One of my favourite monthly reads is Bruce Schneier’s Newsletter. The current issue contains some robustly perceptive observations on what Microsoft needs to do if it really wants to take security seriously. For example:

“One of the simplest, strongest, and safest models is to enforce a rigid separation of data and code. The commingling of data and code is responsible for a great many security problems, and Microsoft has been the Internet’s worst offender. Here’s one example: Originally, e-mail was text only, and e-mail viruses were impossible. Microsoft changed that by having its mail clients automatically execute commands embedded in e-mail. This paved the way for e-mail viruses, like Melissa and LoveBug, that automatically spread to people in the victims’ address books. Microsoft must reverse the security damage by removing this functionality from its e-mail clients and many other of its products. This rigid separation of data from code needs to be applied to all products.”

Oh No! Someone else claiming to have invented the Hyperlink.. Wired story.

Oops — Safeweb’s got some security holes. Why is this a problem? Well, I’m on their Privacy Safety Board, and they haven’t informed me before the story hit the Web and I’m mightily pissed off.

Great column by Dan Gillmor on the way the entertainment industry is increasingly treating everyone as a thief.

“If the business people who rule the entertainment industry had been as powerful 25 years ago as they are today, you’d be breaking the law if you set your videocassette recorder to tape your favorite Olympic event for later viewing. The VCR, assuming the entertainment industry would have allowed a manufacturer to sell it, would not have a fast-forward button because it would let you skip through the commercials without viewing them.

As for tape recorders, you would not have been able to make a copy of the music you just bought so you could play it in your car.”

Hollywood studios sue makers of digital recorders.
LA Times story.

“The lawsuits, which were brought by the largest TV networks and all seven major Hollywood movie companies, say the ReplayTV recorders violate copyrights by enabling users to send videos to other ReplayTV boxes over the Internet and skip commercials automatically. The suit filed by MGM, Fox, Universal Studios and Orion Pictures goes furthest, arguing that it’s illegal to let consumers record and store shows based on the genre, actors or other words in the program description. This claim threatens not just the ReplayTV devices, some copyright experts say, but all recorders like it. Unlike VCRs, which require users to record shows by time slot or unique number, PVRs record based on a show’s name or program description. Users don’t need to know when “Friends” is on. They just need to know the name or a leading actor. Once a program is found, the device can be set to capture it whenever it’s on the air.”

Interesting workshop today on “New Directions in Internet Policy” at Georgia Tech. My IPEF colleague Rex Hughes is a speaker.

John Perry Barlow on the copyright land grab.

“We are born savage and self-centered, and then, unless we move to Hollywood, we get over it. We become civilized. We enter a state in which we understand that sharing is good.

And just as sharing makes us civilized, it’s sharing that makes civilization. It lets us build a great collective work from the exchange of stories, myths, songs, poems, facts, jokes, beliefs, scientific discoveries, elegant engineering hacks, and all of the other products of human thought and discourse.

I know that this is a fairly obvious observation. That’s why I’m stunned that so many kinds of sharing have suddenly, without public debate, become criminal acts. For instance, lending a book to a friend is still all right, but letting him read the same book electronically is now a theft.

Over the last several years, the entertainment industry has railroaded a number of laws and treaties through Washington and Geneva that are driving us rapidly toward a future in which the fruits of the mind cannot be shared. Instead they must be purchased — not from the human beings who created them in the first place, but only from the media megaliths. “

I love the way JPB writes. He is concerned about the same issues that enrage me, and yet manages to package them in more digestible literary packages. Comes from having been a rock lyricist in an earlier life, I suppose. Sigh.

Here’s the text of BT’s ‘complaint’ re infringement of their alleged patent.

More Wired coverage of the BT patent case.

“Assuming for a moment that they have a valid case, then BT made a huge error in allowing that patent to sit unclaimed for so long,” said patent attorney Vincent Jerham. “Had the company piped up when those first Web pages were published and informed people that it owned hyperlink technology, then businesses and Web publishers could have chosen to use hyperlinks or not. Showing up now, more than a decade after the party started, has effectively killed any chance of collecting prior-usage fees.”

John McChesney of NPR visits Aspen and talks about Pringles cans, free networking, and Boingo [RealAudio required]: The intro said that these networks may pose a threat to existing telephone networks. McChesney interviews Jim Selby, and gets the facts right: he notes that the technology was designed for a few hundred feet, but that Shelby (like many others) can range for miles.

[80211b News]