Another of the seemingly secure “TSA” approved luggage locks has fallen to good old fashioned reverse engineering.
According to SafeSkies Locks writer Steve Ragan, the key and the story behind how it was reverse-engineered using a number of store purchased locks was disclosed at a lockpicking conference.
If you remember, in 2015 a large number of TSA master keys became available after a picture of them was shared online, leading to the lockpicking community demonstrating how easy it is to convert an image into a working key. Now you can find the 3D files online to print your own. Read more…
Coldwell Banker teamed up with CNET to define what a smarthome really is – but they didn’t pay any attention to what is in my opinion the most important fact to smarthome buyers.
What technology is transferred to the new owners?
Their examples include very transitory things, like smart TVs and entertainment systems which you would normally expect to leave with the original owner.
And, they don’t cover the difficult process of how exactly do you transfer control of permanent things like your HVAC system to new owners? Do you give them your user name and password? Can they even set a new user name?
For the more complex integrated systems – is it even possible to transfer control over without giving them “your account”? – after all, you don’t want to move into your new smarthome and find you have to set up all the automation again.
Of course for the original owner, if you give someone your account – are you able to set up a new one for your new home? Does the new owner get to see all the logs from your residence? Read more…
This week there was another progression in the infamous and long running Microsoft vs State of NY case – the one if you remember where the New York, USA court is demanding that Microsoft Ireland aquise to a subpoena issued in the USA.
Well this week the Second Circuit court of appeals agreed with Microsoft USA that the USA had no jurisdiction over assets within Ireland:
§ 2703 of the Stored Communications Act does not authorize courts to issue and enforce against U.S.‐based service providers warrants for the seizure of customer e‐mail content that is stored exclusively on foreign server.
A great writeup of the case can be found at Lawfareblog.
This case can still be raised to the Supreme Court, but since there are other legal methods for the USA to request the assistance of the law authorities in other countries, the door is finally closing on trying to impose domestic law on USA companies with assets in other countries.
The current global data economy and the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy act are woefully out of step, but this decision is the right one to support the global technology industry.
After all – if a court in the USA can compel the release of data from Ireland, surely a court in China can compel the release of data stored in the USA?