<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title><![CDATA[[SecurityRatty] tag: filed]]></title>
    <link>http://securityratty.com/tag/filed</link>
    <description></description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
    <generator>iRatty Engine</generator>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Federal Charges Filed Against Alleged Cyber Peeping Tom]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/86dd1b9c05f907fcb650cb7699f2de73</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/86dd1b9c05f907fcb650cb7699f2de73</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[A college student who allegedly rigged a woman's laptop to snap nude photos through her webcam faces federal charges this week, and tops Threat Level's roundup of cybercrime in the federal...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[A college student who allegedly rigged a woman's laptop to snap nude photos through her webcam faces federal charges this week, and tops Threat Level's roundup of cybercrime in the federal courts.<br style="clear: both;"/>
  <img alt="" style="border: 0; height:1px; width:1px;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?i=5e743031c0cace49ee8f1950873fcf31" height="1" width="1"/>
<img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=5e743031c0cace49ee8f1950873fcf31" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=PgSIM"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=PgSIM" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=jjd9m"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=jjd9m" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=pw8om"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=pw8om" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=ohwMM"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=ohwMM" border="0"></img></a>
 <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=QboLM"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=QboLM" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=MECHm"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=MECHm" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=Dijbm"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=Dijbm" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=Php3M"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=Php3M" border="0"></img></a> </div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/wired/politics/privacy/~4/410660103" height="1" width="1"/><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/politics/security/~4/410660104" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 16:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/federal charges">federal charges</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/tops threat level">tops threat level</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/snap nude photos">snap nude photos</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/federal courts">federal courts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/college student">college student</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/laptop">laptop</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/week">week</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/roundup">roundup</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cybercrime">cybercrime</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/politics/security/~3/410660104/fed-blotter-cha.html">Federal Charges Filed Against Alleged Cyber Peeping Tom</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA["Scareware" Vendors Sued]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/116941f75bd6ea940dba21e55c3187e7</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/116941f75bd6ea940dba21e55c3187e7</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[This is good : Microsoft Corp. and the state of Washington this week filed lawsuits against a slew of &quot;scareware&quot; purveyors, scam artists who use fake security alerts to frighten consumers into paying...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/09/microsoft_washington_state_tar.html">good</a>:</p>

<blockquote>Microsoft Corp. and the state of Washington this week filed lawsuits against a slew of "scareware" purveyors, scam artists who use fake security alerts to frighten consumers into paying for worthless computer security software.

<p>The case filed by the Washington attorney general's office names Texas-based Branch Software and its owner James Reed McCreary IV, alleging that McCreary's company caused targeted PCs to pop up misleading security alerts about security threats on the victims' computers. The alerts warned users that their systems were "damaged and corrupted" and instructed them to visit a Web site to purchase a copy of Registry Cleaner XP for $39.95.</blockquote></p>

<p>I would have thought that existing scam laws would be enough, but Washington state actually has a specific law about this sort of thing:</p>

<blockquote>The lawsuits were filed under Washington's Computer Spyware Act, which among other things punishes individuals who prey on user concerns regarding spyware or other threats. Specifically, the law makes it illegal to misrepresent the extent to which software is required for computer security or privacy, and it provides actual damages or statutory damages of $100,000 per violation, whichever is greater.</blockquote><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=RIHdM"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=RIHdM" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=V0u2M"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=V0u2M" border="0"></img></a>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/alerts">alerts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fake security alerts">fake security alerts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/week filed lawsuits">week filed lawsuits</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security alerts">security alerts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/filed">filed</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/washington">washington</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/washington attorney">washington attorney</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/spyware">spyware</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/lawsuits">lawsuits</category>
      <source url="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/10/scareware_vendo.html">"Scareware" Vendors Sued</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Microsoft and the Washington Attorney General Against Scareware Pushers]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/23b1343fa2382419e1f8620a0ac1a120</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/23b1343fa2382419e1f8620a0ac1a120</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Washington states top law enforcement official has filed suit against a man accused of bombarding end users with misleading messages designed to trick them into buying software to fix PC problems that...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Washington state&#8217;s top law enforcement official has filed suit against a man accused of bombarding end users with misleading messages designed to trick them into buying software to fix PC problems that don&#8217;t exist.
The complaint, filed in Washington state court by Attorney General Rob McKenna&#8217;s office, names James Reed McCreary IV of The Woodlands, Texas, [...]]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:46:47 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/washington">washington</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/filed suit">filed suit</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/rob mckennas office">rob mckennas office</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/filed">filed</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/attorney">attorney</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/texas">texas</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/court">court</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/messages">messages</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/complaint">complaint</category>
      <source url="http://cyberinsecure.com/microsoft-and-the-washington-attorney-general-against-scareware-pushers/">Microsoft and the Washington Attorney General Against Scareware Pushers</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Enhanced Domain Protection Services Emerge]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/7acf5055cb56782b95c8c264468b8373</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/7acf5055cb56782b95c8c264468b8373</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Registrars are beginning to offer new services to protect against domain name loss. Are they worth it? Well, they're worth something, but maybe not all the money being charged. Yesterday, Domain Name...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Registrars are beginning to offer new services to protect against domain name loss. Are they worth it? Well, they're worth something, but maybe not all the money being charged.

