Microsoft offers $250k bounty to catch worm creator

Software giant Microsoft is offering a $250,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of hackers behind a powerful computer virus that could lead to millions of PCs being hijacked.

Experts have so far been baffled by the true purpose of the Conficker or Downadup virus, but have described its spread as one of the most serious infections ever seen.

The worm exploits a bug in Microsoft Windows to infect mainly corporate networks, then -- although it has yet to cause any harm -- it opens a link back to its point of origin, meaning it can receive further orders to wreak havoc.

Microsoft has issued a patch to fix the bug, however if a single machine is infected in a large network, it will spread unchecked -- often reinfecting machines that have been disinfected.

The threat from the virus prompted Microsoft in collaboration with other technology industry names to this week announce a $250,000 reward for information to track down those behind Conficker.

"As part of Microsoft's ongoing security efforts, we constantly look for ways to use a diverse set of tools and develop methodologies to protect our customers," said George Stathakopoulos, of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing Group.

Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at anti-virus firm F-Secure says the true scope of the virus is not known, but in the past 24 hours his company monitored Conficker signals from two million Internet protocol addresses.

"That's a lot," he says. "And one IP address here does not mean one infected computer, it means at least one infected computer."

"Many of those IP addresses are obviously company proxies or firewalls, hiding hundreds of more infections behind it. Unfortunately this also makes it impossible to estimate the total count of infected systems."

"So it's still big. Very big."

Microsoft has previously paid out similar rewards to informants who helped identify the creator of Sasser, another notorious worm let loose in 2004. The perpetrator was tracked to Germany, where he was sentenced a year later.

Think you've gotten the warning a little too late and might already have it? I've found a posting online on how to deal with the 2 annoying viruses.

Microsoft meeting with Yahoo : Report

Microsoft's chief executive, Steve Ballmer, met with Yahoo chairman Roy Bostock in New York this week, according to a report in the New York Times.

The newspaper cited an unnamed source who had been briefed on the meeting, but no details of the conversation have been released.

Yahoo's appointment of Carol Bartz as chief executive has heightened speculation that the companies may be able to agree on a takeover, with Microsoft possibly acquiring Yahoo's search engine business.

The news follows reports of an informal conversation between Bartz and Ballmer after she was selected by Yahoo's board.

Jerry Yang, who has stepped down as the head of Yahoo, let a deal with Microsoft fall through last year, angering many of the company's investors.

Yahoo didn't immediately return a call for comment, and Microsoft declined to comment.

*VIRUS ALERT* Downadup virus exposes millions of PCs to hijack

A new sleeper virus that could allow hackers to steal financial and personal information has now spread to more than eight million computers in what industry analysts say is one of the most serious infections they have ever seen.

The Downadup or Conficker worm exploits a bug in Microsoft Windows to infect mainly corporate networks, where -- although it has yet to cause any harm -- it potentially exposes infected PCs to hijack.

Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at anti-virus firm F-Secure, says while the purpose of the worm is unclear, its unique "phone home" design, linking back to its point of origin, means it can receive further orders to wreak havoc.

He said his company had reverse-engineered its program, which they suspected of originating in Ukraine, and is using the call-back mechanism to monitor an exponential infection rate, despite Microsoft's issuing of a patch to fix the bug.

"On Tuesday there were 2.5 million, on Wednesday 3.5 million and today [Friday], eight million," he said. "It's getting worse, not better."

Hypponen explained the dangers that Downadup poses, who is most at risk and what can be done to stop its spread.

How serious is it?

It is the most serious large scale worm outbreak we have seen in recent years because of how widespread it is, but it is not very serious in terms of what it does. So far it doesn't try to steal personal information or credit card details.

Who is affected?

We have large infections in Europe, the United States and in Asia. It is a Windows worm and almost all the cases are corporate networks. There are very few reports of independent home computers affected.

What does it do?

It is a complicated worm most likely engineered by a group of people who have spent time making it very complicated to analyze and remove. The real reason why they have created it is hard to say right now, but we do know how it replicates.

How does it spread?

The worm does not spread over email or the Web. However if an infected laptop is connected to your corporate network, it will immediately scan the network looking for machines to infect. These will be machines that have not installed a patch from Microsoft known as MS08-067. The worm will also scan company networks trying to guess your password, trying hundreds and hundreds of common words. If it gets in, even if you are not at your machine, it will infect and begin spreading to other servers. A third method of spreading is via USB data sticks.

How can I prevent it infecting my machine?

The best way is to get the patch and install it company-wide. The second way is password security. Use long, difficult passwords -- particularly for administrators who cannot afford to be locked out of the machines they will have to fix.

What can I do if it has already infected?

Machines can be disinfected. The problem is for companies with thousands of infected machines, which can become re-infected from just one computer even as they are being cleared.

Did this alert reach you too late? Has your computer already been affected? share your stories...

Chinese software pirates get prison sentences

The alleged ringleaders of a Chinese counterfeiting gang that sold at least US$2 billion worth of bogus Microsoft Corp. software were sentenced to prison terms of up to 6 1/2 years, in what is believed to be the harshest penalties yet under China's tightened piracy laws.

The punishments meted out against the 11 defendants, and announced by Microsoft Corp., could help China improve its image as a country that doesn't crack down hard enough on copyright violators, though the technology and entertainment industries still say China has a long way to go. The sentences ranged from 1 1/2 to 6 1/2 years, according to Redmond, Wash.-based Microsoft.

The fact that Microsoft, and not the Chinese courts, disclosed the sentences is not unusual. Lawyers are the only source of information in many cases in China because rulings often are not publicly announced. Court officials usually refuse to disclose details to reporters.

Microsoft calls the counterfeit software operation -- which was headquartered in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong and busted by Chinese authorities with help from the FBI in 2007 -- the world's biggest phony-software syndicate.

The counterfeit software was found in 36 countries and 11 different languages. It was so sophisticated that it contained legitimate computer code written by Microsoft for programs such as Windows XP and Vista and Microsoft Office, but also had touches of the criminals' own coding as well. That was allegedly added to mimic security programs and fool users into believing the product was authentic.

Microsoft contends that much of the bogus software was detected by its Windows Genuine Advantage program, which is automatically installed on users' machines. It scans computers for pirated software and alerts people if it believes their products aren't properly licensed. The counterfeits were also discovered through customs seizures, test purchases by Microsoft, and resellers who alerted authorities to suspicious competitors.

"There were a number of things that made this case unique and striking, and among them are the fact that customers provided information, the reach of the syndicate was so international, and that Chinese law enforcement partnered so well with American law enforcement," David Finn, Microsoft's associate general counsel for worldwide anti-piracy and anti-counterfeiting, said in an interview.

Software piracy is still rampant despite individual countries' attempts at cracking down. Research commissioned by the Business Software Alliance, an industry trade group, found that 82 percent of the software used in China in 2007 was not legitimately purchased, more than double the worldwide piracy rate of 38 percent.

Pay-Per-Use PC's?

As if Microsoft wasn't squeezing enough money out of computer users with there Windows operating system:

Microsoft has applied for a patent on metered, pay-as-you-go computing.

U.S. patent application number 20080319910, published on Christmas Day, details Microsoft's vision of a situation where a "standard model" of PC is given away or heavily subsidized by someone in the supply chain.

The end user then pays to use the computer, with charges based on both the length of usage time and the performance levels utilized, along with a "one-time charge."

Microsoft notes in the application that the end user could end up paying more for the computer, compared with the one-off cost entailed in the existing PC business model, but argues the user would benefit by having a PC with an extended "useful life."

"A computer with scalable performance level components and selectable software and service options has a user interface that allows individual performance levels to be selected," reads the patent application's abstract. The patent application was filed June 21, 2007.

"The scalable performance level components may include a processor, memory, graphics controller, etc. Software and services may include word processing, email, browsing, database access, etc. To support a pay-per-use business model, each selectable item may have a cost associated with it, allowing a user to pay for the services actually selected and that presumably correspond to the task or tasks being performed," the abstract continues.

Integral to Microsoft's vision is a security module, embedded in the PC, that would effectively lock the PC to a certain supplier.

"The metering agents and specific elements of the security module...allow an underwriter in the supply chain to confidently supply a computer at little or no upfront cost to a user or business, aware that their investment is protected and that the scalable performance capabilities generate revenue commensurate with actual performance level settings and usage," the application reads.

'A more granular approach'

According to the application, the issue with the existing PC business model is that it "requires more or less a one chance at the consumer kind of mentality, where elasticity curves are based on the pressure to maximize profits on a one-time-sale, one-shot-at-the-consumer mentality."

Microsoft's proposed model, on the other hand, could "allow a more granular approach to hardware and software sales," the application states, adding that the user "may be able to select a level of performance related to processor, memory, graphics power, etc that is driven not by a lifetime maximum requirement but rather by the need of the moment."

"When the need is browsing, a low level of performance may be used and, when network-based interactive gaming is the need of the moment, the highest available performance may be made available to the user," the document reads. "Because the user only pays for the performance level of the moment, the user may see no reason to not acquire a device with a high degree of functionality, in terms of both hardware and software, and experiment with a usage level that suits different performance requirements."

By way of example, the application posits a situation involving three "bundles" of applications and performance: office, gaming, and browsing.

"The office bundle may include word-processing and spreadsheet applications, medium graphics performance and two of three processor cores," the document reads. "The gaming bundle may include no productivity applications but may include 3D graphics support and three of three processor cores. The browsing bundle may include no productivity applications, medium graphics performance and high-speed network interface."

"Charging for the various bundles may be by bundle and by duration. For example, the office bundle may be $1.00 [68 pence] per hour, the gaming bundle may be $1.25 per hour and the browsing bundle may be $0.80 per hour. The usage charges may be abstracted to 'units/hour' to make currency conversions simpler. Alternatively, a bundle may incur a one-time charge that is operable until changed or for a fixed-usage period," the document reads.

Microsoft's patent application does acknowledge that a per-use model of computing would probably increase the cost of ownership over the PC's lifetime. The company argues in its application, however, that "the payments can be deferred and the user can extend the useful life of the computer beyond that of the one-time purchase machine."

The document suggests that "both users and suppliers benefit from this new business model" because "the user is able to migrate the performance level of the computer as needs change over time, while the supplier can develop a revenue stream business that may actually have higher value than the one-time purchase model currently practiced."

"Rather than suffering through less-than-adequate performance for a significant portion of the life of a computer, a user can increase performance level over time, at a slight premium of payments," the application reads. "When the performance level finally reaches its maximum and still better performance is required, then the user may upgrade to a new computer, running at a relatively low performance level, probably with little or no change in the cost of use."

The browser wars are back!

At the turn of the century, Microsoft brutally vanquished Netscape in the browser wars. For a while, that victory appeared to be permanent. The battle had been a pretty ugly one: A federal court found that Microsoft illegally used its Windows monopoly to expand Internet Explorer's market share; Netscape never recovered from its loss. For most computer users, though, the browser wars were sublime: The Web browser was "invented" in 1992, and within five years, with hundreds of developers at both Microsoft and Netscape pumping out code, browsers became fast, stable, and capable of some very neat tricks.

These days, Web designers boast about all they can do with AJAX, the set of technologies that allow Web sites to emulate desktop-app behavior like drag-and-drop (ie Google Maps). AJAX runs on code that was created by Microsoft and Netscape as competitive weapons during the browser wars. Yes, today's glorious Web was made possible by yesterday's bruising business confrontation. All of us should rejoice, then, at the dawn of Browser War II.

Google has released a Web browser called Chrome. This new piece of software enters a crowded field of browsers looking for your love. Microsoft with its final revision of Internet Explorer 8,.(Both Chrome and IE 8 run only on Windows, though Google says it's creating versions for other platforms.) In June, Mozilla put out Version 3 of its popular open-source, cross-platform Firefox browser, in Version 3.1. The Norwegian software company Opera also released its latest eponymous, innovative, cult-hit browser. And Apple is now working on the next version of Safari for Mac and Windows.

All this competition is great news, because the world desperately needs a better Web browser. For at least the past four or five years, Firefox has been the gold standard among techies; I've been using it as my primary browser for at least that long. I loved it, I appreciated its smart, clean user interface, its tabs (although all browsers use tabs now, at the time when I moved to Firefox, this was the only browser to do so) and keyboard shortcuts, and most of all—Firefox's killer feature—its ability to run a wide range of useful third-party add-ons. But Firefox is hobbled by a couple of major flaws. It hogs system resources: Use it for a while, and it eats up huge chunks of your computer's memory, eventually slowing browsing to a near snail pace. Firefox is also prone to crashing: Load up an errant Web page, and you risk bringing the program to a halt. (This problem makes session-recovery add-ons like Tab Mix Plus essential.)

Admittedly, I'm not an ordinary Web user—I use my browser as a research tool, mail app, calendar, media player, and a tabbed to-do list. I live and breath the internet, I can't be without it... At any point during the day, I've got three or four browser windows open, each with 10 to 15 Web pages running in tabs (at least). I understand that this bespeaks a kind of insanity, but with Web sites growing ever more useful and Web users growing ever more addicted, it's the sort of insanity that afflicts an increasing number people.

The wonderful thing about Google's new browser, is that it's been built with the singular purpose of handling a hefty workload. While I'm not yet ready to switch to Chrome as my permanent browser—it's got some odd user interface quirks, lacks a few useful features, and doesn't have Firefox's hordes of plug-ins—I've found it to be impressively fast and stable. So far, it's run everything that I've thrown it's way without bringing my computer to a halt. For that alone, I really think that Google's on to something.

Just as Windows runs Photoshop and iTunes at the same time without letting each bother the other, or getting in each others way, Chrome lets its processes do different tasks in parallel. If one Chrome tab is busy loading Google Reader, another Chrome tab won't be crimped while refreshing the CNNSI.com website. Best of all, if one process crashes, your full browser session remains intact. I've inadvertently learned many different ways to make Firefox crash; none of these tricks worked on Chrome. The best I could do was crash a single process—this brought down an individual tab, but Chrome as a whole, kept running.

There are several more under-the-hood improvements. Google claims that Chrome beats other browsers at "garbage collection"— the computer-science term for how a program gets rid of memory it no longer needs. Better garbage collection significantly reduces how much of your computer's resources an application consumes. Google also wrote its own JavaScript virtual machine—the engine that runs all the fancy AJAX code that powers complex new Web apps—that it claims is faster and more stable than other browsers' scripting engines. Though I found Chrome speedy and less demanding on my system's resources than Firefox 3.0, its advantage isn't unsurpassable—Lifehacker's tests give the memory and speed edge to Firefox 3.1.

You aren't likely to notice Chrome's tech improvements when you load it up for the first time. What you'll see is a clean, minimalistic app, one missing several features that you're used to in other browsers. For example, Chrome presents no good way to manage bookmarks. Still, there are some innovative features. Instead of an address bar and a search box, Chrome uses only one input bar in which you're free to type either something like "ebay.com" or "policies of Barrack Obama" Chrome is smart enough to figure out when to take you to a Web page and when to perform a Web search. It also lists other recently visited sites containing ebay, obama, or other like terms.

I found some of Google's other user-interface tweaks a little more annoying than useful. Chrome places its row of tabs in the title bar, an area that in most apps isn't used for anything other than displaying the name of the program. This saves space on your screen, but it also eradicates one of the main ways people have grown accustomed to using tabs in browsers—you can't double-click the tab bar to open a new tab, like you can on every other multi-tab browser. (Double-clicking the bar in Chrome resizes the window.)

This is a petty nitpick, obviously. Chrome is very much a work in progress, a beta program that I expect will improve dramatically in the months to come. It shares two advantages with Firefox: Chrome is open-source, meaning outside developers are free to extend and improve it. And Chrome includes a plug-in infrastructure that lets people create add-ons. Because it's new, neither of these features is very important just yet. But if Chrome catches on, developers will likely build these and other great programs for it; theoretically, people could even take the best bits of Firefox and Chrome and build another single awesome browser.

For Google, Microsoft, and Apple, the browser fight is a means to other ends. Microsoft, which holds more than three-quarters of the browser market, looks at the Web as an extension of its operating system. As more of our programs move online, Microsoft fears that we might have little reason to stick to Windows; it sees control of the browser as a way to control the future of software development. Google seems to want to be in the browser business to fight Microsoft. The company's revenue comes entirely from the Web, so it's got to be wary that most of its customers come through software created by its main rival. (Google substantially underwrites both Firefox and Opera, which both feature Google's search engine as the default.) Apple, meanwhile, needs a browser to beef up its own platform—not only on the Mac but also on its phones and iPods.

Sure, these aims aren't entirely noble. But who cares? As the giants duke it out to come up with the best product, they'll copy and improve upon each other's innovations, bringing new features to all browsers. Chrome's immunity to crashing, for instance, is sure to push both Mozilla and Microsoft to improve their browsers' stability. Perhaps soon you'll be able to load up any browser you like and watch two dozen YouTube videos at once without fearing a crash—just like the Web was always meant to be used.

The gloves appear to be off!

Until next time........

Vista gone already

Microsoft announces Windows 7 as Vista brand is killed

Microsoft has unveiled the next version of its Windows operating system. The marketing name "Vista" is gone and there is apparently no word to replace it. From all indications, the next version of Windows will be called "Windows 7."

Perhaps Microsoft thinks that the lucky number 7 will save it from the tarnish Windows Vista has left behind on the image of Windows (much like the "child no-body dare's speak of" Windows ME). Although the software giant touted Windows Vista as the most secure and user-friendly version of Windows yet, consumers simply did not embrace it. Through Microsoft's dominance with PC makers, Windows Vista has still continued to be a huge success, shipping on almost all new PCs.
Businesses, though, certainly did not welcome Windows Vista readily. The question that remains to be answered is, Will Windows 7 be any different?

Using the version number (this Windows, actually is version 7), instead of some "catchy" name, may help Microsoft differentiate it from other operating systems, while reinforcing that there have been six versions of Windows before this new one (hence, it's a tried-and-true product). No release date has yet been given for Windows 7.
Here's a prediction: Microsoft will see Windows 7 as a non-event (as far as initial release) unless it steps up its marketing campaign soon. If it addresses the perceived issues of software crashes, video and audio handling and speed without the latest hardware, Windows 7 may stand somewhat of a chance.


This sudden move to drop Vista, and already move onto the the next "great" version of Windows is sure to ruffle a few feathers, annoying some computer owners who recently purchased a new computer (present company included) to be up to date hardware wise to even be able to run Vista, and now we're already being told that the next one is coming (with some nice features, i'll give it that.. The touch screen sounds really nice...BUT THAT MEANS I HAVE THE GET ANOTHER COMPUTER??? I JUST GOT THIS ONE!!!!!) .

A friendly gesture on the part of Microsoft, would be to allow all registered owners of there Vista operating systems to receive a free upgrade to Windows 7, along with a credit to allow users to upgrade there systems to run this new release of theres... sure short term they may lose some money, but they'll gain far more with more satisfied customers.

But these are just the thoughts of one person...what do you think? Let me know... and as usual by using the link below, I've found a way for you to earn some money for your critiques of my posts, thoughts and rantings.


Until next time........

Software

I've got to get this off my mind. I love great software. Software makes the system, to me; hardware always takes a backseat. But as overall software prices have risen over the past few years, some vendors seem to have gone out of their way to raise prices. While one company, such as GPSoft (Directory Opus), holds the line by retaining or lowering their upgrade price, another, such as Adobe, and Microsoft are increasing the price of some of the software by 25%-33% for their most recent upgrade. Between multiple versions which no one wants (Microsoft Vista for now, and there's already talks of a newer one coming out???) — just give me the BEST program you build, keep that other weak crap to yourself, — increasingly aggressive activation schemes, falsely marketed "Lifetime licenses," hostile EULAs (one copy per "device"), the encroachment of subscription software (boo!!), and devs who tell devoted users to either pay up, or shut up and get lost, I'm getting pissed!!!