In recent weeks, Chinese regulators have cracked down on some of the country’s biggest and most powerful technology companies, illustrating the immense market power of these companies, which has drawn concern from the government. On Monday, the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR), China’s top market regulator, fined three of the country’s largest technology companies, including e-commerce giant Alibaba Group and social-media juggernaut Tencent, for failing to disclose acquisitions of smaller competitors. Last month, China Securities Regulatory Commission halted the record initial public offering of Ant Group, one of China’s dominant digital payment platforms backed by Alibaba. It then announced new draft rules targeting monopolistic practices on the country’s digital platforms.  FILE – Signs of Alibaba Group and Ant Group are seen during the World Internet Conference in Wuzhen, Zhejiang province, China, Nov. 23, 2020.Analysts who spoke to VOA said these moves reflect the Chinese government’s rising concern over financial technology and e-commerce companies that are using unfair competitive practices to undermine traditional payments and financial service companies. There is also a concern that the companies could pose a systemic risk to the economy.  First fine On Monday, a subsidiary of Alibaba Group, a unit of Tencent Holdings, and an affiliate of express delivery company SF Holding were fined $75,000 (500,000 RMB) each for breaching China’s anti-monopoly law.  SAMR said in a statement that the online economy has become increasingly controlled by a few companies. “Complaints about platform monopoly have been on the rise, indicating competition risks and problems in the online economy,” it said.  FILE – Zhang Mao, minister of China’s State Administration for Market Regulation, attends a news conference on the sidelines of the National People’s Congress in Beijing, China, March 11, 2019.This marks the first fine towards the country’s internet giants since the enforcement of the anti-monopoly law in 2008.  Lu Suiqi, an associate professor of finance at Peking University, says the government has been turning a blind eye to monopoly issues for the past decade, because developing the digital economy was an important part of China’s industrial policy.  “Now these companies have become too strong, they have been using inappropriate means to drive their competitors out of the market,” Lu said. “They have grasped an excessively high market share and there’s a lack of healthy competition, which is bad for the overall economy.” Some 70% of the top 30 Apps in China belong to either Alibaba or Tencent. The two companies are each believed to oversee a payment and financial tractions ecosystem with a market value around $1.5 trillion (10 trillion RMB).  Li Chengdong, founder of the Beijing-based Dolphin think tank, says that the explosive growth of internet firms has made governments around the world vigilant. In the United States earlier this month, attorney generals from 48 states sued Google and Facebook, accusing them of illegally conspiring to shut out smaller rivals. Analysts say there is a similar dynamic happening in China. 38 States Sue Google Over Antitrust Complaints It is the third major lawsuit against the tech giant since October “It’s very common in China for big internet giants to crack down on small- and medium-size start-ups,” he said, adding only more strict regulation and enforcement can put the economy back on track.  Rebalancing away from technology?  Meanwhile, experts recommend China needs to rebalance its economy between e-commerce and brick and mortar stores to achieve more sustainable growth.  Tomson Tang, vice chairman of China Electronic Commerce Association, says China’s e-commerce has developed rapidly over the past 20 years in terms of users and the value of transactions, at the cost of hundreds and thousands of brick and mortar stores.  “The policy and regulations couldn’t catch up with the speed at which e-commerce develops. That include systematic problems on issues around monopoly, which is bad for the real economy,” he told VOA. However, he said the digital economy is a key element for China to maintain overall economic momentum down the road. The government needs to use regulations to make sure that market opportunities created should be open to all participants and cannot be monopolized by a few large companies.  Beijing’s antitrust watchdogs last month announced draft rules targeting monopolistic practices on the country’s digital platforms, which analysts say will have negative implications for major internet companies with dominant positions across segments.  Paul Triolo, a China digital economy fellow at the Washington-based think tank New America, says although the tech giants must comply with the tightening regulations, they might succeed in bargaining with authorities on how the regulations are implemented.  Tang predicts that in the next two to three years, China will establish a national digital economy bureau to oversee all internet companies. “Without such an authority to supervise, coordinate and enforce regulations, it would be difficult to grasp the financial data and structures of these internet giants, thus impact the implementation of the new anti-monopoly law,” he said.  
 
…

Technology giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. has facial recognition technology that can specifically pick out members of China’s Uighur minority, surveillance industry researcher IPVM said in a report. Alibaba itself said it was dismayed a unit developed software that can tag ethnicity in videos, and that the feature was never intended to be deployed to customers. The report comes as human rights groups accuse China of forcing more than 1 million Muslim Uighurs into labor camps in the region of Xinjiang and call out firms suspected of complicity. FILE – Residents line up inside a vocational training center in Artux, in western China’s Xinjiang region, Dec. 3, 2018. Critics say China uses some of these facilities as detention camps for forced labor.China has repeatedly denied forcing anyone into what it has called vocational training centers and has also said Xinjiang is under threat from Islamist militants. Still, sensitivities have prompted caution among Chinese internet firms that often self-censor to avoid running afoul of a government that strictly controls online speech and that last month published draft rules to police livestreaming. Report’s findingsU.S.-based IPVM in a report published Wednesday said software capable of identifying Uighurs appears in Alibaba’s Cloud Shield content moderation service for websites. Alibaba describes Cloud Shield as a system that “detects and recognizes text, pictures, videos and voices containing pornography, politics, violent terrorism, advertisements and spam, and provides verification, marking, custom configuration and other capabilities.” An archived record of the technology shows it can perform such tasks as “glasses inspection,” “smile detection,” whether the subject is “ethnic” and, specifically, “Is it Uighur?” Consequently, if a Uighur livestreams a video on a website signed up to Cloud Shield, the software can detect that the user is Uighur and flag the video for review or removal, IPVM researcher Charles Rollet told Reuters. IPVM said mention of Uighurs in the software disappeared near the time it published its report. Alibaba’s responseAlibaba in a statement said it was dismayed that Alibaba Cloud developed facial recognition software that includes ethnicity as an attribute for tagging video imagery, and that it never intended the software to be used in this manner. The feature was trial technology not intended for customers. Alibaba did not mention Uighurs in its statement. “We have eliminated any ethnic tag in our product offering,” an Alibaba spokeswoman told Reuters. Alibaba is listed on both the New York and Hong Kong stock exchanges. It is the biggest cloud computing vendor in China and the fourth biggest worldwide, showed data from researcher Canalys. Earlier this month, U.S. lawmakers sent letters to Intel Corp. and Nvidia Corp. following reports of their computer chips being used in the surveillance of Uighurs.  
…

The lawsuits against Alphabet Inc.’s Google continue to pile up. On December 17, 38 states filed a joint antitrust complaint that accuses the tech giant of expanding its search monopoly through smart speakers, televisions and cars, according to Reuters. It is the third major lawsuit against the company. The states are seeking to attach their suit with a federal suit announced by the Justice Department in October, according to the Colorado attorney general’s office. The federal case alleges Google made deals with phone makers, including Apple and Samsung, to make Google the default search engine. It alleges it is also using its Android operating system to pressure device makers to preload Google search apps and other Google products. On December 16, another case was filed by another group of states led by Texas. That case alleges Google is harming competitors by engaging in “false, deceptive or misleading acts” with its Google Ads product. In the latest case, the states allege Google is seeking to use exclusionary agreements to dominate search and search advertising over a new set of devices like smart speakers, which Google produces. Accusations against GoogleAccording to CNET, Google accounts for about 90% of U.S. search traffic. That generates “almost all” of the company’s $160 billion in annual sales. The company has long been accused of shutting out competitors by using its dominance to promote its own products. The new lawsuit alleges Google is doing the same with newer devices like voice assistants. “Google is preventing competitors in the voice assistant market from reaching consumers through connected cars, which stand to be a significant way the internet is accessed in the near future,” said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, according to Reuters. Google has yet to comment on the lawsuit. Big Tech has come under increasing attack from both Democrats and Republicans. In addition to the Google cases, Facebook Inc. is also facing antitrust lawsuits. Reuters said the suits were the “biggest antitrust cases in a generation.”  
 
…

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration and President-elect Joe Biden both voiced new alarm Thursday about a wide intrusion into computer systems around the world that officials suspect was carried out by Russia.The cybersecurity unit of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said the hack “poses a grave risk to the federal government and state, local, tribal, and territorial governments, as well as critical infrastructure entities and other private sector organizations.”The assessment by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency was the most pointed yet since news of the intrusion first emerged last weekend. Both the U.S. Treasury and Commerce departments were among the agencies whose secure data and emails were penetrated by the hack.US Says Recent Hacking Campaign Hit Government NetworksThe hackers are believed to be working for RussiaThe cybersecurity unit warned that removing the malware inserted in the network software will be “highly complex and challenging.”Biden, set to become the 46th U.S. president after his January 20 inauguration, said, “There’s a lot we don’t yet know, but what we do know is a matter of great concern.”Biden said he had “instructed my team to learn as much as we can about this breach” and praised career government civil servants “who are working around-the-clock to respond to this attack.”He vowed that after he assumes power, “my administration will make cybersecurity a top priority at every level of government, and we will make dealing with this breach a top priority from the moment we take office.”Biden said he would strengthen the government’s cybersecurity partnerships with the private sector.“But a good defense isn’t enough,” he said. “We need to disrupt and deter our adversaries from undertaking significant cyberattacks in the first place.”“We will do that by, among other things, imposing substantial costs on those responsible for such malicious attacks, including in coordination with our allies and partners,” Biden said. “Our adversaries should know that, as president, I will not stand idly by in the face of cyber assaults on our nation.”
 
…

The U.S. government confirmed on Wednesday that a recent hacking campaign affected its networks and said the attack was “significant and ongoing.”Hackers believed to be working for Russia have been monitoring internal email traffic at the U.S. Treasury and Commerce departments, Reuters reported earlier this week, citing people who said they feared the hacks uncovered so far may be the tip of the iceberg.”This is a developing situation, and while we continue to work to understand the full extent of this campaign, we know this compromise has affected networks within the federal government,” said a joint statement issued by the FBI, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).Technology company SolarWinds Corp., which was the key stepping-stone used by the hackers, said up to 18,000 of its customers had downloaded a compromised software update that allowed hackers to spy unnoticed on businesses and agencies for almost nine months.”Over the course of the past several days, the FBI, CISA, and ODNI have become aware of a significant and ongoing cybersecurity campaign,” the joint statement said.”The FBI is investigating and gathering intelligence in order to attribute, pursue, and disrupt the responsible threat actors,” the statement said.The FBI, CISA and ODNI have formed a Cyber Unified Coordination Group to coordinate the U.S. government’s response, it said.White House national security adviser Robert O’Brien cut short a European trip on Tuesday and returned to Washington to deal with the attack.
…

