Swain/Jackson County U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency (FSA) Executive Director Becky Williamson reminds livestock producers who suffered grazing losses that occurred throughout 2016 due to drought or wildfire to report their losses and to enroll in the Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP) by Jan. 30, 2017.LFP provides compensation to eligible livestock producers who suffered grazing losses for covered livestock due to drought on privately-owned or cash-leased land or fire on federally-managed land. Producers in Swain and Jackson Counties are eligible to apply for 2016 LFP benefits on small grain, native pasture, improved pasture, annual ryegrass or forage sorghum. Livestock producers are encouraged to contact the Swain/Jackson County FSA Office with any questions regarding specific forage crops that are eligible.“Prolonged drought or wildfire conditions have created a need for livestock disaster assistance programs in Swain and Jackson Counties,” said Williamson. “I encourage all affected livestock producers to contact the Swain/Jackson County FSA Office to schedule an appointment to enroll in the program before the Jan. 30 deadline.”Livestock producers must complete the LFP application and required supporting documentation no later than Jan. 30, 2017, for losses that occurred throughout 2016. Producers who already have appointments scheduled require no additional action to meet the deadline.Eligible livestock includes alpacas, beef cattle, buffalo, beefalo, dairy cattle, deer, elk, emus, equine, goats, llamas, poultry, reindeer, sheep or swine that have been or would have been grazing the eligible grazing land or pastureland.Visit www.usda.gov/disaster to learn more about FSA disaster assistance programs or contact the Swain/Jackson County FSA Office at 828-488-2684 Ext.2 or 828-524-3175 Ext.2. To find a local FSA office, visit http://offices.usda.gov.In a continuing effort to better serve the public, USDA has partnered with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other disaster-focused organizations to develop the central resource for disaster related materials. This knowledgebase is a collection of disaster-related resources that are powered by
It’s important to understand how criminals gain access to systems in order to better manage your organization’s network data loss prevention. While the playbook for network penetrations varies from attacker to attacker, there are some consistent patterns that emerge from each enterprise-level incident. Network penetrations can be broken down into three steps, each with distinct signatures.1. On-Ramp to the Network. Attackers have to get a foothold in the network, and this is most often done by social engineering targets to download malware or submit credentials to a phishing site. Additional on-ramps include watering holes, compromised logins, third-party hacks, and exploiting vulnerable third-party apps, particularly content management systems.2. Navigating the Network. Once inside, attackers will use internal documentation to further their attack, pivoting from corporate user to corporate user via compromises to eventually gain access to documents and databases.- Sponsor – 3. Exfiltration. Data exits the system in surprisingly simple fashions. Sometimes it is hidden in traffic, but more often than not, it is zipped or encrypted and moved off the network to a drop site before detection systems can alert users and data loss can be stopped.Human Error in Network Data Loss PreventionNearly all of the network attacks involve the following failures, oversights, or policy breakdowns:Human error is almost always involved. Whether attackers enter through the front door or move laterally through the network, the attackers need employees to take some sort of action, whether it is entering credentials into a phishing site or opening a malicious attachment.Employees use corporate emails to register for third-party sites that have been hacked and, even worse, reused passwords.Lack of two-factor authentication for access to VPN networks, databases, and shares contribute to many of the breaches and magnify password reuse problems.WordPress plugins are exploited for credentials to access servers or to create phishing pages. In general, servers running CMS applications are hackers’ on-ramp of choice.Once inside networks, reconnaissance is performed through corporate directories, wikis, and share sites. Attackers find targets with desired accesses and move laterally using malware or phishing sites sent from internal email.Network traffic monitors fail or are evaded during exfiltration.This article was excerpted from “Basic Training in Network Security.” Read the article to learn best practices in data loss prevention and discover which components of any corporate network are most vulnerable. Stay UpdatedGet critical information for loss prevention professionals, security and retail management delivered right to your inbox. Sign up now
This post appears courtesy of the Ferenstein Wire, a syndicated news service. Publishing partners may edit posts. For inquiries, please email author and publisher Gregory Ferenstein.Apple is formally opposing a proposed UK law that requires tech companies to provide a way for authorities to access encrypted messages. CEO Tim Cook has spoken frequently about the company’s commitment to make customers’ communications so secure that not even the iPhone maker can read their messages. Under so-called “end-to-end encryption,” only sender and receiver have the capacity to unscramble a message. That stands in contrast to other setups, where an Internet company storing messages in the cloud necessarily has a key to decrypt the messages.British leaders, including Prime Minister David Cameron, argue that ultratight encryption prevents intelligence agencies from tracking down terrorists. “Do we want to allow a means of communication between people which we cannot read?” Cameron asked earlier this year. In its formal response to Britain’s Investigatory Powers Bill—called a “snooper charter” by critics—Apple claimed that there is no way to allow a message to be read by the government without opening it up to malicious hackers as well:The best minds in the world cannot rewrite the laws of mathematics. Any process that weakens the mathematical models that protect user data will by extension weaken the protection.Apple is doubly worried that the UK law would apply globally (what they call “extra-territoriality”). Britain wants companies to comply with search warrants, whether they are based domestically or abroad. A Dangerous PrecedentThis could set a dangerous precedent, whereby any state, including China or Russia, could demand the same access to user data. While Britain may have noble intentions, authoritarian regimes may want to spy on Apple’s vast user base for other, less-liberal reasons. Finally, the bill could cause all kinds of complications from overlapping and contradicting rules. In the ever-shifting landscape of privacy laws, one country may consider a British spy warrant “hacking,” and Apple would be forbidden by law to confirm whether they had to give authorities access to the data. There is a growing industry of startups that are based on difficult-to-crack encryption. Some design their wares to prevent spying by hackers or governments, while others simply want to ensure the safety of their users’ data in a world of ever-changing threats. This would put startups in a very difficult situation—caught between laws that demand they protect users’ data and laws that demand they hand it over.The British government will take up the bill next year. Photo by Valery Marchive Tags:#Apple#David Cameron#encryption#encryption keys#Ferenstein Wire#Investigatory Powers Bill#politics#Snooper Charter#Tim Cook#UK#United Kingdom Follow the Puck Why IoT Apps are Eating Device Interfaces gregory ferenstein What it Takes to Build a Highly Secure FinTech … Related Posts Leveraging Big Data that Data Websites Should T…
The IRS has released the interest rates for pension plan years beginning in January 2019, including:the 30-year Treasury bond weighted average interest rate,the unadjusted segment rates,the adjusted rates, andthe minimum present value segment rates.Corporate Bond RateThe three 24-month average corporate bond segment rates applicable for January 2019 (without adjustment for the 25-year average segment rate limits):– 2.55 for the first segment rate,– 3.93 for the second, and– 4.49 for the third.January 2019 Adjusted Segment RatesThe January 2019 adjusted segment rates for plan years beginning in 2017 are:4.16 for the first,5.72 for the second, and6.48f or the third.The rates for plan years beginning in 2018 are:3.92 for the first segment,5.52 for the second, and6.29 for the third.The rates for plan years beginning in 2019 are:3.74 for the first segment,5.35 for the second, and6.11 for the third.30-Year Treasury Weighted AverageFor plan years beginning in January 2019, the 30-year Treasury weighted average securities rate is 2.92, with a permissible range of 2.63 to 3.06.The rate of interest on 30-year Treasury securities for December 2018 is 3.10 percent.The minimum present value segment rates under Code Sec. 417(e)(3)(D) for December 2018 are:3.38 for the first segment rate,4.32 for the second, and4.69 for the third.Notice 2019-13 Login to read more tax news on CCH® AnswerConnect or CCH® Intelliconnect®.Not a subscriber? Sign up for a free trial or contact us for a representative.
