Za objavu
_________
Ksenija Kostić
Marketing
<http://www.pcpress.rs/> www.pcpress.rs
PC Press | Osmana Đikića 4 | 11000 Beograd | Srbija
Tel: +381 11 2080-220 | Mob: +381 63 125 00 26
From: zoja(a)vidamedia.rs [mailto:zoja@vidamedia.rs]
Sent: 19 August 2019 13:49
To: 3oja.pavlovic(a)gmail.com
Subject: Gamescom 2019
Importance: High
Poštovani,
Na ovogodišnjem Gamescom-u, koji se održava od 20. do 24. avgusta u Kelnu, AOC, lider na tržištu gaming monitora, predstaviće svoj opsežni portfelj, uključujući nove gejming monitore serije G2. AOC i Philips monitori predstavljaće se na zajedničkom štandu A-080, veličine čak 102 metra kvadratna, a štand će biti smešten u dvorani 10.1. u kelnskom Izložbenom centru.
Više informacija o događajima na sajmu i fotografij pronćićt u prilogu mejla.
Srdačan pozdrav,
Zoja Pavlović
Vidamedia
Bul. Zorana Đinđića 106
Beograd, Srbija
Tel: +381 63 699026
Email: <mailto:zoja@vidamedia.rs> zoja(a)vidamedia.rs
<http://bjafjic.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/0FCah4j3eu9GjzmNzaJ_QbIj98UUlINXZL…>
Virus-free. <http://bjafjic.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/cl/Cx-cYt3YlYlRw1S66e917Rb3qkoQO0rcsf…> www.avast.com
<http://bjafjic.r.bh.d.sendibt3.com/tr/op/VLM4-Q1NnwBPdbqfEoXDNutShyIQJ8f0Uz…>
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/614164/new-money-laundering-rules-change…
New money-laundering rules change everything for cryptocurrency exchanges
Complying with regulators could mean the difference between going mainstream and remaining forever on the margins of the global financial system.
by Mike OrcuttAug 15, 2019
One of the biggest knocks against cryptocurrency has always been its status as a refuge for tech-savvy criminals. Even as some bigger players—particularly exchanges that handle many billions of dollars in crypto-wealth each day—have gone out of their way to play nice with regulators, the image persists, in part because some crypto firms have evaded regulators by moving to jurisdictions that are less strict.
But the end of the lawless era may be nigh. A new set of global anti-money-laundering rules aimed at cryptocurrency exchanges has been handed down by the Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental organization that sets standards for policing money laundering and terrorist financing. The rules, which call on exchanges to share personal information about their users with each other, are controversial. Many cryptocurrency enthusiasts think the privacy that drew them to the technology could evaporate. On the other hand, complying with the rules is likely to make the industry more attractive to mainstream financial institutions and users. In other words, cha-ching.
Sign up for the Chain Letter — blockchains, cryptocurrencies, and why they matter
The problem
The cryptocurrency market is small and immature compared with markets for traditional stocks and bonds, but the criminals trying to profit from it are among the most sophisticated in the world—and they are reaping bigger and bigger rewards. “Unfortunately, we keep seeing the criminal numbers go up and up and up,” says Dave Jevans, CEO of blockchain analytics firm CipherTrace, which is developing an anti-money-laundering product for exchanges. According to a new report published by the company, thieves and scammers took an estimated $4.26 billion from cryptocurrency exchanges, investors, and users in the first half of 2019. “All of that stuff has to be laundered out,” Jevans says.
What draws criminals to cryptocurrency is the capacity for anonymous, peer-to-peer value transfer. Technically, most cryptocurrency systems are pseudonymous—users are identified publicly, but only by a string of random numbers and letters. Since every transaction is recorded on a public ledger, criminals resort to a range of tactics, including using multiple addresses and exchanges, to cover their tracks as they move ill-gotten money around.
In regulated jurisdictions like the US, Japan, and EU, exchanges—the bridges between the traditional financial system and the cryptocurrency world—are already required to verify the identities of their users, a process commonly called “know your customer.” But many exchanges around the world have lax policies that allow people to move money or cash out without identifying themselves.
