Technology

• Windows Backup for Organizations launches with a unique twist
• It keeps your Windows settings and a list of your apps
• Disk imaging, file copies and disaster recovery aren’t included

Microsoft has been busy lately adding new features to Windows for business users, but its latest release, Windows Backup for Organizations, is a bit of a misnomer, as it doesn’t actually back up your data.

A new company blog announced the general availability of Windows Backup for Organizations, designed for Windows 10 or 11 Entra joined devices.

However, it’s not a full device backup so disk imaging, file copies or disaster recovery are not covered by the new tool.

Windows Backup for Organizations isn’t quite a full backup tool

The core functionality of the tool is backing up Windows settings and keeping a list of installed Microsoft Store apps. It’ll also restore settings and apps to the Start Menu on Windows 11 (22H2 or later).

Writing in the launch post, Microsoft Product Manager Miranda Leschke noted how it can help admins with resetting or migrating devices, and will support a smooth transition between Windows 10 and 11 – something many organizations have delayed, but an imminent task for many with the impending October 14, 2025 Windows 10 end of life deadline drawing nearer.

Windows 10 22H2 only works for backups, but Windows 11 22H2+ will work with backup and restore. Microsoft’s decision not to include restoration capabilities on its soon-to-be deprecated OS is another notable push towards Windows 11.

Disabled by default, IT admins must configure Backup and Restore policies for Windows Backup for Organizations.

From the point of restoration using the new tool, the remaining Out of the Box Experience (OOBE) is the same. After the OOBE is completed, user profiles and preferences will be automatically restored.

You might also like

• Microsoft may have just saved admins a whole of work (and stress) when it comes to installing vital upgrades
• Fancy an upgrade? These are the best mobile workstations and best business laptops
• We’ve ranked the best cloud backup platforms

• Final Fantasy 14's director, Naoki Yoshida, has shared a statement regarding mods that may "infringe" on other players' enjoyment and the core game
• Yoshida says he has no issue with mods but wants players to be aware of the rules
• He also said sharing the use of NSFW mods online could lead to the game being subject to legal measures by regulators in certain countries

Final Fantasy 14's director, Naoki Yoshida, has issued a warning about the continued use of mods that may "infringe" on other players and also lead to legal troubles.

Last week, it was reported that one of Final Fantasy 14's most popular mods was shut down due to a "legal enquiry". The mod, named Mare Synchronos, was a plug-in that allowed users to sync and view other players' mods in-game, like character customization add-ons.

News of the mod's takedown wasn't received well by users, which later led to the game being review-bombed on Steam.

Now, in a new Final Fantasy 14 blog post, Yoshida has responded to the overall matter of mods, stating that though he "tolerates" the personal use of them and understands that modding culture is "rooted in good intentions", he wants players to be aware of the importance of the game's user agreement.

"In the past twenty or so years, I've seen numerous positive examples of games with fan-made mods that expand upon existing gameplay," Yoshida said. "However, these mods are generally created with a vital premise in mind: they are for personal use only, and the individual player is responsible for the mods they use.

"Furthermore, the mods must not impact the core game, its services, or the intended game design in a negative manner. I personally feel that these rules should be followed by all mod creators and users."

The director adds that if players continue to uphold these rules to enhance their personal enjoyment of the game, he personally sees no reason to track them down or investigate gamers for their use of mods.

He also stressed the importance of two rules in particular: that the mods don't "infringe upon others" and they "do not negatively impact the core game, its services, or intended game design, as mentioned above."

Yoshida continued by offering a lengthy list of examples where mods may infringe on others and impact intended game design, including a scenario where a player may use mods to bypass certain conditions to obtain in-game items, like Ultimate Raid loot.

The director explained that this wouldn't be an issue if it were for personal enjoyment; however, showcasing the loot that wasn't earned through participation to other players in-game would be against the rules and would result in the mod's take down.

"In response, our only options would be to ask that players cease using the mod, or to request that the mod creator removes the functionality causing the problem," Yoshida said. "Of course, we could also implement preventative measures in-game, but this would divert programming resources from other areas, potentially damaging the enjoyment of other players in the long run."

(Image credit: Square Enix)

Similarly, Yoshida said that this would also apply to FFXIV Online Store items that have not been purchased but modded, suggesting it would be unfair to players who have spent real money.

"Some may say that Square Enix is to blame for trying to make money by demanding that players spend extra on optional items," he said. "We operate our servers and data centers twenty-four hours a day, three-hundred-sixty-five days a year with the hope that our players can enjoy a reliable gaming experience. Currently, global inflation is taking its toll at a rapid pace, driving up server electricity costs, the cost of land, and even the price of servers themselves.

"We do not want to increase subscription fees for players, if at all possible--but keeping our game running requires sufficient income. If we start creating a deficit, FFXIV may no longer be able to operate. This is an example of damage dealt to the services we provide."

Finally, Yoshida touched on the matter of NSFW mods, reiterating that if a player decides to mod their character to appear naked, it might fall into the category of personal use and responsibility, but if the user shares screenshots online, "FFXIV itself may be subject to legal measures by regulators in certain countries."

"Laws that regulate the content of video games grow stricter by the year," he said. "These laws are there to protect minors and for a variety of other reasons, but the fact remains that they are tangibly becoming stricter. We have a duty to provide our services in adherence to the laws of all countries where FFXIV is available, and if we are unable to do so, the distribution of our game can be prohibited. This is another example of damage dealt to our services."

The director added that he does not intend for his examples to be a censure on mod users or creators, but asks that players respect the game by enjoying it within the confines of basic rules.

You might also like...

• Final Fantasy 14 director has a pretty simple explanation for why the Monster Hunter Wilds collab will feature Omega – 'In the Monster Hunter team, there are many Warriors of Light'
• Here are the three biggest things we learned from the Hollow Knight: Silksong release date trailer
• Everything announced at Gamescom Opening Night Live 2025 from the Sekiro anime to the new Ghost of Yotei mode

• ReMarkable is teasing a new product launch for September 3
• It could be a more portable e-paper tablet
• We've had three ReMarkable tablets launch so far

We've had three generations of the ReMarkable tablet so far, but there's apparently another one on the way – and all the indications are that we're going to see an e-paper device with a smaller form factor.

ReMarkable has posted a teaser clip advertising a special event for September 3, at 8am ET (that's 5am PT / 1pm BST / 10pm AEST), and a new product launch looks likely.

Based on the very brief glimpse we get of a tablet, and the tagline "something is on the move", it seems portability is being prioritized this time around. It makes sense that ReMarkable might want to release a more pocket-friendly version of its E Ink device.

There are also hints about thicker bezels and color support here, although it's difficult to be certain from such a brief series of shots. If you want to join in with the speculation ahead of Wednesday, head to this Reddit thread.

What I want to see

Having used the ReMarkable 2 extensively, I'm pleased to see that another tablet is on the way from the company: ReMarkable's products have always been reliable and well made, and I think a more portable digital notebook is a good idea.

