logo
Iran asks its people to delete WhatsApp from their devices

Iran asks its people to delete WhatsApp from their devices

Euronews7 hours ago

Iranian state television urged people to remove WhatsApp from their smartphones, alleging without specific evidence that the messaging app gathered user information to send to Israel.
In a statement to the Associated Press, WhatsApp said it was 'concerned these false reports will be an excuse for our services to be blocked at a time when people need them the most.'
WhatsApp uses end-to-end encryption, meaning messages are scrambled so that only the sender and recipient can see them. If someone else tries to access these messages all they will see is a distorted message that can't be unscrambled without a key.
'We do not track your precise location, we don't keep logs of who everyone is messaging and we do not track the personal messages people are sending one another,' the statement added. 'We do not provide bulk information to any government'.
WhatsApp is owned by Meta, the US-based parent company of Facebook and Instagram. The app had been one of the most popular messaging apps aside from Instagram and Telegram.
This wouldn't be the first time that Iran has asked people to limit their use of WhatsApp. In 2022, the country banned WhatsApp during mass protests against the government over the death of a woman held by the country's morality police.
Cybersecurity expert Gregory Falco said it's been demonstrated that it's possible to understand metadata about WhatsApp that does not get encrypted.
'So you can understand things about how people are using the app and that's been a consistent issue where people have not been interested in engaging with WhatsApp for that (reason),' he said.
Another issue is data sovereignty, Falco added, where data centres hosting WhatsApp data from a certain country are not necessarily located in that country. It's more than feasible, for instance, that WhatsApp's data from Iran is not hosted in Iran.
'Countries need to house their data in-country and process the data in-country with their own algorithms. Because it's really hard increasingly to trust the global network of data infrastructure,' he said.
While the European Space Agency (ESA) waits to see whether the United States will cut 19 of their joint programmes, experts say the relationship between the two governments will likely not go back to the way it was.
NASA's 2026 technical budget request, which was released earlier this month, details possible cuts to programmes such as the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), a space probe that measures gravitational waves, Envision, ESA's first mission to Venus to measure its different atmospheres, and NewAthena, the world's largest X-ray observatory.
The budget also cuts funding to certain components of Moon missions after Artemis III, a mission that would bring humans back to its surface in 2027.
The cancellations are in the name of finding a more 'sustainable and cost-effective' lunar exploration strategy. The bill still needs to be approved by Congress, which could likely be in the autumn.
Alberto Rueda Carazo, research fellow with the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) think tank, said he has never seen any NASA budget like it.
'Whether or not Congress restores the money, the message is clear: Washington's science commitments can vanish overnight,' he told Euronews Next.
ESA said at a press conference last week that 19 of its research projects might be impacted by the proposed NASA budget cuts.
The ones where mitigation would be needed are the LISA, Envision and NewAthena.
Without NASA contributions to these projects, Carazo said the missions might 'slip years,' possibly pushed back 'well into the 2030s,' and risk cancellation.
The questions that these three missions address, like the mergers of black holes, hot-plasma physics and the history of Earth-size planets, would 'remain unanswered for at least a decade,' he said.
Ludwig Moeller, ESPI's director, believes that the LISA programme will continue in the future with or without NASA.
'I think the objective of what LISA wants to do is perfectly understood,' he said. 'I don't think we will lose the discovery in the medium term'.
Carazo said it could also affect Europe's leadership in fundamental astrophysics, the branch of astronomy that studies the physical structure of stars and other celestial bodies.
The hardest hit of the research programmes, according to Carazo, is the ExoMars mission carrying the Rosalind Franklin rover. NASA provides the launch and descent hardware for the craft to fly so the programme cannot continue unless Europe is able to find and build a heavy-lift alternative.
Josef Aschbacher, ESA's director general, said in a recent press conference that no cuts or cancellations were coming until the US 'finalises' its position, but that no matter the decision made by Congress, ESA would be 'ready' and 'well-prepared' to react.
