| |
|
Saturday, December 21, 2002
|
|
Blogging Goes Mainstream
By Cynthia L. Webb, washingtonpost.com, Friday, December
20, 2002; 9:57 AM
Blogs, or online Web logs of news and
views, were the hot story of 2002, the year when blogging caught the
eye of the mainstream press in a big way and pundits began to recognize
blogs as useful tools for everything from venting about politics to
raving about a favorite band.
Traction
Extends Enterprise Blogging
Dennis Callaghan, eWeek,
December 17, 2002
Traction Software Inc. is trying to
bring the wildly popular Internet technology known as Weblogs, or
"blogs" as they're better known, to the enterprise as a content
management and collaboration tool.
The Providence, R.I.-based company announced this week new versions of
its TeamPage Enterprise Weblog technology specifically designed for
marketing professionals conducting competitive intelligence and market
research....
Free
Speech -- Virtually
Legal Constraints on Web Journals Surprise Many 'Bloggers'
By Jennifer Balderama, Washington
Post, December 19, 2002; Page E01
...[S]ince many bloggers have no
background in publishing, they often come to the medium unaware of the
rules that apply, and complaints are becoming more common. Many people
publish as if they were untouchable, assuming that because what they
write appears in a virtual world, it won't come back to burn them in
the "real" world. Many overlook the fact that their rants can
potentially reach millions of people when posted on the Internet.
6:09:23 PM 
|
|
SC Magazine, October 2002
Part
One: Sound ROI with security benefits
Do you always know who is accessing your company's systems? Illena
Armstrong examines how you can guard your doors
"All of the vulnerabilities that arise
from poor administration, whether they relate to access management or
appli cation management, generally create two categories of threats -
external vulnerabilities and internal vulnerabilities," he [Adrian
Viego, CTO, Business Layers] says. "The external threats are easy to
classify, but internal threats are significantly more serious. Beyond
weak account credential policies, it is not uncommon that many companies
issue their users significantly more privileges than they actually
require to perform their duties."...
As organizations increasingly expose their internal infrastructure to
web, wireless and other access mechanisms, their ability to protect that
infrastructure with a perimeter defense system declines significantly.
"This blurring of internal and external users causes the
access-management problem to grow exponentially," says Gabriel Waters,
director of security strategy with Novell. "For example, in the
traditional model where they must[sigma] manage the number of users times the
number of applications, the problem is relatively linear. However, they
now face multiple access devices, times the types of users, times the
number of applications, hence the exponential problem. Adding to this
problem is the fact that many of these systems will have their own
identity store/user database, their own policy around which users can
access them and their own administrator."...
Part
Two: Authorizing your users
Richard Mackey investigates whether secure and simple ways of
authorizing users are currently feasible
While knowing who is gaining access to
your network is absolutely necessary, it is far from sufficient. Once
authenticated, making sure that each user is only allowed access to the
appropriate files, applications or services, is often the missing link.
This is where authorization by consistently managing fine-grain
access to resources comes into play.
6:13:56 AM
|
|
Broadband
wars I. The battle to build and keep broadband neutral is an
important issue to me. I go a couple rounds on the FT.COM site about it here.
Maybe it is just me, but these debates are never satisfying. The thrust
of Tom Hazlett's final response is that cable is much better than DSL,
so don't regulate cable. On cable, see the next post. But even ignoring
the logic of the claim, we should not forget: However good cable is,
does it begin to match the broadband options available elsewhere. Again,
here in Japan: 100 mbs for $50 a month; 12 mbs for about half that.
What cable company comes even close to that? [Lessig Blog]
Broadband
wars II. If you want to get an idea about how bad the broadband
future will be, you need only read this letter
from the National Cable & Telecommunications Association describing
how good (from their perspective) the broadband future will be. NCTA
wrote this letter to the FCC to criticize a letter filed by the
Coalition of Broadband Users and Innovators. This Coalition, which
includes Microsoft and Disney, told the FCC that it needed to assure
that broadband remain neutral[~]that carriers not be permitted to
discriminate in the service they offer based on the application or
content the user wants. This letter from the Coalition was great and
important moment in the debate about broadband. I've been critical of
Microsoft and Disney in the past, but they deserve all the credit in the
world for taking up this fight. If neutrality is lost in the broadband
platform, that means the end-to-end design of the internet will be lost
as well. And that would profoundly weaken the potential for innovation
and growth on the network. The NTCA letter confirms the worst. After
arguing at first that they are providing neutral service anyway (a
claim which itself is false: have you checked your TOS re: servers?),
they then go on to defend their right to discriminate however they
wish. And they defend it by pointing to Microsoft: If Microsoft is
allowed to cut special deals with partners, why shouldn't the cable
companies? The level of ignorance here is astounding. We are four years
into this debate, and apparently the cable companies have yet to even
understand the argument they are attacking. The difference between
Microsoft bundling products at the edge of the network, and the cable
companies bundling preferred service in the middle of the network, is
the difference between an end-to-end network and the Ma Bell network
the internet replaced. This letter confirms that the cable companies do
not begin to understand the value of end-to-end neutrality. It confirms
precisely the claim of the Coalition: that left to its own devices, the
dominant broadband provider in America (slow and expensive though it
may be) sees no reason in the world why it shouldn't corrupt the basic
internet design. Robert Sachs, president of the NCTA, is an
extraordinarily bright man. He is also apparently a very busy man, for
there is no way he could have written the letter he signed. The NCTA
should spend some more money hiring press people who have taken the
time to understand the arguments they want to rebut. Meanwhile, we,
broadband users of America, need to wake up to the broadband
environment four years of do-nothing-ness have produced. [base "]Open access[per thou]
has been a failure in the United States (though a total success in
Japan, where competition has driven prices down and service up: 100 mbs
at $50 a month); the cable companies are, as we said four years ago,
the single dominant provider of broadband in America. Their service is
slow; it is getting more expensive; and now they claim the right to
corrupt the basic design of the network they increasingly own. My last
book was pessimistic: It was not pessimistic enough. [Lessig Blog]
5:28:29 AM
|
|
cc
launch. After many hours with lawyers, and many productive hours
with tech-types, and lots of imagination by many, an idea first
suggested by Hal
Abelson and Eric
Eldred will come to life on Monday, December 16: Creative Commons.... [Lessig Blog]
CC
Launches. So just back to Japan after a quick trip to San Francisco
to help many many extraordinary people launch Creative Commons. The event was
fantastic, especially the Flash
that explains our Licensing Project.
Watch the flash, and check out the site. We are eager for feedback, and
for ideas about where to go next. I can't begin to describe how grateful
I am to everyone who made this happen. I am especially grateful to
creators who have run with the licenses right away[~]heroes such as Cory
Doctorow (who will be releasing under a CC license the entire text of
his amazing book, Down
and Out in the Magic Kingdom as a free, freely redistributable
e-book on January 9th. But buy the book as a present. It is the best
novel I've read in years), and Peter Wayner (who has licensed his Free for All under a CC
license), and Tim O'Reilly (the first adopter of the "Founders'
Copyright"). It is no accident that those who understand this are
those closest to technology. Our challenge will be to find ways to
explain it so other creators get it as well. If you have ideas, or ideas
for new projects, please let us know. Our single, overarching aim:
build the public domain, by building projects that expand the range of
creative work available for others to build upon. Meanwhile, thanks to everyone who
helped make this happen. And check on this channel
for more news as the project develops. [Lessig Blog]
CC
for software?. Matt
Croydon wonders about how CC
licenses will interact with software. In a careless earlier version of
this, I said they won't. Sam Ruby suggests
the most I could mean by that is that our energy will be directed
elsewhere. Indeed, that's the most I mean. We share RMS's concern that
there is a proliferation of licenses in software. And our view was that
there was a dearth for other creative content. Thus we start outside the
software world. But creative reuse of creative content is what CC is
all about. My apologies for any confusion. [Lessig Blog]
5:21:52 AM
|
|
Economist: Profits at last. The Economist reports that some Internet firms are making profits by charging for content.
It is not just the Internet-shopping boom that has delivered an early Christmas gift to investors. Behind the scenes, a more significant trend can be discerned. A year ago, the collapse in online advertising sales threatened any business[~]from portals such as AOL and Yahoo! to online magazines such as Salon[~]that had built itself around banner-advertising sales. Yet necessity is the mother of invention. Deprived of advertising dollars, some Internet firms have proved surprisingly adept at unearthing alternative sources of income, from subscriptions for digital content to fees for online services. [source: Scott Loftesness]
4:25:05 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Russ Savage.
Last update: 5/8/06; 8:55:41 PM.
|
|
|
