Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Internet'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Site Related
    • News & Updates
    • Site / Forum Feedback
    • Member Introduction
  • News
    • General News
    • FileSharing News
    • Mobile News
    • Software News
    • Security & Privacy News
    • Technology News
  • Downloads
    • nsane.down
  • General Discussions & Support
    • Filesharing Chat
    • Security & Privacy Center
    • Software Chat
    • Mobile Mania
    • Technology Talk
    • Entertainment Exchange
    • Guides & Tutorials
  • Off-Topic Chat
    • The Chat Bar
    • Jokes & Funny Stuff
    • Polling Station

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 103 results

  1. visualbuffs

    How fast is your internet speed?

    I wonder what is the plan on other country dsl they have... i got upgraded to 8mb
  2. Your smart home's fragile existence relies on a factor you can't control… the internet Without it, it's useless A less than useful smart display with no internet connection (Image credit: TechRadar) "Our door camera is offline… not sure why?" That's the message I received from my partner one afternoon. It was a Wednesday, I was at work, and so was she. Our smart home... was dead. For all the positive reviews, in-your-face marketing, consumer hype, and billions of dollars driven into its R&D, the smart home has a major Achilles heel that's completely out of your control. The internet. Until your internet connection fails, you don't realize just how crucial it is. If you think about it, it's obvious, but the point of a smart home is you don't have to think about it: it's there, in the background, quietly taking care of things and letting you get on with your life. All the useful little features – the various 'life hacks' companies are so desperate for you to lap up as they roll out yet another feature, update or brand new device – are all rendered useless. I was the first home that day, but not until late in the evening. By then my internet provider's call centers were long closed, and any hope of an instant resolution was lost. From smart to simple It's only when the internet connection to my house failed, I realized just how many devices relied on it. My smart speakers around the house would bark at me that they were struggling to connect to a network if I dared utter "okay Google", and the Google Home Hub smart display in the bedroom displayed a message saying it couldn't connect – no nice wallpaper pictures, no date or time, even though it had power. Just the error message. With no voice assistants on the smart speakers or display, I wasn’t able to ask for the Philips Hue lights to be switched on, the temperature to be increased via the Nest Thermostat E, or my robot vacuum to give the floor a quick sweep. It wasn’t just voice commands. With no Wi-Fi at home, the apps on my smartphone were also redundant. I wasn’t without lights, heating or a functioning vacuum, of course. All were manually available – a flick of a switch, the turn of a dial and the press of a button allowed for basic functionality – but any advanced features were unavailable. Without the internet, functionality of my smart TV and games console was also reduced. Access to TV apps such as Netflix and Prime Video were out of the question, as was online gaming. The phone apps for my smart home devices were rendered useless (Image credit: TechRadar) And then there was the device which originally alerted us to the issue – the Nest Hello doorbell. We received an email that it had gone offline, which led to an investigation on my smartphone and the realization that our home had lost its internet connection, rather than the Hello developing a fault. While the loss of the doorbell feature allowing us to make sure our Amazon package was delivered safely to a neighbor was slightly frustrating, it was the loss of the security monitoring that was of a greater concern. The Hello is able to record a few seconds of footage any time movement or sound is detected, and alerts you via a smartphone notification. Without an internet connection though, the camera is unable to record any footage, as it’s stored directly in the cloud, rather than locally on the device. Thankfully, we didn’t have any issues during the downtime, but it does make you re-evaluate just how much trust you can have in these products, as many smart home security cameras operate in a similar way. The smarts return, with a possible solution In all, our internet was out for just over 20 hours: in the grand scheme of things not a huge problem, in isolation. However, it wasn’t just our property. Our internet provider had issues with its broadband across the region, which meant we won’t have been the only smart home to go offline. For just less than a day, it was nothing more than a mild inconvenience, but in a situation where your internet connection possibly breaks for multiple days, and as smart devices become more ingrained into the working of our homes, the issues here are real. They need addressing if the technology can be trusted to effectively control key areas of our life. If you can't rely on your smart home, integrating more complex devices and tasks into it will be a difficult sell. Perhaps the introduction of 5G could provide assistance, with the traditional cabled internet line into your home working in tandem with a 5G connection. If one goes down, the other seamlessly takes over. In the UK, mobile carrier EE announced a router which offered this back in May 2018 (although it was 4G and not 5G), but mobile networks are still not widely available enough, nor support this level or usage for this product to be viable for the mass population. As the 5G network roll out continues, bringing next-gen coverage and speeds to more areas, this dual-connection router becomes a far more viable option, and it may just solve the problem for our smart homes. Source: Your smart home's fragile existence relies on a factor you can't control… the internet (TechRadar)
  3. RuNet disconnection tests were successful, according to the Russian government. The Russian government announced on Monday that it concluded a series of tests during which it successfully disconnected the country from the worldwide internet. The tests were carried out over multiple days, starting last week, and involved Russian government agencies, local internet service providers, and local Russian internet companies. The goal was to test if the country's national internet infrastructure -- known inside Russia as RuNet -- could function without access to the global DNS system and the external internet. Internet traffic was re-routed internally, effectively making Russia's RuNet the world's largest intranet. The government did not reveal any technical details about the tests and what exactly they consisted of. It only said that the government tested several disconnection scenarios, including a scenario that simulated a hostile cyber-attack from a foreign country. The experiment was deemed a success, the government said in a press conference today. "It turned out that, in general, that both authorities and telecom operators are ready to effectively respond to possible risks and threats and ensure the functioning of the Internet and the unified telecommunication network in Russia," said Alexei Sokolov, deputy head of the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media, as cited by multiple Russian news agencies [1, 2, 3, 4]. Sokolov said the results of the tests would be presented to President Putin next year. Long-planned tests The successful tests are a culmination of multiple years of planning, law-making from the Russian government, and physical modifications to Russia's local internet infrastructure. The tests were initially scheduled for April this year but were delayed until this fall, to give the Kremlin more time to pass an accompanying law. Called the "internet sovereignty" law, it grants the Russian government the power to disconnect the country from the rest of the internet at will and with little explanation, on the grounds of "national security." To do this, the law mandates that all local internet service providers re-route all internet traffic through strategic chokepoints under the management of Russia's Communications Ministry. These chokepoints can serve as a gigantic flip-switch for Russia's external internet connectivity, but they can also function as an internet surveillance apparatus, similar to China's Great Firewall technology, as many privacy advocates have pointed out. Source
  4. Tim Berners-Lee is credited with inventing the world wide web and now he’s calling on us to save it. The British engineer and computer scientist recently released a Contract for the Web – a list of commitments for governments, businesses and individuals to make in order to tackle fake news and privacy violations online. According to a new report by Amnesty International, the internet is threatened as never before by the dominance of companies such as Facebook and Google), which stand accused of “enabling human rights harm at a population scale”. Tech companies allow us to keep up to date with the world and keep in touch with friends and family no matter where they live. We use them to find job opportunities or to create new communities online. But every time you use search engines or social media, your personal data can be hoarded and sold on to other businesses. No doubt these platforms would argue that our data is the cost of using their services for free, but there’s plenty in this arrangement for ordinary web users to fear. Google could be buying your medical data without your knowledge to sell it on to insurance companies. Perhaps you’ve restricted your Facebook privacy settings, but Facebook can still track you across other websites. Maybe you identify as a gender or ethnic group that is served different adverts because an algorithm determines that you’re not appropriate for certain jobs or housing and credit options. Even the news you read online may be deliberately misleading or dishonest, in the hope of manipulating your political opinions. If the power of large tech companies isn’t challenged with international regulation, human rights could be under threat. Is the world doomed to endure a “digital dystopia”, or could Berners-Lee’s plan ensure the internet remains a common good? Is this for everyone? The Contract for the Web includes ideas such as net neutrality, which would stop internet service providers from slowing down a person’s connection if they browse outside approved or promoted websites. It also includes respect for privacy and data rights, including preventing corporations from handing information over to governments. It includes fighting for the web as a space for positive communities and collaboration – whether this means being more civil when we post online or opposing oppressive moves by governments. This final aim is essential for raising awareness and promoting more inclusive attitudes online, from stopping hate speech to enabling new ideas. This is nothing new. Some of the organisations who support the contract, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have been campaigning for these principles for years. Privacy regulations such as the GDPR have been a small but important step towards protecting data in Europe, and they’ve provided a blueprint for other countries. Groups, including the Mozilla Foundation, promote open-source software that can anyone can download and use. But the fact that Google and Facebook back the contract raises some questions. Do they really want to help reform the web to curb their worst behaviour or will manipulation continue to be the cost of access? The algorithms of Google, Facebook and Twitter determine what people see online, whether that is adverts or political content. The contract does nothing to resolve this huge imbalance in influence and power. Many of us feel like we have no choice but to use their services, and they often use openness – such as free email and free apps like Google Maps – as a way of furthering their control over everything people do online. Google makes money from people using free services, mostly by hoovering up our data to fuel targeted ads, and its business model isn’t likely to change overnight. For internet reform to succeed, it would need international collaboration between governments for effective regulation, along with pressure from users. The early web was full of utopian ideas, like John Perry Barlow’s famous Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace. This tried to place the internet as a space separate from government control, but didn’t anticipate the inevitable extent and character of corporate influence. Berners-Lee has remained faithful to this vision of collaboration and creativity for the betterment of humanity. But history, or perhaps the influence of major corporations, has not been kind to the web. While his new contract won’t fix all of its problems, Berners-Lee is right – we need action now from all sectors to reform the web. It has great potential to bring people together and support the diverse needs of humanity, but only if control can be wrestled from giants like Facebook and Google. Source
