BRUSSELS — In the 10 years since the Brussels terror attacks, the EU has tightened its security strategy but the internet is opening up new threats, according to the bloc’s counterterrorism coordinator.  Daesh is “mutating jihadism,” Bartjan Wegter told POLITICO in an interview on the eve of the anniversary of the terrorist attacks in Brussels, which pushed the bloc to bolster border protection and step up collaboration and information-sharing. The group has “calculated that it’s much more effective to radicalize people who are already inside the EU through online environments rather than to organize orchestrated attacks from outside our borders,” he said.  “And they’re very good at it.” Ten years ago, two terrorists from Daesh (also known as the so-called Islamic State) blew themselves up at Brussels Airport. Another explosion tore through a metro car at Maelbeek station, in the heart of Brussels’ EU district. Thirty-two people were killed, and hundreds more injured.  The attacks came just months after terrorists killed 130 people in attacks on a concert hall, a stadium, restaurants and bars in Paris, exposing gaps in information-sharing in the bloc’s free-travel area. The terrorists had moved between countries, planning the attacks in one and carrying them out in another, said Wegter, who is Dutch. “That’s where our vulnerabilities were.” Today, violent jihadism remains a threat and new large-scale attacks can’t be excluded. But the probability is “much, much lower today than it was 10 years ago,” said Wegter. In the aftermath of the attacks, the bloc changed its security strategy with a focus on prevention and a “security reflex” across every policy field, according to Wegter. It’s also stepping up police and judicial collaboration through Europol and Eurojust, and it’s putting in place databases — including the Schengen Information System — so countries could alert each other about high-risk individuals, as well as an entry/exit system to monitor who enters and leaves the free-travel area. But the bloc is facing a new type of threat, as security officials see a gradual increase in attempted terrorist attacks by lone actors. A lot of that is being cultivated online and increasingly, younger people are involved. “We’ve seen cases of children 12 years old. And, the radicalization process [is] also happening faster,” Wegter said. “Sometimes we’re talking about weeks or months.” In 2024, a third of all arrests connected to potential terror threats were of people aged between 12 and 20 years old, and France recorded a tripling of the number of minors radicalized between 2023 and 2024, said Wegter.  “Just put yourself in the shoes of law enforcement … You’re dealing with young people who spend most of their time online … Who may not have a criminal record. Who, if they are plotting attacks, may not be using registered weapons. It’s very hard to prevent.” Violent jihadism is just one of the threats EU security officials worry are being cultivated online. Wegter said there is also an emerging trend of a violent right-wing extremist narrative online — and to a lesser extent, violent left-wing extremism. There’s also what he called “nihilistic extremist violence,” a new phenomenon that can feature elements of different ideologies or a drive to overthrow the system, but which is fundamentally minors seeking an identity through violence. “What we see online, some of these images are so horrible that even law enforcement needs psychological support to see this kind of stuff,” said Wegter. Law enforcement’s ability to get access to encrypted data and information on people under investigation is crucial, he stressed, and he drew parallels with the steps the EU took to secure the Schengen free movement 10 years ago. “If you want to preserve the good things of the internet, we also need to make sure that we have … some key mechanisms to safeguard the internet also.”

LONDON — The U.K.’s media regulator Ofcom fined 4chan £450,000 on Thursday for failing to comply with age check requirements under the Online Safety Act. The regulator also levied two additional fines of £50,000 and £20,000 on the company for not assessing the risk of users encountering illegal material and failing to specify in its terms of service how they are to be protected from such content, respectively. Ofcom previously fined 4chan £20,000 for failing to respond to to requests for information from the regulator. 4chan has until 2 April to implement age assurance, carry out a “suitable and sufficient” illegal harms risk assessment, and rewrite its terms of service or face a daily penalty of £200. “Companies – wherever they’re based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the U.K. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different,” Suzanne Cater, Ofcom’s director of enforcement, said in a statement. 4chan did not immediately respond when contacted for comment.

Anton, a 44-year-old Russian soldier who heads a workshop responsible for repairing and supplying drones, was at his kitchen table when he learned last month that Elon Musk’s SpaceX had cut off access to Starlink terminals used by Russian forces. He scrambled for alternatives, but none offered unlimited internet, data plans were restrictive, and coverage did not extend to the areas of Ukraine where his unit operated. It’s not only American tech executives who are narrowing communications options for Russians. Days later, Russian authorities began slowing down access nationwide to the messaging app Telegram, the service that frontline troops use to coordinate directly with one another and bypass slower chains of command. “All military work goes through Telegram — all communication,” Anton, whose name has been changed because he fears government reprisal, told POLITICO in voice messages sent via the app. “That would be like shooting the entire Russian army in the head.” Telegram would be joining a home screen’s worth of apps that have become useless to Russians. Kremlin policymakers have already blocked or limited access to WhatsApp, along with parent company Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Microsoft’s LinkedIn, Google’s YouTube, Apple’s FaceTime, Snapchat and X, which like SpaceX is owned by Musk. Encrypted messaging apps Signal and Discord, as well as Japanese-owned Viber, have been inaccessible since 2024. Last month, President Vladimir Putin signed a law requiring telecom operators to block cellular and fixed internet access at the request of the Federal Security Service. Shortly after it took effect on March 3, Moscow residents reported widespread problems with mobile internet, calls and text messages across all major operators for several days, with outages affecting mobile service and Wi-Fi even inside the State Duma. Those decisions have left Russians increasingly cut off from both the outside world and one another, complicating battlefield coordination and disrupting online communities that organize volunteer aid, fundraising and discussion of the war effort. Deepening digital isolation could turn Russia into something akin to “a large, nuclear-armed North Korea and a junior partner to China,” according to Alexander Gabuev, the Berlin-based director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. In April, the Kremlin is expected to escalate its campaign against Telegram — already one of Russia’s most popular messaging platforms, but now in the absence of other social-media options, a central hub for news, business and entertainment. It may block the platform altogether. That is likely to fuel an escalating struggle between state censorship and the tools people use to evade it, with Russia’s place in the world hanging in the balance. “It’s turned into a war,” said Mikhail Klimarev, executive director of the internet Protection Society, a digital rights group that monitors Russia’s censorship infrastructure. “A guerrilla war. They hunt down the VPNs they can see, they block them — and the ‘partisans’ run, build new bunkers, and come back.” THE APP THAT RUNS THE WAR On Feb. 4, SpaceX tightened the authentication system that Starlink terminals use to connect to its satellite network, introducing stricter verification for registered devices. The change effectively blocked many terminals operated by Russian units relying on unauthorized connections, cutting Starlink traffic inside Ukraine by roughly 75 percent, according to internet traffic analysis by Doug Madory, an analyst at the U.S. network monitoring firm Kentik. The move threw Russian operations into disarray, allowing Ukraine to make battlefield gains. Russia has turned to a workaround widely used before satellite internet was an option: laying fiber-optic lines, from rear areas toward frontline battlefield positions. Until then, Starlink terminals had allowed drone operators to stream live video through platforms such as Discord, which is officially blocked in Russia but still sometimes used by the Russian military via VPNs, to commanders at multiple levels. A battalion commander could watch an assault unfold in real time and issue corrections — “enemy ahead” or “turn left” — via radio or Telegram. What once required layers of approval could now happen in minutes. Satellite-connected messaging apps became the fastest way to transmit coordinates, imagery and targeting data. But on Feb. 10, Roskomnadzor, the Russian communications regulator, began slowing down Telegram for users across Russia, citing alleged violations of Russian law. Russian news outlet RBC reported, citing two sources, that authorities plan to shut down Telegram in early April — though not on the front line. In mid-February, Digital Development Minister Maksut Shadayev said the government did not yet intend to restrict Telegram at the front but hoped servicemen would gradually transition to other platforms. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said this week the company could avoid a full ban by complying with Russian legislation and maintaining what he described as “flexible contact” with authorities. Roskomnadzor has accused Telegram of failing to protect personal data, combat fraud and prevent its use by terrorists and criminals. Similar accusations have been directed at other foreign tech platforms. In 2022, a Russian court designated Meta an “extremist organization” after the company said it would temporarily allow posts calling for violence against Russian soldiers in the context of the Ukraine war — a decision authorities used to justify blocking Facebook and Instagram in Russia and increasing pressure on the company’s other services, including WhatsApp. Telegram founder Pavel Durov, a Russian-born entrepreneur now based in the United Arab Emirates, says the throttiling is being used as a pretext to push Russians toward a government-controlled messaging app designed for surveillance and political censorship. That app is MAX, which was launched in March 2025 and has been compared to China’s WeChat in its ambition to anchor a domestic digital ecosystem. Authorities are increasingly steering Russians toward MAX through employers, neighborhood chats and the government services portal Gosuslugi — where citizens retrieve documents, pay fines and book appointments — as well as through banks and retailers. The app’s developer, VK, reports rapid user growth, though those figures are difficult to independently verify. “They didn’t just leave people to fend for themselves — you could say they led them by the hand through that adaptation by offering alternatives,” said Levada Center pollster Denis Volkov, who has studied Russian attitudes toward technology use. The strategy, he said, has been to provide a Russian or state-backed alternative for the majority, while stopping short of fully criminalizing workarounds for more technologically savvy users who do not want to switch. Elena, a 38-year-old Yekaterinburg resident whose surname has been withheld because she fears government reprisal, said her daughter’s primary school moved official communication from WhatsApp to MAX without consulting parents. She keeps MAX installed on a separate tablet that remains mostly in a drawer — a version of what some Russians call a “MAXophone,” gadgets solely for that app, without any other data being left on those phones for the (very real) fear the government could access it. “It works badly. Messages are delayed. Notifications don’t come,” she said. “I don’t trust it … And this whole situation just makes people angry.” THE VPN ARMS RACE Unlike China’s centralized “Great Firewall,” which filters traffic at the country’s digital borders, Russia’s system operates internally. Internet providers are required to route traffic through state-installed deep packet inspection equipment capable of controlling and analyzing data flows in real time. “It’s not one wall,” Klimarev said. “It’s thousands of fences. You climb one, then there’s another.” The architecture allows authorities to slow services without formally banning them — a tactic used against YouTube before its web address was removed from government-run domain-name servers last month. Russian law explicitly provides government authority for blocking websites on grounds such as extremism, terrorism, illegal content or violations of data regulations, but it does not clearly define throttling — slowing traffic rather than blocking it outright — as a formal enforcement mechanism. “The slowdown isn’t described anywhere in legislation,” Klimarev said. “It’s pressure without procedure.” In September, Russia banned advertising for virtual private network services that citizens use to bypass government-imposed restrictions on certain apps or sites. By Klimarev’s estimate, roughly half of Russian internet users now know what a VPN is, and millions pay for one. Polling last year by the Levada Center, Russia’s only major independent pollster, suggests regular use is lower, finding about one-quarter of Russians said they have used VPN services. Russian courts can treat the use of anonymization tools as an aggravating factor in certain crimes — steps that signal growing pressure on circumvention technologies without formally outlawing them. In February, the Federal Antimonopoly Service opened what appears to be the first case against a media outlet for promoting a VPN after the regional publication Serditaya Chuvashiya advertised such a service on its Telegram channel. Surveys in recent years have shown that many Russians, particularly older citizens, support tighter internet regulation, often citing fraud, extremism and online safety. That sentiment gives authorities political space to tighten controls even when the restrictions are unpopular among more technologically savvy users. Even so, the slowdown of Telegram drew criticism from unlikely quarters, including Sergei Mironov, a longtime Kremlin ally and leader of the Just Russia party. In a statement posted on his Telegram channel