American FBI's China accusation spurred by finance, not a good idea to spy on friends!

On Thursday last week, the FBI released a film entitled The Company Man: Protecting America's Secrets, which targets economic espionage. The 35-minute film features two Chinese economic spies who try to bribe a US employee with money, attempting to acquire insulation technology from the latter's company. The two were later prosecuted and caught in the net of justice. According to media reports, the video has already been shown nearly 1,300 times at US enterprises.

An FBI official publicly voiced that "China is the most dominant threat we face from economic espionage … The Chinese government plays a significant role."

The official also declared that economic espionage has caused losses of hundreds billions of dollars annually to the US economy.

How much is "hundreds of billions of dollars?" Say $300 billion, about 2 percent of US annual GDP.

Since the FBI believes that there has been a 53 percent surge in economic espionage in the US, and 95 percent of US companies suspect that China is the main culprit, does it infer that China has stolen 2 percent of US GDP?

Some people may ponder that given the Cold War is over, Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were eradicated and the war on terror is seemingly not that urgent for the moment, and in light of US federal budget constraints, the FBI needs to find new strategic reasons for more funds. Therefore, the "position" of "Chinese economic spies" has been greatly elevated.

What the FBI has done is bound to injure Sino-US relations. But it is US society that will suffer the most. Many Americans will hence think that their economy is fine, their companies have no problems at all and the only issue is the threat from Chinese economic espionage.

It looks to them like Chinese intelligence services and civilian business spies are much more powerful than the FBI, CIA and other non-governmental intelligence forces combined. China is not capable in every category except for spy technology. This is the logic of the FBI.

If we take a good look at China's overall development in this changing world, you will see that one-third of global new technical patents are now created by Chinese companies every year. Innovation has also become China's national slogan. China will eventually be able to challenge the West's dominance in high technology.

China is well aware that it should learn from the West, especially the US, in terms of technology. But this is not stealing.

US universities are also attracting students from all over the world, yet this brings more benefits than losses to the nation due to the dissemination of knowledge.

Someone who always claims that his house was robbed and feels free to suspect his friend or neighbor is the thief is very annoying, and that is what the US is doing right now. The whole world knows that US intelligent agencies are the most notorious regarding this issue.

We hope that the often-silent Chinese intelligence services could expose some hard evidence of espionage by US spies, and make a spy movie featuring US espionage, providing it with a mirror to look at itself.- Global Times

Not a good idea to spy on friends

THERE's been so much dramatic news these days – from Greece's miseries to Iran, China from blowhard Donald Trump – that the shocking story of how America's National Security Agency has been spying on German and French leadership has gone almost unnoticed.

Last year, it was revealed that the NSA had intercepted Chancellor Angela Merkel's cell phone. She is supposed to be one of Washington's most important allies and the key power in Europe. There was quiet outrage in always subservient Germany, but no serious punitive action.

Brazil's president, Dilma Rousseff, was also bugged by American intelligence. Her predecessor, Luiz Lula da Silva, was also apparently bugged.

This year, came revelations that NSA and perhaps CIA had tapped the phones of France's president, Francois Hollande, and his two predecessors, Nicholas Sarkozy and Jacques Chirac. Hollande ate humble pie and could only summon some faint peeps of protest to Washington. Luckily for the US, Charles de Gaulle was not around. After the US tried to strong-arm France, "le Grand Charles" kicked the US and Nato out of France.

Last week, WikiLeaks revealed that the NSA had bugged the phone of Germany's foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, for over a decade. Imagine the uproar and cries "the Gestapo is back" if it were revealed that German intelligence had bugged the phones of President Barack Obama or Secretary of State John Kerry.

A lot of Germans were really angry that their nation was being treated by the Americans as a northern banana republic. Many recalled that in the bad old days of East Germany its intelligence agency, Stasi, monitored everyone's communications under the direct supervision of KGB big brother at Moscow Centre.

The National Security Agency and CIA claim their electronic spying is only aimed at thwarting attacks by anti-American groups (aka "terrorism"). This claim, as shown by recent events, is untrue. One supposes the rational must be a twist on the old adage "keep your enemies close, but your friends even closer".

Ironically, the political leaders listed above – save perhaps Brazil's da Silva – are all notably pro-American and responsive to Washington's demands.

Why would the US risk alienating and humiliating some of its closet allies?

One suspects the reason is sheer arrogance … and because US intelligence could do it. But must US intelligence really know what Mr Merkel is making Mrs Merkel for dinner?

Until WikiLeaks blew the whistle, some European leaders may have known they were being spied upon but chose to close their eyes and avoid making an issue. Raising a fuss would have forced them to take action against the mighty US.

Besides, British, Italian and French intelligence are widely believed to have bugged most communications since the 1950's. But not, of course, the White House or Pentagon. The only nation believed to have gotten away with bugging the White House was Israel during the Clinton years. The Pentagon was bugged by a number of foreign nations, including Israel, China and Russia.

Humiliating Europe's leaders in this fashion is a gift to the growing numbers of Europeans who believe their nations are being treated by the US as vassal states.

There is widespread belief in Western Europe that US strategic policy aims at preventing deeper integration of the EU and thwarting a common foreign policy or a powerful European military. Britain serves as a Trojan horse for America's strategic interests in Europe.

Way back in the 1960's, then German defence minister Franz Josef Strauss, an ardent proponent of a truly united Europe, thundered that Europeans would not play spearmen to America's atomic knights. But, of course, that's just what happened.

The US still runs and finances Nato in the same way the Soviet Union commanded the Warsaw Pact. Washington calls on Europe for troop contingents in its Middle East and south Asian colonial wars in the same way that the Persian Empire summoned its vassals to war.

Many Germans and French, both right and left, would like their leaders to react more forcefully to NSA's ham-handed spying. However, Merkel and Hollande are both political jellyfish eager to evade any confrontation with Big Brother in Washington. Maybe he has too much dirt on them.

But a confrontation is inevitable one day if Europe is to regain its true independence that was lost after World War II.

By Eric S. Margolis who is an award-winning, internationally syndicated columnist. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Related articles

• NSA asked Germany to spy on tech giant Siemens
• What the WikiLeaks documents reveal about US spying on French leaders
• Germany restricts spy cooperation with NSA
• Cautious Merkel on verge of biggest risk with 'Grexit'
• France says it 'trusts' Germany to act on spying claims

Better Internet governance, keys for Internet governance: standards and benchmarks

A series of non-obligatory international norms promoted at a recent Internet conference in Brazil will be helpful to the establishment of global Internet governance, but it remains urgent that some specific rules be worked out to ensure cyberspace is not used as a means for some countries to target others.

The United States National Security Agency's PRISM program disclosed by the Edward Snowden has aggravated the concerns of countries worldwide about cyberspace security and accelerated the push for better Internet governance.

In March, the US government announced that it will turn over the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, known as ICANN, which manages the core functions of the Internet, to a "global multi-stakeholder community". This, if implemented, would be a positive step toward improving global Internet governance. Nevertheless, the better management of cyberspace depends more on how to build a safe, open, equitable and orderly network environment for countries across the world, says an online article of People's Daily.

For the better governance of the Internet, the UN Charter and the universally recognized norms of international relations should be abided by, and the cyberspace sovereignty of each country, including the laws, regulations and policies each country has adopted regarding the Web should be respected.

All countries should be empowered to manage their information facilities and conduct Internet activities within their territory in accordance with their laws, and their information resources should be free from any external threats.

An Internet governance framework should also be built on the principles of tolerance, equality and extensive participation from multiple parties. All countries, big or small, rich or poor, should be allowed to participate in Internet governance and equally share the opportunities brought by booming information technologies. The making of relevant Internet standards, rules and policies should be based on openness, transparency and fairness, and developed countries should help developing ones to develop their network technologies.

And while enjoying their own Internet rights and freedom, countries should not compromise the information freedom and privacy of other countries.

To promote better Internet governance, the voices of all countries should be respected and their coordination is needed to make cyberspace rules acceptable to all.

- China Daily

The key for Internet governance: standards and benchmarks

A global Internet governance conference in Brazil concluded last Tuesday with a strong demand for building an effective worldwide legislative framework, while a series of Internet-related optional standards had been drafted.

The Internet has spread its influence into every aspect of life around the world. But while people enjoy the conveniences that the Internet brings, they are also starting to worry about security and privacy issues and the possible negative impacts of the Internet. Last year, revelations about the American “Prism” program triggered global concerns about surveillance, resulting in calls for protecting the individual, and strengthening Internet governance

Last month, the U.S. announced its plans to turn over the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, known as ICANN, to a “global multi-stakeholder community”, which sent a positive message to the world. But the obligations of Internet governance should go beyond IP address allocation into control of Internet technical standards and a focus on how countries can build a secure, open, transparent, and ordered web environment.

Internet governance should admit and respect a self-regulated space free of government interference in all countries, subject to a country’s level of technology, language, and culture, and people’s wishes in terms of relevant legislation. A country should also be able to supervise its information infrastructure, information resources, and online activities in accordance with laws designed to protect the interests of its people.

Internet governance should focus on extensive cooperation among all stakeholders against a backdrop of a tolerant and fair attitude. Any country, big or small, rich or poor, should have both the obligation to participate in Internet governance, and the right to enjoy opportunities created by IT development.

Internet governance should uphold open, transparent, and win-win principles for general cooperation. The decision-making on Internet standards, rules, and policy should be open and transparent; developed countries should be encouraged to help developing countries in improving network techniques and narrowing the information gap.

Internet governance should insist on both rights and obligations. A country should uphold the right to privacy by ensuring the effective implementation of all obligations under human rights law. Everyone should be able to enjoy the right to and freedom of the Internet, subject to not damaging the interests of other people or the country, and not breaking the law or damaging social morality.

The key for global Internet governance is to promote close cooperation among countries, and build a practical network of international Internet-related rules and standards. All opinions and proposals from all countries should be heard with equal importance while defining rules suitable for all countries.

- The article is edited and translated from 《互联网治理，规范和标准是关键》, source: People's Daily

Related posts:

USA Spying, the Super-Snooper ! Get pay from spying?
 US, Britain spying on virtual world, agents pose as gamers
 NSA's secret MYSTIC system is capable ...
 US Spy Snowden Says US Hacking China Since 2009
 US, UK, India among 'Free World' Governments ...
2013 the year of Internet innovation
 No privacy on the Net ! 
 NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily

US, UK, India among 'Free World' Governments Worst for online spies

WASHINGTON: US' National Security Agency, India's Centre for Development of Telematics, and the UK's GCHQ have been named among the worst online spies by a non-profit group for implementing censorship and surveillance.

Three of the government bodies designated by Reporters Without Borders as 'Enemies of the Internet' are located in democracies that have traditionally claimed to respect fundamental freedoms, a report by the Reporters Without Borders said.

PARIS - Shady agencies at the service of democratically elected governments are among the worst online spies in the world, media watchdog RSF said Wednesda

In the latest instalment of the "Enemies of the Internet" report, wholesale spying by "free world" services -- much of it exposed by US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden --- is offered no distinction from the unabashed surveillance carried out by the world's worst dictatorships. 

To RSF, agencies such as the US National Security Agency, Britain's GCHQ and the Centre for Development Telematics in India embrace the worst methods of snooping in the name of governments that purportedly hold freedom of speech as a national priority. 

They have "hacked into the very heart of the Internet" and turned a collective resource "into a weapon in the service of special interests" that flout the "freedom of information, freedom of expression and the right to privacy". 

"The NSA and GCHQ have spied on the communications of millions of citizens including many journalists," the report by Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF, Reporters Without Borders) said. 

The methods used, many of which NSA contractor Snowden revealed to the world last year before going into hiding in Russia, "are all the more intolerable" because they are then used by authoritarian countries such as Iran, China, Turkmenistan and Saudi Arabia, the report said. 

Also singled out by RSF are private companies that provide their most up-to-date powers of snooping at trade fairs that have become giant spying bazaars selling the best that technology can offer. 

It is at these shows hosted regularly around the world that profit-driven spy-ware firms link up with government agents or nervous multinationals that are in search of the newest ways to observe and control the Internet. 

RSF argued that the censorship carried out by the Enemies of the Internet "would not be possible without the tools developed by the private sector companies to be found at these trade fairs." 

With these tools, spies can track journalists anywhere in the world, RSF said. 

Governments keen to impose censorship also help one another. 

Iran has asked China to help it develop a local version of the electronic Great Wall that cuts off billions of Chinese from the Internet as seen by the rest of the world. China is active in Africa and central Asia too. 

To stop this proliferation of snooping, RSF said a whole new legal framework to govern surveillance was "essential" with states needing to embrace transparency regarding the methods being used. 

The fight for human rights, it warned, "had spread to the Internet".

- The Economic Times-AFP

Related posts:

1. 2013 the year of Internet innovation
2. You are being snooped on, Malaysia views US-NSA spying seriously!
3.US, Britain spying on virtual world, agents pose as gamers..
4. Educate public on changes in e-technology, CAP urg…
5..USA Spying, the Super-Snooper !
6. NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily…
7. Abusing intelligence is stupid
8. Brazil attacks US over spying issue
9. US Spy Snowden Says U.S. Hacking China Since 2009
10. Upset over US cyber spying! 
11. No privacy on the Net !
12. US building new spy wing to focus on Asia 

Get pay from spying?

