Wherever you click, someone’s watching
January 4, 2010
Source: IANS

A few weeks back, Mark Zuckerberg , Facebook’s founder, made a few changes to 
the privacy settings in his profile on the social networking site.
What he did was fairly simple . Facebook essentially allows its users to chose 
their level of privacy, by deciding whether they want to restrict access to 
their ‘friends’ , ‘friends of friends’ or ‘everyone’. Zuckerberg chose the 
option ‘everyone’, allowing hundreds of people access to his personal 
information, which was earlier restricted only to his friends.

Nothing wrong with that, one would presume. However, Zuckerberg’s move was a 
precursor to a major policy decision by his company, that was aimed at 
encouraging its members to share more information, by asking them to review 
their privacy settings.

What Facebook didn’t convey was that unless users actively managed their 
privacy settings themselves, their information about ‘family, relationship, 
education, work’ etc, and their posts would be made visible to everyone, by 
default. Internet observers were soon up in arms, terming it as a ploy to 
“nudge users to share information” so that search engines could index more 
pages from their site.

Although Facebook defended its decision by claiming that “it was a step towards 
empowering its 350 million users”, the episode has renewed the larger debate of 
privacy on the Internet. The moot question it has raised is this — does the 
privacy of users get regularly infringed in a medium, whose strongest point, 
perhaps, is that users can remain fairly anonymous, unless they wish to 
voluntarily share information about themselves?

“The answer is a big Yes,” says Katitza Rodriguez, director of the Electronic 
Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a Washingtonbased group that focuses public 
attention on privacy issues. “All across the world, privacy infringement is an 
issue that has assumed alarming proportions. Whether it is through websites, 
search engines, email or social networking sites, the information of users is 
being accessed without their consent or even their knowledge.”

How does this happen? “Take search engines, for instance,” says Rodriguez. 
“Internet Protocol addresses — which identify unique computers — are the 
primary method by which information submitted to search engines is made 
personally identifiable. Other methods include search query analysis and the 
use of cookies. The irony is that most users are simply unaware that search 
engines like Google are collecting their personally identifiable data.”

And, how is this information used? “There are two major threats to privacy 
today — governments seeking greater access to our lives, and companies who wish 
to commoditise our lives,” says Professor Gus Hosein of the London School of 
Economics. “If a country’s government wants to get information about you, they 
can simply approach Google or Microsoft, and you will never be any the wiser. 
Similarly, companies want to know what you are doing wherever you are, so that 
they can sell ads to you.”

Why this is worrying is because this also leaves the field open for a lot of 
potential misuse. “As an advanced user of the internet , I still have to rely 
on blind faith at times to ensure that my data is not being abused. This is not 
a comforting thought,” says Hosein. The excessive collection of personal data 
by Internet companies has also led to the problem of identity theft, especially 
in the US.

Even in India, where individual privacy rights have never been a major issue, 
the perception is changing fast.“Increased use of internet, growth of 
e-commerce and e-governance and recent trends like misuse of information by 
telemarketers is rapidly changing our notion of privacy,” says Kamlesh Bajaj of 
the Data Security Council of India, a Nasscom subsidiary, formed to spread 
awareness about online privacy and data protection practices in the country.

As awareness about the issue is growing, so is the demand for action. Privacy 
groups like EPIC have now started putting pressure on internet companies to 
establish fair information practices which ensure that the information they 
collect will not be used for secondary purposes without the knowledge and 
informed consent of the user. They are also encouraging citizens around the 
world to sign the Madrid Privacy Declaration, which affirms that privacy is a 
fundamental human right.

With all this happening, users would be hoping that at least in the new decade, 
they can surf the net, without someone constantly looking over.

Twitter bans 370 words as passwords
January 4, 2010
Source: REUTERS

LONDON: Social networking site 'Twitter' has banned 370 words it considers "too 
obvious" to be used as Twitter rejects certain words like "123456" and 
"password" to be used as passwords because it thinks they are too easy to guess 
and put users data at risk, The Telegraph reported.

Along with, names of famous cars such as "porsche" and "ferrari", and football 
teams like "Chelsea" and "Arsenal" are also banned.

A few science fiction words are also a part of the banned word list of the 
website.

"THX1138" -- title of the first film by Star Wars fame director George Lucas, 
is banned. So is "NCC1701" -- the registry number of Star Trek's starship 
Enterprise -- and "trustno1", Fox Mulder's password in The X-Files, the report 
said.

A recent research by insurer CPP has shown that people are often too 
predictable when it comes to choosing passwords.

Security experts advise that a strong password should consist of letters, 
numbers and even punctuation symbols. They should be changed regularly and one 
should not use the same password for their online services.

Microsoft needs a swift kick in the boot-up
January 4, 2010
SOURCE: ET AGENCIES

It took about 20 years before television viewers no longer had to wait for 
their sets to warm up. Yet here we are, 30-plus years into the
personal computer era, and the instant-on PC remains elusive.

That may be about to change. Today’s tech consumers have grown accustomed to 
always-on smart phones and efficient netbooks they can leave for hours in 
“sleep” mode without rebooting. As a result, they are losing patience with the 
spinning logos, hourglasses, and twiddling thumbs that define the experience of 
booting up most Windows PCs.

And they are showing a growing interest in hardware and software that speed up 
the process, or can even side-step it. By most accounts, Windows 7, the current 
version of Microsoft’s operating system, is quicker off the mark than its 
predecessor, Windows Vista. Microsoft cites its efforts with partners such as 
Lenovo Group to optimise Windows boot-up times, and its work on power 
management that it says makes Windows’ sleep mode the moral equivalent of 
instant-on.

Still, making Windows faster is not the same thing as making Windows fast; 
starting a PC can take anywhere from less than one minute to more than 10, 
depending on its hardware and the version of Windows it is using. And leaving 
computers in indefinite sleep runs counter to the US government’s best advice 
on saving energy.

So if you are impatient for a better solution, and after all, impatience is 
what this is all about, here are three ways to get closer to the goal:

Run an instant-on operating system in addition to Windows. A number of programs 
aim to work around Windows’ slow boot times by simply not booting Windows. 
Instead, these programs, some of which come installed on new computers from 
Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Asustek Computer and Acer, among others, launch a 
stripped-down desktop that allows you to surf the Web, handle any email you can 
view in a browser and perform other basic tasks. Windows is there, but only to 
be summoned when needed.

I have been using one such program, HyperSpace from Phoenix Technologies, on a 
Samsung NC10 netbook for the last couple of weeks. If it is a quick start you 
are looking for, HyperSpace provides it.

Press the power button, and within 15 seconds, the Linux-based Hyper-Space 
presents you with a customisable screen including a browser, a notepad 
application, RealNetworks s RealPlayer media software and news, weather and 
stock information. I could jot a quick note, view videos from YouTube and even 
make calls using Skype, all without ever launching Windows.

The experience became a little less satisfying, though, once I hit the icon on 
the HyperSpace desktop to launch Windows. For one thing, you cannot load 
Windows in the background, so using HyperSpace does not eliminate waiting for 
it to boot, just delays it.

Moreover, while the two systems exist side by side, jumping back and forth 
between them can pose problems. I found the speed of the switch to be highly 
variable: Sometimes it was quite brisk; other times, especially when running 
off of the Samsung’s battery, I faced long, uncomfortable pauses where nothing 
seemed to be happening on the screen. Do I keep waiting? Do I click again?

If you are like me, you may find yourself doing fewer and fewer things within 
the Windows environment. Which may be good for your productivity, but cannot 
possibly be good news for Microsoft.

Conventional hard drives are mechanical devices, and it takes time to locate 
and access your data on a spinning platter. Solid-state drives, by contrast, 
have no moving parts; information is stored on microchips, and is instantly 
accessible. As a result, SSDs are faster and use 80% less power, according to 
Samsung, which along with Intel is a major supplier of the drives.

I have been using a Dell Latitude E4300 notebook computer outfitted with a 256 
gigabyte Samsung SSD. No messing around with multiple operating systems here. 
Instead, it is pure Windows, at light speed.

Using Windows 7, the Latitude rockets from zero to ready for action in a mere 
20 seconds. As an added benefit, just about every other function gets a speed 
boost too. Programs launch in the blink of an eye, and the computer shuts down 
in five seconds.

Alas, the speed comes at a stiff price. There is still a vast gulf between SSDs 
and mechanical drives: Putting an SSD in the Latitude adds about $700 to its 
price, compared with a conventional hard disk of similar capacity. In other 
words, solid state is the way to go, but only if you have got the dough.

There are more operating-system alternatives to Windows today than at any point 
in the last two decades. And the options are increasing. Most obviously, there 
is Apple’s OS X. The current version, Snow Leopard, boots 10-15% faster than 
Windows 7, according to most tests. While that is good, no one would describe a 
Mac as “instant on.” And its advantages come at the cost of higher prices and 
less hardware selection than its PC equivalents.

For those with less money in their wallets and more adventure in their souls, 
there is Ubuntu, a free, consumer-oriented Linux environment from Canonical 
with startup times comparable to HyperSpace. And lurking in the wings is 
Google, which is promising its own operating system, Chrome OS, for 2010. 
Chrome OS was designed with instant-on in mind.

At its public debut this summer, Google executives showed a netbook reaching 
its log-in screen seven seconds after powering up, and said they were working 
to bring that down even more. All these developments put Microsoft on notice 
that it is going to have to move more quickly, literally, to retain its 
dominant position. Speaking for computer users everywhere, I cannot wait.