Ten states on Wednesday brought a lawsuit against Google, accusing the search giant of “anti-competitive conduct” in the online advertising industry, including a deal to manipulate sales with rival Facebook.Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced the suit, which was filed in a federal court in Texas, saying Google is using its “monopolistic power” to control pricing of online advertisements, fixing the market in its favor and eliminating competition.”This Goliath of a company is using its power to manipulate the market, destroy competition, and harm you, the consumer,” Paxton said in the video posted on Twitter.Google, which is based in Mountain View, California, called Paxton’s claims “meritless” and said the price of online advertising has fallen over the past decade.”These are the hallmarks of a highly competitive industry,” the company said in a statement. “We will strongly defend ourselves from (Paxton’s) baseless claims in court.”Paxton led a bipartisan coalition of 50 U.S. states and territories that announced in September 2019 they were investigating Google’s business practices, citing “potential monopolistic behavior.”Now Texas is bringing the suit along with other Republican attorneys general from Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota and Utah.The complaint targets the heart of Google’s business – the digital ads that generate nearly all of its revenue, as well as all the money that its corporate parent, Alphabet Inc., depends on to help finance a range of far-flung technology projects.As more marketers have increased their spending online, those digital ads have turned Google into a moneymaking machine. Through the first nine months of this year, Google’s ad sales totaled nearly $101 billion, accounting for 86% of its total revenue.And now the states contend Google intends to use its alleged stranglehold on digital ads to choke off other avenues of potential competition and innovation. The company struck an illegal deal with Facebook, a major competitor for ads, to manipulate advertising auction, according to the complaint. Facebook declined to comment.”Google has an appetite for total dominance, and its latest ambition is to transform the free and open architecture of the internet,” the suit alleges.’Ad tech’ marketplaceIn the “ad tech” marketplace that brings together Google and a huge universe of online advertisers and publishers, the company controls access to the advertisers that put ads on its dominant search platform. Google also runs the auction process for advertisers to get ads onto a publisher’s site. Nine of Google’s products in search, video, mobile, email, mapping and other areas are estimated to have over a billion users each, providing the company a trove of users’ data that it can deploy in the advertising process.Google officials say the company shares the majority of its “ad tech” revenue with publishers, such as newspaper websites. An official recently rejected even the assertion that Google is dominant, saying that market dominance suggests abuse, which is foreign to the company.The state’s suit comes after the U.S. Justice Department sued Google in October for abusing its dominance in online search and advertising – the government’s most significant attempt to buttress competition since its historic case against Microsoft two decades ago.Separately, the FBI is investigating whether Paxton, a close ally of President Donald Trump, broke the law in using his office to help a wealthy donor who is also under federal investigation. This fall, eight of the attorney general’s top deputies accused him of bribery, abuse of office and other crimes in the service of an Austin real estate developer who employs a woman with whom Paxton is said to have had an extramarital affair.All eight of Paxton’s accusers have since been fired or resigned, including the deputy attorney general who had been leading the office’s probe of Google. The court complaint list attorneys with private firms in Houston, Chicago and Washington, D.C., as the lead lawyers on the case.Paxton announced the lawsuit the week after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his legal push to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election, a case that prompted widespread speculation that the attorney general is angling for a preemptive pardon from Trump.  
…

The Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act have just been presented in Brussels. These proposed policies aim to revise all the principles that apply to digital services within the 27 member states — from the publication of illegal content on social networks to the sale of products online.Big Tech companies will not be allowed, for example, to stop users from uninstalling preinstalled software or apps, nor will they be able to use data from business users to compete against them.To do so, the European Union governing body would allow fines of up to 10% of annual global revenue. Another part of the European plan is to make sure e-commerce platforms take more responsibility for their goods and services.European Commission Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager said these new regulations are the right tools to bring “order to chaos” on the internet and to rein in the online “gatekeepers” that dominate the market.“The two proposals, they serve one purpose: to make sure that we, as users, customers, businesses, have access to a wide choice of safe products and services online, just as well as we do in the physical world,” Vestager said. “Whether from our streets or from our screens, we should be able to do our shopping in a safe manner. Whether we turn pages or we just scroll down, we should be able to choose and trust the news that we read. Of course, what is illegal offline is equally illegal online.”After the announcement, some companies criticized the move. A spokesperson for Google said the company was concerned that the measures “seem to specifically target a handful of companies.”Thierry Breton, European commissioner for internal market, denied those allegations.“We respect companies, but we say the bigger they are, the more obligations they may have to fulfill,” Breton said. “What is important to us is that everybody is welcome in Europe, but our responsibility is to decide and give directions and rules to protect what is important to us. These are not two acts where we would say that these companies are too big, and we propose a dismantle. Not here, not on this side of the ocean.”The coming new regulations announced in Brussels echoed the concerns over the world about the influence of big technology companies. In the United States, regulators have increased scrutiny on Google and Facebook, and antitrust cases are looming.  
…

