<?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: restaurants]]></title>
    <link>http://securityratty.com/tag/restaurants</link>
    <description></description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
    <generator>iRatty Engine</generator>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Kill Switches and Remote Control]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/6faff6d8aced2811984a7463136f6b3a</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/6faff6d8aced2811984a7463136f6b3a</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[It used to be that just the entertainment industries wanted to control your computers -- and televisions and iPods and everything else -- to ensure that you didn't violate any copyright rules. But now...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[It used to be that just the entertainment industries wanted to control your computers -- and televisions and iPods and everything else -- to ensure that you didn't violate any copyright rules. But now everyone else wants to get their hooks into your gear.

OnStar will soon include the <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=202400922">ability</a> for the police to shut off your engine remotely. Buses are getting the <a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/06082008/news/regionalnews/busting_terror_114567.htm">same capability</a>, in case terrorists want to re-enact the movie <cite>Speed</cite>. The Pentagon wants a kill switch <a href="http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/the-pentagons-n.html">installed</a> on airplanes, and is worried about potential enemies <a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6171">installing</a> kill switches on their own equipment. 

Microsoft is doing some of the most creative thinking along these lines, with something it's calling "<a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080611-microsoft-patent-brings-miss-manners-into-the-digital-age.html">Digital Manners Policies</a>." According to its <a href="http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080125102%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080125102&RS=DN/20080125102">patent application</a>, DMP-enabled devices would accept broadcast "orders" limiting capabilities. Cellphones could be remotely set to vibrate mode in restaurants and concert halls, and be turned off on airplanes and in hospitals. Cameras could be prohibited from taking pictures in locker rooms and museums, and recording equipment could be disabled in theaters. Professors finally could prevent students from texting one another during class. 

The possibilities are endless, and very dangerous. Making this work involves building a nearly flawless hierarchical system of authority. That's a difficult security problem even in its simplest form. Distributing that system among a variety of different devices -- computers, phones, PDAs, cameras, recorders -- with different firmware and manufacturers, is even more difficult. Not to mention delegating different levels of authority to various agencies, enterprises, industries and individuals, and then enforcing the necessary safeguards.

Once we go down this path -- giving one device authority over other devices -- the security problems start piling up. Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? What prevents them from abusing that power? Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? Can they override my override?

How do we prevent this from being abused? Can a burglar, for example, enforce a "no photography" rule and prevent security cameras from working? Can the police enforce the same rule to avoid another Rodney King incident? Do the police get "superuser" devices that cannot be limited, and do they get "supercontroller" devices that can limit anything? How do we ensure that only they get them, and what do we do when the devices inevitably fall into the wrong hands?

It's comparatively easy to make this work in closed specialized systems -- OnStar, airplane avionics, military hardware -- but much more difficult in open-ended systems. If you think Microsoft's vision could possibly be securely designed, all you have to do is look at the dismal effectiveness of the various copy-protection and digital-rights-management systems we've seen over the years. That's a similar capabilities-enforcement mechanism, albeit simpler than these more general systems.

And that's the key to understanding this system. Don't be fooled by the scare stories of wireless devices on airplanes and in hospitals, or visions of a world where no one is yammering loudly on their cellphones in posh restaurants. This is really about media companies wanting to exert their control further over your electronics. They not only want to prevent you from surreptitiously recording movies and concerts, they want your new television to enforce good "manners" on your computer, and not allow it to record any programs. They want your iPod to politely refuse to copy music to a computer other than your own. They want to enforce <em>their</em> legislated definition of manners: to control what you do and when you do it, and to charge you repeatedly for the privilege whenever possible. 

"Digital Manners Policies" is a marketing term. Let's call this what it really is: Selective Device Jamming. It's not polite, it's dangerous. It won't make anyone more secure -- or more polite.

This essay <a href="http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2008/06/securitymatters_0626">originally appeared</a> in Wired.com.<div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=JiKwGJ"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=JiKwGJ" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=aXm5MJ"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=aXm5MJ" border="0"></img></a>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 02:48:37 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wireless devices">wireless devices</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/devices">devices</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/devices inevitably">devices inevitably</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/digital manners policies">digital manners policies</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent">prevent</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent security cameras">prevent security cameras</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/difficult security">difficult security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cameras">cameras</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent students">prevent students</category>
      <source url="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/07/kill_switches_a.html">Kill Switches and Remote Control</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Security Matters: I've Seen the Future, and It Has a Kill Switch]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/b9aa8529e116abf92778a4755495e63d</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/b9aa8529e116abf92778a4755495e63d</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[It used to be that just the entertainment industries wanted to control your computers -- and televisions and iPods and everything else -- to ensure that you didn't violate any copyright rules. But now...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It used to be that just the entertainment industries wanted to control your computers -- and televisions and iPods and everything else -- to ensure that you didn't violate any copyright rules. But now everyone else wants to get their hooks into your gear.
</p><p>
OnStar will soon include the <a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=202400922">ability</a> for the police to shut off your engine remotely. Buses are getting the <a href="http://www.nypost.com/seven/06082008/news/regionalnews/busting_terror_114567.htm">same capability</a>, in case terrorists want to re-enact the movie <cite>Speed</cite>. The Pentagon wants a kill switch <a href="http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/the-pentagons-n.html">installed</a> on airplanes, and is worried about potential enemies <a href="http://spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6171">installing</a> kill switches on their own equipment. 
</p><p>
Microsoft is doing some of the most creative thinking along these lines, with something it's calling "<a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080611-microsoft-patent-brings-miss-manners-into-the-digital-age.html">Digital Manners Policies</a>." According to its <a href="http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220080125102%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20080125102&RS=DN/20080125102">patent application</a>, DMP-enabled devices would accept broadcast "orders" limiting capabilities. Cellphones could be remotely set to vibrate mode in restaurants and concert halls, and be turned off on airplanes and in hospitals. Cameras could be prohibited from taking pictures in locker rooms and museums, and recording equipment could be disabled in theaters. Professors finally could prevent students from texting one another during class. 
</p><p>
The possibilities are endless, and very dangerous. Making this work involves building a nearly flawless hierarchical system of authority. That's a difficult security problem even in its simplest form. Distributing that system among a variety of different devices -- computers, phones, PDAs, cameras, recorders -- with different firmware and manufacturers, is even more difficult. Not to mention delegating different levels of authority to various agencies, enterprises, industries and individuals, and then enforcing the necessary safeguards.
</p><p>
Once we go down this path -- giving one device authority over other devices -- the security problems start piling up. Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? What prevents them from abusing that power? Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? Can they override my override?
</p><p>
How do we prevent this from being abused? Can a burglar, for example, enforce a "no photography" rule and prevent security cameras from working? Can the police enforce the same rule to avoid another Rodney King incident? Do the police get "superuser" devices that cannot be limited, and do they get "supercontroller" devices that can limit anything? How do we ensure that only they get them, and what do we do when the devices inevitably fall into the wrong hands?
</p><p>
It's comparatively easy to make this work in closed specialized systems -- OnStar, airplane avionics, military hardware -- but much more difficult in open-ended systems. If you think Microsoft's vision could possibly be securely designed, all you have to do is look at the dismal effectiveness of the various copy-protection and digital-rights-management systems we've seen over the years. That's a similar capabilities-enforcement mechanism, albeit simpler than these more general systems.
</p><p>
And that's the key to understanding this system. Don't be fooled by the scare stories of wireless devices on airplanes and in hospitals, or visions of a world where no one is yammering loudly on their cellphones in posh restaurants. This is really about media companies wanting to exert their control further over your electronics. They not only want to prevent you from surreptitiously recording movies and concerts, they want your new television to enforce good "manners" on your computer, and not allow it to record any programs. They want your iPod to politely refuse to copy music a computer other than your own. They want to enforce <em>their</em> legislated definition of manners: to control what you do and when you do it, and to charge you repeatedly for the privilege whenever possible. 
</p><p>
"Digital Manners Policies" is a marketing term. Let's call this what it really is: Selective Device Jamming. It's not polite, it's dangerous. It won't make anyone more secure -- or more polite.
</p>
<p>
---
</p>
<p><em>Bruce Schneier is chief security technology officer of BT, and author of</em> Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World<em>.</em>
</p><br style="clear: both;"/>
  <img alt="" style="border: 0; height:1px; width:1px;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?i=2e7004605a2cfdb2dff6647568035341" height="1" width="1"/>
<img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=2e7004605a2cfdb2dff6647568035341" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=TdV5GI"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=TdV5GI" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=hCKWyi"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=hCKWyi" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=P6GE7i"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=P6GE7i" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?a=YY5ZlI"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/wired/politics/privacy?i=YY5ZlI" border="0"></img></a>
 <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=rAla0I"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=rAla0I" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=DKXIgi"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=DKXIgi" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=IE7M8i"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=IE7M8i" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?a=swX5hI"><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~f/wired/politics/security?i=swX5hI" border="0"></img></a> </div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/wired/politics/privacy/~4/320220918" height="1" width="1"/><img src="http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/politics/security/~4/320220920" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security">security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wireless devices">wireless devices</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/devices">devices</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent">prevent</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent security cameras">prevent security cameras</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/difficult security">difficult security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cameras">cameras</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/prevent students">prevent students</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/difficult">difficult</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.wired.com/~r/wired/politics/security/~3/320220920/securitymatters_0626">Security Matters: I've Seen the Future, and It Has a Kill Switch</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Beware! $4 + a gallon is bringing out the thieves in our communities.]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/8bb1d3fd37e477eb37712dc88f797683</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/8bb1d3fd37e477eb37712dc88f797683</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[We recently alerted our readers to watch out for copper piping, wiring and even art pieces that were being stolen by thieves looking to cash in on the rising price of copper. It was only a matter of...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[We recently alerted our readers to watch out for copper piping, wiring and even art pieces that were being stolen by thieves looking to cash in on the rising price of copper.  It was only a matter of time before the same thing happened to the fuel tanks on our vehicles.  <br /><br />Neil Cavuto ran a story on Fox's "Cavuto World" today about thieves who are even going so far as to drill into tanks in an effort to steal a vehicle's fuel. Gasoline, Dielsel and even greasy cooking oil is being stolen.  That's right - cooking oil. <br /></span><br />I first heard that old cooking oil could be used to run a car on from my brother in Northern Ireland about four or five years ago.  There was very little start-up costs involved and being the owner of a restaurant, he had a ready supply of used oil.  He told me at that at that time, people were converting their vehicles to run on the oil and were going around gathering up used oil from restaurants.  The owners of these establishments were thrilled since they used to pay to have the old oil removed previously.<br /><br />Apparently this recycling of cooking oil has become so popular, that restaurants are now selling it - last I heard for about $1.50 a gallon.  Thieves have discovered its worth and are now draining the oil tanks located at the rear of restaurants.  The report went on to say that SUVs are especially being targeted as their size gives the thieves plenty of good cover.  The fact that their tanks are larger and contain more fuel is an added advantage for them.<br /><br />What can you do?  For starters, if your fuel cap is not lockable, replace it with one that can be locked.  If at all possible, keep your vehicle in a locked garage.  If that is not an option, park it in a well lit area. Unfortunately, the higher the prices go at the pump, the more prevalent that fuel thefts will become.<div class="blogger-post-footer">Visit Sexton Executive Security at www.sextonsecurity.com</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 00:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/oil">oil</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/oil tanks">oil tanks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/thieves">thieves</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fuel">fuel</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fuel cap">fuel cap</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/tanks">tanks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fuel tanks">fuel tanks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fuel thefts">fuel thefts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/thieves plenty">thieves plenty</category>
      <source url="http://www.thebulletproofblog.com/2008/05/beware-4-gallon-is-bringing-out-thieves.html">Beware! $4 + a gallon is bringing out the thieves in our communities.</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Password Expiration: Like Margarine and Water?]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/f3cb96874ec6ffbc70f6693b2432ae26</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/f3cb96874ec6ffbc70f6693b2432ae26</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[We often swallow ideas that we needn't or shouldn't. Take the onetime urging of nutritionists to substitute margarine for butter in the cause of cardiovascular health. When this advice was first...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[We often swallow ideas that we needn't or shouldn't. Take the onetime urging of nutritionists to substitute margarine for butter in the cause of cardiovascular health. When this advice was first circulating, most margarines contained high quantities of trans fats, concoctions that have turned out to be so harmful - to the heart, among other things - that they are now banned in restaurants in NYC. Similar dogma applies to the advice to drink eight eight-ounce glasses of water a day for overall good health. Everyone knows the advice. But no one seems to know where the 8x8 rule comes from or if it is good or bad.