Yesterday, Domain Name Wire revealed that <a href="http://domainnamewire.com/2008/09/23/godaddy-files-patent-for-domain-name-hijack-protection/">GoDaddy has filed for a patent for "Domain Name Hijack Protection."</a> The basic idea of the service is that domain name transfer-out requests are automatically ignored. The customer gets a notice that the request was received and ignored. The user then has the option of turning off the service, and must supply photo ID in order to do it. Comments on the Domain Name Wire article say it's an intentionally cumbersome process, which certainly works out well for GoDaddy, but I'm not so sure I'd call this innovative.

This application may be related to <a href="https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/protect/landing.asp?ci=9004">GoDaddy's Protected Registration service</a>, which similarly protects against casual transfers, a service they call Deadbolt Transfer Protection. In order to perform a transfer, more thorough verification procedures are required, probably involving genuine human beings.

GoDaddy also claims to protect the domain in case of billing problems, such as "credit card expiration, failed billing or outdated contact information." If your domain expires and cannot be renewed because the credit card expired or some other such reason the domain will be placed in "invalid, protected status" for up to one year. In other words, it will be taken off-line, but not made available for anyone else to register. If you've parked it you may not notice, but if you're using the domain you will, because it won't work anymore. At this point you can go back to GoDaddy and make things right. All this costs $24.99 a year, which is a lot of money compared to the base registration. You'd be much better off with a standard domain lock and just being responsible about your domains and reading the e-mail GoDaddy sends you.

And thanks to <a href="http://www.domainnamenews.com/registrars/moniker-launches-domainmaxlock/2452">DomainNameNews for reporting</a> that Moniker, a registrar aimed at higher-volume domain name owners, has launched <a href="http://www.moniker.com/maxlock/">their DomainMaxLock service</a>.

DomainMaxLock, like GoDaddy's Deadbolt, makes you provide more stringent identification for transfers. According to the company you must:
<UL>
<LI>Provide a government I.D. number for verification of your identity.
<LI>Set up custom security questions and answers, further safeguarding your domain assets.
<LI>Provide special verification instructions and artifacts to ensure that your unique business or ownership interests are protected.
<LI>When you request that your domains be unlocked, our security team works directly with you to verify all of the above off-line - further eliminating risks of doing business in an online world! </LI>
</UL>
It's essentially an admission of the failure of automated services with respect to security. The idea is we can trust humans in person, not software. The service costs $34.95 per domain per year for a limited time, but the cost will increase later to $59.99.

