Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Atari Online News, Etc. Volume 13 Issue 50
Volume 13, Issue 50 Atari Online News, Etc. December 16, 2011
Published and Copyright (c) 1999 - 2011
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 #1350 12/16/11
~ Wikipedia SOPA Protest ~ People Are Talking! ~ Understanding SOPA!
~ Banned Game Gets Award ~ Novell Verdict Close! ~ Chrome 15 Is On Top!
~ Facebook Suicide Help! ~ US, Russia Work United ~ Social Media vs Web!
~ WebOS to Open Source! ~ IE Automatic Updates! ~ Twitter Stalking!
-* No Zing to Zynga's IPO Debut *-
-* Chrome Is The Most Secure Browser! *-
-* Most People Still Don't Trust Online Info! *-
=~=~=~=
->From the Editor's Keyboard "Saying it like it is!"
""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If it's not being deluged with the GOP political bashing of each other, it's
the onslaught of holiday advertisements in an effort to get us to buy, buy,
buy! Yes, they say 'tis the season to be jolly, but I haven't seen it! I
guess it's the holiday commercialization cynicism in me, but the season
seems to generate a lot of apathy.
Sure, many people are full of holiday cheer, but rarely do we see those
same people at the malls fighting through the crowds and waiting endlessly
at checkout lines. But, I do enjoy seeing all of the various holiday
lights displayed on houses and other places. People's imagination as to
how they display holiday decorations always amazes me; and I look forward
to seeing the lights and other stuff.
So, I guess that we're left with taking the good with the bad for another
couple of weeks, spend an enjoyable holiday with family and friends, and
then fight with the crowds and lines to return those unwanted gifts, and
then hopefully survive until the new year! And in another year, we do it
all over again! Happy Holidays!
Until next time...
=~=~=~=
->In This Week's Gaming Section - Investors Give 'Farmville' Maker A Cold Shoulder!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" Banned Xbox Game Picks Up Prestigious Award in UK!
=~=~=~=
->A-ONE's Game Console Industry News - The Latest Gaming News!
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Investors Give 'Farmville' Maker A Cold Shoulder
As its workers celebrated with hot chocolate and cinnamon buns, Zynga saw
its stock dinged on its first day of trading Friday - an unexpected turn
of events for a closely watched public debut seen as a precursor to
Facebook's next year.
Zynga Inc., the online game developer behind "FarmVille," ''Mafia Wars"
and other popular time killers on Facebook, raised at least $1 billion in
its initial public offering of stock, the largest for a U.S. Internet
company since Google's $1.4 billion IPO in 2004.
But by Friday afternoon, Zynga's stock fell 50 cents, or 5 percent, to
close at $9.50. The stock priced at $10 on Thursday, at the high end of
its expected range. It traded as high as $11.50 on Friday before heading
into a downward spiral on the Nasdaq Stock Market.
It was far from the eye-popping jump that has been the trend this year for
freshly public Internet darlings such as LinkedIn Corp., which saw its
stock double on its first trading day.
Zynga's opening - with a ticker symbol of "ZNGA" - was supposed to be
big. After all, unlike many others with IPOs, the company is profitable,
with more than 220 million people playing its games on Facebook each
month.
What this all means for Facebook's IPO, expected sometime after April,
is hard to say. One thing is clear, though.
"A hot IPO is not guaranteed," said Kathleen Smith, principal of IPO
investment advisory firm Renaissance Capital.
Despite the big-name public offerings this year, the IPO market is not in
good health. Buyers are skittish and concerned about the high volatility
of freshly public stocks, Smith said. Big name or not, investors don't
want to pay sky-high prices for stocks, especially not before a company
has proven itself with good earnings reports and analyst ratings.
Seventy percent of the 125 companies that went public this year are now
trading below their IPO price, according to Renaissance Capital.
While Friday's drop doesn't look good, it's not devastating for Zynga.
Its CEO, Mark Pincus, said the company's focus is on "delivering great
products" that expand audience for social games over the next few years
- and not on the next trading day.
"We didn't have any expectations coming into this whole process," he said
in an interview. "We decided to go public a long time ago."
Pincus rang the Nasdaq's opening bell in San Francisco, a first in the
city for a freshly public company. The company's roughly 1,700 San
Francisco employees woke up at the crack of down to celebrate with
cinnamon buns and hot cocoa. Zynga also delivered video of the opening
ceremony over the Internet to its offices around the world.
Thursday's pricing gives Zynga a market value of about $7 billion. That's
roughly half of the value of online deals site Groupon, which began
trading in early November. Zynga, though, sold a much bigger chunk of its
available shares, 14.3 percent compared with Groupon's 5.5 percent. It's
an issue of supply and demand - selling more shares means investors don't
have to scramble to get their hands on them.
Wedbush analyst Michael Pachter said stocks trade based on supply and
demand on the first day.
In Zynga's case, he believes the IPO's underwriters placed more shares
with investors who were going to "flip" the stock - that is, buy a hot
stock and quickly sell it to make a profit instead of holding on to it for
the long run. All that selling tempered the stock's price, and other
nervous investors started selling, too.
Sterne Agee's Arvind Bhatia said the issue came down to valuation - what
people are willing to pay.
"You might like a company but not its valuation," said Bhatia, who took
the unusual step of starting coverage of Zynga's stock before it went
public, giving it an "Underperform" rating and a price target of $7.
With its huge player base and a few loyal spenders, Zynga had net income
of $90.6 million in 2010, an unusual pre-IPO money-maker in the sector.
Cowen & Co. analyst Doug Creutz, however, initiated coverage Friday with
a "Neutral" rating on the stock. Although Zynga is the leader in Facebook
gaming, he's concerned that it won't be able to grow fast enough to
justify its stock price. Growth in Facebook gaming has slowed, and
Zynga's market share has declined from 50 percent to 38 percent of daily
active users, he wrote.
He's also concerned that Zynga's famously aggressive and hard-charging
culture may not be the best field to grow good games in. Others have
raised concerns that the focus on deadlines and profits might be squeezing
out creativity and talent.
In November, Groupon raised $700 million in its IPO. The granddaddy of all
Internet IPOs might happen next year, as Facebook Inc. is expected to
raise as much as $10 billion.
Bhatia declined to speculate about what Zynga's first-day drop might mean
for Facebook. But he pointed out that what was a bad year for Zynga was a
good year for Facebook. That's because Facebook stated charging
application developers a 30 percent cut of the money they make through
its site. That means for every dollar a player spends on "FarmVille"
crops, 30 cents goes to Facebook.
"They are in the driver's seat," Bhatia said of Facebook. The company, he
added, is "in class of its own."
Banned Xbox Game Picks Up Prestigious Award in UK
A computer game banned by Xbox for what it perceived to be risqué content
picked up a top award in the UK recently.
The game, which is designed to educate teenagers about sexually
transmitted diseases, bagged the prize at the British Academy Childrens
Awards, organized by BAFTA, late last month.
Privates, described by its Brit-based developer Size Five Games as "a sex
ed shoot-em-up romp," requires the gamer to "lead a teeny-tiny gang of
condom-hatted marines as they delve into peoples vaginas and bottoms and
blast away at all manner of oozy, shouty monsters."
It was commissioned by the UKs Channel 4 Television as a way of
heightening awareness about the dangers of sexually transmitted diseases.
Privates comprises five levels of "bug-busting action" that takes place
among "a variety of gorgeous 3D locations, with a fully-voiced comedy
script and a nutso soundtrack."
"You never know," the games blurb says, "you might even learn something
handy about your downstairs-department."
Asked at the award ceremony about the response to his game, creator Dan
Marshall said, "I get more fan mail about Privates than for anything else.
People love it - and are blown away by its audacious nature."
Marshall said he had been hoping to get the game released on the Xbox 360
but when he sent details of it to the gaming platform, it was rejected.
"The original design document broke a vast number of Xboxs rules,"
Marshall said. "I sent a copy to the very nice people at Xbox, who loved
it, but decided that the rules needed to hold steady."
Anyone who wants to try it out is in luck though, as Privates is available
for download to PCs for free.
=~=~=~=
A-ONE's Headline News
The Latest in Computer Technology News
Compiled by: Dana P. Jacobson
Understanding SOPA: The House Debates The Stop Online Piracy Act
Today, the House Judiciary Committee continued to wrestle the Stop Online
Piracy Act before the second legislative session came to an abrupt end.
The hearing picked up this morning after more than 20 amendments were
rejected over the course of yesterday's controversial 11-hour long markup
process, during which legislators hashed out changes to the bill, which
is commonly known as SOPA (H.R.3261). If passed as initially proposed,
SOPA would broadly expand the U.S. Department of Justice's power to
enforce copyright - and to demand that internet entities like social
networks and search engines take an active role in doing so too. For now
a vote is delayed until "the earliest practical day that Congress is in
session," which could be weeks from now.
In November, some of the biggest companies on the web came out in full
force to oppose a proposed anti-piracy bill as it wended its way through
Congress. Prior to the congressional hearing on November 16, a consortium
of nine companies that would be affected by the bill (eBay, Twitter, AOL,
Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Mozilla, Zynga, and LinkedIn) released an open
letter publicly criticizing SOPA . The hearing only featured a single
witness against the proposal: Google's policy counsel, Katherine Oyama.
(Since SOPA enjoys bipartisan congressional support, the selection of a
single dissenting witness for the opposition, while striking, isn't
uncustomary.)
Supporters of SOPA predictably include many names in traditional media
distribution, like the MPAA, the RIAA, Comcast/NBCUniversal, and Viacom.
The war over the controversial bill highlights a growing rift between new
forms of online digital media distribution and the old guard of the
recording and broadcast industries - and the very real implications this
mounting tension has on web users.
Want to know the basics and how you can take a stand for the future of
the open web? Read our SOPA FAQ below.
What is SOPA?
SOPA is the Stop Online Piracy Act (H.R.3261), which was introduced to the
House in October by a bipartisan group of 12 supporters. SOPA combines two
Senate bills: S.968 and S.978.
What would SOPA do?
The bill would set up a system for the U.S. government to enforce
copyright. It would grant the U.S. Attorney General and the U.S.
Department of Justice the power to take legal action against sites deemed
to be violating copyright. SOPA would also grant the government the power
to request that search engines (Google and Bing, for example), internet
service providers, and social networks like Facebook block access to a
site deemed to be in violation of copyright laws.
Currently, the terms of service agreements on most websites solely
pertain to individual users when it comes to illegal content. SOPA would
extend the burden of responsibility for copyright violation to the
companies that deliver web content to users, as decided and ordered by
the Department of Justice.
How would SOPA affect web users?
Beyond expanding the government's provisions for enforcing copyright
laws, SOPA would also make streaming copyrighted material a felony under
U.S. law, punishable by up to five years in prison.
Where can I read the full text of the bill?
To learn more about SOPA, you can find the bill's full text online at
OpenCongress.org.
What action can I take?
You can easily send your Congressperson a note with your thoughts on SOPA
at AmericanCensorship.org.
Where can I watch SOPA online?
The second day of the hearing is over for now, but when the markup
resumes, you can watch the House Judiciary Committee action live at
Keepthewebopen.com or on the House's official website (we haven't been
able to get that livestream to work, but maybe you'll have more luck!).
Wikipedia May Blackout All Articles To Protest SOPA
In protest against the highly-controversial 'Stop Online Piracy Act'
(SOPA), which will come up for a vote by the Senates House Judiciary
Committee later this week, Wikipedia may blackout all of its
English-language articles. The proposal was issued by Wikipedia founder
Jimmy Wales, who argued in support of the idea on his person Wikipedia
user page after the Italian Wikipedia community achieved success with a
similar protest. He has asked the online encyclopedias users and editors
to say whether or not they support such a blackout.
"A few months ago, the Italian Wikipedia community made a decision to blank
all of Italian Wikipedia for a short period in order to protest a law which
would infringe on their editorial independence. The Italian Parliament
backed down immediately. As Wikipedians may or may not be aware, a much
worse law going under the misleading title of 'Stop Online Piracy Act is
working its way through Congress on a bit of a fast track," wrote Wales.
"My own view is that a community strike was very powerful and successful
in Italy and could be even more powerful in this case."
SOPA would allow corporations (i.e. copyright holders) and the US
government to block access to websites that are suspected of spreading
pirated material, or facilitate such activity. Supporters of SOPA say that
the legislation is needed to further fight online piracy and protect
copyright holders from intellectual property theft. The opposition
movement against SOPA - a faction that includes an increasing number of
tech heavyweights, like Google, Facebook, Twitter, AOL, eBay, Yahoo and
even Microsoft (among many others) - insist that SOPA is dangerous because
it could usher in unprecedented online censorship, and potentially
jeopardize the entire underlying structure of the Internet (the Domain
Name System, or DNS), thus making it less secure.
The Wikipedia straw poll is currently ongoing, and well worth the read, as
each voter is able to write why he or she supports or opposes the Wikipedia
blackout. Self-described hacker Shishir Bashyal has created a pie chart,
automatically updated every two minutes, which currently shows that 88.5
percent of respondents support (55.4 percent) or strongly support (30.1
percent) the community strike. Only 14.6 percent currently oppose (10.4
percent) or strongly oppose (4.2 percent) the blackout.
Wales says that this straw poll will simply be used to gauge opinion on the
matter, but will not itself decide whether the blackout will happen. But
"if this poll is firmly in support," writes Wales, "wed obviously go
through a much longer process to get some kind of consensus around
parameters, triggers, and timing."
U.S., Russia Work To Expand Cyberspace Cooperation
Russia and the United States are planning a regular exchange on "technical
threats" that appear to come from computers in each other's territories, a
White House spokeswoman said on Friday, even as bilateral ties have come
under growing strains.
A range of mechanisms aimed at confidence building and crisis prevention
are being planned to cope with alarming events in cyberspace, said Caitlin
Hayden, a spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council.
These include "regular exchanges on technical threats that appear to
emanate from one another's territory" as well as "no-fail communications
mechanisms to help prevent crisis escalation and build confidence," she
said in an emailed reply to a query.
Some such links have existed for years, including the Nuclear Risk
Reduction Center, but others are "cyber-specific and would begin working
with Moscow for the first time," Hayden said, without giving a projected
start date.
A representative of the Russian Embassy in Washington did not return a
phone call seeking comment.
Vice President Joe Biden said last month the United States was working
with Moscow to link computer emergency response teams and the nuclear risk
reduction centers and setting up lines of communication in case of "an
alarming incident."
"It's a great deal harder to assess another nation's cyber-capabilities
than to count their tanks," he told the London Conference on Cyberspace on
November 1 by videocast.
Howard Schmidt, the White House cybersecurity coordinator, said in a
July 12 blog that the United States and Russia planned to have three types
of cybersecurity-related cooperative mechanisms in place by the end of
this month, including special "24/7" communications links.
Hayden, the spokeswoman, declined to spell out the status of the talks
with Russia, referring only to "ongoing diplomatic discussions." No such
links were being announced for now with China or any other country, she
said.
Strains between Washington and Moscow over Russia's disputed parliamentary
elections are threatening President Barack Obama's "reset" policy, and the
two countries remain at odds over NATO missile defense plans in Europe.
In another sore point, a U.S. intelligence report to Congress in October
said Russia's intelligence services "are conducting a range of activities
to collect economic information and technology from U.S. targets."
"We judge that the governments of China and Russia will remain aggressive
and capable collectors of sensitive U.S. economic information and
technologies, particularly in cyberspace," the Office of the National
Counterintelligence Executive, a U.S. intelligence arm, said.
Schmidt, in his blog, did not speak of any attempt to reduce the risk of
spying but rather of heading off threats to both sides such as "botnets,"
a collection of computers that can be used to swamp a web site with
incoming traffic or other malicious action.
Another goal, he said at the time, was to better understand each other's
military view on operating in cyberspace.
"It's a prime example of the 'reset' in relations taking on a new and
important dimension," Schmidt wrote then.
Jury Says Verdict Close in $1 Billion Microsoft Lawsuit
Jurors have resumed deliberations in a Utah company's $1 billion federal
antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft Corp. and say they're close to a
verdict.
Novell Inc. sued in 2004, claiming Microsoft duped it into developing a
version of its WordPerfect writing program for Windows 95 only to pull
the plug so Microsoft could gain market share with its own Word program.
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates testified last month that Novell just
couldn't deliver a compatible WordPerfect program in time for the rollout,
and that Microsoft's own Word program was actually better.
Jurors said late Thursday they were making progress deciding whether
Novell was entitled to damages. On Friday morning, they said they were
close to finishing deliberations.
Facebook Aims To Help Prevent Suicide
Facebook is making it easier for people who express suicidal thoughts on
the social networking site to get help.
A program launching Tuesday enables users to instantly connect with a
crisis counselor through Facebook's "chat" messaging system.
The service is the latest tool from Facebook aimed at improving safety on
its site, which has more than 800 million users. Earlier this year,
Facebook announced changes to how users report bullying, offensive content
and fake profiles.
"One of the big goals here is to get the person in distress into the right
help as soon as possible," Fred Wolens, public policy manager at Facebook,
told The Associated Press.
Nearly 100 Americans die by suicide every day, and 36,035 a year,
according to U.S Surgeon General Regina Benjamin's office.
Google and Yahoo have long provided the phone number to the National
Suicide Prevention Lifeline as the first result when someone searches for
"suicide" using their sites. Through email, Facebook also directed users
to the hotline or encouraged friends to call law enforcement if they
perceived someone was about to do harm.
The new service goes a step further by enabling an instant chat session
that experts say can make all the difference with someone seeking help.
"The science shows that people experience reductions in suicidal thinking
when there is quick intervention," said Lidia Bernik, associate project
director of Lifeline. "We've heard from many people who say they want to
talk to someone but don't want to call. Instant message is perfect for
that."
Some crisis lines such as Lifeline have been criticized for alerting
police without the caller or user knowing.
How the service works is if a friend spots a suicidal thought on someone's
page, he can report it to Facebook by clicking a link next to the comment.
Facebook then sends an email to the person who posted the suicidal comment
encouraging them to call the hotline or click on a link to begin a
confidential chat.
Facebook on its own doesn't troll the site for suicidal expressions,
Wolens said. Logistically it would be far too difficult with so many
users and so many comments that could be misinterpreted by a computer
algorithm.
"The only people who will have a really good idea of what's going on is
your friends, so we're encouraging them to speak up and giving them an
easy and quick way to get help," Wolens said.
There have been high-profile incidents of suicidal expressions on
Facebook.
Last month, authorities in California said a man posted a suicide note on
Facebook before he killed his wife and in-laws then himself.
