Sunday, September 13, 2009

I can't imagine why this hasn't been done before... still, it should be immediately detected when the “programs installed” are matched against the list of “programs permitted”

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/09/12/1413246/First-Botnet-of-Linux-Web-Servers-Discovered?from=rss

First Botnet of Linux Web Servers Discovered

Posted by kdawson on Saturday September 12, @02:16PM from the shields-up dept.

The Register writes up a Russian security researcher who has uncovered a Linux webserver botnet that is coordinating with a more conventional home-based botnet of Windows machines to distribute malware.

"Each of the infected machines examined so far is a dedicated or virtual dedicated server running a legitimate website, Denis Sinegubko, an independent researcher based in Magnitogorsk, Russia, told The Register. But in addition to running an Apache webserver to dish up benign content, they've also been hacked to run a second webserver known as nginx, which serves malware [on port 8080]. 'What we see here is a long awaited botnet of zombie web servers! A group of interconnected infected web servers with [a] common control center involved in malware distribution,' Sinegubko wrote. 'To make things more complex, this botnet of web servers is connected with the botnet of infected home computer(s).'"



How (not) to be a lawyer in the Internet Age.

http://www.pogowasright.org/?p=3778

A Legal Battle: Online Attitude vs. Rules of the Bar

September 13, 2009 by Dissent Filed under Internet, U.S.

John Schwartz reports:

Sean Conway was steamed at a Fort Lauderdale judge, so he did what millions of angry people do these days: he blogged about her, saying she was an “Evil, Unfair Witch.”

But Mr. Conway is a lawyer. And unlike millions of other online hotheads, he found himself hauled up before the Florida bar, which in April issued a reprimand and a fine for his intemperate blog post.

Mr. Conway is hardly the only lawyer to have taken to online social media like Facebook, Twitter and blogs, but as officers of the court they face special risks. Their freedom to gripe is limited by codes of conduct.

Read more on The Gadsden Times.



Not the kind of bar I'd be likely to wander into – but that's the point isn't it. Start with the ones no one cares about and soon they can say, “We need to install cameras in the last 10% of bars...” Question: Could this “agreement” prevent others (defense counsel) from seeing the tapes?

http://www.pogowasright.org/?p=3761

A local bar agrees to sprout eyes, and that raises some eyebrows

September 12, 2009 by Dissent Filed under Businesses, Surveillance

Peter Hermann reports:

Soon, when you belly up to the bar at Shirley’s Honey Hole on East Oliver Street, police will know when you’ve had your first, second and even third beer. From three miles away at the Citiwatch command center on Howard Street, they will be able to watch you buy a drink for the woman on the corner stool, stumble to the bathroom and challenge someone to a brawl.

As part of a settlement to keep police from padlocking her establishment as a “public nuisance” linked to drug dealing and violence, the owner agreed Tuesday to install surveillance cameras not only outside but also inside her bar, complete with a live video feed to police.

Read more in The Baltimore Sun. Melissa Ngo provides her own commentary on this on Privacy Lives.

On some level, this use of cameras in businesses strikes me as no different than stores that warn customers that they are under store surveillance, but there are significant differences: (1) in this case, the customers are being surveilled by police and not store personnel, and (2) there’s a level of concern that government could use the “nuisance law” or other laws to extract agreement from businesses to become part of a government surveillance network.


(Related) No encryption means anyone can tap in. Now the police will know when you leave your house to drive to the bar and when you leave the bar to drive home. If you have more than a sip of alcohol, they have an excuse to pull you over.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/09/13/0045257/Trust-an-Insurance-Companys-Drive-Cam?from=rss

Trust an Insurance Company's "Drive-Cam?"

Posted by kdawson on Sunday September 13, @04:44AM from the no-voyeurs-here dept.

ramen99 writes

"Our new car insurance company offered us discounts for our teenage driver if we agree to install a 'drive-cam' that records driving habits and wirelessly transmits video footage to a 'neutral driving coach' for evaluation and comment. While this might be great to monitor a new teen driver, it will also monitor other adult drivers. The insurance company claims that they would never use any information obtained to consider changes in insurance rates, but that really sounds unbelievable. Would you give up your privacy to save some dough? Installation is free, and the camera mounts just under the rear-view mirror. Something seems fishy about this..."

Especially when, according to a British insurance firm, computer engineers are most likely to crash (sent in by antdude).


(Related) I must have missed this on Oprah, but it raises interesting ethical & legal questions. If the peeping tom uploads the video does the victim lose the right to fight back? If you go public, do the right to the video go public too?

http://www.pogowasright.org/?p=3776

Erin Andrews: Peeping Tom video made her “stalking victim”

September 13, 2009 by Dissent Filed under Breaches, Internet, Surveillance

Saul Relative writes:

The victimization of Erin Andrews through the peeping tom video, at first as an unknowing victim and then as a fully cognizant and mortified victim, is something that should not be dismissed or made light of, even though the ESPN sports reporter went on “The Oprah Winfrey Show.” Articles in online gossip magazines like TheDirty.com and insinuations made by sports bloggers and writers have pointed at Erin Andrews not being the victim of that peeping tom video as well. Some charge that Erin Andrews 1) did not have to acknowledge that the video was of her (it is blurry to the point on non-identification), [If you deny it is you, doesn't that weaken the prosecution a bit? Bob] 2) hyped the issue by calling a press conference, and 3) used it as a means of self-promotion. Even Tom Weir of USA Today offered the subtle rebuke that, although no one should ever have to endure what Erin Andrews went through, “The Oprah Winfrey Show” was not a “low-profile way of moving on.” But Erin Andrews reminded those watching “The Oprah Winfrey Show” on Friday that she was the victim of a crime, that someone invaded her privacy, and that her victimization continued long after the peeping tom video was posted to the world wide web.

Read more on Associated Content.



They have been early adopters of technology, why not be adopters of the RIAA's IP Lawsuit strategy? (No doubt the police will give the case much attention. Not do anything mind you, but to ensure every possible video is captured to use as evidence and to carefully examine each and every video, some parts several times.)

http://torrentfreak.com/porn-studios-set-to-target-65000-movie-uploaders-090912/

Porn Studios Set To Target 65,000 Movie Uploaders

Written by enigmax on September 12, 2009

In July many adult movie studios filed a copyright complaint against 10,000 alleged porn uploaders. The producers wanted a large number of convictions but were disappointed when prosecutors went after just 10 individuals. The studios have responded by reporting another 65,000 file-sharers and demanding action.

Two months ago, a collection of fifty US and Japan-based adult movie studios filed a mass copyright complaint against around 10,000 South Koreans accused of being heavy uploaders of porn.

The studios also filed suit against 80 websites accused of aiding and abetting the distribution of the illegally uploaded movies.

A National Police Agency spokesman said that the lawsuit was filed at 10 police stations in the South Korean capital, Seoul, and in the Gyeonggi province. The studios asked the police to investigate the infringements, which carry a potential jail sentence.

However, from the 10,000 complaints issued, prosecutors charged just 10 people with copyright infringement. In response, the disappointed studios say they will fight back. Next week they promise to re-file their lawsuit, but this time will increase the number of individuals accused to 65,000.

… “We believe that [the prosecution] should not be discriminatory in applying copyright laws. Illegal copying and distribution run rampant in Korea because it is one of the world’s most wired countries. [Is there any reason to believe that connectivity causes downloading of porn? Bob] We decided to take legal action to minimize our past business losses and to protect anticipated future profits,” he said.

The threat now is that if the local Korean authorities fails to act in a way that pleases the porn producers, they will take their case directly to the US government instead. [...and ask for a declaration of war! Bob]

The initial lawsuit indicated that the studios had also harvested the IP addresses of around 100,000 individuals who downloaded the adult movies but to date, there is no indication that they will become a target. [Okay, not exactly like the RIAA. Bob]



As someone who uses the local library AT LEAST weekly, I do pay attention to articles like this one. However, “pay attention” is not the same as “agree with,” even something as simple as the definition of “information.”

http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/022301.html

September 12, 2009

The relationship between public libraries and Google: Too much information

The relationship between public libraries and Google: Too much information, by Vivienne Waller. First Monday, Volume 14, Number 9 - 7 September 2009

  • "This article explores the implications of a shift from public to private provision of information through focusing on the relationship between Google and public libraries. This relationship has sparked controversy, with concerns expressed about the integrity of search results, the Google Book project, and Google the company. In this paper, these concerns are treated as symptoms of a deeper divide, the fundamentally different conceptions of information that underpin the stated aim of Google and libraries to provide access to information. The paper concludes with some principles necessary for the survival of public libraries and their contribution to a robust democracy in a rapidly expanding Googleverse."



Global Warming! Global Warming! Another process to blame! “Now we must turn off the world's magnets to prevent Global Warming!

http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/09/12/239208/Surprise-Discovery-In-Earths-Upper-Atmosphere?from=rss

Surprise Discovery In Earth's Upper Atmosphere

Posted by kdawson on Sunday September 13, @01:17AM from the nothing-is-as-simple-as-it-first-looks dept.

elyons sends word out of UCLA of a completely unexpected discovery in the physics of the Sun-Earth interaction — a previously unknown basic mode of energy transfer from the solar wind to the Earth's magnetosphere.

"'It's like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down,' said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences. 'We all have thought for our entire careers — I learned it as a graduate student — that this energy transfer rate is primarily controlled by the direction of the interplanetary magnetic field. The closer to southward-pointing the magnetic field is, the stronger the energy transfer rate is, and the stronger the magnetic field is in that direction. [It turns out that] if it is both southward and big, the energy transfer rate is even bigger.'"

The researchers have two papers on the discovery coming out in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

No comments: