• Hacker Finds He Can Remotely Kill Car Engines After Breaking Into GPS Tracking Apps

    “I can absolutely make a big traffic problem all over the world,” the hacker said. A hacker broke into thousands of accounts belonging to users of two GPS tracker apps, giving him the ability to monitor the locations of tens of thousands of vehicles and even turn off the engines for some of them while they were in motion, Motherboard has learned. The hacker, who goes by the name L&M, told Motherboard he hacked into more than 7,000 iTrack accounts and more than 20,000 ProTrack accounts, (...)

    #GPS #géolocalisation #hacking

  • A Saudi Cybersecurity Company Tried to Buy Zero Day Exploits from Me

    We recently got a rare look at how a company tried to source these exploits through private one-on-one deals—because the company came to us. Zero days—exploits that take advantage of vulnerabilities the vendor, such as Apple, doesn’t know about—are a hot commodity. With a zero day, a hacker, perhaps working for a government, can have a better chance of being able to break into a target’s computer or phone. If Apple or Google aren’t even aware of a security issue with their products, hackers (...)

    #DarkMatter #Haboob #hacking

  • Hacker Who Stole $5 Million By SIM Swapping Gets 10 Years in Prison

    A 20-year-old college student who was accused of stealing more than $5 million in cryptocurrency in a slew of SIM hijacking attacks is the first person to be sentenced for the crime. A college student who stole more than $5 million in cryptocurrency by hijacking the phone numbers of around 40 victims pleaded guilty and accepted a plea deal of 10 years in prison, Motherboard has learned. Joel Ortiz accepted the plea deal last week, Erin West, the Deputy District Attorney in Santa Clara (...)

    #Google #SIM #SIMswapping

  • I Gave a Bounty Hunter $300. Then He Located Our Phone

    T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T are selling access to their customers’ location data, and that data is ending up in the hands of bounty hunters and others not authorized to possess it, letting them track most phones in the country. Nervously, I gave a bounty hunter a phone number. He had offered to geolocate a phone for me, using a shady, overlooked service intended not for the cops, but for private individuals and businesses. Armed with just the number and a few hundred dollars, he said he (...)

    #T-Mobile #Sprint #AT&T #Apple_Maps #Maps #smartphone #géolocalisation #harcèlement


  • The Rise and Demise of RSS

    Before the internet was consolidated into centralized information silos, RSS imagined a better way to let users control their online personas.

    The story of how this happened is really two stories. The first is a story about a broad vision for the web’s future that never quite came to fruition. The second is a story about how a collaborative effort to improve a popular standard devolved into one of the most contentious forks in the history of open-source software development.

    RSS was one of the standards that promised to deliver this syndicated future. To Werbach, RSS was “the leading example of a lightweight syndication protocol.” Another contemporaneous article called RSS the first protocol to realize the potential of Extensible Markup Language (XML), a general-purpose markup language similar to HTML that had recently been developed. It was going to be a way for both users and content aggregators to create their own customized channels out of everything the web had to offer. And yet, two decades later, after the rise of social media and Google’s decision to shut down Google Reader, RSS appears to be a slowly dying technology, now used chiefly by podcasters, programmers with tech blogs, and the occasional journalist. Though of course some people really do still rely on RSS readers, stubbornly adding an RSS feed to your blog, even in 2019, is a political statement. That little tangerine bubble has become a wistful symbol of defiance against a centralized web increasingly controlled by a handful of corporations, a web that hardly resembles the syndicated web of Werbach’s imagining.

    RSS would fork again in 2003, when several developers frustrated with the bickering in the RSS community sought to create an entirely new format. These developers created Atom, a format that did away with RDF but embraced XML namespaces. Atom would eventually be specified by a standard submitted to the Internet Engineering Task Force, the organization responsible for establishing and promoting the internet’s rules of the road. After the introduction of Atom, there were three competing versions of RSS: Winer’s RSS 0.92 (updated to RSS 2.0 in 2002 and renamed “Really Simple Syndication”), the RSS-DEV Working Group’s RSS 1.0, and Atom. Today we mostly use RSS 2.0 and Atom.

    For a while, before a third of the planet had signed up for Facebook, RSS was simply how many people stayed abreast of news on the internet.

