Whatever...

The Lords of the Rings fail to deliver

By Ingrid Daschner

Audi founder August Horch (horchen = to listen) Latinised his surname, using the command form of the verb audire (to listen). Thus, Audi means 'listen!'.

However, while Audi may well be very successful, listening doesn't seem to be its speciality. And despite being manufactured at sites around the world, being truly international also isn’t a strong point with the ‘Lords of the Rings’ – at least not when it comes to leasing.

We really wanted an Audi here in the Munich office.  But the leasing department were bothered by JK's form of business: Limited Company, or in short Ltd.

Now, Johnson King Ltd has been entered in the Munich Register of Companies since March 2000.  But that didn't interest Audi.  Nor did the fact that we have leased Mercedes and BMW cars on contract without any problems in the past.

We even presented Audi with business-management evaluations.  But even that didn’t interest them.  For a Limited Company, there is just nothing doing at Audi HQ in Ingolstadt – it’s just too much trouble to change their procedures.

Contrast this with the blossoming trade in personal and company data on the German black market.  For the equivalent of two decent pizzas, you can acquire CDs telling you a lot, if not everything, about people and companies: names, addresses, bank and credit‑card data, turnover, profits, health-insurance, tax numbers etc.  Unscrupulous businessmen are infiltrating companies and bypassing their deficient data protection measures to purloin gigabytes of data so as to earn a bit on the side by selling it.

I'm actually rather proud of the iron principles of German industry, with its awareness of tradition, solidity, adherence to principles, honesty...  But its lack of flexibility combined with a lax attitude to personal information is increasing getting out of step with the modern world.

Anyway, that's one less Audi in Munich, and the competition should be glad – there are over 30,000 Limited Companies registered in Germany, all of whom will be able to lease an Opel, BMW, Mercedes or Ford.  But not an Audi.

Careless talk costs... damages and legal fees?

By Andrew Chatterton

This week saw Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the founder of the World Wide Web, saying that he was increasingly worried about the amount of misinformation spread across the internet.  It’s hard not to feel some sympathy for Sir Tim, who I’m sure didn’t envisage the future of his great idea being based on porn and gossip.

The very nature of the web means that anyone can write whatever they like on any subject they want.  But should this actually be allowed?  Some of the opinions and thoughts on the web wouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a ‘proper’ newspaper or magazine, so why, in a medium with a potentially unlimited readership, should the web be any different?
 

Sir Tim suggests that websites be given a label for trustworthiness once they have been proved reliable – but who is going to issue these labels?  Who’s going to decide what is valuable, trustworthy information and what is rubbish?  The Government?  George Bush?  Me?  OK, probably not me, I grant you, but my point is the same: who is unbiased enough in their judgement to make this call?  I would suggest no one.

However, voicing your opinion on the web, especially if someone else thinks that you’re spreading ‘misinformation’, can already have nasty repercussions.
 

Sheffield Wednesday supporters have over the years had a fair amount to complain about, and might think that the internet offers the perfect place to express these fears and questions.  Indeed, forums that bring together groups with a similar interest is more what Sir Tim perhaps had in mind for the web – but the Sheffield Wednesday board has had other ideas.
 

Comments on a fans forum have led to their lawyers demanding to know the names and email addresses of 14 people who had posted.  The comments they had made were deemed to be ‘false and seriously defamatory messages’, and threatened proceedings included ‘claims for injunctions, damages, interest and legal costs’.

So what was the misinformation spread that had caused such offence?  “What an embarrassing, pathetic, laughing stock of a football club we have become”.  Not exactly terrifying abuse is it, just a fan’s opinion – but is it misinformation?
 

Neither story paints a great picture for the future of the web.  China is a good example of what can happen when one group’s control of the internet can seriously restrict citizens’ rights, but on the other hand, the use of the internet for terrorist or paedophilic activities obviously has to be acted upon.

In an online world of endless opinions but no easy answers, has Sir Tim in fact created his own Frankenstein’s monster?

“Hold the line please caller, we’ve lost your data”

By Rebecca Surtees

 

Government data loss has been in the news all year – not a day goes by without another tale of lost discs or stolen laptops.  Of course, people are concerned about this – and why shouldn’t they be?  Some of their details are probably floating around on an unencrypted memory stick on the verge of being ‘misplaced’ or sitting on an unprotected database waiting to be hacked.

 

A recent report suggests that the NHS is next in the firing line.  According to a survey carried out by one of London’s top teaching hospitals, over three quarters of the hospital’s memory stick-wielding clinicians are roaming the capital with sensitive patient data alongside their holiday snaps – and worst of all, only six percent of these devices are using security measures to safeguard the data.
  

This got me thinking about my own public sector data loss experiences – for instance, being informed by my local hospital’s receptionist that I “hadn’t been born according to the system records”, while waiting in agony with a fractured ankle.  Having also been spun the classic line that the x-rays and blood test results I’d been chasing for weeks had been (mysteriously) ‘lost in the system’, people might just say I’m harping on about bad experiences, but the cynic (and tech PR) in me says it’s more than that.
 

OK, these survey findings are just a snapshot from one institution, but who’s to say they don’t reflect other areas of the NHS?  In today’s tech climate, and judging by the data loss fiascos so far, simple password protection that can be cracked in a matter of seconds just isn’t good enough where patient records are concerned – let alone allowing staff to remove such personal data from the workplace in the first instance.

 

Managing data on portable devices has long been a tricky subject for organisations of all kinds.  However, not only should sensitive information be encrypted as standard, but the Government must also be seen to be actively educating public sector users on safe data practices, as well as enforcing internal security policies.

 

One thing’s for sure - if the necessary measures aren’t taken, the data protection road can only get rockier.

The Fog of PR

By Richard Scarlett

Congratulations to Barclays Bank: so far, not one customer using PINsentry – its two-factor authentication device – has been the victim of online fraud.

However, as someone who carries out a lot of online transactions, my feelings toward this little calculator-type device – that the marketeers promised would provide stronger authentication, greater security and peace of mind – aren’t necessarily as welcoming or congratulatory as you might expect.

As a tech PR, my technical abilities are (I like to think) pretty good.  So it was with great reluctance that I resorted to the customer helpline when I couldn’t get my device to work.  After a very long chat, it emerged that the card that I was issued was in fact ‘last generation’ and unable to work with the ‘new generation’ card readers.  With the helpline running at £1.25 per minute, my patience was fast running out.

Not wanting this to become a frustrated rant about said bank, let’s just say that the issue was resolved and I am now securely shopping and banking online once again.

However, while Barclay’s PR machine may want us to believe that PINsentry is the bulletproof solution to card fraud and ID theft that we’ve all been waiting for, I’m not so sure.  But this exaggerated sense of security could actually cause people to take more risks when online eg. logging on from ‘dirty’ PCs, or buying from sites that they wouldn’t normally touch, with the belief that the device will protect them from everything.

And even though banks may claim not to see any evidence of fraud among those customers using PINsentry and the like, I can’t help thinking that these devices are just a decoy to deflect attention from poor security elsewhere – especially as we live in an age where people in positions of responsibility still think it’s OK to download classified data onto a laptop and leave it in the car, lose USB sticks full of unencrypted private customer records, or send CDs full of sensitive information unsecured in the post.

I think that the banks should ditch the smokescreen consumer devices and focus more on evaluating their own internal security policies and procedures.  That way, customers will no longer be forced to jump through ridiculous hoops, have usability compromised, or even be followed around by Big Brother Banking – or have to put up with the PR song and dance that says it’s all for our own good.

Can you get goosebumps online?

By Carol Pender

It’s that time of year again – back-to-school for millions of kids, with parents frantically making last minute purchases for the new academic year.  But as an article in the Daily Telegraph points out, while this used to mean making sure you had enough pencils, Tipex and smelly rubbers, today’s must-have school tools include the latest laptops, printers and software.

It’s not as if the transition has happened overnight, but it got me thinking about all the ways that technology and particularly the internet, has changed our lives – and wondering whether it’s all really been for the best.  Maybe there’s no right or wrong answer, but I can’t help getting a little nostalgic about “the good old days”.

For example, I came across a story in the French daily paper Le Monde about an initiative to record classical concerts and make them available exclusively for purchase on the internet. With the music industry in general in the doldrums, this could revive interest in orchestral music and maybe even help discover new talent, as the internet does for other musical genres.

But it’ll never replace the experience of actually going to a concert and getting goosebumps when you listen to that Mozart symphony – or even that Radiohead classic – live. And what about the simple pleasures of going to Fnac, browsing through the different sections, and going home with a carefully selected CD?

Having the latest news at home and abroad available at the click of a mouse is great and pretty amazing when you think about it. But in terms of enjoyment factor, can it really compete with sitting down for a couple of hours with the Sunday papers and a pot of coffee?

The same applies to downloading a film versus watching it on the big screen, buying your groceries online versus going to the market, sending an email versus making a call etc etc. Don’t get me wrong, as an expat, I love email and am the first to admit that it has helped me stay in touch with many a person I could have lost contact with. But it’s really not the same as hearing a friend’s voice.  

Of course, the internet is expedient, practical and cheap, and there are some things for which it has become irreplaceable – I don’t know anyone who doesn’t buy their airline tickets and reserve their hotels online. And I’m sure everyone has gotten a few laughs out of the latest YouTube or Mozinor video.

But there needs to be a balance between our lives online and the real world, otherwise we could forget why certain things were important or exciting in the first place.

OK, I'll stop ranting now.  Maybe I'm just having a mid-life crisis at the tender age of 34?!