Technology

Is it safe to travel with your phone right now?

Published

11 months ago

March 23, 2025

Is it safe to travel with your phone right now?

In recent weeks, airport Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents have drawn public outcry for denying travelers US entry based on searches of their phones. A doctor on an H-1B visa was deported to Lebanon after CBP found “sympathetic photos and videos” of Hezbollah leaders. A French scientist was turned away after a device search unearthed messages criticizing the Trump administration’s cuts to research programs, which officers said “conveyed hatred of Trump” and “could be qualified as terrorism.” As the administration ratchets up pressure to turn away even legal immigrants, its justifications are becoming thinner and thinner — but travelers can still benefit from knowing what are supposed to be their legal rights.

Your ability to decline a search depends on your immigration status — and, in some cases, on where and how you’re entering the country. Courts across the country have issued different rulings on device searches at ports of entry. But no matter your situation, there are precautions you can take to safeguard your digital privacy.

CBP device searches have historically been relatively rare. During the 2024 fiscal year, less than 0.01 percent of arriving international travelers had their phones, computers, or other electronic devices searched by CBP, according to the agency. That year, CBP officers conducted 47,047 device searches. But even before this recent wave of incidents, inspections were on the rise: eight years earlier, during the 2016 fiscal year, CBP searched only 19,051 devices.

The “border search” exception

The Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that warrantless searches of people’s cell phones violated the Fourth Amendment. But there’s one exception to that rule: searches that happen at the border. The courts have held that border searches “are reasonable simply because they occur at the border,” meaning in most cases, CBP and Border Patrol don’t need a warrant to look through travelers’ belongings — including their phones. That exception applies far beyond the US’s literal borders, since airports are considered border zones, too.

“Traditionally, the border search exception to the Fourth Amendment allowed customs officers to search things like luggage. The idea was whatever you’re taking with you is pertinent to your travel,” Saira Hussain, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told The Verge. The point was to look for people or things that were inadmissible into the country.

“It can show every facet of your life.”

These days, most travelers are carrying a lot more in their pockets — not only information stored on a phone’s hardware, but anything that’s accessible on it with a data connection. “When you look at devices, the data that you carry with you isn’t just pertinent to your travel. This data can precede your travel by over a decade because of how much information is stored on the cloud,” Hussain said. “It can show every facet of your life. It can show your financial history, your medical history, your communications with your doctor and your attorney. It can reveal so much information that is not analogous at all to the notion of a customs officer looking through your luggage.” Privacy advocates have warned of this issue for years, but in an environment where officers are seeking any pretext to turn someone away, it’s an even bigger problem.

If you’re a US citizen, “you have the right to say no” to a search, “and they are not allowed to bar you from the country,” Hussain said. But if you refuse, CBP can still take your phone, laptop, or other devices and hold onto them.

Permanent residents can similarly refuse a search, but with complicating factors. If someone with a green card leaves the US for more than 180 days, they’re screened for “inadmissibility” — reasons they may be barred from entry — upon returning to the country. Green card holders who have certain offenses on their record may also be deemed inadmissible. That appears to have been the case with Fabian Schmidt, a permanent resident whose family said he was “violently interrogated” by CBP agents at Boston Logan Airport after returning from a trip to Europe. Because of these factors, permanent residents may not feel comfortable refusing a search, even if doing so wouldn’t bar them from entering the country.

Visa holders have fewer rights at ports of entry, and refusing a search could lead to them being denied entry to the country.

There are two types of device searches CBP officers can conduct: basic and forensic, or advanced. “There’s a distinction that the government draws between searching your phone and just looking at whatever is on it, versus connecting your phone to external equipment to search it using advanced algorithms or to copy the contents of your phone,” Hussain said.

The government maintains that it doesn’t need a warrant to conduct “basic” searches of the contents of a person’s phone. During these searches, Hussain explained, agents are supposed to put your phone on airplane mode and can only look at what is accessible offline — but that can still be a lot of information, including any cloud data that’s currently synced.

