Saturday, 2 June 2012

Risks of boomerangs a reality in world of cyberwar


The Obama administration is warning American businesses about an unusually potent computer virusthat infected Iran's oil industry even as suspicions persist that the United States is responsible for secretly creating and unleashing cyberweapons against foreign countries.
The government's dual roles of alerting U.S. companies about these threats and producing powerful software weapons and eavesdropping tools underscore the risks of an unintended, online boomerang.
Unlike a bullet or missile fired at an enemy, a cyberweapon that spreads across the Internet may circle back accidentally to infect computers it was never supposed to target. It's one of the unusual challenges facing the programmers who build such weapons, and presidents who must decide when to launch them.
The Homeland Security Department's warning about the new virus, known as "Flame," assured U.S. companies that no infections had been discovered so far inside the U.S. It described Flame as an espionage tool that was sophisticated in design, using encryption and other techniques to help break into computers and move through corporate or private networks. The virus can eavesdrop on data traffic, take screenshots and record audio and keystrokes. The department said the origin is a mystery.
The White House has declined to discuss the virus.
But suspicions about the U.S. government's role in the use of cyberweapons were heightened by a report in Friday's New York Times. Based on anonymous sources, it said President Barack Obama secretly had ordered the use of another sophisticated cyberweapon, known as Stuxnet, to attack the computer systems that run Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities. The order was an extension of a sabotage program that the Times said began during the Bush administration.
Private security researchers long have suspected that the U.S. and Israeli governments were responsible for Stuxnet. But the newspaper's detailed description of conversations in the Oval Office among Obama, the vice president and the CIA director about the U.S. government's responsibility for Stuxnet is the most direct evidence of this to date. U.S. officials rarely discuss the use of cyberweapons outside of classified settings.
Stuxnet is believed to have been released as early as 2009. It was discovered in June 2010 by a Belarusian antivirus researcher analyzing a customer's infected computer in Iran. It targeted electronic program controllers built by Siemens AG of Germany that were installed in Iran. The U.S. government also circulated warnings to American businesses about Stuxnet after it was detected.
The White House said Friday it would not discuss whether the U.S. was responsible for the Stuxnet attacks on Iran.
"I'm not able to comment on any of the specifics or details," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said. "That information is classified for a reason, and it is kept secret. It is intended not to be publicized because publicizing it would pose a threat to our national security."
Cyberweapons are uncharted territory because the U.S. laws are ambiguous about their use, and questions about their effectiveness and reliability are mostly unresolved. Attackers online can disguise their origins or even impersonate an innocent bystander organization, making it difficult to identify actual targets when responding to attacks.
Viruses and malicious software, known as malware, rely on vulnerabilities in commercial software and hardware products. But it is hard to design a single payload that always will succeed because the target may have fixed a software vulnerability or placed computers behind a firewall.
On the Internet, where being connected is a virtue, an attack intended for one target can spread unexpectedly. Whether a cyberweapon can boomerang depends on its state of the art, according to computer security experts. On that point, there are deep divisions over Flame.
Russian digital security provider Kaspersky Lab, which first identified the virus, said Flame's complexity and functionality "exceed those of all other cybermenaces known to date." There is no doubt, the company said, that a government sponsored the research that developed it. Yet Flame's author remains unknown because there is no information in the code of the virus that would link it to a particular country.
Other experts said it wasn't as fearsome.
Much of the code used to build the virus is old and available on the Internet, said Becky Bace, chief strategist at the Center for Forensics, Information Technology and Security at the University of South Alabama. Flame could have been developed by a small team of smart people who are motivated and have financial backing, she said, making it just as likely a criminal enterprise or a group working as surrogates could have been responsible.
"Here's the wake-up call as far as cyber is concerned: You don't have to be a nation-state to have what it would take to put together a threat of this particular level of sophistication," said Bace, who spent 12 years at the National Security Agency working on intrusion detection and network security. "There's no secret sauce here."
Stuxnet was far more complex.
Still, Stuxnet could not have worked without detailed intelligence about Iran's nuclear program that was obtained through conventional spycraft, said Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at F-Secure, a digital security company in Helsinki, Finland. The countries with the motivation and the means to gather that data are the United States and Israel, he said.
"This is at the level of complexity that very few organizations in the world would even attempt," said Hypponen, who has studied Stuxnet and Flame. "Basically you have to have moles. Most of what they needed to pull this off was most likely collected with what we would characterize as traditional intelligence work."
The more intricately designed a cyberweapon is, the less likely it will boomerang. Stuxnet spread well beyond the Iranian computer networks it was intended to hit. But the collateral damage was minimal because the virus was developed to go after very specific targets.
"When some of these super sophisticated things spread, it's bad but it may not have the same impact because the virus itself is so complex," said Jacob Olcott, a senior cybersecurity expert at Good Harbor Consulting. "It's designed to only have its impact when it finds certain conditions."
Israel is a world leader in cybertechnology and senior Israeli officials did little to deflect suspicion about that country's involvement in cyberweapons. "Whoever sees the Iranian threat as a significant threat is likely to take various steps, including these, to hobble it," said Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon, a former military chief and minister of strategic affairs.
A senior defense official involved in Israel's cyberwarfare program said Friday that, "Israel is investing heavily in units that deal with cyberwarfare both for defense and offense." He would not elaborate. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not allowed to speak with the media.
Isaac Ben-Israel, an adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on cybersecurity issues, declined Friday to say whether Israel was involved with Stuxnet.
It could take years to know who is responsible, which is what is so unsettling about attacks in cyberspace. "We are very good as an industry at figuring out what a piece of malware does," said Dave Marcus, director of advanced research and threat intelligence at digital security giant McAfee. "But we are less accurate when it comes to saying what group is responsible for it, or it came from this country or that organization."




(courtesy:news.yahoo.com)

Apple's digital storefronts rumored to get a face-lift


(Credit: Apple)
Apple's trio of digital storefronts are getting a visual overhaul soon, according to a new rumor.
Citing anonymous sources, Apple blog 9to5Mac said today that the iTunes Store, the App Store, and the iBookstore are getting visual overhauls that will bring "more interactivity." What that actually entails is unclear.
The report adds that the change will also add more social features to store pages. Presumably this would go beyond the current "tell a friend" option that lets you send a quick detail page about the app to someone else by e-mail. 9to5Mac suggests Apple will add a way to share on Facebook, adding a certain degree of credibility to a report from earlier today saying Facebook would be deeply integrated in iOS 6.
One other noteworthy tidbit from the report is that the new stores will not offer any major overhaul to the built-in search tools. Such a move was expected after Apple acquired a small app-finding company called Chomp a few months ago. 9to5Mac says the initial iOS 6 updates for the iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore will not feature improved app discoverability -- something critics have highlighted as a weak point as the size of the App Store has grown.
Apple's annual developer conference is a little more than a week away. The company is expected to introduce iOS 6 there, like it did with iOS 5 last year.




(courtesy:cnet.com)

Apple looms over E3 once again


(Credit: James Martin/CNET)
It's a rite of passage for every tech trade show.
Apple, the 800-pound gorilla of the industry, never has an official presence at shows like CTIA(mobile), CES (consumer electronics), and Computex (PCs). But if you read between the lines of the press conferences and press releases, every company at those shows is implicitly talking about -- and reacting to -- the latest Apple gadgets, new or anticipated.
And now, as we approach the annual E3 trade show, the focus naturally turns to Apple's role in the video game industry.
During E3 2011, we made an obvious observation that resonated in a chilly fashion with traditional gamers: one of the biggest forces in gaming has become Apple, and while the company doesn't attend the show, the shadow of its influence looms large.
Apple used to downplay its involvement in gaming, even when the iPhone was becoming the go-to destination for casual games that the Nintendo DS used to be. But at this year's All Things D conference, Apple CEO Tim Cook didn't mince words: "I view that we're in gaming now in a big way."
Really, Apple has been a force in gaming since the App Store opened its doors in 2008. The question asked repeatedly at last year's E3 was whether devices like the iPad have become the go-to gaming systems for many households over traditional consoles and handhelds, and whether the App Store's aggressive economy and freemium models of pay would influence the rest of the industry.
That's no longer a question anymore: they have. Even Nintendo doesn't deny it. But there's more that Apple has influenced, and will continue to influence.
Small games, big games
It was easier to defend old-school big-budget games with last year's bumper crop of excellent AAA games that clearly could never live on the App Store: Skyrim, Arkham City,Zelda Skyward Sword, BioShock Infinite. It'll be easy to do that again this year, too, but the list of anticipated games doesn't seem as large.
What is a "big game"? There's no arguing the depth of gameplay in most AAA console and handheld titles, but the depth and quality of mobile games continues to grow. The recently released iOS game Air Mail feels like a stand-in for Pilotwings on the 3DS, and costs a fraction of the price. Meanwhile, classic console games are routinely released in the App Store, many going on sale for as low as a dollar.
Then there's the mindshare of popular culture in gaming: Angry Birds, Fruit Ninja, and Where's My Water are the Space Invaders and Pac-Man of our age. There haven't been household gaming mascots from the Big Three console makers since Master Chief, Kratos, and Super Mario.
Online gaming, redefined
Console and PC gamers think of "online games" in terms of massively multiplayer online games (MMOs, such as World of Warcraft) and group-friendly shooters like Call of Duty. But that's an increasingly narrow definition. On smartphones, "online gaming" is Draw Something and Words With Friends. Think that doesn't matter? Zynga's made a fortune off that online connectivity, and plenty of companies like Popcap exploit Facebook Connect to share scores and other data.
The best online gaming platform for most casual gamers has become their phones. Apple and its App Store are leading that charge more than anyone. Comparatively, it's hard for handhelds like the Vita and 3DS to compete.
Casual games, casual controls
Why do video game industry enthusiasts bristle when mentioning Apple? Maybe because gaming on Apple's iOS devices involves a less-than-ideal touch-and-gesture control scheme, leaving button-based games settling for lousy virtual control pads. Apple's always only a physical control pad away from suddenly making a lot of iOS games just as fun to play on an iPad as they would be on a console. The iCade and its spin-off controllers lack analog sticks and universal support, but try one and you'll see the difference.
Meanwhile, the rest of the video game industry, as of the past few years, is meeting Apple halfway with motion-based games and touch games that avoid old-fashioned controllers. Everything from the Vita to the Wii U and Kinect is trying to reach that casual-gaming market that Apple has dominated.
Developers like lots of customers: The iOS pull
I remember attending an EA event showcasing Mass Effect 3 and its iOS spinoff, Mass Effect Infiltrator, last winter. Someone in the crowd asked when this would hit the PlayStation Vita. The EA employee admitted that wasn't currently in the plan. EA, in many ways, is a console and mobile-gaming force, splitting efforts between big console games and a ton of iOS and Android development houses it's acquired. Some of EA's games do hit the Nintendo 3DS and PS Vita, but the focus on mobile has become massive. So, too, with companies like Square Enix, Namco, Sega, Capcom, and many other traditional game publishers. Many of these games are no longer ports of existing titles, but newly developed original titles.
The money's where the largest platform is, and right now that's Apple's iOS. Yes, Android has a larger user base, but thanks to fragmentation -- tons of different phones, with a range of screen dimensions, CPUs, and graphics hardware -- it remains a tougher platform on which to create games. By comparison, the iOS world is one of nearly identical iPhones and iPads -- as streamlined a development platform as there is.
Apple TV and the inevitable apps
I say inevitable because it seems utterly obvious. The Apple TV is an iOS device. Every other iOS device has apps. At some point, the switch will be flipped: apps will be available for some TV-connected Apple device, or a separate Apple TV. (If the rumors are to be believed, that could come as soon as this month.) When that happens, Apple will have games for a TV-connected device. That means Apple will have a gaming console.
Tim Cook may say Apple has no interest in traditional gaming consoles, but he did admit thatgaming on a TV would be "interesting." App developers might have lots and lots of interest. Game developers, not Apple, turned the App Store into an Apple gaming powerhouse. That same software development wave, from thousands of hungry and creative individuals, will do the same for Apple in the living room. You might not get Halo and Uncharted, per se, but you could get something awfully close based on the already considerable power of Apple's A5 and A5X graphics.
Apps have drifted into the console market: the Xbox 360 has a slew of video and social apps, and so does the PS3. The PS Vita adopts the same grid-of-apps layout as a smartphone, and so does the Nintendo 3DS. Having good apps as well as good games has become part of the equation for any gaming hardware, and this year's E3 is bound to unveil new app partnerships.
Of all the Big Three gaming companies, Microsoft looks best set to compete: it's a computer company too, like Apple, and has roots in PCs and mobile phones. Microsoft is an expert at software and user interfaces. The Xbox dashboard, Windows 8, and Windows Phone are already spiritually converging with a very similar "Metro" interface, and with the Kinect in place, an app-equipped 360 could be a true competitor to the Apple TV.
One new thing
Apple launches new hardware every year. The gaming industry can't match that pace. Does it need to? I love being able to play new games on my older console, and so do most console owners. It's a welcome change from the faster obsolescence cycle of most computer and phone hardware. However, it should surprise no one that interest in consoles has waned with the exception of the Xbox 360.
Also, the new hardware at this show is less conversation-starting. Both the PlayStation Vita and Wii U -- systems, needless to say, that feature motion and touch-screen elements -- were new, newsworthy. This year, there seems to be no such product. Meanwhile, not a day goes by (or so it seems) without an Apple TV rumor.
The pressure seems to be on E3, as WWDC lurks around the corner, to step up with a big bunch of product announcements. This isn't a requirement for a successful show, not by a long shot. But, many of these game development houses will be headed up north at the end of the week to attend WWDC. These developers are interested in what Apple will unveil with the latest version of iOS. A chunk of the gaming landscape now exists outside of E3, and it feels like the status of the whole show will never be the same.






