Cryptocurrency "miners," utilities look for ways to get along …

Electric producers aren't sure whether cryptocurrency "miners" are friend or foe.

The miners, who use powerful computers to generate bitcoin, ethereum and other cryptocurrencies by solving complex computational problems, are power hogs that can bring new sources of revenue for energy producers. But that revenue generally comes at a price: millions of dollars of investment in new power stations and lines.

For their part, utilities hesitate to commit those funds for fear the bottom will fall out of the cryptocurrency market, leaving them stuck with the bill for facilities no longer in use.

"Getting power companies to take cryptocurrency mining seriously has been a struggle," said JohnPaul Baric, chief executive of the MiningStore, which makes cryptocurrency mining technology. "Mining is still in its early days, and power companies say they aren't sure of its longevity."

It's not as if the power companies don't want the additional revenue. But in the case of Grant County in Washington State, more than 100 cryptocurrency miners are requesting power. Combined, they are asking for 1,700 megawatts of new power -- that's the equivalent of two nuclear power plants, or 1.5 times the power needs of the city of Seattle. Grant PUD's average electric load is about 600 megawatts.

"We, like any other utility, aren't set up to handle that kind of new demand," said Kevin Nordt, general manager for the Grant County Public Utility District, known as Grant PUD. "Trying to get that kind of infrastructure built would take many, many years and require millions if not billions of dollars in investment. There's a lot of risk involved because it's an nascent industry with a lot of unknown variables."

Cryptocurrency miners use large numbers of computer servers which use massive amounts of electricity -- to solve complex mathematical puzzles needed to create virtual currencies like bitcoin and ethereum. Bitcoin miners alone use more power than the entire country of Ireland. There are more than 2,000 different types of cryptocurrencies.

Grant PUD's popularity with cryptocurrency miners stems in part from its low price for electricity generated from power plants on the Columbia River, Baric said. Electrical expenses are often the highest costs for cryptocurrency miners.

"We are the most power-intensive business ever we use crazy amounts of power," Baric said. "Electricity costs matter."

The average cost of electricity in the U.S. is about 12 cents per kilowatt-hour. But Grant PUD sells its electricity for only 1 to 2 cents a kilowatt-hour, Baric said. Grant PUD is a nonprofit, community-owned hydropower utility based in Moses Lake, Washington, about three hours southwest of Seattle. Its power generation facilities cover 2,800 square miles.

Because of the intense demand, Grant PUD temporarily stopped accepting cryptocurrency mining customers so that it could develop new policies around the industry. The PUD decided to create a new customer class called the "evolving industry" class. The class wasn't meant only for cryptocurrency, but for any other radical, disruptive type technology that may take shape in the future, Nordt said.

The evolving industry class would price in the risk associated with creating new infrastructure for an industry without a long track record, he said.

"We needed to look at this differently," he said. "We don't know how regulatory and other issues are going to break for mining."

Miners, in the meantime, are also suggesting ways they can be of benefit to utilities. One example is for miners to use a utility's "peak load" capabilities that often sit idle. Most utilities build their facilities so they have capacity even for those very hot days in July and August, when everyone is running their air conditioners.

The miners could use that unused peak load capabilities throughout the year and stop mining when the utility needed the extra electricity on those hot summer days. Baric sells products that would automatically shut down the mining operations when the peak load was used.

"The actual physical mining units would just sit there idle and the staff would have the day off," Baric said. "The miners would know for those four or five hours on that hot July day, they will be disconnected."

Miners are also happy to take extra, unused electricity off the hands of producers, Baric said. Utilities inevitably create more energy than they use and generally allow that power to be burned off. Miners are instead willing to buy that access energy which is a benefit to producers, he said.

"Years ago people wondered if the internet would stay around, but suggesting that today would seems silly," Baric said. "That's the way it is with cryptocurrency; it's brand knew and people don't yet understand it yet. But it's here to stay."

Here is the original post:
Cryptocurrency "miners," utilities look for ways to get along ...

Cryptocurrency: Virtual money, real power, and the fight for …

Driving into the small town of Wenatchee, Washington, about three hours east of Seattle, a sign welcomes you to the "Apple Capital of the World." But not far from the abundant orchards, a very different industry is taking root. As unlikely as it may seem, this rural community has become a hub for cryptocurrency mining.

"Cryptocurrency justified the expense to build something that no one would otherwise build," said entrepreneur David Carlson, as rows upon rows of computer servers whirred away at the facility he set up here. "These things can run 24/7 making cryptocurrency."

He has big plans for his business, even if some Wenatchee residents don't like it.

"We want to grow ten times larger than we are now, and we can do it here, or we can do it somewhere, but we're going to do it," Carlson said.

Bitcoin is the best known, but it's just one of many digital forms of currency. These cryptocurrencies are decentralized; rather than being processed through banks, transactions are verified and recorded by individual users. Encrypted technology called blockchain keeps the transactions secure.

Bitcoin hit a highof over $19,700 in December 2017, though it's worth much less, about $6,300, today. Despite the volatility, rising values have fueled a whole new industry and legions of enthusiasts. At a recent cryptocurrency conference in Atlantic City, thousands gathered to explore new ideas and opportunities in the field.

"So I live off of bitcoin," said Kenn Bosak, who hosts "Pure Blockchain Wealth" on YouTube. "It pays my rent. I book my flights with cheapair.com. They accept bitcoin, Dash, all kinds of cryptocurrencies. I book my rooms with BitPay with my Visa card. My Lyft drivers accepts BitPay, that's bitcoin. So I'm all in. I use bitcoin in every aspect of my life."

Unlike dollars or other conventional currencies, cryptocurrency like bitcoin isn't issued by a government. It's created through a process called mining, which is leading to a virtual gold rush around the world.

Every time someone uses cryptocurrency to pay for something, it sets off a flurry of invisible activity. Computer servers, which can be located anywhere in the world, work to verify and process the transaction, racing to authenticate the exchange of digital money through complex transactions.

