The US Desperately Needs of a Department of Cyber Security

By:


As the world is turning digital, warfare is following suit in a very rapid and devastating way. Countless organizations in all sectors (Target, Equifax, DNC, IRS) are continuously reporting data hacks. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), federal civilian agencies reported 35,277 cybersecurity incidents, such as web-based attacks, phishing and loss or theft of computing equipment in 2017.

The public and private sectors in the US have not adapted to cyber threats. Instead of presenting a unified front for defending against these attacks, and have a plan to go on the offensive when necessary, most organizations are busy doing damage control by themselves, without any real long-term plan. This is done despite the fact that countless studies show year after year, that cybersecurity is the number one priority for all IT leaders.

A recent survey of government organizations, private sector and citizens in the U.S., China, Russia, and India found that more than 88% of participants believe that cyberspace threats are significant.

In the United States alone, state and local government IT leaders have maintained for years that cybersecurity needs to be the government’s priority. A 2018 Digital Cities Survey of city government IT leaders put cybersecurity as the top priority. The same survey of county government IT leaders placed cybersecurity at the top of the list for the past 5 years in a row. Lastly, the National Association of State Chief Information Officers (NASCIO) published their top 10 policy and technology priorities for 2019, and cybersecurity was named number 1.

The conventional literature throughout our country claims that cybersecurity is everyone’s problem, and that it needs to be dealt with on multiple levels within the government, private sector, as well as individual citizens. While it is true that cybersecurity needs to be fought for on multiple levels, this fight is extremely inefficient when everyone does their own thing, without a leading organization to set the policy and bear full ownership of outcomes.

The reality is that our nation’s current organization for dealing with cyber-attacks is doomed to fail. Responsibilities, skills and talent are spread across too many different parts of the government, which creates confusion, and most importantly, a lack of leadership and ownership.

For example, the Department of Defense, through its US Cyber Command arm, is responsible for national defense. The FBI is responsible for investigating and enforcement. The Department of Homeland Security oversees damage control and recovery for cyber-attacks. Lastly, every military branch has their own individual cyber units. Lack of communication and too much bureaucracy makes our cyber security efforts extremely inefficient, putting our nation at risk with each second that passes. Each one of these organizations have many other responsibilities and are stretched too thin to give cybersecurity the focus and resources it desperately needs.

President Trump is trying to rectify this situation by further centralizing the management and oversight of federal civilian cybersecurity through the National Cybersecurity Strategy of September 2018. This strategy will enable the Department of Homeland Security to secure all federal department and agency networks, with the exception of national security systems, the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community. This is a step in the right direction, but it needs to be taken further.

There needs to be a department that is one hundred percent responsible for our nation’s cyber security, in the same way our military is responsible for our physical security. This department could be called the “Department of Cyber Security” (DCS) and it should set the policy, provide the proper organizational structure, and work with all other parties (government, private sector, and citizens) to gain control of our nation’s cyber security.

The new Department of Cyber Security’s top priorities should be to:

I. Request and maintain adequate funding – this is a top national security priority.

II. Mobilize our country’s best talent and resources to operate under a single umbrella and a single coherent policy.

III. Fill in the talent gap by promoting cybersecurity workforce, training, economic development. According to the “Presidential Executive Order on Strengthening the Cybersecurity of Federal Networks and Critical Infrastructure,” there is an estimated 299,000 shortfall in cybersecurity professionals across all industry sectors.

IV. Incentivize research, contests, hackathons – it must adopt and encourage ways of unconventional warfare.

V. Collaborate with the private sector to share threat intelligence on an ongoing basis, as well as new advances in the digital world.

VI. Outline liabilities, reporting requirements, and course of action for the other organizations to follow.

The United States must treat the issue of Cybersecurity with the same seriousness it treats the military. It must be organized from top down, it must be prepared to defend our networks and to attack at a moment’s notice. Not prioritizing cybersecurity policy leaves federal, state and local agencies, U.S. critical infrastructure, businesses and citizens extremely vulnerable to attacks that could be absolutely devastating.

Creating a new Department of Cyber Security that is one hundred percent in charge and responsible for our nation’s Cybersecurity is the only solution that allows our country to gain control of the cyber space, successfully defend our networks and be ready to go on the offense when necessary.

RESOURCES:

Tagged:

US Health Care and Health Tech Innovation

By:


On March 28, 2019 District of Columbia’s Judge John Bates made a decision to dismiss the US Labor Department’s association health plan (AHP) rule. The AHP rule allows small businesses the affordability to pool together and provide health plans for employees in a competitive landscape. Judge Bates, however, saw the rule as an initiative to avoid Obamacare regulations. Once again, competition and choice in healthcare has been denied US small businesses, the backbone of national employment. The question now begs: if we cannot come to a workable decision on providing transparent health insurance options to the American people, how will we move forward on improving healthcare? The cost of US healthcare is predicted to reach 20% of GDP by 2025. We need to do better.

According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, healthcare expenditures have skyrocketed from $28 billion to $2.6 trillion over the past 50 years. US taxpayers are bearing the brunt of this increase, with no foreseeable solution coming forth to mitigate the burden. The remedy here is not to block competitiveness in health insurance services, but to increase health technology in our nation’s hospitals, health centers and clinics. We need to become proactive: that is to say, not throw valuable insurance money after reactive, outdated medical facilities and treatments, but invest in the latest preventative, diagnostic and reporting technologies to foster transparency and innovation. As stated in HP’s Megatrends, we need to “shift from standardized, reactive and centralized care to personalized, preventative, decentralized…care for all US citizens” through health technology.

First, let us clarify what health technology entails. Health technology refers to all advancements in procedures which improve both the quality and cost of providing healthcare to individuals and communities. The National Information Center on Health Services Research and Healthcare Technology (NICHSR) lists the following highlights that create a health technology demand:

  • Increasing prevalence of chronic diseases
  • Advances in science and engineering
  • Aging populations (baby boomers)
  • Increasing prevalence of chronic diseases
  • Third-party payment, especially fee-for-service payment
  • Financial incentives of technology companies, clinicians, hospitals, and others
  • Off-label use of drugs, biologics, and devices
  • Strong, growing economies

The United States fits all of the above requirements, and then some. The Trump administration has been on the frontline to advance health tech, starting with electronic health records (EHR). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the MyHealthEData initiative in 2018. This program is supported by the White House Office of American Innovation, as well as the National Institutes of Health and Veterans Affairs, among others. MyHealthEData shall give electronic access of all health records to patients and allow patients to choose providers based on cost and accuracy transparency. Patients will be able to share their data with whichever provider they choose. This is a revolutionary concept in healthcare! According to Jared Kusher, President Trump’s advisor, the Administration is working diligently to solve the interoperability of health data within the nation’s healthcare institutions. Prior administrations have spent over $36 billion with no clear results in fully digitizing or maintaining the accuracy of health records. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn and Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee supports the Administration’s interagency HER plan, stating an impact on over 125 million US patients. We are comforted to see such federal initiatives be redirected to solve transparency and cost issues within healthcare.

The US healthcare industry is geared to be most impacted by Industry 4.0. As delineated by HP’s Megatrends, digital technologies such as 3D printing and emerging technologies such as augmented reality haptic holography, microfluids and autonomous robotic caretakers are now a reality, and benefits both provider and patient alike when mainstream.

  • 3D printing has been introduced to many large private US hospitals, and is making strides in lowering the cost of customized diagnostic devises and patient implants. 3D printing can actually mass produce the hospital buildings as well as customized instruments, tools and medication needed for patients.
  • Haptic Hologram technology is no longer science fiction. This new augmented reality software converts 2D medical imaging such as MRI scans into virtual reality images. Why is this important? This technology allows the surgeon to do a holographic pre-run of surgery on the actual patient without dissection! So, when the actual procedure begins, the diagnosis, time and accuracy of surgery will be dramatically increased.
  • Microfluidics is described as “an entire lab on a tiny microchip.” The tiny microchips give a full diagnosis the patient using a minute sample of patient fluid. The process is not invasive, has a lower test cost and are perfect for point-of-care (POC) tests for urban and rural populations.
  • Artificial intelligence in geriatric health care sector is on the upward trend. AI makes hospices “smart” to actually providing individualized robot caretakers that can immediately detect health changes in the elderly patient.

These technologies are already in use and are being further developed by companies such as HP and IBM, with support from large private healthcare institutions via innovation labs. While many may initially believe these technologies to be expensive to implement, we recall that prior administrations have spent billions of dollars on health care ‘reform’ with little change in our healthcare crisis.

From a policy standpoint we applaud the White House Office of American Innovation and the Health and Human Services department for currently moving forward with the Administration’s interagency plan to improve electronic health records interoperability, and suggest working with such agencies as the National Information Center on Health Services Research and Healthcare Technology (NICHSR) on emerging technology assessments innovation labs to make US healthcare technology the most innovative and accessible to US citizens. The US healthcare insurance reform is currently in legal bottleneck to the detriment of the American people. It’s time to refocus time and financial energy on augmenting our actual healthcare institutions to provide the most beneficial, accurate and transparent healthcare through health tech innovation.

SOURCES:

Tagged:

Credit Reporting Reform: Individual Consumers Must Take Responsibility of Their Own Data

By:


In September 2017, Equifax announced that the information of 143 million of Americans had been hacked. This was just one of the latest companies to be compromised, joining Yahoo’s 1 billion accounts, JPMorgan’s 83 million accounts, and Target’s 40 million accounts hacked, among others.

What made this hack very concerning was the fact that Equifax is one of the largest consumer reporting agencies that collects our very personal and actionable information, including our names, birthdates, social security numbers, addresses, personal finances, credit card numbers, student loans, insurance of choice, rent payments, and others, without us knowing or giving consent, into a centralized database. 143 million accounts (60% of all adults in US) have been compromised. Our data, which we never offered or given permission to be collected and used, has been made available to malicious strangers. This is a very important topic.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), a law that was last updated in 1970 currently governs Equifax and the other credit reporting agencies. Since then, there hasn’t been any changes or updates, except in 2010, when Congress created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) as the first federal agency with authority to examine and regulate consumer reporting agencies. While this was a much-needed addition, it does not provide the necessary requirements to keep our data safe.

Credit bureaus are treated much more loosely than banks, as they do not have the same regulatory oversight and do not have regular security audits. In the event of data breaches, such as Equifax’s, there is no specific federal entity designated to investigate the breach.

In response this tragedy, Rep. Maxine Waters has introduced the Comprehensive Consumer Credit Reporting Reform Act of 2017, which intends to be a complete overhaul the country’s credit reporting system. Among others, it plans to change the dispute process, switching the responsibility of proving accuracy of information from consumers to credit bureaus, restore the affected credit of victims of predatory activities and unfair practices, restrict the use of credit information for employment, rehabilitate the credit standing of struggling private education loan borrowers and limit the amount of time negative information can stay on a credit report.

The proposed changes of this act could positively impact consumers, but they do not specifically address the cybersecurity problem. This act does not provide a specific solution to preventing data breaches and protecting consumers’ information from hackers.

This is a new world defined by ubiquitous, overpowering cyberattacks that render all current cybersecurity systems inadequate and lacking. For the time being, unfortunately, it seems that there isn’t a hack proof solution of storing our data. So, if we cannot control who sees our data, we must at least be able to control, and limit the use of our data.

The best bet is to provide each individual person with their own ability to monitor and control access to their credit information. Regulators must require credit reporting agencies to provide free credit freezes to all people.

A credit freeze is a process that allows you to automatically block anyone from checking your credit, making it impossible for impersonators to open any line of credit under your name. If your credit has a freeze on it, you’ll be notified if someone even attempts to open a line of credit using your information. In the same way you have a 2-factor verification system for your email or cryptocurrency accounts, credit freezes can provide added security layers that consumers can monitor and control individually.

This way, you can keep your credit info in “dark mode”, and only open access to your credit in the exact instant you are applying for a loan, or do any other activity requiring access to your credit score. As soon as you were approved/denied, you can freeze your credit again.

Currently, credit freezes cost $20 each time you initiate it. And because you most likely must initiate a credit freeze for each of the big three credit reporting agencies (Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion), this cost adds up to $60 per credit freeze. Even more, there are hundreds other smaller credit reporting agencies, so this process can get rather complicated and tedious. New legislation needs to require this credit freeze process to be available, and preferably free (or much lower cost) for the consumer across all agencies.

