Google has confirmed that personal data of U.S. employees hired prior to 2006 have been stolen in a recent burglary.

Source: CNET News

Records kept at Colt Express Outsourcing Services, an external company Google and other companies use to handle human resources functions, were stolen in a burglary on May 26. An undisclosed number of employees’ details and those of dependents such as names, addresses, and Social Security numbers were on the stolen computers. It is understood that Colt did not employ encryption to protect the information.

It’s still unclear how many more of Colt Express’ clients were affected by the breach. CBS’ CNET Networks, publisher of News.com, was also affected by the burglary, with about 6,500 employees’ details stolen.

Although there is no evidence of misuse of the data to date, the information obtained could be used by identity thieves to create fake accounts and identities.

It’s only come to light now that Google was one of the companies affected. Google itself was not burglarized, nor were any of its internal systems compromised.

Danny Thorpe, former chief scientist at Borland and engineer at Google who now works for Microsoft, was informed of the theft on July 1.

A letter from Google said personal data of Google employees hired prior to December 31, 2005, may have been stolen in the May 26 burglary of Colt Express Outsourcing Services. No credit card numbers were in the stolen data; just names, addresses, SSNs–all the information needed for a thief to open a credit card account under another’s name.

According to Thorpe, Google has offered to cover the cost of a one-year subscription to a credit report and identity theft-monitoring service. Similar benefits were offered to CNET Networks employees.

ITWorld reported last week that Colt Express Outsourcing Services was in financial difficulty and could not help those affected. The company’s CEO, Samuel Colt III, said in a statement “We do not have the resources, financial and otherwise, to assist you further.”

“We take the security of our employees very seriously and require outside vendors to meet appropriate security standards. We review and update these standards on an ongoing basis,” a Google representative said. “Google is not currently using Colt’s services and had made this decision long before this incident.”

The iPhone drives a lot of interest in the cell phone market these days, and deservedly so. Its sexy touch screen, smooth multimedia interface, and effective ad campaign make it an appealing option.

But what if you’re looking for a phone with a true productivity suite and high-speed data downloads? The iPhone lacks a lot of the convenient features that BlackBerry devotees demand: voice memos, a cut-and-paste option, drafting documents, customizable ring profiles, internal search and scrolling options, syncing task lists from Outlook, etc.

And unlike the iPhone, which is only available on the AT&T network, this list of smartphones includes options for all of the five major carriers.

	iPhone	BlackJack II	BlackBerry Curve 8320 Smartphone	BlackBerry Pearl 8130 Smartphone	Palm Centro
Price	$199-$299 with a new account and 2-year activation with select AT&T iPhone plans	FREE after instant discount from AT&T with a new account	$199.99 after instant discount from T-Mobile with a new account	FREE after rebates and instant discount with a new Verizon Wireless account	$139.99 after instant discount from Sprint with a new account
Weight	4.8oz	4.1 oz	3.9 oz	3.4 oz	4.2 oz
Dimensions	4.5 x 2.4 x 0.5″	4.5 x 2.4 x 0.5″	4.2 x 2.4 x 0.6″	4.2 x 2.0 x 0.6″	4.1 x 2.1 x 0.7″
Removable Battery	Must send to Apple to replace	YES	YES	YES	YES
Stereo Bluetooth enabled	No	YES	YES	YES	YES
Music formats	MP3, ACC	MP3, AAC, WMA	MP3, AAC, WMA	MP3, AAC, WMA	MP3, AAC, WMA
Photo/Video Messaging	NO	YES	YES	YES	YES
Voice-dialing	NO	YES	YES	YES	YES
Max. Memory	8 or 16GB	4GB	8GB	8GB	8GB
Mem. card slot	NO	YES	YES	YES	YES
Camera	2 Megapixel	2 Megapixel	2 Megapixel	2 Megapixel	1 Megapixel
Network	EDGE/ HSDPA	UMTS / HSDPA	GPRS / EDGE	1x EV-DO	1x EV-DO
Top data speed	1.7mbps	3.6 mbps	236Kbps	2.4mbps	2.4mbps
Keyboard	None	QWERTY	QWERTY	SureType	QWERTY

