How would you effectively sanction a government intelligence service?
U.K.,
Netherlands Lead EU Push for New Cyber Sanctions
The U.K., the Netherlands and other European Union
governments are pushing the bloc to expand the scope of its sanctions
regime to include cyber attacks, following alleged attempts by
Russian and Chinese operatives to infiltrate the computer systems of
agencies in Europe and the U.S.
The EU has sanctions protocols in place targeting
states for violating nuclear and chemical weapons treaties or
harboring terrorism. Now the group of countries, that also includes
Estonia, Finland, Lithuania and Romania, wants the bloc to introduce
a similar system against the individuals and organizations that are
behind cyber-attacks, according to a memo obtained by Bloomberg. EU
leaders are slated to discuss security next week in Brussels.
… EU sanctions typically take the form of
asset freezes against companies and individuals and travel bans
against individuals. The bloc also has the ability to apply broader
economic penalties – a policy used against Russia over its
encroachment in Ukraine.
The group is recommending that cyber penalties
focus on individuals and entities. It said the door should also be
left open to making cyber-crimes also subject to “sectoral
measures.”
… Attributing cyber attacks remains a key
hurdle to any sanctions regime, as bad actors often try to fake data
points like internet protocol addresses and domain names that could
trace back to them. The countries in their memo, however, pointed to
detailed and well-researched reports produced by the private sector
using open source evidence.
“The lack of an international response leads”
actors to conclude that malicious cyber activity is “low cost,”
the countries wrote. “Restrictive measures would be a powerful
[??? Bob] tool
to change behavior through signaling at a political level that
malicious cyber activity has consequences.”
Not the smartest advertising slogan…
Facebook
disables accounts for Russian firm claiming to sell scraped user data
Facebook disabled 66 profiles and pages run by a
company claiming to sell user data scraped off the social network's
platform. Facebook also sent a a cease and desist letter to the
company, called Social Data Hub, whose CEO was quoted
in Russian telling Inc. that his company is similar
to Cambridge Analytica.
(Related) “Russians? We don’t need no
stinking Russians!” (Also see the article on Congressional
adoption of social media, below)
Made and
Distributed in the U.S.A.: Online Disinformation
When Christine
Blasey Ford testified before Congress
last month about Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s alleged sexual
assault, a website called Right Wing News sprang into action on
Facebook.
The conservative site, run by the blogger
John Hawkins, had created a series of Facebook pages and accounts
over the last year under many names, according to Facebook.
After Dr. Blasey testified, Right Wing News posted
several false stories about her — including the suggestion that her
lawyers were being bribed by Democrats — and then used the network
of Facebook pages and accounts to share the pieces so that they
proliferated online quickly, social media researchers said.
The result was a real-time spreading of
disinformation started by
Americans, for Americans.
… This month, Twitter took down a network of
50 accounts that it said were being
run by Americans posing as Republican state lawmakers.
Twitter said the accounts were geared toward voters in all 50 states.
On Thursday, Facebook said it had identified 559
pages and 251 accounts run by Americans, many of which amplified
false and misleading content in a coordinated fashion. The company
said it would remove the pages and accounts.
Government’s dream?
… Though the details are still being worked
out, it’s almost certain that all of us will need our genetic
information to be safeguarded, even if you do decide to turn down a
well-meaning gift
of a free DNA test. According to the researchers, it will take only
about 2 percent of an adult population having their DNA profiled in a
database before it becomes theoretically possible to trace any
person’s distant relatives from a sample of unknown DNA—and
therefore, to uncover their identity. And we’re getting ever
closer to that tipping point.
“Once we reach 2 percent, nearly everyone will
have a third cousin match, and a substantial amount will have a
second cousin match,” Erlich explained. “My prediction is that
for people of European descent, we’ll reach that threshold within
two or three years.”
The world my students will live in.
A Future
Where Everything Becomes a Computer Is as Creepy as You Feared
… The industry’s new goal? Not a computer
on every desk nor a connection between every person, but something
grander: a computer inside
everything, connecting everyone.
Cars, door locks, contact lenses, clothes,
toasters, refrigerators, industrial robots, fish tanks, sex toys,
light bulbs, toothbrushes, motorcycle helmets — these and other
everyday objects are all on the menu for getting “smart.”
Hundreds of small start-ups are taking part in this trend — known
by the marketing catchphrase “the internet of things” — but
like everything else in tech, the movement is led by giants, among
them Amazon, Apple and Samsung.
I suspect each member hires people who actually
understands social media to Tweet, mail, post, blog or whatever. Do
they understand the impact of those whatevers? Do they actually
analyze the input they (could) receive?
Social
Media Adoption by Members of Congress: Trends and Congressional
Considerations
“Communication between Members of Congress and
their constituents has changed with the development of online social
networking services. Many Members now use email, official websites,
blogs, YouTube channels, Twitter, Facebook, and other social media
platforms to communicate—technologies that were nonexistent or not
widely available just a few decades ago. Social networking services
have arguably
enhanced the ability of Members of Congress to fulfill their
representational duties by providing them with greater opportunities
to share information and potentially to gauge constituent preferences
in a real-time manner. In addition, electronic communication has
reduced the marginal cost of communications. Unlike with postal
letters, social media can allow Members to reach large numbers of
constituents for a fixed cost. This report examines Member adoption
of social media broadly. Because
congressional adoption of long-standing social media platforms
Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube is nearly ubiquitous, this report
focuses on the adoption of other, newer social media platforms.
These include Instagram, Flickr, and Google+, which have each been
adopted by at least 2.5% of Representatives and Senators.
Additionally, Members of Congress have adopted Snapchat, Medium,
LinkedIn, Pinterest, Periscope, and Tumblr at lower levels. This
report evaluates the adoption rates of various social media platforms
and what the adoption of multiple platforms might mean for an
office’s social media strategy. Data on congressional adoption of
social media were collected by an academic institution in
collaboration with the Congressional Research Service during the
2016-2017 academic year. This report provides a snapshot of a
dynamic process. As with any new technology, the number of Members
using any single social media platform, and the patterns of use, may
change rapidly in short periods of time. As a result, the
conclusions drawn from these data cannot necessarily be generalized
or used to predict future behavior..”
When lawyers go to far…
Champagne
Remark May Cost Lawyer $289 Million Bayer Award
The lawyer most responsible for winning a $289
million verdict against Bayer AG may end up wiping it out.
Brent Wisner was the lead trial attorney who in
August convinced a jury that Monsanto Co.’s Roundup weed killer
caused his client’s cancer. His compelling arguments and
marshaling of evidence resulted in a blockbuster verdict that has
spooked investors looking ahead to thousands of similar lawsuits
across the U.S. pending against Monsanto, which Bayer acquired in
June.
But Wisner’s closing arguments at trial irked
the judge handling the case so profoundly that she’s considering
tossing the verdict and ordering a new trial. The lawyer told jurors
that Monsanto executives in a company board room were "waiting
for the phone to ring" and that "behind them is a bunch of
champagne on ice," according to a court filing. He said that
“if the damages number isn’t significant enough, champagne corks
will pop.”
At a hearing Wednesday, San Francisco Judge
Suzanne Ramos Bolanos cited a number of reasons why she’s inclined
to set aside or dramatically cut the verdict. But she singled out
the champagne comment as she questioned whether Wisner’s
impassioned rhetoric crossed a line. Wisner also told jurors their
decision could “change the world” and they could become a “part
of history.” Bolanos said the comments may prove “sufficiently
prejudicial” to warrant a new trial.
Perspective. Automating fulfillment centers could
save Amazon $15 per hour times a couple of hundred thousand
employees.
CommonSense
Robotics launches micro-fulfillment center in Tel Aviv
Imagine if your neighborhood grocery or
convenience store offered one-hour, on-demand fulfillment — not
through intermediaries like Postmates or Instacart, but entirely
in-house — and made a profit on every order. As fantastical as the
idea might seem, that’s the promise of CommonSense
Robotics, an Israeli micro-fulfillment startup that today
launched its first autonomous sorting and shipping center in downtown
Tel Aviv.
… thanks to a combination of robotic sorting
systems and artificially intelligent (AI) software, it can prepare
orders faster than the average team of human workers — typically in
less than three minutes.
Something to mention to my students.
Expert
attorneys command 4 figure hourly billing fees
The
Business Journals [paywall]: “Boston-based Ropes & Gray
partner Douglas
Meal, one of the most sought-after data privacy and cybersecurity
attorneys in the country, typically charges $1,550
an hour for his services, according to a recent court filing.
The filing offers a rare public glimpse into what some of the
attorneys at Boston’s largest law firm bill on an hourly basis. It
was made last week in a landmark case before a federal appeals court
over the Federal Trade Commission’s ability to punish businesses
for consumer data breaches. Ropes and other firms that worked on the
case are asking the court to require the U.S. government to pay their
attorneys’ fees, which is sometimes allowed in cases involving the
government. Ropes’ client, an Atlanta medical laboratory named
LabMD, is now out of business because of the litigation
brought against it by the FTC [added link to FTC case summary,
timeline and filings/documents], according to the firm. The appeals
court sided with LabMD and against the FTC in the case. Ropes
disclosed the typical hourly rates of Meal and other attorneys to
show the court that they are offering to take a significant discount
for their work on the case…”
No comments:
Post a Comment