Tag: internet

Catholic priest, 57, who pretended to be a 16-year-old skinhead to post in neo-Nazi chatrooms where he threatened to bomb mosques as part of a ‘sexual fetish’ is spared jail

A Catholic priest who posed as a 16-year-old skinhead in neo-Nazi chatrooms where he threatened to bomb mosques as part of his ‘sexual fetish’ has avoided jail. 

Father Mark Rowles, 57, posted under the name ‘skinheadlad1488’ in a racist chatroom called Aryan Reich Killers, where he wrote racist and offensive messages.

Rowles wrote several messages on Telegram, including one where he penned ‘bomb mosques’. 

The priest, who was based in St John Lloyd Catholic Church, in Cardiff, confessed to three counts of sending menacing or offensive messages using the Telegram app in May and June of 2024.  

On Thursday, Rowles was ordered to pay £199, carry out 150 hours of unpaid work, and was handed a three-year Criminal Behaviour Order.

The Catholic Church in Wales is understood to be undertaking a review into the matter, as a spokesperson confirmed the priest had been suspended and had not been in active ministry since the allegations emerged. 

A counter-terror probe into extreme right-wing activity online unearthed the 57-year-old’s actions, and he was later taken into custody. 

In one message, he used an extreme racial slur, adding: ‘They should all be strung up and shot.’ 

And when discussing the ethnicity of Londoners, he wrote: ‘A few bullets to their brains would help’ 

When he was arrested and interviewed by police, Rowles told officers he was not racist, but that he said he was lonely and had a ‘sexual fetish for role play’.

His profile picture showed a young white man with a face covering with a German flag and the words ‘right hand path always’, the court heard.

Prosecutor Rob Simkins said Rowles’ posts showed ‘hostility based on religion and race’.

Jacqui Seal, defending, said: ‘Clearly this is a disturbing case. Throughout his life in the Catholic Church he has never been the subject of a complaint or disciplinary action.

Keep reading

Russia Moves to Mandate State Biometric ID for Online Age Verification

Russian lawmakers are moving forward with a proposal that would make the country’s biometric and e-government systems the mandatory gatekeepers for online age verification.

If implemented, the measure would tie access to adult or “potentially harmful” content directly to a person’s verified state identity, dissolving any remaining expectation of online anonymity.

The plan, discussed on October 28, is being marketed as a child protection initiative. Officials insist it is designed to keep minors away from dangerous material, yet the scope of what qualifies is remarkably broad.

According to TechRadar, one official included pornography, violent or profane videos, and even “propaganda of antisocial behavior” in the list of restricted content.

The main part of the proposal is the use of the “Gosuslugi” digital services portal, which already functions as Russia’s main interface for state verification.

This system connects directly to the Unified System of Identification and Authentication (ESIA) and the national Unified Biometrics System (UBS), both of which are controlled by the government.

State Duma deputy Anton Nemkin, a former FSB officer, suggested that these networks “could be used to verify age without directly transmitting passport data to third-party platforms.”

In effect, the state would become the universal intermediary between citizens and the internet.

Legal experts specializing in digital rights argue that this initiative continues a long-established trajectory.

Since 2012, when Russia began constructing its online censorship framework under the pretext of protecting minors, each new regulation has chipped away at personal privacy while expanding government visibility into everyday digital life.

The current proposal also fits neatly within Moscow’s broader strategy of “digital sovereignty.”

Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Information Policy Andrei Svintsov recently claimed that every Russian internet user will lose their anonymity within “three years, five at most,” TechRadar reported.

This vision aligns with another state project approved in June, the development of a national “super app” integrating digital ID, government services, and payment systems, which would even let users “confirm one’s age to a supermarket cashier.”

Keep reading

Internet Archive’s legal fights are over, but its founder mourns what was lost

Last month, the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine archived its trillionth webpage, and the nonprofit invited its more than 1,200 library partners and 800,000 daily users to join a celebration of the moment. To honor “three decades of safeguarding the world’s online heritage,” the city of San Francisco declared October 22 to be “Internet Archive Day.” The Archive was also recently designated a federal depository library by Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), who proclaimed the organization a “perfect fit” to expand “access to federal government publications amid an increasingly digital landscape.”

The Internet Archive might sound like a thriving organization, but it only recently emerged from years of bruising copyright battles that threatened to bankrupt the beloved library project. In the end, the fight led to more than 500,000 books being removed from the Archive’s “Open Library.”

“We survived,” Internet Archive founder Brewster Kahle told Ars. “But it wiped out the Library.”

An Internet Archive spokesperson confirmed to Ars that the archive currently faces no major lawsuits and no active threats to its collections. Kahle thinks “the world became stupider” when the Open Library was gutted—but he’s moving forward with new ideas.

History of the Internet Archive

Kahle has been striving since 1996 to transform the Internet Archive into a digital Library of Alexandria—but “with a better fire protection plan,” joked Kyle Courtney, a copyright lawyer and librarian who leads the nonprofit eBook Study Group, which helps states update laws to protect libraries.

When the Wayback Machine was born in 2001 as a way to take snapshots of the web, Kahle told The New York Times that building free archives was “worth it.” He was also excited that the Wayback Machine had drawn renewed media attention to libraries.

At the time, law professor Lawrence Lessig predicted that the Internet Archive would face copyright battles, but he also believed that the Wayback Machine would change the way the public understood copyright fights.

”We finally have a clear and tangible example of what’s at stake,” Lessig told the Times. He insisted that Kahle was “defining the public domain” online, which would allow Internet users to see ”how easy and important” the Wayback Machine “would be in keeping us sane and honest about where we’ve been and where we’re going.”

Kahle suggested that IA’s legal battles weren’t with creators or publishers so much as with large media companies that he thinks aren’t “satisfied with the restriction you get from copyright.”

“They want that and more,” Kahle said, pointing to e-book licenses that expire as proof that libraries increasingly aren’t allowed to own their collections. He also suspects that such companies wanted the Wayback Machine dead—but the Wayback Machine has survived and proved itself to be a unique and useful resource.

The Internet Archive also began archiving—and then lending—e-books. For a decade, the Archive had loaned out individual e-books to one user at a time without triggering any lawsuits. That changed when IA decided to temporarily lift the cap on loans from its Open Library project to create a “National Emergency Library” as libraries across the world shut down during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. The project eventually grew to 1.4 million titles.

But lifting the lending restrictions also brought more scrutiny from copyright holders, who eventually sued the Archive. Litigation went on for years. In 2024, IA lost its final appeal in a lawsuit brought by book publishers over the Archive’s Open Library project, which used a novel e-book lending model to bypass publishers’ licensing fees and checkout limitations. Damages could have topped $400 million, but publishers ultimately announced a “confidential agreement on a monetary payment” that did not bankrupt the Archive.

Litigation has continued, though. More recently, the Archive settled another suit over its Great 78 Project after music publishers sought damages of up to $700 million. A settlement in that case, reached last month, was similarly confidential. In both cases, IA’s experts challenged publishers’ estimates of their losses as massively inflated.

For Internet Archive fans, a group that includes longtime Internet users, researchers, students, historians, lawyers, and the US government, the end of the lawsuits brought a sigh of relief. The Archive can continue—but it can’t run one of its major programs in the same way.

Keep reading

UK Lords Debate Impact of VPNs on Censorship Laws

It began as a plan to “keep children safe online.” It has become a national realization about how far the government can reach into the digital lives of its citizens.

The UK’s Online Safety Act has turned into a case study in how a law written for protection can give no protection and end up with mass surveillance.

When peers in the House of Lords met this week to examine its effects, they sounded little like guardians of youth safety, and it was easy to tell they don’t have enough self-awareness to realize they’ve helped unleash a monster.

Lord Clement-Jones, the Liberal Democrat technology spokesperson, noted that young people are already avoiding the law’s controls.

VPNs, he said, are now used on a “widespread” scale, which “risks rendering age-assurance measures ineffective.”

The statement revealed a central problem: the people being protected are already finding their way around the digital ID rules. They always will.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales expressed the issue plainly. Calling the Act “very poorly thought-out legislation,” he told The House magazine: “We will not be age-gating Wikipedia under any circumstances, so, if it comes to that, it’s going to be an interesting showdown, because we’re going to just refuse to do it. Politically, what are they going to do? They could block Wikipedia. Good luck with that.”

Wales’s refusal is part of a natural broader discomfort with the idea of regulating access to information through identification.

Under the new law, platforms must verify users’ ages through ID checks or similar systems. Millions of users will have to prove their identity before they can post or browse. Privacy groups describe this as a national identity program introduced without open debate.

With data breaches still frequent across both government and corporate systems, the setup creates an environment where every login carries potential exposure.

VPN use has increased in response. These tools, once associated with cybersecurity professionals, now serve anyone who prefers to maintain privacy online. They allow people to move through the internet without revealing personal data.

Keep reading

Republicans Are Walking Into A Trap On Section 230 Repeal

Among political conservatives, there is no hotter potato at the moment than the civil liability protections afforded by Section 230 to online operators. Unless Republicans learn to love it again and reject the censorship lawfare complex favored by Democrats, they risk dooming our tech leaders and everyone who uses their products to the sharks circling our legal system.

The twenty-six words tucked into the Communications Decency Act of 1996 shielded publishers from liability so they could host and moderate content and still allow a wide range of speech without fear of lawsuits. Since then, Section 230 has evolved to be one of the most powerful legal shields in the nation against civil litigation in U.S. courts. This gave the early digital economy the guardrails it needed to thrive by incentivizing creatives and disruptors to bring their big ideas to life.

Nothing ices a good idea like the fear of a lawsuit.

Yet, to be a rising star in the Republican Party today conveys some kind of fealty to the idea that Section 230 is antiquated – a relic of the early Internet that has outlasted its usefulness.

Last month, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) called on his colleagues to “fully repeal Section 230” to cut the knees of AI companies and thwart their LLM training models. “Open the courtroom doors. Allow people to sue who have their rights taken from them, including suing companies and actors and individuals who use AI,” said Hawley.

He’s joined in these efforts by fellow Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham and Marsha Blackburn, not to mention Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin and Amyâ?¯Klobuchar.

According to the Section 230 Legislation Tracker maintained by Lawfare and the Center on Technology Policy at UNC-Chapel Hill, there have already been 41 separate bills aimed at curbing some aspects of the law by both Democrats and Republicans in the last two sessions.

The principal motivation for Democrats, including former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, has always been to force censorship of social media platforms to stop “disinformation,” a pretext for muting opposing views. The coordination of Democratic officials pressuring platforms to censor, as revealed in the Twitter Files, proves this beyond dispute.

To highlight the irony, we should remember that President Donald Trump is not only the chief executive of the United States, but also the owner of a social media platform that currently enjoys broad Section 230 protections afforded to any online publisher.

A wish to cripple Section 230 means making Truth Social a target as much as YouTube or Instagram. We should harbor no illusions that right-leaning media publications, podcasters, and websites would be the first to be kneecapped in a post-Section 230 world. Can MAGA and the GOP swallow that pill?

In that scenario, it will be the millions of Americans who currently enjoy freedom of speech online that will lose out. It’s the tens of millions of Americans turning to AI tools to become more productive, create value, and build the next great economic engines of our time who will be harmed by dismantling Section 230.

If Republicans want to cement American dominance in technological innovation, they will have to abandon this devil’s dance on gutting Section 230 liability protections. This is a censorship trap laid by Democrats to benefit them once they return to power.

The premise of broad civil liability protection for platforms is a core principle that has and should be applied to producers across America’s innovative stack, whether it’s oil and gas firms fending off dubious climate cases or artificial intelligence firms building the tools that are the key to America’s present economic dominance.

Keep reading

Proton launches observatory to shed light on dark web crimes

Internet privacy company Proton launched a service on Thursday aimed at shedding light on cybercrimes by revealing new data breaches as stolen data turns up on the dark web.

Switzerland-based Proton, known for its encrypted email and virtual private network services, said it was kicking off its new Data Breach Observatory with data drawn directly from the dark web — a hidden part of the internet where criminals trade in stolen data.

Since the start of this year alone, the company said it had detected nearly 800 notable breaches in single, identifiable companies, leaving more than 300 million individual records exposed.

If it had included the countless compilations of data from multiple breaches found on the dark web, “the true scale of exposed records Proton uncovered in 2025 is actually closer to 1,571 incidents with hundreds of billions of records”, it said.

Going forward, the company said it would update the Data Breach Observatory “in near real time”, and would publish details of newly-discovered breaches “whether or not the companies involved have chosen to be transparent with their users”.

Proton said there was a dire need for these observations, pointing out that while many people are aware that cybercrime is on the rise, facts have so far been hard to come by.

Instead, they rely mainly on self-disclosure by affected companies, who may opt to hide breaches out of embarrassment.

The dark web, which is inaccessible via standard browsers, is often used by criminals as a marketplace for illicit activities.

The trading in stolen personal information there, including financial details and login credentials, creates a significant and largely hidden threat to both individuals and businesses, Proton said.

The Swiss company said its research had found that small- and medium-sized businesses were most impacted.

Companies with 10–249 employees accounted for nearly half of all breach incidents, while businesses with fewer than 10 employees made up 23 percent, it said.

As for the stolen information being traded on the dark web, Proton said email addresses, names and contact information were the most exposed, followed by passwords and sensitive information like government and health records.

Proton said its observatory would generate timely reports of emerging data breaches, enabling it to alert affected businesses and organisations potentially before they are even aware of a leak.

The reports would help them secure systems, protect against further attacks and alert their customers.

Keep reading

The Data Center Proliferation Must Be About Much More Than Data

With Amazon, it was never about the books. No doubt Amazon began as an online bookseller, but what made its stock attractive through years of losses is what books represented.

If Amazon could modernize buying habits with an online bookstore, it could eventually be what it became: an everything store. Markets are a look ahead, and book sales didn’t appeal to patient investors as much as what online book sales signaled about Amazon’s future potential as something much greater than an online bookstore.

It’s important to remember this with the rise of data centers around the country. Meta recently completed another one in El Paso, TX. The $1.5 billion project will, once operational, employ 100 people. Its construction employed as many as 1,800 workers.

It’s worth adding that El Paso is Meta’s third data center in Texas alone. Meta put $10 billion into the construction of all three.  

If asked, most would understandably say that data centers are being created “to store, process, and distribute” vast amounts of data. Translated, the data centers will rapidly bring down the already short wait times for AI-authored searches, paintings, papers, and all manner of other things that the AI-adaptive request.

It all sounds amazing on its face, but the bet here is that broad perception of data center capabilities in no way measures up to the towering reality of their potential. Just as Amazon was much more than a bookstore, it’s no reach to suggest that data centers are about much more than greatly enhanced, low latency searches.

Some will ask what they’re for if not just for searches, and the quick answer to the question is that the future would already be here if it were obvious what it was. Which means there’s no way to foretell the future, but it’s easy to say with confidence that it won’t much look like the present.

Evidence supporting the above claim can be found in the enormous investments being made by Amazon, Meta, OpenAI, X and others in the creation of the data centers. The sizable capital commitments signal confidence on the part of the biggest names in AI technology that the growth potential from the data centers well exceeds the enormous amounts of money required to create them. Since capital is expensive, there’s no room for break even or somewhere close to break even in its allocation.

Which is why the future can’t arrive soon enough. As substantial capital allocations meant to fund data centers indicate, their meaning to how we live, work, play, and get healthy so that we can live, work and play some more will be substantial. 

