Tag Archives: Spain

Отново правото да бъдеш забравен – в Съда на ЕС

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/05/17/rtbf/

Правото да бъдеш забравен е свързано със задължение на доставчици на услуги по силата на решението на Съда на ЕС по дело C‑131/12 Google Spain. Може да се поиска търсачките да не публикуват определени резултати от търсенето.  Много трудности са свързани с практическото прилагане на това задължение – защото ограничаването на информация онлайн лесно може да се превърне в цензура. 

Според публикуваните от Google доклади, в компанията са постъпили 720 000 искания за прилагане на RTBF (правото да бъдеш забравен) и 43 на сто от тях са удовлетворени.

И ето – в Съда на ЕС отново на дневен ред е RTBF – по дело С-136/17. Казусът е от Франция: след като търсачката отказва заличаване и френският регулатор за защита на личните данни потвърждава решението, четири физически лица се обръщат към съда, в резултат от което се появява преюдициално питане към Съда на ЕС за баланса между обществения интерес и защитата на личните данни, особено когато става дума за чувствителни области като  сексуална ориентация, политически, религиозни или философски възгледи, извършени престъпления и влезли в сила  присъди.

Информацията от блога на Google

Filed under: Digital, EU Law Tagged: съд на ес

Съд на ЕС: Uber u юберизацията

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/uber/

 Стана известно заключението на Генералния адвокат Szpunar   по делото C‑434/15  Asociación Profesional Elite Taxi срещу Uber Systems Spain, SL.

Uber е наименованието на електронна платформа, разработена от дружеството Uber Technologies Inc. със седалище в Сан Франциско (Съединени щати). В Европейския съюз платформата Uber се поддържа от Uber BV, учредено по нидерландското право дружество, което е дъщерно на Uber Technologies. Платформата позволява посредством смартфон с инсталирано приложение Uber да се заяви услуга по градски превоз в обслужваните градове. Приложението разпознава местонахождението на ползвателя и открива намиращите се в близост свободни шофьори. Когато шофьор приеме да извърши превоза, приложението уведомява ползвателя, като показва профила на шофьора, както и приблизителна цена на пътуването до посочената от ползвателя дестинация. След извършване на превоза сумата автоматично се изтегля от банковата карта, която ползвателят е длъжен да посочи при регистрация в приложението. Приложението има също възможност за оценяване — както пътниците могат да оценяват шофьорите, така и шофьорите могат да оценяват пътниците. Средна оценка под определен праг може да доведе до отстраняване от платформата.

Предмет на главното производство:

услугата, известна като UberPop, в рамките на която физически лица, непрофесионални шофьори, осигуряват превоз на пътници със собствените си превозни средства.   Тарифите се определят от оператора на платформата въз основа на разстоянието и продължителността на курса. Те варират в зависимост от търсенето в даден момент, така че в часове на голямо натоварване цената на курса може неколкократно да надвиши базовите тарифи. Приложението изчислява цената на курса, която автоматично се изтегля от оператора на платформата, след което той задържа част от нея като комисиона, обикновено между 20 % и 25 %, и изплаща останалата част на шофьора.

Тълкуването, което се иска от Съда, се отнася единствено до правното положение на Uber от гледна точка на правото на Съюза, за да може да се определи дали и в каква степен това право е приложимо по отношение на развиваната от него дейност:  дали евентуалното регламентиране на условията за функциониране на Uber трябва да бъде съобразено с изискванията на правото на Съюза и, на първо място, с това за свободно предоставяне на услуги, или регламентирането на тези условия попада в обхвата на споделената компетентност на Европейския съюз и на държавите  в областта на местния превоз.

Спорът:

тъй като   нито Uber Spain, нито собствениците, нито шофьорите на съответните превозни средства имат лицензите и разрешенията, предвидени в Наредбата за таксиметровите превози на   Барселона, професионалната организация на таксиметровите шофьори предявява иск срещу Uber Systems Spain,   за нелоялна конкуренция,  да му бъде разпоредено да преустанови нелоялното си поведение, състоящо се в  предоставяне на услуги по извършване на резервации по заявка чрез мобилни устройства и по интернет,  чрез цифровата платформа Uber в Испания, както и да му бъде забранено да извършва тази дейност в бъдеще.

Преюдициални въпроси, поставени от Търговския съд – Барселона (общо са четири):

 Следва ли — доколкото член 2, параграф 2, буква г) от [Директива 2006/123] изключва от приложното поле на тази директива транспортните дейности — извършваната от ответника с цел печалба дейност по посредничество между собственика на превозно средство и лицето, нуждаещо се от превоз в рамките на определен град, при която се управляват информационни технологии — интерфейс и софтуерно приложение („смартфони и технологична платформа“ според ответника) — позволяващи на посочените лица да влязат във връзка едно с друго, да се счита просто за транспортна дейност, или тази дейност следва да се разглежда като електронна посредническа услуга, тоест като услуга на информационното общество по смисъла на член 1, параграф 2 от [Директива 98/34]?

При определяне на правното естество на тази дейност може ли последната да се счита отчасти за услуга на информационното общество или е транспортна услуга?

Заключението:

Обичайно Uber се определя като предприятие (или платформа) от т.нар. „икономика на споделянето“. То със сигурност не може да се счита за платформа за споделено пътуване – защото  шофьори предлагат на пътници услуга по превоз до избрана от пътника дестинация и за това получават възнаграждение в размер, който значително надхвърля простото възстановяване на направените разходи. Следователно става дума за класическа услуга по превоз.

Член 2, буква a) от Директива 2000/31/ЕО (Директива за електронната търговия) следва да се тълкува в смисъл, че услуга, състояща се в свързване чрез софтуер за мобилни телефони на потенциални пътници с шофьори, предлагащи индивидуален градски превоз по заявка, не представлява услуга на информационното общество при положение че доставчикът на услугата упражнява контрол върху основните условия на извършвания в тази връзка превоз, по-специално върху цената му.

Това е транспортна услуга.

Filed under: Digital, EU Law, Media Law Tagged: съд на ес

Some notes on Trump’s cybersecurity Executive Order

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/05/some-notes-on-trumps-cybersecurity.html

President Trump has finally signed an executive order on “cybersecurity”. The first draft during his first weeks in power were hilariously ignorant. The current draft, though, is pretty reasonable as such things go. I’m just reading the plain language of the draft as a cybersecurity expert, picking out the bits that interest me. In reality, there’s probably all sorts of politics in the background that I’m missing, so I may be wildly off-base.

Holding managers accountable

This is a great idea in theory. But government heads are rarely accountable for anything, so it’s hard to see if they’ll have the nerve to implement this in practice. When the next breech happens, we’ll see if anybody gets fired.
“antiquated and difficult to defend Information Technology”

The government uses laughably old computers sometimes. Forces in government wants to upgrade them. This won’t work. Instead of replacing old computers, the budget will simply be used to add new computers. The old computers will still stick around.
“Legacy” is a problem that money can’t solve. Programmers know how to build small things, but not big things. Everything starts out small, then becomes big gradually over time through constant small additions. What you have now is big legacy systems. Attempts to replace a big system with a built-from-scratch big system will fail, because engineers don’t know how to build big systems. This will suck down any amount of budget you have with failed multi-million dollar projects.
It’s not the antiquated systems that are usually the problem, but more modern systems. Antiquated systems can usually be protected by simply sticking a firewall or proxy in front of them.

“address immediate unmet budgetary needs necessary to manage risk”

Nobody cares about cybersecurity. Instead, it’s a thing people exploit in order to increase their budget. Instead of doing the best security with the budget they have, they insist they can’t secure the network without more money.

An alternate way to address gaps in cybersecurity is instead to do less. Reduce exposure to the web, provide fewer services, reduce functionality of desktop computers, and so on. Insisting that more money is the only way to address unmet needs is the strategy of the incompetent.

Use the NIST framework
Probably the biggest thing in the EO is that it forces everyone to use the NIST cybersecurity framework.
The NIST Framework simply documents all the things that organizations commonly do to secure themselves, such run intrusion-detection systems or impose rules for good passwords.
There are two problems with the NIST Framework. The first is that no organization does all the things listed. The second is that many organizations don’t do the things well.
Password rules are a good example. Organizations typically had bad rules, such as frequent changes and complexity standards. So the NIST Framework documented them. But cybersecurity experts have long opposed those complex rules, so have been fighting NIST on them.

