Re: The darknet just got its first black market search engine

[Note:  This comment comes from friend David Rosenthal.  DLH]

From: “David S. H. Rosenthal” <>
Subject: Re: [Dewayne-Net] The darknet just got its first black market search engine
Date: April 17, 2014 at 22:57:42 EDT

The darknet just got its first black market search engine
By Adrianne Jeffries
Apr 17 2014

The network of sites known as the darknet, only accessible through the
anonymizing Tor browser, resembles the early internet in many ways —
including being difficult to navigate. Most users get around by clicking
from link to link, accessing pages like “The Hidden Wiki” that list
popular site addresses, or typing long, complex URLs directly into the
browser. Sites often change addresses as a cautionary measure, making
them even more difficult to locate.




Obama’s equal-pay myth is one thing. The GOP’s chauvinism is a problem

Obama’s equal-pay myth is one thing. The GOP’s chauvinism is a problem
Go ahead, turn the White House’s 77-cents quote into the new 47% video. But don’t preach until you know where wage-gap vigilantism gets us
By Ana Marie Cox
Apr 16 2014

Republicans have been both very right and very wrong about their manyobjections over the past week to the White House’s flashy “paycheck equality” push. They’re right to characterize it as a mostly political ploy, an unserious legislative gambit to prove that Republicans are insensitive to the needs of working women. (Who knows why Democrats felt they had to force the issue – Republicans are perfectly capable of proving their insensitivity all by themselves.) Republicans are also correct in pointing out that women have made steady gains receiving equal pay for equal work; if you correct forenough “lifestyle choice” factors, the gap almost disappears.

But here’s where Republicans are wrong: they believe that a gender pay gap due to “lifestyle choices” is somehow OK, or inevitable, or – and this gets to the core fallacy of modern conservatism – that it is OK because it is inevitable.

The Obama administration has hammered on the misleading statistic that women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, and placed most of its rhetorical bet on claiming to have a solution to the problem of women not receiving equal pay for equal work.

Truth is, out of the many approaches outlined in the Paycheck Fairness Act(PFA) currently languishing in Congress, very few would do anything about the 77-cent problem, because that pay gap exists outside of the narrow scope of equally qualified women and men in the same job getting different pay.

According to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, the tendency of women to work in lower-wage careers and take more time off accounts for 60% of the overall, 77-cent, pay discrepancy between men and women. If one controls for all education and demographic factors, including having children under 18 and single parents, women earn 91 cents for every dollar earned by men.

That’s still wrong, that’s still bad, but it doesn’t have the same clarion call ring as “77 cents”; it’s almost a rounding error. It’s the number that Republicans will cop to.

Thus there was a Republican alternative to the PFA, the End Pay Discrimination Through Information Act. It keeps, word-for-word, the PFA language that prohibits retaliation by employers and bans rules against discussing salaries in the first place, stripping out both the sections pertaining to civil cases and eliminating the education and research grants to explore the issue.

The Republican edits weaken the equal pay bill. But since both sections took aim, more or less, at the 91-cent rather than the 77-cent problem, their loss might not have been worth scuttling the entire cause.

Progressives contend that without the threat of compensatory damages (as are awarded in race discrimination suits), the GOP legislation would give employers little incentive to establish equal pay. Indeed, the inability of plaintiffs to gain anything beyond back-pay for wage discrimination based on gender may explain why wage gap suits make up less than 2% of all Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filings. (In 2011, two years after President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter law to extend the statute of limitations for such filings, the number actually decreased.)

But the poor evidence for widespread wage-gap legal vigilantism has roots beyond poor payouts and the chilling effects that both the GOP and the White House legislation address.


Mission-critical satellite communications wide open to malicious hacking

Mission-critical satellite communications wide open to malicious hacking
Weaknesses from a host of makers pose risks to military, aviation, shipping.
By Dan Goodin
Apr 17 2014

Mission-critical satellite communications relied on by Western militaries and international aeronautics and maritime systems are susceptible to interception, tampering, or blocking by attackers who exploit easy-to-find backdoors, software bugs, and similar high-risk vulnerabilities, a researcher warned Thursday.

Ground-, sea-, and air-based satellite terminals from a broad spectrum of manufacturers—including Iridium, Cobham, Hughes, Harris, and Thuraya—can be hijacked by adversaries who send them booby-trapped SMS text messages and use other techniques, according to a 25-page white paperpublished by penetration testing firm IOActive. Once a malicious hacker has remotely gained control of the devices, which are used to communicate with satellites orbiting in space, the adversary can completely disrupt mission-critical satellite communications (SATCOM). Other malicious actions include reporting false emergencies or misleading geographic locations of ships, planes, or ground crews; suppressing reports of actual emergencies; or obtaining the coordinates of devices and other potentially confidential information.

“If one of these affected devices can be compromised, the entire SATCOM infrastructure could be at risk,” Ruben Santamarta, IOActive’s principal security consultant, wrote. “Ships, aircraft, military personnel, emergency services, media services, and industrial facilities (oil rigs, gas pipelines, water treatment plants, wind turbines, substations, etc.) could all be impacted by these vulnerabilities.”

Santamarta said that every single one of the terminals he audited contained one or more weaknesses that hackers could exploit to gain remote access. When he completed his review in December, he worked with the CERT Coordination Center to alert each manufacturer to the security holes he discovered and suggested improvements to close them. To date, Santamarta said, the only company to respond was Iridium. To his knowledge, the remainder have not yet addressed the weaknesses. He called on the manufacturers to immediately remove all publicly accessible copies of device firmware from their websites to prevent malicious hackers from reverse engineering the code and uncovering the same vulnerabilities he did.

The paper gave examples of the types of weaknesses affecting specific SATCOM systems and the types of attacks that they made possible. The HarrisRF-7800B BGAN, for instance, is a terminal the manufacturer markets as providing tactical radio communications to militaries. Santamarta said the devices contain vulnerabilities that allow hackers to replace the normal firmware with malicious code. Adversaries could then monitor the geographic location of the people using the gear or completely disable communications once a device enters a precise area chosen by the attacker. The Harris BGAN M2M terminal can be commandeered by sending malicious SMS messages to it, the researcher reported.

BGAN terminals from Cobham, meanwhile, can be hijacked by exploiting a weakness in its authentication mechanism. “If a member of a unit was targeted with a client-side exploit while browsing the Internet during personal communications time, an attacker would be able to install malicious firmware in the terminal,” Santamarta wrote. He went on to catalog weaknesses in terminals that underpin mission-critical SATCOM used in international aviation and shipping systems as well.


‘Frontline: United States of Secrets’ promises ‘definitive history’ of domestic surveillance

‘Frontline: United States of Secrets’ promises ‘definitive history’ of domestic surveillance
By Adi Robertson

Apr 17 2014

Over the past two weeks, the Pulitzer and Polk awards have recognized the work of Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and other journalists responsible for bringing Edward Snowden’s leaked documents to print. But one of the most high-profile TV reports on US surveillance was an uncritically supportive look from CBS and 60 Minutes. Today, PBS announced plans for a two-part Frontline special called United States of Secrets, which promises the “definitive history” of domestic surveillance since the September 11th attacks. The first part of the series, airing May 13th, is reported by Michael Kirk, who was recently awarded a Polk award for NFL concussion exposé League of Denial. It will examine the roots of the surveillance program in Washington, DC. Martin Smith, another award-winningFrontline producer and correspondent, will investigate the relationship between Silicon Valley and the NSA in a second installment on May 20th.

PBS has tackled the topic of surveillance before. In 2011, it aired Frontline: Top Secret America, based on a two-year Washington Post investigation by journalists Dana Priest and William Arkin. Frontline revisited the topic after the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013. Depending on its scope, the first episode of United States of Secrets will be either competing with or complementing Glenn Greenwald’s book on the NSA and US surveillance, which is released the same day as the first episode. Laura Poitras, meanwhile, is currently editing her own documentary about the Snowden leaks.

Take a long vacation and behold 8,500 films from Pathe now on YouTube

[Note:  This item comes from friend Janos Gereben.  DLH]

From: janosG <>
Subject: Take a long vacation and behold 8,500 films from Pathe now on YouTube
Date: April 17, 2014 at 14:22:55 EDT
To: Dewayne <>


British Pathé uploads 85,000 historic films to YouTube
Thousands of hours of historical footage showing major events, celebrities and simple day-to-day life from 1896 until 1976 has been uploaded to YouTube

British Pathé, the newsreel maker which documented all walks of life on video during the 20th Century, has uploaded its entire collection of moving images to YouTube: <>.

The archive of 3,500 hours of footage was digitised in 2002 thanks in part to a grant from the National Lottery, and is now freely accessible to anyone around the world for free.

Scrolling through the archives reveals everything from the tragic: Emily Davison throwing herself under the King’s horse, the Hindenburg disaster and the Hiroshima bombing, to the downright unusual, such as Southampton University’s 1962 attempt to launch a flying bicycle. <snip>

This Is What the GOP’s War On Science Looks Like

[Note:  This item comes from friend David Rosenthal.  DLH]

This Is What the GOP’s War On Science Looks Like
By Mark Strauss
Apr 1 2014

I’ve seen some surreal moments in our nation’s capitol, but few can compare to watching Republican members of Congress lecture John Holdren last week on the meaning of “science.” Here are some highlights.

Holdren, the president’s science advisor, was the lone witness at a hearing held by the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology to review the White House’s fiscal year 2015 budget request for science agencies.

You can watch the two-hour video here—or better yet, don’t. We’ve watched it for you. Plus, you don’t want to be more embarrassed than you already are about a science committee that includes a congressman who describes evolution as a “lie from the pit of Hell” and another who claims that climate change is a liberal plot to “create global government to control our lives.”

Committee Chair Lamar Smith (R-TX) set the tone of the hearing right away, beginning with the observation, “Unfortunately, this Administration’s science budget focuses, in my view, far too much money, time, and effort on alarmist predictions of climate change.” Smith then questioned Holdren about the National Science Foundation (NSF), which, he said, was swindling American taxpayers by funding apparently useless programs, such a $340,000 grant to study the ecological consequences of early human-set fires in New Zealand.

And that was one of the more courteous exchanges during the hearing. What came next was a series of Bizarro World lectures on climate change.

Doesn’t the Entire Earth Have the Same Climate?

Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) demonstrated his inability to grasp the idea that the world’s climate varies across different regions (which, in fairness, is a sensible line of questioning—if we were living on the forest moon of Endor):

Rohrabacher: Do you believe that tornadoes and hurricanes today are more ferocious and more frequent than they were in the past?

Holdren: There is no evidence relating to tornadoes. None of all. And I don’t know any spokesman for the administration who has said otherwise. With respect to hurricanes, there is some evidence of increased activity in the North Atlantic, but not in other parts of the world. With respect to droughts and floods, there is quite strong evidence that in some regions they are being enhanced by climate change—not caused by [climate change], influenced by climate change.

Rohrabacher: “I don’t mean to sound pejorative…but they’re Weasel words—that in some areas, “globally” there’s not more droughts, “globally” there’s not more hurricanes and they’re not more ferocious. Is that correct?

Holdren: If you want to take a global average, the fact is a warmer world is getting wetter, there’s more evaporation so there’s more precipitation, so on a global average there’s unlikely to be more droughts. The question is whether drought-prone regions are suffering increased intensity and duration of droughts, and the answer there is yes.

Rohrabacher: [snickering] So we actually have more water and more drought? Okay, thank you very much.

Note to Rohrabacher: You can read about how increasing levels of temperature and precipitation can worsen droughts here. Or, if reading is not your thing, here’s a short animated video (with pretty colors!)


Oklahoma Will Charge Customers Who Install Their Own Solar Panels

Oklahoma Will Charge Customers Who Install Their Own Solar Panels
Apr 16 2014

Oklahoma residents who produce their own energy through solar panels or small wind turbines on their property will now be charged an additional fee, the result of a new bill passed by the state legislature and expected to be signed into law by Gov. Mary Fallin (R).

On Monday, S.B. 1456 passed the state House 83-5 after no debate. The measure creates a new class of customers: those who install distributed power generation systems like solar panels or small wind turbines on their property and sell the excess energy back to the grid. While those with systems already installed won’t be affected, the new class of customers will now be charged a monthly fee — a shift that happened quickly and caught many in the state off guard.

“We knew nothing about it and all of a sudden it’s attached to some other bill,” Ctaci Gary, owner of Sun City Oklahoma, told ThinkProgress. “It just appeared out of nowhere.”

Because the surcharge amount has not been determined, Gary is cautious about predicting the impact it will have on her business. She has already received multiple calls from people asking questions about the bill and wanting to have solar systems installed before the new fee takes effect. “We’re going to use it as a marketing tool,” Gary said. “People deserve to have an opportunity [to install their own solar panels] and not be charged.”

“It is unfortunate that some utilities that enthusiastically support wind power for their own use are promoting a regressive policy that will make it harder for their customers to use wind power on their own,” said Mike Bergey, president & CEO of Bergey Windpower in Norman, Oklahoma, in a statement. “Oklahoma offers tax credits for large wind turbines which are built elsewhere, but wants to penalize small wind which we manufacture here in the state? That makes no sense to me.”

The bill was staunchly opposed by renewable energy advocates, environmental groups and the conservative group TUSK, but had the support of Oklahoma’s major utilities. “Representatives of Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. and Public Service Co. of Oklahoma said the surcharge is needed to recover some of the infrastructure costs to send excess electricity safely from distributed generation back to the grid,” the Oklahoman reported.

“We’re not anti-solar or anti-wind or trying to slow this down, we’re just trying to keep it fair,” Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. spokeswoman Kathleen O’Shea told the Oklahoman. “We’ve been studying this trend. We know it’s coming, and we want to get ahead of it.”