Hack Attack
Two stories that simply have to get some attention this month: the SONY hack, and WiFi.
I'll start with the easier of the two: WiFi. What is it? Why is it important? Should the city of Syracuse implement coverage — free throughout the city?
First, what it is: "Wi-Fi is the name of a popular wireless networking technology that uses radio waves to provide wireless high-speed Internet and network connections. A common misconception is that the term Wi-Fi is short for "wireless fidelity," however this is not the case. Wi-Fi is simply a trademarked phrase that means IEEE 802.11x." (Webopedia) The "x" there stands for whatever version is now employed (a, b, etc.)
Your cell phone operates in two modes: WiFi or Cellular. WiFi has a more limited range, and is supplied by some form of router. Cellular has a wider range and is supplied via a cell tower. Both are using radio waves to connect your device to the servers that are supplying data. Today, voice communication is just that: data. Your voice is digitized and transmitted.
When you are near an open WiFi router (little transmitter), it's generally a good idea to use that mode of communication for internet access, as it won't use up bandwidth on your phone's data plan. However, when you're out and about and not near an open WiFi access point, you can rely on your phone's cell communication channel to get your internet connection for you.
Right now, cell phone plans typically offer you three things: voice, text, and data. Texting, or Short Message Service (SMS). Texting is messaging sent via a phone device (cellular). So while instant messaging (IM) can be accomplished over your computer (landline or WiFi connected) text will go over your mobile phone using the same general protocol. Thus, your cell phone bill will reflect minutes spent on voice, on text, and on data.
You won't save minutes or money by linking up with a router and using the local WiFi connection when you text or talk, but you will save data usage. However, you do have to be careful when you have your WiFi option turned on, as your phone will be constantly seeking a WiFi connection, and that uses up battery life. So you may want to turn this option off when you're not near a safe WiFi connection.
Now, as to free WiFi: as we all are aware, there are many places that offer WiFi as part of their service — restaurants, service stations, hospitals and doctor's offices. Generally, many places where wait time is a factor will offer its patrons a free WiFi connection so that they can use their mobile devices freely while they cool their heels. Sometimes this will still require a password; most hotels, for example, will restrict their WiFi to paying guests, and require that you log on to the hotel's portal. Other places will simply have an open WiFi option (you won't see the little lock when you see the list of available networks).
The city of Syracuse is contemplating offering free, city-wide WiFi. This option would enable many people, schools, and others who typically can't afford it, access to the Internet. It also makes the city more attractive to small businesses, as well as potential home buyers, as it offers an enticement to live and do business within the city limits.
Some people are concerned about open access, as we've heard so much about hacking - and this leads me to the next topic.
SONY's epic hack. Well, SONY didn't do the hacking. It is believed that North Korea, aided by the Chinese, hacked into SONY's computers, stealing all sorts of data, including embarrassing emails and the private email addresses of notables — like movie stars, producers and directors.
The upshot was that SONY cancelled the upcoming, controversial film, The Interview, which centered around a plot to kill Kim Jong-Un, North Korea's easily taunted head of state.
Not too long ago, I received a new credit card, as it turns out my provider's servers had been hacked, as well, potentially compromising accounts. Users were warned to watch their next bill or two to be sure there were no spurious charges associated with their accounts.
Computer hacking is a fact of life. The more we use - or are required to use - personal information on the Internet, the more vulnerable we become to this kind of activity. That it will happen is inevitable. How it is handled is key.
In the case of the credit card company, we are assured that charges not made by us will not be enforced (though how, especially at this time of year, and especially given Internet purchases, this can be handled is beyond me). In the case of SONY, a whole new chapter in hacking has begun.
The threat, of course, was that if SONY released the picture, theaters showing it would possibly be bombed or otherwise threatened.
In actuality, the two things — the hacking, and the threat to theaters — are entirely separate issues.
As noted above, hacking can happen — to any organization, at any time. Typically, it's done for financial gain of some kind. The hackers are looking for credit card numbers; social security numbers (for identity theft); proprietary information from a corporate entity, such as trade secrets, stock tenders, or other insider information; or any other information from which they can profit.
We've now experienced a few incidents of hacking or stealing information for the purpose of public embarrassment or political pressure, as with the Wikileaks scandal.
This incident is both, and neither. In actuality, the hacking itself was not a big deal. The movie had been publicized; the trailers had been seen and, in fact, the movie had been screened. There was no "news" there, and no secrets revealed. The silly emails that were shared were embarrassing but not fatal.
