A number of Chinese intruders has knocked over the American top business-lobbying group, and in result nicked everything in its system, including sensitive data about its 3,000,000 members.
According to the local media reports, the hack of the American Chamber of Commerce was the latest in a round of neo-military style hacker attacks on the United States. It indicates that the Chinese aren’t actually interested in digging for military technology, but rather more interested in the business operations of the United States.
Indeed, there seems to be no point stealing military technology if you virtually own the country. If the Chinese ever decide to war with the United States, all China would have to do is stop shipments of its goods and the country would simply grind to a halt. Discovering the technology of American corporations means that the Chinese are able to give their own companies the edge without wasting any money on research, so if any American companies cause a problem the Chinese can always knock them out of business with their own technology.
Recently the news of the hack has come out – it seems that it apparently was a complex operation that involved 300 online addresses, which was discovered and quietly shut down back in May last year. The Chamber representatives claimed that the intruders had focused on 4 Chamber employees working on Asia policy. The hackers managed to steal 6 weeks of their email, and the Chamber only learned of the intrusion after the FBI told them servers in China were stealing its data! Meanwhile, the experts assume that the group of hackers had access to the network for over a year before the intrusion was uncovered.
Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy denied that the attack in question was incited by the government. He also claimed that the allegation that the hack originated in China actually lacked proof and evidence and was at least irresponsible, adding that the issue of online intrusion shouldn't have been politicized.
Apparently the US Chamber of Commerce dealt with the hack by unplugging and destroying some of its PCs and overhauling its security system. It was timed for a thirty-six hour period over the only weekend when the attackers, who kept regular working hours, weren’t really expected to be working so wouldn’t be inconvenienced.
Legislation known as SOPA is getting closer and closer towards final passage, which makes a lot of users very nervous. Today it looks like a very predictable development is taking place – Internet users are generating the lists of IP addresses to bypass DNS filtering.
The expectations are that DNS censorship could soon become a reality in the United States. If a company or government entity decides to make an online service disappear, it would be just the one complaint away from reality. From the very start, experts saw groups sending IP lists over networks like IRC in order to make sure that the web remains relatively unfiltered. Today the concept of sharing unfiltered domain names became a reality.
A lot of users seeing the list in question might not necessarily know what to do with the addresses. That’s why people also publish different guides on how to maintain a HOSTS file, attaching screenshots. Such instructions show what to do with an IP address you get from the list. If you are looking for an IP address to a site not found in the emergency SOPA list, you can obtain it by different ways. First of all, you are able to obtain the IP address of your favorite site via web hosting instruments or even using command prompt. Best of all is if you obtain the IP address before the domain is filtered.
In fact, many industry observers believe that this would become a new norm after SOPA passes. However, there is a problem with this way – the matter is that you are putting your Internet security in the hands of people generating those lists of IP addresses. For example, if one of the users were to add an IP address to the list in question which actually points to a malicious site instead of the real online service, then the troubles start for other users. That’s something that should be manually fixed on the end-users part. Another solution is to remove the entry entirely. In fact, that’s the part that makes a lot of insecurity experts freak out over this suggested bill – because it would make the web less secure. Indeed, if the government wasn’t considering DNS filtering in the SOPA legislation at all and left the automatic DNS system alone, this issue wouldn’t be causing security problems in the first place. However, the authorities seem to pay little attention to such issues.
A number of the most popular sites in the world are ordered to censor themselves of all material that is considered offensive to Indians by February 2012. The list of the online services include such giants as Microsoft, Facebook, YouTube, Google, and 20 more – they will have to remove all objectionable content. That is considering the fact that a number of the online scandals which have hit the country recently include all pictures of women kissing men.
According to the press reports, over 20 social networking services, including the most popular ones throughout the world, have been issued summons by the Indian court, on grounds of containing objectionable material. The websites are currently charged with section 292 (which is sale of obscene books), section 293 (which is sale of obscene objects to young person), and even 120-B (which is criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.
Apparently, the court order follows a complaint to the court made by some private citizen who went online and discovered that the web didn’t comply with an Indian ideal of a moral society. In case such websites fail to clear offensive material off their sites by February 2012, they would be accused of contempt of court.
A statement from the court claims that the judge had been deeply shocked by what was presented amongst the evidence to the court. He ruled that unknown individuals were selling, publicly exhibiting and distributing obscene, lascivious material, which also appeared to the prurient interests and tended to deprave and corrupt the citizens who might read, see or hear it. He added that it was also evident that such material is continuously openly and freely available to any person using the above mentioned network, regardless of their age – indeed, even underage people have full and uncensored access to such obscene material.
As a result, all the well-known names will either have to censor the web or leave the lucrative Indian online market. When facing such choice, the companies are likely to choose the first option. Meanwhile, the industry experts believe that the businesses won’t find much support from local politicians either, because the Indian government is known to be furious that its citizens are able to go online and tell bad things about the Gandhi family.
After being litigated by Universal Music Group, Veoh Networks won as a federal appeals court handed down the decision in their favor. Last week the court ruled that if the site operator can successfully keep users from publishing copyrighted content, they aren’t responsible for copyright violation.
The lawsuit in question was watched attentively by the entertainment industry: by winning, Veoh Networks have really set a precedent, because it is the first national case that managed to reach the appeal court. As a result, a federal panel in the US is currently considering an appeal filed by Viacom in a similar copyright case launched against YouTube.
Launched 5 years ago, Veoh Networks lets its users to publish videos on their site. However, the service does instruct the users not to publish copyrighted content. In addition, the company is using filtering means in order to remove more than 60,000 copyrighted videos. However, even despite all those precautions, the company acknowledges that a number of copyrighted videos have been downloaded from their website. Back in 2007, Universal Music Group filed a lawsuit against Veoh Networks, claiming that their protective tools were insufficient and that the firm knew, or should have been aware, that its users have uploaded copyrighted videos and music that belong to Universal Music Group.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals of San Francisco didn’t agree with the claims of the entertainment industry and exonerated Veoh Networks, deciding that the company was eligible for “safe harbor” under the DMCA. In reply, Universal Music Group argued that Veoh Networks knew that the uploaded content was copyrighted, and that’s why the firm should be held liable. However, the court didn’t change their opinion and decided that since Veoh Networks complied with deleting the copyrighted content it cannot be guilty.
Judge Raymond Fisher said in the 3-0 ruling that rights owners knew exactly what content they own, and therefore are better able to identify violating copies than such service providers as Veoh Networks. In their response, Michael Elking, representing Veoh Networks, claimed that the court’s decision was an important victory for the digital media marketplace.
Germany, which is usually stereotyped as rolling over when well-organized forces order them about, has recently suspended the country’s legal system in order to allow film studios to pursue people for large amounts of cash whenever they like.
A few days ago, Munich Court has ruled that a person must have downloaded a flick named Violent Hooligans just because a movie studio insisted she had. In other words, the court preferred to ignore evidence that it was virtually impossible for the individual to have uploaded the movie onto eDonkey two years ago as she didn’t even have a PC and broadband hardware.
The person in question had subscribed to a two-year Internet and telephone package, but 6 months ago had flogged her PC and had even no email address. So, it is unclear how the alleged offense could have been done, even by a third party. However, as far as the German court believes, the movie studio was first to claim the offense, so the woman would have to pay up.
Although there have been plenty of things which could have caused the court a reasonable doubt, the defendant’s lawyer admitted that the court wasn’t interested. Usually, a rights owner has to prove who committed the copyright violation. That’s not easy for rights owners, as it is difficult to look into a thousand homes, and now it looks like the courts have decided they do not have to do that anymore.
The defendant’s lawyer explained that all a rights owner has to do is prove that a copyrighted work has been traded through a certain IP-address, and after this the accused has to prove her innocence. It seems that the standard is pretty high if it does not believe that lacking the equipment is an excuse. As a result, the woman must pay more than 650 euros in damages to the rights owner.
