Former Chief Security Officer Of Uber Convicted Of Federal Charges For Covering Up Data Breach Involving Millions Of Uber User Records

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Northern District of California

Wednesday, October 5, 2022

Federal Jury Finds Joseph Sullivan Guilty of Obstruction of the Federal Trade Commission and Misprision of a Felony

SAN FRANCISCO – A federal jury convicted Joseph Sullivan, the former Chief Security Officer of Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”), of obstruction of proceedings of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and misprision of felony in connection with his attempted cover-up of a 2016 hack of Uber. The announcement was made by United States Attorney Stephanie M. Hinds and FBI San Francisco Special Agent in Charge Robert K. Tripp following a four week trial before the Hon. William H. Orrick, United States District Judge.

“Technology companies in the Northern District of California collect and store vast amounts of data from users,” said U.S. Attorney Hinds. “We expect those companies to protect that data and to alert customers and appropriate authorities when such data is stolen by hackers. Sullivan affirmatively worked to hide the data breach from the Federal Trade Commission and took steps to prevent the hackers from being caught. We will not tolerate concealment of important information from the public by corporate executives more interested in protecting their reputation and that of their employers than in protecting users. Where such conduct violates the federal law, it will be prosecuted.”

“The message in today’s guilty verdict is clear: companies storing their customers’ data have a responsibility to protect that data and do the right thing when breaches occur,” said FBI Special Agent In Charge Tripp. “The FBI and our government partners will not allow rogue technology company executives to put American consumers’ personal information at risk for their own gain."

The circumstances regarding Sullivan’s violations of the law involve two separate hacks of Uber’s databases—one in 2014 and another in 2016. The evidence at trial established that Sullivan was hired as Uber’s Chief Security Officer (“CSO”) in April 2015. At that time, Uber had recently disclosed to the FTC that it had been the victim of a data breach in 2014 (“2014 Data Breach”) and that the breach related to the unauthorized access of approximately 50,000 consumers’ personal information, including their names and driver’s license numbers. In the wake of that disclosure, the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Protection embarked on an investigation of Uber's data security program and practices. In May 2015, the month after Sullivan was hired, the FTC served a detailed Civil Investigative Demand on Uber, which demanded both extensive information about any other instances of unauthorized access to user personal information, and information regarding Uber’s broader data security program and practices.

The evidence at trial demonstrated that Sullivan, in his new role as CSO, played a central role in Uber's response to the FTC. Specifically, Sullivan supervised Uber’s responses to the FTC’s questions, participated in a presentation to the FTC in March 2016, and testified under oath, at length, to the FTC on November 4, 2016, regarding Uber’s data security practices. Sullivan’s testimony included specific representations about steps he claimed Uber had taken to keep customer data secure.

Exactly ten days after his FTC testimony, Sullivan learned that Uber had been hacked again. The hackers reached out to Sullivan directly, via email, on November 14, 2016. The hackers informed Sullivan and others at Uber that they had stolen a significant amount of Uber user data, and they demanded a large ransom payment from Uber in exchange for their deletion of that data. Employees working for Sullivan quickly verified the accuracy of these claims and the massive theft of user data, which included records on approximately 57 million Uber users and 600,000 driver license numbers.

The evidence demonstrated that, shortly after learning the extent of the 2016 breach and rather than reporting it to the FTC, any other authorities, or Uber’s users, Sullivan executed a scheme to prevent any knowledge of the breach from reaching the FTC. For example, Sullivan told a subordinate that they “can’t let this get out,” instructed them that the information needed to be “tightly controlled,” and that the story outside of the security group was to be that “this investigation does not exist.” Sullivan then arranged to pay off the hackers in exchange for them signing non-disclosure agreements in which the hackers promised not to reveal the hack to anyone, and also contained the false representation that the hackers did not take or store any data in their hack. Uber paid the hackers $100,000 in bitcoin in December 2016, despite the fact that the hackers had refused to provide their true names. Uber was ultimately able to identify the two hackers in January of 2017 and required them to execute new copies of the non-disclosure agreements in their true names and emphasized that they were not allowed to talk about the hack to anyone else. Sullivan orchestrated these acts despite knowing that the hackers were hacking and extorting other companies as well as Uber, and that the hackers had obtained data from at least some of those other companies.

