Accidental Expert's Web Log

Didn't We Tell You to be Careful?

Microsoft's promised to make security "job one" over a year ago, so it's reassuring to see how much progress they've made in that time. Thanks to the great minds at Microsoft, educational institutions can now order three, full color posters featuring faux street signs bearing witticisms such as, "Do Not Pick Up Viruses" and "Hackers Ahead." For free, even. Hey, it sure beats closing the gaping security holes in the operating system.

Maybe Microsoft is really on the right track here. But personally, I won't be satisfied until a message box pops up every time you start your PC, asking "Are You Sure You Want to Start Up Windows?" Now, there's a warning we can use.

Source: Microsoft Education

Did an Iranian Agent Warn the CIA of 9-11 Attacks?

According to a pair of German secret service agents testifying in the Hamburg trial of alleged terrorist Abdelghani Mzoudi, an Iranian spy tried to warn the CIA of impending terrorist attacks. According to the surprise testimony, an Iranian secret services agent by the name of Hamid Reza Zakeri made the attempt before leaving Iran in 2001, but was ignored.

I don't think we can expect the CIA to voluntarily confirm what this Iranian claims he told them, but it does underline the need for the 9-11 commission investigation to proceed without further foot-dragging from the White House.

Source: The Guardian (UK) - 24 Jan 04

Wars 'useful', says US army chief

Schoomaker wants to free up more troops for combat

The head of the United States army has said that the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have provided a "tremendous focus" for the military.

General Peter Schoomaker said in an interview with AP news agency that the wars had allowed the army to instil its soldiers with a "warrior ethos".

But the general, who became chief of staff in August, denied warmongering saying the army must be ready to fight.

He also said he doubted recruiting more troops was a solution to army stress.

"You aren't stronger because you have more people," he said, adding that expanding the army was similar to pouring water on sand.

Many senior military figures have expressed concern about "overstretch", a problem which has become particularly acute in post-war situations like Iraq which require more troops than combat.

But General Schoomaker says the answer could be to expand combat strength by freeing troops from other assignments.

General Schoomaker said the attacks on America in September 2001 and subsequent events had given the US army a rare opportunity to change.

"There is a huge silver lining in this cloud," he said.

"War is a tremendous focus... Now we have this focusing opportunity, and we have the fact that [terrorists] have actually attacked our homeland, which gives it some oomph."

He said it was no use having an army that did nothing but train.

"There's got to be a certain appetite for what the hell we exist for," he said.

"I'm not warmongering, the fact is we're going to be called and really asked to do this stuff."

Source: BBC - 22 Jan 04

The Republican assault on "political hate speech"

This article is a couple of months old, but is worth considering again as the hyperbole season gets into full swing.

Over the last two months, the Republican Party has begun a systematic effort to label attacks on President Bush by Democratic presidential candidates as "political hate speech," a new piece of political jargon intended to delegitimize criticism of Bush. It appears this strategy will expanded in the coming months -- a recent memo from Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie urged party officials to adopt the term in their rhetoric.

Like "Enronomics" and "Daschlenomics", "political hate speech" is a carefully crafted term designed to create a hazy, non-logical association between two concepts. In this case, the phrase associates criticism of the president with "hate speech," which generally refers to speech that attacks others on the basis of their race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Of course, some rhetoric directed toward President Bush could fairly be described as hateful (just like any politician), but Republicans have used the term sweepingly to try to delegitimize nearly all criticism of Bush, regardless of its substance. This is a key tactic of political jargon, which often seeks to undermine the legitimacy of criticism by invoking hazy but powerful emotional symbols.

[...]

Source: Sinsanity.org, 13 Nov 03 4

Microsoft Bullies 17 Year-Old Web Designer

VICTORIA - A Vancouver Island high school student who does Web site design part-time is locked in a legal battle with one of the biggest companies in the world.

Microsoft Corp. of Seattle, currently valued at $300 billion US, wants Mike Rowe to give up www.mikerowesoft.com as his Internet domain name. The company claims copyright infringement of its name.

Through its law firm in Canada, Microsoft has offered him $10 US -- what Rowe paid last August to register the domain.

The 17-year-old Grade 12 student at Belmont High School near Victoria is taking math and chemistry this semester and hopes to study computer science at the University of Victoria next fall.

