Silicon Shecky

Infosec Practitioner

Connect

What good is social media when your friends leave it?

By Leave a Comment

Google Plus, the honeymoon is over. Is social Media any good when you have no one to talk to?

So there we go. Google is really bringing the hammer down on people who use Pseudonyms. Not only for Plus, but also for Buzz, and other Googley apps. What good is it though? People get pissed and leave those services. That means less ad money for Google. It gives people a bad taste in their mouth, so they stop purchasing things that Google supports. It can be a nightmare, especially in this day and age of Twitter and Facebook also.

A friend of mine who just left google plus wrote the following as their last post:

Dear +Bradley Horowitz

I really thought you guys had figured it out, but its pretty clear from the Google Name Policy that Google has once again failed at recognizing the basic tenant of social networking, namely that relationships made and maintained online are just as real as those made in real life if not more so because of the greater pool of finding like minded individuals. Clearly those at the top have never been part of a forum community, an MMO, or been to a spontaneous community event whether it be out in the desert at Burning Man, inside the track at the Indy 500, or just waiting in a line for a concert. Those who have understand that a chosen name is just as real as one printed, stamped and filed by someone’s parents.

Everyone else has already mentioned the safety and legal concerns of denying the protection of a pseudonym to a wide array of people who would be in significant danger should they use their legal names on a public, datamining, service, so I won’t belabor the point.

For Google, I only ask you to watch the numbers as people begin to walk away and try to understand the significance of having a network where no one is, because none of their friends can participate safely.

For everyone else, please repost on your own accounts, you can give me a mention, if you like, but don’t just share it, you never know when I won’t be considered ‘real’ enough for Google.

Collapse this post
They are right. We are living in a world where people are becoming known more for their pseudonyms than their real names. A world where privacy means something.
Google overall has been deviating and basically given up on not being Evil. Android was originally marketed as open source, but now is only semi-open. Chrome browser is out there, but more heavily controlled now. Web apps, have become more and more secretive.
Page and Brin are what they are. Paranoid, secretive, wanting in the end to do good, but now are doing more bad than good. 2 brilliant minds who really don’t understand the real world, nor care about our concerns. Just like their mentor, and now enemy, Steve Jobs, they want to force things down our throats. the want to get all the information they can from everyone, and use that information to force us to the cloud for everything. They shouldn’t have to force us. they should do what they started doing, which was give us the tools we need to make the leap, and open them up so we have reason to. Maybe, someday they will get back to their original vision. I don’t count on it though.
Meanwhile, Google Plus is becoming a ghost town for me. A good number of my friends left due to the naming policy. Even people like Will Wheaton and Felica Day don’t seem to be posting as much. I’ll stick around there until they kick me out for using a nick name most people know me by. It really is a shame, because without the name policy, Google Plus could have laid the smack down on Facebook. People liked the setup, the circles, the security on it. Its too bad that Google doesn’t listen to us about names.

 

Patents: Bane of the Tech World

By Leave a Comment

The patent world is a jumbled mess. Companies are suing companies left and right. In the end, the consumer and economy get hurt.

News broke yesterday that Apple has won a round in the patent infringement case against HTC. HTC of course is appealing. Meanwhile HTC has purchased S3 to sue Apple. Kodak has sued Apple and RIM. Apple and Samsung are suing each other over patents also. This is just a small smattering of the lawsuits going on over smartphones, and just another example of how broken the patent system is.

A patent ( /?pæt?nt/ or /?pe?t?nt/) is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state (national government) to an inventor or their assignee for a limited period of time in exchange for the public disclosure of an invention(from Wikipedia). A simple enough definition, yet a problem arises with patents in the technology industry. Technology moves fast, and patents cause it nothing but problems. The limit for a patent in the United States, or Europe is 20 years. The amount of time one of the patent lawsuits will go through the legal system is 3-15 years depending on resources of the companies, and whether they come up with an agreement outside of court.

The problem really arises in how many things get patented, and are there other ways to do those same things. A lot of the patent issues arise not from hardware, but from software. Software is a bunch of commands and equations. There are only so many ways to program something. Yes, you can license the patents from the patent holder. Yet if you write something that does a similar function, and goes about it a different way, without that patent license, you still could be sued.

This not only can stifle innovation, but create issues for the end consumer, which are the ones who in the end are supposed to benefit from innovation. Without that innovation, you don’t come up with valid competitors, which may leave a lack of choice and a larger expense to the consumer. The lawsuits can sow confusion in the consumer, slowing down the adaptation of new technologies, putting companies out of business, and increasing the unemployment rate. I am not saying that this will or always does happen, but it is a big chance to take.

Imagine, if you will, if say the Pythagorean Theorem was patented. Better yet, if the Theory of Relativity was patented. Think of all the items, designs, and things that we would be missing out on, or that could be sued into non-existence.

The real fix isn’t licensing, or suing, but a more reasonable term for patents and intellectual property in the world of technology, more specifically software.  20 years is reasonable for a drug, considering that by the time it actually gets to market there is around 5-8 years left on the patent, during which time the companies can make up their investment. A company such as Apple can easily make up its investment in a patent for a smartphone within 3 to 5 years of the device hitting market. The problem is that a drug company takes 12 years to market, research, get approval, and get the drug out to the consumer. A company like apple takes about 3 years to get a new device out and less when creating upgrades for said device. The original investment in the technology itself is only viable with the release of the first generation of said product, otherwise you wouldn’t have new iPhones coming out every 6 months to 1 year.

So what is the answer then? A 10 year software patent? Maybe 5 years? With the rate at which technology changes, it has to be less than 20 years. Otherwise, people could become afraid to innovate, new ideas could be stifled, and we will be left with less of a choice for items that are supposed to make our lives better.

Androids Biggest Weakness

By Leave a Comment

I have an Android phone, and I enjoy it. I don’t care for the iPhone. That being said, Apple has one huge advantage over Android.

The Android Smartphones are popular. The work well (for the most part), and are reliable (again for the most part). The open development community for apps has produced some great free applications, that you would have to pay for on iOS. There is a drawback to Android though, and it is something that by all rights should be more of a strength.

When you look into the world and history of Operating Systems, you see a bloody trail over security. Which OS is more secure, which one addresses security problems the fastest, etc. The Open Source community has always claimed that because more people can look at the code, patches can come out faster, and in the Desktop arena this definitely seems to be true. In the world of Smart Phones though, this “advantage” is lost.

The problem is not directly Android or Google, or the Open Source community. The problem is in Manufacturers, and even more so on the carriers. There is a process for patches and updates. Google writes an update, tests, sends to the manufacturer who tests, approves and then sends to the carrier. Android is so customizable, and on so many different manufacturer’s phones that this process has to happen for each model, each customized OS, and each carrier.

Now we are getting into a situation with this long protracted system of updates. Holes being found in the systems are there for months, possibly years before a patch gets pushed out. In this age of phone upgrades every 18 months, of more mobile applications for smart phones, more people banking and shopping off smart phones, and the upcoming Near Field Communications, updates for security need to happen a lot faster. The risk of more and more identity theft is growing, and the slowness of the pipeline is maddening.

Now add on that every manufacturer has been customizing the Android OS to try and differentiate itself from the others. How many more security issues can this raise. How many of the mods are creating security holes (we won’t go into other issues these mods cause)?

Yes, Apple has to go through the same sort of pipeline, but Apple has only piece of hardware (with different chips for GSM or CDMA) and just the carriers to deal with. Its a much shorter pipeline, and Apple can cut a carrier off from future iPhone releases if it wants to. Android needs to come up with something similar soon, especially with all the malware that has been coming out for the platform already.