In terms of what I want to see from the ReMarkable Pocket (or whatever it's called), I think a strong selection of cases is a must: a variety of options for keeping the device well protected on the move, and which offers somewhere to stow the stylus.

Something else I'd really like to see is support for certain third-party note-taking apps. I use Google Keep to organize much of my life, and it would be great to be able bring these notes up on screen, in addition to the existing Google Drive support.

Finally, this might be wishful thinking, but I'd love to see a price as low as ReMarkable can get it. The latest ReMarkable Paper Pro starts at $579 / £559 / AU$929, which is relatively steep, and a more affordable option in a smaller form factor would be most welcome.

You might also like

• Don't make this mistake with your e-paper tablet stylus
• Onyx Boox Go 10.3 review: a versatile alternative to reMarkable
• Daylight claims its tablet screen is better than E Ink

After testing dozens of smartwatches, these are the ones that impressed us the most. From Apple and Samsung to OnePlus and more, here are our top picks to match your budget, lifestyle and phone.

South Park season 27 episode 4 hasn't aired again this week, and it's now the third in a series of ongoing delays. After its controversial premiere, both episodes 2 and 3 have had two-week gaps between them, with episode 4 now following suit (you can expect to see it on September 3 instead).

Paramount has now confirmed this schedule will continue for the entire duration of the 10-episode season, meaning we can now expect the (surely explosive) season finale on November 26.

Initially, the studio hadn't given a reason why, or at least it hadn't publicly. With influential figures in the US Government blasting South Park's parodies on a near-daily basis, I'd already guessed that this could feed into why episodes were taking longer, especially given the Paramount+ exclusive post-credit scenes we're starting to see.

President Trump has been naked in bed with the devil, US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has shot puppies at point blank range, and Towelie's trip to Washington D.C. shone a spotlight on the city's National Guard deployment.

But ahead of South Park season 27 episode 4, we've finally got an explanation – and as it turns out, there are multiple reasons why we're seeing a lag on the launches.

Not only does it feel like a smart move, I also think it's a huge positive. The creators show no signs of slowing down their scathing political parodies, so some breathing space between them could do us all the world of good.

"So much happens right now in just one day with Trump"

Stan, Eric and Kenny will be on our screens until the end of November. (Image credit: Paramount)

According to an interview with Deadline, the season 27 delays initially started with timing episode 2 to release in line with the show's 25th anniversary. Afterwards, a two-week schedule was continued in order to make sure episodes were completely up to date with real-world events.

Deadline's source close to the South Park producers explained, “What they’re doing means this year’s episodes need more time than usual to put together, to finish.

“So much happens right now in just one day with Trump. No one’s going to sacrifice getting it right, even if we have to push getting it to air, and if that makes the season longer, so be it.”

In short, this means that everything is taking more time to make, which isn't surprising in a world with a news cycle that moves at breakneck speed.

What's perhaps more surprising is that Paramount is totally fine with the changes. “We’re not going to argue with what’s working, ” an insider at the studio added. “The numbers are great, the show is getting a lot of attention – if they want to give us a 20-week season for 10-episodes, that’s OK.”

Deadline previously reported that the second episode of Season 27 drew 6.2 million global multi-platform viewers across Comedy Central and Paramount+ in its first three days, numbers which largely came from streaming. Clearly, taking more time is working for everyone, and perhaps this allows creators to cut even deeper with their political parody.

Could this change how comedies, or any streamable series, are released in the future? Very possibly. But for now, there's a certain relief that comes with the empty space between the animated poundings.

With Florida Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna now the latest to clap back at her South Park depiction, the new schedule will likely cool any political jets before anything gets messier than the tension and legal threats we saw through its two-year hiatus.

You might also like

• Beth Dutton and Rip Wheeler spin-off: Everything we know about the sequel series to Yellowstone on Paramount+
• Mayor of Kingstown season 4: everything we know so far about the hit Paramount+ show's return
• New Paramount+ series Avatar: Seven Havens will succeed where the Last Airbender live-action adaptation couldn't, and that should make Netflix panic

• Nintendo Switch 2's second month on sale has been hugely successful
• The console is currently outselling its predecessor by around 75%
• Overall gaming hardware spending reached $384 million as a result

It seems that appetite for the Nintendo Switch 2 isn't going away any time soon, as it's significantly outpacing its predecessor in sales in its second month on store shelves, at least in the US.

That's according to Circana senior director and game industry analyst Mat Piscatella who, shared some Switch 2 sales stats in a recent Bluesky post.

"The Nintendo Switch 2's second month on the market was another explosive one, at least in the US," Piscatella wrote, "where it surpassed 2 million units sold life-to-date, putting it 75% ahead of the unit sales pace set by the Nintendo Switch 1."

According to Piscatella, hardware spending reached $384 million thanks to the Nintendo Switch 2's strong sales performance. That's the highest since July 2008, where consoles on sale at that time included the Nintendo Wii, Nintendo DS, Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PlayStation Portable.

Additionally, Switch 2 exclusive Donkey Kong Bananza entered US July sales charts at #3, only behind the EA Sports MVP Bundle and EA Sports College Football 26, both of which would be expected among the mainstream US gaming audience.

Nintendo Switch 2's second month performance doesn't come as much of a surprise, as the system was already off to an impressively strong start in its launch month of June 2025. At the time, Piscatella told IGN that the Switch 2 had "the biggest launch month sales for any new video game hardware platform," and that Nintendo had largely made enough supply to meet the high demand.

You might also like...

• Black Ops 7 carry forward is no more as devs axe old skins and promise a return to a more 'grounded' Call of Duty
• Early Asus ROG Xbox Ally X benchmark suggests excellent power efficiency and cooling – but I'm still not sold on the handheld
• Square Enix has revealed Final Fantasy 14 Fan Festival 2026 dates, and we'll hopefully learn more about the game's next expansion at the event

• Many AI pilots fail real-world operations and 95% of GenAI pilots don’t reach production, Salesforce claims
• CRMArena-Pro lets enterprises stress-test their AI agents with digital twins
• Two new benchmarks are used for stress-testing AI agents

Salesforce says enterprises are struggling with their AI pilots failing in real-world operations, and has launched CRMArena-Pro, a new service to allow businesses to create a digital twin of their operations to stress-test AI agents before they get deployed.

The company cited recent MIT research which found 95% of generative AI pilots don’t even reach the production stage.

CRMArena-Pro evaluates AI agents on real tasks, like customer service, sales forecasting and supply chain disruptions, but using synthetic data that’s been validated by experts.

Salesforce lets you stress-test AI agents using digital twins

“CRMArena-Pro creates a rigorous, context-rich simulated enterprise environment framework with synthetic data, where it can safely evaluate API calls to relevant systems, as well as the ability to safeguard PII data,” the company wrote in an announcement.

By adding real-world noise into the test environment, CRMArena-Pro can better evaluate performance, strengthen resilience and bridge the gap between pre- and post-deployment.

“The result is AI agents that are capable, consistent, trustworthy, and agentic enterprise-ready.”

Companies can also see how AI agents handle real-world challenges like messy data, legacy systems and complex workflows.

Salesforce noted part of the complexity comes from the vast array of models available to choose today, and knowing which specific model or combination of models to use isn’t so simple.

To that tune, the company has published two new benchmarks to measure agent performance: MCP-Eval for evaluation through synthetic tasks and MCP-Universe, which adds real-world tasks and execution-based evaluators to stress-test agents in complex scenarios.

In a previous post, Salesforce noted that CRMArena-Pro “lays the groundwork for the next frontier: Enterprise General Intelligence” - and for now, users can expect “safe, capable and impactful” AI for all organizations.

You might also like

• We’ve listed the best AI tools and best AI writers
• Salesforce unveils Agentforce 3, its smartest agent platform yet
• Give your workers a helpful boost with the best productivity tools

Data breaches can expose your sensitive personal data. Here's how to protect your Social Security number without spending a dime.

Proper regulation of AI use in academic settings is urgently needed to preserve human learning.

Eyes up here... if only to spot the tearaway who was once booted off Married at First Sight for brawling with one of the other grooms. Let's hope there's no such grappling in Dating Naked UK, as that really would be unbecoming.

You can watch Dating Naked UK season 2 online from anywhere with a VPN and potentially for free.

Premiere: Friday, August 29 (UK, CA)

Stream: Paramount Plus

Use NordVPN to watch any stream

Poor Luke Worley from Clacton is probably never going to live his MAFS UK season 8 ejection down, so he might as well try to learn from it. Plus, nobody applies to be on Dating Naked because their love life's going to plan.

Take Keir, who's drawn to bad boys against her better judgement and has paid the price over and over. Or Matt, who after a year of celibacy is just about fit to burst. A penny for the thoughts of Jordan's mum. The semi-pro footballer says he applied for the show because his mum's been on his back to settle down since 30 appeared on the horizon.

While nudity is well within Connor's comfort zone, it's the prospect of a serious relationship that sends chills running down his bare spine. And we have a philosopher in Nina, who cancels out her wild nights out with green juices and wellness retreats.

Read on as we explain how to watch Dating Naked UK season 2 from anywhere.

Unblock any stream with a VPN

If you're keen to watch Dating Naked UK season 2 but you're away from home and access to the show is geo-blocked, then you could always use a VPN to access it (assuming you're not breaching any broadcaster T&Cs, of course). You may be surprised by how simple it is to do.

Use one of the best VPNs to watch Dating Naked UK from anywhere:

Editors Choice

NordVPN – try the world's best VPN risk-free
We regularly review all the biggest and best VPN providers and NordVPN is our #1 choice. It unblocked every streaming service in testing and it's very straightforward to use. Speed, security and 24/7 support available if you need – it's got it all.

The best value plan is the two-year deal which sets the price at $3 per month, and includes an extra 3 months absolutely FREE. There's also an all-important 30-day no-quibble refund if you decide it's not for you.

– So, try NordVPN 100% risk-free for 30 daysVIEW DEAL ON

How to watch Dating Naked UK season 2 in the UK

Dating Naked UK season 2 premieres with a double-header on Friday, August 29 on Paramount Plus. A pair of new episodes will hit the streamer each week.

A subscription costs £4.99 per month, but if you've never signed up before you'll get a 7-day free trial.

Not in the UK? Anyone from the UK who wants to watch their usual streaming service from abroad can do so by using a VPN.

How to watch Dating Naked UK season 2 in Canada

Dating Naked UK season 2 is exclusive to Paramount Plus in Canada, with a pair of episodes set to land every Friday, starting August 29.

A subscription costs CA$6.99 per month after a 7-day free trial.

Outside Canada when it airs? Simply use a VPN to watch from abroad.

Can you watch Dating Naked UK season 2 in the US?

Paramount Plus is home to Dating Naked UK in the US, but at the time of writing there's no word on when season 2 will arrive. A subscription starts at $7.99 per month after a 7-day free trial.

In the meantime, a VPN will help you tune in if you're an Brit or a Canadian traveling in the US. NordVPN is our recommended provider, and you can find out why with our in-depth NordVPN review.

Can you watch Dating Naked UK season 2 in Australia?

The first season of Dating Naked UK is available to stream on Paramount Plus in Australia, but plans for season 2 are under wraps at the time of publication. Prices start from $AU6.99 per month after a 7-day free trial.

Brits and Canadaians currently away from home can use a VPN to watch Dating Naked UK season 2 from abroad.

Dating Naked UK season 2 trailerDating Naked UK season 2 cast

• Amara, 28
• Connor, 27, factory worker
• Mani, 22
• Jarrakeh, 28, creative artist
• Jordan, 31, semi-pro footballer
• Keir, 25
• Kelsey, 26, car detailer
• Luke, 32, business owner
• Matt, 32
• Nina, 29, party host

Can I watch Dating Naked UK season 2 for free?

Dating Naked UK isn't free-to-air, but viewers in the UK and Canada can make use of the Paramount Plus 7-day free trial to tune in without charge.

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

• The European Commission rejects accusations that the Digital Services Act (DSA) is designed to harm US big tech
• The EU also denies that DSA content-removal requirements constitute internet censorship
• This comes as Trump threatens sanctions against EU member states implementing DSA rules

No, the EU's Digital Service Act (DSA) doesn't constitute internet censorship and isn't designed to harm US big tech giants specifically.

This is the blunt reply from the European Commission on Tuesday, August 26, 2025, in response to accusations made by US President Donald Trump the day before – Reuters reported.

On Monday, in fact, another report from Reuters revealed that the Trump administration was considering imposing sanctions against the European Union and any member states looking to implement DSA rules.

The EU's Digital Service Act seeks to create a safer online environment, said the EU, by limiting the spread of illegal content, including hate speech and child sexual abuse material, and disinformation on digital platforms. It also bans manipulative advertising practices.

Washington sees these actions as restrictions on Americans' freedom of speech, with a government spokesperson confirming to Reuters that authorities are monitoring the situation in Europe "with great concern."

DSA enforcement decisions have so far affected X and Meta, but also Chinese-owned companies like AliExpress, Temu, and TikTok, said an EU spokesperson.

Beyond the EU

(Image credit: Shutterstock / Koshiro K)

US officials' concerns around new digital regulations aren't limited to the EU, though, nor to the Digital Service Act.

In a Truth Social post, Trump shared his intentions to "impose substantial additional tariffs" on all countries that target American tech companies with digital taxes or regulations, "unless these discriminatory actions are removed."

This comes only days after a pledge from the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to at least 13 US tech giants, including Apple, Alphabet (parent firm behind Google), Meta, Microsoft, and Amazon, to resist UK and EU demands to weaken encryption and censor content.

Besides the EU DSA, the FTC raised the alarm about two UK laws in particular – the Online Safety Act and Investigatory Powers Act.

US officials have been critical about the latter, following a Technical Capability Notice (TCN) issued under the law that hit Apple in February and led the tech giant to remove its advanced end-to-end encryption protection from iCloud in the UK market. The UK, however, has now agreed to drop its Apple encryption backdoor request, in a victory for Washington.

