Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Tech

Top rated headsets for PlayStation

Published

on

Trying to pick out a new console headset can be tiresome at best and overwhelming at worst, with arguably too many options on the market. That’s why we’re here to show you all the best PS5 headsets currently available.

We have more than enough experience when it comes to gaming headsets as our team has reviewed countless models over the years, from the most premium variations all the way down to the cheap and cheerful options. Putting this experience to good use, we’ve curated this definitive list of all the best headsets we’ve ever tested for the PS5 console. 

Every headset that features on this list has been put through its paces by a member of our team for at least two weeks and has been used with a multitude of games. We ensure to evaluate as many aspects of the headset as possible, including audio quality, microphone performance and battery life, where applicable. 

Moreover, every headset on this list is compatible with the PS5 console through either a wired or wireless connection. Premium features like Active Noise Cancellation, 3D Spatial Audio and Haptic Feedback are also things that we keep an eye on in case you’re looking for a particularly immersive experience. 

Advertisement

Otherwise, if you’re more of an Xbox gamer then you’ll unsurprisingly be better off checking out our best Xbox headset list instead, while for a more general overview then our best gaming headset guide should have you covered.

Not sure if a gaming headset is right for you? Take a look at our list of the best headphones and best wireless headphones for alternative options.

Advertisement

Without further ado, read on to find out our top picks for the best PS5 headsets you can buy.

Advertisement

SQUIRREL_ANCHOR_LIST

Learn more about how we test headsets

We use every headset we test for at least a week. During that time, we’ll check it for ease of use and put it through its paces by using it in a variety of games, as well as playing music in order to get the full experience.

We also check each headset’s software (if applicable) to see how easy it is to customise and set up.

Advertisement

Advertisement


  • Great audio quality and adequate ANC

  • Intuitive usage and sleek looks

  • Stellar battery life

  • No cup swivel or collapsible design

  • Average headset microphone

With up to 70-hours of battery life, a premium design and excellent sound quality, the Alienware Pro headset is a brilliant choice for PS5 gamers. Although it doesn’t sport the same hardcore gamer aesthetic as others, lacking RGB or motifs, we see this as a good thing as it means you can comfortably wear them outside of your gaming room. 

Advertisement

Available in either black or white, the matte finish is non-reflective and barely shows any prints or smudges. Plus, at just 315g, the headphones are lightweight and comfortable enough to wear for prolonged periods – our reviewer even wore them during gym sessions.

Otherwise, the Alienware Pro headset is equipped with large 50nm drivers, ANC and a detachable boom microphone, plus 2.4Ghz wireless and Bluetooth for mobile devices too. That means you can hook them up to your PlayStation 5 wirelessly.

Regardless of whether you opt for 2.4Ghz wireless or Bluetooth, games and entertainment sound warm, detailed and sport plenty of direction separation. We found in certain titles like Overwatch 2 that the headphones allowed us to discern footsteps of incoming enemies, while in Resident Evil 2 the sound of occasional gunfire and nearby shuffles added depth to the overall gaming experience. 

It’s also key to remember that the Alienware Pro headset benefits from ANC too, which we found does exceptionally well when wearing the headphones out in public. That’s a brilliant addition that makes the Alienware Pro a more versatile headset.

Advertisement

If you’re looking for a PS5 headset that can be worn outside of gaming, then the Alienware Pro is our top choice.


  • Lots of connectivity options

  • Clear and crisp microphone on calls

  • Comfortable fit

  • Versatile and luxurious sound

  • High price point

  • Dated design

The AceZone A-Spire may not look as sleek as other options in this chart, but it still does a job, and it does it well.

Advertisement

Weighing in at 270g, the streamlined headset is exceedingly comfortable to wear over long periods – our reviewer used it for multiple 8-hour work days without complaint – with a flexible leather-clad headband and soft ear cushions that make it ideal for long gaming sessions eSports stars are known for.

Moreover, the microphone can be positioned just about anywhere and stay in place, with a green mark on the mic itself to properly align it to your face for optimal communication, and it flips out of the way when not in use. The headset also boasts a range of connectivity options, from USB to Bluetooth and even Aux to allow you to interface with multiple devices to deliver the lowest latency possible.

Importantly, the audio performance is impressive. The 40mm cans aren’t the largest around but they deliver impressive clarity nonetheless, and an accompanying app allows you to tweak the output further. There are even dedicated profiles for FPS games like Apex Legends created in-house at AceZone.

If you’re looking to get into the eSports world, the AceZone A-Spire is a great place to start.

Advertisement

  • Loud, clear audio

  • Decent looks

  • Relatively comfortable

  • Very plasticky

  • Some exposed wires

Great gaming headsets needn’t cost the earth, and the Turtle Beach Recon 70 is a great example of that. Coming in at a fraction of the price of some of the top-end options in this chart, the Recon 70 offers the core of what a gamer needs with the right compromises.

Clad in a sturdy plastic finish available in the signature blue and white colourway of PS5 accessories, the Recon 70 can certainly take a beating with decent flex in the construction and solid-looking wires that won’t snap after a few weeks of use. You’ll find a retractable mic with lift-to-mute tech, a volume wheel on the cups and a wired 3.5mm headphone jack for easy connectivity.

Advertisement

The audio isn’t to be sniffed at either; the cans delivered a solid balance between hectic explosions, ambient noise and dialogue lines in use, with easily distinguishable footsteps in the likes of Overwatch 2. Things could be improved somewhat in the bass department, but it’s not enough to be a cause for concern.

Sure, you won’t get premium features like ANC, customisable audio or wireless connectivity, but for the price, the Turtle Beach Recon 70 does the job.

Advertisement

  • Comfortable, lightweight fit

  • Versatile wireless connectivity

  • Strong battery life

  • Expensive for a mid-range headset

  • Very similar to the Logitech G522

If you’re a streamer then you’ll undoubtedly appreciate the versatility of a headset with a decent microphone. That’s where the Astro A20X Lightspeed Wireless shines.

Logitech uses the same 48KHz/16-bit option as the pricier Astro A50 X, which means the microphone results in crisp and clear capture, with a rich pickup that’s great for both comms and casual content creation work. Sure, one of the best microphones will provide stronger results, but the Astro A20X Lightspeed’s microphone is much more adept than many of the best gaming headsets.

