IT professionals continue to cite security concerns as one of the largest barriers to cloud migration. Uniform government standards specific to cloud computing have yet to be finalized, leaving important questions regarding data availability and integrity unanswered. SafeGov.org aims to provoke discussion related to these concerns as well as raise awareness of the ways in which cloud computing could ultimately strengthen existing security measures.
Rolfe Winkler, Wall Street Journal, Friday, March 27, 2015
Google is a big player in mobile through its Android mobile-operating system, which ran about 80% of the smartphones shipped in 2014, estimates Strategy Analytics. Its apps, including Google Maps, YouTube, and Gmail, are among the most popular for smartphones. When smartphone users do open a Web browser, Google is even more dominant than on personal computers, with an 84% share of U.S. searches in February, according to StatCounter. ComScore doesn’t release its mobile estimates. The company’s tactics, particularly the agreements that Google signs with smartphone makers, have piqued the interest of antitrust regulators in Europe. Those deals have required device makers to install a range of Google’s less popular apps and to set some Google services like search as defaults in order to gain access to more popular apps like Google Maps and the Play Store digital bazaar, where users can download more than a million other apps and games.
Help Net Security, Friday, March 27, 2015
As companies accelerate their adoption of the cloud, the cloud data footprint is expected to grow to 6.5 zettabytes by 2018. This rapid migration of data into the cloud creates the need for insight into both cloud adoption trends and cloud data security issues.
Rob Wright, TechTarget, Friday, March 27, 2015
A newly released government report shows a lack of basic security controls in many departments and agencies, highlighting the precarious state of federal cloud security.
The Guardian, Friday, March 27, 2015
Google has failed in its attempt in the court of appeal to prevent British consumers having the right to sue the internet firm in the UK. A group known as Safari Users Against Google’s Secret Tracking wants to take legal action in the English courts over what it says is Google’s tracking of Apple’s Safari internet browser. It has accused Google of bypassing security settings in order to track users’ online browsing and to target them with personalised advertisements. Three judges have dismissed Google’s appeal over a high court decision against it and ruled that claims for damages can be brought over allegations of misuse of private information.
Rebecca R. Ruiz, New York Times Bits, Thursday, March 26, 2015
Several members of the Federal Trade Commission defended on Wednesday the actions taken by the agency in its antitrust investigation of Google, nearly a week after an internal document came to light, raising questions about the process. An internal document from the Federal Trade Commission written during the investigation in 2012 but first reported on last week showed that some central staff within the agency had wanted to sue Google for anticompetitive practices. The agency’s five commissioners ultimately voted not to sue. On Wednesday, the three commissioners who were at the F.T.C. at the time of that decision released a joint statement on the decision.
Tom Fairless, Wall Street Journal, Thursday, March 26, 2015
The European Union is set to open a sweeping investigation into whether Internet commerce firms like Amazon.com Inc. are violating the bloc’s antitrust laws by restricting cross-border trade. The inquiry, announced Thursday by the EU’s antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager, follows pressure from France and Germany to use EU competition rules and other regulations to better target the business practices of large technology firms. It is part of a broader EU strategy to knit together the bloc’s fragmented online ecosystems into a digital single market. Policy makers hope that will help European Internet firms to build their clout to better compete with U.S. Web giants like Google Inc. and Facebook Inc.
Cunningham Levy LLP
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
MLATs are formal agreements between countries establishing procedures for requesting evidence stored outside the requesting country’s jurisdiction. Historically, in many time-sensitive cases, law enforcement agencies officials exchanged information informally and private companies cooperated without formal legal process. But with increasing overseas attention to privacy rights and concerns about secret, unilateral data collection by national governments against other countries’ citizens, companies increasingly are refusing to cooperate informally and governments are retaliating for unfair “spying” on their citizens. State and local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) should care about this problem not only because of its potential impact on the general ability of the U.S. to take down international terror and other criminal organizations, but because, in our increasingly interconnected world, what once could have been treated largely as “local” cases, such as cyber fraud and child pornography now require retrieval of evidence from overseas, and even basic crimes without any obvious cyber component will require evidence stored overseas.
The Chertoff Group
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
The issue is put in stark relief by the recent announcement from Alibaba, the Chinese technology company that plans to open up a new data center in Silicon Valley. From a business perspective, the decision makes perfect sense. The center will allow Alibaba to expand one of its product lines — cloud services for businesses — into the American market. It portends an effort by Alibaba to go head-to-head with other cloud service providers, like Amazon, that lease computing systems to businesses. Where, before, Alibaba’s clientele was almost exclusively Chinese, the new data center is part of an effort to become more multinational. And that will give American law enforcement heartburn. Because if they don’t want to be intellectual hypocrites, they are going to be obliged to acknowledge that Alibaba’s entry into the American market also means that the Chinese government will have direct access to American data – because the U.S. government says the exact same thing about American companies operating in China. And that can’t be a comfortable conclusion. The most notable example of this legal theory is a case pending in New York. In December 2013, Microsoft, received a warrant issued by a magistrate in the Southern District of New York that ordered the company to turn over information relating to a user whose data was stored at the company’s Dublin, Ireland, data center.
Pedro Hernandez , eWeek, Wednesday, March 25, 2015
Since Edward Snowden lifted the veil on the U.S. National Security Agency's (NSA) extensive spying capabilities, Microsoft has emerged as an outspoken critic of the government's intelligence-gathering tactics. Today, the Redmond, Wash.-based tech titan is once again imploring government leaders to rein in the NSA. "Today, Microsoft and members of the Reform Government Surveillance coalition, along with civil liberties advocates, sent a letter to the White House and Congressional leaders supporting essential reforms to the USA Patriot Act," announced Fred Humphries, vice president of U.S. Government Affairs for Microsoft. "As we've said before, these reforms must include an end to bulk collection and allow for companies to be transparent about the requests they receive for information." In the wake of the NSA spying scandal, Microsoft compared the intelligence agency's actions to those of hackers—and not the white-hat kind. "Indeed, government snooping potentially now constitutes an 'advanced persistent threat,' alongside sophisticated malware and cyber-attacks," Brad Smith, Microsoft executive vice president and general counsel, said in a December 2013 statement.
Benjamin Herold, Education Week, Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Introduction of a bill intended to establish a new level of federal involvement in the protection of K-12 students' privacy has been delayed following criticism that lawmakers fell well short of creating the strong national law for which advocates hoped. On Monday, U.S. Reps. Jared Polis, D-Colo., and Luke Messer, R-Ind., were poised to introduce the "Student Digital Privacy and Parental Rights Act," developed in close consultation with the White House. But after critical press reports and concern from privacy advocates about the scope and rigor of a near-final draft of the bill, the lawmakers decided to hold off. A revised version of the proposed legislation is now expected to be made public later this week.