The evidence showed that, despite knowing in great detail that Uber had suffered another data breach directly responsive to the FTC’s inquiry, Sullivan continued to work with the Uber lawyers handling or overseeing that inquiry, including the General Counsel of Uber, and never mentioned the incident to them. Instead, he touted the work that he and his team had done on data security. Uber ultimately entered into a preliminary settlement with the FTC in summer 2016, supported fully by Sullivan, without disclosing the 2016 data breach to the FTC.

In Fall 2017, Uber’s new management began investigating facts surrounding the 2016 data breach. When asked by Uber’s new CEO that had happened, Sullivan lied, falsely telling the CEO that the hackers had only been paid after they were identified and deleting from a draft summary prepared by one of his reports that the hack had involved personally identifying information and a very large quantity of user data. Sullivan lied again to Uber’s outside lawyers conducting an investigation into the incident. Nonetheless, the truth about the breach was ultimately discovered by Uber’s new management, which disclosed the breach publicly, and to the FTC, in November 2017.

In addition, the two hackers identified by Uber were ultimately prosecuted in the Northern District of California. Both pleaded guilty on October 30, 2019, to computer fraud conspiracy charges and now await sentencing. The separate guilty pleas entered by the hackers demonstrate that after Sullivan assisted in covering up the the hack of Uber, the hackers were able to commit an additional intrusion at another corporate entity—Lynda.com—and attempt to ransom that data as well.

In finding Sullivan guilty, the jury concluded he obstructed justice, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1505, and that he committed misprision of felony (i.e., knew that a federal felony had been committed and took affirmative steps to conceal that felony), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4. Sullivan faces a maximum of five years in prison for the obstruction charge, and a maximum three years in prison for the misprision charge. However, any sentence following conviction would be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

Sullivan remains free on bond pending sentencing. His sentencing will be set at a later date.

The case is being prosecuted by the Corporate and Securities Fraud Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office. The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI.

Cyberlaundering: From Ghost Uber Rides To Gibberish On Amazon

BY MATTHA BUSBY

‘Keeping track of the ingenious ways in which cybercriminals are utilising digitally enabled means of laundering is one of the major policing challenges of the moment,’ says the University of Surrey’s Dr Michael McGuire. Photograph: finwal/Getty Images/iStockphoto

(THE GUARDIAN MAY 17, 2018)--"We all have a stake in stopping cybercrime, which also enables so many other crimes, from human trafficking and migrant smuggling to trafficking in drugs, illicit firearms and wildlife, and money laundering,” said Yury Fedotov, the director general at the United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime, this week.

States are meeting at the UNODC in Vienna to discuss criminal justice responses to prevent and counter cybercrime, which uses new technologies to generate some $1.5tn in revenue per year, with a rapidly increasing amount laundered via equally cutting-edge digital methods that often avoid detection.

From £2,000 fake ebooks on Amazon and phony listings on Airbnb to ghost journeys on Uber and in-game currencies on video games, the cyberlaunderer’s black market has come a long way from Walter White’s car wash.

Today’s cybercriminals operate in another orbit to yesterday’s crooks thanks to these new and unlikely ways to wash dirty money. And because traditional methods of tracking money laundering rely heavily on the policing of bank transactions, they’re leaving authorities for dust.

“Keeping track of the ingenious ways in which cybercriminals are utilising digitally enabled means of laundering is one of the major policing challenges of the moment,” says Dr Michael McGuire, a professor of criminology at the University of Surrey and author of a new study on cybercrime.

Around $200bn, 10% of the estimated $2tn laundered annually, is cyberlaundered today. By 2020 the proportion laundered digitally v traditional cash methods is expected to double, as economies become increasingly cashless.

“Confronted with a quickly evolving landscape of digital laundering techniques and increasingly affluent cybercriminal groups, under-funded and under-resourced policing agencies are finding it hard to match [them],” says McGuire.

The rapid expansion of fintech, e-commerce and mobile app services has made doing business and transferring money faster and more seamless than ever before. But it has also opened the floodgates to cyberlaunderers who are now finding ways to co-opt legitimate sites and platforms for their own means.

Accordingly, transaction laundering has become a huge financial blindspot for authorities.

“The spike in digital financial crime accompanying the frictionless payments systems these technologies promote suggests criminals may be innovating as quickly, if not quicker,” wrote Izabella Kaminska, editor of the Financial Times’ Alphaville blog, in March 2017. “For now at least, more fintech equals more ‘crimtech’”.

Products listed at astronomically high prices on eBay appear to be real transactions when sold but are in fact methods to launder and secretly send cash. This simple, popular ruse has been used by Islamic State to funnel cash to operatives in the Middle East, according to the FBI.

Similar fake transactions are found elsewhere. Books of gibberish are listed on Amazon for thousands of dollars and are believed to facilitate money laundering.

Titles such as I Have Abundance Overflowing In My Life Forever: Brinks Trucks Follow Me Everrywhere I Go Eternally (Whatever You Ask Believe Receive) are advertised for around $2,000.

One author, who was contacted by US tax authorities, claims fraudulent sales of his obscure books were used to send almost $24,000.

Much the same thing happens through “ghost journeys” on Uber, where complicit drivers accept ride requests from money laundering clients at pre-established rates. There are even guides online explaining how to do this.

On Airbnb, properties are apparently let out without anyone actually staying in them. It has been reported that fraudsters use stolen credit cards to launder their dirty money in cahoots with obliging Airbnb hosts who then send back a percentage of the sum.

Elsewhere, Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, allegedly used laundered money from an offshore account in Cyprus to buy a $2.85m Manhattan apartment that he made thousands renting through Airbnb, despite it being against the terms of the lease.

Video games including Fifa and Counter Strike sell in-game items that allow users to more quickly progress through the game.

These items are resold for thousands on gaming marketplaces where laundering reportedly occurs, while it is also possible to send convertible virtual money to associates abroad.

“Cyberlaundering is on an upward trajectory. It’s rising with the everyday use of the internet,” says Michael Perklin, a digital forensic investigator responsible for catching cyberlaunderers.

Payments for items on eBay are often made via PayPal, which was previously the de rigeur tool for cyberlaundering before the rise of cryptocurrencies such as ZCash and Monero that offer near-total anonymity, but remains popular with criminals.

“Microlaundering is the most obvious way to circumvent PayPal’s payment limits,” says Dr McGuire. “You just run thousands of payments through various accounts. It’s almost impossible to detect.”

PayPal processed $49bn in the first quarter of 2018 alone and was subpoenaed last year by US federal prosecutors investigating the effectiveness of its anti-money laundering programme.

The world is shifting away from traditional banking systems, thanks to the rapid growth of alternative payment options such as Alipay, WeChat Pay, Circle Pay and M-Pesa, which is now Africa’s leading digital money platform. As these mobile payment systems have grown in popularity, so too have they become an integral tool within the developing cybercrime economy.

The US Department of State recently warned that m-payment systems, which accounted for over $700bn transactions globally in 2017, are highly vulnerable to money laundering.

“Financial regulators have their heads in their hands over this kind of thing,” McGuire continues. “It’s almost like how the postal system is used as part of the cybercrime economy, you simply cannot examine every single packet or, indeed, a transaction of less than £1,000.”

“Either it will just have to be accepted as a fact of the day, or if there’s a real keenness to control it there’s going to have to be a mindset change on how small payments are handled and tackled.”

Uber Driver iIn US Illegally charged With 4 California Rapes

Alfonso Alarcon-Nunez. California prosecutors say Alarcon-Nunez an Uber driver living in the country illegally has been charged with raping, assaulting and robbing young women. San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow said Monday, Jan. 22, 2018, that Alarcon-Nunez's alleged victims are between 19 and 22 years old and three were intoxicated when they were assaulted. (County of San Luis Obispo via AP)

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A Mexican man living in the U.S. illegally used his job as an Uber driver to target intoxicated young women and was charged Monday with raping, assaulting and robbing four victims, California prosecutors said.

Alfonso Alarcon-Nunez drove women to their homes, assaulted them, and stole property including cellphones, computers and jewelry, officials said. He collected his fare payments through the smartphone app Venmo to disguise his identity and his Uber records.

DNA evidence helped lead detectives to Alarcon-Nunez, who was arrested at his Santa Maria home last week, San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow said at a news conference. The alleged crimes occurred over four weeks starting in mid-December in San Luis Obispo, a city of about 45,000 that is home to California Polytechnic State University. Alarcon-Nunez's victims are between 19 and 22 and three were drunk at the time of the crimes, Dow said.

Alarcon-Nunez, 39, faces 10 criminal charges, including rape of an intoxicated victim and first-degree burglary. He pleaded not guilty to all charges at his arraignment and remained held in the San Luis Obispo County Jail with bail set at $1.47 million. His next court date was set for Jan. 29.

Detectives are looking for potential witnesses and trying to determine if there are additional victims in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties northwest of Los Angeles, where the Alarcon-Nunez had been driving for Uber since September, Dow said.

Alarcon-Nunez has also gone by the name "Bruno Diaz" and his Venmo username was "Brush Bat," prosecutors said. Officials said Alarcon-Nunez was not always driving for Uber when he picked up women. Sometimes, drivers in cars parked outside bars or restaurants "jump in front of the actual Uber driver and they will take someone unsuspecting to their home. And that's a way of putting someone at risk, and in this case that's exactly what's alleged to have happened," Dow said.

He said the alleged crimes show that the company should improve its driver screening process, Dow said. Dow urged Uber users to make sure they are getting in the car of the correct driver by verifying the license plate and other information provided to clients.

"What police have reported is absolutely horrifying, and something no person should ever have to experience. We have been working with law enforcement to provide them with information for their investigation, and the driver has been permanently removed from the app," Uber spokesman Andrew Hasbun said in a statement Monday.

Alarcon-Nunez returned to the U.S. illegally after a voluntary deportation from New Mexico in 2005, officials said. Dow did not have details about why he was deported or whether he has a criminal record in the U.S.

California issues driver's licenses to immigrants in the country illegally and Alarcon-Nunez had a valid license since 2015. Alarcon-Nunez's immigration status will not have a bearing on the prosecution, Dow said. He could face life in prison if convicted on all charges.

Follow Weber at https://twitter.com/WeberCM .

California Says Uber's Background Checks Missed Convicted Murderer

REUTERS

Wide range of criminals driving for Uber only came to light after they got cited for offering illegal rides.

California prosecutors have broadened their civil lawsuit against popular online ride-sharing service Uber, alleging that its background checks missed people previously convicted of murder and sex crimes, court records show.

The district attorneys of San Francisco and Los Angeles filed an amended complaint against Uber Technologies Inc on Tuesday, which said “systemic failures in Uber’s background check process” came to light after their initial December filing.

The new complaint said registered sex offenders, identity thieves, burglars, a kidnapper and a convicted murderer had passed the firm’s screening process and were driving for the company until they were cited for providing illegal rides.

“I support technological innovation. Innovation, however, does not give companies a license to mislead consumers about issues affecting their safety,” San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon said in a statement on Wednesday.

San Francisco-based Uber said in a statement its screening system has been as effective, and at times more effective, than a different system used by taxi companies.

“We continue to work on improving safety for riders and drivers before, during and after the trip,” it said.

The company added that last year it had rejected more than 600 people who had applied to become taxi and livery drivers in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco because they had been convicted of violent and drunken driving crimes.

In the complaint filed in December, prosecutors contended that Uber drivers work at airports without obtaining authorization and have charged an extra $4 fee to passengers traveling there without paying anything to the airport.

One of the fastest-growing sharing-economy companies, Uber operates its ride-share program in 57 countries and has an estimated value of more than $40 billion.

The firm has been fighting in courts elsewhere in the United States. Earlier this month Uber won the dismissal of a racketeering lawsuit brought by 15 Connecticut taxi and limousine companies seeking to stop Uber from doing business in the state.

Drivers Weigh In On Uber Boom In NYC

Uber drivers and their supporters protest in front of the offices of the Taxi and Limousine Commission in New York. In four years Uber has gone from nearly non-existent to more than 26,000 drivers, joining over 13,000 New York City taxis. (AP)

NEW YORK (AP) — On a muggy summer evening, a woman stood on a midtown Manhattan street corner and switched between raising her hand for a taxi and glancing at her phone, possibly for an Uber car.

