REVIEW: "Digital Contagions", Jussi Parikka

["Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah" <rmslade () shaw ca>]

BKDIGCON.RVW   20070923

"Digital Contagions", Jussi Parikka, 2007, 978-0-8204-8837-0, U$35.95
%A   Jussi Parikka users.utu.fi/juspar juspar () utu fi
%C   Moosstrasse 1, Postfach 350, CH-2542 Pieterlen, Switzerland
%D   2007
%G   978-0-8204-8837-0 0-8204-8837-2
%I   Peter Lang AG
%O   U$35.95 +41-32-376-17-17 fax: +41-32-376-17-27 www.peterlang.net
%O  http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0820488372/robsladesinterne
  http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0820488372/robsladesinte-21
%O   http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0820488372/robsladesin03-20
%O   Audience i Tech 1 Writing 1 (see revfaq.htm for explanation)
%P   327 p.
%T   "Digital Contagions: A Media Archaeology of Computer Viruses"

Buried in the mass of verbiage that makes up the introduction there is
an indication (far from clear) that the intent of the book is to
examine the topic of computer viruses from a cultural, rather than a
technical perspective.  Further, the material Parikka proposes to use
is not related to actual events or activities, but to reports, essays,
and even fiction.  (Hence the reference to "media archaeology" in the
subtitle.  The "contagion" of the title is intended, by the author, to
refer not only to the reproductive spread of viral programs, but also
the new ideas prompted by the existence of these reproductive
applications.)  The idea of examining what people think computer
viruses do (instead of what they actually do) and how the programs are
perceived (rather than how they actually operate) could possibly lead
to some interesting observations.  (I recall, in early seminars on
computer viruses and discussions with the general public, how
frequently I had to explain that viruses were programs and had
authors, and correct the misperception that the applications had just
evolved out of the general computer environment.)  Unfortunately the
introduction also indicates that while Parikka has done extensive
research, he probably hasn't understood it all.  There are a number of
mistakes even in this early listing of events, including an extremely
simplistic definition of viruses and worms themselves, and therefore
the results of his analysis are suspect right from the start.

(In response to the draft of this review, the author stated that "the
point exactly was to question [as the intro says quite clearly] who is
able and allowed to produce knowledge concerning viruses, what is
acknowledged as a "truth" in this context, what kind of alternative
approaches one might be able to come up with. So beyond any ideas of
relativism, it proposes an approach of relationalism: how viruses are
part of broader structures of producing knowledge concerning digital
culture [always in relations, that is.]"  Again, I would have to say
that this is a potentially fascinating study, but that it isn't
articulated clearly, and that the resulting opinions are severely
limited in value due to a lack of distinction between perception and
technical reality.)

In chapter one, the author states that viruses have created fear in
computer users.  Unfortunately, he gives computer users too much
credit in terms of their understanding of the processes involved, as
well as overstating the concern felt by the majority of information
security professionals.  It is only in the past two years that surveys
have started to show the overarching magnitude of the situation, and
only in the past year that "endpoint security" has become a product
selling point.  His background analysis is also slipshod: insects
didn't get into the Mark II because of lights at night, but due to
(humanly inaccessible) windows that had to be left open for
ventilation.  (The use of this particular example in Parikka's work is
rather fascinating, since the Mark II used Harvard Architecture, and
would have been immune to viruses without a major shift in the
underlying operational model.)  The use of the term "bugs" for errors
in Morse code was more likely due to the use of the term "bug" for the
telegraph key: it was the user interface.  (A similar term exists in
the computer world to describe errors: pebkac, or "problem exists
between keyboard and chair.")  Parikka has not sufficiently understood
the culture of the technical communities he is studying.  In
subsequent discussions, the author fails to appreciate the importance
of the distinction between independent malware, and the more directly
utilized blackhat programs such as network mappers and rootkits, as
well as the distinction between malware activity and computer
intruders.  The historical overview seems to end rather abruptly circa
1995.

Although there are occasional mentions of, and references to, computer
viral programs in chapter two, in general Parikka seems to turn away
from the topic in order to explore cultural ideas of the body,
biological viruses, AIDS, the face, and immunity.  He does finish off
with a section exploring the idea of virus writers as psychologically
abnormal, but even here much of the content falls prey to the all-too-
common confusion between virus writers and other blackhat groups.

Chapter three discusses ideas of artificial organisms and ecologies. 
Again, while viruses are remarked on, they are not central to the
deliberation.  It is, however, interesting to note Fred Cohen's
comment that the Morris worm was possibly "the most powerful high-
speed computation event" up to that date, particularly in light of
estimates that the Storm botnet was, at one point, potentially the
second most powerful supercomputer in existence.

A "Conclusion" is entitled "Media Archaeology as Ecology."  The point
seems to be that writings not only record what people have thought
about certain events and conditions, but what they will think in the
future.

Parikka seems to go out of his way to use abstruse words that are
seldom used, and therefore probably poorly understood.  The text is
heavily larded with esoteric cultural references and unusual (and
frequently poorly defined) terms or constructions.  One gets the
feeling that the author is possibly unsure of his own propositions,
and is attempting to convince the reader by a kind of verbal hand-
waving.  The bibliography, and extensive footnotes, is impressive and
even intimidating.  A couple of my own works are cited frequently. 
Because of that, I know that statements and passages supposedly from,
or supported by, those references sometimes are not buttressed by the
credential in question.  In any case, there are definitely errors of
fact even in the "Timeline of Computer Viruses."  No version of the
Dellinger Apple virus of 1981 spread via the "Congo" game, although
one variant interfered with it.

Another point that the author made in response to the draft of this
review is that he is writing from a perspective in social science, and
that what I dismiss as verbiage would make sense to his colleagues. 
Unfortunately, I have to believe that this attitude betrays the
obligation a writer has to his readers, not all of whom may be from a
specialized field.  A creator of technical literature (aside from
documentation or textbooks crafted specifically for a limited
audience) has to be prepared to explain, in basic language, the intent
and major concepts being presented.  This requirement is as applicable
to social science as it is to computer science, and Parikka has not
addressed it sufficiently.  If he is, indeed, to make a contribution
in this field, presumably he has to be able to make his points clearly
to us dummies in the malware research community, too.

Parikka's aim, in examining the influence of computer viruses on
popular culture, as well as the prejudices that popular culture might
impose upon attitudes toward viruses, is a good one, and could have
resulted in some interesting insights.  While other authors (despite
the exaggerated claim by at least one reviewer) have addressed the
history and development of viral programs, I cannot think of another
work so dedicated to the "people" side of the problem.  Unfortunately,
the lack of rigour in Parikka's research and analysis (possibly
exacerbated by his limited understanding of the underlying
technologies) restricts the confidence one can have in his
conclusions.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 2007   BKDIGCON.RVW   20070923


======================  (quote inserted randomly by Pegasus Mailer)
rslade () vcn bc ca     slade () victoria tc ca     rslade () computercrime org
Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world.
                                                       - Lily Tomlin
http://victoria.tc.ca/techrev/rms.htm
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.