Tuesday, March 18, 2014

The U.S. Gives Up Its Control of the Free-Speech Internet (BusinessWeek)


Type the domain name Businessweek.com into a browser, and  you reach servers run by Bloomberg Businessweek. This happens whether you’re sitting in Chennai, India, or Kittery, Maine—your computer has consulted a nearby copy of a single, universal list of which names get you to which servers. This largely invisible process is called the Internet’s domain name system, or DNS. It is so important that the guy who first controlled it, Jon Postel of the University of California at Los Angeles, earned the nickname “God.”
God died in 1998, and now the Internet Corp. for Assigned Names and Numbersmanages the domain name system. Icann is a nonprofit with a complex, international governance structure of what it calls “stakeholders,” a group that includes governments, corporations, and civil society activists. But it has operated, ultimately, under a contract from the U.S. Department of Commerce. Although it never exercised this right or even threatened to do so, the U.S. could always still render a website nameless, making it hard to find—essentially kicking it off the Internet.
On Friday, the Department of Commerce announced that next year it would relinquish its last bit of control over domain names. The system will be replaced by a model of global Internet governance as yet to be determined by Icann. All those stakeholders are on their own now. “The Internet technical community is strong enough to continue its role,” said Icann, “while assuming the stewardship function as it transitions from the US Government.” In protesting that it is strong enough, Icann is revealing that it may not be.
Several times in the last decade, a group of countries has urged that control of domain names be transferred to the United Nations. All you need to know about this movement is that it is led by China and Russia. In the very dull, very important meetings of the International Telecommunications Union, speeches by these countries feature the word “sovereignty.”
The only stakeholders that matter, they are saying, are countries. Right now, China can prevent users inside its borders from viewing a website that promotes Tibetan separatism. But it can’t prevent that website from registering a domain name. It would very much like to, under the argument that the site threatens China’s domestic sovereignty.
This is the advantage of the current, Jon Postel, God-like, single-domain-name system. No country (other than the U.S.) gets to decide what idea deserves a Web address, and while U.S. policies and practices in other cyber realms have been less than stellar, it has been an outstanding protector of free speech on the Internet. Power can exist even when it isn’t exercised or even visible. The Commerce Department has ensured the growth of a lively, commercial, obstreperous Internet in the same way the European Union thrived, in part, under the protective umbrella of all those American tanks waiting to roll into the Fulda Gap.
It’s a bad sign that the U.S. has chosen to give up this power. It means that the administration doesn’t feel that it can get away with holding on to it, diplomatically, which means that on this issue, we no longer enjoy the support of countries such as Germany. Perhaps it was that time we tapped Angela Merkel’s cell phone.
There will be no immediate consequences after the handover next year. Over the short-term, Web addresses will continue to go where they already go. China and Russia have too much invested in the international, commercial Internet to just go their own sovereign ways. But they have already shown their ability to shape the stakeholder process: Even with U.S. control, Icann has had to bow to some of stakeholder demands of sovereign countries. If you want a domain name in Cyrillic, for example, you have to go through one of several countries that use the Cyrillic script. Not too hard for Russia to exercise either sovereignty or diplomatic muscle to prevent Russian speakers from easily finding undesired domains.
But broadly, Icann under its Commerce Department contract did an admirable job of managing a tough, dreary task. It had to work to keep everyone using the same domain name system, which meant it could never be too aggressive with any single country in public. It was always nice to have the U.S. standing in the background as silent muscle. Now that muscle has packed up and gone home. The Internet won’t end next year. But it will start to change.

Monday, March 17, 2014

Missed Alarms and 40 Million Stolen Credit Card Numbers: How Target Blew It (BusinessWeek)


Missed Alarms and 40 Million Stolen Credit Card Numbers: How Target Blew It
Lessons of Experience:
The biggest retail hack in U.S. history wasn’t particularly inventive, nor did it appear destined for success. In the days prior to Thanksgiving 2013, someone installed malware in Target’s (TGT) security and payments system designed to steal every credit card used at the company’s 1,797 U.S. stores. At the critical moment—when the Christmas gifts had been scanned and bagged and the cashier asked for a swipe—the malware would step in, capture the shopper’s credit card number, and store it on a Target server commandeered by the hackers.
Behind this week’s cover
Behind this week’s cover
It’s a measure of how common these crimes have become, and how conventional the hackers’ approach in this case, that Target was prepared for such an attack. Six months earlier the company began installing a $1.6 million malware detection tool made by the computer security firm FireEye (FEYE), whose customers also include the CIA and the Pentagon. Target had a team of security specialists in Bangalore to monitor its computers around the clock. If Bangalore noticed anything suspicious, Target’s security operations center in Minneapolis would be notified.

On Saturday, Nov. 30, the hackers had set their traps and had just one thing to do before starting the attack: plan the data’s escape route. As they uploaded exfiltration malware to move stolen credit card numbers—first to staging points spread around the U.S. to cover their tracks, then into their computers in Russia—FireEye spotted them. Bangalore got an alert and flagged the security team in Minneapolis. And then …
 
Nothing happened.

