View allAll Photos Tagged Cyberthreats
Name: Erin Adrena Holt
Age: 23
Aliases: Eri, Erinbug, (Tyrone’s nicknames for her) Erin, Exosage, Shadowgirl (often called by friends), h0Lt73758 (hacker name)
Nationality: American, has French, Swedish and Norweigian descent
Profile: Despite being an only child, Erin’s family were upper class level elites in the society from Sweden and (and across the United States via her grandparents immigrating there from Norway as well). Her mother was a forensic scientist and her father was a security consultant, but her parents wished to raise her with a normal life, where they taught her martial arts, knowledge and at an early age. Erin's parents divorced when she was 7, but continued to co-parent her together. Her father often had a friend, Dr Edens, who came to visit often and formed a strong bond/friendship with young Erin, (who unknowingly to her, would guide her and become her mentor in the agency).
She met one of her earliest friends and crush during kindergarten, Tyrone Shore. Both went to school together through elementary (as they would protect each sometimes) and soon fell for each other, eventually dated during high school. However when it came to college, Erin focused on academics and Tyrone had his own stuff to handle. leaving the former couple to split for their own reasons, although it was a mutual breakup as friends.
After she graduated university (with a law degree and PhD in social sciences), she started to work for her father’s security firm, which he formed when Erin was nearly 18. She worked as a high ranking IT specialist against cyberthreats. Dr Edens saw much potential in Erin’s powers and talents, and recruited her alongside her ex-boyfriend and one of her older friends, Jesse Arden. She currently works as a field operative, scout and hacker.
Powers and abilities: Erin can blend into shadows, dark aura, and control/create shadow bursts, tendrils, construct and weapons, either ranged or close combat. She can be sensitive to extreme bright light and would often find ways to avoid it, as well as capable of running through dark objects, being able to carry 5 passengers through. Additionally, she has night vision, and is a expert in many forms of martial arts. Her abilities include hacking, searching, skilful in law, legal issues and connections.
Equipment: Erin carries a personal hatchet made from indestructible material. She is able to throw it and call it back, mostly mentally. She carries another powerful energy axe for offensive and defensive purposes, and can be extended for combat. Like other agents, she has her own special suit, and various tech, gadgets and weapons.
Personality: Open-minded, calm, resourceful, freethinking, patient, often observant and trustful. When it comes to romance, she doesn’t really have time for it, but can let her guard down when she meets her ex again.
Congratulations to Intel on their acquisition of Nervana. This photo is from the last board meeting at our offices; the Nervana founders — from right to left: Naveen Rao, Amir Khosrowshahi and Arjun Bansal — pondered where on the wall they may fall during M&A negotiations.
We are now free to share some of our perspectives on the company and its mission to accelerate the future with custom chips for deep learning.
I’ll share a recap of the Nervana story, from an investor’s perspective, and try to explain why machine learning is of fundamental importance to every business over time. In short, I think the application of iterative algorithms (e.g., machine learning, directed evolution, generative design) to build complex systems is the most powerful advance in engineering since the Scientific Method. Machine learning allows us to build software solutions that exceed human understanding, and shows us how AI can innervate every industry.
By crude analogy, Nervana is recapitulating the evolutionary history of the human brain within computing — moving from the logical constructs of the reptilian brain to the cortical constructs of the human brain, with massive arrays of distributed memory and iterative learning algorithms.
Not surprisingly, the founders integrated experiences in neuroscience, distributed computing, and networking — a delightful mélange for tackling cognitive computing. Ali Partovi, an advisor to Nervana, introduced us to the company.
We were impressed with the founding team and we had a prepared mind to share their enthusiasm for the future of deep learning. Part of that prepared mind dates back to 1989, when I started a PhD in EE focusing on how to accelerate neural networks by mapping them to parallel processing computers. Fast forward 25 years, and the nomenclature has shifted to machine learning and the deep learning subset, and I chose it as the top tech trend of 2013 at the Churchill Club VC debate (video). We were also seeing the powerful application of deep learning and directed evolution across our portfolio, from molecular design to image recognition to cancer research to autonomous driving.
All of these companies were deploying these simulated neural networks on traditional compute clusters. Some were realizing huge advantages by porting their code to GPUs; these specialized processors originally designed for rapid rendering of computer graphics have many more computational cores than a traditional CPU, a baby step toward a cortical architecture. I first saw them being used for cortical simulations in 2007. But by the time of Nervana’s founding in 2014, some (e.g., Microsoft’s and Google’s search teams) were exploring FPGA chips for their even finer-grained arrays of customizable logic blocks. Custom silicon that could scale beyond any of these approaches seemed like the natural next step. Here is a page from Nervana’s original business plan (Fig. 1 in comments below).
The march to specialized silicon, from CPU to GPU to FPGA to ASIC, had played out similarly for Bitcoin miners, with each step toward specialized silicon obsoleting the predecessors. When we spoke to Amazon, Google, Baidu, and Microsoft in our due diligence, we found a much broader application of deep learning within these companies than we could have imagined prior, from product positioning to supply chain management.
Machine learning is central to almost everything that Google does. And through that lens, their acquisition, and new product strategies make sense; they are not traditional product line extensions, but a process expansion of machine leaning (more on that later). They are not just playing games of Go for the fun of it. Recently, Google switched their core search algorithms to deep learning, and they used Deep Mind to cut data center cooling costs by a whopping 40%.
The advances in deep learning are domain independent. Google can hire and acquire talent and delight in their passionate pursuit of game playing or robotics. These efforts help Google build a better brain. The brain can learn many things. It is like a newborn human; it has the capacity to learn any of the languages of the world, but based on training exposure, it will only learn a few. Similarly, a synthetic neural network can learn many things.
Google can let the Brain team find cats on the Internet and play a great game of Go. The process advances they make in building a better brain (or in this case, a better learning machine) can then be turned to ad matching, a task that does not inspire the best and the brightest to come work for Google.
The domain independence of deep learning has profound implications on labor markets and business strategy. The locus of learning shifts from end products to the process of their creation. Artifact engineering becomes more like parenting than programming. But more on that later; back to the Nervana story.
Our investment thesis for the Series A revolved around some universal tenets: a great group of people pursuing a product vision unlike anything we had seen before. The semiconductor sector was not crowded with investor interest. AI was not yet on many venture firms’ sectors of interest. We also shared with the team that we could envision secondary benefits from discovering the customers. Learning about the cutting edge of deep learning applications and the startups exploring the frontiers of the unknown held a certain appeal for me. And sure enough, there were patterns in customer interest, from an early flurry in medical imaging of all kinds to a recent explosion of interest in the automotive sector after Tesla’s Autopilot feature went live. The auto industry collectively rushed to catch up.
Soon after we led the Series A on August 8, 2014, I found myself moderating a deep learning panel at Stanford with Nervana CEO Naveen Rao.