Link or URL shortening services are nothing new–TinyURL, for example, has been around since January 2002, when site creator Kevin Gilbertson wanted to link directly to newsgroup postings with really long addresses. Indeed, that’s the true impetus behind these services; taking really long and unwieldy Web links (to an Amazon or eBay item, for example), and shrinking them down to a more reasonable size. Simply copy and paste the offending URL into the field, hit enter, and voila, you’ll get a much shorter link. These shorter links can then be shared via IM or e-mail without the URL breaking, and they are also very useful with micropublishing tools such as Twitter, where character count is at a premium. Most of these services also redirect the links straight to the original address. There are literally hundreds of these link shortening services out there, but we’ve decided to break it down to 10 that we like the most. Here they are in no particular order:

• TinyURL: Arguably the most well-known of the services listed here, TinyURL was probably also one of the first. One of TinyURL’s most appealing features is that the short URLs it creates will never ever expire. It offers a browser bookmark button that’ll provide a TinyURL of your current page, and there’s a preview feature as well.

SnipURL is a link shortening service with a social twist.

(Credit: SnipURL)

• SnipURL: Also known as Snurl and Snipr, SnipURL is a URL shortening service with a social twist. You can sign up for an account which lets you edit URLs, subscribe to the RSS feeds of your latest Snips, password protect them, and snip multiple URLs at once. It also has an open API for developers. Twihrl, a multiaccount desktop client for Twitter, uses SnipURL for its long URLs, for example. Another bonus is that you can choose your own “nickname” for a link. For example, http://snipurl.com/cnetcrave will redirect to our Crave blog. Like TinyURL, the SnipURLs will never expire, plus there’s also a help forum for support.

• Shorl: For a simpler approach, Shorl is a decent alternative. It has a very clean interface without a lot of ads, plus you can sign up for an account to retrieve the statistics of the shortened links.

• Rurl: Rurl is a URL shortening service ideal for mobile use, since the page is very phone-friendly, and the URL itself is really short (about 19 characters long). The short URL is also good for Twitter, because of its character count limit. Like SnipURL, Rurl also has a developer API.

• Metamark: Metamark also prides itself on providing really short URLs (about 20 characters long), but like SnipURL, Metamark lets you add an optional nickname to a link. There’s also a “secret” option to add a secret word after the URL if you don’t want people to guess the link. You can sign up for an account if you wish to retrieve the statistics associated with your link. Unlike the above services though, the links from Metamark do expire after five years, so take note of that.

• Notlong: Notlong kicks it up a notch by not only shortening the links, but it also lets you pick a subdomain name. For example, I just created http://webware.notlong.com a second ago. Another great thing about Notlong is that the moment you create a Notlong URL, it presents you with a password with which to check the statistics of the URL, no registration required. However, you’ll have to be creative to pick a subdomain that hasn’t been chosen already.

Tweetl is a link shortening service built for Twitter.

(Credit: Tweetl)

• Tweetl: With the popularity of Twitter, a service like Tweetl was bound to come along. Its slogan is “Little Links Built for Twitter” and the links are indeed sublimely short (about 17 characters long), which is good for fitting within Twitter’s 140 character count limit. You can get stats of any Tweetl link without signing up just by entering the site ID after s.tweetl.com (Like s.tweetl.com/[id]). You can also add a tag to each Tweetl link by adding a question mark and whatever you want at the end of a Tweetl link, such as this: http://t-l.cc/[id]?insert-tag-here.

• URLTea: URLTea has a dead simple user interface–simply paste in your link into the field, hit enter, and the shortened link will immediately be copied to your clipboard. Similar to Tweetl, you can add tags after the URLTea link with a question mark, such as this: http://www.urltea.com/l?insert-tag. We also like the gingham background; it’s a nice touch.

• MooURL: MooURL is quite possibly the cutest link shortening site ever, with an adorable cow as its mascot. Like URLTea, a shortened link will be immediately copied to your clipboard. Sure it doesn’t have a lot of statistics-tracking like the others, but it’s just so cute.

• ICanHaz: Capitalizing on the Lolcat trend is the folks over at ICanHaz.com. Its slogan is “I can haz short urlz now? kthx”, which is typical of Lolcat speak. Like SnipURL and MetaMark, you can select a nickname to be added after the URL. For example, http://icanhaz.com/webware directs to Webware. The downside is that you have to enter in your e-mail address if you want to edit the URL in the future. Also, unlike SnipURL and MetaMark, the nickname isn’t optional–you have to enter a nickname regardless of whether you want to, and your chosen name might already be taken. However, the best thing about this service is arguably the Lolcat speak aspect of it, for those who are into the Lolcat meme.

Originally posted at http://www.webware.com/8301-1_109-9898698-2.html

Your email account can contain a lot of personal information, from bank alerts to love letters. Email that, I’m sure, you don’t always want other people to see. We understand how important your Gmail accounts are to you, so we’re adding a new layer of information and control. With this new feature, you can now track your recent sessions and you can also sign yourself out remotely.

If you are anything like me, you probably sign in to Gmail from multiple computers. I, for example, occasionally sign into my Gmail account from a friend’s house when I need to check an important email. Usually I remember to sign out, but every once in a while I wonder if I really did. Now I no longer have to wonder.

At the bottom of your inbox, you’ll see information about the time of the last activity on your account and whether it’s still open in another location:

Using the above example, a quick glance at the footer while I’m at work shows that my account is indeed open in one other location. But I recognize the IP address - it’s my computer at home. Turns out I left my Gmail account open when I left home in a hurry this morning.

Your IP address, or Internet Protocol address, is a number associated with your computer when you connect to the Internet. Some of you might want to know your IP address numbers (more info on finding out your IP address below) for an extra layer of control. For others who don’t want to think about IP information, you don’t need to.

Continuing with the above example, I can see more details about my recent activity by clicking on the Details link:

The top table, under “Concurrent session information,” indicates all open sessions, along with IP address and “access type” — which refers to how email was retrieved, for example, through iGoogle, POP3 or a mobile phone. The bottom table, under “Recent activity,” contains my most recent history along with times of access. I can also view my current IP address at the very bottom of this window, where it says “This computer is using IP address…”

With this information, I can quickly verify that all the Gmail activity was indeed mine. I remember using Gmail at the times and locations listed. Being extra cautious, I can also click on the “Sign out all other sessions” button to sign out of the account I left open at home.

Source: http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/remote-sign-out-and-info-to-help-you.html

The ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation sued the Justice Dept. Tuesday for information regarding the use of cellphones as tracking devices. The Washington Post reports that the ACLU had filed, back in November, a Freedom of Information Act request for documents, memos and guidelines on tracking cellphone users.

The groups suspect the government seeks the information without following the Fourth Amendment requirement that it establish probable cause of a crime.

No information was forthcoming, so this suit is an attempt to shake lose the info. The DOJ responded this way:

It is important to remember that the courts determine whether or not cell-site data or more precise cell location data can be turned over to law enforcement in a particular case. . . . Law enforcement has absolutely no interest in tracking the locations of law-abiding citizens. Instead, law enforcement goes through the courts to lawfully obtain data to help locate criminal suspects, sometimes in cases where lives are literally hanging in the balance, such as a child abduction case or a serial murderer on the loose.

An article in the Post last fall revealed that the government routinely asks courts to OK the release of real-time tracking data. As the spokeman said, they “go through the courts.” The issue here apparently is not that they don’t “go” to the courts but whether they show up with inadequate proof of the need for the information and whether the courts rubber-stamp these requests.

Source: http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3880

Less than 60 percent of Web users are outfitted with up-to-date, fully patched browsers, according to a new, IBM co-authored research study, which relies on examinations of users’ Google log records to help reach that conclusion.

Jointly produced by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Google, and IBM Internet Security Services, the study places most of the blame for browser security problems on Microsoft’s Internet Explorer.

A total of 52.4% of all IE users had failed to upgrade to IE7, the latest version of Microsoft’s browser, according to the survey results. Moreover, merely 47.6% of IE users had all of the software upgrades and patches installed on their browsers needed for “safe” Internet surfing.In contrast, 83.3% of Firefox users were using totally updated browsers, followed by 65.3% for Safari and 56.1% for the Opera browser.

As potential remedies for more secure browsing, the researchers suggested that all browser makers should install an auto-update feature — already present in Firefox, for example — and that browsers should be given expiration dates.

“The analysis presented in this paper is based on the large global user base of Google’s Web search and application sites,” the researchers wrote in their paper.

Google’s search and Web application server log data was used to figure out which specific versions of the Firefox, Safari, and Opera browsers people were using, which include the latest point releases. IE, however, only communicates information about which major version is in place — such as IE6 or IE7 — to Web servers.

Consequently, to detect smaller IE browser updates, the researchers reportedly depended on data from users who had installed Secunia’s Personal Software Inspector software on their PCs.

No “personal data” was collected about Google users, according to the authors. Interestingly, though, in recent months, Google has come under fire from privacy advocates who claim the company could be violating a California privacy law by failing to post a link to its privacy policy directly from the Google home page.

