
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Haaze.com / MigelFrias34 / All</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 07:10:22 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[U.S. shutters botnet, can disable malware remotely]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--shutters-botnet-can-disable-malware-remotely</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--shutters-botnet-can-disable-malware-remotely</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 07:10:22 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>MigelFrias34</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=u-s--shutters-botnet-can-disable-malware-remotely</guid>
<description><![CDATA[By seizing servers and domain names and getting permission to remotely turn off malware on compromised PCs, U.S. officials have disabled a botnet that steals data from infected computers. The legal actions are part of the &quot;most complete and comprehensive enforcement action ever taken by U.S. authorities to disable an international botnet,&quot; according to a statement from the Department of Justice. A botnet is a group of computers that have been compromised and are being remotely controlled by attackers, typically to send spam or attack other computers.  It's the first time law enforcement in the U.S. has requested permission from a court to take control of a botnet, according to a request for a temporary restraining order that was granted. Similar action was taken by Dutch officials who downloaded &quot;good&quot; software to computers infected with Bredolab botnet malware, the filing said.  In this case the malware, called &quot;Coreflood,&quot; records keystrokes and private communications, enabling it to steal usernames, passwords, and other private personal and financial information. Once a computer is infected with Coreflood, the malware communicates with a command-and-control server, allowing it to remotely control the compromised computer. The botnet is believed to have infected more than 2 million Windows-based computers worldwide in nearly 10 years.  Prosecutors allege that data stolen by the malware has been used to steal funds from victims' accounts. In at least one case, the malware enabled attackers to take over an online banking session a victim was in the middle of and transfer money to a foreign account, according to court filings. The U.S. Attorney's office in the district of Connecticut has filed a civil complaint against 13 &quot;John Doe,&quot; or unknown, defendants accusing them of wire fraud, bank fraud, and illegal interception of electronic communications. To shut down the botnet and stop it from spreading further, the Justice Department seized five command-and-control servers and 29 domain names used by the bots to communicate with the servers.  To put a halt to the botnet's damage to already infected computers, officials have obtained a temporary restraining order authorizing them to substitute the seized servers with their own and use them to respond to signals sent from hundreds of thousands of compromised computers in the U.S. This will allow authorities to send commands to the infected computers that stop the malware from running, preventing attackers from updating the malware and giving victimized computers time to update their virus signatures.  Officials also are working with Internet Service Providers to identify owners of the compromised computers based on their IP addresses and warn them about the potential for fraud because of the malware on the machines. Computer owners will be told how to &quot;opt out&quot; if they do not want officials to stop the malware from running on their machines. &quot;At no time will law enforcement authorities access any information that may be stored on an infected computer,&quot; the statement said.  &quot;Allowing Coreflood to continue running on the infected computers will cause a continuing and substantial injury to the owners and users of the infected computers, exposing them to a loss of privacy and an increased risk of further computer intrusions,&quot; Judge Vanessa Bryant wrote in her decision granting the temporary restraining order.  The substitute command-and-control server will be operated by the nonprofit Internet Systems Consortium under law enforcement supervision, according to court documents. Microsoft, meanwhile, was expected to update its Malicious Software Removal Tool yesterday to remove Coreflood from infected computers, the filing dated yesterday says. While the actions have disabled Coreflood in its current form, other variants of the malware could still be lurking on the Internet, officials said. From March 2009 through January 2010, one Coreflood server had about 190 gigabytes of data from 413,710 infected computers, the court filing shows. Of known victims, a real estate company in Michigan was defrauded out of $115,771' a law firm in South Carolina lost $78,421, an investment company in North Carolina lost $151,201' and a defense contractor in Tennessee lost $934,528, the document says. The Justice Department is working with the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service, and the U.S. Attorney's office in Connecticut with help from Microsoft and the Internet Systems Consortium.Updated 6:25 p.m. PTwith quote from judge and 5 p.m. PTwith more details from court filing.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Network, don't fail me now!]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=network-dont-fail-me-now</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=network-dont-fail-me-now</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 12 Feb 2011 08:10:15 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>MigelFrias34</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=network-dont-fail-me-now</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Everything in IT depends on the network.--and not just in an abstract, &quot;need it occasionally&quot; sort of way. The packets must flow for virtually every operation, every job, every transaction. Whenever packets drop, or links go down, we're disconnected and isolated. Information doesn't flow' apps don't work' users don't proceed. We need the network up and running, millisecond by millisecond, every millisecond of every day.(Credit:OpenClipArt.org - Pierre-Yves Dubreucq )Our utter, urgent dependency won't lessen in the coming years. It will intensify--redoubling and redoubling again. Cisco calls its vision of the future &quot;together.&quot; HP calls its &quot;converged infrastructure.&quot; IBM calls its &quot;Smarter Planet.&quot; All have interconnectedness at its core. Or take it out of the vendor realm, towards the technologies and trends: Web 2.0. Cloud. Virtual desktop infrastructure. ITaaS. Smart mobile devices. Embedded computing. Wherever you look, to whatever vision of the future, the network is central. Not only will IT estate increasingly coordinate via the network, so will more and more of the global economy, and indeed, the entire scope of human activity.They say you don't really know how valuable a thing is until you miss it and have to do without it. I missed the network a few times this week and I can tell you, it sucks.I use a voice-over-IP (VoIP) telephone system. I could use the AT&amp;amp'T or Verizon cellular networks, but Google Voice is easier, is better integrated with my applications, often has better call quality, and generally is more reliable. Except when the network goes. Then everything goes, all at once. Twice this week, that happened. Once on a mutli-hour conference call, once when I told a colleague &quot;sure, we can talk now' call me!&quot;--12 seconds before network access dropped completely, and stayed down for 20 angst-ridden minutes.I use Amazon Web Services (AWS) servers for development. An entire work session this week was scrapped because, while I could get to the console to start up my &quot;cloud servers&quot; just fine, my development work station couldn't actually &quot;see&quot; or access the servers. Some problem inside AWS Some fluke of the Domain Name System (DNS) Something between me and Amazon Who knows, really Network configurations are famously hard to visualize and troubleshoot. Since Amazon's status board showed all services working, it seemed easier to come back and try again later. But when your use is production rather than development, &quot;come back later&quot; is a lot harder.Critics of cloud services often point to the possibility that the network will be down, or performing poorly, as proof that on-site, owned deployments are better. About a year ago, we converted the majority of our in-house IT to cloud services' having lived with cloud's trade-offs for a year, overall we're very happy to have made the switch. But when the net goes, it is frustrating. And it's still true that the greater control of in-house resources makes it easier to guarantee a certain level of availability. But in-house has its own trade-offs--higher costs, less flexibility, and even some reliability gotchas of its own. Neither approach is invariably superior--it's a case of, for what and by what measuresEveryone increasingly depends on the end-to-end global network being up and performing well every millisecond. So we have to invest in the multiple routes, management tools, troubleshooting skills, and so on that will give us always-there, count-on-it Internet access to our resources--just as we can establish in more constrained enterprise data centers today. Until then, I'm delighted to depend on the network 99.9 percent of the time. But when that page won't load, that app falters, or the connection flutters, I want to light a candle and intone: network, don't fail me now!<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
