I'm not saying that what Google did was right, but it isn't them exploiting a vulnerability.
The Apple designers designed the third party handling of cookies to be how it was. It wasn't a glitch or something unknown, it was expected behavior. So Google was able to use this expected behavior to track users who thought they were safe.
I don't consider it a vulnerability simply because it was designed in. It was being used in exactly the way that it was designed to be used. Google took advantage of a dumb design decision, they didn't find and exploit a vulnerability. Arguably that is just semantics, although I think there is quite a distinction between the two.
I don't think what Google did was particular evil. It was..asshatish..but not evil. If they had actually exploited a vulnerability then that would be a different matter. But simply submitting a form to be able to place a cookie when that is what the browser allows by design...well, that is mainly the fault of the browser.
OK, this is a short reply, since you seem to have misunderstood my last reply. Even though you are not actually disagreeing with me.
It isn't a dancing pigs problem(the more common name), because the user is not aware of any breach of security.
It doesn't matter what the AV says. AV's lose credibility when they report non-malicious stuff as malicious. As I said, McAfee counts aircrack and thepiratebay as malicious. If you know enough to know thepiratebay is not malicious then your AV loses credibility.
The reason it isn't a dancing pigs problem is because the user does not understand the consequences. They are not making a choice to choose pigs over security, because security does not come into the equation. They can be part of a botnet, but it doesn't affect them in anyway. They don't notice a slowdown, don't lose access to their documents etc.
The consequences here are that they are participating in DDoS attacks, potentially having their passwords farmed so spam is sent from their accounts, maybe cc numbers, etc. But, most of the time it doesn't affect them directly, so they are not aware of it.
It isn't like 10 years ago where malware would fuck up your documents and programs. These days there is generally little sign to the end user, which is why they are not aware of the consequences, because they don't even know that anything is happening. Regardless of what the AV says, which is not trustworthy anyway.
Oh, and a tip might be to stop giving customers Avast which is overly loud and noisy and tends to freak people out or make them ignore the warnings. Give them MSE instead.
It wasn't a vulnerability, it was a deliberate design decision that came to bite them in the ass. It was the default behavior and was described as such, only now that it was exploited is it considered a vulnerability.
Making excuses for Google is bad, but then so is making excuses for Apple. Worse so, in this case.
The problem is that your anecdote is not necessarily as representative as you seem to think it is.
Many AV's WILL report P2P programs as malware when this is not the case. McAfee lists TPB as a malicious website. "New Limewire" does indeed sound like malware (despite me being able to find NO references to any software by that name), but are you sure the AV wasn't just blocking non malware p2p software the user wanted to install? Just because the AV says something is malicious does not make it so.
I agree that the problem is more to do with users than UI, although I think both play a part. I think probably the largest problem is people may understand the problem, but not the consequences. Especially these days when malware tends to spy or operate in the background and is no longer inherently destructive. A user may want their PC to work the way they want it to, and may accept being spied on or being part of a botnet as acceptable, because they don't understand the consequences.
I like and agree with most of what you said, but one small part jumped out at me.
"actually, it turns out that with a bit of training, people do understand the difference between the switch that controls the lights and the one that controls the windshield wipers".
See, it isn't that hard, even for non expert users to understand the difference between a program and a document. Is it so hard to turn on file extensions and see that despite the movie file icon, it is an exe and so a program?
You can only blame the paradigm so much. When users don't care about getting even simple thigns right, then it seems less of an issue with the paradigm and more an issue with users being willfully stupid.
The story is interesting, although somehow not that exciting as this kind of advancement is...necessary and expected.
When we can actually upload data to our brains and have thoughts translated to a phonetic language...then we will have something that will move mankind forward generations.
Let me help you out here, since you seem to be missing 3 major points.
1. Philosophy is not the same as rebellion and there is no argument that it should be wiped from the earth. It is beneficial to human kind and is the forerunner to scientific though and exploration.
