Enforceis in the Sales Force Automation Industry

Enforce

enforce

Microsoft v. United States (2016) Court Filing, retrieved on July 14, 2016, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 6 of 22. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here C. The Stored Communications Act As the government has acknowledged in this litigation, “[t]he SCA was enacted to extend to electronic records privacy protections analogous to those provided by the Fourth Amendment.” Gov’t Br. at 29 (citing S. Comm. on Judiciary, Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, S. Rep. No. 99‐541, at 5 (1986)). The SCA provides privacy protection for users of two types of electronic services—electronic communication services (“ECS”) and remote computing services (“RCS”)—then probably more distinguishable than now.[13] See Orin S. Kerr, A User’s Guide to the Stored Communications Act, and a Legislator’s Guide to Amending It, 72 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1208, 1213–14 (2004).  An ECS generally operated by providing the user access to a central computer system through which to send electronic messages over telephone lines. S. Rep. No. 99‐541, at 8.  If the intended recipient also subscribed to the service, the provider temporarily stored the message in the recipient’s electronic “mail box” until the recipient “call[ed] the company to retrieve its mail.” Id. If the intended recipient was not a subscriber, the service provider could print the communication on paper and complete delivery by postal service or courier. Id.; U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA‐CIT‐293, Federal Government Information Technology: Electronic Surveillance and Civil Liberties 47–48 (1985).[14] An RCS generally operated either by providing customers with access to computer processing facilities in a “time‐sharing arrangement,” or by directly processing data that a customer transmitted electronically to the provider by means of electronic communications, and transmitting back the requested results of particular operations.  S. Rep. No. 99‐541, at 10–11.  We will refer to Microsoft and other providers of ECS and RCS jointly as “service providers,” except where the distinction makes a difference. As to both services, the Act imposes general obligations of non‐disclosure on service providers and creates several exceptions to those obligations.  Thus, its initial provision, § 2701, prohibits unauthorized third parties from, among other things, obtaining or altering electronic communications stored by an ECS, and imposes criminal penalties for its violation.  Section 2702 restricts the circumstances in which service providers may disclose information associated with and contents of stored communications to listed exceptions, such as with the consent of the originator or upon notice to the intended recipient, or pursuant to § 2703.  Section 2703 then establishes conditions under which the government may require a service provider to disclose the contents of stored communications and related obligations to notify a customer whose material has been accessed. Section 2707 authorizes civil actions by entities aggrieved by violations of the Act, and makes “good faith reliance” on a court warrant or order “a complete defense.”  18 U.S.C. § 2707(e).[15] Regarding governmental access in particular, § 2703 sets up a pyramidal structure governing conditions under which service providers must disclose stored communications to the government.  Basic subscriber and transactional information can be obtained simply with an administrative subpoena.[16] 18 U.S.C. § 2703(c)(2). Other non‐content records can be obtained by a court order (a “§ 2703(d) order”), which may be issued only upon a statement of “specific and articulable facts showing . . . reasonable grounds to believe that the contents or records . . . are relevant and material to an ongoing criminal investigation.”  § 2703(c)(2), (d).  The government may also obtain some user content with an administrative subpoena or a § 2703(d) order, but only if notice is provided to the service provider’s subscriber or customer. § 2703(b)(1)(B).  To obtain “priority stored communications” (our phrase), as described below, the Act generally requires that the government first secure a warrant that has been issued “using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure,” or using State warrant procedures, both of which require a showing of probable cause. [17] Priority stored communications fall into two categories: For electronic communications stored recently (that is, for less than 180 days) by an ECS, the government must obtain a warrant.  § 2703(a).  For older electronic communications and those held by an RCS, a warrant is also required, unless the Government is willing to provide notice to the subscriber or customer.  § 2703(b)(1)(A). As noted, § 2703 calls for those warrants issued under its purview by federal courts to be “issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.” Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, entitled “Search and Seizure,” addresses federal warrants.  It directs “the magistrate judge or a judge of a state court of record” to issue the warrant to “an officer authorized to execute it.” Rule 41(e)(1).  And insofar as territorial reach is concerned, Rule 41(b) describes the extent of the power of various authorities (primarily United States magistrate judges) to issue warrants with respect to persons or property located within a particular federal judicial district.  It also allows magistrate judges to issue warrants that may be executed outside of the issuing district, but within another district of the United States.  Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(b)(2), (b)(3).  Rule 41(b)(5) generally restricts the geographical reach of a warrant’s execution, if not in another federal district, to “a United States territory,  possession, or commonwealth,” and various diplomatic or consular missions of the United States or diplomatic residences of the United States located in a foreign state. [13] See 18 U.S.C. § 2510(15) (in ECPA Title I, defining “electronic communications service” as “any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications”); § 2711(2) (in ECPA Title II, the SCA, defining “remote computing service” as “the provision to the public of computer storage or processing services by means of an electronic communications system”). [14] For example, in 1984, Federal Express entered the e‐mail market with a service that provided for two‐hour delivery of facsimile copies of e‐mail messages up to five pages in length.  U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Electronic Surveillance and Civil Liberties, at 47. [15] Other provisions of the Act address, among other things, preservation of backup data (§ 2704); delaying notice to a customer whose information has been accessed (§ 2705); cost reimbursement for assembling data demanded under the Act (§ 2706); and exclusivity of remedies that the Act provides to a person aggrieved by its violation (§ 2708). [16] An “administrative subpoena” is “a subpoena issued by an administrative agency to compel an individual to provide information to the agency.”  Administrative subpoena, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014). To obtain such a subpoena, the government need not demonstrate probable cause.  See EEOC v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 587 F.3d 136, 139‐40 (2d Cir. 2009). [17] Thus, § 2703, “Required disclosure of customer communications or records,” provides in part as follows: (a) Contents of wire or electronic communications in electronic storage.―A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communication service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication, that is in electronic storage in an electronic communications system for one hundred and eighty days or less, only pursuant to a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (or, in the case of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures) by a court of competent jurisdiction.    A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communications services of the contents of a wire or electronic communication that has been in electronic storage in an electronic communication system for more than one hundred and eighty days by the means available under subsection (b) of this section. (b) Contents of wire or electronic communications in a remote computing service.—(1) A governmental entity may require a provider of remote computing service to disclose the contents of any wire or electronic communication to which this paragraph is made applicable by paragraph (2) of this subsection— (A) without required notice to the subscriber or customer, if the governmental entity obtains a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (or, in the case of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures) by a court of competent jurisdiction; or (B) with prior notice from the governmental entity to the subscriber or customer if the governmental entity— (i) uses an administrative subpoena authorized by a Federal or State statute or a Federal or State grand jury or trial subpoena; or (ii) obtains a court order for such disclosure under subsection (d) of this section; except that delayed notice may be given pursuant to section 2705 of this title. . . . (g) Presence of officer not required.‐‐Notwithstanding section 3105 of this title, the presence of an officer shall not be required for service or execution of a search warrant issued in accordance with this chapter requiring disclosure by a provider of electronic communications service or remote computing service of the contents of communications or records or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case No. 15–777 retrieved on September 27, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. cases.justia.com

The Pyramidal Structure Governing Access of User Data by Law Enforcement Agencies

Apple vs. FBI (2016) Court Filing, retrieved on February 16, 2016, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 17 of 17. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here II. Search Procedure for digital Devices 4. In searching digital devices or forensic copies thereof, law enforcement personnel executing this search warrant will employ the following procedure: a. Law enforcement personnel or other individuals assisting law enforcement personnel (the "search team") will, in their discretion, either search the digital device (s) on-site or seize and transport the device (s) to an appropriate law enforcement laboratory or similar facility to be searched at that location. The search team shall complete the search as soon as is practicable but not to exceed 60 days from the date of execution of the warrant. If additional time is needed, the government may seek an extension of this time period from the Court on or before the date by which the search was to have been completed. b. The search team will conduct the search only by using search protocols specifically chosen to identify only the specific items to be seized under this warrant. i. The search team may subject all of the data contained in each digital device capable of containing any of the items to be seized to the search protocols to determine whether the device and any data thereon falls within the list of items to be seized. The search team may also search for and attempt to recover deleted, "hidden," or encrypted data to determine, pursuant to the search protocols, whether the data falls within the list of items to be seized. ii. The search team may use tools to exclude normal operating system files and standard third-party software that do not need to be searched. c. When searching a digital device pursuant to the specific search protocols selected, the search team shall make and retain notes regarding how the search was conducted pursuant to the selected protocols. d. If the search team, while searching a digital device, encounters immediately apparent contraband or other evidence of a crime outside the scope of the items to be seized, the team shall immediately discontinue its search of that device pending further order of the Court and shall make and retain notes detailing how the contraband or other evidence of a crime was encountered, including how it was immediately apparent contraband or evidence of a crime. e. If the search determines that a digital device does not contain any data falling within the list of items to be seized, the government will, as soon as is practicable, return the device and delete or destroy all forensic copies thereof. f. If the search determines that a digital device does contain data falling within the list of items to be seized, the government may make and retain copies of such data, and may access such data at any time. g. If the search determines that a digital device is (1) itself an item to be seized and/or (2) contains data falling within the list of items to be seized, the government may retain forensic copies of the digital device but may not access them (after the time for searching the device has expired) absent further court order. h. The government may retain a digital device itself until further order of the Court or one year after the conclusion of the criminal investigation or case (whichever is latest), only if the device is determined to be an instrumentality of an offense under investigation or the government, within 14 days following the time period authorized by the Court for completing the search, obtains an order from the Court authorizing retention of the device (or while an application for such an order is pending). Otherwise, the government must return the device. Notwithstanding the above, after the completion of the search of the digital devices, the government shall not access digital data falling outside the scope of the items to be seized absent further order of the Court. i. Notwithstanding the above, after the completion of the search of the digital devices, the government shall not access digital data falling outside the scope of the items to be seized absent further order of the Court. 5. In order to search for data capable of being read or interpreted by a digital device, law enforcement personnel are authorized to seize the following items: a. Any digital device capable of being used to commit, further or store evidence of the offense (s) listed above; b. Any equipment used to facilitate the transmission, creation, display, encoding, or storage of digital data; c. Any magnetic, electronic, or optical storage device capable of storing digital data; d. Any documentation, operating logs, or reference manuals regarding the operation of the digital device or software used in the digital device; e. Any applications, utility programs, compilers, interpreters, or other software used to facilitate direct or indirect communication with the digital device; f. Any physical keys, encryption devices, dongles, or similar physical items that are necessary to gain access to the digital device or data stored on the digital device; and g. Any passwords, password files, test keys, encryption codes, or other information necessary to access the digital device or data stored on the digital device. 6. The special procedures relating to digital devices found in this warrant govern only the search of digital devices pursuant to the authority conferred by this warrant and do not apply to any search of digital devices pursuant to any other court order. 7. The government is allowed to share the information obtained from this search (to include copies of digital media) with any government agency investigating, or aiding in the investigation of, this case or related matters. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case No. 15-0451M retrieved on September 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. archive.epic.org

How the U.S. Law Enforcement Executes Search Warrants for Digital Devices 

Ransomware is one of the biggest cybersecurity threats facing the world today, and it affects more than just businesses. Many of these attacks target police departments, highlighting the need for better cybersecurity in law enforcement. As cybercrime has grown, law enforcement agencies — from local police departments to the FBI — have prioritized cracking down on online criminals. However, many of these agencies are now in a different position in this dynamic. Ransomware gangs aren’t just evading the police but targeting them. The State of Police Ransomware Attacks Ransomware has in the past few years, and attacks against law enforcement agencies are no different. In 2021, the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police made headlines for falling victim to a ransomware attack demanding $4 million. Attackers leaked hundreds of sensitive internal documents online after the department refused to pay the ransom. risen across the board That same year, cybercriminals from the Dade City, Florida, police department. It refused, and the attackers leaked crime scene photos in revenge. At least nine other law enforcement agencies faced ransomware attacks from 2020 through mid-2021. demanded a $450,000 ransom Ransomware risks continue to threaten law enforcement agencies today. In February 2023, the U.S. Marshals affecting sensitive information over ongoing investigations and agency employees. The same month, the FBI had to contain malicious activity on its network. Had the agency not acted as quickly as it did, it could’ve led to a similar incident. fell victim to a ransomware attack Ransomware Risks for Law Enforcement Ransomware is damaging in any context, but police attacks are particularly pressing. Law enforcement agencies face all the same dangers of a business when these incidents occur, plus an additional layer of urgency, given the nature of their work. Sensitive Data Exposure One of the biggest reasons why ransomware gangs like to target law enforcement is that they carry highly sensitive data. In addition to holding personally identifiable information (PII) on many citizens, police departments have electronic evidence, protected witnesses’ identities, and data on secret operations. Exposing this data could put people in danger, undermine trust in authorities, or hinder ongoing investigations. Even if things don’t reach those extremes, leakage can still have serious consequences. In the Washington, D.C., case, the leaked information included the , which other cybercriminals can use for phishing or identity theft. cellphone numbers and addresses of two dozen officers Agencies like the FBI hold even more sensitive information. In these cases, ransomware attacks could become a matter of national security, as attackers could pass data on government cybersecurity systems or the identities of undercover agents to other criminals. Disrupted Emergency Services Ransomware attacks against police departments and their partner organizations could also stop people from getting needed help. An agency that loses access to mission-critical systems or files may be unable to contact parties or perform services, leaving the citizens they protect vulnerable. A 2018 ransomware attack of the city’s automated emergency dispatching system. 911 dispatchers could still contact police, fire, and health services but had to rely on slower, manual methods as the ransomware took the electronic system offline. Emergency services were able to recover before long, but the incident highlights the destructive potential of these attacks. led to a 17-hour shutdown A larger, more effective ransomware attack could take emergency services offline for hours or even days. Even though backup systems would still work, police officers may be unable to respond as quickly as normal. In some situations, those delays could be a matter of life or death. Financial Losses Just like businesses, police forces face financial ransomware risks, too. These attacks have cost over the past ten years, and they’re only growing costlier. Those expenses have far-reaching implications when they affect public agencies like law enforcement. more than $1 billion Police departments are tax-funded, so their recovery costs reflect on the taxpayers. Monetary losses in these agencies translate into shortfalls for the public they serve. They may also make it harder for agencies to remain within their annual budgets, leading to a higher economic burden on taxpayers or cutting programs that could help the public. A police department that must shrink its budget to recuperate from ransomware losses may put off new tech purchases that could make emergency systems more accessible to citizens. Alternatively, it could come at the expense of programs to boost response efficiency or public safety. How Cybersecurity in Law Enforcement Can Improve Given the high risks of police ransomware, cybersecurity in law enforcement agencies must improve. Here are a few ways police departments can bolster their cybersecurity to prevent and mitigate ransomware attacks. Spotting phishing attempts is , as most attacks start this way. Law enforcement agencies should train all employees on common signs of phishing so they don’t fall for these scams. All workers should also know best practices like never clicking on unsolicited links and not sending sensitive information over email. crucial in avoiding ransomware Considering how sensitive police data is, agencies must also implement advanced monitoring solutions. Artificial intelligence (AI) can continuously monitor networks for suspicious activity to isolate potential threats quickly and accurately. This continuous monitoring should include user and entity behavior analytics (UEBA) and work alongside zero-trust network architecture. Law enforcement cybersecurity must also include extensive backup systems. That includes keeping offline, air-gapped copies of all sensitive information and having a formal plan for responding to emergencies. These procedures should be detailed, include communications protocol, and cover several backup strategies for multiple scenarios. Police departments should rehearse them regularly to ensure everyone knows how to respond. Law Enforcement Agencies Need Better Cybersecurity Ransomware risks are running high across all industries, and government agencies are no exception. Criminals target police departments with increasing frequency and severity, and law enforcement officials must take the time to improve their cybersecurity. Failure to do so could put the public at risk. Police ransomware protection is a complex but achievable goal. Departments that stay on top of cybercrime trends and keep up with advancing security technology can keep their employees and jurisdictions safe.

How Ransomware Impacts Law Enforcement

International Law Enforcement Agencies Collaborate Global Takedown of Largest Cybercriminal Marketplace, Genesis In a groundbreaking and unprecedented move, an international task force of law enforcement agencies united in a global operation across 17 countries to dismantle Genesis, a nefarious cybercriminal empire that reigned supreme in the dark web. With meticulous coordination spanning across borders and jurisdictions, the operation culminated in a dramatic and resounding victory, as the Genesis platform was swiftly seized and several key players in its illicit operation were apprehended in a stunning display of justice prevailing against the forces of cybercrime. The magnitude of this historic takedown reverberates throughout the cyber underworld, serving as a resolute warning to those who dare to engage in illegal activities on the dark web. Since its inception in 2019, this malevolent force had brazenly enabled a wide array of illegal transactions, ranging from the trade of stolen credit card information, personal data, drugs, weapons, and all manner of illicit goods and services. With its cloak of anonymity, Genesis had become a notorious breeding ground for cybercriminals to carry out their nefarious deeds with impunity, posing a dire threat to cybersecurity and law enforcement efforts worldwide. Its heinous activities had festered and grown, wreaking havoc in the virtual domain and beyond, until the day of reckoning finally arrived. In a heart-stopping display of global cooperation, an international coalition of law enforcement agencies from across the globe united in a relentless pursuit of justice against Genesis. The stakes were high as authorities from the United States, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Australia, and other nations orchestrated a meticulously coordinated operation to take down this criminal behemoth. With lightning speed and unwavering determination, search warrants were executed, assets were seized, and suspects were apprehended in a stunning display of force against the malevolent forces behind Genesis. The magnitude of this multinational effort sent shockwaves through the criminal underworld, leaving no doubt that the long arm of the law had reached out to deliver a resounding blow to those who thought they could operate with impunity in the dark recesses of the cyber realm. The fall of Genesis has reverberated across the digital landscape, heralded as a resounding triumph in the relentless battle against cybercrime. Why This Is Important It serves as a resolute warning to everywhere that law enforcement agencies will stop at nothing to protect the digital realm from their nefarious activities. cybercriminals The victory over Genesis stands as a beacon of hope in the ongoing fight against cybercrime, a testament to the unwavering resolve of those who tirelessly combat this ever-evolving threat to our digital world. In a joint statement, the law enforcement agencies involved in the operation emphasized the importance of international collaboration in combatting cybercrime. They highlighted the complexities of investigating and dismantling such sophisticated criminal networks that operate across borders and jurisdictions. The operation also sends a clear message to cybercriminals that law enforcement agencies are determined to track down and prosecute those involved in illegal activities on the dark web. It serves as a warning to other cybercriminals that their illicit activities will not go unpunished, and law enforcement agencies will continue to work tirelessly to disrupt and dismantle their operations. News Summary The , the largest cybercriminal marketplace on the dark web, is a major achievement for international law enforcement agencies. global takedown of Genesis It demonstrates the power of global cooperation in combatting cybercrime and serves as a warning to cybercriminals that their illegal activities will not go unpunished. However, the fight against cybercrime is an ongoing challenge, and law enforcement agencies must continue to work together, adapt to evolving threats, and invest in cybersecurity capabilities to protect individuals, businesses, and societies from the damaging impact of cybercrime.

International Law Enforcement Agencies Take Down Genesis Marketplace

Let’s look at a scenario together. You want to enforce a constraint, for instance, one where any new record must have a unique name, title, etc, but you are not sure where to enforce it exactly. Do you do it at the application level or level? DB Let’s try and get to the bottom of this together. Application level vs database level For me, instituting  your constraints at the DB level is a must, the reason why is that the database could be accessed from many places. So, if you set the constraint over your application level that means if anything else accesses your DB directly, it won't respect your rules. Moreso, most databases carry out the uniqueness validation more efficiently so it's better to have your constraints there. Application level Database level Pros * No migration needed * Force the constraints no matter what client * Handles the indexes behind the scene * Central place to enforce all your rules Cons Extra logic to check the uniqueness Assuming that your case is coverable by the DB of your choice, I would definitely recommend using your DB to enforce your constraints. And all you need to do is to handle the failure on your application level as most DB clients return error codes, something like the below: if ( err && err.code !== 11000 ) {
    console.log(err);
    res.send('duplicate record, u need to focus user!!!');
    return;
  } Of course, I would also recommend wrapping your errors but that's a topic for later. Status code Should the status code be anything besides 4xx? Well well, 4xx means that the user needs to perform some action or in other words, it’s the user's fault that this happened, so it should be 4xx. Which one of the 4xx? Now you might be wondering why not use 400 instead of 409. The thing is, your status code should be clean and actually reflect the status, so if you used 400 code for everything that means the FE has to do extra work with your error responses, then why not make it easy for your API number 1 users and just return 409 Conclusion It's important to simplify your logic and make sure that the data integrity rules are set for all clients and that they are returning the appropriate response status code at all times. Also published here.

Knowing Where and When to Enforce the Uniqueness of Your Data

Twitter v. Elon Musk Court Filing by Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, July 12, 2022 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 30 of 31. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here Feature Image: HackerNoon’s Stable Diffusion AI, prompt “breach of contract” CAUSE OF ACTION Breach of Contract — Specific Performance & Injunction 148. Twitter repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations above. 149. The merger agreement is a valid and enforceable contract. 150. Twitter has fully performed all of its obligations under the merger agreement to date, and is ready, willing, and able to continue so performing. 151. Defendants have breached the merger agreement by, among other things, violating Sections 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.8, and 6.10. 152. In Section 9.9(a), each of the parties agreed that, without posting bond or other undertaking, the other parties “shall be entitled to an injunction, specific performance and other equitable relief to prevent breaches of this Agreement and to enforce specifically the terms and provisions hereof, in addition to any other remedy to which they are entitled at law or in equity.” 153. In Section 9.9(b), the parties expressly “acknowledged and agreed that the Company shall be entitled to specific performance or other equitable remedy to enforce Parent and Acquisition Sub’s obligations to cause the Equity Investor to fund the Equity Financing, or to enforce the Equity Investor’s obligation to fund the Equity Financing directly, and to consummate the Closing” if three conditions are met: (i) all of the conditions set forth in Section 7.1 and Section 7.2 have or will be satisfied at the closing; (ii) the debt financing has been funded or will be funded at the closing if the equity financing is funded; and (iii) the company has confirmed that the closing will occur. 154. All of the conditions set forth in Sections 7.1 and 7.2 have been satisfied or waived, or are expected to be satisfied or waived at the closing, and the closing will occur if the debt and equity financing are funded, which funding is solely within the control of defendants. 155. Twitter has suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of defendants’ breaches. Continue reading here

Musk breached a 'valid and enforceable contract' with Twitter, per lawsuit 

Musk incumplió un 'contrato válido y exigible' con Twitter, según demanda

Musk a rompu un "contrat valide et exécutoire" avec Twitter, par procès

मस्क ने प्रति मुकदमा ट्विटर के साथ 'वैध और लागू करने योग्य अनुबंध' का उल्लंघन किया

訴訟によると、マスクはツイッターとの「有効で執行可能な契約」に違反した

Musk violou um 'contrato válido e executável' com o Twitter, por ação judicial

Musk đã vi phạm 'hợp đồng hợp lệ và có hiệu lực thi hành' với Twitter, theo một vụ kiện

根据诉讼，马斯克违反了与 Twitter 的“有效且可执行的合同”

Twitter v. Elon Musk Court Filing by Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, July 12, 2022 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 13 of 31. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS III - The Final, Agreed-upon Term Deals G. Specific Performance 54. Twitter may seek specific performance, an injunction, or other equitable relief to enforce any of defendants’ obligations under the merger agreement. Id. § 9.9(a). It has the specific power to compel Musk to fund the equity financing and close the merger, provided the closing conditions are met (or are capable of being met at the time of closing), the debt financing (which is already committed) has been or will be funded at the closing, and the company is itself prepared to close. Id. § 9.9(b). Continue reading here

Twitter May Enforce Musk to Close Deal as long as It Met Closing Conditions, per Lawsuit 

Twitter puede obligar a Musk a cerrar un trato siempre que cumpla con las condiciones de cierre, según la demanda

Twitter peut obliger Musk à conclure l'accord tant qu'il respecte les conditions de clôture, par poursuite

ट्विटर मई मस्क को डील बंद करने के लिए मजबूर कर सकता है, जब तक कि यह प्रति मुकदमा बंद होने की स्थिति में है

訴訟によると、Twitter は成約条件を満たしている限り、Musk に取引を成立させる可能性がある

Twitter pode forçar Musk a fechar negócio, desde que atenda às condições de fechamento, por processo judicial

Twitter có thể buộc Musk phải đóng giao dịch miễn là nó đáp ứng các điều kiện kết thúc, theo vụ kiện

根据诉讼，Twitter 可能会强制马斯克在满足成交条件的情况下完成交易

The police department detects and prevents the time and punishes the felons. Most of the time, police officers face unknown threats looming around to disrupt the peace of society. Whenever we hear data science, we think of all the industries except law enforcement. Regardless of what we perceive, using is usual. Data Science is a field in which the data is studied to focus on improving the outcomes, whether it is a production company or society. With the proper study of data, law enforcement can easily prevent crime and take the accused into custody. data science in law enforcement Data Science For Law Enforcement Although data science seems a new field of study, Law enforcement has unknowingly utilized it for a long time. There are many cases where city cops have analyzed the places where the majority of the crime occurs and the time when it happens. With such analysis, the patrolling had been increased in those areas at a specific hour of the day, and the crime rate got reduced easily. Let's look at some specific applications of data science in Law Enforcement. Crime Detection With Data Science Historically, law enforcement agencies were a disjointed data-sharing matrix. The Installation of the National Crime Information Center, Software for crime mapping, and other assisting management tools like CompStat and OneDOJ have improved the condition. Gathering information from social media has given an upper hand to the data scientist at law enforcement agencies. Such information provides law enforcement agencies an idea of a felony tracking someone's search on Google for learning something unusual that may cause harm to society or to the person itself. Such information can also help gather evidence post the crime is conducted. Moreover, text analytics during the interrogation may also help to understand the nature of the accused, which helps to predict which accused should be further interrogated. NLP In Law Enforcement Law enforcement does not just rely upon static data; accurate analysis of the crime requires understanding the answers of the witness, audio recording, and camera footage. That's where NLP plays an important role. AI can analyze emotional distress, but the human element is reasonably necessary. The report on Natural language processing contains computational linguistics and computational psychology. Body Cams Everyone owns smartphones nowadays, but body cam is mandatory for police officers in the United States as they can't perform their duties carrying a mobile phone. This video can be too lengthy, or the quality can be inappropriate because of constant movement. In such cases, data scientists can assist in shortening the length of the videos with the help of AI to detect a specific zone in the video which requires alertness. After establishing the alert, the video can be used for further analysis. Moreover, facial recognition can also help with AI tools to notify the cop on duty to remain alert in suspicious situations. Crime Detection With Data Science By now, it should be clear that algorithmic accuracy is primarily determined by the skill of the statistician or data scientist and the quality of the data. There are numerous statistical models available for use in law enforcement. The list below is not exhaustive; instead, it is a starting point rather than a detailed description of all possible crime detection models. Furthermore, only broad descriptions are provided because a comprehensive examination of when, how, and why each statistical tool is used is outside the scope of this article. This is a well-liked machine learning method (and data science). It is a straightforward binary classification technique that can get trickier. The likelihood of repeat offenders could be estimated using a logistic regression model. Logistic regression: Additionally, cluster analysis can rate the likelihood of crime and identify whether neighborhoods will experience more excellent or lower crime rates. Several clustering techniques are available, including hierarchical, centroid-based, distribution-based, and density-based. One or more clustering tools can be employed on the basis of the type of data and the purpose of the analysis. Clustering algorithms: One of several machine learning and AI models that uses biologically inspired frameworks is CNN. Essentially, the structure of this model mimics the layers between input and output values found in the visual brain using neuronal-type nodes. CNN is a well-liked method for video and image analysis. Convolutional Neural Networks: Despite being frequently utilized for video analysis, CDBNs can also be used for audio analysis. This is particularly valid when the study's input values (or values) are high-dimensional data. Several layers make up CBNs, only one of which is visible. In data science for law enforcement, CDBNs can help categorize the likelihood of who is speaking and what is being said in audio recordings. Convolutional Deep Belief Networks: RNNs have been employed in the past to recognize voice and text (or handwriting). Within the RNN classification, LTSM networks have also been applied to voice recognition and speech-to-text tasks. RNNs could be used by law enforcement to recreate different sorts of audio transcripts, like witness and victim interviews, and analyze emergency calls. Recurrent Neural Networks: Conclusion Data is certainly not new for justice and authority, but technological advancement has made it more accurate and enhanced. Leveraging , Law Enforcement agencies can build software and algorithms to keep their data safe. In the hour of need, those data can be retrieved to solve cases and maintain social harmony. data science consulting services

The Usefulness Of Data Science In Law Enforcement

Rust’s Ownership and Borrowing Enforce Memory Safety

La propiedad y los préstamos de Rust hacen cumplir la seguridad de la memoria

La propriété et les emprunts de Rust renforcent la sécurité de la mémoire

रस्ट का स्वामित्व और उधार स्मृति सुरक्षा को लागू करता है

Rust の所有権と借用によってメモリの安全性が強化されます

Propriedade e empréstimo de Rust reforçam a segurança da memória

Quyền sở hữu và đi vay của Rust thực thi an toàn cho bộ nhớ

Rust 的所有权和借用增强了内存安全性

Photo by on Luke Jones Unsplash This past week, BlockDown livestreamed a noteworthy fireside discussion between Dr. Gavin Woods and Edward Snowden. The conversation explored the subject of decentralization and Web3’s plausibility to serve as humanity’s salvation from central, authoritarian control. This article will explore key points from this discussion and their ties to the technology and vision behind Polkadot by Parity. The recording may be found . here The blockchain community is not united in the strive of decentralization, as many groups and projects also exist with a more centralized architecture. One such example is Ethereum projects that are centralized in order to optimize their network performance. layer-1 What is a Centralized layer-1 Project? Firstly, is indicative of Ethereum’s original chain without any scaling solutions. This is the state of the current Ethereum mainnet, high gas fees and all. layer-1 solutions are built on top of layer-1. Layer-2 Advancements are designed to optimize speed and reduce gas fees for the network. Projects designing these solutions include polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism, and zkSync. More detailed explanations on this subject can be found and . here here At a high level, centralization in a can occur when the validator nodes (which verify the transactions) can be run only by very select individuals or groups. This is due to factors such as cost of the project’s token and the computing power required to run nodes. decentralized network In many instances, there is usually a minimum quantity of token required in a user’s wallet balance to qualify as a validator for the network. At high token costs and high computing costs, this creates a barrier to entry for the average person. One such project with this issue is Solana ($SOL), whose network can easily be overtaken by a select small group of miners. A full deep dive into the specifics may be referenced . here To quote Edward Snowden, “How can we guard against the natural tendency of centralized gain?” During the talk, Snowden alluded to the concepts of market effects and the first-mover advantage. At the time of this writing, we may exhibit such behavior in the blockchain space through Facebook’s rebranding to Meta. A term that alludes to their outpouring of research into developing their corporation’s vision of the . Metaverse For newcomers in this space, this term alludes to a digital world where users may interact as if they were in another virtual reality. It is a general term and currently, many developers and projects are crafting their own vision of a digital landscape for users. The metaverse as a concept, however, is not a term that should belong to a single institution. Further exploration on this topic can be done through two fellow writers on the HackerNoon platform: and @thumbsup @mashacryptoprlab Nevertheless, in order to fully address this question, it is first necessary to discuss the Polkadot project by Parity Technologies. What is the Polkadot Project’s Role? Polkadot is unparalleled in its approach to serve as a layer-0 protocol. Following the hub and spoke model as a technology concept, Polkadot is the hub whereby other networks are interoperable via parachains. Polkadot accommodates interoperability between networks as the central hub facilitates communication between chains. Thus, the core idea is simple. Polkadot ingrains rules and logic deep into the underlying foundational layer, so that it is not permitted for other projects to behave in a manner that would be central and dominant. Guaranteed rule enforcement liberates users from fears of sabotage as credibility in the system is assured. Rather than trust authority, individuals can trust logic and precision. How can This be Achieved in the Technology Stack? indicates that this will be the base layer for all protocols. All other blockchains communicate with Polkadot and execute their own logic, while adhering to the governance and rules of Polkadot. Layer-0 and are used as programming languages to provide an unopinionated and unambiguous means to which smart contracts may be scripted. In Gavin’s own words from Consensus 2021, “the best languages compile down to it”. Web Assembly Rust Now, with this having been presented, it is vital to note that the core protocol is never the source of upgrades. The core protocol is designed in a simple manner with well-defined standards. “blockchains are not fit for modern use, hard forks tend to thwart their own consensus.” ~Gavin Woods (Consensus 2021**) In our fast-paced world individuals expect automatic updates. Upgrades and innovations are enacted in the above layers, so that the historic means of forking and the risks entailed are bypassed. Conclusion Providing a fair system entails dictating what actors in the network may do at the most fundamental level, while permitting rapid technical innovation on the higher levels of the system. Gavin Woods conveys that the extent of how much the world cares will become more evident. The concept of self-sovereignty, self-governance, privacy, and moving away from the trusted authority paradigm may or may not be realized. The solution and purpose of the Polkadot project is to develop an interoperable system that provides guaranteed enforcement of rules transparent to all users and baked into open-source code. Individuals can trust the system. Bad actors and manipulators cannot go against the protocol. This will be a social experiment spanning the next decade. Will we rise above our predecessors and experience a world far different from our current reality? Or, rather will we slip back into complacency as creatures of habit? Only time will tell. Thanks for your time and I hope this article was useful to you. ~MR **The author of this piece was privileged to attend Gavin Wood’s talk on the state of Polkadot and Web3 at Consensus 2021. Highlights from this may be found on . Coindesk As always, all information presented is not to be taken as investment or financial advice. Please do your own research in all matters pertaining to this space. None of my content is to serve as an endorsement of any product, project, or cryptocurrency. All content on this account is strictly for informative purposes.

The Blockchain Social Experiment: Enforced Logic 

For modern organizations, there is a need for reliable options for storing and managing their digital media assets, such as videos, audio, images, and documents, and cloud storage options such as Dropbox have become increasingly popular with most of them, including public safety & law enforcement agencies. Having a reliable cloud data storage and backup platform is a requirement for most organizations in the contemporary world. Employees working in small and medium organizations rely on cloud storage services such as Dropbox to store and share their files. Dropbox is even being used in some law enforcement agencies and policing. However, you might need more than just Dropbox-like storage for managing digital evidence. Why Dropbox May Not Be the Best Option for Law Enforcement Agencies? Dropbox has a few features that help securely store digital evidence, such as 256-bit encryption and password protection. Syncing is faster, since the process is done in blocks and the waiting period to access files on another device is minimal, and the solution is easy-to-use which is why it is preferred by over 500 million individuals, including 11.9 million paying users. But when it comes to managing evidence, that is as far as the advantages of Dropbox go. The system isn’t designed for digital evidence management, and there are several gaps and challenges for securely storing and managing evidence using Dropbox. Its privacy policies are somewhat controversial; the application can access your personal information and share it with third-party organizations such as Google and Amazon Web Services. Dropbox lacks metadata search functionality so a file cannot be searched according to the file information and the date it was created. Now, there are a lot of better alternatives that are designed specifically to manage digital evidence and cater to law enforcement. 9 Dropbox competitors for storing digital evidence: 1. VIDIZMO Digital Evidence Management System (DEMS) VIDIZMO Digital Evidence Management System (DEMS) is custom designed specifically to ingest, store, manage, and share evidence files. Apart from its storage options, multiple features of DEMS such as access management, security and chain of custody make it the ideal option for law-enforcement and governmental agencies. The platform does not store your personal information and protects your sensitive data such as evidence files from third-parties, malicious attacks and otherwise unauthorized access. You can use an array of features such as role-based access control, end-to-end encryption and user groups for controlling access to data and evidence. You can share evidence for only a limited time or number of use. The platform also provides a powerful search using AI by automatically indexing meta data for a quick search using keywords. DEMS offers public cloud storage services (e.g.: Azure, AWS etc.), as well as on-premises and hybrid deployments for specific client requirements. The platform also offers a wide range of features and options for meeting compliances necessary for law enforcement and criminal justice systems, such as CJIS, FedRAMP and more. Unlike DEMS, if you use Dropbox for storing and sharing evidence, files need to be deleted if one wishes to restrict the access of a particular person. In addition to that, DEMS provides an exclusive feature which allows you to search for frames in the video. Instead of having to view the entire video or audio evidence, one can quickly search and jump to the relevant part in the evidence. VIDIZMO understands that evidence may be recorded using different sources such as dash cams, aerial footage such as drone cams, smartphones, body cams and CCTVs. Users can rest assured that in addition to password protection and secured cloud, compatibility is also an essential feature of VIDIZMO DEMS. 2. Google Drive Google Drive is a file storage service which allows organizations to have all files in one place, share the video evidence files online and access them from anywhere. Google Drive has the largest market share when it comes to providing cloud storage services. Google Drive offers 15 GB of free storage space which is huge in comparison to the 2 GB provided by Dropbox. Google Drive is also the leader when it comes to paid storage. Google charges $99.99 per year, whereas Dropbox charges $119.88 per year for a 2 TB of storage space with Drive. Google Drive’s syncing also supports multiple devices which is also possible via the Backup and Sync application. In addition to the two-factor authentication, Google Drive’s Cloud Identity Feature provides endpoint management services. Unlike Dropbox, Google Drive clearly states the number of certifications it follows which includes standards such as ISO 27017, FedRAMP, FISC Compliance and PCI DSS. However, Google Drive has file size limitations such as a restriction of 1,024,000 characters, upper limit of 100MB for slideshow presentations and 2 MB for embedded images. 3. Amazon Drive The tech giant Amazon has a fair share of the market when it comes to providing cloud-based services and storage of video, audio and image files. Similar to Dropbox and Google Drive, Amazon uses block-level file copying so faster syncing speed is one of its traits. Amazon Drive’s free plan includes 5GB of storage space. In addition to providing web-based access, Amazon’s Drive’s desktop app allows access to all the files. Amazon Drive’s ease of syncing with Android, macOS, Windows and iOS is another commendable feature. A drawback is that Amazon Drive only has 2 plans which the restricts the options available for users. 4. Office 365 Office 365 is an ideal platform for collaboration as it provides the facility of sharing content, storing files and collaborating on documents with external users and colleagues through its three main products: OneDrive, Microsoft Teams and SharePoint. Small industries with 50-200 employees and revenue in between 10-50 million dollars comprise the major chunk of the users of 5. Microsoft One Drive. OneDrive is a platform which allows easy file sharing, integration with Windows File Explorer and accessing files from mobile devices. There are three different types of OneDrive sharing links: Shareable (which allows anyone with the link to share), Internal (allows only people within the firm to share) and Direct (only specific personnel can share). Although OneDrive works seamlessly with Microsoft Office apps, there are limited options available for third-party integrations. Furthermore, OneDrive’s right to scan saved files raises security concerns amongst the users. 6. pCloud pCloud is an encrypted cloud storage platform that offers up to 10GB of free storage space. It supports a large number of platforms, including Windows, Mac, SaaS, Android, iPhone, and iPad. The target audience of pCloud is digital-savvy consumers who work with large files. pCloud offers a subscription-based payment plan with its two main tiers being Premium and Premium Plus. The majority of the 10 million customers of pCloud belong to the following industries: retail, legal, insurance, education, accounting, real estate, photographers, and PR/advertising agencies.pCloud offers faster sync and share as compared to Dropbox. The Rewind feature allows users to restore the previous version of the file. pCloud’s great flexibility in terms of its pricing, a wide array of features, and a strict privacy policy comprise of its unique selling points. However, pCloud uses cloud storage for saving without utilizing space from local systems because of which it gets tricky to get the whole backup when needed. 7. WeTransfer is a file transfer service that allows users to share files without having to create an account because of which it is used by officers for quick file transfer. WeTransfer allows sending files up to 2GB for free (which is huge compared to 100MB per file transfer on Dropbox). WeTransfer There are two ways of sending files via WeTransfer: sending a download link via email or creating a download link that allows anyone with the link to download the files. Additionally, WeTransfer Pro allows the transfer limit to be increased to 20GB with 1TB of cloud storage space and custom expiration dates. WeTransfer scans the uploaded files only if it feels the users are breaking the laws or rules. Although WeTransfer allows ease of file transfer without having the premium version, files get deleted after a week. 8. Sync is a Canadian company providing the option to store, share and access files from anywhere in the world and is preferred by organizations for whom security is the highest priority. The best feature that offers is having zero-knowledge encryption – a security feature that ensures that only the user can read their data, thus always having a secure file.  Files are synced using a “vault” which operates as a secure file archive. Sync.com Sync.com is affordable as it offers a Personal Pro 2TB annual plan which charges around $8 a month. It also offers a flexible 500 GB personal plan for users. It also has a multi-user team sharing built-in feature which is compatible with both iOS and Android. Some disadvantages of Sync are slow syncing and lack of support especially for Linux. Sync.com 9. Zoho Docs Zoho Corporation provides an efficient file management system for various firms. Zoho Docs is an online document management system that allows storing, uploading, creating, editing, collaborating and sharing over 160 file types such as spreadsheets, images, audio, videos, and presentations. Unlike many other cloud service providers, Zoho Docs offers a free trial in addition to a free version. It also provides extensive training options such as through webinars, live online, and thorough documentation. Zoho also allows syncing offline files using the drag and drop feature. Moreover, the files can be attached directly to which is beneficial for organizations that require customized domain in their email addresses. The ioS application for Zoho needs improvement and downloads are limited to 10GB per day for users not opting for the paid version. Zoho Mail Conclusion It can be said that law enforcement agencies and government organizations that are on the hunt for alternatives to Dropbox have a variety of options at their disposal. Evidence management systems appear to be the optimal platform for law enforcement agencies who specifically want a platform for their evidence video files to be stored, accessed, reviewed and analyzed. Simple cloud storage solutions are suitable for storing and accessing video evidence files, but unlike digital evidence management, they do not offer features such as chain of custody, transcription services, redaction, and sufficient security. Furthermore, most of them do not offer the necessary compliances such as HIPAA and FedRAMP required for law enforcement. In conclusion, it can be said that the choice of cloud storage platform depends largely on the nature of the business and organizations need to decide carefully which platform will yield the best results for them.

9 Dropbox Alternatives for Evidence Management in Law Enforcement

Biometrics and identity management are so effective and efficient that law enforcement agencies are embracing the technology with open arms. Automated biometric systems are increasingly being used by law enforcement to help verify identities, with new biometric modalities being adopted. While fingerprints were once the gold standard, the iris is rapidly becoming more popular due to its overwhelming accuracy rate and near impossibility to forge. Because biometrics are regularly exchanged between dissimilar systems, a standard was needed to define a common format. Thus the Electronic Biometric Transmission Specification (EBTS) was developed for the exchange of this data across jurisdictions and across systems by different manufacturers for maximum interoperability. Any biometric transaction saved in format can be shared with any other system that uses the same format. It is the only widely accepted format for law enforcement, including international adoption. EBTS Law Enforcement agencies around the globe use either a behavioral modality, physiological modality, or a combination of both. Fingerprints are the most common, followed by iris and facial recognition, with gait and voice recognition becoming more popular. The rapid embrace of biometrics for determining identity after the events of 9/11 has ushered in a revolution in the world of law enforcement and security. Biometrics is not new to law enforcement; an Argentinian criminologist took the first fingerprint 125 years ago. Destructive events around the world have compelled authorities to adopt biometrics more fully in recent years. Almost every country in the world has adopted biometric identification. Law Enforcement and Justice Biometrics Solutions Biometric technology and law enforcement have a long symbiotic history when it comes to police detectives pioneering the use of fingerprint recognition and t. Recent advancements in technology have only made this vital tool even more useful and diverse. biometrics for law enforcemen Law enforcement officers can now scan fingerprints and compare them to remote databases anytime and anywhere, using portable biometric devices. On the other hand, federal law enforcement agencies are looking beyond fingerprints, with the FBI developing biometric databases with face and iris data. Police are actively using facial recognition for surveillance and criminal investigations. Even though technology has certainly played a positive role in investigations into illegal activities such as human trafficking and child abuse, it has also raised serious questions about privacy, civil rights, and racial prejudice. Further technologies are poised to add even more biometric advances to law enforcement in the future, as policymakers, advocacy organizations, police, and other stakeholders search for common ground to tackle these issues. Benefits of Biometrics in Law Enforcement Biometrics has many advantages. The most important is the degree of protection and accuracy it ensures. Unlike passwords, badges, or records, biometric data cannot be forgotten, exchanged, stolen, or forged. Law Enforcement Biometric Solutions Every citizen's protection is the responsibility of law enforcement, homeland security, and defense agencies across the continent. Finding the right partner to have the best options for supporting investigations, background checks, and field identification is a matter of public protection. Conclusion In today's world, law enforcement officers must capture multiple biometrics and correctly identify the individual in front of them.

How Law Enforcement Agencies are Using Biometrics

Smart home automation is one of the most admired and sought-after digital trends triggered and driven by IoT infrastructure. Surely you too would be tempted to have smart devices and home automation to have a luxurious and automated experience. Indeed, IoT-enabled smart home automation is incredible to provide people tech-driven user-experience. But, it also poses a number of risks. IoT isn’t as safe as it is fascinating. It can be largely used to benefit humans in a variety of ways, but needless to say that it comes with a variety of risks. “What Risks?” Well! Let’s get some insights about them. What Risks IoT House Automation Possess? In smart home automation, all the appliances of your connection over a single network, most prominently home WI-FI network. If someone hacks this WI-FI network, it to access your devices, computers, and personal information. A hack to this network allows a hacker to access each device connected within your networks, such as security cameras, home appliances, and your major security devices such as locks and more. opens up a lot of vulnerabilities Cybercriminals can access all the connected devices, and data can be compromised. Thus, the network is termed as the weakest link in the IoT network. Despite these, each connected appliance in your home is prone to higher risks. Hackers leverage platforms such as Shodan and Mirari botnet to scan firmware vulnerabilities of smart devices available in the market. Moreover: Cybercriminals can steal your data or use the data for personal benefits by hacking your routers. Hackers can harness the power of your IoT devices for personal usage, Cybercriminals can infiltrate IoT devices to harm you. There are already stories of cybercriminals hacking security systems and CCTVs. It means the risk assessment increases with each connected device in the IoT network. Thus, IoT app development companies assert that having security provisions is essential in smart home automation. Thus, in this article, we would take an in-depth glimpse at ways of imposing security in IoT home automation. So, stay hooked with me here. Image source How To Consolidate IoT Security In Smart Home Automation? Indeed, connected home with smart devices makes human life easier. However, surging usage of internet-based convenience brings a great risk of becoming a target of cybercriminals. The stealing and misuse of your personal information such as banking details, and cameras, microphones can be used to spy on you. In short, if you are investing in creating a smart home, you need to ensure proper IoT security provision for a smart house. So, here is are the ways you can do that. 1. Set Your Router Precisely Bear the fact in your mind that your WI-FI is the gateway to your smart home, and any cybercriminal should get access to it. So, consolidation of the security begins with a router that connects all IoT devices and provides their actual value in use. Here are the best practices you can ensure to set up a secured router: Alter Your Router’s Default Name It would be foolish to stick to a single default router name. As it would make it vulnerable. Actually, it’s usually made and model time login and password that anyone can discover and get access to your smart home network. Thus, you would need to change the default name and password of your router. So, ensure to change the name of your router that mustn’t be associated with you or your home. Think wisely and be creative but don’t use your personal identifiers. Set A Unique Password Just like your router name, your default password can be provided and discovered easily as a part of the model and make. Ensure to change the default password, and it makes it considering letters, numbers, and symbols. Ensure High Level Of Encryption Another aspect of security is the use of the high level of encryption that is WPA2, WPA3 around the world. If your router supports WEP or WPA protocols, then indeed, it’s time for an upgrade. Actually, Home routers are a major target for hackers. Thus, you need a secure router translates to ensure more smart home security. Image source 2. Integrated Latest Security Patches Another aspect for ensuring IoT security is security patches. Ensure that the devices you are purchasing have the latest security patches installed and keep a close eye on open/exposed ports on your device. It will allow you to have the perimeter under control while security patches will be fighting against the emerging threats on the devices. 3. Have A Separate Wi-Fi Network For IoT Devices These days many routers enable you to set up Guest or secondary network. It means you can create a separate network for your IoT devices to safeguard your main network. It means people in your home, such as relatives, friends, and guests can log into a network that isn’t anyhow related to your IoT devices. Through this, you can ensure that your smart home network is only accessible to you and your family. Keeping IoT devices on different networks keeps the network detached; if any cybercriminal accesses your network, they wouldn’t be able to access all the devices such as laptops or smartphones. Moreover, you can consult with an IoT application development company to get more insight in this regard. 4. Use Multifactor Authentication Have you ever heard about multifactor authentication? Even if you not, you had used the feature while using net backing. In this process, an authentication code gets sent to your email or phone, and when you enter the code, then you get access. A similar strategy you can use to ensure a security layer within your network. It will help to keep your data secured and safe. With the use of two-factor authentication, every time a person logs in to your IoT device. They would have to give additional proof of identity via confirming a one-time pin or verification code sent to your email or phone; after its confirmation, the person can log in to the device. Image source This integrates an extra layer of security and averts unauthorized access to the device. 5. Deploy A Next-Generation Wi-Fi Routers usually have a built-in firewall, which may look sufficient to avert threats. But! you must know that a traditional firewall lacks important security features such as prevention from malware, content filtering, intrusion prevention system, SSL/ SSH interception, VPN, and much more. Thus, having a next-generation firewall is essential in an integrated network platform. Combining this with a traditional firewall can provide your network protection from the mentioned threats. At the same time, a new generation firewall includes capabilities of traditional firewall that can turn our helpful in detecting and protecting against cyberattacks. 6. Keep Your Router Updated Not only are your IoT devices patched and passwords regularly, but also routers, as this is often the first line of defense. Mirai botnet has severely compromised the default IoT password that works effectively. 7. Keep a Global Access Map As consumers use more connected devices and devices at home, it is important to keep a “global access map” to clarify who can access what. A vulnerability is located near the door or windows exposed to a voice assistant while controlling critical actions, such as opening the garage door or turning on the oven! Thus, having a global access map can help you keep track of everything. 8. Create a separate registered email Making separate email alias for each registration (despite using normal registration) and use it. Think “least privileged” and give only access to what it needs. Ask yourself, “Do I really need this?” The best defense is “no”. If you want your system to be completely safe, then don’t take it out of the box. 9. Audit The IoT Devices AT Your Home To ensure better security and safety, you must have periodic audits of IoT devices at your home. It allows you to find glitches within your devices and find points of contraction where a cybercriminal can target. Moreover, upgrading the software of your devices, such as old security cameras. Besides, you can also take time to check if new models are offering stringent security or not. Image source 10. Disable Unwanted Functionalities There might be various features and functionalities in your router or IoT devices that you may not need or not-in use. Disable features to ensure that no point of access prone to cyber-attacks. So, ensure to disable unwanted functionalities and unused features. 11. Watch Out For Outages Make sure that your hardware outages won’t result in an unsecured state for the devices, as this can cause major damages to your application program. 12. Update Your Software When you receive a software update to your mobile phone, you must install it. It may have a patch for the security flaw. For every solution, software updates include patches for security threats; thus, make sure to update your system software. Wrapping Up Following the above practices, you can ensure the IoT security of your smart house. Moreover, there is no doubt that upcoming IoT devices will make your home more automated. They will not just make your life convenient but will also enhance the way you do everyday tasks. However, the security of data can be a major concern for your house that can be infiltrated by IoT devices. So, you need to consider making precise safeguard provisions. Moreover, for this, you can hire IoT app developers that can create a stringent security system for your house or office premise. : This article was crafted by an IoT expert working at . About The Author ValueCoders: An IoT app development company

12 Ways To Enforce IoT Security In Your Smart House

I have been a software developer for one month and slightly over three weeks now and there are a couple of tools, tricks and techniques which I did not know of before but have appreciated so far. Some of those that stand out for me are the style linters and the HTML validators. To start with, my conscience is bemused at the imagination of how someone could even conceptualize such ideas. Well, I guess I will be conceptualizing similar ideas a while later. With a bemused conscience, I have decided to write about what I learned by using the style linters and HTML validators. These tools will teach one (especially a newbie to coding) best coding practices while they catch and sometimes resolve code bugs. Pretty interesting right! It gets better because worrying about code indentation, missing semicolons, and the like is something of the past since style linters will catch them and sometimes correct them. By now, some of you are asking what in coding are style linters and HTML validators, so I will import some definitions for you here. The HTML Validator. Well, I will define the HTML validator based on my experience using it. It is a web application that will run through every line of your HTML code and provide you a detailed report of the warnings and errors where your code does not follow the standard HTML page layout. It is interesting how the validator will quote for you the line and the specific column in that line of where the error/warning has been found. Huh, wise right! Some of the common errors/warnings reported by the HTML validator relate to the semantic HTML layout. Now semantic HTML layout is emphasized in HTML 5 and it is intended to make interpretation of the HTML structure easy to understand for both the browser and any other person reading the code. The HTML validator I have used so far is found at . It is very user friendly and free to use. You just need to know the URL (Luckily I have provided it). Then you can copy and paste your HTML code in the HTML validator or you can upload your HTML file to the HTML validator. Either way, it will catch the errors and warn you on what in your code does not abide by the standard. Once you have the report of errors and warnings caught by the validator, you need to go to your HTML file and correct these errors. If you feel satisfied with your corrections, you should re-validate the HTML code by either copying your updated HTML code and pasting it in the HTML validator or uploading the updated HTML file. https://validator.w3.org/ So by going through this process, one is able to learn new things about HTML elements and their markup usage. Right now, I am hoping you are in consensus with me that this is an excellent way to enforce and teach the appropriate usage of the HTML elements in creating markup. Well, I was able to take a screenshot of some of the errors/warnings that I have had to correct in my markup and I will share it here to illustrate my sentiments expressed above. So for example if I referred to error number 3 in the screenshot above that says “Start tag seen without seeing a doctype first”, resolving this error can only mean that I should have a doctype first for every markup I write and thus I will  have learned the importance and use of the doctype keyword. As such, I see the teacher and the enforcer in the HTML validator at W3. The Stylelinter. A linter is a tool that analyses your source code to flag programming errors, bugs, stylistic errors, and suspicious constructs (source: ). Style linters are specific to CSS style rules and are used to keep CSS code in check. Wikipedia From the brief experience I have had with style linters, there are many extensions that plugin to most code editors and can perform stylelinting, although the best way with which I have been able to learn from style linters is by configuring them to catch and flag the errors so that I can fix the errors/warnings manually.  As of now, I have been exposed to using the Stickler Stylelint configuration. Here, Stickler is an application that is used to enable the linter and Stylelint is the linter tool that is used to keep the code in check. By using the Stickler Stylelint configuration, it is possible to catch Stylelint errors both in the local development environment (probably your editor) and in the remote repository. Wonder not about how the dual stylelinting is achieved, it is very simple and I will show how in the next paragraphs if you will stick on. First of all, if you would like to read more on Stickler, you can check out this link . Now, Stickler is very user friendly and free to use. I will start with what I found easiest to set up Stickler configuration in your remote repository. https://stickler-ci.com/ Stickler is a third party application that is integrated into GitHub. So you have to install it in your GitHub account by opening the Stickler official website on . Then choose the install our GitHub application option and you will be redirected to your GitHub account at . Here you will make your Stickler configurations based on your preferences. https://stickler-ci.com/ https://github.com/apps/stickler-ci Back to the official Stickler website, you will be provided a toggle switch (illustrated below) to activate and deactivate stickler on and off any of your repositories. If you activate Stickler on your repository, it will then go ahead and create a pull request in your repository seeking to merge the stickler configuration files into your branch. Once you merge the pull request to your branch, the configuration files will be added to your repository branch and the magic will ensue. Henceforth, everything that is committed to your repository will be subjected to Stylelint checks and you will be presented  with findings of the checks. The findings will ask you to make changes in your code so that it meets the set standards. By this, when code is written by collaboration of various awesome developers or in a team, it will appear as though it was written by one developer. Simply put, it ensures uniformity of code written across a team or teams which has enormous benefits in the world of coding. One of the benefits is that it is easy for everyone on the team to read the code. So I guess, it is a worthy tool to have in the toolbox in your company or on your project. To illustrate my sentiments above, I will share some screenshots of the toggle button to activate stickler on the remote repository and how the checks appear in the remote repository. Please note that in order for stickler stylelint checks to show in your repository, you need to open a pull request after activating Stickler on your repository. The style lint checks will display where the commit history ends in the pull request or you can access them by clicking the Checks tab found in the top navigation bar of the pull request. Below is a screenshot of how the checks will display in the pull request. Passed stickler checks in the remote repository Failed stickler checks in the remote repository. With stickler properly activated on the remote repository, next would be to configure Stickler and Stylelint in the local environment. Thanks to the creator(s), all you need is to define your style rule standards and save them in a file that you to name “ ” and add this file to your local project folder. You also HAVE to add another file to your local folder that you name “ ” (Key to note that this name starts with a “.”). In this file, is where you will specify the linters that are enabled and the path to the standard style rules that you saved in the “stylelint.config.js”. HAVE stylelint.config.js SHOULD .stickler.yml I will provide examples of these files in the screenshots below. In these screenshots below, we have stylelint as the enabled linter. Descriptive example of .stickler.yml file structure Example of a stylelint.config.js file If you have the and files added to your local project folder, then you are good to be notified of any CSS code you write that does not abide by the style rule standards defined in the config.stylelint.js. .stickler.yml stylelint.config.js Your local folder should look like this when the files have been added. When Stickler is configured properly, Stylelint will catch the error/warnings in the style rules and highlight the line where the errors/warnings are with a red sinusoidal underline (Danger!). Additionally, the report of errors/warnings can be found under the PROBLEMS tab in the terminal of your editor. Like before, I took some screenshots to illustrate the errors as reported by Stylelint. How Stylelint errors/warnings are highlighted. Some of the error examples can be seen in the following screenshot. As seen in the screenshot above, even missing a semicolon where the rules defined in your stylelint.config.js file require a semicolon will be regarded as “SIN” by Stylelint. When you have manually resolved stylelint errors a couple of times, you become accustomed to the expected style rule standards and in turn you develop excellent coding practices. This is where the component of teacher and enforcer is embedded in the use of stylelinters. If you reading this line, then congratulations upon having read all I had to write about the lessons that one (especially a newbie to coding) will learn if they use the stylelinters and the HTML validator. The lessons are actually implied because the primary purpose of the stylelinters and the HTML validators is to flag programming errors. I will end this piece with a note that there are linters for other languages like Ruby, and JavaScript although this post focused on stylelinters. However, I believe the implied lessons that are embedded within their usage are universal across all.

The Teacher and Enforcer in Style Linters and HTML Validators

In my past life, I was an auditor and performed hundreds of cybersecurity readiness assessments. These were sometimes called “gap analysis” and the essential purpose of these assessments were to provide organizations with the answers to the test for their upcoming official assessment. One of the first questions I would ask and observations I would perform is whether all privileged users enabled multi-factor authentication (MFA) to access the production AWS accounts. Like the rest of the world, the majority of my clients were hosted on AWS. One of the first items I would ask for is the AWS to review the MFA status of all users with access to the production account. IAM credential report Unfortunately, it was common to see multiple users without MFA enabled. This issue  presented itself during official or formal assessments as well, resulting in deviations or findings being displayed in their reports. These reports are presented to prospective customers and current customers during vendor due diligence activities. This finding is avoidable, specifically on AWS and I am sure on the other major CSPs. These organizations cared, they were great security people. They culturally required MFA in most cases, users would sign acceptable use policies and information security policies that say they must use MFA. The problem is they left the decision to enforce this configuration up to their users. A recurring cybersecurity threat will always be humans and often the humans in your organization. Some organizations have flexible policies that allow new users to configure MFA within their first week or no defined time frame at all. New users are eager to get to work and sometimes miss key items like enabling MFA, . I do not think they are to blame Security teams should implement the basics to set their users up for success. On AWS you can reduce this risk by configuring a Force MFA IAM policy that requires all users to sign in to the AWS console with MFA. If they do not sign on with MFA, they will have their normal permissions revoked and only be able to enable MFA. In this , I demonstrate how to implement this force MFA policy on your AWS account (watch on 2x and it’s only 5 minutes). 10 minute video If you are not a video type, check out this that outlines step by step instructions to implement this crucial security  configuration (however, the policy in this link is missing a required action element for the policy to work). AWS blog Why does this matter? Alleviating the administrative burden of managing MFA for all new users helps your system administrators and security engineers focus on things that matter. Chasing down new users to enable MFA might work when you are a team of 10 or 20. However, as you scale your organization you will have to and use technology to enforce your policies. This IAM policy is an example of taking an automated approach to security best practices and eliminating the human threat vector associated with MFA misconfigurations. automate security best practices Compliance assessments are not fun, they are often draining and cause a lot of  heartburn. This discomfort is exacerbated when these assessments result in a “failure” or “deviation” identified because of preventable security flaws. Wherever you can reduce or eliminate the potential for a finding in your assessment, you should immediately take those steps. This policy helps reduce evidence requests from your auditors as well, freeing up your team to protect your systems instead of capturing outdated screenshots. Previously published at https://medium.com/@ayawn/the-smart-way-to-use-iam-policies-to-enforce-mfa-on-aws-362705ae25e4

Why You Should Use IAM Policies to Enforce MFA on AWS

While the dark web has become synonymous with nefarious acts, there are positive encounters that take place there too. It's not all hackers and shared login credentials. If anything, its users put forth an extreme focus on privacy and also may be reliant on it if they live in an area where censorship is an issue -- these are positive reasons for use. That said, criminal acts still take place there. Most recently, . 73.2 million user records were placed for sale About 30 million come from the dating app Zoosk, while 15 million are from the printing service Chatbooks. The rest come from a variety of sites, including the newspaper (1 million), South Korean fashion and furniture sites (8 million total) and the Chronicle of Higher Education (3 million). ( ) Star Tribune source These numbers matter. To put in perspective, There's a real need to protect consumers, business owners and others from online attacks. 60% of small and medium businesses close their doors six months after experiencing a cyber attack. It's no easy feat when trying to get to the source of mass hacking events and other criminal acts. Unlike the public version of the web, it's not as easy to detect where crimes originate, who is involved and how they're continuing to communicate. Social Links ( : ), an open source intelligence (OSINT) software vendor, just launched , a new tool for law enforcement and governing agencies around the world. It's a standalone analogue of the Social Links SaaS service and the new solution accumulates the experience of hundreds of law enforcement agencies around the world, including the majority of European countries. Disclaimer The author is a consultant for Social Links Social Links BOX One of the things that sets them apart from their competitors, is that there is no need for the cloud. In order for law enforcement and government agencies to be truly privatized, they need to ensure that their data collection stays in-house and in a closed loop - a must-have. “We have been listening to our customers’ ongoing needs and created the Social Links BOX based on those who require the storage of all data in a closed loop, explains Ivan Shkvarun, co-founder, Social Links. “Our partners need to automate their open-source investigations, but they cannot use cloud services. Our standalone product solves this problem: now all the power of our tools and all the methodological developments are at their disposal.” is a growing field and competitors are working diligently to set themselves apart -- including a priority on privacy, access and, of course, competitive pricing (although you can expect a costly service for the type of access needed). Digital forensics Open sources frequently change their formats, operating rules and interfaces. Using a platform, like Social Links, allows clients have the ability to constantly monitor these changes and make necessary adjustments. The ability to change at a similar pace is essential and will allow digital forensics to maintain a valuable place at the table. ( : ) Disclaimer The author is a consultant for Social Links

Digital Forensics: An Overview and Its Impact On Law Enforcement

On Thursday, September 27th, the SEC found a Marshall Islands-based company that was not following regulations set in place by the SEC and the US Treasury for U.S. investors. The company in question is 1Broker, also known as 1Pool. 1Broker is an online trading platform, in which investors can use Bitcoin for trading fiat forex pairs and CFDs in commodities, stocks, and indices. In the , they filed charges against 1Broker for “violating the federal securities laws in connection with security-based swaps” and that 1Pool and Patrick Brunner, the CEO, “solicited investors from the US and around the world” to trade on its platform. SEC’s statement Before taking a deeper dive into the problems with the platform, let’s take a step back: 1Broker is not located in the US. It’s based in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, a small set of islands in the Pacific Ocean. Not even remotely close to US territory. Yet the SEC tracked the company down and ripped it apart instantly. How? The SEC enforcers found a way to get hold of the company’s domain name and asked the . Thus, investors trying to log in to their accounts could not and instead were confronted by the image above. FBI to seize it In a response to the seizure, 1Broker and that they will refund them. In their words, “on September 28th 2018, our domain 1broker.com was closed by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This means that the trading panel is not accessible anymore — funds, servers and databases are not affected. Currently, our top priority is to allow customer withdrawals. The company holds enough funds to cover all withdrawal requests, of course.” has announced that customer’s accounts are safe Of course. Not so fast. Their post continues, “Before we can take the required steps to do that [allow customer withdrawals], we have to seek permission from the authorities.” At this point, 1Broker is under investigation by the SEC. It is unlikely money will be refunded to anyone until the SEC has found out what is really going on with the 1Broker platform. Maybe they will find accounts for known bad actors or money launders. Maybe there are accounts for drug dealers, or worse, for terrorists. If you read their FAQ, it is clear the company does not understand what happened. 1Pool writes that 1Broker (remember they are one and the same) “posed no threat to investors and since the launch in 2012, we were able to build a very good reputation among traders.” They point to their terms of service, which tells customers to check whether using 1Broker violated the rules of their county of residence, and if so, not to use it. accusing 1Broker of being a scam dating back to one year ago, a user by the name of brutfce writes about 1Broker, “there’s also the problem of legality in many countries they serve. They serve the USA (I am US resident and was able to sign up and deposit) which I believe it’s illegal to provide CFDs to US people from my understanding. Since Patrick the guy who runs 1broker, is known, this could cause a problem for him and his company.” In a Reddit thread Patrick, who himself is quite active on Reddit, replied to brutfce via his account Patrick-1Broker, saying, “there are in fact open legal questions about Bitcoin denominated contracts in some countries and per our terms, it is forbidden to trade on 1Broker if you live in such a country.” The defense is flimsy. “Forbidding” someone from doing someone means nothing if there is no enforcement. In the SEC’s report, they allege that an FBI Special Agent was able to successfully complete trades on the platform. Clearly, no one is reading their terms of service, and no one at 1Broker is enforcing those terms. 1Broker violated a long list of laws, including not being registered as a Broker-Dealer, not verifying the identity of their customers (KYC), or preventing money laundering (Anti Money Laundering, or AML). The list goes on. A handy screenshot of Google Maps. There are the Marshall Islands, Northeast of Australia in the Pacific Ocean. So how was an American government organization able to shut down a platform in the Marshall Islands where they have no apparent jurisdiction? In reality, every country has sovereignty, but some have more sovereignty than others. Going to the domain registrar with an injunction can very well take care of the matter. Now that the SEC has uncovered one of their most powerful weapons, setting up a company whether it’s in the Cayman Islands, Gilbraltar, the Marshall Islands, Bahamas or Malta means nothing if the company on-boards one U.S. investor. Just one. How can these companies do business if their website is suddenly shut down without warning, their accounts, and the funds within them, frozen? The SEC can and will go after companies that have US customers. What about other countries? Well, they are not rollovers either. They have their own set of investor protections in place which is why most of the aforementioned locations are small islands. The other countries will act, whether they are inspired by the SEC or not. It is a certainty. The SEC is just getting started, and they are not amused. They are going to prevent any systemic risk, and they are going to fix this cryptocurrency free-for-all marketplace. They are going to impose the rules. StartEngine is a leading equity crowdfunding platform that has helped 250+ companies raise over $80M. We are also currently raising capital. Join the nearly 3,500 StartEngine Owners who have already invested in us. Invest in StartEngine here . For more information, view our Offering Circular .

The SEC Takes Enforcement Worldwide

At Machine Box, we’ve always been about empowering you to build amazing things with simple machine learning tools. One important aspect of this approach is ownership. When you use Machine Box, you get complete control of all of your data, and nowhere is this more important than in surveillance and face recognition. Back in May of 2018, of our minds. this came to the forefront [T]he American Civil Liberties Union led a group of more than two dozen civil rights organizations that asked Amazon to stop selling its image recognition system, called Rekognition, to law enforcement. At the time, I remember trying to wrap my head around the implications of this backlash for face recognition in general. On the one hand, I am a strong advocate for personal privacy, not just from government organizations but from large companies attempting to track my every thought. On other hand, I’ve been the victim of a crime that could have either been prevented just by the presence of surveillance cameras — or at least the resulting video could have helped law enforcement identify him later. So just like everyone else, I have to grapple with the age-old question of security vs. liberty. The reason I bring this up is because the company that acquired Machine Box two new applications that can use to recognize known offenders in law enforcement video. recently announced Facebox A natural extension to the aiWARE application suite, agencies are now empowered to not only intelligently search to find pertinent evidence but identify suspects and redact sensitive materials within that evidence prior to distribution. I’ve also been a strong advocate for the use of video in law enforcement, as it can be a superior arbiter of truth. But capturing all of that video won’t help much if law enforcement agencies have to sift through it manually. Furthermore, compliance with evidentiary laws and other considerations become even more difficult without the assistance of AI-powered capabilities to make sense of what video has been captured. There’s simply too much video. We want video, but we also have to draw a line between helping law enforcement keep us safe and enabling Big Brother. This is why I prefer these applications use Facebox. Facebox is a Docker container that can run in either a private or public cloud environment, where the ingress and egress of data is 100% controllable by the application. In either deployment option, there’s no open-ended cloud endpoint into which face data simply disappears. Instead, you as the developer are in 100% control of your data — from training data, state files, to any subsequent data you present to Facebox. You’ll note that in the press release it mentions the fact that the only faces that are used to train the face recognition are those of existing offenders or persons of interest provided by the specific law enforcement agency using the app. Because runs in such a controlled manner, all of the training data never leaves the chain of custody of the law enforcement organization. It is treated like a fingerprint found at the scene of a crime. Facebox This is congruent with our mission of being able to let organizations keep their data private and within their control. Additionally, Facebox enables the face data and all the biometric properties therein to be deleted or forgotten. Other face recognition services might not allow this, either because they want to maintain that data forever due to their business goals, or because they technically don’t have those capabilities. For example, in it states: Google Vision’s API terms of service b. Submission of ContentSome of our APIs allow the submission of content. Google does not acquire any ownership of any intellectual property rights in the content that you submit to our APIs through your API Client, except as expressly provided in the Terms. For the sole purpose of enabling Google to provide, secure, and improve the APIs (and the related service(s)) and only in accordance with the applicable Google privacy policies, Before you submit content to our APIs through your API Client, you will ensure that you have the necessary rights (including the necessary rights from your end users) to grant us the license. you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sublicensable, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to Use content submitted, posted, or displayed to or from the APIs through your API Client. “Use” means use, host, store, modify, communicate, and publish. (emphasis mine) it offers us the ability to expand not just the reach of Machine Box, but the democratization of the power of these tools. Part of that step is to address these use cases head on, and to do our best to uphold our values. We joined Veritone because

Stories, News & Mentions about ENFORCE

Enforce’s Stories on HackerNoon