I’ve been using GoPro’s Mission 1 Pro action camera for a few weeks now. I’m not quite ready to slap a final verdict on it, but I’ve definitely learned a few things that are worth knowing if you’re considering buying one. I’ve tested a range of features, from the new slow-motion mode to shooting 50 megapixel stills, and it’s impressed in some ways — and left me wanting more in others. 

But I’m not yet ready to give it a review score. The reason being that I’ve had a very early sample with unfinished software that isn’t representative of how it might work if you went and bought one. My first model even had a pre-production lens, which was changed on the second unit I received. So while there are some things I’ve been able to test, it’s not fair to the camera to base my review off what I’ve seen so far. 

But here’s what I can tell you.

How much is the Mission 1 Pro?

The Mission 1 Pro is on sale now for $700. Then there’s the base Mission 1, which has the same large sensor and new processor of the Pro model but lacks the slow-motion skills. It costs $500. At the top of the range is the Mission 1 Pro ILS, which has the same specs as the model I’ve been testing but uses an interchangeable micro four thirds lens mount — a first for any GoPro. 

The ILS model — due out later in the year — will also cost you $700. It’s the model I’m most excited about, but I’ll get into that later. 

Why is the Mission 1 Pro exciting? 

The Mission 1 Pro’s got a new GP3 image processor and a larger 1-inch sensor. GoPro says it offers better dynamic range and low-light performance. More importantly, it offers an astonishing 960fps frame rate for slow-motion video and 8K open-gate recording, meaning it captures footage using the entire sensor. 

Those are potent specs from a device that still fits in the palm of your hand and is fully waterproof, even without a dive case. 

Is the Mission 1 Pro slow motion good? 

On paper, very. It can shoot at an astonishing 960 frames per second, which is the sort of speed you’d normally only get from dedicated slow-motion cameras. But there are caveats. First, it’ll only capture this footage at full HD, so if you’re working on a 4K or 8K project, you’ll need to upscale that footage and you could potentially lose quality as a result.

Advertisement

It also only shoots in short bursts of 10 seconds at a time, so you’ll need to get your timing right if you want an epic shot; you can’t simply leave it running for minutes and hope you get the shot. But I don’t think that’s a problem. It’s important to keep in mind that slowing 10 seconds of 960fps footage to a 30fps timeline results in roughly five minutes of slow-motion video. 

My preferred slow motion is shooting at 240fps, which the camera can achieve at 4K resolution and in its Log color profile for better color grading in post production. That 240fps frame rate still offers an impressive 8x slow-motion effect when played back at 30fps and goes well beyond what even my professional Canon R5 or Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K Pro can achieve.

What is the general Mission 1 Pro video quality like?

Here’s where I can’t really answer with any certainty. The footage I’ve shot so far has been hit and miss. I’ve found the auto white balance to be a bit unreliable, often producing slightly unnatural colors and forcing me instead to shoot using manual white balance — which, to be honest, I would probably want to do anyway to ensure consistent colors in a shot. 

I also sometimes found the image processing went a bit too far in brightening shadows and saturating the color, resulting in more of an HDR look than I would have wanted. It’s why I’d rather shoot my footage mostly using in the 10-bit Log profile, which gives me more flexibility for adjusting my footage in post production. 

Overall, image quality seems solid, though not noticeably better than the already excellent Hero 13 Pro it replaces. The biggest upgrades in this model appear to be aimed at those who want more advanced slow-mo capabilities.

That said, it’s important to remember that I’ve installed at least four firmware updates during my testing and only received the final production hardware a few days ago. I haven’t yet had the chance to re-test it in a wide range of scenarios. It’s certainly off to a good start, but whether it does enough to justify an upgrade from the previous model remains to be seen once I’ve spent more time shooting in both daylight and low-light conditions.

How about still images?

They’re fine, at least based on my tests so far. The super-wide angle lens means that fine details aren’t great, but if you’re into capturing those huge, sweeping vistas on your travels, then it’ll be fantastic. It shoots in DNG raw and my advice is to use it: Having manual control over the colors has been critical for me, as has the ability to pull back shadow and highlight detail in Adobe Lightroom. 

What about battery life?

Again, it’s impossible to say with certainty at this point as the software updates will certainly play a big part in how energy efficient the camera is. However, the battery life from the new Enduro 2 battery already seems solid. Even after a long day out shooting footage on the levada walks on the stunning island of Madeira, I still got back to my lodgings with plenty of battery to spare. 

What new accessories are there for the Mission 1 Pro? 

There’s a new camera cage that comes with a detachable grip and a sort of shutter button that fits into the cold shoe slot. While it makes the usually very small camera a lot bigger, it also makes it easier to hold and operate more like a regular compact digital camera. 

GoPro has also announced a set of wireless microphones which will natively work with the cameras without the need for external receivers — much like DJI does with its mics and Osmo cameras. I haven’t tried these yet, but for content creators and vloggers these will likely be a must buy. 

What about the interchangeable lens Mission 1 Pro ILS?

