Tumblr Goes Radio Silent On Net Neutrality After Verizon Acquisition

Back when Verizon first began expressing interest in pivoting from broadband duopolist to media and advertising, you might recall that it launched a short-lived technology blog named Sugarstring. Sugarstring quickly made headlines for all the wrong reasons however, after it was revealed that Verizon was banning any new hires from writing about hot-button subjects like net neutrality, or the fact that companies like Verizon and AT&T are now bone-grafted to the nation's intelligence and surveillance apparatus.

Sugarstring is long-since dead, replaced in large part by Verizon's acquisitions of Yahoo and AOL, which also brought Huffpo, Engadget, and Techcrunch under the Verizon umbrella. And while Verizon itself has been busy using fake reporters to blatantly lie about the company's ongoing role in killing net neutrality, there's no indication (yet) that the company has pressured any of its own news outlets to quiet down on the subject. In fact, we've noted previously that some of the best reporting on net neutrality in recent months has originated at TechCrunch (this piece in particular is worth a read).
But while Verizon hasn't yet tried to get its own news outlets to quiet down on net neutrality, other now-Verizon-owned companies that used to be very active on the subject have gone dead quiet. Case in point: Tumblr, which was an integral ally in the SOPA/PIPA fight and an outspoken protector of net neutrality, is now utterly radio silent as FCC boss Ajit Pai attempts to kill the popular consumer protections. Insiders at the company this week expressed their concern to the Verge that Verizon is pressuring CEO David Karp to keep his mouth shut on the subject:

"Now, multiple sources tell The Verge that employees are concerned that Karp has been discouraged from speaking publicly on the issue, and one engineer conveyed that Karp told a group of engineers and engineering directors as much in a weekly meeting that took place shortly after SXSW. “Karp has talked about the net neutrality stuff internally, but won’t commit to supporting it externally anymore,” the engineer said. “[He] assures [us] that he is gonna keep trying to fight for the ability to fight for it publicly.” Karp did not respond to four emails asking for comment, and neither Yahoo nor Tumblr would speak about the matter on the record."

Granted Karp may just have toned down the company's rhetoric voluntarily to avoid ruffling feathers during the transition. And obviously any time a smaller company gets acquired by a larger conglomerate (especially from the historically droll and stodgy telecom sector) you'll see a major culture shift that often isn't for the better. Still, Verizon's positions on subjects like net neutrality are so hostile, Tumblr employees have grown increasingly uneasy in recent weeks, which could lead to an exodus of talent at the company:

“Some of our previous stances on issues that are really important to Tumblr employees and its community are being silenced,” said the former employee. “We've been really noisy about things like net neutrality in the past. We asked the new Head, Simon Khalaf, about it in an all-hands a few weeks ago and he said it was ‘not his problem’ and ‘above his pay grade.’” A current employee and another former employee corroborated this account."
It's unfortunate to have lost Tumblr's voice in the net neutrality fight, especially given that other industry giants like Google and Netflix have similarly gone mute on the subject, leaving consumers and small businesses increasingly alone in fighting for something vaguely resembling an open and healthy internet. And while you'd like to think Verizon is above trampling the editorial independence of former AOL and Yahoo news outlets, Verizon's Sugarstring experiment should make it pretty clear that ham-fisted attempts at censorship aren't exactly out of character for the telco.

For now, however, Verizon appears content to try and use entirely fake journalists like "Jeremy" to spread misinformation on net neutrality, as evident by this recent, comically misleading video by the company:

Read More >>

Read More

Net Neutrality Is Dying. Speak Out Now Before It's Too Late

“Come on! The internet is an incredible place!” said comedian and political commentator John Oliver, “And tonight, we need to talk about an issue that is impacting it.” He was just one of the many advocates of a free and open internet who were using the public forum to spread awareness on the threats that the internet is about to face. On May 18, 2017, the current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) led by Chairman Ajit Pai voted 2-1 on a motion to repeal rules and regulations put in place by his predecessor to ensure a free and open internet for all.

The motion, if sustained during a second vote held after the FCC is fully staffed later this year, would mean the repelation of the so-called net neutrality regulations that were put into place by retired FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler to ensure that internet service providers like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon cannot discriminate against various types of internet traffic in a way that suits their businesses. This would give popular broadband companies and internet service providers greater monopoly in their services, allowing them to regulate and alter the people’s access to the internet in a way that suits their needs.

The question of net neutrality is a rather big one, and significantly more important than being able to decide what streaming service you want to use or what search engine you wish to access, though that alone should be incentive enough to speak up. If the proposal put forward by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai falls into place, it would allow internet service providers to block, throttle and fast-lane various parts of the internet at will, potentially regulating and censoring your entire web-surfing experience and forcing you to stick to the destinations that pay protection money to these cable and broadband companies. It would effectively lead to the monopolization of a free institution that since the 1980s has served as the freest and most democratic source of unbridled information.

It is only rarely that we get to see big corporations the likes of Google and Facebook take up the cause of ordinary citizens on a massive scale, but when we do, it is assured that the matter at hand is an important one. When it came to net neutrality, however, we saw our entire country, rich, poor, democrat, republican, independent and corporate, come together to support an idea that is necessary for the growth and prosperity of our data nation as a whole. That is because net neutrality is an idea that anyone can get behind, one that promotes free and equal access to information for every citizen of the country, and initiative that is not only desirable but also essential for the growth of our country and the entire world from an information perspective.

Thankfully for us, the fight isn’t over yet. A huge number of organizations, small and large, are coming together on July 12 to protest the current administration's blatant disregard of public opinion in their decision to break net neutrality, and it is the hope of these participants that, with the correct amount of attention, they can force the government to take notice regarding an issue that should clearly be independent and bipartisan, much like climate change and affordable healthcare.

If you or anyone you know considers themselves an informed citizen of the country and of the internet, one that is prepared to fight for its freedom and in turn, the freedom of the people, I request you to join now by signing up at this website to participate in the massive protest being held on July 12 to demonstrate our apartisan love for net neutrality and the principles that govern it. Remember, the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

Read More >>

Read More

Netflix Joins Support of Net Neutrality

July 12 will be a national day of action for net neutrality, and Netflix has finally announced it will be fully participating.

During the Obama years, Netflix was a major player on the front lines of the fight for ensuring net neutrality. As a streaming service, Netflix theoretically relies on net neutrality to ensure internet providers don’t slow down their streaming speed in order to elevate cable programs.

But Netflix hasn’t seemed to be as enthusiastic as of late, even as the FCC under Ajit Pai, a former cable lobbyist appointed by Trump, poses the most grave threat to net neutrality we’ve ever seen.

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings recently said, “We think net neutrality is incredibly important, [but] not narrowly important to us because we’re big enough to get the deals we want.”


This raised concerns that Netflix had grown too big for it’s britches and that the fight for net neutrality had lost one of its most powerful forces.

But a few days ago, Netflix released another statement saying, “Netflix will never outgrow the fight for net neutrality. Everyone deserves an open Internet.” A Netflix spokesperson also added, “”We support strong net neutrality protections, even if we are at less risk because of our popularity. There are other companies for whom this is a bigger issue, and we’re joining this day of action to ensure the next Netflix has a fair shot to go the distance.”

Some have said that Netflix’s response was just a PR ploy and they’re just doing this to save face because of growing public pressure. That may be true, but ultimately it doesn’t matter. It’s great that there’s enough public zeal out there to put pressure on companies, and it’s great that Netflix has reaffirmed its position regardless of their motive.

Maybe Netflix really is big enough now to have sufficient negotiating power to take care of themselves when it comes to streaming speeds and dealing with ISPs. But the internet-based video streaming industry as a whole needs net neutrality and would be one of the hardest hit mediums if Pai and cable providers have their way.

Without net neutrality, cable providers can prioritize cable TV in ways that will attempt to deter people from using various online video streaming platforms. Imagine going to Youtube, Amazon or Netflix and seeing a message saying something along the lines of, “To access this site you must pay $5.99/month access fee to your internet provider. If you would like to be able to stream without buffering for 10 minutes or more, an additional $2 fee will be added for each video.”

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of the what’s going on with net neutrality right now. Regardless of what you think of Netflix, it’s a huge relief to have them, and all their lobbying resources, in the fight.

Read More >>

Read More

Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”

The Obama administration has been debating for months how to respond to the alleged Russian intrusions, with White House officials concerned about escalating tensions with Moscow and being accused of trying to boost Clinton’s campaign.

In September, during a secret briefing for congressional leaders, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) voiced doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to officials present.

The Trump transition team dismissed the findings in a short statement issued Friday evening. “These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again,’ ” the statement read.

Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking.

“I don’t believe they interfered” in the election, he told Time magazine this week. The hacking, he said, “could be Russia. And it could be China. And it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”

The CIA shared its latest assessment with key senators in a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill last week, in which agency officials cited a growing body of intelligence from multiple sources. Agency briefers told the senators it was now “quite clear” that electing Trump was Russia’s goal, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.

For example, intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees. Moscow has in the past used middlemen to participate in sensitive intelligence operations so it has plausible deniability.

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has said in a television interview that the “Russian government is not the source.”

The White House and CIA officials declined to comment.

On Friday, the White House said President Obama had ordered a “full review” of Russian hacking during the election campaign, as pressure from Congress has grown for greater public understanding of exactly what Moscow did to influence the electoral process.

“We may have crossed into a new threshold, and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart some lessons learned,” Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser, Lisa Monaco, told reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

Obama wants the report before he leaves office Jan. 20, Monaco said. The review will be led by James Clapper, the outgoing director of national intelligence, officials said.

During her remarks, Monaco didn’t address the latest CIA assessment, which hasn’t been previously disclosed.

Seven Democratic senators last week asked Obama to declassify details about the intrusions and why officials believe that the Kremlin was behind the operation. Officials said Friday that the senators specifically were asking the White House to release portions of the CIA’s presentation.

This week, top Democratic lawmakers in the House also sent a letter to Obama, asking for briefings on Russian interference in the election.

U.S. intelligence agencies have been cautious for months in characterizing Russia’s motivations, reflecting the United States’ long-standing struggle to collect reliable intelligence on President Vladi­mir Putin and those closest to him.

In previous assessments, the CIA and other intelligence agencies told the White House and congressional leaders that they believed Moscow’s aim was to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system. The assessments stopped short of saying the goal was to help elect Trump.

On Oct. 7, the intelligence community officially accused Moscow of seeking to interfere in the election through the hacking of “political organizations.” Though the statement never specified which party, it was clear that officials were referring to cyber-intrusions into the computers of the DNC and other Democratic groups and individuals.

Some key Republican lawmakers have continued to question the quality of evidence supporting Russian involvement.

“I’ll be the first one to come out and point at Russia if there’s clear evidence, but there is no clear evidence — even now,” said Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and a member of the Trump transition team. “There’s a lot of innuendo, lots of circumstantial evidence, that’s it.”

[U.S. investigating potential covert Russian plan to disrupt elections]

Though Russia has long conducted cyberspying on U.S. agencies, companies and organizations, this presidential campaign marks the first time Moscow has attempted through cyber-means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election, the officials said.

The reluctance of the Obama White House to respond to the alleged Russian intrusions before Election Day upset Democrats on the Hill as well as members of the Clinton campaign.

Within the administration, top officials from different agencies sparred over whether and how to respond. White House officials were concerned that covert retaliatory measures might risk an escalation in which Russia, with sophisticated cyber-capabilities, might have less to lose than the United States, with its vast and vulnerable digital infrastructure.

The White House’s reluctance to take that risk left Washington weighing more-limited measures, including the “naming and shaming” approach of publicly blaming Moscow.

By mid-September, White House officials had decided it was time to take that step, but they worried that doing so unilaterally and without bipartisan congressional backing just weeks before the election would make Obama vulnerable to charges that he was using intelligence for political purposes.

Instead, officials devised a plan to seek bipartisan support from top lawmakers and set up a secret meeting with the Gang of 12 — a group that includes House and Senate leaders, as well as the chairmen and ranking members of both chambers’ committees on intelligence and homeland security.

Obama dispatched Monaco, FBI Director James B. Comey and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to make the pitch for a “show of solidarity and bipartisan unity” against Russian interference in the election, according to a senior administration official.

Specifically, the White House wanted congressional leaders to sign off on a bipartisan statement urging state and local officials to take federal help in protecting their voting-registration and balloting machines from Russian cyber-intrusions.

Though U.S. intelligence agencies were skeptical that hackers would be able to manipulate the election results in a systematic way, the White House feared that Russia would attempt to do so, sowing doubt about the fundamental mechanisms of democracy and potentially forcing a more dangerous confrontation between Washington and Moscow.

[Putin denies that Russia hacked the DNC but says it was for the public good]

In a secure room in the Capitol used for briefings involving classified information, administration officials broadly laid out the evidence U.S. spy agencies had collected, showing Russia’s role in cyber-intrusions in at least two states and in hacking the emails of the Democratic organizations and individuals.

And they made a case for a united, bipartisan front in response to what one official described as “the threat posed by unprecedented meddling by a foreign power in our election process.”

The Democratic leaders in the room unanimously agreed on the need to take the threat seriously. Republicans, however, were divided, with at least two GOP lawmakers reluctant to accede to the White House requests.

