General

In this screenshot, camera footage shows a group of alleged neo-Nazis outside the home of Raw Story investigative reporter Jordan Green.

Scam Bucket: Innocence is no replacement for digital vigilance

Lou Covey

On Mastodon a poster asked last week, “Looking for an article or blog or text, that succinctly describes, at grade 1 level English, why ‘if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear’ is a crazy and bad argument, and perhaps also includes what some good arguments are.” We thought that is an excellent idea for a Scam Bucket post. Let’s get to the biggest argument against that philosophy.

It may not be scandalous, like a drug addiction, pornography or drug dealing, but there is personal information that everyone wants to keep from someone like passwords, account number and routing number to your bank account, and social security numbers

People who ascribe to the philosophy will readily agree to those limitations of what should be available to public knowledge. What they may not be willing to admit that they have done something in their life that they are ashamed. As Jesus Christ once proclaimed, “No one is without sin. No, not one.”

Sometimes, the error is made in ignorance. Clicking on a link in an email that connects to a porn site. Being rude to a waiter or failing to give a tip. Road rage someone recorded without knowledge or consent. Sometimes it was a mistake they made when they were younger and didn’t know any better… or knew better and did it anyway.

Then there are things that people are totally innocent of but were accused of it anyway. An average of 200–300 people are arrested every year for felonies but are exonerated, according to the National Registry of Exonerations. If the arrest was reported in the news, it is likely the exoneration was not. So the news of the arrest still exists even though they did not commit the crime.

John Gilmore, director of research at the data-scrubbing service DeleteMe, related a story of Jordan Greene, a journalist who covered neo-Nazi rally in North Carolina. Members of the group picked out his face in a photo of the rally, ran it through facial recognition, found where he lived and showed up at his house holding burning flares.

A recent scam has arisen ...

Free Membership Required

You must be a Free member to access this content.

Join Now

Already a member? Log in here
Read more...

Getting serious about PQC

Lou Covey

t seems like everyone should be concerned, based on the level of urgency the companies present, but in the end, no one has yet built a quantum computer capable of breaking even the most standard 256-bit encryption. To that statement, the industry responds with, “Yet.”

This year, however, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued the first, approved algorithm standards to produce encryptions capable of fighting off quantum computing attacks. So we thought it would be a good idea to put together a batch of experts to explain why the rest of us should care.

The invitation was put out to a dozen experts in the PQC industry, but also to the companies tasked with implementing their products into the internet. Unfortunately, none of the PQC companies ended up accepting the invitation when they learned they would on the same platform discussing their approaches. But we did get acceptances from representatives from the other group. Our final panel was Karl Holqvist, CEO of of Lastwall;; Tim Hollebeek, industry strategist for Digicert; and Murali Palanisamy, chief solutions officer of AppviewX.

The three companies both compete with and complement each other services, but all were active in the development of the standards with NIST. Our conversation is available on our podcast Crucial Tech.

However, there are still questions regarding the urgency, timing, and whether the introduction of quantum computing on an encryption-busting level is even possible in the near future.

The rest of this story is available with a subscription only.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Read more...
California legislature pases AI laws

Solons scrambling to save AI

Lou Covey

State legislatures are scrambling hard to enact regulations of the cybersecurity and AI industries to protect them from themselves. And the leaders of those industries object to the efforts, like drug abusers forced into rehab.

For the past 10 years, the investor world shoveled money into any company that said they are focused on AI, but that support is starting to shake. Many AI startups that have received billions of investment are struggling financially, not the least of which is the elephant in the room, OpenAI. The most successful AI company in the world is on pace to lose $5 billion this year and, according to CEO Sam Altman, the company needs more than $8 billion more investment this year or will face bankruptcy inside 12 months.

Part of the loss of confidence in AI are the number of failures that seem to be increasing. The AI Incident Database, which chronicles incidents dating back to 1983, now contains 629 incidents. An even bigger reason is the self-governing rules the industry says it has adopted either don’t work or are ignored altogether.

The industry has generally acknowledged its weaknesses. More than a year ago, Altman sat before the US Senate essentially begging for the government to regulate the industry. Support for that legislation has waned, however, as 15 U.S. state legislatures are considering dozens of bills to regulate the development and use of artificial intelligence.

In a letter from OpenAI Chief Strategy Officer Jason Kwon to California Senator Scott Wiener (author of SB 1047), the company highlighted several reasons it opposed the bill, including the recommendation that regulation should be, "shaped and implemented at the federal level. A federally-driven set of AI policies, rather than a patchwork of state laws, will foster innovation and position the US to lead the development of global standards."

The “patchwork” argument has been used to oppose proposed laws in nine states. The problem with that is most federal laws come after a critical mass of laws at the state level. Historically, when two thirds of the sites pass similar laws, the US Congress considers standardizing them nationally. The US is less than halfway through that process.

The legislators authoring these bills seem to understand that they are not “experts” in technology and have been working with tech companies to make the bills more palatable. In California’s SB 1047, Weiner, removed provisions for criminal prosecution and an entirely new state bureaucracy to enforce the bill before it went to the governor’s desk last week. Instead, the bill merely directs the state attorney general to file civil charges when companies violate the mandates.

Premium Membership Required

You must be a Premium member to access this content.

Join Now

Already a member? Log in here
Read more...
person holding clear glass decor

Crossing the Compliance Chasm

Tarique Mustafa

There is a wide gap between regulatory compliance mandates and practical implementation and enforcement that I like to call the “Compliance Chasm”. That chasm is defined by the activity to protect consumers and consideration for the economic and operational impact on business enterprises. Finding that balance requires thought, not the more popular whack-a-mole enterprise strategy that reacts to new compliance mandates.

The frequency and size of regulatory fines are rising for non-compliance. In January 2023, Meta was fined $418 million for GDPR violations by Meta properties’ Facebook and Instagram. Ireland’s Data Protection Commission follows up in May that same year with a $1.3 billion fine for additional violations. And those were just the latest fines imposed on web giants, that also included Google and Amazon.

The targets of those fines might be justified in saying compliance is an impossible task. By 2025 the volume of data/information created, captured, copied, and consumed worldwide is forecast to reach 181 zettabytes. Nearly 80% of companies estimate that 50%-90% of their data is unstructured text, video, audio, web server logs, or social media activities.

Read more...
English riots cause unprecedent damage

Security concerns reach beyond CISOs

Lou Covey

The English riots this past week provide a Dickensian “best of times…worst of times.” context to politics in the United Kingdom and possibly the United States later this year. The UK has had a significant political shift in leadership that brought relief to the majority of that countries citizens (the best) but also encouraged the minority opinion to lash out with provocation from domestic actors and foreign states (the worst). This highlight the fact that digital security concerns reaches far beyond the confines of corporate CISO offices.

The rioters are extreme anti-immigration nationalists whipped up by false information regarding the stabbing of several young children and adults at a dance recital in Southport, a town just north of Wales. The disinformation came from several sources but is primarily coming through a Russian-linked website posing as a legitimate American news organization. The claim was meanwhile amplified up by far-right figures Tommy Robinson and Andrew Tate. Robinson was arrested under anti-terrorism laws but is out on bail has been vacationing in Europe. He is still spreading disinformation. Tate is currently under “judicial supervision” for rape and human trafficking charges. X owner Elon Musk has also participated personally in sewing the discord.

Foreign interference grows

Meanwhile, open source intelligence monitored by companies like Zero Fox and Fletch have identified efforts by North Korea and Russia to interfere in elections of Western countries including Germany and the United States. Zero Fox said, “The Telegram-based bot service IntelFetch had been aggregating compromised credentials linked to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and their websites. This data, primarily sourced from botnet logs and third-party breaches, includes sensitive information such as login credentials for party members and delegates. This breach poses a significant risk of unauthorized access and potential disruptions to the convention.”

Zero Fox said the DNC had been alerted several weeks ago and that the weaknesses fixed. The DNC Convention is set to begin August 19 and Zero Fox was planning on announcing their findings that day to boost their profile.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Read more...