Articles Posted in David Badertscher

by

Volume 2 Number 12 December 2009.

Automatic Software Updates and Patching
From the Desk of David Badertscher
Security vulnerabilities are flaws in the software that could allow someone to potentially compromise your system. Each year, the volume of software security vulnerabilities discovered increases, and the hacking tools available to exploit these vulnerabilities become more readily available and easier to use. Vulnerabilities in commonly used programs such as Adobe PDF Reader, QuickTime, Adobe Flash and Microsoft Office are prime targets of attacks on computers connected to the Internet. Recent statistics reported show that 48% of the cyber attacks identified in the second quarter of 2009 were targeted against vulnerabilities in Adobe Acrobat/Adobe Reader1 and in October 2009 Microsoft released patches for a record number of security holes. No entity is immune to vulnerabilities, so we must ensure we understand the risks and take appropriate mitigation steps.

Why do I need to update my software?

One of the basic tenets of computer security is to update your operating system and other software installed on your computer. Software updates fix problems in the software, add functionality, and most importantly, fix vulnerabilities that impact the security of the software and subsequently your computer. These vulnerabilities can lead to your computer-and information that resides on it-being compromised. Exploitation of vulnerabilities may occur by opening documents, viewing an email which contains malicious code or visiting a web site hosting malicious content. Seventy percent of the top 100 web sites hosted malicious content or contained a link designed to redirect users to malicious sites.2
What is a software patch (fix) and when should I install software patches?

Patches are often called “fixes.” A patch is software that is used to correct a problem to an application (software program) or an operating system. Computer companies are continuously addressing security holes (i.e. vulnerabilities) in computer software which could be used to infect your computer with a virus, spyware or worse. When vulnerabilities are discovered, the software vendor typically issues a fix (i.e. patch) to correct the problem. This fix should be applied as soon as possible since the average time for someone to try to exploit this security hole can be as little as a few minutes. Most major software companies will periodically release patches, usually downloadable from the Internet, that correct very specific problems in their software programs.

My computer includes hundreds of software programs– which ones do I need to update and how often?

One of the challenges facing the average computer user is to know which software needs to be updated and how often. Software programs that communicate or interact with the Internet are especially susceptible to attacks and should be kept at a vendor-supported version and current on all patches.

Many software programs include a feature called “auto update.” This feature allows the computer to check for updates at periodic intervals. The software will automatically check for updates and save them to your computer. Some updates will instruct you to “reboot” your computer before the software update can be applied.

At a minimum, you should enable the auto update feature on the following products:

Anti-virus and Anti-spam signatures: anti-virus and anti-spam software requires regular updates to virus and spam signatures to remain effective. New viruses and other types of malware appear every day and the anti-virus/anti-spam vendors release new signatures on a daily basis to stay on top of the new threats. Windows Office software: Word, Excel, Outlook, etc. – (see below for updating Windows software) Internet Browsers: e.g., Internet Explorer (Microsoft), Firefox (Mozilla), Safari (Apple) and Chrome (Google). Make sure you update any software you use for browsing the Internet. Adobe products: e.g., Adobe Reader, Adobe Acrobat, Flash, Shockwave Media Players: e.g., Windows Media Player (Microsoft), QuickTime (Apple), Real Player (Real Networks) and Flash Player (Adobe)

Java (Sun Microsystems): Java is software that is installed on most computers to allow users to play online games, conduct online chats, and view images in 3D, among other functions. It is also used for Intranet applications and other e-business solutions. Other software programs that communicate or interact with the Internet, like e-mail, web servers, and remote desktop software are especially susceptible to attacks and should be kept current on patches and version levels.

It is very important to promptly download and patch your operating system and programs whenever security updates or “service packs” become available. These patches are created to protect systems against potential attacks. Be aware that attacks sometimes occur before updates are released.

How do I update my Microsoft Windows programs?

Windows Update is a Microsoft service that provides updates for the Windows operating system and other Microsoft software. Installing Windows updates, such as “service packs” and other patches, is necessary to keep your Windows system secure. To activate Windows Update, go to Settings/Control Panel/Automatic Updates. When you turn on Automatic Updates, Windows routinely checks the Windows Update web site for high-priority updates that can help protect your computer from the latest viruses and other security threats. These updates can include security updates, critical updates, and “service packs.” Depending on the setting you choose, Windows automatically downloads and installs any high-priority updates that your computer needs, or notifies you as these updates become available. Be sure to set the auto updates to daily, as patches can be released at any time.

Note: Many organizations have formal processes to patch systems that will automatically update all appropriate software. In these situations, no end user action is required.

******************************

Source: 1. F-Secure
Source: 2. SC Magazine
The above comments are based on information tips provided by the Multi-State Information and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC). To learn more about MS-ISAC go to http://www.msisac.org/
__________________________________________
OTHER NEWS AND VIEWS Continue reading

by

A report prepared by New York Governor David Paterson’s Task Force on Transforming Juvenile Justice released in December 2009. It “shines a harsh light” on the problems in New York’s prisons for juvenile offenders
According to this Report, ” the problems are so acute that the state agency overseeing the prisons has asked New York’s family court judges not to send youths to any of them “unless they are a significant risk to public safety,” recommending instead alternatives like therapeutic foster care.”

This Report comes three months after a federal investifgation found that excessive force was routinely used at the four New York prisons, “resulting in injuries as severe as broken bones and shattered teeth.”

Although we are not authorized to include in this posting a draft copy we have seen of the Report, the following is an excerpt from the Executive Summary>
Continue reading

by

February 29, 2008

A number of people who have distinguihed themselves in the legal profession have also been quite successful as poets. Wallace Stevens comes to mind. That brings me to the poetry of Professor Lawrence Joseph, Reverend Joseph P. Tinnelly, C.M. Professor of Law, which was the subject of the 2008 Law and Literature Symposium, “Some Sort of Chronicler I Am: Narration and the Poetry of Lawrence Joseph,” on February 29, 2008, at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. The Symposium was put together by the University of Cincinnati Law Review. Professor Joseph was joined in the Symposium by a group of distinguished legal and literary scholars who used Professor Joseph’s poetry as a starting point to explore the nature of narration in poetry and its relationship to the language of law, and other forms of narration and language. The Symposium has been published in 77 Cincinnati Law Review. Number 3 Spring 2009. To help illustrate the depth and range of topics covered in the Symposium, here is al list of papers and their contributors included in the 77 Cincinnati Law Review symposium issue:

Narrating Justice ….. Joseph P. Tomain

Continue reading

by

We just received word about the outcome of the vote on the proposal to change the name of Special Libraries Association (SLA) to the Association for Stategic Knowledge Professionals. The name change proposal stemmed from the findings of the Alignment Project, an intensive two year research effort aimed at understanding the value of the information and knowledge professionals in todays environment and how to communicate that value.

Although not a member of SLA, I have followed developments related to this issue on the SLA listserv and have been very impressed with both the dedication and passion exhibited by the SLA membership.

As for the outcome, I think this is good news. As a professional librarian (an information and knowledge professional) I am very concerned about libraries and librarianship being viable now and remaining so in the future. An important part of that viability, it seems to me, relates to the essential need for libraries and librarians to maintain a clear identity as the preeminent information and knowledge professionals in the world, both now and in the future. There is a danger that proposals such as the one we are discussing here will, if ratified, result in a dilution of that identity and by extension diminish the perceived value of librararies and librarians (whatever their names) in the marketplace as compared to other organizations and occupations that are somewhat comparable. I commend the SLA membership for its decision.

David Badertscher
Here is a note from SLA Headquarters concerning the outcome of the vote of the SLA membership:
Continue reading

by

David Badertscher*

Some jurors have always had an urge to visit a crime scene or research a case they’re considering while on jury duty, but now the Internet is making it much easier to play detective.

“As simple as it might have been to research facts on their own in the past, now jurors don’t have to have a brother-in-law who’s a doctor or a next-door neighbor who’s a dentist. Everyone has access to the world of doctors and dentists,” says Laura A. Miller, the chair of the criminal litigation section of the American Bar Association and a partner at Nixon Peabody.

Continue reading

by

GungaWeb is an online tool that assists analysis of New York criminal cases with respect to sentencing, lesser included offenses, plea bargaining restrictions, charging and offense elements.

Detailed sentencing reports for all Penal Law offenses plus DWI and,now for 2009, Aggravated Unlicensed Operation of a Motor Vehicle (VTL511). Dynamic detailed and summary reports of lesser included and greater inclusory offenses. Commentary on pertinent legislative amendments included.

Current subscribers include over 100 New York judges and law clerks.

Continue reading

by

Updated to November 25, 2009

Over the past months we have posted a variety of items related to the quest for health care reform in the United States. See our last posting at “Health Care Update as of the Beginning of October 2009. The quest continues. During the last month the House of Representatives passed HR 3962(Affordable Health Care for America Act) on November 7 and the Senate has at least agreed to begin debate on their bill HR3590 (Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act) on November 21.. Given the historical record of attempts at health care reform these are remarkable achievements but we still do not know if the end is in sight.

Rather than engage in extended discussion on this posting we will concentrate identifying selected documents related to the two bills mentioned above and close by mentioning a few recent news articles of interest. First the documents:

Continue reading

by

Jurimetrics, The Journal of Law, Science and Technology (ISBN 0897-1277), published quarterly, is the journal of the American Bar Association, Section of Seience & Technology law and the Center for Study of Law, Science and Technology of the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University. It was first published in 1959 under the leadership of Layman Allen as Modern Uses of Logic in Law (MULL). A former name, Jurimetrics Journal, was adopted in 1966. The current name was adopted in 1978. Until now Jurimetrics has been published and distributed in hard copy. Soon ( beginning with the Winter 2010 issue) Jurimetrics will be electronic only.

According to the American Bar Association, here is how this works: Subscribers will receive an e-mail message letting them know when a new issue is available. That e-mail will include a link to a Web site where subscribers can lood at all of the abstracts and then download-or print out-any of the articles they want to read in PDF format.

The electronic version will be fully searchable, so subscribers can scan Jurimetrics for topics that are of interest. According to ABA this enhanced format also means that subscribers can be provided with more articles, “packed with more information–and get them to you much faster.”

Continue reading

by

October 2009
In January 2009, the Library of Congress (LC) contracted with R2 Consulting LLC (R2) “to investigate and describe current approaches to the creation and distribution of MARC records in US and Canadian libraries”, with a primary focus from a primarily economics perspective on “in effect” mapping “the marketplace for cataloging records, including incentives for and barriers to production” of these records. One especially critical aspect of the project has been to assess the degree to which sources other than LC create records in significant quantities, and to determine the extent to which “all roads lead to DLC/DLC.” From a quick read, it appears that RDA and FRBR may it have been afforded sufficient treatment in this Study. Those interested in this topic will certainly want to re-visit the article by Joni Cassidy and members of her staff, AACR Move Over! Here Comes RDA

The following posting includes an excerpt from the Introduction to the resultant Study issued in October 2009 followed by a link for downloading the entire text of the Study.

From the Introduction:

In January 2009, the Library of Congress (LC) contracted with R2 Consulting LLC (R2) to investigate and describe current approaches to the creation and distribution of MARC records in US and Canadian libraries. The primary focus is on the economics of existing practice, in effect mapping the “marketplace” for cataloging records, including incentives for and barriers to production. The underlying question is whether sufficient cataloging capacity exists in North America, and how that capacity is distributed. This project was designed to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, seeking to understand in detail the ways in which cataloging records are produced and distributed, as well as who bears the costs and who realizes the value. We are not attempting to offer solutions or suggest changes, though some have become obvious as we’ve looked at the data. One especially critical aspect of the project has been to assess the degree to which sources other than LC create records in significant quantities, and to determine the extent to which “all roads lead to DLC/DLC.”

The goal is to achieve the best possible understanding of current circumstances and practices:

What is the overall cataloging capacity in North America?

Where does it reside?

What are the primary distribution pathways and channels for sharing records?

How much redundancy is there?

What can we predict about cataloging capacity over the next 5‐10 years?

What is the estimated need/demand? How does this compare with capacity?

What is the relative importance of authority control to libraries?

What is the current reliance by North American Libraries on LC cataloging?

Over the course of six months, R2 employed a number of information‐gathering techniques. First, we developed a social network called Bibliographic Record Production: www.bibrecordproduction.ning.com which ultimately attracted more than 800 members. This forum was used to develop and refine surveys, to assure that we were asking the right questions, and to enlist proportionate representation from all market segments. We performed a literature search as highlighted in the bibliography. We developed two extensive surveys, one for libraries and one for vendors, and worked diligently to assure the participation of school, public, academic and specialized libraries, and of Canadian as well as US libraries. We took special care with the school and small public library markets, as they are often under‐represented in such studies, and rely almost exclusively on records produced by LC, even if those records reach them through other channels. We also interviewed key people by phone, and made a site visit to the Library of Congress.

The surveys were released in April and completed in May 2009. There are a handful of areas where gaps exist, but the response was proportionate to the size of the respective markets, a factor that gives us confidence in the results. Overall, survey responses were strong, with 972 libraries and 70 vendors participating. Results are summarized in sections II and III of the report; Library and Distributor responses respectively. Note that the survey questions themselves can be found online at:

www.r2test.net/pdfs/Survey Questions ‐ Libraries.pdf www.r2test.net/pdfs/Survey Questions ‐ MARC Systems, Distributors, and Service Providers.pdf

Despite many revisions and our best efforts to achieve clarity in the survey questions, it is apparent that a common understanding does not apply across all market segments. There is, in fact, not really a shared understanding of what constitutes a MARC record, since it can serve purposes other than cataloging. In addition, the distinction between creating a record (which ideally occurs once for each title) and distributing a record (where the same record may be provided to multiple customers) proved confusing to some respondents. This has made quantitative comparisons unreliable, and we have introduced them only in cases where the data are relatively unambiguous.

Our primary observations and conclusions are described in the two subsequent sections of the report:

III. The Conflicted Market IV. Economics of Cataloging Continue reading

by

David Badertscher

One hundred years ago last Tuesday (November 3, 1909) the criminal court building in Manhattan (bounded by Centre, Lafayette, Franklin, and White Streets) was declared unsafe for human occupancy and everyone in the building at the time was ordered to leave immediately.

According to a New York Times article Written the following day, “when the last man was out a squad of thirty policemen under Inspector Daley and Captain Galvin took charge of the building, roping it off on all sides and remaining on guard outside the building to forbid anyone to enter or even pass through any of the flanking streets”.

Continue reading
Contact Information
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2025, David Badertscher
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design