Daily Digest on AI and Emerging Technologies (24 June 2026) – https://pam.int/daily-digest-on-ai-and-emerging-technologies-24-june-2026/

Daily Digest on AI and Emerging Technologies (25 June 2026) – https://pam.int/daily-digest-on-ai-and-emerging-technologies-25-june-2026/

Daily Digest on AI and Emerging Technologies (26 June 2026) – https://pam.int/daily-digest-on-ai-and-emerging-technologies-29-june-2026/

 

Governance, Regulation, Legislation, Geostrategies

UN report outlines AI standards for Digital Public Goods

(DigWatch) A new report from the United Nations University Institute in Macau, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the UN Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies examines the conditions under which AI systems can qualify as Digital Public Goods. The study was launched during UN Open Source Week 2026 and focuses on aligning AI development with public interest goals. The report argues that AI systems cannot be assessed in the same way as conventional open-source software because they rely on datasets, model weights, computing infrastructure and ongoing governance. While openness can improve transparency and reuse, it does not automatically guarantee safety, equity or alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). – https://unu.edu/macau/news/new-research-report-ai-systems-digital-public-goods

UN experts call for gender-responsive AI governance

(DigWatch) UN human rights experts have warned that AI and related digital technologies could deepen gender inequalities if they are developed and deployed without meaningful regulation. The Working Group on discrimination against women and girls said AI is reshaping the conditions in which women and girls exercise their rights. In a report to the Human Rights Council, the experts said the absence of gender-responsive AI governance could amplify exclusion, reinforce harmful stereotypes and worsen structural inequalities. – https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/06/un-working-group-calls-action-ensure-ai-serves-equality-not-discrimination

UN secretary-general calls for greater transparency on AI’s climate impact

(DigWatch) UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called on AI companies to publicly disclose the environmental impact of their operations, including carbon emissions, water consumption, and land use. Speaking at London Climate Action Week, Guterres proposed an AI Environmental Transparency Initiative, arguing that communities are often left without clear information about the environmental impact of nearby data centre developments. Citing a UN study, Guterres said data centres consumed more electricity in 2025 than all but ten countries, accounting for around 1.5% of global electricity demand. That share could approach 3% by 2030, while AI-related water consumption and pollution are also projected to rise significantly. By 2030, that figure is projected to nearly double to close to 3 per cent, while the water use and pollution associated with AI are also expected to double within four years. – https://unu.edu/inweh/news/un-secretary-general-launches-ai-environmental-transparency-initiative-calling-ai

Council of Europe urges democratic safeguards for AI

(DigWatch) The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has said AI presents both significant opportunities and serious risks for democratic systems. In a resolution based on a report by Deborah Bergamini, the Assembly described AI as one of the most transformative technologies in human history while warning of its potentially disruptive effects on democracy. However, it also expressed concern about the technology’s potentially disruptive impact on democracy in Europe and beyond. – https://www.coe.int/be/web/portal/-/parliamentary-assembly-warns-of-risks-of-ai-but-also-highlights-its-democratic-potential

The Missing Resistance in China’s AI Debate

(Yaqiu Wang – Lawfare) Trump’s visit to China in May was marked by pomp and circumstance but produced few breakthroughs. One of the summit’s few concrete results was an agreement to cooperate on “artificial intelligence (AI) guardrails.” The United States and China are locked in a modern-day space race over AI, with both governments viewing AI leadership as central to economic competitiveness, military power, and global influence. At the same time, the potentially catastrophic risks posed by advanced AI—from military escalation and cyberattacks to loss of human control over powerful systems—make some degree of cooperation not only desirable but necessary.  But it remains unclear how the two countries would work together, given deep mistrust, fear on both sides that slowing technological development could mean losing out to the other, and differences in how the two sides define AI-related threats. One area where China has a clear competitive edge is that, compared with the United States, AI appears to face much less popular resistance in the country. In a 47-country KPMG survey, 69 percent of respondents in China said AI’s benefits outweighed its risks, compared with only 35 percent who felt the same in the United States. Many Chinese users seem pragmatic about AI: If a tool is useful and affordable, they readily use it. Meanwhile, the leaders of Chinese AI companies quietly focus on building AI tools, not philosophizing about societal transformation or advising how Beijing should address it. China can look more practical and focused toward technological innovation vis a vis the United States. But beneath the order is a state that suppresses dissent and a society in which people have little say over the kind of technological future being built in their name. – https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-missing-resistance-in-china-s-ai-debate