Whistleblowing hero: Germans holding up pictures of Snowden while protesting in front of the Reichstag building which houses the Bundestag (lower house of parliament) in Berlin . — AFP

Heavy-duty spying does not pay 

The hidden costs, and the controversy, of the massive US global spying operation keep on growing.

IF officials behind the US-based “Five Eyes” spying network had hoped the scandal would soon fade away, their obvious disappointment should be an object lesson about their excesses and abuses.



US, British, Canadian, Australian and New Zealand spies – together with their Singaporean and South Korean co-conspirators – had violated the implicit trust placed in their governments by friendly and ally nations around the world.

Former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden had exposed how the conspirators had tapped into fibre-optic cables in 20 locations worldwide and infiltrated 50,000 computer networks.

This unprecedented scale of spying makes no distinction between friend and foe. It has provoked questions about the value of being a friend or “ally” of these Western countries.

Countries in the world’s main regions have routinely been spied on: Europe, East Asia, West Asia and Latin America. The spying exceeds all norms of intelligence gathering to target the personal cell phones of national leaders, from German Chancellor Angela Merkel to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and even his wife Ibu Ani Yudhoyono.

Snowden’s leaks reveal that Spain, for example, had been spied on so much as to have 20 million phone calls tapped each day. For the US authorities to insist that it was all for the sake of fighting terrorism is too much of a stretch.

The spying covers economic as well as political purposes. It was revealed that a foreign government’s confidential information picked up from spying is also used to give an unfair advantage to US companies against other companies in bids for international contracts.

Today’s supercomputers can do a lot of work in very little time. The ones used in the US global spying scheme apparently had very little ethical human supervision, precisely because that was the intention.

It has long been a “given” that all countries gather intelligence, to varying degrees, through some of their diplomats, expatriates and other undercover operatives. The extent of this activity also varies with the distance in relations between the spying country and the one spied upon.

Between friendly countries, discussions on issues of common interest and concern are the means of updating one another on events. Excessively intrusive and invasive spying, however, such as the kind Snowden has revealed, is supposed to be for untrustworthy governments and enemy nations.

Such universal perceptions and expectations lie at the heart of the current spying controversy. There is little wonder that countries so sordidly spied on take the matter so seriously.

Such spying shows the United States would enforce its will on all other countries, as opposed to sharing information between equal partners with mutual respect. It also implies that rules will be made by the US alone.

At the bilateral meeting in Jakarta during the week between Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Susilo, Malaysia declared full support for Indonesia in placing the spying scandal on the agenda of the next Asean Summit in Myanmar.

In seeking a satisfactory corrective for spying intrusions that breach all known limits, granting a regional profile to the problem is the least that Indonesia and Malaysia can do. Thailand is another Asean country targeted by these spies operating in part from the respective Australian embassies.

France and Germany are particularly outraged by “Five Eyes” snooping. Italy, the Netherlands and Spain are also concerned, as the scandal unites political parties within individual nations as well as European countries throughout the EU – except for Britain.

The aggrieved countries find the excessive spying violating privacy rights, their national sovereignty as well as their domestic laws. US officials predictably reject its seriousness.

The EU now wants a new law requiring private IT companies to inform European regulators if a foreign snooping request is made on any European citizen. That effort could clash with an existing US law that bans any company whose “cooperation” is required from telling anyone.

The potential conflict would pit European determination against US intransigence. It would further test the trans-Atlantic alliance in the post-Cold War period.

As the initial leaks started to provoke European anger, clandestine efforts tried to dilute or divert the upset.

It was somehow also “leaked” that the French government had been spying on its own population, followed by allegations that the German government had known about and even used information obtained by US-connected spies. The truth of these “mitigating” leaks was, however, less clear.

As expected, such efforts at damage control had a very limited effect. The harm perpetrated by US-led spying on the trust, goodwill and relations with Europe was far more serious, and remains a main feature in the foreground.

In Latin America “south of the border”, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and Venezuela are particularly disturbed by US-led spying activities. Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Uruguay are also concerned.

Several of these countries have already offered asylum to Snowden, who hopes to avoid prosecution in the US after his current one-year asylum stay in Russia. The more Washington pressures and threatens these countries, the more keen they are to protect whistleblowers like Snowden.

The Union of South American Nations (Unasur) is currently working on a new, alternative communications system that will cut the prospect of US spying in the region. As a sign of seriousness, the region’s defence ministers who form Unasur’s defence council are tasked with developing the new system.

Unasur’s 12 member countries may be disadvantaged in lacking sophisticated technological inputs for the system. However, they also enjoy certain advantages in a renewed unity, determination and strength of purpose.

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, whose email had been hacked by US spies, has accused Washington of violating human rights and crime. Four days ago, she followed this with a defence procurement contract that spelt out clearly where Brazil stood.

Capping a 10-year plan, Rousseff announced on Wednesday that Brazil would buy 36 of Sweden’s Saab Gripen fighter jets instead of Boeing’s F/A-18s in replacing the air force’s ageing fleet. Brazil had bargained the price down from US$6bil (RM19.8bil) to US$4.5bil (RM14.8bil).

US officials privately grumbled over having lost “a US$4bil deal” but in fact the cost of NSA spying on Brazil is almost twice that. Boeing’s price for the F/A-18s was US$7.5bil (RM24.7bil).

Over the longer term, the cost to the US economy is likely to grow if Washington does not or cannot seriously mend its ways. US-based companies like Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft are often seen by other countries as part of the problem in having to comply with US laws and demands.

Unasur is already showing the way forward by working on an alternative. In time, other regions like Europe and countries such as Russia, India and China may also develop their own communications systems and software, taking more business away from US companies.

In the short term it is always tempting to blame the messenger such as Edward Snowden rather than the problematic nature of the message itself. Ironically, the development of modern communications has raised awareness of privacy and sovereignty rights – and of their violations.

To level the playing field, IT development as well as spying activities may need to become more equalised. By serving the greater interests of the greater number, that would be democratisation indeed.

Contributed by Bunn Nagara, who is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia, The Star/Asia News Network

Related posts:

1. 2013 the year of Internet innovation
2. You are being snooped on, Malaysia views US-NSA spying seriously!
3.US, Britain spying on virtual world, agents pose as gamers..
4. Educate public on changes in e-technology, CAP urg...
5..USA Spying, the Super-Snooper !
6. NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily...
7. Abusing intelligence is stupid
8. Brazil attacks US over spying issue
9. US Spy Snowden Says U.S. Hacking China Since 2009
10. Upset over US cyber spying! 
11. No privacy on the Net !
12. US building new spy wing to focus on Asia 

2013 the year of Internet innovation

A man uses his smartphone to take a picture of a person wearing a mask of former U.S. spy agency contractor Edward Snowden during a protest in Berlin, July 4, 2013.

As the year comes to a close, we need to reflect on what are the most important things that have affected our lives in 2013.

The Internet continues to transform our world. The most significant Internet event in 2013 was not the listing of Facebook, which priced the company at $104 billion (almost Bt3.4 trillion), but Edward Snowden's July revelations of Internet surveillance, which revealed that Big Brother, friend or foe, is really watching. Since my smartphone is smart enough to track me even in the toilet, there is really no privacy left in this world.

On the plus side, Singles Day - November 11 - garnered 35 billion yuan (Bt187 billion) in online sales on one day in China. Since China already accounts for one-third of the smartphones in the world, and they can make and sell smartphones at one-third the price of Apple or Samsung, it is not surprising that e-commerce in the Middle Kingdom is set to overtake even the US in volume next year.

Online business is here to stay.

What the combination of the Internet and smartphone means is that a person in the remotest part of Indonesia can sell his or her product to buyers worldwide, and collect over the smartphone, which was impossible to imagine even 20 years ago.

Amazing also are the apps downloaded in their millions to maximise personal efficiency. Ease of personal communication, meanwhile, has been taken to a new level with apps like WeChat. Such free Internet services are rising so fast that even revenue from SMS text messages is slowing down.

On the other side, after Snowden, what must consider the proper role of the government in the Internet and how it should behave to encourage Web innovation and growth?

Nobel Laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz was one of the first to tackle the subject, in "The Role of Government in a Digital Age" (2000), with Peter and Jonathan Orzag. Their report recommended 12 principles. The first three cover the state's proper role in the affairs of the Internet:

1. Provide public data and information.

2. Improve efficient government services.

3. Support basic research.

The next six principles are areas where the government should exercise caution. These include:

4. Adding specialised value to public data and information.

5. Providing private goods only under limited circumstances.

6. Providing services online where private services are more efficient.

7. Ensuring that mechanisms exist to protect privacy, security, and consumer protection online.

8. Promoting network externalities only with great deliberation and care.

9. Maintaining proprietary information or exercising rights under patents or copyright.

The report also signalled "red light" areas of state intervention in the Internet:

10. Governments should exercise substantial caution in entering markets in which private sector firms are active

11. Governments (including government corporations) should generally not aim to maximise net revenues or take action that would reduce competition.

12. Government should only be allowed to provide goods or services for which appropriate privacy and conflict-of-interest protections have been erected.

The Stiglitz-Orzag report was written for the US market, but the general principles are useful guides for all states. The trouble is that Snowden showed that the US government might have failed to follow some of these guidelines. We do know that governments are becoming increasingly intrusive on the Internet, and that such intrusion inhibits competition and innovation.

Because the Internet is evolving very fast, the role of government in Web affairs also needs to evolve. Businesses are becoming even more service and information-oriented, with increasing numbers going digital and in the "Cloud". This means that governments are struggling with three major issues: protecting private privacy, ensuring a level playing field in competition, and taxing online activities.

Governments must also sort out jurisdictional duties and powers, because the Cloud is global, and taxation and regulation is not only national, but departmental. It is as if each small part of the bureaucracy is trying to regulate the whole Cloud. We can all touch and feel its power, but there is no overall central authority that can control the Cloud.

An island nation in the Pacific might pass a law on the Cloud, but could it enforce it?

Individual privacy is being threatened by the practice of hacking, and the biggest hackers are not bedroom-bound nerds, but governments everywhere.

The second problem of a level playing field is a serious one. If Google has maps and can monitor everything I do through my smartphone, does that information belong to Google or to me? If it belongs to the large platforms, does that not confer a huge informational advantage on them? How can governments ensure that there is a level playing field between these massive online platforms and the small businesses that have no such information or may have to pay the platform for it?

The third area is taxation. Online commerce has escaped the tax radar because it is new. In contrast, bricks-and-mortar shops have rents, create jobs and pay value-added taxes. If everything moves online, the government loses the ability to tax, and bricks-and-mortar retail shops will complain they are losing out to larger and larger platforms. Bookshops around the world are closing in droves now that everyone can order through Amazon.

There are no easy answers to these tough questions. The interdependent and interconnected nature of the Internet means that regulatory or government action in one part may affect the system as a whole. In other words, government action or non-action creates a shadow system - the business moves offline, offshore or into cyberspace.

What we need is better transparency, better education, wider access and also some key principles of fair competition that should be enforced for online business to innovate.

Finally, a year-end reminder: use your smartphone in the toilet, and someone (not Snowden) can hear you flush. Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to all.

Contributed by Andrew Sheng, President of the Fung Global Institute.

Related posts:
1. You are being snooped on, Malaysia views US-NSA spying seriously!
2.US, Britain spying on virtual world, agents pose as gamers..
3. Educate public on changes in e-technology, CAP urg...
4..USA Spying, the Super-Snooper !
5. NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily...
6. Abusing intelligence is stupid
7. Brazil attacks US over spying issue
8. US Spy Snowden Says U.S. Hacking China Since 2009
9. Upset over US cyber spying! 
10. No privacy on the Net !
11. US building new spy wing to focus on Asia

You are being snooped on, Malaysia views US-NSA spying seriously!

Asia being snooped on, too 

Spying by foreign intelligence agencies is also prevalent in Malaysia and other regional countries via the Internet or spying equipment located in embassies.

SO last week it was the turn of Asians to learn that their region was also the subject of foreign spying.

This was no surprise. If American intelligence is spying on Americans, on Latin Americans, and on Europeans (including its top political leader, Angela Merkel of Germany), it is a foregone conclusion that Asia would not be left out.

There is no revelation yet that Asian prime ministers and presidents have had their personal mobile phones and e-mails tapped.

But it is also a foregone conclusion that these things are happening. Be prepared, therefore, to read in the coming weeks about famous Asian leaders, opposition stalwarts, journalists and celebrities being the subjects of snooping.

Nevertheless, the news that American and Australian embassies are being used to snoop on Asian countries justifiably caused outrage in our region. The Australian surveillance is reportedly in cooperation with the United States.

Malaysia is one of the places where Australian intelligence operates to spy, according to reports in the Der Spiegel and Sydney Morning Herald. They revealed that the spying takes place from the Australian High Commission in Kuala Lumpur.

Other Asian countries where the intelligence collection is conducted is the Australian embassies in China, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Timor Leste and Papua New Guinea.