The “travel rule”
In June the Financial Action Task Force (FATF; pronounced “fat F”) published a much anticipated, technically nonbinding guidance detailing expectations of how its 37 member jurisdictions should regulate their respective “virtual asset” marketplaces. Here’s the contentious part: whenever a user of one exchange sends cryptocurrency worth more than 1,000 dollars or euros to a user of a different exchange, the originating exchange must “immediately and securely” share identifying information about both the sender and the intended recipient with the beneficiary exchange. That information should also be made available to “appropriate authorities on request.”
Besides deterring would-be money launderers, this makes it possible to blacklist certain individuals who are subject to economic sanctions, as well as entities like terrorist organizations. It’s essentially a crypto version of a US banking regulation commonly called the “travel rule,” which imposes a similar requirement on traditional financial institutions (though the threshold is $3,000). In the US, crypto exchanges have always been subject to this rule, according to a recent guidance from the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. The agency just hasn’t started enforcing it yet.
Not so nonbinding
Since the Group of Seven (G7) and influential members of the G20 plan to apply the policy, it really is binding, says Jesse Spiro, global head of policy at Chainalysis, a blockchain analytics firm. In particular, the US, which held FATF’s rotating presidency from July of 2018 until last month (China now holds that responsibility), is pushing the issue. Secretary of Commerce Steve Mnuchin has called FATF’s standards “binding to all countries.”
A global anti-money-laundering system?
In July, Reuters reported that as part of an effort to combat money laundering, Japan’s government is “leading a global push” to set up for cryptocurrency exchanges a system like SWIFT, the international messaging protocol that banks use for bank-to-bank payments. Last week, a report from Nikkei suggested that 15 governments are planning to create a system for collecting and sharing personal data on cryptocurrency users.
But several people familiar with the FATF-led international discussions around cryptocurrency regulation told MIT Technology Review that these reports don’t have it quite right. There doesn’t appear to be a government-led global cryptocurrency surveillance system in the works—at least not yet. And it’s likely that whatever does eventually emerge won’t look much like SWIFT. Exchanges are still early in the process of figuring out what systems and technologies to use to securely handle sensitive data, Spiro says, and how to do it in a way that complies with a range of local privacy rules. “There are a lot of balls in the air,” he says.
A line in the sand
“Regulators have made clear that the old way of transacting, where you have pseudonymous transfers—that’s not going to scale,” says Yaya Fanusie, a blockchain consultant and researcher who used to be an economic and counterterrorism analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency. Some users may leave compliant exchanges for others that choose not to share personal information, or seek out more decentralized methods of exchange that are harder to police.
But Fanusie says such a community will have to remain niche. He says mainstream financial institutions, which many think could drive the next phase of cryptocurrency adoption, will be more comfortable adopting the technology knowing that money laundering controls are in place. “I would describe the crypto space as being at a crossroads,” says Fanusie. Over the next year are so, we will see the industry “trying to figure out how it wants to position itself, and if it wants to scale.”
This story has been edited to reflect that China now holds the FATF presidency.
Sent from my iPad 2018
Ovo ce biti vrlo citano... i svi ce ukrasti...
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/998528/Dash-cam-car-Europe-fines-…
Driver WARNING - Your dash cam could land you up to £9,000 fine and see you JAILED abroad
MOTORISTS in Britain are being warned about using a dash cam while driving abroad as it could land you thousands of pounds worth of fines and even a prison sentence while abroad.
By Luke John Smith PUBLISHED: 08:14, Mon, Aug 6, 2018 UPDATED: 14:48, Mon, Aug 6, 2018
Drivers using dash cams in Europe can land fines of up to £9,000 (Image: GETTY)
Dash cams are becoming increasingly more popular in Britain, with drivers using to protect themselves in case of a crash.
In fact, some insurers are even recognising the benefit of dash cam footage in the instance of a crash and a claim and can offer drivers a discount for using them.
However, it is a different case across other countries in Europe.
A number of EU countries can punish drivers for using a dash cam while abroad and even risk a prison sentence for using them.
The use of a dash cam is completely illegal in Austria and drivers can be fined £9,000 for being caught using them and up to £22,000 for repeat offences.
In Luxembourg, drivers are banned from using them and can even face prison time for using them and in Portugal, motorists are banned from using or owning one.
While some EU countries completely ban them, there are some that allow driver stop film while driving but have serval restrictions in place in regards to sharing or using the footage.
