security

Thursday July 23, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday July 23, 2020

Cyber attack agreements needed to avoid mutually assured destruction, Blair says

Countries around the world need to form cyber attack agreements to avoid going down a path to “mutually assured destruction”, Tony Blair has said.

August 1, 2019

In the wake of the report into Russian interference in British democratic processes, the former prime minister called for states to “push for some common form of standards”.

Without such a framework, he warned, countries would be carrying out cyber attacks the “entire time to each other”, putting global security at risk.

In an interview with the PA news agency, Mr Blair, who was a leading Remain voice in the 2016 referendum, said he was “not one of those people who thinks the Brexit result came about as a result of Russian interference”.

March 21, 2018

But he said: “If they are interfering, and they will want to interfere, because obviously it is the policy of the Russian government to have a weaker West, and so you can see why they might want certain results to happen in politics.

“If they are trying to do it, then you need to take countermeasures.”

Mr Blair said that the “heightened ability to use cyber in destructive way” meant that at some point “the world is going to have to come to a set of agreements and protocols on this because otherwise you are going to be down a path of mutually assured destruction”.

“These capabilities are only going to grow, they are going to become more and more sophisticated, and governments are going to use them.

COVID-19 Cartoons

“But to be clear, that capacity has got to be developed in order to defend yourself as a country and then you’ve got to know how to both thwart interference and cyber attacks.

“And in the end you are going to have to push for some common form of standards here, otherwise countries are going to be doing it the entire time to each other and then the security of the world gets put at risk.”

Earlier this week, the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) accused the Government of being slow to recognise the potential threat posed by Russia to British democratic processes and of not properly considering whether Moscow could interfere in the Brexit referendum until after the event.

Mr Blair said: “I don’t know that people turned a blind eye deliberately – but the fact is that if a foreign government is essentially engaged in trying to disrupt our democratic process, whether they are successful in it or not, of course you’ve got to act. (Newschain.uk) 

 

Thursday January 30, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 30, 2020

U.K.’s plan to deal with Huawei 5G provides an uncertain course for Canada to consider

By cautiously allowing Huawei into only select parts of its 5G cellular networks, Britain is charting its own course in cybersecurity, while seeking to appease both China and the U.S.

December 12, 2018

But the unique nature of the British strategy means it is untested and could yet prove impossible to carry out.

And as Canada moves closer to its own decision on whether to allow the Chinese telecom manufacturer into this country’s 5G systems, Britain’s plan will serve as an example to either follow or avoid.

“They are putting together a policy for themselves which, on paper, is logical,” said Catherine Rosenberg, the Canada research chair in future internet at the University of Waterloo. “But is it going to work the way they want? It’s unclear.”

The U.K.’s announcement on Tuesday amounts to letting Huawei halfway in the system.

Identified as a “high-risk vendor” by British officials, the Shenzhen-based telco will only be allowed to provide equipment used in the outer layer of Britain’s 5G networks, such as transmission facilities. Huawei gear will be banned from the brains of the operation, known as the core components.

January 29, 2019

With current 4G technology, only the core equipment processes user information. The outer tier — known as the edge — beams cellular data between devices.

But here’s where it gets complicated — and potentially cumbersome for Britain. Higher-speed 5G is designed to cut down on latency by integrating some processing functions on the edge of the network, effectively blurring the line between core and edge.

Rosenberg said U.K. mobile networks could indeed choose to only purchase Huawei equipment to perform transmission functions in 5G networks.

But she questioned whether the plan would achieve its intended goal. The next-generation cellular technology is “more and more software-oriented” and “edge-based,” said Rosenberg, who also holds the Cisco research chair in 5G systems.

In vehicle terms, it’s like banning a certain manufacturer’s parts from being used in a car’s engine, only to buy tires from the same company. And with 5G, it’s as if engine parts are now being installed in the wheels.

June 17, 2017

The U.S. has long contended that China could access Huawei’s technology to spy on — or even shut down — foreign telecommunication services. China has always denied these claims.

The fifth-generation technology raises the stakes, as it’s not only expected to provide higher speeds on new 5G-enabled smartphones and other communication devices, it’s also set to form the basis for a deeper presence of the internet in everyday life. A 5G-enabled “internet of things” is meant to allow for more smart devices, self-driving vehicles, as well as tech-based solutions in health care and beyond.

Despite 5G’s projected ubiquity, the thinking behind Britain’s plan is this: if Huawei doesn’t supply core system components, then it won’t have access to sensitive data. But from country to country, the perception of the technological reality of 5G seems to vary based on political considerations. (Source: CBC) 

 

Thursday August 1, 2019

August 1, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday August 1, 2019

Another day, another data hack — and truth is, there’s not much you can do about it

When news emerged on Monday evening that Capital One, one of the biggest issuers of credit cards in the world, had been breached in a major data hack where the personal information of more than 100 million people was stolen, reaction from consumers was swift and almost unanimous: another one?

March 21, 2018

That’s because the hack — in which a former Amazon Web Services employee broke into Capital One’s servers and stole information on up 106 million people, including 140,000 Social Security numbers in the U.S., and 1 million Social Insurance Numbers in Canada — is just the latest in a long run of hacks, each seemingly bigger than the last.

U.S. retailer Target was among the first to be hit in a major way, as the chain revealed in 2013 that credit card data for 70 million of its customers was stolen. Next was do-it-yourself hardware chain Home Depot the following year, where 57 million people were affected.

Hotel chain Marriott was next in the hit parade, in a multi-year breach that dated back to 2014 when hackers exploited a flaw in their cybersecurity to steal credit card details and other data on half a billion customers.

But the biggest one to date was Yahoo’s. The online company admitted in 2017 that an astonishing three billion people had their Yahoo emails breached by online fraudsters.

October 11, 2018

That same year, credit monitoring firm Equifax revealed that it had been hit, as 143 million people had their information stolen.

For many people, the Equifax breach was emblematic of just how widespread the problem of data theft is, because the information was stolen from a credit reporting agency that also offers credit-monitoring services itself.

This week’s Capital One hack is just yet another reminder of what cybersecurity experts have known for a while:  you’ve probably already had your information stolen, and the only question is whether you know it.

“Assume your data is out there because in all likelihood it is,” is how cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs puts it.

In and of themselves, none of the major breaches may have been enough for a fraudster to “steal” someone’s entire identity, nor do they mean that the hundreds of millions of victims can expect to have major headaches to worry about for the rest of their lives. (CBC) 

 

Saturday February 10, 2018

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday February 10, 2018

Should Hamilton homeowners be allowed to point cameras at the street?

The city will look at making it legal for homeowners to point security cameras at the street as a way to aid police investigations.

February 17, 2014

But the province’s former privacy commissioner, Ann Cavoukian, is urging council to think twice.

Councillors endorsed a motion from Coun. Sam Merulla Wednesday to study changing a city bylaw that bans residential security cameras from pointing anywhere other than the homeowner’s own property.

Merulla argued home security footage is an increasingly crucial investigative tool, pointing to footage that helped police track down the people who murdered Ancaster’s Tim Bosma.

“You can already walk down the street holding a video camera without breaking the law. But you can’t point a security camera at the street? That doesn’t make sense to me,” he said.

January 17, 2001

He also argued the existing bylaw is tough to enforce, given a homeowner can refuse access to a bylaw officer seeking to examine camera footage.

But Cavoukian, now a privacy expert-in-residence at Ryerson University, said Hamilton’s bylaw was hailed as a “progressive” measure when it was passed in 2010. (The rule was one of many included in the city’s “fortifications” bylaw enacted in response to gang clubhouse concerns.)

“You would be going from a wonderful bylaw that protects your citizens’ fundamental right to privacy … to allowing practically everything (in neighbourhoods) to be recorded,” she said. “Why would you do that?”

It’s unclear how many Ontario cities actually ban private homeowner cameras from pointing at public spaces. London has a bylaw with similar provisions. (Source: Hamilton Spectator) 

 

SaveSave

Friday December 1, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday December 1, 2017

Trump’s behavior raises questions of competency

Donald Trump potentially has millions of lives in his hands as the threat of a devastating war with North Korea swiftly escalates.

January 20, 2017

Yet the President of the United States is raising new questions about his temperament, his judgment and his understanding of the resonance of his global voice and the gravity of his role with a wild sequence of insults, inflammatory tweets and bizarre comments.

On Wednesday Trump caused outrage and sparked fears of violent reprisals against Americans and US interests overseas by retweeting graphic anti-Muslim videos by an extreme far right British hate group. Earlier this week he used a racial slur in front of Native American war heroes. He’s attacked global press freedom, after cozying up to autocrats on his recent Asia tour.

August 18 2017

And now there are reports that the President has revived conspiracy theories about former President Barack Obama’s birthplace and is suggesting an “Access Hollywood” video on which he was heard boasting sexually assaulting women, and for which he apologized last year, had been doctored.

In normal times, it would be a concern that the President is conducting himself in a manner so at odds with the decorum and propriety associated for over two centuries with the office he holds.

September 20, 2017

But the sudden escalation of the North Korean crisis, following the Stalinist state’s launch of its most potent ever missile on Tuesday, takes the world across a dangerous threshold.

If diplomacy is unable to defuse the North Korea crisis, or slow its march to the moment when Kim Jong Un can credibly claim to be able to target all of the United States with a nuclear payload, Trump will face one of the most intricate dilemmas of any modern President. Will he live with the threat posed by a mercurial, wildly unpredictable adversary? Or, will he launch what could turn out to be a hugely bloody and destructive war to remove Kim’s nuclear threat?

November 3, 2017

There will be a premium on Trump’s judgment, his capacity to absorb the most serious detail and to make choices that could put many, many lives at risk, and draw the United States into escalating situations in Northeast Asia. Trump would be required to switch from the swaggering, untethered political persona he has been reluctant to drop as President into the role of sober statesman, unifying the nation and US allies — a switch he has rarely achieved so far in his 10 months in power.

On Wednesday, in St. Charles, Missouri, Trump stuck to his preferred name calling, again blasting Kim as “Little Rocket Man” and branding him a “sick puppy” after his White House earlier promised severe new sanctions against Pyongyang. But he didn’t elaborate on his vows to “handle” the situation. (Continued: CNN) 

 

SaveSave

SaveSave