These verification services are similar in many ways to those performed by CAs (certificate authorities). Since GoDaddy is also one of those, it's likely they can get better utilization out of that staff by offering such services.
<p><a href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~a/FCZhqYUdUonhGhpMKWK6obfrCas/a"><img src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~a/FCZhqYUdUonhGhpMKWK6obfrCas/i" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p><img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/RSS/cheap_hack/~4/8Vacprz_ezY" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/domain">domain</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/standard domain lock">standard domain lock</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/higher-volume domain">higher-volume domain</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/domain assets">domain assets</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/domain expires">domain expires</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service">service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/domainmaxlock service">domainmaxlock service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/godaddy">godaddy</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/services">services</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.ziffdavisenterprise.com/~r/RSS/cheap_hack/~3/8Vacprz_ezY/enhanced_domain_protection_services_emerge.html">Enhanced Domain Protection Services Emerge</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Wee-Fi: CSIRO Wins Patent Appeal; Zune-Fi in SF; Kodak ESP 9]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/95aa70e977b254cabeb9c3b2679b4b8d</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/95aa70e977b254cabeb9c3b2679b4b8d</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Australian tech office wins appeal: Buffalo sinks further into the hole as it loses its appeal against a judgement over its use of what the Australian CSIRO technical agency asserts is its patented...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/weefi.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/hardware/soa/CSIRO-victorious-in-Wi-Fi-appeal/0,130061702,339292134,00.htm?omnRef=1337"><strong>Australian tech office wins appeal:</strong></a> Buffalo sinks further into the hole as it loses its appeal against a judgement over its use of what the Australian CSIRO technical agency asserts is its patented technology used in all 802.11 implementations. The case, in the patent-holder-friendly US Eastern District Court of Texas--a venue that may be dethroned as a <em>forum coveniens</em> for patentholders' suits in new legislation--prevents Buffalo from importing or selling gear in the US with Wi-Fi technology embedded. In Japan, the patent office threw out CSIRO's patent. While Cisco paid CSIRO as the result of an acquisition of an Australian company a few years ago, most US-based technology giants are involved in resisting the patent's continued validation and enforcement. I've read the patent and some of the suits, and as a non-patent expert, it's clear CSIRO original invention didn't cover what's at stake. However, CSIRO was allowed in a subsequent filing to extend its patent to cover already-in-use technology in a way that seems odd to me, but happens in patents all the time. Many millions of dollars and many more years may be expended before a resolution happens. CSIRO apparently isn't asking for insane fees, although anything paid to them would be passed along to consumers. If companies settled, this might result in an increase of 1 to 5 percent on retail prices. It may ultimately effect WiMax, too, though no suits in that area have been filed.</p>

<p><a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10046542-75.html"><strong>Finding Zune-Fi:</strong></a> Ina Fried of News.com wanders the polite streets of San Francisco in search of Zune connections over Wi-Fi. She finds a few, and has a good experience. One cafe owner sees the ease with which she can stream music and calls it cool. She can't connect at the long-running Google-sponsored free Wi-Fi at Union Square, however, which means the Wi-Fi likely has an accept button that must be pressed. Surely Microsoft could insert a little technology that would allow a browser-free acceptance of terms? Probably involves Yet Another Protocol: the Wi-Fi Terms Browser-Free Presentation Protocol (WTBFPP).</p>

<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com//images/2008/kodakesp9.jpg" alt="kodakesp9.jpg" border="0" width="150" height="120" align="right" /><a href="http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=13572&pq-locale=en_US"><strong>Kodak adds interesting Wi-Fi enabled all-in-one:</strong></a> The new Kodak ESP 9 is a multi-function printer (fax, scan, print, copy) that connects to a network via Wi-Fi or Ethernet. The $300 device spits out 30 pages per minutes in color, 32 ppm in black only. Kodak claims that the model line to which the ESP belongs uses ink in a vastly more efficient manner than the "average of comparable consumer inkjet printers." </p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2008 05:53:19 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/csiro">csiro</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/patent">patent</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cover">cover</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cover already-in-use technology">cover already-in-use technology</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/free wi-fi">free wi-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi">wi-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/kodak">kodak</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/technology">technology</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi technology">wi-fi technology</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008452.html">Wee-Fi: CSIRO Wins Patent Appeal; Zune-Fi in SF; Kodak ESP 9</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[U.S. Olympic Committee Trying to Take Chicago2016.com Away from Grad Student]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/5ad23aec12e5ec6dbbea9825fd10d587</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/5ad23aec12e5ec6dbbea9825fd10d587</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2004 graduate student Stephen Frayne Jr. bought the domain name Chicago2016.com. Now the U.S. Olympic committee and the Chicago group organizing an Olympic bid for that year want it from him. They...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[In 2004 graduate student Stephen Frayne Jr. bought the domain name <A href="http://www.chicago2016.com" rel=nofollow target="_blank">Chicago2016.com.</A> Now <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-thu-chicago2016-dotcom-battlsep18,0,6898818.story" target="_blank">the U.S. Olympic committee and the Chicago group organizing an Olympic bid for that year want it from him.</a> They have filed through arbitration processes to have the domain turned over.

The committee is currently using <a href="http://chicago2016.org/" target="_blank">chicago2016.org</a> as its domain, but that's not good enough. "We certainly see Chicago2016.com as the logical default domain for our site, and we believe having someone else control it is misleading for people seeking information about Chicago's bid," said Patrick Sandusky, a spokesperson for Chicago 2016. The Chicago Tribune article on this story describes "Chicago 2016" as "a moniker protected by trademark." I did a trademark search and there are several with that string in it, none of which were filed before 2006.

Frayne launched the site to be, he claims, a forum for public discussion of Chicago's bid. He also owns Tokyo2016, another city bidding for that Olympiad, and is also being pursued for that domain.

My own opinion: There are no trademarks in "Chicago 2016" that the committee can reasonably claim ownership of. Obviously it just hasn't offered Frayne enough money for the domain yet.

<a href="http://www.domainnamenews.com/up-to-the-minute/us-olympic-committee-trying-to-take-chicago2016com-away-from-grad-student/2360" target="_blank">Hat tip to DomainNameNews.</a>
<p><a href="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~a/Y0DDdUQD6sE8I9PyRVHgjKMm4K8/a"><img src="http://feedads.googleadservices.com/~a/Y0DDdUQD6sE8I9PyRVHgjKMm4K8/i" border="0" ismap="true"></img></a></p><img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/RSS/cheap_hack/~4/r9FwDKGAoqE" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/chicago tribune article">chicago tribune article</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/chicago">chicago</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/committee">committee</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/olympic committee">olympic committee</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/domain">domain</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/logical default domain">logical default domain</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/chicago2016">chicago2016</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/bid">bid</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/olympic bid">olympic bid</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.ziffdavisenterprise.com/~r/RSS/cheap_hack/~3/r9FwDKGAoqE/us_olympic_committee_trying_to_take_chicago2016com_away_from_grad_student.html">U.S. Olympic Committee Trying to Take Chicago2016.com Away from Grad Student</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[EFF files surveillance lawsuit against NSA, Bush, Cheney]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/68461e1a69102e730faaea413747e58e</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/68461e1a69102e730faaea413747e58e</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit against the president and vice president alleging that an NSA electronic surveillance program continues to illegally spy on U.S....]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit against the president and vice president alleging that an NSA electronic surveillance program continues to illegally spy on U.S. residents.<br style="clear: both;"/>
    <a style='font-size: 10px; color: maroon;' href='http://www.pheedo.com/hostedMorselClick.php?hfmm=v2:ada82eefc1f9bc9bcd395b257007ff82:%2FelbmQMLesAr1LbA1feH8RlXcVIvt%2FGiNbTT04LXMwLwaS0501xzufPjOPXaDvhRjArURV3vcUhN%2BlmSceKtxLpmwRTroAtoiIqDHrFu4K8%3D'><img border='0' title='Add to digg' alt='Add to digg' src='http://www.pheedo.com/images/mm/digg.gif'/></a>
    <a style='font-size: 10px; color: maroon;' href='http://www.pheedo.com/hostedMorselClick.php?hfmm=v2:673785f9833b72931acbad557e252ac9:nSIwKnQEIIvgmPzl6aq6IA9JQGhdVdwct%2BgGwdnpHefq2H%2FeTMueVXLMT03CkHGQKpN5MCEHwY03%2FmE7%2Fhrw0b2rxQ2WyHJs7uLEO0N3bow%3D'><img border='0' title='Add to StumbleUpon' alt='Add to StumbleUpon' src='http://www.pheedo.com/images/mm/stumbleit.gif'/></a>
    <a style='font-size: 10px; color: maroon;' href='http://www.pheedo.com/hostedMorselClick.php?hfmm=v2:59e624d979e35c3801f87fdc9ea37dea:%2BhN2FME2yYj9v8EJRZHWslZPCG%2BKJe7YQ1PsoqPAAKt10VJGgnU6nrY9h1J9162u76p%2Ff7v54Y45NHi4iUdNf5W3QvZ8Yok2kV9mthHp0vo%3D'><img border='0' title='Add to Twitter' alt='Add to Twitter' src='http://www.pheedo.com/images/mm/twitter.png'/></a>
    <a style='font-size: 10px; color: maroon;' href='http://www.pheedo.com/hostedMorselClick.php?hfmm=v2:3957ad81c87c801e4e34d2598fd4dc41:eStAaAwnpNQoLJrmUEghofP4zdZ0CzVr5rTK36bh1PWsLlLQfsfLF6jHdXzmW89O91zvtOiBhC2dNUp42pldofkTvS8Dzet3fz40SP6Q3wU%3D'><img border='0' title='Add to Slashdot' alt='Add to Slashdot' src='http://www.pheedo.com/images/mm/slashdot.png'/></a>
<br style="clear: both;"/>  <img alt="" style="border: 0; height:1px; width:1px;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?i=4a3166c300fa0ac9673841ec3790b231" height="1" width="1"/>
<img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=4a3166c300fa0ac9673841ec3790b231" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/vice president">vice president</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/president">president</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/lawsuit">lawsuit</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/spy">spy</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/residents">residents</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.computerworld.com/click.phdo?i=4a3166c300fa0ac9673841ec3790b231">EFF files surveillance lawsuit against NSA, Bush, Cheney</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Sorry, Qantas, No Unfettered Broadband]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/e46bb700b1a972d41bfd64aba65817f9</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/e46bb700b1a972d41bfd64aba65817f9</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Qantas backs off from earlier plans, changes provider for in-flight broadband: The Sydney Morning Herald somewhat erratically and incompletely reports that Qantas has delayed and modified its...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/plane.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-limits-access-to-web/2008/09/17/1221330929870.html"><strong>Qantas backs off from earlier plans, changes provider for in-flight broadband:</strong></a> The Sydney Morning Herald somewhat erratically and incompletely reports that Qantas has delayed and modified its in-flight broadband plans. Aeromobile was the provider when the service <a href="http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/article.php?story=2007081609481129&query=qantas"><strong>was tested in second quarter 2007</strong></a>, but OnAir is now described as the airline's partner. This was noted by colleague Fabio Zambelli, who emailed me the news, and <a href="http://www.setteb.it/content/view/4742"><strong>has his own account</strong></a> at 7BIT (in Italian).</p>

<p><a href="http://www.onair.aero/index.php?pid=123"><strong>OnAir</strong></a> has so far tested their calling/texting-only service on two aircraft--one operated by Air France, one by TAP Portugal--even though RyanAir announced plans that its planes would started being unwired with the service by late 2007. Still no word on that fleet progress.</p>

<p>Qantas will apparently launch cached Web browsing and limited Web email (probably through a proxy) along with instant messaging, with full Internet service coming "later in 2009." This is clearly due to a lack of satellite coverage that was just remediated a few weeks ago (see below). The first plane with limited service, a new A380, should be in flight 20-October-2008.</p>

<div style="float:right; margin:0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px;"><p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com//images/2008/SorryQantas.jpg" alt="SorryQantas.jpg" border="0" width="100" height="152"></p><p style="font-size: 10px">I hate in-flight<br/>broadband</p></div>To Qantas' credit, note that each seat on the plane will have a laptop opower socket, a USB port, and a multimedia system that can show 100 movies and 500 TV show episodes, play the contents of 1,000 CDs and 20 radio stations, and offer 80 games. 

<p>The Morning Herald seems to overstate the importance and scope of a complaint filed by the union representing American Airlines' flight attendants. The detailed coverage in the U.S. had more to do with the potential for issues, and likely attendants lack of interest in policing yet another media on the plane. Filtering doesn't work, the attendants probably already know, and this may just be a negotiating point with the airline.</p>

<p>On why Qantas is waiting until late 2009? This requires unwinding how OnAir gets its signal.</p>

<p>Aeromobile and OnAir both rely on Inmarsat satellites for their service. Both companies had several years ago staked their futures on the fourth-generation network Inmarsat was to inaugurate with three satellites that would use beamforming to allow precise delivery of nearly 500 Kbps per receiver, with hundreds or thousands of regions being able to be targeted from a single satellite. Inmarsat's third-gen network--don't confuse this with 3G cellular ground-based networks--can deliver about 64 Kbps per channel.</p>

<p>Now, unfortunately, Inmarsat was three years late on launching its trans-Pacific bird. While the company <a href="http://www.inmarsat.com/About/Newsroom/Press/00021465.aspx?language=EN&textonly=False"><strong>claims 85 percent coverage of the earth</strong></a> and 98 percent coverage of population, there's a big gap over the Pacific that also prevents them from having good overlap between the U.S. and Japan/China/Korea, as well as the southern Pacific, covering Australia. Since the biggest market for long-haul flights would likely be Australia, Japan, and China, traveling trans-Pacific or trans-hemispheric routes, that gap is rather large.</p>

<p>Aeromobile opted to build out a service, deployed only by Emirates airline as far as I can tell, that uses the 3G service since it was available, and most necessary equipment is already installed on most over-water planes. OnAir was waiting for 4G, which has necessitated a long wait, but allowed them to launch in Europe with a seemingly next-generation service. Given that OnAir is controlled by an airline-owned integration firm, SITA, and by Airbus, they're not going anywhere.</p>

<p>Inmarsat finally <a href="http://spaceflightnow.com/proton/i4f3/"><strong>lofted its third satellite on Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan</strong></a> on 19-August-2008, and the launch and separation was reported as successful. Previously, the company has needed up to a year to verify and deploy its 4G satellites. (You can <a href="http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=12380.105"><strong>read extremely close coverage of the launch</strong></a> at a Web site devoted to space enthusiasm.)</p>

<p>However, the dirty little secret about Inmarsat's BGAN is that it costs a fortune to heft bandwidth across it. Thus, in-flight broadband over BGAN, if it's ever available, is going to be changed on an extremely high per-MB rate. None of the providers want to say this. This is in contrast to Row 44 (and, once, Connexion by Boeing), which relies on leased Ku-band transponders where they can fix costs and they require high volumes to keep per-bit costs efffectively low.</p>

<p>OnAir's launch of calling on Air France's service involves paying a few euros per minute for calls, which might help you understand what data costs could ultimately run.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/satellite coverage">satellite coverage</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/coverage">coverage</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service">service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service involves">service involves</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/internet service">internet service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/in-flight broadband plans">in-flight broadband plans</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/plans">plans</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/inmarsat satellites">inmarsat satellites</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/inmarsat">inmarsat</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008448.html">Sorry, Qantas, No Unfettered Broadband</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[EFF files surveillance lawsuit against NSA, Bush, Cheney]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/194cf3626f332214a60da45fd3961ddc</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/194cf3626f332214a60da45fd3961ddc</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), U.S. President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other government officials,...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), U.S. President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other government officials, alleging that an NSA electronic surveillance program continues to illegally spy on U.S. residents.]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/president george bush">president george bush</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/national security agency">national security agency</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/electronic frontier foundation">electronic frontier foundation</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/nsa">nsa</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/government officials">government officials</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/lawsuit">lawsuit</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eff">eff</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/spy">spy</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/filed">filed</category>
      <source url="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/091808-eff-files-surveillance-lawsuit-against.html?fsrc=rss-security">EFF files surveillance lawsuit against NSA, Bush, Cheney</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Admins More Powerful Than Hackers]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/129b0a6513d7cd4fbb34906e33f0cd7a</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/129b0a6513d7cd4fbb34906e33f0cd7a</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Do you trust your admins? We hope so
The case of Terry Childs, the former San Francisco City Systems Administrator, is a good example of why you should be careful Childs held the network hostage by...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you trust your admins? We hope so.</p>
<p>The case of Terry Childs, the former San Francisco City Systems Administrator, is a good example of why you should be careful &#8212; Childs held the network hostage by withholding passwords and setting up a rogue access point. However in the court case, a supposedly expert witness testified that Childs posed no danger because the city could lock him out with simple steps.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, as Ira Winkler at RSA says, it&#8217;s not that simple &#8211;</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8230;an administrator with a grudge can cause infinitely more damage than a “computer hacker” could ever dream of.</p>
<p>Given that Childs had his job for years, and purposefully kept a wide variety of critical network information from everyone else, it is impossible for them to lock him out of the network with “simple steps”. Of course soon after Tygar [the expert witness] filed his “expert” report, they discovered the rogue access point.</p></blockquote>
<p>Read the full <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.rsaconference.com/Security_Topics/Hackers_and_Threats/Blog_Ira_Winkler.aspx">commentary here</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 09:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/childs">childs</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/terry childs">terry childs</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/network">network</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/childs posed">childs posed</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/critical network information">critical network information</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/simple">simple</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/simple steps">simple steps</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/careful childs held">careful childs held</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/rogue access">rogue access</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/itsecurity/~3/394542854/">Admins More Powerful Than Hackers</source>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
