Page 2,802«..1020..2,8012,8022,8032,804..2,8102,820..»

Ransomware Is the IRS of Bitcoin – The Wall Street Journal

Ransomware is to bitcoin as the Internal Revenue Service is to the dollar. Just as the taxman forces you to use dollars to pay your taxes, electronic ransom demands have been set in bitcoin, forcing companies, individuals and even some governments to use the cryptocurrency if they wish to regain control of their computer systems.

If this sounds wacky, bear with me. Before getting into the full explanation, we need a brief tour of theories of money. The most widely accepted is that money was created because early humans found it so inconvenient to barter with pigs, llamas or berries. It would be much easier to swap my llamas for widely accepted itemscowrie shells, fancy feather boas or carved stonesand then swap those items again for grain than it would be to find someone with grain who happened to want llamas.

Money was also a means of accounting for debts; easier still than using cowrie shells would be to take the grain now, get some notches on a tally stick, and later provide llamas, or grain, or whatever was promised to pay off the debt.

The first of these theories focuses on money as a means of exchange, an area where bitcoin has floundered because of the cost and hassle required to actually buy something in bitcoin. Only when its anonymity and international nature help enough to offset these disadvantages, such as in evading money-laundering laws, taxes and capital controls, is it much used. The rest of bitcoin trading is speculation and exchange arbitrage.

The second theory focuses on moneys role as a unit of account, an area where bitcoin hasnt had any success so far. Even in El Salvador, where bitcoin is being made legal tender, stuff will still be priced first in dollars, then translated into bitcoin for anyone paying in crypto.

More here:
Ransomware Is the IRS of Bitcoin - The Wall Street Journal

Read More..

The SEC should have approved a bitcoin ETF a long time ago, regulator Peirce says – CNBC

Hester Peirce, commissioner of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), center, listens during a House Financial Services Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Tuesday, Sept. 24, 2019.

Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Hester Peirce is perplexed.

For years, the Securities and Exchange Commission, of which Peirce is a member, has denied applications by the nation's exchanges and financial firms to list securities that track the performance of popular digital currency bitcoin.

Earlier say, 10 years ago concerns about potential market manipulation and liquidity may have made sense, but things have changed.

"That is the probably the biggest, the most-often-asked question that I get: When will the SEC approve a bitcoin exchange-traded product?" Commissioner Peirce said in an interview with CNBC on Thursday.

"I thought that if we had applied our standards as we have applied them to other products, we would already have approved one or more of them," she said. "With each passing day, the rationale that we have used in the past for not approving seems to grow weaker."

The SEC applies a "unique, heightened standard" to filings related to digital assets, she wrote in 2020. And she has argued that the agency is asking exchanges and would-be ETF sponsors for assurances beyond what it asks for traditional, equity-based products.

"People of a regulatory mindset, when they encounter something new like this, say, 'Oh, wait a minute: The market for bitcoin looks a bit different than the markets we're used to,'" Peirce said Thursday.

Now, she added, the bitcoin market looks more like an established market that has more participation from institutional and mainstream retail investors.

"So, I think the markets have matured quite a bit," Peirce said.

Renewed calls for an SEC-approved bitcoin ETF come just weeks after the regulator said it would again delay its decision on whether to approve an application by VanEck to list shares of its Bitcoin Trust on the Chicago Board of Exchange's BTZ Exchange.

Regulators said in a letter dated June 16 that they would take additional time to seek comments from the public. Specifically, the SEC is asking investors and academics for their opinions on whether bitcoin ETFs could be vulnerable to manipulation, or whether bitcoin itself is sufficiently dispersed and therefore resistant to similar underhanded tampering.

But Peirce, a Republican appointed as one of the SEC's five commissioners by former President Donald Trump, has long decried what she sees as a double standard at her own agency when it comes to bitcoin products.

Perhaps her most pointed objection came in a 2018 dissent, when she argued that the SEC should have approved an application filed by the Chicago Board of Exchange's Bats BTZ Exchange to list and trade shares of the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust.

"By precluding approval of cryptocurrency-based ETPs for the foreseeable future, the Commission is engaging in merit regulation," she wrote at the time. "Bitcoin is a new phenomenon, and its long-term viability is uncertain. It may succeed; it may fail. The Commission, however, is not well positioned to assess the likelihood of either outcome, for bitcoin or any other asset."

Three years later, the current VanEck filing similar to pending bitcoin ETF applications from Fidelity, Cathie Wood's Ark Invest, and several others is viewed by the industry as a litmus test of an SEC now helmed by a cryptocurrency expert, Chairman Gary Gensler.

Former Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler testifies at a U.S. Senate Banking Committee hearing on systemic risk and market oversight on Capitol Hill in Washington May 22, 2012.

Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

His nomination to lead the SEC by President Joe Biden, and his subsequent confirmation in the Senate, was met with optimism by many in the crypto community, as he is seen as a practiced hand in crafting novel financial rules.

Gensler, who has taught crypto courses at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is perhaps best known for his influential tenure as chair of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Obama administration. While there, Gensler helped devise and institute a new oversight regime for the swaps market that had been largely unregulated prior to the financial crisis.

So, while Democrat Gensler may not necessarily agree with Trump-appointee Peirce in all matters, they may align in wanting a more proactive SEC when it comes to bitcoin regulation.