(courtesy:cnet.com)



Inside the Samsung Galaxy S III: Quad-core drives galaxial screen


Samsung Galaxy S III
Samsung Galaxy S III
(Credit: Brian Bennett/CNET)
Samsung Galaxy S III main circuit board. The Samsung Exynos 4412 quad-core A9 processor is in orange; Samsung NAND flash in yellow.
Samsung Galaxy S III main circuit board. The Samsung Exynos 4412 quad-core A9 processor is in orange; Samsung NAND flash in yellow.
(Credit: chipworks)
The Samsung's Galaxy S III's vast 4.8-inch screen sits atop a quad-core processor and Sony camera, among other goodies exposed in detail via a chipworks teardown.
Before we dive into the specs, let's be clear. For a phone, it's big. Big enough to be brushing up against 5-inch mini tablets.
"I'd say it does verge on being unnecessarily large, but thankfully it isn't as ludicrously big as theSamsung Galaxy Note with its 5.3-inch screen," said CNET"s Jessica Dolcourt in her review of the phone.
And note this is the global version of the phone, not the LTE version that has yet to arrive in the U.S. The LTE-based U.S. version could opt for a dual-core Qualcomm chip that integrates the LTE function. We'll have to wait and see, though.
Nitty-gritty specs: 
  • Processor: Samsung Exynos 4412 quad-core A9 processor with 1GB DDR2 memory. The quad-core Samsung chip was only announced in April. So, this is the first chance for Samsung to strut its quad-core stuff. Owing to its 32-nanometer tech, the Exynos 4 Quad has "two times the processing capability over the 45-[nanometer] process based Exynos...Dual while consuming 20 percent less power," Samsung said in April.
  • Camera: the 8MP camera sensor is a Sony back-illuminated sensor (BSI) unit. Essentially the same camera found in the iPhone 4S. "Folks can finally compare Apples to Androids when it comes to picture quality," said iFixit, which provided commentary to the chipworks teardown. And the other camera? At 1.9MP, it "should vastly outperform the VGA unit on the iPhone 4S," according to iFixit.
  • Battery: The 2100 mAh battery is big when compared with the iPhone 4S' 1420 mAh and Galaxy Nexus' 1750 mAh units. The battery incorporates the Near Field Communications (NFC) module used in "S Beam." 
  • Glass: One of the first phones to tap Corning Gorilla Glass 2. Corning says it is up to 20 percent thinner, enabling slimmer devices and better touch responsiveness and brighter images but with the same "damage resistance" as before. 
  • Display: iFixit makes a good point. At a resolution of 1280x720 the display packs almost as many pixels into a 4.8-inch screen as some laptops have in a 13-inch screen.
  • Other silicon highlights: Samsung NAND flash; Intel Wireless PMB9811X Gold Baseband processor; Murata WiFi Module; Broadcom BCM47511 Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver. 












(courtesy:cnet.com)

Friday, 1 June 2012

Judge says 37 Oracle APIs are not copyrightable


The structure, sequence, and organization of the 37 Java APIs at question in the Oracle v. Google case are not copyrightable, Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court of Northern California said in a ruling today.
However, it's a narrow ruling that only covers the APIs at question in the copyright phase of this case.
Oracle had sued Google over copyright infringement related to the use of 37 Java APIs used on the Android mobile operating system. Google argued they were free to use because the Java programming language is free to use, and the APIs are required to use the language. Oracle tried to make the case that Google had knowingly used the APIs without a license from Sun Microsystems, which was bought by Oracle in 2010.
That's after the jury came back with a partial verdict in the copyrights phase of the trial a few weeks ago in which the then-12 jurors said that Google had infringed upon Oracle's copyrights -- but they could not come up with a unanimous answer on the question of fair use.
However, now Alsup has handed another win to Google by ruling that the 37 APIs weren't copyrightable in the first place. Here is the heart of the ruling:
So long as the specific code used to implement a method is different, anyone is free under the Copyright Act to write his or her own code to carry out exactly the same function or specification of any methods used in the Java API. It does not matter that the declaration or method header lines are identical.
Under the rules of Java, they must be identical to declare a method specifying the same functionality -- even when the implementation is different. When there is only one way to express an idea or function, then everyone is free to do so and no one can monopolize that expression. And, while the Android method and class names could have been different from the names of their counterparts in Java and still have worked, copyright protection never extends to names or short phrases as a matter of law.
The key point to understand here is that Alsup's ruling only refers to the APIs in this lawsuit, and he is not handing down a broad ruling that would extend to all APIs in general, something that could have turned the ruling into an important legal precedent.
"This order does not hold that Java API packages are free for all to use without license," Alsup wrote. "It does not hold that the structure, sequence, and organization of all computer programs may be stolen. Rather, it holds on the specific facts of this case, the particular elements replicated by Google were free for all to use under the Copyright Act."
Thus, that calls for two major decisions wrapped up: Oracle's copyright infringement claim against Google is dismissed, turning Google's motion for a retrial into a moot point.
Now the big question will be where Oracle heads from here: accept the U.S. District Court's decision or try to go for an appeal. The latter seems like an incredible long shot given that it barely won on any counts from the jury on copyrights and absolutely nothing on patents.
The jury only gave Oracle the win on the nine lines of code involved in the rangeCheck method, and Alsup had previously said before Oracle could only hope for statutory damages -- a maximum of $150,000 -- at best on those. The court later tacked on the test files, but Oracle's efforts in this case will not result in the payday for which it originally hoped.
In a statement, Oracle said it would appeal the decision, maintaining that a "license has always been required for an implementation of the Java Specification":
Oracle is committed to the protection of Java as both a valuable development platform and a valuable intellectual property asset. It will vigorously pursue an appeal of this decision in order to maintain that protection and to continue to support the broader Java community of over 9 million developers and countless law abiding enterprises. Google's implementation of the accused APIs is not a free pass, since a license has always been required for an implementation of the Java Specification. And the court's reliance on "interoperability" ignores the undisputed fact that Google deliberately eliminated interoperability between Android and all other Java platforms. Google's implementation intentionally fragmented Java and broke the "write once, run anywhere" promise. This ruling, if permitted to stand, would undermine the protection for innovation and invention in the United States and make it far more difficult to defend intellectual property rights against companies anywhere in the world that simply takes them as their own.





(courtesy:cnet.com)

Humble Indie Bundle V breaks records, racks up $1.75mn in under a day


The fifth Humble Indie Bundle has been released, and already, it is the most successful one yet, making a staggering $1.75 million, in less than a day.
Of course, not just have the previous bundles’ popularity been the biggest draw for to Humble Indie Bundle V, for this time around, the team has put together five of the biggest selling indie gamesof 2011 and 2012.
As before, you can pay what you want for the Humble Indie Bundle, unlocking four games (Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Psychonauts, Limbo, and Superbrothers: Sword & Sworcery EP). If you pay above the average price, you also get Bastion.
What you pay for the Humble Indie Bundle V can once again be divided by your preferences, amongst the games’ developers, charities (Electronic Frontier Foundation and Child’s Play Charity), and Humble Bundle Inc. itself.
All the games are absolutely DRM-free and cross-platform (Windows, Linux, Mac), and if you pay more than $1, you also get a Steam-activation key.
The Humble Indie Bundle V games put together would have normally cost $110, and so of course, a deal like this for some of the biggest indie games of the recent past is definitely a bargain almost any gamer should not afford to miss. To sweeten it up, you also get all the games’ original soundtracks, in FLAC and MP3.
Visit Humble Bundle here – there are 13 days to go, and the sooner you grab it, the better, after all, if most people intend to get all five games, the average price will only go up.







(courtesy:thinkdigit.com)


Twitter Bird Gadget