Check out my new weekly podcast!

I was asked to be a guest on an internet radio show a couple times late last year. The host of that show decided that he needed to focus more on his business, and asked me if I would like to take over his show. I was floored – I’d never considered hosting my own show. I spoke at length with the network’s owner and agreed to give it go! We rebranded the show after my book and the very first episode went live last week (the second episode should be available shortly)! You can find it on the America Out Loud web site, as well as on iTunes. (It will show up on other podcast sites soon.)

Like the book and the newsletter, my goal is to provide timely, practical, easy-to-understand advice for securing your digital devices and guarding your online privacy. I will cover noteworthy news items, interview a guest about an important topic, and answer questions from listeners. Please check it out and tell your friends! If you have a question you’d like me to answer on the air, or if you happen to know of someone who would make a great guest, please drop me a line at “CareyParker” at “”.

Beware Hype and Click-Bait

(It’s been a while since I’ve written a full blog post. I’ve been putting most of my efforts into my weekly newsletter – be sure to subscribe to get weekly tips and news on cyber security and online privacy.)

Headline Hyperbole

This week, we saw the following headline from The Guardian: “WhatsApp vulnerability allows snooping on encrypted messages”. This story was immediately picked up by just about every other major tech news web site, with headlines that were even more dire:

  • A critical flaw (possibly a deliberate backdoor) allows for decryption of Whatsapp messages (BoingBoing)
  • WhatsApp Apparently Has a Dangerous Backdoor (Fortune)
  • WhatsApp encrypted messages can reportedly be intercepted through a security backdoor (Business Insider)

I swear there were others from big-name sites, but I can’t find them – I think they’ve been deleted or updated. Why? Because this story (like so many others) was completely overblown.

Which brings us to the point of this article: our online news is broken. It’s broken for much the same reasons that the media is broken in the US in general – it’s all driven by advertising dollars, and ad dollars are driven by clicks and eyeballs. (See also: On the Ethics of Ad-Blocking). But the problem is even more insidious when applied to the news because all the hyperbolic headlines and dire warnings are making it very hard to figure out which problems are real – and over time, like the boy who cried wolf, it desensitizes us all.


Let’s take this WhatsApp story as an example. The vague headline from The Guardian implies that WhatsApp is fatally flawed. And the other headlines above are even worse, trotting out the dreaded and highly-loaded term “backdoor”. Backdoor implies that someone at WhatsApp or Facebook (who bought WhatsApp) has deliberately created a vulnerability with the express purpose of allowing a third party to bypass message encryption whenever they wish and read your private communications.

The first few paragraphs from the article seem to confirm this. Some excerpts:

  • “A security vulnerability that can be used to allow Facebook and others to intercept and read encrypted messages has been found within its WhatsApp messaging service.”
  • “Privacy campaigners said the vulnerability is a ‘huge threat to freedom of speech’ and warned it could be used by government agencies as a backdoor to snoop on users who believe their messages to be secure.”
  • “If WhatsApp is asked by a government agency to disclose its messaging records, it can effectively grant access”

Now let’s talk about what’s really going on here. It’s a little technical, so bear with me.

The Devil In The Details

Modern digital communications use what’s called public key encryption. Unlike private key systems (which have a single, shared key to both encrypt and decrypt data), public key systems use two keys:

  1. Public key: Freely given to everyone, allows a sender to encrypt a message
  2. Private key: Fiercely protected and never shared, used to decrypt received messages that were encrypted with the public key

If you had a single, shared key, then you would have to find some secure way to get a copy of that key to your intended message recipient. You can’t just email or text it, or even speak it over the phone – that could be intercepted. The public key system allows you to broadcast your public key to the world, allowing anyone to send you an encrypted message that only you can decrypt, using your closely-guarded private key. In this same fashion, you use the other person’s public key to respond. This is insanely clever and it’s the basis for our secure web.

