WASHINGTON — At first, the bar association for immigration attorneys began receiving inquiries from a couple students a day. These were foreigners studying in the U.S., and they’d discovered in early April their legal status had been terminated with little notice. To their knowledge, none of the students had committed a deportable offense.

In recent days, the calls have begun flooding in. Hundreds of students have been calling to say they have lost legal status, seeking advice on what to do next.

“We thought it was going to be something that was unusual,” said Matthew Maiona, a Boston-based immigration attorney who is getting about six calls a day from panicked international students. “But it seems now like it’s coming pretty fast and furious.”

The speed and scope of the federal government’s efforts to terminate the legal status of international students have stunned colleges across the country. Few corners of higher education have been untouched, as schools ranging from prestigious private universities, large public research institutions and tiny liberal arts colleges discover status terminations one after another among their students.

At least 600 students at more than 90 colleges and universities have had their visas revoked or their legal status terminated in recent weeks, according to an Associated Press review of university statements and correspondence with school officials. Advocacy groups collecting reports from colleges say hundreds more students could be caught up in the crackdown.

Around 1.1 million international students were in the United States last year — a source of essential revenue for tuition-driven colleges. International students are not eligible for federal financial aid, and their ability to pay tuition often factors into whether they will be admitted to American schools. Often, they pay full price.

Many of the students losing their legal status are from India and China, which together account for more than half the international students at American colleges. But the terminations have not been limited to those from any one part of the world, lawyers said.

Four students from two Michigan universities are suing Trump administration officials after their F-1 student status was terminated last week. Their attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, Ramis Wadood, said the students never received a clear reason why.

“We don’t know, and that’s the scary part,” he said.

The students were informed of the terminations by their universities via email, which came as a shock, Wadood said. The reason given was that there was a “criminal records check and/or that their visa was revoked,” Wadood said, but none of them were charged or convicted of crimes. Some had either speeding or parking tickets, but one didn’t have any, he said. Only one of the students had known their entry visa was revoked, Wadood said.

Students have filed similar lawsuits in several other states, arguing they were denied due process.

In New Hampshire, a federal judge last week granted a temporary restraining order to restore the status of a Ph.D. student at Dartmouth College, Xiaotian Liu, while he challenges the revocation of his visa.

At many colleges, officials learned the legal immigration status of some international students had been terminated when staff checked a database managed by the Department of Homeland Security. In the past, college officials say, legal statuses typically were updated after colleges told the government the students were no longer studying at the school.

The system to track enrollment and movements of international students came under the control of Immigration and Customs Enforcement after 9/11, said Fanta Aw, CEO of NAFSA, an association of international educators. She said recent developments have left students fearful of how quickly they can be on the wrong side of enforcement.

“You don’t need more than a small number to create fear,” Aw said. “There’s no clarity of what are the reasons and how far the reach of this is.”

Her group says as many as 1,300 students have lost visas or had their status terminated, based on reports from colleges.

The Department of Homeland Security and State Department did not respond to messages seeking comment.

Foreigners who are subject to removal proceedings are usually sent a notice to appear in immigration court on a certain date, but lawyers say affected students have not received any notices, leaving them unsure of next steps to take.

Some schools have told students to leave the country to avoid the risk of being detained or deported. But some students have appealed the terminations and stayed in the United States while those are processed.

Still others caught in legal limbo aren’t students at all. They had remained in the U.S. post-graduation on “optional practical training,” a one-year period — or up to three for science and technology graduates — that allows employment in the U.S. after completing an academic degree. During that time, a graduate works in their field and waits to receive their H-1B or other employment visas if they wish to keep working in the U.S.

Around 242,000 foreigners in the U.S. are employed through this “optional practical training.” About 500,000 are pursuing graduate degrees, and another 342,000 are undergraduate students.

Among the students who have filed lawsuits is a Georgia Tech Ph.D. student who is supposed to graduate on May 5, with a job offer to join the faculty. His attorney Charles Kuck said the student was likely targeted for termination because of an unpaid traffic fine from when the student lent his car to a friend. Ultimately, the violation was dismissed.

