Published June 5, 2025 10:00am EDT close Don’t be so quick to click that Google calendar invite. It could be a hacker’s trap Cybercriminals are sending fake meeting invitations that seem legitimate. NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles! Americans’ personal data is now spread across more digital platforms than ever. From online shopping habits to fitness tracking logs, personal information ends up in hundreds of company databases. While most people worry about social media leaks or email hacks, a far less visible threat comes from data brokers.I still find it hard to believe that companies like this are allowed to operate with so little legal scrutiny. These firms trade in personal information without our knowledge or consent. What baffles me even more is that they aren’t serious about protecting the one thing that is central to their business model: data. Just last year, we saw news of a massive data breach at a data broker called National Public Data, which exposed 2.7 billion records. And now another data broker, LexisNexis, a major name in the industry, has reported a significant breach that exposed sensitive information from more than 364,000 people. A hacker at work (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)LexisNexis breach went undetected for months after holiday hackLexisNexis filed a notice with the Maine attorney general revealing that a hacker accessed consumer data through a third-party software development platform. The breach happened on Dec. 25, 2024, but the company only discovered it months later. LexisNexis was alerted on April 1, 2025, by an unnamed individual who claimed to have found sensitive files. It remains unclear whether this person was responsible for the breach or merely came across the exposed data.MASSIVE DATA BREACH EXPOSES 184 MILLION PASSWORDS AND LOGINSA spokesperson for LexisNexis confirmed that the hacker gained access to the company’s GitHub account. This is a platform commonly used by developers to store and collaborate on code. Security guidelines repeatedly warn against storing sensitive information in such repositories; however, mistakes such as exposed access tokens and personal data files continue to occur.The stolen data varies from person to person but includes full names, birthdates, phone numbers, mailing and email addresses, Social Security numbers and driver's license numbers. LexisNexis has not confirmed whether it received any ransom demand or had further contact with the attacker. An individual working on their laptop (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)Why the LexisNexis hack is a bigger threat than you realizeLexisNexis isn’t a household name for most people, but it plays a major role in how personal data is harvested and used behind the scenes. The company pulls information from a wide range of sources, compiling detailed profiles that help other businesses assess risk and detect fraud. Its clients include banks, insurance companies and government agencies.In 2023, the New York Times reported that several car manufacturers had been sharing driving data with LexisNexis without notifying vehicle owners. That information was then sold to insurance companies, which used it to adjust premiums based on individual driving behavior. The story made one thing clear. LexisNexis has access to a staggering amount of personal detail, even from people who have never willingly engaged with the company.Law enforcement also uses LexisNexis tools to dig up information on suspects. These systems offer access to phone records, home addresses and other historical data. While such tools might assist in investigations, they also highlight a serious issue. When this much sensitive information is concentrated in one place, it becomes a single point of failure. And as the recent breach shows, that failure is no longer hypothetical. A hacker at work (Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson)7 expert tips to protect your personal data after a data broker breachKeeping your personal data safe online can feel overwhelming, but a few practical steps can make a big difference in protecting your privacy and reducing your digital footprint. Here are 7 effective ways to take control of your information and keep it out of the wrong hands:1. Remove your data from the internet: The most effective way to take control of your data and avoid data brokers from selling it is to opt for data removal services. While no service promises to remove all your data from the internet, having a removal service is great if you want to constantly monitor and automate the process of removing your information from hundreds of sites continuously over a longer period of time. Check out my top picks for data removal services here.Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web.2. Review privacy settings: Take a few minutes to explore the privacy and security settings on the services you use. For example, limit who can see your social media posts, disable unnecessary location-sharing on your phone and consider turning off ad personalization on accounts like Google and Facebook. Most browsers let you block third-party cookies or clear tracking data. The FTC suggests comparing the privacy notices of different sites and apps and choosing ones that let you opt out of sharing when possible.3. Use privacy-friendly tools: Install browser extensions or plugins that block ads and trackers (such as uBlock Origin or Privacy Badger). You might switch to a more private search engine (like DuckDuckGo or Brave) that doesn’t log your queries. Consider using a browser’s "incognito" or private mode when you don’t want your history saved, and regularly clear your cookies and cache. Even small habits, like logging out of accounts when not in use or using a password manager, make you less trackable.GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE4. Beware of phishing links and use strong antivirus software: Scammers may try to get access to your financial details and other important data using phishing links. The best way to safeguard yourself from malicious links is to have antivirus software installed on all your devices. This protection can also alert you to phishing emails and ransomware scams, keeping your personal information and digital assets safe. Get my picks for the best 2025 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android and iOS devices.5. Be cautious with personal data: Think twice before sharing extra details. Don’t fill out online surveys or quizzes that ask for personal or financial information unless you trust the source. Create separate email addresses for sign-ups (so marketing emails don’t go to your main inbox). Only download apps from official stores and check app permissions.6. Opt out of data broker lists: Many data brokers offer ways to opt out or delete your information, though it can be a tedious process. For example, there are sites like Privacy Rights Clearinghouse or the Whitepages opt-out page that list popular brokers and their opt-out procedures. The FTC’s consumer guide, "Your Guide to Protecting Your Privacy Online," includes tips on opting out of targeted ads and removing yourself from people-search databases. Keep in mind you may have to repeat this every few months.7. Be wary of mailbox communications: Bad actors may also try to scam you through snail mail. The data leak gives them access to your address. They may impersonate people or brands you know and use themes that require urgent attention, such as missed deliveries, account suspensions and security alerts.Kurt’s key takeawayFor many, the LexisNexis breach may be the first time they realize just how much of their data is in circulation. Unlike a social media platform or a bank, there is no clear customer relationship with a data broker, and that makes it harder to demand transparency. This incident should prompt serious discussion around what kind of oversight is necessary in industries that operate in the shadows. A more informed public and stronger regulation may be the only things standing between personal data and permanent exposure.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPShould companies be allowed to sell your personal information without your consent? Let us know by writing us atCyberguy.com/Contact.For more of my tech tips and security alerts, subscribe to my free CyberGuy Report Newsletter by heading to Cyberguy.com/Newsletter.Ask Kurt a question or let us know what stories you'd like us to cover.Follow Kurt on his social channels:Answers to the most-asked CyberGuy questions:New from Kurt:Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved. Kurt "CyberGuy" Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on "FOX & Friends." Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

The top-selling phones of early 2025 have been broken down by country, and while most results won’t surprise you, one unexpected result was that a Google Pixel device actually made the list. more…

Data broker LexisNexis Risk Solutions (LNRS) has just disclosed a data breach that occurred at the end of last year, and while it doesn't affect as many individuals as other recent high profile incidents—such as the DISA hack that included 3.3 million people's information—it underscores the ever-present concerns with companies collecting (and profiting off of) user data. As TechCrunch reports, LexisNexis Risk Solutions uses consumers' personal and financial information to help corporations conduct risk assessments on prospective customers and detect fraudulent transactions. For example, LexisNexis sold data on vehicle driving habits collected by car manufacturers to insurance companies to set premiums, while law enforcement agencies pull data from LexisNexis about suspects. (LexisNexis Risk Solutions is a subsidiary of the same corporation that owns data analytics and research firm LexisNexis.)The LexisNexis hack compromised data collected on 364,333 individuals, and there's a potential class action lawsuit brewing over the incident. Here's what you need to know. What happened with LexisNexis?According to the company's filing with the Maine attorney general's office, a data breach took place on December 25, 2024 but wasn't discovered until May 14, 2025. A third-party platform used by LexisNexis was hacked, compromising information that may include the following: NamePhone numberMailing addressEmail addressSocial Security numberDriver's license numberDate of birthIn a letter to affected individuals, LexisNexis states that no financial or credit card information was included in the breach, nor has any data been obviously misused (so far). Few additional details about the incident have been disclosed, other than that none of the company's own networks or systems were hacked. What consumers need to doLexisNexis sent a notice dated May 24 to consumers whose data may have been compromised, so if you receive a letter from LexisNexis Risk Solutions, don't throw it out. The company is offering 24 months of identity protection and credit monitoring services through Experian IdentityWorks, and you must enroll online by August 31, 2025 using the activation code provided in your notice. Affected individuals can also indicate their interest in joining a class action lawsuit against LexisNexis through Oklahoma-based firm Abington Cole + Ellery. If you want to volunteer to be considered as a class representative, fill out the online form with your name, contact information, and connection to the breach.Finally, even if you don't plan to join the class action suit, you should keep an eye out for signs of identity theft. Check your credit report—which you can request for free on a weekly basis—and monitor your accounts for any unauthorized activity. You can also freeze your credit, place a fraud alert, and take other steps to secure your Social Security number so no one can open accounts or take out debt in your name.

Smart TVs, take note Breaking down why Apple TVs are privacy advocates’ go-to streaming device Using the Apple TV app or an Apple account means giving Apple more data, though. Scharon Harding – Jun 1, 2025 7:35 am | 22 Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Credit: Aurich Lawson | Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more Every time I write an article about the escalating advertising and tracking on today's TVs, someone brings up Apple TV boxes. Among smart TVs, streaming sticks, and other streaming devices, Apple TVs are largely viewed as a safe haven. "Just disconnect your TV from the Internet and use an Apple TV box." That's the common guidance you'll hear from Ars readers for those seeking the joys of streaming without giving up too much privacy. Based on our research and the experts we've consulted, that advice is pretty solid, as Apple TVs offer significantly more privacy than other streaming hardware providers. But how private are Apple TV boxes, really? Apple TVs don't use automatic content recognition (ACR, a user-tracking technology leveraged by nearly all smart TVs and streaming devices), but could that change? And what about the software that Apple TV users do use—could those apps provide information about you to advertisers or Apple? In this article, we'll delve into what makes the Apple TV's privacy stand out and examine whether users should expect the limited ads and enhanced privacy to last forever. Apple TV boxes limit tracking out of the box One of the simplest ways Apple TVs ensure better privacy is through their setup process, during which you can disable Siri, location tracking, and sending analytics data to Apple. During setup, users also receive several opportunities to review Apple's data and privacy policies. Also off by default is the boxes' ability to send voice input data to Apple. Most other streaming devices require users to navigate through pages of settings to disable similar tracking capabilities, which most people are unlikely to do. Apple’s approach creates a line of defense against snooping, even for those unaware of how invasive smart devices can be. Apple TVs running tvOS 14.5 and later also make third-party app tracking more difficult by requiring such apps to request permission before they can track users. "If you choose Ask App Not to Track, the app developer can’t access the system advertising identifier (IDFA), which is often used to track," Apple says. "The app is also not permitted to track your activity using other information that identifies you or your device, like your email address." Users can access the Apple TV settings and disable the ability of third-party apps to ask permission for tracking. However, Apple could further enhance privacy by enabling this setting by default. The Apple TV also lets users control which apps can access the set-top box's Bluetooth functionality, photos, music, and HomeKit data (if applicable), and the remote's microphone. "Apple’s primary business model isn’t dependent on selling targeted ads, so it has somewhat less incentive to harvest and monetize incredible amounts of your data," said RJ Cross, director of the consumer privacy program at the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG). "I personally trust them more with my data than other tech companies." What if you share analytics data? If you allow your Apple TV to share analytics data with Apple or app developers, that data won't be personally identifiable, Apple says. Any collected personal data is "not logged at all, removed from reports before they’re sent to Apple, or protected by techniques, such as differential privacy," Apple says. Differential privacy, which injects noise into collected data, is one of the most common methods used for anonymizing data. In support documentation (PDF), Apple details its use of differential privacy: The first step we take is to privatize the information using local differential privacy on the user’s device. The purpose of privatization is to assure that Apple’s servers don't receive clear data. Device identifiers are removed from the data, and it is transmitted to Apple over an encrypted channel. The Apple analysis system ingests the differentially private contributions, dropping IP addresses and other metadata. The final stage is aggregation, where the privatized records are processed to compute the relevant statistics, and the aggregate statistics are then shared with relevant Apple teams. Both the ingestion and aggregation stages are performed in a restricted access environment so even the privatized data isn’t broadly accessible to Apple employees. What if you use an Apple account with your Apple TV? Another factor to consider is Apple's privacy policy regarding Apple accounts, formerly Apple IDs. Apple support documentation says you "need" an Apple account to use an Apple TV, but you can use the hardware without one. Still, it's common for people to log into Apple accounts on their Apple TV boxes because it makes it easier to link with other Apple products. Another reason someone might link an Apple TV box with an Apple account is to use the Apple TV app, a common way to stream on Apple TV boxes. So what type of data does Apple harvest from Apple accounts? According to its privacy policy, the company gathers usage data, such as "data about your activity on and use of" Apple offerings, including "app launches within our services...; browsing history; search history; [and] product interaction." Other types of data Apple may collect from Apple accounts include transaction information (Apple says this is "data about purchases of Apple products and services or transactions facilitated by Apple, including purchases on Apple platforms"), account information ("including email address, devices registered, account status, and age"), device information (including serial number and browser type), contact information (including physical address and phone number), and payment information (including bank details). None of that is surprising considering the type of data needed to make an Apple account work. Many Apple TV users can expect Apple to gather more data from their Apple account usage on other devices, such as iPhones or Macs. However, if you use the same Apple account across multiple devices, Apple recognizes that all the data it has collected from, for example, your iPhone activity, also applies to you as an Apple TV user. A potential workaround could be maintaining multiple Apple accounts. With an Apple account solely dedicated to your Apple TV box and Apple TV hardware and software tracking disabled as much as possible, Apple would have minimal data to ascribe to you as an Apple TV owner. You can also use your Apple TV box without an Apple account, but then you won't be able to use the Apple TV app, one of the device's key features. Data collection via the Apple TV app You can download third-party apps like Netflix and Hulu onto an Apple TV box, but most TV and movie watching on Apple TV boxes likely occurs via the Apple TV app. The app is necessary for watching content on the Apple TV+ streaming service, but it also drives usage by providing access to the libraries of many (but not all) popular streaming apps in one location. So understanding the Apple TV app’s privacy policy is critical to evaluating how private Apple TV activity truly is. As expected, some of the data the app gathers is necessary for the software to work. That includes, according to the app's privacy policy, "information about your purchases, downloads, activity in the Apple TV app, the content you watch, and where you watch it in the Apple TV app and in connected apps on any of your supported devices." That all makes sense for ensuring that the app remembers things like which episode of Severance you're on across devices. Apple collects other data, though, that isn't necessary for functionality. It says it gathers data on things like the "features you use (for example, Continue Watching or Library)," content pages you view, how you interact with notifications, and approximate location information (that Apple says doesn't identify users) to help improve the app. Additionally, Apple tracks the terms you search for within the app, per its policy: We use Apple TV search data to improve models that power Apple TV. For example, aggregate Apple TV search queries are used to fine-tune the Apple TV search model. This data usage is less intrusive than that of other streaming devices, which might track your activity and then sell that data to third-party advertisers. But some people may be hesitant about having any of their activities tracked to benefit a multi-trillion-dollar conglomerate. Data collected from the Apple TV app used for ads By default, the Apple TV app also tracks "what you watch, your purchases, subscriptions, downloads, browsing, and other activities in the Apple TV app" to make personalized content recommendations. Content recommendations aren't ads in the traditional sense but instead provide a way for Apple to push you toward products by analyzing data it has on you. You can disable the Apple TV app's personalized recommendations, but it's a little harder than you might expect since you can't do it through the app. Instead, you need to go to the Apple TV settings and then select Apps > TV > Use Play History > Off. The most privacy-conscious users may wish that personalized recommendations were off by default. Darío Maestro, senior legal fellow at the nonprofit Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), noted to Ars that even though Apple TV users can opt out of personalized content recommendations, "many will not realize they can." Apple can also use data it gathers on you from the Apple TV app to serve traditional ads. If you allow your Apple TV box to track your location, the Apple TV app can also track your location. That data can "be used to serve geographically relevant ads," according to the Apple TV app privacy policy. Location tracking, however, is off by default on Apple TV boxes. Apple's tvOS doesn't have integrated ads. For comparison, some TV OSes, like Roku OS and LG's webOS, show ads on the OS's home screen and/or when showing screensavers. But data gathered from the Apple TV app can still help Apple's advertising efforts. This can happen if you allow personalized ads in other Apple apps serving targeted apps, such as Apple News, the App Store, or Stocks. In such cases, Apple may apply data gathered from the Apple TV app, "including information about the movies and TV shows you purchase from Apple, to serve ads in those apps that are more relevant to you," the Apple TV app privacy policy says. Apple also provides third-party advertisers and strategic partners with "non-personal data" gathered from the Apple TV app: We provide some non-personal data to our advertisers and strategic partners that work with Apple to provide our products and services, help Apple market to customers, and sell ads on Apple’s behalf to display on the App Store and Apple News and Stocks. Apple also shares non-personal data from the Apple TV with third parties, such as content owners, so they can pay royalties, gauge how much people are watching their shows or movies, "and improve their associated products and services," Apple says. Apple's policy notes: For example, we may share non-personal data about your transactions, viewing activity, and region, as well as aggregated user demographics[,] such as age group and gender (which may be inferred from information such as your name and salutation in your Apple Account), to Apple TV strategic partners, such as content owners, so that they can measure the performance of their creative work [and] meet royalty and accounting requirements. When reached for comment, an Apple spokesperson told Ars that Apple TV users can clear their play history from the app. All that said, the Apple TV app still shares far less data with third parties than other streaming apps. Netflix, for example, says it discloses some personal information to advertising companies "in order to select Advertisements shown on Netflix, to facilitate interaction with Advertisements, and to measure and improve effectiveness of Advertisements." Warner Bros. Discovery says it discloses information about Max viewers "with advertisers, ad agencies, ad networks and platforms, and other companies to provide advertising to you based on your interests." And Disney+ users have Nielsen tracking on by default. What if you use Siri? You can easily deactivate Siri when setting up an Apple TV. But those who opt to keep the voice assistant and the ability to control Apple TV with their voice take somewhat of a privacy hit. According to the privacy policy accessible in Apple TV boxes' settings, Apple boxes automatically send all Siri requests to Apple's servers. If you opt into using Siri data to "Improve Siri and Dictation," Apple will store your audio data. If you opt out, audio data won't be stored, but per the policy: In all cases, transcripts of your interactions will be sent to Apple to process your requests and may be stored by Apple. Apple TV boxes also send audio and transcriptions of dictation input to Apple servers for processing. Apple says it doesn't store the audio but may store transcriptions of the audio. If you opt to "Improve Siri and Dictation," Apple says your history of voice requests isn't tied to your Apple account or email. But Apple is vague about how long it may store data related to voice input performed with the Apple TV if you choose this option. The policy states: Your request history, which includes transcripts and any related request data, is associated with a random identifier for up to six months and is not tied to your Apple Account or email address. After six months, you request history is disassociated from the random identifier and may be retained for up to two years. Apple may use this data to develop and improve Siri, Dictation, Search, and limited other language processing functionality in Apple products ... Apple may also review a subset of the transcripts of your interactions and this ... may be kept beyond two years for the ongoing improvements of products and services. Apple promises not to use Siri and voice data to build marketing profiles or sell them to third parties, but it hasn't always adhered to that commitment. In January, Apple agreed to pay $95 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing Siri of recording private conversations and sharing them with third parties for targeted ads. In 2019, contractors reported hearing private conversations and recorded sex via Siri-gathered audio. Outside of Apple, we've seen voice request data used questionably, including in criminal trials and by corporate employees. Siri and dictation data also represent additional ways a person's Apple TV usage might be unexpectedly analyzed to fuel Apple's business. Automatic content recognition Apple TVs aren't preloaded with automatic content recognition (ACR), an Apple spokesperson confirmed to Ars, another plus for privacy advocates. But ACR is software, so Apple could technically add it to Apple TV boxes via a software update at some point. Sherman Li, the founder of Enswers, the company that first put ACR in Samsung TVs, confirmed to Ars that it's technically possible for Apple to add ACR to already-purchased Apple boxes. Years ago, Enswers retroactively added ACR to other types of streaming hardware, including Samsung and LG smart TVs. (Enswers was acquired by Gracenote, which Nielsen now owns.) In general, though, there are challenges to adding ACR to hardware that people already own, Li explained: Everyone believes, in theory, you can add ACR anywhere you want at any time because it's software, but because of the way [hardware is] architected... the interplay between the chipsets, like the SoCs, and the firmware is different in a lot of situations. Li pointed to numerous variables that could prevent ACR from being retroactively added to any type of streaming hardware, "including access to video frame buffers, audio streams, networking connectivity, security protocols, OSes, and app interface communication layers, especially at different levels of the stack in these devices, depending on the implementation." Due to the complexity of Apple TV boxes, Li suspects it would be difficult to add ACR to already-purchased Apple TVs. It would likely be simpler for Apple to release a new box with ACR if it ever decided to go down that route. If Apple were to add ACR to old or new Apple TV boxes, the devices would be far less private, and the move would be highly unpopular and eliminate one of the Apple TV's biggest draws. However, Apple reportedly has a growing interest in advertising to streaming subscribers. The Apple TV+ streaming service doesn't currently show commercials, but the company is rumored to be exploring a potential ad tier. The suspicions stem from a reported meeting between Apple and the United Kingdom's ratings body, Barb, to discuss how it might track ads on Apple TV+, according to a July report from The Telegraph. Since 2023, Apple has also hired several prominent names in advertising, including a former head of advertising at NBCUniversal and a new head of video ad sales. Further, Apple TV+ is one of the few streaming services to remain ad-free, and it's reported to be losing Apple $1 billion per year since its launch. One day soon, Apple may have much more reason to care about advertising in streaming and being able to track the activities of people who use its streaming offerings. That has implications for Apple TV box users. "The more Apple creeps into the targeted ads space, the less I’ll trust them to uphold their privacy promises. You can imagine Apple TV being a natural progression for selling ads," PIRG's Cross said. Somewhat ironically, Apple has marketed its approach to privacy as a positive for advertisers. "Apple’s commitment to privacy and personal relevancy builds trust amongst readers, driving a willingness to engage with content and ads alike," Apple's advertising guide for buying ads on Apple News and Stocks reads. The most private streaming gadget It remains technologically possible for Apple to introduce intrusive tracking or ads to Apple TV boxes, but for now, the streaming devices are more private than the vast majority of alternatives, save for dumb TVs (which are incredibly hard to find these days). And if Apple follows its own policies, much of the data it gathers should be kept in-house. However, those with strong privacy concerns should be aware that Apple does track certain tvOS activities, especially those that happen through Apple accounts, voice interaction, or the Apple TV app. And while most of Apple's streaming hardware and software settings prioritize privacy by default, some advocates believe there's room for improvement. For example, STOP's Maestro said: Unlike in the [European Union], where the upcoming Data Act will set clearer rules on transfers of data generated by smart devices, the US has no real legislation governing what happens with your data once it reaches Apple's servers. Users are left with little way to verify those privacy promises. Maestro suggested that Apple could address these concerns by making it easier for people to conduct security research on smart device software. "Allowing the development of alternative or modified software that can evaluate privacy settings could also increase user trust and better uphold Apple's public commitment to privacy," Maestro said. There are ways to limit the amount of data that advertisers can get from your Apple TV. But if you use the Apple TV app, Apple can use your activity to help make business decisions—and therefore money. As you might expect from a device that connects to the Internet and lets you stream shows and movies, Apple TV boxes aren't totally incapable of tracking you. But they're still the best recommendation for streaming users seeking hardware with more privacy and fewer ads. Scharon Harding Senior Technology Reporter Scharon Harding Senior Technology Reporter Scharon is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica writing news, reviews, and analysis on consumer gadgets and services. She's been reporting on technology for over 10 years, with bylines at Tom’s Hardware, Channelnomics, and CRN UK. 22 Comments

Despite more and more companies requiring employees to return to the office, the telework/hybrid life is still going strong. Across US-based PCMag readers who took our Business Choice ISP survey, 28% work exclusively from home. Meanwhile, 38.8% work from home multiple days a week, and a majority (54.9%) say they do so at least occasionally. No matter where employees get their jobs done, internet connectivity is paramount. If you work from home, you need to choose the best ISP to keep connected and up to speed. If you run the IT department for a large office, choosing a provider can make or break the work done there. Which ISP is right for your workplace? The answer depends on your specific needs and service availability—sadly, affordable fiber optics aren’t available to all. But we’ve got a cross-section of providers below, selected by PCMag readers, representing the best in class. For the best home internet service providers, read our Readers’ Choice 2025: ISPs coverage. The Top US ISPs for Work in 2025Home Office ISPsThe top of the chart in terms of working from home belongs to a municipal provider, Nextlight, available in a suburb of Denver, CO. Fiber-to-the-home services provided by a local utility company like this score well with home users, and more than enough of the people rating Nextlight also use it for working from home.In the subcategories where it earns a score, Nextlight is on top, even besting the bigger name GFiber, though the two tie for likelihood to recommend. “Great value, excellent customer service, excellent product,” says one work-from-home Nextlight user.Only a select few can take advantage of a muni ISP, however. So we also always pick a major ISP as a winner, and this year, that’s clearly AT&T Fiber. Of all the ISPs with a multi-state reach in the millions, AT&T Fiber has the best scores.(Note: Click the arrows in our interactive charts to view various elements of our survey results.)Respondents had favorable things to say about AT&T Fiber. “My wife works from home, and we had a fiber cut in the yard; they were quick to repair it, in three hours,” says one respondent. Another offers, “AT&T Fiber still beats any of the cable services we have tried.” When it comes to satellite-based ISPs for working from home, Starlink stands alone. The other satellite ISPs don’t even make the cut, as not enough of our readers rate them. Even so, Starlink scores incredibly well, with numbers only bested by local fiber providers. Respondents typically refer to the service as pricey—it scores lowest for value—but note that it is a step up from any other option they have available. Astound Broadband wins as the top cable company for work-from-home use. It also has high scores for mobile and home phone service, both things that telecommuters are very likely to put to use. Lastly, the T-Mobile 5G Home InternetWork ISPs We ask respondents to rate the ISPs they use in a workplace that isn’t at home. The usual suspects tend to be huge names in the internet world, like Spectrum (from Charter) or Xfinity (from Comcast), and both do indeed appear in this list. But at the bottom. Recommended by Our EditorsThis year, Astound Broadband also is the top ISP with readers for in the office outside the home.Astound seals the deal with high marks in all its subcategories, in particular ease of use, speed, and reliability. Reader comments include “Nothing but great things to say” and “These guys are the best. I had my business set up for success in no time.” IT-Managed ISPsThis list was a little larger than last year, when the award went to Astound and Fios. This time around, those two weren't in the running, leaving the field to just three players.AT&T. The company improved its scores since 2024, from 7.9 out of 10 for overall satisfaction to an 8.2. When IT adopts AT&T for use, the ISP earns very high scores for connection reliability, speed, and ease of use. It also earns a good rating for management, an important factor for an IT department.The Top Canadian ISPs for Work in 2025Home Office ISPsThe majority of Canadians use one of the big three ISPs (Bell, Rogers, and Telus) or one of their off-shoot “flanker” brands, which use their parent company's network. But there are a select few ISPs that also have their own network and are trying to grow by not just leasing lines from others. Those include companies like Cogeco, Eastlink, and Videotron. The latter is once again the top pick in our survey by Canadians who work from homeVideotron is the top ISP for overall satisfaction, speed, and ease of use; it ties with TekSavvy (an ISP that mainly uses lines owned by other providers) for customer service. Among ancillary services that business users will appreciate, Videotron rates high for its mobile phone service and the home Wi-Fi routers it provides. “Fast and worth the price,” one user says of Videotron.Other noteworthy top scores for work-from-home go to Virgin Plus (owned by Bell), which has the top scores for value, reliability, and tech support, plus ties with leader Videotron for customer service. But somehow, with all that, Virgin Plus only landed in fifth place.We also focus on the big three, since many people prefer having an ISP from a major corporation, especially for work. Bell Canada tops the list of those providers, narrowly staying ahead of Telus for overall satisfaction again this year. “Bell Canada has always been very good at offering reliable internet," says one respondent, "so we are able to get our jobs done properly and quickly.” Work and IT-Managed ISPsFor the second year in a row, Telus is the top pick for ISPs managed by IT teams. It also earns the top spot for ISPs in offices, as chosen by the employees who use it. The scores Telus earns are the best across every possible category, though it's just a couple of tenths of a point above Bell for overall satisfaction. But the spread is higher in categories like cost, reliability, tech support, customer service, and management. “Telus at my workplace [is] a seamless, positive experience with no problems,” says one survey taker. Another says it has “the best customer service in the world," adding that the "connection is amazing.” When it comes to IT-managed ISPs, Telus also wins, and with even higher numbers. In many cases, it's a full point ahead of Bell. Meanwhile, Rogers consistently comes in third in all areas in both charts, except for setup, where it beats Bell (but not Telus) both times.The PCMag Business Choice survey for ISPs in the US was in the field from Feb. 10 to May 5, 2025; the Canadian survey was conducted via a panel of users from Feb. 24 to March 3, 2025. For more information on how we conduct surveys, read our methodology. 