In July, police in Pennsylvania said they believed they were able to help
prevent a man's suicide after the man's friend in California alerted
police about a distraught Facebook posting. Police met with the man, who
was committed to a hospital.
The Lifeline currently responds to dozens of users on Facebook each day.
Crisis center workers will be available 24 hours a day to respond to users
selecting the chat option.
Chrome 15 Takes Top Spot for Browsers
There's a new top dog among browser versions. Recent statistics show
Google's latest Chrome browser has taken the No. 1 spot, bumping out the
most popular version of Internet Explorer from Microsoft.
According to StatCounter.com data released Thursday, Chrome 15 now captures
24.55 percent of the world market, edging out IE8's 22.9 percent.
Mozilla's Firefox 9.0 is at 14 percent, and IE9 is in fourth at 10.4
percent. Those rankings, covering the last half of November and the first
week in December, are of particular release versions. \
When taken as a brand, with all versions combined, IE is still tops with
39.5 percent market share, Chrome is second at 26.5 percent, and Firefox
takes a close third at 25.3 percent. As newer versions cycle in and older
ones drop out, the brand rankings could begin to reflect the latest
version rankings.
This is the first time since IE8 was released in early 2010 that it has
not been in the top spot, and this is the first time any browser not
developed by Microsoft has had the lead. In the U.S., IE8 still leads, at
27 percent for the week of December 5, compared with Chrome 15's 18.1
percent.
A key factor in the browser horse race appears to be the updating
mechanism. Google released Chrome 16 Wednesday, which will automatically
replace most users' Chrome 15 via the update mechanism. The auto-updating
has been a feature of the browser since Chrome's introduction three years
ago.
Mozilla has gotten some flak over its frequent update plan for Firefox,
which involves user consent every six weeks to receive the latest
incarnation. Firefox had previously had "silent updating," but that was
dropped a year ago in favor of user notification and consent. Now, it will
move back to automatic updating, expected to roll out in mid-2012.
"One of the negative side effects," wrote Mozilla developer Brian Bondy in
October on his blog, "is that minor annoyances with software updates
suddenly become much more noticeable. Most users don't want to think about
software updates nor version numbers and now they are being forced to do
so every six weeks."
On his blog, Mozilla Foundation Chairman Mitchell Baker wrote earlier this
fall that users were alerted to Firefox updates "to make sure people are
aware and in control of what's happening in their environment." But, he
said, users are complaining of "update fatigue," because the
"notifications are irritating."
The frequent updating has reportedly led to users of various browsers
having to update browser-based apps on some cycle as well. But
auto-upgrades are feeding the browser race, and Microsoft said Thursday it
will start auto-upgrading IE in January, for users who have opted for
auto-updates. Enterprises will still be able to control updates.
Previously, Microsoft had requested permission before updating, but now
users will automatically receive the latest version available for that
operating system version. The auto-updating for IE will start in Australia
and Brazil first, and then roll out to other markets on a schedule to be
announced.
Automatic Updates Coming To Internet Explorer
Microsoft intends to begin delivering automatic updates of its Internet
Explorer browser beginning next year to ensure that as many machines as
possible running Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 are protected from the
latest malware schemes of cyber criminals.
"Automatic updates are a very good idea based on every piece of security
research I've seen," said White Hat Security CTO Jeremiah Grossman.
"Keeping software up to date - particularly Web browsers - is critical for
online security."
The new service will be available initially to those Windows customers who
have activated the automatic update feature in Windows. The plan is to
introduce automatic IE upgrades gradually - with the first Windows users
to see the new offering located overseas and then scaling up delivery over
time.
"This is an important step in helping to move the Web forward," noted Ryan
Gavin, the general manager of Internet Explorer business and marketing at
Microsoft.
"We will start in January for customers in Australia and Brazil who have
turned on automatic updating via Windows Update," he wrote in a blog
Thursday.
According to Microsoft's latest security intelligence report, the biggest
online threat that Windows users face comes from socially engineered
malware targeting outdated Web browsers and other aging software. Making
the move to the most current products and services helps PC users increase
their protection against the most prevalent online threats, the software
giant said.
One of the popular features of Google's Chrome Web browser has long been
its seamless, out-of-sight upgrades under the hood. Earlier this year,
Mozilla likewise indicated that it would emulate Google's browser upgrade
strategy by early 2012 and now Microsoft intends to follow suit.
On desktop PCs, notebooks and netbooks, IE currently holds a 52.6 percent
share of the global browser market - down from 58.8 percent in December
of 2010, according to Net Applications. By adding automatic updates,
however, Microsoft stands a better chance of hanging on to the IE users
it already had locked in.
"I do think it will affect the rates at which people change browsers -
mainly because I think people consider switching when they are going
through an upgrade cycle," said Net Applications Executive Vice President
Vincent Vizzaccaro. "If the upgrade cycle happens in the background, that
will take away that reminder to consider switching browsers."
Large corporations, educational institutions and other organizations which
need time to evaluate and fully integrate the latest browser upgrades will
have the ability to opt out of the automatic upgrade program and develop
customized browser upgrade schedules that best fit their respective
business requirements.
"The Internet Explorer 8 and Internet Explorer 9 Automatic Update Blocker
toolkits prevent automatic upgrades of IE for Windows customers who do not
want them," Gavin wrote.
Individual consumers with automatic updating via Windows Update switched
on will retain the same personal home page, search provider and default
browser settings after receiving each new browser upgrade. Additionally,
consumers who have previously declined invitations to install IE8 or IE9
on their PCs will not be forced to do so.
"Future versions of IE [also] will provide an option in the product for
consumers to opt out of automatic upgrading," Gavin said.
Individual IE users also will be able to uninstall any IE browser update
and continue receiving support for the specific version of IE that they
prefer to run on their machines. Still, Gavin noted that "the Web overall
is better - and safer - when more people run the most up-to-date browser."
Chrome Is The Most Secured Browser
Google Chrome offers more protection against online attacks than any
other mainstream browser, according to an evaluation that compares
exploit mitigations, malicious link detection, and other safety features
offered in Chrome, Internet Explorer, and Firefox.
The 102-page report, prepared by researchers from security firm
Accuvant, started with the premise that buffer overflow bugs and other
security vulnerabilities were inevitable in any complex piece of
software. Rather than relying on metrics such as the number of flaws
fixed or the amount of time it took to release updates, the authors
examined the practical effect protections included by default in each
browser had on a wide class of exploits.
Their conclusion: Chrome is the most secured browser, followed closely
by Microsoft IE. Mozilla's open-source Firefox came in third, largely
because of its omission of a security sandbox that shields vital parts
of the Windows operating system from functions that parse JavaScript,
images and other web content.
"We found that Google Chrome did the most sandboxing," Chris Valasek,
who is a senior research scientist for Accuvant, told The Register.
"It restricted the movements more than any other browser. Internet
Explorer came up a close second because it implemented a sandbox where
you could do certain things but you were allowed to do more things than
you could in Chrome. Lastly, Firefox came in last because it didn't
implement a sandbox yet."
The report was commissioned by Google, but the authors insist they had
complete autonomy in deciding what metrics to use and what conclusions
they made. The researchers have released more than 20MB worth of data,
software tools, and methodology so peers may review or build upon the
research. The study focused solely on the security offered by Chrome,
IE, and Firefox, which when combined account for more than 93 percent of
web users, according to the report. All three browsers tested were run
on Windows 7.
Their finding is backed up by anecdotal evidence, as well. Chrome has
emerged unscathed during the annual Pwn2Own hacker contest
for three years in a row, something no other browser entered has done.
Reports of in-the-wild exploits that target the browser are also
extremely rare.
In much the way traditional sandboxes prevent sand from mixing with
grass on a playground, security sandboxes isolate application code
inside a perimeter that's confined from sensitive OS functions. By
placing severe restrictions on an application's ability to read and
write to the hard drive and interact with other peripheral resources,
sandboxes are designed to lessen the damage attackers can do when they
successfully exploit a vulnerability in the underlying code base.
The so-called token in the Chrome sandbox, for instance, doesn't allow
browser processes to access files outside of an extremely limited set of
directories. It also forbids them from creating connections known as
network sockets to communicate directly with servers over the internet.
The sandbox in IE, by contrast, allows browser resources to read almost
all parts of a hard drive and puts few restrictions on the creation of
network sockets, the researchers said.
As a result, attackers who exploit a vulnerability in the Microsoft
browser will have an easier time accessing contacts, documents, and
other data stored on the hard drive of a targeted computer and uploading
it to a command and control server.
"The Google Chrome token is far more restrictive," said Accuvant Chief
Research Scientist Ryan Smith, who compared tokens to a driver's license
that spells out what vehicles a holder is permitted to drive and other
conditions, such as whether eyeglasses are required. "It's more like a
learner's permit, whereas the Internet Explorer token is more like a
Class C regular driver's license."
The researchers analyzed each browser's ability to read files, write
files, and perform 13 other actions. As indicated in the graphic below,
Chrome blocked all but two of them. Of those, one known as "system
parameters" was partially blocked. IE, meanwhile, completely blocked
only two actions, and partially blocked seven more actions. Seven
additional actions, including the ability to read files, access
networks, and create processes, were completely unrestricted.
In last place was Firefox, which allowed nine actions and partially
blocked the remaining six actions.