For some reason, Minneapolis didn’t react to the sirens. Bloomberg Businessweekspoke to more than 10 former Target employees familiar with the company’s data security operation, as well as eight people with specific knowledge of the hack and its aftermath, including former employees, security researchers, and law enforcement officials. The story they tell is of an alert system, installed to protect the bond between retailer and customer, that worked beautifully. But then, Target stood by as 40 million credit card numbers—and 70 million addresses, phone numbers, and other pieces of personal information—gushed out of its mainframes.
When asked to respond to a list of specific questions about the incident and the company’s lack of an immediate response to it, Target Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer Gregg Steinhafel issued an e-mailed statement: “Target was certified as meeting the standard for the payment card industry (PCI) in September 2013. Nonetheless, we suffered a data breach. As a result, we are conducting an end-to-end review of our people, processes and technology to understand our opportunities to improve data security and are committed to learning from this experience. While we are still in the midst of an ongoing investigation, we have already taken significant steps, including beginning the overhaul of our information security structure and the acceleration of our transition to chip-enabled cards. However, as the investigation is not complete, we don’t believe it’s constructive to engage in speculation without the benefit of the final analysis.”
More than 90 lawsuits have been filed against Target by customers and banks for negligence and compensatory damages. That’s on top of other costs, which analysts estimate could run into the billions. Target spent $61 million through Feb. 1 responding to the breach, according to its fourth-quarter report to investors. It set up a customer response operation, and in an effort to regain lost trust, Steinhafel promised that consumers won’t have to pay any fraudulent charges stemming from the breach. Target’s profit for the holiday shopping period fell 46 percent from the same quarter the year before; the number of transactions suffered its biggest decline since the retailer began reporting the statistic in 2008.
In testimony before Congress, Target has said that it was only after the U.S. Department of Justice notified the retailer about the breach in mid-December that company investigators went back to figure out what happened. What it hasn’t publicly revealed: Poring over computer logs, Target found FireEye’s alerts from Nov. 30 and more from Dec. 2, when hackers installed yet another version of the malware. Not only should those alarms have been impossible to miss, they went off early enough that the hackers hadn’t begun transmitting the stolen card data out of Target’s network. Had the company’s security team responded when it was supposed to, the theft that has since engulfed Target, touched as many as one in three American consumers, and led to an international manhunt for the hackers never would have happened at all.  The heart of Target’s antihacking operation is cloistered in a corner room on the sixth floor of a building in downtown Minneapolis. There are no internal-facing windows, just a locked door. Visitors ring a bell, then wait for a visual scan before being buzzed in. 
If you’ve seen one security operations center, or SOC, you’ve essentially seen them all. Inside, analysts sit in front of rows of screens that monitor Target’s billion-dollar IT infrastructure. Government agencies often build their own SOCs, as do big banks, defense contractors, tech companies, wireless carriers, and other corporations with centralized stockpiles of high-value information. Retailers, however, tend not to. Most still focus on their primary mission, selling stuff—in part because their sprawling networks of stores and e-tailing entry points are difficult to lock down against incursions. A three-year study by Verizon Enterprise Solutions(VZ) found that companies discover breaches through their own monitoring in only 31 percent of cases. For retailers, it’s 5 percent. They’re the wildebeests of the digital savannah. Target was striving to be different. Company officials say its information security staff now numbers more than 300 people—a tenfold increase since 2006, says one of the chain’s former information security managers. Less than a year before the Thanksgiving attack, Target brought in FireEye, a security software company in Milpitas, Calif., that was initially funded by the CIA and is used by intelligence agencies around the world.

Friday, March 14, 2014

Rebaja de Precios ...de Google Drive (ZDNet)

Google Drive storage prices slashed; now starts at $1.99 for 100GB

Summary: The freebie option will stay put at 15GB of complimentary cloud storage space.
By  for Between the Lines |
zdnet-google-drive_blog_pricing2
Rent. Airfare. The average gallon of milk. These prices all tend to go up on average.
That's not the case in the cloud business.
Amazon Web Services is already famous for routine nips and tucks around its cloud services portfolio, and Google Drive is no different.
The Mountain View, Calif.-based company announced on Thursday that it would be slashing Drive pricing, effective immediately.
Scott Johnston, a director of product management at Google, noted in a blog post that these price reductions were made possible thanks to new infrastructure improvements behind-the-scenes.
Here's a look at the new model:
  • $1.99 for 100 gigabytes (previously $4.99)
  • $9.99 for one terabyte (previously $49.99)
  • $99.99 for 10 terabytes and higher
The freebie option will stay put at 15 gigabytes of complimentary cloud storage space -- an attractive option compared to 10 gigabytes offered by Box and just two gigabytes offered by Dropbox.
To put these allotments into a perspective the average Internet user can understand, Johnston quipped that a terabyte alone would be "enough storage for you to take a selfie twice a day for the next 200 years and still have room left over for… shall we say… less important things."
The Google Apps team has been busy this week.
On Monday, the cloud-based suite of software introduced a new referral program rewarding $15 bonus per new user subscription. The program suggests a new strategy in taking on Microsoft Office 365.
More recently, Google Drive also launched a new online marketplaces dedicated to add-ons, introducing new editing and formatting functionality when producing documents or spreadsheets.
The program is still in developer preview mode, but it is gearing up to launch with more than 50 add-ons in tow, all built by partners using Google Apps Script.
Rachel King is a staff writer for ZDNet based in San Francisco.

Thursday, March 13, 2014

Top 5: Best countries to host your website for data privacy (Nomad Capitalist)

 Reliability issues are totally different from privacy issues. This is the goal of this article (Ed)
by  |           
This site is about the idea of thinking beyond borders and challenging pre-conceived notions. When it comes to data privacy and the best countries to host your website, you have to think outside of the box. That means that a country that has high taxes and a high cost of living may be valuable for other reasons, such as protecting your data privacy.
While the United States has most of the world’s top web hosting companies, those companies are subject to increasingly draconian anti-privacy laws. (The US also hosts more malware than any other country by a factor of three). Just as the US government has helped themselves to offshore .com domain names, hosting your website within US borders could pose a serious risk to your data privacy, especially if you publish things the US government doesn’t like.
While the best countries to host your website may vary based on what country you’re based in, here are some of the countries with the strongest data privacy laws for websites and the press. They just so happen to be some of the most scenic countries in the world… in case you ever want to pay your server a visit.

Top 5 Best countries to host your website for data privacy

Romania data privacy laws
Romania: The Eastern European country is an emerging destination for web talent and hosting, and also benefits from European attitudes toward data privacy.
5. Romania
Romania has some of the fastest internet speeds in the world, and is an emerging destination for hiring a virtual assistant for internet work. But Romania’s position in less-regulated eastern Europe gives it an advantage not only in its central location close to Europe and Asia, but also with its personal and data privacy laws. Unlike The Land of the Free, which cloaks its privacy-killing measures in patriotism, Romania has established agencies such as The National Supervisory Authority For Personal Data. Freedom of the Press in Romania is approaching that of the US, as well.
Switzerland data privacy
Switzerland: Websites hosted in the central European country jumped after PRISM was unveiled. Despite its banking debacles, Switzerland has high standards of privacy.

4. Switzerland
After the Edward Snowden incident, web hosting company Hostpoint reported a 45% increase in customers. Now, telecom company Swisscom is building a Swiss-based cloud for data privacy. While the US government covertly gathers internet user data using FISA and the Patriot Act, Switzerland requires a formal request to be filed by prosecutors to get internet data. Switzerland’s Federal Act on Data Protection attempts to maintain one of the highest data privacy standards in the world.
Netherlands data privacy
The Netherlands: a top country for data privacy, and one of the best countries to host a website
3. Netherlands
Score one for freedom: the Dutch government recently accused Google of violating data privacy laws. While the US government is encouraging such anti-privacy measures, the Netherlands has EU privacy laws as well as its own provisions to provide websites with excellent privacy. It’s no surprise, considering the Netherlands is ranked second in Freedom of the Press, behind only Finland. There are actual examples of how Dutch web hosting companies forced the government to provide them legal paperwork for taking a site down, and the government backed off. Of course, the Netherlands’ location in Europe makes it an excellent choice for pure geographic reasons, but one of the highest privacy standards in Europe doesn’t hurt, either.
Norway internet data privacy laws
Norway: Data privacy laws are strong throughout much of the Nordic region, but most so in Norway, which also boasts a high ranking on the Freedom of the Press Index

2. Norway
While Sweden web hosting company Banhhof reportedly hosts Wikileaks, Norway surpasses Sweden in data privacy and freedom of the press rankings. Despite sharing many of the European values of data privacy, Norway is not a member of the EU, which means it has been free to craft its own privacy laws free from Eurozone interference. Web hosts in Norway, called “webhotell”, are a bit more expensive but offer greater protections than a US web host. Cloud storage services like Runbox operate from Norway, and Jottabox brags how its pure Norwegian ownership allows it to protect its clients’ data from US law in a way that US companies operating European data centers can’t. This assertion is based on the need for foreign governments to get permission from a Norwegian court to access private data.
Iceland is a best data privacy company
Iceland: According to our findings are the opinions of webmasters around the world, it is the best country to host your website
1. Iceland
Despite its economic issues following the Global Financial Crisis, Iceland is well-known for its strict data privacy laws. In addition to its excellent connectivity to both Europe and North America, Iceland’s Data Protection Act in 2000 took great measures to ensure the government of all of 300,000 people followed strict protocol to protect privacy. While Iceland has adopted the Eurozone’s privacy regulations – which are undoubtedly better than those in the United States, it has gone a step further and gotten rid of more stringent requirements to maintain data. Encrypted communication services like Unseen.is operate from Iceland. And Kim Dotcom recently announced that he would move to encrypted Mega file service to Iceland if New Zealand passed anti-privacy laws.



Andrew Henderson

Expat entrepreneur. Perpetual traveler. Citizen of the world. Andrew visits over a dozen new countries  each year in search of more freedom and better opportunities. His tips show how you can make money and take back your liberty beyond your own borders.