The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) said the alert was issued in coordination with Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, the BND, and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The group, also known as “Fancy Bear,” has been attributed by Western governments to Russia’s military intelligence service, the GRU.According to the BfV, APT28 exploited weaknesses in TP-Link routers, affecting several thousand devices worldwide, including about 30 in Germany.

In some cases, authorities confirmed breaches, leading operators to replace compromised hardware.The agency said the campaign was aimed at facilitating surveillance of sensitive targets, including state institutions and key infrastructure networks.

APT28 has previously been linked to cyberattacks against Germany’s parliament, the Social Democratic Party and air traffic control systems, underscoring its long-standing role in espionage operations targeting European institutions.

German authorities urged heightened vigilance and coordination among operators to mitigate risks posed by the ongoing campaign.

A month-long trial of Meta’s smartglasses has highlighted concerns over privacy, usability and real-world application, as the wearable technology continues to draw mixed reactions from users and experts despite growing global sales.

The device, developed by Meta in collaboration with Ray-Ban, integrates a camera and an artificial intelligence assistant capable of responding to voice commands.

The assistant can provide directions, identify objects and read messages aloud, with users able to select from a range of celebrity-inspired voices, including one modeled on Judi Dench.

The company’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has said smartglasses could become a primary computing interface over the next decade, potentially replacing some smartphone functions such as taking photos, making calls and navigating.

Meta reported global sales of more than 7 million units in 2025.In practice, however, the experience of using the glasses appears uneven. Voice commands are not always accurately processed, and responses from the assistant can be incomplete or delayed.

Users often find themselves verifying outputs on their phones, undermining the intended hands-free functionality.The device’s visual recognition capabilities are also limited.

While it can identify basic objects and settings, it struggles with more complex queries. In one instance, it provided a generic description of an artwork at Tate Modern without offering meaningful context or interpretation. Similarly, attempts to identify specific items such as clothing accessories or provide product-related information were unsuccessful.

Real-time translation, another promoted feature, has also shown inconsistencies. During conversational tests, translations appeared with a delay and lacked clarity, resulting in less effective communication compared with established tools such as smartphone-based translation applications.

Public reaction to the glasses has been cautious. Users report that the most common question from others is whether they are being recorded. The presence of a built-in camera, even with a small LED indicator designed to signal recording, has contributed to discomfort among bystanders.

The indicator can be difficult to notice, particularly in well-lit environments, raising concerns about transparency.The device has gained traction among content creators, who use it to capture first-person footage.

However, it has also been associated with controversial use cases, including recording individuals in public without their knowledge. This perception has contributed to the emergence of the nickname “pervert glasses” in online discourse.Industry experts say the technology lacks clearly defined everyday applications.

Iain Rice, a professor of industrial artificial intelligence at Birmingham City University, said smartglasses may eventually find niche uses but currently do not offer compelling reasons for widespread adoption. He noted that previous attempts at similar technology, such as early smartglasses, faced limited uptake due to similar concerns.

Rice also questioned whether consumer demand aligns with the product’s design. While Meta has focused on aesthetics to make the glasses more appealing, he said it remains unclear whether users are willing to adopt wearable devices that are not essential to daily life.

The development of smartglasses comes as Meta continues to invest in emerging technologies, including its previously emphasized metaverse strategy. The company has reportedly scaled back some aspects of that initiative after significant financial investment, reflecting broader challenges in identifying sustainable use cases for new digital platforms.

Privacy remains a central issue in the adoption of wearable recording devices. While there are currently no specific laws in the United Kingdom prohibiting recording in public spaces, the introduction of discreet, always-available cameras raises questions about consent and personal boundaries.

Some users argue that the ability to record interactions enhances personal safety, while others view it as intrusive.Meta has stated that users are responsible for complying with legal and ethical standards when using the device.

A company spokesperson said the terms of service require users to operate the glasses “in a safe, respectful manner” and not engage in activities that infringe on privacy or constitute harassment.The experience of extended use suggests that familiarity with the device can reduce initial hesitation, potentially increasing reliance on its features.

However, this adaptation may also normalize behaviors that raise ethical concerns, particularly in relation to recording others without explicit awareness.

As smartglasses continue to evolve, their adoption is likely to depend on improvements in functionality, clearer use cases and regulatory frameworks addressing privacy and data use.

For now, the technology remains at an early stage, with its long-term role in consumer electronics still uncertain.

The measures expand enforcement powers under the Hong Kong national security law, introduced by Beijing in 2020 following large-scale pro-democracy protests in the financial hub.

The latest amendments mandate that individuals hand over “any password or other decryption method” needed for police to access electronic devices believed to contain evidence.

The rules apply not only to those under investigation for national security offences but also to individuals who own, possess, or are authorized to access the relevant devices, as well as anyone with knowledge of the required passwords or decryption tools.

Failure to comply constitutes a criminal offence, marking a shift from previous practice, where refusal to unlock devices was not treated as obstruction.The amendments were formulated under the direction of Chief Executive John Lee in coordination with the National Security Commission.

A government spokesperson said the measures aim to ensure that activities endangering national security can be “effectively prevented, suppressed and punished,” while safeguarding the lawful rights and interests of individuals and organizations.

Hong Kong has further strengthened its legal framework with an additional security law enacted in 2024, complementing the broader legislation imposed after the 2019 unrest.