Artificial Intelligence and the China-U.S. Rivalry

Feb 12, 2022

• 

  Leonardo Dinic

  Advisor to the CroAsia Institute

Developments in artificial intelligence will completely transform government management, economic security, social stability, and global governance. With this, it is safe to say that the country that reaches an artificial intelligence ‘breakout point’ in the coming decades will likely dominate global politics and commerce. 

Artificial intelligence is incredibly useful for civil and military applications, which often eliminates a clear distinction for usage. Any AI model that is developed for civil purposes can quickly become appropriated for military use. China recently submitted a position paper to the UN Convention of Certain Conventional Weapons requesting increased regulation of the military applications of AI. However, an international framework for AI is yet to emerge. 

An example of civil and military synthesis of AI technology is face-detecting technology which can be used for security checkpoints or for personal devices like mobile phones, but can also be used to identify and eliminate key individuals in a war or battlefield scenario. Chinese satellites can already take photos three times faster than that of their U.S. counterparts. 

The Beijing-3 satellite can snap photos of extensive areas and identify any military vehicle or weapon while rotating up to 10 degrees per second. The Chinese military is also quickly ‘catching up’ in tactical applications such as unmanned shooting systems, robot combatants, and airspace simulators. While the U.S. began this type of research and development nearly 20 years ago, the CCP is quickly closing the gap with developments in AI and machine learning systems. 

Both the CIA and the PLA are actively working to develop AI systems that will be able to deploy hundreds, if not thousands, of drones at the push of a button. They are also examining the possibilities of creating robotic warriors that could be more effective than human soldiers in the future. 

In the U.S., the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) found that when a fighter jet flown by AI went up against a human controlled jet, the AI flown jet won every single time. 

Therefore, in wartime scenarios, artificial intelligence will be able to speed up decision-making, increase precision, and reduce reaction times, though the possibility of miscalculation also becomes a concern in the event that the AI is wrong. 

In terms of AI implementation in the civil space, China, for better or for worse, has significantly outpaced the West. 

The CCP launched its Social Credit System back in 2014 to monitor the behavior of ordinary citizens and use it for offering benefits or limiting privileges. The entire social credit system is founded in facial recognition and big data analysis technology ultimately fueled by AI algorithms. 

Similar projects have not yet been implemented in the West, at least not overtly. The coming months and years will reveal whether or not similar AI innovations will serve as a central pillar in the European and American visions for the ‘Great Reset.’ 

Advanced technologies like artificial intelligence will likely have the greatest impact on economic and security. China outperforms the U.S. in key indicators like product market tests, financial market tests, research publications, patents, and results in international competitions.  

Also, U.S. capital supports almost all large tech companies in China, specifically Baidu, Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance – TikTok’s parent company. 

Regardless of the civil or military application, China has become the ‘Saudi Arabia’ of data because of its massive consumer base and the increased usage of applications by almost all of China’s citizens. Quality data has become as important as any other commodity in the AI race. 

This importance will only continue to grow as the AI market size continues to increase by USD 17.29 billion from 2020 to 2025, with an accelerated CAGR of 35%. North America will likely register the highest growth during this period. North American supremacy could last until 2027. However, Asia-Pacific will likely register the highest CAGR over this period, mostly because of invention launches and increases in requests for products and development expenditures. 

The device market is already driving innovation, most notably in smartphones, cameras, robots, wearables, smart speakers, automotive, smart mirrors, and computer processors. However, AI is also quickly disturbing smart home, government, healthcare, industrial, aerospace and defense, and the construction industries. 

With respect to U.S.-China competition in the artificial intelligence space, many U.S. officials, including Nicolas Chaillan, the former chief software officer of the U.S. Air Force, fear that the U.S. might lose the ‘AI race’ against China because Washington is not aggressive enough in its funding or support of crucial AI projects. In contrast to the centralized nature of Chinese R&D, most innovation in the U.S. happens in the private sector, which is not always developed or facilitated by the U.S. government. This ‘decoupling’ between the private and public sectors often creates delays and information gaps between important parties. The U.S. still leads in the military aspect of AI, but this could quickly change since China is fueling its innovation with big data, digital surveillance, and cloud computing. 

Until recently, the U.S. held solid leads in talent, research, development, and hardware, while China excelled in adoption and data quantity and quality. However, China has managed to leapfrog ahead of the U.S. slowly and will likely overtake America in the coming years. The first country to acquire an artificial intelligence ‘strategic weapon’ will have a massive edge in security and the global economy.  

Artificial intelligence innovation will continue to rapidly change the landscapes of all of these sectors, while simultaneously transforming security and civil life. 

If the U.S. plans to retain its leadership, it should empower the Department of Defense (DOD) to make more of an effort to drive innovation through research and development funding. The U.S. government should actively expand its partnerships with the private sector, academic, and non-governmental institutions to improve its ability to drive innovation in AI. Otherwise, China’s strengths will continue to propel it forward as an AI leader. 

Information TechnologyTechnologyU.S.-China Rivalry

Time for a Time-out in Promoting U.S. Exceptionalism

Feb 12, 2022

• 

  Philip Cunningham

  Independent Scholar

On January 6, 2022, U.S. President Joe Biden made the uncharacteristically blunt accusation that his predecessor Donald Trump has been “holding a dagger at the throat of America.” He further added, in his comments timed to mark the first anniversary of a mob-led attack on the U.S. Capitol, that Trump was waging an “undemocratic” campaign not unlike the actions of autocrats and dictators far from home. 

The details of the January 6 attack, linked closely to the machinations and scheming of the then lame-duck President Trump make for chilling, fascinating reading, with the very stakes of America’s future as a democracy in the balance. The die-hard Trump supporters who could not countenance their leader losing came close, perhaps closer than most people realize, to destroying America’s hallowed tradition of a peaceful transfer of power after elections and threatened to make a mockery of America in the eyes of the world. 

How ironic that America, struggling to keep alive its tarnished, idiosyncratic and much-diminished political system known as “democracy” at a tender juncture where political violence is lurking its head in the shadows, should continue to wag the finger at China and other countries for not being “more like us.” 

Maybe this would be a good time for the U.S. State Department, led by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, to call a time-out on the time-tested U.S. penchant for hectoring and belittling China and other countries for not doing things the American way. 

Maybe this would be a good time to reset U.S. diplomacy and rhetoric to reflect the reality that we live in a multipolar world in which the U.S. standard is no longer the gold standard. 

Maybe this would be a good time to stop sowing hatred against China and other countries that dare to disagree, dare to do things differently, and call a moratorium on the righteous bully pulpit hectoring. 

The veteran diplomat Chas W. Freeman recently spoke about how the U.S. is not only tone-deaf in dealing with China, but at risk of damaging itself, and even more ominously, at risk of creeping into a self-destructive state of war. He deplores the lack of depth of Biden’s diplomatic picks, including Antony Blinken and Victoria Nuland, both of whom have outsized roles in dealings with China and Russia, and both of whom he characterizes as demagogues without serious diplomatic experience, trained instead in the hot house of U.S. domestic politics as boosters for the Democratic Party. 

He described the Summit on Democracy, hosted by Blinken, to be ironic, “because our own democracy is clearly in bad shape.” He goes on to say the U.S. is “evaluated internationally as having a partially failed democracy. So, this is an odd moment to be attempting to trumpet the virtues of the system we ourselves are abandoning.” 

As a witness to history as the translator for Nixon during his 1972 trip to China, Freeman is thoroughly intimate with the complex and nuanced policy challenges that the Cold War posed for keeping the peace. But the peace was kept, and peaceful rivalry flourished, and the U.S.-China relationship eventually became the anchor for the global economic order. Ambassador Freeman concludes that it is a fool’s errand to attempt to go out and start banging the drum for democracy and thus “reorganize the world along ideological lines—democracies versus authoritarian regimes or non-democracies” and he condemns the whole conceit in a word: “ridiculous!” 

Freeman knows that diplomacy is not easy, but as a seasoned diplomat he sees no reason for the world’s democracies to make things more difficult for themselves by provoking conflict with countries which, according to U.S. diktat, don’t qualify. The Republic of the Congo was invited to the democracy summit, Thailand and Singapore were not. While this might curry favor with a particular leader in Africa, it sets back U.S. diplomacy in Southeast Asia. 

Freeman notes that autocratic regimes have a hard time building coalitions—they are primarily concerned with self-preservation and survival—so it doesn’t make sense for the U.S. to push them closer together, as it is currently doing with China and Russia. What’s more, in this age of embattled democracy, even within U.S. shores, it would be prudent and circumspect to stop trying to whip the world into an ideological line, and instead focus on fixing the broken system at home. 

President Biden is known to be a conciliatory man, but with a fifty-fifty split in Congress and an opposition party that will go to absurd lengths to oppose and sabotage cooperation, these are not conciliatory times. The situation is grave and there is serious work to be done at home. 

Instead of decrying the Belt and Road Initiative, the U.S. needs to get real about rebuilding its own broken, antiquated infrastructure. Instead of attacking Huawei for its potential market dominance in 5G and hampering its ability to sell phones, it should promote domestic industry to come up with rival products that will win in a free marketplace. Instead of chasing Chinese scientists and scholars out of the U.S. under blanket accusations of espionage and theft, the U.S. would be wise to build on its excellent system of tertiary education to continue winning the hearts and minds of the world’s scholars as it did in the past. 

The tasks confronting the broken U.S. system are many, but its broken democracy is making diplomacy difficult, and real communication is getting as challenging at home as abroad.  In ideological terms, the U.S. shows signs of veering into a destructive civil war, in which each domestic faction adopts a “my way or the highway” approach to civic discourse. 

The attitude is quintessentially American, but also self-destructive. 

America’s rugged individualism, which has contributed to so much that is good and creative about the U.S., is not without its toxic side, as anti-vaxxers and Trump “truthers” demonstrate with abject lack of concern for others during the depths of a pandemic which requires social cooperation to stem. 

It’s time for a time-out on touting U.S. democracy as the best system of governance bar none. Even though the U.S. system has great merits it’s also a great mess right now.

DemocracyAmerican Politics

States Will Consider More Than 210 Bills on Toxic “Forever Chemicals” in 2022

At least 32 states will consider more than 210 bills related to per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

SUMETEE THEESUNGNERN / EYEEM / GETTY IMAGES

BY Kristina Marusic, 

Environmental Health News

PUBLISHED February 11, 2022

Protecting people from exposure to toxic “forever chemicals” will be a top priority for new state regulations throughout the U.S. in 2022, according to a new analysis.

The analysis, published by the Safer States network, found that at least 32 states will consider more than 210 bills related to PFAS (per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances), making regulation of the chemicals one of the most prevalent issues in state policy making this year.

PFAS are a class of more than 9,000 compounds with similar properties. They’re used in everything from clothing and carpeting to nonstick pots and pans, furniture, cosmetics and personal care products, and food packaging containers. PFAS don’t readily break down once they’re in the environment, so they accumulate human bodies over time. Exposure to PFAS is linked to cancer, thyroid disease, high cholesterol, pregnancy-induced hypertension, asthma, and ulcerative colitis.

Testing has found PFAS in everything from chocolate cake and leafy greens to yoga pants and sports bras, makeup, and drinking water throughout the country.

“State legislatures recognize the severity of the toxic PFAS crisis we’re facing and they’re taking action,” said Sarah Doll, national director of Safer States, in a statement. “States continue to lead the way in addressing these serious problems with urgency and innovative solutions.”

States Step Up on PFAS

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has promised to regulate PFAS more strictly at the federal level. Efforts to do so are underway, but many health advocates say the process is moving too slowly. In the meantime, states are taking action to protect residents from harmful exposures.

The 32 states considering policies related to PFAS in 2022 include Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

According to the Safer States analysis:
At least 19 states will consider policies to regulate the use of PFAS, like restricting their use when it’s avoidable, requiring disclosures when the chemicals are found in consumer goods, or restricting their use in specific categories like cosmetics, textiles, and food packaging (AK, CA, CO, HI, IA, IL, MA, MD, MI, MN, NH, NC, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT, WA, and WI).
At least 17 states will consider policies related to PFAS cleanup, management, and accountability, such as designating the chemicals as hazardous, restricting their disposal, or allocating resources toward cleanup (AK, CA, FL, IL, IN, MA, ME, MD, MI, MN, NH, NC, OK, RI, VT, WA, and WI).
At least 19 states will consider legislation related to PFAS in drinking water, groundwater, or soil (AK, AZ, CT, FL, IA, IN, KY, ME, MN, NC, NH, NY, OH, RI, SC, VA, VT, WV, and WI).
At least three states will consider policies that ban PFAS in products labeled as recyclable (HI, MD, and NJ)
At least 6 states will consider policies that strengthen existing safe chemical policies for cosmetics or children’s products (CA, MA, MI, NY, VT, and WA)

“In Michigan, PFAS and other ‘forever chemicals’ have impacted my community for decades,” said Michigan State Senator Winnie Brinks (D-Grand Rapids) in a statement. “We’ve made significant strides in assessing the scope of the problem statewide and filtering PFAS out of drinking water.”

“However, there’s still so much to be done to stop contamination at its source, to require businesses to find alternatives to these harmful chemicals, and to create fair timeframes during which people who’ve been harmed can seek justice,” Brinks added. “We also need stronger laws that send a message to corporate polluters that profits never come before public health.”

PFAS in Consumer Goods

The analysis comes on the heels of novel testing from EHN.org and wellness community Mamavation that found evidence of PFAS in makeup, sports bras, and yoga pants and leggings.

And just last month the non-profit Toxic-Free Future found that almost three-quarters of 47 pieces of outdoor apparel, bedding, and kitchen linens that were marketed as stain- or water-resistant contain one or more PFAS.

“I’ve seen first-hand how the market is impacted by state policies on toxic chemicals,” said Mike Schade, director of Toxic-Free Future’s Mind the Store program, in a statement. “It’s wise for retailers to get ahead of the curve and mitigate potential risks by taking action right away.”

Kristina Marusic
Kristina covers environmental health and justice issues in Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania. Prior to joining Environmental Health News, Kristina covered issues related to the environment and social justice as a freelancer for a wide range of digital media outlets including The Washington Post, Slate, Vice, Women’s Health, MTV News, The Advocate and Bustle.

Labor Caucus Calls for Passage of PRO Act to Stop Starbucks’s Union Busting

Rep. Donald Norcross speaks during a press conference advocating for the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act in the House of Representatives on Capitol Hill on February 5, 2020, in Washington, D.C.

SAMUEL CORUM / GETTY IMAGES

BYSharon Zhang,

  Truthout

February 11, 2022

The Congressional Labor Caucus has called on the Senate to pass a sweeping bill that would strengthen U.S. labor laws in response to Starbucks’s increasingly brazen union-busting tactics over the past weeks.

The House representatives are demanding the passage of the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, a bill championed by the labor movement that would make it easier for workers to organize and form unions.

“We have had it with corporate spokespeople and lobbyists saying they’re pro-worker when asking for meetings on Capitol Hill, while at the same time using every trick in the book to stop unionizing efforts cold in their tracks,” the caucus said in a statement. “Workers have the right to organize – it’s time they had a level playing field to do so.”

The House passed the legislation last March, but due to uniform opposition from the GOP and several Democratic holdouts in the Senate, including Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Arizona), it currently stands little chance of passing into law.

Lawmakers in favor of the PRO Act have lamented the weak state of the country’s labor laws.

“There hasn’t been any real meaningful change in labor law in over half a century,” Labor Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Donald Norcross (D-New Jersey) told Truthout. When it comes to union-busting moves like Starbucks’s mass firing of what the union says was the entire organizing team at a Memphis store, “there is no real recourse in terms of punitive damages,” he went on.

Starbucks Workers United has filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) over the terminations, calling the firings the company’s “most blatant act of union-busting yet.” Norcross called the company’s move an “amateur error,” especially considering that the company has been working with at least 30 lawyers from one of the country’s most notorious union-busting law firms.

“It’s ridiculous. You know, you’re paying eight bucks for a cup of coffee. The CEO made $20 million last year and [the company] won’t even talk to them about organizing to give their employees a voice,” Norcross said. “Stupid is probably the nicest thing I can say about Starbucks right now.”

But even if the NLRB finds that Starbucks violated federal labor laws mandating that companies can’t retaliate against workers for organizing, the punishment for the $100 billion company would be little more than a slap on the wrist. The only liability for Starbucks would be that they would have to give the fired workers back pay, which is no more than the usual cost of operations.

The PRO Act would implement harsher penalties for companies that violate labor laws and would place further restrictions on the actions that companies can take to union bust. Many of its provisions would directly make Starbucks workers’ union campaign easier – among other things, the bill would outlaw captive anti-union meetings, which Starbucks has been conducting in stores across the country.

Despite the current state of labor laws, however, the company’s attempts to break up organizing efforts may still backfire. The firing is “more empowering than anything for those workers,” Norcross said.

Indeed, the day after the terminations, workers in Oklahoma City said in their union campaign announcement letter to CEO Kevin Johnson that the firings only added fuel to the fire of their movement.

“This termination was blatant retaliation, and while it was meant to discourage the formation of the committee we are announcing today, it has only emboldened us and highlighted the need for this union even more,” the workers wrote. Several stores have filed to unionize since the termination, bringing the current total to about 80 locations.

The more attention the union campaign gets, the more support it seems to pick up. On Thursday, four New York City area stores filed to unionize – and with their campaign announcements, 76 New York lawmakers, including members of Congress like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D), signed a letter to Johnson asking the company to adhere to non-interference principles laid out by the union.

Harvard’s Sexual Harassment Lawsuit is About Free Speech for Students

Three Harvard University graduate students filed a lawsuit over allegations of sexual harassment by a longtime anthropology professor.

BY LEXI MCMENAMIN

FEBRUARY 11, 2022

TEEN VOGUE

NTZOLOV

This month, a controversy at Harvard University — which has been brewing for years — boiled over. On February 8, Harvard University graduate students Margaret Czerwienski, Lilia Kilburn, and Amulya Mandava filed a lawsuit in federal court against the university, alleging that anthropology professor John Comaroff had “sexually harassed students for years” and “[intimidated] students by threatening their academic careers if they reported him,” as reported by The New York Times.

Comaroff was placed on unpaid leave in January, when the university announced it found that the professor had violated Harvard’s sexual harassment and professional conduct policies, as reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education. Comaroff categorically denied the accusations and criticized Harvard’s handling of the situation, accusing the university of a “failure to accord [him] a fair process.”

Initially, Comaroff had other defenders on campus. Thirty-eight Harvard professors, including notable names like Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Jill Lepore, issued a letter of support for him.

In response to the circulating letter, Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences dean Claudine Gay noted the dangers of taking a public stand on the allegations “without a comprehensive understanding of the facts.” Then came the Times report. In the days since the details of the lawsuit were published, 34 of the letter's 38 original signees have retracted their support.

The letter itself caused a firestorm on campus, prompting 73 other Harvard faculty members to release a letter of their own in support of the three women. “As is evident from the letters written in his support, Professor Comaroff is a scholar with a powerful network of friends and colleagues,” the letter read in part. “This raises the question of why three graduate students would go public with their complaints against him and willingly subject themselves to protracted, grueling, and potentially career-ending investigations.” Good question — one often not considered enough before questioning the veracity of a harassment accusation.

The backtracking of those 34 professors is perplexing. At the time of their signing, allegations of sexual misconduct against Comaroff were widely reported locally (though not to the detail revealed upon the lawsuit filing). The allegations had been covered by The Harvard Crimson, the campus newspaper, including one especially thorough report that was published nearly two years ago, in the spring of 2020. In that piece, Comaroff was presented as part of a wider problem with gender disparities and discrimination in Harvard’s anthropology department; at the time of publication, he was one of three then-tenured professors facing accusations of sexual misconduct.

In their defense, the apologetic professors pointed to the lack of transparency around university procedure for pursuing Title IX complaints of sex-based discrimination. But that rationale isn’t good enough. They claim they “failed to appreciate the impact that this would have on our students” and admit they “[lacked] full information about the case,” but they don’t actually apologize for their actions.



Nicole Bedera, Ph.D., a sociologist at the University of Michigan who studies sexual violence on the structural level, tells Teen Vogue she believes the signers’ actions constitute "a form of harassment" she says is likely to have a chilling effect on future victims coming forward. This creates a truly un-free situation for speech, in the opposite direction of what the professors may have intended.

“If students see their classmates mistreated and retaliated against when they come forward, that will inform their own decisions about whether to report,” says Alexandra Brodsky, staff attorney at Public Justice and author of Sexual Justice. “It's incumbent on the open letter's signatories, and the Harvard administration, to act swiftly and smartly to remedy the letter's chilling effects. An unapologetic retraction is unlikely to cut it.”

Commentators like Nicole Froio, Ph.D., who studies sexual violence and masculinity, contextualized Czerwienski, Kilburn, and Mandava’s lawsuit as representative of a structural tendency in academia to enable and perpetuate the exploitation of grad students. The complaint describes that allegedly hostile environment in detail: It claims that Harvard already knew about sexual misconduct allegations against Comaroff at his previous institution before hiring him in 2012; stalled on its own investigation until the Crimson was preparing its 2020 report; that Comaroff retaliated against those speaking out; and that Harvard obtained Kilburn’s therapy records and gave them to Comaroff, who then used that material to disparage her.

Comaroff’s legal team tells Teen Vogue he “categorically denies ever harassing or retaliating against any student,” and says he “was never the subject of any Title IX or other complaint” at his previous institution. He also says, via his legal team, that he did not request access to any medical records and “[takes] strong issue with Ms. Kilburn’s representation, in the complaint, of the role the records played in the ODR process.”

Harvard also issued a statement, on February 10, disputing the allegations in the lawsuit and standing behind its findings. The statement detailed the university's policies surrounding the sharing of medical records, noting that all guidelines were followed, in response to the allegations related to Kilburn’s therapy records.

Sofia Andrade, Harvard sophomore and arts chair of the Crimson, tells Teen Vogue the ripple effect of the crisis is already being felt on campus. “As a student looking to soon start the thesis-advising process, it was incredibly concerning to read those 38 professors, many of whom my friends or I could have once considered advisors, so vehemently defend someone who has had credible allegations against him from multiple women, even since his last job,” Andrade says. “More than anything, it really makes you question who academia serves.”

Title IX, the federal civil rights law that dictates how schools that receive federal funds should address gender disparity, is an imperfect system; its shortcomings, and the larger questions raised by stories like that of Comaroff, are felt at higher-education institutions nationwide. “This story is a lot bigger than Harvard. This is the normative experience of victims who try to report sexual harassment, especially if they are graduate students in a tightly knit program,” says Dr. Bedera, who tweeted a thread detailing suggestions for how faculty can support students around sexual misconduct.

When I was in college, a professor at another university invited me to interview for an internship. At the end of the day — in a city where I didn’t know anyone, outside a hotel where I was staying alone — he kept me locked in his car with him for hours, asking me prying, intimate questions, apparently expecting me to stay. I left as soon as I could; he did not give me the internship.

The confused shame I felt after that experience, which certainly could have gone worse, held me back from pursuing new opportunities, such as applying to grad school at that professor’s institution, thinking I had squandered all the opportunities provided to me. One day, years later, out of curiosity, I googled the professor’s name: He had been fired earlier that year after several misconduct allegations against him were made public.

With sudden clarity, I felt I had permission to try again. Looking back, I made it to exactly where I needed to be. But I mourn the years my fear took from me, especially since I never reported the interaction, having no idea who even to tell, and worried the professor, a respected figure in the industry, would ruin my career. “Victims regularly face retaliation, invasions of privacy, and punishment for their decision to come forward,” Dr. Bedera says, describing “the burdens of reporting sexual harassment.”

“We need to overhaul these systems to ensure that reporting doesn't mean sacrificing safety or an education or a career,” she continues. “Victims have been wronged and deserve support with as little intrusion as possible on their lives. Reporting should be the beginning of a sigh of relief, not the start of a new nightmare.”

Want more from Teen Vogue? Check this out: The Modern American University Is a Right-Wing Institution

Jennifer King Breaking NFL Barriers For Black Women

By Newsy Staff
February 11, 2022

King is the first Black female assistant coach in the NFL and the first Black woman to act as a lead-position coach during an NFL game.

This Black History Month, Newsy is celebrating those who have made strides even in the face of adversity. We're highlighting assistant running back coach for the Washington Commanders, Jennifer King. Not only is King the first Black female assistant coach to be hired by an NFL team, this past season she became the first Black woman to act as a lead-position coach during an NFL game. She spoke with Newsy about her trailblazing career.

NEWSY'S LINDSEY TUCHMAN: Thank you so much for being here with us this morning. We just want to know first how you got to this point and what's your story?

JENNIFER KING: Yeah, thanks for having me. It's been a wild journey to get here. I started in college basketball and coached college basketball for about 10 years and ultimately met Coach Ron Rivera when I got my head coaching job in Carolina, and it kind of took off from there. So you know, I've had stops in Carolina twice, at Dartmouth, in Arizona and now entering year three in D.C.

NEWSY'S ROB NELSON: What do you think it means for other folks of color to see you — particularly young women, young girls of color — to see you in this position.

KING: I think it's important. You know, ultimately, I made a decision to be the representation I didn't have. I know I take it seriously and I know the other women in the league take it seriously, as well, that we're their representation now so little kids, little girls can see us working and if they want to be football coaches, they have representation now.

TUCHMAN: Yeah, that's exceptionally important. And there's has been a lot of news, though. So your team recently went under a name change, now known as the Washington Commanders. How do you feel about this decision finally being made?

KING: It feels good. You know, obviously it's a tough decision and you can't make everybody happy with the decision, but I'm happy with it. And I think, you know, we're ready to go into a new era and I think our uniforms look really good. So that's exciting. But we're ready to go.

NELSON: It should be an exciting season for a lot of reasons. And listen, you know, the NFL obviously has been in the news lately dealing with some diversity issues. I'm just curious as to how you see your role in that and how you would describe the league's efforts in terms of diversity beyond players, but folks like you in the coaching and management ranks.

KING: I think, obviously, there's always work to be done. The league has a women in football forum put on by Sam Rapoport, which helps identify women who want to work in football, and it's not just coaching, but all aspects of the business. But you know, obviously on the coaching side, there's a lot of work that needs to be done for diversity. I'm excited to be kind of at the ground level now, hopefully a new era. You know, there's things that need to be adjusted with how we're hiring people, but I think that the league is committed to it and hopefully we can get all the ownerships and everything available as well.

NELSON: Very cool. And now back to the game that you love. For those of us who love football, but don't, you know — at 5’8” I was never going to be a real threat on the field — so for those of us who love the game, but don't know quite how it works for someone in your position as a coach, what is your daily flow like once the season really gets cracking over the summer?

KING: We have really long days. I think that's something people don't realize. They only see us playing games, but I mean we work 16 hours a day sometimes — more just to make sure we're prepared for Sunday. So it's a lot of work that goes into what we do and super-long days, so it's not glamorous at all. When you see us at the game, you know, we had a long week before that.

TUCHMAN: Yeah, and speaking of a long week, there are some people getting ready for an exciting game on Sunday. The Cincinnati Bengals take on the L.A. Rams in the Super Bowl. We've got to know who you're rooting for.

KING: I guess being in the league, I don't really have a preference. I have friends on both sides so I really just want to see a good game. We had Super Bowls kind of get out of hand lately, so hopefully we'll have a nice game and you know, I wouldn't mind seeing it end on the last play. I just want to be entertained.

NELSON: And I assume this time next year we'll be talking about the Commanders' Super Bowl appearance in Super Bowl LVII. Right?

KING: I like that. That sounds good to me.

NELSON: All right. Jennifer King, assistant running backs coach for the Washington Commanders, thanks so much for being with us. We appreciate it. Best of luck to you and to the team.

KING: Thank you.

GT Exclusive: Hidden frontline: Bing Dwen Dwen was used as bait for cyberattacks at Beijing 2022

By Cao Siqi

Published: Feb 11, 2022 10:15 PM

Cyber security. Photo: IC

The Beijing 2022 Winter Olympic Games has reached its halfway point with athletes from all over the world showing the brilliance of competitive sports. Apart from these intense competitions in the venues, fierce battles were also launched in a "hidden frontline" - cyberspace.

Cybersecurity experts from Qianxin, a leading Chinese security firm which bears the task of safeguarding the information infrastructure during the Beijing 2022, shared with the Global Times on Friday their experiences during the past days, and one of the most unforgettable was to resist attacks from hackers under the cover of Bing Dwen Dwen, the panda-shaped mascot.

While the unprecedented opening ceremony was being held at the Bird's Nest on February 4, a team of elite cybersecurity experts were sitting backstage, guarding against any possible attacks under minus-10 C like "soldiers."

The Global Times learned from the company that they established 11 teams of special forces consisting of 1,500 experts 30 days ago and already launched the cybersecurity services 800 days ago, as the Olympic Games has also become a stage for hackers to show their "skills." For example, during the 2016 Rio Olympic Games, the websites of the government and sponsors were attacked by APT hacking groups and a large amount of data was leaked.

In a dark house at the Bird's Nest, Li Xubin and his team are in battle mode. Within two hours, the team gathered and analyzed about 110 million pieces of information recorded in thousands of operating, database systems uninterrupted. By sorting out the information and conducting correlation and behavior analyses, the team monitored, alerted and dealt with attacks and threats in real time, ensuring "zero accidents" for the opening ceremony.


Qianxin's cybersecurity command center for Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics. 

Photo: Courtesy of Qianxin

On February 5, the Chinese team won the 2,000-meter short track speed skating mixed team relay, claiming the first gold medal of the Beijing Winter Olympics for the Chinese sports delegation and achieving a good start for the country in the new year.

"That night, when the Chinese team stormed to the championship, there was a surge in traffic across live broadcast systems. We detected a suspected attack on the telecom operator's system and dealt with it in 13 minutes with the help of SkyEye, our new generation threat perception system," cybersecurity expert Bai Yongshuai said.

Through attack and defense penetration and data analysis, SkyEye could accurately discover known advanced network attacks and unknown new types of hosts and servers in the network, using threat intelligence, machine learning and other technologies based on network traffic and terminal logs.

During the Winter Olympics, telecom operators are responsible for communication services, scheduling and command, and live events. Any security incident may cause serious consequences. At the opening ceremony of the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang on February 9, hackers disrupted the internet and broadcasting systems, took down the Olympic website for several hours, temporarily disabled local Wi-Fi around venues and disrupted live coverage of the opening ceremony.

In response to the cyberattack, the Pyeongchang Olympic Organizing Committee quickly shut down internal web servers and the official website completely. The official website was not restored until 8 am the next day.

The success of the Beijing Winter Olympic Games has not only promoted a large number of athletes, but also brought the mascot - Bing Dwen Dwen - to be a buzzword on the internet. Legions of enthusiastic fans are trying to find ways to buy their beloved mascot as the cute panda has been sold out in China, and even overseas.

Jack, a threat analyst from the company who is also a fan of Bing Dwen Dwen, found a clue while checking terminal alarms: a computer frequently accessed an unknown IP address in the past two days. Experience told him that the computer was very likely to fall in a trap.

After further investigation, Jack found the IP address pointed to a website about the Winter Olympics, where the words of sales of Bing Dwen Dwen leapt to his eyes.

It turned out that it was a phishing website where the hackers forged the page of the Winter Olympics and seduced victims to access the page under the disguise of selling Bing Dwen Dwen.

Once the victims registered their information, hackers can use the phishing page to steal their names, ID numbers, bank card numbers, payment passwords, and verification codes, and send the stolen information back to the attacker's server, Jack said.

Phishing sites are just the tip of the iceberg in cyber threats during Beijing 2022.

According to a prediction from experts at Digital World Consulting, a Beijing-based consulting company specializing in the cybersecurity industry, since the Beijing 2022 does not sell tickets to foreign audiences, which will make demand for live broadcasts of events in other parts of the world very prominent, it is estimated that at least 500 million cyberattacks are likely to happen during the Games.

Such an estimate was based on the situation in the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 when the Cyber Threat Alliance said attacks to the Tokyo Olympics would be enhanced as hackers believed the cybersecurity capability was weak at that time, especially amid the increasing demand for livestreaming broadcasts.

The Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics saw around 450 million attempted cyberattacks when the events were held in the summer of 2021, Japan-based Kyodo News reported in October 2021.

ARCHAEOLOGY

Heritage sites in Africa threatened by climate change

Heritage of Outstanding and Universal Value located along the African coast is at risk from climate change.

A global team of climate risk and heritage experts, where Dr Nicholas Simpson from the University of Cape Town’s (UCT) African Climate and Development Initiative (ACDI) was one of the leading contributors, have provided the first comprehensive assessment of exposure of African cultural and natural Heritage Sites to extreme sea levels and erosion associated with accelerating Sea Level Rise.

The team invested a year identifying and painstakingly mapping the physical boundary of 284 African coastal heritage sites. They then modelled the exposure of each site at future global warming scenarios.

They found 56 sites (20%) are at risk from a one-in-100-year extreme sea-level event including the iconic ruins of Tipasa (Algeria) and the North Sinai archaeological Sites Zone (Egypt). The paper’s authors shared: “By 2050, the number of exposed sites is projected to more than triple, reaching almost 200 for high emissions”.

At least 151 natural and 40 cultural sites will be exposed to the 100-year event from 2050 onwards, regardless of the warming scenario. The authors explained: “There are several countries which are projected to have all their coastal heritage sites exposed to the 100-year coastal extreme event by the end of the century, regardless of the scenario: Cameroon, Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Western Sahara, Libya, Mozambique, Mauritania, and Namibia”.

Under the worst-case scenario, this is also true for Côte d’Ivoire, Cabo Verde, Sudan and Tanzania. They added: “This is very concerning because none of these countries currently demonstrate adequate management or adaptive capacity to anticipate or establish heritage protections commensurate with the severity of these hazards”.

A co-author on the paper shared: “Small island heritage sites are especially at risk. For example, Aldabra Atoll, the world’s second-largest coral atoll, and Kunta Kinteh Island (The Gambia) could both see significant amounts of their extent exposed by 2100 under high emissions raising questions of their survivability under climate change.” 

The results highlight the importance of climate change adaptation and mitigation responses to protect and reduce the exposure of these iconic heritage sites. The authors explained: “If climate change mitigation successfully reduces greenhouse gas emissions from a high-emissions pathway to a moderate emissions pathway, by 2050 the number of highly exposed sites can be reduced by 25%. This would be a significant saving in terms of Loss and Damage from climate change”.

The authors highlighted: “These findings help with prioritising sites at risk and highlight the need for immediate protective action for African Heritage Sites; the design of which requires in-depth local-scale assessments of vulnerability and adaptation options. Urgent climate change adaptation for heritage sites in Africa includes improving governance and management approaches; site-specific vulnerability assessments; exposure monitoring; and protection strategies including ecosystem-based adaptation”. Find out more

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

Header Image Credit : Shutterstock

Court gives 'Freedom Convoy' truckers until 7 PM EST to vacate Ambassador Bridge -- or risk possible arrest

Brad Reed
February 11, 2022

Truckers and supporters on foot arrive at Parliament Hill in Canadian capital Ottawa on January 29, 2022 to protest government vaccination mandates(AFP)

A Canadian court on Friday told the anti-vax truckers occupying the Ambassador Bridge in Ontario are being given until this evening to vacate -- or risk potentially getting arrested.

CBC Windsor News 6 reporter Katerina Georgieva brings word that an injunction against the protesters occupying the bridge has been granted and will take effect starting at 7 p.m.

Additionally, the Windsor Police Department has put out a new warning to the demonstrators that they could soon be arrested if they don't leave the bridge.

"We are providing notice that anyone blocking streets or assisting others in the blocking of streets may be committing a criminal offence and must immediately cease further unlawful activity or you may face charges," the department said. "You could be arrested if you are a party to the offence or assisting others in the direct or indirect commission of this offence."

The police also warned the demonstrators that their vehicles could be seized, and said that any Americans who get arrested may be denied reentry to their native country.

Earlier on Friday, Ontario Premier Doug Ford declared a state of emergency in his province and issued a new order aimed at ending the truckers' siege of Ambassador Bridge.

WATCH: Ontario's right-wing premier dodges questions about why he went snowmobiling during trucker siege

Brad Reed
February 11, 2022

Conservative Ontario Premier Doug Ford on Friday declared a state of emergency in his province and told the anti-vaxx "Freedom Caravan" protesters blocking access to key bridges to vacate the area and go home.

However, Ford faced some tough questions about his actions over the last week, particularly about what he decided to do last weekend when the trucker protest was turning into a full-blown crisis.

The trouble for Ford began when CTV reporter Colin D'Mello pointed out that Ford went snowmobiling last weekend despite the fact that he described the anti-vax mandate protests as "a siege" and Ottawa police described them as an "insurrection."

"Let me make it clear, Colin, I've been on this phone almost 24-7, along with the premiers, the U.S. ambassadors, the prime minister around the clock," a defiant Ford replied. "Make no mistake: I have been engaged from the second that this has happened. I'll be continuing being engaged."

"Fair enough, but you are not dismissing what I'm saying here," D'Mello replied. "I'm asking you, premier, were you snowmobiling on Saturday, in Cottage Country, while Ottawa was under siege?"
ADVERTISEMENT

"Let me tell you, Colin, I was at the cottage, I went out on my snowmobile... I take calls until one o'clock in the morning, I get calls before six o'clock in the morning, and I will not stop until we get this taken care of," he said.

Watch the video below.

Canada’s 2 Biggest Parties Have a ‘Freedom Convoy’ Problem. Conservatives Especially.

Many Conservatives have voiced support for the convoy, which is largely unpopular among Canadians.

By Anya Zoledziowski

VICE CANADA
TORONTO, CA
11.2.22


CONSERVATIVE MP PIERRE POILIEVRE HAS ACCUSED PRIME MINISTER JUSTIN TRUDEAU OF TRYING TO SILENCE THE FREEDOM CONVOY IN OTTAWA. 

On Jan. 31, Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre took a selfie with people holding Canadian flags near Parliament in Ottawa. They were supporters of the “freedom convoy” that’s currently laying siege in the country’s capital, demanding an end to all COVID-related restrictions.

“These are the people the media and [Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau want to silence,” Poilievre wrote on Twitter. “Bright, joyful, and peaceful Canadians championing freedom over fear on Parliament Hill.”

Poilievre, the Conservative Party leadership frontrunner, is one of several Tory politicians who’ve voiced unequivocal support for the protests, which have not been all that peaceful.

For two weeks, hundreds of devoted members of the anti-vax trucker convoy have paralyzed Ottawa’s downtown core, blared their horns incessantly, and harassed residents. Convoy members have flown flags with swastikas, taken a shit on a lawn adorned with a pride flag, and are allegedly responsible for 200 reported hate crimes. Ottawa is currently under a state of emergency. Elsewhere, convoyers have shut down two of the busiest ports of entry on the US-Canada border.

All of this, under the guise of “freedom” and getting the economy running.

The movement started out as a protest against new rules that make it mandatory for truckers travelling across the US-Canada border to be fully vaccinated. But it quickly devolved into chaotic action against all COVID restrictions—and against many federal politicians that the convoyers don’t like, especially Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. It comes at a time when Omicron levels are levelling off and COVID restrictions in Canada are already starting to loosen—but thousands of Canadians are still hospitalized, even as the situation steadily improves.

Conservative politicians have largely failed to condemn the racism, homophobia, and harassment that has been connected to the movement today, with some—though not all—calling for sympathy and 

Meanwhile, the U.S. is applying pressure on Canada to clear out the blockades clogging ports of entry at the U.S.-Canada border.

During a snap parliamentary debate on Monday night, interim Conservative Party leader Candice Bergen said Canada is “more divided than ever” and blamed Trudeau for it. She also suggested that Trudeau called people “misogynists” and “racists” simply because they didn’t get the vaccine. (She’s since asked for the blockades to come down because they’re damaging international commerce at the border.) Alberta Conservative MP John Barlow has also voiced support for the convoyers, tweeting they are “grabbing this moment in our history.”

Amid all of the chaos, federal Conservatives opted to oust Erin O’Toole as their leader because he was viewed by many as too liberal. Some experts think it was really bad timing.

“Why would you dump the leader of an official opposition in the middle of a rapidly evolving conflict that could devolve into a crisis?” said Melanee Thomas, a political science professor with the University of Calgary.

O’Toole didn’t manage to unseat Trudeau during the last federal election, so Conservatives are likely trying to appeal to their perceived base so that they win government in the future, two experts told VICE World News, and their approach to the “freedom convoy” highlights that tension. Now, the question is: what identity will they cement? A fiscally conservative but socially progressive one, like what O’Toole was trying to do—or one that’s decidedly more to the right, and taps into the same anti-government anger Donald Trump exploited. It’s a soul-searching expedition that has the potential to backfire on their own party—and on all Canadians, too.

“It wont bode well for the party—or for the rest of us,” Thomas said.

Conservatives haven’t set boundaries

One of the main problems, according to Thomas, is that Conservative leaders haven’t concretely defined the Conservative Party’s values. So, you have MPs like O’Toole taking a more hard-lined stance against racism, while other MPs try to avoid the subject.

That means the party as a whole is failing to condemn fringe, far-right values promoted by some of the convoy’s leaders, Thomas said, adding that MPs are “playing footsies” with extremists “because they don’t want to lose a potential voter or donor.”

“You’re fully prepared to stand with someone holding a Nazi flag, if not shoulder to shoulder, then a few blocks away from them,” Thomas said.

Some MPs and their supporters have tried to push back on criticisms, saying the convoy isn’t “anti-vax” or racist, but rather “anti-mandate.” As University of Toronto political science professor Eric Merkley put it: “Not everyone believes that the truck convoy is motivated by unsavoury individuals. They don’t trust the media's representation of the convoy as accurate.” Conservatives, who are already “badly split,” might be scared to speak out against the convoy because they don’t want to lose voters who are tired of the pandemic and believe the trucker convoy is really about freedom, Merkley said.

Many sitting Conservatives might also believe that because the far-right People’s Party of Canada (PPC) stole some of their votes during the last election, it’s important to win them back.

“It’s a myth that the PPC lost them the campaign, so therefore they have to get those voters back,” Merkley said. “Supporting the convoy and what not could be seen as curing that, but I think it's mistaken.”

Thomas said by failing to condemn the trucker convoy’s nastiness, the Conservatives have created the impression that they might welcome fringe views.

“In the absence of political elite and leaders repudiating the far-right, that means they’re prepared to open up the tent.”

According to Thomas, it’s a poor long-term strategy: Canadian political parties need moderate, non-partisan voters on their side to win elections since about half of Canadians don’t have a strong party affiliation.

“Let the fringe go. It’s not a winning strategy,” Thomas said. She pointed at Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, who has spent practically his entire term pandering to the fringe right and the anti-vaccine mandate folks. Today he is the second least popular premier in Canada, and his party is receiving significantly fewer donations than the left-leaning NDP.

All Canadians affected

In the meantime, a lot of people have been making comparisons between the rallies in Canada and the Jan. 6 Capitol riot in the U.S. According to Merkley, Canada is better positioned to stave off a U.S.-style political crisis because Canadians don’t tend to support political parties with the same intensity as Americans.

“That’s not to say it can't happen in the future,” Merkley said. “But I have a lot of faith that politicians want to get elected and want to win power,” and in Canada federal parties need to win over progressive constituencies in the Greater Toronto Area and Vancouver if they want to hold office.

More concerning is how the Conservative approach to the anti-government convoy will play out for the rest of Canadians. Thomas said she’s worried that they have the potential to erode trust in democracy, including in the Prime Minister's Office.

According to the University of Calgary professor, the convoyers are creating space for extremists to galvanize their own support and gain mainstream legitimacy, which could further divide Canadians. Far-right organizers and conspiracy theorists have been attached to the convoy movement since its inception.

“We should be more honest with ourselves, frankly,” Thomas said. “Canadians like to say we aren't like the U.S. and we aren't as racist, and that attitude has allowed all of this to fester…. We aren't doing ourselves a service if we don't acknowledge that that stuff is very much a reality here too.”

On Twitter there are already several posts of people of colour saying they are frightened by the freedom convoy. One South Asian trucker told VICE World News he’s too scared to take his usual route across the Alberta-Montana border because he doesn’t want to interact with convoyers.

There is also a risk that when COVID restrictions inevitably loosen—already a reality in Saskatchewan and Alberta—the convoy will take credit, Merkley said.

“If you can go and shut down the capital and change policy, that would really erode trust.”

Trudeau likely won’t benefit

Ultimately, the freedom convoy doesn’t represent Canadians—or truckers. About 90 percent of truckers are vaccinated, and most Canadians spent the pandemic wearing masks and getting vaccinated. A recent survey by pollster Leger found that 62 percent of Canadians oppose the convoy.

“It’s important to reiterate that as distressing as these convoys are, they aren’t representative of Canadians or even conservatives. We are not as polarized as some people think we are,” Merkley said.

But just because the Conservatives could end up shooting themselves in the foot, it doesn’t mean Trudeau is better off. He’s been largely absent during the Ottawa occupation and now two of his MPs have broken ranks and spoken out against their leader’s approach to the situation.

“I don't think there is a scenario where this situation helps Trudeau. It’s out of control,” Merkley said. “Long-term, though, the convoys could very well be beneficial for the Liberal Party, but that depends on what the Conservative Party does.”

Follow Anya Zoledziowski on Twitter.

We’re looking for mom vans too!' Right-wing extremists recruiting parents for chaotic trucker convoys
Travis Gettys
February 11, 202

Supporters of the Canadian truckers' protest against Covid-19 vaccine mandates pulled in front of the Parliament building in Ottawa on January 28, 2022

White nationalists and anti-vaxxers are cooking up a protest in the U.S. similar to one that has wrought havoc in Canada.

Right-wing activists have effectively shut down Ottawa's downtown and the U.S.-Canada border with big-rig trucks to protest COVID-19 safety measures, and American conservative media outlets have celebrated the demonstration -- which some want to copy, reported Mother Jones.

“You don’t have to be a trucker,” said Denis Aguilar, founder of the anti-vaccine Freedom Angels Foundation and the far-right women’s group Mamalitia. “We’re looking for mom vans, too!”

Emboldened activists in the U.S. are planning convoys on Telegram, including one set for March 1 in Washington, D.C., and are hoping to enlist families and children for moral support.

“Have some music and get involved with your community,” Aguilar posted on TikTok. “Truckers make the world go round, and if anyone is going to put a stop to these mandates, it’s them — just watch what Canada’s doing.”

Mother Jones obtained Telegram posts from groups in Southern California planning chaotic demonstrations to pressure the government to drop public health mandates, and these activists are citing the Ottawa demonstration as an inspiration.

“It’s critical that we understand why the Canadian protest is so effective, so we can do the same in the United States,” wrote the leader of one Los Angeles group. “It was not the convoy itself, but the occupation of Ottawa and the resultant economic and psychological effects on the Canadian government that is effective.”

“We Americans need to grow out of our tendency to prioritize 'performative protest' and flashy stunts for social media clout," that person added, "and instead focus on the systems and institutions responsible for our oppression and how to best disrupt them.”

Many of the individuals involved in these plans have posted blatantly racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic content as they plot their disruptions, even as they encourage parents to enlist their children and slip convoy messages into classroom Valentine's Day treats.

“I showed my boys the video of the trucker who shared the card and cookies donated by a family and they want to do the same,” one member wrote. “Please let me know how I can get them to the truckers.”

Extremist groups have been using vaccine and masking mandates, as well as fears of critical race theory, to draw parents into their orbit, and the organizing groups have exploded in membership from hundreds to tens of thousands as the Ottawa demonstration rages.

“These people are PTA presidents, moms, everyday families,” said one source who monitors the organizing groups. “And they are working together with white nationalists.”

These cybercriminals plant criminal evidence on human rights defender, lawyer devices

There's more than one way to silence civil rights activists, it seems.


Written by Charlie Osborne, Contributor
Posted in Zero Day on February 11, 2022 | 

Cybercriminals are hijacking the devices of civil rights activists and planting "incriminating evidence" in covert cyberattacks, researchers warn.

According to SentinelLabs, an advanced persistent threat (APT) group dubbed ModifiedElephant has been responsible for widespread attacks targeting human rights activists and defenders, academics, journalists, and lawyers across India.

The APT is thought to have been in operation since at least 2012, and over the past decade, ModifiedElephant has continually and persistently targeted specific, high-profile people of interest.

However, rather than focusing on data theft, the APT's activities are far more sinister: once inside a victim's machine, the group conducts surveillance and may plant incriminating files later used to prosecute individuals.

"The objective of ModifiedElephant is long-term surveillance that at times concludes with the delivery of 'evidence' -- files that incriminate the target in specific crimes -- prior to conveniently coordinated arrests," the researchers say.

SentinelLabs has identified "hundreds of groups and individuals" targeted by the APT.

ModifiedElephant starts an infection chain with spear-phishing emails. These emails contain documents laden with malware, including the NetWire and DarkComet remote access trojans (RATs), as well as keyloggers and an Android Trojan.

SentinelLabs has connected the dots between previously unattributable attacks and says that while ModifiedElephant has operated under the radar for so long, there is an "observable correlation between ModifiedElephant attacks and the arrests of individuals in controversial, politically-charged cases."

While the malware used by the threat actors is considered "mundane" and not particularly sophisticated, a number of the APT's victims have also been targeted with NSO Group's Pegasus surveillanceware, the subject of an explosive investigation by Amnesty International, Forbidden Stories, and various media outlets in 2021.

While attribution isn't concrete, the team says that ModifiedElephant activity "aligns sharply with Indian state interests."

"Many questions about this threat actor and their operations remain; however, one thing is clear: Critics of authoritarian governments around the world must carefully understand the technical capabilities of those who would seek to silence them," SentinelLabs cautioned. "A threat actor willing to frame and incarcerate vulnerable opponents is a critically underreported dimension of the cyber threat landscape that brings up uncomfortable questions about the integrity of devices introduced as evidence."