« March 5, 2006 - March 11, 2006 | Main | March 19, 2006 - March 25, 2006 »

March 16, 2006

Web Sites Offer Anonymous Venting

And they name names, too.  The Chicago Tribune is reporting about a number of web sites that offer anonymous venters to complain about everything from bad tippers to bad bosses, and everything in between.  Some have resulted in litigation, as individuals who have allegedly riled anonymous venters have been named.  One attorney identified as a bad tipper is cited by the story.  In his defense, he said the $3 tip on a $200 bill was an error of a decimal point.  And that actually points out the problem with these sites.  While it may feel good to blast a perceived injustice, how can one defend against this?  It's not pretty.  Maybe it's time to invoke that law congress passed earlier that prohibits anonymous communications with the intent to annoy.

Read it in the Trib (free with site subscription).

March 16, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Net Neutrality Update

Quest CEO Richard Notebart (formerly with Ameritech, now part of SBC which is now the new AT&T) said his company would never degrade web traffic on his company's network to get a competitive advantage.  More at eWeek.

In other news, Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) said while he favored the principle of net neutrality, he didn't think it would be in the telecommunications bill that's before the Commerce Committee.  Senator Stevens is the chair.  The National Journal has one take on the story, with CNET having a slightly different one.  That story suggests a more luke-warm support for the principle by the senator.

March 16, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Another Court Holds Google Caching Legal

A federal court in Pennsylvania dismissed copyright claims against Google brought by an e-book author that covered caching of his web site and other entries in Google's Usenet archive.  The story is at CNET, and the opinion is here.  Judge Surrick issued his opinion on March 10.

March 16, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 15, 2006

Sony Loses Patent Round on Game Technology

Sony has been locked in a patent battle with Immersion Technology over Sony's use of "DualShock Technology" as used in the PlayStation 2.  This involves the use of vibrating motors that provide feedback in game controllers.  Immersion sued Sony and Microsoft in 2004 and won a judgment of $82 million.  Sony claimed in a later case that Immersion withheld evidence, seeking to overturn the ruling.  The District Court said no, and now Sony faces damages at $91 million.  No word on Sony's next step, which would be to the Court of Appeals.

Stories at Earthtimes, TechNewsWorld, and PSXExtreme.

March 15, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sony PlayStation 3 Delayed

Sony announced that the PlayStation 3 has been delayed due to digital rights management software for the Blu-ray drives that will be part of the console.  The technology standard for Blu-ray copyright protection has yet to be finalized.  CNN International has the story.

I guess root kit technology is out on that that system.

March 15, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Apple Issues Patches for OS X

Apple issued its own set of patches for OS X on Monday that fixes security flaws.  The story is in CNET, and a follow-up story has an interview with Bud Tribble, one of the architects of OS X on hacker attention to Apple and Apple's patch policies.

March 15, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Microsoft Patch Tuesday - Critical Fixes

Yesterday was patch Tuesday for Microsoft, and there are critical fixes for Windows and Office.  As typical, these fixes go after flaws that would allow attackers to take over a computer.  Details from ComputerWorld.

March 15, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 14, 2006

Judge to Order Google to Give Some Information to the Government

The hearing in the subpoena dispute between the Department of Justice and Google took place today.  According to the Washington Post, Judge Ware said he would order Google to turn over some information, specifically a random sample list of web sites in the Google database.  The Judge expressed concern about other parts of the government's request.  He expressed concern about giving the government a random sample of search requests, stating that he didn't want to create the impression that search engines could become tools for government surveillance.

There is some indication in the press that Google negotiated with the DOJ for a disclosure that was more palatable to the company.  That report is in Red Herring.  The Court indicated that a formal ruling was imminent.

More stories on this (with various perspectives) are in CNET, MarketWatch, the San Jose Mercury News, and the San Francisco Chronicle.

Court filings are available at FindLaw.

March 14, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

March 13, 2006

About Our Reader Survey Link Above

Please take a moment to fill out our short reader survey here.  We would like to have a better idea about who is reading this blog so we can better serve you.  Thanks in advance for your help.  (The survey will remain at the top of the middle column throughout this week.)

March 13, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Watching the Watchers

The Chicago Tribune published an investigative report yesterday on how easy it is to use the Internet to out CIA employees, even the secret ones.  The story lead starts with a description of an agent, her general past history and current whereabouts.  The Tribune did not publish so many details at the request of the CIA, who, from the tone of the story, acknowledged what the paper uncovered.  In fact, using subscription based online services, the Tribune was able to find "a virtual directory of more than 2,600 CIA employees, 50 internal agency telephone numbers and the locations of some two dozen secret CIA facilities around the United States."  This has got to be scary for an agency that does most of its business in shadows.

It has to be scary for the rest of us as well, as 1) the government can't keep certain secrets which they ought to keep, 2) even though we know our lives are digitized, we don't know the true extent, and 3) if the Tribune can get information on 2,600 CIA agents, what can anybody get on us?

Scary stuff.  Lexis and Westlaw have people finder portions of their databases that contain some truly detailed information about people, although they were not mentioned in the article.  The paper probably used other sites as well, similar to those who promised telephone records for anyone.  Those sites came through prompting outrage and legislation.  Will these disclosures do the same?

The article is on the Tribune web site, with free access via site subscription.

March 13, 2006 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack