Reading view

Spain Ban Social Media Platforms for Kids as Global Trend Grows

Spain Ban Social Media Platforms

Spain is preparing to take one of the strongest steps yet in Europe’s growing push to regulate the digital world for young people. Spain will ban social media platforms for children under the age of 16, a move Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez framed as necessary to protect minors from what he called the “digital Wild West.” This, Spain ban social media platforms, is not just another policy announcement. The Spain ban social media decision reflects a wider global shift: governments are finally admitting that social media has become too powerful, too unregulated, and too harmful for children to navigate alone.

Spain Ban Social Media Platforms for Children Under Age of 16

Speaking at the World Government Summit in Dubai, Sanchez said Spain will require social media platforms to implement strict age verification systems, ensuring that children under 16 cannot access these services freely. “Social media has become a failed state,” Sanchez declared, arguing that laws are ignored and harmful behavior is tolerated online. The Spain ban social media platforms for children under age of 16 is being positioned as a child safety measure, but it is also a direct challenge to tech companies that have long avoided accountability. Sanchez’s language was blunt, and honestly, refreshing. For years, platforms have marketed themselves as neutral spaces while profiting from algorithms that amplify outrage, addictive scrolling, and harmful content. Spain’s message is clear: enough is enough.

Social Media Ban and Executive Accountability

Spain is not stopping at age limits. Sanchez also announced a new bill expected next week that would hold social media executives personally accountable for illegal and hateful content. That is a significant escalation. A social media ban alone may restrict access, but forcing executives to face consequences could change platform behavior at its core. The era of tech leaders hiding behind “we’re just a platform” excuses may finally be coming to an end. This makes Spain’s approach one of the most aggressive in Europe so far.

France Joins the Global Social Media Ban Movement

Spain is not acting in isolation. On February 3, 2026, French lawmakers approved their own social media ban for children under 15. The bill passed by a wide margin in the National Assembly and is expected to take effect in September, at the start of the next school year. French President Emmanuel Macron strongly backed the move, saying: “Our children’s brains are not for sale… Their dreams must not be dictated by algorithms.” That statement captures the heart of this debate. Social media is not just entertainment anymore. It is an attention economy designed to hook young minds early, shaping behavior, self-image, and even mental health. France’s decision adds momentum to the idea that a social media ban globally for children may soon become the norm rather than the exception.

Australia’s World-First Social Media Ban for Children Under 16

The strongest example so far comes from Australia, which implemented a world-first social media ban for children under 16 in December 2025. The ban covered major platforms including:
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • TikTok
  • Snapchat
  • Reddit
  • X
  • YouTube
  • Twitch
Messaging apps like WhatsApp were exempt, acknowledging that communication tools are different from algorithm-driven feeds. Since enforcement began, companies have revoked access to around 4.7 million accounts linked to children. Meta alone removed nearly 550,000 accounts the day after the ban took effect. Australia’s case shows that enforcement is possible, even at scale, through ID checks, third-party age estimation tools, and data inference. Yes, some children try to bypass restrictions. But the broader impact is undeniable: governments can intervene when platforms fail to self-regulate.

UK Exploring Similar Social Media Ban Measures

The United Kingdom is now considering its own restrictions. Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently said the government is exploring a social media ban for children aged 15 and under, alongside stricter age verification and limits on addictive features. The UK’s discussion highlights another truth: this is no longer just about content moderation. It’s about the mental wellbeing of an entire generation growing up inside algorithmic systems.

Is a Social Media Ban Globally for Children the Future?

