Aretha Franklin’s 1985 hit Who’s Zoomin’ Who? came to mind this week amid growing security concerns in Taiwan and around the world over the popular remote videoconferencing software created by Zoom Video Communications.
While Franklin was wondering about who was checking out a potential date more, a man or a woman, the public and government authorities in many places want to know who can or has been checking out what is being said, or seen, in video and audio communications using the San Jose, California-based tech company’s app.
Vice Premier Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) on Tuesday said that government agencies and state-run companies should not use Zoom’s products or other software that could pose a security risk, as the Executive Yuan sent out a letter reminding them to observe the Information and Communication Security Management Act (資通安全管理法).
The Ministry of Education followed those warnings up by telling schools that Zoom was banned for distance learning, much as the New York City school system had done earlier.
The German Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Wednesday banned its staff using Zoom’s software, saying that its security and data protection shortcomings made it too much of a risk. The US Senate reportedly later told its members to find an alternative platform for remote work, while agencies and companies ranging from NASA to SpaceX and Google have banned the app either partially or completely over security concerns.
The warnings and bans have crimped the tech start-up’s meteoric rise in the wake of lockdowns and travel bans as the COVID-19 outbreak turned into a pandemic that created an exponential need for videoconferencing and digital platforms by non-corporate users — including organizers of international policy meetings and the British Cabinet.
The backlash follows reports by Citizenlab and other researchers that Zoom software transmits and receives encryption and decryption keys from a server in Beijing, even for conversations between parties outside of China, and an increasing number of reports of “zoombombing” — the crashing or hijacking of meetings by strangers or even invited guests, in addition to earlier complaints that it was sharing data with Facebook.
The company’s latest woes appear to be threefold: Zoom’s app uses cryptographic techniques known to have weaknesses; its research and development appears to be done largely by programmers working for it, directly and indirectly, in China; and Zoom uses servers in Beijing to handle meeting keys, which leaves it open to potential legal demands from the Chinese government for access to the keys and transmissions.
Given the proliferation of phishing, ransomware, industrial espionage and cybercrime over the past few years, security needs are certainly paramount for those seeking to use videoconferencing technology, but Zoom’s app took off precisely because it marketed its ease of use, its “just working” mantra, and what now appears to be some deliberate obscuration of its transport and security protocols.
Taiwan has more reason than most to be wary of software and apps that are vulnerable to hacking from within China or legal pressure from Chinese authorities, but the numerous security lapses regarding Zoom’s products should make anyone cautious about using its technology — or others’ — for corporate, medical or government needs, unless security can be ensured.
As Zoom executives scramble to repair the public relations damage to their firm, the complaints raised about its apps are a prime example of why ease of access and convenience are no excuse for ignoring due diligence on privacy and security concerns, whether on an individual, organizational or governmental level.
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
Former Japanese minister of defense Shigeru Ishiba has been elected as president of the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and would be approved as prime minister in parliament today. Ishiba is a familiar face for Taiwanese, as he has visited the nation several times. His popularity among Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers has grown as a result of his multiple meetings and encounters with legislators and prominent figures in the government. The DPP and the LDP have close ties and have long maintained warm relations. Ishiba in August 2020 praised Taiwan’s
On Thursday last week, the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a well-researched report titled “The Widening Schism across the Taiwan Strait,” which focused on rising tensions between Taiwan and China, making a number of recommendations on how to avoid conflict. While it is of course laudable that a respected international organization such as the ICG is willing to think through possible avenues toward a peaceful resolution, the report contains a couple of fundamental flaws in the way it approaches the issue. First, it attempts to present a “balanced approach” by pushing back equally against Taiwan’s perceived transgressions as against Beijing’s military threats
RSS