Vastly Important Notes

Make it, so?

Geech continues to speak truth to power with this trenchant denunciation of Make magazine.  I agree, Make jumped the shark, whittled with found dental tools out of homemade soap, about six months ago.  And by "shark" I mean "bong".

I propose we start a magazine called Break, dedicated to running well produced photo essays of Make stuff being systematically reverted to their constituent elements.

Friends and Enemies

I've started the semi-annual process of digging my blog out of obscurity.  First step was to reorganize my navbar links section.  I decided that from now on, it's only going to list people I know in real life.  This means that a few choice links had to go, but Boing Boing, Ed Felton and Wendy Seltzer don't really need me to drive their traffic.

On the other hand, you can now follow a single link and see pictures of Geech's kids.  The only way you'd have an easier time seeing pictures of his kids is if you sat every day at my desk, which is right next to his and within the visual angle of all four of his giant monitors.  Web 2.0 is other people.

Jon Udell qualifies as someone I know because I went on a camping trip of sorts with him.  Jeneane Sessum qualifies just because.  Check out the new section on my sidebar.  I'll be adding more links as I remember who I else I know.

Step two of the vastly important reclamation project is going to involve fixing the slightly out of date graphic on my archives page.

Step three is probably to go back to not posting for six months.  Wish me luck.

Vienna

I had a hankering to start up the blog again. Who knows how long it'll last but here goes.

I'm in Vienna for a couple of days. They're really into some guy (? - hard to tell for sure from the portraits) named Mozart here. You literally can't walk a block without running into something Mozart related. It's like with Starbucks in the US, except they have just as many Starbucks (Starboxen?) here as we do at home, so there's really not much room for anything else. The "anything else" is quite beautiful though. Walking around old European capitals always reminds me that the most historically-significant building in my neighborhood is the art deco Sears-Roebuck store from the 1930s. Apparently it's the 250th anniversary of Mozart founding the city or something, so they're really going all out. Mozart must be some sort of mythical city-creating hero in Vienna, like Paul Bunyan in Brainerd or Benjamin Franklin in Philadelphia.

I'm here to moderate a panel at the Global Security Forum. It's been a worthwhile experience. One of my panelists, Aldo Agostini from Venice, made a fascinating point about the different meanings of "privacy" between the U.S. and Europe. According to Mr. Agostini, the American concept of privacy is rooted in the goal of "freedom", while the European definition centers around "dignity". I'm not entirely sure what "dignity" is, but the Europeans seem quite attached to it. It might somehow be related to the Japanese word, "shame", but that's a concept as strange to Americans as anthropomorphic panda bears riding in giant-panda-shaped fighting robots. Except less cool, like Brainerd.

Anyway, I'll take freedom over dignity any day. I'd take happiness over dignity. I've even been known to take a nice big steak over dignity.

Speaking of which, I've yet to eat any of the famous Viennese meat products so when the conference was over I headed back to the Radisson with the plan of changing clothes and then hitting a restaurant. Once in my room I flipped open the hotel-provided Vienna guide book and read the very first sentence in the "sightseeing" section:

"Even though we are facing an economic slump, terror threats and cost reduction measures: Vienna is still one of the most popular places for outings and holidays."

Way to go for the hard sell! Now I see why our idea of marketing isn't centered around "dignity", either.

Under the guidebook was a brochure for the fancy hotel restaurant. The pictures looked appetizing until I saw this one in the corner:

Ok, seriously, I'm thinking of calling the cops.

Back to the guidebook, randomly flipped open to page 41:

"Would you like to discover Vienna in a special way? Would you like to discover Vienna in a very-special way?"

No. I'm going to bed hungry.

[Update: Two people have already accused me of "name dropping" Brainerd. Yes, I've been there. Any place that has Jello in the all-you-can-eat salad bar is OK in my book.]

It beats working

Jeneane Sessum has written a great article for PR Blog Week 2.0 called, "Adding Your Voice to the Conversation. Why CEOs Should Blog."  It makes me out to be much smarter than I really am!  What fun.

I've been podcasted

I've never listened to a podcast before; I'm too old, and back in my day we just called them mp3 files. Until today!

InfoWorld's Jon Udell has just podcast (is this the right tense?) an interview with me talking about the convergence of physical and IT security. Forty minutes of hard-rockin' talk on FIPS-201 standards is exactly what all the cool kids will be jamming to while waiting for the, um, ski lift.

Sorry, the air conditioning in our building is down today. I'm going to have words with my landlord about the convergence of sweaty programmers and the withholding of the rent.

Belated update

I think I've figured out the "DHS smartcards using Bluetooth" flap.  Near as I can tell, there was never any plan to make Bluetooth-enabled cards (which doesn't make any technical sense anyway) or Bluetooth-enable badge holders (which would be just strange).  There was speculation at a public forum about making Bluetooth-connected card readers so that you could read DHS smartcards with, say, a Blackberry.  This is actually not a bad idea.  I think you could overcome the security issues in this use case because Bluetooth would basically be an unsecured conduit between two secure participants (much like the Internet is with SSL).  Either way, I don't think it ever got much past the "wouldn't it be neat if we could..." public-musing phase.

Bottom line: Bluetooth panic around DHS cards is uninformed and unjustified.

EPIC responds

Bruce Schneier, writing on behalf of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, has put out a well-written refutation of my recent criticisms of EPIC's report on the DHS smart card program.  (Links to EPIC's report, my original blog entry, the much-shortened C|net article and EPIC's response).

I'll post a more thorough response when I have a bit of time, but here's where I'm leaning:

1. I'll mostly concede the "ISO/14443 is RFID" point.   ISO/14443 clearly is "RFID" in the broad sense of the word, but much scare-hay has been made by applying non-ISO/14443 aspects of RFID to discussions about smart cards.  There's more to talk about here, but I was wrong and apologize for it.  The word "RFID" has taken on many meanings and I should have been more precise.  As I said in the original article, the only real answer is to move to strong, active cryptography on RFID cards which (among other benefits) would make it virtually impossible to an unauthorized third-party to snoop a conversation.

2. I'm glad that EPIC admits their mistake on calling the DAC cards "Bluetooth".  However, I'm very puzzled by this "Bluetooth-enabled card holder" business.  If, as Bruce suggests, it's a way to rebroadcast card data over Bluetooth... that's just strange.  Not necessarily bad, but strange.  Ok, probably bad.  Maybe he means Bluetooth card readers.  That would make a bit more sense.  I've never heard any talk at DHS about these things, so I'm going to do a bit more research before commenting further.  Still, the cards themselves have nothing to do with Bluetooth and the card program should not be unjustly criticized because some hypothetical peripherals that use the card might be poorly thought out.  There will eventually be thousands of hardware and software products that work with government smart cards.  Some of them are bound to be dumb.   I could make a machine that sucks in your dollar bill and then punches you in the stomach, but my talking about such a machine should not subject the entire system of U.S. Currency to ridicule.  Come to think of it, the Vend-o-Punch™ might not be such a bad idea. 

3. I do not agree at all with EPIC's response on the biometrics points.  There's still a lot of confusion over the issues.  More on this later.

4. We've met about half-way on the PIN discussion.  A global and mandatory-override short (4 or 6 number) PIN is probably a bad idea, although not for the reasons stated in the original report.  I think the DAC use of PINs is mostly fine.

5. The disclaimer about my indirect involvement with DHS appears on my blog but not on the C|net article because the editors at C|Net asked me to cut the originally submitted 1,700 words down to 700.  The blog is linked to from the article.

As an aside, Bruce Schneier is a demigod of sorts in the security industry.  His Crypto-Gram newsletter has been worth reading for a long time now.  I'm glad to see him engaged in this discussion.

You keep using that word...

I've received much good feedback on my last post about the pudding-headed report criticising the new DHS smartcard program.  Many people are justifyiably mystified by the report's references to Bluetooth.  The strange thing isn't that the new smartcard doesn't use Bluetooth, but that smart cards and Bluetooth have absolutely nothing to do with each other.  It's like asking, "Doesn't the new Honda Accord suffer from all the well documented problems of Esperanto?"  The short answer is "no", the real answer is, "what the hell are you talking about?"

The problem, of course, is buzzword creep.  With all the industry terminology floating around these days, it's hard for people to remember whether combining two particular concepts produces an argument that's coherent (like biometrics and privacy) or less so (like pancakes and the doctrine of original intent).  That modesty does not typically hinder such people from writing technology assesments or legal opinions is beyond the scope of this blog post. 

Bluetooth, a fine technology with many years of buzzwordiness behind it, is particularly suseptible to such content-free punditry.  In service to all the technology companies who make perfectly good products that have nothing to do with Bluetooth, but feel market pressure to be 100% buzzword compliant, I offer the following decal:

You wouldn't put it on a cell phone (whether it had Bluetooth or not), but you could stick it onto a toaster, tax software, or a government smart card.  I'd start sticking it on our software boxes, but I bet our attorneys wouldn't be too happy.

Cleaning out the slothwebs

A few people have asked about the apparent reversal of fortune which has caused this blog to go from too-much content to barely none at all over the past two months.  There's not really a good reason for the decline, just the normal ebb and -- err,  what's the opposite of "ebb"? -- bbe of blogging.  I've resisted posting about my lack of posting because that's exactly the kind of solipsistic navel-gazing that I find particularly unappealing in a blog.  There's nothing appealing about my navel.  This is a "trust but do not verify" type of thing.

I'm presently in the second week of a six country slog (five countries for business, one to serve me booze out of a hollowed-out pineapple) and the blogging-urge is beginning to stir again.  I logged on today to clear out some of the accumulated pr0n spam from the comments and trackbacks.  Like circling vultures they are - gathering around blogs too weary to swat them away.  I also noticed that my once-so-artsy archives page has outlived its design mandate.  Photoshop beckons. 

I shall return.

More cool cartograms

This is not a squished butterfly or a rampaging elephant.  It's a cartogram by Michael Gastner and colleagues from the University of Michigan showing a county-level election map of the United States where the relative sizes of the counties are based on population, not geographic area.  Check out the entire page which starts with the familiar red/blue election map and iteratively deforms it to show the voting patterns of individual voters.

Are these types of cartograms useful, other than for making democrats feel slightly better?  Probably not, but they're neat to look at and they represent the continuum of political belief in this country far better than geographic maps. 

I guess it really is a rampaging elephant, after all.

Thanks to Lee Wright for the link.

Red Sox Nation - Far East

Due to a last-minute change of schedule, I had to send Seth Hitchings, one of our best (read: customer presentable) engineers to Taiwan during World Series week.  Apparently, our local team was somehow involved.  Seth managed to catch most of the games live from his hotel room and a tea shop.  He kept a web journal, complete with pictures, of the events.   

I was flying home from Denver during the last game.  The pilot had the game on one of the in-seat audio channels.  The Sox won just as we were taxiing to our gate at Logan and I thought that mobs of fans would run out onto the tarmac and tip my plane  over.

People seemed to be in a pretty good mood around the office today.  I assume it must be because they missed me during my two weeks of travel. 

Seth, sorry you missed the home crowds; take pride in your role as Red Sox ambassador to the people of Taiwan.  Thanks for going.

Oh, nice tie.

A groan of puns

One of the ways I amuse myself on business trips is trying to come up with clever (given my somewhat limited and juvenile intellect) collective nouns.  A collective noun is a peculiar feature of the English language used to describe a group of other nouns – usually people or animals.  Common examples are, "a flock of sheep", "a school of fish" and "a pride of lions".  Quasi-humorous collective nouns include, "a suit of lawyers" and "a club of golfers".  I’ve tried explaining this concept to non-English speakers, but have not generally succeeded.

Last year, while watching horse races at the Hong Kong Jockey Club (no longer the, ahem, Royal Hong Kong Jockey Club, as I was politely but firmly corrected by my hosts), I saw a number of jockeys standing around at an award ceremony and spontaneously invented, "a shortage of jockeys".  Today, passing group after group of uniformed Japanese school girls in my cab (or, more accurately, being passed by group after group while stuck in Tokyo traffic), I triumphantly decided that from now on, the collective noun shall be, "a giggle of schoolgirls".

My pride in these two linguistic inventions was cruelly dashed ten minutes ago when I discovered not only that both had already been coined, but that they appear together on a single Google-indexed web page.

I hate Google.  They ruin my best ideas.

[Update: "a bloviation of bloggers" is original!  My place in English language history is secured.]

What's taking so long in that voting booth?

Edward Felten over at Freedom to Tinker has two amazing posts (one, two) about bugs in popular electronic voting machines that, if true, make it possible for just about anyone with a $50 smart card kit to vote multiple times and otherwise seriously tamper with the election.  Actually “bugs” is not the right word.  The problems stem from a design so stupid that it’s hard to spot the specific error.  Like someone once said, “This so far off it’s not even wrong.”  Google thinks that someone was Wolfgang Pauli.

I’ve put together the following technical illustration to explain the problem:

Here’s a slight variation on the “conversation” from Edward’s first post.  It won’t make sense until you’ve read the original.

terminal to card: "My password is 1234"
card to terminal: "la la la la la la la la la la"
terminal to card: "Are you a valid card?"
card to terminal: "No. I mean yes!"
terminal to card: "Please deactivate yourself."
card to terminal: "Whatever you say, spaceman."

For the record, I cannot verify that Edward’s description of the problem in Diebold machines is accurate.  However, the allegations are well documented and wholly consistent with the track record of electronic voting machines in this country.  I can verify that “programming” smart cards is as easy as claimed; we do it all the time.  Of course you can make smart cards (or, more accurately, smart card based systems) that don’t have such flaws (again, we do it all the time), but just because something could be done correctly, doesn’t mean that it has been done correctly. 

The problems with electronic voting machines should be front page news.  These aren’t slight theoretical flaws.  They’re a clear and present danger to the foundations of our democracy.  Note, that I don’t believe the allegations that these flaws are deliberately engineered to throw the election. Occam’s razor digs up carelessness and incompetence long before it gets to malice.  Either way, the problems are inexcusable.  Secure electronic systems are a well known area.  For example, Dielbold also makes perfectly good ATM machines.  They should know how to build a secure box.

One of these is not like the other

What do Robert Scoble, yogurt and I have in common?  It’s not our creamy centers; we’re the unlikely subjects of a recent article on corporate blogging at Portals Magazine.

[Update: so many jokes; so many lawyers.]

Foo Camp roundup

I got back from O’Reilly’s Foo Camp a few of days ago.  It was… what’s the expression the kids used to say…Insanely Great.  There were lots of impressive people and keen sessions.  Among other things, we figured out how to do electronic voting exactly right.  More on that later.

The picture, by James Duncan, is of a working 3D chocolate printer made out of Lego.  Click on the thumbnail for a larger view.

Just for the record, I “camped” in the Sebastapol Holiday Inn Express.  It didn’t make me any smarter, but at least I could snore without making any permanent enemies among the world’s Alpha Geeks.

Since I’m way late in blogging this event, I’ll take the path of least resistance and just provide a partial (!) list of other blog coverage.  This Internet thing is gonna be big some day.

Cameron Marlow (Overstated)
Chris Shiflett
Danyel Fisher (Made of People)
Dav Coleman (AkuAku)
Dave McClure (Master of 500 Hats)
David Hornlik (VentureBlog)
David Weinberger (Joho the Blog)
Don MacAskil (onethumb)
Erik Hatcher
Furzundfeuerstein (Fart and Flintstone)
James Duncan (Whoot!)
Jeff Barr
Jim Winstead (trainedmonkey)
Mark Fletcher (Winged Pig)
Mark Frauenfelder (BoingBoing)
Mie (Kokochi)
Mike Clark
Nan Barber
Paul Jones
Robert Scoble (Scobleizer)
Russel Beattie
Tantek Çelik
Tim Bray
Zak Greant (Polymorph)
Ross Mayfield

Shape of politics

Last week I wrote about the 4:1 imbalance of Electoral College voting power between the citizens of big and small states.  Now, Electoral-vote.com has a nifty new cartogram (a map distorted by some variable) showing the relative electoral votes of each state.  The colors represent current poll results in the presidential race and are updated daily.  Click on the picture for the full-size view.

So now we have two choices for making presidential elections fair in this country:  (1) Reform the Electoral College. (2) Find a way to push and stretch the tectonic plates under the North American continent to physically rearrange the landmass to the shape above.  Keep in mind that the first option is politically difficult.

[Update: Actually, I just realized that option 2 won’t change the voting power.  I hope no one has started already.]

Conference rooms contest winners

Voting for the CoreStreet conference room name contest is closed and the result is a tie.  A [expletive deleted] tie.  With 153 total people voting, “Superhero Secret Identities” and “Historically Important Fortifications” got exactly 60 votes each.  It was a neck and neck race for the past three days.  “Superheroes” did quite a bit of (legal) lobbying here, here and here.  “Fortifications” was the hands-down office favorite and seemed to benefit from a grass-roots email campaign.  To make matters worse, I’ve just realized that I mistakenly wrote “polls will close on 11:59pm on Sunday, July 31st”, when Sunday was, of course, really August 1st.  We’ll never know what multitudes might have been disenfranchised by that somewhat confusing statement. 

I admit to being totally unprepared for a dead-even poll result.  This is especially embarrassing since I’m supposed to be some sort of expert on electronic voting.  I suppose there are ways to resolve this sort of thing: we could have a run-off, or I can extend the polling for another day or I can sift through the logs and disqualify a vote or two.  Perhaps voting should be extended for exactly one more year because in 2005 the last Sunday in July really will be the 31st.  The problem is, all of these options entail more work for me and frankly… see my first real post on this blog.

So we have two claimants for the prize.  Wasn’t there something about this kind of situation in the Bible?  Some wise way to decide who is more deserving?  Oh, I remember: make two babies!

So my post-solomonic determination is to award two first place prizes.  Both “superheroes” and “forts” will receive a $150 Amazon gift certificate along with whatever CoreStreet schwag I can dig out of the supply closet.  There will be no second-place winner.  Since “forts” got the most votes from CoreStreet employees, we’re going to use that as the conference room naming scheme.  We’ll use “superheroes” for something else – perhaps development project codenames. 

I already have contact info for “forts” (my friend, the famous rodeo cowboy Lee Wright).  “Superheroes” should contact me by email.  Congratulations to both!

So let it be written.  So let it be done. 

Conference room name battle

[Update 8/02/04: Voting is closed – see the results.]

We’ve received dozens of good suggestions in the Name My Conference Rooms contest.   Here are the five six finalists:

Please vote for your favorite.  Vote early, but only vote once.  If I see suspicious IP address voting patterns, I reserve the right to throw away votes.  So as not to upstage our upcoming national election, there will be no verifiable paper trail.  The winner will receive random CoreStreet goodies and a $150 gift certificate from Amazon.com.  The runner-up will just get the goodies.

Voting will close at 11:59 PM (eastern US time), Sunday, July 31st August 1st.  Winners will be announced on Monday.

Fight! 

[Nepotism alert: the “planetary mnemonics” entry was submitted by my brother, or someone pretending to be him.]

[Update: Sunday is the 1st, not the 31st.]

Conference room contest last chance

There’s only a bit more than a day left in the Name My Conference Rooms contest.  If you’ve got ideas left, now’s the time to submit them.  We’ve received so many responses that I’m going to change the procedure a bit:  Tomorrow evening, we’ll pick our favorite five entries and I’ll post them in a blog poll on this site.  The first and second place winners will be chosen by an open vote.

Speaking of which, the plurality of you (36%) chose the correct answer in my last poll.

Name my conference rooms contest

CoreStreet reached an important milestone today, and I need your help to, um, get to the next plateau.  Or something.

Our main office finally got crowded enough that it’s not always possible to find an empty conference room, so we have to add the conference rooms as schedulable resources to Outlook/Exchange.  This means we need to name them.  This means we need a naming scheme.  This is where you come in.

We currently have eight rooms to name, but the scheme should scale to more as we grow.  Send me your idea for a conference room naming scheme as well as eight sample names.  For example, you might submit the naming scheme, “Diseases of the Foot” and the room names, “Arthritis, Freiberg’s Disease, Gout, Kohler’s Disease, Ollier's Disease, Club Foot, Maffucci’s Syndrome and Seiver’s Disease.”  This example would be syntactically correct, but would not win.

You can enter via the comments section on this post or by email to: phil*AT*corestreet*DOT*com.  The names should be one part clever, two parts topical and office appropriate to taste.  Winners will be chosen on Wednesday, July 28th by a committee of judges consisting of myself and whoever else is hanging around my desk at the time.  The second-place winner will receive one each of whatever CoreStreet schwag (shirt, mug, exploding pen, etc.) happens to be in the marketing closet that day.  The first-place winner will receive a $150 Amazon.com gift certificate plus the schwag.

I hope the blogosphere doesn’t let me down on this one.

E-Voting interview

I did a pre-taped radio interview on the topic of electronic voting today.  It should air in the next few weeks.  My two main points were:

1. Full public disclosure and strong auditing of the source code and all other details of an electronic voting system are necessary for public trust.  No voting system that relies on obfuscation for security should be placed into service.

2. A paper trail is absolutely necessary, for now, to validate election results.  In a few years, it may be possible to phase out paper completely once a strong digital-certificate based credential (like the U.S. Military’s Common Access Card) makes it into the hands of voters.

Much of my views on electronic voting have been informed by Edward Felten over at Freedom to Tinker.

An illustrated Excel bug mystery

This is a pretty geeky and technical post.  If you don't find software engineering or bugs particularly interesting or funny, you're probably better off just scrolling right past this.  You've been warned.

Otherwise...

Ok, here I am working on an important spreadsheet for my board.  Typity Type.

Oh, look at that. I made the column headings hyperlinks – it’s so like me to pay attention to the fine details. Hmm, better check to make sure some of those links actually work. Click. Click. Yup, the links work. Oh look, Excel changed the color of the “visited” links to remind me where I’ve been. How thoughtful, just like in IE. Ok, let’s print some copies on my color laser. Ick, it printed the “visited” links in that reddish color. That’s annoying – I don’t want to give my board members printouts with some of the links a different color. That’s kind of dumb, why would Excel bother to print that? Ok, I’m sure there’s a perfectly intuitive way to fix this, but I’m a bit rushed today so I’ll just look for a shortcut. Hmmm, I bet if I just change the font color of those column headers, Excel will get rid of the “visited” information. Let’s make them all red. Yup, that worked. Now they’re all the same color. Hmmm, red looks a bit alarming. Let’s try green. Ok, they’re all green. That’s better, but still a bit strange. I guess people are just used to seeing hyperlinks be blue, so I’ll just make them all blue. This is more work than I anticipated. Hmmm, I think that’s the wrong shade of blue. Let me squint at the color picker and try to find the blue color that’s closest to the normal hyperlink color. I really wish I hadn’t started this in the first place, but if I can find the right color I'll be all done. Ah, I think this might be it... AAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH! So I ask: What’s going on under the hood of Excel on this one? Do you think there’s something hard coded to check for that particular hex color value and display “visited” colors only if you choose that particular shade of blue? Or maybe it detects the “default” link color and activates “visited” mode then. Dave Engberg, our CTO, insists that style garbage collection is responsible - basically Excel realizes the back-to-where-you-started nature of my color changing operations and optimizes them right out of existence. I wonder if any of the Microsoft bloggers knows the real story here. Anyone? Scoble? Anyway, I think the source of this bug might have some interesting architecture implications. I told you this post was geeky.

World Technology Digest 1 – Big and small

There’s an infinite number (well, I counted six before getting distracted) of on-line sources for gadget and technology news. How are you supposed to piece together all the information without being overwhelmed? How can you see the big picture? In this irregular new feature of Vastly Important Notes, I’ll pull together disparate technology trends into a cohesive vision of the future. I wouldn’t be a pundit otherwise.

Without further ado:

Miniaturization is a passing fad. I have proof. I forgot to snap this myself the last time I was in Tokyo, but the photo above is a picture of the world’s largest cell phone. Notice the antenna.

It’s so big, you have to stand inside it. Thanks to Anne Sullivan for taking the picture.

These cell phone booths are a great idea, but they will never succeed in the U.S. until we have an appropriate technical means to pay for the calls. Some say the answer is micropayments, but that may prove too complicated.  Luckily, Gizmodo reports that Toshiba, Hitachi and other Japanese manufactures are quickly ramping up the production of giant quarters:

You might recall that IBM invented giant quarters in the late nineties, but the Japanese are really pushing the envelope. It’s hard to be precise, but assuming that those reference hard drives are the same size, the Toshiba quarter (right) looks at least 33% bigger than the IBM quarter (left), and it probably costs less as well.

IBM is rumored to have a secret research program underway to engineer something even better than giant quarters, but I’m not sure that they’ve thought this through all the way.  Once again, the hard drive is shown for scale:

Giant cell phones? Check. Giant quarters? Check. Everything is adding up so far, but how do these really cool and tiny Sony Ericsson remote control Bluetooth cars (reported by Jonathan Schwartz) fit into the grand scheme of things?

Think of them as a pilot program; if an old fashioned pocked-sized cell phone can pump out enough Bluetooth to control one of these little cars, imagine what the walk-in type can control.  Defensetech might have the answer:

Of course, remote control robot attack helicopters will cost more than giant quarters to operate.  That’s why I predict that we’ll see someone develop novelty giant sized million dollar bills sometime soon.

So there you have it.  Invest in big wallets and leave it to World Technology Digest to keep connecting the dots.

[Nonsense blogging is a surprisingly good way to unwind from a week of staring at contracts.  Note to the Peppercoin guys: just kidding, your solution is really much more elegant than the giant quarters.]

First Hero of IT

I just found out that I'm supposed to get an actual physical trophy for the InfoWorld award I wrote about last month.  I hope it looks like this.  If not, the InfoWorld editors are free to borrow my design for next year's model; he's the original “IT Hero”, you know. 

You might have to work out licensing issues with Hasbro.

[Preempting some comments: Yes, I own one of these robots.  No, it cannot pick up a cup of coffee.]

Vastly important origins

Marketing Sherpa has published a brief case study on the hows and whys behind your humble narrator’s fine Internet publication.  This is the first article ever written that’s entirely about this blog.  I’m naturally very pleased and looking forward to seeing a second story so I can proclaim an important trend and maybe issue a press release.

It’s all true, except for the bit about SpoofStick only taking a few hours to program.  It took a few hours to hash out the details, but programming was a longer and not-altogether painless process.

First ISLAND inhabitants

Mark has taken ISLAND, my proposed rating system for deceptive software, and measured four popular software downloads: WinZip, the Google Toolbar, Yahoo! Messenger and AOL Instant Messenger.  The results are interesting.

Looks like I’ll have to recalibrate my prediction that “a fairly clean piece of shareware would come in at 94.”  Ouch.

Deceptive Software ISLAND

Last week, the Google Blog started soliciting comments on Google’s “Proposal to help fight deceptive Internet software.” The proposal is directed against spyware, adware and other annoying and/or dangerous practices often found in “free” programs. Google’s recommendations consist of basic standards of notification and behavior that vendors ought to implement when distributing software over the internet. I wholeheartedly agree.

I’d like to propose a rating system to help users identify dirty software.  It works like this:

Each program is given a score of “0” to “5” in six categories of annoying or deceptive practices.  A score of “0” in any category means that the program does not engage in the practice at all, a score of “1” indicates fairly benign activity, while “5” connotes significant perfidy.  To help you remember the six categories, I consulted the Internet Anagram Server and realized that they spell ISLAND.  Here are the six categories along with what installers would say in an honest world:

In the Walls
This software installs uninvited guests which will scurry around your system's innards to be only occasionally glimpsed when a program crashes or you move a window suddenly out of the way.
(1 = Installs a discreet shortcut for a helpful utility or company catalog in the main software's program menu.  5 = Installs multiple, unrelated programs that hook into the registry, run in the background, and are difficult to uninstall.)

Spy
This program watches your actions and sends them back to the mother ship.  It's just our way of looking out for you.
(1 = Actions directly related to software operations are anonymized, kept in aggregate form only and never shared with third parties.  5 = Wide ranging data, including personal information, is collected, linked to your identity and sold to third parties.)

Limited
We've removed some features from this free version of the software, so you won't get to where you want to go without buying the full version.  Don't think about this until you've already put in half the driving time.
(1 = Some advanced features, which only power-users would need have been eliminated.  5 = Fundamental features, such as the ability to save your work, are missing.)

Advertising
This software will display advertisements on your screen.  It may be "free", but you'll pay with your eyeballs and your attention span.
(1 = Displays a single, small, not-animated ad as part of the program UI.
5 = Pops up ads disguised to look like error messages in new windows all over the place with no indication of what's causing them.)

Nag
This free software will periodically nag you to spend money on the full commercial version.  If you were a good person, you'd send us money.
(1 = Discreet button in the UI that accepts a voluntary donation.  5 = Modal dialog box with an increasing delay that demands payment before you can continue with the program, eventually totally disabling  all use.)

All Your Default Are Belong To Us
We know that you've been too busy to get around to changing your homepage,  media player and download manager settings.  We'll take care of that for you.  You're welcome!
(1 = Program makes itself the default viewer for only the type of file its primarily meant to handle.  5 = Any settings that can be changed to make you see more of the vendor's products, will be changed.)

After scoring each category, the total points are added up, multiplied by three and subtracted from 100.  So the best possible score is 100 and a program that commits egregious acts in all ISLAND categories will score a 10.

For example, SpoofStick, which doesn’t have any ISLAND misfeatures, scores 100.

I’d guess that a fairly clean piece of shareware would come in at 94, and scores below 82 are pretty lousy.  Now all we need is for somebody to rate every single piece of Internet software and establish a trusted registry. 

Who's got free time next weekend?

[My friend Igor Rivilis recently wrote about his experience with software annoyances here.  I think there’s plenty of great free software out there, but the bad stuff seems to be getting out of hand.]

 

I have an educated family

My brother Mark has just graduated from Columbia.  My pride in his accomplishment is not at all lessened by the observation that the university seems to have merely cut-n-pasted his name into nonsense baby-talk stolen from a blogger.com template.

(Sigh, and the whole page in ALL CAPS to boot.  What Would Tufte Say?)

Thanks for the new look!

I've been bemoaning my lack of design skills for a while now, so when Allahpundit - arguably the blogoshpere's most celebrated image wrangler - offered to help spiffy up Vastly Important Notes, I didn't ask too many questions.

I'm very fond of the new design.  How about you?

Wireless Access Pointless

Mark Ayzenshtat has written about his adventures leeching wireless internet connectivity while driving through the pre-apocalyptic landscape of suburban California.  I'm not sure if this is a good or bad thing.

Setting up Wireless Access Point (WAP) security is pretty cumbersome and the results are brittle.  Wireless devices randomly stop working and need to have their encryption keys re-entered.  What's worse, different manufacturers seem to use different passphrase hashing algorithms, so you pretty much always wind up manually typing in hex strings.  To make the process extra-tragic, some confused product designers have tried to "add security" to the process by making the GUI key entry boxes display only blanks (like most password fields) and/or disabling cut-n-paste functionality.  This guarantees that you'll have to type in a long string of numbers and letters several times, and still never be exactly sure of why your WiFi doodad isn't working.  Whenever I see such design, I am tempted to violence.

Not only is securing a wireless LAN difficult for most mortals, but there's very little motivation to actually make the attempt.  You probably won't notice the bandwidth drain of someone leeching from you, and virus and worms are best combated at the firewall and PC level.  You and your neighbor might actually be better off sharing the same access point and not having two separately encrypted networks fighting for the radio spectrum. 

When something is both difficult and unrewarding, the masses will eschew it.  That’s why most people don't read the fine print on medical forms and why they don't secure their wireless networks.  My own 802.11b access point recently gave up the ghost host, and I haven’t bothered to replace it because I can usually see three or four unprotected wireless networks just sitting in my living room.

Of course, if you keep your wireless network unsecured, you never know who might get on it.  That’s a little disconcerting, but the physical network has always been a weak security link because it’s hard to know who’s listening in; and that goes double for wireless.  You need to secure each computer and the important data regardless of whether you turn on encryption on your WAP or not.

Who suffers from this furtive air sharing?  I suppose the WAP manufacturers would sell more hardware if everyone had to buy their own access point, but that doesn’t seem like a good enough reason.  After all, the pump lobby doesn’t get to force all of us to dig our own water wells.  Internet Service Providers (ISPs) suffer some economic damage, because they typically charge a flat monthly fee for unlimited data usage and freeloaders, err, cause more load.  For free.  ISPs can try switching to a metered rate, but that approach hasn’t worked well in the U.S. market.  A couple of years ago most service providers solved this problem by restricting access to just one or two specific computers registered to each account.  That cost too much money in tech support calls when stymied customers tried to hook up new computers, so the practice has been mostly dropped.  Either way, economic damage to the ISPs is a business issue, not a security problem.  The companies should figure out how to fairly charge for their services, not lecture consumers on sloppy prevention.  There are enough real security issues vying for consumer attention as is.

I’m looking forward to the day where I can reliably get wireless data service everywhere, without having to build my own private piece of infrastructure.  A crisper understanding of who we’re trying to protect, better adherence to standards and some smart new technology will get us there.  A chicken in every pot, not a mini broadcast tower under every desk.

Mmmmmmm, potted chicken.

[Brant Chamberlain wins the impromptu, "Quick, i need a geeky euphemism for a piece of hardware dying" office contest.  His first suggestion was even funnier but, alas, not suitable for general audiences.]

SpoofStick 1.0 is here

[Update June 04: If you came directly to this page from Brian’s Buzz, Brian Livingston’s newsletter, welcome!  Please see my quick reply to Brian’s comments here.  SpoofStick now has its own category where you can see all the latest news and coverage.  If you feel like browsing my other articles, here’s the front page.]

The general release version (1.0) of SpoofStick is now available for download for both Internet Explorer and Firefox.  The 1.0 version includes a standardized UI across both platforms and a much smaller installer for the IE version. 

Many thanks to the over three thousand of you who tried out the beta versions, to the dozens that gave useful feedback, and to the handful of bottom-phishers that harvested the "spoofstick" email address and clogged up my mailbox with pr0n and important information about my eBay account.  This last category of people, in particular, reminds me of why we do this.

Thanks also to the bloggers and journalists – amateur and professional – who helped spread the world.  I'm especially gratified to see that some of them have screenshots of SpoofStick running on their browsers.  It's always good to see proof that your software actually installs.

Here’s some of what the web had to say:

Jon Udell -  InfoWorld (screenshot, great write-up and first external mention of SpoofStick!)
Chris Lindquist - CIO.com(nice article, and the title makes SpoofStick sound downright superheroic)
Adam Gaffin - NetworkWorldFusion
Mark Ayzenshtat - Marked for Dearth (also did the programming)
Asa Dotzler - Adot's Notblog* (Asa drives big traffic)
Under The Sun (first Bible quote associated with SpoofStick)
Tara Calishan - ResearchBuzz (helped debug the press release)
Robin Bloor - Bloor Research (SpoofStick made him switch to Firefox from IE)
Nick Codignotto - Primordial Ooze (screenshot)
Mozdev extension room
Mozilla News
Chris Walken - talkaboutshareware.com (I'm pretending it's Christopher Walken)
inetinfo (with phish stick joke!)
John Ludwig - a little ludwig goes a long way
ExecTechNews
beaglebot - linkfilter.net
kayodeok
[expletive deleted]happens

Of course, nothing can top the comment from Carol Baraoudi that I wrote about on May 3rd.

Download SpoofStick 1.0 for Microsoft Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox here.

Quick aside

(Dear ResearchBuzz, Thanks for pointing out the error in our press release.  We’ll fix it right up.  Also, may we steal your privacy policy?  Faithfully Yours, Phil.) 

I get unexpected visitors

A couple of years ago my Chief Financial Officer and  I found ourselves quite unintentionally stranded at 9773 feet on top of the Schilthorn mountain in Switzerland after the last cable car had descended for the evening.  The resulting five hour walk (him) and crawl (me) back to civilization contained many a humbling experience.  A lifetime flat-city dweller, I simply had no appreciation of the otherworldliness of high places until I found myself stuck on a mostly vertical plane, holding on to a stunted tree, being suspiciously eyed by a bearded goat.

I was reminded of this tonight when I checked the traffic graph for my blog.

Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit.com linked to the second part of the post on my recent travels and observations about airline security, and in one sentence managed to drive over 1,100 visitors to this site in just a few hours.  That’s a lot of influence.  If the U.S. government is still unsure about the best organization to receive our June 30th transfer of authority in Iraq, perhaps we should consider Mr. Reynolds for the job.  He’d certainly be efficient at reading through the daily ministry reports.

Many of the readers who came here from Instapundit left insightful comments.  I thought I’d answer some of them here:

Nick points out that the hijacking risk is still real for cargo planes and that armed pilots would help for both types of flights.  I tentatively, but not wholeheartedly, agree.  Opposition to arming pilots seems to come in three flavors (1) placing a gun in the cockpit makes it more likely that that gun can be used by a terrorist, (2) pilots do not have adequate training/background checks to be trusted with a gun, and (3) pilots should focus on safely flying the airplane – especially in an emergency – not on fighting terrorists.

The first objection is fair – and hard to get around.  Training and procedures will help, but ultimately it’s a tradeoff.  I don’t honestly know if we’re better of with a controlled gun or no gun onboard.  I’m leaning toward controlled gun.  The solution to the second objection is easy: more training, better checks. 

The third objection seems to stem from an action-movie view of a lone pilot in hand to hand combat with an assailant, with pauses in punching for just long enough to right the controls.  This may actually be close to the truth on both flight 93 and EgyptAir 900, but neither of those flights had a secure cockpit door.  I think the “shoot vs. fly” procedures for armed pilots would be pretty straightforward:  If there’s no terrorist smashing through the cockpit door, fly the plane.  If there is a terrorist smashing through the cockpit door, shoot the terrorist, then fly the plane.  Also, the vast majority of flights will have at least one co-pilot and autopilot.

Roosevelt, TomK and Dave wrote about the threat of shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, otherwise known as MANPADS.  I’ve written about MANPADS here and here.  The gist: we should invest in technology to limit the risk from existing, unsophisticated, designs and mandate smart “kill-switches” for new, much more lethal designs produced by the U.S. and cooperative allies.

Researcher pointed out that “the metal detector with gain cranked way up would pick up the metal wires and metal detonator components necessary for a hidden bomb?”  True, but I wouldn’t put any of that stuff through the metal detector.  Even the shoe-bomber got around that, and he’s not the swiftest Taliban on the monkey bars, if you know what I mean.  Also, as Stef comments, metal detector tolerances are pretty much random.

Finally, Toren says, “The overwhelming and useless airport security is here to stay, because of the very simple reason that government jobs never go away.”

I’ve finally met someone more cynical than myself.  It’s an honor to make your acquaintance, sir.

Holy attempting to swallow a co-equal branch of government, Batman!

Allan from DemSEC has written about a bill introduced by Congressman Ron Lewis in the U.S. House of Representatives which would allow Congress to ignore certain rulings of the Supreme Court.

The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a judgment of the United States Supreme Court--

(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the enactment of this Act; and

(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the constitutionality of an Act of Congress.

The bill is called the "Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004" and, though lacking a teeth-gnashingly obnoxious name like some other recent legislative emanations, is still worthy of criticism.  If this bill passes, I recommend the quick issuance of an Executive Order declaring that the President can dismiss both Congress and the Supreme Court, but only if he really, really wants to.

Actually Congress already has the power to overturn unpopular Supreme Court decisions – it’s called a Constitutional amendment – although I hear there’s more paperwork involved and someone has to phone the states.  Anyway, a Constitutional amendment is the only way this act could stick, since the Supreme Court would presumably strike it down the very first time the bill was invoked.  Of course, such a slap-down would itself satisfy both of CAJAA’s triggering conditions.  The resulting attempt at recursive self-defense would be fun to watch but unlikely to succeed.  It’d be like using a magic lamp to wish for more wishes.  Everybody knows you can’t do that; the precedent goes all the way back to “Aladdin v. Genie.”

Besides the ability to amend the constitution, Congress has already been dealt another valuable card in the Checks & Balances game:  If Congress is really concerned about “activist judges” getting on the court, all it has to do is not approve any.  Make those nominees squirm!  It takes a lot less than two-thirds majority in both houses to scuttle a judicial appointment.  Makes for good C-SPAN as well.

Congress could also try not passing blatantly unconstitutional laws in the first place. 

As an added bonus, the preceding three methods work just as well against the lower federal and state courts – something completely unaddressed in Congressman Lewis’ effort. 

I’m not making any judgments on the broader “activist judges” issue because, (1) I can kind of see both sides of the argument, and (2) it’s irrelevant to the merits of this bill.  All I’m saying is that looking for an end-run (is that a valid sports analogy? I’m never sure.) around the past 200 years of the foundations of American democratic governance is a curious way to show your respect for tradition.  Mr. Lewis may have legitimate concerns about the modern role of the judicial branch.  Certainly the press release explaining the bill taps into a serious and ongoing debate.  Still, Congress already has ways to balance the influence of the courts.  Congress should use them.

[Dahlia Lithwick criticizes the bill, as does Eugene Volokh.  Stephen Bainbridge offers a defense.]

Google as muse

If I ever run out of ideas to write about (unlikely, time is the scarcer commodity), all I have to do is look at the search words people used to find my site.  This is also a good way to measure how well my posts are satisfying the world’s random information needs.  I think of it as an impromptu “reader’s request” mail bag, with an opportunity to fill gaps in my reporting.

Let’s see.  Two people searched for, "visitors interested in strengthening america".  Check, I wrote about that particular version of the VISA act here.

One person searched for, "golf boxers" funny.  Yup, golf boxers are funny.  That’s why I wrote about them in a strange little rant.  Although I originally used another clothing item which my PR instincts made me tone down.

Another accidental reader wanted to know, why is medicine important?  That’s a good question, um, Timmy.  Medicine is important because it keeps many people healthy - healthy enough to become grandparents.  Before Google, grandparents were the most efficient method of information storage and retrieval.  So a hundred years ago (in the age of “client/server”) you couldn’t have gotten your question answered without medicine.  Also medicine is important because it helps medical school graduates pay off their student loans.

Lastly, someone sat in front of a Google search box and typed in: explain why the internet is important  to many businesses and discuss brie.  I probably shouldn’t do this, since it looks like someone is trying to cheat on their school assignment (third year at BU, if memory serves), but here goes:

The Internet is important to many businesses because it gives them a way to advertise their product, which, in the case of artisan brie makers is a delicious mold-ripened whole-milk cheese with a whitish rind and a soft, yellow center.  Also, the Internet can help businesses keep a watchful eye on their competitors.  Like those artless philistines in Wisconsin.

I guess with this domain name, comes a certain responsibility.  Want to know why other stuff is important?  Just search for it, stumble on to Vastly Important Notes and wait a month or two for me to remember to check my referrer logs.  Google is a muse as well as a beacon.

New Disclaimer

I’ve updated my disclaimer a bit:

DISCLAIMER:

Security and terrorism are vital subjects, and I realize that some people may find my tone inappropriately snarky at times.  Humor is an important part of how I understand the world, and it’s difficult for me to be coherent without occasionally trying for a laugh.  I mean no disrespect.

This is a personal journal.  My employers do not endorse or necessarily agree with my opinions.  At best they think I'm occasionally funny.

For now, all content on this site is © 2004 by Phil Libin.  I’ll look into alternate copyright structures in the near future and may change the scheme.  Suggestions welcome.

Now that I’ve set high expectations for humor, allow me to live down to it.

Blog related program activities 3

“Vastly Important Notes” has reached a milestone of sorts.  There are now more comments than posts – even discounting Au Pair spam.  This feels vaguely satisfying in some irrational way.  Next stop, Journalistic Power Level 3!

My brother, Mark Ayzenshtat, has come forward as the author of the notorious Vastly Important Nuts parody.  The savage reign of terror that I’ve imposed at the office in a (apparently mistaken) attempt to smoke out the perpetrators will now be rescinded.  My apologies to the wrongly accused.

Everything on this site has now been moved over to www.vastlyimportant.com.  If you’re still using the old URL (whose name shall not be spoken lest Google indexes it again), please update your Bookmarks… or Favorites…or “My Places on the Internet”.  Some of you have noticed that you can’t get here if you leave the “www” off of the URL.  I’ve got trouble tickets open with my registrar and my blog host, but both claim that it’s an unsolvable problem.  I asked my IT guy but he just mumbled something about “flying monkeys.”  Not giving up yet.

I'm a friggin' squirrel

I wouldn’t have thought that enough people read this site to have to worry about becoming the victim of squirrelly mockery, but here we are.  The really hurtful part is that it’s so much funnier than my original source material.  I’ll redouble my efforts.

Comment Spam

The good news is that someone is reading my blog; the bad news is that it’s an automated spam bot.  I’d left the blog unsupervised while tending to real life business for the past few days and came back to find a heaping pile of spam in my comments section.  I suppose it’s inevitable that every spot on the Internet which could contain a misspelled ad for hair replacement serum will contain a misspelled ad for hair replacement serum.  Or 10,000 such ads.  Has this formulation become a named law yet?  It seems to be the bastard offspring of Mr. Murphy and Mr. Moore? 

I’ve manually deleted most of the spam, but that could quickly become an unmanageable process.  If anyone has ideas about how do deal with comment spam, please let me know.  Perhaps the spam bot can suggest a nice Au Pair service or herbal Viagra pill instead.

Make me a logo, get $500

It may be too late for me to strive for personal comeliness, but that doesn’t mean my blog has to look dull as well.  I’d like to commission some branding work from the Internet community.  Here’s the deal:

I’d like a 150 x 150 pixel logo for use on this website and possible print applications.  The logo should be direct, memorable and iconic.  Like me.  I’d also like an appropriately sized banner graphic for the top of the site.  The banner should include the words “Vastly Important Notes”.  All artwork has to be original and submitted to me by email.  If I select your work, you must transfer all intellectual property to me and I’ll pay you $500 via Paypal or personal check.  If I don’t select your work, I won’t use it anywhere and you may retain all ownership.  If I don’t receive anything I really like, I won’t select anything.  This offer is void if it’s illegal for some strange reason wherever you live; consider moving.

Oh, and I’ve already heard “*poof* you’re a logo”, in response to the title of this post.  Please send artwork or funnier jokes only.

Nothing new here

It turns out that my Google Superpowers idea had been previously described by Glenn Fleishman.  It’s hard to come up with an original idea on the internet, but I take solace in the knowledge that my own entry was longer and more convoluted – thus demonstrating less respect for my reader(s)’ blog-surfing time.  Customer service is what “Vastly Important Notes” is all about.

In an effort to ensure that even this admission of non-originality isn’t derivative of someone’s past work, I’d like to end with my favorite string of bytes from random.org:

dc 2f 09 c5 7b 00 8d 3d 42 67 00 22 a8 71 eb 30 64 b6 de 2d f3 89 bc 2b f2 8d 3d fe 6d 6c 1b e4

Thank you.

Help my brother change his name

My younger brother, Mark Ayzenshtat, is about to graduate from Columbia University and wants to change his last name before plunging into the real world.  He thinks his name is overly long and oddly spelled and has set up a blog to solicit name ideas.  If you help him choose his new name, you’ll be able to wring a favor out of him later on in life.  Or maybe I’m thinking of leprechauns again.  Anyway, I’ve already suggested all of the scatological, juvenilely prurient and post-ironic names, so don’t bother with those.

A geek by any other name

Freedom to Tinker laments the devolution of the word “hacker.”  It used to refer to a “very skilled programmer”, then “someone who breaks into computer systems” and now just about anyone the writer wants to frown upon.  The conclusion is that the word is no longer very useful and should be phased out of media use.

I am not completely free from guilt in the demise of this fine word.  Growing up in programming circles, “hacker” always had a strong positive connotation, and when I talk to technical friends we use the word almost exclusively in this way.  However, when talking to investors, customers or media, I often fall into the more common negative meaning.  I feel like I’m betraying my roots somehow, buy my roots don’t write the big checks and so I muddle by in shame.

In the ninetees, there was an attempt to get the bad guys reclassified as “crackers.”  This picked up some momentum and there was even an alt.crackers Usenet group, but it eventually got overrun by the great “Saltine vs. Ritz” debate, and linguistic credibility faded.  For anyone interested in the subject, I recommend the seminal book.

Still, precision is important in my line of work, so from now on I resolve to be more careful in my choice of words when talking about computer criminals.  “Intruder,” is an adequate word for someone who breaks into computer systems.  “Pirate” is fine for copyright thieves.  “Jammer” might work for denial of service attackers.  “Worm writing loser,” pretty much rounds out the rest of the bad-guy taxonomy.

Now we just need a name for “good hackers.”  A non-stupid name.  Luckily, I never need to talk to my customers about the good guys, so this can wait.

Blog related program activities 2

Now that the late unpleasantness of the dotcom bubble is a few years past, the random permutations of all two and three dictionary word domain names that had been registered by foresightful cybersquatters have more or less expired and are once again available for cheap registration.  Henceforth, the new address of this site shall be: www.vastlyimportant.com.  The old address will continue to work for an undefined time interval, at which point it may suddenly disappear without warning.  Such are the ineffable mysteries of DNS. 

Also, enjoy our new, more confidence-inspiring, color scheme and template. 

Lastly, Freedom to Tinker is a good read.  It’s about “your freedom to understand, discuss, repair, and modify the technological devices you own.”  I own many technological devices which, in exercising my freedom to understand them, have been modified completely beyond repair.

Blog related program activities

I've been on the lookout for a good, frequently updated, digest of security publications, advisories and blogs.  I found one: http://www.infosecdaily.net/ .

DISCLAIMER

This is a personal journal.  My employers do not endorse or necessarily agree with my opinions.  At best they think I'm occasionally funny.