Let’s start with one unambiguous fact: More children are diagnosed with autism today than in the early 1990s. According to a sweeping 2000 analysis by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a range of 2–7 per 1,000, or roughly 0.5 percent of US children, were diagnosed with autism in the 1990s. That figure has risen to 1 in 35 kids, or roughly 3 percent.The apparent rapid increase caught the attention of people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who assumed that something had to be changing in the environment to drive it. In 2005, Kennedy, a lawyer and environmental activist at the time, authored an infamous essay in Rolling Stone that primarily placed the blame for the increased prevalence of autism on vaccines. (The article was retracted in 2011 as more studies debunked the vaccine-autism connection.) More recently, he has theorized that a mysterious toxin introduced in the late 1980s must be responsible. Now, as the nation’s top health official leading the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy has declared autism an “epidemic.” And, in April, he launched a massive federal effort to find the culprit for the rise in autism rates, calling for researchers to examine a range of suspects: chemicals, molds, vaccines, and perhaps even ultrasounds given to pregnant mothers. “Genes don’t cause epidemics. You need an environmental toxin,” Kennedy said in April when announcing his department’s new autism research project. He argued that too much money had been put into genetic research — “a dead end,” in his words — and his project would be a correction to focus on environmental causes. “That’s where we’re going to find an answer.”But according to many autism scientists I spoke to for this story, Kennedy is looking in exactly the wrong place. Three takeaways from this storyExperts say the increase in US autism rates is mostly explained by the expanding definitions of the condition, as well as more awareness and more screening for it.Scientists have identified hundreds of genes that are associated with autism, building a convincing case that genetics are the most important driver of autism’s development — not, as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has argued, a single environmental toxin.Researchers fear Kennedy’s fixation on outside toxins could distract from genetic research that has facilitated the development of exciting new therapies that could help those with profound autism.Autism is a complex disorder with a range of manifestations that has long defied simple explanations, and it’s unlikely that we will ever identify a single “cause” of autism.But scientists have learned a lot in the past 50 years, including identifying some of the most important risk factors. They are not, as Kennedy suggests, out in our environment. They are written into our genetics. What appeared to be a massive increase in autism was actually a byproduct of better screening and more awareness. “The way the HHS secretary has been walking about his plans, his goals, he starts out with this basic assumption that nothing worthwhile has been done,” Helen Tager-Flusberg, a psychologist at Boston University who has worked with and studied children with autism for years, said. “Genes play a significant role. We know now that autism runs in families… There is no single underlying factor. Looking for that holy grail is not the best approach.”Doctors who treat children with autism often talk about how they wish they could provide easy answers to the families. The answers being uncovered through genetics research may not be simple per se, but they are answers supported by science.Kennedy is muddying the story, pledging to find a silver-bullet answer where likely none exists. It’s a false promise — one that could cause more anxiety and confusion for the very families Kennedy says he wants to help. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a news conference at the Department of Health and Human Services in mid-April to discuss this agency’s efforts to determine the cause of autism. Alex Wong/Getty ImagesThe autism “epidemic” that wasn’tAutism was first described in 1911, and for many decades, researchers and clinicians confused the social challenges and language development difficulties common among those with the condition for a psychological issue. Some child therapists even blamed the condition on bad parenting. But in 1977, a study discovered that identical twins, who share all of their DNA, were much more likely to both be autistic than fraternal twins, who share no more DNA than ordinary siblings. It marked a major breakthrough in autism research, and pushed scientists to begin coalescing around a different theory: There was a biological factor.At the time, this was just a theory — scientists lacked the technology to prove those suspicions at the genetic level. And clinicians were also still trying to work out an even more fundamental question: What exactly was autism? For a long time, the criteria for diagnosing a person with autism was strictly based on speech development. But clinicians were increasingly observing children who could acquire basic language skills but still struggled with social communication — things like misunderstanding nonverbal cues or taking figurative language literally. Psychologists gradually broadened their definition of autism from a strict and narrow focus on language, culminating in a 2013 criteria that included a wide range of social and emotional symptoms with three subtypes — the autism spectrum disorder we’re familiar with today.Along the way, autism had evolved from a niche diagnosis for the severely impaired to something that encompassed far more children. It makes sense then, that as the broad criteria for autism expanded, more and more children would meet it, and autism rates would rise. That’s precisely what happened. And it means that the “epidemic” that Kennedy and other activists have been fixated on is mostly a diagnostic mirage. Historical autism data is spotty and subject to these same historical biases, but if you look at the prevalence of profound autism alone — those who need the highest levels of support — a clearer picture emerges. (There is an ongoing debate in the autism community about whether to use the terminology of “profound autism” or “high support needs” for those who have the most severe form of the condition.) In the ’80s and ’90s, low-support needs individuals would have been less likely to receive an autism diagnosis given the more restrictive criteria and less overall awareness of the disorder, meaning that people with severe autism likely represented most of the roughly 0.5 percent of children diagnosed with autism in the 1990s. (One large analysis from Atlanta examining data from 1996 found that 68 percent of kids ages 3 to 10 diagnosed with autism had an IQ below 70, the typical cutoff for intellectual disability.)By 2025, when about 3 percent of children are being diagnosed with autism, about one in four of those diagnosed are considered to have high-support needs autism, those with most severe manifestation of the condition. That would equal about 0.8 percent of all US children — which would be a fairly marginal increase from autism rates 30 years ago. Or look at it another way: In 2000, as many as 60 percent of the people being diagnosed with autism had an intellectual disability, one of the best indicators of high-support needs autism. In 2022, that percentage was less than 40 percent.As a recently published CDC report on autism prevalence among young children concluded, the increase in autism rates can largely be accounted for by stronger surveillance and more awareness among providers and parents, rather than a novel toxin or some other external factor driving an increase in cases.Other known risk factors — like more people now having babies later in their life, given that parental age is linked to a higher likelihood of autism — are more likely to be a factor than anything Kennedy is pointing at, experts say. “It’s very clear it’s not going to be one environmental toxin,” said Alison Singer, founder of the Autism Science Foundation and parent of a child with profound autism. “If there were a smoking gun, I think they would have found it.”While Kennedy has fixated on vaccines and environmental influences, scientists have gained more precision in mapping human genetics and identifying the biological mechanisms that appear to be a primary cause of autism. And that not only helps us understand why autism develops, but potentially puts long-elusive therapies within reach. It began with an accident in the 1990s. Steven Scherer, now director of the Center for Applied Genomics at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, began his career in the late 1980s trying to identify the gene that caused cystic fibrosis — in collaboration with Francis Collins, who went on to lead the Human Genome Project that successfully sequenced all of the DNA in the human genome in the early 2000s. Scherer and Collins’s teams focused on chromosome 7, identified as a likely target by the primitive genetic research available at the time, a coincidence that would reorient Scherer’s career just a few years later, putting him on the trail of autism’s genetic roots.After four years, the researchers concluded that one gene within chromosome 7 caused cystic fibrosis. Soon after Scherer helped crack the code on cystic fibrosis in the mid-1990s, two parents from California called him: He was the world’s leading expert on chromosome 7, and recent tests had revealed that their children with autism had a problem within that particular chromosome.That very same week, Scherer says, he read the findings of a study by a group at Oxford University, which had looked at the chromosomes of families with two or more kids with autism. They, too, had identified problems within chromosome 7.