DarkCyber for July 24, 2018, Now Available
July 24, 2018
DarkCyber for July 24, 2018, is now available at www.arnoldit.com/wordpress and on Vimeo at https://vimeo.com/281132690 .
Stephen E Arnold’s DarkCyber is a weekly video news and analysis program about the Dark Web and lesser known Internet services.
This week’s program covers five Dark Web and security related stories.
The first story reports that a hacker stole technical details of the hunter killer MQ9 Reaper drone. These documents were offered for sale on a Dark Web eCommerce site. The documents in the wrong hands could lead to a bad actor’s development of jamming technology.
Second, the consumerization of encrypted blockchain services is accelerating. The Chinese electronics giant Huawei has announced that it will release a blockchain enable mobile phone in the fall of 2018. The idea is to make it easy to use digital currency from a mobile device. Each device can function as a node on the network which would expand the use of digital currency.
Third, Opera has released as a beta product of its flagship browser with a built in digital currency wallet. The implementation eliminates most of the technical complexity associated with using Bitcoin or other digital currencies. Stephen E Arnold, author of Dark Web Notebook, said: “Consumerization of encrypted services can be a plus for some business transactions. However, if the user of the encrypted services engages in illegal activity, the challenge for law enforcement becomes significantly more difficult for some investigations.”
The fourth story reports that German authorities are stepping up certain Tor related activities. Operators of Tor nodes and computers providing Tor relay services were seized in multiple locations in the country. German authorities allegedly wanted information about the use of Tor as well as the names of individuals who have contributed money to the US based Tor Project, a non profit organization sponsoring the development of the Tor software bundle.
The final story discloses that Mozambique has developed a fast growing heroin smuggling industry. The infrastructure used by the bad actors is based on mobile phones and WhatsApp messaging software. The heroin business now rivals Mozambique’s coal exporting business in revenue.
DarkCyber is released weekly on Tuesday at 0130 am US Eastern time.
Kenny Toth, July 24, 2018
China Senses Silicon Valley Weakness: The Art of Digital War in Action
July 23, 2018
In the early 2000s, China was referred to as the “sleeping dragon,” because it was believed the Middle Kingdom would overtake the US as the world’s top economic power. It did not happen. China still remains a major economic powerhouse, but instead of total economic dominance China is challenging Silicon Valley. The Atlantic looks at how in the article, “How China’s Tech Revolution Threatens Silicon Valley.”
Beijing is a hotbed for young, educated professionals working in startups. Once upon a time college graduates applied for jobs at state-owned businesses and banks, because of job security. It is not like that anymore. People who had those jobs were unengaged with them. The new economic boom fueled by public and private funding allows the young to walk a different path free of the monotonous labor of their fore parents.
There are many Chinese startup success stories: Alibaba, search engine Baidu, and phone manufacturer Xiaomi. Beijing is a startup epicenter and it is very much like walking in New York City, London, Los Angeles, Paris, or another modern city except it is Asian. Since the end of the Cold War, China’s economic and cultural identity has been a group mentality followed by a US copycat status.
China, however, wants to be the world’s technology leader in robots, AI, clean energy cars, and more. The government that used to stymie creativity is now actively calling for it:
“Chinese leaders are looking to young entrepreneurs to spearhead the transformation. It helps that much the world’s hardware, such as smartphones and computers, is already made domestically, with many key parts produced in the southern factory metropolis of Shenzhen. Also supporting China’s strength is an influx of venture capital into Chinese start-ups, from both home and abroad, and from private investments by rich Chinese individuals who lack safer options given China’s volatile stock market and restrictions on investments in housing. Last year, Chinese-led funding accounted for nearly a quarter of worldwide venture capital, a 15-fold increase from 2013, with most of the investment going to Chinese companies, according to a recent Wall Street Journal analysis. During that period, U.S.-led funding doubled.”
The Chinese government is giving money to people with startup ideas. But what does the Chinese government demand in return? China does not like anything that gives them a bad name and they also are controlling. What is the Chinese government going to demand when the interest on their loans comes due?
What will US companies do if certain products and services are no longer affordable, economically viable, or available?
Whitney Grace, July 23, 2018
IBM and Watson
July 23, 2018
I spotted a brief comment about IBM’s recent earnings report. Yep, IBM is doing better. However, “IBM Results Leave Watson Thinking” makes this point:
Artificial intelligence is at the heart of IBM’s long-term strategy, yet its cognitive solutions business experienced a slight decline.
If I had the energy, I would pull from my IBM cognitive archive some of the statements about the huge payoff Watson would deliver, the odd ball advertisement showing Watson as chemical symbols, and the news release about the Union Square office. But it is Monday, and I am reluctant to revisit the Watson thing.
The operative word is “decline.”
Stephen E Arnold, July 23, 2018
Google: A Small Fine, Fuschia, and Maybe Some KaiOS
July 23, 2018
A modest fine from the EU and the buzz about a replacement for Android have not slowed Google’s innovative pace. With Android on most mobile phones, Google is seeking a way to refuel its mobile ad goals. The future may be Fuschia, but Google seems to want a Plan B.
The need to ensure internet access in emerging markets is one key factor in a recent financial decision by Google, we learn from the International Business Times’ article, “Why Is Google Funding Feature Phone Operating System KaiOS?” Writer Mike Luces reports that Google has made a Series A investment of $22 million in Kai Technologies, maker of an operating system that already powers some 40 million feature phones around the world. The article observes:
“,,, KaiOS stated that Google made the investment to ensure that new feature phones will have access to the internet, especially those sold in emerging markets. ‘This funding will help us fast-track development and global deployment of KaiOS-enabled smart feature phones, allowing us to connect the vast population that still cannot access the internet, especially in emerging markets,’ KaIOS CEO Sebastian Codeville said. KaiOS is currently powering the feature phones manufactured by TCL, HMD Global and Micromax. Google has already developed apps for KaiOS, so this new investment is seen as the tech giant’s way of ensuring its presence in the feature phone market without really developing and releasing hardware. Google is instead bringing its famous Android apps to KaiOS, including Google Maps, YouTube, Google Search and even its smart assistant, Google Assistant.”
Luces also observes that the moves takes place as the smartphone market in general appears to be slowing down. Another important item of information—KaiOS phones already outnumber iPhones in India, a huge market. We are interested to see what affects this investment will have. Founded in 2016, Kai Technologies is based in San Diego and maintains facilities in several cities. They are also hiring right now, in case anyone is interested.
The Beyond Search team assumes that Margrethe Vestager may be interested in KaiOS.
Cynthia Murrell, July 23, 2018
Insight into Google Image Search
July 22, 2018
I read “This Is What Happens When You Google the Word “Idiot.” The insight pivots on a query sent to Google Images for the word “idiot.” The results presented images of the US president. The same query fed to Bing generates a set of results without the image of Donald Trump. Here’s the explanation about the “why” of these results:
Google states that “[image search] analyzes the text on the page adjacent to the image, the image caption and dozens of other factors to determine the image content.” Added to that, Google uses sophisticated algorithms to remove duplicate images and ensure that the best quality images are presented first in your results. What this means is that whoever writes an article determines (mostly, there are other factors too) whether an image appears in Google Image Search results or not. This partly depends on the keywords they use adjacent or in the caption of the image, not necessarily the “content” of the image. Also, Google indexes the images on a website the same way it indexes web pages, by crawling across the Internet periodically. A quick investigation of the pages in the search results for the word “idiot” proves this to be true. In each of the links where Donald Trump’s image appears, the word “idiot” appears as a keyword and in most cases close to his image or sometimes in the caption.
Seems simple enough. Word plus image equals relevance.
Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2018
Are Some Google Docs Exposed to Web Indexing Systems?
July 21, 2018
Recently, Russian search giant Yandex reported seeing Google Docs turn up in search results. Previously, this was thought to be impossible. However, this brings up a lot of questions that others have taken for granted: namely, how secure are documents on the cloud? This was looked at more closely in the Media Post story, “Private Google Docs Serve Up In Yandex Search Engine Results.”
According to the story:
“[O]ther search engines can only serve up Google documents that had either been deliberately made public by its authors or when a user publishes a link to a document and makes it available for public access and search… Saving and protecting users’ personal data is our main priority for search engines. A Yandex spokesperson said the search only yields files that don’t require logins or passwords.”
For its part, Google appears to deflect the Yandex observation. Regardless, the Yandex assert arrives near the muddy heels of other security woes like the idea that our Gmail messages and their content could be used by developers. With the Android matter behind it, the EU may look at access to certain Google content.
Patrick Roland, July 21, 2018
Facebook: A New York City-Sized PR Problem
July 20, 2018
I read “Once nimble Facebook Trips Over Calls to Control Content.” If you are looking for this write up online, the story’s headline was changed to “What Stays on Facebook and What Goes? The Social Network Cannot Answer.” You may be able to locate the online version at this link. (No promises.) The dead tree version is on Page A1 of the July 20, 2018, edition which comes out on Thursday night. Got the timeline square?
I wanted to highlight a handful of comments in the “real” news story. Here we go with direct statements from the NYT article in red:
- The print version headline uses the phrase “once nimble.” Here in Harrod’s Creek that means stumbling bobolyne. In Manhattan, the phrase may mean something like “advertise more in the New York Times.” I am, of course, speculating.
- I marked in weird greenish yellow this statement: “Facebook still seems paralyzed over how to respond.” So much for nimble.
- Another: “Comically tripped up”. Yep, a clown’s smile on the front page of the NYT.
- My favorite: The context for being a bit out of his depth. Whatever does “yet lucidity remai9ned elusive.” Does this mean stupid, duplicitous, or something else?
- I thought Silicon Valley wunderkind were sharp as tacks. In the NYT, I read “Facebook executives’ tortured musings.” Not Saturday Night Live deep thoughts, just musings and tortured ones at that.
- How does Facebook perceive “real” journalism? Well, not the way the NYT does. I circled this phrase about Alex Jones, a luminary with some avid believers one mine drainage ditch down the road a piece which is Kentucky talk for “some”: “Just being false doesn’t violate community standards” and “Infowars was a publisher with a ‘different point of view.’”
- This is a nifty sequence crafted to recycle another “real” journalist’s scoop interview with Mark Zuckerberg: “what Facebook would or would not allow on its site became even more confusing.” So, a possible paralyzed clown who lacks lucidity is confusing.
- The “bizarre idea” word pair makes sure I understand what the NYT believes in a lack of clear thinking.
But these brief rhetorical flourishes set up this statement:
A Facebook spokeswoman [who is not identified] explained that it would be possible, theoretically, to deny the Holocaust without triggering Facebook’s hate-speech clause.
Those pesky algorithms are at work. But the failure to identify the person at Facebook who offered this information is not identified. Why not?
Here’s another longer statement from the NYT write up:
And what exactly constitutes imminent violence is a shifting line, the company said— it is still ‘iterating on’ its policy, and the rules may change.
I don’t want to be too dumb, but I would like to know who at the company offered the statement. A company, to my knowledge, cannot talk unless one considers firing a question at Amazon’s Alexa.
I put an exclamation point on this statement in the NYT article:
All of this fails a basic test: It’s not even coherent. It is a hodge podge of declarations and exceptions and exceptions to the exceptions.
Net net: Facebook has a public relations problem with the New York Times. Because of the influence of the “real” newspaper and its “real” journalists, Facebook has a PR problem of magnitude. Perhaps the point of the story is to create an opportunity for a NYT ad sales professional to explain the benefits of a full page ad across the print and online versions of the New York Times?
Stephen E Arnold, July 20, 2018
Geo Map Pricing
July 20, 2018
In the market for maps for your application? If so, you may find the pricing data in “Farewell, Google Maps” useful. Current information about the costs of real time, cloud based data services can be difficult to get for a specific use case. Here’s the segment which I found helpful:
- Google Maps – $7 for each 1000 map loads irrespective of map size or zooming/panning by the user ($5.60 with discount for high volume)
- Mapbox – $0.50 for each “map view”, which despite the name is not a map view, but request of 4 or 15 map tiles (depending on map type), rounded up
- Azure Maps – $0.50 for 1000 “transactions”, where transaction is equal to 15 map tiles
- TomTom – $0.50 for 1000 “transactions” ($0.40 with highest volume discounts), each transaction is equal to 15 map tiles
- HERE – pricing is by bundles, Standard bundle amounts to $0.50 for 1000 “transactions” (15 tiles)
- MapTiler – $0.05 for each map tile
- Apple Maps – so far is in beta and offers a generous free usage allowance, no commercial pricing available.
The write provides other helpful information; for example, data density. I would point out that the illustrations used make another point; specifically, low contrast maps are very difficult to read.
Stephen E Arnold, July 20, 2018
Amazon Clarification on Network Switches
July 19, 2018
I read an exclusive on Marketwatch. (I did not know it was “real” journalism.) The story is “Exclusive: Amazon Denies It Will Challenge Cisco with Switch Sales.” The story’s main point struck me as:
Amazon.com Inc.’s top cloud-computing executive has officially denied that Amazon Web Services plans to start selling network switches to other businesses, after a report last week claiming that move was in the works damaged stocks of Cisco Systems Inc. and other major networking companies.
I think I understand.
Amazon may be building switches with Amazon Web Services and maybe its streaming data marketplace baked in. But these switches will not be old to “other businesses.”
Such a switch would add some functionality to Amazon’s own infrastructure. I wonder if these switches, assuming they exist, would add some beef to Amazon’s government client activities. For example, some lawful intercept activities take place at network tiers where there are some quite versatile switches.
The write up adds:
Amazon would not comment on whether it is creating its own networking equipment, just that it did not plan to sell such equipment to other businesses.
If Amazon wins more US government cloud and AWS centric work, certification of these devices eliminates possible questions about backdoors or phone home functions in gear sourced from other companies.
To sum up, Amazon does not deny it is building switches (whatever that term includes).
Worth watching in the context of the on going dust up between Oracle’s data marketplace and Amazon’s designs on building a new source of revenue with its marketplace innovations.
Stephen E Arnold, July 19, 2018
Heigh Ho, Filter, Away: You Cannot Find Info If It Is Not in the Index
July 19, 2018
Google recently revealed some data about the effects of adjustments it made to its algorithm back in 2014 in an effort to minimize piracy. TorrentFreak shares these figures in, “Google Downranks 65,000 Pirate Sites in Search Results.” Writer Ernesto informs us:
“In a comment to Australian media, Google states that it has demoted 65,000 sites in search results, a list that’s still growing every week. In total, the company received DMCA takedown requests for over 1.8 million domain names, so a little under 4% of these are downranked. The result of the measures is that people are less likely to see a pirate site when they type ‘watch movie X’ or ‘download song Y.’ This means that these sites see a drop in visitors from Google and a quite significant one too. ‘Demotion results in sites losing around 90 percent of their visitors from Google Search,’ a Google spokesperson told The Age. Indeed, soon after the demotion signal was implemented, pirate sites were hit hard. However, pirates wouldn’t be pirates if they didn’t respond with their own countermeasures. In recent years, many infringing sites have hopped from domain to domain, in part to circumvent the downranking efforts. In addition, Google’s measures also created an opportunity for smaller, less reputable, sites to catch search traffic that would otherwise go to the main players.”
Still, it seems to be a net win against piracy, all told. Some still call for Google to completely remove sites guilty of piracy from their search results, a move Google has its reasons for refusing to make. We’re reminded the company has also described piracy as an “availability and pricing problem,” and says governments should be promoting new business models instead of laying blame at the search engine’s feet. That is an interesting argument.
Cynthia Murrell, July 19, 2018
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
