- apple-list - University of Manitoba Mailing Lists

INTEREST: "What Price Cool?" too cool toward facts
by billing 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

...from: http://www.macworld.com/article/139937/2009/04/what_price_cool.html?lsrc=mw… Microsoft's 'Apple tax' needs a refund Posted on Apr 9, 2009 3:29 pm by Dan Moren Category | Mac Some people look at numbers and think “Ah, thank goodness: cold hard facts.” Me, I’ve been a bit distrustful of numbers ever since that whole "7 ate 9" business. You see, numbers purport to be all objective and straightforward, but just like words, their meanings can be twisted and turned, interpreted to suit the agenda of whoever's holding their leash. Take, for example, this recent report (PDF link) by frequently-quoted analyst Roger L. Kay, the President of Endpoint Technologies Associates. “What Price Cool?” sets out to discover the “hidden costs” of owning Macs versus owning Windows PCs—but you don’t need to flip to the end of the 10-page report to tell how it’s going to end. Spoiler: Windows PCs are cheaper! It’s right there on page one, where it reads “Sponsor: Microsoft.” The Redmond-based software giant has recently gone to great lengths to point out Windows machines' inherent superiority, attempting to dispell the perceived "coolness" of Macs anddenigrate their performance. So it’s hardly shocking to find that this report retreads the same ground whilst applying a thin patina of carefully selected “facts.” The meat of the piece is the last three pages which feature the “realistic point of view” of a hypothetical family of four, including two charts that line up the prices of building what are supposedly comparable Windows PC and Mac systems. The hypothetical dad's spreadsheet examines the differences in cost over five years and— amazingly—concludes that buying Macs will be a mind-boggling $3,330 more expensive. There are a few flaws here—okay, there are several flaws here, and to pick them apart one-by-one would only be redundant, repetitive, and redundant, but let’s take a look at just a few of them to get the idea. For one thing, the report repeats the age-old fallacy that once you buy into a Mac you have to buy into the whole Apple ecosystem, despite the fact that we largely left that world behind around the time that people were wondering who precisely had let the dogs out. For example, Kay budgets $150 per year for Apple’s MobileMe service— that being the price of the MobileMe family pack, which supports up to five users. But you don’t need MobileMe—Kay says it’s for backup and file sync, both of which can be accomplished with free technologies provided by Apple and others. Heck, the Windows Live Mesh that Kay touts even runs on a Mac. But similar third-party syncing services like Dropbox work well too. And, for backup, every Mac comes with Time Machine built-in. Look, I just saved the hypothetical family a hypothetical $750—hypothetically, of course. Kay also insists, for some reason, that the family buy an AirPort Extreme router for $180 instead of the $150 Linksys Wireless N router that he budgeted for the PCs, despite the fact that the Mac and Linksys routers are interoperable. You could save another $30 (or—and I know this is going out on a limb—you could spend the extra $30 to buy the AirPort Extreme for the PC side because it's a better product. Hey, it's an option). Here’s another wacky choice: Kay suggests the family will want add Blu- ray capability (which, it’s true, is not currently supported by OS X) to the desktop system in year four. He budgets $95 for a Lite-On internal drive for the PC and $300 for an external Sony Blu-ray drive for the Mac. Never mind that, as they've chosen the extremely expandable Mac Pro, they could easily upgrade the computer with that same internal Blu-ray drive (presuming, of course, that four years from now, Apple’s added Blu-ray support to OS X—if not, that Sony player won't be much more useful anyway). Knock off another $205. But let’s look at this from the other side for a moment: what’s been left out of the costs of owning a PC? Well, how about security? Malware is a pretty common sight on Windows PCs and you won’t find any expert recommending you run your machine without virus protection. But most virus protection costs a certain amount per year: HP, for example, includes 15 months of Norton Internet Security for free, but that’ll leave the family out in the cold just over a year in—they’ll have to spend another $60 to $80 to cover them for the whole five year period. And that’s just for one of the two computers. Not much, but it adds up. The report also makes a big deal out of having to re-buy existing Windows software for OS X, but it barely touches upon the immense value of all the software included with every Mac. iLife is referred to only by the cost of upgrading it, and Kay doesn’t bother to enumerate what similar capabilities—music creation, video editing, DVD authoring—would cost on Windows. And then there’s Windows itself. Kay says in his report how great Microsoft’s forthcoming Windows 7 will be: “This gap [in user experience] will likely close up when Microsoft introduces Windows 7 late this year.” And yet, mysteriously, no mention is made anywhere of the price it’ll cost this family to upgrade to Windows 7, if it doesn’t ship by the time they want to buy their new computers. In truth, that’s because nobody knows, but Vista’s cheapest software costs $200 a pop, suggesting our hypothetical family will have to shell out around $400 if they want to get all the improvements to help close that "user experience gap." Apple’s forthcoming Snow Leopard update, by comparison, will run $200 for the whole family, if the company sticks to the pricing scheme it's been using for years. Add up all those tweaks and you’ll find the price difference has almost been halved—and that’s just with the no-brainer changes. But it’s like I said up top: despite looking all serious and factual, numbers can be massaged and carefully selected to tell any story. And as much as figures and charts might tell you about cost, they speak very little to the idea of what you get for that money—of value beyond specifications and technologies. What about the time saved not dealing with viruses and annoying security software? What about those hard-to- quantify benefits of what Kay admits is a superior user experience? Kay would have you believe that everything can be reduced to quantitative measurements, and that’s emblematic of the way Microsoft operates. But there are plenty of important qualitativedifferences as well. The report bandies about the term “cool” like a four-letter word, but it mistakes the trappings of "cool" for its substance. True coolness is never really about appearance and only those who just don't get it claim that it is. Apple’s computers are fantastically designed and aesthetically attractive, but that's not what makes them cool—what makes them cool is what they allow their users to do. And for many, that's worth a few extra bucks.

1 0

INTEREST: Malicious Computer Virus Is Revised
by billing 13 Apr '09

13 Apr '09

...from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/10/technology/10virus.html?th&emc=th Malicious Software Is Revised By JOHN MARKOFF Published: April 9, 2009 The riddle of a malicious software program that has spread throughout the Internet deepened Thursday as security researchers examined a new version of the software that they said made it more difficult to eradicate the program. The program, known as Conficker, targets versions of Microsoft’s Windows operating system and has now been distributed in four versions, computer security specialists said. Several of the groups monitoring the program said the most recent version, which began to appear Tuesday, appeared to be targeted at improving a peer-to-peer communications system between computers that are infected and hardening the system by making infected machines more resistant to anti-virus software. Several researchers also said there might be a connection between the authors of Conficker and of another program known as Waladec, a malware program that has been used to distribute fraudulent advertisements through e-mail spam. They also noted that the Conficker authors have switched strategies and are using the program’s peer-to- peer mechanism to update the system. Originally, they had appeared to plan to download instructions to Conficker by generating new Internet addresses that infected machines could download instructions from. An earlier version of the program had been set to begin contacting servers on April 1, raising widespread concern about the authors’ intent. Now, however, the system for programming Conficker uses a peer- to-peer mechanism that can be initiated from any one of millions of infected systems. The consensus within the computer security industry is that although there are now some indications that Conficker’s authors are intent on building a giant spam system, there is no hard evidence. “This is just Step 5 in a thousand-step chess match,” said Vincent Weafer, vice president of the security response division at Symantec.

1 0

INTEREST: new MacPros: when slower is actually faster
by billing 31 Mar '09

31 Mar '09

...from: http://www.macworld.com/article/139507/2009/03/macpro2009.html?lsrc=mwweek Quad-Core and Eight-Core Mac Pros (2009 editions) New Mac tower boosts performance despite speed drop by James Galbraith, Macworld.com Though you wouldn’t know by looking at it, Apple’s new tower, the Mac Pro, has just received a major overhaul. The two tower models pack a brand-new processor and video system, and feature a reorganized internal design. However, they have lower clock speeds than their predecessors. PRODUCT: Mac Pro Quad-Core/2.66GHz RATING PROS New Nehalem microprocessor; easier to upgrade internal components; lower price. CONS None significant. COMPANY Apple PRICE AS RATED $2,499 BEST CURRENT PRICE $2,388.00 PRODUCT: Mac Pro Eight-Core/2.26GHz RATING PROS New Nehalem microprocessor; easier to upgrade internal components; lower price. CONS Most routine apps perform better with fewer, faster processors. COMPANY Apple PRICE AS RATED $3,299 PEOPLE WHO READ THIS ALSO READ: Avoiding Mac buyer's remorse Six things Apple needs to do right now Why even IT pros are demanding Macs Review: Wolfram Mathematica 7 Psystar rolls out new, compact Mac clone The five most underused Finder tools Last year’s standard Mac Pro () featured a 2.8GHz eight-core Intel Xeon processor based on the Harpertown/Penryn architecture. This year, there are two models: a quad-core system with a 2.66GHz Nehalem Xeon processor, and an eight-core model running two quad-core Xeon processors at 2.26GHz. Also new to the Mac Pros are Nvidia GeForce GT 120 graphics cards and a revamped interior designed to ease user access for upgrading internal components. Similar but different Aside from the second optical-drive slot on the front, the Mac Pro continues to use the same big-handled, aluminum case as the Power Mac G5, introduced nearly five years ago. There are some minor changes to the exterior, though—specifically in the type and number of connections. First, the two FireWire 400 connectors from previous generations have been replaced with backward-compatible FireWire 800 ports, bringing the number of FireWire ports to four—two on the front and two on the back. The five USB 2.0 ports, two on the front and three on the back, remain. On the graphics card, one of the two dual- link DVI connectors at the rear of the system has been replaced with a Mini DisplayPort connector, which lets you connect either to Apple’s 24-inch LED Cinema Display () or, with adapters (not included), to a second DVI display. The new Mac Pros have been remodeled on the inside to provide for easier access to components. Upon opening the case, you immediately notice major changes in the layout of the components. The memory modules are no longer installed on two sliding trays—instead, the memory and processor all rest on a sled at the bottom of the case, which you remove by releasing two latches. The quad-core Mac Pro has four memory slots that ship with 3GB, 6GB, or 8GB of 1,066MHz DDR3 SDRAM modules; the eight-core Mac Pro has eight DIMM slots for a maximum of 32GB of RAM. The memory design no longer requires the large heat sinks. The Mac Pro still has four internal cable-free hard-drive slots, using a sliding tray to attach the drives directly to the motherboard. Now, though, the large plastic piece holding the fan near the front of the Mac Pro is much smaller, giving your fingers more room to grip the hard-drive sleds. This is a small but welcome change. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve struggled over the years to remove that first drive. Another nice design change helps ease the removal of PCI cards from the four full-size PCI Express 2.0 card slots. In the past, to remove a card, you’d first need to turn two large thumbscrews that held a small plate keeping the cards in place. Then you had to feel around behind the card, searching for a little plastic tab mounted on the motherboard, which you needed to lift up in order to release the card. With the new Mac Pro, that second step is much easier. You now simply push a single thin bar that extends across all the PCI Express 2.0 slots to release any or all cards. Apple has also made installation of its add-on Apple RAID card much easier: you just put it into the clearly marked top slot, and you’re ready to go. Installed in the first PCI Express 2.0 slot is the new Nvidia GeForce GT 120 graphics card with 512MB of video RAM; the last generation of Mac Pros came standard with an ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT graphics card with 256MB of memory. 2.66GHz Quad-Core/2.26GHz Eight-Core Mac Pro Speedmark Scores Longer bars are better. Blue bars in italics represent reference systems. Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith, Chris Holt, and Helen Williamson. New processor The new Mac Pro uses Intel’s Xeon 3500 or 5500 quad-core processors, part of the new Nehalem family of microprocessors. Several major architectural innovations have the new processors featuring all four cores on a single die, making its 8MB of L3 cache available to any and all processing cores. The memory controller is now on-chip, giving the processor faster access to the main memory, and eliminating memory latency by up to 40 percent. Previously, the Mac Pro had 12MB of L2 cache per processor, with 6MB shared between pairs of processing cores. Each processor now has full access to 8MB of L3 as well as a small amount of dedicated L2 cache, whereas the previous Mac Pro had no L3 cache. A technology called Hyper-Threading creates two virtual cores per each physical core, allowing each physical core to run two processes at once, which helps use the available processing power more efficiently. Also new to the Nehalem processors is a technology Intel calls Turbo Boost. Turbo Boost helps speed up the majority of applications that haven’t been written to take full advantage of multicore processors by allowing the system to spin down idle processing cores while increasing the speed of the processors in use. This lets a 2.93GHz Xeon, for example, run at speeds as high as 3.33GHz, Apple says. Performance So do all of these innovations translate to better performance? The 2.66GHz quad-core Mac Pro posted faster speeds in Photoshop, Compressor, iMovie, iTunes, and 3-D game benchmarks than the previous standard eight-core Mac Pro. That’s pretty impressive considering that the new Mac Pro is using only half the number of processing cores as last year’s standard configuration—and at a slower speed. The new quad- core’s score in our overall system performance suite, Speedmark 5, was 16 percent faster than that of the previous 2.8GHz eight-core Mac Pro. It was also 27 percent faster in our Photoshop tests, and 20 percent faster at Compressor than the older system. 2.66GHz Quad-Core/2.26GHz Eight-Core Mac Pro benchmarks Speedmark 5 Adobe Photoshop CS3 Cinema 4D XL 10.5 Compressor iMovie HD iTunes 7.5 Quake 4 Finder OVERALL SCORE SUITE RENDER MPEG ENCODE AGED EFFECT MP3 ENCODE FRAME RATE ZIP ARCHIVE Mac Pro 2.66GHz Quad-Core (Nehalem) 348 0:35 0:18 0:47 0:29 0:46 81.2 3:27 Mac Pro 2.26GHz 8-Core (Nehalem) 343 0:36 0:13 0:57 0:34 0:47 70.8 3:55 Mac Pro 2.8GHz 8-Core (Harpertown, 3GB RAM) 301 0:48 0:16 0:59 0:34 0:49 74.5 3:49 Mac Pro 2.8GHz 8-Core (Harpertown, 6GB RAM) 319 0:39 0:16 0:59 0:33 0:49 75.0 3:47 Mac Pro 2.66GHz Quad-Core (Woodcrest) 262 0:44 0:28 1:19 0:40 0:54 54.7 4:01 24-inch iMac Core 2 Duo/3.06GHz (March 2009) 308 0:39 0:41 1:25 0:37 0:50 85.6 3:24 Power Macintosh 2.5GHz Quad-Core G5 226 1:10 0:32 1:30 0:39 0:48 41.6 4:40 >Better <Better <Better <Better <Better <Better >Better <Better Best results in bold. Reference systems in italics. Speedmark 5 scores are relative to those of a 1.5GHz Core Solo Mac mini, which is assigned a score of 100. Adobe Photoshop, Cinema 4D XL, iMovie, iTunes, and Finder scores are in minutes:seconds. All systems were running Mac OS X 10.5.6 with the Mac Pro 2.66GHz Quad Core outfitted with 3GB of RAM, and the Mac Pro 2.26GHz 8-Core with 6GB of RAM. The Photoshop Suite test is a set of 14 scripted tasks using a 50MB file. Photoshop’s memory was set to 70 percent and History was set to Minimum. We recorded how long it took to render a scene in Cinema 4D XL. We used Compressor to encode a 6minute:26second DV file using the DVD: Fastest Encode 120 minutes - 4:3 setting. In iMovie, we applied the Aged Film Effect from the Video FX menu to a one minute movie. We converted 45 minutes of AAC audio files to MP3 using iTunes’ High Quality setting. We used Quake's average-frames-per-second score; we tested at a resolution of 1,024x768 pixels at the Maximum setting with both audio and graphics enabled. We created a Zip archive in the Finder from two 1GB files.To compare Speedmark 5 scores for various Mac systems, visit our Mac Hardware Guide.—MACWORLD LAB TESTING BY JAMES GALBRAITH, CHRIS HOLT, AND HELEN WILLIAMSON. 2.66GHz Quad-Core/2.26GHz Eight-Core Mac Pro benchmarks Quake 4 Quake 4 Call of Duty 4 Call of Duty 4 Call of Duty 4 Mathematica Compressor 1,024x768 1,600x1,200 1,024x768 1,344x880 1,920x1,200 MathematicaMark 7 ProRez 422 to H.264 Mac Pro 2.66GHz Quad-Core (Nehalem) 81.2 41.6 68.1 39.6 24.3 10.1 9:38 Mac Pro 2.26GHz 8-Core (Nehalem) 74.5 41.1 77.7 38.1 24.1 16.8 8:14 Mac Pro 2.8GHz 8-Core (Harpertown, 3GB RAM) 75.0 21.5 77.8 28.7 16.9 9.7 9:02 Mac Pro 2.66GHz Quad-Core (Woodcrest) 54.7 19.8 26.1 10.5 6.1 6.9 12:52 24-inch iMac Core 2 Duo/3.06GHz (March 2009) 85.6 73.2 73.7 58.1 42.2 4.1 28:32 >Better >Better >Better >Better >Better >Better <Better Best results in bold. Reference systems in italics. We used Quake 4's timedemo run at 1,024x768 at high quality settings and antialialsing off, we then ran it again at 1,600x1,200 at Ultimate quality settings with 2X antialialsing enabled. For Call of Duty 4, we ran a self-recorded timedemo at 1,024x768 and antialiasing and shadows turned off, we then ran it again at both 1,344x880 and 1,920x1,200 with Shadows on and 4X antilaliasing enabled. We ran Mathematica 7's built-in benchmark, MathematicaMark. We used Compressor to encode a 6minute:26second ProRes file to the application's H.264 for iPod/ iPhone 640x480 preset with QMaster set to create a cluster comprised of the maximum number of instances per system.—MACWORLD LAB TESTING BY JAMES GALBRAITH, CHRIS HOLT AND HELEN WILLIAMSON. The new 2.26GHz eight-core Mac Pro has twice as many processing cores as the 2.66GHz quad-core model, but each core runs 15 percent slower than the cores in that 2.66GHz quad-core Mac Pro. Because many applications have a difficult time using even four processors efficiently, the advantage of having eight was not apparent in most of the application tests that make up our Speedmark benchmark test suite. In fact, the new eight-core system posted a lower Speedmark score than the quad-core system, and bested it in just one test—Cinema 4D, where it posted a 28 percent faster time. Pro app testing We run Speedmark on all Mac systems, so the suite is light on the few industrial-strength professional applications that take full advantage of multicore processors. Speedmark tests are also run one at a time, which can mask the advantage of increased RAM. For those reasons, we decided to add a couple of tests to the suite to better test the Mac Pro, namely Mathematica() and a ProRes Compressor test. In these tests, the applications recognized and used all 16 virtual cores of the new eight-core Mac Pro. In MathematicaMark 7, the new quad-core Mac Pro received a score of 10.1, nearly identical to the 9.7 score of last year’s eight-core 2.8GHz Mac Pro. The new 2.26GHz Mac Pro scored 16.8, or 73 percent higher than last year’s eight-core Mac Pro. In our ProRes encode test to Compressor’s H.264 iPod/iPhone 640 by 480 preset, the new 2.66GHz Mac Pro took 9 minutes and 38 seconds to convert our 6 minute and 41 second clip, about 6.6 percent longer than the older eight-core 2.8GHz system did. The new 2.26GHz Mac Pro was about 8.9 percent faster than last year’s model. The new Mac Pro’s graphics performance showed much improvement when running 3- D games at high resolution. With the Nvidia GeForce GT 120 graphics, the new Mac Pros were able to push through 44 percent more frames per second than last year’s standard 2.8GHz eight-core Mac Pro when running Call of Duty 4 at 1,920 by 1,200 pixels, and nearly twice as many frames per second when running Quake 4 at high resolution. The new 3.06GHz 24-inch iMac (), with its Nvidia GeForce 130 graphics chip, beat both Mac Pros in our most of our graphics tests. Macworld’s buying advice The new Mac Pros, with their cutting-edge Nehalem processor technology, are able to execute more tasks at a faster clip, despite lower processor speeds. And their new internal design makes adding hard drives, memory cards, and PCI Express 2.0 cards easier than ever. Apple’s most expandable Mac is the pro platform for power users. With its improved graphics, memory bandwidth, and reduced memory latency, the 2.66GHz quad-core Mac Pro was faster than the 2.8GHz eight-core Mac Pro, and at $2,499 costs $300 less. It would be a fine purchase for anyone replacing an older Mac or buying a new one for the first time. That is especially true for people who work with processorintensive apps such as video or graphics. It’s harder to recommend that people spend $800 more for the new $3,299 2.26GHz eight-core Mac Pro if they don’t run software written for the top-of-the-line Mac Pro’s eight processor cores. Though the 2.26GHz model was faster at most individual tasks than the previous eightcore 2.8GHz Mac Pro, and very fast in a few of our professional applications tests, it was slower than the new quad-core model at the majority of our application tests.

