Google and Data: Doing Stuff Without Data?
January 25, 2020
The Verge has been one of the foot soldiers carrying a pointy stick toward the Google. A few days ago, Google mobilized its desktop search results. The idea was to make search results look the same; that is, virtually impossible to determine where a link came from, who paid for it, and how it was linked to a finger tap or an honest-to-goodness thumb typed word or phrase.
The Verge noted the difference because its experts looked at a page of results on a tiny display device and then on a bigger device and noted the similarity or differences. “Google’s Ads Just Look Like Search Results Now” stated on January 23, 2020:
In what appears to be something of a purposeful dark pattern, the only thing differentiating ads and search results is a small black-and-white “Ad” icon next to the former.
Yikes, a dark pattern. Tricking users. Changing to match mobile.
A day later, The Verge reported that “Google is backtracking on its controversial desktop search results redesign.” The write up stated:
The company says it will experiment with favicon placement.
But the point is not the Verge’s useful coverage of the Google shift. For DarkCyber, the new interface illustrates that the baloney about Google using data to determine its actions, the importance of A B testing, and the overall brilliance of Googlers illustrates that the GOOG does what it wants.
If Google’s “data” cannot inform the company that an interface change will irritate outfits like the Verge, users, and denizens of the Twitter thing — maybe the company’s data dependence is a shibboleth?
If Google cannot interpret A B data in a way to avoid backlash and crawfishing, maybe Google’s data skills are not what the PR machine says?
DarkCyber thought experimenting and analysis came first at the Google. It seems that these steps come after guessing. Ah, the Google.
Stephen E Arnold, January 25, 2020
A Call for Openness in Search
January 24, 2020
DarkCyber understands that if one cannot “find” something, that something does not exist for most people who look for the “something.” This is not a statement from Grasshopper or a tablet unearthed outside of Athens. Finding is required in order to do work or — as a matter of fact — anything in a digital environment.
“Opening Up Search Is an Ethical Imperative” presents an argument for opening up search. “Opening up” appears to mean that Google’s grip on ad supported search and retrieval is broken. The write up states:
This is a shocking state of affairs given search’s ubiquitous impact on human well-being. And no I don’t think I’m overreaching. Search might mean a doctor diagnosing a patient with tricky symptoms. Bad search results might have life or death consequences. E-Commerce isn’t about buying pointless frivolities. It’s increasingly society’s economic glue. We no longer call on someone in sales to describe our needs verbally. Instead we request via the e-commerce search bar. Add job search, dating search, enterprise search, food delivery, grocery, legal, real estate, and so on, and you get a picture where search is indeed eating the world. What human activity will exist that won’t involve a search bar?
The statement is accurate. In the context of the article, search also means looking for information on a public facing Web site, not just locating a pizza restaurant or checking the weather. Here’s another statement we noted:
As users are reaching more-and-more for search, supporting the community collectively helps ensure positive outcomes for society as a whole. We’ll collectively help doctors find the right diagnosis for a suffering patient; support a purchasing agent find the right parts for an airplane they’re manufacturing; uplift lawyers seeking to hold the powerful accountable by helping them find solid legal precedent for their arguments.
Again, an accurate observation.
The article includes a list of suggestions for companies and others; for example, Do open source correctly and create search talent.
Several observations:
- For most people, including those in organizations, search occurs on mobile devices. Either form factor or the location in which the user runs the search is not conducive to the “library style” of information retrieval and review. The habituation to mobile and on the fly searching is going to be difficult to change. As my eighth grade teacher said, “Habits are like a soft bed: Easy to get into and hard to get out of.” Her grammar may have been questionable, but her comment applies to search today.
- You can learn more about the “open everything” initiative in the DarkCyber video news program which will become available on January 28, 2020. A former CIA professional reveals his commitment to “open everything.” The remarks may spark some fresh thinking.
- The introduction of the word “ethical” into the article raises some interesting questions; namely, “In today’s environment, what does ‘ethical’ mean? This is a surprisingly difficult word to define across contexts.
To sum up:
- There are different search and retrieval systems. Some are ignored like Qwant; others are misunderstood because they are metasearch systems; still others are proprietary systems swathed in buzzwords like artificial intelligence and machine learning; and even more are “sort of” open source like Amazon’s search system which was influenced by defectors from Lucid Imagination, now LucidWorks. Plus there are other variations. Search remains confusing and tangled in the shoe laces of worn out sneakers.
- The dominance of Google means that Google is in charge of presenting information to people using computing devices. The market penetration in some countries is over 95 percent which is the reason that most estimates of search share beat the drum for marginal players like Bing, Qwant, and DuckDuckGo. The thinking is, “A percent or two of share means some money. But the money is not Google scale.”
- Google is not about to change unless the search business is regulated, Google implodes which is possible but not in the next year or two, or billions of people change their “habits.”
Advertisers go where the eyeballs are. Money can alter the meaning of ethics. And that money issue may be the reason Web sites are not indexed comprehensively, US government Web sites are indexed infrequently and superficially, and why Google ignores certain types of content.
Stephen E Arnold, January 24, 2020
\
Online Video: Revenue Options to Watch
January 24, 2020
Since we assembled CyberOSINT: Next Generation Information Access, we have been monitoring video content innovations. Of interest to the team are interfaces. These are essential because — let’s face it — keyword search on mobile devices sucks. Clicking on big, colorful icons is the future. How smart are the interfaces? Not smart enough.
In terms of eyeballs, both Twitch and Neverthink are taking approaches that Video content continues to proliferate. However, monetization seems to innovating slowly and in predictable ways. The “begging for dollars” approach is the most common. In this post, I want to highlight a problem with begging.
A ripple roiled the Twitter-verse because a Twitch content producer with the handle BadBunny, wanted more financial support from her followers. (This performer (content creator) adopts a left leaning, abrasive persona; therefore, her approach may have been designed to attract publicity.) “Twitch Streamer BadBunny Slams Her Own Viewers for Not Paying for Her Content” reported:
The streamer, frequent in the Just Chatting section, is close to reaching 100,000 followers on Twitch thanks to her content and the guests she brings to her debates. During a broadcast on January 18, she slightly deviated from the topic of conversation to refer to her audience, insisting she needed the cash to continue creating content for the platform. After giving the blunt message, BadBunny, who could not believe the number of people who were watching her for hours for free, said she was surprised to see that her message was in vain since she did not get new subscribers. Faced with the refusal, she exclaimed: “How did all my speech about how I need subscribers to start the broadcast, blah, blah, blah, result in zero subscribers?”
DarkCyber believes BadBunny’s situation may reflect the lack of monetization innovation at Amazon Twitch. The platform is popular, but Microsoft has been poaching some streaming talent from Twitch. Twitch has other challenges, and these may be making Twitch cause people like BadBunny to demonstrate her Xanthippe-infused characteristics.
For sake of contrast, DarkCyber wants to call attention to to Neverthink.tv. The service is different from Twitch because it streams content available on other services; for example, YouTube, Reddit, and others. As a result, ads on Neverthink.tv drive traffic to YouTube. Presumably, Google passes some of the cash to creators. (But maybe not?)
The key differentiators of Twitch and Neverthink are:
- User interface. Both provide point and click video consumption. The Neverthink approach deals with categories, not individual streamers.
- Revenue model. Amazon jams ads in front of and in the middle of some streams. Neverthink accepts sponsored content for cash and uses what appears to be Google ads in some streams. Neverthink accepts money to run videos as “Specials.” Twitch may accept money, but if it does, the deals are not labeled. (Do those featured streamers who attend Twitchcon get some money?)
- Curation. The Neverthink angle is curation. Allegedly smart software and video loving humans make sure nothing “bad” streams. Twitch — regardless of its method — does have some interesting content. DarkCyber won’t provide any examples, but we do present some of the gambling, stolen content, and somewhat off color content in our lectures to law enforcement and intelligence professionals.
Net net: Twitch may have to up its game. Neverthink seems to have a more varied monetization model. What happens if Neverthink lures popular streamers to its app? Amazon Twitch will have to get woke or do a rethink.
If you want to check out these services, here are the links you need:
- www.twitch.tv. BadBunny is at https://www.twitch.tv/badbunny/videos
- www.neverthink.tv A useful “channel” is Millennial AF. DarkCyber finds this service educational.
Stephen E Arnold, January 24, 2020
Amazon: Eero Subscriptions Mean Another Revenue Stream for Amazon
January 24, 2020
Earlier this year, Amazon acquired router maker Eero, which makes networked systems that distribute WiFi across an entire home. Now, CNBC reports, “Amazon Just Announced a New Way to Make Money from its Home Wi-Fi Business: Subscriptions.” Writer Todd Haselton explains:
“The new features include Eero Secure and Eero Secure+, the latter of which used to be called simply ‘Eero Plus.’ Eero secure tracks your browsing and can warn you if you’re visiting potentially malicious sites that might be infected with malware or have been known to phish for private information. It also comes with parental controls. Eero Secure+ offers the same features as Eero Secure but adds in a VPN provided by Encrypt.me, which hides the data crossing your network, a 1Password subscription that gives you one place to manage all of your passwords and Malwarebytes anti-virus software.”
Yes, as many companies have found, subscriptions are a great way to make money. Users can access Eero Secure for $2.99 per month or $29.99 per year, while Eero Secure+ goes for $9.99 a month or $99.99 per year. If Eero really takes off, we may see these services added to the Amazon Prime subscription—giving them reason to hike the price across the board, of course. Again.
Cynthia Murrell, January 24, 2020
Irony, Outrage, Speculation: Amazon Rings the PR Gong
January 23, 2020
Remember the Gong Show? The host was an alleged government asset. The content of the show was humans performing. The focus was on humans who sang, dance, and cavorted in weird, sometimes incredible ways. The result? The host rang a gong. The performer, hooked by a big old person cane, found himself or herself dragged from the camera’s eye.
The elements of the program:
- Alleged government connections
- A ranking system for wild and crazy performances
- The big humiliation with the old person’s cane.
I thought of the Gong Show as I worked my way through dozens and dozens of write ups about the hacking of a mobile phone used by Jeff Bezos, the motive force of Amazon. You know Amazon: The online bookstore, the operator of the S3 leaking buckets, and policeware vendor.
The most interesting reports swirl around what Vice encapsulates in the article “Here Is the Technical Report Suggesting Saudi Arabia’s Prince Hacked Jeff Bezos’ Phone.” The report reveals
that forensic investigators found a suspicious file but no evidence of any malware on the phone.
Interesting, but not as fascinating as the assertions about who allegedly compromised Mr. Bezos’ mobile, when the alleged data sucking took place, and when the content was spirited away, how the compromise actually was implemented, and where those data went.
DarkCyber finds it interesting that fingers are pointed at countries, some government officials, Facebook’s always-interesting WhatsApp software, and at NSO Group, a company certain media outlets frequently reference. (NSO Group may be one of the specialized software vendors getting more publicity than Star Wars’ films.)
In our DarkCyber video news program, we devote almost two full minutes to the problems information technology managers face when implementing cyber security.
The Bezos Affair presents an opportunity to confront an unpleasant reality: Security is difficult.
The real time monitoring, the smart cyber defenses, the companies creating policeware, and the methods available to actors—each of these underscore how vulnerable individuals and organizations are.
The speculation, however, does little to make clear how protections can be achieved. In fact, the coverage of the Bezos Affair has reduced the coverage of what may be an even more egregious security lapse explained in “Microsoft Blames Itself for Customer Support Data Leak.” The “misconfiguration” error exposed 250 million customer records.
One gets the coverage, a world leader is implicated, an Israeli company is cast in a negative light. These are real time “real news” factoids. But the loss of 250 million customer records by Microsoft, the possible vendor for the US Department of Defense, is ignored.
Why are these problems commonplace? The answer, which we provide in our January 28, 2020, video, is provided. That answer is going to be a surprise. You can view the video program on the Beyond Search / DarkCyber blog by clicking the video promo image. No ads, no sponsors, no outside influencers, and no odd ball “You may also like.”
Stephen E Arnold, January 23, 2020
Tweet Insight: Half Right
January 23, 2020
DarkCyber spotted a Tweet about Google search results. You can find the information at this link. The insight is that:
There’s something strange about the recent design change to google search results, favicons and extra header text: they all look like ads, which is perhaps the point?
What if every search result is an ad, an ad driver, or an ad component?
The idea is that the results are shaped to generate revenue, not information.
Stephen E Arnold, January 23, 2020
Human Facial Recognition: Move the Method to Software, Right?
January 23, 2020
Here is a unique use of AI. Discover reports, “Algorithm Accurately Reconstructs Faces from a Monkey’s Brain Waves.” The write-up cites a study from the Caltech that took researcher Doris Tsao and her team nearly 15 years to complete. The research was performed on macaque monkeys because their ability to differentiate faces is similar to that of humans. Writer Nathaniel Scharping tells us:
“Working with macaques, the researchers say they identified a small group of neurons that are specialized to pick out individual features of faces and assemble them into a single image. With an fMRI machine, they watched as the monkeys looked at a series of 2,000 different faces and recorded which neurons were active in the so-called ‘face space’ of their brains. They could even pinpoint specific neurons that corresponded to different features. In all, they assembled a library of about 200 neurons that work to piece together facial features. The real test of their work, however, came when they worked backwards, reassembling faces using only information from firing neurons. With data on how the facial feature neurons fired, they rebuilt uncannily accurate versions of the faces. You can see the resemblance in the image above, from the study published Thursday in Cell. The reconstructed faces look almost exactly like the faces seen. The image is stark proof that primate brains’ break faces apart into tiny, digestible pieces as part of the process of recognition.”
The article shares the original and reconstructed images, and they are indeed nearly identical. The researchers have a lot more work ahead of them; they had previously pegged six areas of the brain responsible for processing faces, and this experiment only looked at two of them. Tsao and her team hope their work might lead to help for the blind. By stimulating the right neurons, someday we may be able to communicate visual information right into the brain, bypassing the eyes altogether.
Cynthia Murrell, January 23, 2020
Where Did That Technology Originate?
January 23, 2020
Western tech companies have been under fire for cooperating with China’s efforts to spy on its own citizens. Google and Apple have both been criticized for censoring apps and other content the Chinese government found problematic. Now, BuzzFeed tells us that “Amazon, Apple, and Google Are Distributing Products from Companies Building China’s Surveillance State.” Reporters Rosalind Adams and Ryan Mac write:
“The goods and apps come from three companies — Division, Dahua Technology, and iFlytek — which the US Commerce Department recently placed on an export blacklist for their role in aiding in the surveillance and detention of more than a million Uighur Muslims and other Muslim ethnic minorities in China’s northwest Xinjiang region. The blacklist designation prevents US companies from exporting commodities or software to those companies. But it does not stop Amazon and eBay from selling their products in their own online marketplaces, or Google and Apple from distributing their apps to US consumers. BuzzFeed News’ findings underscore, however, the extent to which the technology industry’s leading companies continue to work with entities that supply surveillance software and cameras to watch over one of the world’s most persecuted ethnic minorities. BuzzFeed News counted hundreds of products from Dahua and Hikvision, which manufacture security system equipment, and iFlytek, a voice recognition and translation company, on Amazon, eBay, and Overstock. Apple and Google also collectively distributed more than 100 apps from the three Chinese companies on the Apple App Store and Google Play, the main marketplace for Android software.”
The article supplies more information about Hikvision, Dahua Technology, and iFlytek and the products they sell, so navigate there for those details. Western companies risk being expelled from China if they do not cooperate with the government’s demands, and it is hard to turn down the profits a market of 1.4 billion people offers. However, it is difficult for Western democracies to put pressure on China to change its ways when our own companies support it. By vending these blacklisted companies’ apps and hardware through their online marketplaces, the tech giants embrace a loophole. Doing so is further evidence they value profits over principles.
Cynthia Murrell, January 23, 2020
About the Bezos Mobile Matter: Who Can Speculate? Everyone
January 22, 2020
I received a couple of communications about the mobile phone allegedly operated by Jeff Bezos, a tireless worker and high profile wealthy genius. A British newspaper suggested that Mr. Bezos’s mobile was compromised. Then the ever reliable Internet began passing along the story. A few moments ago (it is now 0704 am US Eastern on January 22, 2020) I spotted “Saudi Dismisses Reports It Is Behind Hacking of Amazon Boss Bezos’ Phone.”
The write up states:
“Recent media reports that suggest the Kingdom is behind a hacking of Mr Jeff Bezos’ phone are absurd. We call for an investigation on these claims so that we can have all the facts out,” Saudi’s US embassy said in a message posted on Twitter.
First, how many countries’ intelligence agencies have access to specialized software tuned to compromise a mobile device? The correct answer is, “No one is supposed to know.” DarkCyber estimates that specialized tools are available to many countries. Some using software from Europe; others using software from the East; and others relying on basement methods. Zerodium pays for mobile exploits for a reason. Companies like NSO Group want to maintain a low profile for a reason. IBM does not talk about the CyberTap technology it acquired years ago. The list could be expanded, but you will have to attend one of my law enforcement and intelligence lectures to get more information.
Second, how easy is it to spoof one mobile for another? Not as easy as performing other interesting acts. However, there are companies providing a range of hardware and software tools to make this type of spoofing possible. If you want the names of these outfits, that information will not appear in a free blog post. But these outfits are doing business and providing certain unique services. The customers are usually governments, but friends of friends are a reality. Where can these spoofs take place? Think in terms of a coffee shop or a communications control facility.
Third, who did it? The list of possible actors is long. With Amazon’s increasing success in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates, there are a number of possibles. Would one of these countries attempt to access Mr. Bezos’ mobile? DarkCyber suggests having some facts before disseminating allegations. Certain types of chatter can have interesting downstream consequences; for example, Mr. Snowden’s ability to enjoy the weather in the south of France and Mr. Greenwald’s interactions with the current Brazilian authorities.
Several observations:
- The message is that mobiles are targets
- A high profile individual can be made the center of an international media magnet
- Work is needed to work backwards to determine if a compromise took place, who did it, and why?
In the meantime, there are security gaps everywhere. S3 buckets expose information. Complex systems generate vulnerabilities. Assumptions about cyber access are often wrong.
Where was Amazon’s chief technology officer? At Mr. Bezos’ side? Probably not. That individual was grilling a Facebook executive about access to personal data in Germany.
Perhaps someone is sending a message to Amazon? Who is paying attention? Probably journalists, high profile mobile phone users, and individuals with leverageable information.
Stephen E Arnold, January 22, 2020
Data Leak Exposes Methods
January 22, 2020
The cat is out of the Hermes handbag. Raw Story reports, “Massive Leak of Data Reveals New Money-Hiding Secrets of Superrich—and this in ‘Only the Beginning’.” Last summer, the transparency group Distributed Denial of Secrets leaked data from the Formations House, a British company that serves the well-to-do around the world. It has taken journalists some time to analyze the roughly 100 GB of data, dubbed “#29Leaks,” and now news stories are cropping up. They say the company has been creating legal entities as fronts for money laundering, tax evasion, and fraud. We learn:
“According to Unicorn Riot, reporting from the data will have an international scope: Formations House has been the subject of international scrutiny for years, and the #29Leaks documents have been under investigation for some time. It is expected that news stories in Central America, Africa and Europe will examine information drawn from this set of leaks. The use of Formations House-managed companies to move money around between offshore and private banking centers like Luxembourg and other parts of the world is among the main themes of this dataset. Other documents expected to be covered in detail show how the African nation of The Gambia is commonly used to create banks and insurance companies on paper for wealthy people in other continents, which Formations House and related parties package and facilitate. On Tuesday The Times of London showed, via undercover reporting, how Formations House sets up shell companies for its clients. McClatchy reported on how Formations House helped Iran’s national oil company avoid sanctions. The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project detailed schemes across Eastern Europe. The Economic Times, meanwhile, dug into the company’s Pakistani-British management.”
The Pursuance Project, which has been helping make sense of the leaked information, expects reporting will continue to emerge. In fact, they say, they are only beginning to analyze all the data available from this trove.
Cynthia Murrell, January 22, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
