Archive for the ‘Internet Security News’ Category

Filibuster Censorship: Ron Wyden About Censorship Opponents’ Names

Tuesday, November 29th, 2011
Share
Use SmartHide to Avoid Internet Censorship
www.smarthide.com
Surf any sites being anywhere, watch video and use social sites on your Mac, Android or PC

Ron Wyden announces names of opponents from senate while considering PROTECT IP act. One of the tasks was reading out name and ask senators to choose by visiting stopcensorship.org.

Two act one of them is concerned on-line piracy and the other is PROTECT IP would destroy much of what has been build up concerning the net. All this gives the chance for some corporations and governments to block American access for some sites. Corporations and government provide some new power and block the access to some websites that are accused of copyright thefting , since then sites like you tube pass to new lengths of police contribution and settle people in prison.

The filibuster affords the senator some opportunities for standing up for some believes and few things that every American has a voice and some opportunity to pass away.

Filibuster is perspective that looks like it is leadership that calls in order to choose before Christmas break . Protect IP that passes senate judiciary and understanding and makes it so that we gain some victory through a jobs bills.

There is a hope that the colleagues in congress will realize that a free and open web is something that as Americans should celebrate and do not allow special interests to quash.

Some hope the colleagues in Congress realize a free and open web is no less no more but something that Americans can celebrate and mark some special interests.

There is also a hope that some colleagues of the Congress can see that it is possible to realize open and free web.

There is a hope that colleagues will realize PIPA or SOPA are wrong for protecting intellectual property in view of the price that is too high.

Share

New Bill is Released About Free Speech Rights On The Internet

Monday, November 28th, 2011
Share
Use SmartHide to Achieve Free Speech Rights On The Internet
www.smarthide.com
Surf any sites being in any place and forget about any restrictions on your Mac, Android or PC

There is no doubt the Internet is meant for different purposes. Most prefer to have accounts such as Facebook, Twitter, Tumbrl or Myspace. These sites allow to make free speech different making the gap because of distance. The form of global communication is a great step for American people.

Nowadays American government tries to keep those rights.

The Internet usage leads to downloading some posted lyrics or pictures of celebrity to the profile or on-line forums. Such new bills that are being ignored by the government could put users in serious trouble.

SOPA or H.R.3261 and one more Protect IP Act or S. 968 are the bills that change world web forever. A closer inspection shows out unconstitutional acts.

Sopa provides the government and American citizens the rights to have something on the web removed without a warning or court dispute. This won’t affect Americans bug the others countries too. The bill is meant to protect from pushing attacks, it is going to punish someone who utilizing their rights to Free Use in the web.

Free Use is an act that is used by Americans for restriction of copyright holders. On the whole Free Use says that one can use something that are meant for parody, educational, or comedic purpose. As far as you are not profiting off whatever you use, you have not violated the copyright.

SOPA and the Protect IP Act will negate this act and make it so that any copyright holder accuse anyone of theft or infringement. It makes possible for some websites such as Facebook where free speech and Free Use is utilized to be removed completely from the web. The way the bill is written infringe on our rights as American citizens.

Recently as well the juridical representatives have announced they won’t be listening the sides opposing the bills. It makes provides some rights for free speech, right to protest, right to assembly to deny.

As well as the legislators released that they won’t listen to anyone that opposes the bill. This also negates right for free speech, right to protest , right to assembly. The bills has a constitutional character and completely alienate rights as laid out . The petition circulate on the Internet originating on whitehouse.gov and are fighting against the tyranny. The petition I should reach 25 000 signatures before December 18th.

Share

Chinese Internet Censorship Is Supported by Tech Chiefs

Friday, November 25th, 2011
Share
Use SmartHide to Avoid Chinese Internet Censorship
www.smarthide.com
Surf any sites being in China, watch video and use social sites on your Mac, Android or PC
Chinese Internet Censorship

Chinese Internet Censorship

Chinese tech chiefs, including Alibaba’s Jack Ma, pledge to support government censorship.

Chinese tech firms in the face of their top leaders together with Alibaba CEO Jack Ma urged to uphold the frames of censorship and realize some goals of the Chinese government.

Firm’s representatives met hold a meeting in Bejing during three days as Reuter reports. The meeting concluded report informing that all companies would safeguard the broadcasting of positive messages and stop spread of on-line rumours.

Participants are Sina Corp’s Charles Chao and Robin Li of Baidu.

The report stated companies would crack down on sexual pornography, web fraud and illegal spread of harmful information on the web.

For example microblogging service blocked this year information blogs about Arab spring uprisings.

One may find different opinions concerning this issues for example Maio Wei, minister of Industry and Information Technology marked these companies should increase surveillance of their users.

Chinese web censorship rules for a long time was a part of the on-line landscape. Such facts often cause more concentration then we presuppose specially for foreign- based companies.

Clearly, the firms involved in today’s announcement have no such qualms. Whether the results of this meeting will spell even stricter censorship and surveillance is a matter too veiled in propaganda for Western interpretation; however, China’s general trajectory where web services are concerned has been trending toward less rather than more freedom of information. We suppose that the resolutions adopted by Ma, Li, et al. will steady the nation’s already plotted course.

Share

Overall Information Security News

Wednesday, November 16th, 2011
Share

Banking systems warns of possible loss of customers’ personal information.

Recent survey commissioned by technology group Unisys found out that the of loss or hackingof personal information from company would make customers to change it.

The review also showed out that among 12 nations customers from Australia are mostlywarned about hacking and information theft.

John Kendall Unisys Security program director presupposes that the released findingswarning to business keeping private information.

Mr. Kendall also stated that customers recognize some power for fighting back . He also statedthat data security becomes more than business issue . A real business is based on financialimplications and customers’ trust.

Share

Censorship Across the World. New Google Report

Wednesday, November 9th, 2011
Share

 

Google now is taking some steps in technological world. According to recent release of ”transparency report” considering detailed use of Google world citizens get nice opportunity in learning much more about the leaders and their place in on-line universe. The report analyzes government actions concerning the content whether it should be removed or not. Among the top countries in content removal requests the first place occupy Brazil and Germany. They prefer to remove the great number of items. Top of the countries for web censorship consists of the following countries: China, Cuba, Myanmar, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Turkmenistan.

After the Us has requested the user data Google complied with 93% of the requests. They informed of police brutality, these instances were refused in removing. On the whole Google’s actions in modern society are called to be revolutionary. Government requests for the information and proved data for American citizens and really reveals much activity not spoken.

According to Richard Warner’s investigations who is law professor at IIT Chicago – Kent College of law Internet has become a space of free expression and somewhat economic growth, it has a lack of ability in discriminating some types of data

Behavior in the web is too hard to be tracked, it can be difficult to be tracked for governmental representatives.

Warner noted that Google is more focused on collecting data than on anything else.

But this report does not lie upon the private data collection. Professor Paul Booth thinks it to be totally subjective because of different cultural values. Perspectives of regarding privacy are less versatile especially in USA. They say more comfort can be found in the conditions of some restrictions and strict censorship and protection but still it is very difficult to find the line between them.

Booth believes the available information is increasing changing society’s view on censorship, he also supports transparency, questions the power of the information in the hands of big corporation.

Information control gives some worries, it makes Google turn evil, all these information can be controlled.

Only if the government revisits and updates legislation for considering some new technologies something can become definite.

The ultimate goal of this debate should create “real citizen protection”.

Share

China Plans to Control the Internet on A New level

Friday, November 4th, 2011
Share

China is strengthening its control over the Internet and social media, apparently as a result of the role new technologies have played this year in channeling public discontent around the world.

Asked about Internet censorship in China, a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman told reporters recently that the government regulates Internet use in China to safeguard the public interest. Efforts also are under way to intensify the state’s control over online social media and instant-messaging services, to promote what is described as the “orderly dissemination of information.”

Chinese authorities have acted firmly in the past to try to prevent instant-communications techniques from influencing mass protests, but the rapid growth and quick adoption of such technologies by Chinese political activists is seen as a major challenge to Beijing’s efforts.

The Internet is having an impact on what issues are discussed and debated in Chinese society. Analysts say online information circulating rapidly among China’s 400 million Internet users has pushed public-interest issues into the national spotlight and influenced coverage decisions by state-controlled media.

Online news reports with video and photographic images deliver a powerful message within seconds around the world.

Beijing is known to employ tens of thousands of Internet censors to keep track of Internet reports and remove those the state finds offensive. Countless other Chinese are paid to post positive comments about the government on Internet message sites. The VOA correspondent in China reports the latter are known as “soldiers in the 50-cent army,” after the amounts they reputedly are paid for posting pro-government messages.

Source: http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2011/11/02/china-plans-tighter-internet-controls/

Share

GB is Against Internet censorship

Thursday, November 3rd, 2011
Share

LONDON, Nov. 3 (UPI) — Governments shouldn’t censor opinions or restrict the flow of information on the Internet in the name of security, British Foreign Secretary William Hague says.

Hague, speaking at the London Conference on Cyberspace, said that while cybersecurity threats loom large for all nations, government censoring what is posted on the Internet isn’t the way to deal with it.

“We reject the view that government suppression of the Internet, phone networks and social media at times of unrest is acceptable,” he said.

Instead, the chief British diplomat outlined a set of seven principles he asserted could used to reach broad international agreements to help fight burgeoning cybercrime and espionage without trampling on freedom of expression or handing too much power to individual governments.

Hague told at a reception for delegates at the two-day conference — in which representatives of 60 countries gathered to discuss cybersecurity – that it’s vital the Internet remain a bastion of free speech, the Financial Times reported.

“It is essential that the debate is as inclusive as possible, everyone has an interest in these issues and no one person or body controls the Internet,” he said.

Among the principles Hague put forward included “the need for governments to act proportionately” and in line with international law.

The foreign minister also called for protection of freedom of expression; respect for privacy and copyright; and for internationally coordinated action against criminals acting online, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Britain’s call for less government censorship of the Internet came only a month after China and Russia, which Britain and the United States accuse of censoring political speech on the Internet, proposed standards in which policing cyberspace would be left to each country.

They had only a small presence at the cyberspace conference after issuing their own visions of Internet governance last month, joined by Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.

In a letter sent to the U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the four advocated a cyberspace code of conduct centered on the rights of individual governments to control the dissemination of information that “undermines other countries’ political, economic and social stability, as well as their spiritual and cultural environment,” the Journal reported.

But U.S. Vice President Joe Biden, appearing via teleconference at Tuesday’s event, said that kind of government control over the Internet isn’t necessary or desirable.

“This in our view would lead to a fragmented Internet,” he said.

Internet free speech advocacy groups also put in appearances at the London conference, eager to condemn government clampdowns on cyberspace freedoms, including such moves made by Western governments.

John Kampfner, chief executive of the Index on Censorship group, noted the British government has discussed restrictions on the use of social media in the wake of this year’s London riots.

“It’s very easy to defend this case of black and white human rights against dictatorships around the world, but as soon as our own Western style stability of the state is called into question then freedom of expression is expendable,” Kampfner told attendees, Deutsche-Welle reported.

“There should be one rule for all, including Western governments.”
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2011/11/03/Britain-decries-Internet-censorship/UPI-29061320315960/#ixzz1cfjJPivk

Share

USA Government Has Introduced Anti-piracy Protect IP Bill

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011
Share

Protect IP bill is indeed designed to stop piracy. It has a matching bill in the House. It is tough to top Protect IP, but sometimes it is possible. It contains some provisions chilling innovation. Some provisions tinker with the fundamental fabric of the web. Some corporations acquire power censor. What is best of all is bypassing legal process for doing much more of it. The timing could be more exquisite because numerous protests emerging all around in the US give some complains about the power about the inside political system, big content that is quite literally try to foist its version of the Great Firewall of China. For the present moment US government is setting up a blacklist international websites infringing IP rights. The equivalent of making phone carriers suitable for conversations made on the on-line phones. Upon the government lies the decision of what can be observed on the web and what not.

Then the technical way is to be achieved by tinkering domain name servers. It is the technology that transfers the web address into unique IP address while a server is not stored. Having a DNS that is the heart of the Internet and pulling at this fabric we may have dramatic consequences.

Finally Digital Millennium Act have introduced for a long time ago IP rights with the technology innovation booming in the US, it is being modified to the point of lopsided. If a sight has some infringing content according to the sight holder‘s opinion a takedown notice can be sent and all this content will be removed or information can be contested.

Some payment providers such as PayPal, visa or MasterCard can be required for terminating services to any site after having received a letter alleging that the give website does not answer to some notions of law or act illegally. The funs can be turned off if happens something they do not like. The funds won’t function again if they do not pass through the courts. As a result they won’t get any income.

On the whole America has put much effort into Internet censorship, it is a real message US should broadcast now. But this is not the most troubling aspect of the bill. It is normal for governments to send the rest of the world that it sets up censorship apparatus.

It is a terrible legislation. Congresswoman from Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Silicon Valley recently have described the effect the bill will get: it will broke up with the notion of the Internet entirely.

We see the history is repeating, content proposes the remedy
This is history repeating. Except the remedy big content are proposing this time wouldn’t just stop VCR technology. It would chill free speech, stop innovation, and pull at the fabric of the Internet. In short: they are trying to give America it’s very own version of the Great Firewall of China.

Share

Professionals Strike With Internet Censorship

Monday, October 31st, 2011
Share

Notions of protection of freedom and free expression of emotions all these is a form of on-line media functioning. Among professionals there exist an opinion the professionals and watchdog are becoming under attack. National Audiovisual Media Council that is governmentally founded made a warning for several televisions channels not to show episodes of programs being criticized by some social groups and what’s more religious figures.

A number of politicians declared the council’s warning. It stranded out that it was a simple attack on freedom of expression. The council announced plans for establishing a database of media websites for organizing on-line media. Abdey –Hadi Mahfouz recently called on Lebanese website hosts for registering websites at the council. The applications would start accepting applications on 1st of November. He did not specify all the types of websites requiring registration or technical means used for creating such a database.

Neither the government nor the Parliament agree with new law regulating media, council declared its decisions and recommendations will be followed by all media organizations until a new law will be released. Executive media director Samid Kassir Eyes Foundation is not agree. According to his statements there is nothing legal. There is no possibility to impose regulations on Internet media. The council cannot demand the implementation of law. It is unacceptable for advisory board to disregard new developments in the World Wide Web.

Since 1994 there are much changes in this sphere. All blogs, on-line portals are now major news source for the Leban population. The council has no intention of freedom of expression being damaged. As far as mandate has expired its validity there is no possibility to carry out duties on protecting audiovisual organizations. During last years hundreds of blogs and more than a dozen of on-line portals have been opened. Political parties establish individual information website against opponents online. Mainly such on-line news portal are being supported by some regulations fixed by on-line media. Some media report that government should support its functioning because it a new sector of web life. There are some ethics that must be avoided among them one can find religion, children, sects.

Share

USA and China – Questions and Answers About Internet Censorship

Saturday, October 29th, 2011
Share

Recent events in China has really changed the opinion towards the situation concerning censorship in China. USTR (United States Trade Representative) responsible for commercial matters requested consultations at WTO concerning Internet censorship regime.

It was not just a formal complaint. It is sooner a question set among countries concerning sensitive issue. Overall China’s treatment towards the situation and questions taken into consideration will consider the key to the information freedom in the People’s Republic of China.

On the whole this article is devoted to explanation of the significance of the development in this direction. Two primary questions will be discussed in this material. First aspect is USA and China positions at WTO concerning censorship issues. Second aspect to regarded is explanation possible illegacy of China’s Internet censorship according international law, regarding exact questions posed to the country during the latest consultations. It should be noted the implications of this development can greatly influence domestic politics of the country.

Questions about intellectual property rights case.
A number of consultations hold with China touched upon several aspects of intellectual property laws. Finally WTO declared a formal complaint. The complaint reflected China’s policy in providing no protect of the intellectual property rights failing in censorship laws. If we take into consideration legal products of show business here we may found some singer banned in this particular country, it means further away all the music products coming from his name won’t be protected in this direction in the given country. If a singer holds a copyright country’s authorities won’t enforce the copyright, it means her creative products can be objected to free pirate.

Sound reclamations in the Chinese authorities rounds led to the statement if the work was not allowed in the country so there is no use of protecting it. Talking about American and Chinese treatment of the situation the American side points out a great volume of copyrighted information that does not suit the requirements of Chinese censorship. WTO denied China’s defense and declared it must take intellectual property rights in case the goods do not meet country’s property rights if the goods does not suit fixed requirements.

Audiovisual products in China
One more questions is well worth paying attention to in this argue. After WTO decided the dispute between China and US in the above indicated. Question concerning audiovisual products rose above. According to Chinese law only inner enterprises are allowed to import movies, magazines, books and other similar products which are illegal under international law.

China took the defensive side pointing to another aspect of WTO law. According to the law country can take violate measures towards WTO if there is necessity in protecting the aspects of morality. Such censorship regime required in protecting public morality. China disputed this aspect, urging that monopoly for importing cultural products need to be enforced.

US declared that China has a right to move a model without relying the frames of censorship. Both parties can import the products and apply to the central censorship permission department. China urged this approach is far more costly, china needs to hold the reforms and import the regime of complying international law.

Current consultations
For the present time there are being holded consultations devoted to the disputes. One of the obligations accepted by China after joining to WTO is publishing and making publicly available some foreign jurisprudence translations affecting international law. Foreign business can’t be imagined without a website. Some foreign websites are often blocked in the country. Such giants as Facebook, Twitter or Google are the best examples. The problem is humbling little brick and business companies not well known over the country.

1. Service supplier websites are usually based not in the country and sometimes are inaccessible. It can prevent companies from marketing products to the market. There must be an agreement between two sides in understanding rules and adopting appropriate policies in order to avoid the problems.

Among the main problems to be decided one can find the follows issues:
- Determining ministry responsible for blocking and unblocking websites
- Clearing out what particular criteria influence on getting access to the foreign websites
- What ministers are responsible for drafting?
- What is the process of a blocked website?
- How does the blocking occur considering directly or indirectly.
- are questions of blocking and unblocking are typically implemented by companies by means of the written order in government. What particular organs are organized in such process?
-can a service supplier determine being not in the area what is up with success to the website in order to avoid some misunderstandings.
- can a service supplier be affected by a decision in blocking the website.
- is the process used to preventing in getting access to the websites both foreign and not.

2. United states is interested in better understanding of the functions of the office for foreign business
- What are the responsibilities and authorities of the SIIO?
- Will the SIIO handle licensing or other approval processes for Internet service providers or make decisions regarding filtering of foreign websites? If so, please describe which of these processes the SIIO will manage.
- Should companies contact the SIIO or some other entity when they have questions concerning China’s Internet laws, regulations and policies? If the SIIO is the appropriate contact, which office or individual should be contacted?
- Which categories of objectionable conduct are managed by each ministry with responsibilities or authorities for managing Internet content?

3. USA agrees that having a n information from SIIO foreign websites are blocked while sharing IP addresses.
- What is the explanation of all this?
- Are there any ways that China can filter to avoid inadvertent website blockages?
- Are Chinese authorities able to consider reasonable in notifying the owners of the host or sites, can web site hosting service ensure that the other sites are inadvertently blocked?
- What steps should be taken in considering reasonable notifying, can website ensure the other sites to be blocked?

4. State council has issued some measures for the administration in order to describe some content categories which may not be disseminated by service providers. Two additional categories of the content issued by Ministry of information and State Council may not be transmitted. United States is seeking clarity upon the broad nature of the categories.
- If there any laws, policies and regulations or other guidance able to establish criteria in determining whether the content fits eleven categories or not.
- Are government orders or requests filtering specific terms communicated directly to Internet information? If yes, then how are directives communicated? Are these requests made publicly?

5. According to the information coming from White Paper in China “business operators and Internet information service providers establish web security and utilize technical measures for the transmission of all types of illegal information ”.
- How is illegal information defined in this instance?
- Is a written governmental order required for a private corporation or a relevant authority to block the transmission of illegal information?
- What types of technical measures do service suppliers expect to use to prevent transmission of the illegal information? Do authorities in China approve specific technical measures? If so, which ministry does this?

WTO put China in situation required to appear and answer all the questions. It puts Chinese government in some kind of a tricky position. The funny thing about censorship is that people who know the rules of the game can make it effective.

Opinion and analysis
US-China relations at WTO become more and more clear. A growing pattern of WTO disputes between two countries pay attention to China’s censorship policy.

It should be noted US has never alleged there should be a practice of censorship. The decision to practice censorship is a matter of internal policy of China because being a sovereign state it must decided between people and government of the country. Taking into account that the Chinese censorship impacts trade relations with other countries the censorship regime should be not so strict and more transparent.

Share