from the these-are-not-serious-people dept

You might recall that when political news website Semafor entered the media industry on the back of $25 million in private money, they made all kinds of promises about how they were somehow going to revolutionize U.S. media. In reality most of their promises were relatively inane, and it didn’t take long before the outlet demonstrated it was primarily interested in propping up the status quo.

Case in point: one of the very first things the outlet did is start hosting “Restoring Trust In Media” annual conferences. Except each year they make it a priority to unironically validate, normalize and platform a lot of the people actively working to undermine trust in news. Like former Fox News propagandist Tucker Carlson the first year, and overt bigot Megyn Kelly last year.

Semafor keeps being criticized for not only not helping to “restore trust in media,” but for actively making the problem worse. But they keep doubling down. This year’s event, for example, is a who’s who of people that have made U.S. media immeasurably less trustworthy over the last year:

So you’ve got FCC boss Brendan Carr, an authoritarian zealot who has been wiping his ass with the First Amendment. You’ve got Mathias Dopfner, the owner of Politico whose feckless “both sides” reporting and apparent admiration of Trump has helped normalize authoritarianism. You’ve got Matt Murray, the Washington Post Editor who is helping Jeff Bezos throw the paper’s reputation in the toilet in service to Trumpism and corporate power.

You’ve also got Hamish McKenzie, the Substack co-founder who has openly coddled white supremacists and fascists for engagement cash. A few folks from Fox News, arguably the biggest and most successful right wing propaganda operation ever created. And then some representatives for Meet The Press, another stellar example of generally feckless establishment “both sides” or “view from nowhere” access journalism.

When Semafor co-founder and editor-in-chief Ben Smith has been criticized for this in the past he’s pretty consistently been strangely obtuse, insisting these are important people who need interviewing.

But none of the attendees are ever meaningfully pressed. Tucker Carlson wasn’t pressed at all at his role as propagandist. Megyn Kelly isn’t pressed for her grotesque levels of racism and race-baiting engagement clowning. Key figures at Washington Post or Politico aren’t asked serious questions about their role in normalizing authoritarianism.

The Semafor reporting and interviews that come out of these events are generally toothless. For example this piece about Brendan Carr, one of the most extreme anti-free-speech zealots to ever lead the agency (who destroys consumer protection standards in his free time), never really seriously explains why anything he’s been doing is even particularly controversial. In fact it starts like this:

“US Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr on Wednesday praised CBS under the new leadership of David Ellison and Bari Weiss.

“I think they’re doing a great job,” Carr said at Semafor’s Restoring Trust in Media event Wednesday, adding that he appreciates the network is “trying to do something different” and experimenting with new formats.”

Advertisement

Real hard hitting stuff there, guys.

The result is a sort of bizarre pseudo-journalistic credibility kayfabe, punctuated by conferences purportedly dedicated to a subject the hosts and attendees either don’t understand or lack the credibility to be candidly honest about.

Also please note how Semafor doesn’t think it’s important to invite literally anybody from the worker-owned independent media that’s actually trying to restore trust in U.S. journalism. Not a single independent journalist (Marisa Kabas would be a good choice) with anything interesting or useful to say about where traditional corporate media may have genuinely gone wrong over the last few years.

The great irony is that Semafor can’t be honest about eroding trust in media because that would involve criticizing consolidated corporate media and the extraction class. It would require criticizing increasingly-consolidated Republican ownership of media for propaganda purposes. It would require being honest about the fact that journalism probably shouldn’t be a traditional for-profit venture.

Being honest about any of this would upset financiers, sources, ownership, and a big swath of ad-clicking viewership. You can’t have that, so instead you get this bizarre, performative simulacrum of what integrity and meaningful introspection is supposed to look like.

Filed Under: ben smith, brendan carr, integrity, journalism, mathias dopfner, matt murray, media, propaganda, restoring trust in media

Companies: semafor

Apple has promised a “big week” for the company, which includes an in-person event for press and creators on March 4. But it didn’t exactly wait until Wednesday to get things started. The news started on Monday with the announcements of the iPhone 17e and M4-powered iPad Air.