The news reports also revealed that the US embassies have also been conducting surveillance activities in many Asian countries including Malaysia, Indonesia, China, Thailand, Cambodia and Myanmar.

Malaysia last Friday registered its protests in official notes handed to the Australian High Commissioner and the US Deputy Chief of Mission who were summoned to Wisma Putra. The notes warned that surveillance of close friends could severely damage relations.

Indonesia warned the United States and Australia that the continuation of surveillance facilities inside their embassies threatened to derail years of trust built up between countries.

China also responded to the report that the American embassy in Beijing and consulates in Shanghai and Chengdu operated special spying facilities.

Its Foreign Ministry has demanded an explanation from the United States, saying that “foreign entities must not in any form engage in activities that are incompatible with their status and that are harmful to China’s national security and interest”.

Also last Friday, Brazil and Germany introduced a draft resolution to a United Nations General Assembly committee calling for an end to excessive surveillance.

The press reports on spying in Asian countries are based on information leaked by Edward Snowden, a former contractor with the US National Security Agency.

Newspapers and magazines had previously revealed that the personal phones of the German chancellor and the Brazilian president had been tapped. Both leaders have registered protests directly to US President Barack Obama.

Last week also saw revelations by the Washington Post that the US and British intelligence agencies had found a way of intercepting communications from Google as well as Yahoo as the data were being passed between their data centres.

“We are outraged at the lengths to which the government seems to have gone,” said Google’s chief legal officer.

The Internet giant companies have found that their encryptment system protecting e-mail and other information flowing through its data centres is not secure after all.

The technology companies are worried that their millions of customers will no longer trust that their privacy will be protected.

How will this affect the use of browsing, e-mail, Facebook and other facets of the Internet technology?

US companies and entities currently dominate the global Internet business. Much of the world’s flow of data go through Internet companies based in the United States.

The US administration had projected itself as an honest host of the Internet centres, respecting the rights and privacy of the world’s Internet and e-mail users, and a champion of Internet freedom.

That image has been shattered by the series of revelations emerging from Snowden’s leaked files. The opposite image has replaced it, of a government that has used high technology to gather billions of bits of data on practically all Internet users.

If counter-terrorism was the official reason, this now seems to be only a pretext for also spying on any important person, including one’s closest allies.

Now that they have lost confidence that the United States or other countries will respect privacy of the politicians, companies and citizens of their countries, some governments are now planning to limit the reach of American-based Internet companies.

The Financial Times reported that Brazil is planning regulations that would force technology companies to retain information on the Internet about its citizens and institutions within Brazil itself.

It also said that European officials are discussing the need to have stronger cloud computing capabilities in Europe to protect their citizens’ privacy.

Brazil is also planning to bring up in various UN agencies and fora the need for a global framework to respect and protect privacy on the Internet.

Contributed by Global Trends Martiin Khor
The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own.

Related posts:  
1.  USA Spying, the Super-Snooper !
2.  NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily 

Malaysia views spying seriously

KLUANG: Spying activities on Malaysia by its allies is a serious matter, says Defence Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

This is because it can cause relations between Malaysia and these countries, long established based on trust and sincerity, to be tense.

“I believe if this (spying) is not fully explained, our long-established good relations can be adversely affected. Therefore, we need a full explanation on the extent of the spying activities and for what purpose.

“Tensions can be avoided if the allies involved uphold the trust and sincerity in their relations with Malaysia,” he said.

Hishammuddin said this to reporters after attending a Deepavali open house hosted by Johor Unity and Human Resources Committee chairman R.Vidyanathan here yesterday.

The spying issue arose following media reports on the claim made by intelligence informant Edward Snowden that the United States had 90 electronic surveillance facilities throughout the world, including at its embassy in Kuala Lumpur.

In light of this, Hishammuddin wanted a detailed explanation on the matter as such activities could threaten Malaysia’s security and its other interests.

The US ambassador to Malaysia, Joseph Y. Yun, was reported to have explained on the spying claim to Wisma Putra.

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman said Yun had stated that all surveillance activities by the United States throughout the world were specifically for security, to detect threats of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

On his trip to China last month, Hishammuddin said it was aimed at enhancing cooperation in the area of defence, especially through joint exercises, exchange programmes involving navy and other military officers, establishing cooperation between the defence industries of both countries, and efforts to combat terrorism and transnational crime.

Meanwhile in Yan, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar said they would arrest any foreign diplomat found to be involved in spying activities.

“We will not hesitate because spying is a threat to the country’s sovereignty. In the 1980s, we have arrested foreign diplomats involved in spying activities.

“We will do the same again if there is proof of such activities,” he told newsmen after a briefing on the Sungai Limau by-election at the Yan police headquarters yesterday.

- The Star/Asia News Network Monday Nov 4, 2013

NSA secretly hacks, intercepts Google, Yahoo daily

The United States’ National Security Agency has secretly broken into the main communications links that connect Yahoo and Google data centers worldwide. That’s according to documents released by former NSA contractor, Edward Snowden, The Washington Post reports.

Video: NSA intercepts Google, Yahoo traffic overseas report | The Nationalhttp://www.thenational.ae/article/2013110
 http://shar.es/IxZIJ



According to the documents, the agency and its British counterpart GCHQ, through a project called MUSCULAR, collected data stored on Google and Yahoo servers. That allowed both governments access to hundreds of millions of user accounts from individuals worldwide.

“From undisclosed interception points, the NSA and GCHQ are copying entire data flows across fiber-optic cables that carry information between the data centers of the Silicon Valley giants,” RT cites the Post’s Barton Gellman and Ashkan Soltani.

A January 9th document says that in the preceding 30 days, collectors had processed over 181 million pieces of information, including both metadata and the actual contents of communications.

The government can already request information from phone or data through the FISA Amendments Act but this data collection would ostensibly take place without Google and Yahoo even being aware of it.

When you send email or store files with an internet company, that data is regularly shared among servers around the world, in order to ensure quick access to your information from wherever you happen to be. Google and Yahoo run customized private networks to shuttle that information around, passing between and within countries, as the Post indicates in a graphic. To move that information, the companies use fiber optic connections, light-speed networks running over thin glass cables. According to the Post, it’s those connections that the NSA is able to monitor. None of Yahoo’s inter-server traffic is encrypted. Not all of Google’s is either.

The MUSCULAR program, according to Wednesday’s leak, involves a process in which the NSA and GCHQ intercept communications overseas, where lax restrictions and oversight allow the agencies access to intelligence with ease.

“NSA documents about the effort refer directly to ‘full take,’ ‘bulk access’ and ‘high volume’ operations on Yahoo and Google networks,” the Post reported. “Such large-scale collection of Internet content would be illegal in the United States, but the operations take place overseas, where the NSA is allowed to presume that anyone using a foreign data link is a foreigner”.

The Post points out that company staffers were surprised and angry to hear that their their networks had been compromised. Google said that it was “troubled by allegations of the government intercepting traffic between our data centers”.

The report comes amid a storm of protest about NSA surveillance both at home and overseas of phone and Internet communications.

On Tuesday, US officials said reports that American spy agencies snooped on millions of Europeans were false.

Alexander told lawmakers that in many cases European spy agencies had turned over phone records and shared them with US intelligence.

Related posts:

1. USA Spying, the Super-Snooper ! 
2. Abusing intelligence is stupid
3. Upset over US cyber spying!
4.US Spy Snowden Says US Hacking China Since 2009 
5.US building new spy wing to focus on Asia 

USA Spying, the Super-Snooper !

The United States is running clandestine communications intelligence facilities at its embassies in Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta, Bangkok, Phnom Penh and Yangon.

The country is doing so by tapping telephones and monitoring communications networks from electronic surveillance facilities in US embassies and consulates across east and south-east Asia, according to information disclosed by intelligence whistleblower Edward Snowden.A top secret map dated August 13, 2010 lists nearly a hundred surveillance facilities worldwide, the map however, shows no such facilities are located in Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Japan and Singapore – the US’s closest allies.

Snoopy the Snooper

According to the map published by Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine today, a joint Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – National Security Agency (NSA) group known as ” Special Collection Service” conducts the sweeping surveillance operation, as well as clandestine operations against specific intelligence targets.The map, which was initially published in full on Der Spiegel‘s website but subsequently replaced with a censored version, lists Special Collection Service facilities at 90 locations worldwide, including 74 manned facilities, 14 remotely operated facilities and two technical support centres.

The map confirms the global reach of US signals intelligence operations with special collection facilities located in most major capitals on every continent.Read the full story here

http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php/headline/8057-us-embassy-in-kl-and-elsewhere-conducting-clandestine-operations-.html

By Hanin Fadiyah@www.harakahdaily.com

Related posts:
1. Abusing intelligence is stupid
2. Upset over US cyber spying!
3.US Spy Snowden Says US Hacking China Since 2009 
4.US building new spy wing to focus on Asia 

Brazil attacks US over spying issue

The UN General Assembly opened last week with an electrifying speech by President Dilma Rousseff who slammed US cyber-snooping activities with President Barack Obama in the audience.

INTERNET spying by the US government became a major issue at the United Nations General Assembly last week when political leaders heard a blistering attack by the Brazilian president who was visibly angry about how her country and her own office have been targets of cyber-snooping activities.

She called the US action a breach of international law, a grave violation of human rights and civil liberties, and a disrespect for national sovereignty.

It was condemnation in the strongest terms at the highest political forum in the world, with UN and commercial TV stations beaming the speech live.

The surveillance issue, which has caused ripples with continuous revelations in the media emerging from whistle-blower Edward Snowden’s files, has now reached the UN.

And in the most spectacular fashion. It was an extraordinary scene when President Dilma Rousseff gave the opening speech among the government leaders gathered for the annual General Assembly.

Traditionally, Brazil’s president speaks first, followed by the US president. Thus, Barack Obama could not avoid hearing her speech.

Many had expected Rousseff to touch on the Internet spying issue, since she had strongly criticised the US when the media broke the news on specific instances of US Internet surveillance on the Brazilian President’s office, other departments, including the Brazilian Mission to the UN, and the national oil company Petrobas. She recently cancelled a state visit to Washington.

But her speech and performance was far beyond what was anticipated. With the atmosphere electrifying in the packed hall of leaders, the Brazilian president cut out the usual diplomatic niceties while addressing one of the most sensitive issues to have emerged globally in recent years.

She called it “a matter of great importance and gravity ... the global network of electronic espionage that has caused indignation and repudiation in public opinion around the world.”

Rousseff described the Internet spying as creating “a situation of grave violation of human rights and of civil liberties; of invasion and capture of confidential information concerning corporate activities, and especially of disrespect to national sovereignty”.

She started by laying the foundation of her argument: “A sovereign nation can never establish itself to the detriment of another sovereign nation.

“The right to safety of citizens of one country can never be guaranteed by violating fundamental human rights of citizens of another country. The arguments that the illegal interception of information and data aims at protecting nations against terrorism cannot be sustained.”

She said she fought against authoritarianism and censorship, and thus has to uncompromisingly defend the right to privacy of individuals and the sovereignty of her country.

“In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy. In the absence of the respect for sovereignty, there is no basis for the relationship among nations,” she added.

Her speech touched on three actions. First, Brazil had asked the US for explanations, apologies and guarantees that such procedures will never be repeated.

Second, Brazil is planning actions to defend itself from the spying. It will “adopt legislation, technologies and mechanisms to protect us from the illegal interception of communications and data”.

Third, she proposed international action, saying: “Information and telecommunication technologies cannot be the new battlefield between states. Time is ripe to create the conditions to prevent cyberspace from being used as a weapon of war, through espionage, sabotage, and attacks against systems and infrastructure of other countries.”

Stating that the UN must play a leading role to regulate the conduct of states with regard to these technologies, she called for the setting up of “a civilian multilateral framework for the governance and use of the Internet and to ensure the effective protection of data that travels through the web”.

She proposed multilateral mechanisms for the worldwide network, based on the principles of freedom of expression, privacy and human rights; open, multilateral and democratic governance; universality; cultural diversity; and neutrality of the network, guided only by technical and ethical criteria, with no restrictions allowed on political, commercial, religious grounds.

Delegates who hoped that Obama would respond were disappointed. He did not refer to the Brazilian president’s address made only a few minutes before.

He made only a passing reference to the issue, saying: “we are reviewing the way we gather intelligence.”

Rousseff’s speech came at the right time and venue, since people worldwide have been increasingly troubled or outraged by the extent of cyber-spying revealed by the media.

The issue is even more serious for developing countries. Media reports indicate that there are double standards, with the US spying programme requiring a special court procedure for opening data on individual US citizens, while there is no such procedure for residents outside the US, and thus the surveillance is comprehensive for the world outside the US, with the citizens, companies and government offices all being targets.

Moreover, the media reports show that the US actions do not stop at surveillance. There are also schemes to engage in cyber actions or attacks.

Rousseff’s speech at the UN indicates Brazil plans follow-up moves in the UN for setting up a multilateral system to regulate the use and misuse of the Internet. This would be a timely international response to the recent revelations.

Contributed by Global Trends, MARTIN KHOR
The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own.

Related posts:
 Upset over US cyber spying!
Abusing intelligence is stupid 
US Spy Snowden Says US Hacking China Since 2009
No privacy on the Net !
US building new spy wing to focus on Asia
Flawed perception remembering Heroes and Zeroes  

Abusing intelligence is stupid

Governments that deliberately pervert their spy agencies are shooting themselves in the head.

ALL countries operate spy agencies, so some of their practices and experiences are universal.

Governments deem intelligence services to be useful, even necessary, in evaluating and anticipating events – so they are earnestly nurtured and cultivated. However, whether and how far these services actually contribute to policymaking depends on a multitude of variable factors.

The capacity of a “secret service” derives from the scale of its available resources – human, financial, technical, etc.

The richer a country the greater the means for developing its intelligence service, and the more powerful a country the greater its need or purpose for doing so.

Yet that need not mean that a richer or more powerful country would have a more competent intelligence service.

Unlike conventional institutions such as the armed forces, the critical criteria cannot be the strength of numbers or the expanse of field coverage.

Since the quality of information handled is key, spy agencies perform like a scalpel where other security institutions act like meat cleavers.

At the same time, all of them need to be coordinated and concerted through optimised complementarity.

Conceptually, the intelligence services are highly professional institutions performing specialised tasks in the national interest.

In discharging their duties, they must observe laws and conventions that guide and limit their clandestine activities.

In practice, however, they are often politicised in the perceived interests of specific administrations.

This compromises their credibility, debases their status and subverts their effectiveness.

Another universal experience, regardless of a country’s developed or developing status, is that the intelligence services are boosted in times of great national distress.

Trying times are also the best times to stretch and test their capacities.

Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), for example, originated in the Secret Service Bureau established in 1909.

This was a joint effort of the War Office and the Admiralty, with a focus on Imperial Germany.

The impetus for the service developed with the exigencies of two world wars.

In the United States, the demands of wartime intelligence in the early 1940s resulted in the creation of the OSS (Office of Strategic Services) to coordinate information streams from the armed forces.

The OSS would later morph into the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), technically the first US spy agency.

The United States until then did not have a centralised intelligence agency, so the CIA emerged to fill the gap.

As it was with the SIS, the existence of the CIA was not officially acknowledged until decades later. But what began as a fledgling effort requiring British inputs soon ballooned into a US intelligence community comprising no less than 16 spy agencies.

Intelligence agencies tend to have a civilian (police) or military character depending on the needs of the state at the time. Nonetheless, their constant is the primary purpose of protecting the state.

The early Soviet Union felt it needed to guard against counter-revolution, and so established the Cheka secret police under the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

The Cheka then underwent several transformations to become the NKVD, which in turn experienced further transformations to become the KGB of Cold War lore, in the process picking up military elements in the world wars.

The Malayan Emergency (1948-60) was a domestic insurgency that exercised the resources of the police force.

The police department that focused on vital intelligence gathering was the Special Branch, evolving under British tutelage during the colonial period and developing further upon Malayan independence.

Currently, all national intelligence agencies combine human (Humint) and signals (Sigint, or telecommunications interceptions) intelligence.

The latter comprises communications between individuals (Comint) and electronic intelligence (electronic eavesdropping, or Elint) that favour countries with bigger budgets because of the costs incurred in technology and expertise.

However, while a common strength lies in surveillance or information-gathering, analysis and interpretation of the information so gathered often fail to keep pace.

Where analytical deficits occur, political interests often exploit these spaces to pervert the course of intelligence gathering.

At the same time, the quality of intelligence is sometimes patchy where official links are weak.

Britain’s SIS was thus handicapped in Germany during the First World War, just as US intelligence services are now hampered in Iran and Syria as they were in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.

The problem is compounded when governments refuse to acknowledge their inadequacies and prefer to give their own dubious capacities the benefit of the doubt.

The mistake often lies in equating overwhelming military superiority with operational success requiring sound intelligence.

And so regime change in Iraq was described as a “cakewalk” and a “slam dunk”, with unanticipated difficulties emerging once the plan was operationalised.

A similar development almost occurred in Syria upon underestimating President Bashar al-Assad’s effective control.

Hyper-intelligence combines the prowess of two or more ally countries’ intelligence services, taking spying to a whole new level.

The US-British “special relationship” is one such example, only that it is more than bilateral collaboration.

What began as a post-war agreement between London and Washington in 1946 soon encompassed the other English-speaking countries of Canada, Australia and New Zealand in the UKUSA (United Kingdom – United States of America) Agreement.

Focusing on but not limited to Sigint, this “Five Eyes” pact formalises the sharing of intelligence on other countries that any of the five spies upon.

Earlier this month, a leak by former US intelligence operative Edward Snowden revealed that the UKUSA Agreement goes further than these five Western countries. It effectively and routinely includes Israel as well.

The National Security Agency (NSA) reputedly runs the most extensive intelligence gathering operation for the United States.

Its global reach is shared with the largest unit in the Israel Defense Force, the NSA-equivalent Unit 8200 (or ISNU, the Israeli Sigint National Unit), in unfiltered form.

That means anything and everything that the United States and/or the other “Five Eyes” countries knows about the rest of the world from spying are known by Israel as well.

It explains Washington’s determination to “get Snowden” – not only are the leaks embarrassing, they discourage other countries from engaging the United States in security cooperation.

The other problem is no less serious: politicisation, which corrupts and perverts otherwise professional and competent intelligence services.

This amounts to blowback, a CIA-originated term meaning self-inflicted policy injury.

It (in)famously occurred when the US-British axis that invaded Iraq built its rationale on the lie that Saddam had stockpiled “weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs) – even when whatever little intelligence there was had indicated that Iraq had dismantled WMD facilities years before.

It happened again when Washington insisted that Assad was responsible for chemical weapons attacks in civilian areas.

Not only had Russian intelligence and UN inspectors found anti-Assad rebels culpable instead, but both German and Israeli intelligence had privately cleared Assad of those charges.

The inside information available to diplomats had cast such doubt on the US allegations that US-friendly countries such as Singapore refused to accept Washington’s version at the UN.

Politics had dictated that the United States stick with its allegations, just as politics had dissuaded Israeli policymakers from correcting misinterpretations of intelligence data wrongly blaming Assad.

Fiddling with intelligence for some passing gratification such as attacking an adversary may seem tempting, but dumbing down vital strategic data is a dangerous and costly exercise. It is also an act of singular and self-defeating stupidity.

Contributed by  Behind The Headlines: Bunn Nagara
> Bunn Nagara is a Senior Fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.
>The views expressed are entirely the writer's own.

Related posts:
Upset over US cyber spying!
US Spy Snowden Says US Hacking China Since 2009 - Rightways 
Technologies: No privacy on the Net ! 
US building new spy wing to focus on Asia
Flawed perception remembering Heroes and Zeroes 

Play safe on the mobile, secure your devices!

All a sinister person needs to do to spy on you is to simply penetrate your smartphone or tablet.

OF late, spying has been a household word after revelations of Prism, a clandestine mass electronic surveillance programme operated by the United States National Security Agency (NSA), by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. 

But one does not need an entire state programme to spy on someone.

All that a sinister person needs to do is to penetrate their intended victim’s smartphone or tablet. Which is quite an easy thing to do, actually. One of the common methods used is spyware.

Such spyware can easily be found by searching on Google although they are usually not free.

There is a possibility that consumers might download spyware from an identified party or an unknown source accidentally. - Goh Chee Hoh

This is what happened when a husband in Singapore suspected his wife of having an affair. On the pretence that his phone was not working, he borrowed his wife’s phone to make a call but instead installed a spyware app.

The husband was then able to see the calls made (but not hear the actual conversation), messages sent and her location at that point, from a computer using a Web-based application that communicated with the app.

When the information confirmed that she was having an affair, he continued to monitor her phone for some time before posting the information online, including the messages she sent to her “lover”. He did not reveal any personal details about themselves but this is how the news became public.

However, many have questioned the authenticity of the story, with some brushing it off as a publicity stunt to sell the spyware app.

Nevertheless, it pays to be safe, as there are apps that can do such things and they are easily obtainable from the Web.


“Mobile phones are an integral part of consumers’ lives, with two thirds of adults worldwide reporting that they use a mobile device to access the Internet,” says David Hall, senior manager of regional product marketing for Norton at Symantec Corporation.

“As we use our mobile phones in new and innovative ways, we’re also putting sensitive information at risk.”

“Spyware is a type of malware (malicious software) that logs information and then forwards that information from your device,” explains Rob Forsyth, director for Asia Pacific at Sophos Ltd.

Usually, such spyware is capable of operating quietly in the background so it can easily go unnoticed by an unsuspecting device owner.

“For a regular user, it is very difficult to figure out that they’ve been infected,” says Goh Su Gim, security advisor for Asia Pacific at F-Secure (M) Sdn Bhd. “There’s no obvious signs.”

In fact, it may surprise you to know that such threats could actually come from a source that’s known to you.

“There is a possibility that consumers might download spyware from an identified party such as their spouse, friends, colleagues, business associates or from an unknown source accidentally,” says Goh Chee Hoh, managing director for South-East Asia at Trend Micro Inc.

As an example, he describes a mobile phone monitoring service which uses Nickispy, a family of viruses that attacks Android devi­ces). It is said to be capable of monitoring a mobile user’s activities and whereabouts. The Chinese website which offers this service charges subscribers fees costing US$300 to US$540 (RM900 to RM1,620).

“This spyware sends MMS to the victim’s mobile device. Once the MMS is downloaded, the cybercriminal is granted access to your line of communications,” Chee Hoh says.

This security issue is further compounded in cases where a consumer uses the same device for both work and personal purposes.

“From a personal user’s standpoint, one can experience loss of privacy whereas from a business perspective, an organisation may lose sensitive data which can lead to loss of revenue,” he explains.

Had such an act been committed in Malaysia, it would go against Section 231 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998. Using an app to obtain information from another person’s phone can land the offender a RM50,000 fine or a prison term not exceeding two years if convicted.

The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia commission (MCMC), our multimedia industry nurturer and regulator, also said that it does not act alone when pursuing offenders.

“We look at each case individually and help other agencies like the police, for example, when upholding the law,” said Sheikh Raffie Abd Rahman, MCMC head of strategic communications.

By SUSANNA KHOO and ZAM KARIM
bytz@thestar.com.my, The Star/Asia News Network

Simple safeguards to keep your devices secure

While the mobile security and privacy threats remain very real and imminent, the steps to prevent such problems are really quite straightforward and easy to do.

Following are some practical tips, courtesy of security specialists Symantec Corporation, Sophos Ltd, Trend Micro Inc and F-Secure (M) Sdn Bhd, that you should take note of:

1. Use your device’s built-in security features 

Configure your security settings so that functions such as location sharing are disabled and passwords are not saved but need to be manually keyed in each time.

You can also make your device more secure by activating its lock function and requiring an identification action such as a fingerprint scan, keystroke pattern, numeric PIN or alphanumeric password in order to access the device.

2. Use strong passwords and secure Internet connections

Unique and strong passwords will help prevent valuable information from being stolen from your device. Using a different password for each and every app would be best but you would need to ensure that you have a good way of remembering those passwords if you choose to go this route.

Avoiding open and unsecured Internet connections such as free public WiFi will also reduce risk of online threats on your mobile device.

3. Never jailbreak or root your device 

Use your device as recommended by the manufacturer instead of modifying the version of the iOS or Android operating system that has been installed. This is usually done to install pirated games and apps for free but this makes it easier for spyware to operate on your device.

4. Be cautious when choosing and installing apps

It’s a vast universe out there in the World Wide Web and, at times, it’s hard to tell the good guys from the bad ones. It therefore pays to be extra careful when downloading apps from the Internet. If something is too good to be true, it probably is. Do background checks on developers if you need to be sure, and scrutinise an app’s ratings and reviews as well.

It’s also a better idea to download apps directly from the Google Play Store for Android devices rather than from third party websites since downloads from some of these sources may contain malware.

Do have a close look at the Terms and Conditions as well as permissions requested by an app prior to installing it, as you don’t want to unknowingly allow developers to track and collect personal data which is unnecessary for running the app.

5. Scrutinise notifications and services running on your device 

Stay alert whenever you receive any notification on your device. Some may contain malicious links or cleverly trick you into submitting personal information to cybercriminals.

Also, pay special attention to services running in the background on your device that seem unfamiliar or strange. You will have to refer to online guides on how to check, as it differs among devices.

The principle of “when in doubt, throw it out” could help save you a great deal of trouble later on.

6. Log out immediately

This is especially crucial for social media apps where the chances of your data being misused are higher. Make it a habit to log out of such apps and re-enter login information each time you use them.

7. Stay up-to-date

Take time to pick out a preferred mobile security software and install it on your device. Make sure to constantly update it, and don’t forget to check for updates for all your apps and to install any available patches for your device’s operating system as well. Set up routine scans for your device, and review the logs each time a scan is concluded.

By Susanna Khoo
bytz@thestar.com.my ,The Star/Asia News Network

Related posts: 

1. Upset over US cyber spying!
2. US Spy Snowden Says U.S. Hacking China Since 2009
3. US building new spy wing to focus on Asia