Data Encryption Software Market: Size, Share, Analysis, Regional Outlook and Fo – News by aeresearch

Medical Insurance Market: Opportunities, Demand and Forecasts, 20202025 By Market Study Report

The Latest Research Report on Medical Insurance Market size | Industry Segment by Applications (Large Insurance and Microinsurance), by Type (Insured Liability and Payment Method), Regional Outlook, Market Demand, Latest Trends, Medical Insur...

The Latest Research Report on 3D Modeling CAD Software Market size | Industry Segment by Applications (Small Business, Midsize Enterprise, Large Enterprise and Other), by Type (Cloud-based and On-premises), Regional Outlook, Market Deman...

The Latest Research Report on 4G/5G infrastructure Market size | Industry Segment by Applications (Logistics and Shipping and Security and Surveilance), by Type (Femtocell, Pico Cell, Micro Cell, Macro Cell,,Market segment by Type, the p...

The Latest Research Report on Digital Hospital Market size | Industry Segment by Applications (Medical Care, Personal Health Tracking and Others), by Type (Mobile Health, Healthcare Information Technology, Wearable Devices, Telehealth...

The Latest Research Report on Digital Transformation in Logistics Market size | Industry Segment by Applications (Bio Pharma, Chemical Pharma and Specially Pharma), by Type (Cold Chain Logistics and Non-cold Chain Logistics), Regional Outlo...

Continue reading here:
Data Encryption Software Market: Size, Share, Analysis, Regional Outlook and Fo - News by aeresearch

EARN IT Act threatens end-to-end encryption – Naked Security

While were all distracted by stockpiling latex gloves and toilet paper, theres a bill tiptoeing through the US Congress that could inflict the backdoor virus that law enforcement agencies have been trying to inflict on encryption for years.

At least, thats the interpretation of digital rights advocates who say that the proposed EARN IT Act could harm free speech and data security.

Sophos is in that camp. For years, Naked Security and Sophos have said #nobackdoors, agreeing with the Information Technology Industry Council that Weakening security with the aim of advancing security simply does not make sense.

The first public hearing on the proposed legislation took place on Wednesday. You can view the 2+ hours of testimony here.

Called the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act (EARN IT Act), the bill would require tech companies to meet safety requirements for children online before obtaining immunity from lawsuits. You can read the discussion draft here.

To kill that immunity, the bill would undercut Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) from certain apps and companies so that they could be held responsible for user-uploaded content. Section 230, considered the most important law protecting free speech online, states that websites arent liable for user-submitted content.

Heres how the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) frames the importance of Section 230:

Section 230 enforces the common-sense principle that if you say something illegal online, you should be the one held responsible, not the website or platform where you said it (with some important exceptions).

EARN IT is a bipartisan effort, having been introduced by Republican Lindsey Graham, Democrat Richard Blumenthal and other legislators whove used the specter of online child exploitation to argue for the weakening of encryption. This comes as no surprise: in December 2019, while grilling Facebook and Apple, Graham and other senators threatened to regulate encryption unless the companies give law enforcement access to encrypted user data, pointing to child abuse as one reason.

What Graham threatened at the time:

Youre going to find a way to do this or were going to go do it for you. Were not going to live in a world where a bunch of child abusers have a safe haven to practice their craft. Period. End of discussion.

One of the problems of the EARN IT bill: the proposed legislation offers no meaningful solutions to the problem of child exploitation, as the EFF says:

It doesnt help organizations that support victims. It doesnt equip law enforcement agencies with resources to investigate claims of child exploitation or training in how to use online platforms to catch perpetrators. Rather, the bills authors have shrewdly used defending children as the pretense for an attack on our free speech and security online.

If passed, the legislation will create a National Commission on Online Child Sexual Exploitation Prevention tasked with developing best practices for owners of Internet platforms to prevent, reduce, and respond to child exploitation online. But, as the EFF maintains, Best practices would essentially translate into legal requirements:

If a platform failed to adhere to them, it would lose essential legal protections for free speech.

The best practices approach came after pushback over the bills predicted effects on privacy and free speech pushback that caused its authors to roll out the new structure. The best practices would be subject to approval or veto by the Attorney General (currently William Barr, whos issued a public call for backdoors), the Secretary of Homeland Security (ditto), and the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

The bill doesnt explicitly mention encryption. It doesnt have to: policy experts say that the guidelines set up by the proposed legislation would require companies to provide lawful access: a phrase that could well encompass backdoors.

CNET talked to Lindsey Barrett, a staff attorney at Georgetown Laws Institute for Public Representation Communications and Technology Clinic who said that the way that the bill is structured is a clear indication that its meant to target encryption:

When youre talking about a bill that is structured for the attorney general to give his opinion and have decisive influence over what the best practices are, it does not take a rocket scientist to concur that this is designed to target encryption.

If the bill passes, the choice for tech companies comes down to either weakening their own encryption and endangering the privacy and security of all their users, or foregoing Section 230 protections and potentially facing liability in a wave of lawsuits.

Kate Ruane, a senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, had this to say to CNET:

The removal of Section 230 liability essentially makes the best practices a requirement. The cost of doing business without those immunities is too high.

Tellingly, one of the bills lead sponsors, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, told the Washington Post that hes unwilling to include a measure that would stipulate that encryption is off-limits in the proposed commissions guidelines. This is what he told the newspaper:

I doubt I am the best qualified person to decide what best practices should be. Better-qualified people to make these decisions will be represented on the commission. So, to ban or require one best practice or another [beforehand] I just think leads us down a very perilous road.

The EARN IT Act joins an ongoing string of legal assaults against the CDAs Section 230. Most recently, in January 2019, the US Supreme Court refused to consider a case against defamatory reviews on Yelp.

Weve also seen actions taken against Section 230-protected sites such as those dedicated to revenge porn, for one.

In March 2018, we also saw the passage of H.R. 1865, the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA) bill, which makes online prostitution ads a federal crime and which amended Section 230.

In response to the overwhelming vote to pass the bill it sailed through on a 97-2 vote, over the protests of free-speech advocates, constitutional law experts and sex trafficking victims Craigslist shut down its personals section.

Besides the proposed bill containing no tools to actually stop online child abuse, it would actually make it much harder to prosecute pedophiles, according to an analysis from The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. As explained by Riana Pfefferkorn, Associate Director of Surveillance and Cybersecurity, as it now stands, online providers proactively, and voluntarily, scan for child abuse images by comparing their hash values to known abusive content.

Apple does it with iCloud content, Facebook has used hashing to stop millions of nude childrens images, and Google released a free artificial intelligence tool to help stamp out abusive material, among other voluntary efforts by major online platforms.

The key word is voluntarily, Pfefferkorn says. Those platforms are all private companies, as opposed to government agencies, which are required by Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search to get warrants before they search our digital content, including our email, chat discussions, and cloud storage.

The reason that private companies like Facebook can, and do, do exactly that is that they are not the government, theyre private actors, so the Fourth Amendment doesnt apply to them.

Turning the private companies that provide those communications into agents of the state would, ironically, result in courts suppression of evidence of the child sexual exploitation crimes targeted by the bill, she said.

That means the EARN IT Act would backfire for its core purpose, while violating the constitutional rights of online service providers and users alike.

Besides the EFF, the EARN IT bill is facing opposition from civil rights groups that include the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans for Prosperity, Access Now, Mozilla, the Center for Democracy & Technology, Fight for the Future, the Wikimedia Foundation, the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, the Consumer Technology Association, the Internet Association, and the Computer & Communications Industry Association.

Earlier this month, Sen. Ron Wyden, who introduced the CDAs Section 230, said in a statement that the disastrous legislation is a Trojan horse that will give President Trump and Attorney General Barr the power to control online speech and require government access to every aspect of Americans lives.

Read my full statement on the disastrous EARN IT Act, which will give Bill Barr and Donald Trump more control over twitter.com/i/web/status/1

Wydens statement didnt specifically mention encryption, but his office told Ars Technica that when [the senator] discusses weakening security and requiring government access to every aspect of Americans lives, that is referring to encryption.

Read this article:
EARN IT Act threatens end-to-end encryption - Naked Security

WhatsApp Users To Get This Killer New Feature: Heres How It Works – Forbes

NurPhoto via Getty Images

It looks like WhatsApp will soon add some serious security changes to its messaging app, now used by 2 billion people worldwide, as it strives to fend off competition from other platforms seen as being more secure. WhatsApp has always positioned itself as a security and privacy champion, and so this comes as little surprise. All that said, given WhatsApps scale, such changes have a huge impact.

Last year, reports emerged that the Facebook-owned messaging giant was testing disappearing or self-destructing messages for Group Chats. The platforms sister app, Facebook Messenger, has had the functionality for some time within its so-called secret conversations,, meaning theyre end-to-end encrypted.

Now, according WABetaInfo, WhatsApp is stepping up plans to launch the functionality some time soon. As GSMArena explains, in two beta versions of the app, the option to set self-destructing messages in private chats can be found. The app versions are2.20.83and2.20.84and you can choose the expiry period of the messages between one hour, one day, one week, one month or one year.

With a timer set, users can see a clock icon which warns them that the message will disappear, providing an indication of how long remains. There is no confirmation as to the timing of the launch of the new functionality, or whether other security protections such as reporting screenshots or preventing text-copying will be added as part of this shift to more secure endpoint functionality.

Disappearing messages.

WhatsApp does not compete with Messenger, they are from the same stable after all. But it does compete with Signal, which is getting more traction in the market and has recently confirmed its plans to become more mainstream. Ironically, Signals shift into WhatsApp territory has been helped by an investment from departed WhatsApp co-founder Brian Acton.

Signal is starting to encroach on WhatsApp territory, which had been the secure message platform of choice for businesses, government officials and other groups for anything other than officially restricted data. Recently we have seen the EU mandate Signal as an alternative to WhatsApp, citing security considerations, although for the EUs diplomatic staff, even Signal is not secure enough.

Signal operates a much more secure client-side app than WhatsApp, with security prioritized over ease of functionality. So much so that even transferring chat history to a new phone is tricky on an Android and impossible on an iPhone. WhatsApp uses its own version of Signals open-source security protocol to protect WhatsApp chats, but Signals version remains open-source and so is seen as being more secure. Signal offers a disappearing message function for every chat.

