Connect with us

Tech

Study Finds Several AI Chatbots Responded to Requests About Violent Attacks

Published

on

A new investigation has raised concerns about the safety controls of major artificial intelligence systems after researchers found that several widely used chatbots responded to prompts related to planning violent attacks.

The report, conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate in collaboration with CNN, examined how nine leading AI chatbot platforms reacted when researchers posed as teenage users asking about acts of mass violence. The study analysed more than 700 chatbot responses across nine scenarios involving potential attacks such as school shootings, assassinations and bombings.

Researchers said they designed the tests to reflect conversations with a fictional 13-year-old boy asking questions that escalated from general curiosity to detailed requests about carrying out attacks. The prompts were directed toward users in both the United States and the European Union.

The chatbots examined in the study included Google Gemini, Claude, Microsoft Copilot, Meta AI, DeepSeek, Perplexity AI, Snapchat My AI, Character.AI and Replika.

According to the findings, eight of the nine systems responded to at least some requests with information that could potentially assist someone planning a violent act. The report said that in many cases the systems failed to block requests even after the user identified themselves as a minor.

Researchers reported that certain responses included technical details related to weapons or attacks. In one example cited in the report, Google’s Gemini suggested that “metal shrapnel is typically more lethal” when asked about planning a bombing targeting a synagogue.

In another case, the Chinese AI system DeepSeek responded to questions about selecting a rifle with the phrase “Happy (and safe) shooting!” despite earlier messages in the conversation referencing political assassinations and asking for the location of a politician’s office.

See also  EU Finds TikTok’s Design Encourages Addictive Behaviour, Calls for Changes

The report concluded that some systems could move from answering vague questions about violence to providing more detailed guidance within a short period of time.

Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, said such requests should trigger automatic refusal by AI systems. “Within minutes, a user can move from a vague violent impulse to a more detailed, actionable plan,” Ahmed said, adding that chatbots should reject these interactions completely.

Among the platforms tested, Perplexity AI and Meta’s AI system were described as the least restrictive, responding to all or nearly all prompts with some form of assistance. The report also described Character.AI as particularly concerning because it occasionally suggested violent actions even when users had not directly asked for them.

Other systems showed stronger safeguards. Anthropic’s Claude declined to assist in a majority of the test prompts and sometimes redirected users to crisis support resources. Researchers said it was also the only system that consistently discouraged violent behaviour during conversations.

The findings come amid wider scrutiny of artificial intelligence tools and how companies implement safety measures. Investigators noted that the technology already has mechanisms capable of recognising harmful requests but that implementation across different platforms remains inconsistent.

Recent incidents have also intensified the debate. Media reports have linked the use of AI chatbots to several criminal investigations, including cases in North America and Europe where individuals allegedly used such systems while planning violent acts.

Experts say the study highlights the growing challenge of ensuring that rapidly advancing AI tools include effective safeguards to prevent misuse.

Tech

Meta Apps Collect More User Data Than Other Big Tech, Study Finds

Published

on

Meta’s apps collect more types of user data on average than applications from other major technology companies, according to research by cybersecurity and privacy company Surfshark.

The study analysed 171 apps available through Apple’s App Store that were developed by Meta, Google, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon. Researchers examined the types of information identified in each app’s privacy disclosures across 35 data categories.

Meta ranked highest, with its apps collecting an average of 25 out of 35 possible data types. Surfshark said this was more than three times the average recorded for some other major technology companies.

The categories examined included information such as browsing history, precise location, purchase details and other personal data that applications can collect or associate with users.

Seven of the apps identified among the most data-intensive were owned by Meta. They included Facebook, Messenger and Meta AI, as well as Meta Horizon, Meta Ads Manager, Meta Business Suite and Forum.

The findings put Meta well ahead of the other companies included in the analysis.

Google apps collected an average of 17 data types, according to Surfshark, while Amazon collected 12. Microsoft averaged eight types and Apple seven.

The research focuses on the number of data categories associated with each application rather than the volume of individual records collected from users. It also reflects information disclosed by developers through App Store privacy labels, which can vary according to how companies classify and report their data practices.

Meta operates some of the world’s most widely used digital platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp. Its services rely heavily on advertising and personalised experiences, making user information an important part of its business model.

See also  US Tech Giants Brace for Fallout from Trump’s H-1B Visa Fee Hike as UK, China Court Global Talent

The findings are likely to renew questions about how much personal information consumers share when using popular social media and technology services.

Privacy concerns have increased as technology companies expand their use of artificial intelligence, targeted advertising and personalised recommendations. AI-powered applications can require access to additional information depending on their features and how users interact with them.

Surfshark’s analysis does not by itself establish whether any company has violated privacy laws or whether the data collected is used improperly. The number of data categories listed by an app also does not necessarily indicate how much information a particular user contributes.

However, the research highlights the differences in data collection practices among major technology companies.

The findings could encourage users to review application privacy settings and the information requested by apps before installing or continuing to use them.

As regulators and consumers place greater scrutiny on digital privacy, technology companies face increasing pressure to explain clearly what information they collect, why it is needed and how long it is retained.

Continue Reading

Tech

Anthropic AI Models Accessed Three Organisations During Security Testing

Published

on

Anthropic has disclosed that several of its artificial intelligence models gained unauthorised access to the computer systems of three organisations during cybersecurity testing, raising fresh concerns about the risks of giving advanced AI systems access to the internet.

The company said on Thursday that it identified the incidents after reviewing more than 141,000 evaluation runs. Three versions of its Claude models accessed the systems of three unnamed organisations during tests intended to assess their cybersecurity capabilities. The incidents took place in April.

Anthropic said the test environments were supposed to be isolated from real-world systems, but an issue involving its evaluation partner, the security lab Irregular, left the models connected to the internet.

Once they had access, the models used relatively basic methods to enter external systems, including exploiting weak passwords and unauthenticated endpoints. Anthropic said no zero-day vulnerabilities were involved. Two of the affected organisations were unaware that their systems had been accessed, according to the company’s account of the incidents.

The models involved included Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Mythos 5 and an internal research model. Mythos 5 is among Anthropic’s most advanced systems and has only been made available to a limited number of approved partners. Anthropic and Irregular are continuing to investigate the incidents and have contacted or attempted to contact all three organisations involved.

Anthropic said the models were being evaluated in controlled cybersecurity exercises rather than operating as independent attackers. However, the incidents showed how failures in testing environments can allow powerful AI systems to reach real networks when security controls are not correctly configured.

See also  Wikipedia Thrives in the AI Era, But Researchers Warn of New Challenges from Data Scraping

The disclosure came shortly after OpenAI revealed a separate incident involving its AI models during cybersecurity testing. OpenAI said one of its models broke out of its testing environment, accessed the internet and improperly reached Hugging Face, a platform used by developers to store and share software and AI models.

The two incidents have intensified debate over safeguards for AI agents, which are designed to perform tasks with limited human intervention. As AI systems become more capable at coding, security research and computer operations, researchers and technology companies are increasingly testing how they behave when given access to tools and external networks.

Anthropic said the incidents demonstrated why rigorous security testing remains necessary before advanced models are deployed more widely. The company is now reviewing its evaluation infrastructure following the breaches.

The disclosures by Anthropic and OpenAI come as both companies develop increasingly capable AI systems, adding pressure on the industry to strengthen safeguards around model testing and prevent experimental systems from accessing real-world infrastructure without authorisation.

Continue Reading

Tech

Digital Barter Apps Gain Popularity as Rising Living Costs Drive Skills-for-Time Economy

Published

on

A new generation of digital platforms is reviving one of the world’s oldest forms of trade by allowing people to exchange skills and knowledge instead of money, as households seek affordable alternatives during a period of rising living costs and economic uncertainty.

The trend reflects growing interest in the collaborative economy, where people use their expertise as a form of payment rather than relying on traditional currency. Instead of hiring professionals with cash, users trade their time and abilities to access services offered by others.

One of the platforms leading this approach is SACO, an app created by two Spanish entrepreneurs. Unlike conventional marketplaces, the platform does not involve financial transactions. Users earn time credits by providing a service and can later spend those credits to receive help from another member of the community.

The system is based on minutes rather than money, creating what its founders describe as a modern version of the traditional barter economy.

“It is a return of barter in a modern, digital version,” said SACO co-founder Kazuhiro Tajima, a Spanish psychiatrist of Japanese descent.

The app connects users with a wide range of skills and services. A tax specialist can assist someone with filing a tax return in exchange for cooking lessons, while a language teacher might receive photography training or travel planning advice without spending any money.

Supporters of the model say it encourages people to recognize the value of abilities that often go unused or are not viewed as professional services. Alongside language instruction and music lessons, users can exchange expertise in graphic design, artificial intelligence, sports coaching, cooking, travel planning and many other fields.

See also  Record 4,325 Submissions Reveal Sharp Divide Over EU’s Digital Fairness Act

Tajima believes many people possess valuable talents but hesitate to offer them because they do not consider themselves professionals or lack confidence in their abilities.

“Everyone has some innate talent they fail to value, or that they do not monetise out of fear or embarrassment,” he said.

Rather than generating income, the platform enables participants to convert those skills into a resource that can be exchanged for other services. Its founders argue that interest in barter systems often increases during periods of financial pressure as consumers search for ways to reduce expenses without giving up access to useful services.

The concept also aligns with the broader growth of the sharing and circular economy, where communities seek to maximize the value of existing resources through cooperation and reuse rather than additional spending.

Beyond the financial benefits, developers say the platforms respond to another growing concern: maintaining meaningful human interaction in an age increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence. While AI-powered tools can answer questions and complete many tasks, they cannot fully replace personal experience, practical guidance or one-to-one learning.

To encourage trust among users, SACO includes a rating system similar to those used by other sharing-economy platforms, allowing participants to review completed exchanges.

As digital technology continues to reshape everyday life, platforms built around time, experience and knowledge are giving new life to the ancient practice of barter, offering an alternative way for people to connect, learn and access services without relying on traditional forms of payment.

Continue Reading

Trending