“We have case after case after case exactly like that, where there is no underlying crime,” said Kuck, who is representing 17 students in the federal lawsuit. He said his law firm has heard from hundreds of students.

“These are kids who now, under the Trump administration, realize their position is fragile,” he said. “They’ve preyed on a very vulnerable population. These kids aren’t hiding. They’re in school.”

Some international students have been adapting their daily routines.

A Ph.D. student from China at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill said she has begun carrying around her passport and immigration paperwork at the advice of the university’s international student office. The student, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being targeted by authorities, said she has been distressed to see the terminations even for students like her without criminal records.

“That is the most scary part because you don’t know whether you’re going to be the next person,” she said. ___

Seminera reported from Raleigh, N.C., and Keller reported from Albuquerque, N.M.

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

NEW YORK — When Donald Trump offered some financial advice Wednesday morning, stocks were wavering between gains and losses.

But that was about to change.

“THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!! DJT,” he wrote on his social media platform Truth Social at 9:37 a.m.

Less than four hours later, Trump announced a 90-day pause on nearly all his tariffs. Stocks soared on the news, closing up 9.5% by the end of trading. The market, measured by the S&P 500, gained back about $4 trillion, or 70%, of the value it had lost over the previous four trading days.

It was a prescient call by the president. Maybe too prescient.

“He’s loving this, this control over markets, but he better be careful,” said Trump critic and former White House ethics lawyer, Richard Painter, noting that securities law prohibits trading on insider information or helping others do so. “The people who bought when they saw that post made a lot of money.”

The question is, Was Trump already contemplating the tariff pause when he made that post?

Asked about when he arrived at his decision, Trump gave a muddled answer.

“I would say this morning,” he said. “Over the last few days, I’ve been thinking about it.”

He then added, “Fairly early this morning.”

Asked for clarification on the timing in an email to the White House later, a spokesperson didn’t answer directly but defended Trump’s post as part of his job.

“It is the responsibility of the President of the United States to reassure the markets and Americans about their economic security in the face of nonstop media fearmongering,” wrote White House spokesman Kush Desai.

Another curiosity of the posting was Trump’s signoff with his initials.

DJT is also the stock symbol for Trump Media and Technology Group, the parent company of the president’s social media platform Truth Social.

It’s not clear if Trump was saying buying stocks in general, or Trump Media in particular. The White House was asked, but didn’t address that either. Trump includes “DJT” on his posts intermittently, typically to emphasize that he has personally written the message.

The ambiguity about what Trump meant didn’t stop people from pouring money into that stock.

Trump Media closed up 22.67%, soaring twice as much as the broader market, a stunning performance by a company that lost $400 million last year and is seemingly unaffected by whether tariffs would be imposed or paused.

Trump’s 53% ownership stake in the company, now in a trust controlled by his oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., rose by $415 million on the day.

Trump Media was bested, albeit by only two-hundreds of a percentage point, by another Trump administration stock pick — Elon Musk’s Tesla.

Last month, Trump held an extraordinary news conference outside the White House praising the company and its cars. That was followed by a Fox TV appearance by his commerce secretary urging viewers to buy the stock.

Tesla’s surge Wednesday added $20 billion to Musk’s fortunes.

Kathleen Clark, a government ethics law expert at Washington University School of Law, says Trump’s post in other administrations would have been investigated, but is not likely not to trigger any reaction, save for maybe more Truth Social viewers.

“He’s sending the message that he can effectively and with impunity manipulate the market,” she said, “As in: Watch this space for future stock tips.”

The head of Meta’s artificial intelligence research division said she plans to step down, vacating a high-profile position at the parent company of Facebook and Instagram at a time of intense competition in the development of AI technology

MENLO PARK, Calif. — The head of Meta’s artificial intelligence research division said she plans to step down, vacating a high-profile position at a time of intense competition in the development of AI technology.

Joelle Pineau, Meta’s vice president for AI research, said Tuesday she is leaving at the end of May after eight years with the company.

“Today, as the world undergoes significant change, as the race for AI accelerates, and as Meta prepares for its next chapter, it is time to create space for others to pursue the work,” she wrote in a social media post.

Meta — the parent company of Facebook and Instagram — didn’t immediately respond to an emailed request for comment about the move. Pineau didn’t announce a replacement.

Based in Montreal, where she is also a computer science professor at McGill University, Pineau has been the face of Meta’s “open-source” approach to building AI systems, such as its flagship large language model called Llama, in which core components are publicly released for others to use or modify.

Her announcement comes ahead of the company’s debut of a new LlamaCon AI conference on April 29.

In 2023, she began directing Meta’s AI research division, formerly known as Facebook AI Research, which had been founded a decade earlier by a group that included pioneering AI researcher Yann LeCun. LeCun stepped down as the group’s director in 2018 but remains Meta’s chief AI scientist.

Elon Musk has sold social media site X to his own xAI artificial intelligence company in a $33 billion all-stock deal, the billionaire announced on Friday.

Both companies are privately held, which means they are not required to disclose their finances to the public.

Musk said in a post on X that the move will “unlock immense potential by blending xAI’s advanced AI capability and expertise with X’s massive reach.” He said the deal values xAI at $80 billion and X at $33 billion. Musk, who serves as CEO of Tesla and SpaceX as well as an advisor to President Donald Trump, bought the site then called Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, gutted its staff and changed its policies on hate speech, misinformation and user verification and renamed it X.

He launched xAI a year later.

“xAI and X’s futures are intertwined. Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent. This combination will unlock immense potential by blending xAI’s advanced AI capability and expertise with X’s massive reach,” Musk wrote on X. “The combined company will deliver smarter, more meaningful experiences to billions of people while staying true to our core mission of seeking truth and advancing knowledge.”

It’s not clear if the move will change anything for X users — xAI already uses data from X user posts to train its artificial intelligence models and paying X users have access to its AI chatbot, Grok.

FRANKFURT, Germany — European sales of Tesla electric vehicles tumbled 49% in the first two months of the year compared with a year earlier even as overall sales of EVs grew, according to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association.

There have been complaints about an aging lineup of vehicles from Tesla and also a significant backlash against CEO Elon Musk and his affiliation with the Trump administration in the U.S. In Europe, Musk’s endorsement of Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany party in last month’s national election drew broad condemnation.

Tesla faces increasing competition from major automakers as they ramp up EV production, including China’s BYD. On Tuesday, BYD reported a record 777.1 billion yuan ($107 billion) in revenue for 2024 as sales of its electric and hybrid vehicles jumped 40%. Earlier this month, BYD announced an ultra fast EV charging system that it says is nearly as quick as a fill up at the gas pump.

Tesla sales for January and February slumped to 19,046 from 37,311 in the same period in 2024. That comes against the background of a 28.4% increase in sales of all battery-electric cars in Europe.

German politicians and opinion media sharply criticized Musk over his support for the AfD, while Tesla vehicles and dealerships have been the target of protesters in the U.S. and Europe over the AfD endorsement and his role advising U.S. President Donald Trump in drastically reducing the size of the US federal government.

Tesla sales are falling globally, however. The company posted its first annual sales drop in more than a dozen years in January. Tesla’s new Cybertruck has had multiple recalls including last week, when the company recalled nearly all of them because panels that run along the left and right side of the windshield can fly off when driving.

It was the eighth recall of the Cybertruck since deliveries to customers began just over a year ago.

Waymo on Tuesday added Washington to its pioneering robotaxi service’s steadily expanding list of U.S. markets, although passengers will have to wait until next year until they can take a driverless ride around the nation’s capital city.

For now, Waymo’s robotaxis will continue to map Washington’s streets and corridors with a safety driver sitting behind the wheel to take control of the vehicle if something goes wrong — a precaution required under the regulations currently in force in the District of Columbia.

