UN HUMAN RIGHTS CHIEF WARNS OF IMPLICATIONS OF APPLE

The U.N. human rights chief says U.S. authorities “risk unlocking a Pandora’s Box” in their efforts to force Apple to create software to crack the security features on its phones, and is urging them to proceed with caution. Zeid Raad al-Hussein warned in a statement about the potential for “extremely damaging implications” on human rights, journalists, whistle-blowers, political dissidents and others. He said the case is “potentially a gift to authoritarian regimes” and criminal hackers. Through the courts, the FBI is trying to force Apple to help crack an encrypted iPhone used by a gunman behind a December shooting spree in San Bernardino, California, that killed 14 people. Zeid said the case centers on where the “key red line” should be set to protect people “from criminals and repression.”

DOES AN EXTREMIST’S iPHONE CONTAIN A “CYBER PATHOGEN”?

A local prosecutor has o ered an unusual justi cation for forcing Apple to help hack an iPhone used by a San Bernardino mass killer: The phone might have been “used as a weapon” to introduce malicious software to county computer systems. San Bernardino County District Attorney Michael Ramos acknowledged to The Associated Press that there’s no evidence of malicious software in the county’s computer network. But he added, “I wouldn’t call it a total hypothetical.”  Computer security experts say the prospect is unlikely. By late Friday (04), the prosecutor’s claim had sparked a wave of social media postings, many of which mocked the DA’s use of the non-technical term “cyber pathogen” to describe the supposed malware. Apple has resisted calls to help unlock the phone, arguing that building a software tool to override the phone’s security features would render other iPhones vulnerable to criminals and government authorities around the world. Investigators, meanwhile, are eager to see if the phone used by shooter Syed Farook - one issued by Farook’s employer, the county health department - contains any useful information about other suspects. 

But the idea that Farook might have used the phone to transmit a “lying-dormant cyber pathogen” into county data systems is a new one. Ramos’ o face, however, cited it in a court ling Thursday among several other reasons to support the government’s position. “This was a county employee that murdered 14 people and injured 22,” Ramos said. “Did he use the county’s infrastructure? Did he hack into that infrastructure? I don’t know. In order for me to really put that issue to rest, there is one piece of evidence that would absolutely let us know that, and that would be the iPhone.” The argument drew condemnation from one software expert who has signed a brief in support of Apple’s position. “Ramos’s statements are not only misleading to the court, but amount to blatant fear mongering,” independent software researcher Jonathan Zdziarski wrote in a post on his personal blog. Other security experts who haven’t taken sides also discounted the scenario. “It’s de nitely possible, technically, but it doesn’t seem to me at rst glance to be likely,” said David Meltzer, a computer security expert and chief research o cer at Tripwire, a commercial IT security rm. He said Apple’s iPhone operating system is a relatively closed environment that’s designed so users can’t easily introduce their own programs. Ramos, meanwhile, said he’d heard about social media posts that mocked the term “cyber pathogen,” which is not generally used by tech experts. “When they do that,” he said, “they’re mocking the victims of this crime, of this horrible terrorist attack.”

US APPEALS RULING ON ACCESSING DATA IN NEW YORK iPHONE CASE

Calling a York judge’s ruling “an unprecedented limitation” on judicial authority, the Justice Department has asked a Brooklyn federal court to reverse a decision that said Apple Inc. wasn’t required to pry open a locked iPhone. The government’s 45-page brief comes a week after U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein issued his decision in a routine drug case, dealing a blow to the Obama administration in its battle with the tech giant over privacy and public safety. Lawyers for the Justice Department called their Monday request routine, arguing that the case is not about asking Apple to do anything new, or to create a “master key” to access all iPhones. Apple has opposed the government’s move in a separate case involving the shooter who killed 14 people Dec. 2 in San Bernardino, California. Apples  pushback has fueled a national debate over digital privacy rights and national security. Apple had previously assailed the government’s move, saying U.S. officials were seeking “dangerous power” through the courts and trampling on the company’s constitutional rights. The Brooklyn case involves a government request that is less onerous for Apple and its phone technology. The so-called extraction technique works on an older iPhone operating system and has been used dozens of times before to assist investigators. The California and New York cases both hinge on the government’s interpretation of the centuries-old All Writs Act. The new cases present another challenge for federal courts, which have to sort out how a law that is used to help government investigators square privacy and encryption in the digital age. The government asserted in court papers Monday that Orenstein’s ruling in New York is “an unprecedented limitation on” judicial authority and that his legal “analysis goes far a eld of the circumstances of this case.” It also stated that the government “does not have any adequate alternatives” to obtaining Apple’s assistance because attempting to guess the passcode would trigger the phone’s auto-erase security feature. Federal prosecutors cited several examples in which Apple has extracted data from a locked device under the law, including a child exploitation case in New York, a narcotics case in Florida and another exploitation case in Washington state.

