AOL 9.0 accused of 'badware behavior'
StopBadware.org advisers users to steer clear of the software
By Robert McMillan, IDG News Service August 28, 2006
AOL's free Internet client software has earned the company a slap on the wrist from StopBadware.org, a consortium set up to combat malicious software. In a report set to be released Monday, the group advises users to steer clear of the software because of its "badware behavior."
The report blasts the free version of AOL 9.0 because it "interferes with computer use," and because of the way it meddles with components such as the Internet Explorer browser and the Windows taskbar. The suite is also criticized for engaging in "deceptive installation" and faulted because some components fail to uninstall.
The main problem is that AOL simply doesn't properly inform users of what its software will do to their PCs, said John Palfrey, StopBadware.org's co-director. "We don't think that the disclosure is adequate and there are certain mistakes in the way the software is architected in terms of leaving some programs behind," he said. "When there are large programs, some of which stay around after you've thought you've uninstalled them, they need to be disclosed to the user."
Because AOL has taken steps to address StopBadware.org's concerns, the group has held off on officially rating AOL 9.0 as badware, Palfrey said.
... StopBadware.org bills itself as a "Neighborhood Watch" of the Internet. It is run out of two well-respected university departments: Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and University of Oxford's Internet Institute in the U.K.
... AOL has also come under fire for licensing its free antivirus software, called Active Virus Shield, with what anti-adware advocates view as excessive advertising and data gathering provisions.
... StopBadware.org makes its reports available on this Web page.
Soon, every recorded conversation will be transcribed this way... Maybe.
http://www.researchbuzz.org/wp/2006/08/27/some-new-features-at-podzinger/
Some New Features at PodZinger
Filed under: Multimedia-Video, Multimedia-Audio
Last February I reviewed a site called PodZinger. PodZinger, if you don’t remember, does machine transcription of podcasts and then makes the material searchable, which is just lovely. (And as far as I know they have that arena pretty much to themselves, which boggles the mind.) PodZinger’s at http://www.podzinger.com/ .
And IT managers are not normally trained for this... Remember to keep those budget meeting transcripts where the CEO said the organization couldn't afford the spend money on security.
IT execs on firing line over security breaches
The most recent incident involved AOL's CIO
Jaikumar Vijayan August 25, 2006 (Computerworld) --
The cost of data breaches may be getting a lot higher for IT professionals who are deemed to be responsible for failing to properly secure corporate information.
For example, AOL LLC's chief technology officer abruptly resigned this week in the aftermath of a disclosure that the company had publicly released data on searches done by about 650,000 of its online subscribers. AOL also fired two workers in its research division, which was responsible for the data release and had been overseen by now-former CTO Maureen Govern.
It was the second time this month that high-level technology managers lost their jobs because of data breaches. On Aug. 3, Ohio University announced that it had sacked two top IT managers for what it saw as their failure to prevent a series of breaches that were discovered at the Athens-based school during the spring
... IT managers should expect firings and other harsh disciplinary actions to become more common as organizations face increasing public pressure to address data breaches that they suffer, said Robert Scott, managing partner at Dallas-based law firm Scott & Scott LLP.
"In order for companies to have a credible position in the marketplace, they're going to have to explain in a public way what they have done to address the issue," Scott said. "The risks that companies face from a liability and a reputation perspective are such that when breaches occur, people will not only need to be held accountable, but heads will have to roll." [“It is better to look proactive than to be proactive.” Fernando Bob]
... Tim O'Pry, CTO at The Henssler Financial Group in Kennesaw, Ga., said accountability is necessary, and it's reasonable to expect that people will lose their jobs where negligence has occurred.
The problem is that many times, the workers responsible for a security breach are only following what until then had been accepted practices within their companies, O'Pry said. And they may not have had the responsibility or authority to change the practices, he noted.
... Forging closer ties with IT audit teams is a key to survival in the new environment, Hession advised. "If you think you have an issue, go to audit and tell them about it," he said. If the audit group concurs that a security problem exists, it should be easier to get the resources needed to fix it, Hession added. And if the auditors agree that there's an issue "and nobody does anything about it, you probably don't need to be falling on your sword" if a data breach does occur, he said.
Companywide outreach and communication also are key, according to Scott. Managers who are responsible for IT security "need to do a better job of articulating a business case [that] suggests that ignoring data security and shuffling it to the bottom of the priority list is a recipe for disaster," he said.
In addition to the incidents at AOL and Ohio University, the massive security breach disclosed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in May resulted in a wide-ranging shake-up that included the resignation of the agency's chief information security officer. But the CISO's departure is thought to have been driven by his frustration over organizational issues within the VA, which traditionally has split most IT and security responsibilities among its three main operating divisions.
http://techdirt.com/articles/20060828/004204.shtml
Can We Set Up An Online Learning Class About Our Screwed Up Patent System?
from the might-help dept
There's been a lot of buzz in the last few weeks over the patent awarded to the provider of online courseware, Blackboard. The patent seems ridiculously broad and basically seems to cover the entire concept of e-learning software. So, of course, what else would Blackboard do, but sue another company for patent infringement? Blackboard claims that people are overreacting, but as people go through and breakdown the specific claims in the patent, it just looks worse and worse. There is simply no reason that this patent ever should have been issued. There is nothing in the patent that is remotely new or non-obvious -- and it's difficult to make even the slightest case that the issuance of this patent has any societal benefit. Instead, you could make a pretty good case that it's done plenty of harm. In the meantime, plenty of people are saying that the blame should fall entirely on the patent system and not Blackboard, but they are defending their decision to sue another provider. Hopefully, the growing backlash (especially from academia) against Blackboard for resorting to a lawsuit means that more universities decide to go with other software providers.
Virtual Law
http://techdirt.com/articles/20060828/025121.shtml
Who Do You Blame When Your Virtual Bank Fails?
from the should-have-thought-about-that-earlier dept
It's not like there haven't been warnings about the blurring boundary between online games and the real world when it comes to the legal system. In all of these online worlds, especially when real money gets involved, people just aren't clear as to whether or not in game actions have real world legal implications. On the one hand, you have people who will say that if something of real value is "stolen" in the game, that's a crime. Something of value has been lost. However, this gets tricky when you realize that some online games have theft or other crimes as a part of the gameplay on purpose. If stealing goods from other players is a part of the game, how can it be illegal outside of the game? So, even if it's not a major part of the game -- or if it's a programming flaw that allows it -- how can it be fair to say it's "illegal"? So, now, take that same issue to a larger scale. What if someone sets up an in-game bank? Then, it turns out the bank is actually a scam, and the owner simply takes all the money people gave him and runs? That's apparently exactly what happened recently. It may be tempting to say the guy committed real fraud -- but, again, the game let him do this. There was no guarantee within the game that the bank was legit. There was no FDIC "backing" the bank. There was a very real risk in putting money into that bank, but people did so by choice, as part of the game. The real issue is that too many online worlds are really just punting on the issue of an in-game legal system or conflict resolution system. They're forgetting that they've basically built a world -- and that world needs some sort of legal system as well. [Sounds like a call for articles to me... Bob] If there's a problem, then let the in-game mechanisms sort out the results or punishment. Because, if there isn't an official law enforcement/judicial process, you'll get the next best thing: an online mafia who will run the online world for you. Either way, that's still better than cluttering up the real world courts over these types of disputes.
Sometime you have to let your inner intellectual take over...
http://beeradvocate.com/news/stories_read/673
Beer: The Midwife of Civilization
Horst Dornbusch on Beer and Civilization #10
[I want a T-shirt that says: “Bibo cerevisiam, ergo sum” Bob]
No comments:
Post a Comment