Group items tagged

Guess what? That unlocked rant you put on your MySpace profile is open to the public and can be seen by anyone with a computer. Imagine that! Cynthia Moreno learned this the hard way. A judge ruled earlier this month that it was not an invasion of her privacy when a local newspaper published a rant pulled from her MySpace blog. After a visit to her hometown of Coalinga, Calif., college student Moreno penned a 700-word blog entry titled "An Ode to Coalinga" that opened with "the older I get, the more I realize how much I despise Coalinga." Moreno subsequently deleted the blog entry, but Roger Campbell, principal of Coalinga High School, discovered it before the deletion and handed it over to his friend Pamela Pond, editor of the Coalinga Record newspaper. Pond then published the rant in its entirety as a letter to the editor, printing Cynthia's full name. The Moreno family was met with death threats and shots were fired outside their home. Cynthia's father David was forced to close his 20-year-old family business, and the family moved to another town. The family sued the newspaper and the Coalinga-Huron Unified School District for invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress. The case against the newspaper was dismissed on free speech grounds, but the case against Campbell and the school district was allowed to proceed. Campbell did not violate Moreno's rights when he handed over her rant to Pond because Moreno's blog entry was published on the Internet and available for anyone to see, according to the Superior Court of Fresno County.

Social networkig may seed malware spread. Education is still one of the most successful computer security tools

Websense CTO Dan Hubbard outlines four ways companies can protect their information from threats and compromise on the social Web. 1) Most Web Posts on Blogs and Forums are Actually Unwanted Content (Spam and Malware) As more and more people interact with each other on sites allowing user-generated content, such as blogs, forums and chat rooms, spammers and cybercriminals have taken note and abuse this ability to spread spam, post links back to their wares and direct users to malicious sites. Websense research shows that 85 percent of all Web posts on blogs and forums are unwanted content - spam and malware - and five percent are actually malware, fraud and phishing attacks. An average active blog gets between 8,000 and 10,000 links posted per month; so users must be wary of clicking on links in these sites. Click here to find out more! Additionally, just because a site is reputable, doesn't mean its safe. Blogs and message boards belonging to Sony Pictures, Digg, Google, YouTube and Washington State University have all hosted malicious comment spam recently, and My.BarackObama.com was infected with malicious comment spam.

An eBay Inc. effort to broaden communication through the popular Twitter Web-messaging service highlights the hurdles facing corporate users of online social media. The growing Twitter audience also attracted the attention of eBay's lawyers, who last month required Mr. Brewer-Hay to include regulatory disclaimers with certain posts. Some followers think the tougher oversight is squelching Mr. Brewer-Hay's spontaneous, informal style. His experience shows the tension that can arise as more companies tap social media to reach investors, customers and others. Eighty-one Fortune 500 companies sponsor public blogs, including Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Chevron Corp. and General Motors Corp., according to the Society for New Communications Research. Of those blogs, 23 link to corporate Twitter accounts. On Thursday, a Johnson & Johnson executive reported for the first time on the health-care giant's annual meeting via Twitter, which allows users to post "tweets" of as many as 140 characters via text messages and the Web. Such efforts raise thorny questions. Blogs and tweets can run afoul of Securities and Exchange Commission regulations on corporate communications. But sanitizing such posts risks hurting credibility with online audiences. The online auctioneer launched a corporate blog in April 2008. Two months later, blogger Richard Brewer-Hay began "tweeting" -- posting updates on Twitter -- about Silicon Valley technology conferences, eBay's quarterly earnings calls and other topics.

Update on Feb. 18, 8:33 a.m.: Facebook is backing off changes to its terms of service, informing users on their official blog that they will remain intact. "Over the past couple of days, we received a lot of questions and comments about the changes and what they mean for people and their information," Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg writes in the blog. "Based on this feedback, we have decided to return to our previous terms of use while we resolve the issues that people have raised." To learn more, read our original post below. Facebook is having trouble dousing the flames in a firestorm over its trustworthiness. A recent change in its terms of use -- the legalese tacked onto the bottom of most websites -- has sparked concerns that the social networking giant plans to own all users' information forever. Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed in a blog post Monday that "on Facebook people own and control their information." But privacy advocates still aren't satisfied. "I think in simple terms it's a tug of war over user data," says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington. "People put information on a Facebook page to share with friends. But it's pretty much with the understanding that they're deciding what to post and who has access to it. Facebook, like any other company, is trying to obtain maximum commercial value from its users."