2. Religions are similar to cults, especially under a dictionary definition. Religions are harmful to people as they encourage a lack of critical thinking, cause people to donate money that would be better spent elsewhere, cause them to make poor life decisions. You only have to look at the ridiculous resistance to accepting evolution for an example of harm.
3. Scientology is similar to Judea-Christianity, indeed any religion...because it is a religion. People are believing things which if they stopped and thought, would agree are unlikely, improbably and downright irrational. Yet, for some reason they have faith so none of that matters. Which goes back to point 2, that religions are harmful.
Get the founders arrested after passing a new law specifically targeting them. Or extradite them to another country, like the United States, have a show trial, and then disappear them. Not hard to solve one website.
Thankfully, things don't work like that. Laws in the US wont affect other countries an most countries are not dumb enough to have signed the extradition agreement with the states that the UK did.
No it won't. People use more bandwidth on Netflix than piracy.
That's just silly. There are at least as many Pirates as Netflix users, and given the amount of stuff that isn't available on netflix....given that netflix doesn't have software or games....yeah. Silly thing to say.
No, you are wrong. What's more you miss the point. A donation can have a reward. If the only way to get that "reward" is with a donation for a fixed amount, that is not a donation, that is selling a product for a fixed price. Unless I donate $2 to 7/11 everytime I buy a bottle of coke.
Batman, in the Detective title or his own title, has not been an executioner since the 40's. The high value to which he considered life is a defining character trait.
It is like buying a mug from NPR. If you want a mug from NPR, then you have to give them money (and not just any amount, but some amount exceeding a minimum). You could also choose not to give them any money, and not get a mug.
A donation is a voluntary gift. If the only way to get something is via a donation, then it isn't a donation. A donation can have a reward, but when the only way to get an item is via a donation, that's false advertising.
It's a big problem I have with the EFF actually, and there "donation" pledges at conferences.
OS X does not have a malware scanner. It has a list of malicious checksums and only checks files saved through certain applications. Download a malicious file through a torrent for example, and it won't raise a flag.
It isn't a scanner and should not be stated to be one.
That's just the point. They are not an independent country as they're part of the EU. France, Germany, et. al. have been screaming for many years that Ireland's low tax rates are unfair and must be raised and yet they are able to keep their tax rates as they want them, regardless of this pressure.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter that other EU countries don't like it, in this regard Ireland are free to set their own taxes. It is not at all, in any way, analogous to the EU passing legislation and forcing countries to implement it. That is the point being discussed. Irish taxes are irrelevant.
It's not the same thing but it is applicable to the argument. Ireland is able to do what it wants even though it is part of the EU.
It isn't applicable to the argument. It is irrelevant. The EU does not control the taxes each country sets, just as the federal government in the US does not set state taxes. Every country in the EU has a certain level of independence, especially with things like taxes.
The EU forcing every country to implement a law when the people of that country don't agree with it is an entirely different issue and not democratic in the least.
The commission is not directly elected but is selected by those who have been democratically elected. You can vote for those who then select the members of the commission.
In practice, this means little. The people need far, far more say for democracy at the EU level not to be a joke.
I have to disagree on the basis that there is nothing stopping people from making themselves heard.
You seem to be making the case that just because people can make themselves heard means they have a say. We both know this is far from true.
As I said, it's not perfect. No system is perfect. I maintain that it is far from a joke, though, and is arguably one of the most democratic systems in place in the world today.
I agree no system is perfect. I think it is a joke because it is one of the least democratic systems in place today. You've yet to show how it is one of the most, especially since you acknowledge the limitations of the EP and the the EC is not directly elected.
I don't know why you bring up Irish tax laws, it is not analogous to the situation I describe at all. Ireland is an independant country and can set whatever taxes they like. This isn't at all the same thing as the EU passing legislation and requiring all states to implement some form of it or face penalties. Which the 3 strikes law is a perfect example of.
