======================================================================== THE GRIPE LINE: ED FOSTER http://www.infoworld.com ======================================================================== Tuesday, September 7, 2004
LATEST WEBLOG ENTRIES ======================================================================== * Uncompromising Positions * IBM Software Maintenance Isn't Rational * The DMA, the FBI, and Spam ADVERTISEMENT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Grid technology the future face of computing Grid technology is the face of computing moving forward, providing the best implementation for standardizing, consolidating and improving the flexibility of the IT infrastructure. Don't be left behind, watch this new webcast. http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6FB:2B910B2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- UNCOMPROMISING POSITIONS ======================================================================== Posted September 6, 11:33 PM Pacific Time Readers had a number of strong things to say about my Identifying Compromised Websites story ( http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6EC:2B910B2 ), but they were by no means of one mind in their views. Some said websites absolutely have a duty to inform visitors of the possibility they were infected on a previous visit, while others argued that any form of website liability could irreparably damage the Internet. "At one time they hid the results of hospital death statistics," one reader wrote. "Their excuse was that hospitals would not accurately report statistics if the information was made public. Eventually, they concluded that if the law required the hospitals to report information and the hospitals lied to protect themselves, then that constituted FRAUD and would be prosecuted. Simple problem; simple solution. So the argument for the cover-up of sites compromised by Download.ject does not hold water. They are not divulging the names to protect them from their own malfeasance of not updating servers with the latest Microsoft patch. Shame on them and shame on the government for protecting them." But would forcing websites to disclose their security failings have a chilling effect? "Yes, I would like to know if I've visited a compromised site," wrote another reader. "But, I believe the security burden lies with the client, because the alternative would destroy the reason for my Internet use in the first place. Just as software liability threatens free software, so website liability threatens independent web sites. If that kind of accountability becomes mandatory, then the barrier to entry for website authors will be raised. Instead of merely being able to post content, you'll have to be bonded and insured, etc. In effect, the Internet will cease to be a voice for the masses and instead promote only corporate mantra. As with every preceding period in history, only the rich will have a voice, for they can afford the liability insurance." Still others though felt that such liability concerns were groundless. "The notion that websites would face lawsuits for not downloading the latest Microsoft patch is hogwash, plain and simple" wrote another reader. "You could no more sue a company for running their site with buggy software than you can sue Microsoft for selling the buggy software in the first place ... The industry is just using this as an excuse to preserve the code of silence." Well, all I know is that I wish more companies would take the approach one reader recalled a client of his had once adopted. "A few years ago, my client's PCs were infected with a virus, which promptly mailed itself out to his address book," the reader wrote. "He and his people had ignored my warnings and advice about protection, of which even a minimal dose would have prevented the incident. I got him cleaned up and he straightened up his security. And then he did something that surprised me. He called every one of his customers, personally -- hundreds of them -- to apologize and to offer any assistance he could in cleaning up. ... For the full story: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6ED:2B910B2 IBM SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE ISN'T RATIONAL ======================================================================== Posted September 5, 1:29 PM Pacific Time When a software company is acquired, do its customers always suffer as a result? Lending some credence to that idea is the lament of a long-time Rational Software customer over the changes he's seen since that company was acquired by IBM. "We've been using several of Rational Software's developer tools for years - ClearCase, Rose, and PurifyPlus mainly," the reader wrote. "They had always been one of the better companies to deal with, and they really understood the issues that developers and developers' IT staffs face. Phone support was great -- I could be talking to a very knowledgeable engineer within a minute usually. Pricing was fair, and I don't think we experienced any maintenance increases over a period of four-plus years. Patches and upgrades were clearly documented and generally installed without a hitch. Accurate renewal quotes were sent out a couple months in advance. The website was only fair, but information was pretty easy to get to." All that started to change in February 2003 when IBM completed the acquisition of Rational. "The wheels have pretty much fallen off after the IBM acquisition," the reader wrote. "The proverbial straw that broke my back was the recent quote I received for maintenance. ... For the full story: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6F6:2B910B2 THE DMA, THE FBI, AND SPAM ======================================================================== Posted September 4, 11:02 AM Pacific Time Does it bother anyone else that the Direct Marketing Association is now playing a central role in funding government anti-spam enforcement activities? It sure doesn't sit right from my point of view. As the nation's foremost proponent of direct marketing, the DMA has been a major player in the spam debate for many years. Along with a few of its more influential members like Microsoft and AOL, it virtually dictated the atrociously counterproductive Can Spam Act of 2003 to Congress, in large part to pre-empt much stronger state anti-spam laws. Over the last few months, it has been dribbling out information ( http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6F5:2B910B2 ) about Operation Slam Spam, an "industry/law enforcement cooperative effort" with the FBI that the DMA is funding to the tune of $500,000. Now, most of the publicity that Operation Slam Spam has garnered so far suggests that the DMA's money is earmarked primarily for bringing the perpetrators of phishing scams to justice. Since my readers and I have been whooping and hollering ( http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6E9:2B910B2 ) for some time now about the need for more enforcement action against phishing, how can I possibly object to this? After all, beggars can't be choosers, and it's clear that our law enforcement agencies are woefully ... For the full story: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6F7:2B910B2 Contact Ed Foster at [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Ed Foster's "Reader Advocate" column, http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6F8:2B910B2 , can be read exclusively at his GripeLog Web site: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6FC:2B910B2 ======================================================================== ADVERTISE ======================================================================== For information on advertising, contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] UNSUBSCRIBE/MANAGE NEWSLETTERS ======================================================================== To subscribe, unsubscribe or change your e-mail address for any of InfoWorld's e-mail newsletters, go to: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6E7:2B910B2 To subscribe to InfoWorld.com, or InfoWorld Print, or both, or to renew or correct a problem with any InfoWorld subscription, go to http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6FA:2B910B2 To view InfoWorld's privacy policy, visit: http://newsletter.infoworld.com/t?ctl=88D6F9:2B910B2 Copyright (C) 2004 InfoWorld Media Group, 501 Second St., San Francisco, CA 94107 This message was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/BCfwlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kumpulan/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
