Hong Kong Kowtows To China Again, Turns Virtual Police State Into An Actual Police State

from the cutting-edge-advances-in-bootlicking dept

The Chinese government agreed to stay out of Hong Kong's (government) business until 2047 when it took possession of the region in 1997. It has refused to hold up its end of the bargain.

Its steady encroachment into Hong Kong's affairs has been met with increasingly intense pro-democracy protests. Realizing this wasn't going to make its eventual takeover any easier, the Chinese government increased its pressure on the local government. When that wasn't working fast enough, it started replacing legislators with handpicked pro-China representatives.

When all of that still wasn't enough to get the Hong Kong populace to bend the knee, it implemented a new national security law and imposed it on the region. Being anti-China meant being a threat to national security. Pro-democracy protesters were threatened with life sentences. Pro-democracy press outlets were hassled and their leaders arrested.

Apparently, giving Hong Kong the appearance of a police state just isn't enough. If Hong Kong is going to become China 2.0 far ahead of schedule, it needs to become an actual police state.

Hong Kong's leader Carrie Lam announced a reshuffle of her cabinet on Friday, placing two ex-cops in key cabinet positions, including the police commissioner who presided over the widespread use of violence against mostly peaceful demonstrators during the 2019 protest movement.

The ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) approved the appointment of former secretary for security, John Lee, to replace Matthew Cheung as Lam's second-in-command, while former police commissioner Chris Tang was made secretary for security, the government said in a statement on its official website.

What's left of the Hong Kong government isn't willing to fight back against China's omnipresent imposition of its will. Handing the security of the nation over to police officials who encouraged the use of violence against protesters makes it clear the Chinese government is done fucking around. I mean, it never really was. But it's done making incremental changes.

The remnants of Hong Kong's government are on the side that has the power. Insect overlords are just what the region needs.

Asked if Hong Kong had become a police state, as evidenced by the new appointments, pro-Beijing lawmaker Alice Mak dismissed journalists' concerns.

"If it’s a police state, why not? I don’t think there’s any problem with a police state," Mak said. "When we say a police state, I will view the other side, that is the emphasis on security."

The only thing experiencing any insecurity is the Chinese government, which likely viewed the region as a pushover when it took control in 1997. It probably expected pockets of resistance, but whatever plans it had in place prior to its agreement-violating putsch apparently didn't scale well enough to keep Hong Kong's population silent and compliant.

With cops heading the national security team, there's nothing holding the police back. The national security law greatly expanded law enforcement's powers. Jackbootstrapping the government's national security oversight ensures officers will never have to fear reprisal for their actions, pushback for overstepping whatever boundaries remain, or any judicial roadblocks slowing them down as they inflict China's worst aspects on their fellow countrymen.

Filed Under: carrie lam, china, democracy, hong kong, national security law

Chinese Government Now Using National Security Law To Censor Art Being Displayed In Hong Kong

from the less-freedom-for-all;-tiny-Chinese-flags-for-others dept

Hong Kong's new "national security" law -- thrust on it by the Chinese government that's supposed to stay out of Hong Kong's governmental business until 2047 -- continues to increase the amount of censorship in the supposedly still-independent region.

Once the Chinese government began interfering, Hong Kong residents revolted. This only encouraged the Chinese government to apply a heavier hand. The new law allows prosecutors to seek life sentences for anti-government protesting. It also hands police the power to censor the internet and compel assistance to decrypt communications.

To further ensure its desires go unchallenged, the Chinese government adopted a resolution that forced four pro-democracy legislators out of office in Hong Kong. This led to another dozen sympathetic lawmakers resigning from their positions in protest. Unfortunately, this means there are even fewer Hong Kong politicians willing to stand up to the Chinese government's impositions.

The national security law has already enabled the punishment of dissent, censored the internet, silenced pro-democracy press, and ousted pro-democracy legislators. Now it's coming for culture, seeking to limit Hong Kong residents to government-approved creative works.

The updated rules announced Friday require Hong Kong censors considering a film for distribution to look out not only for violent, sexual and vulgar content, but also for how the film portrays acts “which may amount to an offense endangering national security.”

Anything that is “objectively and reasonably capable of being perceived as endorsing, supporting, promoting, glorifying, encouraging or inciting” such acts is potential grounds for deeming a film unfit for exhibition, the rules now say.

This gives China-approved censors the freedom to forbid anything they perceive as being anti-China. And it's not just limited to content. The rules also allow films to be censored if the perceived "effect" of viewers of the work might cross the multiple lines the Chinese government says now threaten the security of the nation.

The new rules have already had their intended impact on theaters and filmmakers, including those participating in an annual Hong Kong film festival.

A local cinema was pressured into scrapping the screening of a documentary on the fierce clashes between police and radical protesters occupying the Hong Kong Polytechnic University at the height of the social unrest, while the M+ Museum in the city’s cultural hub came under similar pressure not to show exhibits deemed to be anti-China art.

In a separate development on Friday, organisers of the Fresh Wave International Short Film Festival, which nurtures local young film talent, cancelled its screenings for Far From Home, saying the Office for Film, Newspaper and Article Administration had failed to issue either a certificate of approval or notice of refusal to approve in time.

And so it continues. China isn't going to wait until 2047 to take control of Hong Kong. It wants subservience now. The pro-democracy protests that have rocked Hong Kong for the past few years will continue. But it looks as though China's national security mandates will ultimately turn Hong Kong into a directly controlled subsidiary of the Chinese government a couple of decades ahead of schedule.

Filed Under: censorship, china, culture, free speech, hong kong, national security

G7 And Technical Standards: Blink And You Might Have Missed The New Battleground

from the governments-encroaching dept

Amid all the news about the third wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic and the politics behind the vaccination roll out, you might have missed the Ministerial Declaration from the G7 Digital and Technology Ministers’ meeting. As per tradition, the G7 Digital Ministerial provides the opportunity for the seven richest countries of the world to declare their commitments and vision on the type of digital future they would like to see. The document is non-binding but it has the tendency to provide some useful insights on the way the G7 countries view digital issues and their future positions in multilateral fora; it is also informative of other, more formal, multilateral processes. On 28 April 2021, a statement was made addressing key technology issues and opportunities including security in ICT supply chains, Internet safety, free data flows, electronic transferable records, digital competition and technical standards.

Yes, you read that right - technical standards. In the last several years technical standards have moved from the realm of engineers into wider politics. News stories have been replete with China’s efforts to become a competitive force on 5G, AI and facial recognition standards and its wish to be developed internationally based on their national rules, culture and technology. But the public eye turned more closely to China when it was discovered that the facial recognition standards being developed by China in the UN system were from countries on the US sanctions list and used by China for monitoring Uighurs.

None of this is new. For the past few years and for anyone who has been paying attention, China has been strategically positioning itself in various standards bodies realizing that shifting from a unipolar to a multipolar world order cannot happen unless it is capable of demonstrating a more strategic and competitive approach to the domination of the west. What was the tipping point, however, that made the seven richest countries in the world offer explicit language on standards inserted into their declaration? Everything seems to be pointing to the "newIP" standard proposal, recommending a change in the current Internet technology, that was put forward by Huawei and supported by China in the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). Although this new standard did not manage to pass the ITU’s study group phase, it did raise the eyebrows of the West. And, rightly so. 

Historically, Internet standards have paved their own path and have majorly managed to stay outside of politics.  In one of the earliest Requests for Comments (RFC), the definition of a standard was specific and narrow:  a standard is “a specification that is stable and well-understood, is technical competent, has multiple, independent and interoperable implementations with operations experience, enjoys significant public support, and is recognizably useful in some or all parts of the Internet”. 

Traditionally, governments have had a hands-off approach in the development and deployment of standards related to the Internet; their development was part of the consensus-based, community-driven process developed and nurtured by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and their deployment was left to the market.  A standard’s life has always depended on its utility and contribution to the evolution of the Internet. 

This seems to be the case less and less. Over the past years, governments have shown increasing interest in the development of standards, and have sought ways to inject themselves into Internet standardization processes. There are two distinct ways that this trend has emerged. First, there's China, which actively seeks to displace the current Internet infrastructure. That was clear in the attempt with the “newIP” proposal. China has been strategic in not directly suggesting a complete rejection of the Internet model; instead, its claims have been that the Internet cannot meet future technologies and needs and, therefore, a new infrastructure, developed  and nurtured by governments, is necessary. The second trend continues to support the open, market-driven standards development processes, but seeks ways for governments to be more actively involved. This, so far, has mainly been interpreted as identifying ways to provide incentives for the creation and deployment of certain standards, often those deemed strategically important. 

Even though these approaches reflect different political and governance dimensions - China supports a top-down approach over the West’s bottom-up model - they do share one commonality: in both cases, politics are becoming part of the standardization process. This is entirely unlike the past 30 years of Internet development. 

This could have significant implications in the development and future of the Internet. There are benefits from the current structure: efficiency, agility and collaboration. The existing process ensures quick responses to problems. But, its main advantage is really the collective understanding that standards are driven by what is “good for the Internet”; that is, what is required for the Internet’s stability, resilience and integrity. 

This doesn’t mean that this process is perfect. Of course, it comes with its own limitations and challenges. But, even then, it is a tested process that has worked well for the Internet throughout most of its existence. It has worked - despite its flaws - because it has managed to keep political and cultural dimensions separate. Participants, irrespective of background, language, and political persuasion have been collaborating successfully by having the Internet and what's good for it, as their main objective. 

On the contrary, intergovernmental standards are driven by political differences and political motives. They are designed this way. This is not to say that governments should not be paying attention to the way standards are developed. But, it is crucial to do so in ways that do not seek  to upend a model that is tested and responsive to the needs of the Internet. 

Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis is the Senior Director, Policy Strategy and Development at the Internet Society.

Dominique Lazanski is the Director of Last Press Label, and a Consultant in International Internet and Cybersecurity Standards and Policy.

Filed Under: china, g7, governments, internet standards, multistakeholder, politics, standards

Chinese Government's Hacker Competition Is Being Used To Find Exploits To Wield Against Uighur Citizens

from the aiding-and-abetting dept

Anything the Chinese government can weaponize against its Uighur Muslim population, it will. And has. Further details about an iPhone exploit discovered by Chinese hackers show the Chinese government got into the bug bounty program solely to find vulnerabilities to wield against the government's least-liked residents.

Patrick Howell O'Neill's article for MIT Technology Review points out Chinese hackers used to participate in popular hacking competitions like Pwn2Own, providing invaluable assistance to tech companies and tech users by finding vulnerabilities that could be patched before they were exploited by malicious hackers.

In 2017, Chinese participation in international competitions came to a halt. The founder and CEO of tech giant Qihoo 360 publicly criticized Chinese hackers for helping foreign tech companies find and patch security flaws. The CEO suggested this talent should stay at home and help the government find vulnerabilities to exploit.

That's exactly what has happened. The Chinese government banned participation in foreign hacking competitions and started its own. The first homegrown event was won by a researcher working for Qihoo 360, who found an exploit that allowed malicious actors to take control of even the latest iPhones simply by steering the iPhone user to a webpage containing malware.

This was patched two months later by Apple, quietly and with little attention drawn to it. But incidents occurring in the two months between the discovery and the patch didn't go unnoticed. Google's security researchers observed unusual activity and wrote about it.

[I]n August of [2019], Google published an extraordinary analysis into a hacking campaign it said was “exploiting iPhones en masse.” Researchers dissected five distinct exploit chains they’d spotted “in the wild.” These included the exploit that won Qixun [of Qihoo 360] the top prize at Tianfu, which they said had also been discovered by an unnamed “attacker.”

Now, more details about that string of attacks has been revealed. And it shows the Chinese government took the winning exploit and weaponized it against its Uighur population.

Shortly after Google’s researchers noted the attacks, media reports connected the dots: the targets of the campaign that used the Chaos exploit were the Uyghur people, and the hackers were linked to the Chinese government. Apple published a rare blog post that confirmed the attack had taken place over two months: that is, the period beginning immediately after Qixun won the Tianfu Cup and stretching until Apple issued the fix.

This has now been confirmed by another source: the US government. Its surveillance agencies also picked up on the malicious hacking efforts and noted their targeting of China's favorite target of oppression. And it was the government's intervention that sped up Apple's response to the exploit.

The US quietly informed Apple, which had already been tracking the attack on its own and reached the same conclusion: the Tianfu hack and the Uyghur hack were one and the same. The company prioritized a difficult fix.

This is the sort of cooperation one prefers to see. The federal government has often portrayed Apple as an enemy -- not just of agencies like the DOJ, but of the American public. In this case, the government worked with Apple to stop attacks on foreign citizens by a foreign government. The Chinese government made the most of this exploit for two months -- one it obtained through a homegrown hacking competition that appears to exist solely to create offensive tech weapons for state-ordained hacking.

Meanwhile, the hacker who discovered the exploit and collected the cash (all while working for the company whose CEO called for Chinese hackers to stop helping foreign companies and start helping The Man stick it to locals and foreign adversaries) is trying to distance himself from the damage his exploit has wrought.

When we contacted Qixun Zhao via Twitter, he strongly denied involvement, although he also said he couldn’t remember who came into possession of the exploit code. At first, he suggested the exploit wielded against Uyghurs was probably used “after the patch release.”

Both of these claims are untrue. And both have been debunked by both independent research and US government surveillance. While it's unwise to tangle with the Chinese government by refusing to hand over discovered vulnerabilities, it's probably a little easier to sidestep that obligation by sitting out government-sponsored hacking competitions. In the end, this isn't the researcher's fault. The government chose to use it this way. But anyone entering a Chinese government-sponsored hacking competition is likely well aware any discoveries they make will be weaponized by an extremely oppressive government.

Filed Under: china, exploits, hackathon, hackers, hacking competition, surveillance, uighurs
Companies: apple

China Pushing Explicitly-Biased Facial Recognition Standards And Local Tech Companies Are Pitching In To Help

from the [clippy-bmp]-it-looks-like-you're-trying-to-commit-genocide dept

Facial recognition tech is plagued by bias, most of it unintentional. That's why it tends to perform more poorly when attempting to recognize minorities and women. Law enforcement doesn't tend to view these problems as bugs since it, too, operates with many of the same biases. But these are usually the byproduct of faulty inputs, which can be exacerbated by choices made by end users.

In China, the bias is the point. The Chinese government's persecution of its Uighur population has seen local tech companies tasked with providing surveillance tools that single out Uighur Muslims so the government can more efficiently control them.

Huawei is building a system that provides the government with "Uighur alarms" whenever a suspected Uighur passes in front of the government's millions of cameras. According to Huawei, this is still in the testing phase, which means nothing more than there's a plan for it to be put to use. Even if it's no more accurate at identifying Uighurs than it is at identifying criminals, it will likely be good enough to put to real-world use. Collateral damage to innocent residents isn't the sort of thing that slows surveillance rollouts in China.

China wants even more facial recognition power. And it has several partners willing to help it out, even if it means the tech will be used to oppress people, rather than protect people from things like crime and security threats.

China enlisted surveillance firms to help draw up standards for mass facial recognition systems, researchers said on Tuesday, warning that an unusually heavy emphasis on tracking characteristics such as ethnicity created wide scope for abuse.

The technical standards, published by surveillance research group IPVM, specify how data captured by facial recognition cameras across China should be segmented by dozens of characteristics - from eyebrow size to skin color and ethnicity.

"It's the first time we've ever seen public security camera networks that are tracking people by these sensitive categories explicitly at this scale," said the report's author, Charles Rollet.

New standards issued by the Chinese government mandate detection of certain traits, including ethnicity and skin color. These mandates don't just affect the cameras the government owns. They also require this tech be built into cameras operated by private businesses and residential structures.

And it's no longer limited to areas where the Uighur population is largest. It's intended to cover the entire country. The standards issued by the government don't specify which ethnicities the government is most interested in, but other documents seen by IVPM spell it out pretty explicitly.

The police standards above only mention "ethnicity" in the context of China's 56 official ethnic groups. Uyghurs are not explicitly mentioned by these standards, despite the fact that Chinese police often integrate Uyghur-detecting AI software in their security camera networks.

However, a Chinese facial recognition company, Bresee, which is owned by Uniview's parent company TransInfo, uploaded an explainer to its website that "EthicCode" is meant for tracking Uyghurs and Tibetans ('Zang' people in Chinese) specifically.

As is always the case when more details come out about the Chinese government's latest tech company aided affront to humanity, the tech companies named have stepped up to offer very carefully worded non-denials. Here are two US government blacklisted surveillance camera manufacturers (Dahua and Hikvision) not denying they will be contributing to the deployment of tech targeting certain ethnic groups.

Dahua described as "false" media reports that it had helped draft government standards for detecting individual ethnic groups.

"Dahua was not involved in creating the database section of the document that mentions ethnic groups," the company added in an emailed statement.

Asked about the IPVM report, a Hikvision spokesman said the company was "committed to upholding the highest standards and respect for human rights".

"As a manufacturer that does not oversee the operation of our products, we do ensure our cameras are designed to protect communities and property," he added.

Dahua: We didn't write the standards we will be following. Hikvision: Hey, we just make the stuff. Pretty much the upper extent of backbone allowed by an authoritarian government that isn't going to take "no" for an answer. That's why the mandates exist. And if these companies want to continue to exist, they'll do what they're told.

Filed Under: china, facial recognition

PC Game 'Devotion' Is Back, Now Being Sold Directly By The Developer

from the going-direct dept

Late last year, we discussed a disappointing move by GOG to delist well-reviewed horror PC game Devotion from its platform. Making it all very odd were the facts that GOG had just announced that morning that the game would be available that day, as well as Devotion's previous delisting from Steam. The reason for the multiple delistings was never perfectly spelled out in either case, but the game includes a reference to China's President Xi and the never ending joke that he resembles Winnie the Pooh. GOG, instead of being open about that being the obvious reason to delist the game, instead said it made the move after receiving "messages from gamers." Groan.

Well, fortunately, this is 2021, which means instead of the game dying on the doorstep of well-entrenched gatekeepers, developer Red Candle Games can instead just release the game itself on its own website.

After running into nothing but trouble on other people’s platforms, the game’s developers have decided to just sell the game themselves, opening up an online store for international customers that is selling digital, DRM-free copies of Devotion, their previous game Detention, as well as soundtrack bundles for both.

Despite all the complaints from the industry about how the internet serves only to flood the universe in copyright infringement, this is the transformative power of the internet. Gatekeepers that add value can still find a place for themselves, as GOG and Steam have certainly done. But when they try to shut down the distribution of content for cowardly business reasons, well, the developer can just route around them and sell directly to the consumer. Honestly, it's mostly surprising that this has happened more often in the past and become the norm.

For its part, Red Candle Games does plan on this being the norm for them moving forward.

And, really, why not? The developer has been bitten in the ass twice now when it comes to distributing through the big online players, both times over the hurt feelings of a honey-mad, cartoon maybe-bear President of China. Why not just go it alone and keep from having to put up with all of this nonsense.

The bigger question is, of course, just how successful this will be. If Red Candle Games can demonstrate that it can go it alone in this way, showing that routing distribution through the likes of Steam and GOG aren't always the best path, that could lead to more experiments like this... or a change in the distributors behavior.

Filed Under: china, devotion, direct sales, drm free, president xi, video games, winnie the pooh
Companies: gog, red candle games, valve