So what pieces of conventional wisdom in computer security are like margarine and the 8x8 water doctrine? I'd hold forth <i>password expiration</i> as a prime candidate. 
]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/water">water</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/margarine">margarine</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/password expiration">password expiration</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/8x8 water doctrine">8x8 water doctrine</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cardiovascular health">cardiovascular health</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/advice">advice</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/substitute margarine">substitute margarine</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/similar dogma applies">similar dogma applies</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/health">health</category>
      <source url="http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1286">Password Expiration: Like Margarine and Water?</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Restaurant chain served up payment card data to hackers]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/e50ca5390c5222dd5950c32b33736682</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/e50ca5390c5222dd5950c32b33736682</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Dave &amp; Buster's disclosed that credit and debit card numbers were stolen last year from systems at 11 of its restaurants allegedly by three hackers who have been indicted by a federal grand...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Dave & Buster's disclosed that credit and debit card numbers were stolen last year from systems at 11 of its restaurants &mdash; allegedly by three hackers who have been indicted by a federal grand jury.
<p><a href="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~a/Computerworld/Security/News?a=SnZKUd"><img src="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~a/Computerworld/Security/News?i=SnZKUd" border="0"></img></a></p><img src="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~r/Computerworld/Security/News/~4/289843120" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/federal grand jury">federal grand jury</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/debit card">debit card</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/restaurants allegedly">restaurants allegedly</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/hackers">hackers</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/credit">credit</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/systems">systems</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/dave">dave</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/buster">buster</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~r/Computerworld/Security/News/~3/289843120/article.do">Restaurant chain served up payment card data to hackers</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[The hackers that couldn't code straight]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/758d3cfe02807cd3236b0e66fd656006</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/758d3cfe02807cd3236b0e66fd656006</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Had to laugh reading this story about the three men charged with hacking and installing a packet-sniffer at several Dave and Buster restaurants across the US. The scam did result in hundreds of...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>Had to laugh reading <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20080512/tc_pcworld/145781" target="_blank">this story</a> about the three men charged with hacking and installing a packet-sniffer at several Dave and Buster restaurants across the US. The scam did result in hundreds of thousands of dollars of fraudulent bank card charges. However, the packet sniffer software was so buggy that when it was first installed at the first Dave and Busters, it did not even work and captured no credit card data.&nbsp; The next version of the program worked a little better, but it seems the criminals had to continually go back to the restaurants and restart the program when it hung up!</p> <p>I don't know what is more disgusting.&nbsp; The lack of quality of the sniffer program or the apparent lack of any security at all by the folks running the restaurants.&nbsp; In any event I see a bright future for the outsourcing of hacking programs to people who can do a better job than this Apple Dumpling Gang.</p></div>

