Mediaboss Marketing

The following is an opinion piece and does not necessarily reflect the views of The Clarion, its staff or the institution. If you would like to submit a response or an opinion piece of your own, please contact Editor in Chief Abby Petersen at ajp87848@bethel.edu. Samuel Krueger |Columnist

Four years ago, the scab over the supposedly healing wound of racial prejudice in America was torn off. A man was shot in Sanford, Florida. Two names emerged to the forefront of American media: Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman.

Shortly after the incident, Black Lives Matter was formed and relative unrest in the aftermath of the use of deadly force from police has been pervasive ever since.

There are two sides in these circumstances, those who side with the police, or perhaps the murderer, and those who side with the criminal, or perhaps the victim. Because of the polarizing nature of these events, Blue Lives Matter emerged. I preface with this because I generally consider myself very trusting of the police, therefore, I am solidly under the Blue Lives Matter hashtag. I believe that our police officers are often times put in positions that are dangerous, scary and complicated. I also believe that the prominent culture in many black neighborhoods and a continued lack of communication between law enforcement and African American communities perpetuates an atmosphere of unsafe circumstances for people of color and police officers alike. This puts both sides in positions to do unreasonable and uncalculated things.

Generally, I am relieved when an officer in this position is acquitted. However, the circumstances of the Philando Castille case were different. Castile was killed only miles from where I live. Minnesota is my home. This didnt happen in some far away state. I pictured the faces of some of my closest friends, people of color, in Castiles position. Until that morning, I never understood what it was like to be afraid for someone I love from a group of people I trust to keep me safe.

I want to move beyond the fact that this shooting was unjustified. To me, that much is obvious. I want to talk about the lack of response from the National Rifle Association.

The NRA has always been the first line of defense for our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. They have spent millions and millions of dollars to lobby the government and have mobilized millions of people to march, demonstrate and vote to protect our rights. The NRA is possibly the most powerful advocacy group in America, boasting a membership of more than 5 million active members.

I regularly see stories on their social media of the concealed carrier who stopped a bank robbery, the elderly person who scared off a mugger or the woman who shot her would-be rapist. The NRA plays a big role in cases such as these. Even when someones life is in danger, and a shooting is justified, the legally armed citizen is still generally tried in court. These are the people that the NRA has always stepped in to protect. Providing legal and even financial support for the people who legally and rightfully defended themselves and others. However, the NRA was silent over Castiles murder.

Now, I cant say whether this is because of racism or simply because these situations are always complicated and any judgment at all would be met with criticism, but I believe the NRA should have spoken on this issue. This situation is far less complicated than others before it. Castile was legally licensed to carry that gun, he had no warrants, no drugs in his car, he was not backed into any sort of corner and therefore had no reason to even reach for the gun he was legally carrying. Because of this, I do not believe that the officers account adds up. We have video of the encounter. If the officer shot Castile for reaching into his pocket, why did he not shoot the passenger when she reached for her phone? That day I expected Black Lives Matter and the NRA to both be protesting outside of the governors mansion.

Black lives really do matter and I think that the NRA should be at the forefront of this issue. I have always believed that these issues are rooted in culture rather than in the color of someones skin. The same ways we prevent injuries in the sport of hunting can be used to fight gun violence at a community level. We should start by teaching people about basic safety around firearms. The NRA and hunting advocacy groups also teach about one very important aspect of owning and using a gun. They teach that life is sacred and that guns arent just toys, they are tools as well. The NRA should also use their lobbying capabilities to push for better training in police departments. I understand that the police have a difficult job, but they should always respect a persons right to bear arms. This division between people of color and the law enforcement community can be healed if the culture of violence on both sides is changed. The NRA should lead this effort.

In the end, Castile was legally carrying a firearm and his second amendment rights were infringed upon during his encounter with the police. This should have been a rallying cry to the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of more African Americans, who should be in the NRA. If the NRA really cares about reaching out to an often disenfranchised community with a complicated past when it comes firearms and violence, they should run to the protection of any American who is legally carrying a firearm, regardless of their race.

Like Loading...

Original post:
Philando Castile: What we haven't heard from the NRA - Clarion

By Eric Auchard | LOS GATOS, Calif.

LOS GATOS, Calif. U.S. local social networking phenomenon Nextdoor is entering Germany, Europe's largest market, the company said on Monday, following expansion moves last year into Britain and the Netherlands, where it has grown rapidly.

San Francisco-based Nextdoor launched in 2011 and now covers more than 144,000 discrete U.S. neighborhoods, or roughly three-quarters of the country, the company estimates.

Local residents can use the site to ask advice on everything from finding babysitters to organizing neighborhood sports clubs or even how to contend with household rodent invasions, via computer or mobile phone apps.

Its local forums serve as conversation starters that help neighbors meet one another, forging real-world bonds instead of the virtual ones that connect friends as well as strangers on social networks such as Facebook, Snapchat or Twitter.

"Most social media apps are about self-expression," Co-founder and Chief Executive Nirav Tolia said in an interview. "Nextdoor is about getting things done. It's more of a utility."

"If you lose your dog, your online friends can give you sympathy but your neighbors help you find it," he said.

Nextdoor has raised over $210 million in funding from top-tier Silicon Valley venture capitalists, with its last financing round in 2015 valuing the company at more than $1 billion.

Since expanding into Britain last year, Nextdoor has signed up users in 40 percent of UK neighborhoods, or about 11,000 in all. Similarly, it has drawn in members in 4,000 Dutch neighborhoods, covering about 44 percent of the country, Nextdoor said.

The company has already been testing its service in 200 neighborhoods in Germany and aims to have thousands up and running by the end of this year, Tolia said.

It has hired veteran internet executive Marcus Riecke, the one-time head of eBay's German local selling site and CEO of StudiVZ, a successful early German rival to Facebook that ran out of steam around the start of this decade. Riecke will run Nextdoor's national offices from Berlin.

To join Nextdoor Germany, members must use their real names and confirm their home address at nextdoor.de. Conversations are only accessible among verified local neighbors and are not available via Google or other search engines.

Nextdoor began generating revenue from its U.S. site this year by selling online advertising. The model is similar but more locally focused than the ads that finance Facebook or Google, reviving the tradition of local classified ads that has disappeared as the online era wiped out the economics of local newspaper circulars.

(Reporting By Eric Auchard; Editing by Richard Pullin)

Apple Inc broadened a legal attack on Qualcomm Inc, arguing to a U.S. federal court that license agreements that secure the chip maker a cut of every iPhone manufactured were invalid.

NEW YORK A federal judge on Tuesday faulted the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's apparent "indifference" toward how to distribute money left over from its 2015 settlement with Sprint Corp over unauthorized customer charges.

Excerpt from:
Neighborhood social network Nextdoor expands into Germany - Reuters

Social networking apps make it a breeze to share content and keep in touch with friends and family. If you asked people which company dominates that market, most would likely tell you it'sFacebook (NASDAQ:FB) -- and they'd be right.

See how Facebook's monthly active users (MAUs) compare to the other global social giants:

Data sources: Company quarterly reports, Statista, and TechCrunch. Chart by author.

Facebook actually claims the top three spots with its namesake network, stand-alone Messenger app, and WhatsApp, which it acquired inlate 2014. Facebook has been expanding Messenger into a "platform" with payments, chatbots, ride-hailing services, and other features. It's alsobeen adding enterprise features to WhatsApp. Facebook also owns Instagram, which doesn't break the top five, butreaches over 700 million MAUs.

Tencent's (NASDAQOTH:TCEHY) WeChat (known as "Weixin" in China) is China's top messaging app. Like Facebook, Tencent is also expanding WeChat's reach with a platform of various services. QQ is its older PC-based messaging app, which is still widely used across social games, e-commerce, and other sites.

Facebook and Tencent should keep growing as their ecosystems continue locking in users. Meanwhile, other competitors -- like Twitter and Snap -- could remain tiny players in a market dominated by these two titans.

Offer from The Motley Fool: The 10 best stocks to buy nowMotley Fool co-founders Tom and David Gardner have spent more than a decade beating the market. In fact, the newsletter they run, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has tripled the S&P 500!*

Tom and David just revealed their ten top stock picks for investors to buy right now.

Click here to get access to the full list!

*Stock Advisor returns as of June 5, 2017.

Leo Sun has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Facebook and TWTR. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Link:
A Foolish Take: The 5 Biggest Social Networks - Motley Fool

VR Systems provides voter registration software and hardware to elections offices in eight states. Courtesy of VR Systems hide caption

VR Systems provides voter registration software and hardware to elections offices in eight states.

The Florida elections vendor that was targeted in Russian cyberattacks last year has denied a recent report based on a leaked National Security Agency document that the company's computer system was compromised.

The hackers tried to break into employee email accounts last August but were unsuccessful, said Ben Martin, the chief operating officer of VR Systems, in an interview with NPR. Martin said the hackers appeared to be trying to steal employee credentials in order to launch a spear-phishing campaign aimed at the company's customers.

VR Systems, based in Tallahassee, Fla., provides voter registration software and hardware to elections offices in eight states.

"Some emails came into our email account that we did not open. Even though NSA says it's likely that we opened them, we did not," Martin says. "We know for a fact they were never opened. They did not get into our domain."

VR Systems COO Ben Martin told NPR that no elections vendor would send customers software updates once voting had begun, which it had in this case. Dina Ivory/Courtesy of VR Systems hide caption

Instead, Martin said, the company isolated the suspicious emails and alerted law enforcement authorities, who it was already working with because of two attempts to break into state voter registration databases earlier last summer.

The NSA document said that at least one of the company's email accounts was "likely" compromised based on information uncovered later in the spear-phishing campaign. That attack took place days before the November election and involved fake emails sent to as many as 122 local election officials in an apparent effort to trick them into opening attachments containing malicious software.

"They tried to pretend to be us to leverage our relationship with our customers," said Martin.

But Martin noted that while the NSA says the emails were made to look as if they came from VR Systems, they were sent from a phony email address vr.elections@gmail.com. He said his company does not use Gmail and never sends its customers documents in the form of email attachments. He added that no elections vendor would send customers software updates once voting had begun, which in this case it had.

"That's why I believe most of our customers knew immediately that this was bogus," said Martin. The company was alerted to the fake emails by one of its customers, and Martin said it immediately warned its other customers. So far, there is no evidence that any of the recipients opened the attachments or had their systems infected with the malicious software.

Still, cybersecurity experts say the attempted attacks are a clear sign of Russian interest in interfering with U.S. elections either by manipulating votes or causing chaos at the polls. Some have warned that vendors might be exploited to gain access to local or state voting systems.

In this case, the NSA report concluded that the purpose of the malicious software was "to establish persistent access or survey the victim for items of interest to the threat actors." While last year's attacks appeared to only involve voter registration systems, some experts say such systems can be used as a gateway to actual voting machines.

The Senate and House intelligence committees will explore Russia's efforts to interfere in U.S. elections last year and how to prevent future attacks at two hearings on Wednesday. Former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson will appear before the House committee. The Senate panel will hear from current U.S. intelligence officials and state election experts.

View post:
Despite NSA Claim, Elections Vendor Denies System Was Compromised In Hack Attempt - NPR

When Edward Snowden walked out of the NSA in 2013 with thumb drives full of its most secret files, the agency didn't have a reliable list of peoplelike Snowdenwho had privileged access to its networks. Nor did it have a reliable list of those who were authorized to use removable media to transfer data to or from an NSA system.

That's one of the alarming revelations in a Department of Defense Inspector General report from last year. The report, which was ordered by Congress, reviewed whether the NSA had completed some of the most important initiatives it has started in response to the Snowden leak to make its data more secure. The New York Times obtained the DOD IG report via FOIA.

The most shocking detail in the report is that even at the new National Security Agency data center in Utah, "NSA did not consistently secure server racks and other sensitive equipment" in data centers and machine rooms. At the Utah Data Center and two other facilities, the report stated, "we observed unlocked server racks and sensitive equipment." The finding that the NSA wasn't locking down all its server racks was first disclosed and reported in a House Intelligence Committee Report on Edward Snowden's leaks released in December.

But the more fundamental problem revealed in the report is that the NSA has done little to limit the number of people who have access to what are supposed to be the most protected hardware the NSA has.

The IG report examined seven of the most important out of 40 "Secure the Net" initiatives rolled out since Snowden began leaking classified information. Two of the initiatives aspired to reduce the number of people who had the kind of access Snowden did: those who have privileged access to maintain, configure, and operate the NSA's computer systems (what the report calls PRIVACs), and those who are authorized to use removable media to transfer data to or from an NSA system (what the report calls DTAs).

The government's apparent lack of curiosity is fairly alarming

But when DOD's inspectors went to assess whether NSA had succeeded in doing this, they found something disturbing. In both cases, the NSA did not have solid documentation about how many such users existed at the time of the Snowden leak. With respect to PRIVACs, in June 2013 (the start of the Snowden leak), "NSA officials stated that they used a manually kept spreadsheet, which they no longer had, to identify the initial number of privileged users." The report offered no explanation for how NSA came to no longer have that spreadsheet just as an investigation into the biggest breach thus far at NSA started. With respect to DTAs, "NSA did not know how many DTAs it had because the manually kept list was corrupted during the months leading up to the security breach."

There seem to be two possible explanations for the fact that the NSA couldn't track who had the same kind of access that Snowden exploited to steal so many documents. Either the dog ate their homework: Someone at NSA made the documents unavailable (or they never really existed). Or someone fed the dog their homework: Some adversary made these lists unusable. The former would suggest the NSA had something to hide as it prepared to explain why Snowden had been able to walk away with NSA's crown jewels. The latter would suggest that someone deliberately obscured who else in the building might walk away with the crown jewels. Obscuring that list would be of particular value if you were a foreign adversary planning on walking away with a bunch of files, such as the set of hacking tools the Shadow Brokers have since released, which are believed to have originated at NSA.

NSA headquarters in Maryland. Image: MJB/Flickr

The government's apparent lack of curiosityat least in this reportabout which of these was the case is fairly alarming, because it is a critically important question in assessing why NSA continues to have serious data breaches. For example, it would be important to know if Hal Martin, the Booz Allen Hamilton contractor accused of stealing terabytes of NSA data in both hard copy and digital form, showed up on these lists or if he simply downloaded data for decades without authorization to do so.

Even given the real concern that Russia or someone else might have reason to want to make the names of PRIVACs and DTAs inaccessible at precisely the time the NSA reviewed the Snowden breach, the NSA's subsequent action does provide support for the likelihood the agency itself was hiding how widespread PRIVAC and DTA access was. For both categories, DOD's Inspector General found NSA did not succeed in limiting the number of people who might, in the future, walk away with classified documents and software.

With PRIVACs, the NSA simply "arbitrarily" removed privileged access from some number of users, then had them reapply for privileged access over the next 3 months. The NSA couldn't provide DOD's IG with "the number of privileged users before and after the purge or the actual number of users purged." After that partial purge, though, NSA had "a continued and consistent increase in the number of privileged users."

As with PRIVACs, the NSA "could not provide supporting documentation for the total number of DTAs before and after the purge" and so was working from an "unsubstantiated" estimate. After the Snowden leak, the NSA purged all DTAs and made them reapply, which they did in 2014. The NSA pointed to the new number of DTAs and declared it a reduction from its original "unsupported" estimate. When asked how it justified its claim that it had reduced the number of people who could use thumb drives with NSA's networks when it didn't know how many such people it had to begin with, the NSA explained, "although the initiat[iv]e focused on reducing the number of DTA, the actions taken by NSA were not designed to reduce the number of DTAs; rather they were taken to overhaul the DTA process to identify and vet all DTAs." The IG Report notes that the NSA "continued to consistently increase the number of DTAs throughout the next 12 months."

When, in 2008, someone introduced a worm into DOD's networks via a thumb drive, it decreed that it would no longer use removable media. Then, after Chelsea Manning exfiltrated a bunch of documents on a Lady Gaga CD, the government again renewed its commitment to limiting the use of removable media. This report reveals that only in the wake of the Snowden leaks did the NSA get around to developing a vetted list of those who could use thumb drives in NSA's networks. Yet as recently as last year, Reality Winner (who, as an Air Force translator, was presumably not a privileged access user at all) stuck some kind of removable media into a Top Secret computer, yet the government claims not to know what she downloaded or whether she downloaded anything at all (it's unclear whether that Air Force computer came within NSA's review).

When contacted with specific questions about its inability to track privileged users, the NSA pointed to its official statement on the DOD IG Report. "The National Security Agency operates in one of the most complicated IT environments in the world. Over the past several years, we have continued to build on internal security improvements while carrying out the mission to defend the nation and our allies around the clock." The Office of Director of National Intelligence did not immediately respond with comment to my questions.

Yet this issue pertains not just to the recent spate of enormous data breaches, which led last month to the worldwide WannaCry ransomware attack using NSA's stolen tools. It also pertains to the privacy of whatever data on Americans the NSA might have in its repositories. If, three years after Snowden, the NSA still hasn't succeeded in limiting the number of people with the technical capability to do what he did, how can NSA ensure it keeps Americans' data safe?

Read the original here:
The NSA Has Done Little to Prevent the Next Edward Snowden ... - Motherboard