G
Dutch police have arrested a 40-year-old man on suspicion of hacking... after they accidentally sent him a link granting him access to their own confidential documents.
Who is the bigger plonker? The police for sharing a download link, or the guy who demanded a "reward" for the return of the files?
Meanwhile, the UK has signed contracts worth over £800 million with Palantir for NHS and Ministry of Defence systems. British MPs are now asking awkward questions about why their due diligence has reached such a different conclusion.
Switzerland chose sovereignty over convenience. They chose not to risk using Palantir.
Other countries should be asking themselves: if Switzerland deemed these risks unacceptable, what are we missing?
What do you think?
2/2
The Swiss government has ended its contract with American analytics company Palantir, after federal agencies in the country rejected Palantir at least nine times over seven years. The reason? Security concerns that should make other countries think carefully:
- Risk of US intelligence gaining access to sensitive data
- Potential loss of national sovereignty
- Dependence upon foreign specialists in crisis situations
Swiss authorities won't touch their software with a bargepole.
1/2
The Jeffrey Epstein case continues to reveal disturbing and uncomfortable truths - not just about power and abuse, but also about how online reputations can be manipulated.
Thomas Brewster writes on Forbes about how Epstein, after his 2008 conviction, reportedly invested heavily in search engine manipulation, content placement, and even discussed HACKING INTO SITES to suppress negative press and spread news of his philanthropy instead.
