Google's Chrome browser is making a significant security move by distrusting certificates issued by Entrust, a prominent Certificate Authority (CA), beginning late 2024. This decision throws a wrench into the operations of numerous websites including those of major organizations like Bank of America, ESPN, and IRS.GOV, among others.

Digital certificates (SSL/TLS) play a vital role in ensuring secure connections between users and websites. These certificates issued by trusted CAs act as a security seal - more like a blue tick for websites - and helps users gauge the legitimacy of the website. It also ensures an encrypted communication to prevent data breaches.

However, Chrome is removing Entrust from its list of trusted CAs due to a concerning pattern of "compliance failures, unmet improvement commitments, and the absence of tangible, measurable progress" over the past six years. Entrust's repeated shortcomings in upholding security standards have led Google to lose confidence in their ability to act as a reliable CA.

"It is our opinion that Chrome’s continued trust in Entrust is no longer justified." - Google Chrome

This move also extends to AffirmTrust, a lesser-known provider acquired by Entrust. While these certificates account for only a small fraction (0.1%) compared to Let's Encrypt (49.7%), the impact is still significant considering organizations like Bank of America, BookMyShow, ESPN and even government websites like IRS.gov, which have high internet traffic volumes, are also certified by Entrust.

[caption id="attachment_79569" align="aligncenter" width="1024"] Bank of America and IRS.gov certificates as displayed on Chrome Certificate Viewer[/caption]

What This Means for Users and Website Owners

Starting November 1, 2024, Chrome users encountering websites with distrusted Entrust certificates will be met with a full-page warning proclaiming the site as "not secure."

[caption id="attachment_79563" align="aligncenter" width="1024"] Sample of how Chrome will display warning for websites having a certificate from Entrust or AffirmTrust (Source: Google)[/caption]

This warning only applies to certificates issued after October 31, 2024, providing a grace period for websites with existing Entrust certificates. However, as certificates have lifespans, website owners must transition to a different CA before expiration. Considering its market share Let's Encrypt, a free and trusted option, comes highly recommended.

This shift is crucial for maintaining a secure web environment. When a CA fails to meet expectations, it jeopardizes the entire internet ecosystem. Chrome's decision prioritizes user protection by eliminating trust in potentially compromised certificates.

Website owners using impacted Entrust certificates should act swiftly to switch to a different CA. The Chrome Certificate Viewer can be used to identify certificates issued by Entrust. While this may seem inconvenient, it's necessary to ensure continued user access without security warnings.

Potential Workaround Only on Internal Networks

Large organizations managing internal networks have some leeway. Chrome allows enterprises to bypass these changes by installing the affected certificates as trusted on their local networks. This ensures internal websites using these certificates function normally.

The Entrust Controversy: A Deeper Look

Further context emerges from discussions on Mozilla's Bug Tracker (Bug 1890685). It reveals a critical issue – Entrust's failure to revoke a specific set of Extended Validation (EV) TLS certificates issued between March 18 and 21, 2024. This violated their own Certification Practice Statement (CPS).

Entrust opted against revoking the certificates, citing potential customer confusion and denying any security risks. However, this decision sparked outrage. Critics emphasized the importance of proper revocation procedures to uphold trust in the CA system. Entrust's prioritization of customer convenience over security raised concerns about their commitment to strict adherence to security best practices.

A detailed post on Google Groups by Mike Shaver sheds further light on the situation. Shaver expresses doubt in Entrust's ability to comply with WebPKI and Mozilla Root Store Program (MRSP) requirements. Despite attempts to address these concerns, Entrust's handling of certificate revocation, operational accountability, and transparency remain under scrutiny.

Shaver points out Entrust's tendency to prioritize customer convenience over strict adherence to security standards. He also criticizes the lack of detailed information regarding organizational changes and Entrust's failure to meet Mozilla's incident response requirements. Until Entrust demonstrates substantial improvements and transparency, continued trust in their certificates poses a significant risk to the overall web PKI and the security of internet users.

But this is not the end of it. In fact it is just the tip of the ice berg. Shaver's comments in the forum are in response to a host of compliance incidents between March and May related to Entrust. Ben Wilson summarized these recent incidents in a dedicated wiki page.

"In brief, these incidents arose out of certificate mis-issuance due to a misunderstanding of the EV Guidelines, followed by numerous mistakes in incident handling including a deliberate decision to continue mis-issuance," Wilson said.

This is a very serious shortcoming on Entrust's behalf considering the stringent norms and root store requirements, he added.

However, Chrome's decision to distrust Entrust certificates sends a strong message – prioritizing user safety requires holding CAs accountable for upholding the highest security standards.

