Children and Cyberspace: Navigating the Web of Safety in the Era of Misinformation and Deepfakes in India

Introduction:

This Op-ed sheds light on the perspectives of the US and China regarding cyber espionage. Additionally, it seeks to analyze China's response to the US accusation regarding cyber espionage.

What is Cyber espionage?

Cyber espionage or cyber spying is the act of obtaining personal, sensitive, or proprietary information from individuals without their knowledge or consent. In an increasingly transparent and technological society, the ability to control the private information an individual reveals on the Internet and the ability of others to access that information are a growing concern. This includes storage and retrieval of e-mail by third parties, social media, search engines, data mining, GPS tracking, the explosion of smartphone usage, and many other technology considerations. In the age of big data, there is a growing concern for privacy issues surrounding the storage and misuse of personal data and non-consensual mining of private information by companies, criminals, and governments. 

Cyber espionage aims for economic, political, and technological gain. Fox example Stuxnet (2010) cyber-attack by the US and its allies Israel against Iran’s Nuclear facilities. Three espionage tools were discovered connected to Stuxnet, such as Gauss, FLAME and DuQu, for stealing data such as passwords, screenshots, Bluetooth, Skype functions, etc.

Cyber espionage is one of the most significant and intriguing international challenges globally. Many nations and international bodies, such as the US and China, have created their definitions and have always struggled over cyber espionage norms.

The US Perspective

In 2009, US officials (along with other allied countries) mentioned that cyber espionage was acceptable if it safeguarded national security, although they condemned economically motivated cyber espionage. Even the Director of National Intelligence said in 2013 that foreign intelligence capabilities cannot steal foreign companies' trade secrets to benefit their firms. This stance is consistent with the Economic Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996, particularly Section 1831, which prohibits economic espionage. This includes the theft of a trade secret that "will benefit any foreign government, foreign agent or foreign instrumentality. 

Second, the US advocates for cybersecurity market standards and strongly opposes transferring personal data extracted from the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to cybercrime markets. Furthermore, China has been reported to sell OPM data on illicit markets. It became a grave concern for the US government when the Chinese government managed to acquire sensitive details of 22.1 million US government workers through cyber intrusions in 2014.

Third, Cyber-espionage is acceptable unless it’s utilized for Doxing, which involves disclosing personal information about someone online without their consent and using it as a tool for political influence operations. However, Western academics and scholars have endeavoured to distinguish between doxing and whistleblowing. They argue that whistleblowing, exemplified by events like the Snowden Leaks and Vault 7 disclosures, serves the interests of US citizens. In the US, being regarded as an open society, certain disclosures are not promoted but rather required by mandate.

Fourth, the US argues that there is no cyber espionage against critical infrastructure during peacetime. According to the US, there are 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical, nuclear, energy, defence, food, water, and so on. These sectors are considered essential to the US, and any disruption or harm would impact security, national public health and national economic security.

The US concern regarding China’s cyber espionage

According to James Lewis (a senior vice president at the Center for US-China Economic and Security Review Commission), the US faces losses between $ 20 billion and $30 billion annually due to China’s cyberespionage. The 2018 U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Section 301 report highlighted instances, where the Chinese government and executives from Chinese companies engaged in clandestine cyber intrusions to obtaining commercially valuable information from the U.S. businesses, such as in 2018 where officials from China’s Ministry of State Security, stole trade from General Electric aviation and other aerospace companies.    

China's response to the US accusations of cyber espionage

China's perspective on cyber espionage is outlined by its 2014 anti-espionage law, which was revised in 2023. Article 1 of this legislation is formulated to prevent, halt, and punish espionage actions to maintain national security. Article 4 addresses the act of espionage and does not differentiate between state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic purposes and state-sponsored cyber espionage for national security purposes. However, China doesn't make a clear difference between government-to-government hacking (spying) and government-to-corporate sector hacking, unlike the US. This distinction is less apparent in China due to its strong state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. However, military spying is considered part of the national interest in the US, while corporate spying is considered a crime.

China asserts that the US has established cyber norms concerning cyber espionage to normalize public attribution as acceptable conduct. This is achieved by targeting China for cyber operations, imposing sanctions on accused Chinese individuals, and making political accusations, such as blaming China and Russia for meddling in US elections. Despite all this, Washington D.C has never taken responsibility for the infamous Flame and Stuxnet cyber operations, which were widely recognized as part of a broader collaborative initiative known as Operation Olympic Games between the US and Israel. Additionally, the US takes the lead in surveillance activities conducted against China, Russia, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, and several French presidents. Surveillance programs such as Irritant Horn, Stellar Wind, Bvp47, the Hive, and PRISM are recognized as tools used by the US to monitor both allies and adversaries to maintain global hegemony.

China urges the US to cease its smear campaign associated with Volt Typhoon’s cyberattack for cyber espionage, citing the publication of a report titled “Volt Typhoon: A Conspiratorial Swindling Campaign Targets with U.S. Congress and Taxpayers Conducted by U.S. Intelligence Community” by China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Centre and the 360 Digital Security Group on 15 April. According to the report, 'Volt Typhoon' is a ransomware cyber criminal group self-identified as the 'Dark Power' and is not affiliated with any state or region. Multiple cybersecurity authorities in the US collaborated to fabricate this story just for more budgets from Congress. In the meantime, Microsoft and other U.S. cybersecurity firms are seeking more big contracts from US cybersecurity authorities. The reality behind “Volt Typhoon '' is a conspiratorial swindling campaign to achieve two objectives by amplifying the "China threat theory" and cheating money from the U.S. Congress and taxpayers.

Beijing condemned the US claims of cyber espionage without any solid evidence. China also blames the US for economic espionage by citing the European Parliament report that the National Security Agency (NSA) was also involved in assisting Boeing in beating Airbus for a multi-billion dollar contract. Furthermore, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff also accused the US authorities of spying against the state-owned oil company “Petrobras” for economic reasons.

Conclusion

In 2015, the US and China marked a milestone as both President Xi Jinping and Barack Obama signed an agreement, committing that neither country's government would conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of trade secrets, intellectual property, or other confidential business information to grant competitive advantages to firms or commercial sectors. However, the China Cybersecurity Industry Alliance (CCIA) published a report titled 'US Threats and Sabotage to the Security and Development of Global Cyberspace' in 2024, highlighting the US escalating cyber-attack and espionage activities against China and other nations. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the volume and sophistication of Chinese hacking since 2016. According to a survey by the Center for International and Strategic Studies, out of 224 cyber espionage incidents reported since 2000, 69% occurred after Xi assumed office. Therefore, China and the US must address cybersecurity issues through dialogue and cooperation, utilizing bilateral and multilateral agreements.

‍

Introduction

YouTube is testing a new feature called ‘Notes,’ which allows users to add community-sourced context to videos. The feature allows users to clarify if a video is a parody or if it is misrepresenting information. The feature builds on existing features to provide helpful content alongside videos. Currently under testing, the feature will be available to a limited number of eligible contributors who will be invited to write notes on videos. These notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. Viewers will be able to rate notes into three categories: ‘Helpful,’ ‘Somewhat helpful,’ or ‘Unhelpful’. Based on the ratings, YouTube will determine which notes are published. The feature will first be rolled out on mobile devices in the U.S. in English. The Google-owned platform will look at ways to improve the feature over time, including whether it makes sense to expand it to other markets. 

YouTube To Roll Out The New ‘Notes’ Feature

YouTube is testing an experimental feature that allows users to add notes to provide relevant, timely, and easy-to-understand context for videos. This initiative builds on previous products that display helpful information alongside videos, such as information panels and disclosure requirements when content is altered or synthetic. YouTube in its blog clarified that the pilot will be available on mobiles in the U.S. and in the English language, to start with. During this test phase, viewers, participants, and creators are invited to give feedback on the quality of the notes.

YouTube further stated in its blog that a limited number of eligible contributors will be invited via email or Creator Studio notifications to write notes so that they can test the feature and add value to the system before the organisation decides on next steps and whether or not to expand the feature. Eligibility criteria include having an active YouTube channel in good standing with Yotube’s Community Guidelines.

Viewers in the U.S. will start seeing notes on videos in the coming weeks and months. In this initial pilot, third-party evaluators will rate the helpfulness of notes, which will help train the platform’s systems. As the pilot moves forward, contributors themselves will rate notes as well.

Notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. People will be asked whether they think a note is helpful, somewhat helpful, or unhelpful and the reasons for the same. For example, if a note is marked as ‘Helpful,’ the evaluator will have the opportunity to specify  if it is so because it cites high-quality sources or is written clearly and neutrally. A bridging-based algorithm will be used to consider these ratings and determine what notes are published. YouTube is excited to explore new ways to make context-setting even more relevant, dynamic, and unique to the videos we are watching, at scale, across the huge variety of content on YouTube.

CyberPeace Analysis: How Can Notes Help Counter Misinformation

The potential effectiveness of countering misinformation on YouTube using the proposed ‘Notes’ feature is significant. Enabling contributors to include notes on videos can offer relevant and accurate context to clarify any misleading or false information in the video. These notes can aid in enhancing viewers' comprehension of the content and detecting misinformation. The participation from users to rate the added notes as helpful, somewhat helpful, and unhelpful adds a heightened layer of transparency and public participation in identifying the accuracy of the content. 

As YouTube intends to gather feedback from its various stakeholders to improve the feature over time, one can look forward to improved policy and practical over time: the feedback mechanism will allow for continuous refinement of the feature, ensuring it effectively addresses misinformation. The platform employs algorithms to identify helpful notes that cater to a broad audience across different perspectives. This helps showcase accurate information and combat misinformation.

Furthermore, along with the Notes feature, YouTube should explore and implement prebunking and debunking strategies on the platform by promoting educational content and empowering users to discern between fact and any misleading information. 

Conclusion

The new feature, currently in the testing phase, aims to counter misinformation by providing context, enabling user feedback, leveraging algorithms, promoting transparency, and continuously improving information quality. Considering the diverse audience on the platform and high volumes of daily content consumption, it is important for both the platform operators and users to engage with factual, verifiable information. The fallout of misinformation on such a popular platform can be immense, and so, any mechanism or feature that can help counter the same must be developed to its full potential. Apart from this new Notes feature, YouTube has also implemented certain measures in the past to counter misinformation, such as providing authenticated sources to counter any election misinformation during the recent 2024 elections in India. These efforts are a welcome contribution to our shared responsibility as netizens to create a trustworthy, factual and truly-informational digital ecosystem.

References:

• https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/new-ways-to-offer-viewers-more-context/
• https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/youtube-tests-feature-that-will-let-users-add-context-to-videos/article68302933.ece

‍

Introduction

Ransomware is one of the serious cyber threats as it causes consequences such as financial losses, data loss, and reputation damage. Recently in 2023, a new ransomware called Akira ransomware emerged or surfaced. It has targeted and affected various enterprises or industries, such as BSFI, Construction, Education, Healthcare, Manufacturing, real estate and consulting, primarily based in the United States. Akira ransomware has targeted industries by exploiting the double-extortion technique by exfiltrating and encrypting sensitive data and imposing the threat on victims to leak or sell the data on the dark web if the ransom is not paid. The Akira ransomware gang has extorted a ransom ranging from $200,000 to millions of dollars.

Uncovering the Akira Ransomware operations and their targets

Akira ransomware gang has gained unauthorised access to computer systems by using sophisticated encryption algorithms to encrypt the Data. When such an encryption process is completed, the affected device or network will not be able to access its files or use its data.

The affected files by Akira ransomware showed the extension named “.akira”, and the file’s icon shows blank white pages. The Akira ransomware has developed a data leak site so as to extort victims.  And it has also used the ransom note named “akira_readme.txt”.

Akira ransomware steeled the corporate data of various organisations, which the Akira ransomware gang used as leverage while threatening the affected organisation with high ransom demands. Akira Ransomware gang threaten the victims to leak their sensitive data or corporate data in the public domain if the demanded ransom amount is not paid. Akira ransomware gang has leaked the data of four organisations and the size ranges from 5.9GB to 259 GB of data leakage.

Akira Ransomware gang communicating with Victims

The Akira ransomware has provided a unique negotiation password to each victim to initiate communication. Where the ransomware gang deployed a chat system for the purpose of negotiation and demanding ransom from the affected organisations. They have deployed a ransom note as akira_readme.txt so as to provide information as to how they have affected the victim’s files or data along with links to the Akira data leak site and negotiation site.

How Akira Ransomware is different from Pegasus Spyware

Pegasus, developed in the year 2011, belongs to one of the most powerful family of spyware. Once it has infected, it can spear your phone and your text messages or emails. It has the ability to turn your phone into a surveillance device, from copying your messages to harvesting your photos and recording calls. In fact, it has the ability to record you through your phone camera or record your conversation by using your microphone, it also has the ability to track your pinpoint location. In contrast, newly Akira ransomware affects encrypting your files and preventing access to your Data and then asking for ransom n the pretext of leaking your data or for decryption.

How to recover from malware attacks

If affected by such type of malware attack, you can use anti-malware tools such as SpyHunter 5 or Malwarebytes to scan your system. These are the security software which can scan your system and remove suspicious malware files and entries. If you are unable to perform the scan or antivirus in normal mode due to malware in your system, you can use it in Safe Mode. And try to find a relevant decryptor which can help you to recover your files. Do not fall into a ransomware gang’s trap because there is no guarantee that they will help you to recover or will not leak your data after paying the ransom amount.

Best practices to be safe from such ransomware attacks

Conclusion

The Akira ransomware operation poses serious threats to various organisations worldwide. There is a high need to employ robust cybersecurity measures to safeguard networks and sensitive data. Organisations must ensure to keep their software system updated and backed up to a secure network on a regular basis. Paying the ransom is illegal mean instead you should report the incident to law enforcement agencies and can consult with cybersecurity professionals for the recovery method.