 |
|
|
|||||
The UKs shockingly intrusive order for Apple to create a backdoor into users encrypted iCloud data doesnt only affect Brits; it could be used to access the private data of any Apple account holder in the world, including Americans. Less than a week after security experts sounded the alarm on the report, US Congress is trying to do something about it. The Washington Post reported on Thursday that, in a rare show of modern Capitol Hill bipartisanship, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) wrote to the new National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, asking her to take measures to thwart the UKs surveillance order including limiting cooperation and intelligence sharing if the country refuses to comply. If Apple is forced to build a backdoor in its products, that backdoor will end up in Americans phones, tablets and computers, undermining the security of Americans data, as well as of the countless federal, state and local government agencies that entrust sensitive data to Apple products, Biggs and Wyden reportedly wrote. The US government must not permit what is effectively a foreign cyberattack waged through political means. The pair told Gabbard that if the UK doesnt retract its order, she should reevaluate US-UK cybersecurity arrangements and programs as well as US intelligence sharing with the UK. Wyden sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Biggs is on the House Judiciary Committee and chairs the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance. Wyden reportedly began circulating a draft bill that, if passed, could at least make the process harder for UK authorities. The proposed modification to the 2018 CLOUD Act would make information requests to US-based companies by foreign entities more onerous by requiring them to first obtain a judges order in their home country. In addition, it would forbid other countries (like, oh, say... the UK) from demanding changes in encryption protocols to the products or services of companies in the US. Request challenges would also be given jurisdiction in US rather than foreign courts. Apple The UK order, first reported by The Washington Post, requires Apple to create a backdoor into its Advanced Data Protection, a feature introduced in iOS 16.2 in 2022. Advanced Data Protection applies end-to-end encryption to many types of iCloud data, including device backups, Messages content, notes and photos, making them inaccessible even to Apple. The order demands a blanket ability to access a users fully encrypted data whenever and wherever the target is located. The order was issued under the UKs Investigatory Powers Act 2016, known (not so affectionately) as the Snooper's Charter, which expanded the electronic surveillance powers of British intelligence agencies and law enforcement. It would be a criminal offense for Apple to publicly confirm receiving the order, so the company hasnt commented on the matter. Security experts warn that implementing this backdoor would needlessly expose anyone with an Apple Account to foreign spying, hackers and adversarial countries. Apple reportedly received a draft of the order last year when UK officials debated the changes. In a written submission protesting them, the company said the planned order could be used to force a company like Apple, that would never build a back door into its products, to publicly withdraw critical security features from the UK market. The company can appeal the notice but cant use the appeal to delay compliance. Most experts in the democratic world agree that what the UK is proposing would weaken digital security for everyone, not just in the UK but worldwide, Ciaran Martin, former chief executive of the UKs National Cyber Security Center, told The Washington Post.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/us-lawmakers-respond-to-the-uks-apple-encryption-backdoor-request-182423656.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
Peacocks adaptation of the PlayStation classic Twisted Metal was surprisingly fun and I was fairly excited when it got a season two renewal. Now we have an actual trailer for the new batch of episodes and, lo and behold, it focuses almost entirely on the titular tournament. The first season had a lot going for it. Co-leads Anthony Mackie and Stephanie Beatriz were charming and the episodes were short, focused and fun. One thing fans were left waiting on, however, was the actual Twisted Metal demolition derby. After all, thats the whole point of the games. The shows creators, which include folks behind Cobra Kai and Deadpool, have fixed this glaring omission, as season two looks to focus exclusively on tournament-based vehicular combat. In other words, we can expect a truckload of off-the-wall nonsense when the second season premieres this summer. The trailer shows off plenty of new faces, many of which are culled from the games, and even spotlights the iconic host Calypso (played by Anthony Carrigan from Barry.) The franchises mascot, killer clown Sweet Tooth, also returns, still voiced by Will Arnett and performed by the wrestler Samoa Joe. For the uninitiated, the first season took place in a post-apocalyptic version of the US and involved a cross-country trip. Despite the dystopian setting, the show managed to be goofy and not grimdark. I would classify it as an action-comedy. Twisted Metal joins other modern TV adaptations of video games, like Knuckles, The Last of Us, Arcane and Castlevania: Nocturne.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/the-twisted-metal-season-two-trailer-finally-shows-off-the-titular-tournament-180609928.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
Major publishers, including Politico and Vox, and their parent companies are suing the AI startup Cohere for copyright and trademark infringement, according to the Wall Street Journal. This is another salvo in the ongoing war between the people that make stuff and the AI algorithms that mimic the stuff that people make. The various publishers, which also include The Atlantic and The Guardian, have accused Cohere of improperly using more than 4,000 copyrighted works to train its large language model. Additionally, the startup has been accused of passing off large segments of entire articles to its users without proper attribution. Rather than create their own content, theyre stealing ours to compete with us without our permission, without compensation, and undermining our very business that feeds their machines in the first place, said Danielle Coffey, CEO of the News Media Alliance, which organized the lawsuit on behalf of its members. Thats theft. The suit also says the company has engaged in trademark infringement, suggesting that the algorithm would send articles to users with proper attribution, using the publishers name, but the article itself would be filled with hallucinated and incorrect information. One example given in the suit involves a piece that The Guardian published about Hamass attack on the Nova music festival in Israel, only the AI conflated the terror attack with a 2020 shooting in Nova Scotia, Canada. Members of the News Media Alliance are suing the AI company Cohere, accusing it of stealing their journalism without permission to train its generative AI model. The CEOs of Politico and Business Insider just sent memos to staff announcing the lawsuit. pic.twitter.com/ZyLASydeM7 Max Tani (@maxwelltani) February 13, 2025 The publishers are seeking the maximum amount of damages under the Copyright Act, which is $150,000 per work infringed. The suit also wants to reduce the access that Cohere has to copyrighted works. They also hope to set a legal precedent to establish the terms of the playing field for licensed use of journalism for AI, including for training and also real-time uses, according to Pam Wasserstein, president of Vox Media. Vox publishes stuff like The Verge, New York Magazine and Polygon. Cohere is currently valued at $5 billion. The company creates software that developers can use to build AI applications for business use. It also operates a chatbot for general users. It has received backing from venture-capital firms like Index Ventures and companies like NVIDIA and Salesforce. Of course, this is just the latest legal action taken against an AI company on behalf of a publisher. The New York Times sued OpenAI in 2023 for copyright infringement and News Corp brands, including The Wall Street Journal and New York Post, sued Perplexity back in October. The New York Times has also had beef with Perplexity. Just this week, a judge ruled in favor of Reuters in a suit against the AI company Ross Intelligence.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/major-publishers-sue-ai-startup-cohere-over-copyright-infringement-165352238.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||