Facebook: Fine, We Are Cooperative
July 25, 2019
Other than sharing fake news, being a hotspot for senior citizens, and causing more drama than a family reunion, Facebook is known to not cooperate with authorities. As a private business, Facebook chooses its own autonomy but the French are fed up and Facebook might comply. A story from Reuters shares that it is an “Exclusive: In A World First, Facebook To Give Data On Hate Speech In French Courts.”
Facebook is notorious for not protecting its users’ privacy, because they sell it to advertisers. However in an odd turn of non-self-serving events, Facebook complied with French courts to turn over information on users that post hate speech. French Minister for Digital Affairs Cedric O is a big supporter of French President Emmanuel Macron and has advised him on numerous issues related to technology companies.
Macron wants France to exhibit model behavior:
“The decision by the world’s biggest social media network comes after successive meetings between Zuckerberg and Macron, who wants to take a leading role globally on the regulation of hate speech and the spread of false information online. So far, Facebook has cooperated with French justice on matters related to terrorist attacks and violent acts by transferring the IP addresses and other identification data of suspected individuals to French judges who formally demanded it.”
Facebook already turns over information related to terrorism and violent actions, but the inclusion of hate speech will allow French judicial processes to run as intended. O maintains connections with Facebook executives. Since O took office, he has made it a priority to target hate speech. O is also not against US tech companies buying smaller, promising French startups.
Facebook has not revealed hate speech users’ information in the past, because the company says it upholds freedom of speech and does not want other governments misusing that power.
Facebook may be a freed of speech champion, but we known they are ruled by the almighty dollar or, in this case, euro. Or is it eur O?
Whitney Grace, July 25, 2019
Snowden: Struggling for Relevance?
July 20, 2019
Notorious government information leaker, Edward Snowden recently explained how he protected himself during his treasonous acts. The Next Web shares the details in, “Edward Snowden Used Bitcoin To Buy Servers For 2013 Mass Surveillance Leak.” Snowden revealed that he relied on Bitcoin’s censorship resistance to leak information in 2013. He revealed this information at Bitcoin 2019, a conference held in San Francisco.
Snowden said he transferred the sensitive information about the National Security Agency and Five Eyes Intelligence Agency to servers paid for with Bitcoin. Snowden lauded Bitcoin’s permission less and decentralized infrastructure that allows users to exchange funds without being watched. Snowden praised Bitcoin more:
“ ‘Bitcoin is free money […] you are able to exchange and interact permissionless. And when I think about privacy, that’s what it’s all about. What does liberty mean? It’s freedom from permission, it means we live our lives in a way that we can experiment, we can engage, we can try things, we can even fail, and we don’t have to get a permission slip from the principal’s office. We are not watched, we are not recorded […] this ability to act without permission […] is the foundation of all rights. It used to be that governments could watch you […] but now all of this happens with devices that we, ourselves, pay for,” said Snowden, adding “and while we do that privacy stops being the status quo and liberty stops being the natural state of things,’ he noted.”
Snowden reiterated his support that privacy is not about needing to hide something, but more about protecting oneself. He also addressed that criminals use Bitcoin, but stated that more criminals use the US dollar. Snowden was charged in 2012 and his passport was revoked. Russia currently grants him asylum, but his residency permit will run out in 2020.
DarkCyber awaits the next Snowden announcement. Perhaps a rah rah for Facebook and Libra?
Whitney Grace, July 20, 2019
Professional Publishers, Release the Legal Eagles
July 19, 2019
Most people don’t pay any attention to professional publishing. There are some folks who live and breathe the world of academics who write, fame loving lawyers who write essays about the “law”, and bright individuals who just want to share what graduate students have discovered. There’s also wonky papers cooked up so that the “authors” can attend a conference in Las Vegas, where some dreams can become reality.
Nature published “The Plan to Mine the World’s Research Papers.” The subtitle asks the question, “A giant data store quietly being built in India could free vast swathes of science for computer analysis — but is it legal?”
The answer may be, “Sure, the project is in India, a country which has taken an interesting approach to production of name brand pharmaceuticals.”
The write up is very long: Here’s a summary.
Copy journal, technical, and professional papers. Extract the text and images. Tag the content. Make the data available for data mining.
Simple enough.
DarkCyber noted this statement in the write up:
When Nature contacted 15 publishers about the JNU data depot, the six who responded said that this was the first time they had heard of the project, and that they couldn’t comment on its legality without further information. But all six — Elsevier, BMJ, the American Chemical Society, Springer Nature, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences and the US National Academy of Sciences — stated that researchers looking to mine their papers needed their authorization. (Springer Nature publishes this journal; Nature’s news team is editorially independent of its publisher.)
How many universities, researchers, and editors working at professional publishing companies would find a use for this information when it is free?
Enough to tip over the classy, little understood worlds of:
- Tenure track processes
- Library budgets
- Professional publishing companies themselves.
Worth watching? Yes, indeed.
Stephen E Arnold, July 19, 2019
More Encouragement for Bad Actors
July 19, 2019
If one is looking to avoid censorship or regional blocking online, the best option is really to set up a VPN. However, for those who prefer a browser-based solution, PirateBrowser may be the answer. MakeUseOf gives us “3 Shocking Reasons to Use PirateBrowser in Your Country.” Reporter Christian Cawley begins with a little background:
“First released in 2013, the PirateBrowser is a web browser issued by the Pirate Bay website. The notorious file sharing site created the browser to help members find the site after it was banned. … The PirateBrowser is a version of Mozilla Firefox with the FoxyProxy add-on. There is also Tor integration (using Vidalia), which helps to beat censorship. For example, sites blocked in countries across the European Union, Iran, and North Korea can be accessed using the Pirate Browser. Sites blocked or limited by ISPs are unblocked when viewing with the PirateBrowser.”
Pirate Bay went on to make another version, PirateSnoop, which is based on Chrome instead of Firefox. So, yes, if one wants to get around censorship or geo-blocked streaming services, these are good options. The third reason may surprise some, but makes perfect sense—getting better prices on hotels, flights, and other purchases. Cawley writes:
“Online stores of all kinds base their pricing on where you are based. With a tool like PirateBrowser, you can visit sites selling technology and other goods and get a different price. This might even be substantially lower than the price on offer in your usual browser. This is a trick that is regularly used with a VPN. Usually, booking flights and hotel stays can prove cheaper by visiting a different version of the usual site. For example, you might live in country A and book from country B to make a saving. While this option isn’t available in PirateBrowser, its ability to circumvent website detection can result in lower prices.”
The article assures us that we need not navigate to Pirate Bay to access PirateBrowser or PirateSnoop, so they are completely legal to download (see the links above). We are cautioned, though, that the browser does not render users anonymous. Websites and internet providers will be able to see what you do, which is more or less of a problem depending on which country you are in. Once again we come to the notion of setting up a VPN—it is your best bet if you need your privacy. In case readers wish to know more about that option, the article supplies this link to MakeUseOf’s list of The Best VPN Services.
Cynthia Murrell, July 19, 2019
Google Is a Curious Outfit: Who, How, Why, Where, Buy, and Build?
July 16, 2019
Ah, the familiar Silicon Valley question: Buy or build?
Reuters, a “real news” outfit, published “Google Accused of Ripping Off Digital Ad Technology in U.S. Lawsuit.” DarkCyber has no idea if the alleged lawsuit is valid or if Google “ripped off” a company called Impact Engine.
According to the “real news” story:
Impact Engine Inc filed the complaint in federal court in San Diego, California, alleging various Google online advertising platforms, including Google Ads and Google AdSense, infringed on six patents.
DarkCyber believes that Impact Engine is convinced that Googlers took technology developed by the smaller firm. Google’s present senior management is probably unaware of the actions of young at heart Googlers.
Based on DarkCyber’s experience interacting with large, successful corporations, Google-type outfits ask a lot of questions. But these are predictable and probably should not be answered without prior thought. Scripting answers is a reasonable way to prepare for a lunch with a predator.
Now what about the basic questions. Here are a few I have experienced:
- Who are you?
- Who developed the innovation?
- Why was it developed?
- Why is it better than existing innovations?
- When did you develop the innovation?
- Did you patent the innovation and receive a patent?
- Where can this innovation be implemented?
- How much of a revenue boost does the innovation represent?
- How much did you spend in cash to create the innovation?
- How long did it take to create the innovation?
- How many people worked on the innovation in [a] its preliminary phase, [b] its testing phase, and [c] its commercialization phase?
- What is the programming language used?
- Does the innovation run from the cloud or on premises?
- What are the next series of enhancements you plan to add to your innovation?
- How long will those take?
- How much money do you need to implement the enhancements in half your time estimate?
- Who are your competitors?
- What are the gotchas in your innovation?
- Who is your nightmare competitor?
- What do you worry about relative to this innovation when you go to bed at night?
- If you had a magic wand, what changes would you make in the innovation as it exists at this time?
- Would you rough out a block diagram of the major components of the innovation?
- Would you walk us through your basic slide deck?
There are other questions, of course.
