Tag Archives: security

LinkedIn is spamming all of my Gmail contacts

Linkedin...good idea, bad idea?

Linkedin...good idea, bad idea?

UPDATE2 I finally got a response on Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM, it said, “I would first like to apologize for the delay in responding to your inquiry. This is certainly not the customary wait time for a reply from LinkedIn Customer Support. We have been experiencing higher than expected volumes, and your patience is greatly appreciated.” So, they’ve been so busy that it took 2 1/2 weeks to get back to me? Still, they haven’t answered my questions, one what happened and two, who did they email on my behalf? I need a list. Stay tuned.

UPDATE today is October 17, 2011, so it’s been a week since I’ve reported my problem, and I have not gotten anything back from LinkedIn support. Pathetic.

Today is October 12, 2011, so first off, if you have recently recieved a LinkedIn request from me; I apologize for this. I used the “See Who You Already Know on LinkedIn” (they claim to be able to pull contacts from over 39 providers) on LinkedIn to find new people to connect with in Gmail contact list.  It found over 400 of them, so I chose a few of them to email, and it emailed ALL OF THEM and more. This included people I’m already linked in to, technology related mailing lists that I’m on, email alaises for my domain (?) and deceased relatives…it’s really a disaster. Oh, I’ve gotten 5 requests FROM MYSELF to connect, and it even posted on my blog, via the DISQUS comment system, as me, but only to one old post. Plus today it sent a followup, presumably to everyone it emailed the other day, and was nice enough to update the thread on my site, reminding me of the contact request. My support requests to LinkedIn haven’t been answered and it’s been almost 36 hours, my support history looks like this:

EFF's SSD (Surveillance Self-Defense) Project

EFF-logo-transEFF has a page covering what they call The SSD Project (Surveillance Self-Defense) which they provide, “…to educate the American public about the law and technology of government surveillance in the United States, providing the information and tools necessary to evaluate the threat of surveillance and take appropriate steps to defend against it.“  This is important stuff, and what I wish others would know, so I’m posting links to the source in the hope it will get more exposure and results in the search engines of the Internet.  I will contact EFF and see if we can formulate a better method to disseminate and distribute this text, allowing for updates and annotations going forward. Also, I aggregate news that cover these kind of issues over on Left to chance, take a look, then follow @lefttochance and @eff on Twitter to stay informed, and consider joining the LinkedIn EFF Group I run to join in the conversation.  In other words, get involved and …

Know  your  rights!

Racial profiling no better than random screening

im_not_a_terrorist_tshirt-p235795651146942575qrdq_400While the TSA alway seem to be trying to cover every eventuality, even warning me about my 6 oz. tube of hair gel last week in Rhode Island, statistical studies are showing that racial profiling is no better than radom screening in finding terrorist suspects. Just as people with the same names as potential suspects are showing up on watchlists, this is not a good way to determine their threat level.  While there certainly are many challenges to generating profiles of potential terrorists, this study released by the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science does a mathematical analysis how we’re deploying the profiles we do have, and suggests we may not be using them wisely.

HOWTO: disable IPv6 networking in Debian

Is IPv6 ready?

UPDATE: It’s been some time since I posted this, but I just read a post called Linux Hardening – Quick Wins that reinforces my thinking on this point; if you don’t need a service, you shouldn’t have it running:

Disable IPv6: Unless you know that you need it, disabling IPv6 is a good idea as it is hard to monitor, making it attractive for hackers, and it’s also hard to spot security vulnerabilities in the protocol.

Again, this is no shot at IPv6, merely my point that if you’re not using it, you shouldn’t be running it.

Tonight I did ran netstat (`netstat -plunt`) on my Debian server and saw that I had some ports listening via IPv6.  It’s a shame IPv6 hasn’t caught on as it’s better than IPv4 in virtually every way, and it should, especially since TCP/IPv4 was standardized in ARPANET RFC’s… in 1981!  Also, IPv6 provides network level security via IPSec, which enables authentication of sender and encryption of communication path, to secure communications, all fun stuff, but while some point to the fact that the Beijing Olympics used IPv6 exclusively as a point in how far it’s come, that’s hardly saying much when the protocol went Alpha… in 1996!  I mean I put things off and get distracted, sure, but come on!  So while its adoption can be argued to be a case of the chicken before the egg, since I’m not using anything IPv6, nor do I or my ISP even have the capability to use it, it’s silly and perhaps dangerous to leave it running with open ports.  So, if you’re not using it, disable it – it’s easy, just put on your pointy hat and follow along…

Citizen's laptops may be detained at border: no suspicion required

hmmm...what is this Minesweeper game all about?Ok, I’ve read this a few times, but I still cannot believe it. Yesterday the Department of Homeland Security disclosed that traveler’s laptop computers “or other electronic devices” can be confiscated, without any suspicion of a crime! Better yet, they can make and share copies of your data, have the data translated, unencrypted, etc. This is especially topical for me since I’ll be leaving the country on Sunday with the laptop that I’m typing this on. “Federal agents may take a traveler’s laptop computer or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing, as part of border search policies the Department of Homeland Security recently disclosed. Also, officials may share copies of the laptop’s contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons, according to the policies, dated July 16 and issued by two DHS agencies, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” Now I ask you, how fucked is that? “”The policies . . . are truly alarming,” said Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), who is probing the government’s border search practices. He said he intends to introduce legislation soon that would require reasonable suspicion for border searches, as well as prohibit profiling on race, religion or national origin.” So while congress is now looking at it, the article points out that these procedures have been in place for a long time, but only revealed last month, “…because of public interest in this matter.” So this makes me ask, what else should we be interested in that our government is doing so we can discover other ways our rights are being shoved aside? These tactics are excessive and a violation of individual rights, could at least can cause an interruption of business, but at most are a direct invastion of privacy and a violation of civil rights. And if they can do this, I think the next obvious step would be for them to check on incoming data into the country, why not? What’s the difference if I carry a laptop with data on it into the country versus emailing it into the country? I don’t think it would be that big of a leap; we need to keep up the ‘public interest’ in this matter else we lose more freedoms we didn’t know we had. Go to EFF today to learn what they’re doing to fight for our digitial rights and privacy, because the laws are being (re)written NOW!

Page 1 of 712345...Last »