
The Afghan data breach has already cost millions. What happens next?
People named on a leaked dataset that officials feared could become a Taliban 'kill list' must make life or death decisions: whether to move house or, for those who may have already left the country, whether to send their families running.
At least 18,500 Afghans have already been secretly flown to Britain and more are expected to arrive in the coming days.
Back in the UK, the government is having to grapple with the issues of accommodation for the Afghans whose lives they put in danger more than three years ago, in February 2022, when their data was leaked in a massive blunder.
A flurry of legal action is expected as dozens of judicial reviews involving Afghans who have been blocked from coming to the UK are upended, law firms seek compensation for those affected and previously rejected applicants launch appeals.
Here is what to expect next:
Untested system costing £360,000 a month
All of those Afghans affected by the data breach should have been sent proactive notifications to tell them they were among the victims, although the Ministry of Defence (MoD) may be relying on out-of-date information.
An information service centre will also be established to notify individuals affected by the incident. Inquiries around the world will be directed here. The service, which costs £360,000 a month, has never been tested at scale before.
It will provide advice on what has happened and how individuals can take actions to protect themselves. A follow-up notification will then be sent advising them what to do next.
The centre will provide an online self-checker capability; a reactive email service aimed at individuals both in the UK and abroad who are concerned they or their family members are affected. There will also be an automated telephone capability plus a 'limited' call-handling service, which costs £30,000 a month.
•
Those answering the phones will not be able to tell those calling whether they have been affected or not. Calls will be taken in English only and calls from Afghanistan are discouraged.
According to a government plan for 'break glass' — the moment news of the data breach is revealed — prepared in the weeks leading up to the lifting of the superinjunction, 'there remains a risk that we incorrectly email unaffected persons and the self-checker wrongly informs persons if they are likely to be affected or not'.
More than 3,000 principal applicants on the list — plus their family members, taking the total to about 18,500 — have so far been allowed to come to Britain under the secret Afghan Response Route, which has been shut down.
More than 5,000 more Afghans affected by the breach who have received invitation letters already to come to the UK will be flown to Britain. This will take the total to almost 24,000 Afghans affected by the breach being brought to the UK. The remaining affected Afghans — potentially 76,000 people when taking into account family members — will not be allowed to come as the three Afghan schemes have been shut down.
A gigantic lawsuit and 'substantial payments'
Hundreds of Afghans all over the world are in the process of launching a claim against the government for leaking their personal data as part of a massive lawsuit that could end up costing taxpayers more than £250 million.
The lawsuit is being prepared by Barings Law, a Manchester-based firm that had already signed up some 1,000 clients while the superinjunction remained in place, even though the individuals did not know why they were agreeing to take legal action.
Adnan Malik, head of data protection at Barings Law, told The Times his clients had suffered 'real and ongoing harm' and 'live with the fear of reprisal against them and their families, when they were owed a duty of care for their dangerous work'.
'We would expect substantial financial payments totalling five figures for each claimant,' he said. 'While this will not fully redress the harm they have been exposed to, it will enable them to move forward and rebuild their lives.'
Thousands more Afghans are likely to join the legal fight for compensation once they are able to determine whether or not their name is on a 19,000-strong list of principal individuals whose data was breached in February 2022. About 19,000 applicants were on the list, but the MoD feared as many as 100,000 individuals were put at risk by the leak when taking into account family members.
Each Afghan could end up with at least £50,000 each and Barings believes they could have as many as 5,000 clients in the coming months. Thousands of family members may also be able to claim compensation because their names were on the list, which included phone numbers and addresses.
Malik said the leak was an 'incredibly serious breach which the MoD has tried to hide from the British public … It involved the loss of personal, identifying information about Afghan nationals who have helped British forces to defeat terrorism and to support security and stability in the region.
'By allowing their information to be leaked, the MoD has put multiple lives at risk, damaged its own reputation and put the success of future efforts in jeopardy by diminishing trust in its data security protocols.'
Malik said the 'lifting of a superinjunction which kept this data breach a secret is crucial in exposing the failings so that lessons can be learnt'.
Those Afghans suing the MoD are in the UK, Afghanistan, America, Turkey and Australia, as well as African nations. Until now the law firm had been unable to tell their clients why exactly they may be owed compensation without breaching the superinjunction.
Messages circulated on WhatsApp groups urging Afghans to sign up to the legal case on the expectation they would be given huge sums of money, without knowing the true extent of why.
Housing strain over rescued Afghans
Thousands of hotel rooms are being earmarked for new Afghan residents as councils 'creak under the pressure' of having to find houses for them alongside British citizens and an influx of refugees, court documents have disclosed.
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, announced a pledge to stop using hotels to accommodate asylum seekers by the end of the current parliament — expected in 2029 — as part of her spending review last month. But the government is likely to increasingly rely on hotels as hundreds of vulnerable Afghans a month are rescued from the clutches of the Taliban.
Behind the scenes, 2,200 beds have been made ready at three hotels and a pilot site to make way. More than 1,000 rooms on MoD bases are being taken up by rescued Afghans and at one point 20 per cent of the defence estate was being used to house them.
By September, the government will have run out of 'transitional' accommodation in the form of hotels, serviced accommodation and pilot projects already available, documents released to the court state, raising questions about where all the Afghans will go.
One Afghan in a family of four will cost taxpayers about £1.25 million over three years if they are put into MoD transitional accommodation, including a hotel.
It costs half that amount if social housing is found for them instead, according to government figures, but officials have pointed out local government is 'creaking under current pressures' and in March 2023 there were 1.29 million households on social housing waiting lists.
At one point the problem with finding room for the Afghans was deemed so severe that officials asked ministers to consider asking foreign governments, including the US, to see if they would take them. Officials under the previous Conservative government debated the costs for what was described as a 'Rwanda-style' scheme.
The Afghans who are being rescued are not asylum seekers, having come to the UK legally and been given indefinite leave to remain.
Misinformation and threat of riots
The government has been concerned about the impact on public disorder of the data breach and its handling of it. This is especially so given the superinjunction has been lifted in the summer, when the risk of unrest is deemed to be higher.
Court documents disclosed how MoD officials discussed ways to 'provide cover' for the numbers of Afghans arriving last year. Rather than announce there would be large numbers of future arrivals, the government agreed to put out an 'agreed narrative that provides context for the increased numbers without disclosing information relating to the incident'.
However, their arrival in large numbers — at a time the real reason why many had been rescued was covered up — has been linked to unrest in the UK.
CHRISTOPHER FURLONG/GETTY IMAGES
In May, Bracknell Forest council responded to 'misinformation circulating regarding our new Afghan families' after a rumoured assault on a girl that turned out to be fake. After a Facebook user posted in multiple groups their daughter had been attacked the council issued a statement that 'we want to make sure all our residents have the facts' and that it 'would like to reiterate that our new families are not illegal immigrants, asylum seekers or refugees'.
'They have indefinite leave to remain and so are now UK residents,' it added. 'The new families are part of the national Afghan Resettlement Programme, which offers relocation and resettlement to Afghan citizens, and their immediate family, who worked for or with the UK government to support the UK mission in Afghanistan [and] are considered vulnerable or in danger from the Taliban.'
MoD documents also referred to the summer riots of 2024, in which asylum seekers and Muslims were targeted, and which were described by officials as 'the worst outbreak of racial violence in the UK for decades'.
Officials noted that 15 of the 20 primary disorder hotspots were in the top 20 per cent of local authorities with high numbers of supported asylum seekers and Afghan resettlement arrivals. They said that 'this underlines the importance of mainstreaming community cohesion considerations throughout our resettlement approach'.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
This weekend, 100,000 people stood up to fight against the demonisation of trans people
One hundred thousand people, let me repeat, 100,000 people joined Saturday's march for London Trans+ Pride. It broke 2024's record of 60,000 and extended the capital's reign as the largest trans rights protest in the world. But pride doesn't even begin to encompass the full breadth of emotion I feel: not only in making it happen, but in the tenacity of our community. This was my second year helping to organise the march – and I do apologise to any of those still hearing the echoes of my voice ringing out 'Claim your space, we have the whole of Whitehall!' through a megaphone. As a proud trans woman, working alongside the collective of 30 or so volunteers who put on this event every year is a privilege. I am by no means its voice, and there are many others more qualified to be the community's voice, such as artist Lewis G Burton, BBC presenter Dr Ronx and Heartstopper actor Yasmin Finney, who all made speeches in Parliament Square. But I am writing this as someone who found comfort and community here and wanted to give back. For me and for so many other people, Saturday's march represents the ultimate safe space. It is a day of protest and of joy, liberation and celebration. There wasn't anything like it when I started my transition some 15 years ago. I was lucky enough to know exactly who I was from a young age – just as my mother had known who she was, and my father had known who he was. My parents have been my most supportive allies, and I was so moved to see signs from other families along the march. I spent several years working as an organiser of large-scale events before joining London Trans+ Pride. And while my career may have been my foundation for this move into advocacy, nothing can prepare you for the energy of those marching. I'm not surprised that so many more people joined compared to 2024. It has come at a time when we need proactive activism and allyship more than ever. Following the explosion against trans+ rights in the last five years, from puberty blocker bans to the Supreme Court's contested ruling in April – that the legal definition of a woman is someone born biologically female – friends, family and total strangers have stepped up and demonstrated their support – and highlighted that most Britons have never, and will never, view trans people as a threat. Our team was supported by almost 600 volunteer stewards. These people come from all over the UK and give up their time to guide the march. We could not safely deliver an event of such magnitude every year without them, and we owe them so much. They, and the additional 35,000 marchers we saw yesterday, have stepped up at a time when visible support is so needed. We tend to see significant mainstream coverage about small protests against immigration, but little about the thousands of people supporting trans rights. We heard the author Caroline Litman speaking about her late daughter, Alice, and initiatives highlighted from ally support groups such as the Trans Solidarity Alliance and Not in Our Name, and the enviable strength and determination of Trans Kids Deserve Better. When I had time to look up from my work as a pink blur of headsets and event management forms, I could soak in the phenomenon engulfing me. I spent all day being moved by the placards, banners, flags, and by the humour. The progressive spins on viral trends were a favourite: 'Nothing beats a Jet2 Holiday; except top surgery.' British irony combined with the joy of medical autonomy: something I see regularly in my new career in gender-affirming healthcare – an area persistently targeted in the tirade against our community. In my role, I get to float between marchers, volunteers and community workers throughout the march and see all the variety of support there. And while my bones may be a little worse for wear after what can only be described as the job of a lifetime – and thank goodness for comfy shoes – I couldn't imagine anything better. But this lovely day is counterbalanced by the continued demonisation of women like me, people like this and communities like ours. Our rights appear to be being used as pawns on the world's political stage to distract from larger issues. London Trans+ Pride was, is and will always remain a testament to joy. It confirms us as human by showing up for each other and everyone else through the intersectionality of systemic oppression. 2025 continues to be a horrific year for human rights. But, thanks to everyone who marched and made history, today, the future for trans people feels a little brighter.


Daily Mail
28 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Apple and Google face calls to install 'kill switches' in mobile phones stolen by moped gangs to end resale market
Pressure is mounting on big tech companies to install remote 'kill switches' in mobile phones amid ongoing phone-theft epidemic. Senior Conservative politicians have urged the Labour Government to 'force' Apple and Google to end the criminal phone trade once and for all by rendering all stolen phones useless. Kill switches work by severing smartphones from the cloud once the devices have been reported to police as stolen. James Conway, who oversees Scotland Yard's phone-theft investigations, believes this will slash their market value on the black market, massively disincentivizing criminals from snatching them. This call to action comes after a Daily Mail investigation revealed that vulnerable youngsters are being groomed into stealing phones by county-lines gangs, which are then shipped abroad in bulk and sold around the world. Last night Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp told the Daily Mail: 'The Labour Government is presiding over a crime epidemic - with phone theft rife. 'Mobile phone companies should urgently implement 'Kill Switches' which prevent stolen phones from accessing the cloud globally. 'Google and Apple claim to have antitheft measures but these are clearly completely ineffective. This call to action comes after a Daily Mail investigation revealed that vulnerable youngsters are being groomed into stealing phones by county-lines gangs, which are then shipped abroad in bulk and sold around the world. 'If companies like Apple continue to refuse to do this voluntarily then the Government must urgently legislate to force them, by amending the Crime and Policing bill. 'Implementing a 'Kill Switch' is vital and the Government should legislate to compel big tech companies to do this if they're not going to do it voluntarily.' Meanwhile, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, Alicia Kearns added: 'A remote kill switch would reclaim our streets and better protect us all from the plague of phone thieves in our cities. 'This is the sort of initiative phone companies should be introducing to better protect their customers and help tackle organised crime.' Some 80,000 phones are stolen in London every year, with around 80 per cent of this bounty ending up abroad. Across the entire United Kingdom, around 230 mobile phones are stolen every single day. Speaking to the Daily Mail last week, Commander James Conway, who oversees Scotland Yard's phone-theft investigations, explained that a 'kill switch' would ensure that a 'the [stolen device] wouldn't operate as a smartphone any more and would have next to zero value in that market.' In response to the growing phone-theft crisis several cyber security companies such as Nuke From Orbit have been established to make it easier for users to safeguard their accounts. Nuke From Orbit allows users to block access to multiple services and accounts simultaneously after the user's phone has been stolen. James O'Sullivan, CEO and Founder of Nuke From Orbit explained: 'As our lives become more reliant on mobile phones, the need to be able to disavow that device when stolen increases exponentially.' A spokesperson for Google said: 'Google's top priority is the safety of its users, and we are proud to bring constantly evolving, industry-leading security technologies to Android. 'Our freely available anti-theft features help users to protect their devices before, during, and after a theft. 'Users in locations at risk of phone theft can simply switch them on and stay protected.'


Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trans ruling means every lavatory user will need to be checked, museums claim
Staff will have to check the sex of visitors using lavatories after the Supreme Court's trans ruling, museum bosses have claimed. Museums Galleries Scotland, a national body that represents 455 non-national museums and receives £1.7 million a year in public funds, claims organisations will have to close while they reassess lavatory provisions. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that 'sex' in law is a person's biological sex, not gender identity. However, the Scottish Government has so far failed to produce guidance for public bodies on single-sex spaces such as lavatories. In its submission, the museums body says it has concerns the EHRC's initial guidance does not 'uphold the spirit of inclusion' and that the human rights body did not consult with trans people or trans organisations in its development. Policing of toilets is 'unfeasiable' The response goes on to say: 'When there is a need to 'prove' your sex, what proof will be acceptable given gender recognition certificates are not, nor are altered birth certificates – but how would you know? It is likely this role would fall on front-of-house staff, which we believe puts undue pressure on them to do this 'in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. 'The practical application of policing toilets is unfeasible as, to avoid discrimination, it would require every single person using toilets to be checked adding substantial workload and staff costs to undertake this role.' Museums Galleries Scotland also raised concerns the interim guidance does not make reference to people with intersex conditions and states there are 1.1 million intersex people in the UK. Susan Smith, co-founder of For Women Scotland, said the Museums Galleries Scotland submission is 'a masterclass in legal idiocy and scientific illiteracy'. She said: 'The EHRC guidance aims to protect organisations and ensure they adhere to law: it is not supposed to set out the best way for public bodies to evade or trash their responsibility to protect the public from discrimination or harassment. ''Inclusion' covers all protected characteristics and rights have to be balanced. The time of prioritising the demands of trans-identifying men over the real needs of women and other groups is over.' Ms Smith said the assertion that staff would have to police toilets is 'wilfully misunderstanding' that having policies that align with the law 'does not mean they are required to vet every user'. MGS accused of 'scaremongering' Instead it means if women complain about a man being in the women's lavatories, it will be investigated. 'What is clear is that MGS have had unlawful policies for some time. All parties at the Supreme Court understood that self-identification has never been lawful, including the Scottish Government, which funds MGS,' Ms Smith said. 'Finally, it is outrageous that MGS are happy to spread debunked lies and attempt to scaremonger about serious medical conditions which they call 'intersex'. Last time we checked, museum staff were not endocrinologists. 'The status of people with Differences of Sex Development is not affected by the Supreme Court ruling and the wildly inflated numbers MSG cite should embarrass whoever submitted the report.' The museums body also states that members of the public have been 'policing toilets' at heritage sites by 'making assumptions based on stereotypes' and has created an 'environment of suspicion'. Dr Kath Murray, of the policy organisation Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, said: 'It is deeply concerning that a major national institution signed off and submitted such an ill-informed response to the EHRC consultation. 'The response fails to consider the needs of women and instead repeats trans activist talking points. The figures cited on the 'intersex' population have been widely debunked and bear no relevance to the implementation of the Supreme Court judgment.' The Nationalist government released its response to the consultation late on Friday night, claiming that services needed to justify why they were single-sex.