Blog post 1: On the topic of internet control and regulation

By Yves Wienecke January 13, 2019

SiliVaccine

Twitter user Martyn Williams was sent an e-mail with and alleged North Korean antivirus software from 2013 attached and laced with additinal malware from a person claiming to work as a software engineer at a Japanese security company. Williams then forwarded the software, named 실리왁찐 (SiliVaccine) to Checkpoint researchers, who took it to their labs for research and analysis.

1. Sketchy e-mail with SiliVaccine [1]

After analyzing the software, researchers discovered that about 25% of the antivirus software’s source code was identical to an older verson of a Japanese antivirus software: Trend Micoro. As for the remaining code, researchers found many bugs and conflicting functionality. For example, attempts to scan a file by right-clicking the file and selecting an option on the drop-down menu resulted in no activity.

In order to understand the purpose for such a software in a country like North Korea, it is important to understand the current state of technology in the country. To give some background, in North Korea, technology is heavily controlled and regulated by government officials. North Korea has a firm hold on the access and type of media that citizens are able to access. The internet is banned widespread usage among North Korean citizens; instead North Korea makes use of an intranet that, in contrast to the outwardly, public-facing internet, is a private network isolated from other countries.

With this in mind, it may seem baffling as to the reasons for which North Korea employs the usage of an antivirus - after all, if North Korean servers are blocked from the outside world and vice versa, then the potential for threat and cyber attack incidences should drop quite dramatically. Checkpoint researchers explained that the enclosed North Korean intranet is not immune to unwanted software as a result of the efforts of human rights organizations such as Flash Drives for Freedom who accept USB drive donations and smuggle these USBs across the border filled with western media such as wikipedia articles, Korean soap operas, more.

2. “Importing hope into North Korea, one USB drive at a time” [2]

North Korea’s control over the content that citizens are able to view raises an interesting question about the role of government in regulating content shared over the internet. In the case of North Korea, where viewing banned material is punishable by public execution, governmental control is an obvious breach of rights. However, in places outside of the DPRK, the ethics of regulating the internet is not so black and white.

The Great Firewall of China [3]

Following suite in censorship of media, China is notorious for its usage of a strict firewall that restricts major website such as Google, Facebook, and Youtube. On one hand, Chinese alternative platforms such as weibo and baidu receive greater traffic and Chinese support. On the other hand, citizens and people travelling through China are forced to go against Chinese law and use a VPN in order to bypass the firewall to access their e-mail on google or watch the latest update from a youtube blogger. This is a huge roadbloack for minority group who seek community and content from western sites, such as LGBT youth in China. [3]

Regulation of websites has some advantages: protecting national security from hate or terrorist groups, and restricting access to website that sell illegal products or offer illegal services. However, when it is the government that has the final say on what gets goes or gets blocked, regulation becomes a slippery slope that can lead to censorship of view critical of the current politics and propaganda. In fact, Google came under fire last year for enabling China’s restrictive firewall with work on Project Dragonfly.

Project Dragonfly

Not too long after employees of Google protested the company’s collaboration with the American military for using artificial intelligence along with drones to identify human targts, the tech giant was placed under scrutiny once again for working with China on a search engine, named Dragonfly. [4] This variant of the google search engine would greatly expand the userbase and boost revenue for Google on the condition that the engine agree with Chinese censorship laws and internet regulation. This would silence peaceful protests or produce misleading results for topics that may cast the government in a bad light. Searching on such asn engine for information on Tiananmen Square would return no result insteading the greusome reality of the government demolishing groups of protesters.

Google is not the only company guilty of interacting with China despite ethical concerns. After being banned in China in 2009, Facebook has been attempting to develop relationships with Chinese companies to expand their market in China. These attempts involve sharing data with Chinese companies such as Huawei - a company that is in close contact with the Chinese government. Due to concerns of cyber espionage from microscopic cards on Huawei phones, the company is now unofficially banned from being sold in America by large telcom companies like AT&T and Verizon.

Internet regulation in America

Government regulation of a large platform for discussion and expressing one’s opinions presents the potential for abuse of power and overregulation. Although some regulation is necessary to uphold current laws against illegal activities like the circulation of child pornography, it is easy for regulation to hinder free speech. The discussion over regulating the internet is especially concerning due to the natural state of the internet: ever changing and rapidly dynamic. Internet trends and jokes can sometimes last mere days before changing focus to something completely different.

It seems that there is a deficit in the discussion of internet regulation of lawmakers and government officials who are qualified and highly knowledgeable about the today’s technology and the innerworkings of the internet. Virtual space is new and can not be approached the same way as physical space. For example, copyright laws on youtube videos and laws regarding net neutrality stir mixed emotions amongst internet users, lawmakers, and companies. Furthermore, decisions on regulation laws have the potential for setting positive or negative precedent, which will impact the way in which the Internet is controlled in the future.

Future Steps

I believe that it is integral to promote discussion between organizations dedicated to technology and the internet, and lawmakers. Active public discourse over future state of internet regulation should be held to include the various perspectives of not only businesses and corportations, but also users. The impact of regulation reaches nearly every American, but it is unfathomable to expect every technology user to understand the details and implications of internet regulation.

However, there are a number of well-informed users such as content creators on youtube, website masters, contributors to open source software, and podcast hosts, who could enlighten and provide advice to lawmakers for approching technology topics. The internet is a very powerful tool that is a part of the fabric of daily life for many Americans, so I believe that decisions regarding its regulation should include voices from many Americans. Regardless of how the future of regulation progresses, I hope that companies will better prioritize ethics and humanity rather than threatening democracy for revenue.

---

Sources

[1] Perekalin, Alex. “SiliVaccine: Antivirus from North Korea.” Kaspersky Lab official blog, 9 Jan. 2019, usa.kaspersky.com/blog/35c3-dprk-antivirus/16942.

[2] Miller, Joshua Rhett. “Importing hope into North Korea, one USB drive at a time.” New York Post, 17 Mar. 2017, nypost.com/2017/03/17/importing-hope-into-north-korea-one-usb-drive-at-a-time/.

[3] i-D. “China’s Youth Breaking Through the Great Wall.” Youtube, 15 Feb. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Buk8h5ijysQ.

[4] Shane, Scott, Daisuke Wakabayashi. “‘The Business of War’: Google Employees Protest Work for the Pentagon,” The New York Times, 4 Apr 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/technology/google-letter-ceo-pentagon-project.html.

[5] LaForgia, Michael, Gabrial J.X. Dance. “Facebook Gave Data Access to Chinese Firm Flagged by U.S. Intelligence.” The New York Times, 5 Jun 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/technology/facebook-device-partnerships-china.html.