The Podjacker Threat 354
Schlemphfer writes "As everyone knows by now, podcasting has taken off in a big way. But over the past week, several tech journals and The Daily Source Code have reported on the threat of 'podjacking,' the creation of an alternate RSS feed without the consent of the podcast's owner. I'm the host of a podcast, which has the dubious distinction of being the first widely-publicized victim of a podjacking. To teach others from my experiences I have posted an article entitled Preventing and Surviving a Podjacking (also available in PDF). So far this story has attracted widespread but generally
inept media and blogger
coverage. This article sets the record straight on what really happened, and shows the simple steps every podcaster should take to protect their shows from podjacking."
The Usage Axiom (Score:2, Interesting)
This could be a variation of the "Law of Unintended Consequences."
Invent something new. There will be at least one person, each, who:
Been There (Score:5, Interesting)
It isn't the easiest solution (takes a lot of time to manage) and won't always work (e.g. they set their UA to one that looks like a valid browser or some other UA that I allow), but it clears most of the riffraff, i think.
Maddox (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Apple? (Score:3, Interesting)
Xerox invented the GUI, apple just brought it to the people.
Re:PLEASE, enough with the words! (Score:3, Interesting)
Or would you rather be like the French and have some group decide what words can be allowed (not that actual French speakers listen to them much)?
Production vs. Marketing (Score:3, Interesting)
You might argue that the world would be better off without middle men such as marketers, publishers, etc. (I think the catchy phrase for this is "disintermediation".) But this story provides evidence that these people actually do add value in some cases.
Re:PLEASE, enough with the words! (Score:3, Interesting)
The Feud That Won't Die (Score:2, Interesting)
If you piece the two stories together, they're actually totally consistent on what happened:
That's the chronology, as both sides put it. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who gives a damn? This is not a technical conflict at its core, it's a personality conflict.
I think there's a good case to be made that RSS "feed hijacking" could happen as described: somebody mirrors your content without permission and becomes more popular than your original feed, then extorts you for your own readers/listeners. However, there's no evidence that it's ever actually happened. You'd have to be really failing to pay attention for it to succeed.
It's certainly not what happened here. The Vegan guy deliberately signed on for a questionable service, got pissed off when the service fragmented his audience, and then both sides started hitting each other with their dicks.
That's the whole story. And I do wish they'd shut up.