What to Know About the Hacking Group ShinyHunters and Its F.B.I. Breach

The bureau was the latest target of the notorious gang of cybercriminals that steals sensitive personal data and sells it online.

By Chris Cameron for The New York Times

September 29, 2026

A criminal hacking group known as ShinyHunters revealed last week that it had stolen a vast trove of sensitive personal data from the F.B.I., potentially one of the worst breaches of sensitive government information in the internet age.

The breach may have compromised information about tens of thousands of former and current F.B.I. employees, including data like home addresses, Social Security numbers and even secretive job assignments.

In a series of cryptic statements, ShinyHunters demanded that the F.B.I. retract a public advisory the bureau had issued this spring warning of the group’s cyberattacks. In an email to The New York Times on Friday, ShinyHunters said that the bureau had until the end of Tuesday to fulfill its request. But on Monday, it appeared to walk back that demand, saying it would not publish the data, as it typically does with the information it steals.

In a video posted online on Tuesday, the F.B.I. warned the group that it would aggressively pursue its members as it promoted the recent arrest of a suspect it said was affiliated with the group.

Here’s what to know:

What is ShinyHunters?

ShinyHunters is a loose collective of relatively young hackers who have been responsible for dozens of data breaches since about 2019. The group has typically engaged in what are known as ransom-or-release attacks, demanding millions of dollars in payments in exchange for not publishing the data its members steal.

The name of the group appears to refer to the Pokémon video games, specifically players who devote significant time and energy toward hunting for rarer shiny Pokémon.

Recent arrests offer a glimpse of ShinyHunters’ membership, suggesting that the group operates across the globe.

Sebastien Raoult, a French citizen who was then 22 years old, was convicted in 2024 of participating in some ShinyHunters attacks after being arrested in Morocco. He was extradited to the United States for trial and sentenced to three years in prison.

Others who were suspected of being part of ShinyHunters were arrested last year in France. All were young men — born between 2001 and 2004 — and were described by officials as highly isolated.

On Monday, the security journalist Brian Krebs reported that the authorities in the Netherlands had arrested a 24-year-old convicted cybercriminal on suspicion of aiding in data thefts and extortions tied to ShinyHunters just days before the F.B.I. breach. ShinyHunters denied on Monday that the suspect was associated with the group.

What have they been up to?

ShinyHunters has targeted hundreds of corporations, government agencies and other entities for their ransom attacks.

Cybersecurity authorities say the group often targets software and cloud service providers. Once infiltrated, those providers can allow hackers to gain access to many targets simultaneously. Several high-profile Google and Salesforce customers, for example, were breached through several waves of attacks over the past year. Those targets included the luxury goods company LVMH — the owner of Dior, Louis Vuitton and Tiffany — and Adidas.

In one of its first major attacks, the group stole the sensitive data of millions of AT&T customers from the company in 2021 and sold the trove online. The telecommunications giant initially denied that the data was authentic, but the company confirmed in a legal filing in 2024 that the hackers acquired sensitive customer records, including account numbers, passcodes and Social Security numbers. AT&T was hit with another cyberattack targeting a cloud service provider, Snowflake, in 2024. The breach exposed phone records from “nearly all” of its customers, the company said.

Among the group’s more high-profile targets this year was Rockstar Games, the studio behind the highly anticipated video game Grand Theft Auto VI, in which it stole and shared the company’s financial data. That data revealed the studio’s profit margins, including billions of dollars in revenue from players buying in-game cash.

ShinyHunters has claimed to have breached a variety of targets: Grubhub; the European Commission; the airline Qantas; the insurance company Allianz Life; Kering, the luxury goods company that owns Balenciaga, Gucci and Alexander McQueen; Harvard University, Princeton University and the University of Pennsylvania; Pornhub; and Telus, the Canadian telecom company.

The group’s attacks have significantly ramped up over the past year, officials and experts say.

In May, it said it had compromised an online learning system called Canvas that is used by thousands of schools and universities around the world, an attack that prompted the F.B.I.’s advisory in the spring. The group also said it was behind attacks against Ticketmaster in 2024, which the hackers said had compromised the information of more than 500 million customers.

What is happening with the F.B.I. breach?

Last week, ShinyHunters said it had stolen records from an online jobs portal for the F.B.I. and demanded that the F.B.I. “correct or simply REMOVE” the spring advisory.

Even as ShinyHunters has now said that it would not release the data, as it has for previous breaches, security researchers warned that even if the group did not publish the data, it could still sell it to other criminals or foreign governments.

It is also unclear just how much sensitive information the hackers stole. The group claimed to have stolen records on everyone who has applied for a job at the F.B.I., and told The Times that the people with compromised information numbered in the tens of thousands. An internal memo sent to the F.B.I. work force by bureau leaders said it was investigating the breach under the presumption that all employees had data stolen.

A sample of records shared with The Times by the hackers included particularly sensitive workplace records, including extraordinary job assignments like counterintelligence, narcotics and various desks focused on Russian, Chinese and Iranian national security threats.

