
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is This Thing On?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/</link>
	<description>Keeping politicians&#039; hands off the Net &#38; everything else related to technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:51:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: tramadol</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-35002</link>
		<dc:creator>tramadol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 22:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-35002</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;81e31de21f46 Hi     http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav tramadol&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>81e31de21f46 Hi     <a href="http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav" rel="nofollow">http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav</a> tramadol</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tramadol</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47647</link>
		<dc:creator>tramadol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 22:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47647</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;81e31de21f46 Hi     &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav&quot;&gt;http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav&lt;/a&gt; tramadol&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>81e31de21f46 Hi     <a href="http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav">http://www.abc-acupuncture.com/baxqorav</a> tramadol</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Lee</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47646</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 19:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47646</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Enigma, I agree. Isn&#039;t that what I said in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Enigma, I agree. Isn&#8217;t that what I said in the first place?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eee_eff</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47645</link>
		<dc:creator>eee_eff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 18:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47645</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#039;s emails to Arnold&#039;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#039;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release that to the press.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Yes there exists the intentional tort of public disclosure of private facts (which doesn&#039;t really exist for public figures)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But the fact that he intended to keep the files private does not change the fact that they are of public interest, so there&#039;s nothing wrong in fact, the press has a duty) to make the files public.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#8217;s emails to Arnold&#8217;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#8217;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release that to the press.</i><br /><br />Yes there exists the intentional tort of public disclosure of private facts (which doesn&#8217;t really exist for public figures)<br /><br />But the fact that he intended to keep the files private does not change the fact that they are of public interest, so there&#8217;s nothing wrong in fact, the press has a duty) to make the files public.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Lee</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-35001</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 18:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-35001</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Enigma, I agree. Isn&#039;t that what I said in the first place?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Enigma, I agree. Isn&#8217;t that what I said in the first place?</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: enigma_foundry</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-35000</link>
		<dc:creator>enigma_foundry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-35000</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#039;s emails to Arnold&#039;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#039;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release that to the press.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Yes there exists the intentional tort of public disclosure of private facts (which doesn&#039;t really exist for public figures)&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But the fact that he intended to keep the files private does not change the fact that they are of public interest, so there&#039;s nothing wrong in fact, the press has a duty) to make the files public.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#8217;s emails to Arnold&#8217;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#8217;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release that to the press.</i></p>

<p>Yes there exists the intentional tort of public disclosure of private facts (which doesn&#8217;t really exist for public figures)</p>

<p>But the fact that he intended to keep the files private does not change the fact that they are of public interest, so there&#8217;s nothing wrong in fact, the press has a duty) to make the files public.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47644</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47644</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Guys, it seems I wasn&#039;t clear. I completely agree that Arnold&#039;s technical people blundered. And I agree that people shouldn&#039;t be required to browse with JavaScript on. From a technical perspective, this wasn&#039;t a &quot;hacking incident,&quot; those files were public, and (as I said before) I don&#039;t think there was anything remotely unethical about accessing them&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#039;s emails to Arnold&#039;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#039;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release &lt;i&gt;that&lt;/i&gt; to the press. Yes, he (or his tech support people) blundered in posting the files, but that doesn&#039;t mean that anything people find there should automatically be reported by the press.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guys, it seems I wasn&#8217;t clear. I completely agree that Arnold&#8217;s technical people blundered. And I agree that people shouldn&#8217;t be required to browse with JavaScript on. From a technical perspective, this wasn&#8217;t a &#8220;hacking incident,&#8221; those files were public, and (as I said before) I don&#8217;t think there was anything remotely unethical about accessing them<br /><br />But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#8217;s emails to Arnold&#8217;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#8217;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release <i>that</i> to the press. Yes, he (or his tech support people) blundered in posting the files, but that doesn&#8217;t mean that anything people find there should automatically be reported by the press.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elf M. Sternberg</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47643</link>
		<dc:creator>Elf M. Sternberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47643</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;No offense, Tim, since you&#039;ve done the same thing, but the Governator&#039;s tech people blundered badly.  What you&#039;ve described is known as &quot;active indexing,&quot; which means that the web server has to make some effort to create a browseable directory listing when no default index file is provided.  At least with the Apache and Light webservers (I don&#039;t know much about Microsoft&#039;s IIS), active indexing is off by default.  You turn it on by adding the phrase &quot;Options +Indexing&quot; to the configuration.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Turn off active indexing, and you can&#039;t just browse the directory one level up: you can only view files for which you have an exact URL, or can guess the exact URL.  All other URLs (including the one for the directory itself) generate a &quot;file not found&quot; or &quot;listing not permitted&quot; warning, depending upon the server.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is a classic social vs. technological failure: the convenience of having one auto-indexed depository for audio both raw and postprocessed overrode any consideration of security.  The Governator and his tech people have now paid the price for that convenience.  &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No offense, Tim, since you&#8217;ve done the same thing, but the Governator&#8217;s tech people blundered badly.  What you&#8217;ve described is known as &#8220;active indexing,&#8221; which means that the web server has to make some effort to create a browseable directory listing when no default index file is provided.  At least with the Apache and Light webservers (I don&#8217;t know much about Microsoft&#8217;s IIS), active indexing is off by default.  You turn it on by adding the phrase &#8220;Options +Indexing&#8221; to the configuration.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p>Turn off active indexing, and you can&#8217;t just browse the directory one level up: you can only view files for which you have an exact URL, or can guess the exact URL.  All other URLs (including the one for the directory itself) generate a &#8220;file not found&#8221; or &#8220;listing not permitted&#8221; warning, depending upon the server.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p>This is a classic social vs. technological failure: the convenience of having one auto-indexed depository for audio both raw and postprocessed overrode any consideration of security.  The Governator and his tech people have now paid the price for that convenience.  </p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-34999</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 13:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-34999</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Guys, it seems I wasn&#039;t clear. I completely agree that Arnold&#039;s technical people blundered. And I agree that people shouldn&#039;t be required to browse with JavaScript on. From a technical perspective, this wasn&#039;t a &quot;hacking incident,&quot; those files were public, and (as I said before) I don&#039;t think there was anything remotely unethical about accessing them&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#039;s emails to Arnold&#039;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#039;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release &lt;i&gt;that&lt;/i&gt; to the press. Yes, he (or his tech support people) blundered in posting the files, but that doesn&#039;t mean that anything people find there should automatically be reported by the press.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guys, it seems I wasn&#8217;t clear. I completely agree that Arnold&#8217;s technical people blundered. And I agree that people shouldn&#8217;t be required to browse with JavaScript on. From a technical perspective, this wasn&#8217;t a &#8220;hacking incident,&#8221; those files were public, and (as I said before) I don&#8217;t think there was anything remotely unethical about accessing them</p>

<p>But look: if the files had been copies of Arnold&#8217;s emails to Arnold&#8217;s mother about her medical problems, or email to his wife discussing their sex life, I presume we&#8217;d all agree that it would be sleazy to release <i>that</i> to the press. Yes, he (or his tech support people) blundered in posting the files, but that doesn&#8217;t mean that anything people find there should automatically be reported by the press.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elf M. Sternberg</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-34998</link>
		<dc:creator>Elf M. Sternberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 13:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-34998</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;No offense, Tim, since you&#039;ve done the same thing, but the Governator&#039;s tech people blundered badly.  What you&#039;ve described is known as &quot;active indexing,&quot; which means that the web server has to make some effort to create a browseable directory listing when no default index file is provided.  At least with the Apache and Light webservers (I don&#039;t know much about Microsoft&#039;s IIS), active indexing is off by default.  You turn it on by adding the phrase &quot;Options +Indexing&quot; to the configuration.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Turn off active indexing, and you can&#039;t just browse the directory one level up: you can only view files for which you have an exact URL, or can guess the exact URL.  All other URLs (including the one for the directory itself) generate a &quot;file not found&quot; or &quot;listing not permitted&quot; warning, depending upon the server.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This is a classic social vs. technological failure: the convenience of having one auto-indexed depository for audio both raw and postprocessed overrode any consideration of security.  The Governator and his tech people have now paid the price for that convenience.  &lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No offense, Tim, since you&#8217;ve done the same thing, but the Governator&#8217;s tech people blundered badly.  What you&#8217;ve described is known as &#8220;active indexing,&#8221; which means that the web server has to make some effort to create a browseable directory listing when no default index file is provided.  At least with the Apache and Light webservers (I don&#8217;t know much about Microsoft&#8217;s IIS), active indexing is off by default.  You turn it on by adding the phrase &#8220;Options +Indexing&#8221; to the configuration.</p>

<p>Turn off active indexing, and you can&#8217;t just browse the directory one level up: you can only view files for which you have an exact URL, or can guess the exact URL.  All other URLs (including the one for the directory itself) generate a &#8220;file not found&#8221; or &#8220;listing not permitted&#8221; warning, depending upon the server.</p>

<p>This is a classic social vs. technological failure: the convenience of having one auto-indexed depository for audio both raw and postprocessed overrode any consideration of security.  The Governator and his tech people have now paid the price for that convenience.  </p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ned Ulbricht</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-47642</link>
		<dc:creator>Ned Ulbricht</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 10:46:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-47642</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;[I]t&#039;s equally clear that the governor didn&#039;t&lt;/i&gt; intend &lt;i&gt;to make the files publicly available. So it&#039;s not crazy to argue that it&#039;s unethical to release them public. But I don&#039;t think that argument really works.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Slow down.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If there wasn&#039;t any notice that the governor&#039;s staff intended to keep the files private, then whatever they may have thought is utterly immaterial.  Iow, it may very well be crazy to argue that it&#039;s &#8220;unethical&#8221;&#8212;let alone criminal&#8212; to release them publicly.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;According to Laura Kurtzman&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15503172.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;September 12th AP report&lt;/a&gt;, the governor&#039;s communications director has claimed that the files were protected by a pop-up, but this claim has been denied by the&lt;br&gt;Angelides campaign:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;[Adam] Mendelsohn said the Angelides campaign staffers should have encountered a pop-up warning before downloading the audio file.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p&gt;Amanda Crumley, communications director for the Angelides campaign, said the researcher who downloaded the file never received such a warning.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p&gt;&quot;If they have a pop-up window, that&#039;s something they&#039;ve added now,&quot; she said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;There aren&#039;t any further details on the mechanics of this supposed pop-up window, but imho, just for instance, it&#039;s unreasonable to assume that everyone must browse with javascript turned on.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Anyhow if turns out that there wasn&#039;t any real notice, then calling the CHP to investigate a &#8220;hacking incident&#8221; was at best a waste of time.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><i>[I]t&#8217;s equally clear that the governor didn&#8217;t</i> intend <i>to make the files publicly available. So it&#8217;s not crazy to argue that it&#8217;s unethical to release them public. But I don&#8217;t think that argument really works.</i></blockquote>

<p><br /></p>

<p>Slow down.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p>If there wasn&#8217;t any notice that the governor&#8217;s staff intended to keep the files private, then whatever they may have thought is utterly immaterial.  Iow, it may very well be crazy to argue that it&#8217;s &ldquo;unethical&rdquo;&mdash;let alone criminal&mdash; to release them publicly.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p>According to Laura Kurtzman&#8217;s <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15503172.htm" rel="nofollow">September 12th AP report</a>, the governor&#8217;s communications director has claimed that the files were protected by a pop-up, but this claim has been denied by the<br />Angelides campaign:</p>

<p><br /></p>

<blockquote><p>[Adam] Mendelsohn said the Angelides campaign staffers should have encountered a pop-up warning before downloading the audio file.</p><br /><p>Amanda Crumley, communications director for the Angelides campaign, said the researcher who downloaded the file never received such a warning.</p><br /><p>&#8220;If they have a pop-up window, that&#8217;s something they&#8217;ve added now,&#8221; she said.</p><br /></blockquote>

<p><br /></p>

<p>There aren&#8217;t any further details on the mechanics of this supposed pop-up window, but imho, just for instance, it&#8217;s unreasonable to assume that everyone must browse with javascript turned on.</p>

<p><br /></p>

<p>Anyhow if turns out that there wasn&#8217;t any real notice, then calling the CHP to investigate a &ldquo;hacking incident&rdquo; was at best a waste of time.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ned Ulbricht</title>
		<link>http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/comment-page-1/#comment-34997</link>
		<dc:creator>Ned Ulbricht</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 2006 09:46:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techliberation.com/2006/09/12/is-this-thing-on/#comment-34997</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;[I]t&#039;s equally clear that the governor didn&#039;t&lt;/i&gt; intend &lt;i&gt;to make the files publicly available. So it&#039;s not crazy to argue that it&#039;s unethical to release them public. But I don&#039;t think that argument really works.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Slow down.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If there wasn&#039;t any notice that the governor&#039;s staff intended to keep the files private, then whatever they may have thought is utterly immaterial.  Iow, it may very well be crazy to argue that it&#039;s &#8220;unethical&#8221;&#8212;let alone criminal&#8212; to release them publicly.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;According to Laura Kurtzman&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15503172.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;September 12th AP report&lt;/a&gt;, the governor&#039;s communications director has claimed that the files were protected by a pop-up, but this claim has been denied by the
Angelides campaign:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;[Adam] Mendelsohn said the Angelides campaign staffers should have encountered a pop-up warning before downloading the audio file.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Amanda Crumley, communications director for the Angelides campaign, said the researcher who downloaded the file never received such a warning.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&quot;If they have a pop-up window, that&#039;s something they&#039;ve added now,&quot; she said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

&lt;p&gt;There aren&#039;t any further details on the mechanics of this supposed pop-up window, but imho, just for instance, it&#039;s unreasonable to assume that everyone must browse with javascript turned on.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Anyhow if turns out that there wasn&#039;t any real notice, then calling the CHP to investigate a &#8220;hacking incident&#8221; was at best a waste of time.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><i>[I]t&#8217;s equally clear that the governor didn&#8217;t</i> intend <i>to make the files publicly available. So it&#8217;s not crazy to argue that it&#8217;s unethical to release them public. But I don&#8217;t think that argument really works.</i></blockquote>

<p>Slow down.</p>

<p>If there wasn&#8217;t any notice that the governor&#8217;s staff intended to keep the files private, then whatever they may have thought is utterly immaterial.  Iow, it may very well be crazy to argue that it&#8217;s &ldquo;unethical&rdquo;&mdash;let alone criminal&mdash; to release them publicly.</p>

<p>According to Laura Kurtzman&#8217;s <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15503172.htm" rel="nofollow">September 12th AP report</a>, the governor&#8217;s communications director has claimed that the files were protected by a pop-up, but this claim has been denied by the
Angelides campaign:</p>

<blockquote><p>[Adam] Mendelsohn said the Angelides campaign staffers should have encountered a pop-up warning before downloading the audio file.</p>

<p>Amanda Crumley, communications director for the Angelides campaign, said the researcher who downloaded the file never received such a warning.</p>

<p>&#8220;If they have a pop-up window, that&#8217;s something they&#8217;ve added now,&#8221; she said.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>There aren&#8217;t any further details on the mechanics of this supposed pop-up window, but imho, just for instance, it&#8217;s unreasonable to assume that everyone must browse with javascript turned on.</p>

<p>Anyhow if turns out that there wasn&#8217;t any real notice, then calling the CHP to investigate a &ldquo;hacking incident&rdquo; was at best a waste of time.</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