<p><a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=Yrqwzz"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=Yrqwzz" border="0"></img></a></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=8PFb7H"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=8PFb7H" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=nC0aoH"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=nC0aoH" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=onGv6H"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=onGv6H" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=6nmRtH"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=6nmRtH" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=H45juh"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=H45juh" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?a=k2sq7h"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears?i=k2sq7h" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears/~4/289114912" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 17:25:43 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/program">program</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/sniffer program">sniffer program</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/restaurants">restaurants</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/buster restaurants">buster restaurants</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/apparent lack">apparent lack</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/credit card data">credit card data</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/packet sniffer software">packet sniffer software</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/lack">lack</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/dave">dave</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/StillsecureAfterAllTheseYears/~3/289114912/the-hackers-tha.html">The hackers that couldn't code straight</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Eye-Fi Adds Geotagging, Splits Up Product Line]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/5f2f9ea858e0fb2fc115487b16b2b185</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/5f2f9ea858e0fb2fc115487b16b2b185</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[The folks who brought us simple Wi-Fi for digital cameras add locations, modify pricing: Eye-Fi developed a supremely simple 2 GB Secure Digital card that can work with any digital camera and transfer...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/69628725@N00/1907044776" title="View 'Eye-Fi 1' on Flickr.com"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2228/1907044776_17c82ba821_s.jpg" alt="Eye-Fi 1" border="0" width="75" height="75" align="right"/></a><strong><a href="http://www.eye.fi/a-wireless-memory-card/">The folks who brought us simple Wi-Fi for digital cameras add locations, modify pricing:</a></strong> Eye-Fi developed a supremely simple 2 GB Secure Digital card that can work with any digital camera and transfer photos over known Wi-Fi networks with no effort. Now they've split their original $99 product offering into three items differentiated by features: Eye-Fi Explore, with Wi-Fi-based geotagging ($129); Eye-Fi Share, for uploading to photo-sharing systems ($99); and Eye-Fi Home, which is a cable-replacement service ($79). The Eye-Fi Explore will be available starting 9-June-2008.</p>

<p>The Eye-Fi Explore product relies on Skyhook Wireless's system of analyzing the signal strength of nearby Wi-Fi networks to extrapolate latitude and longitude. Eye-Fi ties that into their system to stamp images with locations. This deal also ties into Wayport's domestic network of 10,000 hotspots, most of which are McDonald's outlets, allowing free uploading via those systems. The purchase price covers one year of hotspot service. You can upgrade an existing Eye-Fi to the new feature for a fee. All three products work with Mac OS X Tiger and Leopard, and Windows XP/Vista.</p>

<p>Because Skyhook needs a live Web connection to look up the Wi-Fi environment, Eye-Fi can store the Wi-Fi snapshot when the picture is taken, and manage inserting the appropriate photo metadata (EXIF format) at upload for <a href="http://flickr.com/help/organizr/#199">Flickr</a> and other services that support geotagging.</p>

<p>Geotagging is a very popular idea, something that I'm quite taken with because it pairs the act of taking a photograph with the location at which the picture is taken, making a digital photograph seem a little less untied to reality. But until now, it's been generally quite involved to match a picture with coordinates. A handful of specialized cameras embed GPS chips, and there's software to facilitate other methods, but the cost and battery drain of GPS chips have apparently so far kept it from being a widely deployed feature, while the wonkiness of alternatives doesn't appeal to mainstream users.</p>

<p>Sony once sold this wacky <a href="http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&amp;storeId=10151&amp;langId=-1&amp;partNumber=GPSCS1KA">GPS companion</a> (which I just found out isn't available in either released model) that would track your location over time, and use that information to geotag images via a special software program that let you pair its stream of data with your photographs. </p>

<p>Eye-Fi and Skyhook are doing something almost the same, since the camera isn't capturing the GPS data, and the Eye-Fi isn't applying the information live, much of the time. But it's eminently more usable than the Sony system, because the Eye-Fi handles the assembly seamlessly for you. </p>

<p>Now there's just one thing to worry about. Think about this: McDonald's are everywhere, and nearly all of the U.S. locations have Wi-Fi. The Eye-Fi uploads whenever it can, as long as the camera is turned on. You're geotagging images without any effort. Okay, got it? So...you call in sick to work, and run off to take some photos. Your boss, using RSS to subscribe to your Flickr feed, not only sees your pictures as you wander the town, unknowningly promiscuously uploading them via quick-serve restaurants' networks, but also knows precisely where you are.</p>