(AP) — The United States abruptly called off preparations for a military strike against Iran over the downing of a U.S. surveillance drone, a U.S. official said, while Iran claimed Friday it had issued several warnings before shooting down the drone over what it said was Iranian territory.The Trump administration offered no immediate public account of the thinking behind the last-minute halt in U.S. preparations for retaliation, amid days of escalating tensions between the two countries. A U.S. official, who was not authorized to discuss the operation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said the targets would have included radars and missile batteries.The swift reversal was a stark reminder of the serious risk of military conflict between U.S. and Iranian forces as the Trump administration combines a “maximum pressure” campaign of economic sanctions with a buildup of American forces in the region. As tensions mounted in recent weeks, there have been growing fears that either side could make a dire miscalculation that led to war.On Friday, the head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard’s aerospace division told Iranian state television that Iran had warned a U.S. military surveillance drone several times before launching a missile at it.Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh made the comments standing in front of what Iranian authorities described as pieces of the U.S. Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk drone.Hajizadeh told state TV: “Unfortunately they did not answer.”He added Iran collected the debris from its territorial waters. The U.S. military says that the drone was in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz when it was shot down.The New York Times separately reported that President Donald Trump had approved the strikes Thursday night, but then called them off. The newspaper cited anonymous senior administration officials.Asked earlier in the day about a U.S. response to the attack, Trump said, “You’ll soon find out.”According to the official who spoke to The Associated Press, the strikes were recommended by the Pentagon and were among the options presented to senior administration officials.It was unclear how far the preparations had gone, but no shots were fired or missiles launched, the official said.The military operation was called off around 7:30 p.m. Washington time, after Trump had spent most of Thursday discussing Iran strategy with top national security advisers and congressional leaders.The downing of the U.S. drone — a huge, unmanned aircraft — over the Strait of Hormuz prompted accusations from the U.S. and Iran about who was the aggressor. Iran insisted the drone violated Iranian airspace; Washington said it had been flying over international waters.Trump’s initial comments on the attack were succinct. He declared in a tweet that “Iran made a very big mistake!” But he also suggested that shooting down the drone — which has a wingspan wider than a Boeing 737 — was a foolish error rather than an intentional escalation, suggesting he may have been looking for some way to avoid a crisis.“I find it hard to believe it was intentional, if you want to know the truth,” Trump said at the White House. “I think that it could have been somebody who was loose and stupid that did it.”Trump, who has said he wants to avoid war and negotiate with Iran over its nuclear ambitions, cast the shootdown as “a new wrinkle … a new fly in the ointment.” Yet he also said “this country will not stand for it, that I can tell you.”He said the American drone was unarmed and unmanned and “clearly over international waters.” It would have “made a big, big difference” if someone had been inside, he said.But fears of open conflict shadowed much of the discourse in Washington. As the day wore on, Trump summoned his top national security advisers and congressional leaders to the White House for an hour-long briefing in the Situation Room. Attendees included Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, national security adviser John Bolton, CIA Director Gina Haspel, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and Army Secretary Mark Esper, whom Trump has said he’ll nominate as Pentagon chief.Pompeo and Bolton have advocated hardline policies against Iran, but Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, said “the president certainly was listening” when congressional leaders at the meeting urged him to be cautious and not escalate the already tense situation.On Capitol Hill, leaders urged caution, and some lawmakers insisted the White House must consult with Congress before taking any actions.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said no specific options for a U.S. response were presented at the meeting. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, “The administration is engaged in what I would call measured responses.” And late Thursday, House Republicans on the Foreign Affairs, intelligence and Armed Services committees issued a statement using the same word, saying, “There must be a measured response to these actions.”The Trump administration has been putting increasing economic pressure on Iran for more than a year. It reinstated punishing sanctions following Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. out of an international agreement intended to limit Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from earlier sanctions.Citing Iranian threats, the U.S. recently sent an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf region and deployed additional troops alongside the tens of thousands already there. All this has raised fears that a miscalculation or further rise in tensions could push the U.S. and Iran into an open conflict 40 years after Tehran’s Islamic Revolution.The paramilitary Guard, which answers only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said it shot down the drone at 4:05 a.m. Thursday when it entered Iranian airspace near the Kouhmobarak district in southern Iran’s Hormozgan province. Kouhmobarak is about 1,200 kilometers (750 miles) southeast of Tehran.Taking issue with the U.S. version of where the attack occurred, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted that his country had retrieved sections of the military drone “in OUR territorial waters where it was shot down.” He said, “We don’t seek war but will zealously defend our skies, land & waters.”Air Force Lt. Gen. Joseph Guastella, commander of U.S. Central Command air forces in the region, disputed that contention, telling reporters that the aircraft was 34 kilometers (21 miles) from the nearest Iranian territory and flying at high altitude when struck by a surface-to-air missile. The U.S. military has not commented on the mission of the remotely piloted aircraft that can fly higher than 10 miles in altitude and stay in the air for over 24 hours at a time.“This attack is an attempt to disrupt our ability to monitor the area following recent threats to international shipping and free flow of commerce,” he said.Late Thursday, the Federal Aviation Administration barred American-registered aircraft from flying over parts of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman and several major airlines from around the world on Friday began rerouting their flights to avoid the area, including British Airways, Australia’s Qantas, Germany’s Lufthansa and the Dutch carrier KLM.Democratic leaders in particular urged the president to work with U.S. allies and stressed the need for caution to avoid any unintended escalation.Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York said he told Trump that conflicts have a way of escalating and “we’re worried that he and the administration may bumble into a war.”
E.K.: Dogs and humans are very similar to one another, so you can use the same technology to look at dog DNA or human DNA. With these direct to consumer tests, for dogs or humans, often you’re not looking at every single part of the genome. You’re just looking for changes, or mutations, that are linked to some kind of disease or condition.Q: How accurate are the tests for dogs that are now on the market?E.K.: With genetic tests for humans, there have been so many studies that look at whether or not a certain mutation in your genes actually leads to you developing a certain disease. There just isn’t this massive body of work on dog genomes. So many of these tests are telling owners that their dog could get a certain disease without any major studies on how likely that is to happen. The science needs to catch up.Q: What are the dangers of potentially inaccurate test results?L.M.: In my veterinary practice, I’ve seen more and more people coming in with results that show their dog has a chance of developing conditions like epilepsy, heart disease, and degenerative muscular disorders, and they want to make treatment decisions right away. They’re ready to pay for more tests or medical interventions that the dog might not actually need, that could be quite expensive, and that could be invasive for the dog. In some cases, people preemptively end their dog’s life if they think their dog is predisposed to a degenerative disease, because don’t they want their pet to suffer.Q: Genetic testing kits for humans are regulated. Why aren’t pet tests? GIL COHEN MAGEN/REUTERS/Newscom Should you get your pet’s DNA tested? Scientists urge caution You’ve probably seen an ad for a company that wants to tell you about your genome. Just spit in a tube, send it in, and you can learn about your disease risk.Now, you can do the same for your pets, at least according to nearly a dozen—and growing—companies on the market. But how accurate are these tests—and why are these businesses not subject to the same regulations as those that analyze human DNA?Science chatted with Lisa Moses, a veterinarian affiliated with Harvard Medical School in Boston, and Elinor Karlsson, director of vertebrate genomics at the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Both are authors on an opinion piece published today in Nature about these and other potential issues with the booming pet genomics industry. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)Q: What kind of pets are being tested?Lisa Moses: It’s overwhelmingly dogs. There are some tests for cats, but right now it’s about 90% dogs.Q: Why would an owner want to get their pet’s DNA tested?Elinor Karlsson: A lot of dog owners are interested in what breeds are in their dog, or some fun facts, like how big their dog could get. But there’s also testing for somewhere between 100 and 200 different genetic variants that have been linked to disease.Q: Is the process of testing a dog’s DNA different from testing a human’s? A sample of dog saliva contains enough DNA for a genetic test. Veterinarian and researcher Lisa Moses L.M.: With any new technology, regulation often lags behind, and for humans, there’s been more time for conversations to take place, and rules have been established that govern how the tests are vetted. With veterinary medicine, there hasn’t been a formal and systematic discussion about the ethics related to these new technologies. We need to start talking about this, because right now a lot of people are in the dark.Q: What might happen if this industry continues to go unregulated?L.M.: I worry that if the tests don’t improve, people are going to notice that their dogs don’t actually get the diseases they’re at risk for. I don’t want people to lose the idea that there is tremendous value in genetic testing, if we do it right. We really do have the potential to figure out that our patients get diseases long before they do permanent damage, if we are able to make this happen.Q: How can we improve genetic testing for pets?L.M.: We need to start with a conversation that encompasses the international veterinary community, the testing industry, and the scientists. We have to come up with some mutually agreed upon ways to report these results, and figure out how to validate them. We’d need to have transparency on how the tests are done, how the science is done, and talk seriously about data sharing. There’s a consortium, the International Partnership for Dogs, and they’re trying to do some standardization and data sharing. But, it’s brand new and I don’t know yet how successful they’re going to be.Q: What kind of things could we learn from pet genetics, if we do it right?E.K.: Dogs carry a lot of the same diseases humans do. By studying dogs, we could learn a lot about the causes of things like cancer, or diabetes, and use that information to develop new treatments for humans. By Frankie SchembriJul. 25, 2018 , 1:00 PM Evolutionary biologist Elinor Karlsson Michael J. Butts Lisa Moses