The announcement was made by WhatsApp on Monday through an official company blog post, where the Meta-owned messaging platform said users can begin reserving unique usernames ahead of the feature’s broader release later this year. The company said the update is designed to reduce the need to expose personal phone numbers when initiating conversations.

With more than 3 billion users worldwide, WhatsApp has traditionally relied on phone numbers as the primary method for identifying and contacting accounts. The upcoming system introduces a different approach by allowing users to be discovered through a unique username instead.

Alice Newton-Rex, WhatsApp’s vice president of product, said the feature was designed with privacy as its primary objective.

According to Newton-Rex, users who enable the option will be reachable only by their exact username rather than their phone number. She also clarified that WhatsApp will not maintain a searchable username directory or provide username suggestions while people search, reducing the likelihood of unsolicited contact.

The company has not announced an exact launch date beyond saying the feature will become available over the coming months.

Usernames Designed to Limit Personal Information Sharing

The introduction of usernames addresses a longstanding privacy limitation on WhatsApp, where anyone possessing another person’s phone number could attempt to initiate contact.

Current privacy tools on the platform include blocking individual users, silencing unknown callers, and displaying optional profile names within group chats for participants who have not saved one another’s contact details. Those measures do not remove the requirement to use phone numbers as account identifiers.

Under the new system, users will have the option of sharing a username instead of their personal mobile number when communicating with new contacts.

Reservation Process Opens Before Global Rollout

WhatsApp said it is opening username reservations ahead of the public launch to give users an opportunity to secure preferred names before the feature becomes widely available.

Newton-Rex acknowledged that desirable usernames are expected to attract significant interest, which influenced the company’s decision to allow early reservations.

Businesses, organizations and creators that already operate verified or established accounts on Meta’s other platforms, including Facebook and Instagram, will also be eligible to reserve matching usernames for WhatsApp.

Rules Intended to Reduce Impersonation Risks

WhatsApp said usernames must contain between three and 35 characters.

To help reduce impersonation, the company plans to reserve certain usernames associated with celebrities, public figures, government organizations and other high-profile entities rather than making them immediately available for public registration.

The company has not provided additional technical details on how those protected usernames will be managed.

Although WhatsApp remains less widely used than traditional text messaging services in the United States, it continues to serve as one of the world’s largest messaging platforms across Europe, Asia and many other regions. The username system represents one of the platform’s most notable identity and privacy updates by reducing dependence on phone numbers while maintaining existing account security.

Tags: WhatsApp, Meta, Usernames, Privacy, Messaging Apps, Digital Identity, Online Privacy, Meta Platforms, Mobile Apps, Technology

The post WhatsApp Introduces Usernames to Reduce Phone Number Exposure on Messaging Platform appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

From a technology industry standpoint, the dominant angle is platform power consolidation: by removing one of the biggest reasons users abandoned aging accounts, Google is lowering churn risk while deepening reliance on its broader services stack. Rather than forcing users to create fresh identities and manually migrate years of data, the company now keeps them inside the same Google Account framework, preserving behavioral continuity, storage history, and service-linked credentials.

According to reporting by the Associated Press, the feature began a limited rollout in India before expanding this week to all Google Account users in the United States, though availability elsewhere remains unclear. The gradual deployment underscores Google’s preference for controlled identity-layer changes, where even minor authentication adjustments can ripple across devices, enterprise tools, and external platforms.

Identity Flexibility Strengthens Ecosystem Retention

The most important technology implication is not cosmetic username cleanup, but reduced switching friction inside Google’s ecosystem. For more than two decades, Gmail usernames effectively acted as permanent digital anchors, often discouraging professional users from keeping older personal accounts once naming conventions became outdated.

By allowing a primary username change while preserving the old address as an alternate alias, Google removes a structural pain point without weakening account continuity. Messages sent to both the legacy and updated addresses still flow into the same inbox, ensuring that account history, cloud assets, and sign-in relationships remain intact.

This design choice also protects Google’s data gravity advantage. Users who might otherwise migrate to a competing productivity platform can now modernize their identity without leaving Gmail, preserving long-term engagement across Workspace-adjacent consumer services.