Otherwise, the Astro A20X Lightspeed’s sound quality is generally impressive, with a bit more oomph to its bass compared to the G522. In fact, overall we concluded that its soundstage is decently wide and helps to accentuate details such as footsteps and gunfire with good placement.

The Astro A20Z Lightspeed also comes with a small PlaySync base station that handles 2.4GHz Lightspeed wireless connection. The base station is fitted with two USB-C ports which can be connected to a games console and PC simultaneously, which is pretty useful too. 

Advertisement

Finally, with red accents and the inclusion of customisable RGB lighting, the Astro A20X Lightspeed unmistakably looks the part as a gaming headset.


  • Comfortable fit

  • Warm and wide sound

  • Sublime ANC

  • Excellent battery life

  • Thick charging case

  • Connectivity is inconsistent

  • Mic is rather thin sounding

Gaming headsets are great, but what if you want something a little more compact? Maybe something you could also use on your daily commute to listen to music? Well, that’s where a new category of gaming earbuds comes in, and the Sony Inzone Buds are by far the best we’ve seen for PS5 gamers.

Advertisement

As you might expect, the Inzone Buds are pretty compact, sporting a mix of a matted and glossy finish that looks good – though you won’t find any gamer-esque RGB lighting here.

The key thing here is that the buds are much more comfortable to wear than traditional gaming headsets, with a design not too dissimilar to the AirPods Pro with a range of eartips to choose from. That also helps create a decent seal to maximise the ANC capabilities of the buds, which is some of the best around, gaming headset or not.

Connecting to PS5 via a 2.4GHz Wi-Fi dongle, there’s 0 latency compared to regular Bluetooth-powered TWS buds that’s perfect for gaming – especially compared with the spatial audio tech on offer that seriously widens the soundscape. Bass performance isn’t quite as impressive as over-ear cans, but that’s to be expected from such a small form factor.

Importantly, these can also double up as regular earbuds. And with similar tech to the top-end WF-1000XM5s, they do a pretty good job overall.

Advertisement

  • Big, meaty sound

  • Sturdy construction

  • Simple controls

  • Incredible battery life

  • Expensive

  • Lack of RGB may not please some

  • Lacklustre software

The HyperX Cloud Alpha Wireless headset features 50mm drivers and a purposeful and stylish design, according to our reviewer. We liked how sturdy and comfortable these cans were, with the blend of metal and smooth rubber on the earcups making it feel like a truly premium peripheral.

We also found the audio to be fabulous, offering a big, meaty sound profile, which works great for gaming. It supports DTS Headphone:X spatial audio, which we found provided some additional direction for in-game sounds and attacks.

Advertisement

And of course, the standout feature of this headset has to be the 300-hour battery. Our reviewer mentioned how this was tricky to test, though said how the battery never appeared to drain significantly, and how the headset didn’t need to be charged even after a week of usage.

We did note that the microphone was okay, with a clear but thin performance. This will still work well for most gamers, though it is slightly disappointing for the price.

So, if you are after a headset that offers a ridiculously long battery life and comes with impeccable audio, the HyperX Cloud Alpha Wireless is one of the best PS5 headset options available, even if it is on the expensive side.

Advertisement

  • PlayStation Link is a genuine connectivity upgrade

  • Planar magnetic drivers squeezed into £130 headset

  • Pillow-soft earcups are comfy and block out noise

  • Long battery life

  • Design won’t be for everyone

  • Sub-par Bluetooth audio performance

  • No ANC

There’s a lot to like about the original Pulse 3D headset that launched alongside the PS5, and while it’s definitely worth considering if you’re tied to a strict budget, it absolutely pales in comparison to the far superior PlayStation Pulse Elite.

This newer headset is a far more premium product in almost every way. For starters, it now boasts magnetic drivers which amplify audio quality to a noticeable degree, pairing perfectly with the immersive nature of PlayStation’s 3D audio. It’s surprising too to see magnetic drivers here as they tend to appear on pricier headphones, but to have them on the £129.99/$149.99 Pulse Elite is fantastic.

There’s even a retractable boom mic that allows your vocals to come through clearly to any of your teammates, and it also makes the Pulse Elite brilliantly suited for calls too. Speaking of which, it is possible to connect the headset to your phone although our reviewer noted that it presented a lesser experience in this area, particularly when listening to music. When listening to music on the PS5 however, the Elite did the job perfectly.

Advertisement

Part of the reason why the Elite headset works best with PS5 is because of the PlayStation Link software, which allows for a quick and seamless connection with your console. While it works brilliantly in execution, it does require a USB-A dongle in order to work, but it is included in the box.

There’s also a wall-mounted charger bundled in too, which serves as a handy place to put your Pulse Elite headset when it’s not in use. We found that a quick 10-minute charge could nab you two hours of audio playback in a pinch, but you’re unlikely to need a top-up midgame. Our reviewer was able to get through 10-hours of playtime with more than 50% battery still left in the tank.

Advertisement

Test Data

  Alienware Pro Headset AceZone A-Spire Turtle Beach Recon 70 Astro A20X Lightspeed Wireless Sony Inzone Buds HyperX Cloud Alpha Wireless PlayStation Pulse Elite
Battery discharge after 1 hour of gaming 1 %
1-100% charge time with included charger 120 Minutes
Frequency response 2020000 Hz

Full Specs

  Alienware Pro Headset Review AceZone A-Spire Review Turtle Beach Recon 70 Review Astro A20X Lightspeed Wireless Review Sony Inzone Buds Review HyperX Cloud Alpha Wireless Review PlayStation Pulse Elite Review
UK RRP £299 £30 £169.99 £179.99 £189.99 £129.99
USA RRP $227.99 $319 $179.99 $199.99 $199.99 $149.99
EU RRP €319 €200
Manufacturer Dell Turtle Beach Logitech Sony HyperX Sony
IP rating Not Disclosed No
Battery Hours 75 35 90 00 24 300 30
Fast Charging Yes
Size (Dimensions) 150 x 90.2 x 205 MM x x INCHES x x INCHES 262 x 87.2 x 177.5 MM -2 x x INCHES x x INCHES
Weight 315 G 270 G 244 G 298 G 13 G 335 G 2.44 LB
ASIN B09TRW57WB B0CMDH9M5W
Release Date 2024 2023 2023 2025 2023 2022 2024
First Reviewed Date 30/01/2024 23/10/2025 18/10/2023 22/04/2022 06/03/2024
Model Number CFI-ZHW2
Driver (s) 55mm 40 40mm 40mm Pro-G drivers 50mm Planar Magnetic Drivers
Noise Cancellation? Yes Yes
Connectivity 2.4Hz, Bluetooth 5.3, USB Bluetooth, Wired, 3.5 AUX 3.5mm wired 2.4GHz with PlaySync base, Bluetooth USB-C receiver, Bluetooth LE 2.4GHz PlayStation Link, Bluetooth
Colours White, Black White/blue, White, Black Black/Red black and white
Frequency Range – Hz – Hz 0.02 20 – kHz 20 20000 – Hz 20 20000 – Hz 15 21000 – Hz – Hz
Headphone Type On-ear Over-ear Over-ear True Wireless Over-ear Over-ear
Sensitivity 100 dB
Frequency response 2020000 Hz
Polar patterns Cardioid
Compatibility 3.5mm Xbox, PlayStation, PC, Nintendo Switch

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Tech

Following Artemis II’s Journey Around The Moon

Published

on

NASA is going back to the Moon! We’ll follow the crew of Artemis II every step of the way.

Day 1 – Liftoff!

After resolving a last-minute communications issue with the Flight Termination System (FTS), the Artemis II Space Launch System (SLS) rocket lifted off from Launch Complex 39B at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida at 6:35 PM EDT.

Main engine cutoff (MECO) for the SLS rocket occurred at 6:43 PM, placing the Orion spacecraft and crew members Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen safely into orbit around the Earth. Just before 7:00 PM, all four solar array “wings” were successfully deployed from the European Service Module.

Advertisement

The next major milestones are the perigee and apogee raise maneuvers — two engine burns which will put the Orion spacecraft into a higher orbit, necessary for the eventual trans-lunar injection (TLI) burn which will put the vehicle on course for the Moon.

NASA Live Stream

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

7 new horror movies on Netflix, Shudder, HBO Max, and more in April 2026

Published

on

The best streaming services have added plenty of new movies in April, and I was excited to see lots of horror titles among them.

April is a strong month for horror with some of the biggest franchises and originals available to watch from the comfort of your living room. The month is typically associated with pranks and comedies, but if you want something more macabre, I’ve got you covered.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

OldVersion Is Back, And Better Than Ever

Published

on

You know what they say — you can’t keep a good website down. OldVersion.com, the repository of outdated software that has been serving up old versions of tools you need for the last twenty-five years, is not going away as we reported last year. Not only is it sticking around, it’s gotten a retro facelift inspired by Windows 3.1 or OS/2. Mostly Windows, given the screensaver, but we’ll let you find that for yourself.

We’re thrilled to see that OldVersion has gotten the support they need to keep going after running into financial troubles. According to founder Alex Levine, some of that support came as a result of the Hackaday article reporting on the then-upcoming closure, so kudos to you guys for stepping up.

While we absolutely love the retro redesign of the new website, that’s one thing notably lacking — an obvious donation button. Well, that and old-school HTTP support so you can get on with your retromachines, but that, at least, is in the works according to the site roadmap. It’s a little weird that in this year of the common era 2026 you have to do extra work to give up on HTTPS functionality, but it is the way it is.

In the meantime, the site is fully usable as long as you have HTTPS capability, or go through a proxy. Perhaps you could use this ESP8266 code to get started making one, if you don’t want to embarrass your old computer by using something more powerful than it as a pass-through.

Advertisement

Speaking of proxies, if old versions of software aren’t enough for you, how about an old version of the internet? We heard you like old versions, so you can visit an old version of OldVersion!


Note that if you’re reading this after 01/04/2026, the look-and-feel of OldVersion.com may not match what’s depicted here.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

SpaceX Files Draft for Potentially Stratospheric IPO

Published

on

SpaceX is looking to the heavens for its upcoming initial public offering based on a $1.75 trillion valuation, according to confidential paperwork filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

As reported by Bloomberg, the draft IPO registration is the first step toward a possible June offering that could raise approximately $75 billion. The filing allows the company to get feedback from the SEC before the information is released publicly.

The IPO may be open to more people than just the wealthiest investors. According to a report by The Motley Fool, SpaceX plans to allocate around 30% of the initial shares to “retail investors,” meaning individual investors. Normal retail allocation tends to be around 10% of shares.

Advertisement

A SpaceX representative didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Why a SpaceX IPO is a big deal

Spaceflight is an incredibly expensive endeavor; SpaceX gets billions of dollars from the US government to launch satellites and help keep NASA’s programs running. Almost a year ago, the company set a target of launching every other day through the end of 2025 and ended up launching a record 165 orbital flights.

But SpaceX is no longer just a high-flying rocket company. Its Starlink division provides data access to homes, remote locations, airlines and direct to many mobile phones in areas where there’s no cellular coverage. It also recently acquired xAI, another of Elon Musk’s companies, and owns the social media site X (formerly Twitter).

It’s the AI angle that seems to be driving up the company’s valuation ahead of the IPO. The xAI all-stock acquisition valued the company and SpaceX at $1.25 trillion. This year, OpenAI and Anthropic PBC are also expected to go public.

Advertisement

Although those numbers are eye-popping, the company has plenty of challenges before it can get off the launchpad.

Starlink has announced a plan to send up new V3 third-generation satellites that should bring gigabit internet speeds to its network, but those won’t be ready until 2027. Getting them up requires SpaceX’s heavy-duty Spacecraft vehicle, which has had limited success in testing so far. In the meantime, its current Starlink satellites have been exploding in orbit as recently as this week.

And for xAI, the skies aren’t exactly clear despite the current fervor for all things AI. Musk announced in mid-March that “xAI was not built right first time around, so is being rebuilt from the foundations up.” And the company is being sued by three teen girls and their guardians for “devastating” harm caused by its Grok AI generating child sexual abuse images.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

WhatsApp notifies 200 users who installed fake app built by Italian spyware maker SIO

Published

on

WhatsApp has notified approximately 200 users, primarily in Italy, that they were tricked into installing a counterfeit version of the messaging app that was actually government spyware. The fake application was built by SIO, an Italian surveillance technology company that develops spyware for law enforcement and intelligence agencies through its subsidiary ASIGINT. WhatsApp said it had proactively identified the affected users, logged them out of their accounts, warned them about the privacy risks, and urged them to delete the fake client and install the official app from a trusted source. The company told TechCrunch it also plans to send a formal legal demand to SIO to halt any malicious activity linked to the campaign.

The disclosure, first reported by Italian newspaper La Repubblica and news agency ANSA, marks the second time in little more than a year that WhatsApp has publicly named a spyware vendor operating against its users in Italy. In early 2025, WhatsApp alerted around 90 users, including journalists and pro-immigration activists, that they had been targeted by Paragon Solutions, a U.S.-Israeli surveillance firm whose flagship product, Graphite, was deployed by Italy’s domestic and foreign intelligence services. That revelation triggered a political crisis in Rome. Italy’s parliamentary intelligence oversight committee, COPASIR, confirmed the use of Graphite and found that seven Italians had been targeted. Paragon subsequently cut ties with Italy’s spy agencies after the government declined to verify whether the spyware had been used against a specific journalist, Francesco Cancellato of the news site Fanpage.

SIO’s spyware operates through a different model. The malware, identified in its own code as Spyrtacus, is embedded in fake applications designed to look like legitimate software. Researchers have found 13 different samples of Spyrtacus dating back to 2019, with the most recent from late 2024. Previous versions impersonated Android apps from Italian mobile providers TIM, Vodafone, and WINDTRE, as well as earlier fake versions of WhatsApp itself. TechCrunch first exposed SIO’s Android distribution campaign in February 2025. The latest operation, targeting iPhones, represents an expansion of the tactic to Apple’s ecosystem. Once installed, Spyrtacus can steal text messages, chat histories, and call logs, as well as record audio and video directly from the device’s microphone and camera.

The delivery mechanism is as revealing as the malware itself. In Italy, authorities routinely obtain cooperation from mobile carriers, who send phishing links to their own customers on behalf of law enforcement. The target receives what appears to be a routine update notification from their provider, directing them to install what looks like a standard WhatsApp update. The Italian justice ministry has maintained a price list and catalogue showing how authorities can compel telecom companies to send such messages, a system that effectively turns the mobile network itself into a distribution channel for state surveillance tools. The cost of renting spyware in Italy is remarkably low: as of late 2022, law enforcement could access these tools for as little as €150 per day, without the large upfront acquisition costs that typically limit deployment in other countries.

Advertisement

Italy’s position as a spyware hub is unusual among Western democracies. Companies including Hacking Team, Cy4Gate, RCS Lab, and Raxir have all been based in the country, drawn by a legal framework that provides a formal statutory basis for the “captatore informatico,” or computer interceptor, effectively state-sanctioned trojan software. Fabio Pietrosanti, president of the Hermes Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights, has said that spyware is deployed more frequently in Italy than anywhere else in Europe because the low cost and permissive regulation make it accessible to a far wider range of law enforcement agencies than in neighbouring countries. The result is an ecosystem in which municipal police forces, not just national intelligence agencies, can commission surveillance operations against individuals.

Advertisement

WhatsApp spokesperson Margarita Franklin told TechCrunch the company could not yet confirm whether the 200 affected users included journalists or members of civil society. “Our priority has been protecting the users who may have been tricked into downloading this fake iOS app,” she said. The company did not specify whether it had referred the matter to Italian prosecutors or to any regulatory authority. Apple and SIO did not respond to requests for comment.

The legal landscape around commercial spyware has shifted substantially in the past year. In May 2025, a California jury ordered NSO Group, the Israeli maker of Pegasus, to pay WhatsApp $167 million in punitive damages after finding it had enabled hacks of approximately 1,400 users through zero-click attacks. A federal judge later reduced the award to $4 million but imposed a permanent injunction barring NSO from targeting WhatsApp’s infrastructure. NSO has appealed. WhatsApp’s parent company Meta described the verdict as a landmark, and it has since expanded its legal strategy against the broader surveillance industry. The formal legal demand WhatsApp intends to send SIO follows the same pattern: use litigation and public disclosure as deterrents against companies that profit from compromising encrypted messaging platforms.

The proliferation of spyware vendors presents a challenge that extends well beyond any single platform. Apple has sent mercenary-spyware threat notifications to users in more than 150 countries since 2021, alerting individuals it believes have been individually targeted by state-sponsored attacks. In April 2025, Apple notified the Italian journalist Ciro Pellegrino, one of the Paragon victims, that he had been targeted. The notification systems run by Apple and WhatsApp now represent the primary mechanism by which victims of government surveillance learn they have been compromised, a function that was once the exclusive domain of the cybersecurity industry’s specialist researchers.

The global lawful-interception market was valued at $4 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach $15 billion by 2032, growing at roughly 16 per cent annually. That growth is being driven not by the Pegasus-style zero-click exploits that attract headlines, but by the kind of low-cost, phishing-based tools that SIO sells. The barrier to entry for government surveillance has dropped to the point where a local police department in a midsize Italian city can commission the same class of spyware deployment that was once the preserve of national intelligence agencies. The gap between regulatory ambition and enforcement capacity in Europe means that the legal frameworks governing these tools have not kept pace with the speed at which they are being adopted.

Advertisement

What makes the SIO case distinct from the Paragon scandal is the method. Paragon’s Graphite used zero-click exploits that required no action from the target. SIO’s Spyrtacus requires the target to install a fake application, a social-engineering approach that relies on trust in the carrier and familiarity with routine app updates. The fact that Italian telecoms participate in the delivery chain, sending phishing messages to their own subscribers at the state’s request, turns the mobile infrastructure itself into an instrument of surveillance. It is one thing for a government to hack a phone. It is another for the phone company to help.

WhatsApp’s decision to publicly name SIO and notify the affected users follows the broader pattern of tech platforms asserting themselves as counterweights to state surveillance in ways that would have been unthinkable a decade ago. The company is not merely patching a vulnerability. It is identifying the vendor, alerting the victims, and threatening legal action, a posture that positions a messaging app owned by Meta as a more effective check on government spyware abuse than any European regulatory body has managed to date. Whether that dynamic is reassuring or alarming depends on your view of where the responsibility for protecting citizens from their own governments should ultimately rest.

For the 200 users in Italy who received WhatsApp’s notification, the immediate question is narrower: who authorised the surveillance, and on what legal basis? The answer may never become public. Italy’s lawful-intercept framework permits the use of these tools under judicial oversight, but the oversight mechanisms have repeatedly proven inadequate to prevent abuse. The Paragon scandal demonstrated that intelligence agencies could target journalists and activists under the cover of lawful authority. The SIO case suggests the problem runs deeper, extending to less prominent vendors, cheaper tools, and a distribution model that exploits the trust citizens place in their mobile carriers. The spyware industry does not need zero-click exploits to be dangerous. It just needs a convincing notification from your phone company.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

California Suspends Enforcement of Law Requiring VCs to Report Diversity Data

Published

on

Under a new state regulation, venture capital firms operating in California were supposed to submit demographic data about their portfolio companies, including the gender and race of startup founders they backed. But amid public criticism from some tech leaders, the California agency administering the new requirement suspended it just before the Wednesday deadline for firms to make their first disclosures.

“The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) has announced that it plans to initiate rulemaking in response to comments by various stakeholders relating to the Fair Investment Practices by Venture Capital Companies Law,” the state agency posted on its website in mid-March. “Implementation and enforcement of the [law] will be suspended pending completion of the rulemaking and until final regulations are in place.”

California lawmakers first passed the measure in 2023, and it was signed into law shortly thereafter by Governor Gavin Newsom. For decades, women and people of color have received only a small share of overall startup funding relative to their representation in the US population. Lawmakers hoped putting more public scrutiny on investment decisions would help foster greater equity in the market, including for people who are disabled, retired military, or LGBTQ+.

The law called for venture capital and some other investment firms to file annual reports starting March 1 of last year about the overall makeup of the founding teams they had invested in and the amount of money they provided to diverse founders. Firms were meant to collect the demographic data through a voluntary survey that was then anonymized. California authorities planned to publish the filings online. Lawmakers amended the law in 2024 to delay reporting until April 1, 2026 and enable the state to levy daily fines for noncompliance.

Advertisement

The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the authority it used to sidestep the deadline set by lawmakers. Newsom’s office also didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Financiers focused on funding entrepreneurs from underrepresented backgrounds had supported the law. But the National Venture Capital Association, the tech investment industry’s leading trade group, opposed it. The group argued that voluntary data collection would inflate diversity statistics and that publishing inaccurate data could lead to unfair attacks on investors genuinely trying to tackle diversity issues. Over the past year, the Trump administration has defunded and attacked diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives in both the public and private sectors, leading many businesses and organizations to pull back from them.

In February, the venture capital association wrote to Newsom asking for the reporting deadline to be pushed back again because, in its view, the state had bungled the process. California authorities didn’t publish the standardized survey founders were supposed to fill out until early this year and, at the time, they still hadn’t introduced a way for firms to register with regulators as required by the law, according to the association. “This administrative timeline creates an environment ripe for error and threatens to produce the misleading and counterproductive data we previously warned against,” association president and CEO Bobby Franklin wrote.

Last month, as the deadline for the first reports loomed, some entrepreneurs and investors began complaining on social media about the survey effort. “The latest California malarky is a requirement for venture investors to collect/report racial and gender statistics,” wrote Blake Scholl, the founder and CEO of venture-backed aviation startup Boom Supersonic. “I want to live in a world where merit matters—not skin color or what you have between your legs.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

New CrystalRAT malware adds RAT, stealer and prankware features

Published

on

New CrystalRAT malware adds RAT, stealer and prankware features

A new malware-as-a-service called CrystalRAT is being promoted on Telegram, offering remote access, data theft, keylogging, and clipboard hijacking capabilities.

The malware emerged in January with a tiered subscription model. Apart from the Telegram channel, the MaaS was also promoted on YouTube, via a dedicated marketing channel that showcased its capabilities.

Kaspersky researchers say in a report today that the malware features strong similarities to WebRAT (Salat Stealer), including the same panel design, Go-based code, and a similar bot-based sales system.

CrystalX also includes an extensive list of prankware features designed to annoy the user or disrupt their work. Despite its “fun” side, CrystalX offers a large set of data theft capabilities.

Advertisement
Telegram channel promoting CrystaX RAT
Telegram channel promoting CrystaX RAT
Source: Kaspersky

CrystalX RAT details

Kaspersky says that the malware provides a user-friendly control panel and an automated builder tool that supports customization options, including geoblocking, executable customization, and anti-analysis features (anti-debugging, VM detection, proxy detection, etc.).

The generated payloads are zlib-compressed and encrypted with the ChaCha20 symmetric stream cipher for protection.

The malware connects to the command-and-control (C2) via WebSocket and sends info about the host for profiling and infection tracking.

CrystalX’s infostealer component, which Kaspersky found to be temporarily disabled as it is being prepared for an upgrade, targets Chromium-based browsers via the ChromeElevator tool, Yandex, and Opera. Additionally, the tool collects data from desktop apps such as Steam, Discord, and Telegram.

The remote access module can be used to execute commands via CMD, upload/download files, browse the file system, and control the machine in real time via built-in VNC.

Advertisement

The malware also exhibits spyware-like behavior, as it can capture video and audio from the microphone.

Finally, CrystalX features a keylogger that streams keystrokes in real time to the C2, and a clipper tool that uses regular expressions to detect wallet addresses in the clipboard and replace them with ones the attacker provides.

Remote desktop function in CrystalX RAT panel
Remote desktop function in CrystalX RAT panel
Source: Kaspersky

Putting some “fun” in the package

What sets CrystalX apart in the crowded MaaS space is its rich set of prankware features.

According to Kaspersky, the malware can do the following on infected devices:

  • change desktop wallpaper
  • alter display orientation to various angles
  • force system shutdown
  • remap mouse buttons
  • disable input devices (keyboard/mouse/monitor)
  • show fake notifications
  • change cursor position on the screen
  • hide various components (desktop icons, taskbar, the Task Manager, and the Command Prompt executable)
  • Provide attacker-victim chat window

While the above features do not improve the attack’s monetization potential for cybercriminals, they certainly make the product distinctive, and could bait script kiddies and low-skilled/entry-level threat actors into getting a subscription.

Another reason for the prank features could be potential for victim manipulation, or even distraction, while the data theft modules run in the background.

Advertisement

To reduce the risk of malware infections, users are advised to exercise caution when interacting with online content and avoid downloading software or media from untrusted or unofficial sources.

Automated pentesting proves the path exists. BAS proves whether your controls stop it. Most teams run one without the other.

This whitepaper maps six validation surfaces, shows where coverage ends, and provides practitioners with three diagnostic questions for any tool evaluation.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

South Dakota GOP, Governor Get Their Voter Suppression On

Published

on

from the getting-the-fix-in dept

Because South Dakota governor Larry Rhoden is forever obligated to serve Kristi Noem and Kristi Noem is forever obligated to serve Donald Trump, he and his GOP buddies are making America MAGA again, starting with his home turf.

Non-citizens have never really disrupted voting. But they’re the convenient scapegoat for a party that’s justifiably worried it’s going to lose its majority during the mid-terms. Multiple efforts are being made all over the nation to disenfranchise anyone that’s not part of Trump’s most rabid voting base. Pretending people not allowed to legally vote are somehow flipping elections for the Democratic Party is more than merely obnoxious. It’s actually harming the democratic process.

Here in South Dakota, two laws have been passed in recent weeks with the express purpose of keeping non-white people from showing up to vote. The first, passed at the beginning of this month, allows any rando to claim a person they saw voting shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

Voters in South Dakota will soon be able to challenge other voters’ citizenship.

Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden signed legislation into law last week that authorizes challenges by individuals and election officials.

Advertisement

[…]

State law already allows challenges to a voter’s registration up to the 90th day before an election, if a person is suspected of lacking South Dakota residency, voting in another state or being registered to vote in another state. The new law adds citizenship as a justification for a challenge.

Challenges may be filed by the South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office, the auditor in the county where the voter is registered, or a voter in the same county. The challenge must be in the form of a signed, sworn statement and must include what the law describes as “documented evidence.”

Now, we can all see what the law is. But we all know how it will be applied. State employees with access to voter rolls will raise challenges against anyone with a foreign-sounding last name. While it’s unlikely few citizens will actually file challenges, they’ll certainly feel comfortable accosting anyone standing in line to vote whose skin is darker than their own. Given the inevitability of these responses, it’s easy to see the law accomplishing exactly what it’s supposed to: limit the number of non-white voters at the polls during the mid-terms and beyond.

Advertisement

But that’s not the only suppression effort signed into law this month. There’s also this one, which raises the bar for participating in the democratic process with the obvious intention of limiting participation to the sort of voters the GOP thinks with vote for it:

New voters in South Dakota will have to prove that they are United States citizens in order to cast a ballot in state and local races under a bill signed on Thursday by Gov. Larry Rhoden.

The new law, which does not apply to South Dakotans already on the voter rolls, comes amid a national push by Republicans to tighten voting rules and root out voting by noncitizens, which is already illegal and believed to be rare.

“This bill ensures only citizens vote in state elections, keeping our elections safe and secure,” said Mr. Rhoden, who is seeking election to a full term this year and is facing a crowded Republican primary field. 

It’s already illegal in South Dakota to vote if you’re not a citizen. This bill addresses a completely imaginary “problem.” And it forces voters to provide a passport, birth certificate, and other documents proving citizenship before they’re allowed to vote. While it may be easy for many people to present these documents, the simple fact is that they’ve never been asked to do this before, and anyone who’s not aware this law has been passed will be denied the opportunity to vote because the GOP decided to move the goalposts during an election year.

Advertisement

Non-citizens voting in South Dakota has never been an issue. The fact that 273 non-citizens were recently removed from the state’s voting rolls may seem a bit sketchy but there’s a good reason there might be a few hundred non-citizens with voter registrations:

Noncitizens can obtain a driver’s license or state ID if they are lawful permanent residents or have temporary legal status. There’s a part of the driver’s license form that allows an applicant to register to vote. That part says voters must be citizens. 

The problem is that this is all on the same form. The voter registration part of the form has a signature line, which many applicants will fill out and sign even if their intention is only to get a drivers license or ID card, especially since it appears before the final signature block for the entire application.

If applicants are not asked to affirmatively state their intention to register to vote (as the Department of Public Safety employees ask now, along with asking applicants to write “vote” on the form to signal their affirmation), their applications might be processed, along with the voter registration applicants didn’t realize they enabling.

The Secretary of State’s office (the office that’s supposed to be reviewing voter registrations for eligibility) threw the Department of Public Safety under the bus:

Rachel Soulek, director of the Division of Elections in the Secretary of State’s Office, placed blame on the department in her response to South Dakota Searchlight questions about the situation.

“These non U.S. citizens had marked ‘no’ to the citizenship question on their driver’s license application but were incorrectly processed as U.S. citizens due to human error by the Department of Public Safety,” Soulek wrote.

Advertisement

That’s not what happened. Their ID applications were processed and the Soulek’s department failed to catch the inadvertent errors. And it doesn’t really even matter who’s at fault because despite the errors, this is still a non-issue.

Soulek said only one of the 273 noncitizens had ever cast a ballot. That was during the 2016 general election.

A handful of clerical errors that resulted in a single illegal vote in the past decade cannot be a rational basis for a new law. And there’s a good chance the sole vote was made in error, rather than maliciously. After all, if the state told this person they could vote, who were they to question that determination?

This is nothing more than state governments stepping up to do what Trump can’t. His SAVE Act is stalled and lots of last-minute gerrymandering at the behest of the president is tied up in court. His loyalists are doing what they can to make his perverted dreams a reality in states that are most likely to lean Republican in the first place, which makes all of this as pointless as it is stupid. But the underlying threat to democracy remains, ever propelled forward by the people who claim to love America the most.

Filed Under: immigration, larry rhoden, racism, south dakota, trump administration, voter fraud, voter suppression

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Meta and YouTube lost landmark social media trials. That’s bad for free speech.

Published

on

This week, juries in California and New Mexico dealt a pair of landmark verdicts against America’s social media giants.

In Los Angeles, jurors awarded $6 million to a young woman who alleged that Instagram and YouTube had damaged her mental health. A day earlier, a jury in Santa Fe ruled that Meta had designed its social media platforms in a manner that harmed minors — and ordered the company to pay $375 million in recompense.

These decisions constituted a breakthrough for a legal movement that sees social media companies as the new “Big Tobacco” — an industry that knowingly peddles harmful and addictive products. And it was a triumph for advocates of “child online safety,” who believe that social media is corrosive to minors’ psychological well-being. With thousands of similar lawsuits pending, the California and New Mexico verdicts could prove to be transformative precedents.

Yet the decisions have also raised alarm bells for many free speech advocates. To organizations like FIRE — and civil libertarian writers like Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown — these decisions will do more to undermine free expression online than to safeguard young people’s mental well-being.

Advertisement

To better understand — and interrogate — this perspective, I spoke with Nolan Brown. We discussed how the recent verdicts could open the door to broader censorship, the evidence for social media’s psychological harms, and whether parents can sufficiently protect their kids from problematic internet use without the government’s help. Our conversation has been edited for clarity and concision.

You’ve written that these verdicts are “a very bad omen for the open internet and free speech.” How so?

One key protection for online speech is Section 230 of the Federal Communications Decency Act, which prevents online platforms from being held liable for speech they host but don’t create.

What we’re seeing in these cases is an attempt to get around Section 230 by recharacterizing speech issues as “product liability” issues. Instead of saying, “We’re going after platforms for hosting harmful speech,” the plaintiffs are saying, “We’re going after them for negligent product design.”

Advertisement

In other words, the choices that social media companies make about how to curate their feeds or encourage engagement.

Right. Some of the things they complained about were “endless scroll” (where you keep going down and the feed doesn’t stop at the end of a page), recommendation algorithms that promote content that a user is more likely to engage with, and beauty filters.

But ultimately, if you look at what they’re actually going after, it comes down to speech. When you talk about TikTok or YouTube being so engaging that it’s “addictive,” you’re talking about content: No matter how TikTok’s algorithm is designed, it wouldn’t be compelling to people if the content wasn’t compelling.

Similarly, in the California case, the plaintiff argued that Meta allowing beauty filters on images was a negligent product design, since they promote unrealistic beauty standards, which caused her to develop body image issues.

Advertisement

But that really just comes back to speech: The choice to use a filter is something that individual users do to express themselves. Providing those tools for users is a form of speech.

But aren’t many of these product design choices content-neutral? A defender of these verdicts might argue: Social media companies are manipulating minors into compulsively using their platforms, in a manner that’s bad for their mental health. And they’re doing this, in part, through push notifications, autoplaying videos, and endlessly scrolling feeds. So, why can’t we legally restrict their use of those features — without constraining the kinds of speech they’re allowed to platform?

Some people will say, “Why don’t we limit notifications — or kick people off after an hour — if they’re minors?” But in order to implement any set of rules or product design choices just for young people, these platforms would need to have a foolproof way of knowing who is a minor and who is an adult.

And that means age verification procedures, where they’re either checking everyone’s government-issued ID, or they’re using biometric data — or something else that requires everyone to submit identification before they can speak anywhere on the internet.

Advertisement

And that creates a lot of problems. It makes people’s data more vulnerable to identity theft, hackers, and scammers. It also means that your identity is tied to everything you do online. And that can be dangerous, especially for people who are talking about sensitive issues or protesting the government. The ability to speak and organize online anonymously is very important.

What if the product design restrictions applied to adults and minors alike? If we barred social media companies from issuing push notifications for everyone, that would avoid the age verification issue, right?

Many platforms give people the tools to do these things already. You can turn autoplay off. You can have a chronological feed. You can tailor your settings so that you don’t have these features.

If we’re saying, “Why can’t the government mandate these options?” I think that’s a very slippery slope. You might think, “Okay, who cares about push notifications? Why can’t the government just mandate that they not do push notifications?” But the rationale for that gets us into much broader territory.

Advertisement

It’s effectively saying: Since some people will have a problem with this, the government must micromanage the way that the product is made. Yet people can use all sorts of products in a problematic way: Fitness regimes, streaming services, food. And we’re not saying like, okay, the government gets to step in and tell these companies exactly how to do business in the way that would be least harmful to people. And that attitude is particularly dangerous when we’re talking about products involving speech.

A skeptic might argue that the slope here isn’t actually that slippery. After all, the government has already shown that it can enact targeted, content-neutral restrictions on speech without triggering a cascade of censorship.

For example, since 1990, there have been limits on the amount of advertising that can air during children’s programming in a given hour — and also a requirement that ads and content be clearly separated. Those measures are arguably more intrusive on speech than, say, banning autoplay of videos on a social media platform. And yet, the Children’s Television Act of 1990 didn’t lead to any really sweeping constraints on First Amendment rights.

I just think it makes a big difference if you’re talking about restricting speech for minors and restricting it for adults. And what you were just mentioning were restrictions that would apply to everybody.

Advertisement

Beyond the First Amendment issues, you’ve expressed some skepticism about the specific causal claims made by plaintiffs in these cases: Specifically, that social media caused their mental health difficulties. Yet many social psychologists — most prominently Jonathan Haidt — have argued that these platforms are corrosive to children’s psychological being. So, why do you think the allegations here are overstated?

In the California case specifically, this young woman is alleging that, because she was on social media since she was very young, she developed mental health issues. But there was a lot of testimony showing that there were many other things going wrong in her life. She was exposed to domestic violence. She had troubles with her parents, troubles at school.

So the idea that social media directly caused her difficulties — rather than these life stressors that are well-known to cause harm — I think that’s kind of suspect.

And I think you see this problem in the broader research on social media’s mental health impacts. There’s often a correlation between depressive symptoms and heavy social media use because people who are having a difficult time at home and at school — people who are socially isolated — tend to use social media more than people in better circumstances.

Advertisement

How much do your views on the regulation of social media hinge on skepticism about the actual harms of these platforms? If we acquired evidence that there really were major impacts here — that autoplay and beauty filters were dramatically worsening kids’ mental health — would you support legal restrictions on these features? Or would First Amendment considerations override public health concerns, irrespective of the evidence?

The strength of the evidence is important for guiding the decision-making of individuals, parents, families, communities, and school districts. But even if we knew that beauty filters caused a lot of harm, the government still would not be justified in banning them, since they are avenues for speech. Plenty of people are not harmed by them.

There are so many things that harm some people, but that are useful to others. And I don’t think the existence of problematic use justifies banning those things for everyone.

I think talk of social media “addiction” can be unhelpful on this front. That language suggests that this is something that’s automatically harmful for everyone. And that just isn’t the case. Plenty of people use social media in a healthy way, in the same way that countless people can drink alcohol without it harming them, or eat a bag of chips without bingeing on them.

Advertisement

I think it’s the same way with social media. This is a technology that can harm some people, particularly those who already have psychological issues.

But it isn’t this addictive substance or a poison where you can’t even be exposed to it, or else. I think that view imbues smartphones with an almost mystical quality.

There are many cases, though, where we choose to heavily regulate a substance or practice — not because it harms everyone who engages with it — but rather, because it imposes massive harms on a minority of problem users. Gambling and alcohol are two examples. But even with opioids, many people can pop some pills and never develop a dependency. Yet some end up addicted and dying of overdoses. And for that reason, we heavily restrict access to opioids.

So, I feel like the question here might be less about whether social media is bad for everyone than whether it has truly large harms for problem users.

Advertisement

I think there are people who talk about it the way you do. But others describe social media as if it’s something that people are powerless against. But yes, I don’t think we have strong evidence that this is harmful in the way that addictive substances are. In fact, I think the evidence is really mixed. Some studies suggest that moderate smartphone use is actually correlated with better mental health outcomes.

You argue that, instead of seeking government restrictions on social media, parents should exercise more responsibility over their kids’ use of smartphones and apps.

Many parents argue that their capacity to monitor their children’s social media use is really limited and that they lack the tools to protect their kids from the harmful effects of these platforms. What would you say to them?

I think this is straightforward with very young children. Like, why is a 6-year-old having unfettered alone time on a digital device? In the California case, the plaintiff was using social media as a very young child. And at that age, parents definitely have control over what their kids do and see online; you can control whether your kid has access to a smartphone. With adolescents, there are areas where tech companies are working with parents. We’ve seen more parental controls being introduced in recent years. We’ve seen Meta roll out specific accounts for minors that have some restrictions on them. We’ve seen things like the introduction of phones that allow basic texting but not certain apps. So, I think private solutions are possible here. I think we can address people’s legitimate concerns without having the government infringe on free expression.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Apple expands iOS 18 updates to more iPhones to block DarkSword attacks

Published

on

Apple

Apple has now made it possible for more iPhones still running iOS 18 to receive security updates that protect against the actively exploited DarkSword exploit kit.

“We enabled the availability of iOS 18.7.7 for more devices on April 1, 2026, so users with Automatic Updates turned on can automatically receive important security protections from web attacks called DarkSword,” reads a note in today’s iOS 18.7.7 security update changelog.

“The fixes associated with the DarkSword exploit first shipped in 2025.”

In March, researchers at Lookout, iVerify, and Google Threat Intelligence revealed a new “DarkSword” exploit kit that targeted iPhones running iOS 18.4 through 18.7.

Advertisement

The six vulnerabilities used by the DarkSword exploit kit are tracked as CVE-2025-31277, CVE-2025-43529, CVE-2026-20700, CVE-2025-14174, CVE-2025-43510, and CVE-2025-43520.

While iOS exploits have typically been used in highly targeted spyware campaigns, this iOS exploit kit was used much more widely, including by Turkish commercial surveillance vendor PARS Defense, a threat actor tracked as UNC6748, and a suspected Russian espionage group tracked as UNC6353.

In these attacks, GTIG observed three separate information-stealing malware families deployed on victims’ devices: a highly aggressive JavaScript infostealer named GhostBlade, the GhostKnife backdoor, and the GhostSaber JavaScript malware, which can execute code and steal data.

Since July 2025, with the release of iOS 18.6, Apple has been steadily fixing the flaws as they are disclosed in security updates pushed out to compatible devices.

Advertisement
Threat actors using the DarkSword exploit kit
Source: GTIG 

However, by late 2025, Apple stopped offering iOS 18 updates to newer devices capable of running the newer iOS 26. 

For those who decided not to upgrade and stay on iOS 18, availability to the security updates became limited, with newer devices no longer receiving patches for DarkSword vulnerabilities released in 2026.

Since then, only a small number of devices remained able to receive iOS 18 updates, and the last 18.7.6 update was offered only to iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR devices.

To make matters worse, a researcher released the DarkSword exploit kit on GitHub last month, making it accessible to other threat actors who wanted to target older iPhones.

Today, Apple has released iOS 18.7.7 to make it available to more devices that want to stay on the older operating system while remaining protected from the latest threats.

Advertisement

Devices eligible to receive the new update now include iPhone XR, iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, iPhone 11 (all models), iPhone SE (2nd generation), iPhone 12 (all models), iPhone 13 (all models), iPhone SE (3rd generation), iPhone 14 (all models), iPhone 15 (all models), iPhone 16 (all models), iPhone 16e, iPad mini (5th generation – A17 Pro), iPad (7th generation – A16), iPad Air (3rd – 5th generation), iPad Air 11-inch (M2 – M3), iPad Air 13-inch (M2 – M3), iPad Pro 11-inch (1st generation – M4), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd – 6th generation), and iPad Pro 13-inch (M4).

iPhone users still running iOS 18 with Automatic Updates enabled will now receive the latest version and protections against the DarkSword exploit kit.

Automated pentesting proves the path exists. BAS proves whether your controls stop it. Most teams run one without the other.

This whitepaper maps six validation surfaces, shows where coverage ends, and provides practitioners with three diagnostic questions for any tool evaluation.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025