The UK and US governments have introduced a ban on taking laptops and tablets on planes as cabin baggage on flights from selected Middle East and North African Countries.

Which Countries?

For the UK, the ban covers all flights from 6 countries: Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Lebanon. This means that 14 airlines, including British Airways and Easyjet, will be affected by the ban.

For the US, the ban covers all flights from 8 countries: Turkey, Morocco, Jordan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. This will affect 9 airlines that, between them, operate around 50 flights to the US per day. Among the airports affected by the US ban is the world’s busiest international airport, Dubai International.

Why?

The ban is being introduced as a security measure to prevent terrorists from targeting commercial aviation using innovative means, such as hiding explosives inside popular electronic devices.

As far as the US is concerned, the timing for (and the nature of) the ban is based upon was has been referred to as “evaluated intelligence”. Although this is unlikely to mean specific threats, the ban enables the two governments to provide a clear, very public, and re-assuring move to protect citizens from more obvious potential risks, and a counter to terrorist propaganda.
Examples of commercial aviation attacks that have been widely reported in support of the ban include the downing of a Russian airliner Sinai in 2015 killing all 224 people, the attempt at downing an airliner in Somalia in 2016, and the attacks on Brussels and Instanbul airports.

Why A Cabin Luggage Ban?

Many have argued that it would make little difference whether an automatic explosive device was in the hold or in the cabin area. The logic of banning potential concealed explosive devices from the cabin appears to be to separate the ‘bomber from the bomb’ e.g. in the case of manually operated devices, and to prevent explosions near the fuselage. Explosions in the cabin area are believed to be more likely to breach the fuselage, and cause the kind of massive de-pressurisation that brings down aircraft.

Which Devices Are Banned?

For example, for US-bound passengers, the non-exhaustive list of devices includes laptops and tablets, cameras and portable DVD players, e-reading devices, electronic game units larger than a smartphone, travel printers and scanners. The UK banned list is similar and will essentially apply to almost any electronic device that is not a phone.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For airline businesses, the ban could hit profits by affecting passenger numbers, could increase baggage scanning and security costs, and could negatively affect customer satisfaction levels. For business travellers, the ban could mean lost time where work could be done e.g. on the laptop during flights. The ban could also mean the hassle of having to find other means of entertainment on long flights, and perhaps having to suffer more distractions from other passengers who cannot use their electronic devices e.g. children. The ban could also mean greater disruption (particularly in the early stages of the ban) as a result of increased waiting times at security. Some commentators have also pointed out that there is the potential for electronic devices stored in the baggage hold to be damaged or lost, and this could have insurance implications.

The discovery that last week’s London terror attacker Khalid Masood used WhatsApp’s encrypted message service minutes before the killings have led for calls, not least by Home Secretary Amber Rudd, to give the government access to the un-encrypted content of messages on the platform.

Unacceptable?

In a weekend TV interview, Home Secretary Rudd described the current situation whereby terrorists can secretly talk to each other on a formal social media messaging platform as ‘unacceptable’. Home Secretary Rudd and the government’s frustration have meant that a meeting has been set for this week with Facebook and other technology companies to try and broker a work-around.

Shift From End-To-End Encryption

The government’s likely position at the meeting will be to seek a shift by social media platforms e.g. Facebook, WhatsApp and Apple’s iMessage, away from the complete end-to-end encryption model that denies everyone (including government’s) access to message content, towards allowing specific unscrambled messages to be handed to the government on warranted request.

Issues & Objections

The government’s wish to have greater access on request and surveillance powers have, however, been met with several counter-arguments and objections from technical and security commentators, tech companies, and even a former Ministry of Defence’s cyber-security chief. The arguments and objections against granting the government yet more powers include:

• There is already a wide-ranging Investigatory Powers Act (“Snooper’s Charter”) in place. As well as potentially enabling secret backdoors to be created in apps and thereby undermining public trust in their software, the Act is regarded by many as granting enough powers for now.
• Doubts exist as to whether the WhatsApp activity by the London terror-attacker were even related to the atrocity anyway.
• If encryption was banned or weaknesses / backdoors were built-in to popular platforms, determined criminals would simply obtain encryption products from other sources.
• Banning encryption e.g. as a knee-jerk reaction to specific attacks and / or to gain access to communications of a few people could pose much wide security risks to all of us. For example, we could all face greater privacy and security risks from authoritarian governments, foreign spies, hackers and other criminals.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

Security and privacy is important in business communications, whether by phone app, social platform, or by email system. Businesses could argue that a more immediate and more likely risk comes from cyber criminals, many of whom have already shown themselves to be capable of exploiting situations where there are back-doors in software / platforms / systems, or where there is a lack of adequate encryption. Relaxing security protection for all for the sake of a few may, therefore, may not be a response that will benefit businesses right now. The debate, however, looks likely to continue for some time.

A man has been arrested after he alleged tweeted a flashing animated strobe-style picture, which triggered an epileptic seizure in the recipient.

US police found (after searching sender 29-year-old John Rayne Rivello’s computer) that he had been researching the triggers of epileptic seizures online.

Part of a Planned Hate Campaign?

Further forensic searches of Maryland-based Mr Rivello’s computer by police found more evidence that the sending of the flashing image to the victim, Texas-based Kurt Eichenwald, appeared to be part of simmering and pre-planned hate campaign. Among the digital evidence, police discovered:

• Messages sent to other Twitter users about Mr Eichenwald, with some suggesting a plan for a virtual attack. One such message from Rivello was found to say “I hope this sends him into a seizure”.
• A screenshot of an altered Wikipedia page for Mr Eichenwald in Mr Rivello’s iCloud account. The alterations, allegedly made by Mr Rivello’, included a death date for Mr Eichenwald of the day after the (allegedly) malicious tweet had been sent.
• A message, allegedly sent by Mr Rivello to Mr Eichenwald, saying “You deserve a seizure for your post”.

The Victim

The victim (Mr Eichenwald) is a s+enior writer at Newsweek magazine, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a best-selling author of four books. One book, ‘The Informant’ (from 2000), was made into a film in 2009. Since 1986, Mr Eichenwald has been employed by The New York Times since 1986 and primarily covered Wall Street and corporate topics.

It was widely known that Mr Eichenwald suffered from epilepsy because he had written articles about the condition and his struggles with it, since being diagnosed at the age of 18 in 1979. He was awarded a journalism prize from the Epilepsy Foundation of America for his 1987 article about the condition.

After seeing the flashing image tweeted by Mr Rivello, Mr Eichenwald reportedly suffered an epileptic seizure that has had long lasting effects on his health.

The Motivation?

The motivation for the attack is not clear, although some commentators have alleged that it may be down to Mr Eichenwald’s public criticism of President Donald Trump.

Flashing & Seizures

There is medical evidence to suggest that flashing images that fill the field of vision and that change abruptly in light intensity and luminance could trigger seizures in an epilepsy sufferer.

Technical commentators have pointed out that a seizure-triggering image would have to be very carefully constructed to take account of the visual limitations of Modern LED screens and to make sure that the flash rate of the image fell within the most sensitive range of 15-25 flashes per second.

Cyber Stalking Charge

According to the New York Times, Mr Rivello now faces a charge of criminal cyber-stalking and could face a 10-year sentence.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

This story illustrates how the form of cyber-attacks can be wide and varied, and how determined individuals can use information about victims that they find online to target their attacks. Cyber criminals use similar research and information gathering processes to attack company systems. Most attacks on companies, however, arrive via email in the hope that opening emails and clicking on bogus links can enable the loading of malware onto the victim’s computer. In addition to having anti-virus and email filtering protection, staff should be educated on how to spot and deal with potentially dangerous emails and suspicious contacts. Businesses should also be aware that attacks can also come from disgruntled ex-employees for example, with insider knowledge of IT and data systems.

If car manufacturers are given sole access your modern car’s digital data records (and not third party repair businesses), this could mean that manufacturers will recommend their own repair centres and spare parts, which would very likely mean higher bills and less choice for you.

Argument

The argument between car manufacturers / manufacturer-owned businesses and independent / third party car repair and other businesses over who has access to your car’s data is now well under way.

What Data?

Today’s car engines contain sensors and mini-computers (as required by European law) and they have an onboard diagnostic (OBD) port, which allows mechanics to plug in a cable and access the data stored in the car’s computer or electronic control unit (ECU).

As well as giving access to diagnostic performance data, this port gives access to emissions data, which enables them to check whether vehicles comply with pollution regulations.

The mini-computers and sensors (which are now important parts of modern engines) measure, collect and send data to car manufacturers about wear and tear on your car’s parts, your car’s fuel efficiency, and how far and fast your car has been driven, among other things.

Your engine’s computer also transmits other potentially lucrative data to your manufacturer such as when your service is due.

Unfair Advantage For Manufacturers?

Third-party car repair and car parts retailers, supported by the FIGIEFA, British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVRLA), Cecra, FiA, ADPA, and Leaseurope are arguing that:

• Since manufacturers are the only ones with access to the data being sent from their cars, they can recommend their own spare parts and repair shops. This is an unfair advantage that distorts the market. Consumers are given less choice and face having to travel further than they would like (to manufacturer-owned / endorsed repair shops), and may face higher bills if manufacturers are allowed to only recommend their own parts and repair businesses.
• The use of cloud-based programs called hypervisors could enable the widespread use of a vehicle interoperable, standardised, secure and open-access platform. This could provide a way for third-party companies to securely access car data, and could create fair competition in the market.

The other side of the argument comes from the car manufacturers, supported by The European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA). This point of view states that:

• Allowing direct third-party access to vehicular electronic systems will jeopardise safety, cyber security (because vehicle electronic systems could be hacked) and vehicle integrity.
• Allowing third-parties access to car computer systems is a threat to trade-secrets and aspects of those systems that are covered by intellectual property rights.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

It does seem as though there is little scope for competition and a possible unfair advantage for car manufacturers while they retain sole access to car computer data. Economics, and the experiences of other markets would suggest, therefore, that servicing bills for your business vehicles are likely to be higher while the power rests with a relatively small group of manufacturers. It could also mean less choice, and more inconvenience.

In an age when people are living longer, healthcare systems and resources are being strained, with elderly people facing challenges like loneliness, more research is being carried out into how robots could bridge the care gap.

The Challenges

The global population is ageing. In the UK alone for example, people are having fewer children and living longer lives. By 2040, nearly one in seven people is projected to be aged over 75 (UK Government figures) and this will mean that public spending will need to increase, and already stretched care systems will be under unprecedented pressures. Meeting the caring and or nursing needs of the elderly, as well as addressing companionship issues, are likely to be major issues facing us all in years to come.

How Can Robots Help?

Research into (and the development of) ‘robo-nurse’ and ‘robo-carer’ devices has been taking place over several years now. Examples include:

• A robot receptionist called Nadine at the Institute of Media Innovation, in Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University. Nadine uses AI, and is capable of autonomous behaviour. The ability to recognise people and human emotions, and make associations using a knowledge database could mean that this type of robot has potential as a nurse for elderly people.
• A robo-pet ‘baby seal’ called ‘Paro’. Developed in Japan, the units (5,000 of which are already in use) respond to touch and are designed to make eye contact. The therapeutic effects of these pets have been reported to include the improvement of symptoms such as depression, anxiety and stress in dementia patients. There is also evidence that ‘Paro’ units have helped non-verbal patients to speak again. Medical commentators have highlighted the potential for robo-pets like Paro to help with treatments for post-traumatic stress disorders, neuro-cognitive rehabilitation for stroke patients, help for children on the Autism-spectrum, and help with pain management or palliative care patients.
• Robot units that can monitor aspects of patients’ health, administer some aspects of care and medication, and send alerts when needed.

Ethical And Security Issues

Some security and technology commentators have highlighted possible ethical and security issues with the use of robotic solutions. Protection, and the ethical use of the personal data gathered about individuals by robots may be a cause for concern. There is also an argument that the use of robots may simply mean that elderly patients are more isolated, and will miss out on many of the factors that real human contact can bring.

IBM Favours IoT

IBM has been reportedly looking more at IoT rather than robot solutions as a more immediately viable option. For example, the company is reported to have experimented with IoT sensors and how they can be used to identify changes in physical conditions or anomalies in a person’s environment. The purpose of this kind of sensor is to understand a person’s habits and to spot potentially significant changes to those habits remotely. This will enable the care provider to respond accordingly.

Costs Of Robots A Big Concern

Health and care budgets here in the UK are stretched anyway. With the current likely costs of individual robots running into thousands of pounds, the idea of providing robot nurses and carers on a large scale may still be some way off.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The development and merging of technologies such as AI, robotics, IoT and smart technologies, could present a realm of new business opportunities and opportunities for innovation within existing markets. There appears to be a broad consensus that the need for all kinds of scalable care solutions for the elderly and the sick exists, and will become greater over time. This represents major potential markets for the right technology-based products and services.