As the rest of the country celebrated the USA’s first World Cup win and the New York Knicks championship, Anthropic spent its weekend fighting the Trump administration over its latest model release. At 5:21 PM on Friday, the company received a US export control directive to suspend access to its Mythos 5 and Fable 5 AI models by “any foreign national” inside or outside the US, “including foreign national Anthropic employees.” The only way that was possible, Anthropic determined, was to completely disable products it spent the past week hyping — and travel to Washington, DC in hopes of changing President Donald Trump’s mind. Now, over the coming days, the US government could dramatically alter the trajectory of the entire industry, dealing a major blow to American AI companies.
Technology
Amazon security research reportedly led to the White House’s Anthropic Fable ban
According to the Wall Street Journal, the export control directive that led to Anthropic cutting off access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 was triggered in part by cybersecurity research from Amazon and conversations between CEO Andy Jassy and the White House. According to the report, the paper from Amazon claims that, through a series of prompts, it was able to get Fable 5 to serve up information that could be used in cyberattacks. Amazon has yet to respond to a request for comment.
Shortly after Jassy shared the company’s findings with the government, it made the call to block its use by foreign nationals. Complicating this issue is that many of Anthropic’s researchers are foreign-born, meaning they were barred from accessing their own product.
In a statement, Anthropic disputed the government’s characterization of the issue as a “jailbreak.” It argued that many of the same vulnerabilities could be discovered using other publicly available models, including GPT 5.5. Some security researchers appear to back the company’s interpretation. Katie Moussouris, the founder and CEO of LutaSecurity posted on BlueSky that “I’ve seen the paper. It’s not a jailbreak.” Former Commerce Department official Kate Koren speculated to the WSJ that the White House’s dislike of Anthropic may have influenced the decision.
Anthropic and the Trump administration have been at odds for some time over the company’s refusal to allow its AI to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or to power lethal autonomous weapons. In February, Trump instructed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s AI. And just hours later, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth designated the company a supply chain risk.
The government and the company seemed to have made amends, and the two had worked together to expand access to Mythos. However, now the two seem destined to clash again.
Technology
Inside the fight over Claude Mythos 5
Claude Mythos 5 and Fable 5 are built on the same foundation as Anthropic’s Mythos Preview, which Anthropic dubbed too dangerous to publicly release. (The company’s warnings could be seen as genuine concern or more hype for their own model — or both.) Mythos 5 was made available to a select group of government agencies and companies, while Fable 5, which featured additional safeguards, was deemed “safe for general use.” But when a report indicated those guardrails may have failed, Anthropic’s dire warnings about Mythos falling into the wrong hands came back to haunt it.
A source familiar with the situation, who participated in the negotiations between Anthropic and the Trump administration, said the administration called the AI lab on Friday around 1pm ET and gave the company a 90-minute ultimatum to shut down access to Mythos 5 and Fable 5. If it didn’t, then the government would impose export controls on Anthropic by authority of the US Commerce Department.
The source said that Anthropic executives were talking to the White House within 15 minutes of that first call, confirming that CEO Dario Amodei joined the discussions about an hour and 15 minutes after that initial call. Amodei directly spoke with US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross, in some cases more than once, the source confirmed.
Anthropic wrote in a release on Friday that the company believed that the government “believes it has become aware of a method of bypassing, or ‘jailbreaking’ Fable 5.” Rather than an existential threat, though, Anthropic said that the jailbreak in question was a “potential narrow, non-universal” one that was “shared with the government” by an entity the company declined to name. Moreover, Anthropic said the behavior wasn’t unique to Fable 5. “We have reviewed a report that we believe is the basis of the government’s directive and validated that the level of capability displayed there is widely available from other models (including OpenAI’s GPT-5.5),” Anthropic wrote.
Semafor reported, citing one source familiar, that the hubbub began because the US government was concerned that a China-linked group had accessed the technology. But the source said that the China rumors went back weeks, referring to a large global telecommunications company that was initially cleared to be included in access to Mythos Preview, and that when the US government shared its concerns, Anthropic immediately revoked access.
An X post by David Sacks, the US government’s former AI and crypto czar who stepped down in March, didn’t mention China either. Sacks did, however, mention the unnamed entity that had exposed the issue to the government, calling it “a highly credible trusted partner of both Anthropic and the USG who was testing Fable [which] came forward with a jailbreak of those guardrails.”
Some reports point to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy as the person who flagged concerns to the US government after researchers at Amazon had red-teamed Fable 5. That conclusion stands at odds with some independent red-teamers, who have said they were impressed with the level of the protections.
The source familiar with the negotiations said that the Amazon research was explicitly mentioned in conversations with the US government. The person added that Anthropic had had access to that paper within days of the Friday export control directive and had been going back-and-forth since then with Amazon researchers to discuss it.
Everything in that paper, the source said, could be achieved by OpenAI’s GPT-5.5.
Anthropic spent the weekend scrambling to make nice with the Trump administration, beginning with virtual meetings and then flying employees to DC, including Dave Orr, Anthropic’s head of safeguards; Logan Graham, who runs its frontier red team and has led work on Project Glasswing; and Nicholas Carlini, a leading frontier developer and cybersecurity researcher. Axios reported, citing a source familiar with the Trump administration’s thinking, that the company simply has repeatedly made missteps in its communication with the administration and that it “has not done a great job at trying to speak to the administration and appreciate the ideological differences.” For Anthropic, the timing couldn’t be worse: the company had banked on Mythos to help it recover, in part, from months of high-profile clashes with the US Department of Defense.
The source familiar with the negotiations said that Anthropic pre-briefed the administration on Fable 5, and that the US Department of Commerce conducted testing pre-deployment, with no concerns shared at the time. The source added that Anthropic had been working closely with government agencies since Mythos Preview’s release.
The Trump administration initially took a hands-off approach to AI safety — but post-Mythos, it has become more ambivalent, even as it frets over the threat of losing the AI race to China. Now, prominent cybersecurity leaders have warned that sidelining Mythos 5 and Fable 5 could give China a significant AI advantage. Trump’s move has galvanized international calls for alternatives to American AI systems, while effectively putting a major US AI company’s new flagship model on ice.
A public letter from tech and cybersecurity executives called for restrictions on Fable 5 to be repealed on Sunday. “Not all of us agree that AI regulation is the right way forward,” the letter states, adding that if regulations are going to happen regardless, then they should be rooted in “scientific evaluations developed with input from industry and academia.”
Alex Stamos, chief product officer at Corridor, told The Verge he organized the public letter because the countless number of vulnerabilities in the past decade-plus, written in a variety of different coding languages, require AI to patch before bad actors find them. “We’re in a race, and I think policymakers don’t understand that,” Stamos said. “There’s this weird arrogance, this idea that American labs are hugely ahead of our adversaries that will always be true, that it’s really important to restrict access because of that. I just think that’s foolish. If the labs are ahead, it’s only by a matter of months. And you can see that in the open evaluations. The cutting-edge models are only something like six months ahead of the Chinese models — and those are the models we know about.”
The public letter goes on to state that though Anthropic’s Mythos-class models are skilled at finding cybersecurity vulnerabilities and taking advantage of exploits, they aren’t “uniquely good” at these tasks and that Fable 5’s safeguards “were so aggressive as to be the source of humor in the cyber community on launch day.” Stamos told The Verge that “there’s a real overstatement of Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic is somewhat responsible for this themselves, clearly … Mythos is great, but the real turning point was really last year.”
Stamos said the industry is awash with backup contracts being signed with non-US companies and open-weight models being deployed on alternative hardware arrangements because the past weekend made political risk part of companies’ business plans more than ever before.
“They are laughing at us in Beijing right now,” Stamos said. “One of America’s champions is being kneecapped by the US government while we’re in a race with the Chinese. It’s just incredibly stupid. That’s why I wrote the letter, and I think that’s why a lot of people signed onto it.”
Ben Van Roo, co-founder and CEO of Legion Intelligence, a system of agents for the national security community, told The Verge that “the directive of ‘no foreign national should use this model’ is the most impossible thing to enforce.” He added, “When I first read that, my whole… [network of] AI community nerds was exploding.”
To make matters even more urgent, OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft have all come out with their own comparable products to Anthropic’s Mythos, making many of the same claims about their effectiveness and risks. If the Trump administration bans Anthropic’s advanced cybersecurity models, it can make a case for banning its competitors’ models, too. That could spur AI industry leaders to unite and help out Anthropic or, as with its fight over autonomous weapons with the Pentagon, position themselves as a safer and more compliant alternative.
Even as the Trump administration is trying to free tech companies of regulatory hassles, the Anthropic order could amount to a dramatic restriction on powerful AI models — depending on how the next few days play out.
Legion Intelligence’s Van Roo called it “uncharted territory” in the regulatory setting, adding that he doesn’t think this is the last time something like this will happen.
We’ve also entered the era of AI populism, when a growing number of people are pushing back against the AI industry’s outsized influence and the concentration of power at the top via data center protests, pledges to quit using AI chatbots, lawsuits over wrongful deaths, and even attempted attacks on AI company CEOs. Van Roo says the Trump administration’s recent moves against Anthropic could stoke “greater fears and concerns, potentially for the wrong reasons.”
The source familiar with the negotiations described the weekend’s conversations as constructive, with some members of the administration admitting that putting export controls on model providers isn’t ideal, since competitors with similar products may find themselves under the same restrictions — and since the US government is currently exploring a program that would encourage the export of American AI systems.
Monday’s talks concluded with no resolution as of yet.
As Anthropic continues to negotiate with the US government, there’s little chance that the company’s other myriad issues with the Pentagon won’t come up — namely, the ongoing battle between Anthropic and the Department of Defense over acceptable usage policies for Anthropic’s tech by the US military.
“This is new and we’ve never had anything potentially this drastic before, and it does have some real ramifications” in terms of how to enforce access to powerful models, Van Roo said. “Who gets to use this new technology that continues to outpace our own ability to regulate it?”
Technology
Smart street sensors could be watching your city next
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
New York City is expanding the use of small street activity sensors that count pedestrians, cyclists, buses and vehicles. The city says the goal is safer street design, better traffic planning and a clearer picture of how people actually use roads. That may sound like a very New York story. However, it is really a sign of where many U.S. cities could be headed.
Across America, towns and cities are trying to solve the same problems. Drivers speed through busy corridors. Pedestrians cross where there is no crosswalk. Cyclists squeeze past parked cars. Buses get stuck in traffic. City leaders often have to make expensive safety decisions with limited data. Now, sensors can watch those patterns all day and all night.
HOW SURVEILLANCE TECH LED POLICE TO ACCUSE THE WRONG PERSON
Transportation officials say smart sensors can help reveal how people actually use roads, from mid-block crossings to blocked bike lanes. (NYC DOT)
The promise is safer streets. The concern is privacy. The big question is whether cities can use this technology without making everyone feel like they are being watched.
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Smart street sensors are coming to U.S. roads
The New York City Department of Transportation says it will expand its street activity sensor program to about 100 locations across the five boroughs. The city first tested the sensors at 20 intersections during a pilot program that began in 2023. Now, it plans to add about 80 more locations.
The tech behind the sensors is a form of AI called computer vision. In simple terms, the device looks at the street scene and classifies what it sees. That could be a pedestrian, cyclist, car, truck, bus or scooter. NYC DOT says the processing happens in real time. The video frames are deleted nearly instantly after the sensor collects the count.
The devices are mounted on city street infrastructure, such as poles or signs. Beyond counting different road users, the sensors can also measure speeds, capture turning movements and map how people move through a street or intersection.
How smart street sensors track traffic
Traditional traffic studies often depend on workers standing near a road and counting what they see. That can work, but it has limits.
A worker may count vehicles for a few hours. A city may collect data during one part of the day. Bad weather, school schedules, holiday traffic or construction can skew what gets recorded. Smart street sensors change that.
They can collect street activity data continuously. That gives transportation officials a much broader view of what happens over time. For example, a sensor may show that pedestrians cross mid-block every morning because a crosswalk is too far away. It may show that cyclists keep swerving around loading trucks. It may show that vehicles turn too fast near a school or bus stop. That kind of information can help cities redesign streets around real behavior, not just how people are supposed to move.
Why smart street sensors could make roads safer
Street safety often starts after something terrible happens. A crash occurs. A complaint gets filed. A dangerous intersection gets attention.
Smart sensors could help cities act sooner. The sensors can detect what transportation officials call near-misses. These are close calls that do not always show up in crash reports.
Think about a car door that swings open near a cyclist. Or a driver who turns while a pedestrian is already crossing. Or a delivery truck that blocks a driver’s view at a busy corner. Nobody may get hurt in that moment. Still, the pattern can reveal real danger.
If sensors detect repeated close calls in the same place, city planners may have a stronger reason to act before a crash happens. That could mean adding a crosswalk, changing signal timing, redesigning a bike lane or adjusting how curb space gets used.
AI DASHCAMS ENHANCE TRUCKER SAFETY WHILE RAISING PRIVACY CONCERNS
New York City is expanding smart street sensors that count pedestrians, bikes, buses and vehicles as officials look for safer street designs. (NYC DOT)
What smart street sensors may reveal
The most interesting part of this technology may be what it shows cities about everyday habits. Roads rarely work the way they look on a planning map. People cross where it feels convenient. Cyclists avoid lanes that feel unsafe. Drivers speed up when a road feels too wide. Buses slow down when curb space gets clogged. A sensor can help document those patterns.
That could help cities answer practical questions: Are pedestrians crossing in the same unsafe spot every day? Do cyclists avoid a certain bike lane because cars block it? Do buses slow down near busy loading zones? Are drivers turning too quickly near a school? Is a street redesign actually working? Better answers could lead to better decisions. But only if cities use the data in a way people can see and understand.
Smart street sensors raise privacy questions
This is where many people will pause. A sensor on a street pole can sound helpful. It can also sound creepy.
New York City says the sensors are designed with privacy in mind. According to the DOT, video is processed in real time and then discarded. The city says only anonymous data is kept. Faces and license plates are deliberately obscured.
That means the system is supposed to keep the traffic pattern, not the personal identity behind it.
Still, privacy concerns will not disappear with one promise from city officials. People have good reason to ask what gets collected, how long data is stored, who can access it and whether the rules could change later.
Those questions matter for every city that considers similar technology. Safer roads are important. So are clear limits on how much street-level data a city collects.
Why public access to street sensor data matters
If taxpayers help fund street sensors, the public should know what the sensors find. New York City says some information will be added to its open data page. Street safety advocates want more regular reporting. That is important.
A city should not collect information from public streets and then bury the results in a hard-to-find system. Residents should be able to see whether the technology leads to safer crossings, better bike routes, faster buses or fewer dangerous close calls.
Public reporting also helps build trust. If a city says sensors protect privacy, it should show how. If officials say sensors improve safety, they should show the results. Without that transparency, even a useful technology can feel like another layer of surveillance.
WASHINGTON COURT SAYS FLOCK CAMERA IMAGES ARE PUBLIC RECORDS
A Flock camera is shown close up with trees in the background, illustrating how surveillance tools can generate leads but still require human verification to avoid mistakes. (Antranik Tavitian/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
What smart street sensors mean for you
Even if you do not live in New York, this rollout is worth watching. Your city may be paying attention to how New York uses this technology. If the program helps planners make safer decisions faster, similar sensors could show up near schools, busy intersections, bike corridors or downtown streets in other communities.
If you walk often, the data could support better crosswalks and safer signal timing. Cyclists may benefit from stronger evidence for protected bike lanes. Drivers could notice new street designs that slow traffic, change turns or shift parking. Bus riders may see improvements if cities use the data to find where transit gets delayed.
However, cities need clear policies before these systems spread. They should explain what the sensors collect, what they delete, who reviews the data and how the public can see the results. Safer streets are a good goal. Public trust is part of getting there.
Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?
Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: Cyberguy.com
Kurt’s key takeaways
Smart street sensors could help cities fix dangerous roads before someone gets hurt. That is the strongest argument for this technology. If a city can spot risky patterns, identify near-misses and redesign streets based on real data, that could save lives. At the same time, cities need to handle privacy with care. People should not have to choose between safer streets and reasonable limits on public surveillance. The best version of this technology gives planners better information while keeping personal details out of the system. New York City may be one of the biggest test cases, but this is now a national conversation.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Would smart street sensors make you feel safer, or make public streets feel a little too watched? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
Technology
Facebook’s new AI Mode search gets its info from public posts
Your public Facebook posts could help inform AI-generated results in Meta’s new AI Mode. When you search on Facebook, the “AI Mode” option will appear alongside the usual search modes like “People” and “Marketplace.” It’s one of several new AI features Meta is rolling out starting today, including photo presets that swap sports jerseys onto fans and suggestions for collage templates.
Instead of “just links,” it gives users AI-generated results that pull from publicly-posted content across Meta’s platforms, like the AI search feature in its new Reddit-like Forum app. Users can also ask Meta’s AI follow-up questions in response to the search results it generates.
-
Louisiana2 minutes agoBeware the coordinated effort to manufacture carbon storage acceptance | The Lens
-
Maine9 minutes agoWoman Died after Fire in Fort Kent, Maine
-
Maryland12 minutes agoTemperatures Near 100 Degrees Couldn’t Stop This Southern Maryland HYROX Team – The BayNet
-
Michigan17 minutes agoMissing White River kayaker found safe, police say
-
Massachusetts24 minutes ago
More than half of Massachusetts voters say they’ve weighed leaving the state, new Suffolk/Globe poll finds. Here’s why. – The Boston Globe
-
Minnesota27 minutes agoSevere Thunderstorms Expected Wednesday In Southern Minnesota With Large Hail And Strong Winds
-
Mississippi39 minutes ago1-year-old toddler shot dead by Mississippi cop during chase in Walmart parking lot
-
Missouri42 minutes agoKansas City, Missouri Police investigating fatal shooting