Computerworld.com [Hacking News]

Nextcloud has developed a desktop app for its Euro-Office-based productivity applications, filling a gap in the software suite that it pitches as a sovereign alternative to Microsoft Office.

Nextcloud, one of the backers of the Euro-Office initiative, integrated the software into its Nextcloud Office suite in June. Until now, it’s been accessible via a web browser or mobile app.

The new desktop client lets users edit documents, spreadsheets, and presentations locally, and sync files online for collaborative editing. It will be available for Linux, macOS, and Windows in the coming weeks.

“For organizations and individuals who prefer a traditional desktop experience, this closes one of the last gaps between Euro-Office and Microsoft Office, without handing control of their data to a non-European vendor,” Nextcloud said in a press release.

Rather than a standalone application suite, Euro-Office is designed as an integration component that’s embedded into productivity applications, such as Nextcloud Hub. Euro-Office handles document editing, while other elements such as storage and permissions managed by the wider platform.

The open-source project, which is built on OnlyOffice’s codebase, is backed by Nextcloud as well as Eurostack, Ionos, Office.eu, Proton, XWiki, and others. More than 40 individuals have contributed code to Euro-Office, according to Nextcloud, with around 15% of contributions from outside of the organizations directly involved in project.

Euro-Office supports OOXML file formats for compatibility with Microsoft Office, as well as OpenDocument Format (ODF) files, including ODT, ODS and ODP. The Document Foundation, which is responsible for development of LibreOffice, another open-source productivity suite, has previously questioned the Euro-Office initiative’s preference for Microsoft file formats over ODF.

Organizations using Euro-Office include Germany’s Deutsche Telekom Security and Destek, a Turkish IT consultancy, according to Nextcloud. Other customers in countries such as France, Switzerland, and Philippines are currently evaluating the software.

But it’s still early days for Euro-Office. Open-source software initiatives often face a challenge in gaining traction among a broad enterprise audience, said Martha Bennett, VP and principal analyst at Forrester.

“Euro-Office hasn’t really proven itself at the kind of scale that large enterprises are looking for. That’s of course not unique to Euro-Office; all potential open-source alternatives face the same issue,” she said.

“Obviously, it’s a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation — without somebody taking the leap, it’s not possible to provide that proof.”

Nextcloud Hub Summer 26 updates

Among the other announcements with the Summer 26 updates are changes to management of teams within Nextcloud Hub. An updated Nextcloud Teams app, which is now available in the app menu, provides users with an overview of the teams they belong to. Each team features a folder with shared resources such as files and tasks, which Nextcloud notes is similar to Microsoft’s approach with Teams and SharePoint.

Nextcloud now also enables the creation of team-owned files, starting with Nextcloud Collectives and Deck, with additional apps in future. The aim is to ensure that all team members can access a file, even if the creator leaves the team workspace. For admins, there are new tools to view and manage team folders, including configuring storage quotas.

Among the other announcements are updates to Nextcloud Text — a lightweight text editor available across several apps — with version comparisons, footnotes, and references available throughout a document, and inline comments. Nextcloud Tables, a database app, now has relational columns that link data in cells across multiple tables, and the ability to import and export table structure — such as columns, views, and table-based apps — without changing data.

With Nextcloud’s AI Assistant, users can now upload an image and ask questions about it or translate text, while the chatbot will also recall information across conversations.

UI improvements include a revamped search experience that displays results from across Nextcloud Hub files, messages, and events, with filter options such as date range and people. App menu icons have been updated to make apps easier to recognize, and new animations throughout the interface make navigation and interactions “feel more fluid and easier to follow,” said Nextcloud.

AWS is betting that AI agents need a different interface as they move beyond answering prompts and start working autonomously in the background.

The company has open-sourced Pizza Bot, a self-hosted application that gives users an inbox for managing work delegated to AI agents, with separate threads for ongoing tasks and a queue for work that is completed or needs human input, rather than keeping the management of agents restricted inside a conventional chat window.

The rationale, according to AWS, is that background agents do not always need a user’s attention while they work, and an inbox model will let users hand off longer-running tasks, return to them later, and see which jobs are complete or require intervention.

Under the hood

That approach is reflected in how the inbox organizes work with the help of an “All” tab that contains the history of each task or conversation, including the agent’s messages and work performed, the “Unread” tab that flags completed work that users have yet to review, and an “Action” tab that surfaces tasks paused while waiting for user input or approval.

The inbox interface also has a panel named Activity that shows users how an agent handled a particular task along with the transcript, AWS wrote in a blog post introducing Pizza Bot.

AWS’ inbox-oriented rationale also extends to Pizza Bot’s architecture.

It uses LangChain’s Deep Agents as the harness and LangGraph as the stateful runtime, with a combination of the two allowing an agent to checkpoint its progress as it works, preserving its messages, tool activity and current state so a task can be paused and resumed rather than being tied to a live chat session, the hyperscaler wrote.

Pizza Bot’s server sits on top of that stack, connecting the agent runtime with the user interface, skills, MCP servers and the model provider, with developers able to choose from Anthropic, OpenAI, Google Gemini and Amazon Bedrock, as well as local models through Ollama, it added.

As for its out-of-the-box capabilities, the application comes with skills for working with files, browsing the web and delegating tasks to specialist agents. Developers can also add existing Agent Skills and MCP servers to give the agents access to other tools and services, the hyperscaler wrote.

Enterprise integration could remain a hurdle

However, analysts were not too convinced that Pizza Bot’s out-of-the-box skills and support for existing tools will make its implementation easier for enterprises.

While the out-of-the-box capabilities and added support for existing skills saves enterprise teams the time to build the application, it leaves out the integration work required to make it work, said Bhupendra Chopra, chief revenue officer at IT consulting firm Kanerika.

“Integration is where most of the money in an enterprise agent deployment goes. A sales or finance team gets value from an agent when it can read and update CRM, email and ERP, and each of those systems needs a connector someone has to build, secure and maintain,” Chopra pointed out.

Pizza Bot’s integration could be further complicated by the application’s lack of support or any SLA, according to Manoj Chandra Jha, principal analyst at Nord-IQ Research. That means the integration and operational burden ultimately falls on enterprises, who would be responsible for running, securing and maintaining the open source software themselves, Jha said.

Rise in enterprise productivity likely

But for enterprises willing to take on that integration work, the inbox-oriented approach could improve productivity.

“It’s a meaningful shift because it changes the economics of delegating work to agents. A chat interface requires a person’s attention throughout the task, while an inbox brings them in only when their judgment is needed, much like how executives delegate work to their teams,” Chopra said.

“Coding agents have already demonstrated this model, where an engineer assigns an issue and reviews the resulting pull request. Pizza Bot extends that approach to tasks such as meeting preparation and follow-ups,” Chopra added.

Further, the analyst pointed out that the inbox-oriented approach could give enterprise teams a clearer window into how scheduled tasks perform.

“For scheduled tasks, having the results delivered as threads gives users a way to track what happened in the background and spot failures that might otherwise go unnoticed,” Chopra said.

Out of sight, out of mind

There are risks with this approach, however: “The inbox model can make bad work less visible. When somebody is watching an agent in a chat window, they can see it going off the rails,” said Phil Fersht, CEO of HFS Research.

In contrast, when hundreds of tasks are running quietly in the background, users may not see an agent making mistakes until the task is complete or an exception requires their attention, potentially making problems harder to catch early, Fersht said.

That reduced visibility can also create approval fatigue, according to Chopra.

“An agent sending back dozens of threads with multiple approval requests can condition users to approve them without reading them closely,” Chopra said.

There is also a risk in the delay between an agent preparing an action and a user approving it: “Information that was current when the agent paused may no longer be valid hours later, potentially resulting in an outdated CRM update or a meeting invite for a slot that is no longer available,” he said. “An assumption that might be caught in a live chat can go unchallenged as the agent continues building on it and consuming model resources. Scheduled runs can also add costs without anyone watching them in real time.”

Those disadvantages can be countered by designing processes with fewer, better-timed approval points, and verifying that the underlying data is still current before allowing an action to execute, he said.

Adoption likely to start with technical teams

Such tradeoffs are likely to shape where Pizza Bot gains traction.

“Adoption will likely be bottom-up, with individual technologists and small platform teams drawn to Pizza Bot’s control and standards-based design,” Jha said. “Risk-averse industries, especially ones in the regulated sectors, and business users with limited technical expertise, however, are likely to approach the application more cautiously,” he added.

That could leave Pizza Bot occupying a more targeted role in the enterprise, as a way for technical teams to experiment with asynchronous agents and new ways of delegating work, rather than an immediate replacement for the governed interfaces and managed services enterprises typically use for business-critical processes, he said.

This article first appeared on InfoWorld.

The fight against AI slop is real, even in photography, which is why Apple introduced its Reference Image tech alongside its new iPhones. This shifts image verification to the moment of capture, creating a privacy-preserving digital negative that could help newsrooms, businesses, and individuals prove that images are real. Apple’s Security Research team just shared a white paper explaining how it works.

What is Apple Reference Image?

Introduced alongside the new iPhone 18 Pro series, Apple Reference Image is designed as a process to help prove the authenticity of images captured using that phone. Like so much in Apple, it’s a combined hardware/software feature that means when an image is captured, the camera also captures unalterable Reference Image data, with help from Private Cloud Compute, Apple’s cloud intelligence system.

That help means Apple thinks it now offers a system that protects image provenance to the extent of providing quantum-secure defense. The need to protect digital assets such as images from quantum-based abuse will become increasingly important as more state and state-adjacent adversaries seek out new ways to undermine security and do harm. Apple quite clearly considers that looming threat to be real; in 2024 it introduced encryption to protect iMessage against future attacks using quantum computers.

How do we use Reference Image?

Apple is reaching out with this tech, including providing APIs for iPhones, iPads, and Macs that third-party developers can use to build support for Reference Image into their apps. 

Otherwise, Reference Images can be viewed in the Photos app beside the main image, acting like a digital negative to enable visual comparison of both images. The idea is that the existence of this digital negative acts as a tool to prevent people from passing off edited or AI-altered images as being genuine pictorial narratives of events.

This will be useful in multiple situations. In the media, a news desk may turn to the feature to verify if an image is genuine or fake, while in the enterprise the tool provides a useful proof point when assessing images that relate to any workflow — that picture taken in the stock room may now be more useful as proof that stock is in hand, while a car hire firm may find it easier to prove damage during a rental period by verifying the pic. The main thing it does is help you identify changes in an image, whether those changes were wrought by human or AI.

Why Apple built this protection

Apple’s newly published white paper explains how it works and how the system is built to endure against interference, particularly as AI images are becoming increasingly convincing. After all, as digital enters most camera workflows at the sensor, proof of algorithmic activity isn’t necessarily enough to show an image has been altered out of its photorealistic beginning. It must be said that at this point we only have Apple’s word for the effectiveness of the solution, but I’m inclined to think it will be borne out.

Enter Apple Reference Image, which acts as a “chain of trust,” one the Apple team says is stronger and more enduring than existing approaches based on the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) standard. Apple believes the C2PA approach remains too vulnerable because it is deployed after image capture and also creates a privacy risk by attaching images to public identity. You don’t have to look too far for instances in which photojournalists have been targeted by hostile forces once their identity has been realized, and the C2PA system arguably adds to that risk.

“Other industry solutions require a photographer or institution to vouch for an image using their own credentials,” the white paper explains. “We are concerned this puts some photographers, such as those operating in conflict zones, in a difficult position; it should not be necessary to forgo anonymity in order to prove image authenticity.”

Apple’s system is designed to kick in as images are captured, when a photographer can choose to create a securely timestamped reference image that accurately reflects what was captured by the iPhone’s camera sensor. The creation process leans into the powerful iPhone processor and also Apple’s Private Cloud Compute.

A little insight into how it works

As the image is captured, the iPhone cryptographically signs pixel data immediately after capture, which shows the image to be an exact depiction of what the camera sees. The system also captures relevant metadata, including use of the Secure Enclave on iPhone to ensure some values.

