The Federal Communications Commission is well aware of the potential damage from fake emergency alerts, and it's hoping to minimize the threat with policy changes. The agency has proposed rules that would require stricter security for the Emergency Alert System (EAS) and Wireless Emergency Alerts. Participants and telecoms would have to not only report EAS breaches within 72 hours, but provide yearly certifications that they both have "sufficient" safeguards and a risk management plan.

The proposed rules would also require phone carriers to send authentication data ensuring that only legitimate emergency alerts reach customer devices. The FCC is similarly looking for comments on the effectiveness of the current requirements for transmitting EAS notices, and suggestions for "alternative approaches" with improvements.

The proposal comes three years after University of Colorado researchers warned that it was easy to spoof FEMA's presidential alerts, with no way to verify the authenticity of the broadcasts. And while the 2018 Hawaii missile alert was the result of an error rather than a hack, it underscored the risks associated with false warnings. Even at small scales, a fake alert could reach tens of thousands of people, possibly leading to panic and reduced trust in real messages.

It's not certain if the proposals are enough. The 72-hour window may help prevent some false alerts, but not all of them — that's plenty of time for a hacker to both breach an emergency system and send fake messages. It's likewise unclear if the FCC would update its security requirements to keep up with evolving threats. Even so, this shows that the Commission is at least aware of the dangers.

The National Transportation Safety Board is calling on its sister agency to implement regulation requiring all vehicles sold in the US to include blood alcohol monitoring systems. The NTSB sent the recommendation to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Tuesday after completing an investigation into a horrific collision last year that involved drunk driving and the death of two adults and seven children.

“Technology could’ve prevented this heartbreaking crash — just as it can prevent the tens of thousands of fatalities from impaired-driving and speeding-related crashes we see in the US annually,” said NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy. “We need to implement the technologies we have right here, right now to save lives.”​

According to statistics published by the NHTSA, nearly 43,000 people died on US roads last year, marking the highest that number had been in 16 years. While traffic deaths fell slightly between April and June, Ann Carlson, the agency’s acting administrator, said a “crisis” was still underway on the country’s roads. “We need NHTSA to act. We see the numbers,” Homendy told The Associated Press. “We need to make sure that we’re doing all we can to save lives.”

The NTSB says all new cars sold in the US should include an integrated system that passively detects if the driver is under the influence of alcohol. It notes that such a system could be combined with advanced driver monitoring technologies to prevent accidents. Separately, the agency recommends that the NHTSA incentivize automakers to include tech that prevents speeding-related collisions. The NTSB does not have the authority to regulate or enforce any safety measures it suggests. It has been calling on the NHTSA to explore alcohol monitoring technologies since 2012.

The NHTSA also faces pressure from Congress to mandate such systems. Under last year’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the agency has three years to study the feasibility of various alcohol monitoring technologies and establish a final set of rules. It can seek an extension, however. And in the past, it has been slow to implement such requirements.

The Treasury Department is keenly aware that crypto scams and hacks remain serious problems, and it's pressuring the rest of the US government to respond. As The Washington Postnotes, the Treasury has issued a report calling on other federal regulators to further crack down on scams and other illegal crypto activity. Officials want agencies to "expand and increase" investigations and enforcement, issue clearer guidance and help crypto users understand both risks and the reporting tools at their disposal.

In all cases, the Treasury asked for more coordination between government divisions. The department also asked for greater transparency on illegal activity to help spot trends in scams and other crimes.

The tougher stance is necessary given the dangers, according to the report. While proponents argue crypto can democratize financial services by making them more affordable and accessible, the Treasury found that there wasn't much evidence to support the claim. If anything, the department found that low-income households were particularly vulnerable to ripoffs — 29 percent of crypto investors had an annual income below $50,000, according to Federal Reserve Board data.

It's not clear that the findings will lead to decisive action. The Treasury didn't outline a concrete strategy for battling crypto scams and security breaches, and regulators have their own sometimes-conflicting views of how to govern digital assets. The Securities Exchange Commission sees most crypto tokens as securities it can monitor, while the Commodity Futures Trading Commission unsurprisingly wants to treat tokens as commodities. Although the bureaus might not be fighting, this report doesn't do much to establish common ground.

NASA has completed a critical repair of its next-generation Space Launch System (SLS) rocket. On Friday, engineers replaced the leaky seal that forced the agency to scrub its most recent attempt to launch Artemis 1. On September 3rd, a fitting on one of the fuel lines to the SLS began leaking hydrogen. Ground crew at Kennedy Space Center tried to troubleshoot the problem three times, only for the leak to persist and force NASA to call off the launch attempt. On Friday, engineers also replaced the seal on a 4-inch hydrogen “bleed line” that was responsible for a smaller leak during an earlier August 29th launch attempt.

With the new gaskets in place, NASA plans to conduct a fueling test to verify they’re working as intended. The dry run will see engineers attempt to load the SLS with all 736,000 gallons of liquid hydrogen and oxygen it would need during a regular flight. NASA hopes to successfully complete that test as early as September 17th. “This demonstration will allow engineers to check the new seals under cryogenic, or supercold, conditions as expected on launch day and before proceeding to the next launch attempt,” the agency said.

On Thursday, NASA announced it was targeting September 23rd for another go at putting Artemis 1 into space, with September 27th as a backup. Whether it can make those dates will depend on next week’s fueling test and a decision from the US Space Force. Flight regulations require that NASA test the battery of Artemis 1’s flight termination system every 20 days. That’s something it can only do within the Kennedy Space Center’s Vehicle Assembly Building. The Space Force previously granted the agency an extension on the 20-day deadline. NASA has now asked for another waiver.

President Biden is still unveiling measures to combat climate change, and his newest efforts are aimed at preventing environmental crises. The President has outlined a string of executive actions that, notably, include the first "Wind Energy Areas" in the Gulf of Mexico. The 700,000 acres will allow for enough potential offshore wind power to supply over 3 million homes, according to the administration. The Secretary of the Interior, meanwhile, will further work on wind power along the mid-to-southern Atlantic Coast as well as the Florida Coast.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has unveiled $2.3 billion in funding to bolster resilience against heat waves, wildfires and similar climate change-related disasters. New guidance from the Department of Health and Human Services expands the use of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program for air conditioning, community cooling centers and other resources to fight extreme heat.

As in the past, Biden characterized his efforts as useful for the economy, not just the environment. The wind power projects should create jobs, while the FEMA and Health Department initiatives could minimize the damage from natural disasters. These events disproportionately hurt minorities and underserved communities, he said, and they also put critical infrastructure at risk.

Biden has pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030. The White House has also devoted billions of dollars to clean energy projects, planned a national EV charging network and fought to reverse the purchase of gas-powered Postal Service vehicles.

This isn’t as extensive a response as some expected. The Washington Post reported that Biden considered declaring a climate emergency this week, though press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed he is still open to the idea. Biden is far from alone in failing to treat the warming climate with urgency, though. Congress has struggled to pass climate-related legislation given Senate opposition from Republicans and Democrat holdout Joe Manchin. These executive moves could help Biden advance elements of his climate agenda despite the legislative roadblock.

Congressional Democrats are calling on the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy to address the recent proliferation of cryptocurrency mining within the US. In a letter sent Friday (via The Guardian), Senator Elizabeth Warren and five other lawmakers said the two agencies should work together to require crypto mining firms to disclose their energy use and emissions.

The request comes after the group recently completed an investigation that began at the start of the year. According to the letter, data collected from seven of the largest mining companies in the US, including Stronghold, Bitfury and Riot, indicates they can collectively use more than 1 gigawatt of electricity. Put another way, that’s almost enough to power all the residential buildings in Houston.

Warren and the other lawmakers say they’re concerned about what all that power use will mean for the environment and consumers. Regarding the former, they state that emissions data from three of the surveyed companies indicate they emit approximately 1.6 million tons of CO2 annually or the equivalent of the tailpipe emissions of almost 360,000 cars. “Bitcoin miners are using huge quantities of electricity that could be used for other priority end uses that contribute to our electrification and climate goals, such as replacing home furnaces with heat pumps,” the letter states.

On the latter point, the lawmakers cite a 2021 study from the University of California, Berkeley that estimated crypto mining in upstate New York raised annual electricity bills by approximately $165 million for small businesses and $79 million for consumers. What's more, they say their investigation doesn’t even scratch the surface of the full impact of crypto mining on power use and emissions in the US. “None of the companies provided full and complete information in response to our questions,” they note.

“The results of our investigation, which gathered data from just seven companies, are disturbing, with this limited data alone revealing that crypto miners are large energy users that account for a significant – and rapidly growing – amount of carbon emissions,” the letter states. By requiring crypto mining firms to disclose their energy use and emissions, the group says the EPA and Department of Energy could provide lawmakers with better data to inform future policy decisions. The agencies have until August 15th to respond to the request.

Juul has asked a federal appeals court to temporarily block a Food and Drug Administration ban on sales of its vaping products in the US. The agency issued the order on Thursday, citing a lack of sufficient evidence provided by the company to show its devices are safe. The FDA acknowledged that it wasn't aware of "an immediate hazard" linked to Juul's vape pen or pods.

“FDA’s decision is arbitrary and capricious and lacks substantial evidence,” Juul said in a filing with the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, according to The Wall Street Journal. The company called the ban extraordinary and unlawful. It requested an administrative stay until it can file a motion for an emergency review of the FDA’s order.

Juul claimed that, without the stay, it would suffer significant and irreparable harm. The company makes the lion's share of its revenue in the US. If the stay is granted, Juul and retailers will be able to keep selling its products there. The company argued in the filing that the order marked a move away from the FDA's typical practices, which allow for a transition period. 

"We respectfully disagree with the FDA’s findings and decision and continue to believe we have provided sufficient information and data based on high-quality research to address all issues raised by the agency," Juul's chief regulatory officer Joe Murillo told Engadget after the FDA issued the order. "In our applications, which we submitted over two years ago, we believe that we appropriately characterized the toxicological profile of JUUL products, including comparisons to combustible cigarettes and other vapor products, and believe this data, along with the totality of the evidence, meets the statutory standard of being appropriate for the protection of the public health."

In 2020, the FDA required makers of e-cigarettes to submit their products for review. It looked at the possible benefits of vaping as an alternative to cigarettes for adult smokers. It was weighing those up against concerns about the popularity of vaping among young people. The agency has authorized 23 "electronic nicotine delivery systems," including products from NJOY and Vuse parent Reynolds American.

The FDA slammed Juul in 2019 for telling students that its products are "totally safe." The Federal Trade Commission and state attorney generals have investigated Juul over claims it marketed its vape pens to underage users. In the last year, the company has agreed to pay at least $87 million to settle lawsuits in several states — including North Carolina, Washington state and Arizona — which alleged that it targeted young people with its marketing. It has faced similar suits in other states.

NASA wants a deeper understanding of the many unexplained, flying objects that appear in the sky. The agency is launching a study team this fall to observe UFOs, now known as UAPS (unidentified aerial phenomena). While it may be tempting to think of UFOs as the stuff of sci-fi and conspiracy theories, NASA’s announcement states right off the bat that there is “no evidence UAPs are extraterrestrial in origin.” Instead, the focus of the mission appears to be on gathering data and furthering our scientific understanding of UAPs. There’s a practical reason why. Unexplained flying objects — no matter the origin — can pose a threat to flight safety and national security, as military officials have noted.

“The limited number of observations of UAPs currently makes it difficult to draw scientific conclusions about the nature of such events. Unidentified phenomena in the atmosphere are of interest for both national security and air safety. Establishing which events are natural provides a key first step to identifying or mitigating such phenomena, which aligns with one of NASA’s goals to ensure the safety of aircraft,” said the agency in its announcement.

NASA is far from the only US government agency with an interest in UAPs. Last month, Congress held its first hearing on UFOs in over 50 years, where Pentagon officials noted that reports of UAPs are more frequent now than in the past. More than 143 incidents of unidentified flying objects have been reported to the Pentagon since 2004 and remain unexplained, according to a report released last year by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

NASA’s UAP study will be led by astrophysicist David Spergel of the Simons Foundation and NASA’s Daniel Evans, the assistant deputy associate administrator for research at the agency’s Science Mission Directorate. The study will take nine months to complete, and the team will consult with a field of experts in science, aeronautics and data analytics.

Upon the study’s conclusion, NASA promises to make both its findings and all the collected data public. “All of NASA’s data is available to the public – we take that obligation seriously – and we make it easily accessible for anyone to see or study,” Evans said in a statement.

Canada is banning 4G and 5G telecom equipment from Chinese companies Huawei and ZTE, joining its "Five Eyes" allies in doing so. The decision follows a three-year review that was delayed by political tensions with China after Huawei’s CFO Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada on a US warrant. 

"Our government will always protect the safety and security of Canadians and will take any actions necessary to safeguard our critical telecommunications infrastructure," said Canada's innovation minister, François-Philippe Champagne, in a press release.

"We’re disappointed but not surprised. We’re surprised it took the government so long to make a decision," Huawei spokesperson Alykhan Velshi told The Guardian. "We see this as a political decision, one born of political pressure primarily from the United States."

Two of Canada's largest wireless providers, Bell and Telus, switched to Ericsson and Nokia equipment in 2020 to build their next-generation 5G networks. However, both operators have some Huawei 5G equipment in place as part of so-called non-standalone 5G networks integrated with previous 4G networks. Those 4G networks were also built using Huawei equipment. Huawei has sold over $700 million in equipment to Canadian operators since 2018, mostly to Bell and Telus. 

Both operators reportedly approached the federal government in the past to ask about compensation from taxpayers for potential removal Huawei or ZTE gear. The CEO of a smaller Northern operator, Iristel, previously said that a requirement to remove existing equipment would be "catastrophic." 

However, Champagne said that operators will be required to remove any Huawei or ZTE gear at their own expense. Existing 5G equipment must be removed or terminated by June 28, 2024 and any 4G equipment by December 31, 2027, according to the policy statement.

Canada's Five Eyes intelligence allies, the US, Britain, Australia and New Zealand, have already banned Huawei and ZTE wireless equipment. Canada has faced growing pressure to do the same, over fears it could compromise the security of all five nations, given that China's laws require state companies to cooperate with intelligence services. 

The Biden administration may be struggling in its efforts to fight security-related misinformation. The Washington Postsources claim the Department of Homeland Security has "paused" a Disinformation Governance Board just three weeks after its April 27th announcement. Officials reportedly decided to shut down the board May 16th, but that decision appears to be on hold after a last-minute effort to retain board leader Nina Jankowicz. She resigned from the board and the DHS today (May 18th).

While the leakers didn't directly explain why the Disinformation Governance Board was frozen, they claim the White House neither had clear messaging nor a defense against misinformation and threats levelled against Jankowicz. The board was meant to examine approaches for fighting viral lies and had no power over content, but far-right influencers and outlets misrepresented it as a censorship tool and villainized Jankowicz. The campaigns led to harassment and threats against the board leader — in other words, the board was the victim of the very sort of attack it was supposed to prevent.

We've asked the DHS for comment. In a statement to the Post, the department said the board's role had been "grossly mischaracterized" and that Jankowicz had been targeted by "unjustified and vile personal attacks and threats." Previously, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and White House press secretary Jen Psaki have respectively tried to clarify the board's objectives and debunk falsehoods with little effect.

There is a chance the board could survive depending on a Homeland Security Advisory Council review. If the reports are true, though, the US government may have to rethink its anti-disinformation efforts if they're going to survive both criticism and internal scrutiny.