Friday Squid Blogging: New Jurassic Squid Predecessors

News story: “Scientists discover a bizarre Jurassic ‘squid’ unlike anything ever seen.”

Scientists have identified the “fattest” belemnite ever discovered, a bizarre, barrel-shaped squid relative that lived in Wyoming’s ancient seas 160 million years ago. The exceptionally rare fossils reveal a creature unlike anything previously known, potentially a predator of smaller squid-like animals and a surprising survivor of a supposedly vanished family.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered.

Blog moderation policy.

Posted on November 6, 2026 at 5:05 PM • 8 Comments

Comments

Clive Robinson • November 6, 2026 7:23 PM

@ Bruce, ALL,

More Apple backdoor censorship?

Apple was in effect the first mobile phone OS developer to put into their OS the foundations of “Client Side Scanning”(CSS) under increasing pressure from US legislators and law enforcement agencies.

Apple received a lot of bad press over it and slid some of it backwards.

Importantly though it emphasised the point that the US Gov had finally accepted the impossibility of NOBUS backdoors in “End to End Encryption”(E2EE) even though it had been repeatedly pointed out by those involved with ICTsec.

Thus the USG move to attack privacy on the other side of the “security end point” via CSS as an “end run attack”.

Something pointed out on this blog back in the very early days of “Secure Messaging Apps” and the weak links in the security chains on consumer and commercial systems.

Hence the argument for taking the “security end point” off the device that is the “communications end point” (and why I gave the basics of the design of how to build a “Deniable Encryption” system on this blog).

Well Apple have a new less obvious nod in the direction of “Client Side Censorship”(CSC).

Investigators have discovered quite deliberate censorship in the user side “autocomplete” text entry system,

Apple’s autocomplete restrictions include ‘Dictator Trump’ and ‘Sleepy Joe,’ researcher finds

Apple has an undisclosed multilingual gray list of tens of thousands of words and phrases that its iOS keyboard will ​not autocomplete or swipe-type, a researcher said on Friday.

“The list is not a ban. iPhone users can still type what they like when drafting emails and texts. But the words on the ‌list will not be suggested to users via autocomplete or swipe-typing in most cases. The researcher, Derik Kauffman, said the find opens a window into how Apple manages the tradeoff between anticipating what hundreds of millions of iPhone users are trying to say and preventing the devices from offering offensive or politically charged suggestions to users – something he said could quietly shape how they communicate.

“It’s a very light-touch form of censorship,” said Kauffman. “But at the scale that Apple is operating, it only takes a light touch to have a big impact.”“

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/apples-predictive-text-restrictions-include-dictator-trump-sleepy-joe-researcher-2026-11-06/

Not only is it a first step “light-touch censorship” system, it also opens up fingerprinting users via their typing cadence and word / symantec usage.

cybershow • November 7, 2026 2:18 AM

@Clive
re: Apple auto-complete

Complexity is the tyrant’s friend

Apple’s actions remind us that anyone making at-scale technology for use by a
significant cohort has the opportunity to exercise subtle soft power and
influence. If fully in control of the system and channels, one can delay,
discard or distort messages, with plausible deniability. Though scientists
spent decades on communications and storage protocols to avoid or correct
integrity failure, we see strategic errors nefariously injected at the
application layer. These can always be blamed on illegible system behaviours
for which no human seems accountable. Indeed this is a ‘feature’ of complex and
opaque systems that serve power, and why simple and open systems are resisted.

Apple, with its closed, tightly integrated ecosystem is especially problematic
in this regard.

The “perfect” system for the soft censor or manipulator is a demonstrably
imperfect one. A fine example is Google’s elaborate and precarious mail
delivery system. Its ever-changing and proprietary interpretation of SPF, DKIM,
spam scores, and “user defined delivery options” makes it a seemingly
non-deterministic beast. However, it’s tedious but amusing to me which messages
– to certain people on certain subjects – are prone to mysterious delivery
problems whereas others are not. The fact that malfeasance is unfalsifiable
even in principle adds another ‘feature’ of gaslighting to the arsenal. One
always falls under the accusation/suspicion of paranoia, lack of understanding
or making spiteful claims. In such systems there is always a “rational
explanation”, albeit one that nobody can name or explain why an error happened
on that particular occasion.

It is not until investigative hackers fully reverse engineer and expose
the code of these systems that the truth gets out.

Things like LLMs and auto-complete serve to amplify this mischief because we’ve
accepted and internalised that Big Tech computer systems may misinterpret,
randomly delay, discard or alter our messages. We should help people understand
that one of the less well understood problems with all “AI” is that it is an
intervention. As interpreter/translator (transformers were developed for
mapping problems) it is a potentially defective agent.

Cavin • November 7, 2026 4:29 AM

@Clive Stop wasting our time by constantly directing our attention to things we can’t control. You biggest hacker of all time , You

Anonymous • November 7, 2026 6:35 AM

“AlterEgo is a non-invasive, wearable, peripheral neural interface that allows humans to converse in natural language with machines, artificial intelligence assistants, services, and other people without any voice—without opening their mouth, and without externally observable movements—simply by articulating words internally. The feedback to the user is given through audio, via bone conduction, without disrupting the user’s usual auditory perception, and making the interface closed-loop. This enables a human-computer interaction that is subjectively experienced as completely internal to the human user—like speaking to one’s self.”

Rontea • November 7, 2026 9:27 AM

From Dave Taylor:

Google announced that it’s changing how schools can restrict access to its AI tools. But, as Google explained to The New York Times, if schools block AI completely, “they will not have access to search” either. Google Search seems like an essential tool in the digital age, regardless of a school’s position on AI. It’s concerning that Google can dictate how schools incorporate AI into their curricula.

freedom • November 7, 2026 12:50 PM

Google Search seems like an essential tool in the digital age,

Does it? t’s a very low quality service that exists to spy on people and feed them propaganda. It can be trivially replaced by a real decentralized search systems.

Also the fact that government schools are accomplices of google, letting google spy on children should be kind of a red flag…

lurker • November 7, 2026 5:13 PM

@Rontea, ALL

“if schools block AI completely, they will not have access to search”

This is bully behaviour we might expect of a monopolist. But surely Google is aware that there are other search engines available. The sad part is that many schools who should know better, are not aware how easy it is to use alternate search.

Clive Robinson • November 7, 2026 7:18 PM

@ Andy,

First off, thanks for the “shout out” I suspect @Bruce is likewise pleased with the “hat-tip”.

With regards,

“It is not until investigative hackers fully reverse engineer and expose the code of these systems that the truth gets out.”

I’m of the view that,

1, Just observing malfeasance in EMail etc is enough to go into full on avoidance mode (it’s why I don’t personally “do email” or similar).

The reason, “Because waiting on the ‘never never’ of “reverse engineering” for proof can do you a great deal of harm in the meantime.

2, All communications channels have redundancy to transfer information. Anywhere there is redundancy you can open up a channel within a channel[1].

3, Where there is redundancy you can make what appears random look like innocent plain text. Thus you can use the “observer problem” to your advantage.

Hence “Deniable encryption” that has Shannon “Perfect Secrecy” via “all messages are equiprobable” can give you a covert channel inside “What is to an observer a plaintext message” that also has other useful properties / features.

But…

4, You should always take the “security end point” and UI off of the device with the “communications end point”

Because with a little thought it kills “Client Side Scanning” and with care gets around “soft-censorship”.

Interestingly “deniable encryption” is something you can get an LLM System to do…

Which is proof enough that guardrails at an LLMs input and output will always be subject to being bypassed thus fail… And by extension any LLM Agent in a “sandbox” that still has external communications will be insecure at best thus fail.

At some point within the next decade I suspect most people will have caught up with this information.

And as we saw with the end of the “war on E2EE” which triggered the push for “Client Side Scanning”. CSS will likewise be over for those who prefer to excercise both caution and care over convenience.

Thus it’s time to start thinking about the next battle within the war of “peoples right to privacy” v “authoritarians you have no rights”.

Sometimes you have to apprentice as a Poacher to become a good Gamekeeper[2]…

[1] See the papers of Claude Shannon and Gustav Simmons for the proofs.

[2] This Poacher to Gamekeeper transition is something the less than bright managers towards the top of large companies have yet to wake upto with regards AI. As many in the software game know unless you are a lot smarter than AI then the result of using AI to produce code will be,

“Well over priced AI slop”

Thus the question will arise fairly soon of,

“Where do we get smart people?”

The answer that most senior managers do not want to hear is,

“By training them up for 20,000 hours.”

For which people will expect decent renumeration befitting skills that few others will ever acquire.

And No “Current AI LLM and ML System” will even get close to those required skill levels no matter how the Altman and Amodei types, their genuflecting employes and servile shills spout otherwise.

Leave a comment

Blog moderation policy

Login

Allowed HTML <a href="URL"> • <em> <cite> <i> • <strong> <b> • <sub> <sup> • <ul> <ol> <li> • <blockquote> <pre> Markdown Extra syntax via https://michelf.ca/projects/php-markdown/extra/

Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.