In the battle over whether the US or China will lead the world in AI, the argument for the US side largely can be summed up in four words: USA good, China bad.

In this worldview espoused by big US AI companies, the Trump administration, and many Republican members of Congress, AI born and bred in China is portrayed as a grave security risk. The Chinese government, they claim, will use Chinese AI models to steal information from businesses, individuals, and government agencies. They also claim that because Chinese AI complies with Chinese censorship rules, US companies that use these models will be forced to comply with the rules as well.

Critics also say that if US AI is overtaken by Chinese AI, the US economy could be dealt a crushing blow, because the hundreds of billion dollars being invested by US AI companies will go down the tubes.

Because of this, Big AI firms Anthropic and OpenAI are lobbying to ban Chinese open-source AI from the US.

Not all AI companies and their customers agree with a ban. Microsoft, Meta, and AI chip maker Nvidia, among others, say there’s room for both US AI models and Chinese open-source models.

What’s the fight really about? To understand, let’s first dig into the tech behind most Chinese AI.

What’s the fuss about?

The fight is primarily over what’s called lightweight open-source AI. “Lightweight” means the AI models don’t require multibillion-dollar data centers to train, build, and run them. They need comparatively modest processing power.

That’s attractive for businesses, because lightweight models are less expensive to license and run than much American AI tech, notably OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Anthropic’s Claude.

The other draw for businesses is that Chinese open-source AI tech can be used for free. And perhaps more important that is that the AI is typically what’s called “open weight,” which means businesses can tweak the technology for their own purposes.

When a traditional American AI model is trained, people who train it must decide how much “weight” to give to every parameter in every element of training data. For example, if AI were being trained to tell the difference between an apple and an orange, a great deal of weight would be put on the color of the fruit and the appearance of its skin. Less weight would be put on the fruit’s shape or size.

When a company buys American AI, they don’t know how much weight is given to each training parameter. They don’t even know what the parameters are. In open-weight AI, though, businesses have access to those parameters — and they can assign their own weights to them. This means they can customize the AI more easily for their particular needs in ways they can’t with traditional American AI models.

(Note that the terms open weight and open source are often used interchangeably when talking about AI, although technically they differ. Some open-weight models withhold some information such as their source code and training data — information that should be made public for a model to be considered truly open source.)

What Microsoft says about the Chinese models

Microsoft, Nvidia, Google, Meta, and many smaller companies don’t agree that Chinese lightweight open-source AI should be banned. They claim that security and censorship issues can be easily solved. And they believe use of the models will help the United States economically, not hurt it.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella posted on X: “Open-weight models are essential to a healthy AI ecosystem.” He added that the models will “strengthen American competitiveness and expand economic opportunity, while protecting national security.”

Microsoft was also one of more than 200 corporate signers of a document outlining all the reasons they believe open-weight AI is important.

Microsoft isn’t just talking about the importance of using Chinese lightweight open-source AI — it’s begun offering it to its customers and is looking to expand it even more. Right now, DeepSeek, the first Chinese lightweight open-source model to make its way to the US, is available via Azure. And Microsoft is testing offering DeepSeek to customers of its Copilot Cowork agentic AI product.

Keep in mind that Microsoft’s embrace of Chinese lightweight open-source AI has less to do with virtuous thinking than with profit-making. Offering these products to its customers will please both old and new customers because of the tech’s benefits. The more Microsoft offers to its customers, the more money it will make.

What happens next?

It’s unclear what happens next with the Chinese AI products. OpenAI and Anthropic are allied with the Trump administration in wanting them blocked or limited in the US.

Still, there’s an increasing groundswell backing back their use. Bill Gurley, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, told the New York Times: “You have two factions fighting over this issue. There’s the people who want OpenAI and Anthropic to own everything, and then there’s everybody else, including customers.”

My bet is that in short term, OpenAI and Anthropic will get what they want, because Trump has got their back. But after Trump leaves office, don’t be surprised if Chinese open-source AI has its day in the sun, backed by Microsoft.

Oracle began a new round of layoffs this week, sending early-morning termination emails to staff for the second time in six months.

The latest wave began Monday with affected staff being told, “After careful consideration of Oracle’s current business needs, we have made the decision to eliminate your role as part of a broader organizational change,” according to BusinessInsider. Termination was immediate.

That’s the same wording as in the previous wave of layoffs, which took place on March 31 and affected workers in the US, India, Canada, Mexico and Uruguay. In the 12 months to May 31, Oracle cut its global workforce from about 162,000 to about 141,000, a decline of roughly 13%.

Oracle has made no public statement confirming the latest round of job cuts, but in a regulatory filing days earlier the company said it had set aside a further $700 million for restructuring charges, bringing the total charges this year to roughly $2.8 billion.

What the new termination emails say

Staff receiving the latest termination emails were told termination and compensation details would follow by DocuSign, Business Insider wrote. An internal document reviewed by the publication said severance terms varied by role and region, and some teams facing double-digit percentage cuts.

Affected employees took to social media to vent.

Eric Brunson, a senior principal offensive security researcher at Oracle, described in a LinkedIn post how he had lost access to corporate communication tools before receiving any formal notice. “I woke up to not being able to log back into Slack,” he wrote. “No new emails or notification in email and I’m locked out of there. I was able to get ahold of my manager on LinkedIn and she confirmed.” Brunson said the timing fell two days before a scheduled RSU vesting date, adding, “Probably part of the plan.”