Spain’s move, combined with France, Australia, and the UK, signals a clear global trend. For years, social media companies promised safety tools, parental controls, and community guidelines. Yet harmful content, cyberbullying, predatory behavior, and addictive design have continued to spread. The reality is uncomfortable: platforms were never built with children in mind. They were built for engagement, profit, and data. A social media ban globally for children may not be perfect, but it is becoming a political and social necessity. Spain’s decision to ban social media platforms for children under age of 16 is not just about restricting access. It is about redefining digital childhood, reclaiming accountability, and admitting that the online world cannot remain lawless. The digital Wild West era may finally be ending.
  •  

Benefits of Executive Monitoring Platforms for Business Growth

executive monitoring platforms

When a CEO's deepfake appears in a fraudulent investor call, when stolen credentials surface on dark web marketplaces, or when executive impersonation attempts trick employees into wire transfers, the damage isn't just technical—it's existential. Yet most organizations treat executive protection as an afterthought, if they think about it at all, instead of leveraging Executive Monitoring Platforms to detect and mitigate these threats proactively. Here's the uncomfortable reality; your executives aren't just high-value employees. They're walking attack vectors. Their social media presence, their public speaking engagements, their digital footprints across platforms—all of it creates opportunities for threat actors. And unlike technical vulnerabilities that can be patched, executive exposure is permanent, cumulative, and growing by the day. Executives understand visibility as a business necessity for leadership, brand building, and investor confidence. What they often lack is executive security intelligence that shows how attackers weaponize that visibility. The question isn't whether your leadership team needs executive monitoring. It's whether you can afford not to have it. Cyble Annual Threat Landscape Report, Annual Threat Landscape Report, Cyble Annual Threat Landscape Report 2025, Threat Landscape Report 2025, Cyble, Ransomware, Hacktivism, AI attacks, Vulnerabilities, APT, ICS Vulnerabilities

The Executive Blind Spot Nobody Talks About

Traditional security frameworks focus on perimeter defense, endpoint protection, and network monitoring. Executive monitoring exists in a different dimension entirely—one that bridges digital risk, physical security, and reputational management in ways most security teams aren't equipped to handle. Consider what attackers see when they target executives: comprehensive LinkedIn profiles detailing career histories and professional networks, conference schedules announcing travel plans weeks in advance, published interviews revealing decision-making processes and strategic priorities, social media posts exposing family members and personal interests, and professional email addresses easily harvested for spear-phishing campaigns. This isn't reconnaissance requiring sophisticated hacking. It's open-source intelligence gathering anyone can perform in an afternoon. The real vulnerability is that executives themselves rarely understand their exposure. They view public visibility as part of the job—necessary for thought leadership, investor relations, and business development. They're not wrong. But they're also not thinking like attackers.

Why Executive Threats Are Business Continuity Issues

A compromised server gets fixed. A breached database gets contained. But when executives become attack targets, the damage radiates through the organization in ways that don't show up in incident reports. Business email compromise attacks targeting executives cost organizations an average of $4.1 million per incident. That's not counting the reputational damage, the eroded stakeholder trust, or the board-level questions about why leadership wasn't better protected. Deepfake technology has matured to the point where realistic video and audio impersonations can be generated in hours, not days. When a fake CEO video circulates making false claims about company performance, markets react before PR teams can even draft responses. Executive credential leaks create cascading risks. Unlike typical employee accounts, executive credentials often have elevated privileges, access to sensitive strategic information, and the authority to approve high-value transactions. A single compromised executive account can become the fulcrum for devastating attacks. This is where standard security tools fall short. They protect infrastructure—but they don’t deliver real-time executive protection. They don’t monitor the dark web for leaked executive credentials, track impersonation accounts on social platforms, or identify deepfakes before they go viral. That gap is precisely what executive monitoring solutions are designed to fill.
Interested in exploring how executive monitoring can strengthen your leadership protection and enable strategic growth? Learn more about comprehensive executive threat intelligence solutions at Cyble.com.

The Growth Multiplier Effect

Here's the business case that gets overlooked in security discussions; executive monitoring doesn't just prevent damage—it enables growth. When leaders can engage publicly with confidence, thought leadership accelerates. When executives travel internationally backed by executive protection services, deal-making and partnerships move faster. When boards know that leadership exposure is continuously monitored, governance concerns diminish and strategic focus increases. Organizations with robust executive monitoring platforms demonstrate operational maturity that resonates with investors, partners, and enterprise clients. It signals that security isn't just an IT function—it's embedded in how the business operates at the highest levels. For companies pursuing M&A activity, executive protection becomes due diligence table stakes. Acquiring companies want assurance that leadership teams come without hidden security liabilities. The velocity of business decisions improves when executives aren't second-guessing their digital exposure. Strategic communications happen more freely. Competitive intelligence can be gathered more aggressively. Innovation discussions occur with less fear of leakage.

