Description: Lori Jae and George E., owner of GE Investigations, want you to call in: 1-866-472-5795 and tell us what drives you crazy in your relationship. We want to hear from you…Let’s rant! Be anonymous, just let us hear from you!!! Say anything you need to say but let’s rant about our relationships or just share with us your pet peeves! Talk to us at 1-866-472-5795 would you have an affair? Would you want a divorce? Do you have a question about how to hire a private eye? How can a private detective help you! We are here for you on “contract for love” with Lori Jae and George E.
The president of GE Investigations, LLC will return as the guest on Contract For Love with Lori Jae. The topic of discussion with be more about the gritty side of marriage, a follow up to the show from December 10th.
Tune in live on Wednesday December 31 (New Year’s Eve) at 12 Noon Pacific Time on Voice America 7th Wave.
You can share your story during the show by calling in LIVE on air:
Google Begs Court to Reconsider Ruling That Wi-Fi Sniffing Is Wiretapping
WIRED / Threat Level by David Kravets September 25, 2013
Google is asking a federal appeals court to reconsider a recent ruling finding Google potentially liable for wiretapping when it secretly intercepted data on open Wi-Fi routers.
The Mountain View-based company said the September 10 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will create “confusion” (.pdf) about which over-the-air signals are protected by the Wiretap Act, including broadcast television.
The case concerns nearly a dozen combined lawsuits seeking damages from Google for eavesdropping on open Wi-Fi networks from its Street View mapping cars. The vehicles, which rolled through neighborhoods around the world, were equipped with Wi-Fi–sniffing hardware to record the names and MAC addresses of routers to improve Google location-specific services. But the cars also gathered snippets of content.
The search giant petitioned the San Francisco-based appeals court to reconsider its decision that allowed the case to proceed at trial — a ruling that upended Google’s defense.
Google claimed it is was legal to intercept data from unencrypted, or non-password-protected Wi-Fi networks. Google said open Wi-Fi networks are “radio communications” like AM/FM radio, citizens’ band and police and fire bands, and are “readily accessible” to the general public and exempt from the Wiretap Act — a position the appeals court rejected.
“This error is exceptionally important. It promises to have a substantial, long-lasting effect on the application of the Wiretap Act in an environment of rapid technological change. If allowed to stand, the panel’s ruling will create confusion about the Wiretap Act’s prohibitions, threaten the development of new radio-based technologies, and raise questions about whether activities that Congress intended to protect may now be deemed unlawful,” Google wrote the appeals court late Monday.
The court has the option of rejecting Google’s petition. Or, it could rehear the case with the same three-judge panel or decide the issue en banc with an 11-judge panel. The 9th Circuit is the nation’s largest appeals court, and covers Arizona, California, Montana, Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington and Nevada.
Google said the decision makes it unclear whether intercepting broadcast television might be deemed wiretapping, as might the interception of “public safety communications” or “any marine or aeronautical communications systems.”
“That makes no sense, will create confusion about what radio-based signals can be lawfully received, and is not what Congress intended,” Google wrote in its petition.
Google was sniffing packets of data on unsecured Wi-Fi networks in about a dozen countries over a three-year period, until German privacy authorities began questioning in 2010 what data Google’s Street View cars were collecting. Google, along with other companies, use databases of Wi-Fi networks and their locations to augment or replace GPS when attempting to figure out the location of a computer or mobile device. Google had claimed the lawsuit was “without merit,” and has abandoned the practice of payload sniffing from open networks.
The flap, meanwhile, has wide-ranging implications for the millions who use open, unencrypted Wi-Fi networks at coffee shops, restaurants or any other businesses that try to attract customers by providing free Wi-Fi.
Hanni Fakhoury, an Electronic Frontier Foundation staff attorney, said the court’s decision had some pluses and minuses. One fallout is that security researchers face the risk of civil penalties or even criminal prosecution for intentionally capturing payload data traveling over open Wi-Fi networks.
On the other hand, the decision also provides a strong argument that the feds and other law enforcement agencies that want to spy on data transmitted over unencrypted Wi-Fi will need to get a wiretap order to do so. We’ve seen the government use a device called a ‘moocherhunter’ without a search warrant to read Wi-Fi signals to figure out who’s connecting to a particular wireless router. This decision suggests that to the extent the government uses a device like this (or even a ‘stingray’ to the extent it can capture Wi-Fi signals) to capture payload data — even if just to determine a person’s location—they’ll need a wiretap order to do so. That’s good news since wiretap orders are harder to get than a search warrant.
Ironically, the Federal Communications Commission last year cleared Google of wrongdoing in connection to it secretly intercepting Americans’ data on unencrypted Wi-Fi routers.
The commission said that, between 2008 and 2010, “Google’s Street View cars collected names, addresses, telephone numbers, URL’s, passwords, e-mail, text messages, medical records, video and audio files, and other information from internet users in the United States.”
The commission, however, fined Google $25,000 for stonewalling the investigation.
Big Brother strikes again: Now TWITTER wants to start tracking you on the web
Social media site plans to track users and the websites they visit
Advertisers will be able to use this data to create more personalised ads
The service is switched on by default – but users can opt out
Daily Mail / U.K. By Victoria Woollaston July 4, 2013
In a blog post, Twitter said that the service will be launched in the U.S. but did not say whether it would be rolled out to other areas.
The idea, Twitter said, is to show ‘more useful’ adverts to its users.
In a statement, it said: ‘Users won’t see more ads on Twitter, but they may see better ones.’
By tracking them with a cookie to see what they look at online, the adverts will be for products or services that the user may have already looked at or expressed an interest in.
Twitter is not the first site to use personalised advertising; Facebook already does it, as does Google.
HOW WILL TWITTER TRACK YOU?
In its blog post, Twitter used the example of a florist when discussing its new advertising plans.
If a florist wants to advertise on Twitter for Valentine’s Day, for example, they would prefer to show their advert to flower enthusiasts, or people who have already looked for bouquets on their site.
The florist can approach Twitter and share a ‘scrambled, unreadable’ and anonymous email address – known as a hash.
Alternatively, they can use browser-related information – known as a browser cookie ID.
Twitter can then use the email address or the cookie to scan its users and match the advertisers with the relevant people.
The site can then match that information to accounts and show them a Promoted Tweet with the Valentine’s Day deal.
Twitter adds this is how most other companies handle this practice, and added it doesn’t give advertisers any additional user information.
In the case of Google, the search results as well as the sponsored adverts can also be personalised.
This means, for example, if you’re a gadget fan and have bought Apple products or read stories about the Apple brand, when you search Google for the word ‘Apple’, results about the tech company rather than the fruit will feature higher in the search list.
Sites could previously track users using cookies and not inform the person visiting the site they were doing so.
In May 2012 a new EU regulation came into force that meant any sites which used cookies had to display a warning message for each visitor.
The Twitter tracking will be turned on by default, but users will be able to opt out.
It site also said that users who have the Do Not Track (DNT) feature enabled on their browsers will not be affected by the plans.
Firefox, Chrome and Internet Explorer all have the DNT feature built-in and users have to enable it if they want to stop websites tracking them.
Twitter also explained that users can stop advertisers from tracking them on Twitter by going to their Account Settings page and unticking the ‘promoted content’ box.
Twitter is expected to earn about $583 million in advertising revenue this year and $1 billion in 2014, according to research firm EMarketer.
Twitter has been praised by privacy campaign groups for supporting DNT.
A blog post from Adi Kamdar from the Electronic Frontier Foundation said: ‘Twitter is setting an important example.
‘It is possible to exist in an ecosystem of tailored advertisements and online tracking while also giving users an easy and meaningful opt-out choice.
‘This is in stark contrast to many other advertising and tracking firms.
‘Consumer privacy is an issue of control and transparency; you may be perfectly fine with targeted ads, but you should have the ability to know what information companies have about you and the option of saying no.
To support its claim for transparency, Twitter will also be linking to each advertising partners’ firms cookie opt-out pages.
When users enable DNT or opt out from cookies on websites their data is wiped from the companies’ files.
This means any stored log-in or payment details are removed and will need to be entered in manually.
Ubisoft today revealed that a hack of its systems exposed user names, email addresses, and encrypted passwords, but not financial data.
The attackers exploited one of Ubisoft’s websites “to gain unauthorized access to some of our online systems,” the company said in a statement. Ubisoft shut down the hackers’ access, but discovered that they had infiltrated the company’s account database.
“It’s important to note that no personal payment information is stored with Ubisoft, so fortunately all credit/debit card information was safe from this intrusion,” according to Ubisoft.
Ubisoft is recommending that all account holders change their passwords on ubi.com, as well as on other websites where they might have used the same password.
Although passwords were encrypted, they “could be cracked, in particular if the password chosen is weak. This is the reason we are recommending that our users change their password,” Ubisoft said.
Ubisoft declined to go into specifics about the attack “for security reasons,” but denied that it originated via any Uplay services. The company has alerted the necessary authorities and said it taking steps to shore up its systems. But “no company or organization is completely immune to these kinds of criminal attacks,” Ubisoft said. Access to Ubisoft games was not affected.
Ubisoft is one of several high-profile gaming firms that will be rolling out games for the upcoming Xbox One and PlayStation 4, including Watch Dogs, which ironically requires players to hack into various electronic systems. In May, Ubisoft revealed that it worked with Kaspersky Lab to make sure the hacking in the game looked authentic.