Did You Know You Had a LexID? No. Worth Checking Maybe
April 22, 2021
With ICE’s contract with Thomson Reuters’ CLEAR expiring, The Intercept reports, “LexisNexis to Provide Giant Database of Personal Information to ICE.” Apparently the company could not resist the $16.8 million contract despite downplaying its ties to the agency in the past. Once focused on providing data to legal researchers and law firms, reduced sales compelled LexisNexis to branch into serving law enforcement. The firm will be supplying Homeland Security agents with billions of records that aggregate data from sources both public and private, like credit histories, bankruptcy records, license plate photos, and cell phone subscriber info. Naturally, these profiles also come with analytics tools. Reporter Sam Biddle writes:
“It’s hard to wrap one’s head around the enormity of the dossiers LexisNexis creates about citizens and undocumented persons alike. While you can at least attempt to use countermeasures against surveillance technologies like facial recognition or phone tracking, it’s exceedingly difficult to participate in modern society without generating computerized records of the sort that LexisNexis obtains and packages for resale. The company’s databases offer an oceanic computerized view of a person’s existence; by consolidating records of where you’ve lived, where you’ve worked, what you’ve purchased, your debts, run-ins with the law, family members, driving history, and thousands of other types of breadcrumbs, even people particularly diligent about their privacy can be identified and tracked through this sort of digital mosaic. LexisNexis has gone even further than merely aggregating all this data: The company claims it holds 283 million distinct individual dossiers of 99.99% accuracy tied to ‘LexIDs,’ unique identification codes that make pulling all the material collected about a person that much easier. For an undocumented immigrant in the United States, the hazard of such a database is clear.”
Biddle notes that both LexisNexis and Thomson Reuters are official data partners of Palantir, which insists it is not, itself, a data company. It is, however, a crucial partner to law enforcement agencies at all levels across the US, as well as the security departments at several corporations. The firm supplies its clients, including ICE, with huge datasets, analysis tools, and consultants to help organizations track anyone of interest. Despite these partnerships, both Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis have largely escaped the controversy that has surrounded Palantir.
Biddle has trouble reconciling LexisNexis’ new contract with its insistence it is actually on the side of detainees because it supplies them with access to an e-library of legal materials. For its part, the firm takes pains to note the contract complies with President Biden’s Executive Order 13993, which revised immigration enforcement policies and DHS interim guidelines. We are reminded, though, that despite the new occupant of the Oval Office, those running ICE remain the same. It is their hands into which this astounding trove of personal data is being delivered.
Cynthia Murrell, April 22, 2021
TikTok: A Good Point about Data Collection
April 21, 2021
I wish I could recall which addled Silicon Valley podcaster explained that TikTok was not a problem. I would urge this individual to read in the British paper the article “Case Launched Against TikTok over Collection of Children’s Data.” The essay explains:
Despite a minimum age requirement of 13, Ofcom found last year that 42% of UK eight to 12-year-olds used TikTok. As with other social media companies such as Facebook, there have long been concerns about data collection and the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office is investigating TikTok’s handling of children’s personal information. Longfield said: “We’re not trying to say that it’s not fun. Families like it. It’s been something that’s been really important over lockdown, it’s helped people keep in touch, they’ve had lots of enjoyment. But my view is that the price to pay for that shouldn’t be there – for their personal information to be illegally collected en masse, and passed on to others, most probably for financial gain, without them even knowing about it. “And the excessive nature of that collection is something which drove us to [challenge] TikTok rather than others.
The cloud of unknowing swirling around individuals who insist that data collection from children is no big deal is large and possibly impenetrable.
TikTok says it is an outfit staying within the bright white lines. Nevertheless, according to the write up:
In February last year, ByteDance, the Chinese company legally domiciled in the Cayman Islands that owns TikTok, was fined a record £4.2m ($5.7m) in the US for illegally collecting personal information from children under 13.
Add to the actions which triggered the fine, TikTok is an outfit associated with China. The data from TikTok might add some useful insights about user predilections if those data flow into a Chinese aggregation system.
To the cheerleaders for TikTok, I would suggest a rethink of your position. However, it is possible that funding for some cheerleading squads may be coming from interesting sources and carry along some other agendas. Bad actors can operate within a regulation lax environment. That’s a reality.
Stephen E Arnold, April 21, 2021
Google and the Annoying Australian Government
April 16, 2021
I noted “Australian Judge Rules Google Misled Android Users on Data.” The write up reports:
Google broke Australian law by misleading users about personal location data collected through Android mobile devices…
In the big world of the Google does this decision matter?
Chair of the Australian Competition Commission finds the decision important for Australia. The news story states:
This is an important victory for consumers, especially anyone concerned about their privacy online, as the court’s decision sends a strong message to Google and others that big businesses must not mislead their customers. We are extremely pleased with the outcome in this world-first case.
Like Facebook, Google finds that Australia is having difficulties accepting the systems and methods of the digital nation states. One risk to the GOOG may be that other mere countries emulate the ways of the Aussies. Imagine the chaos if the EC downs three or four Foster’s and screams, “Let’s put Googzilla on the barbie.”
Even Google’s legions of attorneys might balk at a trip to Brussels or Strasbourg as the Australian emulation attracts attention.
Stephen E Arnold, April 16, 2021
Microsoft Gets Some Help
April 14, 2021
I want to keep this item brief. Here’s the headline which caught my attention:
The DoJ statement says:
Throughout March, Microsoft and other industry partners released detection tools, patches and other information to assist victim entities in identifying and mitigating this cyber incident. Additionally, the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency released a Joint Advisory on Compromise of Microsoft Exchange Server on March 10. Despite these efforts, by the end of March, hundreds of web shells remained on certain United States-based computers running Microsoft Exchange Server software.
Here’s a partial fix as explained in the DoJ write up:
This court-authorized operation to copy and remove malicious web shells from hundreds of vulnerable computers shows our commitment to use any viable resource to fight cyber criminals. We will continue to do so in coordination with our partners and with the court to combat the threat until it is alleviated, and we can further protect our citizens from these malicious cyber
breaches.”
Interesting. To the reader of this blog who did not find my Microsoft Bob security T shirt amusing I would say, “What about a Microsoft Bob security baseball cap?” The Microsoft softball team appears to need some professional players to be competitive in this season’s games.
Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2021
Australia Demands Fairness from Big Tech. Waves Expected Worldwide
April 7, 2021
After wrangling over the issue for weeks, Australian regulators and Facebook have come to an agreement. Regulators demanded the social media platform, as well as Google, start paying news publishers their fair share for content. Sounds reasonable, considering that out of every $100 spent on online advertising in that country, $53 goes to Google and $28 to Facebook. That is 81% going to just two companies.
Facebook responded by temporarily blocking all news to Australian users. (Google made a similar threat, but made deals with several Australian media groups instead.) Now that a compromise has been reached and the blackout ended, all that remains is for the adjusted media law to be passed. Yahoo News discusses “Why the World is Watching Australia’s Tussle with Big Tech.” Writer Andrew Beatty observes:
“Although the rules would only apply in Australia, regulators elsewhere are looking closely at whether the system works and can be applied in other countries. Microsoft — which could gain market share for its Bing search engine — has backed the proposals and explicitly called for other countries to follow Australia’s lead, arguing the tech sector needs to step up to revive independent journalism that ‘goes to the heart of our democratic freedoms’. European legislators have cited the Australian proposals favorably as they draft their own EU-wide digital market legislation. Facebook’s decision to roll back the news ban comes after it received widespread criticism for the initial blackout, which also impacted some emergency response pages used to alert the public to fires, floods and other disasters. The company quickly moved to amend that mistake, but the incident left questions about whether social media platforms should be able to unilaterally remove services that are part of crisis response and may even be considered critical infrastructure.”
Critical infrastructure—that is an interesting twist. Both Facebook and Google insist they don’t mind paying for content, something each has started to do in very limited ways. They just don’t want to be told how much to pay; Australian regulators would like independent arbiters to oversee deals to be sure they are fair. World Wide Web inventor Tim Berners-Lee warns the precedent of charging for links could “break the internet.” Are the extended consequences of holding these two companies to account really so dire?
Cynthia Murrell, April 07, 2021
India May Use AI to Remove Objectionable Online Content
April 7, 2021
India’s Information Technology Act, 2000 provides for the removal of certain unlawful content online, like child pornography, private images of others, or false information. Of course, it is difficult to impossible to keep up with identifying and removing such content using just human moderators. Now we learn from the Orissa Post that the “Govt Mulls Using AI to Tackle Social Media Misuse.” The write-up states:
“This step was proposed after the government witnessed widespread public disorder because of the spread of rumours in mob lynching cases. The Ministry of Home Affairs has taken up the matter and is exploring ways to implement it. On the rise in sharing of fake news over social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp, Minister of Electronics and Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad had said in Lok Sabha that ‘With a borderless cyberspace coupled with he possibility of instant communication and anonymity, the potential for misuse of cyberspace and social media platforms for criminal activities is a global issue.’ Prasad explained that cyberspace is a complex environment of people, software, hardware and services on the internet. He said he is aware of the spread of misinformation. The Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 has provisions for removal of objectionable content. Social media platforms are intermediaries as defined in the Act. Section 79 of the Act provides that intermediaries are required to disable/remove unlawful content on being notified by the appropriate government or its agency.”
The Ministry of Home Affairs has issued several advisories related to real-world consequences of online content since the Act passed, including one on the protection of cows, one on the prevention of cybercrime, and one on lynch mobs spurred on by false rumors of child kidnappings. The central government hopes the use of AI will help speed the removal of objectionable content and reduce its impact on its citizens. And cows.
