its camera, grasps with its hands, and moves the player’s chair in response to game events; no hardware modifications required.

So how well does it work? Pretty well, apparently! Participants found the synchronized motion feedback accurate and highly enjoyable, although it does seem like there were some rough edges. Some testers reported that the sustained motion and constant vibration were tiring, and in some cases seemed to worsen VR sickness.

Still, using a robot in this way seems to be a conceptual success and showcases the potential of humanoid robots as flexible, general-purpose devices. We’ve seen a robot used to provide interactive force feedback in VR before, but a driving simulator makes for a pretty fun demonstration.

The video is embedded below, and for more information, check out the team’s research paper.

Summer is when pools move from being part of the setup to becoming part of everyday life. What starts as a manageable routine quickly turns into regular use, whether it is weekends with family, hosting friends, or simply spending more time outdoors. It is also when maintenance stops being occasional and begins to demand consistency, which is where most systems start to fall short.

Surface debris returns faster than expected, shallow areas remain inconsistent, and steps that were meant to be automated begin to come back into the routine. What looks simple at the start of the season starts to take more time than it should, especially when the pool is being used more often.

Beatbot positions the Sora 70 as a way to remove that friction altogether. Built as a 4-in-1 cordless system, it brings together water-surface cleaning, waterline scrubbing, wall climbing, and floor cleaning into a single workflow that reduces the need for repeated intervention. More than that, it fits into how pools are actually used during the season, making it a practical upgrade for homeowners and a high-value gift for those investing in easier, more usable outdoor living. With the Anniversary Campaign running from May 9 to 25, it arrives at a point where that shift becomes both relevant and easy to act on

A 4-in-1 system designed to replace fragmented pool cleaning

Most robotic pool cleaners still leave gaps in how cleaning is handled. Floors are covered, walls are managed, but surface debris, shallow platforms, and waterline buildup are often left to separate tools or manual effort. That fragmentation becomes more visible with regular use, when no single cycle fully resets the pool and maintenance starts to return in smaller, repeated steps.

The Sora 70 is designed to replace that fragmented approach. Its 4-in-1 system brings together water-surface cleaning, waterline scrubbing, wall climbing, and floor cleaning into a single cycle, reducing the need for multiple devices or follow-up passes. Instead of dividing the process, it handles the pool as one continuous environment, which is where most systems tend to fall short.

In practical terms, this shifts the experience from managing individual cleaning tasks to relying on a system that delivers complete coverage in one run. That reduction in manual effort is what makes it a smarter upgrade, and also what allows it to stand out as a more considered purchase for homeowners looking to simplify how their pool is maintained.

Designed to handle the areas most systems miss

In many pools, the challenge is not cleaning the obvious surfaces but reaching the areas that are easy to skip. Shallow platforms, tanning ledges, and multi-level sections often sit outside the effective range of standard robotic cleaners, which leaves parts of the pool inconsistent even after a full cycle.

The Sora 70 addresses this through its dual SonicSense ultrasonic sensors, which allow it to navigate shallow-water zones as low as 8 inches. This enables it to move across varied pool layouts without breaking the cleaning path, maintaining continuity from surface to floor.

That consistency removes the need for manual correction after each cycle, which is where most of the effort tends to go. For users looking for reliable cleaning that holds up through regular use, this is where the system begins to justify itself not just as an upgrade, but as something that delivers ongoing value over time.

JetPulse turns surface cleaning into an active process

Surface debris is one of the most persistent issues in pool maintenance, especially during summer use when leaves, dust, and particles return quickly. Most robotic systems rely on passive movement, collecting debris only when it drifts into range, which often requires multiple cycles to achieve visible results.

The Sora 70 takes a more active approach through its JetPulse system. A twin-jet mechanism generates directed water flow that pulls floating debris toward the intake, allowing it to be captured earlier in the cycle rather than after repeated passes. This shortens the time between cleaning and usability, which matters more during periods of frequent use. Instead of waiting for the pool to settle, it stays ready with fewer interruptions, supporting a setup that is easier to maintain without repeated intervention.

HydroBalance maintains consistent suction across the entire cycle

In many robotic cleaners, suction performance drops as the cleaning cycle progresses, which leads to uneven results and often requires additional runs to fully clear the pool. That inconsistency becomes more noticeable during regular use, when debris accumulates quickly and cleaning needs to be reliable rather than repeated.

The Sora 70’s HydroBalance system is designed to maintain a steady flow throughout the cycle. A center-mounted pump creates a direct, low-resistance path, while a high-efficiency motor sustains 6,800 GPH suction without drop-off. The 6.7-inch intake reduces clogging, and the bottom-hugging design helps retain suction close to the surface being cleaned. This allows debris to be removed in a single pass, reducing the need for additional cleaning cycles and making the system easier to depend on as part of a regular pool routine.

Filtration that supports both routine cleaning and higher-precision results

Alongside debris removal, the Sora 70 is built to handle the difference between visible cleaning and actual water clarity. A 6L, 150-micron debris basket captures leaves, insects, and larger particles during everyday use, allowing longer cycles without frequent emptying and keeping routine maintenance consistent.

When finer particles become more noticeable, particularly during periods of frequent use, an optional 3-micron ultra-fine filter captures dust, pollen, and algae spores that are not always visible during standard cleaning cycles.

By maintaining the same cleaning process while improving the level of filtration, the system avoids adding extra steps while delivering a more refined result. That consistency becomes part of its long-term value, particularly for homeowners who want a setup that continues to perform without added effort, and for those considering a more considered purchase that improves how the pool is maintained over time.

Retrieval that does not interrupt the process

Retrieval remains one of the most inconvenient parts of robotic cleaning. The process often requires manual handling at the end of each cycle, which breaks the sense of automation. The Sora 70 addresses this through Smart Water-Surface Parking and One-Touch App Retrieval. At the end of a cycle, it rises to the surface and moves toward the pool edge, where it can be accessed without additional effort.

The SmartDrain system releases excess water before lifting, reducing weight and making handling easier. This keeps the experience consistent from start to finish, without reintroducing effort at the final step, which is often where automation tends to fall apart.

Built for longer use, not just shorter cycles

Pool cleaning needs to keep up with usage, especially during summer when the pool is used more frequently. The Sora 70 is powered by a 10,000 mAh battery that supports up to seven hours of surface cleaning or five hours of full-pool cleaning, allowing it to cover up to 3,230 square feet in a single cycle.

Its cordless design removes the need for cable management, improving ease of use in active outdoor environments. This makes it easier to treat as part of a regular setup rather than a task that needs planning, which is where most systems start to feel limiting.

A shift that fits how pools are used through the season

Pool usage changes once the season is in full swing, with expectations moving beyond basic cleaning toward maintaining a space that stays ready without repeated attention. Bringing surface cleaning, walls, and the pool floor into a single system allows the Sora 70 to remove the need for managing separate steps, keeping the overall setup consistent even during periods of regular use without adding to the workload.

That difference becomes more relevant when the decision moves from solving an immediate problem to choosing a system that continues to deliver over time. For homeowners upgrading an outdoor space, the Sora 70 works as a high-value addition that improves how the pool is used without adding complexity. It also translates naturally into a premium, practical gift for pool owners or new homeowners, where the value comes from reducing a recurring task rather than introducing another one.

With Anniversary pricing from May 9 to 25, where it is available at $1,149, down from $1,499, the timing aligns with peak pool use. The shift toward less manual work and a more reliable setup becomes easier to act on, making it a relevant upgrade for the season as well as a considered purchase that continues to deliver beyond it.

Sora 30: a smart upgrade for consistent everyday cleaning

Building on the approach established by Beatbot’s Sora 70, the Sora 30 focuses on the parts of pool cleaning that define everyday use, delivering consistent results without moving into full 4-in-1 automation. It is designed for users who want dependable cordless pool cleaning that reduces manual effort while keeping the system simple to operate.

Its 3-in-1 cleaning across floor, walls, and waterline ensures routine maintenance is handled in a single cycle, with dual roller brushes supporting stable wall climbing and consistent contact across surfaces. The filtration system captures both larger debris and finer particles within the same pass, helping avoid repeat runs, while a runtime of up to five hours allows most residential pools to be cleaned without interruption.

Coverage extends to shallow zones such as steps and ledges, and smart surface parking brings the unit to an accessible point for retrieval, with the fully cordless design removing cable management altogether and making repeated use easier to manage over time.

