An average of about four “nationally significant” cyberattacks were launched in the UK every week in the last year, twice as many as in the previous 12 months, according to the UK cyber agency’s latest annual review.

“Cyber is being used by state and non-state actors,” said the National Cyber Security Centre, “and the overall cyber threat to the UK is growing from an already high level.”

Where are the attacks coming from?
Globally, around half of cyberattacks in 2024 may be attributed to financially motivated cybercriminals, while state-sponsored actors accounted for around a third, according to a report by Cognyte.

The “Big Four” – North Korea, Iran, Russia and China – are highest on the UK’s state actor list, said Politico. Three are considered “hostile states” and “Britain has an uneasy relationship with the latter”.

But a group of young, English-speaking hackers, who sometimes go by the name of Scattered Spider, claimed responsibility for the recent large-scale attacks on M&S and Jaguar Land Rover, although this hasn’t been confirmed.

How do the new hacking groups work?
Ransomware is still one of the “most acute and pervasive cyberthreats” to the UK, said the National Cyber Security Centre. This was underscored in the attacks on British retailers this year, but most cybercriminals are “sector agnostic”. They target organisations that are vulnerable, hold sensitive data and are likely to pay a ransom.

One Russian group, Qilin, is “cementing its place as one of the most prolific ransomware-as-a-service operations in the world”, after an attack in Japan and the US, said Digit. It essentially “rents out” its malware and infrastructure to other hackers for a share of their ransom profits.

How are states using cyberattacks?
Countries including Russia, Iran and China are “increasingly relying on criminal networks” to target political “adversaries”, said AP News. Security officials are reporting “growing collaboration” between governments and hackers, demonstrating “increasingly blurred lines” between state espionage and hackers motivated by financial gain.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, for example, has “inspired a growing number of pro-Russia hacktivist groups”, said the UK cyber agency. Without formal state control, they choose Western targets based on vulnerability, which “makes their activities less predictable”.

Following a flurry of rumours, the creators of “The Inbetweeners” have confirmed the cult show is returning to the small screen. Damon Beesley and Iain Morris announced that they are “plotting more adventures” for the four awkward friends – Will, Jay, Neil and Simon – 17 years after the Channel 4 series first aired.

‘Damaging the original legacy’
“The Inbetweeners” specialised in that “specific brand of toe-curling cringe humour” for which British sitcoms are renowned, said Helen Coffey in The Independent. Unlike “Skins”, in which the teens were all “beautiful yet permanently angst-ridden”, the uneasy group of friends at the centre of this show “struck a cultural chord because they painted a fairly accurate, if exaggerated, portrait” of British adolescence. Characters were “sick in nightclubs”, fibbed about their sexual conquests and “casually joked about one of their teachers being a paedophile”.

It was “completely and utterly of its time” – which is why news of the reboot “brings me no pleasure whatsoever”. The problem isn’t just that you “risk forever damaging the original legacy with a botched job” but also that “grasping attempts to cash in on” the nostalgia leaves less space and money for truly “groundbreaking” new projects.

A millennial dream
“There couldn’t be a better time to unite the four unlikely friends,” said City A.M.’s Adam Bloodworth. The show epitomises the “millennial cliche: the backpack-wearing, binge-drinking nomad who didn’t quite fit in with the idea of growing up”. For many of us, “not much has changed” since the series, which spawned two films, first hit our TV screens. “If there was ever more of a reason to bring ‘The Inbetweeners’ back, I don’t know what that would be.”

Reboot plans are often met with a great deal of “fear”, said Milo Pope in Metro, but this revival could be an “exciting next step in the show’s history”. It “deserves a chance to prove it still has something to say”.

A coypu photobombs a snap of swans on a lake in Germany. The image, titled “Meet the Neighbours”, was taken by Luca Lorenz, who has won the Rising Star award in this year’s Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition.

Luca Lorenz / Wildlife Photographer of the Year

“One Battle After Another” has scooped a 95% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and garnered plenty of Oscar buzz. If you’ve seen it, loved it and are wondering which of director Paul Thomas Anderson’s films to watch next, there’s plenty of quality work to choose from.

There Will Be Blood
This epic period drama captures “the pursuit of the American dream in all its nightmarish horror”, said Esquire. Set in early 20th century New Mexico, it follows the “ruthless quest for wealth by silver-prospector-turned-oil-baron Daniel Plainview (played by Daniel Day-Lewis in an Oscar-winning performance)”.

The Master
“There’s really never been a performance like the one Joaquin Phoenix gives as Freddie Quell”, a “shattered and strange” Second World War veteran, said Vulture. Struggling to readjust to society and his old life, he falls under the spell of charismatic cult leader Lancaster Dodd, played by a “spectacularly preening” Philip Seymour Hoffman. Anderson’s filmography is “full of bangers” but “The Master” is “the greatest of them all”.

Boogie Nights
Anderson’s “Boogie Nights” stands out for the director’s obvious “affection for his characters”, said Slant magazine. The movie chronicles the rise of Dirk Diggler (Mark Wahlberg, pictured above with Julianne Moore), a nightclub dishwasher who becomes a porn actor under the tutelage of adult film director Jack Horner (Burt Reynolds). Diggler builds a supportive circle of friends and soon becomes a porn star, but his spiralling drug habit and growing ego threaten to bring his world crashing down. “Anderson tries to be a bad boy but settles, thank God, for being a humanist.” It’s an “amazing achievement”.

Bojo’s ‘Boriswave’ tantrum shows how unfit he was for No 10
Sean O’Grady in The Independent
Boris Johnson “was always a shameless figure”, writes Sean O’Grady. The former PM still “refuses to take responsibility for the damage he, above all others, has done to this country”, not least with the “Boriswave” that brought 2.6 million immigrants “into the country entirely legally”. As always, “the excuses are ready to hand” and “someone else” is blamed. He “cannot honestly examine himself” and should not “be allowed anywhere near power again”.

Three Reckonings the Gaza Deal Will Force
Michael J. Koplow on Foreign Policy
If the Gaza deal holds, Israelis will face “three reckonings”, writes Michael J Koplow of the US-based Israel Policy Forum. The first is with the country’s leadership: Israelis will “likely demand” that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is replaced with one that can “rebuild” trust. Second, though their attitudes to Palestinians may be “at their nadir”, Donald Trump’s plan calls for Israelis to “engage with Palestinians in multiple ways”. And third, the US-Israel relationship is “going to change. The only question is how much.”

The Left still cannot fathom why Brits voted for independence from the EU
Annabel Denham in The Telegraph
The “EU enthusiasts” who can’t comprehend why “Britain’s uneducated, xenophobic masses voted to Leave” are still “yattering on about Brexit”, writes Annabel Denham. “The Left remains psychologically damaged by the 2016 vote” and “wants to rekindle its old love affair, failing to grasp that Europe has changed”, drifting “towards more central planning, higher debts, mounting piles of red tape”. Rejoining wouldn’t “mean a return to some warm, pre-referendum era” and wouldn’t “magically reignite growth”.