1 0

INTEREST: Canadian/UK research firms find sophisticated "social malware" at work
by billing 30 Mar '09

30 Mar '09

...from: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-746.html The snooping dragon: social-malware surveillance of the Tibetan movement Shishir Nagaraja, Ross Anderson University of Cambridge March 2009, 12 pages Abstract In this note we document a case of malware-based electronic surveillance of a political organisation by the agents of a nation state. While malware attacks are not new, two aspects of this case make it worth serious study. First, it was a targeted surveillance attack designed to collect actionable intelligence for use by the police and security services of a repressive state, with potentially fatal consequences for those exposed. Second, the modus operandi combined social phishing with high-grade malware. This combination of well-written malware with well-designed email lures, which we call social malware, is devastatingly effective. Few organisations outside the defence and intelligence sector could withstand such an attack, and although this particular case involved the agents of a major power, the attack could in fact have been mounted by a capable motivated individual. This report is therefore of importance not just to companies who may attract the attention of government agencies, but to all organisations. As social-malware attacks spread, they are bound to target people such as accounts-payable and payroll staff who use computers to make payments. Prevention will be hard. The traditional defence against social malware in government agencies involves expensive and intrusive measures that range from mandatory access controls to tiresome operational security procedures. These will not be sustainable in the economy as a whole. Evolving practical low-cost defences against social-malware attacks will be a real challenge. ...and from the full text: "We monitored the network traﬃc on its mail service in California and immediately observed that gaining access to emails would have been straightforward for anyone who could monitor this circuit, since the traﬃc was unencrypted. The email server could be contacted via POP, IMAP and HTTP in insecure modes, with passwords and mail passing in plain text. We also noted that some passwords chosen by [the users] were easily broken with a dictionary attack[...] in about 15 minutes [3]. The ‘standard’ security-consultant advice might therefore have been that [users] turn on TLS encryption to their mail server, and adopt a password policy. However such a superﬁcial diagnosis and prescription would not have given much of a defence. It turned out that the attackers used a diﬀerent route. 2.1 The attack vector Email attachments appear to have been the favoured strategy to deliver malicious pay-loads. This worked because the attackers took the trouble to write emails that appeared to come from fellow Tibetans and indeed from co-workers. The use of carefully-written email lures based on social context to get people to visit bogus websites has been called ‘social phishing’; in this incident, such email was used to spread malware and we therefore call this strategy social malware. [...] We then examined samples of email attachments from the local ﬁle systems them with the expert help of Mikko Hypponen at F-Secure Corporation, who determined that they could support ﬁle search and retrieval operations and also function as keyloggers. This conﬁrms that the attackers had pretty much full access to the data on the infected computers. (In fact, one monk claimed that he actually ‘saw’ the bot open his Outlook Express and send infected attachments to others without any action on his part!) [...] ... there is nothing in the modus operandi that prevents [these attacks] from being carried out by a smaller opponent. For example, we saw no evidence that the initial break involved wiretapping the backbone traﬃc from Dharamsala to California [...]. There was no need, given the tools and methods they actually employed. In fact, even a capable motivated individual could have carried out the attacks we describe here. Until recently, one might have assumed that it would take a ‘geek’ to write good malware, and someone with interpersonal skills to do the social manipulation. But the industrialisation of online crime over the past ﬁve years means that capably-written malware, which will not be detected by anti-virus programs, is now available on the market. All an attacker needs is the social skill and patience to work the malware from one person to another until enough machines have been compromised to complete the mission. What’s more, the ‘best practice’ advice that one sees in the corporate sector comes nowhere even close to preventing such an attack. Thus social malware is unlikely to remain a tool of governments. Certainly organisations of interest to governments should take proper precautions now, but other ﬁrms had better start to think about what it will mean for them when social malware attacks become widespread. [...] So what are the broader implications? How can social malware be dealt with? [...] One thing we predict, though, is that the social response to the threat of social malware will be slow and ineﬀective. This is because of elementary security economics. Banks will try to shift the blame to accounting system providers, and vice versa. The accounting vendors will advise customers to lock down user PCs, without being too explicit about how. Companies seeking redress will ﬁnd themselves up against standard terms and conditions whereby both banks and vendors disclaim liability; in many markets they are oligopolistic suppliers, so may be able to defend these contract terms for some time. The banking regulators have shown that they believe whatever the banks tell them, that they are uninterested in protecting bank customers, and in any case they have no expertise in information security. The initial attacks will aﬀect only a minority of ﬁrms, so the rest will prefer to blame the attacks on the victims’ negligence rather than acknowledging that their own policies need to change. Many companies will rely for advice on their auditors, and big audit ﬁrms, being ponderous and bureaucratic, give the same advice year-in year- out until litigation or regulation forces change. In short, we predict that the criminals who adapt social malware to fraud will enjoy many years of rich pickings. Indeed, if either of us were inclined to crime, this would be what we’d go for. [...] 4 Conclusions [The attackers] used social phishing to install rootkits on a number of machines and then downloaded sensitive data. People in Tibet may have died as a result. The compromise was detected and dealt with, but its implications are sobering. It shows how diﬃcult it is to defend sensitive information against an opponent who uses social engineering techniques to install malware. We have described this social malware attack here and considered its consequences. [...] the techniques used are available even to private individuals and are quite shockingly eﬀective. In fact, neither of the two authors is conﬁdent that we could keep secrets on a network- connected machine that we used for our daily work in the face of determined interest from a capable motivated opponent. The necessary restrictions on online activity would not be consistent with eﬀective academic work. Organisations that maintain sensitive information on network-attached computers and that may have such opponents had better think long and hard. The implications are serious already for people and groups who may become the target of hostile state surveillance. In the medium term we predict that social malware will be used for fraud, and the typical company has really no defence against it. We expect that many crooks will get rich before eﬀective countermeasures are widely deployed. = - = - = - = ...from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/technology/29spy.html?_r=1&th&emc=th Vast Spy System Loots Computers in 103 Countries By JOHN MARKOFF Published: March 28, 2009 TORONTO — A vast electronic spying operation has infiltrated computers and has stolen documents from hundreds of government and private offices around the world, including those of the Dalai Lama, Canadian researchers have concluded. Tim Leyes for The New York Times The Toronto academic researchers who are reporting on the spying operation dubbed GhostNet include, from left, Ronald J. Deibert, Greg Walton, Nart Villeneuve and Rafal A. Rohozinski. Vast Reach of ‘GhostNet’ In a report to be issued this weekend, the researchers said that the system was being controlled from computers based almost exclusively in China, but that they could not say conclusively that the Chinese government was involved. The researchers, who are based at the Munk Center for International Studies at the University of Toronto, had been asked by the office of the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader whom China regularly denounces, to examine its computers for signs of malicious software, or malware. Their sleuthing opened a window into a broader operation that, in less than two years, has infiltrated at least 1,295 computers in 103 countries, including many belonging to embassies, foreign ministries and other government offices, as well as the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan exile centers in India, Brussels, London and New York. The researchers, who have a record of detecting computer espionage, said they believed that in addition to the spying on the Dalai Lama, the system, which they called GhostNet, was focused on the governments of South Asian and Southeast Asian countries. Intelligence analysts say many governments, including those of China, Russia and the United States, and other parties use sophisticated computer programs to covertly gather information. The newly reported spying operation is by far the largest to come to light in terms of countries affected. This is also believed to be the first time researchers have been able to expose the workings of a computer system used in an intrusion of this magnitude. Still going strong, the operation continues to invade and monitor more than a dozen new computers a week, the researchers said in their report, “Tracking ‘GhostNet’: Investigating a Cyber Espionage Network.” They said they had found no evidence that United States government offices had been infiltrated, although a NATO computer was monitored by the spies for half a day and computers of the Indian Embassy in Washington were infiltrated. The malware is remarkable both for its sweep — in computer jargon, it has not been merely “phishing” for random consumers’ information, but “whaling” for particular important targets — and for its Big Brother-style capacities. It can, for example, turn on the camera and audio-recording functions of an infected computer, enabling monitors to see and hear what goes on in a room. The investigators say they do not know if this facet has been employed. The researchers were able to monitor the commands given to infected computers and to see the names of documents retrieved by the spies, but in most cases the contents of the stolen files have not been determined. Working with the Tibetans, however, the researchers found that specific correspondence had been stolen and that the intruders had gained control of the electronic mail server computers of the Dalai Lama’s organization. The electronic spy game has had at least some real-world impact, they said. For example, they said, after an e-mail invitation was sent by the Dalai Lama’s office to a foreign diplomat, the Chinese government made a call to the diplomat discouraging a visit. And a woman working for a group making Internet contacts between Tibetan exiles and Chinese citizens was stopped by Chinese intelligence officers on her way back to Tibet, shown transcripts of her online conversations and warned to stop her political activities. The Toronto researchers said they had notified international law enforcement agencies of the spying operation, which in their view exposed basic shortcomings in the legal structure of cyberspace. The F.B.I. declined to comment on the operation. Although the Canadian researchers said that most of the computers behind the spying were in China, they cautioned against concluding that China’s government was involved. The spying could be a nonstate, for-profit operation, for example, or one run by private citizens in China known as “patriotic hackers.” “We’re a bit more careful about it, knowing the nuance of what happens in the subterranean realms,” said Ronald J. Deibert, a member of the research group and an associate professor of political science at Munk. “This could well be the C.I.A. or the Russians. It’s a murky realm that we’re lifting the lid on.” A spokesman for the Chinese Consulate in New York dismissed the idea that China was involved. “These are old stories and they are nonsense,” the spokesman, Wenqi Gao, said. “The Chinese government is opposed to and strictly forbids any cybercrime.” The Toronto researchers, who allowed a reporter for The New York Times to review the spies’ digital tracks, are publishing their findings in Information Warfare Monitor, an online publication associated with the Munk Center. [...] In any case, it was suspicions of Chinese interference that led to the discovery of the spy operation. Last summer, the office of the Dalai Lama invited two specialists to India to audit computers used by the Dalai Lama’s organization. The specialists, Greg Walton, the editor of Information Warfare Monitor, and Mr. Nagaraja, a network security expert, found that the computers had indeed been infected and that intruders had stolen files from personal computers serving several Tibetan exile groups. Back in Toronto, Mr. Walton shared data with colleagues at the Munk Center’s computer lab. One of them was Nart Villeneuve, 34, a graduate student and self- taught “white hat” hacker with dazzling technical skills. Last year, Mr. Villeneuve linked the Chinese version of the Skype communications service to a Chinese government operation that was systematically eavesdropping on users’ instant-messaging sessions. Early this month, Mr. Villeneuve noticed an odd string of 22 characters embedded in files created by the malicious software and searched for it with Google. It led him to a group of computers on Hainan Island, off China, and to a Web site that would prove to be critically important. In a puzzling security lapse, the Web page that Mr. Villeneuve found was not protected by a password, while much of the rest of the system uses encryption. Mr. Villeneuve and his colleagues figured out how the operation worked by commanding it to infect a system in their computer lab in Toronto. On March 12, the spies took their own bait. Mr. Villeneuve watched a brief series of commands flicker on his computer screen as someone — presumably in China — rummaged through the files. Finding nothing of interest, the intruder soon disappeared. Through trial and error, the researchers learned to use the system’s Chinese-language “dashboard” — a control panel reachable with a standard Web browser — by which one could manipulate the more than 1,200 computers worldwide that had by then been infected. Infection happens two ways. In one method, a user’s clicking on a document attached to an e-mail message lets the system covertly install software deep in the target operating system. Alternatively, a user clicks on a Web link in an e-mail message and is taken directly to a “poisoned” Web site. The researchers said they avoided breaking any laws during three weeks of monitoring and extensively experimenting with the system’s unprotected software control panel. They provided, among other information, a log of compromised computers dating to May 22, 2007. They found that three of the four control servers were in different provinces in China — Hainan, Guangdong and Sichuan — while the fourth was discovered to be at a Web-hosting company based in Southern California. Beyond that, said Rafal A. Rohozinski, one of the investigators, “attribution is difficult because there is no agreed upon international legal framework for being able to pursue investigations down to their logical conclusion, which is highly local.”

1 0

INTEREST: SuSe LINUX 11 Release Candidate available for download
by billing 26 Feb '09

26 Feb '09

The next version of both the SusE LINUX Enterprise Server (SLES) and Desktop (SLED) - version 11 - is being made available in the Release Candidate for downloads. A registration is required to complete the download process. Here's the write-up about SLES/SLED 11: Novell Downloads Disclaimer ATTENTION! By downloading the above ISO images provided for the SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 Sneak Preview, you are accessing pre-release versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11 and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11. You are using these pre-release versions at your own risk! These pre-release versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise 11 are made available exclusively via download as a preview. Novell recommends to use them solely for evaluation purposes. Do not use the pre-release versions to run any system in production. Also, there is no upgrade path available from the Sneak Preview versions to the final General Availability versions of SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11 and SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11, or to later versions. Novell does NOT provide any bug-tracking channel, support, services, or warranty for the use of these pre-release versions, no matter if you update from a previous version of SUSE Linux Enterprise or if you perform a completely new installation. Thanks http://download.novell.com/protected/Summary.jsp?buildid=_skp4YryXVs~

1 0

FYI: Adobe Acrobat and Reader Vulnerability exploits PDF files
by billing 21 Feb '09

21 Feb '09

Begin forwarded message: > From: Ken De Cruyenaere <kdc(a)cc.umanitoba.ca> > Date: February 20, 2009 9:43:00 PM CST (CA) > To: um-compureps(a)cc.umanitoba.ca > Subject: [C-REPS] Heads up ! - Adobe Acrobat and Reader Vulnerability > > > There is an exploit in the wild and a patch is not expected until > March 11th. > > See below for suggested (temporary) solutions. > > ----- Forwarded message from CERT Advisory <cert-advisory(a)cert.org> > ----- > > > Systems Affected > > * Adobe Reader version 9 and earlier > * Adobe Acrobat (Professional, 3D, and Standard) version 9 and > earlier > > > Overview > > Adobe has released Security Bulletin APSB09-01, which describes a > vulnerability that affects Adobe Reader and Acrobat. This > vulnerability could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary > code. > > > I. Description > > Adobe Security Bulletin APSB09-01 describes a memory-corruption > vulnerability that affects Adobe Reader and Acrobat. Further > details are available in Vulnerability Note VU#905281. An attacker > could exploit these vulnerabilities by convincing a user to load a > specially crafted Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) file. > Acrobat integrates with popular web browsers, and visiting a > website is usually sufficient to cause Acrobat to load PDF content. > > > II. Impact > > An attacker may be able to execute arbitrary code. > > > III. Solution > > Disable JavaScript in Adobe Reader and Acrobat > > Disabling Javascript may prevent some exploits from resulting in > code execution. Acrobat JavaScript can be disabled using the > Preferences menu (Edit -> Preferences -> JavaScript and un-check > Enable Acrobat JavaScript). > > > Prevent Internet Explorer from automatically opening PDF documents > > The installer for Adobe Reader and Acrobat configures Internet > Explorer to automatically open PDF files without any user > interaction. This behavior can be reverted to the safer option of > prompting the user by importing the following as a .REG file: > > Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 > > [HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\AcroExch.Document.7] > "EditFlags"=hex:00,00,00,00 > > > Disable the display of PDF documents in the web browser > > Preventing PDF documents from opening inside a web browser will > partially mitigate this vulnerability. If this workaround is > applied it may also mitigate future vulnerabilities. To prevent PDF > documents from automatically being opened in a web browser, do the > following: > 1. Open Adobe Acrobat Reader. > 2. Open the Edit menu. > 3. Choose the preferences option. > 4. Choose the Internet section. > 5. Un-check the "Display PDF in browser" check box. > > > Do not access PDF documents from untrusted sources > > Do not open unfamiliar or unexpected PDF documents, particularly > those hosted on web sites or delivered as email attachments. Please > see Cyber Security Tip ST04-010. > > > IV. References > > * Adobe Security Bulletin apsa09-01 - > <http://www.adobe.com/support/security/advisories/apsa09-01.html> > > * Securing Your Web Browser - > <http://www.us-cert.gov/reading_room/securing_browser/> > > <snip> > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > > --- > Ken De Cruyenaere Computer Security Coordinator > kdc(a)cc.umanitoba.ca Information Services & Technology > (204) 474-8340 University of Manitoba > > > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > _______________________________________ > um-compureps mailing list > um-compureps(a)lists.umanitoba.ca > http://lists.umanitoba.ca/mailman/listinfo/um-compureps >

1 0

FYI: if you share, make sure you have a termination clause...
by billing 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

....or... All your content are belong to us.... forever. As you may already have heard, the online "social networking" service FACEBOOK briefly changed their "Terms of Service" this month... and then changed them back. The initial change allowed FACEBOOK to retain anything you'd put into your FACEBOOK account (pictures, text, poems, songs, etc.), even if you had closed your account. The online video-blog Rocketboom (www.rocketboom.com) has a video that examines some of the issues surrounding this event: http://www.rocketboom.com/rb_09_feb_19/

1 0

FYI: ECODISC DVD stuck in Mac slot drive...
by billing 18 Feb '09

18 Feb '09

...from: http://www.ecodiscdvd.net/ "EcoDisc is the revolutionary, eco-friendly DVD with all the optical properties, playability and quality of traditional DVDs at a third less of the cost. They use 50% less polycarbonate and produce 52% less CO2 emissions. You can easily convert your existing CD line to a more profitable EcoDisc line. They’re thinner, lighter, more flexible, more durable and environmentally friendly. Go green, save green, make green. Go EcoDisc." Sounds great, right? Thinner, lighter, use less material, creates less pollution, flexible.... what could be the problem? They are "too thin" for slot-loading drives..... They've already been used in magazine give-away's in the UK. They're coming to North America... ...from: http://www.digitaltoast.co.uk/ecodisc-cover-dvd-stuck-in-mac-slot-drive ECODISC DVD STUCK IN MAC SLOT DRIVE The problem of unwanted freebie coverdiscs has been growing for a while now. So, someone invented EcoDiscs, which are half the thickness of a normal DVD. Except they’ll bugger your Mac up and leave you with a bill for £65+VAT. The Independent and The Daily Mail amongst others gave away some ecodisc cover DVDs this weekend, and on Monday, a distressed relative called to say the mac was making strange noises. After a couple of hours, I began searching on the internet, and found the answer: http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/01/17/slot_load_pc_pro_drive_mayhem/comme… http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/155010/mail-on-sunday-angers-mac-users-with-dvd… http://qompute.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/ecodisc-becoming-ecodisaster-for-ma… http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/01/17/slot_load_pc_pro_drive_mayhem/ http://digg.com/apple/Environmental_DVD_Wrecks_Apple_Drives http://www.kizo.com/2008/environmental-dvd-wrecks-apple-drives/ http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/17/1747254 I phoned The Independent who took no responsibility at all, but said they’d send out a standard form reply by email (which never came) disclaiming all responsibility. So, there’s a warning on the disc (click for full size: hint, you're looking for this symbol ) Yes, it’s 4mm high, in fuzzy print. As if anyone is going to see that! It needs to be the LARGEST thing on the disc. I then called the manufacturer, ODS, who sent me the document below - yes, the solution is to turn the Mac upside down while ejecting the disc. In fact, as this didn’t work at first, I followed further guidelines on the net suggesting I bang it while ejecting and upside down! This finally freed the disc, but does anyone have any idea how bad that can be for a hard drive?! It could cause a head-crash and data loss at the least. Another surprising thing is that according to one of the articles above, Ecodisc have had “less than 12 calls about it”. Makes you wonder why they need a standard document like this, doesn’t it... Everything below is quoted: EcoDisc – argument guideline to get EcoDisc out of Apple computer If customers face the unlikely incident that the EcoDisc is not ejected out of a computer slot-in drive (even after several trials) our recommendation is: To try with 1. turn laptop/PC upside down, 2. press manual “eject” button To restart the computer once again and try with the eject button If accessible: to take the disc-drive out of the computer, open the disc-drive with a screw driver and then take the disc out. A technically versed person can accomplish this within ten minutes To take the computer to the next Apple shop for fixing; cost approx. 25-50€. Not to insert a second EcoDisc afterwards, because we cannot guarantee that this measure works with all slot-in drive constructions existing world wide Not to use tools like tweezers or other, because these tools might really damage the drive, but the EcoDisc itself does not damage the drive or destroy it, just might block the ejection mechanism ....sounds like the best thing is to just not insert them in the first place.... thanks, wayne