Now a company talking with a Google-type firm is likely to be darned excited to be in proximity to a deep pocket power center. Consequently the visitors are probably going to say too much, be too specific, and reveal more than the visiting team thought was possible.
Yep, well, there’s the fact that power and potential money loosens lips.
What happens when the small outfit leaves with booth leftovers in hand, a reasonable vegan lunch, and worshipful praise from the big company’s “team players”?
Let me boil down the gist of the debriefs in which I have participated:
- Is this innovation any good?
- Can we duplicate it quickly and easily? (Build?)
- If not, how much do you think the innovation is worth?
- Can we just license the innovation? (Semi-buy?)
- Should we forget this outfit and go to the competitors named in the meeting?
- Don’t we already have this functionality?
- Does anybody remember meeting with this company or anyone who works there before?
- Should we buy this outfit?
There are other considerations, of course.
In short, when big Google type outfits meet with small innovative outfits, the expectations of the small company are likely to be different from those at the big company.
Therefore, the legal dust up. Worth monitoring this particular action. But the matter of patents, prior art, and the patents which the big company may have tucked in their cloud storage device are likely to have some bearing on the matter.
One thing is certain: The lawyers involved will get paid a lot of money. And the money people? Sure. Money people.
Stephen E Arnold, July 16, 2019
Facebook: Fine and a Reminder of Ozymandius?
July 13, 2019
I just wanted to document that Facebook will have to pay a fine. Well. allegedly. On the other hand, the rumored penalty evokes the trunkless legs of stone. Ozymandius time in Silicon Valley. For details, navigate to “Facebook Reportedly Fined $5B over Cambridge Analytica Fiasco.” No high flier wants to wear a t shirt with the word “fiasco” stenciled in red. Perhaps if it were paired with the Nike Betsy Ross shoes and “fiasco” spelled “phiasco”, the label could be trendy. The t shirt would collect likes like a hamburger gathers flies at a picnic on a 90 degree day in Mountain View. I noted this statement in the write up:
The FTC approved the settlement in a 3-to-2 vote with Republican commissioners in favor and Democrats opposing, according to Wall Street Journal sources. The arrangement and further details have yet to be confirmed publicly, and any agreement will still have to be reviewed by the Department of Justice.
Yep, some money, just a bit tardy.
Stephen E Arnold, July 13, 2019
Exclusive: DataWalk Explained by Chris Westphal
July 9, 2019
“An Interview with Chris Westphal” provides an in-depth review of a company now disrupting the analytic and investigative software landscape.
DataWalk is a company shaped by a patented method for making sense of different types of data. The technique is novel and makes it possible for analysts to extract high value insights from large flows of data in near real time with an unprecedented ease of use.
DarkCyber interviewed in late June 2019 Chris Westphal, the innovator who co-founded Visual Analytics. That company’s combination of analytics methods and visualizations was acquired by Raytheon in 2013. Now Westphal is applying his talents to a new venture DataWalk.
Westphal, who monitors advanced analytics, learned about DataWalk and joined the firm in 2017 as the Chief Analytics Officer. The company has grown rapidly and now has client relationships with corporations, governments, and ministries throughout the world. Applications of the DataWalk technology include investigators focused on fraud, corruption, and serious crimes.
Unlike most investigative and analytics systems, users can obtain actionable outputs by pointing and clicking. The system captures these clicks on a ribbon. The actions on the ribbon can be modified, replayed, and shared.
In an exclusive interview with Mr. Westphal, DarkCyber learned:
The [DataWalk] system gets “smarter” by encoding the analytical workflows used to query the data; it stores the steps, values, and filters to produce results thereby delivering more consistency and reliability while minimizing the training time for new users. These workflows (aka “easy buttons”) represent domain or mission-specific knowledge acquired directly from the client’s operations and derived from their own data; a perfect trifecta!
One of the differentiating features of DataWalk’s platform is that it squarely addresses the shortage of trained analysts and investigators in many organizations. Westphal pointed out:
…The workflow idea is one of the ingredients in the DataWalk secret sauce. Not only do these workflows capture the domain expertise of the users and offer management insights and metrics into their operations such as utilization, performance, and throughput, they also form the basis for scoring any entity in the system. DataWalk allows users to create risk scores for any combination of workflows, each with a user-defined weight, to produce an overall, aggregated score for every entity. Want to find the most suspicious person? Easy, just select the person with the highest risk-score and review which workflows were activated. Simple. Adaptable. Efficient.
Another problem some investigative and analytic system developers face is user criticism. According to Westphal, DataWalk takes a different approach:
We listen carefully to our end-user community. We actively solicit their feedback and we prioritize their inputs. We try to solve problems versus selling licenses… DataWalk is focused on interfacing to a wide range of data providers and other technology companies. We want to create a seamless user experience that maximizes the utility of the system in the context of our client’s operational environments.
For more information about DataWalk, navigate to www.datawalk.com. For the full text of the interview, click this link. You can view a short video summary of DataWalk in the July 2, 2019, DarkCyber Video available on Vimeo.
Stephen E Arnold, July 9, 2019
Google to Kiwis: You Are Flightless Birds, Not Us
July 5, 2019
I read “Google Suspends Trends Email Alerts in New Zealand after Breaching Court Order.” The headline caught my attention. New Zealand? Home of Kim Dotcom. Get away spot for some Silicon Valley Lord of the Rings admirers? A handy place to experience earth tremors.
The write up reminded me:
Google has backed down in a spat with the New Zealand government after its email alert system Trends breached a court order suppressing details of a high-profile murder case. According to Reuters and AFP, Google has suspended its Trends feature in the country following outcry from the New Zealand government.
I can understand Google’s point of view. New Zealand is a mere country and a small one at that. It is far away, and it does not click as much as an important country’s residents.
The hassle surfaced because an automated Google alert named the person who killed another. Stating the alleged killer’s name was a no no. Google ignored that court order.
Google said, “Yo, we’re sorry.” However, Google was not too keen on making changes to its systems because a mere country wanted the US firm to follow the laws of that lesser nation state.
Here’s the nifty part. The write up reported:
New Zealand politicians reacted strongly to this reply, with justice minister Andrew Little accusing Google of “flipping the bird” at the country’s legal system.
What’s the problem with Google (a big virtual country) doing what’s good for itself. Plus, little countries have to be careful because Google has digital firepower and could use it to send a message. Oil embargo? Forget that? How about no email and no Web traffic?
The write up included this statement:
In the UK, for example, politicians have argued that Facebook is incapable of policing “harmful” content on its platform, and needs to be overseen by domestic regulators. In France, Google has been fined millions of dollars for failing to meet EU data privacy laws. And in New Zealand, Facebook was strongly criticized by prime minister Jacinda Ardern for failing to stop the spread of videos of the Christchurch terrorist attacks. “They are the publisher not just the postman,” said Arden in March. “There cannot be a case of all profit no responsibility.”
Get real. This is the Google politicians and officials are irritating. What about removing New Zealand and the UK from Google Maps?
If you are not on Google, you don’t exist. Understand?
Stephen E Arnold, July 5, 2019
GDPR Violators: A List
June 26, 2019
If you want to know who and what have violated GDPR rules, navigate to GDPR Enforcement Tracker on the Enforcement Tracker Web site. Here a three interesting names on the list:
- Italian political party Movimento 5 Stelle
- Mayor’s Office of the city of Kecdkemét, Hungary.
Stephen E Arnold, June 26, 2019
Google: A Tuneful Allegation about Indexing and Search Results
June 17, 2019
Google continues to attract criticism. DarkCyber noted an interesting twist on cleverness. Google has been a clever outfit. Now there may be evidence that a company with song lyrics may be slightly more clever. According to Boy Genius Report, a company with a database of song lyrics allegedly believed that Google was copying the lyrics and using them without permission. Remember. This is an allegation, and anyone not clever can make an allegation do a two step. The company with the lyrics is named Genius, and allegedly Genius inserted a coded message within its lyrics. Thus, when Google acquired these lyrics, Genius alleges that the coded messages appeared in Google’s lyrics. Smoking gun? How long has Genius been aware of the GOOG’s alleged improper use of lyrics? The answer, according to the article, is two years.
Several observations:
- This is an allegation, so it seems that legal eagles will take flight
- The use of “codes” is interesting because it suggests that the intake, indexing, and content processing system in use at Google may operate in an indiscriminate manner. The scraping may give a bad actor an idea for injecting certain types of data into a Google system. (I cover this type of exploit in my lectures about the flaws in the most widely used algorithms in content processing. Now we have allegations of a big time use case.)
- The allegation may provide some additional information about how Google allegedly favors its own content over that of third parties. The idea which could inspire some legal analysis is that: [a] Google knows via its analytics which content is hot, [b] Google seeks to acquire that content in some manner; and [c] when a query is run for something in that corpus, Google displays its content, not that of a third party.
Net net: Google is indeed clever, but this may be an example of a smaller company being clever-er. Worth watching what fancy dancing the Google uses to deal with this allegation of “genius.”
Stephen E Arnold, June 17, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