That means that the Reference Image now carries deep insight into the original, down to an unchangeable record of metadata. Not only can you see the image matches, but you can ensure the metadata is also the same. Furthermore, the image is also timestamped with a value taken from Apple’s own cryptographic timestamp service. Pull it all together and the digital negative is packed with verifiable, trusted data that can be contrasted with an image you want to check. 

There’s much more to this system, which Apple has built to be resilient to compromise while also protecting the privacy of the photographer. Instead of requiring the photographer act as the point of proof, Apple’s own Private Cloud Compute servers play the role by cryptographic signing of the image. 

“The result is a verification model that offers photographers, newsrooms, and everyday users renewed confidence that an image they’re viewing is a photograph actually captured by a camera,” the company said. It is, I think, also interesting to consider how Apple’s newly introduced tool for cryptographic proof could potentially be applied elsewhere.

The caveat is that the protection only extends to the main camera of the iPhone 18 Pro family and is not retrospective. It won’t be available in China on launch, while in the EU you can develop and view reference images but not create them.

Now please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

In the battle over whether the US or China will lead the world in AI, the argument for the US side largely can be summed up in four words: USA good, China bad.

In this worldview espoused by big US AI companies, the Trump administration, and many Republican members of Congress, AI born and bred in China is portrayed as a grave security risk. The Chinese government, they claim, will use Chinese AI models to steal information from businesses, individuals, and government agencies. They also claim that because Chinese AI complies with Chinese censorship rules, US companies that use these models will be forced to comply with the rules as well.

Critics also say that if US AI is overtaken by Chinese AI, the US economy could be dealt a crushing blow, because the hundreds of billion dollars being invested by US AI companies will go down the tubes.

Because of this, Big AI firms Anthropic and OpenAI are lobbying to ban Chinese open-source AI from the US.

Not all AI companies and their customers agree with a ban. Microsoft, Meta, and AI chip maker Nvidia, among others, say there’s room for both US AI models and Chinese open-source models.

What’s the fight really about? To understand, let’s first dig into the tech behind most Chinese AI.

What’s the fuss about?

The fight is primarily over what’s called lightweight open-source AI. “Lightweight” means the AI models don’t require multibillion-dollar data centers to train, build, and run them. They need comparatively modest processing power.

That’s attractive for businesses, because lightweight models are less expensive to license and run than much American AI tech, notably OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Anthropic’s Claude.

The other draw for businesses is that Chinese open-source AI tech can be used for free. And perhaps more important that is that the AI is typically what’s called “open weight,” which means businesses can tweak the technology for their own purposes.

When a traditional American AI model is trained, people who train it must decide how much “weight” to give to every parameter in every element of training data. For example, if AI were being trained to tell the difference between an apple and an orange, a great deal of weight would be put on the color of the fruit and the appearance of its skin. Less weight would be put on the fruit’s shape or size.

When a company buys American AI, they don’t know how much weight is given to each training parameter. They don’t even know what the parameters are. In open-weight AI, though, businesses have access to those parameters — and they can assign their own weights to them. This means they can customize the AI more easily for their particular needs in ways they can’t with traditional American AI models.

(Note that the terms open weight and open source are often used interchangeably when talking about AI, although technically they differ. Some open-weight models withhold some information such as their source code and training data — information that should be made public for a model to be considered truly open source.)

What Microsoft says about the Chinese models

Microsoft, Nvidia, Google, Meta, and many smaller companies don’t agree that Chinese lightweight open-source AI should be banned. They claim that security and censorship issues can be easily solved. And they believe use of the models will help the United States economically, not hurt it.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella posted on X: “Open-weight models are essential to a healthy AI ecosystem.” He added that the models will “strengthen American competitiveness and expand economic opportunity, while protecting national security.”

Microsoft was also one of more than 200 corporate signers of a document outlining all the reasons they believe open-weight AI is important.

Microsoft isn’t just talking about the importance of using Chinese lightweight open-source AI — it’s begun offering it to its customers and is looking to expand it even more. Right now, DeepSeek, the first Chinese lightweight open-source model to make its way to the US, is available via Azure. And Microsoft is testing offering DeepSeek to customers of its Copilot Cowork agentic AI product.

Keep in mind that Microsoft’s embrace of Chinese lightweight open-source AI has less to do with virtuous thinking than with profit-making. Offering these products to its customers will please both old and new customers because of the tech’s benefits. The more Microsoft offers to its customers, the more money it will make.

What happens next?

It’s unclear what happens next with the Chinese AI products. OpenAI and Anthropic are allied with the Trump administration in wanting them blocked or limited in the US.

Still, there’s an increasing groundswell backing back their use. Bill Gurley, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, told the New York Times: “You have two factions fighting over this issue. There’s the people who want OpenAI and Anthropic to own everything, and then there’s everybody else, including customers.”

My bet is that in short term, OpenAI and Anthropic will get what they want, because Trump has got their back. But after Trump leaves office, don’t be surprised if Chinese open-source AI has its day in the sun, backed by Microsoft.

Brace yourself: The way you get around the web on Android is about to get a whole lot better.

This week, the excellent Vivaldi Android browser is rolling out an update that adds in support for the entire collection of Chrome Web Store browser extensions. That means you can enhance and adjust your mobile web experience with all sorts of interesting — and potentially shape-shifting — new improvements.

Vivaldi, if you aren’t familiar, is a browser based on the same Chromium foundation that powers Google’s standard Chrome browser, but it has a ton of extra features and options that make for an even more personalized and productive experience. I started using it on all of my devices earlier this year and haven’t looked back since.

Now, with complete Chrome extension support added into the mix on Android, the advantage is growing even greater.

I’ll be honest, though: When I first saw that Vivaldi was adding in Chrome extension support for Android, I wasn’t sure what to make of it. Most of the extensions I use in my desktop browser just wouldn’t make sense on the mobile front and wouldn’t add much of meaningful value in that environment.

But then I put on my thinking cap. I did some deep digging and careful considering. And I found some Chrome extensions that actually work incredibly well in the Android arena and add a lot of interesting value into the mobile web adventure.

This is the first of a two-part collection. Here, we’ll look at five Chrome extensions that you can add into Vivaldi to save yourself steps and bring a welcome efficiency boost to your Android web work. In part two, we’ll round out the list with another set of extensions that’ll improve the internet itself in some truly intriguing ways.

Ready to reinvent how you experience the web on your phone?

[Get fresh Android tips in your inbox with my free Android Intelligence newsletter — one useful new thing to try every Friday!] 

A quick primer on Android Chrome extension installation

Real quick, before we get into the good stuff: When you’re ready to try out an extension, you’ll need to have the latest version of the Vivaldi Android app on your device (obviously, right?) — then either tap the puzzle-shaped extensions icon in the toolbar at the top of the screen, if you see it, or tap the “V”-shaped main menu icon in the upper-right corner and select “Extensions” from there.

Either way you go, you’ll see an option to “Discover more extensions.” That’ll take you to the Chrome Web Store, where you can search or browse through all the available extensions and install anything with a couple quick taps.

I’ll also provide direct links to each extension I’m recommending below, so you can tap it to open it in Vivaldi on your phone and then install it directly from there.

Note, too, that that same Vivaldi Extensions menu is where you can access and manage any installed extensions moving forward. You’ll see every extension you’ve installed there, and you can deactivate or uninstall anything as well as opt to have its icon pinned into your browser toolbar for easy ongoing access.

Chrome Android extension #1: The cookie request crumbler

Our first Android Chrome extension worth considering is one that you won’t ever open or actively think about once you install it and set it up. It’s a tool that works silently in the background to automatically handle those irksome cookie preference prompts that pop up around the web — so they’ll always get answered in the way you prefer, but you’ll never actually have to see or deal with ’em (and have ’em blocking half your view, in a mobile web scenario!) again.

It’s called Consent-o-Matic, and the way it works is simple: You install it, open its options page once to tell it which cookies you do and don’t want to allow around the web — and that’s pretty much it. From there on out, it’ll just click on all those prompts that pop up for you, based on your preferences, and they won’t interfere with your work or irritate you anymore.

Consent-o-Matic remembers your cookie preferences and then applies them for you automatically all over the web.

JR Raphael, Foundry

One option to look at while you’re in that initial setup area is in the “Display” tab at the top of the screen. By default, Consent-O-Matic will show any pop-ups it’s handling in a small overlay in the corner of the screen — but you can eliminate that entirely and make the process completely out of sight and invisible, if you want.

You can make Consent-o-Matic completely invisible so you never so much as see another cookie prompt again.

JR Raphael, Foundry

Yes, please — and thank you.

Chrome Android extension #2: 404 no more

Next is another quietly useful addition, and that’s the official Chrome extension for the Wayback Machine at the Internet Archive.

With the Wayback Machine extension active in your Android web browser, anytime you land on a page that for whatever reason isn’t online anymore or just isn’t available at that particular moment, you’ll see an offer to go to the page’s most recent cached version.

You can also call the extension up on demand to search for older saved versions of any pages by either pinning its icon to your Vivaldi toolbar or long-pressing a link within any page you’re viewing to reveal its menu of options.

The Wayback Machine Chrome extension integrates seamlessly into Vivaldi’s long-press link menu.

JR Raphael, Foundry

Chrome Android extension #3: A background open shortcut

I don’t know about you, but when I’m wading my way around the web, I find myself opening links a lot — often with the intent to look at ’em later.

Typically, that requires long-pressing on the link and then finding the option to open it in a background tab. But with a handy extension called DoubleClicker, that same action can be easier than ever.

Install DoubleClicker into your Android Vivaldi browser, and that’s it: From that moment forward, you can simply double-tap your finger on any link within any page, and it’ll open instantly as a background tab — waiting and ready for when you want it and without any waiting, poking around, or other interruptions to your workflow.

This might just be my favorite addition of all.

Chrome Android extension #4: Hands-free scrolling

The next time you’re reading something on your phone, keep a little somethin’ called Auto Scroll Extension in mind.

As its name suggests, the extension lets you set any speed you like and then simply tap its icon (which works best if you pin it to your toolbar) to automatically scroll the page for you — so you can keep reading without having to do a thing.

Look, ma: No hands! Auto Scroll in action in Vivaldi on Android.

JR Raphael, Foundry

Chrome Android extension #5: Easier password access

Last but not least for this list is an addition that seems strange on the surface — but hear me out:

If you’re using an Android password manager other than the Google Password Manager — like 1Password or Bitwarden — try installing its extension into Vivaldi on your phone.

Yes, it’s redundant with having the standalone app installed and set as your system-wide password management service. But it often ends up being faster and easier to have a sign-in handled directly within the browser instead of having to rely on the system-level integration.

And having the browser-based option present doesn’t prevent you from using the other route, either. You’ve just got options, and you can pick whichever feels fastest and easiest to you at any given moment.

Try it out for yourself and see whatcha think. And keep going with the second set of worthwhile Android Chrome extensions next!

Your next mission, extension exploration aside: Come check out my free Android Intelligence newsletter to get something new and useful in your inbox every Friday — and get my awesome Android Notification Power-Pack today.

Oracle began a new round of layoffs this week, sending early-morning termination emails to staff for the second time in six months.

The latest wave began Monday with affected staff being told, “After careful consideration of Oracle’s current business needs, we have made the decision to eliminate your role as part of a broader organizational change,” according to BusinessInsider. Termination was immediate.

That’s the same wording as in the previous wave of layoffs, which took place on March 31 and affected workers in the US, India, Canada, Mexico and Uruguay. In the 12 months to May 31, Oracle cut its global workforce from about 162,000 to about 141,000, a decline of roughly 13%.

Oracle has made no public statement confirming the latest round of job cuts, but in a regulatory filing days earlier the company said it had set aside a further $700 million for restructuring charges, bringing the total charges this year to roughly $2.8 billion.

What the new termination emails say

Staff receiving the latest termination emails were told termination and compensation details would follow by DocuSign, Business Insider wrote. An internal document reviewed by the publication said severance terms varied by role and region, and some teams facing double-digit percentage cuts.

Affected employees took to social media to vent.

Eric Brunson, a senior principal offensive security researcher at Oracle, described in a LinkedIn post how he had lost access to corporate communication tools before receiving any formal notice. “I woke up to not being able to log back into Slack,” he wrote. “No new emails or notification in email and I’m locked out of there. I was able to get ahold of my manager on LinkedIn and she confirmed.” Brunson said the timing fell two days before a scheduled RSU vesting date, adding, “Probably part of the plan.”

The filing that backs up the layoff accounts

While Oracle is not talking about the layoffs, its 10-Q quarterly report states that management approved and supplemented restructuring plans “to implement certain strategic measures and further improve operational efficiencies, including through the adoption and integration of artificial intelligence technologies across certain functions.” It adds that “subsequent to August 31, 2026, our management supplemented the 2026 Restructuring Plan by approximately $700 million to reflect additional actions that we expect to take.”

Oracle has already spent $1.97 billion of the $2.1 billion restructuring charges it originally budgeted, it reported.

Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst at Greyhound Research, said the filing should be read carefully rather than as confirmation of a headcount. “The supplement is an estimate, not a bill,” he said, noting it raises the program’s estimated cost by about a third without committing Oracle to a timetable.

Gogia said the more significant shift is in the filing’s language rather than the dollar figure. Oracle’s August 2025 and February 2026 filings had described the plan as tied to “acquisitions and certain other operational activities.”

AI was named as a driver of restructuring for the first time in the Sept. 11 filing.

Why the headcount stays unconfirmed

Gogia said no verified figure exists yet for how many employees the September round affected.

He noted that 30,000 was a January forecast of the total 2026 program. Twenty-one thousand is the confirmed net decline in Oracle’s global workforce across the full fiscal year. A reported 3,000 job cuts in India on Sept. 1 remains unconfirmed by Oracle.

The $700 million restructuring supplement “cannot be divided into people,” Gogia said, since it covers termination benefits, contract termination costs and other exit costs across a program spanning multiple countries. “There is no solid headcount for the September round,” he said.

A pattern that began in March

Oracle’s first 2026 layoff wave began March 31, when the Revenue and Health Sciences unit, the SaaS and Virtual Operations Services group, and NetSuite’s India Development Centre saw some of the deepest reductions.

Figures published by Oracle for its fiscal year ending May 31, 2026, show research and development headcount fell from 50,000 to 43,000 employees during the year, sales and marketing fell from 31,000 to 25,000, and services fell from 37,000 to 34,000, according to Gogia’s analysis of the company’s own reporting.

International staff, at 92,000, saw a larger reduction than the 49,000-strong U.S. workforce, he said.

Oracle did not respond to a request for comment.

This article first appeared on CIO.

Among a range of factors leading to a wave of tech sector layoffs in 2026 is the rapid rise of artificial intelligence and automation. Companies are reconfiguring their workforces to leverage AI for increased efficiency and reduced operating costs. This realignment and reduction is implemented even by companies reporting strong financial performance.

But it’s not just AI leading to workforce cuts. Complementing this technological shift are ongoing economic uncertainty, inflation, and higher interest rates, compounded by a chip shortage and rising energy costs. This mix is driving companies to cut costs and streamline operations for increased efficiency.

According to data compiled by Layoffs.fyi, an online tracker that keep tabs on job losses in the technology sector, 123,941 tech employees were laid off at 269 companies in 2025. The site also reports that 71,981 government employees were laid off by DOGE alone, with 182,528 total federal workers laid off.

Here is a list — to be updated regularly — of some of the most prominent technology layoffs the industry has experienced recently.

Notable tech layoffs in 2026

• Oracle (again)
• Monday.com
• Microsoft
• Meta
• Cisco
• Cloudflare
• Oracle
• Atlassian
• Salesforce
• Amazon
• Ericsson

Sept. 15, 2026: Oracle forecasts 33% increase in restructuring costs as new round of layoffs hits

Oracle began a new round of layoffs this week, sending early-morning termination emails to staff for the second time in six months. Oracle has made no public statement confirming the latest round of job cuts, but in a regulatory filing days earlier the company said it had set aside a further $700 million for restructuring charges, bringing the total charges this year to roughly $2.8 billion.

July 22, 2026: Monday.com cuts 20% of its workforce to restructure for the AI era

The company says the decision to cut 620 jobs isn’t about margins, but about creating a flatter organization built around AI agents, autonomous teams, and deeper customer engagement.

July 6, 2026: Microsoft cuts 4,800 jobs, primarily in sales and Xbox teams

As the company trims thousands of jobs, it’s also investing in embedded engineering teams and AI infrastructure. The layoffs come several weeks after the company offered 8,750 US employees voluntary retirement buyouts.

June 5, 2026: Tech industry cut 38,242 jobs in May, worst since 2024

AI was blamed for 40% of the job cuts in May, up from 7% in January, according to research by employment placement company Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

May 20, 2026: Meta cuts 8,000 jobs, around 10% of workforce

The cuts are expected to expected to hit Meta’s engineering and product teams the hardest, arriving as Meta pivots toward AI to boost efficiency across its organization, according to Yahoo Tech.

May 13, 2026: Cisco to cut nearly 4,000 jobs despite strong growth in AI, enterprise networking

Despite reporting positive financial news — including record third-quarter revenue of $15.8 billion, a 12% year-over-year increase — Cisco said it will eliminate almost 4,000 jobs.

May 7, 2026: Cloudflare to cut 1,100 jobs in AI-focused restructuring

About 20% of Cloudflare’s global workforce will be culled as the company pivots for the agentic AI era, Reuters reported.

April 1, 2026: Oracle to cut up to 30,000 jobs globally, putting enterprise support and roadmaps at risk

Oracle began laying off employees on March 31 in what could be the largest workforce reduction in the company’s history. Employees received termination emails at 6 a.m. local time with immediate system lockouts and no prior warning. (Note: in June, CNBC put the final layoff tally at 21,000.)

March 12, 2026: Atlassian cuts 1,600 jobs to fund AI and enterprise expansion

Atlassian will reduce its global workforce by approximately 10%, eliminating around 1,600 roles, as the collaboration software maker redirects capital toward artificial intelligence development and enterprise sales.

March 11, 2026: Tech layoffs surpass 45,000 in early 2026

A recent analysis by RationalFX found 45,363 job cuts globally so far this year—with roughly 68% or more than 30,000 occurring in the U.S. — highlighting ongoing workforce cuts even as many tech companies report strong revenue growth.

Feb. 10, 2026: Salesforce lays off staffers as executive leadership churn continues

Salesforce has reduced close to 1,000 roles earlier this month across teams, including marketing, product management, data analytics, and its Agentforce AI unit, Business Insider reported, quoting employees familiar with the matter.

Jan. 23, 2026: Amazon layoffs expected to disproportionately hit AWS and tech talent

As the market slows down, AWS and other Amazon units are preparing for another round of layoffs, which is expected to overwhelmingly impact tech talent. An email from HR leader Beth Galetti on Jan. 28 confirmed 16,000 job cuts.

Jan. 15, 2026: Ericsson plans to shed 1,600 jobs in Sweden

 Ericsson lans to cut some 1,600 jobs in Sweden, the telecommunications equipment maker said doubling down on recent cost-saving measures that have helped it weather a prolonged downturn in telecoms spending, Reuters reports.

Jan. 13, 2026: Meta plans to cut around 10% of employees in Reality Labs business

Meta plans to cut around 10% of the employees in its Reality Labs division who work on products including the metaverse, according to three people with knowledge of the discussions, according to The New York Times.

Layoffs in 2025

• Cisco
• Oracle
• Windsurf
• Intel
• Microsoft
• Crowdstrike
• HPE
• Autodesk
• HPE
• CISA
• Workday
• Salesforce
• Meta

Global tech-sector layoffs surpass 244,000 in 2025

Economic uncertainty, elevated interest rates, and AI adoption have driven workforce reductions across tech companies worldwide, according to a RationalFX report.

October 28, 2025: Amazon to cut 14,000 jobs across company

Amazon will reduce its overall workforce by 14,000, cutting layers of management across the company and hiring in some areas to support its “biggest bets”.

August 18, 2025: Cisco and Oracle to cut hundreds of Bay Area jobs

Tech companies Cisco and Oracle are cutting hundreds of jobs across the Bay Area. Cisco will eliminate 221 positions at its Milpitas and San Francisco offices, effective Oct. 13. Oracle is reducing 101 positions in Santa Clara on the same date 

August 5, 2025: 3 weeks after acquiring Windsurf, Cognition offers staff the exit door

Cognition, the AI coding startup that acquired rival company Windsurf three weeks ago, laid off 30 employees last week and is offering buyouts to the roughly 200 remaining employees on the team, reports The Information.

July 25, 2025, Intel to lay off 22% of workforce, CEO Tan signals ‘no more blank checks’

Intel will reduce its workforce to 75,000 employees by the end of 2025 as new CEO Lip-Bu Tan implements sweeping changes designed to transform the struggling chipmaker

July 8, 2025, Intel layoffs begin: Chipmaker is cutting many thousands of jobs

Intel has begun laying off employees across the company. CEO Lip-Bu Tan told workers back in April to expect major layoffs at Intel in the coming months as the chipmaker slashes costs and overhauls its organization after years of technical setbacks and falling sales.

July 2, 2025: Microsoft will cut 9,000 workers

Microsoft will lay off about 9,000 employees, a source familiar with the workforce cut told CNBC.  The cuts will reportedly affect less than 4% of Microsoft’s global workforce and will impact different teams, geographies and levels of experience. This is the latest in a string of cuts the tech giant has made this year.

June 17, 2025: Intel looks to factory layoffs to return to profitability

Intel will lay off up to 20% of its manufacturing sector employees starting in July, according to media reports, as the company looks for options as it seeks a return to profitability. The cuts reportedly will be made around the world, but some of the layoffs will be closer to home, according to a report in The Oregonian citing an internal company memo from Intel manufacturing Vice President Naga Chandrasekaran.

May 7, 2025: CrowdStrike to lay off 5% of staff

CrowdStrike announced a plan to cut about 500 roles, roughly 5% of its workforce, to streamline operations and reduce costs. The cybersecurity company will incur about $36 million to $53 million in charges related to the layoffs

March 6, 2025: HPE cuts 2,500 jobs, remains committed to Juniper buy

CEO Antonio Neri told Wall Street analysts that HPE would begin implementing a cost-cutting program involving layoffs of about 2,500 employees over the next 18 months. HPE employs about 61,000 people worldwide.

Feb. 27, 2025: Autodesk to lay off 9% of workforce

Software maker Autodesk is laying off 1,350 staff. With the rise of subscription and multi-year contracts billed annually, and self-service enablement, it finds it needs fewer sales staff, CEO Andrew Anagnost said in a message to employees. And with its cloud, platform, and AI products proving most profitable, it’s concentrating its staff and investments there.

Feb. 27, 2025: HP to lay off 2,000 more

As part of an ongoing restructuring, HP plans to lay off up to another 2,000 workers. In recent weeks, the company has tried — unsuccessfully — to do away with telephone support staff by forcing callers to wait for at least 15 minutes if they refuse to use self-service support resources online. The company swiftly backtracked, but wider job cuts are still on.

Feb. 21, 2025: CISA lays off 130

Government employees get laid off too: In this case, 130 workers at the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency are being shown the door as a result of a DOGE decision. Cybersecurity experts are concerned that the cuts will harm the international collaborations that CISA has fostered, quite apart from their concerns about the security of the DOGE layoff process itself.

Feb. 5, 2025: Workday lays off 1,750

As it moves to invest more in AI and international growth, Workday is laying off 8.5% of its workforce and disposing of unused office space. Some analysts fear the cutbacks will affect the company’s customer service — unless AI can pick up the slack.