“While forensic inspections are powerful, a lot of mischief can happen through the physical, ‘thumbing-through’ inspections that law enforcement can engage in,” Tom McBrien, counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, also told The Verge.

“A lot of mischief can happen through the physical, ‘thumbing-through’ inspections that law enforcement can engage in”

For the most part, courts have avoided the question of whether CBP can conduct warrantless basic searches of a person’s phone or laptop, effectively allowing the agency to do so. But there’s one geographic exception to this rule. Last year, a federal judge in New York’s Eastern District ruled that CBP can’t conduct any warrantless searches of travelers’ devices. That ruling doesn’t apply anywhere else in the country, but the district includes John F. Kennedy Airport in Queens — the sixth-busiest airport in the US. That ruling applies to both basic and forensic inspections.

Elsewhere in the country, judges have imposed some limitations on advanced searches. Warrantless forensic searches are allowed in some places and prohibited in others, depending on how different federal circuit courts rule. The Supreme Court could clear this up with a ruling that applies nationwide, but it’s avoided the question for years.

“Your rights will be different depending on whether you’re on a flight landing in Boston Logan in the First Circuit or Reagan/Dulles in the Fourth Circuit,” McBrien said. “Similarly, your rights would be different if you’re crossing the border in Arizona (Ninth Circuit) or New Mexico (Tenth Circuit). This does not make a lot of sense, but the Supreme Court has consistently declined to address these disparities by consistently denying petitions for certiorari in cases that have teed the question up.”

Some courts have been more permissive than others. The Ninth Circuit — which includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington — prohibits warrantless forensic searches unless officers are looking for “digital contraband,” such as child sexual abuse material. The Fourth Circuit — covering Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia — prohibits warrantless forensic searches unless officers are looking for information related to ongoing border violations, such as human smuggling or drug trafficking.

In 2023, a federal judge in the Southern District of New York ruled that the border search exception doesn’t extend to forensic searches, for which warrants are needed. (Oddly, the case in question involved a phone search at Newark Liberty Airport in New Jersey, a state that is in a different federal circuit from New York.) These searches, judge Jed Rakoff wrote, “extend the Government’s reach far beyond the person and luggage of the border-crosser — as if the fact of a border crossing somehow entitled the Government to search that traveler’s home, car, and office.”

Malik’s phone was taken even though he’s enrolled in Global Entry

Not all judges agree. In 2021, Adam Malik, an immigration lawyer, sued CBP after agents at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport seized his phone and searched the contents without a warrant. According to the lawsuit, Malik’s phone was taken even though he’s enrolled in Global Entry, CBP’s trusted traveler program. Because the agents couldn’t bypass Malik’s password, they sent the phone to a forensics lab, which extracted all the phone’s data.

A federal court ruled in favor of DHS, saying the warrantless search hadn’t violated Malik’s rights. When Malik appealed to the Fifth Circuit — which covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas — the judges held that the search didn’t require a warrant. But the court also expressed “no view on how the border-search exemption may develop or be clarified in future cases.”

In other words, the constitutionality of these searches is still an open question — and CBP won’t stop conducting them until and unless it’s expressly forbidden from doing so.

These distinctions matter because they determine a person’s basis for challenging device inspections in court. But given the Trump administration’s recent track record of ignoring the law and flouting judicial orders, limiting what can be found on your phone is a safer bet than suing the government over an unlawful search after the fact.

Instead of trying to game out what rights you have depending on your immigration status and what airport you’re flying into (or what land border you’re crossing), the best way to keep your devices safe from CBP is to limit what’s on them.

“We always encourage data minimization when crossing the border; you want to travel with the least amount of data possible,” Hussain said.

Before traveling, you should encrypt your devices and make sure you’re using secure passwords. Travelers should disable biometric logins like Face ID, since some courts have ruled that police can’t compel you to tell them your password but they can use biometrics to unlock your phone.