We’ll be updating this roundup throughout the week as we learn exactly what Apple has in store for everyone (though we have a decent idea of what to expect, such as new MacBooks). For now, though, here’s our recap of everything Apple announced on Monday:

iPhone 17e

Apple has spruced up this year’s entry-level iPhone with some pretty solid upgrades, though it’s keeping the starting price at $599. The iPhone 17e has double the base storage of the iPhone 16e at 256GB. It also has MagSafe support with Qi2 wireless charging speeds of up to 15W, double that of the iPhone 16e.

Design-wise, Apple hasn’t exactly rocked the boat. The iPhone 17e looks pretty much identical to its predecessor. It appears that Apple is sticking with the same 48MP Fusion camera system as it used in the iPhone 16e too.

That said, the 6.1-inch Super Retina display has Ceramic Shield 2. According to Apple, this provides “3x better scratch resistance than the previous generation and reduced glare.” The company slotted its C1X cellular modem into the iPhone 17e as well. It says this is up to two times faster than the C1 that was in the iPhone 16e. The device has the same A19 chip as the iPhone 17, so it supports Apple Intelligence AI tools, and it runs iOS 26.

In addition, the iPhone 17e has an IP68 rating for water and dust resistance, as well as the promise of “all-day battery life.” It also supports satellite-powered features including Emergency SOS, Roadside Assistance, Messages and Find My.

Pre-orders for the iPhone 17e open on March 4 and it will be available in black, white and soft pink. The device will hit shelves in more than 70 countries and regions on March 11.

iPad Air M4

The latest iPad Air boasts Apple’s M4 chip. That means the mid-range iPad is effectively remaining a year behind the iPad Pro. The M4 is almost two years old at this point, while the top-end model has the newer M5 chip. Still, if you only use an iPad for casual tasks like watching shows, web browsing, email and so on, the M4 will be more than powerful enough. It will be more adept at handling resource-intensive tasks like video editing than previous iPad Air models too.

Apple has also bumped up the RAM from 8GB from the last-gen model to 12GB. Given the sharp increase in RAM prices in recent months, it’s slightly surprising that Apple is sticking to the same prices for the iPad Air. The 11-inch M4 iPad Air starts at $599 while the 13-inch version starts at $799, each with 128GB of storage. There’s a $50 discount for those buying it for educational use.

Apple claims the M4 delivers up to 2.3 times faster performance compared with the M1 iPad Air and “over 4x faster 3D pro rendering with ray tracing performance.” Of course, the new iPad Air runs iPadOS 26.

Apple gave the iPad Air other internal upgrades by including its N1 and C1X connectivity chips. As such, this is the first iPad Air with Wi-Fi 7 support. As you might expect, 5G cellular connectivity is available as well.

The design of the M4 iPad Air doesn’t seem to have changed, as it appears to have the same LCD display Apple used in the last two iterations of the tablet. The company has stuck with the same rear-facing camera and dual-speaker setup as well.

As with the iPhone 17e, pre-orders for the M4 iPad Air open on March 4. The tablet will hit retailers in 35 countries and regions on March 11. It will be available in blue, purple, starlight and space gray.

In the last week, both Samsung and Xiaomi have taken the wraps off their latest superphones, but only one of them has properly impressed me. I’ve spent weeks testing the Leica Leitzphone by Xiaomi ahead of its launch at MWC 2026 and I concluded that it’s the best camera phone I’ve ever used. I even gave it a CNET Editors’ Choice award because it has been so damn impressive — and I think Samsung should be worried. 

Samsung’s Galaxy S26 Ultra is a jack-of-all-trades phone, packing a supercharged processor, a funky privacy screen and that all-important S Pen stylus. But its cameras only saw small improvements, with a slightly larger aperture on the main and telephoto cameras being the most notable upgrades. Beyond that, it really comes down to Samsung’s various software AI tricks, like the ability to change the style of hat you’re wearing in a photo. 

Advertisement

This has become a trend for Samsung, with the last few Ultra phones only slightly iterating on previous camera setups, adding a few extra megapixels here and there but largely leaning into software updates to make up for a lack of hardware innovation. While Samsung’s top-tier phones have been among the best camera phones around, Xiaomi and Leica’s Leitzphone has shown what true photography innovation looks like. 

This camera beast packs a number of firsts. We’ll start with the LOFIC image sensor, which stands for Lateral Overflow Integration Capacitor and is basically a new type of sensor technology that improves dynamic range in a single image. It’s capable of taking gorgeous images in all conditions, including at night. Samsung was rumored to be considering LOFIC sensors for its phones (as is Apple) but evidently opted not to go down this route just yet. 

