Author Archive

3D news animators take on the TSA

by:

You knew this one was coming: Next Media Animation, the Taiwan-based company that creates hilarious videos lampooning current news stories, has tackled the backlash in the U.S. against “enhanced” airport security patdowns.

An Internet-fueled revolt against x-ray body scanners and the, um, intimate searches that occur when you decline to be scanned inspired NMA to come up with this:

Really, you gotta love any video that features a nun doing kung fu and a federal employee offering a private lap dance.

[Spotted via Boing Boing.]

Opt Out Day: Saying no to naked airport scans

by:

Many travelers who pass through the nation’s overcrowded airports as the holiday season begins are going to be subjected to a new kind of security procedure. They’ll be asked to walk into a machine that will allow a Transportation Security Administration employee to see what they look like naked.

The idea, say TSA officials, is to look for hidden weapons or explosives. But the promoter of National Opt Out Day says it’s just “security theater,” and he’s urging a rebellion.

At OptOutDay.com, the site operator ( identified as Brian Sodegren) writes about the choice travelers have when confronted with a full-body scan: Either consent to being seen naked by a TSA worker in a nearby room, or having a thorough pat-down in which genital areas are probed.

It’s the day ordinary citizens stand up for their rights, stand up for liberty, and protest the federal government’s desire to virtually strip us naked or submit to an “enhanced pat down” that touches people’s breasts and genitals.  You should never have to explain to your children, “Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it’s a government employee, then it’s OK.”

Opt Out Day is Nov. 24, the day before Thanksgiving, and it involves choosing the pat-down rather than the body scanner. A physical search takes a lot more time than the scan, and the idea is to cause long delays and send a message to the feds. Given that this is one of the busiest travel days of the year, enough folks opting out are sure to cause problems.

The site features videos that show exactly what TSA officials see when you step inside one of their machines. And yes, the video below includes x-ray nakedness, so click only if such things don’t offend you.

If you’re traveling on Nov. 24, which kind of search will you choose?

Courage! A new meaning for ‘overcoming hurdles’

by:

Watching this video of a girls’ hurdle race gone horribly awry, I can’t decide whether to laugh or cry. Of course, having done not much better than this on the hurdles in junior high doesn’t help matters . . .

What the heck. I think I’ll laugh.

[Spotted via Gawker.]

Sesame Street does ‘An App for That’

by:

Apple recently was granted a trademark on “there’s an app for that,” the catchphrase used in its iPhone commercials. Indeed, the line has been cropping up everywhere, to the point that it has reached official cliche status.

Want proof? “There’s a app for that” yields about 849,000 results in a Google search.

Now, Sesame Street has crafted a song featuring Muppets singing “there’s an app for that”, touting a non-existent product call the iPogo.

You can watch below. We are not responsible for any earworms that may ensue.

[Spotted via Mashable.]

Firesheep: Making Web-connection hijacking easy

by:

One of the joys of living in the Internet age is the increasing ubiquity of Wi-Fi hotspots. More and more businesses – particularly those where consumers congregate – are offering Wi-Fi access. It’s often free, as well as being free of any password requirements or encryption.

While that’s convenient, it’s also dangerous. Security experts have long warned that connecting to a non-encrypted hotspot leaves you vulnerable to attack. It’s a warning that most Wi-Fi users gleefully ignore, as they sign in to check their Facebook walls, scan e-mail messages or browse their Twitter streams.

It’s even more dangerous if you’re not making secured connections to the websites themselves. Sites that use a secure, encrypted connection have https in their Web address – rather than just http – and show a lock icon in most browsers.

In the past, you could take some comfort in the fact that it requires some skill to launch one of these attacks. Most people are honest, and even more people are clueless as to the hackery needed to access someone else’s online accounts.

Firesheep changes all that. It’s a Firefox extension that makes it ridiculously easy to log into certain sites as another user. It’s as simple as this:

1. Launch the Firesheep extension in a Firefox sidebar.
2. Click the Start Capture button.
3. See who’s connected to which sites.
4. Double click on one of those connections.
5. You’re logged in as someone else on that site.

Ian Paul at PCWorld has a good explanation of how Firesheep works.

Firesheep is basically a packet sniffer that can analyze all the unencrypted Web traffic on an open Wi-Fi connection between a Wi-Fi router and the personal computers on the same network. The extension waits for someone to log in to any of the 26 sites listed in Firesheep’s database. When you log in to Amazon, for example, your browser’s Amazon-specific cookie communicates with the site and contains personally identifying information such as your user name and an Amazon session number ID.

As your browser swaps cookie information back and forth with the Website a third party can hijack that communication and capture info including your user name and session ID. Typically, the cookie will not contain your password. But even without your password, the fact that Firesheep has snagged your session cookie means that a hacker can, at least in theory, access your account and gain virtually unrestricted access. If the hacker got your Yahoo Mail cookie they could send an e-mail; if it was Facebook they may be able to post a message; and so on. Any operations that require your password, however — such as accessing your credit card information on Amazon — should not be possible using Firesheep.

On Wednesday, I downloaded Firesheep and started testing it to see if it was as dangerous as some have said. During last night’s episode (MP3) of Technology Bytes, a Houston-based radio show I co-host, I was able to see some of my compadres’ connections using the extension. At one point, I logged into a co-host’s Facebook page as him.

It freaked me out so much, I immediately logged out.

I mentioned this on the air, and co-host Jay Lee grabbed the extension, installed it, and then used it to log into the Twitter account of J.R. Cohen, who was our guest in the studio. Jay wasn’t as timid as I – he tweeted through Cohen’s account that he’d hijacked it.

Although security experts note that Firesheep doesn’t give you access to a user’s password, it may give you access to settings that let you change it. If the site doesn’t require you enter an existing password to change it to a new one, an account owner could be locked out.

Why would someone create a tool like this? Seattle developer Eric Butler said he wrote Firesheep to point out that too many websites don’t provide an encrypted, https connection, leaving their users vulnerable.

And even when an encrypted version of a site is available, it’s often not the default. For example, most people get to Twitter by way of http://twitter.com. But Twitter also has https://twitter.com, which is secure. You should use the latter URL when connecting.

Facebook, on the other hand, has https://facebook.com, which takes you to your Wall when you log in. But as soon as you click on a link to go to another part of the site, you revert to http://facebook.com. A Facebook rep told TechCrunch the company is working on a fully encrypted version of the site, but it will take months to finish.

So what can you do to protect yourself? NetworkWorld suggests subscribing to a low-cost VPN service that provides a secure connection anywhere on the Net. However, that may be a layer of complexity that’s daunting to some users.

Another solution is to fight the Firesheep extension with another Firefox extension. HTTPS Everywhere lets you sign in to many mainstream sites using an https connection. While it doesn’t cover every site, and it’s only available for Firefox, it’s a start.

You could, of course, avoid public Wi-Fi altogether, which is inconvenient but secure. Or, you could opt for a cellular provider’s 3G or 4G data plan, which is expensive.

There’s no easy answer, at least not until all Web operators wise up and offer fully encrypted access to all their sites.

Did Charlie Chaplin film a cell phone in 1928?

by:

Irish filmmaker George Clarke thinks he’s stumbled across something rather strange: A film clip from a 1928 Charlie Chaplin film that appears to show a woman talking on a mobile phone.

The image comes from behind-the-scenes footage shot during the premiere of The Circus at Mann’s Chinese Theater in Hollywood. Clarke noticed that a woman – or what may be a man dressed as a woman – crosses the shot with her left hand held to the side of her head. As she turns toward the camera, there appears to be a small, square, thin, black object in her hand. She’s clearly talking.

Clarke thinks the simplest explanation is that you’re looking at a time traveler talking on a cell phone.

See for yourself. Clarke begins showing the footage at about 2:37 into this YouTube video.

Of course, there were no cell phones in 1928. And even if this was a time traveler, there would be no cell towers to handle the call. The original AT&T, however, did exist in 1928, so if this is someone using a mobile phone, you know the network connection was almost certainly lousy . . .

Then again, any civilization advanced enough to travel through time doesn’t need a cell tower, since the iPhone XXXIV will have a new feature: A personal wormhole.

I found this item on film critic Roger Ebert’s blog. Clarke says in the video that no one’s been able to give him a good, non-science-fiction explanation of what the woman is really doing. He should read the comments under the Ebert entry – there are plenty of suggestions:

By Jackie Anderson on October 25, 2010 1:19 PM

Electronic hearing aids were invented long before 1928, but were still hand-held devices at the time. The woman’s is shaking it in frustration, I don’t think it’s a time traveler even though that would be way cool.

By Clancy on October 25, 2010 1:25 PM

I don’t see anything that this gentleman sees in this clip. Mostly, he’s presuming an awful lot, and seems rather foolish because of it.

A much more likely explanation for the woman’s behavior is that she’s shielding her eyes or face from the sun (check out the shadows) while also holding something in her hand. She could be holding anything, such as a case for glasses or cigarettes. It is presumptive to suggest either, but much more realistic than a time traveler in drag (talking on a “device” that would not work due to the lack of a supportive infrastructure).

By Brian S on October 25, 2010 1:51 PM

Looks to me more like the person is clutching a collar against the wind, and what looks like a phone when the person turns his/her head is a trick of the light, a shadow coming off the hands against the face. I think that’s a more likely explanation than a time traveler using a communications device of some kind. The talking could just be the kind of filling in you ask extras to provide–a person muttering to him/herself while walking down the street.

By Jaime on October 25, 2010 1:56 PM

1924 Siemens pocket sized carbon microphone/amplifier device:

http://hearing.siemens.com/sg/10-about-us/01-our-history/milestones.jsp?year=1924

This reminds me of the recent flap regarding a modern-era hipster apparently captured in a photo taken in 1941. Being a sci-fi junkie, I’d really like to believe time travelers walk among us, but in these particular cases, I think I’ll pass.

Be careful what you name your computer files

by:

Geek Squad: The Enforcers Houston Chronicle file photo

Got any file names on your computer’s hard drive that use double entendres? Do you get coy with what you call photos, documents or video files?

Given a recent ruling by a federal judge, you may want to go for a more, um, conventional naming convention . . .

Forbes.com’s Not-So-Private Parts blog reports on an Alabama case in which racy filenames on a computer brought for repair to the Geek Squad at a Best Buy resulted in the techs turning the PC over to law enforcement:

When the Geeks did their diagnostic scans of the computer, they found a pesky virus that appeared to be linked to specific files on Melton’s computer. Those particular files had names of a “very explicit nature,” says a judicial opinion in the case . . ., which led the Geeks to contact the police as they suspected they’d found child porn.

The suspect in the case, Corey Beantee Melton, argued that he had not personally downloaded the files, suggesting they appeared on his hard drive through peer-to-peer file-sharing programs. That defense didn’t fly, and he was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

But on appeal, Melton argued his Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure had been violated. The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals begged to differ and upheld his conviction.

The Court determined that Melton’s expectation of privacy for explicitly-named files was unreasonable.  “Based on the purpose and goals underlying the statutes criminalizing the possession of child pornography, it is clear that, at the point when officers were looking at the filenames on the computer, any expectation of privacy in files that had names that were highly suggestive of child pornography was not an expectation that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable,” wrote Presiding Judge Kelli Wise, in deciding that the officers had not violated Melton’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

Of course, if you don’t have kiddie porn or other illicit material on your PC, you shouldn’t have much to worry about. And, hopefully, you’re smart enough not to drop off a porn-laced portable for repair at a Best Buy in the first place.

But you may now want to think twice before naming your files in a suggestive manner. Getting cute could earn you some unwanted legal attention.

Presidential seal falls down, goes boom

by:

The Seal of the President of the United States is a common sight, and is often affixed to whatever podium the Commander-in-chief is using.

Usually, though, it’s affixed a lot more securely than it was Tuesday night, when President Obama spoke at Fortune magazine’s “Most Powerful Women Summit”.

As he was exhorting the need for modern skills in the workplace, the seal took a tumble from the lectern.

The fall happens about 40 seconds into the video embedded above.

After a startled “Whoops!”, Obama recovered nicely.

“That’s all right, all of you know who I am,” he quipped, though he allowed that somebody “back there” – gesturing at the backdrop behind him – was probably “sweating bullets”.