Page 4,207«..1020..4,2064,2074,2084,209..4,2204,230..»

Take Two: Bitcoin Miner BTCS Announces New Merger Deal – CoinDesk

The publicly traded bitcoin miner BTCS is moving toward a new merger, public records reveal.

New filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) show that BTCS has signed a non-binding letter of intent with Blockchain Global Limited. Blockchain Global, according to the filings, operates a bitcoin mine out of China and also runs an Australian bitcoin exchange called AXC.io.

The firm also invests in other companies in the bitcoin and blockchain space, perhaps most notably the publicly-traded DigitalX. Earlier this year, Blockchain Global notably invested in DigitalX through a convertible loan denominated in bitcoin.

The merger effort is the second for BTCS, which moved to merge with bitcoin miner Spondoolies-Tech back in 2015. Yet despite being cleared by a key regulator in Israel, where Spondoolies was based, the deal ultimately fell apart after an Israeli court dissolved the firm amid financial problems.

It also comes as BTCS looks to shore up its financial position, having raised $1 million earlier this year in a bid to stem the tide of losses. Issues aside, representatives for both BTCS and Blockchain Global struck positive notes in statements announcing the deal.

"The blockchain space continues to suffer from a talent void. Together with BCG, and their track record of success, were positioning ourselves to fill this talent void, ultimately capitalizing on the immense opportunity in blockchain technologies and leveraging our early-mover advantage," Charles Allen, CEO of BTCS, said of the planned merger.

Puzzle piece image via Shutterstock

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Contact us at [emailprotected].

Read more from the original source:
Take Two: Bitcoin Miner BTCS Announces New Merger Deal - CoinDesk

Read More..

A Bitcoin Law for Every State? Interest and Animosity Greet Model US Regulation – CoinDesk

A two-year effort to unify cryptocurrency business regulations across the U.S. has concluded now, the technology's enthusiastsjust have to convince legislators to enact it.

Established in 1982, the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) is a non-profit association made up of 350 commissioners. All are lawyers by trade, and theirgoal isto draft legislation that brings clarity to areas where state law is creating instability.

Given the onerous regulatory regimes that have so far been enacted for cryptocurrencies, it may be no surprise that the ULC has taken an interest in the area. Since the group began its work in 2014, attempts by states to regulate the tech have attracted everything from public boycotts to criticism and petitionsto ongoing lawsuits.

But with the ULC's work now concluded, some industry observers are optimistic this narrative could see a much-needed reversal.

Stephen Middlebrook, an attorney with Womble Carlyle who served as the American Bar Association advisor to the ULC during its drafting process, expects several states to introduce itsUniform Regulation of Virtual Currency Businesses Actin upcoming legislative sessions around the country.

Middlebrook told CoinDesk:

"It's my understanding that legislators in several states who were interested in legislating in this area held off waiting for the Uniform Act. So, I think there's sort of a built up demand for it."

Others involved with the work agree.

Sarah Jane Hughes, who served as reporter for the ULC committee, said Texas and California which were involved in the drafting process would likely be early adopters.

"We believe that there are a number of states that have been holding back their own regulatory and legislative approaches in order to wait for this," she said.

The Uniform Act seeks to spell out which virtual currency-related activitiesare and are not considered money transmission, and therefore require licensure. It furtherdefines foundational conceptssuch as the "custody" of crypto assets.

One of the more innovative itemsthe bill seeks to put into law is a three-tier licensing structure that offers full exemptions for individuals and small entities, createsa regulatory sandbox for startups andgrants full licensure status for larger virtual currency businesses.

And legislators seem keen to continue engaging and working with the nascent industry.

Matt Dababneh, a member of the California state assembly who hasintroducedvirtual currency legislation in the past, told CoinDeskhe is considering the Uniform Act, explaining:

"I have been monitoring the growth and progression of virtual currency and how it impacts our economy. I am still reviewing all of the recommendations put forth in the [Uniform]Act. I will continue to be engaged in this issue as virtual currency becomes a more prominent payment option for businesses throughout the state."