That’s something Waymo already has been doing since it began sending out its robotaxis in Washington in late January after a brief trial run in the capital last year.

While the robotaxis continue to learn their way around the city, Waymo executives expressed confidence they will be able to work with regulators to clear the way for completely driverless rides at some point next year through its Waymo One app.

“We’re excited to bring the comfort, consistency, and safety of Waymo One to Washingtonians, those who work and play in the city every day, and the millions of people from around the world who travel to the District every year,” Waymo co-CEO Tekedra Mawakana.

If Waymo’s ambitions pan out, Washington and Miami next year will be added to four other U.S. markets where its robotaxis are transporting passengers — Phoenix, Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area and Austin, Texas as part of a partnership with ride-hailing leader Uber. Waymo and Uber also are teaming up to begin dispatching its robotaxis in Atlanta later this year.

The growth has helped turn what began as a head-turning novelty in Phoenix and then in San Francisco into an increasingly common sight in the cities where Waymo operates. The company says it had provided more than 4 million driverless rides to paying customers through the end of this year, and is now providing them at a pace of 200,000 paid trips per week.

That has established Waymo as the early frontrunner in driverless technology while others are racing to catch up. Both Amazon and Tesla are gearing up to launch their own services in different U.S. cities while another ride-hailing service, Lyft, has announced plans to add robotaxis as an option in Atlanta and Dallas.

Waymo’s early lead in the still-nascent robotaxi market is a vindication of a technology that began as a secret project within Google in 2009 before it was spun off into a separate company owned by Alphabet Inc. in 2016.

WASHINGTON — For weeks, Democratic lawmakers have met with and mimicked figures they believe may offer them a path back to power in Washington: online influencers and content creators.

Hours before President Donald Trump’s joint address to Congress this month, Senate Democrats huddled with a dozen online progressive personalities who have millions of followers. House Democrats were introduced, without staff, to 40 content creators who Democratic leaders said could help them grow their audience online.

An earlier tutorial session in February featured online personalities like the YouTube commentator Brian Tyler Cohen.

The result has been a burst of Democratic online content, including direct-to-camera explainers in parked cars, scripted vertical videos, podcast appearances and livestreams — some topping trending charts online, others drawing mockery from liberal allies and Republicans in Congress.

But while the Democratic Party is largely divided over the path forward after last year’s election losses, party leaders agree that, no matter the message, how they connect with voters in the digital media landscape will be key to a political comeback.

More than a dozen Democratic senators, asked about the party’s digital strategy, pointed to Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey as the architect of their new push.

“We’ve seen tremendous growth of Democratic senators now. They’re engaging in the tools and strategies necessary to elevate their voice in a new, changing media market, where legacy media is not the place that people get their news now,” Booker said. “We’re just weeks into this, but just by making key changes … we’re seeing a massive growth in engagement with the content that our senators are creating, and we’ve only just begun.”

Booker said he’s aiming for Democratic senators to double online engagement with their content over the next year — and early metrics have been noticeable. Democratic senators racked up more than 87 million views on content they published in response to Trump’s joint address to Congress, according to Booker’s office.

Not all of that online engagement is positive. After more than two dozen Democratic senators posted identical scripted videos knocking Trump’s speech, saying he should have addressed the cost of living and his support for billionaire adviser Elon Musk, conservatives mocked them as inauthentic and out of touch.

“They are all actors reading a script,” Musk wrote on X, the social media platform he owns.

There’s no doubt that Democrats are playing catch-up. Trump and his fellow Republicans built a digital operation that fed on bombast and celebrity, and it’s a strategy they’ve taken with them to the White House. Official government accounts are new filled with right-wing memes, cinematic videos and pugnacious statements.

The Democratic embrace of influencers has also yielded mixed early results. Democrats were ridiculed online after a food and wellness influencer who attended the House Democrats’ creators event created a “Choose Your Fighter” video collage of Democratic congresswomen for Women’s History Month.

The White House posted a video in response that read “America chose its fighters last November,” and the Pentagon, normally known for being studiously non-partisan, posted a video stating “We chose our fighters a long time ago.”

But Booker and other Democratic leaders don’t consider the sneers to be a downside. Missteps are to be expected, they say, but the path to Americans’ attention will require some discomfort from lawmakers.

“I do think that the caucus as a whole is trying to figure out how we show people that we are real people,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of the congresswomen featured in the viral “Fighter” video. Crockett, whose posts regularly garner millions of views online, said she was used to criticism for her often frank statements and was more interested in combating perceptions that Democrats are “elitist” or “robotic.”

“I didn’t like the jumping, I’m going to be honest, though,” Crockett added about the viral “Choose Your Fighter” video.

Democrats adopted a more combative stance online in recent weeks as Trump’s moves to slash the federal workforce drew protests from liberals and pushback at GOP town halls. Top Democratic digital operatives who worked for the 2024 presidential campaign of then-Vice President Kamala Harris have been in high demand, with many Democrats anticipating close 2026 races in which digital strategies may be key.

Some of the most prominent Democrats across the country have been engaging more in new media since the election. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York has touted the party’s message on progressive podcasts over the last month, including from the comedian Jon Stewart and the progressive outlet MeidasTouch. Clips of those videos were also lampooned online but garnered millions of views.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a potential Democratic presidential contender in 2028, has launched a podcast of his own on which he has welcomed close Trump allies like the right-wing activist Charlie Kirk and former Trump aide Steve Bannon to discuss hot-button political topics.

“We want to make sure we hit the podcasters that normally don’t have Democrats on there,” said Rep. Derek Tran, a Democrat from a competitive California House district. “The ones that are more right-leaning or independent, and be able to address a crowd and an audience that’s not typical for the Democratic base.”

Some House Democrats have expressed frustration that the guidance from Democratic leaders about social media is too vague, while others grumble that leaders are too prescriptive in their approach to messaging on platforms they don’t intuitively understand. Meanwhile, Democratic strategists have cautioned lawmakers that garnering attention online is secondary to the goal of using social media as a tool in specific policy fights and campaigns.

“I think there’s a fine line before we’re being cringe and trying too hard and seeming too thirsty. I think the most important thing in any of this is being as authentic and genuine as we can be,” said Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif.

“When it comes to authenticity, it also means leaning into what makes each of us unique. Like many of my colleagues probably should not be doing ‘get ready with me’ videos. It would look super cringe. But I’m a 36-year-old woman, and I do my makeup all the time, and I watch a lot of makeup tutorial videos, so it makes sense for me to do it,” said Jacobs.

Some Democrats think that the party’s messaging strategy hinges as much on the messengers as the medium it’s communicated on.

“If you know how to talk to people, it doesn’t matter what medium is going to exist,” said Sen. Ruben Gallego, a freshman Democratic senator from Arizona. “You could be the best freaking spokesperson in the world, but if you don’t know how to talk to working-class people, it doesn’t matter if you have the best TikTok following, it’s just not going to translate.”

ATLANTA — The Trump administration has cut millions of dollars in federal funding from two cybersecurity initiatives, including one dedicated to helping state and local election officials.

The U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, known as CISA, has ended about $10 million in annual funding to the nonprofit Center for Internet Security, a CISA spokesperson said in an email Monday.

It’s the latest move by Trump administration officials to rein in the federal government’s role in election security, which has prompted concerns about an erosion of guardrails to prevent foreign meddling in U.S. elections.

CISA announced a few weeks ago that it was conducting a review of its election-related work, and more than a dozen staffers who have worked on elections were placed on administrative leave. That followed an administration move to disband an FBI task force focused on investigating foreign influence operations, including those that target U.S. elections.

“I have grave concern for state and local election officials and for the security of our elections going forward,” said Larry Norden, an election security expert at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU’s School of Law.

In recent years, CISA has faced sustained criticism from Republicans over past efforts to counter misinformation about the 2020 presidential election and the coronavirus pandemic. Previous CISA leadership had said the agency never engaged in censorship and only worked with states to help them notify social media companies about misinformation spreading on their platforms.

When asked Monday if the review of CISA’s election work was complete and if the agency could share a copy of the report, an agency spokesperson said it was an internal review to “help inform how the agency moves forward to best support critical infrastructure” and was not planned for public release.

The two cybersecurity initiatives facing cuts are the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center, which included state and local election officials along with representatives of voting system manufacturers, and the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center, which has benefited state, local and tribal government offices.

Both have been organized within a nonprofit, the Center for Internet Security.

The activities no longer being funded include cyber threat intelligence, cyber incident response and engaging with state and local government officials. In a statement, the agency said ending the funding will help “focus CISA’s work on mission critical areas, and eliminate redundancies.”

Following CISA’s decision, the Center for Internet Security posted a notice online that it was no longer supporting the election-specific initiative. A spokesperson for the Center for Internet Security did not respond to questions sent by email about the effects of the cuts.

The National Association of Secretaries of State, comprised of top state election officials from across the country, was seeking information from CISA about the move and its recent election-specific review, said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon, a Democrat who is president of the bipartisan group.

Simon said he was waiting for more information before drawing conclusions. He said the group’s executive board recently sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem urging CISA to continue services to state and local election officials, including support for the election information sharing center.

“We got a lot out of it,” Simon said Monday.

CISA falls under the Department of Homeland Security, although it has its own Senate-confirmed director. President Donald Trump has yet to nominate someone as CISA director. The agency was formed in 2018 during the first Trump administration and is charged with protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure, from dams and nuclear power plants to banks and voting systems.

A spokesperson for the National Association of State Election Directors said the group was hoping to learn more from the Center for Internet Security about the effect of the federal cuts on its operations.

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who served as chair of the executive committee for the election information sharing initiative, said it provided crucial support during last year’s presidential election. Election officials were reporting malicious cyberattacks and sharing important details in real time, which she said allowed Maine to preemptively block those attempting to target her state’s networks.

“We will find a way to protect our elections,” said Bellows, a Democrat. “But given the sophistication of these threats, the elimination of the (information sharing initiative) is both inefficient and extremely dangerous.”

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has paused offensive cyberoperations against Russia by U.S. Cyber Command, rolling back some efforts to contend with a key adversary even as national security experts call for the U.S. to expand those capabilities.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive operations, on Monday confirmed the pause.

Hegseth’s decision does not affect cyberoperations conducted by other agencies, including the CIA and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. But the Trump administration also has rolled back other efforts at the FBI and other agencies related to countering digital and cyber threats.

The Pentagon decision, which was first reported by The Record, comes as many national security and cybersecurity experts have urged greater investments in cyber defense and offense, particularly as China and Russia have sought to interfere with the nation’s economy, elections and security.

Republican lawmakers and national security experts have all called for a greater offensive posture. During his Senate confirmation hearing this year, CIA Director John Ratcliffe said America’s rivals have shown that they believe cyberespionage — retrieving sensitive information and disrupting American business and infrastructure — to be an essential weapon of the modern arsenal.

“I want us to have all of the tools necessary to go on offense against our adversaries in the cyber community,” Ratcliffe said.

Cyber Command oversees and coordinates the Pentagon’s cybersecurity work and is known as America’s first line of defense in cyberspace. It also plans offensive cyberoperations for potential use against adversaries.

Hegseth’s directive arrived before Friday’s dustup between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the Oval Office. It wasn’t clear if the pause was tied to any negotiating tactic by the Trump administration to push Moscow into a peace deal with Ukraine.

Trump has vowed to end the war that began when Russia invaded Ukraine three years ago, and on Monday he slammed Zelenskyy for suggesting the end to the conflict was “far away.”

The White House did not immediately respond to questions about Hegseth’s order.