Travelers should disable biometric logins like Face ID

The EFF recommends that travelers limit what can be found during basic phone or laptop searches by uploading their data onto the cloud and deleting it off their device — and ensuring that it’s fully been removed, since agents can also look through your phone’s “recently deleted” files during basic searches. Customs agents are supposed to keep your phone on airplane mode while they conduct a basic search, but that still lets them see any cached emails, text messages, and other communications. The best way to safeguard this information is to back it up onto the cloud and then wipe your phone or laptop entirely.

Backing up sensitive or personal data doesn’t just prevent others from accessing your device; it also ensures you don’t lose that data if CBP seizes your phone or computer. McBrien also suggests that people turn their phones off when they’re crossing the border or at the airport. “Turning the phone off means that when you turn it back on, it requires a passcode whether or not you use FaceID or other biometric measures,” McBrien said.

In a better legal environment, these precautions wouldn’t be the only meaningful shield between you and a border search. “Without strong constitutional and statutory protections, personal choices about how to configure one’s device and apps can only mitigate — not eliminate — the dangers that border device searches pose to their privacy and speech rights,” McBrien said. For now, if CBP really wants to look through your phone, they’ll likely find a way. But you can still protect yourself as much as possible.

Technology

Stellantis is in a crisis of its own making

Published

11 hours ago

February 21, 2026

Press Room

Stellantis is in a crisis of its own making

Demand for EVs has gone glacial, and one automaker after another is running aground: General Motors threw $7.6 billion overboard. Ford washed $19.5 billion off its books. Leave it to Stellantis to face the most titanic charge yet, a $26.5 billion bill for its own misplaced bet on EVs.

The Jeep, Dodge, and Chrysler parent company hasn’t said how much of that unfathomable sum is explicitly due to EV losses, as the write-down wiped away about 25 percent of the company’s stock value overnight. Every automaker faces the same cooling EV demand and whipsawing political climate, yet Stellantis appears the most exposed, due in part to longstanding failures to keep up with evolving tech or consumer tastes. Don’t forget quality. An additional $16.7 billion charge for warranty and recall claims, including a recall of 320,000 Jeep 4xe plug-in hybrids for battery-fire risks, adds insult to financial injury.

The names may change — Stellantis, Fiat Chrysler, DaimlerChrysler, Chrysler Corp. — but the company stays frustratingly familiar. It’s the slightly off-key sister in the Motown trio. It’s an automaker enamored of the quick fix, the low-hanging fruit.

In America, that low-hanging fruit tends to come in bunches of eight, with Hemi V8s below the hood of a thirsty pickup, SUV, or muscle car. Now it’s déjà vu all over again. Stellantis plans to ship 100,000 Hemi engines from its Saltillo, Mexico, factory in 2026, tripling output to power Ram 1500 pickups, Jeep Wranglers, and other models. For now, the demand appears there, and executives intend to give the people what they want.

During an analysts’ call last year, Stellantis CEO Antonio Filosa said the so-called Big Beautiful Bill — making sure to give President Trump credit — allows the company “more flexibility in choosing… a mix between ICE and electric versions that we sell. And this will mean, to us, a lot of additional profit.”

A driver from Stellantis takes a journalist on a drive in a 2026 Jeep Gladiator Rubicon during the 2026 Chicago Auto Show Media Preview at McCormick Place in Chicago in February of 2026.

Photo by Joel Lerner/Xinhua via Getty Images

After a bad EV bet, automakers hope for an ICE winning streak

It’s hard to blame automakers for wanting to make back these brutal EV losses. Like GM, Ford, or Toyota, Stellantis is forecasting a financial windfall from the Trump administration’s blank check on pollution and mileage rules. But the pendulum will inevitably swing, and if this automaker doesn’t invest in affordable passenger cars and tech, it’s going to get its head lopped off.

Certainly, Stellantis’ EVs weren’t getting it done in America. The hunky Dodge Charger Daytona was a valiant-but-failed attempt at updating Mopar muscle for an electric age. Dodge was forced to add a gasoline version. A half-baked Jeep Wagoneer S EV, at more than $70,000 with options, fell flat in showrooms. The 2026 Jeep Recon is the company’s next shot at luring Tesla Model Y buyers, though the Mexico-built SUV will also start from $67,000, and with no $7,500 consumer tax credit to soften the blow.

The names may change — Stellantis, Fiat Chrysler, DaimlerChrysler, Chrysler Corp. — but the company stays frustratingly familiar

Those models aren’t what the Trump administration has in mind to “assist” the industry, as it locks fuel-economy and emissions rules into a time machine, seemingly bound for the Eisenhower administration. A yearlong spree against regulations culminated with last week’s killing of the “endangerment finding,” the historic ruling that required the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gases as a threat to public health and safety.

Automakers will no longer face fines for failing to meet tailpipe pollution or fuel-economy standards. They will no longer be required to buy pricey climate credits from the likes of Tesla, or spend billions developing EVs that weren’t boosting the bottom line.

In the face of such regulatory monkey business, the Detroit Three are naturally tempted to play see no evil, hear no evil. Automakers are free to make whatever cars they like, at least until the next sheriff rides into Washington. “Choice” is their new mantra. Unsurprisingly, their choice is to make hay and haul it in fossil-fueled SUVs and pickup trucks that generate virtually all its profits.

Washington insists this is all about making cars more affordable. That includes a vindictive axing of fuel-saving stop/start technology, which the EPA calculated was trimming owners’ gasoline bills between 7.3 and 26.4 percent. (Wait, doesn’t gasoline cost money?) And it’s precisely those feature-stuffed trucks and SUVs that drove the price of the average new car past $50,000 in the first place. Today’s cheap gasoline also encourages automakers to party now and pay later. Longer memories will recall the old Chrysler getting caught with its pants down whenever fuel prices spiked, its showrooms overflowing with unsold, guzzling trucks. Churlish types may even recall Chrysler’s 2009 bankruptcy and subsequent federal bailout.

Still Top-Heavy with Trucks

Like its automaking peers, Stellantis insists it won’t walk away from EVs. But it remains more reliant on trucks and SUVs than any rival. Stellantis would at least try to own its area of expertise. Yet sales of its bread-and-butter Ram pickup, after briefly nosing past the mighty Ford F-150, have fallen off a cliff. Sure, some of that drop came from Ram’s controversial decision to drop a V-8 in favor of a more-efficient “Hurricane” inline V-6. But it’s more related to the botched rollout of a redesigned 2025 Ram, with production bottlenecks, quality glitches, and the elimination of an affordable “Classic” model in favor of moneymakers like the $87,000 Tungsten edition.

Try this for market malpractice: Prior to the launch of the 2026 Jeep Cherokee, a critical hybrid SUV that revives a storied Jeep nameplate, Stellantis didn’t even have a straight-up rival for the Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, or other wildly popular compact SUVs. (The Jeep Compass is much smaller and not up for that fight).

“That’s really where the market is, and the Koreans and Japanese are all over those segments,” says Tom Libby, director of industry analysis for S&P Global Mobility.

Like its automaking peers, Stellantis insists it won’t walk away from EVs. But it remains more reliant on trucks and SUVs than any rival

Compact SUVs are one of 33 market segments, by S&P’s count, yet those models account for 21 percent of all US sales. Stellantis, in effect, “was only competing in four-fifths of the market,” Libby says.

A revolving door of management hasn’t helped. Filosa is the latest CEO following the abrupt resignation of Carlos Tavares in December 2024, with Tavares facing pressure from all sides. Dealers, suppliers, the UAW, key shareholders, and the managing board were in near-revolt over slumping sales and Tavares’ relentless cost-cutting. Like a perpetually rebuilding sports franchise, each new company chief arrives with high hopes and fresh strategies, then gets replaced before he or she can see it through.

“You can’t keep changing course and expect things to improve,” Libby says.

In Europe, Stellantis’ Peugeot and Citroen brands were doing solid EV sales. Now the EU is watering down an EV mandate for 2035. So Stellantis plans to resurrect diesel engines in at least seven European models. Some analysts see this as smart business, with Chinese automakers having no diesels to sell. But this is also Stellantis at its blast-from-the-past best. In Europe, diesels have fallen from more than half the market in 2015 to 7.7 percent today. EVs are at nearly 20 percent and rising fast, driven by the arrival of Chinese models from BYD and others.