There are also possible impacts for Europe's Moon mission aspirations, because if the NASA cuts are approved, Carazo said Europe's 'two principal avenues into the Artemis architecture would disappear'.
The ESA builds European Space Modules (ESMs) that provide electricity and oxygen to Orion, the spacecraft picked by NASA for the Artemis missions to the surface of the Moon. The NASA cuts would mean that the assembly line in Bremen, Germany, would finish the hardware for the flights but would have nothing scheduled after 2028.
That could mean an 'early shut down' of the production line and the associated supply chain, Carazo added.
The ESA also contributes three key elements for Gateway, the first international space station to be built around the Moon. Like the ESM parts, the Gateway hardware that's been built 'would have nowhere to go,' and Europe would lose a 'guaranteed, sustained presence in cislunar space'.
There are other knock-off effects to consider regarding Europe's aspirations to study the Moon, he added.
'European astronaut seats after Artemis III would vanish, and key technologies that ESA is counting on for a later lunar-surface architecture—closed-loop life support, high-power solar-electric propulsion—would be delayed, widening the capability gap Europe had hoped to close in the 2030s,' he added.
It is quite easy for NASA to get out of deals with the ESA or other partners, even if a contract has been signed, Carazo said.
NASA contracts fall under the US Federal Acquisition Regulation, where the government has a 'termination for convenience' clause that lets them cancel any contract they want so long as they pay for costs already incurred.
'If Congress deletes the line item, NASA is legally obliged to stop spending, give ESA formal notice and negotiate a settlement; there is no binding dispute-resolution clause that could force the United States back in,' Carazo said.
'A pull-out would be diplomatically and politically messy but completely lawful'.
The US has done this before by exiting its ExoMars programme obligations in 2012 under the Obama administration, Carazo added. Withdrawing from this project, in particular for a second time, 'would cement the perception that US commitments last no longer than a presidential term'.
Europe's best bet while waiting for the American position to become clear is to offer to absorb a bigger share of the mission and ground costs while also investing in homegrown hardware to supply ESA's future missions, Carazo added.
The most immediate consequence of the NASA cuts would be a 'permanent dent in Washington's reputational capital,' Carazo said. A 'diversification' of partners to assist with the ESA missions would follow so that 'no single foreign veto can stall an ESA flagship [programme] again.'
ESA is looking to broaden relationships with Canada, Japan and India and while no deals are actively being pursued with China, it remains an option that could be explored, Carazo added.
'All of this reshapes the diplomatic map of space science, diluting US soft power,' Carazo said, adding that projects like China's International Lunar Research Station could start to 'woo European participation'.
This is not the first time that Europe has discussed its sovereignty in space, according to Ludwig Moeller, ESPI's director. In 2023, an expert group released a report that noted Europe has 'no independent human launch capacity' and 'relies on non-European partners to send humans to space,' according to a press release about the report.
The NASA budget cuts are bringing up this discussion again, Moeller added, along with questions of how much Europe should be investing in security and defence.
'The two points, security, defence and exploration are both on the agenda to an extent that I don't think in the history of Europe has ever existed,' he said. 'This … disruption is unique.'
Part of the sovereignty discussion is how Europe is developing domestic supply chains to build the necessary hardware for NASA-vulnerable missions like the ExoMars, according to Daniel Neuenschwander, ESA's director of human and robotic exploration in last weeks media briefing.
For example, Neuenschwander said that critical parts for the ExoMars rover, like an americium radioisotope heater unit (RHU) could be built in Europe to sustain future Moon missions.
Yet, Moeller said Europe is not ready to give up on a transatlantic relationship that is built on shared values.
'[Space exploration] really takes a village and the USA is still part of that village… in a different size, maybe in a different shape,' he said. '[But] Space exploration is a decadal task, it's not a transaction of the day'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says Meta's offered $100 million to poach staff
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says Meta's offered $100 million to poach staff

Euronews

time31 minutes ago

  • Euronews

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says Meta's offered $100 million to poach staff

OpenAI's boss has accused Meta of trying to poach his his best employees with $100 million (€87 million) in signing bonuses. Sam Altman told his brother Jack on his podcast that Meta was offering more than that in 'compensation per year,' but didn't elaborate on any of the benefits or stock options being offered. Meta, the owner of the social and messaging apps Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, just made a $14 billion (€12.18 billion) investment to buy a 49 per cent stake in Scale AI, an artificial intelligence startup, as a way of bolstering the AI side of its business. Scale AI had a preexisting business relationship with OpenAI, where it fine-tuned their more advanced ChatGPT models. Global leaders say winning the AI race is critical to national security and for advancements in health, business, and technology. Meanwhile, companies such as OpenAI, Google and DeepSeek, among many others, are battling it out to build the best AI platforms. Altman said that while he respects Meta's 'aggression' in competing with OpenAI, but that so far, none of his top talent has left him yet. 'I think Meta thinks of us as their biggest competitor and, you know, I think it's rational for them to keep trying [with AI],' Altman said. 'I think the strategy of a ton of upfront guaranteed comp(ensation) and that being the reason you tell someone to join … I don't think that's going to set up a great culture'. Altman added that he respects much about Meta but doesn't think it is 'great at innovation'. Instead, Altman thinks staff are staying at OpenAI because of a 'really special culture' at his company and their mission to create artificial superintelligence, where AI will be smarter than humans. 'I think people look at the two paths [OpenAI vs Meta] and they say OpenAI's got a really good shot, a much better shot on actually delivering on super intelligence and may eventually be the more valuable company,' he said.

Could Europe bring in top research talent from the US?
Could Europe bring in top research talent from the US?

Euronews

time42 minutes ago

  • Euronews

Could Europe bring in top research talent from the US?

US government spending on health research has reached a 10-year low, forcing universities to draw from their savings and hurting companies that sell lab supplies. Researchers who pursued global health, race, gender identity, climate change and topics related to diversity, equity and inclusion also saw their grants terminated. This has led to three-quarters of US-based respondents in a Nature poll considering leaving the country, creating an opportunity for the EU to attract researchers from the US. "We believe that diversity is an asset of humanity and the lifeblood of science. It is one of the most valuable global goods, and it must be protected," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in May in a speech delivered at La Sorbonne University in Paris. In 2024, the US accounted for 36% of all highly cited researchers, compared to 21% in China and 19% in the EU (including Switzerland and Norway), according to a Bruegel analysis. While the EU retains a significant portion of its own talent, it also contributes substantially to the global pool of mobile top researchers, particularly to the US. Among US-based highly cited researchers at Harvard, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia, 7.7% earned their PhD in the EU. A large portion of the US-based top research workforce also has an international education, with 24% of US-based highly cited researchers being entirely educated abroad. Family ties, personal life plans and career prospects are among the factors that can persuade researchers to move countries. However, there is still a large salary gap between US and EU academics. A top researcher at the University of California can earn between $500,000 (€432,300) and over $1 million (€865,240) annually. In contrast, even the highest-paid professors at top European institutions such as Spain's Complutense University of Madrid typically earn no more than €77,122. Initiatives such as Choose Europe, which includes a €500 million package aimed at attracting researchers to Europe, alongside efforts to reduce barriers for international students and researchers, could lead to essential changes in the long run. For instance, Provence-Aix Marseille University reported being "inundated" with applications from US-based researchers after announcing the launch of the three-year Safe Place For Science program, where they expect to raise €15 million and host around 15 researchers. Yet, between 2022 and 2024, the most attractive destinations among US graduates who wanted to move abroad were the United Kingdom and Canada. "Life-changing plans take time, and it is too early to expect a massive outflow from the US," the Bruegel analysis stated. But 30 years of exposure to glyphosate has shattered his dreams and his existence. He was diagnosed five years ago with an intravascular B-cell lymphoma, a rare form of cancer. It has been recognised as an occupational disease. Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in the world and also the most controversial. It has been classified as 'probably carcinogenic' by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) since 2015. More recent studies from research institutes such as the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) have established a likely link between exposure to the chemical and certain forms of cancer. Yet, the European Union has extended its authorisation until 2033, relying on studies by EFSA and ECHA, the European authorities for food and chemical safety. Several environmental and consumer rights organisations challenged the decision before the European Court of Justice last April. The gap between assessments results from the methodologies used by research institutes and European regulatory agencies, according to Xavier Coumoul, a toxicologist and researcher at Inserm in France. 'When a pesticide manufacturer wants to market a product, the regulatory agencies require the manufacturer to conduct its own tests to prove the product is safe,' he explains. This process raises many questions surrounding the independence of these surveys. 'EFSA gives little consideration to epidemiological studies and relies considerably on what the industry provides, whereas Inserm or IARC rely much more on the academic literature and monitoring real-life product use.' Ludovic Maugé, whose life now hangs by a thread, is among those for whom the product's toxicity is undeniable. After undergoing more chemotherapy than is usually permitted, his last hope, he says, is a transplant using his own modified stem cells. It's a vanishingly small chance. 'As my oncologist told me, we can no longer speak of a cure,' he confides. Since his cancer was recognised as an occupational disease, Ludovic receives a modest social allowance, along with monthly compensation of 180 euros from Bayer-Monsanto — which manufactured the product that poisoned him. 'It's a pittance, but I don't care. What mattered most to me was to see my illness recognised as work-related.' Despite his daily ordeal, Ludovic, who can no longer work, wants to take his fight further. 'What I want is to spread the message to everyone. Glyphosate destroyed my life — it poisoned me. These products destroy people and destroy nature,' he insists. He is outraged by the EU's decision to renew glyphosate's authorisation. 'When I see politicians reauthorising these products, it makes me furious. It's the pesticide lobby. Unfortunately, we can't do anything against these politicians and Bayer-Monsanto. If I had one thing to say to the European Union, it's this: just ban these products. That's it.'

Iran threatens response if US crosses 'red line': ambassador
Iran threatens response if US crosses 'red line': ambassador

France 24

timean hour ago

  • France 24

Iran threatens response if US crosses 'red line': ambassador

After decades of enmity and a prolonged shadow war, Israel says its surprise air campaign that began on June 13 is aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons -- an ambition Tehran denies. Iran said early Wednesday that it fired hypersonic missiles at Israel in the latest round of overnight strikes between the arch foes. US President Donald Trump has said that Washington has played no part in the bombing campaign by its ally Israel, but has also warned Iran that his patience is wearing thin. "We firmly believe that the United States is complicit in what Israel is doing," Iranian ambassador Ali Bahreini told a press conference. "And at any time, at any point, if we come to the conclusion that the United States is directly involved in attacks against Iran, we will start responding to the United States." He said Tehran was "vigilant" about Trump's "completely unwarranted" and "hostile" remarks. "There is a line which, if crossed, there should be a response on our side... once the red line is crossed, the response will come," Bahreini said. 'We will respond strongly' "We will respond strongly and we will stop aggression from any side, be it Israel or the United States," he told the UN correspondents' association. "And we have given a message to the United States that we will respond very firmly and will stop the aggression by anybody -- including the United States. Bahreini also said Tehran was "resolute in responding to Israeli attacks". "We will respond very, very, very seriously and strongly, and that is what we are doing now. Nobody should expect Iran to show any kind of restraint," he said. He also criticised the attitude of Western and European nations. "Not only they are not condemning the attacks and aggression, they are trying to justify the aggression," he said. Addressing the UN Human Rights Council on Wednesday, Bahreini issued a warning to Israel's allies. "The Israeli regime's supporters, and the United States at the forefront, should know that supporting this regime means directly supporting international humanitarian and human rights law violations," he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store