Your main argument for the EU being satisfactorily democratic is the EP. The EP cannot proposes legislation, only amendments. Think about that for a second. The commission holds a lot of power, yet you cannot vote for it's members.
To claim the people have a say in everything is bullshit. There are basically no countries where the people have a say in everything....it isn't workable with a representative democracy. Having a say on significant issues is a minimum, and something the EU misses out on. Could the people in the EU vote for or against ACTA?
The democratic deficit in the EU has been acknowledged and discussed since the 70's. That the EP is democratically elected does not make the problem go away.
Err, no. Thing is, you're too slow. Sorry. It is the speed at which the robot operates that makes this impressive. For you to change your move after the robot has made its move would be far too obvious.
See, we know the robot is cheating, but to people who don't know it looks like it is just winning. You couldn't pull off the same feat.
In the US, the States retain many powers that the Federal government is not allowed to fuck with. The same is true for the EU.
No, in the EU, the EU forces member states to enact laws that they may disagree with, such as the 3 strikes law, or face penalties.
The countries in the EU provide checks and balances to each other, quite without meaning to.
In practice, you have the strongest countries outlinng the policy and the smaller countries can't really say much. What the UK, German and France want, they tend to get.
So how, exactly, is democracy at the EU level a joke?
Because it isn't as democratic as you have said? Because the people don't have say in a lot of matters? Because the Lisbon treaty passed despite people not wanting it? Because here you have an official saying ACTA will go ahead and nothing can stop it?
Microsoft got slapped with a fine only because the EU wanted to prove themselves. The browser/media player nonsense was ridiculous and undeserved. Silly EU.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as you convince the bank it was a fraudulent charge....
I'm not saying that what Google did was right, but it isn't them exploiting a vulnerability.
The Apple designers designed the third party handling of cookies to be how it was. It wasn't a glitch or something unknown, it was expected behavior. So Google was able to use this expected behavior to track users who thought they were safe.
I don't consider it a vulnerability simply because it was designed in. It was being used in exactly the way that it was designed to be used. Google took advantage of a dumb design decision, they didn't find and exploit a vulnerability. Arguably that is just semantics, although I think there is quite a distinction between the two.
I don't think what Google did was particular evil. It was..asshatish..but not evil. If they had actually exploited a vulnerability then that would be a different matter. But simply submitting a form to be able to place a cookie when that is what the browser allows by design...well, that is mainly the fault of the browser.
OK, this is a short reply, since you seem to have misunderstood my last reply. Even though you are not actually disagreeing with me.
It isn't a dancing pigs problem(the more common name), because the user is not aware of any breach of security.
It doesn't matter what the AV says. AV's lose credibility when they report non-malicious stuff as malicious. As I said, McAfee counts aircrack and thepiratebay as malicious. If you know enough to know thepiratebay is not malicious then your AV loses credibility.
The reason it isn't a dancing pigs problem is because the user does not understand the consequences. They are not making a choice to choose pigs over security, because security does not come into the equation. They can be part of a botnet, but it doesn't affect them in anyway. They don't notice a slowdown, don't lose access to their documents etc.
The consequences here are that they are participating in DDoS attacks, potentially having their passwords farmed so spam is sent from their accounts, maybe cc numbers, etc. But, most of the time it doesn't affect them directly, so they are not aware of it.
It isn't like 10 years ago where malware would fuck up your documents and programs. These days there is generally little sign to the end user, which is why they are not aware of the consequences, because they don't even know that anything is happening. Regardless of what the AV says, which is not trustworthy anyway.
Oh, and a tip might be to stop giving customers Avast which is overly loud and noisy and tends to freak people out or make them ignore the warnings. Give them MSE instead.
It wasn't a vulnerability, it was a deliberate design decision that came to bite them in the ass. It was the default behavior and was described as such, only now that it was exploited is it considered a vulnerability.
Making excuses for Google is bad, but then so is making excuses for Apple. Worse so, in this case.
The problem is that your anecdote is not necessarily as representative as you seem to think it is.
Many AV's WILL report P2P programs as malware when this is not the case. McAfee lists TPB as a malicious website. "New Limewire" does indeed sound like malware (despite me being able to find NO references to any software by that name), but are you sure the AV wasn't just blocking non malware p2p software the user wanted to install? Just because the AV says something is malicious does not make it so.
I agree that the problem is more to do with users than UI, although I think both play a part. I think probably the largest problem is people may understand the problem, but not the consequences. Especially these days when malware tends to spy or operate in the background and is no longer inherently destructive. A user may want their PC to work the way they want it to, and may accept being spied on or being part of a botnet as acceptable, because they don't understand the consequences.
I like and agree with most of what you said, but one small part jumped out at me.
"actually, it turns out that with a bit of training, people do understand the difference between the switch that controls the lights and the one that controls the windshield wipers".
See, it isn't that hard, even for non expert users to understand the difference between a program and a document. Is it so hard to turn on file extensions and see that despite the movie file icon, it is an exe and so a program?
You can only blame the paradigm so much. When users don't care about getting even simple thigns right, then it seems less of an issue with the paradigm and more an issue with users being willfully stupid.
More Aussies than chavs. Aussie aussie aussie, oi oi oi. etc.
Thought that was always just the Aussies. Huh.
The story is interesting, although somehow not that exciting as this kind of advancement is...necessary and expected.
When we can actually upload data to our brains and have thoughts translated to a phonetic language...then we will have something that will move mankind forward generations.
Let me help you out here, since you seem to be missing 3 major points.
1. Philosophy is not the same as rebellion and there is no argument that it should be wiped from the earth. It is beneficial to human kind and is the forerunner to scientific though and exploration.
2. Religions are similar to cults, especially under a dictionary definition. Religions are harmful to people as they encourage a lack of critical thinking, cause people to donate money that would be better spent elsewhere, cause them to make poor life decisions. You only have to look at the ridiculous resistance to accepting evolution for an example of harm.
3. Scientology is similar to Judea-Christianity, indeed any religion...because it is a religion. People are believing things which if they stopped and thought, would agree are unlikely, improbably and downright irrational. Yet, for some reason they have faith so none of that matters. Which goes back to point 2, that religions are harmful.
Get the founders arrested after passing a new law specifically targeting them. Or extradite them to another country, like the United States, have a show trial, and then disappear them. Not hard to solve one website.
Thankfully, things don't work like that. Laws in the US wont affect other countries an most countries are not dumb enough to have signed the extradition agreement with the states that the UK did.
No it won't. People use more bandwidth on Netflix than piracy.
That's just silly. There are at least as many Pirates as Netflix users, and given the amount of stuff that isn't available on netflix....given that netflix doesn't have software or games....yeah. Silly thing to say.
No, you are wrong. What's more you miss the point. A donation can have a reward. If the only way to get that "reward" is with a donation for a fixed amount, that is not a donation, that is selling a product for a fixed price. Unless I donate $2 to 7/11 everytime I buy a bottle of coke.
Batman, in the Detective title or his own title, has not been an executioner since the 40's. The high value to which he considered life is a defining character trait.
Think about what you are saying.
It is like buying a mug from NPR. If you want a mug from NPR, then you have to give them money (and not just any amount, but some amount exceeding a minimum). You could also choose not to give them any money, and not get a mug.
A donation is a voluntary gift. If the only way to get something is via a donation, then it isn't a donation. A donation can have a reward, but when the only way to get an item is via a donation, that's false advertising.
It's a big problem I have with the EFF actually, and there "donation" pledges at conferences.
What anti MS FUD. When was the last time Hotmail was down? It may have issues, but reliability is not one of them. Never was.
OS X does not have a malware scanner. It has a list of malicious checksums and only checks files saved through certain applications. Download a malicious file through a torrent for example, and it won't raise a flag.