Third-Party Login Dependencies Face New Stress Tests

The update also exposes a data governance and interoperability risk layer. Because Gmail addresses often function as federated credentials for banking apps, productivity software, social platforms, and legacy SaaS accounts, the change introduces possible synchronization issues outside Google’s controlled environment.

Google has already warned that some non-Google services may fail to immediately recognize the new username, particularly where email strings are used as immutable identifiers rather than dynamic login aliases. In practice, this could create short-term authentication mismatches, password recovery complications, or account duplication risks for external services with rigid identity schemas.

The issue is especially relevant for enterprise software vendors and app developers whose systems historically assumed Gmail addresses would never change. The policy update may pressure more platforms to separate user identity keys from visible email labels, a broader best-practice shift in authentication architecture.

Rollout Limits Suggest Controlled Risk Management

Google’s once-per-12-month restriction and lifetime cap of three changes indicate that the company is treating username mutability as a carefully rate-limited identity operation rather than a casual profile edit.

That cap serves multiple infrastructure purposes: reducing impersonation abuse risk, protecting trust signals in email-based verification workflows, and minimizing strain on legacy synchronization systems. It also suggests Google is balancing user flexibility against anti-fraud safeguards, particularly in areas like recovery email mapping, device trust histories, and third-party OAuth permissions.

For Chromebook users and some synced environments, Google acknowledged short-term compatibility issues, reinforcing how deeply Gmail identifiers are embedded across operating system layers and browser-based authentication sessions.

Strategic Stakes for Big Tech Identity Systems

The broader market implication is that digital identity permanence is becoming negotiable across consumer platforms. As users increasingly expect flexible naming, life-event updates, and reputation portability, Google’s move may raise competitive pressure on other large platforms whose usernames still function as irreversible account primitives.

What appears consumer-friendly on the surface is, strategically, a retention upgrade: Google is modernizing identity flexibility while keeping every historical signal, storage object, and behavioral data trail attached to the same monetizable account.

For Big Tech, that is less a user-experience tweak than a reinforcement of ecosystem durability.

The post Google’s Gmail Identity Shift Redefines Platform Lock-In and User Retention appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

In an age where artificial intelligence can clone your face and voice in seconds, Denmark is taking a bold stand: give every citizen the legal right to control their own likeness.

Danish Culture Minister Jakob Engel-Schmidt has proposed a new law that would treat a person’s face and voice as their property—meaning if someone’s features are used in an AI-generated deepfake, they can demand it be taken down.

“Technology has outpaced legislation,” Engel-Schmidt told CNN. “We shouldn’t accept a world where people are run through a digital copy machine and misused for all sorts of purposes.”

A Personal Copyright Over Your Identity

Under the proposed law, individuals—whether celebrities, artists, or private citizens—would have the right to request takedowns of AI-generated content that imitates their appearance or voice without consent.

That could have a big impact in an era where viral deepfakes are becoming more common, especially in the entertainment industry. Engel-Schmidt pointed to artists who’ve found AI-generated music online that mimics their voice, fooling fans into thinking it’s authentic.

One high-profile example: Celine Dion warned her followers earlier this year about deepfake content circulating online that appeared to be her singing—but wasn’t.

Artists Are Already Speaking Out

The music world is increasingly alarmed by generative AI. In April 2024, over 200 artists—including Billie Eilish, Katy Perry, the Jonas Brothers, Kacey Musgraves, J Balvin, and Miranda Lambert—signed an open letter demanding protections against AI impersonation in the music industry.

Denmark’s plan could be one of the first national laws to answer that call.

Engel-Schmidt says the bill has already earned cross-party support in parliament and is expected to pass this fall. But that’s just step one.

“Once it’s law, we’ll look at adding real consequences—like fines—for companies that don’t comply with takedown requests,” he said.

Balancing Free Speech and Human Dignity

The minister is careful to note that this isn’t about censorship.

“We’re champions of free speech,” he said. “But people should have the right to say yes or no to being used by generative AI.”

So far, Engel-Schmidt hasn’t formally approached major tech platforms about the proposal—but he says those conversations are coming.

“It’s in their interest, too, to make AI work for humanity—not against artists, public figures, and everyday people.”

A Global Push for Deepfake Accountability

Experts say Denmark’s approach is part of a growing global movement to regulate generative AI and protect against its misuse.

“Deepfakes pose both individual and societal risks,” said Athina Karatzogianni, a professor of technology and society at the University of Leicester. “They threaten personal rights and also damage the democratic values of equality and transparency.”

With generative AI rapidly evolving, Denmark’s proposal may become a model for other countries trying to navigate the same ethical minefield.

Source: CNN – Denmark plans to thwart deepfakers by giving everyone copyright over their own features

The post Denmark Moves to Give Citizens Legal Control Over Their Face and Voice appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

A futuristic orb, a face scan, and a mission to separate humans from bots — that’s the pitch from Tools for Humanity, the startup co-founded by OpenAI’s Sam Altman. But when I gave it a try, the Orb couldn’t even verify me as human.

Turns out, that’s (sort of) by design.

The Orb is part of a bold attempt to fix a growing problem on the internet: telling real people apart from bots. With AI now able to solve CAPTCHAs and generate realistic fake identities, verifying humanity online is harder — and more important — than ever.

Enter the Orb: a sleek, sci-fi-looking device designed to scan your face and eyes, analyzing details like shape and light response to confirm your uniqueness. If it works, it grants you a WorldID, a digital credential that proves you’re human. That ID could be used across websites — from social media to banking — to cut through bot interference and fraud.

But when I stepped up to the Orb, it rejected me. The reason? My yellow-tinted blue-light blocking contact lenses. The device flagged my face as “blocked,” suggesting I might be trying to fool it.

“Well, that’s sad, but I’m grateful it rejected you,” joked Tiago Sada, Chief Product Officer at Tools for Humanity. “It means the system is doing its job.”

Sada says the Orb was built in response to bots running wild on the internet — scalping concert tickets, cluttering dating apps, and even spreading misinformation campaigns. “Every single time tickets go live, bots buy them up and drive prices sky-high,” he explained. “And on dating apps, you’ll come across an account with six fingers — that’s AI.”

But getting the public to trust a machine that scans your face and stores your identity? That’s a harder sell.

Already, privacy concerns have led to bans and investigations. Hong Kong blocked the project entirely. Regulators in the UK are probing it. Critics fear this is just another way for big tech figures like Altman to centralize power under the guise of innovation.

Once scanned, users receive a WorldID via a mobile app. Think of it like Face ID, but not tied to Apple — and theoretically usable across multiple platforms.

So far, WorldID has a limited number of use cases. Some Reddit communities and Shopify stores have “human-only” access points for verified users. Over 12 million people across 20+ countries have tried the Orb, which is available at malls, events, and soon — through a home delivery option starting in Latin America.

The Orb is temporarily unavailable in the U.S. while updates are underway. But the World App remains live.

The Orb’s identity system is tied to World, an open-source platform originally launched as Worldcoin in 2023. Users in some countries receive Worldcoin cryptocurrency for verifying their identity. (I didn’t — Worldcoin isn’t available in the U.S.)

The idea? To prepare for a world where AI transforms economies — and possibly distribute universal basic income, a concept Altman supports.

But giving users crypto in exchange for biometric scans raises red flags. Critics say it could encourage people to overlook privacy concerns, or hand over too much power to a handful of tech leaders.

Sada defends the model, saying World gives users ownership of the network — and that privacy is a core focus. According to Tools for Humanity, face scans are encrypted, sent to the user’s device, and then deleted. The app can also be locked for added security.

Much of the tech behind the Orb is open source, allowing external experts to examine its privacy protections.

“It’s not very intuitive that something like this is private,” Sada admitted. “But we believe privacy is freedom — and World is built to protect that.”

Source: CNN Newsource – Here’s what happened when I tried the Sam Altman-backed orb face scanner

The post I Tried the Face-Scanning Orb Backed by Sam Altman — Here’s What Happened appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

In the documentary The Remarkable Life of Ibelin, a Norwegian couple shares the surprising and heartfelt story of their disabled son, Mats Steen, and his hidden life in the online game World of Warcraft—a world his parents knew little about until after his death.

A Life Beyond the Wheelchair

When Mats Steen passed away in 2014 at the age of 25 from Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), his parents, Robert and Trude Steen, were shocked by the outpouring of grief from people across Europe. While they knew their son was an avid gamer, they had no idea that for nearly a decade, Mats had lived a vibrant second life in World of Warcraft, taking on the role of an avatar named Ibelin. His story is now told in the documentary The Remarkable Life of Ibelin.

In the film, Mats Steen introduces his online world: “I leave this world, and I spend most of my time in a distant world called Azeroth,” he says. “In there, my chains are broken, and I can be whoever I want to be.” For Mats, who used a wheelchair for much of his life, World of Warcraft offered the chance to experience the freedom, social connections, and love he struggled to find in the physical world.

The Hidden Life of Ibelin

Mats’ parents had long assumed he lived a lonely, isolated existence due to his illness. Robert Steen reflected, “We believed that he lived a lonely and isolated life, without experiencing love or being important… until after his passing.” When they posted an announcement of Mats’s death on his gaming blog, they were flooded with messages from his online friends. These messages revealed the deep connections Mats had formed in the gaming world—friendships, shared experiences, and even love—shocking his parents and forever changing their understanding of his life.

Exploring a Digital Avatar’s Reality

Mats’s dual life was first explored by Norwegian broadcaster NRK in 2019, followed by a BBC article that inspired filmmaker Benjamin Ree to create the documentary. Ree reflects on how Mats’s story raises critical questions relevant today: “Can you form real friendships with people you’ve never met? Can you experience love online? How close can you get to someone you’ve only interacted with through text?”

The documentary uses a mix of VHS footage from the Steen family, voice-acted recitations of Mats’s blog Musings of Life, and animated scenes from World of Warcraft to bring Mats’s life to the screen. It also features interviews with Mats’s friends from the game, who share their memories of Ibelin, his in-game persona.

The film reveals that Mats’s online interactions were not just trivial gaming banter. His community, called Starlight, contributed 42,000 pages of conversation, giving Ree the raw material to piece together Mats’s emotional journey as Ibelin. Ree describes it as “like a film script that’s 42,000 pages long,” capturing the complexities of Mats’s online life.

Ibelin: A Virtual Extension of Mats

Mats’s avatar, Ibelin, was named after Balian of Ibelin, a character from the 2005 film Kingdom of Heaven, played by Orlando Bloom. In World of Warcraft, Ibelin is tall, strong, and noble—a stark contrast to Mats’s real-life physical limitations. As Ibelin, Mats was a heroic, charismatic figure who “fought evil” and formed lasting friendships. In the documentary, Ibelin introduces himself as “Ibelin Redmoore, famed detective and nobleman, who finds friends and fights evil wherever he goes.”

Mats saw Ibelin as an “expansion of myself,” an idealized version of his true self. But Ibelin wasn’t just a superhero; his friends in the game describe him as a kind, supportive presence. One message from a fellow player reads, “He would always lighten the mood,” while another tribute says, “He was there for me, and I could talk to him about the stupid things.”

A Romantic at Heart

Beyond his in-game heroics, Ibelin was also a romantic. Mats’s online friends recall that he had a reputation as an “incurable romantic” who often had success with women in the game. In particular, Mats developed a close relationship with a player named Lisette, who played as the avatar Rumour. Their virtual bond grew into what seems to have been Mats’s greatest love story. In the documentary, Ibelin meets a “dark-haired, mysterious beauty” in the game, and their virtual kiss on the cheek becomes a poignant moment for Mats. “It was just a virtual kiss, but boy could I feel it,” Mats reflects in the film.

The documentary also introduces Xenia and her son Mikkel, who play online together as their avatars, Reike and Nikmik. Xenia shares how Mats’s mature advice helped her and her son improve their relationship, further highlighting the depth of Mats’s emotional presence in the online world.

A Life Unseen

The Remarkable Life of Ibelin is a moving exploration of how an online game provided Mats Steen with a platform to experience the connection, love, and acceptance he yearned for. Through his virtual persona, he lived a full and rich life—one that, until his death, remained hidden from his parents. The film also touches on broader themes, such as the generational divide in the way people engage with technology and the evolving nature of friendships in the digital age.

For the Steen family, Mats’s death marked the beginning of a journey into discovering the depth of his virtual life. The documentary offers a touching reminder of how technology can provide meaningful connections, even when physical limitations or geographic distances stand in the way.

