Stories from Abroad

Apparently, hackers working for the Russian government stole details of how the US penetrates foreign computer networks and defends against cyberattacks after a National Security Agency contractor removed the highly classified material and put it on his home computer. The hackers appear to have targeted the contractor after identifying the files through the contractor’s use of a popular antivirus software made by Russia-based Kaspersky Lab.

The theft, which hasn’t been disclosed, is considered by experts to be one of the most significant security breaches in recent years. It offers a rare glimpse into how the intelligence community thinks Russian intelligence exploits a widely available commercial software product to spy on the US. The incident occurred in 2015 but wasn’t discovered until spring of 2016, apparently.The stolen material included details about how the NSA penetrates foreign computer networks, the computer code it uses for such spying and how it defends networks inside the US.

Global Harmonization & US Leadership in Wireless Technologies. While some in this country may eschew global harmonization, and I understand that our market position means we have the option of going it alone or in coordination with a handful of other countries, offering commercial services on the same frequencies around the world has many benefits for US consumers and providers. On the consumer side, there is the ability to use your devices and have the same wireless experience at home and abroad. At the same time, the economies of scale created by marketing products internationally enables research, development, and manufacturing costs to be widely dispersed, promoting investment and innovation while reducing the cost of devices and services for Americans.

Facebook has said ads bought by Russian operatives reached 10 million of its users. But does that include everyone reached by the information operation? Couldn’t the Russians also have created simple — and free — Facebook posts and hoped they went viral? And if so, how many times were these messages seen by Facebook’s massive user base? The answers to those questions, which social media analyst Jonathan Albright studied for a research document he posted online Oct 5, are: No. Yes. And hundreds of millions — perhaps many billions — of times.

The leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee largely endorsed the findings of the intelligence community that Russia sought to sway the 2016 US elections through a hacking and influence campaign, and they called for a “more aggressive, whole-of-government approach” to ensure future elections are not similarly compromised.

“There is consensus among members and staff that we trust the conclusions of the ICA,” Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-NC) said, referring to the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia was behind hackings of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign director John Podesta’s e-mail account and had attempted to exploit public opinion by sowing false information, much of it through fake social media accounts. “But we don’t close our consideration of it,” he added. Chairman Burr also said that “the issue of collusion is still open” and would not be resolved until the committee’s work was done. He said that a deadline for the committee was the looming start of the 2018 primary season.

Russia has opened a new battlefront with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), according to Western military officials, by exploiting a point of vulnerability for almost all allied soldiers: their personal smartphones. Troops, officers and government officials of NATO member countries said Russia has carried out a campaign to compromise soldiers’ smartphones.

The aim, they say, is to gain operational information, gauge troop strength and intimidate soldiers. Russian officials deny that Moscow stages such attacks. US and other Western officials said they have no doubt Russia is behind the campaign. They said its nature suggests state-level coordination, and added that the equipment used, such as sophisticated drones equipped with surveillance electronics, is beyond the reach of most civilians.

[Commentary] Italy’s antitrust chief Giovanni Pitruzzella feels so overwhelmed by the amount of information on the internet that he has called for government regulation to fight fake news. Pitruzzella builds his case by contrasting the First Amendment with the European Convention on Human Rights, which he argues provides no constitutional protection of “fake news.” This is due to an interpretation of the limits of protected speech that says that the distribution of “fake news,” in Pitruzzella’s words, violates Europeans’ “right to be pluralistically informed.” Yes, our digital era and the explosion of speech and communication on social media are unique.

But the introduction of the printing press in the 15th century and its impact on the world in the ensuing centuries may serve as an instructive analogy from which Pitruzzella may take a lesson or two. In the 16th and 17th century, access to the press triggered waves of fake news and dissemination of wild conspiracy theories about witches and millenarian crazes. Religious fanaticism was printed side-by-side with scientific discoveries. During the first century after Gutenberg, print did as much to spread lies and false information as enlightened truth.

[Flemming Rose is a WorldPost contributor and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. Jacob Mchangama is director of the Copenhagen-based think tank Justitia.]

The European Union will order Amazon to pay several hundred million euros in back taxes on Oct 4. The EU’s enforcement arm, the European Commission, opened up an investigation three years ago into a partnership between Amazon and Luxembourg that allowed the e-commerce giant to shield some of its assets from taxation. The fine would be the latest action Europe has taken to try to rein in American tech giants. In a similar move in 2016, the EU ordered Apple to pay 13 billion euros in back taxes. The company allegedly benefited improperly from tax laws in Ireland.

Russian operatives set up an array of misleading Web sites and social media pages to identify American voters susceptible to propaganda, then used a powerful Facebook tool to repeatedly send them messages designed to influence their political behavior, apparently. The tactic resembles what American businesses and political campaigns have been doing in recent years to deliver messages to potentially interested people online.

The Russians exploited this system by creating English-language sites and Facebook pages that closely mimicked those created by US political activists. The Web sites and Facebook pages displayed ads or other messages focused on such hot-button issues as illegal immigration, African American political activism and the rising prominence of Muslims in the United States. The Russian operatives then used a Facebook “retargeting” tool, called Custom Audiences, to send specific ads and messages to voters who had visited those sites, apparently. People caught up in this web of tracking and disinformation would have had no indication that they had been singled out or that the ads came from Russians.

The European Union courts will hear a case with a massive impact on Facebook and other American internet service companies. The case, which an Irish court on Oct 3 referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union, revolves around where companies can store personal information.

Max Schrems is suing Facebook under the claim that, so long as the United States allows bulk surveillance programs, the US cannot guarantee that data stored on servers located on its shores abides by the EU’s stringent personal data protections laws. Currently, Facebook and other companies use what are known as “standard contractual clauses” to assure European users that their personal information is being protected. Schrems launched a similar case against an earlier treaty between the United States and European Union to cover cross-boarder data storage known as Safe Harbor, which the European courts eventually nixed. Safe Harbor was replaced by a new treaty, Privacy Shield, which is undergoing similar challenges. If courts continue to find US protections for European Citizens data insufficient, it could result in US internet service companies being unable to do business with Europe without setting up specialized servers there.

Apparently, associates of President Donald Trump and his company have turned over documents to federal investigators that reveal two previously unreported contacts from Russia during the 2016 campaign. In one case, Trump’s personal attorney and a business associate exchanged emails weeks before the Republican National Convention about the lawyer possibly traveling to an economic conference in Russia that would be attended by top Russian financial and government leaders, including President Vladi­mir Putin, according to people familiar with the correspondence. In the other case, the same Trump attorney, Michael Cohen, received a proposal in late 2015 for a Moscow residential project from a company founded by a billionaire who once served in the upper house of the Russian parliament, these people said.

The previously unreported inquiry marks the second proposal for a Trump-branded Moscow project that was delivered to the company during the presidential campaign and has since come to light. Cohen declined the invitation to the economic conference, citing the difficulty of attending so close to the GOP convention, according to people familiar with the matter. And Cohen rejected the Moscow building plan.