on Feb. 11, he blasted the regulators behind the move as “idiots,” accusing them of undermining soldiers at the front. He said troops rely on the app to communicate with relatives and organize fundraising for the war effort, warning that restricting it could cost lives. While praising the state-backed messaging app MAX, he argued that Russians should be free to choose which platforms they use. Pro-war Telegram channels frame the government’s blocking techniques as sabotage of the war effort. Ivan Philippov, who tracks Russia’s influential military bloggers, said the reaction inside that ecosystem to news about Telegram has been visceral “rage.” Unlike Starlink, whose cutoff could be blamed on a foreign company, restrictions on Telegram are viewed as self-inflicted. Bloggers accuse regulators of undermining the war effort. Telegram is used not only for battlefield coordination but also for volunteer fundraising networks that provide basic logistics the state does not reliably cover — from transport vehicles and fuel to body armor, trench materials and even evacuation equipment. Telegram serves as the primary hub for donations and reporting back to supporters. “If you break Telegram inside Russia, you break fundraising,” Philippov said. “And without fundraising, a lot of units simply don’t function.” Few in that community trust MAX, citing technical flaws and privacy concerns. Because MAX operates under Russian data-retention laws and is integrated with state services, many assume their communications would be accessible to authorities. Philippov said the app’s prominent defenders are largely figures tied to state media or the presidential administration. “Among independent military bloggers, I haven’t seen a single person who supports it,” he said. Small groups of activists attempted to organize rallies in at least 11 Russian cities, including Moscow, Irkutsk and Novosibirsk, in defense of Telegram. Authorities rejected or obstructed most of the proposed demonstrations — in some cases citing pandemic-era restrictions, weather conditions or vague security concerns — and in several cases revoked previously issued permits. In Novosibirsk, police detained around 15 people ahead of a planned rally. Although a small number of protests were formally approved, no large-scale demonstrations ultimately took place. THE POWER TO PULL THE PLUG The new law signed last month allows Russia’s Federal Security Service to order telecom operators to block cellular and fixed internet access. Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, said subsequent shutdowns of service in Moscow were linked to security measures aimed at protecting critical infrastructure and countering drone threats, adding that such limitations would remain in place “for as long as necessary.” In practice, the disruptions rarely amount to a total communications blackout. Most target mobile internet rather than all services, while voice calls and SMS often continue to function. Some domestic websites and apps — including government portals or banking services — may remain accessible through “whitelists,” meaning authorities allow certain services to keep operating even while broader internet access is restricted. The restrictions are typically localized and temporary, affecting specific regions or parts of cities rather than the entire country. Internet disruptions have increasingly become a tool of control beyond individual platforms. Research by the independent outlet Meduza and the monitoring project Na Svyazi has documented dozens of regional internet shutdowns and mobile network restrictions across Russia, with disruptions occurring regularly since May 2025. The communications shutdown, and uncertainty around where it will go next, is affecting life for citizens of all kinds, from the elderly struggling to contact family members abroad to tech-savvy users who juggle SIM cards and secondary phones to stay connected. Demand has risen for dated communication devices — including walkie-talkies, pagers and landline phones — along with paper maps as mobile networks become less reliable, according to retailers interviewed by RBC. “It feels like we’re isolating ourselves,” said Dmitry, 35, who splits his time between Moscow and Dubai and whose surname has been withheld to protect his identity under fear of governmental reprisal. “Like building a sovereign grave.” Those who track Russian public opinion say the pattern is consistent: irritation followed by adaptation. When Instagram and YouTube were blocked or slowed in recent years, their audiences shrank rapidly as users migrated to alternative services rather than mobilizing against the restrictions. For now, Russia’s digital tightening resembles managed escalation rather than total isolation. Officials deny plans for a full shutdown, and even critics say a complete severing would cripple banking, logistics and foreign trade. “It’s possible,” Klimarev said. “But if they do that, the internet won’t be the main problem anymore.”

LONDON — Keir Starmer wants the public to know he’s going to move fast and fix things.  Speaking to an audience of young people last month, the U.K. prime minister said that unlike the previous Conservative government, which took eight years to pass the country’s Online Safety Act, Labour will legislate fast enough to keep up with the breakneck speed of technological change and its associated harms.  “We’ve taken the powers to make sure we can act within months, not years,” he said.   His words came after the government decried Elon Musk’s X for allowing deepfaked nude images to flood its platform. “The action we took on Grok sent a clear message that no platform gets a free pass,” Starmer said.  Labour showcased its bold new approach last week, tabling two legislative amendments that seek to grant ministers sweeping powers to change the U.K.’s online safety regime without needing to pass primary legislation through Parliament — meaning MPs and peers would have next to no opportunity for scrutiny.  While Labour argues this is necessary to deal with the onslaught of online harms brought about by technology — particularly AI — digital rights activists and civil liberties campaigners fear executive overreach, and say Labour is confusing fast action for good policy, especially as it mulls the possibility of a social media ban for under-16s.  GOVERNMENT HANDS ITSELF NEW POWERS The first amendment, to the Crime and Policing Bill, would empower any senior government minister to amend the Online Safety Act near unilaterally for the purposes of “minimizing or mitigating the risks of harm to individuals” presented by illegal AI-generated content.   The second amendment, to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, looks to go even further, giving ministers the ability to alter any piece of primary legislation to restrict children’s access to “certain internet services.”   The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) has said it wants to act “at pace” in response to the findings of its consultation, the “key focus” of which is whether to ban social media for under-16s, a policy idea which has picked up momentum in multiple countries since Australia introduced a ban at the end of last year.  Amendments like those tabled this week are commonly referred to as Henry VIII clauses, which allow ministers to largely bypass Parliament. They are not entirely new: successive governments since the 1980s have increasingly relied on statutory instruments for lawmaking, according to the Institute for Government.   But such clauses bring problems that could last long after Starmer’s premiership. The government may have good intentions when it comes to online safety, but the measures proposed are “storing up trouble for years to come at a very worrying moment where anti-democratic parties [around the world] are gaining traction,” Anna Cardaso, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty told POLITICO.  “When you create a law, you have to think about what a future government could do with those powers. A future government might not be motivated purely by reducing harms to children, or might have a very different view of what counts as harm,” agreed James Baker, advocacy manager at digital rights organisation Open Rights Group.   Baker pointed to steps taken by the Trump administration in the U.S. to target websites hosting LGBTQ+ content and reproductive health advice.   There are also questions to be asked about proportionality under the Human Rights Act, he argued, not least because the evidence base on how children are affected by social media is muddy at best — a DSIT-commissioned study published in January found little high-quality evidence of a correlation between time spent on social media and poorer reported mental health, for example.   Although the government hopes its use of Henry VIII powers will speed things up, the move is vulnerable to challenge in the courts — not only from human rights campaigners concerned about the impact on privacy and freedom of expression, but also from tech companies navigating any new regulations.   “The inevitable consequence of such broad regulatory discretion is an explosion in litigation,” Oliver Carroll, legal director at law firm Bird & Bird, said.   ‘FIRE-FIGHTING’ The government has backed away from plans to introduce primary legislation dedicated to artificial intelligence, with ministers instead looking to regulate AI at the point of use on a sector-by-sector basis.   Primary legislation on AI would have allowed parliamentarians and other stakeholders to “debate and hammer out the fundamental principles and a framework of regulation,” Liberty’s Anna Carsado said. “But instead, they’ve dodged the hard thing, and they’re just firefighting emergency by emergency by statutory instrument.”   The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill amendment gets its first outing in the House of Commons today, where it stands a good chance of surviving thanks to Labour’s 158-seat majority. Both amendments will also have to pass the House of Lords, where they could meet more resistance.  DSIT did not respond when contacted by POLITICO for comment.  

LONDON — Labour peer Margaret Hodge is among the candidates vying to be the next chair of the media regulator Ofcom. Hodge, who was the MP for Barking until 2024 and has supported stricter social media regulation, was among the candidates interviewed for the role last week, according to two people familiar with the appointment process, granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak on the record.   Hodge, a veteran Labour politician who has spoken about her experience of online abuse, would be another political appointment to the £120,000-a-year role at a crucial time for the independent regulator. The previous Conservative government appointed Michael Grade, a Tory peer, as chair in 2022. His term ends on April 26, and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, which is leading the recruitment process, hopes to announce his replacement before then. The interview panel, which is made up of civil servants and independent members, will now hand Technology Secretary Liz Kendall a shortlist of approved candidates. Former Conservative Culture Secretary Jeremy Wright is also in the running, according to the same two people quoted above. Wright, one of the architects of the Online Safety Act (OSA), has been critical of Ofcom’s implementation of the flagship law. The Telegraph newspaper has reported Channel 4’s former Chairman Ian Cheshire is also on the shortlist.  Kendall has also been critical of Ofcom for not implementing parts of the OSA quickly enough. She warned last November that it risks losing public trust.  Ofcom, which also regulates TV and radio, is about to embark on a major review of the telecoms sector, which is being upended by developments in artificial intelligence and satellite technology.  A DSIT spokesperson said they were unable to comment on the recruitment process. Hodge did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

LONDON — U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday said the government “need to look at” social media design features like infinite scroll as part of action to encourage healthier habits for children online. Speaking at an event on Monday morning, Starmer said he was concerned that even exposure to ostensibly non-harmful online content could be problematic for kids’ development. The U.K. government is due to launch a consultation in the next few weeks into children’s online safety which will specifically consider whether to ban under-16s from social media. The government on Monday announced it would give itself powers to swiftly enact findings from that consultation, which will last three months. Starmer said that “there will be action coming out of this consultation,” even if that’s not an outright ban, and suggested that specific features including infinite scrolling and autoplay could be targeted. “Some of the addictive features on social media that mean you never stop scrolling, or once you want watch one thing, another thing comes up and you’re on your screen the whole time, we need to look at that, because even if it’s good stuff, the question is, how do we get people off it and not simply on their screen?” Starmer said. He reiterated the point in an interview with Radio 2. “Yes, there’s the sort of overarching question of whether under 16 should be on social media at all … There are features within social media that are intended to make it addictive, so the sort of constant scrolling, the sort of auto player for next thing … all of these are designed to keep young people on-screen, not off-screen. And we have to tackle that,” Starmer said. This comes after the European Commission made a preliminary finding earlier this month that TikTok’s infinite scroll and autoplay features breached Europe’s Digital Services Act.

MUNICH, Germany — The U.S. is not interfering in European politics, a senior U.S. State Department official told POLITICO on Saturday, despite reported efforts by the Trump administration to fund MAGA-aligned organizations on the continent.  Speaking at the POLITICO Pub on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, U.S. Under Secretary of State Sarah Rogers pushed back on a Financial Times report that she had backed a program to fund far-right think tanks and institutes in Europe. “The idea that we have a slush fund for the far right is a lie,” Rogers said. “It’s not America’s decision to govern who’s elected in Europe.” The message from Rogers appeared to be another sign of the Trump administration trying to send conciliatory signals to Europe, despite the recently published National Security Strategy calling on the U.S. to “cultivate resistance” to the political status quo on the continent. And it came just hours after Secretary of State Marco Rubio called for a “strong and revitalized Europe” on the Munich stage.  Rogers has courted controversy by taking to her official social media accounts to launch public attacks, from characterizing immigrants to Germany as “imported barbarian rapist hordes” to connecting Sweden’s migration policy to instances of sexual violence, and for her sharp rebukes of social media regulations in the EU and the United Kingdom. After U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s searing Munich speech last year criticizing European democracies for ostensibly pushing back on free speech rights in efforts to crack down on election interference, Rogers indicated that the U.S. is still making a list of which allies have been naughty and nice, but used a gentler tone.  “In terms of who’s a good ally, we certainly have views on that, but whoever’s elected, we will work with them,” she said. At Munich, she has faced questions over whether rising far-right European parties, such as Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) and France’s National Rally, might share U.S. priorities when it comes to beefing up defense.  Many right-wing parties have qualms over higher military spending and many also have warm relations with the Kremlin. Rogers said that despite holding meetings with an AfD spokesperson last year, she has also talked with the British and French governments.  “I’m a diplomat,” Rogers said. “It’s my job to meet with people that disagree with us on at least some things.”  The White House also has disagreements with would-be European allies on the right, she said, and there is some common ground on efforts to crack down on AI deepfakes and sexual exploitation on social media. “We certainly don’t disagree that defamatory sexualized deepfakes are a serious issue, possibly addressable by law,” she added.

LONDON — The U.K.’s data protection watchdog has opened a formal investigation into Elon Musk’s companies X and xAI, over the use of personal data by the Grok AI system to generate a flood of sexualized deepfakes. In a statement on Tuesday, the Information Commissioner’s Office said the “reported creation and circulation of such content raises serious concerns under U.K. data protection law and presents a risk of significant potential harm to the public.” “These concerns relate to whether personal data has been processed lawfully, fairly and transparently, and whether appropriate safeguards were built into Grok’s design and deployment to prevent the generation of harmful manipulated images using personal data,” it said. The formal investigation follows an announcement last month that the ICO was seeking urgent information from X and xAI, amid widespread reports that Grok had been used to generate sexualized images of children and adults. William Malcolm, executive director for regulatory risk and innovation at the ICO, said the reports about Grok “raise deeply troubling questions about how people’s personal data has been used.” “Losing control of personal data in this way can cause immediate and significant harm. This is particularly the case where children are involved,” Malcolm said. “Where we find obligations have not been met, we will take action to protect the public.” While the ICO’s investigation will focus on X and xAI’s compliance with U.K. data protection law, Malcolm said it would work closely with other regulators in the U.K. and abroad that are also investigating the issue. Ofcom, the U.K.’s communications regulator, opened a formal investigation into X last month under the Online Safety Act. That investigation is ongoing, Ofcom said on Tuesday. It is progressing “as a matter of urgency” but could take “months,” Ofcom added, noting that it must follow a “fair process” and “it would not be appropriate to provide a running commentary.” Ofcom also said it is not currently investigating xAI, which provides the standalone Grok AI tool, noting that “it can only take action on online harms covered by the [OSA].” The act does not apply to AI tools which do not involve searching the internet, interacting with other social media users, or generating pornography, it said. The U.K.’s Technology Secretary Liz Kendall has previously said she is assessing options to address “gaps” in the OSA. The European Commission announced its own probe into X last month, while French authorities searched X’s offices in Paris on Tuesday as part of their own criminal investigation into Grok, POLITICO reported. X did not immediately respond when contacted for comment.

LONDON — Pornhub will no longer be fully available in the U.K. from Feb. 2, its parent company Aylo announced Tuesday, citing the consequences of Britain’s Online Safety Act. Aylo said it made an effort to comply after the act’s Children’s Codes came into force last summer, requiring adult sites to have highly effective age-assurance. But visitors — both adults and under-18s — are flocking to non-compliant sites en masse, Alexzandra Kekesi, vice president of brand and community at Aylo, said. Despite sharing these findings with the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the U.K.’s communications watchdog Ofcom, “we’re still continuing to see more of the same,” she said. Aylo says users who go through age assurance prior to the Feb. 2 cut-off date will still be able to access the site. During a press conference, Aylo’s lawyers were keen to argue that the blame for its decision should be put at the government’s feet, rather than Ofcom’s, and argued only device-based age-assurance by the likes of Google, Apple, and Microsoft would solve the problem. “This law, not our regulator, this law by its very nature is pushing both adults and children alike to the cesspools of the internet, to the most dangerous material possible,” Solomon Friedman, a partner at Ethical Capital Partners and a lawyer representing Aylo said. “And while there [were] six months by Aylo of good faith effort to be part of this ecosystem, to gather data and share it with the government, the data now really speaks for itself. This law not only is not protecting children, it’s putting children and adults in greater danger online,” he added.

LONDON — The U.K. government’s upcoming ban on nudification apps won’t apply to general-purpose AI tools like Elon Musk’s Grok, according to Tech Secretary Liz Kendall. The ban will “apply to applications that have one despicable purpose only: to use generative AI to turn images of real people into fake nude pictures and videos without their permission,” Kendall said in a letter to Science, Innovation and Technology committee chair Chi Onwurah published Wednesday. Grok, which is made by Musk’s AI company xAI but is also accessible inside his social media platform X, has sparked a political uproar because it has been used to create a wave of sexualized nonconsensual deepfakes, many targeting women and some children. But Grok can be used to generate a wide range of images and has other functionalities, including text generation, so does not have the sole purpose of generating sexualized or nude images. The U.K. government announced its plan to ban nudification apps in December, before the Grok controversy took off, but Kendall has given it as an example of ways that the government is cracking down on AI-generated intimate image abuse. Kendall said the nudification ban will be put into effect using the Crime and Policing Bill, which is currently passing through committee stage. The Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology did not immediately respond when contacted by POLITICO for comment. The U.K.’s media regulator Ofcom launched an investigation into X on Monday to determine whether the platform has complied with its duties under the Online Safety Act to protect British users from illegal content. The U.K, government has said Ofcom has its full support to use whatever enforcement tools it deems fit, which could include blocking X in the U.K. or issuing a fine.