Media Disclaimer: This report is based on internal and external research obtained through various means. The information provided is for reference purposes only, and users bear full responsibility for their reliance on it. The Cyber Express assumes no liability for the accuracy or consequences of using this information.

Crypto scammers hijacked Channel 7 News Australia's YouTube account to run a live stream of an Elon Musk deepfake on loop. The AI-generated version of the business tycoon was seen luring users to scan a QR code and invest in a money-doubling scheme through cryptocurrency. The news and media company is investigating claims even as traces of account takeover persist at the time this article was published.

Crypto Scammers Shift to Deepfake Deployment

Crypto scammers hijacking social media accounts of popular brands and celebrities on platforms like YouTube and X is not a novel thing. But what transpired on Thursday could very well be a snippet of things to come as we move towards the Age of AI.

Crypto scammers first took over the YouTube account of Channel 7 News and modified it in a way that it masqueraded the official Tesla channel.

[caption id="attachment_79292" align="aligncenter" width="300"] Hijacked Channel 7 News' YouTube Account Screenshot (Source: Reddit)[/caption]

After making aesthetic changes to the YouTube account, the crypto scammers replaced the videos in the channel with a deepfake live stream of Tesla chief Elon Musk. The AI-generated Musk was seen encouraging viewers to scan a QR code and invest in cryptocurrency.

[caption id="attachment_79296" align="aligncenter" width="600"] Musk's Deepfake Asking Users to Scan or Regret (Source: Reddit)[/caption] As per local media, the Musk deepfake said, "All you need to do is scan the QR code on the screen, go to the website and watch your cryptocurrency double. Today's event is a chance for all crypto enthusiasts and users to double their assets."

"This is an opportunity that cannot be missed." - Elon Musk Deepfake

The deepfake video was made in a way that Musk's AI version even interacted with the audience, where he continued to say that twice as much would return to investors' wallets.

The Channel 7 News has several region- and programming-specific YouTube channels, and most of them seemed to be hijacked at present, with all of them running the same deepfake live stream on loop. The page is no longer accessible via direct links from the company website, but as pointed by a Reddit user, if you go to the YouTube channel via the platform's search, it still displays the changes made by crypto scammers, which is a Tesla logo as seen in the images above.

Experts, Leaders Press for Deep Fake Regulations

Owing to the menace of deepfakes, nearly 1,500 AI and tech experts in February urged global regulation of deepfakes to curb risks like fraud and political disinformation. An open letter recommends that lawmakers criminalize deepfake child pornography, penalize creators and facilitators of harmful deepfakes, and hold software developers accountable.

"The whole deepfake supply chain should be held accountable, just as they are for malware and child pornography." - The Open Letter

Legal experts and technologists have also previously urged the U.S. Congress to regulate the use of deepfake technologies and provide new protections particularly for women and minority communities against the use of digitally manipulated media. Experts warned that the deceptive content is already affecting national security, personal privacy and public trust.

A coordinated international police operation led by Interpol has resulted in the disruption of global online scam networks that carried out phishing, investment fraud, romance and impersonation scams and operated fake online shopping sites. The global operation, codenamed “First Light,” led to the seizure of assets amounting to $257 million and froze more than 6,700 bank accounts linked to the online scam syndicates. Under the banner of Operation First Light 2024, the police also arrested a total of 3,950 suspects and identified another 14,643 as likely members of the global online scam syndicates.

“By confiscating such large amounts of money, and disrupting the networks behind them, we not only safeguard our communities but also deal a significant blow to the transnational organized crime groups that pose such a serious threat to global security.” - Director of Interpol’s Financial Crime and Anti-Corruption Centre (IFCACC), Dr Isaac Kehinde Oginni

Global Online Scam Crackdown Impact

The impact of this police operation against global online scam is “more than just numbers – they represent lives protected, crimes prevented, and a healthier global economy worldwide,” Oginni said. Interpol’s Global Rapid Intervention of Payments (I-GRIP) mechanism traced and intercepted the illicit proceeds from online scams across borders in both, fiat currency cash ($135 million) and cryptocurrency ($2 million). An example of this interception was a business email compromise fraud that involved a Spanish citizen who unwittingly transferred $331,000 to Hong Kong, China, the Interpol said. In another case, the Australian authorities successfully recovered AU$ 5.5 million (approximately $3.7 million) for an impersonation scam victim, after the online scammers fraudulently transferred the funds to Malaysia and Hong Kong-based bank accounts. The global nature of online scams was underscored by the operation’s diverse participants. From rescuing 88 young people forced to work in a Namibian scam ring to preventing a tech support scam targeting a senior citizen in Singapore, Operation First Light 2024 showcased the importance of international cooperation. Operations of First Light have been coordinated since 2014 and are designed to fight social engineering and telecom fraud. The operation is funded by China’s Ministry of Public Security and coordinated by Interpol. [caption id="attachment_79238" align="aligncenter" width="1024"] Operation First Light conclusion meeting in Tianjin, China (Source: Interpol)[/caption] In 2022, First Light saw a coordinated effort between law enforcement of 76 countries that resulted in the seizure of $50 million worth of illicit funds that was defrauded from more than 24,000 victims. “The world is grappling with the severe challenges of social engineering fraud, and organized crime groups are operating from Southeast Asia to the Middle East and Africa, with victims on every continent,” Oginni said.

“No country is immune to this type of crime, and combating it requires very strong international cooperation.” - Dr Isaac Kehinde Oginni

Investment and Phishing Scams Top Threats to U.S.

According to FBI's Internet Crime report (IC3), Investment scams led to the highest reported losses in the United Stated last year. Totaling $4.57 billion, investment scams saw a 38% increase from 2022. Crypto-investment fraud also rose 53% to $3.94 billion. Scammers mainly targeted individuals aged 30-49 in these scam types. Phishing schemes, on the other hand, were the most reported crime in 2023, with over 298,000 complaints, comprising 34% of all complaints received. In the FBI San Francisco division, there were 364 complaints with nearly $1.5 million in losses. Santa Clara County had the most complaints, while Alameda County had the highest losses at $500,000.

Experts are raising eyebrows after OpenAI announced a one-month delay in the rollout of its highly anticipated “Voice Mode” feature for ChatGPT, citing safety concerns. The company said it needs more time to ensure the model can “detect and refuse certain content.”

“We’re improving the model’s ability to detect and refuse certain content. We’re also working on enhancing the user experience and scaling our infrastructure to support millions of users while maintaining real-time responses.” - OpenAI

The stalling of the rollout comes a month after OpenAI announced a new safety and security committee that would oversee issues related to the company’s future projects and operations. It is unclear if this postponement was suggested by the committee or by internal stakeholders.

Features of ChatGPT’s ‘Voice Mode’

OpenAI unveiled its GPT-4o system in May, boasting significant advancements in human-computer interaction. “GPT-4o (‘o’ for ‘omni’) is a step towards much more natural human-computer interaction,” OpenAI said at the time. The omni model can respond to audio inputs at an average of 320 milliseconds, which is similar to the response time of humans. Other salient features of the “Voice Mode” promise real-time conversations with human-like emotional responses, but this also raises concerns about potential manipulation and the spread of misinformation. The May announcement gave a snippet at the model’s ability to understand nuances like tone, non-verbal cues and background noise, further blurring the lines between human and machine interaction. While OpenAI plans an alpha release for a limited group of paid subscribers in July, the broader rollout remains uncertain. The company emphasizes its commitment to a “high safety and reliability” standard but the exact timeline for wider access hinges on user feedback.

The ‘Sky’ of Controversy Surrounding ‘Voice Mode’

The rollout delay of “voice mode” feature of ChatGPT follows the controversy sparked by actress Scarlett Johansson, who accused OpenAI of using her voice without permission in demonstrations of the technology. OpenAI refuted the claim stating the controversial voice of “Sky” - one of the five voice modulation that the Voice Mode offers for responses – belonged to a voice artist and not Johansson. The company said an internal team reviewed the voices it received from over 400 artists, from a product and research perspective, and after careful consideration zeroed on five of them, namely Breeze, Cove, Ember, Juniper and Sky. OpenAI, however, did confirm that its top boss Sam Altman reached out to Johannson to integrate her voice.

“On September 11, 2023, Sam spoke with Ms. Johansson and her team to discuss her potential involvement as a sixth voice actor for ChatGPT, along with the other five voices, including Sky. She politely declined the opportunity one week later through her agent.” - OpenAI

Altman took a last chance of onboarding the Hollywood star this May, when he again contacted her team to inform the launch of GPT-4o and asked if she might reconsider joining as a future additional voice in ChatGPT. But instead, with the demo version of Sky airing through, Johannson threatened to sue the company for “stealing” her voice. Owing to the pressure from her lawyers, OpenAI removed the Sky voice sample since May 19.

“The voice of Sky is not Scarlett Johansson's, and it was never intended to resemble hers. We cast the voice actor behind Sky’s voice before any outreach to Ms. Johansson. Out of respect for Ms. Johansson, we have paused using Sky’s voice in our products. We are sorry to Ms. Johansson that we didn’t communicate better.” – Sam Altman

Although the issue seems to have resolved for the time being, this duel between Johannson and Altman brought to the fore the ethical considerations surrounding deepfakes and synthetic media.

Likely Delays in Apple AI and OpenAI Partnership Too

If the technical issues and the Sky voice mode controversy weren’t enough, adding another layer of complication to OpenAI’s woes is Apple’s recent brush with EU regulators that now casts a shadow over the future of ChatGPT integration into Apple devices. Announced earlier this month, the partnership aimed to leverage OpenAI's technology in Cupertino tech giant’s “Apple Intelligence” system. However, with Apple facing potential regulatory roadblocks under the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), the integration’s fate remains unclear. This confluence of factors – safety concerns, potential for misuse, and regulatory hurdles – paints a complex picture for OpenAI's “Voice Mode.” The cybersecurity and regulatory industry will undoubtedly be watching closely as the technology evolves, with a keen eye on potential security vulnerabilities and the implications for responsible AI development.

In a significant move to bolster data privacy protections, the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) inked a new partnership with France’s Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL). The collaboration aims to conduct joint research on data privacy issues and share investigative findings that will enhance the capabilities of both organizations in safeguarding personal data. The partnership between CPPA and CNIL shows the growing emphasis on international collaboration in data privacy protection. Both California and France, along with the broader European Union (EU) through its General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), recognize that effective data privacy measures require global cooperation. France’s membership in the EU brings additional regulatory weight to this partnership and highlights the necessity of cross-border collaboration to tackle the complex challenges of data protection in an interconnected world.

What the CPPA-CNIL Data Privacy Protections Deal Means

The CPPA on Tuesday outlined the goals of the partnership, stating, “This declaration establishes a general framework of cooperation to facilitate joint internal research and education related to new technologies and data protection issues, share best practices, and convene periodic meetings.” The strengthened framework is designed to enable both agencies to stay ahead of emerging threats and innovations in data privacy. Michael Macko, the deputy director of enforcement at the CPPA, said there were practical benefits of this collaboration. “Privacy rights are a commercial reality in our global economy,” Macko said. “We’re going to learn as much as we can from each other to advance our enforcement priorities.” This mutual learning approach aims to enhance the enforcement capabilities of both agencies, ensuring they can better protect consumers’ data in an ever-evolving digital landscape.

CPPA’s Collaborative Approach

The partnership with CNIL is not the CPPA’s first foray into international cooperation. The California agency also collaborates with three other major international organizations: the Asia Pacific Privacy Authorities (APPA), the Global Privacy Assembly, and the Global Privacy Enforcement Network (GPEN). These collaborations help create a robust network of privacy regulators working together to uphold high standards of data protection worldwide. The CPPA was established following the implementation of California's groundbreaking consumer privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). As the first comprehensive consumer privacy law in the United States, the CCPA set a precedent for other states and countries looking to enhance their data protection frameworks. The CPPA’s role as an independent data protection authority mirror that of the CNIL - France’s first independent data protection agency – which highlights the pioneering efforts of both regions in the field of data privacy. By combining their resources and expertise, the CPPA and CNIL aim to tackle a range of data privacy issues, from the implications of new technologies to the enforcement of data protection laws. This partnership is expected to lead to the development of innovative solutions and best practices that can be shared with other regulatory bodies around the world. As more organizations and governments recognize the importance of safeguarding personal data, the need for robust and cooperative frameworks becomes increasingly clear. The CPPA-CNIL partnership serves as a model for other regions looking to strengthen their data privacy measures through international collaboration.

In a high-stakes clash within the crypto verse, Kraken, a leading U.S. cryptocurrency exchange, has accused blockchain security firm Certik of illicitly siphoning $3 million from its treasury and attempting extortion. The dispute shows the significant tensions between ethical hacking practices and corporate responses and underscores the complexities and challenges within the bug bounty ecosystem.

Accusations from Kraken

Nick Percoco, Kraken's chief security officer, took to social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter) to accuse an unnamed security research firm of misconduct. According to Percoco, the firm - later revealed to be Certik - breached Kraken’s bug bounty program rules. Instead of adhering to the established protocol of promptly returning extracted funds and fully disclosing bug transaction details, Certik allegedly withheld the $3 million and sought additional compensation, Percoco claimed. Percoco claimed that "the ‘security researcher’ disclosed this bug to two other individuals who they work with who fraudulently generated much larger sums. They ultimately withdrew nearly $3 million from their Kraken accounts. This was from Kraken’s treasuries, not other client assets." He said that after contacting the researchers, instead of returning the funds they "demanded a call with their business development team (i.e. their sales reps) and have not agreed to return any funds until we provide a speculated $ amount that this bug could have caused if they had not disclosed it. This is not white-hat hacking, it is extortion!" Percoco said that in the decade-long history of Kraken’s bug bounty program, the company had never encountered researchers who refused to follow the rules. The program stipulates that any funds extracted during bug identification must be immediately returned and accompanied by a proof of concept. The researchers are also expected to avoid excessive exploitation of identified bugs. The dispute escalated as Certik reportedly failed to return the funds and accused Kraken of being “unreasonable” and unprofessional. Percoco responded that such actions by security researchers revoke their “license to hack” and classify them as criminals.