The real issue was the threat to attack theaters showing the film. But consider: any theater, or stadium, or concert hall, can be attacked at any time, making Americans less free to go where they want to do and do what they want to do. Freedom of movement is a hallmark of American life. It doesn't require hacking into the movie-maker (or sports team, or band/orchestra) server to threaten to bomb a venue.
What's really happening here is a whole new chapter in "warfare." Yes, we were shown that our "private" correspondence and information can be grabbed, and grabbed not just by script kiddies looking to make a name for themselves in the cyber-world, or thieves trying to steal massive amounts of money. Rather, "rogue states," or enemies of the U.S. and our political process can — and will — get into not our state's information, but the information of private corporations. Ostensibly, this information could be used against the corporation in that money could be siphoned off, projects in development could be revealed, and so on. But the threat to life and limb itself didn't require hacking. The hacking was more of a hand gesture; insulting, but not fatal.
The media, naturally, went into overdrive on this. Who should have said what to whom and when?
SONY was in a can't-win situation: if they went ahead and released the movie, and anything happened at any theater, their liability would be clear and deadly. Some suggested (laughably, to my mind) that the government indemnify SONY, and not let US Citizens be bullied by such threats. Of course the US Government could suggest such a tactic, but ultimately, the courts would be clogged up with lawsuits one way or another, should anything have happened. The US Government could compensate SONY for the loss of potential revenue from the film. But how would such a number be quantified?
A better suggestion — and as it turns out, one that will be undertaken as of this writing — is that SONY simply show the film via streaming so that there is no concentration of viewers in any one location. People who want to show solidarity and an odd form of patriotism can watch the movie, and make a hand gesture back at the North Koreans (and Chinese) or whoever did the hacking and made the threats.
The entire thing is both murky, and frightening. The notion that our comings and goings — significantly, and in a way pitifully in the arena of entertainment — can be controlled by threats of violence, is alarming. As noted above, it's always possible to attack a large gathering of people. What's different this time is both the public threat, and the insolence of the hack. It's a way of making us, as a nation, look like bumbling idiots.
It's an interesting and challenging condundrum: the hack is ultimately a childish flip-off. The threat of attack is potentially serious. To react either way, you are giving credence to both.
In the final analysis, SONY has probably taken the only road it could by offering the movie free via streaming. And perhaps the president could have stayed home (on watch), watched the movie himself (and made sure to have lots of popcorn and photos of himself doing so), and we would have ensured both our safety, and to a degree, our dignity, were as protected as possible.
I'll start with the easier of the two: WiFi. What is it? Why is it important? Should the city of Syracuse implement coverage — free throughout the city?
First, what it is: "Wi-Fi is the name of a popular wireless networking technology that uses radio waves to provide wireless high-speed Internet and network connections. A common misconception is that the term Wi-Fi is short for "wireless fidelity," however this is not the case. Wi-Fi is simply a trademarked phrase that means IEEE 802.11x." (Webopedia) The "x" there stands for whatever version is now employed (a, b, etc.)
Your cell phone operates in two modes: WiFi or Cellular. WiFi has a more limited range, and is supplied by some form of router. Cellular has a wider range and is supplied via a cell tower. Both are using radio waves to connect your device to the servers that are supplying data. Today, voice communication is just that: data. Your voice is digitized and transmitted.
When you are near an open WiFi router (little transmitter), it's generally a good idea to use that mode of communication for internet access, as it won't use up bandwidth on your phone's data plan. However, when you're out and about and not near an open WiFi access point, you can rely on your phone's cell communication channel to get your internet connection for you.
Right now, cell phone plans typically offer you three things: voice, text, and data. Texting, or Short Message Service (SMS). Texting is messaging sent via a phone device (cellular). So while instant messaging (IM) can be accomplished over your computer (landline or WiFi connected) text will go over your mobile phone using the same general protocol. Thus, your cell phone bill will reflect minutes spent on voice, on text, and on data.
You won't save minutes or money by linking up with a router and using the local WiFi connection when you text or talk, but you will save data usage. However, you do have to be careful when you have your WiFi option turned on, as your phone will be constantly seeking a WiFi connection, and that uses up battery life. So you may want to turn this option off when you're not near a safe WiFi connection.
Now, as to free WiFi: as we all are aware, there are many places that offer WiFi as part of their service — restaurants, service stations, hospitals and doctor's offices. Generally, many places where wait time is a factor will offer its patrons a free WiFi connection so that they can use their mobile devices freely while they cool their heels. Sometimes this will still require a password; most hotels, for example, will restrict their WiFi to paying guests, and require that you log on to the hotel's portal. Other places will simply have an open WiFi option (you won't see the little lock when you see the list of available networks).
