Co-op attack 'not impacting Channel Islands data'
A cyber attack on the Co-op Group in the UK "has not impacted" members' data security in Guernsey or Jersey, the Channel Islands' group says.
It comes after hackers infiltrated the UK group's IT networks and claimed to have stolen the customer and employee data of more than 20 million people.
The Channel Islands Co-operative Society (CI Coop) said: "We can confirm that this incident has not impacted data security or systems functionality at CI Coop, and that the data of our members has not been compromised."
It explained that the UK-based Co-op Group did not store the personal details of members of the Channel Islands' organisation.
'Temporary impact'
A spokesperson for CI Coop said: "Due to the sustained malicious attempts by hackers to access to Co-op Group systems, they have taken proactive steps to keep their systems safe.
"This is temporarily impacting our colleagues' ability to perform their roles and how many deliveries we are getting into our stores.
"We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause to our members and customers."
The UK Co-op has more than 2,500 supermarkets, as well as 800 funeral homes and an insurance business.
It employs about 70,000 staff nationwide.
Follow BBC Guernsey on X and Facebook. Follow BBC Jersey on X and Facebook. Send your story ideas to channel.islands@bbc.co.uk.
More on this story
Related internet links
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Lawyers could face ‘severe' penalties for fake AI-generated citations, UK court warns
The High Court of England and Wales says lawyers need to take stronger steps to prevent the misuse of artificial intelligence in their work. In a ruling tying together two recent cases, Judge Victoria Sharp wrote that generative AI tools like ChatGPT 'are not capable of conducting reliable legal research." 'Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect,' Judge Sharp wrote. 'The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue.' That doesn't mean lawyers cannot use AI in their research, but she said they have a professional duty 'to check the accuracy of such research by reference to authoritative sources, before using it in the course of their professional work.' Judge Sharp suggested that the growing number of cases where lawyers (including, on the U.S. side, lawyers representing major AI platforms) have cited what appear to be AI-generated falsehoods suggests that 'more needs to be done to ensure that the guidance is followed and lawyers comply with their duties to the court,' and she said her ruling will be forwarded to professional bodies including the Bar Council and the Law Society. In one of the cases in question, a lawyer representing a man seeking damages against two banks submitted a filing with 45 citations — 18 of those cases did not exist, while many others 'did not contain the quotations that were attributed to them, did not support the propositions for which they were cited, and did not have any relevance to the subject matter of the application,' Judge Sharp said. In the other, a lawyer representing a man who had been evicted from his London home wrote a court filing citing five cases that did not appear to exist. (The lawyer denied using AI, though she said the citations may have come from AI-generated summaries that appeared in 'Google or Safari.') Judge Sharp said that while the court decided not to initiate contempt proceedings, that is 'not a precedent.' 'Lawyers who do not comply with their professional obligations in this respect risk severe sanction,' she added. Both lawyers were either referred or referred themselves to professional regulators. Judge Sharp noted that when lawyers do not meet their duties to the court, the court's powers range from 'public admonition' to the imposition of costs, contempt proceedings, or even 'referral to the police.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data
TechCrunch
36 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Lawyers could face ‘severe' penalties for fake AI-generated citations, UK court warns
The High Court of England and Wales says lawyers need to take stronger steps to prevent the misuse of artificial intelligence in their work. In a ruling tying together two recent cases, Judge Victoria Sharp wrote that generative AI tools like ChatGPT 'are not capable of conducting reliable legal research.' 'Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect,' Judge Sharp wrote. 