YouTube cracks down on third-party apps that block ads. Experts predict a new cyberwar between Iran and Israel. Elon Musk backed off from his fight with the Brazilian government, and Broadcom made concessions in the face of customer anger and European regulatory scrutiny of VMWare’s new pricing.
All about Hashtag Trends: “Who blinks first?” I’m your host, Jim Love. Let’s get started.
YouTube is ramping up its battle with ad-blocking software and extensions. The video streaming giant announced it will now crack down on third-party apps that allow users to skip ads on YouTube videos.
If you watch YouTube videos through third-party apps that are specifically designed to block ads, you may experience some issues. YouTube said in an update this week that when users access content through these ad-blocking apps, they may face video buffering issues or receive error messages that prevent them from watching at all. .
This expands on YouTube’s existing efforts to prevent viewers from using ad blockers when watching videos on the platform. Last year, YouTube began showing error messages and disabling videos to users who had ad-blocking browser extensions enabled.
The company claims that third-party apps remove ads, preventing creators from getting paid for the content they create. YouTube said in a statement that it only allows apps that follow API terms of service that require displaying ads.
Ad-blocking app AdGuard says it is not affected by this policy change because it does not use YouTube’s API, but many other apps that collect ad-free YouTube videos could be blocked. be.
Of course, YouTube continues to offer ad-free premium subscriptions as an alternative for viewers who want to skip commercials. However, this crackdown is likely not welcomed by people who prefer to watch YouTube through ad-blocking software or mobile apps.
As more entertainment moves to streaming platforms, the tension between companies seeking ad revenue and users seeking to avoid ads seems destined to grow even more.
Source: The Verge
Elon Musk’s social media company The platform’s lawyers initially said they would challenge Brazil’s Supreme Court’s ruling, but have now told the court they would abide by all decisions.
A legal battle has erupted between Elon Musk’s Company X and Brazil’s Supreme Court over the removal of certain accounts accused of spreading misinformation and hate speech. Musk said last week that he would challenge Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes’ order to block X from some accounts in the country.
But in a letter to Moraes seen by Reuters, X’s lawyers reversed course and said the platform would comply with all rulings issued by the Supreme Court and Brazil’s top election authority.
This marks a shift from X’s Brazilian subsidiary, which had previously argued that it had no control over whether its U.S. parent complied with Brazilian court orders.
Supreme Court justices have led investigations into digital militias accused of attempted coups and spreading disinformation, particularly during the era of President Jair Bolsonaro.
Musk, who describes himself as a free speech absolutist, has called Moraes’ orders unconstitutional and called for his resignation, prompting judicial authorities to investigate him for obstruction.
The revocation by X’s lawyers is likely aimed at defusing tensions with Brazilian authorities. However, the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee has now subpoenaed X for information regarding a Brazilian court’s content regulation order.
While debates continue to rage over the role of social media in democracies, major U.S. social media companies are beginning to realize that they are no longer immune to government regulation in other countries.
Source: Reuters
A former security executive at ride-hailing company Uber has taken on a new role advising other company leaders on how to properly respond to cyberattacks and data breaches. Joe Sullivan was convicted last year of covering up a 2016 data breach at Uber and obstructing a federal investigation.
A federal judge sentenced him to three years of probation and community service. His case marks the first time a top U.S. national security official has faced criminal charges related to improper handling of a data breach. It is considered.
Sullivan is now working with a cybersecurity firm to ensure other executives don’t make the same mistakes he did.
Since then, Sullivan has reflected on his experiences and shared advice with other security leaders on how to respond appropriately when a cyberattack occurs. He currently joins cybersecurity company BreachRx as a senior advisor. The company provides a platform to automate and document a company’s response in the critical first hours after a breach is detected.
Sullivan said security executives face increasing legal risks as regulators crack down on poor cybersecurity practices and demand more accountability from companies affected by data breaches. However, he argues that chief security officers are often underfunded and understaffed, making it difficult to properly secure networks. Sullivan hopes his case will encourage companies to invest more in cybersecurity, but he worries that some recent regulatory actions may encourage remediation to go too far. Security leaders are currently afraid of taking responsibility when an incident occurs.
And with that plaguing companies, is it any wonder that companies are struggling to retain senior security talent?
Sources include: Axios
Tensions between Iran and Israel are rising following weekend missile attacks. As both sides consider their next moves, cybersecurity experts have warned that cyber warfare could be imminent as part of the conflict.
Israel and Iran have a long history of cyber warfare, having launched destructive computer viruses and launched hacking attacks against each other over the years. However, this weekend’s missile attack on Israel from Iranian territory marks an unprecedented escalation of open hostility between the two countries.
And now, as both sides consider retaliation, cybersecurity analysts say they need to prepare for a potential onslaught of high-stakes cyberattacks.
“The open hostility and the overt physical aspects of the state-on-state conflict have moved things into another realm,” said Andrew Boleen, a cyber analyst at security firm Flashpoint.
He said a cyber attack could allow Iran and Israel to strike back against each other without risking mass casualties from further missile launches.
Both countries have advanced cyber capabilities. Iran has used data erasure malware against other countries. Ten years ago, the United States and Israel jointly introduced the Stuxnet computer virus to thwart Iran’s nuclear program.
Cyber ​​warfare has already begun to spill over from the recent missile exchange. Hacking groups linked to Iran, Russia and others recently took down Israeli emergency services apps and news websites as part of the ongoing conflict with Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip.
The use of cyber warfare by nation states is increasing. Since then, numerous examples of state-sponsored attacks have occurred. Recently, France suffered a major cyber attack after announcing increased aid to Ukraine. And now we are at risk of an all-out cyber war between Iran and Israel.
The problem is that these attacks often spill over into a broader threat. The resulting malware leaks into the wild, providing hacker armies with new tools to threaten the infrastructure of businesses and society.
Officials have so far maintained that they have not seen a major cyber attack resulting from the weekend missile attack, but analysts say Israel is considering a response and both sides are facing unknown unknowns that could lead to a long and bitter standoff. We anticipate that the situation may change rapidly as we move into this area.
Sources include: Axios
Some VMware customers unhappy with new licensing policies introduced by the company’s new owner, semiconductor giant Broadcom, may be given a reprieve. The move comes amid increased regulatory scrutiny of the changes in Europe.
When Broadcom acquired VMware in a massive $61 billion deal last year, it announced plans to move VMware’s product licenses to a subscription model and bundle its virtualization software into new enterprise IT platforms.
The change sparked an angry backlash from many VMware customers who are used to perpetual licenses and are concerned about higher costs over the long term. Many of them requested that Broadcom maintain a perpetual license option.
Now, Broadcom CEO Hock Tan says the company is offering some concessions in response to customer feedback. Tan said in a blog post that Broadcom is also offering free security patches for some supported versions of his VMware products to customers who continue with old perpetual licenses rather than new subscriptions. announced that it would provide.
Tan also acknowledged that Broadcom is granting update extensions to many VMware customers to give them time to adapt to the new model.
The move comes after European antitrust regulators began questioning Broadcom over the license changes following complaints from some technology groups. Analysts believe this could also be an effort by Broadcom to stem a potential mass exodus of customers from VMware products.
Research firm Gartner recently estimated that VMware’s market share in hyperconverged infrastructure, which combines storage, compute, and networking, will increase from 70% today to 2029 as customers consider re-architecting virtualization or switching vendors. It predicted it would plummet to just 40% by 2020.
This could be the first major compromise by Broadcom in its effort to overhaul its controversial VMware business as the technology industry’s latest mega-merger continues to reel.
Source: The Register
That’s today’s show. As always, I’d love to hear your thoughts. Contact us at therealjimlove@gmail.com or our new editorial address – editor@technewsday.ca.
You can find our show notes, along with other articles, at TechNewsDay.ca or .com. Check it out.
I’m your host, Jim Love. Have a wonderful Wednesday!