The city of Syracuse is contemplating offering free, city-wide WiFi. This option would enable many people, schools, and others who typically can't afford it, access to the Internet. It also makes the city more attractive to small businesses, as well as potential home buyers, as it offers an enticement to live and do business within the city limits.
Some people are concerned about open access, as we've heard so much about hacking - and this leads me to the next topic.
SONY's epic hack. Well, SONY didn't do the hacking. It is believed that North Korea, aided by the Chinese, hacked into SONY's computers, stealing all sorts of data, including embarrassing emails and the private email addresses of notables — like movie stars, producers and directors.
The upshot was that SONY cancelled the upcoming, controversial film, The Interview, which centered around a plot to kill Kim Jong-Un, North Korea's easily taunted head of state.
Not too long ago, I received a new credit card, as it turns out my provider's servers had been hacked, as well, potentially compromising accounts. Users were warned to watch their next bill or two to be sure there were no spurious charges associated with their accounts.
Computer hacking is a fact of life. The more we use - or are required to use - personal information on the Internet, the more vulnerable we become to this kind of activity. That it will happen is inevitable. How it is handled is key.
In the case of the credit card company, we are assured that charges not made by us will not be enforced (though how, especially at this time of year, and especially given Internet purchases, this can be handled is beyond me). In the case of SONY, a whole new chapter in hacking has begun.
The threat, of course, was that if SONY released the picture, theaters showing it would possibly be bombed or otherwise threatened.
In actuality, the two things — the hacking, and the threat to theaters — are entirely separate issues.
As noted above, hacking can happen — to any organization, at any time. Typically, it's done for financial gain of some kind. The hackers are looking for credit card numbers; social security numbers (for identity theft); proprietary information from a corporate entity, such as trade secrets, stock tenders, or other insider information; or any other information from which they can profit.
We've now experienced a few incidents of hacking or stealing information for the purpose of public embarrassment or political pressure, as with the Wikileaks scandal.
This incident is both, and neither. In actuality, the hacking itself was not a big deal. The movie had been publicized; the trailers had been seen and, in fact, the movie had been screened. There was no "news" there, and no secrets revealed. The silly emails that were shared were embarrassing but not fatal.
The real issue was the threat to attack theaters showing the film. But consider: any theater, or stadium, or concert hall, can be attacked at any time, making Americans less free to go where they want to do and do what they want to do. Freedom of movement is a hallmark of American life. It doesn't require hacking into the movie-maker (or sports team, or band/orchestra) server to threaten to bomb a venue.
What's really happening here is a whole new chapter in "warfare." Yes, we were shown that our "private" correspondence and information can be grabbed, and grabbed not just by script kiddies looking to make a name for themselves in the cyber-world, or thieves trying to steal massive amounts of money. Rather, "rogue states," or enemies of the U.S. and our political process can — and will — get into not our state's information, but the information of private corporations. Ostensibly, this information could be used against the corporation in that money could be siphoned off, projects in development could be revealed, and so on. But the threat to life and limb itself didn't require hacking. The hacking was more of a hand gesture; insulting, but not fatal.
The media, naturally, went into overdrive on this. Who should have said what to whom and when?
SONY was in a can't-win situation: if they went ahead and released the movie, and anything happened at any theater, their liability would be clear and deadly. Some suggested (laughably, to my mind) that the government indemnify SONY, and not let US Citizens be bullied by such threats. Of course the US Government could suggest such a tactic, but ultimately, the courts would be clogged up with lawsuits one way or another, should anything have happened. The US Government could compensate SONY for the loss of potential revenue from the film. But how would such a number be quantified?
A better suggestion — and as it turns out, one that will be undertaken as of this writing — is that SONY simply show the film via streaming so that there is no concentration of viewers in any one location. People who want to show solidarity and an odd form of patriotism can watch the movie, and make a hand gesture back at the North Koreans (and Chinese) or whoever did the hacking and made the threats.
The entire thing is both murky, and frightening. The notion that our comings and goings — significantly, and in a way pitifully in the arena of entertainment — can be controlled by threats of violence, is alarming. As noted above, it's always possible to attack a large gathering of people. What's different this time is both the public threat, and the insolence of the hack. It's a way of making us, as a nation, look like bumbling idiots.
It's an interesting and challenging condundrum: the hack is ultimately a childish flip-off. The threat of attack is potentially serious. To react either way, you are giving credence to both.
In the final analysis, SONY has probably taken the only road it could by offering the movie free via streaming. And perhaps the president could have stayed home (on watch), watched the movie himself (and made sure to have lots of popcorn and photos of himself doing so), and we would have ensured both our safety, and to a degree, our dignity, were as protected as possible.
Comments