DarkCyber for May 15, 2018, Now Available
May 15, 2018
DarkCyber for May 15, 2018, is now available at www.arnoldit.com/wordpress and on Vimeo at https://vimeo.com/268758291
Stephen E Arnold’s DarkCyber is a weekly video news and analysis program about the Dark Web and lesser known Internet services.
The stories in the May 15, 2018, program are another Dark Web murder-for-hire scam goes wrong, the “Terror in the Dark” report provides information about how bad actors use the hidden Internet, a run-down of manufacturers of cell site simulators, a new map of the Dark Web, and the New Zealand teen ran a drug dealing business from his parents’ home.
Please, note that Stephen will be lecturing the week of June 4, 2018, at the Telestrategies ISS conference. He will produce and release a special report about on of our team’s research findings on June 5, 2018. Due to time zones, the go live date for the program may be different. We will announce schedule shifts in Beyond Search.
Kenny Toth, May 15, 2018
Law Enforcement and Big Data
May 11, 2018
The job of being an officer of the law has never been harder, but many on the tech side are trying to make it easier. But, as with most innovations, this might make life harder. Confused? Join the club. A recent spate of big data law enforcement innovations are due to become a hot button issue for the foreseeable future. The latest one came from a recent Boing Boing piece, “Raleigh Cops are Investigating Crime by Getting Google to Reveal the Identity of Every Mobile User Within Acres of the Scene.”
According to the story:
“Public records requests have revealed that on at least four occasions, the Raleigh-Durham police obtained warrants forcing Google to reveal the identities of every mobile user within acres of a crime scene, sweeping up the personal information of thousands of people in a quest to locate a single perp.”
Such a double edged sword. On one hand we all want wrongdoers to be handled in a lawful way, but on the other this is all getting too close to science fiction. Couple that with the recent news that smart devices like Alexa are listening to every conversation and may some day be used as evidence in court.
In Stephen E Arnold’s “Making Sense of Chat” presentation for the Telestrategies ISS conference in Prague in June 2018, he will highlight three commercial systems which can process large flows of data. He said:
The efficiencies of the new systems means that needed information can be identified and displayed to an investigator. Smart software, not a team of analysts, scans digital information, identifies content with a probability of being germane to a case, and presenting that data in an easy-to-understand report. The result is that the hand waving about invasive analysis of information is often different from the actual functioning of a modern system. Today’s newest systems deliver benefits that were simply not possible with older, often manual methods.
He plans to offer webinars on the chat topic as well as his deanonymizing blockchain lecture. Watch for details in Beyond Search and in his weekly DarkCyber video.
Patrick Roland, May 11, 2018
Policeware Lights Up Venture World
May 8, 2018
Spy agencies have has recently begun taking on a different look, that of a Silicon Valley startup. That’s because some of the world’s most secretive organizations have started to publicly proclaim that they are investing in digital spying tools. The most recent example popped up in a Jerusalem Times story, “Start-Up Spies? Mossad Enters the World of Venture Capitalism.”
The story focuses on the Israeli spy agency, Mossad, publicly starting a VC fund.
“In June, the fund was made public for the first time and previous announcements have indicated that it would invest NIS 10 million per year in five companies following a similar model to the CIA in this arena.
“The CIA’s parallel outfit is called Q-Tel, which is defined as the ‘strategic investor for the US intelligence and defense communities that identifies and adapts cutting-edge technologies.’”
This combination of entities, spy agencies and tech companies, might seem like a dream combination on the surface, but it is highly flawed. As the New York Times pointed out, being investors is not exactly what an organization like the CIA or Mossad is known for. Perhaps they have bright people handing the money in these organizations, but we wouldn’t count on it.
Patrick Roland, May 8, 2018
Metadata Collection Spike: Is There a Reason?
May 6, 2018
I read “NSA Triples Metadata Collection Numbers Sucking Up over 500 Million Call Records in 2017.” Interesting report, but it raised several questions here in Harrod’s Creek. But first, let’s look at the “angle” of the story.
I noted this statement:
The National Security Agency revealed a huge increase in the amount of call metadata collected, from about 151 million call records in 2016 to more than 530 million last year — despite having fewer targets.
The write up pointed out that penetration testing and trace and tap orders declined. That’s interesting as well.
The write up focused on what’s called “call detail records.” These, the write up explained, are:
things like which numbers were called and when, the duration of the call, and so on…
The write up then reminds the reader that “one target can yield hundreds or thousands of sub-targets.”
The article ends without any information about why. My impression of the write up is that the government agency is doing something that’s not quite square.
My initial reaction to the data in the write up was, “That does not seem like such a big number.” A crawl of the Dark Web, which is a pretty tiny digital space, often generates quite a bit of metadata. Stuffing the tiny bit of Dark Web data into a robust system operated by companies from Australia to the United States can produce terabytes of data. In fact, one Israeli company uploads new data in zipped block to its customers multiple times a day. The firm of which I am thinking performs this work for outfits engaged in marketing consumer products. In comparison, the NSA effort strikes me as modest.
My first question, “Why so little data?” Message, call, image, and video data are going up. The corresponding volume of metadata is going up. Toss in link analysis pointers, and that’s a lot of data. In short, the increase reported seems modest.
The second question is, “What factors contributed to the increase?” Based on our research, we think that some of the analytic systems are bogged down due to the wider use of message encryption technology. I will be describing one of these systems in my June 2018 Telestrategies ISS lecture related to encrypted chat. I wonder if the change in the volume reported in the write up is related to encryption.
My third question is, “Is government analysis of message content new or different?” Based on the information I have stumbled upon here in rural Kentucky, my thought is that message traffic analysis has been chugging along for decades. I heard an anecdote when I worked at a blue chip consulting firm. It went something like this:
In the days of telegrams, the telegraph companies put paper records in a bag, took them to the train station in Manhattan, and sent them to Washington, DC.
Is the anecdote true or false? My hunch is that it is mostly true.
My final question triggered by this article is, “Why does the government collect date?” I suppose the reasons are nosiness, but my perception is that the data are analyzed in order to get a sense of who is doing what which might harm the US financial system or the country itself.
My point is that numbers without context are often not helpful. In this case, the 2010 Pew Data reported that the average adult with a mobile makes five calls per day. Text message volume is higher. With 300 million people in the US in 2010 and assuming 30 percent mobile phone penetration, the number of calls eight years ago works out to about 1.5 billion calls. Flash forward to the present. The “number” cited in the article seems low.
Perhaps the author of the article could provide more context, do a bit of digging to figure out why the number is what it is, and explain why these data are needed in the first place.
One can criticize the US government. But I want to know a bit more.
Net net: It seems that the NSA is showing quite a bit of focus or restraint in its collection activities. In the May 16, DarkCyber, I report the names of some of the companies manufacturing cell site simulators. These gizmos are an interesting approach to data collection. Some of the devices seem robust. To me, capturing 500 million calls seems well within the specifications of these devices.
But what do I know? I can see the vapor from a mine drainage ditch from my back window. Ah, Kentucky.
Stephen E Arnold, May 6, 2018
Removing Drug Information from Social Media May Be Difficult
April 27, 2018
There is an opioid dealer nearby. In fact, this drug kingpin is not standing on the corner or lurking on college campuses, this supplier is right at your fingertips. Thanks to a recent article, the plague of drug sales through popular and public social media platforms has caught the attention of some powerful people. We learned about these developments in a recent Wired article, “One Woman Got Facebook to Police Opioid Sales on Instagram.”
While it’s a little confusing, the basic story goes that one woman who discovered opioid sales on Instagram (which is owned by Facebook) reached out to Facebook, urging them to take action, through a rival social platform, Twitter. The tactic worked, even getting the FDA involved.
According to the story:
“It shouldn’t take this much effort to get people to realize that you have some responsibility for the stuff on your platform…A 13 year old could do this search and realize there’s bad stuff on your platform — and probably has — you don’t need the commissioner of the FDA to tell you that.”
However, the act of policing drug sales on social media platforms and the dark web is not as easy as one might think. Yes, they shut down offending accounts, but beyond that there is little that can be done. According to the story, it outlawed certain hashtags, like it had done before. “Instagram previously restricted the drug-related hashtags, #Xanax and #Xanaxbar and banned #weedforsale and #weed4sale.”
It’s a small step, but hopefully one that will lead to greater and greater progress. For more information, learn more about CyberOSINT (the Dark Web) here.
Patrick Roland, April 27, 2018
Commercial Solutions for Government: A Path Forward
April 13, 2018
I often hear grumbling when I tell law enforcement and intelligence professionals to use commercial tools. Some LE and intel professionals are confident that open source tools like Maltego, a little midnight oil, and their in house technical staff can build a system better than commercial offerings. In my 50 year work career, that can happen. But it does not happen often. The 18f alternative to Squarespace is a good example of spending money for software which falls short of low cost, widely available commercial tools.
Cybercrime has become a serious hurdle for police. It seems that under-funded departments and agencies find that procurement cycles and technological advances by bad actors combine to make certain tasks difficult. We noted the PC Magazine story, “Feds Bust Black Market Forum Behind $530M in Cybercrimes.”
According to the article:
“The Department of Justice on Wednesday announced the indictments of 36 suspects allegedly responsible for the black market Infraud forum, which sold stolen credit card details, malware, and information that could be used for identity theft, including Social Security numbers.”
This is a win for cybercrime cops. Several of the American suspects have been arrested and several more international criminals are being extradited. However, we believe that only the private sector can adequately combat clever cybercrime. We recently heard about what seems to be a positive plan from Entrepreneur magazine.
Google’s new Chronicle cyber security company may offer LE a useful tool. The specialty for Chronicle is Zero Day Attacks, which are those sneaky cyber attacks that happen instantly—unlike ransomware, for example. This is just one small piece of a massive private sector puzzle that can help put cybercrime under control for good.
Combine the capabilities of Google with Recorded Future (a company in which Google has a stake), and the open source alternatives may come up short.
Patrick Roland, April 13, 2018
Yikes! Google Kiddie YouTube a Target
April 12, 2018
I thought Google and its kiddie YouTube had figured out how to show age appropriate videos to children. If the information in the story “Child Advocates Ask FTC to Investigate YouTube” is accurate, the GOOG may face some PR challenges. Nothing is quite as volatile as an online advertising site displaying videos which can be perceived as inappropriate. Because the write up is branded “AP” which once meant Associated Press, I am unwilling to quote from the write up. If my understanding of the assertions in the “news” story are accurate, I recall learning:
- “Child advocate groups” — no, I don’t know what outfits these are — want Google to be “investigated.”
- Google apparently profits from showing ads to children. (Who knew?)
- Google has an app but it is not too popular with parents. (I don’t know who does not use the app because the AP story did not tell me as I recall.)
- Google has channels aimed at children. One of these may be named ChuChuTV. (Nifty spelling of “choo”.)
- Advertisers can get access to children but if the child says, “Googzilla, I am not 13” some content is blocked. (If I were a child, I would probably figure out how to get access to the video about unicorn slime pretty quickly.)
Among the entities I recall seeing identified in the article are:
- Georgetown University law clinic
- Jeff Chester, The Center for Digital Democracy
- Josh Golin, Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood
- Senator Edward Markey
- Juliana Gruenwald Henderson, an FTC professional
- Kandi Parsons, once an FTC lawyer
What’s missing? Links, examples of bad videos, data about what percent of kiddie YouTube programming is objectionable, and similar factual data.
I don’t want to be suspicious, but regardless of filtering method, some content may be viewed as offensive because subjective perception is not what smart software does well at this point in time.
In March 2018 I was appointed to a Judicial Commission focused on human trafficking and child sex abuse. My hope is that the documents and data which flow to me do not include assertions without specific entities being identified or with constraints that make me fearful of quoting from these documents in my writings.
After 50 years of professional work, I am not easily surprised. Therefore, I am not surprised that online ad vendors similar to Google would focus on generating revenue. I am not surprised that videos vetted by smart software may make mistakes when “close enough for horseshoes” or “good enough” thresholds may be implemented for decision making. I am not surprised that individuals who spend time watching kiddie videos find content which is inappropriate.
Perhaps follow up stories from the “Associated Press” will beef up the details and facts about Google’s problems with kiddie YouTube. Quotes from folks are what “real” journalists do. Links, facts, and data are different from quotes. Make enough phone calls, and one can probably get a statement that fits the “real” news template.
Net net: I think more specifics would be helpful particularly if the goal is to find Google “guilty” of breaking a law, wrong doing, or some other egregious behavior. For now, however, the matter warrants monitoring. Accusations about topics like trafficking and child sex abuse and related issues are inflammatory. Quotes don’t cut it for me.
Stephen E Arnold, April 12, 2018
Now That Craigslist Censors Content Where Will That Info Go?
March 27, 2018
Short honk: I read in Newsweek (sorry, The Daily Beast) this story: “The New Law That Killed Craigslist’s Personals Could End the Web As We’ve Known It.” Like many write ups, the main point for The Daily Beast write up strikes me as:
Under current law, the site can’t be held legally liable if someone uses veiled terms to solicit commercial sex—aka prostitution—through the Craigslist personals. But FOSTA will change that, opening up Craigslist (and every other digital platform) to serious legal and financial jeopardy should it accidently “promote” or “facilitate” prostitution.
What happens when censorship forces some content producers to find other communication channels? The research for my “Dark Web Notebook” suggests that some content producers will shift to hidden services; for example, peer to peer, encrypted chat system. Others will turn to the information leaking Dark Web. And a few will become innovators, cooking up new communication confections to dodge authorities.
In my upcoming lecture for some lawyers at a well known government agency, I emphasize that the cyber enforcement task is going to become much more difficult and quickly.
There are some fixes, and if you want to talk about this options, write darkcyber333 at yandex dot com for more information. (Yes, I have a nifty video conferencing system and a PayPal account.)
Stephen E Arnold, March 27, 2018
Is the UK Approach to Security a Pathfinder?
March 4, 2018
The United States Government may face a dilemma. Citizens want the Internet to be safer and more accurate. However, the government wants those citizens to solve that problem themselves. The idea of government policing of the internet upsets a lot of folks. However, maybe there is a way to make everyone happy. The United Kingdom thinks it has the solution for government internet policing, as we learned from a recent GCN article, “How the UK Created Her Majesty’s Cyber Service.”
According to the story, one of the many elements of this plan, include:
“DMARC deployment in the public sector, which will make it more expensive or riskier for attackers to spoof messages that appear to come from the government. Getting all government domains to use Domain-Based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance will demonstrate that the technology can be implemented at scale.”
However, it’ll be worth watching how these good intentions play out. Vietnam recently attempted to employ a similar internet policing strategy. Instead of employing a Great Firewall like China, the nation attempted has tried to respond when issues arise…and that’s not good. The Vietnamese government is unable to respond fast enough and the Washington Post is wondering whether their internet could actually fail. Strange crossroads many are at and worth monitoring.
What may be instructive is the UK’s approach. The Guardian story “MI5 Agents Can Commit Crime in UK, Government Reveals” indicates that Britain is making “exceptions” in order to fight crime. Which threat is larger: Criminals or legal authorities?
Patrick Roland, March 4, 2018
Shiver Me Timbers! Is this the End of Pirate Bay?
March 1, 2018
Admit it! You, like millions of other people, have downloaded an illegal movie, music, book, or other media from Pirate Bay. Is it illegal? Yes. Are you going to be charged? Probably not. Downloading illegal movies, music, books, and other media is not law enforcement’s top priority because they are more preoccupied with more dangerous crimes. Online piracy has been dealt a serious blow and torrent sites like Pirate Bay may sink into the Internet’s briny deep. Read the details in Express’ article, “End Of Pirate Bay? Torrent Sites Left Fearing 2018 Will ‘Kill’ Off Online Piracy.”
Pirate Bay has haunted the Internet ocean for over fifteen years and is a reliable staple for downloading the illegal content of all kind. Law enforcement has tried to sink Pirate Bay and other torrent sites for years, but when one Web site is destroyed another pops up in its place. A non-law enforcement entity will deal a blow to torrent sites: Google. In 2018, Google will launch its new Chrome browser that features an ad-blocker. The ad-blocker automatically blocks autoplay videos and other annoying pop-ups. Why is this bad for torrent sites?
Torrent websites rely on the revenue they bring in from advertising, and the Chrome ad blocker has left some fearing if they’ll be able to carry on. The owner of one torrent site, who did not want to be named, previously told TorrentFreak that the ad blocker could signal the end of torrents. They said: ‘The torrent site economy is in a bad state. Profits are very low. Profits are f***** compared to previous years. Chrome’s ad-blocker will kill torrent sites. If they don’t at least cover their costs, no one is going to use money out of his pocket to keep them alive. I won’t be able to do so at least.’
Law enforcement agencies and governments have tried to halt online piracy for years. As they have wised up to how torrent Web sites skirt the authorities and laws have changed to ensure takedowns, online piracy may be near its end.
Torrent Websites are nearly as old as the Internet. It is hard to imagine the Internet without the more discoverable illicit activities compared to the Dark Web. While Google Chrome and its ad-blocker may be the end for this generation of online piracy, give China, Russia, the Middle East, and Eastern European countries a few months. They will come up with something and it will probably be on the Dark Web.
Whitney Grace, March 1, 2018
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