Accessible through a number of other methods — such as by entering “Google privacy” on the Google search line — this policy does state, among many other things, that when “you use Google services, our servers automatically record information that your browser sends whenever you visit a website.”

These server logs “may include information such as your web request, Internet Protocol address, browser type, browser language, the date and time of your request and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify your browser,” according to Google’s policy statement.

Google’s policies around log data and personal data are different, though. According to Google, the personal information collected includes that person’s e-mail address and Google search activity, for instance. Yet this personal information is collected only from users who set up Google Accounts, and users can supposedly cancel those accounts at any time.

Why did IBM pitch in on the browser research, too? Logically, IBM’s interest would seem to revolve around the study’s acknowledged focus on the browser as a potential vulnerability point in host-based computing.

“In recent years the Web browser has increasingly become targeted as an infection vector for vulnerable hosts,” the researchers said, in a preface to the report. “Classic service-centric vulnerability exploitation required attackers to scan for and remotely connect to vulnerable hosts (typically servers) in order to exploit them. Unlike these, Web browser vulnerabilities are commonly exploited when the user of the vulnerable host visits a malicious Web site.”

Source: http://www.betanews.com/article/Web_browser_study_uses_Google_data_to_pinpoint_security_problems/1215030984

The de facto registrar of superlative achievements has credited Mozilla for officially setting a record for downloads in a 24-hour period: 8,002,530 copies of Firefox.

Mozilla’s Download Day on June 17, whose server-crippling success delayed its official start, sought to popularize the open-source Web browser. Mozilla, which oversees the Firefox project, projected at the time that it cleared 8 million, but the number is now official.

“As the arbiter and recorder of the world’s amazing facts, Guinness World Records is pleased to add Mozilla’s achievement to our archives,” Gareth Deaves, Guinness’ records manager, said in a statement.

Though Download Day was a big publicity stunt, it’s hard to sniff with too much disdain at the total. To me at least it indicates that people see more in this particular browser than just a bundle of bits to surf the Web; they like its technology, its open-source nature or other attributes, and downloading and using it is an event somewhat akin to suffering in line for hours for rock show tickets or to buy an iPhone.

I’m skeptical that Download Day in and of itself will appreciably shift Firefox’s market share results in the short term. But it did probably coax people toward a more modern browser, which Web site operators probably are happy to see, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Mozilla managed to sign up more Firefox fanboys through its promotional devices.

Also for the record, Net Applications gave Firefox 3 2.31 percent market share for the entire month of June, compared with 4.28 percent for Safari 3.1, 16.13 percent for Firefox 2, 26.38 percent for Internet Explorer 6, and 46.45 percent for No. 1 IE 7. The statistics are based on actual usage at various major search engines. Because Firefox 3 was released midway through June, the statistics likely will show significantly greater share for it in July.

Source: http://www.webware.com/8301-1_109-9983245-2.html

El Segundo (CA) – If we believe the public statements of AMD executives, then the company’s market strategy has always been based on maintaining and growing market share at virtually any expense. So far, this game cost AMD more than $4.3 billion, but according to iSuppli, AMD may have reached a point where it may have stabilized its market share and could have a foundation for growth in the future. However, iSuppli’s numbers indicate that AMD is walking on very thin ice.

iSuppli’s latest CPU market share numbers is the perfect chart for everyone. There is positive and negative items for every party involved and you could spin the numbers in any way you prefer. Depending on your view, both AMD and Intel are growing, while all others are losing, albeit at a slowing pace. Really? Well, not so much.

Let’s look at AMD first. iSuppli said that AMD’s market share was at 10.9% in Q1 2007, which climbed to 14.1% in Q4 2007 and fell slightly to 13.00% in Q1 2008. Overall, the trend appears to be positive for AMD.

Of course, we have to also mention that Q1 2007 was a disastrous quarter for the company. Within three months the company lost almost one third of its CPU market share to Intel (down from 15.7%). The Q1 loss was a staggering $611 million and reflected the full effect and success of Intel Core 2 Duo processors (as well as channel problems for AMD.) At that time, AMD held on to a strategy that brought massive price cuts in the hope to keep further market share losses to a minimum. Not considering the cost, the strategy worked and AMD was able to avoid further losses. Market shares are indeed climbing again, but it is clear that the current market share gains are “artificial” gains supported by prices AMD obviously cannot afford.