Cyber warfare is cheaper than traditional military force, can be carried out covertly and doesn’t carry the same risk of escalation or retaliation, making it an increasingly popular tool for nations that want to contend with the U.S. but lack the traditional economic or military might, according to Snehal Antani, CEO of Horizon3.ai, a San Francisco-based cybersecurity firm founded by former national security officers.

Cyberespionage can allow adversaries to steal competitive secrets from American companies, obtain sensitive intelligence or disrupt supply chains or the systems that manage dams, water plants, traffic systems, private companies, governments and hospitals.

The internet has created new battlefields, too, as nations like Russia and China use disinformation and propaganda to undermine their opponents.

Artificial intelligence now makes it easier and cheaper than ever for anyone — be it a foreign nation like Russia, China or North Korea or criminal networks — to step up their cybergame at scale, Antani said. Fixing code, translating disinformation or identifying network vulnerabilities once required a human — now AI can do much of it faster.

“We are entering this era of cyber-enabled economic warfare that is at the nation-state level,” Antani said. “We’re in this really challenging era where offense is significantly better than defense, and it’s going to take a while for defense to catch up.”

Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi also has disbanded an FBI task force focused on foreign influence campaigns, like those Russia used to target U.S. elections in the past. And more than a dozen people who worked on election security at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency were put on leave.

These actions are leaving the U.S. vulnerable despite years of evidence that Russia is committed to continuing and expanding its cyber efforts, according to Liana Keesing, campaigns manager for technology reform at Issue One, a nonprofit that has studied technology’s impact on democracy.

“Instead of confronting this threat, the Trump administration has actively taken steps to make it easier for the Kremlin to interfere in our electoral processes,” Keesing said.

ROME — The FBI has accused North Korean-linked hackers of conducting one of the largest thefts of cryptocurrency publicly known, seizing some $1.5 billion worth of ethereum from a Dubai-based firm.

The theft earlier this month targeting Bybit, one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges, represents yet another involving a team of hackers identified by the U.S. government by the names TraderTraitor and the Lazarus Group.

The hackers steal cryptocurrency “through the dissemination of cryptocurrency trading applications that were modified to include malware that facilitates theft of cryptocurrency,” the FBI has said.

In an online public service announcement late Wednesday, the FBI said it believed the North Korean-backed hackers were “responsible for the theft.”

“TraderTraitor actors are proceeding rapidly and have converted some of the stolen assets to Bitcoin and other virtual assets dispersed across thousands of addresses on multiple blockchains,” the FBI said in its announcement. “It is expected these assets will be further laundered and eventually converted to fiat currency.”

North Korean state media has not acknowledged either the theft or the FBI accusation. Pyongyang’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press.

However, North Korea has stolen an estimated $1.2 billion in cryptocurrency and other virtual assets in the past five years, according to South Korea’s spy agency. It represents a rare source of badly needed foreign currency to support its fragile economy and fund its nuclear program in the face of intense U.N. sanctions and North Korea’s strict border closures during the coronavirus pandemic.

A U.N. experts panel separately said it was investigating 58 suspected cyberattacks by North Korea between 2017 to 2023 that saw some $3 billion stolen to “reportedly help to fund the country’s development of weapons of mass destruction.”

Bybit co-founder and CEO, Ben Zhou, acknowledged the FBI’s announcement in a post on the social platform X by linking to a website offering $140 million in bounties for tracking the stolen crypto and getting it frozen by other exchanges.

Bybit has said a routine transfer of ethereum, one of the most popular cryptocurrencies, from a so-called “cold” or offline wallet was “manipulated” by an attacker who transferred the crypto to an unidentified address. The blockchain analytics firm Certik has described the theft as “the largest breach” in the history of blockchain transactions.

The theft has seen overall crypto prices drop in recent days as investors in part have been spooked by the hack despite the industry getting a boost from the election of U.S. President Donald Trump. Industry leader Bitcoin traded over $82,000 a coin on Thursday, down from high of over $100,000 a month ago.