As part of Beatbot’s Anniversary offer from May 9 to 25, the Sora 30 is available at $699, down from $999, positioning it as a clear step up from entry-level cordless pool cleaning. It works both as a smart upgrade for everyday use and as a practical, high-value gift for pool owners or new homeowners, delivering less work, more pool time, and a setup that holds up through regular use.

AquaSense X: a premium system for low-intervention pool care

Extending beyond the Sora series, Beatbot’s AquaSense X is designed for users who want pool cleaning to operate with minimal involvement, moving from consistent maintenance into a more automated, system-led approach.

It brings complete, all-zone coverage into a system built around advanced pool robotics, combining floor, walls, waterline, and surface cleaning with filtration and water clarification. Automated debris handling reduces the need for manual emptying, while intelligent navigation ensures consistent coverage across the entire pool without requiring supervision, shifting the experience from managing cleaning cycles to relying on a system that runs with minimal input. This makes it particularly relevant for larger pools or setups that see frequent use, where consistency and reduced intervention matter more than isolated cleaning performance.

As part of Beatbot’s Anniversary offer from May 9 to 25, the AquaSense X is available at $3,999, down from $4,250, positioning it as a flagship upgrade within advanced pool robotics. It also works as a premium, high-value gift for homeowners investing in outdoor spaces, delivering less work, more pool time, and a system that continues to perform without constant attention.

AquaSense 2 Ultra: AI-powered cleaning for complex pool environments

Positioned within the premium segment, the AquaSense 2 Ultra introduces HybridSense AI-powered mapping, enabling precise navigation, obstacle detection, and adaptive path planning across complex pool layouts. Its 5-in-1 cleaning system covers surface, floor, walls, waterline, and water purification, while HybridSense AI mapping helps reduce cleaning time by up to 50% through more efficient coverage. ClearWater natural clarification improves water clarity alongside debris removal, and side brushes enhance surface cleaning performance, ensuring that both visible and fine particles are addressed within the same cycle.

Adaptive path planning allows it to navigate multi-level platforms and irregular pool shapes more effectively, while remote control functionality provides flexibility when needed. Once cleaning is complete, the system returns to the pool edge automatically for easy retrieval without manual handling.

Available at $2,649, with $501 off as part of Beatbot’s Anniversary offer from May 9 to 25, the AquaSense 2 Ultra stands out as a compelling premium upgrade for users looking to step into AI-driven pool cleaning. It balances reduced cleaning time, complete coverage, and advanced automation, making it easier to maintain a high-quality pool setup with less ongoing effort.

A more complete way to approach pool care this season

This lineup works because each system is aligned to a clear level of effort reduction. The Sora 70 brings full coverage into a single system. The Sora 30 simplifies everyday cleaning into a more consistent routine. The AquaSense range extends that further into automation and intelligent control.

With the Anniversary Campaign running from May 9 to 25, the decision shifts from comparing features to choosing how much of the process to remove. Whether it is replacing manual cleaning, consolidating multiple tools, or moving toward a more automated setup, the current pricing makes that shift easier to act on now.

For pool owners preparing for the season, or for those looking at a more meaningful, high-value gift, this is a moment where upgrading becomes a practical decision. Whether it is about reducing ongoing effort or making the pool easier to use day to day, the Sora 70 aligns with a simple outcome that defines summer use at its best, less work and more time in the water.

There are probably a few old Fire TV Sticks still plugged into TVs across the country, collecting dust and loading just slowly enough to make you wonder whether it’s time to replace them. According to a proposed class-action suit filed in California, that sluggishness isn’t an accident. The suit alleges that Amazon deliberately ended software support for first- and second-generation Fire TV Sticks without adequately disclosing its plans to do so, effectively pushing functional hardware into early obsolescence and steering frustrated owners toward buying newer models.

The plaintiff named in the suit, Bill Merewhuader, filed in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, said he purchased two second-generation Fire TV Stick devices from Best Buy in 2018, four years after the company debuted its first Fire TV Stick. Merewhuader said that a few years later, he experienced slower streaming speeds, difficulty navigating menus and long load times. 

He eventually was unable to use the device. He purchased new Fire TV Sticks in 2024, according to the filing.

