Navigation

Archive | Big Business

Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Let’s Unfuck the Internet!

By on June 9, 2016 in Big Brother, Big Business, Big Data, Big Government, decentralization, Internet

This is exciting…

The web is a little fucked up right now. Governments are spying on civilians, some block specific websites, and companies like Amazon have a stranglehold on the cloud services business. But what if we could create a decentralized web, with more privacy, less government control, and less corporate influence?

Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, wants to do exactly that. Sir Tim recently gathered some top computer scientists in a San Francisco church at an event called the Decentralized Web Summit, where attendees brainstormed ways to make the internet more broadly distributed. The smartest technologists on the planet showed up to join the discussions including early internet architect Vint Cerf and Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive.

Gizmodo: The Web’s Creator Now Wants to Unfuck It »

So, why?

“The temptation to grab control of the internet by the government or by a company is always going to be there. They will wait until we’re sleeping, because if you’re a government or a company and you can control something, you’ll want it,” he said.

The Inquirer: Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Internet has become ‘world’s largest surveillance network’ »

0

An EU-US Privacy Shield?

By on February 2, 2016 in Big Brother, Big Business, Data Protection, EU, Facebook, NSA, Privacy, surveillance, US

Last October the EU-US “Safe Harbour” agreement was canceled by the European Court of Justice. This agreement was created to ensure that European personal data was to be treated with care when handled by US companies. But the ECJ found that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Data Protection Directive, because of NSA access.

ArsTechnica then reported…

“The most significant repercussion of this ruling is that American companies, such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter, may not be allowed to send user data from Europe back to the US.”

Link: Europe’s highest court strikes down Safe Harbour data sharing between EU and US »

Today the media has reported that a new agreement has been reached: The EU-US Privacy Shield.

Such an agreement has been a top political priority for the EU as well as the US — as the respective administrations have not wanted data protection to get in the way of business as usual.

But is there a real agreement? Not really. All there is, is a “framework agreement”, basically saying that the EU and the US agree to agree at some point.

Today ArsTechnica writes…

“What that means in practice is that the Commission has negotiated some breathing space to strike a deal with the US.”

“The US has clarified that they do not carry out indiscriminate mass surveillance of European citizens,” EU Commissioner Andrus Ansip has declared. No further details on this, though…

Link: Last gasp Safe Harbour “political deal” struck between Europe and US »

Apparently the EU and the US have no such thing as an actual deal to show. But there is a lot of hot air coming out of Brussels and Washington.

Earlier today, before the news about an “framework agreement” from Brussels, ArsTechnica had an interview with Max Schrems, the Austrian law student who took this case to court to begin with.

“On the subject of any potential new agreement, he argues it would be no better, and that a sector-specific approach to EU-US data transfers would be preferable. “If this case goes back to the ECJ [European Court of Justice]—which it very likely will do, if there is a new safe harbour that does not meet the test of the court—then it will fail again, and nobody wants that,” he says.”

Link: Why Safe Harbor 2.0 will lose again »

Apart from the EU and the US having agreed to agree — everyone seems to be just as much in the dark as before. (There is also the hidden agenda of mass surveillance and intelligence cooperation that led to the end of “safe harbour” in the first place, to be taken into consideration.)

I suppose the new agreement, when it is finalized, will end up in the European Parliament for final approval. Then, if not before, we should know. And it is encouraging that the Parliament has been very vigilant concerning EU-US data protection issues in the past.

/ HAX

0

This might be the end of a free and open Internet

By on October 30, 2015 in Big Business, EU, Free Markets, Internet

There has been a long-lasting battle over net neutrality in the European Union. Worries are that Big Telecom will throttle traffic and hold e.g. startups hostage — in order to press them for money, in exchange for giving them access to what can be described as regular Internet services.

All the big telecoms operators replied that they would never do that. So, the EU went along with some seemingly reasonable exceptions in the framework…

The EC has been couching these as “services like IPTV, high-definition videoconferencing or healthcare services like telesurgery” — which it says use the Internet protocol and the same access network but “require a significant improvement in quality or the possibility to guarantee some technical requirements to their end-users”.

This legal framework passed the European Parliament just the other day.

There is demand on the part of providers of content, applications and services to be able to provide electronic communication services other than internet access services, for which specific levels of quality, that are not assured by internet access services, are necessary. Such specific levels of quality are, for instance, required by some services responding to a public interest or by some new machine-to-machine communications services. Providers of electronic communications to the public, including providers of internet access services, and providers of content, applications and services should therefore be free to offer services which are not internet access services and which are optimised for specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, where the optimisation is necessary in order to meet the requirements of the content, applications or services for a specific level of quality.

