Cyberlaw Central

I’ve been much more active lately on Twitter than here on the blog, for a variety of reasons. Most of them are work related, it’s nice to be busy! With the limited time I’ve had, it’s been much easier to post quick links to interesting articles on Twitter. For those of you who don’t follow me there (here’s a link), here are some of the more interesting tweets from the last month:

- New WPA encryption hack – To be secure, wifi users should switch to WPA-2 or WPA-AES standards. http://is.gd/2C7FL
- RT @CanadianPI: The security risks of “Free Public WiFi” http://bit.ly/9INRj
- More SCO lawsuit news coming, thanks to the 10th Cir. overturning the 2007 decision re: ownership of UNIX – http://is.gd/2xY4C
- RT @HostExploit: The US-CCU issues a report on a one year old cyberwar because? http://bit.ly/j7wkH
- RT @windycitizen: 7 crimes you can commit that cost less than downloading music. http://windycitizen.com/wdzF
- Wow, predictive blacklisting could block internet attacks before they happen – http://is.gd/2oAkL
- Interesting study of the M. Jackson death coverage on Twitter – “Detecting Sadness in 140 Characters.” http://is.gd/2osvD
- Reading about the latest Facebook privacy lawsuit, it’s a laugher. http://is.gd/2mPbG
- Reading how yesterday’s Twitter and Facebook outages were DDOS attacks against one user in the Republic of Georgia – http://is.gd/26O8b
- From NetworkWorld, a Latvian ISP was cut off by its upstream provider due to ties to cybercrime. http://is.gd/24Tmq
- The acting Cybersecurity Czar has stepped down. http://is.gd/22a0V

Enjoy,
Kevin

Welcome to 2009! Postings here have been light at the end of 2008 due to other considerations, such as work and sleep. Let’s see if 2009 brings the planned regular posting schedule. I’ve still been active online, just not here. You can follow me on Twitter at @cyberlaw.

The most interesting link to share recently is for the final report of the Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency. The conclusions seem rather predictable at first glance, but there are some good nuggets in the report itself. In particular, in the “Regulating for Cybersecurity” section which begins on Page 49 (Page 55 in the downloadable PDF from the above link), there are recommendations for increasing the use of secure protocols by mandating that the government only contract with entities that use secure protocols themselves.

Another item I’ve been remiss in doing is posting my recommendations for Blawg Review of the Year in 2008. As a past host in 2008, I am eligible to post my favorite reviews. The winner will then be tabulated and announced later. My list, in no particular order other than numerical, are as follows:
- Blawg Review 148, hosted by Brett Trout. I gotta love Internet memes, even Rickrolling.
- Blawg Review 182, hosted by newly minted lawyer Dave! Gulbransen. Go ahead, take Dave’s test.
- Blawg Review 189, hosted by Colin Samuels. What can I say except that Colin does fabulous work.

Good job, all. I host again on May 25th…

That’s enough ramblings for one day, more regular posts will (hopefully) follow.

ICANN has today approved an expansion of the top level Internet domains from the familiar ones (.com, .net, .org, etc) to an unlimited array of choices. All that will be required is a showing of technical ability to manage the requested domains. Details are currently sketchy regarding the application process, it appears that ICANN has yet to approve the final implementation steps. For more, including a limited FAQ, here’s a link to ICANN’s press release.

The results of the FCC’s wireless spectrum auction are of particular interest to more than just people in the telecom industry, as it will significantly impact how people access the Internet for years to come.

It’s no big surprise that Verizon is the big winner, but I especially enjoyed reading Susan Crawford’s analysis of the issue of what Verizon will do with it entitled “Why Block C Matters.” Susan is an ICANN board member, as well as a law professor at Cardozo Law School. I agree with her that it confirms the existing business model of handheld devices being used to access the Internet.

It also means that we’re going to have to deal with Verizon’s dominance in this segment of the market.

It also means that we’re going to have less options for wireless access than we otherwise would have had if others would’ve won the bidding.

It also means that we’re going to have a company who can bring market pressures to bear to discriminate against other carriers, all while promising in public to have an “open” network.

I wonder if we will someday look back on this day as the day in which the wireless Internet changed.

Here’s a link to the last post, written before his death, that blogger Andrew Olmstead wanted published in the event he died while serving in Iraq. He posted at the site Obsidian Wings as G’Kar, a character from Babylon 5. His choice of that character resonates with me as a fan of the show. The post is interspersed with some great quotes spoken through the series by that character as well as a few others, if you’re not already a fan of the show I can’t recommend it highly enough. And, it’s all available on DVD for you newbies.

What makes this particularly worthy of posting here are Andrew’s comments on the ephemeral nature of the web, that his last words will last only so long as someone continues to pay the hosting bill.

Ryan Blitstein asks this question in a great article at the Mercury News, here is the link.

To summarize, the difficulties include legislators who don’t understand the technology, as well as companies that fight good laws because the proposed law hurts their bottom line. Special interests, as usual, appear to have more sway than implementing good laws to fight spyware or phishing attacks.

To further understand why stronger laws are needed, he’s also written a three-part series on cybercrime. Here are links to Part I, Part II, and Part III. (Hat tip to Bruce Schneier for linking to Part III today.)

These laws are needed, and are needed soon.

The first of the IPLAC High Tech Committee’s lunchtime discussions will be held on November 16, 2007 at John Marshall Law School from 12-1:30. As the chair, I can say that I am really excited to have this come together.

If you can join us, please do! The details on how to register are in the flyer.

—
Please join the IPLAC High Tech Committee on November 16, 2007 from 12:00-1:30 PM at John Marshall Law School for a presentation by Christopher J. McGeehan entitled “Secondary Trademark Infringement Liability on the Internet: A Comparison of American and International Approaches.” This is the first presentation of our Lunchtime Discussion series. The members of the High Tech Committee will lead a discussion of this topic after the presentation. The registration fee of $15.00 covers the cost of a box lunch and a beverage.

Here are a few short items of interest I’d like to pass along:

1) Conrad Jacoby has a great article on the electronic discovery of employee-owned computer equipment that was published at llrx. Here is a link.

2) If you’ve not already seen Michael Wesch’s video called Information R/evolution, check it out now. It only takes a few minutes, but is well worth it.

The Bill of Rights Defense Committee has put together a 26-minute video entitled “FBI Unbound: How National Security Letters Violate Our Privacy”, which can be viewed online or ordered on DVD.  It features interviews with Lisa Graves, Bruce Fein, and George Christian, who actually received one of these letters and can talk about it.

Hat tips to EFF and BeSpacific for the link.

Cyberlaw Central Commentary:

National Security Letters are the hidden, secret ways that ISP’s can be ordered to turn over customer information without judicial oversight.  Authorized by the Patriot Act, these are intended for anti-terrorism activities, but are capable of significant abuse.  This video does a good job explaining what they are, I highly recommend watching.

In preparation for the November 7, 2006 elections, check out the Technology Voter Guide prepared by CNET News.com.  The link leads to the analysis page, from which you can click on the map to see how your representatives in your state voted on technology issues. Then, you can click on each person’s name to see their votes on particular bills.  What a wonderful resource, I’ll be sure to study it further before voting.