Accidental and On-Purpose Insider Threats in Federal Agencies Still Raging
September 28, 2015
The article on Eweek titled Insider Threats a Major Security Issue for Federal Agencies looks at the recent results of a MeriTalk survey investigating federal response to insider threats through interviewing federal IT managers. The results are shocking, with almost 30% of agencies acknowledging data lost to an insider threat in the last year and half of respondents claiming that unauthorized personnel commonly fail to observe protocols. Even worse, most agencies have no tracking in place to recognize what a staffer may have seen or shared, making them virtually incapable of following up on risky behavior in their employees. The article says,
“The most startling finding from the survey is the fact that 45 percent of agencies say they’ve been a target of an attack – malicious or unintentional – yet 50 percent still say employees do not follow all the protocols in place,” Steve O’Keeffe, founder of MeriTalk…”There is also a lack of agreement on the best solution. Frequent, hands-on employee training is the key to preventing these incidents, as well as accountability. However, we are all human and people make mistakes.”
O’Keefe recommends the immediate and comprehensive adoption of better encryption and two-factor authentication to address the issue. But perhaps equally important is continuously updated training, and ongoing training, to avoid the common accidental insider threats.
Chelsea Kerwin, September 28, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Algorithms Still Need Oversight
September 8, 2015
Many have pondered what might happen when artificial intelligence systems go off the rails. While not spectacular enough for Hollywood, some very real consequences have been observed; the BBC examines “The Bad Things that Happen When Algorithms Run Online Shops.”
The article begins by relating the tragic tale of an online T-shirt vendor who just wanted to capitalize on the “Keep Calm and Carry On” trend. He set up an algorithm to place random terms into the second half of that oft-copied phrase and generate suggested products. Unfortunately, the list of phrases was not sufficiently vetted, resulting in a truly regrettable slogan virtually printed on virtual examples. Despite the fact that the phrase appeared only on the website, not on any actual shirts, the business never recovered its reputation and closed shortly thereafter. Reporter Chris Baranuik writes:
“But that’s the trouble with algorithms. All sorts of unexpected results can occur. Sometimes these are costly, but in other cases they have benefited businesses to the tune of millions of pounds. What’s the real impact of the machinations of machines? And what else do they do?”
Well, one other thing is to control prices. Baranuik reports that software designed to set online prices competitively, based on what other sites are doing, can cause prices to fluctuate day-to-day, sometimes hour-to-hour. Without human oversight, results can quickly become extreme to either end of the scale. For example, for a short time last December, prices of thousands of products sold through Amazon were set to just one penny each. Amazon itself probably weathered the unintended near-giveaways just fine, but smaller merchants selling through the site were not so well-positioned; some closed as a direct result of the error. On the other hand, vendors trying to keep their prices as high as feasible can make the opposite mistake; the article points to the time a blogger found an out-of-print textbook about flies priced at more than $23 million, the result of two sellers’ dueling algorithms.
Such observations clearly mean that consumers should be very wary about online prices. The bigger takeaway, though, is that we’re far from ready to hand algorithms the reigns of our world without sufficient human oversight. Not yet.
Cynthia Murrell, September 8, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
The Public Living Room
June 6, 2015
While much of the information that libraries offer is available via the Internet, many of their services are not. A 2013 Gallup survey showed that over 90 percent of Americans feel that libraries are important to their communities. The recent recession, however, forced local governments to cut library funding by 38 percent and the federal government by 19 percent. Some library users see the “public living room” (a place to read, access computers, research, play games, etc.) as a last bastion for old technology and printed material.
Alternet’s article. “Why Libraries Matter More Than Ever In The Age Of Google” highlights a new book by John Palfrey called BiblioTech that discusses how libraries can maintain their relevancy and importance in communities. Palfrey’s biggest argument is that humans are creating huge amounts of data, which is controlled by big and small tech companies. These companies are controlling what information is available for consumption, while libraries offer people the ability to access any type of information and free of charge.
Palfrey offers other reasons to continue using libraries: print and ink archives are more reliable than digital, how physical, communal space is important for communities and education, and how librarians are vital components.
“These arguments, however, rely too heavily on the humans-are-better-than-technology rationale where “better” is measured by technological rather than humanistic standards. If librarians have a higher success rate than Amazon’s algorithm at recommending books, this might not be true forever. Does that mean we won’t need librarians at some point? No, the dilemma of disappearing libraries is not just about efficiency, it’s also about values. Librarians recommend books because they are part of a community and want to start a discussion among the people they see around them—to solve the world’s problems, but also just to have a conversation, because people want to be near each other. The faster technology improves and surpasses human capability, the more obvious it becomes that being human is not merely about being capable, it’s about relating to other humans.”
Palfrey’s views are described as ideological and in many ways they are. Politicians cut funding, because they view libraries as archaic institutions and are blinded when it comes to the inequity when it comes to information access. Libraries indeed need a serious overhaul, but unlike the article explains, it is not simply updating the buildings and collections. It runs more along the lines of teaching people the importance of information and free information access.
Whitney Grace, June 7, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
