The government argued that attaching the tiny device to a car’s undercarriage was too trivial a violation of property rights to matter, and that no one who drove in public streets could expect his movements to go unmonitored. Thus, the technique was “reasonable,” meaning that police were free to employ it for any reason without first justifying it to a magistrate, the government said.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

Four city police officers accompanied two Apple employees to the home in south central San Francisco, the city’s police department said in a statement on Friday.

The police statement didn’t say when the search took place or name the device that went missing. However, the department’s press release was sent in a document titled “iphone5.doc.”

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

Scotland Yard says it has nabbed two more people that it says are members of the group; one of them is said to be connected to crimes committed under cover of the online identity “Kayla.”

In a statement, police did not release the names of the two men arrested. They are aged 20 and 24, and one comes from the town of Mexborough, while the other comes from Warminster. The arrests were conducted in cooperation with local police and the FBI. In one case, a home was searched and computer equipment taken.

It was the second pair of arrests in as many days. On Thursday, police arrested two others as part of the growing worldwide investigation into the activities of LulzSec and Anonymous.

And yet the hacker crimes continue, seemingly unabated. Anonymous has dubbed today “Texas Takedown Thursday” or #TTT on Twitter. The target: Law enforcement agencies in the state of Texas, in apparent retaliation for the arrests earlier this summer of 16 people said to be associated with Anonymous.

The group says it has leaked about three gigabytes worth of email and other data from private email accounts it says belong to certain police officials in Texas. It also claimed credit for defacing a Web site belonging to the Texas Police Chiefs Association.

It’s the second such targeting of police officers in a particular state. In June, the group went after the Arizona State Police, posting home addresses of officers.

LulzSec and Anonymous, in their various contortions, have had a busy summer. The group and its sympathizers started out making Sony’s existence miserable, on the heels of an attack on the PlayStation network; the attack brought the network down for several weeks.

BART authorities said they shut down parts of a wireless phone network in four of the system’s stations as part of a tactic to slow down the efforts of protesters, and that they did it because protesters had said they would use mobile devices to “coordinate their disruptive activities.” Such a disruption, BART officials argued, could lead to overcrowding on train platforms and cause “unsafe conditions,” fears of which justified the move.

The National Journal reports the FCC is looking into the shutdown of wireless service, but as yet is only “collecting information” about the actions that were taken. “Any time communications services are interrupted, we seek to assess the situation,” FCC spokesman Neil Grace said.

The protests were in response to the fatal shooting by BART police on July 3 of a man who allegedly pulled a knife on the officers. BART officials say they’re on solid legal ground. Meanwhile, another protest is planned for tonight.

In a speech to Parliament today, Cameron appeared to endorse the idea that posts on Facebook and Twitter, and communication via BlackBerry Messenger, helped fuel the violence that crippled his country for several days. And he floated the notion of a government-sanctioned crackdown.

From his prepared remarks:

Mr Speaker, everyone watching these horrific actions will be stuck by how they were organised via social media.

Free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for ill.

And when people are using social media for violence we need to stop them. So we are working with the Police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.

And here, wags will point out that British cops are also using social media, because they posted photos of looters on a Flickr page – here’s one the cops say was taken from a looter’s own Twitter post – and isn’t that a double standard, blah blah blah. Don’t waste your energy debating that one.

If a crackdown moves forward, though, it will put services like Facebook and Twitter in a tricky position: The services’ standard line is that they’ll comply with requests from cops and courts in whatever country they operate in when it comes to subpoenas and the like. But actually censoring communication is a different matter. BlackBerry maker Research in Motion has already said it would work with cops trying to trace text messages sent using its service.

Also worth bearing in mind: Freedom of speech is already much more limited in the U.K. than in the U.S.; recall the farcical but somewhat effective effort to prevent U.K. newspapers and Web sites from printing soccer star Ryan Giggs’ name this spring.

UPDATE: Here’s a response from Twitter spokeswoman Rachel Bremer: “Our only comment is that if the government would like to talk about this we’d be happy to listen.”

The PR firestorm kicked off last week after a woman, who goes by the name of EJ, blogged about how the apartment she rented out using Airbnb was completely trashed and vandalized.

Airbnb was able to confirm last week that a suspect is in custody, but now a whole new crop of customers with negative reviews have popped up with their own bad experiences here and here.

Hoping to defuse the situation, Brian Chesky, Airbnb’s CEO and co-founder, is sending a letter to its users today to apologize and to announce a new $50,000 guarantee that will protect the property of hosts who book through its Web site. (Yes, EJ will qualify; it will apply retroactively to any hosts who have reported incidents prior to today.)

The entire letter is embedded below.

It will be important to watch whether these steps will be enough to slow the questions regarding the company’s entire business model, which is a little bit like Craigslist but offers the appearance of safety measures.

In the letter, the San Francisco-based start-up, which just raised $112 million, says it hopes this can be a valuable lesson to other businesses “about what not to do in a time of crisis, and why you should always uphold your values and trust your instincts.”

In addition to the new guarantee, it will also have a 24-hour customer hotline beginning next week; it has also added an in-house task force dedicated to reviewing listings for suspicious activity and says you can contact the CEO directly at brian.chesky@airbnb.com.

Here’s the entire letter:

Last month, the home of a San Francisco host named EJ was tragically vandalized by a guest. The damage was so bad that her life was turned upside down. When we learned of this our hearts sank. We felt paralyzed, and over the last four weeks, we have really screwed things up. Earlier this week, I wrote a blog post trying to explain the situation, but it didn’t reflect my true feelings. So here we go.

There have been a lot of questions swirling around, and I would like to apologize and set the record straight in my own words. In the last few days we have had a crash course in crisis management. I hope this can be a valuable lesson to other businesses about what not to do in a time of crisis, and why you should always uphold your values and trust your instincts.

With regards to EJ, we let her down, and for that we are very sorry. We should have responded faster, communicated more sensitively, and taken more decisive action to make sure she felt safe and secure. But we weren’t prepared for the crisis and we dropped the ball. Now we’re dealing with the consequences. In working with the San Francisco Police Department, we are happy to say a suspect is now in custody. Even so, we realize that we have disappointed the community. To EJ, and all the other hosts who have had bad experiences, we know you deserve better from us.

We want to make it right. On August 15th, we will be implementing a $50,000 Airbnb Guarantee, protecting the property of hosts who book through our website. We will extend this policy to EJ and any other host who may have reported their home damaged while renting on Airbnb in the past or future.

We’ve built this company by listening to our community. Guided by your feedback, we have iterated to become safer and more secure. Our job’s not done yet; we’re still evolving. In the wake of these recent events, we’ve heard an uproar from people, both inside and outside our community. Know that we were closely listening.

Today we are launching a new safety section of the website (www.airbnb.com/safety) with the following offerings:

Airbnb Guarantee

Starting August 15th, when hosts book reservations through Airbnb their personal property will be covered for loss or damage due to vandalism or theft caused by an Airbnb guest up to $50,000 with our Airbnb Guarantee. Terms will apply to the program and may vary (e.g. by country). This program will also apply retroactively to any hosts who may have reported documented incidents prior to August 1, 2011.

24-Hour Customer Hotline

Beginning next week, we will have operators and customer support staff ready to provide around the clock phone and email support for anything big or small.

2x Customer Support Team

Since last month we have more than doubled our Customer Support team from forty-two to eighty-eight people, and will be bringing on a 10-year veteran from eBay as our Director of Customer Support next week.

Dedicated Trust & Safety Department

Airbnb now has an in-house task force devoted to the manual review of suspicious activity. This team will also build new security features based on community feedback.

Contact the CEO

If you can’t get a hold of anyone or if you just want to contact me, email brian.chesky@airbnb.com.

We’ve also added several other safety-related features to strengthen the trust and confidence of our community:

Safety Tips

Suggestions for both guests and hosts on how to utilize our tools to better inform your decisions.

Verified Profiles

Our updated user profiles chronicle their history on Airbnb, giving you more insight than ever about a potential host or guest. Along with standard social information, you’ll also see if a user has verified their phone number, connected their Facebook account, and whether the majority of their reviews are positive or negative. And as always, you can read their reviews and references.

Customized trust settings

We now give hosts the ability to set custom trust parameters for bookings; those who don’t meet the specified requirements will be unable to make a reservation. Selections for Trust Settings include: verified phone numbers, profile descriptions, location information, with more coming soon.

Product suggestions poll

Have more ideas on improving safety? Now, you can submit and vote on the best ideas through our new product suggestions poll.

Many more product updates will be released in the coming days. In addition to these new features, there are safeguards already in place to protect the community. These include over 60 million Social Connections, private messaging before booking, a secure reservation and payment system and transaction-based reviews. We also provide verified photographs, fraud detection algorithms, and flagging capabilities.

These steps are just the beginning. Improving the safety and security of our system is ongoing. Although we do have these measures in place, no system is without some risk, so we remind you to be vigilant and discerning. As a member of the community, you have invaluable experience that we hope to draw upon to improve our system. If you have any ideas or feedback, please share them with us at www.airbnb.com/safety.

What’s made us proud during this trying time is the response of our community. Emails of support to EJ poured in; many hosts offered her a place to stay in their homes. It’s been inspiring to see that Airbnb can really bring out the best in people. Like Airbnb, the world works on the idea that people are good, and we’re really in this together.

When we first started Airbnb, I told my mom about our plans for the business and she said, “Are you crazy? I’d never do that.” But when I told my late grandfather he said, “Of course! Everyone used to stay in each others’ homes.” We’re bringing back this age-old idea with new technology. Now each day, you and the rest of the community are creating meaningful connections around the world.

Thank you for being part of our community.

Sincerely,

Brian Chesky
CEO, Co-founder
Airbnb
brian.chesky@airbnb.com

This morning, News Corp. CEO and majordomo Rupert Murdoch, his son James (who is also a top company exec) — as well as former employee and full-time lightning rod Rebekah Brooks — march on down to the British Parliament to answer questions from a committee there about the ever-growing PhoneGate scandal.

