Technology

Nuclear weapons in space are bad news for the entire planet

Published

2 years ago

March 19, 2024

Nuclear weapons in space are bad news for the entire planet

Last month, several news outlets reported that Russia could be planning to deploy a space-based nuclear weapon, alarming, well, pretty much everyone.

US policy hawks, space environmentalists, and anyone with a lingering memory of Cold War-era fears over nuclear annihilation were all sounding the alarm about the threat posed by a Russian nuke in space.

As scary as the prospects sound, the US government has assured people that the weapon doesn’t necessarily pose a threat to people on the ground. Instead, it would target other objects in space, like the satellites used by the US military for communications and other operations.

But that struck some as cold comfort, especially given Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unpredictability. And Putin has indicated that putting a nuclear power unit in space is a priority for the country.

In the long term, defense experts warn that having a nuclear weapon positioned in space could pose a threat to life on Earth by eroding international relations and space law. From clouds of space debris that could cut off access to space to the development of weapons that could launch from space to hit targets on the ground, space-based nukes have the potential to impact everything — and everyone.

Anti-satellite weapons already exist — but not nuclear ones

No country has ever used an anti-satellite weapon against another country, but several countries have destroyed their own satellites in demonstrations of their military capabilities — including the US, Russia, China, and India.

These tests are not without controversy: a 2021 Russian test of an anti-satellite weapon, for example, drew condemnation from NASA for creating debris that threatened astronauts on the International Space Station (including Russian cosmonauts). Since then, a UN panel has called for a ban on the testing of such weapons and several European Union nations and the US have pledged not to perform destructive tests.

A nuclear weapon in space would cause much more destruction than previous anti-satellite weapons tests, explained Andrew Reddie of the Berkeley Risk and Security Lab, as existing space-based weapons typically destroy just one satellite at a time. In the age of huge satellite constellations such as Starlink, knocking out a single satellite is more of an annoyance than a major threat.

To destroy satellites at scale, you need a different weapon, such as a directed energy weapon based on the ground. Or, you could use a nuclear weapon in space, which creates not only shock effects but also heat, radiation, and an electromagnetic pulse — giving it the ability to take out or impair entire networks.

A nuclear weapon in space would cause much more destruction than previous anti-satellite weapons tests

International laws protecting space

The best response the international community has had to date in restricting the stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons is international law. When it comes to space, the key piece of legislation is the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, of which Article IV prohibits placing nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit.

Detonating a weapon in space would be unprecedented and could run afoul of international rules barring the use of indiscriminate weapons on civilians or civilian objects.

“It seems to be that any kind of destruction of something in space is an indiscriminate weapon, and indiscriminate weapons are prohibited, and the use of indiscriminate weapons are a war crime,” said Christopher Johnson, professor of law at Georgetown University.

However, this assumes that satellites are being destroyed by a kinetic impact. It might be possible to disable or jam satellites in another way, such as using an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP. Some reports have suggested that Russia is developing an EMP anti-satellite weapon rather than a nuclear one. If that could be done in a way that doesn’t create a debris field, that may not contravene the international law because it would no longer be a weapon of mass destruction or indiscriminate in its effects.

With the current situation, “We don’t know what is being threatened,” Johnson said and pointed out that the details matter a lot here and that Russia is capable of a very close reading of the relevant laws to stay within them.

Detonating a weapon in space would be unprecedented and could run afoul of international rules

The cascading debris problem

The reason that the use of weapons in space could be considered indiscriminate is because of the debris field they create. Destruction of objects in space creates large pieces of debris, which are hazardous but relatively easy to track. Where it gets dangerous is the increasing number of medium and small pieces of debris, which are too small to be trackable but are still traveling at high enough speeds to do tremendous damage to other objects or even people in space.

“A fleck of paint the size of your thumbnail can go through most spacecraft. Traveling at a very high velocity — 18,000 mph — it’ll go right through it,” said space debris expert Vishnu Reddy of the University of Arizona.

A serious collision in orbit could create a field of small debris pieces that would quickly collide with other satellites, creating a cascade. At a critical mass, each collision creates more debris, which creates more collisions, which creates more debris, until an entire orbit becomes difficult or impossible to access.

This scenario, known as the Kessler syndrome, could cut off access to space for generations: from making rocket launches more difficult, dangerous, and expensive to, at worst, making any kind of space travel completely impossible for decades and shutting humanity off from the stars.

This concept of the syndrome was first proposed in the late 1970s, when there were optimistic predictions that the Space Shuttle might fly as often as once per week. That never came to fruition, so in the intervening decades, there was less concern about the possibility of a cascading debris event.

But now, with the pace of both government and private launches ramping up to the highest levels ever, space debris is once again on everyone’s radar, Reddy said: “The old fear has come back.”

“A fleck of paint the size of your thumbnail can go through most spacecraft.”

Vulnerable orbits

The most useful orbits around the planet are getting increasingly crowded, and even if humanity stopped launching things into space tomorrow, the debris already in orbit would continue to collide and make the problem worse.

Over the long term, if this problem isn’t addressed, it could spiral into a Kessler syndrome, as the situation can go from bad to catastrophic quickly. “The timeline for the cascading collisional scenario is very short,” Reddy said. “We’re talking anywhere from hours to days to weeks, not months to years to decades.”

The use of a nuclear weapon in orbit, depending on its size and in which orbit it is detonated, could kick off such a cascading scenario. But this isn’t exclusive to nuclear weapons. It’s possible that a bad actor destroying a single, carefully chosen satellite could create a cascade, Reddy said, if they picked a vulnerable target.

In geostationary orbit, for example, there are only so many slots available for satellites in the ring around the Earth’s equator. That makes the slots in high demand, as they are a limited resource. And this scarcity is compounded by the fact that it’s very difficult to remove debris from an orbit so distant, at over 20,000 miles from the Earth’s surface. If these slots are blocked by debris, it could cut off functionality for systems like communications satellites, weather satellites, and navigation satellites.

“That would be really, really bad,” Reddy said. “One satellite explosion big enough would be enough to destroy a lot of assets in geostationary orbit.”

Fears for the future

Although it’s unlikely that any actor would launch a nuclear weapon in space with the specific intention of kicking off a cascading debris effect, it might happen as a consequence of trying to destroy a particular military system. But the debris isn’t the only thing that has experts worried.

Security risk expert Andrew Reddie questioned what it would take to convert the technology for a nuclear anti-satellite weapon into a platform that could deploy nuclear weapons from space to targets on the ground. This would require a reentry vehicle, for example, which doesn’t exist yet but could theoretically be constructed based on existing technology. Nukes launched from space would give less warning time than those launched from the surface, threatening thousands or even millions of people.

It’s not that the deployment of nukes in space is necessarily likely, with no current indication that Russia is developing such a weapon. But it does show how nuclear weapons in space could shift the geopolitical landscape dramatically and why reports of potential space-based nuclear weapons have drawn such condemnation.

“The old fear has come back.”

A matter of global governance

Russian President Vladimir Putin has denied any plans to develop a nuclear anti-satellite weapon and has said that Russia is against the deployment of nuclear weapons in space. And experts agree that Russia takes pride both in its space program and in its role in international governance as a permanent member of the United Nations, though the invasion of Ukraine has shaken the country’s international status and resulted in the suspension of joint space missions with other space agencies.

For the Russians to develop or deploy such an anti-satellite weapon “would undermine their diplomatic efforts,” Johnson said. Russia has a global leadership role in space governance and was a key negotiator in the Outer Space Treaty, and going against that would be self-undermining. “They take their role seriously,” Johnson said.

There is also international pressure from beyond the US and Europe. Even China, which has a space program that is notably separate from other nation’s space programs and does not participate in international projects like the International Space Station, has emphasized that it is against the proliferation of weapons in space. US government representatives are trying to recruit China and India in discouraging Russia from pursuing nuclear anti-satellite technology.

Deploying a weapon in space would be against Russia’s own self-interest, experts argue. Spreading a debris field across an entire orbit limits the ability of everyone to access space, including those who fired the weapon.

However, those effects are not necessarily symmetrical. “The Americans rely on space far more than both Russia and China, so in most domains, if you were to degrade it for everybody, that would be a problem,” Reddie said. “But if you’re degrading space, it’s going to asymmetrically affect the Americans. And the Russians know that.”

This raises the question of what the global consequences might be if — or when — any nation chooses to use a space-based weapon and whether the existing international legal structure could respond to that.

Space debris expert Reddy compared firing such a weapon to flipping a chess board when you’re losing a game: “It’s no longer about winning. It’s ‘I’m losing, so nobody wins.’”

Technology

Here’s your first look at Kratos in Amazon’s God of War show

Published

3 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

Here’s your first look at Kratos in Amazon’s God of War show

Amazon has slowly been teasing out casting details for its live-action adaptation of God of War, and now we have our first look at the show. It’s a single image but a notable one showing protagonist Kratos and his son Atreus. The characters are played by Ryan Hurst and Callum Vinson, respectively, and they look relatively close to their video game counterparts.

There aren’t a lot of other details about the show just yet, but this is Amazon’s official description:

The God of War series storyline follows father and son Kratos and Atreus as they embark on a journey to spread the ashes of their wife and mother, Faye. Through their adventures, Kratos tries to teach his son to be a better god, while Atreus tries to teach his father how to be a better human.

That sounds a lot like the recent soft reboot of the franchise, which started with 2018’s God of War and continued through Ragnarök in 2022. For the Amazon series, Ronald D. Moore, best-known for his work on For All Mankind and Battlestar Galactica, will serve as showrunner. The rest of the cast includes: Mandy Patinkin (Odin), Ed Skrein (Baldur), Max Parker (Heimdall), Ólafur Darri Ólafsson (Thor), Teresa Palmer (Sif), Alastair Duncan (Mimir), Jeff Gulka (Sindri), and Danny Woodburn (Brok).

While production is underway on the God of War series, there’s no word on when it might start streaming.

Technology

300,000 Chrome users hit by fake AI extensions

Published

3 hours ago

February 27, 2026

Press Room

300,000 Chrome users hit by fake AI extensions

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Your web browser may feel like a safe place, especially when you install helpful tools that promise to make your life easier. But security researchers have uncovered a dangerous campaign in which more than 300,000 people installed Chrome extensions pretending to be artificial intelligence (AI) assistants. Instead of helping, these fake tools secretly collect sensitive information like your emails, passwords and browsing activity.

They used familiar names like ChatGPT, Gemini and AI Assistant. If you use Chrome and have installed any AI-related extension, your personal information may already be exposed. Even worse, some of these malicious extensions are still available today, putting more people at risk without their knowing.

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.

More than 300,000 Chrome users installed fake AI extensions that secretly harvested sensitive data. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)

What you need to know about fake AI extensions

Security researchers at browser security company LayerX discovered a large campaign involving 30 malicious Chrome extensions disguised as AI-powered assistants (via BleepingComputer). Together, these extensions were installed more than 300,000 times by unsuspecting users.

Some of the most popular extensions included names like AI Sidebar with 70,000 users, AI Assistant with 60,000 users, ChatGPT Translate with 30,000 users, and Google Gemini with 10,000 users. Another extension called Gemini AI Sidebar had 80,000 users before it was removed.

These extensions were distributed through the official Chrome Web Store, which made them appear legitimate and trustworthy. Even more concerning, researchers found that many of these extensions were connected to the same malicious server, showing they were part of a coordinated effort.

While some extensions have since been removed, others remain available. This means new users could still unknowingly install them and expose their personal data. Here’s the list of the affected extensions:

AI Assistant
Llama
Gemini AI Sidebar
AI Sidebar
ChatGPT Sidebar
Grok
Asking ChatGPT
ChatGBT
Chat Bot GPT
Grok Chatbot
Chat With Gemini
XAI
Google Gemini
Ask Gemini
AI Letter Generator
AI Message Generator
AI Translator
AI For Translation
AI Cover Letter Generator
AI Image Generator ChatGPT
Ai Wallpaper Generator
Ai Picture Generator
DeepSeek Download
AI Email Writer
Email Generator AI
DeepSeek Chat
ChatGPT Picture Generator
ChatGPT Translate
AI GPT
ChatGPT Translation
ChatGPT for Gmail

FAKE AI CHAT RESULTS ARE SPREADING DANGEROUS MAC MALWARE

These malicious tools were listed in the official Chrome Web Store, making them appear legitimate and trustworthy. (LayerX)

How the fake AI Chrome extension attack works

These fake extensions pretend to offer helpful AI features, such as translating text, summarizing emails, or acting as an AI assistant. But behind the scenes, they quietly monitor what you are doing online.

Once installed, the extension gains permission to view and interact with the websites you visit. This allows it to read the contents of web pages, including login screens where you enter your username and password.

In some cases, the extensions specifically targeted Gmail. They could read your email messages directly from your browser, including emails you received and even drafts you were still writing. This means attackers could access private conversations, financial information and sensitive personal details.

The extensions then sent this information to servers controlled by the attackers. Because they loaded content remotely, the attackers could change their behavior at any time without needing to update the extension.

Some versions could also activate voice features through your browser. This could potentially capture spoken conversations near your device and send transcripts back to the attackers.

If you installed one of these extensions, attackers may already have access to extremely sensitive information. This includes your email content, login credentials, browsing habits and possibly even voice recordings.

We reached out to Google for comment, and a spokesperson told CyberGuy that the company “can confirm that the extensions from this report have all been removed from the Google Web Store.”

BROWSER EXTENSION MALWARE INFECTED 8.8M USERS IN DARKSPECTRE ATTACK

Once installed, the extensions could read emails, capture passwords, monitor browsing activity and send the data to attacker-controlled servers. (Bildquelle/ullstein bild via Getty Images)

7 ways you can protect yourself from malicious Chrome extensions

If you have ever installed an AI-related Chrome extension, taking a few simple precautions now can help protect your accounts and prevent further damage.

1) Remove any suspicious or unused browser extensions

On a Windows PC or Mac, open Chrome and type chrome://extensions into the address bar. Review every extension listed. If you see anything unfamiliar, especially AI assistants you don’t remember installing, click “Remove” immediately. Malicious extensions depend on going unnoticed. Removing them stops further data collection and cuts off the attacker’s access to your information.

2) Change your passwords

If you installed any suspicious extension, assume your passwords may be compromised. Start by changing your email password first, since email controls access to most other accounts. Then update passwords for banking, shopping and social media accounts. This prevents attackers from using stolen credentials to break into your accounts.

3) Use a password manager to create and protect strong passwords

A password manager generates unique, complex passwords for each account and stores them securely. This prevents attackers from accessing multiple accounts if one password is stolen. Password managers also alert you if your login credentials appear in known data breaches, helping you respond quickly and protect your identity. Check out the best expert-reviewed password managers of 2026 at Cyberguy.com.

4) Install strong antivirus software and keep it active

Good antivirus software can detect malicious browser extensions, spyware, and other hidden threats. It scans your system for suspicious activity and blocks harmful programs before they can steal your information. This adds an important layer of protection that works continuously in the background to keep your device safe. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com.

5) Use an identity theft protection service

Identity theft protection services monitor your personal data, including email addresses, financial accounts, and Social Security numbers, for signs of misuse. If criminals try to open accounts or commit fraud using your information, you receive alerts quickly. Early detection allows you to act fast and limit financial and personal damage. See my tips and best picks on how to protect yourself from identity theft at Cyberguy.com.

6) Keep your browser and computer fully updated

Software updates fix security vulnerabilities that attackers exploit. Enable automatic updates for Chrome and your operating system so you always have the latest protections. These updates strengthen your defenses against malicious extensions and prevent attackers from taking advantage of known weaknesses.

7) Use a personal data removal service

Personal data removal services scan data broker websites that collect and sell your personal information. They help remove your data from these sites, reducing what attackers can find and use against you. Less exposed information means fewer opportunities for criminals to target you with scams, identity theft or phishing attacks.

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.

Kurt’s key takeaway

Even tools designed to make your life easier can become tools for cybercriminals. Malicious extensions often hide behind trusted names and convincing features, making them difficult to spot. You can significantly reduce your risk by reviewing your browser extensions regularly, removing anything suspicious and using protective tools like password managers and strong antivirus software.

Have you checked your browser extensions recently? 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

Anthropic refuses Pentagon’s new terms, standing firm on lethal autonomous weapons and mass surveillance

Published

15 hours ago

February 26, 2026

Press Room

Anthropic refuses Pentagon’s new terms, standing firm on lethal autonomous weapons and mass surveillance

Less than 24 hours before the deadline in an ultimatum issued by the Pentagon, Anthropic has refused the Department of Defense’s demands for unrestricted access to its AI.

It’s the culmination of a dramatic exchange of public statements, social media posts, and behind-the-scenes negotiations, coming down to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s desire to renegotiate all AI labs’ current contracts with the military. But Anthropic, so far, has refused to back down from its two current red lines: no mass surveillance of Americans, and no lethal autonomous weapons (or weapons with license to kill targets with no human oversight whatsoever). OpenAI and xAI had reportedly already agreed to the new terms, while Anthropic’s refusal had led to CEO Dario Amodei being summoned to the White House this week for a meeting with Hegseth himself, in which the Secretary reportedly issued an ultimatum to the CEO to back down by the end of business day on Friday or else.

In a statement late Thursday, Amodei wrote, “I believe deeply in the existential importance of using AI to defend the United States and other democracies, and to defeat our autocratic adversaries. Anthropic has therefore worked proactively to deploy our models to the Department of War and the intelligence community.”

He added that the company has “never raised objections to particular military operations nor attempted to limit use of our technology in an ad hoc manner” but that in a “narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values” — going on to specifically mention mass domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons. (Amodei mentioned that “partial autonomous weapons … are vital to the defense of democracy” and that fully autonomous weapons may eventually “prove critical for our national defense,” but that “today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons.” He did not rule out Anthropic acquiescing to the military’s use of fully autonomous weapons in the future but mentioned that they were not ready now.)

The Pentagon had already reportedly asked major defense contractors to assess their dependence on Anthropic’s Claude, which could be seen as the first step to designating the company a “supply chain risk” – a public threat that the Pentagon had made recently (and a classification usually reserved for threats to national security). The Pentagon was also reportedly considering invoking the Defense Production Act to make Anthropic comply.

Amodei wrote in his statement that the Pentagon’s “threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.” He also wrote that “should the Department choose to offboard Anthropic, we will work to enable a smooth transition to another provider, avoiding any disruption to ongoing military planning, operations, or other critical missions. Our models will be available on the expansive terms we have proposed for as long as required.”