"I didn't do this to make money," Rowe said in an interview on Friday. He's serious about trying to keep his on-line name out there in cyberspace, but also admitted "I'm having a little bit of fun."

He thought it would be a "cool" name for his business since it had his name in it and "the same phonetic sound as the famous company Microsoft."

[...]

She wonders why a big company like Microsoft would pursue him.

"I don't know why. It's one of those coincidences of life. That happens to be his name," she said.

It took a while for Microsoft to come after Mike Rowe Soft, but on Nov. 19, Rowe got an e-mail from law firm Smart & Biggar, claiming he was infringing copyright and demanding that he transfer his domain name to Microsoft.

He replied asking for some financial assistance for losing the name and site. He told the lawyers how much work he put into the business and said the domain name was worth at least $10,000.

This week, a fat package of correspondence was couriered to Rowe's home, which claimed that all along his intention was to extract "a large cash settlement."

Customers of Microsoft could also be confused by the mikerowsoft Web page, the letter said.

[...]

Source: Vancouver Sun, 17 Jan 04

Report Urges U.S. to Work On Better Health Coverage

Too many Americans are uninsured, weakening the economy, an advisory group says. It calls for wholesale action by 2010.

WASHINGTON - Because the growing number of Americans without health insurance results in unnecessary sickness and death, weakens the nation's economy and undermines the entire health care system, the federal government must begin working now to expand coverage to all Americans by 2010, the Institute of Medicine said Wednesday.

The nonpartisan organization, which advises the government on health issues, declined to endorse a specific strategy for health care reform. But its new report, "Insuring America's Health: Principles and Recommendations," called on President Bush, Congress and the Democratic presidential contenders to reject piecemeal proposals.

After three years of intensive research and five previous reports on the costs of insurance, the institute concluded that "small steps are inadequate," said Mary Sue Coleman, president of the University of Michigan and co-chair of the committee that wrote the report. "It is time to insure America's health."

The Democratic candidates have released proposals that range from incremental expansions of Medicaid, the government's health care program for the poor, to national health insurance. And Bush is expected next week to renew his call for tax credits to help those without health insurance purchase it.

Earlier this week, the administration dismissed calls for universal coverage.

"It's not realistic," Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson told reporters. "I don't think, administratively or legislatively, it's feasible."

More than 43 million Americans had no health insurance at any time in 2002, according to the Census Bureau. That year's increase in the share of uninsured Americans, from 14.6% in 2001 to 15.2%, was the largest in a decade.

Calling 43 million "a big, big number," former Sen. Bob Dole, the Republican presidential candidate in 1996, strongly endorsed the institute's report.

Dole called on lawmakers from both parties to cooperate on the issue and encouraged voters to demand specific coverage plans from both Bush and the Democratic presidential nominee.

In spite of "the scope of the problem and the [limited resources] of our federal government," Dole said, "I think we have what it takes to get it done. All we lack is the will to get it done."

[...]

Source: Los Angeles Times, 15 Jan 04 (subscription)

Duck ala Scalia

Vice President Dick Cheney and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia spent part of last week duck hunting together at a private camp in southern Louisiana just three weeks after the court agreed to take up the vice president's appeal in lawsuits over his handling of the administration's energy task force.

While Scalia and Cheney are avid hunters and longtime friends, several experts in legal ethics questioned the timing of their trip and said it raised doubts about Scalia's ability to judge the case impartially.

But Scalia rejected that concern Friday, saying, "I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned."

Federal law says "any justice or judge shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be questioned." For nearly three years, Cheney has been fighting demands that he reveal whether he met with energy industry officials, including Kenneth L. Lay when he was chairman of Enron, while he was formulating the president's energy policy.

[...]

The pair arrived Jan. 5 on Gulfstream jets and were guests of Wallace Carline, the owner of Diamond Services Corp., an oil services company in Amelia, La. The Associated Press in Morgan City, La., reported the trip on the day the vice president and his entourage departed.

Source: Los Angeles Times 17 Jan 04 (subscription)

Accidental Expert Blog Recussitated?

For what it's worth, I've decided to wake up this blog, after months of hibernation, as a public clipping file. I haven't got the time these days, or frankly the fortitude, for much in the way of original commentary, but somehow I doubt that yet another opinionated voice will be missed. The fact is, we seem to be in a place where the news more or less explains itself. So here it is, an election year cavalcade of news items that make my head spin. It's the kind of dizziness that begs to be shared.

Speaking of Elections...

This article provides a detailed, step-by-step formula for hacking a vote-tallying application called GEMS, a database developed in Microsoft Access. Presumably, GEMS is employed by most if not all registrars of voters in the US using the Diebold vote-casting system.

Please don't try this in your own precinct, friends. (And you'd better hope nobody else does, either.)

Microsoft to Supply "Homeland Security?"

Okay, so the impulse is to wax sarcastic. but some events just defy satirical treatment -- they're utterly self-satirizing. Do we even need to ask why the company that issues an average of fifty security alerts every year is being given any official responsibility for security, homeland or otherwise... let alone, complete?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Department of Homeland Security said on Tuesday it has awarded a five-year, $90 million enterprise agreement to Microsoft Corp to become the department's primary technology provider.

Under the contract, Microsoft will supply desktop and server software to the newly created department, which has merged parts of 22 different agencies into one entity.

The agreement delivers licensing coverage for about 140,000 desktops and will help the department to establish a common computing environment, Homeland Security said in a statement.

Dell Marketing LP. was selected as the reseller, to provide the day-to-day management of the enterprise agreement, it said.

I should think not, but there we have it.

Federal Elections, A Subsidiary of the Microsoft Corporation

Here's a minor outrage with long-term implications. The Department of Defense recently initiated an on-line voting project called the Federal Voting Assistance Program, permitting members of the uniformed services and other U.S. citizens residing overseas to cast their votes via the Internet in federal, and many state, elections.

But there's a hitch: This Internet voting franchise is restricted to owners of Microsoft Windows computers. The Frequently Asked Questions section of the site doesn't even address the issue of whether the system will ever be expanded to include all computer platforms -- and that's such an obvious question, it's hard to believe that it's never been posed. It's also difficult to imagine a excuse, let alone a rationale, for this limitation. Clearly, it could be little better than an example of pure laziness or carelessness on the part of government officials.

A commercial monopoly is a thing we may as individuals try to avoid. But when voting rights, even in this limited instance, are restricted to owners of a specific commercial product, then that becomes entirely another, far more serious matter. Sadly, this also figures as the continuation of a thoughtless trend within the whole of the federal government to ignore issues of the citizenry's need for open channels of digital commerce with our government, instead of arbitrarily restricted ones.

Drip, Drip, Drip

Remember when the Monica story broke and Bill Clinton thought he could outsmart the nation by equivocating and playing word games? Didn't work, did it? If Clinton would have come clean right at the start, both he and the nation would've been spared a lot of grief. But he was too smart for that. He simply could not bring himself to do it.

Witness now George W. Bush, who pointed his finger at Clinton's wayward encounters with honesty, running his campaign on the premise that he was a man of higher moral character. Today we find him trying to outsmart the nation by shading the truth, then when he's found out, attempting to fix the blame on others. George is definitely not smarter than Bill, and this fancy-dance certainly isn't going to work any better for him. The drip, drip, drip has already begun.

The President has about two days to admit, "I was trying to mislead the American people, it was wrong, and it was entirely my fault that it happened." The alternative is drip, drip, drip.

NGOs in Iraq Under the White House Thumb

According to an Op-ed piece by Naomi Klein in the Guardian (UK), non-governmental aid agencies in Iraq are under strict orders from the US Agency for International Development (USAid) to promote US foreign policy as a condition of providing humanitarian assistance to the people of Iraq. Some humanitarian assistance contracts come with a further proviso forbidding direct communications with the media about what the NGOs do and see in-country. It's all in the name of "accountability" of course, but a gag order is a gag order, and the rationalization hardly matters.

It's been painfully obvious from before the start of this war that the Bush administration lacked a plan for post-war Iraq, beyond placing the nation under military authority and hoping for the best. They'd made no arrangements with the NGOs beforehand, and clearly are doing so now only grudgingly, and in a way that irritates and frustrates the very people who've offered to help. The administration is evidently determined to stick the US taxpayer with the entire bill for this adventure and its consequences, and to tick off as many of our (now, mainly former) allies and friends as possible along the way.

