Welcome to loopedin.com™, a blog that aims to provide occasional and brief commentary on tech, law, and current topics of interest.
Unfortunately, few people ever read the end user license agreement (EULA) for software or cloud-based services. Those that do may find surprises like this gem from Amazon’s AWS cloud contracts.
Basically, AWS is invoking its rights not to be sued for patent infringement by its customers not only for the time you’re using its service, but going forward — in theory — in perpetuity.
. . .
First, neither the Microsoft Azure license nor Google Cloud contracts include similar limitations, the lawyers said. The overall “broad covenant not to sue” is not unusual in and of itself, said a Seattle-based attorney, but the extensions of limitations beyond the term of contract was striking.
. . .
What’s interesting here is that, in theory, this 8.5 provision could allow Amazon to defend itself against customers (or former customers) if it ends up using their IP down the road.
This is a good example of Microsoft’s cutting-edge innovation — something for which it often gets little or no credit.
According to The New York Times, Google isn’t going to let Skype runaway with all the high-tech, language barrier-smashing fun. An upcoming update will allow the app to auto-recognize popular languages and translate them into text in real time.
In addition, Google Translate will also let you take snapshots of signs or menus or whatever, and also translate onscreen.
Six months ago, Microsoft has unveiled Skype Translator, a real time translator tool that can be used to bridge two people from different parts of the world by allowing them to speak with one another using their native language. You can try the feature as part of a preview program, but it is limited to Spanish and English for voice translation, and 40 languages for text messaging.
Google is not being indifferent about Microsoft’s move, as it is reportedly working on a significant update for its Google Translate app for Android. Currently the app offers text translation for over 80 languages, including English, Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hindi, Russian and Spanish, and voice translation for just a few of them.
Unintended consequences; overreaching laws and zealous enforcement impacting important security research
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) essentially deals with unauthorized access of computers and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), among other things, protects copyrighted material through criminalizing efforts to circumvent digital rights management. Each offers important protections; however, in a recent article, lawyer Jonathon W. Penney writes about how these laws are shaping the ethics of code and security research. For me, this illustrates how difficult it is to balance the legitimate interests of various stakeholders. Legislators, judges, and lawyers routinely struggle with rules and their varied exceptions.
In late July 2014, the information security world was on edge. Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University—who work “closely with the (US) Department of Homeland Security”—were scheduled to give a talk at the Black Hat USA information security conference on a simple method to “de-anonymize” Tor users.
. . .
But the talk never happened. It was pulled from the conference program at the last minute, with the CMU researchers, as reported in the Washington Post, claiming the materials they planned to present had “not yet been approved by CMU/SEI for public release.”
. . .
Expansive laws like the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, coupled with aggressive enforcement by state authorities and corporate interests, have subjected an increasing array of online activities to criminal and civil penalty. What was once considered “full disclosure” may today constitute a criminal act under the CFAA or DMCA.
. . .
“Code is law,” the aphorism Larry Lessig popularized, spoke to the importance of computer code as a central regulating force in the Internet age. That remains true, but today, overreaching laws are also increasingly subjugating important social and ethics questions raised by code to the domain of law. Those laws—like the CFAA and DMCA—need to be curtailed or their zealous enforcement reigned; they deter not only legitimate research but also important related social and ethics questions.
via CFAA reform: How laws are determining the ethics of code. Check out Mr. Penney’s entire piece — it’s worth reading.
Since 1986, technology has advanced at breakneck speed while electronic privacy law remained at a standstill. The outdated Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) allows the government to intercept and access a treasure trove of information about who you are, where you go, and what you do, which is being collected by cell phone providers, search engines, social networking sites, and other websites every day.
The ACLU has put together this eye-opening infographic that succinctly demonstrates the need to update outdated laws.
The longer that existing laws remain unchanged, the harder it will be to change them later. A certain inertia develops when the status quo is maintained.
Free speech is the cornerstone of democratic governments, so it is troubling when a government’s actions results in chilling free speech.
The latest survey found that writers living in liberal democratic countries “have begun to engage in self-censorship at levels approaching those seen in non-democratic countries, indicating that mass surveillance has badly shaken writers’ faith that democratic governments will respect their rights to privacy and freedom of expression, and that—because of pervasive surveillance—writers are concerned that expressing certain views even privately or researching certain topics may lead to negative consequences.”
If you use Apple Mail in Yosemite, beware of the following issue:
A glitch in the search software in Apple’s OS X Yosemite can expose private details of Apple Mail users, revealing their IP address as well as other system details to spammers, phishers and online tracking companies.
. . .
At the moment, the only way to work around the issue seems to be to uncheck the “Mail & Messages” box for Spotlight in System Preferences. When this option is disabled no mails are returned in Spotlight’s search results, and thus, no preview is shown.
It’s a dangerous, malware infested world out there.
Malware detections by AV-Test, a company that tests the effectiveness of antivirus software, spiked in 2014 to more than 143 million, up 72 percent from last year, according to a report released Thursday.
To put that in perspective: there was more malware found over the last 2 years than in the previous 10 years combined.
. . .
“At the pace we’re going, that’s just not feasible [to defend against] anymore,” said Jérôme Segura, senior security researcher at Malwarebytes.
If you’ve ever wondered why privacy matters and why you should fight to protect it, just watch this short TED video:
Glenn Greenwald was one of the first reporters to see — and write about — the Edward Snowden files, with their revelations about the United States’ extensive surveillance of private citizens. In this searing talk, Greenwald makes the case for why you need to care about privacy, even if you’re “not doing anything you need to hide.”
Amazing, if it can be implemented as described. From AppleInsider:
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office officially awarded Apple U.S. Patent No. 8,903,519 for a “Protective mechanism for an electronic device,” which looks to safeguard expensive computer hardware from accidental drops, a problem that has become all too familiar with the latest slim iPhone designs. Apple’s invention can not only estimate where a device will make impact, but actively shift the unit’s center of gravity so that sensitive components like glass screens and cameras are not damaged.
Interesting legal arguments are coming out of a case involving Microsoft and a warrant issued by the US. Others in the tech industry like Apple, AT&T, Cisco, and Verizon are taking Microsoft’s side. The ultimate outcome may have profound legal repercussions, so this is one to watch.
From Ars Technica:
Microsoft’s fight against the US position that it may search its overseas servers with a valid US warrant is getting nasty.
Microsoft, which is fighting a US warrant that it hand over e-mail to the US from its Ireland servers, wants the Obama administration to ponder a scenario where the “shoe is on the other foot.”