Officials from the Netherlands and Australia today formally stated that they are convinced Russia was responsible for the deployment of the “Buk” anti-aircraft missile system that shot down Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 (ML17) in 2014. The announcement came a day after a Dutch-led joint investigation team released a report on their findings, which concluded the missile had belonged to the Russian Army’s 53rd anti-aircraft brigade, which was based outside the city of Kursk, north of the Ukrainian border.
Physical evidence collected by investigators, along with radar track and flight recorder data, pointed to the use of a specific warhead type associated with Buk surface-to-air missiles. Paint transferred from fragments of the missile to the aircraft’s fuselage was matched with recovered parts of the missile.
Russia has long denied that any of its military equipment ever crossed the border into eastern Ukraine, and the Russians presented several alternative scenarios—including blaming the downing of the airliner on a Ukrainian Air Force pilot. The Russians at first claimed to have radar evidence proving their allegation, but the country then said it was lost—only to claim they had found it again just two days before the Joint Investigative Team’s 2016 press conference. The separate target that Russia claimed to have identified on radar was actually part of ML14’s fuselage breaking away after the missile detonated.
Russian cybersecurity software maker Kaspersky Labs has announced it will be moving core infrastructure processes to Zurich, Switzerland, as part of a shift announced last year to try to win back customer trust.
It also said it’s arranging for the process to be independently supervised by a Switzerland-based third party qualified to conduct technical software reviews.
“By the end of 2019, Kaspersky Lab will have established a data center in Zurich and in this facility will store and process all information for users in Europe, North America, Singapore, Australia, Japan and South Korea, with more countries to follow,” it writes in a press release.
“Kaspersky Lab will relocate to Zurich its ‘software build conveyer’ — a set of programming tools used to assemble ready to use software out of source code. Before the end of 2018, Kaspersky Lab products and threat detection rule databases (AV databases) will start to be assembled and signed with a digital signature in Switzerland, before being distributed to the endpoints of customers worldwide.
“The relocation will ensure that all newly assembled software can be verified by an independent organization, and show that software builds and updates received by customers match the source code provided for audit.”
In October the company unveiled what it dubbed a “comprehensive transparency initiative” as it battled suspicion that its antivirus software had been hacked or penetrated by the Russian government and used as a route for scooping up US intelligence.
Being a trusted global cybersecurity firm and operating core processes out of Russia where authorities might be able to lean on your company for access has essentially become untenable as geopolitical concern over the Kremlin’s online activities has spiked in recent years.
Yesterday the Dutch government became the latest public sector customer to announce a move away from Kaspersky products (via Reuters) — saying it was doing so as a “precautionary measure”, and advising companies operating vital services to do the same.
Responding to the Dutch government’s decision, Kaspersky described it as “very disappointing”, saying its transparency initiative is “designed precisely to address any fears that people or organisations may have”.
“We are implementing these measures first and foremost in response to the evolving, ultra-connected global landscape and the challenges the cyber-world is currently facing,” the company adds in a detailed Q&A about the measures. “This is not exclusive to Kaspersky Lab, and we believe other organizations will in future also choose to adapt to these trends. Having said that, the overall aim of these measures is transparency, verified and proven, which means that anyone with concerns will now be able to see the integrity and trustworthiness of our solutions.”
The core processes that Kaspersky will move from Russia to Switzerland over this year and next — include customer data storage and processing (for “most regions”); and software assembly, including threat detection updates.
As a result of the shift it says it will be setting up “hundreds” of servers in Switzerland and establishing a new data center there, as well as drawing on facilities of a number of local data center providers.
Kaspersky is not exiting Russia entirely, though, and products for the Russian market will continue to be developed and distributed out of Moscow.
“In Switzerland we will be creating the ‘worldwide’ (ww) version of our products and AV bases. All modules for the ww-version will be compiled there. We will continue to use the current software build conveyer in Moscow for creating products and AV bases for the Russian market,” it writes, claiming it is retaining a software build conveyor in Russia to “simplify local certification”.
Data of customers from Latin American and Asia (with the exception of Japan, South Korea and Singapore) will also continue to be stored and processed in Russia — but Kaspersky says the list of countries for which data will be processed and stored in Switzerland will be “further extended, adding: “The current list is an initial one… and we are also considering the relocation of further data processing to other planned Transparency Centers, when these are opened.”
Whether retaining a presence and infrastructure in Russia will work against Kaspersky’s wider efforts to win back trust globally remains to be seen.
In the Q&A it claims: “There will be no difference between Switzerland and Russia in terms of data processing. In both regions we will adhere to our fundamental principle of respecting and protecting people’s privacy, and we will use a uniform approach to processing users’ data, with strict policies applied.”
However other pre-emptive responses in the document underline the trust challenge it is likely to face — such as a question asking what kind of data stored in Switzerland that will be sent or available to staff in its Moscow HQ.
On this it writes: “All data processed by Kaspersky Lab products located in regions excluding Russia, CIS, Latin America, Asian and African countries, will be stored in Switzerland. By default only aggregated statistics data will be sent to R&D in Moscow. However, Kaspersky Lab experts from HQ and other locations around the world will be able to access data stored in the Transparency Center. Each information request will be logged and monitored by the independent Swiss-based organization.”
Clearly the robustness of the third party oversight provisions will be essential to its Global Transparency Initiative winning trust.
Kaspersky’s activity in Switzerland will be overseen by an (as yet unnamed) independent third party which the company says will have “all access necessary to verify the trustworthiness of our products and business processes”, including: “Supervising and logging instances of Kaspersky Lab employees accessing product meta data received through KSN [Kaspersky Security Network] and stored in the Swiss data center; and organizing and conducting a source code review, plus other tasks aimed at assessing and verifying the trustworthiness of its products.
Switzerland will also host one of the dedicated Transparency Centers the company said last year that it would be opening as part of the wider program aimed at securing customer trust.
It expects the Swiss center to open this year, although the shifting of core infrastructure processes won’t be completed until Q4 2019. (It says on account of the complexity of redesigning infrastructure that’s been operating for ~20 years — estimating the cost of the project to be $12M.)
Within the Transparency Center, which Kaspersky will operate itself, the source code of its products and software updates will be available for review by “responsible stakeholders” — from the public and private sector.
It adds that the details of review processes — including how governments will be able to review code — are “currently under discussion” and will be made public “as soon as they are available”.
And providing government review in a way that does not risk further undermining customer trust may also provide a tricky balancing act for Kaspersky, given multi-directional geopolitical sensibilities, so the devil will be in the policy detail vis-a-vis “trusted” partners and whether the processes it deploys can reassure all of its customers all of the time.
“Trusted partners will have access to the company’s code, software updates and threat detection rules, among other things,” it writes, saying the Center will provide these third parties with: “Access to secure software development documentation; Access to the source code of any publicly released product; Access to threat detection rule databases; Access to the source code of cloud services responsible for receiving and storing the data of customers based in Europe, North America, Australia, Japan, South Korea and Singapore; Access to software tools used for the creation of a product (the build scripts), threat detection rule databases and cloud services”; along with “technical consultations on code and technologies”.
It is still intending to open two additional centers, one in North America and one in Asia, but precise locations have not yet been announced.
On supervision and review Kaspersky also says that it’s hoping to work with partners to establish an independent, non-profit organization for the purpose of producing professional technical reviews of the trustworthiness of the security products of multiple members — including but not limited to Kaspersky Lab itself.
Which would certainly go further to bolster trust. Though it has nothing firm to share about this plan as yet.
“Since transparency and trust are becoming universal requirements across the cybersecurity industry, Kaspersky Lab supports the creation of a new, non-profit organization to take on this responsibility, not just for the company, but for other partners and members who wish to join,” it writes on this.
Next month it’s also hosting an online summit to discuss “the growing need for transparency, collaboration and trust” within the cybersecurity industry.
Commenting in a statement, CEO Eugene Kaspersky, added: “In a rapidly changing industry such as ours we have to adapt to the evolving needs of our clients, stakeholders and partners. Transparency is one such need, and that is why we’ve decided to redesign our infrastructure and move our data processing facilities to Switzerland. We believe such action will become a global trend for cybersecurity, and that a policy of trust will catch on across the industry as a key basic requirement.”
On Thursday, Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee released a massive new trove of Russian government-funded Facebook political ads targeted at American voters. While we’d seen a cross section of the ads before through prior releases from the committee, the breadth of ideological manipulation is on full display across the more than 3,500 newly released ads — and that doesn’t even count still unreleased unpaid content that shared the same divisive aims.
Russia sought to weaponize social media to drive a wedge between Americans, and in an attempt to sway the 2016 election. They created fake accounts, pages and communities to push divisive online content and videos, and to mobilize real Americans.
After viewing the ads, which stretch from 2015 to late 2017, some clear trends emerged.
Russia focused on black Americans
Many, many of these ads targeted black Americans. From the fairly large sample of ads that we reviewed, black Americans were clearly of particular interest, likely in an effort to escalate latent racial tensions.
Many of these ads appeared as memorials for black Americans killed by police officers. Others simply intended to stir up black pride, like one featuring an Angela Davis quote. One ad posted by “Black Matters” was targeted at Ferguson, Missouri residents in June 2015 and only featured the lyrics to Tupac’s “California Love.” Around this time, many ads targeted black Facebook users in Baltimore and the St. Louis area.
Some Instagram ads targeted black voters interested in black power, Malcolm X, and the new Black Panther party using Facebook profile information. In the days leading up to November 8, 2016 other ads specifically targeted black Americans with anti-Clinton messaging.
Not all posts were divisive (though most were)
While most ads played into obvious ideological agendas, those posts were occasionally punctuated by more neutral content. The less controversial or call-to-action style posts were likely designed to buffer the politically divisive content, helping to build out and grow an account over time.
For accounts that grew over the course of multiple years, some “neutral” posts were likely useful for making them appear legitimate and build trust among followers. Some posts targeting LGBT users and other identity-based groups just shared positive messages specific to those communities.
Ads targeted media consumers and geographic areas
Some ads we came across targeted Buzzfeed readers, though they were inexplicably more meme-oriented and not political in nature. Others focused on Facebook users that liked the Huffington Post’s Black Voices section or Sean Hannity.
Many ads targeting black voters targeted major U.S. cities with large black populations (Baltimore and New Orleans, for example). Other geo-centric ads tapped into Texas pride and called on Texans to secede.
Conservatives were targeted on many issues
We already knew this from the ad previews, but the new collection of ads makes it clear that conservative Americans across a number of interest groups were regularly targeted. This targeting concentrated on stirring up patriotic and sometimes nationalist sentiment with anti-Clinton, gun rights, anti-immigrant and religious stances. Some custom-made accounts spoke directly to veterans and conservative Christians. Libertarians were also separately targeted.
Events rallied competing causes
Among the Russian-bought ads, event-based posts became fairly frequent in 2016. The day after the election, an event called for an anti-Trump rally in Union Square even as another ad called for Trump supporters to rally outside Trump tower. In another instance, the ads promoted both a pro-Beyoncé and anti-Beyoncé event in New York City.
Candidate ads were mostly pro-Trump, anti-Clinton
Consistent with the intelligence community’s assessment of Russia’s intentions during the 2016 U.S. election, among the candidates, posts slamming Hillary Clinton seemed to prevail. Pro-Trump ads were fairly common, though other ads stirred up anti-Trump sentiment too. Few ads seemed to oppose Bernie Sanders and some rallied support for Sanders even after Clinton had won the nomination. One ad in August 2016 from account Williams&Kalvin denounced both presidential candidates and potentially in an effort to discourage turnout among black voters. In this case and others, posts called for voters to ignore the election outright.
While efforts like the Honest Ads Act are mounting to combat foreign-paid social media influence in U.S. politics, the scope and variety of today’s House Intel release makes it clear that Americans would be well served to pause before engaging with provocative, partisan ideological content on social platforms — at least when it comes from unknown sources.
On Thursday morning, the House of Representatives’ Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released a vast trove of thousands of Russian-bought Facebook and Instagram ads designed to sow doubt among the American population in the run-up to the November 2016 presidential election. The committee had promised to publish the ads late last year.
While a limited number of ads had been released previously, the new cache reveals a scale and scope previously unseen.
According to the committee, there were 3,393 advertisements purchased, which were seen by more than 11.4 million Americans. The Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency created 470 Facebook pages, which made “80,000 pieces of organic content” seen by more than 126 million Americans.
Democrats from the House Intelligence Committee have released thousands of ads that were run on Facebook by the Russia-based Internet Research Agency.
The Democrats said they’ve released a total of 3,519 ads today from 2015, 2016 and 2017. This doesn’t include 80,000 pieces of organic content shared on Facebook by the IRA, which the Democrats plan to release later.
What remains unclear is the impact that these ads actually had on public opinion, but the Democrats note that they were seen by more than 11.4 million Americans.
“Russia sought to weaponize social media to drive a wedge between Americans, and in an attempt to sway the 2016 election,” tweeted Adam Schiff, who is the Democrats’ ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee. “They created fake accounts, pages and communities to push divisive online content and videos, and to mobilize real Americans,”
Russia sought to divide us by our race, our country of origin, our religion, and our politics. They attempted to hijack legitimate events meant to do good – teaching self-defense, providing legal aid – as well as those events meant to widen a rift.
He added, “By exposing these Russian-created Facebook advertisements, we hope to better protect legitimate political expression and safeguard Americans from having the information they seek polluted by foreign adversaries. Sunlight is always the best disinfectant.
In conjunction with this release, Facebook published a post acknowledging that it was “too slow to spot this type of information operations interference” in the 2016 election, and outlining the steps (like creating a public database of political ads) that it’s taking to prevent this in the future.
“This will never be a solved problem because we’re up against determined, creative and well-funded adversaries,” Facebook said. “But we are making steady progress.”
If you build it, they will come. And if you 3D-print it, they will come faster, cheaper and more sustainably.
We live in an era of overpopulation and mass housing shortages. Yet we also live in a time of phenomenal digital innovation. On the one hand we have major crises affecting the health, liberty and happiness of billions of people. But look at the other hand, where we have potential for life-changing technological breakthroughs at a rate never before seen on this planet.
Our challenges are vast, but our capabilities to produce solutions are even greater. In the future, we will remember this moment in time as a pivotal one. It is now — not tomorrow, and certainly not five years from now — when technology and innovation are disrupting multiple major industries, including those of housing and construction, at breathless and breakneck speed.
Innovators around the world are hard at work to change the way we design, build and produce our homes, and all of this will result in massive change to the housing status quo. Harnessing the revolutionary power of 3D printing, companies from Russia to China, the U.S. and the Netherlands have already proven that not only can a home be 3D-printed, it can be done cheaply, efficiently and easily.
Here are just a few ways 3D printing is already transforming the way we live.
In March 2017, Apis Cor, 3D-printing specialists with offices in Russia and San Francisco, announced they had produced a 3D-printed home in just 24 hours. That means that from the time you drank your coffee yesterday to the time you sat down for cereal this morning, they produced the self-bearing walls, partitions and building envelopes of an entire home, installed it on site and added the roof and interior finishings. It happened in the dead of winter in a tiny Russian town named Stupino, and it was done using Apis Cor’s on-site printer, which means that the massive cost and logistical hurdle of transporting parts and building materials from factories to a home site was almost entirely eliminated.
Think about the possibilities: You select the site where you want to build your home, Apis Cor brings in their 4.5-meter-long printer, the raw materials are set up and within one single day, your home is printed and ready for you. Compare that to the traditional six- or seven-month construction time the industry is used to, and you’ll begin to understand the scope of potential disruption.
The speed of technological innovation here is also exponential and mind-blowing; just one year before Apis Cor’s breakthrough, we in the 3D-printing industry were marveling over Chinese construction company HuaShang Tengda, who set their own record by 3D-printing a two-story home in a month and a half. Consider that, for a moment: This industry is moving so quickly that construction time has been slashed from 45 days to 24 mere hours in the span of a single year.
Housing prices in America have skyrocketed over the past 50 years, with the average price for a home now surpassing $200,000. And remember, that’s just the average — if you live on the East or West Coast, chances are you’re going to be shelling out something closer to the half-million dollar mark (or more!).
According to a report from the McKinsey Global Institute, a full one-third of people who live in cities will find decent housing out of their reach due to cost by the year 2025. And construction costs are the primary barrier — the report also states that it will take between $9 trillion and $11 trillion just to build the necessary houses to flip that supply-demand ratio and make housing affordable in that time.
New Story, a Silicon Valley-based nonprofit that builds housing in the developing world, just unveiled a new 3D printer at SXSW that can print a house in less than a day for $4,000. DUS Architects — a Dutch architecture studio that has been 3D-printing houses since 2012 — has unveiled the KamerMaker, a huge 3D printer that can build using local recycled materials. This slashes transport, material and manufacturing costs, all driving down costs.
The bottom line
What’s so revolutionary about 3D printing is that its potential is limited only by our imaginations. If the past few years have taught us anything about this industry, it’s that barriers of size, scope and material do not apply to the potential that 3D printing brings to the manufacturing market. From cars to food,to the houses we live in, the industry isn’t just gearing up for a shakeup. It’s in the throes of it already, because change is happening now.
On Monday, Iranian law enforcement authorities ordered Internet service providers to block traffic from the Telegram anonymous chat application, four days after Iran’s Telcommunications Infrastructure Company rescinded Telegram’s license to operate in the country. Tehran’s chief prosecutor claimed that the service is used by pornographers and terrorists and ordered that the ban be enforced in a way that would prevent users from bypassing it via a virtual private network.
Iran had previously tied Telegram to the ISIS attacks in Tehran in July of 2017. And the Iranian government had previously blocked Telegram temporarily in January during nation-wide demonstrations for what officials claimed were national security reasons. But according to Iranian press agency MNA, Iran’s Parliament Committee of National Security and Foreign Policy Chairman Alaeddin Boroujerdi said in an April 1 radio interview that the service would be permanently banned and replaced with a domestically developed alternative.
Iran’s move mirrors that of the Russian government, which continues its efforts to block Telegram after the application’s developers refused to provide encryption keys to access users’ messages. Efforts to block Telegram in Russia have led to Russian ISPs blocking large swaths of Internet addresses at cloud providers, including Google and Amazon, as Telegram users began to employ proxy services and VPNs set up in the cloud. Protests continue in Russia over the government’s move, including a protest on Monday in which thousands of people threw paper planes representing Telegram’s logo.