Considering an Epistemology of the Dark Web

May 31, 2016

The comparisons of Nucleus to Silk Road are rolling in. An article from Naked Security by Sophos recently published Dark Web marketplace “Nucleus” vanishes – and no one knows why. This piece echoes the questions those following this story have wondered. Was it attacked by ransomware? Maybe they were busted? The article also offers the low-down on how Tor works to explain why accurate investigations into the Dark Web are challenging. We learned,

“That’s why Tor also supports so-called hidden services, which have special URLs ending .onion, where your anonymised network requests are not only bounced around inside the Tor network, but also processed and answered from inside Tor. This makes it hard to find the servers behind a hidden service, which in turn makes it hard to block that service, even if it’s clearly breaking the law by selling firearms improperly or trafficking in illegal drugs. This, in turn, means it’s hard to measure what’s really going on in the Dark Web, and how many underground marketplaces exist to bring buyers and sellers together.”

We found it refreshing this piece reiterated how data about the Dark Web is not easy to pinpoint. From several tens of thousands of Dark Web sites to much lower counts, many cybersecurity groups and researchers seem certain they have the right number. But to continue on the endless hypotheses train related to the nucleus disappearance, we’ll weigh in. Maybe law enforcement outside the US operated the site? Just a thought.

 

Megan Feil, May 31, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

The Google Knowledge Vault Claimed to Be the Future

May 31, 2016

Back in 2014, I heard rumors that the Google Knowledge Vault was supposed to be the next wave of search.  How many times do you hear a company or a product making the claim it is the next big thing?  After I rolled my eyes, I decided to research what became of the Knowledge Vault and I found an old article from Search Engine Land: “Google ‘Knowledge Vault’ To Power Future Of Search.” Google Knowledge Graph was used to supply more information to search results, what we now recognize as the summarized information at the top of Google search results.  The Knowledge Vault was supposedly the successor and would rely less on third party information providers.

“Sensationally characterized as ‘the largest store of knowledge in human history,’ Knowledge Vault is being assembled from content across the Internet without human editorial involvement. ‘Knowledge Vault autonomously gathers and merges information from across the web into a single base of facts about the world, and the people and objects in it,’ says New Scientist. Google has reportedly assembled 1.6 billion “facts” and scored them according to confidence in their accuracy. Roughly 16 percent of the information in the database qualifies as ‘confident facts.’”

Knowledge Vault was also supposed to give Google a one up in the mobile search market and even be the basis for artificial intelligence applications.  It was a lot of hoopla, but I did a bit more research and learned from Wikipedia that Knowledge Vault was nothing more than a research paper.

Since 2014, Google, Apple, Facebook, and other tech companies have concentrated their efforts and resources on developing artificial intelligence and integrating it within their products.  While Knowledge Vault was a red herring, the predictions about artificial intelligence were correct.

 

Whitney Grace, May 31, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Hacktivists Become Educators on Dark Web

May 30, 2016

A well-known hactivist group is putting themselves out there on the Dark Web. International Business Times reported on the collective’s new chatroom in a piece entitled Anonymous hackers launch dark web chatroom OnionIRC to teach next generation of hacktivists. Anoynmous intends to teach those interested in hacktivism about the basics: coding, encryption and even history. IBT journalists went undercover and logged into the chat room to learn more about the next generation of hacktivists. Reporting back, the article states,

“[we] found roughly 40 people logged in and talking about topics, such as GPG encryption, NSA surveillance and how the government reportedly installs backdoors into computer software. According to HackRead, which first reported on the chatroom, the IRC has at times been particularly dysfunctional. Indeed, during our time in the chatroom, some of the contributors appeared to lack any hacking knowledge at all. “I want to learn Bash. Beginner level. Where should I start?” wrote one anonymous contributor. “With a Bash Book,” came the reply. This group, at least in its current form, is a far-cry from the more sophisticated and feared members that in the past have been known to hack federal agencies and assist in global political uprisings.”

This article’s reference to the “next generation of hacktivists” calls to mind a question about the age demographics of Dark Web users. Our bet is that, while they may tend young, there is likely to be significant representation from a variety of age groups. While it’s captured media attention, the Dark Web is no new phenomenon.

 

Megan Feil, May 30, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Open Source Software Needs a Micro-Payment Program

May 27, 2016

Open source software is an excellent idea, because it allows programmers across the globe to share and contribute to the same project.  It also creates a think tank like environment that can be applied (arguably) to any tech field.  There is a downside to open source and creative commons software and that is it not a sustainable model.  Open Source Everything For The 21st Century discusses the issue in their post about “Robert Steele: Should Open Source Code Have A PayPal Address & AON Sliding Scale Rate Sheet?”

The post explains that open source delivers an unclear message about how code is generated, it comes from the greater whole rather than a few people.  It also is not sustainable, because people do need funds to survive as well as maintain the open source software.  Fair Source is a reasonable solution: users are charged if the software is used at a company with fifteen or more employees, but it too is not sustainable.

Micro-payments, small payments of a few cents, might be the ultimate solution.  Robert Steele wrote that:

“I see the need for bits of code to have embedded within them both a PayPalPayPal-like address able to handle micro-payments (fractions of a cent), and a CISCO-like Application Oriented Network (AON) rules and rate sheet that can be updated globally with financial-level latency (which is to say, instantly) and full transparency. Some standards should be set for payment scales, e.g. 10 employees, 100, 1000 and up; such that a package of code with X number of coders will automatically begin to generate PayPal payments to the individual coders when the package hits N use cases within Z organizational or network structures.”

Micro-payments are not a bad idea and it has occasionally been put into practice, but not very widespread.  No one has really pioneered an effective system for it.

Steele is also an advocate for “…Internet access and individual access to code is a human right, devising new rules for a sharing economy in which code is a cost of doing business at a fractional level in comparison to legacy proprietary code — between 1% and 10% of what is paid now.”

It is the ideal version of the Internet, where people are able to make money from their content and creations, users’ privacy is maintained, and ethics is essential are respected.  The current trouble with YouTube channels and copyright comes to mind as does stolen information sold on the Dark Web and the desire to eradicate online bullying.

 

Whitney Grace, May 27, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Erdogan Government Cracks down on Turkish Media

May 26, 2016

The Turkish government has been forcibly seizing and intimidating the nation’s media, we learn from “Erdogan’s Latest Media Takeover is About More than Just One Newspaper” at Mashable. Is this the future of publishing?

Turkish police fought protesters and manhandled journalists as the government wrested control of Zaman, Turkey’s most popular newspaper and, as journalist Suna Vidinli puts it, the country’s “last remaining effective voice of criticism in the press.” She continues:

“President Erdogan had long planned to take over Zaman as the paper was affiliated with Gulen Group, his main remaining adversary in his quest for absolute power. Earlier in the week, the Turkish Supreme Court — in a surprising and rare move — had released two top editors of Cumhuriyet, Can Dundar and Erdem Gul, from prison. They were imprisoned for writing about the illegal trafficking of weapons to radicals in Syria.

“Erdogan saw their release as a direct move against his authority and wowed to show who was boss. He signaled that the two journalists would be put back in prison soon and declared ‘things can get shaky in the following days.’ Hence, the takeover of Zaman was carefully planned as the most brutal confiscation of media to date in Turkish history.

“The confiscation of Zaman media group highlights some critical developments in Turkey. The government immediately took the media group offline, and a special tech team was brought in to completely wipe out the news archive and web content of the newspaper.”

The Chihan News Agency was also included in the seizure, a group we learn was the only non-governmental organization to monitor Turkish exit polls to ensure fair elections. The article notes that the remaining independent media in Turkey seem to have been effectively cowed, since none of them reported on the violent takeover. Governments, media groups, and human rights organizations around the world condemned the seizure; the U.S. State Department called Turkey’s pattern of media suppression “troubling.” We couldn’t agree more.

