Tag Archives: request

Irish Authorities Request Microsoft to Investigate Alleged Illegal Data Processing by IDF

Posted on by
Reply

Irish officials have received a formal request to look into Microsoft regarding claims of unlawful data processing by the Israel Defense Forces.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL), a human rights organization, filed the complaint with the Data Protection Commissioner, who is legally charged with overseeing all data processing activities within the European Union.

This comes after reports in August from the Guardian, along with Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and Hebrew media Local Call, highlighted that substantial amounts of Palestinian phone communications were stored on Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform as part of an extensive surveillance initiative by the Israeli military.

The ICCL asserts that the handling of personal data “aided in the commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide by Israeli forces.” Microsoft’s European headquarters are located in Ireland.

“Microsoft’s technologies are endangering millions of Palestinians. These are not just theoretical data protection issues,” said Joe O’Brien, executive director of ICCL.

He remarked that cloud services “enable tangible violence” and emphasized the need for the “DPC to respond swiftly and decisively” given the “risk to life involved in the matter at hand.”

He further stated, “When European infrastructure is used to facilitate surveillance and targeting, the Irish Data Protection Commissioner must step in and utilize its full authority to hold Microsoft accountable.”

A collection of leaked documents reviewed by the Guardian has indicated that as early as 2021, the Israeli military’s intelligence unit, Unit 8200, started discussions to transfer large amounts of classified intelligence data to a cloud service operated by a US company.

The documents revealed that Microsoft’s storage facilities were employed by Unit 8200 to archive extensive records of Palestinian daily communications, which facilitated specific airstrikes and other military actions.

Following this revelation, Microsoft initiated an urgent external inquiry into its connections with Unit 8200. Preliminary findings led the company to suspend this unit’s access to certain cloud storage and AI services.

ICCL contends that Microsoft played a crucial role in enabling Israel’s military surveillance system known as “Al-Minasek.”

The organization claims that records of intercepted conversations between EU servers and Israel were reportedly “deleted,” obstructing evidence of unlawful processing before an EU inquiry could commence, violating the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that regulates personal data usage.

With Azure’s vast storage and computational capabilities, Unit 8200 was establishing an indiscriminate system allowing agents to collect, replay, and analyze cell phone calls from entire populations.

A spokesperson for the DPC stated, “We can confirm that the DPC has received the complaint and is currently evaluating it.”

Microsoft has been approached for a response.

Source: www.theguardian.com

UK Can Request Backdoor Access to Encrypted Data for Apple Users on Demand

Posted on by
Reply

Reports suggest that pressure from Washington is compelling the UK government to insist that Apple give UK law enforcement backdoor access to encrypted customer data.

In January, the UK’s Home Office formally requested that Apple grant law enforcement access to the heavily encrypted data stored on behalf of its customers. Nevertheless, the US company has resisted offering advanced data protection services in the UK and subsequently withdrew them, asserting that privacy is one of their “core values.”

According to the Financial Times, sources within the UK government believe that pressure from Washington, including from US Vice President JD Vance, is creating significant challenges for the Home Office.

Vance has previously criticized the concept of “creating a backdoor in our own technology network,” labeling it “crazy” because such vulnerabilities could be exploited by adversaries, even if intended for domestic security.

The FT, citing Whitehall sources, reported that “the Home Office will essentially have to back down.”




JD Vance criticizes the creation of backdoors to access encrypted data. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

The Home Office has not commented immediately.

The Ministry of Home Affairs issued a “Technical Capability Notice” to Apple under the Investigatory Powers Act. However, in February, Apple responded by withdrawing its advanced data protection (ADP) services from the UK, stating, “We’ve never built a backdoor or a master key to either our products or services, and we never will.”

ADP is available globally, providing end-to-end encryption for iCloud drives, backups, notes, wallet passes, reminders, and other services.

Apple has initiated a legal challenge in the Investigatory Powers Court regarding the Home Office’s authority to request backdoor access. Although the Home Office requested confidentiality, the judge ordered that case details be disclosed.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The government aims to position the UK as an attractive destination for investment from US tech companies.

Some ministers contend that encryption technology hinders law enforcement’s ability to address crimes, such as child exploitation. However, there are concerns that demanding backdoors could jeopardize a technological agreement with the US, which is a critical aspect of the trade strategy.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Request to Dissolve Google’s Advertising Technology Business Follows Chrome Sale Motion

Posted on by
Reply

On Friday, the US government demanded that Google divest its highly lucrative advertising technology division. This follows a judge’s finding that the tech giant is responsible for a second illegal monopoly in just a year.

U.S. government attorney Julia Turber Wood stated in federal court in Virginia, “We have a defendant who has discovered a way to protest. Maintaining the monopoly of repeat offenders is not a viable solution,” she added.

This marks the second request from the US government, amidst another suit regarding Google’s premier search engine, which also seeks to address sales involving the Chrome browser.

The US government specifically pointed out that Google dominates the market for publishing banner advertisements on websites, impacting a wide range of creators and small news outlets.

A second phase of the Virginia court hearing is set for September, where discussions will focus on modifying the advertising landscape per the judge’s ruling.

During the initial phase of last year’s trial, plaintiffs alleged that the majority of websites utilize Google’s Ad software products.

Skip past newsletter promotions

District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema largely agreed with the rationale and found that Google has established an illegal monopoly over the advertising software and tools utilized by publishers, albeit partially dismissing claims concerning tools used by advertisers.

The US government indicated it would leverage this trial to motivate Google to divest its exchange operations with ad publishers, asserting that it cannot be relied upon to change its practices.

“Behavioral modification is not enough since it won’t stop Google from discovering new methods of exerting control,” stated Tarver Wood.

Google has countered the suggestion of agreeing to a binding commitment to enhance transparency with advertisers and publishers on the AD Tech platform. However, Google’s attorney Karen Dunn acknowledged the “trust issues” raised in the case and expressed willingness to accept oversight to ensure compliance with the judge’s order. Google also contested the proposed divestiture as inappropriate, which Judge Brinkema quickly dismissed as a viable debate.

The judge encouraged both parties to seek mediation, stressing that a negotiated settlement is far more efficient and cost-effective than conducting a prolonged trial.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Apple challenges UK government data request in confidential court hearing

Posted on by
Reply

The Guardian has learned that appeals to the UK government’s request to access clients’ highly encrypted data will be heard in a secret High Court hearing.

The appeal, scheduled for Friday, will be reviewed by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, an independent court with the authority to investigate allegations of illegal actions by the UK Intelligence Reporting Authority.

This goes against a directive issued by the Home Office in February under the Investigatory Powers Act, which compels law enforcement to provide requested information.

The Home Office is seeking the ability to access users’ encrypted data in cases of national security threats. Currently, even Apple does not have access to data protected by Advanced Data Protection (ADP) programs.

ADP allows iCloud users to safeguard photos, memos, and other data with end-to-end encryption, ensuring that only users can access it. Messaging services like iMessage and FaceTime maintain default end-to-end encryption.

Apple has argued that removing this tool would make users vulnerable to data breaches and jeopardize customer privacy. Creating a “back door” would enable Apple to access all data and potentially share it with law enforcement agencies.

Last week, Computer Weekly reported that Apple plans to challenge the secret order.

The court took the unusual step of announcing the closed hearing before President Rabinder Singh on March 14th.

The court listing does not mention Apple or the government, and it does not disclose if the court is associated with either party.

The hearing will be held privately due to security concerns, but media outlets like Computer Weekly argue that it is a matter of public interest and should be conducted in open court as details have already been leaked.

News organizations, including the Guardian, and civil society groups are supporting Computer Weekly in their petition.

In a statement in February, Apple expressed disappointment at the situation. They cited increasing data breaches and threats to customer privacy as the reason for ceasing to offer advanced data protection in the UK.

A spokesperson emphasized the urgency of enhanced security with end-to-end encryption in cloud storage and reiterated Apple’s commitment to user data security.

“As we have stated many times before, we have never created backdoors or master keys for our products or services,” the spokesperson said.

Both Apple and the Home Office declined to comment on the upcoming hearing, and the Guardian reached out to the court for more information.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk seeks shareholder approval for $56 billion payout from Tesla, judge rejects request

Posted on by
Reply

Tesla is seeking shareholders’ re-approval for CEO Elon Musk’s hefty $56 billion compensation plan from 2018, which was previously rejected by a Delaware judge in January for being excessive and unjustified.


Musk’s compensation, tied to Tesla’s market value increase to $650 billion over the next decade, currently stands at over $500 billion, according to LSEG data, excluding salary or cash bonuses.

The rejection from Delaware Court of Chancery’s Kathleen McCormick criticized the board’s decision, deeming the compensation “incalculable” and unfair to shareholders.

Tesla’s move for a fresh shareholder vote appears to bolster support for Musk’s pay package and challenge the court’s ruling, which disapproved the largest corporate pay package in America.

In response to the court’s decision, board chair Robin Denholm expressed disagreement, stating that the ruling did not conform to corporate law principles.


In 2023, Musk’s compensation was recorded as $0, as he does not draw a salary but is compensated through stock options. The court case also mentioned Musk’s involvement in an attempt to disrupt Twitter Inc.’s acquisition deal.

Tesla is suggesting a re-vote on the original 2018 compensation package, contemplating legal considerations, as well as seeking approval from shareholders to relocate its state of incorporation from Delaware to Texas.

Ahead of the market opening, shares of the leading automaker rallied by 1%.

This year has been challenging for Tesla, with reports of underperforming against market expectations and observing its first decline in deliveries in four years, prompting a workforce reduction of 14,000 employees. The broader electric vehicle industry has also experienced a slowdown, with major players like Ford revising their plans.

Meanwhile, Apple scaled back its self-driving electric car project, leading to layoffs, indicating a shifting landscape in the electric vehicle sector.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk’s request for nearly $900 million in Starlink subsidies denied by FCC

Posted on by
Reply

Republican critics were furious after the Federal Communications Commission rejected nearly $900 million in subsidies for Elon Musk’s Starlink internet service, calling it a revenge move by the Biden administration. did.

Musk’s SpaceX was appealing a 2022 FCC move that denied the company access to about $886 million in subsidies as part of a government program to boost rural internet service. .

The five-member FCC, led by Democratic-appointed Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, affirmed the decision on Tuesday, finding that Starlink “has failed to demonstrate that it can deliver its promised services.”

republican party FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr objects. In the decision, Musk claimed that “President Biden has given the green light to federal agencies” after the billionaire bought Twitter for $44 billion last year.

In August, the Department of Justice sued SpaceX, accusing it of discriminating against refugees and asylees in its hiring practices. SpaceX fired back, arguing that the federal government’s lawsuit is unconstitutional.

Kerr said the FCC’s denial of the subsidy “certainly falls within the Biden administration’s pattern of regulatory harassment.”

Another Republican, Nathan Symington, agreed with Kerr and argued that his colleagues at the FCC improperly set SpaceX’s 2025 performance standards three years early.

Starlink’s application for nearly $900 million in government grants was denied. AFP (via Getty Images)
The recent failure of SpaceX’s Starship rocket has been cited as a potential cause for concern. zumapress.com

“What’s the point in having an agreement to build service by 2025 if the FCC can keep it there until 2022 on a whim?” Symington said.

When the FCC initially denied SpaceX’s grant application, Musk’s company had already won approval to provide satellite-based, high-speed broadband Internet service to about 642,000 rural locations in 35 U.S. states. Was. At the time, Rosenworcel expressed concern that Starlink’s internet was not reaching the “promised speeds.”

The agency this week cited some of its concerns over the recent failure of SpaceX’s Starship, which exploded shortly after liftoff last month.

Elon Musk criticized the FCC for this decision. Reuters

“After a careful legal, technical and policy review, the FCC has determined that this applicant will be eligible for approximately $900 million in Universal Service Funds over approximately 10 years,” Rosenworcel said in a statement. We judged that the burden was not fulfilled.”

Musk personally slammed the FCC’s decision, writing to X that Starlink is “the only company actually solving rural broadband at scale!”

“What actually happened was that the companies that lobbied for this large allocation (not us) thought they were going to win, but instead they lost to Starlink. So now they’re changing the rules so that SpaceX can’t compete,” Musk said.

Musk has frequently clashed with the Biden administration since President Biden took office in 2020. The billionaire called Biden a “wet-sock puppet” and accused the president of disrespecting Tesla despite the company’s leading role in the development of electric cars. The government will support you.

Meanwhile, Musk’s business faces multiple federal investigations, including an ongoing investigation by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration into the company’s Autopilot self-driving assist technology.

Tesla on Wednesday announced a major recall of 2 million vehicles over concerns that the vehicles lacked adequate safety features to “prevent driver misuse.”

Source: nypost.com