Економіка

A wave of brief internet outages hit the websites and apps of dozens of financial institutions, airlines and other companies across the globe Thursday.The Hong Kong Stock Exchange said in a tweet Thursday afternoon Hong Kong time that its site was facing technical issues and that it was investigating. It said in another post 17 minutes later that its websites were back to normal.Internet monitoring websites including ThousandEyes, Downdetector.com and fing.com showed dozens of disruptions, including to U.S.-based airlines.Many of the outages were reported by people in Australia trying to do banking, book flights and access postal services.Australia Post, the country’s postal service, said on Twitter that an “external outage” had impacted a number of its services, and that while most services had come back online, they are continuing to monitor and investigate.Many services were up and running after an hour or so, but the affected companies said they were working overtime to prevent further problems.Banking services were severely disrupted, with Westpac, the Commonwealth, ANZ and St George all down, along with the website of the Reserve Bank of Australia.Services have mostly been restored.Virgin Australia said flights were largely operating as scheduled after it restored access to its website and guest contact center.“Virgin Australia was one of many organizations to experience an outage with the Akamai content delivery system today,” it said. “We are working with them to ensure that necessary measures are taken to prevent these outages from reoccurring.”Akamai counts some of the world’s biggest companies and banks as customers.Calls to Akamai, which is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, but has global services, went unanswered.The disruptions came just days after many of the world’s top websites went offline briefly due to a problem with software at Fastly, another major web services company. The company blamed the problem on a software bug that was triggered when a customer changed a setting.Brief internet service outages are not uncommon and are only rarely the result of hacking or other mischief. But the outages have underscored how vital a small number of behind-the-scenes companies have become to running the internet. 
…

Facial recognition technology is playing an increasingly important role in helping law enforcement with criminal investigations, police say. But civil rights advocates are raising the alarm about its power and potential abuse of people’s privacy. VOA’s Julie Taboh has more
…

U.S. President Joe Biden’s unexpected decision to name a staunch antitrust advocate to lead the Federal Trade Commission has thrilled supporters of stronger regulation of the tech industry and has prompted predictions of regulatory overreach from representatives of some of the country’s largest internet companies.Lina Khan, 32, a professor at Columbia Law School prior to her nomination, is known for advocating a hard-nosed approach to the regulation of large technology firms like Amazon, Facebook, Google and Apple. She was nominated to fill an open seat on the FTC in March, and on Tuesday she was confirmed in a bipartisan 69-28 vote in the Senate.Shortly afterward, the news that she would be not just a commission member but its leader was announced by Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar at a Senate hearing.Her confirmation may signal an unexpectedly aggressive stance toward big tech firms from a presidential administration that had not seemed to make reining in the giants of Silicon Valley a major priority.Early run-in with big techKhan was born in London to Pakistani immigrant parents. The family moved to the United States when she was 11 and settled in New York City. Khan went to Williams College in Massachusetts, where she edited the school newspaper and completed her thesis on the political theorist Hannah Arendt.Khan’s first run-in with the might of big tech firms came when she was barely out of college and working for the Open Markets Program at the New America Foundation, a left-of-center think tank. The program’s focus was on the anti-competitive behavior of big businesses, such as Google, which happened to be a major financial supporter of the New America Foundation.FILE – This March 19, 2018, photo shows a Google app.In 2017, after the Open Markets Program expressed its approval of the European Union’s decision to slap Google with a $2.7 billion fine for the way it ranked its own shopping services in internet search results, the company’s chief executive reached out to the head of New America to express his displeasure.What happened afterward is disputed by the various parties involved, but within about two months, the Open Markets team was formally separated from the foundation.Going after big tech companiesKhan made a name for herself in the world of antitrust law with a 2017 article in The Yale Law Journal called “Amazon’s Anti-Trust Paradox.” The piece argued that typical antitrust doctrine in the U.S., which considers “consumer welfare” when determining whether a company is engaging in anti-competitive behavior, is inadequate in today’s world. A consumer products giant like Amazon can keep prices low — the biggest determinant of consumer welfare — even as it uses its dominance of a technology platform to disadvantage its competitors.Two years later, Khan followed up with an article in the Columbia Law Review advocating the application of “structural separations” to tech firms. The idea is that a system in which a company operates a platform on which goods and services are sold while simultaneously selling goods and services on that platform creates “a conflict of interest that platforms can exploit to further entrench their dominance, thwart competition and stifle innovation.”A prime example, offered in the paper, was Apple’s decision to block the popular music streaming service Spotify from its app store at the same time that it was trying to roll out a competing service called Apple Music.House reportKhan went on to help lead a major investigation into competition in digital markets by the majority staff of the House Judiciary Committee, which was issued in October of last year. The report included sweeping proposals for the application of antitrust law to the tech industry — including Khan’s favored concept of structural separation — and infuriated advocates for the tech industry.FILE – This combination of photos shows logos for social media platforms Facebook and Twitter.Khan’s participation in the House Judiciary report figured strongly in the negative reaction that news of her appointment as FTC chair generated from the industry. NetChoice, a group that represents giant companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter and more, quickly released a statement indicating its dismay with the decision.”Lina Khan’s antitrust activism detracts from the Federal Trade Commission’s reputation as an impartial body that enforces the law in a nondiscriminatory fashion,” said Carl Szabo, the group’s vice president and general counsel.Khan’s work on the House Judiciary report “casts doubt on her ability to fairly and neutrally apply our antitrust laws as they stand today,” Szabo said.Cheers from the leftDuring his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, Biden competed against other candidates, like Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who specifically called on the government to “break up” large technology firms. During the  campaign, Biden never went as far as Warren, which made the elevation of Khan to lead the FTC all the more surprising.”Lina brings deep knowledge and expertise to this role and will be a fearless champion for consumers,” Warren said in a statement Tuesday. “Giant tech companies like Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon deserve the growing scrutiny they are facing, and consolidation is choking off competition across American industries. With Chair Khan at the helm, we have a huge opportunity to make big, structural change by reviving antitrust enforcement and fighting monopolies that threaten our economy, our society and our democracy.”Even the New America Foundation — now New America — which separated with Khan and the Open Markets team under questionable circumstances in 2017, applauded her nomination to run the FTC.In a statement Tuesday, Joshua Stager, deputy director of broadband and competition policy at the foundation’s Open Technology Institute, called Khan a “proven thought leader who has helped jolt antitrust enforcement out of stagnant 1970s thinking. After years of sluggish enforcement — particularly in digital markets — the FTC needs a fresh perspective. We look forward to working with Commissioner Khan.”
…

Astronauts from both the U.S. space agency, NASA, and the European Space Agency ((ESA)) left the International Space Station ((ISS)) Wednesday to begin a project to upgrade the floating laboratory’s solar panel power supply system.
 
NASA flight engineer Shane Kimbrough and ESA astronaut Thomas Pesquet worked for several hours to install the first two of six ISS Roll-Out Solar Arrays (iROSAs)) to ultimately upgrade six of the station’s eight power channels.
 
NASA says the current solar arrays are functioning well but were designed for a 15-year service life and are in their 21st year of service. The new solar arrays will be positioned in front of six of the current arrays, increasing the station’s total available power from 160 kilowatts to a maximum of 215 kilowatts.  
 
The electrical boost will be needed to accommodate paying passengers and film crews expected to visit the ISS later this year.
 
Pesquet and Kimbrough will install two more of the new solar arrays Sunday. 
…

As President Joe Biden prepares for his first meeting with Russia’s Vladimir Putin on Wednesday in Geneva, the White House says the threat of ransomware will be a “significant topic” of conversation between the two leaders.Until just a couple of years ago, ransomware was viewed largely as a financial crime, hardly an issue that would dominate the first face-to-face meeting between the Russian and American leaders.But the issue was catapulted to the forefront of geopolitics last month after cybercriminals believed to be operating in Russia breached the networks of a major U.S. pipeline operator and a meat processor, demanding and receiving millions of dollars in ransom.Although U.S. officials have not accused the Russian government of direct involvement in the latest attacks, some lawmakers say Russia-based cybercriminals often work with the knowledge, if not the complicity, of the Kremlin. They are demanding that Biden deliver a tough message to Putin to end the practice.In a ransomware attack, cybercriminals encrypt a company’s or institution’s data and then demand a ransom in exchange for a decryption key and a promise not to release the data. Ransomware groups often offer their services to other hackers in exchange for a share of the ransom. Experts say this has helped lure a growing number of otherwise novice cybercriminals into the lucrative ransomware business.Following are the answers to three key questions about Russia’s role in ransomware attacks:What do we know about Russian-speaking ransomware groups?Cybersecurity firms track several dozen ransomware groups around the world. Most are believed to operate in Russia and former Soviet republics such as Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Latvia, according to the cybersecurity firm Recorded Future.Their precise number is unknown, though it has steadily grown in the past couple of years. Recorded Future tracks about 15 Russian-speaking ransomware groups. Check Point, an American-Israeli security firm, monitors seven, including several responsible for major ransomware attacks in recent years.Among them are DarkSide and REvil, the two groups behind the attacks on Colonial Pipeline and JBS, a major beef producer, respectively. REvil was behind some of the biggest ransomware attacks in the U.S. in 2020, according to Lotem Finkelstein, Check Point’s threat intelligence group manager.”Maybe there are more, but we can only speculate,” Finkelstein said in an interview with VOA.Babuk, another Russian-speaking ransomware family discovered early this year, has attacked at least five big entities, with one victim already paying the attackers $85,000 in ransom, according to the cybersecurity firm McAfee.  The Metropolitan Police Department of Washington, D.C., reportedly was another victim. The Russian-speaking ransomware groups follow an unwritten rule: As long as they avoid targets in Russia and other former Soviet republics, “they’re left to operate in peace by local authorities,” Recorded Future says.Another rule of the game: Ransomware gangs work only with Russian-speaking partners.What is known about ties between ransomware gangs and the Kremlin?The Russian government has denied any involvement in the recent ransomware attacks on the U.S., and the precise ties between the ransomware groups and the Kremlin remain uncertain. While U.S. officials have accused Russian spy services of co-opting criminal hackers, they’ve been careful not to directly blame the Russian government for the recent attacks on Colonial Pipeline and JBS.In the wake of the attack on the Colonial Pipeline, which sparked panic purchasing of gasoline and traffic congestion along the East Coast, President Biden has said that so far, there has been “no evidence based on, from our intelligence people, that Russia is involved, though there is evidence that the actors, ransomware, is in Russia.”During a recent congressional hearing, FBI Director Christopher Wray said he could not publicly discuss the nexus between cybercriminals and the Russian actors. Nevertheless, he noted that the “most recent” ransomware attackers “are individuals who, perhaps not coincidentally, specifically target English-speaking victims.”U.S. lawmakers go further, however, insisting that the attacks emanating from Russia could not take place without at least the Russian government’s tactic approval. Senator Mark Warner, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and co-chair of the bipartisan Senate Cybersecurity Caucus, said the cybercriminals operate “with the indirect acquiescence of the Russian government.””And don’t think for a moment that the Russia spy services, the Russian government isn’t watching and learning from the techniques of these cybercriminals,” Warner said during an interview on Washington Post Live on Monday.The line between cybercriminals and state actors has blurred. Many Russia-based cybercriminals may be working for Russian spy services during the day and “moonlighting” as cybercriminals in the evening, Warner said.How is the U.S. responding to the threat of ransomware?With ransomware emerging as a national security threat, some lawmakers and cybersecurity experts are calling for a more aggressive U.S. response. The Justice Department’s recently formed ransomware task force recovered most of the $5 million of cryptocurrency paid by Colonial Pipeline. The effort to recover the ransom is important, experts say, but lawmakers warn it’s not enough to halt the larger problem.”I believe we need to start thinking about going on the offense and hitting them back,” Republican Representative Michael McCaul said during a House Homeland Security hearing on the Colonial Pipeline cyberattack. “There should be consequences.”Cybersecurity experts agree that a more vigorous government response is needed.”I certainly think that there is a way and an opportunity to disrupt the aggressive threat actors that continue to cause havoc in the United States,” said Charles Carmakal, chief technology officer at the cybersecurity firm FireEye.Ahead of Wednesday’s summit, Putin has suggested that one approach might be a mutual agreement to extradite cybercriminals between the U.S. and Russia. Biden said at the G-7 meeting that he was “open” to Putin’s idea, calling the offer “potentially a good sign of progress.”National security adviser Jake Sullivan later clarified Biden’s statement, saying the president is “not saying he’s going to exchange cybercriminals with Russia” but that he agrees cybercriminals should be held accountable in both countries. 
…

Billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott announced Tuesday that she has donated $2.7 billion to communities “that have been historically underfunded and overlooked.” “Because community-centered service is such a powerful catalyst and multiplier, we spent the first quarter of 2021 identifying and evaluating equity-oriented nonprofit teams working in areas that have been neglected,” Scott wrote in a blog post. But Scott emphasized in the post that she struggled with headlines centering on her instead of the organizations and causes she hopes to uplift.  “Putting large donors at the center of stories on social progress is a distortion of their role,” Scott wrote. She said that the headline she would wish for her post was “286 Teams Empowering Voices the World Needs to Hear.” Among the “teams” Scott listed as the recipients of her donations were higher education institutions “successfully educating students who come from communities that have been chronically underserved.” Scott also listed interfaith organizations working to bridge racial divides, and arts and cultural institutions working with “culturally rich regions and identity groups that donors often overlook.” Scott committed to donating half her fortune to charity upon divorcing Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in 2019.MacKenzie Bezos Pledges to Give Away Half Her Fortune

        MacKenzie Bezos, who just months ago divorced the world's richest man, has pledged to give away half her fortune to charity. The former wife of Amazon founder and chief executive Jeff Bezos is one of the 19 new signatories to the Giving Pledge who have promised to donate more than 50% of their wealth, the organization said. "I have a disproportionate amount of money to share,'' MacKenzie Bezos said in a letter released Tuesday. "My approach to philanthropy will continue to be thoughtful. It will take…

“My approach to philanthropy will continue to be thoughtful. It will take time and effort and care. But I won’t wait. And I will keep at it until the safe is empty,” she wrote at the time. Scott has donated an estimated $8.5 billion in the past year. 
 
…

Digital images of fake people–that look real–are being sold online—by the thousands. Deana Mitchell explores the issue.Producer: Deana Mitchell
…

The government of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is in a battle with U.S. tech firms over a new set of online speech rules that it has enacted for the nation of nearly 1.4 billion.  The rules require companies to restrict a range of topics on their services, comply with government takedown orders and identify the original source of information shared. If the companies fail to comply, tech firm employees can be held criminally liable.  The escalation of tensions between Modi’s government and tech firms, activists say, could result in the curtailment of Indians’ online speech.  “Absent a change in direction, the future of free speech in the world’s largest democracy is increasingly imperiled,” said Samir Jain, director of policy at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a digital rights advocacy group. “Users will have less freedom of expression and less access to news and entertainment that is unapproved by the government. The rules will thereby undermine Indian democracy,” Jain told VOA. At the center of the battle is Twitter, which asked for a three-month extension to comply with the new IT rules that went into effect May 25.  On May 24, New Delhi police attempted to deliver a notice to Twitter’s office, which was closed at the time, and then released a video of officers entering the building and searching the offices on local TV channels. #WATCH | Team of Delhi Police Special cell carrying out searches in the offices of Twitter India (in Delhi & Gurugram)Visuals from Lado Sarai. pic.twitter.com/eXipqnEBgt— ANI (@ANI) May 24, 2021In a tweet days later, Twitter said it was “concerned by recent events regarding our employees in India and the potential threat to freedom of expression for the people we serve.”Right now, we are concerned by recent events regarding our employees in India and the potential threat to freedom of expression for the people we serve.— Twitter Public Policy (@Policy) May 27, 2021“We, alongside many in civil society in India and around the world, have concerns with regards to the use of intimidation tactics by the police in response to enforcement of our global terms of service, as well as with core elements of the new IT rules,” the company said.  Earlier this month, the government sent a letter to Twitter saying it was giving the company “one final notice” adding that if Twitter fails to comply, there will be “unintended consequences,” according to NPR, which obtained the letter.  “It is beyond belief that Twitter Inc. has doggedly refused to create mechanisms that will enable the people of India to resolve their issues on the platform in a timely and transparent manner and through fair processes by India based clearly identified resources,” the letter said. The Indian government is pushing back on criticism that its new rules restrict online speech.  “Protecting free speech in India is not the prerogative of only a private, for-profit, foreign entity like Twitter, but it is the commitment of the world’s largest democracy and its robust institutions,” India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) said in a statement. Some who are critical of the government’s new IT rules are also skeptical of the tech industry’s response.  It is “not an existential crisis as everyone will have us believe,” said Mishi Choudhary, a technology lawyer and founder of India’s Software Freedom Law Center. Choudhary said users will be forced to stay on the sidelines, rather than taking an active role in discussions about their basic rights.  “Some of the companies are still playing the game of ‘we are a sales office’ or ‘our servers are in California,’ frustrating anyone who comes to their legitimate defense as well,” Choudhary said.  India has a long tradition of free speech, and its tech savvy market is attractive for U.S. tech firms looking to expand. Although the Indian constitution protects certain rights to freedom of speech, it has restrictions. Expressions are banned that threaten “the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.”Even before the recent tensions between tech firms and the government, India was among the top nations in the world seeking to restrict online speech. From Jan. 1, 2020, to June 1, 2020, India was one of the top five countries asking Twitter to remove content. For example, after violent protests on Jan. 26th involving farmers unhappy with new agricultural laws, the Modi government demanded Twitter block 500 accounts, including those of journalists, activists and opposition leaders. Twitter did so, and then eventually reversed course only to receive a noncompliance notice, according to a company statement. Several Indian journalists faced charges of sedition over their reporting and online posts following the protest by farmers. Among them is the executive editor of the Caravan magazine, Vinod K. Jose and although his Twitter handle is currently active, it was withheld in India this year.The official handle of @thecaravanindia is withheld in India: pic.twitter.com/2t4FV5IgM0— Vinod K. Jose (@vinodjose) February 1, 2021The government is also particularly sensitive about criticism of its handling of the coronavirus, asking that social media firms remove mention of the B.1617 variant as the “Indian variant.”  In May, the government ordered social media firms to remove any mention of the Indian variant. The variant first reported in India is now called Delta, according to the World Health Organization. Earlier this month, Twitter complied with a request from the government to block the Twitter account of Punjabi-born Jaswinder Singh Bains, alias JazzyB, a rapper. While Twitter informed him that he had been blocked for reportedly violating India’s Information Technology Act, he said he believes he was blocked for supporting the farmers in their protests, according to media reports. Jason Pielemeier, director of policy and strategy at the Global Network Initiative, an alliance of tech companies supporting freedom of expression online, wrote to the MeitY, Pielemeier calling attention to many issues with the new rules.  “Each of these concerns on its own can negatively impact freedom of expression and privacy in India,” he wrote. “Together, they create significant risk of undermining digital rights and trust in India’s regulatory approach to the digital ecosystem.” Twitter isn’t the only tech firm affected by new laws. WhatsApp, the encrypted messaging app owned by Facebook, filed a lawsuit in May against the Indian government arguing that the new rules allow for “mass surveillance.” According to the lawsuit, the new rules are illegal and “severely undermine” the right to privacy of its users.At issue for WhatsApp is that under the new rules, encryption would have to be removed, and according to The Guardian, messages would have to be in a “traceable” database. 
…