Cloud Hosting

Policy decisions around voting technology have a huge impact on the security, fairness, and accessibility of elections. These decisions must be made from a fully informed perspective, particularly when the outcomes may disproportionately impact marginalized communities. One of the thorniest decisions in election administration is whoif anyoneshould be able to vote over the internet. To better inform this decision, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) should collect data on the availability of internet voting options to people with disabilities and on how many disabled voters take advantage of these options.

Having a variety of convenient options available to voters is an important way to ensure an inclusive democracy. Internet voting might seem to be an extremely convenient option. Unfortunately, widespread internet voting poses grave security risks to elections. As a 2020 notice from four federal agencies and a 2018 consensus report carried out by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have warned, the return of voted ballots over the internet is risky and perhaps impossible to make safe and secure. In our view, the potential dangers of widespread internet voting have not been significantly mitigated (by advances in technology, legislation, election procedures, or anything else) in the years since these publications. Accordingly, we have advocated against the implementation of universal internet voting.

Despite its weaknesses, though, internet voting may be the preferred method for some voters. These voters may be military personnel and overseas citizens (who have rights under UOCAVA, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) without access to reliable mail. They may also be voters with disabilities who have difficulty accessing a polling place with accessible technology, or who are unable to independently and privately mark and/or return a paper absentee ballot. For example, a report released this month by the EAC and Rutgers University researchers showed that 38% of surveyed 2022 voters with vision impairments encountered difficulty voting with a mail ballot.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, more than half of the states in the U.S. allow military and overseas voters to return their ballots electronically, via email, fax, or an online portal. Prior to the 2020 election, blind voters and disability rights groups sued states, arguing that they should be afforded the same ability to vote online. They argued that the unequal availability of online voting was discriminatory and therefore violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, a vital civil rights statute that aims to minimize discrimination of disabled people and was passed 33 years ago today. Partly as a result of lawsuits like these, some voters with disabilities in 13 states are now able to return their ballots electronically. For some disabled voters, internet voting provides an accessible alternative by allowing them to complete and return a ballot using adaptive technology (such as a screen reader) rather than by having to go to a polling place or mark, fold, and return a mail ballot by hand. (Several counties have piloted programs in which election officials bring accessible voting technology directly to disabled voters homes, in a form of curbside voting where the curb is the voters home, but there is little evidence that these programs are effective and scalable. They also do not serve blind or low-vision voters who want to vote absentee for a common reason: they will be absent from their home jurisdiction during the voting period.)

As a result, electronic ballot return presents a tradeoff. From a disability rights perspective, internet voting may be the best or even only way for some disabled voters to cast a ballot independently and thereby enhance access to the ballot. From a cybersecurity perspective, internet voting is considered untrustworthy and unauditable, and therefore poses such severe risks to democracy that internet voting should be limited as much as possible.

One key to addressing this tradeoff and ensuring that our elections are as secure and accessible as possible is having information on how many voters are voting online. The EAC collects some of this data from election officials when it conducts the Election Administration Voting Survey (EAVS) and Policy Survey (EAPS) after each federal election. The survey includes questions about how many UOCAVA voters return their ballots electronically. (The survey data shows that, in 2020, at least 317,919 UOCAVA voters returned their ballots electronically via email, fax, or online portal. In 2022, at least 99,174 did.) But the survey does not collect any data on how many voters not covered by UOCAVA, such as disabled voters, vote electronically.

As states have expanded the availability of internet voting for disabled voters, it has become critically important for the EAC to collect data on how many disabled voters are choosing to vote online. Michelle Bishop, a disability voting rights expert at the National Disability Rights Network, has said that, just as with UOCAVA voters, we must be willing to take a calculated risk as we offer electronic voting options to disabled voters. But it is impossible to calculate the scale of this risk without data on how many disabled voters choose to vote online.

It is possible that the number of disabled individuals who have voted over the internet is rather low. In Colorado, for example, just over 100 non-UOCAVA voters returned their ballots electronically in 2022 presumably far fewer than the number of disabled voters who were eligible to do so. If so, this raises the question whether states that have internet voting available are doing sufficient outreach to voters who may otherwise have a difficult time voting. But if the number is very high, that might suggest that voters who have the ability to use more secure methods of voting (such as in-person, hand-marked paper ballots) are voting over the internet, creating unnecessary risk.

Because of the serious security risks posed by internet voting, we need to do the best possible job of ensuring that internet voting is available to those voters who truly need itand no one else. Right now, we dont know how well we are doing at that goal. But having better usage numbers will give us a sense and help us improve election policies in order to achieve it. (We also need to have a better understanding of what the numbers should bein other words, the number of voters who have no way to vote other than over the internet. But such an analysis is beyond the scope of the EACs biennial surveys.)

To help paint a clearer picture of who votes over the internet, the EAC should modify the surveys that it will send to election officials after the 2024 election. Specifically, it should modify the EAPS survey to determine which non-UOCAVA voters in each jurisdiction are allowed to use electronic ballot return, and it should modify the EAVS survey to collect quantitative data on how many non-UOCAVA voters returned their ballots electronically. Reliable data is critical for making informed decisions about election technology and election policynot just for disabled people, but for everyone. There can be real tension between cybersecurity and accessibility in elections. Decisions on these matters must be made with evidence and data at the forefront.

The authors thank Michelle Bishop, Alexia Kemerling, Deborah Scroggin, and John Sebes for helpful feedback and conversations. The authors also thank Judd Choate, Election Director for Colorado, for providing recent data related to non-UOCAVA electronic ballot return.

Original post:
How Many Disabled People Vote Over the Internet? We Need Better ... - Center for Democracy and Technology

New Jersey, United States Verified Market Research recently released a research report titled Global Internet security Market Insight, Forecast To 2030, which assesses various factors influencing its trajectory. The report presents a high-quality, accurate, and comprehensive research study to provide players with valuable insights for making strategic business decisions. The research analysts have conducted an in-depth segmental analysis of the Global Internet security market based on type, application, and geography. The vendor landscape is also illuminated to inform readers about potential changes in market competition. Detailed company profiling of the top players in the Global Internet security market is included as part of the competitive analysis. Players can leverage the value chain analysis and Porters Five Forces analysis offered in the report to strengthen their position in the Global Internet security market.

The report analyzes leading players in the Global Internet security market, considering their market share, recent developments, new product launches, partnerships, mergers, acquisitions, and markets served. A thorough analysis of their product portfolios is also provided to explore the products and applications they focus on while operating in the Global Internet security market. Additionally, the report offers two separate market forecasts one for the production side and another for the consumption side of the Global Internet security market. It concludes with useful recommendations for both new and established players in the Global Internet security market.

Internet Security Market was valued at USD 41.20 Billion in 2019 and is projected to reach USD 74.04 Billion by 2027, growing at a CAGR of 8.2% from 2020 to 2027.

Get Full PDF Sample Copy of Report: (Including Full TOC, List of Tables & Figures, Chart) @https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/download-sample/?rid=5846

Leading 10 Companies in the Global Internet security Market Research Report:

International Business Machine (IBM) Corp., Hewlett Packard, Microsoft Corp., Cisco System Inc., Intel Corporation (McAfee Inc.), Symantec Corporation, Trend Micro, Kaspersky Lab, Dell (SonicWall Inc.). Symantec and IBM.

Global Internet securityMarket Segmentation:

Internet Security Market, By Type

Hardware Software Services

Internet Security Market, By Technology

Authentication Cryptography Access Control Technology Content Filtering

Internet Security Market, By Application

BFSI Retail Manufacturing Education IT & Telecommunications Government Aerospace, defense & intelligence Others

All of the segments studied in the research study are analyzed on the basis of BPS, market share, revenue, and other important factors. Our research study shows how different segments are contributing to the growth of the Global Internet security market. It also provides information on key trends related to the segments included in the report. This helps market players to concentrate on high-growth areas of the Global Internet security market. The research study also offers a separate analysis of the segments on the basis of absolute dollar opportunity.

The authors of the report have analyzed both developing and developed regions considered for the research and analysis of the Global Internet security market. The regional analysis section of the report provides an extensive research study on different regional and country-wise Global Internet security markets to help players plan effective expansion strategies. Moreover, it offers highly accurate estimations of the CAGR, market share, and market size of key regions and countries. Players can use this study to explore untapped Global Internet security markets to extend their reach and create sales opportunities.

Inquire for a Discount on this Premium Report@ https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/ask-for-discount/?rid=5846

What to Expect in Our Report?

(1) A complete section of the Global Internet security market report is dedicated for market dynamics, which include influence factors, market drivers, challenges, opportunities, and trends.

(2) Another broad section of the research study is reserved for regional analysis of the Global Internet security market where important regions and countries are assessed for their growth potential, consumption, market share, and other vital factors indicating their market growth.

(3) Players can use the competitive analysis provided in the report to build new strategies or fine-tune their existing ones to rise above market challenges and increase their share of the Global Internet security market.

(4) The report also discusses competitive situations and trends and sheds light on company expansions and mergers and acquisitions taking place in the Global Internet security market. Moreover, it brings to light the market concentration rate and market shares of top three and five players.

(5) Readers are provided with findings and conclusion of the research study provided in the Global Internet security Market report.

Key Questions Answered in the Report:

(1) What are the growth opportunities for the new entrants in the Global Internet security industry?

(2) Who are the leading players functioning in the Global Internet security marketplace?

(3) What are the key strategies participants are likely to adopt to increase their share in the Global Internet security industry?

(4) What is the competitive situation in the Global Internet security market?

(5) What are the emerging trends that may influence the Global Internet security market growth?

(6) Which product type segment will exhibit high CAGR in future?

(7) Which application segment will grab a handsome share in the Global Internet security industry?

(8) Which region is lucrative for the manufacturers?

For More Information or Query or Customization Before Buying, Visit @ https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/product/global-internet-security-market-size-and-forecast-to-2025/

About Us: Verified Market Research

Verified Market Research is a leading Global Research and Consulting firm that has been providing advanced analytical research solutions, custom consulting and in-depth data analysis for 10+ years to individuals and companies alike that are looking for accurate, reliable and up to date research data and technical consulting. We offer insights into strategic and growth analyses, Data necessary to achieve corporate goals and help make critical revenue decisions.

Our research studies help our clients make superior data-driven decisions, understand market forecast, capitalize on future opportunities and optimize efficiency by working as their partner to deliver accurate and valuable information. The industries we cover span over a large spectrum including Technology, Chemicals, Manufacturing, Energy, Food and Beverages, Automotive, Robotics, Packaging, Construction, Mining & Gas. Etc.

We, at Verified Market Research, assist in understanding holistic market indicating factors and most current and future market trends. Our analysts, with their high expertise in data gathering and governance, utilize industry techniques to collate and examine data at all stages. They are trained to combine modern data collection techniques, superior research methodology, subject expertise and years of collective experience to produce informative and accurate research.

Having serviced over 5000+ clients, we have provided reliable market research services to more than 100 Global Fortune 500 companies such as Amazon, Dell, IBM, Shell, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, Siemens, Microsoft, Sony and Hitachi. We have co-consulted with some of the worlds leading consulting firms like McKinsey & Company, Boston Consulting Group, Bain and Company for custom research and consulting projects for businesses worldwide.

Contact us:

Mr. Edwyne Fernandes

Verified Market Research

US: +1 (650)-781-4080US Toll-Free: +1 (800)-782-1768

Email: sales@verifiedmarketresearch.com

Website:- https://www.verifiedmarketresearch.com/

Read more:
Global Internet security Market Size and Forecast | International ... - Glasgow West End Today

Cyberattacks have long posed a major challenge to healthcare providers, but were now entering a new phase in the threat landscape where malicious actors are preparing to cause even more damage.

More threat actors, are targeting connected medical devices in order to disrupt patient care. (Image credit: samunella - stock.adobe.com

A growing number of threat actors, from cybercriminal gangs focused on ransomware to state-sponsored attackers, are targeting connected medical devices (known as the Internet of Medical Things, or IoMT) in order to disrupt patient care, steal information or gain persistent access to hospital networks.

These attacks are readily achievable due to the relatively poor state of foundational medical device security hygiene, which presents a simple vector for threat actors who can hold these devices for ransom and render them unusable, among other types of attacks.

The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is responding to this threat with a new effort to boost the security of these devices so providers and their patients are better protected.

The FDA recently released new cybersecurity guidance for medical device makers that requires they provide a reasonable assurance that these devices are cybersecure, as well as post-market updates and security patches to keep these devices protected. This new guidance, which falls under the FD&C Act (Section 524B, Ensuring Cybersecurity of Devices), went into effect on March 29, 2023.

The FDAs new guidance makes important changes to how medical devices are developed and maintained by their manufacturers, and it could certainly go a long way toward reducing the risks providers may face. However, its important for providers to recognize that this guidance while a significant step in the right direction does not address all of the risks associated with medical devices. There are several areas where providers will need to remain vigilant in order to protect their patients and maintain operational integrity.

Here are four key issues to keep in mind:

Legacy devices need not apply

The FDAs new cybersecurity requirements only apply to new medical devices, which are submitted for premarket approval on or after March 29, 2023. This means existing, or older/legacy, devices are not required to meet these elevated standards.

There has been extensive research on the security limitations of IoMT devices, and in our own analysis we have found that many devices lack strong password policies (i.e., they may contain default or weak passwords), firmware is often several years out of date and may contain multiple high-risk vulnerabilities, lax settings and misconfigurations, among other problems. For example, Phosphorus Labs has observed that up to 90% of infusion pumps in active clinical settings are running with default passwords.

Security issues are likely to persist

Under these requirements, device makers will need to follow better development practices in order to build products that are more secure from the start. However, this doesnt necessarily mean the device will be free from security problems.

To begin with, device manufacturers do not have complete control over their products, from a software development standpoint. Most of these devices utilize third-party software and firmware, and they may also include third-party hardware components as well. It is more difficult to ensure the security of a product when it relies on third-party code.

Additionally, even the most talented software development teams can still make mistakes, either by overlooking certain vulnerabilities or accidentally introducing them into the software/firmware design. Better development practices can reduce risks, but they cant completely eliminate them.

Security patches take time to deliver

One of the most important new FDA requirements is that device makers must have a process in place to provide post-market security support to their products. This will go a long way toward reducing the risks with these devices.

That said, it will still take time for device makers to (a) discover new vulnerabilities and (b) develop patches to fix them. Lastly, the patches have to be (c) implemented on the device. This A to C process will likely take several months on average to complete and in some cases, it could take significantly longer.

During this waiting period, threat actors that discover the same vulnerability can write or buy an exploit and begin carrying out attacks. This is what is known as a zero day attack when hackers are able to exploit a vulnerability before a patch is available. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a warning about the growing risk of healthcare zero day attacks in 2021.

Healthcare providers may also run into additional problems in terms of keeping up with vulnerability announcements and patches. They could also struggle with determining who is responsible for implementing these updates, or implementing compensating controls by changing configurations on vulnerable devices while awaiting a patch from the manufacturer (Is it the vendors responsibility? The IT team? Facilities management?)

Monitoring not included

The new standards do not require manufacturers to monitor their products for signs of suspicious activity. Once a medical device is deployed in a healthcare environment, it is the providers responsibility not the manufacturers to make sure it does not become infected with malware or is otherwise compromised or accessed by an unauthorized user. Manufacturers do not have complete control over how devices are installed and operated in clinical settings.

This type of continual monitoring can be a daunting task for providers, due to the sheer number and diversity of these devices, which can range from patient health monitors to infusion pumps and MRI machines.

How to Ensure Robust Device Security

Overall, the FDAs new security requirements are an important step forward in securing healthcare facilities from potential cyberattacks. However, providers must still remain vigilant to protect their medical devices from a variety of threats.

Healthcare providers are a lucrative target for cybercriminals, and an effective disruption target for U.S. adversaries, so these attacks will not scale down they are only going to increase in frequency and complexity.

To better protect critical equipment, providers need to carry out several key security steps.

Inventory management & risk assessment

Accurate inventorying is vital. Providers must know exactly how many and which type of devices they have, where they are on the network, and what their security and risk status is (i.e., end-of-life or discontinued devices, password strength, firmware status/age, device configurations, etc.). This can be a complex task due to the sheer size and variety of devices on the network, so healthcare providers should look to third-party solutions.

Strong access & authentication controls

Make sure all devices use strong passwords and rotate/change them regularly. Restrict or disable remote access features. Devices should also have valid, up-to-date digital certificates.

Firmware management

Devices must be regularly updated and patched to address exploitable firmware vulnerabilities. Establish a scalable device lifecycle management framework tailored to your organizational needs.

Continuous monitoring & configuration management

Medical devices require continuous monitoring to check for configuration drift (i.e., changed device settings), new updates or security patches being made available, passwords changing back to factory defaults, devices being moved, etc. This requires a comprehensive security strategy.

Make security fundamental

Build a culture of security within the healthcare organization. This includes training staff on security awareness and incident response.

Sonu Shankar, vice president of Phosphorus, is a 15-year veteran of the cybersecurity industry, who has led efforts in software development, product management, threat detection and cybersecurity strategy at companies including Arctic Wolf and Cisco.

Read this article:
Cyber hygiene for medical devices: What the FDA's new guidelines ... - Chief Healthcare Executive

Exploring the Impact of Hardware Security Modules on Internet Safety in North America

The advent of the digital age has brought with it a myriad of opportunities and challenges, with internet safety being a paramount concern. In North America, the issue of internet safety has been thrust into the limelight, with the rise in cyber threats and data breaches. One of the key solutions to this growing problem is the use of Hardware Security Modules (HSMs).

HSMs are physical devices that safeguard and manage digital keys for strong authentication and provide cryptoprocessing. These devices are designed to protect sensitive information from cyber threats, thereby enhancing internet safety. The impact of HSMs on internet safety in North America is profound and multifaceted.