<p>This makes me suggest that you might set your Flickr upload preferences to keep images private and your geotagging preferences the same. You can then expose the images you want for public consumption. The <a href="http://www.cartome.org/panopticon1.htm">Panoptican</a> is...us!</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 10:07:15 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eye-fi">eye-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi">wi-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/simple wi-fi">simple wi-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi networks">wi-fi networks</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eye-fi ties">eye-fi ties</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eye-fi home">eye-fi home</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eye-fi handles">eye-fi handles</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi environment">wi-fi environment</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/eye-fi explore">eye-fi explore</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008314.html">Eye-Fi Adds Geotagging, Splits Up Product Line</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Wayport Tops 10,000 McDonald's Locations]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/f8771881a38c1fc7d001b68fa32359dc</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/f8771881a38c1fc7d001b68fa32359dc</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Ten thousand is an arbitrary place to put a stick in the sand, but significant nonetheless: The milestone of 10,000 McDonald's wired up--a few hundred have back access only, due to being stores within...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.wayport.com/NewsReleases.aspx?id=1832">Ten thousand is an arbitrary place to put a stick in the sand, but significant nonetheless:</a></strong> The milestone of 10,000 McDonald's wired up--a few hundred have back access only, due to being stores within WalMart centers--is a vindication of Wayport's long-term strategy, dating back to 2004. Wayport switched at that point from a slightly more public-faced, public-access company to one that understood that back-office operations could be just as valuable, if less sexy, than front-facing consumer networks. Dan Lowden, Wayport's long-time marketing and business development chief, said yesterday, "In a lot of these venues, the back office comes first. The Wi-Fi public access for some is a big priority, but for others it's a nice to have, great thing to have, but the priority is the back office."</p>

<p>Although several other quick-service restaurants like McDonald's lack any comprehensive Wi-Fi plan--Burger King, Wendy's, and Subway to name three of the largest--Wayport is locked out of working with direct competitors. This opens the potential for another firm to handle a several-thousand-location network. Wayport has worked with both McDonald's corporate-owned stores (about 2/3rds of stores in the U.S.), as well as reaching out to franchisees, who Lowden noted pay a predetermined flat rate for the service via McDonald's. "It's made them incredibly efficient to be able to offer this to their franchisees at one price, instead of variable pricing," he noted. Wayport acts as the layer between various telecom providers, applications and services, and the stores.</p>

<p>Wayport provides several kinds of back-office services, although credit-card processing was the first thing htey rolled out. They've extended to remote video feeds for security, Redbox DVD rental systems that are found in some McDonald's, and kiosks used for job applications. Lowden said Wayport offers things as straightforward but critical as a dial-up fail-safe when a broadband connection drops. </p>

<p>Wayport also manages AT&T's hotspot network, which puts them in the unwiring seat for the 7,000-odd Starbucks stores that will converted from T-Mobile to AT&T service during 2008. Wayport was once the clear leader in the hotspot builder market, with T-Mobile in the second position. Now, Wayport will be operating through a direct contract or management agreement over 18,000 hotspots in the U.S.; T-Mobile will likely be the second biggest with a couple thousand locations (Borders and FedEx/Kinko's tops among them). The No. 3 player is hard to figure. Panera? </p>

<p>I've been predicting for some time that media on the edge--music, videos, movies, and games stored on servers on the local Wi-Fi network--will be the next big development in venue-oriented Wi-Fi, with Starbucks likely far in the lead. Lowden wouldn't comment on any specific plans in the works, of course, but said generally, "Storing and caching all that content on the edge...hasn't been leveraged in the past, but it will be in the future to create a very unique experience." At Barnes & Noble, Wayport caches some multimedia data that's available to customers in the stores.</p>

<p>The advantage for in-store media storage is that you can leverage the speed of the local network, and add additional access points to distribute network load. The choke point is no longer the Internet connection, but local network speed. I expect--though Wayport, AT&T, and Starbucks haven't said it--that Starbucks infrastructure will be all 802.11n for this reason, likely with both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz support for the best throughput in the higher-frequency band for media transactions. (In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you could only buy movies via 5 GHz.)</p>

<p>Lowden also noted that the proliferation of mobile devices with Wi-Fi built in have led to them reaching out to venues that wouldn't have made sense for them to work with previously, and for unlikely candidates to reach out to them, too. Wayport is now working with a number of healthcare facilities that, while they have their own network infrastructure, wanted to outsource public access Wi-Fi (whether they choose to charge or underwrite it), and certain applications that they're not as experienced with running themselves.</p>

<p><strong>A little history:</strong> In 2001 and again in 2004, the heat seemed to be on the public side of Wi-Fi: lots of money to be made, ostensibly, lots of partnerships and venues to be built, and an overcrowded supply of infrastructure builders. The year before, Wayport looked to be an also-ran in the hotspot provider business. </p>

<p>Despite being one of the earliest firms to put Ethernet and then Wi-Fi into hotels, and build out hotspots in airports; and despite their survival of the first hotspot meltdown in 2001 during the dotcom crash and brief venture capital shortage; and despite their early entrance into allowing wholesale pricing for hotspot aggregators; the firm seemed about to be eclipsed by apparently deep-pocketed Cometa (with AT&T, IBM, and Intel in various capital and support roles), Toshiba's mom-and-pop focused turnkey system, and T-Mobile, which had the Starbucks contract. What a difference a year makes.</p>

<p>Cometa, Toshiba, and Wayport contended for the contract to build out back-office and public-access service at McDonald's in the U.S., and Wayport won. Within a few weeks, Toshiba passed its few hundred locations to Cometa, which shut its doors in May 2004. Wayport, meanwhile, had <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/003377.html">cooked up a strategy</a> for McDonald's that it announced later that month. </p>

<p>Their approach involved a fixed-rate charged for unlimited access by retail network partners for all the locations in their pool. This meant that partners had a fixed cost, instead of a per-session cost, and Wayport could obtain specific revenue even before usage by a partner ramped up. Wayport hasn't discussed the details of this arrangement in depth since, but has partnered with Sony with its Mylo, Nintendo with its DS game player, and ZipIt with its wireless messaging appliance. </p>

<p>The McDonald's deal also apparently gave Wayport a way to extend its work with SBC-later-AT&T; Wayport had earlier in 2004 <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/003151.html">became the managed-services contractor</a> for SBC to build out The UPS Store/Mailboxes Etc. nationwide. (UPS <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/007770.html">dropped AT&T as its partner</a> in mid-2007, although that didn't appear to have anything to do with Wayport's role.)</p>

<p>AT&T through Wayport developed its large resold/managed footprint that incorporated resale of Wayport's McDonald's locations with the UPS Store and a few hundred other managed locations, including a handful of airports. The Cingular acquisition of AT&T Wireless put more airports in SBC's hands, too. (SBC was once the 60 percent majority owner of Cingular; when SBC and BellSouth, the other owner, merged that put the newly rebranded AT&T in charge of Cingular which it relabeled as AT&T. Confusing, huh?)</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:25:32 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wayport">wayport</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wi-fi">wi-fi</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/comprehensive wi-fi plan">comprehensive wi-fi plan</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/local wi-fi network">local wi-fi network</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/att service">att service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/service">service</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wayport offers">wayport offers</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/network">network</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/wayport caches">wayport caches</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008294.html">Wayport Tops 10,000 McDonald's Locations</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Do you know how identity theft happens most of the time?]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/412682e77461decf697d4f02ba3f476a</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/412682e77461decf697d4f02ba3f476a</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Many people probably think that identity theft occurs most often as a result of hackers gaining unauthorized access to our computers. However, this is not the case

I attended a Web 2.0 round table...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Many people probably think that identity theft occurs most often as a result of hackers gaining unauthorized access to our computers.  However, this is not the case.<br /><span id="fullpost"><br />I attended a Web 2.0 round table discussion yesterday (called "The New New Internet").  I was quite surprised to hear Mike Bradshaw, a self-described Google Department Head, tell us that the # 1 security concern was not hacking but having your laptop stolen.  When you think about it, it really does make sense.<br /><br />When you think about how many laptops get taken on business trips, into cafes and restaurants and anywhere else that users can get a WIFI signal, it's no wonder that so many are stolen.  Not to mention the fact that the average laptop costs in excess of $1000.00 and is easy to pick up and carry away.<br /><br />Mr. Bradshaw's statement reminded me that I had read some time ago about latop thefts reported by Government employees and taken from Government offices and vehicles.  The news often covers stories about laptops being misplaced and stolen and having thousands of personnel files being compromised as a result.<br /><br />Signing-in on my laptop is done through Biometrics.  My password is my finger print which is captured when I swipe my finger across the log-in portal.  It's probably only a matter of time before they can have some kind of built-in biometric sensor that would know the difference between a thief  and the real owner.  If I had my way, I think I would like to have it give off a nice little electrical shock when someone tried to steal it.<br /><br />However, the icing on the cake would be then if the machine could exclaim in a very loud voice to the thief: "I tasered you, bro". <br /><br /></span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Visit Sexton Executive Security at www.sextonsecurity.com</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/time">time</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/laptop">laptop</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/average laptop costs">average laptop costs</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/built-in biometric sensor">built-in biometric sensor</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/finger print">finger print</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/time ago">time ago</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/google department head">google department head</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/finger">finger</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/identity theft occurs">identity theft occurs</category>
      <source url="http://www.thebulletproofblog.com/2008/02/do-you-know-how-identity-theft-happens.html">Do you know how identity theft happens most of the time?</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Terrible animal abuse caught on video at Westland/Hallmark meat company]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/3c9e1d813240b8cba5e27c093409bca6</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/3c9e1d813240b8cba5e27c093409bca6</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[It would have been difficult for anyone to have watched the CNN video yesterday morning regarding animal abuse at the Westland/Hallmark meat processing plant and to not have felt outraged

The video,...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[It would have been difficult for anyone to have watched the CNN video yesterday morning regarding animal abuse at the <a href="http://www.westlandmeat.com/">Westland/Hallmark </a>meat processing plant and to not have felt outraged.  <br /><span id="fullpost"><br />The video, which was covertly recorded by a factory employee, showed cows being pushed, dragged and prodded in order to get them into the slaughter house.  As was obvious from the video, some of these animals were so sick that they could not stand up on their own and were "scooped" up by fork lifts and dropped into the killing area.<br /><br />The reporter commented how these animals' symptoms were similar to that of the fatal "mad cow" disease.  However, that did not stop the meat company from including them with the others that were being butchered and sold to fast food restaurants and to schools to feed the nation's children. <br /><br />Yesterday, two fast food chains: "Jack in the box' and "In-out burgers", stated that they were no longer purchasing beef products from Westalnd/Hallmark.  Today, 150 school districts dropped the meat company as their vendor.<br /><br />What is difficult to understand is how the company President, Steve Mendell, could come out with a statement assuring the public that they "have met the highest standards for harvesting and processing meat".  Either he is of the belief that the general public are about as sharp as bowling balls or the industry must have some really low standards overall.<br /><br />Another difficult thing to understand is the fact that Westland/Hallmark claimed to have a full time USDA veterinary medical officer on site IN ADDITION to a full time officer from USDA's Grading Service.  "Full time" should mean that they are always there durng work hours, should it not?  It seems that the USDA has a lot of questions to answer.<br /><br />It is ironic that last week we saw so much in the press about the Congressional hearing into Roger Clemens and the allegations that he took steroids.  If he did, he shouldn't have, but is it right to devote so much attention and resources to an athelete when hundreds of thousands - possibly millions, of peoples lives and health are jeopardized by unscrupulous business practices that should have been detected by the very Govt. Agency assigned to over see such abuse?<br /><br />I for one, will be reading labels in the supermarket more closely in the future.  I would suggest that all of you do the same.             <br /></span><div class="blogger-post-footer">Visit Sexton Executive Security at www.sextonsecurity.com</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/meat company">meat company</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/meat">meat</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/video">video</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/yesterday">yesterday</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/cnn video yesterday">cnn video yesterday</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fast food chains">fast food chains</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/low standards">low standards</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/fast food restaurants">fast food restaurants</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/unscrupulous business practices">unscrupulous business practices</category>
      <source url="http://www.thebulletproofblog.com/2008/02/terrible-animal-abuse-caught-on-video.html">Terrible animal abuse caught on video at Westland/Hallmark meat company</source>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