At the end of July, mandatory age verification in the UK was also enforced as per the Online Safety Act, age-gating not just adult-only content, but also so-called legal but harmful material across multiple platforms like social media, dating apps, and even music streaming services, like Spotify.

Millions of Brits have so far turned to the best VPN apps to bypass age checks, mostly for fear of the privacy and security consequences of sharing their most sensitive data with third parties.

You might also like

• The Online Safety Act isn't just about age verification – end-to-end encryption is also at risk
• The EU could be scanning your WhatsApp chats by October 2025 
• Apple and Meta set to face fines for alleged breaches of EU DMA

• Samsung has announced an event on September 4
• We'll likely see the Galaxy Tab S11 series and the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE
• Other leaks have given us a clear idea of what to expect from the Galaxy Tab S11 series

It’s a busy time for smartphone launches, because not only has the Google Pixel 10 series just launched, with the iPhone 17 series likely to land in a matter of weeks, but Samsung has also now announced a new launch event.

This will take place on September 4 at 5:30am ET / 2:30am PT / 10:30am BST / 7:30pm AEST, and it will be streamed live on Samsung’s YouTube channel.

So what can you expect? Well, Samsung hasn’t named any specific devices in its event invite, but it has said that we’ll see “premium AI tablets” and “the newest member of the Galaxy S25 family”, which almost certainly means the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 series and the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE respectively.

Specs and images are already out in the wild

Thanks to leaks and rumors we also have a good idea of what to expect from these devices, and in fact there are some new leaks about the Galaxy Tab S11 series.

First up, leaker @MysteryLupin has shared a full specs list for the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11. This mentions an 11-inch 1,600 x 2,560 display with a 120Hz refresh rate, an included S Pen stylus, a MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus chipset, 12GB of RAM, 512GB of storage, a microSD card slot, an IP68 rating, and an 8,400mAh battery with 45W charging.

The list also mentions a 13MP rear camera, a 12MP front-facing one, four stereo speakers, a thickness of just 5.5mm, and a weight of 484g.

So the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 sounds like an accomplished slate going by this specs list, and the Samsung Galaxy Tab S11 Ultra should be even better. For that, Android Headlines has shared some renders and videos, providing a good sense of what it might look like.

(Image credit: Android Headlines)

You can see the slate in gray and silver colors, and it’s shown with slim bezels and a small notch, with a dual-lens camera on the back. An S Pen stylus and a keyboard accessory are also pictured.

Some of these images also include specs, mentioning a 14.6-inch display, which based on previous leaks will probably have an 1,848 x 2,960 resolution. We’ve also heard in previous leaks that the Galaxy Tab S11 Ultra could have a MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus chipset, 16GB of RAM, a 12MP main camera, a 13MP ultra-wide one, and an 11,600mAh battery with 45W charging.

As for the Samsung Galaxy S25 FE, there’s no new information on that, but previous S25 FE leaks point to a 6.7-inch 120Hz screen, an Exynos 2400 chipset, 8GB of RAM, and 128GB or 256GB of storage.

They also mention 50MP, 12MP, and 8MP cameras on the back, a 12MP one on the front, a battery of either 4,500mAh or 4,900mAh, and 45W charging.

You might also like

• The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra could have major changes to its cameras and design, but one key spec might be lacking
• The Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra could have a privacy-boosting AI trick built into its screen – here’s how it works
• Two key specs leak for the Galaxy S26 – and we may get a battery upgrade at last

If Zero Trust actually worked like the industry said it would, VPNs would’ve disappeared years ago. Instead, they’re booming. We’ve all heard the warnings, seen the vendor pitches, and read enough LinkedIn posts to fill several lifetimes: Zero trust is supposed to be here.

And yet, despite all that hype, the business VPN market isn’t just alive — it's thriving, projected to nearly double from $5.7 billion in 2024 to well over $10 billion by 2033.

The Comfort of the Familiar

I wrote my first VPN — Tunnel Vision — back in 1998, for the first customer of my first startup. Later we replaced it with an IPsec key manager. Then I wrote sshuttle, a sort of VPN built on top of SSH. At Google, I ended up writing a multicast VPN tool we called "frobnicast" (don’t ask). And finally, I co-founded yet another VPN company to try fixing this once and for all. That makes it five VPNs so far. As the meme goes, we have become exceedingly efficient at it.

Why do we keep writing new VPNs? Because the old ones suck. But honestly, it's not just VPNs that suck — it’s TCP/IP that sucks. If IPv4 had been encrypted by default and access-controlled from the beginning and didn't run out of IP addresses and IPv6 had successfully rolled out, we wouldn’t need VPNs. Every generation of these tools has been a workaround for something broken further down the stack.

Still, businesses don’t let go of familiar tools easily. I once wrote that “not changing stuff is amazingly powerful as a product strategy.” VPNs are dependable. Or at least, they’re the devil we know. They’re built into enterprise security bundles, they’re in the onboarding checklist, and they’ve been “good enough” for long enough that most teams have figured out how to live with them.

But when a tool sticks around long after its design goals are obsolete — like my old dialer program WvDial, still popular decades after modems became irrelevant — it’s worth asking why. In WvDial’s case, the answer was simple: everything else was worse. That story still applies to VPNs.

When Security Gets in the Way

According to recent research, this comfort comes at a cost. Over 83% of engineers admit to bypassing their company's security controls simply to get work done. Worse yet, 68% retain access to internal systems after leaving their employers, exposing critical gaps in the security lifecycle. Yet, despite these clear risks, only 10% of professionals feel their current VPN "works well."

So, VPNs linger not because they're ideal, but because migrating fully to zero trust isn’t trivial. It’s not a product you can buy; it’s a shift in how you think. Continuous verification, least privilege access, and identity-first networking sound simple until you try to retrofit them into a sprawling, 20-year-old IT architecture.

The VPN Misconception

There’s a common belief that VPNs are fundamentally insecure. They’re not. But the traditional enterprise VPN model, the one that drops you inside the perimeter and lets you wander freely, is dangerous. That’s like giving everyone a master key to your office building.

A better model grants access one step at a time, based on who you are, what you need right now, and where you’re coming from. Microsegmentation. It’s not about banning tunnels — it’s about more, smaller tunnels, each with its own control valve.

Where Zero Trust Really Begins

The most secure approach is one where identity management is everything. Not where you are, not what subnet you’re on, not whether you’re in the office. Identity. Strong authentication, hardware-backed keys, just-in-time access.

But identity isn’t easy. Our survey found only 29% of organizations have adopted identity-based access control at scale. Even fewer use automation. Many still rely on spreadsheets and service account credentials that outlive the employees who set them up.

So security becomes a tax. It slows people down. And when security gets in the way, people route around it. That’s why VPN fatigue is real — and growing.

Yet, there's hope. Nearly half of surveyed companies are consolidating fragmented tools, embracing automation, and experimenting with adaptive policies. But more interestingly, they're starting to rethink their whole approach.

Security and engineering teams are collaborating instead of clashing. They're designing systems that work with people, not against them. AI tools are emerging — not to replace humans, but to help notice the things humans miss: a sudden pattern change, a weird login time, an unexpected access request.

More companies are adopting modular, policy-driven systems. Instead of writing 50 firewall rules, they define intent: "this kind of app talks to that kind, under these conditions." That’s not Zero Trust as a checklist — it’s Zero Trust as infrastructure.

A Pragmatic Path Forward

Zero trust isn’t a product you install. It’s a direction you walk in.

Start by reducing implicit trust — wherever you find it. Use strong identity through encryption, not IP addresses. Make credentials short-lived. Assume the worst. Break your network into zones. Shrink the blast radius.

But do it gradually. Nobody rips out all their networking in a day. Choose one high-value system and zero-trustify it. Learn. Repeat.

VPNs will stick around a while, not because they’re good, but because everything else is hard or immature. But as we’ve seen with tools like WvDial, still in use long after its time, familiarity isn’t the same as fitness. The future belongs to systems that embrace the complexity of real-world access — and make it feel simple.

I don't want to write VPNs, I don't want to deploy VPNs, I just want to solve real problems. But we can't solve the real problems without a working network. So here I am with a $1.5B company still selling VPNs. Sure it's maybe the best VPN. But it looks like I'll be continuing to do it for years, so that other people can finally solve real problems.

And if we finally get it right this time, maybe we can stop reinventing the same broken tunnel — one VPN at a time.

We've listed the best VPN deals.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

• Three in five firms would pick UK over Europe, APAC and US for tech investments, Barclays report finds
• Tech companies saw cash flows and savings rise, overdrafts reduce
• Further government support is needed for long-term support

New research from Barclays has claimed tech firms are increasingly seeing the UK as an attractive place to invest, with 62% of tech leaders favoring the UK over Europe and nearly as many favoring the UK over APAC (61%) and the US (60%).

A strong customer base, skilled workers with a diverse talent pool and fast consumer adoption of tech were cited as key influencers behind the UK’s potential success.

Three in four also noted the UK’s economic climate supports growth (76%) and that its political landscape will help over the next three years (75%).

Tech firms are investing in the UK

Half of the 500 UK-based technology leaders surveyed said they now plan to increase AI investments by 20% over the next 12 months with almost all of them (95%) reporting increasing client demand for AI products and services.

Thanks to the healthy landscape in the UK, 70% of the tech firms surveyed plan to increase capex by an average of 8.9% this year.

Separate Barclays data found that tech business cash flows rose by 1.7% between Q1 2024 and Q1 2025, and the tech sector had the higher increase in savings account balances, up 21.5%. Overdraft usage also fell 26.2% despite borrowing remaining relatively flat, suggesting increased financial health.

“There’s a clear sense that the UK is holding its own on the global tech stage, with founders and leaders increasingly seeing the UK as one of the best places in the world to grow and scale,” Head of Technology, Media & Telecoms & Innovation Banking Helena Sans commented.

Looking ahead, 72% agree that government backing is essential to long-term growth. This includes specialized funding programs (44%), support to attract international investors (37%), enhanced tax incentives for equity investments (36%) and startup and SME grants (36%).

You might also like

• We’ve listed the best AI tools and best AI writers
• The best online collaboration tools can help make you more efficient
• UK firms are investing heavily in new tech - but will it make any difference?

We spoke with experts to determine the best healthy foods for cooking in your air fryer. They're also quick and easy to prep.

From the war in Ukraine, to the Middle East, and escalating tensions in the South China Sea, the threat of conflict is forcing governments and businesses to confront an uncomfortable truth that digital systems are not immune to geopolitical pressure.

At London Tech Week recently UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that the way that war is being fought “has changed profoundly,” adding that technology and AI are now “hard wired” into national defense. It was a stark reminder that IT infrastructure management must now be viewed through a security lens and that businesses need to re-evaluate data management technologies and practices to ensure they are not left out in the cold.

Easier said than done. According to recent research from Civo, 83% of UK IT leaders say geopolitics threatens their ability to control data and 61% view sovereignty as a strategic priority, yet only 35% know exactly where their data resides. That’s not just a compliance gap. It’s a sign that infrastructure, policy and strategy are still out of sync.

Data sovereignty used to be a conversation for the policy teams and legal departments. Not anymore. Regulatory fragmentation, rising cyber risk, and increasingly complex data ecosystems are forcing organizations to treat sovereignty as a live operational concern. Whether it’s knowing who can access your AI training data or ensuring a healthcare provider meets national residency requirements, data sovereignty now defines what businesses can and cannot do.

The EU Data Act, the UK's evolving position (the UK is no longer bound by the EU Data Act but it remains closely aligned in practice to preserve data adequacy and ensure the continued free flow of data with the EU), and the increasing stringency of critical infrastructure policies, are starting to shape what enterprise resilience should look like.

As Lord Ricketts noted in the House of Lords in October last year, “the safe and effective exchange of data underpins our trade and economic links with the EU and co-operation between our law-enforcement bodies.” That trust depends on demonstrating a clear and enforceable approach to data control.

For many, public cloud services have created a false sense of flexibility. Moving fast is not the same as moving safely. Data localization, jurisdictional control, and security policy alignment are now critical to long-term strategy, not barriers to short-term scale. So where does that leave enterprise IT? Essentially, it leaves us with a choice - design for agility with control, or face disruption when the rules change.

Modern infrastructure needs to be sovereignty-aware

Sovereignty-aware infrastructure isn’t about isolation. It’s about knowing where your data is, who can access it, how it moves, and what policies govern it at each stage. That means visibility, auditability, and the ability to adjust without rebuilding every time a new compliance rule appears.

A hybrid multicloud approach gives organizations the flexibility while keeping data governance central. It’s not about locking into one cloud provider or building everything on-prem. It’s about policy-driven control across environments, managing workloads through the context of data.

For example, a financial services firm may need to keep customer transaction data within UK borders, but still wants to run analytics in the cloud. With the right architecture, workloads can move, but sensitive data stays governed. That’s sovereignty in practice, not theory.

Of course, generative AI introduces a new layer of complexity. Training models on private data, deploying inference at the edge, or simply sharing prompts between locations adds pressure to already stretched governance models.

And while many organizations have rushed to build or adopt AI tools, few have aligned these efforts with data residency or compliance. Sovereignty isn’t just about storage anymore. It’s about compute, access patterns, and understanding how third-party models interact with your data.

Building with sovereignty in mind

Edge and sovereign cloud capabilities will be essential here. But they only work if infrastructure teams are given the mandate and support to build with sovereignty in mind. That means cross-functional collaboration between legal, compliance, and IT. It also means choosing platforms that support location-aware deployment and policy enforcement from day one.

According to Nutanix’s recent public sector sovereignty research, 94% of public sector organizations are already using GenAI tools, yet 92% say they could do more to secure those workloads, and 81% say their infrastructure needs improvement to support sovereignty requirements. That says everything you need to know about the challenges facing both public and private organizations. Complexity has clouded judgement and capability.

