Global E-mail Encryption Market 2021 Demands To Sustain in Future Industry Size, Growth, Revenue, Global Statistics and Forecast to 2030 The Manomet…

TheE-mail Encryption MarketReport makes available the current and forthcoming technical and financial details of the industry. The report contains an in-depth analysis of market characteristics, size and growth, segmentation, regional and country breakdowns, competitive landscape. This report explores all the key factors affecting the growth of the global market, including demand-supply scenario, pricing structure, profit margins, production, and value chain analysis. TheBig Market Researchstudy involves the extensive usage of both primary and secondary data sources.

The process begins with internal and external sources to obtain qualitative and quantitative information related to the Global E-mail Encryption Market. It also provides an overview and forecast for the Global E-mail Encryption Market based on all the segmentation provided for the global region. The predictions highlighted in the Global E-mail Encryption Market share report have been derived using verified research procedures and assumptions. By doing so, theBig Market Researchreport serves as a repository of analysis and information for every component of the Global E-mail Encryption Market

NOTE:Our report highlights the major issues and hazards that companies might come across due to the unprecedented outbreak of COVID-19.

Ask for a Holistic Sample PDF Copy of Global E-mail Encryption Market with Figures, Graphs and Tocs:https://www.bigmarketresearch.com/request-sample/4305143?utm_source=MNO&utm_medium=MWA

Market players have been discussed and profiles of leading players including Top Key Companies:HPData MotionProofpointEdgeWaveTrend MicroCryptzoneSymantecSophosLuxSciPrivato

Key highlights from Covid-19 impact assessment:

Why to Select This Report:

Talk to our Analyst / Ask for a profitable discount on Global E-mail Encryption Market and Get More Information Related to This Report:https://www.bigmarketresearch.com/request-for-discount/4305143?utm_source=MNO&utm_medium=MWA

The Global E-mail Encryption Market is also characterized by a highly complex value chain involving product manufacturers, material suppliers, technology developers, and manufacturing equipment developers. Partnerships between research organizations and the industry players help in streamlining the path from the lab to commercialization. In order to also leverage the first mover benefit, companies need to collaborate with each other so as to develop products and technologies that are unique, innovative and cost effective.

The report includes the region-wise segmentation North America (United States, Canada and Mexico), Europe (Germany, France, UK, Russia and Italy), Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India and Southeast Asia), South America (Brazil, Argentina, Colombia etc.), Middle East and Africa (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, Nigeria and South Africa) of the market. In the regional segmentation, the regions dominating the Global E-mail Encryption market are included along with the regions where the growth of the market is slow.

By the product type, the Global E-mail Encryption Market is primarily split into 2020-2025:On-PremisesCloud

By the end-users/application, the Global E-mail Encryption Market report covers the following segments 2020-2025:BFSIHealthcareGovernmentRetailIT and TelecomEducationManufacturingOthers

Conclusively, this report is a one stop reference point for the industrial stakeholders to get Global E-mail Encryption market forecast of till 2025. This report helps to know the estimated market size, market status, future development, growth opportunity, challenges, and growth drivers of by analyzing the historical overall data of the considered market segments.

You May Also Like Our Other Top Trending Reports:

For More Information Regarding Other Similar Trending Report Click on The Given Link:https://manometcurrent.com/provider-data-management-solution-market-forecast-covering-growth-inclinations-development-strategies-until-2030-kyruus-lexisnexis-apexonhealth/

Contact us:Mr. Abhishek Paliwal5933 NE Win Sivers Drive, #205, Portland,OR 97220 United StatesDirect:+1-971-202-1575Toll Free:+1-800-910-6452E-mail:help@bigmarketresearch.com

See more here:
Global E-mail Encryption Market 2021 Demands To Sustain in Future Industry Size, Growth, Revenue, Global Statistics and Forecast to 2030 The Manomet...

Hardware Encryption Market 2021 Industry Analysis by Manufacturers, End-User, Type, Application, Regions and Forecast to 2027 The Manomet Current -…

Hardware Encryption Industry is going to play an increasingly important role in the coming years, Market Predicts High CAGR between 2020 and 2027. Breaking down the global trend Hardware Encryption Market currently leading in Europe, the APAC region, South America, and the MEA region. Hardware Encryption is totally fragmented due to presence of maximum players in most of the regions across the globe. Later, the report also delivers different segments on basis of product category, plentiful applications of the product and key revenue regions which highly contribute to the Market share.

Request a Free Sample to Understand the Scope of the Report: https://www.esticastresearch.com/report/hardware-encryption-market/#request-for-sample

Note: Report Covers the Detailed Pre and Post COVID-19 Impact Analysis on Hardware Encryption Market

Hardware Encryption Market was valued at $52.45 billion in 2016, and is projected to reach $1,085 billion by 2024, having a CAGR of 46.3% during the forecast period of 2017 to 2024. The technology which encrypts the data stored in a hard drive using appropriate and specific mathematical functions is called as hardware encryption. Hardware encryption restricts the unauthorized entities from accessing the important data. The hardware encryption market is majorly driven by reduced cost of encryption and increasing complexity & volume of data breaches.

The research scrutinizes new growth opportunities, carried out with in-depth analysis of the Hardware Encryption Market on the basis of development, and data analysis accounting every aspect of Hardware Encryption Market. Global industry interprets the fundamental aspects of the commanding Market players with their business summary, Hardware Encryption Market sales, press release and evolution taking place in the Market.

COVID-19 IMPACT Analysis on Hardware Encryption Market

Coronavirus has influenced every one of the organizations, little or large, dealing in any sector. The growth curves of Hardware Encryption Market have seen immense fluctuations in the year 2020. The Market scenario and the pace of growth have taken a colossal turn and have prompted numerous adjustments in the cycles, which will have repercussions for a significant stretch. 2021 is probably going to be superior to 2020 for the Hardware Encryption Market players as the greater part of the organizations have continued their activities and the interest is getting reestablished for them.

Some Major 10+ Key players in the Hardware Encryption Market:

Certes Networks Inc.IBM CorporationImation Corp.Kingston Technology Corporation Inc.Maxim Integrated Products Inc.Micron Technology Inc.NetApp Inc.Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.SanDisk CorporationSeagate Technology LLCToshiba Corporation

Click here to get the short-term and long-term impacts of COVID-19 on this Market. Please visit: https://www.esticastresearch.com/report/hardware-encryption-market

Hardware Encryption Market Competitive Analysis:

The report studies the competitive framework and business environment via different analytical frameworks such as

Download the Post-Pandemic Business Planning Structure : https://www.esticastresearch.com/report/hardware-encryption-market/#request-for-sample

Hardware Encryption Market Segmentation:

Report digs deep into critical aspects of key subjects which help Market players to make appropriate changes in their approach. Hardware Encryption Market report provide competitive analysis which helps readers to become aware of unique characteristics of crucial factors impacting the Market competition. Hardware Encryption Market report provides accurate Market data, Market dynamics and key segments. Report will also provide that how will Market situation change in the coming years and the Important changes in Market dynamics, it also provides former, on-going, and projected Market analysis in terms of volume and value with Emerging segments and regional Markets.

By Segments

By UsageStorage DeviceNetwork

By Application,

Healthcare SectorMilitary & AerospaceAutomotive & TransportationBFSIIT & TelecomOthers (Retail, Education, Individual User)

Regional analysis:

Geographical Markets are covered separately within the report that includes a competitive analysis on their Market performance in the base year as well as predictions for the forecast year. Extensive primary research is conducted to carry out leading information in order to understand the Market condition and competition within a specified geography. Comparison between two or multiple geographical Markets is carried out effectively to know where to invest in.

By Regions:

Click here for Detailed Analysis Report : https://www.esticastresearch.com/report/hardware-encryption-market

Customization of the Report: This report can be customized to meet the clients requirements. Please connect with our sales team (ash@esticastresearch.com), who will ensure that you get a report that suits your needs. You can also get in touch with our executives on +1-213-262-0704 to share your research requirements. Note: If you have any special requirement, please let us know and we will offer you the report as you want.

Click Here for FREE Consultation Call with Our Analysts/Industry Experts to Find Solution for Your Business : https://www.esticastresearch.com/report/hardware-encryption-market/#inquiry-before-buying

Contact Us:

Esticast ResearchEmail: ash@esticastresearch.comPhone: +1-213-262-0704Web: http://www.esticastresearch.com

More:
Hardware Encryption Market 2021 Industry Analysis by Manufacturers, End-User, Type, Application, Regions and Forecast to 2027 The Manomet Current -...

Former Anonymous and Lulzsec hacker discusses his criminal past and gives his top tips for avoiding ransomware – Texasnewstoday.com

Jake Davis, known as Topiary, breaks down the Travelex hack amongst others, and explains why the governments repeated attempts to outlaw end-to-end encryption will never work

Jake Davis, the former hacker known as Topiary and senior member of hacktivist groups Anonymous and Lulzsec has spoken about the scale of the ransomware challenge facing organisations today, and given his tips for staying secure.

Speaking at Computings recent Cyber Security Festival, Davis began by outlining his history as a hacktivist before his capture and arrest in 2011.

Im a former hacktivist, I was involved in Anonymous and Lulzsec. I was involved in hacking the Westboro Baptist Church, which is a homophobic and racist group. W e would target groups like this and take them down. That also shows the silly mistakes I made when I was a hacker.

Obviously Im not one now because Im showing my face I got caught! I used my real voice like an idiot during the live broadcast of the hack on YouTube in 2010.

He also discussed his history with Lulzsec.

I was also involved in Lulzsec we were a meta hacking group that tried to make fun of hacking groups who took themselves seriously. Our naive teenage goal was to expose the lack of global security posture by hacking everything in existence. With immediate hindsight that was very reckless. Someone dared us on Twitter to take down the CIA website, so we took it down for the afternoon.

His groups were also involved in several attacks on well-known newspapers.

We pioneered this real fake news strategy where wed highlight security flaws in major newspaper websites by hacking into them and posting stories as if they were from their own editorial team like Tupac and Biggy are alive in New Zealand.

We also went after News International in 2011 in the midst of the phone hacking scandal, where journalists from the Sun and News of the World and others were getting away with hacking the voicemails of celebrities, whilst hacktivists were prosecuted. They had very good lawyers so they were getting away with it, so we hacked them in response.

But events soon spiralled out of control.

Things got a little out of hand. We were 17 and 18 at the time. We didnt realise the scope of how the real world would respond, until we saw our ridiculous imagery of a man in a top hat sipping wine with a cat flying through space, on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. The headline was Hackers broaden their attacks.

People started to dress like us, and we were trending on Twitter with boy band One Direction at number two. We realised things have gone too far and we were doomed. And indeed we were.

Davis outlined the details of his arrest and prosecution.

I was arrested in a joint Met Police operation with the FBI. I was sentenced to two years in a young offenders institute. Luckily I didnt need to spend anything like two years though because for the previous two years Id been in home detention with an electronic tag, because it took so long to go to trial. In 2011 prosecuting this type of attack was so novel, the legal teams and judges didnt know how to get to grips with it.

I spent five years until 2018 banned from encryption. Which makes no sense, the law made no sense. I spoke to someone from the serious crime prevention squad to explain I needed to draw some money from the bank. Technically Im using encryption when I put the card in, because you enter your PIN, that goes to the bank and its encrypted. If I turn on my computer, thats encryption.

Today Davis works in the cyber security industry.

I do some traditional cyber work, some bug bounty hunting, creative consultancy for TV, movies and theatre. I talk to universities and schools and encouraging the next generation of hackers not to be like Lulzsec, but to think critically and to use their skills to make the world a more secure place.

If I had to compare 2021 to 2011 theres a lot of negativity around hacker groups now because theyve moved more towards financial gain, especially with ransomware. Thats what I hear about the most.

Bug Bounties

He explained that he is a big fan of bug bounties, with some companies encourage ethical hacking where hackers privately expose the vulnerabilities they have discovered in corporate sites in exchange for money, so that the organisation can fix the problem before a more malicious actor has the chance to exploit it.

Bug bounties are very useful, and they did not exist in any formal way when I was hacking ten years ago. There were some companies ten years ago we hacked who we decided to inform quietly rather than make public. The NHS for example. In 2011 we found flaws in NHS websites in England so we told them about it privately. The Crown Prosecution Service decided to prosecute us for this anyway which nowadays would be completely insane.

If youre a big company and you put out a notice saying you can hack us within this scope, theres no way youre going to start prosecuting hackers, youd get laughed out of the room. We often in the UK overlook things like in Argentina if youre a bug bounty hacker you earn 40 times more than the median salary.

This is improving year on year in places like Argentina, where bug bounty hackers can provide for their entire families, and their skills are through the roof. If youre Facebook and you have a $500 minimum which you pay hackers, and you pay it directly into their Paypal account thats amazing for them.

When ethical hackers were surveyed and asked why they hack, the number one reason was To make money. This is what motivates even the most moral and ethical hackers. Thats the same motivation for not very ethical hackers and thats a big problem because the ability to make money through cybercrime has always existed, but its become very easy now.

We like to think were in a world where 11 billion records have been leaked but only very high level hackers can go after those records, but the truth is that the skill floor is so ridiculously low.

The site HaveIBeenPwned.com lists 11.4 billion breached accounts in existence, a number which is growing by around a billion a year.

This is a very ethical website, you put in your email address and it says you are in this many data breaches, but there are unethical versions of this site where people put in your email or phone number and they get all of your information and takes no skill to do. We dont really know how many of these sites have been hacked.

Travelex

Davis went on to explain that around $350 million was paid out in ransoms in 2020, then gave a case study around the Travelex hack in 2020.

Theres a very specific type of software they were using which was eight months out of date. They were advised to patch this five months before by the UK government, and five months before that UK security advisors came out with a fix for this bug. So essentially they were eight months out of date on a piece of software and were hit with a ransomware attack, and ended up paying out 2.3 million.

This is an interesting example of ransomware groups who dont target companies but software vulnerabilities. So if there are 10,000 companies using a piece of software and the hackers know of a vulnerability in that software they go for all 10,000, and they check the net and go Oh look weve got Travelex, lets extort them, and they end up paying.

A Dutch supermarket ran out of cheese once because of ransomware. A logistics supplier got hacked. No one was specifically targeting a Dutch logistics company they just happened to be using a piece of software.

It was the same with Wannacry. They werent targeting the NHS, they were targeting banks elsewhere in the world and it just so happened to hit the UK.

Darkside

He also described more advanced hacking groups like Darkside, which he said included hackers with a far higher level of skill.

Theyre very media savvy and they use double extortion. They also know whats in the files theyve hacked. So they can extort you for money for releasing the files, but then they go We know the damage it would cause to you to release this information, and that results in a lot of companies paying up. I saw recently a chatlog because they have their own customer support, which is really victim negotiation chat, where a victim was saying Ill pay 7 million, and Darkside said: Youre not a bunch of children we know you have the money, give us 12 million. And they ended up getting it.

These groups can also outsource to other hackers, because they have a lot of money, and a lot of cryptocurrency. So they say to another hacker Well pay you $500,000 for a zero-day vulnerability. That will net them more ransomware revenue. And theyll also offer ransomware as a service and take an affiliate percentage of it.

A lot of them wont be able to get that money out because its very traceable, but they still have millions of dollars at their disposal, but often not much skill. And thats a scary thought when there are websites where you can buy the latest iPhone hack for a million dollars they have that, its not much money to them.

Security Tips

All of which is very alarming for organisations of all shapes and sizes. So what does Davis recommend that we do about it?

You can search peoples usernames or passwords to retrieve information about an entire company. So credential management is extremely important along with enforcing unique credentials.

Two-factor authentication is also essential. And please dont use SMS for two-factor authentication, because basically the entire telecoms network should be destroyed and rebuilt!

The most important thing I can leave you with on ransomware is dont just worry about stopping ransomware hitting you, but run simulations on what would happen if ransomware did hit you. The raging debate at the moment is should you pay the ransom?

My view is you should never pay unless you have to, so you should strive to not have to. So run these simulations so you can say if we are hit, can we position ourselves do we dont need to pay? So you have the backups, they work and the damage can be mitigated so you can still function as a business.

My number one piece of advice: just listen to more talks for security events.

Davis then discussed cyber insurance, explaining that hackers today target cyber insurance companies specifically so they can get lists of clients, so they know who to hack. They then get a higher likelihood of receiving a payout.

Cyber insurance companies now often refuse to payout ransom demands. There are 40 or so companies about the $500 million premium threshold and if only a few of those are hit and get a maximum payout then youre looking at over half a century of premiums. At the moment its risky for companies getting cyber insurance but its also risky for the cyber insurance companies themselves.

He sees wasted effort in cyber security, and also dislikes the extravagant claims made by some products.

Im very sceptical of expensive products which claim to stop 100 per cent of all hacks. You cannot say youre 100 per cent unhackable. Companies who claim to make you invincible should be avoided. What I see a lack of is hiring good people and sticking to basic principles.

For instance the Travelex hack could have been avoided by patching software. I wish I didnt have to say this, if you have these core principles in place you destroy the low hanging fruit for low level hackers. Whats happened in the last decade is the low level hackers have scaled up and now youve got people that ten years ago couldnt fund themselves now have access to millions of dollars in cryptocurrency and can buy the worlds greatest exploits and espionage technology and run havoc with it.

Companies are focused on defending against the big nation-state zero-day exploiting threats, but getting knocked out by these cheeky attacks by kids. And they dont admit it, because it would look bad to say we forgot to lock this door, but this is what most hacks are, and it will continue that way until we correct this basic posture.

End-to-end Encryption

Finally Davis talked about the UK governments repeated attempts to outlaw end-to-end encryption.

It wont work. Banning end to end encryption is like banning maths, it wont work. You cant put a backdoor into end-to-end encryption for the government because as Ed Snowden says a backdoor for one is a backdoor for all.

Theres also nothing wrong with encrypting your data. Lots of threat actors will say youre hiding something. The classic line is you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide, which I dont agree with at all. Its not about hiding something its about your basic fundamental human right to privacy.

I travel around with a lot of sensitive work-related information on my laptop, and I take pride in full-disc encrypting it. This is something we can all do.

Governments find most success in taking over entire infrastructure. If you look at end-to-end encrypted messenger apps which are designed specifically for crime like EncroChat, they just get completely taken over by governments.

I agree with targeted surveillance, going after specific people, but mass surveillance and going after end-to-end encryption is a very slippery slope, so my advice is to encrypt everything.

Former Anonymous and Lulzsec hacker discusses his criminal past and gives his top tips for avoiding ransomware Source link Former Anonymous and Lulzsec hacker discusses his criminal past and gives his top tips for avoiding ransomware

Read the original post:
Former Anonymous and Lulzsec hacker discusses his criminal past and gives his top tips for avoiding ransomware - Texasnewstoday.com

How the FBI Is Trying to Break Encryption Without Actually Breaking Encryption – Gizmodo

Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP (Getty Images)

Since at least the 1990s, federal officials have publicly worried that encrypted communications give aid to terrorists and criminals. More often than not they have, to some degree, been right.

In the early 2000s, Los Zetas, the infamous Mexican cartel, actually created their own military-grade encrypted radio network, which they used to mask the movements of their narco-trafficking supply chain. Around the same time, al Qaeda and other terrorist Mujahideen groups began using self-engineered encryption software in the hopes of avoiding the all-seeing eye of Americas national security state. Other criminal groups quickly followed suit and, today, the need for dark capabilities has given rise to companies that intentionally court and sell exclusively to underworld clientele. These firms, which allegedly go to great lengths to protect their customers, appear to have a short life span, however: In the last few years, a number of prominent encryption platforms and other technologies have been infiltrated and dismantled by law enforcementwith the most recent example occurring just a week ago.

Last Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Trojan Shield, a bold, over-the-top law enforcement operation. In it, the FBI used a high-level criminal informant to co-opt and then run an encrypted chat platform, called ANOM, designed specifically for transnational criminal organizations. Rather than infiltrate an existing platform, the feds had decided to create and operate their own. When drug traffickers and money launderers flocked to ANOM, the FBI and other authorities were waiting, ready to intercept and study all of the communications the crooks offered up. It was the honeypot to end all honeypotsa baited trap on a global scale.

Certainly, the short-term payoff from the operation has been overwhelming: all last week, governments throughout the world continued a parade of hundreds of arrests, with police holding press conferences and gleefully trotting out indictments related to the operation. Alleged biker gangs, Italian crime families, drug traffickers throughout the world were all ensnared. In the U.S., the Justice Department indicted 17 people allegedly involved in managing ANOM (despite the FBIs secret role), arresting a majority of them. The operation has also revealed a deluge of intelligence about the ways in which international criminal syndicates operate, which will doubtlessly help inform future investigations targeted against such groups.

And yet, one of the operations long-term goals, as stated by police, seems elusiveif not quixotic. We aim to shatter any confidence in the hardened encrypted device industry with our indictment and announcement that this platform was run by the FBI, said Acting U.S. Attorney Randy Grossman during a press conference last week. Similarly, Suzanne Turner, the special agent in charge of the FBIs San Diego Field Office, said that this should be considered a warning to criminals. [Those] who believe they are operating under an encrypted cloak of secrecy, your communications are not secure, Turner said. She later added that the operation would hopefully keep criminals guessing as to whether a platform was a legitimate business or one secretly run by the feds.

G/O Media may get a commission

Grossman and Turners statements mark a turning point in a decades-long effort by the U.S. government to undermine encrypted communication, which has proliferated into the mainstream in recent years, from Signal to iMessage, WhatsApp to Google Messages. If the cops cant break encrypted technologies, theyll break our confidence in them insteadeven if it means crossing the line themselves.

Encrypted messaging apps are pretty much untouchable by law enforcement, said James A. Lewis, a security professional with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in a phone call. Lewis has studied the issue for years.

People used to speak by air-conditioners, or go for a walk in the park, he said, referencing Godfather-type scenarios, in which criminals would sneak around to avoid wiretapping. Now, he said, everybody, including the mafia, has a smartphone in their pocket. Thus, the temptation to rely on such easy methods of communication is strong. Its just a general shift to relying on messaging, he said. Criminals have moved with the rest of the population.

The companies that have preceded ANOMmany of which were infiltrated and dismantled by copsworked hard to conceal their activities, which were done in the service of criminal ecosystems centered around drug dealing and murder, government officials have argued. For instance, Phantom Secure, a now-defunct phone company that offered modified, encrypted Blackberry and Android devices, reportedly sold a majority of its services to Mexican drug cartels, which used the devices to communicate with underlings and strategize narcotics shipments. Two other platforms that were recently taken down by policeSky Global and EncroChatallegedly functioned in very much the same way.

Similarly, the devices used by the kind of groups ensnared in Trojan Shield are far different than your average civilian encrypted chat app like Signal or WhatsAppboth of which use end-to-end encryption, meaning only the sender and recipient have access to any conversations. Most often, they are modified phones that have had the GPS, mic, and camera capabilities disabled, and include a specialized encrypted chat app that functions on a closed loop with other devices specifically designed to communicate with each other. On top of this, the government claims companies that sell such devices will often offer covert protection to their customershelping to remotely wipe the contents of phones if they are confiscated by police. With all of these benefits, criminals have little incentive to give up these types of services because they are simply too useful to their operations.

A lot of the encryption is un-hackable, Lewis said. If you can get access to the device then your chances are better, but if you are just intercepting traffic, it can be exceptionally difficultmaybe even impossible [to hack it].

That unbridgeable impasse is partially why the FBI and other federal agencies have spent the last 30 years waging a slow-motion campaign against the use of encryption. During the first so-called Crypto Wars in the 1990s, national security politicos in the Clinton administration argued that the proliferation of encryption technologies worldwide would effectively create a force-field around corruption. Ever since then, federal officials have, in one way or another, aggressively pursued a workaround for the technology, often employing strategies that threatened civil liberties and treated Americans privacy as an afterthought.

This has gone through a number of different iterations. When the 90s lobbying to halt encryptions export didnt work, the feds quickly turned to a different strategy: lobbying the private sector to install backdoors in their encrypted networks so that the FBI could enjoy intimate access to Americans protected communications. Beginning in the mid-2000s, the Justice Department and the FBI went on a charm offensivetrying to explain to Congress and the American people why it really needed to do this. That campaign has lasted for years, with ongoing lobbying by the FBI director continuing to the present moment.

With Trojan Shield, it really seems like a whole new tactic in the governments ongoing battle against encryption, but one that is far more psychological than legal. Here, the bureau seems to be attempting to shake overall confidence in encrypted platformsinspiring doubt over whether those communications are really secure or just a giant honeypot with an FBI agent lingering in the rearview. In so doing, theyre basically trying to undermine a technology that serves as one of the few protections for everyday peoples privacy in a world intentionally designed to eviscerate it.

Jennifer Lynch, the surveillance litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that the recent operation was concerningadding that she doubted the FBI even had the legal authority in the U.S. to carry out Trojan Shield, which is probably why it was partnered with more than 100 countries, according to the DOJ.

We still dont know a lot about how this investigation occurred and how all of the data-sharing transpired among the different countries that were involved, Lynch said in a phone interview. What we do know, however, is concerning enough. The FBI said that they geo-fenced communications of Americans. That says to me that even the FBI doesnt believe they have legal authority under the Fourth Amendment or our federal wiretapping act to do what they did.

Extrapolating on that point, Lynch noted the bureaus partnership with Australia, which recently passed the TOLA Act. The law allows the Australian government to compel private companies and technologists to reengineer software and products so that they can be used to spy on users. Australias laws also allow for extensive wiretapping, ones that far outstrip the ones available in the U.S., Lynch said.

Basically, the FBI is laundering its surveillance through another country, she said.

Alternately, Lewis argues that the challenges posed by encryption force law enforcement to get creative with how they combat the increasing use of the technology by criminal groups.

You have to get a subpoena, you have to get the company to cooperate, said Lewis, explaining the current restrictions when police try to investigate malfeasance via encrypted chat platforms. The company wontin many caseshave access to the unencrypted data. Thats where something like this becomes attractive [to criminals].

Even with high-powered entities like the National Security Agency, the data they intercept wont necessarily be useful in traditional law enforcement investigations, he said. The NSA is not in the law enforcement business, he said. Theyre not collecting evidence. So even in the cases where they have intercepted traffic, it could not be used in court, said Lewis. So youve got technology problems and legal problems.

If the operation has seeded doubt about the security of the platforms for criminal use, then its done its job, he argues.

Its certainly planted a seed of doubt in their minds, he said, of the criminals. Uncertainty really helps. It means theyll want to do more face-to-face meetings or something else other than talk on the phone, which may make them easier to catch, he said.

Of course, the FBI plants seeds of doubt by chucking handfuls of the stuff at everyone within earshotits not just criminals who will fear that someones reading every text, its all of us. And for Lynch, thats an injustice.

I think that what the FBI did is highly suspect, she said, and I think that we should all be concerned about itbecause it makes us question the privacy and security of our communications.

See the original post:
How the FBI Is Trying to Break Encryption Without Actually Breaking Encryption - Gizmodo

Vergecast: Windows 11 leaks, RCS encryption, and this week in antitrust – The Verge

Every Friday, The Verge publishes our flagship podcast, The Vergecast, where co-hosts Nilay Patel and Dieter Bohn discuss the week in tech news with the reporters and editors covering the biggest stories.

In this episode, the show is split into three sections. First, Nilay and Dieter talk to Verge senior editor Tom Warren about this week in Microsoft: leaks of the Windows 11 UI, announcements from E3 2021, and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella doubling as the companys chairman.

In section two of the show, Verge politics reporter Makena Kelly returns to explain the continuing push by the US government to enact antitrust legislation on tech monopolies this week, five new bills were introduced and the Senate confirmed a new commissioner of the FTC.

In part 3, Verge managing editor Alex Cranz joins in to chat about this week in gadgets and Google the company is adding end-to-end encryption to their Messages app, Sonos officially announced their picture frame speaker, and Telsas Model S Plaid made its big debut.

You can listen to the full discussion here or in your preferred podcast player.

The rest is here:
Vergecast: Windows 11 leaks, RCS encryption, and this week in antitrust - The Verge

Bitcoin and Encryption: A Race Between Criminals and the F.B.I. – The New York Times

Law enforcement also has an advantage when it gets ahold of digital devices. Despite claims from Apple, Google and even the Justice Department that smartphones are largely impenetrable, thousands of law enforcement agencies have tools that can infiltrate the latest phones to extract data.

Police today are facing a situation of an explosion of data, said Yossi Carmil, the chief executive of Cellebrite, an Israeli company that has sold data extraction tools to more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies, including hundreds of small police departments across the United States. The solutions are there. There is no real challenge to accessing the data.

The police also have an easier time getting to data stored in the cloud. Technology companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft regularly turn over customers personal data, such as photographs, emails, contacts and text messages, to the authorities with a warrant.

From January 2013 through June 2020, Apple said, it turned over the contents of tens of thousands of iCloud accounts to U.S. law enforcement in 13,371 cases.

And on Friday, Apple said that in 2018, it had unknowingly turned over to the Justice Department the phone records of congressional staff members, their families and at least two members of Congress, including Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, now the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The subpoena was part of an investigation by the Trump administration into leaks of classified information.

Yet intercepting communications has remained a troublesome problem for the police. While criminals used to talk over channels that were relatively simple to tap like phones, emails and basic text messages most now use encrypted messengers, which are not.

Two of the worlds most popular messaging services, Apples iMessage and Facebooks WhatsApp, use so-called end-to-end encryption, meaning only the sender and receiver can see the messages. Not even the companies have access to their contents, allowing Apple and Facebook to argue that they cannot turn them over to law enforcement.

Read more from the original source:
Bitcoin and Encryption: A Race Between Criminals and the F.B.I. - The New York Times

WhatsApp vs govt: Can traceability and encryption co-exist? – Business Today

Amidst WhatsApp's own privacy policy havoc, many have questioned the irony of WhatsApp's recent challenge to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Intermediary Rules) on grounds of privacy.

That said, WhatsApp's challenge brings some key issues to light, especially with respect to compatibility of these rules with end-to-end encryption technologies and the consequent privacy implications.

Encryption technologies in India have long been a bone of contention, especially with the government's authority to require decryption of content under Information Technology laws.

Also Read: WhatsApp sues Indian govt, says new media rules mean end to privacy

The recently notified Intermediary Rules on 25 February 2021 for 'intermediaries' (e.g. WhatsApp, Facebook and Twitter) and digital media publishers (e.g. online news portals and video streaming platforms) have now created a pandemonium in the industry by requiring tracing and identification of users and deploying technological tools for content moderation.

Though these tracing and content moderation obligations apply only to 'Significant Social Media Intermediaries' (SSMIs) (i.e. social media intermediaries having over five million registered users in India), these rules create serious implications for online platforms and users across the board. Notably, WhatsApp has challenged these rules before the Delhi High Court as the 3-month timeline given to SSMIs to implement these obligations came to an end on May 26, 2021.

Identification of 'first originator'

Under the new Intermediary Rules, SSMIs 'primarily' providing messaging services are obligated to identify the first originator of information in India (without identifying the contents of the information) when required by court or executive order on grounds such as national security, public interest etc. This is a step further in the existing obligations to decrypt content upon government orders and maintaining decryption keys.

This is likely to be an obstacle for popular messaging platforms such as WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram deploying the signal protocol end-to-end encryption technology. With this cryptographic protocol, the users on such platforms are generally allotted numeric fingerprints (e.g. adding users through QR codes) and the messages are secured and only visible to the sender and receiver. This is an attractive feature for users to protect their privacy. However, pursuant to these new obligations, the privacy of users will be impacted with platforms implementing technical changes to enable user tracing.

Citing the landmark Supreme Court decision in KS Puttaswamy v Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1 (Puttaswamy) on the fundamental right to privacy, WhatsApp, in its challenge, has reportedly contended that this obligation violates users' privacy rights as traceability of users will require collection and storage of user data on a massive scale. As per the recent statement published by WhatsApp on its website, "in order to trace even one message, services would have to trace every message". Though there have been several petitions challenging these rules (including WhatsApp's), there is presently no stay on the operation of these rules.

Also Read: MeitY defends new social media rules after WhatsApp lawsuit, assures right to privacy

While it may be argued that SSMIs can trace users by fingerprinting content with numeric codes, there are doubts about the accuracy of tracing without undermining encryption protocols.

For instance, WhatsApp has argued that tracing will be impacted if there are even microscopic changes in the information being shared and the format of sharing (e.g. sharing of an image versus screenshot of that image or adding an extra character or space to a text message).

Interestingly, in separate ongoing litigations since 2019, WhatsApp has objected to suggestions for enabling tracing, such as displaying the originator's information to the recipient of a forwarded message or encrypting original messages with special encryption keys (and corresponding private keys) known only to WhatsApp.

News reports also suggest that WhatsApp has also not confirmed the latest government proposal to the messaging platform for assigning alpha-numeric hash to messages exchanged on its platform. Technology experts have had an apathetic response to the feasibility of such measures, citing concerns such as difficulty in storing hashed copies of millions of messages exchanged on the platform, creating a virtual partition for the platform features across various countries, etc.

Content moderation

Apart from tracing and identification of users, another controversial obligation for SSMIs is to 'proactively' identify and moderate certain categories of information (such as child sexual abuse materials) using technology-based measures (including automated tools or other mechanisms). Adding another layer of review, the rules also require human oversight and periodic review of such measures by SSMIs.

This obligation is another challenge for platforms using encryption technology since, in order to identify and filter content, the content transmitted by users would need to be visible to the platform operators. In parallel, WhatsApp had also expressed its reluctance to implement measures for content filtering before the Supreme Court in In Re: Prajwala (Videos of Sexual Violence and Recommendations) Suo Motu W.P. (Crl.) No. 3 of 2015 due to its end-to-end encryption.

Since the present rules also envisage human oversight and periodic review of these measures, it appears that simply using automated tools (to analyse the encrypted content through numeric codes) to enable content moderation will not be sufficient. Implementing human oversight on content moderation without disrupting end-to-end encryption technology and ensuring accuracy and fairness with automated tools seems to be a Herculean task at this stage.

Also Read: 'User privacy remains highest priority': WhatsApp responds to Centre's 'trick consent' remark

Commercial implications and way forward

Circulation of fake news, child abuse material and other unlawful content has been a rapidly growing problem in India. While encryption protects users' privacy and security, it also leaves unlawful activities online unchecked. It is undeniable that regulation of online content is required to some extent and identification of perpetrators could be useful, but, on the other hand, there is also potential for arbitrary executive orders for user identification and content monitoring on vague and overbroad grounds.

The shield of encryption protecting the users' privacy may have to be redevised to comply with the new Intermediary Rules. Further to the proportionality test propounded by the apex court in the Puttaswamy decision, it is vital to ensure that there is a proportionate balance between regulatory scrutiny and privacy rights. Regulatory scrutiny should not be at the cost of users' privacy.

Although there are some safeguards prescribed under the rules, the existing review mechanisms under information technology laws should also be duly implemented against executive orders. To balance commercial concerns with regulation by the government, it is also crucial to have autonomous review mechanism and independent oversight by industry bodies (similar to some recommendations for regulation of cloud communication and the proposed data protection framework).

These rules are also riddled with certain ambiguities, such as interpretation of 'messaging' services, extent of moderation required, scope of human oversight and periodic review, etc., which may open doors to overcorrection, excessive regulation and potential misuse by administrative authorities.

Another aspect wreaking havoc on the industry is the impact on global practices of such platforms. For instance, storing meta data and location data for tracing the first originator may require weakening the encryption standards and open risks to data breaches and potential violations under stricter data protection laws like in the European Union. Gaps in legislative guidance and unrest in the industry have rendered the burning question for stakeholders (and the industry at large) - is end-to-end encryption technology compatible with these obligations?

While the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has stated that the new Intermediary Rules will not force platforms to break their end-to-end encryption, some stakeholders and experts have repeatedly argued that traceability and encryption cannot co-exist. Evidently, these additional obligations will significantly impact the commercial and technical operations of platforms that use encryption. It will be interesting to see the outcome of WhatsApp's recent challenge to the new rules and how the leading messaging platforms (or other SSMIs using encryption protocols) in India implement the necessary technical changes to comply with the new obligations.

(Harsh Walia (Partner), Abhinav Chandan (Partner) and Tanya Varshney (Associate), Khaitan & Co.)

See the rest here:
WhatsApp vs govt: Can traceability and encryption co-exist? - Business Today

How to Enable Zooms End-to-End Encryption Feature – Wccftech

The pandemic has made Zoom one of the most popular video conferencing applications. When it comes to video conferencing apps, we always try to make sure our privacy settings are up to the mark to keep the communications secure.

Zoom is trying to ensure that users get the security they deserve, and it has an essential encryption feature that many people dont know about.End-to-end encryption ensures that even if you are hacked, the hacker will not be able to make any sense out of your data. It also keeps your data safe from the company itself.

How to Restore HomePod mini Software Using iTunes or Finder

Zoom initially only encrypted data on its own servers, but with the end-to-end encryption feature, an encrypted key will be generated on the users computer, making your data truly secure. In today's tutorial,I will show you how to enable end-to-end encryption in Zoom on Windows 10 computers in just a few simple steps.

Step-1: Open Zoom App and sign in.

Step-2: Click on the settings cog on the top right corner of the app.

Step-3: Click on View More Settings at the bottom of the settings window.

How to Stop Windows 10 Apps From Accessing Your Messages

Step-4: You will be directed to the settings in your browser. Click on the Settings tab on the left side of your screen.

Step-5: Click on the Meeting tab.

Step-6: Scroll down till you reach the toggle switch for Allow use of end-to-end encryption. Turn it On. [If it is grey, it is Off. If it is blue, it is switched On]

Step-7: You will be asked to verify your number. After you enter your phone number. Click on Send Verification Code. You will then be sent a 6-digit code on your given number. Enter that code and then move on to the next step.

Step-8: After verification, your settings will be updated. Click on End-to-end encryption in the Default encryption type section.

Step-9: Click Save.

After following these steps, your Zoom will be end-to-end encrypted.

Here is the original post:
How to Enable Zooms End-to-End Encryption Feature - Wccftech

WhatsApp to Enable Multi-Device Support With End-to-End Encryption: Report – Gadgets 360

WhatsApp will make its multi-device support available with end-to-end encryption, according to a report. The Facebook-owned instant messaging app has marketed its privacy-focussed encryption for some time. It is claimed to protect text and voice messages, photos, videos, documents, and calls in a way that they aren't accessible by anyone except the sender and receiver. However, enabling the same level of protection on multiple devices alongside syncing communication between them is not that easy and involves technical challenges in its implementation.

Although WhatsApp is yet to provide official details, WhatsApp beta tracker WABetaInfo has reported that the end-to-end encryption available on WhatsApp will be compatible with its upcoming multi-device support.

Earlier this month, Mark Zuckerbergmentionedin an alleged conversation with WABetaInfo that chats when using multi-device support on WhatsApp will still be end-to-end encrypted. Screenshots shared by WABetaInfo showed that the Facebook CEO stated that the company solved the challenges involved in implementing end-to-end encryption in an elegant way to make sure that the chats between users are protected even when using the messaging app on multiple devices.

WhatsApp was thought to be working on enabling multi-device support since at least July 2019. The feature lets users simultaneously access the app on up to four devices. It seems to be at a final stage of its internal testing as screenshots detailing the new addition appeared online in the recent past. WhatsApp Head Will Cathcart also purportedly noted in the messages exchanged with WABetaInfo that the new addition could be provided in a public beta in the next month or two.

Alongside enabling end-to-end encryption when using multi-device support, WhatsApp is said to be bringing end-to-end encrypted backups. There is, however, no exact timeline on when it would be available even for public beta testers.

WhatsApp uses Signal's encryption protocol for offering end-to-end encrypted communication experience on its app. Competitors including Google Messages also embraced the same protection method to address privacy concerns raised by digital activists. However, since end-to-end encryption limits traceability on platforms, governments and regulators in some countries including India have demanded ways to get a backdoor entry.

Does WhatsApp's new privacy policy spell the end for your privacy? We discussed this on Orbital, the Gadgets 360 podcast. Orbital is available on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever you get your podcasts.

More:
WhatsApp to Enable Multi-Device Support With End-to-End Encryption: Report - Gadgets 360

Finding the balance in encryption and crime-fighting Monash Lens – Monash Lens

Operation Ironside last week resulted in more than 800 suspected underworld criminals arrested after being tricked into using an encrypted messaging app in which police were able to monitor chats about serious crime, including murder.

The operation was run in conjunction with the Australian Federal Police, targeting global serious and organised crime. Drugs, weapons, luxury vehicles and cash were seized across more than a dozen countries in whats been called a watershed moment for international policing. Its again highlighted issues relating to encrypted communications within criminal networks.

This operation involved the distribution amongcriminal networks of a secure encrypted communication system known as An0m that was in reality controlled by law-enforcement agencies. However, while ultimately enormously successful in disrupting criminal networks, the use of An0m very likely accounted for only a small percentage of criminal communication in Australia the AFP estimated this at around 5%.

Like much of the world, many of the conversations between Australians are conducted via text messaging. And increasingly, these messages are sent and received in encrypted form.

Well-known messaging apps such as WhatsApp, iMessage and Signal employ end-to-end encryption technology. This means that the digital material making up the messages, including text, images, audio and video are all encrypted on the sending device before theyre transmitted, and are only able to be decrypted by the final receiving device.

Under this model, its not feasible, at least with current computer technology, for an eavesdropper (or law enforcement agency) to decrypt any messages they intercept.

This enables completely private information exchange. For many reasons, this facility of modern life is highly desirable. It provides comfort that our interactions arent being spied upon, and allows us to securely exchange sensitive information. Indeed, beyond text messaging, end-to-end data encryption is crucial for the safety of many of the online transactions we now take for granted.

So, tools for pervasive encrypted communication, once thought of as the purview of security agencies and secretive intelligence operatives, sit in all our hands today. But as recent events highlight, theres a darker consequence of this technology. Along with hiding our innocuous conversations with friends, our work discussion groups, not to mention the voices of freedom under oppression, end-to-end encryption does just as good a job at hiding criminal activity of the worst kind.

Although law-breaking is increasingly technology-driven, criminal networks do not need to be particularly sophisticated to obscure their communications with these widely available secure messaging apps.

This has resulted in the always-present tension between the privacy of individuals, and the safety of communities, being writ large. Coupled with the anonymisation of online activity afforded by the dark web, these technologies have placed enormous barriers in the way of policing and disrupting serious crime. After all, surveillance by law enforcement authorities under warrant is only fruitful if the data gathered is able to be read and understood.

As one particularly damaging example of crime facilitated by the internet, and increasingly by encrypted communication, the distribution of child sexual abuse material has reached a horrendous scale.

Last year, the US-based National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received more than 21 million reports of it from electronic service providers, 94% of which were from Facebook. At the same time, in order to meet oft-stated commitments to user privacy, Facebook is racing to implement end-to-end encryption across its platform. But the company has since acknowledged that this change will make uncovering such material much more difficult.

Although the Facebook-owned WhatsApp has increased its reporting of child sexual abuse material through sophisticated analysis of metadata, its clear that the absence of an ability to analyse the content of images themselves hampers the technological countering of this crime. Similarly, terrorism, drug trafficking and illegal weapons trading are all beneficiaries of the capacity to effectively obscure communication.

Here lies the challenge.

As more and more of our communications are hardened by encryption, the debate will continue as to where the line between privacy and safety sits.

Theres a widespread expectation that users in many parts of the world want to engage in privacy-preserving communication, and hence theres a high value in marketing such systems to gain competitive advantage.

How, then, do we best respond to the need for disruption of criminal activity and preservation of safety in communities in such an environment?

Legislative responses to the rise of end-to-end encryption and the challenges it poses to law enforcement agencies, so far, vary.

In Australia, perhaps the most powerful feature of controversial laws passed in 2018 is the capacity to issue enforceable technical capability notices.

These notices could require service providers to take actions to ensure the provider is able to help to enable laws to be enforced or national security safeguarded. These notices are so named as they may require providers to employ new technical capabilities beyond those they already implement.

Importantly, these notices are prohibited from requiring that providers implement back doorsor other systemic weaknesses such as building a decryption capability or requiring that providers make their encrypted systems less effective. A range of other notices can be issued to providers to require them to provide assistance using their existing technologies via whats known as an industry assistance framework.

As more and more of our communications are hardened by encryption, the debate will continue as to where the line between privacy and safety sits.

Governments will likely be grappling with this issue for some time, given simultaneous commitments to security of personal data and safety of their population.

Indeed, the Council of the European Union adopted a resolution in December entitled Security through encryption and security despite encryption, calling for a new regulatory framework and investigation of technical solutions. Also last year, an international statement calling for similar action was released by the US Department of Justice.

More widely, the topic of end-to-end encryption, including technical and legal responses, continues to be the subject of much dialogue between the tech industry, government, academia, and law enforcement.

Ultimately, the whole community must be genuinely involved in this debate so that a balanced position that is both workable and broadly acceptable is achieved.

View original post here:
Finding the balance in encryption and crime-fighting Monash Lens - Monash Lens