"She's going to take whoever comes first," yellow cab driver Jatinder Singh speculated as he scouted out the scene. While New York City riders have increasingly more choices in how to get from here to there with the rise of e-hailing apps — and lawmakers grapple with how to regulate the booming industry — the drivers who keep cars moving are stuck in the middle.

Uber, a service that allows riders to choose a car type and pay by credit card from a mobile phone, has in four years gone from nearly non-existent to more than 26,000 drivers, joining the city's 13,437 taxis.

Some traditional yellow cab drivers say that since the arrival of Uber, the increased competition has cost them about 30 percent of their earnings. Uber drivers also have complained the crowded streets are hurting their bottom line, a notion disputed by the company, which is moving forward with a goal of adding 10,000 drivers by the end of the year. The plan alarmed New York City lawmakers who later backed off a plan to cap the number of cars on the street in exchange for ridership data to study the issue.

Here's a look at how the battle for New York City's streets is playing out, through the eyes of those behind the wheel: UBER RISING "In three years, there will be no taxis on New York City streets," Uber driver Michael Keflom predicted as he prowled the streets for passengers in his Mercedes SUV.

The 48-year-old driver moved from Eritrea, in Africa, to New York City in the late eighties, and during college started driving a yellow cab — a job he kept on and off for 26 years during a career as a commercial pilot.

He says that if Uber had existed back in the mid-90s, he would never have stepped foot in a cockpit. Keflom said he's made it his mission to convince his taxi-driving friends to join him at Uber for the flexibility — drivers own their cars and can work when they want.

Liang Wang has been driving for Uber for about a year and this is his first driving job. He chose the company because he believed the yellow cab shift schedule was just too rigid. "The yellow cab schedule, you have to wake up at midnight or finish really late. And I have a daughter," said Wang, who drives five to six days a week around his family schedule.

SUFFER THE TAXI DRIVER Noureddine Benbedda, who owns his own yellow cab, said he used to take home $700 a week after paying a garage and the lease on the city medallion that allows him to drive. Now he's lucky if he brings home $500. He used to have another driver take the night shift who has since quit, leaving Benbedda to drive longer hours to make up for it.

"My family is suffering now," he said. Mohammad Sultan echoes Benbedda. After 27 years as a taxi driver, the 59-year-old says his earnings have dropped by $200 a week. Even though he's lost 30 percent of his business since Uber arrived on the streets, he remains positive.

"It's good that there's no more taxi monopoly," Sultan said. "Now we have another opportunity." IN BOTH DRIVER SEATS Driver Jatinder Singh has seen both sides: he drove with Uber and returned to driving a taxi.

"The drivers who are suffering they want to come back to a cab, but they can't, because they bought a brand-new car," he said. "My friend bought a Hyundai Sonata hybrid and they're stuck for good, for five years until the car is paid off."

He owned a yellow cab, which he decided to paint black so he could start driving with Uber. That lasted about six months before he sold the car and returned to taxi driving. Singh hoped the surge pricing at Uber — it costs more to get a lift when demand outpaces supply— would make up for the lack of tips, but the money never came.

"They had so many drivers, too many drivers." Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance says the problem lies in Uber's model, which she claims was never created to serve full-time drivers.

"For them it's a gig economy. If you're a full-timer, you can't compete with the flood of vehicles," she said. "I don't want to mince words here, for generations it has been a full-time job."

Uber Tops Taxi Use For Business Travelers, New Report Shows

Uber driver Karim Amrani sits in his car parked near the San Francisco International Airport parking area in San Francisco, Wednesday, July 15, 2015. In the three months ended in June, Uber overtook taxis as the most expensed form of ground transportation, according to expense management system provider Certify. (AP)

NEW YORK (AP) — Taxis are losing business travelers to ride-hailing services like Uber, a survey shows.

In the three months ended in June, Uber overtook taxis as the most expensed form of ground transportation, according to expense management system provider Certify. Uber accounted for 55 percent of ground transportation receipts compared with taxis at 43 percent.

That's a big jump from just the beginning of the year. In the first quarter, Uber Technologies had 46 percent of receipts tracked by Certify compared with 53 percent for taxis. "Established travel providers will need to adapt quickly or face further market share erosion to the sharing economy," Certify CEO Robert Neveu said in a statement.

Certify based its finding on the 28 million trip receipts its North American clients submit each year. It does not include receipts from business travelers whose companies use other services to track expenses.

Uber connects travelers with various cars through its smartphone app. Some drivers work for car service companies; others spend a few hours driving their personal cars on the side for some extra money.

Business travelers might be quickly moving toward Uber, but employers still have reservations about safety and liability. Depending on the city, Uber drivers aren't necessarily regulated by government taxi licensing authorities. Both Uber and competitor Lyft insure their drivers during paid rides and also require the drivers to carry personal auto insurance that covers them the rest of the time.

Uber's pricing compared with traditional cabs can vary. Its UberX service, often drivers in Toyota Camrys or Honda Civics, is typically cheaper, but its high-end black cars and SUVs cost a premium. During peak hours, Uber charges a "surge" premium that can add anywhere from 20 percent on to the cost to doubling or tripling it. During really busy periods the surge can be even more.

In a few cities, Uber beat out taxis by a wide margin for business travelers. In its home town of San Francisco, 79 percent of rides expensed through Certify during the second quarter were for Uber. In Dallas, 60 percent were for Uber and 54 percent in Los Angeles. Certify noted that it saw rental car transactions drop at the same time.

__ Scott Mayerowitz can be reached at http://twitter.com/GlobeTrotScott

Uber, Lyft Push Back Against NYC Regulations

Uber drivers and their supporters protest in front of the offices of the Taxi and Limousine Commission in New York, Thursday, May 28, 2015. Uber and Lyft are pushing back against a New York City effort to regulate app-based car services. The proposal before the Taxi and Limousine Commission would require car services that riders can summon with their phones to comply with many of the rules that govern the yellow cabs they compete with.

NEW YORK (AP) — Representatives of Uber and Lyft warned Thursday that a New York City effort to regulate app-based ride-hailing services will stall innovation and threaten competition.

The regulations "will be crushing to our thousands of drivers," Michael Allegretti, New York head of public policy for San Francisco-based Uber, said at a public hearing of New York's Taxi and Limousine Commission.

But commission Chairwoman Meera Joshi said the proposed rules changes are minor adjustments to existing regulations that have been mischaracterized by opponents. She said a requirement that car-service companies inform the commission of updates to their apps would not mean, as critics have charged, that Uber and the other app-based companies would have to divulge technical information.

"It's not software, it's not source code or any advanced programming," Joshi said. She said requiring the companies to submit trip data to the commission would not invade passengers' privacy. "We're not requiring the submission of any passenger information or any information about lifestyle and habits at all," Joshi said. "Simply date, time and location of pickup."

Representatives of the app-based car industry and its backers argue that the rules would be burdensome to the industry. "Will you, the TLC, set the global standard for embracing the future or undermine that progress by unfairly targeting transportation innovation?" Allegretti asked.

Diana Dellamere, a public policy manager for Lyft, criticized a proposal limiting the number of electronic devices that a driver can use to two. Some drivers work for multiple companies and have a phone for each company.

"Drivers who might want to experiment with different companies ... will be forced to choose, and of course they will choose the biggest company," she said. The regulations address issues including fares, airport pickups and the availability of wheelchair-accessible cars.

Ryan Wanttaja, assistant general counsel for the taxi commission, said passengers would have to agree in advance to so-called "surge pricing," which forces riders to pay a premium during high-demand times. He said apps would have to include a way to request a wheelchair-accessible vehicle.

TLC officials said they are working with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which runs the region's airports, to move car service vehicles to designated lots at LaGuardia and Kennedy airports so that they don't clog traffic.

A few dozen Uber drivers rallied outside the commission's Manhattan headquarters before the hearing, chanting "We love Uber!" Drivers for Uber, yellow taxis and traditional, non-Internet-based car services packed the hearing room and applauded or booed the speakers.

The commission may vote on the regulations at its June 18 meeting.

Uber's Popularity Surges; Travelers Avoiding Taxis

 The Uber app displays cars available to make a pickup in downtown Manhattan on a smart phone, in New York. A new report by expense management system provider Certify shows that 47 percent of the ground transportation rides by its users in March were through Uber.

NEW YORK (AP) — Business travelers are bypassing the taxi queue with greater frequency, choosing instead ride-hailing services like Uber Technologies.

A new report by expense management system provider Certify shows that 47 percent of the ground transportation rides by its users in March were through Uber. That's more than tripled from the 14 percent of rides that Uber had just over a year ago in January 2014. In a few cities, Uber now tops taxi rides for business travelers.

"While we often see noteworthy market shifts — leading restaurant chains and hotels exchanging leadership positions, for example — it is unprecedented to see one vendor grow to take such a commanding market share within one year's time," says Certify CEO Bob Neveu.

While taxis, limousines and airport shuttles still dominate the ground transportation business, Certify's report shows ride-hailing services are rapidly on the rise among business travelers. Certify based its finding on the 28 million trip receipts its North American clients submit each year.

Uber connects travelers with various cars through its smartphone app. Some drivers work for car service companies; others spend a few hours driving their personal cars on the side for some extra money.

Business travelers might be quickly moving toward Uber, but their employers have some major concerns. Mike McCormick, executive director of the Global Business Travel Association, notes that many companies are worried about issues of safety and liability. Depending on the city, Uber drivers aren't necessarily regulated by government taxi licensing authorities. Both Uber and competitor Lyft insure their drivers during paid rides and also require the drivers to carry personal auto insurance that covers them the rest of the time.

Uber has faced criticism that its employees inappropriately accessed customer data and that it does not properly screen drivers to ensure they have clean criminal records. In a few cities, Uber beats out taxis by a wide margin for business travelers. In its home town of San Francisco, 71 percent of rides expensed through Certify during the first quarter were for Uber; 29 percent used taxis. Uber also beat out all other forms of ground transportation in Dallas, accounting for 56 percent of the rides.

In Los Angeles and Washington D.C., Uber represented 49 percent of business travel rides. Taxis, limousines and airport shuttles still reigned in New York, Miami and Chicago where they took 79 percent, 77 percent and 75 percent of rides expensed, respectively.

__ Scott Mayerowitz can be reached at http://twitter.com/GlobeTrotScott

Uber Partners With Starwood, Giving Hotel Points For Ride

Anthony Khoury, head of Middle East and Africa expansions for Uber, demonstrates the mobile application at a press event to celebrate the official launch of the car-hailing service in Cairo. Uber passengers can now earn one Starwood rewards point for each dollar they spend on a ride in a car found through the Uber app, the San Francisco-based company said Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2015.

NEW YORK (AP) — Uber is partnering with hotel chain Starwood to give riders a bit more incentive to choose the ride-hailing service over a taxi.

Uber passengers can now earn one Starwood rewards point for each dollar they spend on a ride in a car found through the San Francisco-based company's mobile app. Guests spending the night at one of Starwood's 1,200 hotels will earn two to four points per dollar spent, depending on their level of status with Stamford, Connecticut-based Starwood. Points can't be earned until the Uber passenger spends at least one night during the calendar year at a Starwood hotel.

Free hotel nights start at 3,000 points for the lowest tier of hotels, like the Four Points by Sheraton Tucson Airport in Arizona, and can be as high as 35,000 points a night for properties like the St. Regis Princeville Resort in Hawaii.

This is the first global deal where ground transportation passengers can earn hotel points for trips. This potentially helps Uber in big cities such as New York, San Paulo, Brazil and Bangalore, India where it's going head to head with established taxi companies and car services.

Some airport car services do offer passengers airline miles for their trips, but those programs are open to a number of airlines. This new Uber partnership is exclusive to Starwood. Neither company would disclose the terms of the deal.

The hotel company, known for its Sheraton, Westin and W brands, already has similar partnerships with Delta Air Lines and Emirate Airline. "Our guests get to us in many different ways," says Mark Vondrasek, Starwood's senior vice president of loyalty and partnership marketing. Through these partnerships, "we're trying to get members to concentrate their stays with us."

__ Scott Mayerowitz can be reached at http://twitter.com/GlobeTrotScott.