Friday, August 30, 2013

Hackers: Pro-Assad Group Targets US Websites

The Syrian Electronic Army claims to have hacked Twitter, tweeting: 'Hi @Twitter, look at your domain, its owned by #SEA :)'

The hackers infiltrate outlets it perceives to be aligned against Mr Assad
Pro-Assad regime hackers claim to have targeted leading US media websites, shutting down the New York Times for 30 minutes.
The Syrian Electronic Army said it had hacked sites belonging to Twitter and the Huffington Post, making them unstable, as well as closing down the NYT.
The NYT attributed the meltdown to a "malicious external attack".
When users attempted to visit www.nytimes.com, the only message that appeared was "Hacked by the SEA".
Meanwhile, Twitter confirmed the hack saying "viewing of images and photos was sporadically impacted", but added that "no user information was affected".
The SEA boasted in a tweet: "Hi @Twitter, look at your domain, its owned by #SEA :)" 

The boasting tweet from the SEA hacking group


While the Twitter site continued to function as normal, the SEA claimed to have changed domain details, redirecting social media traffic to its own server.
The shadowy hacker collective has also claimed to have changed domain details belonging to the Huffington Post news site.
The latest attacks come weeks after the Twitter feed of the Associated Press news agency was targeted.
The feed falsely reported that Barack Obama was injured in an attack on the White House.
The Washington Post website was also hacked this month in an attack blamed on the same group.
The SEA infiltrates organisations it perceives to be aligned against the Assad government.
The string of cyber attacks comes as US leaders have publicly discussed the possibility of launching an attack against the Assad government.
The potential for military action comes amid claims Mr Assad deployed chemical weapons on the Syrian people, two years into the nation's civil war.



Skype Works On Developing 3D Video Calls

Skype's owner Microsoft says the idea may be some years off but work on the designs is already under way.

The company has revolutionised the way people communicate
Skype is aiming to develop 3D video calls which could eventually allow workers to send "body doubles" to meetings.
But it may be several years before the service is ready for homes and offices.
Teams have been working with state-of-the-art tools that capture 3D footage, said Skype's Mark Gillett.
"We have it in the lab, we know how to make it work and we're looking at the ecosystem of devices and their capability to support it in order to make a decision when we might think about bringing something like that to market," he told the BBC.
Skype, which is owned by Microsoft and is marking its 10th anniversary, hinted at its plans in April when it released an advertisement telling viewers it was searching for a way to create "body doubles" for workers unable to travel to meetings.
Its forays into 3D technology were confirmed as the format appeared to founder in other areas.
The BBC's head of 3D announced last month that there were no further plans to use the technology following a two-year trial.
It ran a pilot scheme in which it televised a number of programmes in 3D including Strictly Come Dancing and the ceremonies for the Olympics last year.
But, while an estimated 1.5 million homes have TV sets that can run the technology, only around half of those able to watch London 2012 in 3D did so.

 

New York Times site slow to return for some users after cyber attack

Two days after hackers took down the New York Times website, some readers were still having trouble accessing it Thursday.

The Syrian Electronic Army, a hacktivist group that supports Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, has claimed responsibility for the attack on the Times site.
The Times' website went down for several hours Tuesday after an attack for which the Syrian Electronic Army, a hacktivist group, claimed responsibility. 


Marc Frons, chief information officer at the Times, told employees Tuesday that the SEA "or someone trying very hard to be them" had launched the attack on Melbourne IT, the company's domain name registrar.
The culprits rerouted traffic directed at the Times to other addresses. The Times' computer system wasn't compromised internally.
Melbourne IT said it had fixed the problem by 5 p.m. ET Tuesday, but some users were still having problems accessing the Times site on Wednesday and Thursday. The Times said in an email to readers Thursday afternoon it expected all access to be restored for all users by the end of the day. 

 
Melbourne IT chief technology officer Bruce Tonkin said in an email that users who attempted to access the site while it was down had the incorrect domain records stored temporarily on their computers or servers. It's the computer equivalent of having the wrong telephone number.
After the records are updated for those users, their computers or servers will be able to access nytimes.com again. 

"A rough rule of thumb when trying to make an intentional change to a [domain name system] setting is that it will take 48 hours for the change to fully propagate to all users on the Internet," Tonkin said.
Readers who didn't try to access the site while it was down shouldn't have any problems, he added.
Times spokeswoman Eileen Murphy said Thursday that the company was adopting additional security measures "given the vulnerabilities that this incident exposed at the registrar level."
Melbourne IT said it was reviewing what other layers of security it could add. It recommended that clients utilize special security features to lock their domain names, which the Times apparently hadn't done. 

Alex McGeorge, senior security researcher at Immunity Inc., said the attack underscored the importance of vetting business partners for security weaknesses.
"I think the lesson for companies is that if you've got something that's this significant and this sensitive, you need to demand that the people that provide services to you undergo security audits and make those results available to you," he said. 

Earlier this month, the Syrian Electronic Army breached a news recommendation engine that provides links on news sites including CNN, The Washington Post and Time.

Don't underestimate Google

Google's stock has lagged Facebook, Apple and Microsoft lately. But just like the tortoise and the hare, slow and steady may win the race.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney, Abbott Laboratories and AbbVie, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.

It may seem odd to call a company that's worth $285 billion, has a dominant share of its market, and projections of 15% annual earnings growth for the next few years an underdog. But lately Google (GOOG) has fallen out of favor with investors.
The stock is down nearly 8% since it hit an all-time high back in mid-July ... just before Google reported earnings that disappointed investors. That's obviously not a dramatic sell-off. But it is getting close to a technical 10% correction.
And Google has lagged both the broader market and some of its key rivals. The Nasdaq has been flat since mid-July.
Meanwhile, Facebook (FB) has surged nearly 60% since its late July earnings report on mounting evidence that it will be a huge force to be reckoned with in mobile advertising.



Apple (AAPL) has bounced sharply off its 52-week lows and has gained 20% during the past few weeks on better-than-expected earnings and growing hopes for the new iPhone and iPad ... which will be unveiled next month.

The endorsement from hedge fund manager Carl Icahn, who tweeted earlier this month that he bought a "large position" in Apple and is pushing CEO Tim Cook for a bigger stock buyback, obviously helped too.


Even Microsoft (MSFT), which tanked the day after a poor earnings release last month, has since rebounded. The stock popped late last week after CEO Steve Ballmer announced he would be retiring sometime within the next 12 months.
The only Google rival that hasn't done that well in the past month is Yahoo (YHOO). Like Google, shares are also down about 9% from their 52-week high.
It's possible that investors may now want CEO Marissa Mayer, who's been busy buying Tumblr and some smaller start-ups, to do more than just provide some sizzle. They actually want her to deliver the steak. And by that I mean, real evidence of a sustainable turnaround in ad sales and earnings.
Still, Yahoo has been a better stock than Google this year.
But don't get me wrong. Google is still doing extremely well in 2013. It's up a more than respectable 20% year-to-date.
So if anything, the recent Google weakness may be a good buying opportunity. Google often has stretches where its stock gets overlooked because the company is so dependable.
Google never had to convince investors that it understood mobile. Google is still a young enough company that it won't face calls from activist shareholders to start buying back stock or pay a dividend.  And nobody is demanding that CEO Larry Page step down.
But Google is far from perfect.

The company's wearable Google Glass still looks more like great fodder for jokes than a product that might actually generate strong sales and profits.

It's not clear if Google will ever come up with a way to supplant Facebook in social media. And the company may soon have to worry a lot more about how much of a force a publicly traded Twitter could become in the online ad market.

And for all the market share success that Google has had with its Android operating system, the jury is still out on whether the company's foray into hardware through its $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility will turn out to be a stroke of genius or a colossal writedown waiting to happen.

Finally, there's the corporate governance issue. It's unfortunate that Google has chosen to concentrate most of the decision making power for the company in the hands of just three people. Page, fellow co-founder Sergey Brin (who appears to be the Eric Clapton of tech in a convoluted Layla-esque love triangle) and chairman Eric Schmidt.


Of course, Google is not the only company to have a dual class stock system. Facebook does too. And you can argue that Page, Brin and Schmidt deserve the benefit of the doubt. They've been undeniably successful in managing the company since its initial public offering nine years ago.
That's why I think Google, despite its flaws, still may be the best bet of all its competitors. It has the ideal combination of a reasonable valuation and strong growth.
Google trades for just 17 times 2014 earnings estimates. Profits are expected to increase 18% next year.


Yes, Facebook's profits will increase at a faster clip. Analysts are forecasting a 34% jump in earnings in 2014. But that should happen, given that Facebook is a younger company. And even with Facebook's growing clout in mobile, its stock looks a lot riskier. Shares trade at nearly 45 times next year's earnings estimates.
Next up? Apple. It's cheaper than Google and trades for less than 12 times fiscal 2014 earnings estimates. But there are legitimate questions about its future. Earnings are expected to climb only 8% in fiscal 2014 after a drop this year.
Microsoft? Also trading at just 12 times next year's profit forecasts. But we don't even know who the next CEO will be and what direction he or she will take the company.  I'll pass.


That leaves Yahoo. Mayer has obviously changed the culture and made Yahoo cool again. And it is slightly cheaper than Google, trading at 16 times 2014 earnings estimates. But at some point, investors are going to demand better results and won't be satisfied by more acquisitions.
So there you have it. Google may be out of favor right now. But it shouldn't be for long.













Apple Macs and iOS devices en route to Iran

Now that the US government has eased sanctions on tech gadgets, Apple says it will sell Macs, iPhones, and iPads to customers planning to bring those products to the Middle Eastern country.

People in Iran now can own the iPad mini.
(Credit: CBS Interactive)

Apple announced it will begin selling Macs and iOS devices to customers headed to Iran.
Typically, it is forbidden for US companies to sell products destined for Iran because of long-lasting sanctions against the Middle Eastern country. But, in the name of human rights, the Obama administration recently eased those sanctions for tech gadgets.

"We have been told by the US government that most Apple products are covered by regulatory changes announced by the Treasury Department on May 30," an Apple spokesperson told CNET. "As a result, Apple is no longer banned from selling Macs and iOS devices to customers who plan to bring those products to Iran."

In May, the US government loosened sanctions that for more than two decades have prohibited companies from selling electronic devices such as computers, cell phones, and wireless routers to Iran. The move now allows US residents to export electronic equipment to individuals but not to the Iranian government or its associates. By easing sanctions on laptops and mobile devices, the US government believes it can help protesters and dissidents inside Iran.

 "The people of Iran should be able to communicate and access information without being subject to reprisals by their government," the Treasury Department said in a statement that also accused Iran's government of "[attempting to] silence its people by cutting off their communication with each other and the rest of the world."
Iran is known for cracking down on its citizens over the use of social networks, e-mail, and blogs. Throughout the last few years, the country's government has blocked access to major international news sites, Google's search engine, YouTube, and social-networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Several times last year, Iran even cut off access to the Internet.

Apple stock may ride iPhone roller coaster

Apple's stock has dropped in the month after iPhone announcements in five of the past six years. Will it happen again?

Think the next iPhone will boost Apple's stock?

It may initially but the gains may be short-lived. In five of the past six years, Apple's (AAPL, Fortune 500) stock has ended up lower a month after the new iPhone was revealed. And in 2011 -- the one year that Apple's stock actually finished higher after an iPhone release -- it still pulled back sharply from its initial post-iPhone bump. 

Take a look: 

2012: Last September, Apple's stock rose 3% in the four trading days after CEO Tim Cook unveiled the iPhone 5. But a month after the announcement, Apple shares were down 8%. 

2011: In the two weeks after Apple unveiled the iPhone 4S in October 2011, Apple's stock soared 13%. But it dipped after that. Two weeks later, the stock was only 8% higher than on day one. (Of course, Steve Jobs' death only a day after the iPhone 4S was unveiled quickly overshadowed much of the buzz around the iPhone and its then-new Siri feature) 

2010: The stock rose 9% during the week and a half after the iPhone 4 was unveiled. But the stock was 1% lower a month after the announcement.
2009: Apple shares didn't move too much shortly after the company announced the iPhone 3GS -- but shares were down 4% a month after the 3GS news.
2008: Shares rose 2% the day after the iPhone 3G was unveiled but were down 1% a month after the announcement.
2007: The stock gained 5% in the week after Steve Jobs unveiled the first iPhone. But three weeks later, shares had fallen by 7%.
But is this just coincidence? Did Apple stock really fall because it couldn't live up to iPhone hype? Or was there something bigger going on with the market at those particular points of time?
Let's look at how the tech-heavy Nasdaq -- of which Apple is a big part -- did in those post iPhone periods.
2012: Nasdaq down 4%, Apple down 8%.
2011: Nasdaq up 12%, Apple up 8%.
2010: Nasdaq down 3%, Apple down 1%.
2009: Nasdaq down 6%, Apple down 4%.
2008: Nasdaq down 9%, Apple down 1%.
2007: Nasdaq up 7%, Apple down 7%.
That shows no discernible trend. Apple outperformed the Nasdaq a month after the iPhone was unveiled three times out of six. In the other three years, Apple lagged.
That's why some analysts consider Apple's share price drops following iPhone announcements to be meaningless. 

"I think the stock movement is somewhat random," said Trip Chowdhry, managing director of Global Equities Research.
But others argue that there are legitimate reasons for Apple's stock to fall after iPhone announcements. 

"I don't think it's random," said Ryan Detrick, senior technical strategist at Schaeffer's Investment Research. "We have seen this before. There is so much hoopla with Apple, but soon after the news comes out, there's not as much reason to be excited anymore."
Apple is expected to unveil the iPhone 5S (or whatever it will be called) on Sept. 10. Will Apple's stock be lower on Oct. 10? 

Let's just say it's not quite the same as betting on the sun to rise in the east. Apple no longer is the darling of Wall Street that it once was. Despite a recent rebound, investors may still be looking at Apple as a potential bargain. The stock has lost 30% of its value since hitting an all-time high a year ago. 

"Apple has been down for so long, a new product could be a good thing to boost momentum," said Detrick. "Excitement around a new iPhone might be just what the stock needs."

Tech Minute: Back to school apps for students

As the new school year begjns, shake off those summer cobwebs with a few educational smartphone apps designed to jumpstart your students' learning. In this Tech Minute, CNET's Kara Tsuboi reports on some of her favorite back-to-school apps.