Advertisement

The Leitzphone is also among the first phones ever to use real moving lens elements in its telephoto zoom, allowing true lossless zooming rather than jumping only between specific zoom levels. It works well and a similar setup has been rumored to appear on the last few generations of Ultra, but it’s never actually happened. 

Then there’s the physical control ring around the Leitzphone’s camera, the stunning Leica colour profiles built right into the camera experience and the pristine quality of the Leica Summilux optics used in the lenses. 

By partnering with such a photography icon, Xiaomi has truly innovated its photography, delivering multiple firsts that genuinely improve the image-taking experience. As both a professional photographer and a genuine enthusiast myself, I’ve been blown away by the photos I’ve been able to shoot with the phone. 

But Samsung hasn’t excited me this time round. Its new generative AI tools might be fun gimmicks, but they’re not appealing to an actual photographer like myself. The S26 Ultra needs to be more than a cameraphone, of course — it needs to be “ultra” in every sense of the word. But Samsung’s latest model shows that proper photography isn’t a priority for the company. 

As such Samsung risks losing out on the huge number of photographers and content creators (both professional and amateur alike) who are instead going to be looking at rivals like Xiaomi for products that can live up to their imaging demands. 

By Ricardo Amper, Founder & CEO, Incode

Deepfakes are evolving and are no longer confined to misinformation campaigns or viral media manipulation. Most security teams already understand the deepfake problem; however, the more urgent shift is how synthetic media is being operationalized.

This fraud vector is being leveraged inside the identity moments that power the internet and economy – such as customer onboarding at a bank, driver onboarding for gig and delivery platforms, marketplace seller verification, account recovery, remote hiring, partner access, and privileged access workflows.

As more work and business is done remotely, identity has become a primary control point – and a primary target. Bad actors don’t only want to fool a selfie check; they want to impersonate a real person, establish durable access, and reuse that foothold across consumer and enterprise environments.

Cybersecurity and fraud teams are now dealing with a convergence of tactics that all aim at the same decision – the moment a system concludes “this is a real person”:

• High-fidelity synthetic faces and voices that can pass quick checks
• Replayed real footage from stolen or harvested sessions
• Automation that probes verification flows at scale
• Injection attacks that compromise the capture pipeline and substitute the input stream upstream

This is why “deepfake detection” alone is no longer enough. Enterprises need full-session validation: including perception, device integrity, and behavioral signals… all in a single, real-time control.

That is the model behind Incode Deepsight: an approach built to validate identity sessions end-to-end, not just evaluate the media in isolation.

The right question is not only “Does this face look real?” It is “Can we trust this entire session end-to-end?”

Deepfakes and injection are enterprise security issues

In enterprise systems, a successful bypass is not a reputation event; it’s an access event. When verification accepts a manipulated or compromised session as real, attackers can:

• Create fraudulent accounts using synthetic identities
• Take over existing user accounts
• Bypass HR verification in remote hiring
• Gain unauthorized access to sensitive internal systems

Unlike social media deception, these attacks can enable persistent access inside trusted environments. The downstream impact is durable: account persistence, privilege-escalation pathways, and lateral movement opportunities that start with a single false verification decision.

Where identity checks fail: assuming the sensor is trustworthy

Most identity checks are built around two signals: facial similarity and “liveness.” Both are useful,  and both can be undermined if the system assumes the input stream is authentic.

Attackers break that assumption in two complementary ways.

First, they mimic real media. Deepfakes and voice clones are improving under real operating conditions – short clips, mobile capture, compression, and imperfect lighting. A workflow that depends on a narrow visual surface area is increasingly exposed to false acceptance.

Second, they bypass the sensor entirely. Injection attacks substitute the input stream before it reaches analysis. Instead of presenting a face to a camera, attackers can:

• Use virtual camera software to feed synthetic or pre-recorded video
• Run verification sessions inside emulators designed to mimic legitimate mobile devices
• Operate from rooted or jailbroken devices that bypass integrity checks
• Substitute live capture with manipulated streams upstream

In these scenarios, the media can look perfect because it never had to survive a real capture path. That is why perception-only defenses (even strong ones) are necessary but not sufficient.