I opened with an introduction to deep learning and why it has exploded in the past four years (video primer). I ended with some common patterns in the power and inscrutability of artifacts built with iterative algorithms. We see this in biology, cellular automata, genetic programming, machine learning and neural networks.
There is no mathematical shortcut for the decomposition of a neural network or genetic program, no way to “reverse evolve” with the ease that we can reverse engineer the artifacts of purposeful design.
The beauty of compounding iterative algorithms — evolution, fractals, organic growth, art — derives from their irreducibility. (More from my Google Tech Talk and MIT Tech Review)
Year 1. 2015
Nervana adds remarkable engineering talent, a key strategy of the first mover. One of the engineers figures out how to rework the undocumented firmware of NVIDIA GPUs so that they run deep learning algorithms faster than off-the-shelf GPUs or anything else Facebook could find. Matt Ocko preempted the second venture round of the company, and he brought the collective learning of the Data Collective to the board.
Year 2. 2016 Happy 2nd Birthday Nervana!
The company is heads down on chip development. They share some technical details (flexpoint arithmetic optimized for matrix multiplies and 32GB of stacked 3D memory on chip) that gives them 55 trillion operations per second on their forthcoming chip, and multiple high-speed interconnects (as typically seen in the networking industry) for ganging a matrix of chips together into unprecedented compute fabrics. 10x made manifest. See Fig. 2 below.
And then Intel came knocking.
With the most advanced production fab in the world and a healthy desire to regain the mantle of leading the future of Moore’s Law, the combination was hard to resist. Intel vice president Jason Waxman told Recode that the shift to artificial intelligence could dwarf the move to cloud computing. “I firmly believe this is not only the next wave but something that will dwarf the last wave.” But we had to put on our wizard hats to negotiate with giants.
The deep learning and AI sector have heated up in labor markets to relatively unprecedented levels. Large companies are recently paying $6–10 million per engineer for talent acquisitions, and $4–5M per head for pre-product startups still in academia. For the Masters students in a certain Stanford lab, they averaged $500K/yr for their first job offer at graduation. We witnessed an academic turn down a million dollar signing bonus because they got a better offer.
Why so hot?
The deep learning techniques, while relatively easy to learn, are quite foreign to traditional engineering modalities. It takes a different mindset and a relaxation of the presumption of control. The practitioners are like magi, sequestered from the rest of a typical engineering process. The artifacts of their creation are isolated blocks of functionality defined by their interfaces. They are like blocks of magic handed to other parts of a traditional organization. (This carries over to the customers too; just about any product that you experience in the next five years that seems like magic will almost certainly be built by these algorithms).
And remember that these “brain builders” could join any industry. They can ply their trade in any domain. When we were building the deep learning team at Human Longevity Inc. (HLI), we hired the engineering lead from the Google’s Translate team. Franz Och pioneered Google’s better-than-human translation service not by studying linguistics, grammar, or even speaking the languages being translated. He focused on building the brain that could learn the job from countless documents already translated by humans (UN transcripts in particular). When he came to HLI, he cared about the mission, but knew nothing about cancer and the genome. The learning machines can find the complex patterns across the genome. In short, the deep learning expertise is fungible, and there are a burgeoning number of companies hiring and competing across industry lines.
And it is an ever-widening set of industries undergoing transformation, from automotive to agriculture, healthcare to financial services. We saw this explosion in the Nervana customer pipeline. And we see it across the DFJ portfolio, especially in our newer investments. Here are some examples:
• Learning chemistry and drug discovery: Here is a visualization of the search space of candidates for a treatment for Ebola; it generated the lead molecule for animal trials. Atomwise summarizes: “When we examine different neurons on the network we see something new: AtomNet has learned to recognize essential chemical groups like hydrogen bonding, aromaticity, and single-bonded carbons. Critically, no human ever taught AtomNet the building blocks of organic chemistry. AtomNet discovered them itself by studying vast quantities of target and ligand data. The patterns it independently observed are so foundational that medicinal chemists often think about them, and they are studied in academic courses. Put simply, AtomNet is teaching itself college chemistry.”
• Designing new microbial life for better materials: Zymergen uses machine learning to predict the combination of genetic modifications that will optimize product yield for their customers. They are amassing one of the largest data sets about microbial design and performance, which enables them to train machine learning algorithms that make search predictions with increasing precision. Genomatica had great success in pathway optimization using directed evolution, a physical variant of an iterative optimization algorithm.
• Discovery and change detection in satellite imagery: Planet and Mapbox. Planet is now producing so much imagery that humans can’t actually look at each picture it takes. Soon, they will image every meter of the Earth every day. From a few training examples, a convolutional neural net can find similar examples globally — like all new housing starts, all depleted reservoirs, all current deforestation, or car counts for all retail parking lots.
• Automated driving & robotics: Tesla, Zoox, SpaceX, Rethink Robotics, etc.
• Visual classification: From e-commerce to drones to security cameras and more. Imagen is using deep learning to radically improve medical image analysis, starting with radiology.
• Cybersecurity: When protecting endpoint computing & IOT devices from the most advanced cyberthreats, AI-powered Cylance is proving to be a far superior and adaptive approach versus older signature-based antivirus solutions.
• Financial risk assessment: Avant and Prosper use machine learning to improve credit verification and merge traditional and non-traditional data sources during the underwriting process.
• And now for something completely different: quantum computing. For a wormhole peek into the near future, our quantum computing company, D-Wave Systems, powered a 100,000,000x speedup in a demonstration benchmark for Google, a company that has used D-Wave quantum computers for over a decade now on machine learning applications.
So where will this take us?
Neural networks had their early success in speech recognition in the 90’s. In 2012, the deep learning variant dominated the ImageNet competitions, and visual processing can now be better done by machine than human in many domains (like pathology, radiology and other medical image classification tasks). DARPA has research programs to do better than a dog’s nose in olfaction.
We are starting the development of our artificial brains in the sensory cortex, much like an infant coming into the world. Even within these systems, like vision, the deep learning network starts with similar low level constructs (like edge-detection) as foundations for higher level constructs like facial forms, and ultimately, finding cats on the internet with self-taught learning.
But the artificial brains need not limit themselves to the human senses. With the internet of things, we are creating a sensory nervous system on the planet, with countless sensors and data collecting proliferating across the planet. All of this “big data” would be a big headache but for machine learning to find patterns in it all and make it actionable. So, not only are we transcending human intelligence with multitudes of dedicated intelligences, we are transcending our sensory perception.
And it need not stop there. It is precisely by these iterative algorithms that human intelligence arose from primitive antecedents. While biological evolution was slow, it provides an existence proof of the process, now vastly accelerated in the artificial domain. It shifts the debate from the realm of the possible to the likely timeline ahead.
Let me end with the closing chapter in Danny Hillis’ CS book The Pattern on the Stone: “We will not engineer an artificial intelligence; rather we will set up the right conditions under which an intelligence can emerge. The greatest achievement of our technology may well be creation of tools that allow us to go beyond engineering — that allow us to create more than we can understand.”
-----
Here is some early press:
Xconomy(most in-depth), MIT Tech Review, Re/Code, Forbes, WSJ, Fortune.
Full video, more photos, and some notable quotes:
We didn’t realize he was going to show up there [audience laughter], so kudos to you guys for arranging a nice surprise like that.
He put people’s lives at risks in the long run. I know there’s been a lot of talk by Edward Snowden and journalists who say the things disclosed did not put national security or people at risk. That is categorically not true. They actually do. There’s also an amazing arrogance to the idea that he knows better than the framers of the Constitution how government should work.
There are things we need to be transparent about: our authorities, processes, our oversight, who we are. We at the NSA have not done a good job of that, and that’s part of the reason why this has been so sensational. We’re “Never Say Anything”
We devote inordinate — I shouldn’t say that, I should say appropriate time and effort to ensure we protect that privacy and beyond that the privacy of citizens around the world, not just Americans. We’re all on the same network. I use a particular Internet email service that is the number-one email service of choice of terrorists. We need to pick that apart and find the information that’s relevant. In doing so, we’re going to necessarily encounter Americans and innocent foreign citizens going about their business. And when you find it, because you’re certain to find it, here’s how to protect it. We have minimization procedures approved by the Attorney General that are constitutionally based.
Absolutely folks have the right to privacy.
If you’re not connected to an intelligence target, you’re not of interest to us.
Q: Where would you place terrorism in terms of threats to Americans overall?
A: Terrorism is still number one. We have never been in a time where there are more places where things are going... You have a lot of “arcs of instability” in the world right now. In Syria there’s a civil war and a massive number of foreign fighters flooding in there to learn to be terrorists. These are westerners with passports to European countries or the US. They are learning to do jihad and they have expressed intent to go out and do that in their home countries. Iraq is suffering from a high level of sectarian violence; it’s a breeding ground for violence. In the horn of Africa there’s lots of weak governance, which forms a breeding ground for terrorist activities. Number two is cyberthreat… Destructive attacks concern me the most. In 2012, at Saudi Aramco, a Wiper-style virus took out 35,000 computers. In March 2013, a South Korean attack attributed in the press to North Korea, took out thousands of computers. Those are on the rise; we see people expressing interest in those capabilities.
The reason there hasn’t been a major attack in the US since 9/11 is not an accident. That’s hard work we’ve done and folks in the military have done and allies around world have done. You’ve heard the numbers: 54 terrorist attacks were stopped. 25 of them were in Europe, 18 occurred in just three countries, some of them our allies, some of whom are beating the heck out of us over the NSA programs. But that’s not an accident, that’s hard work.
In 42 of those events, the PRISM program was hugely relevant and material in contributing to stopping those attacks.
These programs have been authorized by two Presidents, two political parties, by Congress twice and by federal judges 16 times. It’s not the NSA running off and doing these things. This is a legitimate activity of the US government, as agreed to by all branches of the government. President Madison would be proud.
Q: Did Congress know exactly what you were doing?
A: Congress is a big body. In the lower house there are 535 of them and they change out every two years. I would say that Congress members had the opportunity to make themselves aware.
This is a really important conversation that impacts not just the NSA or the government, but you and the Internet companies. The issue of privacy and personal data is much bigger than government. So don’t rely on headlines or sound bites, or on one-sided conversations, That’s an idea worth spreading. We wear badges here, and the lanyard of those people who do crypto-analytic work says “look at the data.” So that’s my idea worth spreading: look at the data.
rk says “look at the data.” So that’s my idea worth spreading: look at the data.
From the transcript, corrected where I could.
023
McKinsey Global Infrastructure Initiative Summit
Tokyo, Japan
Thursday, October 20th, 2022
10:35–11:10
BUILDING CYBER RESILIENCE
Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, such as the Colonial Pipeline, are increasing in frequency and size. Concurrently, infrastructure operators are implementing new technologies that increase efficiencies, but these could also make their assets more vulnerable to cyberattacks. How can the industry embrace digital adoption while managing cyberthreats? What can be done about zero-day exploits—that is, cyberattacks that occur the same day a vulnerability is discovered by a hacker? What preventive strategies might reduce downtime?
Panelists:
Mark Fialkowski, President Mobility Solutions, Parsons
Marc Ganzi, Chief Executive Officer, Digital Bridge
Shinichi Yokohama, Chief Information Security Officer, EVP Security and Trust, NTT Group
Moderator: Swarna Ramanathan, Partner, McKinsey & Company
Photograph by McKinsey Global Infrastructure/Stuart Isett
Pentagon's new massive expansion of 'cyber-security' unit is about everything except defense
Cyber-threats are the new pretext to justify expansion of power and profit for the public-private National Security State
From:www.guardian.co.uk
by:Glenn Greenwald
As the US government depicts the Defense Department as shrinking due to budgetary constraints, the Washington Post this morning announces "a major expansion of [the Pentagon's] cybersecurity force over the next several years, increasing its size more than fivefold." Specifically, says the New York Times this morning, "the expansion would increase the Defense Department's Cyber Command by more than 4,000 people, up from the current 900." The Post describes this expansion as "part of an effort to turn an organization that has focused largely on defensive measures into the equivalent of an Internet-era fighting force." This Cyber Command Unit operates under the command of Gen. Keith Alexander, who also happens to be the head of the National Security Agency, the highly secretive government network that spies on the communications of foreign nationals - and American citizens.
The Pentagon's rhetorical justification for this expansion is deeply misleading. Beyond that, these activities pose a wide array of serious threats to internet freedom, privacy, and international law that, as usual, will be conducted with full-scale secrecy and with little to no oversight and accountability. And, as always, there is a small army of private-sector corporations who will benefit most from this expansion.
Disguising aggression as "defense"
Let's begin with the way this so-called "cyber-security" expansion has been marketed. It is part of a sustained campaign which, quite typically, relies on blatant fear-mongering.
In March, 2010, the Washington Post published an amazing Op-Ed by Adm. Michael McConnell, Bush's former Director of National Intelligence and a past and current executive with Booz Allen, a firm representing numerous corporate contractors which profit enormously each time the government expands its "cyber-security" activities. McConnell's career over the last two decades - both at Booz, Allen and inside the government - has been devoted to accelerating the merger between the government and private sector in all intelligence, surveillance and national security matters (it was he who led the successful campaign to retroactively immunize the telecom giants for their participation in the illegal NSA domestic spying program). Privatizing government cyber-spying and cyber-warfare is his primary focus now.
McConnell's Op-Ed was as alarmist and hysterical as possible. Claiming that "the United States is fighting a cyber-war today, and we are losing", it warned that "chaos would result" from an enemy cyber-attack on US financial systems and that "our power grids, air and ground transportation, telecommunications, and water-filtration systems are in jeopardy as well." Based on these threats, McConnell advocated that "we" - meaning "the government and the private sector" - "need to develop an early-warning system to monitor cyberspace" and that "we need to reengineer the Internet to make attribution, geolocation, intelligence analysis and impact assessment - who did it, from where, why and what was the result - more manageable." As Wired's Ryan Singel wrote: "He's talking about changing the internet to make everything anyone does on the net traceable and geo-located so the National Security Agency can pinpoint users and their computers for retaliation."
The same week the Post published McConnell's extraordinary Op-Ed, the Obama White House issued its own fear-mongering decree on cyber-threats, depicting the US as a vulnerable victim to cyber-aggression. It began with this sentence: "President Obama has identified cybersecurity as one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation, but one that we as a government or as a country are not adequately prepared to counter." It announced that "the Executive Branch was directed to work closely with all key players in US cybersecurity, including state and local governments and the private sector" and to "strengthen public/private partnerships", and specifically announced Obama's intent to "to implement the recommendations of the Cyberspace Policy Review built on the Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI) launched by President George W. Bush."
Since then, the fear-mongering rhetoric from government officials has relentlessly intensified, all devoted to scaring citizens into believing that the US is at serious risk of cataclysmic cyber-attacks from "aggressors". This all culminated when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, last October, warned of what he called a "cyber-Pearl Harbor". This "would cause physical destruction and the loss of life, an attack that would paralyze and shock the nation and create a profound new sense of vulnerability." Identifying China, Iran, and terrorist groups, he outlined a parade of horribles scarier than anything since Condoleezza Rice's 2002 Iraqi "mushroom cloud":
"An aggressor nation or extremist group could use these kinds of cyber tools to gain control of critical switches. They could derail passenger trains, or even more dangerous, derail passenger trains loaded with lethal chemicals. They could contaminate the water supply in major cities, or shut down the power grid across large parts of the country."
As usual, though, reality is exactly the opposite. This massive new expenditure of money is not primarily devoted to defending against cyber-aggressors. The US itself is the world's leading cyber-aggressor. A major purpose of this expansion is to strengthen the US's ability to destroy other nations with cyber-attacks. Indeed, even the Post report notes that a major component of this new expansion is to "conduct offensive computer operations against foreign adversaries".
It is the US - not Iran, Russia or "terror" groups - which already is the first nation (in partnership with Israel) to aggressively deploy a highly sophisticated and extremely dangerous cyber-attack. Last June, the New York Times' David Sanger reported what most of the world had already suspected: "From his first months in office, President Obama secretly ordered increasingly sophisticated attacks on the computer systems that run Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities, significantly expanding America's first sustained use of cyberweapons." In fact, Obama "decided to accelerate the attacks . . . even after an element of the program accidentally became public in the summer of 2010 because of a programming error that allowed it to escape Iran's Natanz plant and sent it around the world on the Internet." According to the Sanger's report, Obama himself understood the significance of the US decision to be the first to use serious and aggressive cyber-warfare:
"Mr. Obama, according to participants in the many Situation Room meetings on Olympic Games, was acutely aware that with every attack he was pushing the United States into new territory, much as his predecessors had with the first use of atomic weapons in the 1940s, of intercontinental missiles in the 1950s and of drones in the past decade. He repeatedly expressed concerns that any American acknowledgment that it was using cyberweapons - even under the most careful and limited circumstances - could enable other countries, terrorists or hackers to justify their own attacks."
The US isn't the vulnerable victim of cyber-attacks. It's the leading perpetrator of those attacks. As Columbia Professor and cyber expert Misha Glenny wrote in the NYT last June: Obama's cyber-attack on Iran "marked a significant and dangerous turning point in the gradual militarization of the Internet."
Indeed, exactly as Obama knew would happen, revelations that it was the US which became the first country to use cyber-warfare against a sovereign country - just as it was the first to use the atomic bomb and then drones - would make it impossible for it to claim with any credibility (except among its own media and foreign policy community) that it was in a defensive posture when it came to cyber-warfare. As Professor Glenny wrote: "by introducing such pernicious viruses as Stuxnet and Flame, America has severely undermined its moral and political credibility." That's why, as the Post reported yesterday, the DOJ is engaged in such a frantic and invasive effort to root out Sanger's source: because it reveals the obvious truth that the US is the leading aggressor in the world when it comes to cyber-weapons.
This significant expansion under the Orwellian rubric of "cyber-security" is thus a perfect microcosm of US military spending generally. It's all justified under by the claim that the US must defend itself from threats from Bad, Aggressive Actors, when the reality is the exact opposite: the new program is devoted to ensuring that the US remains the primary offensive threat to the rest of the world. It's the same way the US develops offensive biological weapons under the guise of developing defenses against such weapons (such as the 2001 anthrax that the US government itself says came from a US Army lab). It's how the US government generally convinces its citizens that it is a peaceful victim of aggression by others when the reality is that the US builds more weapons, sells more arms and bombs more countries than virtually the rest of the world combined.
Threats to privacy and internet freedom
Beyond the aggressive threat to other nations posed by the Pentagon's "cyber-security" programs, there is the profound threat to privacy, internet freedom, and the ability to communicate freely for US citizens and foreign nationals alike. The US government has long viewed these "cyber-security" programs as a means of monitoring and controlling the internet and disseminating propaganda. The fact that this is all being done under the auspices of the NSA and the Pentagon means, by definition, that there will be no transparency and no meaningful oversight.
Back in 2003, the Rumsfeld Pentagon prepared a secret report entitled "Information Operations (IO) Roadmap", which laid the foundation for this new cyber-warfare expansion. The Pentagon's self-described objective was "transforming IO into a core military competency on par with air, ground, maritime and special operations". In other words, its key objective was to ensure military control over internet-based communications:
It further identified superiority in cyber-attack capabilities as a vital military goal in PSYOPs (Psychological Operations) and "information-centric fights":
And it set forth the urgency of dominating the "IO battlespace" not only during wartime but also in peacetime:
As a 2006 BBC report on this Pentagon document noted: "Perhaps the most startling aspect of the roadmap is its acknowledgement that information put out as part of the military's psychological operations, or Psyops, is finding its way onto the computer and television screens of ordinary Americans." And while the report paid lip service to the need to create "boundaries" for these new IO military activities, "they don't seem to explain how." Regarding the report's plan to "provide maximum control of the entire electromagnetic spectrum", the BBC noted: "Consider that for a moment. The US military seeks the capability to knock out every telephone, every networked computer, every radar system on the planet."
Since then, there have been countless reports of the exploitation by the US national security state to destroy privacy and undermine internet freedom. In November, the LA Times described programs that "teach students how to spy in cyberspace, the latest frontier in espionage." They "also are taught to write computer viruses, hack digital networks, crack passwords, plant listening devices and mine data from broken cellphones and flash drives." The program, needless to say, "has funneled most of its graduates to the CIA and the Pentagon's National Security Agency, which conducts America's digital spying. Other graduates have taken positions with the FBI, NASA and the Department of Homeland Security."
In 2010, Lawrence E. Strickling, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information, gave a speech explicitly announcing that the US intends to abandon its policy of "leaving the Internet alone". Noting that this "has been the nation's Internet policy since the Internet was first commercialized in the mid-1990s", he decreed: "This was the right policy for the United States in the early stages of the Internet, and the right message to send to the rest of the world. But that was then and this is now."
The documented power of the US government to monitor and surveil internet communications is already unfathomably massive. Recall that the Washington Post's 2010 "Top Secret America" series noted that: "Every day, collection systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications." And the Obama administration has formally demanded that it have access to any and all forms of internet communication.
It is hard to overstate the danger to privacy and internet freedom from a massive expansion of the National Security State's efforts to exploit and control the internet. As Wired's Singel wrote back in 2010:
"Make no mistake, the military industrial complex now has its eye on the internet. Generals want to train crack squads of hackers and have wet dreams of cyberwarfare. Never shy of extending its power, the military industrial complex wants to turn the internet into yet another venue for an arms race".
Wildly exaggerated cyber-threats are the pretext for this control, the "mushroom cloud" and the Tonkin Gulf fiction of cyber-warfare. As Singel aptly put it: "the only war going on is one for the soul of the internet." That's the vital context for understanding this massive expansion of Pentagon and NSA consolidated control over cyber programs.
Bonanza for private contractors
As always, it is not just political power but also private-sector profit driving this expansion. As military contracts for conventional war-fighting are modestly reduced, something needs to replace it, and these large-scale "cyber-security" contracts are more than adequate. Virtually every cyber-security program from the government is carried out in conjunction with its "private-sector partners", who receive large transfers of public funds for this work.
Two weeks ago, Business Week reported that "Lockheed Martin Corp., AT&T Inc., and CenturyLink Inc. are the first companies to sign up for a US program giving them classified information on cyber threats that they can package as security services for sale to other companies." This is part of a government effort "to create a market based on classified US information about cyber threats." In May, it was announced that "the Pentagon is expanding and making permanent a trial program that teams the government with Internet service providers to protect defense firms' computer networks against data theft by foreign adversaries" - all as "part of a larger effort to broaden the sharing of classified and unclassified cyberthreat data between the government and industry."
Indeed, there is a large organization of defense and intelligence contractors devoted to one goal: expanding the private-public merger for national security and intelligence functions. This organization - the Intelligence and National Security Alliance (INSA) - was formerly headed by Adm. McConnell, and describes itself as a "collaboration by leaders from throughout the US Intelligence Community" which "combines the experience of senior leaders from government, the private sector, and academia."
As I detailed back in 2010, one of its primary goals is to scare the nation about supposed cyber-threats in order to justify massive new expenditures for the private-sector intelligence industry on cyber-security measures and vastly expanded control over the internet. Indeed, in his 2010 Op-Ed, Adm. McConnell expressly acknowledged that the growing privatization of internet cyber-security programs "will muddy the waters between the traditional roles of the government and the private sector." At the very same time McConnell published this Op-Ed, the INSA website featured a report entitled "Addressing Cyber Security Through Public-Private Partnership." It featured a genuinely creepy graphic showing the inter-connectedness between government institutions (such as Congress and regulatory agencies), the Surveillance State, private intelligence corporations, and the Internet:
Private-sector profit is now inextricably linked with the fear-mongering campaign over cyber-threats. At one INSA conference in 2009 - entitled "Cyber Deterrence Conference" - government officials and intelligence industry executives gathered together to stress that "government and private sector actors should emphasize collaboration and partnership through the creation of a model that assigns specific roles and responsibilities."
As intelligence contractor expert Tim Shorrock told Democracy Now when McConnell - then at Booz Allen - was first nominated to be DNI:
Well, the NSA, the National Security Agency, is really sort of the lead agency in terms of outsourcing . . . . Booz Allen is one of about, you know, ten large corporations that play a very major role in American intelligence. Every time you hear about intelligence watching North Korea or tapping al-Qaeda phones, something like that, you can bet that corporations like these are very heavily involved. And Booz Allen is one of the largest of these contractors. I estimate that about 50% of our $45 billion intelligence budget goes to private sector contractors like Booz Allen.
This public-private merger for intelligence and surveillance functions not only vests these industries with large-scale profits at public expense, but also the accompanying power that was traditionally reserved for government. And unlike government agencies, which are at least subjected in theory to some minimal regulatory oversight, these private-sector actors have virtually none, even as their surveillance and intelligence functions rapidly increase.
What Dwight Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex has been feeding itself on fear campaigns since it was born. A never-ending carousel of Menacing Enemies - Communists, Terrorists, Latin American Tyrants, Saddam's chemical weapons, Iranian mullahs - has sustained it, and Cyber-Threats are but the latest.
Like all of these wildly exaggerated cartoon menaces, there is some degree of threat posed by cyber-attacks. But, as Singel described, all of this can be managed with greater security systems for public and private computer networks - just as some modest security measures are sufficient to deal with the terrorist threat.
This new massive expansion has little to do with any actual cyber-threat - just as the invasion of Iraq and global assassination program have little to do with actual terrorist threats. It is instead all about strengthening the US's offensive cyber-war capabilities, consolidating control over the internet, and ensuring further transfers of massive public wealth to private industry continue unabated. In other words, it perfectly follows the template used by the public-private US National Security State over the last six decades to entrench and enrich itself based on pure pretext.
People the world over bemoan computer hackers and information breaches but feel powerless to stop them. Deborah Housen-Couriel ’77 does something about the problem — she helps her clients outwit cyber threats.
The lawyer and cybersecurity expert, who advises clients internationally, spoke on “Cybersecurity Today: The What, Why, How and Who” on Monday, Feb. 11, at 6:45 pm in the Rhodes Room of Beveridge Hall.
Housen-Couriel practices in Israel and fights cyber threats globally. Her specific area of expertise is global and Israeli cybersecurity law and regulation, and she works closely with the leading Israeli cybersecurity firm Konfidas.
Housen-Couriel supports her law practice with her own extensive research on cybersecurity, satellite communications, and outer-space law. She is writing a doctoral dissertation on how information sharing may reduce cyberthreats.
Housen-Couriel’s visit was sponsored by the Wantman Family State of the World Speaker Series at NMH, now in its 10th year. Series founder Charles Wantman ’59 attended the event.
CISPA, the Privacy-Invading Cybersecurity Spying Bill, is Back in Congress
February 13, 2013 | By Mark M. Jaycox. Electronic Frontier Foundation.
It's official: The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act was reintroduced in the House of Representatives yesterday. CISPA is the contentious bill civil liberties advocates fought last year, which would provide a poorly-defined "cybersecurity" exception to existing privacy law. CISPA offers broad immunities to companies who choose to share data with government agencies (including the private communications of users) in the name of cybersecurity. It also creates avenues for companies to share data with any federal agencies, including military intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency (NSA).
EFF is adamantly opposed to CISPA. Will you join us in calling on Congress to stop this and any other privacy-invasive cybersecurity legislation?
As others have noted, “CISPA is deeply flawed. Under a broad cybersecurity umbrella, it permits companies to share user communications directly with the super secret NSA and permits the NSA to use that information for non-cybersecurity reasons. This risks turning the cybersecurity program into a back door intelligence surveillance program run by a military entity with little transparency or public accountability.”
Last year, CISPA passed the House with a few handful of amendments that tried to fix some of its vague language. But the amendments didn't address many of the significant civil liberties concerns. Those remaining problems were reintroduced in today's version of CISPA. Here's a brief overview of the issues:
Companies have new rights to monitor user actions and share data—including potentially sensitive user data—with the government without a warrant.
First, CISPA would still give businesses1 the power to use "cybersecurity systems" to obtain any "cybersecurity threat information" (CTI)—which could include personal communications—about a percieved threat to their networks or systems. The only limitation is that the company must act for a "cybersecurity purpose," which is vaguely defined to include such things as "safeguarding" networks.
CISPA overrides existing privacy law, and grants broad immunities to participating companies.
At the same time, CISPA would also create a broad immunity from legal liability for monitoring, acquiring, or sharing CTI, so long as the entity acted “in good faith.” Our concern from day one has been that these combined power and immunity provisions would override existing privacy laws like the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act.
Worse, the law provides immunity “for decisions made based on” CTI. A rogue or misguided company could easily make bad "decisions" that would do a lot more harm than good, and should not be immunized.
CISPA also raises major transparency and accountability issues.
Information provided to the federal government under CISPA would be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and other state laws that could otherwise require disclosure (unless some law other than CISPA already requires its provision to the government).
Users probably won't know if their private data is compromised under CISPA, and will have little recourse.
CISPA's authors argue that the bill contains limitations on how the federal government can use and disclose information by permitting lawsuits against the government. But if a company sends information about a user that is not cyberthreat information, the government agency does not notify the user, only the company.
CISPA is a dangerous bill
These are just a couple of reasons of why CISPA is a dangerous bill and why President Obama threatened to veto the bill last year. CISPA essentially equates greater cybersecurity with greater surveillance and information sharing. But many of our cybersecurity problems arise from software vulnerabilities and human failings, issues CISPA fails to address. For instance, the recent series of hacks suffered by New York Times were suspected to be from spearphishing and victims downloading malicious software masked as email attachments—the types of issues that CISPA doesn't deal with.
We were heartened to hear that President Obama's new Executive Order on cybersecurity will encourage government agencies to more readily share cybersecurity information with companies, and may even reduce unnecessary secrecy around cybersecurity information. Let's use the momentum from the Executive Order to turn a new leaf in the cybersecurity debate, beginning a broader public dialogue about cybersecurity that doesn’t assume that surveillance is the right solution.
Please join EFF in opposing CISPA by contacting Congress today.
023
McKinsey Global Infrastructure Initiative Summit
Tokyo, Japan
Thursday, October 20th, 2022
10:35–11:10
BUILDING CYBER RESILIENCE
Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, such as the Colonial Pipeline, are increasing in frequency and size. Concurrently, infrastructure operators are implementing new technologies that increase efficiencies, but these could also make their assets more vulnerable to cyberattacks. How can the industry embrace digital adoption while managing cyberthreats? What can be done about zero-day exploits—that is, cyberattacks that occur the same day a vulnerability is discovered by a hacker? What preventive strategies might reduce downtime?
Panelists:
Mark Fialkowski, President Mobility Solutions, Parsons
Marc Ganzi, Chief Executive Officer, Digital Bridge
Shinichi Yokohama, Chief Information Security Officer, EVP Security and Trust, NTT Group
Moderator: Swarna Ramanathan, Partner, McKinsey & Company
Photograph by McKinsey Global Infrastructure/Stuart Isett
www.globaltimes.cn/page/202212/1281909.shtml
US has made its Africa strategy a Gordian knot: Global Times editorial
The second US-Africa Leaders Summit kicked off on Tuesday in Washington and will last for three days. The US-based Foreign Policy magazine reported that "Team Biden wants to court African nations without talking about Beijing." But this was broken on the first day. At a panel discussion with several African leaders, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said China was expanding its footprint in Africa "on a daily basis" through its growing economic influence, which will "destabilize" the continent.
African countries have been wearied of US' various remarks aiming to sow discord. This time, coming all the way to the US, the leaders of 49 countries and the African Union are not to have dinner at the White House, not to be lectured by Americans, nor to hear Americans bad-mouthing China. As a matter of fact, they have clearly shown their reluctance and aversion towards the pressure piled on them to take sides, and ask the US to respect them.
The day ahead of the summit, the US pledged to provide $55 billion to Africa over the course of the next three years in economic, health and security support for Africa. Then, the US announced an expansion of its cooperation and capabilities in outer space to include some African countries. It is reported that during the summit, President Joe Biden will declare US support for the African Union's admission to the G20. These are of course good things. Now that the US has made so many promises, it should focus on fulfilling it.
China is willing to see more countries, including the US, offer sincere help to Africa, as the saying goes, "the more the better." African countries also are eager to seek strong support and assistance to deal with the food crisis, financial crisis, and fiscal crisis in the post-pandemic era. In this regard, there are many things the US can, needs and should do. But what's concerning is if the US will play the "lip service" trick once again.
The first US-Africa Leaders Summit was held eight years ago during the Obama administration. The two summits were separated by not only eight years, but also a US president who insulted African countries as "shithole," which has become a historical witness of US' capriciousness and disrespect for Africa.
The Power Africa initiative, which was proposed during the Obama administration, has only completed about 25 percent of the total. Now that the Biden administration wants to regain the trust of Africa, it must first repay these debts.
The US has made its Africa strategy a Gordian knot. It has set its goal to prevent China's development in the African continent instead of helping African countries cope with development difficulties, which fundamentally goes against the wishes of African countries and damages their interests. In other words, the US wants to let African countries pry away the bricks of the projects built with China's aid, by only painting a few pieces of cake.
In the past, the US regarded the African continent as a problem that it disliked and needed to be solved, but now it regards Africa as a pawn in the major power competition. It never really regards Africa as a cooperative partner of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect. Not only African countries have been keenly aware of this, but the international community also sees it clearly.
The African people still have fresh memories of the proxy wars waged by the US and the Soviet Union in Africa during the Cold War, making them deeply guard against big power competition. With the world becoming more multipolarized, they are even more opposed to and resistant to be regarded as a pawn in the strategy of major countries.
The US Strategy toward Sub-Saharan Africa released in August mentioned China three times, all of which described China in a negative context, arousing extensive dissatisfaction in Africa. A well-known South African scholar bluntly pointed out that this strategy is "thoroughly unremarkable strategy that came across as the latest in a long list of paternalistic lectures the US and the broader West have given Africa on how to run its affairs." And it seems that Washington "has not read the African mood very well."
African countries hope to build good relationship with the US, but they don't want to achieve it at the cost of China-Africa development and cooperation. China is Africa's largest trading partner, with trade volume reaching $254 billion in 2021, which is four times that of US-Africa trade. China is also one of the countries with the largest investment to Africa, bringing millions of job opportunities to the continent. Hospitals, highways, airports, stadiums which are built with Chinese aid are all over Africa. The US can be like China and do more practical things for African people. If the US-Africa Leaders Summit can be held around this theme, it will be welcome by everybody.
www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/biden-aims-to-inject-new-ene...
Biden Aims to Inject New Energy Into US Relations With African Nations
WASHINGTON — President Biden sought to revitalize America’s listless relationship with Africa on Wednesday, promising a grab bag of economic initiatives to make up for a predecessor who had denigrated the continent and catch up with strategic competitors like China that have expanded their influence.
Assembling most of Africa’s leaders in Washington for the first time since 2014, Mr. Biden vowed to invest what aides calculated will be $55 billion on the continent over the next three years while supporting its ambitions for greater global leadership and bolstering efforts to transform it into a more prosperous, healthier and technologically advanced region.
“The United States is all in on Africa’s future,” Mr. Biden declared in an address to the delegations of 49 nations attending the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit. Adapting a line he often uses to pitch domestic priorities, the president added, “Together, we want to build a future of opportunity where no one, no one, is left behind.”
The three-day gathering may go a long way toward emphasizing American support for Africa, with concrete pledges on issues of great importance. At the same time, it did not include a sweeping, inspirational initiative like President George W. Bush’s PEPFAR program to combat AIDS or President Barack Obama’s Power Africa drive to electrify tens of millions of homes. Unclear was whether Mr. Biden’s less splashy commitments would have an effect that would be noticed and positively shape perceptions of America.
The United States is widely seen as lagging behind China in cultivating Africa, a geopolitical contest that in recent years has expanded to include powers like Russia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has exacerbated food shortages in Africa while Covid-19 has disrupted supply chains, multiplying challenges in a region with no shortage of them to begin with.
American influence in Africa dwindled under Mr. Biden’s predecessor, Donald J. Trump, who paid little attention to the continent except to deride some of its 54 nations with an expletive and to complain that after immigrants from Nigeria saw the United States, they would never “go back to their huts.” Mr. Trump spoke of Africa as if the entire continent were a single country, and once confused the name of an African nation.
Without mentioning any of that history, Mr. Biden sought to demonstrate affection for the region, celebrating the visiting African leaders and their spouses at a gala dinner at the White House featuring Gladys Knight on Wednesday night and honoring Morocco’s success as the first African nation to make the final four in the World Cup.
“I know you’re saying to yourselves, ‘Make it short, Biden, there’s a semifinal game coming up,’” he joked as he opened his speech just 13 minutes before game time. (Morocco fell to France, 2-0.)
At the dinner in the White House East Room, Mr. Biden raised the more painful history of slavery. “We remember the stolen men and women and children who were brought to our shores in chains, subjected to unimaginable cruelty — my nation’s original sin was that period,” he said. Their descendants, he added, “have helped build this country and propel it to higher heights, leading the charge, blazing new trails and forging a better future for everyone in America.”
In the course of his interactions with African leaders, the president unveiled a series of initiatives, including an agreement meant to encourage the formation of a continentwide free-trade zone that has stalled over the last few years. He vowed to help African countries do more to transition to clean energy and plug into the digital economy, a contrast to China, which has focused much of its investment in Africa on building roads, bridges, airports and other physical infrastructure.
Mr. Biden said in his keynote address that the goal was not to “create political obligation or foster dependence” but to “spur shared success,” a phrase he said characterized his approach. “Because when Africa succeeds, the United States succeeds,” he said. “Quite frankly, the whole world succeeds as well.”
The Biden administration has sought to deflect the perception that its efforts this week were aimed at competing with China, which has surpassed the United States in trade and economic cooperation with Africa.
But the emphasis put on Africa was an implicit recognition that the United States has little choice but to commit to the continent, which is projected to account for one in four people by 2050 and is rich in the resources needed to combat climate change and transition to clean energy, like vast forests and rare minerals used to power electric vehicles.
Mr. Biden’s challenge was to convince the African leaders that he was serious about wanting to trade with them. Many were openly skeptical. At a side event in Washington hours before Mr. Biden spoke, President Paul Kagame of Rwanda shrugged when asked if anything had come out of the inaugural U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit hosted by Mr. Obama in 2014.
“Well, at least we had a good meeting,” he replied, drawing laughter from the crowd.
Mr. Biden planned to return to the summit at the Washington Convention Center on Thursday for a session on the African Union’s strategic vision for the continent. Vice President Kamala Harris will host a working lunch, and Mr. Biden will close the gathering with a discussion of food security.
The Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine provided Mr. Biden with an entry point for his pitch to Africa’s leaders, reminding them that the United States delivered 231 million vaccines to 49 African countries.
Yet the war in Ukraine also underscored the scale of American priorities. A mistake by Mr. Biden in his speech underscored the context. He described a digital economy initiative for Africa as a $350 billion investment, when in fact it will be $350 million, as noted in the official White House transcript correcting the president’s error. By contrast, the Biden administration and Congress have committed $66 billion to the war in Ukraine and the White House has just asked Congress for another $37.7 billion.
Some analysts wondered whether the roster of projects ticked off by the president and his aides this week would be more effective than a single broad initiative like those introduced by Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama.
“When I hear a laundry list, a long list of investments, that’s just showing what the U.S. is doing,” said Aubrey Hruby of the Africa Center at the Atlantic Council. “But I don’t know if that sinks in very well. Whereas with Power Africa it was simpler, perhaps more memorable. It drew on the power of the podium.”
“The key,” she added, “will be what people remember one month from now. Or one year from now. What becomes real.”
The digital economy project includes a partnership with Microsoft and programs to train African entrepreneurs to write code. “American big tech recognizes that the demographic future of this world is African,” Ms. Hruby said. “A million Africans turn 18 every month. This is the future.”
As ever in this week’s summit, China was the unspoken factor. When Mr. Biden announced $800 million in new contracts for Cisco Systems and a smaller company named Cybastion “to protect African countries from cyberthreats,” it offered a counterpoint to the dominance of Huawei, the Chinese technology firm whose cellphones and computers systems are ubiquitous across Africa, stoking fears that Beijing could use them for cyberespionage.
The Biden administration this week announced its support for an initiative to use minerals mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo to make batteries for electric vehicles in factories in neighboring Zambia. That deal meets the African goal of keeping supply chains for one of the world’s hottest new businesses on the continent.
It also meets an American strategic objective, countering worries in Washington that China is obtaining a stranglehold on rare minerals in countries like Congo.
The administration also signed a memorandum of understanding to support the African Continental Free Trade Area, which was started in 2019 and promises to unlock the enormous economic potential of a continent of 1.3 billion people and a total market of $3.4 trillion by easing trade barriers between individual countries.
Africa’s mostly colonial-era borders are further heightened by protectionist policies, poor transport links and other measures that hinder trade. The free-trade area could increase intra-Africa trade by up to one-quarter, or $70 billion, by 2040, helping to lift 30 million people out of extreme poverty, according to the United Nations and the World Bank. But implementation has been slow, and experts say that assistance from the United States and other foreign powers is needed to bolster its chances of success.
Jake Sullivan, Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, said the current administration has been working hard to restore ties to Africa over the nearly two years since Mr. Trump left office.
“Look, any time an administration chooses not to put as much energy or emphasis into a place, it obviously has some ramifications,” he told reporters this week. But “we believe that we are not coming into this summit from a standing start. We’re coming into this summit with a head of steam around a set of issues that this summit, I think, is going to kick into a higher gear.”
ZoomCharts is offering data visualization tools to support presenters at the Cyber Threats World Summit 2015, taking place May 15th, 2015 at the Lalit Mumbai, Sahar Airport Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400059, India.
Check out what you can do with ZoomCharts charts and graphs at zoomcharts.com
ZoomCharts is a leading data visualization provider, offering the world’s most interactive data visualization software with fully interactive charts and graphs that support big data sets, work with all mobile devices, and perform at incredibly fast speeds. Be among the growing number of professionals discovering the exciting potential that ZoomCharts has in improving the efficiency of data analysis and presentation.
The third annual Cyber Threats World Summit brings together national and international cyber security experts and professionals to understand the nature of cyber attacks. Cyber security is an important subject, as India is the third most vulnerable country in the world to cyber attacks.
It is an event in the interest of professionals such as Senior Management, Policy Makers, Business Owners, Procurement Specialists, Board Management, CEOs, CTOs, CFOs, IT Executives, Mobile App Developers, Accountants, and Lawyers, among many others.
Be a part of the conference that will highlight critical aspects of next generation cyber threats, in sectors such as Telecom and IT, Banking & Financial services, Defense, Government, Legal, Transportation, and more.
Learn how to cope with emerging and continuing cyber threats that have seen increases in volume, from sources such as hostile governments, terrorist groups, disgruntled employees, malicious intruders, and malware, with the opportunity to discuss ways to secure the cyber space of the future in order to ensure financial security and business continuity.
Check out ZoomCharts products:
Network Chart
Big network exploration
Explore linked data sets. Highlight relevant data with dynamic filters and visual styles. Incremental data loading. Exploration with focus nodes.
Time Chart
Time navigation and exploration tool
Browse activity logs, select time ranges. Multiple data series and value axes. Switch between time units.
Pie Chart
Amazingly intuitive hierarchical data exploration
Get quick overview of your data and drill down when necessary. All in a single easy to use chart.
Facet Chart
Scrollable bar chart with drill-down
Compare values side by side and provide easy access to the long tail.
ZoomCharts
The world’s most interactive data visualization software
#zoomcharts #interactive #data #visualization #charts #graphs #bigdata #dataviz #CyberThreats #Mumbai #India #Lalit #cyber #security #web # Telecom #IT #Banking #Financial #Defense #Government #Legal #Transportation
ZoomCharts is offering data visualization tools to support presenters at the National Conference on Emerging Trends in Information Technology, the theme of which will be Cyber Security: A Panoramic View.
Organized by the Institute of Innovation in Technology & Management, and in collaboration with the Institute of Information Technology & Management, the event takes place on March 21st, 2015, at, D-27, 28, Institutional Area, Janakpuri, New Dehli-110058.
Check out what you can do with ZoomCharts charts and graphs at zoomcharts.com
ZoomCharts is a leading data visualization provider, offering the worldâs most interactive data visualization software. All charts and graphs are completely interactive, support big data sets, work on all modern devices including touch screens, and perform at incredibly fast speeds. Be among the growing number of professionals discovering the exciting potential that ZoomCharts has in improving the efficiency of data analysis and presentation.
Original papers being accepted at the cyber security conference include those by researchers, academicians, industrialists, and postgraduate students.
There is a wide range of topics being covered at the event, such as Cloud Security, Mobile and Web Security, Wireless Network Security, Social Networking Security and Privacy, Network Security and Cryptography, End Point Security, Biometrics, Anti-Forensic Techniques, Honeynet Technologies, SCADA Security, Cyber Threats and Trends, Firewall Management, Virtualized Machines, SOA Security Issues, and more.
Check out ZoomCharts products:
Network Chart
Big network exploration
Explore linked data sets. Highlight relevant data with dynamic filters and visual styles. Incremental data loading. Exploration with focus nodes.
Time Chart
Time navigation and exploration tool
Browse activity logs, select time ranges. Multiple data series and value axes. Switch between time units.
Pie Chart
Amazingly intuitive hierarchical data exploration
Get quick overview of your data and drill down when necessary. All in a single easy to use chart.
Facet Chart
Scrollable bar chart with drill-down
Compare values side by side and provide easy access to the long tail.
ZoomCharts
The worldâs most interactive data visualization software
#zoomcharts #interactive #data #visualization #charts #graphs #bigdata #dataviz #Delhi #NewDelhi #India #IITM #IT #cyber #cybersecurity #security #cloud #mobile #web #wireless #network #social #socialnetwork #privacy #cryptography #endpoint #biometrics #antiforensic #Honeynet #SCADA #cyberthreats #firewall #SOA
Lt. Col. Darrell Walker, G-2 operations officer, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command/Army Forces Strategic Command, administers the oath of office to Sgt. 1st Class Melissa Lively, an intelligence analyst with U.S. Special Operations Command, during her promotion Feb. 15 at the command's Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, headquarters. Lively, who serves in the U.S. Army Reserve, works as a counterintelligence cyber threat analyst for SMDC.
Paul Shemella, Combating Terrorism Program Manager for the Center for Civil-Military Relations (Naval Postgraduate School), speaks to more than 20 members of Iraq’s Counter-Terrorism Service during a three-day course focusing on cyber threat security and extremist ideology Sept. 4-6.
Members of the Colorado National Guard's Task Force Cyber help the Colorado Secretary of State Wayne W. Williams monitor network traffic and advise the Chief Information Officer Trevor Timmons Nov. 6, 2018. (U.S. Air National Guard Photo by Maj. Darin Overstreet)
July 7, 2011: Washington, D.C.
Full Committee Hearing
This official Congressman Darrell Issa photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of Congressman Darrell Issa, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the U.S. House of Representatives, or any Member of Congress.
South Carolina National Guard, state Government, University of South Carolina, and South Carolina’s Businesses join forces in cyber-security, and announce the SC Cyber consortium on Feb. 24, 2016, Columbia, South Carolina. The newly created SC Cyber consortium will educate businesses, government agencies, and USC students on cyber-security tools, skills, and procedures, with the ultimate goal to enhance South Carolina’s ability to fight cyber threats at all levels of the local government and industry. SC Cyber aims to develop a series of strategically located, cyber-security, hubs across South Carolina. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Staff Sgt. Roberto Di Giovine/Released)