| |
|
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
|
|
When Johns Hopkins officials announced this week that a courier had
lost nine backup computer tapes containing personal data on 135,000
employees and patients, security specialists were critical, even though
the information probably was destroyed without being compromised.
The reaction came not just because the tapes were lost, but
because they weren't encrypted -- coded so that they could be read only
with a computerized key.
"Have we not learned from history yet, that if you're going to give
[data] to a third party that you either encrypt or password protect
it?" said Linda Foley, executive director of the Identity Theft
Resource Center in San Diego.
Amid a spate of lost or stolen data, some organizations and
industries have begun taking steps to better protect employee and
customer information, yet far too many have not, privacy advocates say.
Many still leave sensitive information uncoded or hand it off to
sometimes-careless employees or third parties.
This year alone, Social Security numbers were posted on a public
Web site at the University of Nebraska; personal information on 537
people was stolen from the New York Department of Labor; a hacker
accessed Social Security numbers for more than 1,200 people at the
University of Missouri; and a laptop was stolen that contained medical
records for 1,100 patients at the Salina Regional Health Center in
Kansas.
Some consultants say that costs keep organizations from updating
their security practices -- encryption software and developing privacy
procedures can be expensive. But the No. 1 reason is complacency,
according to Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy
Information Center, or EPIC, in Washington.
"They don't see themselves as being in a position where they're going to lose something," Coney said.
8:40:57 PM 
|
|
Schneier: Why Microsoft Sold Out Consumers in Vista. Today, the PC industry needs Hollywood more than Hollywood needs the PC. Most consumers rely on traditional consumer electronics devices to view DVDs and TV content, but companies like Microsoft are betting on the converged digital home and desperately want a bigger piece of the media device market. Because of the DMCA, Microsoft has to get permission to build devices compatible with Hollywood's DRMed content. So when Hollywood demanded that Microsoft lard Vista with restrictions to access high-def DVD and digital cable content, the software giant was in a weak bargaining position.
But as Bruce Schneier explains in a recent editorial (via BoingBoing), Vista's DRM may also be a play to turn the tables and turn Microsoft's platform into a distribution channel on which Hollywood relies:
"[W]hile it may have started as a partnership, in the end Microsoft is going to end up locking the movie companies into selling content in its proprietary formats.
"We saw this trick before; Apple pulled it on the recording industry. First iTunes worked in partnership with the major record labels to distribute content, but soon Warner Music's CEO Edgar Bronfman Jr. found that he wasn't able to dictate a pricing model to Steve Jobs. The same thing will happen here; after Vista is firmly entrenched in the marketplace, Sony's Howard Stringer won't be able to dictate pricing or terms to Bill Gates. This is a war for 21st-century movie distribution and, when the dust settles, Hollywood won't know what hit them....
"Microsoft is reaching for a much bigger prize than Apple: not just Hollywood, but also peripheral hardware vendors. Vista's DRM will require driver developers to comply with all kinds of rules and be certified; otherwise, they won't work. And Microsoft talks about expanding this to independent software vendors as well. It's another war for control of the computer market."
Schneier overstates his case a bit when he says Microsoft could have simply refused Hollywood's demands for DRM and Hollywood would have released today's high-def video content for Vista anyway. But he's right that Microsoft would very much like to lock content vendors into a distribution channel that it controls, including for channels like IPTV and digital downloads. And the more Hollywood depends on Microsoft, the more Microsoft may be able to limit competition from other tech companies' platforms and devices. [EFF: Deep Links]
7:19:17 PM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2007 Paul Hardwick.
Last update: 3/4/07; 11:15:46 AM.
|
|
|