Firstly, HSMs have significantly reduced the risk of data breaches. They provide a secure environment for the storage and use of encryption keys, which are essential for protecting sensitive data. By ensuring that these keys are never exposed to the outside world, HSMs make it extremely difficult for cybercriminals to gain access to encrypted data. This has led to a significant decrease in the number of successful data breaches, thereby enhancing the overall safety of the internet.

Secondly, HSMs have played a crucial role in ensuring the integrity of online transactions. They provide a secure platform for the execution of cryptographic operations, which are essential for the verification of online transactions. By ensuring that these operations are carried out in a secure environment, HSMs prevent cybercriminals from tampering with transaction data. This has not only increased the safety of online transactions but also boosted consumer confidence in online shopping and banking.

Moreover, HSMs have facilitated the implementation of robust access control mechanisms. They provide a secure means of storing and managing digital certificates, which are used to authenticate users and devices. By ensuring that these certificates are stored in a secure environment, HSMs prevent unauthorized access to sensitive systems and data. This has significantly improved the security of online services and applications, thereby contributing to the overall safety of the internet.

Furthermore, HSMs have enabled the secure implementation of cloud services. They provide a secure means of storing and managing encryption keys in the cloud, thereby ensuring that sensitive data stored in the cloud is protected from cyber threats. This has not only increased the safety of cloud services but also facilitated their widespread adoption.

In conclusion, the impact of Hardware Security Modules on internet safety in North America is significant. By providing a secure environment for the storage and use of encryption keys, HSMs have reduced the risk of data breaches, ensured the integrity of online transactions, facilitated the implementation of robust access control mechanisms, and enabled the secure implementation of cloud services. As cyber threats continue to evolve, the role of HSMs in enhancing internet safety is set to become even more critical. Therefore, it is imperative for businesses and individuals alike to understand and leverage the benefits of HSMs in order to safeguard their sensitive data and ensure the safety of their online activities.

Read more here:
The Impact of Hardware Security Modules on Internet Safety in North ... - Fagen wasanni

3 things you need to know about the darknet

Beneath the surface of the internet we all know lies a second network known as the darknet.

The darknet is a hidden part of the internet that is not indexed by traditional search engines, such as Google, and requires special software, like the TOR browser, to access. It has garnered a reputation for being a hotbed of illicit marketplaces and anonymous dealings.

In this article, well explore three essential things you need to know about the darknet.

It offers anonymity and privacy

One of the most defining characteristics of the darknet is the high level of anonymity it offers its users. Traditional internet activities often leave a digital trail that can be traced back to the users IP address. However, on the darknet, individuals can browse websites and communicate without revealing their identity or location. This level of privacy attracts people who may have legitimate reasons for wanting to protect their online activities, such as whistleblowers, journalists working on sensitive stories, or citizens living under oppressive regimes.

On the flip side, this anonymity has also facilitated illegal activities, making the darknet a haven for cyber criminals. Various illicit goods and services, such as drugs, weapons, stolen data, and hacking tools, are bought and sold on darknet marketplaces, often using cryptocurrencies for added anonymity. Many infamous hacking groups also host their sites on the darknet, where they release stolen data.

Its crucial to understand that while the darknet provides a layer of privacy, engaging in illegal activities can still have severe legal consequences.

Cyber security risks

While the darknet can shield users from some surveillance and tracking, it is not without its own set of cyber security risks. Many websites on the darknet can be potential traps, hosting files and software infected with malware that can compromise users systems and steal sensitive information. Moreover, some darknet marketplaces can disappear overnight in what is called an exit scam, where the operators disappear with users funds.

Additionally, law enforcement agencies around the world have been increasingly cracking down on darknet criminal activities. Several high-profile arrests and takedowns of darknet marketplaces have occurred in recent years. The perception of complete anonymity on the darknet can lead some users to engage in risky behaviour, unaware that their actions may not be as hidden as they think.

Dual nature and ethical dilemmas

The darknets duality is a complex aspect that sparks ethical debates. While it offers a platform for freedom of expression and privacy for some, it also harbours illegal and harmful activities. The anonymity that enables activists to communicate securely can also protect criminals. As a result, discussions arise about the balance between safeguarding individual rights and enforcing the law.

For anyone who wishes to traverse the darknet for whatever reason its essential to be aware of the potential consequences and exercise caution.

3 things you need to know about the darknet

Read the original here:
3 things you need to know about the darknet - Cyber Security Connect