Thursday, February 15, 2018

UK blames Russia for cyber attack, says won't tolerate disruption - Reuters

CYBER RISKFEBRUARY 15, 2018 / 7:07 PM / UPDATED 2 HOURS AGO
UK blames Russia for cyber attack, says won't tolerate disruption
Reuters Staff
LONDON/MOSCOW (Reuters) - Britain blamed Russia on Thursday for a cyber-attack last year, publicly pointing the finger at Moscow for spreading a virus which disrupted companies across Europe including UK-based Reckitt Benckiser (RB.L).
FILE PHOTO: A man types on a computer keyboard in Warsaw in this February 28, 2013 illustration file picture. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel/Files
Russia denied the accusation, saying it was part of “Russophobic” campaign it said was being waged by some Western countries.
The so-called NotPetya attack in June started in Ukraine where it crippled government and business computers before spreading around the world, halting operations at ports, factories and offices.
Russia denies British allegations that Moscow was behind cyber-attack
Britain’s foreign ministry said the attack originated from the Russian military.
“The decision to publicly attribute this incident underlines the fact that the UK and its allies will not tolerate malicious cyber activity,” the ministry said in a statement.
“The attack masqueraded as a criminal enterprise but its purpose was principally to disrupt,” it said.
“Primary targets were Ukrainian financial, energy and government sectors. Its indiscriminate design caused it to spread further, affecting other European and Russian business.”
Moscow has previously denied being behind the NotPetya attack, and on Thursday Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia “categorically denies the allegations”.
“We consider (them)... groundless. This is nothing more than a continuation of a Russophobic campaign that is without proof,” Peskov told a conference call with reporters.
Reckitt, a consumer goods maker, as well as Danish shipping company AP Moller-Maersk S/A (MAERSKb.CO), were among those affected, with the total cost of the attack running into hundreds of millions of pounds.
British defense minister Gavin Williamson said the attack was part of a new era of warfare and Britain had to be ready to respond. “We must be primed and ready to tackle these stark and intensifying threats,” he said in a statement.
Britain has recently become more vocal about the threat posed by Russia at a time when some members of the ruling Conservative Party have expressed concern about the impact of cuts to defense spending.
In November Prime Minister Theresa May accused Russia of meddling in elections and planting fake stories in the media.

Newt Gingrich: Here’s how to balance the federal budget in the next decade - Fox News