Just as Amazon.com as a source of books in no way resembles what Amazon has become, the cost of data centers signals that their perception in 2025 will in no way resemble how they’re perceived in 2035. Call it a generational thing, but data center will have different meaning depending on when you were born.

Keep reading

The EU’s Two-Tier Encryption Vision Is Digital Feudalism

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, recently showed a moment of humanity in a tech world that often promises too much, too fast. He urged users not to share anything with ChatGPT that they wouldn’t want a human to see. The Department of Homeland Security in the United States has already started to take notice.

His caution strikes at a more profound truth that underpins our entire digital world. In a realm where we can no longer be certain whether we’re dealing with a person, it is clear that software is often the agent communicating, not people. This growing uncertainty is more than just a technical challenge. It strikes at the very foundation of trust that holds society together. 

This should cause us to reflect not just on AI, but on something even more fundamental, far older, quieter and more critical in the digital realm: encryption.

In a world increasingly shaped by algorithms and autonomous systems, trust is more important than ever. 

Encryption is our foundation

Encryption isn’t just a technical layer; it is the foundation of our digital lives. It protects everything from private conversations to global financial systems, authenticates identity and enables trust to scale across borders and institutions.

Crucially, it’s not something that can be recreated through regulation or substituted with policy. When trust breaks down, when institutions fail or power is misused, encryption is what remains. It’s the safety net that ensures our most private information stays protected, even in the absence of trust.

A cryptographic system isn’t like a house with doors and windows. It is a mathematical contract; precise, strict and meant to be unbreakable. Here, a “backdoor” is not just a secret entry but a flaw embedded in the logic of the contract, and one flaw is all it takes to destroy the entire agreement. Any weakness introduced for one purpose could become an opening for everyone, from cybercriminals to authoritarian regimes. Built entirely on trust through strong, unbreakable code, the entire structure begins to collapse once that trust is broken. And right now, that trust is under threat. 

Keep reading

Secret details of Israel’s mammoth deal with Google and Amazon revealed – media

Israel has forced US tech giants Google and Amazon to violate their own legal obligations under a 2021 cloud services contract with West Jerusalem, according to a joint investigation by several news media outlets, including The Guardian.

The Jewish state’s contracts with US tech platforms have been under close scrutiny following widespread accusations, including from the UN, that its military response to the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack that killed over 1,200 people constitutes a genocide.

Known as Project Nimbus, the $1.2 billion deal reportedly bars the firms from restricting the Israeli government’s access to cloud services they provide, even if it violates their terms of use, the reports, carried by The Guardian along with +972 Magazine and Local Call, suggest.

The deal also reportedly requires the two companies to secretly notify West Jerusalem using a so-called “winking mechanism” should any foreign state or court seek access to Israeli data stored in the cloud.

Keep reading

Obama’s Latest Ploys at Shadow Government, Internet Censorship Exposed. He Needs to Be Held Accountable.

Former President Barack Obama’s presidential legacy is crumbling before our eyes. While he works to perform the roles of former president and titular head of the Democrat Party, running interference for the flailing campaigns of Democrat gubernatorial candidates Abigail Spanberger (VA) and Mikie Sherrill (NJ), and propping up CA Gov. Gavin Newsom and his unconstitutional gerrymandering scheme, he has the looming threat of the government for whom he used to be the head, precipitating his legacy’s increasing demise. 

In July, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard dropped evidence that exposed how then-President Obama and his intelligence apparatus created fraudulent documents that spearheaded the entire Russia Collusion hoax lodged against President Donald Trump 45. 

As DNI Gabbard stated,

The stunning revelations these intelligence documents expose should concern every American. There is irrefutable evidence detailing how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false, promoting the contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, as though it were true. The documents we released shows how they did it: manufacturing findings from shoddy sources, suppressing evidence that disproved their false claims, disobeying IC tradecraft standards, and withholding the truth from the American people,” said DNI Gabbard. “In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people and worked with their partners in the media to promote this lie to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump.

Keep reading