internet

secrecy-icon

Thinking of staying in a Travelodge this weekend? Don’t bother!

As people who read this blog regularly, you will remember that 4 weeks ago I made a post about Travelodge UK having suffered a data breach.  If you want a bit of background first, click this link to open that article in a new window, then continue reading back here.


Since that post there was a generic update from Travelodge stating that no financial data had been accessed, and that engineers were working round the clock to find out what had happened and update customers. (Basically a generic email full of platitudes, trying to sweep the issue under the carpet and keep everyone calm). That update has simply not happened. Despite repeated prompting of the Travelodge UK twitter account, the best I have received is a week ago I was told that an update would be out ‘shortly’ . I’m guessing that their definition of shortly and mine differ wildly, as I certainly don’t class a week of no action or info as shortly.


I’ll personally never stay in a Travelodge again, I simply don’t trust them with my data any more, and their lack of updates and quite frankly pathetic handling of this issue has burned what little trust or respect I may have had in them after the breach. Other large companies that have suffered data breaches in recent months have announced within a week, usually days, what has happened, what data was accessed and such like. Without this information the customers who’s details have been accessed have not got the ability to take any action to prevent further security problems that may arise from the data leaked, or even identity theft if address details were compromised. Over 4 weeks to make a full and frank disclosure to customers who have potentially had their information compromised is simply not acceptable. The lack of such update tells me that Travelodge either have inadequate systems and can’t securely protect data and audit any breach, or they simply don’t care enough to tell their customers in a timely fashion. They seem more intent on simply forgetting about the issue and hoping everyone else does, so that they don’t get any more bad publicity out of the problem.


I’d urge others to seriously consider their choice of hotel in the future, and avoid Travelodge if at all possible. if they can’t even tell us what data has been accessed or how it happened, how can we trust their word and be sure that financial data has not been accessed and therefore trust them enough to input your card details again? (and that is before you even consider that you might get your card charged twice, as they announced yesterday)


EDIT

Seems there was an update, from this, they just didn’t bother mailing anyone about it, just noticed this on their twitter feed. http://twitter.com/#!/TravelodgeUK/status/89388586784407553

It’s still entirely unacceptable in my eyes, that they haven’t even bothered to mail customers about this, that it took so long, that no numbers of how many accounts were breached but first and most importantly that they had customer details in an unencrypted database in the first place. Especially in such a database that seemingly would have no way of easily auditing or verifying who had accessed the data if it took them over 3 weeks to find out!


~Shepy

Dropbox exposed files with security hole, and an alternative.

First of all, this might look like a sponsored post in some places, but I assure you it’s not, but backup is something I take very seriously and extol the virtues of to anyone who will listen! Now, that out of the way as some of you may know, Dropbox is a service in use by some 25 million people to backup and sync files which they feel are important and should be looked after, many using the free 2gb account to backup just the absolute essentials. So what then if a flaw in security allowed anyone to log in to any dropbox account they liked, using any mish-mash of random characters typed as a password? Unfortunately this is’t a hypothetical situation I am describing here, this actually happened this week and all 25 million accounts were open for the world to login to due to a fault in a software patch. Though Dropbox state there was less than 1% of accounts accessed during this time, that still means up to 250,000 accounts were potentially compromised. If your account was one of them you should have received a mail by now telling you what happened, which folders were accessed, apologising for it an assuring you that it wont happen again.


For me though, an apology is simply not good enough, people use a backup service so that they can be sure their data is safe and secure, but if the people you entrust to make that backup cant keep it secure then it’s almost pointless to even use the service. This compounded with the change in TOS a few months back which state Dropbox will decrypt your files if requested by law enforcement agencies, and that a previous ‘Staff can’t access your files’ mantra suddenly being changed to ‘Staff are prohibited’ from accessing your files being widely reported on the net, I no longer feel that Dropbox is a service I want to trust important data to, in fact I’m not even sure I want to trust them with unimportant data.


When I was discussing this with a friend, he mentioned that he too had the same concerns, and had gone looking for an alternative, which turned up SpiderOak, a very similar but at the same time altogether different service.


An alternative

First and foremost, SpiderOak encrypts all your files at the client end, they never store your password and therefore are literally unable to provide access to your files to anyone, including their staff or law enforcement agencies. Files are stored on their servers in blocked segments encrypted at the byte level, so not even file names and folder structures are accessible. Even when you log in to the website your password is maintained only in RAM memory, in an encrypted form, only as long as you’re connected, and never put to disc. And that’s just the start of the improvements over Dropbox, some of the other big ones are:


  • Faster data upload – compression and de-duplication upload your info much faster
  • De-duplication means if you have the same file at home and work, it only takes the space of one copy
  • Selective backup, you can opt to backup any folder on you machine (including network shares and external drives)
  • Consolidation of backup between all of your devices and machines, you can browse them all through the GUI
  • Complete revision history, no old copy is ever removed unless you choose to remove it.
  • Sharing can be done on a folder level, like Dropbox’s public links you can share files with anyone, but share a full folder not just single files.
  • Open Source transparency means they are actively trying to release their code to help the wider net community as well.
  • Great referral system offering much more space for no charge (4x what Dropbox offers)


Though it is a shame the circumstances under which I felt obligated to move to a different backup / sync provider, I am wholly impressed with SpiderOak and glad that I did make the mov. I’ve got much more faith in it and find it to be much more featured than Dropbox.


Sign up & get 6gb free

If you’d like to sign up then I’d suggest you do so with my referall link, which you will find at the end of this post, and also use the promo code ‘worldbackupday’ which will give me 1gb of free space, and instantly start your account with 6gb of free space if you do both.


Let me know what you think of the service, and that referral link is:  https://spideroak.com/download/referral/33d3bbe7b656b2c4cf47e479f4409406


~Shepy

Twitpic, Why I wont go back, and why you shouldn’t either. [A follow up]

Ok, well obviously from the title this is a follow up to my previous post which was “Why I have left Twitpic, and why you should too.


The situation till now

That article has caused a lot of buzz over the past two days, I have seen massive numbers of people coming to the site through it, and plenty of comments (both on the post itself and on twitter). I still don’t think the issue is done though and there seems to be a lot of misinformation about the situation, the responses and the general malaise about the whole issue.


As a quick recap for those that don’t want to click through to the original article, in a nutshell, Twitpic edited their terms of service from a simple “You own the rights to your photos” to a rather more intrusive “You own the rights, but grants us essentially the right to do whatever we like” (I’m obviously paraphrasing here). This understandably caused a massive uproar on the internet, not least amongst those who make a living from their creative talents such as photographers and designers. One of the most interesting things I find about this change to the terms of service is the lack of the communication, the attempt to almost slip this change in through the side door. I saw no mention of this in the email address I have associated with Twitter (which presumably as a once authorised service Twitpic had access too) nor did I see mention of this on the Twitpic blog (where as if Twitter, Facebook, Ebay etc etc decide to change their TOS then I get several mails before and on the date of change).  This was simply a change that was decided upon, implemented and quietly added to the terms of service the site with no announcement.  I personally would not have even been aware had I not noticed a tweet from @iA regarding the matter.


What’s happened in the last 48 hours.

Well, things have gone quite mental in a few places regarding this issue, blog posts have been made aplenty, news articles have sprung up and much has been said and discussed on Twitter. Twitpic themselves even decided to bring something to the party, with a response on their own blog, though more on this later. I’ve had a variations in comments from ‘Thanks for letting me know’ to ‘You couldn’t be more naive’, all of which are there on the original post if you would like to go see the counter arguments (I’m firmly against censorship, I always leave all comments as they were posted).


Whilst obviously I don’t have access to the actual numbers of people using the various services available for posting pictures to Twitter, I have seen much commenting from people saying they wont use Twitpic any more, and I’ve seen a definite increase in the number of links I am seeing to pictures on other services.


I also find it interesting to note that a deal between Twitpic and WENN has been announced, a deal that will facilitate the sale of images posted by celebrities to Twitpic to the various news outlets via a licensing deal through WENN. This is exactly the kind of thing I was worried about, the sub-license and sale of images, and although this appears to be only geared towards images posted by celebrities at the moment the conditions in the TOS that allow for this equally apply to each and every user of the service.


The Twitpic Blog

As mentioned previously, Twitpic posted on their blog to state that they apologised for the new terms that were posted, and they they were wildly misunderstood, which was a deft move on their part I feel.  See, what most people don’t realise is that the initial change to the TOS for Twitpic also included a paragraph that stated:


You may not grant permission to photographic agencies, photographic libraries, media organizations, news organizations, entertainment organizations, media libraries, or media agencies to retrieve from Twitpic for distribution, license, or any other use, content you have uploaded to Twitpic.

(Paragraph copied from IanVisits)


This seems to have been misconstrued as meaning if you uploaded an image to Twitpic, then you were no longer free to license or sell that image anywhere else. I don’t read it as that, and this is where I think the confusion has entered into the matter. I read that as meaning that if you do sell this image to anyone or anywhere else, then you must provide that image directly to the buyer yourself, and can not direct them to Twitpic to retrieve the image.


I think that it is this paragraph or clause that the Twitpic blog post refers to, and it is this which they apologise for the confusion about, not the new clauses that still remains to this moment, the clauses which I discussed in the previous article. They did however get a lot of mileage out of people thinking that this blog post referred to the points I, and others, made about the grant of license to images.


I also find it really interesting to note that of all of the posts on the first page of the Twitpic blog (at time of writing) there are only two posts that have commenting disabled; the one about the changes to the copyright, and one which is a job vacancy advert (and therefore requires no reply). I would have thought that if this really was an issue that they thought had been taken wrongly and that they wanted to clear up, then they would have allowed commenting and addressed the issues that visitors brought up, rather than just shutting up shop and hoping that the retraction of a mistake would be taken as the back tracking on the issue that most think it is, when (in my opinion) they are actually talking about a clause that most don’t even know existed.


Defending the clauses

I’ve had a few comments through various channels that these clauses are needed to operate the business and provide the service to which their users have signed up, but I disagree with this idea. Things such as “They need to sublicense for their bandwidth provider to carry the content” doesn’t ring true when it could have easily been worded as “our third party infrastructure” or “our suppliers” rather than “successors and affiliates” (affiliate marketing, familar term to anyone?). Claiming that Facebook made this same mistake and didn’t withdraw their terms is simply wrong, if you look at the TOS that Facebook initially tried to push through it claimed rights to derivative works, something that it no longer does in it’s terms. Part of the problem here is that people are accepting too much as a means of providing a service, such as thinking that derivative works is needed to provide an image service. A thumbnail (in the USA at least, where Twitpic is based) has already been classed as a transformative change (See Leslie A. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation) as it is a change that provides additional functionality to the user, and as such is transformative in providing information in a way it was not previously available. A company such as Twitpic does not require a derivative license to be able to provide their service, but they do need it to be able to modify and republish the image in other formats.

So what happens now?

Personally I am still adamant on the statement that I have left Twitpic, and will no longer use their service. I doubt I would even return now if they change the terms back to what they were prior to the 4th of May because I have lost faith in the company for the very fact that they have brought in these clauses and the fact they neglected to announce the changes to their users.


I have personally settled on Posterous, though I have seen others going to other services which have even more friendly terms of service (Pesterous claims reproduction rights in line with their advertising of their own business, I have no issue with this, it is standard practise for me as a photographer to do this with portfolio photographs).


I guess my final advice is to carefully think about the images you are posting, how much you value them, and what would happen if they were reproduced without your input or decision on where they could be used (as is what you are essentially agreeing to in some of the TOS). If you’re comfortable with the terms then go right ahead, make an account and start posting (some of them can even import your old Twitpic images!), but if you’re not happy for whatever reason then keep shopping around till you find one you do agree with.


We have a plethora of services and choice for almost every aspect of our on line lives, and I firmly believe that it is through voting with our feet and moving away from services that make poor decisions and fail to respect their users that we will eventually create a system in which we are considered and catered for when changes like this are discussed in boardrooms, and not just tied in to terms that are very much one sided through clicking an ‘I Agree’ button.


~Shepy

http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2011/05/10/twitpic-changes-its-terms-of-service/T