Jose Pagliery

Apparently, federal investigators and computer scientists continue to examine whether there was a computer server connection between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank. Questions about the possible connection were widely dismissed four months ago. But the FBI's investigation remains open, apparently, and is in the hands of the FBI's counterintelligence team -- the same one looking into Russia's suspected interference in the 2016 election.

One US official said investigators find the server relationship "odd" and are not ignoring it. But the official said there is still more work for the FBI to do. Investigators have not yet determined whether a connection would be significant. The server issue surfaced again this weekend, mentioned in a Breitbart article that, according to a White House official, sparked President Trump's series of tweets accusing investigators of tapping his phone. CNN is told there was no Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant on the server.

A spectre is haunting the West -- the spectre of cyberwar. It's now clear, according to American intelligence agencies, that the Russian government engaged in a campaign of hacking, email leaks and fake news in an attempt to undermine the American political process -- and steer the presidential election to Donald Trump. Russia has repeatedly denied the allegation.

But many are now asking: Are we at cyberwar? In the cybersecurity industry -- mostly made up of hackers and spies -- the conventional wisdom was that cyberwar is like physical war. It's only war when someone dies or something explodes. But what happened during the recent American election is forcing experts to revisit that idea. "'Nothing's blown up' is the old school way of thinking," said Dave Aitel, a former scientist at the National Security Agency. "But I don't have to blow something up to destroy your country. I just have to reduce trust in your national way of life."

China's spies hacked into computers at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation from 2010 until 2013 -- and American government officials tried to cover it up, according to a Congressional report. The House of Representative's Science, Space and Technology Committee released its investigative report on July 13. It presents the FDIC's bank regulators as technologically inept -- and deceitful.

According to congressional investigators, the Chinese government hacked into 12 computers and 10 backroom servers at the FDIC, including the incredibly sensitive personal computers of the agency's top officials: the FDIC chairman, his chief of staff, and the general counsel. When congressional investigators tried to review the FDIC's cybersecurity policy, the agency hid the hack, according to the report. Investigators cited several insiders who knew about how the agency responded. For example, one of the FDIC's top lawyers told employees not to discuss the hacks via e-mail -- so the e-mails wouldn't become official government records. FDIC Chairman Martin Gruenberg is being summoned before the Congressional committee on July 14 to explain what happened.

Even if you power off your cell phone, the US government can turn it back on. That's what ex-spy Edward Snowden revealed in a recent interview with NBC's Brian Williams.

It sounds like sorcery. Can someone truly bring your phone back to life without touching it? No. But government spies can get your phone to play dead.

It's a crafty hack. You press the button. The device buzzes. You see the usual power-off animation. The screen goes black. But it'll secretly stay on -- microphone listening and camera recording.

How did they get into your phone in the first place? Here's an explanation by former members of the CIA, Navy SEALs and consultants to the US military's cyber warfare team. They've seen it firsthand.

Government spies can set up their own miniature cell network tower. Your phone automatically connects to it. Now, that tower's radio waves send a command to your phone's antennae: the baseband chip. That tells your phone to fake any shutdown and stay on. A smart hack won't keep your phone running at 100%, though. Spies could keep your phone on standby and just use the microphone -- or send pings announcing your location.

John Pirc, who did cybersecurity research at the CIA, said these methods -- and others, like physically bugging devices -- let the US hijack and reawaken terrorists' phones. "The only way you can tell is if your phone feels warm when it's turned off. That means the baseband processor is still running," said Pirc, now chief technology officer of the NSS Labs security research firm.

When you look at the history of AT&T, you wonder why federal regulators ever bothered to break up the telecom giant.

To tear down a nationwide monopoly, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company was forcibly split into "Baby Bells" in 1984. But most of those have since joined forces once again, forming the AT&T we know today. Not all the parts made it back into "Ma Bell," though. Several Baby Bells later merged to form Verizon. One part eventually gave birth to CenturyLink. But the vast majority melted back together to form the new AT&T.

Now, AT&T is trying to buy DirecTV for $49 billion, which would be the fourth-biggest telecommunications merger in history. AT&T already rules over an empire of wireless, landline telephone and fiber optic cables. If regulators approve the deal, it will get a satellite TV network too -- and control over the content flowing to nearly every screen in our lives.

You can spot the words "privacy policy" at the bottom of nearly every website. Don't be fooled. Those policies are more about data collection than privacy.

Companies use these policies to alert you to how they track your location, read your emails, spy on your Web browsing -- and sell some of that to advertisers. It doesn't help that these disclaimers are close to unintelligible.

With the help of several legal experts, CNN has reviewed policies at many top websites and apps. The conclusion: Most privacy policies are basically useless.

• They're too vague. Unclear language isn't just annoying. It arms companies with more legal muscle. Having ambiguous language in privacy policies lessens a consumer's ability to fight back if their personal information is ever mishandled.
• Terms are open-ended.
• Policies change all the time.
• Sometimes they don't even exist. Mobile app developers are increasingly relying on even more nebulous "permissions" instead of privacy policies. These pop-ups list all the features an app can access on your phone. It's worth paying attention to them, because they're starting to get weird.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg said he called President Barack Obama to express frustration about the government's spying and hacking programs.

"When our engineers work tirelessly to improve security, we imagine we're protecting you against criminals, not our own government," Zuckerberg wrote in a Facebook post.

His concerns are based on the latest reports from investigative reporters at The Intercept, which reveal that the National Security Agency has weaponized the Internet, making it possible to inject bad software into innocent peoples' computers en masse.

Zuckerberg took to Facebook to decry the tactic, saying it runs counter to the company's attempts to protect its users. He noted that Facebook encrypts users' communications, uses secure software and encourages people to use safer sign-in procedures.

"The US government should be the champion for the Internet, not a threat," Zuckerberg wrote. "They need to be much more transparent about what they're doing, or otherwise people will believe the worst.