1 0

INTEREST: Stanford's "Clean Slate" Internet redesign...
by billing 16 Feb '09

16 Feb '09

...from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/weekinreview/15markoff.html?th&emc=th Do We Need a New Internet? By JOHN MARKOFF Published: February 14, 2009 Two decades ago a 23-year-old Cornell University graduate student brought the Internet to its knees with a simple software program that skipped from computer to computer at blinding speed, thoroughly clogging the then-tiny network in the space of a few hours. The program was intended to be a digital “Kilroy Was Here.” Just a bit of cybernetic fungus that would unobtrusively wander the net. However, a programming error turned it into a harbinger heralding the arrival of a darker cyberspace, more of a mirror for all of the chaos and conflict of the physical world than a utopian refuge from it. [...] ...from: http://cleanslate.stanford.edu/about_cleanslate.php About Clean Slate Mission Our mission is to "reinvent the internet" so Future Internet can: • overcome fundamental architectural limitations (e.g. lack of security and mobility support) of today's Internet • incorporate new technologies (e.g. sensor networks, optical networks) • enable new class of applications and services (e.g. content dissemination, sensorized physical world, large scale virtual world environments) • continue to be a platform for innovations and thus be an engine for economic growth and prosperity for the society. We know our mission is ambitious - that is what makes it worthy of our group of very talented students, staff, and faculty. Our Approach • We think of the Internet in very broad terms: it is not just about the TCP/IP protocol stack and switches and routers. It is the collection of systems that make the heart of the Internet: the services, computation and storage - those concentrated in dedicated centers, and those globally distributed. It is also the diversity of ways that we will connect to, and interact with, the Internet - via mobile and personal communication, with virtual presence and virtual worlds, reaching all parts of the globe. Together, these form the online infrastructure that society will continue to depend on. • We are taking an interdisciplinary approach with students, staff, and faculty from Departments of Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, and Management Science and Engineering and from Business School and Law School. Stanford's depth and breadth of expertise combined with its collaborative culture makes the interdisciplinary program possible. • We are also partnering with the industry to benefit from its insights, technologies, and resources. Stanford's long history of successful collaboration with the industry and its location and role in the Silicon Valley makes the industry collaboration at this scale possible. • We are reducing barrier to exploring a (radical) idea by creating a mechanism to seed exploratory projects. • We are also undertaking larger collaborative flagship projects to address broader research themes and associated challenges that require development of new architectures, technologies and systems and their deployment in a test bed network. For these projects, we are exploring special partnerships with the industry. • We are selectively collaborating with researchers outside Stanford and also contributing to national initiatives such as NSF's GENI initiative including FIND that we share a common vision with. • We are making it an enjoyable and fun experience for the participants in the program. Our Team We have assembled a great team with members that have a strong track record of contributions in all aspects of the Internet: • From theory to system development to deployment to technology commercialization • From physical layer technologies to network architectures and protocols to distributed systems and services to applications • Security and robustness of networks and systems • Economics and policy issues pertaining to current and future Internet You can learn more about the team by looking at People section of the website. We are always interested in new members including undergraduate and graduate students who have a passion to make the world a better place using innovations especially in networking and systems. If you are interested, look at Contact section of the website. ...from: http://yuba.stanford.edu/trainwreck/ The Future of TCP: Train-wreck or Evolution? April 1, 2008 Stanford University, Stanford, CA Sponsored by: The Stanford Clean Slate Internet Program Cisco Systems The Stanford Computer Forum Home Program Committee Important Dates Agenda Registration Logistics ParticipantsContact Workshop Description: Spurred on by a widespread belief that TCP is showing its age and needs replacing - and a deeper understanding of the dynamics of congestion control - the research community has brought forward many new congestion control algorithms. There has been lots of debate about the relative merits and demerits of the new schemes; and a standardization effort is under way in the IETF. But before the next congestion control mechanism is deployed, it will need to be deployed widely in operating systems and - in some cases - in switches and routers too. This will be a long road, requiring the buy-in of many people: Researchers, product developers and business leaders too. Our own experience of proposing new congestion control algorithms has been met with the challenge: "Show me the compelling need for a new congestion control mechanisms?", and "What will really happen to the Internet (and my business) if we keep TCP just the way it is?" As a community, we need examples that are simple to understand, and demonstrate a compelling need for change. We call them the "Train wreck scenarios". Examples might show that distribution of video over wireless in the home will come to a halt without new algorithms. Or that P2P traffic will bring the whole network crashing down. Or that huge, high-performance data-centers need new algorithms. Whatever your favorite example, we believe that if we are collectively armed with a handful of mutually agreed examples, it will be much easier to make a business case for change. Or put another way, if we can't articulate compelling examples to industry leaders, then is the cost and risk of change worth it? The goal of the workshop is to identify a handful of really compelling demonstrations of the impending train-wreck. The outcome will be a set of canonical examples that we will use to persuade industry of the need for change. You can choose the way you present your demonstration: You could bring equipment and show a live-demo; you could show simulations or animations; or you could produce a video showing a real or synthetic demo. Whatever method you choose, the goal is to create a case that will persuade a mildly-technical but influential business leader of the need for change. We will invite a panel of judges to give prizes for the most compelling examples in two categories: (1) The Overall Most Compelling Example, which will be judged on a combination of the technical merits and the presentation of the scenario, and (2) The Most Technically Compelling Example, which will be judged on its technical merit alone, without consideration of the way it is presented. The whole purpose of the workshop it to focus on the problem, not the solutions. We are most definitely not interested in your favorite scheme, or ours. So we need some ground-rules. No-one is allowed to mention a specific mechanism, algorithm or proposal at any time during the workshop: Not in their talk, not in a panel, and not in questions to the speakers. The only mechanisms that will be allowed mention are: TCP (in its standard and deployed flavors), and idealized alternatives for purposes of demonstration. For example, comparing TCP with an oracle that provides instantaneous optimal rates to each flow. We will video the entire workshop and all the demonstrations, and make it publicly available on the Internet. We will make any proceedings and talks available too. The goal is to open up the demonstrations for public scrutiny and feedback after the event. The event is hosted by the Stanford Clean Slate Program and local arrangements will be made by the Stanford Computer Forum, Nick McKeown and Nandita Dukkipati. The workshop has received offers of support and funding from Cisco Systems and Microsoft. Last updated March 30, 2008

1 0

FYI: got a car? Look out for computer malware...
by billing 06 Feb '09

06 Feb '09

...from: http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?date=2009-02-03 The SANS Institute (SysAdmin, Audit, Network, Security: an affiliation of over 165,000 computer security personnel around the world) has posted the above article on their site. The short story is that fliers put under the windshield wipers of cars in Grand Forks, ND alluded to parking violations and gave a web site URL. Browsing to the URL installed malware on Microsoft Windows machines. Click on the link for all the "gory" details.... Wayne

1 0