Signal

It has been a difficult 12-months for WhatsApp on the security front. The platform that has done more to promote end-to-end security for the masses than anyone else has been hit with reports ofnation-state attacks,malicious media filesand the risk of a backdoor tolock out targeted individuals out. In this WhatsApp has become a victim of its own success. When attackers are looking for new vulnerabilities, a ubiquitous applike WhatsApp or Facebookprovides a likely access point onto most phones if an exploit can be found. That goes with the territory.

Beefing up security will not help WhatsApp, or Signal for that matter, defend the latest moves by the U.S. government to undermine end-to-end encryption, allowing law enforcement access to private chats. Disappearing messages will not help a plug gaps in the encryption armour. And so while WhatsApp beefs up its security, the real battle looks like being with lawmakers not other platforms.

More here:
WhatsApp Users To Get This Killer New Feature: Heres How It Works - Forbes

The EARN IT Bill Is the Government’s Plan to Scan Every Message Online – EFF

Imagine an Internet where the law required every message sent to be read by government-approved scanning software. Companies that handle such messages wouldnt be allowed to securely encrypt them, or theyd lose legal protections that allow them to operate.

Take Action

Stop the Graham-Blumenthal Attack on Encryption

Thats what the Senate Judiciary Committee has proposed and hopes to pass into law. The so-called EARN IT bill, sponsored by Senators Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), will strip Section 230 protections away from any website that doesnt follow a list of best practices, meaning those sites can be sued into bankruptcy. The best practices list will be created by a government commission, headed by Attorney General Barr, who has made it very clear he would like to ban encryption, and guarantee law enforcement legal access to any digital message.

The EARN IT bill had its first hearing today, and its supporters strategy is clear. Because they didnt put the word encryption in the bill, theyre going to insist it doesnt affect encryption.

This bill says nothing about encryption, co-sponsor Sen. Blumenthal said at todays hearing. Have you found a word in this bill about encryption? he asked one witness.

Its true that the bills authors avoided using that word. But they did propose legislation that enables an all-out assault on encryption. It would create a 19-person commission thats completely controlled by the Attorney General and law enforcement agencies. And, at the hearing, a Vice-President at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) made it clear [PDF] what he wants the best practices to be. NCMEC believes online services should be made to screen their messages for material that NCMEC considers abusive; use screening technology approved by NCMEC and law enforcement; report what they find in the messages to NCMEC; and be held legally responsible for the content of messages sent by others.

You cant have an Internet where messages are screened en masse, and also have end-to-end encryption any more than you can create backdoors that can only be used by the good guys. The two are mutually exclusive. Concepts like client-side scanning arent a clever route around this; such scanning is just another way to break end-to-end encryption. Either the message remains private to everyone but its recipients, or its available to others.

The 19-person draft commission isnt any better than the 15-person commission envisioned in an early draft of the bill. Its completely dominated by law enforcement and allied groups like NCMEC. Not only will those groups have a majority of votes on the commission, but the bill gives Attorney General Barr the power to veto or approve the list of best practices. Even if other commission members do disagree with law enforcement, Barrs veto power will put him in a position to strongarm them.

The Commission wont be a body that seriously considers policy; it will be a vehicle for creating a law enforcement wish list. Barr has made clear, over and over again, that breaking encryption is at the top of that wish list. Once its broken, authoritarian regimes around the world will rejoice, as they have the ability to add their own types of mandatory scanning, not just for child sexual abuse material but for self-expression that those governments want to suppress.

The privacy and security of all users will suffer if U.S. law enforcement is able to achieve its dream of breaking encryption. Senators should reject the EARN IT bill.

Take Action

Stop the Graham-Blumenthal Attack on Encryption

View original post here:
The EARN IT Bill Is the Government's Plan to Scan Every Message Online - EFF

Patent hints that encrypted displays could appear on future Apple devices – TechSpot

Why it matters: Regardless of the security and privacy measures we take on our devices, the content reaching us through their screens is ultimately susceptible to shoulder surfing and is often the source of amusement for overly inquisitive peers. Although third-party and in-built privacy screens have tried to address the problem and succeeded to some extent, Apple seems to be developing a solution that visually encrypts the display itself to make it impossible for unwanted observers to figure out the actual screen content.

Shoulder surfing remains a common practice among folk who have little regard for user privacy and often engage in this unethical activity, either for personal amusement or to social engineer their way to someone's sensitive information.

There have been attempts to curb this phenomenon with products like HP's Sure View display technology built into some of its laptops and third-party privacy filters for several form-factor devices. Apple users, however, might not have to worry long about this problem as the company recently filed for a patent that tracks the user's gaze as they operate the device and visually encrypts content to protect it from unwanted observers.

PhoneArena reports that Apple's 'gaze-dependent display encryption' technology could appear in multiple Apple devices in the future, including iPhones, iPads, monitors, the Apple Watch - basically anything with a display and other hardware required for the tech to function.

Using the camera to identify and track the user's gaze, along with special processing circuitry, the device's screen can generate visually encrypted frames when an onlooker is detected. These frames are made up of two regions: one that includes unmodified content for the intended user, based on their gaze and proximity from the camera, and a second obscured region that shows manipulated content through text scrambling, color altering, and image warping techniques.

The area within these circles represents unmodified information currently under user view

The patent also suggests that content manipulation will take place dynamically as "display content is not to be visually encrypted" when an onlooker's gaze is away from the display. When they do take a peek (intentionally or otherwise), the processing circuitry will begin generating visually encrypted frames, seemingly unnoticeable to the user.