'The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue.' That doesn't mean lawyers cannot use AI in their research, but she said they have a professional duty 'to check the accuracy of such research by reference to authoritative sources, before using it in the course of their professional work.' Judge Sharp suggested that the growing number of cases where lawyers (including, on the U.S. side, lawyers representing major AI platforms) have cited what appear to be AI-generated falsehoods suggests that 'more needs to be done to ensure that the guidance is followed and lawyers comply with their duties to the court,' and she said her ruling will be forwarded to professional bodies including the Bar Council and the Law Society. In one of the cases in question, a lawyer representing a man seeking damages against two banks submitted a filing with 45 citations — 18 of those cases did not exist, while many others 'did not contain the quotations that were attributed to them, did not support the propositions for which they were cited, and did not have any relevance to the subject matter of the application,' Judge Sharp said. In the other, a lawyer representing a man who had been evicted from his London home wrote a court filing citing five cases that did not appear to exist. (The lawyer denied using AI, though she said the citations may have come from AI-generated summaries that appeared in 'Google or Safari.') Judge Sharp said that while the court decided not to initiate contempt proceedings, that is 'not a precedent.' Techcrunch event Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW 'Lawyers who do not comply with their professional obligations in this respect risk severe sanction,' she added. Both lawyers were either referred or referred themselves to professional regulators. Judge Sharp noted that when lawyers do not meet their duties to the court, the court's powers range from 'public admonition' to the imposition of costs, contempt proceedings, or even 'referral to the police.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Departure of Reform UK chair Zia Yusuf is latest in a long line of Farage fallings-out
Delivered without warning in a 54-word tweet, Zia Yusuf's announcement that he was standing down as Reform UK's chair has seemingly come out of the blue. For close watchers of Nigel Farage's party in recent times, however, the departure of the man largely credited with 'professionalising' its operation before last year's general election performance and last month's local election breakthrough is not a shock. A self-described 'British Muslim patriot', it had not been hard to find Islamophobic commentary about Yusuf among users of Reform UK Facebook groups. Others who left the party – or who have been ejected from it – were angered by his corporate approach, which they blamed for making it a cold house for grassroots veterans and mavericks. In his 11 months as Reform's chair, Yusuf brought with him the ethos and language that might be more associated with a vibrant tech start-up than a hard-right British political party. A businessman who made a fortune from selling his luxury concierge service, Velocity Black, in 2023 for a reported $300m, Yusuf exploded on to the political scene last June by donating a six-figure sum to Farage's party. The two men had known each other for years, having met at a party hosted by the former Ukip treasurer Stuart Wheeler. In his new role at Reform, Yusuf oversaw a restructuring of the party from branch level upwards, pledging to introduce bespoke technology and enforce the tightest vetting of any political party in Britain in a bid to root out cranks and extremists. At rallies, he was a regular speaker, initially wowing the grassroots and earning the discreet praise even of political rivals. He was often one of the few non-white people in the room and was the living embodiment of Farage's insistence that Reform was not a racist party. As recently as Monday, Farage sought to fend off allegations of racism and xenophobia being levelled at Reform, by pointing out at a press conference in Scotland that his party's chair was Scottish born and had 'parents who come from the Indian subcontinent'. But there had long been rumours that all was not well in Reform, not least after the falling-out that led to the departure of its Great Yarmouth MP, Rupert Lowe. Aside from the online abuse, Yusuf is said to have been increasingly at odds with other senior figures in the party. This week's controversy over comments in parliament by Reform's newest MP, Sarah Pochin, in which she called on the prime minister to ban the burqa, appears to have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Yusuf wrote on X that it was a 'dumb' question, given that was not party policy. For some time, Farage and Yusuf appeared to be joined at the hip, frequently appearing side by side, but the party leader did not come in behind his young chair on the Pochin issue. Yusuf's tweet on X announcing his departure was as blunt as it gets. Crediting himself with having 'quadrupled Reform's membership and delivered historic electoral results', he added: 'I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time.' The response from Farage – also delivered, as custom now dictates, on X – was, on the surface, laudatory, with the leader describing him as 'a huge factor in our success'. Yet, a paternalistic tone was obvious. 'Politics can be a highly pressured and difficult game and Zia has clearly had enough,' Farage said. Looking back at the longer sweep of the Reform UK leader's political career, the parting of ways is on brand. Farage's time in charge of various parties – from Ukip to the Brexit party – has been littered with fallings-out. There is, as many of his admirers and critics agree, room for only one trailblazer at the top of any Farage-led party. However, at a time when Reform is riding high in the polls, the departure of Yusuf comes with a serious question. Could this be the thread that unravels the seemingly unstoppable Reform juggernaut?
