Funny examples of how surveillance and detection systems are prone to false negatives:

Philosopher method
Rest your head on your hand. This position suggests that you are tackling an issue, which might be crucial to the existance of the company.

While working on security metrics, I came across this lonely graph:

I say lonely, because it does not come with any explanation or context. Correlation? Cause? The intended message is clear, which is good. But good is not enough. Great charts are hard to build in a way that they can can resist attacks, just like secure systems.

The best part of this controversy is the concern expressed by one of the donkey owners:

Water trader Simon Kamau, who uses donkeys to transport water to his clients utters: “In all the three years I have been in this business, I have never tied a nappy on a donkey.

“The problem is that the donkey can give you a fatal kick. I was once kicked by a donkey and it broke my leg.

“What the council should do is come to us traders and show us how to tie the nappies on the donkeys,” Mr Kamau says

Hmm, Mr Kamau does not mention what he was doing behind his donkey. Maybe he just did not realize the risks. Some large American cities used to be smelled before seen, the saying goes, due to horse droppings and privately managed garbage services. A public control method thus makes sense if the city wants to systematically clean its streets. But it sounds like some donkey training might also be needed…or perhaps regulation with more teeth that would spur more than nappy innovation. Come on Apple, where is your iDonkey? Nice case study of how controls can go awry.

Argh. I recently had to patch the platform this site runs on and I have noticed a few glitches. You will probably notice some of them if you poke around, at least until I find time to lint-pick. For example, today I mysteriously lost a post or two, including one about a BBC man who was jailed by a case of mistaken identity. My comment was basically that the story made the mainstream news most likely because of the victim’s affiliation. The story is here.

The arrest warrant had a photo which obviously wasn’t me and the passport number didn’t even match my own. It was all so absurd I thought the mix-up would be sorted within hours. Instead I found myself in a Slovenian court.

Details, details. He is lucky he did not discover the problem in the American system, or he might have been shuffled off without any chance to defend himself.

My brother, who’d flown over from the UK, collected me with consulate staff. My flight was the next day so I booked into a hotel and to kill time I went for a walk with my brother. By coincidence we bumped into one of the policemen who’d arrested me.

Uh, huh. What a “coincidence” to run into the police. Either this guy is incredibly naive, or the police in Slovenia do a terrible job of silently trailing suspects. I wonder if they literally “bumped” into each other.

He said he thought I was not the right man, but had to do his job – and he didn’t want me to go away with a bad impression of Slovenia or its people. I haven’t. But psychologically it’s hit me hard and will always live with me. My name has been removed from international “wanted persons” files but I still worry about travelling. Plans to visit the United States next year have been cancelled because I’m worried about US immigration.

A bad impression? I believe far fewer mistakes could have been made. Was this the fault of the policeman, who apparently could tell something was off from the start, or the “system” of detection that he is meant to enforce?