Apple's "Hide My Email" feature is essential to my privacy and security setup. Almost every time I create a new login account, particularly when I don't fully trust the company behind it, I mask my real email address with Hide My Email. If the company in question turns out to be shady and decides to sell my email address, or suffers a data breach and leaks it instead, no worries: They never had my real email to begin with. At least, they're not supposed to.
Hide My Email has a privacy and security problem
As reported by 404 Media's Joseph Cox, Hide My Email has a vulnerability that can expose the email addresses behind Hide My Email's aliases. The details here are slim, and that's by design: This is an active security vulnerability, and revealing too much could spread the exploit even further. But according to Tyler Murphy, co-founder of EasyOptOuts, "almost anyone" can tap into this vulnerability to learn the real email address behind any Hide My Email proxy.
If you're not aware of how Hide My Email works, here's a quick rundown: Let's say your email address is yourname@gmail.com. When you sign up for a new account somewhere, Hide My Email can generate an "alias" for you. In this case, we can pretend the feature came up with sizzle_lax_3y@icloud.com (they almost always look something like this). You sign up for the new account with that alias, rather than your real email address, and all emails to that alias automatically funnel to your legitimate inbox. Functionally, it's like you gave the company your real address. But should you need to sever ties with the company, you can simply kill the alias, and your real email address remains anonymous.
The issue here is that through “free, publicly accessible people-search sites," bad actors can figure out what your real email address is through the alias. Cox says they tested the findings with Murphy. They sent Murphy one of their Hide My Email aliases, and within five minutes, Murphy replied with Cox's actual email address. While Murphy says tests have been limited, the exploit has worked on every alias he's tried. That doesn't bode well for Hide My Emial's security.
Apple knows about the Hide My Email exploit
What's more, Apple has apparently known about the flaw since June of 2025. Murphy says he contacted the company about the vulnerability more than a year ago. Apple did respond a month later, confirming it was looking into the problem. Then in March of 2026, Apple replied, announcing it had patched the flaw.
Seeing as it's currently July, that clearly wasn't the case. Murphy contacted Apple again to let them know Hide My Email still had this vulnerability. Apple responded that it was again looking into it, and confirmed as recently as May that the investigation is ongoing. Apple did ask Murphy not to disclose the issue until it had patched it, to avoid putting customers at risk. But Murphy said he didn't feel comfortable letting users continue to rely on Hide My Email without knowing about the risks.
Hide My Email is already in trouble
This story comes just weeks after TechCrunch reported that Apple was changing Hide My Email for the worse. According to the report, Apple plans to change the domain of Hide My Email aliases from @icloud.com to @private.icloud.com. This significantly reduces the effectiveness of the feature, as it lets everyone know you're using an alias. As it stands now, aliases are indistinguishable from typical iCloud email addresses (perhaps other than the odd names), because the domains are the same. By labeling alias domains with "private," humans and bots alike will know this isn't your real address, and may block your aliases when creating accounts.
Apple hasn't actually rolled out these changes yet, but any way you look at it, Hide My Email is having a bad month. I'm not going to overhaul my entire workflow based on these reports just yet, but I do hope Apple takes appropriate action and patches the flaw as soon as possible. (And, for good measure, drops its plans to change Hide My Email domains.)
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
The Samsung HW-Q800F soundbar is down to $467.99 on Woot right now, which is a good chunk less than its $597.99 Amazon sale price, and the lowest price it’s ever gone for, according to price trackers. This offer is valid for four weeks or until it sells out, with free shipping for Prime members and a $6 fee for others. It comes with a 90-day Woot limited warranty, but the real appeal here is the performance: It’s a 5.1.2-channel system with Dolby Atmos support, meaning you get immersive audio, even without extra satellite speakers.