The U.S. government’s suit against Facebook for illegally stifling competition and limiting consumer choice will be watched worldwide, particularly by the social network’s more than two billion users. Tina Trinh reports. 
Produced by: Tina Trinh  
 
…

On an earnings call two months ago, SolarWinds Chief Executive Kevin Thompson touted how far the company had gone during his 11 years at the helm. There was not a database or an IT deployment model out there to which his Austin, Texas-based company did not provide some level of monitoring or management, he told analysts on the October 27 call. “We don’t think anyone else in the market is really even close in terms of the breadth of coverage we have,” he said. “We manage everyone’s network gear.” Now that dominance has become a liability – an example of how the workhorse software that helps glue organizations together can turn toxic when it is subverted by sophisticated hackers. On Monday, SolarWinds confirmed that Orion – its flagship network management software – had served as the unwitting conduit for a sprawling international cyberespionage operation. The hackers inserted malicious code into Orion software updates pushed out to nearly 18,000 customers. SolarWinds Corp. CEO Kevin Thompson celebrates his company’s IPO on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, Oct. 19, 2018.And while the number of affected organizations is thought to be much more modest, the hackers have already parlayed their access into consequential breaches at the U.S. Treasury and Department of Commerce. Three people familiar with the investigation have told Reuters that Russia is a top suspect, although others familiar with the inquiry have said it is still too early to tell. A SolarWinds representative, Ryan Toohey, said he would not be making executives available for comment. He did not provide on-the-record answers to questions sent via email. In a statement issued Sunday, the company said, “we strive to implement and maintain appropriate administrative, physical, and technical safeguards, security processes, procedures, and standards designed to protect our customers.” Cybersecurity experts are still struggling to understand the scope of the damage. Sending the malicious updates from March to June, when America was hunkering down to weather the first wave of coronavirus infections, was “perfect timing for a perfect storm,” said Kim Peretti, who co-chairs Atlanta-based law firm Alston & Bird’s cybersecurity preparedness and response team. Assessing the damage would be difficult, she said. “We may not know the true impact for many months, if not more – if not ever,” she said. US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency logoThe impact on SolarWinds was more immediate. U.S. officials ordered anyone running Orion to immediately disconnect it. The company’s stock has tumbled more than 23% from $23.50 on Friday – before Reuters broke the news of the breach – to $18.06 on Tuesday. SolarWinds’ security, meanwhile, has come under new scrutiny. In one previously unreported issue, multiple criminals have offered to sell access to SolarWinds’ computers through underground forums, according to two researchers who separately had access to those forums. One of those offering claimed access over the Exploit forum in 2017 was known as “fxmsp” and is wanted by the FBI “for involvement in several high-profile incidents,” said Mark Arena, chief executive of cybercrime intelligence firm Intel471. Arena informed his company’s clients, which include U.S. law enforcement agencies. Security researcher Vinoth Kumar told Reuters that, last year, he alerted the company that anyone could access SolarWinds’ update server by using the password “solarwinds123.” “This could have been done by any attacker, easily,” Kumar said. Neither the password nor the stolen access is considered the most likely source of the current intrusion, researchers said. Others – including Kyle Hanslovan, the cofounder of Maryland-based cybersecurity company Huntress – noticed that, days after SolarWinds realized their software had been compromised, the malicious updates were still available for download. The firm has long mooted the idea of spin-off of its managed service provider business and on Dec. 9 announced that Thompson would be replaced by Sudhakar Ramakrishna, the former chief executive of Pulse Secure. Three weeks ago, SolarWinds posted a job ad seeking a new vice president for security; the position is still listed as open. Thompson and Ramakrishna could not be reached for comment. 
…

Lawmakers in Britain have proposed legislation that would fine social media companies if they do not quickly take action to remove illegal content like child pornography or terrorist materials. U.S. based Facebook and Twitter and China-owned TikTok could be fined up to 10% of turnover, according to Reuters. CNBC reported that Ofcom, a British media watchdog, would have the power to enforce the laws if they are enacted. Under the proposal, which will be introduced next year, social media companies must establish clear terms and conditions about content, CNBC reported. FILE – Britain’s Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Oliver Dowden arrives for a Cabinet meeting, at Downing Street in London, Britain, July 21, 2020.”We are entering a new age of accountability for tech to protect children and vulnerable users, to restore trust in this industry and to enshrine in law safeguards for free speech,” Britain’s Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden said Tuesday. In addition to fines, some sites could be blocked from the British market if they fail to act. Dowden left open the possibility for criminal charges against companies that permit illegal content, according to Reuters. “These measures make this the toughest and most comprehensive online safety regime, and they will have a clear and immediate effect,” he told lawmakers.  But the proposals don’t stop at illegal content. According to Reuters, the proposed legislation would require companies to have clear policies against misinformation that could cause “harm,” such as information about COVID-19 vaccines. “We already have strict policies against harmful content on our platforms, but regulations are needed so that private companies aren’t making so many important decisions alone,” said Rebecca Stimson, Facebook’s head of Britain public policy. Other Big Tech companies echoed Facebook. Under the proposed laws, online journalism and user comments on news sites would be exempt to “safeguard freedom of expression,” Reuters reported. Britain’s move comes as the European Union was also set to unveil a slate of similar proposals on December 15.
…

Apple on Monday began adding labels that reveal what user data is gathered by games, chat or other software offered in the App Store for its popular mobile devices. The iPhone maker announced plans for such privacy labels when it first unveiled the new version of its iOS mobile operating system, which it released in September. “App Store product pages will feature summaries of developers’ self-reported privacy practices, displayed in a simple, easy-to-read format,” Apple said in a blog post when iOS 14 launched. “Starting early next year, all apps will be required to obtain user permission before tracking.” Apple began pushing out the labels Monday, with the rule applying to new apps for iPhones, iPads, Apple Watch, Apple TV and Mac computers. The labels will contain information provided by developers when they submit apps for approval to appear on the App Store’s virtual shelves, according to the Silicon Valley-based company. Apple last week began requiring developers to submit privacy information for use in labels. “Apple recently required that all apps distributed via their App Store display details designed to show people how their data may be used,” Facebook-owned smartphone messaging service WhatsApp said in a blog post explaining what data the app gathers. “We must collect some information to provide a reliable global communications service,” it said. The aim, according to Apple, is for users to be able to easily see and understand what apps do with their data, from lists of contacts to where they are. Data types added to labels will include tracking in order to target advertising or sharing with data brokers, as well as information that could reveal user identity. Apple and Android mobile operating systems provide tools for controlling the kinds of data apps can access once they are installed. 
 
…

After nearly an hour of widespread global outages of Google services, most users were again able to access their Gmail, Google Drive and YouTube accounts Monday morning.
 
“Update — We’re back up and running! You should be able to access YouTube again and enjoy videos as normal,” YouTube tweeted once service was restored.
 
Google, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., has not said what caused the outage.
 
Some users of Google Home Services, which can control lighting and other smart devices, reported outages, as well.
 
“I’m sitting here in the dark in my toddler’s room because the light is controlled by @Google Home. Rethinking … a lot right now,” tweeted one user.I’m sitting here in the dark in my toddler’s room because the light is controlled by @Google Home. Rethinking… a lot right now.— Joe Brown (@joemfbrown) December 14, 2020 
According to Bloomberg, Google search and advertisements were not affected by the down time.
 
While outages among Big Tech companies are not uncommon, this outage was notable because it impacted so many different Google products, Bloomberg reported. 
…

The head of the European Union’s medical agency confirmed Friday it had been the subject of a cyberattack for the past two weeks but said it will not impact its ongoing evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines.The cyberattack was originally announced Wednesday, with the agency providing few details. During an online meeting with the European Parliament, European Medicines Agency (EMA) executive director, Emer Cooke, said the agency had “launched a full investigation in close cooperation with the law enforcement officials and other relevant entities.”In a brief statement on its website, Pfizer partner BioNTech said it had been informed that some of the documents related to regulatory submission for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, which has been stored on an EMA server, had been “unlawfully accessed.” The company said it did not believe any personal data of trial participants had been compromised.Cooke said Friday, “We can assure you that the timelines for the evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccines and treatments are not impacted. And the agency as you see today continues to be fully functional.”The Amsterdam–based agency is evaluating the Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine already approved by Britain and Canada, as well as the vaccine candidate from Moderna. The agency said it will make a decision on conditional approval at a meeting to be held by December 29, while a decision on Moderna’s version should follow by January 12.Cooke said based on the data for the two vaccines so far, “the safety and efficacy look very promising, and we have not seen the adverse events coming up that would be a concern.”Earlier this week, Cooke said the vaccine developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca is also being considered but complete data for that vaccine has not yet been submitted. 
…

The U.S. added China’s biggest computer chipmaker SMIC to a blacklist of alleged Chinese military companies last week, a move that will further widen the gap between China’s chip technology and the rest of the world.Despite its status as the world’s factory, China has never figured out how to make advanced chips. In recent years, Beijing has been planning a series of sweeping government policies and pouring billions of dollars into the industry to fulfill its chip self-sufficiency goal.So far, under ever-tightening international export controls, however, the country has only found itself mired in some of the most embarrassing industrial failures in its recent history. Most notably, one of the nation’s most high-profile chipmakers was taken over by municipal authorities in its home city of Wuhan, and a Beijing-based chipmaker, the Tsinghua Unigroup, defaulted on a corporate bond.FILE – A Chinese microchip is seen through a microscope set up at the booth for the state-controlled Tsinghua Unigroup project which is driving China’s semiconductor ambitions during the 21st China Beijing International High-tech Expo in Beijing.In this highly internationally integrated industry, experts say, no country can manufacture chips on its own, and China’s efforts to develop its semiconductor sector remains out of reach.Highly globalized chainSemiconductor production is considered one of the most sophisticated manufacturing processes in the world, involving more than 50 disciplines. Billions of transistor structures must be built within a few millimeters.The core equipment used to manufacture computer chips includes lithography machines. A Dutch company called ASML is the only company in the world currently capable of producing high-end extreme ultraviolet lithography machines. Of its 17 core suppliers, though, more than half are from the United States, and the rest are companies located throughout Europe.The company is jointly owned by shareholders from dozens of countries. According to its official website, among the top three major shareholders, two are from the United States and one is from the United Kingdom. Capital Research and Management Co. is the largest shareholder, and the second largest is the BlackRock Group; both are in the U.S. Additionally, Taiwan’s TSMC and South Korea’s Samsung also hold shares in ASML, allowing these two manufacturers to enjoy the priority right to purchase the machine.   In Bid to Rely Less on US, China Firms Stockpile Taiwan Tech HardwareChina wants to become technologically self-reliant in 10 years but needs help for nowWhile ASML may dominate the chipmaking machine market, it is only one part of the long chain in the industry. The lens of its lithography machine is manufactured by Zeiss of Germany, the laser technology is owned by Cymer of the United States, and a French company provides key valves.Jan-Peter Kleinhans, a senior researcher at the Berlin think tank New Responsibility Foundation and director of the Technology and Geopolitics Project, said no country can make chips without foreign companies’ technology. He told VOA in a telephone interview that it took ASML more than two decades to develop their machines, and “they rely themselves on a network of around 5,000 suppliers to build this machine.”Kleinhans said that without the participation of any one of these companies, the entire global semiconductor chain would break.Kobe Goldberg, a researcher at the New American Security Research Center, told VOA that what China is trying to do is to build a totally nationalized supply chain in a highly internationalized industry. “That is much more difficult in an industry like semiconductors since it is so internationally integrated.”John Lee, a senior researcher at the Mercator Institute for China Studies, a think tank in Germany, said several Chinese firms already have the capacity to manufacture or fabricate some semiconductors. But they can easily face a crackdown by the U.S. government since American companies have a very strong dominance in the upstream segment of the supply chain, such as chip design.
 Huawei’s Survival at Stake as US Sanctions LoomStarting Sept. 15, China’s telecom giant Huawei will be cut off from essential supplies of semiconductors and without those chips, Huawei cannot make smartphones or 5G equipment on which its business depends, business analysts say”The dominance of U.S.-origin technology in upstream sectors of the global semiconductor supply chain means that Chinese ICT [information and communications technology] firms across the board are exposed to U.S. export controls, regardless of what happens to SMIC or Huawei as individual companies,” Lee added.Multilateral export controlThe multilateral export control implemented by democratic countries can be traced back to the informal multilateral regime called the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (CoCom).  Established in 1949, the 17-member organization, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, France and Australia, attempted to coordinate controls over the export of strategic materials and technology to communist countries. In 1952, a separate group was established to scrutinize exports to China.US Imposes Curbs on Exports by China’s Top Chipmaker SMICNew Commerce Department requirements mean American suppliers of certain technology products to SMIC must apply for individual licenses before they can exportAlthough CoCom ceased to function on March 31, 1994, the list of prohibited items it formulated was later inherited by another multilateral export agreement, the Wassenaar Arrangement, which was signed in 1996. As many as 42 European, American and Asian countries joined the program, which allows member states to exercise control over their own technology exports, and China is again included in the list of targeted countries.Last December, the group reached an agreement to add chip manufacturing technology to the list of items subject to export controls.  While this revision does not explicitly target China, it points out that export restrictions are targeted at nonmember states, while China, along with Iran and North Korea, are not member states. Some Chinese observers called the jointly implemented move a “collective action” against China by countries that dominate the chip manufacturing supply chain.The Bureau of Industrial Security of the U.S. Commerce Department also announced in October of this year that six emerging technologies would be included in a new export control under the Wassenaar Agreement. All these technologies are directly related to chip manufacturing, including extreme ultraviolet lithography necessary for advanced chip manufacturing.Martijn Rasser, a senior researcher at the Center for New American Security’s Technology and National Security Project, told VOA the world’s liberal democracies have a huge advantage in their network of alliances and partnerships, adding: “It’s something that China just completely lacks, and that’s a big, a big headwind for them.”
…

Getting a COVID test can mean long lines and delayed results. Matt Dibble looks into recent breakthroughs that may have more of us performing a test at home.
Camera: Matt Dibble       Producer: Matt Dibble
…

The head of the European Union’s medical agency confirmed Friday it had been the subject of a cyberattack for the past two weeks but said it will not impact its ongoing evaluation of COVID-19 vaccines.The cyberattack was originally announced Wednesday, with the agency providing few details. During an online meeting with the European Parliament, European Medicines Agency (EMA) executive director, Emer Cooke, said the agency had “launched a full investigation in close cooperation with the law enforcement officials and other relevant entities.”In a brief statement on its website, Pfizer partner BioNTech said it had been informed that some of the documents related to regulatory submission for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, which has been stored on an EMA server, had been “unlawfully accessed.” The company said it did not believe any personal data of trial participants had been compromised.Cooke said Friday, “We can assure you that the timelines for the evaluation of the COVID-19 vaccines and treatments are not impacted. And the agency as you see today continues to be fully functional.”The Amsterdam–based agency is evaluating the Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine already approved by Britain and Canada, as well as the vaccine candidate from Moderna. The agency said it will make a decision on conditional approval at a meeting to be held by December 29, while a decision on Moderna’s version should follow by January 12.Cooke said based on the data for the two vaccines so far, “the safety and efficacy look very promising, and we have not seen the adverse events coming up that would be a concern.”Earlier this week, Cooke said the vaccine developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca is also being considered but complete data for that vaccine has not yet been submitted. 
…

Getting a COVID test can mean long lines and delayed results. Matt Dibble looks into recent breakthroughs that may have more of us performing a test at home.
Camera: Matt Dibble       Producer: Matt Dibble
…

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission and nearly every U.S. state sued Facebook Inc. Wednesday, saying it broke antitrust law and should potentially be broken up.With the filing of the twin lawsuits, Facebook becomes the second big tech company to face a major legal challenge this fall.The FTC said in a statement that it would seek an injunction that “could, among other things: require divestitures of assets, including Instagram and WhatsApp.”In its complaint, the coalition of 46 states, Washington, D.C., and Guam also asked for Facebook’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp to be judged to be illegal.FILE – New York State Attorney General Letitia James listens to a question at a press conference in New York City, Aug. 6, 2020.”For nearly a decade, Facebook has used its dominance and monopoly power to crush smaller rivals, snuff out competition, all at the expense of everyday users,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James.James said the company used vast amounts of money to acquire such rivals before they could threaten the company’s dominance. Facebook said it is reviewing the FTC and state antitrust complaints.The company said the government “now wants a do-over with no regard for the impact that precedent would have on the broader business community or the people who choose our products every day.”The U.S. Justice Department sued Alphabet Inc.’s Google in October, accusing the $1 trillion company of using its market power to fend off rivals.The lawsuits are the biggest antitrust cases in a generation, comparable to the lawsuit against Microsoft Corp. in 1998. The federal government eventually settled that case, but the yearslong court fight and extended antitrust scrutiny prevented the company from thwarting competitors and is credited with clearing the way for the explosive growth of the internet.Facebook shares fell as much as 3% after the news before paring losses and were last down 1.7%. 
 
…

SpaceX launched its shiny, bullet-shaped, straight-out-of-science fiction Starship several miles into the air from a remote corner of Texas on Wednesday, but the 6 1/2-minute test flight ended in an explosive fireball at touchdown.It was the highest and most elaborate flight yet for the rocket ship that Elon Musk says could carry people to Mars in as little as six years.This latest prototype — the first one equipped with a nose cone, body flaps and three engines — was shooting for an altitude of up to 12.5 kilometers. That’s almost 100 times higher than previous hops and skimming the stratosphere.Starship seemed to hit the mark or at least come close. There was no immediate word from SpaceX on how high it went.The full-scale, stainless steel model — 50 meters tall and 9 meters in diameter — soared out over the Gulf of Mexico. After about five minutes, it flipped sideways as planned and descended in a free-fall back to the southeastern tip of Texas near the Mexican border. The Raptor engines reignited for braking and the rocket tilted back upright. Upon touching down, however, the rocket ship became engulfed in flames and ruptured, parts scattering.The entire flight — as dramatic and flashy as it gets, even by SpaceX standards — lasted just over six minutes and 40 seconds. SpaceX broadcast the sunset demo live on its website; repeated delays over the past week and a last-second engine abort Tuesday heightened the excitement among space fans.”Awesome test. Congratulations Starship team!” read a scroll across the screen.Musk kept expectations low going into this first high-altitude attempt by Starship, cautioning earlier this week there was “probably” a 1-in-3 chance of complete success.Two lower, shorter test flights earlier this year from Boca Chica, Texas — a quiet coastal village before SpaceX moved in — used more rudimentary versions of Starship. Essentially cylindrical cans with cone tops and single Raptor engines, these early vehicles reached altitudes of 150 meters. An even earlier model, the short and squat Starhopper, made a tiny, tethered hop in 2019, followed by two increasingly higher climbs.  
…

YouTube said on Wednesday it would start removing content that falsely allege widespread fraud changed the outcome of the U.S. presidential election, in a change to its more hands-off stance on videos making similar claims.
The update, which applies to content uploaded from Wednesday, comes a day after “safe harbor,” a deadline set by U.S. law for states to certify the results of the presidential election.
YouTube said it would start enforcing the policy in line with its approach towards historical U.S. presidential elections.
Online platforms have been under pressure to police misinformation about the election on their sites.
YouTube, owned by Alphabet Inc’s Google, was widely seen as taking a more hands-off approach than Facebook Inc and Twitter Inc, which started labeling content with election misinformation. YouTube labels all election-related videos.
After the November election, Reuters identified several YouTube channels making money from ads and memberships that were amplifying debunked accusations about voting fraud.
Last month, a group of Democratic senators asked YouTube to commit to removing content containing false or misleading information about the 2020 election outcome and the upcoming Senate run-off elections in Georgia.
Asked about how the policy would apply to Georgia elections, a YouTube spokeswoman said this policy only applied to the presidential election.
YouTube said in a blog post on Wednesday that since September it had removed over 8,000 channels and thousands of misleading election-related videos for violating its existing policies.
The company said more than 70% of recommendations on election-related topics came from authoritative news sources.
YouTube also said that since Election Day, fact-check information panels had been triggered over 200,000 times on election-related search results
…

Prominent U.S. cybersecurity firm FireEye said Tuesday that foreign government hackers with “world-class capabilities” broke into its network and stole offensive tools it uses to probe the defenses of its thousands of customers, who include federal, state and local governments and top global corporations.The hackers “primarily sought information related to certain government customers,” FireEye CEO Kevin Mandia said in a statement, without naming them. He said there was no indication they got customer information from the company’s consulting or breach-response businesses or threat-intelligence data it collects.FireEye is a major cybersecurity player — it responded to the Sony and Equifax data breaches and helped Saudi Arabia thwart an oil industry cyberattack — and has played a key role in identifying Russia as the protagonist in numerous aggressions in the burgeoning netherworld of global digital conflict.Neither Mandia nor a FireEye spokeswoman said when the company detected the hack or who might be responsible. But many in the cybersecurity community suspect Russia.“I do think what we know of the operation is consistent with a Russian state actor,” said former NSA hacker Jake Williams, president of Rendition Infosec. “Whether or not customer data was accessed, it’s still a big win for Russia.”FireEye’s Mandia said he had concluded that “a nation with top-tier offensive capabilities” was behind the attack.The stolen “red team” tools — which amount to real-world malware — could be dangerous in the wrong hands. FireEye said there’s no indication they have been used maliciously. But cybersecurity experts say sophisticated nation-state hackers could modify them and wield them in the future against government or industry targets.The hack was the biggest blow to the U.S. cybersecurity community since a mysterious group known as the “Shadow Brokers” in 2016 released a trove of high-level hacking tools stolen from the National Security Agency. The U.S. believes North Korea and Russia capitalized on the stolen tools to unleash devastating global cyberattacks.The nation’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warned that “unauthorized third-party users” could similarly abuse FireEye’s stolen red-team tools.Milpitas, California-based FireEye, which is publicly traded, said in Tuesday’s statement that it had developed 300 countermeasures to protect customers and others from them and was making them immediately available.FireEye has been at the forefront of investigating state-backed hacking groups, including Russian groups trying to break into state and local governments in the U.S. that administer elections. It was credited with attributing to Russian military hackers mid-winter attacks in 2015 and 2016 on Ukraine’s energy grid. Its threat hunters also have helped social media companies including Facebook identify malicious actors.Thomas Rid, a Johns Hopkins cyberconflict scholar, said that if the Kremlin were behind the hack it could have been seeking to learn what FireEye knows about Russia’s global state-backed operations — doing counterintelligence. Or it might have seeking to retaliate against the U.S. government for measures including indicting Russian military hackers for meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and other alleged crimes. FireEye is, after all, a close U.S. government partner that has “exposed many Russian operations,” he said.FireEye said it is investigating the attack in coordination with the FBI and partners including Microsoft, which has its own cybersecurity team. Mandia said the hackers used “a novel combination of techniques not witnessed by us or our partners in the past.”Matt Gorham, assistant director of the FBI’s cyber division, said the hackers’ “high level of sophistication (was) consistent with a nation state.”The U.S. government is “focused on imposing risk and consequences on malicious cyber actors, so they think twice before attempting an intrusion in the first place,” Gorham said. That has included what U.S. Cyber Command terms “defending forward” operations such as penetrated the networks of Russia and other adversaries.U.S. Sen. Mark Warner, a Virginia Democrat on the Senate’s intelligence committee, applauded FireEye for quickly disclosing the intrusion, saying the case “shows the difficulty of stopping determined nation-state hackers.”Cybersecurity expert Dmitri Alperovitch said security companies like FireEye are top targets, with big names in the field including Kaspersky and Symantec breached in the past.“Every security company is being targeted by nation-state actors. This has been going on got over a decade now,” said Alperovitch, the co-founder and former chief technical officer of Crowdstrike, which investigated the 2016 Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.He said the release of the “red-team” tools, while a serious concern, was “not the end of the world because threat actors always create new tools.”“This could have been much worse if their customer data had been hacked and exfiltrated. So far there is no evidence of that,” Alperovitch said, citing hacks of other cybersecurity companies — RSA Security in 2011 and Bit9 two years later — that contributed to the compromise of customer data.Founded in 2004, FireEye went public in 2013 and months later acquired Virginia-based Mandiant Corp., the firm that linked years of cyberattacks against U.S. companies to a secret Chinese military unit. It had about 3,400 employees and $889.2 million in revenue last year, though with a net loss of $257.4 million.The company’s 8,800 customers last year included more than half of the Forbes Global 2000, companies in telecommunications, technology, financial services, healthcare, electric grid operators, pharmaceutical companies and the oil-and-gas industry.Its stock fell more than 7% in after-hours trading Tuesday following news of the hack.
…

Legislation to make Facebook and Google pay media organizations for news content will be introduced in the Australian parliament on Wednesday, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said Tuesday.
 
Frydenberg said the measure would be reviewed by a parliamentary committee after its introduction and before legislators vote on it next year.
 
If the measure becomes law, Frydenberg said the internet giants must negotiate payments for content with local publishers and broadcasters. A government-appointed mediator would decide the payment terms if a deal is not reached.
 
Facebook has said it may block Australian news content instead of paying for it.
 
Google has warned the legislation would lead to “dramatically worse” search results on Google and YouTube and jeopardize free services.
 
Until recently, most countries watched companies shift advertising money to the world’s largest social media website and search engine, depriving news outlets of their primary revenue source. The dramatic decline in advertising revenue sparked a wave of closures and job losses.
 
Regulators, however, are beginning to rein in the two corporate giants, which Frydenberg said receive 80% of Australia’s online advertising spending.
…