Source

The post Ibelin: The Virtual World Where Mats Steen Found Love and Friendship appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have made it possible for speech synthesis tools to generate eerily realistic voices. These tools can mimic accents, whisper, and even clone the voices of real people. But with these developments, it raises the question: how can we tell the difference between a human voice and an AI-generated one?

Today, it’s easier than ever to have a conversation with AI. From chatbots that answer questions to AI systems that speak multiple languages and use different accents, technology is making it possible for machines to communicate like never before. In fact, some AI-powered tools can now clone the voices of real people. For instance, one AI tool was recently used to replicate the voice of late British broadcaster Sir Michael Parkinson for a podcast series. Another example is natural history broadcaster Sir David Attenborough, who was disturbed to hear his voice cloned by AI to say things he never said.

While some of these voice-cloning tools are used for harmless entertainment, others are being exploited in scams to deceive people. For example, criminals use AI-generated voices to trick people into transferring money or revealing personal information.

However, not all AI-generated voices are used maliciously. They are also integrated into chatbots powered by large language models, making conversations with machines sound more natural and convincing. Take ChatGPT’s voice function, for example. It can respond with variations in tone and emphasis, much like a human would to convey empathy or emotion. It can also interpret non-verbal cues like sighs or sobs, speak in over 50 languages, and even make phone calls to assist with tasks. In one demonstration, ChatGPT even ordered strawberries from a vendor over the phone.

These AI advancements lead to a compelling question: is there anything truly unique about the human voice that helps us distinguish it from machine-generated speech?

The Challenge of Telling AI from Human Voices

Jonathan Harrington, a phonetics expert at the University of Munich, Germany, has spent years studying how humans speak, produce sounds, and create accents. He is impressed by how realistic AI-generated voices have become in recent years. However, he believes there are still subtle cues that can help us tell the difference.

To explore this, we set up a challenge. We asked Conor Grennan, Chief AI Architect at New York University Stern School of Business, to create audio clips where he reads a passage from Alice in Wonderland—once with his own voice and once with an AI-generated voice from ElevenLabs, a speech-cloning software company. After playing the clips for people, around half of them struggled to tell which voice was human and which was AI.

One of the cybersecurity experts we spoke to, Steve Grobman from McAfee, was also unable to easily distinguish the two voices. He mentioned that AI voices may lack certain nuances, such as the natural cadence or breathing patterns we associate with human speech. For instance, humans often breathe irregularly, while AI-generated voices may sound too perfect.

In fact, many experts acknowledge that detecting deepfakes—AI-generated speech or video that imitates real people—can be difficult for the human ear. For example, a deepfake of Bill Gates once fooled listeners, making it sound as though he was endorsing a quantum AI stock trading tool. Despite sounding like him, it was flagged as a fake by deepfake detection software.

How Can We Tell AI from Human Voices?

While AI-generated voices have become impressively realistic, there are still some clues that can help us tell them apart from human speech.

One key feature to listen for is intonation, or the rise and fall in pitch during a sentence. Humans typically adjust their pitch to reflect the meaning or emotion behind their words. For example, the phrase “Marianne made the marmalade” may sound different depending on whether it’s a statement or a question. AI voices can struggle with this level of nuance.

Another clue lies in prosody, the rhythm and pattern of speech. Humans naturally emphasize certain words for meaning, and AI voices often fail to replicate this consistently. For example, if asked, “Did Marianna make the marmalade?”, a human would likely emphasize the word made, while an AI might emphasize a different word.

Additionally, breathing patterns can be a giveaway. Humans naturally breathe irregularly, and their breath intakes may vary in length. AI-generated voices, however, might sound too perfect or regular, giving away their artificial nature.

The Growing Threat of Voice Cloning

As AI voice technology improves, concerns about voice cloning are rising. Experts worry that cloned voices could be used in scams, identity theft, or to manipulate individuals. One cybersecurity example highlighted by Assaf Rappaport, CEO of cybersecurity firm Wiz, involved criminals creating a voice clone of him using a recent talk he gave. They attempted to use the cloned voice to deceive his employees into revealing credentials, though the attempt was unsuccessful.

Cybersecurity expert Pete Nicoletti from Check Point Software recommends being cautious if you suspect someone is using a voice clone. He advises asking personal questions or suggesting you’ll call back to verify their identity. In a work setting, you should avoid making wire transfers based solely on a phone call from someone claiming to be a high-level executive.

The Future of AI Voices

AI voice technology is improving rapidly, and experts like Dane Sherrets, innovation architect at HackerOne, believe it will only get more convincing. AI can now mimic human-like inflection, breathing, and even hesitation, but it’s still not perfect. While AI can replicate much of human speech, it struggles to capture the full range of human emotions and the complexities of context.

As AI continues to advance, experts are working to develop better detection tools. McAfee, for example, is partnering with major PC manufacturers to install deepfake detection software on devices, and ElevenLabs offers a free tool to detect AI-generated voices. However, as AI technology and detection tools evolve, we may find ourselves in a race where distinguishing AI from humans becomes increasingly difficult.

Conclusion: The Importance of Face-to-Face Interaction

Given the growing capabilities of AI-generated voices, it’s becoming harder to tell whether you’re speaking to a human or a machine. Experts recommend being cautious and using alternative methods to verify someone’s identity, such as asking personal questions or using voice validation methods. In some cases, the best solution might be to spend more time interacting in person.

In the battle between AI-generated voices and detection technology, we may find that the key to distinguishing a real person from a machine lies not in the voice itself, but in the authenticity of human interaction.

Were you able to tell which voice was AI and which was human in our “Alice in Wonderland” challenge? The first clip was AI, and the second was human.

Source

The post AI-Generated Voices: How to Tell Them Apart from Real Human Speech appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Introduction to a High-Tech Hoax

In August, 44-year-old neurologist Dr. Ruchika Tandon from Lucknow, India, fell victim to a sinister scam that drained her family’s life savings. Under the guise of a “digital arrest,” fraudsters manipulated her into believing she was involved in a grave federal investigation, coercing her to transfer nearly ₹25 million (around $300,000). This scam, which has victimized many Indians, highlights the dangers of cyber fraud.

The Mechanics of the ‘Digital Arrest’ Scam

Scammers posing as law enforcement officials use video calls to threaten victims with arrest over fabricated charges. They demand money transfers, claiming it’s necessary for “government verification” or bail. Victims are coerced into constant surveillance, isolated from family, and forced to surrender their finances.

Dr. Tandon’s ordeal began with a call from someone impersonating a telecom regulator, warning her of alleged complaints linked to her phone number. This escalated to threats of arrest for “money laundering related to trafficking.” The scammers demanded she purchase a smartphone for better surveillance and monitored her life via Skype for six days.

The Human and Financial Toll

Over the course of her “digital arrest,” Dr. Tandon endured staged trials, relentless questioning, and emotional manipulation. The scammers also exploited her family, including her elderly mother. Eventually, she was convinced to transfer her entire savings to their accounts.

This isn’t an isolated incident. Between January and April 2024, Indians lost over ₹1.2 billion to similar scams. Investigations reveal that many operations are based in Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos, with stolen money often funneled into cryptocurrency.

Victims and Resistance

Journalist Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay narrowly escaped a similar scam in July. Recognizing discrepancies in the scammers’ narrative, he disconnected his modem and alerted friends. His quick thinking saved him from financial ruin.

Authorities have arrested 18 suspects linked to Dr. Tandon’s case, recovering part of her stolen funds. Yet, the psychological impact lingers. Victims like Dr. Tandon struggle with anxiety and paranoia, haunted by the trauma of their experiences.

Government and Public Response

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the issue in October, urging citizens to remain vigilant against such scams. Law enforcement officials emphasize public awareness as a critical defense against cyber fraud.

The Scammers’ Strategy

Investigators reveal that the scammers are well-educated professionals, including engineers and cybersecurity experts. They meticulously gather personal data from social media to exploit victims’ vulnerabilities. However, their errors—such as misrepresenting financial procedures or legal insignias—sometimes raise suspicion and offer victims a chance to escape.

Conclusion
The “digital arrest” scam is a stark reminder of the growing sophistication of cyber fraud. While victims like Dr. Tandon work to rebuild their lives, the public must remain cautious, informed, and proactive in safeguarding personal information.

Source

The post The ‘Digital Arrest’ Scam: How Fraudsters Are Looting Millions from Indians appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.