In this insight, we look at how Stephen Wilhite invented the GIF file, and how his invention has endured while the Internet has undergone vast changes.

Who Was Stephen Wilhite? 

Stephen Wilhite is regarded as one of the inventors who changed the face of the Internet. White worked at CompuServe in the 1980s. Founded in 1969, Ohio-based Compuserve was the first major online service provider in the US and is the oldest of the Big Three information services (along with AOL and Prodigy).

Stephen Wilhite worked as part of a team at CompuServe managed by former chief technical officer Alexander “Sandy” Trevor, but Stephen Wilhite invented the GIF by himself, at home, and then brought the new file format into Compuserve to be worked on by the team. Stephen Wilhite retired in 2000 and is reported to have spent much of his time traveling, camping, and building model trains in his basement.

In 2013, Stephen Wilhite was given a Lifetime Achievement Award at the Webby Awards in New York for the invention of the GIF and his contribution to internet culture.

Died March 14, 2022 

Sadly, Stephen Wilhite died of Covid on March 14, just days after his 74th birthday, leaving a wife, four stepchildren, a son, 11 grandchildren and three great-grandchildren.

What Is A GIF? 

Graphics interchange format, commonly known is GIF (pronounced ‘jiff’, according to Wilhite) is a type of compressed file for images. Invented by White in 1987, while he was at Compuserve, a GIF allowed image transfers across the slow modem connections that were available at the time. GIFs allowed for colour, replacing the black-and-white run-length encoding format (RLE), and offered lossless compression, i.e. no degradation of pixels to make the image smaller, as with JPG files.  GIFs are one of the oldest images used online and the first GIF created is thought to be clip art picture of an airplane in the sky.

Extensible – Animated 

Wilhite is also credited with having the foresight to make GIFs extensible, enabling developers to add their own custom information and leading to the creation of animated GIFs in 1995. The Netscape Navigator browser is often credited with helping to boost the popularity of GIFs as it supported the .GIF format, including animated GIFs.

Although, after a relatively brief period of popularity, GIFs were largely phased out in favour of other compressed file formats for static pictures. However, GIFs remained, largely because, unlike other formats, they provided a fast, easy way to create animated images.

Popularity Again

Animated GIFs have had a resurgence in popularity recent years thanks to users on platforms like 4chan and Reddit creating inventive and funny ‘memes’ (from the Greek word for “imitated”) using the animated GIF format. These files have also been widely shared and popularised through other big social media platforms. GIFs have also been used recently for as a compact, universally accepted form of low-fidelity video.

It has been reported that Wilhite’s favourite was the first popular digital meme, ‘the dancing baby’ from 1996.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Time has proven the value of the invention of the GIF which has stayed around and fulfilled a continuing need and filled a gap in an area which has seen massive, fast, and continuous changes – the Web. GIFs have evolved to enable creativity expression (memes), keeping them relevant, and it’s likely that they’ll be around a lot longer yet. It’s amazing that one man could simply invent this type of file at home, and it was truly an innovation that has been valuable around the world. With the death of Stephen Wilhite, the world has lost another of the great Internet pioneers.

Freeing-up space and getting rid of junk files can help a PC perform faster and better. Here’s how to use the built-in Window ‘Disk Cleanup’ tool to find and delete those old junk files:

– In the Start menu, search for Disk Cleanup, and select Disk Cleanup.

– Wait for Disk Cleanup to analyse the selected drive.

– In the Disk Cleanup window, choose the files you’d like to remove from your computer, and select OK at the bottom.

– Select Delete Files in the prompt that appears.

– You may not want to delete ESD files because although it will free-up lots of space, these files are important for resetting a PC to factory settings.

Deepfake videos of both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky have appeared online this week, both with quite different messages.

What Are Deepfake Videos?  

Deepfake videos are made using deep learning technology and use manipulated images of target individuals (found online), often celebrities, politicians, and other well-known people to create very convincing videos of the subjects saying and doing whatever the video-maker wants them to.

President Volodymr Zelensky’s Deepfake – “Childish Provocation”  

A deepfake video of President Zelensky was posted on his official Instagram account last week. The obviously fake video of President Zelensky, which was so poor that it prompted much ridicule from Ukranian viewers, gave a false message that President Zelensky was thinking about surrendering to Russia. The poor-quality video was dismissed by President Zelensky as “Childish Provocation”.  

However, the posting of the video prompted a warning from the Ukrainian Centre for Strategic Communications that Putin’s government may use more deepfakes to convince Ukrainians to surrender.

Removed By Meta  

The fake video of President Zelensky talking about surrender had been posted on Meta (Facebook) and its Russian counterpart VKontakte. Meta quickly removed the video from its platform for breaking its rules relating to “manipulated media”.

Warning In March  

It had been anticipated that deepfakes may be one of the weapons used in the cyber war against Ukraine which has accompanied the physical attacks. Earlier this month, for example, Ukraine’s Centre for Strategic Communications warned that that Russia may use altered videos of President Zelensky in order to distort public perception of the invasion.

Putin Video  

The Putin deepfake video, posted on Twitter, showed the Russian president announcing the surrender of Russia and asking Russian troops to drop their weapons and go home. A close examination of the video revealed that it had been made using clips from an address delivered by Putin on Feb 21.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?  

Deepfakes are now becoming more common and the case of these two videos shows how deepfakes are likley to be used and weaponised in future conflicts, elections, and other campaigns as a propaganda tool. Although, as in the case of the President Zelensky video, the quality may be poor, these videos are likely to improve in future to the point where they could be convincing to many viewers and could be widely shared, thereby successfully influencing some opinion. Deepfake videos are part of the wider challenge of fake news that today’s social media platforms are facing and, in this case, Meta’s rules on manipulated media could be used as a legitimate reason to remove the video from its platform.

Germany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) has warned that Russia-based Kaspersky’s anti-virus software could be used for spying or launching cyber-attacks.

Russian Companies Forced To Launch Cyber-Attacks?  

The warning was aimed at Russian IT businesses who, claims the BSI, could be used via the software to carry out offensive operations, or forced against their will to attack target systems, or be spied upon. The warning also suggests that Kaspersky’s anti-virus products could be used as a tool for attacks against an IT company’s own customers.

Politically Motivated 

It is no surprise that Kaspersky has defended the safety of its products and stated that the BSI’s claims have been made purely on political grounds and not on any technical assessment of its products. Kaspersky has also denied any ties to any government, including Russia’s.

Sponsorship Dropped  

The warning by the BSI led to Eintracht Frankfurt football club dropping its sponsorship agreement with Kaspersky.

History of Accusations  

There have been many well-publicised accusations in the past against Kaspersky centring around the allegation of a possible close tie with the Russian state and, therefore, a possible security risk. For example:

In December 2017, following a warning in a letter by Director of the UK National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), Ciaran Martin, to Whitehall chiefs about the danger of Russian software, Barclays bank has emailed its online banking customers to say that it would no longer be offering Kaspersky Russian anti-virus because of possible security risks.

Also in December 2017, then US President Donald Trump banned the use of Kaspersky Lab within the U.S. government as part of a broader defence policy spending bill. The ban reinforced a directive from September that year that civilian agencies should remove Kaspersky Lab software within 90 days. Both the earlier directive and the ban were based on security fears over Kaspersky’s possible links with the Russian State.

Kaspersky Says…  

In reply to the latest allegations from Germany, Kaspersky has issued a statement which explains that its “data processing infrastructure was relocated to Switzerland in 2018”, and that “the security and integrity of our data services and engineering practices have been confirmed by independent third-party assessment”.  

Kaspersky says that “We believe this decision is not based on a technical assessment of Kaspersky products – that we continuously advocated for with the BSI and across Europe – but instead is being made on political grounds.”  

What Does This Mean For Your Business?  

Suspicions about Kaspersky’s possible links to the Russian state have been the subject of several warnings from UK, US, and other nations’ security agencies over the past few years. It is not surprising, therefore, that with anti-Russian state feelings running high and sanctions being imposed that Kaspersky would again be in the frame. With a warning coming from such a credible and official source as Gemany’s Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), and with clear evidence of Russian cyber-attacks already (against Ukraine) it is not surprising that the warning has had an immediate commercial effect, i.e. dropped sponsorship by a major football club. It is unlikely that Kaspersky’s assurances will be heard at this time and more commercial pain for the company is likely to follow. The warning is part of an expanding surface of pressure and sanctions being applied in a bid to force an end to Putin’s war being waged against Ukraine.

With so many smart devices now all around us in homes and offices, we look here at ways to minimise the risk of having your privacy invaded.

The Internet of Things (IoT) 

IoT devices are those devices that are now present in most offices and homes that have a connection to the Internet and are, therefore, ‘smart’ and inter-connected. These devices, each of which has an IP address, could be anything from white goods, smart thermostats, digital assistants (Amazon Echo) to CCTV cameras, medical implants, industrial controllers, building entry systems, and even the car. There are now even smart malls and cities in some parts of the world. IoT devices transmit and collect data which can be processed in datacentres or the cloud and uses several different communications standards and protocols to communicate with other devices (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, ZigBee or message queuing telemetry transport (MQTT).

Privacy Risks   

Although the smart element of these devices can be used to improve their performance, it can also represent a risk to privacy and security. For example, smart security cameras and smart assistants are essentially cameras and microphones in the home. Also, W-Fi routers, smart lightbulbs and other gadgets and wearables collect and transmit personal data. The risk is that the private data collected by IoT devices and shared over the internet could be vulnerable to hackers around the world. This, in turn, can compromise security as well as privacy as the hacked/intercepted data is used for cybercrime and physical crime (e.g. burglary) using information gained from CCTV cameras. Other risks include:

– Hackers remotely taking control of devices to misuse them and spy.

– Some IoT devices have pre-set, default unchangeable passwords, which, if discovered by cyber-criminals, can enable the device to be taken over and misused.

– IoT devices are prevalent and are often overlooked in security planning, leaving them unguarded and vulnerable to hacks and attacks.

– IoT devices are deployed in many systems that link to (and are supplied by) major utilities, e.g. smart meters in homes. This means that a large-scale attack on these IoT systems could affect the economy.

– “Shadow IoT” devices (i.e. connected to corporate networks without the knowledge of IT teams) also now pose a threat to organisations by allowing attackers a way to get into a corporate network. These devices can include fitness trackers, smartwatches and medical devices.

Protecting Privacy   

Actions that can be taken to retain privacy and limit the potential risks posed by IoT devices include:

– Securing your router by changing the default settings, i.e. the change the default administrative username, password, network name, and avoid using login names or passwords that contain your name, address, or router brand. Also, enable encryption and check for hardware and software updates.

– Changing the default username and password on IoT devices that connect to the router, using two-factor authentication (2FA).

– Not sharing passwords between devices.

– Taking time to understand what a device collects and how. Users may then make informed choices such a turning smart speakers or cameras off occasionally for privacy.

– Regularly updating each device’s firmware.

– Taking advantage of any extra security features on a device, e.g. enabling encryption or setting up a passcode lockout (“three strikes, and you’re out”).

– Disabling any data collection that is not seen as necessary on a device and disabling or disconnecting any devices that are not in regular use.

IoT Security

The threat of the IoT being used for cybercrime has prompted many businesses to start investing in IoT security solutions. According to a recent report by Meticulous Research®, the IoT Security Market could be worth as much $59.16 Billion by 2029.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?  

The IoT brings many advantages to businesses in terms of cost savings, the gathering of valuable data, monitoring and management. For consumers, smart devices deliver new levels of value-adding functionality and looking ahead, towns and cities will begin to rely even more on the benefits of IoT devices and systems. However, smart devices come with a privacy and security risk if certain steps are not taken such updating firmware, changing default passwords, and disconnecting them when they’re not needed. For businesses, IoT security has become an important issue and demand for it has increased in many industries and organisations. This demand is being driven by an increasing number of ransomware attacks on IoT devices, and an increase in the number of IoT security regulations. The risk may be even greater now in the light of the war waged by Russia on Ukraine. Businesses, therefore, need to take an audit of which IoT devices are in use and make sure appropriate measures are taken to maximise security and privacy.

A recent revision to the (draft) Online Safety Bill could mean that executives who don’t comply with the regulator’s information request could start facing penalties such as jail just two months after the bill becomes law.

The Online Safety Bill 

The UK government’s Online Safety Bill, published in May 2021 and now introduced to parliament, is (draft) legislation that’s designed to place a ‘duty of care’ on internet companies which host user-generated content to limit the spread of illegal content and “legal but harmful” content on these services.

The idea of the Online Safety Bill is essentially to prevent the spread of illegal content and activity (e.g. images of child abuse, terror material, and hate crimes), as well as to protect children from harmful material, and to protect adults from legal but harmful content.

The Bill applies to social media platforms, video-sharing platforms, search engines plus other tech services and requires them to put in place systems and processes to remove illegal content as soon as they become aware of it. The Bill also requires these services to take additional proactive measures with regards to the most harmful ‘priority’ forms of online illegal content.

Ofcom’s Expanded Role 

The Bill, which is due to be introduced as law later this year, will use Codes of Practice to regulate the behaviour of social media companies and will be enforced by the media and communications regulator, Ofcom. The regulator will have the powers to fine rule-breakers as much as 10 per cent of their global annual turnover! Also, Ofcom will have the powers to force companies failing to comply to improve their practices and even to block non-compliant sites.

Dame Melanie Dawes, Ofcom Chief Executive, said of the introduction of the Bill to Parliament (March 17): “Today marks an important step towards creating a safer life online for the UK’s children and adults. Our research shows the need for rules that protect users from serious harm, but which also value the great things about being online, including freedom of expression. We’re looking forward to starting the job”. 

Punishing Named Executives 

One recent aspect of the debate around the Online Safety Bill, in line with the idea of bringing about a new era of accountability, has been the naming and punishing of specific individuals/executives within offending companies to make them more accountable. The draft Bill, for example, already included the ability to impose criminal sanctions of named tech executives.

Was 2 Years – Could Be Two Months! 

These sanctions (i.e. prison sentences) were originally due to be delayed for two years (a grace period) after the laws are passed but some UK MPs have been asking the government to remove this long grace period before criminal sanctions can be faced.

Digital Secretary Nadine Dorries, who has personal experience of having been targeted by trolls, was recently reported to have favoured a six months timeline (grace period) before the imposition of prison terms for those tech execs who fail to remove “harmful algorithms”.

The most recent revisions to the Bill, however, mean that when it becomes law, the time frame for being able to apply criminal liability powers against senior executives in social media and tech companies could be down to as little as two months.

In a recent press release (March 17), the government said: “Today the government is announcing that executives whose companies fail to cooperate with Ofcom’s information requests could now face prosecution or jail time within two months of the Bill becoming law, instead of two years as it was previously drafted.” 

The punishment for not cooperating with Ofcom (including falsifying or destroying data) could see offenders facing up to two years in prison, or a substantial fine.

Offences 

The kinds of priority offences listed in the draft bill are terrorism, child sexual abuse, and exploitation. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s Secretary of State also has powers to add further priority offences (with Parliament’s approval) via secondary legislation once the bill becomes law.

As it stands now, the Bill has been written to tackle online safety in areas such as protecting children from harmful online content, limiting user’s exposure to illegal content and requiring online platforms where users can post their own content ensure they ‘protect children, tackle illegal activity and uphold their terms and conditions’.

More recent additions to areas covered by the Bill include:

– Making social media platforms tackle ‘legal but harmful’ content (as defined by Parliament).

– Tackling paid-for-scam adverts on social media and search engines.

– Ensuring that there are 18+ age verification checks on pornography-hosting sites.

Also written into the Bill are measures to address anonymous trolls online, and the criminalisation of cyber flashing.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

With the Bill being strengthened in recent months to bring about greater accountability among executives of social media companies, the hope is that this will make them take it more seriously and make compliance a priority. The treat of possible prison terms for executives, has now been backed up with a dramatically reduced ‘grace period’ – two months instead of two years. The hope that this will really drive the message home that the UK government now intends to get tougher about online safety and how social media platforms offer protection to users. The Bill is now being debated in Parliament which is a signal that it could soon become law. Social media platforms, freedom and rights groups, child safety organisations, law firms, and tech and safety commentators will now be watching closely to see what aspects of the Bill will make it into law and what changes will need to be made by tech businesses to comply.