Until Germany is dragged kicking and screaming to the European Court to remember how a normal legal system should work, it looks like entertainment industry has the right to pick any name out of a phone book, accuse him or her of illegal file-sharing and the court will allow them to demand 650 euros from each. However, if you are from the entertainment industry yourself, and your staff was caught infringing the law, you can use any lame excuse you like and that one will have to be accepted by the court.
hey have announced a list of cities eligible to bid for super-fast broadband funding. However, the experts think that the cash might make no difference to a lot of British cities.
After the authorities have announced that the 4 capital cities in the United Kingdom will be awarded part of a £100 million fund created for developing high speed broadband, they revealed a list of cities who’ll scrap it out for broadband cash.
The permit to grab the remaining money and find themselves a part of the super-fast broadband project was given to Birmingham, Glasgow, Bristol, Leeds, Newcastle, Nottingham, Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, and Bradford. The Department for Culture, Media and Sport is currently taking bids from the towns able to plead the best case for receiving the money, which will involve explanation of how they are going to use the 80-100 Mbps speeds to push growth. Meanwhile, the broadband will be supplied by ISPs BT and Virgin.
As you understand, the competition will mean that some cities will lose out on the cash. However, it still seems to make it easier to allocate the resources more fairly. Industry observers think that there are still doubts about the ability to make a difference to 10 cities taking into account the amount on the table. By limiting the funding to 4 pre-selected capital cities, and adding 6 out of the 10 cities only going to get into the project, the UK will least have an idea of how far the money will have to spread. The authorities pointed out that a lot of cities are already approaching existing targets for 2015, like Cardiff, despite the fact that such steps might have been made prior to any knowledge of further funding.
Mainly, the cities have been working towards improving Internet connection, though it is not clear whether some of their projects were going ahead with the prior knowledge that government funding might be available. However, experts agree that the offered amount is little in comparison to the scale of the task in improving broadband systems, but if the authorities will carefully target the worst served locations, it might make a difference. Nevertheless, the best people can expect is that the project will ensure broadband at speeds well above the 2 Mbps available everywhere.
One of the security experts has accused Siemens Corporation of lying to the press about security bugs that could result in intruders taking out critical infrastructure.
Billy Rios recently claimed that Siemens' SIMATIC systems could be easily broken into and operated remotely by any user having an Internet connection. And he must be furious about Siemens spinners telling the press that there were no open issues over authentication bypass bugs at the company at all. Indeed, such statement, made by Siemens representatives, was news to Billy Rios who had reported a glaring authentication bypass for their SIMATIC systems eight months ago. Since May 2011, he had been patiently waiting for a fix, because the discovered bug affects almost every Siemens SIMATIC customer.
He went on to disclose the username and password for the company’s SIMATIC systems, saying that if a customer changes his or her password to a new one containing a special character, it may automatically be reset to simple “100”. It is that easy!
Siemens SIMATIC systems appeared in the news when they got compromised by the Stuxnet virus. Considering the fact that Stuxnet was fairly advanced, in case Billy Rios is right it perhaps didn’t have to be. Rios claimed that the session cookie returned by the system when a user logs in seems to be secure, but he discovered that pretty much the same cookie is returned each time a user logs in. After being decoded, the values of the cookies become completely predictable.
In other words, an intruder could gain remote access to a SIMATIC HMI running different control systems and critical infrastructure across the globe. In the end, it might become possible for everyone to take over a control system without even knowing either the username or password!
This can’t sound causing no alarm – either for expert or ordinary users. That’s why Rios is right to be furious that the company dares to announce they had no open issues about authentication bypass bugs at the system at all. Writing in his blog, Billy Rios muttered that next time the company should think more than once before lying to the media about security bugs that are able to affect the critical infrastructure, or it may have no Merry Christmas at all.
The Chinese Alibaba Group has recently hired a Washington lobbying company that is being seen that the group will make a bid for all of Yahoo in case talks to unwind their Asian partnership fail. The lobbying firm, named Duberstein Group, is governed by Kenneth Duberstein, who is a former White House chief of staff under President Reagan. Among the company’s other clients there are BP America, Goldman Sachs & Co and Pfizer.
Alibaba Group head, Jack Ma, said in September that he wanted to purchase all of Yahoo in case the chance appears. Nevertheless, he might get some troubles with Washington that may not want to see a US company taken over by a firm from a country engaged in controlling and censoring the web.
The United States might be happier in case its own online filtering legislation, known as the SOPA act, passes, but at the moment the country can afford to be sanctimonious with China. According to the media, Huawei ran into opposition when they were trying to purchase American assets over the years.
It is really not easy to see how there could be a national security concern in Yahoo corporation going to Alibaba Group. In fact, whatever happens with the Yahoo being sold, it will involve Alibaba and Softbank, with all three parties having a need to untangle complex relationships leaving Yahoo in charge of a much bigger company.
Meanwhile, the Yahoo's board that has led the company to such spectacular successes over years again looks reluctant to give up control. After turning down an overpriced deal from Microsoft Corporation, the company is attempting to protect itself from any buyouts through selling some of the assets that Alibaba and Softbank are looking for. The recent plan, estimated at $17 billion, would reduce Yahoo's 40% stake in Alibaba and get Yahoo out of Yahoo Japan.
Long time ago the story emerged about the Newzbin portal and the entertainment industry’s attempts to block access to this website. The latest news were that the UK Internet service provider BT was forced by court order to block access to this online service due to the MPA’s decision to file a lawsuit. The MPA did that on behalf of its members, including Warner Bros, Fox, Disney and Paramount Pictures.
After the entertainment industry won the case against the largest UK provider, its goal was for other intermediaries to follow suit. Now it looks like the outfit’s dream may come true – recently, another Internet service provider – Sky Broadband – was court ordered to also block access to Newzbin portal. The ISP representatives admitted that they are working with the rest of the industry over implementing a sustainable framework for tackling piracy. If the ISP is presented with clear and robust evidence of copyright infringement, it promised to take the appropriate action in respect to website filtering, as they have with Newzbin 2 now.
Other UK broadband providers, including Virgin Media and TalkTalk, are considering the industry’s solution in the near future as well. For example, TalkTalk admitted that the company has received a letter from the anti-piracy outfit, asking whether it would legally object to an order to block access to the news portal. Currently TalkTalk is considering its position, as there are a number of objectionable elements to the proposed injunction. The ISP claimed it would only block access to a service if ordered to do so by a court. Meanwhile, Virgin Media said that as a responsible provider, it would comply with any court order. However, the company strongly believes that such deterrents should be accompanied by compelling legal alternatives like its agreement with Spotify, providing consumers with access to entertainment content at the adequate price.
When an employee left the company he worked for, the latter believed that he had to turn over the keys to his Twitter account, as the company owned all his followers.
An individual named Noah Kravitz has been sued by his ex-employer, the company Phonedog.com. The company demands $340,000 in damages for “stealing” his 17,000 Twitter followers with him when he left the outfit and found another job.
More than a year ago, Noah Kravitz quit his job at Phonedog.com company, after having worked there almost 4 years. He had been tweeting under the nickname Phonedog-Noah. As the time passed, Noah had gathered around 17,000 followers on Twitter. According to him, when he left the company PhoneDog told him he could keep his Twitter account if he posted from time to time.
The former employee believed that he was parting on good terms with the company and responded that it was all right to post tweets on its behalf occasionally. During the interview to the local media, Noah admitted that he started writing as NoahKravitz, while keeping all his friends under that new handle. However, in 8 months, PhoneDog launched a lawsuit against its former employee, saying that the Twitter list was a customer list. Now the company is seeking damages of $2.50 a month per each follower, which for 8 months totals to $340,000.
There are some reasons why the company has suddenly changed its mind – among them there are facts that Noah Kravitz demands 15% of the site's gross advertising revenue due to his position as a vested partner, along with some back pay he is owed. However, things could get messy, since the case is about to decide if the company you are working for can own your Twitter followers and if this has a value in the first place. Meanwhile, Noah Kravitz admits he was confused that he was being sued for a third of a million dollars for doing exactly what he was told.