Another good example is intrusion-detection. These days, I scan the entire Internet, setting off everyone’s intrusion-detection systems. I can see first hand that they are doing intrusion-detection wrong. But the NIST Framework recommends they do it, because many organizations do it, but the NIST Framework doesn’t demand they do it well.
When this EO forces everyone to follow the NIST Framework, then, it’s likely just going to increase the amount of money spent on cybersecurity without increasing effectiveness. That’s not necessarily a bad thing: while probably ineffective or counterproductive in the short run, there might be long-term benefit aligning everyone to thinking about the problem the same way.
Note that “following” the NIST Framework doesn’t mean “doing” everything. Instead, it means documented how you do everything, a reason why you aren’t doing anything, or (most often) your plan to eventually do the thing.
preference for shared IT services for email, cloud, and cybersecurity
Different departments are hostile toward each other, with each doing things their own way. Obviously, the thinking goes, that if more departments shared resources, they could cut costs with economies of scale. Also obviously, it’ll stop the many home-grown wrong solutions that individual departments come up with.
In other words, there should be a single government GMail-type service that does e-mail both securely and reliably.
But it won’t turn out this way. Government does not have “economies of scale” but “incompetence at scale”. It means a single GMail-like service that is expensive, unreliable, and in the end, probably insecure. It means we can look forward to government breaches that instead of affecting one department affecting all departments.

Yes, you can point to individual organizations that do things poorly, but what you are ignoring is the organizations that do it well. When you make them all share a solution, it’s going to be the average of all these things — meaning those who do something well are going to move to a worse solution.

I suppose this was inserted in there so that big government cybersecurity companies can now walk into agencies, point to where they are deficient on the NIST Framework, and say “sign here to do this with our shared cybersecurity service”.
“identify authorities and capabilities that agencies could employ to support the cybersecurity efforts of critical infrastructure entities”
What this means is “how can we help secure the power grid?”.
What it means in practice is that fiasco in the Vermont power grid. The DHS produced a report containing IoCs (“indicators of compromise”) of Russian hackers in the DNC hack. Among the things it identified was that the hackers used Yahoo! email. They pushed these IoCs out as signatures in their “Einstein” intrusion-detection system located at many power grid locations. The next person that logged into their Yahoo! email was then flagged as a Russian hacker, causing all sorts of hilarity to ensue, such as still uncorrected stories by the Washington Post how the Russians hacked our power-grid.
The upshot is that federal government help is also going to include much government hindrance. They really are this stupid sometimes and there is no way to fix this stupid. (Seriously, the DHS still insists it did the right thing pushing out the Yahoo IoCs).
Resilience Against Botnets and Other Automated, Distributed Threats

The government wants to address botnets because it’s just the sort of problem they love, mass outages across the entire Internet caused by a million machines.

But frankly, botnets don’t even make the top 10 list of problems they should be addressing. Number #1 is clearly “phishing” — you know, the attack that’s been getting into the DNC and Podesta e-mails, influencing the election. You know, the attack that Gizmodo recently showed the Trump administration is partially vulnerable to. You know, the attack that most people blame as what probably led to that huge OPM hack. Replace the entire Executive Order with “stop phishing”, and you’d go further fixing federal government security.

But solving phishing is tough. To begin with, it requires a rethink how the government does email, and how how desktop systems should be managed. So the government avoids complex problems it can’t understand to focus on the simple things it can — botnets.

Dealing with “prolonged power outage associated with a significant cyber incident”

The government has had the hots for this since 2001, even though there’s really been no attack on the American grid. After the Russian attacks against the Ukraine power grid, the issue is heating up.

Nation-wide attacks aren’t really a threat, yet, in America. We have 10,000 different companies involved with different systems throughout the country. Trying to hack them all at once is unlikely. What’s funny is that it’s the government’s attempts to standardize everything that’s likely to be our downfall, such as sticking Einstein sensors everywhere.

What they should be doing is instead of trying to make the grid unhackable, they should be trying to lessen the reliance upon the grid. They should be encouraging things like Tesla PowerWalls, solar panels on roofs, backup generators, and so on. Indeed, rather than industrial system blackout, industry backup power generation should be considered as a source of grid backup. Factories and even ships were used to supplant the electric power grid in Japan after the 2011 tsunami, for example. The less we rely on the grid, the less a blackout will hurt us.

“cybersecurity risks facing the defense industrial base, including its supply chain”

So “supply chain” cybersecurity is increasingly becoming a thing. Almost anything electronic comes with millions of lines of code, silicon chips, and other things that affect the security of the system. In this context, they may be worried about intentional subversion of systems, such as that recent article worried about Kaspersky anti-virus in government systems. However, the bigger concern is the zillions of accidental vulnerabilities waiting to be discovered. It’s impractical for a vendor to secure a product, because it’s built from so many components the vendor doesn’t understand.

“strategic options for deterring adversaries and better protecting the American people from cyber threats”

Deterrence is a funny word.

Rumor has it that we forced China to backoff on hacking by impressing them with our own hacking ability, such as reaching into China and blowing stuff up. This works because the Chinese governments remains in power because things are going well in China. If there’s a hiccup in economic growth, there will be mass actions against the government.

But for our other cyber adversaries (Russian, Iran, North Korea), things already suck in their countries. It’s hard to see how we can make things worse by hacking them. They also have a strangle hold on the media, so hacking in and publicizing their leader’s weird sex fetishes and offshore accounts isn’t going to work either.

Also, deterrence relies upon “attribution”, which is hard. While news stories claim last year’s expulsion of Russian diplomats was due to election hacking, that wasn’t the stated reason. Instead, the claimed reason was Russia’s interference with diplomats in Europe, such as breaking into diplomat’s homes and pooping on their dining room table. We know it’s them when they are brazen (as was the case with Chinese hacking), but other hacks are harder to attribute.

Deterrence of nation states ignores the reality that much of the hacking against our government comes from non-state actors. It’s not clear how much of all this Russian hacking is actually directed by the government. Deterrence polices may be better directed at individuals, such as the recent arrest of a Russian hacker while they were traveling in Spain. We can’t get Russian or Chinese hackers in their own countries, so we have to wait until they leave.

Anyway, “deterrence” is one of those real-world concepts that hard to shoe-horn into a cyber (“cyber-deterrence”) equivalent. It encourages lots of bad thinking, such as export controls on “cyber-weapons” to deter foreign countries from using them.

“educate and train the American cybersecurity workforce of the future”

The problem isn’t that we lack CISSPs. Such blanket certifications devalue the technical expertise of the real experts. The solution is to empower the technical experts we already have.

In other words, mandate that whoever is the “cyberczar” is a technical expert, like how the Surgeon General must be a medical expert, or how an economic adviser must be an economic expert. For over 15 years, we’ve had a parade of non-technical people named “cyberczar” who haven’t been experts.

Once you tell people technical expertise is valued, then by nature more students will become technical experts.

BTW, the best technical experts are software engineers and sysadmins. The best cybersecurity for Windows is already built into Windows, whose sysadmins need to be empowered to use those solutions. Instead, they are often overridden by a clueless cybersecurity consultant who insists on making the organization buy a third-party product instead that does a poorer job. We need more technical expertise in our organizations, sure, but not necessarily more cybersecurity professionals.

Conclusion

This is really a government document, and government people will be able to explain it better than I. These are just how I see it as a technical-expert who is a government-outsider.

My guess is the most lasting consequential thing will be making everyone following the NIST Framework, and the rest will just be a lot of aspirational stuff that’ll be ignored.

Growing Code Club

Post Syndicated from Philip Colligan original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/growing-code-club/

In November 2015 we announced that the Raspberry Pi Foundation was joining forces with Code Club to give more young people the opportunity to learn how to make things with computers. In the 18 months since we made that announcement, we have more than doubled the number of Code Clubs. Over 10,000 clubs are now active, in communities all over the world.

Photo of a Code Club in a classroom: six or seven children focus intently on Scratch programs and other tasks, and adults are helping and supervising in the background

Children at a Code Club in Australia

The UK is where the movement started, and there are now an amazing 5750 Code Clubs engaging over 85,000 young people in the UK each week. The rest of the world is catching up rapidly. With the help of our regional partners, there are over 4000 clubs outside the UK, and fast-growing Code Club communities in Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Hong Kong, New Zealand, and Ukraine. This year we have already launched new partnerships in Spain and South Korea, with more to come.

It’s fantastic to see the movement growing so quickly, and it’s all due to the amazing community of volunteers, teachers, parents, and young people who make everything possible. Thank you all!

Today, we are announcing the next stage of Code Club’s evolution. Drum roll, please…

Starting in September, we are extending Code Club to 9- to 13-year-olds.

Three girls, all concentrating, one smiling, work together at a computer at Code Club

Students at a Code Club in Brazil

Those in the know will remember that Code Club has, until now, been focused on 9- to 11-year-olds. So why the change?

