cyberchuck.nz - Slashdot User

Yahoo Changes User Profiles, To Massive Outrage 255

Posted by kdawson on Sunday October 19, 2008 @12:20AM from the why'd-you-go-and-do-that dept.

Wiseleo writes "Yahoo decided to massively screw up their entire userbase by changing all user profiles to blank. No warning, no automated way to get data back, and other unwanted changes. The blog has such choice quotes as 'We know this has been a rough transition for some of you and, and are committed to helping you use, understand, and (hopefully) enjoy your new profile,' and, 'We also know lots of you worked hard on your old profiles and want your data. If you feel like you're missing data, we've saved a copy of your old profile (and alias) and our Customer Care team can retrieve this information. You won't, however, be able to revert back to your old profile format, but you will be able to get any data that you think is missing. To do this, please go here to contact Customer Care.' There were 850 comments posted, all negative, on the first day. There are hundreds more today. There is even more outrage on the Yahoo Messenger blog."

Comment Re:The real problem (Score 1) 635

by cyberchuck.nz on Thursday June 19, 2008 @01:23AM (#23850903) Attached to: Man Fired When Laptop Malware Downloaded Porn

This was a laptop, right? Not a computer sitting in his office. There is no reason to suppose that any of the alleged porn-surfing was done on company time.

How is it misuse then? Looking at sexy pictures doesn't harm the computer or the company at all. Do they also fire people for using their company laptop, at home and on their own time, for browsing Slashdot or eBay?

This is a problem we had in the company I work at.
Looking into it, we actually learnt that Microsoft ISA does its logging in UTC and we concluded that although it was possible the staff involved were browsing porn, it was done on personal time. Although it was a company laptop, the porn was browsed on personal time and so we said "Hey - look, can you not do this on company equipment?"

What is hard is proving intent.
Although you can prove that a website was browsed at a particular time (using proxy logs), you cannot easily prove intent. What's the difference between a person browsing porn and someone going to a dodgy (cracks/warez/etc) site and accidentally getting porn in the process? You can generally get an idea based on the number of hits a site gets, along with how long they spend on the site (or how many links they follow), but once more - you can not easily prove intent.

This is why we just blacklist at the proxy level - if they can't get to the websites, we don't have to worry about proving intent or informing management

Google, Yahoo, and the Elephant In the Room 123

Posted by CowboyNeal on Saturday June 14, 2008 @12:32PM from the nothing-to-see-here dept.

CWmike writes "Linda Rosencrance reports that despite assurances from Google and Yahoo that their online advertising deal doesn't need regulatory approval, the two companies should not be too quick to dismiss Microsoft's influence on Capitol Hill. Andrew Frank, an analyst at Gartner, said both Yahoo and Google will benefit from the deal, but he also said Microsoft will do everything in its power to bring the arrangement to a screeching halt. 'Expect Microsoft to challenge it and come back aggressively with some search plans of its own,' he said. Rob Enderle, of the Enderle Group, said Microsoft is a formidable opponent and knows how to play politics. 'Without Microsoft, this probably would stand up to regulatory scrutiny,' Enderle said. 'But Microsoft has increased its presence on Capitol Hill significantly ... and there are restraint of trade issues, so by the nature of Google's size and because Microsoft is going to be pounding on a lot of doors, I think this is going to be a problem.'"

Slashdot Top Deals