A Downbeat Independence Day

From time to time, I like crack open the little copy of the Constitution and the Bill or Rights I keep on my desk, selecting some section to read over, as a small refresher course on the principles on which this nation was founded. This July 4th, my choice was prompted by a story in my morning newspaper. So here is Amendment VI of the Bill of Rights:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Yesterday, the Bush administration announced that six terrorism suspects will be subjected to military tribunals, a process adopted in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. We don't know the names of these suspects, how long they've been held, of what they are accused, where they are being held, or even where the trials will take place. What we do know is that the accused -- if that's what they should rightly be called -- won't be free to select council for their own defense. The trials can, and most likely will, be conducted in secret, and the judge and jury in the trials will be members of the U.S. armed forces.

The Bush administration's timing is often a bit off, but this Independence Day, this American thinks they've really missed the beat.

Is Saddam Alive?

I've yet to see any meaningful treatment of this issue in the national press, but just last evening on the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, Ahmad Chalabi, the co-founder of the Iraqi National Congress and the Pentagon's favorite Iraqi expatriate, made a startling statement. When asked by the New Hours's Margaret Warner to explain his claims that Saddam Hussein himself is personally directing attacks on U.S. forces, Chalabi chillingly replied, "Saddam has organized a network of his supporters whom he can amply to pay to make operations against United States forces and they are doing it," and that he is "paying a bounty for the killing of U.S. Soldiers "

Wait a minute. Didn't Chalabi just say that not only is Saddam alive, but directing Iraqi resistance to the U.S. and British occupation forces? What's more, Chalabi claims that Hussein is "moving in an arc northwest of Baghdad across the Tigris around the Tikrit area" with virtual impunity.

What's most troubling about Chalabi's claim is not that Saddam Hussein might have slipped the grip of the U.S. military, but that our own government is so utterly silent on the question of whether the individual against whom this war was waged remains a free man. They seem to be easing this issue towards the sidelines, just as they did with Osama "dead or alive" bin Ladin and Iraq's alledged caches of weapons of mass destruction. It looks like "bait and switch" time once again, as the Bush administration rearranges the shells on the table, and hopes we don't notice.

TODAY'S DEEP THOUGHT

Recently, I began to notice a odd phenomenon which had apparently been occurring right in front of me for some time: A small pile of dead gnats was steadily accumulating around the right side of my Apple flat panel display. One had even managed to maneuver itself inside the monitor's transparent plastic leg before expiring. Until now, I'd somehow managed to avoid giving this anomalous distribution of deceased insects any serious thought.

But now I have developed a thesis. Apple's LCD displays feature a touch-button at the lower right-hand corner of the screen. It's backlit all of the time -- but when the Mac is put to sleep, the button beats with a bright, blue-gray glow all through the night. Little did we know, but apparently the color and rhythm of this light is the ultimate gnat aphrodisiac, drawing the poor little blighters from all corners of my home to my darkened office. There they come to come to their untimely end at the foot of my Apple Studio Display.

Well, that's our minor scientific curiosity for today. Scoff if you like, but papers have been published on less.

DOUBLE TAXATION? LET'S PRETEND SOMEBODY ACTUALLY CARES

All the recent blather in Washington about relieving citizens of the "double-taxation" on dividends raises an obvious question: do Congress or the President really care about double taxation when it hits people in the middle tax brackets? As one who is hardly poor but certainly not rich, I'd have to say, absolutely no. Not only does this "tax relief" relieve me of virtually no taxes, it also won't relieve me of the other multiple tax burdens I, and probably most of us, actually pay.

I'm self-employed. Accordingly, I pay 15.3 percent of my income right off the top — the so-called "self-employment tax." No matter what it's called, this is in reality both the employee's and the employer's contribution to the Social Security fund. Not only is this tax highly regressive (a subject for another rant), but only half of what I pay is deductible from my income taxes. Meaning, of course, that I pay federal income taxes on the other half of my self-employment tax. Hey presto, double taxation. If I then go out and spend that money on retail goods, I pay sales tax. Now, isn't that beginning to look like triple taxation?

I'm waiting for our representatives in Washington, Republican or Democrat, to address this inequity in the tax codes — not that I really expect it. In fact, raising double-taxation as some sort of moral issue is an example of another double thing our elected officials specialize in: double speak.