Apple responded Monday: “Judge Orenstein ruled the FBI’s request would ‘thoroughly undermine fundamental principles of the Constitution’ and we agree. We share the judge’s concern that misuse of the All Writs Act would start us down a slippery slope that threatens everyone’s safety and privacy.” In October, Orenstein invited Apple to challenge the government’s use of the 1789 law that compelled the company to help the government obtain iPhone data in criminal cases. Since then, lawyers say Apple has opposed requests to help extract information from over a dozen iPhones in California, Illinois, Massachusetts and New York. In the California case, officials are looking for access to the phone used by Syed Farook but owned by San Bernardino County, where he was a health inspector. Federal investigators say the attack by Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, was at least partly inspired by the Islamic State group. The couple died later in a gun battle with police.  FBI Director James Comey told a House judiciary panel last week that the government was “asking Apple to take the vicious guard dog away and let us pick the lock” on the iPhone. Should Apple create the specialized software to allow the FBI to hack the iPhone in California, Comey said it would take 26 minutes to do what’s known as a brute force attack - testing multiple passcodes in quick, computational succession. Apple has said that being forced to extract information from an iPhone, no matter the circumstance, “could threaten the trust between Apple and its customers and substantially tarnish the Apple brand.”

BMW SHOWS OFF CONCEPT CAR FOR THE SELF- DRIVING FUTURE

 

Luxury automaker BMW AG is showing o a sleek concept car aimed at a future in which drivers choose between the pleasures of high-performance driving and letting the car take control. The company unveiled the Vision Next 100 at ceremonies Monday for the company’s 100th birthday at Munich’s Olympic Hall. The car offers a choice of driver-controlled or vehicle-controlled operations. In driver mode, the car indicates the ideal driving line and speed; in “ease” or autonomous mode,  the steering wheel retracts and the driver and front- seat passenger can turn to face each other.

Concept cars suggest what future production models might look like Auto executives said last week at the Geneva International Motor Show that some elements of autonomous driving could begin being introduced around the end of this decade. 

 

VERIZON TO PAY $ 1.4M IN 'SUPERCOOKIE' FCC SETTLEMENT

Verizon will pay a $1.35 million fine over its “supercookie” that the government said followed phone customers on the Internet without their permission. Verizon will also have to get an explicit “yes” from customers for some kinds of tracking. The supercookies landed their name because they were hard, or near-impossible, to block. Verizon uses them to deliver targeted ads to cellphone customers. The company wants to expand its advertising and media business and bought AOL for its digital ad technology in 2015. The Federal Communications Commission said Monday that it found that Verizon began using the supercookies with consumers in December 2012, but didn’t disclose the program until October 2014. Verizon updated its privacy policy to disclose the trackers in March 2015 and gave people an option then to opt out. The FCC settlement says consumers now must opt in to letting Verizon share data with a third party. But for data-collection and sharing within Verizon itself, the company can choose to have customers either opt in or automatically do it and give consumers the option to stop it, a less stringent requirement.

The New York company has already changed some practices that critics considered most invasive. In an emailed statement, the company said that the FCC  settlement recognizes that it had already made adjustments to its ad programs that give consumers more choices. Nate Cardozo, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a privacy watchdog that had been critical of the supercookies, said the settlement was an “unqualified win” for consumers. “Today’s order will mean that other companies contemplating similar involuntary tracking will think twice before proceeding without explicit consumer consent,” he wrote in an email.

RUBICON PROJECT CARVES OUT PROFITABLE NICHE IN DIGITAL ADS

You may not be familiar with the Rubicon Project, but chances are its technology helped pick some of the ads you might have seen on your phone or personal computer. Rubicon serves as a matchmaker between digital publishers trying to sell ads and marketers looking for the best place to promote their products and services. The Los Angeles company, though small, has been increasing its influence in the $170 billion digital advertising market. More than 1,500 publishers and tens of thousands of advertisers rely on Rubicon to figure out which marketing messages are best suited to the different audiences that gravitate toward certain websites and apps. The company says it processes 7 trillion requests per month using about 60,000 different algorithms. Last year, Rubicon managed more than $1 billion in ad spending. That’s a paltry amount compared to market leaders Google and Facebook, which last year sold a combined $87 billion in advertising. But its exchange for mobile ads ranks as the third largest behind those of Google and Twitter. The 8-year-old company recently posted its rst full-year pro t, helping to lift its stock back above its April 2014 initial public offering price of $15. The shares ended recently were trading between $17 and $18. Gregory Raifman, Rubicon’s president, recently discussed the state of the digital ad market with The Associated Press. The interview has been edited for clarity and length. Q: Rubicon Project’s revenue nearly doubled last year to $248.5 million. What is driving that? A: We provide a comprehensive solution for buyers and sellers. Google and Facebook operate in their own walled gardens. We are the only one that operates in an open Web environment. We are now reaching well over 1 billion users. So if you are an advertiser that wants to reach an audience at scale across mobile, desktop and video, then you have to be working with Rubicon Project. 

Q:How are you able to figure out which ads are most likely to appeal to specific audiences?

A: The biggest brands in the world have data about what their consumers want. Publishers have other data on why users come to their site. Our job is to match the data of the buyer with the data of the seller in a way that creates the best environment at the best price.

Q: We are seeing more ways to block digital ads from appearing on screens. How does that a ect Rubicon?

A: From our perspective, ad blocking is an opportunity. Good advertising follows good content. If you are working with really good content providers, you are typically going to find better and better advertising. Consumers will typically react well to quality advertising. They will react poorly to low-end advertising.

Q: Any thoughts on where the industry is heading?

A: There are not that many that can say their industry is growing as quickly as ours. We feel like Rubicon Project is playing a central role. I often joke that this industry changes so rapidly that in three years you could build a whole new company out of your existing company. 

CHINA LOOKS TO RUMP UP INTERNET GROWTH, AND ITS CONTROLS

China's government has highlighted big data, encryption technology and “core technologies” such as semiconductors as the key elements of its push to grow into a tech powerhouse, according to a new five-year plan released Saturday that envisages the Internet as a major source of growth as well as a potential risk. Even as it highlighted the need to improve Internet infrastructure to rural areas and unlock the digital economy’s potential, Chinese economic planners called for a more secure and better managed Web, with enhanced Internet control systems, Internet security laws and real- name registration policies. Chinese officials including Internet czar Lu Wei have played down concerns over what critics have described as China’s expanding Web censorship, saying that it is the Chinese government’s sovereign prerogative and a necessary measure to maintain domestic order. China’s development plan calls for a better cybersecurity approval system and more “precise” Web management to “clean up illegal and bad information.” The plan also calls for a multilateral, democratic, transparent and international governance system and active participation in international Internet governance efforts. Premier Li Keqiang highlighted the promise of the Internet, saying Saturday that various traditional sectors, ranging from manufacturing to government to health care, need to connect to the Web and raise their e ciency as part of an overarching national strategy called “Internet Plus.” He vowed to raise research and technology spending to account for 2.5 percent of gross domestic product in the five years through 2020, which he said would mark a “remarkable achievement.” The five-year plan calls for all families in large cities to have access to 100 megabyte- per-second Internet service and broadband coverage reaching 98 percent of the population in incorporated villages. At the same time, Chinese leaders, wary of over- relying on foreign technology, will seek to boost China’s homegrown industry and cut down on imports - a strategy that has drawn complaints from trade partners like the United States.  Similar to previous years, when Chinese leaders highlighted industries such as e-commerce as a growth focus, the new draft of China’s development plan specifically elevated big data and cloud computing, relatively new and promising fields that Chinese industry experts view as not yet cornered by U.S. companies that dominate other parts of the technology market. The plan also calls for China to catch up on “core” technologies such as semiconductors and basic computer parts and software, as well as encryption technology. China’s campaign to beef up its chip technology has encountered political resistance from the United States. China’s national chip champion, Tsinghua Unigroup, said last month that it would abandon its attempt to acquire a stake in California data storage rm Western Digital, the second deal it has scrapped because of opposition from U.S. regulators who do not want sensitive technology to fall into Chinese hands.