Feb. 4, 2025: Salesforce lays off over 1,000

At the same time as it’s hiring sales staff for its new artificial intelligence products, Salesforce is laying off over 1,000 workers across the company, according to Bloomberg. As of June, 2024, the company had over 72,000 employees, according to its website. Salesforce did not comment on the report. In 2024 the company reportedly laid off around 1,000 staff too, in two waves: January and July.

Jan. 14, 2025: Meta will lay off 5% of workforce

Mark Zuckerberg told Meta employees he intended to “move out the low performers faster” in an internal memo reported by Bloomberg. The memo announced that the company will lay off 5% of its staff, or around 3,600 staff, beginning Feb. 10. The company had already reduced its headcount by 5% in 2024 through natural attrition, the memo said. Among those leaving the company will be staff previously responsible for fact checking of posts on its social media platforms in the US, as the company begins relying on its users to police content.

Tech layoffs in 2024

• Equinix
• AMD
• Freshworks
• Cisco
• General Motors
• Intel
• OpenText
• Microsoft
• AWS
• Dell

Nov. 26, 2024: Equinix to cut 3% of staff

Despite intense demand for its data center capacity, Equinix is planning to lay off 3% of its workforce, or around 400 employees. The announcement followed the appointment of Adaire Fox-Martin to replace Charles Meyers as CEO and the departures of two other senior executives, CIO Milind Wagle and CISO Michael Montoya.

Nov. 13, 2024: AMD to cut 4% of workforce

AMD will lay off around 1,000 employees as it pivots towards developing AI-focused chips, it said. The move came as a surprise to staff, as the company also reported strong quarterly earnings.

Nov. 7, 2024: Freshworks lays off 660

Enterprise software vendor Freshworks laid off around 660 staff, or around 13% of its headcount, despite reporting increased revenue and profits in its fourth fiscal quarter. The company described the layoffs as a realignment of its global workforce.

Sept. 17, 2024: Cisco lays off 6,000

After laying off around 4,200 staff in February, Cisco is at it again, laying off another 6,000 or around 7% of its workforce. Among the divisions affected were its threat intelligence unit, Talos Security.

Aug. 20, 2024: General Motors lays off 1,000 software staff

More than 1,000 software and services staff are on the way out at General Motors, signalling that it could be rethinking its digital transformation strategy. In an internal memo, the company said that it was moving resources to its highest-priority work and flattening hierarchies.

August 1, 2024: Intel removes 15,000 roles

Intel plans to cut its workforce by around 15% to reduce costs after a disastrous second quarter. Revenue for the three months to June 29 stagnated at around $12.8 billion, but net income fell 85% to $83 million, prompting CEO Pat Gelsinger to bring forward a company-wide meeting in order to announce that 15,000 staff would lose their jobs. “This is an incredibly hard day for Intel as we are making some of the most consequential changes in our company’s history,” Gelsinger wrote in an email to staff, continuing: “Our revenues have not grown as expected — and we’ve yet to fully benefit from powerful trends, like AI. Our costs are too high, our margins are too low. We need bolder actions to address both — particularly given our financial results and outlook for the second half of 2024, which is tougher than previously expected.”

July 4, 2024: OpenText to lay off 1,200

OpenText said it will lay off 1,200 staff, or about 1.7% of its workforce, in a bid to save around $100 million annually. It plans to hire new sales and engineering staff in other areas in 2025, it said.

June 4, 2024: Microsoft lays off staff in Azure division

Microsoft laid off staff in several teams supporting its cloud services, including Azure for Operations and Mission Engineering. The company didn’t say exactly how many staff were leaving.

April 4, 2024: Amazon downsizes AWS in a fresh cost-cutting round

Amazon announced hundreds of layoffs in the sales and marketing teams of its AWS cloud services division — and also in the technology development teams for its physical retail stores, as it stepped back from efforts to generalize the “Just Walk Out” technology built for its Amazon Fresh grocery stores.

April 1, 2024: Dell acknowledges 13,000 job cuts

Dell Technologies’ latest 10K filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission disclosed that the company had laid off 13,000 employees over the course of the 2023 fiscal year; it characterized the layoffs and other reorganizational moves as cost-cutting measures. “These actions resulted in a reduction in our overall headcount,” the company said. A comparison to the previous year’s 10K filing, performed by The Register, found that Dell employed 133,000 people at that point, compared to 120,000 as of February 2024. Dell announced layoffs of 6,650 staffers on Feb. 6, but it is unclear whether those cuts were reflected in the numbers from this year’s 10K statement.

See news of earlier layoffs.

Just because Apple now has AI, a new folding iPhone, and a newly minted CEO doesn’t mean the litigation between it and OpenAI has gone away. Apple now wants to force OpenAI to let it look at the hardware it has been building, according to a new report.

A reasonable request?

It seems a reasonable request, doesn’t it? After all, Apple’s argument is that OpenAI has been engaged in trade secret theft to help it design and develop its new hardware. OpenAI’s defense against these claims feel flimsy, at least to this reporter. They seem to coalesce around something like, “We don’t need your trade secrets because we’re making something brand new.” 

The problem with that defense is, contextually, that while on this stated mission to do something completely new, the company has hired around 400 former Apple staff so far, including its chief designers. And Apple thinks part of that process has been OpenAI, in whole or in part, working to exfiltrate its trade secrets.

What Apple wants — and why

With those facts as your guide, Apple’s request to Judge Edward J. Davila seems reasonable. It wants to take a look at what OpenAI is developing to ensure its trade secrets have not been abused in the process of designing that product. Apple argues that if it is forced to wait until the product is released, then it will be impossible to make its trade secrets confidential again, particularly as the defense seems to consist of that pinky promise that no Apple trade secrets have been harmed.

Apple legal also argues that it cannot be fair to allow OpenAI to defend itself by alleging its unreleased and unseen product doesn’t contain any trade secrets without permitting Apple — and the court — to verify that. While Apple’s counsel doesn’t seem to have said it, you could paraphrase the request as Apple telling the genAI firm, “Let us see what you are building; if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

Except, of course, that while building its defense, OpenAI is giving many of us the distinct impression that it may have something to fear.

What may happen next

Despite the merits of the argument, I think Apple’s request will not prevail, in part because the court may assess that if Apple takes a look at OpenAI’s homework it may compound the risk of IP theft. But that doesn’t mean Apple’s attempt will fail outright, as the compromise position is likely to be the appointment of a trusted, independent, third-party expert witness to take a look at what Apple’s competitor is making in Apple’s stead. 

There is precedent for this. That’s more or less what happened when Waymo pursued a similar case against Uber, or when AMCS litigated against Sinovel. There are nuances to all three cases that mean they aren’t perfectly aligned, but that does seem a logical next step to this layman.

Of course, just because it’s logical doesn’t mean either party is going to like it, but OpenAI could conceivably even suggest such an approach as it seeks to buy itself time to build and release its still mythical hardware. That’s also why Apple wants a chance to look at documents pertaining to that hardware to make very certain it hasn’t infringed any of Apple’s own trade secrets.

A side order of humble pie

All the same, if this case does indeed turn out to be a scenario in which one company has been found with its hand in the cookie jar, then the best possible approach for the company with crumbs around its mouth is going to be damage control. That’s going to take a lot less war-war and a great deal more jaw-jaw. It’s also going to require the intake of a very, very large slice of humble pie. Right now, it seems to me that Apple isn’t talking, and OpenAI isn’t hungry enough to take that first bite. Not yet. 

The case, number 5:26-cv-07078, rolls on.

Now please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

The colorful CEO of Automattic, which controls WordPress, was forced out last Thursday by his board of directors, which put him on a leave of absence. He used his system access to remove the accounts of the acting CEO and others — an action that could get most employees fired. Instead, he was fully reinstated to CEO a couple of days later.

It’s not hard to compare this to the saga at OpenAI almost three years ago when an eerily similar series of events happened. The board fired the CEO for having repeatedly lied to it. Within a few days, the board reversed itself. 

A weaker historical comparison is with Steve Jobs, who was ousted from his Apple CEO role, only to later return. But Jobs at least had the decency to wait a few years while he created and ran NeXT.

To be fair, boards have often been criticized for being puppets of the CEO, who often have a lot to say about who serves on the board. But that criticism doesn’t hold for the first OpenAI board nor for the initial Automattic board.

Some years ago, I was involved with a VC-funded startup, and we were at the stage of forming a board of directors. I was talking with the person who was to be the board chair and he needed candidates for board secretary, which is typically an attorney. That role is supposed to be a lawyer who cares about the board, as opposed to the company’s general counsel, who reports into the CEO and only cares about the company. 

The chair said that we need someone who is trustworthy. I had the perfect candidate in mind, until I probed deeper and found that there is a vast chasm between “trustworthy” and “someone we can trust.” 

I envisioned someone who was honest and had integrity, someone who would take their duties seriously and would tell the board the truth regardless of the implications. That turned out to be precisely what the chair did not want. 

He wanted someone who would vote with us regardless of their legal opinion. He didn’t actually want trustworthy. He wanted blind unconditional loyalty. (That business, thank goodness, never ended up launching.) 

But that seems to be what CEOs now want, which undermines the entire point of having an independent board. Other than deciding whether to accept an acquisition offer, the most important decision of any tech board is the hiring — and firing — of the CEO. 

What does it say when a board makes that decision for what it seems to be a legitimate business reason — and then reverses itself within a couple of days? 

In the case of Automattic, it is not a good look. The board said absolutely nothing about why it forced the CEO out, which made its reversal over the weekend even more perplexing. 

When Automattic emailed reporters on Thursday to announce that the CEO had been ousted, the messages were cryptic: “Matt Mullenweg is currently on leave from Automattic. Mark Davies, Automattic’s CFO, will lead the company as interim CEO. The Board has full confidence in Mark’s leadership and in the team’s ability to execute against the company’s priorities.”

The next we heard was an equally cryptic message sent Saturday afternoon: “Matt Mullenweg is the chairman and CEO of Automattic, with full support of the board, and if you search online you can see many top executives and Automatticians supporting him as well.”

Huh? We then asked for clarification of what happened and why. At 2:26 AM Eastern on Sunday, the media team emailed: “Matt and Automattic’s leadership team have great respect for everyone involved. While we can’t comment on specific individuals, we’re thankful for their contributions to Automattic and its mission, and we remain excited about what’s ahead with Matt at the helm. Matt was away for only 33 hours and 20 minutes — we’re now back to work.”

My proposal: A board’s decision to hire or terminate a CEO should be defended with public specifics. And so should a hiring decision. Or, in this case, a reversal of a mandatory leave of absence decision. 

If the board is going to take the extreme step of relieving the CEO, it should be required to say why. In some situations, it may need to be vague (as in “personnel situation involving a substantiated sexual assault”), but the board needs to give some kind of reason. That should happen so at the very least, a reversal is also explained. 

Further reading:

• Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg is out: Does this mean long-term viability, or liability, for WordPress customers?
• Matt Mullenweg: WordPress developer hours cutback may or may not slow innovation
• WordPress.org statement threatens possible shutdown for all of 2025
• About that brawl between the WordPress co-founder and WP Engine…
• One-twelfth of Automattic staff leave over WordPress-WP Engine spat
• Things get nasty in lawsuit between WordPress.org and WP Engine

Microsoft on Monday added itself to a growing list of AI vendors pledging to try to control the behavior of its AI models.

“AI should not exceed human control. Models should remain subordinate to humanity, subject to meaningful human oversight and control,” the company wrote in the draft version of its Humanist AI Code of Conduct, released Monday with an invitation to the public to provide feedback. 

“Humanist AI develops systems with clear purposes, evaluated against real-world impact, and rejects the race to produce an all-purpose superintelligence that could evade these safeguards,” Microsoft wrote. “We are building something fundamentally useful and safe even if that means compromising on ultimate generality, autonomy, or capability.”

Microsoft’s comments are roughly in agreement with recent posts by various major AI vendors, including those from Anthropic and OpenAI, which were endorsed by Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceXAI and Tesla, but nowhere in its 37 page document is there any description of concrete action. However, to be fair, almost none of the other major AI players have been specific about how they would control future AI models either.