Merewhuader says in the complaint that Amazon intentionally made older devices perform poorly to spur hardware upgrades and “bricked” Fire TV devices “before the expiration of their useful life.” 

A representative for Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Lawyers for the plaintiff said they had no further comment beyond the legal complaint.

Streaming devices are getting older

Popular streaming devices from big tech companies have been around for nearly two decades. Apple debuted AppleTV in 2007, and Roku followed the next year. Google’s Chromecast, which evolved streaming devices from set-top boxes to plug-in dongles, launched in 2013. Amazon followed up the next year with its Fire TV box and plug-in stick, released later in 2014.

As earlier generations of devices from these tech companies age, it’s common for them to lose functionality, as they can’t run newer apps or access certain features. For instance, Apple’s first Apple TV box is all but inoperable today and was eventually replaced with Apple TV 4K streaming boxes.  

Read more: Google Will Pay $135M to Android Phone Owners. Learn Who’s Eligible and How to Get Paid

The filing partly hinges on allegations that Amazon did not inform buyers that Fire TV Stick devices would lose functionality or become inoperable over time, and that the performance of early devices did not match the promises Amazon made in its marketing.

The proposed class action would be open to anyone who resides in the US and who still owns a first- or second-generation Fire TV Stick as of Jan. 1, 2023, or April 1, 2023, respectively. 

Password resets are often the first response to a suspected compromise. It makes sense; resetting credentials is a quick way to cut off an attacker’s most obvious path back in.

However, that doesn’t always completely solve the issue. In both Active Directory (AD) and hybrid Entra ID environments, password changes do not immediately invalidate the old credential across every authentication path.

Even a short window is an opportunity that potentially allows attackers to maintain access or re-establish a foothold.

For security architects and IT administrators, this gap has real implications during incident response.

The password reset gap

Windows systems cache password hashes locally to support offline logon. If a device hasn’t reconnected to the domain, it may still hold the previous credential in a usable form. In hybrid environments, there can also be a short delay before the new password syncs to Entra ID.

This means there are three possible states created after a password reset:

1. The user has logged in with the new credential while connected to AD. The cached credential store updates, invalidating the old hash.

2. The user has not logged in to a particular machine since the reset. The old cached credential may still be usable for certain authentication attempts.

3. In hybrid deployments, the password has been reset in AD but the new hash has not yet synchronized to Entra ID. The old password may still authenticate during the password hash synchronization interval.

How attackers exploit the gap

Cached credentials

Attackers take advantage of cached password hashes with methods like pass-the-hash, where the hash itself is used instead of the plaintext password. If that hash was captured before the reset, changing the password doesn’t immediately invalidate it everywhere.

Limiting that exposure is crucial to defending AD environments. Solutions like Specops uReset enable secure self-service password resets by enforcing end-user ID verification to reduce the risk of reset abuse.

When combined with the Specops Client, uReset can update the local cached credential store immediately on the device where the reset is performed, closing the window where the old hash remains usable on that endpoint.

This doesn’t remove identity drift entirely, but it does reduce exposure at the network edge, where corporate laptops and remote systems are frequently targeted.

Active sessions

AD authentication is primarily handled through Kerberos tickets, which are valid for a set period of time. If a user or attacker already has a valid ticket, they can continue accessing resources without re-entering a password.

That means an attacker with an active session remains authenticated even after the password has been changed. In some cases, that window is long enough to establish additional persistence or move laterally.

Unless sessions are explicitly invalidated, through logoff, reboot, or ticket purging, access can continue well beyond the reset itself.

Service accounts

Unlike user accounts, service accounts tend to have long-lived passwords, with elevated privileges tied to critical systems. Attackers can expose those credentials through techniques like Kerberoasting or discover them when moving laterally through a network.

Because these accounts are tied to running services, they’re less likely to be reset quickly, especially if there’s a risk of disruption. That makes them a reliable fallback for attackers after an initial access point is closed.

Ticket attacks

As mentioned above, in environments using the Kerberos authentication protocol, access is controlled through tickets rather than repeated password checks. If an attacker can forge those tickets, they don’t need valid credentials at all.

A Golden Ticket attack, made possible by compromising the Kerberos Ticket Granting Ticket account, allows attackers to create valid ticket-granting tickets for any user in the domain. Silver Tickets are more targeted, granting access to specific services without contacting a domain controller.

In both cases, these attacks effectively bypass password changes. Resetting user passwords won’t invalidate forged tickets, and access can continue until the underlying issue is addressed.

Permissions

AD is heavily driven by Access Control Lists (ACLs). If an attacker grants a compromised account (or a new one they control) rights like resetting passwords for other users, they’ve effectively created a backdoor. Even if the original password is changed, those permissions remain.

Furthermore, accounts protected by AdminSDHolder (like Domain Admins) inherit permissions from a specific template. Attackers who modify the ACL on the AdminSDHolder object can ensure their permissions are re-applied every hour by SDProp.

How to ensure attackers are removed

The time between a password reset and it synching across AD and Entra ID is small, typically just a few minutes, which severely limits the opportunity attackers have to exploit the gap. Forcing more frequent synchronizations is also possible, for instance turning on AD Change Notification or manually initiating a Sync to the Entra ID tenant.

However, the gap still exists, and by the time an account compromise is discovered, attackers may have been able to establish additional footholds. If password resets aren’t enough on their own, defenders need to look at fully closing off access.

That starts with invalidating anything already in play. Active sessions should be terminated, and Kerberos tickets cleared by forcing logoffs or reboots on affected systems. For more serious compromises, resetting the KRBTGT account (twice) is often necessary to invalidate forged tickets.

Next comes credential hygiene beyond standard user accounts. Service account passwords should be rotated, especially those with elevated privileges, and any cached credentials on endpoints should be cleared as systems reconnect.

Just as important is reviewing what’s changed in the directory itself. That means auditing:

• Group memberships
• Delegated rights and ACLs
• Privileged accounts and roles

Look for anything that could allow access to be re-established without relying on a password.

For serious breaches, there isn’t a single step that guarantees eviction. It’s a combination of cutting off sessions, rotating the right credentials, and verifying that no hidden access paths remain.

Secure your AD today

Hardening your AD requires every account to be protected by strong passwords, combined with a secure reset process that limits opportunities for abuse.

Specops helps you do both, giving you confidence that password resets strengthen your security rather than introduce new gaps.

Book a demo to see how our solutions can support your identity security strategy.

Sponsored and written by Specops Software.

The surveillance infrastructure tracking American drivers has grown far more sophisticated than most people realize. What began as simple plate-logging technology has evolved into AI systems capable of identifying faces, flagging unusual travel patterns and building detailed movement profiles — all without the knowledge of the people being watched. Companies such as Flock Safety now operate in communities across 49 states, and their data is accessible to thousands of law enforcement agencies, including federal immigration enforcement, according to civil liberties groups. State legislatures are among the few institutions actively writing rules around how these systems can be used, and what those rules say (or don’t say) have real consequences for your privacy on the road.

That raises a large question: What are the best privacy protection laws? I wanted to provide more details for anyone wondering what to support or what their state is currently doing. One challenge is that every state is different, and there’s no clear guide on what privacy laws work and which have flaws.

I spoke to Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel and lead for the American Civil Liberties Union’s surveillance work, to find the best examples. These laws are making the biggest difference in our privacy. 

“Collective action, rather than individual action, is required,” Marlow told me. “I would caution that while Flock is the most problematic ALPR company in America, there are many other ALPR companies, like Axon and Motorola, that present serious privacy risks, so switching from Flock to Axon/Motorola ALPRs at best may constitute minimal harm reduction, but it is far from a solution.”

Which of today’s laws are a better solution? This is a “throw everything against the wall and see what sticks” situation. Let’s talk about what’s sticking. 

The best laws on the books for limiting new surveillance technology

Current privacy laws focus on two recent capabilities of local law enforcement: ALPRs, or automatic license plate readers, that can identify and track cars, and drone surveillance equipped with AI cameras. Security companies, such as Flock, are also starting to offer more traditional cameras that can provide live views and track people from the ground.

With AI features like Flock’s “Freeform” technology that let police enter any type of search they like to see what cameras bring up, these are powerful tools, and new legislation is required to address them. Let’s go over several categories of laws that make a difference. 

Laws restricting the use of AI detection features

Some of the broadest laws tackle what AI cameras are allowed to do at all. These laws don’t specifically target ALPR cams or drones, but they do limit the searches that police and commercial entities can make. 

Illinois has long been the best example of these privacy laws with its BIPA, or Biometric Information Privacy Act that protects personal ID like fingerprints and facial data, and requires written consent if a company wants to use them. 

That law is so far-reaching that certain camera features like Google Nest’s Familiar Faces technology is completely blocked in Illinois, along with some of Flock’s recognition features. Cities can pass similar legislation, too: Travel to Portland, Oregon and you’ll find that certain facial recognition features won’t work there, either. 

The one issue with laws like these is that they don’t include license plate and vehicle data, at least not yet. That information, which is closely tied to your name and address, needs to be protected by additional legislation or added onto existing biometric laws. So far, the former is more common: California is the only state I’ve noticed that now includes ALPR data as “personal information” for its privacy laws. 

Laws that ban what details police cameras can see

States are also passing new types of laws that allow the use of ALPR cameras, but ban those cameras from being able to record and pass along personal information, or at least make that information confidential in some way — including Florida and New Hampshire. 

These laws can ban cameras from seeing details like the people inside a car, for example, limiting them only to a license plate. Companies like Flock advertise the ability of their cameras to notice other descriptive details above a vehicle such as bumper stickers or roof racks, so laws like these can hamper the use of such AI detection. 

In a related note, states may add stricter authorization steps for police cameras. For example, rules that require the police chief to sign off on any search using ALPRs make it less likely that the data is misused when collected.

Laws that limit the use of ALPRs to certain police activities

A number of states have created laws that allow the use of license plate and AI cameras, but only for specific purposes, such as ongoing investigations involving a murder or kidnapping. Some states have very strict limits on how these cameras can be used, while others have much broader descriptions. 

Laws like these keep ALPR cameras out of the hands of businesses, HOAs and similar organizations, who would otherwise be able to contract with companies like Flock Safety. They may also block cameras from being used in certain areas, such as on public highways. 

Laws requiring that any data collected by cameras be deleted within a certain timeframe

One of the most effective surveillance laws for protecting privacy is the requirement to delete any footage caught by these cameras unless its actively being used in a confirmed investigation. That means police can’t make unauthorized searches or share that data with outside organizations after a certain time.

Laws like these also prevent police departments from creating long-term files about people they want to keep an eye on and note their routines and behaviors. As Marlow said, “The idea of keeping a location dossier on every single person just in case one of us turns out to be a criminal is just about the most un-American approach to privacy I can imagine.”

New Hampshire has the most stringent laws here, requiring the collected data to be deleted within 3 minutes if not used, a far shorter timeline than most, but one the ACLU agrees with.

“For states that want a little more time to see if captured ALPR data is relevant to an ongoing investigation, keeping the data for a few days is sufficient,” Marlow told me. “Some states, like Washington and Virginia, recently adopted 21-day limits, which is the very outermost acceptable limit.” Marlow warned that the longer police keep this data, the easier it is to build patterns of life “that can eviscerate individual privacy.” 

I’ve also seen states with laws that require ALPR data deleted after several years, but at that point it’s largely useless, as the data could easily be compiled and moved to other platforms by then. 

Laws banning police from sharing data outside of the state

States like Virginia and Illinois have passed laws making it illegal to share any ALPR or related data outside the state, including with federal agencies. These laws are typically targeted at the Department of Homeland Security and ICE, which (along with the FBI and other agencies) have been known to request data from local police Flock cameras or be granted backdoor access to Flock search systems. 

Laws that keep data from going out of state prevent that — as long as there are ways to track data transmission and enforce the law — which is difficult. “Ideally, no data should be shared outside the collecting agency without a warrant,” Marlow said, “But some states have chosen to prohibit data sharing outside of the state, which is better than nothing, and does limit some risks.”

States like Minnesota have also added requirements to make ALPR searches public so that citizens can check what searches the police have made, an important step for accountability that’s still rare for this technology.

Laws requiring state approval and office certifications for any ALPR camera

There’s another option to manage these high-powered cameras — subject them to an approval process by the state before contracts and installation. The tricky part is that approval process can look completely different depending on the state. 