As is usually the case, the devil is in the details when it comes to crypto systems. The underlying math is solid and the algorithms have been rigorously tested. Where these systems break down is in the implementation. You can have an unbreakable deadbolt on your front door, but if you leave the key under your door mat or there’s a window right next to the lock on the door that can be broken… you get the idea.

Here’s the problem with how WhatsApp implemented their encryption. The app will generate public and private keys for you on the fly, and exchange public keys with the person you’re communicating with – all in the background, without bothering you. That’s fine – so far, so good. But let’s say Alice sends a message to Bob while Bob is offline. WhatsApp on Alice’s phone has used Bob’s last known public key to encrypt these messages, and they’re waiting (either on Alice’s phone or maybe on WhatsApp’s servers) for Bob to come online to be sent. In the meantime, Bob has dropped his phone in the toilet and must get a new one. He buys a new phone, reinstalls WhatsApp, and WhatsApp is forced to generate a new public/private key pair. When he comes online, Alice’s copy of WhatsApp figures out that the public key it has for Bob is no longer valid. And here’s where things fall apart. WhatsApp will then get Bob’s new public key and re-encrypt the pending messages, and then re-send them.

Bug or Feature?

That’s it. That was the fatal flaw. The “backdoor”. Did you catch it?

If you missed it, don’t feel bad. This stuff is complicated and hard to get right. The problem is that Alice was not warned of the key change and (crucially) was not given the opportunity to validate Bob’s new key. So, theoretically, some third party – let’s call her Mallory – could somehow force Bob to go offline for a period of time and then pretend to be Bob with a new device. This would trick Alice’s copy of WhatsApp to re-encrypt the pending messages using Mallory’s key and send them to Mallory. So, if you’re following along, what that means is that Mallory could potentially receive the pending messages for Bob. Not past messages. Just the pending ones, and potentially ones in the near future –  at least until Bob comes back online.

This key change is part and parcel of how modern public key crypto messaging works. The only possible fault you can find here with WhatsApp is that they don’t (currently) enable changed key warnings by default and they don’t block re-sending of pending messages until the user (in this case Alice) reviews the new keys and approves the update (ie, satisfies herself that it’s really Bob who is sending the new key).

Is that a “backdoor”? No. Not even close. It was not maliciously and secretly implemented to allow surreptitious access by a third party. Furthermore, if Alice turns on the key change warning (a setting in WhatsApp), it would allow her to see when this happens – a big no-no when it comes to surveillance. Is it a vulnerability or bug? No, not really. It’s a design decision that favors convenience (just going ahead and re-sending the messages) over security (forcing Alice to re-authenticate a recipient every time they get a new device, reinstall WhatsApp, or whatever). You can argue about that decision, but you can’t really argue that it’s a bug – it’s a feature.

UPDATE: The EFF has an excellent article on this with a very similar description. However, it also mentions a new effort called Key Transparency by Google which looks promising.

Remove Profit from the Press

So now let’s return to the big picture. Online news sites produce free web content that we consume. But producing that content costs money. In today’s web economy, people just expect to get something for nothing, which makes it almost impossible for sites to rely on a subscription model for revenue – if you ask people to pay, they’ll just go to some other site that’s free. So they turn to the de facto web revenue model: advertising. The more people who view the ads on your web site, the more money you get. And therefore you do whatever you can to get people to CLICK THAT LINK – NOW!! (This is called click bait.) It’s the same influence that corrupted our TV news (“if it bleeds, it leads”).

Some things should just not be profit-driven. News – in particular, investigative journalism – is one of those things. The conflict of interest corrupts the enterprise. TV news used to be a loss leader for networks: you lost money on news with the hopes of building loyalty and keeping the viewers around for the shows that followed.

Maybe that ship has sailed and it’s naive to believe we can return to the days of Walter Cronkite or Edward R Murrow. So what are we to do? Here are some ideas (some of which came from this excellent article):

  1. Subscribe to local and national newspapers that are doing good work. If you don’t care to receive a physical paper, you can usually get an on-line or digital subscription.
  2. Give money to organizations that produce or support non-profit investigative journalism. You might look at ProPublica, Institute for Non-Profit News, The Investigative Fund, NPR, and PBS. This article also has some good ideas.
  3. Share news responsibly. Do not post sensationalistic news stories on your social media or forward hyper-partisan emails to everyone you know. Don’t spread fake news, and when you see someone else doing this, (respectfully) call them out. Not sure if a story is real? Try checking, Politifact, or This article also has some great general advice for spotting fake or exaggerated news.
  4. When you do share news stories, be sure to share the original source whenever possible. This gives credit where credit is due (including ad revenue). If you found a derivative story, you may have to search it for the link to the original source.
  5. Use ad-blockers. This may seem contrary to the above advice, but as I mentioned in this blog, right now the ad networks are being overly aggressive on tracking you around the web and are not policing their ads sufficiently to prevent malware. It’s not safe to blindly accept all ads. You can disable the ad-blocker on individual web sites that you wish to support – just be aware of the risk.


Second interview: IoT

My second interview has posted on the George Orwell 2084 site – this one about the Internet of Things, or IoT. As they say, the “S” in “IOT” is for security. In this interview, we talk about the impact that these newly-connected “smart” devices are having on our lives, particularly with respect to our overall security – including some simple things we can all do to mitigate the threats. Check it out!

Interview on George Orwell 2084: Gooligan

Check out my radio/podcast interview with David Boron at George Orwell 2084. We talked about the Gooligan malware for Android, which has infected over 1 million Android phones so far and is making lots of money for the hackers.

Look for another interview in the near future about the Internet of Things and how the insecurity of these devices is a major threat.

If you are worried, you can go to Check Point’s Gooligan web site to check. (Check Point is the company that discovered this malware.)

Ditch Yahoo. Use ProtonMail. [updated]

I’ve been a Yahoo Mail user for 19 years. My Yahoo user ID has only 4 characters in it. It’s been my public (read spam) email address since 1997. I’m sure it’s the longest actively-used email account I’ve ever had. But now it’s time for me to move on. You should, too. Here’s why, and how…

How NOT To Handle Security

Yahoo announced recently that there was a massive breach in 2014 of many of its users’ accounts. While initial reports estimated 500 million users were compromised, it could actually be much worse. (If you haven’t changed your Yahoo password in the last two years, you should do so now.)

Password database breaches are going to happen. Security is hard and nothing is ever 100% secure. But we can and should judge a company by how seriously they take their users’ security and how they react when bad things happen.

While we’re pretty sure the breach occurred two years ago, it’s not clear yet that Yahoo knew about it before July of this year. However, Yahoo didn’t tell anyone about it until after the story broke elsewhere, two months later. It’s also been reported that Yahoo execs had a policy of not forcing users to reset passwords after a data breach because they didn’t want to lose customers. It’s also obvious that Yahoo prioritized shiny new features over security and privacy.

The Last Straw

That’s all pretty bad, but it gets worse. In a separate report shortly after this breach was announced, it was revealed that Yahoo allowed and perhaps helped the NSA or FBI to build a real-time email search program for all its customers, enabling mass surveillance in a way that was previously unprecedented.

Either of these scandals alone would be unacceptable, and should give any Yahoo user a valid reason to abandon their services – but taken together, it almost mandates it. This is a clear case where we, as consumers, need to show Yahoo that this is not acceptable, and do it in a way they will understand: close your Yahoo account and move to another service.

Ditch Yahoo

I’m not going to lie…. if you actually use your Yahoo account (like I do), this is not going to be fun or easy. But if you really care about your security, and security in general, you need to let Yahoo (and the other service providers) know that you take these horrendous security failures seriously. To do that, you have to hit them where it hurts: money. In your case, that means abandoning their services. Ditching Yahoo will not only make yourself safer, it will hopefully drive other service providers to improve their own security – which helps everyone.

I would say that you have at least three levels of options here, in increasing order of effectiveness (in terms of protesting Yahoo’s behavior):

  1. Stop using Yahoo email and all its other services
  2. Archive your Yahoo email locally and delete everything from their servers
  3. Delete your Yahoo account entirely

To stop using your Yahoo email, you will need to change everywhere you used your Yahoo email account and migrate to a new email service. LifeHacker has some tips that will help, but read through the rest of this article before choosing your new email provider.

To really rid yourself of Yahoo completely, you also need to abandon all their services: Flikr, Tumblr, fantasy sports, Yahoo groups, Yahoo messenger, and any of the dozens of other services.

Your next step is to archive all your old Yahoo email. These emails may contain valuable info that you’ll some day need to find: important correspondence, account setup/recovery info for other web sites, records of purchases, etc. If you’ve used an email application on your computer to access Yahoo (like Outlook or the Mail app on Mac OS), you should already have all your emails downloaded to your computer. But you might also want to consider an email archiving application: Windows users should look at MailStore Home (free); Mac users might look at MailSteward (ranges from free to $99).

Once you’ve safely archived everything, you should delete all your emails from Yahoo’s servers. Why? Well, if nothing else, it should prevent successful hackers from perusing your emails for info they could use against you (identity theft, for example). Assuming Yahoo actually deletes these emails, it may also keep Yahoo (or the government) from digging through that info.

You should reset your Yahoo password to a really strong password (use a password manager like LastPass). I would highly recommend setting up two-factor authentication, as well.

As a final step, you can completely close your Yahoo account. Note that this may not actually delete all your data. Yahoo probably retains the right to save it all. But this is the best you can do.

If you find that you are just too invested in Yahoo to completely abandon your email account (and I’ll admit I may be in that camp), you can set up email forwarding. This will send all of your incoming Yahoo email to a different account. (It’s worth mentioning that it looks like Yahoo tried to disable this feature recently, probably in an effort to prevent the loss of users.)

Use ProtonMail

While GMail and Outlook are two popular and free email providers, you should take a hard look at newer, more security- and privacy-conscious services. I would personally recommend ProtonMail. They have a nice free tier of service that includes web access and smartphones apps for iPhone and Android. If nothing else, grab your free account now to lock in a good user name before all the good ones are taken. Tell your friends to do the same. Just adding new free users will help the cause, even if the accounts aren’t used much.

But I’d like to ask you to go one step further: I encourage you strongly to sign up for one of their paid tiers of service, even if you don’t need the added features. The only way we’re going to force other service providers to take notice and to drive change is to put our money where our mouths are. Until it becomes clear that people are willing to pay for privacy and security, we’ll be stuck with all the ‘free’ services that are paid for with our personal info and where security is an afterthought.

Update Dec 14 2016:

Yahoo has just announced another breach, this time over 1 billion accounts hacked (maybe more). DITCH YAHOO!!


(This article is adapted from a few of my previous weekly security newsletter articles.)

The Pros & Cons of Anti-Virus Software

When most people think of protecting their computers, they think of anti-virus (AV) software. Viruses are a real problem, of course, but how well do AV apps protect you? And are there any downsides to using AV software?

In older times, AV software was essential and generally did a good job at finding malware on your computer. Generally speaking, the core function of AV software is to recognize known malware and automatically quarantine the offending software. Some AV software is smart enough to use heuristic algorithms to recognize malware that is similar to the stuff it already knows is bad, or recognize suspicious behavior in general and flag it as potentially harmful. A popular new feature for a lot of AV software is to monitor your web traffic directly, trying to prevent you from going to malicious web sites or from downloading harmful software.

That all sounds good, but the devil (as always) is in the details. Firstly, in the ever-connected world of the Internet, malicious software is produced so frequently and is modified so quickly that it’s really hard for AV software to keep a relevant list of known viruses. Also, the bad guys have moved to other techniques like phishing and fake or hacked web sites to get your information – attacking the true weakest link: you. AV software just isn’t as effective as it used to be.

But the problem is much worse than that. In many cases, the AV software itself is providing bugs for hackers to exploit. Recently, Symantec/Norton products were found to have horrendous security flaws (which they claim to have since fixed). Increasingly, AV products are offering to monitor your web traffic directly, but this means inserting themselves into all of your encrypted (HTTPS) communications, which has all sorts of ugly security and privacy implications (see Superfish and PrivDog as examples).

So… what are we to do? My recommendation (Tip #23 from my book) is to install basic, free anti-virus software. There are still plenty of old exploits out there that hackers will always try, and AV software will help defend you against these. But I don’t believe that the for-pay AV software is really worth it – and many of them may do more harm than good.

For PC users, I highly recommend Microsoft’s Windows Defender (or Security Essentials for older PCs). For Mac, I would go with Avira or Sophos Home. Be sure to completely uninstall any other AV software you might have before trying to install new AV software. I don’t believe any of these programs will offer to monitor live web traffic, but if they do, I would NOT enable this feature. The security implications of doing this incorrectly are horrendous.

At the end of the day, your best protection is to follow basic safe-surfing practices:

  1. Don’t click on links or attachments in emails unless you specifically requested them.
  2. Be wary of anything that sounds too good (or too bad) to be true. If you get a scary email about one of your accounts, log into your account by manually typing the web address or use a favorite/bookmark (do NOT use any links provided!) and look for alerts there. You can also search to check for known hoaxes and scams.
  3. Use unique, strong passwords for each of your web accounts. Use a password manager like LastPass to generate and manage those passwords.
  4. Keep your operating system and apps up to date. This includes smartphones and tablets.
  5. Back up all your files.
  6. Use an ad-blocker. Unfortunately, bad guys are slipping malware into ad networks. I use both uBlock Origin and Privacy Badger.

Our Insecure Democracy

I happen to be a rather political person, but I try to keep my politics out of my work in the security and privacy arena because these issues must transcend politics. Our democracy in many ways depends on some basic level of computer security and personal privacy. In no place is this more obvious than the security and privacy of the voting booth.

With the 2016 US election fast approaching, it’s important to call attention to the sorry state of affairs that is the US voting infrastructure. There are plenty of other problems with the US election system, but there’s hardly anything more fundamental to our democracy than the method by which we vote. (I’ll be focusing on the US election system, but these principles should apply to any democratic voting system.)

At the end of the day, the basic requirements are as follows (adapted from this paper):

  1. Every eligible voter must be able to vote.
  2. A voter may vote (at most) one time.
  3. Each vote is completely secret.
  4. All voting results must be verifiable.

The first requirement may seem obvious, but in this country it’s far from guaranteed. For many reasons, many eligible and willing voters either cannot vote or have serious obstacles to voting: inability to get registered, lack of proper ID, lack of nearby voting sites, lack of transportation, hours-long waits at polling places, inability to get out of work, and so on. Voting should be as effortless as possible. Why do we vote on a Tuesday? We should vote on the weekend (Saturday and Sunday). For people that work weekends, they should be given as much paid time off as necessary to vote. We should also have early voting and support absentee voting.

The second requirement has become a hot-button political issue in this country, though in reality, in-person voter fraud has been proven again and again to be effectively non-existent. We’ve got this covered, folks. We don’t need voter ID laws and other restrictions – they’re fixes for a problem that doesn’t exist, and they end up preventing way more valid voters from voting than allowing invalid voters to vote (see requirement #1).

Now we get to the meat of the matter, at least in terms of security and privacy. The third requirement is that every vote is completely secret. Most people believe this is about protecting your privacy – and to some extent, this is true. You should always be able to vote your conscience without worrying how your boss, your friends, or your spouse would react. You should be to tell them or not, lie or tell the truth – there should be no way for them to know. However, the real reason for a secret ballot is to prevent people from selling their vote and to prevent voter intimidation. If there is no way to prove to someone how you voted, then that vote can’t be verifiably bought or coerced. I think we had this pretty well figured out until smartphones came along. What’s to prevent you from taking a picture of your ballot? Depending on what state you live in, it may be a crime – but as a practical matter, it would be difficult to catch people doing this. However, I’m guessing this isn’t a big problem in our country – at least not yet.

Which brings us to the fourth and final requirement: verifiability. This is really where the current US voting system falls flat. In many states, we have voting systems that are extremely easy to hack and/or impossible to verify. We live in the era of constantly connected smartphones and tablets – a touchscreen voting system just seems like a no-brainer. But many electronic voting systems leave no paper trail – no hard copy of your vote that you can see, touch, feel and verify, let alone the people actually counting and reporting the vote tallies. The electronic records could be compromised, either due to a glitch or malicious tampering, and you probably wouldn’t even know that it happened. But regardless of how you enter your vote, every single vote placed by a voter must generate a physical, verifiable record. That may seem wasteful in this digital age, but it’s the only way. There must be some sort of hard copy receipt that the voter can verify and turn in before leaving the polling place. Those hard copy records must be kept 100% safe from tampering – no thefts, no ballot box stuffing, no alterations. And every single election result should include a statistical integrity audit – that is, a sampling of the paper ballots must be manually counted to make sure the paper results match the electronic ones. If there is any reason to doubt the electronic results, you must be able to do a complete manual recount. That’s the key.

Unfortunately, according to that same MIT paper, we have a hodge-podge of voting systems across the country, many of which have at least some areas where they use electronic voting systems (Direct Reporting by Electronics, or DRE) without a paper trial (Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail, or VVPAT).

voting systemsThis map pretty much says it all to me. It’s time that we adopt national standards for our voting infrastructure. You can leave it up to each state to implement, if you’re a real “states rights” type, but honestly I think we should just hand this over to the Federal Election Commission and have a single, rock solid, professionally-vetted, completely transparent, not-for-profit, non-partisan voting system. Of course, we’d need to revamp the current FEC – give it the budget, independence and expertise they need to do their job effectively. It should be staffed with non-political commissioners (never elected to office and no direct party affiliation) and they should be completely free from political and financial influence. This is much easier said than done, but if we can just agree that our democracy is more important than any party or ideology, just long enough to do this, then maybe we can make it happen. Of course, there’s no way any of this will happen before this year’s elections, but we should be able to get this in place for 2018 if we start now.

What can YOU do? As always, get educated and get involved. Write your congress person and vote for people that have vowed to reform our election and voting systems. If nothing else, give money to organizations that are doing the right things, and ask your friends and family to do the same. I’ve given some examples below for you to consider. Note that it’s very hard to find completely unbiased organizations because these issues have been so politicized and our country right now is very polarized. But whatever your political leanings, you can’t have a true democracy if you can’t have fair, open, and verifiable elections.

If you’re interested, here are a couple more good articles to check out.

UPDATE: Another interesting story on the security of our voting system.

CONTEST: Spread the Word!

I would like to enlist your aid in getting the word out! I’m doing my best to reach as many people as I can – I feel strongly that people need to have a basic understanding of computer security and online privacy. Obviously my book is one way of reaching people, but right now I’m focused on expanding the readership of my free weekly newsletter.

To that end, I’m announcing my first-ever contest! (I’ve never done this before, so bear with me on this.) For the next two weeks (until 11:59pm Eastern on July 24th), I will be asking you to help me sign up as many new people as possible – and to make it worth your while, I’ll be giving out prizes!

Share my newsletter sign-up link (below) with as many people as you can over the next two weeks. Make sure they note your email address on the form, as well, so that you get proper credit! Here are the prizes!

  • If you sign up FIVE new people, I will answer one custom question about security or privacy for you!
  • If you sign up TEN new people, I will send you a free link to download a color PDF version of my book!
  • Whoever signs up the MOST new people (at least ten) will receive a free, signed copy of my book by mail!! (restricted to US, Canada, UK and Europe)

Again, this contest ends at 11:59pm on Sunday, July 24th! Note that all new subscribers are eligible for this contest, as well!!

Now go spread the word!! Here is the link you need to send out for people to sign up:


I will use the “referrer” email addresses to determine who gets prizes, and I’ll email you directly to let you know if and what you win! (If you have any questions, please email me: