Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Atari Online News, Etc. Volume 16 Issue 27
Volume 16, Issue 27 Atari Online News, Etc. July 4, 2014
Published and Copyright (c) 1999 - 2014
All Rights Reserved
Atari Online News, Etc.
A-ONE Online Magazine
Dana P. Jacobson, Publisher/Managing Editor
Joseph Mirando, Managing Editor
Rob Mahlert, Associate Editor
Atari Online News, Etc. Staff
Dana P. Jacobson -- Editor
Joe Mirando -- "People Are Talking"
Michael Burkley -- "Unabashed Atariophile"
Albert Dayes -- "CC: Classic Chips"
Rob Mahlert -- Web site
Thomas J. Andrews -- "Keeper of the Flame"
With Contributions by:
Fred Horvat
To subscribe to A-ONE, change e-mail addresses, or unsubscribe,
log on to our website at: www.atarinews.org
and click on "Subscriptions".
OR subscribe to A-ONE by sending a message to: dpj@atarinews.org
and your address will be added to the distribution list.
To unsubscribe from A-ONE, send the following: Unsubscribe A-ONE
Please make sure that you include the same address that you used to
subscribe from.
To download A-ONE, set your browser bookmarks to one of the
following sites:
http://people.delphiforums.com/dpj/a-one.htm
Now available:
http://www.atarinews.org
Visit the Atari Advantage Forum on Delphi!
http://forums.delphiforums.com/atari/
=~=~=~=
A-ONE #1627 07/04/14
~ Facebook Admits Error! ~ People Are Talking! ~ Phantasy Star Online 2
~ NSA Spying, Thumbs-up? ~ EPIC Files A Complaint ~ Iwata Gets Re-elected!
~ Russia Restricts Web! ~ Forget Requests: 70K! ~ NSA Targeted German!
~ Microsoft Aids Outlook ~ ~ Photoshop 2014 News!
-* Denny's and Atari Partners! *-
-* Facebook - Unethical or Typical Act? *-
-* NSA's Internet Monitoring Said To Be Legal *-
=~=~=~=
->From the Editor's Keyboard "Saying it like it is!"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Happy Independence Day here in the U.S., a happy 4th of July! The weather
hasn't cooperated for today's typical celebrations, but that cannot always
be possible. Even the annual Boston Pops celebration on Boston's Charles
River was played out a day early due to storms and the fast-approaching
Hurricane Arthur! But, the revelers are still out there, as witnessed by
my neighbors out shooting off fireworks in the pouring rain! So much for
common sense!
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
->In This Week's Gaming Section - Denny's and Atari Partner To Remix Gaming Favorites!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Satoru Iwata Re-Elected as Nintendo President!
Phantasy Star Online 2 Still Down!?
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE's Game Console Industry News - The Latest Gaming News!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Satoru Iwata Re-Elected as Nintendo President
Nintendo president Satoru Iwata has been re-elected to the board of
directors at the company's Annual Shareholders Meeting.
The meeting, which took place today in Japan, saw Iwata safely retain his
position in the company despite being absent due to recent surgery.
It'll come as a relief to Iwata, as his approval rating from investors
has steadily been declining in recent years. It was riding high at 92.9
percent in 2011, but that dipped to 77.3 percent last year. His current
approval rating hasn't been announced, but we're working to track it
down.
There were serious concerns earlier this year that the Nintendo president
could be voted out following a slump in his internal approval rating and
another annual loss, but it seems investors are keen to see him remain at
the helm, for another year at least.
With the news that Mario Kart 8 has managed to sell over 2 million copies
however, perhaps this will be the year Nintendo's fortunes turn around.
Phantasy Star Online 2 Still Down, So What Exactly Is A DDoS ?
Another day has gone by and Phantasy Star Online 2 (PSO2) is still down.
Sega is pleading with customers to be patient and give them another
24 hours as they are still under heavy assault by a massive DDoS attack
on their systems.
Last time we discussed this here on ModVive we focused on the cultural
politics surrounding the game, and singled out some possible culprits
based on that ongoing drama. This time well take a step back and look at
what exactly a DDoS attack is, how they are carried out, and the usual
reasons why they happen.
What is a DDoS?
DDoS stands for Distributed Denial of Service. The purpose of the attack
is to bring a server, usually hosting a webpage, to its knees. How? When
a computer receives a request it must answer it, even to tell that
request to go shove it. A DDoS attack floods said server system with so
many requests it cant handle them all, thus no one else can connect and
it can potentially lock up a system if its a big enough attack.
How Would You Pull Off a DDoS?
So how do they do this? Well back in the day, and by that I mean as little
as a few years ago, youd just run some kiddy script and you could kill
any low level website in under an hour from the comfort of your basement
with the power of your average desktop computer. This was a bad idea for
a number of reasons, not least of which was the fact that you basically
told the whole world who you were with a giant neon sign the moment you
clicked nuke. When you connect to a server it logs the IP address of the
sender every time and once you DDoSed a system the one thing they have is
all the return addresses youve sent them when you attempted to cripple
their service.
Even if you hide behind a VPN (or three) or sit behind fifteen firewalls,
its not going to take long for the victim to connect the dots. So whats
an enterprising asshat with a burning hatred of Bronies or super deformed
hentei to do? Well what he could do is distribute the attack across
multiple systems across the world. This is where the distributed in
DDoS comes from, but sources vary. Sometimes it simply means that the
attacker distributed the packets to you, other times they distributed the
attack across a whole network. One way is to simply buy the server power
in various places with the necessary software and simply pull the trigger
remotely. Another is to trigger a botnet that has infected machines
around the world silently listening for the command to begin the assault
on all of that dreaded tentacle porn.
Why Would Someone Initiate a DDoS Attack?
This is where the profit motive comes into play. All of the above is
expensive, and that money has to come from somewhere. What usually
happens during a modern attack is information theft. Using the DDoS as
cover, systems can be compromised that can allow hackers to get into
customer and transaction records and give them easier access to sellable
info like credit card numbers while the IT department is busy putting out
all of the other fires caused by the initial attack.
Sega has claimed that this has not happened in this instance, which is
usually an indication that it wasnt tried for at all. Otherwise we would
all be prompted to change our passwords and contact our banks by now
just in case. This leads a lot of credence to the angry sub-group theory
except for the fact that they would still have to shell out a lot of cash
to keep an attack like this going, which leads us to one last guess as to
who is behind this.
Who is Responsible for the DDoS?
Potentially the culprit could be none other than China. Their hatred of
the free worlds access to waifu anime funtime has been well known and
this key strike against the worlds leading supply of under aged bikini
clad avatars controlled by middle aged men will be a day that will live
in infamy! Oh, whats that? They have their own MMOs and one of them
is sponsored by martial arts superstar Jet Lee? So why would they
attack PSO2?
Because they wouldnt, at least not intentionally. The problem with a
botnet controlled DDoS is that its automated and sometimes theres
unintended collateral damage. China has launched the largest DDoS in
history using such a botnet against websites that have been organizing
the democracy movement in Hong Kong, and there has been quite a few
online services swept up in the attack. Its possible that the server
system PSO2 is housed in is also hosting target websites, and its
gotten caught in the crossfire, or that the acronym PSO is within the
target parameters which explains why other PSO related sites have also
been hit.
But this is all just speculation at this point and there wont be any
answers until the servers come back up and the IT staff does a post
mortem on the attack. Whether its racists, anti-racist, angry
customers, potential customers, or the Chinese government, the only
thing that matters to most PSO2 players is when theyll finally be able
to get in and whack yellow penguins with lightning katanas until bikinis
fall out, and Sega assures everyone that this day is coming soon.
Phantasy Star Online 2 DDoS Attack Follow-up
On Phantasy Star Series Official Blog, a follow-up report about suspension
of Phantasy Star Online 2 due to fierce DDoS attack has been uploaded.
DDoS attack against PSO2 still continues intermittently. Though the
administrators began making preparations for recovery of the service, it
will take more time to restart the game server.
Besides, maintenance of PSO2 and PSO2es official website will be carried
out from 16:00 to 18:00 on June 26 (Thu). During the maintenance, these
websites become unavailable.
The followings are the services under suspension:
* Download of PC edition game client* Download of PSO2 Character Create
Trial Edition for PC* Purchase of Arc Cash (AC)
* Log-in to PSO2 for PC and PS Vita
* Log-in to PSO2es for smartphone
The administrators announced that schedules of Item Design Contest, PSO2
2nd Anniversary Memorial Character Contest, PSO2 2nd Anniversary Memorial
Character Portrait Contest and various other events and campaigns will be
adjusted.
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE Gaming Online - Online Users Growl & Purr!
"""""""""""""""""""
Denny's and Atari Partner To Remix Gaming Favorites
Denny's, America's iconic family diner, and Atari, one of the world's
most recognized publishers and producers of video game entertainment,
have joined together to bring back a few classic arcade games, but with
some unique twists.
Inspired by Denny's new "Greatest Hits Remixed" menu - which features a
selection of the diner's iconic dishes all with a new culinary spin -
three of Atari's most famous games, Asteroids, Centipede and Breakout,
have been remixed as "Hashteroids," "Centipup" and "Take-Out." Beyond
just a new name, the games will feature diner elements, such as flying
hash browns and syrup bottle shooters. All three games are available on
the Denny's mobile app for iPhone and Android devices.
"Our 'Greatest Hits Remixed' menu celebrates a few of Denny's most
beloved dishes, by incorporating modern flavors for a fresh, new taste,"
said Frances Allen, chief brand officer for Denny's. "We're constantly
looking to provide a fresh take on tradition for our guests, and this
partnership with Atari allows us to extend the fun beyond our menu, and
add a new spin on classic gameplay."
Each of the new remixed games incorporates diner items into play:
Hashteroids You're aboard the SS Denny's Condiment Transport ship and
the mission is clear: deliver 40 tons of condiments to the 4th planet in
sector 7d.
Centipup Once upon a time, a young boy named Danny came across a bottle
of syrup and with just a slight squeeze the bottle's sticky contents had
the power to turn anyone or anything into a fried egg.
Take-out A wall made entirely of delicious Denny's breakfast items
appears blocking all the take-out orders from their rightful owners. The
only way to feed customers is to break down that wall!
"We are excited to be partnering with Denny's on this partnership.
Transforming our classic and beloved games into a retro, remixed
promotion will be a natural way to expose our brand to a new generation
and resonate with our long-time fans in a fun and unique way," said Fred
Chesnais, Chief Executive Officer, Atari, Inc.
The remixed Atari games are just one of several new features available on
Denny's recently refreshed "Build Your Own" mobile app, which allows
users to build and personalize their app exactly how they like, from
their homepage layout to a variety of themes. Interactive elements such
as the "Museum of Diner Art" are guaranteed to keep guests entertained,
while regular features including the restaurant finder and menus keeps
the latest Denny's news at guests' fingertips.
For more information about Denny's Atari partnership or limited time
"Greatest Hits Remixed" menu, including new remixed dishes such as the
Red White and Blue Slam, Baja Moons Over My Hammy and Tuscan Super Bird,
please visit www.dennys.com.
=~=~=~=
A-ONE's Headline News
The Latest in Computer Technology News
Compiled by: Dana P. Jacobson
Facebook Admits 'Communications' Error With Emotions Study
Facebook "communicated really badly" about a controversial study in which
it secretly manipulated users' feelings, the social network's chief
operating officer Sheryl Sandberg admitted Wednesday.
The company clandestinely altered the emotional content of feeds of nearly
700,000 users for a week in 2012, giving some sadder news and others
happier news in a study aimed at better understanding "emotional
contagion".
The research, published last month, has prompted online anger and
questions about the ethics of the research and forced Facebook on the
defensive.
It was an experiment as part of product testing, Sandberg told a women's
business seminar in New Delhi when asked whether the study was ethical.
"We communicated really badly on this subject," she said, before adding:
"We take privacy at Facebook really seriously."
Sandberg, who was in India to promote her gender-equality book "Lean In"
and meet leaders of Indian companies and senior politicians, declined to
speak to reporters asking further questions.
The comments came as several European data protection regulators began
looking into whether Facebook broke privacy laws when it carried out the
study.
British authorities will question Facebook over the experiment, officials
said Wednesday.
The Information Commissioner's Office, Britain's independent data
watchdog, is liaising with the Irish data protection authority and
seeking "to learn more about the circumstances", a spokesman said.
The study by researchers affiliated with Facebook, Cornell University and
the University of California at San Francisco, appeared in the June 17
edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
In the study, Facebook placed positive or negative posts in users' feeds
to see how this affected their mood -- all without their explicit consent
or knowledge.
The results indicate "emotions expressed by others on Facebook influence
our own emotions, constituting experimental evidence for massive-scale
contagion via social networks", the researchers concluded, and noted
emotion was relevant to human health.
Given Facebooks billion users and widespread influence, the experiment
has raised worries over its ability to influence users moods and
thinking.
Critics say research on people is normally governed by strict ethical
regulations.
In a statement earlier in the week, Facebook said none of the data used in
the study was associated with a specific person's account.
It said it did research to make its content "as relevant and engaging as
possible", which meant understanding how people respond to positive or
negative information.
The researchers said the study was consistent with Facebook's Data Use
Policy, to which all users agree before creating a Facebook account.
But a number of users criticised the psychological experiment, posting
words like "super disturbing," "creepy" and "evil" as well as angry
expletives.
The study can be found at: www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full.pdf
Facebook Experiment on Users: An Ethical Breach Or Business As Usual?
It's not yet clear if Facebook broke any laws when it manipulated the news
feed content of nearly 700,000 users without their explicit consent to
test whether social networks can produce "emotional contagion."
(It turns out, to a modest extent, they can.)
But the uproar after release of the results of this 2012 study is raising
new questions on how pervasive such practices are and the extent to
which they mark a breach of corporate ethics.
While it is generally known that Internet companies such as Facebook,
Google, Microsoft, Twitter, and Yahoo, claim the right to collect, store,
access, and study data on their users, the Facebook experiment appears to
be unique.
Not only is the company the largest social network in the world, the kind
of information it accumulates is highly personal, including user
preferences spanning politics, culture, sport, sexuality, as well as
location, schooling, employment, medical, marriage, and dating history.
The social network algorithms are designed to track user behavior in real
time what they click and when.
The Information Commissioner's Office in the United Kingdom announced the
launch of an investigation to determine whether Facebook broke data
protection laws governed by the European Union. The Federal Trade
Commission in the US has not yet said whether it is launching a similar
probe or not. On Thursday, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a
civil liberties advocacy group in Washington, filed a formal complaint
with the FTC, urging action.
The experiment, conducted over a week in January 2012, targeted 689,003
users who were not notified that their news feed content was being
manipulated to assess their moods in real time. The study determined that
an increase in positive content led to users posting more positive status
updates; an increase in negative content led to more negative posts.
What alarmed many Internet activists wasn't the use of metadata for a
massive study, but rather the manipulation of data to produce a reaction
among users, without their knowledge or consent, which they see as a
violation of corporate ethics.
Its one thing for a company to conduct experiments to test how well a
product works, but Facebook experiments are testing loneliness and family
connections, and all sorts of things that are not really directed toward
providing their users a better experience, says James Grimmelmann, a law
professor and director of the Intellectual Property Program at the
University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies in College
Park.
These are the kinds of things that never felt part of the bargain until
it was called to their attention. It doesnt match the ethical trade we
felt we had with Facebook, Professor Grimmelmann says.
Many academics studying tech and online analytics worry about the ethics
involving mass data collection. A September 2013 survey by Revolution
Analytics, a commercial software provider in Palo Alto, Calif., found
that 80 percent of data scientists believe in the need for an ethical
framework governing how big data is collected.
Facebook leaders expressed remorse, but they stopped short of apologizing
for the experiment, which reports show reflect just a small portion of
the studies that the company regularly conducts on its nearly 1 billion
users. On Wednesday, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg told The Wall Street
Journal the study was merely poorly communicated.... And for that
communication, we apologize. We never meant to upset you.
In response to its critics, Facebook notes that policy agreements with
users say that user data can be used for research. However, the term
research was added in May 2012, four months after the study took place.
Others say the complexities of the tests require stricter oversight, now
that it is known the company has been conducting hundreds of similar
experiments since 2007 without explicitly notifying the public.
Burying a clause about research in the terms of use is not in any way
informed consent," says Jenny Stromer-Galley, an associate professor who
studies social media at the School of Information Studies at Syracuse
University in New York.
"The issue is that people dont read terms of use documents, and ethical
principles mandate that people involved in basic research must be
informed of their rights as a participant, she adds.
Some say Facebook could have avoided the controversy simply if it had
provided more transparency and allowed its users to opt out.
Lance Strate, professor of communications and media studies at Fordham
University in New York City, says that the revelations, which are among
many such privacy violations for Facebook, suggest social networks have
outlived their purpose because they no longer adhere to the Internet
values of openness, honesty, transparency, and free exchange.
With this move, Facebook has violated the essential rules of online
culture, and now begins to appear as an outsider much like the mass media
industries. It is almost impossible to recover from the breaking of such
taboos, and the loss of faith on the part of users. Zuckerberg started
out as one of us, but now we find that he is one of them, Professor
Strate says.
EPIC Fail: Facebook Study Provokes Formal Complaint from Privacy Group
On Thursday, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed a
complaint against Facebook with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC),
requesting the company be investigated. The thirteen page complaint
(PDF) states Facebook purposefully messed with peoples minds in
order to conduct psychological research, referring to a study which was
recently published in cooperation with Cornell researchers. Over the
course of a week in 2012, approximately 700,000 users newsfeeds were
purposefully manipulated so users saw either more sad news or more
happy news. The researches reported a successful study, claiming to
have proven emotional states can be transferred to others via
emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions
without their awareness.
The study has since come under considerable criticism for its lack of
upfront transparency, and potentially damaging effects. Attempting to
minimize the negative perception of the study, Adam Kramer, one of
Facebooks researchers, claims the effects were actually quite small.
Others have pointed out, however, the actual impact of the study is
irrelevant, as final results could not have been known prior to its
completion. The complaint alleges that at the time of the experiment,
Facebook did not state in the Data Use Policy that user data would be
used for research purposes. EPIC argues the company, currently
required to protect user privacy by a 20 year agreement with the FTC,
conducted the study illegally and unethically.
EPIC is not the only group attempting to take action against Facebook.
Center for Digital Democracy director Jeffrey Chester claims he too has
contacted regulators, and his group is also considering filling an
official complaint. Currently, they plan to speak to the FTC during the
next week about what they perceive to be a violation of law.
Facebook responded adamantly to the complaints against the study,
releasing a statement which reads, When someone signs up for Facebook,
weve always asked permission to use their information to provide and
enhance the services we offer. To suggest we conducted any corporate
research without permission is complete fiction. It goes on to state
that companies that want to improve their services use the information
their customers provide, whether their privacy policy uses the word
research or not. On Wednesday, however, COO Sheryl Sandberg made an
apology, defending the studys purpose. but calling it poorly
communicated.
Social media users expressed their outrage and suspicion over the whole
affair. Facebook is certainly not a new name in controversy concerning
internet security and privacy. The more its users, and those of similar
websites, learn, the more people have a tendency to worry. The
controversy has also raised some concern for whether a notice or
disclaimer in the documents detailing the terms of use is sufficient or
ethical, given that so many users never read them. Whether or not the FTC
will find Facebook in the wrong is yet to be seen.
NSA's Internet Monitoring Said To Be Legal
The first time the bipartisan Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
dissected a National Security Agency surveillance program, it found
fundamental flaws, arguing in a January report that the NSA's collection
of domestic calling records "lacked a viable legal foundation" and should
be shut down.
But in its latest study, the five-member board takes the opposite view of
a different set of NSA programs revealed last year by former NSA systems
administrator Edward Snowden.
The new report, which the board was to vote on Wednesday, found that the
NSA's collection of Internet data within the United States passes
constitutional muster and employs "reasonable" safeguards designed to
protect the rights of Americans.
The board, whose members were appointed by President Barack Obama, largely
endorsed a set of NSA surveillance programs that have provoked worldwide
controversy since Snowden disclosed them. However, the board's report
said some aspects of the programs raise privacy concerns meriting new
internal intelligence agency safeguards.
Under a provision of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act known
as Section 702, the NSA uses court orders and taps on fiber optic lines
to target the data of foreigners living abroad when their emails, web
chats, text messages and other communications traverse U.S.
telecommunications systems.
Section 702, which was added to the act in 2008, includes the so-called
PRISM program, under which the NSA collects foreign intelligence from
Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple and nearly every other major American
technology company.
U.S. intelligence officials and skeptical members of Congress have agreed
that Section 702 has been responsible for disrupting a series of
terrorist plots and achieving other insights.
The board said the programs have "led the government to identify
previously unknown individuals who are involved in international
terrorism, and it has played a key role in discovering and disrupting
specific terrorist plots aimed at the United States and other countries."
Because worldwide Internet communications are intermingled on fiber optic
lines and in cyberspace, known as the cloud, the collection inevitably
sweeps in the communications of Americans with no connection to terrorism
or foreign intelligence. Activists have expressed concern that a secret
intelligence agency is obtaining private American communications without
individual warrants. Some have questioned how such a program could be
legal under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
The board, including a Democratic federal judge, two privacy experts and
two former Republican Justice Department officials, found that the NSA
monitoring was legal and reasonable and that the government takes steps
to prevent misuse of Americans' data. Those steps include "minimization"
that leaves out the names of Americans from intelligence reports unless
they are relevant.
"Overall, the board finds that the protections contained in the Section
702 minimization procedures are reasonably designed and implemented to
ward against the exploitation of information acquired under the program
for illegitimate purposes," said the report. "The board has seen no trace
of any such illegitimate activity associated with the program."
That said, the board noted that the rules "potentially allow a great deal
of private information about U.S. persons to be acquired by the
government."
The board was troubled by the "unknown and potentially large scope of the
incidental collection of U.S. persons' communications," and collection of
communications about a target, such as a foreign terrorist organization,
that could capture two innocent Americans discussing the organization.
The report proposals some rule-tightening. For example, the board
recommends that NSA and CIA analysts query Section 702 data using the
names or email addresses of Americans "only if the query is based upon a
statement of facts showing that it is reasonably likely to return foreign
intelligence information."
Section 702 has its roots in the Terrorist Surveillance Program, a
collection program President George W. Bush ordered after the 9/11 attacks
without seeking a change in the law. After administration lawyers deemed
aspects of it illegal, and after so-called warrantless wiretapping was
disclosed in news reports, Congress essentially legalized the program in
2008.
Obama, then a senator running for president, voted in favor of the bill.
NSA Targeted German Privacy Activist
German media reported Thursday that users and supporters of a popular
online anonymity tool are among those automatically singled out for
special attention by U.S. security services.
The report by public broadcasters WDR and NDR says the code from the
National Security Agency's XKeyscore software reveals the NSA's interest
in anyone who uses a program called Tor that can obscure a person's
digital trail.
The code for the software, which was created to filter through vast
amounts of data to find information of interest to U.S. intelligence,
also monitors a handful of key computers that act as phone books for the
Tor network, the report said.
One of those computers reportedly belongs to Sebastian Hahn, a German
student and online privacy activist.
The report came on the day German lawmakers began hearing expert
testimony for a probe into the activities of foreign intelligence
agencies in Germany. The inquiry was sparked by reports based on
documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, which showed
that German citizens, including Chancellor Angela Merkel, were targeted
by U.S. intelligence.
Former U.S. intelligence official William Binney told the lawmakers that
Thursday's report was plausible.
Binney, who left the NSA in 2001 alleging surveillance overreach after
the 9/11 terror attacks, said factors that put people into "zones of
suspicion" include visiting certain websites regularly.
The report published by WDR and NDR was co-authored by three privacy
activists linked to the developers of Tor. One of them, Jacob Appelbaum,
was previously involved in the publication of reports based on Snowden
documents.
The creation of Tor was partly funded by the U.S. government to help
dissidents in authoritarian countries communicate freely. But law
enforcement agencies around the world have claimed that it also makes
the work of identifying online criminals harder.
A Thumbs-up for NSA Internet Spying on Foreigners
Endorsement of the NSA's Internet surveillance programs by a bipartisan
privacy board deeply disappointed civil liberties activists Wednesday
while providing a measure of vindication for beleaguered U.S.
intelligence officials.
James Clapper, director of national intelligence, welcomed the conclusion
by the independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that the
National Security Agency's Internet spying on foreign targets in the U.S.
has been legal, effective and subject to rigorous oversight to protect
the rights of Americans.
Activist groups panned the report as a dud.
It was a dizzying turnabout for a privacy board that in January drew
criticism in the other direction for branding the NSA's collection of
domestic calling records unconstitutional.
As they unanimously adopted their 190-page report on Wednesday, the five
board members all appointed by President Barack Obama sought to
explain their largely favorable conclusions about surveillance programs
that have provoked worldwide outrage since former NSA systems
administrator Edward Snowden revealed them last year.
At issue is a spying regime, first definitively disclosed in Snowden
documents last year, under which the NSA is using court orders to obtain
foreign customers' emails, chats, videos and texts from Google, Facebook
and other U.S. tech companies under a program known as PRISM. The
documents also showed that the agency is intercepting foreign data as it
transits fiber optic lines in the U.S.
Yahoo, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Facebook did not immediately respond
to requests for comment. Google and LinkedIn declined to comment.
The reputations of American technology companies have suffered abroad over
the perception that they cannot protect customer data from U.S. spy
agencies. Last week, the German government said it would end a contract
with Verizon over concerns about network security.
European and other foreign intelligence agencies routinely demand
cooperation from their national companies, U.S. officials say, but those
operations have not been leaked to the news media.
The targets of the surveillance the U.S. privacy board was looking at this
time must be foreigners living abroad, but the NSA also collects some
American communications either by mistake, or because the Americans were
talking to or about foreign targets. The programs come under Section 702
of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which legalized programs launched
after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Last week, the Obama administration
disclosed for the first time that it targeted nearly 90,000 people or
groups under the programs last year. There are 2.4 billion Internet
users worldwide.
In January, the privacy board criticized a different program authorized
under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, through which the NSA had been
collecting billions of American telephone records and searching through
them in terrorism investigations. Obama has since called for ending NSA's
collection of those records.
For the Section 702 probe, board members noted that they spent hours in
classified briefings with intelligence officials, learning the details of
how the NSA programs operate. And they came away convinced that the
public debate about the programs had been rife with misconceptions.
For example, said board chairman David Medine, a former government
privacy lawyer, the Internet surveillance "is not a bulk collection
program" but instead targets specific foreigners living abroad for
terrorism or intelligence purposes. And, he said, contrary to media
reports, it is not true that the NSA will monitor a person if the
evidence shows just a 51 percent probability that he or she is a
foreigner living abroad. The agency is barred from targeting an American
without a warrant.
"We had the benefit of going into the CIA and the NSA and the FBI and the
Justice Department and meeting with the key people who run the program
and seeing demonstrations of how it works," Medine said.
"We concluded that the program is legal, valuable and subject to intense
oversight," said board member Elisebeth Collins Cook, a former Republican
staff member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Some activists strongly disagreed.
"The board's recommendations would leave in place the government's ability
to spy on its citizens along with their friends, family members and
business partners overseas without any suspicion of wrongdoing,"
complained Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice in New
York.
The report appears to lengthen the already-long odds against lawmakers
who want to put restrictions of the Section 702 programs. The House
recently passed legislation seeking to cut off funding for searching 702
data connected to Americans, but key senators oppose any changes to the
program.
The board did propose some modest rule tightening in order to further
protect the rights of Americans, members said.
Critics, including Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, have accused the
government of using 702 data for "back door" warrantless searches of
Americans. Two board members, Medine and Patricia Wald, a retired federal
judge, wanted the board to recommend a requirement that a judge approve
queries tied to Americans. They also wanted Americans' information to be
purged more regularly.
But the other three board members did not agree.
"We have seen no evidence of a back door," Cook said.
Board member James Dempsey, Vice President for Public Policy at the Center
for Democracy & Technology whose own organization called the report a
"tremendous disappointment" added, "Trying to limit discovery of data
(already) in the hands of the government is not the right way to go
here."
Wald cautioned that within the large volume of communications the NSA
collects, "there will be much private and confidential information" about
Americans which criminal investigators would need a warrant to obtain.
While the information could not be used in a criminal case, it is subject
to searching by the NSA, CIA and FBI, and could be used, for example, to
put someone on a no-fly list.
NSA Chief Says Terrorists Are Changing Their Behavior Thanks to Snowden Leaks
More than a year ago, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden began leaking
thousands of confidential documents that he stole while working for the
National Security Agency. The documents shined light on a number of
controversial spying methods employed by the government agency, many of
which were considered violations of American citizens privacy.
There are very good arguments for and against Snowdens actions, and one
of the most valid arguments against the leaks was the suggestion that
terrorists would alter their behavior and strategies in order to avoid
the now-public NSA monitoring tactics. As it turns out, the NSA has now
confirmed that this is indeed the case but the problem apparently
isnt as serious as many people had feared.
When Snowden first began leaking some of the confidential documents he
collected, many people argued that terrorists would use the information
about PRISM and numerous other NSA spying programs to alter the way they
communicate. As a result, the threat toward America and its allies would
increase dramatically.
In an interview with The New York Times, new NSA chief Adm. Michael Rogers
confirmed that this is indeed the case terrorists are altering their
communications in an effort to avoid known NSA surveillance methods.
Contrary to the concerns voiced last year, however, Rogers believes that
the NSA can still operate effectively to protect America and its interests
despite the leaks.
I have seen groups not only talk about making changes, I have seen them
make changes, Rogers told The Times. Even still, he said that he doesnt
believe the sky is falling.
Russian Lawmakers Pass New Bill Restricting Internet
Russia's parliament passed a bill on Friday requiring Internet companies
to store Russians' personal data inside the country in an apparent move
to pressure sites such as Facebook and Twitter into handing over user
information.
Introducing the bill to parliament this week, MP Vadim Dengin said "most
Russians don't want their data to leave Russia for the United States,
where it can be hacked and given to criminals."
"Our entire lives are stored over there," he said, adding that companies
should build data centres in Russia.
The bill would increase pressure on social networking services which do
not have offices in Russia and have become a vital resource for
anti-government groups.
Both Facebook and Twitter refuse to hand over user data to governments.
Just days before the bill was formally proposed last month, Twitter's
public policy chief Colin Crowell visited Russia to speak with media
watchdog Roskomnadzor. Few details of the visit were publicised, but
access to user data is thought to have been top of the list.
Russia is also asking Twitter to open a local office, which the company
has so far refused to do.
"Nobody wants to relocate to Russia, but I am pessimistic. I think (the
Russian authorities) will make them relocate the servers," said Andrei
Soldatov, a journalist who tracks Russia's security services.
"For the most part, this is directed against Gmail, Facebook, and
Twitter," he said.
If passed, the rules will not take effect until September 2016 but will
provide the government with grounds to block sites that do not comply.
That could cause problems for Russian companies such as tourism websites
and airlines that rely on foreign-based online booking services.
Google told AFP they need time to study the final version of the law
before commenting.
Yandex, a popular Russian search engine, said by email that the company
is already using Russian servers, but added that building data centres
required by law from scratch would take more than the two years
allocated.
Russia's Association of Electronic Communication (RAEC), a group that
lobbies on behalf of Internet companies and also helped organise
Crowell's visit, said the new measures would be detrimental to Internet
users.
"Many global Internet services would be impossible," the group said
earlier this week. "The bill takes the right of people over their own
personal data away from them."
"They want the iron curtain all over again, with everything written on
pieces of paper like in the Soviet Union," Vladimir Kantorovich, vice
president at the Russian Association of Tour Operators, told AFP.
"I feel like the Duma wants to lock us in an armoured cell for our
protection without asking if we need it."
The bill must still be approved by the upper chamber and President
Vladimir Putin before it becomes law, but is only the latest in what
appears as a concerted push by the government to crack down on Internet
dissent.
Lawmakers have already passed a slew of restrictions, including a
requirement for bloggers to register as media if they have more than
3,000 followers and a law directed against "extremist" language that
could see Russians go to jail for up to five years for retweeting
offensive information.
Conservative lawmakers are also discussing the possibility of widespread
Internet filters that could only be lifted for people who hand over their
passport information.
Google Hit By 70,000 'Right To Be Forgotten' Requests
More than 70,000 people have already asked Google to delete links about
them under Europe's "right to be forgotten" ruling, with some of the
world biggest news sites the first to be hit.
The search engine has restricted access to a BBC blog posting and several
British newspaper stories under a legal ruling granting people a right to
be "forgotten" in search engines, it emerged on Thursday.
Google said it had received 70,000 requests since it put a form online on
May 30 as a result of the ruling by the European Court of Justice.
The court said that individuals have the right to have links to
information about them deleted from searches in certain circumstances,
such as if the data is outdated or inaccurate.
But BBC economics editor Robert Peston complained that Google had "killed
this example of my journalism" after being informed that a 2007 posting
about former Merrill Lynch chairman Stan O'Neal had been removed from
certain searches in Europe.
The Guardian newspaper also said it had been notified that six links to
its stories had been removed from search results, three of them about a
2010 controversy involving a now-retired Scottish Premier League referee.
The newspaper said Google gave it no reason for removing the link or a
chance to appeal.
Reports in Europe late Thursday indicated that Google restored some
deleted Guardian story links to search results, indicating the
California-based Internet titan was refining the right-to-be-forgotten
process on the go.
European news organisations have opened fire on Google for removing links
to stories from search results in the name of adhering to the court order.
Mail Online, the world's biggest news site, said it had received
notification that links to a story about the same Scottish referee,
Dougie McDonald, had been removed from certain searches.
Other stories restricted include one about a couple caught having sex on
a train, and another about a Muslim man who accused the airline Cathay
Pacific of refusing to employ him because of his name.
"These examples show what a nonsense the right to be forgotten is. It is
the equivalent of going into libraries and burning books you don't like,"
said Martin Clarke, the publisher of Mail Online.
He said the website would regularly publish lists of articles removed
from Google's European search results, while the BBC and The Guardian
also published links to the restricted stories.
The links remain visible on Google.com, the US version of the site, and
the restrictions only appear to relate to certain search terms.
A commentary in The Guardian noted that a search for Dougie McDonald no
longer brought up its story on Google.co.uk, but a search for "Scottish
referee who lied" worked fine.
According to the story, McDonald was found to have lied about his reasons
for granting a penalty in a Celtic v Dundee United match.
Google, the world's leading search engine, said that each request "to be
forgotten" would be examined individually to determine whether it met the
ruling's criteria.
A spokeswoman told AFP: "We have recently started taking action on the
removals requests we've received after the European Court of Justice
decision.
"This is a new and evolving process for us. We'll continue to listen to
feedback and will also work with data protection authorities and others
as we comply with the ruling," she said.
Google To Shut Down Failing Social Network (No, Not That One)
Google will shut down its early social-networking service, Orkut, which
was launched 10 years ago but has failed to put Google ahead in what has
become one of the Webs most popular businesses.
Google said it will shut down Orkut, which is widely used in Brazil and
India but hasnt caught on more broadly, on Sept. 30, to focus on its
other social networking initiatives.
The company declined to say how many users Orkut has.
Over the past decade, YouTube, Blogger and Google+ have taken off, with
communities springing up in every corner of the world. Because the growth
of these communities has outpaced Orkuts growth, weve decided to bid
Orkut farewell, Google said in a post on the Orkut blog Monday.
Orkut was launched early in 2004, the same year that Facebook, now the
worlds No. 1 social network with 1.28 billion users, was founded.
The services shutdown comes as Googles social networking plans remain
in question. In April, Vic Gundotra, the head of Googles social
networking services, left the company.
Gundotra oversaw the 2011 launch of Google+, a social networking service
similar to Facebook. Gundotra said in October that 300 million people
visit the Google+ webpage every month.
Google has increasingly sought to position Google+ less as a social
networking stream that competes with Facebook, and more as a means of
establishing a unified user identity system to improve Googles various
Web properties. Last year, for example, Google began requiring users of
its YouTube site to sign in with their Google+ identities before posting
comments about videos.
The company said it would preserve an archive of all Orkut communities
that will be available from Sept. 30.
If you dont want your posts or name to be included in the community
archive, you can remove Orkut permanently from your Google account,
Google said.
Microsoft Ramps Up Protection for Outlook Email
Microsoft on Tuesday said it is scrambling Outlook email messages in
transit to thwart spying by governments or others.
Toughened encryption at Outlook and Microsoft OneDrive online "cloud"
data storage service came less than a month after the technology titan
got low marks in a Google ranking of such defenses against online
snooping.
"We are in the midst of a comprehensive engineering effort to strengthen
encryption across our networks and services," Microsoft vice president
of trustworthy computing security Matt Thomlinson said in a blog post.
"This effort also helps us reinforce that governments use appropriate
legal processes, not technical brute force, if they want access to that
data."
US Internet firms are eager to fend off privacy concerns provoked by US
online spying tactics exposed by former intelligence agency contractor
Edward Snowden, who has taken refuge in Russia.
Microsoft also announced the opening of a transparency center at its
Redmond, Washington, headquarters where governments can check the
integrity of its software.
Google in June stepped up its effort to make it tougher for spies or
anyone else to snoop on email, unveiling Chrome browser software for
scrambling digital messages.
A test version of a software tool called "End-to-End" was released so
Internet engineers can dabble with making mini-programs that plug into
Chrome browser and encrypt Gmail messages in ways that shield them from
eyes of everyone except senders and recipients.
In a move that put pressure on other services, Google broke down how
much message traffic received from them was encrypted.
Photoshop 2014: Software Finally Worth Renting
In the beginning, there was Photoshop: the software, the verb, the
phenomenon.
It was 1990. The program was entirely black and white (not even shades of
gray), just like the Macs it ran on. It had 20 tool icons and six menus.
Over the next 23 years, Photoshops maker, Adobe, did what all software
makers have always done: it released a new major version every couple of
years, piling on new features each time and charging $200 for each
upgrade.
Then, in 2013, everything changed. There would be no more megalithic
Photoshop versions every other year, Adobe said. No more version
numbers, in fact.
Photoshop would become a steadily evolving, constantly improving entity
called Photoshop CC, and youd pay for it as a subscription. You
wouldnt buy it outright anymore. You would pay $20 or $30 a month,
forever.
It was the first time a consumer software company had ever required you
to rent its product, and the people were not happy. There were outraged
blog posts, and petitions.
All of which, in time, faded away, exactly as Adobe knew it would and
now, a year later, 2.3 million people have subscribed, either to
Photoshop or to more complete sets of Creative Cloud programs, which
include Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver, Premiere, and so on.
What made the switch particularly infuriating was how little Adobe seemed
to care about its customers, especially those who arent on corporate
expense accounts; for most of them, renting wound up costing a lot more
than buying. Clearly, requiring subscriptions was beneficial for Adobe
but what was in it for us?
The companys response boiled down to this: First of all, well give you
20 gigabytes of online storage space for sharing your documents. Second,
well keep updating our programs all year long, slipping in new features
when theyre ready, so you get them sooner. Youll always be current
with the very latest tools.
And, indeed, the first year of this experiment worked just that way.
Photoshop received three minor updates: in September 2013, February
2014, and just now.
Whats weird, though, is that the new release is called Photoshop CC 2014.
It has a year label, just as in the olden days.
Why? Adobe says the perpetually evolving software blob idea wasnt
entirely practical for people like the authors of Photoshop books,
creators of Photoshop plug-ins, and for people using older operating
systems (as Photoshop gets new features, sometimes it also gets new
system requirements). All of these parties would be much happier if
there were certain named baseline versions of Photoshop to write
about, or write for, or plan around.
In other words, Adobes programs will continue to receive updates every
few months, but there will also be tied up with a bow year-named
milestone versions.
When you subscribe to the full Creative Cloud suite, you pay $600 a year,
or $75 a month. (There are student, corporate, and upgrader prices,
too.) You get to download and install constantly updated copies of
14 programs: Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver, Premiere,
Muse, the works. Reviewing the new versions of all 14 of the Creative
Cloud programs would require more webpages than Yahoo has available.
But Photoshop is worth a closer look first, because its Adobes most
famous, most-used program. And second, because Adobe has made permanent
what was once a limited-time rental deal: Photoshop and the Lightroom
photo-organizing program, both, for $120 a year ($10 a month).
That pricing changes everything. Now, renting Photoshop is actually less
expensive than buying it (which used to cost $700 plus $200 every time
there was an upgrade). After three years, youd have paid $900 to own, but
just $260 to rent. At five, 10, and even 20 years, youd still come out
ahead renting.
Only after 30 years would the buy and pay for upgrades plan start
costing less. (The numbers would shift a bit if you sometimes skipped
upgrades, but the principle is the same.)
So what does the $10 a month get you?
My favorite new feature in Photoshop CC 2014: The program opens in about
two seconds, and thats on a MacBook Air laptop. (The previous version
took five seconds.) Opening Photoshop that quickly means it feels light
on its feet; it no longer feels like a bloated behemoth.
The rest of the new stuff is designed to improve life in niche situations.
For example, there are two new blur modes one that lets you create a
spin blur. And one, called Path Blur, that lets you simulate motion blur
in an amount and path that you specify.
There are powerful new typography features, too. You can search for fonts
by name. And if youve selected a type layer, you can try on each
typeface for size, on your actual text, as you roll your mouse down the
Fonts menu (just like Microsoft Word).
Over the years, Photoshop has sprouted increasingly clever ways of cutting
a subject out of a photo, or just selecting it apart from its background
to paste it into a different background, say, or to adjust its color.
In Photoshop CC 2014, theres yet another way: the Select Focus Area
command. It isolates the subject of a photo by detecting which parts are
in focus and separating them from the blurriness of a background:
It works very well, at least as a starting point in making a selection; of
course, it works only in photos where there is a blurry background.
Also handy: When youre dragging objects around, new indicators help
identify how far apart they are from one another, and when youve got
them aligned.
If you have access to a 3D printer, youll be happy to learn that
Photoshops Print Preview dialog box for 3D objects is more accurate and
more flexible than before. You may even be happy to learn this: In
earlier versions of Photoshop, when you opened an OBJ file containing
multiple meshes and multiple groups, all meshes were imported as a
single group in the 3D panel. Beginning the 2014 release of
Photoshop CC, the structure of the meshes and groups is preserved
during import and export operations.
If you have any idea what that means, that is.
But what youll quickly discover is that most of them are fairly tweaky,
edge-case features. Theres nothing new that approaches the importance of
layers (added in 1994), Actions macros (1996), multiple undo (1998),
type on a path and Smart Guides (2003), or the Spot Healing brush and
lens correction (2005).
Maybe thats just a sign of product maturity. Maybe theres just nothing
missing that people need. Maybe Photoshop has pretty much reached its
destiny. Heaven knows its complicated enough already.
But theres another possible explanation: Maybe, now that were all
locked into paying a subscription fee, theres less incentive for Adobe
to drive forward. Weve already agreed to pay for whatever is to come,
sight unseen, so Adobe can get away with adding very little. This
isnt the old days, when Adobe knew it wouldnt earn our upgrade dollars
unless it knocked our socks off every other year.
Are you cynical enough to believe that theory? Actually, it doesnt much
matter; even if Photoshop doesnt continue to develop at all, renting is
now officially a better deal than buying.
Adobe, of course, strenuously insists that this whole subscription thing
is all about the customer. That staying current and enjoying Adobes
online offerings is well worth the money.
Well, the elephant in the room would like to know this: If youre so
sure were going to love the subscription model, why dont you make it
optional? Let us decide if its worth it!
(That, after all, is how Microsoft does it with Office. You can rent it
or buy it. Voilà: No public outcry.)
But, no, most of Adobes professional creativity programs are now
available only for rent.
Im a cynic, yes. But Ill admit it: Once youre into this whole
Creative Cloud club, there is a nice psychological feeling of being
up to date and connected. You get the little alerts that announce new
versions ready to download. You have instant access to 700 typefaces
online, ready when you need them. You can look over other artists
work on Behance.net, Adobes website for customer posting and
commentary (or post your own work there). You can install your programs
on two different machines (like a Mac and a PC).
Im not crazy about software-as-a-mandatory-subscription. I dont like
that we have to put blind faith in the company not to jack up its
rates, in effect holding all of our files hostage. I dont like that
were paying in advance for features whose quantity and quality we
still dont know.
And I hope we dont see the day when Office, Quicken, games, and
utility programs are available only for rent, too.
But for now, Adobe has found a price and batch of features that make
sense.
=~=~=~=
Atari Online News, Etc. is a weekly publication covering the entire
Atari community. Reprint permission is granted, unless otherwise noted
at the beginning of any article, to Atari user groups and not for
profit publications only under the following terms: articles must
remain unedited and include the issue number and author at the top of
each article reprinted. Other reprints granted upon approval of
request. Send requests to: dpj@atarinews.org
No issue of Atari Online News, Etc. may be included on any commercial
media, nor uploaded or transmitted to any commercial online service or
internet site, in whole or in part, by any agent or means, without
the expressed consent or permission from the Publisher or Editor of
Atari Online News, Etc.
Opinions presented herein are those of the individual authors and do
not necessarily reflect those of the staff, or of the publishers. All
material herein is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing.