Quickly Deutsche Telecom seized the opportunity…

Writing in a blog post yesterday DT CEO Timotheus Höttges suggests the carrier is preparing to use the provision of specialized services to charge startups for “guaranteed good transmission quality” — arguing this will offer them a way to compete with better resourced rivals, such as large tech platforms like Google.

For smaller companies and startups to have the same access to the Intenet as today (and as Big Business) they would only have to “pay a couple of percent for this in the form of revenue-sharing”.

Until this day, the Internet has been an arena where companies of all sorts and sizes have been able to compete freely on equal terms. The Internet has been free and open for all. Those days of the Internet as a common utility now seems to be over.

Naturally one can argue that carriers can do whatever they want with their net. But with the Internet being a global common infrastructure everything is interconnected and rather complicated.

If big ISP:s starts to throttle and compartmentalize their parts of the network — it will be the end of a free and open Internet as we know it.

And it will be the end of an era of free enterprise for all on a level playing field Internet.

I really hoped that the big carriers would have a reasonable approach to the new EU rules — and only apply exceptions the way they were meant to be applied. But, sadly, the opposite did happen.

I’m all pro free markets. But today, I’m very disappointed with Deutsche Telecom and those carriers who will, no doubt, follow in their steps as this door has now been opened.

For the European Commission and the European Parliament, they just have to realize that they have been royally screwed by the telecoms lobby. However, the EU member states in the Council must be very pleased. They have always represented the interest of their old, ex-monopoly, formerly state-owned telecoms giants.

Link: Carrier DT Targets Startups After Europe Agrees Net Neutrality Rules »

/ HAX

Update, also read: Deutsche Telekom chief causes uproar over net neutrality »

1

EU pairing up with US online companies to censor the Internet

By on October 26, 2015 in Big Brother, Big Business, Censorship, EU, Facebook, Google, Internet

Then we have this one…

“In August 2015, the European Commission confirmed to EDRi that it’s preparing to partner with US online companies to set up an ‘EU Internet Forum’ which apparently includes discussing the monitoring and censorship of communications in Europe. Participants of this Forum include Facebook, Google/YouTube, Ask.fm, Microsoft and Twitter. The first meeting was held on 24 July 2015 and focused on ‘reducing accessibility to terrorist content’.”

Read more at EDRi: EU Commission: IT companies to fix “terrorist use of the Internet” »

0

Sony & MPAA to use trade agreements to stop copyright reform

By on April 20, 2015 in Big Business, Big Entertainment, Copyright, EU, Freedom of Speech, Intellectual Property, Internet, TTIP, US

Some days ago Wikileaks released the “dump” from the Sony hack. Among other things, we can find this piece of information…

“Finally, in regard to trade, the MPAA/MPA with the strong support of your studios, continue to advocate to governments around the world about the pressing the need for strong pro-IP trade policies such as TPP and the proposed EU/US trade agreement (TTIP).”

i) This might refer to the ISDS article of TTIP, allowing companies to sue countries who are changing laws in ways that may limit these companies future profits. In this case, suing the EU if it would reform its legal framework on copyright.

ii) It might also be a signal that TTIP will be yet another attempt to limit the freedom of the Internet — and to force Internet Service Providers to police (and be responsible for) everything their customers are up to. (Like in the ACTA treaty, that was voted down by the European Parliament.)

Probably both.

Today, copyright and “intellectual property” are concepts that are used in ways they where never intended to. They have become arguments for limiting free flow of information and free speech. They have become arguments for mass surveillance and control. And they are suffocating the free market.

Copyright must be reformed and adopted to todays markets and todays technology. But apparently Big Entertainment is doing all in its power to stop such a reform.

Finally, I love free trade. But I’m not so sure that is what trade agreements like TTIP is about. It looks more like regulations and restrictions, in many areas. And you don’t need trade agreements to have free trade. All you have to do is to open up your borders.

/ HAX

0

Big Entertainment and Big Media declaring war on VPN

By on April 18, 2015 in Big Business, Copyright, Democracy, File Sharing, Free Markets, Intellectual Property, Privacy, VPN

TorrentFreak reports from New Zeeland…

“A pair of Internet providers who defied TV company demands to switch off their VPN services will be sued in the coming days. CallPlus and Bypass Network Services face legal action from media giants including Sky and TVNZ for allowing their customers to use a VPN to buy geo-restricted content.”

This was somehow expected. The copyright industry is very annoyed when it comes to VPN services.

There is reason to believe that the New Zeeland cases will be the start of a series of similar court cases around the world. The entertainment and media industries are essentially multinational. Most likely, this is just a pilot case.

Once again Big Business wants to shut down legitimate Internet services, just to protect their outdated business models. But they can never win. Instead, they should accept and embrace the simple fact that the Internet provides one global media market.

It is ridiculous to believe that people all over the world would refrain from watching their favourite TV series and films if VPN services where to be shut down. It would only bring new life to traditional illegal file sharing.

One must remember that people using media services via VPN are not pirating. They are paying customers – only in another country. All Big Entertainment and Big Media might accomplish by going after VPN services is to turn these paying customers into non-paying pirates.

The fact that the copyright industry refuses to adopt to a global, connected market is nothing new. This seems to be a never ending story.

But VPN is not just about light entertainment. VPN is serious stuff. It is used by companies, organisations, governments and private individuals for security and privacy reasons. It is a way to get round censorship. It is a part of the toolbox that dissidents, opposition groups and activists  use to communicate securely.

There is no way Big Entertainment and Big Media should be allowed to shut down this important instrument of freedom, security and anonymity. Instead, they must learn to adapt to the real world market.

TorrentFreak: TV Companies Will Sue VPN Providers “In Days” »

/ HAX

0

EU: Should you be in control of your personal data or not?

By on April 10, 2015 in Big Business, Big Government, Data Protection, EU, Privacy

The European Union is currently working on a new legal framework for data protection.

This process has been subject to massive lobbying from companies on both sides of the Atlantic – trying to water it down.

At the moment the dossier is dealt with at the European Council. There EU member states seems to be just as eager to undermine any substantial protection of citizens rights to their own data as the industry lobbyists.

This is a complex process, hidden behind a wall of documents and often carried out behind closed doors. It’s all so complicated that the media seems to choose to ignore it.

So, what is the conflict all about?

To put it simply: It’s about your right to control your own personal data.

The principle that lobbyists and member states refuse to accept is that it should be up to you to decide if and how your data is to be used. It’s a matter of consent.

The Big Business and Big Government approach is that there is no need for consent. That you should not be in control of how your personal information is used. That you and your rights are not important.

The usual suspects would like to keep us all as digital slaves.

This is about privacy. And it’s about your right to control your own life.

/ HAX

0

International Bullshit Day

By on January 28, 2015 in Big Business, Big Government, Data Protection, EU, Privacy, US

Today (January 28) is Data Protection Day (Europe) or Data Privacy Day (US and Canada).

From Wikipedia…

Data Privacy Day’s educational initiative originally focused on raising awareness among businesses as well as users about the importance of protecting the privacy of their personal information online, particularly in the context of social networking. The educational focus has expanded over the past four years to include families, consumers and businesses. In addition to its educational initiative, Data Privacy Day promotes events and activities that stimulate the development of technology tools that promote individual control over personally identifiable information; encourage compliance with privacy laws and regulations; and create dialogues among stakeholders interested in advancing data protection and privacy. The international celebration offers many opportunities for collaboration among governments, industry, academia, nonprofits, privacy professionals and educators.

Splendid! Or..?

Let’s follow the money. Among participating organisations and corporate supporters are: FTC, FCC, FBI, New York State Attorney General Office, UK Information Commissioner, Microsoft and Verizon.

Yeah, right!

The core question when it comes data protection / privacy is: Who is the owner of your personal data? Is it you? Or someone else?

The EU is in the process of hammering-out new data protection laws. In this work US government and corporate lobbyists, as well as most EU member states are working hard to take away your control over your personal data.

They paint one image. But the do the opposite.

So–IMHO–Data Protection Day / Data Privacy Day is mostly astroturf.

If you really want to celebrate January 28 – you should support European Digital Rights (EDRi) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

/ HAX

0

16 December: Sentencing in the Barrett Brown Case

By on December 16, 2014 in Barret Brown, Big Brother, Big Business, Big Government, Democracy, Hacktivism, US, Wikileaks

Today–Tuesday December 16–a Dallas federal court will deliver its sentence in the Barrett Brown case. It all started with copy-pasting a link.

Writer, journalist and hacktivist Barrett Brown was the leading force in Project PM–a journalistic project scrutinizing private intelligence and security firms running outsourced contracts for the US Government.

The material came from a data dump retrieved by hackers said to belong to the Anonymous network. Even though Brown did not take part in this operation himself, he had access to the site where the information was stored.

His problems started when he copy-pasted a link to this site to Project PM. As the data dump contained all sorts of information (e.g. credit card information) it was possible for the authorities to go after him. From the Free Barret Brown website…

“Having previously been raided by the FBI on March 6, 2012 and not arrested or charged, on September 12, 2012 Barrett Brown was again raided and this time arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation while he was online participating in a Tinychat session. He was subsequently denied bail and detained without charge and adequate medical treatment for over two weeks while in the custody of US Marshals. In the first week of October 2012, he was finally indicted on three counts, related to alleged activities or postings on popular websites such as Twitter and YouTube.”

