среда, 29 июля 2015 г.

uEurpean Union Investigates Claims Disneyland Paris Charges Different Prices According To Where Customer Livesr


4 4 4 9
  • In European Union member states, consumers aren’t supposed to be charged differently for products or services depending on where they live. Yet visitors to the happiest place accessible by Paris commuter rail, Disneyland Paris, have complained to the European Commission that the resort charges people differently according to where they’re from.

    The items in question are vacation packages, not just regular old tickets to the park itself. The Financial Times provided the example of a premium package, for which travelers from other parts of France were charged €1,346, but people from the United Kingdom had to pay €1,870, and someone from Germany would be charged €2,447.

    Disneyland disagrees with the allegations, pointing out that visitors from different places need different services, and that travelers from more distant parts of Europe must book their travel farther in advance, which raises the prices. The company’s vice president explained to AFP that “an English (visitor) will reserve a holiday six months to a year in advance, while with the French it’s four to six months ahead.” The site doesn’t detect where visitors are and show them different prices accordingly, he claims.

    While people traveling from different places might see different prices on the website, they are welcome to call in and request the price available to a French tourist: they’d just be responsible for getting themselves to the park using railroads or a car, instead of having transportation charges included in their package price.

    Does this explanation make sense? Since the alleged discriminatory pricing happened in France, French investigators are now in charge of the case and will check out consumers’ claims.

    Disneyland Paris rejects price discrimination claim [AFP]
    Taking the Mickey? Disneyland Paris accused of overcharging foreign visitors [Guardian]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uNearly 80% Of Americans Hold Some Form Of Debt, But It Isn’t Always Badr


4 4 4 9
  • When most people think of debt, they probably conjure up a vision of consumers struggling to make ends meet after making unwise financial decisions. But that actually isn’t the case for most Americans. In fact, like other things, debt in moderation is actually a good thing.

    That’s according to a new report [PDF] from Pew Charitable Trusts that found debt is a routine but complicated aspect of U.S. households’ with nearly 80% of Americans holding at least some form of debt.

    The report, titled “The Complex Story of American Debt,” examines how four generations of consumers’ hold debt and their views toward it.

    Of the 80% of consumers holding debt, most is connected to mortgages. The median amount of debt for consumers across all generations was $67,900.

    Unsurprisingly, the divide in the amount of debt held by consumers finds that middle-aged consumers have the most, while those entering the later stages of life and those just entering adulthood have the least.

    Screen Shot 2015-07-29 at 11.04.49 AMMembers of the silent generation – those born between 1928 and 1945 – hold just $30,000 in total debt, while Gen Xers – those born between 1965 and 1980 – have an average of $103,800 in debt.

    Much like consumers indebtedness varies by generation, so do their feelings about debt.

    For the most part, a majority of Americans — seven in 10 — view debt as a necessity in their lives, even though they would prefer not to have it.

    Similarly, most consumers, about 68%, believe that loans and credit cards have expanded their opportunities by allowing them to make purchases or investments that their income and savings alone could not support.

    Still, the report found that debt is more often than not seen as a negative mark in consumers’ lives, with 79% of consumers believing that other people use debt irresponsibly.

    Screen Shot 2015-07-29 at 11.05.45 AMConsumers’ attitudes on debt varied significantly depending on their stage in life. For example, members of the silent generation say that the availability of credit cards and loans afforded them more opportunities, while members of the Millennial generation – those born between 1981 and 1997 – see those products as a potentially harmful to their finances.

    “Overall, Gen Xers’ and Millennials’ aversion to debt may reflect their greater debt burdens at an earlier stage in life than previous generations, as well as having experienced the Great Recession when they were just beginning school, entering the workforce, and purchasing their first homes,” the report states.

    The report found that each new generation is significantly influenced by the generation before them.

    That trend can certainly be seen when it comes to consumers’ debt related to education. It appears that while many consumers say they would change the way they paid for college, they haven’t exactly passed that knowledge to younger generations.

    Many Gen Xers that are still paying off their student loans are now gearing up to send their own children to college.

    Nearly 93% of Gen X parents say their oldest child will go to college, with about 83% saying they plan to help pay for the costs. However, a majority have only set aside $4,000 in dedicated college savings accounts, believing that their child will receive grants and scholarships to pay for a majority of their college expenses.

    “In reality, far fewer students receive grants or scholarships, and more depend on loans,” the report states. “The college-bound teenagers of Gen Xers are poised to take on as much or more debt than their parents.”

    Consumers’ financial health and sense of security related to debt also varies depending on age.

    For older Americans, lower levels of debt indicate greater financial security, while consumers of working age who have higher amounts of debt have healthier balance sheets, according to the report.

    When comparing low- and high-debt retirees, the report found those who paid off their debts earlier in life were more likely to have accumulated more assets and net worth.

    As for the younger Americans accumulating more debt – for homes or education purposes – their current financial situation is similar to those of the silent generation who now feel more secure.

    Overall, the report suggests that while the long-term effects of debt for young Americans is still to be determined, their financial futures may be on the same path as older generations.

    “Sustainable debt can be a positive force for the economic mobility and financial security of young Americans and their families,” the report states.



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uHackers Can Now Remotely Attack A Gun, Change Its Target, And Lock The Owner Outr


4 4 4 9
  • (jayRaz)

    (Not the gun that was hacked. Photo: jayRaz)


    Over the past few years we’ve heard a lot about the smart, connected devices that make up the internet of things. From ceiling fans to cars and cameras, they’re everywhere. Unfortunately, anything that can connect to the internet can be hacked through the internet… and now, it seems, that includes guns.

    Wired has reported today on a husband and wife security team that will be presenting their newest hack at a security conference in August. Their project? They’ve spent the last year hacking a pair of sniper rifles.

    The TrackingPoint self-aiming rifles come with a fully-computerized, Linux-powered scope that allows the user to designate a target, then set variables like wind, temperature, and ammunition type. When the shooter pulls the trigger, the computer takes over and chooses the specific moment to fire, only activating when the gun is perfectly aimed, Wired explains. The weapon “can allow even a gun novice to reliably hit targets from as far as a mile away.”

    That is, as long as nobody’s come along on wifi and stuck their fingers in the gun’s code.

    The weapon’s wifi is turned off by default, which is the good news. The bad news is, as soon as it’s turned on, it’s vulnerable. The rifle uses a default password that allows anyone in range to communicate with it. Once connected, a hacker can access the weapon’s APIs to muck around with its targeting application and other features.

    (Why does a gun have wifi at all, you may ask? “So you can do things like stream a video of your shot to a laptop or iPad,” Wired explains.)

    The researchers demonstrated to Wired the range of control they had remotely over the gun. By assigning new values to variables the scope tracks, they were able to completely change its targets or even to disable the gun entirely. They were also able to interfere with the gun’s security, altering the PIN a user can set to limit others’ access to lock out the owner.

    Happily, they were not able to fire the rifle remotely — doing that still requires manually pulling the trigger.

    The risks from this particular hack, of this particular rifle, are low. Researchers had to acquire and dismantle one of the rifles in order to discover the full extent of its vulnerabilities. The guns are luxury items that go for $13,000 apiece, Wired reports, and about a thousand have been sold. They are far from the most common firearms being purchased and carried today.

    But the potential pitfalls in the category of “smart gun” are something that buyers will have to be keenly aware of going forward. Using technology to increase security features on firearms isn’t itself a bad idea — but providing insecure internet connections opens it up to a whole world of problems.

    In the same way that very few people thought about the network security of their cars until last week, very few people are thinking about the default password and exploitable wifi code embedded in firearms today. The problem is larger than one gun, one phone, one printer, one car, or one camera. It’s a whole world of default passwords and poor security that consumers don’t usually even know they need to change.

    Hackers Can Disable a Sniper Rifle—Or Change Its Target [Wired]



ribbi
  • by Kate Cox
  • via Consumerist


uThe Pros & Cons Of Windows 10 Sharing Your WiFi Passwords With Your Contactsr


4 4 4 9
  • All around the world today, Windows users are updating their operating systems to Windows 10, better known as Microsoft’s attempt to atone for the sins of Windows 8. However, the newest version of Windows has a feature that is either — depending on who you speak to — a huge privacy concern, or maybe not that big a deal.

    The feature, dubbed Wi-Fi Sense, shares an encrypted version of a user’s WiFi network password with their Skype, Outlook, and possibly Facebook contacts.

    The sharing with Skype and Outlook contact is by default, while the user must opt in to share with Facebook contacts. The contacts never actually see the password, which is stored remotely on a Microsoft server, but if they ever come within reach of your WiFi network, they’ll be able to log on.

    If that doesn’t sound like a good idea to you, you’re not alone in thinking so.

    Cybersecurity expert and journalist Brian Krebs is skeptical about the safeguards that Microsoft has claimed to build into the Wi-Fi sense.

    “The company says your contacts will only be able to share your network access, and that Wi-Fi Sense will block those users from accessing any other shared resources on your network, including computers, file shares or other devices,” he writes. “But these words of assurance probably ring hollow for anyone who’s been paying attention to security trends over the past few years: Given the myriad ways in which social networks and associated applications share and intertwine personal connections and contacts, it’s doubtful that most people are aware of who exactly all of their social network followers really are from one day to the next.”

    After all, hackers with a goal are not easily deterred by roadblocks put in their way. Just look at the Home Depot payment terminal breach. The hackers in that case used phishing e-mails to access the credentials of a third-party air-conditioning contractor for the retailer. What’s to stop someone from deceiving a user into adding them to their contacts?

    Microsoft’s argument is that Wi-Fi Sense is actually safer than simply giving your friends your WiFi password whenever they come to visit. The idea is that it’s more secure to grant contacts access to the network without ever having to give them the password than it is to explicitly share your password with them.

    Once someone has the actual password, it can be shared with others or possibly used to figure out other passwords for websites and services. Microsoft claims that your Wi-Fi Sense contacts have no way to pass your passwords on to others.

    Microsoft also says that Wi-Fi Sense will not share passwords for networks secured with authentication protocols like 802.1x EAP, meaning most corporate networks would not be included. But if your business uses a more simple wireless network that’s similar to what you’d find in a typical home environment, Wi-Fi Sense is probably not a good idea.

    Over at Forbes.com, Amit Chowdry acknowledged the concerns of Wi-Fi Sense but said he believes the benefits outweigh the risks.

    “This feature lets your friends access your Wi-Fi network without having to actually tell them your password. Sometimes people use the same password for their e-mail and Wi-Fi network, which could be a major privacy risk if their friends are nosy,” he writes. “Wi-Fi Sense also makes connecting to your Wi-Fi network less of a hassle if your password is extra long with a variety of letters, numbers and symbols. And Wi-Fi Sense does not actually show your Wi-Fi password at all.”

    But that seems to bring up the concern about the fact that all these network passwords are going to be stored by Microsoft. That has to be a tempting target for hackers hoping to access all that information.

    “Depending on Microsoft’s infosec protocols, this is either completely fine and dandy, or a potential goldmine for wardriving hackers,” writes Ars Technica’s Sebastian Anthony. “Again, as long as you don’t share the passkey from your workplace’s Wi-Fi network, the potential security risk is low.”

    So how do you opt out?

    People wanting to avoid having anything to do with Wi-Fi Sense can do two things: Opt out of the feature on Windows 10, and change the name of their wireless router.

    The first is the easiest. Simply go to “Change Wi-Fi settings” on your computer, then click “Manage Wi-Fi settings,” where you can turn the feature off.

    To keep anyone from using Wi-Fi Sense to access your home network, change the SSID of your network by adding “_optout” to the end. So if your network name is “ChrisIsAwesome,” you’d change it to “ChrisIsAwesome_optout.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uGoogle Slaps Air Pollution Monitoring Systems On Street View Cars In San Franciscor


4 4 4 9
  • The next time you see a Google Street View car cruising down your block, it might be doing more than just snapping photos — it could be tracking air pollution.

    The Wall Street Journal reports that Google has teamed up with Aclima, a San Francisco-Based air quality tech company, to equip three Street View cars with air quality monitoring stations.

    The cars, which should hit the streets of San Francisco this fall, will collect data on the levels of carbon monoxide, methane, particulate matter and volatile organic compounds polluting the air.

    Aclima says that the roving pollution detectors will be able to help researchers and scientists better manage and improve air quality.

    While the Environmental Protection Agency already has air quality sensors spread throughout the city, Aclima says the new mobile monitoring capabilities will fill in the gaps where fine-scale changes in pollution levels are often missed.

    “The monitoring network is designed for air quality regulation, but does not give a detailed picture of a community or urban area such that people can get a real sense of what air pollution is around their immediate surroundings,” Melissa Lunden, Director of Research for Aclima, says. “Mobile air quality sensing gives us a picture of the variability. It fills in those missing pixels.”

    The two companies previously teamed up to run a test of the system in Denver last year, resulting in a dataset that shows when the air quality is best or worst in certain areas of the city.

    Pollution tech company equips Google cars to deliver hyper-local air quality data [The Washington Post]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uVerizon Makes HBO Now Available To FiOS Customersr


4 4 4 9
  • hbonowverizonSince the spring launch of HBO Now, the streaming service that allows you to get HBO content without having to pay for a cable TV package, New York-based Cablevision was the only pay-TV/broadband provider selling subscriptions directly to its customers. Now the folks at Verizon have seen that there’s money to be made from people who want TV but don’t want cable, and is making HBO Now available for its FiOS and other broadband customers.

    Just like the other sellers of HBO Now, Verizon is offering a 30-day free trial, after which the cost is $15/month.

    After months of exclusivity on Apple devices, HBO Now recently opened up access to phones and other devices running the Android operating system. But even as the service has expanded its availability, no HBO Now sellers have offered it at a lower price or tried to bundle it together with other products.

    Compare that to the recently released Showtime standalone streaming service, which retails of $11/month, but which is being discounted to $9/month on platforms like Hulu and PlayStation Plus.

    Verizon says in its announcement that HBO Now will be a part of its upcoming mobile video offering, Go90.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uJudge Backtracks On Walmart Shoplifter’s Lifetime Ban From All U.S. Storesr


4 4 4 9
  • Earlier this week a Walmart shoplifter said she likely wouldn’t follow a court order barring her from stepping inside any of the retailer’s thousands of locations. Turns out, that might not have been such a brazen statement after all, as the judge who handed down the lifetime ban clarified that he didn’t really mean to prevent the woman from entering all stores.

    NJ.com reports that Mount Olive Municipal Judge Brian Levine revised his ruling, saying that he never intended to include a nationwide ban as part of his sentence for the 64-year-old woman, who admitted to shoplifting $78 worth of vitamins last December.

    The original ruling, which included one year of probation, a $268 fine and 15 days of community service, stated that the woman was barred from all Walmart stores in New Jersey or elsewhere.

    “In essence what I should have said was that I found as a matter of fact that she did enter into an agreement with Walmart not to go to Walmart in Mount Olive or any other place in New Jersey or the United States,” the judge said. “So to the extent that I sentenced her or ordered her by court order not to go to Walmart in any place … I am vacating that portion of the order.”

    A couple of former prosecutors previously shared their doubts on the judge’s ability to actually ban the woman from all Walmart stores in the country, saying the order appeared to be outside the purview of sentencing provisions.

    Still, the court order revision doesn’t necessarily mean the woman can step foot in a Walmart again, as she once singed an agreement with the retailer to stay away from stores.

    The public defender who represented the woman tells NJ.com that when she signed the agreement with the company she believed it pertained only to one location and not others.

    “It’s been explained to [her] that the document is for all Walmart stores, not just for that one,” he said.

    Judge: I didn’t mean to ban shoplifter from every Walmart in America [NJ.com]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist