Want to see cyber attribution and deterrence in action? In August, a hacker pulled the names of US military personnel and others out of a corporate network and passed them to ISIL. British jihadist Junaid Hussain exulted when ISIL released the names. “They have us on their ‘hit list,’ and we have them on ours too…,” he tweeted. On the whole, I’d rather be on theirs. Two weeks after his tweet, Hussain was killed in a US airstrike, and two months after that, the hacker who obtained the list was arrested in Malaysia (subscription required) on a US warrant.
We explore that story and more with Gen. Michael Hayden, the only person to serve as both Director of the National Security Agency and of the Central Intelligence Agency. Gen. Hayden explains why he differs with FBI director Comey on encryption and with the European Court of Justice on whether the US sufficiently respects privacy rights, along with other topics.
Our news roundup dwells again on the ECJ’s decision and the Article 29 Working Party press release on the decision, a release characterized by far more bold font than bold thinking. In other news, magistrates are revolting again, or maybe still, as Magistrate Judge Orenstein hints that Apple’s desire to thwart law enforcement should trump law enforcement’s interest in getting evidence off a locked phone.
Cyber insurance rates are rising, raising questions about who should be covered and whether insurance companies will do the security regulating the government is reluctant to do.
Meanwhile, we’re treated to dueling Wassenaar leaks from government. State says the intrusion software language will be revised not rewritten, while Commerce insists nothing is decided (subscription required). There’s really nothing like the last year of an administration, when every agency has its own policy agenda – and apparently its own spin room. If there were any doubt about whether Commerce is right to want an explanation from the Europeans about how (or, more accurately, whether) they’re enforcing this provision, Citizen Lab provides it with a new report showing that the surreptitious access tool sold by Europe’s FinFisher is present in more than 30 countries, not all of whose civil liberties laws meet a standard set by the United States – or even the lower bar set by the European Union.
As always, the Cyberlaw Podcast welcomes feedback. Send an e-mail to [email protected] or leave a message at +1 202 862 5785.
Comments