Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

January 08 2014

How did we end up with a centralized Internet for the NSA to mine?

I’m sure it was a Wired editor, and not the author Steven Levy, who assigned the title “How the NSA Almost Killed the Internet” to yesterday’s fine article about the pressures on large social networking sites. Whoever chose the title, it’s justifiably grandiose because to many people, yes, companies such as Facebook and Google constitute what they know as the Internet. (The article also discusses threats to divide the Internet infrastructure into national segments, which I’ll touch on later.)

So my question today is: How did we get such industry concentration? Why is a network famously based on distributed processing, routing, and peer connections characterized now by a few choke points that the NSA can skim at its leisure?

I commented as far back as 2006 that industry concentration makes surveillance easier. I pointed out then that the NSA could elicit a level of cooperation (and secrecy) from the likes of Verizon and AT&T that it would never get in the US of the 1990s, where Internet service was provided by thousands of mom-and-pop operations like Brett Glass’s wireless service in Laramie, Wyoming. Things are even more concentrated now, in services if not infrastructure.

Having lived through the Boston Marathon bombing, I understand what the NSA claims to be fighting, and I am willing to seek some compromise between their needs for spooking and the protections of the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. But as many people have pointed out, the dangers of centralized data storage go beyond the NSA. Bruce Schneier just published a pretty comprehensive look at how weak privacy leads to a weakened society. Others jeer that if social networking companies weren’t forced to give governments data, they’d be doing just as much snooping on their own to raise the click rates on advertising. And perhaps our more precious, closely held data — personal health information — is constantly subject to a marketplace for data mining.

Let’s look at the elements that make up the various layers of hardware and software we refer to casually as the Internet. How does centralization and decentralization work for each?

Public routers

One of Snowden’s major leaks reveals that the NSA pulled a trick comparable to the Great Firewall of China, tracking traffic as it passes through major routers across national borders. Like many countries that censor traffic, in other words, the NSA capitalized on the centralization of international traffic.

Internet routing within the US has gotten more concentrated over the years. There were always different “tiers” of providers, who all did basically the same thing but at inequitable prices. Small providers always complained about the fees extracted by Tier 1 networks. A Tier 1 network can transmit its own traffic nearly anywhere it needs to go for just the cost of equipment, electricity, etc., while extracting profit from smaller networks that need its transport. So concentration in the routing industry is a classic economy of scale.

International routers, of the type targeted by the NSA and many US governments, are even more concentrated. African and Latin American ISPs historically complained about having to go through US or European routers even if the traffic just came back to their same continent. (See, for instance, section IV of this research paper.) This raised the costs of Internet use in developing countries.

The reliance of developing countries on outside routers stems from another simple economic truth: there are more routers in affluent countries for the same reason there are more shopping malls or hospitals in affluent countries. Foreigners who have trespassed US laws can be caught if they dare to visit a shopping mall or hospital in the US. By the same token, their traffic can be grabbed by the NSA as it travels to a router in the US, or one of the other countries where the NSA has established a foothold. It doesn’t help that the most common method of choosing routes, the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), is a very old Internet standard with no concept of built-in security.

The solution is economic: more international routers to offload traffic from the MAE-Wests and MAE-Easts of the world. While opposing suggestions to “balkanize” the Internet, we can applaud efforts to increase connectivity through more routers and peering.

IaaS cloud computing

Centralization has taken place at another level of the Internet: storage and computing. Data is theoretically safe from intruders in the cloud so long as encryption is used both in storage and during transmission — but of course, the NSA thought of that problem long ago, just as they thought of everything. So use encryption, but don’t depend on it.

Movement to the cloud is irreversible, so the question to ask is how free and decentralized the cloud can be. Private networks can be built on virtualization solutions such as the proprietary VMware and Azure or the open source OpenStack and Eucalyptus. The more providers there are, the harder it will be to do massive data collection.

SaaS cloud computing

The biggest change — what I might even term the biggest distortion — in the Internet over the past couple decades has been the centralization of content. Ironically, more and more content is being produced by individuals and small Internet users, but it is stored on commercial services, where it forms a tempting target for corporate advertisers and malicious intruders alike. Some people have seriously suggested that we treat the major Internet providers as public utilities (which would make them pretty big white elephants to unload when the next big thing comes along).

This was not technologically inevitable. Attempts at peer-to-peer social networking go back to the late 1990s with Jabber (now the widely used XMPP standard), which promised a distributed version of the leading Internet communications medium of the time: instant messaging. Diaspora more recently revived the idea in the context of Facebook-style social networking.

These services allow many independent people to maintain servers, offering the service in question to clients while connecting where necessary. Such an architecture could improve overall reliability because the failure of an individual server would be noticed only by people trying to communicate with it. The architecture would also be pretty snoop-proof, too.

Why hasn’t the decentralized model taken off? I blame SaaS. The epoch of concentration in social media coincides with the shift of attention from free software to SaaS as a way of delivering software. SaaS makes it easier to form a business around software (while the companies can still contribute to free software). So developers have moved to SaaS-based businesses and built new DevOps development and deployment practices around that model.

To be sure, in the age of the web browser, accessing a SaaS service is easier than fussing with free software. To champion distributed architectures such as Jabber and Diaspora, free software developers will have to invest as much effort into the deployment of individual servers as SaaS developers have invested in their models. Business models don’t seem to support that investment. Perhaps a concern for privacy will.

May 23 2013

Surfer haben Rechte mit Nutzerumfrage zu Cloud Computing

Das Projekt “Surfer haben Rechte” des Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband (VZBV) hat sich zum Ziel gesetzt, “die Verbraucher zu befähigen, sich sicher im Internet zu bewegen und aktiv teilzunehmen.” Eine sehr wichtige Aufgabe. Aktuell bereitet das Projekt eine Informationskampagne zum Thema Cloud Computing vor. Hierzu wurde zunächst eine Online-Nutzerumfrage gestartet. Wir sind gespannt auf die Ergebnisse und werden auf unserem Informationsportal zum Cloud Computing ebenfalls darüber berichten.

March 30 2013

Deutschlandradio Kultur über die Cloud und digitale Konzertsäle am Samstag 14.05 Uhr

Die allseits beliebte Sendung rund um Medien und digitale Kultur “Breitband” gibt es heute wieder um 14.05 Uhr auf Deutschlandradio Kultur zu hören. Mit dabei ein Interview mit iRights-Kollege Philipp Otto zum Thema: Gewachsene Abhängigkeit – wie viel Vertrauen legen wir in die Cloud? Im Vorbericht zur Sendung heisst es:

Was passiert, wenn Dienste ihre Datenschnittstellen einschränken, woher kommt die Popularität von Whatsapp, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter und Co., und was haben Cloud-Dienste, was wir nicht haben?

Hier der Link zu unserem Informationsportal zu Cloud Computing.


Zeichnung von BBobyXP auf Deviantart, CC-BY-SA
Disclaimer: Mem.

In der Sendung wird es viele weitere spannende Themen geben. So geht es zum Beispiel um Bittorrent Live und Video-Streaming-Netzwerke Marke Eigenbau. dazu wird es auch noch ein Interview mit Alexander D. McWilliam geben. McWilliam spricht unter anderem über “How to build a digital concert hall?

Hier alle Informationen wie DRadio Kultur nachher – oder auch schon jetzt – gehört werden kann.

Reposted byphintech phintech

December 21 2012

Cloud 2012: Vom Big Brother-Award bis zum Öko-Server

Die „Cloud“ ist nicht immer einfach zu fassen. Doch sie entwickelt sich, wie rasant wachsende Datenströme im Netz zeigen. iRights hat die Nachrichten rund um die Wolke zusammengestellt.

Brauchen wir keine PCs und Konsolen mehr, wenn Schreibprogramme und Spiele auch internetbasiert laufen? Ist das Streaming die Zukunft der Musikindustrie? Das Cloud-Computing bedeutet eine digitale Revolution, doch die läuft recht still ab. Die Datenwolke ist kein Promi, in den üblichen Jahresrückblicken wird sie keinen Platz finden.

iRights Cloud hat Meldungen zusammengestellt, die auch ein wenig stellvertretend für die Entwicklung des Cloud-Computings stehen. Neben Enthusiasmus für viele neue Anwendungen zeigen sich Ängste: Wie sicher ist das Cloud-Computing? Bedeutet es das Ende der Privatsphäre? Wie klimaschädlich sind die großen Rechenzentren?

Das Informationsportal iRights Cloud wird vom Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz (BMELV)  gefördert. Der Jahresrückblick „Cloud 2012“ ist als Artikel und als PDF kostenlos abrufbar und darf unverändert und mit Namensnennung im Internet und anderswo weiterverbreitet werden (Creative Commons: Namensnennung-Keine Bearbeitung / CC BY-ND 2.0 DE).

Cloud 2012: Vom Big Brother-Award bis zum Öko-Server

Die “Cloud” ist nicht immer einfach zu fassen. Doch sie entwickelt sich, wie rasant wachsende Datenströme im Netz zeigen. iRights hat die Nachrichten rund um die Wolke zusammengestellt.

Brauchen wir keine PCs und Konsolen mehr, wenn Schreibprogramme und Spiele auch “internetbasiert” laufen? Ist das Streaming die Zukunft der Musikindustrie? Das Cloud-Computing bedeutet eine digitale Revolution, doch die läuft recht still ab. Die Datenwolke ist kein Promi, in den üblichen Jahresrückblicken wird sie keinen Platz finden.

iRights Cloud hat Meldungen zusammengestellt, die auch ein wenig stellvertretend für die Entwicklung des Cloud-Computings stehen. Neben Enthusiasmus für viele neue Anwendungen zeigen sich Ängste: Wie sicher ist das Cloud-Computing? Bedeutet es das Ende der Privatsphäre? Wie klimaschädlich sind die großen Rechenzentren?

Das Informationsportal iRights Cloud wird vom Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz (BMELV)  gefördert. Der Jahresrückblick “Cloud 2012″ ist als Artikel und als PDF kostenlos abrufbar und darf unverändert und mit Namensnennung im Internet und anderswo weiterverbreitet werden (Creative Commons: Namensnennung-Keine Bearbeitung / CC BY-ND 2.0 DE).

iRights Cloud: Cloud – Der Jahresrückblick 2012, 21.12.2012

Cloud Jahresrückblick als PDF, ca. 400 KB

November 27 2012

U.S. Senate to consider long overdue reforms on electronic privacy

In 2010, electronic privacy needed digital due process. In 2012, it’s worth defending your vanishing rights online.

This week, there’s an important issue before Washington that affects everyone who sends email, stores files in Dropbox or sends private messages on social media. In January, O’Reilly Media went dark in opposition to anti-piracy bills. Personally, I believe our right to digital due process for government to access private electronic are just as important.

Why? Here’s the context for my interest. The silver lining in the way former CIA Director David Petraeus’ affair was discovered may be its effect on the national debate around email and electronic privacy, and our rights in a surveillance state. The courts and Congress have failed to fully address the constitutionality of warrantless wiretapping of cellphones and the location of “persons of interest.” Phones themselves, however, are a red herring. What’s at stake is the Fourth Amendment in the 21st century, with respect to the personal user data that telecommunications and technology firms hold that government is requesting without digital due process.

On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider an update to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), the landmark 1986 legislation that governs the protections citizens have when they communicate using the Internet or cellphones. (It’s the small item on the bottom of this meeting page.)

If you somehow missed the uproar online last week, the tech policy world went a bit nutty when CNET’s Declan McCullagh broke a story about Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) rewriting the text of his ECPA amendment.

By the end of the day, Senator Leahy said he would not support that proposal, but what the draft reflected is pressure from law enforcement and federal regulatory agencies to not only keep warrantless access open but to enshrine it in law.

Today, Senator Leahy’s office posted a manager’s amendment and summary of changes for the committee’s consideration.

“The manager’s amendment is vastly improved, as compared to the controversial one last week,” said Greg Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy & Technology and the director of its Project on Freedom, Security & Technology, in a phone interview.

“We support the manager’s amendment, and will support the bill,” he said. “It will establish a clear, consistent standard for law enforcement access to content. It will require a warrant going forward. This is a huge improvement over current law and will bring ECPA into the modern age.”

In a post on the amendment at CDT.org, Nojeim reiterated CDT’s support. “It will protect consumer privacy, remove the uncertainty law enforcement currently faces, and foster the growth of U.S. cloud computing companies, which will be able to promise their clients that the information they store in cloud will be as secure against government access as information stored locally,” he wrote.

Verify, then trust

This week, the senators on the Judiciary Committee are likely to continue be under some pressure to suggest changes to this amendment that would weaken the protections in it. The manager’s amendment already contains some concessions to law enforcement, with respect to extending the time periods after which the federal government must notify an individual that government has obtained electronic communications, or that a service provider must wait to inform that individual that those records have been obtained.

There’s also clarity that the search warrant requirement in this amendment does not apply to federal anti-terrorism laws, specifically the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

“We believe that they’ve kept the central protection in the manager’s amendment, that law enforcement must obtain a warrant to read private communications or digital content, such as documents stored in the cloud,” said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for the ACLU, in a phone interview. “That’s a huge privacy win, and we’re glad to see that that’s stayed in.”

