Tim McAllister · AI incident watch

See where the reports lead.

Explore the places sources name as affected or targeted, see why most AI incidents have no single location, then open a report to see what happened and what to learn from it.

Register reviewed . Location review .

The global picture

AI incidents, in context.

Shaded countries and region zones show where sources place affected or targeted organizations. Select a place, or open a report’s footprint.

147curated reports

Where these reports sit

29 of 147 reports name an affected or targeted place. The others are not missing; most AI incidents happen in a platform, a lab or an undisclosed environment rather than at a mappable location.

2 places · 2 reports2 places · 3 reports2 places · 3 reports3 places · 4 reports14 places · 12 reportsAustralia: 4 reports8 places · 3 reports3 places · 5 reports4 places · 1 report3 places · 13 reports4 places · 2 reports4 places · 4 reportsIndonesia: 1 report3 places · 5 reports2 places · 5 reports3 places · 2 reports5 places · 6 reports2 places · 2 reportsMexico: 1 reportNew Zealand: 1 reportPortugal: 1 reportRussia: 2 reportsWest Africa (broad region): 1 report
Reports per country: 1 · 2–3 · 4–6 · 7+ Targeted or attempted only Broad region · approximate zone Vulnerability / research only Nearby places · zoom to explore

Drag to pan. + / − to zoom, arrow keys to pan. Ctrl/⌘ + scroll to zoom. Use the place list on touchscreens.

Shading and markers are approximate: a country is shaded when a source names it, and broad regions are drawn as rough zones because the sources do not name individual countries. Neither shows an exact site or an attacker’s location. Counts are distinct reports, and one report can cover many places.

Read the record

All reports

147 reports · newest first

What the map shows

A country is shaded when a source names affected or targeted organizations there; darker shading means more distinct reports. Hatching marks countries where every report describes targeting or attempts, not confirmed compromise. When a source names only a broad region, such as Western Europe or Southeast Asia, the map draws an approximate zone instead of guessing a country. Nothing on the map identifies an exact site. Attacker origin, a vendor’s headquarters, server locations and a researcher’s location are not treated as affected locations. One report can cover many places, so place counts overlap.

Every report is accounted for. Reports without a map location fall into four groups:

Worldwide, no breakdown.
Multinational activity without a usable country or regional breakdown, so no marker is placed.
Platforms and supply chain.
A provider, package, marketplace or repository was compromised. Affected customers are wherever its users are; the sources do not break them down by country.
Victim location not disclosed.
Real organizations or systems were affected or targeted, but the sources do not say where.
Research, tests and decoys.
Lab studies, demonstrations, sandboxed evaluations, honeypots and disclosed flaws without a documented real-world victim. There is no victim location to map.

This curated register is not a measure of incident prevalence by country.

Location evidence

Map outlines: Natural Earth, public-domain 1:110m data. Register scope and methodology.