Tinker Data Bankers Spies

Hong Kong Tightens Rules on IPOs – The Territory Gets Tough on Regulating Domestic and International New Listings

Starting Oct. 1, in a worst-case scenario, bankers and listing professionals could be put behind bars for their role in public listings in Hong Kong, up till recently a top capital-raising center and magnet for initial public offerings from Chinese companies. To top it off, the current clampdown on data and corporate investigations in mainland China further complicates the situation.

The controversy stems from measures announced by the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission in December 2012 to step up the regulatory regime for listing sponsors, including clarifications of their liabilities – up to civil and criminal liabilities – to be put into effect Oct. 1 this year, and will apply to all public listings filed from that date. These measures supplement the new listing rules previously announced by The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong to promote more extensive and thorough due diligence of listing candidates.

You can find the entire column here and there.

If I Were Snowden

The Art of Hiding and Being Undetectable

The world knows by now Edward Snowden, the former private contractor for the National Security Agency who leaked revelations of massive US clandestine electronic surveillance and eavesdropping programs, is still at large in Hong Kong.

You might wonder how Snowden managed to remain obscure, both in the physical and cyber spheres.

Hong Kong, a former British colony now a major global financial center and Special Administrative Region of China, is one of the most densely populated areas in the world with a population of over seven million spread over just 1,104 square kilometers.

But it is precisely for these reasons that Hong Kong may be the ideal place. One could be easily spotted or located or one could capitalize on the dense crowd and modern infrastructure to negotiate his way unnoticed in the physical, digital and cyber dimensions.

And Snowden sure knows how to do that.

So what would you do if you were Snowden or if you simply needed to hide and remain undetectable for a period of time?

Please read the full column here and there.

The Enemies of the US

Take your pick: Edward Snowden, Internet and phone service providers, or just everybody?

The furor over the past week about how US intelligence agencies like the National Security Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have for years scooped up massive loads of private communications data raises one critical and distressing question.

Who, worldwide and in the US, are the general public supposed to trust now that it seems all forms of digital and cyber communications risk being read by the American authorities? The Americans, it seems, don’t believe it’s that big a deal. By 62-34, according to the latest poll by Pew Research and the Washington Post, they say it’s more important to investigate the threats than protect their privacy. But what about the rest of the world?

The immediate acknowledgement, rather than point blank denial, of the massive clandestine eavesdropping programs is no doubt alarming even for those long suspicious of such covert undertakings. But the more disturbing part is that the official response amounts to plain outright lies.

Please read this entire Opinion Column here.

The Genesis of Hong Kong´s Company Law Fuss

The Companies Ordinance review has been years in the making

A recent hotly debated topic in Hong Kong relates to the government’s attempt to rewrite the Companies Ordinance, spurred largely by the sudden public realization that the resulting new Companies Bill was already passed in the local legislature without much media attention and the rude awakening to the subsequent impacts.

Much of the current media focus and public debates have been placed on only one aspect of the many proposed changes: to withhold from the public parts of the identification numbers and details of the residential addresses of company directors found in the Hong Kong company registration records.

The lightning rod for public concern has struck many a wrong cord, including outcries about the suppression of transparency and apprehension over possible government submission to China’s will.

This column looks at the roots of the situation and puts the fuss in perspective.

Please read full article here.

Hong Kong Considers Freedom of Information Act

While Attempting to Suppress Transparency

Paradoxically, even as the Hong Kong government is proposing far-reaching changes to the Companies Ordinance that would bring due diligence and investigations to a stop, officials are also quietly studying the possibility of introducing a Freedom of Information Act.

If that seems a contradiction, that’s because it is.

The Companies Ordinance amendments, either missed or ignored by the mainstream media when it was passed through the legislature earlier last year, will result in withholding from the public parts of the identification numbers and details of the residential addresses of company directors found in the Hong Kong company registration records – the very thing a freedom of information act is designed to facilitate.

Please read the full column here.

Shhh… Spying on Journalists

The Pentagon’s recent sworn: They won’t spy on journalists.

(Yeah right…. Yes, I hear you at the back.)

The US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave an order July 19 to clampdown on classified leaks from the Pentagon and “monitor all major, national level reporting”.

This raised immediate concerns amongst the press as journalists wondered: is the Pentagon planning to spy on their very act of reporting or simply to conduct wide-sweeping news scans for supposedly leaked information? The former, left to one’s imagination, could include wiretapping, surveillance and various forms of intrusive acts.

The Pentagon press secretary George Little reportedly replied in writing:

“The secretary and the chairman both believe strongly in freedom of the press and encourage good relations between the department and the press corps.” (Read this).

Meanwhile, a true story, I know a journalist who was spied upon by a Chinese intelligence agent.

The agent apparently tried to recruit the reporter by offering “huge rewards” if he cooperates and collects information about certain individuals under the pretense of combing background data for potential stories.

This journo friend declined outright but not long after, he suspected his phones were bugged and asked for help.

My advice?

Quite simply though cumbersome: buy and replace regularly several low-value, use-and-dispose SIM cards, several used cellular phones (the pre-smartphone days type like those good old Nokia, Ericsson, Motorola, etc) and used laptops.

In short, change your phone and cyber lifestyle – at least for the time being (Refer to my earlier commentary: Shhh… How to Beat the CIA and Protect Your Data).

The Complicated World of Corporate Espionage

It isn’t as straightforward as it looks
Corporate espionage used to be rather straightforward – as the typical Coke-Pepsi textbook example illustrates, in which each tries to steal the other’s recipe for sugared water. It is a crime when someone steals company data/trade secrets and passes it to a business rival.
Well, yes — but not quite, in the case a series of court decisions in the United States that complicate the issue considerably (Read the entire column here and there).