“On December 4, 2012 Barrett was indicted by a federal grand jury on twelve additional counts related to data from the Stratfor breach. Despite his lack of direct involvement in the operation and stated opposition to it, he faces these charges simply for allegedly pasting a hyperlink online. On January 23rd, 2013 he was indicted a third time on two more counts, relating to the March 2012 FBI raid(s) on his apartment and his mother’s house.”

After that, everything was blown out of proportion. The Daily Beast reports…

“The government’s actions in this case have been extreme. Prosecutors in the Northern District of Texas have written that Brown, along with the activist group Anonymous, sought to overthrow the U.S. government. They tried to seize funds that were raised for his legal defense. They obtained a gag order against the defendant and his lawyers restricting what they could say about the case for several months. They sought to identify contributors to a website where Brown and others dissected leaks and researched shady links between intelligence contractors and governments. Perhaps most egregious of all, they pursued a case against Brown’s mother, who was forced to plead guilty to a misdemeanor related to a separate FBI raid on her home, resulting in six months probation and a $1,000 fine.”

This far into the case, Brown faced a life time prison sentence and accepted a plea agreement.

Dallas Morning News describes what happened next…

“But the U.S. attorney’s office asked Lindsay to drop those charges in March. The charges, which were dismissed, accused Brown of trafficking in stolen data and aggravated identity theft.”

“The most serious charge remaining against Brown was the one involving threats to the FBI agents. Brown made some of the expletive-laced threats in a YouTube video he posted in which he said he would shoot any federal agents who came for him. Brown also said in a video that he would ruin one FBI agent’s life and look into his kids.”

Today we will know the outcome of this affair. Prosecutors seek a 8.5 year prison sentence. And the defence is going for time served.

Governments (not only the US Government) outsourcing intelligence and security operations to private companies is a problem–as it withdraws information about what is going on from democratic oversight.

The Barrett Brown case also is a matter of freedom of the press.

In the wake of the Snowden files exposing NSA mass surveillance, one should be extra vigilant. From the Project PM we already have had a glimpse of what is going on. For instance private US intelligence contractors have been involved in secret operations to discredit and damage Wikileaks and its editor in chief Julian Assange.

On a tragic side note–renowned US national security journalist Michael Hastings was about to dig deeper into the Project PM material (and the Barrett Brown case)–when he reportedly found himself being investigated by the FBI. Unfortunately Hastings died when his car exploded in a single car crash in Los Angeles, in the early morning hours of June 18, 2013.

This really is an intriguing and disturbing affair.

Free Barrett Brown | Project PM | Barrett Brown on Wikipedia

/ HAX
(proud contributor to the Barret Brown defense fund)

Some additional links:
Peter Ludlow: Barrett Brown case smacks of oppression »
Sentencing Looms for Barrett Brown, Advocate for “Anonymous” »
Why everyone should care about journalist Barrett Brown’s sentencing today »
Journalist Barrett Brown Faces Sentencing on Tuesday After Two Years Behind Bars »

Update: Barrett Brown sentencing delayed until January 22, 2015 »

Update 2: The Intercept–The Latest Twist in the Bizarre Prosecution of Barrett Brown »

1

And now, the game will change…

By on July 19, 2014 in Big Business, Big Government, Bitcoin, Internet

Earlier this summer, The Telegraph ran a very long and extremely interesting piece by Matthew Sparkes: The coming digital anarchy »

If you didn’t read it, please do. If you did, read it again. It points out a concept that the general public knows practically nothing about, that might change society and our lives in a dramatic way: blockchain.

Already a blockchain based digital currency, Bitcoin, is making payments on the internet (and in the real world) easy, fast and cheap. We might not need banks in the future. And if you think that is a game changer, consider what will happen when governments no longer are in control of money — with no possibility to inflate it and with limited ways to confiscate it or enforce taxation.

Sparkes gives us many other examples on the use of blockhain based processes. To take just a few examples, it might be used for safe cloud services or to distribute the voters democratic mandate to more than just one political candidate. The possibilities seems to be endless.

Now, to get to my point…

Technology solutions such as blockchain will re-distribute and decentralize power in society in a spontaneous and disruptive way.

Big Government and Big Business will not be amused.

The copyright wars, the fight over mass surveillance and the forceful pushing of a square plug into a round hole during the €uro crisis… All of that will be nothing compared to what will take place when the ruling classes realize that they are losing their grip, losing their power over others and that their models for how to do things are to be obsolete.

Some of these dinosaurs will not even understand what’s going to hit them. Or that it is happening right now.

The only way for them to save status quo might be to severely restrict the free flow of information on the Internet.

On top of this we should keep in mind that the ruling classes have their own armed wing with the right to use force to uphold Order–the police.

So finally, we might actually find out what will happen when an unstoppable force meets an gigantic immovable object.

/ HAX

6