14/2/2018
BUDGET just in
Newt Gingrich: Here’s how to balance the federal budget in the next decade
Newt Gingrich By Newt Gingrich | Fox News
Breaking down Trump's 2019 budget proposal
President's budget aims to jump-start construction and make it easier to fire federal workers. The Chair of Business and Finance Brian Brenberg provides insight on 'Fox & Friends First.'
Let me offer hope to those who believe a balanced federal budget is important.
It is possible to balance the budget in the next decade – if we have the intelligence to focus on things that will work and avoid things that are impossible.
I should know. The only four balanced federal budgets since 1969 came from a project House Republicans insisted on when I was speaker.
We set out in the spring of 1995 to balance the budget as an act of policy. We had passed a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget in the House with a vote of 300-132 and we came within three votes of passing it in the Senate with a final vote of 64-35.
Clearly, there was a solid majority in favor of a balanced budget in both the House and Senate. However, amending the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress.
At a working dinner in the Capitol a few days later, the House Republican leadership discussed simply pretending that the amendment had passed and working to balance the budget anyway.
Our most senior member, Bill Archer, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, had campaigned on balancing the federal budget when he replaced George H.W. Bush as the representative for the 7th Congressional District of Texas in 1971. At this dinner, 24 years later, we set out to implement his promise.
Budget Chairman John Kasich of Ohio played a key role in developing and implementing the first balanced budget in a generation. He had strong support from House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, Appropriations Chairman Bob Livingston of Louisiana, and Energy and Commerce Chairman Tom Bliley of Virginia.
As we prepared for that extraordinary project, we were helped by business leaders who had led their companies through large-scale changes. Every Wednesday evening, we would have 15 business leaders come in for dinner to brief us on what big changes require.
Of course, balancing the federal budget required changes on a scale that dwarfed virtually all the companies advising us. After all, President Clinton’s proposed federal budget for the previous year aimed to increase spending from $1.468 trillion to $1.78 trillion over five years.
Nonetheless, the Republican leadership in 1995 had three principles which came up over and over:
· Define large goals with incredibly short deadlines
· Delegate like crazy and hold people accountable (you get what you inspect, not what you expect)
· Throw all the “experts” out of the room. They will waste your time with what can’t be done and reject the changes you need.
We applied these principles over and over. We also listened to our members – to learn about good ideas and to learn what we could and could not pass.
We had a deliberate strategy of educating the country and appealing to the American people so that we could sustain the effort to balance the budget, despite the best efforts of the news media and the Clinton administration to stop us.
Some of what we did was very popular. Reforming welfare and requiring able-bodied adults to go to work in exchange for benefits had 95 percent approval in a 1995 Hart/Teeter poll for NBC and the Wall Street Journal.
Our greatest challenge was to modernize Medicare, so we could save money while improving choices for senior citizens. We knew this was very dangerous in a presidential election year.
We spent a year earning the trust of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) – the one organization that could have destroyed our effort. We spent that same year training our members, so they could hold town hall meetings on Medicare reform and win the support of their constituents.
We also made deep cuts to the capital gains tax in order to accelerate economic growth and increase government revenue through higher incomes rather than higher taxes.