The filing that backs up the layoff accounts

While Oracle is not talking about the layoffs, its 10-Q quarterly report states that management approved and supplemented restructuring plans “to implement certain strategic measures and further improve operational efficiencies, including through the adoption and integration of artificial intelligence technologies across certain functions.” It adds that “subsequent to August 31, 2026, our management supplemented the 2026 Restructuring Plan by approximately $700 million to reflect additional actions that we expect to take.”

Oracle has already spent $1.97 billion of the $2.1 billion restructuring charges it originally budgeted, it reported.

Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst at Greyhound Research, said the filing should be read carefully rather than as confirmation of a headcount. “The supplement is an estimate, not a bill,” he said, noting it raises the program’s estimated cost by about a third without committing Oracle to a timetable.

Gogia said the more significant shift is in the filing’s language rather than the dollar figure. Oracle’s August 2025 and February 2026 filings had described the plan as tied to “acquisitions and certain other operational activities.”

AI was named as a driver of restructuring for the first time in the Sept. 11 filing.

Why the headcount stays unconfirmed

Gogia said no verified figure exists yet for how many employees the September round affected.

He noted that 30,000 was a January forecast of the total 2026 program. Twenty-one thousand is the confirmed net decline in Oracle’s global workforce across the full fiscal year. A reported 3,000 job cuts in India on Sept. 1 remains unconfirmed by Oracle.

The $700 million restructuring supplement “cannot be divided into people,” Gogia said, since it covers termination benefits, contract termination costs and other exit costs across a program spanning multiple countries. “There is no solid headcount for the September round,” he said.

A pattern that began in March

Oracle’s first 2026 layoff wave began March 31, when the Revenue and Health Sciences unit, the SaaS and Virtual Operations Services group, and NetSuite’s India Development Centre saw some of the deepest reductions.

Figures published by Oracle for its fiscal year ending May 31, 2026, show research and development headcount fell from 50,000 to 43,000 employees during the year, sales and marketing fell from 31,000 to 25,000, and services fell from 37,000 to 34,000, according to Gogia’s analysis of the company’s own reporting.

International staff, at 92,000, saw a larger reduction than the 49,000-strong U.S. workforce, he said.

Oracle did not respond to a request for comment.

This article first appeared on CIO.

Just because Apple now has AI, a new folding iPhone, and a newly minted CEO doesn’t mean the litigation between it and OpenAI has gone away. Apple now wants to force OpenAI to let it look at the hardware it has been building, according to a new report.

A reasonable request?

It seems a reasonable request, doesn’t it? After all, Apple’s argument is that OpenAI has been engaged in trade secret theft to help it design and develop its new hardware. OpenAI’s defense against these claims feel flimsy, at least to this reporter. They seem to coalesce around something like, “We don’t need your trade secrets because we’re making something brand new.” 

The problem with that defense is, contextually, that while on this stated mission to do something completely new, the company has hired around 400 former Apple staff so far, including its chief designers. And Apple thinks part of that process has been OpenAI, in whole or in part, working to exfiltrate its trade secrets.

What Apple wants — and why

With those facts as your guide, Apple’s request to Judge Edward J. Davila seems reasonable. It wants to take a look at what OpenAI is developing to ensure its trade secrets have not been abused in the process of designing that product. Apple argues that if it is forced to wait until the product is released, then it will be impossible to make its trade secrets confidential again, particularly as the defense seems to consist of that pinky promise that no Apple trade secrets have been harmed.

Apple legal also argues that it cannot be fair to allow OpenAI to defend itself by alleging its unreleased and unseen product doesn’t contain any trade secrets without permitting Apple — and the court — to verify that. While Apple’s counsel doesn’t seem to have said it, you could paraphrase the request as Apple telling the genAI firm, “Let us see what you are building; if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

Except, of course, that while building its defense, OpenAI is giving many of us the distinct impression that it may have something to fear.

What may happen next

Despite the merits of the argument, I think Apple’s request will not prevail, in part because the court may assess that if Apple takes a look at OpenAI’s homework it may compound the risk of IP theft. But that doesn’t mean Apple’s attempt will fail outright, as the compromise position is likely to be the appointment of a trusted, independent, third-party expert witness to take a look at what Apple’s competitor is making in Apple’s stead. 

There is precedent for this. That’s more or less what happened when Waymo pursued a similar case against Uber, or when AMCS litigated against Sinovel. There are nuances to all three cases that mean they aren’t perfectly aligned, but that does seem a logical next step to this layman.

Of course, just because it’s logical doesn’t mean either party is going to like it, but OpenAI could conceivably even suggest such an approach as it seeks to buy itself time to build and release its still mythical hardware. That’s also why Apple wants a chance to look at documents pertaining to that hardware to make very certain it hasn’t infringed any of Apple’s own trade secrets.

A side order of humble pie

All the same, if this case does indeed turn out to be a scenario in which one company has been found with its hand in the cookie jar, then the best possible approach for the company with crumbs around its mouth is going to be damage control. That’s going to take a lot less war-war and a great deal more jaw-jaw. It’s also going to require the intake of a very, very large slice of humble pie. Right now, it seems to me that Apple isn’t talking, and OpenAI isn’t hungry enough to take that first bite. Not yet. 