What the Purdue Political Deepfakes Incident Database benchmark shows

One practical problem for deepfake defense is generalization: detectors that test well in controlled settings often degrade in “in-the-wild” conditions.

Researchers at Purdue University evaluated deepfake detection systems using their real-world benchmark based on the Political Deepfakes Incident Database (PDID).

PDID contains real incident media distributed on platforms such as X, YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, meaning the inputs are compressed, re-encoded, and post-processed in the same ways defenders often see in production.

Key factors include:

• Heavy compression and re-encoding
• Sub-720p resolution
• Short, mobile-first clips
• Heterogeneous generation pipelines

Detectors were evaluated end-to-end using metrics such as accuracy, AUC, and false-acceptance rate (FAR). In identity workflows, FAR is often the more consequential metric, because even a small false-acceptance rate can allow persistent unauthorized access.

Purdue’s results also highlight a practical reality for defenders: performance varies dramatically across detectors once inputs look like production.

Among the commercial systems evaluated in Purdue’s PDID benchmark, Incode’s Deepsight delivered the strongest results when the task is purely visual deepfake detection – evaluating video content itself under real incident conditions.

But that is only the first layer of the problem.

It’s important to be precise: PDID measures robustness of media detection on real incident content. It does not model injection, device compromise, or full-session attacks.

In real identity workflows, attackers do not choose one technique at a time; they stack them. A high-quality deepfake can be replayed. A replay can be injected. An injected stream can be automated at scale.

The best media detectors still can be bypassed if the capture path is untrusted. That’s why Deepsight goes even deeper than asking “Is this video a deepfake?”

Deepsight closes that gap by validating the full session across three layers: perception, integrity, and behavior, so that the system can stop attacks whether they arrive as a convincing deepfake, a replay, or an injected stream.

Manual review doesn’t close the gap

Human review can reduce some classes of fraud, but it is not a scalable security control against synthetic media.

Even trained reviewers struggle to determine real from fake as generative models improve.

Today’s injection attacks invalidate the premise and undermine human judgment entirely: a session can appear legitimate while the input stream is substituted upstream. Even consensus reviews among several experts cannot establish that the capture path was authentic.

The security model that holds up: trust the session, not just the pixels.

If attackers can win either by improving the media or by bypassing the sensor, defenses have to validate the session across multiple layers in real time:

• Perception: Is the media itself manipulated?
• Integrity: Is the device, camera, and session authentic?
• Behavior: Does the interaction reflect a real human and a normal verification flow?

This model creates resilience. If a high-quality deepfake evades perception, integrity and behavioral signals can still prevent a successful bypass. If media is injected, integrity checks can fail the session regardless of how realistic the pixels look.

How Incode Deepsight blocks deepfakes and injection attacks in real time

Attackers are scaling. They can iterate against verification flows quickly, probe edge cases, and operationalize what works. Deepfakes raise the baseline risk of false acceptance, injection removes the camera as a reliable sensor and automation increases the volume of attempts.

Enterprises that treat identity verification as a one-time check rather than a real-time security process will struggle to keep pace.

Incode Deepsight is designed around a simple premise: if identity workflows are being attacked at both the media layer and session layer, defenses must validate the entire verification session end-to-end.

During live verification, Deepsight combines three layers in real time:

• Perception analysis: Multi-modal AI that evaluates video, motion, and depth signals across multiple frames to detect synthetic media and physical spoofs. Deepsight also protects ID capture by detecting AI-generated identity documents.
• Integrity validation: Camera and device authenticity checks to identify and block injected media sources, such as virtual cameras, emulators, and compromised environments.
• Behavioral risk signals: Detection of automation indicators and bot-like interaction patterns that frequently accompany scaled attacks.

This layered model is what makes Deepsight resilient in practice. If a high-quality deepfake evades perception, integrity and behavioral signals can still prevent a successful bypass. If media is injected, integrity checks can fail the session regardless of how realistic the pixels look.

The goal is straightforward: determine whether the entire verification session can be trusted – not only whether a face looks real, but whether a real human is present on a trusted device in a live, untampered interaction.

Closing the gap between detection and deployment

Defending identity workflows now requires controls that assume adversarial AI and untrusted capture environments.

Deepfake defense must evolve from spotting manipulated pixels to validating the authenticity of entire verification sessions. Layered defenses across media authenticity, device integrity, and behavioral signals are the most reliable way to reduce false acceptance without adding unnecessary friction for legitimate users.

