Centre for Internet and Society

fb-Post

praskrishna — 2012-11-20T11:30:48Z

fbPost

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/fbpost_balthackeray.jpg

FB & Google have already monopolised Indian cyberspace

praskrishna — 2016-07-08T15:59:46Z

In an interview with Catch, Sunil Abraham, executive director of Center for Internet & Society, puts the recent US-India cyber relationship framework into perspective. Abraham also talks about how Indian surveillance policies are outdated and why the country has failed to check the hegemonic tendencies of companies like Facebook and Google.

The interview was published by Catch News on July 3, 2016.

US-India signed a cyber relationship framework earlier this month. Could you explain some of the takeouts that may have important implications in the near future?

In the framework, both sides have made a "commitment to the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance" - in immediate practical terms that means India will accept the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) transition proposed for the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Unfortunately, as my colleague Pranesh Prakash points out "U.S. state control over the core of the internet's domain name system is not being removed by the transition that is currently underway."

India along with Brazil and other emerging powers should have insisted that the question of jurisdiction be addressed before the transition. We must remember, that the multi-stakeholder model is just a fancy name for open and participatory self-regulation by the private sector. While the multi-stakeholder model is useful as a complement to traditional state-led regulation, it cannot be used to protect human rights or ensure the security of a nation state.

[That is precisely why - the very next sentence in the announcement for the the framework for the US-India Cyber Relationship says "a recognition of the leading role for governments in cyber security matters relating to national security". This is because ICANN-style multistakeholderism requires all stakeholders to be on "equal footing" without "distinct roles and responsibilities". In other words, the governments are saying that the multistakeholder model is fine for all Internet Governance areas with the exception of Cyber Security. Given the limits of the multistakeholder model this is indeed the wise thing to do. Since American corporations dominate the Internet, US foreign policy has historically pushed for the multistakeholder model as fig leaf for forbearance and reduced foreign regulatory burden American corporations operating in other jurisdictions. Therefore India must not drink the multistakeholder cool-aid whole sale. It cannot afford a laissez-faire approach where it waits for corporations to self-regulate - it must regulate whenever public interest or human rights are harmed. In other words, it must go beyond the multistakeholder model and produce appropriate regulation where necessary. Needless to add - it must also deregulate in areas where harms don't exist. Apart from this many of the details of the announcement are positive steps that will increase security in India and the USA, and indeed the also across the world.]

What are some aspects of Intellectual Property Rights that should be looked at, in the context of the framework?

There is some language around Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) that should be examined carefully too. The US corporations benefit from a maximalist IP regime. But Make in India, Digital India and Startup India all depend on flexibilities to the IP regime and therefore India should refuse signing. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) obligations like the "Digital 2 Dozen" which the US is actively proselytizing across the Pacific. If we make that mistake, we will make zero progress in indigenous security research and product development and also many other areas of our economy, health sector and education sector will be severely compromised. Therefore it would be best to keep IP rights expansion and enforcement out of the framework for the US-India Cyber Relationship.

The PIL seeking a ban on WhatsApp was refused by the SC recently. Encrypted messaging services like Telegram however, have been used in the past by terror groups. What's your take on such end-to-end encryption services?

Privacy and security are two sides of the same coin. You cannot have one without the other. End-to-end encryption is the basis for online privacy. End-to-end encryption is a pre-requisite for many legitimate actions of law abiding citizens online such as commerce, banking, tele-medicine, protection of intellectual property, witness/source protection, client confidentiality etc. Therefore, banning end-to-end encryption would mean the death of individual privacy and national security.

If the government wants to promote cyber security it should promote the use of end-to-end encryption amongst law abiding citizens.

Terrorist have to be stopped through targeted profiling, surveillance and interception. Big data analytics may be useful to watch for patterns in the meta data but there is no replacement for good old fashioned police work.

Once suspects have been identified the encrypted channels can be compromised by:

Placing trojans on the end-user devices
Performing man-in-the-middle attacks and
Using brute force attacks with super computers.

Snowden's revelations have made it very clear that blanket and mass surveillance does not help foil terror attacks or stop organised crime. So far, research and government reports from across the world indicate that only a minority of terrorists use encryption. However, this situation may change.

We don't have any proper encryption policy under the IT Act yet. What's taking so long and what are the key points that any policy in this matter must include in future?

We need many different types of encryption policies. We need a policy that mandates encryption and digital signature for all government personnel and also for all government transactions. We need policies that promote research and development in cryptography and mathematics. We need to update our criminal procedure code so that encrypted communications and data can be targeted by law enforcement and used effectively in the criminal justice process.

However, we should not have any broad encryption policy that tries to regulate encryption as a technology. That would be a highly regressive move and will be impossible to enforce. That would breed contempt for rule of law.

Surveillance and the tech around it has been contentious for various governments. Where do we stand vis-a-vis regulating surveillance measures by the state?

Our surveillance and interception laws are outdated. They need to be modernized to deal with advancements in technology and also global developments when it comes to data protection and privacy law.

In fact, our organisation was part of a global effort called Necessary and Proportionate which identified 13 principles to modernise surveillance which are connected to various aspects such as Legality, Legitimate aim, Competent judicial authority, Integrity of communications and systems and more. Some of these principles may have to be customised for the Indian context. [For example, given the load on courts perhaps India should stay with executive authorization of interceptions and data access requests. However, getting the law correct is only half the job. For the law cannot fix what the technology has broken. Some surveillance projects are well designed. For ex. the NATGRID - from what I understand it is a standard and platform that which will allow 12 security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies to temporarily make unions of sub-sets of 21 data sources. These automated temporary databases will be created under existing data access provisions of the law. I also hope the NATGRID is also using cryptography to ensure the maintenance of a non-repudiable log that will identify all officers involved in authorizing the each request and accessing the resultant data. Unfortunately, other surveillance projects are unmitigated disasters. For example, UID or Aadhaar. Many Indians don't realize that Aadhaar is a surveillance project. Biometrics is just a fancy name for remote, covert and non-consensual identification technology. Using the UID database the government can identify every single Indian without their consent. The so called "consent layer" in the India Stack is being developed by volunteers outside the UIDAI to avoid transparency under the Right to Information Act. Nothing in the current layer of the "consent layer" allows citizens to revoke consent. There is no facility in the UID Act to delete yourself from the database. Identity information aka the UID number and authentication information aka your biometrics for about a billion Indians have been collected and stored in a centralized location. It is as if our parliamentarians have written an open letter to criminals and foreign governments says "here is the information you need to wreck whole sale damage - come and get it". Hopefully the Supreme Court will save us from this impending disaster.]

With a sluggish US market, India has the biggest potential for companies like FB & Google, next only to China. Do you feel that in the quest to take over the Indian market, FB & Google are going to monopolise cyberspace in India?

I have news for you - they have already monopolised Indian cyberspace. They have completely wiped out competition in certain domains.

One of the many reasons they have done this is because we don't have laws and regulations to temper their hegemonic tendencies. For example, we could use data portability and interoperability mandates for social media to spark competition in markets where there are entrenched monopolies.

Competition law can be used to protect other firms from abuse of market power. Consumer protection law and privacy law could be used to ensure that user's rights are not compromised in the race for market share. In addition, a modern privacy law compliant with the best practices in the European Data Protection Regulation 2016, would allow emerging Indian companies to compete with giants like Facebook and Google on a level playing field. [Speaking of level playing field - only recently has the government introduced the "equalization levy". This was long overdue. Imagine the amount of tax that could have been collected so far and damage that has been done to competition. Regardless the current NDA government deserves our kudos for ensuring that Facebook and Google contribute their fair share of taxes. The new IPR Policy was also an opportunity to address the monopoly of Google and Facebook. There should have been a concerted attempt to use free/open source software, open standard and open content to bolster Indic language technologies. A billion dollars from every spectrum auction should be used to create incentives for Indian private sector, research and academic organisation who can contribute openly to the Indic cyberspace. This is the market where we can still build a highly competitive market. Today, given government inaction - millions of Indians are training Google's language platforms every time they use machine translation or speech to text technologies. This corpus of information will not be available for public interest research. Ideally we should also have Indians contributing to commons-based peer production projects like Wikipedia for their Indic language needs. Unfortunately the government totally missed this opportunity.]

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/catch-news-asad-ali-july-3-2016-fb-and-google-have-already-monopolised-indian-cyberspace

FB

praskrishna — 2014-04-03T09:25:25Z

Facebook

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/FB.png

FB

praskrishna — 2018-10-26T00:51:19Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy3_of_FB.png

FB

praskrishna — 2016-09-14T09:48:05Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy3_of_FB.jpg

FB

praskrishna — 2016-01-27T02:53:19Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy2_of_FB.png

FB

praskrishna — 2016-01-27T02:51:13Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_FB.png

FB

praskrishna — 2016-03-16T14:29:21Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_FB.jpg

FB

praskrishna — 2016-03-16T14:29:15Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/FB.jpg

FB

praskrishna — 2016-03-16T14:32:20Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy2_of_FB.jpg

Father-son duo promote Punjabi online

praskrishna — 2014-02-06T01:52:17Z

A father-son duo has been working to include more information about Punjab and Punjabi on Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia.

The article by Jatinder Preet was published in the Sunday Guardian on February 1, 2014.

Charan Gill and his son Satdeep Gill have written hundreds of articles in English, Hindi and Punjabi in both Shahmukhi and Gurmukhi scripts. The father-son duo recently represented Punjabi in the first ever Train the Trainer Program in India, held at the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS-A2K) in Bangalore. The four-day event was organised for capacity building amongst Wikimedia volunteers for effective and efficient outreach programs in their respective regions to expand the Wikimedia movement in India, informed Charan Gill.

Satdeep Gill, a graduate student at Punjabi University, Patiala was already a contributor to the Punjabi Wikipedia when he attended a workshop held by veteran Punjabi Wikipedian G.S. Guglani. Satdeep became quite active after the workshop and soon his father too joined in. Charan informs he has contributed around 2700 articles, while Satdeep who is one of the administrators, has written around 600 pages. When he started there were around 3000 articles and there were too many factual and other errors, said Charan. He started editing older articles and adding newer ones along with Satdeep. There were others who joined in and now it has around 8700 articles. "Our target is to reach 10,000 by April," said Charan.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/sunday-guardian-february-1-2014-jatinder-preet-father-son-duo-promote-punjabi-online

Faking it on WhatsApp: How India's favourite messaging app is turning into a rumour mill

praskrishna — 2017-05-19T14:44:05Z

Spreading fast and wild on WhatsApp fake news about riots, ‘miracle’ currency

The article by Samarth Bansal was published in the Hindustan Times on May 19, 2017. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

It didn’t take long after demonetisation for almost everyone to hear about the ‘special properties’ of the new Rs 2000 note, which was said to include a ‘built-in GPS-enabled nano-chip’. News of this high-tech feature spread rapidly, even though there was no notification about it from the Reserve Bank of India or any other government department. What there was, instead, was a popular WhatsApp message.

WhatsApp messages were involved in another fake-news controversy the very same month, when word of a salt shortage in North India spread widely. The fake news unleashed panic, and in Hyderabad, among other places, salt prices increased by a factor of four. It even extracted a victim, a woman died in Bakarganj Bazaar, Kanpur, when she slipped and fell into a drain in a panicked buying melee.

This isn’t the only time that fake news that circulated on WhatsApp led to violence. In 2013, messages sent on WhatsApp helped to incite riots in Muzaffarnagar. A two-year old video of a lynching in Pakistan was mischievously promoted as an attack on two Hindu boys by Muslims in Kawal village of Muzaffarnagar. The video, in turn, provoked calls for revenge. Though the police blocked the video on the internet, its spread could not be stopped on the app.

Facebook, WhatsApp’s parent company, has faced much flak for not curbing the circulation of fake news. On its part, Facebook has now said it will try to flag questionable news stories with the help of users and external fact checkers to cope with this problem.

But the instant messaging app poses similar challenges in a particularly intractable form. WhatsApp offers a particularly private medium of communication, something many people like about it. A case currently being heard at the Supreme Court of India concerns the protection of this very quality — while WhatsApp would like to allow Facebook to access its user data, a PIL contends that this move would be a violation of privacy.

The same factors of WhatsApp’s design that protect its users also make it difficult or impossible to study many aspects of communication on the platform. Even as anecdotal evidence piles up that WhatsApp is being used to distribute fake news, then, it remains hard to know just what is happening or what can be done in response.

Facebook vs WhatsApp

The differences between WhatsApp and Facebook dictate the ways people share news on each platform. “Facebook is a social platform where people express their concerns, react, and build perceptions based on an individual’s posts,” says Anoop Mishra, a digital marketing and social media consultant. “However, on WhatsApp, which is an end-to-end messaging platform, people share content in a more personal and closed way.”

It is because the primary mode of sharing on instant messaging apps is one-to-one, as opposed to the one-to-many relationship on Facebook, that the former feels more personal. This personal quality of most of the content shared directly or on small groups via WhatsApp carries with it the implicit endorsement of people you know. Given that the app is now a large and growing part of people’s lives on mobile devices, the way it influences news consumption demands more attention. “Lack of content moderation and privacy controls gives WhatsApp an edge over Facebook for sharing any type of multimedia content,” says Mishra.

For instance, to get your friends’ attention on Facebook, you need to tag them. Not every post by every friend shows up on your news feed; what you see is dictated by an algorithm. WhatsApp has a big advantage here since it works like a text message. You know that your message will be received by everyone you send it to.

A black hole for content

There is no non-anecdotal way to track the spread of content on WhatsApp. Facebook, for instance, is compatible with analytics tools capable of determining that a particular news report has been shared 7,000 times, say, or viewed 20,000 times.

Such analysis is not feasible with WhatsApp, which offers no way to mine social media data to understand the patterns, trends, or reach of any given message. Even its original source is completely opaque. What is true of particular texts also applies to the total sum of activity on WhatsApp: it is impossible to determine what kinds of messages the public is sharing most, what sorts of conditions people are sharing these messages in, or where in the world they are spreading.

Surpassing one billion

WhatsApp arrived in India at the beginning of the decade. At that time, chat apps were generally considered to be interchangeable with text messages. Today they’re widely understood to support sharing of all forms of multimedia content — photos, videos, audio files and even text documents.

Simplicity is one of WhatsApp’s signature virtues. All you need to do is download it: the programme automatically scans your phone book and links up with your contacts who are also users. Crucially, you don’t even need a password. According to Guide to Chat Apps, a report by the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University, the requirement of a password is “a significant barrier to entry for many people in emerging markets when it comes to other apps and social media platforms.”

In February 2016, WhatsApp crossed the one billion mark for active users worldwide. India is its largest market, with about 160 million active users.

WhatsApping the news

WhatsApp’s reach and growing role in the consumption of photos and videos has prompted media companies to take it seriously as a distribution channel. A report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism highlights the increasing adoption of new social networks among young people and the growing importance of recommendations as a gateway to news. “The digital generation expects the news to come to them,” says the report’s author journalist Nic Newman in a press release. “Young people rarely go directly to a mainstream news website anymore.”

But unlike apps like WeChat and Snapchat, which are gaining currency among millennials, WhatsApp hasn’t positioned itself as a media distribution platform. Media organisations have been experimenting nonetheless. For instance, the BBC ran pilots on WhatsApp and WeChat for the Indian elections in 2014. Users subscribed to the BBC news service on WhatsApp by adding a number to their contacts and sending a request message to join. They were then put on a broadcast list that sent them up to three updates a day in Hindi and English. Many media outlets, including ours, now have a WhatsApp sharing icon on their mobile websites.

For all its susceptibility to the dissemination of fake news, WhatsApp presents unique challenges to the mass sharing of content, just as it does for the mass tracking of it. It has no official application program interface (API), the service which allows programmers to build applications that automate the functions of a platform. “An official WhatsApp API release could spawn an entirely new industry of startups, in much the same way that the release of Twitter’s API did,” says the Tow Center report. “Except this time, it could be even bigger, given WhatsApp’s near-billion account user base.” Reaching out to a wider audience on WhatsApp — with either fake or authentic news — needs to be performed manually, via broadcast lists, which allow you to send the same message to many people at once, and groups.

State of control

Fake news might lead only to harmless speculation or minor inconvenience, as it did with rumours about the Rs 2000 note, or it could be dangerous, as was the case during the Muzaffarnagar riots. Pranesh Prakash, a policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society, a research and advocacy group focused on digital technology, believes that social media rumours gain potency after the imposition of censorship, under which people begin to wonder what the government is trying to conceal. “There is no way rumours can be completely quelled,” he says, “but the state can act against rumours through clear communication that calls out particular rumours, and tells people not to believe them.”

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/hindustan-times-samarth-bansal-faking-it-on-whatsapp-how-india-s-favourite-messaging-app-turned-into-a-rumour-mill

Faking a stand

praskrishna — 2015-09-27T12:41:51Z

A 'Like' here, a forward there, new-age India's patriotism is confined to social media

The article by Shweta T. Nanda was published in the Week on September 20, 2015. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

On the eve of Independence Day, Pune-based homemaker Archana Chaurasia, 36, was engaged in an animated conversation with friends when a WhatsApp message notification broke the rhythm of their chat. The content of the forwarded text pushed her into a deep thought for a few seconds. Brimming with pride, she forwarded it to five others on her contact list before returning to the chitchat.

The message read:
The property left behind by Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam:
He owned 6 pants (2 DRDO uniforms), 4 shirts (2 DRDO uniforms), 3 suits (1 western, 2 Indian), 2500 books, 1 flat (which he has donated), 1 Padmashri, 1 Padmabhushan, 1 Bharat Ratna, 16 doctorates, 1 website, 1 twitter account, 1 email id. He didn't have any TV, AC, car, jewellery, shares, land or bank balance.

He had even donated the last 8 years' pension towards the development of his village. He was a real patriot and true Indian... India will forever be grateful to you, sir… Is there any politician compared to him? Make sure all your friends and dear ones read this before 15th August.

“Such forwards evoke patriotism. While most of us aren’t able to do much for the nation, the least one can do is forward such interesting messages and share your love for the country,” explains Chaurasia.

Taken in by a sense of national pride, netizens are not thinking twice before forwarding messages. What we overlook though is how such innocent forwards are propelling a sense of false patriotism, especially among the youth. Often, the content of such messages is erroneous. For instance, DRDO doesn’t have a uniform!

Similarly, you might have thought that when the Empire State Building in New York was lit up in tricolour for Independence Day, it was a US government initiative. But in reality, some Indian Americans had raised money, booked it in advance and adorned it with saffron, white and green lights. The building can be booked in advance by anyone like a swish hall in a five-star hotel.

The messages could be provocative in the garb of ‘faux patriotism’—a recent video clip showing Indian Army firing at its Pakistani counterpart was, in fact, a footage of a three-year-old artillery exercise. Likewise, forwarded messages claiming Brahmos Missiles have been deployed on the Indo-Pak border and UNESCO has judged Jana Gana Mana as the world’s best national anthem were also incorrect.

“The desire to proclaim the greatness of your own political identity, which can often be linked to a religion, is a large part of what fuels the forwarding phenomenon, apart from the innate desire to share new-found knowledge,” says Pranesh Prakash, policy director at The Centre for Internet and Society, Bengaluru. That is why, forwarded messages that celebrate the achievements of historical figures and reassert that Indians have always been great go viral, he explains. “As you trust the person who is sending it, you don’t think about its accuracy. In fact, you don’t tend to question the authenticity of anything that reinforces a view that you already hold,” he says.

Faiz Ullah, assistant professor of media and cultural studies at Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, however, looks at it as the signal of a changing society, one that is witnessing the rise of a show-off culture, symbolism and individualism.

“The idea of patriotism is being trivialised,” he says. “It happens when you let the market decide your action. You are known for what you consume than what you give up. And the focus is more on forwarding patriotic messages or marketers announcing freedom sales than doing something substantial for the nation.”

E-forwards are a powerful tool in mobilising people, says Gaurav Singh, owner of Poltubaaz, an election management firm and political consultancy. The Delhi-based company also offers bulk e-texting services across social media and communication platforms.

While there is no study on the exact market size and open rate of such forwards across platforms, in case of emails, says Singh, out of 100 such messages, at least 30 are opened by users. Data analytics also allows one to zero in on the areas of interest of users and forward them relevant content accordingly.

“Some people create such messages just for fun, some do it to serve a commercial purpose, and some others aim to gain political mileage out of it,” says Singh. “For instance, supporters of political parties or those who swear by a certain kind of ideology create and circulate such messages to evoke a particular kind of mass sentiment.” Agrees Rakshit Tandon, a consultant with Internet and Mobile Association of India: “These networks play a key role in peddling strong ideologies.”

Congress spokesman Randeep Singh Surjewala says many such messages are the work of BJP supporters, who want to alter the country’s cultural landscape to reap long-term political dividends. “Their dirty tricks department is using vitriolic measures and false propaganda to influence people,” he says.

But Vinod Bansal, a spokesman of Vishva Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, says these organisations don't believe in false propaganda but in doing national service. “Anyway, if such forwarded messages are factually correct and evoke patriotism, there is nothing wrong with them,” he says. For instance, if a video of terrorist Yakub Memon’s hanging is being popularised, you can’t call it Hinduisation; instead it is nationalism, he adds.

Another entrepreneur who owns a political campaign management firm that provided consultancy services to a national party in the 2014 general elections, however, reveals that party supporters, particularly of the youth wing, work round-the-clock to circulate e-forwards targeting a particular vote bank, aiming at both long-term and immediate political benefits. “We cater to such requests, and make sure that the content is not in-your-face but subtle yet effective.”

But is there a way to curb such erroneous e-forwards? Although it is possible to zero in on the point of origin of such messages on social media, it also means invading users’ privacy, says Rakesh Sharma, Supreme Court lawyer and founder of social networking platform Sabakuch.com. “Until someone objects to the content of the forwarded message [finding it defaming or explicit], we can’t do anything about it.”

Tandon, who is also an adviser to Uttar Pradesh Police’s cyber complaint redressal cell, says that unless cyber users learn “netiquettes” and take to “internet hygiene”, this menace will not stop. “Users have a responsibility, too,” he says. “Unless you know the authenticity of forwarded messages, don’t circulate them. Also, educate others.”

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-week-september-20-2015-shweta-t-nanda-faking-a-stand

Fake News, Rumors & Online Content Regulation

praskrishna — 2017-02-28T02:46:13Z

Medianama and Mint organized #NAMApolicy open house on 'Fake News, Rumors & Online Content Regulation' on February 22, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre. Japreet Grewal and Amber Sinha attended the event.

The discussions broadly covered the impact of Fake News on democratic processes, Legal status of online content regulation in India & administrative challenges with Fake News, Responsibility and accountability of online platforms, while addressing challenges of identification of sources of Fake News, Potential legal and non-legal ways of addressing Fake News, etc.

Agenda

06:30 to 07:00 pm - Registration
07:00 to 07:10 pm - Introductory note
07:10 to 09:00 pm - Round-table discussion moderated by Nikhil Pahwa
09:00 pm onwards - Networking dinner

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/fake-news-rumors-online-content-regulation

Fake News Cascade

praskrishna — 2018-12-11T13:34:45Z

Fake News Cascade

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/FakeNewsCascade.jpg