Denying bitcoin ETF applications not only runs the risk of a double standard but also may leave thousands of investors with few, more-dangerous alternatives.

"The complications of not approving [an application] become stronger, because people are looking for other ways to do the same kinds of things that they would do with an exchange-traded product," she said. "They're looking at other types of products that aren't as easy to get in and out of, they're looking at companies, perhaps, that are somehow connected with bitcoin or crypto more broadly."

Bitcoin itself has suffered a violent start to the summer and has seen its price swoon more than 40% over the last three months. Though it remains one of the most actively traded digital assets, some market watchers say bitcoin is at a critical juncture.

"It looks like it may be getting ready for a retest of $30,000, and that could be critical," UBS director of NYSE floor operations Art Cashin said on Thursday. "If you break the $30,000, then traders will look to see if there's a trapdoor, cascade sell-off that follows."

Its dizzying ups and downs come even as a growing number of businesses and banks, including payments companies Square and PayPal, have started to facilitate bitcoin transactions.

Meanwhile, Bank of New York Mellon said in February that it will begin financing bitcoin, a key development as it is both the nation's oldest bank and a leader in custody banking.

As of late Friday morning, bitcoin was up 1.6% around $33,550.

Despite the currency's volatile price swings, Peirce remains convinced that a bitcoin ETF is overdue.

It's not the SEC's job to approve or reject applications based on the merits of the investment itself, she said Thursday, especially if exchanges are meeting statutory requirements for protecting investors from fraud.

"Bitcoin now is so decentralized. The number of nodes that are involved in Bitcoin is large, and the number of people who have an interest in keeping that work decentralized is very large," she said. "People should make their own decisions: If people don't want to buy bitcoin because they think it's manipulated, they shouldn't buy bitcoin."

Visit link:
The SEC should have approved a bitcoin ETF a long time ago, regulator Peirce says - CNBC

Read More..

When to buy Bitcoin next? JPMorgan suggests an indicator to track – Economic Times

NEW DELHI: Bitcoin, the most popular cryptocurrency, is currently trading at half its all-time high levels. In the last few weeks, it has traded rangebound, disappointing traders who want to make a quick buck.

If you are one of those traders, there is a nifty tool that can be tracked to spot the time when there will be an opportunity to make money in Bitcoin. According to analysts at JPMorgan, all you need to do is track Bitcoin's dominance in the whole cryptocurrency space.

A healthy number there in terms of the share of Bitcoin as a percentage of the total cryptocurrency market-cap at 50 per cent or above. I think thats another indicator to watch in terms of whether this bear phase is over or not, said Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou of JPMorgan.in an interview with CNBC.

A bear market refers to the scenario when an asset class falls 20 per cent below its all-time high. Trading anything in bear market can be risky but sometimes rewarding, if you can buy at the right time.

Bitcoin dominance is determined by simply dividing Bitcoin's market-cap by the total market-cap of all cryptocurrencies. Currently, the indicator shows Bitcoin dominance at 44.7 per cent. In comparison, it was around 60 per cent in April.

There are two ways the dominance can reach 50 per cent again: one, if there is a rally in Bitcoin price taking its market share higher; and two, other currencies see a massive sell off, effectively bringing the cryptocurrency market cap down.

Analysts have seen some buying in Bitcoin and demand for Ethereum, its competitor currency, has gone down.Some technical upgrades in the framework may also work for Bitcoin.

Crypto markets overall have seen significant gains over the last 6-9 months despite the recent dip in prices. But the market is still sustaining very well above the all-time high prices of 2017. This is a good sign of the market still holding a positive sentiment. We are looking forward to the forthcoming upgrades to different blockchain networks and might see more fundamental strength in this space leading to sustainable growth in the future, said Avinash Shekhar, Co-CEO, ZebPay.

Read more here:
When to buy Bitcoin next? JPMorgan suggests an indicator to track - Economic Times

Read More..

Has The Rally to $90K+ Started for Bitcoin? – Yahoo Finance

Almost a month ago, see here, I was looking for Bitcoin (BTC) to bottom around $26K before the next rally would start. On June 22, BTC bottomed at $29247 and is now essentially stuck between $30830-34450. In sideways markets, the Elliott Waves (EWP) has some difficulties in determining the next most likely move as there are many possible options under such circumstances. In Figure 1 below, I am showing the Bullish option. My premium crypto trading members also have access to the possible Bearish path.

Figure 1. Bitcoin daily chart with detailed EWP count and technical indicators.

If last Saturdays low holds, BTC has a Bullish setup.

Bitcoin fell a bit short of the ideal wave-v target zone of $24077-26750, as shown in my June 8 update, but did make a lower low below the May 19 $29563 (red) intermediate wave-iii low, which therefore technically suffices for a 5th wave. Yes, financial markets and crypto included do not always have to follow the ideal textbook patterns, far from it.

Thus, if BTC can hold last Saturdays low and rally back above this weeks high from around current levels, then there is an excellent potential Bullish path in front of us. We then know the course is Bullish, but we do not know if BTC will take short-cuts, the scenic route, or follow the GPS instructions, so to say. Here Ive outlined the ideal path, i.e., GPS instructions, as that is all I can go by for now.

Please note BTC is below its 50-day Simple Moving Average (SMA) and 200d SMA, which are Bearishly stacked (price<50<200). Thus, technically BTC is in a Bear market setup, and the odds of good things happening, i.e., higher prices, are lower than when BTC is above both SMA (price>50>200). See for example, the left side of the chart. Besides, BTC is also below its Ichimoku Cloud, adding weight to the Bearish evidence.

Bottom line: the daily chart of BTC is still bearish as its price is below critically important SMAs and the Ichimoku Cloud, diminishing the odds of higher prices. But, it has a potentially bullish setup in place if it can hold last Saturdays low and rallies back above this weeks high. If that can happen, then BTC should be on its way to the low- to mid-$50Ks (major wave-1) before a more meaningful pullback starts (major wave-3), from where it can then stage its next significant rally to the $90Ks.

Story continues

For a look at all of todays economic events, check out our economic calendar.

This article was originally posted on FX Empire

Original post:
Has The Rally to $90K+ Started for Bitcoin? - Yahoo Finance

Read More..

Check Point Software Technologies Sponsors The Smart Factory @ Wichita by Deloitte to Demonstrate the Need for an Integrated Cyber Security Approach -…

SAN CARLOS, Calif., July 06, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (NASDAQ: CHKP), a leading provider of cyber security solutions globally, today announced it has become a sponsor of The Smart Factory @ Wichita, a new Industry 4.0 immersive experience center by Deloitte. The sponsorship identifies the need for cyber security as a core component of any secure smart factory and enables Check Point customers access to experience the advanced manufacturing methods and technologies at the heart of digital transformation.

As a sponsor, Check Point Software will work with Deloitte to advance the execution of smart factories and enable manufacturers to adopt Industry 4.0 technologies that boost quality, productivity and sustainability, in a digitally secure manner. As part of the sponsorship, Check Point will leverage the powerful ecosystem of The Smart Factory @ Wichita to help customers secure their manufacturing infrastructures and supply chains. From augmented workforce efficiency through asset intelligence to smart warehousing solutions, the digital transformations that manufacturers are undertaking requires a comprehensive cyber security architecture to keep every element of a smart factory safe from ransomware attacks and hackers.

The increasing connectivity of smart factories and the convergence of OT and IT networks expands the attack surface of industrial manufacturing and critical infrastructure facilities, says Dan Yerushalmi, Chief Customer Officer at Check Point Software Technologies. Cyber attacks in the US alone have increased over 300% in the past 9 months creating the need for consolidated cyber security architecture that minimizes risk exposure across IT and OT environments, and blocks attacks before they reach critical assets.

The Smart Factory @ Wichita is a highly digitized, connected production facility that uses technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT) and robotics to help companies manufacture products, create new business value, unlock data-driven insights, and automate or eliminate business processes. These technologies enable people to do their jobs in a more productive and efficient manner while improving quality and overall safety. The Smart Factory @ Wichita will bring secure digital transformations to life by demonstrating how to merge existing technologies with new innovations, sparking a dialogue about how companies can accelerate their journeys toward scalable and sustainable capabilities.

Story continues

We are thrilled to have Check Point Software onboard as a Builder sponsor of the Smart Factory @ Wichita to accelerate the secure adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies and the value it can bring to manufacturers across their business ecosystem, said Stephen Laaper, principal, Deloitte Consulting LLP. The integrated cyber approach that Check Point brings to the Smart Factory @ Wichita, and the combined power and effort of our sponsors will enhance the experience and outcome available to clients that walk through the factory doors, accelerating the speed and adoption of a secure digital transformation for their organization.

To learn more about the partnership, please visit:https://www.checkpoint.com/partners/global-systems-integrator/deloitte/

About Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.Check Point Software Technologies Ltd. (www.checkpoint.com) is a leading provider of cyber security solutions to governments and corporate enterprises globally. Its Infinity portfolio of solutions protects enterprises and public organizations from 5th generation cyber-attacks with an industry leading catch rate of malware, ransomware and other threats. Check Point Infinity comprises three core pillars delivering uncompromised security and generation V threat prevention across enterprise environments: Check Point Harmony, for remote users; Check Point CloudGuard, to automatically secure clouds; and Check Point Quantum, to protect network perimeters and datacenters, all controlled by the industrys most comprehensive, intuitive unified security management. Check Point protects over 100,000 organizations of all sizes.

About DeloitteDeloitte provides industry-leading audit, consulting, tax and advisory services to many of the worlds most admired brands, including nearly 90% of the Fortune 500 and more than 7,000 private companies. Our people come together for the greater good and work across the industry sectors that drive and shape todays marketplace delivering measurable and lasting results that help reinforce public trust in our capital markets, inspire clients to see challenges as opportunities to transform and thrive, and help lead the way toward a stronger economy and a healthier society. Deloitte is proud to be part of the largest global professional services network serving our clients in the markets that are most important to them. Building on more than 175 years of service, our network of member firms spans more than 150 countries and territories. Learn how Deloittes more than 330,000 people worldwide connect for impact at http://www.deloitte.com.

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (DTTL), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as Deloitte Global) does not provide services to clients. In the United States, Deloitte refers to one or more of the US member firms of DTTL, their related entities that operate using the Deloitte name in the United States and their respective affiliates. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Please see http://www.deloitte.com/about to learn more about our global network of member firms.

Ana Perez Check Point Software 415-299-7767press@us.checkpoint.com

See the original post:
Check Point Software Technologies Sponsors The Smart Factory @ Wichita by Deloitte to Demonstrate the Need for an Integrated Cyber Security Approach -...

Read More..

Some Experts Think It’s Time For An International Cyber Treaty – NPR

U.S. President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands as Swiss President Guy Parmelin (right) looks on during the U.S.-Russia summit at Villa La Grange on June 16 in Geneva, Switzerland. Peter Klaunzer/Getty Images hide caption

U.S. President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin shake hands as Swiss President Guy Parmelin (right) looks on during the U.S.-Russia summit at Villa La Grange on June 16 in Geneva, Switzerland.

The recent ransomware attacks on the U.S. gas and meat industries have sparked renewed conversations about the possibility of an international cyber agreement that would set the ground rules for what is and isn't permissible, and spell out sanctions for violators.

In the latest sign of the U.S.-Russia cyber tensions, the National Security Agency and other government security branches issued a joint advisory Thursday on how Russia's military intelligence has been trying to break into government and private computer networks for the past two years.

The statement did not cite specific hacks, though it provided pages of technical details, noting, for example, that the attackers often sought to go through Microsoft's cloud services to reach an intended target.

The timing of the U.S. government advisory was also seen as noteworthy. It came just two weeks after President Biden held a summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Geneva, warning the Russian leader the U.S. would respond to future hacks, especially those directed at "critical infrastructure."

As shown by the attack on Colonial Pipeline that shut down a major East Coast oil distribution network, the U.S. and other countries have a compelling interest in containing such a threat, says Glenn Altschuler, a professor of American Studies at Cornell University.

"We're talking about the possibility of taking out power grids, water systems, hospital services," he tells NPR.

Altschuler thinks such an agreement at least a bilateral version of it between the U.S. and Russia could be loosely modeled on Cold War arms agreements.

Such discussions have been kicking around for years, but many cyber experts remain deeply skeptical that such an agreement could be reached, let alone enforced.

The first big challenge would be simply getting everyone to agree to the rules. Russia, China, Iran and North Korea have all been blamed for significant hacks against the U.S., and analysts say those countries see cyber strikes as cheap, effective and easy to deny.

It's not even clear if such countries would be willing to actually agree to terms, because cyber attacks for them are "really useful in their geopolitical positioning," April Falcon Doss, a former National Security Agency official who now heads a technology program at Georgetown's law school, tells NPR.

Compared to the arms agreements between the U.S. and Soviet Union, a cyber treaty would be extremely difficult to monitor and enforce. That's because the production, development and stockpiling of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons is fundamentally different from the ephemeral nature of cyber weapons, says Doss.

"If the question is whether or not a signatory to a nuclear arms control treaty is building up their nuclear stockpile, there will almost certainly be some evidence, factory production, storage of nuclear weapons," she says. "There will be satellite imagery or there will be on the ground reports."

Tests of nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles, such as those carried out by North Korea in recent years, are also relatively simple to monitor compared to the challenge of keeping an eye on the dark corners of the Internet to track down new cyber weapons, Doss says.

"Detecting their development is much harder because you don't have big stockpiles of missiles sitting around and there's nothing that's visible in that sense," she says.

Thomas Graham, a U.S.-Russia expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, says any analogy to a Cold War-style arms agreement would be tenuous.

"We're dealing with computer code. So this is radically different from some nuclear weapons," he tells NPR.

The Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, currently the only binding international agreement governing cyber crimes and hacking, dates to the early 2000s. It aims to increase cooperation, harmonize national laws dealing with hacking and improve techniques for investigating cyber crimes. While Washington has signed on, Moscow, Beijing, Pyongyang and Tehran have not.

In 2015, when Barack Obama was president, the U.S. and China reached a cyber agreement declaring that neither side would "conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information for commercial advantage."

The Trump administration criticized the deal, which has been widely seen as ineffective.

Priscilla Moriuchi, a former National Security Agency official, calls the U.S.-China deal "a great experiment" that "failed for a number of reasons."

While at the NSA, Moriuchi's job was to monitor Chinese compliance. In an email to NPR, she said her view is that "the Chinese government never really complied with the agreement."

Storage tanks at a Colonial Pipeline Inc. facility in Avenel, New Jersey, U.S. In May the pipeline was hit by a major ransomware attack that caused it to shut down for days. Mark Kauzlarich/Bloomberg via Getty Images hide caption

Storage tanks at a Colonial Pipeline Inc. facility in Avenel, New Jersey, U.S. In May the pipeline was hit by a major ransomware attack that caused it to shut down for days.

Meanwhile, China, Russia, North Korea and particularly Iran have reasons to be just as suspicious of the U.S. and its allies. What many consider the most successful cyber attack ever the 2010 Stuxnet worm that targeted Iranian nuclear centrifuges has been attributed to the U.S. and Israel, though neither country has ever officially acknowledged it.

Recent hacks, including the one against Colonial Pipeline, the major gasoline supplier, and JBS, the world's largest meat producer, were blamed on Russian criminal gangs, not the Russian government itself.

This activity by non-state actors makes the problem of "attribution" that much more difficult, says Graham. "There's also the possibility of false flag operations, because people can disguise the IP addresses," he says.

Cornell's Altschuler says while Cold War arms agreements might not be a perfect prototype, they could at least provide a framework for a cyber treaty.

Instead of inspectors on the ground to guarantee the destruction of nuclear weapons, such a cyber treaty might ensure compliance via remote monitors, he says.

"It would also have to include limiting the monitoring to international cyber traffic and it would have to have protection for privacy so that in most instances, metadata could not be converted into an investigation of an individual," Altschuler says. But he acknowledges that "all of those things are complicated, extremely difficult to work out."

Robert G. Papp, a former director of the Center for Cyber Intelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency, has also called for a cyber agreement with Russia. "It is in our national interest to negotiate some limits to this activity to reduce these threats and the human and financial resources needed to address them," he writes.

Meanwhile, it's important to distinguish between electronic snooping and other types of cyber activity, such as the theft of intellectual property, and attacks that cause physical damage, like shutting down an electrical grid.

"[Cyber] spying is unlikely to go away," Doss says. "No nation is going to want to give up that ability."

So, where does that leave things? Is there a way to limit the damage done by hacking without a formal treaty?

At the recent summit in Geneva between Biden and Putin, the U.S. leader presented Putin with a list of 16 areas of critical infrastructure from energy to water that the U.S. considers off limits.

"[If] in fact they violate these basic norms, we will respond," Biden said.

U.S. officials say Putin has used cyber for his own political purposes and has shown little interest in curbing Russia-based ransomware attacks that prove disruptive to the West. Still, the Russian leader said after the summit that the two sides could "begin consultations" over cybersecurity issues.

A set of such norms would be more obtainable that any sort of formal treaty, Moriuchi says.

She says the only way to establish that kind of norm is outlining clear red lines and imposing consequences if lines are crossed.

Here is the original post:
Some Experts Think It's Time For An International Cyber Treaty - NPR

Read More..

Greetings from the Internet! Connect with EFF this Summer – EFF

Every July, we celebrate EFFs birthday and its decades of commitment fighting for privacy, security, and free expression for all tech users. This years membership drive focuses on a central idea: analog or digitalwhat matters is connection. If the internet is a portal to modern life, then our tech must embrace privacy, security, and free expression for the users. You can help free the tubes when you join the worldwide community of EFF members this week.

Join EFF!

Free the Tubes. Boost the Signal.

Through July 20 only, you can become an EFF member for just $20, and get a limited-edition series of Digital Freedom Analog Postcards. Each piece of this set represents part of the fight for our digital future, from protecting free expression to opposing biometric surveillance. Send one to someone you care about and boost our signal for a better internet.

Physical space and cyberspace arent divided worlds anymore. The lines didnt just blur during the last year; they entwined to help carry us through crisis. This laid bare the brilliance and dangers of a world online, showing us how digital policies will shape our lives. You can create a better future for everyone as an EFF member this year.

Will you help us encourage people to support internet freedom? It's a big job and it takes all of us. Heres some language you can share with your circles:

Staying connected has never been more important. Help me support EFF and the fight for every tech users right to privacy, free speech, and digital access. https://eff.org/greetings

Twitter | Facebook | Email

We introduce new member gear each summer to thank supporters and help them start conversations about online rights. This year's t-shirt design is a salute to our resilience and power when we keep in touch.

EFFCreative Director Hugh D'Andrade worked in this retrofuturist, neo-deco art style to create an image that references an optimistic view of the future that we can (and must) build together. The figure here is bolstered by EFF's mission and pale gold and glow-in-the-dark details. We have all endured incredible hardships over the last year, but EFFwith the strength of our relationships and the power of the webnever stopped fighting for a digital world that supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people. Connect with us and we're unstoppable.

Donate TOday

K.I.T. Have a nice summer <3 EFF

See the original post:
Greetings from the Internet! Connect with EFF this Summer - EFF

Read More..

Pirates of the cyber seas: How ransomware gangs have become securitys biggest threat – Sydney Morning Herald

Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size

Cyber security experts, ex-military officials and some politicians are pushing for ransomware gangs to be treated not as hackers but like pirates of the past, in a rethink of how to best counter their growing threat to businesses, industries and society.

The shift recognises the way ransomware gangs are used by authoritarian nations to mount sustained attacks on Western businesses and sectors, a new dimension in the ongoing contest between strongmen and democracies.

Tim Watts, shadow assistant minister for communications and cyber security, calls ransomware gangs modern-day pirates. He wants aggressive coordination between international law enforcement, targeted sanctions, even cyber operations aimed to disrupt the gangs, in an effort to close the gaps being exploited by cyber criminals.

The bulk of the solution here is not technological, but instead policy, regulation, law enforcement, diplomacy and then a bit of offensive cyber, says Watts.

Labors assistant spokesman for communications and cybersecurity Tim Watts likened ransomware crews to pirates.Credit:Dominic Lorrimer

For years, ransomware attacks were treated as a subset of hacking. The liability of such intrusions was considered a cost of doing business one whose responsibility sat squarely on the businesss shoulders.

But things have changed.

In a decade, ransomware software has grown from a tool by hackers to extort individuals for hundreds of dollars, to an underworld service-for-hire among criminals to shakedown entire industries for hundreds of millions. Cryptocurrency, meanwhile, has proven an ideal means of paying ransom to shadowy gangs across borders.

JBS food processor in Australia and the US was hit by ransomware gang DarkSide in May, leaving about 7000 meat workers out of work until the company could develop a workaround. In the US, a DarkSide ransomware attack halted petrol to the east coast. The Clop ransomware group was reportedly behind the December attack Transport for NSW.

All of the gangs are based in Eastern Europe but the Kremlin wont extradite or prosecute these gangs as long as they dont attack Russian interests. The political protection they enjoy allows the growing industry of cyber criminals to operate with impunity, costing businesses as much as $3.4 billion in ransom and downtime in Australia in 2020, cyber security company Emsisoft reports.

Meanwhile, the frequency of attacks has increased during the pandemic with hospitals, most recently finding themselves under attack during COVID-19.

Loading

To date, the most common designation for a hacking group is advanced persistent threat - a term that denotes a sophisticated team, often linked to a government. The famed Russian hacking group Fancy Bear is also known as APT 28.

Because of the changing nature of ransomware, now even information security researchers are reconsidering how to view the problem. Cisco Talos Intelligence Group has proposed a new classification for the groups, a term that is taken directly from the pirate days: privateer.

We believe its time to recognise that a new category can be defined, one where the ransomware syndicates enjoy some kind of protection from governments, even if not intentionally.

Talos proposes the term privateers to describe actors who benefit either from government decisions to turn a blind eye toward their activities or from more material support, but where the government doesnt necessarily exert direct control over their actions.

Watts agrees with privateer designation.

A privateer, or a pirate with papers, in the 18th Century worked similarly. They were commissioned by governments to carry out quasi-military activities, according to Britannica, robbing and pillaging all who they crossed as long as they werent from their sponsoring country.

Theres political history too.

In the 1700s the Spanish navy dominated the seas until a poorer and weaker Britain came along and overwhelmed it by giving pirates the protection to act on its behalf without official sanction.

The use of privateers allowed states to project maritime power beyond the capabilities of their regular navies, Britannica writes.

Russias President Vladimir Putin, right, and US President Joe Biden have ramped up rhetoric over allegations of cyber attacks.Credit:

Today ransomware gangs in Eastern Europe or North Korea extend the power of those countries deep into targeted democracies. With political cover at home, the gangs are free to go after Western business which also serve the political goal of Moscow or Pyongyang, which see themselves at war with democracies and their economic dominance.

As technology advances and the cost to business spirals, the economics of the threat become more favourable to the criminals.

Robert Potter of Canberra-based cyber security company Internet 2.0 says approaching ransomware gangs as privateers is a good idea especially if it involves intelligence sharing and working directly with law enforcement.

His company has already been working with law enforcement to break up ransomware gangs through intelligence sharing.

The Australian Federal Polices Cybercrime Operations is expected to form a ransomware taskforce to co-ordinate efforts against the gangs. The Australian Cyber Security Centre and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission will likely have a role in the effort.

Some experts think Western governments should recast their relationships with business in a way that essentially mirrors the wider links between ransomware gangs and their governments.

Loading

Retired US Army major general Thomas Ayres wrote last month that todays pirates sail the cyber seas in their search for riches by ransom or theft.

Recent destructive hacks have proved that federal action alone cant protect the cyber infrastructure Ayres wrote.

He calls for the US government to give companies targeted by ransomware immunity to lawsuits for data loss in exchange for helping mount a rapid response.

He wrote last month that the time has come to ...enlist and arm private corporations to defend their interests and those of a country.

Such a bold move would essentially convert companies into a fleet to fight off ransomware gangs.

Loading

Americas chief cyber agency, the National Security Agency, this week opened a Cyber security Collaboration Centre to develop deeper ties with private sector and learn about active hacking campaigns from US companies that are continuously under attack.

As the politics around ransomware attacks evolve, the innovative use of technology to wreak havoc on Western industries by strongmen nations is poised to accelerate.

US FBI Director Christopher Wray in recent testimony warned the scale of this is something I dont think the country has ever seen anything quite like it, and its going to get much worse.

Thats already proving true in Australia.

The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.

Link:
Pirates of the cyber seas: How ransomware gangs have become securitys biggest threat - Sydney Morning Herald

Read More..

Meet the Consulting Firm Staffing the Biden Administration – The Intercept

From its headquarters just blocks from the White House, a small, high-powered team of former ambassadors, lawyers, and Obama appointees has spent the past few years solving problems for the worlds biggest companies.

Less than six months into the Biden administration, more than 15 consultants from the firm WestExec Advisors have fanned out across the White House, its foreign policy apparatus, and its law enforcement institutions. Five, some of whom already have jobs with the administration, have been nominated for high-ranking posts, and four others served on the Biden-Harris transition team. Even by Washington standards, its a remarkable march through the revolving door, especially for a firm that only launched in 2017. The pipeline has produced a dominance of WestExec alums throughout the administration, installed in senior roles as influential as director of national intelligence and secretary of state. WestExec clients, meanwhile, have controversial interests in tech and defense that intersect with the policies their former consultants are now in a position to set and execute.

The arrival of each new WestExec adviser at the administration has been met with varying degrees of press coverage headlines for the secretary of state, blurbs in trade publications for the head of cybersecurity but the creeping monopolization of foreign policymaking by a single boutique consulting firm has gone largely unnoticed. The insularity of this network of policymakers poses concerns about the potential for groupthink, conflicts of interest, and what can only be called, however oxymoronically, legalized corruption.

The private sector can in essence co-opt the public sector.

WestExec does not affirmatively share its clients, and public financial disclosure forms only offer broad outlines. Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, says that government ethics laws written decades ago arent equipped to handle a situation in which a single firm launches 15 senior officials. Yes, theyre employed by the government, Ill grant you that. But are they actually working for the American people or not? Where does their loyalty lie? said Clark. The private sector can in essence co-opt the public sector.

These White House officials are experienced government leaders whose prior private sector experience is part of a broad and diverse skill set they bring to government service, said a White House spokespersonin a statement. WestExec did not reply to a detailedlist of questions for this story.

The firm describes one of its chief selling points as its unparalleled geopolitical risk analysis, now confirmed by the saturation of its employees in positions of power. WestExec has also succeeded in getting tech startups into defense contracts and helped defense corporations modernize with tech; it worked to help multinational companies break into China. One of its collaborators is the defense-centered investment group Pine Island Capital Partners, which launched a SPAC, or blank check company, last year. Tony Blinken advised Pine Island and was a part owner. (Michle Flournoy, another WestExec co-founder, had her nomination to be secretary of defense nixed. President Joe Biden instead nominated Lloyd Austin, himself a former Pine Island partner but not a WestExec consultant.)

What makes WestExec boutique is the promise that its executives would have face time with its seasoned policymakers. We felt other firms brought people in for big names and never got to see the big names, said one WestExec co-founder in 2020. Tony is on client calls.

The WestExec to Biden administration pipeline, part one.

Graphic: Soohee Cho/The Intercept

Blinken, now secretary of state, advised household names like telecommunications giant AT&T, defense contractor Boeing, shipping magnate FedEx, and the media company Discovery as a WestExec founding partner. He worked for Big Tech pillars Facebook, LinkedIn, Microsoft, and Uber. He helped niche companies like speakers bureau GLG, art seller Sothebys, and biopharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences. Blinken also lists clients that are global investment firms and asset managers, like Blackstone, Lazard, Royal Bank of Canada, and the multinational conglomerate SoftBank which does extensive business with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He even advised the consulting group McKinsey & Company. Though Blinken left WestExec in July 2020 after The American Prospect inquired about the relationship each of these businesses has an international profile that may impact his calculations as he implements Bidens foreign policy.

Blinken also brought several of his key staff members at the State Department with him from WestExec. His senior adviser Julianne Smith, who listed Boeing and SoftBank as clients, earned $34,000 as a WestExec consultant while holding down a full-time role at the think tank German Marshall Fund. Smith has been nominated to be permanent representative to NATO. (Blinken also brought WestExec executive assistantSarah McCoolto the State Department as his director of scheduling.) Barbara Leaf, a former ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, worked for the firm and advised the National Basketball Association. She went on to serve as Bidenssenior director for the Middle East at the National Security Council. Leaf awaits a vote to be the State Departments assistant secretary for Near Eastern affairs. Meanwhile, consultant Daniel B. Shapiro, Obamasambassador to Israeland a very busy early member of the firm, according to his colleague, is being floated as a Middle East envoy. The Prospect revealed last summer that one of WestExecs clients was Windward, an Israeli artificial intelligence company that specializes in ship tracking.

The firm also provided a comfortable place for Bidens most powerful intelligence chiefs to wait out the Trump administration. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines had her name scrubbed from WestExecs website early on, but she worked with the firm from October 2017 to July 2020, when she joined Bidens transition team as foreign policy lead. According to a questionnaire completed before her confirmation hearing, she delivered strategic advice on cyber norms; national security threats; and testing, evaluation, validation and verification of machine learning systems by the Department of Defense to clients like Facebook, JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft, and Open Philanthropy. Deputy Director of the CIA David S. Cohen was an early member of WestExecs core team alongside Haines and Blinken. But its impossible to know who his clients were, because an exemption for the spy agencies officials means that his disclosure is not publicly available.

That exempts them from public accountability, said Clark, the ethics expert at Washington University, and thats a problem because we cant necessarily rely on internal controls and external, public disclosure. A CIA spokesperson declined to share the companies Cohen worked for at WestExec.

Then theres Chris Inglis, who the Senate recently approved as national cyber director. He earned $15,000 from the firm and worked for internet security outfit CrowdStrike and email encryption company Virtru.

Since its founding in 2017, WestExecs focus has been to enhance the capabilities of defense, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies. It partners with the Silicon Valley venture firm Ridgeline, which describes itself as mission-driven meaning that unlike some tech investors, which avoid working with the military, Ridgeline seeks out military products. Both Cohen and Inglis appeared on Ridgelines website, and through that partnership, Blinken invested in the venture groups many portfolio companies. The obscure startups have kooky names (Agolo, Doodle, Wallaroo, etc.) but are innovating advanced technologies like drones, artificial intelligence, and robots. The alumni of WestExec are deeply engaged in emerging tech, which could lead to conflicts of interest as they take on policymaking roles that affect the contracts the government greenlights.

One of the administrations most visible faces also worked at the firm. Jen Psaki, now the White House press secretary, was a senior adviser to WestExec, where she did crisis communications for the Israeli facial recognition software company AnyVision and advised the nonprofit Spirit of America.

The WestExec to Biden administration pipeline, part two.Not pictured: senior adviser to the domestic policy adviser Erin Pelton; director of scheduling for the secretary of state Sarah McCool; nominee for assistant secretary of defense Celeste Wallander; Biden-Harris transition team advisers Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Cristina Killingsworth, Jay Shambaugh, and Puneet Talwar; deputy director for the U.S. Cyberspace Solarium Commission John Costello; and vice chair of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence Robert O. Work.

Graphic: Soohee Cho/The Intercept

As companies faced the Covid-19 pandemics massive challenges, Lisa Monaco joined Blinken on client calls. As a WestExec adviser, she worked for Boeing and SoftBank. Now Monaco is the U.S. deputy attorney general. Before Matt Olsen earned millions of dollars as a senior official at Uber, he worked early on as a principal for the firm. Biden has nominated Olsen to be assistant attorney general in the National Security Division.

Ely Ratner is developing China policy for the Defense Department as assistant secretary for Indo-Pacific security affairs. At WestExec, according to his Office of Government Ethics forms, Billable hours were for background white papers without identified clients and most income was passive retainer. Though he only earned $11,450 at WestExec, he did so while making more than $400,000 at the think tank Center for a New American Security.

Gabrielle Chefitz, a senior associate of WestExec, joined the Pentagon as special assistant to the under secretary of defense for policy. In June, Biden nominated WestExec senior adviser Celeste Wallander to be assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs.

WestExecs consultants are so connected and pedigreed that they often hold down multiple jobs, appointments, and titles. Thats how someone like Elizabeth Rosenberg, a former WestExec senior adviser, can join the Treasury Department as a senior official without much notice. At the end of May, Biden nominated Rosenberg to be Treasurys assistant secretary for terrorism financing. In her LinkedIn profile, she says she has managed federal initiatives to promote financial transparency. Her role at WestExec fell off the bio that the White House released publicizing the nomination.

The U.S. Agency for International Development administrators office is also full of the firms consultants. Colin Thomas-Jensen advised WestExec and its clients on due diligence and navigating political risk in Sub-Saharan Africa, and those clients included Boeing, SoftBank, and Delta Capital Management, a venture capital firm that specializes in financing litigation. In April, Thomas-Jensen joined USAID as national security director. That month, WestExecs Latin America expert Michael Camilleri began serving as senior adviser to Administrator Samantha Power and as executive director of the agencys Northern Triangle Task Force. As a WestExec consultant, he advised Blackstone, SoftBank, the Intel founders multibillion-dollar nonprofit Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, and the mineral extraction company Rio Tinto.

And its not just international policy that will be shaped by the firm. Erin Pelton, who works in the White House as a senior adviser on domestic policy, provided advisory services to WestExec. And the nominee to be the Department of Commerces assistant secretary for industry and analysis, Grant Harris, has a connection to the firm. His personal consulting firm Connect Frontier, which advises companies and organizations working in developing markets, hired WestExec.

Even Bidenworlds backbenchers are entangled in the firm. The Biden-Harris transition team was advised by WestExec consultants Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Puneet Talwar, Jay Shambaugh, and Cristina Killingsworth. Further, the firms members oversee influential nonpartisan federal commissions: Robert O. Work at the National Security Commission for Artificial Intelligence and John Costello at the Cyberspace Solarium Commission.

West Execs advisors have worked together at the highest levels of government, navigating and anticipating the impact of international crises on decision making we can provide the same insights and strategies to business leaders around the world, Blinken said in an early pamphlet advertising the firm.

A half-year after Blinkens return to government, the pamphlet is still featured on WestExec co-founder and managing partner Nitin Chaddas LinkedIn profile. Its a reminder to potential clients about the firms enduring proximity to power.

Read more:
Meet the Consulting Firm Staffing the Biden Administration - The Intercept

Read More..

‘Hard Platforms’ vs ‘Friendly Platforms’: Understanding Jihadist Activism on the Internet Homeland Security Today – HSToday

Our understanding of how the Internet has fostered terrorist activism is conditioned by an important bias that affects the robustness of our conclusions: the assumption that the Internet offers a series of traits that intrinsically aid the attainment of the goals of terrorist groups. Such analysis makes the mistake of describing the Internet as it is at present and extrapolating the traits to past and future contexts. In fact, since its inception, the Internet has mutated constantly as a result of different technological innovations and the way in which new uses have been internalised by society.

A large number ofworksexplore the historical evolution of terrorist activism on the Internet as if the different generations of radicals had been operating with the same kind of tool. In reality, for much of its existence the technology has lacked functions ease of use, connectivity, adding individuals, and personalisation that are an integral part of present-day social media. These functions are often considered to be a basic feature of the Internet but are, in fact, relatively new within its short lifespan.

Read more at the Global Network on Extremism & Technology

(Visited 52 times, 24 visits today)

Read the rest here:
'Hard Platforms' vs 'Friendly Platforms': Understanding Jihadist Activism on the Internet Homeland Security Today - HSToday

Read More..