Once again libraries are under threat of closure. It seems strange that a place of privacy protection and learning could lose support at a time when they are more relevant than ever.

Take the Netflix model of paying a nominal monthly fee in order to check out a movie, for example. Who wants a Netflix account when they could give the same amount to their local library and get far more in return? Libraries do information dissemination without the burden of trying to make a profit for their investors, which has come to mean they don’t have any incentive to track, collect and sell your identity information. They also end up allowing people to share access to a single license but, unlike Netflix, the license is technically owned by the viewers who share access.

Even more interesting is an idea that the notion of a library, as an exchange of information for public access, could be protected by law.

The Act says a local authority which is a library authority must “provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all persons . . . whose residence or place of work is within the library area of the authority or who are undergoing full-time education within that area”. Its stock of “books and other printed matter, and pictures, gramophone records, films and other materials”, must be “sufficient in number, range and quality to meet the general requirements and any special requirements both of adults and children”.

That sounds like the library is the school. It might seem crazy to try and legislate the quality of information until you read how Isaac Asmiov described the library in a letter to new patrons of one in Troy, Michigan:

An updated version is on YouTube from Piers Cawley, who wrote and performed a song called “Child of the Library” at OSCON 2011 and then received a standing ovation:

Funny intro in the README

Is this tool for me ?
———————

[…]

As a script kiddie, you may have found a piece of code you don’t understand on the internet, but are nonetheless decided to go to jail.

In all those cases, and surely many others, Pmcma was probably made for you.

I think they mean that if you run Pmcma on code without authorization and get caught you will go to jail. The decision to go to jail? That sounds like a protest. I don’t think that fits with the motive of someone who wants to run scripts in the sense of a “kiddie”. Perhaps it could be translated into French like this:

En tant que pirate adolescent vous voulez tester le logiciel sur Internet et ne se soucient pas d’aller en prison.

Ok, that’s my attempt at Canadian French, but still…I put the emphasis on being unaware of consequences rather than making it a decision to go to jail.

Anyway, Pmcma offers to automatically write exploits for flaws it finds in software (given it has root privilege) without the need for sourcecode.

The New York Times reports that a human rights advocacy group has filed a complaint in reference to Cisco network surveillance product marketing material.

The group’s evidence includes documents that the group says were part of Cisco’s marketing pitch to Chinese organizations and government agencies, including a page from a PowerPoint presentation boasting that Cisco’s technology can “recognize over 90% of Falun Gong pictures” in e-mail traffic. Another document, which the group says was used by Cisco’s sales teams, described a broad public security database that would contain information on Chinese citizens, including “key personnel of ‘Falun Gong’ evil cult organization.” That database would in turn be connected to a system of firewalls and monitoring systems that could be used to filter content that the Chinese government considers to be sensitive.

There are many odd details in this case. Why would Cisco make a direct reference to Falun Gong instead of an indirect reference, for example. Did they have to say Falun Gong pictures could be recognized? That seems unusually tailored for a customer pitch. And why would Cisco be headed into this market/sales pitch when they are at the end-of-life for their entire security product line (MARS, ASA, etc) everywhere else? But the much larger question this case raises, beyond any specific presentation or sales pitch, is whether any tech company could be sued on the same basis for selling to the Chinese.