In Texas, for example, a license is required but these seem relatively easy to obtain — although not everyone has followed that law. 

Vermont, however, enacted a series of laws to create a lengthy approval process to ensure ALPR cameras could only be used in certain circumstances and that the data was tightly controlled. This approval process was so thorough that local organizations decided to pass altogether: By 2025, no law enforcement agency in the state was using ALPR cams.

Laws requiring warrants before launching surveillance drones

In the past year, I’ve seen a new concern on the rise in neighborhoods in addition to ALPR cameras. There are now surveillance drones equipped with cams that can recognize vehicles or human features (beards, hats, shirt colors and so on) and follow people automatically. Those have required a further set of laws to address. 

States including Alaska, Idaho, Utah and Texas have laws specifically requiring a warrant before drones are used for surveillance. Technically, this should prevent the use of Flock’s automatic drone launches for things like gunshot detection or 911 calls, but local law enforcement appears to have found ways around these laws due to exemptions and other loopholes.

It’s worth noting my state nearly nuked its drone warrant requirements with new legislation in 2025, which ultimately failed to pass, a reminder that the rules are always up for change.

Keep an eye on the legislation in your state

New laws are subject to frequent challenges, including companies such as Flock or local police departments outright ignoring them. That requires extensive legal action to address and a buildup of case law that can take years, not mention methods of investigation and enforcement by the state that may not currently exist. 

Proposed legislation can also be subject to many changes, even if it’s likely to be passed, so the details can shift. That means if you want to see specific bans or privacy requirements in your state, you should track ongoing legislation as it passes through approval stages, and continue to contact your senators and representatives.

If you’re not sure what’s in a law, it’s important to read it carefully or find analysis by a legal expert to learn more. Many lesser laws I didn’t include on this list have lots of carveouts, exceptions and latitude in how surveillance cameras can be used, rendering them fangless for privacy purposes.

But that’s not all you can do. I’ve also seen the rise of advocacy initiatives like The Plate Project from the Institute of Justice that you can join, contribute to or just read up on to do more. And don’t forget about the local level — voicing concerns at a city council forum could help limit surveillance contracts before they even begin. 

For more information, check out if your landlord can watch you with a security camera, and if it’s legal to record audio and video in your own home. 

BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan have the mandate. Maturities run from three years to 25 years.

The trade follows Alphabet’s record Swiss issuance in February and Amazon’s $37bn dollar deal in March, and is the latest demonstration that hyperscalers are now multi-currency borrowers.

Amazon is preparing its first-ever Swiss franc bond issuance, Bloomberg reported on Monday, in a six-tranche deal that stretches across three-, five-, seven-, ten-, fifteen- and twenty-five-year maturities.

BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, and JPMorgan have been mandated to run the books. Amazon has not yet disclosed the size of the trade; pricing is expected later this week.

The trade is the most visible sign yet that the largest US hyperscalers have crossed a threshold in their funding strategy. A US dollar bond programme is no longer sufficient on its own.

The capital required to fund AI infrastructure has become large enough that Big Tech treasurers are now actively diversifying into euros, sterling, and Swiss francs, often within the same multi-currency programme, to broaden their investor base and to capture pockets of demand that the US market alone cannot satisfy at acceptable rates.

Amazon’s path into the Swiss market follows a well-trodden one. Alphabet sold more than CHF 2.75bn (roughly $3.6bn) across five maturities in February as part of a multi-currency drive that included sterling, euro, and a rare 100-year US dollar bond.

That Swiss tranche was the biggest-ever corporate bond sale in the Swiss market. Caterpillar and Thermo Fisher Scientific have both used the same market in the past eighteen months.

What Amazon adds to that list is scale: with roughly $200bn of capex planned for 2026 according to CEO Andy Jassy’s recent comments, the company’s incremental funding requirement runs to multiple tens of billions per year.

Six tranches across the Swiss curve is consistent with a treasurer trying to lock in long-duration capacity rather than to fund a specific project.

On 10 March, Amazon raised about $37bn across eleven tranches in the US bond market. That trade was followed shortly afterwards by a EUR 14.5bn deal split across multiple tenors.

The combined dollar-and-euro raise was, at the time, the largest single funding event in the company’s history. Demand on the dollar trade was reported to have run roughly four times the size sold.

Pricing on the long end came inside Treasury yields by margins that would have been inconceivable for the company a decade ago.

The Swiss franc issuance now extends that pattern into a third currency and a market structure where issuance costs typically run materially below dollar equivalents for similarly-rated borrowers.

The arithmetic behind the issuance is straightforward. Amazon Web Services is growing AI-related revenue at the high end of the hyperscaler range, but the capex required to support that growth is sufficiently lumpy that the company has chosen to pre-fund a significant share through long-duration debt rather than to draw down cash reserves.

That choice is being made simultaneously by Alphabet, Microsoft, Meta and Oracle. Combined hyperscaler debt issuance ran past $121bn in 2025 and is on pace to top that figure by mid-2026; the $650bn of combined Big Tech AI capex now planned for 2026 is the operating-budget number that explains the funding-side urgency.

Investor reception of these trades has been consistently strong. The four largest US hyperscalers all retain credit ratings in the AA range, which gives them access to the deepest pools of institutional fixed-income demand at margins that no private-market financing structure can match.

The largest 2025 trades were oversubscribed by margins that would have looked unusual in any other sector; Amazon’s March dollar trade ran roughly 4x covered.

The Swiss franc market is smaller in absolute terms (the all-currency corporate market clears around CHF 60-70bn a year by Refinitiv tracking), but the rate environment, with Swiss yields running materially below US dollar and euro equivalents, makes it commercially attractive for issuers whose absolute funding needs can be split across currencies.

The currency-strategy logic is genuinely diversification rather than yield optimisation. A multi-currency programme reduces dependence on any single investor base, gives a treasurer flexibility about which tranches to access in periods of regional volatility, and lengthens the average maturity profile by tapping markets where long-duration demand is particularly deep.

Amazon’s choice of a 25-year tranche at the long end of this Swiss deal is consistent with that strategy. Three, five, seven and ten-year tranches give the company belly-of-curve flexibility.

The fifteen and twenty-five-year pieces match insurance and pension demand that is harder to source in equivalent size in dollars.

The wider question, which the cleaner trades of the past three months have made more rather than less acute, is how long the supportive funding environment lasts.

Hyperscaler bond issuance has been running at a pace that even bullish analysts had not modelled at the start of 2025. Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan have estimated that the sector may need to issue as much as $1.5 trillion of additional debt over the coming several years to fund the AI build-out at planned pace.

That figure assumes capex continues to grow on its current trajectory; if AI revenue growth lags those expectations, the credit metrics underpinning the AA ratings could come under more scrutiny.

The cash-generation strength behind Alphabet’s market-cap rise is part of the story that has kept the credit picture intact so far, but it depends on operating cash flow continuing to scale with the build.

Amazon’s specific position remains comfortable. The company generated approximately $100bn of free cash flow in fiscal 2025 against group capex of about $80bn, with the gap funded from existing cash reserves and incremental debt.

AWS’s operating margins have stayed above 30%, the highest in the segment. The credit spread on Amazon’s recent dollar issuance was in line with that of higher-rated peers, and the Swiss franc trade is expected to price comfortably inside the broader US dollar curve.

That Alphabet’s earlier $10bn bond sale, then the company’s largest and cheapest, was, in its time, considered the standard-setting hyperscaler funding event.

Amazon’s current programme is, in dollar terms, several multiples of that size and is unlikely to be the largest such trade for very long.

What the Swiss issuance does not yet answer is whether AI revenue scaling will eventually justify the issuance pace.

Amazon’s bond investors are taking the company’s AWS-plus-retail combined cash-flow profile as collateral for the AI build, not the AI revenue itself, which remains too early in its monetisation curve to support credit metrics on a standalone basis.

That is the same bet Alphabet, Microsoft, and Meta are asking their bond books to take. The premise has worked through 2025 and into 2026.

Whether it works through to the back half of the decade depends on what AWS, Google Cloud, and the various large-language-model product lines deliver in revenue over the same window.

For now, the Swiss tranche prices when it prices, and Amazon adds a fourth jurisdiction to a treasury programme that increasingly looks more like that of a sovereign issuer than a corporate one.

The company has yet to issue in yen. On the current trajectory, that is a question of when rather than whether.