“As a security researcher, your license to “hack” a company is enabled by following the simple rules of the bug bounty program you are participating in. Ignoring those rules and extorting the company revokes your “license to hack”. It makes you, and your company, criminals.”

Certik's Response to Kraken

Following Kraken’s public accusations, Certik disclosed its involvement and countered Kraken’s narrative by accusing the exchange of making unreasonable demands and threatening its employees. Certik claimed Kraken demanded the return of a “mismatched” amount of cryptocurrency within an unfeasible timeframe without providing necessary repayment addresses. The company provided an accounting of its test transactions to support its claims. Certik shared its intent to transfer the funds to an account accessible to Kraken despite the complications in the requested amount and lack of repayment addresses.

“Since Kraken has not provided repayment addresses and the requested amount was mismatched, we are transferring the funds based on our records to an account that Kraken will be able to access.” - CertiK

CertiK’s Take on Kraken’s Defense Systems

Certik defended its actions and instead highlighted the inadequacy of Kraken’s defense systems. The firm pointed out that the continuous large withdrawals from different testing accounts, which were part of their testing process, should have been detected by Kraken’s security measures. Certik questioned why Kraken’s purportedly robust defense systems failed to identify such significant anomalies. “According to our testing result: The Kraken exchange failed all these tests, indicating that Kraken’s defense in-depth-system is compromised on multiple fronts. Millions of dollars can be deposited to ANY Kraken account. A huge amount of fabricated crypto (worth more than 1M+ USD) can be withdrawn from the account and converted into valid cryptos. Worse yet, no alerts were triggered during the multi-day testing period. Kraken only responded and locked the test accounts days after we officially reported the incident.” - CertiK The blockchain security firm said the fact behind their white hat operation is that “millions dollars of crypto were minted out of air, and no real Kraken user’s assets were directly involved” in these research activities. The firm also said that the dispute with the cryptocurrency exchange is actually shifting focus away from a more severe security issue at Kraken. “For several days, with many fabricated tokens generated and withdrawn to valid cryptos, no risk control or prevention mechanisms were triggered until reported by CertiK,” it said. “The real question should be why Kraken’s in-depth defense system failed to detect so many test transactions.” Regarding the money siphoned, Certik said, “Continuous large withdrawals from different testing accounts was a part of our testing.” With an aim of transparency, the security firm disclosed details of all testing deposit transactions and the timeline of how the bug bounty saga played out on X. [caption id="attachment_78192" align="aligncenter" width="698"] Timeline of the Kraken vs CertiK zero-day and bug bounty dispute (Source: CertiK on platform X)[/caption]

Disclosure of Product Flaws Treads a Fine Line

The news of the escalated dispute comes on the heels of another incident where a white hat hacker - after following bug bounty ethics - was threatened by the legal team of the company to “cease and desist.” Andrew Lemon, an offensive security expert, responsibly reported a critical vulnerability to an unnamed company that manufactured and sold a traffic control system. The vulnerability allowed a remote unauthenticated attacker to bypass security and gain full control of a traffic controller, giving them the ability to changing stoplights and modify traffic flow, Lemon explained in a LinkedIn post. But to Lemon’s surprise, instead of acknowledging and addressing the bug with the engineering team, its legal team threatened to sue him under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. “I Received a letter from a company's legal team instead of engineering after responsibly disclosing a critical vulnerability in a traffic control system I purchased from eBay,” he said. “The company's response? In order for them to acknowledge the vulnerability, hardware must be purchased directly from them or tested with explicit authorization from one of their customers, they threatened prosecution under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and labeled disclosure as irresponsible, potentially causing more harm.” Security Engineer Jake Brodsky responded saying, “Legally they're not wrong for writing such a letter or even bringing a court case against the researcher. However, ethically, because it pits professional organizations against each other for no good reason, it is problematic.” Disclosure of product flaws treads a very fine line. On the one hand, nobody likes the publicity that follows. On the other hand, if nobody says anything, the only way we can improve is in the aftermath of an investigation where fortunes are lost and people get hurt.

Implications for the Bug Bounty Ecosystem

The Kraken-Certik dispute and the one highlighted by Andrew Lemon raises critical questions about the operational dynamics and ethical boundaries within bug bounty programs. These programs are designed to incentivize security researchers to identify and report vulnerabilities, offering financial rewards for their efforts. However, these cases reveal potential pitfalls when communication and mutual understanding between parties break down. The ethical framework of bug bounty programs relies on clear rules and mutual trust. Researchers must adhere to the program’s guidelines, including the immediate return of any extracted funds and full disclosure of their findings. On the other hand, companies must provide clear instructions and maintain professional interactions with researchers. There is a need for well-defined protocols and communication channels between companies and researchers. Ensuring transparency and clarity in expectations can prevent misunderstandings and conflicts, fostering a more cooperative environment for cybersecurity improvements.

Experts slammed the latest European Union proposals for chat control to prevent child sexual abuse, calling the proposals a front for mass surveillance that will undermine encryption standards. Meredith Whittaker, president of the Signal foundation that operates the end-to-end encrypted (E2EE) messaging application, criticized the latest European Union proposals for chat control to prevent child sexual abuse, calling it “an old wine repackaged in new bottle.” “For decades, experts have been clear: there is no way to both preserve the integrity of end-to-end encryption and expose encrypted contents to surveillance. But proposals to do just this emerge repeatedly,” Whittaker said.

“Either end-to-end encryption protects everyone, and enshrines security and privacy, or it’s broken for everyone.” – Meredith Whittaker

The Chat Control Proposal

Her statement comes in response to the European Council’s proposal for chat control, which lays down rules to monitor E2EE under the veil of preventing and combating child sexual abuse. “While end-to-end encryption is a necessary means of protecting fundamental rights and the digital security of governments, industry and society, the European Union needs to ensure the effective prevention of and fight against serious crime such as child sexual abuse,” the proposal says. “It is crucial that services employing end-to-end encryption do not inadvertently become secure zones where child sexual abuse material can be shared or disseminated. Therefore, child sexual abuse material should remain detectable in all interpersonal communications services through the application of vetted technologies.” The proposal suggests that chat control could work in way that when any visual content is uploaded, the users be required to give explicit consent for a detection mechanism to be applied to that particular service. “Users not giving their consent should still be able to use that part of the service that does not involve the sending of visual content and URLs,” it said. “This ensures that the detection mechanism can access the data in its unencrypted form for effective analysis and action, without compromising the protection provided by end-to-end encryption once the data is transmitted.”

What Experts Say

However, Whittaker said that what the EU is proposing isn't possible without fundamentally undermining encryption and creating “a dangerous vulnerability in core infrastructure” that can have global implications beyond Europe. She called the proposal a “rhetorical game” of some European countries that have come up with the same idea under a new banner. Whittaker was referring to previous proposals under the name of “client-side scanning,” which is now being called “upload moderation.”

“Some are claiming that ‘upload moderation’ does not undermine encryption because it happens before your message or video is encrypted. This is untrue. We can call it a backdoor, a front door, or “upload moderation.” But whatever we call it, each one of these approaches creates a vulnerability that can be exploited by hackers and hostile nation states, removing the protection of unbreakable math and putting in its place a high-value vulnerability."

Whittaker reiterated that mandating mass scanning of private communications fundamentally undermines encryption, “Full stop.”

Chaos Computer Club, German MP Also Opposed

The Chaos Computer Club (CCC) and Patrick Dreyer, Member of European Parliament for the German and the European Pirate Party, argued along similar lines. The proposal stipulates that users must actively agree to chat control, but the refusal to do so comes with a punishment: Those who do not agree are no longer allowed to send any pictures or videos at all, a severe restriction of the service. “There can be no talk of voluntary participation here,” commented Linus Neumann, spokesman for the Chaos Computer Club. [caption id="attachment_77633" align="aligncenter" width="1024"] Source: Patrick Dreyer[/caption] Dreyer urged Europeans to take immediate action against the Chat Control proposal and said the EU countries pushing the proposal are exploiting the short period after the European Elections during which there is less public attention and the new European Parliament is not yet formed. “If Chat Control is endorsed by Council now, experience shows there is a great risk it will be adopted at the end of the political process,” he said. Dreyer said the silver lining in the current situation is the fact that many EU governments have not yet decided whether to go along with this final Belgian push for Chat Control mass surveillance. The countries still considering the proposal are Italy, Finland, Czech Republic, Sweden, Slovenia, Estonia, Greece and Portugal. Only Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria and Poland are relatively clear that they will not support the proposal, but this is not sufficient for a “blocking minority,” Dreyer said. The proposal for chat control searches of private communications could be greenlighted by EU governments as early as Wednesday, June 19. Dreyer urged Europeans to press their governments to vote against this. “Demand a firm ‘No.’ Time is pressing. This may be our last chance to stop Chat Control!” Dreyer said.

In the aftermath of the Synnovis ransomware attack that struck last week, London hospitals continue to struggle to deliver patient care at an optimal level. The attack on the pathology services provider has brought down the daily blood sampling count in major London hospitals from 10,000 to merely 400 per day, according to Synnovis.