Image: Stellantis

Too Many Brands, Not Enough Stars

Notoriously, Stellantis has too many underperforming brands, with 14 core outfits including a superfluous Lancia, Vauxhall, and DS in Europe. (I’ll leave Maserati off that list, hoping this once-glorious brand can survive). By this point, a boss-baby CEO would realize he has too many toys to play with. Yet each new chief has resisted making tough calls on which brands to cut loose. As brands such as Chrysler wither, executives publicly proclaim their love and commitment, only to neglect them.

Attempts to reestablish Fiat and Alfa Romeo in America were noble, especially for enthusiasts who crave some la dolce vita in their cars. But Alfa Romeo sold 5,600 cars here last year and a paltry 1,300 for Fiat. Sorry, but the experiment has failed. And despite having seven brands in America, none is the kind of mainstream anchor provided by GM’s Chevrolet, Ford, Toyota, or Honda.

Yet for all that, Stellantis doesn’t have a mainstream domestic car brand to take on Toyota, Honda, or Hyundai. It doesn’t have a high-margin luxury brand akin to Cadillac, whose thriving EV sales (prior to the kibosh on consumer credits) saw it pass a stumbling Audi in the US luxury ranks.

“You can’t keep changing course and expect things to improve.”

— Tom Libby, director of industry analysis for S&P Global Mobility

Things hit bottom in August, when Stellantis’ share of the US retail market reached a record-low 5.4-percent, according to S&P Global. The company has begun to turn things around, with retail share rising to 6.3 percent in November. But after shedding market share to Toyota or Honda for decades, the company is now losing it to Hyundai and Kia, whose sales have exploded. Not coincidentally, those Korean brands have invested in full lineups that encompass affordable sedans, SUVs, and smartly designed EVs.

One ominous number illustrates the depth of the problem. Stellantis’ percentage of repeat customers, which S&P calls its manufacturer loyalty measure, sunk to around 41 percent in August, before recovering to 47 percent for the fourth quarter. In other words, fewer than half of current owners are buying another Stellantis model, and that’s with seven brands to choose from. Among automakers that offer at least two brands here, only Volkswagen was lower at 44 percent.

At GM, a healthy 66 percent of owners end up buying another GM model, followed by Toyota and Ford at a respective 64 and 61 percent. That loyalty has become a critical indicator of long-term success, as a growing number of automakers fight over a limited (or shrinking) pie of new-car buyers. The winners are those who can steal customers from rivals, win over younger generations, and ideally keep them for life.

Can Stellantis Turn Things Around?

The frustrating part is that Stellantis, when it’s on its game, can deliver compelling cars and trucks, full of charm and personality.

The plush-and-powerful Ram. The Jeep Wrangler, which experienced a massive sales renaissance as Americans rediscovered the joys of authentic off-roaders. The Dodge Challenger and its Hellcat and Demon offshoots. The overlooked Maserati GranTurismo Folgore, a sweet-driving, 202-mph electric indulgence that makes a Lucid look like a Hertz rental.

Stellantis has little choice but to lean into its traditional customer base for now. But Stellantis must keep investing in electrification and other advanced tech, before the winds change again. Chinese EVs already have a foothold in Europe and a coming toehold in Canada and will inevitably blow into America as well.

The Ram 1500 REV pickup, serially delayed, remains an intriguing tech play. This type of “extended range electric vehicle,” or EREV, uses an ICE engine solely to generate electricity for a battery, which then efficiently powers the wheels. With much longer electric ranges than today’s plug-in hybrids, and the ability to fill a gas tank when needed, EREVs could prove popular with Americans who are leery over EV range or long charging times. Ram says the REV can cover 145 miles on plug-in electricity alone, with 690 miles of total range.

Filosa intends to revitalize a near-dormant Chrysler brand, including an actual sedan (possibly electric) based on the Halcyon concept, and perhaps a sporty small car priced below $30,000. The company is also readying a demo fleet of Charger Daytonas, powered by semi-solid-state batteries — from the Massachusetts-based Factorial Energy — that helped a lightly modified Mercedes EQS sedan cover 749 miles from Stuttgart to Sweden, with 85 miles of range to spare.

If Stellantis can get in on the ground floor of crazy-ranging, rapid-charging solid-state batteries, it and other homegrown automakers could leapfrog the best lithium-ion technology in all of China. Stellantis would be viewed as a tech leader, not a follower. Show them 500 miles of range and a 15-minute charge, and EV fans might consider a Dodge, Chrysler, or Ram for the first time in their lives. Don’t laugh. Remember how Tesla was going to drive every legacy automaker out of business? The clock may be ticking on Stellantis, but it’s not too late to change.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

Lawrence Ulrich

Technology

YouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes

Published

12 hours ago

February 21, 2026

Press Room

YouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An email arrived that looked like a routine billing alert for YouTube TV Premium. Near the top, it displayed “BILLING FAILED” in capital letters. Below that, the message claimed the payment was declined and urged immediate action to keep streaming. This email was sent to us by Jackie from New York, NY, who immediately knew something was wrong.

“I’m not a YouTube TV Premium subscriber so I knew right away this was a scam. So why am I receiving these emails?”
— Jackie from New York, NY

That question matters. If a billing alert references a service you do not use, it is almost always a scam. The email still appeared legitimate. Billing notices like this are common, and scammers rely on that familiarity to slip past quick checks.

Another warning sign appeared in the sender’s details. The message was routed through a domain with no connection to Google or YouTube. That mismatch confirmed what Jackie already suspected.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

TAX SEASON SCAMS 2026: FAKE IRS MESSAGES STEALING IDENTITIES

Cybersecurity experts warn that billing emails from domains unrelated to Google or YouTube are a major red flag. (Photo by S3studio/Getty Images)

Why this scam feels so convincing

Scammers understand behavior. People skim emails. They react quickly when access to familiar services feels threatened. This message uses recognizable branding, clean formatting and simple language. It also assumes the recipient already subscribes. That assumption is intentional. These emails go out in bulk, knowing some recipients really do have YouTube TV and may act before verifying.

Urgency language is meant to push for quick action

Scam emails rely on pressure. This one uses several subtle cues.

‘BILLING FAILED’ draws immediate focus

Capital letters pull attention to the problem first. It feels like a system notice, even though no real account check took place.

‘Fix your payment now to keep streaming’ creates momentum

That line suggests access could stop at any moment. Scammers know interruptions feel urgent, so they push fast decisions.

‘Status: Payment declined’ sounds technical

The word status makes the message feel automated and official. In reality, scammers use vague labels because they cannot see real billing data.

‘Date: Today’ adds time pressure

Including today makes the issue feel current and unresolved. Legitimate companies rarely demand same-day action through email links alone.

When urgency replaces clarity, that pressure itself becomes the warning sign.

ROBINHOOD TEXT SCAM WARNING: DO NOT CALL THIS NUMBER

Scam emails mimicking YouTube TV billing notices use urgent language and fake support buttons to steal login and payment details. (Robert Michael/picture alliance via Getty Images)

Red flags hiding in plain sight

The layout of the email matters as much as the wording.

“Confirm billing” buttons are designed to prompt clicks

The red CONFIRM BILLING button encourages action before verification. Real companies usually direct users to sign in normally, not through a single email button.

“Contact support” links can be misleading

The black CONTACT SUPPORT button looks official and helpful. In scam emails, these links often lead to fake support pages or phishing forms.

Color and design influence behavior

Red suggests urgency. Dark colors suggest authority. Familiar branding builds comfort. Together, they encourage quick action.

If an email pushes any button to fix a problem, pause and verify first.

The biggest red flag most people miss

The message claims to be about YouTube TV. The sending infrastructure points somewhere else. Lifeheaters.com has no legitimate relationship with Google or YouTube. Billing emails should always come from official domains tied directly to the company.

We reached out to Google, YouTube’s parent company, and a spokesperson told us, “We can confirm that this is a phishing scam and not an official communication from YouTube.”

How to protect yourself from YouTube TV billing email scams

If you receive a billing alert like this, pause before acting. Scammers rely on speed and stress. These steps help you stay in control.

1) Go straight to the official website or app

Instead of clicking links in the email, open a new browser tab. Then go directly to the official YouTube TV website or app. Real billing issues always appear inside your account dashboard.

2) Check billing inside your account settings

Once you are logged in, review your payment status. If there is a real problem, you will see it there. If everything looks normal, the email is fake.

3) Inspect links before you click

Hover your cursor over any link in the email. Look closely at the destination. If the domain does not clearly match Google or YouTube, do not click it. That mismatch is a major warning sign. Also, installing strong antivirus software adds a critical layer of protection. It can block malicious links, flag phishing pages and stop malware before it installs. That matters if you accidentally click the wrong thing. The best way to protect yourself from malicious links that install malware and potentially access your private information is to have strong antivirus software installed on all your devices. This protection can also alert you to phishing emails and ransomware scams, keeping your personal information and digital assets safe.

Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com.

4) Act fast if you already clicked

If you clicked the link or entered information, respond quickly. Change your Google password right away. Consider using a password manager to securely store and generate complex passwords, reducing the risk of password reuse. Then review recent account activity and payment methods for any suspicious activity.

Next, see if your email has been exposed in past breaches. Our No. 1 password manager pick includes a built-in breach scanner that checks whether your email address or passwords have appeared in known leaks. If you discover a match, immediately change any reused passwords and secure those accounts with new, unique credentials.

Check out the best expert-reviewed password managers of 2026 at Cyberguy.com.

5) Remove your data from data broker sites

Scammers often target people using leaked personal data. A data removal service helps reduce how much of your information is floating around online. Less exposed data means fewer targeted scam attempts.

While no service can guarantee the complete removal of your data from the internet, a data removal service is really a smart choice. They aren’t cheap, and neither is your privacy. These services do all the work for you by actively monitoring and systematically erasing your personal information from hundreds of websites. It’s what gives me peace of mind and has proven to be the most effective way to erase your personal data from the internet. By limiting the information available, you reduce the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information they might find on the dark web, making it harder for them to target you.

Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com.

Get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web: Cyberguy.com.

6) Watch for sender domains that do not match

Legitimate companies send billing emails from their own domains. A message about YouTube TV should never route through an unrelated site like lifeheaters.com. That disconnect alone is enough to walk away.

7) Never update payment info through email links

Scammers want your login details or credit card number. Avoid giving them either. Always update billing information directly inside your account, not through an email prompt.

HOW TO SAFELY VIEW YOUR BANK AND RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS ONLINE

Google confirmed a YouTube TV “billing failed” email routed through an unrelated domain was a phishing scam. (Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Kurt’s key takeaways

This email looked polished. The message felt urgent. The branding felt familiar. Yet one small detail gave it away. Billing emails should always come from official domains and verified accounts. When they do not, trust your instincts and verify independently. Pausing for ten seconds can save you weeks of cleanup.

Have you received a billing or subscription email that looked real but turned out to be fake? What tipped you off? Let us know your thoughts by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson is an award-winning tech journalist who has a deep love of technology, gear and gadgets that make life better with his contributions for Fox News & FOX Business beginning mornings on “FOX & Friends.” Got a tech question? Get Kurt’s free CyberGuy Newsletter, share your voice, a story idea or comment at CyberGuy.com.

Technology

Xbox shakeup: Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond are leaving Microsoft

Published

23 hours ago

February 20, 2026

Press Room

Xbox shakeup: Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond are leaving Microsoft

After nearly 40 years at Microsoft, Xbox chief and Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer is leaving the company, along with Xbox president Sarah Bond. Spencer’s retirement was announced in a memo from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella on February 20th, stating, “Last year, Phil Spencer made the decision to retire from the company, and since then we’ve been talking about succession planning.”

Follow along below for the latest updates on Microsoft’s Xbox leadership changes