For doing this work, the machines (and their owners) are rewarded with new cryptocurrency. With a sufficient number of powerful computers, it can be a lucrative business.

That's what David Carlson's company, Giga Watt, is busy doing at his facility in Wenatchee. He started with just a few small machines, but with the help of investors, he's scaled up significantly. Now his rooms full of computer servers work feverishly to mine cryptocurrency around the clock.

David Carlson shows CBS News' Errol Barnett his cryptocurrency mining operation in Wenatchee, Washington.

CBS News

Each of the small machines makes roughly $1,500 worth of bitcoin every year, though the amount of profit fluctuates every day. As Carlson showed CBS News correspondent Errol Barnett around, the site hummed with the sound of giant industrial cooling fans.

"Every one of these things is like a thousand-watt hair dryer. So there will be a thousand of those hairdryers in this spot. So that's quite a lot of heat. Don't try it at home," Carlson said.

"This entire wall is the future, according to you," Barnett said.

"Yeah. The future of money right here," Carlson replied.

He plans to have 22 of his pods completed by the end of the year and all that computer power sucks up a huge amount of electricity.

"Our pods use one and a half megawatts, which is typically associated with, like, 600 homes," he said.

Powering his operation would cost a fortune most places, but Wenatchee has a competitive advantage: the Columbia River. Dams on the river generate cheap hydroelectric power, which has drawn crypto mining enthusiasts to this corner of the country.

Steve Wright, the general manager of the Chelan County public utility, says it has long been an economic engine for the region. "What we have seen more recently are industries like cryptocurrency that have come to the region for the same reasons that aluminum came here. Low-cost, reliable electricity," he said.

Dams on the Columbia River provide cheap power to the Pacific Northwest.

CBS News

But even here, there are limits.

"We have requests for service that would double the usage here in the county, and we're trying to figure out, you know, how are we going to deal with that, and what the implications would be for the people who live here," Wright said.

Because access to cheap power is key, crypto miners are racing to set up shop anywhere in the world they can find low rates. Cold climates are also preferred, to help reduce cooling costs.

But this tech boom is not without problems. Among the issues: the droning noise of all that equipment. The hum reverberates far beyond the walls. And some of the operations have sprung up in a decidedly makeshift fashion.

"Would you want to live next to one of these?" said Andrew Wendell, customer service director for the utility. "Not just the aesthetics, but also the noise. There's a lot of noise. They really do belong in an industrial setting."

He continues, "And it gives us a bit of a concern, because, quite literally, you could have a tractor trailer come in and load this thing up and move it out, literally overnight. And so it just begs the question, from a utility who is providing and building the infrastructure to support these, how long is our investment? When we build those, we are building for 40, 50, 60 years. This doesn't look like that long term."

Not only is he worried about miners abandoning Wenatchee and leaving behind expensive new power connections there are also safety concerns. Some mining setups push the infrastructure to the breaking point.

Industrial fans are needed to cool the rows of supercomputers that mine for cryptocurrency.

CBS News

Wendell shows us an example. "What we have here is a standard residential home, but this shed, about 10 by 10 here, off to the side with the fence, that's full of cryptocurrency mining operations."

He holds up the remnants of a frayed and melted underground electrical cable.

"This plastic insulation breaks down because there's so much heat?" Barnett asks.

"There's so much heat. It can't dissipate the heat. So the insulation breaks down, and then the cables go phase to phase. And when they go phase to phase, they combust. They arc and they can start a fire. And that's what happened [here], is a fire started," Wendell said. "The bottom line is, is that when you mix the cryptocurrency mining with traditional residential load, if you don't have things built and designed appropriately, you're going to have some problems."

He adds, "In this part of the country, a wildfire can spread and burn literally hundreds of homes. So we take that very seriously."

While some in Wenatchee are excited about the economic potential of cryptocurrency mining, many others are concerned about its massive power consumption and other risks.

"Nobody wants a fire, you know, like their apartment complex burning down, because someone is mining bitcoin," one resident said.

Some admit they don't fully understand it. "It's just going to drain our power, and that's really all I know," a local woman told us.

Facing overwhelming demand for power from cryptocurrency miners and increasing concern from the community, the utility placed a moratorium on new mining requests until they could agree on a solution. Local miners were not happy.

"They went overboard with their moratorium. It was kinda crazy for 'em to say, 'No, you can't do that. We're we're shutting everything down in the in the entire county,'" said Matt McColm. He was planning to set up a mining operation in his insurance office to generate some extra money for his 12-year-old son's college fund. He'd already ordered the equipment on Amazon. But now he'll have to move it all to a site a few hours away in Oregon instead.

"What you've got is is you've got is several large players that kind of salted the earth for everyone else. They're literally consuming large sections of our town and edging out the small ones," McColm said. "It's kinda rough, because I'd rather develop here locally... and put the money here in Wenatchee."

Earlier this month, the utility held a public hearing for input on the moratorium and the future of cryptocurrency mining in Wenatchee.

Some locals stood up to voice complaints about what the industry is doing to their town. "I read a lot about what bitcoin operators want, and what bitcoin is doing for them. I'm not hearing that it's doing anything much for us. This is a take, take, take, not a give," one woman said.

Others made the case to encourage business development, like the man who said, "I'd ask you guys to consider the very small operations that are existing right here in town. A large rate increase would drastically affect our business, putting some of us out."

Much of the concern about cryptocurrency mining is its volatility. With prices soaring one day and crashing the next, many worry the entire market could collapse. But advocates say they are missing the big picture a growing industry that's about more than just mining.

Malachi Salcido, another large-scale miner, says the rise of supercomputing, using specialized hardware and cheap power, can also enable things like artificial intelligence.

"And so it helps you to understand why in the world would you build a 30, 40-year asset for something that's only nine years old? I didn't. I built it for a new technology that will have many current and future iterations that we don't yet fully understand," he said.

He believes his investment will pay off, even if cryptocurrency fizzles.

