Latest news with #SAS
Daily Mail
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Fury as secret identities of SAS troops are leaked online by army association magazine in fresh data blunder that could have put lives at risk
An urgent probe has been launched after the identities of SAS troops from one of its most senior regiments were published online. The fresh data blunder came last year when a Grenadier Guards' in-house publication included a rollcall of the names and deployments of its most senior officers. Ten men were listed next to the codename MAB - which is shorthand for MoD A block - the site of the UK special forces headquarters, The Sunday Times has reported. The codename has been widely publicised online - in turn allowing any terrorist group or enemy state to work out that the troops were part of the SAS. The document containing the information about the soldiers' identities was produced by the Grenadier Guards Regimental Association. The group is a charitable association made up of former service members - with such organisations routinely handed information about active army personnel. Defence secretary John Healey is understood to be furious at the data breach which comes just days after the Afghan superinjunction was exposed. Head of the army General Sir Roly Walker has ordered an investigation into why the details of the SAS soldiers were so widely available. He said according to The Sunday Times: 'The security of our people is of the utmost importance and we take any breach extremely seriously.' 'As a result of this incident, I have directed an immediate review into our data-sharing arrangements with our regimental and corps associations to ensure appropriate guidance and safeguards are in place to best support the vital work they do,' he added. Meanwhile, SAS legend Chris Ryan was also concerned at the leak, and told MailOnline last night: 'There are serious questions to be answered here. 'Why is this data readily available and to who? 'This is an information management issue. Malicious or accidental insider, a breach has consequences. 'What classification is the in-house magazine and who signed it off? 'When these breaches happen, there's needs to be accountability or they will keep happening.' The former military hardman-turned acclaimed author added: 'This is a "MABulous" blunder by the Guards - that's why they have their own squadron.' It comes after the Mail revealed earlier this week that special forces, MI6 spies and government officials were among more than 100 Britons on the lost Afghan dataset. It emerged that a secret operation smuggling migrants to Britain was being run by ministers after a military blunder put 100,000 'at risk of death' from the Taliban. Ministers fought for two years to hush-up the data blunder with an unprecedented super-injunction that silenced this newspaper and other media. The High Court was told the draconian gagging order was necessary to protect 100,000 Afghans the UK had put 'at risk of death'. But after we were able to get access to the database and analyse it, it became clear that dozens of senior British military officers including a brigadier and government officials were also exposed. The Mail's investigation triggered a massive secrecy row yesterday as security-cleared parliamentarians erupted in fury at being kept in the dark. Lord Beamish, chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, said: 'I am astounded at this. 'The idea that members of MI6 are on this get quarterly reports from the security agencies and we have heard nothing at all. Why?' The MOD said: 'It's longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on Special Forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.' A spokesman added: 'The government strongly welcomes the Intelligence and Security Committee's scrutiny of the Afghan data incident. 'Defence Intelligence and the wider department have been instructed by the Defence Secretary to give their full support to the ISC and all parliamentary committees. 'If ministers and officials are asked to account and give evidence, they will. 'We have restored proper parliamentary accountability and scrutiny for the decisions that the department takes and the spending that we commit on behalf of the taxpayer.'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
If You Invested $1000 in Seagate a Decade Ago, This is How Much It'd Be Worth Now
How much a stock's price changes over time is a significant driver for most investors. Not only can price performance impact your portfolio, but it can help you compare investment results across sectors and industries as well. FOMO, or the fear of missing out, also plays a role in investing, particularly with tech giants and popular consumer-facing stocks. What if you'd invested in Seagate (STX) ten years ago? It may not have been easy to hold on to STX for all that time, but if you did, how much would your investment be worth today? Seagate's Business In-Depth With that in mind, let's take a look at Seagate's main business drivers. Headquartered at Dublin, Ireland, Seagate is leading provider of data storage technology and infrastructure solutions. The company's primary product offering is hard disk drives which is commonly referred to as disk drives, hard drives or HDDs. HDDs are used as the primary medium for storing digitally encoded data on rapidly rotating disks with magnetic also develops other electronic data storage products such as SSD (solid state drive) and storage subsystems. Also, the company offers storage solutions like a scalable edge-to-cloud mass data platform that includes data transfer shuttles and a storage-as-a-service HDD and SSD product portfolio includes Serial Attached SCSI (SAS), Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (SATA), and NonVolatile Memory Express (NVMe) based designs to support a various mass capacity and legacy applications. The systems portfolio includes storage subsystems for scale-out storage servers, enterprises, cloud service providers (CSPs) and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).Seagate reported revenues of $6.6 billion in fiscal 2024. The company offers its products under two heads — Mass Capacity Storage and Mass Capacity Storage product line includes high-capacity enterprise HDDs ship in capacities of up to 30TB. The company plans to ramp up volume for HAMR (heat-assisted magnetic recording) 30+TB qualification units in early calendar-year 2024. The portfolio also includes enterprise nearline SSDs, video and image HDDs (VIA) and NAS HDDs and SSDs. In fiscal 2024, the company shipped 398 exabytes of HDD storage legacy product line includes desktop drives, mission critical HDDs and SSDs and external storage solutions with capacities up to 20TB shipped, under the Seagate Ultra Touch, One Touch, Expansion and Basics product lines and the LaCie brand. Bottom Line Anyone can invest, but building a successful investment portfolio takes a combination of a few things: research, patience, and a little bit of risk. So, if you had invested in Seagate a decade ago, you're probably feeling pretty good about your investment today. A $1000 investment made in July 2015 would be worth $3,047.14, or a 204.71% gain, as of July 18, 2025, according to our calculations. Investors should note that this return excludes dividends but includes price increases. The S&P 500 rose 196.12% and the price of gold increased 183.10% over the same time frame in comparison. Looking ahead, analysts are expecting more upside for STX. Business improvement strategies, strong market conditions and focus on advanced tech like HAMR are aiding Seagate's performance. Continued momentum in mass capacity revenues, driven by robust nearline cloud demand, propels the growth trajectory. Nearline cloud revenues and exabyte shipments are riding on a favorable demand environment amid supply constraints and AI-driven cloud expansion. Its Mozaic HAMR drives, offering 3TB per disk, are being shipped to qualified customers, with broader cloud rollout planned for the second half of 2025. Margins expanded more than 1,000 bps year over year in the reported quarter end, led by high-capacity nearline drives and pricing. Fiscal fourth-quarter revenues are expected at $2.4 billion (+/- $150 million), with stable demand and minimal tariff impact. Our current estimate is $2,402 million. Macroeconomic woes and a high debt hurt it. The stock is up 11.74% over the past four weeks, and no earnings estimate has gone lower in the past two months, compared to 3 higher, for fiscal 2025. The consensus estimate has moved up as well. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Seagate Technology Holdings PLC (STX) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Sign in to access your portfolio
Metro
2 days ago
- Politics
- Metro
Afghan veteran warns data breach poses shadow threat ‘for years to come'
A former British Paratrooper who spent more than a decade serving in numerous operations across Afghanistan has warned that the data breach will pose a security threat for years to come. Ahmad Fahim said maintaining cover 'is part of staying alive' after it emerged that more than 100 British personnel — including members of the SAS and SBS — have been compromised. The personal information relating to serving and former members of the special forces and spies was emailed out in error, it emerged yesterday, after it was earlier revealed earlier in the week that thousands of Afghans had been put at risk by the error. Fahim, who often worked alongside US Special Forces in the country, warned that this type of data could be traded or passed on to other groups with greater capabilities than the Taliban. The spreadsheet sent out in February 2022 by a defence official was first revealed to have included the personal information of 18,714 Afghans before it emerged that members of MI6 and British special forces were also among those compromised. Fahim said: 'As a former British Paratrooper who served in numerous operations across Afghanistan for over a decade, often alongside US Special Forces, this is a story I take seriously on both a personal and professional level. 'The leak of personal data, including the identities of over 100 British officials, some from specialist units, is more than just a serious administrative failure. 'Once information like that is exposed beyond secure systems, it becomes impossible to contain. 'Whether it's picked up by Taliban-linked networks, traded to proxy groups, or passed on to actors with broader capabilities, the long-term consequences are real.' Fahim, who worked across Afghanistan for more than a decade, assesses that the Taliban and their affiliates have become more sophisticated in how they deal with sensitive material. He raised the prospect that the information may have been traded or passed on to nefarious actors with greater capabilities than the Islamic militants — including foreign intelligence services. Red flags that have already emerged include one person named in the dataset threatening to post it in a Facebook group. The data is also understood to have exchanged hands in the UK for a large sum of money, according to The Times. 'The Taliban and their affiliates have become far more structured in how they gather and move sensitive material,' Fahim said. 'What starts as a local breach can quickly become global. 'Data like this can be sold or traded through shadow networks, shared with foreign intelligence services, or used for cyber-tracking, impersonation, mapping patterns of life, or even targeting contacts abroad. 'These aren't far-fetched scenarios, they're the kinds of risks that follow people for years, especially those who've served in classified or high-threat roles. Operational security isn't just about what happens in theatre, it's about protecting our people long after the mission ends. 'Many of those named in this leak worked in roles where staying off the radar wasn't optional, it was part of staying alive and keeping others safe. 'That line's now been crossed.' A secret programme to relocate Afghans named in the dataset to the UK took place while the details of the breach were kept secret. The largest covert evacuation mission in British peacetime history could end up costing billions of pounds. As a decorated veteran who encountered the Taliban firsthand and saw the chaos and death of the UK's mass evacuation from Kabul airport in 2021, Fahim believes a threat remains to those still in the country. He now works in the security industry after a military career which began when he served as an interpreter for US Special Forces in Afghanistan, where he was born, before joining the Paras. 'The threat to Afghan nationals still inside the country is even more immediate,' Fahim said. 'Many have no cover, no fallback. The fact that both British and Afghan individuals were exposed shows the scale of this failure. The least we owe these people is honesty and protection.' The breach took place when the official trying to verify Afghan applications to come to the UK erroneously sent out a large database. A super-injunction, meaning even the secrecy order itself could be reported, prevented the blunder being made public. In the meantime, the largest covert evacuation in peacetime British history was launched to get Afghans out of the country. Entitled the Afghanistan Response Route, the programme has cost around £400 million so far and could amount to £850 million by the time it ends. 'Mistakes happen, but what makes this worse is how long it was kept quiet, not just ignored but actively hidden under an injunction,' Fahim said. 'When something this serious goes wrong, leadership isn't about silence, it's about taking responsibility, fixing it, and ensuring it never happens again. If we say we stand by those who stood by us, then we've got to do better than this.' The latest revelations can be reported after a High Court hearing yesterday, which enabled some of the spreadsheet contents to be reported. In a statement to parliament on Tuesday, Defence Secretary John Healey said: 'My first concern has been to notify as many people as possible who are affected by the data incident and to provide them with further advice.' More Trending Mr Healey continued that it had not been possible to contact everyone affected as he outlined how anyone concerned about the breach can seek further security advice, including through a 'self-checker tool'. A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: 'It's a longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on Special Forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.' Do you have a story you would like to share? Contact MORE: British spies and SAS soldiers' personal details leaked in Afghan data breach MORE: Roll call of nameless Afghans killed in action while serving the UK MORE: Paratrooper tells how race out of Afghanistan left devastating toll
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
No 10 defends Healey amid accusations he misled Commons over Afghan data leak
Downing Street has defended John Healey amid accusations he misled Parliament over the Afghan data leak that resulted in an unprecedented legal gagging order under the previous Tory government. Number 10 said the Defence Secretary's statement to the Commons, in which he said that 'to the best my knowledge' no serving armed forces personnel were put at risk by the breach, was 'accurate'. Opposition critics have demanded the minister 'correct the record' after it emerged days later that MI6 spies and members of the SAS were among those affected. Asked whether Mr Healey had misled MPs, a Number 10 spokesman said: 'I believe it was an accurate statement.' He said the Government is 'committed to transparency' and 'in terms of security of our personnel, we take take that extremely seriously, particularly those in sensitive positions.' On Thursday, it emerged that details of more than 100 Britons, including those working for MI6 and in special forces, were included in a spreadsheet sent out 'in error' by a defence official in February 2022. Defence sources have said information relating to personnel was included in the spreadsheet after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the country. An injunction over the breach was sought by then defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace, and a wider-ranging superinjunction, which prohibits disclosure not just of the information but of the order itself, was granted in 2023. The initial breach saw a dataset of 18,714 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released via a file that was emailed outside authorised government systems. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) became aware of the blunder only when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023. The leak also led to the creation of the secret Afghanistan Response Route, which is understood to have cost about £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million. The gagging order was granted by the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban finding out about the breach, and lifted on Tuesday. Speaking to the Commons following the revelations, Mr Healey said: 'To the best of my knowledge and belief, no serving member of our armed forces is put at risk by the data loss.' Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said: 'Three days ago John Healey claimed no-one serving in the armed forces was put at risk by the data breach. Today we found out that appears to be false. 'We need to know if any serving members of the armed forces were impacted – and the Defence Secretary must urgently come before Parliament to answer the question of whether he knowingly misled MPs and the public.' Lib Dem MP Ian Roome said: 'It is really important to restore public trust that he now clarifies his remarks. It is the least that our brave armed forces personnel along with the thousands of Afghans impacted deserve.' The Lib Dems said Mr Healey should 'urgently come to Parliament and correct the record.' Meanwhile, Tory ex-ministers have sought to distance themselves from the handling of the breach after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said members of the previous government had 'serious questions to answer' over the episode. Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick said he and former home secretary Suella Braverman had 'strongly opposed' plans for the Afghan Response Route in 'internal meetings'. Ex-defence secretary Sir Grant Shapps said he had kept the superinjunction in place in order to 'save lives' and err 'on the side of extreme caution.' But speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Friday, the ex-MP for Welwyn Hatfield said: 'I would do the same thing all over again. I would walk over hot coals to save those lives.' Asked whether he supported calls from the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) for the publication of an intelligence assessment which formed the basis of the superinjunction, he said: 'Yes, I would.' He added he knew the committee 'won't like' the fact the incident had been kept secret but 'it was just so sensitive that if anything had got out at all, it would put those lives at risk'. Despite having kept the order in place during his tenure as defence secretary, which lasted just under a year, Sir Grant said he was 'surprised' it had remained for 'so long'. He added: 'I don't think it should have carried on as long as it had. I'm surprised that it has. Those questions are for others. 'But I came in, the problem was there, I dealt with it, and as a result I think that we saved lives.' Meanwhile, the chairman of the ISC said the previous government had ignored the usual process whereby the committee is able to see sensitive information to ensure there is scrutiny. Lord Beamish told BBC Radio Scotland: 'I think there are serious constitutional issues here.' A total of about 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the relocation scheme. The official responsible for the email error was moved to a new role but not sacked. The superinjunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments, before it was lifted on Tuesday. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has apologised on behalf of the Conservatives for the leak, telling LBC: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people, yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there … and we are sorry for that.' Former armed forces minister James Heappey, himself an ex-Army officer who served in Afghanistan, said ministerial colleagues offered no 'fierce opposition' to the relocation scheme. Mr Heappey also said claims he had backed a 'new entitlement' for people affected by the breach but not eligible for other schemes were 'untrue'. Ms Braverman has said there is 'much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials'. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the previous government's actions in relation to Kabul, and has described the handling of the breach as 'farcical'. Sir Ben has said he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction because the decision was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk. An MoD spokesperson said: 'It's longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on special forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.'
The Independent
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
No 10 defends Healey amid accusations he misled Commons over Afghan data leak
Downing Street has defended John Healey amid accusations he misled Parliament over the Afghan data leak that resulted in an unprecedented legal gagging order under the previous Tory government. Number 10 said the Defence Secretary's statement to the Commons, in which he said that 'to the best my knowledge' no serving armed forces personnel were put at risk by the breach, was 'accurate'. Opposition critics have demanded the minister 'correct the record' after it emerged days later that MI6 spies and members of the SAS were among those affected. Asked whether Mr Healey had misled MPs, a Number 10 spokesman said: 'I believe it was an accurate statement.' He said the Government is 'committed to transparency' and 'in terms of security of our personnel, we take take that extremely seriously, particularly those in sensitive positions.' On Thursday, it emerged that details of more than 100 Britons, including those working for MI6 and in special forces, were included in a spreadsheet sent out 'in error' by a defence official in February 2022. Defence sources have said information relating to personnel was included in the spreadsheet after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the country. An injunction over the breach was sought by then defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace, and a wider-ranging superinjunction, which prohibits disclosure not just of the information but of the order itself, was granted in 2023. The initial breach saw a dataset of 18,714 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released via a file that was emailed outside authorised government systems. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) became aware of the blunder only when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023. The leak also led to the creation of the secret Afghanistan Response Route, which is understood to have cost about £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million. The gagging order was granted by the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban finding out about the breach, and lifted on Tuesday. Speaking to the Commons following the revelations, Mr Healey said: 'To the best of my knowledge and belief, no serving member of our armed forces is put at risk by the data loss.' Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said: 'Three days ago John Healey claimed no-one serving in the armed forces was put at risk by the data breach. Today we found out that appears to be false. 'We need to know if any serving members of the armed forces were impacted – and the Defence Secretary must urgently come before Parliament to answer the question of whether he knowingly misled MPs and the public.' Lib Dem MP Ian Roome said: 'It is really important to restore public trust that he now clarifies his remarks. It is the least that our brave armed forces personnel along with the thousands of Afghans impacted deserve.' The Lib Dems said Mr Healey should 'urgently come to Parliament and correct the record.' Meanwhile, Tory ex-ministers have sought to distance themselves from the handling of the breach after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said members of the previous government had 'serious questions to answer' over the episode. Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick said he and former home secretary Suella Braverman had 'strongly opposed' plans for the Afghan Response Route in 'internal meetings'. Ex-defence secretary Sir Grant Shapps said he had kept the superinjunction in place in order to 'save lives' and err 'on the side of extreme caution.' But speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Friday, the ex-MP for Welwyn Hatfield said: 'I would do the same thing all over again. I would walk over hot coals to save those lives.' Asked whether he supported calls from the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) for the publication of an intelligence assessment which formed the basis of the superinjunction, he said: 'Yes, I would.' He added he knew the committee 'won't like' the fact the incident had been kept secret but 'it was just so sensitive that if anything had got out at all, it would put those lives at risk'. Despite having kept the order in place during his tenure as defence secretary, which lasted just under a year, Sir Grant said he was 'surprised' it had remained for 'so long'. He added: 'I don't think it should have carried on as long as it had. I'm surprised that it has. Those questions are for others. 'But I came in, the problem was there, I dealt with it, and as a result I think that we saved lives.' Meanwhile, the chairman of the ISC said the previous government had ignored the usual process whereby the committee is able to see sensitive information to ensure there is scrutiny. Lord Beamish told BBC Radio Scotland: 'I think there are serious constitutional issues here.' A total of about 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the relocation scheme. The official responsible for the email error was moved to a new role but not sacked. The superinjunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments, before it was lifted on Tuesday. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has apologised on behalf of the Conservatives for the leak, telling LBC: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people, yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there … and we are sorry for that.' Former armed forces minister James Heappey, himself an ex-Army officer who served in Afghanistan, said ministerial colleagues offered no 'fierce opposition' to the relocation scheme. Mr Heappey also said claims he had backed a 'new entitlement' for people affected by the breach but not eligible for other schemes were 'untrue'. Ms Braverman has said there is 'much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials'. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the previous government's actions in relation to Kabul, and has described the handling of the breach as 'farcical'. Sir Ben has said he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction because the decision was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk. An MoD spokesperson said: 'It's longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on special forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.'
