Placeholder Content Image

Fergie opens up about cancer “paranoia”

<p dir="ltr">Sarah Ferguson has spoken candidly about feeling paranoid that her cancer would return. </p> <p dir="ltr">The Duchess of York appeared on a UK morning show, and shared how she regularly wakes in the middle of night in a panic that she would “get cancer somewhere else”. </p> <p dir="ltr">The 64-year-old royal, who appeared on the show to talk about the importance of attending your regular mammogram appointments, said, “You start four in the morning syndrome.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“You know that moment when you suddenly wake up and go ‘oh I'm sure I've got cancer somewhere else... I'm gonna go and ring my doctor’.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“I'm getting over that but it's only been a few months since I've had the operation, so I'm just beginning to sit up straight.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The Duchess also opened up about feeling grateful that her diagnosis was caught early, and navigating the “feeling of demise” at the reality of living with cancer.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I caught it so early, just in time,” she added.</p> <p dir="ltr">“The real thing is, it's that terrible fear of ‘oh no, it won't happen to me’... and that's why I want to shout about it. I wouldn't be sitting here if I hadn't have gone.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Fergie admitted that she had been putting off her routine appointment, but her older sister, who was visiting her from Australia, pushed her to have the mammogram. </p> <p dir="ltr">The Duchess added that she's “very grateful” to the Royal Free Hospital and the NHS, praising their detection systems.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I had a shadow, it was like a splat,” she explained. “Eighteen months before, it wasn't there. So it had come on from the last mammogram to this mammogram.”</p> <p dir="ltr">She also added she will “never forget” her drive from the hospital.</p> <p dir="ltr">“Your mind goes into, ‘oh my god I've got to have a mastectomy, and you look it up and it's all so terrifying and this is what's going to happen and then I'm not going to see my grandchildren grow up’.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“That's what goes through your head... it's that feeling of demise.”</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Feeling paranoid? You might be more susceptible to conspiracy theories

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">A </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/paranoid-people-may-be-more-susceptible-to-believing-conspiracy-theories" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">new study</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> suggests that people who are paranoid are more likely to believe conspiracy theories than those who are not paranoid.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">UK scientists surveyed 1000 people in an online survey to determine whether there was a relationship between </span><a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/paranoia"><span style="font-weight: 400;">paranoia</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;"> - the irrational and persistent feeling that people are ‘out to get you’ - and different components of conspiracy theories.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The main survey tested participants’ agreement with conspiracies that affected them or wider society, as well as whether the events the theories referred to were incidental or intentional.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">For instance, participants were asked to score how much they agreed or disagreed with statements surrounding vaccination. These included theories describing intentional events that affected the individual - e.g. “Some of the vaccines I have received have been designed to be harmful to me, but I was unaware of this at the time” - and some describing events that affected society that were incidental - e.g. “Vaccines given to the public have unintended harmful side effects and the public are unaware of this”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">After analysing their results, the researchers found that people who were more paranoid were more likely to believe theories that affected them as individuals, as well as those that described events that were intentional.</span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height:281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7847128/antivax1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/1ea59529e70a4056af956bcb4ad8ce34" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">The study found that paranoid people were more likely to endorse beliefs, such as anti-vaccination beliefs, than those who are not. Image: Getty Images</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Counter to their initial predictions, the team found people were more likely to believe theories they thought people similar to them would also believe, whether they were paranoid or not.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">As for the overall group of participants, they found people were more likely to believe theories that suggested the event or harm it referred to was accidental, rather than intentional. People were also more likely to believe theories that affected the whole of society rather than just themselves.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Overall, we show that the believability of conspiracy theories may depend on the level of intentional harm implied, and who is specified as the target of the harm described,” the scientists wrote.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">They argue that these results could also impact our understanding of belief revision - the process by which we change our beliefs after receiving new information.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Particularly, they suggest that paranoia may affect a person’s ability to update their beliefs in conspiracies, and the features of different theories may have a role to play too.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Their findings were published in the journal </span><em><a rel="noopener" href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211555" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Royal Society Open Science</span></a></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Image: Getty Images</span></em></p>

Mind

Placeholder Content Image

Bluetooth headphone hacking: paranoia or a genuine cause for concern?

<div class="copy"> <p>US Vice President Kamala Harris made waves recently, when an <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.politico.com/newsletters/west-wing-playbook/2021/12/06/kamala-harris-is-bluetooth-phobic-495343" target="_blank">article</a> from Politico’s ‘West Wing Playbook’ reported that she refuses to use Bluetooth headphones, believing them to be vulnerable to attack by <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/like-catching-smoke-can-we-stop-a-cyberwar/" target="_blank">malicious hackers</a>. The article described the Vice President as “Bluetooth phobic”, but is there more than paranoia at play here? Is Bluetooth headphone hacking really a thing?</p> <p>Bluetooth technology has streamlined our gadgets, stripping away most of the troublesome wires and jacks that are forever getting tangled in the bottoms of our bags and in the far reaches of our drawers. But it does come with a cost – limited by a short operational range, and designed to be used only between devices in close proximity, Bluetooth technologies have tended to create a lackadaisical attitude towards security.</p> <h2>What do experts say about Bluetooth headphone hacking?</h2> <p>“The risk is significant,” says Christophe Doche, Associate Dean at the Australian Institute of Business Intelligence. “Bluetooth is one of these technologies that was initially designed without too much concern for security.”</p> <p>This is particularly true for innocuous add-ons, such as headphones.</p> <p>Different devices are generally equipped with different security features, with the most stringent protections found where you’d expect them – in computers and laptops. But in headphones? Not so much.</p> <p>“Bluetooth headphones are typically fairly ‘dumb’ devices,” says Paul Haskell-Dowland, Professor of Cyber Security Practice and Associate Dean for Computing and Security in the School of Science at Edith Cowan University.</p> <p>We don’t tend to bother encrypting devices such as headphones, he says.</p> <p>“Most headsets can be simply connected by pressing a button on the headset to initiate the ‘sync’, or may even be selectable directly on the phone with no further interaction required,” he says.</p> <p>Even so, it’s not particularly likely that our headphones will provide the ‘crack’ through which attackers can directly infiltrate, and we generally have little to fear from enjoying a wireless groove session.</p> <p>“When simply listening to music, such headphones don’t really represent any significant risk,” says Haskell-Dowland.</p> <p>Instead, their biggest vulnerability stems from their susceptibility to eavesdropping.</p> <h2>How can others eavesdrop on your Bluetooth headphones?</h2> <p>This is because we do much more than listen to our favourite tunes on our headphones – they are routinely used for phone calls, and increasingly for remote conferencing. As a radio-frequency device, there are opportunities to capture the radio signals and eavesdrop into communications.</p> <p>“A competent and determined attacker could take advantage of Bluetooth headphones and protocols, to implement, for instance, a man-in-the-middle attack, effectively intercepting all the traffic coming in and out the headphones,” says Doche.</p> <p>Haskell-Dowland expresses similar concerns, but reiterates that much of the threat is context-dependent.</p> <p>“Given that a lot of Bluetooth headset use is undertaken in public settings, the concerns are perhaps no different to being overheard by the person sat next to you on the train – although capturing the Bluetooth audio would include all parties in the call,” he says.</p> <p>This means that any sensitive information divulged is only ever as secure as the weakest point in the chain. You can take measures to guard security at your end, but it only takes one group member wearing Bluetooth headphones to open the whole conversation to prying ears.</p> <p>In some very rare instances, a more sophisticated attack known as privilege escalation might be executed. This involves moving from the wireless communication channel to accessing the data on the device itself.</p> <p>“Privilege escalation to your phone or tablet can be even more destructive, because there we have credentials for our online services and possibly sensitive financial and medical data as well,” says Kim Crawley, cybersecurity researcher for <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.hackthebox.com/" target="_blank">Hack The Box</a> and author of the book <em>8 Steps to Better Security: A Simple Cyber Resilience Guide for Business (Wiley Tech).</em></p> <h2>Does this mean Harris’s caution is warranted?</h2> <p>Crawley believes Kamala Harris is right to be cautious about Bluetooth headphone hacking, given her position.</p> <p>“There’s not much that I agree with Vice President Harris on, but I definitely agree with her use of wired earbuds and microphones,” she says.</p> <p>“She is a prominent cyberattack target who is very often privy to highly classified information. Removing the possibility of wireless interception from the device-to-peripheral level does what we in cybersecurity call ‘reducing your attack surface’.”</p> <p>Doche agrees, but notes that just because Harris might be justified in her cautious approach, this doesn’t mean we all need to be similarly worried.</p> <p>“The everyday person faces exactly the same issues,” he says. “However, the likelihood that a competent and determined attacker would try to breach their headphones is less, just because they are not a high-profile target. It is fair to say that they face a smaller risk.”</p> <p>While the risk from Bluetooth headsets is small and generally focused towards specific individuals, being aware of risk and minimising vulnerabilities is always a good idea.</p> <p>“Absolutely nothing that we do with computer technology is zero risk,” says Crawley. “It’s all about deciding what level of risk is acceptable to us.</p> <p>“Every new Bluetooth standard features stronger encryption and more secure cryptographic implementation. But the technology <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/what-is-ransomware-and-how-is-it-dealt-with/" target="_blank">cyberattackers</a> use to crack or bypass encryption is always getting stronger, too. Encryption and decryption is a constant cat-and-mouse game and digital arms race.”</p> <h2>What are the best ways to safeguard your privacy?</h2> <ul> <li>The first step comes at the point of purchase. Buying a headset that requires a PIN code to connect to your phone or computer is a good start, but you can also look for headsets that support stronger levels of security through the use of encryption. If possible, change the PIN code to a unique value – when headsets share a common default code, it is easy to track down the code in online manuals.</li> <li>Try to use headsets supporting the most recent versions of Bluetooth.</li> <li>Only leave your Bluetooth in ‘discoverable’ mode when you’re pairing new headphones with your phone or laptop. Once linked, your device will retain the headset’s unique identifying code – there is no need to replicate the linking process each time you use the same headphones.</li> <li>Turn off Bluetooth when not in use (though this may be challenging in countries where COVID track-and-trace apps use Bluetooth).</li> </ul> <em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></div> <div id="contributors"> <p><em>This article was originally published on <a rel="noopener" href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/computing/bluetooth-headphone-hacking/" target="_blank">cosmosmagazine.com</a> and was written by Jamie Priest. </em></p> </div>

Technology