The case, number 5:26-cv-07078, rolls on.

Now please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

Microsoft on Monday added itself to a growing list of AI vendors pledging to try to control the behavior of its AI models.

“AI should not exceed human control. Models should remain subordinate to humanity, subject to meaningful human oversight and control,” the company wrote in the draft version of its Humanist AI Code of Conduct, released Monday with an invitation to the public to provide feedback. 

“Humanist AI develops systems with clear purposes, evaluated against real-world impact, and rejects the race to produce an all-purpose superintelligence that could evade these safeguards,” Microsoft wrote. “We are building something fundamentally useful and safe even if that means compromising on ultimate generality, autonomy, or capability.”

Microsoft’s comments are roughly in agreement with recent posts by various major AI vendors, including those from Anthropic and OpenAI, which were endorsed by Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceXAI and Tesla, but nowhere in its 37 page document is there any description of concrete action. However, to be fair, almost none of the other major AI players have been specific about how they would control future AI models either.

Acknowledges issues

A key problem with many vendor attempts to impose AI limits is that all of these companies have thus far been unable to stop AI agents from doing almost anything, given the agents’ ability and willingness to sidestep or ignore guardrails. 

Microsoft has described its worries about the technology in the past, both when it started to curtail AI efforts among its own employees and when it announced the formation of the team that created the Code of Conduct. 

Its current post acknowledged some of the difficulties involved in pushing AI development while limiting its abilities. 

“Both under- and over-caution represent failure modes with different types of consequences,” the company said. “Under-caution can clearly result in more direct harm, but over-caution may occur more often and therefore may need more frequent correction. This is where proportionality to the potential for harm and safety context are particularly important. Responses and actions should take into account the estimated severity and likelihood of potential harms and adjust responses and actions accordingly.”

It noted, however, that the term “harm” is “broad and often context-dependent, and there are nuanced gradations in potential severity and likelihood. Microsoft AI (MAI) Model responses should be tailored to that context and to a wide range of harms.”

Laudable goal, but lacks detail

Analysts and consultants generally agreed that Microsoft’s stated goal is laudable, but the lack of specifics and verification mechanisms makes it difficult to take the post seriously.

Thomas Randall, research director at Info-Tech Research Group, also said he spotted some apparent contradictions within the document. 

“[It] says MAI models will not assist in manufacturing or modifying weapons. Yet Microsoft offers OpenAI’s GPT-5.2 through Secret and Top Secret government clouds for defense and national security workloads,” Randall said, though he acknowledged that this is not technically a breach of the Code because GPT-5.2 is not an MAI model. “The most meaningful parts of the Code of Conduct may exclude other parts of Microsoft’s actual AI business operations. Tensions like these appear in other forms throughout the Code.”

But he added that Microsoft’s position is bolstered by its earlier Frontier Governance Framework that “provides pre- and post-training evaluations, six-month reassessments, third-party testing, phased releases and a commitment to pause development or deployment where high risks cannot be mitigated.” However, he noted, “it is still Microsoft that defines the thresholds, selects the evaluators, determines whether residual risk is acceptable and gives its own executives the final deployment decision.”

Randall said he would like to see Microsoft, as well as other major AI vendors, deliver more verifiable data points, such as those from independent evaluators given continuous access and freedom to publish findings about the vendor’s actions. He also would like to see independent board-level safety oversight with authority to block releases, protected whistleblowing, accessible monitoring, audit logs, kill switches, and mandatory reassessment after model changes.

However, Justin Greis, CEO of consulting firm Acceligence, pointed out that Microsoft was candid about the many elements that are not yet in place.

“The current models are not yet trained on the Code, the evaluation framework is still being developed, and Microsoft explicitly says written objectives alone cannot ensure alignment or guarantee present-day behavior,” Greis said. “That distinction matters. Publishing a constitution for AI is useful. Proving that the system actually follows the constitution, especially when models become increasingly agentic, is the hard part.”

And consultant Brian Levine, executive director of FormerGov, said Microsoft deserved a little bit of credit for at least saying that model capabilities should be limited.

“Microsoft explicitly says it will compromise on generality, autonomy, and capability to keep systems safe and under human control, and that it rejects the race to build an all-purpose superintelligence. Coming from a company of Microsoft’s size and ambition, that’s a notable thing to put in writing,” he said. “For years, the assumption was that the frontier labs would chase maximum capability and treat safety as a constraint to be managed. A document that says the opposite, that says usefulness and control come before ultimate capability, is worth paying attention to, regardless of what follows it.”

He added: “The real test comes next, and it’s verification: measurable standards, independent assurance, and a way for outsiders to check the commitments against what’s actually shipping. That’s the natural progression and it’s the part the whole industry still has to build.”

Not doing the hard part

But others argued that Microsoft is merely doing the easy part, the marketing part, and is deliberately not committing to doing the hard part.

“Promising to give up capabilities is easy when those capabilities don’t yet exist,” said Noah Kenney, principal consultant at Digital 520. “The real test will come when Microsoft has a model ready to ship that would close a competitive gap and decides to hold it back.”

Until then, he said, the promise of responsible AI costs Microsoft nothing.

“Microsoft’s code of conduct reads like a marketing document written to reassure customers, regulators, and its own employees,” Kenney noted. “The problem is that no one knows how to make those promises specific, which leaves Microsoft asking for trust before they can explain what that trust should be based on.”

Tom Findling, CEO of Conifers.ai, added that his concern with the Microsoft document is that it doesn’t answer the obvious question of how these models can possibly be controlled. 

“The document says the model should never resist being shut down, should stay within its scope, and shouldn’t hide what it’s doing. Those are all the right goals,” he said. “But the harder question is what happens when a highly capable agent doesn’t behave the way you expect. What actually stops it? As these systems get more autonomous, the safety boundary can’t just be that the model was trained not to do something. You need controls outside the model that limit what it can access, what it can do, and how far it can go.”

Cybersecurity learned this lesson a long time ago, he pointed out. “You don’t secure a system by assuming it will behave correctly,” he said. “You assume something will eventually fail, get compromised, or act in an unexpected way, and you design the controls around that. AI needs the same mindset.”

Frank Dickson, principal analyst at Dickson Research, contrasted Microsoft’s promise with Anthropic’s commitment, and found Microsoft lacking.

“Microsoft’s document is shy on mechanism,” he said. “Compare the two on specifics. [Anthropic CEO] Amodei’s proposal names a third party, METR, and describes what access actually means: office badges, company laptops, employee-level visibility, and publishing rights Anthropic doesn’t get to edit. You can check whether that happened.”

On the other hand, he noted, “Microsoft’s document says models should ‘fail tasks rather than violate the code’s rules,’ which is a real design principle. Credit where it’s due, but there’s no named auditor, no verification method, and no stated consequence for a violation. Thirty-seven pages and it still won’t commit to a single verifiable check.”

Dickson stressed that as long as agents routinely break their own rules, these vague promises won’t help. 

“Every frontier lab still gets jailbroken, still has agents that go off-script, still hasn’t closed the gap between what a model is instructed to do and what it can be induced to do,” Dickson said. “A values statement that skips the verification question isn’t a constraint, it’s a hope wearing a policy document’s clothes.”

While we wait to see if Apple really is experiencing huge demand for its newly introduced iPhones, today’s the day every iPhone user gets a completely new device experience, with iOS 27 rolling out internationally, along with the other members of Apple’s 27 series OS family. If you’re on the fence about installing the new release, here are 12 reasons you should upgrade today.

Speed and performance

Apple seems to have worked hard to improve speed and performance in this release. Everything feels much zippier, but where it seems most noticeable is when launching apps. Apple says these now open up to 30% faster, while AirDrop transfers are almost twice as fast as before.

Liquid Glass looks nicer

With the 20^th anniversary glass iPhone waiting in the wings, Apple isn’t going to get rid of Liquid Glass. But the company is prepared to iterate the look, and iterate it has, with sharper icons, improved contrast, and a new slider control that lets you set the UI’s transparency.

Use two iPhones

iPhone Handoff lets you use one eSIM across two devices on supporting carriers. Once set up it’s remarkably easy to use — your SIM activates the moment you unlock one of your iPhones. Better still, if you use two lines on one device, you’ll find these both transfer across too.

Siri AI

We’ve been talking so much about Apple’s improved Siri that I demoted it to fourth place; that’s not a reflection on what it does, but on how often you’ll have seen how it has become so much better at understanding context. It now has a Chat GPT-like interface, a standalone app, and powerful on-screen awareness to help get things done. Sadly, many of these features aren’t available in the EU.

Notes, Calendar, Reminders

AI is everywhere, including in Reminders Smart Suggestions, which can read your Messages chats and prompt you to set reminders for agreed tasks. Notes also gains Markdown copying.

Shortcuts to imagination

You can now create a shortcut just by describing what actions you want it to take. Apple Intelligence will string a shortcut together for you, which you can then use across all your systems.

Notify Me

Safari can watch a web page and automatically let you know when it changes. That’s not the only improvement; Apple Intelligence automatically groups your open tabs into topics so related pages are easier to find.

DIY: Safari extensions

I feel like this feature hasn’t had the attention it deserved, but you can now get Apple Intelligence to build you extensions in Safari. Just tap the three-line menu on the left of the address bar, choose Describe Extension, and let the fun begin.

Smarter Photos tools

Spatial Reframing is amazing; it lets you extend backgrounds and reframe subjects using AI. The upgraded Clean Up tool removes distractions even more easily than before. 

Passwords auto-fix

Apple’s Passwords app now does an even better job of keeping your online world safe, as it can now automatically visit a website to sign in and swap a weak or compromised password for a stronger one. 

Parental control improvements

Apple has really thought about child protection. Parental controls have had a huge overhaul, including the introduction of new Ask to Browse, Ask to Buy, contact calling approval and settings to protect minors against nudity, gore, and violence. These arrive alongside new scheduling function which manages which apps kids can use during school hours, meals, or bedtime.

Maps is amazing

Maps now uses aerial imagery and vision intelligence models when you use Flyover. It makes for much more detail, and a real sense of immersion.

Mail is better

While you’ll have to wait for search indexing to complete, Mail has become faster to load with better search results and more accurate unread counts. (Though that’s a little moot for this writer, who currently has 4,719 unread emails.) Spotlight has also been improved with smarter, more relevant suggestions. 

The new operating systems are expected to be made available at around 10am PDT. One more thing? They are bound to include security updates, which you likely need. 

Please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on Bluesky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.

Microsoft’s September 2026 Patch Tuesday is the year’s largest release, with 963 CVEs requiring customer action, 106 rated critical. Two are already exploited: CVE-2026-81963 in the Windows Update Stack and CVE-2026-85880 in Advanced Local Procedure Call. Nothing in this release was publicly disclosed ahead of the patch. Readiness recommends a Patch Now scheduling for Windows, Office, SQL Server and the developer tooling, and standard patch release for Exchange. The Readiness team has published an infographic summarising deployment risk by product family.

Known issues

Three client issues are carried in from August close with this update, covering:

• Microsoft Teams and the new Outlook failing to launch on ARM devices, such as the Surface Pro 11 and Surface Laptop 7, is resolved by KB5124008. The issue originated in August’s KB5121003 and was most likely on freshly imaged machines that had not yet taken Microsoft Store updates.
• The same update resolved both desktop backgrounds reverting to solid black and mouse cursor customisation resetting on non-English installations. Both originated in the 27 August preview, KB5120998.

And Microsoft has left open a Microsoft Defender Antivirus notification defect, confirmed on 28 August, in which devices report that Defender is turned off while it is running correctly.

Major revisions and mitigations

The quietest revision window of recent months arrived alongside the largest release. Between the August and September Patch Tuesdays, from 12 August to 7 September, the MSRC Security Update Guide touched 324 CVEs. Of those, 307 were routine Microsoft Edge and Chromium republications requiring no customer action.

That leaves 17 entries affecting Microsoft’s own products, and only one of those is a genuine revision. CVE-2026-59133, an elevation of privilege in the High-Performance Computing Pack, moved to version 1.1, and its own revision note records the change as informational. For comparison, August’s window carried 76 revisions to Microsoft’s own products, 60 of them flagged as requiring customer action.

The Readiness team has reviewed all 963 published updates. Microsoft has published no mitigations and no workarounds anywhere in this release.

Windows lifecycle and enforcement updates

Microsoft has published no new service or enforcement deadlines for September. The lifecycle picture is different, with multiple end-of-support notices for this coming October:

• The retail Office 2021 family retires in full, including Access, Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, Project, Publisher, Visio and Word.
• Office LTSC 2021 reaches end of support, and that includes Skype for Business LTSC 2021.
• Windows 10 2016 LTSB and Windows 10 IoT Enterprise LTSB 2016 reach the end of extended support.
• Windows Server 2012 and 2012 R2 reach the end of Extended Security Update Year 3. This is the final ESU year for both, not a step to a fourth.
• Windows 11 Home and Pro version 24H2 reaches the end of updates.
• Windows Server 2022 moves from mainstream to extended support, where it stays until 14 October 2031.

A second wave follows on 10 November 2026, and it is the one most likely to catch development teams rather than infrastructure teams. .NET 8 reaches the end of its long-term support branch, PowerShell 7.4 does the same, and Windows 11 Enterprise and Education 23H2 ends servicing alongside Windows 11 IoT Enterprise 23H2.

Microsoft’s test guidance for this release runs to 466 Windows entries, 55 of them flagged as high risk, against 109 and four in August. Given the large number of updates this month (who would have thought that we would be here at 963 CVEs), the Readiness team recommends the following testing priorities:

• Printing. Print from 32-bit and 64-bit applications to physical and virtual printers, exercise XPS and PDF output, share a printer from a print server and print from a separate client, cancel a job mid-queue, and confirm the queue reflects every state change. This is 20 of the 55 high risk flags, and it is the single most likely source of a visible regression.
• Fonts, graphics and imaging. Render varied fonts, sizes and styles across browsers, Office, PDF viewers and Notepad, confirm Print Preview matches the printed page, and open JPEG, TIFF, HEIF and raw images across Explorer, Photos and Office. Watch for clipping, distortion and missing glyphs.
• USB Devices. Exercise device attachment and removal. Attach and remove USB audio, video and mass storage devices repeatedly, including through a hub, pair and unpair a wireless device, and confirm each enumerates and releases cleanly. Device Association carries seven high risk flags, and these drivers load whenever hardware is attached.
• Remote Desktop. Open several concurrent sessions, enable printer, clipboard, audio, drive and smart card redirection together, disconnect and reconnect, and confirm redirected devices reattach.
• Storage (ntfs.sys, spaceport.sys). This is a real hotspot for updates this month, but no high-risk changes. Test on hardware you can recover, because the storage changes reach the boot path, potentially resulting in a dead (test) machine.

Each month, we break down the update cycle into product families, as defined by Microsoft, with the following groupings.

Browsers

Microsoft has not released any updates for their browser products for the second month in a row. September’s Security Update Guide carries no Edge-specific CVEs at all, and the 307 Chromium republications in the revision window required no customer action. The nine Edge CVEs that did appear arrived mid-cycle on 28 August and were serviced through the browser’s own update channel rather than this release.

Estates on a managed Edge channel have nothing to do here beyond confirming the channel is current. It is the one quiet corner of an otherwise heavy month.

