Security updates have been issued by AlmaLinux (.NET 8.0, .NET 9.0, and webkit2gtk3), Debian (ruby-rack, strongswan, ublock-origin, and wordpress), Fedora (firefox, kea, openapi-python-client, openbao, python-uv-build, qt5-qtbase, ruby, ruff, rust-astral-tokio-tar, rust-attribute-derive, rust-attribute-derive-macro, rust-backon, rust-collection_literals, rust-get-size-derive2, rust-get-size2, rust-interpolator, rust-manyhow, rust-manyhow-macros, rust-proc-macro-utils, rust-quote-use, rust-quote-use-macros, rust-reqsign, rust-reqsign-aws-v4, rust-reqsign-command-execute-tokio, rust-reqsign-core, rust-reqsign-file-read-tokio, rust-reqsign-http-send-reqwest, rust-tikv-jemalloc-sys, rust-tikv-jemallocator, samba, skopeo, sssd, Thunar, unbound, uv, vgrep, and xorg-x11-server-Xwayland), Mageia (bind, libtiff, sope, and transfig), Oracle (compat-libtiff3, kernel, libtiff, redis, redis:6, and redis:7), Red Hat (kernel, kernel-rt, libssh, xorg-x11-server, and xorg-x11-server-Xwayland), Slackware (seamonkey), SUSE (bind, chromedriver, chromium, colord, coreboot-utils, git-bug, ImageMagick, java-11-openj9, java-17-openj9, java-21-openj9, java-25-openj9, kea, libmozjs-115-0, libmozjs-140-0, libssh, libtiff-devel-32bit, nodejs18, ongres-scram, poppler, python311-starlette, rav1e, squid, strongswan, webkit2gtk3, xorg-x11-server, and xwayland), and Ubuntu (linux-gcp-6.14 and linux-hwe-6.8).
"An engineer got curious about how his iLife A11 smart vacuum worked and monitored the network traffic coming from the device," writes Tom's Hardware.
"That's when he noticed it was constantly sending logs and telemetry data to the manufacturer — something he hadn't consented to."
The user, Harishankar, decided to block the telemetry servers' IP addresses on his network, while keeping the firmware and OTA servers open. While his smart gadget worked for a while, it just refused to turn on soon after... He sent it to the service center multiple times, wherein the technicians would turn it on and see nothing wrong with the vacuum. When they returned it to him, it would work for a few days and then fail to boot again... [H]e decided to disassemble the thing to determine what killed it and to see if he could get it working again...
[He discovered] a GD32F103 microcontroller to manage its plethora of sensors, including Lidar, gyroscopes, and encoders. He created PCB connectors and wrote Python scripts to control them with a computer, presumably to test each piece individually and identify what went wrong. From there, he built a Raspberry Pi joystick to manually drive the vacuum, proving that there was nothing wrong with the hardware. From this, he looked at its software and operating system, and that's where he discovered the dark truth: his smart vacuum was a security nightmare and a black hole for his personal data.
First of all, it's Android Debug Bridge, which gives him full root access to the vacuum, wasn't protected by any kind of password or encryption. The manufacturer added a makeshift security protocol by omitting a crucial file, which caused it to disconnect soon after booting, but Harishankar easily bypassed it. He then discovered that it used Google Cartographer to build a live 3D map of his home.
This isn't unusual, by far. After all, it's a smart vacuum, and it needs that data to navigate around his home. However, the concerning thing is that it was sending off all this data to the manufacturer's server. It makes sense for the device to send this data to the manufacturer, as its onboard SoC is nowhere near powerful enough to process all that data. However, it seems that iLife did not clear this with its customers.
Furthermore, the engineer made one disturbing discovery — deep in the logs of his non-functioning smart vacuum, he found a command with a timestamp that matched exactly the time the gadget stopped working. This was clearly a kill command, and after he reversed it and rebooted the appliance, it roared back to life.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader registrations_suck for sharing the article.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
"AI isn't just a tool anymore; it's an integral part of the development experience," argues GitHub's blog. So "Agents shouldn't be bolted on. They should work the way you already work..."
So this week GitHub announced "Agent HQ," which CNBC describes as a "mission control" interface "that will allow software developers to manage coding agents from multiple vendors on a single platform."
Developers have a range of new capabilities at their fingertips because of these agents, but it can require a lot of effort to keep track of them all individually, said GitHub COO Kyle Daigle. Developers will now be able to manage agents from GitHub, OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, xAI and Cognition in one place with Agent HQ. "We want to bring a little bit of order to the chaos of innovation," Daigle told CNBC in an interview. "With so many different agents, there's so many different ways of kicking off these asynchronous tasks, and so our big opportunity here is to bring this all together." Agent HQ users will be able to access a command center where they can assign, steer and monitor the work of multiple agents...
The third-party agents will begin rolling out to GitHub Copilot subscribers in the coming months, but Copilot Pro+ users will be able to access OpenAI Codex in VS Code Insiders this week, the company said.
"We're into this wave two era," GitHub's COO Mario Rodriguez told VentureBeat, an era that's "going to be multimodal, it's going to be agentic and it's going to have these new experiences that will feel AI native...."
Or, as VentureBeat sees it, GitHub "is positioning itself as the essential orchestration layer beneath them all..."
Just as the company transformed Git, pull requests and CI/CD into collaborative workflows, it's now trying to do the same with a fragmented AI coding landscape...
The technical architecture addresses a critical enterprise concern: Security. Unlike standalone agent implementations where users must grant broad repository access, GitHub's Agent HQ implements granular controls at the platform level... Agents operating through Agent HQ can only commit to designated branches. They run within sandboxed GitHub Actions environments with firewall protections. They operate under strict identity controls. [GitHub COO] Rodriguez explained that even if an agent goes rogue, the firewall prevents it from accessing external networks or exfiltrating data unless those protections are explicitly disabled.
Beyond managing third-party agents, GitHub is introducing two technical capabilities that set Agent HQ apart from alternative approaches like Cursor's standalone editor or Anthropic's Claude integration. Custom agents via AGENTS.md files: Enterprises can now create source-controlled configuration files that define specific rules, tools and guardrails for how Copilot behaves. For example, a company could specify "prefer this logger" or "use table-driven tests for all handlers." This permanently encodes organizational standards without requiring developers to re-prompt every time... Native Model Context Protocol (MCP) support: VS Code now includes a GitHub MCP Registry. Developers can discover, install and enable MCP servers with a single click. They can then create custom agents that combine these tools with specific system prompts. This positions GitHub as the integration point between the emerging MCP ecosystem and actual developer workflows. MCP, introduced by Anthropic but rapidly gaining industry support, is becoming a de facto standard for agent-to-tool communication. By supporting the full specification, GitHub can orchestrate agents that need access to external services without each agent implementing its own integration logic.
GitHub is also shipping new capabilities within VS Code itself. Plan Mode allows developers to collaborate with Copilot on building step-by-step project approaches. The AI asks clarifying questions before any code is written. Once approved, the plan can be executed either locally in VS Code or by cloud-based agents. The feature addresses a common failure mode in AI coding: Beginning implementation before requirements are fully understood. By forcing an explicit planning phase, GitHub aims to reduce wasted effort and improve output quality.
More significantly, GitHub's code review feature is becoming agentic. The new implementation will use GitHub's CodeQL engine, which previously largely focused on security vulnerabilities to identify bugs and maintainability issues. The code review agent will automatically scan agent-generated pull requests before human review. This creates a two-stage quality gate.
"Don't let this little bit of news float past you like all those self-satisfied marketing pitches we semi-hear and ignore," writes ZDNet:
If it works and remains reliable, this is actually a very big deal... Tech companies, especially the giant ones, often like to talk "open" but then do their level best to engineer lock-in to their solution and their solution alone. Sure, most of them offer some sort of export tool, but the barrier to moving from one tool to another is often huge... [T]he idea that you can continue to use your favorite agent or agents in GitHub, fully integrated into the GitHub tool path, is powerful. It means there's a chance developers might not have to suffer the walled garden effect that so many companies have strived for to lock in their customers.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
OpenAI "hasn't yet turned a profit," notes Wall Street Journal business columnist Tim Higgins. "Its annual revenue is 2% of Amazon.com's sales.
"Its future is uncertain beyond the hope of ushering in a godlike artificial intelligence that might help cure cancer and transform work and life as we know it. Still, it is brimming with hope and excitement.
"But what if OpenAI fails?"
There's real concern that through many complicated and murky tech deals aimed at bolstering OpenAI's finances, the startup has become too big to fail. Or, put another way, if the hype and hope around Chief Executive Sam Altman's vision of the AI future fails to materialize, it could create systemic risk to the part of the U.S. economy likely keeping us out of recession.
That's rarefied air, especially for a startup. Few worried about what would happen if Pets.com failed in the dot-com boom. We saw in 2008-09 with the bank rescues and the Chrysler and General Motors bailouts what happens in the U.S. when certain companies become too big to fail...
[A]fter a lengthy effort to reorganize itself, OpenAI announced moves that will allow it to have a simpler corporate structure. This will help it to raise money from private investors and, presumably, become a publicly traded company one day. Already, some are talking about how OpenAI might be the first trillion-dollar initial public offering... Nobody is saying OpenAI is dabbling in anything like liar loans or subprime mortgages. But the startup is engaging in complex deals with the key tech-industry pillars, the sorts of companies making the guts of the AI computing revolution, such as chips and Ethernet cables. Those companies, including Nvidia and Oracle, are partnering with OpenAI, which in turn is committing to make big purchases in coming years as part of its growth ambitions.
Supporters would argue it is just savvy dealmaking. A company like Nvidia, for example, is putting money into a market-making startup while OpenAI is using the lofty value of its private equity to acquire physical assets... They're rooting for OpenAI as a once-in-a-generational chance to unseat the winners of the last tech cycles. After all, for some, OpenAI is the next Apple, Facebook, Google and Tesla wrapped up in one. It is akin to a company with limitless potential to disrupt the smartphone market, create its own social-media network, replace the search engine, usher in a robot future and reshape nearly every business and industry.... To others, however, OpenAI is something akin to tulip mania, the harbinger of the Great Depression, or the next dot-com bubble. Or worse, they see, a jobs killer and mad scientist intent on making Frankenstein.
But that's counting on OpenAI's success.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
"It's been hard for me to understand why Atlas exists," writes MIT Technology Review. " Who is this browser for, exactly? Who is its customer? And the answer I have come to there is that Atlas is for OpenAI. The real customer, the true end user of Atlas, is not the person browsing websites, it is the company collecting data about what and how that person is browsing."
New York Magazine's "Intelligencer" column argues OpenAI wants ChatGPT in your browser because "That's where people who use computers, particularly for work, spend all their time, and through which vast quantities of valuable information flow in and out. Also, if you're a company hoping to train your models to replicate a bunch of white-collar work, millions of browser sessions would be a pretty valuable source of data."
Unfortunately, warns Fast Company, ChatGPT Atlas, Perplexity Comet, and other AI browses "include some major security, privacy, and usability trade-offs... Most of the time, I don't want to use them and am wary of doing so..."
Worst of all, these browsers are security minefields. A web page that looks benign to humans can includehidden instructions for AI agents, tricking them into stealing info from other sites... "If you're signed into sensitive accounts like your bank or your email provider in your browser, simply summarizing a Reddit postcould result in an attacker being able to steal money or your private data,"Brave's security researchers wrotelast week.No one has figured out how to solve this problem.
If you can look past the security nightmares, the actual browsing features are substandard. Neither ChatGPT Atlas nor Perplexity Comet support vertical tabs — a must-have feature for me — and they have no tab search tool or way to look up recently-closed pages. Atlas also doesn't support saving sites as web apps, selecting multiple tabs (for instance, to close all at once with Cmd+W), or customizing the appearance. Compared to all the fancy new AI features, the web browsing part can feel like an afterthought. Regular web search can also be a hassle, even though you'll probably need it sometimes. When I typed "Sichuan Chili" into ChatGPT Atlas, it produced a lengthy description of the Chinese peppers, not the nearby restaurant whose website and number I was looking for.... Meanwhile, the standard AI annoyances still apply in the browser. Getting Perplexity to fill my grocery cart felt like a triumph, but on other occasions the AI has run into inexplicable walls and only ended up wasting more time.
There may be other costs to using these browsers as well. AI still has usage limits, and so all this eventually becomes a ploy to bump more people into paid tiers. Beyond that,Atlas is constantly analyzing the pages you visit to build a "memory" of who you are and what you're into. Do not be surprised if this translates to deeply targeted ads as OpenAI startslooking at ways to monetize free users. For now, I'm only using AI browsers in small doses when I think they can solve a specific problem.
Even then, I'm not going sign them into my email, bank accounts, or any other accounts for which a security breach would be catastrophic. It's too bad, because email and calendars are areas where AI agents could be truly useful, but the security risks are too great (andwell-documented).
The article notes that in August Vivaldi announced that "We're taking a stand, choosing humans over hype" with their browser:
We will not use an LLM to add a chatbot, a summarization solution or a suggestion engine to fill up forms for you, until more rigorous ways to do those things are available. Vivaldi is the haven for people who still want to explore. We will continue building a browser for curious minds, power users, researchers, and anyone who values autonomy. If AI contributes to that goal without stealing intellectual property, compromising privacy or the open web, we will use it. If it turns people into passive consumers, we will not...
We're fighting for a better web.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.