When it comes to performance, the Q800F feels most at home with TV and movies. The subwoofer has plenty of rumble for action-heavy scenes, while the dedicated center channel makes dialogue stand out even when everything else gets loud. That’s something a lot of cheaper soundbars miss, and it makes a big difference if you don’t want to ride the volume button during every show. Additionally, it plays nice with just about any device you throw at it—HDMI passthrough for 4K at 60Hz with HDR and Dolby Vision, plus Bluetooth, wifi, AirPlay, and Spotify Connect. If you’ve got a recent Samsung TV, you can even skip the HDMI cable altogether and stream Atmos wirelessly. Voice control is built in through Alexa; however, reportedly, connecting it to Google Assistant requires a little extra effort using Samsung’s app.
There are some trade-offs. The Q800F doesn’t offer HDMI 2.1 support or features like VRR, which limits its appeal if you’re chasing cutting-edge gaming specs. And Atmos performance, while present, doesn’t match that of the more expensive Q990F with dedicated satellites (the surround effect feels wider than a basic stereo bar, but not always fully convincing). Also, the bass can skew a little boomy, and there’s a dip in the mids that can thin out certain dialogue. Still, for a clean setup with powerful sound and strong format support, the Q800F offers a lot of the premium experience at mid-range price.
I'm on my third summer of running in a long-sleeved sun shirt. I now enjoy my summer runs a lot more, and I spend a lot less on sunscreen. I even managed to snag a Rabbit UPF Deflector hoodie before they sold out last year, and it was worth every penny.
If you're not entirely sold on wearing long sleeves in the heat, I get it: At first, I wasn't either. I knew that other people ran in sun shirts, but I never thought running in one was for me. Instead, I coated my arms, neckline, and back in sunscreen, and cringed during my run as it mixed with sweat and turned into a gross, drippy slime. I sometimes missed a spot, and enjoyed patches of sunburn on my shoulder blades. It just comes with the summer running territory, right? Not if you wear a sun shirt!
I don't recall exactly why I bought my first one, but it was probably a "what the hell, this can't get any worse" kind of thing. It wasn’t a fancy one. Everybody on Reddit told me to get a particular Rabbit hoodie, but it wasn’t in stock when I needed it. Instead, I ended up getting this UPF 50+ rashguard from Amazon for under $30, and a second shirt I didn’t end up liking as much. I started wearing them on my runs. Two years later, here's what I've learned.
What sun shirts do, and why they're great for running
Sun shirts have one main job: They protect you from UV rays (doing the same job as sunscreen). The good ones also wick sweat, which can end up keeping you cooler than if you were running without the shirt.
When it comes to UV protection, sun shirts definitely work. Dermatologists, including those at the American Academy of Dermatology Association, actively recommend wearing sun-protective clothing, in addition to seeking shade and using sunscreen. When you’re out on a run, shade may not be an option, and you’ll still need some sunscreen to cover your face and hands. But when it comes to your torso and arms, a sun shirt offers significant advantages over slathering on sunscreen:
You can’t miss a spot, as you might when you’re trying to get sunscreen on the back of your arms and shoulders.
You don’t need to reapply (as much) sunscreen on long runs, which can feel nearly impossible when you’re sweaty.
You won’t have to deal with sunscreen sweating off or working its way across your skin (which is the main reason we need to reapply, anyway).
If you use a spray sunscreen like I sometimes do, you won't have to deal with its sticky feel, and the fact that you're supposed to rub it in anyway.
You’ll go through far less sunscreen each year—a pretty significant savings if you have sunburn-prone skin like me.
Aside from these objective points, the thing that really sold me on wearing one was that I hate the feeling of suncreen-and-sweat slime dripping down my arms. It's gross, it gets on everything, and I do not like it.
What it feels like to run in a sun shirt (a lot less sweaty)
I wore a sun shirt for the first time during a sweltering heat wave. I try to run in the evening or morning when it’s cooler, but no matter the time of day, the humidity was ridiculous and the wet bulb temperature was oppressively high.
I put on the shirt for an evening run first, sunscreened only the parts of me that weren’t covered (face, hands, lower legs), and ventured out. On balance, I don’t think I was hotter or cooler than I would have been without the shirt, but the slime situation was much improved. The shirt also absorbed and (sort of) wicked away my sweat. On the one hand, that means I’m running in a damp shirt. On the other: no dripping.
Intrigued, I wore a shirt again for a sunnier morning run, and had a similar experience. In a real show of how much I trusted these things, I even wore a sun shirt the time I planned poorly and ended up having to do a midday run in 93-degree weather (don’t worry, I carried ice water and stayed safe); it worked well then too. On one of these runs, I noticed a light breeze, so I peeled off the shirt as I finished the run. The air on my skin felt nice and cooling, but it was more like a nice treat than a cause for me to regret that I'd been wearing the shirt in the first place.
I did have one further “aha” moment: On one of my runs, I noticed that the shirt was long enough that it bunched up a bit around my hips. That extra fabric wasn’t doing me any favors, so I got out a pair of scissors and cropped the shirt just below my waistline. Now I get a bit of a breeze on my torso, while still keeping my skin out of the sun.
The first year I wore sun shirts, I really did wear them for just about every run. These days, I've reached a compromise. On really humid days, the sun shirt soaks up sweat that never evaporates. (This is only an issue in humid climates, so if you live out west you'll pretty much always be cooler with the sun shirt on.) So if there's a day when staying cool is a higher priority than sun protection or sensory comfort, I run on shady trails in short sleeves, and leave the sun shirt at home.
What to look for when buying a sun shirt
Any clothing marketed to runners tends to be expensive, although to be fair, it’s often lighter weight or better quality than bargain-basement stuff. Still, you don’t have to only search for “running sun shirt.” Also consider looking for “long-sleeved wicking shirt,” “UPF shirt,” or even “rash guard” (a rash guard being a long sleeved shirt worn for surfing).
The ideal running sun shirt will have most or all of these features:
A UPF rating (like SPF, but for clothing) - the higher the number, the better.
Wicking or “cooling” fabric.
A high neck or even a hood, to protect your neck and/or head.
Thumb holes, which means longer sleeves, the better to protect your hands.
Lightweight fabric—beware the rashguards that are designed with thicker swimsuit-type fabric.
A moderately loose fit (although this is up to preference). If you normally buy from the women's section, consider the "men's" styles too—you might prefer the way they fit.
Sun protection experts tend to recommend colors that are dark (black, blue) or bright (red, yellow) rather than white or pastel. That’s because darker colors absorb more ultraviolet rays. Personally, I haven’t been able to convince myself to get a dark color when the shirts are available in white and pastels. Maybe black is more sun protective, but I’m worried it will be hotter. (This may be a “me” problem, so if you’re looking for good advice, listen to the dermatologists.)
After running all that first summer in sun shirts made for surfers, I finally picked up the aforementioned Rabbit hoodie. It cost a lot more—$70, versus $30 or less for the cheap ones I'd used the year before. The material on the Rabbit shirt is of a much lighter weight, and it has laser-cut holes at the armpits for venting. It also has a hood with a built-in visor (the better to cover your neck and the sides of your face) and, as a bonus, a zippered pocket at the side. I later got an REI Sahara Shade hoodie, which doesn't have those extra features but has a fabric so comfortable I sometimes just wear it around the house.
With all that in mind, here are some sun shirt options, in a variety of styles and price ranges, that fit the bill. If you aren’t totally sold yet, start with a cheaper one and see how you like it. You might just join me in the less-slimy runners club.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
Woot has the Beats Studio Buds for $78.82, a sizable drop from their original $149.95 price and the lowest price tracked so far, according to price tracking tools. For comparison, Amazon is selling the same earbuds for $94.95 right now. Prime members also get free shipping, while non-Prime shoppers pay $6, though Woot notes that these earbuds cannot be shipped to Alaska, Hawaii, or P.O. box addresses. One of the Studio Buds' biggest strengths is that these earbuds don't really force you to pick a side—iPhone owners get conveniences like one-tap pairing and Find My support, while Android users still get fast pairing and a companion app.
The earbuds themselves are small, light, and easy to wear for extended periods, and the three included ear tip sizes make it easier to find a secure fit for commuting, workouts, or everyday use. They're also rated IPX4, so sweat and light rain aren't much of a concern. That said, these are not neutral-sounding earbuds. They lean bass-heavy, which gives pop, hip-hop, and electronic music more punch, but may feel too boosted if you prefer a flatter sound. Battery life is rated for about five hours with ANC enabled or up to eight hours without it, while the charging case extends total listening time to roughly 15 to 24 hours, depending on how you use them.
Its ANC performance is also good enough to make everyday listening more enjoyable, especially for consistent background sounds like air conditioning, though this PCMag review notes that voices and higher-pitched sounds still come through more than they would on pricier Sony or Bose earbuds. As for controls, you can handle playback, calls, and switching between ANC and Transparency mode from either earbud—with volume being the only exception since you still have to adjust that from your phone. Still, at under $80, they're one of the more affordable ways to get active noise cancellation from a pair of earbuds that work especially well with Apple's ecosystem, without locking Android users out in the process.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
The Soundcore Boom 2 is down to $89.99 on Amazon, a solid drop from its usual $129.99. It has an IPX7 rating and can float, so it's fine around pools or at the beach without needing constant attention. If it falls into the water, it will come back up on its own—your music will cut out while it is submerged, since Bluetooth cannot transmit through water—but in most situations, the bigger advantage is that the speaker itself survives without any issues.
Sound-wise, the Boom 2 delivers up to 80 watts through a setup that includes two tweeters and a dedicated woofer, which is enough to fill a large room or carry across an outdoor space. There’s also a BassUp feature that boosts the low end; turning it off noticeably reduces the impact, so you will likely want to keep it on for a fuller, heavier sound. You can also pair a second unit for stereo sound, though it is limited to Bluetooth since there’s no wifi support.
There is also a built-in light system that syncs with your music. It adds a bit of atmosphere at night, though it also drains the battery faster. Speaking of, battery life is rated at up to 24 hours, but that figure assumes moderate volume with lights and bass boost turned off. In real use, especially at higher volumes, expect less. Charging takes about five and a half hours over USB-C, which works best as an overnight recharge rather than a quick top-up.
The design focuses more on durability than refinement, and the sound, while loud, does not have the same balance you get from speakers like the JBL Flip 6 or Sony SRS-XB23, especially in the mids and highs. The companion app helps by letting you adjust the EQ and control the lighting, which gives you some flexibility to shape the sound. Still, this is not meant for detailed listening sessions or for someone who prioritizes audio precision, notes this PCMag review. It works best for people who want a speaker that can handle unpredictable environments, play loud without much effort, and keep going through a full day of use.
We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication.
The 75-inch Sony Bravia 9 is down to $2,498 from its usual $3,499.99 price—its lowest price so far, according to price trackers. This is Sony’s 2024 flagship Mini-LED QLED TV, built for those who want a bright, high-end picture without springing for an OLED. Amazon is also including free delivery to the room of your choice, which is useful for a TV this large. (Though note that delivery service does not include unpacking, assembly, packaging removal, or haul-away.)
OLED TVs still have the edge in perfect black levels and wider viewing angles, but the Bravia 9 gets much brighter than most OLEDs, making it a strong fit for living rooms with a lot of daylight. Its Mini-LED backlight and local dimming system help keep dark scenes looking deep without adding much bloom around bright objects like subtitles, according to this PCMag review. It also uses Sony’s image processing well, so lower-quality sources like cable TV, DVDs, and compressed streams can look cleaner than they would on a cheaper large screen. That said, direct reflections and off-angle viewing are its main limitations, so it works best when most you're watching from a central couch rather than from seats spread around the room.
The Bravia 9 also has the everyday conveniences you would expect from a high-end TV. Google TV is built in (with the usual streaming apps), plus Google Cast, Apple AirPlay, and hands-free Google Assistant, so it should fit easily into most homes without needing a separate streaming device. The 70-watt speaker system is also stronger than what you get from many thin TVs, and it can work as a center channel with compatible Sony soundbars and receivers.