According to several officials, McConnell raised doubts about the underlying intelligence and made clear to the administration that he would consider any effort by the White House to challenge the Russians publicly an act of partisan politics.

Some of the Republicans in the briefing also seemed opposed to the idea of going public with such explosive allegations in the final stages of an election, a move that they argued would only rattle public confidence and play into Moscow’s hands.

McConnell’s office did not respond to a request for comment. After the election, Trump chose McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, as his nominee for transportation secretary.

Some Clinton supporters saw the White House’s reluctance to act without bipartisan support as further evidence of an excessive caution in facing adversaries.

“The lack of an administration response on the Russian hacking cannot be attributed to Congress,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who was at the September meeting. “The administration has all the tools it needs to respond. They have the ability to impose sanctions. They have the ability to take clandestine means. The administration has decided not to utilize them in a way that would deter the Russians, and I think that’s a problem.”

Read More >>

Read More

7.3-magnitude earthquake strikes off Japan

A tsunami warning is in effect for Japan's Fukushima Prefecture after a 7.3-magnitude earthquake struck off Honshu at 5:59 a.m. Tuesday (3:59 p.m. Monday ET), according to the Japan Meteorological Agency.

A tsunami wave of 1-3 meters (3-10 feet) is possible, according to the agency. The US Geological Survey put the magnitude at 6.9, striking 37 kilometers (23 miles) east-southeast of Namie off the country's east coast at a depth of 11.4 kilometers (7 miles).

Two aftershocks were reported by USGS, one 5.4 and one 4.8.

Several tsunami waves have been spotted off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture, CNN affiliate NHK reported. One was spotted 22 kilometers off the coast of Iwaki City; a 90-centimeter wave was reported at Port of Soma; a 60-centimeter wave was reported at Port of Onahama.

Video on social media from Onahama featured sounds of sirens in response to the warning in effect. Images of the port showed waves that the broadcaster described as "backwash" that happens before a tsunami hits shore.

NHK urged the public to evacuate, cautioning that even if waves appear low in the ocean they can rise as they reach shore. The broadcaster reminded people to dress warmly in the cold rain and urged them to help others leave.

"Please do not think that you are safe. Please evacuate to high grounds," the network said. "Please think about the worst-case scenario and evacuate right away."

Earthquakes are common in Japan. The most recent was a 6.2 magnitude in late October near Kurayoshi, a city to the west of Osaka, which caused a handful of injuries.

The epicenter of this latest earthquake was not far south of the 2011 quake that caused a devastating tsunami, damaged nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant and killed more than 15,000 people. The devastating earthquake and tsunami in Japan will rank among the costliest natural disasters on record.

The 2011 quake moved Japan's coast 8 feet and shifted the Earth's axis, ranking among the costliest natural disasters on record.

Tokyo Electric Power Company Inc. said there had been no abnormalities or change in radiation levels at Fukushima Daiichi. Authorities are working to confirm reports that the reactor's cooling system stopped, NHK reported.

There is no tsunami threat to Hawaii as a result of the quake, the Honolulu Department of Emergency Management said.

Developing story - more to come

CNN's Radina Gigova and Taylor Ward contributed to this report.

Read More >>

Read More

How smart home devices are being hijacked to attack Internet

The huge cyberattack that crippled the Internet and disabled dozens of websites Friday appeared to be the biggest attack of its kind that the world has ever seen.

But it may not hold that title for for long.

What made last week’s Internet takedown so effective — and, some would say, sinister — was how the attackers weaponized everyday devices like security cameras, digital video recorders and baby monitors.
By exploiting the devices’ Web connections, hackers could infect them with malicious software and use them to paralyze huge portions of the Internet with a barrage of junk data in what is known as a distributed denial of service, or DDoS, attack.
For many, the breach was a stark demonstration of just how insecure the Internet remains. To some, it also felt like a call to action.
At a time when everything from televisions to refrigerators to kids’ toys are being equipped with an Internet connection, experts and legislators said, something ought to be done to ensure the security of these devices.

Yet there is little consensus around who should bear that responsibility.

“There aren’t just one or two types (of Internet of Things devices), there are tens of millions,” said Jeremiah Grossman, SentinelOne’s chief of security strategy. “So what we can expect going forward is a lot more of the same. ... Look out election day. Look out Cyber Monday.”

The Internet of Things encompasses a wide array of electronics: smart washing machines that will text you when your clothes are done, refrigerators that can order more groceries, wearable tech that can monitor your biorhythms, and talking toys that respond to words uttered by children.

Every year, more and more appliances are being made that connect to the Internet. Securing them is often an afterthought, experts said.

Many consumers, for instance, don’t see the danger in leaving a default password on a smart microwave, said Brian White, the chief operating officer for security firm RedOwl Analytics.

This is the attitude hackers bank on. If they can crack into a device using an easy-to-guess password, they can turn an everyday DVR into a zombie device enslaved to malicious software that can be used in attacks such as Friday’s assault.

“We are putting an enormous amount of compute capability in the average home, and it is very difficult for the average consumer to ensure their home is securely networked and their devices are updated,” White said.

Companies have long been held accountable for securing their own websites — banks, for instance, have security systems in place. But Internet of Things manufacturers are not required to guarantee a base level of security in the devices they create.

And when the priority is making the most inexpensive device possible, Grossman said, makers often skimp on things like security features.

Information security people “have been screaming bloody murder about this for years,” Grossman said. “Everything from cameras to toasters, refrigerators, microwaves. And because there’s no regulation, the manufacturers don’t need to make sure these devices ship with any security whatsoever.”

No single government agency oversees the devices or practices of the Internet of Things, though several have limited authority over parts of it.

Since Friday’s Internet blitz, some legislators have begun calling for greater government intervention.

“Not only does this kind of attack limit access to important information, delay financial transactions, and disrupt our nation’s commerce flows, but it also points to significant vulnerabilities in our national security,” Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Stockton, said in a statement Saturday.

Friday’s attack targeted Dyn, an Internet infrastructure firm that, among other things, provides domain name services and online traffic management to hundreds of companies, including Amazon, CNN, GitHub, Twitter, Netflix, PayPal, Reddit, Zendesk and the New York Times, among many others.

In a DDoS attack, hackers typically deploy a botnet, or a network of compromised computers, to send phony traffic to a specific site or server with the intent of overwhelming it so it cannot respond to queries from real people.

What made the attack different was that it used a botnet seen only once before — last month in a record-size attack against cybersecurity journalist Brian Krebs’ website. The botnet, known as Mirai, used infected cameras spread across the world to send waves of traffic at Dyn’s DNS system at unprecedented rates.

Mirai continually scans the Internet for devices and then attempts to gain access to them by using a known default password or exploiting a weakness in outdated software.

Kyle York, Dyn’s chief strategy officer, said in a statement Saturday that the company was able to mitigate the first two waves in a matter of hours and fended off a third without customers seeing an impact.

But Dyn’s attackers may not have been using the full brunt of Mirai’s force.

Level 3 Communications, an Internet service provider based in Colorado, began monitoring the Mirai assault in the midst of its attack on Dyn. Level 3 reported that only about 10 percent of devices compromised by Mirai were deployed in Friday’s attack.

“There needs to be a much greater awareness among the public, among manufacturers,” White said. “This may have been a wake-up moment, but as with most things in the cyber realm, it may take a few more times for it to sink in.”

It has not yet been determined who was behind Friday’s attack, which came at Dyn in several waves beginning about 4 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time. But because the code behind Mirai was leaked after the attack on Krebs, it could have been anyone.

“Mirai is a DDoS-for-rent environment,” Dale Drew, Level 3 Communications’ chief Internet security officer, said in a video posted on Periscope. Hackers charge others for access to compromised machines, making it hard to determine the actual force behind a given attack.

The Department of Homeland Security and the FBI continue to investigate Friday’s cyberattack, though they have not yet identified a party responsible.

Activist hacker groups Anonymous and New World Hackers said they were responsible for the cyberassault on Dyn late Friday, telling several news organizations that it was an act of solidarity and retaliation over the Ecuadoran government’s decision to cut off WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s Internet connection.

“Twitter was kind of the main target. It showed people who doubted us what we were capable of doing, plus we got the chance to see our capability,” a New World Hacker member who identified himself as “Prophet” told the Associated Press on Saturday via a Twitter message.

The hacker said the group’s next target would be the Russian government in response to the cyberattacks Russia has allegedly launched against the U.S. this year.

But security experts and U.S. officials said they had their doubts about the group’s boasts.

No evidence over the weekend could link either group to the Dyn attacks, and both have taken credit for high-profile attacks in the past when they, in fact, were not involved.

“If they were just trying to prove a point, they would have done it briefly, rather than kept a series of sustained attacks going a number of times throughout the day,” Grossman said. “I mean, it’s possible. But it’s not plausible.”

Read More >>

Read More