    Today, RSS is not dead. But neither is it anywhere near as popular as it once was. Lots of people have offered explanations for why RSS lost its broad appeal. Perhaps the most persuasive explanation is exactly the one offered by Gillmor in 2009. Social networks, just like RSS, provide a feed featuring all the latest news on the internet. Social networks took over from RSS because they were simply better feeds. They also provide more benefits to the companies that own them. Some people have accused Google, for example, of shutting down Google Reader in order to encourage people to use Google+.

    RSS might have been able to overcome some of these limitations if it had been further developed. Maybe RSS could have been extended somehow so that friends subscribed to the same channel could syndicate their thoughts about an article to each other. Maybe browser support could have been improved. But whereas a company like Facebook was able to “move fast and break things,” the RSS developer community was stuck trying to achieve consensus. When they failed to agree on a single standard, effort that could have gone into improving RSS was instead squandered on duplicating work that had already been done. Davis told me, for example, that Atom would not have been necessary if the members of the Syndication mailing list had been able to compromise and collaborate, and “all that cleanup work could have been put into RSS to strengthen it.” So if we are asking ourselves why RSS is no longer popular, a good first-order explanation is that social networks supplanted it. If we ask ourselves why social networks were able to supplant it, then the answer may be that the people trying to make RSS succeed faced a problem much harder than, say, building Facebook. As Dornfest wrote to the Syndication mailing list at one point, “currently it’s the politics far more than the serialization that’s far from simple.”

    #RSS #Histoire_informatique #Politique_algorithme #Normalisation

    • J’apprécie, comme toi, qu’il fasse remarquer que les décisions
      techniques ont des conséquences politiques. Il est clair que l’abandon de facto de la #syndication SS a accéléré le passage d’un web décentralisé vers un web polarisé par les GAFA. Je suis moins convaincu par ses explications sur les raisons pour lesquelles la syndication n’a pas tenu sur le long terme :

      – dire que RSS n’est pas user-friendly est franchement débile. RSS est un format. L’utilisateur ne le voit pas. Quasiment aucun utilisateur
      de RSS, que ce soit côté producteur ou consommateur, n’a regardé à quoi ça ressemblait en utilisant vi ! Un logiciel peut être
      « user-friendly » ou pas. Pour un format, ça n’a pas de sens.

      – je trouve qu’il exagère le rôle des disputes au sein du monde de la
      syndication. Certes, ces disputes ont pu contribuer à semer le trouble mais n’exagérons pas : ça se passait dans un tout petit microcosme et la grande majorité des webmestres et des lecteurs n’en ont jamais entendu parler. (Au passage, le camp vainqueur est nettement celui qui voulait un format simple : les sites Web n’utilisent qu’une petite partie du format.) Et, d’une point de vue pratique, ces disputes n’ont eu aucune conséquence : tous les logiciels de lecture comprennent les trois formats. Le webmestre peut donc publier ce qu’il veut, sans inquiétude.

      – par contre, il parle trop peu des raisons politico-marketing de
      l’abandon de la syndication : propagande effrénée des médias et
      autres autorités en faveur des solutions centralisées, notamment.

  • The roundabout revolutions

    The history of these banal, utilitarian instruments of traffic management has become entangled with that of political uprising, #Eyal_Weizman argues in his latest book

    This project started with a photograph. It was one of the most arresting images depicting the May 1980 #Gwangju uprising, recognised now as the first step in the eventual overthrow of the military dictatorship in South Korea. The photograph (above) depicts a large crowd of people occupying a roundabout in the city center. Atop a disused fountain in the middle of the roundabout a few protestors have unfurled a South Korean flag. The roundabout organised the protest in concentric circles, a geometric order that exposed the crowd to itself, helping a political collective in becoming.

    It had an uncanny resonance with events that had just unfolded: in the previous year a series of popular uprisings spread through Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, #Oman, Yemen, Libya, and Syria. These events shared with Gwangju not only the historical circumstances – they too were popular protests against military dictatorships – but, remarkably, an urban-architectural setting: many of them similarly erupted on roundabouts in downtown areas. The history of these roundabouts is entangled with the revolutions that rose from them.

    The photograph of the roundabout—now the symbol of the “liberated republic” – was taken by #Na_Kyung-taek from the roof of the occupied Provincial Hall, looking toward Geumnam-ro, only a few hours before the fall of the “#Gwangju_Republic”. In the early morning hours of the following day, the Gwangju uprising was overwhelmed by military force employing tanks and other armed vehicles. The last stand took place at the roundabout.

    The scene immediately resonates with the well-known photographs of people gathering in #Tahrir_Square in early 2011. Taken from different high-rise buildings around the square, a distinct feature in these images is the traffic circle visible by the way it organises bodies and objects in space. These images became the symbol of the revolution that led to the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak in February 2011 – an event described by urban historian Nezar AlSayyad as “Cairo’s roundabout revolution”. But the Gwangju photograph also connects to images of other roundabouts that erupted in dissent in fast succession throughout the Middle East. Before Tahrir, as Jonathan Liu noted in his essay Roundabouts and Revolutions, it was the main roundabout in the capital of Tunisia – subsequently renamed Place du 14 Janvier 2011 after the date on which President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali was forced to flee the country. Thousands of protesters gathered at the roundabout in Tunis and filled the city’s main boulevard.

    A main roundabout in Bahrain’s capital Manama erupted in protests shortly after the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt. Its central traffic island became the site of popular protests against the government and the first decisive act of military repression: the protests were violently broken up and the roundabout itself destroyed and replaced with a traffic intersection. In solidarity with the Tahrir protests, the roundabouts in the small al-Manara Square in Ramallah and the immense Azadi Square in Tehran also filled with protesters. These events, too, were violently suppressed.

    The roundabouts in Tehran and Ramallah had also been the scenes of previous revolts. In 2009 the Azadi roundabout in Iran’s capital was the site of the main protests of the Green Movement contesting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection. Hamid Dabashi, a literature professor at Columbia University and one of the most outspoken public intellectuals on these revolutions, claims that the Green Movement was inspirational for the subsequent revolutionary wave in the Arab world. In Palestine, revolt was a permanent consequence of life under occupation, and the al-Manara roundabout was a frequent site of clashes between Palestinian youth and the Israeli military. The sequence of roundabout revolutions evolved as acts of imitation, each building on its predecessor, each helping propel the next.

    Roundabouts were of course not only exhilarating sites of protest and experiments in popular democracy, but moreover they were places where people gathered and risked their life. The Gwangju uprising is, thus, the first of the roundabout revolutions. Liu wrote: “In all these cases, the symbolism is almost jokingly obvious: what better place to stage a revolution, after all, then one built for turning around?” What better way to show solidarity across national borders than to stage protests in analogous places?

    Why roundabouts? After all, they are banal, utilitarian instruments of traffic management, certainly not prone to induce revolutionary feeling. Other kinds of sites – squares, boulevards, favelas, refugee camps – have served throughout history as the setting for political protest and revolt. Each alignment of a roundabout and a revolution has a specific context and diverse causes, but the curious repetition of this phenomenon might give rise to several speculations. Urban roundabouts are the intersection points of large axes, which also puts them at the start or end of processions.

    Occupying a roundabout demonstrates the power of tactical acupuncture: it blocks off all routes going in and out. Congestion moves outward like a wave, flowing down avenues and streets through large parts of the city. By pressuring a single pivotal point within a networked infrastructure, an entire city can be put under siege (a contemporary contradistinction to the medieval technique of surrounding the entire perimeter of a city wall). Unlike public squares, which are designed as sites for people to gather (therefore not interrupting the flow of vehicular traffic) and are usually monitored and policed, roundabout islands are designed to keep people away. The continuous flow of traffic around them creates a wall of speeding vehicles that prohibits access. While providing open spaces (in some cities the only available open spaces) these islands are meant to be seen but not used.

    Another possible explanation is their symbolic power: they often contain monuments that represent the existing regime. The roundabouts of recent revolutions had emblematic names – Place du 7 Novembre 1987, the date the previous regime took power in Tunisia; “Liberty” (Azadi), referring to the 1979 Iranian Revolution; or “Liberation” (Tahrir), referring to the 1952 revolutions in Egypt. Roundabout islands often had statues, both figurative and abstract, representing the symbolic order of regimes. Leaders might have wished to believe that circular movement around their monuments was akin to a form of worship or consent. While roundabouts exercise a centripetal force, pulling protestors into the city center, the police seek to generate movement in the opposite direction, out and away from the center, and to break a collective into controllable individuals that can be handled and dispersed.

    The most common of all centrifugal forces of urban disorganisation during protests is tear gas, a formless cloud that drifts through space to disperse crowds. From Gwangju to Cairo, Manama to Ramallah, hundreds of tear-gas canisters were used largely exceeding permitted levels in an attempt to evict protesters from public spaces. The bodily sensation of the gas forms part of the affective dimension of the roundabout revolution. When tear gas is inhaled, the pain is abrupt, sharp, and isolating. The eyes shut involuntary, generating a sense of disorientation and disempowerment.

    Protestors have found ways to mitigate the toxic effects of this weapon. Online advice is shared between activists from Palestine through Cairo to Ferguson. The best protection is offered by proper gas masks. Improvised masks made of mineral water bottles cut in half and equipped with a filter of wet towels also work, according to online manuals. Some activists wear swim goggles and place wet bandanas or kaffiyehs over their mouths. To mitigate some of the adverse effects, these improvised filters can be soaked in water, lemon juice, vinegar, toothpaste, or wrapped around an onion. When nothing else is at hand, breathe the air from inside your shirt and run upwind onto higher ground. When you have a chance, blow your nose, rinse your mouth, cough, and spit.

    #révolution #résistance #giratoire #carrefour #rond-point #routes #infrastructure_routière #soulèvement_politique #Corée_du_Sud #printemps_arabe #Egypte #Tunisie #Bahreïni #Yémen #Libye #Syrie #Tahrir

    Du coup : #gilets_jaunes ?

    @albertocampiphoto & @philippe_de_jonckheere

    This project started with a photograph. It was one of the most arresting images depicting the May 1980 #Gwangju uprising, recognised now as the first step in the eventual overthrow of the military dictatorship in South Korea. The photograph (above) depicts a large crowd of people occupying a roundabout in the city center. Atop a disused fountain in the middle of the roundabout a few protestors have unfurled a South Korean flag. The roundabout organised the protest in concentric circles, a geometric order that exposed the crowd to itself, helping a political collective in becoming.

    –-> le pouvoir d’une #photographie...

    signalé par @isskein

    ping @reka

  • Taxi 2.0: The Bumpy Road to the Future of Cabs - Motherboard


    After a typical honeymoon period of unquestioning and often oblivious tech culture praise, Uber and its taxi app brethren are getting some real, overdue scrutiny. Thank cabbies in part, for highlighting the fact that much of Uber’s business model success has to do with bypassing basic taxi regulations, safety checks, and continuous commercial insurance coverage, in a monoplistic bid for all sides of the taxi market. Protests and lawsuits and injunctions now follow close behind these companies into nearly every new city they zoom into, with the requisite lawyers and lobbyists in the backseat.

    At the same time, anyone who’s experienced a city knows that licensed taxi companies are due for an upgrade, and maybe some of these apps’ success has to do with the old industry’s disinterest in adaptation. Shutting out the Uber model—and its rather edgier “rideshare” kin, like Lyft and SideCar and UberX—from the ride-for-hire ecosystem is as poor an answer as allowing it to persist without the institution of new checks and rules.

    In the short documentary “Taxi 2.0,” filmmaker Max Maddox attacks the issue from street-level in San Francisco by talking to taxi and Uber and Lyft drivers and the people that use each. No one comes away looking great. Everyone’s trying to figure out what it all means. (Where, exactly, is the sharing in this sharing economy? And how are these taxis called “rideshares” when there’s no real ride-sharing going on?) Apart from concerns about unfair competition, says Maddox, “taxi proponents say these rideshares are unsafe for the public. In the midst of this drama, drivers on both sides of the playing field struggle just to put bread on the table.”

    Here we see the specter not only of a new labor war in the taxi industry, between established hacks and amateur upstarts armed with GPS maps, but a of a stratified ride-for-hire future, in which taxis are left carrying the unconnected lower classes, while Uber and the like carry the relative big money. Technology has a way of dividing us like that.

    I usually feel half-guilty when I get in a TNC, but the cab system is far from perfect at the same time.

    Maddox, a broadcasting student at San Francisco State University whose interest was piqued after seeing “so many mustached cars drive by,” came away from the months-long project with mixed feelings about the future of cabs.

    “After interviewing all these guys, I’m still on the fence about transportation network companies, or rideshares, whatever you want to call them,” Maddox says. “I usually feel half-guilty when I get in a TNC, but the cab system is far from perfect at the same time. I can’t endorse one platform over the other. I just hope something changes so they can coexist.”

    ’Taxi 2.0’ Credits: Producer: Max Maddox; Editor: Jarod Taber; Photographer: Asger Ladefoged; Writer: Ben Mitchell; Sound: Gabe Romero Associate Producer: Jason Garcia

    #Taxi #Uber #USA #San_Francisco

  • Shocking Maps Show How Humans Have Reshaped Earth Since 1992 - Motherboard

    “There is so much talk about the change in environment,” Stepinski told me over the phone. “But surprisingly enough, there was not a map. There are maps of individual land cover issues, like forest or agriculture. But there was not a map of everything.”

    To fill this gap, Stepinski and his colleagues used satellite data collected by the European Space Agency’s Climate Change Initiative, which included geospatial maps of land cover designed to monitor climate change.

    The team broke these maps into 81-kilometer-squared tracts and created a legend of color-coded tiles based on nine broad types of transitions that occurred between 1992 and 2015 (agriculture gains in yellow, forest losses in maroon, etc). The tiles are shaded to reflect the degree of change, with the lightest shade corresponding to regions altered by less than 10 percent, and dark patches representing regions that shifted by 30 percent or more.

    #cartographie #terres #urbanisation #agriculture #déforestation

  • YouTube Lets California Fire Conspiracy Theories Run Wild

    Conspiracy theory vloggers have been able to easily manipulate YouTube and amass millions of views that provide a flagrantly false narrative about the disaster in California. The Camp Fire in California has killed at least 79 people, left 699 people unaccounted for, and created more than a thousand migrants in Butte County, California. In these circumstances, reliable information can literally be a matter of life death. But on YouTube, conspiracy theories are thriving. Currently, when a (...)

    #Google #YouTube #algorithme #manipulation

  • Facebook and Google’s Targeted Advertising Is Ruining the Internet and Breaking the World


    In copying the traditional media’s advertising-based business model, internet companies neglected to adopt a crucial rule: the separation between business operations and editorial decisions. Though the rule was far from universally respected, 20th century journalism’s code of ethics prohibited financial considerations from influencing news coverage. This ethical screen allowed American capitalism to subsidize the press, which in turn helped keep the government and companies honest: checks and balances at work.

    This all fell apart with targeted advertising, which stole journalism’s lunch money and used it to sustain platforms whose driving logic isn’t to educate, to inform, or to hold the powerful to account, but to keep people “engaged.” This logic of “engagement” is motivated by the twin needs to collect more data and show more ads, and manifests itself in algorithms that value popularity over quality. In less than 20 years, Silicon Valley has replaced editorial judgment with mathematical measures of popularity, destabilized the democratic systems of checks and balances by hobbling the Fourth Estate, and hammered nail after nail into the coffin of privacy.

    (...) Targeted advertising provides tools for political advertisers and propagandists to micro-segment audiences in ways that inhibit a common understanding of reality. This creates a perfect storm for authoritarian populists like Rodrigo Duterte, Donald Trump, and Jairo Bolsanaro to seize power, with dire consequences for human rights. Dipayan Ghosh and Ben Scott, authors of the “Digital Deceit” report series, note that “ we have permitted technologies that deliver information based on relevance and the desire to maximize attention capture to replace the normative function of editors and newsrooms .”

    For decades, thinkers like Hannah Arendt, Karl Polanyi, and many others have repeatedly warned us that fascism is the direct consequence of subordinating human needs to the needs of the market. Having willfully ignored the lessons of history, we have allowed corporate greed to transform our media ecosystem into one that structurally favors authoritarian populism. Saving democracy requires more than reforming internet companies, of course, and the exact recipe for success varies by country. In the United States, we need to reverse 30 years of media deregulation, exponentially increase public support for public interest media, and address the structural inequalities in our electoral system that give power to a party that less than half the electorate supports.

    #surveillance_capitalism #media_deregulation #authoritarian_populism

  • Why Sleep Apnea Patients Rely on a CPAP Machine Hacker

    An Australian hacker has spent thousands of hours hacking the DRM that medical device manufacturers put on CPAP machines to create a free tool that lets patients modify their treatment.

    pour nos ami·es qui utilisent une machine à respirer, sachez qu’il existe désormais un #logiciel_libre de contrôle du bidule (appelé SleepyHead), et qu’il permet de lire ses #données soi-même, et potentiellement d’améliorer son traitement

    “I cannot tell you enough how different my CPAP experience is with this software. It’s the difference between night and day,” Lynn said. “I’m possibly alive because it exists.”

    #santé #hack #respirer

  • The Culture War Comes to Linux - Motherboard

    After #Linux adopted a new Code of Conduct, a small group of programmers threatened to rescind their code from the project. Lead Linux developers say the threat is “hollow.”

    A small group of programmers are calling for the rescission of code contributed to Linux, the most popular open source operating system in the world, following changes made to the group’s code of conduct. These programmers, many of whom don’t contribute to the Linux kernel, see the new Code of Conduct as an attack on meritocracy—the belief that people should mainly be judged by their abilities rather than their beliefs—which is one of the core pillars of open source software development. Other developers describe these attacks on the Code of Conduct as thinly veiled misogyny.

    It’s a familiar aspect of the culture war that many online and IRL communities are already dealing with, but it has been simmering in the Linux community for years. The controversy came to the surface less than two weeks after Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux, announced he would temporarily be stepping away from the project to work on “understanding emotions.” Torvalds was heavily involved with day to day decisions about Linux development, so his departure effectively left the community as a body without a head. In Torvalds’ absence, certain developers seem committed to tearing the limbs from this body for what they perceive as an attack on the core values of Linux development.

    So far, these threats haven’t actually resulted in developers pulling code from the Linux kernel, but some Linux contributors fear that this controversy could snowball to the point where significant chunks of the Linux kernel are revoked from use. This would have huge ramifications for anyone online, given that most internet services used on a day to day basis run on Linux. I spoke with a number of Linux developers about the source of the controversy, what could be done to improve the Code of Conduct, and why they think these threats to implement a Linux “killswitch” are totally overblown.

    Voir aussi : https://seenthis.net/messages/723091 et https://seenthis.net/messages/724176

    #sexisme #code #développement #domination #Torvalds #méritocratie

  • Experts Call for Transparency Around Google’s Chinese-Made Security Keys

    Google’s Titan Security Keys, used to lock down accounts, are produced in China. Several experts want more answers on that supply chain process, for fears of tampering or security issues. On Thursday, Google started selling its own Titan Security Keys on the Google Store ; hardware tokens that offer more robust two-factor authentication than a text message or smartphone app. Rather than just providing a password, which a hacker may be able to phish or otherwise obtain, users have to also (...)

    #Google #backdoor #spyware #hacking

  • The Impossible Job : Inside Facebook’s Struggle to Moderate Two Billion People

    Moderating billions of posts a week in more than a hundred languages has become Facebook’s biggest challenge. Leaked documents and nearly two dozen interviews show how the company hopes to solve it. This spring, Facebook reached out to a few dozen leading social media academics with an invitation : Would they like to have a casual dinner with Mark Zuckerberg to discuss Facebook’s problems ? According to five people who attended the series of off-the-record dinners at Zuckerberg’s home in (...)

    #Facebook #Reddit #Tumblr #Twitter #YouTube #algorithme #manipulation #discrimination

  • Spyware Company Leaves ‘Terabytes’ of Selfies, Text Messages, and Location Data Exposed Online

    A company that sells surveillance software to parents and employers left “terabytes of data” including photos, audio recordings, text messages and web history, exposed in a poorly-protected Amazon S3 bucket. This story is part of When Spies Come Home, a Motherboard series about powerful surveillance software ordinary people use to spy on their loved ones. A company that markets cell phone spyware to parents and employers left the data of thousands of its customers—and the information of the (...)

    #smartphone #Spyfone #spyware #hacking

  • Deplatforming Works - Motherboard

    The dust is still settling after Alex Jones’s InfoWars was more-or-less simultaneously banned by YouTube, Spotify, Apple, and Facebook. The move has spawned thousands of takes about whether deplatforming Jones was the right move or a slippery slope toward more censorship. But just as important to consider: Will it work?

    This is called “deplatforming” or “no platform,”—social media companies (sans Twitter, which says he hasn’t broken its rules) have decided to stop being complicit in spreading Jones’s conspiracy theories and hate. And we’ve seen no indication Jones will stop. But will his business remain viable and will his influence wane?

    “The good that comes with deplatforming is, their main goal was to redpill or get people within mainstream communities more in line with their beliefs, so we need to get them off those platforms,” Robyn Caplan, a PhD student at Rutgers University and Data and Society affiliate, told me on the phone. “But now we’ve put them down into their holes where they were before, and they could strengthen their beliefs and become more extreme.”

    The question is whether it’s more harmful to society to have many millions of people exposed to kinda hateful content or to have a much smaller number of ultra-radicalized true believers.

    Donovan believes that, ultimately, it’s important to deplatform people when their rhetoric is resulting in negative, real-world consequences: “The way Jones activates his audiences has implications for people who have already been victimized,” she said. “We have always had groups of white supremacists, misogynists, and violent insurrectionists joining message boards. But social media has made these tools much more powerful. So yes, we must take away the kinds of coordinative power they’re able to gain on platforms.”

    #Deplateformisation #Fake_News

  • High Speed #Internet Is Causing Widespread Sleep Deprivation, Study Finds - Motherboard

    “High-speed Internet makes it very enticing to stay up later to play video games, surf the web and spend time online on social medias,” the researchers concluded. “Given the growing awareness of the importance of sleep quantity and quality for our health and productivity, providing more information on the risks associated with technology use in the evening may promote healthier sleep and have non-negligible effects on individual welfare and well-being.”


  • Youtube Streik : Wofür Youtuber jetzt kämpfen | WALULYSE - YouTube

    Les creators de Youtube fondent un syndicat pour défendre leur intérêts contre la corporation géante. Ironie de l’histoire, c’est au pays de Karl Marx que s’organisent les canuts du XXIème siècle.

    S’agit-il encore d’un exemple pour le phénomène que notre Karl à nous commente d’une manière ironique ou assistons-nous à la naissance du mouvement ouvrier du XXIème siècle suivant la déscription de Mathilde Larrère ?

    Hegel fait quelque part cette remarque que tous les grands événements et personnages historiques se répètent pour ainsi dire deux fois. Il a oublié d’ajouter : la première fois comme tragédie, la seconde fois comme farce.

    A Viral Slingshot Channel Started a YouTuber’s Union - Motherboard

    With almost 10,000 ’members’ behind him, Jörg Sprave wants to show Google that YouTubers have the power to negotiate better working conditions.

    Creators, Users... To Arms ! Join the YouTubers Union. - YouTube

    Youtubers Union | United We Stand

    Welcome to the official homepage of the YouTubers Union!

    We are a community based movement that fights for the rights of YouTube Creators and Users. Our core demands are:

    Monetize everyone - Bring back monetization for smaller channels.
    Disable the bots - At least verified partners have the right to speak to a real person if you plan to remove their channel.
    Transparent content decisions - Open up direct communication between the censors ("content department") and the Creators.
    Pay for the views - Stop using demonetized channels as “bait” to advertise monetized videos.
    Stop demonetization as a whole - If a video is in line with your rules, allow ads on an even scale.
    Equal treatment for all partners - Stop preferring some creators over others. No more “YouTube Preferred”.
    Pay according to delivered value - Spread out the ad money over all YouTubers based on audience retention, not on ads next to the content.
    Clarify the rules - Bring out clear rules with clear examples about what is OK and what is a No-No.
    Everyone is welcome to join - we need you! No matter if you are PewDiePie or just a user.
    You don’t have to pay any money and you have zero obligations.
    You can join us simply be becoming a member of our Facebook group and/or by joining our forum.

    United We Stand!

    Jörg Sprave

    #disruption #internet #WWW #vidéo #médias #syndicalisme #grève #théorie_de_la_valeur #marxisme #BIG5

  • Encrypted Messaging Apps Have Limitations You Should Know

    Encrypted communication used to be too complicated for mainstream use, but approachable apps like WhatsApp and Signal have become a no-brainer for digital privacy. With all of their security-minded features, like disappearing messages and identity-confirming safety numbers, secure chat apps can rightfully give you peace of mind. You should absolutely use them. As the adage goes, though, there’s no such thing as perfect security. And feeling invincible could get you in trouble.

    End-to-end encryption transforms messages into unintelligible chunks of data as soon as a user presses send. From there, the message isn’t reconstituted into something understandable until it reaches the receiver’s device. Along the way, the message is unreadable, protected from prying eyes. It essentially amounts to a bodyguard who picks you up at your house, rides around with you in your car, and walks you to the door of wherever you’re going. You’re safe during the transport, but your vigilance shouldn’t end there.

    “These tools are hugely better than traditional email and things like Slack” for security, says Matthew Green, a cryptographer at Johns Hopkins University. “But encryption isn’t magic. You can easily get it wrong. In particular, if you don’t trust the people you’re talking to, you’re screwed.”

    On one level it’s obvious that both you and the person you’re chatting with have access to the encrypted conversation—that’s the whole point. But it’s easy to forget in practice that people you message with could show the chat to someone else, take screenshots, or retain the conversation on their device indefinitely.

    Former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort found this out the hard way recently, when the FBI obtained messages he’d sent over WhatsApp from the people who received them.

    In another current investigation, the FBI was able to access Signal messages sent by former Senate Intelligence Committee aide James Wolfe, and had at least some information about the encrypted messaging habits of New York Times reporter Ali Watkins, after the Justice Department seized her communications records as part of a leak investigation. Though it’s unknown how the FBI gained access to these encrypted chats, it wouldn’t necessarily have taken a crypto-breaking backdoor if investigators had device access or records from other chat participants.

    You also need to keep track of how many devices you’ve stored your encrypted messages on. If you sync chats between, say, your smartphone and your laptop, or back them up in the cloud, there are potentially more opportunities for the data to be exposed. Some services, like iMessage and WhatsApp, either have cloud backups enabled by default or nudge users toward it to streamline the user experience. Manafort provides a useful illustration once again; investigators accessed his iCloud to access some of the same information informants gave them, as well as to glean new information about his activity. The chats were encrypted in WhatsApp; the backups were not.

    “Digital systems strew data all over the place,” Green notes. “And providers may keep metadata like who you talked to and when. Encrypted messaging apps are valuable in that they tend to reduce the number of places where your data can live. However, the data is decrypted when it reaches your phone.”

    That’s where operations security comes in, the process of protecting information by looking holistically at all the ways it could be obtained, and defending against each of them. An “opsec fail,” as it’s known, happens when someone’s data leaks because they didn’t think of a method an attacker could use to access it, or they didn’t carry out the procedure that was meant to protect against that particular theft strategy. Relying solely on these encrypted messaging tools without considering how they work, and without adding other, additional protections, leaves some paths exposed.

    “Good opsec will save you from bad crypto, but good crypto won’t save you from bad opsec,” says Kenn White, director of the Open Crypto Audit Project, referencing a classic warning from security researcher The Grugq. “It’s easy for people to be confused.”

    The stakes are especially high in government, where encrypted chat apps and disappearing message features are increasingly popular among officials. Just last week, sources told CNBC that investigators for special counsel Robert Mueller have been asking witnesses to voluntarily grant access to their encrypted messaging apps, including Dust, Confide, WhatsApp, and Signal. CNBC reported that witnesses have cooperated to avoid being subpoenaed.

    Several encrypted messaging apps offer a disappearing message feature to help ensure that neither you nor the person you’re chatting with keeps data around longer than necessary. But even this precaution needs to come with the understanding that the service you’re using could fail to actually delete the messages you mark for erasure from their servers. Signal had a recent problem, first reported by Motherboard, where a fix for one bug inadvertently created another that failed to delete a set of messages users had set to disappear. The app quickly resolved the issue, but the situation serves as a reminder that all systems have flaws.

    “Encrypted communication apps are tools, and just like any other tool, they have limited uses,” says Eva Galperin, director of cybersecurity at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

    In fact, simply choosing an encrypted messaging service may cary unknown risks. Some services like Confide and Telegram haven’t allowed an independent auditor to evaluate their cryptography, meaning it’s difficult to know how trustworthy they are, which of their promises they keep, and what user data they actually retain. And iMessage may collect more metadata than you think.

    Signal, WIRED’s secure messaging recommendation, is open source, but it also proved its trustworthiness in a 2016 case where the service was subpoenaed. Developer Open Whisper Systems responded to a grand jury subpoena saying it could only produce the time an account was created and the most recent date that a user’s Signal app connected to its servers. The court had asked for significantly more detail like user names, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses. Signal had retained none of it.

    While end-to-end encryption is a vital privacy protection that can thwart many types of surveillance, you still need to understand the other avenues a government or attacker could take to obtain chat logs. Even when a service works perfectly factors like where messages are stored, who else has received them, and who else has access to devices that contain them play an important role in your security. If you’re using encrypted chat apps as one tool in your privacy and security toolbox, more power to you. If you’re relying on it as a panacea, you’re more at risk than you realize.

    Lily Hay Newman - 06.14.18


    #vie_privée #messagerie_chiffrée #protection_des_données_personnelles #autodéfense_numérique #cryptography #chiffrement #Signal #gnupg