Then you only need a few seconds alone with the targets computer to unplug the keyboard, plug it into your laptop to infect it, then plug it back into the targets computer and leave.
In addition, it should be relatively easy to program a PLA (programmable logic array) with a USB interface to create a small device to upload the key-logger to the keyboard. That device could be fit into a hollowed out cell phone so that no one would be the wiser. Later, that same device could be used to download the keystrokes. Who is going to notice someone sitting at a computer with a cell phone laying on the desk? The device could even be designed to download and store the logs from dozens or hundreds of keyboards. If the user had frequent enough access to the keyboards, such as in a university computer lab or library, then they could just make the rounds every once in a while and round up all kinds of passwords. Especially since the URL and password is often the only thing many people actually type on a computer used primarily for web access.
What this means is that universities need to secure the USB connections for the keyboards so that they can not be easily unplugged. Then they need a regular procedure to go around and reset the firmware on the keyboards. Perhaps someone could write a little app that could be run on boot-up that checks the firmware for malicious code and resets it to the default every time the machine is rebooted. Perhaps this should be included in the next update from Apple.
Developers already pay to install electrical wiring and connect to the grid when they build a house. That cost is included in the cost of a new home. Anyone who has built a house out in the country, away from the existing grid, knows how much the electric companies charge to "bring out electricity" to a remote location. It can be in the thousands of dollars (US). So, in effect, all that cabling is already paid for. The electric companies are now just trying to get us to pay for it a second time.
So, he is allergic to Wi-Fi but not to the electromagnets in his headphones? Or to the PTFE and/or PVC in all the cables connecting all his equipment? Or to the nano-vinyl dust coming off of those albums every time he plays them? (When they wear out, it has to go somewhere.) Or to the water proofing in that tent? Or to the hundreds of other chemicals leaching out of his electronics, especially when they get overheated?
In free countries, how did the powerful become powerful? Have they done something you couldn't do?
If you can think of a better way to say that, I would appreciate it, but I am looking for something that has a bit of sharpness, so people will think about it.
How about this:
"In free countries, how did the powerful become powerful? Have they done something you should have done but didn't?"
I feel this avoids the appearance of encouraging people to emulate even the evil attributes of the powerful.
Grant
P.S. Kudos to you for trying to wake people up to their own potential. And double-kudos for not getting argumentative when challenged. Good luck in all your endeavors.
phantomfive, I definitely agree with you that it is possible to gain power through ethical means. I guess it just seemed to me as if your signature implied that we, the non-powerful, should not complain about those with power if we are not willing to do what they had done to gain their power. A lot of people seem to justify an "any means necessary" approach to gaining power, and your signature seemed to be encouraging that attitude.
In free countries, how did the powerful become powerful? Have they done something you couldn't do?
Often they have done something (or a series of things) that most people wouldn't do, and that many believe one shouldn't do. It is rarely or ever a simple matter of the ones with the power having been the ones who were merely more capable. Free countries still have social norms, standard ethical codes, and even laws that a few choose to ignore. That those few who choose to ignore the norms, codes, and laws sometimes gain power is not an excuse for the rest of us to ignore them as well. An "every man for himself" culture often sounds great until that "every man" happens to be someone who is willing or able to take from you to get what they want.
Here is the bulk of an e-mail I sent to Corry Doctorow on this subject yesterday:
I am writing to comment on the fatalist tone of your article. You seem to believe that once an entity has achieved what I call "practical monopoly" status (defined as: reaching a position where people go to the entity first when looking for a specific type of product or information in great enough proportions that that entity has a large and significant influence on what information people find or products they buy.) then there is nothing to be done about it other than attempt to create yet another practical monopoly. You don't seem to leave open the possibility of the public making an end run around the monopolies, completely bypassing their so-called "gates."
This is similar to the old yarn about the troll under the bridge who demanded a toll to cross. When the toll gets too high, what is to stop others from building their own bridges downstream? According to your article, the cost of building a bridge is too high. Well, then people can build ferries. If enough people build enough ferries and leave them for others to use then the troll will get no toll and will either go away or reduce the toll.
Here is the ferry I propose we build. Open standards for metadata about creative content or products available on the internet. In fact many of the pieces of our ferry are lying about on the shore already. XML, RDF, Dublin Core, OWL, The Semantic Web. With all these pieces we should be able to construct an open standard which will allow independent creators of books, music, and more to post information about their offerings on their web sites. Then lots of independent "organizer" web sites could crawl the internet searching for this metadata, index it, and organize it in any way they think their users might like. These independent web sites could offer reviews or create their own little communities based around specific genres of product. Most importantly, anyone would be able to build their own web site to do this just as anyone would be able to use a ferry left tied up along the shore.
This system could work similarly to the way that web advertising works, where payments are only made to the independent organizing site if the user clicks through and then makes a purchase. The standard would have to include metadata about the content and what standard genres it fits into. It would also have to include information as to how to the financial end of the transaction should be handled. This standard would go hand in hand with your previous idea of creating a Creative Commons type of licence for crafters. People who design the product could post the metadata on their web site, then others would know exactly how they can go about making and or selling the product.
Larger pieces of our ferry would consist of open-source web-based "shopping cart" software for handling the sale of the products and payment systems such as PayPal. Naturally, many creators may choose to simply set up a "shop" on eBay, Amazon, or Yahoo! But with pre-made, easy-to-use, open-source tools many others may be inclined to set up their own independent shops on their own web sites. In effect, using the ferries we have built and tied up along the shore to cross that river and connect the creators directly to the users of the content.
So, in a way, it is not gatekeepers who stifle innovation. It is lack of innovation that stifles innovation. If the door is closed go through the window. If the window is closed get out the chain saw.;^)
I am a firm believer that more and better standards plus increased use of standards such as RDF and The Semantic Web will finally give us the internet and world we want. The so-called "gatekeepers" Doctorow wrote of only exist because web developers eschew standards that don't immediately make their sites look better or produce immediate results in terms of increased sales. These web developers cater to the "gatekeepers" (AKA
I didn't actually wish for anything. I wasn't even alive back then. All I said is that Martin Luther increased the innovation and diversity in religion. And you have substantiated my point.
Please remember, religion in this case is the metaphor not the topic. My original comment was about the fallacious logic used by ta bu shi da yu to summarily dismiss Doctorow's argument. In addition, your argument that Luther gave us Creationism, Fundamentalism, and televangelists is rather specious. Who is to say what further atrocities may have grown out of the Catholic church if Protestantism had never taken away Catholicism's monopoly on religion in the western world.
The Roman Catholic church has stifled diversity and innovation in religion specifically because the Pope and priests pose as intermediaries between between the parishioners and their god. Just ask Martin Luther. He couldn't even get the "Church" to allow him to translate the Bible into his native language so individuals could determine for themselves what it actually said and meant. He had to use innovation and start his own church, thereby increasing diversity in religion.
When organizations become so big that they are a practical monopoly (I don't want to get into a debate about what exactly is a monopoly and who has or doesn't have one. I define "practical monopoly" to mean most people go to them first when looking for a specific type of product or information to a great enough degree that that organization has a large and significant influence on what information people find or products they buy.) then they can stifle innovation simply by not making it easy for the public to find those things.
Lately I have been complaining that Google stifles my ability to find what I need simply by predominantly showing me sites that are selling a thing rather than simply have information about the thing itself. This stifles my access to new and innovative things simply by burying them amongst the marketing sites.
Don't get a new car at all. Get a scooter and live close to work. It is entirely feasible. I've been riding a scooter in Kansas winters for the last three years and I love it. There have been only a very few times when I needed to take the bus.
The problem with the internet as a means of fighting autocratic regimes is that the internet depends on a real-time connection that must pass through centralized connections. There are only two solutions:
1) Decentralize the connections. Create ad-hock long distance wireless networks that can't be scrambled but can be masked to appear as simple noise.
2) Switch to a store and forward technology and rely on smuggling of data back and forth across borders. This can be facilitated by simply smuggling thumb drives around but that is quite slow. It can also be accomplished by using the wireless connections in 1) above but connecting only at appointed times. This is to reduce the chance of being detected and located by the authorities. These times can be randomized according to an algorithm such that the two ends know when to turn on but the times are difficult to predict by watching the RF traffic. The data must be transmitted in a store and forward manner and in short bursts but it would still go relatively quickly. Something like NNTP would work fine. If multiple forwarding stations were set up, then they could even choose a random path for each burst of data to make detection even more difficult. The beauty of store and forward is that even if the wireless connections go down, then other methods like smuggling thumb drives could seamlessly take up the slack.
And you have just fallen prey to the scam. Giving up the right to protect ourselves against overreaching governments (which are primarily controlled by the wealthy and corporations) will eventually lead to far more suffering than child pornography. By making you fear and hate child pornographers so much that you are willing to give up your rights they have made you a pawn in their system of exploitation. You should hate child pornographers, but you should find ways to fight them other than simply giving up your rights - and those of everyone else.
I agree. This is a non-story. Some people just can't get over the notion that "cyberspace" is a separate dimension where the only reality that exists is the one they want to exist. As much as I love the internet, it is only a means of communication. Vastly complex communication, but communication nonetheless. And it is subject to the same laws that already govern communication between individuals or groups.
I had a manager who did this to me without my knowledge once. Even though I fixed the entire network for him and gave an entire month's notice, he marked my record saying he would not hire me again. When I went looking for a job later I had difficulty because the one thing my former employer was allowed to report to reference seekers was false information. Fortunately for me, that manager had actually been fired for incompetence just after I left so the HR dept was happy to amend my records to show the truth.
In your case, if it is the HR dept that is threatening you then get all your records and get them to make the request in writing. Then take that to the authorities. If you already have a job offer, then tell them what is happening and ask if they will let you start a week later. If you don't, then go ahead and work the extra week. Heck, if they want to pay a disgruntled, short-timer to stay in the building for an extra week, that is their problem.
I'm telling you, people should just start moving out of London - and England altogether. Let them spend millions of their taxpayer's money putting up cameras to spy on their taxpayers, but then there won't be anyone left on the screens.
If they ever put up cameras wherever I live, then I will just start wearing a mask, everywhere I go, and then randomly switch them out and trade with other people at random points in my trip. That should keep them confused.
I'll support this as soon as they pass legislation requiring all legislators to record and video all conversations they have - 24 hours a day - in order to make sure they don't do any backroom dealing not in the public's best interest.
In my area most people will be able to receive fewer stations after the switch. From what I have read, even big cities like LA will have reduced availability of channels. How is this going to kill cable?
It seems everyone is forgetting that it was a consumer asking the question. A consumer doesn't really care if the entity who created their software stops development or support for a while. No regular consumer gets any real support from the original manufacturer of a program anyway. Almost all of the commercial software developers now rely on "community support" through forums rather than direct support anyway. Most regular consumers get their support from whoever installed the software, whether that be a friend, a store, or the smart person in the family. That person knows the best source of support is Usenet or other online forums.
Most regular consumers buy one version of a program and then don't update it for years. If the coming recession lasts longer than the standard upgrade cycle of most consumers - about 5 years in my experience - then which distribution model is most "recession proof" will be the least of our worries.
Finally, anyone who is thinking of "switching" to open source is under no obligation to totally abandon all the software they have already purchased. Anyone who does so is making a "religious" decision rather than a rational one.
Exactly what I was going to say. All we need is hackable appliances. If you think some appliance repair outfits are scams now, just wait till they can shut down your appliances remotely. Most people are seriously uneducated about the common technology around them such as pilot lights and thermostats. It will be easy for businesses to sell contracts to "maintain" appliances and then randomly shut them down to prove that the contract was worth it. All the "repair" person will have to do is come out and pretend to do something while the their home office remotely turns the appliance back on. This charade will be used to convince people that they should keep renewing their contract regardless of how reliable their appliances may really be.
I predict this will happen within one year of the time that at least 25% of appliances sold have this technology.
I agree. As a former network manager, I have installed Sage accounting software and dealt with the business. It doesn't matter whether the blogosphere thinks that the Sage math software is infringing on the trademark of the Sage accounting software. All that matters is that the Sage accounting software company WILL definitely think so. They are a very egotistical and litigious company. Just as soon as they get wind of this open source project they will hit them with a lawsuit. And it won't be pretty. The Sage accounting software company will likely not stop at requesting that the open source project stop using their name. They will likely ask for damages in an amount that no open source project can afford.
I tried to find some way to send an e-mail to the Sage open source project to this effect but they have provided no means to do this on their web site.
Slashdot Mirror
In addition, it should be relatively easy to program a PLA (programmable logic array) with a USB interface to create a small device to upload the key-logger to the keyboard. That device could be fit into a hollowed out cell phone so that no one would be the wiser. Later, that same device could be used to download the keystrokes. Who is going to notice someone sitting at a computer with a cell phone laying on the desk? The device could even be designed to download and store the logs from dozens or hundreds of keyboards. If the user had frequent enough access to the keyboards, such as in a university computer lab or library, then they could just make the rounds every once in a while and round up all kinds of passwords. Especially since the URL and password is often the only thing many people actually type on a computer used primarily for web access.
What this means is that universities need to secure the USB connections for the keyboards so that they can not be easily unplugged. Then they need a regular procedure to go around and reset the firmware on the keyboards. Perhaps someone could write a little app that could be run on boot-up that checks the firmware for malicious code and resets it to the default every time the machine is rebooted. Perhaps this should be included in the next update from Apple.
Developers already pay to install electrical wiring and connect to the grid when they build a house. That cost is included in the cost of a new home. Anyone who has built a house out in the country, away from the existing grid, knows how much the electric companies charge to "bring out electricity" to a remote location. It can be in the thousands of dollars (US). So, in effect, all that cabling is already paid for. The electric companies are now just trying to get us to pay for it a second time.
Yes! That is even better! Cool!
So, he is allergic to Wi-Fi but not to the electromagnets in his headphones? Or to the PTFE and/or PVC in all the cables connecting all his equipment? Or to the nano-vinyl dust coming off of those albums every time he plays them? (When they wear out, it has to go somewhere.) Or to the water proofing in that tent? Or to the hundreds of other chemicals leaching out of his electronics, especially when they get overheated?
Riiiiiight!
How about this:
"In free countries, how did the powerful become powerful? Have they done something you should have done but didn't?"
I feel this avoids the appearance of encouraging people to emulate even the evil attributes of the powerful.
Grant
P.S. Kudos to you for trying to wake people up to their own potential. And double-kudos for not getting argumentative when challenged. Good luck in all your endeavors.
phantomfive, I definitely agree with you that it is possible to gain power through ethical means. I guess it just seemed to me as if your signature implied that we, the non-powerful, should not complain about those with power if we are not willing to do what they had done to gain their power. A lot of people seem to justify an "any means necessary" approach to gaining power, and your signature seemed to be encouraging that attitude.
Often they have done something (or a series of things) that most people wouldn't do, and that many believe one shouldn't do. It is rarely or ever a simple matter of the ones with the power having been the ones who were merely more capable. Free countries still have social norms, standard ethical codes, and even laws that a few choose to ignore. That those few who choose to ignore the norms, codes, and laws sometimes gain power is not an excuse for the rest of us to ignore them as well. An "every man for himself" culture often sounds great until that "every man" happens to be someone who is willing or able to take from you to get what they want.
I am a firm believer that more and better standards plus increased use of standards such as RDF and The Semantic Web will finally give us the internet and world we want. The so-called "gatekeepers" Doctorow wrote of only exist because web developers eschew standards that don't immediately make their sites look better or produce immediate results in terms of increased sales. These web developers cater to the "gatekeepers" (AKA
I didn't actually wish for anything. I wasn't even alive back then. All I said is that Martin Luther increased the innovation and diversity in religion. And you have substantiated my point.
Please remember, religion in this case is the metaphor not the topic. My original comment was about the fallacious logic used by ta bu shi da yu to summarily dismiss Doctorow's argument. In addition, your argument that Luther gave us Creationism, Fundamentalism, and televangelists is rather specious. Who is to say what further atrocities may have grown out of the Catholic church if Protestantism had never taken away Catholicism's monopoly on religion in the western world.
The Roman Catholic church has stifled diversity and innovation in religion specifically because the Pope and priests pose as intermediaries between between the parishioners and their god. Just ask Martin Luther. He couldn't even get the "Church" to allow him to translate the Bible into his native language so individuals could determine for themselves what it actually said and meant. He had to use innovation and start his own church, thereby increasing diversity in religion.
When organizations become so big that they are a practical monopoly (I don't want to get into a debate about what exactly is a monopoly and who has or doesn't have one. I define "practical monopoly" to mean most people go to them first when looking for a specific type of product or information to a great enough degree that that organization has a large and significant influence on what information people find or products they buy.) then they can stifle innovation simply by not making it easy for the public to find those things.
Lately I have been complaining that Google stifles my ability to find what I need simply by predominantly showing me sites that are selling a thing rather than simply have information about the thing itself. This stifles my access to new and innovative things simply by burying them amongst the marketing sites.
As soon as someone claims something is 100% secure I know they don't know what they are talking about.
I'd rather walk.
Don't get a new car at all. Get a scooter and live close to work. It is entirely feasible. I've been riding a scooter in Kansas winters for the last three years and I love it. There have been only a very few times when I needed to take the bus.
The problem with the internet as a means of fighting autocratic regimes is that the internet depends on a real-time connection that must pass through centralized connections. There are only two solutions: 1) Decentralize the connections. Create ad-hock long distance wireless networks that can't be scrambled but can be masked to appear as simple noise. 2) Switch to a store and forward technology and rely on smuggling of data back and forth across borders. This can be facilitated by simply smuggling thumb drives around but that is quite slow. It can also be accomplished by using the wireless connections in 1) above but connecting only at appointed times. This is to reduce the chance of being detected and located by the authorities. These times can be randomized according to an algorithm such that the two ends know when to turn on but the times are difficult to predict by watching the RF traffic. The data must be transmitted in a store and forward manner and in short bursts but it would still go relatively quickly. Something like NNTP would work fine. If multiple forwarding stations were set up, then they could even choose a random path for each burst of data to make detection even more difficult. The beauty of store and forward is that even if the wireless connections go down, then other methods like smuggling thumb drives could seamlessly take up the slack.
I say name it after his brother. In other words, name it "Colbert" but pronounce it with a hard 'T'.
And you have just fallen prey to the scam. Giving up the right to protect ourselves against overreaching governments (which are primarily controlled by the wealthy and corporations) will eventually lead to far more suffering than child pornography. By making you fear and hate child pornographers so much that you are willing to give up your rights they have made you a pawn in their system of exploitation. You should hate child pornographers, but you should find ways to fight them other than simply giving up your rights - and those of everyone else.
I agree. This is a non-story. Some people just can't get over the notion that "cyberspace" is a separate dimension where the only reality that exists is the one they want to exist. As much as I love the internet, it is only a means of communication. Vastly complex communication, but communication nonetheless. And it is subject to the same laws that already govern communication between individuals or groups.
I had a manager who did this to me without my knowledge once. Even though I fixed the entire network for him and gave an entire month's notice, he marked my record saying he would not hire me again. When I went looking for a job later I had difficulty because the one thing my former employer was allowed to report to reference seekers was false information. Fortunately for me, that manager had actually been fired for incompetence just after I left so the HR dept was happy to amend my records to show the truth. In your case, if it is the HR dept that is threatening you then get all your records and get them to make the request in writing. Then take that to the authorities. If you already have a job offer, then tell them what is happening and ask if they will let you start a week later. If you don't, then go ahead and work the extra week. Heck, if they want to pay a disgruntled, short-timer to stay in the building for an extra week, that is their problem.
I'm telling you, people should just start moving out of London - and England altogether. Let them spend millions of their taxpayer's money putting up cameras to spy on their taxpayers, but then there won't be anyone left on the screens.
If they ever put up cameras wherever I live, then I will just start wearing a mask, everywhere I go, and then randomly switch them out and trade with other people at random points in my trip. That should keep them confused.
I'll support this as soon as they pass legislation requiring all legislators to record and video all conversations they have - 24 hours a day - in order to make sure they don't do any backroom dealing not in the public's best interest.
In my area most people will be able to receive fewer stations after the switch. From what I have read, even big cities like LA will have reduced availability of channels. How is this going to kill cable?
'Nuf said.
It seems everyone is forgetting that it was a consumer asking the question. A consumer doesn't really care if the entity who created their software stops development or support for a while. No regular consumer gets any real support from the original manufacturer of a program anyway. Almost all of the commercial software developers now rely on "community support" through forums rather than direct support anyway. Most regular consumers get their support from whoever installed the software, whether that be a friend, a store, or the smart person in the family. That person knows the best source of support is Usenet or other online forums. Most regular consumers buy one version of a program and then don't update it for years. If the coming recession lasts longer than the standard upgrade cycle of most consumers - about 5 years in my experience - then which distribution model is most "recession proof" will be the least of our worries. Finally, anyone who is thinking of "switching" to open source is under no obligation to totally abandon all the software they have already purchased. Anyone who does so is making a "religious" decision rather than a rational one.
Exactly what I was going to say. All we need is hackable appliances. If you think some appliance repair outfits are scams now, just wait till they can shut down your appliances remotely. Most people are seriously uneducated about the common technology around them such as pilot lights and thermostats. It will be easy for businesses to sell contracts to "maintain" appliances and then randomly shut them down to prove that the contract was worth it. All the "repair" person will have to do is come out and pretend to do something while the their home office remotely turns the appliance back on. This charade will be used to convince people that they should keep renewing their contract regardless of how reliable their appliances may really be. I predict this will happen within one year of the time that at least 25% of appliances sold have this technology.
I agree. As a former network manager, I have installed Sage accounting software and dealt with the business. It doesn't matter whether the blogosphere thinks that the Sage math software is infringing on the trademark of the Sage accounting software. All that matters is that the Sage accounting software company WILL definitely think so. They are a very egotistical and litigious company. Just as soon as they get wind of this open source project they will hit them with a lawsuit. And it won't be pretty. The Sage accounting software company will likely not stop at requesting that the open source project stop using their name. They will likely ask for damages in an amount that no open source project can afford.
I tried to find some way to send an e-mail to the Sage open source project to this effect but they have provided no means to do this on their web site.