For those living under a rock, News Corp. is embroiled in ever more serious controversy about who knew what and when (also where, why and how much) in the hacking of phones of a myriad of well-known people in the U.K. by its News of the World tabloid newspaper.

Besides celebrities and politicians, that has included the voicemails of a murdered girl, an appalling act that has galvanized public opinion and the weak spines of legislators into action in this inquiry.

It’s sordid, it’s ugly and it makes for what could be an explosive event, starring the man who brought you “Titanic,” Glenn Beck, “Glee” and, most recently, the sale of Myspace.

There’s no question, getting the 80-year-old Murdoch on the ropes will be the aim of the committee members holding the hearing, and how one of the world’s most famous and legendary media moguls performs — or does not — will be a big deal to both interested observers and News Corp. shareholders.

By way of full disclosure, that’s not me, but this site is owned by Dow Jones, which is owned by News Corp. In other words, somewhere up the corporate food chain, Murdoch is my boss.

In any case, that has never stopped me or AllThingsD.com from telling it like it is, so here is the liveblog of what is sure to be a doozy of a media event:

6:36 am PT:: It all starts for the Murdochs, as soon as the former Scotland Yard head John Yates has completed questioning about the police’s obvious bungling of the various investigations over the years.

Rupert Murdoch and his son, James Murdoch, are on, looking grave and dressed in grey.

Sitting behind them are Rupert Murdoch’s wife, Wendi Deng, and his top adviser at News Corp., Joel Klein, who is heading up the phone hacking scandal internally at the company.

The hearing — in a room that looks like a high school debate could take place there — starts off politely enough.

But the first question is directed toward James Murdoch about his clearly incomplete investigation when phone hacking allegations were first made many years ago. He begins with an apology.

“These actions do not live up to the standards of News Corp.,” says the younger Murdoch.

He is interrupted by his father, Rupert Murdoch, who notes rather dramatically: “This is the most humble day of my life.”

The questioner quickly asks the obvious query, after James Murdoch claims News Corp. was not in full possession of the facts when execs had told a previous committee there was no reason to believe there was more widespread hacking.

Were News Corp. execs lying?

James Murdoch continues to insist that the bulk of evidence came out — “real evidence” — in later civil trials. And also, that News Corp. is now investigating the situation fully.

He throws around words like “proactive action” and “transparency,” which is probably cold comfort now to those hacked when things were less clear to News Corp.’s senior management.

Now up, Rupert Murdoch, who is asked quickly about statements he made about not tolerating wrongdoing and who had lied to him at News Corp. about the phone hacking.

Apparently, he “didn’t know” a lot about the hacking that took place, while also defending the non-hacking employees of his company.

But the questioner is still on him about exactly what he did know about the situation, which seems to be — at least according to his testimony — a lot of I-don’t-knows.

6:53 am: It continues about what Rupert Murdoch knew and when he knew it and what he did. Or not.

As Rupert Murdoch keeps up with this tone of not being clued in to what have turned out to be critical events, James Murdoch wants to keep jumping in with the details, which he is eager to impart.

“At what point did you find out criminality was endemic at News of the World?” asks the questioner.

Rupert Murdoch does not like the word endemic, but stresses that he was “shocked, appalled and ashamed” by the case of the murdered girl, Milly Dowler.

The questioner seems frustrated by Rupert Murdoch’s answers, which are, for the typically razor-sharp media mogul, unusually slow.

Like a persistent terrier who wants to perform, James Murdoch is back again offering to serve up the deets.

7:04 am: Now, it is onto the closing down of News of the World: Was the tabloid shut down because of the criminality?

“We had broken our trust with our readers,” says Rupert Murdoch. “We felt ashamed for what had happened.”

A new questioner is on, with a bizarre query about why Rupert Murdoch came in the back door of the Prime Minister’s house at 10 Downing Street on a recent visit there.

It’s a cloddish effort to show him as a powerful puppetmaster to pols, but only serves as a punch line.

Back on track, with questions about whether there was hacking in the U.S., which Rupert Murdoch said he could not believe had happened.

More questions about how badly the company acted, which came down to the questions about whether he was “ultimately” responsible for the hacking.

“Nope,” says Rupert Murdoch, who keeps insisting he relied on others, some of whom apparently “misled” him.

It’s an astonishing admission and, really, excuse, given he has been chairman, CEO and a very strong leader of News Corp. for more than a half-century.

7:16 am: A new questioner, who asks who decided to close down News of the World. It was Murdoch himself, his son and other execs.

Next up, why did News Corp. pay off a victim of hacking, which James Murdoch did without informing his father or the News Corp. board.

James Murdoch essentially points out that it is typical to do this in companies of the global scale of News Corp.

These are apparently very busy, busy, busy people, who do not seem to have time to notice how such juicy and best-selling scoops might have been magically produced by News of the World.

Onto ethical conduct guidelines, which News Corp. has in a pamphlet form, says James Murdoch, but pages which some at the company have obviously never cracked.

Rupert Murdoch is asked again about his culpability in the case, which he continues to maintain he does not shoulder the blame.

James Murdoch does note that the company “will think more forcefully … about our journalism and ethics.”

Given the situation, in which every day brings a new revelation of bad acts by News Corp. employees, this promise of better behavior seems to be a case of much too little and very, very late.

Rupert Murdoch still uses the opportunity to stress the need for a free press, despite its excesses.

7:31 am: More about the payments to settle with phone hacking victims and how soon the company realized the problems were more widespread.

James Murdoch talks about how he might have acted differently had he known more then as he does now.

“If we knew now what we knew then,” says James Murdoch, “we would have taken more action and moved more aggressively.”

But what else is he going to say? It’s a could-have, would-have, should-have line of questioning that is eliciting very little in the way of true information.

Finally, a good point about “willful blindness,” which is a term from the Enron scandal about avoiding knowing about problems you really should have known about.

“Is that a question?,” asks James Murdoch. It is a statement, actually, and a decent enough one.

“We didn’t do that,” says Rupert Murdoch firmly this time.

Still, soon enough, Rupert Murdoch is insisting he was not as involved as people have imagined him to be with the management of his newspapers.

A new questioner is pressing this important point, but Rupert Murdoch is not biting on a query about his legendarily hands-on managing style.

“I’d say, ‘What’s doing?’” he explains about his conversations with editors, but adding he might not have been told about payoffs to phone hacking victims.

The questions are in the deep weeds here, but it’s still interesting that Rupert Murdoch continues to maintain that his life was too busy to wallow in the details, however controversial and important those details might be.

7:55 am: More and more don’t-knows pile up and up in a giant mountain of acts perpetrated by someone somewhere, but not the Murdochs.

“I can tell you I was surprised as you were,” says James Murdoch about certain payments to various hackers and those who were hacked.

Was it Les Hinton, who then ran News International and later Dow Jones, from which he recently resigned?

Could be! Maybe! Mistake were made! Who knows!

Well, someone does!

It moves onto Brooks, the tarnished News International exec and editor whom Rupert Murdoch does note he still trusts. Finally, some certainty!

Brooks is definitely one of the more compelling characters in this drama, although the media focus on her striking red hair color seems odd and vaguely sexist, as if she is some flame-haired she-devil from media hell. She might certainly be guilty in this mess, but her fabulous hair has nothing to do with it.

(Rupert’s mane is grey, by the way, and James’ is brown, if you really need to know.)

Fascinatingly, Murdoch’s backing of Brooks has been strong and consistent, despite intense criticism of her by many in this scandal.

The payment of legal fees of perpetrators and payments to the victims in the hacking seems to obsess one questioner, who wants News Corp. to stop doing it.

Murdoch says he’d like to if contracts did not preclude that, which essentially means News Corp. will keep up forking over the legal fees and payments.

8:12 am: The attention turns to how James Murdoch found out about the various emails that showed there was more evidence of hacking than was first thought about and what he felt about it.

He says very little, noting that the matter is under police investigation. It’s not don’t-know now, but can’t-say.

The hearing is beginning to feel a little rope-a-dope, with the Murdochs apologizing and taking blows, saying very little — either claiming lack of knowledge or lack of ability to comment about the ongoing police inquiry — and tiring out the questioners.

It is a classic tactic of the boxing champion Muhammad Ali and it works in the ring.

Whether that will be the case with PhoneGate remains to be seen, but it certainly has made what could have been a more explosive hearing much less so.

Instead, it seems to have turned into a what didn’t the Murdochs know and when didn’t they know it hearing.

On questioner gets this irony. “That’s frankly unsatisfactory,” he says about the Murdochs continuing shock and surprise at the thorny situation they find themselves in.

Maybe it seems a little hard to believe, but the persistent story from James Murdoch is that they were told by their lawyers, the police and others that nothing was awry once the initial phone hacking investigation was complete and only found out about the larger problem in later civil lawsuits.

But, asks the questioner to Rupert Murdoch, should his editors and managers at News of the World have known about it?

Of course, they should have.

But, once again, the legendary media baron, who made his fortune and fame in disseminating news and information across the world in newspapers, on television, on satellite and on the Web — at least for now — can’t say.

So, was he “kept in the dark” about the situation? Rupert Murdoch acknowledges he might have asked more questions, although he noted his British newspapers were only a small part of his massive empire.

But, he adds, “Anything that is seen as a crisis comes to me.”

Well, not the phone hacking crisis, it seems.

But, they’re sorry. So sorry. And, of course, humbled.

8:54 am: Suddenly, there is a disturbance, in which someone seems to have possibly attempted to accost the Murdochs.

But it is not clear what has happened, as the hearings are suspended for 10 minutes.

James Murdoch leaps up quickly to protect his father, which he has been doing in this hearing verbally already, where the strategy seems to be to let him largely do all the talking.

Even faster on her feet and with arms raised toward a man in a plaid shirt and carrying a pie plate with shaving cream is Rupert Murdoch’s wife, Wendi.

The man seems to have managed to get some of the foam on Rupert Murdoch, but Wendi Deng appears to have partially thwarted her husband from receiving a full pie in the face.

It’s the first striking visual of this hearing, protecting the patriarch and the king of the empire from harm, no matter what.

Here is a video of the incident:

According to Britain’s Channel 4: “As the man was being led away in handcuffs escorted by a single police officer, he refused to give his name, saying: ‘As Mr Murdoch himself said, I’m afraid I cannot comment on an ongoing police investigation.’”

9:09 am: The room is cleared, so it is only the Murdoch crew behind James and Rupert Murdoch, and now the committee is even more solicitous.

Rupert Murdoch is without his jacket and his wife is being commended for her most excellent left hook.

Still, it’s back to business and the questioner does zero in on a major disconnect over how two media execs as famously aggressive and involved as the Murdochs were so passive in this hacking situation.

It “was a terrible shock,” says James Murdoch.

The same is said about what would be even more disturbing and recent allegations of the hacking of the victims of the 9/11 bombings.

Both father and son say there is no evidence of this so far, but they were surely looking into it.

While it certainly did not come through in what have largely been feckless questions from the committee, the final questioner does correctly ask the pair if they might want to pay more attention.

The last question is for Rupert Murdoch and finally gets to the real query everyone wants to ask.

Noting Murdoch is “captain of the ship,” she asks if he has considered resigning.

“No,” answers Murdoch firmly.

“Why not?” she presses.

“People let me down and it’s for them to pay,” says Rupert Murdoch. “But I think, frankly, I am the best person do clean this up.”

He finishes up with a statement about being sorry, how he was also betrayed and how phone hacking and bribery is wrong.

“Saying sorry is not enough, things must be put right,” he says.

Finally, something we do know.

With the device, which attaches to an iPhone, an officer can snap a picture of a face from up to five feet away, or scan a person’s irises from up to six inches away, and do an immediate search to see if there is a match with a database of people with criminal records. The gadget also collects fingerprints.

Until recently, this type of portable technology has mostly been limited to military uses, for instance to identify possible insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

The arrests come only three days after police in Spain arrested three alleged members of the group in that country, apparently finding one of the servers used in the attacks in one of the houses raided. Anonymous retaliated in typical fashion, launching a distributed denial-of-service attack against the Web site of the Spanish National Police.

Anonymous stands accused of attacking the Web site of Turkey’s board of elections right before national elections held there Sunday. The group is also said to have attacked the Web site of the Turkish Directorate of Telecommunications in protest over Internet censorship. The ruling AK Party plans to introduce a new filtering system that the country’s Internet users will be required to use.

France and Spain aren’t the only European countries who have arrested alleged members of Anonymous. In January, police in the United Kingdom arrested five people ranging in age from 15 to 26 in an early morning raid following attacks against Mastercard and PayPal among others.

And if all that weren’t enough hacker news for you, LulzSec, the mysterious group that has been hacking Sony Web sites right, left and center, is still on the loose. Having made a Web security start-up famous in the course of its self-styled campaign of chaos, or what it would call lulz, over the weekend it released 26,000 user names and passwords to an adult site. Today it took to taunting game publisher Bethesda Softworks via its Twitter feed. The company just released a new game, Brink , and the group hinted that its next exploit will have something to do with that game.

Bethesda, we broke into your site over two months ago. We’ve had all of your Brink users for weeks. Please fix your junk, thanks! ^_^

June 13, 2011 9:57 am via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@LulzSec

The Lulz Boat

Here the WikiLeaks leader comments on Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg recently beating him out for Time magazine’s Person of the Year.

The faux Assange is not happy that social networking beat out classified documents.

This skit–the third so far–seems to be getting funnier each time:

A national poll released today by Common Sense Media asking how well social networks protect kids online produced an answer that should come as a shock to exactly no one:

Not very well, at least according to parents.

A full 75 percent of them gave social networking sites such as Facebook a negative rating for the task.

About 2,000 parents were polled by the nonprofit media organization, as well as 400 teens, who also gave thumbs down to social networks’ ability to police themselves.

There will be a big roundtable discussion on the topic in Washington, D.C., this morning, which will include Common Sense Media head Jim Steyer, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz and Deputy Secretary of Education Anthony Miller.

Along with the poll results, San Francisco-based Common Sense Media said it will also announce the launch of the “Protect Our Privacy–Protect Our Kids” campaign to help parents protect kids’ reputations and personal information online.

I love the smell of impending privacy legislation in the morning!

Already from Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts: “As the House author of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, I remain intently interested in ensuring that children are not targeted online and their privacy is strictly protected. Twelve years after the bill was signed into law, entire new technologies and industries have emerged that could put children’s safety at risk, making a legislative update necessary. I look forward to introducing such legislation to bring COPPA into the 21st century.”

Thus, here is more for pols to chew on: The bulk of those surveyed are more concerned with online privacy than they were five year ago (another obvious one); parents do not believe Web sites, including search engines such as Google (GOOG), should share the location of kids (count me in on that one too!); and teens think their friends overshare (you think?).

But instead of me telling you, just read it all here in top-line results for adults and teens, as well as in the official press release:

Final CSM adults topline

Final CSM teen topline

Privacy Poll Results and Campaign Launch

Earlier today, I wrote a piece about how I was one of the 114,000 AT&T customers whose email and device identity numbers had been easily exposed earlier this week via a flaw in the way the company registered the Apple (AAPL) iPad 3G for cellular access.

In my post, I complained that I had yet to hear from the telecom giant about the security snafu and release of my personal email address, which AT&T (T) had yet to acknowledge to those impacted.

Well, the company does read tech blogs, so this morning, this communication from a PR honcho was sent to my work email, which is available on this site publicly.

Regrets? AT&T has a few:

Hi Kara:

I am writing to apologize that your personal e-mail address was made public. As you know, we fixed the flaw that caused this almost as soon as we heard about it from one of our business customers. But that doesn’t change the fact that your personal information was exposed without your permission. That is something we truly regret.

Nothing is more important to us than protecting the privacy of customer information. You should know that in this case, the only thing compromised was your email address and not, for example, the contents of your email or any other personal information. And as you also know, the problem only affected iPad 3G customers. No other mobile devices or customers were involved.

Thanks very much for your patience. Please let me know if there is anything we can do for you or if you have any questions.

Mark Siegel
Executive Director-Media Relations
AT&T
[Address redacted]
[Work phone number redacted]
[Mobile phone number}
[Email address redacted]

As you can see, I used my crack security system–DELETE!–to save Siegel any incursions into his privacy.

And while I do appreciate the reaching out, I still want to hear–as do others affected–officially from AT&T about exactly what’s what.

Siegel told me in a follow-up email: “We are finalizing our plans for communicating with customers.”

(Suggestion to make us happy: A free iPhone 4 might be a sweet gesture. Only kidding!! Sort of.)

In addition, I am not sure, as he wrote in the initial email, whether it is comforting or not that it was only my email and only my iPad 3G that were violated.

That’s sort of like telling me that only one room of my digital house was broken into, although nothing good was taken, so not to worry.

Actually, if that happened in real life, I would still call the police. That is, if the call on my iPhone didn’t drop.

Again, I kid! Sort of.

A lot of this stuff has been out in one form or another, but the narrative is pretty fascinating. If you plow through the document embedded at the bottom of the post, bear in mind that it’s a tale told by Matthew Broad, a detective in San  Mateo County Sheriff’s office. So it’s possible that other parts of the story, and/or different versions of the same story, may still end up coming to light.

Among the highlights:

• Apple knew that Brian Hogan, the 21-year-old who found the iPhone, had the thing because his roommate, Katherine Martinson, called and told the company he had it. Her reasoning, according to Apple (AAPL) security chief Rick Orloff: “Suspect Hogan connected the stolen iPhone to her computer and she believed that Apple would eventually trace the iPhone back to her via IP addresses. Therefore she contacted Apple in order to absolve herself of criminal responsibility.”
• Martinson told police that Hogan had offered the phone to Gizmodo, AOL’s (AOL) Engadget.com and PC World. While Gizmodo owner Gawker Media had previously said it paid $5,000 for access to the phone, the affidavit is a bit fuzzier. Martinson says Hogan told her Gizmodo offered $10,000 for the gadget and later said he’d received $5,000 from Gizmodo and a total of $8,500. But she wasn’t clear where the other $3,500 came from. “Martinson said Hogan also told her that he will receive a cash bonus from Gizmodo.com in July if and when Apple makes an official product announcement regarding the new iPhone.”
• There’s a long cops-and-robbers interlude where police show up at Hogan’s house, but he takes off and is eventually tracked down at his father’s place. In the end, Hogan and Thomas Warner, another roommate, help the cops retrieve a computer, a flash drive and other equipment they’d removed from their place “in order to ‘protect’” Hogan.
• Apple CEO Steve Jobs did indeed reach out to Gizmodo to ask for the phone back. Here’s editor Brian Lam’s response to Jobs, via email (click to enlarge):

And here’s the entire affidavit, which we’re able to see because a group of media companies, including CNET, Bloomberg, Wired and the Los Angeles Times, petitioned a California judge to unseal it. Gawker Media, via COO Gaby Darbyshire, declined to comment on the affidavit and its contents.

UPDATE: Here’s Gawker’s position, via an email Darbyshire sent Saturday afternoon:

First of all, the warrant and supporting affidavit do not appear to acknowledge the sanctity of the newsroom or even address the serious issues at stake.

Second, the idea that it is a felony trade secret theft to photograph an item that was admittedly left in a bar is ridiculous.

Finally, Gizmodo from the start was attempting to investigate if this item was a genuine prototype of a product belonging to Apple; we believed that confirmation of its authenticity and ownership quite reasonably needed to be made in writing – and once we obtained that, the item was returned immediately.

EFF has a detailed piece on the warrant issue here.

Gizmodo-iPhoneOrder

Here’s a video that is sure to go rocketing around the Web today: A smackdown by Jon Stewart on “The Daily Show” of Apple for its behavior related to the stolen iPhone 4G prototype.

It’s titled: “Appholes.”

That’s gotta hurt.

There’s not much more to be said than Stewart does in a tough attack on the recent door-bashing police raid of a reporter from Gizmodo, which bought the smartphone from the person who allegedly found it in a German beer garden in Silicon Valley.