All this effort paid off both in balancing the budget and in helping House Republicans keep our newly made House majority.
This experience suggests the following principles for getting back to a balanced budget:
First, we must maximize economic growth. This is the key to balancing the budget in a free society. It is virtually impossible to sustain an austerity budget filled with economic pain.
Maximizing economic growth leads to a happier population as jobs, take-home pay and retirement benefits increase. It also increases the flow of revenue to the government so the budget becomes easier to balance.
The increased profitability and wealth from economic growth make it possible for new ideas and new entrepreneurs to grow rapidly. The rise of companies such as Amazon, Wal-Mart, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Blue Origin, SpaceX and others happen more easily and faster in a growing economy.
Second, we must identify extremely large cost centers that can be fixed to really change long-term spending. Welfare reform was an example from our balanced budget effort in the 1990s. Moving people from welfare to work saved an enormous amount of money for the federal government and states. It was one of the keys to balancing the budget.
Some cost centers to look at today include:
1. Higher education, which has grown more expensive more quickly than health care. The work of Mitch Daniels at Purdue University, Dr. Jerry Davis at College of the Ozarks, Brandon Busteed at Gallup and Sebastian Thrun at Udacity are all examples of better learning at much lower costs.
2. Alzheimer’s is the costliest disease in America. From now to 2050 it will cost an estimated $20 trillion (about the size of the entire national debt). A crash program in brain science would probably do more to balance the budget than any other effort.
3. The Defense Department, NASA and other purchasing agencies should study Wal-Mart, Amazon, and other smart purchasers. Defense and space have to move at the speed of technology – not the speed of bureaucracy. When for the same price you can buy 10 flights with the private sector’s Falcon Heavy or John Glenn versus one flight with the government’s Space Launch System (which has yet to fly), you know there are huge savings.
4. The bureaucracies must be modernized to meet the age of the tablet and the smartphone. The 1943 Pentagon that was designed for manual typewriters and carbon paper ought to be turned into a triangle. Modern information systems can provide a huge difference in speed and capability.
5. The health-care system is the largest single driver of costs in America. A single giant solution – whether conservative or socialist – simply won’t work. No one is smart enough to replace 18 percent of the economy in one giant move. We need 1,000 steps of specific reforms all aimed toward lower costs, better access and more modern solutions.
Third, we must distinguish between true entitlements and transfer programs. There are three genuine earned entitlements: Social Security, Medicare and veterans’ benefits. In all three, people have done things to deserve support.
You can modernize and improve the entitlements, but you can’t cut them. Public reaction to entitlement cuts would be too explosive and would destroy the entire balanced budget effort. However, various transfer programs, such as welfare and food stamps, can all be rethought and reformed – starting with work requirements.
Fourth, fraud is rampant throughout government. More than $100 billion a year is stolen in Medicare and Medicaid alone. Applying modern anti-fraud techniques developed by the major credit card companies could save the federal government $100 billion to $200 billion a year ($1 trillion to $2 trillion over a decade).
These initial steps should give you confidence that a systematic effort can in fact balance the federal budget within a decade.
We have done it before. We can do it again.
Newt Gingrich is a Fox News contributor. A Republican, he was speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. Follow him on Twitter @NewtGingrich. His latest book is "Understanding Trump."

Australia bans ministers from having sex with staff after Barnaby Joyce scandal - Guardian


Australia bans ministers from having sex with staff after Barnaby Joyce scandal
Malcolm Turnbull responds to ‘shocking error of judgment’ by deputy PM, who had a relationship with a former staffer who is now pregnant
Katharine Murphy Political editor
@murpharoo
Thu 15 Feb 2018 19.09 AEDT Last modified on Thu 15 Feb 2018 19.32 AEDT
Malcolm Turnbull announces ban on ministers having sex with their staffers – video
Australia’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, will move to ban sexual relationships between ministers and their staff, in response to a scandal which has engulfed the deputy prime minister and leader of the National party, Barnaby Joyce.
Turnbull announced the ban at the end of a parliamentary week dominated by controversy over Joyce’s relationship with a former staffer, Vikki Campion, which began when Sydney’s Daily Telegraph published a front-page photograph effectively confirming the end of Joyce’s 24-year marriage, and Campion’s pregnancy.
Why is Barnaby Joyce's leadership under threat? – video explainer
The prime minister said on Thursday his deputy had made “a shocking error of judgment” and created a “world of woe” for the women in his life. He said Joyce was taking some personal leave to reflect and seek forgiveness from his former wife and four daughters, “and make a new home for his partner and their baby”.
In a swingeing assessment of Joyce’s conduct and judgment, reflecting a rupture in their relationship, Turnbull said the incident involving the deputy prime minister and Campion, who was employed as his media adviser, raised “some serious issues about the culture of this place, of this parliament”.
What Turnbull said about Joyce and the code of conduct changes – full transcript
Read more
The prime minister said the code of ministerial standards needed to “speak clearly about the values of respect in workplaces, the values of integrity that Australians expect us to have”.
He said Australians expected parliamentarians to behave decorously. Ministers needed to be “very conscious that their spouses and children sacrifice a great deal so they can carry on their political career, and their families deserve honour and respect”.
Turnbull said when it came to serving in public life, “values should be lived”.
He said he intended to add “a very clear and unequivocal provision” to the ministerial code of conduct: “Ministers, regardless of whether they are married or single, must not engage in sexual relations with staff.”
The prime minister’s declaration late afternoon, and his direct reflection on the behaviour of his colleague, followed confirmation earlier in the day that Joyce will not act in the top job, as is customary, when Turnbull departs Australia to visit Washington next week.
The Liberals govern in coalition with the Nationals, and when the prime minister is overseas, the leader of the National party acts in the role.
PM changes code of conduct to ban sex between ministers and staffers – as it happened
Read more
Turnbull confirmed that decision during parliamentary question time on Thursday, in a highly visible gesture tantamount to a vote of no confidence in the leader of the National party.
To compound Joyce’s woes, the Senate also passed a motion on Thursday afternoon calling on him to resign or be sacked. The vote passed 35 votes to 29, and no Liberal colleagues spoke in support of the deputy prime minister.
Nationals had hoped the rolling controversy around Joyce was beginning to subside at the conclusion of a difficult parliamentary week, but Turnbull’s public benching of his colleague at the opening of question time, and the late afternoon upgrade of the ministerial code of conduct, hangs a lantern over the deputy prime minister’s woes.
Senior Liberals, including the prime minister, have sought to distance themselves from the Joyce fracas throughout the week.
A spokesman for the deputy prime minister said the decision to take leave next week was Joyce’s. He had asked for personal leave because “he wanted to support his family and partner after such intense public focus on personal matters”.
As well as the obvious efforts by Liberals to isolate him, Joyce on Thursday also faced a fresh round of parliamentary scrutiny about his dealings with the businessman Greg Maguire, who supplied free accommodation in Armidale when the deputy prime minister separated from his wife of 24 years, Natalie.
After first suspending the standing orders in parliament early in the day to force Joyce to account for that arrangement, Labor then doubled down on the inquisition in question time.
The deputy prime minister told parliament Maguire had contacted him to offer him a place to stay in Armidale, rent-free, as a favour for a “mate”.
But the businessman has contradicted this version, previously telling two newspapers it was Joyce who first approached him seeking a temporary place to stay, and that the deputy prime minister offered to pay rent.
As well as pursuing the issue of whether or not Joyce had potentially misled the House of Representatives in his account of the conversation, and whether the contact breached ministerial standards, Labor also raised an instance where the Department of Agriculture picked up the tab for a $5,000 function at Maguire’s hotel in Armidale in 2016.
Barnaby Joyce and the difficulties avoiding a conflict of interest
In seeking to land a point about a potential breach of ministerial standards, the shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, pointed out Maguire had been the recipient of “at least $5,000 of taxpayers’ money in his pocket when he gave the deputy prime minister free accommodation” after the breakup of his marriage.
Joyce stood by his account of the conversation with Maguire concerning the Armidale property, and professed to be unaware about the $5,000 payment to the businessman for the departmental function at the Quality Hotel Powerhouse.
The deputy prime minister said it wasn’t notable to be unaware of such a small payment in a “multibillion-dollar department”.
The ministerial standards say ministers in their official capacity may accept customary official gifts, hospitality tokens of appreciation, but must not seek or encourage any form of gift in their personal capacity.
The rules also state that gifts “in a purely personal capacity” don’t need to be registered unless the parliamentarian judges that a conflict of interest “may be seen to exist”.
The prime minister told parliament that according to Joyce’s account of his conversation with Maguire “he did not encourage or solicit the gift, and unless honourable members opposite are able to present a case that his statements are false, then he has not breached that particular ministerial standard which I just quoted from”.

Coinbase Releases Tool for Merchants to Accept Cryptocurrencies - Fortune

15/2/2018
Coinbase Releases Tool for Merchants to Accept Cryptocurrencies
In this photo illustration, a visual representation of the digital Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin is displayed in front of the Bitcoin course's graph of Coinbase cryptocurrency exchange website on February 2, 2018 in Paris, France.
By BLOOMBERG Updated: February 14, 2018 9:19 PM ET | Originally published: February 15, 2018
It may become a whole lot easier to use cryptocurrencies for payments.
Digital-assets exchange Coinbase Inc. is releasing a service for merchants to accept Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ethereum and Litecoin payments, and deposit them into their own digital wallets, according to a blog post by the San Francisco-based company. The setup requires just an email address and a phone number.
The product, called Coinbase Commerce, can be directly integrated into a merchant’s checkout flow or added as a payment option on an e-commerce platform. Commerce platform Shopify, which was already accepting Bitcoin payments, is one of the first platforms to start using the service, Coinbase said.
Other merchants already taking cryptocurrencies are Overstock.com, Expedia Inc. and Microsoft Corp.

Regina Mustafa receives death threats in US mayor race - Al Jazeera

15/2/2018
Regina Mustafa receives death threats in US mayor race
Mustafa said she largely felt welcome in Rochester despite occasional confrontations [Twitter]
Mustafa said she largely felt welcome in Rochester despite occasional confrontations [Twitter]
A woman seeking to become the first Muslim mayor of a city in the US state of Minnesota has claimed receiving a death threat online.
Regina Mustafa, running for mayor in the city of Rochester, which is about 160km southeast of Minneapolis, said a threat to "execute" was made online by "Militia Movement" earlier this week.
"I have no way of knowing if the person is nearby or across the country," Mustafa told the Post-Bulletin.
On her Twitter page, Mustafa said: "It won't derail me. But any threats must be taken seriously. No one should feel threatened when wanting to serve their community in elected office."
Regina Mustafa
@cidi_cidimn
Threat to "Execute" me made online. It won't derail me. But any threats must be taken seriously. No one should feel threatened when wanting to serve their community in elected office.
3:46 AM - Feb 13, 2018
Mustafa said the threat, made on a post she made on Google Plus last year, has been reported to the police.
Almost 12,000 of Rochester's 114,000 population is Muslim.
In response to the threat, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) requested police to investigate the matter.
"We urge state and federal law enforcement authorities to investigate this implicit threat of violence targeting a member of a minority community seeking to take part in our nation’s political process," said Jaylani Hussein, CAIR Minnesota chapter's executive director.
According to a report in the Star Tribune, Mustafa had people shout at her from passing cars.
The report adds that a man walked up to her at a coffee shop last year and told her to "go home".
Rochester Police Department told The Independent that it was investigating the incident but as the threat was directly not aimed at Mustafa, it would be difficult to prosecute the individual.
"I'm concerned they're considering this as harassment," she said.
"I've suffered harassment. I know what harassment is. This is a threat."
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA NEWS

Boris Johnson talking 'total nonsense' about EU, European Commission president Juncker says - Independent

14/2/2018
Boris Johnson talking 'total nonsense' about EU, European Commission president Juncker says
Foreign Secretary had accused Juncker of wanting European superstate
Jon Stone Brussels @joncstone
Golden State Warriors coach blasts Trump and NRA over Florida shooting
Boris Johnson is talking “total nonsense” by claiming EU chiefs wants to turn the bloc into superstate, the President of the European Commission has said.
Asked for his response to comments made by the Foreign Secretary, Jean-Claude Juncker told reporters in Brussels that he was “strictly against” an EU superstate.
“Some in the British political society are against the truth, pretending that I am a stupid, stubborn federalist, that I am in favour of a European superstate,” Mr Juncker told a press conference.
Johnson plans EU speech for Valentine’s Day to unify warring Tories
“I am strictly against a European superstate. We are not the United States of America, we are the European Union, which is a rich body because we have these 27, or 28, nations.
“The European Union cannot be built against the European nations, so this is total nonsense.”
During the EU referendum campaign Mr Johnson had accused EU leaders like Mr Juncker of wanting to create a superstate similar to the ones sought by Hitler or Napoleon, but “by different methods”.
On Wednesday the Foreign Secretary gave a speech claiming that Brexit represented a “natural desire for self-government of the people, by the people, for the people” and a break from EU politicians’ plan to “create an overarching European state as the basis for a new sense of European political identity”.
Jean-Claude Juncker speaks about the future of Europe in Brussels (EbS)
Other EU politicians also piled in against Mr Johnson's address, in which the Foreign Secretary claimed that Brexit represented the extension of the principle of “liberal idealism”.
“Putting up barriers to the movement of trade and people and suggesting that the identity of citizens can only be national is not liberal – it’s quite the opposite,” said Guy Verhofstadt, the leader of the Liberal group in the European Parliament and the body’s Brexit co-ordinator.
Mr Juncker’s comments came after he himself made a speech laying out his vision for the future of Europe, with a bicameral legislature and directly elected single president.
“In the next European elections we need to make changes, make sure that Europe is at the heart of the whole electoral campaign,” he said.
But Mr Juncker said proposals such as trans-national lists and the merging of the European Council and European Commission presidencies would be unlikely to be implemented during his mandate due to a lack of support from member states.