The Linkielist

Linking ideas with the world

The Linkielist

Daily Archives: November 10, 2020

EU Takes Another Small Step Towards Trying To Ban Encryption; New Paper Argues Tech Can Backdoor Encryption Safely. It can’t.

Posted on by

In September, we noted that officials in the EU were continuing an effort to try to ban end-to-end encryption. Of course, that’s not how they put it. They say they just want “lawful access” to encrypted content, not recognizing that any such backdoor effectively obliterates the protections of end-to-end encryption. A new “Draft Council Resolution on Encryption” has come out as the EU Council of Ministers continues to drift dangerously towards this ridiculous position.

We’ve seen documents like this before. It starts out with a preamble insisting that they’re not really trying to undermine encryption, even though they absolutely are.

The European Union fully supports the development, implementation and use of strong encryption. Encryption is a necessary means of protecting fundamental rights and the digital security of governments, industry and society. At the same time, the European Union needs to ensure the ability of competent authorities in the area of security and criminal justice, e.g. law enforcement and judicial authorities, to exercise their lawful powers, both online and offline.

Uh huh. That’s basically we fully support you having privacy in your own home, except when we need to spy on you at a moment’s notice. It’s not so comforting when put that way, but it’s what they’re saying.

[…]

This is the same old garbage we’ve seen before. Technologically illiterate bureaucrats who have no clue at all, insisting that if they just “work together” with the tech industry, some magic golden key will be found. This is not how any of this works. Introducing a backdoor into encryption is introducing a massive, dangerous vulnerability

[…]

Attacking end-to-end encryption in order to deal with the miniscule number of situations where law enforcement is stymied by encryption would, in actuality, put everyone at massive risk of having their data accessed by malicious parties.

[…]

Source: EU Takes Another Small Step Towards Trying To Ban Encryption; New Paper Argues Tech Can Nerd Harder To Backdoor Encryption | Techdirt

Introducing a backdoor is introducing a vulnerability – one that anyone can exploit. The good guys, the bad guys and the idiots. There is a long and varied history of exploited backdoors in all kinds of very important stuff (eg the clipper chip, the encryption hardware sold to governments, mobile phone networks, even kids smartwatches, switches, and they’ve all been misused by malicious actors.

Here is a long but not conclusive list

European Commission charges Amazon over misuse of seller data to make copy cat products

Posted on by

The European Union is serving formal antitrust charges to Amazon, saying that the retailer has misused its position to compete against third-party businesses using its platform. Officials, led by competition chief Margrethe Vestager, believe there is enough evidence to charge the company for this misuse. This data, so the claim goes, was used by Amazon to build copycat products to undercut these independent businesses, especially in large markets like France and Germany.

At the same time, regulators have opened a second investigation into favorable treatment around the “Buy Box” and the “Prime Label.” Officials suspect that independent sellers that use Amazon’s own logistics network are able to use features that those with their own logistics networks do not. Vestager said that they want those independents to be able to “compete on the merits” rather than on any sort of lock-in.

Amazon, very broadly, is a retailer itself, but it’s also a retail platform that lets third parties sell their wares side by side with Amazon’s own. These independent, unaffiliated companies can even piggyback on Amazon’s vast logistics and warehousing network. But there’s a catch: If a small seller makes a surprisingly popular product, Amazon can see that sales data on its own system. There could be the temptation for Amazon to make a similar product and direct sales toward itself.

This isn’t a hypothetical, and The Wall Street Journal published a report in April claiming the company was doing this very thing. Former employees have claimed that Amazon can not only identify hot trends but also use that data to price their own products competitively. In one example, the makers of a popular car trunk organizer found that, a while after, Amazon launched a very similar product as part of its private label offering.

Now, Amazon has said that using third-party seller data in this manner is against its own policies and affirmed that position in Congress. Amazon has also said that the practice of producing “private label” goods is used by every major retailer, and isn’t a threat to the independent brands they sell. But regulators in both the US and Europe aren’t satisfied with that answer and are pushing for more information. In July 2019, the EU opened a formal investigation to see if what Amazon was doing violated local competition rules, with today’s charges the result of that procedure.

[…]

 

Source: European Commission charges Amazon over misuse of seller data | Engadget

I have been talking about this since early 2019, it’s good to see action on this!

Analysis of Trump’s tweets reveals systematic diversion of the media

Posted on by

President Donald Trump’s controversial use of social media is widely known and theories abound about its ulterior motives. New research published today in Nature Communications claims to provide the first evidence-based analysis demonstrating the US President’s Twitter account has been routinely deployed to divert attention away from a topic potentially harmful to his reputation, in turn suppressing negative related media coverage.

The international study, led by the University of Bristol in the UK, tested two hypotheses: whether an increase in harmful media coverage was followed by increased diversionary Twitter activity, and if such diversion successfully reduced subsequent media coverage of the harmful topic.

[…]

The study focused on Trump’s first two years in office, scrutinising the Robert Mueller investigation into potential collusion with Russia in the 2016 Presidential Election, as this was politically harmful to the President. The team analysed content relating to Russia and the Mueller investigation in two of the country’s most politically neutral media outlets, New York Times (NYT) and ABC World News Tonight (ABC). The team also selected a set of keywords judged to play to Trump’s preferred topics at the time, which were hypothesized to be likely to appear in diversionary tweets. The keywords related to “jobs”, “China”, and “immigration”; topics representing the president’s supposed political strengths.

The researchers hypothesized that the more ABC and NYT reported on the Mueller investigation, the more Trump’s tweets would mention jobs, China, and immigration, which in turn would result in less coverage of the Mueller investigation by ABC and NYT.

In support of their hypotheses, the team found that every five additional ABC headlines relating to the Mueller investigation was associated with one more mention of a keyword in Trump’s tweets. In turn, two additional mentions of one of the keywords in a Trump was associated with roughly one less mention of the Mueller investigation in the following day’s NYT.

Such a pattern did not emerge with placebo topics that presented no threat to the President, for instance Brexit or other non-political issues such as football or gardening.

[…]

Professor Lewandowsky said: “It’s unclear whether President Trump, or whoever is at the helm of his Twitter account, engages in such tactics intentionally or if it’s mere intuition. Either way, we hope these results serve as a helpful reminder to the that they have the power to set the news agenda, focusing on the topics they deem most important, while perhaps not paying so much attention to the Twitter-sphere.”

Source: Analysis of Trump’s tweets reveals systematic diversion of the media