The report refers to sandboxing as a "standard best practice within many
popular applications." Chrome implements sandboxes in versions that run
on Windows, MacOS X, and Linux. Microsoft deployed sandboxing more than
five years ago, starting when users ran IE version 7 on Windows Vista or
later versions of Windows. Even Apple, which commands a tiny fraction of
the browser market, implemented a robust sandbox in versions of Safari
that run on Lion, the latest release of OS X.
In this context, the continuing failure of Firefox to offer sandboxing
features is hard to excuse.
In a statement issued prior to the release of Accuvant's report,
Johnathan Nightingale, Mozilla's director of Firefox engineering, said:
"Firefox includes a broad array of technologies to eliminate or reduce
security threats, from platform level features like address space
randomization to internal systems like our layout frame poisoning
system. Sandboxing is a useful addition to that toolbox that we are
investigating, but no technology is a silver bullet. We invest in
security throughout the development process with internal and external
code reviews, constant testing and analysis of running code, and rapid
response to security issues when they emerge. We're proud of our
reputation on security, and it remains a central priority for Firefox.
The researchers also gave Chrome high marks for the strict limitations
it places on software add-ons that extend the things users can do with
the browser. As a result, attackers who manage to exploit extension bugs
or trick victims into installing malicious add-ons are severely limited
in the damage they can do. By comparison, IE and Firefox give extensions
much wider latitude. IE add-ons, for instance, have the ability to
create processes and to access the Windows clipboard, which can be a
means of funneling malicious data from one application to another.
The other area where Chrome outflanked its rivals was its offering of
what's known as JIT hardening. Short for just in time, JIT refers to
code that's compiled on the fly and executed inside the browser.
Attackers have long relied on JIT techniques to convert JavaScript into
malicious machine code that bypasses exploit mitigations such as ASLR.
JIT hardening in Chrome, and to a lesser extent in IE, counteract JIT
attacks by compiling JavaScript in an unpredictable way that makes it
hard for attackers to control. Mozilla developers have yet to implement
the feature in Firefox.
Besides ranking the security of the top three browsers, the paper argues
that many of the metrics regularly used to gauge how well software
stands up to hack attacks are unreliable. One such metric is the number
of vulnerabilities patched, based on the assumption that more bugs
indicate poorer-quality code than programs with fewer bugs. Other
frequently cited factors include how quickly bugs are fixed and the
severity of the bugs.
In the end, a browser will either succumb to a given exploit or it
won't, and that's all that mattered to the paper's authors.
"We really didn't believe those [metrics] had much merit because it's
really hard to correlate those things, especially between browsers and
vendors," said Valasek, who along with Smith, was assisted by Accuvant
colleagues Joshua Drake, Paul Mehta, Charlie Miller, and Shawn Moyer.
"So we decided: Let's focus this paper on exploitation mitigation
technology to show how these actually stand up against attackers when
they find a vulnerability."
HP To Contribute webOS to Open Source
HP today announced it will contribute the webOS software to the open
source community.
HP plans to continue to be active in the development and support of webOS.
By combining the innovative webOS platform with the development power of
the open source community, there is the opportunity to significantly
improve applications and web services for the next generation of devices.
webOS offers a number of benefits to the entire ecosystem of web
applications. For developers, applications can be easily built using
standard web technologies. In addition, its single integrated stack offers
multiplatform portability. For device manufacturers, it provides a single
web-centric platform to run across multiple devices. As a result, the end
user benefits from a fast, immersive user experience.
"webOS is the only platform designed from the ground up to be mobile,
cloud-connected and scalable," said Meg Whitman, HP president and chief
executive officer. "By contributing this innovation, HP unleashes the
creativity of the open source community to advance a new generation of
applications and devices."
HP will make the underlying code of webOS available under an open source
license. Developers, partners, HP engineers and other hardware
manufacturers can deliver ongoing enhancements and new versions into the
marketplace.
HP will engage the open source community to help define the charter of the
open source project under a set of operating principles:
The goal of the project is to accelerate the open development of the
webOS platform
HP will be an active participant and investor in the project
Good, transparent and inclusive governance to avoid fragmentation
Software will be provided as a pure open source project
HP also will contribute ENYO, the application framework for webOS, to the
community in the near future along with a plan for the remaining
components of the user space.
Beginning today (Tuesday), developers and customers are invited to provide
input and suggestions at http://developer.palm.com/blog/.
Most People Still Don't Trust Online Info
Over the past decade, Americans have witnessed the rise of social networks
and mobile technology that's put the Internet at an arm's reach, day and
night - yet a new study has found that people are even more distrustful
of the information they find online.
Three-quarters of Internet users find the Web an important source of
information, but most people still don't deem the content they see online
reliable, according to a report out this week from the University of
Southern California.
Such are the deep chasms among Americans' attitudes about the Internet.
In 2010, 15 percent of Internet users said they find only a small portion
of online information reliable. That's greater than the 7 percent who
were likewise skeptical of the vast majority of information they come
across on the Internet.
The mistrust is especially true for social networks. That said, people
don't look to social networks for reliability. Rather, they visit the
sites to socialize and share photos, updates and videos.
Trust grows when it comes to established media outlets and government
websites. In 2010, 79 percent of Internet users said they found content
posted on government websites reliable, about the same as in 2003, the
first year the center looked at that question.
Jeff Cole, author of the study and director of USC Annenberg School's
Center for the Digital Future, said Americans tend to be more trusting of
government and big media.
"Other countries are better at distinguishing good information from (the)
unreliable," he said. In repressive regimes where media is closely tied
to the government, citizens grow adept at filtering truth from propaganda.
When it comes to privacy online, Americans are actually more concerned
about businesses than the government, the report found. Nearly half of
U.S. Internet users said they are worried about companies watching what
they do online, compared with 38 percent who said the same for the
government.
Looking ahead to the next decade, Cole expects tablet computers and other
touch-screen devices to largely replace personal computers and with them,
the clunky computer mouse.
The center has surveyed more than 2,000 U.S. households each year since
1999. The latest report is a look back at the past decade of Americans'
Internet use. The margin of error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.
Consumers Not Turning to Social Media Sites for Local Business Info
People who look for information about local restaurants and businesses
are turning to the Internet but not social media sites, according to a
new study.
The Pew Internet and American Life Project found that the Internet far
outpaces other sources for local business information, followed by
newspapers and word of mouth. Yet people rely very little on sites such
as Facebook and Twitter for this type of information.
More than half (51%) of adults who look for news and information about
local restaurants, bars and clubs use the Internet to do so. About 38%
of this demographic performs search engine queries for local restaurant
information, while 17% visit specialty sites. Only 3% said they turn to
social networking sites.
Even more surprising is that only one percent of those who look for
information about local businesses beyond restaurants - such as retail
stores - turn to social networking sites. The news comes as more local
restaurants and businesses focus marketing initiatives around social
media sites.
Small businesses aren't convinced about the impact of social media either.
A study revealed last month that only 12% of local businesses considered
using social media a "must" for their business, while 50% said they
couldnt do without word-of-mouth marketing.
Meanwhile, the more recent Pew report found that newspapers remain
popular for finding out information about local businesses. Among the 31%
of culture seekers who prefer this method, about 26% read printed copies
while 5% visit their favorite newspaper sites. Word of mouth is also a
popular way to find out information about local spots, with 23% of
respondents who look for business information reporting that as their
favored approach.
People who seek out information and news about local businesses and
restaurants are more likely to have college educations and earn a salary
of $75,000, according to Pew. This group is also more likely to be young
female adults living in urban environments.
The study was conducted over the phone among 2,251 adults age 18 and
older, with a margin of error of 2.4%.
Are you surprised that more people aren't turning to social media sites
for local business information? What can local businesses do to make its
social networking profiles more of a destination for information?
Twitter Stalking Is Protected Free Speech, Judge Rules
A San Francisco judge has declared cyberstalking on Twitter and blogs
constitutionally-protected free speech, reports The New York Times. The
ruling is a victory for the First Amendment. But like all things worth
fighting for, it comes at a price.
Heres what happened: A Buddhist religious leader in Maryland named Alyce
Zeoli became friends with a man named William Lawrence Cassidy. At some
point, the two had a falling out. Cassidy took the mature route, and began
posting thousands of messages on blogs and Twitter, often using pseudonyms,
that aggressively disparaged Zeoli. Some of them even called for her death.
Understandably distraught, Zeoli then worked with the FBI to have Cassidy
arrested, which he was, based on interstate stalking laws. Cassidy, the
government argued, had caused Zeoli "substantial emotional distress."
This, however, was not enough to convince Judge Roger W. Titus, who
declared that Cassidys actions, while distasteful, were not enough to set
a precedent that could cause serious harm to the entire foundations of
speech on the Internet.
"[W]hile Mr. Cassidys speech may have inflicted substantial emotional
distress, the governments indictment here is directed squarely at
protected speech: anonymous, uncomfortable Internet speech addressing
religious matters," wrote Judge Titus, in his official order.
Titus ruled that, because no one was forced to read Cassidys posts and
tweets - as opposed to a "telephone call, letter or email specifically
addressed to and directed at another person" - they are considered free
speech, not harassment, just as personal bulletin boards of the colonial
era fell under the protection of the First Amendment, which "protects
speech even when the subject or the manner of expression is uncomfortable
and challenges conventional religious beliefs, political attitudes or
standards of good taste."
One of Zeolis lawyers, Shanlon Wu, told the Times that Zeoli was
"appalled and frightened by the judges ruling." It is not yet clear
whether there will be an appeal to the ruling.
=~=~=~=
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.