Learn how Deepsight blocks deepfakes and injection attacks in real time. incode.com/deepsight

Sponsored and written by Incode.

To mark Holi 2026, OPPO India has introduced festive offers on its Reno Series and Find X9 models. Customers will be able to take advantage of interest-free EMI options, zero-down-payment options, and other cashback benefits. These offers will be available for a brief period of time from March 1st to March 8th.

Festive Holi Offers

1. Zero Down Payment & Interest-Free EMI

2. Bank Card Cashback Benefits

To make upgrades more attractive, OPPO is offering customers up to 10% cashback on bank card transactions. These offers will be available for EMI and non-EMI transactions. The cards issued by SBI, Axis Bank, Bank of Baroda, Federal Bank, DBS, IDFC First Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, and Yes Bank are eligible for these offers.

3. 10% Cashback on UPI Transactions

OPPO is offering up to 10% cashback on UPI transactions during the Holi sale. This benefit helps reduce the overall purchase cost. At the same time, it encourages customers to use digital payment methods.

OPPO Reno15 Series

The OPPO Reno15 Series is built for those who love capturing colourful moments. The Pro Mini model features a 200MP camera, while the Reno15 comes with a 50MP main camera.

Both devices offer 3.5x telephoto zoom, PureTone Technology, and 4K HDR video recording. The Pop-Out feature makes photos look more dynamic. The Reno15 starts at Rs 41,399, and the Reno15 Pro Mini starts at Rs 53,999.

OPPO Find X9

The OPPO Find X9 combines premium imaging with festive offers, starting at Rs 69,499. It includes a Hasselblad-tuned triple camera system led by a 50MP Sony LYT808 sensor with OIS, supported by a 50MP ultra-wide and a 50MP Sony LYT600 3X periscope telephoto lens.

The phone sports a 6.59-inch 120Hz AMOLED display protected by Gorilla Glass 7i and carries an IP69 rating. With the MediaTek Dimensity 9500 chipset, a 7025mAh battery, 80W wired and 50W wireless charging, plus AI tools like AI MindSpace, AI Editor, and O+ Connect, it delivers a complete flagship experience.

OPPO’s special Holi deals are valid between March 1 and March 8, 2026. Since the campaign runs for a short time, buyers should plan their purchase accordingly.

Apple on Monday unveiled the latest version of its budget-friendly iPhone line. The iPhone 17e retails for $599 and will be available on March 11.

The smartphone comes with the A19 chip that’s found in the base iPhone 17, and will support Apple Intelligence. The base model comes with 256 GB of storage, which Apple says is twice the entry storage from the previous generation.

One of the most notable changes from the previous budget iPhone is the addition of MagSafe and Qi2, which supports wireless charging up to 15W.

The smartphone is available in black, white, and a new soft pink color.

Additionally, the iPhone 17e comes with C1X, Apple’s latest-generation cellular modem, which, the company says, is up to twice as fast as the C1 modem in the iPhone 16e, and uses 30% less energy.

As for the camera, the iPhone 17e features that same 48-megapixel camera as the iPhone 16e.

The iPhone 17e is rated IP68 for dust and water resistance, and its 6.1-inch Super Retina XDR display is protected by Ceramic Shield 2, which is said to offer trice the scratch resistance than the previous generation.

The iPhone 17e supports Emergency SOS via satellite, Roadside Assistance, and Find My.

Tai Neilson, a senior lecturer at Macquarie University explores how data has become a ‘hot commodity’ for companies training AI systems.

When the World Wide Web went live in the early 1990s, its founders hoped it would be a space for anyone to share information and collaborate. But today, the free and open web is shrinking.

The Internet Archive has been recording the history of the internet and making it available to the public through its Wayback Machine since 1996. Now, some of the world’s biggest news outlets are blocking the archive’s access to their pages.

Major publishers – including The Guardian, The New York Times, the Financial Times, and USA Today – have confirmed they’re ending the Internet Archive’s access to their content.

While publishers say they support the archive’s preservation mission, they argue unrestricted access creates unintended consequences, exposing journalism to AI crawlers and members of the public trying to skirt their paywalls.

Yet, publishers don’t simply want to lock out AI crawlers. Rather, they want to sell their content to data-hungry tech companies. Their back catalogues of news, books and other media have become a hot commodity as data to train AI systems.

