Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Atari Online News, Etc. Volume 15 Issue 18
Volume 15, Issue 18 Atari Online News, Etc. May 10, 2013
Published and Copyright (c) 1999 - 2013
All Rights Reserved
Atari Online News, Etc.
A-ONE Online Magazine
Dana P. Jacobson, Publisher/Managing Editor
Joseph Mirando, Managing Editor
Rob Mahlert, Associate Editor
Atari Online News, Etc. Staff
Dana P. Jacobson -- Editor
Joe Mirando -- "People Are Talking"
Michael Burkley -- "Unabashed Atariophile"
Albert Dayes -- "CC: Classic Chips"
Rob Mahlert -- Web site
Thomas J. Andrews -- "Keeper of the Flame"
With Contributions by:
Fred Horvat
To subscribe to A-ONE, change e-mail addresses, or unsubscribe,
log on to our website at: www.atarinews.org
and click on "Subscriptions".
OR subscribe to A-ONE by sending a message to: dpj@atarinews.org
and your address will be added to the distribution list.
To unsubscribe from A-ONE, send the following: Unsubscribe A-ONE
Please make sure that you include the same address that you used to
subscribe from.
To download A-ONE, set your browser bookmarks to one of the
following sites:
http://people.delphiforums.com/dpj/a-one.htm
Now available:
http://www.atarinews.org
Visit the Atari Advantage Forum on Delphi!
http://forums.delphiforums.com/atari/
=~=~=~=
A-ONE #1518 05/10/13
~ Holder Denies 'Bowing' ~ People Are Talking! ~ Zero-day Trade!
~ Dutch Police Can Hack? ~ Common Windows8 Gripes ~ Ouya Is Delayed!
~ Man Linked to SpyEye! ~ Call of Duty: Ghosts! ~ Acer Aspire R7!
~ Cern Recreating First! ~ Cyberwar Strategies? ~ Teens vs. Adults?
-* New Law To Combat Cyber Theft *-
-* No Internet? Next Xbox Still Works! *-
-* Internet Sales Tax Bill, Tough House Sell! *-
=~=~=~=
->From the Editor's Keyboard "Saying it like it is!"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""
First off, I want to apologize for the lack of an issue last week. During
the entire week, I was tied up dealing with my father's estate which ended
up culminating in a trip to Maine which took up most of the day Friday.
It was a long week, and an extremely long day! There was no way that I was
going to complete the week's issue, nor even get tt done late. So, we're
back this week.
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
->In This Week's Gaming Section - Next Xbox Will Work Even When Your Internet Doesnt!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Ouya Delayed to End of June!
Call of Duty: Ghost Coming!
And much more!
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE's Game Console Industry News - The Latest Gaming News!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Microsoft: Next Xbox Will Work Even When Your Internet Doesnt
Should single-player games, Blu-ray playback, and live TV viewing be
possible on a gaming console with no Internet connection? Most gamers
would say "yes," but they have been worried that Microsoft feels
differently; the next generation Xbox has been consistently rumored to
require a permanent network connection.
It won't.
According to an internal Microsoft e-mail sent to all full-time employees
working on the next Xbox, "Durango [the codename for the next Xbox] is
designed to deliver the future of entertainment while engineered to be
tolerant of today's Internet." It continues, "There are a number of
scenarios that our users expect to work without an Internet connection,
and those should 'just work' regardless of their current connection
status. Those include, but are not limited to: playing a Blu-ray disc,
watching live TV, and yes playing a single player game."
The quotation also implicitly confirms another rumor: the next Xbox will
sport an HDMI input, to allow cable boxes to be hooked up for live TV
viewing. Our sources tell us that the console will be able to provide TV
listings and similar information.
How far this offline support will extend still isn't clear. It could take
the form of a fully offline mode akin to that on the Xbox 360 (insert
optical disc, install game, play, all without an Internet connection) or
it could be more like Steam (install and activate online but enable
subsequent offline play once this has been done).
While one could argue that "installing a game" is one of the "scenarios"
that gamers "expect to work" when offline, a more Steam-like approach
would be consistent with rumors that the next Xbox will use its Internet
connection to block installation of secondhand games.
Still, though the next Xbox won't make everybody happy, it looks like
fears that the console will be useless when your broadband goes down have
been overblown.
Ouya Delayed to End of June, Snatches $15 Million in New Funding
The most visible of the Android-based micro-consoles with the name that
sounds like what Kool-Aid man says when hes busting through painted
styrofoam walls will delay its $100 Ouya game cube until the end of June:
specifically June 25 about two weeks after E3 wraps.
The reason for the delay? The company doesnt say in a press release
thats mostly about other stuff, burying the revised launch date at the
end (the system was originally due out June 4), but Joystiq managed to
speak with Ouya honcho Julie Uhrman, who explains the sudden pushback:
Weve had incredibly positive reactions from our retail partners, and so
in order to meet their greater than expected demand, we decided to shift
the launch date by a couple of weeks three weeks which will allow us
to create more units and, basically, have more units on store shelves in
June.
You know all the worry about the controller feeling cheap? Complaints
about some of the buttons sticking under the top plate when hammered? It
sounds like Ouyas already addressed this (well, the button-sticking part
anyway): Uhrman says the companys made the holes for the face buttons a
trifle larger to rectify the problem. We made that change very early so
all the units are being produced with those larger button holes, says
Uhrman. The revised controllers are already shipping to Kickstarter
backers.
As Gamasutra notes, the new launch date pits Ouya squarely against
GameStick, a flash drive-sized, Android-based game console designed to
plug directly into Smart TVs (or to a standard TV through an HDMI dock).
GameStick has a launch date of June 10, but the companys said the first
units wont be in the hands of those who preordered it until the final
week of June.
But what Ouya really wants everyone to know, is that it just secured $15
million in new funding led by Silicon Valley-based venture capital firm
Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, with participation from Mayfield Fund,
NVIDIA, Shasta Ventures and Occam Partners. If KPCB rings some distant
game history bells, it may be because its the company EA Chief Creative
Officer Bing Gordon joined upon leaving Electronic Arts in 2008. Gordon
originally signed up with EA in 1982 (just a few months after its
inception), devoting over a quarter century to the game giant Trip
Hawkins started. As part of the Ouya funding deal, Gordon will join
Ouyas board of directors alongside Uhrman as well as Roy Bahat, chairman
of the board (Gordon also serves on the board of directors at Amazon,
Klout, Lockerz, MEVIO, Zazzle and Zynga).
Ouya raised nearly $8.6 million last summer, with over 63,000 Kickstarter
backers throwing in to propel the conceptual console well beyond its
stated $950,000 goal. Preliminary reviews of initial beta systems
dispatched to backers in late March have been mixed, spawning a handful of
apologias. No, Kickstarter projects arent by necessity grab something
and hang on! beta pilgrimages Nataly Dawns Kickstarter-funded album
How I Knew Her sounds like something that cost a lot more than $100k to
produce, and for my money, games column Tom vs. Bruce (also
Kickstarter-funded) is absolutely peerless but yes, its true,
mass-manufactured technology with ergonomic variables and questionable
launch software lineups rarely arrive blemish-free.
In any event, Ouyas real challenge isnt pricing ($100 is plenty cheap)
or patching up gamepad glitches (already well in hand) or whether this
button should have been here or there, its about what this things going
to let you do when you power it on. No one cares about the aesthetics
(its a grayish plastic cube, so what), and you have to try pretty hard
at this point to screw up a gamepad with conventional face buttons,
thumbsticks and triggers. But if Ouya launches with a stable of
been-there-played-that games, well
will gamers leap in for the fiddly
emulators and tiny handful of media services, all for the elusive promise
of better to come? Thats the $8.6 million dollar question.
Call of Duty: Ghost Coming to Xbox 360, PS3, PC and Next-gen Platforms
Activision on Wednesday announced that the latest installment of its
best-selling Call of Duty franchise, called Call of Duty: Ghost, will
launch later this year on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, PC and next
generation platforms. The latest Call of Duty game is being developed by
Infinity Ward, the studio behind the original Call of Duty and the
critically acclaimed Call of Duty: Modern Warfare series. Activisions
first-person shooter has consistently shattered game sale records year
after year and its latest installment is expected to continue this trend.
Call of Duty: Ghost is scheduled to be released on November 5th. Starting
today, fans can pre-order the game at retail stores. Activisions press
release follows below.
ACTIVISION ANNOUNCES THE NEXT GENERATION OF CALL OF DUTY WITH CALL OF DUTY:
GHOSTS
Call of Duty: Ghosts will set a new Benchmark for the Next Generation
All-New World, Story, Characters and Experience, All Powered by New,
Next Gen Call of Duty Engine from the Developer that started it all,
Infinity Ward
For an Exclusive First Look at the Game, Tune in to Xbox: The New
Generation Revealed, May 21 at 10AM PDT on Xbox.com, Xbox Live or SPIKE TV
Groundbreaking Title Lands on November 5
Santa Monica, CA May 1, 2013 Prepare for the next generation of
Call of Duty. The franchise that has defined a generation of gaming is set
to raise the bar once again with the all-new Call of Duty: Ghosts.
Published by Activision Publishing, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of
Activision Blizzard, and developed by Infinity Ward, the studio that
created the original Call of Duty and the seminal Call of Duty: Modern
Warfare series, Call of Duty: Ghosts ushers in the next generation of the
franchise. The new title delivers a riveting all-new gameplay experience
built on an entirely new story, setting and cast of characters, all
powered by a new, next generation Call of Duty engine that redefines the
series for the next generation.
Infinity Ward set the gold standard for first-person action for a
generation, and theyre going to do it again with Call of Duty: Ghosts,
said Eric Hirshberg, CEO of Activision Publishing, Inc. Ghosts delivers
an all-new story, all-new characters, an all-new Call of Duty world, all
powered by a next generation Call of Duty engine, which is a leap forward
for the franchise. Infinity Ward is going all-in to create the next
generation of Call of Duty worthy of the worlds greatest fans.
Everyone was expecting us to make Modern Warfare 4, which would have
been the safe thing to do. But were not resting on our laurels, said
Mark Rubin, executive producer of developer Infinity Ward. We saw the
console transition as the perfect opportunity to start a new chapter for
Call of Duty. So were building a new sub-brand, a new engine, and a lot
of new ideas and experiences for our players. We cant wait to share
them with our community.
To see an exclusive first look at Call of Duty: Ghosts tune in to
Xbox: the Next Generation Revealed on May 21 at 10AM PDT on Xbox.com,
Xbox LIVE or SPIKE TV for the debut of the all-new game from Infinity Ward.
We are consistently thrilled with the overwhelming response received
from critics and consumers alike to the Call of Duty series, which has
firmly established its home on the Xbox 360 with the games largest and
most engaged community, said Don Mattrick, president of the interactive
entertainment business at Microsoft. With Call of Duty: Ghosts, we have
no doubt that our longtime partners, Activision and Infinity Ward, will
raise the bar higher than ever before for this incredible franchise.
Starting today, fans can begin pre-ordering their copy of Call of Duty:
Ghosts at retail outlets worldwide.
Theres no other video game property like Call of Duty. Its the
biggest game franchise on the planet that has had some of the biggest game
entertainment launches in history, said Tony Bartel, president of
GameStop. We are very excited for the launch of Call of Duty: Ghosts, as
we transition to next generation consoles.
Call of Duty: Ghosts will release on Xbox 360 video game and
entertainment system from Microsoft, PlayStation®3 computer entertainment
system and PC on November 5. Call of Duty: Ghosts will also be available
for next generation platforms. For the latest intel, check out:
http://www.callofduty.com/ghosts, http://www.facebook.com/CODGhosts, or
follow on Twitter @InfinityWard. Call of Duty: Ghosts is not yet rated.
GameStop Ending PlayStation 2 Trade-Ins in June
GameStop has confirmed that it will no longer accept PlayStation 2
trade-ins as of June 1, 2013. In a statement provided to IGN, a GameStop
representative said the following:
We can confirm that as of June 1st we will no longer be accepting the PS2
console or its related product for trades. We know that the 12 year old
system is a popular one and for many gamers, GameStop is the only place to
find a great selection of its games. We will still offer a wide selection
of the PS2 hardware, accessories and games in many of our stores and
online for several months, based on remaining stock from trades.
We are very excited about the upcoming PS4 and are making room in our
stores for it and other new platforms expected this fall.
Earlier this year, Sony ceased production of the PlayStation 2, ending its
life as the best-selling home console of all time. Since its launch in
2000, more than 150 million PlayStation 2s have been sold worldwide, with
more than 1.5 billion software units sold.
Video Game Play Sharpens Elderly Minds
Wanna help grandma keep her mind sharp? Consider throwing out her crossword
puzzles and giving her a joystick. Because a study finds that elderly
people who played a video game for at least 10 hours gained three years of
protection from cognitive decline. Gamers also became quicker at processing
information. The research is in the journal PLoS ONE. [Fredric D. Wolinsky
et al, A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive Training Using a Visual
Speed of Processing Intervention in Middle Aged and Older Adults]
Almost 700 subjects were divided into two groups: those between the ages of
fifty and sixty-four and people aged sixty-five and older. Members from
each age group were asked to either work on a crossword puzzle or play a
video game called Road Tour, which involves matching fleeting images of car
types and road signs.
In both age groups, those who played the video game showed improvements on
executive functionwhich includes memory, attention, problem solving skills
and perceptionwhen tested a year later.
Some of the gamers were given four additional hours of training with the
game. And their cognitive improvement lasted an additional year. So video
games might help ward off cognitive decline. Just dont play Road Tour
while actually driving.
Video Game Maker Drops Gun Makers, Not Their Guns
In the midst of the bitter national debate on gun violence, gun
manufacturers and videogame makers are delicately navigating one of the
more peculiar relationships in American business.
Violent "first-person shooter" games such as "Call of Duty" are the bread
and butter of leading video game publishers, and authenticity all but
requires that they feature brand-name weapons.
Electronic Arts licensed weapons from companies like McMillan Group
International as part of a marketing collaboration for "Medal of Honor:
Warfighter." Activision Blizzard gives "special thanks" to Colt, Barrett
and Remington in the credits for its "Call of Duty" titles.
Rifles by Bushmaster, which made the gun used in the Newtown, Connecticut
school shooting last December, have appeared in the hugely popular "Call
of Duty."
Yet, in the wake of the Newtown shooting, the biggest advocate for gun
ownership, the National Rifle Association, took aim at videogames to
explain gun violence. One week after 20 schoolchildren and six adults
were killed in the shooting, NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre called
the videogame industry "a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry
that sells, and sows, violence against its own people."
Now at least one game maker, the second largest by revenue in the United
States, is publicly distancing itself from the gun industry, even as it
finds ways to keep the branded guns in the games. Electronic Arts says it
is severing its licensing ties to gun manufacturers - and simultaneously
asserting that it has the right, and the intention, to continue to
feature branded guns without a license.
For the gunmakers, having their products in games is "free marketing, just
like having Coca-Cola" in a movie, said Roxanne Christ, a partner at
Latham & Watkins LLP in Los Angeles, who works with video game companies
on licensing, but has not personally done a gun deal.
Yet it is also a virtual double-edged sword. "It gives publicity to the
particular brand of gun being used in the video game," said Brad J.
Bushman, a professor at Ohio State University who has studied video game
violence. "On the other hand, it's linking that gun with violent and
aggressive behavior."
Gun makers, including the Freedom Group that owns brands like Remington
and Bushmaster, and the NRA, did not respond to repeated requests for
comment from Reuters.
First-person shooter games let players blast their way through
battlefields while looking down the barrel of a virtual gun, taking aim
with the flick of a controller.
Some of those guns - like the Colt M1911 pistol in "Call of Duty" - turn
sideways to face the screen during reloading, revealing the brand name.
Games also offer lists of branded weapons to choose from.
Licensed images of weapons in "Medal of Honor: Warfighter" - a game that
simulates military missions like fighting pirates in Somalia - offer what
EA spokesman Jeff Brown calls "enhanced authenticity."
Back in the late 90's, video game makers initially approached gun companies
for licenses to inoculate themselves from potential lawsuits, video game
industry lawyers say. Over the years, legal clearances were granted for
little or no money by gunmakers, these lawyers said.
Yet overt signs of cooperation between the video game and gun industries
had begun to draw criticism even before the December school shooting in
Connecticut.
In August, game fans and some video game news outlets vehemently objected
to EA putting links to weapons companies like the McMillan Group and gun
magazine maker Magpul, where gamers could check out real versions of
weapons featured in the game, on its "Medal of Honor: Warfighter" game
website.
"What kind of message is a video game publisher like EA sending when it
encourages its players to buy weapons?" asked Laura Parker, the associate
editor of gaming site GameSpot Australia in a post in August.
EA immediately removed the links and dropped the marketing tie-up, which
it said was part of a charity project to raise money for military
veterans. The company said it received no money from its gun company
partners.
"We won't do that again," said Brown. "The action games we will release
this year will not include licensed images of weapons."
EA said politics and NRA comments critical of game makers had nothing to
do with its decision. "The response from our audience was pretty clear:
they feel the comments from the NRA were a simple attempt to change the
subject," Brown said.
EA also says video game makers can have branded guns in their games
without getting licenses, meaning the industry could drop the gun
companies and keep their guns.
Activision, the industry leader, declined to comment on whether it
licenses gun designs from gun manufacturers or if it would stop doing so.
Branded guns have consistently been featured in its blockbuster shooter
games like the decade-old "Call of Duty."
"We're telling a story and we have a point of view," EA's President of
Labels Frank Gibeau, who leads product development of EA's biggest
franchises, said in an interview. "A book doesn't pay for saying the word
'Colt,' for example."
Put another way, EA is asserting a constitutional free speech right to use
trademarks without permission in its ever-more-realistic games.
Legal experts say there isn't a single case so far where gun companies
have sued video game companies for using branded guns without a license.
But EA's legal theory is now being tested in court. Aircraft maker Bell
Helicopter, a unit of Textron Inc, has argued that Electronic Arts'
depiction of its helicopters in "Battlefield" was beyond fair use and
amounted to a trademark infringement. EA preemptively went to court,
suing Bell Helicopter to settle the issue.
The U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, has set a jury
trial for the case in June.
Activision Warns of Rocky Second Half
Activision Blizzard Inc warned investors on Wednesday that it expects a
challenging second-half and holiday quarter because of heavy competition
and uncertainty around the launch of new video game consoles.
The shares of the largest U.S. video games publisher were down about 5
percent at $14.45 in after-hours trading from its $15.26 close on the
Nasdaq.
Subscribers to "World of Warcraft," a large source of steady
subscription-based revenue, dropped sharply by about 14 percent to 8.3
million last quarter from 9.6 million in the previous quarter, the company
said.
Activision executives told analysts they expect Warcraft subscriber
figures to dip further in coming months as the fantasy-action game
continues to lose users to similar, free-to-play games.
"No one understands what 'numbers to go lower' means and that's got
investors concerned," said Michael Pachter, an analyst at Wedbush
Securities. "Activision's going to have to stabilize that."
To arrest the loss of subscribers, the company will invest significantly
in the franchise and deliver new content to engage players, Chief
Executive Officer Bobby Kotick said in an interview.
The company, known for its "Call of Duty" and "Skylanders" games, slightly
raised its 2013 revenue and earnings forecast to $4.25 billion and 82
cents per share, compared with $4.18 billion and 80 cents provided at the
end of the last quarter ended January 30.
Its 2013 outlook was below the view of Wall Street analysts, who expected
the company to forecast revenue of $4.27 billion and earnings at 85 cents
per share.
In contrast, rival Electronic Arts Inc on Tuesday forecast fiscal 2014
earnings above Wall Street's expectations, triggering a 17 percent rally
in its shares on Wednesday.
The video game industry is grappling with flagging sales as players
migrate from to buying packaged games for consoles to free or
less-expensive offerings on mobile devices.
Moreover, consumers have held back from buying hardware and software as
they await new versions of Sony Corp's PlayStation and Microsoft Corp's
Xbox, which are expected later this year.
Nintendo Co Ltd's new Wii U console, which was launched in November, has
disappointed investors with its lackluster sales, casting doubt on the
industry's hope that new consoles could boost prospects.
This year, Activision will clash with a number of mega-franchises during
the coming holidays, a crucial period that often accounts for the bulk of
the industry's annual revenue.
Its top releases include shooter game "Call of Duty: Ghosts", which will
compete with EA's "Battlefield 4" over the holidays. Its "Skylanders SWAP
Force", a children's fantasy-adventure game sold with actual toys that
come to life onscreen, will battle Disney's "Infinity", based on a similar
concept, and is slated for release in August.
"Infinity is going to be supported by a large marketing budget so
obviously, it's something that's formidable," Pachter said.
To try and get a leg up on the competition, Kotick told analysts that
Activision will "further increase our sales and marketing investments,"
without offering specifics.
Activision's warnings about the competition overshadowed strong
first-quarter earnings.
The Santa Monica-based company said non-GAAP revenue, adjusted for the
deferral of digital revenue and other items, rose to $804 million,
surpassing Wall Street's average revenue forecast for $704.6 million and
up 37 percent from $587 million in the same quarter a year ago.
Non-GAAP income totaled $199 million, or 17 cents per share, in the fourth
quarter, compared with $67 million, or 6 cents per share a year earlier.
This beat Wall Street's average earnings estimate of 11 cents per share,
according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.
Sony CEO, Executives Give Up Financial Bonuses
For years, Sony has suffered from lagging electronics sales and supporting
new proprietary technology that simply hasnt panned-out on the market.
While the PlayStation brand has long been one of Sonys strongest, and
while Sony is now finally in the black, that doesnt mean the company
doesnt want to become even more profitable following a significant
bloodletting over the last couple of years.
According to The Raw Story (via Nikkei), 40 Sony executives including
well-known Sony CEO Kaz Hirai are giving up their financial bonuses in a
move described by a Sony spokeswoman as unprecedented. The move will
only save Sony about $10 million (the company expects to make a profit of
$403 million in fiscal year 2013), and is likely a largely symbolic move
towards Sonys shareholders. Either way, its a bigger move than last
year, when seven Sony executives gave up their financial bonuses.
Sony will report its fiscal year 2013 results, running from March 2012 to
March 2013, in early May.
=~=~=~=
A-ONE's Headline News
The Latest in Computer Technology News
Compiled by: Dana P. Jacobson
Internet Sales Tax Bill Faces Tough Sell in House
Traditional retailers and cash-strapped states face a tough sell in the
House as they lobby Congress to limit tax-free shopping on the Internet.
The Senate voted 69 to 27 Monday to pass a bill that empowers states to
collect sales taxes from Internet purchases. Under the bill, states could
require out-of-state retailers to collect sales taxes when they sell
products over the Internet, in catalogs, and through radio and TV ads.
The sales taxes would be sent to the states where a shopper lives.
Current law says states can only require retailers to collect sales taxes
if the merchant has a physical presence in the state.
That means big retailers with stores all over the country like Wal-Mart,
Best Buy and Target collect sales taxes when they sell goods over the
Internet. But online retailers like eBay and Amazon don't have to collect
sales taxes, except in states where they have offices or distribution
centers.
"This bill is about fairness," said Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., the bill's
main sponsor in the Senate. "It's about leveling the playing field
between the brick and mortar and online companies and it's about
collecting a tax that's already due. It's not about raising taxes."
The bill got bipartisan support in the Senate but faces opposition in the
House, where some lawmakers regard it as a tax increase. Grover Norquist,
the anti-tax advocate, and the conservative Heritage Foundation oppose
the bill, and many Republicans have been wary of crossing them.
Supporters say the bill is not a tax increase. In many states, shoppers
are required to pay unpaid sales tax when they file their state tax
returns. However, states complain that few taxpayers comply.
"Obviously there's a lot of consumers out there that have been accustomed
to not having to pay any taxes, believing that they don't have to pay any
taxes," said Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., the bill's main sponsor in the
House. "I totally understand that, and I think a lot of our members
understand that. There's a lot of political difficulty getting through
the fog of it looking like a tax increase."
On Tuesday morning, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, declined to say
whether the House would take up the bill. Later, he told Bloomberg
Television in an interview that he would "probably not" support the bill.
But he said he would refer it to the House Judiciary Committee and
"we'll see what they think."
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said there
are problems with the bill, but he did not reject it outright.
"While it attempts to make tax collection simpler, it still has a long way
to go," Goodlatte said in a statement. Without more uniformity in the
bill, he said, "businesses would still be forced to wade through
potentially hundreds of tax rates and a host of different tax codes and
definitions."
Goodlatte said he's "open to considering legislation concerning this topic
but these issues, along with others, would certainly have to be
addressed."
Internet giant eBay led the fight against the bill in the Senate, along
with lawmakers from states with no sales tax and several prominent
anti-tax groups. The bill's opponents say it would put an expensive
obligation on small businesses because they are not as equipped as
national merchandisers to collect and remit sales taxes at the multitude
of state rates.
Businesses with less than $1 million in online sales would be exempt. EBay
wants to exempt businesses with up to $10 million in sales or fewer than
50 employees.
"The contentious debate in the Senate shows that a lot more work needs to
be done to get the Internet sales tax issue right, including ensuring
that small businesses using the Internet are protected from new burdens
that harm their ability to compete and grow," said Brian Bieron, eBay's
senior director of global public policy.
Some states have sales taxes as high as 7 percent, plus city and county
taxes that can push the combined rate even higher.
Many governors Republicans and Democrats have been lobbying the
federal government for years for the authority to collect sales taxes from
online sales.
The issue is getting bigger for states as more people make purchases
online. Last year, Internet sales in the U.S. totaled $226 billion, up
nearly 16 percent from the previous year, according to government
estimates.
States lost a total of $23 billion last year because they couldn't collect
taxes on out-of-state sales, according to a study done for the National
Conference of State Legislatures, which has lobbied for the bill. About
half of that was lost from Internet sales; half from purchases made
through catalogs, mail orders and telephone orders, the study said.
Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to
comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers
calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also
establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so
retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.
Opponents worry the bill would give states too much power to reach across
state lines to enforce their tax laws. States could audit out-of-state
businesses, impose liens on their property and, ultimately, sue them in
state court.
Senators Propose Law To Combat Cyber Theft
A group of senior Republican and Democratic senators proposed a new law
on Tuesday to combat computer espionage and the theft of valuable
commercial data from U.S. companies.
The four powerful senators - Democrats Carl Levin and Jay Rockefeller and
Republicans John McCain and Tom Coburn - joined together to launch the
Deter Cyber Theft Act.
The proposed law aims to combat the theft of intellectual property from
U.S. companies, which spend billions in research and development only to
be targeted by foreign firms and countries that illegally access their
data and use it to compete against them.
General Keith Alexander, head of the U.S. National Security Agency and
commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, has called the growing problem the
"greatest transfer of wealth in history."
China is accused of being the biggest culprit in theft attempts against
U.S. companies. American lawmakers have said U.S. companies suffered
estimated losses in 2012 of more than $300 billion due to trade-secret
theft, much of it due to Chinese cyber espionage.
Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said the new law would
help protect American businesses and innovation.
"We need to call out those who are responsible for cyber theft and
empower the president to hit the thieves where it hurts most - in their
wallets, by blocking imports of products or from companies that benefit
from this theft," Levin said in a statement.
McCain, a powerful voice in the Senate on armed services and foreign
affairs issues, said the bill would give President Barack Obama
authority to target those who try to benefit from cyber crime.
A divided U.S. Congress has not approved much legislation in recent years,
given a string of partisan fiscal battles.
But with lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle acknowledging that
cyber security is a rising concern, this bipartisan measure - sponsored by
leading senators - will likely draw plenty of interest.
A senior Democratic aide described cyber security as a "huge priority,"
for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
The proposed act would require the Director of National Intelligence to
compile an annual report that includes a list of nations that engage in
economic or industrial espionage in cyberspace against U.S. firms or
individuals. It would include a priority watch list of the worst
offenders.
The report would also include a list of U.S. technologies targeted by the
espionage, details of what had been stolen and a list of items produced
using the stolen information.
The DNI's report would also list countries that had benefited from the
theft and the action taken by the U.S. government to combat cyber
espionage.
Under the proposed law, the president would be required to block imports
of products containing stolen U.S. technology or products made by
state-owned enterprises of nations on the DNI's priority watch list that
are similar to items identified as being made using stolen technology.
Special Report: U.S. Cyberwar Strategy Stokes Fear of Blowback
Even as the U.S. government confronts rival powers over widespread
Internet espionage, it has become the biggest buyer in a burgeoning gray
market where hackers and security firms sell tools for breaking into
computers.
The strategy is spurring concern in the technology industry and
intelligence community that Washington is in effect encouraging hacking
and failing to disclose to software companies and customers the
vulnerabilities exploited by the purchased hacks.
That's because U.S. intelligence and military agencies aren't buying the
tools primarily to fend off attacks. Rather, they are using the tools to
infiltrate computer networks overseas, leaving behind spy programs and
cyber-weapons that can disrupt data or damage systems.
The core problem: Spy tools and cyber-weapons rely on vulnerabilities in
existing software programs, and these hacks would be much less useful to
the government if the flaws were exposed through public warnings. So the
more the government spends on offensive techniques, the greater its
interest in making sure that security holes in widely used software
remain unrepaired.
Moreover, the money going for offense lures some talented researchers away
from work on defense, while tax dollars may end up flowing to skilled
hackers simultaneously supplying criminal groups. "The only people paying
are on the offensive side," said Charlie Miller, a security researcher at
Twitter who previously worked for the National Security Agency.
A spokesman for the NSA agreed that the proliferation of hacking tools
was a major concern but declined to comment on the agency's own role in
purchasing them, citing the "sensitivity" of the topic.
America's offensive cyber-warfare strategy - including even the broad
outlines and the total spending levels - is classified information.
Officials have never publicly acknowledged engaging in offensive
cyber-warfare, though the one case that has been most widely reported -
the use of a virus known as Stuxnet to disrupt Iran's nuclear-research
program - was lauded in Washington. Officials confirmed to Reuters
previously that the U.S. government drove Stuxnet's development, and the
Pentagon is expanding its offensive capability through the nascent Cyber
Command.
Stuxnet, while unusually powerful, is hardly an isolated case. Computer
researchers in the public and private sectors say the U.S. government,
acting mainly through defense contractors, has become the dominant player
in fostering the shadowy but large-scale commercial market for tools
known as exploits, which burrow into hidden computer vulnerabilities.
In their most common use, exploits are critical but interchangeable
components inside bigger programs. Those programs can steal financial
account passwords, turn an iPhone into a listening device, or, in the
case of Stuxnet, sabotage a nuclear facility.
Think of a big building with a lot of hidden doors, each with a different
key. Any door will do to get in, once you find the right key.
The pursuit of those keys has intensified. The Department of Defense and
U.S. intelligence agencies, especially the NSA, are spending so heavily
for information on holes in commercial computer systems, and on exploits
taking advantage of them, that they are turning the world of security
research on its head, according to longtime researchers and former top
government officials.
Many talented hackers who once alerted companies such as Microsoft Corp to
security flaws in their products are now selling the information and the
exploits to the highest bidder, sometimes through brokers who never meet
the final buyers. Defense contractors and agencies spend at least tens of
millions of dollars a year just on exploits, which are the one essential
ingredient in a broader cyber-weapons industry generating hundreds of
millions annually, industry executives said privately.
Former White House cybersecurity advisors Howard Schmidt and Richard
Clarke said in interviews that the government in this way has been putting
too much emphasis on offensive capabilities that by their very nature
depend on leaving U.S. business and consumers at risk.
"If the U.S. government knows of a vulnerability that can be exploited,
under normal circumstances, its first obligation is to tell U.S. users,"
Clarke said. "There is supposed to be some mechanism for deciding how they
use the information, for offense or defense. But there isn't."
Acknowledging the strategic trade-offs, former NSA director Michael Hayden
said: "There has been a traditional calculus between protecting your
offensive capability and strengthening your defense. It might be time now
to readdress that at an important policy level, given how much we are
suffering."
The issue is sensitive in the wake of new disclosures about the breadth
and scale of hacking attacks that U.S. intelligence officials attribute to
the Chinese government. Chinese officials deny the allegations and say
they too are hacking victims.
Top U.S. officials told Congress this year that poor Internet security has
surpassed terrorism to become the single greatest threat to the country
and that better information-sharing on risks is crucial. Yet neither of
the two major U.S. initiatives under way - sweeping cybersecurity
legislation being weighed by Congress and President Barack Obama's
February executive order on the subject - asks defense and intelligence
agencies to spread what they know about vulnerabilities to help the
private sector defend itself.
Most companies, including Microsoft, Apple Inc and Adobe Systems Inc, on
principle won't pay researchers who report flaws, saying they don't want
to encourage hackers. Those that do offer "bounties", including Google
Inc and Facebook Inc, say they are hard-pressed to compete financially
with defense-industry spending.
Some national-security officials and security executives say the U.S.
strategy is perfectly logical: It's better for the U.S. government to be
buying up exploits so that they don't fall into the hands of dictators or
organized criminals.
When a U.S. agency knows about a vulnerability and does not warn the
public, there can be unintended consequences. If malign forces purchase
information about or independently discover the same hole, they can use
it to cause damage or to launch spying or fraud campaigns before a
company like Microsoft has time to develop a patch. Moreover, when the
U.S. launches a program containing an exploit, it can be detected and
quickly duplicated for use against U.S. interests before any public
warning or patch.
Some losses occur even after a patch.
That happened to Microsoft and its customers with a piece of malicious
software known as Duqu. Experts say it was designed to steal
industrial-facility designs from Iran and that it used an exploit that
tricked computers into installing malicious software disguised as a font
to render type on the screen.
Those who dissected the program after its discovery in 2011 believe it was
created by a U.S. agency. Though Duqu resembled Stuxnet in some respects,
they couldn't say for sure how it was assembled, or whether the spying
tool had accomplished its mission.
What's certain is that criminal hackers copied Duqu's previously
unheard-of method for breaking into computers and rolled it into "exploit
kits," including one called Blackhole and another called Cool, that were
sold to hackers worldwide.
Microsoft had by then issued a patch for the vulnerability. Nevertheless,
hackers used it last year to attack 16 out of every 1,000 U.S. computers
and an even greater proportion in some other countries, according to
Finland-based security firm F-Secure.
The flaw became the second-most frequently tried among tens of thousands
of known vulnerabilities during the second half of 2012, F-Secure said.
Hackers installed a variety of malicious software in cases when the
exploit worked, including copies of Zeus, a notorious program for
stealing financial login information that has been blamed for hundreds of
millions of dollars in bank thefts. Microsoft won't say whether it has
confronted U.S. officials about Duqu and other programs, but an executive
said the company objects "to our products being used for malicious
purposes."
Former NSA Director Hayden and others with high-level experience have
boasted that U.S. offensive capabilities in cyberspace are the best in
the world. But few outsiders had any idea what was possible before 2010,
when a small laboratory discovered the worm called Stuxnet.
It took teams of security experts in several countries months to dissect
the program. They discovered that it had been meticulously engineered to
launch invisibly from a portable flash drive and spread through connected
Windows-based personal computers in search of machines running a specific
piece of industrial control software made by Siemens AG of Germany.
If Stuxnet found that software and a certain configuration, it changed
some of the instructions in the program and hid its tracks. Eventually,
the truth came out: The only place deliberately affected was an Iranian
nuclear facility, where the software sped up and slowed down
uranium-enriching centrifuges until they broke.
Stuxnet was unique in many ways, one of them being that it took advantage
of four previously unknown flaws in Windows. In the industry, exploits of
such vulnerabilities are called "zero-days," because the software maker
has had zero days' notice to fix the hole before the tool's discovery.
It can take months for security patches to be widely installed after a
vulnerability is reported, so even a "two-day" exploit, one released two
days after a warning, is valuable.
But exploits can't be counted on to work once the holes they rely on are
disclosed. That means contractors are constantly looking for new ones that
can be swapped in to a particular program after the original vulnerability
is fixed. Some security firms sell subscriptions for exploits,
guaranteeing a certain number per year.
"My job was to have 25 zero-days on a USB stick, ready to go," said a
former executive at a defense contractor that bought vulnerabilities from
independent hackers and turned them into exploits for government use.
Zero-day exploits will work even when the targeted software is up to
date, and experts say the use of even a single zero-day in a program
signals that a perpetrator is serious. A well-publicized hacking campaign
against Google and scores of other companies in early 2010, attributed by
U.S. officials and private experts to Chinese government hackers, used
one zero-day.
Many zero-day exploits appear to have been produced by intelligence
agencies. But private companies have also sprung up that hire programmers
to do the grunt work of identifying vulnerabilities and then writing
exploit code. The starting rate for a zero-day is around $50,000, some
buyers said, with the price depending on such factors as how widely
installed the targeted software is and how long the zero-day is expected
to remain exclusive.
It's a global market that operates under the radar, often facilitated by
other companies that act as brokers. On the buy side are U.S. government
agencies and the defense contractors that fold the exploits into
cyber-weapons. With little or no regulation, it is impossible to say who
else might be purchasing zero-days and to what end, but the customers are
known to include organized crime groups and repressive governments spying
on their citizens.
Even one of the four exploits used by Stuxnet may have been purchased.
Swedish Defense Research Agency expert David Lindahl said the same trick
employed by the exploit in question was used in a piece of Russian crime
software called Zlob prior to Stuxnet's discovery. The same person may
have sold the exploit to both the United States and to Russian criminals.
However, Lindahl and other experts said simultaneous invention can't be
ruled out.
The issue of rival countries or gangs using a flaw that U.S. officials
have known about but decided to keep secret is a big concern. The National
Security Agency declined to say whether or how often that happens, but
researchers said simultaneous security discoveries occur often.
"It's pretty naïve to believe that with a newly discovered zero-day, you
are the only one in the world that's discovered it," said Schmidt, who
retired last year as the White House cybersecurity coordinator. "Whether
it's another government, a researcher or someone else who sells exploits,
you may have it by yourself for a few hours or for a few days, but you
sure are not going to have it alone for long."
China is thought to do a lot of its work on exploits in-house, relying on
its own programmers, though Reuters has reviewed email from self-declared
Chinese buyers offering large sums. "I really need some 0days,if you have
some remote exploit 0days of windows system, I think I can buy it. you
know, money is not the problem," one hopeful wrote in 2006.
Cesar Cerrudo, a researcher in Argentina and the recipient of the 2006
email, was among the first to sell zero-days in the open, targeting
experts who wanted to test the security of networks for their employers
or clients.
Cerrudo said he ignored some requests from China that seemed suspiciously
detailed, such as one for an exploit for an out-of-date version of
Microsoft Office. Cerrudo said he regrets selling to a research
institution in Europe he won't name that he later realized received a
great deal of funding from a national government. Now Cerrudo works at
IOActive Inc, a Seattle-based consulting firm that advises corporate
clients on security.
"Fewer people are publishing details about vulnerabilities and exploits,"
Cerrudo said, and that hurts overall safety. "People are trying to keep
their techniques and exploits private so they can make a lot of money."
A Paris-based security company called Vupen sells tools based on exploits
to intelligence, law-enforcement and military authorities in most of the
world. It refrains from selling to countries such as Iran or North Korea,
and says it voluntarily follows European and U.S. rules limiting arms
exports, though others say it isn't clear whether exploits are subject
to the most restrictive U.S. rules.
Until 2010, Vupen often notified software vendors for free when it found
vulnerabilities, said chief executive Chaouki Bekrar. That has now
changed. "As our research costs became higher and higher, we decided to
no longer volunteer for multi-billion-dollar companies," Bekrar said.
When software makers wouldn't agree to a compensation system, he said,
Vupen chose to sell to governments instead. "Software vendors created
this market by not decently paying researchers for their hard work."
In Bekrar's estimation, Vupen is doing good. "Exploits are used as part
of lawful intercept missions and homeland security operations as legally
authorized by law," he said, "to protect lives and democracies against
both cyber and real world threats."
The company is one of the most visible players in the business. Vupen sent
a dozen researchers to an elite April conference on offensive hacking
techniques at the luxury Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach, where
attendees eschewed nametags, dined on stone crab and heard such talks as
"Advanced Heap Manipulation in Windows 8." The only larger contingents
were one from the conference's organizer, zero-day reseller Immunity Inc,
and one from the U.S. government.
A newer entrant to the market is ReVuln, based in Malta. ReVuln says it
specializes in crafting exploits for industrial control systems that
govern everything from factory floors to power generators.
This is a major concern for governments because such systems are
considered prime targets for terrorists and enemy nations, with the
potential for high loss of life. Additionally, the software that controls
them is much harder to patch than something like Windows, which Microsoft
frequently fixes with updates over the Internet. Employees at several
large makers of control systems say they don't know how to reach all
their users, let alone convince them to make changes when holes are
discovered.
ReVuln's founders, Italian researcher Luigi Auriemma and former Research
in Motion vulnerability hunter Donato Ferrante, declined to say anything
about their customers. In an email interview, they said they sold some
exploits exclusively and others more widely. Asked if they would be
troubled if some of their programs were used in attacks that caused death
or destruction, they said: "We don't sell weapons, we sell information.
This question would be worth asking to vendors leaving security holes in
their products."
Much of the work on offensive cyber-warfare is done by publicly traded
U.S. defense contractors, now joined by a handful of venture
capital-backed start-ups seeking government buyers for a broad array of
cyber-weapons that use exploits. Defense contractors both buy exploits and
produce them in-house.
Major players in the field include Raytheon Co, Northrop Grumman Corp and
Harris Corp, all of which have acquired smaller companies that specialize
in finding new vulnerabilities and writing exploits. Those companies
declined to discuss their wares. "It's tough for us, when you get into
the realm of offensive," said Northrop spokesman Mark Root.
Reuters reviewed a product catalogue from one large contractor, which was
made available on condition the vendor not be named. Scores of programs
were listed. Among them was a means to turn any iPhone into a room-wide
eavesdropping device. Another was a system for installing spyware on a
printer or other device and moving that malware to a nearby computer via
radio waves, even when the machines aren't connected to anything.
There were tools for getting access to computers or phones, tools for
grabbing different categories of data, and tools for smuggling the
information out again. There were versions of each for Windows, Apple and
Linux machines. Most of the programs cost more than $100,000, and a solid
operation would need several components that work together. The vast
majority of the programs rely on zero-day exploits.
Intelligence agencies have a good reason to leave a lot of the spyware
development work to outsiders, said Alex Stamos, chief technology officer
at an Internet security unit of NCC Group Plc. "It's just like munitions
development," he said. "They don't purchase it until the vendors can
demonstrate it works."
Another newcomer with U.S. agencies as clients is Atlanta-based Endgame
Inc, which in March raised $23 million in a second round of funding led by
the blue-chip Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield
& Byers. Endgame is chaired by the chief executive of In-Q-Tel, a venture
capital firm set up in 1999 at the request of the CIA to fund private
companies developing technology that could be useful to the intelligence
community.
Some of Endgame's activities came to light in purloined emails published
by hackers acting under the banner Anonymous. In what appear to be
marketing slides, the company touted zero-day subscriptions as well as
lists of exactly which computers overseas belonged to specific criminal
"botnets" - networks of compromised machines that can be mobilized for
various purposes, including stealing financial passwords and knocking
websites offline with traffic attacks.
The point was not to disinfect the botnet's computers or warn the owners.
Instead, Endgame's customers in the intelligence agencies wanted to
harvest data from those machines directly or maintain the ability to
issue new commands to large segments of the networks, three people close
to the company told Reuters.
Endgame declined to comment.
Ted Schlein, a Kleiner partner who sits on Endgame's board, said he
couldn't comment on the company's classified business. But he defended the
idea of captive botnets.
"If you believe that wars are going to be fought in the world of cyber in
the future, wouldn't you want to believe you would have a cyber-army at
your disposal? Why wouldn't you want to launch a cyber-army if needed?"
Booming 'Zero-day' Trade Has Washington Cyber Experts Worried
The proliferation of hacking tools known as zero-day exploits is raising
concerns at the highest levels in Washington, even as U.S. agencies and
defense contractors have become the biggest buyers of such products.
White House cybersecurity policy coordinator Michael Daniel said the trend
was "very worrisome to us."
Asked if U.S. government buying in the offensive market was adding to the
problem, Daniel said more study was needed. "There is a lot more work to
be done in that space to look at the economic questions...so we can do a
better job on the cost-benefit analysis," he said.
Some security experts say the government's purchasing power could help
instead of hurt. They argue the U.S. government should bring the market
into the open by announcing it will pay top dollar for zero-days and then
disclosing all vulnerabilities to the companies concerned and their
customers.
"Given that people are now buying vulnerabilities, the U.S. should simply
announce that it is cornering the market, that they will pay 10 times
anyone else," said Dan Geer, chief information security officer at
In-Q-Tel, the U.S. intelligence community's venture capital firm. He said
he was speaking outside of his official capacity.
Richard Clarke, who served as counter-terrorism chief in the White House
before becoming a cybersecurity advisor there a decade ago, said the
government should at least review the exploits it has and disclose the
vast majority.
"In some rare cases, perhaps the government could briefly withhold that
information in order to run a high-priority collection mission," he said.
"Even then, however, the government should closely monitor to see if
anyone else has discovered the vulnerability and begun to use it."
Howard Schmidt, who served as White House cybersecurity czar under Obama,
said he agreed with Clarke's approach. Asked if he had made the same
argument during his recent two and a half years in the White House, he
said he couldn't betray confidences by going into detail.
But Schmidt added: "The entire discussion on cascading effects and the sort
of unintended consequences of any type of malware was had more than once...
That's the discussion that needs to continue to take place."
Here's One Way to Try to Avoid the FBI's Internet Wiretapping Proposal
If The New York Times is to be believed, the Obama administration is "on
the verge of" signing off on a proposal from the FBI that would make it
easier for the agency's to intercept online communications. Please allow
us to offer a tip that may help you avoid the Feds' steely gaze.
We should first explain what is being proposed. For some time, the FBI has
sought a way to observe information that passes through internet service
providers in the same way they can (with a warrant) listen in on phone
conversations. The problem is that while it's relatively easy for the FBI
to deal with the handful of companies that operate telephone networks,
there are many, many platforms on the Internet which people use to
communicate: Gchat, Facebook, Twitter direct messages, Snapchat, etc. And
as people specifically, the people who the FBI wants to listen in on
use phones less and the Internet more, less and less communication is
visible to their wiretapping. In testimony before Congress in 2011, the
FBI's general counsel described what she called the "Going Dark" problem.
[S]ome providers are currently obligated by law to have technical
solutions in place prior to receiving a court order to intercept
electronic communications, but do not maintain those solutions in a
manner consistent with their legal mandate. Other providers have no such
existing mandate and simply develop capabilities upon receipt of a court
order. In our experience, some providers actively work with the
government to develop intercept solutions, while others do not have the
technical expertise or resources to do so. As a result, on a regular
basis, the government is unable to obtain communications and related
data, even when authorized by a court to do so.
The problem isn't really encryption, as such. While communications over
Facebook and GMail and Apple's iMessage are encrypted, what the FBI really
wants is a way for those companies and others that don't use encryption
to let it peek in on what is being said.
Not always, mind you just after they get a court order. The FBI
presents it as a natural evolution of its existing ability to eavesdrop
on phone calls once a judge signs a warrant. In those cases, the FBI
approaches a phone company, which allows access to communications
involving a party. What the FBI wants to do, it assures those asking, is
simply to allow that same sort of ability if it goes and knocks on
Facebook's front door, warrant in-hand. The Times quotes another of the
FBI's attorneys.
This doesnt create any new legal surveillance authority, [Andrew
Weissmann] said. This always requires a court order. None of the going
dark solutions would do anything except update the law given means of
modern communications.
Late last month, The Washington Post reported on the proposal being
developed by a government task force which would need to be passed by
Congress. The amendment to the existing wiretapping law the
Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act would allow a court to
impose a series of increasing fines if a firm won't or can't comply with
an FBI request to allow it to observe communications. (In the past, the
Feds would apparently back off from companies that resisted.) In addition
to indicating the president's likely support, The Times clarified how it
would work in practice:
Under the proposal, officials said, for a company to be eligible for
the strictest deadlines and fines starting at $25,000 a day it must
first have been put on notice that it needed surveillance capabilities,
triggering a 30-day period to consult with the government on any technical
problems.
Foreign-based communications services that do business in the United
States would be subject to the same procedures, and would be required to
have a point of contact on domestic soil who could be served with a
wiretap order, officials said.
That notice
that begins the 30-day requirement for compliance could, for
example, be in the form of the signed warrant from the judge.
It sounds simple. It is not.
For one thing, internet communications are not like phone calls. While the
FBI's goal isn't to break encryption directly, that's its effect in
practice. This is not a trivial endeavor. Internet traffic is encrypted at
various levels of difficulty, some of which are far harder to access than
others. In some cases, the encryption takes place between users and isn't
done by the company. Coming up with systems to allow the FBI access to
communication could theoretically be very time- and resource-consuming.
Because that cost is borne differently by companies of different sizes,
The Times points out a strategy for those looking to evade observation.
The difference [in the latest proposal], officials say, means that
start-ups with a small number of users would have fewer worries about
wiretapping issues unless the companies became popular enough to come to
the Justice Departments attention.
Which brings us to the most obvious way for terrorists or drug dealers or
law-breakers or, yes, privacy puritans to avoid the FBI's proposed
wiretapping ability: if you want to reduce the likelihood that your
communications will be observed, check out what will hereafter be known as
"burner" companies new shops that enable the sort of communications you
want to do but are unlikely to have enough users that one draws the
attention of the FBI. Become a TechCrunch afficianado! When a company
announces it's "a new way to connect people," that's your best bet, as
long as it doesn't become too popular. (The "burner" analogy to cheap cell
phones you've seen The Wire, right? is flawed, of course; that would
be more like creating new Facebook accounts to send messages for a day or
so.)
But of course, the FBI is not the only who might have an easier time
observing your communications if the proposal goes forward. Opponents
argue that placing backdoors into online platforms, these companies will
necessarily be creating a way for anyone with enough savvy and access
(i.e. hackers) to discover and break in. The Verge quotes a professor
from Columbia University: "I think its a disaster waiting to happen.
There is a tiny chance that all of this is moot. The Guardian's Glenn
Greenwald pointed to a CNN interview last week with a former FBI agent who
claimed that the federal government was already storing all digital
communication. All as in all. This is highly unlikely, if only because of
the infrastructure that would be required. But if it is the case: Go
ahead and use Facebook.
U.S. Top Lawman Denies Bowing to Hollywood in Megaupload Case
The United States' chief prosecutor has denied that its investigation into
the Megaupload file-sharing site on charges of online piracy is an example
of Washington bowing to Hollywood pressure.
During a visit to New Zealand, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder also said
that he saw no reason why Kim Dotcom, the founder of the defunct site who
lives in New Zealand, should not be extradited to the United States to
face charges of facilitating massive piracy of copyrighted music and
movies.
"That's not true," Holder told Radio New Zealand, when asked to respond to
Dotcom's claims that Hollywood moguls are pressuring Washington to target
file-sharing sites, which can house pirated content uploaded and
downloaded by individual users.
"(The case) was brought on the basis of facts, on the basis of law, and it
is consistent with the enforcement priorities that this administration has
had," he said.
The United States began a criminal copyright case against Dotcom in
January 2012. At Washington's request, New Zealand law enforcement
officers conducted a dramatic raid on his mansion outside Auckland.
Attempts to have him sent to the United States for trial were delayed
after a New Zealand court last year found that New Zealand used unlawful
warrants in his arrest and illegally spied on him in the lead-up to the
raid.
An extradition hearing is scheduled for August, although it could be
delayed by further appeals. Holder said he expected Dotcom to be
extradited to the United States, adding that he was happy with the level
of cooperation with New Zealand authorities on the case.
"There are things which are working their way through the New Zealand
court system, but we've had good communications, and I think at the end of
the day, there will be an appropriate result," he said.
Dotcom and six associates face U.S. charges that they conspired to
infringe copyrights, launder money and commit racketeering and fraud.
The copyright case could set a precedent for internet liability laws and,
depending on its outcome, may force entertainment companies to rethink
their distribution methods.
Dotcom maintains that Megaupload, which housed everything from family
photos to Hollywood blockbusters, was merely a storage facility for online
files, and should not be held accountable if content stored on the site
was obtained illegally.
The U.S. Justice Department counters that Megaupload encouraged piracy by
paying money to users who uploaded popular content and by deleting content
that was not regularly downloaded.
Holder is visiting New Zealand this week for a meeting of attorneys
general from the United States, New Zealand, Australia, Britain, and
Canada.
Dutch Ponder Giving Police The Right To Hack
The Dutch government has unveiled the draft of a law that would give
police investigating online crimes the right to hack into computers in
the Netherlands or abroad and install spyware or destroy files.
Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten said Thursday that such actions would
carried out only after the approval of a judge. The bill would also make
it a crime for a suspect to refuse to decipher encrypted files during a
police investigation.
Spokesman Wiebe Alkema said the bill will undergo revisions and be put to
parliament by the end of the year.
Simone Halink of the digital rights group Bits of Freedom says the law
would set a bad precedent, giving a "green light" to oppressive
governments to hack into civilian computers.
Man Facing Charges Linked to SpyEye Virus
An Algerian man accused of helping to develop and market a computer
program that drained millions of dollars from bank accounts around the
world pleaded not guilty Friday to nearly two dozen charges.
A 23-count indictment charges Hamza Bendelladj, 24, with wire fraud, bank
fraud, computer fraud and conspiracy. U.S. Attorney Sally Yates said the
man was extradited to Atlanta from Thailand on Thursday and was arraigned
in federal court Friday afternoon. A second person is also charged in the
indictment but has not been identified. Investigators could not disclose
whether the person was in the U.S. or abroad. Officials also could not
disclose what information led them to Bendelladj.
Bendelladj, whose nickname is "Bx1," is accused of developing and
marketing SpyEye, a banking Trojan. However, federal authorities have not
said exactly how Bendelladj helped develop the software. Court records
don't indicate whether he had a lawyer.
The malware was implanted onto computers to secretly collect financial
information and drain bank accounts. Authorities say the malware impacted
253 different financial institutions and is responsible for untold
amounts of financial theft.
"We're talking millions," Yates said Friday. "We don't have the precise
number quantified at this point."
Trojans such as SpyEye can be profitable for cybercriminals. A small group
of hackers in Eastern Europe arrested in 2010 was able to steal about $70
million from companies, municipalities and churches in Europe and the U.S.
SpyEye was designed to automatically steal sensitive information such
as bank account credentials, credit card information, passwords and PIN
numbers after being implanted in victims' computers. After the program
took control of a computer, it allowed hackers to use a number of covert
techniques to trick victims into giving up their personal information
including data grabbing and presenting victims with a fake bank account
page. The information was then relayed to a command and control server,
which was used to access bank accounts.
Bendelladj was indicted in December 2011 and was on a trip from Malaysia
to Egypt when he was arrested during a layover at an airport in Bangkok
on Jan. 5, 2013. Police there seized two laptops, a tablet computer, a
satellite phone and external hard drives.
Although authorities say he never set foot on U.S. soil, Bendelladj is
accused of leasing a virtual server from an unidentified Internet company
in Atlanta to control computers that were impacted by SpyEye. The company
was unaware the man was allegedly using the server for illegal purposes,
Yates said.
"The federal indictment and extradition of Bendelladj should send a very
clear message to those international cybercriminals who feel safe behind
their computers in foreign lands that they are, in fact, within reach,"
Mark F. Giuliano of the FBI's Atlanta field office said in a news
release.
Bendelladj and others allegedly developed and sold various versions of
SpyEye and its components on the Internet between 2009 and 2011.
Cybercriminals were able to customize their purchases to choose specific
methods of gathering personal information from victims. Bendelladj and
others also allegedly advertised SpyEye on Internet forums focused on
cybercrime and other criminal activity.
Yates said that Bendelladj is not accused of being part of a specific
criminal organization, and that he and his associates are not accused of
carrying out cyberterrorism.
While the arrest does show that authorities are vigilant about trying to
fight cybercrime, cybersecurity experts said there is still a vast network
of cybercriminals finding more sophisticated ways to remain anonymous and
create malware resistant to antivirus programs.
"At the end of the day, this one arrest, unfortunately, won't cause a lot
of reduction in online fraud attempts," said George Tubin, senior security
strategist at Boston-based Trusteer, a provider of cybercrime prevention
programs. "Hopefully it sends a message maybe to the fraudsters that you
can be caught and you need to think twice."
Investigators say SpyEye is still active, and authorities are trying to
track down computer hackers who are still using the virus. Hackers have
developed a mobile version of SpyEye called Spitmo, which targets victims'
smartphones, Tubin said. Cybercriminals can steal personal information
through victims' computers and forward themselves text messages from the
victims' cellphones to fraudulently verify the person's identity and lock
them out of bank accounts and other personal accounts. That method is more
widely used in Europe, Tubin said.
If convicted, Bendelladj faces up to 30 years in prison for conspiracy to
commit wire and bank fraud, and up to five years for conspiracy to commit
computer fraud. The 21 counts of wire and computer fraud carry maximum
sentences of between five and 20 years each. The man may also be fined up
to $14 million.
Acer Aspire R7: Windows 8 Laptop-Tablet In One Crazy Package
Ever since Windows 8 was announced last year a slew of crazy-looking
computers have been introduced. Take Lenovo's IdeaPad Yoga laptop, which
has a screen that rotates all the way around to turn into a tablet. Or
Asus' Taichi with its two screens, which allow you to use the device as a
laptop and then close the lid to make it a tablet.
But Acer has just upped the ante in the funky Windows 8 computer game.
Today, at an event in New York City, the company introduced the Aspire R7,
a full-fledged 15.6-inch laptop with a "floating" screen. The screen hinge
allows the touchscreen to be propped up and then angled, like a desktop
monitor or all-in-one computer. You can then even flip the touchscreen
around, so if a person is sitting across the table they can see it. The
idea, Acer says, is that all the touchscreen Windows 8 laptops are awkward
to use - you have to reach out over the keyboard and trackpad. This brings
the screen closer to you.
Speaking of the keyboard and trackpad, Acer decided that putting the
trackpad below the keyboard was just a bit too traditional. On the R7 it
put the trackpad above of the keyboard so that when the screen is folded
down you can still use the keyboard.
Acer will begin selling the R7 on May 17 for $1,000. Best Buy will carry
a special "Star Trek Into Darkness" version, which will come with a free
download of the "Star Trek: The Video Game." The laptop comes standard
with a 15.6-inch 1920 x 1080-resolution screen, a Core i5 processor, 6GB
of RAM, and a combo 500 GB hard drive with a 24 GB solid-state drive.
Last month it was reported that the PC market has seen the steepest
decline in its history. Research firm IDC's data showed that shipments of
PCs plunged 14 percent in the first quarter of this year. That's the
sharpest decline in sales of personal computers since the firm started
tracking the industry in 1994. Technology experts and pundits have
hypothesized about the causes of the ailing personal computer market.
IDC, specifically, cited Windows 8, Microsoft's new computer and tablet
operating system, as one of the main reasons people turned away from
buying computers.
"While some consumers appreciate the new form factors and touch
capabilities of Windows 8, the radical changes to the UI, removal of the
familiar Start button, and the costs associated with touch have made PCs
a less-attractive alternative to dedicated tablets and other competitive
devices," Bob O'Donnell, IDC Program Vice President, said in a statement
last month.
Acer, however, doesn't seem to be too worried about that. In addition to
the Aspire R7, it released the Aspire P3, an "ultrabook convertible," or
a Windows 8 tablet with a detachable keyboard dock. It is available now,
starting at $799.99.
Common Windows 8 Gripes and Possible Solutions
Microsoft is preparing an update to Windows 8 for release later this
year. It says the changes are designed to address complaints and
confusion with the new operating system.
Windows 8 is the most radical overhaul of Microsoft's operating system
since Windows 95 came out nearly two decades ago. It was revamped to
embrace the types of touch-screen controls popular on smartphones and
tablet computers, devices that are siphoning sales from the desktop and
laptop PCs that have been Microsoft's traditional stronghold. Windows 8
was released with much fanfare in October, but got a lukewarm reception
from consumers.
Part of the problem is that Windows 8 tries to be all things to all
people. It's designed to respond to touch-screen controls, but it also
works with traditional mouse and keyboard commands. It offers a new layout
that resembles tablet computers, but it also has a desktop mode that looks
like previous versions of Windows. What results is confusion.
In addition, many of the controls to launch programs and change settings
have been tucked away. That gives Windows 8 a cleaner look, but it also
requires people to do more work finding all the controls.
Microsoft Corp. isn't saying much about what the new Windows 8 will have.
Nor will it say whether it will charge for the upgrade. What the Redmond,
Wash., company will say is that it's responding to customer feedback in
developing the update.
Here's a look at some of that feedback and possible solutions in the coming
update:
The problem: There's no central place for launching programs and changing
settings.
Windows 8 features a new start page that takes over the entire screen. The
page is filled with boxes, or tiles, for accessing your favorite programs.
But to get to programs you use less often, you need to slide up a menu
from the bottom, click on "All apps" and find the one you want. When
you're already using a program, such as a Web browser, you have to switch
back to this start page to launch a different one, even if it's one of
your favorites. To access settings, you need to slide over a set of
icons, known as charms, from the right of the screen.
By contrast, past versions of Windows have a "start" button on the lower
left corner, which allowed quick access to programs and settings without
interrupting your workflow. That button is always there as you move from
program to program.
The solution: Restore the "start" button. Don't make people figure out
where everything is. Make it easy for them to see where to "start."
The problem: Microsoft is encouraging people to use the new tablet-style
layout filled with tiles, but many programs are designed for the older,
desktop mode. That's the case even with Microsoft's popular Office suite
of business tools, despite the fact that the latest version of Office
came out months after Windows 8 comes out.
As a result, using Windows 8 feels like running two different computers on
the same machine, as the tile and desktop modes don't communicate well
with each other. Consider Microsoft's Internet Explorer 10 browser. Web
pages you open in desktop mode won't appear when you switch to the browser
in the tile mode. Because many popular programs run only in desktop mode,
it would make sense to do most of your computing there, but Windows 8
always forces you into tile mode when you start the machine.
The solution: Allow people to enter the desktop mode automatically when
they start their machines. Over time, people may get more comfortable with
tile mode and may want to switch, but don't force it on them and make them
resent it before they are ready.
The problem: Those charms on the right are useful for restarting your
machine, configuring your wireless connection and changing other
settings. But you're left to figure out how to access them. On touch
screens, you have to know to swipe a menu from the right, like opening a
sock drawer. If you're using a mouse, you need to drag the cursor to the
top or bottom right of the screen, then drag it to the appropriate charm.
The solution: Besides restoring the "start" button and having those
settings instantly accessible, offer an option to have that sock drawer
continually appear. It's similar to how the Taskbar is always present on
older versions of Windows, usually at the bottom. It's also similar to
how the Dock is always there on Mac computers (though once you're used to
it, you can hide the Dock until you move your cursor there).
The problem: There's no obvious way to close programs, the way you can by
hitting an "x'' at the corner of the program in older versions of Windows.
You need to figure out how to drag the app to the bottom of the screen,
and the way you do it depends on whether you are using touch or a mouse.
Stray too far to the left or the right, and your computer will enter a
multi-window mode instead.
The solution: Restore the "x." Don't force people to do gestures that
don't seem intuitive to the task at hand.
The problem: In making it easy for touch screens, mouse and keyboard
commands are more complex to use and figure out.
The solution: Don't try to be a one-size-fits-all operating system. Apple
and Google have kept their systems separate for touch-screen mobile
devices and for traditional computers that use mouse or trackpad
controls.
Microsoft can improve usability by designing the operating system for one
or the other. Don't expect this to change in the promised update, though.
IT Industry Backs Software Patent Change
The Government has announced a change to planned new patent rules today
which has put an end to fears that computer software might be covered by
new patent protection.
Industry sources have welcomed the decision and the Labour Party has
called it "a humiliating back down".
Commerce Minister Craig Foss has released a supplementary order paper to
clarify issues around the patentability of computer programmes in the
Patents Bill.
"These changes ensure the Bill is consistent with the intention of the
Commerce Select Committee recommendation that computer programs should
not be patentable," Foss said.
The Patents Bill is designed to replace the Patents Act 1953 and update
the New Zealand patent regime.
The Commerce Select Committee recommended in 2010 that software should not
be patentable, which led to lobbying from patent lawyers and others.
Foss then released a supplementary order paper (SOP) which changed some
wording in the bill and caused industry concern that he might be
reversing his decision.
Ongoing consultation with the New Zealand software and IT sector had led
to today's announcement, Foss said.
"I'm confident we've reached a solution where we can continue to protect
genuine inventions and encourage Kiwi businesses to export and grow."
The Labour Party said Foss had been forced into "a humiliating back down"
over the software patent system.
"Last year Craig Foss gave in to patent lawyers and multinational software
players and sought to impose a software patents system on our IT sector,"
said communications and IT spokesperson Clare Curran.
"He overrode the advice of the Commerce Select Committee that copyrighting
software would smother innovation."
Foss said there had been "a lot of noise" about the SOP when he released
it and today's move was not a back-down.
"There were some concerns out there but that was a misconception about
what we intended from the first SOP."
His intention was always that devices such as digital cameras or washing
machines, that make use of a computer program, would be patentable, but
not the software itself, Foss said.
Internet New Zealand welcomed today's tabling of the SOP, saying it made
clear that computer software was not patentable in New Zealand.
Foss' decision to amend the Patents Bill drew to a close "years of
wrangling between software developers, ICT players and multinational
heavyweights over the vexed issue of patentability of software", said
spokesperson Susan Chalmers
"Patenting software would not only make the continued development of the
Internet more difficult, it would reduce innovation and could well stymie
interoperability of various software platforms," she said.
New Zealand's largest IT representative body, the Institute of IT
Professionals, expressed relief and said a major barrier to software-led
innovation had been removed.
Chief executive Paul Matthews said although there were varied opinions on
the matter, the consensus amongst professionals was that the patent
system simply did not work for software.
"If you look at the New Zealand market, you would be hard pressed to find
many people that were thinking patents would be a good idea."
It was in New Zealand's best interests for software to continue to be
covered through the provisions of copyright - "a far more appropriate
mechanism" - in the same way movies and books were, Matthews said.
"We believe it's near impossible for software to be developed without
breaching some of the hundreds of thousands of software patents awarded
around the world, often for 'obvious' work.
"Thus many software companies in New Zealand, creating outstanding and
innovative software, live with a constant risk that their entire business
could be threatened due to litigious action by a patent holder."
Patenting software would give large overseas firms the opportunity to
monopolise a concept and crush smaller competitors through the legal
system, he said.
New Zealand's biggest software exporter, Orion Health, also welcomed Foss'
decision.
Chief executive Ian McCrae said obvious things were being patented under
the current regime.
"You might see a logical enhancement to your software, but you can't do it
because someone else has a patent.
"In general, software patents are counter-productive, often used
obstructively and get in the way of innovation."
Matthews said a recent poll of more than 1000 Kiwi IT professionals found
94 per cent wanted to see software patents gone.
A petition launched by the industry against software patents received over
1,000 signatures in under a week, he said.
Tavi Leads the Teens-Are-Dumb-on-Twitter Revolt Against Dumb Adults
Today the teens are giving adults a taste of their own medicine on
Twitter. In response to the ongoing #followateen movement, in which
grownups examine the tweets of kids to discover how silly most of Twitter
is, teens on the social platform are rising up and asking their brethren
to #followanadult because, as the team behind one prominent teems
claims, adults are lame, too. If this all sounds like a bunch of
gibberish it kind of is! we're here to explain.
The idea for #followateen goes back to 2011 and is credited to Boston
Phoenix music writer David Thorpe, a.k.a. @Arr. And the concept is pretty
simple: Go on Twitter. Follow a teen who uses Twitter. Tweet about what
they do on Twitter with the hashtag #followateen. Thorpe explained all of
this in an email to BuzzFeed's Katie Notopolous back in April: "If you
get below the surface, Twitter is like 99% teens who are mad at their
moms and think English class is total bullshit (and don't even get me
started about Keighlinn, who is being a TOTAL bitch). It's a lot of fun
to find a random one and casually keep tabs on their stupid teen life.
It's not a stalky thing, it's just about tuning in to the weird secret
worldwide teenosphere and seeing what's up with today's youth."
In April Thorpe tweeted:
By request of @katienotopoulos, let's bring back #followateen for
2013. Here's how it works: find a teen, follow it, and report on its
life.
Lucrative Trillion (@Arr) April 12, 2013
So Notopolous, quite a few BuzzFeed employees, and other Internet
denizens have been keeping tabs on teens. Just yesterday, Notopolous
published an update on #followateen, with some examples of what various
young people have been up to on social media. Said young people, it
seems, have pretty mundane lives:
My teen wants a smoothie and hates everyone.#followateen
Juston Payne (@justonpayne) May 2, 2013
My teen got asked to prom by dude texting "prom??".. It was very cute
#followateen
Cam Cam (@squidvstractor) April 30, 2013
The #followateen movement has not gone without criticism. An essay in The
New Inquiry by Helena Fitzgerald focused on the creepiness of it all:
Besides the comments on proms and crushes and parents and school and
#yolo, the most common theme on #followateen is people pointing out that
#followateen is creepy. Its a good point. Of course its creepy. Its
really creepy. If you havent yet noticed, Twitter is, itself, creepy.
But today some Internent-dwelling teens are trying to turn the tables.
This morning, Rookie, the website aimed at teenage girls that is the
brainchild of teenage wunderkind fashion blogger/Internet celebrity Tavi
Gevinson, tweeted:
Growns who think teen tweets are dumb (#followateen) should see their
fellow adults'. Today we dare to #followanadult. Join us won't you?
Rookie (@RookieMag) May 3, 2013
Now of course Gevinson is a particularly Internet-savvy teenager, and not
exactly #followateen's target audience. Anaheed Alani, Rookie's editorial
director (and an adult herself) told The Atlantic Wire in an email that
the the idea for #followanadult came from a discussion on Facebook last
night: "Something about it felt off to us mostly that the tweets the
people who took part in that were mocking were no lamer than most adults'
tweets. A writer of ours, Hazel Cills, came up with the idea for
#followanadult and made the first tweet about it." Cills, who has been
tweeting things like "My adult works in media and hates New York
#followanadult," explained her reasoning in an email to the Wire as well:
I remember seeing a lot of #followateen tags on my Twitter feed and
thinking that was kind of weird and sort of mocking teens. The
#followanadult tag is kind of like teens saying "Okay adults, we see you,
we'll let you know how unintentionally hilarious you are too." I follow
mostly adults already, so all of my tweets are composites of a bunch of
adults I follow. I don't think the tag is really a parody, rather it's
turning that followateen tag back on its creators in a really funny way.
Gevinson, herself, has also been participating:
my adult is making yet another hilarious joke about google vs bing
#followanadult
Tavi Gevinson (@tavitulle) May 3, 2013
my adult is offended by alleged misuse of the word "literally"
#followanadult
Tavi Gevinson (@tavitulle) May 3, 2013
And others have joined in:
my adult is having anxiety because Joran van der Sloot will be out of
jail in 28 years. #followanadult
rahima (@afdalxrahima) May 3, 2013
Given that this is all very insular, there are also some adults who just
want to be followed.
So what is all this? It's part social experiment, part inside joke, part
amusing Internet ephemera turned on its head. Here's what it looks like,
if your head isn't spinning:
Cern Re-creating First Web Page To Revere Early Ideals Comments
A team at the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (Cern) has
launched a project to re-create the first web page.
The aim is to preserve the original hardware and software associated with
the birth of the web.
The world wide web was developed by Prof Sir Tim Berners-Lee while
working at Cern.
The initiative coincides with the 20th anniversary of the research centre
giving the web to the world.
I want my children to be able to understand the significance of this
point in time: the web is already so ubiquitous - so, well, normal - that
one risks failing to see how fundamentally it has changed
According to Dan Noyes, the web manager for Cern's communication group,
re-creation of the world's first website will enable future generations to
explore, examine and think about how the web is changing modern life.
"I want my children to be able to understand the significance of this
point in time: the web is already so ubiquitous - so, well, normal - that
one risks failing to see how fundamentally it has changed," he told BBC
News.
"We are in a unique moment where we can still switch on the first web
server and experience it. We want to document and preserve that".
The hope is that the restoration of the first web page and web site will
serve as a reminder and inspiration of the web's fundamental values.
At the heart of the original web is technology to decentralise control and
make access to information freely available to all. It is this
architecture that seems to imbue those that work with the web with a
culture of free expression, a belief in universal access and a tendency
toward decentralising information.
Subversive
It is the early technology's innate ability to subvert that makes
re-creation of the first website especially interesting.
While I was at Cern it was clear in speaking to those involved with the
project that it means much more than refurbishing old computers and
installing them with early software: it is about enshrining a powerful
idea that they believe is gradually changing the world.
I went to Sir Tim's old office where he worked at Cern's IT department
trying to find new ways to handle the vast amount of data the particle
accelerators were producing.
I was not allowed in because apparently the present incumbent is fed up
with people wanting to go into the office.
But waiting outside was someone who worked at Cern as a young researcher
at the same time as Sir Tim. James Gillies has since risen to be Cern's
head of communications. He is occasionally referred to as the
organisation's half-spin doctor, a reference to one of the properties of
some sub-atomic particles.
Amazing dream
Mr Gillies is among those involved in the project. I asked him why he
wanted to restore the first website.
"One of my dreams is to enable people to see what that early web
experience was like," was the reply.
"You might have thought that the first browser would be very primitive but
it was not. It had graphical capabilities. You could edit into it
straightaway. It was an amazing thing. It was a very sophisticated thing."
Continue reading the main story
One of my dreams is to enable people to see what that early web
experience was like... It was an amazing thing
Those not heavily into web technology may be sceptical of the idea that
using a 20-year-old machine and software to view text on a web page might
be a thrilling experience.
But Mr Gillies and Mr Noyes believe that the first web page and web site
is worth resurrecting because embedded within the original systems
developed by Sir Tim are the principles of universality and universal
access that many enthusiasts at the time hoped would eventually make the
world a fairer and more equal place.
The first browser, for example, allowed users to edit and write directly
into the content they were viewing, a feature not available on present-day
browsers.
Ideals eroded
And early on in the world wide web's development, Nicola Pellow, who
worked with Sir Tim at Cern on the www project, produced a simple browser
to view content that did not require an expensive powerful computer and
so made the technology available to anyone with a simple computer.
According to Mr Noyes, many of the values that went into that original
vision have now been eroded. His aim, he says, is to "go back in time and
somehow preserve that experience".
"This universal access of information and flexibility of delivery is
something that we are struggling to re-create and deal with now.
"Present-day browsers offer gorgeous experiences but when we go back and
look at the early browsers I think we have lost some of the features that
Tim Berners-Lee had in mind."
Mr Noyes is reaching out to ask those who were involved in the NeXT
computers used by Sir Tim for advice on how to restore the original
machines.
Awe
The machines were the most advanced of their time. Sir Tim used two of
them to construct the web. One of them is on show in an out-of-the-way
cabinet outside Mr Noyes's office.
I told him that as I approached the sleek black machine I felt drawn
towards it and compelled to pause, reflect and admire in awe.
"So just imagine the reaction of passers-by if it was possible to bring
the machine back to life," he responded, with a twinkle in his eye.
The initiative coincides with the 20th anniversary of Cern giving the web
away to the world free.
Keeping the web free and freely available is almost a human right
There was a serious discussion by Cern's management in 1993 about whether
the organisation should remain the home of the web or whether it should
focus on its core mission of basic research in physics.
Sir Tim and his colleagues on the project argued that Cern should not
claim ownership of the web.
Management agreed and signed a legal document that made the web publicly
available in such a way that no one could claim ownership of it and that
would ensure it was a free and open standard for everyone to use.
Mr Gillies believes that the document is "the single most valuable
document in the history of the world wide web".
He says: "Without it you would have had web-like things but they would
have belonged to Microsoft or Apple or Vodafone or whoever else. You
would not have a single open standard for everyone."
The web has not brought about the degree of social change some had
envisaged 20 years ago. Most web sites, including this one, still tend
towards one-way communication. The web space is still dominated by a
handful of powerful online companies.
But those who study the world wide web, such as Prof Nigel Shadbolt, of
Southampton University, believe the principles on which it was built are
worth preserving and there is no better monument to them than the first
website.
"We have to defend the principle of universality and universal access,"
he told BBC News.
"That it does not fall into a special set of standards that certain
organisations and corporations control. So keeping the web free and
freely available is almost a human right."
=~=~=~=
Atari Online News, Etc. is a weekly publication covering the entire
Atari community. Reprint permission is granted, unless otherwise noted
at the beginning of any article, to Atari user groups and not for
profit publications only under the following terms: articles must
remain unedited and include the issue number and author at the top of
each article reprinted. Other reprints granted upon approval of
request. Send requests to: dpj@atarinews.org
No issue of Atari Online News, Etc. may be included on any commercial
media, nor uploaded or transmitted to any commercial online service or
internet site, in whole or in part, by any agent or means, without
the expressed consent or permission from the Publisher or Editor of
Atari Online News, Etc.
Opinions presented herein are those of the individual authors and do
not necessarily reflect those of the staff, or of the publishers. All
material herein is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing.