Put simply: demand. There is a huge demand from young people for more opportunities to learn about computing generally, and for Code Club specifically. The first generations of Code Club graduates have moved on to more senior schools, and they’re telling us that they just don’t have the opportunities they need to learn more about digital making. We’ve decided to take up the challenge.

For the UK, this means that schools will be supported to set up Code Clubs for Years 7 and 8. Non-school venues, like libraries, will be able to offer their clubs to a wider age group.

Growing Code Club International

Code Club is a global movement, and we will be working with our regional partners to make sure that it is available to 9- to 13-year-olds in every community in the world. That includes accelerating the work to translate club materials into even more languages.

Two boys and a woman wearing a Code Club T-shirt sit and pose for the camera in a classroom

A Code Club volunteer and students in Brazil

As part of the change, we will be expanding our curriculum and free educational resources to cater for older children and more experienced coders. Like all our educational resources, the new materials will be created by qualified and experienced educators. They will be designed to help young people build a wide range of skills and competencies, including teamwork, problem-solving, and creativity.

Our first step towards supporting a wider age range is a pilot programme, launching today, with 50 secondary schools in the UK. Over the next few months, we will be working closely with them to find out the best ways to make the programme work for older kids.

Supporting Code Club

For now, you can help us spread the word. If you know a school, youth club, library, or similar venue that could host a club for young people aged 9 to 13, then encourage them to get involved.

Lastly, I want to say a massive “thank you!” to all the organisations and individuals that support Code Club financially. We care passionately about Code Club being free for every child to attend. That’s only possible because of the generous donations and grants that we receive from so many companies, foundations, and people who share our mission to put the power of digital making into the hands of people all over the world.

The post Growing Code Club appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

[$] The rise of copyright trolls

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/721458/rss

At the 2017 Free
Software Legal and Licensing Workshop
(LLW), which was held April 26-28
in Barcelona, Spain, more information about the GPL enforcement efforts by Patrick McHardy
emerged. The workshop is organized by the Free Software Foundation Europe
(FSFE) and its legal
network
.
A panel discussion on the final day of the workshop discussed
McHardy’s methodology and outlined why those efforts are actually far from
the worst-case scenario of a copyright troll. While the Q&A portion of the
discussion was under Chatham House
Rule
(which was the default for the workshop), the discussion between
the three participants was not—it provided much more detail about McHardy’s efforts, and
copyright trolling in general, than has been previously available publicly.

European Astro Pi Challenge winners

Post Syndicated from David Honess original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/european-astro-pi-winners/

In October last year, with the European Space Agency and CNES, we launched the first ever European Astro Pi challenge. We asked students from all across Europe to write code for the flight of French ESA astronaut Thomas Pesquet to the International Space Station (ISS) as part of the Proxima mission. Today, we are very excited to announce the winners! First of all, though, we have a very special message from Thomas Pesquet himself, which comes all the way from space…

Thomas Pesquet congratulates Astro Pi participants from space

French ESA astronaut Thomas Pesquet floats in to thank all participants in the European Astro Pi challenge. In October last year, together with the European Space Agency, we launched the first ever European Astro Pi challenge for the flight of French ESA astronaut Thomas Pesquet to the International Space Station (ISS) as part of mission Proxima.

Thomas also recorded a video in French: you can click here to see it and to enjoy some more of his excellent microgravity acrobatics.

A bit of background

This year’s competition expands on our previous work with British ESA astronaut Tim Peake, in which, together with the UK Space Agency and ESA, we invited UK students to design software experiments to run on board the ISS.

Astro Pi Vis (AKA Ed) on board the ISS. Image from ESA.

In 2015, we built two space-hardened Raspberry Pi units, or Astro Pis, to act as the platform on which to run the students’ code. Affectionately nicknamed Ed and Izzy, the units were launched into space on an Atlas V rocket, arriving at the ISS a few days before Tim Peake. He had a great time running all of the programs, and the data collected was transmitted back to Earth so that the winners could analyse their results and share them with the public.

The European challenge provides the opportunity to design code to be run in space to school students from every ESA member country. To support the participants, we worked with ESA and CPC to design, manufacture, and distribute several hundred free Astro Pi activity kits to the teams who registered. Further support for teachers was provided in the form of three live webinars, a demonstration video, and numerous free educational resources.

Image of Astro Pi kit box

The Astro Pi activity kit used by participants in the European challenge.

The challenge

Thomas Pesquet assigned two missions to the teams:

  • A primary mission, for which teams needed to write code to detect when the crew are working in the Columbus module near the Astro Pi units.
  • A secondary mission, for which teams needed to come up with their own scientific investigation and write the code to execute it.

The deadline for code submissions was 28 February 2017, with the judging taking place the following week. We can now reveal which schools will have the privilege of having their code uploaded to the ISS and run in space.

The proud winners!

Everyone produced great work and the judges found it really tough to narrow the entries down. In addition to the winning submissions, there were a number of teams who had put a great deal of work into their projects, and whose entries have been awarded ‘Highly Commended’ status. These teams will also have their code run on the ISS.

We would like to say a big thank you to everyone who participated. Massive congratulations are due to the winners! We will upload your code digitally using the space-to-ground link over the next few weeks. Your code will be executed, and any files created will be downloaded from space and returned to you via email for analysis.

In no particular order, the winners are:

France

  • Winners
    • @stroteam, Institut de Genech, Hauts-de-France
    • Wierzbinski, École à la maison, Occitanie
    • Les Marsilyens, École J. M. Marsily, PACA
    • MauriacSpaceCoders, Lycée François Mauriac, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
    • Ici-bas, École de Saint-André d’Embrun, PACA
    • Les Astrollinaires, Lycée général et technologique Guillaume Apollinaire, PACA
  • Highly Commended
    • ALTAÏR, Lycée Albert Claveille, Nouvelle Aquitaine
    • GalaXess Reloaded, Lycée Saint-Cricq, Nouvelle Aquitaine
    • Les CM de Neffiès, École Louis Authie, Occitanie
    • Équipe Sciences, Collège Léonce Bourliaguet, Nouvelle Aquitaine
    • Maurois ICN, Lycée André Maurois, Normandie
    • Space Project SP4, Lycée Saint-Paul IV, Île de la Réunion
    • 4eme2 Gymnase Jean Sturm, Gymnase Jean Sturm, Grand Est
    • Astro Pascal dans les étoiles, École Pascal, Île-de-France
    • les-4mis, EREA Alexandre Vialatte, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
    • Space Cavenne Oddity, École Cavenne, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
    • Luanda for Space, Lycée Français de Luanda, Angola
      (Note: this is a French international school and the team members have French nationality/citizenship)
    • François Detrille, Lycée Langevin-Wallon, Île-de-France

Greece

  • Winners
    • Delta, TALOS ed-UTH-robotix, Magnesia
    • Weightless Mass, Intercultural Junior High School of Evosmos, Macedonia
    • 49th Astro Pi Teamwork, 49th Elementary School of Patras, Achaia
    • Astro Travellers, 12th Primary School of Petroupolis, Attiki
    • GKGF-1, Gymnasium of Kanithos, Sterea Ellada
  • Highly Commended
    • AstroShot, Lixouri High School, Kefalonia
    • Salamina Rockets Pi, 1st Senior High School of Salamina, Attiki
    • The four Astro-fans, 6th Gymnasio of Veria, Macedonia
    • Samians, 2nd Gymnasio Samou, North Eastern Aegean

United Kingdom

  • Winners
    • Madeley Ad Astra, Madeley Academy, Shropshire
    • Team Dexterity, Dyffryn Taf School, Carmarthenshire
    • The Kepler Kids, St Nicolas C of E Junior School, Berkshire
    • Catterline Pi Bugs, Catterline Primary, Aberdeenshire
    • smileyPi, Westminster School, London
  • Highly Commended
    • South London Raspberry Jam, South London Raspberry Jam, London

Italy

  • Winners
    • Garibaldini, Istituto Comprensivo Rapisardi-Garibaldi, Sicilia
    • Buzz, IIS Verona-Trento, Sicilia
    • Water warmers, Liceo Scientifico Galileo Galilei, Abruzzo
    • Juvara/Einaudi Siracusa, IIS L. Einaudi, Sicilia
    • AstroTeam, IIS Arimondi-Eula, Piemonte

Poland

  • Winners
    • Birnam, Zespół Szkoły i Gimnazjum im. W. Orkana w Niedźwiedziu, Malopolska
    • TechnoZONE, Zespół Szkół nr 2 im. Eugeniusza Kwiatkowskiego, Podkarpacie
    • DeltaV, Gimnazjum nr 49, Województwo śląskie
    • The Safety Crew, MZS Gimnazjum nr 1, Województwo śląskie
    • Warriors, Zespół Szkół Miejskich nr 3 w Jaśle, Podkarpackie
  • Highly Commended
    • The Young Cuiavian Astronomers, Gimnazjum im. Stefana Kardynała Wyszyńskiego w Piotrkowie Kujawskim, Kujawsko-pomorskie
    • AstroLeszczynPi, I Liceum Ogolnokształcace w Jasle im. Krola Stanislawa Leszczynskiego, Podkarpackie

Portugal

  • Winners
    • Sampaionautas, Escola Secundária de Sampaio, Setúbal
    • Labutes Pi, Escola Secundária D. João II, Setúbal
    • AgroSpace Makers, EB 2/3 D. Afonso Henriques, Cávado
    • Zero Gravity, EB 2/3 D. Afonso Henriques, Cávado
    • Lua, Agrupamento de Escolas José Belchior Viegas, Algarve

Romania

  • Winners
    • AstroVianu, Tudor Vianu National High School of Computer Science, Bucharest
    • MiBus Researchers, Mihai Busuioc High School, Iași
    • Cosmos Dreams, Nicolae Balcescu High School, Cluj
    • Carmen Sylva Astro Pi, Liceul Teoretic Carmen Sylva Eforie, Constanța
    • Stargazers, Tudor Vianu National High School of Computer Science, Bucharest

Spain

  • Winners
    • Papaya, IES Sopela, Vizcaya
    • Salesianos-Ubeda, Salesianos Santo Domingo Savio, Andalusia
    • Valdespartans, IES Valdespartera, Aragón
    • Ins Terrassa, Institut Terrassa, Cataluña

Ireland

  • Winner
    • Moonty1, Mayfield Community School, Cork

Germany

  • Winner
    • BSC Behringersdorf Space Center, Labenwolf-Gymnasium, Bayern

Norway

  • Winner
    • Skedsmo Kodeklubb, Kjeller Skole, Akershus

Hungary

  • Winner
    • UltimaSpace, Mihaly Tancsics Grammar School of Kaposvár, Somogy

Belgium

  • Winner
    • Lambda Voyager, Stedelijke Humaniora Dilsen, Limburg

FAQ

Why aren’t all 22 ESA member states listed?

  • Because some countries did not have teams participating in the challenge.

Why do some countries have fewer than five teams?

  • Either because those countries had fewer than five teams qualifying for space flight, or because they had fewer than five teams participating in the challenge.

How will I get my results back from space?

  • After your code has run on the ISS, we will download any files you created and they will be emailed to your teacher.

The post European Astro Pi Challenge winners appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

New product! Raspberry Pi Zero W joins the family

Post Syndicated from Eben Upton original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/raspberry-pi-zero-w-joins-family/

Today is Raspberry Pi’s fifth birthday: it’s five years since we launched the original Raspberry Pi, selling a hundred thousand units in the first day, and setting us on the road to a lifetime total (so far) of over twelve million units. To celebrate, we’re announcing a new product: meet Raspberry Pi Zero W, a new variant of Raspberry Pi Zero with wireless LAN and Bluetooth, priced at only $10.

Multum in parvo

So what’s the story?

In November 2015, we launched Raspberry Pi Zero, the diminutive $5 entry-level Raspberry Pi. This represented a fivefold reduction in cost over the original Model A: it was cheap enough that we could even stick it on the front cover of The MagPi, risking civil insurrection in newsagents throughout the land.

MagPi issue 40: causing trouble for WHSmith (credit: Adam Nicholls)

Over the ensuing fifteen months, Zero grew a camera connector and found its way into everything from miniature arcade cabinets to electric skateboards. Many of these use cases need wireless connectivity. The homebrew “People in Space” indicator in the lobby at Pi Towers is a typical example, with an official wireless dongle hanging off the single USB port: users often end up adding a USB hub to allow them to connect a keyboard, a mouse and a network adapter, and this hub can easily cost more than the Zero itself.

People in SPAAAAAACE

Zero W fixes this problem by integrating more functionality into the core product. It uses the same Cypress CYW43438 wireless chip as Raspberry Pi 3 Model B to provide 802.11n wireless LAN and Bluetooth 4.0 connectivity.

Pi Zero Announcement Video

Music: Orqestruh by SAFAKASH – https://soundcloud.com/safakash

To recap, here’s the full feature list for Zero W:

  • 1GHz, single-core CPU
  • 512MB RAM
  • Mini-HDMI port
  • Micro-USB On-The-Go port
  • Micro-USB power
  • HAT-compatible 40-pin header
  • Composite video and reset headers
  • CSI camera connector
  • 802.11n wireless LAN
  • Bluetooth 4.0

We imagine you’ll find all sorts of uses for Zero W. It makes a better general-purpose computer because you’re less likely to need a hub: if you’re using Bluetooth peripherals you might well end up with nothing at all plugged into the USB port. And of course it’s a great platform for experimenting with IoT applications.

Official case

To accompany Raspberry Pi Zero W, we’ve been working with our friends at Kinneir Dufort and T-Zero to create an official injection-moulded case. This shares the same design language as the official case for the Raspberry Pi 3, and features three interchangeable lids:

  • A blank one
  • One with an aperture to let you access the GPIOs
  • One with an aperture and mounting point for a camera

Three cases for the price of one

The case set also includes a short camera adapter flexi, and a set of rubber feet to make sure your cased Zero or Zero W doesn’t slide off the desk.

New distributors

You may have noticed that we’ve added several new Zero distributors recently: ModMyPi in the UK, pi3g in Germany, Samm Teknoloji in Turkey, Kubii in France, Spain, Italy and Portugal, and Kiwi Electronics in the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Raspberry Pi Zero W is available from all Zero distributors today, with the exception of Micro Center, who should have stock in stores by the end of this week. Check the icons below to find the stockist that’s best for you!

UK, Ireland

PimoroniThe Pi Hut

United States

AdafruitCanakitMicrocenter

Canada

Canakit

Germany, Austria, Switzerland

France, Spain, Italy, Portugal

Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg

Turkey

Global

PimoroniThe Pi HutAdafruit
Canakit

The post New product! Raspberry Pi Zero W joins the family appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Another Shadow Brokers Leak

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2016/11/another_shadow_.html

There’s another leak of NSA hacking tools and data from the Shadow Brokers. This one includes a list of hacked sites.

According to analyses from researchers here and here, Monday’s dump contains 352 distinct IP addresses and 306 domain names that purportedly have been hacked by the NSA. The timestamps included in the leak indicate that the servers were targeted between August 22, 2000 and August 18, 2010. The addresses include 32 .edu domains and nine .gov domains. In all, the targets were located in 49 countries, with the top 10 being China, Japan, Korea, Spain, Germany, India, Taiwan, Mexico, Italy, and Russia. Vitali Kremez, a senior intelligence analyst at security firm Flashpoint, also provides useful analysis here.

The dump also includes various other pieces of data. Chief among them are configuration settings for an as-yet unknown toolkit used to hack servers running Unix operating systems. If valid, the list could be used by various organizations to uncover a decade’s worth of attacks that until recently were closely guarded secrets. According to this spreadsheet, the servers were mostly running Solaris, an operating system from Sun Microsystems that was widely used in the early 2000s. Linux and FreeBSD are also shown.

The data is old, but you can see if you’ve been hacked.

Honestly, I am surprised by this release. I thought that the original Shadow Brokers dump was everything. Now that we know they held things back, there could easily be more releases.

EDITED TO ADD (11/6): More on the NSA targets. Note that the Hague-based Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is on the list, hacked in 2000.

The Highest Man in Spain

Post Syndicated from Lennart Poettering original http://0pointer.net/blog/photos/canaries-360.html

Ever wanted to know what’s the view like being the highest person in all of Spain? — No? Hmm, can’t help you then. — Otherwise:

Pico del Teide

That’s on the summit of Pico del Teide at 3718m, on Tenerife island. Unless you leave solid ground this is as high as you can get in Spain. 163m lower it’s a bit more obvious that the Teide is a volcano:

Pico del Teide

And coming down to the surrounding caldera it’s even more obvious:

Pico del Teide

Pico del Teide

Pico del Teide

On a ridge next to the caldera you find the Teide Observatory:

Teide Observatory

The caldera is covered in old lava flows:

Caldera

Caldera

Vulcanism has created various interesting rock formations in the caldera:

Roques

Roques

Tenerife is not just about the Teide and its dusty caldera. In the north of the island you find the Anaga mountain range:

Tenerife North

Neighboring Gran Canaria was where our little trip started and ended, right after the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit. Gran Canaria has no Teide but a very impressive landscape nonetheless:

Roque Nublo

That’s the view from the Roque Nublo, the island’s most famous landmark. The rock itself is visible here (on the left):

Roque Nublo