Tag Archives: Cisco

Feel free to lose control

Yup, we all have that. You, me, pretty much everyone. Even the Catholic cleric in [censored], should you doubt that, ask any choir boy there. So when the BBC gave us ‘Facebook sued for ‘losing control’ of users’ data’, I merely shrugged and went ‘Meh’. You see, it is not about “the case against the technology giant, expected to last for at least three years, will argue a “loss of control” over users’ personal data warrants individual compensation”, which is hypocrite on a few levels, we see people handing over data and fact to complete strangers in Facebook and plenty of other social media paths. We laugh at “Coolum resident Essena O’Neill, 19, said she was paid up to $2,000 for the posts, which show her posing with products and often in revealing positions. With more than 600,000 followers on Instagram and 260,000 on YouTube, Ms O’Neill has deleted many of her original photos and re-captioned others with more honest descriptions” (ABC, 2015). We also get (two weeks ago) ““I accidentally posted a picture on Instagram of my wine glass and I was naked,” she said whilst nervously laughing. Then, she went on to explain that you could actually see her naked body in the reflection of the wine glass”, is anyone buying this? Social media has been used on a huge number of settings revealing ‘accidentally’ facts that normally do not get to see the light of day, and in all this we are given ““loss of control” over users’ personal data”? Go cry me a river! In the mean time, did anyone see Alexander Nix, Julian Wheatland, Rebekah Mercer, or Steve Bannon in the dock of a courtroom in any of the hit countries? In this the quote “harvesting of Facebook users’ personal information by third-party apps was at the centre of the Cambridge Analytica privacy scandal” applies, a third party app, was there any documented agreement, or documented acceptance of the harvesting of personal data? I do not see Microsoft in the dock in court over their exchange failure that had hit 250,000 businesses, so why not? And when we see “Cambridge Analytica’s app on Facebook had harvested the data of people who interacted with it – and that of friends who had not given consent” did anyone consider putting the board of directors of Cambridge Analytica in prison? I wonder how far we have strayed from the flock of convictions to go after the money and not the transgressors. I do get it, it is a rule or Torts, the mere “go where the money is” is not a wrong setting, but in this setting all the blame on Facebook seems wrong. They are not without fault, I get that, but to see a reference to Journalist Peter Jukes giving us “leading the action, claims his data was compromised”, so how was his data compromised? What evidence is there? In turn I have equal issues with “The Information Commissioner’s Office investigation into these issues, which included seizing and interrogating Cambridge Analytica’s servers, found no evidence that any UK or EU users’ data was transferred by [app developer] Dr [Aleksandr] Kogan to Cambridge Analytica”, I wonder how far backup investigation went, in turn the setting of ‘no evidence that any UK or EU users’ data was transferred’ is almost preposterous, the data was collected, as such it went somewhere, the fact that the Information Commissioner’s Office couldn’t find that part is mere icing on the cake of Cambridge Analytica. In addition, when we see “Mr Jukes told BBC News it was not about “where the data went” but rather “that Facebook didn’t care”. “They didn’t look after it,” he said.” Can this be proven? ‘Didn’t care’ is subjective and presumptive, we can agree that security measures failed, yet ‘They didn’t look after it’ is equally unproven, and these people are not going after the people of Cambridge Analytica as THEY transgressed on the data. As such as we look at Eton boy Alexander Nix, in the setting of “Nix agreed to a disqualifying undertaking prohibiting him from running U.K. limited companies for seven years after permitting companies to offer potentially unethical services, while denying any wrongdoing”, he got a mere slap on the hand, with a mandatory 7 year vacation all whilst we are told ‘denying any wrongdoing’, in addition there is “agreeing to delete previously obtained data”, a 2019 agreement, so where was the data all this time? Let’s be clear, Facebook has made blunders, huge ones, yet in light of the fact that Microsoft gets a mere fine and the issues is closed after that, why keep on going after Facebook? When we see ZDNet give us ‘Microsoft Exchange Server attacks: ‘They’re being hacked faster than we can count’, says security company’ two weeks ago (at https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-exchange-server-attacks-theyre-being-hacked-faster-than-we-can-count-says-security-company/), what gives, why are they not being sued for setting a dangerous precedence on corporate information? We go after Huawei without evidence, we ignore alleged criminals and their app transgressions with our data, but it is fine to go after Facebook whilst ignoring the massive flaw that is Microsoft? So what gives?

So yes, we can lose control all we like, but if we hamper the courts with empty cases that are set on emotion, all whilst people like Alexander Nix, Julian Wheatland, Rebekah Mercer, and Steve Bannon are allowed to return to positions and try again? And what about Cambridge Analytica? As it was soon thereafter acquired by? The only reason I see to acquire Cambridge Analytica is because of hardware, because of software and because of data, so who is looking into that, preferably all before we lose time slapping Facebook around? I see very little after 2018, but perhaps Peter Jukes is too busy to see were his alleged compromised data optionally went. 

So whilst we giggle on statements like “I accidentally posted a picture on Instagram of my wine glass and I was naked”, we see a setting where a large group of people are using social media for all kind of things, the limelight most of all and in this we need to separate the real issues from the fictive cash cows. In this, did you wonder if the people are realising that Wired gave us a mere hour ago “collaboration platforms like Discord and Slack have taken up intimate positions in our lives, helping maintain personal ties despite physical isolation. But their increasingly integral role has also made them a powerful avenue for delivering malware to unwitting victims—sometimes in unexpected ways” (at https://www.wired.com/story/malware-discord-slack-links/) and that is a mere tip of the iceberg, a massively large one. How many apps are a gateway to YOUR system? So when we take notice of “hackers have integrated Discord into their malware for remote control of their code running on infected machines, and even to steal data from victims”, as such in that case it is not the nude reflection shot that matters, it is the wineglass porn that some people decided not to post that is out there for everyone to see. Consider the words by Stephen Fry on 2014, when he said “The best way to prevent nude pictures online, is to never pose nude”, or something according to those lines and he is right, the best social media is the boring one, where you just say hi and connect to relatives. But the limelight is for some just too appealing and to give everyone the lowdown on all your needs and that is what players like Cambridge Analytica were banking on. As such, when we add that light, that spotlight, what data of Peter Jukes was transgressed on and in light of the Exchange server issues, the Cisco issues and the larger stage of interconnecting apps, can it even be proven that it was Facebook? 

I’ll buy popcorn for that court case, it should be fun.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

An almost funny thing

I saw an article at the BBC and I will get to that in a moment, but it reminded me of a situation that happened in 2010. I needed a new laptop and I was looking in a shop at their Collection of laptops. A man came to me and was trying to convince me just how amazing this laptop was. My inner demon was grinning, I get it, the man was enthusiastic, he was giving the numbers, but in all this, did he realise what he was saying? I am not doubting the man’s skills, he was doing a good job, I was however in IT and had been there for 30 years, so I have pretty much seen it all, and there it was, my little demon, on my right shoulder calling me ‘pussy’. So as the man stated ‘this laptop has a one terabyte hard-drive, can you even imagine ho much that is?’, I could not resist and my response was ‘Yup, that would fit roughly 10% of my porn collection’, his jaw dropped to the ground, his eyes almost popped, the demon inside me stated ‘Nice!’ Actually, it was not quite true, it would only fit a rough 0.32114%. It was the impact of the shock factor. You see, there is a hidden agenda there, when you (appropriately) use the technique, you get to see the real salesperson and that was what I needed. He was thrown, but he recomposed and continued giving me the goods on the laptop, I bought that laptop roughly 132 seconds later.

So today I saw ‘The Rise of extortionware’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56570862), here I notice “where hackers embarrass victims into paying a ransom”, it is not new, it is not even novel. I will also give you the second game after the people involved get arrested, they will demand anonymity and any bleeding heart judge will comply. I state that these people will be handed the limelight so that the people that faced ransomware attacks can take their frustration out of these people. But that remains wishful thinking. So next we get “Experts say the trend towards ransoming sensitive private information could affect companies not just operationally but through reputation damage. It comes as hackers bragged after discovering an IT Director’s secret porn collection.” I have the question was it a private or a company computer? You see, sone focus on the boobies, just what the advertisers on Twitter hope for, they want the click bitches, it makes them money. It is time that we set the larger stage, you see the entire mess would be smaller if Cisco and Microsoft had done a proper job. OK, I apologise, Cisco does a proper job, but some things slip through and in combination with Microsoft exchange servers it is not slipping through, it is a cyber hole the size an iceberg created on the Titanic and we need to set a much larger stage. So when we see “Thanks God for [named IT Director]. While he was [masturbating] we downloaded several hundred gigabytes of private information about his company’s customers. God bless his hairy palms, Amen!”, it seemingly answers that he might keep it on a corporate computer, or he uses his private computer for company stuff. Yet in that same light the hacker should not be allowed any anonymity, we all get to see who the hacker is. If there is something to be learned it is see with “Hackers are now actually searching the data for information that can be weaponised. If they find anything that is incriminating or embarrassing, they’ll use it to leverage a larger pay-out. These incidents are no longer simply cyber-attacks about data, they are full-out extortion attempts” There are two sides

  1. The station of ALWAYS ONLINE needs to change, there needs to be an evolving gateway of anti hack procedures and a stage of evolving anti hack routers and monitoring software. You think that Zoom is an option?
    Tom’s Guide gave us less than 2 weeks ago “More than a dozen security and privacy problems have been found in Zoom”, as well as “Zoom’s ease of use has made it easy for troublemakers to “bomb” open Zoom meetings. Information-security professionals say Zoom’s security has had a lot of holes, although most have been fixed over the past few year”, so whilst you contemplate ‘most have been fixed’, consider that not all are fixed and that is where the problem goes from somewhat to enormous. Well over 20% of the workforce works at home, has zoom meetings and that is how cyber criminals get the upper hand (as well as through disgruntled employees), a change in mindset is only a first station.
  2. Remember that Australian? (Julian Assange) We were told that soon there would be some leaks on issues on banks (Wall Street) then it suddenly became silent, now some will say that it is a bluff, but in light of the meltdown in 2008, I am not so certain, I reckon that some have ways to show the hackers who they are and they profit by not doing that. Can I prove this? Absolutely not. It is speculation, but when you look at the timeline, my speculation makes sense. 
  3. The third side is optionally the second side as the second side might not be a real side. When we see “Hackers are now actually searching the data for information that can be weaponised. If they find anything that is incriminating or embarrassing, they’ll use it to leverage a larger pay-out. These incidents are no longer simply cyber-attacks about data, they are full-out extortion attempts”, the underlying station is ‘information that can be weaponised’ and the IT sector is helping them.

How did I get there? The cloud is not as secure as some state, and the salespeople need to take notice. Business Insider gave us about 6 months ago “70% of Companies Storing Data With Cloud Companies Hacked or Breached”, see the link we are now slowly getting presented? 

In the OSI model, we see layers 3-7 (layer 8 is the user). So as some have seen the issues from Cisco, Microsoft and optionally Zoom, we see a link of issues from layer 3 through to layer 7 ALL setting a dangerous stage. Individually there is no real blame and their lawyers will happily confirm that, but when we see security flaw upon security flaw, there is a larger stage of dangers and we need to take notice. And here the dangers become a lot more interesting when we consider the Guardian yesterday when we saw “Intelligence value of SolarWinds hacking of then acting secretary Chad Wolf is not publicly known”, what else is not publicly known? How many media outlets ignored the Cisco matter, how come ZDNet is one of the few giving us “it’s not releasing patches for some of the affected devices that reached end of life” less than 8 weeks ago. Again I say Cisco did the right thing by informing its customers close to immediately, yet when we see “More than 247,000 Microsoft Exchange servers are yet to be patched against the CVE-2020-0688 post-auth remote code execution (RCE) vulnerability impacting all Exchange Server versions under support” (source: bleepingcomputers.com) as far as I can see, a lot of the media ignored it, but they will shout and repeat the dangers of Huawei, without being shown actual evidence, and I state here, that unless we make larger changes, the extortion path will evolve and become a lot larger. With 70% of cloud systems getting hacked or breached, a large chunk of the Fortune 500 will pay too much to keep quiet and who gets to pay for that? There is a rough 99.867765% chance that its board members will not, it might be speculatively, so please prove me wrong.

A stage where the needs of the consumers changes in a stage where the corporations are not ready to adjust and all whilst the IT salespeople have that golden calf that does everything and make you coffee as well. Adjustments are needed, massive adjustments are needed and we need to make them now before the cybercriminals are in control of our IT needs and that is not mere speculation, when you see flaw after flaw and too little is done as too many are the victim of its impact is a serious breach and it has been going on for some time, but now it is seemingly out in the light and too many are doing too little and as we laugh at “God bless his hairy palms, Amen!” Consider that stage, and now consider that they invade a financial institution, these are clever criminals, they do not empty your account, they merely take $1, perhaps $1 every other month, this implies that they are looking at a $16,000,000 every two months. And this is merely one bank, one in a thousand banks, some a lot bigger than the Australian Commonwealth bank and lets face it, the fact that layer 3 to layer 7 is leaky in hundreds of thousands of customers, do you really think that banks are off-limits? Do you really think that this is a simple hick-up or that the scenery is changing this quickly by people claiming that it will be fixed in no-time? 

We need massive changes and we need them a lot sooner than we think.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

The wide net

We all have the idea to go phishing, we want trout, we want salmon and we use the biggest net possible to get at least one. So when AP gave us ‘Casting a wide intrusion net: Dozens burned with single hack’ (at https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-politics-europe-eastern-europe-new-zealand-f318ba1ffc971eb17371456b015206a5), not only was I not surprised, I had been warning people about this for a few years, that setting is apparently upon us now (or at least some are admitting it now). There we see “Nimble, highly skilled criminal hackers believed to operate out of Eastern Europe hacked dozens of companies and government agencies on at least four continents by breaking into a single product they all used” this does not surprise me, this happened in the late 80’s as well when someone used Aston Tate’s DB3 to introduce a virus, it is simple find something they all use and hamper its function, a basic strategy that an Italian (Julius Caesar) introduced 2000 years ago, there he hampered the roads and not servers but you get the idea, the classics still work.

When we are given “The Accellion casualties have kept piling up, meanwhile, with many being extorted by the Russian-speaking Clop cybercriminal gang, which threat researchers believe may have bought pilfered data from the hackers. Their threat: Pay up or we leak your sensitive data online, be it proprietary documents from Canadian aircraft maker Bombardier or lawyer-client communications from Jones Day.” It might seem rash but the people relied on others to keep their data safe and whilst we see more and more that they cannot contain the bacon the clients are suffering, this is not a simple station and we get it, but package solutions tend to come with flaws and that has been a truth for 20 years, so why are you all crying now? It is the final part that has more bearing “Members of Congress are already dismayed by the supply-chain hack of the Texas network management software company SolarWinds that allowed suspected Russian state-backed hackers to tiptoe unnoticed — apparently intent solely on intelligence-gathering — for more than half a year through the networks of at least nine government agencies and more than 100 companies and think tanks. Only in December was the SolarWinds hacking campaign discovered by the cybersecurity firm FireEye. France suffered a similar hack, blamed by its cybersecurity agency on Russian military operatives, that also gamed the supply chain. They slipped malware into an update of network management software from a firm called Centreon, letting them quietly root around victim networks from 2017 to 2020.” This is important because of what happened in the last two years, remember how ‘stupid’ American people started to blame Huawei for all the bad whilst offering absolutely no supporting evidence? Huawei does not need to bother to aid whichever government there was, silly software developers are doing that for them, we see an abundance of intrusion problems that include SolarWinds, Accellion and Cisco. A stage where thousands of systems are at risk, but no, the ‘silly’ people kept on blaming Huawei. Even I knew better and as Sony gave me the idea for an intrusion method called ‘Plus One’ (a viable way to drive the Pentagon nuts) with an alternative direction that I call ‘Vee One’, but that one has a few hiccups I reckon. Then I got creative and saw a new parameter in play. One that is based on a little part I read in a Cisco manual, the text “When You Add A Hard Disk To A Virtual Machine(VM), you can create a new virtual disk, add an existing virtual disk, or add a mapped Storage Area Network (SAN) Logical UnitNumber (LUN). In most cases, you can accept the default device node. For a hard-disk, a non default device node is useful to control the boot order or have different Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) controller types. For example, you might want to boot from an LSI Logic controller and use a Bus-logic Controller With bus sharing turned onto share a data disk with another VM.” You see that small text indicates that there is a nice workaround in Cisco CMX and it opens up a lot more than they bargained for, that in conjunction with the share issues thy were already facing gives out a whole new meaning to the phrase ‘Copy me I want to travel’, n’est pas? (for the French victims)

It is a much larger stage, most laws aren’t ready for this, prosecuting the guilty parties is close to impossible and any quick fix they make will only make things harder, the setting was and has for always been the makers of software, time constraints and lack of deep testing makes for a lousy solution and in most cases these players have a pushy marketing department (example: Ubisoft), and yes ‘You be soft!’ because the small tidbit that AP gives us with “Attackers are finding it harder and harder to gain access via traditional methods, as vendors like Microsoft and Apple have hardened the security of the operating systems considerably over the last years” yet it is a small stage and not a correct one. Weaknesses in Azure, issues with advertising in apps and a larger stage of programming, we see it clearest in .NET, but it goes way beyond that, for example “The problem of memory leaks is not uncommon in any technology. Simply put, the framework doesn’t release the memory that it no longer needs. .NET is frequently criticised for memory leaks and memory-related issues. Although .NET has a garbage collector for this sort of problem, engineers still have to invest additional efforts into proper resource management. And the leaks keep on growing as the application scales.” (source: Altexsoft) and it shows the smallest part, if there is a leak in one place, there will be in other places too and the leaks are not the real problem, getting it to semi-crash and taking over its right on a network are a quick way into any system, I saw the example with an accounting program (censored name), I got the program to crash (took about 20 seconds) and I ended up with the administrator rights to the entire mainframe from ANY location running that software. I get it, there will always be a bug in any place and the makers were quick to fix it, but for a few weeks there was an entrance point that took minimum efforts and that setting is only increasing with routers and cloud systems, these companies rely on marketeers that are ready to push for the investors sake and leave the client swimming in a swamp, I have seen it more than once and it will happen again, and this setting has been going on since 1989 and over the next 3-4 years it will grow to 150%, the push to billions and to quickly get to billions will be overwhelming for too many players all whilst the law will not be able to protect the victims, they will merely point at torts law, even though that you are the victim, most contracts are offered as an ‘as is’ solution and for the most software makers can avoid prosecution for the longest time, long enough for the hackers to get away with your data and sell it, what a lovely system you bought. Oh and before I forget, organised crime is way ahead of me, so for some it will already be too late.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

Thanks for the support

We all have to say thanks, I in this case to the BBC, they were just able to give support to two issues that I put out in the open over a year ago (too tired to find these articles, they are at least a year old and it is 33 degrees Celsius at present (at 21:30), The first is the lacking approach to Common Cyber Sense within the US Administration, I found that failing in the Pentagon in 2018, I found Cisco routers still carrying the password Cisco123 in at least two sensitive areas and there was the use and abuse of non secured USB sticks in more than two sensitive places and on top of all that, the US ends up with an idiot in the White House relying on a password like MAGA2020, how bad do things need to get? I agree that the man Victor Gevers did everything right, including alerting the proper players, but this is a much larger problem. So when we see “The president’s account, which has 89 million followers, is now secure. But Twitter has refused to answer direct questions from BBC News, including whether the account had extra security or logs that would have shown an unknown login”, the quote forgets to give a larger part, you see, this was all on the user, when the user is thick as molasses and equally stupid, can we blame Twitter? And this now also reflects back to ‘6 simple questions’, which I released on February 3rd 2020, there we see the simple setting that the Daily Mail, the Daily Mail of all sources that there was a way to infect accounts yet no way to establish by who or how. It gets us back to the original question ‘Where is the evidence that Saudi Arabia infected ANY phones?’, a question that FTI Consulting and the United Nation essay writers can not inform us. It shows a much larger lack of cyber security and proper cyber defences, all whilst these so called investigators are happy to accuse whomever is a political and not a true target, is that too much?

I ended that article with question 6 ‘Why on earth is the UN involved in an alleged Criminal investigation where so much information is missing?’, now we see a new page turned, can any criminal investigation hold any water when the users are that thick? MAGA2020, really?

So when we consider “Mr Gevers also claimed he and other security researchers had logged in to Mr Trump’s Twitter account in 2016 using a password – “yourefired” – linked to another of his social-network accounts in a previous data breach”, in all this the need to employ Common Cyber Sense is a situation that becomes more and more essential and we need to catch on quicker than we are, because it is people like that who will claim things against Russia and China, whilst letting their security services in at their leisure because they cannot be bothered with Common Cyber Sense. 

As I see it, President Trump will optionally get two additional Christmas cards this year, one from 76B Khoroshevskoe Highway, the other from 14 Dongchangan Avenue, Dongcheng District, Beijing. Both will be stating “Thanks for the support”, what a lovely way to end a presidency and probably the first time that a US President gets a Christmas card from both locations.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

A political stage of nowhere

Less than an hour ago the BBC gave us ‘EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech’, apart from the discriminatory nature of the stage, are they doing anything else than merely fuelling their own gravy train? Consider the news from last July, there we were given ‘Apple has €13bn Irish tax bill overturned’, a case that started in 2016, had Apple and the government of Ireland in a twist, when you consider “The Irish government – which had also appealed against the ruling – said it had “always been clear” Apple received no special treatment”, I am on the fence, and in this the European Commission wasted 4 years in going nowhere, in the light of that revelation, can we even trust the approach the EU has? When we look at the first option, we see ‘Online harms law to let regulator block apps in UK’, this means an almost immediate blocking of Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp and a few more. Local laws have been ‘accomodating’ to large corporations for such a long time, that social media is caught in the middle (and yes they benefitted too), so they re now pushing for changes that end privacy, because that is a conclusion. If we hunt down the perpetrators, we need to coat the materials in identity revealing codes, in addition, the EU government will have to adjust laws to make the poster responsible for what they post and that will lead to all kinds of privacy adjustments (that does not worry me), yet when insurance companies will use that setting to see transgressions on social media and they demand adjustment by handing over the posted evidence, how long until people like Margrethe Vestager start realising that they were clueless from the start? The BBC article gives us “The law would give local officials a way to ask Airbnb and other apps to hand over information or remove listings”, which now puts some players on the dark-web and the chaos (and organised crime involvement) merely increases. For example, when we see “not use data gathered via their main service to launch a product that will compete with other established businesses”, how will that be proven and tested? By handing all data over to the government? How many frivolous cases will that grave train launch? How is it impossible to stop advantage seekers a stage where they use Margrethe Vestager and her gang of idiots to do the bidding of (optionally) organised crime?

Even though I spoke of the Accountability Act, a legal direction that could thwart a few issues from the start in June 2012, 8 years later and this group is hardly even on the track of resolving anything, only to get their grubby greedy fingers on data, the new currency. And in this, the tech companies have their own games to play as Facebook shows with “Apple controls an entire ecosystem from device to app store and apps, and uses this power to harm developers and consumers, as well as large platforms like Facebook”, what Apple does, IBM did for decades, what Apple does Microsoft did for decades, so where is that train station? So even as we see “And they may influence other regulators – in the US and elsewhere – which are also planning to introduce new restrictions of their own” we also need to realise that after a decade, the local and EU laws have done little to nothing to hold the poster of information to criminal account, it seems to me a massive oversight. And in all this there is no view that the EU will wisen up any day soon. 

So as I see it, this will soon become a political stage that goes nowhere and in all this these layers merely want their fingers on the data, the currency that they do not have. How is that in any way acceptable?

Oh and when we see the blocking of apps and localisation, how long until people find an alternative? An alternative that the EU, the UK and the US have no insight over? Will they block apps that interact with data centres in China, Saudi Arabia and optionally other locations too? I raised it in other ways in ‘There is more beneath the sand’ in 2019 as well as some issues in 2018, a setting that was almost two years ago, as such is it not amazing that we see a shortsighted approach to this issue, whilst I gave the option EIGHT YEARS AGO and the laws are still not ready? They are ready to get the data from Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft, as such when the trial goes wrong, hw will these people be compensated for the loss of uniquely owned data, data that they collected over the decades? Will the stupid people (Margrethe Vestager et al) compensate per kilobyte? How about $25,000,000 per kilobyte? Perhaps we should double that? What will be the price and in this, we should demand that Margrethe Vestager and her teams will be criminally liable for those losses, or will the gravy train decide that it is a little too complex to hold one station to order, and let face it, that gravy train has 27 stops to make, all with their own local needs, their local incomes and their local digital wannabe’s.

When a setting like that goes nowhere, you better believe that there is someone behind the curtain pulling strings for their own enriching needs, that is how it always has been, as such, let me give you the smallest example from January 2020, there we see “‘DIGITAL CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE’ CONFERENCE”, with the nice quote “The e-Evidence Project led by the European Commission, DG Justice and Consumers, provides for the e-Evidence Digital Exchange System that manages the European Investigation Order/Mutual Legal Assistance procedures/instruments (e-Forms, business logic, statistics, log, etc.) on European level. The Reference Implementation Portal is the front-end portal of the e-Evidence Digital Exchange System and is also provided by the EC”, yet this is only step one. In all this we can also include the EC (at https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cybercrime/e-evidence_en), where we see: “However, present-day solutions too often prove unsatisfactory, bringing investigations to a halt”, I get it, you will say, will this not resolve it? Well, consider “provide legal certainty for businesses and service providers: whereas today law enforcement authorities often depend on the good will of service providers to hand them the evidence they need, in the future, applying the same rules for access to all service providers will improve legal certainty and clarity”, in this we need to look in detail at ‘provide legal certainty’, which at present under privacy laws is a no-no, and the poster cannot be identified and cannot (and will not) be held to account. As well as ‘applying the same rules for access to all service providers’, still the poster remains out of reach and the local and EU laws have done NOTHING for over a decade to change that, as such, when we consider this, why should Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft suffer the consequences, in addition we see the absence of IBM, why is that? Does it not have data collection software, it has data centres, it has cloud solutions, so why are they absent?

And in light of earlier this year, as we were told ‘Google starts appeal against £2bn shopping fine’, how will that end? The law remains untested in too many aspects, in this the entire data stage is way too soon and in that the blowback will be enormous, all whilst the EU (UK too) is unable to do anything about data driven organised crime, other than blame state operators Russia and China, consider the Sony Hack of 2011, I was with the point of view by Kurt Stammberger (before I even knew about Kurt Stammberger), North Korea lacks infrastructure and a whole deed of other parts. I also questioned the data, like “former hacker Hector Monsegur, who once hacked into Sony, explained to CBS News that exfiltrating one or one hundred terabytes of data “without anyone noticing” would have taken months or years, not weeks”, I even considered an applied use of the Cisco routers at Sony to do just that, all issues that North Korea just could not do and in that environment, when we see these levels of doubt and when we get “After a private briefing lasting three hours, the FBI formally rejected Norse’s alternative assessment”, which might be valid, but when we see a setting where it takes three hours to get the FBI up to speed, can we even trust the EU to have a clue? Even their own former director of German Intelligence, gave us recently that they did not fully comprehend Huawei 5G equipment, and they will investigate the data owners, al before the posters of the messages are properly dealt with? I think not!

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Politics, Science

About lights and tunnels

If we take the change of new technology (like 5G), we need to feel to be in charge. We tend to forget that part (I surely did at some point) and whilst I was considering a different form of new IP, I considered the small status that the thought came from a direction where my knowledge is not that great, I am no expert on technological 5G, I never claimed to be that. So when my mind grew towards a new form of mobile security towards 5G+ or even 6G, my mind set an image, yet the stage of routing, ciphering and deciphering waves are not the stages I am an expert in, yet forms of the solution come to me. I am not a mathematician, so I see images, images of clockworks, clockworks of gun cylinders and they intersect. 7, 9 and 11 shooters, cylinders of different properties are intersecting, what do you set when there are n 7 cylinders all with different time settings, n 9 cylinders and n 11 cylinders. Setting a larger stage of frequencies and cut stages that are linked, all set in an algorithm via a new form of routing, the result is a new stage of mobile communication that cannot be hacked, until true AI and true Quantum computing are a fact, the shallow circuits cannot cut through the mesh, a new stage of true privacy and at present Google and Huawei are the only ones even close to setting this up, even as they have the juice, they will need someone like Cisco to pull some of the weight. 

It would also seem a different stage to the mobile phone. I remember the old walkie talkies in the 60’s. The more advanced models had several crystals so that there was a unique signal. I wondered what we could do to emphasise on privacy in today’s mobile setting. In stead of crystals, we have a mobile phone, it is a transmitter, but what happens when it is not set to a band, but it can be set to 7,9, or 11 separate frequencies. A sort of time slice and that is the beginning, the carrier will give you the connection with the slices, their routers will set the connection and unless the hacker has the set, they can never get the entire conversation, unless they have every connection and then they would need to unscramble thousands of phones depending on the hardware whether they used 7,9 or 11 parts. If I get it to work in my mind, it could signal a new age of real privacy for people with a mobile phone.

But in the end, it is merely a sideline towards more interesting IP. The idea hit me when I was looking at a real estate site, which one does not matter. I was merely curious. It all started with a spec pal by Piers Morgan, he made a special on Monte Carlo and I was curious, as I had never been there. So as I got curious, I took a look and I noticed that speed was an interesting flaw, even on a mobile, a place where well over 50% of all searches are done, it took nearly forever. Yet when I took the Google Tester (at https://search.google.com/test/mobile-friendly) the site passed the test, it made perfect sense, yet the delay was real. I do not think it was them, or me. But it got me thinking of a different approach.
Google has had that setting for a long time, they call it the Lightbox ad. I had another use for the ad, or as I would call it, another media container. But the media container would require a different use, it would require the user to use a different approach, not that this would be bad, but it would optionally reduce the bandwidth that they use. If the app links to the toppling on the site, yet when we look, the app gets the link to the media container on the google server, the real estate data needs are not going via the offerer, it goes via the seeker and hey are either really seeking, or merely browsing, the browsers will no longer impede on the business, the seekers will not notice and these media containers can all be used for advertising all over the place, it is up to the realtor which ones are ready for advertising all over the place, and there is the larger kicker, it is a setting that (as far as I can tell) no realtor has considered and that is where the larger stage comes, because when 5G hits, the realtor will see a much larger benefit, they would not need to update (other then optionally an app), they will be ready, and they will push towards both their needs via their site, an app and via Google Ads, three directions instead of one and it will be a larger stage when no one was thinking ahead. 

There is light at the end of the tunnel, I switched on the lights, and no one cares who switched on the lights and that is OK, it is just that no one realised that the lights were not on, that should leave you with the consideration why no one realised that.

 

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Science

The tech is out there

Even now, as the larger players (Microsoft and Wall-mart) are starting a bidding fight for TikTok, we see the flaw on several levels in the digital age. I illuminated it yesterday, in my previous article.  We are in a stage where everyone is shouting that they have Digital Media Managers , Digital Marketers, Account Managers, Social Media Managers and so on, and so on. Yet, where it counts, we see (at https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/WIGOV/bulletins/29bf2b8) the statement on Kenosha and the shooting, but when I looked at the site in ‘Self destruct initiated’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/08/27/self-destruct-initiated/) there was no mention at all and that was at 02:57 on August 27th, whilst the shooting was on August 23, it took 4 days for the digital media manager to wake up. Yet the police section in the news of the City of Kenosha website is still empty, so why do they have a website and who manages it? It is nice to have politicians and captains of industry hide behind the Internet of Things, digital media and digital needs, but where it counts, are they even aware that they flunked the pooch? 

A second set is given by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53930775), here we see ‘Facebook says Apple ad-blocking settings could halve revenue’ where we get introduced to “Apple’s plan to require all users to actively opt in before they can be tracked “may render Audience Network so ineffective on iOS 14 that it may not make sense to offer it”, Facebook said”, whilst we also get “In the upcoming iOS 14, apps have to explicitly ask users’ permission to collect and share data, meaning ads will no longer be able to just “follow” users to apps outside of Facebook”, all whilst everyone is ignoring “way for advertisers to extend their campaigns beyond Facebook and into other mobile apps”, lets be clear, FaceBook has every right to advertise on its site, it is the price of getting a free service, yet where does it state that the people have to agree to be followed “into other mobile apps”? In that article, where does it state the need and rights of the consumer? (I am not attacking the BBC or the writer of the article), we overlook technology to the mere shallow assumption related to it. We see the attack on Apple from Epic games (Fortnite) and we see Microsoft supporting Epic games, yet thee fact that the rule that Apple relied on is pretty much the same rule Microsoft has in place, so how did that make sense? It only looks clear when we see the path Microsoft has in play and they mobile XCloud is relying on the millions of iPhone users. I mentioned that in ‘The stage pushed by Microsoft’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/08/24/the-stage-pushed-by-microsoft/), so again we see a tech setting that is getting a shallow treatment and in this case I do not attack the media (even though I think they fell short), for the media it is all the emotion, as such we see the BBC giving us ‘Apple Fortnite players left behind in new update’, yet the stage where Epic games would be allowed back if they remove the external link in the game, which is against the developers agreement that Epic games agreed to when they got on the Apple store, a rule that Microsoft has in play as well and the media pretty much smoothed over with what I would personally see as ‘applied ignorance in action’.  

We see two versions of limited tech insight. This entire setting also applies to Huawei, the accusations and the lack of evidence is centre to all this. We get ‘Huawei’s networking equipment has not been detected spying’, in a Sky article last July, and it is the driving part in all this, we want evidence and we keep on getting bitching American politicians, one after another all emotions and no evidence. All whilst last week in the Australian Financial Review (at https://www.afr.com/technology/is-huawei-too-big-to-fail-20200824-p55ont) where we get the repeated “shot down by an announcement from the US government that it would use the global dominance of American technology to cut off all supplies of semiconductors to Huawei”, which is stupidity on a new level. It seems that it is not and that would be fair, the short term solution is met as semiconductors are not available. Yet in this for over a year Huawei was ready to that stage making (read: designing) their own semiconductors. When that happens, the US will have a Chinese competitor in another field and the US will lose even more ground. So whilst the US is in denial that Huawei grew because it had a good product, slightly cheaper but a lot better, in all this they rely on “Driven by the belief that Huawei could enable the ruling Chinese Communist party and its military to spy on other countries and their companies, undermine their national security and steal their commercial secrets, the US government used every option open to it”, where ‘could’ is the operative word and the additional ‘undermine their national security and steal their commercial secrets’, and guess what, there is no evidence on any level and the situation merely becomes worse when you consider ‘Critical flaw in IOS routers allows ‘complete system compromise’’, a part that ZDNet gave us in June (and before that, at https://www.zdnet.com/article/ciscos-warning-critical-flaw-in-ios-routers-allows-complete-system-compromise/), it is a simple situation, the Chinese government does not need to use Huawei to spy, they can use Cisco equipment (an American company based in San Jose) and download server by server on a global scale. When did the media give you that part? That weakness and a few more have been out in the open, and we hear nothing. This is not on Cisco, as it warned the users and is working on fixes, but the media is blind to the flaw, why is that?

Both the tech and the flawed tech is out there and there is a growing issue for a lot of people that we get limited and one sided revelations, who is served better to that? I am going with the personal view that the setting of the media catering to Shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers remains firmly in place.

The tech is out there, but who is taking a good look at it and who is using it to the maximum that would be required in the digital age? I’ll let you brew on that for a little while.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Politics

The station of choice

As we see that we have stations of choice, we also see that our choices were limited. We are overwhelmed with some flu version that has the name of a Mexican beer, we are overwhelmed with what the media calls ‘bad news’ and they are not playing a game with you (most are not), towards the stage where thousands of jobs are gone in any nation that has signs of Covid-19. And we haven’t even seen the main event in any of that. So whilst we see the BBC giving us “HSBC plans to speed up job cuts after interim profits plunged and the bank said bad loans linked to the coronavirus could reach $13bn (£9.8bn)”, OK, we get that, loans were all amassed and extended and then the people got sick, startup companies and existing companies, all got hit. But then we realise the headline and we need to consider the impact of ‘HSBC to speed up 35,000 job cuts as profits slump’, some choices were not choices at all, not for those 35,000 and not for the hundreds of thousands that also are losing their job. Some seem unavoidable, yet the stage of a bank needing to shed 35,000 jobs has another stage to consider, a stage where the bottom dollar and margins are the movement reasons in this particular time. Let’s be clear, it is a time that we have not seen for a little over 100 years. In Australia Victoria is now in a stage 4 lockdown, a second lockdown. There will be businesses hit, there will be consequences for a lot of people, yet when I saw last year in 2019 reporting 23% more profits, I find it a little distasteful to read about 35,000 jobs lost, all whilst banks have been filling their pockets for close to a decade, if there was one situation where loyalty is leaving the building the this is it. There is however an upside, if we consider that 2% of the American people has the Coronavirus and a percentage of that will not survive, we see that job openings are coming. Globally we are moving faster and faster towards 20,000,000 Coronavirus patients, we are almost there, almost 750,000 people were lost on some official places, yet there are loads of articles giving us that the number of deceased people is a lot higher, as such loyalty is not something bosses want to take chances on, but that is merely my view on the matter. Let’s be clear, a lot of them were retired, yet not all, so they need replacement and when the financial sector, after non stop massive profits is shedding its staff, there is nothing stopping a place like Saudi Arabia starting a new financial cornerstone, they are getting access to well over 100,000 people on a global setting. 100,000 people with knowledge of the sector and the clients. Now that they are not spending billions on Newcastle, they could set a corner in the financial sector and setting up shop, with staff needing a job it might not be the worst idea and they have the billions, a lot do not. The world market is soon to be about choice and a lot are handing over the options and opportunities they have to merely meet a short term bottom dollar. I get it, plenty of catering, bars and restaurants do not have the options, or the reserves, they are with their back to the wall and trying to survive, no blame there, but the Fortune 500 and banks shedding jobs, it makes no sense. A situation where they rely on governmental hand-outs whilst they went around making as much profit as they could whilst paying as little tax as they could (which is no crime mind you), but there is a stage where the feeling of insecurity becomes slightly distasteful. Even as we understand that there is a station of choice, yet we seemingly forgot that the station of choice is one with limited settings. It becomes a much larger setting when we consider the impact of 5G, no matter what choice we had, we now see ‘Experts say expanding 5G will boost regional economies during COVID-19’, yet we also see “Although the pandemic has brought uncertainty to our lives, the advantages of 5G infrastructure are increasingly clear. The outbreak has led to increased demand for ICT solutions specifically in areas like 5G amid a boost in network usage and 5G 2B innovations. Meeting that demand will require new forms of public-private partnerships based on open collaboration, supporting strong industry policies that will enable social value, economic development and provide enhanced service experiences to consumers across the region” So when we realise that ‘new forms of public-private partnerships’, some might get the idea that it means new jobs, but this is exactly the danger I had spoken about and this meeting of the SAMENA Telecommunications Council Leaders was in Dubai and Huawei was making enough noise to unite the 5G community in the Middle East towards Huawei, not just Huawei, but there is a clear station where they are coming out on top. It was the scenario I have described a few times and now that the view grows towards ‘new forms of public-private partnerships’ via Huawei, the stress levels go up, the US has a lot to lose and they will lose a fair share of it, in an age of loss of jobs, we get to slowly witness a market shift towards Huawei and the Middle East in almost EVERY segment of 5G and as western corporations fall short on innovation and lack of speed in their apps, we see the danger flexing in a few new directions, I saw several of them as the US is bullying others to drop Huawei, but so far has NEVER shown clear evidence of Chinese governmental dangers. Especially in light of the open dangers that Cisco is leaving out in the open (not intentionally mind you), I think that in the networking environment we have larger dangers that have been confirmed, also by the maker of the hardware. Even as we see the buyout of chipmakers, we see a dangerous setting, we could lose a lot and as I see it, most nations are blindly accepting the stage that America is feeing Europe and the Commonwealth, most are getting more and more aware that 5G is for some treasury coffers will be the last straw of one with coins and one with IOU notes and the stage we are approaching is now set that 5G will be lacking in speed and will be behind all with Huawei hardware. That is the stage we are moving forward to and a stage where job loyalty is at an all time low, a stage where others move in on fields they were never able to move in on and now 5G will move faster. Ericsson gives us “The frontrunners in 4G – largely in the US and China – became the big winners of the “app economy.” The same dynamic will play out with 5G but on a potentially massive scale”, consider that quote, consider the advantage that Huawei has and now consider that players from the Middle East will be entering a field with freedom of movement for well over a year and that stage has never existed before. Consider that in 2018 the stage was “US 4G leadership also resulted in more than $40 billion in additional app store revenue”, so that stage was a large benefit for the US, who is now losing that stage where Asia and the Middle East will get a much larger share than ever before, do you really think that app designers aren’t packing up ion a stage where nations lose more and more loyalty? If Google wants to stay in the race, they need to grow at least three more data centres in the next year alone, and that is merely Google, the others need to grow a much larger input into those regions to stay ahead of the game, the advantage that they had ib 4G is now gone, India was making waves and when they realise the losses they will get as Huawei is shown the door is staggering. In a stage of $40,000,000,000, we see the new economy rise an d Europe and the US will only be a smaller part towards it, the stations of choice are dwindling down and those who SHOULD do something about it are indecently silent. It worries me because it will impact the Common wealth for far too much, as America stops being a superpower, the Commonwealth will be alone taking up the baton of the free world, we will have to seek a partner and Europe is unlikely to make it, so how can this so called ‘free world’ be insured when the option for the Commonwealth becomes Russia or China? I don’t see it, do you? And even as there is no cold war, there is a new war coming, not with fighting units and out in the open bashing, but it will be a new war. The Digital war will be new, it will be massive and our team has thrown out the most important options from the get go. It worries me and it should worry you as well. 5G is too important a battle, and so far both Ericsson and Nokia are all making marketing claims, but are they showing equal or more advancement than Huawei? As far as I can tell no, and that is where Samena comes in. A council where we see STC, Batelco, Arabsat, Etisalat International, Mobily, Omantel, Orange, Sudatel, Zain Kuwait and of course Samena. A stage where there is a much larger stage for meetings that impact the Middle East as it becomes a larger stage for players like Huawei. So here’s hoping that the current US president is not getting this wrong as much as his stance on the Coronavirus, because the cost will be a lot higher this time around. A stage where the big players handed over revenue to Asia and the Middle East via a conscripted setting of ego, it will be a first, yet at present it iOS close to certain to become actuality.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

Light at the end of the economy

Yes, we all see the light at the end of the tunnel, but what if that light was the realisation that it was the end of the economy? What happens when we realise that the bullies have won, the stupid people took over? I am not talking about people with a lesser degree, an academic is not increasingly clever than an agrarian, to be an expert in livestock might not hold weight in Whitechapel, but it holds weight and more than we realise. No, I am talking about these so called clever people that make claims and then refuse to back up the claims. It is seen in ‘Huawei 5G kit must be removed from UK by 2027’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53403793). In that part we see “Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden told the House of Commons of the decision. It follows sanctions imposed by Washington, which claims the firm poses a national security threat – something Huawei denies.” Sanctions imposed by the fat fucking bully in the White House? How about the clear claim that evidence is presented, not like the US Joker with the silver briefcase, but ACTUAL evidence. So far we see US companies being out on a limb not able to secure jack shit (pardon for the impression), but that is the short and sweet of it. If factual evidence was presented it was a different stage, but this is all greed driven and the US cannot continue its path when Huawei gets to win the massive share it gained due to true innovation, not marketed innovation that US companies have with ‘5G Evolution’, but actual factual innovation. And who are we the Commonwealth to get bullied by a nation with no solutions, a 25 trillion dollar debt, and claims that they cannot back up?

At present the 5G war will be settled in 2024 with at present Huawei, a Chinese company becoming the clear winner, Ericsson and Nokia are growing by only because of American bullies. In all the stages my voice was clear “Show us the Evidence”, the US setting its parameters on ‘should’ and ‘could optionally’, not on stages that contain ‘evidence found’ and ‘this is the stage of pressing data’, which is still being done by US companies, but the US does not care about that. It is the loss that Huawei represents that has them showing of as the number one bully, telling number 10 Downing Street what the UK needs to implement. And in light of the ‘or there will be intelligence repercussions’, all whilst the CIA has been failing and applying dew uptime conduct to its allies, is not really the most reliable situation to face.

You see, the stage would be different if actual evidence was presented and that has so far not been done, a mere example that was settled in 2011 is as bad as it gets, when we hold the jobs of these politicians to bear when they make a claim and they cannot give proof is another path, but at the point they will hide behind ‘national security’ with the added phrase ‘It is a really complex situation’, as far as I can tell, it is simple. There either is evidence, or there is not. 

Even as late as last January, politics.com give us “While US officials are declining to comment on specifically what the new evidence may encompass, one delegation member hinted that part of the risk revolves around speculation that Huawei may be engaged…”, so still after more than two years we see ‘hinted’ and ‘speculation’ and no evidence. This is not me making the claims as a novel thing, whole groups of cyber experts are in the same boat as I am in and they know these systems. So as the UK is basically throwing away the economic advantage it might have all for the grace of a bully who stops mattering in the political field soon enough. We see a larger stage, the new economy in Europe will be largely in the hands of the Huawei wielders, and not for governmental reasons, but for the simple reason that their equipment is 3-5 years more advanced than whatever is out now and those making claims that they will equal it, will already be behind the new Huawei devices. The advantage the USA has was washed away through the use of bullet point driven flaccid presenters of slides and so-called new forms of presentations, all whilst they were talking ‘concepts’ someone else made an actual device that works and that is the stage we are in now. So even as we see the Wall Street Journal (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/ericsson-emerges-as-5g-leader-after-u-s-bruises-huawei-11591095601) handing the world leadership to Ericsson last month, we need to consider part of that headline ‘After U.S. Bruises Huawei’, as per: when do we allow a bully to dictate our rules? There is no doubt, both Nokia ad Ericsson are good, but what some regard to be the two Sony sound systems, Huawei is wielding a Bang & Olofsson sound system, two are good, one is better. And for some good is good enough, I get that. There is no shame and no opposition from them if that is the choice, but to be forced to take a second choice system is not a choice and it is done because the US wants things to remain the way they are and they refuse to fix anything. We can add to this the acts of the media, even as Forbes came out with the news ‘Cisco Confirms 5 Serious Security Threats To ‘Tens Of Millions’ Of Network Devices’, we must equally herald Cisco of keeping the people in the loop. This is not an attack on Cisco, if anything they deserve their position, they have a temporary unfortunate stage, and they will resolve it, but the rest of the media largely stayed quiet, even as millions of network devices were in actual danger, but they will not inform the public. They have no issues publishing conjecture and speculation, as such they are still surprised when social media cannot tell the difference between real news and fake news? I wonder why?

In all this, it was just two years ago when we were given ‘Huawei Joins the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation’ with the added quote “The Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO) is pleased to announce that Huawei, the leading global information and communications technology solution provider, has joined the organisation as ICT Sector Member. This is membership category of the CTO that is open to the private sector.” It does not matter whether the CTO is real, whether this is some virtual distinction that has no real bearing, I wonder where the actual threat is showing to be that Huawei is a danger, so far no real evidence has ever been presented other than some case that was settled 9 years ago. So as we see more noise of ‘stolen IP’ consider that Huawei is further along than anyone else, as such how can the IP be stolen? How can IP be stolen from others that sets them 3-5 years ahead of the competition? Is that not a valid question? 

In the end, when politicians proclaim in 2028 that the economy is moving along too slow because of 5G gaps, be sure to remember that elected officials put the UK and the Commonwealth in that stage in the first place. The rules of evidence also apply to real life, not merely the courts, and so far the accusing players have not presented any relevant evidence, merely speculated options that come from fear, fear of losing the super comfy life they currently have.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

The enemy is us

It is not a new setting, yet thee setting is more complete. We are being duped and misinformed by a player who has no evidence, it merely is in a stage where it has become Oliver Twist stating ‘Please Sir, can I have some more’ (as I made mention to yesterday. Yet so far they have never produced ANY evidence that their statements hold any value, any facts or any truths. The best we can get are speculations and even as we will not dismiss speculations, the evidence is not on their side, their side is a collapse of economic prowess and a complete shutdown of the dollar, their greed got them that way. So when we we see the BBC give us ‘Ministers signal switch in policy over 5G policy’ we see nothing immediately wrong until we see: “He added he wanted Samsung and NEC to become 5G network kit providers”. So Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden, a person that has now firmly set his personal intent towards American confirmations by giving the handle to two providers, one with close to zero 5G IP powers? 

Lets look at the state of things, in the first, I am a capitalist, there is nothing wrong with being a capitalist, yet I have never stepped away from accountability, and I will demand that we all demand complete accountability for those making these steps, including the warrants for treason against people like Oliver Dowden for betraying the economic station of the commonwealth. The UK and other nations needed the Huawei goods for that, but the corrupt republic of the United States is stopping this because it would end their greed driven needs that will not be stopped until we are all under the foot of Wall Street and no one is waking up.

Now, if the US (that place with stupid people) has actually presented factual and direct evidence of Huawei equipment being and actual danger, the situations would be different, but that has not happened has it? To see this we can point to the Verge (at https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/17/18264283/huawei-security-threat-experts-china-spying-5g) and a few other sources. They give us “Is Huawei a security threat? There is no hard evidence to support this notion, and some of the reasons put forward for this notion are weak. For example, the background of the chairmen of Huawei. Huawei founder Mr. Ren Zhengfei once served in the People’s Liberation Army. As we know, serving in the army was one way of getting out of poverty for people in the countryside, which is where Mr. Ren is from. His time in the army was a short one and he was not in any important position.” There was no hiding these facts and as far as I can tell, they never did, yet the US has hidden the flaws of Cisco equipment for well over a year, even as these devices gave criminals access to global networks, so who is at fault? Then there is the point of view of Senator Warner (Democrat from Virginia) “There is ample evidence to suggest that no major Chinese company is independent of the Chinese government and Communist Party — and Huawei, which China’s government and military tout as a “national champion,” is no exception. Allowing Huawei’s inclusion in our 5G infrastructure could seriously jeopardize our national security and put critical supply chains at risk. It could also undermine U.S. competitiveness at a time when China is already attempting to surpass the U.S. technologically and economically through the use of state-directed and state-supported technology transfers.” This is quite. Clearly a point of view and he is allowed to have it, more importantly he should be allowed to have it to influence AMERICAN positions, no one denies this, yet take consideration of ‘at a time when China is already attempting to surpass the U.S. technologically and economically’, which is an issue for them, especially when you realise that Huawei is 3-5 years ahead of America, the patents are pretty precise about that, Huawei focused on 5G when almost no one else did and now that 5G is here, the US is blatantly backwards to that side of the equation, hiding behind marketing like 5G evolution, which is at best 4G with a different label, the press gave light to that small part. We can go on about this, but I feel it is important to give light to Francis Dinha, CEO OF OpenVPN. He gives us “The US is right to treat Huawei as a security threat, but I don’t believe any ban on any equipment is the right solution. No matter what equipment we use for 5G, there will be security risks. With such an exponentially higher amount of data, there will inherently be an exponentially higher risk. But taking a competitor out of the market could lead other companies to get complacent, which would mean US innovation and development could be slowed — which presents an even more severe security risk overall. Rather than relying on our network to be secure, we ought to seriously consider building an overlay secure virtual network across the 5G infrastructure that could provide end-to-end security, controlled and managed by the 5G network operators. We need guidelines to improve network security, and we need to push to make software for this equipment open-source. Open-source means transparency and security, which is exactly what we need as we move to 5G. Huawei is a risk, certainly — but there are other ways besides a ban to mitigate that risk. No matter who is making our 5G equipment, we need to be proactive about cybersecurity.” I do not completely agree with him, yet he states that the US should be allowed to see Huawei, a Chinese producer as a threat, I cannot deny them that right. What is important is ‘could lead other companies to get complacent’ I believe that he intentionally omitted the word ‘American’ from that part and this is exactly how Huawei got to get ahead in the game in the first place, so let’s call that a checked item, shall we? And then he gives the diamond in the rough, with ‘Open-source means transparency and security, which is exactly what we need as we move to 5G.’ We see the larger frame, Huawei offered 1-2 months ago, to sell their technology allowing others to catch up, but it was basically rejected out of hand, why? I personally see it as the fact that Huawei would still have ended up with a massive chunk of cash (off course) and that is where the so called American bankrupt state is in danger, it needs all the cash it can get and it needs to set the stage where Chinese corporations ends with close to none, their stage of equilibrium is what Wall Street dictates and the 25 trillion market its only viable when the US gets 75%, not 25% and China with 75%, that is the larger issue and the US (Europe too) are too far behind Huawei at present, if the 5G war is decided between 2022-2024, Huawei has basically won and the US has nothing, that is the stage we are aligning to. So as the BBC gave us “Ministers approved Huawei’s involvement in January, but some senior Tories want to prevent that because of concerns over security” we would love to know which senior politicians and what EVIDENCE they have,. But we will not get an answer to either part there will we? And as we are given “In principle, controlling the tech at the heart of these networks could give Huawei the capacity to spy or disrupt communications during any future dispute. This is important, as more things – from self-driving cars to fridges, baby monitors and fire alarms become connected to the internet.” There is the issue of evidence and the fact that America has that same ability, and let’s not deny the fact that we have seen that America will lie to everyone else when it serves THEIR purpose, so how is this any different? The maker of the BBC text did go all out to mention ‘baby monitors’, so far there is a much larger concern when they are connected to the internet, the fact that the CISCO equipment there is making it already an option, so we do not need to wait for either China or Huawei, and the BBC article does not bear that out, does it? 

At what point did we disregard the need for evidence? I meed it because I am not writing some pro China article, if there is ACTUAL evidence it needs to be out in the open so that we can make an informed decision, the decision makers seemingly do not want that to happen as there is no evidence, there is only the emotional stage, or as Mark Rubio Republican for Florida voiced it “Huawei is a Chinese state-directed telecom company with a singular goal: undermine foreign competition by stealing trade secrets and intellectual property, and through artificially low prices backed by the Chinese government”, which is interesting as there is all kind of evidence that opposes ‘a Chinese state-directed telecom company’, as well as ‘stealing trade secrets and intellectual property’, the second one is interesting as that is not the function of Huawei and moreover, Huawei is 5 years ahead of any American competition and well over 3 years ahead of the mainstream competition, so why steal the IP of someone who is intellectually backwards? I fail to see the point, do you?

By adhering to greed driven agenda’s we have become our own worst enemy and I will be around to see this explode in our faces and for the most, I will get to ridicule the media for adhering to the need for misinformation and to let those who championed false information get away with a fat wallet whilst destroying the Commonwealth economy, because that is still up for debate, there is no alternative, these people can emigrate to America and never be allowed back into the Commonwealth until they are prosecuted in open court with no allowance to hide behind ‘national security interests’, I reckon it would be their greatest fear, to be held to account for their actions, it usually is.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science