Cynthia Murrell, April 7, 2021
Intellectual Cohesiveness: A Reading List
March 30, 2021
Why do liberal arts graduates struggle to understand the logic of a Facebook-type engineer or a Google-like wizard or the demeanor of a Twitter-like senior manager? Easy. The reading list for engineers includes books about math, physics, and programming. The well-rounded humanoid educated in the currents of Western culture read other books. Which other books? I am delighted you asked. You can find a list of the 1,138,841 most frequently assigned texts. Just click this link and view the Open Syllabus Galaxy. Yes, the diagram is not a list. Listicles are not popular with some of the thumbtypers, so behold a visualization.
Let’s return to the notion of intellectual cohesiveness, shall we? In order to build a shared knowledge base, educated individuals should have some familiarity with the most assigned college texts. That way, when someone references Napoleon and a winter walk, the others engaged in the conversation will know that the little emperor did skipped a lesson about winter in Eastern Europe.
Without a shared knowledge base, it is difficult to know what the other person is talking about. For a recent example, consider the questioning of big tech’s luminaries by the oh, so wise elected officials.
One observation. A person assigned a book to read does not guarantee that the book was read.
Cohesiveness must be obtained in some other way in our zip zip world I think.
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2021
Apple Confronts the Middle Kingdom: Another Joust between a High Tech Country and a Nation State
March 19, 2021
How did Australia fare in its head-to-head death match with Facebook? Readers of this blog know that I declared Facebook the winner over a mere country. Imagine. A country with kangaroos thinking it could win against the digital social kingdom. I declared Facebook the winner and pegged Australia as the equivalent of a company selling used RVs to residents of Silicon Valley who could not afford an apartment.
Now China finds itself in the midst of Apple peels because Chinese iPhone app developers are following Apple’s privacy guidelines. Imagine. Programmers in China have the daring do to veer outside the boundaries of the orchard owner.
“Apple Warns Chinese Apps Not to Dodge Its New Privacy Rules” explains:
But even before introducing the changes, Apple is facing problems in China, where tech companies are testing ways to beat the system and continue tracking users without prompting for their consent. Apple previously said it would reject from its App Store any apps that “are found to disregard the user’s choice”. On Thursday, Apple fired pre-emptive warnings to at least two Chinese apps, telling them to cease and desist after naming a dozen parameters such as “setDeviceName” that could be used “to create a unique identifier for the user’s device”.
The write up explains that Chinese developers are testing technology to put gates in the fence around the Apple app orchard. That’s not what Apple permits. The techniques referenced in the source article smack of breach techniques long in use by specialized software companies. Some of the methods were hinted at in some of the Snowden documents and in the public dump of the Hacking Team’s RCS. Certain government-supported intelware companies employ similar techniques in their solutions as well.
What’s ahead?
- Apple declares victory and makes changes as it did for Russia. Business is business, and the ethical issues are really super important unless the economic hit is a consideration
- Apple declares that China has ruined the apple orchard, so no more digital delicacies will be exported to the Middle Kingdom
- China demonstrates that it can influence behavior by pulling certain supply chain strings, suggesting tariff changes to countries in its orbit, and engaging in face-to-face discussions with Chinese nationals working for the Silicon Valley giant.
Surveillance operates on steroids when app developers have access to the treasure trove of data from users’ actions.
This is another distinctly 21st century issue: A mere country and some of its state backed developers finding that access to the abundance in the Apple orchard hindered.
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2021
Palantir and Anduril: Best Buds for Sure
March 12, 2021
I read “Anduril Industries Joins Palantir Technologies’ TITAN Industry Team.” In the good old days I would have been zipping from conference to conference outputting my ideas. Now I sit in rural Kentucky and fire blog posts into the datasphere.
This post calls attention to an explicit tie up between two Peter Thiel-associated entities: Palantir Technologies and Anduril. The latter is an interesting company with some nifty smart technology, including a drone which has the cheerful name “Anvil.”
For details about the new US Army project and the relationship between these two companies, the blog post was online as of March 8, 2021. (Some information may be removed, and I can’t do much about what other outfits do.)
Information about Anduril is available at their Web site. Palantir is everywhere and famous in the intelware business and among some legal eagles. No, I don’t have a Lord of the Rings fetish, but some forever young folks do.
Stephen E Arnold, March 12, 2021
Cyprus: Illuminating Some Interesting Organizations
March 10, 2021
Cyprus, a fine island, can be baffling to first time visitors. Some of the confusion may be reduced if the information in “Cyprus to Life Veil of Secrecy with Register of Company Owners.” Some firms in the specialized services game have offices in Nicosia. Some are housed in what look like fancy villas or zippy apartment buildings. The listing of company owners is not available, but allegedly the list will become available in the near future. Why is this a big deal? Some bad actors use Cyprus as a headquarters and financial resource center. Why not part a super yacht and take care of business in above average anonymity. The list may be called the “Ultimate Beneficial Owner” register. Among the individuals concerned about this new sunlight are quite interesting individuals allied with certain powerful Eastern European leaders and “organizations.” Who is in charge of this project? Cyprus’s Ministry of Energy, Commerce, and Industry. Will that individual exercise some additional caution? We will know and maybe get a chance to learn about the UBO people. Maybe.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