This is the model I’m most excited about. While the specs on paper for the Mission 1 Pro are awesome — especially when it comes to slow motion — I’m generally not a fan of the super-wide angle, fixed-focus look achieved by “traditional” action cameras like this. Sure, they’re great if you want a big field of view when strapping one to your head and hurling yourself down a mountain on a bike, but GoPro cameras have never challenged traditional filmmaking. 

But strap on a high quality micro four thirds lens from the likes of Panasonic, Olympus or Voigtlander and now you’ve got a proper setup capable of high-speed shooting at a range of focal lengths, adjustable focus and shallow depth of fields for cinematic bokeh –all from a camera body small enough to slip into your jacket pocket.

I’m genuinely excited about spending some real time with the Mission 1 Pro ILS and seeing whether GoPro can truly play in a more professional cinematography arena. 

Should you buy the GoPro Mission 1 Pro?

I’m still in the early days of testing but I can say a few things with certainty. The 960fps slow-motion mode is an amazing headline, but its application is arguably quite niche. I struggled to even find things to shoot and was only really happy with a brief clip of a pigeon flapping its wings. Think hard about whether that sort of slow motion is really important to you, especially considering its limitations.

Beyond the slow-mo skills, the overall quality that I’ve seen so far isn’t leaps and bounds beyond what the company offers from its Hero 13 camera. So if you already have a recent GoPro and mostly use it to shoot at 4K at a standard 24, 30 or 60fps, then I don’t think you’ll see much benefit. But for those of you upgrading from a much older model — such as the Hero 7 — you’ll certainly see the boost in quality.

The real excitement will come when the ILS model arrives and we’re able to pair that larger image sensor and slow-motion skills with a professional-standard lens. Stay tuned for that.

Microsoft is testing a new Defender for Endpoint capability that will automatically isolate compromised endpoints to thwart attackers’ attempts to move laterally across the network.

This is now available in preview mode and works as part of automatic attack disruption, a feature designed to contain attacks, limit their impact, and provide security teams with more remediation time.

Compromised endpoints that are automatically isolated are disconnected from the network to reduce the risk of further impact, but they retain connectivity to the Microsoft Defender for Endpoint service, which will continue to monitor the device.

“When a device in your organization is suspected to be compromised, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can automatically isolate the device as part of automatic attack disruption,” Microsoft said.

“Automatic isolation helps reduce the risk of further impact on the organization, limit attacker lateral movement, and prevent impacts such as data exfiltration and ransomware propagation.”

Automatic device isolation works only on onboarded end-user workstations managed by Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

​As Microsoft explained, they can also be released from containment at any time by security operators after completing the incident investigation and mitigating the risks.

To release a device from automatic isolation, select the device from the “Device inventory” or open the device page and select “Release from isolation” from the action menu.

Nearly four years ago, in June 2022, Microsoft also announced that admins could manually contain compromised, unmanaged Windows devices by cutting off incoming and outgoing communication with onboarded Defender for Endpoint endpoints.

Microsoft also began testing device isolation support for Defender for Endpoint on onboarded Linux devices in January 2023, with the capability reaching general availability in October 2023.

The same month, it revealed that Defender for Endpoint could also isolate compromised user accounts as part of automatic attack disruption to block lateral movement in hands-on-keyboard ransomware attacks.

More recently, Microsoft began testing another new feature for the Defender for Endpoint enterprise endpoint security platform that automatically blocks traffic to and from undiscovered Windows endpoints, preventing attackers from breaching other non-compromised devices on the network.

Earlier this month, it revealed another Defender for Endpoint preview feature that will allow admins to schedule antivirus scans on onboarded Linux systems using the Microsoft Defender portal, mdatp managed JSON configuration, or the mdatp command-line tool.

“Scheduled scans support daily quick scans, interval-based quick scans, and weekly full scans, with options for low-priority execution, idle-time scheduling, and randomized start times,” it said.

Automated pentesting tools deliver real value, but they were built to answer one question: can an attacker move through the network? They were not built to test whether your controls block threats, your detection rules fire, or your cloud configs hold.

This guide covers the 6 surfaces you actually need to validate.

Download Now

Data breach notification service Have I Been Pwned says a data breach at convenience store chain 7-Eleven affects over 185,000 people, including their names, dates of birth, and physical addresses.

The data breach, reported in April, also included phone numbers and email addresses.

Have I Been Pwned, which collects caches of data breaches and alerts affected individuals that their data was compromised, said in a new listing that 7-Eleven was the victim of a hack-and-extortion attack. The ShinyHunters group took credit for the breach, saying they would publish the data if they weren’t paid.

Per a listing with Maine’s attorney general’s office, 7-Eleven chief information security officer Jim Kastle said the hackers gained access to an internal server containing franchisee documents. A separate listing with Massachusetts’ attorney general said the breach also included Social Security numbers and driver’s licenses.

Spotify is expanding its offerings with a pretty wide selection of narrated long-form magazine articles from several publications that are most likely already familiar to you. The audio streaming service has announced that it’s adding over 650 long-form articles to its audiobook library. While all the pieces it added are in the English language only, they will be available in all of Spotify’s regions where audiobooks are available. 

The articles included in this rollout include pieces from Rolling Stone, The Atlantic, Vogue, Variety, Billboard, Vibe, GQ, WIRED, Vanity Fair and Pitchfork. Spotify has teamed up with more publications, but as you can see, the curated collection offers articles on topics subscribers are most likely interested in, namely music and technology. “With Articles, we’re introducing long-form journalism in audio as a natural extension of the music, podcasts, and audiobooks people already come to Spotify for, focused on topics we know they love,” said Colleen Prendergast, Licensing Lead at Spotify Audiobooks. Prendergast also said that by offering subscribers shorter formats to listen to, the hope is for them to interact more with books, particularly the audiobooks in Spotify’s library, over time. 

Each narrated article Spotify has released is under two hours long, and subscribers can listen to them against their audiobooks listening time. A Spotify Premium subscription includes 15 hours of audiobook listening time a month. Voracious readers can purchase top-ups, however, such as the Audiobooks+ monthly add-on with higher listening time limits. They can also just purchase individual articles to listen to for $2 each. 

The company said in its announcement that the narrated articles it released were produced in-house by the Spotify Audiobooks team. We’ve asked Spotify for clarification whether that means the narrations were done by human talents or generated using AI, and we’ll update this post when we hear back. 

Spotify announced several generative AI-focused updates during the company’s investor day last week. One of the features it’s launching next month in the US will allow users to generate personal podcasts directly within Spotify by drawing from the user’s profile and any file they upload, including PDFs and URLs. It’s also launching “Prompted Playlists” for audiobooks, which can create playlists based on user’s prompts describing what they want to hear more of and their listening history. 

The war over forever chemicals in cookware has seen celebrity chefs, major cookware makers, and state legislatures enter into battle. Now, a new front has opened over advertising claims.

Cookware company Caraway is alleging that “Big Cookware” is using a lawsuit to try to “silence” the company, which rose to prominence making forever-chemical-free pans. Caraway recently launched a marketing campaign in response to a lawsuit filed in February by two large pan makers, which claims that Caraway is harming their reputation by marketing its products as free of “toxic” chemicals—despite never mentioning either company by name.

The lawsuit, filed by Groupe SEB USA and Meyer in the Southern District of New York, claims that Caraway’s marketing around forever chemicals, a colloquial term for per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS), is harmful to the industry as a whole. Caraway’s marketing materials, the two companies say in the suit, is not grounded in scientific fact and “has caused immense and continuing harm to consumers, to Plaintiffs, and to other cookware and bakeware companies in the marketplace.”

In response to questions from WIRED, Carmine Zarlenga, a lawyer at Mayer Brown representing Groupe SEB USA and Meyer in the case, sent over a press release. “Claiming to be a smaller company is no defense to false advertising—all companies large and small have the same rights and obligations under federal and state false advertising laws,” Zarlenga said in the release.

The lawsuit is the latest attack on anti-PFAS advocacy by two of the largest companies in the global cookware industry. In 2024, as more than two dozen state legislatures weighed bans on consumer products with PFAS in them, Groupe SEB, the parent company of Groupe SEB USA, and Meyer formed the Cookware Sustainability Alliance, an advocacy group for the industry. That group has actively opposed bans, including signing letters and testifying in statehouses.

Last fall, facing a bill in the California legislature to ban consumer products containing PFAS, celebrity chefs, including Rachael Ray, Marcus Samuelsson, and David Chang sent letters to the legislature opposing the bill. (Ray and Chang have cookware lines affiliated with Meyer, while Samuelsson serves as a “chef partner” for All-Clad, which is owned by Groupe SEB. WIRED sought comment from All Clad, Ray, Samuelsson, and Chang. All four did not respond.) The bill ultimately passed the legislature but was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom.

“The Cookware Sustainability Alliance focuses on state-level advocacy to protect perfectly safe cookware from being swept into overly broad PFAS product bans,” the group’s president, Steve Burns, told WIRED in an email. “We are not a party to any lawsuit at this point.”

Last year, the Cookware Sustainability Alliance challenged claims made by Caraway through the National Advertising Division (NAD), an independent nonprofit that is often linked with the Better Business Bureau National Programs that self-polices the ad industry. The alliance challenged some of the claims in Caraway’s advertising around PFAS.

The NAD ruled that Caraway could continue to advertise its products as “nontoxic” and “PFAS-free,” but it should avoid specific claims in its advertising, including that other nonstick cookware “can release toxins into your food and home during ordinary, manufacturer-recommended use.”

Caraway, the February lawsuit alleges, continued to use that messaging despite the NAD decision. The company says that most examples of advertising highlighted in the lawsuit simply state that its products are nontoxic and that it fully complied with the NAD’s recommendations. But the suit also claims that Caraway “has not taken down many of the relevant advertisements.” In a memo to support a dismissal motion, Caraway alleged the NAD did not provide “any factual support whatsoever to the element of consumer deception.”