 

Cynthia Murrell, May 26, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

Google Changes Its Algorithm Again

May 26, 2016

As soon as we think we have figured out how to get our content to the top of Google’s search rankings, the search engine goes and changes its algorithms.  The Digital Journal offers some insight into “Op-Ed: How Will The Google 2016 Algorithm Change Affect Our Content?”

In early 2016, Google announced they were going to update their Truth Algorithm and it carries on many of the aspects they have been trying to push.  Quality content over quantity is still very important.  Keyword heavy content is negated in favor of pushing Web sites that offer relevant, in-depth content and that better answer a user’s intent.

SEO changes took a dramatic turn with a Penguin uploaded and changes in the core algorithm.  The biggest game changer is with mobile technologies:

“The rapid advancement of mobile technologies is deeply affecting the entire web scenario. Software developers are shifting towards the development of new apps and mobile websites, which clearly represent the future of information technology. Even the content for mobile websites and apps is now different, and Google had to account for that with the new ranking system changes. The average mobile user is very task oriented and checks his phones just to quickly accomplish a specific task, like finding a nearby café or cinema. Mobile-oriented content must be much shorter and concise than web-oriented one. The average web surfer wants to know, learn and explore things in a much more relaxed setting.”

Google wants to clear its search results of what is known as unviable information and offer users a better quality search experience for both their mobile devices and standard desk computers.  Good to know that someone wants to deliver a decent product.

 

Whitney Grace, May 26, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

China Reportedly Planning Its Own Precrime System

May 25, 2016

Some of us consider the movie Minority Report to be a cautionary tale, but apparently the Chinese government sees it as more of good suggestion. According to eTeknix, that country seems to be planning a crime-prediction unit similar to the one in the movie, except this one will use algorithms  instead of psychics. We learn about the initiative from the brief write-up, “China Creating ‘Precrime’ System.” Writer Gareth Andrews informs us:

“The movie Minority Report posed an interesting question to people: if you knew that someone was going to commit a crime, would you be able to charge them for it before it even happens? If we knew you were going to pirate a video game when it goes online, does that mean we can charge you for stealing the game before you’ve even done it?

“China is looking to do just that by creating a ‘unified information environment’ where every piece of information about you would tell the authorities just what you normally do. Decide you want to something today and it could be an indication that you are about to commit or already have committed a criminal activity.

“With machine learning and artificial intelligence being at the core of the project, predicting your activities and finding something which ‘deviates from the norm’ can be difficult for even a person to figure out. When the new system goes live, being flagged up to the authorities would be as simple as making a few purchases online….”

Indeed. Today’s tech is being used to gradually erode privacy rights around the world, all in the name of security. There is a scene in that Minority Report that has stuck with me: Citizens in an apartment building are shown pausing their activities to passively accept the intrusion of spider-like spy-bots into their homes, upon their very faces even, then resuming where they left off as if such an incursion were perfectly normal. If we do not pay attention, one day it may become so.

 

Cynthia Murrell, May 25, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Google Is Keeping It Real

May 25, 2016

In the 1990s, we were promised that virtual reality was a sure thing.  While flying toaster screen savers and Pixar’s computer animation kept us distracted, virtual reality was forgotten until recent developments in the gaming industry, such as the semi-affordable Oculus Rift, made it available for the average person.  Virtual reality has become so advanced that people are already saying it will change how we live.

Do not forget, however, that virtual reality is still fake.  It is a reflection of the real world and no matter how high in definition the graphics are, it is not real.  Uber Gizmo says that Google does not want to give its users a fake experience, rather “Google’s Focus Reportedly On AR, Not On VR”.

AR stands for augmented reality and Google has already experimented in the area.  The Google Glass was an augmented reality headset, although it had a limited reach and appeal.  The new Google Cardboard, however, is a VR platform that provides a cheaper alternative to expensive VR goggles.  Google is heading into the augmented reality arena, because:

“Apparently the reason for going with augmented reality is because Google doesn’t think that the public will invest too much in virtual reality headsets, which in their current iteration are huge and chunky devices that can’t really be worn outside. This is versus augmented reality in which your phone could offer up such features, and not to mention the more svelte design of the Google Glass.”

Virtual reality is simply the predecessor to augmented reality, similar to how motion capture techniques are replacing some live action special effects.  It is another example of how we are at the start of something new, but it will take time to catch on.

 

Whitney Grace, May 25, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Australian Software Developer Revealed the Panama Papers

May 23, 2016

The Panama Papers have released an entire slew of scandals that sent out ripples we will be dealing with for years to come.  It also strikes another notch in the power of software and that nothing is private anymore.  But how were the Panama Papers leaked?  Reuters reports that a “Small Australian Software Firm Helps Join The Dots On The Panama Papers”.

Nuix Pty Ltd. is a Sydney-based software development company that donated its document analysis program to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) to delve through the data from Mossack Fonseca, the Panamanian law firm that leaked the documents.  Reporters have searched through the data for some time and discovered within the 2.6 terabytes the names of politicians and public figures with questionable offshore financial accounts.

“By using the software, the Washington-based ICIJ was able to make millions of scanned documents, some decades old, text-searchable and help its network of journalists cross reference Mossack Fonseca’s clients across these documents.  The massive leak has prompted global investigations into suspected illegal activities by the world’s wealthy and powerful. Mossack Fonseca, the firm at the center of the leaks, denies any wrongdoing.  The use of advanced document and data analysis technology shows the growing importance of technology’s role in helping journalists make better sense of increasingly bigger news discoveries.”

Nuix Pty is a ten-year-old company and their products have been used to conduct data analysis in child pornography rings, people trafficking, and high-end tax evasion.  Another selling feature for the company is their dedication to their clients’ privacy.  They did not allow themselves to have access to the information within the Panama Papers.  That is an interesting fact, considering how some tech companies need to have total access to their clients’ information.

Nuix sounds like the Swiss bank of software companies, guaranteeing high-quality services and products that guarantee results, plus undeniable privacy.

 

Whitney Grace, May 23, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

A Snapshot of American Innovation Today

May 23, 2016

Who exactly are today’s innovators? The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) performed a survey to find out, and shares a summary of their results in, “The Demographics of Innovation in the United States.” The write-up sets the context before getting into the findings:

“Behind every technological innovation is an individual or a team of individuals responsible for the hard scientific or engineering work. And behind each of them is an education and a set of experiences that impart the requisite knowledge, expertise, and opportunity. These scientists and engineers drive technological progress by creating innovative new products and services that raise incomes and improve quality of life for everyone….

“This study surveys people who are responsible for some of the most important innovations in America. These include people who have won national awards for their inventions, people who have filed for international, triadic patents for their innovative ideas in three technology areas (information technology, life sciences, and materials sciences), and innovators who have filed triadic patents for large advanced-technology companies. In total, 6,418 innovators were contacted for this report, and 923 provided viable responses. This diverse, yet focused sampling approach enables a broad, yet nuanced examination of individuals driving innovation in the United States.”

See the summary for results, including a helpful graphic. Here are some highlights: Unsurprisingly to anyone who has been paying attention, women and U.S.-born minorities are woefully underrepresented. Many of those surveyed are immigrants. The majority of survey-takers have at least one advanced degree (many from MIT), and nearly all majored in STEM subject as undergrads. Large companies contribute more than small businesses do while innovations are clustered in California, the Northeast, and close to sources of public research funding. And take heart, anyone over 30, for despite the popular image of 20-somethings reinventing the world, the median age of those surveyed is 47.

The piece concludes with some recommendations: We should encourage both women and minorities to study STEM subjects from elementary school on, especially in disadvantaged neighborhoods. We should also lend more support to talented immigrants who wish to stay in the U.S. after they attend college here. The researchers conclude that, with targeted action from the government on education, funding, technology transfer, and immigration policy, our nation can tap into a much wider pool of innovation.

 

 

Cynthia Murrell, May 23, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta