Slashdot Mirror


Will Your CD Player Tell on You?

An anonymous reader writes "Ever feel like not being a marketing statistic? Well just by playing certain store-bought compact discs in your home or office computer, your new music disc may be transmitting your listening habits in real time to the respective record company...." Charming. Read on for more... Anonymous Continues: "A company by the name of Bandlink is providing technology to record companies that allows a cd played in a personal computer to contact their server and relate statistics such as what track you're listening to and when you're listening to them. This information is then compiled into customizable reports that allow the record company to develop "User Profiles". There are benefits listed for the consumer such as cd-specific chatrooms, concert information, etc but the question remains: What's your price for privacy? The only indication that the cd you're purchasing is Bandlink "enabled/disabled" is a small logo on the packaging. There is no mention of a opt in/opt out agreement when the cd is inserted on the website and none was displayed in a personal demonstration.

Favorite quote from their website: "Virtually any information you want to know about your fan or the quality of your release can be obtained.""

438 of 693 comments (clear)

  1. What sort of idiot? by Trusty+Penfold · · Score: 5, Funny


    What sort of idiot has their firewall configured to let their CD player send packets out?

    1. Re:What sort of idiot? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Average Idiot.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:What sort of idiot? by BlackGriffen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The kind who uses a CDDB, or who doesn't have a firewall.

      BlackGriffen

    3. Re:What sort of idiot? by AirLace · · Score: 2

      The kind of idiot who doesn't know how to use the iptables scripting interface? If you have to tailor your firewall for every kind of program, there's probably something wrong with the programs you choose to run.

      If you can't trust the authors of your programs to some extent, then data that's dear to you is bound to slip out of your network sooner or later.

    4. Re:What sort of idiot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      What sort of idiot has their firewall configured to let their CD player send packets out?


      And how do you configure your firewall to stop your CD player from sending packets out? For all you know it could be using HTTP. Do you have to configure your firewall to allow you to browse every website you go to? I suppose you mean those toy host-based ones that say some app is trying to use the Internet. Those are EASY to a skilled programmer to bypass. I will not mention any more so idiot programmers don't get any ideas on how to do it.

    5. Re:What sort of idiot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      a) CDDB is now evil

      b) CDDB has a known IP, which can be allowed.

    6. Re:What sort of idiot? by rant-mode-on · · Score: 4, Informative
      • And how do you configure your firewall to stop your CD player from sending packets out?

      Whilst that's something that iptables/chains just can't cope with (sadly) I have Norton Internet Firewall, for my remaining Windows PC, which is application based. ie, you can accept/deny any connection for each application. Its a great facility, one which I wish was available on Linux. There's nothing like knowing which applications are spying on you...

      Of course, NIF is too complicated for your average Windows user, but ZoneAlarm has similar facilities, and is much easier to get to grips with.

      Gawd, never thought that I'd be promoting a windows app...
    7. Re:What sort of idiot? by hitzroth · · Score: 5, Funny

      Idiots aren't average. That's why they're idiots.

      --
      In mathematics, one does not understand things, one merely gets used to them.
      --VonNeumann
    8. Re:What sort of idiot? by orthogonal · · Score: 2

      And how do you configure your firewall to stop your CD player from sending packets out

      Well, only the HTTP proxy is allowed to call out to port 80 (amd it's only allowed port 80, 8080, and 8100).

      If another program wants out, I have to allow it.

      One minor problem is that, as I'm running Win2K, the proxy's address is stored in the registry, and some programs know how to read this.

      But I still have to allow any program to contact the proxy, as even localhost to localhost connections are disallowed by default.

    9. Re:What sort of idiot? by BlackGriffen · · Score: 2, Informative

      "a) CDDB is now evil [slashdot.org]"

      Even freedb? http://www.freedb.org/

      "b) CDDB has a known IP, which can be allowed."

      Good point.

      BlackGriffen

    10. Re:What sort of idiot? by windex · · Score: 4, Informative

      grsecurity let's you limit network access to specific uid/gid's. You could in effect make programs setgid 'network' if you want them to be able to access the network and blanket deny the rest of the lot.

    11. Re:What sort of idiot? by soulsteal · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, the average median person is an Idiot. What scares me is that 49% of the population is dumber than that.

    12. Re:What sort of idiot? by Tingler · · Score: 5, Funny

      I guess you haven't been to a mall lately.

    13. Re:What sort of idiot? by SomeGuyFromCA · · Score: 1

      I have Norton Internet Firewall, for my remaining Windows PC, which is application based. ie, you can accept/deny any connection for each application.

      I would never trust a firewall that lives on the same machine as the hostile app would be on. Double that for a Windows machine.
      --
      if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
    14. Re:What sort of idiot? by AsparagusChallenge · · Score: 1

      Not exactly the 49%. If I remember correctly, between 22-24% are average, around 38% are under average and 38% are over average on a normal distribution. That's from the back of my head, it's probably a bit off.

    15. Re:What sort of idiot? by Cokelee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The same damn person that is running iMesh, or KaZaA. Both of which are INFINITELY worse about privacy.

    16. Re:What sort of idiot? by HughsOnFirst · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just after my 5 unused mod points expire, a variation on the "in Soviet Russia" riff that is actually funny.

    17. Re:What sort of idiot? by denisdekat · · Score: 3, Informative

      maybe you should download zone alarm, it's good for those who don't know too much about securing stuff ...

    18. Re:What sort of idiot? by shaitand · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd suggest that a very large chunk of those who find slashdot interesting enough to read are above average at the least. First they read, this alone indicates they are probably above the low set as average. Second they are interested in technological innovations, science, physics, mathmatical puzzles, computer programming, and free speech. True there are those who just hang around to see what the newest mp3 player is. But for the most part there is a reason that the opinions you see on slashdot tend to differ from what you see mainstream, mainstream is in very large part those average and below average intelligences at work.

    19. Re:What sort of idiot? by FuegoFuerte · · Score: 2

      Idiots aren't average. That's why they're idiots.

      How wrong you are. More accurate would be: "Average people are idiots. That's why they're average."

    20. Re:What sort of idiot? by hansroy · · Score: 1

      The average idiot doesn't even have a firewall.

    21. Re:What sort of idiot? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Check out Guarddog - it's a GUI (kde) firewall management program that is application/goal based.

      A rather fine piece of software. I should use it :)

    22. Re:What sort of idiot? by sg_oneill · · Score: 2

      Yeah, or you could say that 49.99999999999999999999% of all people are below the exact average(or is it median or mode or floogle?). It really depends which way you cock your head when you look at it.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    23. Re:What sort of idiot? by TheLink · · Score: 4, Funny

      Still, it seems a very large chunk can't read but can post :).

      --
    24. Re:What sort of idiot? by weave · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I don't see how zone alarm can stop spy packets that go through http via IE via a COM object call. Any little proggie can grab a page such as "http://spysite/stats?uid=xxxxxxx&cd=nnnnnnnnn&tra ck=n" and then discard the results. You'd never know about it and your zone alarm will not stop it unless you stop all traffic from IE and use a different browser. (probably not a bad idea...)

      A com object call requires the target program (like IE) to be running and if it's not, will launch it. It's like a remote-control of the external app and hence I believe that app (IE in this case) would be the one grabbing the page and returning the results. It's not like a library call. The process should be identified as IE to zone alarm (and hence a good guy).

      If I'm wrong, I'd love for someone who knows how COM works to tell me. But I'm betting I'm right...

    25. Re:What sort of idiot? by MikeDX · · Score: 1

      I will not mention any more so idiot programmers don't get any ideas on how to do it.

      What sort of idiot programmers? :)

    26. Re:What sort of idiot? by Khazunga · · Score: 2

      Worse than that, there's a whole slew of "good" programs in ZoneAlarms view. Check this article on Infoworld.

      --
      If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
    27. Re:What sort of idiot? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      they lower what the average finals out at, but they still don't drop the numbers down as low as the average human being.

    28. Re:What sort of idiot? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      ok to those who disagree with me. It's not fair to make fun of the trolls. They suffer from a real disease. OPD (Excessive Post Disorder) and in some cases GPD (goatse.cx post disorder) they can't help but post, even if they have nothing to say!

    29. Re:What sort of idiot? by parking_god · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I use Opera as my primary browser but leave IE as the default program for HTML files. I also set ZoneAlarm to query when IE tries to go outside the box. That way, when a com object call tries to start IE, ZA asks me if I want to let it out. Most of the time, I tell it no.

      My question is, do all those frustrated calls get queued up somewhere, just waiting for me to let IE hit the net so they can all go tell on me?

      --pg

      --
      Brandishing Dangerous Logic
    30. Re:What sort of idiot? by Imperator · · Score: 2

      On Win32, ZoneAlarm has a number of features I haven't seen in any other Windows firewall package. The chief among these is the ability to restrict access by programs. Most firewalls would let your CD player send out packets on tcp/80 without thinking about it. ZoneAlarm will let you decide whether this is normal behavior (e.g. WinAmp minibrowser) or something undesirable (like sending out your credit card numbers to Bandlink).

      I know about firewalls. I know about network security. But on my personal Win32 boot, where I don't trust all the code I run, I use ZoneAlarm as my firewall of choice. The OpenBSD gateway will catch the incoming packets on tcp/31337, but it won't do a damn bit of good against spyware.

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    31. Re:What sort of idiot? by JCCyC · · Score: 2

      Whoa! Even better, take a look at the "owner" module help:

      OWNER match v1.2.7a options:
      [!] --uid-owner userid Match local uid
      [!] --gid-owner groupid Match local gid
      [!] --pid-owner processid Match local pid
      [!] --sid-owner sessionid Match local sid
      [!] --cmd-owner name Match local command name

      Let it be known that I applied patch-o-matic through CVS, so your average neighborhood distribution-provided iptables may not have these options.

    32. Re:What sort of idiot? by jridley · · Score: 2

      Tiny Personal Firewall does this as well and is free and pretty easy to use.

    33. Re:What sort of idiot? by Cinematique · · Score: 2

      Perhaps some need a better grasp of reality. Just because someone does not know the ins and outs of the computer world does not automatically make them an idiot by default. Ignorant, sure. Idiot, hardly.

      I could make the statement, "All poor spellers are idiots." Is it true? Some of said "idiots" are simply apathetic sentence architects who harbor quite a wealth of technical information in that noggin of theirs... they just don't see a point in typing to 100% perfection. So does that make them: (a) an idiot (b) a lazy ass - or - (c) ignorant?

      Probably "C," although to a lesser extent, "B" as well.

    34. Re:What sort of idiot? by JoeBuck · · Score: 2

      Application-based firewalls give a false sense of security. This is because apps can simply ask IE to send their data through the firewall for them. Things like ZoneAlarm and Norton's firewall only catch the previous generation of spyware, those apps that directly access the network.

    35. RE: What sort of idiot? by chinstrap · · Score: 1

      Do you ask this question out of idiocy or stupidity? Either way take a moment out of you day to look up 'idiot' & 'stupid' in the dictionary and maybe you will begin to understand some of the responses you have received. 99.9% of us are "idiots" about something at any given moment as defined by the following in Webster's: "One who is void of understanding" or "an unlearned person." While your in the "I's", may I suggest you look up ignorance? Then in the future you will know you are not the idiot when you ask such a question. English lesson over.

    36. Re:What sort of idiot? by racermd · · Score: 1

      That is *so* true. Give this man a cigar!

      I've done tech support for a number of years, and I can easily differentiate between those who are "idiots" and those who just don't get it. Specifically, the idiots are the ones who just don't get it and often don't try. Make an effort, and nobody is going to give you too much of a hard time. Don't even try, and you run yourself right out of the support queue. Truncated example:

      Them: "I have an error message with only an 'OK' button. Do I press 'OK'?"
      Me: "Yes, as there is no other option to get rid of that dialog box."
      Them: "Now I have *another* of these error messages with only an 'OK' button. Do I press 'OK'?"
      Me: "No. Pack your computer up and bring it back to the store. Tell them it's broken with a PEBKAC error ID 10-T. They'll be happy to assist you in finding a suitable replacement ."

      --
      My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
    37. Re:What sort of idiot? by Rambo,+John+J. · · Score: 1

      Still, it seems a very large chunk can't read but can post :).

      And there is a large number of us that can read, but aren't allowed to post :)

    38. Re:What sort of idiot? by rant-mode-on · · Score: 1

      This is an interesting point, which I was unaware of. Thankfully, being a paranoid Linux user, I actually have IE blocked from accessing the internet. It screws windows update, but I've always thought that was an optimistic title. Your point is still valid, and interesting though.

    39. Re:What sort of idiot? by TheLink · · Score: 2

      If it's about posting to Slashdot, they could use proxies.

      My ISP's range of IPs were blocked before - I could moderate but not post directly. Could post via proxies.

      --
    40. Re:What sort of idiot? by GotSanity · · Score: 1

      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups. Besides . . . next we will have our telephones tracking what types of telemarketers we hang up on the most.

    41. Re:What sort of idiot? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      actually yes, if you look even though they are on opposite sides of the keyboard, they are EXACTLY opposite respective to the home row.

    42. Re:What sort of idiot? by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      Hitzroth, you don't drive, do you? I know damn well you don't ride a motorcycle.

  2. My desktop is my property by Sean80 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You know what? I think the law should start considering my computer desktop and my network connection as my personal property. Want to display a popup on my desktop? Sure, $5 a time. Want to send some bits on my behalf? Sure, $1 million a time. If you try and steal advertising space on my desktop, or steal some of the bits that I own, then you go to jail.

    1. Re:My desktop is my property by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2
      Do you really own your desktop or do you only own a right to use it! Go read the EULA that you never agreed to?



      Shit is getting weirder and weirder today in the computing world. Did you also know that Windows is considered a piece of integrated hardware that can not be removed from the pc at sale time? This was Microsoft's legal argument on why all pc's must come only with his os. Bill Gates came up with all these weird idea's of ownership thanks to his years at Harvard law school. Do I own my couch or just a right to sit on it? My guess is the RIAA thinks this service is an integrated part of the cd and therefor has a right to broadcast your listening habits since you only purchased a right to listen to it. All your cd's belong to them. right?

      Now every company in existence is doing these strange esorotic things with ownership to there own advantage. I deffinetely do not like this trend.

    2. Re:My desktop is my property by garcia · · Score: 1, Redundant

      yup. Don't install the software...

      Don't agree to their EULA and you are fine.

    3. Re:My desktop is my property by Jon-o · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, you DO control your computer, and can and SHOULD be careful about what you run on it. In this case, simply turning off the ridiculously stupid autorun when you put in CDs is enough to foil whatever the cd does when you insert it.

      Same goes with javascript and ad popups - just turn them off! It's your computer!

      Sure, there are conveniences that you lose in doing that, but many conveniences come with security risks and other annoyances. It's just like the security problems with Outlook autorunning attachments and scripts all the time - it's a ridiculous way of writing software, and never should have been included, and anyone with a clue either turns it all off or gets a different mail program. For some reason, people don't see javascript and autorun and similar things in the same way. I do.

    4. Re:My desktop is my property by General+Wesc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've never had anyone else put a pop-up on my desktop. I have to run the javascript/ECMAscript that opens the window. I have to install the program to access the website, I have to (implicitely or explicitely) grant it permission to run Javascripts/ECMAscripts, I have to tell the program to visit the website with the script.

      You're trying to fine people for writing a script. Sounds like the DMCA to me. (Note: the DMCA is a bad thing.)

    5. Re:My desktop is my property by MisterMook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hell, do one better: Don't buy the CD with the stupid privacy idiocy on it, wait a day, and download the songs you want from P2P networks. The sooner the major music publishers go under, the sooner one of them will be forced to figure out a workable economic model that doesn't rely on legal strongarming and gives customers what they want instead of what the major labels think they SHOULD want.

    6. Re:My desktop is my property by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

      What EULA? I've never owned, used or run a personal copy of Windows. I have to use Windows-based stuff at work but since there's nothing personal of mine on it I couldn't care less about EULAs - strictly someone else's problem.

    7. Re:My desktop is my property by cioxx · · Score: 5, Funny
      Don't agree to their EULA and you are fine.

      That's what I do. I usually click "YES" in the EULA popup and install the program, but deep down inside I don't agree with it.
    8. Re:My desktop is my property by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      That's really going to hold up in court: "I signed the contract, but deep down inside I didn't agree." Of course, people on /. say EULAs won't hold up in court either.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    9. Re:My desktop is my property by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      How do you disable autoplay under Windows XP? I can't find the option for it, I remember seeing it under Windows 98, but now I can't find it.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    10. Re:My desktop is my property by program21 · · Score: 2

      2 words - NetBIOS popups.

      --
      This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
    11. Re:My desktop is my property by nyseal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I disagree. The previous poster stated that it's HIS computer. If he wants autorun on, then so be it. That does'nt make it right for a third party to send or receive any information from that PC. Turning things on & off on your computer does not absolve others from hacking or viewing your system. Whether or not it's stupid to do so is irrelevent. I know it's knaive, but hey....whatever.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    12. Re:My desktop is my property by MulluskO · · Score: 2

      Another solution is to install firewall proucts like ZoneAlam which will actually prompt you before giving applications access to the internet.

      --

      Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
    13. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And he dropped out.

      Lucky his dad had some cash, so he could weasel the bajillions out of us.

      Imagine if he went to MIT and got under RMS's thall, then none of this might have happened...

    14. Re:My desktop is my property by chipwich · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But you're missing the point... As technology becomes ever more integrated with our lives, the option of "just turn it off" becomes increasingly less possible. No, not from a technical perspective, but from a *social* perspective.

      Sure, you could turn your cell phone off when you're not making a call so that telco's and gov can't triangulate your position, but do you?

      Sure, you could pay for everything in cash instead of credit to avoid an electronic trail, but do you?

      Sure, you could wait 10 minutes at the bridge instead of using a new electronic toll payment system, but do you?

      Smart agents and networked technologies like this erode our privacy. But do we get enough in return?

      How much would you sell *your* privacy for?

    15. Re:My desktop is my property by Jon-o · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Turning on autorun is like telling the the third party that they now have your permission to send or receive information. If I run software on my computer, it's because I trust it enough to do so.

      Now, if I don't know that it's running, or it shouldn't be running, (because it's doing so via a security hole, for example) it's a different story. But in this case, the computer owner has configured the computer to run software on CDs when they are inserted, and then he has inserted a CD.

      Of course, debates on whether autorun should be ennabled by default are welcome - I know which side I would be on. But calling this "hacking your system" isn't very accurate.

    16. Re:My desktop is my property by mobets · · Score: 1

      Go here
      and download Tweak UI. One of the many options in there is turning auto run off for individual drive letters. Unfortunatly, this also turns off auto updating, so it won't recognize changing the CD.

      --

      It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
    17. Re:My desktop is my property by mobets · · Score: 1

      I didn't read the article, but this could apply in the future. What if this got integrated into most CD software. You previously gave it access to get CDDB information and now you bought one of these CD's. None of the firewall software would do anything because it is a repeat program. It would mean that there was one more program that you would have to set to prompt you every single time instead of just aproving it.

      --

      It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
    18. Re:My desktop is my property by pbryan · · Score: 2

      If he wants autorun on, then so be it. That does'nt make it right for a third party to send or receive any information from that PC.

      If leaves autorun enabled, then inserts a CD with unknown content, he probably shouldn't be surprised if his computer stops obeying his commands and decides to obey someone else.

      This is one of the most compelling cases for open source software. A license, however implcit, should not include the right of the manufacturer to decide what the user's system can, cannot, will, will not do.

      I *dare* you to read the Microsoft Windows XP End User License Agreement. I *double* dare you to actually agree to its terms. I think people would be seriously surprised if they actually read the agreements they are engaging in by opening cellophane wrappers and inserting CDs into drives.

      --

      My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

    19. Re:My desktop is my property by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      Of course, people on /. say EULAs won't hold up in court either.

      Of course, it's pretty difficult to enforce a contract that, in order to be agreed to, I've already had to;

      1. Purchase the software
      2. Bring it home
      3. Unwrap it
      4. Install it

      Seems to me, by the time I've purchased the software I've already violated their agreement by using it without agreeing to their license.

      There are these funny laws surrounding "contracts" in most of the civillized world, you know.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    20. Re:My desktop is my property by minion · · Score: 1

      I believe his main point to this was that its HIS equipment that HE bought, thus he should not be forced to watch/listen to advertisments.

      You can receive broadcast TV for FREE, but it does come with a price: Advertisements. You can BUY HBO and Showtime, and they don't.

      You buy your computer, you don't BORROW it, and thats the problem. The advertisements should be limited to KIOSKS and public terminals if they want to follow the same rules as television and traditional media outlets.

      --

      -- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
    21. Re:My desktop is my property by Sentry21 · · Score: 2

      Chances are, if the government wanted to track you down, they'd just pay someone to follow you. If they wanted to know what you were buying, they'd subpoena the companies that your tail said you went to.

      I don't know why all Americans I meet are so certain that the government is out to get each and every one of them. Get real guys, even if all government was as citizen-hostile as you seem to think, your lives are far more pathetically uninteresting than they would ever care to waste their time on. Get over yourselves.

      --Dan

    22. Re:My desktop is my property by CheeseCow · · Score: 1

      It is not about the auto-run feature, when someone places a pop-up ad on my desktop, they are trespassing, and I should be able to sue them.

      Perhaps the new Windows version with "trustworthy computing" will solve some of this, and perhaps make it harder to do bad stuff, but make your computer 100% secure, because noone else can do bad stuff either. :P

    23. Re:My desktop is my property by MikeDX · · Score: 1
      Of course, it's pretty difficult to enforce a contract that, in order to be agreed to, I've already had to;

      1. Purchase the software
      2. Bring it home
      3. Unwrap it
      4. Install it
      5. Imagine a beowulf cluster of it.
      6. Think about what it would do in soviet russia
      7. ?????
      8. Profit!
    24. Re:My desktop is my property by The+Analog+Kid · · Score: 1

      IANAL but, what if your a minor legally any contract you sign is VOID. Your parents would have to sign it, but what if the Operating Systems registered to the minor? So you get away scott-free or what if you use a script to just skip the EULA all together, then you can honestly(like a pollitican) say you never say the EULA.

    25. Re:My desktop is my property by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2

      That's what I do. I usually click "YES" in the EULA popup and install the program, but deep down inside I don't agree with it.

      So long as you don't read it, there's no consideration, and without consideration there can be no contract.

      There is also no signature, nor proof of acceptance, therefore again, no contract.

      HELP WANTED AD: Person in Germany to click EULA agreements for me.

    26. Re:My desktop is my property by ryanvm · · Score: 2

      How much would you sell *your* privacy for?

      Oooh 50 bucks!!! That was an offer, right?

    27. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1


      I don't know why all Americans I meet are so certain that the government is out to get each and every one of them.


      Whew! I'm glad to know that everything is A-OK then. Me and all my comrads should stop complaining or report to a re-education camp.

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    28. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1


      when someone places a pop-up ad on my desktop, they are trespassing, and I should be able to sue them.

      Perhaps the new Windows version with "trustworthy computing" will solve some of this


      Ha ha ha! Funny joke!

      You're kidding right?

      The whole purpose of Trustworthy Computing is to ensure that they can pull this kind of crap and that you cannot do anything about it. That is, that your computer obeys their commands, not your commands. Whether they actually exploit it in this way just depends on how nice do they want to be today?

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    29. Re:My desktop is my property by Mawbid · · Score: 1
      I feel differently. To me, turning autorun on (err, I mean not turning it off) means that you give the disc permission to ...well, autorun. That's it. So, ordinarily, whether something happens in response to you double clicking an executable on a cd or in response to you inserting a cd while autorun is enabled has no bearing on whether that something is allowed.

      However, in the case of audio CD's (or things being marketed as such), something subtly different is going on. The thing that happens when you insert the CD under autorun is not the same thing that happens when you normally use audio CD's. What happens is unexpected. Therefore, you couldn't have authorised it to happen. The user's expectations matter.

      In the real world, of course, we turn off autorun anyway, but I think it's needlessly submissive to say that anything that happens when we insert a CD under autorun happens with our permission.

      --
      Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
    30. Re:My desktop is my property by CheeseCow · · Score: 1

      Umph. I've always seen things from the bright side, that's my problem. Now I am wondering what trustworthy computing will really mean, but if it would give me more control, I'd be glad.

      And yes, I expect them to be nice. I don't buy things from people who aren't nice. And that's what all the not-nice people want, all the time.

    31. Re:My desktop is my property by nyseal · · Score: 1

      Oops, I forgot.....people are not allowed to make mistakes; especially on Slashdot.

      --
      [SIG] Remember Mattel handheld games?
    32. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1

      I believe his main point to this was that its HIS equipment that HE bought, thus he should not be forced to watch/listen to advertisments.

      One word: Palladium

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    33. Re:My desktop is my property by Kallahar · · Score: 2

      Well, why can't we do this? I run WebWasher to filter all my ads anyway, why not pair that to a paypal (or whatever, no flames please) link for an advertiser to get whitelisted? One-on-one payments wouldn't be practical, but maybe a clearinghouse that keeps track of who has paid for what?

      Most of the effort in ad blocking software has gone into simply blocking everything, maybe this is an opportunity to change that?

      Travis

    34. Re:My desktop is my property by DavidYaw · · Score: 1

      Sure, you could wait 10 minutes at the bridge instead of using a new electronic toll payment system, but do you?

      How much would you sell *your* privacy for?


      I would sell a PART of my privacy for $450 a year. With the electronic toll system on the New York State Thruway, one can enroll in a plan where the first 30 miles of each trip are free. The plan costs $80 per year, and 30 miles works out to about a dollar per trip. To work and back is ten trips a week, 52 weeks a year, plus other trips on the Thruway on evenings and weekends, is over 550 trips per year, therefore about $550 saved, less $80 enrollment fee, is ~$450.

      That said, I consider the loss of privacy to be minimal. Sure, NYS could use it to track speeders, but they don't (I've taken a ~80 mile trip in under an hour (speed limit is 65), and nothing happened.); and I have a feeling that if they did, that's when the privacy advocates would come out and put a stop to it VERY quickly.

    35. Re:My desktop is my property by EricWright · · Score: 1

      Lisa: Where'd you get five bucks? I want five bucks!
      Bart: I sold my soul to Milhouse.
      </simpsons>

      Sorry, couldn't resist.

    36. Re:My desktop is my property by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      I saw that, program CDs is not one of the options, it's music files, video files, mixed content, and music CDs, I have all of them disabled, but I still get auto-play on game CDs.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    37. Re:My desktop is my property by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Very true, I remember in another topic those two ideas were suggested and the idea of, if you aren't a minor, getting drunk and taping yourself signing the EULA because appearently contracted signed while drunk are also void.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    38. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1

      Now I am wondering what trustworthy computing will really mean, but if it would give me more control, I'd be glad.

      It will give Microsoft more control, not you.

      Starting at the boot loader. Your trusted hardware will not even execute a bootstrap unless it is digitally signed. Who will hold the private keys to do the signing? In order for the system to remain "trusted" the boot loader must be trusted. So the only boot laoders that will get signed are ones that Microsoft can trust to only load signed operating system kernels. So now the trust is extended to the kernel. Only a signed kernel can be booted. The only way you're going to get a kernel signed is if Microsoft can be sure that it is trusted to only do its master's bidding. (Otherwise all this trust business is moot.) You might be able to get an open source kernel signed (guess what, it'll cost some "nominal fee" to cover the soruce code audits) but only if the open OS is trusted not to run any untrusted code in privileged mode (i.e. kernel modules). So now the problem is that only signed kernel modules can be run. You're definitely not going to get any modules such as, say, sound drivers signed unless they are trusted to not to play any naughty bits from those mp3s downloaded by the evil pirates who are going to destroy the world economy. The os will execute unsigned applications, but won't allow them to use any "privileged" api's, such as playing sound or video. Trusted applications, that are signed, such as Windows Media Player, can use the privileged api's. Untrusted naughty applications, such as say, Winamp, will be limited in what they can do. You cannot tamper or patch trusted applications, because then the digital signature becomes invalid. So a trusted version of, say LookOut! (errr... I mean Outlook) could do nice things such as support automatically deleting e-mails. You could trust the system to only let the user read the message twice, or hold the message for 2 weeks, and then the message disappears without trace. I could trust the system to honor protection flags in data. If I copy protected content into the clipboard, it can only be pasted into a trusted application. The system provides the clipboard api. It will simply refuse to provide an untrusted application with the contents of the clipboard if the clipboard contents are flagged as the precious valuable property of a corporate copyright holder.

      Are you still so niave to believe that "trusted computing" is about giving YOU more control? (No disrespect intended.)

      And yes, I expect them to be nice. I don't buy things from people who aren't nice. And that's what all the not-nice people want, all the time.

      This is a nice niave view in an ideallistic world with a competitive market.

      Hello. Wake up. We have a single player with monopoly control of the computer industry. You have no choice. You buy a PC, it has Windows. Next, you buy a PC and its hardware will have Palladium to ensure it can only execute a trusted OS. It is already difficult today to NOT use Windows. Do you really think they want to even allow you to have any choice about whether you buy from them based on how nice they want to be today? Disney is not nice, and people just keep buying from them. There are other examples.

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
    39. Re:My desktop is my property by CheeseCow · · Score: 1

      You know, you are very un-optimistic about this. What I hope for is something that would make a scanned digital copy as good as a paper one. That would mean that we could save $$, not to mention the environment.

      And yes, I believe "Trustworhty computing" is good. But I do not believe it means more control to me. It means that I can create a digital document, and it will never have to be printed. We can have "Trusted archives" instead of paper copies. I beleive MS will do this, because there are a lot of money involved. I know my department will buy something like this.

      And I do think it would be like a "layer of security", and an OS such as Linux could still be run, the Palladium features would just be left out.

      But because of people yelling(like j00), and a lot of peoples distrust of MS, they won't dare to do something really bad.

      That's why I think this will be good. Perhaps even GNU/Linux can have Palladium, because *someone* will demand competition in the market.

    40. Re:My desktop is my property by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      "Sure, you could turn your cell phone off..." Hell, I don't even HAVE a cell phone. They wouldn't allow me to have one in my cell. What the hell good are they?

    41. Re:My desktop is my property by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1

      You know, you are very un-optimistic about this.

      I belive it is realistic.

      What I described is exactly what Palladium is. Whether you are optimistic or not is simply a matter of how nice you expect Microsoft to be. But handing over control of your computer is exactly what trusted computing is about -- this is a plain simple fact. The only optimism / pessimism is whether you expect them to play nice once they have total control.

      What I hope for is something that would make a scanned digital copy as good as a paper one.

      In exactly what way does this have anything to do with trusted computing?

      And yes, I believe "Trustworhty computing" is good.

      I disagree. It is bad because there is no reason for a corporation to control the world's computers. None of the things you mention justify this.

      [trusted computing] means that I can create a digital document, and it will never have to be printed. We can have "Trusted archives" instead of paper copies.

      Trusted computing doesn't mean this. Right now without having trusted computing from the hardware on up you can verify the authenticity of documents. Public key cryptography. Digital signatures. MD5 checksums. These are all tools to ensure that you have the right document. It is not necessary for me to have control of YOUR computer in order for you to be sure that you're reading a document I wrote without anyone having tampered with it. So again, this does not justify trusted computing.

      And I do think it would be like a "layer of security", and an OS such as Linux could still be run, the Palladium features would just be left out.

      Your 'layer of security' remark is totally vague. Please be specific as to what you mean. I believe it means only a layer of control over everyone's system and nothing else.

      Yes, Linux can still be run, but without any "trust", and therefore excluded from more and more each day. Taken to an extreme, there is no reason that Microsoft would have to allow Linux to even run at all. If the hardware will only boot trusted bootloaders, then only "trusted" bootloaders will run. Of course, Microsoft will claim that this is all open for anyone to participate. Anyone can pay some huge fee to get their bootlaoder signed, but this will in effect kill Linux. This all comes, ironically, down to trust. You trust Microsoft and I don't. I base my distrust on 20+ years of observation. I don't know what you base your trust on.

      But because of people yelling(like j00), and a lot of peoples distrust of MS, they won't dare to do something really bad.

      I'm not yelling, where do you get that idea?

      I definitely distrust MS, for good reason.

      Just because a lot of people are watching won't stop MS from playing nasty. It hever has before. Now that they've got the green light from the government, why would they suddenly start playing nice now? Microsoft seems friendly to their customers (except for the price gouging) because they are customers. Microsoft is hostile to competition. It is not enough for Microsoft to succeed. Everyone else must fail. That is the way they act.

      That's why I think this will be good. Perhaps even GNU/Linux can have Palladium, because *someone* will demand competition in the market.

      People can demand all they want. That doesn't mean squat. And if it is just *someone* then that really doesn't mean squat. Unless *most* people demand it, it is guaranteed that nothing will happen. Even if most people demand it provides no guarantee that anything will happen.

      I've tried to provide sound reason for what I believe, and facts about what trusted computing means. You don't seem to dispute that trusted computing means no control for you. It seems the only difference we are left with is that you trust Microsoft and believe they will do no wrong, and I think exactly the opposite.

      --
      The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
  3. And how is this different... by NetDanzr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...from all those players (including WinAmp) that analyze your CD and download the songlist for you? And this applies to 99% of retail CDs, not only those that are enabled by this technology.

    1. Re:And how is this different... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This is different becuase with WinAmp, you basically ask the software to retrieve the song name. If you don't want it to do that, you don't turn that feature on.

      What Bandlink cds will (supposedly) do is tell the company what your listening to behind your back.

    2. Re:And how is this different... by NetDanzr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, according to their Web site, you still have to agree to something (EULA, probably) before it istalls the tracking software...

    3. Re:And how is this different... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's very different. Downloading the track list for a given CD generally happens only once, doesn't involve contacting the record company, and doesn't reveal anything about you other than that your machine has the CD in question inserted at the moment.

      What we're looking at here is software that tells the record companies who you are, what your listening habits are like, etc. Essentially, there's a lot more information leaving your computer, and it may not be information that you want to reveal.

    4. Re:And how is this different... by Mr.Ned · · Score: 2

      WinAmp analyizes the CD and queries the CDDB to get the information about that CD like title, artist, track listing, etc. That's a far cry from sending your life habits to some meglomanic corporation.

      Check out http://www.freedb.org/

  4. Re:What sort of idiot?-Duh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "What sort of idiot has their firewall configured to let their CD player send packets out?"

    People who don't read Slashdot.

  5. maybe they'll discover something important by gasgesgos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    this may not be all bad.. "Virtually any information you want to know about your fan or the quality of your release can be obtained." maybe they'll finally realize that everyone knows that the quality of their releases is mostly TERRIBLE... and that most people buy cd's for more than 1 song... this may actually lead to entire CD's being quality once again...

    1. Re:maybe they'll discover something important by scenic · · Score: 2
      are you kidding? All CDs would become crap if they found this out!!! You're willing to pay ~$15 for both a CD with many hits or ~$15 for one hit. So, logically they can stretch out those hits over many purchases instead of just one. If you were a record company, which would you choose?

      Sujal

      --

      politics, food, music, life: FatMixx

    2. Re:maybe they'll discover something important by gasgesgos · · Score: 1

      you misunderstood my point, my point is that people like buying quality cd's... and if the quality of an entire CD can finally be seen by the music execs, they can see that compared to a CD's sales... and then maybe they'll realize that increased sales can be achieved by releasing good CD's, rather than overbloated singles that they call albums...

      cd 1 has low sales, and 2 songs being listened to...

      cd 2 has high sales, with many songs being listened to...

      cd 3 has low sales, with many songs being listened to...

      which would YOU choose to release?

      cd 1 can be categorized as a "one hit wonder"
      cd 2 can be categorized as a good, popular CD. This, in theory, would be the best result.
      cd 3 can be seen as a quality cd, but maybe it needs more promotion, or the band needs to tour.

      this would actually allow the music companies to see what people enjoy, and what they need to give people more of, i dont like the whole privacy invasion thing. the concept of this software is cool, as long as its kept anonymous and confidential.

    3. Re:maybe they'll discover something important by soupdevil · · Score: 1
      From thousands of hours in the studio, I can tell you it's harder to record a crap song than it is to record a hit.

      Musicians and producers agonize over crap songs, rewriting lyrics, trying different effects, trying to make them less crappy.

      In comparison, hit songs record themselves.

  6. DOD? by Squareball · · Score: 4, Funny

    So does this info go to the DOD to see if you're a terrorist? God help me if they know that I like Avril Lavigne!

    1. Re:DOD? by Squareball · · Score: 2

      Really? So you bought her album and have heard the songs that she wrote? She isn't Brittany Spears. She actually does write music and play music. She doesn't just dance around with big fake boobs for dirty old men like you.

    2. Re:DOD? by Bu5h · · Score: 1

      I realize this is off topic: http://www.recroommagazine.com/articles/avril.htm

    3. Re:DOD? by jabber01 · · Score: 1

      If you like Avril Lavigne, God help you in ANYONE knows.

      --

      The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
      What you do today will cost you a day of your life

    4. Re:DOD? by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      Damn, that IS scary! I'm still listening to old Cat Stevens stuff, and everybody knows where he wound up.

  7. I prefer Tiny Personal Firewall by Bonker · · Score: 5, Informative

    I use Tiny Personal Firewall 2.0 to stop this sort of crap under Windows. It'll block any application from 'reporting' back home via the internet. It's a pro at keeping apps like Real Player or guys like this from tattling. It's not open source, but the 2.0 version was freeware. I'm not sure about the 4.0 version.

    I strongly suspect that this won't even be an issue for most Linux users.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:I prefer Tiny Personal Firewall by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 1

      KERIO personal firewall is its new name. It kicks ass. The resource and cpu usage has gone down in recent versions.

      --

      ----
      Go canucks, habs, and sens!
    2. Re:I prefer Tiny Personal Firewall by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 2
      "I use Tiny Personal Firewall 2.0 [tinysoftware.com] to stop this sort of crap under Windows. It'll block any application from 'reporting' back home via the internet."

      Of course like a lot of spyware, it could use MSIE to do its dirty work via HTTP and use whatever proxy setting you have in place. If you have allowed MSIE to access the internet, then TPF (which I also run, btw) will not stop the spying.

    3. Re:I prefer Tiny Personal Firewall by somebaudy · · Score: 1

      I get a "404 Site tiny2 not found" error message.

      Zone Alarm exists in a freeware version and warns me when Real Player wants to communicate with the mother ship.

      --
      http://www.somebaudy.com
  8. Solutions... by Mwongozi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Buy a Mac? Use Linux?

    Uh... disable autoplay? Come on, not tricky, this one. :)

    1. Re:Solutions... by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well sure, I'm certain most of the /. crowd is fully capable of these things, plus firewall and proxy configuration to block the offending packets.

      The real problem here is the general public who doesn't know any better, and even worse - doesn't care.

      In itself, knowing what CD tracks you listen to is obviously not a serious threat as far as privacy invasion goes but...

      Knowing what CD tracks you listen to and when, what groceries you buy and when, and videos you rent and when, who you call and when, where you go and when, and the list goes on and on. The sum of these things is just a bit too much information for corporate america to be keeping detailed track of.

      Perhaps you know how to disable most of these tracking systems, do you really want these big corporations watching the every move of your grandmother - who unlike you, doesnt know any better?

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    2. Re:Solutions... by Chuqmystr · · Score: 1
      It's not tricky but it's getting quite tiresome for me. What ever happened to something being mine to use as I see fit once it's been bought and paid for? So what's next, I get a new refridgerator and wether I like it or not it's 'net enabled via a wireless tech and it reports back what I buy to whomever has elected themselves as the culminator of all marketing knowledge?

      I'm no conspiracy kook, but geeze, the invasiveness is getting far too out of hand. Five years ago I never had to screen my calls and in the mean time I've been quite carefull not to give up personal information leading to phone spam. I really don't look forward to snailmail spam offering me CD deals, oil changes, vacation offers, food coupons and other bullshit based on information gathered from my living habits with devices that are installed into and active in the products I buy reguardless of my desicion to share such data. And what if, just some day, some wierd gov't shit does go down that does allow my collected, against my wishes, "data" to be used in judicial matters? How do I know that some disgruntled and underpaid twit who could give a rats ass about me conveys properly their findings or just passes me off as something else so they can get their pay and go home? Rant over.

    3. Re:Solutions... by cranos · · Score: 2

      Simple solution - cut the cord. Unless of course its a wireless device, in which case all the nieghbourhood will know about the three month old coleslaw in the back.

    4. Re:Solutions... by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      Perhaps you know how to disable most of these tracking systems, do you really want these big corporations watching the every move of your grandmother - who unlike you, doesnt know any better?

      Yeah, my grandmother listens to a lot of gangsta rap. (I care about her oo much to let her use a PC anyway. It's good to be unpopular when spyware first chooses the popular.)

      As an aside, it only occurred to me recently that a simple credit card report could provide a wealth of information on not just purchases, and physical movements. Even without compiling multiple sources a significant detective trail can emerge, as we see on Law & Order each week and accept because it's being used against bad guys (note that the L&O intro presumes suspects guilty :).

      I've started using more cash ... just in case. Just b/c I'm paranoid...

    5. Re:Solutions... by DoraLives · · Score: 1

      Knowing what CD tracks you listen to and when, what groceries you buy and when, and videos you rent and when, who you call and when, where you go and when, and the list goes on and on. The sum of these things is just a bit too much information for corporate america to be keeping detailed track of.

      Every drop of rain can truthfully say, "I did not cause the flood."

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    6. Re:Solutions... by Chuqmystr · · Score: 1

      Exactly my point. Maybe one day most, or all, 'net access will be wireless. It may at least one day be ubiquitous enough for my scenario to take place and that would suck. So when we're all wired and most of what we buy is wired in some form or another just how do we go about thwarting the needless intrusions? It's one thing for those of us in the know but what of the unwashed masses? Before they catch on it'll be far too late to get the legal wheels into motion in any effective fashion. Think about it. If MS got away as they did do you think it will be very easy to take away from the big other corps what they snuck in under the wire? They've got lots more time and money than most of us and won't give up that sort of cash cow without some serious fighting. That's the sort of buffoonery I see in the near future. Anyway, it's all hypothetical and I'm just ranting from mere annoyance and from what I've seen done with tech advances by major corps over the past few years. I love the tech but hate in many cases what's being done with it by those who have the money to advance it. Nothing's free but I honestly feel that the balance between what we collectively give up and what we get in return is badly skewed towards what we must give up. Perhaps I'm wrong but common sense and current trends tell me otherwise. In the mean time, if I ever do get stuck with one of them thar hypothetical, newfangled, wireless 'net enabled refridgerators I'll just take to living from an ice chest and then stock the 'fridge with lots of stuff I'd never eat. Hmmm, I wonder if I can keep cleaning products and motor oil in there with no detrimental effects to the use of them? That should bake their noodles at least .00001% ;-) Or I could just peel the damn RF tags from the products that enable the 'fridge to do it's inventory. Y'know, the ones we're gonna have soon and that will probably have something like "DO NOT REMOVE UNDER PENALTY OF LAW" printed on them. I'll keep 'em with the mattress tag collection I've built up over the years.

    7. Re:Solutions... by archivis · · Score: 1

      I forgot suspicious, cheap, and posessed of an astounding level of poor taste.

      --
      In July O7, I got a mac pro. There's no punchline. Just endless joy and wonder.
    8. Re:Solutions... by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Knowing what CD tracks you listen to and when, what groceries you buy and when, and videos you rent and when, who you call and when, where you go and when, and the list goes on and on. The sum of these things is just a bit too much information for corporate america to be keeping detailed track of.

      I think there's an important point here that you missed. Corporate America is not a single entity, and each of these things is not added to a sum. Sure, Safeway knows what kind of food I buy, and Blockbuster knows what videos I rent*, but there's no way to corrolate my food purchasing habits with my video rental habits. Even if Safeway and Blockbuster were both owned by the same parent company, they don't use the same database.

      The other important point is, if the only thing this information is being used for is gathering statistics to help the companies market more effectively, I don't care. They're not invading my life.

      * Not really; public libraries are wonderful things.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    9. Re:Solutions... by Chuqmystr · · Score: 1

      I'm going to shove my Harbraces in a place that you don't want it. Damn the Brocholli, damn propper grammer (and spelling) and damn the Wright Brothers!

    10. Re:Solutions... by KjetilK · · Score: 2

      The real problem here is the general public who doesn't know any better, and even worse - doesn't care.

      Actually, I meet a lot of people who doesn't know any better, but they still feel they're being exploited.

      They tend to think that the whole IT and entertainment industry sucks, but that there really is no alternative, so they just bend over and take it in. To them, it is all just magic, ref, Arthur C. Clark, it is nothing that can be understood.

      They're starting to think that all of us who is working on this is a bunch of maniacs, but there's nothing they can do about it, so they get on with it.

      I think that what is going to happen, is that we get a huge counter-reaction, like what happened to the environmental stuff. The problem is that people will still only see the magic, they can't see what is good, and what was bad. So, instead of constructively use technology for the good of all mankind, they are going to throw everything out. Us included. Though, we warned them.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    11. Re:Solutions... by zummit · · Score: 1

      > Even if Safeway and Blockbuster were both owned by the same parent company, they don't use the same database.

      ... yet ...

    12. Re:Solutions... by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1
      Well sure, I'm certain most of the /. crowd is fully capable of these things, plus firewall and proxy configuration to block the offending packets.

      The real problem here is the general public who doesn't know any better, and even worse - doesn't care.

      Uh, if they don't care, then is isn't a problem for them, is it? This kind of customer tracking is only a problem if those who don't like it can't avoid it. You seem to think that you know best, and that anyone who doesn't agree is a poor fool, and needs to be protected.

      If the CD companies know what tracks get listened to more, then maybe they'll try to change what kinds of music they sell, so that more of it is 'good' music and people want to buy more.

      Knowing what CD tracks you listen to and when, what groceries you buy and when, and videos you rent and when, who you call and when, where you go and when, and the list goes on and on. The sum of these things is just a bit too much information for corporate america to be keeping detailed track of.
      Tell me, what harm comes from letting CD companies know which of their CDs you find worth listening to? What harm comes from the grocery store knowing what kinds of groceries people tent to buy together? You speak of 'corporate america' as a single entity. Why do you make this assumption? The members of the 'corporate america' you speak of spend much of their time trying to 'kill' eachother (put eachother out of business).

      do you really want these big corporations watching the every move of your grandmother
      There are two problems with this statement:
      1. You're exaggerating. Corporations don't watch people's every move, it wouldn't be practical. They try to collect usage data about whatever it is they're selling, so they can make their product more attractive.
      2. What matters isn't whether you want them watching your grandmother, it's whether your grandmother wants them watching your grandmother. Perhaps your grandmother has decided that giving out this information is harmless, or even beneficial.
      Tim
  9. Who runs an EXE they weren't expecting? by DDX_2002 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Yeah. One more reason why "autoplay" is unchecked on my machine.

    Is this USA only, or are these for sale in Canada or in Europe? Because if they are, Canada's PIPEDA and the EU DPD mean wake up and smell the lawsuits.

    --
    MHO. YMMV. Any resemblance between this post and real persons, or reality in general, was accidental.
    1. Re:Who runs an EXE they weren't expecting? by bahamat · · Score: 1

      Um, you do if you're running windows.

      Just one more reason why choosy moms choose Linux.

    2. Re:Who runs an EXE they weren't expecting? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      For the record i prefer linux. But yes you can turn off autoplay in windows and it is not difficult. There are plenty of legitimate weaknesses in windows, if going to bash it, stick with those.

    3. Re:Who runs an EXE they weren't expecting? by Duds · · Score: 1

      Certinally the "Friends" DVDs sold in europe have this.

      Or at least my copies did.

  10. Pointless by Absurd+Being · · Score: 1

    Seal the device in several layers of shielding metals. No data's getting out then. And nobody's going to steal your new, portable, 500lb cd player.

    --
    Karma: Excellent^(-t/Tau), Tau=Wittiness/Trollishness
    1. Re:Pointless by whiteranger99x · · Score: 2

      Seal the device in several layers of shielding metals. No data's getting out then. And nobody's going to steal your new, portable, 500lb cd player.

      Yeah, the next phase will consist of the RIAA hiring people to drive vans everywhere to pick up stray transmissions emitting from the headphone jack straight to your headphones ;)

      --
      Join the TWIT army now!
    2. Re:Pointless by Absurd+Being · · Score: 1

      That's what active defenses are for. A HARM will stop the RIAA. And remove a few of its members.

      --
      Karma: Excellent^(-t/Tau), Tau=Wittiness/Trollishness
    3. Re:Pointless by GimmeFuel · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that'll only take out a few radar operators, just a thorn in the side of the beast. What we really need is a small tactical nuclear weapon to use on RIAA HQ. You get the uranium, I'll google for the blueprints.

    4. Re:Pointless by Absurd+Being · · Score: 1

      I've just obtained a new pair of rollerskates, too.

      --
      Karma: Excellent^(-t/Tau), Tau=Wittiness/Trollishness
  11. This could be good... by whiteranger99x · · Score: 1

    Maybe the record companies will finally realize that there's more to music than the crap they force feed us, courtesy of radio, and MTV! :P

    Who knows, they might actually TRY to sign people with talent! LOL!

    --
    Join the TWIT army now!
  12. Not that it really matters by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

    to me, anyway; I gave up on the pre-recorded music somewhere back in the late 1980's. But I have to wonder what would iptables do with this? That could be, er, *interesting*

    --
    C|N>K
  13. Here's the real question... by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does it transmit data when you rip a CD?

    1. Re:Here's the real question... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      My guess is that it's just a program that's on a data track. Windows notes there's a data track, The autorun "feature" runs whatever it tells it to run, and *boom*.

      So no, it won't work if you rip it - after all, when you rip a CD, you just copy data and convert it to your format of choice, not run it.

      And believe me, sane people disable autorun in Windows. I know that helped my mental health a great deal. =)

    2. Re:Here's the real question... by theMightyE · · Score: 1
      To my (limited) understanding, this version doesn't, but it brings up an interesting question: Could a future version set itself up to auto-load at startup and quietly look for a case when an audio CD was in the drive and a ripping program was running? Could it then quietly also wait a few minutes and then search the local drives for new .mp3 files, and report back to home base? Mebbe I'm getting out into conspiracy theory land here, but when my 'puter starts sending info out to lawsuit-happy companies, I tend to get a bit worried. Besides, if I can't get paranoid on /., where can I get paranoid?

    3. Re:Here's the real question... by Muddle · · Score: 1

      Yes if you use the CDDB ability of your ripper if it has one.
      You are connecting to the Internet to download the song Titles and Author.
      Personally I let this through my Firewall as I'm not paranoid about using FreeCDDB.
      The time saved typing in all that data for proper ID3v1.1 tagging is a blessing.
      Your use of the internet and these types of features depends upon your personal level of paranoia, what is being sent or recieved etc.
      I know folks with spindles of illegal sofware who allow spyware info sent that give's me shivers and when asked they respond "I have nothing to hide." They act as if I had accused them of being a child beater not understanding that what they do can land them in jail for a lot longer than beating a child would.
      Creating Mp3's is not illegal yet and one should not be paranoid about it.
      I personally have a 20 Meg hard drive nearly full and a collection of CD's that no longer get scratched.
      I also have a sony Mp3 player in my vehicle and this hard drive is shared on my network so my wife can play the music from her computer if she wishes.
      Sharing those Cd's on the internet is illegal though and is something people should be paranoid about.
      Any application that sends personal info to a third party makes me paraniod and are either not used or blocked.
      One can use a packet sniffer to find these apps and block them with a firewall.
      The biggest problem with packet sniffers are the best of them are rather expensive.

  14. What if autorun is disabled? by AsmordeanX · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or better yet. Use Linux which doesn't understand autoplay 'features'. Personally, CDs stay in my PC just long enough to turn into MP3s. The CD is then retired to a dusty bookshelf.

    1. Re:What if autorun is disabled? by AsmordeanX · · Score: 1

      Worse comes to worse I just dump from the audio cable coming out the the back of my stereo. Sure it isn't digital and takes an hour to rip but I personally can't tell the difference.

  15. I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 5, Informative
    First of all, my earlier post was right: Only works on Windows-Compatable PCs. Second, the privacy risk here isn't all that great:

    Bandlink Support

    Bandlink is designed to be run simply by inserting the CD into a Windows Compatible PC. The first time you insert the CD you will need to agree to the Bandlink User License and download the remaining program files. Bandlink should do the rest from then on.

    As you can see, there's a consumer agreement component here. It's not an unimpeded, unstoppable invasion of privacy, like what TiVO was doing. You have to agree as well. In which case, if you don't really care about your privacy (and you like push content, which some people do) it might actually be seen as pretty cool.

    --
    Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    1. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by doormat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So what happens if I dont agree with their license? Do I not get to play the CD, or do they just not collect any information. Or do they use misleading language to trick the consusmer into hitting yes?

      --
      The Doormat

      If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    2. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Misleading language is possible. If you don't agree to their license, I find it difficult if not impossible that you couldn't play the CD. If it works in a consumer CD player, I'd be willing to bet that it'll work in your PC regardless of you saying yes or not to the software.

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    3. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by tswinzig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not an unimpeded, unstoppable invasion of privacy, like what TiVO was doing.

      TiVo sends aggregate information. How is that an invasion of privacy?

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    4. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by nukem1999 · · Score: 2

      Either way, how many users will just hit "yes" without even thinking about it, as most do with other software?

    5. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Inzite · · Score: 1

      The fact that there's any executable code on the CD at all is disturbing enough. Even on enhanced CDs, there's clear enough indication that the CD contains software. But on these, you have no warning, no sticker, no EULA displayed prior to popping the CD into your computer and running their software.

      Bandlink is betting that the average Joe won't care that software is being run on their computer, so long as by clicking "No" to the EULA, the software is never installed. On the other hand, I have no respect for the programmers at Bandlink, and don't trust their software to simply display an EULA, to be free of malicious code, or to avoid causing my CD-ROM to spray sparks, my hard drives to spin faster and faster til destruction, or my monitor to flash explicit Michael Jackson-esque kiddie porn before my sensitive eyes.

      God forbid Bandlink ever hires a disgruntled employee who feels like fucking over his parent company.

    6. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 1
      I (and many others) consider it an invasion of my privacy for information about myself to be collected or compiled without my express consent.

      Would you consider it an invasion of your privacy if a guy stood outside your house (on public property), made note of everbody who exited and entered, as well as times that they did so, compiled that information into an easily accessible format, and then sold it to the highest bidder? Or, for that matter, would you consider it an invasion of your privacy if your car recorded the speed you were traveling and then sent the information to law enforcement officials? Would you consider it an invasion of your privacy if your ISP intercepted and compiled a list of all the domains you vist, and then made the information public (for a fee?)

      All of those examples are just compiling and sending aggregate information...

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    7. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 1

      It's interesting, because as of a little while ago (this may have changed, I'm not a TiVO subscriber) you were't allowed to opt out. Besides, what we're talking about here is a slippery-slope argument. The real "idiots" are the ones who can't see that privacy, which is a very real value, is eroded by things such as this. Its good that we can opt out, which we can, but the point is that we have to be aware that these things are going on in order to opt out. The response was to say that such things are indeed an invasion of privacy. To deny that fact is somewhat foolish; see above.

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    8. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      Well, they could make the CD eject if you click no.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
    9. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by radish · · Score: 3, Informative

      No they are not. Do you even know what aggregate means?? The information gathered by Tivo DOES NOT identify you. It doesn't even contain "unnamed individuals". To use your first analogy, it's like some guy stood at the edge of my town and made notes of who drove in and out. And frankly, I don't care if someone wants to do that, it in NO WAY undermines my privacy. The Tivo data just says "XZY program was watched by 20% of users, of who 35% also watched ABC program". Big f***ing deal.

      Oh, and for the over paranoid tin-foil hat wearing brigade out there, one call to Tivo and you're off the list.

      God it's 3am and I'm responding to some privacy-nut FUD-spreading troll. I need a life.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    10. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Zebbers · · Score: 2

      thats not necessarily true. CDs can play in normal cd players and not cdroms all the time...thats the biggest issue with copyprotection...its the datatracks that are corrupted which only cdrom drives read.

    11. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Bilbo · · Score: 2
      The first time you insert the CD you will need to agree to the Bandlink User License ...

      OK... that's what they say now. However, who's to stop the next guy from implementing a small autorun app on your audio CD that is not so polite?

      --
      Your Servant, B. Baggins
    12. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Piquan · · Score: 2
      as of a little while ago (this may have changed, I'm not a TiVO subscriber) you were't allowed to opt out.
      Huh? You call them, and tell them you want to opt out, and it's done. What are you talking about?
    13. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 1

      Hmm... My neighbor owns a TiVO box, and six weeks ago she called and asked. Two weeks later she called and asked. A week later she called and asked. It hasn't stopped...

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    14. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by craig_au · · Score: 1

      Like people actually read these licences before clicking "I Agree"/"OK"?? 8-)

    15. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by shylock0 · · Score: 1
      Well, first of all... Your response feels a little like flamebait, but I'll clarify a few points:
      1) My neighbor, who has TiVO, called them six weeks ago and asked them to take her off their list, which includes a certain kind of push content (suggestions, which some people like, but which she found annoying -- because even as a mother of three, her viewing habits made it the TiVO box assume she was a lesbian). It didn't stop. Two weeks later, she called back. Still didn't stop. A week later, still going., so she called again. Last Monday she tried again; we'll see what happens...
      2) I'm not a privacy nut. I'm trying to make some extreme comparisons to prove a point. What TiVO did upset a number of people, and the point in an earlier post was relevant because the TiVO issue has been discussed in the past on /.

      Anyway, one of the issues with TiVO -- and the relevant issue in this forum -- was the use of the information acquired to push content. It's basically impossible that, since the info was being used for content push on a user-by-user basis, that it couldn't identify you. It must. Now, in that case, TiVO wasn't selling identified information -- and granted, doing so would probably be illegal without the consent of the user. Again, this was just to prove a point... I'm no privacy nut, but push content by its nature has to be user-linked.

      --
      Statistically speaking, there's a 99.998% chance that my IQ is higher than yours. Get over it.
    16. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by glindsey · · Score: 1

      Your comparison would be correct if TiVo actually did push content to systems. However, the Suggestions feature is done entirely locally within the TiVo software: it uses the Thumbs Up/Thumbs Down data recorded by the user, determines the types of shows that were voted upon, and tries to find similar shows that match the data. At no time is that information being sent across the network -- and the information being gathered is almost entirely voluntarily supplied by the user him/herself, with the exception being that the system assigns one "Thumbs Up" to anything that is recorded.

      Second of all, if she's finding suggestions annoying, there's no need to call TiVo about it; they can't do anything about it anyway. What she needs to do is to go into her preferences and tell the TiVo not to auto-record suggestions, and it won't. It'll still suggest things, but they'll be tucked away in their own little menu, away from those who may consider a TiVo the definitive judge of sexual preference.

      That all being said, I completely agree with your neighbor. TiVo's 2.x software does a horrible job with suggesting shows; at the moment, mine constantly thinks I watch Spanish-language soap operas. Supposedly the 3.x release is supposed to refine the process considerably.

      Yes, this post is starting to go off on a tangent, but I thought it important to note that your information is incorrect. That having been said, I completely agree with the underlying theme of your message. User-identifiable information gathered without the user's knowledge is a horrible invasion of privacy, and if TiVo really did gather that sort of information, you can bet I'd be letting them know how I feel about it.

    17. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your ignorance level is high, young one. Several issues here prove that you have no idea how tivo works, and you probably also have a small penis.

      1) Tivo does not include "a certain kind of push content", beside the guide data. "Suggestions" (or as you call it, "the lesbinator") are just algorithms that let the tivo pick content to record if it has idle space and time. Your fat whore friend cannot call a phone number to get that disabled. Instead, she goes into the tivo unit's preferences to disable that. But yeah, that probably takes 6 weeks to do too.

      2) Calling to remove yourself from opt out aggregate information is something done behind the scenes; no confirmation is shown on the tivo unit yourself. Don't worry, your closet dyke's secret is safe from the time she called 6 weeks ago.

      3) Yes, tivo upset a lot of people by collecting aggregate anonymous habits about its users. Those people are morons. What you probably don't realize is 90% of the web sites out there do the same thing, it's just you CAN'T opt out of them. "Okay, Anonymous User #1 went to this page, then this page then this page". Compare to: "Okay, Anonymous User #2 watched this show, then this show, then this show".

      4) Your misuse of "push content" shows that this conversation shouldn't have began in the first place.

      5) You are probably a virgin.

    18. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by leviramsey · · Score: 3, Interesting
      thats not necessarily true. CDs can play in normal cd players and not cdroms all the time...thats the biggest issue with copyprotection...its the datatracks that are corrupted which only cdrom drives read.

      Very true, but how the hell could you have the data tracks switch between unplayable and playable states based on whether you agree to an EULA?

    19. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by ucblockhead · · Score: 3, Informative
      No, you do get to play the CD just fine...you just don't get to use their "extra" featuers.

      This is a pretty typical "we'll give you personalized content in exchange for personal data" deal. Hardly new and alarming.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    20. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by *xpenguin* · · Score: 2

      Very true, but how the hell could you have the data tracks switch between unplayable and playable states based on whether you agree to an EULA?

      Some software decodes it?

    21. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by rufo · · Score: 2

      Re: TiVo recording Telemundo 24/7... two things:

      First, if you never watch any of the spanish channels, go into the settings menu into the "channels I recieve" box and turn them all off. Tivo won't ever record anything off those channels again. While you're at it, disable Home Shopping Network and anything of the like.

      Secondly, be *very* liberal with your thumbs up and down, especially with the latter. For most shows that you're neutral about, leave it at no thumbs. Unless you really, really, really like a show, leave it at one thumb up. Don't give a show thumbs down unless you don't like it. Keep in mind that generally speaking, you aren't rating the show, you're rating the category, the actors and director, etc. So if you generally like sci-fi, but hate Enterprise, don't give it a thumbs-down - leave it at no thumbs. Too many thumbs down across too many shows will "poison" the system and make the suggestions worthless. Following this advice, I've found it very much worth my while to browse the TiVo suggestions list every week or so - while not everything on there is stuff I would watch, there's quite a bit on there that I wind up recording.

      --
      My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.
    22. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      I (and many others) consider it an invasion of my privacy for information about myself to be collected or compiled without my express consent.

      So do I. However, TiVo does not do that. Please read about what they collect before spouting off.

      From their site FAQ: " TiVo does collect Anonymous Viewing Information; that is, information about viewing choices made while using your DVR, but that does not identify you as an individual or household. In other words, there is no personally identifiable information associated with the viewing information that could identify the viewing information as coming from you or your household. TiVo also collects Diagnostic Information from a small number of randomly sampled DVRs for quality control purposes. If you don't want even your Anonymous Viewing Information or Diagnostic Information used in any way, simply tell us by calling our toll free number (1-877-367-8486)."

      All of those examples are just compiling and sending aggregate information...

      No, they're not. The examples you gave tie the information to me personally. TiVo does not do that with the data they collect from your device. All they know is SOMEBODY WITH A TIVO took these actions listed here. They compile that information together with all the other TiVo's, and look at the data in aggregate.

      There is no invasion of privacy, because that would require them to be collecting PRIVATE DATA from you.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
    23. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by leviramsey · · Score: 2
      Some software decodes it?

      Possible. However, the only two solutions that I've seen to the problem of an insecure PC playing a CD are:

      • Messing with the error correction to cause the hardware to report erroneous errors. This has the advantage of leaving the disc playable in non-error-checking players (which most, outside of mobile players, CD-ROM readers, and DVD players are). In this case, since it's the *hardware* that does the error checking, there's no way to get around it with software (short, perhaps, of reprogramming the error detection code of the reader). Any attempt to access the disc, afaict, will result in a read error being returned, not data from the disc.
      • Encrypting the content on the CD and authenticating. This allows the use of software and (barring something like DeCSS) prevents any unauthenticated playing. The downside is that this is completely unplayable except on CD-ROM readers.

      Note that in my post, I specifically referred to "the data [sic] tracks" switching, implying a physical change in the medium (which is what the current anti-copy CDs do).

    24. Re:I read their site a little more closely... by Analysis+Paralysis · · Score: 2
      Despite the somewhat trollish nature of this AC post, there are a couple of points that should be made.

      TiVo *does* have the ability to "push" content (as demonstrated here) - it just has not done too much of it yet.

      As for the collection of "aggregate anonymous" viewing habits - without knowing exactly what data TiVo themselves have on their database, how can you be sure that data will *stay* anonymous? The data could be stored by unique system ID without violating their privacy policy (which simply excludes tying the data to a household's account number) which *at some point in the future* could be associated with the account id quite legally (with a change in the privacy policy).

  16. Other possibilities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The obvious possibility is information on copying being reported. I can see it now... "Customer A burnt 6 copies and ripped to MP3." And one assumes a burnt copy will also report back to the data leaches...

    1. Re:Other possibilities by DynamicBits · · Score: 1

      That is if you do a 1:1 copy. When I am copying one of my *music* CDs, I see no reason to copy the data track. I bough it for the music, not some lame flash applet. They don't need to wow me with quickly moving graphics; I already bought the CD.

  17. Moot point by pctainto · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can't wait to get this technology with a "copy-protected" cd that won't play in computers. Unless they would do it to try to get information from the people who break the copy protection by using a sharpie...

    --
    I think my principles are reachin' an all time low
  18. disable autorun? by ademko · · Score: 1

    Can't you just disable "auto-run" for audio CDs in Windows? But I guess most average users don't know or care enough to do that. Ohh well, why do you need privacy anyways, unless you've got something to hide, you criminal :)

  19. Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by eric434 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...if it can make your CD 'phone home' when playing it in a regular CD player (as mentioned in the article) that's not 'net connected!

    In any case, this is seriously scary. While I don't think most Slashdotites (being technically literate) will be affected, think of your mom, little sister or brother (if any), peers at school (if any) - all those people who click "OK" mindlessly whenever a dialog box pops up. It's THOSE people that this kind of stuff targets - because those people don't know better. The only way to stop it is to TELL THEM ABOUT IT. Get the word out. Post flyers. Put it in your sig. Whenever you fix someone's computer, tell them about the new 'spy' CDs while you're digging around inside their case or (more likely) plugging in their eithernet cable.

    I'm sure someone will come up with an anti-spy software for this soon, so give out as many copies (assuming the antispy software is freeware) as you can.

    Look how well it worked for CD copy protection, at least for the first wave. We can do this.

    --
    This .sig temporary until a better .sig can be constructed.
    1. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2
      What bugs me most about this is that most consumers will still be charged a %15 restocking fee after they find out about these spyware cd-players if they decide to return them!

      Why? Because %99 of all retailers want a profit no matter what. %15 is what retailers normally make per purchase. So if you buy these and see the EULA then you lose money if you decide not to use it.

      Either way most consumers will be pissed if they actually read the EULA but will put up with it just like they put up with WindowsXP and MS Media Player.

      Also you mentioned that CD copy protection was somehow defeated. Guess what? We lost! BMG admitted that all of there cd's will be copyprotected by this summer!. This pisses me off since I just bought a car stereo last summer and it can't play any copy protected cd's. My moby18 cd is useless and I ended up downloading the mp3's so I can listen to them in my car. Corporations and not users decided what we do. Yes, this will be the norm and I expect the DMCA to be used by anyone who dares to try to disable the spyware.

    2. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by DwarfGoanna · · Score: 1
      "...think of your mom, little sister or brother (if any), peers at school (if any) - all those people who click "OK" mindlessly whenever a dialog box pops up."


      Get the word out. Post flyers. Put it in your sig.


      Yeah, because my mom thinks all my sigs are +1 Informative...she told me so.

      --

      "You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo

    3. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by Computer! · · Score: 2

      I think it's not a bad idea to take it to the next level. Create a virus that sends erroneous user data, generated randomly, to the largest anti-privacy culprits. Work hard to make sure the formatting is exactly how they expect it. Let it spread naturally. Just have it pop up a EULA the first time it runs. It will serve as a DOS on those companies' systems, and make their data worthless. Alternatively, write a "Privacy Desk" application, that shows what data you're just about to send, and allows you to either stop it, or modify it before it's sent out.

      --
      If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
    4. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by eric434 · · Score: 2

      I said the FIRST WAVE of CD copyprotection...

      --
      This .sig temporary until a better .sig can be constructed.
    5. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by Tingler · · Score: 1

      I was able to rip my Moby -18 disc without any problems. I use cdex. If I remember correctly, there was a .txt file at the very end. I couldn't rip it all at once, but I could rip half of it at a time. Why don't you give that a try?

    6. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by Sly+Mongoose · · Score: 4, Funny
      ...or (more likely) plugging in their eithernet cable.
      EITHERnet?

      Supports Ethernet and Token Ring simultaneously?
    7. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by DoraLives · · Score: 1

      Create a virus that sends erroneous user data, generated randomly, to the largest anti-privacy culprits.

      Even as the scriptos continue to shallowly work on figuring out new ways for you to enjoy "a very humor game," certain other parties are hard at work on close analogs of your above. You've very nearly hit it square.

      Stay tuned.

      --
      Is it fascism yet?
    8. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by eric434 · · Score: 2

      Not necessarily your Slashdot sig! your EMAIL sig. Belive it or not, I'll bet many Slashdotters get people asking them questions via email...

      --
      This .sig temporary until a better .sig can be constructed.
    9. Re:Yikes. But they must have some amazing tech... by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      Eric, there is an excellent anti-spyware (freeware) program called SpyBot Search & Destroy, but I don't know if it'll cover this. It's worth checking out... I use it, and recommend it to everybody I know. Only problem... it doesn't automatically STOP the spyware, just tells you if you've got some (when you run it). For the record, I'm running Windows 98 (and I'm so ashamed!... well, not really, but looking forward to playing with SuSE when time permits).

  20. Denial of service setup! by CPUgrind · · Score: 1

    Lets get as many /. readers as possible to coordinate a time to play the exact same track and see if we can crash the server with information overload. Better yet, someone figure out exactly what packets are sent so we can duplicate it without buying the CD and just continuously send worthless information to the servers so they give up.

    1. Re:Denial of service setup! by jzaw · · Score: 1

      now thats the REAL way to do it
      hacktivism at its best
      make all the data they collect meaningless and worthless

      cool

      --
      do acts of random kindness and senseless beauty
  21. Copy Protection by jrs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    With CD copy protection preventing people from listening to cds on their PCs, this shouldn't be a problem.

    1. Re:Copy Protection by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2
      With CD copy protection preventing people from listening to cds on their PCs, this shouldn't be a problem.

      That's the whole point of this kind of thing. The ultimate goal is this: They fsck up the CD so your normal CD player software won't work. Instead, they include their own custom Windows utility to play the CD.

      The catch is that you have to agree to their EULA to listen to the music on your computer. Under the EULA "contract" you waive most of the rights a consumer enjoys under copyright law, and you agree to give up some of your privacy and probably accept their spam.

      Another problem: I got my first CD around 1985, and it still plays fine in any CD player or computer. Many of the old DOS or Windows apps I have from that time period don't work on today's computers. 17 years from now, it's likely that their custom music apps won't work on most peoples' equipment, and the industry will have worked hard to eliminate old-style unencumbered CD players. Every 5 to 10 years your CD collection could turn into a pile of coasters. (Actually, the CD format will probably eventually go away so you won't even get to keep the coasters, but the same problem remains with any DRM scheme.)

  22. Stupid by xenofalcon · · Score: 1

    That would be incredibly easy to block, though. Aside from those of us not running Windows, all you would have to do is shut off any auto-execution features.

    I doubt it will take long for a freeware program to emerge that disables this.

  23. The Great Privacy Principle by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fundamental principle underlying current privacy practices in the United States is: "It is perfectly acceptable for a company to violate your privacy so long as it is for the purpose of selling you things."

    Obviously companies believe this, and on present evidence I'd say that most consumers believe this, too.

    1. Re:The Great Privacy Principle by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1

      What gets me is this: the double standard. If I were do this to them (tracked their habits and info), say through custom designed software, they'd invoke the DMCA on me instantly. Double standard...

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    2. Re:The Great Privacy Principle by po_boy · · Score: 2

      It has become my understanding that people don't see it as a violation of privacy. They're happy to provide that information if it helps people market goods and services to them more effectively. Since the information doesn't do the consumers any good to keep it under wraps, they might as well sell it. In return for disclosing this kind of information they get compensated by having goods and services more effectively marketed toward them. For instance, they may get fewer Kotex ads and more Old Spice ads if that's what market they're in.

      It's a small minority that see this exchange as unadvantageous for either side. Fortunately, at this time, you can still opt out of a lot of this kind of thing if you're against it. Keeping that option and gaining it back in other areas seems like a worthy cause. To that end, converting others to your point of view is a necessity. How do you recommend we do that? What reasons do you have for people to not trade some personal information for more customized marketing?

    3. Re:The Great Privacy Principle by volkris · · Score: 1

      So where are the disadvantages?
      Don't just stop at saying they exist...

  24. Sick and twisted minds, those reps by peculiarmethod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You would think that if they use slashdot in order to find software and techniques that crack their attempts at 'protecting investments,' that by now they would understand that 'user profiling' is not generally liked or condoned by informed users.. in my humble opinion the modern day equivalent of 'racial profiling'.. the initsself modern term for a commonly rampant tendency for humans to generalize and profit of those generalization and the fears that follow. In this case, push technology is their answer to piracy finance losses. When I say loss I say it loosely and in a 'predicted forecasted maybe finacial gains report' kinda way. So, Why can't they get a grip and let customers come to them (with their supposedly superior product)? Why must they collect info on already paying customers when its been written as a disliked idea in popular science fiction (and general fiction/ some nonfiction) forever?

    I give up.. I'll never rant again

    HEY IN ANYONE HERE IS THINKING OF STARTING A COMPANY..

    respect privacy..

    nevermind.. I'm wasting my breathe.

    pm

    --
    ** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
  25. So how does it work? by Tet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are few technical details on their web site, but it appears to just be a mixed mode (data and audio) CD, which when played using Bandlink's CD player software, will give the "benefits" described. Since I don't have any intention of using their software, it's not a problem. Until, of course, people start producing music that can only be played with their player. So far, record companies haven't been brave enough to test such a tactic in the market, although with copy protected CDs, they're getting awfully close to the line. The depressing thing is, I suspect the general public would just meekly go along with it :-(

    --
    "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
    1. Re:So how does it work? by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      If a small minority of consumers raises enough hell, and enrage enough other consumers, we can slam the door on this crap. It's OUR damn money... as the old saying goes, "Don't take no wooden nickels"... we don't have to take 'em.

  26. RIAA Self Destructs Again by KanSer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow. How did this line of thinking go?

    RIAA Exec #1: "Let's start spying on people. It's not like they have a real reason to steal music anyways."

    RIAA Exec #2:"Yeah! And we can have pop-ups that tell them Big Brother is watching!"

    RIAA Exec #1:"No... That would be stupid... right?"

    RIAA Exec #2:"Perhaps... But surely this will make people want to buy music as opposed to downloading it. Right? Right?"

    RIAA Exec #1:"..."

    RIAA Exec #2:"RIGHT?!"

    RIAA Exec #1:"Oops..."

    Me: "Thanks guys. Now I have a morally sound reason to download Britney's newest album! MERRY CHRISTMAS!"

    --
    • MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward Wednesday April 20, @4:20
    1. Re:RIAA Self Destructs Again by serutan · · Score: 2

      At last, somebody has any reason to download a Britney Spears album.

    2. Re:RIAA Self Destructs Again by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      "Thanks guys. Now I have a morally sound reason to download Britney's newest album!...)" I gotta ask... if you're listening to Britney, what the hell have morals got to do with it?

  27. Outdated format? by Stig_Soleng · · Score: 1

    Aren't CDs supposed to be replaced by SACD
    and/or DVD Audio by now? If there's no way to
    avoid copy protections and stuff like this, why
    not buy a format that has better quality, and a protection that is not just some add-on that might even affect the sound?

    Let's push the technology forward by buying
    high-quality SACD/DVD-Audio, and leave all these
    crappy (made so by the record companies) CDs behind.

    Just a thought...

    1. Re:Outdated format? by LinuxOnEveryDesktop · · Score: 1

      Excuse me? You were saying that you work for the RIAA? You actually want DVD-Audio and SACD? You want copyprotected CDs? You want pay-per-listen music? You want total RIAA control over what you listen to and when, and through what device? You want the end of technological innovation?

      Give me a break. And stop promoting that copyprotected non-democratic crap, please.

    2. Re:Outdated format? by Stig_Soleng · · Score: 1

      No. I agree that the RIAA is a Bad Thing. Of course I want DVD-Audio SACD, like a lot of people wanted the CD when everyone was using vinyl. That's called techological innovation. I do not want pay-per-listen, and I don't want total control by RIAA, and I don't think any of these things are part of the SACD/DVD-Audio specs...
      "copyprotected non-democratic crap"? Is it only copyprotection, or also copyright you think is non-democratic?
      I am against copy-protection, because it makes it impossible for me to make legal backup-copies, and affects the sound. But by the way you're talking, it sounds that you might even be against theft-protection in stores too...

    3. Re:Outdated format? by ddimas · · Score: 1

      Actually I am against copyright in its present form. The period is just too long, the original 14 years with one 14 year extension seems to be plenty of protection for artists, note I did not say corporations, corporations should not be able to copyright anything, just as they can't patent anything.
      Of course the ability to transfer the rights to a copyright or patent needs to be restricted also...

    4. Re:Outdated format? by angle_slam · · Score: 1
      SACD and DVD-Audio were never intended to replace regular CDs. To the vast majority of music listeners, regular CDs are "good enough." For those who crave higher quality audio (i.e., audiophiles, those who call a $5000 amplifier a bargain) SACD and DVD-Audio were developed. I'm not sure about DVD-A, but there is not a single SACD release that is unavailable in regular CD format.

      (For the same reason, IMO, high definition DVD will fail, as today's DVD format is "good enough" for the majority of people.)

    5. Re:Outdated format? by LinuxOnEveryDesktop · · Score: 1

      Of course I want DVD-Audio SACD

      OK. Why do you want it? You want high-quality surround sound, right? And maybe you want some extra goodies, right? That's innovation, indeed.

      However, and that's a big however, this innovation comes with a price - built-in DRM technology that denies citizens (and I refuse to degrade citizens to just consumers - the war against the RIAA and others is very much about words) their fair-use rights. DRM technology that - in conjunction with the DMCA and EUCD - restricts the way people can use the music they buy (of course, our friends the lawyers will say that you don't own the music, you only buy some sort of license to it - there's a lot of work there too) to ways that the music distribution companies (note: not the artists) see fit. In other words, this totally kills any innovation having to do with music. I call that backwards, not innovation.

      Is it only copyprotection, or also copyright you think is non-democratic?
      Now, don't read more in my writing that there is.
      The original motive for copyright was ensuring motivation for authors to create more content. It was not to allow authors to have total control over the use of their works.

      The current state of copyright is vastly different. It is now much longer than initially (life of the author + 70 years versus 14 years + optionally another 14 if the author was still alive), and the scope is much, much broader. Like Larry Lessig says, we have gone from a world where most uses of copyrighted material were unregulated, to a world where virtually all uses of copyrighted material are regulated and restricted.

      So in a nutshell, yes, I am against copyright in its current form. Do I think that it is alltogether necessary to encourage authors to create content with a system of intellectual property? Probably for some forms of content. However, there is increasingly evidence that for a lot of content this is not necessary - cf. Free Software, the Wikipedia, the Baen Free Library, etc. Stepping away from the 'one-size-fits-all' super restrictive copyright that the distribution corporations want us to believe is necessary to a much more diverse copyright is one of the arguments of Richard Stallman, and I believe that is a very crucial point.

      So, I hope that this clarifies things a bit.

  28. Try it, smart guys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    At home, my Windows box has no access to Internet (except for Mozilla): the firewall is setup not to let any packet from this particular IP address go through :o)

    Mozilla may establish HTTP connections using the proxy.

    I'd like to see how these smart guys cope with this situation...

    But perhaps, I'm not exactly the kind of person they are looking for...

    1. Re:Try it, smart guys! by sullrich · · Score: 1

      Sure, and the smart guys will just use a standard HTTP/POST to their server and your proxy will let them right through.

      OOPS! Sound's like you'll need ZoneAlarm or something else with that setup.

      -GG

  29. No problem by pardasaniman · · Score: 1

    It is times like this I am glad I don't run a mainstream OS. First viruses, now spyCDware

  30. A little paranoid? by sfe_software · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the Bandlink web site:
    Installation:
    1. Insert you Bandlink CD into your Internet Connected PC. (Bandlink should autostart on Windows).

    2. Click "I Agree" to the Bandlink License and select "Connect" to install Bandlink.

    3. Bandlink should detect your CD, begin CD playback, and display artist content.

    So it's nothing more than some Auto-Run software. Which makes sense, I can't imagine any other way a CD would just magically contact a remote host.

    Solution? Disable auto-run (which I do anyway), or in this particular case, don't accept the license agreement...

    They also mention this a lot:
    There is no encryption, anti-piracy, or any other playback prevention capability within the software.

    My first thought was that they could easily combine so-called "copy protection" with phoning-home, but at least with Bandlink this is not the case.
    --
    NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
    1. Re:A little paranoid? by Hanji · · Score: 1
      Installation:
      1. Insert you Bandlink CD into your Internet Connected PC. (Bandlink should autostart on Windows).
      2. Click "I Agree" to the Bandlink License and select "Connect" to install Bandlink.
      3. Bandlink should detect your CD, begin CD playback, and display artist content.


      Call this a technicality if you want, but I notice there is NO mention there of "read the license," just "Agree to the license"

      I think that's a good hint as to what they expect most people to do...

      Just because there's a EULA doesn't mean it's not an invasion of privacy, even if it's legally OK.
      --
      A Minesweeper clone that doesn't suck
    2. Re:A little paranoid? by sfe_software · · Score: 2

      Call this a technicality if you want, but I notice there is NO mention there of "read the license," just "Agree to the license"

      Call this a technicality, but "Agree to the license" (your quote) implies that one understands, and thus has read (or otherwise interpreted) the license. But that's not what the instructions say -- they say "Click 'I Agree'", which does in fact prove your point. I'm just not sure how the quote morphed into something that counters the very point you were trying to make.

      Just because there's a EULA doesn't mean it's not an invasion of privacy, even if it's legally OK.

      Possibly, but that's not what I was pointing out. The point of my post stands: whoever submitted it didn't do much research, or distorted the facts to get a rise out of the Slashdot crowd. I quote:

      There is no mention of a opt in/opt out agreement when the cd is inserted on the website...

      Yet visiting the link in the article, and clicking on "New to Bandlink" gives the information I originally quoted. It's also mentioned in the FAQs (the same FAQ that his "favorite quote" comes from), and the Support area.

      In my opinion, having to click "I Agree" is more than enough "opt in" here. From here, the fact that usage data will be compiled for statistical and marketing reasons is pretty much obvious, even if you don't read the EULA. It's common practice, and has been for quite some time (before the Internet). Anyone actually concerned about privacy and data usage will have read the EULA. Joe Sixpack won't, and doesn't care. Really, nothing new here.

      Hard to imagine this person would have received a "personal demonstration" that didn't include the above procedure, or at least mention it. Having just read more of the web site, maybe the poster viewed the Flash demo (I have not), and decided to call it a "personal demonstration"? I wonder...

      --
      NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
  31. IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by jsse · · Score: 5, Funny

    CD Player listens to you!

    (At least people in Soviet Russia can grin on this)

    1. Re:IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by seanadams.com · · Score: 1

      Could someone please tell me where this whole "in soviet russia..." thing came from?

      Yes, I also missed the AYB craze by a couple months...

    2. Re:IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by Zebbers · · Score: 2

      from the book 1984 i believe... they say the tv watches you

    3. Re:IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by internic · · Score: 1

      I beleive it's an allusion to comedian Yakov Smirnoff of 80s fame. Back then he had a one dimensional routine about the absurdities of the failing USSR, where many of the jokes began with what you quote. Why the latest slashdot crazy about it, I don't know, though I seem to remember it being mentioned in some post recently.

      See also

      --
      "You call it a new way of thinking; I call it regression to ignorance!" -- Operation Ivy
  32. Everything else you do is being tracked by ToasterTester · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Every time you use a credit card, grocery store discount card, write a check they put through a reader, login to something, and so on and so you're are being profiled. I used to work for the second largest ISP, and everything you connected all your connection attempts and other info was beening uploaded during the connection. Many of the major corporation now run software that monitors your calls, and internet activity. We are being monitored, counted, tracked, profiled, and categoried so much does it even matter. All this is just business, if get into all the tracking the goverment does, and you'll really feel like a specimen under a microscope.

    Actually in many way I feel there is safety in numbers. If they were only monitoring a we few people I would be nervous, but when the amount of data being collected we are people just numbers in a statisitc somewhere. Just another brick in the wall.

    1. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by fshalor · · Score: 1
      HearHear! I'll take it over a lead role in the cage any day. I'm quakin' in my boots about what the computer industry's going to be like in ten years. Scary.

      I wouldn't mind paying $40 a pop for DVD's with MP3's on them. (Or more.) I can't stand paying $17 for a cd, when I can buy a DVD for 6.99 at bestbuy. If the cd's that cheap, I'll think about it. I know it's about 10cents to make a CD. And I'm a musician, so I know how poor the average musician is. And some of these *artists* wouldn't know a scale if it slapped them in the ass...But then again, they don't get much of the $17 dollars anyway.


      end rant

      --
      -=fshalor ::this post not spellchecked. move along::
    2. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by base3 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If they were only monitoring a we few people I would be nervous, but when the amount of data being collected we are people just numbers in a statisitc somewhere.

      This is true so long as you're not an outlier. Consider some examples of things that could make you an outlier:

      • surfing sites in Arabic
      • using or downloading encryption software
      • consulting non-mainstream media sites
      • Reading the Poindexter bio at thememoryhole.org

      I'm sure with minimal effort, others can come up with even more chilling examples. When the government of our corporate republic can legally trawl everything looking for outliers, safety in numbers doesn't make me so comfortable.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    3. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      Actually in many way I feel there is safety in numbers. If they were only monitoring a we few people I would be nervous, but when the amount of data being collected we are people just numbers in a statisitc somewhere. Just another brick in the wall.

      Yes, but people get screwed one-by-one.

      An example of the effect of these databases is what happens to victims of identity theft. I suppose at some point you might cease to exist.

      There is one area that is sacrosanct -- your video rental records. Although presumably they may be subpoenaed, they may not otherwise me disclosed to anyone because of a federal statute on point, which arose from conservatives irritated about something that popped up in the Bork hearings. Note that hearsay video preferences (Long Dong Silver) popped up in the Justice Thomas hearings, and reading selections (Vox) in Lewinsky scandal.

      So, privacy invasion comes up again and again, and it offends people, I hope to the point that more safe harbors like the relatively frivolous video rental law will be passed. It is bizarre, for example, that it has taken so long to protect medical records with the force of law ... sadly our system requires us to wait for sensational abuses before anything changes.

    4. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by wytcld · · Score: 2
      I used to work for the second largest ISP, and everything you connected all your connection attempts and other info was beening uploaded during the connection.

      Wow! This could be a real reason to stay with AOL.... Who wouldn't take spam and popups over being tracked like that? (Can anyone confirm the poster's claim?)

      Connection attempts beening uploaded? Are the saucers involved? Do they track us everywhere?
      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    5. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by ToasterTester · · Score: 2

      Oh its true, I can't remember the name of the service at the moment, but many large corporations use it like IBM. They install the agent software while installing their software. Then when connection is being made your connection attempts and pop info are uploaded to a central computer system that generates reports. But if you use Linux don't fear because they only have agent software for Mac and Windows last I heard.

    6. Re:Everything else you do is being tracked by Phroggy · · Score: 2

      No, you're missing it. If they're tracking that an individual surfs Arabic sites or reads Poindexter's bio, and can identify who that individual is in meatspace, that's a really really bad thing. If they're tracking a corrolation between people who surf Arabic sites and people who read Poindexter's bio to see how large a group is interested in both, that's really not a problem, until you start picking individuals out of the group. Companies like AOLTW are not interested in finding terrorists and handing them over to the FBI; they're interested in demographics and marketing. If the government offered to pay large sums of money for that kind of data, then I'd be worried.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  33. Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by T-Kir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Although I use the free ZoneAlarm.. I'm also pretty restrictive about what programs I allow access, i.e. why oh bloody why does WMP require internet access when playing a media file when all the required codecs are installed (pile of crap it is).

    But, the cynic in me keeps shouting out this idea... what is to stop the disc (well apart from disabling autoplay, unless MS has some other "backdoor" auto execution of something on new media) from opening up a browser window with a heavily customised piece of url every now and then? The default access permissions will allow any web browser to do it's stuff?

    Just food for thought.

    --
    Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
    1. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by Bonker · · Score: 5, Informative

      Absolutely nothing.

      As a matter of fact, I've seen a few applications do just this to try to do 'instant' registration by using rundll32.exe to open a url that's a complex URL-encoded string with registration details.

      Imagine a URL like:

      http://www.company.com/registration.cgi?appname= Fo o&serialno=939848408930$userip=201.101.80.112

      etc...

      The one that comes to mind is PowerDVD. I've seen it do this on a coworkers PC.

      The solution to this is to deny your default browser's abilities to access the internet before installing a new app like this and then applying a deny rule against the IP or hostname it tries to access.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    2. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by pkaminsk · · Score: 1
      The solution to this is to deny your default browser's abilities to access the internet before installing a new app like this and then applying a deny rule against the IP or hostname it tries to access.

      No, the solution is to give up on ACL-based security, and integrate proper capabilities-based security right into the operating system. Of course, the programming language must be safe as well, and preferably friendly to capabilities.


    3. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by Talez · · Score: 1

      why oh bloody why does WMP require internet access when playing a media file when all the required codecs are installed

      Because it likes to get things like artist information, CD covers and other little bits and pieces for you?

      Here, see for yourself.

    4. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by Chazmati · · Score: 2

      Yeah, slick, but the Current Project Status lists "Recent" results from 1998 benchmarked against Linux kernel 2.0.34! The latest pre-release on the status page is EROS v0.8.3, but the link to release notes is for EROS v1.1!

      How is a newcomer to the project supposed to find out what it's all about? That's like a sign that says "If you like your shit together, go away."

    5. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by Chazmati · · Score: 2

      Plus, it will be hard to get that browser working in EROS when "There is currently no graphics support." Straight out of the FAQ.

      I don't think this is the particular solution most people have in mind. Yeah, there may be a couple fanatic lynx users out there: not me.

      I'll grant you that from a theoretical perspective, your argument might be sound. But no way in the near term.

    6. Re:Long URL's (or is that URI ;-) )? by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      Zone alarm is good, and so is Tiny Personal Firewall. I use 'em both on two different machines and they work like a champ. I do NOT use Windows Media Player, for obvious reasons. I use WinAmp, and hope they haven't adopted the same intrusive habits of WMP. I do NOT use RealPlayer for the same reasons, pretty much. I prefer to ward off any invasions, and I have a gun. But man, these monitors are getting expensive to replace!

  34. I like another one by pardasaniman · · Score: 1

    When I used to use windoze, I used ZoneAlarm. It is also freeware. Just look for it on CNet. It had a handy feature of being able to run in the windoze 98 equivlant of an applet in a panel. (You'll see when you download) It allowed you to block ports and restrict which programs wanted access.

    I also used Tine Personal Firewall, but found ZoneAlarm more convenient.

  35. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    IN SOVIET RUSSIA "IN SOVIET RUSSIA" comments are lame

    Join the fight aganist lame /. comments

  36. Block DNS Call? by TrailerTrash · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Can someone with one of these CD's report the addresses they try to write to, and we add a map to 127.0.0.0 in the HOSTS file? That works with all kinds of spyware (e.g., doubleclick, redsherriff).

    Better yet, can someone distribute a universal HOSTS file of all known spyware and update often? I'd pay for the privilege. AdAware may be a good vehicle.

    1. Re:Block DNS Call? by hondo_san · · Score: 1

      Try this link for links to such lists. I have used the technique in the past, but stopped when pages simply refused to load on many of my favorite sites.

      Still, it's a neat thing to try.

  37. So what do you do now? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do you play all the music that you want to listen to? Or did you just stop listening to music pretty much period.
    (This isn't meant to sound arrogant, I'm just curious)

    As someone else had posted earlier, it's not likely iptables would notice. It would probably look like a web page request on the client computer, which would be legitamate as far as the firewall is concerned.

    If this IS the case, thats cool because you could log the packets while the app runs after inserting the CD, and see how they talk to the server. Then using the logged data as a model, you could seed the database with misinformation, or "support" certain bands that you are partial to.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:So what do you do now? by inode_buddha · · Score: 2

      I pretty much just stopped listening to new music at that time; my record and tape collection had everything I wanted, and still does.

      That's interesting about iptables; I had assumed such a thing would use some oddball port and service combination. I'll go RTFM.

      --
      C|N>K
  38. better than... by ack154 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...a Snow White DVD that ruins your computer.

    What's sick is that people will do this. Mostly because they don't know otherwise. It's like the people who install Kazaa WITH the spyware, even though there's a little box that you can UNcheck to not install the garbage (Kazaalite is another story). They just don't know the difference.

    "Oo oo! Who wants to know what I'm listening too?! Oh, wait, you already do..."

  39. So how is this a concern now? by djupedal · · Score: 2

    Remember when certain vocal entities claimed that WORD would inventory your system and phone home to Redmond?

    How can anyone be surprised when the topic of profiling via PC usage comes up?

    Worrying about it gives offending parties too much cred. I doubt there is any real efficiency in how the data (if collected) is used, much less harvested.

  40. Probably not an issue.. by Mattsson · · Score: 1

    I don't think this will affect you very much unless you actually listen to mainstream RIAA approved music.
    The smaller independent recordcompanies probably won't try to alienate their small base of customers by doing idiotic stuff like this. :-)

    "People aren't buying our records! What whould we do?"
    "Hey, I've got an idea. Let make everyone hate our guts!"

    --
    /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
  41. slippery slope and the problem with technophiles by ender's_shadow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is not a big deal now -- you have to install their software for the "feature" to work, etc. Therefore some of the people on this site are not concerned. After all, we listen to our cds on real cd players, and don't use their program, etc.

    The problem arrives when you must install this software to listen to the cd on your computer. Remember, copy protected cds are out there, and adding this layer wouldn't be very hard.

    The next step means loss of fair use. Maybe not for you or your friend who thought Napster was the greatest thing since a windows network on a university campus, but definitely for a lot of people.

    Over the last couple of years the fire has seemed to have burned out. We used to get pissed about this shit, and now the highest rated comments don't seem to care about it all. We're letting our guard down.

  42. autorun.ini by amaprotu · · Score: 1

    autorun.ini

    Thats it. This amazing technology boils down to autorun installing a CD player on your computer that sends the data back to the label. Don't agree, don't install, and you just use your standard CD player, winamp or whatever, to play the CD. The concern would be if the music was encrypted or formated in some way that only by using their program could you play it. But then you wouldn't be able to play it in a standard CD player.

  43. Apparently,you and I live in very different worlds by jbf · · Score: 4, Funny

    The vast majority of people I deal with (in the real world) are idiots. And no, I'm not in tech support/customer service.

  44. whew by digidave · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's a good thing none of their CDs play on PCs or this might be bad.

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  45. What data is being sent? by SparkyMartin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If a company wants to collect this kind of information I'd support it as long as it was purely entirely 100% anonymous. But what guarantee do I have that just the CD, track, and time of playing are sent?

    How do you know that they aren't sending your IP address when they say they aren't? How do you know they aren't sending info about files in 'My Documents' or what files are listed in the 'add/remove' section of the registry? And don't tell me the privacy policy says they aren't so they aren't-privacy policies are changed more often than my underwear, and I change that everyday!

    I don't mean to get all Mulder here, but I am so tired of companies trying to sneek things past me in a 10 page licence agreement for free software that exceeds the length of my deed if I buy a $300000 house!

    1. Re:What data is being sent? by hankaholic · · Score: 1

      I see new banner ad campaigns starting as we speak...

      *flashing obnoxiously*

      Warning:

      Your CD player might be broadcasting your IP address! Click here to protect yourself!

      (The parent got a +5? Since when is drivel modded _up_?)

      --
      Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
    2. Re:What data is being sent? by Shelled · · Score: 2
      I don't mean to get all Mulder here...

      Don't apologize, there's nothing Mulder about it. In the vinyl age who would have believed playing music could be a threat to your privacy? Who'll venture to guess what we'll accept in another fifteen years?

  46. Not on my fscking MAc! by andrewski · · Score: 1

    I listen to anything I want on my Powerbook, and nobody knows but my girlfriend.

    You get what you pay for. Except if it's Windows.

  47. Crazy Eddie says: by Hubert_Shrump · · Score: 2

    What's your price for privacy?

    With a price point in the 15-17 dollar range, you'd be a sucker not to! Folks, you haven't seen deals like this since the 50s!

    --
    Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
  48. Humor dissection by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

    Very nice analysis! An "A-"

    It would have been an A+ had you included some gratuitous footnotes or hyperlinks ... The appearance of scholarship is as important as its fact.

    Also, this Yakov shtick was dead a long, long time ago. I thought we'd deported Yakov to Russia in exchange for dismantling some nukes. But if you look at his personal site, it looks as though he is actually nailing some gigs.

    In Soviet Russia, GIGS nail YOU! Har-har-har.

  49. Re:What sort of idiot?-Duh! by psoriac · · Score: 1

    And some who do.

    --
    I browse Slashdot at +3, Funny
  50. Re:Why ain't this in YRO? by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

    I can't tell the difference anymore anyway, so why bother?

    --
    Why not fork?
  51. Glad I still use analogue media by BryceBerny · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another one of the many benefits of listening to vinyl :)

  52. good lord by RestiffBard · · Score: 2

    I'm getting closer and closer to just taking my system off the net. Reading slashdot, penny arcade and looking up movie showtimes is really not worth the hassle of every tom dick and harry knowing all there is to know about me. No, I don't have anything to hide. But, its my decision who I let know things about me. If that means get off the net, then fine.

    --
    - /* dead coders leave no comments */
    1. Re:good lord by base3 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      A modest proposal:

      PC's are cheap now--run two, one with an Internet connection, and one without. Network internally with IPX/SPX or NetBEUI. Download your entertainment on the Internet connected PC. Play the downloaded content on the disconnected PC. Voila`--the media players, etc. can't call home. For added security, don't do anything sensitive on the Internet connected machine.

      This setup isn't airtight, but it's a damn sight better than giving RealMedia, Microsoft, and every other spyware purveyor on the face of the earth unfettered access to the same machine that contains your financial information or files which indicate certain, um, proclivities.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    2. Re:good lord by SparkyMartin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Network internally with IPX/SPX or NetBEUI.

      You know, this is a great idea and I was thinking the same thing a few weeks ago. Since most if not all apps try to phone home using tcpip, this should provide another level of security. Of course Sygate and Zonealarm will notify you if any app tries to make any sort of connection, but if you don't need all of your home computers to be conected to the net, use a different protocol internally.

    3. Re:good lord by base3 · · Score: 1
      Thanks--I figured I couldn't be the first one to come up with the idea. I used it at a client site that was worried about security while using a dialup--just made the internal network NetBEUI.

      Of course, a truly 1337 h@x0r could construct an IP packet, and put it on the wire as raw Ethernet frames--but this would require some low-level programming goodness, and would still be caught by a real (not running on the same machine) firewall (and wouldn't be caught by something like ZoneAlarm if done on the Internet connected machine). I don't know what a program trying to do that would use as a source address on a non-Internet connected machine, though..

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    4. Re:good lord by jmcnamera · · Score: 1

      Even easier, run VMWare and use a virtual machine to handle your CD playback and the such.

      Only problem with this is VMWare is expensive. Getting off topic, is there a free open VMWare equivalent?

      --
      this is not a sig
    5. Re:good lord by smccurry · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they are trying to get this in place, so that down the road, they can uniquely identify each CD using some sort of digital watermark, and track where a burned copy originally came from.

  53. Things like this really fucking irk me.. by capitalsucks · · Score: 1

    I really get Irked by this kind of BS..apparently there are supposed to be a bunch of hackers on this site..why dont you guys tear up places like this? I'm not playing to the largerthanlife hacker stereotype either..I know what geeks/hackers are like..I am one..I just wish you guys would use your powers to improve life for the whole of the internet more often..hope I dont lose points for this post..

    --
    "I feel it is my duty to look at the porn that kids download before I delete it, to be sure what it is."--School Admin
  54. There is no morally sound reason... by DredPirateRoberts · · Score: 2, Funny

    to download Britney's newest album.

    --
    "All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - George Orwell
  55. Santana's Shaman has this on it by Greg@UF · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The cd is a mixed mode cd, 2 sessions.
    The first is standard cd-da format.
    The second has the bandlink software - 2 mb.
    There's an autorun that pops up saying "You must agree to this to listen to this cd"

    However... when I open windows media player 8, select Play > Cd-audio, then the cd plays just like any other.

    --
    -- You can't give it, you can't even buy it, and you just don't get it!
  56. Vinyl... by chris_eineke · · Score: 1

    Thank god they can't equip vinyls with copy protection. Stuff released on vinyls is better and sounds better... (well, in most of the cases. I dont want to summon a war "analog vs.digital". Several other people already did that ;))

    The analog medium and transfer mechanism, albeit out-dated, is still my prefered method for listening to _good_ music (and NO! I'm not listening to classical music).

    But... wait a second! They could equip every vinyl with a tiny microchip you have to put over a scanner unit to be allowed to play on you "digitally enhanced" turntable.

    OMG!! O_O I found a new marketing idea....

    --
    "All you have to do is be fragile and grateful. So stay the underdog." Chuck Palahniuk, Choke
  57. Linux functionality by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

    Whilst that's something that iptables/chains just can't cope with (sadly) I have Norton Internet Firewall, for my remaining Windows PC, which is application based. ie, you can accept/deny any connection for each application.

    I believe you refer to process name matching, which was added to iptables-1.2.7.

    Of course, iptables doesn't have a pretty GUI interface like NIF, but there are plenty of people that have made front ends for it.

    I don't like the approach much, as there are lots of ways for a programmer to get around it -- I mean, process name/(application name under Windows) is not some immutable thing, and worst case, the program copies itself to a file of a different name and executes itself.

    I suppose if the OS's loader SHA-fingerprinted binaries at load time (expensive, but secure) and granted rights based on said SHAsum, you might manage to securely pull something off like this. Then said application couldn't support "components" or plugins, as MSIE unfortunately relies upon rather heavily. However, in general the "security" provided by NIF/ZA is pretty much an illusion, though it makes end users feel good. You really need lower-level OS support to build a "secure" environment like this.

    Mostly, the point of NIF/ZA is to make the sort of people that read Maximum PC and impress people with their framerates in FPSes feel that their system is "secure".

    No insult intended...(see "mostly" :-) )

    1. Re:Linux functionality by radish · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just as an FYI re: one of your points, ZoneAlarm (at least) does checksum all the apps and compares them when they request a connection. If they've changed since you granted access, you are warned about it. So a malicous app would have to either magically hash down to the same checksum (unlikely!) or it would have to modify the database (hard, as it's protected) or modify the ZA checksum code (maybe easier). All in all, possible but not easy. I've never seen any mention of any app doing any of those things, the easiest is to simply invoke IE and have it make your connections for you!

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

    2. Re:Linux functionality by bwalling · · Score: 2

      I don't like the approach much, as there are lots of ways for a programmer to get around it -- I mean, process name/(application name under Windows) is not some immutable thing, and worst case, the program copies itself to a file of a different name and executes itself.

      There's a handy API for controlling IE. It's even very easy to use. Just use that. Looks like a web browser is making the connection.

    3. Re:Linux functionality by Slime-dogg · · Score: 1

      But doing anything like modifying ZA checksum code is a direct violation of the DMCA. If Record companies were shipping that kinda crap on CD's, they'd be brought down in a jiffy.

      --
      You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
    4. Re:Linux functionality by l1_wulf · · Score: 1

      Ah, eloquently said, and yet it's obvious you have not spent any significant amount of time with NIF. On my XP box I use NIF and while I confess I too have failed to take a more in-depth look at exactly what is going on underneath the hood so to speak, I do know that once a binary, that has been given permission to outbound ports, changes, be it a patch or what not, you are given the dialog asking if said program is allowed outbound access. A screwed up sentence, I know, so I'll break it down. I haven't bothered to determine the means, but NIF will not let an altered (or masquarading) file Internet access without explicit permission. There may be a way around this, but for my purposes it works.

      I have nothing but respect for the majority of your posts (see "mostly" ;-)), it is fairly obvious that you have a firm grasp on Linux of which you are a staunch supporter. That is fine, heh, even a good thing.

      [slips on his flame retardent undaroos]

      It's just that the winbashing bandwagon far exceeded its maximum occupancy a long time ago, and while it was fashionable at one time, I think it has nearly run its course. It has become pretty tiresome watching so many people scramble to their pedestals in an attempt to trump the last winbash, seeing themselves in their mind's eye as someone far superior to the masses. In truth the "uber-geek" looks for praise from their own vocal minority while the majority (read the average Joe) sees the you as the socially inept stroking their own egos.
      BR> *blink* *blink* "the vocal minority"??? Why yes, of course I am referring to those who are fairly to exceptionally knowledgeable in all things Linux and can't find a horn big enough to to call their own to toot. I do not refer to those that have been trained to "be original, be unique, be different, don't follow the mainstream, assert yourself!" You know the type, the sheep that feel the need to be cool by asserting that they are better than everyone else because they can spew the same rhetoric they hear/read from channels they think are intellectually obscure, which they've been trained to believe is superior, regardless of the merits of the actual person speaking/writing.

      I picture it like one big intellectual pyramid scheme, someone at the top expresses a thought and it is passed down to the masses, gaining momentum, changing slightly on its trip down, until the sheep have it in their heads that it is "us against them". Now, the vocal majority in this vocal minorty can't get enough of trying to put everyone that do not agree with their agenda (even if they don't understand this agenda, it is what they want to believe dammit!) which in turn causes this sentiment to reverberate back up, like shockwaves, influencing the ranks above and so it perpetuates.

      But then again, maybe not.

      Point being, I say we try something different. How about we leave off the bashing, stop prejudging those that don't walk behind you like lost puppies (see your 2nd to last paragraph, 0x0d0a) and persue more productive posts.

      I know I strayed pretty far off-topic while replying to a post that was already askew from the original news post, I'm sorry. And for what it is worth 0x0d0a, regardless of how it may have come across, this truly wasn't an attack on you or your post. I really do enjoy reading most of your posts. Ahem, before I get blasted on the weakness of my security, let me say this. Knowledge is power. You're only as secure as you make yourself. You don't have to put your nickel piggy bank in an insured, fireproof safe tucked neatly away in a bank vault.

      That is, know your system(s). Keep them current with updates/patches/etc. and keep informed of vulnerabilities. What's the purpose of corporate strength proxies/firewalls/etc for typical residential use? The bottom line? Of all my home systems ever owned, I can honestly say that I've been virus free and hack free with only one exception, a virus on an ex-girlfriends computer which was quickly taken care of with minimal effects and inconvenience. And not one permanent dedicated PC for firewal/proxy/router service.

  58. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    perhaps you are just full of yourself and have a narrow view of the world where you are king shit and everyone else "just doesn't get it"? 99% of the time thats the case - especially with nerds.

  59. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by I+Am+The+Owl · · Score: 2
    Funny, though not primarily because it is absurd (that would make sense with any country). It is particular about Soviet Russia because it is poking fun at the totalitarian state that people felt was controlling them. Hence, the car driving you, etc.

    Yakov's whole act pretty much fell apart after the Iron Curtain came crashing down...

    --

    --sdem
  60. Privacy? by Cokelee · · Score: 1

    is that pesky thing still around? Short of locking myself in a cage, I honestly cannot escape every trap that exists to try and take it.

  61. Knows all, Tells all by jefu · · Score: 2
    Someone can also figure out who you are sending email to (and unless its encrypted what the email says), what web sites you're visiting, what you download, what (if anything) your taste in p-rn is, who you're sending ICQ/AIM/... messages too (and what).

    They can tell who you call on the phone, where you travel (and with a bit of deduction who you might be visiting and what you might be doing there).

    So what?

    Time for a new job. Are they going to hire you? Better check you out first.

    You like (insert anything-but-vanilla-heterosexual-paraphilia here). Strike one. You go to the wrong church. Tsk Tsk. You enjoy wilderness snowboarding - risky sport that, might result in you being injured and not able to work. Uh oh. You take prescription X - an indication of icky chronic disease. Hmmmm Your grocery card indicates you eat too much unhealthy food. Hmmm again. Your grocery card indicates you drink too much alcohol. Snort. Your email indicates an affinity for the Republican party. Democrats only welcome here You seem to be a linux user. We're a microsoft shop here. Looks like travel to Rainbow Gathering here. No hippies wanted. Gnutella usage indicated. We support the RIAA in every possible way.

    Maybe some of the information is about things that are protected (religion, say). But someone can always point to something else in the list and say that that was the crucial bit of information.

    Or it might not even be your possible new boss, but the health insurance providers who are going to set wonderfully high rates for you (that broken leg after climbing in the 'Gunks cost a whole lot of money remember).

    Small pieces of information might by themselves indicate little, but aggregate them and focus your attention on one or a few people and all kinds of information can be deduced. Accurately. Or Not So Accurately. That may not matter after the fact. This is (I'd bet) the basis for that DARPA Information Awareness Thinggummy.

  62. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    The most important thing to bear in mind concerning idiots is this. Consider how dumb the median idiot is. Half of them are dumber than that.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  63. What about... by cpthowdy · · Score: 1

    a good, old-fashioned boycott? Maybe you should tell your favorite band that although you like their music, you refuse to spend another dime on their latest hit until they force this shit off of their CDs. But what do I know?

  64. Let's see.."Step 4 of installation instructions... by s88 · · Score: 1

    Attach standard phone line to rear of CD player"

    Hmm... why would my CD player need a phone line... oh well. *click*.

  65. There is an opt-in/opt-out agreement. by bmetzler · · Score: 4, Interesting
    It's very simple. If you opt-in you put the cd in your cd player, and let the company profile you. If you opt-out you pass up the cd and move along.

    But I'm all for tracking people's CD usage. That allows companies to market more targetable CD's. Instead of producing CD's that people buy because they "heard" they were good, and then listened to only a few times before getting disgusted with it, it lets them find out what music people listen to over and over again.

    -Brent
    1. Re:There is an opt-in/opt-out agreement. by hysterion · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'm all for tracking people's CD usage. That allows companies to market more targetable CD's. Instead of producing CD's that people buy because they "heard" they were good, and then listened to only a few times before getting disgusted with it, it lets them find out what music people listen to over and over again.
      Hmmm... Overlooked here is that their idea is to sell you many disposable CDs, not a few that you'll listen to over and over again.

      Lightbulbs aren't calibrated to maximize lifetime, but to make it as short as the market will bear.

    2. Re:There is an opt-in/opt-out agreement. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      The problem is that for the "opt-in/out" program to work as you see it, the consumer has to be well informed about what they're opting into if they decide to put the CD in their drive.

      It's not like the record company is going to put a 2-page insert in the CD jewelbox describing what their spyware does, right?

    3. Re:There is an opt-in/opt-out agreement. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      Light bulbs cost a dozen for 5 bucks. And then there's 'extended life' incandescent bulbs and flourescent lighting if you're willing to pay extra for the extra quality.

      If they want to sell us disposable CD's, they would be wise to follow the light bulb model. Sell the ephemeral stuff like pop singles at a very low price point. They'll make up for the low profit margins in volume. Then, for the audiophiles and music lovers, offer selected higher-tier releases (Au20 discs, DVD Audio, etc.)

  66. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by falzer · · Score: 1

    No. The correct sentence for example one would be "In Soviet Russia, mail opens YOU."

  67. This is on quite a few CDs by Andy+Muldowney · · Score: 1

    This isn't just limited to music CDs. I used to work for a company that did a lot of multimedia CDs for some very large clients, and this had to be the top requested feature. Everything from mom and pops to Fortune 100s wanted to see who was using their CDs and when. It's usually just done with an HTTP request (or multiple requests) and a little bit of XML data or something similar.

    I would say this was on at least 50% of the CDs we produced.

  68. how does it work? obsolescence by wattersa · · Score: 1

    The public has already gone along with it in a few areas-- the DVD CCA, for instance. An industry consortium (cartel) that sets the price and standards for content scrambling systems. I'm really suprised they haven't branched out their system to the audio industry yet, probably because research indicates consumers wouldn't buy all new equipment, or they would have done it by now. So instead, we have a few "DRM" type CDs that have come out recently but are backward compatible with home/car CD players and windows PCs. It would be much more convenient for the music industry to have a new format come along like DVD-Audio so they could start from scratch with the scrambling system as DVD did several years ago. What I see happening is that the music industry will encourage more sales of DVD players and drives so that gradually fewer and fewer regular CD drives will be sold, and people will be able to play CSS-encrypted CDs in their DVD players. A far cry indeed from the earliest days of CDs when a simple ISO "don't copy" flag on the disc was supposed to prevent people from ripping CDs to DAT in the mid 1980s.

  69. In short: "No it doesn't" by Oestergaard · · Score: 3, Informative

    I pop the CD in my box and play it. The CD is a "dead" media, it's not something that magically comes to life and starts transmitting information.

    Seriously, how stupid can people be? Ok, so the CD will buffer-overflow my player, and figure out how to access the outside world by executing it's malicious (processor and OS independent) code... You know what? No it won't!

    Shit like that doesn't just happen.

    So maybe *some* people run a player that facilitates said information gathering and transmission - that's their problem. Get a life, get a real player, get a real OS.

    But CD's magically coming to life and transmitting my listening habits (which I guess it stored in the big secret database facility on the moon, which is by the way run by aliens under contract with the government - which is again why they had to fake the moon landing, but that's another story) - no, please, just forget about it...

    1. Re:In short: "No it doesn't" by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      So maybe *some* people run a player that facilitates said information gathering and transmission - that's their problem. Get a life, get a real player

      A RealPlayer you say? Are you sure about that? :)

  70. Does it affect me? by jaavaaguru · · Score: 2, Informative

    I use Linux at home and Solaris at work. Will this affect me? It sounds like it is entirely dependant on which CD-playing program you use. If that's right, then surely it won't affect many people?

  71. Actually, this software seems pretty cool... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 3, Informative

    This software, if it is decently written, looks like it isn't nearly as bad as the article says it is. First, as many have pointed out, you don't have to install it. But notice what it does in addition to sending out your personal information: it lets artists give you access to bonus tracks, artwork related to the music, tour info (and discounts), contests etc etc. It lets you chat (and synch music) with people listening to the same thing, which, although I wouldn't do it, would be considered a perk by a lot of listeners out there.

    Furthermore, their privacy policy says they will not hand out required personal info, but only aggregate info. They do say that they will use your personal info to "contact you about services in which you have expressed interest," which may or may not mean spam. Really, "expressed" should mean a check box, but you never know. It looks like a loophole though. And of course, the artists can require your personal info to log in to their sites, but you can just refuse to give it and not log in if you think that's a problem.

    All in all, I the article is bullshit. If this system is what it says it is, it's just an above-average media player that comes with the CD (although possibly at the cost of, say, a quarter to the buyer). Nothing to bitch about, invoking "privacy" and all that. If you're a privacy zealot, firewall it. If not, there are still a zillion other programs that are more likely to spy on you.

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    1. Re:Actually, this software seems pretty cool... by KlausBreuer · · Score: 1

      Well, well - I've always suspected that the PR shills are in Slashdot as well, but this comment seems to prove it.

      "it lets artists give you access to bonus tracks..." wow, straight out of the ad copy.
      Same with "chat with people listening to the same thing...". So who cares? Who's interested?

      "...which may or may not mean spam". Well, since my data is worth cold, hard cash, you can be very sure that it *will* mean spam. And further profiling, which we all love dearly.

      "...above-average media player..." Just from what rock did you crawl out from?

      "If you're a privacy zealot..." Sure. Just because I do not plan on laying open everything marketable about me does not mean that you can compare me (us?) with religious nutcases.

      "a zillion other programs...more likely to spy on you". Yes. And I hate them all. And will filter them all. Goddamm advertisers.

      After reading a fascinating book about the PR industry ("Trust us, we're experts" - from the same guys who wrote "Toxic sludge is good for you!"), I'm quite sure that there are more than a few PR people on here, modding each other up.
      Keep an eye out for them.

      Ciao,
      Klaus

      Naaah, it's not paranoia if they *are* out to get you ;)

      --
      Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
    2. Re:Actually, this software seems pretty cool... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 2

      While I think your comment should be modded flamebait, I'll take the time to reply. First, note that my email address would imply that I don't work for Bandlink PR, but rather that I'm a Harvard student (and therefore not a lawyer). I'm also not running the software (I have a Mac), and probably never will. I don't listen to music very often, and I find my computer's built-in CD player enough. The only MP3s on my hard disk are Alpha Centauri's sound effects files. Furthermore, I am a privacy zealot (PGP key 0x84B0FDB8), and am running a firewall (just the built-in one, so I'm not blocking outgoing, but I am logging it). Don't flame me for using that term. In any case, since I *don't* work at Bandlink and haven't installed it, I don't know more about their software than their webpage says; caveat lector.

      My original post was intended to point out that the slashdot blurb is false. The blurb implies that you'd better be watching for a little "bandlink" logo on CDs, because Bandlink is spyware that does nothing other than upload what songs you listen to and when, without any warning. This is far from the truth, and I tried to point this out by posting some of the stuff that Bandlink does. Right off the site. But it seems from the other posts I read that most people didn't read the site, so don't flame me about it.

      Who cares about chatting and synching music? Well, I don't. But I have several friends who try to chat with me about music (unsuccessfully because I usually haven't listened to the music they're talking about), and I bet they would love this feature. If nothing else, it would enable them to chat with people of similar interests.

      "above-average media player": I think the visualizations in iTunes (for example) are boring, and art that's actually related to the music would be much more interesting. Kind of like a music video. If the bands actually chose to provide it, this would be really cool. Furthermore, Bandlink seems to have several practical features that iTunes doesn't have, such as giving you tour information. This would be cool if I were actually the type to go to concerts, especially because I (supposedly) could get discounts on the tickets. Just because most Slashdotters don't do this, doesn't mean that nobody does. In fact, it has been claimed on Slashdot that musicians should be making most of their money by going on tour (I would have linked to such a comment, as I've seen several of them, but you can't search for comment contents, only the subkects).

      Now for the privacy part. As I said, Bandlink won't give out your personal info, except when it acts as an intermediary for entering your personal info on an author's site, and then only to the author. This is like Mozilla saying that it won't give out your email address except when you type it into a form on some site, and then only to that site. Doesn't concern me.

      It's more concerning that they can send you email advertising "services that you have expressed interest in." Having not run the software, I don't know exactly what this means. Since Hotmail's policy is worded similarly, I would assume it has a similar meaning. I unchecked all the "please spam me with this" boxes when I signed up for Hotmail, and what do you know, they don't spam me. It's not my main account, but rather the one I give out across the internet and whenever I need to enter an address (the account is mike_hamburg@hotmail.com), and I still have only gotten 3 spams in the past 2 weeks. I'm not recommending Hotmail here, it's just an example. If Bandlink has a checkfield like Hotmail does, it likely won't spam you if you uncheck all the boxes. Otherwise, maybe. If you're concerned (I would be), you can test it by installing on a virtual machine or with an alternate address if you want, logging its outgoing to make sure it doesn't give away info you don't give it. If you run such a test, please email me the results.

      Most spyware makes it clear in the EULA or privacy policy that it's spyware, relying on you not to read it, so that the writers can win in court if you sue. I have read Bandlink's privacy policy and EULA and it doesn't say or even imply that it's spyware, but rather has what might be a loophole depending on circumstances (remember that I'm not a lawyer). This makes me think that it's probably not spyware.

      Finally, putting Bandlink on CDs is infinitely preferable (especially to a Mac user like me) to putting copy protection on them (such as the type that breaks Mac CD drives). They say on the website that it ISN'T copy protection software, and I believe them.

      I won't install this software and you don't have to either, but it's still not anything like what the slashblurb makes it out to be.

      Mike
      PS. As for your comment about PR people, you're almost certainly right that there are lots of them on Slashdot. But I'm not one of them. I hate ads as much as you do, or at least almost as much -- I did risk putting my address, spam-armored, on Slashdot. I'm filtering my accounts and I'm wary about giving out my addresses. I'm running Chimera with popups blocked. I don't think you're *too* paranoid -- maybe just a bit for that whole PR conspiracy thing -- so don't bitch at me.
      \end{rant}

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
  72. MS interested? by Cheese+Cracker · · Score: 1, Troll

    Perhaps we'll see Microsoft buys or "borrows" the idea from Bandlink and incorporates this "nice" feature to the OS. More "added value" to Windows.

  73. rip em by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    Good thing I turn my cds in to MP3s. I assume this removes the threat entirely.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  74. I am so tired of this... by ellem · · Score: 2

    I am tired of my email address being whored out
    I am tired of companies thinking my phone number is necessary for a cash purchase
    I am tired of marketers
    I am tired of all the invasions that happen by companies

    You know if my governemnt wants to know something about me that's one thing, I can vote those pricks out, but when fucking Radio Shack does that pisses me off. Sometimes I need a tralfaz emulator!

    --
    This .sig is fake but accurate.
  75. Buy A Stereo by reallocate · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...enough said.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  76. There are already laws protecting computers. . . by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    against unauthorized access. Perhaps if the "average Joe" started to insist they apply to *his* computer as well the corporate server things would get, ummmmmmm, interesting.

    Of course if your computer software comes attached with an offensive EULA in which you "agree" to have no rights to your own system/network you might well be hosed. I'd like to see someone challange this in court *on the basis that you can't be coerced into signing away a basic property right, even by contract.*

    To my knowledge this hasn't been tried yet in America ( in some other countries the EULA is already considered invalid prima facie). All it takes is someone devoted to the cause with $50,000 American and five years of their life to devote to it.

    Of course there's another option. *Don't use EULAed software.*

    In that case the assumption of having to give some sort of explicit permission to enter your system ought to hold just as much for the personally computer as it does for the corporate/government computer.

    Hacking is a crime. Do your homework, secure your system, and then insist on *prosocuting* any "hacking" of you system, no matter who the "hacker" is.

    Laws are double edged swords that can cut the person who "bought" the law just as well as those it was intended to be a weapon against if the intended victim learns how to use the "weapon."

    KFG

  77. Some moderators got PMS today... [NT] by Cheese+Cracker · · Score: 2

    NT

  78. How to avoid installing vile spyware from CD: by kobotronic · · Score: 2

    (Applies only to windows users)

    The scumware installer appearing when you insert the CD is located on the first partition of the disc, which contains CD-rom data with win32 code. This partition has an autorun.inf file with a link to the installer.

    So far I've not encountered any installers actually installing anything without first prompting for permission to do so (legal mumbo jumbo as mentioned in the discussed scheme nothing more than chaff to confuse and dissuade sheeple from clicking the 'No - I disagree with these terms. Do not install' button, which should be the preferred choice.)

    However, following trends from the ever more aggressive piranha feeding frenzy world of ruthless cyber marketeers, it's a matter of certainty that we shall soon see automatically running installers delivering their nasty payloads with cunning stealth, pausing neither to seek permission or to announce that such an installation actually took place. Perhaps this has already happened. How would you know?

    Stealth deployment of viral spyware is commonplace with the parasitic ridealong schemes seen infecting the installers of "free" ad-supported software such as KaZaa, and many others. This is the crack in the floorboards from where things like the Bonzi Buddy creep out at night.

    To prevent exposing yourself to the risk of CD-deployed malware installation, either hold down the shift key each time you insert such a potentially infected hybrid music CD, or simply disable the autorun feature entirely - much safer, easy to do and fully reversible :

    Locate this key in your windows Registry - use regedit :

    HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Serv ic es\CDRom

    Set value of Autorun parameter to zero. Then reboot. In the future when you insert software installer CDs you will then have to hunt down and manually execute the installer yourself; if the location and name of the installer is not obvious, examine the now disregarded autorun.inf file at the CD-Rom drive root.

    By the way, if you have one such infected CD in your collection, and you have already ripped the tracks and burned them to a 'clean' CD for listening to sans spyware and data partitions, why not mail the original disc to Mr. Ralsky at 6747 MINNOW POND DR, WEST BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322

  79. Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

    So what?
    Now corporations will be able to ::gasp:: give me more of the products I want! They'll be able to see what kinds of music I think are not crap and make more of it so I'll buy music, stock the grocery stores with goods I'd rather buy to entice me into larger purchases, and even make it easier for me to buy the things I'd be buying anyway.

    For all of this talk about how our privacy is being eroded, nobody ever actually steps up and gives a really good reason why that's a bad thing. It's just as arguably a good thing, and in the end there is no hope of reversing this stuff anyway.

    Might as well let it go and stop holding off on the benfits of the future. This resistance is hurting us all more than the actual erosion ever could.

    1. Re:Right.... so? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      Oh god it's corporate support troll!!! Which corporation do you work for volkris? Or maybe you are just a marketing major?

      The reason it's bad is simple, IT'S MY LIFE AND MY CHOICE!, no I'm not choosing to be watched when I buy the cd, I'm choosing to listen to the music on that cd, not to send information about my listening habits.

      It's real simple, you and every other idiot in the entire world, all the billions on earth can all universally agree you want the record companies to know what music you are listening to. And I can be the sole voice in the world that does not. And I will still have every right to not just expect that choice left to me, but to have it. Majority doesn't rule, the majority of people out there have less than a 150 IQ for gods sake! And most of the rest have been bought out. True IQ is arguably meaningless for a number of reasons, but by any measure the average joe who is for some god aweful reason given a say in how the world runs is an idiot.

      Maybe the real answer is to require IQ (or something similar) tests to vote, run for election, perform any function from management on up ... errr scratch that, they might actually come up with something decent to take away my privacy if start putting intelligent people at the top of corporate america.

    2. Re:Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

      Right, so in the end there's nothing actually negative with the deal in practical terms.

      In any case, you're pretty off about what you're agreeing to when you use a CD. If you pop that CD in the drive you're agreeing that it can do whatever it wants while its in there. You aren't just chosing to listen to the music, there's another layer than that. You're chosing to allow that CD to interface with your hardware and one would only hope that your hardware will handle the interaction.

      Now the next layer up involves the agreement between you and the producer of the CD, and it is there that you need to insure that the CD won't be doing anything more than playing the music since that's all you want. You don't have this assurance from these companies, though, and so you should simply not buy the CDs or not be surprised when they do other things.

    3. Re:Right.... so? by shaitand · · Score: 2

      This in particular I have no problem with, although it could be made a little more obvious, perhaps a popup screen that gives a couple options like... "listen to music" and "Install spyware that searches your pc for any marketing data it can find, most definately attaches YOUR name to it so it is in no way anonymous, waits in the background, from time to time checks to see if you are viewing p0rn because this tells us if more sexual music should be pushed or not, and checks to see if you have mp3's on your computer because god knows they have to be stolen music"

    4. Re:Right.... so? by Analysis+Paralysis · · Score: 2
      Corporations *give*?! This sounds as if you live on a different planet from the rest of us. The reason for gathering such data is to *sell* it to every marketroid who might have the vaguest idea on how to exploit it to get you to buy *more*.

      Why is this a bad thing? First, you as an individual lose any control over the information that is being passed on *and* the correlations/conclusions that may be drawn. Listening to gangsta rap a lot and suddenly finding your credit rating plummet (stereotypical criminal) and being subject to more frequent "stop and search" orders by the police is one possibility. Developing a taste for Middle Eastern music and ending up on a profile as a "suspected terrorist" is another (and with Total Information Awareness steamrolling onwards this should be a real concern). On the other hand, would you fancy being deluged with dozens of ultra-short-lifespan CD-samplers through the post based on what the labels *think* you may like? (for an example of product tie-in gone really bad, check this out.

      As for there being no hope for reversing this, well there are a couple of possibilities. Preventing any data being collected is one (either through aggressive use of security measures such as filters/firewalls or by not purchasing invasive products in the first place). Producing false/irrelevant data to "poison" the data pool is another.

    5. Re:Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

      Yes, corporations give in exchange for money. While "sell" would be a more precise term in a larger context, it's still giving, and the consumers still gain. That's an important factor which I wished to hilight. So nyaah.

      Now, as to why it's a bad thing, you say that it's because I lose control over what information is passed on and conclusions that may be drawn.... this itself is neither true nor a bad thing!

      In the examples you give the collection of data is not the problem, the processing of it is. You can be labeled a terrorist and/or have your credit line yanked because of analysis based on anything. It's in the best intrests of the analysts not to err, and by giving them (allowing them to take) more information you allow them to be more accurate. Sure they see that you listen to gangsta rap, but then again they see that you've been purchasing fine wine recently...

      The ones where it is not in their best intrests to be right are beyond consideration; they'll flag you based on anything.

      Now, it's simply not true that I lose control over this information in these ways because I never had it in the first place. Anyone who wants to badly enough can gain that information through various ways, and there isn't a single thing the law can do about it. After all, unless you're watching the corporation (or the police, or your neighbor) back, you won't be able to detect that he's purchasing that undetectable bubble lens camera.

      Total information awareness, as you say, is steamrolling through whether we embrase it or not. If we sit down and accept it as part of our lives we will gain the benefits from it. If we don't and continue to fight it as Slashdotters tend to do we will only gain the negative aspects of it.

    6. Re:Right.... so? by Analysis+Paralysis · · Score: 2
      ...the collection of data is not the problem, the processing of it is

      Without any data to collect, no processing can be done and no inferences can be drawn.

      It's in the best intrests (sic) of the analysts not to err, and by giving them (allowing them to take) more information you allow them to be more accurate.

      Yes, but *why* should you need to give information in the first place. Should you not be "innocent until charged guilty"? And with regards to analysts' interests, they are there to produce results - if the criteria are set to value quantity rather than quality then mistakes below a certain level will be acceptable. How often, for example, does a Wall Street analyst successfully predict market movements? With a lot of the correlation and even conclusions on data being supplied by data-mining software, there is going to be less of the "obvious mistakes" being corrected. Finally, bear in mind that their best interest is not yours. In the case of marketing, the goal is not to "know the customer" or "develop a relationship" (to quote some cuddly marketspeak) it is to get you to spend more money on their products and services. Unless you are wealthy enough not to care about money (is that your butler reading Slashdot? Hi Mr Smithers!) this is probably contrary to your best interests.

      ...it's simply not true that I lose control over this information in these ways because I never had it in the first place.

      Sadly, this is more true for US residents - Europe has stricter laws on computer data (you can demand a copy of information held on you and have it corrected if wrong). Nevertheless, when you supply information you usually have an expectation in which you see it being used (eg using a supermarket loyalty card gives the retailer an idea of your purchasing pattern). However, if that information was sold on to, for example, a debt-collection agency to whom you owed money, they may use it to determine how much you were spending on luxury goods (chocolate biscuits, fruit cake) rather than essentials and therefore be used as leverage to demand a higher payment level from you - or even to increase their interest rate *just enough* to stay within the bounds of affordability. In other words, limiting personal data transfer between companies allows you to better predict the consequences of divulging personal data.

      ...you won't be able to detect that he's purchasing that undetectable bubble lens camera

      Filming someone in a public place (where the expectation of privacy is low) is not as serious a problem (until this is coordinated on a nationwide basis to the extent that everyone is filmed doing everything). However, filming someone in their home should be a very different situation - and similarly what you watch, what you listen to and what you do within your home should be off-limits unless you specifically state otherwise.

      If we sit down and accept it as part of our lives we will gain the benefits from it...

      Err...ever read George Orwell's 1984? Information gathered on such a global basis has *far* more opportunity for misuse than benefit. Do you think you are going to hear about corrupt Congressman X if his contacts in the TIA-Stasi are able to blackmail every journalist with personal information? What about if a community leader/trade union official/ordinary Joe takes a stand against the State on some issue and then sees all their personal details bared to public view? "Knowledge is power" is something that could be applied like never seen before - and all in the supposed "Land of the Free".

    7. Re:Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

      Without any data to collect, no processing can be done and no inferences can be drawn.

      And if you were never born no processing could be done either, what's your point?

      Why should I give them my data? So they can better serve me. The information that could imply guilt could just as easily imply innocence. Errors below certain levels are ALWAYS acceptable. Datamining software works better without people senselessly gunking it up. It will also improve as time goes on. Their best intrest IS mine. If they can sell me something then we BOTH win.

      Laws cannot protect privacy. Intrusions of privacy can be too undetectable these days, the only way to protect someone's privacy would be to destroy everyone else's.

      1984 is probably the most miscited book ever. Analysis after analysis has shown that it would be a pretty much impossible situation to get into and even more impossible to maintain. George Orwell didn't even believe 1984 was possible. To put it simply, never cite the book in serious discussion about the future.

      Here are your options for the future. These are the only two.
      #1: It is illegal, horrible, etc, to invade someone else's privacy. All nice law abiding people don't look at each other. The rest of society and government don't see that as stopping them and they go ahead and watch whomever they want undetected. Who's going to know? Chances are nobody is watching them, after all. You have no privacy, though you can rest easy thinking you do while whomever wants is watching.

      #2: Everyone just goes ahead and accepts that they have no privacy. Society embrases the idea that cameras can be anywhere, and they even integrate them into daily life. You can tune into the police station at any time you want and watch the government at work. Check in on your congressman to make sure he's being proper with his interns. Watch your neighbors houses for people breaking in while they're away. Etc, etc, etc.

      Look, the cameras are going to be there either way. The technology is out and there's no way to stop it. But... why would you want to stop it anyway? Just because you have a little irrational hangup on privacy....

      Anyway, the cameras will be there, the only quesiton is who do you want watching them.

    8. Re:Right.... so? by Analysis+Paralysis · · Score: 2
      And if you were never born no processing could be done either, what's your point?

      The point is that personal privacy depends upon personal data being restricted and given out as sparingly as possible. What information you give out today will be used in unanticipated ways in the future. Witholding information is therefore your best defense.

      Their best intrest (sic) IS mine. If they can sell me something then we BOTH win

      *You* only win if the item being sold was (a) something you wanted/needed and (b) at the best price. As anyone living in a modern society should have figured out by now, the most heavily-advertised products are invariably the most expensive (the prices include the cost of advertising) and price is never a guarantee of quality. Saying that a corporation's interest aligns with yours is high-order naivety - did those buyers of Ford Pintos who ended up horribly disfigured in accidents due to the car's design flaws have their interests served by Ford?

      Laws cannot protect privacy. Intrusions of privacy can be too undetectable these days, the only way to protect someone's privacy would be to destroy everyone else's.

      Rubbish, rubbish and more rubbish. European countries like Norway have strong and effective legislation. Breaches on an individual scale can be stopped by using encryption and auditing all database accesses. Breaches on a company scale will tend to show up more easily due to the scale involved but can be countered by offering rewards to employees who reveal company lawbreaking, along with having a properly empowered regulator. The last point you made about having to destroy everyone else's privacy is ridiculous - can you provide an example?

      1984 is probably the most miscited book ever. Analysis after analysis has shown...

      Examples of this analysis please? Links? The point about the 1984 reference was the issue of an all-powerful state determining every aspect of its citizen's lives. With the increasing amount of personal information floating around and the US Government's desire to access and integrate it, this scenario is becoming more likely. And yes, control *can* be maintained with a good enough security apparatus and contempt for human rights (look at Iraq, China, Burma for good examples).

      Here are your options for the future. These are the only two.

      No they are not. A third option is to have regulation of computer data (as in most European countries), but with extra restrictions on data transfer between companies. Strong one-way encryption of databases can be used to prevent illegal or illicit transfers (as covered here). And those politicians coming up with uber-databases and big-brother style legislation should be voted out of office.

      This of course, requires active monitoring of the legal system and lobbying by the people of companies and legislatures. And it will be the sheep like you that rely on the activists to protect your rights.

      The technology is out and there's no way to stop it. But... why would you want to stop it anyway? Just because you have a little irrational hangup on privacy....

      If you want to live in a house with webcams everywhere making sure that you are not brewing bombs for Al'Qaeda in your bathroom, that's your choice. If you want every little action to be subject to public scrutiny and challenge then that is also your choice. It is however not mine, nor is it likely to be that of most of the people browsing this site. If you want to dismiss privacy as an "irrational hangup" then you deserve all the junk mail, intrusive advertising, conmen selling you penis expanders and "get rich quick" scams and other personal invasions that you are going to get.

    9. Re:Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

      If the FBI determines that people who buy the extra chunky are more likely to be murderers to such a significant amount that they warrant closer investigation, then I would certainly hope they follow through on those indications and investigate me when I buy it. Otherwise they're slacking in their jobs.

      If the IRS pays extra attention to anyone's tax returns and calls them on some payments being out of line then the system is working. It doesn't matter really who they're looking at, everyone should be paying their taxes by the letter of the law.

      In the end there's really nothing wrong with either of your proposed situations.

    10. Re:Right.... so? by volkris · · Score: 1

      Witholding information is your best defense against it being used in the future in unanticipated ways (assuming nobody can get the information through other channels). But so what? Giving complete access is the best defense against many other things. I'm certainly not going to be charged with murder in New York if I was tracked in LA at the time of the crime.

      The most heavily advertised products are almost NEVER the most expensive ones. But that doesn't matter. SOME of us have enough sense not to believe advertisements and so companies are only allowed to sell us products that we actually want and need.

      In the case of the Pinto people were simply not concerned about safety enough not to buy the car. Ford got to make a higher profit on a bunch of cars by not reengineering anything and people who wouldn't have cared enough got to buy them cheaply. Everyone won in the deal. Later on people died from their careless car selection, but that's a matter of poor judgement on the people's side and a completely unrelated topic.

      The last point you made about having to destroy everyone else's privacy is ridiculous - can you provide an example?

      Yes, I can. Given the funding I could within a month have numerous cameras planted in your house where you would never see or detect them. The ONLY way for this invasion of privacy to be detected would be for someone else to be watching me seeing me watching you. But of course that would be an invasion of MY privacy.

      No they are not. A third option is to have regulation of computer data

      How will you regulate the generation of computer data? Why don't I just go and plant my cameras in your house and start my own database of your activities inside? I could do this to a bunch of houses and come up with some killer insider informaiton for a business that I will start down the road, and nobody will know.

      This of course, requires active monitoring of the legal system and lobbying by the people of companies and legislatures. And it will be the sheep like you that rely on the activists to protect your rights.

      The irony is that sheep like you will keep real monitoring of public officials out of the hands of common citizens. They'll be able to watch us, all right, but the cameras will be one way.

      If you want to dismiss privacy as an "irrational hangup" then you deserve all the junk mail, intrusive advertising, conmen selling you penis expanders and "get rich quick" scams and other personal invasions that you are going to get.

      The want of privacy IS irrational. Whether or not you agree that it's to be easily dismissed it is simply not rational. In any case, you seem to have an odd fascination with the stupidity of the public. Many consumers are smart and carefull enough not to get caught in the scams, and the others sort of deserve it.

  80. A modest question by merodach · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey Mister CEO, how 'bout you invite me to your house?

    When you guide me to the door at the end of my visit do you mind if I leave wireless web cams scattered thoughout your house? Like say in your living room and kitchen? Or how about your bedrooms and bathrooms? It would really help me to understand you better.

    Honestly (and sarcasm aside now) - I would just like to know where these people come up with these ideas. Do they not realize it's invasive? Then again thay probably have the same undertsnading impairment of Mr. Ralsky

    --
    ***Blackholes are where the gods divided by zero.***
    1. Re:A modest question by merodach · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh god....I just had a horrifying thought - This is going to be used to figure out what artists are popular ... so they can more quickly saturate the market with copy cats and clones. So much for the record companies trying out new groups with new sounds. I'm depressed now....

      --
      ***Blackholes are where the gods divided by zero.***
  81. ZoneAlarm internals? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 3, Informative

    one of your points, ZoneAlarm (at least) does checksum all the apps and compares them when they request a connection.

    Wow, I would have thought that that would have been prohibitively expensive performancewise, which is why I would assume that only a "trusted OS" would do that. Interesting. So I'd assume (since Google fails to turn up a detailed whitepaper on the first few hits) that ZA MD5s the binary at the first socket access the app tries during an invocation (it certainly can't be every time the app tries to do something, or performance would be completely unbearable).

    But you really don't have to go to all this work. Copy (or contain) a copy of a trusted binary. Drop it into a directory somewhere. Drop a modified msvcrt.dll in the same directory, and let the program link to said DLL, and you've easily got untrusted code running within your "trusted" application.

    Frankly, as long as the OS doesn't have pretty low level support for this, you're going to be able to bypass it.

    I wonder what ZA could do to fix this? MD5summing linked to DLLs would be kind of expensive, and wouldn't work at all if there was application-initiated (rather than load-time OS-initiated) dynamic linking going on. I guess you could do that, take the performance hit...then ZA could hook LoadLibrary() and handle application-initiated linking....

    Still, as you and I mentioned, the monolithic design of IE, providing application-level services and using components left and right, is pretty much an unstoppable impediment to securing a Windows-based system.

    1. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by Reziac · · Score: 2

      BTW, I can tell you firsthand that IE5.5 (as forcibly installed by TurboTax) and Frontpage98 both go around ZoneAlarm.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by l1_wulf · · Score: 1

      LOL, well see what happens when you start a long reply, then leave and return a little later to wrap it up? Someone replied much faster with your reply following quickly after while my reply was busy steaming in its own juices for a bit. NIF also checksums, although I have neglected to dig up any detailed information on how it is handled or even where this information is stored. Like I said before, NIF suits my needs on my XP boxes and have not experienced any problems with it.

      I see one problem with your copied trusted binary and modified msvcrt.dll scenario. You say if someone can manage the requirements they can easily get untrusted code running within your trusted app. If someone managed to do all of that without you knowing I think you have a bigger issue to deal with than whether or not some company knows when you listen to Britney Spears. Not to mention whether or not it would be reasonable for this market research company (or whatever they are)to go to such lengths when the targetted market is most likely NOT going to be computer literate enough to care just how secure their machines are. /. may be one of the more popular websites on the web(as illustrated every time the unsuspecting get slash-dotted) but we amount to a drop in the bucket when compared to the fans of Michael Jackson and the likes.

    3. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by NexusTw1n · · Score: 3, Informative
      BTW, I can tell you firsthand that IE5.5 (as forcibly installed by TurboTax) and Frontpage98 both go around ZoneAlarm.
      Only if you accept the default settings, which automatically allow IEXPLORE.EXE, svchost.exe and services.exe. You can custom setup and then IE 5.5 or frontpage will not access the net without permission.

      And while the orginal parent post gets modded up, it would perhaps be more informative if he had actually used ZoneAlarm...
      Copy (or contain) a copy of a trusted binary. Drop it into a directory somewhere. Drop a modified msvcrt.dll in the same directory, and let the program link to said DLL, and you've easily got untrusted code running within your "trusted" application.


      A quick and simple test reveals that clicking on IEXPLORE.exe in the Program Files/Internet Explorer folder, allows internet access, (if ZA has been to set to allow it of course). Copying the exe into another folder - say My Documents, and running it, creates a ZoneAlarm alert asking if you want IEXPLORE.EXE to access the internet. Which reveals that ZA does indeed MD5 the binary PLUS the program path, making the script kiddy hack described above nigh on impossible.

      As Zone Alarm themselves say, no firewall is perfect, but IMO ZoneAlarm is pretty damn good. It's simple enough for any one to use, which vital in today's harry home owner DSL world, the basic version is free as in free, which is vital to encourage all Windows users to use it, and it contains decent (but not perfect) protection at application level, vital to stop trivial hacks like the one described above.
      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
    4. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      Yes, but some ISPs have started bundling ZA.

      To be fair, that probably means that most users are just going to click "OK" when they see a dialog, but arguing that ZA will be hampered by limited exposure isn't reasonable.

      And given that spyware is seen as one of the few avenues of profit for some types of software...well, there's certainly the incentive.

    5. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by Reziac · · Score: 2

      Okay, I'll be more specific:

      ZAPro 1.0 on WinME (which had been 98lited and generally beaten into submission, but still had its default IE5.5 install). System had no modem yet. IExplore and some other stuff had tried to call out; ZAP (set to "high" plus some custom'd "nobody gets out without asking"; IE5.5 is set to "ask every time") had been doing its "do you want to allow.." thing in the normal and expected way. Installed FP98. My first clue that FP had gone around ZA, was when FP whined "unable to find the online connexion" (doubtless due to the nonexistent modem :) Whatever FP did, ZA apparently didn't see it happen.

      ZAAmateur 2.25 on Win98 with IE5.0 (not 98lited but had been 100% well-behaved). ZA, set to "High", had been stopping everything at the gate (incl. IExplore, also set to "ask") in the normal fashion. Turbotax forcibly installed IE5.5 (and mangled DUN in the process). Once I finally got DUN working again, I went online (using Netscape) to fetch some stuff.. and in less than 10 seconds, the very first ding ZA reported came from a Microsoft IP address (I recognised the netblock, but also whois'd and confirmed it), I'd have to look up the port again but it wasn't one they had any business peeking into. The implication is that something installed by IE5.5 had phoned home behind ZA's back. This is why IE5.5 has since been IEradicated.

      BTW, I have ZAAmateur (as I call the free version :) 2.6.something set to "high" on the WinXP box, and AFAICT it is blocking everything, including iexplore.exe, svchost.exe and services.exe (those latter two occasionally ask for access at bootup; when I did use IE6, ZA piped up in the normal fashion). FP2000 was installed briefly but didn't do anything unusual.

      I certainly agree that for most folk, ZoneAlarm is very good and easy to install and use. It's what I use and what I give my own clients. But as you say it's not perfect, and it rather disturbs me that the imperfections I've noted are tied to M$ products. The implication is that the OS (or stuff directly related thereto) is deliberately disabling ZA for certain functions.

      OTOH, I've never had the least hint that anything got *in* uninvited.

      Anyway, better to be aware of holes than not :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    6. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by NexusTw1n · · Score: 1
      the very first ding ZA reported came from a Microsoft IP address (I recognised the netblock, but also whois'd and confirmed it)
      I have to say I've seen something similar, following a clean XP install, ZA installed immediately before DSL drivers, a full 5 minutes after using windows update to patch the system, I saw M$ trying to contact my PC - this was as I say, at least 5 minutes after the download had completed and installed, 20 minutes after the "we don't record any information - honest guvnor" - scan my computer for updates screen.

      I also saw the weirdest alert, one I've never seen before or since - ZA alerted and said do you want xxx.exe (annoyingly I forgot to note the program name) to receive information from the internet. Not send, receive.

      I'm in absolutely no doubt MS has hooks in the OS that any firewall can't block, because they'll use something like 21, 25 or 80 to bypass external walls, and sneak under application walls because they aren't behaving in a standard way.
      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
    7. Re:ZoneAlarm internals? by Reziac · · Score: 2

      That's why I don't use Windows Update at all (in fact it's the first thing I do away with) -- and why I'm not going to install any XP service packs either. At this point, I don't think either is to be trusted. My solution to the IE/OE/WSH security problems, is to not use IE/OE, and to disable scripting.

      I've never had ZA ask "do you want to *receive* ..." but that would indeed make me very nervous -- it's exactly the sort of alert I'd expect if a trojan server component had installed on my system!! The .EXE name should be in your ZA logfile, tho. Would be interesting to see what it was.

      Likewise, I've no doubt M$ has the OS rigged to let their own stuff sneak in and out (and gods know who else has discovered the holes). Methinks a dedicated firewall machine is in my future.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  82. Why not just ask? by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 2

    This is even dumber because if record companies wanted me to send them the play counts from my MP3 program so that they could make more of the kind of music I like, I would gladly do it. Just use an open source program so that we know exactly what it's doing, and make sure users are asked if they want to participate.

    --
    "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  83. privacy policy by ragnar · · Score: 3, Informative

    The company's privacy policy is listed on their site. From a quick read, the only thing that upsets me is that they pass along your info to the recording groups. It appears that only basic contact info is gathered and there is a fairly easy opt out approach. Of course, they can publish a rosy policy and blatantly ignore it.

    From what I can tell, they are trying to impress recording labels with an avenue to add value to the CD. I read a lot of ranting about how the music industry is clueless and could leverage the Internet better. Maybe this is a positive more in that direction. It is hard to tell.

    I'm a bit paranoid about it as well, but since I use Mac OS X I'll let the Windows people cut their teeth on this one.

    --
    -- Solaris Central - http://w
  84. It�s not that bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Creating a profile of your customers isnt really anything wrong and its advisable for those companies interested in providing good services. If I owned a record company I would like to have my customers profiled. The problem arises when you dont have the choice wheter to be profiled or not. So far bandlink asks for your permission. So the only thing that can be done is to expect that this information turns back to us in the form of better music. At least, i think, we should try not to think that record companies are evil by nature.

  85. What about spoofing the data? by stoicfaux · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can imagine a few bored hacker types writing something to flood Bandlink with bogus data. "Wow, a million people a day are playing 'Baby Got Back' every hour on the hour!"

    I can imagine really, really bored hackers writing a virus to have infected computers spoof data. A new world-wide phenonmena: Polka Love songs!

    1. Re:What about spoofing the data? by nuclearsnake · · Score: 1

      What would be the legal/moral issues to this. Say it does happen. (virus gets out, and sends bad info to the music industry)

      Given:
      1. The virus isnt classified as a virus (for whatever reason) or it gets spred around as a "screw the music industry files"...
      2. It doesnt do anything else (delete files etc)...

      Would the Music people have any rights against the people using it? The creator(s)?
      Just wondering...

      --
      See the forbiden post Here
  86. They're in Canada. by quantumparadox · · Score: 5, Informative

    I bought Santana's Shaman last month and it has the wonderful tracking technology built in. I was curious as to what the "Bandlink" thing did when I bought the cd (never heard of it before). Luckily, I went to their website first and saw the usage statistics crap and decided against installing it.

    I read part way through the EULA (which is apparently available on their website but I couldn't find it) but I didn't see anything about allowing them access to all information.

    I support the idea of adding content to cd's to make them more attractive to purchase ... but I don't want to have to give up personal privacy for those extras. If I just had to install and register I wouldn't mind, tracking is going too far IMHO.

    Since I couldn't find the EULA online (as promised) i've taken the liberty of posting it online (hopefully its not illegal but oh well).
    Its available here
    It weighs in at a hefty 12.8kB ... for text file!.

  87. Buffer overruns... by tjrw · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hmmm...
    wonder how careful they were in programming the server app that listens for these "tattle-tale" CDs.

    Just a thought

    Tim

  88. Don't complain - instead generate bogus reports by karl.auerbach · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The best way to stop this kind of thing is to figure out what it is sending and then to generate reports about things we are not listening to. It will make the marketing reports useless.

  89. Who cares? by Flavius+Stilicho · · Score: 1

    Just don't buy the CDs. I stopped buying CDs over a year ago. I'm not worried about it, nor do I care. I haven't heard anything released since then that I'd want to spend my cash on anyway. If I hear anything that I really like, I'll download it. If the RIAA is sucessful in stopping me from doing that then I just don't listen to new music any more. I have enough music in my collection that I've legally purchaed to keep me happy for a long, long time -- especially at the rate good music is coming out these days.

    Really, who cares? Let them bankrupt themselves.

  90. Use it in music shops by MoreDruid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wouldn't mind this software - though a bit extended - running in music shops. If I would want to buy a cd and listen to it before I buy, I would like to have a touch screen with a 1-10 score for each song. That way I - the customer can express what I feel for each song so the Record Companies may actually see that they publish Bad Stuff (tm). Include two buttons on the screen saying "good music, will buy" and "crap again, will download favourite songs from P2P though" and they can get a legit sense of the consumers' viewpoints. This will be perfectly anonymous (yeehaw for paranoia) and optional.
    They can use this scheme for the downloaded software too, and privacy issues aside, both the consumer and the industry may benefit from this.

    --
    The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
    1. Re:Use it in music shops by buss_error · · Score: 2
      would like to have a touch screen with a 1-10 score for each song. That way I - the customer can express what I feel for each song so the Record Companies may actually see that they publish Bad Stuff (tm).

      They know when they publish Bad Stuff. It's called "Sales in the crapper". Oops. Sorry! I forgot. It's called "No one is buying our overpriced^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h valuable product because they are stealing it with the Internet.

      Quick question for all you music downloaders: How often do you d/l music that you like, but haven't ever bought?

      As for me, I always end up buying it second hand or given to me as a gift. (I don't buy IP where the IP monopoly makes a buck on it.) Since I'm an old fart, I like older music. Good second hand market there.

      --
      Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
  91. IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Penguinoflight · · Score: 2

    The CD player watches YOU

    Oh wait... that's whats happening here.

    --
    "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
    1 John 4:14
  92. Hmmm by mao+che+minh · · Score: 2
    I don't mean to sound pessimistic, but this doesn't suprise me. We go through cycles of how much personal freedom and individualism we enjoy. Right now, with all that has happened in the past decade (the past two years especially), we are at a point of increased privacy loss and nationalism. We as a people will tire of it, it will become unpopular in politics and business, and then we will enjoy another round of increased freedoms.

    This country has only existed for a little over two hundred years, afterall. Time will tell how it will at play out. Let's just hope that we don't end up like SOVIET RUSSIA.

  93. A mixed cursing? by SmartGamer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This may have merit, but as a nerd, I shudder at the entire nauseating concept of such an invasion.

    I just don't like how they don't ask. If they said it clearly, released two versions, and/or popped up a dialog requester with a simple "May I," it wouldn't be a problem. But the fact that it's so subtle and silent indicates to me that this company knows that this misfeature is not going to make it popular.

    On the flip side, it will show artists what music is popular, and what we like to hear, so more of it will be made.

    On the flip side's flip side, said artists will just create the same type of music, remixed a bit, and rereleased- it's the new stuff that I like, the odd and offbeat. If it's cloned, it sort of loses that.

    It's sort of like a survey about your music preferences. Except they don't ask if you want to take it.

    I can also see a DDoS attack on the system myseriously slowing down your comptuer (if you don't know this is happening) if their server gets overloaded by a whole bunch of music listeners, or just a good old ping flood, as your system tries again and again to send. I bet this could cause a good bit of net.congestion, too.

    Not to mention that modem users will hate its guts.

    --
    Warning: Poster of this comment is a nerd. Just like everybody else here.
    1. Re:A mixed cursing? by SmartGamer · · Score: 1

      ...but you have to know to do it.

      --
      Warning: Poster of this comment is a nerd. Just like everybody else here.
  94. Really... why does this matter? Spell it out here by volkris · · Score: 1

    So what?
    Now corporations will be able to ::gasp:: give me more of the products I want! They'll be able to see what kinds of music I think are not crap and make more of it so I'll buy music, stock the grocery stores with goods I'd rather buy to entice me into larger purchases, and even make it easier for me to buy the things I'd be buying anyway.

    For all of this talk about how our privacy is being eroded, nobody ever actually steps up and gives a really good reason why that's a bad thing. It's just as arguably a good thing, and in the end there is no hope of reversing this stuff anyway.

    Might as well let it go and stop holding off on the benfits of the future, right? This resistance is hurting us all more than the actual erosion ever could.

  95. Well, lets put them out of business. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Can someone work out EXACTLY what this software does, so we can fake it and pollute their data.

    Once the record companies see that the service they are buying from these people is compromised.

    What we need is a distributed DOS tool that we can all run and make Greensleeves the most popular tune of the millenium. Or better yet, Britney (you didn't really believe that she was that popular did you ?). :-)

  96. I think that means they own me... by rakjr · · Score: 1

    Let's see, I pay for the dial-up service. I pay for the cd. They use my cd, my computer, and my bandwidth. Therefore they owe the user. Before you laugh, I believe it was Georgia Tech that successfully sued an employee for computer time and bandwidth because he loaded the SETI program (or something similiar) and had lab computers doing computations during screen saving. If they did win, there is then precidence for this type of a law suit.

    --
    In a place beyond time and space, in a land far better than this, look for me there...
  97. Does the RIAA allow htis? by mark*workfire · · Score: 1
    The primary user of the COMPUTER on which the SOFTWARE is installed may make a second copy for his or her exclusive use on a portable computer.

    Now, does this mean I can make a copy of only the software on this disk, or the entire disk? Seems to me that this would give a "fair use" type argument for making that copy. However, you'd have to use an average speed CD player or less, otherwise you'd be making too many copies.

  98. Why do we care? by Piquan · · Score: 2

    I care about privacy, but when somebody else asks me about it, I don't know how to respond. How do you reply to people who say, "But I have nothing to hide!"

    1. Re:Why do we care? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 2

      Simple: "You have nothing to hide either, right? So do you want the entire world seeing the details of your checkbook, or your boss to overhear that joke you told your friend about him? No? Why? After all, you don't have anything to hide, right?".

  99. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
    perhaps you are just full of yourself and have a narrow view of the world where you are king shit and everyone else "just doesn't get it"? 99% of the time thats the case - especially with nerds.
    That's the excuse the stupid (or worse; willfully ignorant) tend to use to justify their behaviour. It's a fact; some people just don't apply common sense, or even some form of reasoning before they open their mouths. Granted, we all have our "duh" moments, but for some people their life is a perpetual series of "duh" moments.
    --
    BD Phone Home!

    Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  100. Bandlink Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I just now figured out some of the recent emails that have come my way from Slashdot.

    I speak on behalf of Bandlink so you can please respond to Support@bandlink.com with any questions you have about the software.

    Jump to Conclusion:
    Essentially, we always get mixed in with the ominous nature of the Recording
    Industry in terms of the Napster litigations and other bad press. We don't offer any encryption software and we are not "Spyware".

    What is it?
    Bandlink is pretty basic in its technology. Designed to make Music "Bigger"
    by providing actual CD owners access to Online Bonus content and other extras. The Online content is served
    from a webserver which, like all webservers, provide "Webtrends" style
    analysis for what files are interacted with or downloaded.
    (This makes up the bulk of our reports and all websites from Amazon, to the NY Times does this.)

    When users interact, with the bonus content, the "Aggregate" information is
    compiled in reports. Also, if the music listener "Ranks" a specific song from the CD or
    from the web based Bonus Content section, then that too is added to the reports which go directly to the musician or record label who most needs to know.

    In terms of personal information, and like most websites, we don't know who is viewing our web content, we just know that someone is.

    All of this information, as most Internet savvy users will know can be obtained via a "Web Server Log". If a user fills out a survey which requests personal information than that is the users choice, and that information will be sent directly to the artists themselves. (Personal info is pretty much limited to mailing lists and other opt-in services.)

    Other than that, Bandlink is pretty mundane. I have seen some of the things that the music industry is considering in terms of encryption, and believe me that this is much much better in that it gives the fans extra content, and lets the artists know more about their fans.

    Please feel free to ask us any further questions about the software directly.

    I have read through most of your posts and you guys are kind of going down a technical path that gives Bandlink waaaaay too much credit. But you are giving some good ideas! (kidding)

    Support@bandlink.com

  101. easy solution to privacy... by Slyk · · Score: 1

    a decentralized internet protocol...perhaps imbedded into a freenet-ish decentralized OS. I advocate a complete abandonment of any protocol that traffics advertisements. Yeah that's a bit extreme, but at this point its only going to get worse. A geek-supported protocol that forbids such waste of bandwidth is the perfect way to fight back. "...even though we die, La Resistance lives on!"

  102. Make this useless.... by Devi0us · · Score: 1

    What's to keep people from finding out the data format of the outgoing packets and seeding their database with a couple of terabytes of bogus statistics? Say every couple seconds a few thousand users send out packets stating that everyone is listening to the best of the 700 club or something? This seems relatively east to make useless, as there can't be too much authentication going on here...

  103. Ask "If you don't have anything to hide...... by felix+rayman · · Score: 1

    then why are you wearing clothes?"

  104. IP addresses to avoid... by raistphrk · · Score: 4, Informative

    This list came from PeerGuardian's blocking list. I'm guessing the BSA IP block at the end. If you really want to keep from reporting data to said parties, just add these (and whatever other beneficiaries of your private data) to your iptables, ipfilter, ZoneAlarm, Tiny, etc. blocked zones. Note that, if for any reason, you want to go to these parties' websites, you won't be able to; your firewall will block access.

    Or, to be perfectly safe, you could borrow a page from our current administration's sex ed book and abstain from downloading. ...but it just feels so good!

    OverPeer:65.174.255.255
    OverPeer:65.160.0.0-65. 160.127.255
    Ranger:216.122.0.0-216.122.255.255
    R anger:204.92.244.0-204.92.244.255
    MediaForce:65.1 92.0.0-65.192.0.255
    MediaForce:65.223.0.0-65.223. 255.255
    MediaForce:4.43.96.0-4.43.96.255
    MediaDe fender:66.79.0.0-66.79.255.255
    RIAA:208.225.90.0- 208.225.90.255
    RIAA:12.150.191.0-12.150.191.255
    MPAA:63.199.57.96-63.199.57.128
    MPAA:64.166.187.1 28-64.166.187.192
    MPAA:198.70.114.0-198.70.114.25 5
    MPAA:209.67.0.0-209.67.255.255
    NetPD:207.155.1 28.0-207.155.255.255
    NetPD:128.241.0.0-128.241.25 5.255
    UnknownC&DCop:64.106.170.128-64.106.170.192
    BayTSP:209.204.128.0-209.204.191.255
    Vidius:207 .155.128.0-207.155.255.255
    GAIN(spyware):64.94.89 .0-64.94.89.255
    GAINCME(spyware):66.35.247.0-66.3 5.247.255
    GAINCME(spyware):66.35.229.0-66.35.229. 255
    MediaDefender:64.225.292.0-64.225.292.127
    RI AA:208.192.0.0-208.192.255.255
    Xupiter.com:63.236 .32.50
    Xupiter.com(mirror):63.208.235.30
    BSA (?) 208.121.215.0-208.121.215.255 (Not sure)

  105. This has been going on for years on DVD disks... by Esterhaus_48 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Many DVD disks include "InterActual" (previously known as "PC Friendly") software which is autorun upon DVD insertion on Windows machines. To the typical home consumer, the message presented appears as if it originated from the PC itself, prompting the user to install the software in order to view the DVD content.

    There are several issues with this, and relavent to the topic of "illegitimacy of spyware":
    1. "InterActual" doesn't actually install an MPEG2 decoder filter, it merely uses the existing filter provided with a new PC
    2. "InterActual" software attempts to redirect the user to whatever content is available online relating (or not) to the title being viewed - spam essentially
    3. "InterActual" assigns itself as the default DVD playback application in Windows, and thus the user is subjected to the inferior quality of the DVD navigation software
    4. "InterActual", if the user performs the standard "click-thru" agreement to watch their DVD content, broadcasts information about what DVD content the user views

    Suffice to say, these points are easily discovered with a Google search, so I'll refrain from excessive linking and leave further research to the reader.

    Now, for the more-than-capable user (read: most of you reading this), an explanation for preventing/disabling/uninstalling this spyware is obviated. But as the initiated, it's our duty to explain this to those who may not understand (read: friends, neighbors, family) what happens with spyware such as "InterActual" software.

    On a personal note: After purchasing my last PC from Dell (please no "Dude" jokes) and inserting a DVD disk, it presented me with a dialog informing me that "InterActual" software was attempting to install and overwrite my settings, and gave me the option to block "InterActual" from installing on my machine. As expected, content is played through the standard DVD software provided by the OEM and I don't have to see that annoying banner anymore when I insert an "InterActual" or "PC Friendly Enabled!" disk.

    Cheers!

    J. Esterhaus

  106. Your desktop doesn't belong to you. by PD · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you're got problems with pop-ups or advertising on your desktop, you don't own it. Microsoft or Apple owns it and they leased it to you.

    So, quit your bitching and download an operating system of your very own already. As long as you're borrowing someone elses' why should you expect to control what it does?

  107. Well, which do they want? by mtnharo · · Score: 1

    First they say we can't play CDs in our computers (evil pirates that we are), then they want us to play them in our computers so that they can track what we are(not) buying.

    If "everyone gets their music from {insert current trendy P2P app here}", then who is going to buy these CDs so they can get more advertising fodder?

  108. Is Pallaidum an answer to spyware like this? by burnsy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Won't my Microsoft Windows "Palladium" PC stop my 13 year old son from installing garbage like this on the home PC, saving our household from having our privacy viloated.

  109. Re:There are already laws protecting computers. . by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1
    I own my own system but with WIndows2k service pack3 installed, ms has ultimate control. If I look at the available users, I see 2 with strange sets of numbers as names. I recieve an error message if I try to remove them. Who are these users? They are agents that Microsoft uses to have ultimate control over my own system.

    Microsoft legally can do this because they own the software but not my hardware. Very cleaver workaround. My guess is the this company has a similiar saying claiming that its their software and god given right to do whatever they want because of it. If you do not like then don't use it!

    I agree that something needs to be done. Pallidium will be very chilling since ms will now own the cpu and all the hardware as well as the software.

  110. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Scaba · · Score: 2

    I believe it originated with the Russian-turned-American comedian Yakov Smirnoff, who also gave us the famous quote "What a country!".

  111. CDs are SHIT by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 3, Interesting
    That's why I listen to the RADIO. Forget this alleged "anti-piracy" BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU garbage.

    Besides, I don't take any of that garbage. Both of my home networks, which are physically separated for paranoia purposes, must pass through a two-stage firewall system powered by four separate OpenBSD boxen (two for each network's firewall). The configuration of these firewalls has evolved over three years' time, but suffice it to say that I feel relatively comfortable knowing that any site that is not specifically white-listed will NOT get accessed by any of my machines, nor will any whitelisted machines get accessed for protocols which I have not specifically allowed. The advantage here is that NO software is going to report JACK SCHITT about my behavior to NO marketer.

    One final note: I am a marketer by profession. B2B, specifically. And I refuse to employ any big-brother techniques in my work. This may be more difficult when marketing to enormous herds of stupid, technologically illiterate masses of IDIOTS, where you need to be stupid like that to make any sales. But I don't give a damn. I'm doing my part to avoid world-wide slavery by not doing that garbage myself.

    WAR IS PEACE.
    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.
    IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

    1. Re:CDs are SHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Christ, please tell me you are joking. Either that or let me guess... You've got a bomb shelter in the backyard with a year supply of canned goods, you run a family fire drill at random times of the day and night once a week and you wear gloves while handling anything that has not been specifically sterilized by you and you alone. That's not security concious, that's downright friggin paranoid. What do you keep on your home PCs, the formula for Coca-Cola? Restricting yourself to such an extreme takes what COULD be an enjoyable experience (browsing the web) and turns it into a fright filled, nightmare inducing JOB. I guess I should be thankful I didn't grow up in a household of paranoia...

  112. How does this work? by Viceice · · Score: 1

    If the record companies make CD to be defective on normal users' PCs, users who don't know how to circumvent copy protection and firewall themselves, then they put in spyware on it hoping to gather statistics on them each time they play it on their PCs... Sounds rather catch-22 to me...

    --
    Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
  113. Not new by ucblockhead · · Score: 3, Informative
    In Winamp:

    Go to Options - Preferences - Setup. The last checkbox is "Allow Winamp to report basic, anonymous program usage information".

    Most mp3 players have something like this, to a greater or lesser extent.

    I'm also amazed that the allegedly technical slashdot audience has not yet figured out that in order for these "bandlink" CDs to work, the user would need to install special software on their machine. I mean, read the fucking site. These "bandlink" CDs don't do squat unless the user specially and deliberately installs the software.

    It is very clear that this is not some sort of behind the seems privacy invasion but an above board trading of information for privacy. (Which, indeed, has issues of its own, but...) Other companies (Real, Musicmatch, etc.) do worse right now.

    --
    The cake is a pie
    1. Re:Not new by SmartGamer · · Score: 1

      But that software can be included as an autorun installer on the disc. And should that installer be silent, there's no way to know...

      Winamp at least tells you so you can turn it off. It even asks in the install.

      --
      Warning: Poster of this comment is a nerd. Just like everybody else here.
  114. A note on TPF by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    Receantly, they have rather changed teh focus of their firewall,a nd I feel the new versions aren't as good as the old ones. However another company, Kerio, is now making Kerio Personal Firewall which seems ot be just like the old Tiny. www.kerio.com.

  115. Spoof it baby! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Don't like this bandlink crap?

    Write a distributed denial of accuracy program (DDOAP) so that anyone who wants to corrupt the bandlink statistics can download and run your program in the background and every hour or so it will send out information to bandlink telling them you are listening to some high-brow band nobody's ever heard of.

    Next thing you know, They Might Be Giants will get a record deal for $30M an album...

  116. The Average Idiot by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Funny
    Surely you don't believe everything you read? Ha-ha ha-ha ha-haah!

    "Geez, how many times can one guy listen to CowboyNeal Sings Manilow?"

    <Troy McClure Voice>Shhhh! Let's just let that one be our little secret, shall we?</Troy McClure Voice>

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  117. Read my post again, very carefully by kfg · · Score: 2

    "Microsoft legally can do this because they own the software but not my hardware. Very cleaver workaround. My guess is the this company has a similiar saying claiming that its their software and god given right to do whatever they want because of it. If you do not like then don't use it!"

    You'll find that this was my point, *and* my solution. Don't use windows. Don't use Palladium. Resist.

    Of course you are the only one that can determine the extent to which you consider *your* system your property, and to what extent you are willing to accept certain *percieved* deprivations for forsaking Windows.

    Me, I consider freedom and functional ownership of my own system and data a *feature.* One which MS cannot, and will not, match.

    If this means I can't play the latest game with latest invasive EULA, well, there *are* other games.

    For that matter Linux can do nearly anything Windows can ( And the odd holes are being filled with amazing rapidity),BUT - you have to be willing to make the step of being willing to realize that Linux does so *differently.*

    This is the step that many are not willing to make. In fact, many are so tied to the Windows way of doing things that they believe that if Linux doesn't accomplish the *same end* in the *same way* it doesn't do it at all.

    There really is a "Windows way" and a "Unix philosophy." When in Rome you'll get along better if you do as the Romans. Life really is just as livable in other cultures, even computer cultures.

    KFG

  118. Easiest solution by dethl · · Score: 1

    format C:

    --
    "Some fight for law. Some fight for justice. What will you fight for? One day, you will see."
  119. Note to self: by dkoyanagi · · Score: 3, Funny

    the CD player knows too much...

  120. I don't think that description is even accurate by aichpvee · · Score: 1

    It seems to me that if you are running a non-windows operating system or if you just don't install their software that it is just a normal cd with a useless filesystem on it filled with useless files.

    --
    The Farewell Tour II
  121. Yet another reason to turn off autorun by TyrranzzX · · Score: 1

    Users don't have to sign any eulas or sign any agreements...the thing can probably install invisibly and quickly without the user even noticing, especially on todays uber-machines.

    You know, I think I was right to buy this router...I may be needing it (as supposed to being glad it's there) within the coming year or 2.

  122. OUCH! What's that sharp pain in my ass? by vectorhead · · Score: 2, Funny

    --OOOOh! i'm being FUCKED by the recording industry -- atleast i'm still loosened up thanks to the motion picture biz.

    --
    \\vectorhead\\
  123. Never say never. by Teach · · Score: 2

    The CD is a "dead" media, it's not something that magically comes to life and starts transmitting information.

    You know, that's just what I used to tell people about email. Remember the Good Times "virus"? I don't know how many emails I sent to people in the mid-nineties explaining to them that emails were just text and weren't "executed" in any way and thus were incapable of harming your computer. Just like (as my example went at the time) no audio CD, no matter how malicious, could contain instructions that could break your CD player.

    Well, guess what? Now everyone* uses an email client that defaults to executing, without notification, code embedded in received emails. By changing the rules, they made a liar out of me in less than six years (the "Good Times" hoax first appeared in December of 1994; the "Love Letter" email worm appeared in May of 2000).

    And in five or ten years, who knows? Maybe everyone* will be running CD player applications that default to "facilitating said information gathering and transmission".

    You and I know better, and this doesn't personally affect us. But that doesn't change the fact that the estimated economic impact of the Love Bug was over $8 billion. Mind you, this is from something I thought was patently impossible a few years earlier.

    Never say never.

    * not everyone

    --
    Graham "Teach" Mitchell, computer science teacher, Leander HS
    1. Re:Never say never. by weave · · Score: 2
      LOL. Yeah, similar thing happened to me in the 80s. I used to say "You can't get a virus by simply sticking a floppy into your computer and taking documents off of it. You actually need to run a program to get infected.

      Then along came WDEF virus on Macs and of course later, Macro viruses in Office docs...

      I also remember someone telling me that there were going to be 56K modems, which I said was impossible because that's too near the speed the telco sends your voice data at and since modem data goes through A-D then D-A at other end, the loss would eliminate that as being possible.

      Then of course, 56K modems came out that worked because they eliminated the D-A step and once again I had egg on my face!

  124. A strange tale.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    okay, so I was bored tonight...

    It appears this software is from: Javakitty Media Inc. in Atlanta, GA.

    The terms of usage clearly state the aggregation of information including machine specs, etc.

    The 'blink.exe' program appears to use libexpat.dll for XML parse functionality and for chatting with users using Jabber.

    Oddly enough, when the program starts it first tries port 80 (HTTP) on www.microsoft.com and if that fails, it tried www.amazon.com. I guess to verify a valid HTTP connection.

    Then it sends XML info back to uma.javakitty.com:8080 with various user content and song info. It logs in with username 'jared' and a trivially encrypted passwd.

    Finally, there appears to be some funky access with an MFC42 (ordinal 0x0219) call with a file 'C:\temp.dat' first with www.chironexsoftware.com and then with www.google.com.

    But wait there's more...

    the final twist is that chironexsoftware.com is registered to the author of this software...

    Registrant:
    jared allen
    65 Koola st , wishart
    Brisbane NA 4122
    Brisbane, NA 4122
    AU
    33432174

    I wonder if he's using this software to pump hits to google for his own website? Hmmm

    Now, time to remove this crap from my computer....

  125. Re:They're in Canada. dude. by freaq · · Score: 1

    whoah. dude.

    dig this excerpt, emphasis added:


    Replacement, Modification and Upgrade of the Software...In the event that CD Intelligence offers a replacement or modified version of or any upgrade to the SOFTWARE, (a) your continued use of the SOFTWARE is conditioned on your acceptance of such replacement or modified version of or upgrade to the SOFTWARE and any accompanying superceding EULA and (b) in the case of the replacement or modified SOFTWARE, your use of all prior versions of the SOFTWARE is terminated.

    so...let's just say for a moment that the softrware is _not_ intrusive, and they have - let's be charitable for a moment - taken measures to prevent data mining. they can foist a modified version on me, along with a modified EULA, or just tell me that a modified version is available, and i have to either (a) bend over and take it, and say i like it, or (b) stop using it.
    staying with the previous version is not an option.

    I wonder who their alleged lawyers are. They should know that it's not legal to read microsoft's mail.
    --
    united states nuclear device terrorist bioweapon encryption cocaine korea syria iran iraq columbia cuba
  126. Use copyright against 'em by chicxulub · · Score: 2, Funny

    Claim copyright on your playlist and then prosecute 'em for piracy of your IP.

  127. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by l1_wulf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What really cracks me up is how this "holier-than-thou" sentiment is lavashed in a forum where we think it is important to be the bigger nerd but what I'd really like to know is how many of you tell your grandma/mother/aunt/girlfriend/whatever that they're an idiot for not keeping up with PC security, or for not patching their OS (what?!?! your grandma doesn't use Linux! What a fucking moron! I'm glad she's not related to me...). Gimme a break folks. How many of you immediately turned around and issued a security bulletin to your family about this horrid new CD technology. I can see it now..."I repeat, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!! If you feel unsafe or unsure whether or not you are using one of these new CDs, please contact my secretary, er answering machine and schedule an appoint, er leave a message and I'll set a time for me to do a security visit with you to ensure you are not in any DANGER. I repeat you morons, DO NOT INSERT THE CD INTO YOUR COMPUTER'S CD DRIVE!!!! (yes grandma, this means you too)." Get real guys.

  128. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by jbf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps. But on the other hand, it could just be that most people are incompetent at their jobs, driving, and whatever else.

    To wit: the left lane on a road is for passing. Most states have laws that restrict the distance that a driver can drive in the left lane before moving over. If you've ever driven long-distance, you know that there are those who insist on indefinately going limit plus 5 (or worse yet: limit) in the left lane. And no, I'm not breaking the law if I try to pass, I live in a prima facie state.

    Second: Examine for a moment a Motorola v60c. The earlier versions are the best example of this. The antenna easily bends in one's pocket. (They've fixed this with new antenna revs.) Worse, when extended, the antenna acts as a lever for the (bulky) antenna tip to use to exert massive force against the rest of the antenna. Net result: three antenna breaks in 6 months, two in-pocket.

    Third: Went to a fast food place looking for food and directions to a gas station. Someone (A) is trying to help me out by asking someone else (B). A: "you familiar with (cityname)?" B: "yeah, kinda" A: "are there any gas stations near here?" B: "whatcha looking for?" A: "gas"

    There's far, far more. These are the easy examples. But if you can honestly say you have not run across any stupidity in the past week, good for you! You're a far more patient being than I.

    Incidentally, I don't mean to disparage those who can't use computers. I can't perform brain surgery; just because others have no expertise in my area doesn't make them idiots. But when people cannot do their jobs or comprehend basic English (where English is their native language)...

  129. Re:Violation of U.S. Privacy laws by hhknighter · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wait wait!
    It's ok for them to do that because they are big corporations. Hence they can make you work for them and turn your computer into a market reporting slave. And if the mass decide against it they will just blame you for allege pirating of mp3s and make it all ok.

    Next step, requirement of CDkeys to activate your CD. Then, charge per CD per song per play through your creditcard or bank account

  130. Duh ?? (How it works) by AftanGustur · · Score: 2


    Didn't anybody read the link ?? (Now *that* was a stupid question !!!)

    There is a small data partition on the CD and MS Windows will "autorun" a program on it. This program will present the user with the Bandlink license and the install the monitoring software on the user's PC. (Windows only).

    Now take a look at the Slashdot story : your new music disc may be transmitting your listening habits in real time to the respective record company.

    Bullshit !

    --
    echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
  131. Why be so concerned? by cyricv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While I agree the music industry is out of control, I really don't see what the issure is here. If I understand correctly it tracks, 1) what cd/tracks you listen to, and 2) when you listen to them. And I would assume it does this by IP, platform, etc.

    How is this any diffrent than when I log onto netscape or google, they track when I log on, and various other information? Such CD tracking seems only a natural progression in information networking.

    And to say nothing about the massive amounts of information a credit card or 'preffered buyer' card can track, knowing what I buy when, and my age. And music CD's are no less optional to consume than a credit card.

    I don't see why this is a problem. If the program accesses data asside from my IP, or information I directly give it, there is a problem.

    But if the company knows my name and what CD I listen to when... I don't care. Such information cannot be used against me, it only shows that my computer was indeed playing the CD, and not that I was. And hey if they can verify it was indeed you it would make a great aliby in court...

    Copy protection blocking access to my files to make MP3s is wrong, but I really don't see how this is. It would seem to be part of the information age.

    1. Re:Why be so concerned? by hhknighter · · Score: 1

      you are probably right. Seriously, how much information can they mine? They can probably afford better statistics gathering method. Like maybe hiring backstreet boys to call everyone who didn't buy their album and ask why you chose westlife instead.

      But most of us are no big fans of recording industry, especially after Napzter got canned.

      Admit it though, Napzter was against the rules.

  132. Protocol? by karlm · · Score: 2

    Anyone up for packet-sniffing the protocol and sending me the results? I'd be more than happy to write a Python and/or Ocaml client to spout random statistics back. Maybe we could set up a website with teams and stuff, keeping track of the total number of fake listening hours reported. (Of course, there'd be lots of cheating on those stats, but what do you expect when you're trying to keep track of self-reported cheating stats?)

    --
    Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
    1. Re:Protocol? by karlm · · Score: 2

      Ehh... you don't need the actual CD to claim that you're listening to a song on it. I also doubt that it' a challenge-response protocol involving random stretches of the current song as proof that you're really listening to the song you claim. My guess is that it's a completely trusted client. Thanks for playing, though.

      --
      Copyright Violation:"theft, piracy"::Anti-Trust Violation:"thermonuclear price terrorism"<-Overly dramatic language.
  133. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by dr.Flake · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well,

    "Half of them are dumber than that."

    actally, some of that half could be equally dumb.

    But i agree on using the median and not the average.
    (because of the uneaqual distribution.)

    --
    Why are other peoples sig's always more witty ???
  134. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by fullpunk · · Score: 1

    Maybe your "common sense" is a non-sens for some other people. I guess all of those you find stupid think the same thing of you. Maybe it's just people don't have the same priorities and values. Just a question of perception.

  135. In Soviet Russia for example by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

    Ok. So, right now you don't see the need for privacy. Can you be sure that it will stay that way for ever? Can you vouch for every future government in your lifetime?

    I don't see any reason why we should help build an infrastructure that would be every despotic governments wet dream. Like that Ben Franklin chap said; "He who gives up basic freedom for a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety".

    Btw, this is way off-topic. I don't care about industries trying to get usage statistics. If people really want to worry, there are more important things to worry about.

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
  136. ba(n)dlink by clockskew · · Score: 1

    I think the problem is not that poeple don't have a firewall or poeple don't know what they are doing it's the fact that 90% of dumb fucks using a computer are also using MS shitty products wich in turn loves to install other shitty products. I think it's time for everybody to stop crying like bitches an spend some time getting a real OS on their pc's. Good luck

    --
    make: warning clock skew detected
  137. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Lasalas · · Score: 1

    Exactly. And just because someone doesn't know how to set up, or even obtain a firewall which can stop outgoing packets from certian hardware/software, it doesn't mean they don't deserve the same privacy rights as us

  138. Simple solution by KlausBreuer · · Score: 1

    The only time a music CD spends in my PC is to get converted to MP3. This file goes into my jukebox, which does not have an external connection anywhere.
    The original CD is played in my HiFi, as required. Sounds much better there anyway - and guess what, it doesn't have an outside connection, either.

    Ciao,
    Klaus

    --
    Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
  139. Re: Chicken or the egg? by Dog+and+Pony · · Score: 2

    The 10 page license agreement is a product of the flawed and money-oriented law(yer) system of the US. That made it necessary, because americans believe they have a "right" to sue anyone over anything. It is only a matter of self-protection.

    Companies only use that to their advantage to sneak in extra stuff, since they need those ten pages anyways. Now this is bad, but the license preceeds this abuse, just as the lawsuit abuse preceeds the licenses.

    Hell, it is almost impossible to make heads or tails out of even the simplest of the free licenses, because they need to cover all possible holes.

    Can't someone come up with a "Common sense license", or even better a "Common sense law". Of course, that would imply that there is such a thing as "Common sense", which I am starting to seriously doubt. :)

  140. To avoid this by NaveWeiss · · Score: 1

    Just disable auto-insert notification in Windows, or disable the CD-autorun using a program like TweakUI.

    Ofcourse this won't work if the CD has a copy protection scheme which forces you to run a program from the disc in order to play it..

    --
    Slashdot community, please notice: I am looking for a girlfriend.
    Nave H. Weiss
  141. Am I living on another planet or what? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    Just how many people have their PCs online ALL THE TIME?? I have mine on for a few minutes , download my email , surf slashdot then disconnect. Then I do some work and maybe play a CD. If you keep your PC online the whole time you'll have far worse problems to worry about than some spyware CD program phoning home. For crying out loud , the solution is so simple , switch off your modems! Jeez...

    1. Re:Am I living on another planet or what? by JazzManDRP · · Score: 1

      It's called BROADBAND and is generally an ALWAYS ON connection. For crying out loud, this is the 21st century! Jeez... ;P

    2. Re:Am I living on another planet or what? by InadequateCamel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most people I know leave their computers on all the time, whether they have broadband or not. I leave mine on standby when I am away, and up until 2 months ago I didn't have a modem.

      I don't know if it is precisely true, but the old adage "The worst thing you can do to your car (or computer?) is turn it on", referring to the stresses on the hardware due to powering on and off over and over. Whether standby is any better I have no idea...

      The issue is not whether we can unplug our modems from the wall, it is whether or not we should HAVE to and whether this company should be able to force us into making this decision.

    3. Re:Am I living on another planet or what? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      Yeah , and everyone has broadband don't they! Not! Besides , doesn't your cable modem have an off switch ??

    4. Re:Am I living on another planet or what? by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      Its a trade off , yes powering on and off causes stresses but leaving it switched on all the time wears it out. So if you're going to use your PC in 30 mins and its already on you don't want to switch it off and on again , but if you're not going to use it for 2 months then why leave it on? Besides which , all those PCs just cause more pollution at the power station even in standby mode.

    5. Re:Am I living on another planet or what? by InadequateCamel · · Score: 1

      I would be much more concerned about people who drive f£*@ing monster trucks to work every day, or people who insist on showering 3 times a day and washing their towels after one use then people who leave their computers idling for an hour.

      I didn't leave my PC alone for 2 months. If I am not going to touch it for 1 day I shut it off, but I don't obsessively turn it off everytime I get up to yazz. That is more energetically wasteful then clicking it into standby when I leave, I wager.

      And besides, some people use their idle CPU time for distributed computing projects and the such. Should these (mostly) noble aims be derailed because someone (MS?) insists on probing your computer and publishing it's contents everytime you turn it on? Servers that re-boot every 20 minutes tend not to be too popular, methinks (isn't that why we moved away from Win98?)

  142. Respond to such companies with your own EULAs by TheLink · · Score: 2

    Send them messages as executables/javascript. They have to click OK to read your messages to them.

    Have fun thinking up EULAs.

    --
  143. Freebsd ipfw too by TheLink · · Score: 2

    I think FreeBSD's ipfw can do that too.

    --
  144. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by J_DarkElf · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, InterActual has bettered its ways a lot with 2.04 (maybe earlier, haven't seen 2.01 to 2.03 myself) -- it is perfectly clear to anyone with half a brain now that the InterActual player is _only_ for the additional features.

    It no longer by default takes over as your standard DVD player, and the uninstall now cleans up all its mess.

    A huge step up from IAplayer 2.0 and PC Friendly.

  145. Yes, I knew that was badly phrased the second. . . by kfg · · Score: 1

    I hit "submit." Preview doesn't help if your brain is simply out to lunch. Perhaps I need an editor.

    Book authors don't typically have this problem because they've got people to tell them they're being a "doofus" *before* they publish.

    KFG

  146. Re:There are already laws protecting computers. . by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Of course there's another option. *Don't use EULAed software.*


    good idea, but that rules out the bigger of the linux distros then.

    redhat- HAS EULA on the cd pouch when you buy it.
    SuSe - EULA
    Lindows - well it really isnt a big distro.. slackware users outnumber this one 5 to 1.
    licoris - well yeah... same as above....

    Basicaly as linux users we should have a ZERO tolerance to Eula's on anything that is linux. and yes that meant taking a direct shot at redhat.

    REDHAT makers... why do you have a eula? why did I have to return the package to the store? I wanted to buy it, but I refused to agree to your eula printed on the install discs envelope..

    I loved redhat very much, it's great for the newbie and corperate... but the Eula makes me want to stay away from it.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  147. Re:There are already laws protecting computers. . by Nept · · Score: 2

    Of course there's another option. *Don't use EULAed software.*

    Hey Taco, how about a Im/practical subject mod?
    That way I could mod the above post, +5 Impractical

    --
    "Teachers leave us kids alone ..." - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
  148. Fair enough -- I'll try again by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

    Fair enough -- I haven't used ZA.

    Try this, though.

    Modify PATH to be prefixed with directory foo, owned by you. Drop that modified msvcrt.dll into said directory. Execute a trusted app, which uses the original binary. One way or another, it's going to be possible to force ZA to deal with libraries. This is actually easier than the first thing I suggested.

  149. Hmm...no, that's not right by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

    MSDN says that PATH is searched well after the others.

    There is a quite possible exploit, though...we just need an unregistered library that's been dumped in the system or windows dir that a trusted app links against.

    The linking search order for unregistered libraries is:

    1) executable dir. This is safe -- we assume that the admin set up this system so that the user doesn't have write perms here.
    2) The current directory -- that's going to tear things. All we have to do is leave a modified unregistered dll in the current dir, and execute a trusted app using its full path from there. *That* will link against the evil code and get full network access unless the ZA people are doing a lot more loader-level crap that I'd suspect they are.
    3, 4, 5)...

    Who at Microsoft came up with the idea of using the *current directory* before the system dir and windows dir, anyway? I can't think if any scenerio where that would be particularly justified...

    1. Re:Hmm...no, that's not right by NexusTw1n · · Score: 1

      Except that most Windows executables have the DLL path encoded (eg GetDllDirectory ) to avoid linking to the wrong version of the DLL. In theory you should only have one copy of each DLL on the drive, in reality coders know that isn't the case and avoid their app going t1ts up by specifying exactly where the DLLs they are using are to be found, in case there are multiple versions on the system.

      So in theory, yes, it may be theoretically possible to trick ZA, but what firewall wouldn't be fooled in those circumstances ? And in reality, any decent app won't be corrupted in this way, because it will be looking at a specific location on the drive for the DLL. Trying to replace that DLL requires (a) Admin rights and (b) a probable reboot to unlock the DLL assuming the trusted app is active and using that library at the time.

      I really doubt a marketing droid for a CD player is going to approve going to such extremes - which would be (IANAL) illegal (tampering with the safe running of your system) just to find out which Britney song is your favourite.

      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Hmm...no, that's not right by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      This definitely is not true -- I've moved libraries from the system dir to the app dir and run apps, when two apps dislike each other's version of a library.

      Second, this linking (as, I suspect, most apps use, for convenience) is load-time, not run-time. Most people are not going to screw with LoadLibrary() when they can have the loader handle things for them perfectly well. There's no call an app can use to check the libraries, because by the time it's making calls, it's already linked.

      And I was thinking more along the lines of more-traditional spyware than CD player stuff.

  150. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by ConsoleDeamon · · Score: 1

    Linux is imune , tada tada .Oww yes linux is Immune .weee dont get spyware---no wee dont get spyware .

    *The Linux Song*

  151. record companies by trocade · · Score: 1

    How are they going to use this? Since there new goal is to make cd's unplayable on computers.. sounds like something only a record company would do..

    1. Re:record companies by trocade · · Score: 1

      their new goal .

  152. Ba hahaha by ExEleven · · Score: 1

    They can try and get there statistics thru my Security.

  153. Listening habits, yeah, sure... by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 2

    Forgive me for being cynical, but I think the recording industry's concern with what happens to music CDs that wind up in computers has nothing to do with listening habits. Given that most CDs are probably not played in computers, and that a particular sort of customer listens to CDs in their computer, you will probably not get valid marketing information from such a technology.

    If you want to catch someone ripping MP3z, however, this is a pretty good way to do it.

  154. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    The median IS a form of average.

  155. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, but it's very unlikely that you will be able to *legally* view DVD content using Linux.

  156. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by jez9999 · · Score: 1

    Not surprising. Cops in America don't seem to prosecute ANY drivers. If you're in a car, you're virtually immune from the law. Hell, when I went over there, half the cars didn't even have numberplates!!! If you didn't have numberplates at the front and rear of the car here (UK), you'd be stopped by the police in 5 seconds.

  157. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by MagPulse · · Score: 2

    Given 10 IQs:

    80, 90, 90, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180

    The median is 90, and only one person has a lower IQ.

    The mean is 131, and in this case exactly half are below that and half are above.

  158. this is a big deal by Fooknut · · Score: 1

    I can't believe there are so many people saying that it's not a big deal. It's not the loss of anything, it's the principle of the thing. We all know that if if you give em an inch... they'll take a mile. If you happily agree to give them stats for FREE, they will push it and pretty soon they'll be selling your stats to someone somewhere, making money off of you not only from the CD you bought, but from your stats.

    I think the least they could do is GIVE you the CD and they make their money off of the stats.

    The big deal is that you're just a number to them, you're just an income source and by participating, you're encouraging the process. This process is not in your favor, why help it?

    Personally, I don't play many cd's on the computer. I buy a cd, make a cd backup, make mp3s and transfer to MD, from there the CD goes on the shelf. If I find spyware on my computer I rip out all traces, put in blocks for future, and write a nasty-gram to the owners.

    A lot of people are too willing to give up their privacy for some little or never used benefit (like "chatting" about a cd). Is that worth it?

    --
    The price we pay for immortality... is death. Narnia The Great Fall
  159. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anarchofascist · · Score: 1, Troll

    "IN SOVIET RUSSIA "IN SOVIET RUSSIA" comments are lame"
    In Soviet Russia, Soviet Russia comments on YOU!

    [ooh, my first Soviet Russia comment - will I be modded up or down? Only YOU can decide!]

    --
    Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
  160. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by John+Sullivan · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nope, the mode is 90. The median is 135.

    --
    This is my World Wide Web of Whatever
  161. Will you get a License Agreement with your CD? by SkunkAh · · Score: 1

    I notice that there needs to be some kind of agreement by the user for the activity that takes place on the computer. This due to the fact that many countries have privacy laws that 'should' protect privacy of it's inhabitants. Usually this agreement with the user is gained by large user agreements in a language that is only understood by lawyers, so it's what they are doing is totally legal. So will we now also get license agreements when buying CDs..where we allow the record labels to execute code on our machine and track our habbits. And I've a feeling that they will try to hide more spyware that for example searches your computer for mp3's and sends that information to the record label or RIAA .. Or possibly deletes all the MP3s of your computer? I know one thing ... as soon as CD's will be guided with license agreements I will not buy any cd anymore!

  162. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by mortuusangelus · · Score: 1

    and exactly what state were you visiting? Also, try showing up near the END of the month.. cops gotta make they're quotas after all, and will happily pull you over for doing stupid crap on the road. I've yet to see cars without license plates that weren't stolen.. or maybe you were just attending a demolition derby?

    --
    Oh god... not again.
  163. Go ahead, spy on me. You won't like it. by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 1
    I don't care if my CD player tells on me. I love sending out user information, because I love fucking up their statistics. I don't listen to pop music. I only listen to classical and jazz (don't think I've bought an album on the pop charts in close to a decade). Anyway, if this make it easier for me to find the music I like, then that's great!. As it is I have to mail order everything.

    There really isn't a big reason to be paranoid about it, they already have the biggest usage statistic they want: SALES! What more do they really care about?

    --

    "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
  164. Squirrels by VB · · Score: 1


    Badlink (and likely other companies like them) are exploring the landscape looking for viable ways to get this demographic data. They may succeed. Here on ./ we all get our panties in a bunch, but sadly, we're the stark minority in assessing the privacy preferences of the consuming public. We need some laws for this form of abuse, but won't get them since the consumer does less to finance the machinations of our current legislature (in U.S.) than the consumer.

    On the other hand, as an artist, I would like to see some availability of tracking in a macro sense. Nothing personally identifying (perhaps have a standard that dictates that you can gather data, but not tie it to a human), but it would be nice to see if people listen to a specific track on a CD in it's entirety; whether it's more popular in one region than in an other.

    Again, tying such data to a specific person is scummy. Perhaps someone could dig up the medical records for the CEO / President of BadLink and mail 7000 boxes of photocopies of it to the company receptionist for distribution to all their business partners. Not that I'd do such a thing...

    --
    www.dedserius.com
    VB != VisualBasic
  165. EULA and the lack of interest therein. by mmmna · · Score: 1

    M$ loves this kind of thing. So do many other software creators in that camp. They (and the companies backing them, driven by stockholders seeking cash revenues) think that they will learn how to draw more interest from you, by learning what you like to do when online and when on PC (but not online). In their licenses, the users usually give permission for information to be transmitted, if, in fact, you click to accept the terms of the license. Doesn't matter if can you read and understand the obfuscation of terms. So no matter who is above or below average, if you don't read the license, you are likely going to grant permission for this to happen.... so why whine about it? If you do not like this tactic, learn to ask questions before you download or install the thieving boogers. And remember: M$ never tells you you fly is down, you have to learn to prohibit open ports, learn to block unwanted transmission of data. Every time someone clicks ok without knowing what, exactly, the software is going to do, they are placing blind trust that the provider of the software is not malicious. We all hear that this is not true, but the next answer will surprise you: 'What can I do about it.... this is all there is!'. 'Resistance is futile'. 'FUD'. Call it what you want, but people are convinced there is nothing they can do about it, they do not know there is an alternative, and from my perspective, I agree that the common M$ user would need an asociates degree in system administration to void such junk research. But the are defeatists by TRAINING. The family which is not Computer administration savvy is a popular entity, not as rare as you'd think. I'd conclude that the commercial $$$ driven developers are simply capitalizing on the ignorance of the consumer. But you knew that.

  166. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Blkdeath · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Maybe your "common sense" is a non-sens for some other people. I guess all of those you find stupid think the same thing of you. Maybe it's just people don't have the same priorities and values. Just a question of perception.

    I'm not talking about (stateful) firewalls; I wouldn't expect my family, friends, or other average users to understand those concepts. I was talking in a somewhat more general sense (the thread was about "average idiots", no?).

    What I was referring to is the sheer number of people who routinely do stupid things. Be it work-related, traffic, personal (social), or other; people do not think things through. People who use hair dryers in the shower, who apply make-up, eat, read a newspaper, use their laptop, etc. while driving 100KM/h on the freeway, or those who can't understand that smoking while filling their car's gas tank isn't a terribly good idea, and that creating personal rocket projection systems to propell themselves into their cottage lake is probably inadviseable, or that standing in the middle of a doorway, contemplating life and their surroundings in a busy hallway isn't quite considerate or practical, or that speaking loudly on a cell phone in a movie theatre, exclaiming things like "Sorry, the sound is too loud, I can't hear you!" will probably incite rage in the other movie goers, or all the ladies (term used loosely, if you'll pardon the pun) who get surprised that, after having unprotected sex with several men and find themselves either sporting a child or an STD (nb; it's entirely common that the surprise child will be the second, third, or fourth), or the people who don't 'get' that drinking a pair of 40oz bottles of [insert favourite alcoholic beverage here] will quite possibly find them in the hospital spitting up blood and fragments of their stomach.

    There are, of course, infinitely more examples, but I think they limit the upper size of these comments somewhere (and $DEITY forbid I should create a database size overflow or something. ;) )

    But to get back to this thread - people who do not understand [cars|computers|electronics|mechanical devices] yet who insist upon taking them apart and/or servicing themselves, then blaming the manufacturer/retailer for selling them defective equipment. Or worse - people who don't understand these things and go against the advise of a trained professional and cause serious detriment for themselves and/or others around them.

    As to the above references to my parents/grandparents; I do tell them what I think when they try to crack their computers and/or administer the installed software. It took me about five years, but my family finally understands that when they do something to the computer, it generally goes wrong and they need my help to fix it. When I do something to the computer, it works, because I do this for a living and know what I'm doing. Generally they feed me and keep my [coffee|beer] [cup|glass] full for my trouble, and everybody's happy.

    The difference being, of course, my family smartened up - other people don't.

    One of the higher standards I try to hold people to, and I realize it sounds horribly cliche, is to know one's limitations. For example, I know that I can change my oil (and filter), top up my fluids, and perform other small routine maintainance tasks on my car. I probably could figure my way through brakes or other aspects, but I don't. Instead, I leave it up to the trained mechanics who have years of experience and industry certifications that say they can do the job properly.

    Another standard I hold people to, for those who are definately literate, is to read atleast the basic instructions before desperately phoning for help. I can't count the times I've had to help people (or been asked and refused) because they wouldn't open the fold-out "Step By Step" instruction set that came with their new purchase. The fact that many of the installations I've performed were insultingly simple is beside the point; the instructions spelled it out so clearly that a child could figure it out. This excuse adults use that technology is so complex that only the younger generations have a chance is complete rhetoric, and complete nonsense. If a University educated individual can't figure out how to connect something with colour-coded, size-differentiated connectors that are labelled at both ends and comes with a step-by-step instruction manual; something's wrong.

    So no, I don't expect that people will understand stateful packet inspection, ingres/egres filtering, bogon filters, application versus network versus physical layer differentiation, or any of the other industry specific jargon I could name; but I do expect people to be able to perform in real life without their hands being held, lest they should manage to kill or maim themselves or someone around them in the process.

    --
    BD Phone Home!

    Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  167. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by blingitybling · · Score: 1

    So what? Just because there are *legal* implications doesn't mean people won't do it.

  168. Re:There are already laws protecting computers. . by Anonym0us+Cow+Herd · · Score: 1

    I loved redhat very much, it's great for the newbie and corperate... but the Eula makes me want to stay away from it.

    Could you be so kind as to briefly summarize what you don't like about the EULA for those of us who avoid Red Hat?

    --
    The price of freedom is eternal litigation.
  169. Re:What sort of idiot? The most important thing by blingitybling · · Score: 1

    Wow...I actually get to see the "Slashdot Math Effect" in action. Sweet...

  170. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by imbezol · · Score: 1

    Restaraunt experience: Waitress: Hi there, have you decided on what you would like to eat? Cust1: Yes, I'll have the Phil's Mix please. Waitress: Pancakes, Waffles or French toast? Cust1: French toast please. Waitress: And how would you like your eggs? Cust1: Over easy please. Waitress: Thank you. And what can I get for you? Cust2: Exactly the same thing please. Waitress: Same thing? Cust2: Yes please. Waitress: French toast as well? Cust2: Yes please. Waitress: How would you like your eggs? Cust2: Over easy please. Waitress: Thank you.

  171. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    A point whic is very unlikely to actually matter to anyone.

    Until attempts are made to catch, arrest, and charge people with the "crime" of watching a DVD on their Linux box, the question over whether it is legal or not is a moot point.

    Someone pointed out to me the other day an old military maxim... Never give an order that you know wont be followed, it only undermines your authority.

    -Steve

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  172. Is anyone considered posting a public list of IPs? by Vengeance · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking that hosts file listings of servers that are often targets of this sort of thing might be a good idea. I'd love to see a web site where I could download the latest list of hosts that privacy advocates would prefer to see denied.

    --
    It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
  173. Sounds awfully hard to do... :-) by lent · · Score: 1

    In the agreement they say that

    In the event that CD Intelligence terminates this EULA, you must immediately stop using the SOFTWARE and destroy all copies of the SOFTWARE and all of its component parts.

    We have come to destroy all copies of the SOFTWARE. Resistance is futile!

    1. Re:Sounds awfully hard to do... :-) by Gamethyme · · Score: 1

      Does that mean we need to smash our CD's, too?

      After all, it contains a copy of the Software (and the CD could be considered a Component Part of you get a clever lawyer and a jury with no common sense)

  174. Or 'considering'? :-P by Vengeance · · Score: 1

    Darn post key...

    --
    It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
  175. More Autorun ideas by gfecyk · · Score: 1

    Having not read the Bandlink website, if I were going to design something like this, I'd do it thusly, assuming a Win32 (9x/ME/NT/2K/XP) machine:

    * The data track would be the last track on the disk, not the first as most combination CDs are, so playing in a normal CD player wouldn't alert the user. Al Yankovic's Running With Scissors CD is one such disk.

    * The autorun program would launch the default CD player (either by doing a "start (trackno).cda" or by poking in the Registry to find out what the player is), thereby not triggering any installation monitors.

    * The program would then monitor the CD-ROM device somehow, through ASPI or a similar interface (NT SCSI direct like NTBACKUP uses?) so it knows what tracks are being played regardless of what software's playing them.

    * Phone home to a host answering on Port 80, which no one blocks anyway.

    It could be defeated by using a digital read/playback CD player as the default, like Windows Media Player's, but WMP's so abusable it's not funny. And even then a CD-ROM monitor could pick up what track is being read if not played.

    --
    Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
  176. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

    Some of those cars probably did have numberplates (license plates), but they were only on the back. Different states have different rules. I know that Illinois and Pennsylvania only require plates on the back. In my home state of New Jersey, you must have them on both sides and a tax disc (actually a square) on your inner windshield. If you're a New Jersey resident with only one license plate on, you are very likely to get pulled over.

  177. Windows is becoming the new television by BeBoxer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems to me that Windows, especially in the consumer domain, is becoming much more like TV. That is, television isn't a service provided to the viewers, it's a service provided to the marketers. The viewer's attention is the actual product which is being sold. The content on the television is not the primary business of television networks, selling advertisments is.

    It seems like Windows is becoming the same way. The fact that a Windows computer can actually do useful things for the owner is becoming secondary to it's use as a vehicle for advertising and gathering marketing information. I think it's one of the things that turns me off the most about Windows, that constant feeling that you can't trust "your" computer at all, because you really can't. Every other program is co-opting "your" computer for the purpose of advertising to you. And it's not even just "free as in beer" software that does it, even stuff you paid good money for feels the need to steal your attention for advertisements. And they all, uniformly, require you to agree to EULA's.

    It's one of the main reasons why I hope Linux never takes off on the desktop, because I don't want to have to deal with all that crap. Fortunately, one of Linux's strengths is that even if some distro does take over the desktop from Microsoft and inherits all the spy-ware and ad-ware, I can just run some other distro that doesn't suck. Not an option with Windows: they all suck.

  178. This won't affect Macs anyway by penginkun · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'm not a programmer, and I cannot think in those terms, but I do know that audio CDs store the audio information a large, chunks of raw data. A program stuck in there would be treated as audio data. So where's the application code at? That code is going to be Windows only, because that's what everyone uses, right? It wouldn't affect Mac and Linux users.

    So, if it's a separate application, why not just look at the task monitor in Windows and kill it?

    Unless, of course, this is a "protected" CD which has its own built-in player and which wouldn't work with any other CD playing app. In which case it's going right back to the store for a refund...

  179. You have to install it! by MasterBlaster · · Score: 1
    From looking at the web page, It looks like the software has to be installed to work. So what Happens if you decide not to install it? The CD probably works just fine but you miss out on all the "bonus" items like the built in CD player (in case you don't have one, I guess) and links to tour dates, chats, and other value added stuff that will convince about 98% of people to install the software to get something free.

    My guess is if you don't install the software you can still use the CD just fine but the web page does not even seem to mention this possibility (after a breif look). I'm sure they can't imagine anyone not wanting to install this software.

  180. Eros-OS.org Slashdotted? by Krioni · · Score: 1

    Um, it's even harded to find out about eros-os when the site is down.

    --
    Lose essential liberties to get temporary safety = get only hassles and security theater.
  181. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by al_d · · Score: 1

    Net result: three antenna breaks in 6 months, two in-pocket.

    And you still haven't learned not to sit on your phone when it's in your pocket? Good example of incompetence.

  182. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by endoboy · · Score: 1

    clearly you've never been a waitron... what you've got posted here isn't evidence of idiocy, it's a transcript of an error correction algorithm

    from the other side of the order pad (so to speak), the issue is that customers are the idoits...More often than not, "exactly the same" means "exactly the same, except...."

    I can't even count the number of times somebody has ordered "exactly the same thing" and then sent it back their mind hadn't been read properly....

  183. A workable model by Planesdragon · · Score: 2

    Hell, do one better: Don't buy the CD with the stupid privacy idiocy on it, wait a day, and download the songs you want from P2P networks. The sooner the major music publishers go under, the sooner one of them will be forced to figure out a workable economic model that doesn't rely on legal strongarming and gives customers what they want instead of what the major labels think they SHOULD want.

    Hey, we're the smart crowd. Why don't WE think up a good model, and sell it to them?

    My idea is a rights-based model, where we buy a lifetime right to own a copy of a Copyrighted Work (for a bit less than the current going rate) and we're more or less left to our own devices to get that copy. If we want to brave P2P, great. If we want to pay the CD-press $5 for the CD, even better.

    Sure, it's a potential loss of privacy--but I think we, as humans, can stand for a business to know who its customers are.

  184. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by l1_wulf · · Score: 1
    Well put. Unfortunately I was suffering from a severe case of lack of sleep and didn't actually intend my reply to be posted under you comment (if I remember correctly). You make some excellent points, but that still does not address the fact that the critical and harsh words bandied about in these forums for "the average idiot" where I'm hearing things like something like 75% of the population is either average or below average (of course that wouldn't be a single one of us reading /., oh no...) and anybody who is not of exceptional intelligence is automatically labelled an idiot. Read back through all the nonsense from the parent of this comment tree and see if you don't get the same notion that these people are stroking their own ego with one hand and stroking their neighbor's with the other.
    As to the above references to my parents/grandparents; I do tell them what I think when they try to crack their computers and/or administer the installed software.
    I have no idea if you were one of the people relegating everyone outside of the /. community the status of idiot, as I've said, I didn't originally intend to attach my reply to yours, but I ask this -- Do you tell your parents and grandparents that they are stupid or they are an idiot, how about a moron?

    The point of my original reply was to show that a great many of the people we are calling idiots because they will likely fall for this evil market research scheme (or whatever the hell you wanna call it) will be those same people we hold dear and love -- our parents, grandparents, girlfriends and other friends & family that are not technically savy enough to keep up with the evil goings-on in the world of computers.

    I'm sorry if you took my original reply as an attack on your post, somehow I doubt the people I really wanted to read my post will ever see it. Oh well.
  185. Everything new is old again by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2

    But you're missing the point... As technology becomes ever more integrated with our lives, the option of "just turn it off" becomes increasingly less possible. No, not from a technical perspective, but from a *social* perspective.

    I think you're correct, this is not really a technological issue, it's a social one. A lot of the "privacy" and anonymity we imagine we have is an artifact of years of impersonal service and crude automation.

    Three or four decades ago, all of the functions you name were handled by people. If you wanted to make a long-distance phone call you talked to an operator who took your information and connected you with the remote number. If you bought something, you usually dealt with a person across the counter, and if you lived in a small town or frequented the same shops that person probably recognized you, knew your family, your social standing, and what you liked to buy.

    Now things are swinging back in that direction again. That kind of personal knowledge, since lost in the underflow of automation, is being extracted again by the current providers of those services. Is this a bad thing? Maybe, not not necessarily. I can't help but think that part of the reason that most people don't get too upset about losing thier pseudo-anonymity is because they never really cared that much to begin with.

  186. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Seraph · · Score: 1

    On the contrary, some do.

  187. Re:There are already laws protecting computers. . by EricWright · · Score: 2

    Strange... my RedHat discs didn't have a EULA. Of course, I know how to download isos and burn them to disc (with my iBook, no less). There wasn't any EULA on the redhat ftp mirror I used.

  188. Doesn't look manditory to me by geekee · · Score: 2

    "There is no mention of a opt in/opt out agreement when the cd is inserted on the website and none was displayed in a personal demonstration."

    Then what do you call this:

    Installation:
    1. Insert you Bandlink CD into your Internet
    Connected PC. (Bandlink should autostart on Windows).

    2. Agree to the Bandlink License and
    select "Connect" to install Bandlink.

    3. Bandlink should detect your CD, begin CD
    playback, and display artist content.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  189. First time as tragedy, the second as farce by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 2
    Now things are swinging back in that direction again. That kind of personal knowledge, since lost in the underflow of automation, is being extracted again by the current providers of those services.
    Except that the knowledge is no longer personal, it is impersonal and global. That's the difference. In the past, when you saw the clerk, the clerk saw you. Today, when you see the card-swipe at the U-scan, you see nobody, and anyone who cares to buy, legislate or hack access to the database sees you. And the memory of the system is absolutely perfect, a trait never possessed by humans absent a whole lot of chicken-scratches on paper (or twists in knitting...)

    What chance does an unaugmented human have against such an apparatus?

  190. Lake Wobegone Effect by still_sick · · Score: 2

    Everyone thinks of themselves, and their own social groupings, as above average.

    --
    ...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
  191. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by DerKlempner · · Score: 1

    To wit: the left lane on a road is for passing. Most states have laws that restrict the distance that a driver can drive in the left lane before moving over. If yu've ever driven long-distance, you know that there are those who insist on indefinately going limit plus 5 (or worse yet: limit) in the left lane. And no, I'm not breaking the law if I try to pass, I live in a prima facie state.

    Highways are like socialism: they both work only in theory.

    --
    UNIX: Find it, fsck it, forget it.
  192. Bogon filter... by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

    So no, I don't expect that people will understand stateful packet inspection, ingres/egres filtering, bogon filters, application versus network versus physical layer differentiation, or any of the other industry specific jargon I could name...

    I think that with some thought, even a VB coder like myself can figure out most of those terms. But I knew I'd spent too much time online when the first one that my mind clearly identified was the Bogon Filter!

    Yikes... have I spent so much time following random links in the Jargon File, that I've lost touch with the actual jargon of my chosen profession?

    Moderators: I know, I'm straying off topic... I'm not using the +1, so please don't hurt me! :)

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
  193. Re:This has been going on for years on DVD disks.. by jez9999 · · Score: 2

    Once families are prevented from copying or "pirating" copies of ms os/applications through product activation and other methods, everyone will be running Gnu/Linux, and therefore, everyone will not be able to legally view DVDs on their Gnu/Linux systems, or something will change. Care to guess which?

    Actually, I beg to differ on your first point. I don't think the fact that they have to pay for 2 copies of Windows instead of 1 (actually many families only have 1 computer so nothing will change, and Windows/Office usually comes pre-installed on a 'joe sixpack' computer) will cause people to suddenly 'jump ship' to GNU/Linux. Most people don't even know what Linux is!!! They'll grumble but pay up, and MS knows that. I really don't think they'd be dumb enough to do something which would lose them their OS monopoly.

  194. Another reason... by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1
    for the consumer to stop purchasing music, and download it instead. Privacy...

    I don't want the record industry to know which CD I play and at what time.

    I believe they get enough info from the retailers anyway, there's no need for this.

    --
    The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
  195. Anti-Spy software by TonyDevilUK · · Score: 1

    There are a number of tools available for removing spy-ware. just search download.com for something like spybot.... ....or move to linux.......

  196. Re:Apparently,you and I live in very different wor by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
    Read back through all the nonsense from the parent of this comment tree and see if you don't get the same notion that these people are stroking their own ego with one hand and stroking their neighbor's with the other.

    Elitism of one form or another is completely natural in any forum. Mechanics scoff at those who can't flush a radiator before their morning coffee, accountants laugh at people who can't balance their cheque books (letalone balance a company's budget), etc.. The geek community happens to harbour intelectual elitism.

    It's a natural progression, too, since those attracted to the 'geeky' IT type professions tend to be of above average intellect (and quite often that results in sub-par social prowess; hence the stereotypes us hellishly cool geeks have to tolerate {cough} ), and many geeks take that for granted, some even get quite high and mighty over it. Hell, sometimes I've even been guilty of it. I doubt any of us are completely immune.

    Now, as to whether the "Slashdot Community" is any form a representation of the true geek, or are somehow in a remarkable intellectual or career bracket; that's highly debateable. Slashdot has a definite reputation in the real (and even the uber-geek) world, and to a great extent it deserves it. This is an inflammatory forum frequented by many hot-tempered, lightening-tongue types who are quick to Google and use the dictionary and thesaurus in order to scald their opponants, and it puts forth a lot of arrogance. You'll never get an argument from me on that front. That's one reason for my philosophy of taking online forums with a very large particle of NaCl; Slashdot especially.

    I have no idea if you were one of the people relegating everyone outside of the /. community the status of idiot

    I tend to judge people on an independant basis; their Slashdot user ID is probably the furthest thing from my mind when doing so, let me assure you.

    Do you tell your parents and grandparents that they are stupid or they are an idiot, how about a moron?

    If they do stupid things, yes. Thankfully they don't often do stupid things (thanks in part to years of goading and conditioning, but I digress) so I don't have to.

    Case in point; a friend of mine (who, incidentally, has about a decade more IT experience than I) recently was solicited by his father for some ISP advise. His father, upon hearing his advice, promptly went his own way. Havnig been a somewhat ongoing trend, he confronted his father about it, who had no response other than one to the effect of a shrug. See, my friend is the one who'll have to deal with his parents when their new ISP ("They're cheaper" was the justification) starts having technical difficulties - or worse - shuts down.

    The point of my original reply was to show that a great many of the people we are calling idiots because they will likely fall for this evil market research scheme (or whatever the hell you wanna call it) will be those same people we hold dear and love -- our parents, grandparents, girlfriends and other friends & family that are not technically savy enough to keep up with the evil goings-on in the world of computers.

    Much like mechanics will toss you a jug of water and a bag of cat litter, it's our job to educate those around us with the basic skillset that will help keep them safe out here in our turf. I try to keep my family abreast of the things they should watch out for, and as a result they no longer reply to "unsubscribe@spamemail.com" addresses, delete mail they know to be SPAM, don't forward chain letters or virus warnings, etc.

    I don't teach them the OSI model or the structure of a TCP packet, I teach them the safeguards they should watch out for, and teach them the skills they need to answer questions they have on their own so they can broaden their knowledge and be more effective technologians.

    </CORN>

    --
    BD Phone Home!

    Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  197. What name does it say on your card? by TPFH · · Score: 1

    (At least free cards like the Safeway[tm] Club Card.)

    Mine says Emanual Goldstein.

    Winston Smith might be more appropriate. I'm not sure.

    Act like nothing's wrong.

    (Of course now that I've posted this on the internet they can find out who I really am. I'm sure I'm the only one in the whole world to ever think of this.)

    --
    This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
  198. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    /*
    * [...] Note that 120 sec is defined in the protocol as the maximum
    * possible RTT. I guess we'll have to use something other than TCP
    * to talk to the University of Mars.
    * PAWS allows us longer timeouts and large windows, so once implemented
    * ftp to mars will work nicely.
    */
    -- from /usr/src/linux/net/inet/tcp.c, concerning RTT [round trip time]

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...