It isn't a scanner and should not be stated to be one.
Likewise :)
He has a point. You're trolling, badly.
I'm just curious, but do you also think women only gyms should be considered unconstitutional?
That's just the point. They are not an independent country as they're part of the EU. France, Germany, et. al. have been screaming for many years that Ireland's low tax rates are unfair and must be raised and yet they are able to keep their tax rates as they want them, regardless of this pressure.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter that other EU countries don't like it, in this regard Ireland are free to set their own taxes. It is not at all, in any way, analogous to the EU passing legislation and forcing countries to implement it. That is the point being discussed. Irish taxes are irrelevant.
It's not the same thing but it is applicable to the argument. Ireland is able to do what it wants even though it is part of the EU.
It isn't applicable to the argument. It is irrelevant. The EU does not control the taxes each country sets, just as the federal government in the US does not set state taxes. Every country in the EU has a certain level of independence, especially with things like taxes.
The EU forcing every country to implement a law when the people of that country don't agree with it is an entirely different issue and not democratic in the least.
The commission is not directly elected but is selected by those who have been democratically elected. You can vote for those who then select the members of the commission.
In practice, this means little. The people need far, far more say for democracy at the EU level not to be a joke.
I have to disagree on the basis that there is nothing stopping people from making themselves heard.
You seem to be making the case that just because people can make themselves heard means they have a say. We both know this is far from true.
As I said, it's not perfect. No system is perfect. I maintain that it is far from a joke, though, and is arguably one of the most democratic systems in place in the world today.
I agree no system is perfect. I think it is a joke because it is one of the least democratic systems in place today. You've yet to show how it is one of the most, especially since you acknowledge the limitations of the EP and the the EC is not directly elected.
I don't know why you bring up Irish tax laws, it is not analogous to the situation I describe at all. Ireland is an independant country and can set whatever taxes they like. This isn't at all the same thing as the EU passing legislation and requiring all states to implement some form of it or face penalties. Which the 3 strikes law is a perfect example of.
Your main argument for the EU being satisfactorily democratic is the EP. The EP cannot proposes legislation, only amendments. Think about that for a second. The commission holds a lot of power, yet you cannot vote for it's members.
To claim the people have a say in everything is bullshit. There are basically no countries where the people have a say in everything....it isn't workable with a representative democracy. Having a say on significant issues is a minimum, and something the EU misses out on. Could the people in the EU vote for or against ACTA?
The democratic deficit in the EU has been acknowledged and discussed since the 70's. That the EP is democratically elected does not make the problem go away.
How about taxes? And yeah, the US does actually have free speech, not crazy censorship that Germany has.
The Producers not being allowed to use the Nazi symbol is insanity.
Err, no. Thing is, you're too slow. Sorry. It is the speed at which the robot operates that makes this impressive. For you to change your move after the robot has made its move would be far too obvious.
See, we know the robot is cheating, but to people who don't know it looks like it is just winning. You couldn't pull off the same feat.
In the US, the States retain many powers that the Federal government is not allowed to fuck with. The same is true for the EU.
No, in the EU, the EU forces member states to enact laws that they may disagree with, such as the 3 strikes law, or face penalties.
The countries in the EU provide checks and balances to each other, quite without meaning to.
In practice, you have the strongest countries outlinng the policy and the smaller countries can't really say much. What the UK, German and France want, they tend to get.
So how, exactly, is democracy at the EU level a joke?
Because it isn't as democratic as you have said? Because the people don't have say in a lot of matters? Because the Lisbon treaty passed despite people not wanting it? Because here you have an official saying ACTA will go ahead and nothing can stop it?
No, it was just a mistake on my part. When I said "people" I meant government facilities/private businesses.
Microsoft got slapped with a fine only because the EU wanted to prove themselves. The browser/media player nonsense was ridiculous and undeserved. Silly EU.