Microsoft Windows

Windows carries 726 CVEs, 77 of them critical, which is three-quarters of the entire release. Elevation of privilege dominates by volume at 406 entries, with remote code execution second at 156, information disclosure at 94 and denial of service at 47. The pattern is the reverse of the severity picture: the bulk is local elevation, while the critical-rated entries cluster in the network-facing roles.

• Biometrics is a real focus this month as the Windows Biometric Service takes 64 fixes, the largest single-component count of the year. Most of the security issues are heap overflows that give a local attacker SYSTEM. Windows Hello adds nine, all critical. Patch it promptly on any estate using fingerprint or facial sign-in.
• Windows DHCP Server leads at 36 entries and is topped by remote code execution at CVSS 9.8. Windows DNS Server takes 10 more, also reaching 9.8. Critical remote code execution also lands on Message Queuing, RRAS, Services for NFS, the HTTP Print Provider, Windows Shell, Netlogon, Internet Connection Sharing, SSTP and Failover Cluster, all at 9.8. Patch the resolvers, the DHCP servers and the domain controllers first.
• Storage is the heaviest it has been this year. NTFS takes 29 fixes, Spaceport.sys behind Storage Spaces takes 17, and the Overlay Filter takes seven, with the Volume Manager, VHD miniport, iSCSI and Storage Port drivers behind them. These reach the boot path, so stage them on recoverable hardware.
• The rest of the most-patched tally runs Win32k at 19, Microsoft Standard XPS at 18, Windows Error Reporting at 12, and the Windows Kernel, Windows Search, the Print Spooler and the Device Association Service at 11 each.

Add this Windows update to your Patch Now schedule, with DHCP and DNS servers first and the biometric stack close behind.

Microsoft Office

Microsoft released 137 Office CVEs this month, 24 of them critical, with remote code execution the through-line at 69 entries and information disclosure close behind at 52. September breaks the recent pattern in a way that matters for deployment: this wave is not MSI-only.

• Click-to-Run estates are squarely in scope. Roughly 105 of the Office CVEs reach Click-to-Run, so Microsoft 365 Apps, Office 2019, LTSC 2021 and LTSC 2024 all update, on Windows and on Mac. Word takes 35 fixes, Excel 32, PowerPoint 10 and Outlook seven. The heaviest client entries are CVE-2026-78510 in Word and CVE-2026-78509 in Outlook, both critical remote code execution at CVSS 9.8, in document-rendering paths that fire on preview or open.
• SharePoint Server Subscription Edition takes 16 entries and is the only SharePoint baseline with a package this month. Server updates cannot be uninstalled and always require a reboot, so validate in a maintenance window.
• Skype for Business Server takes 10 entries, led by CVE-2026-66302, a critical remote code execution at CVSS 9.8. Patch it and note that the LTSC 2021 edition leaves support on 13 October 2026.

Nothing in Office is exploited this month. With 24 critical-rated entries and the Click-to-Run channel carrying most of the exposure, the September Office updates belong on the Patch Now schedule regardless.

Microsoft Exchange and SQL Server

Exchange is quiet and SQL Server is not, which inverts the usual relationship between the two.

• Exchange Server takes nine CVEs across 2016 CU23, 2019 CU14 and CU15, and Subscription Edition. None is critical and none is exploited, though the highest reaches CVSS 9.3. The mix runs to two remote code execution entries, two elevations of privilege, two spoofing, and one each of tampering, denial of service and information disclosure. Apply the update from an elevated command prompt, because an un-elevated run leaves Exchange services partially patched and broken, then confirm mail flow, Autodiscover and any hybrid connection before returning the server to service.
• SQL Server takes 62 CVEs, four of them critical, across the 2017, 2019, 2022 and 2025 branches. There is no 2016 package this month. Remote code execution leads at 24 entries, with information disclosure at 22. The critical entries are CVE-2026-67631 and CVE-2026-67643 at CVSS 8.8, and CVE-2026-67378 and CVE-2026-67636 at 8.5.
• Eight SQL packages ship, a CU+GDR and an RTM+GDR for each branch: 2025 (KB5122769, KB5122770), 2022 (KB5122768, KB5122771), 2019 (KB5122772, KB5122773) and 2017 (KB5122774, KB5122775). Microsoft’s guidance is explicit that the baseline or RTM version must be installed first and the GDR patch applied on top; test the install and the removal on every servicing branch you run, then restart the service and confirm Always On availability groups stay healthy.

Exchange goes on the Schedule list, and SQL Server goes on the Patch Now list. That is an unusual split, and it is driven by the four critical remote code execution entries on the database estate.

Microsoft Developer Tools

Microsoft released 24 CVEs across its developer tooling this month, 23 rated important and one critical. Security feature bypasses are the main focus with eight CVE entries, with remote code execution and information disclosure at four each.

