In the AI age, excessive data accumulation is a cybersecurity threat
Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a prominent member of the Russian opposition living in exile, recently made a stunning revelation about the malignant activities of Russia's military intelligence agency, GRU, in Europe. Putin's spies, he says, are building a hit list of journalists, politicians and public figures who influence public opinion against the Kremlin. Khodorkovsky says the urgent orders to gather personal information -- such as home and work addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and even habits and the daily routines -- on possible targets was sent to GRU operatives and agents in early 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
3 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Newly declassified Russian records reveal more Japanese murders of Koreans in 1945
Newly declassified Russian government documents have revealed a new series of Japanese killings of Koreans in multiple locations in southern Sakhalin Island from Aug. 15 to early September 1945, the Mainichi Shimbun has learned from two Sakhalin-based researchers who obtained the materials. The newly reported murders expand the known scope of the atrocities on what was at the time Japanese-controlled Karafuto. The Soviet Union unilaterally broke the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact and entered World War II against Japan on Aug. 9, 1945. Soviet forces invaded southern Sakhalin on Aug. 11, sparking about two weeks of ground fighting. The newly released records show that, amid the chaos and fear, rumors spread and Japanese residents accused Koreans of being Soviet spies, leading to a series of violent incidents. Previously, two major cases were known from Soviet investigative records: the Kamishisuka incident, in which 18 people were killed at a police station on Aug. 17, 1945, and the Mizuho incident, in which 27 villagers were killed between around Aug. 20 and 25. The new documents reveal that similar killings occurred both before and after these dates, including in early September, after the Aug. 25 end of fighting between Japanese and Soviet forces. Yulia Din of the Sakhalin Regional Museum said she filed an information request with the Russian government in 2019 and obtained investigative records, including witness statements, in 2021. Elena Savelyeva of the Sakhalin museum's "Pobeda" memorial complex published a paper in 2024 based on these materials. According to her research, on Aug. 15, 1945, in Ushiro (now Orlovo) in the northwest part of southern Sakhalin, a Korean man was accused of signaling to Soviet aircraft during an air raid and was shot dead by eight Japanese soldiers. His body was then bayoneted by 27 Japanese under the pretext of combat training. In what was then Chirikoro (now Nerpichye) in the northeast, a Korean man who belonged to a volunteer corps alongside Japanese was suspected of collaborating with the Soviets after requesting the same weapons as his Japanese comrades and shot dead on Aug. 15. In early September, another Korean man was shot dead on suspicion of planning to reveal hidden weapons caches to the Soviets. Soviet authorities investigated these incidents, as they did with the Kamishisuka and Mizuho cases, questioning Japanese involved and searching for victims' bodies. Din noted that some of these incidents had only come to light nearly 80 years after the war, adding that Koreans were supposed to be partners living alongside Japanese, but wartime conditions led to civilians killing civilians. Koichi Inoue, professor emeritus of anthropology at Hokkaido University and an expert on the Mizuho incident, noted, "These investigative records were compiled from the Soviet government's perspective and may lack the Japanese or Korean viewpoint. If the Soviet invasion had not occurred, these incidents likely would not have happened." He added, "As the Soviet Army advanced southward and ground battles loomed, Japanese militarism erupted, and the turmoil likely turned toward Koreans, who had been colonized and ruled by Japan, drawing in even local farmers."
The Diplomat
6 hours ago
- The Diplomat
Thailand Again Accuses Cambodia of Laying Fresh Landmines Along Disputed Border
The country's military claims that three soldiers were injured in a landmine explosion on Saturday, the third in recent weeks. Thailand has again accused the Cambodian military of laying fresh landmines along the two countries' shared border, drawing another angry denial from Phnom Penh. The Royal Thai Army (RTA) claimed that three Thai soldiers were injured by a landmine while patrolling an area between Thailand's Sisaket province and Cambodia's Preah Vihear province on Saturday. One soldier lost a foot and the other two were injured in the explosion. RTA spokesperson Maj. Gen. Winthai Suwaree claimed that the area had previously been cleared by the Thai humanitarian mine action unit, accusing Cambodia of deliberately laying the mines, adding that the act was 'dishonorable, lacks the dignity of a soldier, and constitutes a deliberate violation of the Ottawa Convention.' In a statement, the Cambodian Mine Action and Victim Assistance Authority denied the Thai army's accusation. 'Cambodia's position is unequivocal: We have not, and will not, plant new landmines,' it stated. 'Cambodia is a proud State Party to the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention [the Ottawa Convention], which it ratified in 1999, and has an internationally recognized record of removing, not deploying, these indiscriminate weapons.' A similar denial was also issued by the country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The blast came just two days after the two nations' General Border Committee agreed to a 13-point plan to maintain the ceasefire that was declared on July 28, after five days of fierce clashes along the border, which killed at least 43 people and displaced more than 300,000 on both sides of the border. This involved a mutual pledge to freeze border troop movements and patrols, not to reinforce their positions along the border, and 'not to undertake provocative actions that may escalate tensions.' The blast followed two similar landmine explosions reported by the Thai military, which contributed to the outbreak of hostilities last month. The first took place on July 16 in the eastern sector of the border, when three Thai soldiers were wounded after one stepped on a landmine and lost a foot, after which the Thai army said that it had found that 10 freshly laid Russian-made PMN-2 anti-personnel mines in areas along the border, the same time that the Thai army alleges was involved in Saturday's explosion. A second blast on July 23, which injured five soldiers, one of whom lost his right leg, prompted Thailand to downgrade its diplomatic relations with Cambodia, a move that precipitated the outbreak of fighting on July 24. On both occasions, Cambodia denied laying fresh mines, arguing that the Thai soldiers had strayed from previously agreed patrol routes and stumbled across landmines that were laid during the country's long civil war in the 1980s and 1990s. The exchange of angry statements hints at the level of mistrust and tension that persists between the two sides, despite last week's ceasefire agreement. Politicians and military officials on both sides continue to engage in tit-for-tat statements and accusations that continue to raise the prospect of a resumption of fighting. In comments to the press yesterday, Lt. Gen. Boonsin Padklang, the head of Thailand's Second Army Region, vowed to recapture Prasat Ta Kwai (Prasat Ta Krabei in Khmer), one of three temples that are at the center of the current dispute. He added that the Thai army had now closed Ta Moan Thom, another of these temples, 'and are considering whether to permanently close it or close it only for certain periods.' He also made the unverified claim that Cambodia had suffered 3,000 casualties in the recent border clashes. Cambodian Defense Ministry spokesperson Maly Socheata wasted no time in denouncing the Thai declaration as 'irrefutable evidence of provocation and a deliberate and premeditated attempt to invade Cambodian territory.' She said that Boonsin's comments violated the July 28 ceasefire and 'undermined the spirit of the Cambodia–Thailand General Border Committee's extraordinary meeting in Malaysia on August 7.' Exactly which side is most responsible for the continued tensions is hard to determine. Nonetheless, it is clear that political dynamics on both sides of the border continue to militate against a peaceful solution, and that the nationalist passions stoked by the recent conflict make it hard for either nation to be perceived as 'giving in' to the other, or allowing a perceived slight to go unanswered. On the Thai side, tensions persist between the weak Pheu Thai-led government, which signed the ceasefire agreements on July 28 and August 7, and the Thai military, which has long viewed itself as the ultimate guardian of Thai sovereignty. As Paul Chambers noted in a recent article for Fulcrum, the lead-up to last month's conflict saw the military repeatedly undermine the authority of the Pheu Thai government, which the army and the conservative Thai political establishment, more generally, have long mistrusted. The resulting disjuncture has introduced an unpredictability and volatility into Thai decision-making on the border dispute that has increased the chances of a fresh outbreak of fighting. Unlike its counterpart in Bangkok, Prime Minister Hun Manet's government continues to benefit politically from the border conflict, which has unified the nation around his leadership. Given its control of the military and the press, it has also been able to establish more messaging discipline than the Thai side. This suggests that the government's acrimonious claims about Thai behavior, which have included a number of outlandish false claims, are a conscious strategy to play on Thai internal divisions. Whether or not the Cambodian government actively wishes to stoke the conflict, the sense of le patrie en danger clearly comes with ancillary benefits, creating a distraction from more pressing social and economic challenges. As with the Thai side, it currently has more to gain from confrontation than from a lasting peace.
Yomiuri Shimbun
6 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Vance Says Ukraine Peace Deal Unlikely to Satisfy Either Side
WASHINGTON, Aug 10 (Reuters) – U.S. Vice President JD Vance said a negotiated settlement between Russia and Ukraine was unlikely to satisfy either side, and that any peace deal will likely leave both Moscow and Kyiv 'unhappy.' He said the U.S. is aiming for a settlement both countries can accept. 'It's not going to make anybody super happy. Both the Russians and the Ukrainians, probably, at the end of the day, are going to be unhappy with it,' he said on Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15 in Alaska to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. Trump said Russia and Ukraine were close to a ceasefire deal that could end the three-and-a-half-year-old conflict, possibly requiring Ukraine to surrender significant territory. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, however, said on Saturday that Ukraine cannot violate its constitution on territorial issues, adding, 'Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupiers.' In the Fox News interview recorded on Friday, Vance said the United States was working to schedule talks between Putin, Zelenskiy and Trump, but he did not think it would be productive for Putin to meet with Zelenskiy before speaking with Trump. 'We're at a point now where we're trying to figure out, frankly, scheduling and things like that, around when these three leaders could sit down and discuss an end to this conflict,' he said. A White House official said late on Saturday that Trump was open to a summit with both leaders, but that right now the White House was planning for the bilateral meeting requested by Putin.
