The Market Ticker ®
Commentary on The Capital Markets
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"; those get you blocked as a spammer), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2024-03-17 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Technology , 275 references
[Comments enabled]  

This article deserves more notice than it got....

The consumer advocacy group found issues with a dozen seemingly identical video doorbells sold under brand names including Eken and Tuck. All are made by the Eken Group, based in Shenzhen, China, and controlled through a mobile app called Aiwit, which Eken operates, CR said. 

Eken and Tuck are not well-known brands in the video doorbell market, yet they are relatively strong sellers online. The doorbells appeared in multiple listings on Amazon, with more than 4,200 sold in January alone. Both brands are often touted as "Amazon's Choice: Overall Pick," CR stated.

What is the definition of an "Amazon's Choice"?

That's a good question, but arguably one of the better answers is probably "doesn't get returned often."

This much I can assure you -- Amazon doesn't verify the security chops of such an app or device and apparently neither does Google's Play Store other than by automated scan because despite this article and CR's warning the app is still on the Play Store and claims all data is encrypted in transit and none is collected.

This may be true, by the way.

But as I've noted repeatedly over the years when it comes to home security surveillance cameras are a special problem.  The common protocol used to stream data, RTSP, dates to 1998 and while there is a replacement as a "proposed standard" in RFC 2876 it is not backward-compatible and RTSP offers only authentication via a digest method for access and no security whatsoever on the payload which is live video and audio!

There is a serious tension between the cost of IP cameras and encryption, in that encryption is not "free" on a CPU cycle basis and making cameras that have two-digit costs before the decimal is fairly incompatible with real-time video encryption -- never mind the other issues that arise such as a lack of a published, reasonable standard for it that is interoperable across vendors and the certificate and keying management problems that have to have some sort of secure means of being resolved when you have these devices all over the place.  The latter is serious as PKI (public key) has a cost too; that little "https" thing we all use isn't free to the site owner because the folks issuing it actually have to do work and their security has to be up to snuff or every certificate they issue can be compromised.  In other words this is a material problem and not a trivial one to fix on a mass-marketed device, particularly when cost pressures are involved.

HomeDaemon, the software package I wrote quite some time ago but refuse to put into commercial channels for multiple reasons I've pointed out in the past, works with pretty-much any camera that can do RTSP and resolves the problem by insuring that the data never leaves your premises without being encrypted with strong, PFS-enabled security -- and it never goes to any sort of "cloud" system at all, only being decrypted on your phone.  This narrows the PKI space to one device in your house which is the HomeDaemon gateway (but still has the PKI issue and, if done through public certification authorities such as is in use for this blog) still would have a recurring expense.

New rules are needed to hold online retailers accountable for vetting sellers and the product sold by their platforms, according to CR. It called on the Federal Trade Commission to stop the online sales of the doorbell cameras and on retailers to do more to ensure the quality of the products they sell. 

Well, "stop the sale"?  Entirely disagree.  It should be up to an individual consumer whether they find the trade-off to be fair or not.

But force both the sellers and app publishers to be honest about the issues, yeah, how about that?  And how about considering misrepresentation to be fraud (and throwing people in prison) when it occurs?  And by the way, does this apply to the various "proprietary" cameras and such?  I don't know, because I haven't bought one and looked into it but I'll guarantee given what we do know that the data is not secure on an end-to-end basis.  I'd like to assume that the "Ring" (and related) versions don't share this issue in transport but those have potentially even more-serious trouble because they're all "cloud" enabled and while their data may be encrypted in transport it is not individually encrypted in storage with keying only the customer has and controls.  This clearly is not the case otherwise we wouldn't have (as we do) various places that ask (and allow you to) "help" agencies of various sorts (e.g. police departments) access to said information.

Never mind that Amazon in particular at least back to last summer is known not to encrypt data "at rest" in their cloud storage because they paid a nearly $6 million fine to the FTC for allowing their workers to access RING camera video.  You can't access what's encrypted with only the customer having the keying and thus the question as to whether such is stored "in the clear" is quite-conclusively known.

Why is the above a big deal?  Because such "cloud" storage concentrates a whole bunch of said unencrypted data from different people and places into one place and thus makes that place a very juicy target.  To compromise one camera and its data is bad if its your house that's targeted but to compromise one million cameras at once is obviously much worse and thus it becomes effectively the same as a bank with a big sign on the front of the building stating "$100 million in gold bars is in our vault!"

If you do that you better be sure the vault is adequate to prevent anyone from breaking into it successfully to steal same and if they try they'll get caught before they get in.

My assumption is that any such device sold in the consumer marketplace is insecure in transport and any "cloud" storage unless you, personally, wrap all said transportation of data before it leaves your premises and you never use any of the offered "cloud" options at all.  In the current product environment I have no way to make a recommendation that doesn't result in a severe privacy problem because there's no way to reasonably believe said data is secure in any of the commercial offerings.

In an environment where what is observed is public land (thus there's no expectation of privacy at all) it obviously does not really matter but as soon as that camera is pointing at private property, presumably yours, it matters a great deal and unfortunately in the current marketplace, as has been the case for several years now, there's no answer that I'm comfortable with recommending for purchase.

Maybe I'll decide to release HomeDaemon generally (without charging for it) at some point to resolve at least the "personal access only" problem side of the issue for those willing to put in some personal effort.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-03-13 08:44 by Karl Denninger
in Consumer , 299 references
[Comments enabled]  

And here's the latest...

The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) increased 0.4 percent in February on a seasonally adjusted basis, after rising 0.3 percent in January, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Over the last 12 months, the all items index increased 3.2 percent before seasonal adjustment.

The index for shelter rose in February, as did the index for gasoline. Combined, these two indexes contributed over sixty percent of the monthly increase in the index for all items. The energy index rose 2.3 percent over the month, as all of its component indexes increased. The food index was unchanged in February, as was the food at home index. The food away from home index rose 0.1 percent over the month.

The index for all items less food and energy rose 0.4 percent in February, as it did in January. Indexes which increased in February include shelter, airline fares, motor vehicle insurance, apparel, and recreation. The index for personal care and the index for household furnishings and operations were among those that decreased over the month.

If you recall last month I noted that a serious ramp in gasoline prices started just after the survey week so it was definitely going to show up in the numbers this month.  It did.

But more importantly all items less food and energy, otherwise called "core" inflation, has begun increasing once again after coming down into the 0.2 - 0.3 monthly range for the back half of last year.  It now stands at 0.4% for the last two months which annualizes to 4.9%, or if you want a nice round number, 5%.  That is 2-1/2 times the Fed's alleged target.

The claim is that gasoline was up "just" 4.3% unadjusted.  That's garbage; most areas of the country I watch (including where I live, and I was traveling during the survey period too) saw double that rate of increase on the month, but heh, there's no reason to be honest, right?

The other interesting one, which does appear roughly correct, is piped gas.  It had a small spike last month but is now, as expected with the end of winter heating demand, coming down.

In the "big household" category of course rent remains extremely high in terms of the Fed's "target" as does auto insurance, which continues a 20% annualized increase rate.  Of course nobody cares about this when it comes to the basics of insurance companies and how they make money (and thus how we'll never take care of this problem in all insurance industries until we make any sort of collusive and "push" programs through government something that we actually punish under 15 USC) -- that is, since insurance companies are regulated as to their profit margin the only ways to grow are to either have more claims or more expensive claims.  This isn't a conspiracy -- it is just a basic economic fact of how insurance companies are regulated and thus what public policy has to do lest the cost of the underlying items insured against be forcibly ramped by collusion between said firms, the makers of same and government, particularly when said insurance companies are public entities.  The required laws to so-regulate conduct exist but, in the last 20+ years, it has become public policy to not enforce them at either the state or federal level no matter who or which party is in office.

The internals of the report do show one quite-concerning area -- beef products were up a lot over the month, 7.4%.  Beef is, of course, a primary and excellent source of human nutrition.  It isn't all meats, however, as pork products were down in price.  I guess I'll have to stick some baby backs in the smoker instead of a nice brisket.

A few other curiosities -- FCOJ (frozen concentrated orange juice), the subject of Trading Places, was up 27.2% on the month and fast food continued its ramp, up an astounding 5.2% on the month.  Another of serious impact was non-prescription drugs which were up 9.3% on the month (I don't know what drove that as I don't buy them in general) and medical equipment and supplies which were up 3.4%.  Hope you don't need any of those.....

In any event I see nothing in this report supporting lower interest rates anywhere in the horizon.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-03-08 09:16 by Karl Denninger
in Employment , 412 references
[Comments enabled]  

Hmmm.....

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 275,000 in February, and the unemployment rate increased to 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care, in government, in food services and drinking places, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.

Interestingly enough the market seems to think this "good" report is a reason to rally.  The explanation is probably the two-tick rise in the formal "unemployment" rate, which people in the markets interpret as "rate cuts."

I'll take the under on that bet.

Two of the three ticks in the employment-population ratio were reversed, but the total employed figure (unadjusted household) is only back to where it was last February, and I remind you that we have more people in the workforce -- about 1.5 million more, so from a functional perspective employment is down.

Internally there is a large deterioration in the employment:population ratio for those without a high school diploma -- four ticks, which is extremely bad news on the lower end of the economic strata especially with a few million "migrants" who almost-certainly do not have high school diplomas, even to America's poor standards.

Everyone in the middle (other than Bachelors) had a decent increase in that regard; those with actual 4-year+ degrees were up slightly (one tick.)

One piece of legitimate good news is that hours worked were up a bit and thus so were weekly paychecks, which is the opposite of what we've seen over the last few months.  The bad news, however, is that average checks are up 3.7% over the last 12 months which puts an immediate and direct lie to the government's claims that wages are outstripping inflation.  No they're not, and that is their data, not mine.

I don't see a cause for a rally here, but obviously someone does, and it is of note that the TNX-IRX differential index is widening again as it has been the last couple of weeks, now standing at -11.4 or thereabouts.  That is an extremely-steep inversion of the yield curve and makes the case rather easy from my point of view in that if you believe government inflation numbers short-term government bonds return 5.2% right now with zero risk, where inflation is allegedly two full points less than that and you're not buying something with a P/S of 10 and a P/E somewhere beyond the ionosphere.

The decision is easy for me but YMMV.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-03-07 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 1006 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Haley is out and IMHO good riddance.  She was wildly more-dangerous than Victoria Nuland, who is also leaving and there is plenty of speculation as to cause -- but it may simply be "she's old enough to call it quits."  What's not speculation is that pretty-much the entire Ukraine policy since 2014 has been hers, including our sponsorship of Maidan.  The destruction there in both material and people is hideous and as with Madame Albright's myopic view of international relations born of her roots Nuland's position appears to me to be equally-driven by personal animus.  In my view both should have been jettisoned as soon as that became apparent, but then again I'm never been an employee of the State Department and its various elements and interdependencies.

That Haley had no path to the nomination was known a couple of months ago, but eventually no matter how stubborn you are in the face of facts the money runs out because modern politics requires a lot of it, and the people spending it see it as a prop bet with a potential return.  When the odds get long enough they stop paying and you stop running, like it or not.

This of course means that with Biden being the incumbent and political party doctrine being that sitting Presidents with another term available may not be challenged in the primary it is now a two person race.  Well, sort of.  There are rumors flying around that Kennedy is flirting with attempting to get the Libertarian nomination, and the Libertarian party has ballot access for the Presidential ticket in all 50 states.  Despite his policies being pretty much anything but Libertarian the party, of which I have decent internal knowledge of as I was elected to the EC in Florida, is very likely to embrace this move since it will both bring in money and, assuming he gets any material number of votes, and he will, further-cement their ballot position.

Politics makes for strange compromises sometimes and whether you like it or not that's never going to change.  While I wildly disagree with many of Kennedy's views I might actually vote for him rather than write in Beelzebub or Cthulhu this November, should he run on the Libertarian ticket.  I certainly can't support Biden nor can I support Trump as on the critical issues facing this nation, all related to the rule of law, neither has delivered anything than a Bronx Cheer, albeit aimed in different directions and to the benefit of, in some cases, different people.

I will remind everyone that 8 USC §1324 has been around since long before either Trump or Biden was President and that the Executive, of which the President is the head, has the Department of Justice, AG and FBI under same.  Further, every federal officeholder takes an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States, including the ones they personally disagree with.  There's a process to change the law if you don't like it and that process goes through Congress.  Said law, were it to be enforced, would absolutely would stop all of the illegal immigration games instantly and permanently as it lays out criminal felony penalties, including prison time of 5, 10, 20 and potentially life prison terms, for those who harbor or assist such immigration including those who employ said persons.

Since both of the current "mainstream" candidates claim the situation is a critical problem (and I agree with this) but at the same time claim they don't have the legal tools to deal with it and that is absolutely a lie I will not vote for either of them.

The same applies when it comes to monopolist practices riven through our economy, most-critically in health care as that has the largest impact on the Federal and State budgets.  Again, 15 USC Ch. 1 §1-3 makes clear that such conduct, even the mere attempt if it fails, is a criminal felony carrying prison penalties for each person who is engaged in same.  That law has been challenged twice to the US Supreme Court in the late 1970s and early 80s (Royal Drug and Maricopa County) and found Constitutional both times.  Nonetheless neither major political party has lifted a finger to bring a single criminal charge under that law -- not in health care or in any of the other merger and consolidation activities in any industry.

Now will Kennedy vow to bring said charges?  That would be a reason to vote for him.  Of course he might be lying, but then again he might not.  I already know the other two have lied and nothing they can say now will cause me to believe them thus "might" beats "won't."

There are many who think our markets and economy will chug along through 2024 and that "its just fine."  I argue the data says otherwise; consumer credit has gone vertical, for example, and lates are rising quickly, including in car loans which are more-likely to get paid than a mortgage because without a car you're not going to work and then everything goes down the toilet for you in your personal financial situation.  Thus if you have to screw someone as you simply don't have the money to pay the last person you usually screw is the car finance company.

I'm not dancing in the streets, incidentally, that Trump is the presumptive nominee.  The Supreme Court's 9-0 decision on Colorado the other day probably won't stop some from trying to interfere in the election, but the Court made quite clear that the decision as to who is President lies with the people as the States and other apparatus, other than through Congress, simply do not have jurisdiction to force a decision other than by individual votes at the ballot box.

The dynamic here is likely similar to that of Perot's candidacy.  Whether Perot would have been better for the nation I do not know, but that he recognized the problems on an economic and budgetary basis in various areas, focused at the time on trade, was both clear and correct in his analysis and, as time has proved, on a forward projection of the outcome.  We would have been wise to put him in place on that basis as President but we didn't, and thus here we are.

I am not bullish on American society and the economy given these facts in the intermediate term.  Four years from now, no matter if we put a Democrat or Republican in office, I expect we'll be wishing we didn't given who those two parties have posted up.

But what I wish doesn't change how the ballots have been cast, and when you get down to it all government exists with the consent of the governed.  I've seen no indication that the people of America have declared to any material degree that such consent has been withdrawn, say much less it being actively sabotaged.

So be it; I am one voice and one vote, and have no more right to overrule the decision of the many than you do.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-03-06 11:09 by Karl Denninger
in POTD , 154 references
 

 

View this entry with comments (opens new window)