• The single critical entry is CVE-2026-34182 at CVSS 9.1, a flaw in CMS AuthEnvelopedData processing that allows forged messages to be accepted. It reaches Visual Studio 2017 through 2022.
• The highest-scoring entry in this family is not the critical one. CVE-2026-81376, a Visual Studio Code security feature bypass, reaches CVSS 9.6 while carrying an important rating. It is a useful reminder that severity labels and CVSS scores answer different questions.
• Visual Studio Code and its Copilot extensions take 10 entries, mostly security feature bypasses. Update the editor and confirm workspace trust prompts, extension installation and remote sessions behave as configured.
• .NET ships SDK updates on all three supported lines, x64 and x86: 8.0.131 and 8.0.425, 9.0.121 and 9.0.318, and 10.0.112 and 10.0.401. Install them, then build and run a representative project to check for regressions. Keep the 10 November date for .NET 8 in view while you are in there.
• The .NET Framework ships monthly rollups per operating system: Windows Server 2012 (KB5126147), Server 2012 R2 (KB5126148), Windows 10 1809 (KB5126144), 21H2 (KB5126145), 22H2 (KB5126146) and Server 2022 (KB5126149). One gap worth noting: the 4.7.2 package for Windows 10 1607 is listed as pending and will follow, so estates still on 1607 will not complete their Framework patching this cycle.

Add these to your standard release schedule, behind this month’s Windows, Office and SQL Server priorities. Keep the 10 November date for .NET 8 and PowerShell 7.4 in view while you are in the developer estate, because a patch this month does not extend either branch.

Adobe (and third-party updates)

September is the largest release of the year, and this (crazy, super high) volume is the least interesting thing about it. The 963 CVEs matter less than the 55 entries Microsoft flags as high risk, and those sit in printing and fonts. Adobe shipped two Acrobat builds one digit apart and only the second is a security update (nothing to worry about here). Of the CVEs Microsoft republished, 25 are not Microsoft’s. A version number tells you very little about the work in front of you. So, given my (super-secret knowledge) of how Microsoft operates over the summer, here is my prediction for next month (October). It won’t be as big as this month – but just you wait – November is going to be big. Let’s up those numbers (or not).

Long before Taco Tuesday became part of the pop-culture vernacular, Tuesdays were synonymous with security — and for anyone in the tech world, they still are.  Patch Tuesday, as you most likely know, refers to the day each month when Microsoft releases security updates and patches for its software products — everything from Windows to Office to SQL Server, developer tools to browsers.

The practice, which happens on the second Tuesday of the month, was initiated to streamline the patch distribution process and make it easier for users and IT system administrators to manage updates. Like tacos, Patch Tuesday is here to stay.

Patch Tuesday coverage has long been a staple of Computerworld’s commitment to provide critical information to the IT industry. That’s why we’ve gathered together this collection of recent patches, a rolling list we’ll keep updated each month.

In case you missed a recent Patch Tuesday announcement, here are the latest six months of updates.

September Patch Tuesday: 963 CVEs, 2 exploited flaws, 1 message

September’s Patch Tuesday is Microsoft’s biggest of 2026, with 963 CVEs, two exploited flaws and a clear message: prioritize Windows, Office and SQL Server.

Two vulnerabilities are already exploited: CVE-2026-81963 in the Windows Update Stack and CVE-2026-85880 in Advanced Local Procedure Call. Nothing in this release was publicly disclosed ahead of the patch. Readiness recommends a Patch Now scheduling for Windows, Office, SQL Server and the developer tooling, and standard patch release for Exchange.

Get more info on the September 2026 Microsoft security updates.

August’s Patch Tuesday is a monster: 751 fixes, with an exploited Windows flaw

Microsoft’s August 2026 Patch Tuesday closes at 751 CVE entries (across all product families), with 108 rated as critical. One flaw is already exploited, CVE-2026-68820, an elevation of privilege in the Windows WinSock driver (afd.sys). Two more were disclosed but not exploited.

This security-only release earns Patch Now for Windows, Office and Exchange; no SQL Server updates this month. Unfortunately, several critical issues affect server roles: Windows DNS Server carries a cluster of critical RCEs; Windows DHCP Server is the most-populated Microsoft product family at 14 entries. Testing should lead with printing and fonts and the Remote Desktop client, then a WinSock smoke test given the exploited afd.sys flaw.

Get more info on the August 2026 Microsoft security updates.

July’s Patch Tuesday sees an end-of-support collision amidst a massive, record-setting patch wave

Microsoft addressed 722 CVEs this month once the 427 Chromium upstream relays are set aside — roughly three times a normal cycle and one of the largest single months in recent memory. Two vulnerabilities arrive under active exploitation: an elevation of privilege in Active Directory Federation Services (CVE-2026-56155), and an elevation of privilege in SharePoint Server (CVE-2026-56164). A third, a BitLocker security feature bypass (CVE-2026-50661) is publicly disclosed but not yet exploited.

The July 2026 Patch Tuesday earns Patch Now recommendations for Windows, Office, Exchange, and SQL Server. SharePoint has two critical RCEs on top of its exploited zero-day, and Exchange Server returns with a critical on-premises spoofing flaw. Adding to our (dear) administrator’s efforts, SharePoint Server 2016/2019 and SQL Server 2016 all reach end of support today.

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for July 2026.

For June, Patch Tuesday means an IT scramble

Microsoft this month released 206 updates affecting Windows, Office, Exchange Server, and its developer tools — including three Windows vulnerabilities already publicly disclosed. That trio includes an elevation of privilege in the Collaborative Translation Framework (CVE-2026-45586), a denial of service in HTTP.sys (CVE-2026-49160), and a BitLocker security feature bypass (CVE-2026-50507). At the moment, none appear to be under active exploitation, but all three are rated “Exploitation More Likely.” 

Even without an exploited zero-day, the June 2026 Patch Tuesday release requires Patch Now recommendations for Windows, Office, and Exchange. The latter is back in the patch picture with a consolidated security update that Microsoft recommends installing “as soon as possible.”

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for June 2026.

For May, Patch Tuesday means 139 updates — but no zero-days

Microsoft this month released 139 updates affecting Windows, Office, .NET, and SQL Server (though there were no updates for Microsoft Exchange Server). Despite the absence of zero-days, the May Patch Tuesday update still requires Patch Now recommendations for Windows and Office. 

The combination of three unauthenticated network RCEs (Netlogon, DNS Client, and SSO Plugin for Jira and Confluence), four Word Preview Pane RCEs, the large TCP/IP vulnerability cluster, and the carry-over BitLocker recovery condition (still active on Windows 10 and Windows Server) warrants an accelerated deployment release schedule. 

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for May 2026.

Microsoft’s Patch Tuesday release for April is a whopper

Windows admins are going to be busy this month, dealing with the largest Patch Tuesday cycle in memory. The April release involves 165 updates and roughly 340 unique CVEs from Microsoft — including two zero-days, one of which is already being actively exploited in the wild. 

The Readiness team recommends “Patch Now” schedules for nearly every major product family: Windows, Office (with a zero-day), Microsoft Edge (Chromium), SQL Server, and Microsoft Developer Tools (.NET). April also brings Phase 2 of Microsoft’s Kerberos RC4 hardening with full enforcement set for July. There is a lot to cover, so here’s a useful infographic mapping the deployment risk for each platform.

More info is available here on Microsoft Security updates for April 2026.

IDC analyst Francisco Jeronimo said something interesting following the iPhone Duo introduction on Wednesday: “Apple showed up years after everyone else, yet it walks in and sets the rules.”

He’s right. From the IP resistance to the little touches that set the new foldable apart from most of the competition, Apple has set expectations for the entire market, and while competitor Samsung is trash talking the foldable, even it stands to benefit from the millions Apple is about to sell. Apple is, after all, allegedly paying Samsung $250 for each iPhone Duo display.

But it is not just the rules concerning foldables the company has now defined; it has also set the standard competitors must follow in chip design with its A20 Pro, a super-powered processor that delivers noticeable performance improvements even compared to last year’s iPhone 17. 

What’s new in the chip?

With six CPU cores, seven GPU cores and a new Dual 16-core Neural Engine, the new chip boasts numerous improvements compared to the A19 Pro, not the least of which is that it’s the first 2nm chip Apple has put inside a smartphone. These enhancements bestow it with a series of superlatives:

• Memory bandwidth is 50% higher than last year’s chip.
• GPU graphics performance increases up to 40% over the A19 Pro.
• AI performance is expected to double.

These are all significant improvements that make for noticeable experience boosts for anyone using one of these phones. Prosaically, I anticipate first reviews will celebrate how fast and responsive these devices are, and this will be most evidenced in tasks such as video capture and photography. Pictures will capture more swiftly, open faster, and edit features will become (and already are) more advanced and sophisticated than before. Apple spent ample time celebrating the iPhone 18 Pro series for the new frontiers in digital photography they open up, and not just because of the new reflexive lens.

The point is that the devices have the horsepower to get through computationally intensive tasks, including AI, thanks to the Neural Engines and GPU.

Thermal management is the icing on the quake

What those tasks have in common is heat, which Apple’s product designers have addressed in two critical ways: liquid cooling and processor design.

The processor design is the important thing, because in this case Apple has moved away from the InFO POP packaging of the A19 Pro in which the DRAM is stacked above the chip. It’s now embraced a side-by-side design it described as “inspired by” M-series Apple Silicon.

That works because placing both components alongside each other, rather than in a perpetual embrace, reduces the overall temperature of both by putting a little space between them. As Apple explained it, this Wafer-level Multi-Chip Module (WMCM) approach means the memory gets out of the way of the processor, allowing the latter to make direct contact with the vapor chamber cooling system.

In layman’s terms, it means both memory and chip can perform more intensively while being more efficiently cooled, a move that helps Apple’s iPhone meet those astonishing performance achievements. The vapor chamber is also bigger, made of new material with three times the surface area of before, making it even better at cooling the device.

It also means Apple has achieved a lot of things competitors have not, most particularly in packaging, the use of 2nm chips in a mass market product, and overall design.

That’s where it gets interesting. Both Qualcomm and MediaTek now plan to follow in Apple’s footsteps with the adoption of 2nm chips and side-by-side packaging.

Digitimes suggests it is a move others will follow, as vendors work furiously to ensure their hardware can run AI effectively on device, which iPhones already do. Apple, of course, already knows its Macs, iPhones, and iPads have been designed from the ground-up to support on-device AI as it works to provide the world’s best mass market platforms for secure and private use of the tech.

Friends don’t let friends bet against Apple

All the same, even at the microprocessor level, it’s hard to ignore that where Apple goes, others follow — even while where others go, Apple frequently follows later, but seems to do it better. It has never been a company to bet against, after all. People really should stop doing that.

Please subscribe to my daily, human-curated Apple-related news headline feed at The Core, or follow me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, or Mastodon.