For example in Germany, drivers can use them cameras but must not post it to social media and in France and Belgium footage is strictly only allowed for “private use”.
Tim Shallcross, head of technical policy and advice at IAM Roadsmart, said: “The dash cam can be a double-edged sword.
22 Driving laws you might have broken without realising
22 Driving laws you might have broken without realising
Sleeping in your car while drunk and playing loud music
22 Driving laws you might have broken without realising
Parking on a pavement in London and leaving car while parked on single yellows
"It may show that you were not to blame in a crash, but the camera itself and any memory card used with it can be seized by the police if they suspect an offence has been committed.
"The internet now has lots of examples of drivers and riders who have been convicted on the evidence of their own helmet camera or dash cam."
Austria
While it is not illegal to own a dash cam it is completely illegal to use and drivers could face fines of up to around £9,000 and up to £22,000 for repeat offenders.
Luxembourg
Owning a dash cam is allowed in Luxembourg, but using one is still totally illegal. If you take one, make sure it remains away and not in use.
Portugal
It is completely illegal to own and use a dash cam, so make sure you leave it at home.
Belgium
You can both own and use one, but only for ‘private use’. This means that if there is an accident, the driver is reasonable for informing all the parties before submitting the footage as evidence.
France
Similarly to Belgium, the cameras are restricted to private use and cannot upload the footage online. In the case of an accident, the footage must go straight to the police.
Germany
like in the UK and France, the camera must not restrict the driver’s view and if shared online any faces and number plates must be obscured to comply with the country’s privacy laws.
Norway
The rules echo those of them in the Uk in the sense that it must be out of the way of the driver’s view.
Switzerland
While it is not illegal to use a dash cam there are a lot of heavy restrictions which makes its uses fairly redundant.
It must not be used for entertainment and documenting a journey as there has to be a legal purpose to recording.
Other drivers must be aware they are being recorded. In addition to this strict privacy laws inhibit the illicit recording of people, places, and other cars that are not related to the incident.
Where in Europe it is legal to use a dash cam:
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Denmark
Italy
Malta
Netherlands
Serbia
Spain
Sweden
Sent from my iPad 2018
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/12/def-con-hackers-lawmaker…
Hackers were told to break into U.S. voting machines. They didn’t have much trouble.
Taylor Telford
(Steve Marcus/Reuters)
LAS VEGAS — As Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) toured the Voting Village on Friday at Def Con, the world’s hacker conference extraordinaire, a roomful of hackers applied their skills to voting equipment in an enthusiastic effort to comply with the instructions they had been given: “Please break things.”
Armed with lock-pick kits to crack into locked hardware, Ethernet cables and inquiring minds, they had come for a rare chance to interrogate the machines that conduct U.S. democracy. By laying siege to electronic poll books and ballot printers, the friendly hackers aimed to expose weaknesses that could be exploited by less friendly hands looking to interfere in elections.
Wyden nodded along as Harri Hursti, the founder of Nordic Innovation Labs and one of the event’s organizers, explained that the almost all of the machines in the room were still used in elections across the United States, despite having well-known vulnerabilities that have been more or less ignored by the companies that sell them. Many had Internet connections, Hursti said, a weakness savvy attackers could abuse in several ways.
Wyden shook his head in disbelief.
“We need paper ballots, guys," Wyden said.
After Wyden walked away, a few hackers exchanged confused expressions before figuring out who he was.
“I wasn’t expecting to see any senators here,” one said with a laugh.
In the three years since its inception, Def Con’s Voting Village — and the conference at large — has become a destination not only for hackers but also for lawmakers and members of the intelligence community trying to understand the flaws in the election system that allowed Russian hackers to intervene in the 2016 election and that could be exploited again in 2020.
This year’s programming involved hacking voting equipment as well as panels with election officials and security experts, a demonstration of a $10 million experimental voting system from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and a “part speed-dating, part group therapy" session where state and local election officials gathered with hackers to hash out challenges of securing elections.
Congregants spoke often of the need for thorough auditing of election results, increased funding and improved transparency from vendors. The call for paper ballots was a common refrain. At the time of the 2018 midterm elections, Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, New Jersey and South Carolina had no auditable paper trails.
“Election officials across the country as we speak are buying election systems that will be out of date the moment they open the box,” Wyden said in the Voting Village’s keynote speech. “It’s the election security equivalent of putting our military out there to go up against superpowers with a peashooter.”
House Democrats have introduced two bills that would require paper records to back up voting machines, mandate post-election audits and set security standards for election technology vendors. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has repeatedly blocked votes on the bills, saying election security is the province of the states.
Last month, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a report detailing how Russian hackers probably targeted all 50 states between 2014 and 2017. Although the report did not find evidence that Russian actors tampered with vote tallies on Election Day, the committee said that hackers “exploited the seams” between federal and state authorities and that states weren’t sufficiently prepared to handle such an attack.
“In 2016, cybersecurity for electoral infrastructure at the state and local level was sorely lacking,” the report reads. “Voter registration databases were not as secure as they could have been. Aging voting equipment, particularly voting machines that had no paper record of votes, were vulnerable to exploitation by a committed adversary. Despite the focus on this issue since 2016, some of these vulnerabilities remain.”
Local election officials at Def Con echoed these fears. Joel Miller, an election auditor in Linn County, Iowa, and repeat Def Con attendee, said he’ has had to file Freedom of Information Act requests and a Help America Vote Act complaint to try to get answers about security concerns in the state’s voter registration system from Iowa’s secretary of state. Russian hackers attempted to infiltrate the system in 2016, and while an overhaul of the 14-year-old system is impending, officials have said it will not be replaced before 2020.
“We don’t know what’s going on with the system,” Miller said. “I’m a former IT director, and I know more about what I don’t know, but that’s almost worse than if I didn’t have a tech background. I’m aware there’s more threats out there than we can handle.”
A spokesman for the Iowa secretary of state defended the security of the state’s systems and noted that Secretary of State Paul D. Pate’s chief of staff also attended Def Con this year. “Iowa’s system is secure and we work every day to ensure it remains secure,” the spokesman, Kevin Hall, said in an emailed statement. “Cybersecurity threats are constantly evolving and we are constantly evaluating what’s in place and what gains we can make. This is a race without a finish line.”
At the Voting Village, nestled in a ballroom in the sprawling Planet Hollywood convention center, hackers put the machines’ weaknesses on display with playful flourishes, overtaking one electronic poll book to play the first-person shooter game Doom on it, or leaving Nyan Cat, a Japanese meme, sailing across the screen of another made by VR Systems. Ahead of the 2016 election, Russian hackers installed malware on VR Systems’ company network, The Washington Post reported.
The Voting Village has faced extreme pushback from voting equipment companies and government officials in the past. They’ve argued that the free-for-all environment at Def Con doesn’t replicate the realities of security on Election Day. The National Association of Secretaries of State condemned the exercise as “unrealistic” last year, and Election Systems & Software, one of the major voting machine vendors, sent a letter to its customers making the same argument.
"Physical security measures make it extremely unlikely that an unauthorized person, or a person with malicious intent, could ever access a voting machine,” ES&S wrote last year.
ES&S and VR Systems did not respond to requests for comment about this year’s village.
Hursti said vendors have used legal threats to “create a chilling effect” on research of their equipment, and that they were “actively trying to shoot the messengers” rather than reckon with the weaknesses in their products. That lack of cooperation has left organizers to search for machinery to use at the Voting Village: Some equipment was rescued from a warehouse where the roof collapsed, while other was snagged in government surplus auctions or on eBay, Hursti said.
“One rebuttal is to say we give a lot of access to the machines, but in reality, that’s how research works. Whether or not you can show me how to attack this machine in x or y setting is beside the point,” Hursti said. “This is about discovering vulnerability and stopping it before weaponization.”
The first primary votes of the 2020 election will be cast in the Iowa caucuses in just a few months, but it’s impossible to patch the gaping security holes in U.S. election security by then, or even by Election Day, Hursti said.
“Everyone claiming we can fix this by 2020 is giving a false sense of security,” Hursti said. “The aim should be, can we do something by 2022 or 2024?”
Hours after the Voting Village opened, it was packed with hackers sporting T-shirts with slogans such as, “If I’m not on the government watchlist, someone isn’t doing their job” and “Come to the Dork side" — all eager to test their skills as an act of civic service. By the end of the weekend, they would uncover a litany of new vulnerabilities in the voting equipment, ranging from gallingly obvious passwords to hardware issues and exposure to remote attacks.
On Friday afternoon, one conference attendee meandered through the labyrinth of tables covered in dusty voting equipment and Pabst Blue Ribbon cans, explaining the enterprise to his less-well-versed companion.
“So, this is how the Russians did it,” he said, as a hacker near him crowed about how easy it was to pick the lock on a machine. “The fate of our whole country rests on these machines.”
He shuddered.
Sent from my iPad 2018
Kakvi vrljavi programeri... :(
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/13/windows_notepad_flaw/
We checked and yup, it's no longer 2001. And yet you can pwn a Windows box via Notepad.exe
Google guru shows how WinXP-era text code grants total control
By <https://www.theregister.co.uk/Author/Shaun-Nichols> Shaun Nichols in San Francisco 13 Aug 2019 at 20:40
Patch Tuesday Software buried in Windows since the days of WinXP can be abused to take complete control of a PC with the help of good ol' Notepad and some crafty code.
On Tuesday, ace bug-hunter Tavis Ormandy, of Google Project Zero, detailed how a component of the operating system's <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/tsf/text-services-framework> Text Services Framework, which manages keyboard layouts and text input, could be exploited by malware or rogue logged-in users to gain System-level privileges. Such level of access would grant software nasties and miscreants total control over, and surveillance of, the computer.
Advertisement
The flaw, designated <https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-us/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2019…> CVE-2019-1162, is patched in this month's Patch Tuesday release of security fixes from Microsoft. The relevant update should be installed as soon as possible.
After a lengthy investigation, Ormandy <https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/down-rabbit-hole.html> discovered that the component in question, CTextFramework aka CTF, which dates as far back as the Windows XP era, is riddled with security flaws, which can be exploited via applications that interact with it to handle text on screen.
"It will come as no surprise that this complex, obscure, legacy protocol is full of memory corruption vulnerabilities," Ormandy said. "Many of the Component Object Model objects simply trust you to marshal pointers across the Advanced Local Procedure Call port, and there is minimal bounds checking or integer overflow checking.
Advertisement
"Some commands require you to own the foreground window or have other similar restrictions, but as you can lie about your thread id, you can simply claim to be that Window's owner and no proof is required."
<https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/12/microsoft_windows_bad_drivers/> READ MORE
With this in mind, Ormandy was able to develop a proof-of-concept tool that abused CTF, via Notepad, to launch a command-line shell with System-level privileges.
"The obvious attack is an unprivileged user injecting commands into an Administrator's console session, or reading passwords as users log in. Even sandboxed AppContainer processes can perform the same attack," Ormandy explained.
"Another interesting attack is taking control of the UAC consent dialog, which runs as NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM. An unprivileged standard user can cause consent.exe to spawn using the 'runas' verb with ShellExecute(), then simply become System."
Advertisement
In the grand scheme of things, the uncovered flaws, while fascinating, are not totally Earth shattering. Elevation-of-privilege holes in Windows are a dime a dozen, and Microsoft patches what feels like scores of them a year. In order to abuse CTF, a scumbag has to be running code on your machine anyway, which is not a good situation.
Threat modeling aside, the fact that the vulnerability was found in a basic component of Windows that had been exposed to applications for more than a decade is both a testament to Ormandy's skill at bug-hunting and an example of just how complex and voluminous Windows has become over its thirty-year-plus lifetime, and what a massive challenge that complexity presents Microsoft's engineers from a security standpoint.
"These are the kind of hidden attack surfaces where bugs last for years," Ormandy noted. "It turns out it was possible to reach across sessions and violate NT security boundaries for nearly twenty years, and nobody noticed." ®
Sponsored: <https://go.theregister.co.uk/tl/1848/shttps:/www.mcubed.london/?utm_source=…> MCubed - The ML, AI and Analytics conference from The Register.
Sent from my iPad 2018
-----Original Message-----
From: Dejan Ristanovic <dejan(a)ristanovic.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2019 1:24 PM
Subject: Evolution of the internet: Celebrating 50 years since Arpanet |
Network World
https://www.networkworld.com/article/3410588/evolution-of-the-internet-celeb
rating-50-years-since-arpanet.html
Sent from my iPad 2018=