"The demand internationally for power and networking for computing space is rising so rapidly that I'm very comfortable there will be demand for our location, even if crypto doesn't become the market it could."

Salcido, a Wenatchee native, wants to see his hometown benefit from the new industry. But for now, he must expand elsewhere.

"Our strategic goal is 500 megawatts within the next 5 years, and 5 to 10 percent of the global network. We are currently negotiating developments in northern Idaho, northern Oregon, and northern central California. Our choice is whether or not they happen here," he said.

A moratorium may stem the flood of miners arriving in Wenatchee, but it won't stop them from seeking out cheap power wherever they can find it.

In June, a cryptocurrency mining company called Coinmint took over a massive former Alcoa aluminum plant near the small town of Massena, in upstate New York. Coinmint is investing $700 million to turn it into a bitcoin mining behemoth. Once complete, it could be the largest in the world.

Aerial view of a former Alcoa aluminum plant near Massena, in update New York, which is being turned into a massive bitcoin mining facility.

CBS News

Back in Wenatchee, the only question for Dave Carlson is not whether to grow, but where.

"Cryptocurrency justified the expense to build something that no one would otherwise build," he said. "Supercomputing, A.I. can be the new export."

"So you're confident that you will grow, you're just concerned that it will be elsewhere because Wenatchee blinked at a critical moment?" Barnett asked.

Carlson agreed. "That's exactly right."

Read the original here:
Cryptocurrency: Virtual money, real power, and the fight for ...

New Zealand allows Chelsea Manning entry for speaking tour …

WELLINGTON, New Zealand New Zealand authorities said on Friday that convicted secrets leaker Chelsea Manning can enter the country for a speaking tour, a day after tour organizers said she couldn't enter Australia.

Manning was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison for leaking U.S. government secrets and would not normally qualify for entry into New Zealand under its good-character provisions.

But Immigration New Zealand General Manager Steve Stuart said Manning had been granted a "special direction," allowing her to apply for a working visa for planned speaking events in Auckland and Wellington next month.

Stuart said the agency noted that Manning's sentence had been commuted by President Barack Obama in 2017, that she had not reoffended since being released, and that the chances of her offending while in New Zealand were low.

New Zealand's conservative opposition National Party had urged the government to ban Manning, saying her appearance would not enhance New Zealand's relationship with the U.S.

Australia has similar good-character rules to New Zealand. Manning's tour was due to start in Sydney on Sunday, but on Thursday event organizer Think Inc. said it had received a notice of intention from the Australian government to deny Manning entry.

The group was calling on her supporters to lobby new Immigration Minister David Coleman to allow her into Australia. While Manning can appeal, past precedent suggests the decision has already been made.

Think Inc. said it had given the government letters of support from individuals and organizations who support Manning's entry to Australia.

"Ms. Manning offers formidable ideas and an insightful perspective which we are hoping to bring to the forefront of Australian dialogue," Think Inc. Director Suzi Jamil said in a statement.

Manning, 30, acknowledged leaking more than 700,000 military and State Department documents to anti-secrecy site WikiLeaks in 2010. Known as Bradley Manning at the time of her arrest, she came out as transgender after her 2013 court-martial. She recently lost a Democratic primary in a long-shot bid for a U.S. Senate seat in Maryland.

Under its good-character rules, New Zealand typically denies entry to people who have been sentenced to five years or more in prison at any time in their lives, or who have been sentenced to 12 months or more in prison at some point during the last 10 years.

___

Associated Press reporter Rod McGuirk in Canberra, Australia, contributed to this report.

See the rest here:
New Zealand allows Chelsea Manning entry for speaking tour ...

Australia may ban Chelsea Manning because of ‘character …

Australia is questioning the character of Wikileaks whistle blower and activist Chelsea Manning. Sean Gallup/Getty Images

The Australian government is preparing to ban whistleblower and activist Chelsea Manning because she does not meet the country's "character requirement."

The former soldier spent seven years in prison, including 11 months in solitary confinement, for leaking a trove of classified military documents to Wikileaks which revealed information about US operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

President Barack Obama commuted her sentence shortly before leaving office, and she made a bid for Senate as a Democrat this year.

According to a reported letter addressed to Manning from the Australian Home Affairs Department, Manning applied for a temporary visa on August 8, and the federal government was reviewing her candidacy.

The letter specified that her visa application may be denied under section 501 of the Australian Migration Act, which allows the Minister to deny an applicant if they do not meet the "character requirements."

"A person can fail the character test for a number of reasons, including but not limited to where a non-citizen has a substantial criminal record or where their conduct represents a risk to the Australian community," a spokesperson for the Home Affairs Department told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The 35-year-old, who now makes a living through speaking engagements, had planned events at the Sydney Opera House, as well as in Melbourne, Brisbane. She is also slated to speak in two major cities in New Zealand, though several politicians have called her a "felon" and are lobbying for her visa to be canceled.

Think Inc., which has organized the Australian events, has appealed for support to allow Manning to speak.

"We are looking for support from relevant national bodies or individuals, especially politicians who can support Chelsea's entry into Australia," Think Inc's director Suzi Jamil wrote.

Many have called for action to grant Manning a visa.

Richard Di Natale, the leader of the Australian Greens, wrote a letter to government ministers urging them to grant Manning a visa.

"Australians have indicated their strong interest in hearing what Manning has to say her events in Australia are sold out. To deny her opportunity to speak to our community is unfair and unwarranted."

Some have called out Australia for allowing other controversial figures, including Canadian far-right internet personality Lauren Southern, and former Breitbart senior editor Milo Yiannopoulos, to speak at major events.

Manning had previously been denied entry to Canada in 2017 because of her criminal record.

In September, Manning was named a visiting fellow at Harvard University, but the university withdrew the title days later after pushback from then-CIA director Mike Pompeo.

Read more here:
Australia may ban Chelsea Manning because of 'character ...

Oppose the ban on Chelsea Manning speaking in Australia …

By the Socialist Equality Party (Australia) 30 August 2018

In a direct attack on democratic rights and freedom of speech, the newly-installed Liberal-National Coalition government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison has declared its intent to deny courageous US military whistleblower Chelsea Manning a visa to address what are expected to be large audiences in major Australian cities.

Just days before Manning was due to speak in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, and then in Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand, the Australian government issued her with a Notice on Intention to deny her an entry visa. This was done on the spurious grounds that she fails the Migration Acts character test because of a substantial criminal record. Similar moves are underway to ban her from New Zealand.

The Socialist Equality Party (SEP) condemns the planned political censorship and demands its immediate reversal. Manning is not a criminal. Her heroic act in leaking more than 750,000 classified US military and diplomatic documents, which were then published by WikiLeaks in 2010, exposed the real criminals, who still sit in power in Washington and Canberra.

Manning is being denied her fundamental democratic right to speak publicly about her actions. The people of Australia and New Zealand are being denied their basic democratic right to hear her speak and discuss the political implications of her revelations.

Chelsea Manning, formerly Private Bradley Manning, was incarcerated and tortured in military prisons and sentenced to 35 years imprisonment under the Obama administration. Having enforced her vicious punishment, Obama finally commuted her sentence in 2017 after she had suffered a total of seven years in a prison cell, but deliberately left her criminal record on the books.

That was because the video footage, documents and files that the young US army intelligence analyst made available to the worlds population laid bare the murders, war crimes, human rights abuses and anti-democratic political machinations of the US military, intelligence agencies and political establishment as well as those of its allies, including Australia.

Mannings leaks, and WikiLeaks publication of them, provided essential evidence for the prosecution of those responsible for the illegal invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq and the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

While the Morrison government is moving to ban Manning, successive Australian governments, both Coalition and Labor, have rolled out the red carpet to the very war criminals whose atrocities she exposed.

Over the past year and a half alone, this has included now deceased Republican Party powerbroker Senator John McCain, ex-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, along with a steady procession of admirals and generals. These are the people who should have been put on trial, along with ex-presidents Bush and Obama and their Australian partners, including former prime ministers John Howard, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

Coming less than a week after Morrison was installed via an inner-party coup that ousted Malcolm Turnbull, the ban on Manning is another signal of the Coalition governments total commitment to the preparations by the US ruling class for further war crimes, above all its plans for a military confrontation with China. The message is clearthe Australian ruling elite will eviscerate every basic democratic right to prevent widespread popular opposition to militarism developing into a mass anti-war movement.

The contrast could not be starker. One of Morrisons first acts as prime minister was to hold a warm phone call with US President Donald Trump and invite him to visit Australia.

Warmongers are welcome. Those who have sought to oppose war are not.

There is no doubt that the decision to block Mannings visit has been taken in the closest consultation with the Trump administration and the US intelligence agencies. Politically, however, the government has only dared take this step because it can confidently expect no serious opposition from the Labor Party, which declared WikiLeaks had carried out criminal activity by publishing Mannings leaks in 2010.

Moreover, virtually the entire erstwhile liberal and left of the Australian political and media establishment has abandoned any defence of WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange.

Assange, an Australian citizen, remains trapped in a tiny room in Ecuadors London embassy, cut off from all communication with the world. The refusal of successive Labor and Coalition governments to use its diplomatic power and legal discretion to secure his releasewith years of silent complicity by the Greens and parliamentary independents such as Andrew Wilkiehas left Assange under the constant threat of arrest and extradition to the US to face espionage-related charges.

Apart from well-known journalist John Pilger and a small number of other principled individuals, no political party, trade union, civil liberties organisation or media publication has taken up the demand issued by the SEP at a globally-broadcast rally in Sydney Town Hall Square on June 17 that the Coalition government act immediately to secure Assanges unconditional right to return to Australia.

It is in this fetid atmosphere of contempt for democratic rights and freedom of speech that Manning faces being blocked from visiting Australia.

The attack on Chelsea Manning, on top of Canberras central role in the persecution of Assange, has ominous implications for the democratic rights of the working class.

As the preparations for involvement in further US-led wars intensify, accompanied by escalating austerity and social inequality, state repression will be used against social unrest and political dissent, particularly anti-war opposition. Just two months ago, the Labor Party joined hands with the Coalition to push through parliament unprecedented foreign interference laws designed to criminalise any supposed links to China and opposition to Australian involvement in US-instigated military aggression.

The ban on Manning is a further warning that Morrisons government represents a further lurch by the entire political establishment toward war preparations and efforts to create a far-right movement to divert the mounting social and political discontent in poisonous nationalist directions.

The SEP demands that Chelsea Manning is immediately granted her visa and restates its demand for the unconditional freedom of Julian Assange. Their fate cannot be left in the hands of capitalist governments and courts. Workers and young people in Australia, New Zealand and internationally must come to the defence of these two brave figures, as an essential component of the fight for all the democratic and social rights of the working class.

See also:

John Pilgers speech to the June 17 rallyBringing Julian Assange Home

James Cogans speech to the June 17 rallyThe Turnbull government must act to repatriate Australian citizen Julian Assange to Australia

Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Site from search results.

To fight this blacklisting:

Go here to see the original:
Oppose the ban on Chelsea Manning speaking in Australia ...

Chelsea Manning May Be Banned From Entering Australia: Report

Chelsea Manning speaking at an event in Berlin on May 2, 2018Photo: Getty

Whistleblower and political activist Chelsea Manning is supposed to start her Australian speaking tour at the Sydney Opera House this Sunday. But that could all change if she isnt allowed to enter the country. Manning is reportedly facing some trouble getting a visa from the politically turbulent government down under.

As the Sydney Morning Herald reports, Manning could be denied entry to Australia based on the Migration Act of 1958, which can prohibit people based on bad character. The law specifically mentions criminal convictions as a basis for bad character, but it more or less leaves the determination up to the minister of immigration. David Coleman was sworn into that position just today after a rough and tumble month of political infighting for Australias Liberal Partyroughly the political equivalent to Americas Republican Party.

Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison after she leaked classified information to WikiLeaks that showed evidence of war crimes. President Barack Obama commuted Mannings sentence in 2017 shortly before leaving office. Manning was released in May.

Left-wing activists in Australia are crying foul and believe that the country is discriminating against progressive speakers. Australia has recently hosted some of the biggest names on the so-called alt-right, including Lauren Southern, Stephen Molyneaux, and Milo Yiannopoulos. Southerns tour forced local police in Victoria to shell out $68,000 for security. The tour organizer has so far refused to pay the bill.

Gavin McInnes, founder of the extremist group the Proud Boys, is scheduled to visit the country on his own speaking tour in November. McInnes and his groups account were suspended from Twitter recently over hate speech. But theres no indication that McInnes will be barred from coming to Australia.

People like Southern and Molyneaux have appeared as friendly guests on right-wing television in Australia, where the local media landscape is dominated by companies owned by Rupert Murdoch, the creator of Fox News in the United States. And Australian right-wing media is expected to roll out the red carpet for people like McInnes while disparaging Chelsea Manning.

Manning is supposed to visit the New Zealand cities of Auckland and Wellington while shes in the South Pacific region, but conservatives in that country are also calling for her to be banned.

Chelsea Manning used a position of responsibility and authority to steal hundreds of thousands of documents that may well have put American lives at risk, former New Zealand minister Michael Woodhouse told Radio New Zealand this week.

Gizmodo has reached out to the organizers of Mannings speaking tour but did not immediately receive a reply. Well update this article if we hear back.

[Sydney Morning Herald]

Read more:
Chelsea Manning May Be Banned From Entering Australia: Report

The Best Encryption Software of 2018 | PCMag.com

Encrypt Everything!

Did you ever pass secret, coded messages as a kid? There's a certain thrill in knowing that nobody else can read your communication, even if the content is as banal as "Johnny love Jane." That's just fun, but when the content is significant, like a contract or a patent application, keeping unauthorized types from seeing it is essential. That's where encryption comes in. When you keep all your sensitive documents encrypted, they're inaccessible to hackers and snoops. To share those documents with the right people, you simply supply them the decryption password. Just which encryption product is best for you depends on your needs, so we've rounded up a varied collection of encryption products to help you choose.

In this roundup, I'm specifically looking at products that encrypt files, not at whole-disk solutions like Microsoft's Bitlocker. Whole-disk encryption is an effective line of defense for a single device, but it doesn't help when you need to share encrypted data.

You can use a Virtual Private Network, or VPN, to encrypt your own internet traffic. From your PC to the VPN company's server, all your data is encrypted, and that's a great thing. However, unless you're connected to a secure HTTPS website, your traffic is not encrypted between the VPN server and the site. And of course the VPN's encryption doesn't just magically rub off on files you share. Using a VPN is a great way to protect your internet traffic when you're traveling, but it's not a solution for encrypting your local files.

When the FBI needed information from the San Bernardino shooter's iPhone, they asked Apple for a back door to get past the encryption. But no such back door existed, and Apple refused to create one. The FBI had to hire hackers to get into the phone.

Why wouldn't Apple help? Because the moment a back door or similar hack exists, it becomes a target, a prize for the bad guys. It will leak sooner or later. In a talk at Black Hat this past summer, Apple's Ivan Krstic revealed that the company has done something similar in their cryptographic servers. Once the fleet of servers is up and running, they physically destroy the keys that would permit modification. Apple can't update them, but the bad guys can't get in either.

All of the products in this roundup explicitly state that they have no back door, and that's as it should be. It does mean that if you encrypt an essential document and then forget the encryption password, you've lost it for good.

Back in the day, if you wanted to keep a document secret you could use a cipher to encrypt it and then burn the original. Or you could lock it up in a safe. The two main approaches in encryption utilities parallel these options.

One type of product simply processes files and folders, turning them into impenetrable encrypted versions of themselves. The other creates a virtual disk drive that, when open, acts like any other drive on your system. When you lock the virtual drive, all of the files you put into it are completely inaccessible.

Similar to the virtual drive solution, some products store your encrypted data in the cloud. This approach requires extreme care, obviously. Encrypted data in the cloud has a much bigger attack surface than encrypted data on your own PC.

Which is better? It really depends on how you plan to use encryption. If you're not sure, take advantage of the 30-day free trial offered by each of these products to get a feel for the different options.

After you copy a file into secure storage, or create an encrypted version of it, you absolutely need to wipe the unencrypted original. Just deleting it isn't sufficient, even if you bypass the Recycle Bin, because the data still exists on disk, and data recovery utilities can often get it back.

Some encryption products avoid this problem by encrypting the file in place, literally overwriting it on disk with an encrypted version. It's more common, though, to offer secure deletion as an option. If you choose a product that lacks this feature, you should find a free secure deletion tool to use along with it.

Overwriting data before deletion is sufficient to balk software-based recovery tools. Hardware-based forensic recovery works because the magnetic recording of data on a hard drive isn't actually digital. It's more of a waveform. In simple terms, the process involves nulling out the known data and reading around the edges of what's left. If you really think someone (the feds?) might use this technique to recover your incriminating files, you can set your secure deletion tool to make more passes, overwriting the data beyond what even these techniques can recover.

An encryption algorithm is like a black box. Dump a document, image, or other file into it, and you get back what seems like gibberish. Run that gibberish back through the box, with the same password, and you get back the original.

The U.S. government has settled on Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) as a standard, and all of the products gathered here support AES. Even those that support other algorithms tend to recommend using AES.

If you're an encryption expert, you may prefer another algorithm, Blowfish, perhaps, or the Soviet government's GOST. For the average user, however, AES is just fine.

Passwords are important, and you have to keep them secret, right? Well, not when you use Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) cryptography.

With PKI, you get two keys. One is public; you can share it with anyone, register it in a key exchange, tattoo it on your foreheadwhatever you like. The other is private, and should be closely guarded. If I want to send you a secret document, I simply encrypt it with your public key. When you receive it, your private key decrypts it. Simple!

Using this system in reverse, you can create a digital signature that proves your document came from you and hasn't been modified. How? Just encrypt it with your private key. The fact that your public key decrypts it is all the proof you need. PKI support is less common than support for traditional symmetric algorithms.

If you want to share a file with someone and your encryption tool doesn't support PKI, there are other options for sharing. Many products allow creation of a self-decrypting executable file. You may also find that the recipient can use a free, decryption-only tool.

Right now there are three Editors' Choice products in the consumer-accessible encryption field. The first is the easiest to use of the bunch, the next is the most secure, and the third is the most comprehensive.

AxCrypt Premium has a sleek, modern look, and when it's active you'll hardly notice it. Files in its Secured Folders get encrypted automatically when you sign out, and it's one of the few that support public key cryptography.

CertainSafe Digital Safety Deposit Box goes through a multistage security handshake that authenticates you to the site and authenticates the site to you. Your files are encrypted, split into chunks, and tokenized. Then each chunk gets stored on a different server. A hacker who breached one server would get nothing useful.

Folder Lock can either encrypt files or simply lock them so nobody can access them. It also offers encrypted lockers for secure storage. Among its many other features are file shredding, free space shredding, secure online backup, and self-decrypting files.

The other products here also have their merits, too, of course. Read the capsules below and then click through to the full reviews to decide which one you'll use to protect your files. Have an opinion on one of the apps reviewed here, or a favorite tool we didn't mention? Let us know in the comments.

Pros: MicroEncryption renders bulk data breach of cloud-stored files impossible. Logon handshake authenticates both user and server. Can share files with guests or other users. Retains previous versions of modified files. Secure chat.

Cons: If you forget password or security answers, you lose all access. Can only share entire folders, not files.

Bottom Line: When backing up your sensitive files to the cloud, CertainSafe Digital Safety Deposit Box emphasizes security over all else, but it doesn't sacrifice ease of use.

Pros: Encrypted lockers protect files and folders. Secure online backup. Can lock files and folders, making them invisible. File shredding. Free space shredding. Self-decrypting files. Many useful bonus features.

Cons: Product serial number stands in for master password by default. Locked files are not encrypted. Secure backup requires separate subscription.

Bottom Line: Folder Lock can lock access to files for quick, easy protection, and also keep them in encrypted lockers for serious protection. It combines a wide range of features with a bright, easy-to-use interface.

Pros: Very easy to use. Handles editing encrypted files. Secure sharing using public key cryptography. Secure file deletion. Generates memorable passwords. Secure online password storage.

Cons: Can be risky if you don't ensure local security of your PC.

Bottom Line: AxCrypt Premium makes encryption simple enough for any user, and even offers public key cryptography for secure sharing of encrypted files.

Pros: Offers 17 encryption algorithms. Supports PKI. Secure deletion. Password generator. Encrypts text to/from the clipboard. Command-line operation.

Cons: Awkward, dated user interface. Password generator doesn't work well. Some features described in Help system are absent.

Bottom Line: InterCrypto's Advanced Encryption Package is by far the most feature-rich encryption tool we've tested. But its awkward and dated interface make it one that should be reserved for experts.

Pros: Easy to encrypt file just by moving them into a secure volume. Password quality meter. Can share volumes. Mobile edition. Can encrypt files and folders for email.

Cons: Secure deletion doesn't handle unencrypted originals. Complicated creation of secure volumes, especially after the first. Expensive for what it does.

Bottom Line: Cypherix Cryptainer PE creates encrypted volumes for storing your sensitive files. Lock the volume and nobody can access the files. It does the job, but it's relatively expensive.

Pros: Encrypts files and folders with optional compression. Includes secure deletion. Straightforward user interface. Self-decrypting EXE option.

Cons: No filename encryption. Lacks advanced features.

Bottom Line: Cypherix SecureIT handles the basic task of encrypting and decrypting files and folders in a workmanlike fashion, but it lacks advanced features offered by the competition.

Pros: Can use one to four encryption algorithms. Simple, context-menu-based operation. Can keep passphrase in memory. Secure deletion. Text encryption. Filename encryption.

Cons: Passphrase memory can be a security risk for the careless. Fewer features than some competitors.

Bottom Line: CryptoForge offers a simple, context-menu-based approach to encryption and secure deletion, and it also handles text-only encryption. It's a fine choice for keeping your files safe.

Pros: Creates secure storage for sensitive files. Easy to use. Two-factor authentication.

Cons: Lacks secure deletion. Displayed some odd error messages in testing.

Bottom Line: Any file you drop into InterCrypto CryptoExpert 8's secure storage vaults gets encrypted when you lock the vault. It's easy to use, but it lacks some features and we found some confusing errors in our testing.

Pros: Many options for hiding encrypted files. Easy to use. Two-factor authentication. Can hide existence of containers. Comprehensive secure-deletion file shredder. Trace remover. Price includes five licenses.

Cons: Combination of hidden container and two-factor authentication can destroy data. Portable encrypted containers only portable on systems with Steganos installed.

Bottom Line: Steganos Safe creates secure encrypted storage for your sensitive files. It's very easy to use, and it offers some unique options for maintaining privacy and secrecy.

More here:
The Best Encryption Software of 2018 | PCMag.com

Ban ‘felon’ Chelsea Manning from New Zealand, urge …

The New Zealand opposition has called for US whistleblower Chelsea Manning to be banned from visiting the country to give a series of talks in September.

Manning was released from prison in May 2017 after being sentenced in 2013 in violation of the US Espionage Act for disclosing classified government documents to WikiLeaks.

She requires a special direction visa to visit New Zealand, and is subject to character provisions in section 15 of the Immigration Act 2009.

Opposition immigration spokesperson Michael Woodhouse said the government should decline Manning a special direction visa because of her history of criminal convictions.

This is a convicted felon, sentenced to 35 years in jail, coming in here for money, Woodhouse told Stuff.

The discretion is not there to apply to a person who expresses virtually no remorse for her offending ... Theres no rehabilitation, no remorse, the very purpose of her visit to come and talk about her crimes.

A spokesperson for Immigration New Zealand said an appropriately delegated INZ staff member will look at the representations in the first instance, and they had received an application from Mannings representatives for a visa.

Manning tweeted last year that she was banned from entering Canada due to her criminal convictions. However, she managed to secure a Canadian visa in May this year.

Greens MP and human rights lawyer Golriz Ghahraman said Manning posed no threat to New Zealand and called Nationals stance on Manning callous

Continuing to condemn Manning for exposing war crimes, including against children and journalists in Iraq and Afghanistan, deliberately shifts the conversation away from accountability of those responsible, effectively aligning us with the oppressor in a situation of injustice, said Gharaman.

Nationals call to shun Manning is particularly callous, given the charges laid against her were all about speaking out against serious misuse of power and she has already served a lengthy sentence of imprisonment, at times in solitary confinement ... Chelsea Manning clearly poses no viable risk to New Zealand.

Manning has never apologized or expressed regret for leaking the documents to WikiLeaks, and said she did so because the difficulties of dealing with mainstream outlets left her no other option.

There was literally no [other] way I couldve done it, she said. I make a lot of mistakes but that doesnt mean I regret those mistakes, because those are learning experiences as well.

Mannings prison sentence was cut short and she was released last year after Barack Obama intervened.

This is the second time in a month that the issue of free speech has made news in New Zealand. Auckland mayor Phil Goff banned far-right Canadian speakers Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern from speaking in any council buildings, and Ardern described New Zealand as hostile to their views, though many Kiwis said the duo had a right to speak and bought tickets to their events.

See the original post:
Ban 'felon' Chelsea Manning from New Zealand, urge ...

As his isolation intensifies, WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange faces …

LONDON For Julian Assange, the worlds most famous whistleblower, freedom could be dangerous.

As his residency at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London enters its seventh year, the self-styled cyber revolutionary WikiLeaks founder and controversial publisher of some of the worlds most closely guarded official secrets is facing a pair of converging crises that have left his allies fearing for his wellbeing and his safety.

Inside the embassy, he is living an increasingly secluded existence, having been stripped of his phones, computers and visitor privileges after running afoul of the very government that gave him asylum. Outside the embassy, he is embroiled in the global political scandal surrounding Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, with questions about his role in that drama being raised by friends and foes alike.

In more ways than one, the very walls protecting Assange also appear to be closing in.

Life goes on outside the embassy, journalist Vaughan Smith, one of Assanges staunchest supporters and perhaps the last friend to visit him, told ABC News. But life doesnt go on inside.

In a series of interviews with his lawyers, supporters and friends, the people closest to Assange painted a bleak picture of his present and a grim outlook on his future, telling ABC News that he may both long for and dread the day he is forced out of the embassy.

"He's been effectively in solitary confinement," said Assanges lawyer Jennifer Robinson. Julian has always said he's very happy to face British justice but not at the expense of having to face American injustice.

Assanges supporters fear that, if his relationship with embassy officials further deteriorates, he could face a potentially devastating series of events that could ultimately land him in the hand of U.S. authorities.

Special Counsel Robert Muellers investigators have been probing WikiLeaks possible role in Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 elections, recently questioning at least five witnesses about their contacts with WikiLeaks. If his hosts at the Ecuadorian Embassy were to rescind his asylum and evict him, he faces immediate arrest by British authorities for failing to surrender on an arrest warrant related to a since-dropped rape investigation in Sweden. That arrest could pave the way for his potential extradition to the United States, should U.S. officials decide to charge him with a crime while he is in custody.

The question of whether WikiLeaks may have coordinated with Kremlin operatives has already has made some of his allies question their continued support.

If Julian Assange used WikiLeaks to willingly affect the outcome of the 2016 U.S. election on behalf of a foreign power, a onetime supporter, who asked to remain anonymous, told ABC News, then we are in a whole new ball game.

Assange has been confined to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London since 2012. Little is known about how Assange, who friends say is a "creature of the Internet," has managed his time there, especially since his electronic devices were taken away in March. Visitors have told ABC News he reads, uses a treadmill, and observes the street life below from a window.

Weekends in the embassy, they say, were the loneliest times for Assange. The embassy staff leaves on Fridays, so while the streets bustle with throngs of tourists swirling around the luxury store Harrods next door, Assange is left in the company of a guard with whom, Smith said, Assange doesnt share a common language.

When I saw him, I was concerned about his welfare, as a friend, said Smith, who owns Londons Frontline Club, a club for war journalists that once hosted WikiLeaks press conferences. He was feeling lonely. He scheduled our visit for late in the day on a Friday. It became clear why he wanted company.

On March 28, shortly after Smiths visit, Ecuadorian officials announced new restrictions on Assanges activities, accusing the 47-year-old Australian of violating a "written commitment made to the [Ecuadorian] government at the end of 2017 not to issue messages that might interfere with other states.

Assange appears to have angered his hosts when he publicly questioned via Twitter the British governments assessment that the Kremlin was behind the nerve agent attack on a former Russian intelligence officer in Salisbury earlier this year.

WikiLeaks, however, told a different story, tweeting on Aug. 16 that he has been gagged because of U.S. pressure on Ecuador.

Assanges only human contact outside of embassy staff since March has been with his lawyers, and they are concerned about his health and wellbeing.

He's now unable to receive visitors, doesn't have access to the Internet, no telephone calls, Robinson told ABC News. So he's effectively cut off from the outside world all together. The only people that are able to see him are his legal team, which is obviously a very limited interaction with the world.

Meanwhile, outside the walls of the embassy, Assange and the issue of WikiLeaks suspected dealings with Russian operatives remains of great interest to both U.S. investigators and WikiLeaks supporters.

Last month, Special Counsel Mueller indicted three Russian companies and a dozen Russian individuals, alleging that there were communications between Russian intelligence officers posing as a hacker persona, "Guccifer2.0," and an unnamed Organization-1 -- which sources identified as WikiLeaks -- discussing the politically-timed publication of hacked Democratic Party emails during the 2016 campaign.

Assange has denied having any involvement with Russian state actors, but his animosity toward former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was well known -- he publicly called her a sadistic sociopath during the campaign while Trump praised WikiLeaks five times on the campaign trail for publishing the stolen emails.

What Muellers indictment left unexplained for now was whether WikiLeaks and Assange knew Guccifer2.0 was not a Romanian hacker, as the persona claimed to be, and was really a group of Russian intelligence officers.

In questioning witnesses, Muellers agents have focused on inquiries on their contacts with Republican political strategist and former Trump adviser Roger Stone. Stone tweeted in 2016 that WikiLeaks had a surprise in store for Hillary Clinton a few days before WikiLeaks began posting thousands of hacked emails from her allies.

One witness FBI agents interviewed was Ted Malloch, an American professor living in the U.K., who was questioned March 28 as he arrived at Bostons Logan International Airport and asked about his ties to Stone, who wrote the forward to Mallochs recent book, and WikiLeaks. Agents also asked whether Malloch had visited the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. He told ABC News that he denied doing so.

The intensified focus by Mueller has coincided with Assanges supporters saying they've heard rumors that Ecuador whose president, Lenin Moreno, has derided Assange as a hacker will revoke his asylum imminently and hand him over to British police.

While no charges have ever been announced in the United States, two senior U.S. national security officials this month, when asked separately about Assange potentially facing charges for his past activities, confirmed that they still want to get their hands on Assange, though its unclear what that would entail.

The question of whether Assange and WikiLeaks may have colluded with Russian spies to tilt the American presidential election in favor of Trump has also opened up a rift among transparency and hacktivist circles and WikiLeaks insiders.

Some of his onetime supporters are questioning his denials. For others, Assanges reputation appears to already be beyond repair.

WikiLeaks simply is not what many of us thought it [once] was, a former WikiLeaks volunteer who worked directly with Assange told ABC News.

But others insist Assange would never be a stooge of the Kremlin, saying that he viewed whomever provided the hacked emails in 2016 as assets who could help him jostle Clintons seemingly clear path back into the White House.

I don't think he could work for anybody else. It would be completely out of character, Smith said of the Kremlin collusion theory. He did this [publishing the hacked Democratic emails] thinking Clinton would win and it would screw with her.

Assanges health is suffering, according to his lawyer, and his future is uncertain -- but his friend Smith doesn't believe that Assange will buckle under the pressure.

He is a toughie. He is built to do this sort of thing, Smith said. He is motivated by a belief that he is making a difference. From his perspective, he considers that hes doing the world a favor.

Editors note: This story has been updated to correct that Assange faces an arrest warrant, not charges, for failure to surrender and to add minor edits for clarity.

View original post here:
As his isolation intensifies, WikiLeaks' Julian Assange faces ...

Julian Assange, The Man Behind WikiLeaks – CBS News

Just a few months ago, most people had never heard of a Web site called WikiLeaks, or of its mysterious and eccentric founder, Julian Assange. But in that short period of time both have managed to rattle the worlds of journalism, diplomacy, and national security. WikiLeaks, which solicits and publishes secrets and suppressed material from whistleblowers around the world, has been under cyber attack from governments that want to shut it down. And Assange is currently under legal attack from the U.S. government which would like to charge him with espionage for publishing volumes of classified material from the Pentagon and the State Department.

"60 Minutes" and correspondent Steve Kroft spent two days with him in Great Britain where he is under house arrest, while fighting extradition to Sweden for questioning in two sexual assault cases, which he's called part of a smear campaign against him. In his most extensive television interview to date, Assange talked to us about his work, his vision and the prospects of facing criminal charges in the United States.

Julian Assange: I'm not yet a martyr.

Kroft: Right.

Assange: Let's keep it that way.

For now, Assange is holed up on a bucolic 600-acre English estate with an ankle bracelet, a 10 p.m. curfew, and a slow Internet connection. He declined to talk to us about the allegations in Sweden, on the advice of his attorney. He has not been charged and proclaims his innocence.

Kroft: Well, I suppose if you have to be under house arrest, there could be worse places.

Assange: Well it's a gilded cage. It's still a cage. But when you are forced to stay somewhere against your will, it does become something that you want to leave.

It's a radical departure from the lifestyle that the peripatetic Internet muckraker is used to - bounding from city to city, country to country, and regularly changing his cell phones, hair styles and general appearance, he says, to elude surveillance and avoid being killed, kidnapped or arrested.

And there are reasons for his paranoia: in the last four years, WikiLeaks has released information that played some role in deciding the 2007 election in Kenya, and fueling the anger that recently brought down the government in Tunisia. It has also divulged the membership rolls of a neo Nazi organization in Great Britain, and secret documents from the Church of Scientology. And that was before Assange began publishing U.S. secrets, provoking what he calls threatening statements from people close to power.

Kroft: What statements are you referring to?

Assange: The statements by the Vice President Biden saying, for instance that I was a high-tech terrorist. Sarah Palin calling to our organization to be dealt with like the Taliban, and be hunted down. There's calls either for my assassination or the assassination of my staff or for us to be kidnapped and renditioned back to the United States to be executed.

Kroft: Well as you know, we have a First Amendment and people can say whatever they want, including politicians. I don't think that many people in the United States took seriously the idea that you were a terrorist.

Assange: I would like to believe that. On the other hand the incitements to murder are a serious issue. And unfortunately there is a portion of the population that will believe in them and may carry them out.

2011 CBS. All rights reserved.

Read more here:
Julian Assange, The Man Behind WikiLeaks - CBS News