And yes, customers want to know where their data is, of course they do. Partners also want to understand how it’s being used. With regulators increasingly expecting transparency, not just tick-box compliance, sovereignty, in this context, becomes a proxy for trust.

This is particularly important in sectors like healthcare, education, and government. But it’s not limited to them. Any business operating in or across regulated markets needs to demonstrate control. Not because it’s a checkbox, but because it’s now fundamental to continuity and reputation.

So where do you go from here?

First, get clear on where your data is and what laws apply. That’s not always simple. Next, review your infrastructure to see if it can support location-aware controls, hybrid deployment, and detailed auditing.

Then, consider where GenAI and future workloads are headed. Are you prepared to scale them without breaching sovereignty requirements? Can your teams adapt quickly as policies change?

Finally, treat sovereignty not as a constraint, but as a core part of your design strategy. The organizations that do this well won’t just be compliant, they’ll be more resilient, more transparent, and better prepared for what comes next.

Because in a world where data moves faster than policy, the ability to stay in control isn’t just good governance, it’s good business. And when geopolitics forces the issue, it might just be the nudge needed to get sovereignty right.

We list the best data migration tools to help manage your files.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

Picture the scene. The head of IT security at a major business has just managed their team through several weeks of grueling work in containment and recovery after the latest ransomware attack. Their critical systems are back online, but after constant crunch time and sleepless nights, the team is visibly fraying; morale is low, anxiety is high, and there is more than one empty desk where senior personnel have taken extended sick leave.

This kind of scenario rarely gets attention in the press, where the focus of cyberattacks is on profit and loss, the impact on customers and the bottom line. But serious attacks take their toll on security teams too, and the aftermath can persist for months, leaving the organization even more vulnerable to future threats.

True cyber resilience, then, cannot be measured solely by systems restored or data decrypted - it must also factor in the people whose well-being determines not just how swiftly an organization recovers but whether it can withstand the next digital onslaught.

The hidden internal impact of an attack

The impact of an attack is typically weighed by system downtime, lost business, and potential reputational, legal and regulatory damage. Successful cyber strategies are measured in terms of key metrics like mean time to detect and respond to incidents.

But when the smoke clears and systems are back online, the human cost to personnel dealing with the attack is rarely tallied in stakeholder reports.

A landmark RUSI and University of Kent study found that cybersecurity personnel frequently experience PTSD-like symptoms, from panic attacks to insomnia, long after a crisis has been resolved.

This results in a second wave of disruption as sick leave and diminished morale ripples through the department and goes on to impact the rest of the company. Burnt-out IT and security teams will struggle to keep up the company’s baseline security, further increasing its risk exposure.

One major financial services firm in the University of Kent’s study reflected that placing its exhausted engineers on gardening leave immediately after a ransomware crisis could have averted “months and months” of subsequent sickness absence and spared the organization the hidden costs of burnout.

In short, serious attacks like ransomware don’t just hold data hostage; they also trap people in a cycle of exhaustion and fear. If organizations treat staff wellbeing as an afterthought rather than a key element in the front-line defense, they risk allowing human capital to become the weakest link in their cyber-resilience strategy.

The growing cyber leadership crisis

While the personnel on the frontline of incident response and containment are suffering from stress and overwork, things are often even worse higher up the chain. CISOs and other senior security leaders are usually held ultimately accountable for any failure to prevent or contain a breach, and it’s a responsibility that weighs heavily.

Leaders may be held personally responsible for crises they may lack the budget, headcount or organizational clout to address. Adding to the strain, success in this field frequently remains invisible: a CISO and their team may stop hundreds of daily attack attempts without fanfare, yet a single breach can spell career-ending catastrophe.

Putting in extra hours to stay on top of this workload is standard practice and our research found that 98% of security leaders admit to routinely logging an extra nine hours a week on top of contracted time as they attempt to keep ahead, with 15% pushing beyond sixteen hours overtime.

Soberingly, over half of the respondents said they are actively exploring new roles. This would be a troubling statistic for any industry, but it’s especially damaging in the cybersecurity field grappling with a long-term skills drought. When an IT security leader leaves, they take years of hard-won experience and knowledge with them, leaving the company’s security on less stable footing.

Organizations must protect their security talent

If the individuals responsible for your defenses are exhausted, no firewall can effectively prevent the relentless tide of burnout. Enterprises must integrate human resilience into their incident-response framework, a process that commences well before an alert is triggered.

However, it need not be a resource-heavy exercise for the organization. For example, our research found that 65% of organizations already offer flexible hours and 62% enable hybrid or remote working as standard. Simple measures like this grant staff a sense of control and space to recharge.

On a larger scale, enterprises need to ensure they have a framework in place to protect security personnel, especially leadership roles where the heaviest burden falls. CISOs need to feel empowered on a strategic level with the tools and influence to properly protect the company, not left struggling to make do.

When an incident does occur, the aftermath and recovery phase should focus on forward-looking conversations about what happened and what can be improved for next time. This support is even more important as we see a growing trend towards personal accountability and legal liability when procedures for reporting are not followed.

Removing the stigma of security stress

Alongside specific security processes, there’s a strong psychological element here too. The high-stress nature of cybersecurity should be openly acknowledged and accommodated, not treated as a burden that CISOs should conceal. Conversations around mental health should be normalized, and companies should consider wellbeing checks to spot early warning signs of burn out.

Communication is a key part of this. During an incident, the security team should feel connected to the company they are protecting, not in isolation, and should have a reporting process for feeding back on challenges and concerns if they need additional support.

When an attack has been resolved, a team wellbeing check should be a standard part of the post-incident process. Not every team member will have the same resilience in the face of a stressful crisis, and not every incident will hit the same. Businesses must be aware of who is struggling and provide support to them as needed.

Resilience beyond recovery

Ransomware may be a security issue, but its true impact plays out in human terms: sleepless nights, frayed nerves, and the talent exodus that follows unaddressed burnout.

By incorporating people-first measures into your cyber-resilience strategy, you can ensure that your organization won’t be weakened from within after a breach. The true test of resilience shouldn’t be solely about restoring systems quickly; it should also assess how effectively you protect and preserve the individuals who defend them.

We list the best firewall for small business.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

For many years, application security (AppSec) occupied a small technical niche within cybersecurity and was rarely seen as a critical boardroom-level priority. Today, though, we can see awareness shifting.

In recent research conducted by Checkmarx, nearly half of CISOs said they believe buyers now factor AppSec into purchasing decisions, showing its increased strategic weight in business operations.

Yet there’s still a stark disconnect between how AppSec is seen and how it’s put into practice. Just 39% of respondents felt that their business operations currently run on secured applications.

With AppSec now recognized as critical to business resilience, it often falls short in execution. To close the implementation gap, CISOs must lead a charge in rethinking governance, culture, and scale.

AppSec ownership is shifting but visibility is suffering

As software development cycles accelerate and architectures grow more complex, security responsibilities are moving closer to the code, and in nearly half of software-based companies, security oversight has moved outside the CISO’s office.

Instead, our research found that development or product teams are now just as likely to own AppSec decisions. This shift makes operational sense: embedding security earlier in the SDLC enables scalable protection without sacrificing delivery speed, but it can introduce visibility gaps across teams and pipelines.

Decentralizing AppSec typically introduces fragmentation. On average, organizations juggle more than 11 security tools, many of which are not integrated into a coherent workflow. Without central oversight, CISOs risk losing track of how security is being applied - or where it’s falling short. Inconsistent practices, “shadow security” workarounds, and gaps in coverage become more likely when security policies aren't uniformly applied.

This shift also alters the flow of influence within the company. Developers increasingly have veto power over tools that interrupt their workflows, which means security can take a back seat if the two teams aren’t able to collaborate effectively.

If AppSec is to scale effectively, governance must evolve along with it. That means enabling secure practices without enforcing bottlenecks and without losing visibility in the process. CISOs have a critical role to play here, ensuring that security is implemented smoothly as a set of guardrails rather than roadblocks.

DevSecOps maturity remains low

Despite the push for “shift left” practices and the proliferation of AppSec tools, most organizations lack maturity in their security integration. Of the CISOs in our research just 20% reported “high” or “very high” DevSecOps maturity. Meanwhile, 70% said that at least half of their applications still lack adequate security coverage. This is an alarmingly high figure when considering how important applications have become to most operations.

Part of the problem is that early-stage security integration doesn’t extend far enough. Many teams focus on scanning during development but neglect the runtime and deployment phases where vulnerabilities can still emerge. Others adopt tools without embedding them into daily workflows, leading to alert fatigue or missed risks.

A lack of training also compounds the issue. Developers are not typically trained in security practices and often lack the context or time to triage and fix security findings. This is made even more challenging when results are delivered through disconnected tools or outside their environment. The result is a culture of firefighting, responding to issues late in the lifecycle instead of designing resilient code from the start.

To close the maturity gap, organizations must adopt a layered approach: automated scanning at every stage, context-aware training, and close collaboration between platform engineering and AppSec teams. Maturity isn’t an issue of coverage, it’s about consistency, scalability, and trust between disciplines.

What CISOs must prioritize in 2025

CISOs are best placed to close the gap between strategy and execution in AppSec. Achieving this requires a new strategy built around four key factors: governance, collaboration, alignment and scalability.

Setting down governance

CISOs can no longer manage AppSec through centralized control alone. Instead, they must define a clear governance model for their teams, setting policies, KPIs and risk thresholds that can be embedded into automated workflows.

That means guiding platform teams to select tools that enforce policies programmatically, reducing the need for manual intervention. Security should be part of the pipeline, not a separate gate at the end of it.

Fostering collaboration

With ownership moving closer to developers, CISOs need to use their influence to establish a strong collaborative culture that works for everyone. Start by aligning KPIs across security and development teams to avoid competing incentives.

Then invest in enablement: training tailored to different skill levels, just-in-time guidance, and workflows that stay inside the IDE. Security champions and mentor programs can speed up cultural change, embedding expertise where it matters most.

AppSec risk is business risk

We consistently find that too few CISOs are translating AppSec risks into business terms. While 62% report metrics to the board, only 25% frame those risks in terms of business impact, such as reputational damage, regulatory exposure or lost revenue.

Without this alignment, security will remain a siloed concern until it’s too late and a breach occurs. CISOs must strengthen the AppSec link to wider business goals, reinforcing its role in customer trust, product resilience and competitive differentiation.

Driving scalability with the right technology

Fragmented tooling is one of the biggest barriers to effective AppSec. Consolidating around a platform approach that spans legacy and modern environments enables consistency, reduces noise and enhances developer productivity.

Scalable models should use automation where possible, with human input where needed. That’s how you keep pipelines moving fast - without losing control or visibility over security.

Taking AppSec from bottleneck to enabler

AppSec’s evolution from technical concern to business priority is undeniable, but implementation still lags. As ownership shifts to development teams, the role of the CISO must also evolve to keep security front and centre.

The challenge is no longer about control, but coordination. Governance, culture and technology must all align to embed security where it counts without creating friction. CISOs who lead with vision, build developer trust and champion scalable solutions can transform AppSec from a potential bottleneck into a force multiplier for resilience, speed and long-term business value.

We feature the best DevOps tools.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

Let’s be clear: the UK is no longer preparing for hybrid threats; we’re already living through them. What happened at RAF Brize Norton wasn’t just a protest gone too far. It was an act of sabotage against operational military aircraft, carried out using scooters, paint, and basic hand tools.

The fact that it succeeded tells us everything we need to know about the state of our national security posture: fragmented, reactive, and dangerously misaligned with the threat landscape.

If we neglect the physical layer, we risk undermining all the effort, investment, and capability built into our digital resilience. Security must be holistic—from the perimeter fence to the network firewall, from the patrol route to the SOC dashboard.

And right now? That cohesion simply doesn’t exist.

Hybrid Threats Are No Longer Theoretical

Driven by geopolitical instability and evolving warfare tactics, hybrid threats, where physical and cyber attacks are combined, are becoming the norm.

Across the Middle East and Eastern Europe, digitally coordinated sabotage operations (like drone strikes on critical infrastructure) have exposed the weaknesses in siloed defenses. These aren’t one-off incidents; they’re deliberate, repeatable attack models.

And the UK is not immune. Intelligence sources point to repeated probing of our critical infrastructure, with Russia frequently suspected. Whether it's energy, transport, or defense, our infrastructure is now part of the battlefield.

Why Security Must Be Holistic

Securing critical infrastructure isn’t just a technical challenge, it’s a leadership one.

You wouldn’t install a high-end alarm system at home and then leave the front door wide open. But that’s exactly what many organizations are doing: investing millions in cybersecurity while physical security is neglected or under-tested.

Across defense, utilities, transport hubs, and data centers, the weakest links are often the most mundane: an unchecked fence, a blind CCTV angle, an unmanned gate. These gaps may seem small until they’re exploited.

The reality is stark: we are now in the grey zone, where adversaries operate below the threshold of open conflict, using disruption, ambiguity, and deniability to advance strategic goals.

Brize Norton: Exposing Systematic Failures

The breach at RAF Brize Norton was not complex or sophisticated; it succeeded because no one expected it.

Two individuals, using basic tools and repurposed fire extinguishers, accessed an active runway, disabled aircraft engines with paint, and left undetected. These aircraft support critical UK combat operations, including missions in Ukraine.

This wasn’t symbolic; it had real tactical impact. And it exposed systemic failures, not just in physical security, but in how cyber and physical defenses fail to align.

This is exactly what modern adversaries exploit: seams, blind spots, and bureaucratic silos.

Heathrow: Civil Infrastructure, Same Problem

Just weeks earlier, a fire at a 1960s-era substation shut down Heathrow, cancelling over 1,300 flights and stranding 300,000 passengers.