With all this optimism, though, there's still an uphill battle ahead.

According to Carol Van Cleef, a fintechattorney with BakerHostetler, getting the law passed in any single state, much less all 50, will be a challenge. And there's history to prove it.

About 17 years ago, a uniform money transmitter statute was circulated, with the idea that money transmitters would only need to receive a license from one state, which could then be used as a passport to operate in other states, said Van Cleef.

"As of today, I think approximately 10 states have adopted that. So, we're not going to see this as a real panacea, or think that were resolving the state money transmitter issue," she said at a conference last month in Washington, D.C.

Complicating matters further, a segment of the virtual currency community remains stridently opposed to the Uniform Act on the grounds it too closely resembles New Yorks "BitLicense" regulation, which they claim has chased fintech innovators out of the state.

The Bitcoin Foundation, a non-profit of waning influence in the industry, has urged the National Council of State Legislatures (NCLS), a group that represents state legislators and staff, to direct its members to reject the bill.

Writing to the NCLS, the foundation's executive director Llew Claasen warned:

"Adopting a model act with the characteristics of the New York regulation is sure to threaten the existence of the fintech industry nationwide."

And theremight be merit in these ideas.

Given the fast-moving nature of cryptocurrencies and related technologies, laws like the BitLicense have shown a propensity to quickly become dated.

Since the law was drawn up in 2014, two separate movements have sprung out of the tech:bank-focused private blockchains and initial coin offerings both of which haven't been addressedon the state level.

Still, Middlebrook advocated for a balance here, as both regulators and innovators seek to find a middle ground that can perhaps only be found with time.

He concluded:

"The choice really is whether it's going to be regulated using statutes and regulatory schemes that were designed for other things that dont really mesh well with virtual currency, or whether a regulatory scheme is going to be something specifically designed for businesses operating in this area."

U.S. dollar puzzleimage via Shutterstock

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Interested in offering your expertise or insights to our reporting? Contact us at [emailprotected].

Read more:
A Bitcoin Law for Every State? Interest and Animosity Greet Model US Regulation - CoinDesk

Read More..

Data Encryption in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online

This documentation is archived and is not being maintained.

We are in the process of combining the SharePoint Server 2013 and SharePoint Server 2016 content into a single content set. We appreciate your patience while we reorganize things. See the Applies To tag at the top of each article to find out which version of SharePoint an article applies to.

Applies to: OneDrive for Business, SharePoint Online

Topic Last Modified: 2017-07-31

Summary: Learn how encryption of data security works in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online.

Understand the basic elements of encryption for data security in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online.

Office 365 is a highly secure environment that offers extensive protection in multiple layers: physical data center security, network security, access security, application security, and data security. This article specifically focuses on the in-transit and at-rest encryption side of data security for OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online.

For a description of Office 365 security as a whole, see Security in Office 365 White Paper.

Watch how data encryption works in the following video.

In OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online, there are two scenarios in which data enters and exits the datacenters.

Client communication with the server Communication to OneDrive for Business across the Internet uses SSL/TLS connections. All SSL connections are established using 2048-bit keys.

Data movement between datacenters The primary reason to move data between datacenters is for geo-replication to enable disaster recovery. For instance, SQL Server transaction logs and blob storage deltas travel along this pipe. While this data is already transmitted by using a private network, it is further protected with best-in-class encryption.

Encryption at rest includes two components: BitLocker disk-level encryption and per-file encryption of customer content.

BitLocker is deployed for OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online across the service. Per-file encryption is also deployed in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online in Office 365 multi-tenant and new dedicated environments that are built on multi-tenant technology.

While BitLocker encrypts all data on a disk, per-file encryption goes even further by including a unique encryption key for each file. Further, every update to every file is encrypted using its own encryption key. Before theyre stored, the keys to the encrypted content are stored in a physically separate location from the content. Every step of this encryption uses Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) with 256-bit keys and is Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-2 compliant. The encrypted content is distributed across a number of containers throughout the datacenter, and each container has unique credentials. These credentials are stored in a separate physical location from either the content or the content keys.

For additional information about FIPS 140-2 compliance, see FIPS 140-2 Compliance, and for AES with 256 bit see, Keep Your Data Secure with the New Advanced Encryption Standard.

File-level encryption at rest takes advantage of blob storage to provide for virtually unlimited storage growth and to enable unprecedented protection. All customer content in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online will be migrated to blob storage. Heres how that data is secured:

All content is encrypted, potentially with multiple keys, and distributed across the datacenter. Each file to be stored is broken into one or more chunks, depending its size. Then, each chunk is encrypted using its own unique key. Updates are handled similarly: the set of changes, or deltas, submitted by a user is broken into chunks, and each is encrypted with its own key.

All of these chunksfiles, pieces of files, and update deltasare stored as blobs in our blob store. They also are randomly distributed across multiple blob containers.

The map used to re-assemble the file from its components is stored in the Content Database.

Each blob container has its own unique credentials per access type (read, write, enumerate, and delete). Each set of credentials is held in the secure Key Store and is regularly refreshed.

In other words, there are three different types of stores involved in per-file encryption at rest, each with a distinct function:

Content is stored as encrypted blobs in the blob store. The key to each chunk of content is encrypted and stored separately in the content database. The content itself holds no clue as to how it can be decrypted.

The Content Database is a SQL Server database. It holds the map required to locate and reassemble all of the content blobs held in the blob store as well as the keys needed to decrypt those blobs.

Each of these three storage componentsthe blob store, the Content Database, and the Key Storeis physically separate. The information held in any one of the components is unusable on its own. This provides an unprecedented level of security. Without access to all three it is impossible to retrieve the keys to the chunks, decrypt the keys to make them usable, associate the keys with their corresponding chunks, decrypt any chunk, or reconstruct a document from its constituent chunks.

Link:
Data Encryption in OneDrive for Business and SharePoint Online

Read More..

Researchers use encryption to keep patients’ DNA private – Engadget

When trying to figure out which genetic mutations cause disease and which are associated with healthy individuals, researchers have in the past had to compare whole genomes of thousands of people. But with this work, scientists have shown that a whole genome isn't necessary and there are ways of keeping all of the irrelevant genetic data private. "There is a general conception that we can only find meaningful differences by surveying the entire genome," said Gill Bejerano, an author of the study, in a statement. "But these meaningful differences make up only a very tiny proportion of our DNA. There are now amazing tools in computer science and cryptography that allow researchers to pinpoint only these differences while keeping the remainder of the genome completely private."

What the research team did was create a way for patients to encrypt their genome and report whether their genome analysis showed the presence of particular gene variants. That information was then uploaded to the cloud and researchers were able to reveal only the gene variants that were pertinent to their study. Around 97 percent of the participants' genomes were kept hidden and were only ever viewed in full by the participants themselves. "These are techniques that the cryptography community has been developing for some time," said Dan Boneh, another author of the study. "Now we are applying them to biology."

Ultimately, this means that patients' genetic data can remain private while also being used for study. "We now have the tools in hand to make certain that genomic discrimination doesn't happen," said Bejerano. "There are ways to simultaneously share and protect this information."

Read the original:
Researchers use encryption to keep patients' DNA private - Engadget

Read More..

Additional proof that Lancaster County Commissioners should reconsider encrypting police transmissions – LancasterOnline

Ambulance organizations are worried that the pending encryption of police radio transmissions in Lancaster County will compromise the safety of medics racing to dangerous calls, LNP reported last Wednesday. Emergency medical service leaders asked the county commissioners to revise their June approval of police radio encryption to allow their crews to listen to police calls. The commissioners have not made a decision on the request.

Encryption is a bad idea. Words like transparency and accountability should mean something. Their significance diminishes every time we erect another barrier between government and the public.

We want our police officers to be as safe as they can possibly be. We also believe in the importance of public access to information. These values are not mutually exclusive.

Practically speaking, theres no evidence that encrypting police transmissions will make policing safer or easier. Part of the rationale for encryption is to prevent an ambush or to keep the media from reaching a crime scene before law enforcement, which, by the way, is very rare.

We know police officers would rather not have to deal with media at a crime scene. But the media has a job to do. Weather events, fires, gas leaks the media monitors police transmissions to help keep the public informed. Thats the medias job. Weve asked for proof that media or public access to police transmissions has ever compromised a crime scene or an investigation, or violated the privacy of a victim. Were still waiting.

Weve also asked the county commissioners to reconsider. Now, were not alone.

As LNPs Jeff Hawkes reported, medics need to hear what the first officers on the scene are saying to each other and dispatchers about the nature of a crash, shooting or other emergency requiring an ambulance. They can start to prepare before they arrive if they have more information. Is the crime scene secure? Are flood waters too deep? Are there downed wires?

These are legitimate concerns and questions. And how were the EMS officials received when they spoke up at a meeting with the commissioners last week? Not well.

Police departments, I dont think, would ever come in here and ask you to put some regulation on the fire departments, said Chief Kevin McCarthy of East Earl Township, representing a county police chiefs group. We actually thought the matter was finished.

Its not. Nor should it be. And McCarthys comment misses the point by a wide margin.

The entities that rely on police transmissions should be working together to keep the public safe and informed. Radio transmissions help the media communicate to the public. EMTs use the information to get to people who need help. This is a debate about openness in government and access to information. Once it degenerates into an argument over stepping on toes or whos dictating policy to whom, were in real trouble.

As we wrote when the decision to encrypt was announced, if a lack of public trust and faith in government institutions is a real problem, this law only serves to exacerbate mistrust.

And now you have a group of first responders saying it makes no practical sense either and will make their jobs more difficult.

To lose that ability to communicate or at least monitor (police transmissions) is a real danger to people in EMS, Dr. Michael Reihart, the medical director of a regional emergency health services federation, told LNP.

This should be more than enough for the commissioners to reconsider.

It should be, but apparently, it isnt.

Commissioners Chairman Dennis Stuckey, after hearing from EMS officials, said that hes not inclined to change anything.

Darrell Fisher, president of the Lancaster County EMS Council, told LNP that he will continue to push this issue, and we commend him for doing so.

Its pretty clear that the commissioners and everyone else who favors encryption want Reihart and Fisher to lose interest and go away. We hope they dont.

Commissioner Craig Lehman may represent the last hope for preserving transparency and public accessibility. Lehman opposed blocking media access to police radio, and told LNP that hes sensitive to the medics request and worries about other unintended consequences of encryption that could put police at risk.

We hope the police who requested encryption and the commissioners who voted for it will reopen this discussion. We still believe a compromise can be reached. As LNP Executive Editor Barbara Hough Roda wrote in July, we seek a compromise that will allow law enforcement to do its work, and enable those of us in the news media to do ours.

That doesnt seem like too much to ask. And its the least the public has a right to expect.

Go here to read the rest:
Additional proof that Lancaster County Commissioners should reconsider encrypting police transmissions - LancasterOnline

Read More..

iPhone Secure Enclave firmware encryption key leaked – TechTarget

Despite early reports, experts agree that the leak of the iPhone Secure Enclave Processor firmware encryption key should not pose a security risk and may even ultimately improve user security.

When a hacker/researcher going by the handle "xerub" released the firmware encryption key, the initial reaction was one of panic because the iPhone Secure Enclave is responsible for storing and processing highly sensitive data, as described by Mike Ash, software engineer and fellow at Plausible Labs, in response to the debate around the FBI wanting backdoor access to Apple's encryption:

"The Secure Enclave contains its own [unique ID] and hardware AES engine. The passcode verification process takes place here, separated from the rest of the system. The Secure Enclave also handles Touch ID fingerprint processing and matching, and authorizing payments for Apple Pay," Ash wrote in a blog post about iPhone Secure Enclave last year. "The Secure Enclave performs all key management for encrypted files. File encryption applies to nearly all user data."

While most iPhone system apps use Secure Enclave, and all third-party apps use it by default since iOS 7, Ash wrote, "The main CPU can't read encrypted files on its own. It must request the file's keys from the Secure Enclave, which in turn is unable to provide them without the user's passcode."

While this sounds bad, David Schuetz, senior security consultant at NCC Group, said in his own analysis that the encryption key xerub released was specific to the GSM model of the iPhone 5S -- the first Apple device with the Secure Enclave Processor -- running iOS 10.3.3.

Apple reportedly told TechRepublic that decrypting the iPhone Secure Enclave firmware "in no way provides access" to user data and that Apple does not have plans to patch affected devices.

Xerub also told TechRepublic the encryption key would not impact user security but said the "public scrutiny" around the release could improve the security of the iPhone Secure Enclave.

Schuetz added that modifying the iPhone Secure Enclave firmware would not be possible because "the firmware is also signed by Apple, and the attacker would need to be able to forge the signature to get the phone to install the hacked firmware."

"I think this is a good thing, in the long run. This should have very little practical effect on the security of individual iOS devices, unless a very significant flaw is uncovered. Even then, the potential scope of the finding may be limited to only older devices," Schuetz wrote. "If the security of the Secure Enclave is in any way directly reduced by the disclosure of the firmware, then it wasn't truly secure in the first place."

Read the original here:
iPhone Secure Enclave firmware encryption key leaked - TechTarget

Read More..

Encryption, speed push the modern mainframe into the future – TechTarget

The mainframe computing system, known among its devotees as big iron, is talked about in much the same way as the mighty naval battleship: formidable, uniquely capable, the choice for when big things need doing. Yet the U.S. Navy pulled its last battleship out of the water 25 years ago. So why is the IBM z14 arriving in 2017, when we're well into the era of cloud computing and when sleek, nimble, distributed systems are the focus of so much attention?

It wasn't by accident that enterprises around the world were willing to spend billions on mainframe systems. A mainframe environment, after all, pulls off tasks with an effectiveness -- and at a scale -- that is difficult for other technologies to match. To process billions of daily transactions and payments, big businesses needed big computing. And, to be sure, they still do. But do they need mainframes?

IBM remains the dominant player in the modern mainframe market, and the company has no intention of letting the cloud supplant it as the power behind banking, e-commerce and other commercial endeavors. To make the case for relevance, IBM promises end-to-end encryption that should frustrate even the most determined data thieves. The z14 also includes new capabilities in speed, microservices and machine learning. It all sounds very 21st century.

So will business embrace this modern mainframe? This handbook takes up that question, with TechTarget's Ed Scannell looking closely at an IT landscape that looks very different from when mainframes ruled the data center.

It's enough to make you wonder if the future might start to look a bit like the past.

See more here:
Encryption, speed push the modern mainframe into the future - TechTarget

Read More..

Hardware encryption vs software encryption: the simple guide – Kroll Ontrack UK (press release) (blog)

Encryption is an incredibly important tool for keeping your data safe. When your files are encrypted, they are completely unreadable without the correct encryption key so if someone steals your encrypted files, they cant actually do anything with them.

But there are actually two types of encryption hardware and software both of which offer different advantages. So what these two encryption methods. And why do they matter?

As the name implies, software encryption uses software tools to encrypt your data. Some examples of these tools include the BitLocker drive encryption feature of Microsoft Windows, or the 1Password password manager. Both use encryption tools to protect information on your PC, smartphone, or tablet.

Software encryption typically relies on a password; give the right password, and your files will be decrypted, otherwise they remain locked. With encryption enabled, it is passed through a special algorithm that scrambles your data as it is written to disk. The same software then unscrambles data as it is read from the disk for an authenticated user.

Software encryption is typically quite cheap to implement, making it very popular with developers. Software-based encryption routines do not typically require any additional software or hardware either they just work.

Software encryption is only as secure as the rest of your computer or smartphone. If a hacker can crack your password, the encryption is immediately undone.

Software encryption tools also share the processing resources of your computer, which can cause the whole machine to slow down as data is encrypted/decrypted. You will also find that opening and closing encrypted files is much slower than normal because the process is relatively resource intensive, particularly for higher levels of encryption.

At the heart of hardware encryption is a separate processor dedicated to the task of authentication and encryption. Hardware encryption is increasingly common on mobile devices the TouchID fingerprint scanner on Apple iPhones is a good example.

The technology still relies on a special key to encrypt and decrypt data, but this is randomly generated by the encryption processor. Often hardware encryption devices replace traditional passwords with biometric logons (like fingerprints), or a PIN number that is entered on an attached keypad.

Hardware encryption is considered to be safer than software encryption because the encryption process is kept separate from the rest of the machine. This makes it much harder to intercept or break.

The use of a dedicated processor also relieves the burden on the rest of your device, making the encryption/decryption process much faster.

Typically hardware-based encrypted storage is much more expensive than a software tool. BitLocker is included as free with all new versions of Microsoft Windows for instance, but an encrypted USB thumb drive is quite expensive especially when compared to an unencrypted alternative.

If the hardware decryption processor fails, it becomes extremely hard to access your information.

Encrypted data is extremely hard to recover. Even if the raw sectors are recovered from a failed drive, it is still encrypted which means it is still unreadable. Some software encryption systems, like BitLocker, have built-in recovery mechanisms but you need to have set up your recovery options in advance.

Hardware encrypted devices dont typically have these additional recovery options. Many are designed to prevent decryption in the event of a component failure, stopping determined hackers from disassembling them.

The fastestand most effective way to deal with data loss on an encrypted device is to ensure you have a complete backup stored somewhere safe. For your PC, this may mean copying data to another encrypted device. For other devices, like your smartphone, backing up to the Cloud provides a quick and simple economy copy that you can restore from. As an added bonus, most Cloud services now encrypt their users data too.

Im normally loathed to put in a call us sign off to a blog post, but in the event that you dont have a current backup, you will need to seek professional assistance. Our engineers can provide advice and guidance, but depending on the complexity of the encryption algorithm used, they may not be able to guarantee successful recovery. That said, what we would do is ask you to send in the entire laptop/computer as there may be hardware components not held within the hard drive itself but is critical to decrypting the data.

If you are having problems with an encrypted device, and would like to discuss your options, please get in touch.

Read this article:
Hardware encryption vs software encryption: the simple guide - Kroll Ontrack UK (press release) (blog)

Read More..

Encryption Technology Could Protect the Privacy of Your DNA – Gizmodo

Your DNA is some of the most intimate information out thereencoded in it is information about your health, your personality, your family history. Its not hard to imagine how such sensitive details could be damaging should they fall into the wrong hands. And yet, the privacy practices of the people and programs handling that information isnt exactly up to snuff.

Researchers at Stanford, though, say they may have a fix for the lagging privacy protocols putting anyone whos ever done a DNA test at risk of indecent exposure. In a study published Friday in Science, researchers say that they have developed a genome cloaking technique that makes it possible to study the human genome for the presence of disease-associated genes without revealing genetic information not directly associated with the information being sought.

The hope, they wrote, is to lessen the concerns of genomic privacy violations and genetic discrimination that taint DNA testing.

Applying the principals of cryptography to human biology, researchers were able to correctly identify gene mutations in groups of patients responsible for causing four different rare diseases, as well as the likely cause of a genetic disease in a baby by comparing his DNA to his parents. They could also determine which out of hundreds of patients shared gene mutations. In doing all this, though, they also managed to keep 97 percent or more of the participants unique genetic information completely hidden from anyone other than the owners of the DNA.

To do this, they had each participant encrypt their genome using a simple algorithm on their computer or smart phone. The encrypted information was then uploaded into the cloud, and the researchers used a secure, multi-party computation to analyze it, revealing only the genetic information important to the investigation. They were able to do so within a matter of minutes.

In 2008, Congress passed the Genetic Information and Nondiscrimination Act, but both loopholes in the law and multipleCongressional actions threaten to erode protections that already exist, making people wary of the consequences of genetic testing. The protections of GINA, for example, do not apply to life insurance, long-term care, or disability insurance, meaning those companies are free to ask for genetic information and reject people deemed too risky. Some scientists have said that fears of genetic discrimination could impact the health of patients, if they refuse testing that could help doctors treat them, and could stymy medical research if patients wary of testing opt not to participate in studies.

Ultimately, we will have to strike a balance: A way to share the secrets of our biology with doctors and scientists, while also protecting our privacy.

See original here:
Encryption Technology Could Protect the Privacy of Your DNA - Gizmodo

Read More..

Did Snap Make a Mistake With Its $3 Billion in Cloud Contracts? – Madison.com

When Snap (NYSE: SNAP) filed its IPO registration with the SEC, it revealed that it recently signed a $2 billion deal with Google, the Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOG) (NASDAQ: GOOGL) subsidiary, to use its cloud platform to support Snapchat. Snap then went out and signed a $1 billion deal with Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) to use Amazon Web Services for additional cloud hosting.

These contracts have certain stipulations that require Snap to spend a certain amount with each company every year through 2021. And while they've been very beneficial to Snap's hosting costs per user, Snapchat's sluggish user growth puts a big question mark over whether Snap will meet its spending commitments with Google and Amazon.

Snap's commitments with Google and Amazon are a bit different. The Google deal is for a relatively flat amount every year while the Amazon deal ramps up each year.

Year

Google

Amazon

2017

$400 million*

$50 million

2018

$400 million*

$125 million

2019

$400 million*

$200 million

2020

$400 million*

$275 million

2021

$400 million

$350 million

*Snap can defer up to 15% of the amount to a subsequent year

The deals make it so Snap is committed to spending a bare minimum of $390 million on hosting fees this year. Snap's hosting fees for the first and second quarters were $99 million and $106 million, respectively. Those amounts will continue to climb as Snapchat adds more users and features, so it seems like Snap will hit the bare minimum this year.

But Snap discloses its commitments in its 10-Q every quarter, and it says it still has $243 million left in contractual hosting commitments for 2017. That's down from $350 million in the first quarter. Snap's commitment disclosure implies that it doesn't plan on using any of the slack in its Google contract to defer its hosting costs at this point. But it also implies a significant ramp in cloud spending over the second half of the year, and it's unclear if Snap's data usage will climb that much. If it doesn't, it will have to push back some of its commitments into the next year, raising the bar for user growth and increased engagement on Snapchat.

If Snap fails to meet its minimum obligation with Google, it forfeits any amount below that 15% buffer. Amazon's deal is a bit more lenient in that it allows Snap to prepay for AWS hosting to meet the minimum commitment.

Snap doesn't necessarily need all of its hosting costs to come from users. It could come from its customers. Snap launched its self-serve ad platform earlier this year and it's rolled out several new tools to make it easier for small businesses to create, target, and measure ad performance on Snapchat.

Snap is aggressively courting businesses to its automated ad buying platforms and that could help make up some of the gap in cloud hosting costs in the second half of the year. All of those video ads and measurement data need to be stored somewhere.

That said, it's not clear how great of a return Snap is getting on its self-serve ads. Management noted the auction format of its automated ad buying platform resulted in lower average ad prices for Snapchat in the second quarter. It expects ad prices to rebound in the long run, however, as more businesses join the auction for ads. But it could incur a lot of expenses, including hosting fees in the meantime, as it onboards a lot of new customers.

It'll be interesting to see if Snap actually uses the full $400 million commitment to Google in 2017. Investors should keep an eye on any disclosure in the third or fourth quarter about deferring some of its commitment to 2018. It does have some leeway, but unless it starts attracting a lot of new users and a lot of new advertisers, it might have to admit it's bitten off a bit more than it can chew.

10 stocks we like better than Snap Inc.

When investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the market.*

David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy right now... and Snap Inc. wasn't one of them! That's right -- they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.

Click here to learn about these picks!

*Stock Advisor returns as of August 1, 2017

Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Adam Levy owns shares of Amazon. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Alphabet (A shares), Alphabet (C shares), and Amazon. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read more:
Did Snap Make a Mistake With Its $3 Billion in Cloud Contracts? - Madison.com

Read More..