A new attack that uses terrestrial radio signals to hack a wide range of Smart TVs raises an unsettling prospect—the ability of hackers to take complete control of a large number of sets at once without having physical access to any of them.
Ars Technica: Smart TV hack embeds attack code into broadcast signal—no access required »
Connecticut lawmakers are considering whether the state should become the first in the country to allow police to use drones outfitted with deadly weapons, a proposal immediately met with concern by civil rights and liberties advocates.
Bill would allow Connecticut police to put weapons on drones »
The security of the facial recognition feature on Samsung’s new Galaxy S8 smartphone has come into question, after a video was shared online that appears to show one of the handsets being unlocked by waving a photo of the user’s face in front of the camera.
MacRumors: Facial Recognition Feature on Galaxy S8 Bypassed Using Just a Photo »
Last week, the UK’s Home Secretary Amber Rudd said that WhatsApp risked becoming a “place for terrorists to hide.” Then, like many others that have used this tired old trope, she went on to call for the development of some magic unicorn key to unlock all encrypted communications, one that was somehow available only to those on the side of truth, beauty, law and order, and not to the other lot. In doing so, her cluelessness was particularly evident, as her invocation of the “necessary hashtags” emphasized, but she’s not alone in that. Despite the chorus of experts pointing out for the thousandth time why it’s not possible, the EU Justice Commissioner has just said that the EU must have magic unicorn keys, too.
• Techdirt: EU Plans To Weaken Encrypted Communications Despite Countless Warnings It Can’t Be Done Safely »
• Ars Technica: Cryptic crypto clash: EU justice chief holds “intensive talks” with IT giants »
• Euractiv: EU to propose new rules targeting encrypted apps in June »
A Spanish court on Wednesday sentenced a young woman to jail for posting jokes on Twitter about the 1973 assassination of a senior figure in the Franco dictatorship.
Even the granddaughter of Carrero Blanco attacked the move by public prosecutors to charge Vera and put her on trial, saying in a letter sent to daily El Pais in January that while the jokes were in poor taste they were not worthy of such legal action. “I’m scared of a society in which freedom of expression, however regrettable it may be, can lead to jail sentences,” Lucia Carrero Blanco wrote.
The Guardian: Spanish woman given jail term for tweeting jokes about Franco-era assassination »
That a major U.S. company had to rely on WikiLeaks to learn about security problems well-known to U.S. intelligence agencies underscores concerns expressed by dozens of current and former U.S. intelligence and security officials about the government’s approach to cybersecurity. (…)
Across the federal government, about 90 percent of all spending on cyber programs is dedicated to offensive efforts, including penetrating the computer systems of adversaries, listening to communications and developing the means to disable or degrade infrastructure, senior intelligence officials told Reuters.
Reuters: A scramble at Cisco exposes uncomfortable truths about U.S. cyber defense »
From a proposed Californian law:
18320.5. It is unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on an Internet Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on an Internet Web site, a false or deceptive statement designed to influence the vote on either of the following:
(a) Any issue submitted to voters at an election.
(b) Any candidate for election to public office.
EFF comments…
In other words, it would be illegal to be wrong on the internet if it could impact an election. The bill is unconstitutional under U.S. Supreme Court case law (see our opposition letter for more information on that), and likely to draw immediate and costly lawsuits if it is signed into law.
EFF: California Bill To Ban “Fake News” Would Be Disastrous for Political Speech »
Putting the interests of Internet providers over Internet users, Congress today voted to erase landmark broadband privacy protections. If the bill is signed into law, companies like Cox, Comcast, Time Warner, AT&T, and Verizon will have free rein to hijack your searches, sell your data, and hammer you with unwanted advertisements. Worst yet, consumers will now have to pay a privacy tax by relying on VPNs to safeguard their information. That is a poor substitute for legal protections.
EFF: Repealing Broadband Privacy Rules, Congress Sides with the Cable and Telephone Industry »
Ars Technica: Activists want to know why feds are searching more devices at the border »
The bill passed the U.S. Senate: it looks like your ISP will be allowed to just sell your browsing history. While the bill still needs to pass the House (the lower legislature in the U.S.) and the President’s signature, it seems increasingly likely to unfortunately do so. This doesn’t just mean that your privacy is commercialized – it also means that search-and-seizure is: the Police will be able to just buy your browsing history from your ISP, bypassing any privacy protections completely.