Acknowledges issues

A key problem with many vendor attempts to impose AI limits is that all of these companies have thus far been unable to stop AI agents from doing almost anything, given the agents’ ability and willingness to sidestep or ignore guardrails. 

Microsoft has described its worries about the technology in the past, both when it started to curtail AI efforts among its own employees and when it announced the formation of the team that created the Code of Conduct. 

Its current post acknowledged some of the difficulties involved in pushing AI development while limiting its abilities. 

“Both under- and over-caution represent failure modes with different types of consequences,” the company said. “Under-caution can clearly result in more direct harm, but over-caution may occur more often and therefore may need more frequent correction. This is where proportionality to the potential for harm and safety context are particularly important. Responses and actions should take into account the estimated severity and likelihood of potential harms and adjust responses and actions accordingly.”

It noted, however, that the term “harm” is “broad and often context-dependent, and there are nuanced gradations in potential severity and likelihood. Microsoft AI (MAI) Model responses should be tailored to that context and to a wide range of harms.”

Laudable goal, but lacks detail

Analysts and consultants generally agreed that Microsoft’s stated goal is laudable, but the lack of specifics and verification mechanisms makes it difficult to take the post seriously.

Thomas Randall, research director at Info-Tech Research Group, also said he spotted some apparent contradictions within the document. 

“[It] says MAI models will not assist in manufacturing or modifying weapons. Yet Microsoft offers OpenAI’s GPT-5.2 through Secret and Top Secret government clouds for defense and national security workloads,” Randall said, though he acknowledged that this is not technically a breach of the Code because GPT-5.2 is not an MAI model. “The most meaningful parts of the Code of Conduct may exclude other parts of Microsoft’s actual AI business operations. Tensions like these appear in other forms throughout the Code.”

But he added that Microsoft’s position is bolstered by its earlier Frontier Governance Framework that “provides pre- and post-training evaluations, six-month reassessments, third-party testing, phased releases and a commitment to pause development or deployment where high risks cannot be mitigated.” However, he noted, “it is still Microsoft that defines the thresholds, selects the evaluators, determines whether residual risk is acceptable and gives its own executives the final deployment decision.”

Randall said he would like to see Microsoft, as well as other major AI vendors, deliver more verifiable data points, such as those from independent evaluators given continuous access and freedom to publish findings about the vendor’s actions. He also would like to see independent board-level safety oversight with authority to block releases, protected whistleblowing, accessible monitoring, audit logs, kill switches, and mandatory reassessment after model changes.

However, Justin Greis, CEO of consulting firm Acceligence, pointed out that Microsoft was candid about the many elements that are not yet in place.

“The current models are not yet trained on the Code, the evaluation framework is still being developed, and Microsoft explicitly says written objectives alone cannot ensure alignment or guarantee present-day behavior,” Greis said. “That distinction matters. Publishing a constitution for AI is useful. Proving that the system actually follows the constitution, especially when models become increasingly agentic, is the hard part.”

And consultant Brian Levine, executive director of FormerGov, said Microsoft deserved a little bit of credit for at least saying that model capabilities should be limited.

“Microsoft explicitly says it will compromise on generality, autonomy, and capability to keep systems safe and under human control, and that it rejects the race to build an all-purpose superintelligence. Coming from a company of Microsoft’s size and ambition, that’s a notable thing to put in writing,” he said. “For years, the assumption was that the frontier labs would chase maximum capability and treat safety as a constraint to be managed. A document that says the opposite, that says usefulness and control come before ultimate capability, is worth paying attention to, regardless of what follows it.”

He added: “The real test comes next, and it’s verification: measurable standards, independent assurance, and a way for outsiders to check the commitments against what’s actually shipping. That’s the natural progression and it’s the part the whole industry still has to build.”

Not doing the hard part

But others argued that Microsoft is merely doing the easy part, the marketing part, and is deliberately not committing to doing the hard part.

“Promising to give up capabilities is easy when those capabilities don’t yet exist,” said Noah Kenney, principal consultant at Digital 520. “The real test will come when Microsoft has a model ready to ship that would close a competitive gap and decides to hold it back.”

Until then, he said, the promise of responsible AI costs Microsoft nothing.

“Microsoft’s code of conduct reads like a marketing document written to reassure customers, regulators, and its own employees,” Kenney noted. “The problem is that no one knows how to make those promises specific, which leaves Microsoft asking for trust before they can explain what that trust should be based on.”

Tom Findling, CEO of Conifers.ai, added that his concern with the Microsoft document is that it doesn’t answer the obvious question of how these models can possibly be controlled. 

“The document says the model should never resist being shut down, should stay within its scope, and shouldn’t hide what it’s doing. Those are all the right goals,” he said. “But the harder question is what happens when a highly capable agent doesn’t behave the way you expect. What actually stops it? As these systems get more autonomous, the safety boundary can’t just be that the model was trained not to do something. You need controls outside the model that limit what it can access, what it can do, and how far it can go.”

Cybersecurity learned this lesson a long time ago, he pointed out. “You don’t secure a system by assuming it will behave correctly,” he said. “You assume something will eventually fail, get compromised, or act in an unexpected way, and you design the controls around that. AI needs the same mindset.”

Frank Dickson, principal analyst at Dickson Research, contrasted Microsoft’s promise with Anthropic’s commitment, and found Microsoft lacking.

“Microsoft’s document is shy on mechanism,” he said. “Compare the two on specifics. [Anthropic CEO] Amodei’s proposal names a third party, METR, and describes what access actually means: office badges, company laptops, employee-level visibility, and publishing rights Anthropic doesn’t get to edit. You can check whether that happened.”

On the other hand, he noted, “Microsoft’s document says models should ‘fail tasks rather than violate the code’s rules,’ which is a real design principle. Credit where it’s due, but there’s no named auditor, no verification method, and no stated consequence for a violation. Thirty-seven pages and it still won’t commit to a single verifiable check.”

Dickson stressed that as long as agents routinely break their own rules, these vague promises won’t help. 

“Every frontier lab still gets jailbroken, still has agents that go off-script, still hasn’t closed the gap between what a model is instructed to do and what it can be induced to do,” Dickson said. “A values statement that skips the verification question isn’t a constraint, it’s a hope wearing a policy document’s clothes.”

While we wait to see if Apple really is experiencing huge demand for its newly introduced iPhones, today’s the day every iPhone user gets a completely new device experience, with iOS 27 rolling out internationally, along with the other members of Apple’s 27 series OS family. If you’re on the fence about installing the new release, here are 12 reasons you should upgrade today.

Speed and performance

Apple seems to have worked hard to improve speed and performance in this release. Everything feels much zippier, but where it seems most noticeable is when launching apps. Apple says these now open up to 30% faster, while AirDrop transfers are almost twice as fast as before.

Liquid Glass looks nicer

With the 20th anniversary glass iPhone waiting in the wings, Apple isn’t going to get rid of Liquid Glass. But the company is prepared to iterate the look, and iterate it has, with sharper icons, improved contrast, and a new slider control that lets you set the UI’s transparency.

Use two iPhones

iPhone Handoff lets you use one eSIM across two devices on supporting carriers. Once set up it’s remarkably easy to use — your SIM activates the moment you unlock one of your iPhones. Better still, if you use two lines on one device, you’ll find these both transfer across too.

Siri AI

We’ve been talking so much about Apple’s improved Siri that I demoted it to fourth place; that’s not a reflection on what it does, but on how often you’ll have seen how it has become so much better at understanding context. It now has a Chat GPT-like interface, a standalone app, and powerful on-screen awareness to help get things done. Sadly, many of these features aren’t available in the EU.

Notes, Calendar, Reminders

AI is everywhere, including in Reminders Smart Suggestions, which can read your Messages chats and prompt you to set reminders for agreed tasks. Notes also gains Markdown copying.

Shortcuts to imagination

You can now create a shortcut just by describing what actions you want it to take. Apple Intelligence will string a shortcut together for you, which you can then use across all your systems.

Notify Me

Safari can watch a web page and automatically let you know when it changes. That’s not the only improvement; Apple Intelligence automatically groups your open tabs into topics so related pages are easier to find.

DIY: Safari extensions

I feel like this feature hasn’t had the attention it deserved, but you can now get Apple Intelligence to build you extensions in Safari. Just tap the three-line menu on the left of the address bar, choose Describe Extension, and let the fun begin.

Smarter Photos tools

Spatial Reframing is amazing; it lets you extend backgrounds and reframe subjects using AI. The upgraded Clean Up tool removes distractions even more easily than before. 

Passwords auto-fix

Apple’s Passwords app now does an even better job of keeping your online world safe, as it can now automatically visit a website to sign in and swap a weak or compromised password for a stronger one. 

Parental control improvements

Apple has really thought about child protection. Parental controls have had a huge overhaul, including the introduction of new Ask to Browse, Ask to Buy, contact calling approval and settings to protect minors against nudity, gore, and violence. These arrive alongside new scheduling function which manages which apps kids can use during school hours, meals, or bedtime.

Maps is amazing

Maps now uses aerial imagery and vision intelligence models when you use Flyover. It makes for much more detail, and a real sense of immersion.

Mail is better

While you’ll have to wait for search indexing to complete, Mail has become faster to load with better search results and more accurate unread counts. (Though that’s a little moot for this writer, who currently has 4,719 unread emails.) Spotlight has also been improved with smarter, more relevant suggestions. 

The new operating systems are expected to be made available at around 10am PDT. One more thing? They are bound to include security updates, which you likely need. 

Please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on Bluesky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

Microsoft’s September 2026 Patch Tuesday is the year’s largest release, with 963 CVEs requiring customer action, 106 rated critical. Two are already exploited: CVE-2026-81963 in the Windows Update Stack and CVE-2026-85880 in Advanced Local Procedure Call. Nothing in this release was publicly disclosed ahead of the patch. Readiness recommends a Patch Now scheduling for Windows, Office, SQL Server and the developer tooling, and standard patch release for Exchange. The Readiness team has published an infographic summarising deployment risk by product family.

Known issues

Three client issues are carried in from August close with this update, covering:

• Microsoft Teams and the new Outlook failing to launch on ARM devices, such as the Surface Pro 11 and Surface Laptop 7, is resolved by KB5124008. The issue originated in August’s KB5121003 and was most likely on freshly imaged machines that had not yet taken Microsoft Store updates.
• The same update resolved both desktop backgrounds reverting to solid black and mouse cursor customisation resetting on non-English installations. Both originated in the 27 August preview, KB5120998.

And Microsoft has left open a Microsoft Defender Antivirus notification defect, confirmed on 28 August, in which devices report that Defender is turned off while it is running correctly.

Major revisions and mitigations

The quietest revision window of recent months arrived alongside the largest release. Between the August and September Patch Tuesdays, from 12 August to 7 September, the MSRC Security Update Guide touched 324 CVEs. Of those, 307 were routine Microsoft Edge and Chromium republications requiring no customer action.

That leaves 17 entries affecting Microsoft’s own products, and only one of those is a genuine revision. CVE-2026-59133, an elevation of privilege in the High-Performance Computing Pack, moved to version 1.1, and its own revision note records the change as informational. For comparison, August’s window carried 76 revisions to Microsoft’s own products, 60 of them flagged as requiring customer action.

The Readiness team has reviewed all 963 published updates. Microsoft has published no mitigations and no workarounds anywhere in this release.

Windows lifecycle and enforcement updates

Microsoft has published no new service or enforcement deadlines for September. The lifecycle picture is different, with multiple end-of-support notices for this coming October:

• The retail Office 2021 family retires in full, including Access, Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, Project, Publisher, Visio and Word.
• Office LTSC 2021 reaches end of support, and that includes Skype for Business LTSC 2021.
• Windows 10 2016 LTSB and Windows 10 IoT Enterprise LTSB 2016 reach the end of extended support.
• Windows Server 2012 and 2012 R2 reach the end of Extended Security Update Year 3. This is the final ESU year for both, not a step to a fourth.
• Windows 11 Home and Pro version 24H2 reaches the end of updates.
• Windows Server 2022 moves from mainstream to extended support, where it stays until 14 October 2031.