The EU Cloud and AI Development Act

(Kenneth Propp – Lawfare) On June 3, the European Commission published its long-gestating European Technological Sovereignty Package, a sprawling and ambitious compendium of measures intended to strengthen Europe’s capacity in semiconductors, artificial intelligence (AI), cloud services, and open-source software. “We cannot afford to depend on others for the technologies that keep our hospitals running, our energy grids stable, and our services secure,” a press statement from Commission President Ursula von der Leyen asserted. A senior commission official who worked on the package jubilantly declared that its launch represented “Tech Liberation Day!”. The proposed Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) is the centerpiece of the package. It also is the most important piece of legislation from the perspective of transatlantic relations, since it is squarely aimed at U.S. cloud service companies’ oligopolistic position in the European market. Indeed, as a leading European tech policy observer commented, “CADA represents a significant change in tone for the Commission, which has maintained its ‘open market’ credentials long after the U.S. and China abandoned them”. The commission’s Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the legislation delicately acknowledges that “the current landscape of cloud and AI is characterized by a pronounced dependence on a limited pool of third-country providers.” The market share of EU providers has diminished steadily in the past decade to about 15 percent.  Even worse, as outlined by the commission in the memorandum, is that three U.S. cloud service providers—Microsoft, Amazon Web Services, and Google—currently control more than 70 percent of the European cloud market. According to the memorandum, the commission sees two potential legal risks from this situation. First, these providers are subject to the U.S. CLOUD Act, which enables unilateral U.S. government access to European data for law enforcement purposes. And second, unilateral U.S. sanctions measures could result in the disruption of services to European users (the so-called kill switch). – https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-eu-cloud-and-ai-development-act

First Amendment Questions for AI Transparency Laws

(Bahrad A. Sokhansanj, Mackenzie Arnold – Lawfare) A bipartisan group of lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives recently introduced the AI Foundation Model Transparency Act, which would direct the Federal Trade Commission to set transparency requirements for the data used to train high-impact foundation models. Developers would need to provide information about where training data comes from, how models are trained, and whether user data is collected during use. The bill joins a growing roster of artificial intelligence (AI) transparency measures at the state and federal level, including California’s Assembly Bill (AB) No. 2013, which requires developers to publish high-level summaries of their training data; California’s Senate Bill (SB) 53, which requires frontier AI developers to publish safety frameworks and make public disclosures about risk assessment and mitigation measures; and New York’s RAISE Act, which imposes requirements similar to SB 53. The basic idea behind AI transparency laws is straightforward: As AI plays a larger role in public life, the public should have access to basic information about how these systems are built and the risks they pose. But laws requiring companies to publish information about their AI systems can face First Amendment scrutiny. Legislators drafting disclosure requirements will need to do so with an eye toward how courts may evaluate those laws. Under U.S. law, when the government compels a company to publish information about its products or services, it regulates the company’s speech. That means transparency laws trigger First Amendment scrutiny. If companies challenge these laws in court, the outcome can turn on what level of scrutiny a court applies—a question currently being litigated in a challenge to California’s AB 2013. How courts answer this question will matter far beyond AB 2013. While AI transparency laws remain viable, First Amendment doctrine is becoming less predictable, and drafting choices matter more than many policymakers assume. The questions that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit now confronts will not only affect AB 2013 but also may shape how courts evaluate other AI transparency laws going forward.  – https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/first-amendment-questions-for-ai-transparency-laws

What Online Platforms Can and Must Do to Help Mitigate Escalating Political Violence

(Yaël Eisenstat and Justin Hendrix – Just Security) Political violence is on the rise in the United States. According to a summary of key trends from the Princeton University Bridging Divides Initiative, this rise is reflected across a range of different statistics, from an increase in targeted violence and assassination attempts to an increase in the overall volume of threats and harassment against political figures at the local and national level. Unprecedented levels of threats against public officials, including federal judges, both on- and offline have coincided with a bout of assassination attempts and acts of targeted violence in the United States. A growing number of violent acts over the past decade have demonstrated a clear nexus to the perpetrators’ social media use, including the September assassination attempt against President Donald Trump, Charlie Kirk’s murder, and the arson attack against Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. We are now entering the midterm election cycle with more serious threats emanating from the online systems than ever before, and with fewer protections than we’ve had in a decade. – https://www.justsecurity.org/143939/online-platforms-political-violence/

China pushes AI and biomedicine as strategic growth sectors

(DigWatch) Chinese Vice Premier Liu Guozhong has called for stronger development of the biomedicine sector and brain-computer interface (BCI) technologies, describing them as strategic industries that will support the Healthy China initiative and China’s future industrial development. – https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202606/23/content_WS6a3aab2ac6d00ca5f9a0bc25.html

IMF and China sign MoU on AI and digital economy measurement

(DigWatch) The International Monetary Fund and China’s National Bureau of Statistics have signed a new Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen cooperation on national accounts, macroeconomic statistics and statistical modernisation. The agreement builds on a previous MoU signed in November 2023 and creates a framework for cooperation on implementing the 2025 System of National Accounts. The cooperation will include work on measuring the digital economy, AI, cloud computing, digital intermediation platforms and data as an asset. It will also cover broader areas introduced in updated international statistical standards, including globalisation, economic well-being and environmental sustainability. – https://www.imf.org/en/news/articles/2026/06/24/pr26221-imf-china-sign-new-memorandum-of-understanding-on-statistical-cooperation

European Commission explores scaling AI in agriculture

(DigWatch) The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) and Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CONNECT) jointly organised an online expert workshop on 24 June to explore how to accelerate AI adaption and scale trusted AI solutions across the agriculture sector. The workshop was organised within the framework of the Commission’s Apply AI Strategy, which aims to accelerate AI adoption in strategic sectors, including agri-food, while strengthening European competitiveness, technological sovereignty and uptake among small and medium-sized enterprises. Participants discussed AI applications already being deployed in farm management, precision agriculture, crop and livestock monitoring, advisory services, agricultural robotics and the simplification of administrative processes. – https://dig.watch/updates/eu-commission-scaling-ai-solutions-agriculture

Google proposes a balanced approach to AI governance in the US

(DigWatch) Google has published a policy paper proposing a two-track approach to AI governance in the United States, separating oversight of frontier AI models from rules for widely deployed AI applications. The paper argues that AI policy should avoid what Google describes as a false choice between over-regulation and no regulation. Instead, the company calls for a pragmatic, evidence-based framework that treats the most advanced AI systems differently from everyday AI tools such as chatbots. For frontier AI, Google proposes the creation of a Frontier AI Regulatory Organisation, or FARO. The industry-funded body would operate under federal oversight and develop standards for safety, security, incident reporting and transparency. – https://dig.watch/updates/google-proposes-a-balanced-approach-to-ai-governance-in-the-us

Security and Surveillance

CMC Releases Analysis and Guidance for Education Sector After Canvas Data Breach

(Beth Maundrill – Infosecurity Magazine) The UK’s Cyber Monitoring Centre (CMC) has shared its analysis of the Canvas cyber incident affecting Instructure’s Learning Management System as the education technology firm prepares to share its own findings next week. The CMC said that approximately 160 UK higher education institutions were affected and threat actors exfiltrated confidential course and user data. In total, around 9000 educational institutions are thought to have been affected worldwide. While the incident has not met the CMC’s minimum category threshold, the review aims to better understand the financial impact of data breach events, inform the development of the CMC’s data breach analysis model and deepen insight into cyber risk within the UK higher education sector. – https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/cmc-analysis-education-canvas-data/

Chinese APT CL-STA-1062 Expands Attacks on Southeast Asian Critical Infrastructure With Custom Malware

(Pierluigi Paganini – Security Affairs) Palo Alto Networks Unit 42 researchers published a detailed report on a Chinese-speaking threat actor, tracked as CL-STA-1062, that has been running persistent operations across East Asia since at least March 2022 and shifted focus to Southeast Asian government entities and state-owned critical energy infrastructure from mid-2025 onward. The same group was previously flagged by Cisco Talos as UAT-7237, linked to campaigns against web hosting infrastructure in Taiwan. Between October and December 2025 alone, Unit 42 detected breaches at a minimum of ten different organizations in the region. The intrusion pattern is consistent across targets. The attackers get in through ASPX web shells deployed against vulnerable web applications, use those shells for reconnaissance and tool delivery, and then establish persistent tunneling infrastructure using SoftEther VPN, Yuze, and VNT, all disguised as VMware executables or XDR agents with names like vmtools.exe, vmwared.exe, and XDRAgent.exe. – https://securityaffairs.com/194312/intelligence/chinese-apt-cl-sta-1062-expands-attacks-on-southeast-asian-critical-infrastructure-with-custom-malware.html

Third-Party Breach at Polymarket Leads to $2.94M Crypto Theft

(Pierluigi Paganini – Security Affairs) Polymarket confirmed that a security breach at a third-party vendor allowed attackers to inject malicious code into its website, leading to the theft of funds from an undisclosed number of users. The company said it has contained the incident and is contacting affected customers. The firm announced it will fully reimburse user losses, however the technical details of the attack have not yet been disclosed. – https://securityaffairs.com/194266/security/third-party-breach-at-polymarket-leads-to-2-94m-crypto-theft.html

macOS.Gaslight: North Korea-Linked Malware That Tries to Gaslight the Analyst

(Pierluigi Paganini – Security Affairs) SentinelLabs researchers spotted a Rust-based macOS implant, dubbed macOS.Gaslight, that surfaced in early June after an Apple XProtect update pointed to a VirusTotal sample uploaded on May 22. The binary was undetected by static engines at the time of writing. They named it macOS.Gaslight, and the name is earned. “The sample is a macOS implant and infostealer written in Rust. Its most notable feature is an embedded cascade of fabricated system-failure messages, designed to make an LLM-assisted triage agent doubt its own session.” reads the report published by SentinelLabs. “It attacks the agent’s perception, rather than the sandbox it runs in. Accordingly, we dub this family macOS.Gaslight”. The embedded payload is 3.5 KB of Markdown-fenced hostile data containing 38 fabricated “system” messages, simulating fake token expiry notices, out-of-memory kills, disk exhaustion warnings, and bogus static analysis flags. – https://securityaffairs.com/194256/malware/macos-gaslight-north-korea-linked-malware-that-tries-to-gaslight-the-analyst.html

Defense, Intelligence, Warfare

Iran War Shows Adversaries Can Exploit Big Data, Too

(Justin Sherman – Lawfare) As the war between the United States and Iran reaches a ceasefire, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) has received reports of an alarming activity, the first known of its kind: a U.S. adversary using commercial location data to track and target U.S. forces in the Middle East. This likely refers to data on the latitude, longitude, and identifiers of a specific mobile device, obtained via advertising technology, data-selling, or other systems. It is far more than an isolated incident in one region. An adversary, likely Iran, using commercial location data in this fashion—tapping into the sea of commercial data to enable military or intelligence operations—spotlights a major vulnerability in the United States’ digital footprint. Some in the U.S. government may view the availability of open-source and commercial data as wholly advantageous to U.S. national security, thinking only about how open data could be used for U.S. missions. But the Iran war has exposed just how easily U.S. foreign adversaries can access much of the same data for their own ends—including tracking and targeting military service members. Decision-makers must overhaul their data security thinking to plug current gaps and mitigate these risks in future security and warfare. Open-source information has absolutely exploded online in the past few decades. This data, accessible without a paywall to anyone with an internet connection, spans websites, public-facing social media sites, free commercial satellite imagery platforms, and even artificial intelligence (AI) models that let users query them, for free, without an account. Some open information sources are global in reach and coverage, such as Meta’s Facebook or Google’s free Google Earth. Other sources are more region specific, such as the social media platforms VK in Russia and Weibo in China (even though their “open” nature is variable if you are not within the country in question). – https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/iran-war-shows-adversaries-can-exploit-big-data–too

Frontiers

China’s latest supercomputer strengthens AI ambitions

(DigWatch) China has regained the world’s leading position in supercomputing after the LineShine system became the fastest computer in the latest TOP500 ranking, replacing the US’s El Capitan at the top of the list. The achievement marks China’s return to first place for the first time since 2017 and highlights the growing strategic importance of high-performance computing in the AI era. Unlike many recent AI-focused supercomputers that rely heavily on graphics processing units (GPUs), LineShine achieves exascale performance using conventional central processing units (CPUs). – https://dig.watch/updates/chinas-supercomputer-ai-ambitions

New MIT development reduces energy use in AI systems

(DigWatch) Researchers from MIT and Microsoft have developed a system called Murakkab to improve the speed and energy efficiency of agentic AI workflows. Agentic workflows combine multiple AI models and external tools to complete complex, multi-step tasks, such as analysing video or generating code. MIT said these systems are becoming more important for cloud providers, but their fragmented design can waste computation, energy and money. Murakkab allows developers to describe an AI application in high-level terms rather than manually specifying every model, tool, hardware choice and execution step. The system then identifies suitable models and tools, decides which components should run sequentially or in parallel, and selects hardware resources for cloud deployment. – https://news.mit.edu/2026/improving-ai-agent-speed-and-energy-efficiency-0625