In addition to personal records like names, addresses, phone numbers and Social Security numbers, ShinyHunters also said that it had stolen medical data about employees, including psychiatric records and documents related to blood and urine tests. It also said that it had additional background check files on employees.

Chris Cameron is a Times reporter covering Washington, focusing on breaking news and the Trump administration.

Balloon Fiesta pilot heads west in unconventional craft equipped with 94 helium balloons

BY LOGAN ROYCE BEITMEN / ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

October 4, 2026

In a scene reminiscent of Disney-Pixar’s “Up,” balloonist Jonathan Trappe took off from Balloon Fiesta Park strapped to 94 multicolored helium balloons shortly before 9 a.m. Saturday.

“This is the first time that we’ve had a helium cluster balloon at Balloon Fiesta field,” said Makayla Roberts, vice president of the Garrity Group, which manages press relations for the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta.

It takes considerably longer to inflate 94 helium balloons than a single hot air one, so Trappe’s crew arrived early.

“Myself and about 30 other folks rocked out this morning at, like, 1:30 (a.m.) to see this idea through,” crew member Andrew Pearson said.

Pearson said each balloon requires a full 200-cubic-meter tank of helium.

“Obviously, the tethers are different lengths to make sure they’re not smashing into each other,” he said.

While standard hot air balloons use heated air to create lift, cluster systems rely on the lower density of helium gas.

“If you want to go down, you let some of the helium out. So, maybe you pop one of the lower balloons,” Pearson said. “Then, as far as going up, there’s a whole bunch of different ballasts inside of the gondola — you know, sandbags, water bags. If you dump some of that out, you go up.”

Cluster ballooning was pioneered by a University of Minnesota physicist, Jean Piccard, who ascended to approximately 9,800 feet in 95 helium weather balloons in 1937.

“(Piccard) did it with 95 balloons. So, certainly, we could have done it with more, but it felt like a nice homage to him to not try to one-up him,” Pearson said.

The cluster balloon technique made international news in 1982, when “Lawnchair” Larry Walters, an unlicensed amateur balloon pilot, completed a 45-minute flight in a lawn chair attached to 42 weather balloons. The 2003 Australian comedy “Danny Deckchair” was inspired by his story.

In 2010, Trappe became the first pilot to cross the English Channel using the cluster system, and in 2011 he became the first to cross the Alps. His attempted transatlantic flight in 2013 ended anticlimactically with a controlled crash-landing in Newfoundland, Canada, after only 12 hours in the air.

Trappe was not attempting to set another record this week. But Roberts said the North Carolina pilot’s journey would be significantly longer than that of the other Balloon Fiesta participants.

“He is hoping to fly continuously throughout the day,” Roberts said. “And if he continues to fly, he could make it to Arizona.”

As of 1 p.m., Trappe had flown approximately 130 miles southwest from Albuquerque, according to a GPS tracker attached to the vessel, and was nearing Pie Town — about two-thirds of the way to Arizona.

At 3:18 p.m., Trappe crossed the Arizona border.

Lawsuits settled by city of ABQ in past two years totaled $ 14M

Reports detailing payouts were delayed by over a year

BY MATTHEW REISEN / ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

October 4, 2026

Recently released and long-delayed litigation reports show the city of Albuquerque paid more than $14 million to settle over 100 lawsuits — many alleging sunshine law and civil rights violations.

In fiscal years 2025 and 2026, city attorneys settled at least 115 cases involving a variety of plaintiffs, including people shot by police and those run over by city employees.

The city won another 92 cases over the same period, according to the reports. Those numbers will change, however, as the fourth quarterly report for 2026, a reporting period that ended June 30, still hasn’t been filed.

City spokesperson Dan Mayfield said that a draft of that report is ready for review but hadn’t been sent to the City Council. He added that the reports have “always been issued a few months after the close of the quarter.”

That report is not nearly as late, however, as the last three quarterly reports for 2025. Those were turned in more than a year after the second quarter ended and eight months after the fourth quarter closed.

Under city charter, the reports are to be turned over to the City Council “in a timely manner.”

“There was a delay in 2025 after the Legal Department changed its case management software and shifted some staff roles,” Mayfield said. “Those issues have been resolved.”

Councilor Dan Champine said they had started asking Mayor Tim Keller’s office for the reports in November 2025, with multiple follow-ups that continued until February. He said it was “continuous questions” to former City Attorney Lauren Keefe about the holdup and she finally said “they had fallen” behind on them.

In the meantime, Champine said, “you had roughly about a year’s worth of reports that were just not being done.” When the reports were turned over, he said, no satisfying explanation was given. “It was just, ‘We haven’t had time,’” he said.

“It shouldn’t be a year and a half behind; it shouldn’t be two or three quarters behind,” Champine said. “You’re telling me you’re tracking these things and keeping tabs on them throughout the year; it shouldn’t be that difficult to compile a report … within three months of the quarter ending.”

Keefe was recently replaced by Josh Boone as city attorney, but a new role was created for her on the city’s legal team. Keefe’s departure came after a dispute with the Mayor’s Office had councilors questioning her actions, but an investigation found no wrongdoing.

Champine said the delayed litigation reports were part of the reason he and Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn sponsored legislation that directed the city attorney to provide updates to and assist councilors in legal matters, among other rules. The ordinance was vetoed by Keller before the veto was overridden by the council.

“I saw discrepancies with the city attorney — the city attorney is supposed to work for all entities of the city, but yet fell under the mayor’s purview,” Champine said of the legislation. “So I couldn’t direct her because she doesn’t fall under our purview, she falls under the mayor’s purview.”

In a general statement on the litigation reports, Mayfield said the city “takes every claim seriously and reviews each matter based on facts and circumstances of the individual case.”

“Litigation and settlement reports provide transparency, but a settlement does not necessarily mean the City or an employee acted improperly or that the allegations were substantiated,” according to the statement. “The City remains committed to accountability, following policies and procedures and being transparent with the public about these cases.”

Payday

The filed reports show settlements totaled $14.5 million — the largest single settlement being $2.5 million in the police shooting of a man having a mental health crisis at a Tanoan home.

The highest payouts came from the 19 cases involving the Albuquerque Police Department, settlements that totaled $6.5 million. Those cases included several police crashes, shootings and civil rights violations.

The city agreed to pay $500,000 in a suit alleging sexual assault by an officer who was criminally charged before the case was dismissed and $400,000 in a case where officers killed a man pointing a gun at his own head.

The city also agreed to pay $400,000 to settle a claim in which the SWAT team set fire to a home, leaving a teenager dead inside. That marks the third settlement reached in that case, with the city agreeing to pay $248,000 for public records violations and $750,000 for wrongful death to the family of 15-year-old Brett Rosenau.

However, the largest share of settled cases, 28, revolved around violations of the state Inspection of Public Records Act, which totaled $1.5 million in payouts, some as large as $300,000.

Another 12 personal injury cases were settled for $1.3 million.

The settlements for the past two years, while missing a quarterly report, were a small decrease from settlements reached in 2024 and 2023, which totaled $15.3 million. Those years also saw more settlements, 169, and fewer victories for the city, 47.

Whether cases are settled or dismissed, the costs can be high if the city is using outside counsel. An item scheduled for consideration at the next City Council meeting shows the city has paid more than $2.5 million in attorney costs in a yearslong lawsuit over encampment sweeps.

Champine said, with the council’s job largely revolving around the city budget, it is important they know how much money is going toward settlements.

“That is information that we should probably be privy to, and that’s not just opinion; it’s written in the law. So whether they agree with it or they don’t, it still has to be done. Whether it provides information for a councilor or if it doesn’t provide information for a councilor — that really doesn’t matter,” he said. “The charter states that this is how it’s done. You need to follow the rules. You need to follow the law.”

Furthermore, Champine said, it’s about transparency for the public.

“Taxpayers want to know where their money’s going to, I think they have a right to know,” he said. “If the administration is about abundance and transparency, then you would think they’d say, ‘Hey, this is what we settled, and this is why we settled it, and here’s how we’re going through with it.’”

Seven balloon mishaps keep crews busy on fiesta’s opening morning

State Police said no serious injuries were reported

BY JAMES BENNETT / ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL MANAGING EDITOR

October 4, 2026

Seven hot air balloon incidents were reported Saturday morning during the opening day of the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta, the New Mexico State Police told the Journal.

The unusual string of mishaps included balloons striking power lines and another being blown into a pole after it had already landed.

No injuries were reported, said State Police Sgt. Christian Roman, the day-shift supervisor.

Balloon incidents aren’t unusual during the annual Albuquerque Fiesta, Roman said, but seven in such a short period was.

“It does happen every year that we get a balloon that might crash or, you know, land on like the interstate or something like that,” Roman said. “But never where we had seven, you know, back to back in a row.”

Makayla Roberts, vice president of the Garrity Group, which manages public relations for the event, said the Balloon Fiesta was aware of the incidents.

“We are grateful that everyone involved in the incidents is safe and that there were no injuries,” Roberts said. “Balloon Fiesta works closely with our safety partners to respond to each situation and prioritize the safety of our pilots, crews, spectators and the surrounding community. Our primary concern is always the safety of everyone involved.”

Roman said investigators had not determined what caused all of the incidents, but surface winds could have played a role.

“It could just be due to the weather,” Roman said. “A little bit of wind … at the surface.”

One of the incidents involved a balloon that struck power lines after its pilot attempted to land in the parking lot for AAA Cooper Transportation at 3700 Hawkins NE.

The crash knocked out power to 2,000 customers in the surrounding area, the Public Service Company of New Mexico reported. It was expected to be restored by 11:30 a.m.

William Fitzgerald, 76, of Lubbock, Texas, said he and one passenger were aboard the balloon. Fitzgerald said he chose the parking lot because other balloons had landed there and it appeared to provide enough open space.

“We were planning to land right in here,” Fitzgerald said.

The parking lot was supposed to be the end of the flight.

But Fitzgerald said the wind changed as the balloon descended.

“As we dropped into this area, this air down here was different than the air” higher up, he said.

The balloon began drifting toward the power lines.

Fitzgerald said he tried to get the balloon down as quickly as possible. He initially believed he had enough room to avoid the lines.

“I thought we were going to miss it,” Fitzgerald said.

They didn’t. The balloon touched the power lines, producing a loud electrical pop.

Fitzgerald said the sound came from electricity traveling between the lines through the balloon’s support cables.

Neither Fitzgerald nor his passenger suffered an electrical shock.

Fitzgerald said he did hurt his shoulder and elbow while climbing out of the basket after the balloon came down.

The basket dragged a short distance as the balloon deflated.

The electrical contact also caused extensive damage to the balloon. Fitzgerald said fabric was melted and blown out across a large area between the points where the balloon contacted the lines.

“It’s going to take major repair,” Fitzgerald said.

The crash will end his flying for this year’s Fiesta.

Fitzgerald said he has been coming to Balloon Fiesta for 35 years and had never experienced anything similar at the event.

Another balloon was damaged at the Cinemark parking lot at 901 Pan American NE, but its pilot emphasized that the incident happened after the balloon had already landed.

“I was already landed, and it just blew me over and impaled it,” Carol LaRotonda, the Albuquerque pilot said.

A gust of wind pushed the balloon into a pole, puncturing it.

“Nobody’s hurt,” LaRotonda said. “It wasn’t a landing incident. … It was just a gust of wind.”

State Police were also responding to a balloon incident in the Villa Corrales area, where Roman said a balloon had hit a power line. Injuries were not immediately known as officers headed to the scene.

Another incident was reported near Osuna and Vista del Arroyo NE.

“A crash hot air balloon, and a balloon stuck in a power line,” Roman said in describing the call.

Bernalillo County firefighters had been dispatched to that scene, he said.

Roman said five or six State Police officers were working the incidents Saturday morning.

Officers first determine whether anyone has been injured before investigating what happened, he said.

“We’ll investigate how the incident happened, make sure there’s no injuries or document everything,” Roman said. “We record and obviously document everything that occurred and what happened afterwards.”

The morning’s incidents came as balloons filled Albuquerque’s skies for the first mass ascension of this year’s fiesta.

For Fitzgerald, the morning ended much differently than he had planned.

After 35 years of coming to Balloon Fiesta, his aircraft sat damaged on the ground after a landing attempt that came within feet of succeeding.

The difference, he said, was the air close to the ground.

“We just barely” missed clearing the lines, Fitzgerald said.

Then came the electrical pop — and his fiesta flying was over.

Hundreds of ageing Americans may not get results of Alzheimer’s study due to Trump cuts

Shutdown of study is latest for Trump administration, which has canceled, frozen and otherwise disrupted more than 5,700 medical research grants over two years

By Jessica Glenza for The Guardian

September 17, 2026

Scientific funding cuts imposed by the Trump administration may force researchers to close a study on Alzheimer’s disease risk among 600 ageing people without sharing the results of cognitive tests with participants – even though researchers have all the data to do so.

The Trump administration canceled a federal research grant studying two low-income, majority Black neighborhoods in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in August. Researchers were given 90 days to shut down the study – more than five months earlier than planned. Now, they lack the time and money to assess data collected from trial participants.

As a result, the funding cuts have the potential to unnecessarily delay diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease or dementia syndromes in the group – diseases whose treatments rely on early diagnosis.

Over the course of the last two years, the Trump administration has canceled, frozen and otherwise disrupted more than 5,700 medical research grants funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), according to Grant Witness, which tracks changes to funding. More than 4,500 has since been restored. The cancelation of clinical trials alone has impacted more than 74,000 participants nationally, a Jama study showed. A wide range of studies have been impacted, from those examining childhood hearing loss to pain during cesarean delivery, Jama found.

The cuts are part of the Trump administration’s upheaval of federal scientific grants, which have attempted to remake US science in line with the president’s priorities, often in the name of ridding the government of “DEI”, or diversity, equity and inclusion.

Researchers at Pitt are now also named plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against the NIH, which argues that the administration is attempting to censor research whose conclusions it disfavors.

“The plaintiff’s experiences and stories here really evidence that censoring research can have life or death consequences,” said Olga Akselrod, senior counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union’s racial justice program, and one of the lead litigators in the case. “It is dangerous for public health when research is censored based on political litmus tests, and particularly when it targets areas of research designed to address the needs of underserved populations that disproportionately experience negative health outcomes and some of the most accute health disparities.”

In the canceled study, Tamara Dubowitz and co-researcher Andrea Rosso, an associate professor of epidemiology and expert in brain health at the University of Pittsburgh, examined how the built and social environments of neighborhoods may contribute to Alzheimer’s disease risk. The two neighborhoods being studied were historically ‘red-lined’ – areas denied access to mortgages, loans or insurance based on race.

Black Americans are twice as likely to suffer from Alzheimer’s disease compared to white counterparts, but far less likely to be included in studies. In just one example, of more than 12,000 brain imaging studies on Alzheimer’s disease, only around 700 report race at all. Studies that do report race have more than 87% white participants.

Researchers argue the administration has poorly defined its view of “DEI” and conflated the term with health equity – the study of how groups of people have different health outcomes, and the umbrella under which the Pittsburgh grant falls.

Experts have also warned that grant cancellations “will kill” Americans. In the case of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, early diagnosis is critical. There is no cure for the disease, and treatments to slow its progression are best used early in the disease course.

Roderick Blair, a 70-year-old trial participant who lives in the Homewood neighborhood, said the grant cancellation is a “clear” form of retribution for daring to examine links between the health of Black Americans and structural racism.

“If you don’t agree with me, you’re going to go to the woodshed,” said Blair, later adding, “What has this administration done that has not been a retribution?”

The study was designed to assess cognitive decline over the course of 18 months to two years. Trial participants took lengthy cognitive tests – often lasting hours and including deeply personal survey questions about childhood trauma.

At the time the grant was cut, researchers had just finished data collection and were preparing for an “adjudication of cognitive status”. In adjudications, experts meet and reach a consensus on the outcome of the tests. The tests were expected to be assessed by a neuropsychologist and geriatric psychiatrist – in-demand experts whom even a well resourced patient might wait up to a year to see, the researchers said. The federal government has already invested more than $10m into the study over five years.

Those results were promised to participants when they gave their consent to be part of research, and are impossible to deliver in the timeframe given to researchers for closure. Researchers said they had hoped for a one year, no-cost extension, since funds were frozen for months in the midst of research, thanks to the same DEI-related upheaval. The University of Pittsburgh and the researchers are appealing the grant cancelation.

“The University of Pittsburgh is in the process of submitting appeals to the National Institutes of Health regarding the agency’s recent termination of these awards,” said Jared Stonesifer, head of communications. “These appeals represent the first step in the administrative process meant to act as a pathway for the University, as the recipient of the grants, to seek review of funding decisions. The University believes these appeals are supported by a strong legal foundation and will present its position through the appropriate channels. While the process is ongoing, the University remains hopeful for a favorable resolution.”

Dubowitz, who spoke in her personal capacity, said the appeal argues that delivering results to participants, “is part of an ethical, orderly closeout, but we don’t know whether they are in agreement that that is the case”.

The Trump administration has argued this grant, “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities” and that “the lack of concrete, objective, and measurable variables is not in alignment with NIH’s priorities related to ‘promoting research focused on scientifically valid measurable health outcomes.’”

Beginning in 2025, the administration canceled thousands of scientific grants. Although many canceled grants were reinstated after litigation by research institutions, the administration has continued to quietly cancel more research in 2026, including most recently the grant in question at Pittsburgh, a second on Alzheimer’s at the same institution, and a third at Emory University.

Legal experts argue the targeted cancelations appear to be test cases for making cancelations stick in court. They come as the administration is seeking to move the entire $1tn federal grant-making apparatus under the control of political appointees.

“The most important thing that they added on every year was trust,” said Blair, about researchers at Pitt. “They always gave you feedback on what you got, how you did, what you could do better.”

Agency Diverted $1.4 Billion in Science Funds Mandated by Congress

The move, affecting about one-fifth of the National Science Foundation’s primary research budget, is the latest sign of how the White House is asserting more control over grants.

By Adam Sella, Christopher Flavelle and Irena Hwang for The New York Times

October 2, 2026

The National Science Foundation, one of the biggest sources of federal research funding, withheld $1.4 billion that Congress had intended for research over the course of the past year, according to internal data reviewed by The New York Times.

The extraordinary move — holding back about one-fifth of the N.S.F.’s primary research budget — is the latest sign of how the Trump administration is finding creative ways to work around Congress. Lawmakers from both parties have consistently opposed White House-led proposals to cut funding to major science agencies, including the N.S.F. and the National Institutes of Health.

Since the N.S.F. was founded over 75 years ago, the agency has spent nearly all of its budget on so-called basic research from a wide range of scientific fields, which has led to major advances in technology such as M.R.I.s, semiconductors and the internet.

The White House wants to redirect the money to a limited set of administration priorities, including artificial intelligence and quantum computing, according to two people with knowledge of the administration’s plans.

Congress appropriates money to the N.S.F. on two-year cycles, so the agency could still spend the held-over money in the new fiscal year, which began on Thursday.

But Democratic lawmakers see the strategy as more of a political power grab by the White House.

“The money should be granted as Congress intended, and essentially, they’re ignoring what Congress did,” said Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the Science, Space and Technology Committee. “It’s a dramatic attack on the science enterprise that has served us very well since World War II, when this whole system was set up,” Ms. Lofgren added.

The White House and the N.S.F. said that diverting the money was allowed under Congress’s two-year appropriation.

Mike England, a spokesman for the science foundation, said in a statement that the agency had “carried over funds to invest in agency priorities that are aligned with broader administration initiatives.”

Mr. England said the agency “remains committed to investing in meritorious foundational research across the sciences and engineering that advances American scientific leadership.”

The Trump administration’s efforts to gain more power over grants have played out across the government, where funding decisions have historically been led by experts.

Last month, the N.I.H. signed an agreement to collaborate with the Defense Department, drawing criticism from Democrats on Capitol Hill who warned that the plan could allow the Pentagon to go around Congress and gain access to billions of dollars meant for infectious disease research. The administration previously fired the N.S.F.’s independent oversight board. And it has canceled or delayed thousands of grants across both agencies as part of its quest to punish elite universities and eliminate spending President Trump and his aides view as “woke.”

Mr. Trump’s science adviser, Michael Kratsios, has criticized the agency’s system for deciding which grants to fund. In a report released in July, Mr. Kratsios wrote that the science foundation, under the Biden administration, awarded too many grants that focused on diversity and equity. He also argued the N.S.F. should issue more “fast grants,” in ways “that bypass external review panels.”

The plan to divert N.S.F. funding was reported earlier by Nature, a science journal.

Several people with knowledge of the situation described confusion inside the agency as the staff complied with White House guidance to carry over money as funding deadlines neared. Some divisions had to pull back research proposals that were recommended for funding after peer review, these officials said.

Altogether, the $1.4 billion carried over after the last fiscal year ended on Wednesday amounted to 19 percent of the N.S.F.’s primary research budget allocated by Congress. That is a far higher percentage than in either of the two prior fiscal years, when less than $175 million went unspent, according to internal data from the agency.

At an agency town hall this week, leaders stood by the plan to divert money to administration priorities while offering assurances that the N.S.F. would also remain true to its roots, according to a recording reviewed by The Times.

When an employee raised concerns about whether the N.S.F. would continue supporting basic research, an official responded that “we’re transitioning.” Still, the official said, the agency would continue to “focus on our mission of foundational research.”

Adam Sella covers breaking news for The Times in Washington.

Christopher Flavelle is a Times reporter covering how President Trump is transforming the federal government.

Irena Hwang is a data reporter at The Times, using computational tools to uncover hidden stories and illuminate the news.

Protected:

This content is password-protected. To view it, please enter the password below.

Password:

His Novel Had a Shot at a Top Book Prize. Then Someone Ran an A.I. Test.

“It Was Either That Or Die,” by the Haitian-Canadian author Thélyson Orélien, was the hit of the French literary season. Now it has been pulled from the shortlist for a prestigious prize.

By Catherine Porter, Ségolène Le Stradic and Tiffany Hsu for The New York Times

September 25, 2026

When the Haitian-Canadian author Thélyson Orélien arrived in France this month to promote his novel, it was in many ways his dream tour.

Rave reviews have followed his new book, “It Was Either That Or Die,” depicting a migrant’s harrowing journey out of Haiti and across a dozen countries to safety in Canada. So have television appearances and nods from prestigious literary prizes.

That was until this week, when A.I. detection programs in the hands of social media users assessed that the novel was likely written with the help of artificial intelligence, leading the novel to be pulled from consideration for a prestigious literary award.

Mr. Orélien denied using A.I., and his French publisher said he began writing the novel in 2017 and finished a draft in 2019, years before generative A.I. programs appeared commercially.

But Mr. Orélien was still swept into intense debates that have gripped the global publishing industry and shocked France, where literature is so esteemed that writers are interred in the Panthéon, the mausoleum of national heroes in Paris.

Over just a few days, writers and editors filled TV and radio shows, arguing whether A.I. meant “the beginning of the end of literature.” Publishers grappled with the limits of detection tools, what A.I. use was acceptable, if any, and what they should disclose to readers.

And as critics sparred with defenders of Mr. Orélien, who is Black, over whether he was targeted because of his race and his book’s treatment of migrants, he was accused of plagiarism in earlier writings, inflaming the controversy.

On Friday the Goncourt Academy — the institution overseeing France’s highest literary award — decided to pull the novel from its shortlist, given the “consistent findings of analyses by credible researchers and journalists” suggesting the book was, “in all likelihood, largely the product of artificial intelligence.”

“The point is to send a clear message,” the Academy said on social media, “one that affirms that we neither endorse nor approve, in one way or another, the creation of texts generated by artificial intelligence.”

In a statement provided by his French publisher, Mr. Orélien said, “One can discuss my style, but to treat its techniques as evidence of artificial intelligence has nothing to do with literary criticism.”

At a Paris literary event this week, he told the radio station France Inter that he “had nothing to feel guilty about.”

“I knew that the message of this novel wasn’t going to please everyone,” he added.

His French publishing house, Grasset, said in a statement on Tuesday that it “strongly objected” to the “malicious” accusations, and it reaffirmed its “absolute confidence” in the author.

But Les Éditions du Boréal, the prestigious Quebec publisher that first discovered the book, said on Thursday that “at this stage, it is impossible for us to confirm or deny the allegations the author is facing, and in these circumstances, it is crucial not to draw hasty conclusions.”

The publisher said it had suspended promotional activities out of concern for the author and was helping him compile a dossier of early drafts.

The controversy grew out of accusations from a little-followed, anonymous social media account, which a columnist at Le Figaro, a conservative daily newspaper, later revealed he partly ran.

The newspaper widely publicized the account, which was created in June and appears to have started posting this month. Before focusing on Mr. Orélien, it called a handful of other people “slopper,” meaning they overused A.I., without offering details.

The columnist, Samuel Fitoussi, said in an interview that he had no political agenda in any of the accusations and ran the book through an A.I. detection tool, Pangram, because readers had flagged it. He said he thought an anonymous account would be trusted more than his column in a right-leaning newspaper.

“We wanted to open up the discussion,” he said, “not about this particular man, but to raise awareness about A.I.-generated writing and the fact that A.I. is already capable of winning literary awards.”

Three A.I. detection tests

Experts largely agree that, while A.I. detectors can help authenticate material, they are rarely reliable as the final word on a text’s origins. Many lack the sophistication to distinguish the extent of A.I. involvement, though some offer an estimated percentage.

Three A.I. detection tools and several independent experts assessed that A.I. appeared to have been used in Mr. Orélien’s book to some degree.

Pangram, the gold standard of detectors to many experts, was highly confident that A.I. played a part in writing all 34 chapters of the book. Another detector, GPTZero, also reached Pangram’s conclusion.

Max Spero, Pangram’s chief executive, said that in French the tool’s false positive rate — the times it incorrectly identified a human writing sample as A.I.-generated — is 0.0026 percent, or one out of more than 38,000 texts.

Mr. Spero, who has faced some criticism over Pangram’s accuracy, acknowledged there are no independent studies to confirm that rate. And English is the dominant language used to train most detection services, making many experts less confident in verdicts of non-English text.

“It’s likely that A.I. was used in this case,” said Thierry Poibeau, a French researcher who studies A.I. “That said, it’s still hard to say for sure, and we can’t be absolutely certain of the result.”

An appraisal of the book by Winston, a tool whose co-founder was once a professional English-French translator, was less conclusive than Pangram’s and GPTZero’s. Winston found that sections of the book ranged from 12 percent likely to be human up to 66 percent likely; the acknowledgment page was rated 100 percent human.

Mr. Orélien “has been using A.I. in some way,” said Brian Jabarian, a French native speaker and professor at Carnegie Mellon University who has researched detection tools. He called it “quite shocking” to see many common A.I. tells, like the construction of “this is not x, this is y.”

The controversy also spurred scrutiny over Mr. Orélien’s other work.

On Tuesday, Radio Canada, a national public radio station, said that Mr. Orélien had plagiarized four opinion articles published in 2012 and 2013 on French and Canadian news sites. It also said that chunks of his award-winning 2012 short story, “Où va le monde,” resembled parts of a French book published in 1960, “Le Matin des Magiciens.”

Above one of the opinion columns, the Canadian newspaper La Presse has written, “Since this text was published, we have learned that its author committed plagiarism.”

Mr. Orélien did not respond to requests for comment; his Quebec publisher called plagiarism allegations “a cause for concern.”

A literary furor

Mr. Orélien’s book, recounting a high school teacher’s flight from gangs, through the Darién Gap and across the United States, was the talk of French literary circles even before publication. In France, the book has sold more than 54,000 copies in weeks and earned lavish reviews and prizes.

Before the novel was stripped from consideration for the Goncourt prize, the jury’s president, Philippe Claudel, said he was worried about “the way they’re throwing an author’s name to the wolves,” noting that Mr. Orélien was “a best seller, a French-speaking foreigner, Black and who writes about migration,” all features that could potentially fuel a controversy.

Mr. Orélien, 38, grew up in Gonaïves, Haiti, in a middle-class family, with an accountant father and seamstress mother. This year, he recalled in an interview how he left Haiti after the 2010 earthquake that killed more than 200,000 people and destroyed his home, heading for Canada, where he had relatives and a visa.

Several prominent writers have defended Mr. Orélien, including the acclaimed author Virginie Despentes, who said on a popular evening TV show that writers should not answer to A.I. systems, even those designed to detect the work of A.I.

“Thélyson Orélien doesn’t have to justify himself,” she said.

On a major radio show, an academic who studies A.I. effects on culture, Alexandre Gefen, urged writers to embrace the technology, saying, “Literature is not pure inspiration that simply comes to the writer. That’s not the question we should be asking; the question is, is the book good?”

That idea scandalized Abel Quentin, the author of “Sanctuaries,” a novel calling to resist generative A.I. “Artificial literature is an oxymoron,” he said on the same show.

Publishers, who have been warning against A.I. taking their work to train models and pump out “parasite books” on Amazon, were grappling with how to respond. Some have taken a hard line, such as Mr. Quentin’s publisher, Éditions de l’Observatoire, which had already announced a new label, called “Sanctuary,” to guarantee “100% human-written” works, to be stamped on its books.

Emma Saudin, the company’s fiction editor, said her authors would have to sign a contract saying that they had not used A.I. for brainstorming, structuring or writing. “It seems we need to be on the same page from the start,” she said, adding, “I want to publish books that are written by a human being.”

Renaud Lefebvre, the general director of the publishers union, said it was helping members draft an A.I. code of ethics and potential contract language, such as a clause stipulating that no A.I. would be used to produce a work. But he expressed concern about the idea of a “100 percent human” label.

“It’s not up to humans to say they’re humans,” he said. “It’s up to the artificial to say it’s artificial.”

Guillaume Allary, founder of the publisher Allary Editions, said forbidding authors from using A.I. was like barring them from ordinary search engines.

“We’re at the beginning of a redefinition of what an author is,” said Mr. Allary, adding that writers would start using A.I., much as Renaissance artists worked with entire teams of people. This reimagining, he said, would mean doing away with “the romantic image of the writer alone with his pen.”

For now, Mr. Allary did not see a clear solution. “As long as the contract between the reader and the writer isn’t clear,” he said, “there will be scandals.”

Catherine Porter and Ségolène Le Stradic reported from Paris, and Tiffany Hsu from San Francisco. Giulia Imbert contributed reporting from Paris, Norimitsu Onishi from Montreal, and Juliana Castro Varón and Ashley Shannon Wu provided research from New York.

Catherine Porter is an international reporter for The Times, covering France. She is based in Paris.

Ségolène Le Stradic a reporter and researcher for The Times, based in Paris.

Tiffany Hsu reports on the information ecosystem, including foreign influence, political speech and disinformation

Oil Flows Are Up, but Iran Is Still Menacing the Strait of Hormuz

Iran has been launching drones and missiles at commercial ships in the waterway each week, though it has often failed to strike its targets, according to a Western security official.

By Pranav Baskar, Eric Schmitt and Shirin Hakim for THe New York Times

October 2, 2026

Almost every day in September, Iranian media outlets have published reports of explosions “heard from the sea,” an ominous sign that military activity is taking place in the Strait of Hormuz.

But the reports left mysterious just who was carrying out the attacks.

It turns out it was Iran itself.

Confidential data shared with The New York Times by a Western security official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss operational matters shows that Iran has been launching dozens of drones and missiles at commercial ships in the strait each week, largely out of the public eye, though it has often failed to strike its targets.

And on Wednesday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps for the first time appeared to confirm it was behind the near-daily sounds of explosions heard from Iran’s southern coast, saying it was striking targets in the Strait of Hormuz every 24 hours.

“We prevent them from passing, but for some time now, America has not responded,” a spokesman for the Revolutionary Guards said in a state news interview.

The aggression shows that even as oil exports from the Middle East have rebounded in recent weeks, shipping through the waterway remains risky, as Iran jostles to keep control of one of its biggest sources of leverage.

“Negotiations aren’t going anywhere. Neither side is really budging. So it’s a standoff,” said Gregory Brew, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. He said that the violence in the strait “speaks to the position that both sides are in: Neither is looking to aggressively escalate the conflict.” But both, he said, want to control the waterway.

Since the beginning of August, Iran has launched about 30 drone attacks and 10 anti-ship missile attacks per week against commercial ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, according to the data shared with The Times by the Western security official. At least four commercial ships have been hit by Iran in the past 10 days, the official said.

A tally of reports by a monitoring group run by the British Navy show that since Sept. 10, at least 13 ships, most of them oil tankers, had been struck by projectiles or debris from projectiles. (Those reports may be incomplete because they are based on voluntary reports by ship crews.) While the reports do not specify who was responsible for the attacks, maritime experts say the details suggest many were Iranian.

The attacks in the strait have kept up even as crude oil exports from the Middle East have gotten closer to prewar levels. Part of that turnaround, analysts say, is because of a U.S. military operation aimed at protecting the vessels from the attacks, an effort that appears to have encouraged more shipments from big exporting countries, like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Those ships pass through Oman’s territorial waters in a U.S. Navy-guided route, with the support of U.S. fighter jets and attack helicopters to help ward off strikes. Some ships also turn their transponders off to help pass through the strait undetected.

But analysts say U.S. military protection requires significant resources and will be hard to maintain indefinitely. And a big part of the regional increase in exports, according to Kpler, a cargo tracking group, is from export routes that circumvent the Strait of Hormuz altogether.

Just because more ships and oil are moving than seen earlier in the war “doesn’t mean we’re seeing a normalization of flows,” said Ana Subasic, a trade risk analyst at Kpler.

U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, declined to comment on Iranian attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz in September. The Pentagon has not announced any strikes on Iran or Iranian vessels since early that month.

Ian Ralby, the president of the maritime governance nonprofit group Auxilium Worldwide, said the fact that Washington has appeared not to respond militarily against Iran for its shipping attacks may be a function of the Trump administration’s seeking an off-ramp to the conflict now in its seventh month.

Mr. Brew, the Iran analyst, said that with the rise in oil exports, the administration may think it has less to gain from retaliatory strikes.

Ever since the United States and Israel attacked in February and started the war, Iran has used its ability to throttle shipping through Hormuz, a key route for oil and gas exports, disrupting the global economy.

The United States has imposed a naval blockade and tougher sanctions on Iran in retaliation, putting the country under further pressure, as President Trump has sought to pivot the war from a military campaign to one focused on strangling its economy.

Pranav Baskar is an international reporter at The Times, based in New York.

Eric Schmitt is a national security correspondent for The Times. He has reported on U.S. military affairs and counterterrorism for more than three decades. Contact him securely on Signal: @ericschmitt.36.

Protected:

This content is password-protected. To view it, please enter the password below.

Password: