Tag: data security

Article

Samsung smartphones will end up with a “maintenance mode” for your data protection when you have them repaired

Samsung rolls out One UI 5 ‘Maintenance Mode’ to keep your data safe during repair (9to5google.com)

New Samsung Maintenance Mode protects your data during phone repairs (bleepingcomputer.com)

My Comments

For a long time, most of the good cars came with a “valet key” arrangement of some sort. This especially benefited sedans (saloons), coupes and similar cars that had a lockable trunk (boot), but also benefited any car that had a lockable glove box.

Here, the car would come with one key that can only open the doors and start the engine but can’t open the boot or glove box. You could still open the boot or glove box with a separate dedicated key or another key that can open everything. This was about allowing you to had over your car to a mechanic’s, a valet-operated car park or a similar facility knowing that the staff at the facility can’t steal valuables from the glove box or boot.

Samsung is introducing the “Maintenance Mode” as part of its One UI 5 / Android 13 update for their recent Android smartphones. Here, it is to achieve this same goal by locking your personal data in a separate account not available to technicians who repair or service your phone. These technicians then have access to an account specifically created for testing and repairing the phone.

.. just like cars such as this Jaguar XJ6 did to limit access to the boot (trunk) and glove box when the vehicles were repaired or at valet parking

As well, they can install utility software on your phone as part of the maintenance work but once you log in to your phone again with your normal account, this software is removed. A question that can come up here is what happens if the repair requires the installation of software updates or patches, perhaps to provide driver support for replacement hardware and this has to operate with your own normal account.

Samsung are initially offering this to selected Galaxy phones sold within the USA as part of a beta-test for One UI 5 but are wanting to roll this out across the world through 2023.

Most of us would find this of benefit as we use our smartphones as the digital equivalent of our wallets, photo albums and keyrings. The well-founded fear we have with this is technicians taking advantage of our personal data especially if they see value in it for them.

I would see the “Maintenance Mode” feature being of interest to computing-device vendors and operating-system developers as something to add as a significant feature for an operating system. Here it may be offered during a major feature update cycle for the operating system or as part of a security package.

Such a feature could give all of us peace of mind when we relinquish a smartphone, tablet or laptop computer to technicians that we don’t know for repair.

Articles

Internet services now under a worldwide declaration

US signs Declaration for the Future of the Internet alongside 60 global partners | Windows Central

US Pledges to Keep an Open Internet With Dozens of Other Countries – CNET

Governments Pledge to Keep an Open Internet, Not Russia, China (gizmodo.com)

From the horse’s mouth

The White House, USA

FACT SHEET: United States and 60 Global Partners Launch Declaration for the Future of the Internet | The White House

Declaration-for-the-Future-for-the-Internet_Launch-Event-Signing-Version_FINAL.pdf (whitehouse.gov)

My Comments

The US, European Union, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries signed a declaration regarding the Internet. This declaration, called the “Declaration For The Future Of The Internet” is an effort by the Biden White House to reinforce what the Internet is to be about as an open network of networks with a fair playing field.

This is a response by these countries against digital authoritarianism that has been shown by authoritarian regimes like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. It encompasses domestic and international online repression efforts like censorship along with international political destabilisation efforts like election / referendum interference, disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks.

There is also the same fear that due to populist strongman politics taking place ins some Western and other countries not associated with that kind of politics, the Internet as a symbol of freedom of expression could be under threat in those countries.

It is a reference for public policymakers, citizens, the business community and civil society organisations, but is non-binding. This is seen as a sticking point amongst some because sone countries like the USA aren’t toeing the line when it comes to a free and open Internet with issues like civilian surveillance. But some policymakers in some governments, international organisations and civil society could see this as a “gold standard” for what the Internet should be about.

The goal in this Declaration is to maintain what the Internet was about when it came about in the 1990s – an open network of networks that is freely accessible to all.

It is about protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms for all people in the online space. As well, it is about the global Internet that facilitates the free flow of information for citizens and businesses. That also includes inclusive and affordable connectivity to the Internet, which also factors in access from rural and remote areas. As well, there should be an increase in our digital skills so we can work the Internet competently.

Trust in the global online ecosystem is also underscored, including protection of the privacy and confidentiality of end-users. This is about safe secure private Internet use. For businesses of all sizes, it is about allowing them to compete, innovate and thrive in their own merits.

This goal is to be facilitated using reliable secure interoperable and sustainable infrastructure around the world. Here it would be managed in a multiple stakeholder approach to assure common benefit.

An issue that will need to he looked at is how online services are operated by the private sector. This is with expectations regarding end-user privacy along with their operation as a social good. It may also have to include support for healthy competition between online service providers so as to support innovation and service affordability.

I do see a strong possibility that the Declaration For The Future Of The Internet as a “Gold Standard” for what is expected of the Internet as part of a democratic society.

Articles – From the horse’s mouth

Google

A standard and certification program now exists for mobile application security

A New Standard for Mobile App Security (Google Security Blog post)

Internet Of Secure Things Alliance (ioXT)

ioXt Alliance Expands Certification Program for Mobile and VPN Security (Press Release)

Mobile Application Profile (Reference Standard Document – PDF)

My Comments

There is a constant data-security and user-privacy risk associated with mobile computing.

And this is being underscored heavily as a significant number of mobile apps are part of “app-cessory” ecosystems for various Internet-of-Things devices. That is where a mobile app is serving as a control surface for one of these devices. Let’s not forget that VPNs are coming to the fore as a data-security and user-privacy aid for our personal-computing lives.

Expect this to appear alongside mobile-platform apps to signify they are designed for security

But how can we be sure that an app that we install on our smartphones or tablets is written to best security practices? What is being identified is a need for an industry standard supported by a trademarked logo that allows us to know that this kind of software is written for security.

A group called the Internet of Secure Things Alliance, known as ioXT, have started to define basic standards for secure Internet-of-Things ecosystems. Here they have defined various device profiles for different Internet-of-Things device types and determined minimum and recommended requirements for a device to be certified as being “secure” by them. This then allows the vendor to show a distinct ioXT-secure logo on the product or associated material.

Now Google and others have worked with ioXT to define a Mobile Application Profile that sets out minimum security standards for mobile-platform software in order to be deemed secure by them. At the moment, this is focused towards app-cessory software that works with connected devices along with consumer-facing privacy-focused VPN endpoint software. For that matter, Google is behind a “white-box” user-privacy VPN solution that can be offered under different labels.

This device profile has been written in an “open form” to cater towards other mobile app classes that need to have specific data-security and user-privacy requirements. This will come about as ioXT revises the Mobile Application Profile.

Conclusion

The ioXT Internet-of-Secure-Things platform could be extended to certifying more classes of native mobile-platform and desktop-platform software that works with the Internet of Everything. The VPN aspect of the Mobile Application Profile can also apply to native desktop VPN-management clients or native and Web software intended to manage router-based VPN setups.

At least a non-perpetual certification program with a trademarked logo now exists for the Internet of Everything and mobile apps to assure customers that the hardware and software is secure by design and default.

Article

Zoom to give more control to meeting hosts

How to stop a Zoombombing | Lifehacker

From the horse’s mouth

Zoom

3 New Ways We’re Combatting Meeting Disruptions (Blog Post)

My Comments

During the COVID-19 pandemic causing us to work or study from home, we have been seeing increased use of videoconferencing platforms like Zoom.

It has led to the convergence of business and personal use of popular multiparty videoconferencing platforms; be it business platforms of the Zoom and Microsoft Teams ilk serving personal, social and community needs; or personal platforms like Skype and WhatsApp being used for business use. This is more so with small businesses, community organisations and the like who don’t have their own IT team to manage this software. The software developers even support this convergence through adding “personal and social” features to business users that also gain free social-user tiers or adding business features to personal platforms.

But this has brought along its fair share of miscreants. A key example of this is “Zoombombing” where these miscreants join a Zoom meeting in order to disrupt it. This manifests in disruptive comments being put in to the meeting or at worst all sorts of filth unfit for the office or family home appearing on our screens. Infact there have been a significant number of high-profile Zoom virtual events disrupted that way and a significant number of governments have encompassed this phenomenon as part of raising questions about videoconferencing platform security.

This has been facilitated by Zoom and similar business videoconferencing platforms allowing people to join a videoconference by clicking on a meeting-specific URL This is compared to Skype, Viber, Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp and similar personal videoconferencing platforms operating on an in-platform invitation protocol when joining these meetings.

But these Weblinks bave been posted on the Social Web for every man and his dog to see. There have been some online forums that have been hurriedly set up for people to solicit others to disrupt online meetings.

Zoom recently took action by requiring the use of meeting passwords and waiting-room setups and operating with that by default. As well meeting hosts and participants have been encourage not to place meeting URLs and passwords on any part of the Web open to the public. Rather they are to send the link via email or instant messaging. As well, they are encouraged to send the password under separate cover.

They also have the ability to lock the meeting so no further attendees can come in, which is good if the meeting is based around known attendees. There is also the ability for the host to control resource-sharing and remote-control functionality that Zoom offers. Let’s not forget that they also added meeting-wide end-to-end encryption for increasingly-secure meetings.

But Zoom has taken further action by offering meeting hosts more tools to control their meeting, a feature available to all client software and to all user classes whether free or paid.

There is the ability for the Zoom meeting host to pause the meeting. Once this is invoked, no activity can take place during the meeting including in any breakout rooms that the meeting has spawned. They also have the ability to report the meeting to Zoom’s platform=wide security team and to selectively enable each meeting feature. They can also report users to Zoom’s platform security team, which allows them to file the report and give the disruptive user the royal order of the boot from that meeting.

Another feature that has been introduced thanks to the “join by URL” method that Zoom supports is for meeting hosts to be alerted if their meeting is at risk of disruption. Zoom facilitates this using a Webcrawler that hunts for meeting URLs on the public Web and alerts the meeting host if their meeting’s URL is posted there such as being on the Social Web. Here, they are given the opportunity to change the URL to deflect any potential Zoombomb attempts.

But this year has become a key year as far as multiparty videoconferencing is concerned due to our reliance on it. Here, it may be about seeing less differentiation between business-use and personal-use platforms or the definition of a basic feature set that these videoconferencing platforms are meant to have with secure private operation being part of that definition.

Articles

Zoom to provide end-to-end encryption for those video conferences

Zoom end-to-end encryption is finally rolling out next week | Android Authority

Zoom to preview free end-to-end encryption for meetings | ITNews

Zoom Is Adding End-To-End Encryption to Your Endless Meetings | Gizmodo

Zoom finally rolls out end-to-end encryption, but you have to enable it | Mashable

From the horse’s mouth

Zoom

Zoom Rolling Out End-to-End Encryption Offering (Blog Post)

My Comments

Since the COVID-19 coronavirus plague had us housebound even for work or school, we have ended up using videoconferencing platforms more frequently for work, school and social life. The most popular of these platforms ended up being Zoom which effectively became a generic trademark for multiparty videoconferencing.

But the computer press and consumer-privacy regulators identified that most of these videoconferencing platforms had security and user-privacy / company-confidentiality weaknesses. One of these that has beset Zoom was the lack of end-to-end encryption for multiparty videocalls. This ended up being a key issue due to most of us ending using these platforms more frequently and the increased use of Zoom and similar platforms for medical and legal telexonsultations.

Now Zoom, as part of its recent Zoomtopia feature-launch multiparty videoconference, has launched a number of new features for their platform. These include virtual participant layouts similar to what Microsoft Teams is offering.

But the important one here is to facilitate end-to-end encryption during multiparty videoconferences. This will be available across all of Zoom’s user base, whether free or paid. For the first 30 days from next week, it will be a technical preview so they can know of any bugs in the system.

The end-to-end encryption is based around the meeting host rather than Zoom generating the keypairs for the encryption protocol, which would occur as a videoconference is started and as users come on board. It is a feature that Zoom end-users would need to enable at account level and also activate for each meeting they wish to keep secure. That is different from WhatsApp where end-to-end encryption occurs by default and in a hands-off manner.

At the moment, updated native Zoom clients will support the end-to-end encryption – you won’t have support for it on Zoom Web experiences or third-party devices and services that work with Zoom like the smart displays or Facebook’s Portal TV videophone. This situation will be revised as Zoom releases newer APIs and software that answers thsi need.

If a meeting is operating with end-to-end encryption, there will be a green shield with a lock symbol in the upper left corner to indicate that this is the case. They can click on the icon to bring up a verification code and have that confirmed by the meeting host reading it out loud.

Free users will be required to use SMS-based verification when they set up their account for end-to-end encryption. This is a similar user experience to what a lot of online services are doing where there is a mobile phone number as a second factor of authenticity.

At least Zoom is taking steps towards making its multiparty videoconference platform more safe and secure for everyone.

Article

A call to action is now taking place regarding the data security and user privacy of video conferencing platforms

Privacy watchdogs urge videoconferencing services to boost privacy protections | We Live Security

From the horse’s mouth

Officer Of The Privacy Commissioner Of Canada

Joint statement on global privacy expectations of Video Teleconferencing companies (English / Français)

Press Release (English, Français)

Office Of The Australian Information Commissioner

Global privacy expectations of video teleconference providers – with open letter

Federal Data Protection And Information Commissioner (Switzerland)

Audio And Video Conferencing Systems – Privacy Resource factsheet (English, Français, Deutsch, Italiano)

Open Letter (PDF)

Information Commissioner’s Office (United Kingdom)

Global privacy expectations of video teleconference providers

Open Letter (PDF)

My Comments

Thanks to the COVID-19 coronavirus plague, we are making increased use of various videoconferencing platforms for our work, education, healthcare, religious and social reasons.

This has been facilitated through the use of applications like Zoom, Skype, Microsoft Teams and HouseParty. It also includes “over-the-top” text-chat and Internet-telephony apps like Apple’s Facetime, Facebook’s Messenger, WhatsApp and Viber for this kind of communication, thanks to them opening up or having established multi-party audio/video conferencing or “party-line” communications facilities.

Security issues have been raised by various experts in the field about these platforms with some finding that there are platforms that aren’t fit for purpose in today’s use cases thanks to gaping holes in the platform’s security and privacy setup. In some cases, the software hasn’t been maintained in a manner as to prevent security risks taking place.

As well, there have been some high-profile “Zoombombing” attacks on video conferences in recent times. This is where inappropriate, usually pornographic, images have been thrown up in to these video conferences to embarrass the participants with one of these occurring during a court hearing and one disrupting an Australian open forum about reenergising tourism.

This has led to the public data-protection and privacy authorities in Australia, Canada, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, Switzerland and the United Kingdom writing an open letter to Microsoft, Cisco, Zoom, HouseParty and Google addressing these issues. I also see this relevant to any company who is running a text-based “chat” or similar service that offers group-chatting or party-line functionality or adapts their IP-based one-to-one audio/video telephony platform for multi-party calls.

Some of these issues are very similar to what has been raised over the last 10 years thanks to an increase in our use of online services and cloud computing in our daily lives.This included data security under a highly-mobile computing environment with a heterogeny of computing devices and online services; along with the issue of data sovereignty in a globalised business world.

One of the key issues is data security. This is about having proper data-security safeguards in place such as end-to-end encryption for communications traffic; improved access control like strong passwords, two-factor authentication or modern device-based authentication approaches like device PINs and biometrics.

There will also be the requirement to factor in handling of sensitive data like telehealth appointments between medical/allied-health specialists and their patients. Similarly data security in the context of videoconferencing will also encompass the management of a platform’s abilities to share files, Weblinks, secondary screens and other media beyond the video-audio feed.

As well, a “secure by design and default” approach should prohibit the ability to share resources including screenviews unless the person managing the videoconference gives the go-ahead for the person offering the resource. If there is a resource-preview mechanism, the previews should only be available to the person in charge of the video conference.

Another key issue is user privacy including business confidentiality. There will be a requirement for a videoconferencing platform to have “privacy by design and default”. It is similar to the core data-security operating principle of least privilege. It encompasses strong default access controls along with features like announcing new participants when they join a multi-party video conference; use of waiting rooms, muting the microphone and camera when you join a video conference with you having to deliberately enable them to have your voice and video part of the conference; an option to blur out backgrounds or use substitute backgrounds; use of substitute still images like account avatars in lieu of a video feed when the camera is muted; and the like.

There will also be a requirement to allow businesses to comply with user-privacy obligations like enabling them to seek users’ express consent before participating. It also includes a requirement for the platform to minimise the capture of data to what is necessary to provide the service. That may include things like limiting unnecessary synchronsing of contact lists for example.

Another issue is for the platforms to to “know their audience” or know what kind of users are using their platform. This is for them to properly provide these services in a privacy-focused way. It applies especially to use of the platform by children and vulnerable user groups; or where the platform is being used in a sensitive use setting like education, health or religion.

As well it encompasses where a videoconferencing platform is used or has its data handled within a jurisdiction that doesn’t respect fundamental human rights and civil liberties. This risk will increase more as countries succumb to populist rule and strongman politics and they forget the idea of these rights. In this case, participants face an increased exposure to various risks associated with these jurisdictions especially if the conversation is about a controversial topic or activity or they are a member of a people group targeted by the oppressive regime.

Another issue being raised is transparency and fairness. Here this is about what data is being collected by the platform, how it is being used, whom it is shared with including the jurisdictions they are based in along with why it is being collected. It doesn’t matter whether it is important or not. The transparency about data use within the platform also affects what happens whenever the platform is evolved and the kind of impact any change would have.

The last point is to provide each of the end-users effective control over their experience with the videoconferencing platforms. Here, an organisation or user group may determine that a particular videoconferencing platform like Zoom or Skype is the order of the day for their needs. But the users need to be able to know whether location data is being collected or whether the videoconference is tracking their engagement, or whether it is being recorded or transcribed.

I would add to this letter the issue of the platform’s user-friendliness from provisioning new users through all stages of establishing and managing a videoconference. This is of concern with videoconference platforms being used by young children or older-generation people who have had limited exposure to newer technologies. It also includes efforts to make the platform accessible to all abilities.

This is relevant to the security and user privacy of a videoconferencing platform due to simplifying the ability for the videoconference hosts and participants to maintain effective control of their experience. Here, if a platform’s user interface is difficult to use safely. videoconference hosts and participants will end up opting for insecure setups this making themselves vulnerable.

For example, consistent and less-confusing function icons or colours would be required for the software’s controls; along with proper standardised  “mapping” of controls on hardware devices to particular functions. Or there could be a user-interface option that always exposes the essential call-management controls at the bottom of the user’s screen during a videocall.

This issue has come to my mind due to regularly participating in a Skype videoconference session with my church’s Bible-study group. Most of the members of that group were of older generations who weren’t necessarily technology-literate. Here, I have had to explain what icons to click or tap on to enable the camera or microphone during the videoconference and even was starting it earlier to “walk” participants through using Skype. Here, it would be about calling out buttons on the screen that have particular icons for particular functions like enabling the camera or microphone or selecting the front or back camera on their device.

At least the public-service efforts have come about to raise the consistent security and privacy problems associated with the increased use of videoconferencing software.

Article

Facebook, AMD, Nvidia Join Confidential Computing Consortium | SDx Central

AMD, Facebook et Nvidia rejoignent une initiative qui veut protéger la mémoire vive de nos équipements  (AMD, NVIDIA and Facebook join an initiatiative to protect the live memory of our equipment) | O1Net.com (France – French language / Langue française)

From the horse’s mouth

Confidential Computing Consortium

Web site

My Comments

Some of online life’s household names are becoming part of the Confidential Computing Consortium. Here, AMD, Facebook, NVIDIA are part of this consortium which is a driver towards secure computing which is becoming more of a requirement these days.

What is the Confidential Computing Consortium

This is an industry consortium driven by the Linux Foundation to provide open standards for secure computing in all use cases.

It is about creating a standard software-development kits that are about secure software execution. This is to allow software to run in a hardware-based Trusted Execution Environment that is completely secure. It is also about writing this code to work independent of the system’s silicon manufacturer and to work across the common microarchitectures like ARM, RISC-V and x86.

This is becoming of importance nowadays with malware being written to take advantage of data being held within a computing device’s volatile random-access memory. One example of this include RAM-scraping malware targeted at point-of-sale / property-management systems that steal customers’ payment-card data while a transaction is in progress. Another example are the recent discoveries by Apple that a significant number of familiar iOS apps are snooping on the user’s iPhone or iPad Clipboard with their iPhones without the knowledge and consent of the user.

As well, in this day and age, most software implements various forms of “memory-to-memory” data transfer for many common activities like cutting and pasting. There is also the fact that an increasing number of apps are implementing context-sensitive functionality like conversion or translation for content that a user selects or even for something a user has loaded in to their device.

In most secure-computing setups, data is encrypted “in-transit” while it moves between computer systems and “at rest” while it exists on non-volatile secondary storage like mechanical hard disks or solid-state storage. But it isn’t encrypted while it is in use by a piece of computer software to fulfil that program’s purposes. This is leading to these kind of exploits like RAM-scraping malware.

The Confidential Computing Consortium is about encrypting the data that is held within RAM and allowing the user to grant software that they trust access to that encrypted data. Primarily it will be about consent-driven relevance-focused secure data use for the end-users.

But the idea is to assure not just the security and privacy of a user’s data but allow multiple applications on a server-class computer to run in a secure manner. This is increasingly important with the use of online services and cloud computing where data belonging to multiple users is being processed concurrently on the same physical computer.

This is even relevant to home and personal computing, including the use of online services and the Internet of Things. It is highly relevant with authenticating with online services or facilitating online transactions; as well as assuring end-users and consumers of data privacy. As well, most of us are heading towards telehealth and at-home care which involves the handling of more personally-sensitive information relating to our health through the use of common personal-computing devices.

The fact that Facebook is on board is due to the fact the social network’s users make use of social sign-on by that platform to sign up with or log in to various online services. In this case, it would be about protecting user-authentication tokens that move between Facebook and the online service during the sign-up or log-in phase.

As well,  Facebook has two fingers in the consumer online messaging space in the form of Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp products and both these services feature end-to-end encryption with WhatsApp having this feature enabled by default. Here, they want users to be sure that the messages during, say, a WhatsApp session stay encrypted even in the device’s RAM rather than just between devices and within the device’s non-volatile storage.

I see the Confidential Computing Consortium as underscoring a new vector within the data security concept with this vector representing the data that is in the computer’s memory while it is being processed. Here, it could be about establishing secure consent-driven access to data worked on during a computing session, including increased protection of highly-sensitive business and personal data.