What Effective Executive Monitoring Actually Looks Like

The difference between security theater and genuine protection is specificity. Generic threat intelligence doesn't translate to executive protection. What matters is real-time monitoring across the specific vectors where executive threats emerge. Effective platforms monitor dark web forums and cybercrime marketplaces for executive PII leaks, tracking when credentials, personal data, or sensitive information surfaces in underground channels. They deploy AI-driven deepfake detection across social media and video platforms, identifying manipulated content before it gains distribution. Social media impersonation tracking identifies fake accounts masquerading as executives, often used for business email compromise setup. Compromised credential monitoring alerts when executive email addresses or passwords appear in breach databases, enabling immediate password resets before exploitation. The challenge is scale and speed. Manual monitoring can't keep pace with how quickly threats emerge and spread. By the time a security analyst discovers an executive impersonation account, it may have already been used to contact employees or partners. This is where platforms like Cyble's Executive Monitoring solution demonstrate the value of automation paired with human expertise. Cyble delivers real-time executive protection across the surface web, deep web, and dark web. The platform combines real-time alerts delivered via email, SMS, or WhatsApp with AI-powered threat detection that identifies deepfakes, impersonations, and credential leaks across surface web, deep web, and dark web sources. It provides unified dashboard visibility that consolidates executive threats into a single view rather than fragmenting them across multiple tools, and integrates physical security intelligence for executives traveling to high-risk locations with contextualized threat assessments. What separates effective solutions from basic monitoring is context. Alerting about every potential threat creates noise. Understanding which threats pose genuine risk to specific executives based on their role, public profile, and current activities—that's intelligence. Cyble's approach emphasizes actionable insights over data dumps. When an executive's credentials appear in a breach, the platform doesn't just alert—it provides context about the source, potential impact, and recommended response actions. When deepfakes are detected, automated takedown processes can be initiated, removing fraudulent content before it spreads widely.
Also read: How Cyble is Leading the Fight Against Deepfakes with Real-Time Detection & Takedowns
Instead of flooding teams with noise, Cyble provides insight into severity, relevance, and recommended actions—turning raw data into Executive Security Intelligence.

The ROI Nobody Calculates

Traditional security investments justify themselves through prevented breaches and avoided downtime. Executive monitoring ROI is harder to quantify precisely because it's impossible to measure attacks that never happened due to deterrence and early intervention. But consider the inverse calculation: what's the cost of not having it? A single successful executive impersonation attack costs millions. A leaked executive credential that enables a broader breach amplifies damage exponentially. A deepfake crisis that damages brand reputation takes years to repair. The question shifts from "can we justify the investment" to "can we justify the exposure." Organizations serious about growth recognize that executive security is growth infrastructure, not a cost center. It's the same logic that drives investments in executive coaching, strategic advisors, and leadership development. You're protecting and amplifying the most valuable assets in the organization—the people making decisions.

Building Protection That Scales With Ambition

The final insight that separates mature organizations from reactive ones is that executive monitoring isn't static. As companies grow, executive profiles rise. As leadership becomes more publicly visible, attack surfaces expand. As strategic importance increases, threat actor interest intensifies. Effective senior executive threat protection must scale alongside ambition. Scalable executive protection means platforms that grow with organizational complexity, handling increased numbers of monitored executives as leadership teams expand. They adapt to evolving threat vectors, continuously updating detection capabilities as attack techniques mature. They integrate with existing security infrastructure rather than creating isolated silos, and provide graduated protection levels matching executive risk profiles rather than one-size-fits-all approaches. This requires platforms built on threat intelligence foundations, not bolt-on features added to existing security suites. Cyble's Executive Monitoring exists within a broader threat intelligence ecosystem that includes dark web monitoring, brand protection, and attack surface management. This integration means executive threats aren't isolated signals—they're correlated with broader organizational risk patterns. When an executive's name appears in dark web discussions alongside mentions of your company's infrastructure, that correlation matters. When brand impersonation campaigns coincide with executive travel to specific regions, that context informs protective measures.

The Strategic Imperative

Executive monitoring represents a fundamental shift in how organizations think about security. It acknowledges that protecting infrastructure isn't enough when people are targets. It recognizes that reputational risk and operational risk intertwine at the leadership level. It accepts that digital threats demand digital surveillance, not just digital defenses. For organizations pursuing growth, executive protection isn't optional anymore. It's foundational. The businesses that will dominate their markets in the coming decade aren't just those with the best products or strongest financials—they're the ones whose leadership can operate with confidence, visibility, and strategic aggression because their digital exposure is being actively managed. The threat landscape has evolved. Executive protection must evolve with it. The question is whether your organization will adapt proactively or learn these lessons the expensive way.
Interested in exploring how executive monitoring can strengthen your leadership protection and enable strategic growth? Learn more about comprehensive executive threat intelligence solutions at Cyble.com.
  •  

Enshittification is ruining everything online (Lock and Code S07E01)

This week on the Lock and Code podcast…

There’s a bizarre thing happening online right now where everything is getting worse.

Your Google results have become so bad that you’ve likely typed what you’re looking for, plus the word “Reddit,” so you can find discussion from actual humans. If you didn’t take this route, you might get served AI results from Google Gemini, which once recommended that every person should eat “at least one small rock per day.” Your Amazon results are a slog, filled with products that have surreptitiously paid reviews. Your Facebook feed could be entirely irrelevant because the company decided years ago that you didn’t want to see what your friends posted, you wanted to see what brands posted, because brands pay Facebook, and you don’t, so brands are more important than your friends.

But, according to digital rights activist and award-winning author Cory Doctorow, this wave of online deterioration isn’t an accident—it’s a business strategy, and it can be summed up in a word he coined a couple of years ago: Enshittification.

Enshittification is the process by which an online platform—like Facebook, Google, or Amazon—harms its own services and products for short-term gain while managing to avoid any meaningful consequences, like the loss of customers or the impact of meaningful government regulation. It begins with an online platform treating new users with care, offering services, products, or connectivity that they may not find elsewhere. Then, the platform invites businesses on board that want to sell things to those users. This means businesses become the priority and the everyday user experience is hindered. But then, in the final stage, the platform also makes things worse for its business customers, making things better only for itself.

This is how a company like Amazon went from helping you find nearly anything you wanted to buy online to helping businesses sell you anything you wanted to buy online to making those businesses pay increasingly high fees to even be discovered online. Everyone, from buyers to sellers, is pretty much entrenched in the platform, so Amazon gets to dictate the terms.

Today, on the Lock and Code podcast with host David Ruiz, we speak with Doctorow about enshittification’s fast damage across the internet, how to fight back, and where it all started.

 ”Once these laws were established, the tech companies were able to take advantage of them. And today we have a bunch of companies that aren’t tech companies that are nevertheless using technology to rig the game in ways that the tech companies pioneered.”

Tune in today to listen to the full conversation.

Show notes and credits:

Intro Music: “Spellbound” by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Outro Music: “Good God” by Wowa (unminus.com)


Listen up—Malwarebytes doesn’t just talk cybersecurity, we provide it.

Protect yourself from online attacks that threaten your identity, your files, your system, and your financial well-being with our exclusive offer for Malwarebytes Premium Security for Lock and Code listeners.

  •  

The End of Excuses: 10 Cybersecurity Investments Every CISO Must Make by 2026

2026-CISOs Investment

Coupang’s CEO resigned. Bed Bath & Beyond’s CTO stepped down. Two very different companies, two very similar stories: a massive breach, millions of exposed records, and executives suddenly facing the consequences. Park Dae-jun of Coupang called it a resignation, but everyone knew it was forced. Rafeh Masood’s departure at Bed Bath & Beyond came just days after a breach, leaving questions hanging in the air. These are not isolated incidents, they are a warning. For years, CISOs operated with a cushion. A breach? Brush it off. A delayed response? Justify it. A failing tool? Swap it out. That era is over.  By 2026, cybersecurity isn’t just about systems and alerts. It’s about governance, accountability, and real-world consequences. AI is moving faster than humans can react. Ransomware is clever, adaptive, and relentless. Regulators want proof, not excuses. Boards will no longer settle for “we’re still maturing.”  The hard truth: most security programs as they exist today will not survive 2026. CISOs are being forced to make hard choices, fewer tools, stricter controls, and investments that actually protect the business. Speed helps, but clarity and accountability matter far more.  Here are 10 technologies CISOs will invest in during 2026, not because they are trendy, but because without them, security leadership simply won’t exist.

1. AI-Driven Security Operations (AI-SOC)

Ransomware is no longer noisy, careless, or opportunistic. It is calculated.  As Dr Sheeba Armoogum, Associate Professor in Cybersecurity, University of Mauritius, explains to The Cyber Express, “By 2026, CISOs will prioritize investment in AI-driven security operations and identity-first security platforms to counter the rapid rise of AI-based ransomware and automated extortion attacks. Ransomware is no longer opportunistic; it is adaptive, identity-aware, and increasingly capable of evading traditional detection using AI techniques.”  This is the line CISOs must internalise: traditional SOC models are structurally obsolete. 

Threats now move faster than human workflows can respond. Static rules, manual triage, and analyst-centric escalation chains break down when adversaries use AI to adapt in real time. As a result, CISOs are increasingly backing AI-native SOC platforms that operate through autonomous agents rather than dashboards and alerts.

Cyble Blaze AI exemplifies this shift. Built as an AI-native, multi-agent cybersecurity platform, Blaze AI enables continuous threat hunting, real-time correlation, and autonomous response, allowing security teams to identify and neutralize threats in seconds rather than hours. In practice, this moves security operations from reactive monitoring to machine-speed defense.

AI-SOC is not about replacing analysts; it is about re-architecting operations so humans supervise outcomes instead of chasing alerts. Behavioural analysis, automated decisioning, and immediate containment are no longer “advanced capabilities”—they are foundational.

Any CISO still relying on static rules and manual triage in 2026 will be explaining failure, not preventing it.

2. Identity-First Security Platforms

Perimeter security died quietly. Identity replaced it loudly.  Dr Armoogum makes the reason explicit, “At the same time, identity security controls such as continuous authentication and privileged access governance are critical, as most ransomware campaigns now begin with credential compromise rather than malware exploits.”  This is not a technical nuance, it is a strategic failure point. Most breaches do not break in; they log in.  In 2026, CISOs will invest in identity-first security because everything else depends on it. Human users, service accounts, APIs, workloads, and AI agents all require governance. If identity is weak, cloud controls, endpoint tools, and network defenses are cosmetic.  Identity is now the security control plane.

3. Privacy and Data Governance Platforms

Privacy failures no longer stay in legal departments—they land squarely on security leadership.  As Nikhil Jhanji, Principal Product Manager at Privy by IDfy, told The Cyber Express, “By 2026, CISOs will invest far more in privacy and data governance technologies that make compliance operational rather than aspirational.”  This is the pivot point. Policies and spreadsheets cannot scale to modern data flows. Regulators expect continuous accountability, consent traceability, and defensible evidence.  What matters, as Jhanji notes, is not just prevention:  “What matters now is not just preventing incidents but being able to demonstrate responsible data handling at scale to regulators, boards, and customers.”  In 2026, privacy becomes a living control layer, not a compliance afterthought.

4. Continuous Exposure Management (CEM)

Patch faster has failed as a strategy.  Swati Bhate, Chief Information Security Officer and Chief Risk Officer, i-Source Infosystems Pvt. Ltd., delivers the most uncompromising view in her LinkedIn post of what lies ahead:  “By 2026, the margin for error has hit zero.”  She makes the mandate clear:  “Pre-emptive Blocking > Reactive Patching: Machine-speed attacks demand Continuous Exposure Management (CEM) to block non-compliant deployments automatically.”  This is not about improving hygiene, it is about stopping unsafe systems from existing at all. In 2026, environments that fail security baselines should never reach production.  Security becomes a gate, not a clean-up crew.

5. Confidential Computing and Silicon-Level Isolation

Cloud security tools have a blind spot, and attackers know it.  Bhate warns, “Attackers now target hypervisors to bypass guest OS defenses. Our baseline mandates silicon-level isolation and Confidential Computing.”  This is a direct challenge to CISOs who believe visibility equals control. If memory, workloads, and virtualization layers are exposed, traditional controls are irrelevant.  Confidential Computing moves trust down the stack, to hardware. In 2026, CISOs will invest here not for innovation, but because it closes an attack surface software cannot defend alone.

6. AI Governance and AI Risk Controls

Shadow AI is already out of control.  Bhate again is unequivocal, “Eliminate AI Exhaust: Shadow AI pilots leave unmonitored vector databases. In 2026, data without verified lineage is a liability—not an asset.”  AI governance tools will become mandatory, not optional. CISOs will need visibility into model usage, data provenance, and decision pathways to comply with the EU AI Act and NIS2.  As Bhate concludes:  “The question is no longer how fast your AI can run—it’s whether you’ve built the brakes to keep it from taking the enterprise over a cliff.”

7. Security Platforms That Reduce Tool Sprawl

2025 exposed a hard truth: more tools did not mean more security.  As Manish Bakshi, National Sales Head – Professional Services, Ingram Micro, observed, “Fewer vendors worked better than too many tools.”  CISOs learned that speed without clarity creates fragility. In 2026, they will choose platforms, and partners—that understand business context and remain accountable after go-live.  Enterprise security buyers are no longer impressed by roadmaps. They want predictable outcomes.

8. Cloud-Native Security Platforms

Cloud misconfigurations are no longer accidents; they are liabilities.  CISOs will invest in cloud-native security platforms that continuously assess posture, identity exposure, and workload risk. These tools align with a growing sentiment from practitioners themselves:  As one security practitioner noted on Reddit, “CISOs need people who understand identity, cloud, and how systems connect, not tool jockeys.”  Security in 2026 demands system thinking, not isolated controls.

9. Detection Engineering and SIEM Evolution

Alert volume is meaningless. Understanding is not.  As one security practitioner noted in a Reddit discussion on modern SOC skills, “Shallow alert clicker skills are fading.”  CISOs will invest in platforms and people who can map attack paths, tune detections, automate response, and explain impact in plain English. In 2026, detection engineering becomes a craft—not a checkbox.

10. Risk Quantification and Board-Ready Security Metrics

Finally, CISOs will invest in tools that translate cyber risk into business reality.

By 2026, security leaders will no longer be judged on how many threats they block, but on how clearly they can explain risk, impact, and trade-offs to the business. Boards are done with abstract heat maps and technical severity scores. They want to know what a risk costs, what reducing it achieves, and what happens if it is ignored.

This is where risk quantification platforms come into play. By framing cyber exposure in business terms, they allow CISOs to prioritize controls, justify investment decisions, and have credible, outcome-driven conversations at the executive level. Platforms such as Cyble Saratoga, which focus on moving organizations beyond subjective assessments toward measurable risk understanding, reflect this shift in how security decisions are made.

In 2026, outcomes will matter more than effort. CISOs who cannot quantify risk and articulate trade-offs will lose influence, and eventually relevance.

2026 Will Separate Cybersecurity Leaders From Security Operators 

None of what’s coming in 2026 is surprising. The warning signs have been there for a while, breaches getting bigger, attacks getting smarter, regulators getting stricter, and boards getting far more involved than they used to be.  What is changing is tolerance. Tolerance for loose controls. Tolerance for fragmented tooling. Tolerance for security programs that can’t clearly explain what they’re protecting, why it matters, and what happens when things go wrong.  The technologies CISOs are investing in reflect that shift. Less experimentation. More control. Fewer tools, clearer accountability, and systems designed to prevent mistakes rather than explain them after the fact.  By 2026, cybersecurity won’t be about reacting faster. It will be about making fewer things possible in the first place, and making sure the people responsible can stand behind those decisions when it matters. 
  •