The cause remains under investigation, but the implications are clear: fragile systems, single points of failure, and national disruption caused by one overlooked asset.

Whether accidental or deliberate, this is the playbook for hybrid adversaries: exploit basic vulnerabilities to cause disproportionate impact.

Commercial Organizations Are Not Exempt

It’s a dangerous fallacy to assume that only critical national infrastructure is being targeted. Commercial organizations—from logistics and manufacturing firms to data centers, retail giants, and tech companies—are increasingly in the firing line. The same hybrid tactics being used against government and military targets are being adapted and deployed against the private sector, often with devastating results.

Why? Because attackers don’t care about sector boundaries. They care about impact, access, and leverage. A warehouse fire, a compromised fulfilment center, or a disabled payment gateway network can ripple into national disruption. These aren’t just economic losses; they’re strategic vulnerabilities.

Commercial supply chains are deeply intertwined with national resilience. A major cyber-physical incident at a privately owned port, a cloud provider, or a high-throughput distribution hub could disrupt the economy, erode public trust, or even compromise defense readiness.

Yet too many businesses still view security as a compliance checkbox rather than a strategic function. The result is a security architecture that assumes peace while operating in a contested domain.

To ignore this is to misread the modern threat landscape. Commercial entities must be just as prepared, because when disruption is the goal, anyone with critical throughput becomes a target.

What the UK Is Failing to Grasp

The critical misunderstanding across much of UK security leadership is this: these threats don’t operate in silos. So why do we defend them as if they do?

Many boards still treat cyber and physical security as entirely separate disciplines, with different teams, budgets, and reporting lines. That’s not resilience. That’s friction. And attackers thrive in that friction.

Here’s what’s driving the risk:

Fragmented defenses: Physical security teams don’t have visibility into digital threats, and vice versa.

Poor system segmentation: A cyber breach often leads straight to operational control. A physical breach often exposes the network.

Leadership indecision: Waiting for a regulation to act is like waiting for a break-in to install locks.

What Must Change Now

We don’t need more strategy documents. We need decisive, integrated action. Here’s where to start:

1.Unify Security Governance

Cyber and physical security must be led from a unified framework. Shared threat models. Shared reporting. Unified response protocols.

2.Design for Containment, Not Just Prevention

Breaches will happen. What matters is whether they cascade. Resilience requires segmentation, isolated backups, manual overrides, and tested recovery drills.

3.Treat OT as a Primary Attack Surface

Operational Technology (OT) and Industrial Control Systems (ICS) can no longer be afterthoughts. They must be logged, monitored, and secured like your most sensitive data environments.

4.Train for Real-World, Blended Threats

Exercises must mirror reality: power loss during a cyberattack, disinformation campaigns during a physical breach. Complexity is the new normal. Ensure your teams are ready.

5.Conduct Regular Physical Penetration Testing

Just as networks are stress-tested through red teaming, physical sites must be tested through controlled breaches.

These exercises reveal blind spots in perimeter security, access control, and response protocols, and turn “security theatre” into actual resilience.

6.Act Without Waiting for Mandates

If Brize Norton didn’t drive change, what will? The next incident may come at a greater cost. Waiting for regulatory change is a dereliction of leadership.

Hybrid threats are real. The UK is already a target. Our critical infrastructure, both military and civilian, as well as commercial, is being tested.

Brize Norton and Heathrow are not anomalies. They are indicators of systemic failure: a lack of joined-up thinking, a failure to treat physical and cyber risk as inseparable.

If we don’t act now and build holistic defenses from the fence to the firewall, we are set to learn the next lesson at a much higher cost.

The best internet security suites and the best antivirus software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

I spent a year wrestling with MagSafe cases on my Google Pixel 9, from misaligned rings to hot, flaky charging. That’s why Pixelsnap (native magnets plus Qi2) is the only Pixel 10 feature I care about.

While my colleagues wax lyrical about camera and AI upgrades, I’m just here reliving a year with the Pixel 9. I’ve always envied Apple’s MagSafe wizardry, but adding compatibility with third-party cases is an exercise in frustration.

Sure, the overly rigid dust- and smudge-prone case I ordered from Google alongside my Pixel 9 last year works just fine. But of the eight others from less exacting brands, seven misaligned the magnetic ring and charging failed or limped along while getting uncomfortably hot.

My magnetic car mount barely held, my favorite accessories went flying and even Google’s own non-magnetic bedside charger was fussy about case thickness and alignment.

Robust, reliable magnetic wireless fast charging in the car was surprisingly hard to achieve with the Pixel 9 (Image credit: Lindsay Handmer)

I found workarounds for most issues, but my white whale was tougher: MagSafe wireless charging in my car that could keep up with navigation and music streaming.

After months of trial, error and too many Amazon returns, I finally found a combination that worked. It’s good, but not great, and needs to hog an air vent in summer to avoid overheating.

So as far as I’m concerned, Pixelsnap is the headline Google act this year and everything else is just nice to have.

Finally, there's better charging and the freedom to do without a magnetic case! Or, for people like me (who tussle with gravity a lot), the relief of knowing that even if using a case, proper alignment is now baked into the design.

Pixelsnap 101

Pixelsnap wireless charger with stand (Image credit: John Velasco)

Not sure what I'm on about? You can read more about all the new features in our Pixel 10 review or check out our deeper dive on the new tech, but I've included the key Pixelsnap points below.

• Pixelsnap is on the Pixel 10, Pixel 10 Pro, Pixel 10 Pro XL and Pixel 10 Pro Fold.
• Uses built-in magnets, plus Qi2 for MagSafe-compatible wireless charging and accessories.
• Automatic alignment, faster charging, stronger hold.
• Charge speeds: 15W or up to 25W on the Pixel 10 Pro XL.
• Backward compatibility with most MagSafe chargers and accessories.

So what’s the bad news?

Pixelsnap is a big step up, but it’s not perfect. While not a feature I used too often, Google has removed wireless power sharing to make the new magnetic setup work.

Pixelsnap wireless charging speeds aren't consistent either – it maxes out at 25W on the Pixel 10 Pro XL, but the rest of the lineup is limited to a slower 15W.

MagSafe cross-compatibility is a huge win, but the magnetic accessory landscape is still messy, and older non-Qi2 chargers won’t hit full speed, so you’ll likely need to upgrade.

Not to mention, Qi2 is still hard to find. Case in point: I collect power banks like Pokémon for our best portable chargers guide and comparatively few models currently support 15W or 25W charging on the Pixel 10.

Now, while Pixelsnap is what I care about most, for everyone else, it might not be the standout reason to upgrade to the Pixel 10. But it does remove one of my biggest annoyances with the Pixel lineup, and for that I'm grateful.

Have a MagSafe-compatible or Qi2 setup that just works? Drop the model in the comments and I’ll add it to my test list.

You might also like...

• The Pixel 10 Pro and Pro XL have bonus AI features I didn't expect to love
• I'm a die-hard iPhone fan, but these 5 things from the Pixel 10 launch made me jealous
• Google Pixel 10 vs Google Pixel 9: all the biggest differences