Robot readers

Generative AI systems such as ChatGPT, Copilot and Gemini require access to large archives of content (such as media content, books, art and academic research) for training and to answer user prompts.

Publishers claim technology companies have accessed a lot of this content for free and without the consent of copyright owners. Some began taking tech companies to court, claiming they had stolen their intellectual property. High-profile examples include The New York Times’ case against ChatGPT’s parent company OpenAI and News Corp’s lawsuit against Perplexity AI.

Old news, new money

In response, some tech companies have struck deals to pay for access to publishers’ content. NewsCorp’s contract with OpenAI is reportedly worth more than $250m over five years.

Similar deals have been struck between academic publishers and tech companies. Publishing houses such as Taylor & Francis and Elsevier have come under scrutiny in the past for locking publicly funded research behind commercial paywalls.

Now, Taylor & Francis has signed a $10m nonexclusive deal with Microsoft granting the company access to over 3,000 journals.

Publishers are also using technology to stop unwanted AI bots accessing their content, including the crawlers used by the Internet Archive to record internet history. News publishers have referred to the Internet Archive as a “back door” to their catalogues, allowing unscrupulous tech companies to continue scraping their content.

The cost of making news free

The Wayback Machine has also been used by members of the public to avoid newspaper paywalls. Understandably, media outlets want readers to pay for news.

News is a business, and its advertising revenue model has come under increasing pressure from the same tech companies using news content for AI training and retrieval. But this comes at the expense of public access to credible information.

When newspapers first started moving their content online and making it free to the public in the late 1990s, they contributed to the ethos of sharing and collaboration on the early web.

In hindsight, however, one commentator called free access the “original sin” of online news. The public became accustomed to getting their digital editions for free, and as online business models shifted, many mid- and small-sized news companies struggled to fund their operations.

The opposite approach – placing all commercial news behind paywalls – has its own problems. As news publishers move to subscription-only models, people have to juggle multiple expensive subscriptions or limit their news appetite. Otherwise, they’re left with whatever news remains online for free or is served up by social media algorithms. The result is a more closed, commercial internet.

This isn’t the first time that the Internet Archive has been in the crosshairs of publishers, as the organisation was previously sued and found to be in breach of copyright through its Open Library project.

The past and future of the internet

The Wayback Machine has served as a public record of the web for more than three decades, used by researchers, educators, journalists and amateur internet historians.

Blocking its access to international newspapers of note will leave significant holes in the public record of the internet.

Today, you can use the Wayback Machine to see The New York Times’ front page from June 1997: the first time the Internet Archive crawled the newspaper’s website. In another 30 years, internet researchers and curious members of the public won’t have access to today’s front page, even if the Internet Archive is still around.

Today’s websites become tomorrow’s historical records. Without the preservation efforts of not-for-profit organisations like The Internet Archive, we risk losing vital records.

Despite the actions of commercial publishers and emerging challenges of AI, not-for-profit organisations such as the Internet Archive and Wikipedia aim to keep the dream of an open, collaborative and transparent internet alive.

By Tai Neilson

Tai Neilson is a senior lecturer in media at Macquarie University. His areas of expertise include the political economy of digital media and critical cultural theory. He is the author of Journalism and Digital Labor and a co-editor of the book Research Methods for the Digital Humanities.Tai has published work on journalism and digital media in Digital Journalism, Journalism, Media International Australia, Journalism and Media, Triple-C, Fast Capitalism, and the Global Media Journal.

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.

Claude appears to be having a major outage right now, with elevated errors reported across all platforms.

The incident was flagged on March 2, 2026, and it’s impacting users broadly rather than being limited to one app or region.

According to the latest status update, the team is still investigating the issue.

The first “Investigating” notice went out at 11:49 UTC, and a follow-up update at 12:06 UTC said the investigation is ongoing.

For now, that likely means you may see failed requests, timeouts, or inconsistent responses when trying to use Claude on web, mobile, or API.

There’s no ETA mentioned yet, but the status suggests it’s actively being worked on

Malware is getting smarter. The Red Report 2026 reveals how new threats use math to detect sandboxes and hide in plain sight.

Download our analysis of 1.1 million malicious samples to uncover the top 10 techniques and see if your security stack is blinded.

Download The Report