“Urgent requests are severely restricted at around 400 a day. Historically primary care and community services have generated around 10,000 samples a day for testing, which gives you an idea of the scale of the impact.” - Synnovis

Services including blood transfusions reportedly remain severely disrupted at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital and King's College Hospital. Both hospitals are experiencing disruption of pathology services, particularly blood tests.

Blood Testing Severely Impacted After Synnovis Ransomware Attack

The biggest challenge that Synnovis is currently facing is that all its automated end-to-end laboratory processes are offline since all IT systems have been locked down in response to the ransomware attack. “This means we are having to log all samples manually when they arrive, select each test manually on analyzers and, once tests have been processed, type in each result on the laboratory’s computer system (the Laboratory Information Management System - LIMS),” Synnovis said. And this is not the end of it. Synnovis then must manually deliver these results to the Trust’s IT system so that the results can be further electronically submitted back to the requester. But since the Synnovis’ LIMS is presently disconnected from the Trusts’ IT systems, “this extensive manual activity takes so much time that it severely limits the number of pathology tests we can process at the moment,” Synnovis explained. The pathology service provider normally processes around 10,000 primary care blood samples a day, but at the moment is managing only up to 400 from across all six boroughs. “Despite the measures we know colleagues are taking to prioritize the most urgent samples, we are receiving many more than we can process and we have an increasing backlog,” Synnovis said. The lab services provider last week was able to process around 3,000 Full Blood Count samples but could not export results due to the lack of IT connectivity. “Of those tests processed, we have phoned through all results that sit outside of critical limits, however, we have been unable to return any results electronically and are unlikely to be able to do so,” Synnovis said. The impact of the Synnovis ransomware attack is also felt on NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), as it appealed to the public earlier this week to urgently donate O blood-type (+ve and -ve) across England. The attack caused significant disruption on the hospitals’ ability to match patients’ blood types, leading to an increased demand for O-positive and O-negative blood donations that are medically considered safe for all patients.

Will Process only 'Clinically Critical' Blood Samples

To manage the inadequacy of the services, the service provider is momentarily only accepting blood samples that the requesting clinician considers to be “clinically critical.” Clinicians need to consider a test as “critical” only if a test result is needed within 24 hours to determine a patient’s urgent treatment or care plan. “As experts, your clinical view of what is considered ‘critical’ will be accepted by the laboratory, but we urge you to apply this definition carefully, given the severe capacity limitations we are facing,” Synnovis recommended. [caption id="attachment_77097" align="aligncenter" width="1024"] Source: Synnovis[/caption] The pathology service provider is also working with NHS Trust to install laptops at the hub laboratory, which will give them access to the Trust IT systems to return test results electronically.

Caregivers Working Overtime

Doctors and caregivers at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital and King's College Hospital have been putting in extra hours since the Synnovis ransomware attack disrupted services last week. But this is not enough, as KCH has already cancelled some of its operations and is working only at about 70% capacity. Three of its 17 operating theatres remain shut, BBC reported.

The United Kingdom and Canada privacy watchdogs announced a joint investigation this week to determine the security lapses in the genetic testing company 23andMe’s October data breach, which leaked ancestry data of 6.9 million individuals worldwide. The UK Information Commissioner John Edwards and Privacy Commissioner of Canada Philippe Dufresne will lead the investigation, pooling the resources and expertise of their respective offices.

Focus of 23andMe Data Breach Investigation

The joint investigation will examine three key aspects:

• Scope of Information Exposed: The breadth of data affected by the breach and the potential harm to individuals arising from it.
• Security Measures: Evaluate whether 23andMe had adequate safeguards to protect the sensitive information under its control.
• Breach Notification: Review whether the company provided timely and adequate notification to the regulators and affected individuals, as mandated by Canadian (PIPEDA) and UK (GDPR) data protection laws.

Edwards said the investigation was needed to garner the trust of people in organizations that handle sensitive personal data. He stated:

“People need to trust that any organization handling their most sensitive personal information has the appropriate security and safeguards in place. This data breach had an international impact, and we look forward to collaborating with our Canadian counterparts to ensure the personal information of people in the UK is protected.”

Dufresne on the other hand stated the risks associated with genetic information in the wrong hands. He said:

“In the wrong hands, an individual’s genetic information could be misused for surveillance or discrimination. Ensuring that personal information is adequately protected against attacks by malicious actors is an important focus for privacy authorities in Canada and around the world.”

The data protection and privacy laws in the UK and Canada allow such joint investigations on matters that impact both jurisdictions. Each regulator will assess compliance with the relevant laws they oversee. Neither of the privacy commissioner offices however provided further details on how they would charge or penalize 23andMe, if found in violation of GDPR or PIPEDA. “No further comment will be made while the investigation is ongoing,” the UK ICO said. 23andMe acknowledges the joint investigation announced by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the UK Information Commissioner today.

“We intend to cooperate with these regulators’ reasonable requests relating to the credential stuffing attack discovered in October 2023,” a 23andMe spokesperson told The Cyber Express.

Genetic Testing Company 23andMe Data Breach Timeline

23andMe first disclosed details of the October data breach in an 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The genetic testing company said attackers scraped profiles of 23andMe users who opted in to using the company’s DNA Relatives feature. This profiling feature connects users with genetic distant relatives - or other 23andMe users who share their bits of DNA. The attackers used credential stuffing attacks that affected 0.1% of user accounts, the company told SEC. Using these accounts as a launchpad, hackers were able to access “a significant number of files containing profile information about other users' ancestry.” Threat actors claimed on underground forums that they were able to siphon “20 million pieces of code” from 23andMe. The claimed data set included information DNA ancestry backgrounds belonging to more than 1.3 million Ashkenazi Jewish and Chinese users. By the end of October, another threat actor claimed compromise of 4 million genetic profiles, which the company also investigated. The genetic testing company 23andMe said it notified the affected 6.9 million users - 5.5 million DNA Relatives profiles and 1.4 million Family Tree profile – in December. The company told federal regulators that the data breach incident was set to incur between $1 million and $2 million in one-time expenses. The company faces at least 30 class action lawsuits in U.S.state and federal jurisdictions as well as in Canada. 23andMe blamed the customers’ poor security hygiene for the breach and has since made two-step verification a prerequisite for account logon. It also mandated customers to reset their passwords. *Update 1 (June 12 – 12:00 AM EST): Added response from the 23andMe spokesperson.

Switzerland has seen a notable increase in cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns as it prepares to host a crucial summit aimed at creating a pathway for peace in Ukraine. On Monday, the government reported these developments in a press conference, highlighting the challenges of convening a high-stakes international dialogue amidst rising digital threats. The summit, Summit on Peace in Ukraine is scheduled at a resort near Lucerne from June 15-16, and will gather representatives from 90 states and organizations. About half of the participants come from South America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Notably, absent from the attendee list is Russia which was not invited due to its lack of interest in participating. However, the Swiss government emphasized that the summit’s goal is to "jointly define a roadmap" to eventually include both Russia and Ukraine in a future peace process. Swiss President Viola Amherd addressed the media, acknowledging the uptick in cyberattacks and disinformation efforts leading up to the event. These cyberattacks have targeted various facets of the summit, including personal attacks on President Amherd herself, particularly in Russian media outlets publicized within Switzerland. "We haven't summoned the ambassador," Amherd stated in response to these attacks. "That's how I wanted it because the disinformation campaign is so extreme that one can see that little of it reflects reality."

Switzerland Disruption Efforts and Cybersecurity

Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis also spoke at the press conference, noting a clear "interest" in disrupting the talks. However, he refrained from directly accusing any particular entity, including Russia, when questioned about the source of the cyberattacks. This restraint highlights the delicate diplomatic balancing act Switzerland is attempting as host. Switzerland agreed to host the summit at the behest of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and has been actively seeking support from countries with more neutral or favorable relations with Moscow compared to leading Western powers. This strategic outreach aims to broaden the coalition backing the peace efforts and mitigate the polarized dynamics that have characterized the conflict thus far.

Agenda and Key Issues

The summit will address several critical areas of international concern, including nuclear and food security, freedom of navigation, and humanitarian issues such as prisoner of war exchanges. These topics are integral to the broader context of the Ukraine conflict and resonate with the international community's strategic and humanitarian interests. Turkey and India are confirmed participants, though their representation level remains unspecified. There is still uncertainty regarding the participation of Brazil and South Africa. Switzerland noted that roughly half of the participating countries would be represented by heads of state or government, highlighting the summit's high profile and potential impact. The summit aims to conclude with a final declaration, which ideally would receive unanimous backing. This declaration is expected to outline the next steps in the peace process. When asked about potential successors to Switzerland in leading the next phase, Foreign Minister Cassis indicated ongoing efforts to engage regions beyond the Western sphere, particularly the Global South and Arabian countries. Such inclusion could foster a more comprehensive and globally supported peace initiative.

To Wrap Up

The summit represents a significant diplomatic effort to address the Ukraine conflict. However, the surge in cyberattacks on Switzerland and disinformation campaigns, highlights the complexities of such high-stakes international dialogue. In March 2024, Switzerland’s district court in the German-speaking district of March, home to around 45,000 residents, fell victim to a cyberattack. While details are scarce, the court’s website suggests it could potentially be a ransomware attack. As Switzerland navigates these challenges, the outcomes of this summit could set important precedents for future peace efforts and international cooperation.