Apple secretive on ' polluting and poisoning ' supply chain, says report

Apple is secretive about its supply chain than almost all of its rivals, says a report from leading Chinese environment groups. Photo: Kimberly white/Reuters

Apple is secretive about its supply chain in China than almost all of its rivals, according to a new report by durability of activists, who accuse the company's products degrading environment and poisoning workers.

Despite its claim to be a leading promoter corporate ethics worldwide, maker iPads and iPhones came joint bottom among 29 large firms in transparency study drawn up by a coalition of China's leading environmental groups.

"Behind their stylish image Apple products have a hand, many do not know – pollution and married. This page is hidden deep within the company's secretive supply chain, "claims a declaration from the 36 groups involved in the Green choice initiative.

Their report — for the fourth to look at the effects of global brands on China's environment – view of the openness, enterprises and their reactivity reports of environmental violations at suppliers.

It follows a series of occupational poisoning, heavy metal contamination incidents and suicides at Chinese factories that provide materials and components for mobile phones and computers.

Many leading brands Outsource production to little-known Chinese enterprises, where labour costs may be lower, weaker and environmental safety standards more lax than in the West.

Foreign companies say they promote global levels of corporate social responsibility. The Apple supplier code of conduct claims to draw on "internationally recognised standards to advance social and environmental responsibility".

But it is difficult for third parties to keep foreign companies to account, because they tend to be secretive about their suppliers, pasting corporate confidentiality. This lack of transparency, combined with official corruption and dire political accountability has made China a haven for polluters.

In recent years has more than 3000 children diagnosed with unsafe levels of lead in their blood in a series of heavy metal contamination outbreaks near melting plants. Many of the facilities, provided the materials used in batteries and casings for foreign IT companies.

None of the 29 companies in examination required for their suppliers to disclose information of the discharges, waste, even though there were great differences in their responses to public inquiries and reported environmental problems. Apple was ranked – in parallel with other major consumer electronics companies – which are at least willing to provide data or to answer questions about suppliers.

The authors say Apple's suppliers have been involved in the violation of environmental regulations. The report noted waste discharge violations in recent years by several Chinese companies, which is believed to be a part of Apple's supply chain.

Labour conditions were also called into question, when at least a dozen workers jumped to their deaths last spring at Foxconn electronics complex in Shenzhen, which makes parts for Apple and other foreign companies.

Critics say, foreign firms are mainly responsible for the pollution because they insist on low prices, which puts pressure on suppliers to reduce costs, and corners. This is disputed by the companies.

Apple's reticence was heavily criticized in May last year, when at least 62 workers fell ill after inhaling n-hexane is used to clean the touch screen on a Wintek electronics factory in Suzhou. Leaders on the allegedly changed the harmful chemical – which can damage nerve in up to two years — apparently because the dried faster than alcohol, Taiwan-owned factory thereby increasing efficiency.

Hospitalised victims, quoted in the new green choice video, said they made products to Apple and has written for the company's chief executive, Steve Jobs, asking for an explanation.

"We will ask you whether or not you should be responsible for the supplier companies you have chosen?" you ask in the letter. "When you look at the Apple Phone do you use in your hand and you a swipe it with your finger, it is possible that you may feel as if it is no longer a beautiful screen to show off, but life and blood of us employees and victims? You supervise audit staff to ensure that they were responsible and diligent? "

Nokia and Motorola answered questions about their involvement with Wintek soon after poisoning was unveiled. Apple has yet to confirm or rule out a relationship. The company said it would not comment on individual claims.

The report's authors say they tried months raising Wintek with Apple, but it refused to comment directly.

"This position means it is impossible to have any official supervision over their entire supply chain. Without, how can we trust them? "Ma Jun said of the Institute for public and environmental affairs. "When environmental violations becomes public knowledge, they should not use commercial confidentiality as an excuse for silence. This is different from other leading brands. "

Hewlett Packard, British Telecom, Samsung, Sony, Siemens and Alcatel was credited as being most responsive to third-party queries about alleged environmental violations.

"Apple can say, it is completely ' green ', because it is a brand with no factory, but if we do not manage its supply chain, these are just empty words," said Ma Jun of the Institute for public and environmental affairs. "Far from the best on the planet, it is at the bottom among 29 the tags. Apple should be a leader. If it can move on this, it can change the entire industry. "

View the original article here

Hackers will not be deterred by the UK cyber defences, new report warns

The report comes at a time of heightened awareness of online attack following hacking protests against businesses caught in the WikiLeaks controversy. Photo: Corbis

Military "cyber weapon" will be commonplace this century, but it would be unlikely to deter attacks by "hacktivists" and criminal gangs, and could easily be used for State-sponsored cyber attacks instead of the Organization for economic cooperation and development warns.

British authors of the study, which were released today, also caution "explicit lurid language" and lobbying the Government's technology companies distorts plans to protect the United Kingdom against cyber attacks.

Professor Peter Sommer of LSE and Dr. Ian Brown Oxford University internet Institute was commissioned by the OECD for one of a series of studies of potential "future global shocks".

Their report comes at a time of heightened awareness of online attack following hacking protests against businesses caught in the WikiLeaks controversy.

Answers to other hacking attacks from groups inside China and Russia, is military preparations started to gather pace, the study says. But it also warns: "it is not too difficult for nation States to configure discrete cyber attack units. Any agency that researcher for defensive purposes, the nature of cyber-attacks have all the knowledge required to originate attacks and disguise the fact they are doing.

"Little capital investment required … [en] almost all cyber attacks use hijacked, innocent zombie machines."

Brown says State-supported cyberwar will probably be more common because "cyber weapon will play a key role alongside more conventional and psychological attack of nation States in future warfare". However, the report warns: "a predominantly military [reply] to cyber security is a mistake. Most of the targets in the communications, energy, finance, food, Government, health, transport and water critical national infrastructure is in the private sector. Because it is often difficult to be certain who is attacking you from cyberspace, defence of deterrence is not. "

The authors suggest that "lean, just-in-time delivery systems", supplying supermarkets and manufacturers expose them to serious disturbance if large computer network go down.

"More effective is increasing resilience and robustness of critical systems and society in General … Add redundancy to systems allow some service must be continued, while damaged components in isolation, repair and replacement. Public panic buying can quickly enlarge these interruptions. During 2000 the fuel protests in the United Kingdom stores some imported food rationing. "NATO has created a pole of excellence on cyber defence in Estonia, and last year United States appointed its first cyber warfare General.

"UK [created] office of assurance cyber security and information (Ocsia) and a cyber security operations centre. At European level is Enisa, the European network and information security agency, "the report says.

Ocsia has approximately 20 persons working for it, to bring together experts from military, police and intelligence services. It is the lead agency coordinating £ 650 m cyber security program as the coalition Government announced in October last year.

Summer added: "we do not help us by using the ' cyberwar ' to describe espionage or hacktivist block or unreadable by websites, as seen recently in response to WikiLeaks. Nor is it useful to group the trivially avoidable events like virus and fraud with resolute attempt to interfere with the national infrastructure. "

Cyber warfare strategies and weapons include: unauthorized access to systems [hacking], viruses, and worms that spread across the Internet, Trojan horses, distributed denial of service attack that uses botnets, root-kits and use of social engineering.

View the original article here