In a move which appears to reverse its previous approach based on Microsoft’s file formats, the Australian Government’s central IT decision-making agency appears to have decided that it will standardise its office documents on the Open Document Format going forward. . . .ODF is an Open Document Format, originally developed by Sun Microsystems for the Open Office suite of programs.
Sheridan added: “Support for ODF is available from a wide range of office productivity suites across a variety of operating system platforms, in both open-source and proprietary implementations, allowing agencies a great deal of flexibility in selecting a product which conforms to the COE Policy standard. Standardising on a format supported by a wide range of office suites provides for the greatest possible degree of interoperability without mandating the use of a specific product, as well as providing the best basis for reliable interchange of information between agencies deploying differing office productivity suites.”
Australian Govt Drops Microsoft Office Standard, Opts for ODF
The Delimiter reports:
How Does a Password Hack Work?
A fairly well-detailed article at Ars Technica on the "Anatomy of a Hack" shows how hackers go about the process of cracking supposedly secure passwords.
In March, readers followed along as Nate Anderson, Ars deputy editor and a self-admitted newbie to password cracking, downloaded a list of more than 16,000 cryptographically hashed passcodes. Within a few hours, he deciphered almost half of them. The moral of the story: if a reporter with zero training in the ancient art of password cracking can achieve such results, imagine what more seasoned attackers can do.The strength and speed of this attack is not surprising however, since the passwords were encrypted with the MD5 algorithm, which is widely considered to be cryptographically broken. The first flaws were found in the algorithm in the 1990's, and many more followed over the course of the last ten years. So the question is: are a lot of websites still using broken encryption schemes? And if so, how many? And which ones?
Imagine no more. We asked three cracking experts to attack the same list Anderson targeted and recount the results . . . Even the least successful cracker of our trio—who used the least amount of hardware, devoted only one hour, used a tiny word list, and conducted an interview throughout the process—was able to decipher 62 percent of the passwords. Our top cracker snagged 90 percent of them.
US Entertainment Industry Continues Its Descent into Global Criminal Mafia
Security hysterics are among the greatest threats to our collective and individual security. These are the types who say we have to sacrifice liberty for freedom, or safety for security. Of course, they don't always put it quite so succinctly, but this, in effect, is what their position boils down to, whether it is the FBI, a corporate lobby or a group of "concerned citizens." From Boing Boing:
The hilariously named "Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property" has finally released its report, an 84-page tome that's pretty bonkers. . . . The report proposes that software would be loaded on computers that would somehow figure out if you were a pirate, and if you were, it would lock your computer up and take all your files hostage until you call the police and confess your crime. This is the mechanism that crooks use when they deploy ransomware.
All of the Above: the FBI Continues Its Push for Insecure Network Communications
Tech Cruch asks: "Is the FBI Dumb, Evil, or Just Incompetent?" Do we really have to choose here? These attributes are not mutually exclusive. The only correct answer to this question is: ALL OF THE ABOVE. Excerpt:
A government task force is preparing legislation that would pressure companies such as Facebook and Google to enable law enforcement officials to intercept online communications as they occur,” according to the Washington Post, by fining them increasing sums until they build government-accessible back doors into their systems. . . .The federal government wants us to give up security in the name of security.
the FBI would only be able to wiretap suspects who are either too dumb to use encryption — in which case they ought to be easy enough to catch without wiretaps — or who think they have nothing to hide. Meanwhile, they’d be setting a terrible precedent for other, more draconian governments. Critics say “We’ll look a lot more like China than America after this” … but the Obama administration, which not coincidentally appears to hate whistleblowers above all else, still seems poised to support this initiative. But wait, it gets worse. In order to claim this empty chalice, the powers that be will require a surveillance system that could be abused by the very kind of people it’s supposed to be used against. Could, and almost certainly would . . .
Facebook Syndrome: Hate It or Leave It
It is not going to be long before young people begin migrating away from Facebook in droves, if they aren't already. From Slate:
A new report released this week from the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that Facebook remains the leading social network among American teenagers. It’s also the most reviled. While some teenagers interviewed by Pew claimed they “enjoyed using it,” the majority complained of “an increasing adult presence, high-pressure or otherwise negative social interactions (‘drama’), or feeling overwhelmed by others who share too much.”
In other words, Facebook—as any adult with a profile knows—feels a lot like high school. “I think Facebook can be fun, but also it's drama central,” one 14-year-old girl said. “On Facebook, people imply things and say things, even just by a ‘like,’ that they wouldn't say in real life." Said another, “It's so competitive to get the most likes [on a Facebook picture]. It's like your social position.” Ninety-four percent of American teenagers maintain a Facebook profile, but that doesn’t mean they have to like it. “Honestly,” one 15-year-old girl told Pew, “I'm on it constantly but I hate it so much.” [Emphasis added.]Perhaps it is time to start up Facebookers anonymous.
Irony Alert: Google CEO Warns that Real World Privacy is Threatened by Online Activity
It is unclear whether these two Google executives are even aware of the irony here. From Wired:
As younger and younger generations continue to give away their data and musings online, there is a real and present danger of their virtual identity usurping their actual identity in a damaging way. This was the warning put to the audience at Google's Big Tent event by executive chairman Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen of Google Ideas."As you age, more and more of your digital identity is determined by others and that indelible record is something new generations will live with for the rest of their lives," said Schmidt . . .
"Kids are coming online and saying things that will follow them round for rest of lives," said Cohen, "faster than the physical maturation process. Parents should talk to them about privacy years before the birds and the bees" . . .
Washington Post Pretends Legislative Process Is Not Dominated by Special Interests
The United States federal government is today a wholly owned subsidiary of a handful of powerful corporations. These corporations own our so-called "elected representatives" and write our laws. Things do not have to be this way, but unfortunately, barring a popular insurrection, things are very unlikely to change anytime in the near future. From the Washington Post:
Robert Goodlatte (R-Va.), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has vowed to conduct a comprehensive review of our nation’s copyright laws to determine whether they are “still working in a digital age.” That’s a long overdue task. But there’s a danger that the process will be dominated by a handful of special interest groups that have long been reflexively hostile to technological progress [emphasis added].There's a danger that the process will be dominated by a handful of special interest groups? What planet is this author from? It is a veritable certainty that any such process in the US Congress is dominated by a handful of special interest groups. Pretending otherwise is certainly not helpful.
Last year’s defeat of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) caused industry groups to intensify their lobbying efforts. And they haven’t been subtle about it. In the wake of the SOPA defeat, Motion Picture Association of America chairman Christopher Dodd warned legislators: “Don’t ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don’t pay any attention to me when my job is at stake.” . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)