This is a tremendous opportunity for the private sector to provide a much-needed solution: create a platform or application which connects with all credit agencies and offers consumers instant and painless options to take control over their data. Instead of logging on to multiple credit agencies websites each time they wish to freeze/unfreeze their credit profile, there should be a simple application that communicates with all credit agencies (or separate ones – depending on the consumers’ preference) and is able to freeze/unfreeze credit profiles with the simple push of a button.

This collaboration between the government and private sector must have the chief purpose of allowing individual consumers to control their own use of their credit profile, in the hopes of enhancing security. By definition, it is much more complicated, discouraging and fruitless for hackers to try to break into 143 million individual accounts, than it is breaking into one database holding 143 million accounts. As our banking and financial system is changing to provide consumers with more freedom over their money, perhaps it is time for the credit reporting agencies to do so as well.

Since the credit bureaus and regulatory organizations cannot protect our credit data, it is time to let the private market and individual consumers provide a smarter solution.

Sources:

Categories:
Tagged:

American Exceptionalism vs. Socialism

By:


Ask your neighbors and coworkers whether it’s a privilege to be an American, and nearly all of them will answer with a resounding “yes.” But the rising new leaders of today’s Democratic Party see American privilege as a mass delusion standing in the way of their political ambitions. This was painfully evident last week during President Trump’s State of the Union address (SOTU).

SOTUs have traditionally been positive affairs. American exceptionalism is so everlasting that most presidents can find something in the national condition worth boasting about, and even their political opponents find something in the boasts worth applauding.

Not so this year. Having presided over the strongest economic expansion in generations, President Trump’s speech had no shortage of achievements, and the response of ordinary Americans was electrifying. According to a CBS News poll, 76 percent of Americans who saw the speech approved of it.

However, the response of Democratic lawmakers who attended the speech flew in the face of our political traditions, particularly that of a bloc of congresswomen wearing white from head to toe to commemorate the 100th anniversary of women winning the right to vote.

The “women in white” leered with contempt at the president throughout his speech. They ignored his call for unity and bipartisanship. About half, including newly elected loudmouth Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, refused to join the rest of the chamber for a standing ovation when President Trump called upon the American people to “embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise, and the common good.”

They sat stone-faced when the president touted the lowest ever unemployment among minorities and the disabled. They ignored his praise of new “right to try” legislation giving terminally ill patients access to experimental medicines. Same thing with America becoming a net exporter of energy for the first time in 65 years.

They remained somber even when President Trump announced his new Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative, which promotes the economic empowerment of women in developing countries.

Only when President Trump specifically hailed the achievements of American women — filling 58 percent of new jobs last year and being elected to Congress in record numbers — did members of the group feel obliged to stand en masse, essentially to applaud themselves.

The refusal of Ocasio-Cortez and other “progressive” Democrats to celebrate, or even acknowledge, the success and good works of other Americans, irrespective of ideology or creed, on this time-honored occasion is shameful and unbecoming of servants in public office.

But it’s politically astute. Proponents of the socialist Green New Deal — which now has the support of 70 Democrats in the House, 12 in the Senate, and six presidential candidates — know it’s impossible to get Americans to accept a one-size-fits-all blueprint for centralized planning of their lives and livelihood so long as they think of themselves as privileged.

For all of their divisive rhetoric and mainstream media adoration, Ocasio-Cortez and her ilk aren’t likely to convince a majority of the U.S. public that the American dream is a lie, at least not in time for the 2020 election. But they may convince enough people to enflame the social chaos and division we have been experiencing lately, and that might set a prelude one day for realization of their socialist fantasies.

President Trump is right that the state of our union is strong, at least economically and militarily, and a majority of Americans embrace his call to “step boldly and bravely into the next chapter” of this country’s glorious history. We must not let the ideological radicalism and hunger for power of a few destroy this future.

Zana Nesheiwat is the founder of Brand ZA, Inc., an integrated business solutions and impact-branding firm specializing in financial services, public policy, and technology, and an associate partner with Blackhawk Partners, Inc. a private equity firm based in New York City.

Tagged:

Blockchain: U.S Regulation and Governance.

By:


Blockchain technology is far more than a buzzword. Dubbed “the Internet 3.0”, this distributed ledger technology known best as the data documentation for cryptocurrencies is changing our data management and transactions at breakneck speed. Blockchain technology has inaccurately been held as synonymous with Bitcoin. While Blockchain technology developed to create a foolproof transaction and payments system for Bitcoin, Blockchain goes far beyond crypto, and has now extended reach into countless industries, including government transactional systems. The differentiated structure behind this technology has made it a conundrum to most, and its decentralized base brings many questions to the table regarding regulation. Yet, it is absolutely necessary to understand the workings of this technology and so develop the most optimal regulatory dictates to ensure that the U.S. financial system, business and payment transactions swiftly and safely adapt to digital changes in the global marketplace.

BLOCKCHAIN METHODOLOGY

Blockchain technology is revolutionary in its checks and balances for accuracy, transparency and time to completion. While very technical in nature, we explain the basics of Blockchain. The Blockchain distributed ledger has these main attributes:

  • Recorded information is stored and time stamped.
  • The ledger of transactions is public and transparent.
  • The ledger is decentralized. Transactional information inclusive of contracts is sent to separate computers, or nodes in the Blockchain. This is called a peer to peer (P2P) network.
  • The ledger transactions have what is called a hash function that cryptographically maps information, or input, to ensure that there is a unique digital signature for each transaction step. Any minute change in transaction creates a separate hash. This function ensures that there is no deliberate fraudulent duplication of any one transaction.
  • Transactions and processes within the Blockchain need consensus to be sealed. To prevent malicious blackhat processes or unforeseen crashes, the Blockchain system triggers “Byzantine Faults.” Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) mechanisms require repetition of the same data from each transaction in each node until full consensus is reached. Nodes require a “proof-of-work” consensus to validate transactions in the fastest possible time, which is also part of data mining.

The explanation above is deceptively simple, yet very powerful in terms of speed and transparency. We see that while Bitcoin and other crypto currencies appear to be widely speculative, the actual Blockchain technology is purely methodical, and highly useful in shaping failsafe transaction structure. Naturally, the most concerning feature of Blockchain transaction is its decentralized system. While each Blockchain transaction process may be accurate, the players on a P2P decentralized network can be fraudulent. For example, a private Blockchain set up by a drug cartel can have perfectly accurate transaction processes. Regulation and tracking standards are definitely needed when it comes to the Blockchain.

U.S. BLOCKCHAIN REGULATION

Thus far the U.S. Government has shown support for the development of Blockchain regulation and governance within the context of the technology’s growth and expansion. U.S. Congress has created the Congressional Blockchain Caucus to handle legislation pertaining to Digital Ledger Technology (DLT) and cryptocurrencies. In September 2018 co-chair of the Congressional Blockchain Caucus Tom Emmer (R-MN) introduced the “Resolution Supporting Digital Currencies and Blockchain Technology” bill, the “Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act” and the “Safe Harbor for Taxpayers with Forked Assets Act.” These bills encourage the federal government to monitor Blockchain entities that may or may not need to register as money transmitters. Moreover, the bills provide suggestions for taxation of digital assets via crypto taxation guidance. Thus far under IRS Notice 2014-21, digital currency is treated as property rather than a foreign currency. According to Emmer, the US private sector needs clarity when it comes to Blockchain technology in order to lawfully expand innovation and growth.

Congressman Emmer’s legislation has since been complemented by U.S. Representatives Darren Soto and Ted Budd through the introduction of “The Virtual Currency Consumer Protection Act of 2018” and the “U.S. Virtual Currency Market and Regulatory Competitiveness Act of 2018.” These bills provide recommendations to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Both bills focus on cryptocurrencies with regards to price manipulation, and examine U.S. Blockchain technology regulation in the global cryptocurrency universe. It is noteworthy that the U.S. Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) delineates virtual currency as “a medium of exchange that operates like a currency in some environments, but does not have all the attributes of real currency.” In addition, Representative Warren Davidson (R-OH) has announced his plan to introduce legislation for the development of a new token asset class to facilitate regulation of initial coin offerings (ICOs). Representative Davidson has also offered suggestions for using Blockchain technology for the creation of ‘wall coins’ to fund the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

U.S. PUBLIC SECTOR BLOCKCHAIN IMPLEMENTATION

While U.S. Blockchain regulation is still in the infancy stages, Blockchain technology implementation within various public sector departments shows steady growth.
In 2018 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) took steps to implement a Blockchain tracking system along the supply chain to increase food safety, especially in light of the nationwide E.coli scare that occurred with Californian romaine lettuce. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has currently employed Blockchain technology in its forensic analysis of criminal activity regarding both public and private cryptocurrencies. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) currently have request for proposals regarding Blockchain documentation solutions for accurate identification and fraud prevention. The U.S. Air Force is implementing Blockchain solutions in personnel training to build systems for proper security and logistics. And at the state level, Washington’s Douglas County Department of Commerce is set to pour funds into an entire Blockchain innovation campus.

BLOCKCHAIN OPERATIONAL RISKS

Hossein Kakavand, Bart Chilton and Nicolette Kost de Sevres’ “The Blockchain Revolution: An Analysis of Regulation and Technology Related to Distributed Ledger Technologies” examine the operational risks associated with developing the technology. We highlight the following risks which should be addressed by U.S. regulatory institutions as the Blockchain governance framework takes shape.

Software:

Blockchain software operates in a decentralized fashion. Thus, each owner would have individual transactional access, unlike central clearing software. If a new release of Blockchain software is not evenly installed, the likelihood of immediate consensus transactions may be diminished in reliability as a viable Financial Market Infrastructure (FMI). Bandwidth also may pose a problem when it comes to decentralized Blockchain capacity. With growing number of permissioned and permissionless Blockchains, and heavier transactions both in complexity and volume, there is a question of how to handle both national and global capacity, and which governing entity may be the backup for such capacity.

Cyberattacks:

On January 5, 2019, crypto exchange Gate.io reported a hack of Ethereum Classic worth more than USD$200,000. Oddly enough, the money was returned to the Gate.io by January 12, leading crypto experts to believe the hack was done by an ethical whitehat hacker to delineate consensus and security faults in the Blockchain. The Blockchain is not fully secure, especially due to its decentralized nature. There needs to be more failsafe measures implemented per transaction, and per financial governing entity to safeguard against cyberattacks.

Accountability:

There is an old saying, ‘who will guard the guards?’ This rings true for players in the Blockchain. One of the strengths of the Blockchain prides upon removing intermediaries, thus creating more transparency. However, the players in each transaction need to be savvy in understanding how peer to peer networks operate. Since only a limited percentage of potential users understand the Blockchain, we have systemic operational risk, which can only be mitigated with structured and practical education. In addition, and even more concerning is how to identify a definite entity responsible for ‘crucial repair’ should the Blockchain suffer collapse, as no governing body is formally responsible for maintaining the Blockchain. To date, technology firm R3CEV has lead a sizable consortium of financial institutions for distributed ledger standards, procedures and safety measures. Regulatory bodies may find it highly beneficial to work with such consortiums to form common Blockchain disaster response standards.

Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) is here to stay, and it bodes well for U.S. industry to steadily adopt the technology in supply chain logistics, transactions and payments, while considering a combination of more traditional transaction methods to ensure diversity and safety in commerce. We are heartened to see such bipartisan support for the development of Blockchain technology for U.S. innovation, and encourage U.S. regulatory bodies to work with private sector institutions to properly formulate Blockchain standards.

SOURCES:

Kakavand et al. “The Blockchain Revolution: An Analysis of Regulation and Technology Related to Distributed Ledger Technologies.” SSRN Online. 2017.

Lanz, Jose Antonio. “U.S. Congressman Tom Emmer to Lead Pro-Blockchain and Crypto Legislation.” Ethereum World News Online. 2018.

Lisk Academy. “Blockchain Basics.” Lisk Academy Online. 2019.

Suberg, William. “Two US Bills Focus on Cryptocurrency Market Manipulation and Improving Regulations.” Cointelegraph Online.

Tagged:
Page 2 of 2
1 2