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is getting tough on online viral marketing using blogs and other social networking sites. The proposed rules would make bloggers legally liable if they make untrue statements about products or services. Companies would face sanctions, too, if they use blogs and social networking sites to make untrue claims. "This impacts every industry and almost every single brand in our economy, and that trickles down into social media," Anthony DiResta, an attorney representing several advertising associations, told vnunet.com. The rules have been a long time coming. It's the first revision of the FTC's advertising rules since 1980. New kinds of marketing have sprouted in the last 30 years, but this is the first time the FTC is paying attention to these kinds of advertising practices. Not everyone agrees that this is a good idea. Richard O'Brien, vice-president of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, told the website, "Regulating these developing media too soon may have a chilling effect on blogs and other forms of viral marketing, as bloggers and other viral marketers will be discouraged from publishing content for fear of being held liable for any potentially misleading claim."

Next week, the White House will launch a blog to discuss the Obama administration's open government initiative. In a nod to openness and citizen participation in government, the administration also plans to soon open White House blogs to public comments. In a speech to an annual National Archives and Records Administration conference, Beth Noveck, deputy CTO of the open government initiative at the Office of Science and Technology, asserted that the Obama administration continues to make strides toward opening up the government's data and operations to public scrutiny.

Open government? America might just have to learn to read again.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is planning to regulate online viral marketing that uses blogs and social networking sites. Marketers are spending billions worldwide to get the endorsements of key bloggers and groups on social networking sites. One tactic, used by Microsoft and others, is to send products to bloggers on 'long-term loans' on the understanding that they will comment about them on their sites. AdvertisementUnder the new regulations being proposed, such bloggers would be legally liable if they make untrue statements about the products or services. The companies too would face sanctions. "This impacts every industry and almost every single brand in our economy, and that trickles down into social media," Anthony DiResta, an attorney representing several advertising associations, told The Financial Times. This is the first revision of the rules on this kind of advertising by the FTC since 1980 and is needed, according to the organisation, because new forms of communication have opened up new fields to marketing. "The guides needed to be updated to address not only the changes in technology, but the consequences of new marketing practices," said Richard Cleland, assistant director for the FTC's division of advertising practices. " Word-of-mouth marketing is not exempt from the laws of truthful advertising." Advertisers are resisting the changes, however, which threaten a highly effective form of marketing new products and services. "Regulating these developing media too soon may have a chilling effect on blogs and other forms of viral marketing, as bloggers and other viral marketers will be discouraged from publishing content for fear of being held liable for any potentially misleading claim," Richard O'Brien, vice president of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, said in an advisory to the FTC.

You can't ignore the presence and usage of all the myriad forms of instant messaging, social networking and blogging. The millennial generation won't thrive in companies where Facebook is banned or texting is frowned upon. They think and work so differently from their baby boomer managers that generational clashes are inevitable. The Security Executive Council and CXO Media, producer of CSO Perspectives and CSO magazine, are partnering to probe attitudes toward collaborative technologies like IM and social networking. By participating you will receive a research report based on this survey. Definition of web 2.0 apps: The term "Web 2.0" describes the changing trends in the use of World Wide Web technology and web design that aim to enhance creativity, communications, secure information sharing, collaboration and functionality of the web. Web 2.0 concepts have led to the development and evolution of web culture communities and hosted services, such as social-networking sites, video sharing sites, wikis, blogs, and folksonomies. (Wikipedia)

Even a booster of electronic systems like David Blumenthal, who just started his Washington post as the national coordinator of health IT, points to a myriad of challenges when it comes to digitizing the nation's medical records. Just take a look at his piece this month in the New England Journal of Medicine, in which he cites technical concerns and worries about patient privacy, among other things. In an interview with the WSJ, he said problems can crop up if the systems are installed too quickly and without enough technical support. There are plenty of potential advantages that electronic records can bring, from helping hospitals and doctors get information quickly on patients' medical histories to making catches when two drugs are being prescribed that may interact dangerously together. But there are also risks: Take a look at a study in Pediatrics that cites the case of Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, which initially saw a rise in the death rate for certain patients after computerizing its order-entry system, perhaps because it took longer to begin their treatment. (The hospital told the WSJ the study was "flawed," adding the mortality rate had fallen since then.) The WSJ also cites the case of a patient who was initially given an incorrect diagnosis based on a mix-up involving electronic records and a test result for another patient. Health Blog Question of the Day: What's been your experience with electronic records? Do they prevent safety problems or create new risks?

With so many workers being axed, the threat to sensitive customer, corporate, military information should be examined. Once workers leave with sensitive information, good luck controlling exposure. Cross International borders and the issue potentially expands into an national "incident" with dire consequences for corporate reputation. Protectionism vs Patriotism. Issues raised in the Great Depression revisited with more impact due to expansion of the economy to global status.

Microsoft Corp.'s plan to eliminate U.S. workers after lobbying for more foreigner visas is stirring resentment among lawmakers and employees. As many as 5,000 employees are being shown the door at Microsoft, which uses more H1-B guest-worker visas than any other U.S. company. Some employees and politicians say Microsoft should get rid of foreigners first. "If they lay people off, are they going to think of America first or are they going to think of the world first?" Chuck Grassley, a Republican Senator from Iowa, said in an interview. He sent a letter to Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer the day after Microsoft announced the job cuts last month, demanding Ballmer fire visa holders first. Across the technology industry, some of the biggest users of H1-B visas are cutting jobs, including Intel Corp., International Business Machines Corp. and Hewlett-Packard Co. The firings at Microsoft, the world's largest software maker, came less than a year after Chairman Bill Gates lobbied Congress for an expansion of the visa program. Even before Microsoft announced the cuts, its first-ever companywide layoffs, comments on a blog run by an anonymous Microsoft worker angrily debated getting rid of guest workers first. The author of the Mini-Microsoft blog eventually had to censor and then completely block all arguments about visas, after the conversation "got downright nasty."

Oh, the double-edged sword of Twitter. It's not nice when it makes PR people and reporters look like asses, as Jennifer Leggio will post tomorrow. But it's a whole new can o' beans when it affects political power. And yup, Twitter did in fact (or not - see below) alter the balance of power in Virginia (the state capital of which is Richmond, Va., for what it's worth) this week, as Talking Points Memo blogs: Yesterday the Virginia GOP came very close to taking control of the state Senate, nearly luring a Democratic Senator to switch parties and put them at a 20-20 tie, which would have been broken by the Republican Lt. Governor. Then Jeff Frederick, a state legislator and the party chairman, ruined it all by Twittering this: Big news coming out of Senate: Apparently one dem is either switching or leaving the dem caucus. Negotiations for power sharing underway. The Dems then read the message, quickly mobilized to talk the renegade out of it, and stopped the GOP coup before it could happen. Here's Frederick's exciting presence on Twitter, featuring such nail-biting updates as: * Had great meeting; dinner @ Bookbinders; now at Lucky Strike/Cap Results party. Tired * Meeting w/ Senator about a bill he wants me to support. And then this intriguing post: Meeting w/ HseMajLdr abt my senate post earlier.He gave me info, which came f/ a Senator who said it was public. That will be a fun meeting. At any rate Frederick pointed to a blog post from conservative Roanoke County, which says the whole Twitter story is b.s., that the Dems already knew about the rogue House member before Frederick ever Tweeted. Even so, the strange power of Twitter is now well-established.

A consumer group accused Google of seeking provisions in the economic stimulus package that would allow it to sell patient medical data to Google Health advertisers. Perhaps patients' biggest worry about electronic medical records is that their private health data will get into the wrong hands. To get a feel for some folks' anxiety, just take a look at this from a group called Patient Privacy Rights: "CHILLING NEWS ABOUT HEALTH PRIVACY: You Have None." (Or look at one of our many posts about health data breaches.) So it's probably not a surprise that Google, which last year launched Google Health, a personal online repository, was quick to refute a charge by a different consumer group, called Consumer Watchdog, of "a rumored [Google] lobbying effort aimed at allowing the sale of electronic medical records." The group further claimed that Google is "reportedly" pushing for items in the economic stimulus bill that would allow the company to "sell patient medical information" to advertisers. Google shot back, posting an item in its public policy blog calling the claims "100 percent false and unfounded." The company added: Google does not sell health data. In fact, one of our most steadfast privacy principles is that we don't sell our users' personal data, whether it's stored in Google Health, Gmail, or in any of our products. And from a policy perspective, we oppose the sale of medical information in the health care industry. Google's ear is likely fine tuned to this issue, considering some folks in the medical community have already pointed out the company is not a type required to follow a federal patient-privacy law called HIPAA.

If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. If you don't even know what it is...

Even IT professionals are confused about what constitutes Web 2.0, according to a survey released Wednesday by web security vendor Websense and research firm Dynamic Markets. According to the survey, of 1,300 information technology managers across 10 countries, 17 percent of respondents correctly identified all the items on the survey that can be considered Web 2.0. IT administrators commonly identified the "obvious" Web 2.0 sites -- such as the social networking sites Facebook and LinkedIn, Dave Meizlik, director of product marketing at Websense, told SCMagazineUS.com on Tuesday. They also commonly identified blogs and micro blogs, such as Twitter, as Web 2.0. But, respondents less frequently identified other sites as Web 2.0, including iGoogle and Wikipedia, Meizlik said. Only half of respondents identified video uploading sites, such as YouTube, as part of Web 2.0, the survey found. David Lavenda, vice president of marketing and product strategy at security vendor Worklight, told SCMagazineUS.com on Wednesday that IT administrators know they need to secure the enterprise from Web 2.0 threats, but are not always sure what those threats are. "When you go to organizations where security is really important -- financial and government organizations -- and ask, 'What's your fear of Web 2.0?,' they say, 'I really don't know, but we hear enough stories of people being compromised that we don't want to take a chance.' That's the most common answer." Lavenda said.

A recent talk by some Federal Trade Commission officials confirms that the agency is taking a hard look at online advertising practices. Speaking at an American Bar Association conference, new consumer protection chief David Vladeck had harsh words for the behavioral targeting industry's current privacy practices. The "current approach is not working," he said, according to the law firm Arnold & Porter, which blogged about the speech. Vladeck reportedly said many companies' current practice of notifying users about online ad targeting and allowing them to opt out is inadequate, largely because people don't understand the policies. He's not the first to make this observation. Advocates and policymakers have said for years that privacy policies are incomprehensible even to sophisticated users. A recent study by UC Berkeley School also shows that the policies are filled with enough loopholes as to be meaningless. Meanwhile, consumer protection deputy Eileen Harrington, who also talked at the same event, reportedly called deep packet inspection the most dangerous form of data collection, according to a blog post by the law firm Perkins Coie.

Google has released a more detailed privacy policy for its Google Books product, a move demanded in recent weeks by several critics of its settlement with publishers and authors. The company announced the new policy in a blog post late Thursday afternoon, saying it developed the policy following conversations with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Google had previously said it was unable to release a detailed policy because the Google Books product was incomplete due to the fact that the settlement allowing its Book Search project to display certain types of books has yet to be formally approved. However, criticism of Google's lack of detailed information on the subject appears to have forced its hand. "To provide all users with a clear understanding of our practices, and in response to helpful comments about needing to be clearer about the Books product from the FTC and others, we wanted to highlight key provisions of the main Google Privacy Policy in the context of the Google Books service, as well as to describe privacy practices specific to the Google Books service," wrote Jane Horvath, general privacy counsel for Google, in a blog post.

Wikipedia told the controversial U.K. advertising firm Phorm on Thursday not to spy on Wikipedia's users, saying the company's plan to monitor what sites people visit on the net invaded people's privacy. Wikipedia now joins Amazon.co.uk in opting out of the Big-Brother-esque marketing scheme and creating the possibility of a mass opt-out by the net's largest websites. Phorm wants to pay ISPs -- such as British Telecom -- to let it build marketing profiles of its subscribers by installing boxes inside the ISP that monitor every url users visit and every search they run. Using those profiles, Phorm can charge advertisers high rates to serve targeted ads. But in an email sent Thursday, Wikimedia.org told Phorm not to record anything about urls from domains it controls, ranging from Wikiquotes to Wikipedia -- one of the most popular sites on the net. Phorm operates an opt-out system for sites and ISP customers, but it would be virtually impossible to verify if the company actually complied with such requests. "The Wikimedia Foundation requests that our web sites including Wikipedia.org and all related domains be excluded from scanning by the Phorm / BT Webwise system, as we consider the scanning and profiling of our visitors' behavior by a third party to be an infringement on their privacy," the email read, according to a Wikimedia blog post.

Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com like this http://killdo.de.gg travel,hotel,fun,hotel new,new offer,hotel best,best hotel,hotel travel,seo,backlinks,edu,gov,ads,indexing,bookmark,killgoggle,gogglesuck,goggle bookmark,kill goggle,yahoo,bing,indexing,quality links,linkwell,traffic boster,index best

Last week, a commercial Twitter spamming tool (tweettornado.com) pitching itself as a "fully automated advertising software for Twitter" hit the market, potentially empowering phishers, spammers, malware authors and everyone in between with the ability to generate bogus Twitter accounts and spread their campaigns across the micro-blogging service. TweetTornado allows users to create unlimited Twitter accounts, add unlimited number of followers, which combined with its ability to automatically update all of bogus accounts through proxy servers with an identical message make it the perfect Twitter spam tool. TweetTornado's core functionality relies on a simple flaw in Twitter's new user registration process. Tackling it will not render the tool's functionality useless, but will at least ruin the efficiency model. Sadly, Twitter doesn't require you to have a valid email address when registering a new account, so even though a nonexistent@email.com is used, the user is still registered and is allowed to use Twitter. So starting from the basics of requiring a validation by clicking on a link which will only be possible if a valid email is provided could really make an impact in this case, since it its current form the Twitter registration process can be so massively abused that I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Once a Twitter spammer has been detected, the associated, and now legitimate email could be banned from further registrations, potentially emptying the inventory of bogus emails, and most importantly making it more time consuming for spammers to abuse Twitter in general. If TweetTornado is indeed the advertising tool of choice for Twitter marketers, I "wonder" why is the originally blurred by the author Twitter account used in the proof (twitter.com/AarensAbritta) currently suspended, the way the rest of the automatically registered ones are? Pretty evident TOS violation, since two updates and 427 followers in two hours clearly indicat

While 51% of the comments were posted to blogs and 30% to message boards, just 7% appeared on Facebook and 7% on Twitter.