“So I said, ‘Okay, we’re going to work on autism,’” Scherer told me. He helped coordinate a global research project, uniting his Canadian lab with the Oxford team and groups in the US to run a database that became the Autism Genome Project, still the world’s largest repository of genetic information of people with autism.They had a starting point — one chromosome — but a given chromosome contains hundreds of genes. And humans have, of course, 45 other chromosomes, any of which conceivably might play a role. So over the years, they collected DNA samples from thousands upon thousands of people with autism, sequenced their genes, and then searched for patterns. If the same gene is mutated or missing across a high percentage of autistic people, it goes on the list as potentially associated with the condition. Scientists discovered that autism has not one genetic factor, but many — further evidence that this is a condition of complex origin, in which multiple variables likely play a role in its development, rather than one caused by a single genetic error like sickle-cell anemia.Here is one way to think about how far we have come: Joseph Buxbaum, the director of the Seaver Autism Center for Research and Treatment at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, entered autism genetics research 35 years ago. He recalls scientists being hopeful that they might identify a half dozen or so genes linked to autism.They have now found 500 genes — and Buxbaum told me he believed they might find a thousand before they are through. These genetic factors continue to prove their value in predicting the onset of autism: Scherer pointed to one recent study in which the researchers identified people who all shared a mutation in the SHANK3 gene, one of the first to be associated with autism, but who were otherwise unalike: They were not related and came from different demographic backgrounds. Nevertheless, they had all been diagnosed with autism.Researchers analyze the brain activity of a 14-year-old boy with autism as part of a University of California San Francisco study that involves intensive brain imaging of kids and their parents who have a rare chromosome disruption connected to autism. The study, the Simons Variation in Individuals Project, is a genetics-first approach to studying autism spectrum and related neurodevelopmental disorders. Michael Macor/San Francisco Chronicle via The Associated PressPrecisely how much genetics contributes to the development of autism remains the subject of ongoing study. By analyzing millions of children with autism and their parents for patterns in diagnoses, multiple studies have attributed about 80 percent of a person’s risk of developing autism to their inherited genetic factors. But of course 80 percent is not 100 percent. We don’t yet have the full picture of how or why autism develops. Among identical twins, for example, studies have found that in most cases, if one twin has high-support needs autism, the other does as well, affirming the genetic effect. But there are consistently a small minority of cases — 5 and 10 percent of twin pairs, Scherer told me — in which one twin has relatively low-support needs while the one requires a a high degree of support for their autism.Kennedy is not wholly incorrect to look at environmental factors — researchers theorize that autism may be the result of a complex interaction between a person’s genetics and something they experience in utero. Scientists in autism research are exploring the possible influence when, for example, a person’s mother develops maternal diabetes, high blood sugar that persists throughout pregnancy. And yet even if these other factors do play some role, the researchers I spoke to agree that genetics is, based on what we know now, far and away the most important driver.“We need to figure out how other types of genetics and also environmental factors affect autism’s development,” Scherer said. “There could be environmental changes…involved in some people, but it’s going to be based on their genetics and the pathways that lead them to be susceptible.”While the precise contours of Health Department’s new autism research project is still taking shape, Kennedy has that researchers at the National Institutes of Health will collect data from federal programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and somehow use that information to identify possible environmental exposures that lead to autism. He initially pledged results by September, a timeline that, as outside experts pointed out, may be too fast to allow for a thorough and thoughtful review of the research literature. Kennedy has since backed off on that deadline, promising some initial findings in the fall but with more to come next year.RFK Jr.’s autism commission research risks the accessibility of groundbreaking autism treatmentsIf Kennedy were serious about moving autism science forward, he would be talking more about genetics, not dismissing them. That’s because genetics is where all of the exciting drug development is currently happening.A biotech firm called Jaguar Gene Therapy has received FDA approval to conduct the first clinical trial of a gene therapy for autism, focused on SHANK3. The treatment, developed in part by one of Buxbaum’s colleagues, is a one-time injection that would replace a mutated or missing SHANK3 gene with a functional one. The hope is that the therapy would improve speech and other symptoms among people with high-needs autism who have also been diagnosed with a rare chromosomal deletion disorder called Phelan-McDermid syndrome; many people with this condition also have Autism spectrum disorder.The trial will begin this year with a few infant patients, 2 years old and younger, who have been diagnosed with autism. Jaguar eventually aims to test the therapy on adults over 18 with autism in the future. Patients are supposed to start enrolling this year in the trial, which is focused on first establishing the treatment’s safety; if it proves safe, another round of trials would start to rigorously evaluate its effectiveness.“This is the stuff that three or four years ago sounded like science fiction,” Singer said. “The conversation has really changed from Is this possible? to What are the best methods to do it? And that’s based on genetics.”Researchers at Mount Sinai have also experimented with delivering lithium to patients and seeing if it improves their SHANK3 function. Other gene therapies targeting other genes are in earlier stages of development. Some investigators are experimenting with CRISPR technology, the revolutionary new platform for gene editing, to target the problematic genes that correspond to the onset of autism.But these scientists fear that their work could be slowed by Kennedy’s insistence on hunting for environmental toxins, if federal dollars are instead shifted into his new project. They are already trying to subsist amid deep budget cuts across the many funding streams that support the institutions where they work. “Now we have this massive disruption where instead of doing really key experiments, people are worrying about paying their bills and laying off their staff and things,” Scherer said. “It’s horrible.” For the families of people with high-needs autism, Kennedy’s crusade has stirred conflicting emotions. Alison Singer, the leader of the Autism Science Foundation, is also the parent of a child with profound autism. When I spoke with her, I was struck by the bind that Kennedy’s rhetoric has put people like her and her family in. Singer told me profound autism has not received enough federal support in the past, as more emphasis was placed on individuals who have low support needs included in the expanding definitions of the disorder, and so she appreciates Kennedy giving voice to those families. She believes that he is sincerely empathetic toward their predicament and their feeling that the mainstream discussion about autism has for too long ignored their experiences in favor of patients with lower support needs. But she worries that his obsession with environmental factors will stymie the research that could yield breakthroughs for people like her child.“He feels for those families and genuinely wants to help them,” Singer said. “The problem is he is a data denier. You can’t be so entrenched in your beliefs that you can’t see the data right in front of you. That’s not science.”See More:

It's officially Memorial Day weekend and that means that there are ton of Memorial Day sales to shop right now. With the threat of tariffs driving up prices in the near future, these price reductions have become way more tempting than they have any right to be. I generally try to avoid spending money on anything (well, except puzzles lately), but I've found myself making some bigger purchases on things like furniture and appliances all week long just in case prices never drop this low again. Uncertainty around the cost of goods has me worried that upcoming sales like Prime Day and Black Friday won't necessarily be the best time to buy everything this year.That being said, I've been covering Memorial Day sales for years now and while there are definitely a lot of deals worth taking advantage of now, you should still be shopping smart. Certain product categories will have some of their lowest prices of the year this weekend while others only appear to be marked down temporarily. To help you sort through what's worth buying this weekend and where you should buy it, I've rounded up some key items to shop for while the sales are hot.1. Major AppliancesIn my experience, Memorial Day weekend is the absolute best time to buy major appliances. All of the big retailers like Best Buy, Home Depot, Costco, and Lowe's are having discounts on things like refrigerators, ranges, washers and dryers, dishwashers, etc. You can even find sales direct from the manufacturer that are often better than the standard price drops you'll find at the major retailers. LG for example is offering a special promotion that will net you a free fridge when you buy select models. If you need to upgrade the appliances in your home, I'd suggest doing it right now before prices are affected. Depending on what you're looking for, I'd suggest comparing prices on various brands from the sales listed below.Best appliance salesTech and AppliancesBest Buy Memorial Day SaleSee it at Best BuyAppliancesLG Memorial Day SaleSee it at LGAppliances and FurnitureHome Depot Memorial Day SaleSee it at Home DepotAppliances and FurnitureLowes Memorial Day SaleSee it at LowesRetailer SaleCostco Memorial Day SaleSee it at Costco2. FurnitureAnother big category to consider this weekend is furniture. Memorial Day weekend, or any three-day weekend really, is the best time to buy new furniture at a discount. There are currently furniture deals at every major retailer right now across a ton of different brands. Amazon, Walmart, Target, Home Depot, Costco, and more all have some sort of furniture on sale right now. With the summer season nearly upon us there is a general focus on outdoor and patio furniture, but you can also find price cuts on sofas, chairs, tables, and everything else for the home. Overall, I would suggest checking out the Wayfair Memorial Day sale for the widest range of discounts on everything, but there's also more niche sales like Secretlab gaming chair deals that are worth a look. I've gathered all of the biggest sales that include furniture below.Best furniture salesFurnitureWayfair Memorial Day saleSee it at WayfairGaming chairs and desksSecretlab Memorial Day SaleSee it at SecretlabOffice FurnitureFlexiSpot Memorial Day SaleSee it at FlexiSpotFurniture and KitchenwareCrate&Barrel Memorial Day SaleSee it at Crate&BarrelGaming ChairsAndaSeat Memorial Day SaleSee it at AndaSeatRetailer SaleCostco Memorial Day SaleSee it at CostcoThe Biggest SaleAmazon Memorial Day SaleSee it at AmazonRetailer SaleWalmart Memorial Day SaleSee it at Walmart3. MattressesAlthough mattresses are also furniture, it exists as a totally separate category when it comes to Memorial Day sales. Every major mattress retailer is having a Memorial Day sale right now and you will even find discounts at places you wouldn't expect, like Walmart and Amazon. Right now is the best time to buy a mattress in 2025, and we likely won't see lower prices even during Labor Day sales later this year. And though you can certainly purchase a mattress from Amazon, I'd suggest sticking to the bed-in-a-box brands like Casper or DreamCloud to save the most money. Purchasing directly from the brand itself will also usually come with a better warranty and return policy as well. Here are a few of the best mattress sales I recommend browsing this weekend, but you should also check your local store if you'd prefer to test them out before you buy.Best mattress salesMattressesDreamCloud Mattress SaleSee it at DreamCloudMattressesCasper Memorial Day SaleSee it at CasperTuft & Needle Memorial Day SaleSee it at Tuft & NeedleMattressesSleep Number Memorial Day SaleSee it at Sleep NumberFurnitureWayfair Memorial Day saleSee it at Wayfair4. TVsThere are a lot of different times throughout the year when you can find the best TV deals and Memorial Day weekend is one of them. While we don't usually see the same massive price cuts as we do during Black Friday, there are already some new low prices on higher-end TVs that are worth a look. The LG C4 has recently dropped to its lowest-ever price, and that's one of the overall best TVs you can buy right now. Outside of that, Amazon, Best Buy, Walmart, Costco, and all of the usual suspects are offering some sort of TV sale that is worth a look. If you've been looking to upgrade your TV right now and are worried about prices going up before Black Friday, these sales are worth a look. I've gathered a quick list of the best TV deals going on right now to get you started.Best TV dealsLowest Price Ever65" LG Evo C4 4K OLED Smart TVLowest Price EverSAMSUNG 55-Inch Class QLED 4K QN85D Series Mini LEDLowest Price EverLG 55-Inch Class UT75 Series LED Smart TV 4K2024 ModelSony - 65" Class BRAVIA 8 OLED 4K UHD Smart Google TV5. Laptops and PCsIf you're looking to buy a new laptop or PC this year, I'd recommend making a purchase sooner rather than later and the Memorial Day sales going on right now are just a good excuse. This is especially true if you're trying to find the best time to buy a gaming PC this year, because GPU prices are already on the rise. The best Memorial Day sales on these higher-end machines tend to be directly from the manufacturers, so that's usually where you'll want to look. Dell, HP, and Lenovo all have their Memorial Day sales live right now. You can also check out Best Buy and Amazon if you're looking for brands like Acer and LG at a discount, however.PC and LaptopsDell Memorial Day SaleSee it at DellPC and LaptopsHP Memorial Day SaleSee it at HPThe Biggest SaleAmazon Memorial Day SaleSee it at AmazonTech and AppliancesBest Buy Memorial Day SaleSee it at Best BuyPC and LaptopsLenovo Memorial Day SaleSee it at LenovoWhat Shouldn't You Buy During Memorial Day Sales?While it's true that prices are going to go up on a lot of different things this year, there are definitely some product categories you should wait on. The Amazon Memorial Day sale, for example, has discounts across a bunch of different categories despite those discounts not actually being that good. Since there is no catch-all advice I can give that will save you from spending more than you should in every instance, I would recommend doing your research and comparing prices on just about anything before you buy.That being said, there are a few major categories you should definitely avoid if you can. Although there are some phone deals currently available, right now is definitely not the best time to buy a phone. New iPhone models will be arriving closer to October and that's generally a better time to save money. You also probably don't want to purchase a console or gaming accessories right now as this is generally the worst time to buy those things, even with tariffs potentially raising prices there.When is the next time to save money?Memorial Day sales are generally a good time to get some shopping in, but they aren't the only chance you'll have to save money this summer. The next big sales event you can mark on your calendar will be Fourth of July sales. These will be very similar to Memorial Day discounts, but with more of a focus on summer gear and grills. After that, Amazon Prime Day will take place sometime in the middle of July and you can expect Walmart, Best Buy, and Target to all have competing sales.Jacob Kienlen is a Senior SEO Strategist and Writer for IGN. Born and raised in Portland, Oregon, he has considered the Northwest his home for his entire life. With a bachelor's degree in communication and over 8 years of professional writing experience, his expertise ranges from books and games to technology and food. He has spent a good chunk of his career writing about deals and sales to help consumers find the best discounts on whatever they may be looking to buy.

Want something sexy, silly, and scandalous? Then you'll treasure Honey Don't!, the latest collaboration between married filmmakers Ethan Coen and Tricia Cooke. The pair, who've been collaborating since the 1990 Coen Bros movie Miller's Crossing, brought audiences the madcap mayhem of Drive-Away DollsDrive-Away Dolls star Margaret Qualley reunites with Coen and Cooke, playing a title character once more. Honey O'Donahue is a small-town private eye who keeps her cards close to her chest. When a new client turns up dead in a suspicious car crash, she quips to the crumpled police detective on the scene (Charlie Day, perfectly cast as an affable dope), but won't give up a single observation. Unspoken, this is her mystery to solve. Over the course of this murder investigation, she'll cross paths with a moped-riding femme fatale (Lera Abova), a surly sapphic cop (Aubrey Plaza), and an ultra-vain cult leader (Chris Evans). It's a wild ride with twists, sex, and murder!  You May Also Like Margaret Qualley is dynamite in Honey Don't!While this is the second offering in Coen and Cooke's proposed lesbian trilogy, Honey Don't! doesn'tDrive-Away Dolls. The key to both films is Qualley, who sets the tone. In the first film, she was a chaotically comical masc with a Southern accent as thick as molasses and a libido as powerful as the sun. The movie followed her frenzied energy through pacing and plotting, taking wild turns with madcap energy. In Honey Don't!, click-clacking heels, pencil skirts or tailored flowing slacks with tidy but never bland dress shirts — reflects these old-school inspirations. So does her frankness; she carries a Katharine Hepburn attitude without the Mid-Atlantic accent. So when the aforementioned police detective flirts with her, she says, smooth as butter, "I like girls." (To which Day replies with a cheery bemusement, "You always say that!") Whether playing the cool gay aunt to a small army of nieces and nephews, uncovering a kinky clue, or hooking up with a one-night stand, Honey is suave and sharp, but also warm. This temperament sets her apart from the fleets of male detectives who've come before her, all swagger and steely glares. Plus, her attitude reflects the atmosphere of Honey Don't!'s setting: Bakersfield, California, a sunny place with a dark appetite.   Mashable Top Stories Stay connected with the hottest stories of the day and the latest entertainment news. Sign up for Mashable's Top Stories newsletter By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up! Honey Don't! is a raw and refreshing caper.  Writer Tricia Cooke, actor Margaret Qualley and writer/director Ethan Coen on the set of their film "Honey Don't!" Credit: Karen Kuehn / © 2025 FOCUS FEATURES LLC The screenplay by Coen and Cooke is committed to dark humor, offering gleeful jokes about kinky sex, gruesome death, and the general idiocy of crooks and con men. As Coen directs Honey Don't!, it's tempting to look for comparisons in his shared filmography with his brother, Joel. Is Honey Don't! more Raising Arizona or The Big Lebowski? Burn After Reading or No Country for Old Men? But engaging in this debate risks overlooking the exciting exploration of crime stories that Coen and Cooke are building with their trilogy. Her stamp is clear and important here as the film's co-writer, producer, and editor. Yes, Honey Don't! pulls from film noir inspirations, as do several previous Coen Bros movies… and hundreds of other movies before that. But this crusty California setting gives fresh air to tropes like the femme fatale or the double cross. Where Drive-Away Dolls dug into the rich Americana and queer culture to be found in road trip attractions and lesbian bars, Honey Don't! embraces a less-familiar clutch of gnarly characters, sunbaked and deranged. Chris Evans is hilarious, freed from Disney constraints. Thank goodness that Chris Evans' MCU era has ended. Now the actor who has proven to be a sensational bastard in Knives Out can cut loose with characters who aren't remotely role models.  Related Stories In Honey Don't!, he plays Reverend Drew, a preacher who leads a congregation of dedicated minions who will grant any wish of sex or violence his twisted heart desires. Honey Don't! offers an array of beloved character actors, like Plaza, Day, Billy Eichner, and acclaimed theater performer Gabby Beans. And they are all game for whatever damned thing Cooke and Coen throw their way. Where Qualley plays the straight man to this cluster of kooky clowns, Evans is a ringmaster of his own circus. From the moment he flashes a comically insincere smile, there's a thrill of excitement. Playing punchlines with a gleeful obliviousness, Evans creates a sharp satire of a certain brand of religious leader who believes too much in his own bullshit. His physicality is suitably absurd. Whether he's barking orders in the nude or giving the most hysterical delivery of the word "oui" ever committed to screen, he moves like a cartoon caricature of an arrogant buffoon. Props to Evans for finding a new and fantastic way to continue being America's ass. What's most thrilling about Honey Don't! is perhaps also what's most frustrating about it. Coen and Cooke set up a mystery with a form that seems vaguely familiar at the start. But as Honey chases down the suspects and confounding clues, this story is anything but what you'd expect. And that comes down to the finale, which is sure to divide critics and audiences. Personally, I relished the final surprise of the film, as it suggests this story is bigger than one movie and maybe even one setting can contain. Instead of closure, Honey Don't! offers a taste of something sweet and wild, with the potential for more. And I'm not mad at that. Honey Don't! was reviewed out of the Cannes Film Festival. It will open in theaters on Aug. 22. Topics Film

DanaBot Feds charge 16 Russians allegedly tied to botnets used in cyberattacks and spying An example of how a single malware operation can enable both criminal and state-sponsored hacking. Andy Greenberg, WIRED.com – May 23, 2025 3:56 pm | 0 Credit: Getty Images Credit: Getty Images Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more The hacker ecosystem in Russia, more than perhaps anywhere else in the world, has long blurred the lines between cybercrime, state-sponsored cyberwarfare, and espionage. Now an indictment of a group of Russian nationals and the takedown of their sprawling botnet offers the clearest example in years of how a single malware operation allegedly enabled hacking operations as varied as ransomware, wartime cyberattacks in Ukraine, and spying against foreign governments. The US Department of Justice today announced criminal charges today against 16 individuals law enforcement authorities have linked to a malware operation known as DanaBot, which according to a complaint infected at least 300,000 machines around the world. The DOJ’s announcement of the charges describes the group as “Russia-based,” and names two of the suspects, Aleksandr Stepanov and Artem Aleksandrovich Kalinkin, as living in Novosibirsk, Russia. Five other suspects are named in the indictment, while another nine are identified only by their pseudonyms. In addition to those charges, the Justice Department says the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS)—a criminal investigation arm of the Department of Defense—carried out seizures of DanaBot infrastructure around the world, including in the US. Aside from alleging how DanaBot was used in for-profit criminal hacking, the indictment also makes a rarer claim—it describes how a second variant of the malware it says was used in espionage against military, government, and NGO targets. “Pervasive malware like DanaBot harms hundreds of thousands of victims around the world, including sensitive military, diplomatic, and government entities, and causes many millions of dollars in losses,” US attorney Bill Essayli wrote in a statement. Since 2018, DanaBot—described in the criminal complaint as “incredibly invasive malware”—has infected millions of computers around the world, initially as a banking trojan designed to steal directly from those PCs' owners with modular features designed for credit card and cryptocurrency theft. Because its creators allegedly sold it in an “affiliate” model that made it available to other hacker groups for $3,000 to $4,000 a month, however, it was soon used as a tool to install different forms of malware in a broad array of operations, including ransomware. Its targets, too, quickly spread from initial victims in Ukraine, Poland, Italy, Germany, Austria, and Australia to US and Canadian financial institutions, according to an analysis of the operation by cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike. At one point in 2021, according to Crowdstrike, Danabot was used in a software supply-chain attack that hid the malware in a JavaScript coding tool called NPM with millions of weekly downloads. Crowdstrike found victims of that compromised tool across the financial service, transportation, technology, and media industries. That scale and the wide variety of its criminal uses made DanaBot “a juggernaut of the e-crime landscape,” according to Selena Larson, a staff threat researcher at cybersecurity firm Proofpoint. More uniquely, though, DanaBot has also been used at times for hacking campaigns that appear to be state-sponsored or linked to Russian government agency interests. In 2019 and 2020, it was used to target a handful of Western government officials in apparent espionage operations, according to the DOJ's indictment. According to Proofpoint, the malware in those instances was delivered in phishing messages that impersonated the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and a Kazakhstan government entity. Then, in the early weeks of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which began in February 2022, DanaBot was used to install a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) tool onto infected machines and launch attacks against the webmail server of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense and National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine. All of that makes DanaBot a particularly clear example of how cybercriminal malware has allegedly been adopted by Russian state hackers, Proofpoint's Larson says. “There have been a lot of suggestions historically of cybercriminal operators palling around with Russian government entities, but there hasn't been a lot of public reporting on these increasingly blurred lines,” says Larson. The case of DanaBot, she says, “is pretty notable, because it's public evidence of this overlap where we see e-crime tooling used for espionage purposes.” In the criminal complaint, DCIS investigator Elliott Peterson—a former FBI agent known for his work on the investigation into the creators of the Mirai botnet—alleges that some members of the DanaBot operation were identified after they infected their own computers with the malware. Those infections may have been for the purposes of testing the trojan, or may have been accidental, according to Peterson. Either way, they resulted in identifying information about the alleged hackers ending up on DanaBot infrastructure that DCIS later seized. “The inadvertent infections often resulted in sensitive and compromising data being stolen from the actor's computer by the malware and stored on DanaBot servers, including data that helped identify members of the DanaBot organization,” Peterson writes. The operators of DanaBot remain at large, but the takedown of a large-scale tool in so many forms of Russian-origin hacking—both state-sponsored and criminal—represents a significant milestone, says Adam Meyers, who leads threat intelligence research at Crowdstrike. “Every time you disrupt a multiyear operation, you're impacting their ability to monetize it. It also creates a bit of a vacuum, and somebody else is going to step up and take that place,” Meyers says. “But the more we can disrupt them, the more we keep them on their back heels. We should rinse and repeat and go find the next target.” This story originally appeared at wired.com Andy Greenberg, WIRED.com Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what's next, delivering the most original and complete take you'll find anywhere on innovation's impact on technology, science, business and culture. 0 Comments