Just after posting the article about new safety measures on US aircraft I found an interesting post on New York Times "Jet Lagged" blog titled "Airport Security Folies"

Here after a short excerpt of Patrick Smith article

" Six years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, airport security remains a theater of the absurd. The changes put in place following the September 11th catastrophe have been drastic, and largely of two kinds: those practical and effective, and those irrational, wasteful and pointless.

The first variety have taken place almost entirely behind the scenes. Explosives scanning for checked luggage, for instance, was long overdue and is perhaps the most welcome addition. Unfortunately, at concourse checkpoints all across America, the madness of passenger screening continues in plain view. It began with pat-downs and the senseless confiscation of pointy objects. Then came the mandatory shoe removal, followed in the summer of 2006 by the prohibition of liquids and gels. We can only imagine what is next…."

Continue reading it on NYT website 

On my own opinion, Airport security today is a mix between relevant and must have security measures on a side but also theatrical, annoying and ridiculous measures. Some of these measures are time consuming, put passengers and crew on their nerves for no safety added value. What does really justify them?

• Government "zero  political risk" (if something happens they will be able to tell that all possible protection measures were already taken) ?
• Fear factor = better military/law enforcement budget ?
• Security private experts / companies have highly increase their financial income since September 2001. They certainly not ready to give this golden egg away.
• Did I speak about million dollars detectors and scanners manipulated by low trained personnel ?    

but do you think air travels are safer to face well prepared, organized and motivated enemies ?

Passengers will no longer be able to pack loose lithium batteries in checked luggage beginning January 1, 2008 as new federal safety rules take effect. The new regulation, designed to reduce the risk of lithium battery fires, will continue to allow lithium batteries in checked baggage if they are installed in electronic devices, or in carry-on baggage if stored in plastic bags.

Common consumer electronics such as travel cameras, cell phones, and most laptop computers are still allowed in carry-on and checked luggage.  However, the rule limits individuals to bringing only two extended-life spare rechargeable lithium batteries, such as laptop and professional audio/video/camera equipment lithium batteries in carry-on baggage

The following quantity limits apply to both your spare and installed batteries. The limits are expressed in grams of “equivalent lithium content.” 8 grams of equivalent lithium content is approximately 100 watt-hours. 25 grams is approximately 300 watt-hours:

• Under the new rules, you can bring batteries with up to 8-gram equivalent lithium content. All lithium ion batteries in cell phones are below 8 gram equivalent lithium content. Nearly all laptop computers also are below this quantity threshold.

• You can also bring up to two spare batteries with an aggregate equivalent lithium content of up to 25 grams, in addition to any batteries that fall below the 8-gram threshold. Examples of two types of lithium ion batteries with equivalent lithium content over 8 grams but below 25 are shown below.
• For a lithium metal battery, whether installed in a device or carried as a spare, the limit on lithium content is 2 grams of lithium metal per battery.
• Almost all consumer-type lithium metal batteries are below 2 grams of lithium metal. But if you are unsure, contact the manufacturer!

Indeed this regulation will first be applicable on US registered aircrafts but as usual we may see this new regulation applicable on all International flights. 

Usually all electrical devices, including batteries, are subject to safety certification so either their are considered to be safe or manufacturer has to review quality and safety of its products. 

I really wonder on which basis these new rules are made from. Did anyone saw any incident statistics, reports etc.. (apart Sony made laptop batteries) or is it just one additional constraints air travel passengers will have to deal with.

After lighters and matches in 06, liquids in 07, 08 will add batteries to the restriction list.

All details are here as well as the complete list of items with air travel restrictions

I found the article below on "The Register" site and asked myself the following question: 

If connecting to Internet using an open and unsecured wifi access point is considered as a crime, why authorities do not apply the same principle to other services (mainly electricity and water) we often use without any formal agreement of the owner ?

 " More than half of computer users have illegally stolen Wi-Fi connections, according to The Times – but only 11 alleged offenders have been arrested in the UK, as the police seem to think those deploying Wi-Fi should be more careful about securing their connections.

The data was collected from a "Have Your Say" survey on the website of security-specialist Sophos: apparently 54 per cent of the 560 people who responded admitted nicking bandwidth from insecure Wi-Fi routers.

This might say more about Sophos customers than the general population, and extrapolating the results to every computer user in the country is probably a crime against statistics: so that's exactly what The Times has done.

…

Anyone caught stealing a Wi-Fi connection can be fined up to a grand, even if it's left unsecured, so make sure you ask nicely next time you're looking to log on, and if the person next to you has never stolen a Wi-Fi connection then we have to assume that you have. "

What is your opinion about accessing open wifi ? Do you think it is a crime ?

Source: The Register

Cory Doctorow wrote this Creative Commons-licensed fiction story for Radar Online magazine.

  Une version française est disponible ici

“Give me six lines written by the most honorable of men, and I will find an excuse in them to hang him.” –Cardinal Richelieu

“We don’t know enough about you.” –Google CEO Eric Schmidt

Greg landed at San Francisco International Airport at 8 p.m., but by the time he’d made it to the front of the customs line, it was after midnight. He’d emerged from first class, brown as a nut, unshaven, and loose-limbed after a month on the beach in Cabo (scuba diving three days a week, seducing French college girls the rest of the time). When he’d left the city a month before, he’d been a stoop-shouldered, potbellied wreck. Now he was a bronze god, drawing admiring glances from the stews at the front of the cabin.

Four hours later in the customs line, he’d slid from god back to man. His slight buzz had worn off, sweat ran down the crack of his ass, and his shoulders and neck were so tense his upper back felt like a tennis racket. The batteries on his iPod had long since died, leaving him with nothing to do except eavesdrop on the middle-age couple ahead of him.

“The marvels of modern technology,” said the woman, shrugging at a nearby sign: Immigration–Powered by Google.

“I thought that didn’t start until next month?” The man was alternately wearing and holding a large sombrero.

Googling at the border. Christ. Greg had vested out of Google six months before, cashing in his options and “taking some me time"–which turned out to be less rewarding than he’d expected. What he mostly did over the five months that followed was fix his friends’ PCs, watch daytime TV, and gain 10 pounds, which he blamed on being at home instead of in the Googleplex, with its well-appointed 24-hour gym.

He should have seen it coming, of course. The U.S. government had lavished $15 billion on a program to fingerprint and photograph visitors at the border, and hadn’t caught a single terrorist. Clearly, the public sector was not equipped to Do Search Right.

The DHS officer had bags under his eyes and squinted at his screen, prodding at his keyboard with sausage fingers. No wonder it was taking four hours to get out of the god damned airport.

Read the rest of this entry »

Fifty years ago, the soviet union launched into space a 58.5 centimeters and 83 kilos shiny aluminum sphere equipped with 4 long antennas and 2 radio transceivers.

Sputnik-1 (Спутник-1 / Satellite-1), the first artificial satellite, had triggered what would be called later, "the US vs. USSR Space Race". It orbited 1440 times at 250 kms above Earth surface during 3 months transmitting radio signals on 20 & 40 MHz.

This single event launched new political, military, technological, and scientific developments. The Space Era was born.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Sources: Wikipedia, Nasa.

AT&T threaten to disconnect its customers (Def. Customer:someone who pays for goods or services) who may criticized its services on the Internet (blog, others sites, etc..). AT&T customers must accept TOS (Terms of Service) where you can find the following statement on the section "Term & Termination".

5.1 Suspension/Termination. Your Service may be suspended or terminated if your payment is past due and such condition continues un-remedied for thirty (30) days. In addition, AT&T may immediately terminate or suspend all or a portion of your Service, any Member ID, electronic mail address, IP address, Universal Resource Locator or domain name used by you, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes (a) violates the Acceptable Use Policy; (b) constitutes a violation of any law, regulation or tariff (including, without limitation, copyright and intellectual property laws) or a violation of these TOS, or any applicable policies or guidelines, or© tends to damage the name or reputation of AT&T, or its parents, affiliates and subsidiaries. Termination or suspension by AT&T of Service also constitutes termination or suspension (as applicable) of your license to use any Software. AT&T may also terminate or suspend your Service if you provide false or inaccurate information that is required for the provision of Service or is necessary to allow AT&T to bill you for Service

AT&T also reserves the rights to update or change from time to time the terms of the agreement and apparently without notice. It is the customer's responsibility to regularly check, on their website, to check if terms have changed and if he/she still agrees with them as they become effective immediately after being posted on AT&T website.

This Agreement may be updated or changed from time to time. The current Agreement shall be posted at: www.att.net/legal/tos (“Website”). This site will be updated as changes are made. You agree to visit the Website periodically to be aware of and review any such revisions. All changes shall become effective upon posting of the revised Agreement on the Website. Your continued use of the Service following such notice constitutes your acceptance of those changes. If you do not agree to the revisions, you must terminate your Service immediately.

So, Dear and Cherished AT&T customer, if you really expect to have "The World. Delivered" by AT&T, you rather have to be nice with them. Otherwise…… 

Source: Zataz

The Gartner Group launched during the IT Security Summit, a book written by Richard Hunter (Gartner vice-president) entitled IT Risk: "Turning Business Threats into Competitive".

The Register published an article highlighting some of Hunter's statement. Extracts:

• IT systems have become so integral to businesses that their failure can have disastrous consequences for an organization.

• IT risk is too important to be left to IT departments
• IT risk is related to IT value. It would be short-sighted not to recognize either value or risk

The complete article in available on The Register site.

More interesting than the article itself are indeed the comments which clearly show how wide is the gap between the theory (or the analysis) and the reality.

Best of :

• So the Bean counters and all the people who have no clue about it should have control? BAD IDEA.
• …This is the reason why an I.T director needs to sit on the board. Not however just some one who did a MBA but barely knows how to turn on their PC.
• …much of the problem can be resolved with a bit of education and common sense – and some money of course
• Ignorance, from middle management to board level, of even simple issues relating to IT risks that can be seriously detrimental to the business as a whole.
• Management, up to board level, simply not listening to IT managers who DO know what they are talking about
• In my experience IT risk auditors are finance types who don't understand IT and thus cannot adequately assess the risk
• Yes, let's take away IT disaster management and network security from the people that have a clue.

All comments are here.

I recognize in most comments highly experienced, realistic and well grounded IT guys. About the, so called, IT Analysts… same consideration than for the Burton Group.

As expressed, common sense would be to have IT director on the board, and the management to wake up and become IT skilled.

What's your opinion ?

A report from Burton Group suggests that new emerging standard of wireless network (WLAN / WiFi) 802.11n (Mimo) will start replacing wired Ethernet 802.3 networks within the next 2-3 years as it improves throughput and range compared to actual 802.11 b/g.

IT senior analyst Paul DeBasi goes even further and says "IT professionals should start thinking now about how they will deploy, maintain and benefit from an all-wireless LAN."

This is a joke isn't it ? Even if I'm a fervent of wireless technology, I simply cannot imagine how wireless networks will replace actual wired networks. Here are the main reasons:

• Bandwidth: With 802.11n the maximum theoretical throughput (using 2 steams) will be 248 Mbps meanwhile Ethernet 802.3an (2006) already provides 10Gbps and next IEEE study group target is 802.3ba with both 40 and 100Gbps. I don't even speak about signal attenuation releated to distance and obstacles.

• Frequency spectum 2.4 GHz & 5GHz are very narrow and number of available channels are limited. So maintaining high speed links, large number of clients without facing frequency overlaps and other electro-magnetic interferences seems very unlikely.
• Electro-smog: With 802.11n the range covered will be larger but this will have undoubtedly have a negative impact on performance and signal strength specially when using ISM 2.4 GHz spectrum in a wireless crowed environment.
• VoWLAN capacity: Several studies have been done to determine, how many simultaneous calls one AP can handle. The number of simultaneous calls is 15 before observed speech quality is lowered via increased delay. (I assume the study also get rid of telephone wires).
• A "wireless only" corporate office means that PBX system also have to rely on wireless network, otherwise it would be complete non-sense to pull wire only for telephone and use wireless connectivity for computers.

Is this report a hoax or do they, at the Burton Group, have some enlighten prophets?

Source: ZDNet
Full report is available here (sign-in required)

Et voilà! As foreseen, my S620 is now running on Windows Mobile 6. 

Quick review:

The upgrade procedure was straight forward. 3-4 mins for the installation of the upgrade package and then about 5 mins to wait for the S620 to restart and finish the installation of Windows Mobile 6.

First impressions:

• No major changes on user's interface
• Predictive writing method (T9) working rather well. Definitively an improvement
• Calendar with a better view of your schedule at a glance
• More Alarm options, but still rather limited
• Improved wireless connection (faster link establishment) and better GPRS stability
• No improvement on memory management and closing running applications
• It seems that power management has improved (but perhaps just an impression)
• Can't say if the Smartphone is faster on WM6 than on WM5. Nothing significant.

More will follow, as soon as I will get familiarized with WM6.

Just finished to watch Hugo Ortega's video presenting HTC Shift and I must admit I like the HTC idea of bringing to us an UMPC (Ultra-mobile computer) which has 2 processors and 2 operating systems working independently on board.

Is the UMPC form factor market ready to take-off soon ?
Is the double O/S option chosen by HTC the winning one ?

A recent research by In-Stat found the following:

• The UMD worldwide forecast is for more than 8 million units in 2011.
• 2008-2010 will be key years for the development of a market inflection point of anytime/anywhere wireless connectivity that is necessary for widespread adoption of the UMD paradigm.

Some specifications: 

• Size: 19 x 13.5 x 3cm
• Weight: 0.9 kg 0.791 kg
• 7 inches display
• Resolution : 800×480 – 1024×600
• Operating Systems : Windows Mobile 6 & Windows Vista Business
• CPU's : Qualcomm 400 MHz for WM6 & Dual Core 800 MHz Intel A110 for Vista
• 7 days battery capacity running on WM6 only. 3 hours on Windows Vista
• Ram Memory : 1 GB
• Hard Drive : 40 GB
• Communication : WiFi 802.11 b/g, Bluetooth 2.0,
• Phone data : Quad band GSM/GPRS/EDGE – Tri-Band UMTS/HSPDA
• 1.3 MB built-in camera
• 1 USB 2.0 port, 1 VGA port
• 1 Finger print reader
• 1 SD Card reader
• Slide out Tilt display
• Price tag : 1200 euros (?)
• Availability : Q3 2007

The very interesting concept is the possibility to switch from one environment (e.g WM6) to the second one (Vista Business) and back in just the press of a button. Input can be done either using the QWERTY keyboard or the hand-witting recognition system.

Streaming video is available on Gottatobemobile.com or there is a 250 MB video available for download here.

Shift on HTC website