The whole idea potentially makes sure that information reaches its desired user safely, much like the Compubody Sock from several years ago that set out to achieve the same objective, albeit in a much simpler, low-tech fashion.

The Compubody Sock was certainly effective but risked you getting more attention than usual

It remains to be seen if Apple implements this technology in its future products or simply decides to add this patent to its ever-growing pile of unused ones. The company's Face ID tech could eventually evolve to support this feature, further improving the user privacy of its devices; however, the processing and financial costs associated with this technology are likely going to make for even more expensive Apple products in the future.

Original post:
Patent hints that encrypted displays could appear on future Apple devices - TechSpot

Cloud Encryption Technology Market Outlooks 2020: Industry Analysis, Growth rate, Cost Structures and Future Forecasts to 2025 – 3rd Watch News

The global Cloud Encryption Technology Market is influenced by several strategic factors and demand dynamics, a detailed study of which is presented in this report. The growth of the Cloud Encryption Technology market can be attributed to governmental regulations in key regions and the emerging business landscape. The report on the global Cloud Encryption Technology market covers these notable developments and evaluates their impact global market landscape.

The report presents a comprehensive analysis of market dynamics including growth drivers and notable trends impacting the future growth of the market. The report studies prominent opportunities, recent technological advances, and market changing factors in various nations. The factor affecting the revenue share of key regional markets are briefly analyzed in the report.

Get a Sample Copy of this Report @ https://www.regalintelligence.com/request-sample/75011

The Major Players Covered in this Report:Gemalto, Sophos, Symantec, SkyHigh Networks, Netskope

The rise Cloud Encryption Technology Industry have stimulated the competition between established market players and new entrants. The growing demand as result of vast majority of the population depends on the Cloud Encryption Technology industry to satisfy their daily requirements. The Cloud Encryption Technology industry is well known for its high standards of manufacturing, product quality, packaging and constant innovation. Further, prominent companies in the global industry are focused on providing more reliable Cloud Encryption Technology for various applications. The manufacturers are focused on providing high-performance devices and equipment to all sectors.

Reach us to quote the effective price of this report: https://www.regalintelligence.com/check-discount/75011

Why you should consider this report?

Key methods of major players

Enquire Before Buying this report @ https://www.regalintelligence.com/enquiry/75011

About Us:We, Regal Intelligence, aim to change the dynamics of market research backed by quality data. Our analysts validate data with exclusive qualitative and analytics driven intelligence. We meticulously plan our research process and execute in order to explore the potential market for getting insightful details. Our prime focus is to provide reliable data based on public surveys using data analytics techniques. If you have come here, you might be interested in highly reliable data driven market insights for your product/service,reach us here 24/7.

Contact Us:Regal Intelligencewww.regalintelligence.com[emailprotected]Ph no: +1 231 930 2779 (U.S.)

Follow Us:https://in.linkedin.com/company/regal-intelligence https://www.facebook.com/regalintelligence/ https://twitter.com/RI_insights

See more here:
Cloud Encryption Technology Market Outlooks 2020: Industry Analysis, Growth rate, Cost Structures and Future Forecasts to 2025 - 3rd Watch News

This is the biggest ‘WhatsApp mistake’ you are making on Android phones – Gadgets Now

NEW DELHI: WhatsApp users generally have a tendency to backup all chats: be it relevant or not. While storage is not an issue as WhatsApp backups dont count toward your Google Drive space, what is more concerning is that these WhatsApp backups may not be secured. This is because for Android phone users, the WhatsApp chats that get backed up on Google Drives, loses the default end-to-end (E2E) encryption. On the other hand, WhatsApp backups on iCloud, for iPhone users, these are encrypted. So, the next time you are trying to backup any sensitive chat on WhatsApp on Android, remember it is probably not a good idea as there would be no encryption at all. This is one of the biggest weaknesses in the entire WhatsApp E2E environment in Android.Thankfully, WhatsApp is reportedly working encrypting Google Drive chat backups. Android users can soon expect to password protect their WhatsApp chat backups on Google Drives, however, there is no official date yet as to when this feature would be available. The feature is in an alpha stage of development, so what were showing now is very poor but its enough to understand whats its purpose. Basically the feature allows you to encrypt your backup with a password, so youre sure that nobody (neither WhatsApp nor Google) will be able to see its content, according to WA Beta Info. Meanwhile, you can opt to disable auto chat backup in Google Drive or iCloud. Instead of chat backups, you can export specific chats. If some chats are important and needs to be saved, its a good idea to export them and save it securely somewhere else. Unnecessarily backing up all WhatsApp chats takes up storage and is often of little use. Also, disable the option to automatically add all WhatsApp media files in your phones gallery. WhatsApp photos consume your phones internal storage when they are saved in gallery. So, unless you explicitly want all those silly good morning photographs from appearing in your gallery, disable this option in the settings menu.

Read this article:
This is the biggest 'WhatsApp mistake' you are making on Android phones - Gadgets Now

Child exploitation bill earns strong opposition from encryption advocates – Washington Examiner

A bipartisan group of 10 senators introduced legislation designed to combat online child pornography, but many privacy and cybersecurity advocates are vehemently opposed to the bill.

Many groups focused on privacy and cybersecurity fear the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act ( EARN IT) will lead to new restrictions on the use of encryption on websites and web-based messaging services.

The bill gives the attorney general broad authority to craft new standards for websites and online services to protect against child pornography. Attorney General William Barr has often called encryption a valuable tool for child pornographers and other criminals, and privacy and security groups fear he will quickly move to require encryption back doors in online services.

The bill undermines the privacy of every single American, stifles our ability to communicate freely online, and may jeopardize the very prosecutions it seeks to enable, the American Civil Liberties Union said in a March 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Encrypted communications are vital to everyones privacy.

Sens. Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal released a discussion draft of the bill earlier this year, and on March 5, they introduced the bipartisan EARN IT Act. At the same time, Google, Facebook, and four other online companies announced they were adopting new voluntary guidelines to fight child pornography.

The bill would create a new commission that develops best practices for preventing online child pornography, and it would enforce these standards by removing lawsuit protections from websites and online services that fail to implement them.

The EARN IT Act would require online services to certify the best practices developed by the commission. If not, they risk expanded legal liability under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which protects sites from lawsuits for user-generated content accused of defamation, breach of contract, and other violations.

Section 230 protects video-hosting sites like YouTube and social media providers such as Facebook and Twitter, but also any website that allows users to post comments, including many news sites.

Sponsors of the bill argue that its needed to crack down on the tens of millions of photos and videos posted online depicting child abuse.

The EARN IT Act will ensure tech companies are using best business practices to prevent child exploitation online, Graham said in a statement. For the first time, [websites] will have to earn blanket liability protection when it comes to protecting minors. Our goal is to do this in a balanced way that doesnt overly inhibit innovation, but forcibly deals with child exploitation.

After senators introduced the EARN IT Act, a trickle of criticism turned into a flood, however. The bill could turn voluntary reporting of child pornography by websites into a legal procedure that requires newly deputized websites to get court-ordered warrants before turning in users, the ACLU said in its March 9 letter.

Any evidence of [child abuse] obtained through investigations conducted to comply with the EARN IT Act, therefore, could be inadmissible in court if obtained without a warrant or in any other manner that does not comply with the Fourth Amendment, the ACLU wrote.

Critics also noted the value of encryption to domestic violence victims, to dissidents and journalists, to members of Congress, and to members of the U.S. military.

The 82nd Airborne Army division, deployed in the Middle East, uses encrypted applications Signal and Wickr to avoid surveillance by the Iranian government, the ACLU said. Encrypted services protect all of us from the prying eyes of hostile foreign governments and numerous other bad actors.

Another 25 groups, including FreedomWorks, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Wikimedia Foundation, also wrote a letter to Graham and Blumenthal, voicing strong opposition to the bill. The legislation raises First Amendment and Fourth Amendment concerns, and it could push criminals to underground communications services.

Eliminating or undermining encryption on some online platforms will make law enforcements job harder by simply pushing criminals to other communications options, the groups wrote. In other words, EARN IT would harm ordinary users who rely on encrypted messaging, but would not stop bad actors.

Go here to see the original:
Child exploitation bill earns strong opposition from encryption advocates - Washington Examiner

A sneaky attempt to end encryption is worming its way through Congress – The Verge

A thing about writing a newsletter about technology and democracy during a global pandemic is that technology and democracy are no longer really at the forefront of everyones attention. The relationship between big platforms and the nations they operate in remains vitally important for all sorts of reasons, and Ive argued that the platforms have been unusually proactive in their efforts to promote high-quality information sources. Still, these moves are a sideshow compared to the questions were all now asking. How many people will get COVID-19? How many people will die? Will our healthcare system be overwhelmed? How long will it take our economy to recover?

We wont know the answers for weeks, but Im starting to fear the worst. On Wednesday the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 had officially become a pandemic. A former director for the Centers for Disease Control now says that in the worst case scenario, more than 1 million Americans could die.

This piece by Tomas Pueyo argues persuasively that the United States is currently seeing exponential growth in the number of people contracting the disease, and that hospitals are likely to be overwhelmed. Pueyos back ground is in growth marketing, not in epidemiology. But by now we have seen enough outbreaks in enough countries to have a rough idea of how the disease spreads, and to understand the value of social distancing that is, staying behind closed doors. So I want to recommend that everyone here reads that piece, and consider modifying your behavior if youre still planning events or spending a lot of time in public.

* * *

One risk of having the world pay attention to a single, all-consuming story is that less important but still urgent stories are missed along the way. One such unfolding story in our domain is the (deep breath) Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (EARN IT) Act, which was the subject of a Senate hearing on Wednesday. Heres Alfred Ng with an explainer in CNET:

The EARN IT Act was introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican of South Carolina) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Democrat of Connecticut), along with Sen. Josh Hawley (Republican of Missouri) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Democrat of California) on March 5.

The premise of the bill is that technology companies have to earn Section 230 protections rather than being granted immunity by default, as the Communications Decency Act has provided for over two decades.

For starters, its not clear that companies have to earn what are already protections provided under the First Amendment: to publish, and to allow their users to publish, with very few legal restrictions. But if the EARN IT Act were passed, tech companies could be held liable if their users posted illegal content. This would represent a significant and potentially devastating amendment to Section 230, a much-misunderstood law that many consider a pillar of the internet and the businesses that operate on top of it.

When internet companies become liable for what their users post, those companies aggressively moderate speech. This was the chief outcome of FOSTA-SESTA, the last bill Congress passed to amend Section 230. It was putatively written to eliminate sex trafficking, and was passed into law after Facebook endorsed it. I wrote about the aftermath in October:

[The law] threatens any website owner with up to 10 years in prison for hosting even one instance of prostitution-related content. As a result, sites like Craigslist removed their entire online personals sections. Sex workers who had previously been working as their own bosses were driven back onto the streets, often forced to work for pimps. Prostitution-related crime in San Francisco alone including violence against workers more than tripled.

Meanwhile, evidence that the law reduced sex trafficking is suspiciously hard to come by. And there is little reason to believe that the EARN IT Act will be a greater boon to public life.

Yet, for the reasons Issie Lapowsky lays out today in a good piece in Protocol, it may pass anyway. Once again Congress has lined up some sympathetic witnesses who paint a picture that, because of their misfortune, whole swathes of the internet should be eliminated. It would do that by setting up a byzantine checklist structure that would handcuff companies to a difficult-to-modify set of procedures. One item on that checklist could be eliminating end-to-end encryption in messaging apps, depriving the world of a secure communications tool at a time when authoritarian governments are surging around the world. Heres Lapowsky:

The EARN IT Act would establish the National Commission on Online Child Sexual Exploitation Prevention, a 19-member commission, tasked with creating a set of best practices for online companies to abide by with regard to stopping child sexual abuse material. Those best practices would have to be approved by 14 members of the committee and submitted to the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security, and the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission for final approval. That list would then need to be enacted by Congress. Companies would have to certify that theyre following those best practices in order to retain their Section 230 immunity. Like FOSTA/SESTA before it, losing that immunity would be a significant blow to companies with millions, or billions, of users posting content every day.

The question now is whether the industry can convince lawmakers that the costs of the law outweigh the benefits. Its a debate that will test what tech companies have learned from the FOSTA/SESTA battle and how much clout they even have left on Capitol Hill.

The bills backers have not said definitively that they will demand a backdoor for law enforcement (and whoever else can find it) as part of the EARN IT Act. (In fact, Blumenthal denies it.) But nor have they written the bill to say they wont. And Graham, one of the bills cosponsors, left little doubt on where he stands:

Facebook is talking about end-to-end encryption which means they go blind, Sen Graham said, later adding, Were not going to go blind and let this abuse go forward in the name of any other freedom.

Notably, Match Group the company behind Tinder, OKCupid, and many of the most popular dating apps in the United States has come out in support of the bill. (Thats easy for Match: none of the apps it makes offer encrypted communications.) The platforms are starting to speak up against it, though see this thread from WhatsApp chief Will Cathcart.

In the meantime, Graham raises the prospect that the federal government will get what it has long wanted greatly expanded power to surveil our communications by burying it in a complex piece of legislation that is nominally about reducing the spread of child abuse imagery. Its a cynical move, and if the similar tactics employed in the FOSTA-SESTA debate were any indication, it might well be an effective one.

Trending up: Amazon and the Gates Foundation might team up to deliver coronavirus test kits to Seattle homes. The test kits include nose swabs that can be mailed to the University of Washington for analysis.

Trending up: Amazon will give all employees diagnosed with coronavirus or put into quarantine up to two weeks of paid sick leave. The policy includes part-time warehouse workers. COVID-19 has really been a watershed for tech giants treating their contract workers like the human beings they are.

On the policy front:

The White House met with Facebook, Google, Amazon, Twitter, Apple, and Microsoft to coordinate efforts over the coronavirus outbreak. (Reuters)

YouTube will begin letting creators make money from their videos about the coronavirus. Its a reversal of an earlier decision the company made to automatically demonetize videos that talked about the outbreak. That decision angered creators, and now the company has walked it back. (Julia Alexander / The Verge)

On the economy:

Apple is closing all 17 of its retail stores in Italy until further notice as the coronavirus pandemic sweeps the country. (Mark Gurman / Bloomberg)

The coronavirus outbreak is hurting Airbnb hosts as travel screeches to a halt. The economic downturn is also impacting airlines and hotels, but hosts have fewer resources to cope. (Erin Griffith / The New York Times)

Travel influencers also say the spread of COVID-19 has impacted their lives and bottom lines. (Tanya Chen / BuzzFeed)

On the office front:

Google is asking all employees in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa to work from home due to coronavirus concerns. Employees in North American have already been given the same advice. (Isobel Asher Hamilton and Rob Price / Business Insider)

On the conference front:

The Council on Foreign Relations had to cancel a roundtable discussion about doing business under coronavirus due to, well, the coronavirus. Its one of many events that have been canceled or rescheduled in recent weeks to do the viruss spread. (David Welch / Bloomberg)

The biggest trade show in video games, E3 2020, was canceled due to coronavirus concerns. The event was supposed to take place at the Los Angeles Convention Center this June. (Jason Schreier / Kotaku)

On the misinformation front:

A Facebook group called U.K. Preppers & Survivalists is trying to stop misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic from spreading. One of the moderators said that while people should question news and politicians, questioning doctors isnt helpful. (Hussein Kesvani / Mel)

Hackers are sending emails with fake HIV results and coronavirus information that infect computers with malware, according to cybersecurity researchers at Proofpoint. The fake HIV emails are designed to look like they come from Vanderbilt University. (Jane Lytvynenko / BuzzFeed)

WeChat users in China are evading censors by translating a viral interview from a coronavirus whistleblower in Wuhan, China. Theyre rewriting it backward, filling it with typos and emojis, sharing it as a PDF, and even translating it into fictional languages like Klingon. (Ryan Broderick / BuzzFeed)

We need to combat misinformation about coronavirus the same way were combating the virus itself: with a communitarian focus. This strategy emphasizes the needs of the community rather than just focusing on the individual, this piece argues. (Whitney Phillips / Wired)

Elsewhere:

Microsoft, Google, and Zoom are trying to keep up with demand for their software, which allows people to work remotely. The companies have also started giving it away to companies and schools for free, as the coronavirus pandemic intensifies. (Rani Molla / Recode)

Heres the case for why coronavirus quarantines could be good for memes. Finally, some good news! (Brian Feldman / Intelligencer)

Maryland, Nebraska, and New York have all proposed taxes that would force tech companies to hand over a portion of the revenue generated from digital advertising. The proposals mirror taxes countries like France have also considered. Ashley Gold at The Information has the story:

The proposals vary in approach and scope, but they all center around the idea that big internet companies, having built their fortunes in part through the use of consumers personal information, should be contributing more to government coffers. The bills, which face mixed prospects for adoption, have drawn the ire of tech companies and other business groups, who say it could be challenging to determine precisely how much of their ad revenue comes from each state. In addition, tax experts said, the proposals could run afoul of federal law.

But lawmakers and other advocates believe the proposals might find favor with voters concerned about the power wielded by Silicon Valley and large corporations in general.

Also: The UK government confirmed that it will levy a 2 percent tax on the revenues of search engines, social media services and online marketplaces which derive value from U.K. users starting on April 1st. The United States government has been strongly opposed to the plan. (Shakeel Hashim / Protocol)

After 2016, Americans are alert to Russian election interference and outside attempts to spread discord. But conspiracy theories and vitriol are now coming from influencers in the United States verified users, many from within the media, and passionate hyper-partisan fan groups that band together to drive the conversation. (Rene DiResta / The Atlantic)

Joe Biden has more than tripled the amount of money his campaign is spending on Facebook ads following a strong showing on Super Tuesday. His spend on Facebook ads in March has exceeded that of Bernie Sanders and President Trump. (Salvador Rodriguez / CNBC)

As big tech companies struggle to moderate content with a mix of algorithms, fact-checkers, and policies, Wikipedia is quietly managing to stave off misinformation with an army of anonymous volunteers. (Alex Pasternack / Fast Company)

Clearview AI let multiple people associated with the Trump campaign use its facial recognition app. Venture capital firms including SoftBank, Sequoia Capital, Kleiner Perkins, and Founders Fund also ran searches. Clearview previously tried to claim that the app was only for law enforcement. (Ryan Mac, Caroline Haskins and Logan McDonald / BuzzFeed)

Microsoft organized 35 nations to take down one of the worlds largest botnets malware that secretly seizes control of millions of computers around the globe. The move was unusual because it was carried out by a company, not a government. (David E. Sanger / The New York Times)

Content related to far-right candidates in Poland makes up a greater percentage of general Facebook content than of content on mainstream outlets Facebook pages, according to researchers at Stanford. Evidence suggests this might be because far-right pages are especially good at boosting engagement on Facebook by posting content simultaneously across their networks. (Daniel Bush, Anna Gielewska, Maciej Kurzynski / Cyber Policy Center)

TikTok is launching a Transparency Center in Los Angeles to give outside experts more insight into how the company makes content moderation decisions. Its one of many moves the company has made in recent months to quell the concerns of US regulators and lawmakers. This ones interesting. Reuters explains:

The center would later provide insights into the apps source code, the closely guarded internal instructions of the software, and offer more details on privacy and security.

Several U.S. agencies that deal with national security and intelligence issues have banned employees from using the app, whose popularity among teenagers has been growing rapidly.

According to a 2017 Chinese law, companies operating in the country are required to cooperate with the government on national intelligence.

Egon Durban of Silver Lake is the latest Twitter board member to have never tweeted before joining the board.

Rihanna just announced shes opening a Fenty Beauty House for TikTok creators as part of a promotion for her makeup line. Creators will be able to raid the fully stocked Make-up Pantry to create their own beauty-focused content. What a fun time to be trapped together in a house with a bunch of people you barely know! Dont share make-up brushes yall! (Bianca Betancourt / Harpers Bazaar)

Alphabet was supposed to help Google invent its next blockbuster technologies. But nearly a half-decade has passed since it launched, and the breakthrough new businesses havent materialized. (Nick Bastone and Jessica E. Lessin / The Information)

Google has pressured TV manufacturers not to use Amazons Fire TV system. The strategy has slowed Amazons efforts to expand its Fire TV platform. (Janko Roettgers / Protocol)

Googles sibling company Sidewalk Labs is walking back plans to create a futuristic city in Toronto. The plans, which combined environmentally advanced construction with sensors to track residents movements, raised privacy concerns. In May, the government will announce if the project will proceed. (Ian Austen / The New York Times)

Send us tips, comments, questions, and EARN IT Act worse-case scenarios: casey@theverge.com and zoe@theverge.com.

See more here:
A sneaky attempt to end encryption is worming its way through Congress - The Verge

Bill to protect children online ensnared in encryption fight | TheHill – The Hill

Senate legislation to protect children from sexual exploitation online is being dragged into a larger fight over privacy and encryption.

The bill in question, the EARN IT Act, which has bipartisan support, would create a government-backed commission to develop "best practices" for dealing with rampant child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online.

If tech companies do not meet the best practices adopted by Congress, they would be stripped of their legal liability shield, laid out in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, in such cases.

But critics worry that the bill is simply a vehicle to block the tech industry's efforts to implement end-to-end encryption, a feature which makes it impossible for companies or government to access private communications between devices.

They worry the legislation could give government a backdoor to encrypted devices. That concern has been amplified by Attorney General William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrThe Hill's Morning Report - Trump takes unexpected step to stem coronavirus Hillicon Valley: House passes key surveillance bill | Paul, Lee urge Trump to kill FISA deal | White House seeks help from tech in coronavirus fight | Dem urges Pence to counter virus misinformation House passes key surveillance bill with deadline looming MORE, vocal opponent of encryption, who would head the best practices commission under the legislation.

Sen. Ron WydenRonald (Ron) Lee WydenDemocrats push for paid leave in coronavirus response Congresspours cold water on Trump's payroll tax cut Senate Democrats pan Trump's payroll tax proposal as 'huge mistake' MORE (D-Ore.) has slammed the bill as a "trojan horse to give Attorney General Barr and Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpThe Hill's Morning Report - Trump takes unexpected step to stem coronavirus Democrats start hinting Sanders should drop out Coronavirus disrupts presidential campaigns MORE the power to control online speech and require government access to every aspect of Americans' lives."

But supporters of the bill are pushing back.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamMcConnell, top GOP senators throw support behind surveillance deal as deadline looms Congresspours cold water on Trump's payroll tax cut Kennedy backs online child sexual exploitation bill, proposes back up measure MORE (R-S.C.), a bill co-sponsor, said during a hearing before his committee on Wednesday that the legislation is not about the encryption debate, but the best business practices.

This bill is not about ending encryption, added Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), another co-sponsor, Wednesday. And it is also - Im going to be very blunt here - not about the current attorney general, William Barr.

Blumenthal pointed out that the commission would have 19 members and that 14 votes would be needed to approve a best practice. Among those 19 members would be the attorney general, but also the Department of Homeland Security secretary and the chair of the Federal Trade Commission. The other 16 members would be appointed by the Senate majority leader, Senate minority leader, Speaker of the House and the House minority leader.

That has failed to calm the worries of privacy advocates.

Kathleen Ruane, senior legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, told The Hill that although there are other members on the committee, Barr will have an outsized role. She pointed to language in the bill giving the attorney general final approval power before best practices are sent to Congress.

Blumenthal has said that the attorney general can only reject proposed best practices on the commission, as opposed to pushing any through unilaterally.

Regardless of Barr's role and powers, critics say encryption will come up as the commission debates best practices.

You have law enforcement representatives [on the committee] and this is a huge issue among the law enforcement community... so it's very likely they'll bring it up, said Alan Rozenshtein, associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota and former attorney advisor for the Department of Justice. And then you have victim advocates and to the extent that they believe that encryption is part of the problem or needs to be addressed as part of the problem, they're going to bring it up as well.

"I don't really see a realistic situation in which this does not implicate encryption," he added.

Encryption is not explicitly mentioned in the bill, but that also means nothing stops them from making best practices related to it, said Elizabeth Banker, the deputy general counsel of the Internet Association, a trade association that represents many online companies.

Critics also have broader privacy concerns over the legislation outside of the encryption debate. Ruane said other best practices could pose threats to communication privacy.

One compromise that has been floated is to make it explicit in the legislation that the commission will not make any recommendations about encryption. But Graham has rebuffed that idea.

I'm not going to pre-determine what the right answers are, Graham told reporters Wednesday. Let the commission work.

Other lawmakers have also downplayed any threat to weakening encryption.

I can tell you right now I will not support something that compromises the integrity of encryption for users, because I think that that's hugely significant, Sen. Josh HawleyJoshua (Josh) David HawleyGOP senators introduce bill banning TikTok on government devices The Hill's Morning Report Presented by the APTA Now it's Biden vs. Bernie: no endorsement from Warren Schumer, Roberts clash inflames partisan rift over Supreme Court MORE (R-Mo.), one of the 11 bill co-sponsors, told reporters Wednesday.

Hawley accused tech companies of bringing up the issue of encryption to derail the legislation, which will place more responsibility on them to prevent exploitation of children online.

What the tech companies will do is seize at any straw to try to argue that we just can't possibly revise Section 230, he told reporters. Let's not underestimate how rich they've gotten on Section 230.

Blumenthal said at the hearing that some big tech companies are using encryption as a subterfuge to oppose this bill.

There have been changes to the bill from an earlier version leaked in February. That version had only 15 members on the commission and required a lower threshold to approve best practices.

Asked about those changes, Blumenthal told reporters that legislators were listening for constructive suggestions as they drafted the bill.

As lawmakers move to finalize the bill, both sides are digging in.

I am not going to stand on the sidelines any longer, Graham said Wednesday, vowing to push the legislation forward.

Read the original post:
Bill to protect children online ensnared in encryption fight | TheHill - The Hill