Stewart began the opening monologue by saying he was a huge fan of Apple (AAPL) and its products, but soon was lacing into the company and blaming it for the messy legal morass.

There are a ton of great lines, although it’s the easiest jibe at iPhone wireless carrier AT&T (T) that is still the funniest: “If you want to break down someone’s door, why don’t you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!”

He ended with a plea to CEO Steve Jobs: “C’mon, Steve, just chill out with all the paranoid corporate genius stuff. Don’t go Howard Hughes on us.”

Then, of course, Stewart asked for Jobs to send him the new 4G: “It looks totally sick.”

Enough said, here’s the video:

Let’s make short work of this: Yesterday, the Justice Department named 15 new Assistant U.S. Attorneys to the Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property program, as well as 20 Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agents, to police intellectual property violations, both domestic and international.

The new FBI agents nearly double the number working on copyright issues and will be part of “intellectual property squads,” located in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Washington, D.C.

Why all the muscle? Pressure from the entertainment industry no doubt.

Here’s the full press release from the DOJ:

Department of Justice Announces New Assistant United States Attorneys and FBI Agents to Combat Intellectual Property Crimes

WASHINGTON, April 26 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/–As part of the Department of Justice’s ongoing initiative to confront intellectual property (IP) crimes, Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary G. Grindler announced today the appointment of 15 new Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) positions and 20 FBI Special Agents to be dedicated to combating domestic and international IP crimes.

These new positions–announced on the 10th annual World Intellectual Property Day–are part of the department’s continued commitment to combat the growing number of IP crimes here at home, and abroad. The new AUSA positions will be part of the department’s Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property (CHIP) program.

“Intellectual property law enforcement is central to protecting our nation’s ability to remain at the forefront of technological advancement, business development and job creation,” said Acting Deputy Attorney General Grindler. “The department, along with its federal partners throughout the Administration, will remain ever vigilant in this pursuit as American entrepreneurs and businesses continue to develop, innovate and create.”

The 15 new Assistant U.S. Attorneys will work closely with the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) to aggressively pursue high tech crime, including computer crime and intellectual property offenses. The new positions will be located in California, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington.

The 20 new FBI Special Agents announced today will be deployed to specifically augment four geographic areas with intellectual property squads, and increase investigative capacity in other locations around the country where IP crimes are of particular concern. The four squads will be located in New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and the District of Columbia. The squads will allow for more focused efforts in particular hot spot areas and increased contact and coordination with our state and local law enforcement partners. The 20 new agents will join the 31 agents devoted to investigating IP crimes who have already been deployed to field offices around the country.

“Theft of intellectual property–from inventions to trademarks and copyrights, to industrial designs and trade secrets–is a worldwide problem. It affects individuals and corporations financially and can threaten public safety. The additional FBI agents will significantly strengthen the efforts of our squads investigating intellectual property rights violations and help bring to justice those who seek to profit from intellectual property theft,” said Assistant Director Gordon M. Snow of the FBI Cyber Division.

Acting Deputy Attorney General Grindler serves as chair of the department’s Task Force on Intellectual Property, which was established earlier this year by Attorney General Eric Holder to coordinate the department’s efforts on IP crimes. The task force focuses on strengthening efforts to combat intellectual property crimes through close coordination with state and local law enforcement partners as well as international counterparts. As part of its mission, the task force works together with the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC), housed in the Executive Office of the President, to implement an Administration-wide strategic plan on intellectual property.

The task force includes representatives from the offices of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, and the Associate Attorney General; the Criminal Division; the Civil Division; the Antitrust Division; the Office of Legal Policy; the Office of Justice Programs; the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee; the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys and the FBI.

World Intellectual Property Day was established by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to recognize the importance of protecting intellectual property rights and enforcing their laws. Each year on April 26th, WIPO and its member states seek to increase public understanding of intellectual property through activities, events and campaigns.

When BoomTown was kibitzing with SurveyMonkey CEO Dave Goldberg about where to meet up this week for a chat to catch up, we decided to forgo the obvious and instead choose the complete Silicon Valley cliche of the moment.

Destination: Redwood City and the now-infamous Gourmet Haus Staudt.

As in, the beer garden behind the German grocery store where the iPhone 4G prototype was snatched off a stool from a birthday-celebrating Apple (AAPL) engineer by person still unknown and sold to the now-police-shookdown Gizmodo gadget site.

In other words, just like going to the Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) or Google (GOOG) garage, but fun and with German beer.

We chatted with a very delightful bartender, who filled us in a bit on the night–about the birthday party, about the funky place being popular with tech folk and about how most patrons believe the smartphone was stolen.

There is a lost-and-found behind the bar, he said, and pretty much everyone returns items left by ale-addled customers.

And, let me just say, if the conspiracy theory types who think Apple planned the whole thing saw this charming, but dowdy, joint, they’d think twice about some fiendish plot by CEO Steve Jobs.

This is a perfect place to lose an iPhone or anything else you can imagine.

In any case, we’ll see how it all plays out in the days ahead.

Until then, although no video was allowed, but here are some lovely snaps from my in-my-possession-despite-the-giant-glass-o-beer 3G iPhone to enjoy (click on the images to make them larger):

Unassuming Front:

Window With Gnome and German Hat-Wearing Lion (Also Beer, Natch!):

Dave Points Out the Obvious:

Dave and the Sign:

More Sign (Nine! No, 11! No, 13 German beers on tap!):

Stools of No Return:

Gemütlichkeit-filled Dave und Bier Nicht Mehr:

Security company McAfee Wednesday morning issued a software update intended to give the computers that it’s contracted to protect a new list of malicious files to block and delete. Somehow a file that is part of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Windows operating system made it on to the list. And when McAfee’s software deleted this file, all hell broke loose.

People all over the country reported that their computers stopped working. Among the victimized organization were a hospital in Rhode Island, police in Kentucky and the National Science Foundation, according to the AP.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Authorities are now offering rewards to informers who provide tips about pornographic Web sites, the state-run Xinhua news agency reports (in English and Chinese).

Internet users who report to the police on Web sites that contain lewd and pornographic material are eligible for rewards ranging from 1,000 yuan to 10,000 yuan, according to a joint statement issued Friday by the China Internet Illegal Information Reporting Center and three other government departments (in Chinese), which provided phone numbers and email addresses for the public to submit information.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

The New York agency monitors blogs, tweets and other online posts to gauge positive and negative “buzz” about celebrities, companies and other topics.

Mr. Woods’s buzz rating was overwhelmingly (91 percent) positive prior to the accident but has since dipped to 74 percent positive, 26 percent negative.

In contrast, David Letterman’s positive buzz rose to 79 percent positive, 21 percent negative, five days after his infidelity scandal broke, up from 76 percent/24 percent. Other celebrities, including Alex Rodriguez, Rihanna and Robert Pattinson, have also seen their ratings hold steady or even rise amid unflattering news reports. Prior to the accident, Mr. Woods had a higher positive-buzz rating than all of them, according to Zeta.

Mr. Woods was injured around 2:25 a.m. Friday after crashing his SUV into a fire hydrant and tree. Although tabloids have speculated that he and his wife, Elin Nordegren, were fighting, the police said that neither alcohol nor domestic-violence claims were involved.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Someone named Justin Bieber, who apparently is a teenage singer, was supposed to appear at the Roosevelt Field mall on Friday, but stayed away because the crowd had become too unruly. Police asked a record label executive to help disperse the horde using the messaging service, and claim he didn’t cooperate. More from Newsday:

Police arrested a senior vice president from Bieber’s label, Island Def Jam Records, James A. Roppo, 44, of Hoboken, N.J., saying he hindered their crowd-control efforts by not cooperating.

He was in custody Friday night, pending charges that could include criminal nuisance, endangering the welfare of a minor and obstructing government administration, Smith said.

“We asked for his help in getting the crowd to go away by sending out a Twitter message,” Smith said. “By not cooperating with us we feel he put lives in danger and the public at risk.”

Slightly confusing, because Bieber’s Twitter account–presumably the one the cops wanted Roppo to use–does indeed show that he asked his fans to leave at 4:30 pm Eastern:

But apparently that was too late:

Here’s what a mall full of unruly Justin Bieber fans looks like, by the way. Not sure how helpful Twitter would have in the face of this:

Aussie police reported on the TV show Four Corners that they had infiltrated the hacking forum r00t-you.org, which has about 5,000 members, by tracking hackers logging in to the site and then raiding the Melbourne home of the site’s administrator. Police had logged into the r00t-you.org forum as the administrator to gather information about other cybercriminals, and told the TV program that they had gained access “fairly seamlessly with no harm to our members with continual and actual significant penetration.”

What the police didn’t realize, though, was that they had failed to set a password on their own database application.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Read the rest of this post

In July, cyclist Christopher Long was charged with resisting arrest after participating in a bike rally through New York’s Times Square. But anyone who saw the video below–and since it has generated more than 1.6 million views on Google’s (GOOG) YouTube, that’s a lot of people–would have a hard time figuring out what Long did to get arrested.

And viewers might also wonder what the city of New York would do about police officer Patrick Pogan, who is the one knocking Long to the ground in the clip.

In September, charges against Long were dismissed. And now Pogan is about to be indicted–presumably for “felony charges of filing false records in connection with the police report that Officer Pogan filed after arresting the bicyclist”–reports the New York Times. Pogan could also be charged with a misdemeanor count of assault, says the NYT.

The Times, via its City Room blog, has been doing bang-up coverage of the story, which is pretty much designed to be consumed on the Web. Check out the fascinating story behind the video clip’s origins, and its journey to YouTube, here.

Beginning Sept. 1, animated beat cops will begin patrolling the nation’s 13 top portals, warning citizens away from material the ruling Communist Party finds politically or morally threatening.

According to the Beijing Public Security Ministry, the Sanrio-esque characters will begin showing up on all sites that are registered with the government by the end of the year. “We will continue to promote new images of the virtual police and update our Internet security tips in an effort to make the image of the virtual police more user-friendly and more in tune with how Web surfers use the Internet,” it said.