Showing posts with label buying. Show all posts
Showing posts with label buying. Show all posts

Saturday, 13 July 2013

Nations Buying as Hackers Sell Computer Flaws

The hackers, Luigi Auriemma, 32, and Donato Ferrante, 28, sell technical details of such vulnerabilities to countries that want to break into the computer systems of foreign adversaries. The two will not reveal the clients of their company, ReVuln, but big buyers of services like theirs include the National Security Agency — which seeks the flaws for America’s growing arsenal of cyberweapons — and American adversaries like the Revolutionary Guards of Iran.

All over the world, from South Africa to South Korea, business is booming in what hackers call “zero days,” the coding flaws in software like Microsoft Windows that can give a buyer unfettered access to a computer and any business, agency or individual dependent on one.

Just a few years ago, hackers like Mr. Auriemma and Mr. Ferrante would have sold the knowledge of coding flaws to companies like Microsoft and Apple, which would fix them. Last month, Microsoft sharply increased the amount it was willing to pay for such flaws, raising its top offer to $150,000.

But increasingly the businesses are being outbid by countries with the goal of exploiting the flaws in pursuit of the kind of success, albeit temporary, that the United States and Israel achieved three summers ago when they attacked Iran’s nuclear enrichment program with a computer worm that became known as “Stuxnet.”

The flaws get their name from the fact that once discovered, “zero days” exist for the user of the computer system to fix them before hackers can take advantage of the vulnerability. A “zero-day exploit” occurs when hackers or governments strike by using the flaw before anyone else knows it exists, like a burglar who finds, after months of probing, that there is a previously undiscovered way to break into a house without sounding an alarm.

“Governments are starting to say, ‘In order to best protect my country, I need to find vulnerabilities in other countries,’ ” said Howard Schmidt, a former White House cybersecurity coordinator. “The problem is that we all fundamentally become less secure.”

A zero-day bug could be as simple as a hacker’s discovering an online account that asks for a password but does not actually require typing one to get in. Bypassing the system by hitting the “Enter” key becomes a zero-day exploit. The average attack persists for almost a year — 312 days — before it is detected, according to Symantec, the maker of antivirus software. Until then it can be exploited or “weaponized” by both criminals and governments to spy on, steal from or attack their target.

Ten years ago, hackers would hand knowledge of such flaws to Microsoft and Google free, in exchange for a T-shirt or perhaps for an honorable mention on a company’s Web site. Even today, so-called patriotic hackers in China regularly hand over the information to the government.

Now, the market for information about computer vulnerabilities has turned into a gold rush. Disclosures by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. consultant who leaked classified documents, made it clear that the United States is among the buyers of programming flaws. But it is hardly alone.

Israel, Britain, Russia, India and Brazil are some of the biggest spenders. North Korea is in the market, as are some Middle Eastern intelligence services. Countries in the Asian Pacific, including Malaysia and Singapore, are buying, too, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

To connect sellers and buyers, dozens of well-connected brokers now market information on the flaws in exchange for a 15 percent cut. Some hackers get a deal collecting royalty fees for every month their flaw is not discovered, according to several people involved in the market.

Some individual brokers, like one in Bangkok who goes by “the Grugq” on Twitter, are well known. But after the Grugq spoke to Forbes last year, his business took a hit from the publicity, according to a person familiar with the impact, primarily because buyers demand confidentiality.

A broker’s approach need not be subtle. “Need code execution exploit urgent,” read the subject line of an e-mail sent from one contractor’s intermediary last year to Billy Rios, a former security engineer at Microsoft and Google who is now a director at Cylance, a security start-up.

“Dear Friend,” the e-mail began. “Do you have any code execution exploit for Windows 7, Mac, for applications like Browser, Office, Adobe, SWF any.”

“If yes,” the e-mail continued, “payment is not an issue.”

Thursday, 11 July 2013

The Hard Drive Buying Guide for Students

Although only USB 2.0 compatible, this hard drive is capable of speeds up to 88 MPH.
When you’re putting big projects together, megabytes can turn into gigabytes and even terabytes before you know it, especially if you’re studying a visual arts field like filmmaking, animation, or photography. Many newer laptops limit internal storage space in favor of an ultra-portable design, assuming you’ll turn to external resources to store large files. Cloud storage is a great option, but it relies on Internet connectivity, which isn’t always available when you need it, and can be expensive for storing large amounts of data.

The solution? An external hard drive. These affordable devices are becoming an increasingly popular way to keep your work safely stored and available anytime you need it.

Generally speaking, external hard drives come in two flavors -- desktop and laptop –- and both have their strengths.

Desktop-class drives need to be plugged into the wall to run, tend to have a larger capacity than laptop drives, and are usually somewhat cheaper. But they’re not very portable, and when you’re running from dorm room to classroom to deliver your latest animation, packing it up and then plugging it in is not very convenient.

Laptop-class drives are slimmer, tougher, and don’t need a dedicated power source. You can just hook them up to your computer (or even someone else’s) to transfer the files you need.

If you’ve decided to pick a laptop-class drive, you’ve got another choice: SSD vs. HDD; solid state drives and conventional hard disk drives.

Unlike HDDs, solid state drives have no moving parts, are shock resistant, and can read and write data faster. Because they’re so small, they’re a good choice if weight and space are issues. But their capacity is limited, and if you need a drive that’s big enough to hold hundreds of gigabytes (think video files), a large enough SDD will put a large dent in your budget. In that case, think HDD; chances are it will get the job done.

There’s another set of variables to consider: speed of the drive and the speed of its connection to the PC. Many applications don’t need the fastest-possible speeds, but others, particularly video, demand it.

SSDs are quicker than traditional hard drives, if you can afford them. But whether you’re using an HDD or an SDD be sure to consider the transfer technology it uses to move data to the network or the PC.

For transferring very large files or working directly on your external hard drive, you may want to seek out something with a little more zip than standard USB 2.0. Your best bets are Thunderbolt and USB 3.0, which both offer excellent transfer speeds. FireWire is also a faster alternative to USB 2.0, but it has lost popularity since USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt took off.

Take a look at some of the portable hard drives we’ve put together in this chart to find the best external hard drive for you.

Thursday, 27 June 2013

U.S. watchdog raps Pentagon for buying aircraft for Afghan unit

WASHINGTON - A government watchdog criticized the Pentagon on Friday for forging ahead with controversial helicopter purchases from a Russian arms dealer despite warnings the Afghan special forces unit due to receive the aircraft could not fly or maintain them.

The watchdog - the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction - urged the Pentagon to suspend the $553 million Russian arms deal as well as a $218 million contract for 18 planes from a U.S. firm until plans were in place to fully recruit and train the Afghan special forces unit.

The Pentagon was already under fire for agreeing this month to buy 30 additional Mi-17 helicopters from the Russian arms dealer, Rosoboronexport. That company is a major supplier of weapons to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who is battling rebels trying to overthrow his government.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded this month that Assad's forces have used chemical weapons, and the White House announced on June 13 that President Barack Obama had decided to provide direct military assistance to the Syrian opposition. The Pentagon announced the helicopter purchase five days later.

John Sopko, the special inspector general, noted in a letter to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel that the Army entered into the new purchase agreement even though the Pentagon had a draft report from SIGAR recommending that aircraft purchases for the Afghan unit be suspended.

"We maintain that moving forward with the acquisition of these aircraft is imprudent," Sopko said in the letter.

The helicopter purchases are a difficult issue for the Pentagon. Defense officials say the Mi-17 is the best choice for Afghanistan because the aircraft handles the terrain and climate well and Afghan pilots, air crews and maintenance workers have dealt with the craft since the 1980s.

While U.S.-made helicopters would be a more sophisticated purchase, they are sensitive to Afghanistan's extreme conditions and require more specialized maintenance and longer training to master, they said.

Shifting the Afghan military to a significantly different aircraft would require completely retraining the fliers and maintenance workers, delaying the effort to build the country's helicopter capacity by about three years, said Lieutenant Colonel Jim Gregory.

The special inspector general, in its investigation of the aircraft sales, found that the Afghan Special Mission Wing, which will support counterterrorism and counternarcotics operations, had only 180 personnel earlier this year, less than a quarter of the 860 people envisioned for the force by July 2015.

Control of the force initially was to be split between the Afghan Interior and Defense ministries, and tensions between the departments was hampering recruitment, the report said. A memorandum of understanding shifting control to the Defense Ministry has been drafted but remains unsigned, it said.

The inspector general recommended aircraft purchases for the unit be suspended until the memorandum is signed transferring command and control of the unit to the Defense Ministry.

His office also recommended a series of other steps, including tying acquisition and delivery of new aircraft to completion of personnel and other milestones and developing plans for transferring maintenance and logistics to the Afghans.

The Pentagon and NATO training mission in Afghanistan rejected the request to suspend the aircraft contracts, saying it would delay efforts to build the unit into a capable force. They agreed to SIGAR's other recommendations.

The Pentagon began buying helicopters for Afghan forces from Rosoboronexport in May 2011, when it agreed to purchase 21. Last year it exercised an option to buy an additional 12, bringing the total to 33.

Including the new contract this month, the Pentagon has spent more than $1 billion on helicopters and related maintenance and service with the Russian firm.

The arms deals with Rosoboronexport have outraged some U.S. lawmakers. Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, who sponsored a ban on such purchases, said it was "simply outrageous" for the United States to be buying weapons from Assad's top arms supplier.

Congress barred purchases from Rosoboronexport in the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, but officials said the Pentagon used 2012 funding to pay for the 30 helicopters purchased this month.

Follow me on Twitter @sajilpl

Monday, 24 June 2013

4 stocks I'm buying to ride U.S. energy boom

oxivkmi

Occidental Petroleum Corp v. Kinder Morgan

This week, the sector will be in focus, with President Obama expected to unveil a national plan to combat climate change on Tuesday.

The energy renaissance has also been on the mind of portfolio manager Mark Freeman, who has been stocking up on companies that are benefiting from it. Freeman said his investments have been driven by the U.S. push to become energy independent and its focus on renewable energy sources.

"You get a powerful dynamic in achieving self-sufficiency," said Freeman, chief investing officer of Westwood Holdings Group, which manages $8 billion in assets.

American oil production has surged, and is expected to continue rising. It's lit a fire under energy stocks -- the S&P 500 energy sector index is up over 20% in the past year.

Freeman's firm has invested on all sides of the energy market, from domestic producers to infrastructure components to support services for oil drilling. Here are 4 stocks he's bought, and why he thinks they'll continue to be hot:

1. Domestic producer Occidental Petroleum Corporation (OXY, Fortune 500)'s stock has risen 13% this past year. But Freeman believes it has more to go as the largest onshore producer in the United States.

2. Infrastructure components company Kinder Morgan (KMI, Fortune 500), whose stock is also up 13%, has been big for Freeman. The company has 80,000 miles of pipelines that transport natural gas and petroleum products, and 180 terminals. Freeman believes those assets put Kinder in the perfect position to benefit from increased domestic production.

3. Freeman said that Union Pacific (UNP, Fortune 500), a major railroad franchise, will benefit in the same way, because there will be more demand for crude by rail. The stock is up 32% in the past year.

4. Schlumberger (SLB), a leading oilfield services company, will be big, said Freeman. Energy companies will rely more on Schlumberger to get their work done because it helps supply technology and project management to the oil production industry. Its stock is up 16% this past year.

All these stocks are multi-year holdings for Freeman. To top of page