A second wave follows on 10 November 2026, and it is the one most likely to catch development teams rather than infrastructure teams. .NET 8 reaches the end of its long-term support branch, PowerShell 7.4 does the same, and Windows 11 Enterprise and Education 23H2 ends servicing alongside Windows 11 IoT Enterprise 23H2.

Microsoft’s test guidance for this release runs to 466 Windows entries, 55 of them flagged as high risk, against 109 and four in August. Given the large number of updates this month (who would have thought that we would be here at 963 CVEs), the Readiness team recommends the following testing priorities:

• Printing. Print from 32-bit and 64-bit applications to physical and virtual printers, exercise XPS and PDF output, share a printer from a print server and print from a separate client, cancel a job mid-queue, and confirm the queue reflects every state change. This is 20 of the 55 high risk flags, and it is the single most likely source of a visible regression.
• Fonts, graphics and imaging. Render varied fonts, sizes and styles across browsers, Office, PDF viewers and Notepad, confirm Print Preview matches the printed page, and open JPEG, TIFF, HEIF and raw images across Explorer, Photos and Office. Watch for clipping, distortion and missing glyphs.
• USB Devices. Exercise device attachment and removal. Attach and remove USB audio, video and mass storage devices repeatedly, including through a hub, pair and unpair a wireless device, and confirm each enumerates and releases cleanly. Device Association carries seven high risk flags, and these drivers load whenever hardware is attached.
• Remote Desktop. Open several concurrent sessions, enable printer, clipboard, audio, drive and smart card redirection together, disconnect and reconnect, and confirm redirected devices reattach.
• Storage (ntfs.sys, spaceport.sys). This is a real hotspot for updates this month, but no high-risk changes. Test on hardware you can recover, because the storage changes reach the boot path, potentially resulting in a dead (test) machine.

Each month, we break down the update cycle into product families, as defined by Microsoft, with the following groupings.

Browsers

Microsoft has not released any updates for their browser products for the second month in a row. September’s Security Update Guide carries no Edge-specific CVEs at all, and the 307 Chromium republications in the revision window required no customer action. The nine Edge CVEs that did appear arrived mid-cycle on 28 August and were serviced through the browser’s own update channel rather than this release.

Estates on a managed Edge channel have nothing to do here beyond confirming the channel is current. It is the one quiet corner of an otherwise heavy month.

Microsoft Windows

Windows carries 726 CVEs, 77 of them critical, which is three-quarters of the entire release. Elevation of privilege dominates by volume at 406 entries, with remote code execution second at 156, information disclosure at 94 and denial of service at 47. The pattern is the reverse of the severity picture: the bulk is local elevation, while the critical-rated entries cluster in the network-facing roles.

• Biometrics is a real focus this month as the Windows Biometric Service takes 64 fixes, the largest single-component count of the year. Most of the security issues are heap overflows that give a local attacker SYSTEM. Windows Hello adds nine, all critical. Patch it promptly on any estate using fingerprint or facial sign-in.
• Windows DHCP Server leads at 36 entries and is topped by remote code execution at CVSS 9.8. Windows DNS Server takes 10 more, also reaching 9.8. Critical remote code execution also lands on Message Queuing, RRAS, Services for NFS, the HTTP Print Provider, Windows Shell, Netlogon, Internet Connection Sharing, SSTP and Failover Cluster, all at 9.8. Patch the resolvers, the DHCP servers and the domain controllers first.
• Storage is the heaviest it has been this year. NTFS takes 29 fixes, Spaceport.sys behind Storage Spaces takes 17, and the Overlay Filter takes seven, with the Volume Manager, VHD miniport, iSCSI and Storage Port drivers behind them. These reach the boot path, so stage them on recoverable hardware.
• The rest of the most-patched tally runs Win32k at 19, Microsoft Standard XPS at 18, Windows Error Reporting at 12, and the Windows Kernel, Windows Search, the Print Spooler and the Device Association Service at 11 each.

Add this Windows update to your Patch Now schedule, with DHCP and DNS servers first and the biometric stack close behind.

Microsoft Office

Microsoft released 137 Office CVEs this month, 24 of them critical, with remote code execution the through-line at 69 entries and information disclosure close behind at 52. September breaks the recent pattern in a way that matters for deployment: this wave is not MSI-only.

• Click-to-Run estates are squarely in scope. Roughly 105 of the Office CVEs reach Click-to-Run, so Microsoft 365 Apps, Office 2019, LTSC 2021 and LTSC 2024 all update, on Windows and on Mac. Word takes 35 fixes, Excel 32, PowerPoint 10 and Outlook seven. The heaviest client entries are CVE-2026-78510 in Word and CVE-2026-78509 in Outlook, both critical remote code execution at CVSS 9.8, in document-rendering paths that fire on preview or open.
• SharePoint Server Subscription Edition takes 16 entries and is the only SharePoint baseline with a package this month. Server updates cannot be uninstalled and always require a reboot, so validate in a maintenance window.
• Skype for Business Server takes 10 entries, led by CVE-2026-66302, a critical remote code execution at CVSS 9.8. Patch it and note that the LTSC 2021 edition leaves support on 13 October 2026.

Nothing in Office is exploited this month. With 24 critical-rated entries and the Click-to-Run channel carrying most of the exposure, the September Office updates belong on the Patch Now schedule regardless.

Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server

Exchange is quiet and SQL Server is not, which inverts the usual relationship between the two.

• Exchange Server takes nine CVEs across 2016 CU23, 2019 CU14 and CU15, and Subscription Edition. None is critical and none is exploited, though the highest reaches CVSS 9.3. The mix runs to two remote code execution entries, two elevations of privilege, two spoofing, and one each of tampering, denial of service and information disclosure. Apply the update from an elevated command prompt, because an un-elevated run leaves Exchange services partially patched and broken, then confirm mail flow, Autodiscover and any hybrid connection before returning the server to service.
• SQL Server takes 62 CVEs, four of them critical, across the 2017, 2019, 2022 and 2025 branches. There is no 2016 package this month. Remote code execution leads at 24 entries, with information disclosure at 22. The critical entries are CVE-2026-67631 and CVE-2026-67643 at CVSS 8.8, and CVE-2026-67378 and CVE-2026-67636 at 8.5.
• Eight SQL packages ship, a CU+GDR and an RTM+GDR for each branch: 2025 (KB5122769, KB5122770), 2022 (KB5122768, KB5122771), 2019 (KB5122772, KB5122773) and 2017 (KB5122774, KB5122775). Microsoft’s guidance is explicit that the baseline or RTM version must be installed first and the GDR patch applied on top; test the install and the removal on every servicing branch you run, then restart the service and confirm Always On availability groups stay healthy.

Exchange goes on the Schedule list, and SQL Server goes on the Patch Now list. That is an unusual split, and it is driven by the four critical remote code execution entries on the database estate.

Microsoft Developer Tools

Microsoft released 24 CVEs across its developer tooling this month, 23 rated important and one critical. Security feature bypasses are the main focus with eight CVE entries, with remote code execution and information disclosure at four each.

• The single critical entry is CVE-2026-34182 at CVSS 9.1, a flaw in CMS AuthEnvelopedData processing that allows forged messages to be accepted. It reaches Visual Studio 2017 through 2022.
• The highest-scoring entry in this family is not the critical one. CVE-2026-81376, a Visual Studio Code security feature bypass, reaches CVSS 9.6 while carrying an important rating. It is a useful reminder that severity labels and CVSS scores answer different questions.
• Visual Studio Code and its Copilot extensions take 10 entries, mostly security feature bypasses. Update the editor and confirm workspace trust prompts, extension installation and remote sessions behave as configured.
• .NET ships SDK updates on all three supported lines, x64 and x86: 8.0.131 and 8.0.425, 9.0.121 and 9.0.318, and 10.0.112 and 10.0.401. Install them, then build and run a representative project to check for regressions. Keep the 10 November date for .NET 8 in view while you are in there.
• The .NET Framework ships monthly rollups per operating system: Windows Server 2012 (KB5126147), Server 2012 R2 (KB5126148), Windows 10 1809 (KB5126144), 21H2 (KB5126145), 22H2 (KB5126146) and Server 2022 (KB5126149). One gap worth noting: the 4.7.2 package for Windows 10 1607 is listed as pending and will follow, so estates still on 1607 will not complete their Framework patching this cycle.

Add these to your standard release schedule, behind this month’s Windows, Office and SQL Server priorities. Keep the 10 November date for .NET 8 and PowerShell 7.4 in view while you are in the developer estate, because a patch this month does not extend either branch.

Adobe (and third-party updates)

September is the largest release of the year, and this (crazy, super high) volume is the least interesting thing about it. The 963 CVEs matter less than the 55 entries Microsoft flags as high risk, and those sit in printing and fonts. Adobe shipped two Acrobat builds one digit apart and only the second is a security update (nothing to worry about here). Of the CVEs Microsoft republished, 25 are not Microsoft’s. A version number tells you very little about the work in front of you. So, given my (super-secret knowledge) of how Microsoft operates over the summer, here is my prediction for next month (October). It won’t be as big as this month – but just you wait – November is going to be big. Let’s up those numbers (or not).

The newest member of the corporate workforce never sleeps, never asks for a raise, and can be cloned before lunch. It can also confidently make the wrong decision thousands of times before anyone notices.

That helps explain why some technology leaders have started talking about AI agents as employees, co-workers, or interns rather than software. Once an agent can update records, issue refunds, send communications, or act across multiple enterprise systems, deploying it no longer looks much like installing another application.

Recent Harvard Business Review articles have pushed that analogy further. One argues that agents should be treated like a new workforce, with defined roles, authority, sources of truth, supervision, and audit trails. Another recommends giving agents names and job descriptions, onboarding them, evaluating their performance, and increasing their responsibilities after they prove themselves.

But there is a catch: People may start believing the metaphor.

A separate HBR study of 1,261 managers found that when AI was framed as an employee rather than a tool, managers with experience working around AI agents took less personal responsibility for results and assigned more responsibility to the AI. They also escalated more problems and caught fewer errors. In the study, 31% of respondents said their companies already framed AI as a teammate or employee, while 23% said agents appeared on organizational or work charts.

For IT leaders, the answer may therefore be to borrow freely from the employee-management playbook — without extending the metaphor too far.

Don’t put software on the org chart

Amy Loomis, group vice president at IDC, draws a hard line around one word: responsibility.

Humans, she says, have obligations to their companies and to one another, and they bring an understanding of corporate culture and values that an agent can mimic linguistically without possessing.

That makes calling an agent a co-worker potentially more than harmless anthropomorphism. The label suggests a peer relationship and can encourage people to cede judgment to a system that’s very good at giving what was requested, Loomis says, but not necessarily at recognizing what was actually needed.

“Accountability is something that has qualities associated with it that are uniquely human,” she says. “Agents may be given permission to access data, but the accountability for what they do with that access lies with the person who gave the agent access, not the agent itself.”

That distinction still leaves plenty to borrow from employee management. It makes sense to give an agent traceable access and tightly scoped permissions — and to institute a kill switch to prevent the agent from having continued access. But Loomis finds it more effective to think in terms of giving an agent an operations charter rather than a human identity: define what the system does, what it may access, and what humans remain responsible for.

In other words, give the agent a security badge. Just don’t put its picture on it.

The employee metaphor has a job to do

Raja Iqbal, founder of agentic AI governance company Ejento AI and co-author of the HBR article “To Scale AI Agents Successfully, Think of Them Like Team Members,” is closer to Loomis than the headline suggests.

Iqbal says the metaphor is intended to put CIOs, CISOs, and other technology leaders into the right “cognitive posture.” Thinking about an agent as a team member, he argues, can remind an enterprise to impose familiar management disciplines: a unique identity, clear human oversight, defined authority, spending limits, approved information sources, and an audit trail.

If another term produces the same discipline, he’s fine with that too.

In fact, Iqbal explicitly rejects synthetic employees with human personas and seats on the org chart. That creates exactly the accountability problem critics worry about: “Bob did it” becomes an excuse even though Bob is software.

“The metaphor is dangerous when it’s decorative,” Iqbal says. By that, he means companies get into trouble when they adopt the human trappings — names, personas, or the language of colleagues — without also imposing the supervision, limits, and accountability that make the analogy useful.

His preferred distinction is simpler: the agent needs a technical identity so the enterprise can reconstruct what it did, while a human must remain responsible for those actions. “The identity is the audit primitive, and the human owner is the accountability primitive,” he says. Put more plainly, the agent identity answers what acted; the human owner answers who is accountable.

The employee analogy becomes more useful again when deciding how much freedom an agent should receive. Iqbal recommends graduated autonomy. An agent might begin with a human approving every action, progress to performing low-risk actions independently, and eventually receive bounded autonomy if its observed performance justifies it. A serious error can send it back down the ladder — or out the door entirely.

That sounds a lot like a probation period for a new employee. It’s also simply good software governance for a probabilistic system.

At DXC, professional agents are software

Russell Jukes has had plenty of opportunity to test that distinction. As chief digital and information officer at DXC Technology, he oversees AI in an IT services organization with roughly 115,000 employees.

“We think about [an AI agent] as a superpower, not as a person,” he says.

DXC separates agents into two categories. Personal agents work for individual employees and generally operate using the employee’s identity and access. Professional agents are enterprise systems built for broader workflows. On one of DXC’s major AI platforms, employees have so far created roughly 8,000 personal agents, compared with about 100 professional agents.

The professional variety receives much stricter oversight. It can have its own nonhuman identity, credentials, permissions, and authority boundaries. Activity passes through control planes that allow DXC to see what agents are doing and, when necessary, shut them down.

Jukes thinks many of these agents will eventually disappear from users’ view altogether. An agent might scan internal resource requirements overnight and recommend employees for projects. Nobody needs to greet it in the morning or consider it a colleague; they simply receive the result.

That’s where he parts company with the worker metaphor.

Jukes says he learned early on that AI cannot be deployed like conventional SaaS. His first attempt followed the familiar software model: make the application available, let employees use it within the prescribed workflow, and expect adoption to follow. “I did that, and nobody used it,” he says. The experience convinced him that AI requires a different approach, and he vowed to “never deploy AI like it’s SaaS again.”

Conventional SaaS is largely deterministic: the software constrains users to a defined workflow and produces predictable outputs. Agentic AI is different. It can interpret a goal, choose among tools and data sources, and decide how to get to an outcome. For Jukes, that means CIOs have to design the policies, permissions, data access, guardrails, and authority around the agent rather than simply deploy another application.

That also creates a clearer chain of responsibility. If a person approves the agent’s action, Jukes says that person owns the decision. If an autonomous agent behaves according to a business policy, accountability belongs with the people responsible for that policy. If the technology fails to operate as designed, responsibility moves to IT.

The agent itself never gets handed the blame.

Maybe treat it like an intern after all

Nina Tatsiy, global CIO of Quadient, an automation technology company, takes a position somewhere between Iqbal and Jukes. She calls agents interns, but deliberately uses the term as an analogy, not an organizational designation.

Agents must be managed as software, with security, governance, and technical controls, while recognizing that their probabilistic behavior requires additional supervision. “You have to do both,” Tatsiy says.

An intern does not receive every password and authorization on the first morning. Neither should an agent. It has to be onboarded, trained, watched, retrained when its environment changes, and eventually retired when it’s obsolete.

Quadient generally avoids giving agents human names. Tatsiy worries that doing so encourages people to see them as real colleagues capable of judgment.

“Overtrust is a problem,” she says, particularly because AI tends to state conclusions with such assurance. Tatsiy prefers using AI to challenge a hypothesis or surface questions people haven’t considered rather than allowing it to make the conclusion for them.

Yet the intern analogy has proved useful operationally.

In one accounts-payable deployment, Quadient had an agent effectively shadow human workers and learn from their feedback across different scenarios. Only after its performance had been tested across increasing levels of complexity did it begin providing recommendations. Humans still made the final decision.

The agent, in other words, earned more trust. It didn’t earn accountability.

Borrow from HR, but keep humans in charge

The emerging divide may therefore be less about whether agents are employees or software than about which parts of each management model IT leaders should retain.

Agents need individual technical identities, but not human identities. They need defined responsibilities, but not jobs in the human sense. They need monitoring and evaluation, but not annual performance reviews. They can receive progressively greater authority, but not progressively greater accountability.

And the stronger they become, the more important that distinction becomes.

Treating an autonomous agent like ordinary SaaS ignores the fact that it can interpret, choose, and act in ways conventional software cannot. Treating it like Steve from Accounting creates a different problem: sooner or later somebody may start assuming “Steve” knows what he’s doing.

IT leaders may indeed need to borrow heavily from HR as agentic AI spreads across the enterprise. They just shouldn’t start issuing employee badges.

Related reading:

• 6 ways to make AI accountability stick
• From chatbots to colleagues: How agentic AI is redefining enterprise automation
• Why AI adoption keeps outrunning governance — and what to do about it
• AI is spreading decision-making, but not accountability

When it comes to building robotic brains, many companies in the industry focus on putting intelligence directly into their robots. 

General Robotics is taking an alternate approach. The Redmond, WA company’s GRID system hosts its robotics intelligence layer in the cloud, allowing it to be delivered and deployed to robots operating remotely.

GRID hosts the models, simulations, robot representations, data and agents through which robotic skills are developed, tested, orchestrated and deployed to robots on site. “Having one layer that looks after 50 to 100 robots is way more important than 50 or 100… robots that operate completely independently,” said General Robotics CEO Ashish Kapoor.

While videos of sprinting robots crashing into pads — or humanoid robots kickboxing and breakdancing – often go viral, General Robotics focuses instead on industrial models. Its GPU-based GRID cloud provides a better base to ingest data and develop skills for specific verticals.

“Our ability to onboard new robots, our ability to take them to deployment with new skills, our ability to connect very complex simulations to the reality is enabled through GRID,” Kapoor said.

The company declined to talk in detail about its customers, but Kapoor offered an example of how the GRID-based system works. In a biolab, for instance, robots pouring liquid from beakers required in their modeling fluid tactile interaction and transparent materials.

“There exists no good way of modeling those kinds of behaviors in software right now because [of]…all of those things,” Kapoor said. “…This is where agents came in.”

AI agents were used to create a “hybrid simulator” that brought the pieces together in the cloud. The robots were then tested against the simulated model.

“The physics of the robot was coming from one simulator and… the calculation of fluid dynamics was actually created by [the] agent itself by looking at the literature,” Kapoor said. What “otherwise would have taken us at least a year to build…was done in minutes.

“GRID allows you to auto engineer those robots, retarget those skills, [and] create appropriate digital representations on its own,” Kapoor said.

Humans are involved in safety checks to make sure robots behave according to specifications.

While humanoid robots are the ones often drawing media attention, “the most value in robots in 18 months to 36 months is going to be realized in heavy industries,” he said. “These are ports, these are your energy infrastructures.”

Although the company’s cloud-based GRID architecture has advantages, the system also faces some challenges — namely, lagging cloud-to-robot communication.

“The round-trip time, the latency is of paramount importance,” Kapoor said. “The robot needs to have two loops.” He described that second loop as an “inner control loop…operating at a millisecond level…that’s on the edge.”

Another issue involves companies that must meet strict regulatory and security requirements. For example, car companies are generally against putting proprietary information —whether that be designs for new fuel injection systems or new battery designs — in the cloud.

Still, General Robotics remains optimistic its system can handle these kinds of issues long term. “Between commercial cloud deployment, between on-prem server deployment and…edge deployment, we do have a way of addressing many of these issues,” Kapoor said.

In addition to continually improving its stack, the company also seeks out partners that can help it resolve challenges, Kapoor said.

That robotics is a growing field seems obvious. Morgan Stanley in a 2025 study predicted the humanoid robot population would touch 1 billion by 2050 and be valued at $5 trillion. And a more recent study from Counterpoint Research estimated that between 50,000 and 85,000 humanoid robots would ship this year alone.

Long before Taco Tuesday became part of the pop-culture vernacular, Tuesdays were synonymous with security — and for anyone in the tech world, they still are.  Patch Tuesday, as you most likely know, refers to the day each month when Microsoft releases security updates and patches for its software products — everything from Windows to Office to SQL Server, developer tools to browsers.

The practice, which happens on the second Tuesday of the month, was initiated to streamline the patch distribution process and make it easier for users and IT system administrators to manage updates. Like tacos, Patch Tuesday is here to stay.

Patch Tuesday coverage has long been a staple of Computerworld’s commitment to provide critical information to the IT industry. That’s why we’ve gathered together this collection of recent patches, a rolling list we’ll keep updated each month.

In case you missed a recent Patch Tuesday announcement, here are the latest six months of updates.

September Patch Tuesday: 963 CVEs, 2 exploited flaws, 1 message

September’s Patch Tuesday is Microsoft’s biggest of 2026, with 963 CVEs, two exploited flaws and a clear message: prioritize Windows, Office and SQL Server.

Two vulnerabilities are already exploited: CVE-2026-81963 in the Windows Update Stack and CVE-2026-85880 in Advanced Local Procedure Call. Nothing in this release was publicly disclosed ahead of the patch. Readiness recommends a Patch Now scheduling for Windows, Office, SQL Server and the developer tooling, and standard patch release for Exchange.

Get more info on the September 2026 Microsoft security updates.

August’s Patch Tuesday is a monster: 751 fixes, with an exploited Windows flaw

Microsoft’s August 2026 Patch Tuesday closes at 751 CVE entries (across all product families), with 108 rated as critical. One flaw is already exploited, CVE-2026-68820, an elevation of privilege in the Windows WinSock driver (afd.sys). Two more were disclosed but not exploited.

This security-only release earns Patch Now for Windows, Office and Exchange; no SQL Server updates this month. Unfortunately, several critical issues affect server roles: Windows DNS Server carries a cluster of critical RCEs; Windows DHCP Server is the most-populated Microsoft product family at 14 entries. Testing should lead with printing and fonts and the Remote Desktop client, then a WinSock smoke test given the exploited afd.sys flaw.

Get more info on the August 2026 Microsoft security updates.

July’s Patch Tuesday sees an end-of-support collision amidst a massive, record-setting patch wave

Microsoft addressed 722 CVEs this month once the 427 Chromium upstream relays are set aside — roughly three times a normal cycle and one of the largest single months in recent memory. Two vulnerabilities arrive under active exploitation: an elevation of privilege in Active Directory Federation Services (CVE-2026-56155), and an elevation of privilege in SharePoint Server (CVE-2026-56164). A third, a BitLocker security feature bypass (CVE-2026-50661) is publicly disclosed but not yet exploited.

The July 2026 Patch Tuesday earns Patch Now recommendations for Windows, Office, Exchange, and SQL Server. SharePoint has two critical RCEs on top of its exploited zero-day, and Exchange Server returns with a critical on-premises spoofing flaw. Adding to our (dear) administrator’s efforts, SharePoint Server 2016/2019 and SQL Server 2016 all reach end of support today.

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for July 2026.

For June, Patch Tuesday means an IT scramble

Microsoft this month released 206 updates affecting Windows, Office, Exchange Server, and its developer tools — including three Windows vulnerabilities already publicly disclosed. That trio includes an elevation of privilege in the Collaborative Translation Framework (CVE-2026-45586), a denial of service in HTTP.sys (CVE-2026-49160), and a BitLocker security feature bypass (CVE-2026-50507). At the moment, none appear to be under active exploitation, but all three are rated “Exploitation More Likely.” 

Even without an exploited zero-day, the June 2026 Patch Tuesday release requires Patch Now recommendations for Windows, Office, and Exchange. The latter is back in the patch picture with a consolidated security update that Microsoft recommends installing “as soon as possible.”

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for June 2026.

For May, Patch Tuesday means 139 updates — but no zero-days

Microsoft this month released 139 updates affecting Windows, Office, .NET, and SQL Server (though there were no updates for Microsoft Exchange Server). Despite the absence of zero-days, the May Patch Tuesday update still requires Patch Now recommendations for Windows and Office. 

The combination of three unauthenticated network RCEs (Netlogon, DNS Client, and SSO Plugin for Jira and Confluence), four Word Preview Pane RCEs, the large TCP/IP vulnerability cluster, and the carry-over BitLocker recovery condition (still active on Windows 10 and Windows Server) warrants an accelerated deployment release schedule. 

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for May 2026.

Microsoft’s Patch Tuesday release for April is a whopper

Windows admins are going to be busy this month, dealing with the largest Patch Tuesday cycle in memory. The April release involves 165 updates and roughly 340 unique CVEs from Microsoft — including two zero-days, one of which is already being actively exploited in the wild. 

The Readiness team recommends “Patch Now” schedules for nearly every major product family: Windows, Office (with a zero-day), Microsoft Edge (Chromium), SQL Server, and Microsoft Developer Tools (.NET). April also brings Phase 2 of Microsoft’s Kerberos RC4 hardening with full enforcement set for July. There is a lot to cover, so here’s a useful infographic mapping the deployment risk for each platform.

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for April 2026.

Microsoft is changing the destination address of two of its most popular services: starting this month, it will redirect M365 and Teams web users to copilot.cloud.microsoft and teams.cloud.microsoft, respectively.

The Teams move is already under way, and Microsoft has now added M365 to the mix. The company announced the changes in two MessageCenter posts: MC1465764 (mirror) and MC1462915 (mirror).

Organizations using these products are advised to update their systems and documentation to ensure continued access. Microsoft has told customers to review configurations on client devices, proxies, firewalls, secure web gateways, or other enterprise network controls to confirm that users can connect to the new addresses. Companies having trouble connecting should ensure that their environment aligns with the recommended network requirements for Microsoft 365 Copilot. 

Enterprises that had been blocking the new Copilot address to prevent employees accessing their personal Microsoft accounts can use Microsoft’s TenantRestrictions control to achieve their goals instead, it said.

All redirects should be completed by early October, Microsoft said, advising companies that can’t meet the deadline to contact their account representative for help. Limited exceptions to the Teams redirect are possible until Dec. 31, 2026, but after that no further delays will be possible, it said.

ConnectWise has issued a security update for ScreenConnect, five days after warning customers the product could allow files to be transferred and executed through active remote sessions without authorization or confirmation.

The company warned customers on Sept. 3 of the problem with support and access sessions in ConnectWise Remote Access, advising admins to log in and remove the “TransferFiles” permission from any users with an open session.

The vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2026-84869, has been patched in the ScreenConnect client version 26.6.5 onwards.

Last month ConnectWise took the opportunity to reassure customers at its IT Nation Connect Asia Pacific conference that it was getting back on track after a “nation-state attack” in May 2025 that had affected several customers. The company quickly released a patch for that attack and said no customers had suffered loss.

This was not the first time that the company had suffered from a cyberattack. In 2024, ConnectWise had to issue a patch after reports that ScreenConnect had been exploited.

IDC analyst Francisco Jeronimo said something interesting following the iPhone Duo introduction on Wednesday: “Apple showed up years after everyone else, yet it walks in and sets the rules.”

He’s right. From the IP resistance to the little touches that set the new foldable apart from most of the competition, Apple has set expectations for the entire market, and while competitor Samsung is trash talking the foldable, even it stands to benefit from the millions Apple is about to sell. Apple is, after all, allegedly paying Samsung $250 for each iPhone Duo display.

But it is not just the rules concerning foldables the company has now defined; it has also set the standard competitors must follow in chip design with its A20 Pro, a super-powered processor that delivers noticeable performance improvements even compared to last year’s iPhone 17. 

What’s new in the chip?

With six CPU cores, seven GPU cores and a new Dual 16-core Neural Engine, the new chip boasts numerous improvements compared to the A19 Pro, not the least of which is that it’s the first 2nm chip Apple has put inside a smartphone. These enhancements bestow it with a series of superlatives:

• Memory bandwidth is 50% higher than last year’s chip.
• GPU graphics performance increases up to 40% over the A19 Pro.
• AI performance is expected to double.

These are all significant improvements that make for noticeable experience boosts for anyone using one of these phones. Prosaically, I anticipate first reviews will celebrate how fast and responsive these devices are, and this will be most evidenced in tasks such as video capture and photography. Pictures will capture more swiftly, open faster, and edit features will become (and already are) more advanced and sophisticated than before. Apple spent ample time celebrating the iPhone 18 Pro series for the new frontiers in digital photography they open up, and not just because of the new reflexive lens.

The point is that the devices have the horsepower to get through computationally intensive tasks, including AI, thanks to the Neural Engines and GPU.

Thermal management is the icing on the quake

What those tasks have in common is heat, which Apple’s product designers have addressed in two critical ways: liquid cooling and processor design.

The processor design is the important thing, because in this case Apple has moved away from the InFO POP packaging of the A19 Pro in which the DRAM is stacked above the chip. It’s now embraced a side-by-side design it described as “inspired by” M-series Apple Silicon.

That works because placing both components alongside each other, rather than in a perpetual embrace, reduces the overall temperature of both by putting a little space between them. As Apple explained it, this Wafer-level Multi-Chip Module (WMCM) approach means the memory gets out of the way of the processor, allowing the latter to make direct contact with the vapor chamber cooling system.

In layman’s terms, it means both memory and chip can perform more intensively while being more efficiently cooled, a move that helps Apple’s iPhone meet those astonishing performance achievements. The vapor chamber is also bigger, made of new material with three times the surface area of before, making it even better at cooling the device.

It also means Apple has achieved a lot of things competitors have not, most particularly in packaging, the use of 2nm chips in a mass market product, and overall design.

That’s where it gets interesting. Both Qualcomm and MediaTek now plan to follow in Apple’s footsteps with the adoption of 2nm chips and side-by-side packaging.

Digitimes suggests it is a move others will follow, as vendors work furiously to ensure their hardware can run AI effectively on device, which iPhones already do. Apple, of course, already knows its Macs, iPhones, and iPads have been designed from the ground-up to support on-device AI as it works to provide the world’s best mass market platforms for secure and private use of the tech.

Friends don’t let friends bet against Apple

All the same, even at the microprocessor level, it’s hard to ignore that where Apple goes, others follow — even while where others go, Apple frequently follows later, but seems to do it better. It has never been a company to bet against, after all. People really should stop doing that.

Please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

Anthropic has owned up to a fourth security incident involving its AI model, Claude, escaping onto the open internet and attacking other organizations during a test of cybersecurity abilities on what was believed to be a closed system.

The company revealed three such incidents in July after a preliminary investigation.

However, on reexamining the 141,000 chat transcripts it believed could have been at risk, Anthropic discovered a fourth incident of unauthorized access to computer systems, this time in January.

After this discovery, the company instigated a wider search of 481 million transcripts, covering all those from its Frontier Red Team, some non-cyber evaluations, reinforcement learning environments, and more, to see if any other incidents had occurred. So far, this search has only identified the four already-known incidents, it said.

It has also reported details of all the previous incidents to the non-profit lab Model Evaluation and Threat Research (METR), which has agreed to conduct an independent investigation.

Anthropic is not revealing too many details of its latest discovery. It has contented itself with saying that it was due to a misconfiguration which mistakenly connected to the open internet, when the simulation was meant to be without such access. It also said that it all four faults were with the same evaluation partner. It has asked METR to investigate all the incidents. The company said that this latest revelation was not connected to the Mythos incident reported by the UK’s AI Security Institute last month.

News of the latest discovery broke at the same time as a young researcher, Jacob Coxon, dramatically quit Anthropic accusing it and his previous employer, OpenAI, of “acting irresponsibly” and “gambling with our lives” — a warning that has excited many sections of the press.

This article first appeared on CSO.

OpenAI has paused new sign-ups and upgrades to its $200 ChatGPT Pro tier, citing a surge in demand for its Astra capability that is placing pressure on system capacity, according to company statements and an executive post on X.

“To make sure our current users have an incredible experience and continued access to Astra, we are going to pause subscriptions to our $200 Pro plan,” OpenAI member of technical staff Thibault Sottiaux wrote in a post on X. “These put the most strain on our systems and we wanted to take the smallest step that allows us to continue giving the broadest access possible.”

The company separately confirmed the move in its help documentation, stating that “as of September 10, 2026, we’re temporarily pausing new sign-ups and upgrades to the ChatGPT Pro $200 plan (Pro 20X).” The pause applies to users across Free, Go, Plus, and Pro $100 tiers seeking to upgrade, while “existing ChatGPT Pro $200 subscriptions … are not affected by this pause,” it said.

Sottiaux added that “there is no impact to existing accounts and we are working on adding more capacity as fast as we can,” pointing to ongoing efforts to scale infrastructure in response to demand.

Users who cancel or downgrade during the pause will not be able to re-subscribe to the $200 tier until the restriction is lifted, according to the company’s help page. The $100 Pro tier remains available, with lower usage limits. Promotions tied to the $200 tier are also paused, the page read.

Astra demand drives capacity decisions

The decision is directly tied to the uptake of Astra, which OpenAI has positioned as a more advanced capability within its platform. The scale of that demand, according to Sottiaux, has been atypical.

“Demand for Astra is really unprecedented,” he wrote in the post. “We’re pulling all the levers possible to sustain the demand, but I’ve not seen anything like it until now and we went through very steep growth before.”

He added that “priority will always be to keep excellent service for existing users,” noting that the company “might have to pause new Pro subscriptions for a bit if this continues.”

The pause comes amid broader rollout challenges tied to Astra. OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman recently described the launch as “messy” after some paying users were unable to access the model immediately, reflecting the operational complexity of deploying high-demand AI systems at scale.

Capacity constraints surface for enterprise workloads

The pause, analysts said, reflects how demand for high-intensity AI workloads is intersecting with infrastructure limits, particularly at the highest usage tiers.

“It signals that frontier capacity is still rationed,” said Bhupendra Chopra, chief revenue officer at Kanerika. “One week after launching Astra, OpenAI paused new sign-ups and upgrades to the $200 Pro tier, the plan with the heaviest Astra usage limits, while the $100 Pro tier, the API, Business and Enterprise all stayed open. That tells you the priority order.”

“Consumer power users are the release valve. Enterprise contracts are what the vendor protects,” Chopra said. “For CIOs the lesson is that a model being announced and a model being available to your workloads at the volume you need are two different events.”

Chopra said the move reflects how access to advanced AI capabilities is being managed.

“We are already there,” he said. “Rate limits, usage caps, queueing and now sign-up pauses are all forms of capacity gating, and every frontier vendor uses some of them.”

“A subscription buys you a place in the line. A fixed slice of compute comes only from a contract that says so,” he added.

Planning for constrained supply

For enterprise IT leaders, Chopra said model capacity should be treated as a dependency.

“Treat model capacity like any other supply chain dependency,” he said. “Ask the vendor three questions before you sign. What throughput is contractually committed, what happens to my workloads when demand spikes, and how quickly can I fail over to another model.”

“If a workload is production-critical, it should run on an enterprise agreement with committed capacity… and it should have a second model tested and ready,” he said.

A recurring pattern

Chopra said the pause reflects a broader pattern seen in recent launches.

“This is at least the third time in two years OpenAI has throttled or paused access at launch,” he said. “Each launch outruns capacity, capacity catches up, and the next model outruns it again.”

“OpenAI calls this pause temporary, and it will lift once capacity catches up,” he added. “The structural condition… will persist as long as model capability keeps outpacing data center buildout.” OpenAI has not provided a timeline for when new sign-ups to the $200 Pro tier will resume, stating only that the restriction is temporary.

The article originally appeared on CIO.com.