Q2 2008 is expected to deliver another loss for AMD, while Q3 has been promised by CEO Hector Ruiz to be the return to profitability for the company. Once the company posts positive results again, we will know how much “true” CPU market share the company holds: It will all depend on how profitable AMD’s quad-core and triple-core processors really are and if consumers will prefer triple-core Phenom processors over Intel dual-core CPUs. The graphics unit is the big variable in this game and could play a significant role in bringing the company back to profitability.

Intel, on the other side, seems to have nothing to worry about. The firm’s Q1 2007 share was at 80.4% and dropped to 78.5% in Q4 2007 and went back up to 79.7%. Year-over-year, Intel is down, but you could certainly say that there is a more recent trend that indicates that Intel may be gaining again. Intel recently dropped the prices for two of its quad-core processors to counter AMD’s low quad-core pricing, but has not moved much in dual-core pricing and high-end CPU pricing, indicating that there is very little pricing pressure at this time.

For now, it seems, both companies have settled in comfortable pricing segments and both companies appear to be gaining market share from other vendors, rather from each other. “Other” CPU manufacturers saw their CPU share decline from 8.7% in Q1 2007 to 7.4% in Q4 2007 and 7.3% in Q1 2008. The real question seems to be whether AMD has reached a baseline of market share from where it can create or grow profit margins. Your guess is as good as ours if that is the case at this time.

AMD’s Q2 2008 ended on June 30.

Source: http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/38223/113/

Microsoft is offering iPod nanos, shuffles, and touches as prizes to promote their Live Search in Australia, according to the Brisbane Times on Wednesday. Microsoft is working through a joint venture in Australia with Nine Network, ninemsn, for Internet search.

Microsoft said that using a competitor’s products in this way is frowned upon. However, the Zune is not available in Australia. “Where we don’t have a great product or we don’t have a product at all there’s no internal edict that says we’re not allowed to use competitor products,” a Microsoft source said.

The company is also is offering large discounts on Windows Mobile-based smartphone so keep staff from buying iPhones, the Brisbane Times reported.

Microsoft has been working hard to compete against Google’s search and its corresponding revenue stream. Ninemsn’s head of Live Search, Alex Parsons, said “I’m not going to sit here and tell you we’re going to win this in the next year or two years — that’s not my objective.”

Microsoft appears to be relegated to taking the long view. Mr. Parson’s compared Google to Hoover vacuum cleaners. “I read about when Hoover was vacuum cleaners — I’d like to see what sort of market share Hoover has now against Dyson and some of the German brands,” he said.

Compared to last year, Google searches grew 14 percent in Australia while MS Live Search grew 11 percent. MS may need need to be very patient — while they keep giving away iPods.

Source: http://www.macobserver.com/article/2008/07/02.13.shtml

Here is how you can get a stick ticker in your Firefox browser (works with 1.0 - 2.0.0.* versions):

Go to https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/183

Click on the green ‘Add to Firefox’  button

Click “Install” on the window that pops up

Restart Firefox to see the ticker appear.

Right-click on the ticker to Edit/Add your favorite stocks

Enjoy!

A complete overhaul of the way in which people navigate the internet has been given the go-ahead in Paris.

The net’s regulator, Icann, voted unanimously to relax the strict rules on so-called “top-level” domain names, such as .com or .uk.

The decision means that companies could turn brands into web addresses, while individuals could use their names.

A second proposal, to introduce domain names written in Asian, Arabic or other scripts, was also approved.

“We are opening up a new world and I think this cannot be underestimated,” said Roberto Gaetano, a member of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann).

The organisation said it had already been contacted about setting up domains in the Cyrillic script - used in many Eastern European countries.

“This is a huge step forward in the development of the internet - it will unblock something that has prevented a lot of people getting online,” said Emily Taylor, director of legal and policy at Nominet, the national registry for .uk domain names.

“At the moment, there are one-and-a-half billion people online and four-and-a-half billion people for whom the Roman script just means nothing.”

Country appeal

Icann has been working towards opening up the 25-year-old net addresses for nearly six years. It was one of its founding goals in 1998.

At the moment, top-level domains (TLDs) are currently limited to individual countries, such as .uk (UK) or .it (Italy), as well as to commerce, .com, and to institutional organisations, such as .net, or .org.

The .com suffix is the most popular and most costly TLD.

To get around the restrictions, some companies have used the current system to their own ends.

For example, the Polynesian island nation Tuvalu has leased the use of the .tv address to many television firms.

Under the new plans, domain names can be based on any string of letters, in any script.

Individuals will be able to register a domain based on their own name, for example, as long as they can show a “business plan and technical capacity”.

Companies will be able to secure domain names based on their intellectual property.

The result could be thousands or even millions of new addresses.

“The most likely new TLDs to be pushed into the Icann process are those that have been under development for some time now - the geo-TLDs such as .cym for Wales, .sco for Scotland, .ldn for London, .nyc for New York and so on,” explained Marcus Eggensperger, of Lycos Webhosting.

Lasting legacy

However, the cost of setting up a domain - at least initially - will be an expensive business.

“We expect that the fee will be in the low six figure dollar amounts,” said Dr Twomey.

The organisation has already spent close to $10m on the proposals - set to rise to $20m - and needs to recoup the costs.

“The costs of developing and implementing this policy will be borne by the applicants,” he said. “But we’re certainly not setting this up for profit.”

Many have pointed out that because of the scale of the plan, its introduction and effect will have to be monitored closely.

“I am concerned about spending our TLD name inheritance for future TLD users,” said Dave Wodelet, also of the Icann board.

“I certainly don’t want future generations to look back at us with disdain for not being good stewards of this limited TLD resource.”

However, he said, on balance, he felt that technical and administrative hurdles could be overcome.

Public interest

It is not a view shared by everyone. Many businesses have pointed out that the new system could be very costly. “The major issue with the potentially large number of new TLDs is going to be for brand owners who will want to protect their trademarks,” said Mr Eggensperger.

“For a major pharmaceutical business, the cost of registering all of their trademarks when a new trademark is released runs into hundreds of thousands of pounds.”

Others point out that some generic domain names - such as .news or .sport - could become subject to contention and a bidding war.

Icann has said that it was “aware of all of the concerns” and that it had “considered them very carefully”.

It will implement an arbitration process to oversee disputes and has said that if all else fails a domain would go the “highest bidder” in an auction.

“On balance, the board feels that adopting this resolution is in the best interests of the internet and the public at large,” said Icann board member Dennis Jennings.

The process of introducing the new system will start in 2009, with the first websites possibly coming online in the final quarter of the year.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7475986.stm

For many years, the Internet was the “final frontier,” operating largely unregulated — in part because of the jurisdictional nightmare involved in trying to enforce laws when communications crossed not just state lines but also national boundaries. That was then; this is now.

Legislation that affects the use of Internet-connected computers is springing up everywhere at the local, state, and federal levels. You might be violating one of them without even knowing it.

In this article, we’ll take a look at some of the existing laws and some of the pending legislation that can affect how we use our computers and the Internet. Nothing in this article should be construed as legal advice; this is merely an overview of some of the legislation that’s out there, how it has been interpreted by the courts (if applicable), and possible implications for computer users.

#1: Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

Most computer users have heard of this law, which was signed in 1998 by President Clinton, implementing two World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties. The DMCA makes it a criminal offense to circumvent any kind of technological copy protection — even if you don’t violate anyone’s copyright in doing so. In other words, simply disabling the copy protection is a federal crime.

There are some exemptions, such as circumventing copy protection of programs that are in an obsolete format for the purpose of archiving or preservation. But in most cases, using any sort of anti-DRM program is illegal. This applies to all sorts of copy-protected files, including music, movies, and software. You can read a summary of the DMCA here.

If you’re a techie who likes the challenge of trying to “crack”DRM,” be aware that doing so — even if you don’t make or distribute illegal copies of the copyrighted material — is against the law.

#2: No Electronic Theft (NET) Act

This is another U.S. federal law that was passed during the Clinton administration. Prior to this act, copyright violations were generally treated as civil matters and could not be prosecuted criminally unless it was done for commercial purposes. The NET Act made copyright infringement itself a federal criminal offense, regardless of whether you circumvent copy-protection technology or whether you derive any commercial benefit or monetary gain. Thus, just making a copy of a copyrighted work for a friend now makes you subject to up to five years in prison and/or up to $250,000 in fines. This is the law referred to in the familiar “FBI Warning” that appears at the beginning of most DVD movies. You can read more about the NET Act here.

Many people who consider themselves upstanding citizens and who would never post music and movies to a P2P site think nothing of burning a copy of a song or TV show for a friend. Unfortunately, by the letter of the law, the latter is just as illegal as the former.

#3: Court rulings regarding border searches

Most Americans are aware of the protections afforded by the U.S. Constitution’s fourth amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. In general, this means that the government cannot search your person, home, vehicle, or computer without probable cause to believe that you’ve engaged in some criminal act.

What many don’t know is that there are quite a few circumstances that the Courts, over the years, have deemed to be exempt from this requirement. One of those occurs when you enter the United States at the border. In April of this year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the right of Customs officers to search laptops and other digital devices at the border (the definition of which extends to any international airport when you are coming into the country) without probable cause or even the lesser standard of reasonable suspicion. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and other groups strongly disagree with the ruling. You can read more on the EFF Web site.

Meanwhile, be aware that even though you’ve done nothing illegal and are not even suspected of such, the entire contents of your portable computer, PDA, or smart phone can be accessed by government agents when you enter the United States. So if you have anything on your hard drive that might be embarrassing, you might want to delete it before crossing the border.

#4: State laws regarding access to networks

Many states have criminal laws that prohibit accessing any computer or network without the owner’s permission. For example, in Texas, the statute is Penal Code section 33.02, Breach of Computer Security. It says, “A person commits an offense if the person knowingly accesses a computer, computer network or computer system without the effective consent of the owner.” The penalty grade ranges from misdemeanor to first degree felony (which is the same grade as murder), depending on whether the person obtains benefit, harms or defrauds someone, or alters, damages, or deletes files.

The wording of most such laws encompasses connecting to a wireless network without explicit permission, even if the wi-fi network is unsecured. The inclusion of the culpable mental state of “knowing” as an element of the offense means that if your computer automatically connects to your neighbor’s wireless network instead of your own and you aren’t aware of it, you haven’t committed a crime — but if you decide to hop onto the nearest unencrypted wi-fi network to surf the Internet, knowing full well that it doesn’t belong to you and no one has given you permission, you could be prosecuted under these laws.

A Michigan man was arrested for using a café’s wi-fi network (which was reserved for customers) from his car in 2007. Similar arrests have been made in Florida, Illinois, Washington, and Alaska. See

#5: “Tools of a crime” laws

Some states have laws that make it a crime to possess a “criminal instrument” or the “tool of a crime.” Depending on the wording of the law, this can be construed to mean any device that is designed or adapted for use in the commission of an offense. This means you could be arrested and prosecuted, for example, for constructing a high gain wireless antenna for the purpose of tapping into someone else’s wi-fi network, even if you never did in fact access a network. Several years ago, a California sheriff’s deputy made the news when he declared “Pringles can antennas” illegal under such a statute.

#6: “Cyberstalking” laws

Stalking is a serious crime and certainly all of us are in favor of laws that punish stalkers. As Internet connectivity has become ubiquitous, legislatures have recognized that it’s possible to stalk someone from afar using modern technology. Some of the “cyberstalking” laws enacted by the states, however, contain some pretty broad language.

For example, the Arkansas law contains a section titled “Unlawful computerized communications” that makes it a crime to send a message via e-mail or other computerized communication system (Instant Messenger, Web chat, IRC, etc.) that uses obscene, lewd, or profane language, with the intent to frighten, intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass another person. Some of the lively discussions on mailing lists and Web boards that deteriorate into flame wars could easily fall under that definition. Or how about the furious e-mail letter you sent to the company that refused to refund your money for the shoddy product you bought?

Closely related are the laws against “cyber bullying” that have recently been passed by some states and local governments.

The best policy is to watch your language when sending any type of electronic communications. Not only can a loss of temper when you’re online come back to embarrass you, it could possibly get you thrown in jail.

#7: Internet Gambling laws

Like to play poker online or bet on the horse races from the comfort of your home? The federal Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 criminalizes acceptance of funds from bettors — but what about the bettors themselves? Are they committing a crime?

Under this federal law, the answer is no, but some state laws do apply to the person placing the bet. For example, a Washington law passed in 2006 makes gambling on the Internet a felony. The King County Superior Court just recently upheld that law, although challengers have vowed to take it to the Supreme Court.

Be sure to check out the state and local laws before you make that friendly online bet.

#8: Security Breach Disclosure laws

A California law passed in 2003 requires that any company that does business in California must notify their California customers if they discover or suspect that nonencrypted data has been accessed without authorization. This applies even if the business is not located in California, as long as you have customers there, and no exception is made for small businesses.

#9: Community Broadband Act of 2007

This is a piece of pending federal legislation that was introduced in July of 2007 as U.S. Senate Bill 1853. In April 2008, it was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders and is still winding its way through the legislative process. This federal law would prohibit state and local governments (municipalities and counties) from passing laws that prohibit public telecommunications providers from offering Internet services.

This is in response to laws passed in a few states, as a result of lobbying from the telecom industry, that prohibit cities from installing and operating public broadband networks, such as public wi-fi networks. The big telecom companies have a vested interest in preventing cities from establishing networks that could compete with their own services by providing free or low cost Internet services because the public services are partially or wholly taxpayer-subsidized.

If this law passes, it could make it easier to find free or low cost ISP services in cities that choose to build public networks. On the other hand, it could (depending on how it’s funded) cause tax increases for those who live in those municipalities, including those who don’t use the public networks.

#10: Pro IP Act

Back on the copyright front, the House of Representative recently approved by an overwhelming majority HR 4279, which imposes stricter penalties for copyright infringement. It creates a new position of “copyright enforcement czar” in the federal bureaucracy and gives law enforcement agents the right to seize property from copyright infringers.

This may all sound fine in theory, but when you look at the way other seizure and forfeiture laws have been applied (for instance, the ability of drug enforcement officers to seize houses, computers, cars, cash, and just about everything else that belongs to someone tagged as a suspected drug dealer — and in some cases not returning the property even when the person is acquitted or not prosecuted), it makes many people wary. Read more about the bill here.

Some local jurisdictions have already established seizure authority for piracy. See this article for more information.

Source: http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=356

Temporary Mailbox Services

Now a days Internet has become a home to spam. Millions of spam bots crawl the web daily to find email addresses and then bombard them with spam emails thus destroying their efficiency and creating problems for users. The best solution to this is to get a temporary or disposable email inbox which automatically expires after a certain time period.

Benefits of Temporary/Disposable Mailbox

There are many advantages of having a temporary or disposable mailbox on the web. But here are some key benefits:

• Protect you from spam mails
• Protect your mailbox from exploits, spoofs and hoaxes
• Require no signup and/or registration
• Automatically expire after a certain time period

Top 20 Temporary Mailbox services

Collected below is a list of best temporary/disposable email services that provide you give you a temporary email inbox which is totally spam free and needs no registration or sign up:

1. Mailinator is one of the best and top rated disposable email services that gives you a temporary mailbox on the following address format e.g. something@mailinator.com
2. MyTrashMail is another good temporary mail service that gives you a mailbox in the address format e.g. something@trashymail.com and also gives you secure temporary mailbox if you signup
3. MailExpire stands out in the crowd by giving you the option to have a temporary inbox ranging from 12 hours expiry to as long as 3 months
4. TemporaryInbox is yet another simple and easy to use temporary email service that gives you an email address in different formats
5. MailEater gives you a free temporary email inbox in the format e.g. something@MailEater.com
6. Jetable not only allows you to set the life span of your temporary email inbox but also allows you to forward the mails in your temporary inbox to your real email address
7. SpamBox gives you a temporary email address in the format e.g. something@spambox.us and also allows you to set the lifespan of your inbox
8. GuerillaMail lets you generate a temporary email which expires in a time of 15 minutes and also tell you how to offer a temporary email service on your site.
9. SpamHole provides you a 2 hour long temporary email inbox at the address format e.g. something@spamhole.com
10. 10MinuteMail generates an easy 10 minute email inbox for your temporary email needs
11. DontReg is one bigger, better, faster and safer temporary email inbox solution
12. TempoMail is one new temporary email inbox services that give you spam-free mailbox
13. TempEmail aims to give you a fast, anonymous yet secure temporary email inbox
14. PookMail is a multi-language temporary email inbox service that gives an email address in the format e.g. something@pookmail.com
15. SpamFree24 is a new multi-domain temporary email inbox service which is growing rapidly
16. KasMail requires registration, allows up to 25 aliases, can set aliases to expire after a certain amount of time.
17. SpamMotel requires registration, provides mail forwarding, mail can be accessed through desktop e-mail clients, can reply to e-mail from your real e-mail address using SpamMotel e-mail.
18. GreenSloth requires no registration, receive-only, e-mail expires automatically after a week
19. AnonInbox requires no registration, simple, no frills.
20. Spam.la is a fast disposable email service which requires no registration, no frills. You can see all spam being sent to all Spam.la accounts, or just your own.

Article sourced from http://www.sizlopedia.com/2007/05/27/top-20-temporary-and-disposable-email-services/

Source: http://www.danscartoons.com/TAX10_demo.gif