Beijing in lockdown on 25th Tiananmen anniversary

In a country that buries uncomfortable parts of its history it was hardly surprising that China stamped down hard to prevent any mention of the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen protests and the massacre that followed.

Across the capital Beijing there was high security. Armed police, SWAT teams, army patrols and checkpoints could be seen all across the city and media were prevented from reporting anywhere near Tiananmen Square itself.

Speaking in Poland on the 25th anniversary of the country's move to democracy and the fall of communism, US President Obama spoke of the need to stand together with those who seek freedom. Indeed he specifically mentioned those who were "crushed by tanks" half way round the world in China as they sought to bring about greater reform.

25 years on

Quarter of a century on, China has certainly come a long way. There is much greater economic freedom and for many people life is much better than it was 25 years ago.

Few people would have dreamed of owning cars, let alone houses. In 1989 no ordinary Chinese citizen would have had a mobile phone or access to the Internet. Today, there is hardly a citizen without a cellphone and technology saturates people's homes from smart TVs to Internet connections.

There are still problems of course. There is widespread corruption in both central and local government. The rich poor divide increases daily. And pollution and food safety has become an almost daily topic of discussion.

Irrelevant

While the events in and around Tiananmen 25 years ago are an important part of history, for most people in China they are irrelevant to their current lives.

There is much debate as to how much people really know about the Tiananmen protests. On the surface there appears to be a "collective amnesia", though in private many do admit they have some understanding as to what happened.

In fact it is a kind of "enforced amnesia" with all references blocked on the Internet and official accounts referring to reactionaries and foreign interference. The government does acknowledge that the People's Liberation Army intervened after seven weeks of demonstrations and that people were killed. But the official line is that, rather than crushing a peaceful protest, the military simply defended itself, and the country, against violent counter revolutionary elements.

Not willing to allow open debate Wikipedia pages about the events are blocked, news websites are inaccessible and any discussion could result in arrest.

Beijing today

Expats in Beijing can't fail to notice the increased crackdown. One man who spoke only on the condition of anonymity told tvnewswatch that there was definitely a tense atmosphere across the capital. "There are armed police and military everywhere, helicopters in the sky and military vehicles patrolling the streets," he said.

He said it was difficult to gauge how much people really knew about the events of 25 years ago, but the authorities had done a "good job" in keeping the truth from people. "It's not good here right now. There's a rise in nationalism. There's the Uyghur separatist issues, the economy is slowing and of course the pollution and food safety issues."

With such problems, it is perhaps understandable that the Chinese government would want to hide the truth about pro-democracy and reformist movements.

Media reporting

Every year discussions and reporting in western media is significant. But this year there was a great deal more than usual. CNN's David Mckenzie filed several reports in which he spoke to university students, many of which claimed to have no knowledge of the massacre.

Of the few that did know, they said most people would rather "focus on the future" rather than dwelling in the past. Indeed digging up old wounds is seen by some as something which serves no purpose.

But there's nothing western news organisations love better than an anniversary. And an anniversary like Tiananmen is a made for TV event. Sky's Mark Stone's bizarre reporting from a car as it drove continuously around Tiananmen Square or his being moved on as he stood on Chang'an Avenue where the Tank Man once stood, was compelling viewing.

Blocking the news

Inside China such reports are blocked. Even where people can get CNN or other foreign news channels, screens go black upon any mention of Tiananmen or other sensitive news.

Internet sites are also censored. LinkedIn say they have been forced to censor pages and all of Google's services have been blocked.

Indeed the only Chinese territory where discussions and protests are allowed is Hong Kong. Thousands have marked the events with protests calling for an end to one party rule and greater reform.

This year was also marked by the opening of a museum on a Hong Kong back street. While mostly visited by Hong Kong citizens the museum has already attracted some mainlanders who have come to discover the truth about an event almost deleted from Chinese history.

In the light of recent news that Google and other search engines have been forced by the EU to act should individuals or organisations want links removed, we should perhaps all take a moment of reflection about how history is recorded and the freedom associated with being able to discuss things freely. 

Links and stories:

Wikipedia: Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 / BBC special twitter feed / CNN status on Twitter  / CNN gallery / CNN / Slate / Channel Four News / WSJ / QZ / Straits Times / NYT / FT / Telegraph / NYBooks / Fang Lizhi /

Video: Assignment: China - Tiananmen Square 25 years ago as told through the eyes of the media / Tiananmen [Chinese with subtitles] / Tiananmen Massacre [Chinese]

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Security increases in Beijing after terror attacks

Beijing has become a city in lock-down with increased security checks, and armed police and army patrols posted at stations and key locations. The heightened security comes in the wake of several terror attacks in the restive Xinjiang as well as the south-western Yunnan province and the capital itself. It also comes in the lead up to the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen pro-democracy protests.

Security checks

Travelling on Beijing's subway has always been fraught with problems of overcrowding, but this week's security checks have done little to alleviate the pain for millions of commuters who travel on the Beijing metro every day.

In a country long concerned about domestic insurrection and political protests, as well as local disputes, travellers on public transport have long been used to using airport style X-ray machines.

However, such checks could be avoided if travelling light. Indeed if guns, knives or other dangerous items were carried in pockets of a coat, a commuter could easily pass officers directing those with bags to the X-ray machine.

This week no-one can avoid the checks, bag or no bag. At stations all over the capital passengers now find themselves penned in, herded along narrow corridors towards security gates.

Commuters reaching the end of the line then subjected to body checks as well as the usual bag screenings. At stations in the city's north, subway staff said passengers had to wait between 20-30 minutes to get through the security line, up from about 10-15 minutes prior to the new screening requirements.

Whilst some commuters saw the need for the increased security, others were dismissive and said the checks were merely for show since not all stations were implementing the same stringent measures. According to the South China Morning Post only nine stations were affected by the new security [WSJ / SCMP / RT / Time / Shanghaiist / Sky News].

Terror response

The heightened security is a clear sign the authorities are not going to slacken their response to the recent attacks. In fact there are reports that orders have been issued allowing SWAT teams to shoot terrorists on sight, though it is unclear what constitutes a terrorist.

Such orders could result in serious mistakes as was seen in London in 2005 when a man, Jean Charles de Menezes, was mistakenly shot by armed police [tvnewswatch: Catalogue of errors in de Menezes shooting Aug 2005].

Following that incident the IPPC blasted the Metropolitan police commissioner [tvnewswatch: IPPC report blasts Asst commissioner Aug 2007] and there were long running inquiries. However an inquest brought only an open verdict [tvnewswatch: Open verdict in de Menezes inquest Dec 2008]. Meanwhile a corporate criminal prosecution of the Metropolitan Police, brought under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, alleging that the police service had failed in its duty of care to Menezes, resulted in a guilty verdict and fine [Wikipedia].

Tiananmen anniversary

The likelihood of similar inquiries and prosecutions in a country such as China is remote. Indeed as the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre approaches, there is still no official acknowledgement of the death toll, estimated as high as 3,000 civilians.

In the run up to the anniversary activists have been locked up. "The response by the Chinese authorities to the 25th anniversary has been harsher than in previous years, as they persist with trying to wipe the events of 4 June from memory," said Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International.

Some individuals are still serving long prison sentences whilst others remain in hiding [Telegraph].

Those attempting to rekindle the past find the strong arm of the law on their shoulder. Even seemingly harmless gestures, like posting a selfie in Tiananmen Square while flashing a V for victory, have led to detentions according to the New York Times. Meanwhile the police have been warning Western journalists to stay away from the square in the coming days or "face grave consequences".

Voices cannot be silenced beyond China's borders, nor even in Hong Kong which is run under different rules. On the 4th of June many dissidents and some of those who escaped China at the time of the Tiananmen protests will gather at events in the US, Taiwan and Hong Kong [Bloomberg].

Mothers who lost sons and daughters in the protests also try to keep the memory of the massacre alive [NDTV]. But they, like anyone challenging Beijing's grip on power, face a formidable enemy.

Beijing too faces difficult challenges. In an attempt to keep the peace, prevent dissent and further terror attacks, China's authorities run the risk of stirring up the hornet's nest even more.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Voter apathy helps UKIP success

With UKIP [United Kingdom Independence Party] having secured the most number of the seats for Britain in the European election the other main parties are reeling and re-examining their strategy with only a year to go before the general election.

But while UKIP's leader revelled in his party's achievement, the result was not as much a success as many are claiming.

Voter apathy

Both in Britain and across Europe voter turnout was low. In some European countries the percentage was as low as 13%. Britain saw a slight increase on the 2009 European election, but turnout was considerably smaller than seen at general elections.

In fact with only 36% of the electorate turning out to polling stations across the country, UKIP's 29% share amounts to only 11% of the entire country's electorate. Indeed while Nigel Farage insists that the majority of Britain is fed up with Europe, immigration and the other three major parties, his party's real share of votes was hardly a mandate from the British people.

Scare tactics

There has been much criticism from both the three major parties, and those opposed to UKIP, that there has been far too much media coverage for a party that does not have one MP in the British parliament. There has also been some controversy over the negative stories surrounding some of UKIP's candidates was counterproductive.

The party has been labelled racist and Farage himself has been likened to Hitler. Meanwhile the popular press have fallen into UKIP's hands, printing sensationalist and overblown stories concerning immigration, non-English speaking migrants and benefit claims.

These issues are certainly something that should be tackled. Even with open borders there has to be a measure of how benefits are paid out, how foreign criminals are dealt with and how Britain is affected by EU laws.

Counter arguments

One party which lost out considerably was the Liberal Democrats. The party was in disarray after it only managed to hold on to only one of its 12 MEPs.

The party had maintained that the only way to tackle the issues Britain was facing, whilst being a part of the European Union, was to hold a strong voice in Europe and to fight Britain's corner. The most pro-European party of the main three lost out however, either through apathy of voters or a failure to convince the electorate of the importance of maintaining a strong presence in the European parliament.

Speaking the day after the results were announced, party leader Nick Clegg said the Liberal Democrats should not backtrack on what the party stands for. "We should not lose our nerve," Clegg told the BBC. "We need to explain our case more forcefully," he insisted.

In answer to a question as to whether he might step down as the leader he said the idea had not crossed his mind. In fact he was resolute, saying instead that the party needed to be "resilient and united." [BBC]

Other losers

The Labour party finished in second place, in terms of total votes, but its vote share was up by nearly 10% on 2009. The result was hailed by Ed Miliband as a success  and showed the party was "making progress".

However he conceded Labour has "further to go" in order to achieve a win at next year's general election. There was "deep discontent" in the UK and Labour must show it can "answer the call for change" Miliband said.

However as regards a referendum on Europe, Miliband said the party would not be changing its position. Labour has said it will only hold a public vote if there are any plans for further powers to be transferred from the UK to the EU and opposes the Conservatives' pledge to hold an in-out referendum in 2017 [BBC].

The Conservatives lost out mainly to UKIP with areas once Tory strongholds turning from blue to purple. UKIP gained 23 MEPs, with the Tories having 19, behind Labour which has 20. The Conservative share of the vote was 23.9%, behind Labour on 25.4% and UKIP on 27.5%.

Nonetheless, David Cameron insisted that his party could still win the next election http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27570508 .  

Forward to 2015

While UKIP are no doubt looking to repeat their success in next years general election they will have an uphill battle. After many years and a concentrated effort on only a few seats the Green Party have still only managed to secure one seat in parliament.

The first-past-the-post system will play more into the hands of Labour and the Conservatives than it will Farage's party.

Voter turnout is much higher in general elections than both European and council elections. Furthermore, as many political commentators have said, the electorate often use local and European elections to vent anger, returning to their fold for the national vote.

Disillusionment

UKIP's success certainly shows disillusionment with Europe, but so too does the low turnout. And while the political barrel needed a shake, UKIP's taking of so many seats in the parliament will actually do nothing to the status quo. The European project will carry on regardless given most of the MEPs remain pro-European.

Indeed, UKIP's positions may damage Britain's standing in Europe especially if they don't fight for Britain's corner within Europe. The danger is that UKIP MEPs may merely squander their time in the European Parliament offering up anti-European speeches rather than taking part in proper debate and  ensuring policies are made that are in the best interests of Britain as well as Europe as a whole.

There is also an irony that UKIPs 23 MEPs will now join the gravy train they so much despise, lining their pockets with taxpayers money whilst criticising the driver, crew and the fact there is even a train upon which they are riding.

Meanwhile, those parties which once fought for Britain's position will be less effective, given they are now much fewer in number.

As regards voter apathy there is the suggestion that compulsory voting be implemented. Of course this would not necessarily improve things. Even in countries where such policies exist there are still those who abstain. By itself such laws are meaningless if people are ill informed.

There needs to be a greater understanding about Europe and its workings, how it benefits its member states and how things might be improved. The debate needs to be more reasoned rather than the sensationalist tabloid headlines seen in recent months.

The same is true of council elections. There needs to be more transparency, even perhaps to the degree of all council meetings being televised perhaps through the Internet. Only when people are properly informed can they make informed decisions.

Winston Churchill once said, "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried from time to time.." In order to preserve that democracy the people need to participate. By not becoming educated in the issues there is the danger of the electorate become disillusioned and apathetic.

Churchill is also supposed to have said that "The greatest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." After the recent local and European elections such thoughts might be conjured up in the minds of many.

Results: UK / EU wide 

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Terror attack leaves 31 dead in Xinjiang, China

At least 31 have been killed and more than 90 injured in a terrorist attack in Urumqi, the provincial capital of Xinjiang province in China. The attack is the latest in a string of attacks believed to have been perpetrated by Uighur separatists, a mainly Muslim group many of whom seek independence.

News downplayed

The attackers reportedly crashed two cars into shoppers at a market in the centre of the city and threw explosives from their vehicles. Photographs posted to Chinese social networks showed bodies strewn in the streets and flames leaping into the sky from the area near to the incident.

The Ministry of Public Security called it a "violent terrorist incident", though information about incidents in the region, where ethnic tensions between Uighurs and Han Chinese continue, is tightly controlled. The news was largely downplayed in Chinese media and eyewitness accounts and pictures posted on Sina Weibo, China's version of Twitter, were deleted by censors.

Reports were also scant on Western media too. Whilst Sky News, the BBC and CNN all carried reports, most were brief. Foreign reporters are mostly banned from the region making it difficult to gather information about incidents except through official sources and social media.

Response

According to Xinhua the attackers struck at 07:50 local time, Thursday, at an open air market at Park North Street near Renmin Park. In response to the attack, Chinese President Xi Jinping pledged to severely punish terrorists and spare no efforts in maintaining stability, the news agency said.
However as reported earlier this month, China will have a difficult time in stemming what appears to be a growing terrorist insurgency. Whilst security controls are tight, in what is essentially a police state, the country is vast, making it easy for terrorists to hide amongst the general population. Speaking on Al Jazeera, Roderic Wye, an Associate Fellow with the Asia Programme at Chatham House, said the attacks were likely to have been perpetrated by Uighur separatists but that there was likely to be some outside influences from the wider radical Muslim population beyond China's borders.

Xinjiang, which is home to the Muslim Uighur minority, has seen a spate of attacks in the past year. In October a four wheel drive vehicle was driven into a crowd in Tiananmen Square before exploding in flames injuring 38 and killing 5 including three attackers [Wikipedia]. In March this year 29 people died and some 143 were injured after four people attacked civilians at Kunming railway station in Yunnan province [Wikipedia]. And in April this year at least three died and 79 were wounded after a knife attack and suicide bomb blast at Urumqi station which coincided with a visit by Chinese president Xi Jinping to the city.

Reports: BBC / Sky News / Guardian / CNN / Al Jazeera / RT / France 24 / Press TV /


See also: tvnewswatch: Kunming hit by terror attack July 2008 / tvnewswatch: Internet access blocked after Kunming blast July 2008 / tvnewswatch: More attacks in Cinjiang leave 2 cops dead Aug 2008 / tvnewswatch: China names wanted Islamic terrorists Oct 2008 / tvnewswatch: New al-Qaeda threat to China Oct 2009 / tvnewswatch: Kunming terror attack leaves dozens dead Mch 2014 / tvnewswatch: China on verge of War on Terror May 2014

tvnewswatch, London, UK

US swipes at China over cyberespionage

China has acted angrily to the US issuing several indictments naming 5 members of the People's Liberation Army and their involvement in a number of cyberattacks on American companies.

The unprecedented move comes a few months after the security firm Mandiant released a detailed dossier pointing to a nondescript building in Shanghai where it said China was launching a series of cyberattacks and conducting cyberespionage operations on a massive scale. [See also: tvnewswatch: Chinas growing hacking army Feb 2013 / tvnewswatch: China angry over US accusations of hacking May 2013]

Scare tactics

The release of the indictments may be intended to scare Chinese hackers into submission. By naming the individuals it would be clear to China that the US now has the capability to trace the origins of the attacks, not only to the country, town or city but to an actual individual. While the indictments are unlikely to result in any extraditions, the people named may well feel a little more uncomfortable than they did prior to the FBI posting their details.

Indeed, these individuals will certainly not be able to freely travel outside of China now that they run the risk of ending up behind bars in a US prison on charges which could result in sentences of up to 240 years.

In the highly unusual move, the men were named in the indictment document complete with photographs. Huang Zhenyu (黄振宇), Wen Xinyu (文新宇), Sun Kailiang (孙凯良), Gu Chunhui (顾春晖) and Wang Dong (王东) were named in the charges for what the US says is a widespread problem [Indictment / Indictment PDF].

Earlier Monday, US Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the men, all members of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), "maintained unauthorized access to victim computers to steal information from these entities that would be useful" to the victims' competitors in China.

Holder said some of the "victims" included U.S. Steel Corp., Westinghouse, Alcoa, Allegheny Technologies, the United Steel Workers Union and SolarWorld [BBC / Guardian / Daily Mail].

Denials

However, China has accused the United States of "hypocrisy" and "double standards" following its decision to charge the five Chinese army officers with cybertheft against major American businesses.

The Foreign Ministry in Beijing even took the step of summoning US Ambassador Max Baucus late Monday, the state-run Xinhua news agency reported, as tensions between the two countries threatened to escalate into a full-scale diplomatic incident [Washington Post].

Meanwhile China's defence ministry put out a strongly-worded statement on its website on Tuesday saying that China's government and its military "had never engaged in any cyberespionage activities" [News.mod.gov.cn].

It also took aim at the US, saying, "For a long time, the US has possessed the technology and essential infrastructure needed to conduct large-scale systematic cyberthefts and surveillance on foreign government leaders, businesses and individuals. This is a fact which the whole world knows."

"The US' deceitful nature and its practice of double standards when it comes to cybersecurity have long been exposed, from the Wikileaks incident to the Edward Snowden affair."

Snowden became the main pivot to China's criticism from several quarters. A day after the United States announced indictments against five members of the Chinese military, China's ambassador to the US also accused America of hypocrisy and cited the whistleblower during an exclusive interview with CNN's Christiane Amanpour [Full transcript].

"It's really amazing to see that some people still believe they have moral high ground and credibility to accuse others, if we consider the Snowden revelations and so on and so forth," Cui Tiankai said [BBC / CNN / Guardian / Telegraph].

Indeed the revelations concerning the NSA and Prism make the US's position all the more difficult. There is also the accusation that the United States also practices cyberespionage, both on friendly and less friendly countries.

Nonetheless, even if true the advantages taken by the US are somewhat different to its counterparts, at least in respect to the United States stated aim. Much of the US surveillance program is concerned with security, both domestic and international.

However China's cyberespionage is on a very different scale and its motives are varied. As well as defensive cyberespionage, China is engaged in IP theft on a grand scale, be it industrial or military. In addition there is also a growing number of actual cyberattacks emanating from China which are crippling foreign competitors computer systems and costing companies millions of dollars.

Hitting back

Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, is focused on making China pay a price. "Right now there is no incentive for the Chinese to stop doing this," The New York Times quoted Rogers as saying in February 2013. "If we don't create a high price, it's only going to keep accelerating."

It was "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the Chinese government and military was behind growing cyberattacks against the United States, Rogers said, adding that the US was losing the war to prevent such attacks.

"They use their military and intelligence structure to steal intellectual property from American businesses, and European businesses, and Asian businesses, re-purpose it and then compete in the international market against the United States," Rogers told ABC's This Week.

Eliot Engel, a New York Democratic party representative and ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said that there had to be greater consequences for Chinese cyberhacking and cyberespionage, and called for sanctions and indictments against those responsible, as well as limiting access to visas.

"I think we have to make it very clear to them that they – this cannot be business as usual," Engel said. "If they're going to continue to do this to the extent that they're doing it, there's a price to pay."

This week Rogers' call for greater action took a step forward as the FBI posted the indictments on its website. Certainly the individuals concerned are unlikely to get a US visa, unless they really want to stand trial for cyberespionage. But whilst China may have received a small punch on the nose, it was hardly a forceful blow. Indeed, despite the flow of rhetoric coming from the state media, China was not even bloodied from this latest swipe by the United States.

The indictments were unprecedented, but the US needs to be a lot more forceful in order to effect any behavioural change by China or others engaged in cyberattacks. It perhaps also needs to level with its own people and allies over the revelations concerning Snowden and attempt to reclaim the moral high-ground.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Radical cleric Abu Hamza guilty of terror offences

Radical cleric Abu Hamza faces life inside a US prison after being found guilty of several terror related charges.

Hamza had tried to portray himself as "a preacher of faith" but a jury was unanimous in its decision that the cleric had been involved in supporting terrorism.

Known as Abu Hamza al-Masri, he was tried under the name Mustafa Kamel Mustafa having been extradited to the United States in 2012 after a long running legal battle by US authorities.

Reacting to the verdict Britain's Home Secretary Theresa May said, "I am pleased that Abu Hamza has finally faced justice. He used every opportunity, over many years, to frustrate and delay the extradition process." The verdict was also welcomed by Prime Minister David Cameron who said he plans to reform Britain's relationship with the European court of human rights to prevent future extradition delays.

Hamza came to prominence following the 2001 terror attacks in the US and was often seen at the Finsbury Park mosque in London where his radical preachings drew significant press attention. Due to his having lost his arms and been blinded in one eye, whilst supposedly tackling a landmine in Afghanistan, much of the UK tabloid press nicknamed him "Hook" in allusion to the fictional pirate Captain Hook.

The truth behind his loss of limbs is open to debate with Hamza himself having changed his story several times. He has claimed he was maimed whilst fighting Soviet forces in Afghanistan. However, during his trial in the United States, Hamza stated that his injuries occurred whilst working with explosives with the Pakistani military in Lahore.

Abu Hamza was arrested in May 2004 on a US arrest warrant and eventually flown from RAF Mildenhall to the US in October 2012.

The 11 charges against him included allegations that he arranged satellite communications for a group of kidnappers in Yemen who carried out a deadly attack in which four hostages were killed [Justice.gov].

He was eventually also found guilty of conspiring in 1999-2000 to establish an al-Qaeda training camp in Bly, Oregon, among other acts. In addition he was convicted of various crimes including hostage taking, conspiring to provide material support to terrorists, and abetting religious war in Afghanistan.

Hamza, who has already served a UK prison sentence for using his sermons at the Finsbury Park Mosque in London to incite murder and racial hatred, is due to be sentenced on the 9th September and could face a life term in a federal prison.

While many people have expressed relief and cheered the successful conviction, there has also been anger that the extradition and trial took so long. Survivors of the Yemen hostage situation were particularly scathing in their criticism. Laurence Whitehouse and his wife Margaret were part of a group of 16 Western tourists ambushed by armed men in December 1998. Margaret and three others, including two more Britons, were shot dead after being held for 26 hours as the Yemeni Army mounted a heavy-handed operation to free them. Whilst pleased at the verdict, Mr Whitehouse told The Telegraph, "This has taken a long time, even though there was evidence of his involvement early on."

Another hostage, Eric Firkins, 70, also expressed concern that the Islamist preacher had been allowed to breed hate on the streets for so long. "I was angry the Government was that sensitive to racial issues that they didn't want to antagonise Muslims by arresting the preacher."

Meanwhile there have been allegations that British security services failed to act on information received about Hamza and his terror activities [Telegraph]. However Anjem Choudary, claimed Abu Hamza was a "victim of the war on terror" and insisted the preacher had a "divine permit" to lie about his role as an alleged MI5 informant. Choudary, a British Muslim social and political activist, often labelled an extremist by the UK press, insisted that much of what had been said about Hamza was propaganda. "Sheikh Abu Hamza is the latest in a long line of Islamic activists and intellectuals who have been targeted by the American and British regimes in the war on Muslims. I believe he will gain paradise," he told the Telegraph.

Sky News / BBC / Guardian / Telegraph / Daily Mail / Mirror / Express / Wikipedia

[Pictured: Abu Hamza al-Masri, also known as Mustafa Kamel Mustafa, and his eldest son Mohammed Mustafa Kamel, at a rally in London in 2002. In 1999 Mohammed Mustafa Kamel (at the time 17 years old), and his stepson, Mohsin Ghalain, were arrested in Yemen. They were convicted of being part of a bomb plot involving eight Britons and two Algerians, and were imprisoned for three years and seven years respectively. The prosecution alleged that Abu Hamza had sent them to Yemen to carry out terrorist attacks. The defence argued that the men had been tortured and called the trial a "travesty of justice" / Read more: BBC / Metro / Telegraph]

tvnewswatch, London, UK

EU ruling that may change history

The EU has ruled that Google and other search engines must delete references and links to data connected to an individual in what has been hailed as a victory for people wanting to be forgotten on the Internet.

However the ruling made by a Spanish court could potentially have far reaching consequences which could ultimately lead to history being rewritten or deleted.

Information in the pre-Internet age

Before the advent of the Internet finding information was down to one's skills in seeking out books at local libraries or articles buried in newspapers stored in underground vaults. Even then one might need an understanding of the Dewey Decimal System and other indexing systems. While sometimes difficult to find, most back editions of a newspapers were readily available and books and encyclopaedias could be thumbed through. Most libraries would stock telephone directories of a given area and by cross referencing the information with that of the electoral register, a journalist or anyone else could dig up all sorts of data about any given individual. With a few pounds in pocket one could even get copies of birth, marriage or death certificates from registry offices, thus creating a detailed dossier on the background of a person one was interested in.

But nowadays digging up such information is less easy and may become all the more difficult. Libraries have streamlined their reference sections. Some no longer stock the electoral register, telephone directories have been discarded long ago, and the encyclopaedias have almost been consigned to history. Indeed the Encyclopaedia Britannica has itself decided to stop printing books in favour of online or digital editions in 2012 [Telegraph].

Disadvantages of online data

There is an advantage of online data. It can be sought out quickly with the aid of computers or search tools. Information in stories or on databases can be updated and mistakes corrected, whilst a printed version without the advantage of foresight cannot. But there are disadvantages too. Pages on the Internet can disappear, be deleted or simply be buried so deeply in the mountain of available information as to become impossible to find.

Whilst some organisations such as the Internet Archive have attempted to preserve some webpages from the past, there are vast amounts of information disappearing everyday that were once easily accessible and in the public domain.

Deletion of online resources

Of course much of this information could be considered junk. When Yahoo shut down Geocities, a popular blogging and webhosting platform many were outraged, especially those who had created pages on the online space. While many pages were undoubtedly the personal ramblings of individuals other pages were in depth explorations into cultural history, conspiracy theories and other musings.

Newspapers and media organisations have also deleted online content. For newspapers the information may still exist in hard copy, buried in the dark recesses of a national library, but for some organisations they have only ever been online. For example many articles published by Fox News at the time of 9/11 are now longer available. Indeed many links older than a few years may be deleted.

This situation is bad in that vast swathes of history, and how it was reported at the time, have been consigned to the digital dustbin.

Repercussions of EU ruling

However the problem could become much worse after one Mario Costeja González sought to have information about him removed from the Internet. The Spanish lawyer complained that entering his name in a Google Search led to the display of legal notices dating back to 1998 and published in the online version of La Vanguardia that detailed his debts and the forced sale of his property [Europa.eu].

The court ruled in his favour and Google must now remove links which lead to the references about González' financial past.

While some have hailed the decision a victory, there are others who believe it could create further problems. The information González sought to have removed was not libellous or defamatory, it was merely historical, even if somewhat uncomfortable for the man in question.

Shooting the messenger

Indeed the ruling does not require the paper to destroy such records or articles, only that Google should not index and deliver search results. But herein lies the problem. Whilst Google, Bing and Yahoo might be obliged to comply, other search engines not doing business in Europe may simply ignore the ruling. Duck Duck Go, Russia's Yandex and China's Baidu could in theory still throw up links to the Spanish lawyer's financial past.

Even where search engines comply it has been likened to the removal of the name of a book within a library's database while the book itself remains on the shelf. Furthermore others have pointed out that Google is only doing what it and other search engines do, that of indexing the Internet and making it searchable. Meanwhile the party that was 'guilty' of producing the offending item is left alone.

Google is nonetheless reeling with at least 1,000 take-down requests having been made according to the Telegraph.

Setting precedents

There is another worrying aspect to the EU ruling. In essence a precedent has been set allowing someone to have data removed from the Internet they don't like, albeit by the fact it becomes unsearchable. While González is one individual whom few may have any real interest [until now], there may be many individuals and organisations who would like to have their data removed, feeling it too is "inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant".

Moving down this road could further lead the world into a dystopia envisaged by George Orwell. In his book 1984 he wrote of Memory Holes, a mechanism which allowed the alteration or disappearance of inconvenient or embarrassing documents, photographs, transcripts, or other records, such as from a web site or other archive, particularly as part of an attempt to give the impression that something never happened. Of course Orwell did not foresee the creation of the Internet, but its existence allows the removal of unwanted information much easier.

The scenario also conjures up Ray Bradbury's dark vision of the future from Fahrenheit 451 where all books are illegal and burned. With libraries disappearing and all information shifting to the ephemeral virtual space that is the Internet, there'll be no need to actually ban the books. Nonetheless the Index on Censorship claimed the ruling was a violation of "the fundamental principles of freedom of expression" and "akin to marching into a library and forcing it to pulp books." [IBTimes / Reason] Others have suggested it would be like destroying other indexing systems like Palmers Index which sought to catalogue and cross reference the back editions of The Times from 1790 to 1905 [CBC].

Censorship and Intranets

Another of those opposing the deletion of data is Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales who believes it is a slippery slope that could erode the Internet and lead to greater censorship. Describing the move as "astonishing" Wales said it was "one of the most wide-sweeping internet censorship rulings that I've ever seen" [BBC / IBTimes].

Meanwhile in the Guardian, journalist James Ball described the ruling as "either an eerie parallel with China's domestic censorship of search results, or a huge incentive for tech investment to get the hell out of Europe". Indeed China regularly deletes information deemed unfitting for its 'harmonious society'. Blog posts, tweets, and even news articles disappear into a memory hole. Indeed some information is never published in the first place, thus many in China are ignorant of the Tiananmen Massacre, the great famine in which millions died during the Great Leap Forward, or the destruction of history during the Cultural Revolution.

In addition China also blocks and censors any foreign website that doesn't toe the line. Thus YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, the New York Times and Bloomberg are just some of many platforms which cannot be accessed in the Middle Kingdom.

But what of this ruling. Would companies decide to shift out of Europe in order to avoid having to comply with a mountain of similar complaints. And if they did would such sites be blocked in a China like censorship sweep. Following the revelations over NSA snooping Germany's Angela Merkel has herself talked of a separate European Internet [FT].

Whatever happens as the issue unfurls, it will be painful and confusing for all concerned [NYT / Business Week]

Irony

There is an irony in all this for Mario González. His attempt to delete history and wipe away the past has instead rekindled it. More has now been written about González' past financial history than was ever mentioned previously. Le Vangaudia, can still display the webpage concerned, and while Google may not index it , the link will doubtlessly be posted in many places on the Internet. Indeed the Guardian reprinted the offending article itself on its own webpage.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

China on verge of a War on Terror

At least 6 people have been injured following a knife attack at a railway station in Guangzhou, China. The attack has raised concerns that China is experiencing its own War on Terror.

It was not immediately clear how many people were involved in the attack, but one person was shot and then detained by police. One shopkeeper who witnessed the attack said the perpetrators had sat on steps outside the station for two hours before, at 11am, letting out a shout and launching their attack on passengers with half metre long knives.

Chinese state run media reported that police gunned down one of the attackers, captured a second and said two attackers were still at large. Some reports say the men were wearing "white hats", though it is not clear whether these were taqiyah or kufi often worn by Muslims.

Spate of attacks

And while there was no information on the motivation for the attack, it comes a week after an attack at a station in Urumqi, in the western region in Xinjiang [BBC / Reuters]. At least 3 people were killed and 79 injured after a believed suicide bomber detonated a device [CNN / Daily Mail].

It also follows an attack at Kunming station in March that killed 29 people [Wikipedia / tvnewswatch: Kunming terror attacks leave dozens dead many injured] and a terror attack in October 2013 when a four wheel drive vehicle was deliberately driven into a crowd in Tiananmen Square before bursting into flames [Wikipedia].

Chinese authorities have blamed both these attacks on separatists from the Uighur minority group, which lives in Xinjiang [BBC / VoA / Daily Mail]. China's leaders have vowed to tackle the terrorists head on with president Xi Jinping promising "decisive action" [Xinhua].

However, China may be facing only the beginning of what could become its War on Terror [Wikipedia]. It is a war that may be difficult to win [FT]. The roots of separatist violence goes back many years and there is deeply ingrained suspicions and hostility on both sides [CFR / Foreign Affairs].

Growing backlash

Many Uighurs complain that their language and religion are routinely suppressed. As in Tibet, another restive autonomous region, Beijing has practised a policy of assimilation, flooding Xinjiang with Han Chinese who now comprise 40% of the population.

And while the attacks have been perpetrated by a minority there is a danger that resentment and suspicions will increase tensions. The People's Daily has sensibly called for people to remain calm and not to retaliate. "Don't turn your anger for the terrorists into hostility toward an ethnic group," the paper said.

But there are signs that the situation on the ground is very different. tvnewswatch has learned that students in the middle of their studies were ordered to return to Xinjiang from Yunnan after the Kunming attack.  Uighurs say they are being refused reservations in hotels when they travel outside Xinjiang and recently the district police in Guangxi province, which borders Yunnan, warned, "If anyone discovers people from Xinjiang living, doing business or travelling here, please immediately report them." [NYT Sinosphere].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Max Clifford jailed for 8 years for sex assaults

Defiant to the end the so-called 'King of Spin' Max Clifford was last night spending his first night in prison after being sentenced to 8 years for indecently assaulting a number of girls and women in what some say would be considered rape should the offences have taken place today [BBC].

No apology

After being found guilty the shamed publicist admitted it was "not the best day" of his life but refused to offer any form of apology to the victims.

Before entering court he merely said that he stood by his previous statements that his accusers were "fantasists" and "liars". Talking to Sky's Tom Parmenter the former PR guru said, "I stand by everything I've said in the past - everything."

Lost everything

For the 71 year old who had everything he will likely lose it all. His high-profile PR business is set to close and he may also find himself without his wife of four years. Last night there was speculation that wife Jo Clifford, formerly Jo Westwood, may file for divorce.

According to the Daily Mail his wife had not been seen sporting her wedding ring and was 'very, very angry" over the whole affair. One friend told the paper she was "just waiting for guilty verdicts and then she's going to divorce him for everything he's got."

Max Clifford's wife had spent the trial well away from the courtroom rather than playing the dutiful wife and standing by her man. However she has declined to comment on the rumours or suggestions she has spoken to top London divorce lawyer Raymond Tooth.

A former PA for the publicist they married in April 2010, seven years after the death of Clifford's first wife, Liz.

Cheers

Clifford's sentencing was cheered not only by his victims in court but by many outside the courtroom who had faced humiliation and embarrassment by the 'King of Spin'.

Former Conservative minister David Mellor said he "exults" in Max Clifford's jailing saying the disgraced PR guru "delighted in humiliating his victims".

Mellor had been one of those victims after Clifford brokered deals with tabloids for kiss-and-tell stories with Antonia de Sancha who reveal details about an affair with the minister. Speaking of the jailing Mellor told the Daily Telegraph it showed "there is a God".

Even those who bought his stories had few good words for the man. Former editor of the Sun newspaper Kelvin MacKenzie described Clifford as a "vile individual" when speaking on the BBC's Any Questions. Despite having bought stories from him and having known him some 30 years added that one "couldn't find anybody who has a good word to say about Max Clifford."

Long fall

Life will now be very different for the man who arguably ruined hundreds of people's lives in order to feather his lavish lifestyle. He will leave behind his large house in  a private road in Hersham for a small prison cell. He will say goodbye to his outdoor heated swimming pool where he used to swim daily, though he may have access to a gym. And of course he'll have no housekeeper as such, indeed he might find himself to be someone else's bitch if prison life is all it's rumoured to be.

For someone who played with and controlled so many people's lives, Clifford has fallen off a very tall cliff indeed. And he's certainly come down with a bump [Guardian / Independent].

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Fire Sale threat from XP, Heartbleed & IE bugs

Only weeks after the Heartbleed bug was discovered and Microsoft stopped support for Windows XP another major security issue has been revealed which may further compound problems for Internet users. The issue is so serious that some have suggested these security holes could allow hackers to initiate a 'Fire Sale' cyberattack.

Microsoft security holes

On Saturday 26th April Microsoft reported that a security hole existed in all versions of Internet Explorer from version 6 through to 11. The issue has been deemed so serious that the US and UK governments issued an unprecedented advisory saying that people avoid using the browser until the hole is patch and instead use Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox of Apple's Safari browser [Daily Mail / Washington Post / CNET].

Microsoft said it was already aware of "limited, targeted attacks" to exploit the security flaw which could enable hackers to gain access and user rights to a computer [BBC]. This could allow hackers to obtain passwords, remove and syphon off user date or insert malware and turn the PC into a botnet.

The discovery is significant given the huge number of people still using the browser. Estimates for Internet Explorer's overall market share range from 27.4% to 54.13%, as of October 2012.

No support for XP

The discovery is all the more worrying given the exploit appears to have been present for at least 12 years since it exists in version 6 of the browser. Furthermore, whilst Microsoft will eventually issue a patch there will be a great many users who will not receive it. Anyone still using Windows XP will not receive any support for their operating system and that includes security updates for Microsoft products such as Internet Explorer.

Again estimates vary, but there are still a significant number of people who continue to use Windows XP. The operating system, originally released in 2001, is still used by many government organisations who have failed to upgrade, often due to cost implications. Windows XP is also used in many ATMs, and while those systems could also be vulnerable to hackers most are in closed systems [ZDNet / Bloomberg / ZDNet].

China threat

While individual users can mitigate risk by using a different browser and operating system, the risks come from those who fail to update their systems. China in particular is a case in point. Windows XP is estimated to run on almost 70% of China's computers, while it's only used by 27% by the rest of the world. And while some security firms such as Qihoo 360 have taken on the task to update users not everybody will receive updates [CIO / EcumenicalNews].

China's users of Windows XP must of course register for the product. However many of China's computer users do not have legitimate products and there is a poor understanding of the importance of updating operating systems and software. According to Microsoft 90% of their software used in China, including Windows XP, is pirated meaning most computers have never been updated & are ripe for exploitation [Engadget].

As such millions of users in China could find their computers being taken over and used for malicious purposes. According to one top white-hat hacker, James Forshaw, a vulnerability researcher for Context Information Security, unsupported Windows XP machines in China could pose a threat to the Internet in general if bot-herders round up significant numbers of them to use as launch pads for malicious exploits [NetworkWorld]. This could spell disaster for millions of people not only in China but around the world.

Security

The problem lies in the fact that most people do not take computer and Internet security seriously enough. While one individual may increase their own layers of security such as installing timely operating system updates, running anti-virus software such as Norton or McAfee, and using password managers, others both in professional and non-professional quarters do not.

Thus data shared between one individual and another might not be secure if the third party has failed to take care of their own security. Even if you don't do Internet banking, the data held on some social networking sites could still be useful to criminals. And while one individual might keep their password safe and secure, another user and 'friend' might not. Following Heartbleed many people failed to update their passwords for compromised services which included Facebook amongst others. Thus a hacker, taking advantage of the Heartbleed bug, could potentially access some users' accounts and use that access to create phishing attacks or sift for information about others.

Patching holes

More worrying is where banking or financial institutions continue to use systems that are vulnerable. For example there are suggestions that Windows XP can put SOX, HIPAA and credit card security-compliance at risk [NetworkWorld].

Some firms and governments have paid Microsoft for continued updates. The British government, for example, has paid the software giant £5.5 million for continued support for one more year [Guardian / Telegraph]. The Dutch government has also paid Microsoft to keep its systems updated [ZDNet]. However these measures are merely a stop-gap and will not address the issue in the long term.

Lack of information

Indeed the publicity and understanding of a security threat can be a major factor in mitigating such security threats. Given the number of people potentially affected by the ending of support for Windows XP, the Heartbleed Bug and the security holes in Internet Explorer, the reportage has been relatively scant. Many companies failed to inform their users and information outside tech websites was often confused and contradictory.

'Fire Sale'

Of course Ukraine, the Korean ferry disaster and European elections are important issues. but the recent security issues are arguably far more significant. Indeed some have suggested these recent holes and exploits could lead to a 'Fire Sale', a term used to describe a hypothetical attack by computer hackers on vital networks [Wired].

The term 'Fire Sale' was first coined in the Die Hard movie "Live Free or Die Hard" in which hackers attempted a cyberwarfare attack that performed a three-stage systematic attack on the United States' computer infrastructure.

The film may well have been fiction, but the shocking truth is that the world's computer systems are vulnerable to attack and common flaws make such attacks easier and more likely.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Rumours fly after Google+ chief Vic Gundotra quits

There has been wild rumours and speculation after Vic Gundotra announced he was to step down and leave Google for pastures new [BBC].

Gundotra was the main driving force behind Google's social network Google+, and his leaving the company has driven speculation that the search giant may consign the platform to the scrap heap.

The main source for such rumours came from the website TechCrunch which described Google+ as the "Walking Dead" and suggested it would "no longer be considered a product, but a platform" and thus "ending its competition with other social networks like Facebook and Twitter."

Despite the article being widely quoted and shared on social networks, many have dismissed the suggestions.

One prominent voice was Yonatan Zunger, Google+'s Chief Architect, who said the information contained in the TechCrunch article was "BS" [bullshit].

"The TechCrunch article is BS," Zunger said, "Google+ isn't going anywhere, I can promise you."

Killing redundant products

Of course, anyone using Google+ may well have been justifiably concerned that their favourite social network might be consigned to history. Google has "retired" many of its products that it has deemed "redundant".

In the past few years Google has closed countless services which it said had lacked take-up. In 2011 Google dropped property search within its Maps citing lack of use. Google Desktop was also retired the same year and Google Health was shutdown in early 2012. Google Wave's retirement became one of the most talked about closure, especially given the huge publicity surrounding its launch.

Google Wave which started life in 2009 was hung out to dry within 3 months of its public release in May 2010 and by 2012 had been closed down altogether.

Google+ launch

Launched in 2011 Google+ provides a stream of content such as photos and status updates that its users post for their friends. Its original selling points included a way to create groups of contacts, or "circles," to share more specific types of information. Another is Hangouts, a popular messaging tool that enables group video chat.

The sharing of photos is a key part of the platform. Video & pictures may be set to automatically upload from a user's mobile device or even added to Google+ photos from Google Drive. Thereafter a user may select these to share with individuals, circles or even to an email address of a person not yet on Google+. And in recent months Google has added what it calls Google Awesome where automated algorithms put together movies or animated Gifs which may be shared.

Google+ has also been integrated into the sign-in procedure of Google's various services, including Gmail, YouTube and Google Play. Using a single login and password users are obliged to use their real name which also appears on any reviews or comments they post on Google platforms, an effort to reduce spamming and abusive behaviour.

While Google has received some criticism for some of its changes in log-in procedures and real name policies, the social network has grown significantly with a supposed 540 million active users, though remains far smaller than Facebook which claims more than 802 million [WSJ / The Register].

Trust

Killing the social network could prove to be suicidal for Google. While not as popular as Facebook and Twitter, Google+ has gained a large number of loyal users who would be disappointed and angry should the search giant decide to shut the service down.

Its closure would also reduce trust in the company. People would justifiably be concerned about the safety of other services such as Google Drive or GMail.

Certainly Google+ might change from its form, but it is unlikely to be killed off. It must also be noted that one of the authors of the TechCrunch article, Alexia Tsotsis, owns shares in Facebook, Yahoo!, and Twitter, while the other, Matthew Panzarino, is described in his TechCrunch bio as "relentlessly covering Apple and Twitter." Of course this does not explain their information or sources, but it could be partly why they closed the article by comparing Google+ to an "unwelcome hairy spider" whose integration is a form of "grating party crashing." And according to one blog it draws their credibility into question.

TechCrunch has based much of its assertions on anonymous sources which say that staff are being reshuffled. But reassignment is hardly proof of anything in a company which is in constant flux and redevelopment.

Angry beehive

While not completely dismissing the TechCrunch article other tech websites have asserted that Google+ still has a place, providing a particular niche for certain individuals.    

Mashable describes the social network as an "angry beehive" of enthusiastic users. The types of user also tend to be different, often more involved in technology and specialised interests, and according to Mashable's Chris Taylor, a little bit "weird". Indeed there has been an angry response from many users at the suggestion that Google+ could shut shop.

For its part Google has denied the rumours and meanwhile stated that Google+ Vice President of Engineering David Besbris will take command of Google+ [CNET]. The speculation may well continue, but for now the safety and future of the social network is assured.

As for Vic Gundotra, he has only praise for the company he is leaving but left no clue as to where he is heading next, something that is also open to speculation.

tvnewswatch, London, UK

Heartbleed bug gives Internet users massive headache

This week Microsoft ended its support of Windows XP meaning that that up to 25% of Windows users in the world could be vulnerable to increased attacks by hackers. While serious this was nothing compared to the reports that OpenSSL, which is meant to encrypt communications between a user's computer and a web server, had bugs.

Discovery of bug

The bug was independently discovered by a team of security engineers at Codenomicon and Neel Mehta of Google Security, who first reported it to the OpenSSL team. Codenomicon team found the Heartbleed bug while improving the SafeGuard feature in Codenomicon's Defensics security testing tools and reported this bug to the NCSC-FI for vulnerability coordination and reporting to OpenSSL team.

Given the name Heartbleed by the Codenomicon team, it was deemed "a serious vulnerability in the popular OpenSSL cryptographic software library".

This weakness allows stealing the information protected, under normal conditions, by the SSL/TLS encryption used to secure the Internet, the team said. SSL/TLS provides communication security and privacy over the Internet for applications such as web, email, instant messaging (IM) and some virtual private networks (VPNs), the team added, on a special website set up following its discovery.

Catastrophic

Dubbed "the biggest security issues that's faced the Internet to date" by some commentators, others described it as even more serious. Bruce Schneier, an American cryptographer, computer security and privacy specialist, said the discovery was "catastrophic" on his blog.

The bug is not only serious in relation to security but also serves as a wake-up call to how security and passwords are handled both by users and the language of the Internet.

Users have been constantly encouraged to use both strong passwords and individual passwords for every website. Furthermore individuals are encouraged to change passwords frequently. However, even those who might have followed such advice would still have been vulnerable to the so-called Heartbleed bug since it had remained undiscovered for at least two years. This would have made it possible for any group or individual with knowledge of its existence to harvest information from users of websites where OpenSSL was employed.

NSA & espionage

In fact some have suggested that this may have been behind the NSA's supposed ability to monitor individuals' Google or Facebook accounts. Although the NSA could have used the Heartbleed vulnerability to obtain usernames and passwords, as well as so-called session cookies to access online accounts, this would have only allowed them to hijack specific accounts whose data they obtained. For the NSA and other spies, the real value in the vulnerability lies in the private keys used for SSL that it may allow attackers to obtain [Wired / EFF].

Cracking SSL to decrypt Internet traffic has long been on the NSA's wish list and according to the Guardian, in an article published in September 2013, the NSA and Britain's GCHQ had "successfully cracked" much of the online encryption Internet users rely on to secure email and other sensitive transactions and data.

Schneier is one of many who have questioned how such a major issue could have been included in the OpenSSL technology, and suggested that, within the context of the PRISM scandal, intelligence agencies may have played a part. "At this point, the odds are close to one that every target has had its private keys extracted by multiple intelligence agencies," he said.

"The real question is whether or not someone deliberately inserted this bug into OpenSSL and has had two years of unfettered access to everything."

Some of the concerns as regards NSA snooping pre-dates the existence of Heartbleed. Nonetheless, the discovery of Heartbleed raises the issue concerning Internet security and privacy once again.

Reporting & advice

Following its discovery on Friday 4th April, Google immediately patched the gaping security hole, as did other tech companies that were made aware of it before it was finally made public on Monday 7th. Even then news leaked out slowly and with much confusion over what people should do. On Tuesday 8th April the BBC reported the vulnerability but gave no clear advice as to what users might do to remain safe online. Indeed even the BBC later reported the whole issue had brought nothing but confusion. 

Other websites were more forthright and suggested Internet users change all their passwords. Time ran with just such a headline and Tumblr, the photosharing website now owned by Yahoo, suggested users take the day off and revise their password list.

"This might be a good day to call in sick and take some time to change your passwords everywhere — especially your high-security services like email, file storage, and banking, which may have been compromised by this bug," Tumblr wrote on an online post.

Bad advice

Whilst such suggestions seemed good advice on the face of it, following through could have left some people even more exposed than they were already. Should a website or server not made appropriate changes and updated certificates and patches, Internet users may, by changing their password pass this on to third parties. Indeed given the vulnerability was now public there would be a far stronger chance that vulnerable websites would be targeted by hackers looking for such data.

In fact the best advice was in fact to sit back a little and wait. Users were correctly advised by some news outlets to check to see whether a website was vulnerable, and whether it had carried out the necessary updates. Only then should users change passwords.

The Heartbleed website itself helped by providing a tool in order to identify affected sites.

Other independent technology websites helped out by providing lists of affected sites and others which were not. Mashable provided a useful list and some advice alongside, while Github also published an extensive list of vulnerable websites [as of 8th April]. Mainstream media reports were however scant on detail. For example ABC cited only a handful of well known tech companies such as Google, Facebook and Yahoo.

The general advice now was that people should change passwords, with the caveat that the site be checked to see that it had patched the security holes. On Wednesday 8th April the BBC reported that both "tech firms" and "security advisors" were urging people to change all their passwords, advice that was repeated on other news outlets throughout the week [Daily Mail].

But other reports in other media suggested the opposite. On the same day the Guardian wrote that "security experts" were warning people not to update passwords.

Confused reports

But what of the tech firms, banks and websites themselves? It appeared they were just as clueless, confused or simply remained silent over the whole issue.

Few sent emails or posted messages on their websites concerning the bug and as to what their users might do.

Indeed given the possibility that even banks might have been affected there might well have been a sense of panic from many uses of online banking systems. Yet banks were either evasive or non committal.

When contacted by the Daily Mail on the 9th April many of Britain's major banks would not comment on whether passwords should be changed. The HSBC said they were 'monitoring' the situation and a Lloyds spokesman said they would not comment on security issues.

Yet in an article published in the Daily Mirror it reported that Lloyds, NatWest and the Royal Bank of Scotland had said their websites were not vulnerable to attack. On the other side of the Atlantic there was just as much confusion. CBC reported that banks weren't at risk but CNN said they could not verify whether American Express and a number of other financial companies were vulnerable. By Thursday the Telegraph provided some clarification in its list which showed UK banks were unaffected

Meanwhile no major banking organisation made any public statement to their users through their websites, email or letter.

In truth, even if vulnerable to the OpenSSL bug most banks have a second layer of security such as the use of special USB sticks, electronic keypads or interfaces within pages which evade keylogging viruses. Nonetheless the absence of information has left some people who use the Internet confused and worried.

Outside of banking there are things that may also have helped prevent third parties accessing data such as 2-step-verification as used by Google and others. Essentially this requires a mobile phone to which special codes are sent in order to log-in at an unfamiliar location or computer.

No-one safe

Such methods can certainly help to protect users but as Reuters reported on Wednesday there is little most people can do to protect themselves from such bugs.

With OpenSSL used on about two-thirds of all web servers there is much patching to be done. To look at it another way it affects more than 60% of the world's websites and some half a million servers. This will be difficult for the millions of websites and companies involved [PCWorld]. In the meantime hackers will be attempting to exploit the remaining open holes.

And with the cat out of the bag, and with many sites still unpatched it is open season for hackers and phishers. Kurt Baumgartner, a researcher with security software maker Kaspersky Lab, told Reuters his firm uncovered evidence Monday that a few hacking groups believed to be involved in state-sponsored cyber espionage were running scans shortly after news of the bug first surfaced on Monday.

By Tuesday, Kaspersky had identified scans coming from "tens" of actors, and the number increased on Wednesday after Rapid7 released a free tool for conducting such scans. "The problem is insidious," Baumgartner said. "Now it is amateur hour. Everybody is doing it."

The risks go further with Kaspersky Lab's Baumgartner saying that devices besides servers could be vulnerable to attacks because they run software programs with vulnerable OpenSSL code built into them.

Others affected

They include versions of Cisco Systems Inc's AnyConnect for iOS and Desktop Collaboration, Tor, OpenVPN and Viscosity from Spark Labs. The developers of those programs should have either updated their software or published directions for users on how to mitigate potential attacks.

Indeed many have already addressed the issue though many users of such services did not get an update emailed to them [VPNspblog]. Instead updates were often posted on social media such as one by 12VPN on Twitter which stated that their webservers were patched and their VPN methods were not affected. As such many users may well have missed this important message.

Problems were further compounded when Cisco and Juniper revealed their server equipment was also affected by Heartbleed [WSJ]. And while the average user of Facebook of Google changed their passwords, the issues surrounding Cisco and Juniper equipment could be time consuming. According to Jaime Blasco, director of AlienVault Labs, part of AlienVault LLC, it will take longer to fix networking equipment and software because Cisco and Juniper will have to rely on customers applying the patches they push out. "It's more painful to update these kinds of devices," Blasco said. "You have to go one by one." [Business Week]

Juniper and Cisco equipment is widely used around the world including China where it has been employed in the so-called Great Firewall of China. It is unclear if China's censorship machine was or will be affected, but websites across China were in just as much as a panic as the rest of the world to patch up the security holes.

Hackers exploit bug

On Thursday both Xinhua and the People's Daily reported that major websites were "taking steps" to mitigate problems. The People's Daily also said there were signs that some hackers had already taken advantage of the flaw, but did not elaborate further. And according to Wang Minghua with the National Computer Network Emergency Response Technical Team Coordination Center, "a surge in such attacks could be expected soon". The US have also issued warnings saying hackers are already exploiting the bug [BBC]. 

All this was surely enough to give anyone potentially affected by Heartbleed a severe headache. The damage may turn out to be small, but as the Guardian this week discussed, there is a risk such flaws could reoccur in the future. With programmer Robin Seggelmann, who wrote the code for the part of OpenSSL that led to Heartbleed, saying it was an accident, the risk of a human error recurring is a sure bet [Mashable].

tvnewswatch, London, UK