  5. The next 50 years may bring pervasive connectivity, brain-computer interfaces and walled-off areas of the internet. As the internet turns 50, the technology is only picking up steam and continuing to reinvent many aspects of our lives, from the way we do business, and the way we find dates and jobs, to the way we run for political office. The internet was born when the first Arpanet link was established between the University of California, Los Angeles and the Stanford Research Institute at 22:30 hours on October 29, 1969. UCLA professor Leonard Kleinrock and his student Charley Kline sent the first message to Bill Duval, a programmer at Stanford University. That first communication was the spark that ignited the growth of the internet and everything it has brought with it – email, sharing pictures on Facebook, buying books and toasters on Amazon, watching movies on Netflix, cat videos, mean-spirited memes and election-tampering bots. The spark was lit in 1969, but the internet really began to transform our lives in the late ‘90s to early 2000s. “Oh, the internet is turning 50, but that first internet connection between Stanford and UCLA was between two guys. It didn’t involve the whole planet,” says Genevieve Bell, a Senior Fellow at Intel Corp. and director of the Autonomy, Agency and Assurance Institute at the Australian National University. “It really started to change our lives and shake our consciousness around the time when Google became a verb. It all exploded at the intersection of Google, smartphones, apps, Amazon, Facebook and eBay.” It’s difficult to quantify how the internet has changed the world. If someone needs directions, most no longer go to the car to pull out a map. If it’s the middle of the night, they don’t have to wait till their bank opens at 9 a.m. to find out how much money is in their checking account. What did the president say at a rally last night? Go online to read his comments. We file our taxes online. We order food online. “The internet has changed our ideas of time and space and distance,” Bell says. “The internet can instantly tell us who was president in 1969, and what hours the new restaurant in town is open. We can watch a rover moving around on Mars. I can keep track of my friends in America from Australia.” The internet also has created new communities, bringing together people from all over the world because they share a common love for the same band, Pez dispensers or a TV chef. Of course, the existence of the internet also means anonymous online trolls can flood social media with hateful comments, and overseas bots can post negative and untruthful tweets about politicians and celebrities to incite anger, dissension and even violence. And while enterprises of all sizes use the internet to streamline their supply chain management operations and connect customers more closely with their brands, they also have to deal with hackers stealing customers’ financial information, or competing corporations and nation states planting negative online comments or using the internet to spy on their product plans or financials. Privacy, or the increasing loss of it, also is a problem thanks to the internet – or more accurately, thanks to the way we use the internet . “As the years have passed, the internet has been getting smarter,” says David Reinsel, a senior vice president at IDC, a technology analyst firm. “You’re no longer just going somewhere. It’s watching you go somewhere, and it is learning about you by what you purchase and what you search and what you ‘like.’ With everything you do online, you leave a trail of information. Your digital self is more you than your physical self now. And it’s pushing information at you based on what it knows about you.” Companies are using all of that personal information to strategically target individual users with specific advertisements and marketing. “Before a company would create a product for men or for a particular generation,” Reinsel says. “Now with the information they’re getting about us online, they can tailor it down to the individual. Think about the day you walk into a restaurant and you’re greeted by name and you’re presented a menu that takes into account what foods you like and your allergies. We’re not there yet, but that’s where we’re heading. The downside, though, is if that restaurant tells your health insurance company that you ordered the banana split. I have a problem with that.” Companies have a lot of opportunities to siphon information about our likes and dislikes, our political leanings, our hobbies and our 2 a.m. shopping sprees because our laptops, tablets and smartphones have become something of an extra appendage. We’re rarely unconnected. The thought of it makes many people anxious and feel at loose ends. Surveys have shown that while many people scroll online news sites, Twitter and Facebook over their morning coffee, others can’t even wait until they get out of bed to check to see what’s happening in the world or what memes are being posted. We’re addicted. We’re so connected that entire businesses – AirBnB, Uber, GrubHub and online mega giant Amazon – exist totally online. Pervasive internet connectivity, brain-computer interfaces So if the internet has changed our lives this dramatically in the last 50 years or even the last 15 years, what could the next 15 or 50 years bring? While the internet has created the opportunity for people to work productively and successfully all while being out of the office, the advancement of technologies like virtual reality and augmented reality will only add to the power of telecommuting tools like Skype, Zoom, instant messaging and Slack, according to Marc Weber, internet history program founder at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, Calif. “There are companies that are really using remote technology to change the way they work,” Weber says. “But when we get satisfactory virtual reality over the Web and other remote enabling technologies, there will be an even bigger change. If you make it easy to do telepresence or other ways to virtually connect people, that will change the way people work.” While Google failed with the initial release of its Google Glass wearable technology, which was widely panned as awkward and creepy, Weber predicts that more, and better, wearable devices will hit the market, and that will help change the way we connect to the internet. “Right now, we access the internet through these tiny screens we carry in our pockets,” Weber says. “Whether it’s something like Google Glass, advances in smart watches, or a brain-computer interface so we can surf the Web in our mind’s eye, there will be some new technology that makes it easier to access the internet. We couldn’t predict Airbnb and Yelp before smartphones became common. How can we predict what will happen when we can get information through our brain-computer interface? The next big advance in how we access the internet will change the medium again.” Kleinrock, who today is a distinguished professor of computer science at UCLA, has great hopes for the next 10 or 20 years of the internet. For starters, we’ll be even more connected than we are now, he says, and that’s going to enable another exciting round of technological growth. Instead of simply being well connected to the internet at home, in the office or at the local cafe, we’ll have a strong, fast connection when we’re walking the dog, traveling in the country or out in the middle of nowhere. Picture a day when you wake up on 5G, have 5G access in your car and out in the world. You’d have a continuous flow of information, with persistent authentication unlocking everything from your car to your office building and your mailbox. Sensors in the front door to your house might check your walking gait and your heart rate, and then connect to a chip in your body, and unlock the door as you approach it. “I foresee a pervasive global nervous system on this planet so wherever you go, the internet is available and accessible,” Kleinrock says. “And the internet of things will explode. We’ll be able to take cyber space that lives in your laptops and cell phones and embed it in the walls, in our cars and in our bodies with logic, memory, sensors, cameras, microphones and displays. You won’t have to see them or touch them. We’ll have this invisible network. Add to that the fact that we will have intelligent software agents that live in the network and alert you to things, seek out things you want and handle your priorities. It’ll be maybe 10 years before we have the proper interface, like speech and brain wave sensing, so instead of flapping my tongue, I’ll be able to communicate with my walls or car by just thinking about something.” Dark side of internet connectivity However, Kleinrock also envisions negatives in this futuristic scenario. What if that widespread access doesn’t apply to everyone or every country? “I do worry that we’re in for trouble,” he says. “I’m concerned that nation states will put walls around their national networks and won’t communicate with others. China, Russia, Turkey, even the EU – what if you can’t move from one of these areas of the internet to another? If we break up into separate networks, we lose an awful lot. We lose the ability to roam around without boundaries, and that has made the internet so powerful.” Charles Severance, clinical professor of information at the University of Michigan, says he also fears that what he calls today’s golden age of universal internet connectivity will go away. “I think there will be dark forces, whether companies or governments, that will control our connections,” says Severance, who teaches a course called Internet History, Technology and Security. “What if there’s a day when people will only be approved to connect to Facebook? Try to go to another site and the connection won’t work. Whoever holds these shared resources will become traffic cops and they will make you bribe them or pay them for resources.” “We are in the golden age of the internet,” Severance says. “In 50 years, we’ll say, ‘When I was a kid, you could connect from anywhere. You could put up any website.’ And kids will say, ‘What?’ It’ll be so sad that only old people will remember how great the internet was. I’m not looking forward to the next 50 years. I’m just really happy now.” Source
  6. Coming across a lot of VPN services I stumbled upon PureVPN with an offering of more than 10 features: Easy to use Apps 2000+ Servers Split Tunneling 24 Hour Live Chat Unlimited Bandwidth More detailed PureVPN review 2019 My premium plan screenshots are attached in the image format. Here are the list of VPN clients offered by PureVPN: Windows Mac Android Firestick Chrome Extension Dedicated Kodi Repo However my only concern is the performance and speed of this VPN service as stated by a lot of review websites that it has speed issues if someone can help me with this in getting better speeds with PureVPN ? As I cannot get so many features in this pricing with other VPN provider.
  7. Under his direction, the site grew to become a credible video game streaming contender . Matt Salsamendi was just 18 years old when he co-founded Mixer, the site which has grown to be the third most popular video game streaming platform. Now, he's announced he is moving on from the company to take on new projects. The company was originally called Beam, and it was acquired by Microsoft in 2016. It was subsequently renamed as Mixer, where it succeeded in tempting over some high-profile Twitch users such as Fortnite star Ninja. Mixer remains a David next to Twitch's Goliath though, with a StreamElements report showing Twitch makes up 72.2 percent of time spent watching live streams and Mixer makes up just 3 percent. Mixer is continuing to grow, however, with a report from Streamlabs showing the number of gaming hours streamed on the platform has tripled in the third quarter of this year, likely due to the presence on Ninja on the platform. "During my time at Mixer, we made leaps in technology and community that changed the way people think about competition in the game streaming space," Salsamendi wrote in a statement posted to Twitter. Regarding the company's acquisition by Microsoft, he was positive: "The support we received from across Microsoft was humbling for me and the experience I've gained in the last three years is irreplaceable." Salsamendi is now moving into a different field, working on using lasers in music projects. He didn't give a lot of details on what his new project will be, but he said he has a passion for lighting at EDM festivals and tours and will be pursuing that. Source
  8. He wants a rehearing. President Trump is determined to challenge an appeals court ruling preventing him from blocking critics on Twitter. The Justice Department has filed papers for Trump that demanded a rehearing by the Second US Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, arguing that the three-judge panel's unanimous decision was "fundamentally misconceived." The move would supposedly create a chilling effect for politicians if upheld. "Public officials who address matters relating to their public office on personal accounts will run the risk that every action taken on that account will be state action subject to constitutional scrutiny," according to the filing. The challenge may face an uphill battle. In the earlier ruling, Circuit Judge Barrington Parker noted that @RealDonaldTrump is "one of the White House's main vehicles" for official activity -- it's under scrutiny precisely because many of Trump's tweets are state actions. He "hereby ordered" companies to find alternatives to production in China on August 23rd while using his personal account, for example, and incorrectly . If Trump was allowed to block critics of his policies on his personal account, other politicians could simply shift their announcements to personal accounts to avoid their responsibilities for civic interaction. This lines up to a degree with a January ruling that an official's Facebook page is a public forum. As it is, there are calls for consistency across the aisle. Critics have sued Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arguing that they, too, shouldn't be blocked on Twitter merely based on disagreements. While Trump may not be fond of seeing critics' tweets, the ruling could also ensure that rival politicians have to contend with online objectors of their own. Source
  9. Cloudflare has gone down around the world and vast numbers of websites have gone down with it. The company provides cloud computing services to millions of people, meaning that a lot of websites are not accessible. One of these is Down Detector, which tracks outages, meaning people can’t even see if the website they want to visit is working or not. The chat service Discord has also stopped working as well as a number of other prominent pages. Matthew Price, Cloudflare CEO, tweeted: ‘Aware of major @Cloudflare issues impacting us network wide. Team is working on getting to the bottom of what’s going on. Will continue to update.’ One person tweeted: Cloudflare, possibly the largest internet/networking company in the world doesn’t have any kind of automated visibility on downtimes. does that not concern anyone? ‘Half their network is down and their status page says “all systems OK!’ they claimed. The outage appears to have started in the past hour. Unable to check Down Detector for updates, people took to Twitter in a quest for answers. ‘Sure is great that when Cloudflare goes down it takes half the Internet with it,’ one person wrote. Another roared: ‘Typical illustration of how bad the internet is centralized nowadays: Cloudflare is down, most websites & services being disrupted by this.’ The outage caused problems with the cryptocurrency website Coindesk, which tweeted: ‘ Due to a Cloudflare outage, we’re getting bad data from our providers, which is showing incorrect crypto prices. ‘Calm down everyone, Bitcoin is not $26.’ The outage appears to have been resolved now. Price added: ‘Appear to have mitigated the issue causing the outage. Traffic restored. Working now to restore all services globally. More details to come as we have them.’ Source
  10. Moscow is developing a ‘sovereign’ web that critics say will enhance official power to silence dissent Thousands of protesters had gathered outside government headquarters in Magas, the capital of the heavily Muslim republic of Ingushetia in Russia’s north Caucasus. They were there to oppose concessions in a years’-long bitter border dispute with neighbouring Chechnya, but when they tried to share information about the protest on WhatsApp they found the internet was down on all three major Russian mobile providers across Ingushetia. The October outage began late at night before the protest was scheduled to start, and lasted until it died down more than two weeks later. When protests sparked up again, the internet suddenly went out of action once more. It amounted to a virtual blackout: locals’ fondness for voice messages has made WhatsApp the main form of communication in the north Caucasus. No official explanation was given until spring, when the FSB security service — the successor to the KGB — admitted in court that it had shut down the internet because of “terrorist threats”. All but one of the supposed threats coincided with the dates of the protests, says Andrei Sabinin, who filed a lawsuit against the FSB and the interior ministry over the outages. “They want to take down platforms for spreading information online,” the human rights lawyer says. “No WhatsApp means no communication in the Caucasus. As soon as you go into Ingushetia, it’s a black hole.” Protests in Ingushetia over land swaps with Chechnya in October 2018, when WhatsApp was shut down in the republic to curb discussion about the issue Activists fear Ingushetia’s blackouts could be repeated across Russia thanks to a law signed by President Vladimir Putin in May. The measure ostensibly aims to create a “sovereign internet” — effectively a parallel web run entirely on Russian servers — that would allow Moscow to keep the internet operating in the event of a foreign cyber attack aimed at disabling it. To do so, internet providers will be required to install equipment which Russia could use to separate itself from the worldwide web at the flick of a “kill” switch. The technology is meant to reroute all external traffic through Russian-controlled nodes while creating a back-up domain name system to help the country’s internet function independently. Russia’s dependence on foreign systems would be vastly reduced, hastening a global Balkanisation of the internet where the west’s influence is fragmented. It also uses a technique known as deep packet inspection, or DPI, to centralise filtration powers in the hands of Russian censors, who have previously relied on internet providers to block access to banned content. “It’s framed as a precaution, but it’s actually a means of control,” says Sergey Sanovich, a political scientist at Stanford University who specialises in Russian online censorship. “For the most part this is about making sure the Russian government can, when necessary, have more direct access to control of information space.” Russia let its internet grow largely untrammeled until 2012, when Mr Putin’s return to the presidency met with mass street protests organised via social media. The Kremlin responded with an aggressive crackdown on online dissent: opposition pages were put on a list of banned websites, dozens of people went to prison for “liking” and reposting material, and independent news websites were brought to heel. But this ad hoc system was seen as inefficient. In 2014, Mr Putin declared the internet a “CIA project” able to weaken Russia’s sovereignty. Officials blamed the US for using it to start the Arab spring and Ukraine’s Maidan revolution in 2013-14. Some pro-Kremlin figures spoke of emulating China’s Great Firewall — a mix of technologies and laws designed to regulate the internet domestically, whose architects were invited to Moscow to share advice. The crackdown intensified after 2017, when opposition leader Alexei Navalny aired a video of an anti-corruption investigation — which racked up more than 20m views on YouTube — to help spark the largest nationwide protests since the Soviet Union collapsed. In 2018, Russia restricted access to almost 650,000 websites— a nearly fivefold increase on the year before, according to human rights group Agora. Yet Russia’s late start meant it lacked both the infrastructure and the human resources to control the internet as effectively as Beijing. China boasts its own hugely popular messaging services, such as WeChat, and has a reported 2m people who police public opinion online. By contrast, Roskomnadzor — the communications ministry’s watchdog — has just over 3,000 employees. “The Chinese have been blocking things since day one,” says a person close to Russia’s communications ministry. “We can’t do that.” Roskomnadzor made its most ambitious effort to ban Telegram, the messaging service, last year, accusing it of failing to comply with FSB requests to share user data. The attempt to block the app was a disastrous failure. Pavel Durov, Telegram’s Russian founder, rerouted its traffic through cloud hosting services, forcing censors into a game of whack-a-mole that saw them temporarily take down more than 16m IP addresses, including their own website, while having little effect on Telegram. The ban became a running joke among officials. At a ministry party last year, Roskomnadzor chief Alexander Zharov was taking photographs of a picturesque sunset on his phone when guests joked that he should share them on the app, prompting a foul-mouthed tirade, according to one guest. The crackdown intensified after 2017 when opposition leader Alexei Navalny posted a video of an anti-corruption investigation, garnering over 20m views © AP “He’s a hostage to the situation,” says the person close to the ministry. “He knows you can’t block it. We have no control over the process. The guys with epaulettes [in the FSB] bring bills to [lawmakers] and we have to implement them, [but] we look like idiots.” Part of the problem, experts say, is that Russia’s security bureaucracy rarely takes its own technical limitations into account. “Attempts to implement Russia’s notion of information security on the internet have been distinguished by mishaps because they don’t really understand how the internet works,” says Keir Giles, a senior fellow of the Russia and Eurasia programme at Chatham House. “If you prevent free flow of information across national borders you’ll break the internet.” Advocates for greater controls frame it as a way to ensure Russia’s independence from hostile powers. “A great deal of sectors of the real economy — power stations, transport infrastructure — depend very closely on the internet. It’s an issue of state security,” says Andrei Klishas, a member of the upper house of parliament, who co-authored the law. Mr Klishas cites the latest US cyber security strategy, with its emphasis on making countries like Russia pay “costs likely to deter future cyber aggression,” as the impetus for Moscow to act. President Donald Trump added to those fears last month, when he admitted that the US carried out a cyber attack against a Kremlin-backed “troll farm” in St Petersburg during the 2018 US midterm elections in apparent retaliation for Russia’s online meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign. Experts say Russia’s justifications for shutting the country off from the global internet are too vague to support such sweeping action. These scenarios include: a threat to network “integrity” that would prevent it from securing user communications; anything that would affect its ability to function such as a natural disaster; and “deliberate destabilising informational pressure from outside or within”. Russian president Vladimir Putin aims to create a 'sovereign internet' — effectively a parallel web run entirely on domestic servers © AP “There needs to be a way to react to the threats,” says Irina Levova, head of a government working group on internet issues. “[But] you can’t just say let’s go to Mars tomorrow and have everyone go without having the technology to do so.” Officials successfully tested the DPI system in a “fairly large region with a population of several thousand” — not Ingushetia — several months ago, says Mr Klishas, and plan to do a nationwide test later this year. But serious doubts remain about whether the law’s aims are even realisable. According to Ms Levova, maintaining the DPI equipment alone may cost as much as Rbs134bn ($2bn) a year— seven times Mr Klishas’ estimate — while many of the law’s technical provisions have yet to be clarified. Roskomnadzor reportedly hired RDP.RU, a company partly owned by state-run Rostelecom, to supply the DPI equipment before the bill was even passed. There is scepticism in the industry on whether Russia can produce the required technology. It has yet to undergo a full-scale test. And attempts to separate Russia from global technology value chains have failed: 96 per cent of state institutions still use unapproved foreign software despite an attempt to move them on to domestically produced alternatives, according to the audit chamber, which monitors the spending of government departments. Russia’s government bought Rbs82bn in foreign hardware last year, compared with just Rbs18bn of domestically-produced equipment, according to state defence conglomerate Rostec. “Right now it’s totally impossible,” says a senior executive at a major Russian tech company. “There’s no capacity to produce really productive, powerful chips. It would take years to develop that industry and in that time Apple will have gone much further. We could buy everything from China, they’ve done it all themselves, but that would raise national security questions.” The Russian web Centralising control over Russia’s internet — in a bid to make it more secure — could actually make it more vulnerable to foreign attacks, says Artem Kozlyuk, head of privacy rights group Roskomsvoboda. “Where the internet is more centralised and there is one state provider, then there is more risk of external meddling,” he says. Russia might also be trying to safeguard itself from the consequences of its own cyber operations, Mr Giles says. The WannaCry and NotPetya attacks — which ravaged businesses globally with ransomware and were blamed on Moscow — did considerable damage in Russia, taking some state-owned companies’ systems offline. “Massive disruption has blowback,” he says. “[These measures] make sure that you don’t suffer damage by cutting yourself off.” When Russian troops seized Crimea in 2014, they quickly took over the peninsula’s main internet exchange point and cable connections to the mainland. “That was the gold standard to achieve total information dominance — the only things the target population is receiving are yours,” says Mr Giles. Activists fear the internet isolation plan will do the same to Russian citizens. “It’ll be a totally different internet. It won’t be as quick or secure as it is now,” Mr Kozlyuk says. “Blocking will be totally non-transparent. It might take months until someone finds out there was some sort of internal order [to block a site].” Mr Klishas says the system will simply help Roskomnadzor enforce existing law, which is ostensibly aimed at preventing terrorism and child pornography but is often redirected to suppress dissent. “When states started fighting money laundering, the system was ineffective for a long time, especially [against] problems like drug trafficking and international terrorism. People always found ways to finance this unlawful activity. Then new procedures appeared to close these legal loopholes,” he says. Undeterred by the Telegram ban, the FSB recently made a similar demand to Yandex, Russia’s largest tech company. Yandex, which already shares some data with authorities, said on Tuesday it would push back against the FSB’s requests to decrypt all user communications. Despite sweeping requirements on data storage and censorship compliance — which saw LinkedIn banned in 2016 — Roskomnadzor has made little progress in bending Facebook and Google to its demands. In December Russia fined Google Rbs500,000 for failing to sign up to a government system for sharing information with the security services. Google continues to defy the law, but there has been an escalation in Moscow’s attempts to pressure western companies, Mr Sanovich says. “The irony is that Putin, who is conducting all these information operations abroad, also makes Google or Facebook enforce censorship at home,” he adds. “If they comply they risk making the regime stronger and compromising the integrity of their platform, but it’s much more significant if they are blocked. The media environment in Russia is now so heavily government-controlled that these providers play a vital role in giving Russians access to unfiltered information.” Roskomnadzor is doubling down on that by making it more difficult to avoid its bans. Though virtual private networks remain widely accessible, several have recently abandoned their Russian servers after the watchdog ordered them to share user traffic information with the Kremlin. Mr Kozlyuk expects it to use DPI to enforce the ban by filtering individual VPN traffic and fining those using them. “It’s the logical extension,” he says, “first you control the content, then the infrastructure, then the users.” Source
  11. Google makes billions from its cloud platform. Now it’s using those billions to buy up the internet itself — or at least the submarine cables that make up the internet backbone. Above: An operator works during the mooring of an undersea fiber optic cable near the Spanish Basque village of Sopelana on June 13, 2017. In February, the company announced its intention to move forward with the development of the Curie cable, a new undersea line stretching from California to Chile. It will be the first private intercontinental cable ever built by a major non-telecom company. And if you step back and just look at intracontinental cables, Google has fully financed a number of those already; it was one of the first companies to build a fully private submarine line. Google isn’t alone. Historically, cables have been owned by groups of private companies — mostly telecom providers — but 2016 saw the start of a massive submarine cable boom, and this time, the buyers are content providers. Corporations like Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon all seem to share Google’s aspirations for bottom-of-the-ocean dominance. I’ve been watching this trend develop, being in the broadband space myself, and the recent movements are certainly concerning. Big tech’s ownership of the internet backbone will have far-reaching, yet familiar, implications. It’s the same old consumer tradeoff; more convenience for less control — and less privacy. We’re reaching the next stage of internet maturity; one where only large, incumbent players can truly win in media. Consumers will soon need to decide exactly how much faith they want to place in these companies to build out the internet of tomorrow. We need to decide carefully, too; these are the same companies that are gaining access to a seemingly ever-increasing share of our private lives. Walling off the garden If you want to measure the internet in miles, fiber-optic submarine cables are the place to start. These unassuming cables crisscross the ocean floor worldwide, carrying 95-99 percent of international data over bundles of fiber-optic cable strands the diameter of a garden hose. All told, there are more than 700,000 miles of submarine cables in use today. While past cable builders leveraged cable ownership to sell bandwidth, content providers are building purposefully private cables. The internet is commonly described as a cloud. In reality, it’s a series of wet, fragile tubes, and Google is about to own an alarming number of them. The numbers speak for themselves; Google will own 10,433 miles of submarine cables internationally when the Curie cable is completed later this year. The total shoots up to 63,605 miles when you include cables it owns in consortium with Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon. Including these part-owned cables, the company has enough submarine infrastructure to wrap around the earth’s equator two-and-a-half times (with thousands of cable miles to spare). The impetus for Google’s submarine projects This submarine cable boom makes more sense when you look at the growth of traffic that’s taken place in the past decade. In the Atlantic and Pacific, content providers accounted for over half of total demand in 2017. Content provider data use has skyrocketed from less than eight percent to near 40 percent in the past 10 years. It should be noted here that stats are significantly lower in Africa and the Middle East, suggesting that developed nations hunger for video content and cloud apps are a driver of the trend. This is supported by overall international bandwidth use between countries. In 2017, India only used 4,977 Mbps of international bandwidth. The U.S. used a staggering 4,960,388 Mbps that same year. The cost of privatized infrastructure Like the removal of Net Neutrality, privatizing internet infrastructure has only reduced prices for consumers. The problem we now face is a moral one: Do we want a private internet? Or do we want to preserve the “Wild West” web that we’ve had to this point? Unfortunately, the question isn’t as simple as drawing a line between “good” and “bad” network optimizations. Practices like edge networking and zero-rating are critical to the business models of companies like Netflix and AT&T — they also don’t technically violate the rules, and ultimately deliver much better services to consumers. As we look to the future, we need to start asking ourselves what the internet is really going to look like whenever the content services that already command so much of our attention are in control of the internet backbone as well. Privatized infrastructure may bring untold benefits for consumers in the short run, but is there a cost we aren’t considering? Source
  12. Russia is considering whether to disconnect from the global internet briefly, as part of a test of its cyber-defences. The test will mean data passing between Russian citizens and organisations stays inside the nation rather than being routed internationally. A draft law mandating technical changes needed to operate independently was introduced to its parliament last year. The test is expected to happen before 1 April but no exact date has been set. Major disruption The draft law, called the Digital Economy National Program, requires Russia's ISPs to ensure that it can operate in the event of foreign powers acting to isolate the country online. Nato and its allies have threatened to sanction Russia over the cyber-attacks and other online interference which it is regularly accused of instigating. The measures outlined in the law include Russia building its own version of the net's address system, known as DNS, so it can operate if links to these internationally-located servers are cut. Currently, 12 organisations oversee the root servers for DNS and none of them are in Russia. However many copies of the net's core address book do already exist inside Russia suggesting its net systems could keep working even if punitive action was taken to cut it off. The test is also expected to involve ISPs demonstrating that they can direct data to government-controlled routing points. These will filter traffic so that data sent between Russians reaches its destination, but any destined for foreign computers is discarded. Eventually the Russian government wants all domestic traffic to pass through these routing points. This is believed to be part of an effort to set up a mass censorship system akin to that seen in China, which tries to scrub out prohibited traffic. Russian news organisations reported that the nation's ISPs are broadly backing the aims of the draft law but are divided on how to do it. They believe the test will cause "major disruption" to Russian internet traffic, reports tech news website ZDNet. The Russian government is providing cash for ISPs to modify their infrastructure so the redirection effort can be properly tested. Source
  13. Wilson Drake

    Happy Safer Internet Day 2019

    This year lets all raise our hands to make Internet a safer place on Safer Internet Day
  14. What do Heartbleed, WannaCry, and million dollar iPhone bugs have in common? Alex is a software security engineer at Mozilla, where he works on sandboxing and anti-exploitation for Firefox. Previously he was a software engineer with the United States Digital Service, and served as a member of the board of directors of both the Python and Django Software Foundations. One bug affects iPhones, another affects Windows, and the third affects servers running Linux. At first glance these might seem unrelated, but in reality all three were made possible because the software that was being exploited was written in programming languages which allow a category of errors called "memory unsafety." By allowing these types of vulnerabilities, languages such as C and C++ have facilitated a nearly unending stream of critical computer security vulnerabilities for years. Imagine you had a program with a list of 10 numbers. What should happen if you asked the list for its 11th element? Most of us would say an error of some sort should occur, and in a memory safe programming language (for example, Python or Java) that's what would happen. In a memory unsafe programming language, it'll look at wherever in memory the 11th element would be (if it existed) and try to access it. Sometimes this will result in a crash, but in many cases you get whatever happens to be at that location in memory, even if that portion of memory has nothing to do with our list. This type of vulnerability is called a “buffer-overflow,” and it's one of the most common types of memory unsafety vulnerabilities. HeartBleed, which impacted 17 percent of the secure web servers on the internet, was a buffer-overflow exploit, letting you read 60 kilobytes past the end of a list, including passwords and other users’ data. There are other types of memory unsafety vulnerabilities with C/C++, though. Other examples are “type confusion,” (mixing up what type of value exists at a place in memory) “use after free,” (using a piece of memory after you told the operating system you were done with it) and “use of uninitialized memory” (using a piece of memory before you’ve stored anything in it). Together, these form some of the most common vulnerabilities across widely used software such as Firefox, Chrome, Windows, Android, and iOS. I've been tracking the security advisories for these projects for more than a year and in almost every release for these products, more than half of the vulnerabilities are memory unsafety. More disturbingly, the high and critical severity vulnerabilities (generally those which can result in remote code execution, where an attacker can run any code they want on your computer; this is usually the most severe type of vulnerability) are almost always memory unsafety. From my own security research into the widely used open source image processing libraries ImageMagick and GraphicsMagic, in the last year I've found more than 400 memory unsafety vulnerabilities. If these vulnerabilities are so prevalent, can cause so much damage, and there are languages that don't have these pitfalls, then why are these languages still so common? First, while there are now good choices for languages that prevent memory unsafety vulnerabilities, this wasn’t always the case. C and C++ are decades-old and enormously popular languages, while memory-safe languages that are usable for low-level programming like web browsers and operating systems, such as Rust and Swift, are only just starting to achieve popularity. A bigger issue is that when developers sit down to choose a programming language for a new project, they're generally making their decision based on what languages their team knows, performance, and ecosystem of libraries that can be leveraged. Security is almost never a core consideration. This means languages which emphasize security, at the cost of ease of use, are at a disadvantage. Furthermore, many of the most important software projects for internet security are not new, they were started a decade or more ago, for example Linux, OpenSSL, and the Apache webserver are all more than twenty years old. For massive projects like these, simply rewriting everything in a new language isn't an option; they need to be incrementally migrated. This means that projects will need to be written in two languages, instead of one, which increases complexity. It can also mean needing to retrain a huge team, which takes time and money. Finally, the largest problem is that many developers don't believe there's a problem at all. Many software engineers believe the problem is not that languages like C/C++ facilitate these vulnerabilities, it's that other engineers write buggy code. According to this theory, the problem isn't that trying to get the 11th item in a 10 item list can result in a critical vulnerability, the problem is that someone wrote code which tries to get the 11th item in the first place, that they either weren't a good enough engineer or weren't disciplined enough. In other words, some people think that the problem isn't with the programming language itself, only that some people don't know how to use it well. Many developers find this position compelling, despite the mountain of competing evidence—these vulnerabilities are omnipresent, and effect even companies with the largest security budgets and the most talented developers! It's one thing to discuss the tradeoffs and how we can make memory-safe languages easier to learn, but after thousands upon thousands of vulnerabilities that are preventable with a better programming language, the evidence makes it clear that "try harder not to have bugs" is not a viable strategy. However, there is some good news. Not everyone is in denial about this problem. Rust (disclosure: Rust’s primary sponsor is my employer, Mozilla) is a relatively new programming language which aims to be usable for every problem C and C++ are used for, while being memory safe and thus avoiding these security pitfalls. Rust is gaining adoption, it’s now used by Mozilla, Google, Dropbox, and Facebook, and I believe this demonstrates that many people are starting to look for systemic solutions to the memory unsafety problem. Further, Apple’s Swift programming language is also memory safe, while its predecessor, Objective-C, was not. There are a number of things we can do to accelerate the search for a comprehensive solution to the ongoing security disaster that is memory unsafety. First, we can get better at quantifying how much damage memory safety causes. While I've been performing rudimentary statistics for a few projects, there is an opportunity for more rigorous tracking. The CVE project, an industry-wide database of known vulnerabilities, could track for every vulnerability whether it was a memory unsafety issue, and whether a memory safe language would have prevented it. This will help us answer questions like, "Which projects would benefit most from a programming language that is memory safe?" Second, we should invest in research into how to best migrate existing large software projects to memory safe languages. Currently the idea of migrating something like the Linux kernel to a different programming language is a task almost too large to imagine. Dedicated research into what sort of tools could facilitate this, or how programming languages could be designed to make it easier, would dramatically reduce the cost of improving older, larger, projects. Finally, we can shift the culture around security within software engineering. When I first learned C++ in college, it was expected that sometimes your program would crash. No one ever told me that many of those crashes were also potential security vulnerabilities. A lack of awareness about the connection between the bugs and crashes developers encounter and security issues, from early on in a developer’s career, is emblematic of how security is a secondary concern in software engineering and how we teach it. When creating new projects it should be accepted that one of the criteria when choosing a programming language should be "How will this choice impact security?" Memory unsafety is currently a scourge for our industry. But it doesn't have to be the case that every Windows or Firefox release fixes dozens of avoidable security vulnerabilities. We need to shift ourselves from treating each memory unsafety vulnerability as an isolated incident, and instead treat them as the deeply rooted systemic problem they are. And then we need to invest in engineering research into how we can build better tools to solve this problem. If we make that change and that investment we can make a dramatic improvement to computer security for all users, and make HeartBleed, WannaCry, and million dollar iPhone bugs far less common. Source
  15. The internet is an amazing place where you can find more than 1 billion websites. Along with some fantastic sites there are some weird ones too. It’s impossible for a person to visit every website. Therefore we have gathered some strange websites on the internet. Some of them are funny, some are really boring and a few are like you can’t answer why they exist. We haven’t included adult site here, so you can click on all link without any hesitation. Enjoy the list! 1. Iloveyoulikeafatladylovesapples: Feel the hunger of the fat lady until you let her eat enough apples. The website is completely useless still you can enjoy the graphics and background music. 2. Thenicestplaceontheinter.net: The really sweet website that offers free hugs. Go get it. 3. SciencevsMagic.net/Tes: You can mix the words amazing and weird to describe this one. Also, the website gave AIDS to my eyes. 4. Michaeljfoxnews: Feel the earthquake on your computer. 5. Pointerpointer: I don’t know where did they find these pictures but this is how you get to the specific point. 6. Heeeeeeeey: Just click on link and get the heeey hooo party feel. 7. wwwdotcom: A serious tip for you. 8. Rainymood: Rain makes everything better. So just sit back and enjoy the sound effect to enlighten your mood. 9. Isitchristmas: The name suggests all. May be the website has been designed for people suffering from short term memory loss. 10. Cat-bounce: And that’s how humans play with emotions of cats. 11. 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111: Believe me; I have no idea what the exact purpose of website. But it seems like website owner is not really a fan of Arnold Schwarzenegger. 12. Heyyeyaaeyaaaeyaeyaa: A catchy music with special cartoon characters for our special readers. 13. Thisman: This is the height of weirdness! The website says that hundreds of people dream about this face. No, I don’t. 14. Breakglasstosoundalarm: The thing you wanted to do once in your life is here. 15. Internetlivestats: I don’t think this is a live data, however you will get an idea of few internet stats. 16. Simonpanrucker: No words to explain this useless thing. Kindly decide yourself how weird it is. 17. Ilooklikebarackobama: You might wanna reply this website, “No you don’t, not even a bit”. 18. Corgiorgy: The cute dog army. 19. Haneke: If you like complicated things and pay too much attention into details, you won’t regret after visiting this website. 20. Fearthegaychicken: The question is what makes you think that this chicken is gay. Is it background color or the sound? 21. Koalastothemax: An amazing creativity and fun with pixels. 22. Procatinator: Cats popularity is increasing day by day and somehow this website is the reason behind it. 23. Youfellasleepwatchingadvd: If your mom doesn’t allow you to watch TV, you could spend some time here. 24. Essaytyper: This is the place where you become a professional typist in no time. 25. Feedthehead: My advice is, don’t just feed the head, play with the whole face. 26. Nooooooooooooooo: If your boss gives you extra workload, you can reply him this link. 27. Zoomquilt: The weirdness tends to infinity. Even a telescope can’t look so far. 28. Staggeringbeauty: Just shake the mouse and see the snake’s reaction. 29. Anasomnia: This is how dreams become nightmare. 30. Eelslap: Slap tight as many times as you want. He won’t mind. Source
  16. Internet Download Manager 6.31 Build 9 Changelog: http://internetdownloadmanager.com/news.html Changes: (Released: Oct 18, 2018) Fixed problems with downloading for several types of video streams Fixed the problems with Firefox and Google Chrome integration caused by some security applications Fixed bugs Download: http://mirror2.internetdownloadmanager.com/idman631build9.exe Retail: http://download.internetdownloadmanager.com/commerce/2odlksMSLPFNW84503ksu99vnwud/idman631build9f.exe http://mirror2.internetdownloadmanager.com/commerce/2odlksMSLPFNW84503ksu99vnwud/idman631build9f.exe
  17. For years, the number of Americans who have reported using the internet, social media, and smartphones has been on a meteoric rise. But that rate has slowed to a near-stall. New data published this week by the Pew Research Center show that, since 2016, that number has plateaued, indicating those technologies have reached a saturation point among many groups of people. The percentage of Americans using smartphones (77%), the internet (88% to 89%), and social media (69%) has remained virtually unchanged during the last two years. “Put simply, in some instances there just aren’t many non-users left,” the report states. More than 90% of adults younger than 50 report they use the internet or own a smartphone. This number squares with some of the trends noticed earlier this year by Gartner, a global research firm. The fourth quarter of 2017 marked the first time since 2004 that the market for smartphones declined globally compared to the prior year. People are less frequently buying new phones. “While demand for high quality, 4G connectivity and better camera features remained strong, high expectations and few incremental benefits during replacement weakened smartphone sales,” the firm reported. That’s already posed significant challenges for foreign companies looking to break into the US market. The Chinese brand Xiaomi is the fourth-largest seller of smartphones in the world. But as CNBC reported earlier this year, any goals it has for getting its products into American hands will be tough, with market saturation being a big reason why. Of course, there are segments of the US population that represent room in which to expand the use of smartphones and the internet. About 60% of Americans living in rural zones complain they have internet speeds so slow that it inhibits use. There’s also the population over 50 years old, which often complains that learning a new technology isn’t worth their time, according to the Pew report. In 2015, a Pew survey showed 34% of people over 65 said they had no confidence in their ability to perform tasks online. So for companies looking to make inroads, some of the challenges are clear: Invent products that make usability improvements to what’s already offered by Apple or Samsung that can be applied across a broad age range of people. It’s a tall order, but a tighter market could just pave the way for a newer, better wave of technology. Source
  18. Eric Schmidt, who has been the CEO of Google and executive chairman of its parent company, Alphabet, predicts that within the next decade there will be two distinct internets: one led by the U.S. and the other by China. Village Global VC. The firm enlists tech luminaries — including Schmidt, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Diane Green — as limited partners, then invests their money into early-stage tech ventures. At the event, economist Tyler Cowen asked, “What are the chances that the internet fragments over the years?” Schmidt said: BRI is an economic development strategy of the Chinese government that aims to connect and facilitate all kinds of trade, including digital trade, between China and countries in Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Schmidt’s predictions come at a time when his successor at Google, CEO Sundar Pichai, has stirred up controversy around the company’s strategy in China. Reportedly, Google has been developing “Project Dragonfly,” a censored version of its search engine that could appease authorities in China. The project allegedly included a means to suppress some search results, booting them off the first page, and a means to fully block results for sensitive queries, for example, around “peaceful protests.” In recent weeks, hundreds of Google employees lobbied Pichai for more transparency and signed a letter saying that the reported plans raised “urgent moral and ethical issues.” Pichai has said that Google has been “very open about our desire to do more in China,” and that the team “has been in an exploration stage for quite a while now,” and considering “many options,” but is nowhere near launching in China. In a separate discussion last night between Schmidt and several start-up founders, he lauded Chinese tech products, services and adoption, especially in mobile payments. He noted that Starbucks in China don’t feature a register. Customers order ahead online and pay with their phones before picking up their lattes. A business development leader with Facebook, Ime Archebong, asked Schmidt if large tech companies are doing enough good in the world. Schmidt replied: “The judge of this is others, not us. Self-referential conversations about ‘Do I feel good about what I’m doing?’ are not very helpful. The judge is outside.” At several points in the private discussion, Schmidt urged entrepreneurs to build products and services that are not merely addictive, but valuable. He also said not enough companies “measure the right things.” Too many focus on short-term revenue growth and satisfying shareholders, rather than what’s best for their users, society and the long-term health of their companies. Schmidt was the CEO of Google from 2001, when he took over from co-founder Larry Page, through 2011, when Page reclaimed the reins. He remained as executive chairman of Google and then Alphabet until earlier this year. Source
  19. Benin has joined a growing list of African states imposing levies for using the internet. The government passed a decree in late August taxing its citizens for accessing the internet and social-media apps. The directive, first proposed in July, institutes a fee (link in French) of 5 CFA francs ($0.008) per megabyte consumed through services like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter. It also introduces a 5% fee, on top of taxes, on texting and calls, according to advocacy group Internet Sans Frontières (ISF). The new law has been denounced, with citizens and advocates using the hashtag #Taxepamesmo (“Don’t tax my megabytes”) to call on officials to cancel the levy. The increased fees will not only burden the poorest consumers and widen the digital divide, but they will also be “disastrous” for the nation’s nascent digital economy, says ISF’s executive director Julie Owono. A petition against the levy on Change.org has garnered nearly 7,000 signatures since it was created five days ago. The West African nation joins an increasing number of African countries that have introduced new fees for accessing digital spaces. Last month, Zambia approved a tax on internet calls in order to protect large telcos at the expense of already squeezed citizens. In July, Uganda also introduced a tax for accessing 60 websites and social-media apps, including WhatsApp and Twitter, from mobile phones. Officials in Kampala also increased excise duty fees on mobile-money transactions from 10% to 15%, in a bid to reduce capital flight and improve the country’s tax-to-GDP ratio. Digital-rights advocates say these measures are part of wider moves to silence critics and the vibrant socio-political, cultural, and economic conversations taking place online. The adoptions of these taxes, they say, could have a costly impact not just on democracy and social cohesion, but on economic growth, innovation, and net neutrality. Paradigm Initiative, a Nigerian company that works to advance digital rights, has said it was worried Nigeria would follow Uganda’s and Zambia’s footsteps and start levying over-the-top media services like Facebook and Telegram that deliver content on the internet. But taxing the digital sector might have a negative impact in the long run. Research has already shown that Uganda’s ad hoc fees could cost its economy $750 million in revenue this year alone. “These governments are killing the goose that lays the golden egg,” Owono said. Source
  20. With the peak of the Internet more and more people are getting their business and personal stuff online. But that also has it consequences: it is the privacy and security, or more importantly, lack of. Here are some basic tips to make your life more private and secure: Don’t open shady links. Now that’s an obvious one but often forgotten. ‘X tagged you in this’ or ‘look at this cute photo’ should always be taken with the grain of salt. Especially if you don’t often communicate with that person or that link doesn’t look too good like www.asdgsdg.com/photo.exe' Use quality antivirus software. Use something free like Avast or Microsoft Security Essentials or if you are willing to pay: Eset NOD32. Don’t skimp on this, it could save your digital life. Use a premium VPN. Nowadays you can barely trust your ISP to not log or use your data for potential gains. Especially in the US where they can sell your data to the advertisers. Pretty scary right? Pick something like NordVPN and get military grade security with respect to your privacy. I’ve dug out this coupon code earlier (USENORD60) which gets you 1 year of VPN for $60. A pretty good value I think. Use social media conservatively. Even if you take all the necessary precautions but post on Facebook that you aren’t home right now, it isn’t really safe, is it? Even more, I recommend not using social media, because they track you. Everybody tracks you online. Limit yourself of Google, use Duck Duck Go for searching, Privacy Badger for tracking cookies and HTTPS Everywhere extensions for security, ProtonMail for securely encrypted mail. Also, you could get one of the safest OS out there, Tails. Here are my 2 cents. Hope these tips are useful to someone. If you have any questions do let me know.
  21. selesn777

    NetSetMan Pro 3.7.3 Retail

    NetSetMan Pro 3.7.3 Retail NetSetMan is a network settings manager which can easily switch between 6 different, visually structured profiles including IP addresses, gateways (incl. Metric), DNS servers, WINS servers, IPv4 and IPv6, extensive WiFi managment, computer name, workgroup, DNS domain, default printer, network drives, NIC status, SMTP server, hosts and scripts. NetSetMan offers you a powerful, easy-to-use interface to manage all your network settings at a glance. Main features: Management for network settings (LAN & WLAN)Tray-Info for all current IP settingsNSM Service to allow the use without admin privilegesAdministration for defining usage permissionsQuick switch from the tray iconAuto-saving of all settingsCommand line activationQuick access to frequently used Windows locationsTwo different user interfaces (Full & Compact)3.7. - 2014-06-03 Free vs Pro Website: http://www.netsetman.com/ OS: Windows XP / Vista / 7 / 8 (x86-x64) Language: Ml Medicine: Keygen Size: 3,66 Mb.
  22. tao

    Traceability

    At a recent workshop on cybersecurity at Ditchley House sponsored by the Ditchley Foundation in the U.K., a primary topic of consideration was how to preserve the freedom and openness of the Internet while protecting against the harmful behaviors that have emerged in this global medium. That this is a significant challenge cannot be overstated. The bad behaviors range from social network bullying and misinformation to email spam, distributed denial of service attacks, direct cyberattacks against infrastructure, malware propagation, identity theft, and a host of other ills requiring a wide range of technical and legal considerations. That these harmful behaviors can and do cross international boundaries only makes it more difficult to fashion effective responses. In other columns, I have argued for better software development tools to reduce the common mistakes that lead to vulnerabilities that are exploited. Here, I want to focus on another aspect of response related to law enforcement and tracking down perpetrators. Of course, not all harms are (or perhaps are not yet) illegal, but discovering those who cause them may still be warranted. The recent adoption and implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union creates an interesting tension because it highlights the importance and value of privacy while those who do direct or indirect harm must be tracked down and their identities discovered. In passing, I mention that cryptography has sometimes been blamed for protecting the identity or actions of criminals but it is also a tool for protecting privacy. Arguments have been made for "back doors" to cryptographic systems but I am of the opinion that such proposals carry extremely high risk to privacy and safety. It is not my intent to argue this question in this column. What is of interest to me is a concept to which I was introduced at the Ditchley workshop, specifically, differential traceability. The ability to trace bad actors to bring them to justice seems to me an important goal in a civilized society. The tension with privacy protection leads to the idea that only under appropriate conditions can privacy be violated. By way of example, consider license plates on cars. They are usually arbitrary identifiers and special authority is needed to match them with the car owners (unless, of course, they are vanity plates like mine: "Cerfsup"). This is an example of differential traceability; the police department has the authority to demand ownership information from the Department of Motor Vehicles that issues the license plates. Ordinary citizens do not have this authority. In the Internet environment there are a variety of identifiers associated with users (including corporate users). Domain names, IP addresses, email addresses, and public cryptography keys are examples among many others. Some of these identifiers are dynamic and thus ambiguous. For example, IP addresses are not always permanent and may change (for example, temporary IP addresses assigned at Wi-Fi hotspots) or may be ambiguous in the case of Network Address Translation. Information about the time of assignment and the party to whom an IP address was assigned may be needed to identify an individual user. There has been considerable debate and even a recent court case regarding requirements to register users in domain name WHOIS databases in the context of the adoption of GDPR. If we are to accomplish the simultaneous objectives of protecting privacy while apprehending those engaged in harmful or criminal behavior on the Internet, we must find some balance between conflicting but desirable outcomes. This suggests to me that the notion of traceability under (internationally?) agreed circumstances (that is, differential traceability) might be a fruitful concept to explore. In most societies today, it is accepted that we must be identifiable to appropriate authorities under certain conditions (consider border crossings, traffic violation stops as examples). While there are conditions under which apparent anonymity is desirable and even justifiable (whistle-blowing, for example) absolute anonymity is actually quite difficult to achieve (another point made at the Ditchley workshop) and might not be absolutely desirable given the misbehaviors apparent anonymity invites. I expect this is a controversial conclusion and I look forward to subsequent discussion. Author Vinton G. Cerf is vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist at Google. He served as ACM president from 2012–2014. < Here >
  23. The service will roll out nationwide by year-end, in Cuba, one of the least connected countries. People record videos with their mobile phones of a street musician's performance in Cuba. Communist-run Cuba has started providing internet on the mobile phones of select users as it aims to roll out the service nationwide by year-end, in a further step toward opening one of the Western Hemisphere’s least connected countries. Journalists at state-run news outlets were among the first this year to get mobile internet, provided by Cuba’s telecoms monopoly, as part of a wider campaign for greater internet access that new president Miguel Diaz-Canel has said should boost the economy and help Cubans defend their revolution. Analysts said broader web access will also ultimately weaken the government’s control of what information reaches people in the one-party island state that has a monopoly on the media. Cuba frowns on public dissent and blocks access to dissident websites. “It’s been a radical change,” said Yuris Norido, 39, who reports for several state-run news websites and the television. “I can now update on the news from wherever I am, including where the news is taking place.” Certain customers, including companies and embassies, have also been able to buy mobile data plans since December, according to the website of Cuban telecoms monopoly ETECSA, which has not broadly publicized the move. ETECSA has said it will expand mobile internet to all its 5 million mobile phone customers, nearly half of Cuba’s population, by the end of this year. ETECSA did not reply to a request for more details for this story. Whether because of a lack of cash, a long-running US trade embargo or concerns about the flow of information, Cuba has lagged behind in web access. Until 2013, internet was largely only available to the public at tourist hotels in Cuba. But the government has since then made increasing connectivity a priority, introducing cybercafes and outdoor Wi-Fi hotspots and slowly starting to hook up homes to the web. Long before he took office from Raul Castro in April, 58-year-old Diaz-Canel championed the cause. “We need to be able to put the content of the revolution online,” he told parliament last July as vice president, adding that Cubans could thus “counter the avalanche of pseudo-cultural, banal and vulgar content.” Cuba could use subsidies to encourage the use of government-sponsored applications, analysts said. Last month, ETECSA launched a free Cuba-only messaging application, Todus, while Cuba’s own intranet with a handful of government-approved sites and email is much cheaper to access than the wider internet. In a 2015 document about its internet strategy that leaked, the Cuban government said it aimed to connect at least half of homes by 2020 and 60 percent of phones. But many Cubans are skeptical. ETECSA president Mayra Arevich told state-run media in December it had connected just 11,000 homes last year. “I’ve been many times to the ETECSA shop to ask if they can give us home access,” said Yuneisy Galindo, 28, at a Wi-Fi hotspot on one of Havana’s thoroughfares. “But they tell us they still aren’t ready and will call us.” Most mobile phone owners have smartphones, although Cuba is only now installing 3G technology, even as most of Latin America has moved onto 4G, with 5G in its final testing phase. “This rollout will expand slowly at first and then more quickly, if the government is increasingly confident that it can control any political fallout,” said Cuba expert Ted Henken at Baruch College in the United States. The price could prove the biggest restriction for many, though. Hotspots currently charge $1 an hour, compared with an average state monthly wage of $30. It was not clear what most Cubans will pay for mobile internet, but ETECSA is charging companies and embassies $45 a month for four gigabytes. Source
  24. The site’s head claims that the policy of not collecting personal information allows people to be “more true to themselves. Steven Huffman, the co-founder and CEO of Reddit Reddit, the self-described “front page of the internet,” may have a key tool in its arsenal as Americans begin to question their relationship with social media: anonymity. According to Steve Huffman, the site’s co-founder and CEO, “privacy is built into Reddit.” All that’s required to create an account and post on any of Reddit’s 1.2 million forums is an email address, a username, and a password. You don’t need to tell the company your birthday, your gender, or even your real name. As Huffman put it on Thursday at the Aspen Ideas Festival, which is co-hosted by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic, “Reddit doesn’t want the burden of personal information ... and is not selling personal information.” Huffman argued that anonymity on Reddit actually makes using the site “more like a conversation one has in real life” than other exchanges on the internet. “When people detach from their real-world identities, they can be more authentic, more true to themselves,” he claimed. Huffman gave as an example a subreddit called StillTrying, a forum for couples who have had trouble conceiving children. He posited that such a community wouldn’t exist on other platforms. At least one such group does, in fact, exist on Facebook—or at least did in 2015—but, unlike StillTrying, it was visible only to members. Everything on Reddit is visible to anyone with an internet connection, so it’s conceivable that Reddit could be a resource to a greater number of people than groups on other sites. Unlike many other anonymous social networks, including Whisper and the now-defunct Yik Yak, the namelessness of Reddit does have its limits. Redditors maintain one consistent identity through their usernames, with an associated score called “karma” that tells other users how often they’ve been upvoted or downvoted—essentially a proxy for how informative, trustworthy, and civil the community has found them in the past. “People care about their reputations on Reddit,” Huffman said on Thursday. “There’s some stake to it.” He said that, in general, these reputations motivate Redditors to keep their posts more civil than the comment sections of other sites, which he called “toxic,” “agro,” and “off-putting.” Reddit’s favoring of aliases over actual personal information could help it avoid data-breach scandals like those that have befallen Facebook, Yahoo, and Equifax in recent years, or tap into users’ most sensitive identities. But it also undeniably introduces vulnerabilities into the site. Reddit is notorious for hosting trolls and bullies. (Huffman himself once told The New Yorker, “I consider myself a troll at heart.”) A subpar Reddit karma score may not be enough to deter some would-be harassers, especially those posting mostly in groups filled with like-minded users who are happy to upvote offensive content. “We are extremely proud to have created this enriching experience where people can be themselves,” Huffman said. The question is whether these anonymous online personas are really the selves we want to be. Source
  25. There have long been warnings that tough anti-piracy measures will eventually 'break the Internet'. While that catastrophe is yet to happen, meddling in any piece of complex machinery is likely to lead to unexpected consequences. Like the hobbyist tuner trying to squeeze the last bit of performance out of an already perfectly good car, exhilaration - or catching fire - is always around the corner. Back in the 80s, I fancied myself as a half-decent 8-bit coder but of course, there was always someone who did it outrageously better. Like my idols in the C64 demo scene, for example, whom I eventually rubbed shoulders with. They made computers do things they weren’t supposed to, like displaying graphics in places the machine didn’t natively allow or playing music on the heads of disc drives. The aim, at least in part, was to push software and hardware to breaking point. What they didn’t need, however, was help from self-professed experts. Unfortunately for them, my clearly superior teenage coding knowledge (and access to their machines) allowed me to quietly ‘improve’ some of their work in progress, ‘fixing’ it here and there without needing to ask permission or mention what I’d done. Luckily for the shape of my face, nothing broke down immediately and development on the ‘improved’ software mostly continued as if nothing had happened. And then people began swearing. A lot. I’m still sorry for that. I imagine the cursing that went on back then, in the wake of my efforts to ‘fix’ problems that were none of my business, was similar to that recently uttered by Internet pioneer Vint Cerf and the inventor of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, in response to the Article 13 controversy. These men, who were there at the very beginning, also had a vision for their creations that didn’t involve smart-asses interfering with their work. Just like my unwanted efforts to ‘improve’ perfectly good parallax scrolling, web-blocking and content filtering are added complications that don’t easily fit with the original vision for an open web. No one wants complications. Most people – the vast majority of people – go on, 99% of people – do not want web-blocking, they don’t want filtering, and they don’t want expanded liabilities for intermediaries. But they’re mainly not being obtuse or pro-piracy, it’s just that their Internet (like a certain group’s scrolling) doesn’t need fixing because it’s just fine as it is. Of course, this call for the status quo is easily countered by the pro-blocking and pro-filtering movement who claim that the measures they want implementing globally have shown to work thus far, without any serious collateral damage. On this basis alone, why should anyone object to more of the same? Well, why shouldn’t they? None of these restrictions improve Internet users’ lives and there’s a dramatically reduced chance that the “Internet will break” if it’s left alone. So why not leave it? It’s not as if the public is being offered an incentive to welcome restrictions with open arms – price reductions on movies and music alongside a promise to increase quality if restrictions are put in place perhaps? Hardly. The point is this: it’s easy to frame this argument as one between those in favor of protecting copyright and those who want to pirate everything. In truth, it’s actually more fundamental. This is a clash between people who believe the Internet shouldn’t be tampered with – period – and those who believe that, because they’re potentially losing money, they should be allowed to tinker under everyone’s hood. People should, of course, be allowed to protect their rights but not at any cost. In the same way the Internet has grown and developed beyond all expectations, we should expect that the movement to block, filter, delete, divert and otherwise meddle in the net’s inner workings will grow too, probably in ways we’d never envisioned 10 years ago. That being said, it’s unlikely that any single filtering, blocking or liability-increasing effort will “break the Internet” and even a couple combined won’t herald the online apocalypse. After all, censorship machines are attacking as we speak, and most of us are still online with decent amounts of freedom. But in the same way that the famous Doomsday Clock ticks and tocks inexorably towards midnight, it’s not one event under consideration here, but the interplay between many. A restriction or web-block here, a content filter or a long-forgotten scrolling adjustment there. None of it really matters until that moment when history catches up with us and we wished we’d have been more careful over who was given control. Should we really be letting people who don’t know what they’re doing mess around with something so important, even when they’re doing it for reasons they genuinely believe in? If something really is properly broken, then perhaps we should consider sensible ways to fix it. However, when all the fixes become the very reason everything breaks down, we will have clearly gotten our priorities wrong and it will be too late. The big question is how long we’ll have to wait to find out. Will it be ‘never’ as we’re reliably informed by the entertainment industries or ‘sooner or later’ as the technologists suggest? The truth is, none of us really knows. The Internet experts don’t know there will be a meltdown next decade and copyright holders can’t promise that everything will be just fine in 20 years’ time. What we can say, however, is that our beloved Internet has served us pretty well up to now and despite much complaining and the existence of piracy, most people are doing very well out of it. No matter what happens it’s unlikely to break completely but there is a chance, at some point in the future, it will find itself being suffocated into submission. So, the simple challenge for us today is to find ways to protect rightsholders without affecting the vision for the open Internet. Answers on a postcard, please. Written by Andy at TF
×
×
  • Create New...