Senator Leahy’s statement, however, does leave room for debate:

“I welcome the upcoming Senate Judiciary Committee debate on updating the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to better protect Americans’ digital privacy rights. Today, this critical privacy law is significantly outdated and out-paced by rapid changes in technology and the changing mission of our law enforcement agencies.

“When I led the effort to write the ECPA more than 25 years ago, no one could have imagined that emails would be stored electronically for years or envisioned the many new threats to privacy in cyberspace. That is why I am working to update this law to reflect the realities of our time and to better protect privacy in the digital age. I join the many privacy advocates, technology leaders, legal scholars and other stakeholders who support reforming ECPA to improve privacy rights in cyberspace. I hope that all members of the Committee will join me in supporting the effort in Congress to update this law to protect Americans’ privacy.”

The other side of the issue is represented by a diverse coalition of digital rights advocates that spans traditional ideological labels. Notably, Americans for Tax Reform and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) agreed that electronic privacy deserves a bipartisan upgrade.

The coalition is urging people to go to VanishingRights.com to tell their senators to support warrants for personal electronic communication.

I think they’re on the right side of history.

July 16 2012

Wochenrückblick: CETA-Abkommen, Verwertungsgesellschaften, Cloud-Datenschutz

Nach ACTA sorgt CETA für neue Diskussionen, die EU-Kommission will Verwertungsgesellschaften stärker regulieren, Datenschützer stellen Praxishinweis

Weiterlesen

May 21 2012

Wochenrückblick: Urheberrechtsdebatte, Button-Lösung, Cloud-Sicherheit

Im Urheberrechtsstreit konstatiert SPD-Netzpolitiker Klingbeil „Versäumnisse“ der Politik, die Button-Lösung gegen Kostenfallen im Netz gilt

Weiterlesen

October 12 2011

Nicht aus allen Wolken gefallen: Internet-Nutzern ist »Cloud Computing« längst bekannt

Mit dem Thema »Cloud Computing« wissen die allermeisten deutschen Internet-Nutzer schon seit langem etwas anzufangen: Der Bekanntheitsgrad der via Internet nutzbaren, web-basierten Programme liegt bereits seit drei Jahren bei deutlich mehr als 90 %.
Auch die tatsächliche Nutzung von web-basierten Diensten hat sich auf hohem Niveau etabliert. Zwar lassen die Ergebnisse der W3B-Studie keine Wachstumstendenzen bei der Nutzung erkennen – dessen ungeachtet nutzt heute immerhin gut ein Drittel der Internet-Nutzerschaft (35 %) diese Services. Gut ein weiteres Viertel (27 %) setzt web-basierte Anwendungen zumindest gelegentlich ein.

Die meistgenutzten Cloud-Angebote sind dabei ganz klar die web-basierten E-Mail-Dienste (wie z. B. GMX FreeMail oder Yahoo! Mail). Sie werden von 41 % der deutschsprachigen Internet-Nutzer ca. einmal pro Woche eingesetzt. Es folgen web-basierte Officeanwendungen sowie Online-Virenscanner mit je ca. 12 % wöchentlichen Anwendern.
Keine herausragende Rolle spielt hingegen bislang die Online-Speicherung von Backups bzw. Daten in einer »Cloud«: Lediglich 5 % der befragten Internet-Nutzer machen von dieser Möglichkeit ca. einmal pro Woche Gebrauch. Weitere 5 % tun dies ca. einmal pro Monat.

Die Nutzerschaft der Online-Datenspeicherung ist somit heute (noch) eine sehr überschaubare Gruppe. Diese Woche stellt Apple offiziell seinen »iCloud«-Service vor, welcher in das Betriebssystem iOS 5 integriert ist. Wird es Apples iCloud gelingen, diesen Bereich zu revolutionieren? Wird das Cloud Computing durch Apple zum Massen-Phänomen? Gefragt sind hier nutzerorientierte Angebote: Was die Anwender heute an web-basierten Programmen schätzen, ist vor allem deren einfache Verfügbarkeit. Auch die leichte Bedienbarkeit sowie die geringen Kosten sind aus Nutzersicht attraktiv.

Der W3B-Report »Nutzungsverhalten« mit weiteren Auswertungen ist im Juni 2011 erschienen.

September 06 2011

02mydafsoup-01

ownCloud | gives you freedom and control over your own data


ownCloud gives you universal access to your files through a web interface or WebDAV. It also provides a platform to easily view & sync your contacts, calendars and bookmarks across all your devices and enables basic editing right on the web.

August 25 2011

DAV zum Cloud Computing

Der Ausschuss Informationsrecht des Deutschen Anwaltvereins hat zum Thema Cloud Computing, speziell aus datenschutzrechtlicher Sicht Stellung genommen.

Seine zentralen Thesen lauten:

  • Cloud Computing mit Dienstleistern außerhalb der EU ist (rechtlich) derzeit nicht möglich.
  • Wegen der strengen deutschen Regeln zur Auftragsdatenverabreitung ist Cloud Computing in der Regel selbst dann unzulässig, wenn die Datenverarbeitung in solchen Ländern stattfindet, die nach Ansicht der EU ein geeignetes Datenschutzniveau aufweisen.

Das bedeutet aber im Grunde nichts anderes, als, dass die Cloud-Dienste von amerikanischen Anbietern wie Apple oder Google nach deutschem Datenschutzrecht unzulässig sind und, dass eigentlich jegliches Cloud Computing bei denen die Server außerhalb der EU stehen, nicht den Anforderungen unseres Datenschutzrechts genügt.

Bereits der Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragten hatte in seinem letzten Tätigkeitsbericht zum Ausdruck gebracht, dass er Cloud Computing als globales Modell für nicht mit dem Datenschutzrecht vereinbar hält. Dass die Vorschriften über die Auftragsdatenverarbeitung bei entsprechender Auslegung auch das Hosting in Frage stellen können, habe ich bereits in einem früheren Beitrag erläutert.

July 31 2011

02mydafsoup-01
FreedomBox v Facebook - Eben Moglen on Vimeo


Eben Moglen talks about the perils of the centralisation of data and the way to regain control of our internet. A condenced version of his 2010 Open World Forum talk.
freedomboxfoundation.org/​
kickstarter.com/​projects/​721744279/​push-the-freedombox-foundation-from-0-to-60-in-30
Reposted byRKcheg00

July 20 2011

02mydafsoup-01

[...]

The problem is that this concentration of power in the hands of a few creates problems for resilience and availability. "From an engineering standpoint, the downsides to this are the same things you get with monoculture in agriculture," says Labovitz. Ecosystems without genetic variation are the most vulnerable to being wiped out by a single virus. Similarly, as more of us depend on ever fewer sources for content, and get locked into proprietary technologies, we will become more susceptible to potentially catastrophic single points of failure.

That problem will only intensify with the ascendancy of the cloud, one of the biggest internet innovations of the past few years. The cloud is the nebulous collection of servers in distant locations that increasingly store our data and provide crucial services. It started with web mail services like Hotmail, which let you store your email on central servers rather than on the computer in front of you. The concept quickly spread. Last month, Apple announced the iCloud, a free service that will store all your music, photos, email, books and other data - and even apps - for seamless access via any Apple device, be that an iPhone, iPad or MacBook laptop.

Some companies have moved their entire IT departments into the cloud. Indeed, there are companies that barely exist outside the cloud: in addition to backing up data, Amazon lets internet-based companies rent space on its servers.

The cloud could generate exactly the single points of failure that the internet's robust architecture was supposed to prevent. And when those points fail, they may fail spectacularly. During an outage of Amazon's cloud service in April, when the company's servers went dark, entire companies briefly blinked out of existence. Cloud services also raise security concerns. "One big issue with being connected to the cloud is that a lot of information is in different places and shared," says Labovitz. "You no longer have one castle to protect. It's a much more distributed architecture, and a connected one. You just need one weak link."

[...]

Welcome to the age of the splinternet - tech - 20 July 2011 - New Scientist
Reposted bykrekk krekk
02mydafsoup-01
[...]

‘When it comes to Cloud Computing, the relationship between the service provider and the customer is by nature asymmetrical’, he says. ‘The former has thousands if not millions of customers and limited liability; in case of litigation, it will have entire control over elements of proof. As for the customer, he bears the risk of having his service interrupted, his data lost or corrupted — when not retained by the supplier, or accessed by third parties and government agencies)’.


[...]

The CVML partner then laid out six critical elements to be implemented in European legislation. These would legally supersede US contractual terms and, as a result, better protect European customers.

1 / Transparency. Guillaume Seligmann suggests a set of standard indicators pertaining to service availability, backup arrangements and pricing – like in the banking industry for instance. In Europe, a bank must provide a borrower with the full extent of his commitments when underwriting a loan. (Some economists say this disposition played a significant role at containing the credit bubble that devastated the US economy).Soup Bookmarklet

2 / Incident notifications. Today, unless he is directly affected, the customer learns about outages from specialized medias, rarely though a detailed notification from the service provider. Again, says Seligmann, the Cloud operator should have the obligation to report in greater details all incidents as well as steps taken to contain damage. This would allow the customer to take all measures required to protect his business operations.

3 / Data restitution. On this crucial matter, most contracts remain vague. In many instances, the customer wanting to terminate his contract and to get back his precious data, will get a large dump of raw data, sometimes in the provider’s proprietary format. ‘That’s unacceptable’, says the attorney. ‘The customer should have the absolute guarantee that, at any moment of his choosing, he we have the right to get the latest backed-up version of his data, presented in a standard format immediately useable by another provider. By no means can data be held hostage in the event of a lawsuit’.

4 / Control and certification. Foreign-headquartered companies, themselves renting facilities in other countries, create a chain fraught with serious hazards. The only way to mitigate risks is to give customers the ability to monitor at all times the facility hosting their data. Probably not the easiest to implement for confidentiality and security reasons. At least, says Guillaume Seligmann, any Cloud provider should be certified by a third party entity in the same way many industries (energy, transportation, banking) get certifications and ratings from specialized agencies – think about how critical such provisions are for airlines or nuclear power plants.

5 / Governing laws. The idea is to avoid the usual clause: “For any dispute, the parties consent to personal jurisdiction in, and the exclusive venue of, the courts of Santa Clara County, California”. To many European companies, this sounds like preemptive surrender. According to Seligmann’s proposal, the end-user should have the option to take his case before his own national court and the local judge should have the power to order really effective remedies. This is the only way to make the prospect of litigation a realistic one.

6 / Enforceability. The credibility of the points stated above depends on their ability to supersede and to render ineffective conflicting contractual terms imposed by the service provider. In that respect, the European Union is well armed to impose such constraints, as it already did on personal data protection. In the US, imposing the same rules might be a different story.

The overall issue of regulating the cloud is far from anecdotal. Within a few years, we can bet the bulk of our hard drives – individual as well as collective ones – will be in other people’s large hands: Amazon S3 storage service now stores 339 billion objects – twice last year’s volume.
We’ll gain in terms of convenience and efficiency. We should also gain in security.

[END]
Catching the Cloud | mondaynote.com 2011-07-17
Reposted bykrekk krekk

May 18 2011

Online-Konsultation über Cloud Computing

Die Europäische Kommission hat eine öffentliche Online-Konsultation über die Vor- und Nachteile von Cloud Computing gestartet. Im Rahmen der Digitalen Agenda soll eine “Europäische Cloud Computing Strategie” entwickelt werden. Zielgruppe der Konsultation sind neben Unternehmen und Behörden auch Wissenschafteinrichtungen und weitere Anwender. Bei der Umfrage geht es um “Erfahrungsberichte, Bedürfnisse, Erwartungen und Einblicke in deren [der Zielgruppe] Nutzung von Cloud Computing”.

Es geht konkret um Fragen für “Clouds für Nutzer”, “Clouds im öffentlichen Sektor”, “gesetzliche Rahmenbedingungen”, “Interoperabilität” und nicht zuletzt um globale Lösungen und Einschätzungen in diesem Bereich. Die EU-Kommission umreißt das Problemfeld wie folgt: “Cloud Computing bedeutet ein anderes Denkmuster in Bezug auf unsere heutigen dezentralisierten IT Systeme. Es verändert bereits heute IT-Dienstleistungsanbieter und es wird auch die Art, wie andere Industriebereiche ihre IT Bedürfnisse als Endnutzer ausbauen und wie Bürger ihre Computer und sonstigen mobilen Geräte nutzen, verändern. Obwohl es sich noch im Anfangsstadium befindet, ist Cloud Computing bereits eine kommerzielle Realität mit einer sich ständig vergrößernden Anhängerschaft.”

Die Beteiligung an der Konsultation ist bis zum 31. August 2011 möglich.

December 09 2010

Turbulenzen in der Wolke: Proprietäre Clouds oder freie Netze

Proprietäres Cloud-Computing legt die Macht über die Daten in die Hände weniger.

Weiterlesen

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl