What is Digg?14 Comments
- waxpancake, on 01/28/2008, -1/+3Full Disclosure: lanemik (Mike Lane) is a SmugMug employee.
- rainforest1155, on 01/28/2008, -0/+2Mike isn't the CEO of SmugMug, but an employee - you can find more details in the original blog post comments:http://blogoscoped.com/forum/121864.html#id121878
I'm sure that Don, our CEO, will be joining into the blog comments later on.
Sebastian (another SmugMug employee) - madeingermany, on 01/28/2008, -0/+1I do think these help links should be clearer about the limited amount of hiding that is taking place:
http://www.smugmug.com/help/private-albums
http://www.smugmug.com/help/hide-photos - lanemik, on 01/28/2008, -0/+1heh, if I were CEO, I would have a lot more money and a lot less time. No, no, I'm a stay-at-home dad with a part time job at SmugMug.
- op12, on 01/28/2008, -1/+2You mean like this line from the first paragraph in the blog post?
"...you must set photos you want to keep fully private to be password protected, too, not just private... and even then, we’re not fully sure it will cover all cases, though in my test that did the job."
I don't see how they neglected to give details on how to secure yourself. - tr808, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1The title of this post is extremely misleading!!
Here's the deal: There is a misunderstanding around what a "private" gallery versus a "password protected" gallery means. The former can be easily found if you want to increment gallery IDs and isn't meant for naked pictures of your wife/girlfriend/pastor while the latter *is*.
It is apparent that users are not clearly understanding this distinction and SmugMug will update their interface to make it more clear. Seems that the OP is nothing more than an attempt to get some Digg hits at SM's expense. - madeingermany, on 01/29/2008, -0/+1The part about password protected galleries being accessible is pure speculation.
- ludwik, on 01/28/2008, -2/+3You can basically download all the private photos, from all the users *at once*. Here is a user comment from the site:
"It took me about 15 seconds to generate a gallery of images using FlashGot's "Build Gallery" feature. From there, I found private photos of a naked man taking photos of himself in a bathroom, candid photos of a couple from what appeared to be a vacation or honeymoon, and a topless pregnant woman. It was easy to then identify the username of the uploader by removing the "www." from the image URL, which then redirected to the user's subdomain.
This is the kind of security hole that could ruin lives." (Andy Baio) - ludwik, on 01/28/2008, -1/+1"In my own tests of downloading just private galleries, I saw many mundane photos like vacation pics or animals, but also rarer pics of people skinny dipping, posing in the bed room with lingerie, modeling for artistic nude photos and so on."
- delfuego, on 01/28/2008, -1/+1Alas, your understanding is wrong. Or to be more inquisitive: *why* is this inaccurate? What other part of the story is there?
- delfuego, on 01/28/2008, -1/+1Mike, Philip's post certainly gives mention to passwords and whatnot, but certainly also stresses that SmugMug's idea of privacy doesn't jibe up with otherwise common ideas of privacy. And of course, I'm with waxpancake: it'd be nice if you had identified yourself as the CEO of SmugMug in your comment.
- lokkju, on 01/29/2008, -0/+0Someone had to do it: a GreaseMonkey script to browse galleries numerically
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/21777 - grannyrobin, on 01/28/2008, -3/+2My understanding is that this is inaccurate and doesn't tell the full story.
- lanemik, on 01/28/2008, -3/+1Those posting images on SmugMug can make it so nobody can find, see, or post them anywhere else on the internet if they choose to do so. This blog post neglects to give details on SmugMug's security features which makes it less than balanced or fair.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is